More on Brexit
- This topic has 493 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 9 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Alan said
“Robbo’s comments were an opportunity for you to respond with reasoned arguments against his observations, even though you consider these to be ad hominem attacks.”
No they weren’t. his comment were full of strawmen that I have no intention of knocking down.
Is it not possible to discuss Labour, Corbyn and the SPGB’s policy without talking about me? Why drag personal issues into a debate unless your argument is bankrupt? I’m afraid you are not being neutral here, Alan. Think about it?
There is actually no member acting as forum moderator, VM. Matt is just performing a technical role, not an interventionalist one on forum content.So far, until now, despite a few off topic contributions such as this is developing into, the forum has been without any acrimony.
You have to still address my post, VM, that does try to discuss why the Party has failed to make connection with the working class and how it now survives on the life-support of its financial reserves.
I’ll elaborate to further discussion.
Too often I hear some members blame our fellow-workers ignorance for the lack of progress. Yet they offer no substantive strategy to end that ignorance. I hear wishful thinking that something will change at some unspecified time in the future which will sow the seeds of socialist ideas. But it sounds rather anti-Marxist in presenting determinist views and disputing the principle that Mankind makes its own history
In no way do I wish to disparage the efforts made by gallant individuals who make great personal sacrifices to contribute to the Party’s case but we are all mortal and unless we come up with a few answers, our future is not a promising one.
I have lost count how many times I have proposed a dedicated debate to confront the issues we face.
This is where I think we should seek agreement with others.
1. Capitalism can no longer be administered or reformed in the interest of society. To be a socialist is to understand capitalism, as a social system, as in the interest of the ruling class; 2. Capitalism is incapable of eliminating poverty, wars, economic crises, environmental climate change, etc. 3. Socialism can solve the social problems confronting society today, since the material conditions are ripe for socialism, except for a socialist majority. Socialism is the solution to the social problems and irreconcilable contradictions of capitalism. Socialism cannot be rammed down the workers’ throats against their wishes. The socialist victory is dependent upon the fervor and enthusiasm of the determined, conscious socialist majority. These are the characteristics of a socialist.
What makes a Party member involves a bit more and a narrower criteria. Members agree on the Party’s view of the nature of the socialist revolution and attitudes on class struggle Materialist Conception of History; the Law of Value, the Party’s leader-free structure, its attitude to reformism and religion.
The Socialist Party is the party of committed class-conscious socialists and its small membership merely reflects the small number of class-conscious socialists. Call it an elitist interpretation if you wish, but we are workers who have a greater knowledge of social realities than other workers.
But the actual socialist movement based on the former criteria of who is a socialist is a broader “membership” which we should be tapping into more and even they too have a higher level of consciousness than most fellow-workers.
Fair comment Alan but you appear to be suggesting that only SPGBr’s are class conscious. I very much disagree with this part:
“The Socialist Party is the party of committed class-conscious socialists and its small membership merely reflects the small number of class-conscious socialists.”
I know many class conscious workers outside of the SPGB
There is actually no member acting as forum moderator, VM. Matt is just performing a technical role, not an interventionalist one on forum content.So far, until now, despite a few off topic contributions such as this is developing into, the forum has been without any acrimony.
I am acting as the Forum moderator also. I expect ALL forum members to observe the normal protocols of behaviour on here.
Yes I do recognize the difficulties of definitions.
In my post I did try to differentiate three differing consciousnesses.
The Party’s more exclusive requirement for membership, a broader wider acceptance of socialist ideas and a fellow-worker level
There can be a emotional, subjective loyalty to one’s class, to one’s work-mates, one’s community but that can be corrupted by populists from right and left into nationalism or sectionalism.
I hold that there is an important ingredient that is required, knowledge, education, understanding which makes one a socialist.
I did acknowledge that it could be considered an elitist analysis but it is what we know or have concluded that separates us from fellow-workers. However, it may not separate us from those who think themselves socialists but are non-members or been refused membership of the Party
Also remember I have repeatedly declared that we are part of the “Thin Red Line’ and have advocated closer collaboration, too close for some in the Party to presently contemplate
I stand corrected, Matt.
Your very hands-off approach compared with BrianJ’s interventionist style made me think we were operating without a moderator.
Therefore my appreciation to your worthy good self.
And Matt I would expect you to intervene when a member is attacked by another. No, only kidding 😀
Apologies. I accidently deleted the post 185244 when copying it to respond privately to the poster.
This post has been removed as it is in breach of Forum guidlines.
7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages.
I view robbo as a schoolboy bully with minions around him and thus treat him with the same contempt.
Oh pleeeez. Vin, get a grip.
I simply criticised you for coming out with the ridiculous statement that “The SPGB is small because it is hostile to workers and their attempts to feed and house themselves”
Now, apparently, because I have criticised you, I’ve suddenly become a “schoolboy bully”. All I can say is you have got to be “super sensitive” if you dont like the idea of others criticising you.. There is another word for that but I won’t mention it. Try to grow a thicker skin if you can’t handle criticism.
You talk about strawman arguments but your whole contribution has been one long strawman argument. So Corbyn recognises there is a class divide in society. Great! And your point is – what? Socialists are quite happy to acknowledge that at least Corbyn is saying something that you wouldn’t see a Tory politician saying. But at the end Corbyn’s Labour Party is as fully committed to capitalism as the Tories. THAT is why we oppose him and his Party or do you prefer that we did not?
You also talk about the SPGB’s “sectarianism” but frankly you have shown nothing but sectarianism in your bitter attacks on the SPGB. Please stop it. You are alienating a lot of people who once had a lot of sympathy for you when you were in SPGB. You chose to leave even when you were urged to remain. That in itself make your hostility all the more baffling and uncalled for.
“…the ridiculous statement that “The SPGB is small because it is hostile to workers and their attempts to feed and house themselves”…”
Robbo, I actually don’t think VM’s criticism is as ridiculous as you say and it is our approach to reforms that has to a large extent, but not wholly, determined our size and connection to the broader workers’ movement. Can that really be denied?
Of course some will say it is the very reason for our longevity.
Our actual nuanced attitude to the difference of reforms and reformism is often lost in translation.
It was the same with the perceived view of our position on trade unions. An urban legend grew up around it within political circles, some who should have known a lot better.
Do we place all the blame on our enemies disinformation, or should we take some responsibility for it ourselves and accept we can be expressing our case better and clearer on bread and butter issues.
My apologies to ALB for this continuous derailing of the Brexit topic and his efforts to clarify something that many workers erroneously believe should be a priority in politics. If he can forebear with us, i’m sure this interference with it will soon disappear and normal service will resume.
“…I have received another abusive email from one of your members for daring to come on here and criticise the party. …”
And here I am repeatedly criticizing the party in a number of recent posts and i’m upsetting no one enough to get any abuse…
As comedian Frank Carson would say, it must be the way I tell them
the ridiculous statement that “The SPGB is small because it is hostile to workers and their attempts to feed and house themselves”…”
Robbo, I actually don’t think VM’s criticism is as ridiculous as you say and it is our approach to reforms that has to a large extent, but not wholly, determined our size and connection to the broader workers’ movement. Can that really be denied?Sorry I dont agree, Alan. If Vin had rephrased his sentence to say something along the lines that “The SPGB is small because it is hostile to workers attempts to win reforms” I might have just let the matter rest even if I wouldn’t myself use the word “hostile”. It is better just to say we oppose reformism
But he didn’t say that did he? He wasn’t referring to reforms. He was referring to our attitude to workers as workers . He was saying we are “hostile” to them.
That is a pretty outrageous claim to make in my opinion and when challenged on that Vin gets into a fit of pique and calls me a schoolboy bully for daring to criticise him
Very strange behaviour is all I can say….
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.