The Socialist Cause
- This topic has 65 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello I am a new user on this site, anyway my main concern is will socialism ever materialize or will it be just another utopian dream? Many people seem to be very uninterested in socialism or even have hard feelings toward it. What is the best way to spread this idealogy (or theory whatever) is what I am asking. Based on your collective experiences, what do you feel is the most effective way to get the socialist message across to ordinary people.
Thankyou for your imput.
That is the golden question. I don't think there's any single most effective way. All we can do as a minority is spread the message in any and every way we can. Sorry that's not a very satisfactory answer but I don't think there is a simple one…
yea I mean it sucks thinking the way i do sometimes.. like having basically no one around you who thinks like you. But is there something we did wrong to make socialism sooooo unpopular? Do we need to do something radically different? Is violence the answer? Is peaceful protest the answer? WHAT can we do to reach people other than the college student/intellectual type? HOW do we reach the foundation of the working class and spark a fire underneath their butts? These are the questions I ask myself but as you said there is no clear answer…experience alone seems to be the best modal now. But when will it take people who today don't give a rats ass about socialism to actually WANT it and WORK for it? That is the question that haunts me the most.
Capitalist Pig wrote:…experience alone seems to be the best modal now.No, Marx argued for the view that humans do 'theory and practice'.'Experience alone' just means that the 'theory' part of the inescapable couplet is provided by a hidden, unacknowledged, ruling class theory.All humans use theory and practice.So, 'experience alone' in our world is actually 'ruling class ideas and ruling class practice'.I think that this is reflected in your questions, which contain assumptions (ie. a 'theory') which socialists don't share.
Capitalist Pig wrote:I don't understand the point your trying to make from 'experience alone'.Simply, that 'experience alone' doesn't exist for humans.If you think it does, I'd ask 'who told you so?', because you didn't emerge from the womb able to do 'experience alone', you had to be taught by, initially, your parents and close relatives, and later, by teachers, priests, politicians and scientists.They were all already brought up in a society, consisting of the same influential roles that you and me were brought up. So, they learned and taught, as do you and I. Humans are social animals.One of the ruling class ideas within our society is that 'we are all individuals', and that 'individual experience' is the source of knowledge (what you called 'experience alone').In fact, all humans have always learned from the society in which they have grown up, and so the notion of 'experience alone' is not only invalid, but also a ruling class idea to help prevent all of us asking 'where do we get our ideas from?'.If the source of an individual's ideas are 'experience alone', then they don't have to even ask that question, never mind try to answer it.My advice to you is to ask further why you think 'experience alone' is even possible.The socialist answer is 'it isn't', and we live in a society where knowledge is produced by society, and so has social characteristics.If you conclude that 'experience alone' is valid and possible, then I think you'll have difficulty coming to understand the socialist viewpoint.Hope that helps, CP.
As DJP so rightly states, what you ask is the "Big Question"! If we knew the answer, it would be akin to solving the riddle of the Sphinx, unravelling the Gordian Knot without the use of Alexanders sword and squaring the circle, all in one afternoon.What I would say, is that one asks people to look around at the contradictions Capitalism throws up by its very existence.Homeless people alongside empty unoccupid properties.Hungry, starving people, alongside destroyed food. Fields left fallow to keep prices high.Sick people, denied drugs because of "cost", when the ingredients of the same, cost pennies.These are just a few examples. As one lives ones life, these contradictions leap out at you.Why do you think a bus passes by almost empty, or a pensioner has 2/3 or 4 items in their shooping basket, at most. Or a mother/father shouts at their children when they ask for sweets or treats at the checkout?Does no one want the bus? Does the pensioner not want/need more food? Does/would the parent not like to treat their children? Bring a smile to their faces, see them happy?These, as with a plethora of other examples, are down to one thing! the cannot pay, cannot have world (as John Bissett used to say) we live in.Next time you venture out keep your eyes and ears open and encourage people you know to do the same!!!
steve colborn wrote:What I would say, is that one asks people to look around at the contradictions Capitalism throws up by its very existence.Homeless people alongside empty unoccupid properties.Hungry, starving people, alongside destroyed food. Fields left fallow to keep prices high.Sick people, denied drugs because of "cost", when the ingredients of the same, cost pennies.These are just a few examples. As one lives ones life, these contradictions leap out at you.I disagree that 'these contradictions leap out at you', steve.That's to assume the same method that CP was arguing for: 'experience alone'.That is, that 'experience' of all the things you mention by 'looking around' will make the 'contradictions' clear.All these (to us, terrible) phenomena can be explained away if one uses the 'theory of the market'. Since we live in a society that tells everyone from birth that 'the market works – how else would we eat?', these phenomena can be explained away as just 'unavoidable consequences', just like 'death is an unavoidable consequence of life'.Unless 'people' 'look around' with a different theory (ie. socialist theory), then the conditions you describe will remain 'horrible but necessary' to those just using their eyes.The material conditions do not speak to us, matter does not tell us what it is.The correct method, as I've said to CP, is Marx's 'theory and practice'. 'Practice/experience alone' will not do this. 'Experience' means 'capitalist understanding'.
Best way to get the message across is by making Socialism and the parties representing it credible. We are not yet there. Whether we will get to socialism cannot be predicted without a working crystal ball. Best way to get there is convincing people (especially through elections where they exist) not forcing them, not shooting people, not deceiving people, not patronising people and not ignoring people. Nothing wrong with preaching to college students or intellectuals, but the worst thing that happened to misrepresent socialism was the soviet union.
LBird wrote:Capitalist Pig wrote:I don't understand the point your trying to make from 'experience alone'.Simply, that 'experience alone' doesn't exist for humans.If you think it does, I'd ask 'who told you so?', because you didn't emerge from the womb able to do 'experience alone', you had to be taught by, initially, your parents and close relatives, and later, by teachers, priests, politicians and scientists.They were all already brought up in a society, consisting of the same influential roles that you and me were brought up. So, they learned and taught, as do you and I. Humans are social animals.One of the ruling class ideas within our society is that 'we are all individuals', and that 'individual experience' is the source of knowledge (what you called 'experience alone').In fact, all humans have always learned from the society in which they have grown up, and so the notion of 'experience alone' is not only invalid, but also a ruling class idea to help prevent all of us asking 'where do we get our ideas from?'.If the source of an individual's ideas are 'experience alone', then they don't have to even ask that question, never mind try to answer it.My advice to you is to ask further why you think 'experience alone' is even possible.The socialist answer is 'it isn't', and we live in a society where knowledge is produced by society, and so has social characteristics.If you conclude that 'experience alone' is valid and possible, then I think you'll have difficulty coming to understand the socialist viewpoint.Hope that helps, CP.
Interesting. Now we are talking about something totally different. But ok so instead of relying on experience you just rely on theory. But all i'm saying is that socialism is kind of only a novelty now for people. Like how do you debunk almost one hundred of leninism when its so deeply ground into peoples minds even from a young age. You would have to have to reteach the people who would actually give up their beliefs to something completely new…people don't like to do that, they just like to stick to what they already know and not question it because this offers security. It takes a LONG time to explain all of this sheeet to people and most people don't have the patiance or time. The only way people will question their beliefs is if our message is repeated over and over again through PR…this is the conclusion I have come to
The worst problem we face is the legacy of 100 years of reformist "socialism" and leninst "communism", this has muddied the waters, perhaps irrecoverably. When or if socialism happens the odds are, i think, that it will not be called socialism and the the socialist party of great britian will not be THE socialist party.Right now it is not hard to convince people that there is something wrong, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if "it's a nice idea but…." is the most common responce to our case. With the "but…" relating to some kind of idea about "human nature".I think those are the two greatest barriers we have to overcome…
Capitalist Pig wrote:But ok so instead of relying on experience you just rely on theory.You'll fit in very well on this site, CP. The rest here can't read my posts, either.Let's try again. Not just 'theory'.Theory and practice.Some bloke called Karl Marx, apparently.
The big question that always comes up is, what's the alternative? Perhaps it's the lack of convincing detail on this score – or, more likely, the horrors or failings of living or recently dead examples – that is the biggest barrier. Look at Russell Brand. People like him. But he still can't answer the question. Can anyone?
DJP wrote:The worst problem we face is the legacy of 100 years of reformist "socialism" and leninst "communism", this has muddied the waters, perhaps irrecoverably. When or if socialism happens the odds are, i think, that it will not be called socialism and the the socialist party of great britian will not be THE socialist party.Right now it is not hard to convince people that there is something wrong, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if "it's a nice idea but…." is the most common responce to our case. With the "but…" relating to some kind of idea about "human nature".I think those are the two greatest barriers we have to overcome…Spot on there DJP. This has been my general experience to date.It's a hard slog debunking those common barriers. The hardest being the human nature, reinforced concrete bunker.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.