Televised Party Leader debates
- This topic has 36 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
To clarify I'm not against disputing public claims that some non-member is a socialist, but I think it unwise to get into the nitty-gritty of whether a non-member would be hypothetically accepted or rejected where there is no application for membership.
jondwhite wrote:To clarify I'm not against disputing public claims that some non-member is a socialist, but I think it unwise to get into the nitty-gritty of whether a non-member would be hypothetically accepted or rejected where there is no application for membership.It depends on how you define a "socialist" (not socialism). A socialist has to be more than one who holds socialist ideas in their head, and doesn't communicate those ideas to anyone else or contribute in other ways to the promotion of socialism.
rodmanlewis wrote:jondwhite wrote:To clarify I'm not against disputing public claims that some non-member is a socialist, but I think it unwise to get into the nitty-gritty of whether a non-member would be hypothetically accepted or rejected where there is no application for membership.It depends on how you define a "socialist" (not socialism). A socialist has to be more than one who holds socialist ideas in their head, and doesn't communicate those ideas to anyone else or contribute in other ways to the promotion of socialism.
i think this topic is going in a different direction about what is a 'socialist', but I don't believe the first 'socialists' only came into being in June 1904.
[/quote]i think this topic is going in a different direction about what is a 'socialist', but I don't believe the first 'socialists' only came into being in June 1904.[/quote]A socialist has to be more than someone who holds socialist ideas. They have to be in a position to assist in propagating those ideas, even if that just means remembering us in their will.
Yes, if they are helping the socialist movement. But it would be better if they joined. It would give them and us more confidence to continue the work.
rodmanlewis wrote:Yes, if they are helping the socialist movement. But it would be better if they joined. It would give them and us more confidence to continue the work.Straying into the realm of the claim that has been knocked about here the now and then, that only members of the SPGB/WSM are socialists.
SocialistPunk wrote:Straying into the realm of the claim that has been knocked about here the now and then, that only members of the SPGB/WSM are socialists.The realm of the rediculous. I challenge anyone to convince me this man was not a socialist'Or stopped being a socialist when the SPGB expelled himhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upoHgSGdifA
Vin wrote:SocialistPunk wrote:Straying into the realm of the claim that has been knocked about here the now and then, that only members of the SPGB/WSM are socialists.The realm of the rediculous. I challenge anyone to convince me this man was not a socialist'Or stopped being a socialist when the SPGB expelled himhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upoHgSGdifA
I am not saying that socialists can only be found in the SPGB/WSM. In fact, the only contribution that some members make is being membership fodder–they don't contribute anything else; they don't give any financial support, and they don't respond to communications from branch secretaries. This means they are a burden on the party, whose members have to spend valuable time and effort chasing them up when they could be doing something more useful.We know there are non-members who support and help the party. Whatever their reasons for not joining, it's a fact that they contribute more to the socialist movement than some members.If some members behave in a disruptive manner because they think they are the "true believers", then that leads us to question their socialist credentials. On the other hand, perhaps they are the genuine socialists and we're not!? Let's hear their argument for us not being socialist.
How many people come across the party and agree but then go on to think 'it aint gonna happen in my lifetime so why sweat blood and tears? The workers aren't going to join me so to hell with it! The SPGB is too small.I think it was Robbo used the term 'critical mass' Perhaps people will join at that point, when they see the possibility of progress. Suffering now for something that will happen after we are gone doesn't make sense to many. The point is it is not a religion socialist are not religious, not willing to wear a hairshirt, why should we? I rejoined a few years back because I genuinely feel there is 'something in the air' as Tthe band Thunderclap Newmen once sang
Vin wrote:How many people come across the party and agree but then go on to think 'it aint gonna happen in my lifetime so why sweat blood and tears? The workers aren't going to join me so to hell with it! The SPGB is too small.I think it was Robbo used the term 'critical mass' Perhaps people will join at that point, when they see the possibility of progress. Suffering now for something that will happen after we are gone doesn't make sense to many. The point is it is not a religion socialist are not religious, not willing to wear a hairshirt, why should we? I rejoined a few years back because I genuinely feel there is 'something in the air' as Tthe band Thunderclap Newmen once sangI think the term 'critical mass' has been doing the rounds in the party for many years. But that won't happen if members of the working class hold off joining until we're bigger, for obvious reasons. The question is how do we target members of the working class who will join regardless of our size, and are prepared for the long haul and many disappointments? Those who are holding off until something 'seems to be happening' are useless as far as we're concerned. And then there are the 'revolving door' members who join, leave, rejoin, leave again…We should be making workers feel guilty about their hanging on to the apron strings of capitalism–a system that dispossesses them of much of what they produce. Make them feel guity about bequeathing this rotten system to their children and grandchildren. Point out to them that this exploititive system only maintains itself because of their support, and is not the fault of governments who can only carry out their, admittedly, tacit support.
Vin wrote:I challenge anyone to convince me this man was not a socialist'Or stopped being a socialist when the SPGB expelled himhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upoHgSGdifASimple. He and the others who were expelled at the same time ceased to be socialists when they renounced, on several occasions, the democratic will of a majority of party members. Socialism and democracy are inseparable. This reluctance to observe democratic decisions continued with the formation of 'Socialist' Studies by many of those expelled including Hardy; in fact by all accounts democracy within this organisation was non-existent. As one ex-member of 'Socialist' Studies has observed:
R.Cumming in 2004 wrote:We need democratic practice in this Party. The affiliation of the Ukraine group to the Party involved 9 members at a JBM voting in favour. What about the other 20-30 who didn't attend this Branch meeting? You cannot reply that they abstained, for there were only 9 members present, and there have been no voting forms sent out.It is the same with this farce over the post of General Secretary. Cyril May died on the 15th of October 2003. There have been no elections to this post since then. It has been 4 months, and we still have an Acting General Secretary who was either elected undemocratically or was self-appointed.I have not been asked to vote on anything since I joined the Party on 16th June 2002. This is almost two years. The 1905 Rule Book of the Party makes it clear that the post of General Secretary is elected every year. What has happened to this? You have decided we don't need a rulebook! I contend we do need a rulebook, and I would be well within my rights to deny the very existence of this organisation on the basis that it has no rulebook.I suggest, that elections of the various officers of the Party take place as soon as possible. This should be prioritised. Forget printing Socialist Studies. Forget your lecture list. Forget it all until you actually set up some kind of democratic apparatus.For this purpose, it is necessary that a special conference of all members be convened. All members of the Party should be encouraged and even helped (financially) to attend if necessary. At this Conference, those present should decide the organisational form the Party is going to have.So there you go, comrades, you have your requests. Democratic practice is one of the most important aspects of a socialist political organisation. I am trying to give you a chance to get rid of the ANARCHIST nonsense of `we rule by consensus', and to establish a proper socialist party based on democratically agreed principles, policy and rules.Still not convinced, gnome. The expulsions were a petty shambles and an embarrasment and we have still learned nothing from it. If conference votes for PG tips and a comrade insisted on buying Typhoo tea bags, he should not be expelled and in my eyes remains a socialist.Have another listen to Comrade Hardcastle 'Democracy'?
Vin,Gnome and myself may lock horns from time to time, but I'm in total agreement regarding democracy and socialism. You can't have socialism without democracy and if that group of one time SPGB members were ignoring conference decisions, then they aint socialists in any practical sense.It's one thing to be a theoretical Marxist, even then I bet Marx would be turning in his grave at the idea of people who dismiss socialist democracy in favour of their ego, it's entirely another thing when it comes to being a socialist.
Vin wrote:Still not convinced, gnome.Didn't expect you to be; it's hard for some people to accept that someone they once admired has 'fallen from grace'. Hardy's contribution to the party, as in the case of Coleman's, was valuable, even impressive, at the time, but nobody's indispensible. They were one-time comrades we once knew…We've just lost another prolific writer and speaker, albeit active in the party for a much shorter period; it's always regrettable when that happens but the struggle goes on regardless…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.