has it never occurred to you that what you call secrecy but what more accurately should be called discretion, is dictated by the circumstances ?
In today’s circumstances of rampant reaction, who gains if a campaign can be discredited by labelling it a ‘loony left’ front because its left wing leadership allowed this by putting self promotion above promotion of the campaign in question ?

I am proud to say i knew Redmond for 29 years and i know his guiding principle was that, as Marx and Engels put it in the Communist Manifesto: ” the Communists have no interests separate and apart from those of the working class as a whole”. If furthering the interests of the many progressive campaigns he was involved in meant doing unsung, anonymous work without raising his own or his organisation’s profile then that was the price to be paid for that campaign’s efficacy.

I would have thought such an approach should be commended rather than condemned given the British left’s penchant for self promotion.

“23 - ‘Doesn’t look like socialism to me.’

I’m sure this is terrifying them.”

And your fucking point is? Some kind of macho thing, ’steel-hardened communist’ stuff and all that, I suspect.

I’m sure this is terrifying them.

Being part of a secretive clique is likely to lead to unacceptable actions. Does ‘Socialist Action’ exist, what are their politics? At least with the RCP/LM/Spiked lot you get to read an on-line publication.

Doesn’t look like socialism to me.

http://www.davidosler.com/2009/10/redmond_oneill_an_assessment_b.html

…for a more critical assessment…

Given the sensitivity of the matter - he leaves behind people who loved him, people who admired him, people who supported him in his politics - then I can understand why my comments were censored, not that I agree with that.

But:

“Galloway, Gerry Adams and Salma Yacoob and Ken Livingstone are all people who have advanced the struggle in their own way.

To be recognised for your contribution by four such giants is testimony enough.”

Sorry, not ‘giants’, and in a funny way, not ‘testimony enough’.

It is not inappropriate to mention his major involvement in the curious thing called ‘Socialist Action’ (called so by others, if not themselves). How could it be, that’s what he did?