Cameron’s EU deal
- This topic has 265 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The streets will become less cosmopolitan, and the old white bigots (most of them are middle-aged and older) will have triumphant sneers on their faces.
And why is that? You`re in support of Monsanto and GM? No wonder the SPGB is ignored by the young! But then, you lot support vivisection and the allopathic medical establishment anyway, don`t you?
So what`s wrong with herbalism, when scientifically applied? And why aren`t you worried about GM?
Here is not the place to discuss this. There's a separate thread on it here:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/gm-foodNothing against herbalism "when scientifically applied" but that's what a lot of them don't want and why they oppose the EU directive on this and are hoping for a Leave vote. From one of their sites:
Quote:The EU referendum raises interesting questions, and may potentially mean we could supply herbals outside of this Directive.Is this the place to discuss the In/Out referendum? If so, I must say I think the party's stand on this is wrong and shameful, even from its own point of view. One of the key issues in this referendum is workers rights at work. The EU guarantees basic protections; the Outers promise to tear them up. Hence there is a clear working class interest in the poll (and that's not even to go into all the other issues, where working class interests are also at stake). In calling for abstention, the SPGB is going against its own declared position on supporting reforms in the working class interest. I hope all members will consider rebelling against the party and voting for Remain.
I don't think leaving the EU will see a bonfire of workers' rights, no matter how much Labour Remain likes to say so; the truce in class struggle these 'riughts' represent is in the interests of the masters, as much as the workers. Some international trade treaties, such as the deal between the EU and Canadia mandate ILO standards, so there's no reason why future trade deals might not do the same. Also, there is the element of democracy, that relying on supranational bodies to inhibit government action is not healthy, it's likely that any government that does go for a bonfire of employment rights will find itself heavily voted out. Further, it's most likely the UK will remain within the EEA, which will also mandate worker's rights.Our position of calling for an active refusal to settle disputes within the ruling class is to my mind the right one.
Perhaps you're right about that, but the labour movement is not so sure: it is broadly for Remain and most economists agree that Brexit will make us all worse off. The trouble with the position you describe is that, because you take a totalising view of what capitalism and the ruling class interest is (as you argue here, even working class interests are in the ruling class interest), just about everything that goes on in the world is deemed a dispute of no importance. Your commitment to voting for pro-working-class reforms isn't worth the paper it's written on!
It's not a commitment to vote for pro-working class reforms, it's a commitment to vote on a case by case basis. If, say, our delegate were called to vote specifically on these regulations, or there were a referendum on these working rights, we may hold a vote of our members and decide to call for a vote in favour, as it is, the issue of the specific membership of the EU isn't a direct matter on these particular rights, we're talking hypothetical repeal here.Many years ago, Yarm had a vote to leave Cleveland County Council and join North Yorkshire. Now, maybe there would be all sorts of contingencies and personal interests (The Poll Tax, I told you it was a long time ago, was lower in north Yorkshire, but Clveland provided all sorts of services that may have been lost to certain individuals). I can't imagine a Socialist living in Yarm (well, I can't imagine a socialist living in yarm, you should see the place), who would have tried to pretend that Clveland or North Yorkshire was a working class issue.
Or even Hampxit;http://www.camdennewjournal.com/hampstead-hampxitShould workers vote for the Parish Commune?* *(c) Eddie Grant.
Also, I'll add there is an element of Slipepry Slope Fallacy going on in the dabte;http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html
Quote:The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question.The immediate and direct results of leaving the EU are difficult to see, not least because there is no policy document (nor a government) coming forward to say what will take it's place, the leave document that came out earlier this week is airy stuff (the ambiguity has been a deliberate part of the remain strategy).
Haha, very good! I don't know what makes me more nervous: polling the proles about Brexit, or polling your members! (Only joking.)
stuartw2112 wrote:Haha, very good! I don't know what makes me more nervous: polling the proles about Brexit, or polling your members! (Only joking.)Calling us 'wrong and shameful' won't do it of course, when everyone knows we are correct and principled to a fault. Right back at you joker.
Perhaps in the debate generally but not (I don't think, unless I slippery slipped up myself) from myself. What will inevitably result from Brexit is uncertainty – uncertainty we could well do without, a gamble for (as you say) the airy utopian dreams of the petit bourgeoisie. In this debate, give me the Big Bourgeoisie (and the labour movement) anyday.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.