Socialist Studies 25 years
- This topic has 138 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
You are going to subvert capitalism from within. This is you being realistic, is it? I had a suspicion that this was going to be your rationale. No more wild talk about building a socialist working class majority.
Well, the capitalist class have had a good innings, but we wont be sorry to see it go. I almost feel sorry for them.
The Socialist Party in Guilts and Bonds. Y’now, it has a ring to it!
By the way, Jim D’Arcy bought Head Office, and he wasn’t making a ‘capital investment’.Twford John wrote:By the way, Jim D'Arcy bought Head Office, and he wasn't making a 'capital investment'.I maybe wrong about this but I vaguely recall in Barltrop's book The Monument which I read years ago that it was an elderly female comrade in Edinburgh with a cat called Karl Marx who put down the money for 52 Clapham High St!
robbo203 wrote:Twford John wrote:By the way, Jim D'Arcy bought Head Office, and he wasn't making a 'capital investment'.I maybe wrong about this but I vaguely recall in Barltrop's book The Monument which I read years ago that it was an elderly female comrade in Edinburgh with a cat called Karl Marx who put down the money for 52 Clapham High St!
It seems that Frank Offord also contributed in some way although it's not entirely clear who actually put down the money to enable the party to acquire the premises.
Socialist Standard wrote:Frank Offord was Party auditor for a number of years, and was one of the back room boys of the Party. Some of his early life had been spent in China, and he wrote and spoke on various aspects of the conditions there. Together with the late Ted Kersley, he was the mainspring of the New Premises Committee, and it was he who discovered our present Head Office at 52 Clapham High Street. When the lease at Rugby Chambers expired it was this Committee that organised the move, much of the expense of which was paid by Frank out of his own pocket. It was he who introduced films to be used in conjunction with socialist lectures. Ill-health prevented him in the last few years from carrying on any Party activity.gnome wrote:robbo203 wrote:Twford John wrote:By the way, Jim D'Arcy bought Head Office, and he wasn't making a 'capital investment'.I maybe wrong about this but I vaguely recall in Barltrop's book The Monument which I read years ago that it was an elderly female comrade in Edinburgh with a cat called Karl Marx who put down the money for 52 Clapham High St!
It seems that Frank Offord also contributed in some way although it's not entirely clear who actually put down the money to enable the party to acquire the premises.
Socialist Standard wrote:Frank Offord was Party auditor for a number of years, and was one of the back room boys of the Party. Some of his early life had been spent in China, and he wrote and spoke on various aspects of the conditions there. Together with the late Ted Kersley, he was the mainspring of the New Premises Committee, and it was he who discovered our present Head Office at 52 Clapham High Street. When the lease at Rugby Chambers expired it was this Committee that organised the move, much of the expense of which was paid by Frank out of his own pocket. It was he who introduced films to be used in conjunction with socialist lectures. Ill-health prevented him in the last few years from carrying on any Party activity.Interesting. So who was the elderly woman from Edinbugh then – the one who lived with Karl Marx (the cat, that is)?
Twford John wrote:I see why you would feel uncomfortable about Socialist Party Investments and wish to pass it off as a joke. It wasn't my purpose to embarrass you. What I am trying to get at, and I should have used a less sensitive example, is: do you believe that democracy is, as it were, a trump card. That if a majority of the membership supports a proposal, no matter how preposterous ( and a revolutionary party making capital investments does appear pretty preposterous ),then the democratic decision overrides everything else?Jim D'Arcy certainly had a bob or two. Now if only I could remember how he got all that money?oh that's right I remember, didn't he own a building company, where he employed workers and by definition paid them less than the value of their labour time? I also seem to recall a rumour that his business was prosperous because he used lumpy labour (non unionised labour that is). Perhaps Twyford John gets his name from being a plumber for D'Arcy. Has he got a mate called Armitage Shanks Fred? Pretty apt name you have there John, considering tha quality of your contribution
By the way, that obituary for Frank Offord in the Socialist Standard which mentions Offord putting his hand in his pocket was written by Jim D'Arcy.The old lady in Edinburgh was Agnes Hollingshead.
Tim Kilgallon I see no reason why a Socialist Party should feel uncomfortable about making capital investments.Should the Party spot a promising business opportunity, does it mean to invest just its own funds, or will it be open to individual members to have a gamble? I have my modest pile in ERNIE bonds, but I'll be waiting til the Crack o' Doom before he picks me out. I take for granted that the draw is honest, the administrators incorruptible, and that there is not a sniff of a fiddle. But have you ever met anyone or even heard of anyone who has won a prize any bigger than a £1,000? Wouldn't it be nice to know for sure that larger prize winners do in fact exist? Having got that off my chest, lets get back on-thread before the moderators notice something.As someone who finds the Investors Chronicle frankly baffling, the Party sharing potentially lucrative information would be the comradely thing to do. Let's help ourselves to help ourselves. Yours For Profitable Socialist Activity.
Dropthebomb wrote:Tim Kilgallon I see no reason why a Socialist Party should feel uncomfortable about making capital investments.Should the Party spot a promising business opportunity, does it mean to invest just its own funds, or will it be open to individual members to have a gamble? I have my modest pile in ERNIE bonds, but I'll be waiting til the Crack o' Doom before he picks me out. I take for granted that the draw is honest, the administrators incorruptible, and that there is not a sniff of a fiddle. But have you ever met anyone or even heard of anyone who has won a prize any bigger than a £1,000? Wouldn't it be nice to know for sure that larger prize winners do in fact exist? Having got that off my chest, lets get back on-thread before the moderators notice something.As someone who finds the Investors Chronicle frankly baffling, the Party sharing potentially lucrative information would be the comradely thing to do. Let's help ourselves to help ourselves. Yours For Profitable Socialist Activity.Judging from your comments (making the fairly safe assumption that you are also Twyford John) I am not shocked that you find the Investors Chronicle baffling, I would have thought that you found walking up right without dragging your knuckles along the street a bit of a struggle.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:Judging from your comments (making the fairly safe assumption that you are also Twyford John) I am not shocked that you find the Investors Chronicle baffling, I would have thought that you found walking up right without dragging your knuckles along the street a bit of a struggle.I'm not at all sure that it's a "fairly safe assumption to make" (that Dropthebomb is also Twyford John). If that were to be the case then this individual is not only an obvious troll but also a sock puppet as the earlier account is very much extant.
Why aye, Vin ( short for ' vindictive' ).Too right. The fact that Harry Young was from 'The Smurk' and drank sherry should have put you on your guard. Unless he supped it from a pint glass. 'Steve Coleman' was a proletarian from his carefully manicured fingernails down to the soles of his hand-made shoes. He would ambush Shakespeare scholars in the groves of academe and quote Ben Jonson at them. And what about the reckless allegation that 'Steve' was MI5? Ridiculous! MI5 only recruit from the homosexual population and 'Steve' was sound as a pound on that score. If I believed that there was something called 'homophobia' I would say that last statement was 'homophobic'. But there isn't, so it's not. John Crump was MI5. After setting in motion – with others- a change in Party attitudes which saw it 'reaching out' to the 'wider working-class movement', and which directly led to a 40% plummet in membership, job done, he was sent to Japan on a mission and was bumped off by Dr. No slipping a laser-toting tarantula into his bed. And it served him bloody well right.
Reminder: 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.
Dropthebomb wrote:Why aye, Vin ( short for ' vindictive' ).Too right.I don't know what Vin has to do with this discussion, obviously Dropthebomb is a little obsessed with him.Dropthebomb is not a member of Socialist Studies. It is clear that he is a member of the SPGB. The first and ony person to say 'Vin' was short for 'Vindictive' was Fraser Anderson on Spintcom in reply to me On 25 September 2016 at 19:22, Fraser Anderson f_raz_1@… [SPINTCOM] <SPINTCOM@yahoogroups.com>wrote: "stop being so VINdictive…"No idea what you mean here comrade.If there is a breach we should correct it. End of story.
lindanesocialist wrote:Dropthebomb wrote:Why aye, Vin ( short for ' vindictive' ).Too right.I don't know what Vin has to do with this discussion, obviously Dropthebomb is a little obsessed with him.Dropthebomb is not a member of Socialist Studies. It is clear that he is a member of the SPGB. The first and ony person to say 'Vin' was short for 'Vindictive' was Fraser Anderson on Spintcom in reply to me On 25 September 2016 at 19:22, Fraser Anderson f_raz_1@… [SPINTCOM] <SPINTCOM@yahoogroups.com>wrote: "stop being so VINdictive…"No idea what you mean here comrade.If there is a breach we should correct it. End of story.
You've got it all wrong, Linda. I was the one who made that comment…. to Fraser in response to something he'd said about Vin. Fraser then replied, "no idea what you mean here comrade…" It was intended to be a joke. Clearly it backfired.Let's now try to draw a line under this paranoid shit.
With regard to post #73. Thanks for the clarification Gnome. A misunderstanding. I thought I had heard the word VINdictive elswhere and made an error. I don't think that Fraser is 'dropthebomb' and I unreservedly apologise to Fraser for the implication.Dropthebomb is a troll and I know Fraser wouldn't act in this manner.But someone is and whoever it is has a bee under his/her bonnet about Vin.This needs bringing to an end, so we can move on
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.