Talk:Socialist Party USA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Contents

[edit] Election box metadata

This article contains some sub-pages that hold metadata about this subject. This metadata is used by the Election box templates to display the color of the party and its name in Election candidate and results tables.

These links provide easy access to this meta data:


[edit] Socialist Party Dynamic

Is this sentence more proper? I believe it gets my point across without actually deleting information....for which I am quite sorry. I am just getting the hang of all of this.

[edit] Still don't like it

The sentence added really is just kind of hearsay. Also, how do you measure the "success" of the Socialist Summer campaign?

SonofRage

[edit] Hearsay

essentially all information about the socialist party can be considered hearsay -- ie information communicated by another. I have modified the sentence again, since you are correct. The success of an internal effort that few are aware of (socialist summer) is inconsequential. The continuing success of the party as a whole however is a real issue to be addressed, whether everyone involved likes it or not.

I believe this is within the scope of the guidelines presented to me by the moderator.

Remember, I dont like the Socialist Summer line since it is mostly irrelevant, but that doesnt mean it is going away.

[edit] Socialist Summer

I think the Socialist Summer line is relevant because it's about what the party is involved in at the moment and shows that the SP is not merely an electoral entity.

SonofRage

[edit] Protected

I've protected this page with reservations as the dispute seems quite minor. I'm just doing it to encourage the parties to resolve the matter on this talk page. Will look in again in a few days. AndyL 23:05, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] International affiliation?

Does the Socialist Party have an international affiliation? --Revolución (talk) 01:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

It does not, but we do have amicable relations with socialist parties.----RedSpurs 22:58, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What more do we need?

I think the basic discussion on the platform is pretty good, and hits on the major divides in the party's internal life. What else is appropriate for the page? Could someone point to a model political party entry? Cadriel 14:15, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Multi-Tendency Tendency

The "Multi-Tendency Tendency" link has been removed before, and I'm removing it again. It is a parody of the sectional infighting in the SP that preceded the 2005 convention, and does not function as an active tendency. Cadriel 14:01, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I've deleted this link again. It's not a serious tendency in the party, and anyone disputing that will have to do so on this talk page. Cadriel 11:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1984

Why didn't they have a Presidential candidate in 1984? Шизомби 01:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

They were hoping to work with the Citizens' Party, if I remember correctly. --metzerly 01:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why nominated for check of neutrality?

Would redeagle688 care to explain the reason for nominating this article for a non-neutrality check?

[edit] thesocialistparty.org

There seems to be some disagreement about whether this article should include links to several sites hosted on thesocialistparty.org, in particular the "Fist and Rose Tendency", "Oregon Socialist" and "Socialist Party of Oregon" links. Although I don't know if the Fist and Rose Tendency still exists (or was more serious than the "Multi-Tendency Tendency" mentioned above -- I see that the FaRT site is party of the M-TT site), I see no reason to remove links to the Oregon Socialist or SP Oregon, which is affiliated with the SP-USA to my knowledge. I'll add them back in and request that if they are removed in the future a brief note explaining the reasoning behind the action be placed here. David Schaich 15:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I've been informed privately that the National Committee (NC) of the SP-USA recently voted to disassociate itself from thesocialistparty.org since the administrator of that Web site, Michael Marino, has used it to abuse and slander members of the Party. As a result of the NC's decision, the links to thesocialistparty.org should be left out of this article. David Schaich 17:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Here is the relevant motion, which can be found on the Socialist Party's Web site here:
Motion: It is the sense of the National Committee that Michael Marino has posted, on thesocialistparty.org, material that unfairly maligns members of the Party... and we call on Cde. Marino to remove all inappropriate material. Until that time, the Party will not link to or refer individuals to thesocialistparty.org website in any manner. Motion passed 7 yes (...) 3 No (...).
David Schaich 21:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I've updated the membership figure (http://sp-usa.org/ncminutes/0206nc.html). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.141.48.42 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link spam and www.sp-usa.org

Over the last several months there has been a considerable amount of spam related to Socialist Party USA. Large numbers of links have been created to this page across a range of categories which are not specifically related to SPUSA, and several editors (myself included) have been removing them. Examples of this spamming are Left-libertarianism, Pederasty in the modern world, Sexual apartheid, Prison Activist Resource Center, Prison reform, National Postal Mail Handlers Union, Labour movement, Black Power.

Although SPUSA undoubtedly has a political opinion on these topics, so do the myriad of other political and social parties across the world. Linking SPUSA to these articles is simply unworkable, and in the end makes for confusion and additional work for editors who must remove the links.

I am posting this here because the link spamming is being done by an anonymous editor/editors, and there is no practical way to directly contact the person. I would hope that this note starts a conversation which eventually involves those who are adding these links, and that we can find a solution to this problem.--Bookandcoffee 19:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Democratic centralism

I felt it was necessary to clarify SP generally rejects what is commonly defined as democratic centralism, rather than democratically controlled centralist elements per se, since it actually functions through a combination of centralist and autonomist elements, in a democratic way. SP USA isn't an "absolutely horizontal" organization in practice nor theory, and neither do various party tendencies (be they Luxemburgism/"Gramscianism", Debsianism etc.) reject certain democratically controlled centralist elements. Furthermore, even in the narrower sense of the term, it wouldn't be true to claim Socialist Party completely rejects democratic centralism, so for example Walt Brown, who is anti-abortion, delivered a pro-abortion message (in accordance with the party platform) when he was running as the party's presidential candidate. This obviously doesn't undermine the genuine, strong democratism of the party's theory and practice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.172.34.227 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I still think it's important to have a link to the page where the SP specifically rejects Leninism and "democratic centralism". The "commonly defined as" is good to include, and clarifies the SP's use of quotation marks in the linked page. I also expanded the paragraph to mention some of the controversy over the Statement of Principles, but I'm still debating over whether to mention Walt Brown specifically. -David Schaich Talk/Cont 20:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


I know I've not contributed, but as a member and local officer, I think David_Schaich is right on the money here. Not being "absolutely horizontal" is a looong way from democratic centralism. The SP rejects democratic centralism explicitly, even if a contributer believes (perhaps rightly, perhaps not) that it doesn't always practice what it preaches. My concern is that the change was actually made to remove the word 'Leninist' from the things the SP rejects.T L Miles 19:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Next Left Notes?

Is Next Left Notes still affiliated with the Direct Action Tendency? I was under the impression that it has now become an organ of the revived SDS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.32.172.179 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you seem to be right. It describes itself as "now an unofficial organ of SDS/MDS". The bigger question is whether or not DAT is still an active tendency... I'm under the impression that it's been pretty much defunct since most of its leaders headed off to the new SDS. I'll be bold and remove NLN, but leave the DAT for now. -David Schaich Talk/Cont 20:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Having searched without success for any sign that the Direct Action Tendency still exists, I've removed it from the article. Its domain name is for sale and all Google hits are a year or two old. -David Schaich Talk/Cont 19:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent changes

Just a warning that I'm going to be making some substantial changes to the article in the near future. It started when I decided that the paragraph about the National and Organizing Conventions would fit better in the "History" section than in the "Platform and principles" section, and quickly spiraled into something larger (though still under control). I think the new version will be an improvement in many respects. Leave a note here if there are any major problems with it. -David Schaich Talk/Cont 02:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Howie's Endorsement by two NY State Locals

Heya, I'm local Sec of the Greater NYC local. We DID vote to endorse Howie, ignorant of the brouhaha around him with the NC. I, personally, was also ignorant of the NC rules stating that the State party would have to take it up with the NC to endorse a SP member running on another line. Therefore we rescinded the endorsement, though individuals did endorse Howie (myself included) as there's no restrictions on that.

Technically, therefore, the Central NY Local couldn't have officially endorsed Howie either.

Some might find this pedantic I know, but it is the system the party works under.

Soli,T L Miles

I'll fix up the article, though I'll keep it sort of vague since I don't think it's worthwhile to try to untangle this here. -David Schaich Talk/Cont 03:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/o/c/Talk%7ESocialist_Party_USA_fb99.html"