I confess, the title is a bit clickbaity. As I have said before, some stuff is still being shared with me via Google Docs from my old branch. Most of it is garbage which I don’t have the time or patience to wade through. I did however come across this old document written by my old branch secretary, on what the role of branch secretary should be and how the branch should be run. Here is a juicy extract:
Where a comrade with a tendency towards egoism makes political or organisational mistakes they should be immediately and sharply corrected. We should avoid giving such comrades leading positions in the branch until we can eradicate all traces of arrogance.
It is obvious what they meant by comrades ‘with a tendency towards egoism’. They mean people with functioning brains who can actually think for themselves and will argue back instead of uncritically accepting whatever the corrupt leadership of this satanic cult have already handed down as the ‘correct position’. (The richness of them calling other people ‘arrogant’ should not be lost on anyone, especially when they claim to be the only hope for the human race!) Thinking for yourself and standing up for yourself when subjected to slander and bullying by these self-righteous bigots and freaks is apparently ‘egoism’ now. This is a classic cult tactic of redefining words to mean something completely different from what they would otherwise mean, usually as a means of shaming and recalcitrant members. This is no different from how the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Scientology redefine words to control their membership. ‘Eradicate all traces of arrogance’ means subjecting difficult new members to struggle sessions to break them down and destroy their sense of self until they agree to submit.
Here is another extract:
Q16: What’s the best way to deal with a comrade raising differences in a hostile manner?
A: It’s the right and duty of every comrade to raise sincere criticisms and differences if they have them. But this should always be done in a friendly and comradely way, with a view to raising the political level of all comrades in the branch.
The role of leadership, in the event that a comrade adopts a hostile attitude while raising differences, is to calm everything down. Secretaries and leading comrades must never rise to provocations or respond with rudeness and hostility. Such behaviour serves only to raise the temperature and obscure the political questions. We must highlight the political questions at the heart of a dispute. This requires a cool head, a calm and collected attitude, and taking all the time necessary to sweep secondary, personal and other petty squabbles aside so that the political issues can come to the fore.Above all, we must never respond to political differences with bureaucratic or organisational manoeuvres. If there are differences then they must be worked out politically.
This is very telling. Note that it is never defined what constitutes ‘acting in a hostile manner’ when raising differences. The truth is that the IMT defines any and all dissent as ‘acting in a hostile manner’ towards the organisation. We know for a fact that dissidents have been baselessly accused of wanting to destroy the organisation, had slanders spread about them to turn other members against them, and been subjected to cultish bullying and harassment. The last sentence is particularly hypocritical, as we know for a fact that the IMT uses bureaucratic measures to silence critics, despite noisily proclaiming its democratic credentials. It is always the leadership that chooses to act in a hostile manner when faced with criticism, rather than the other way round. They whip up an attitude of hysteria and tribalism that clouds the judgement of the membership and forces them to rally to ‘defend the organisation’ from whichever petty-bourgeois scoundrels are public enemy no. 1 now. A ‘calm and collected attitude’ is the exact opposite of what I was faced with when I raised disagreements and when others in the organisation have done likewise. The attitude was more one of bewilderment and fury, an astonishment that I was daring to question any aspect of this supposedly perfect organisation.
I don’t recommend reading too much of this crap. It isn’t great for your mental health.