伊恩 rintoul 係啱嘅, 任何激進. 佢嘅諗法係, 建設一個選舉聯盟的項目只對革命者有一定的意義, 它有助於 “論羣眾性革命黨嘅建設. Revoltionaries – 唔係一個馬克思主義的術語, #8217?
At the very best and kindest it can only be said he is a raving ratbag.
What is fascinating about this creature (伊恩 Rintoul) is his incredible ability to ensure everyone elses point of view is incorrect. He is the self appointed head of the refugee action group, being the moral conscience of them all. In an article in the Punch website he openly seems think there is something analagous about labor and Liberal policies. As far as I am aware the policies are about the same as arseholes and elbows, yet Rintoul doesnt see much difference – quote:
Leave aside that successive Labor Prime Ministers and Immigration Ministers have been telling us there were no children in detention – they were in Alternative Places of Detention (APODs). They just looked like detention centres, and felt like detentions centres. Turns out they were detention centres. At best, Labor’s announcement takes us back to 2005 under the Howard government. Unquote.
He goes on:
Labor’s announcement was a disgraceful con job. There will be no justice for asylum seekers until off-shore processing and mandatory detention are dismantled completely. But the Gillard government lacks the political courage.
仲可以, thats one thing, the Leftys will want more illegal immigrants and the right will want less. The real thinkers will want to send the lot back. So far all ok, a free country unless you voice an opinion contrary to any left winger then its different. Always breaking some law if you do. They have been written that way to silence criticism.
He has at varoius times been associated with all sorts of Socialist Alliances – more your radical groups.
In an article on the web called “Ozleft” – described as being “An independent forum of strategy, tactics and history in the Australian left, green and labour movements” – the following appears:
The idea that “the decision [to become a multi-tendency party] last year did not substantially change the SA” (ISO internal bulletin 2004) might be true, but only because the character of the Alliance had already been set in practice by the DSP. There is no doubt that many of the decisions of the ISO, before and since, represent an accommodation to the DSP’s push to formally establish the Alliance as a regrouped socialist party.
At least one element of the ISO’s rationale for remaining in the Alliance is that the party that is now the Alliance “can become a significant player in the unions and movements while strengthening the socialist current in Australian society” (ISO internal bulletin 2004). Given the criticisms the ISO has of the multi-tendency party, it would seem that the involvement of the ISO rests on the prospect of intervening in this speculative view of the Alliance, even as its influence and that of the smaller affiliates, declines.
Ian Rintoul goes on:
It is worth noting the point Alex Callinicos of the British Socialist Workers Party (SWP) makes in the Regroupment and the Socialist Left Today (IST Discussion Bulletin no 2 Jan 2003, published also in Links) – that the project of building an electoral alliance only has a meaning for revolutionaries to the extent that it aids “the construction of a mass revolutionary party.”
Now you know, he is a ratbag, a very dangerous one as they usually are.
His agenda with the refugee advocacy isnt anything to do with the plight of them, its all about getting his name in the papers the same as Kevin Rudd the dud.