Are physical meetings the best form of democratic control in 2015?
- This topic has 60 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This is becoming a thread not just for Private Fraser, but for Jeremiah, Cassandra and Moaning Minnie. I'll leave youse to it.
That's hardly a faith-restoring, confidence-building rebuttal, ALB, that instils hope and promise for a better future. Some might ungenerously say that it is the defence of someone going into denial modeWe can take the returns of party polls of those who are of sufficient interest to vote in our decision making as a true guage of membership. Can i ask what our paper membership is and our poll return numbers are. Also for deeper analysis as an experiment can we take a total of the monthly attendance figures of all branches (taking into account there are branches that can't meet every month and do so bi-monthly and even including those)Another approach is to count how frequently branches cannot meet their quorum requirments and discover what the percentage is?Even on this forum we know that a few members decline to join it or much less care about participating. All i am saying is that we should look at ourselves with the tools available to see just where we are at so we can determine how to approach the future. Without an accurate picture of ourselves how can we develop publicity and propaganda policies. I'm certainly Private Fraser, my glass being half empty, because i keep seeing that empty bottle sitting there from which i cannot re-fill from. But i have suggested some remedies which i think may counter what i do see as a downward spiral, willingly putting my head above the parapets and accepting being shot down for offering different options. One reason i gave to another comrade for re-joining was that i felt sorry for the Party and joined out of pity for it. That was i think in 2001. I remain a member for much the same reason, doing my best to prove myself wrong on my prognosis and predictions and contributing as much as i can to reversing the trend. Gnome informed us that the youngest member of KSRB is15, and i think it makes him the youngest in the party as a whole …Which of us will assure his or her generation will definitely see a socialist society established…Which of us will even go as far as to claim that the movement was gathering strength towards our objective to give him or her something to look forward to? TWC for all my disputes with him…has expressed a real truth, we have to have strong foundations , especially for those who come after us to build upon, not just a declaration of principles, though, but also a solid organisational structure. I have proposed that we turn ourselves into a genuine World Socialist Party and use the internet and the web as our main medium. Not something to do next week or next year but to be something we work towards in cooperation with the companion parties, who are scarcely in much better condition than we are. I'm not settling back to accept what fate offers. So, i do suggest we can do something, and unlike Cassandra we can decide our own future. I'm not a fatalist…things can change but we have to make them change
ALB wrote:This is becoming a thread not just for Private Fraser, but for Jeremiah, Cassandra and Moaning Minnie. I'll leave youse to it.Alan,I've been watching this thread with interest and I think there are some valid points being made by the "Moaning Minnies". I particularly noticed your remark about the low ballot paper returns. An easy identifier of member interest if ever there was one.What strikes me, and it's particularly odd as usually members of the SPGB are quick to refute, is the lack of credible counter argument being put forward against Vin, Robbo and yourself. The proverbial ostrich once more springs to mind.I think there is hope for the SPGB/WSM, if only members admit to there being serious flaws that need dealing with once and for all. It saddens me to see party members in denial, when things are so dangerously close to the event horizon.You were right to note there are parallels with what John Crump said about the situation the SPGB was in back in the sixties and early seventies. Back then there were double the members there are now. I think that speaks for itself.The social environment is ripe for the plucking. It's now or never.
I'm afraid the answer is imple. People don't like our case and don't agree with us. That was the message at the general election, either they reject us outright, or say they like what we say, but want to 'do something now' and so will vote Labour. Nothing we change in our presentation or organisation is going to change that situation. All we can do is go on having our views and stating them.
Young Master Smeet wrote:I'm afraid the answer is imple. People don't like our case and don't agree with us. That was the message at the general election, either they reject us outright, or say they like what we say, but want to 'do something now' and so will vote Labour. Nothing we change in our presentation or organisation is going to change that situation. All we can do is go on having our views and stating them.From Private Fraser to Corporal Jones
I totally agree with what Alan is saying in #32 but would add that although small changes have been made with the decision making process aka the introduction of the Outreach Department our present structure of organisation does not lend well to modern forms of communication or the flow of information. Its not just the name of the party which should be up for discussion but also the very structure of the party.Presently, we are totally focused on accountability and responsibility throughout the party, from individual members having their say on organisational matters to the EC being accountable and responsible to the Branches and Conference decisions. The problem from my end is how do we retain that essential accountability and responsibility but also increase flexibility in the decision making process so that communication improves and the flow of information engages with those members who are adamant with hanging on to the 'hard copy' of the past?A sure sign that there are problems ahead with our structure, is not just with those 118 who actually take part in the decision making process by filling in their ballot papers, but also the fact that our active members are not filling party positions. A depleted EC and no General Secretary is spelling it out that the membership are increasingly finding it difficult to commit themselves to a structure which fails to correspond to their aspirations for the future.Obviously, once the web site comes on stream there will be improvements in internet usage and informatics. However, these changes on their own will be insufficient in bringing about radical changes in the structure of the party.We are quick enough on doing a system analysis on the disfunctionality of capitalism but very reluctant on doing the same analysis to ourselves.
Oh, and online meetings do have aplace, but physical meetings are more info intensive. Conference does not take place in London, but in every branch meetng in the country.Anyway, there are tools out there we could us: http://liquidfeedback.org/http://www.spliddit.org/http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/https://www.surveymonkey.com/etc.The big change is that the population is more mobile these days, and people just don't tend to group in branches around geographic locations.
Young Master Smeet wrote:I'm afraid the answer is imple. People don't like our case and don't agree with us. That was the message at the general election, either they reject us outright, or say they like what we say, but want to 'do something now' and so will vote Labour. Nothing we change in our presentation or organisation is going to change that situation. All we can do is go on having our views and stating them.Unfortunately it'snot as simple as that YMS. But it is also not as simple people not understanding it either. It's a mixture of both, with a big dollop of the way the party communicates becoming irrelevant. Brian puts it perfectly.
Brian wrote:We are quick enough on doing a system analysis on the disfunctionality of capitalism but very reluctant on doing the same analysis to ourselves.I think the fact that the membership is dwindling is an indication something is being done wrong. If the party numbers were static then we might be able to reasonably conclude that most people just don't like the message and that it only appeals to a few weirdos (people like us) in every generation. But members numbers are dwindling away.If nothing else we should be able to see even the small number of weirdos are not being drawn in as they used to be. The conclusion then must be the way the SPGB responds to the changing socio-political climate.Keep calm and carry on as usual, while we are being passed by.I don't have all the answers, but I have a suspicion that the way the party traditionally responds to the "left" is not working as well as it used to in this digital communication age.I might get a chance to expand on my ideas later.
Quote:The conclusion then must be the way the SPGB responds to the changing socio-political climate.Fraid that doesn't follow. It could be that the conditions outside the party that generated members have gone/changed; it could have been that sun spots caused us to become members: we don't know. Assuming just one more tweek in our propaganda, one more change in our structure, a different tone of voice, etc. will lead to the breakthrough is egoising. People will become members, or they won't, all we can do is express our opinion.
Young Master Smeet wrote:Quote:The conclusion then must be the way the SPGB responds to the changing socio-political climate.Fraid that doesn't follow. It could be that the ; it could have been that sun spots caused us to become members: we don't know. Assuming just one more tweek in our propaganda, one more change in our structure, a different tone of voice, etc. will lead to the breakthrough is egoising. People will become members, or they won't, all we can do is express our opinion.
Nobody is assuming that the proposals for change will lead "to the breakthrough" but that we make a start on addressing the real threat of a further decline in membership and activity. And its no "could have been" about it for "the conditions outside the party that generated members have gone/changed" for the point the proposals are trying to make is there has not been a corresponding change within the party on what we say and what we do, or how we do things.
Brian wrote:Young Master Smeet wrote:Quote:The conclusion then must be the way the SPGB responds to the changing socio-political climate.Fraid that doesn't follow. It could be that the ; it could have been that sun spots caused us to become members: we don't know. Assuming just one more tweek in our propaganda, one more change in our structure, a different tone of voice, etc. will lead to the breakthrough is egoising. People will become members, or they won't, all we can do is express our opinion.
Nobody is assuming that the proposals for change will lead "to the breakthrough" but that we make a start on addressing the real threat of a further decline in membership and activity. And its no "could have been" about it for "the conditions outside the party that generated members have gone/changed" for the point the proposals are trying to make is there has not been a corresponding change within the party on what we say and what we do, or how we do things.
What Brian said.I would have thought it obvious that changing conditions outside would impact the fortunes of the SPGB/WSM.I guess some prefer to maintain a stiff upper lip in the face of adversity. You never know, it might just work old bean.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l_3-23zAWM
I think the Internet is to blame for all of this. Not the Party. If it's not religion they're hooked on then hundreds of millions of workers are addicted to online porn, video games, sports, Faecesbook, twitter and all the rest of the shit. Fuck I spend hours on my iPhone every day. I'm addicted too. There's ever more blatantly nationalist/pro capitalist shit on the hundreds of channels on the telly. Never before in history have the masters been able to dish up so many distractions in the form of "entertainment" than now. I don't know if anyone on here is taking this into account. Arguably the net is actually making workers even more stupid, addicted and phobic than they already were. Yesterday I watched the first item on CH4 news which detailed the effect the Intermet is having on the brains of kids. The masters are catching them younger and younger these days because these weans of 3-5 years old are consumer monkey drones already. What the fuck are they going to be like as adults? Total epsilons?What astonishes me is how prescient Huxley and Orwell were. Their horrible vision is slowly coming true. The iPads are the tele-screens now. What really disappointed me was how the Zeitgeist Movement just seemed to shrivel away and die off. Was this because it was a phenomenon borne of the Internet? Similarly just look at how successfully the Capitalist Class completely extinguished and buried the Occupy Movement. I hope I'm totally wrong here but from what I can see the Capitalists are slowly but surely eclipsing the entire neutrality of the net leading to a situation eventually where the Internet will be their tool almost completely. Our masters would have nothing to worry about even if we didn't have the net because the workers I come into contact with every day are utterly clueless about the fact that we even live in a social system. They never ask questions. EVER EVER EVER!!! The fact is I would be in the same boat as them had both my parents not been party members. Their involvement is the only reason I ever joined (then left). From what I'm reading, party members are beating themselves up over an issue over which they have no control. What can a body of 350 mostly elderly people do? Clearly the WSM is dying out in the face of a collosal global pro capitalism entertainment behemoth.
Ozymandias wrote:. I hope I'm totally wrong here but from what I can see the Capitalists are slowly but surely eclipsing the entire neutrality of the net leading to a situation eventually where the Internet will be their tool almost completely. Our masters would have nothing to worry about even if we didn't have the net because the workers I come into contact with every day are utterly clueless about the fact that we even live in a social system. They never ask questions. EVER EVER EVER!!! The fact is I would be in the same boat as them had both my parents not been party members. Their involvement is the only reason I ever joined (then left). From what I'm reading, party members are beating themselves up over an issue over which they have no control. What can a body of 350 mostly elderly people do? Clearly the WSM is dying out in the face of a collosal global pro capitalism entertainment behemoth.And yet despite everything you say Ozzy, the net has been held up as a prime example – perhaps the prime example – of an alternative way for people to relate to one another . A gift economy. I take the direct opposite view to you. I don't think the capitalists are "slowly but surely eclipsing net neutrality". I think the capitalists and their politicians are slowly losing power. Cynicism and disbelief has never been more widespread. The status of politicians has never been lower. Authority figures have never been so blatantly disrespected, derided and mocked than now. "Pig-gate", I imagine, is dominant topic of pub discussions up and down the country at this very moment. ALB has suggested that "This is becoming a thread not just for Private Fraser, but for Jeremiah, Cassandra and Moaning Minnie" Well I might be a Moaning Minnie for going on about how the Party pigheadedly (perhaps I shouldnt mention pigs in this polite company) and shortsightedly refuses to even consider changing the way it does things or thinks about things but I am far from being a pessimist. Quite the opposite – the opportunities for putting across socialist ideas are expanding not contracting and I disagree with SP when he says "But haven't you heard Ozzy, millions of workers know about our socialism and reject it" – unless of course he is being ironic which I assume is the case For instance I just stumbled on a FB group where there is a very lively discussion on socialism and capitalism.(https://www.facebook.com/groups/1434654420087854/?ref=ts&fref=ts) I've made contributions and referred people to SPGB literature but I am quite unable to deal with all the responses. More reinforcement would be welcomed . There are probably thousands upon thousands of these little microcosms of debate throughout the net that we are simply unaware of and have not made use of. Vin is right. Much more emphasis needs to be placed on the net..People don't so much reject the SPGB having heard the case. The fact is overwhelmingly people haven't a clue of even the existence of the SPGB let alone what it stands for. And the relatively tiny number of people who do know what it stands for, largely reject the SPGB because they think it is too small to make credible progress (a self fulfilling prophecy) or because of silly pointless policies that the SPGB inflicts on itself such as its bar on religious socialists which handicaps its own growth I'm convinced that reforming the SPGB and addressing all these various problems within the organisation will transform its prospects. The opportunities are there and you only have to open your eyes and see it for yourself
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.