26th August // Day of Action
- This topic has 30 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
There’s been a lot of talk in this topic about a fair price for energy; but what does ‘fair price’ mean? It means the price people pay while still having enough money to spend on other commodities, without businesses having to raise their workers’ wages (eating into profits).
Imagine if the NHS were totally privatised and people demanded a ‘fair price’ for health-insurance.
“Anyway, the socialist revolution is inevitable. This is due to the materialist conception of history”
Yeah, sure, except that previous ‘revolutions’ didn’t require a politically conscious majority to implement them, which is where the MCH falls down.
But take care with predictions; they can often leave you with egg on your face.
(https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/topic/russian-tensions-2/page/3/#post-225741)
The trouble with sayings that claim to be truisms is that they are sometimes false.
There are about a billion people in the world who are going for days without a meal and they have not risen up but have only expressed despondency and despair.
The SPGB has always been cautious in assuming that suffering brings consciousness and warned against the Leftist approach of embracing workers’ immiseration as a means of politicalisation.
The problem with this particular reform (and many other reformist solutions) is that the reformists misunderstand the problem!
The high prices for energy have not arisen because of some whim of the ruling class that can be adjusted by a cut in prices. The high price of energy has occured because of a cut of in supply.
If the reform argued for by Lizzie45 and his/her friends occured, consumption would pick up and supply would disappear, so even more social distress, freezing older and vulnerable people. The logic of capitalism is that we ration goods through price. If the reform mongers were arguing for a needs based rational rationing system, where for example, the old and infirm were given bigger rations than the younger and more healthy, I would understand the logic of their argument. Cutting the prices just pushes the problem down the road while until the supply runs out.
I am not saying that high prices are equitable, correct or supportable, just that muddle headed reformism often don’t solve even the limited problems they aim to solve.
In the circumstances (no majority desire or organisation for socialism) the only action that workers can take with any chance of some success is to press for higher wages to compensate for the rise in their cost of living.
Refusing to pay the increased gas bill is a gesture that won’t do any harm even if it won’t get anywhere, but to campaign for a “fair price of energy” is a misdirection of effort, even a red herring. It is a proposition worthy of King Canute’s advisers.
It seems that there are quite a few groups that have sprung up recently to campaign on this sort of issue. We met a disillusioned Labourite at our stall at Carshalton ecofair yesterday (yes, we were out this weekend campaigning too — for socialism} who was a supporter of this group:
https://mobile.twitter.com/RescueBritain/status/1554051060792233984
He was expecting to be expelled from the Labour Party.
Incidentally, he was not the only disillusioned Labourite we met. There must have been at least half a dozen.
Supporters of reformism, such as Lizzie45, argue that without the campaigns of the labourists and their reformist associates, “Gains” such as welfare reforms, health service support, better unemployment benefits, retirement benefits, union recognition, collective bargaining, equality and diversity reforms, et al, would only have been achieved by Labour Party style campaigns, and that without all of these Labourist campaigns, the working class would have been deprived of these benefits.
Yet the Republic of Ireland, with a long history of highly reactionary and right wing governments, where the Irish Labour Party have a long history of supporting the “Blue Shirt” Fine Gael party, have probably a more “progressive” and worker friendly state than most in Europe. So much so that many, me included, have applied for Irish Citizenship.
Looks to me like they the reformists could have saved their time, money and emotional investment shouting for reforms, the ones that were “achieved” would have been given regardless of their requests.
The term “Uncle Tom” has been used as term to describe those who were passive and docile in terms of slavery. Perhaps we can use the term Lizzie45 to describe someone who is equally accepting of wage slavery.
“Supporters of reformism, such as Lizzie45, argue that without the campaigns of the labourists and their reformist associates, “Gains” such as welfare reforms, health service support, better unemployment benefits, retirement benefits, union recognition, collective bargaining, equality and diversity reforms, et al, would only have been achieved by Labour Party style campaigns, and that without all of these Labourist campaigns, the working class would have been deprived of these benefits.”
LMFAO! You presume far too much BD. You know nothing about me!
“You know nothing about me”
Well, I know you prefer to dish out distracting insults and obfuscation rather than addressing the arguments.
It also appears that you have not travelled north of Potters Bar.
I know from your postings that you think reforms are worthwhile, despite the evidence.
I can assume that you have no answer to my point that the current fuel emergency is a result of supply side issues and that the actions you suggest will not address this, other wise you would have countered this contention.
I can also assume that your similar silence about the changes to welfare, human rights, etc offered by the Irish state without the need of campaigns you suggest, is for the same reason.
Also, based on your previous posts about former members, I strongly suspect that you were either a member of the SPGB or that you knew the party well at some point in the 1980s – 90s.
I would surmise that this did not end well.
I am however, at a loss to understand, given that you know the SPGBs view on reforms, quite why you would start a post publicising the event you support.
One last thing, if I am correct that you are of a similar vintage to myself, I always feel that using things like LMFAO, LOL, etc. when you reach our age, is a bit like when your granny said things like “groovy” back in the 1960s, you know, just a little bit uncomfortable.
Wrong on all counts. Far too much surmising and way too little substance. I was born in 1977, am originally from Österreich and have travelled widely.
Happy now, dude?
Perhaps you should invest some money on a rail ticket that takes you further north than Watford.
Or even more challenging answer the political arguments that challenge your reformist agenda
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.