WPNZ Open Letter
- This topic has 8 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Rather than the debate be conducted by individual e-mail, I have taken the liberty of placing it here, (the only change was that I used the writers initials instead of full name for the sake of privacy as this is a forum open to the public.)
Open E-Letter Dec. 2018, World Socialist Party New Zealand:
Dear comrades, Lately our branch has discussed the lack of progress within our party and whether overseas has had the same lack of progress. Within this discussion we have concluded that proceeding with the same methods would not be an intelligent way of dealing with the problem of advancing the cause. Some of the suggestions made are to do with the name Socialism. We can continue using this word but by far the majority of the world’s population understand Socialism to mean different to what we know it to mean. Thus, the mere mention of the word creates a barrier to those who are averse to the what they believe Socialism is. Also discussed, that Socialism will be voted in by the majority. We have noted that none of the changes from primitive Communism to human slavery to feudalism or to capitalism has been selected by a majority vote but in fact it has been changed by social evolution. Our part it seems is to be the catalyst for next stage. Maybe it would be wise to demonstrate to the people of a wonderful world that is evolving. It only needs people to understand that the old ways of employment for sustenance will be phased out. We are asking companion parties their thoughts on these matters and any suggestion they have.
Addendum – T. Could you point out its the meaning behind the word and not the word itself which has no reference in the real world that matters. Showing people what is possible now and let there imagination do the rest, rather than looking back at. A comprehensive study needs to take place in regards how the receiver of the message interprets the message.
regards G.
Good evening comrades.
In regards to the letter from our companion party in New Zealand, it’s understandable that socialism gives most individuals a bad rub, or, as many on left, gives them a misguided understanding of what socialism entails. So our battle to educate is looking somewhat, in some cases, unfulfilling.
Personally, it’s not the name of the society that brought me to socialism, as I began my journey wanting a stateless, money free society with democratic social ownership before I even knew what socialism meant.
This name we advocate, it has a long history of horrible crimes tied to it, and all for the wrong reasons – because none of what has occurred has been in the name of socialism – only by name, not principles. So if we as a global movement should continue using socialism, it’ll be a hard fought battle to truly get through its genuine meaning. What really is our alternative? Rebranding socialism?
Marx and Engels used many words or phrases to mean a post-capitalist society, it’s not completely out of the question to use one of the many different names they used, or as an organization, democratically create something new. But this is all just contemplation on the subject at hand. I’m just one individual, no matter the name, I’ll always advocate the abolition of capitalism, wage labour, and bourgeois democracy.
DM
Once again we are described by the term anarcho-socialist.
https://www.poliquads.com/antifa-issue
Is it a description we should embrace?I know some on Libcom would challenge our credentials but so would many anarchists such as egoist/individualists Stirnerites challenge them.
Maybe even to be more provocative and spark debates on differences we should call ourselves anarcho-Marxists
Actually it was the ineffable George Walford in his Idiotical Commentary who invented calling us “anarcho-socialists” as in this article from 1984:
He does come up with a good quip here, though, that the anarchists want to abolish the state the day before the revolution while we want to abolish it the day after.
I doubt that the NZ comrades would like us to take it up. After all, the word “anarchism” has negative popular connotations too (bomb-throwing, anarchy, individualism). So, by combining them, we’d get the worst of both worlds. I imagine what they’ve got in world is something like “free access society”, “world commonwealth”, “resource-based economy”.
I think the real trouble about what we call ourselves is that the capitalist controlled media would distort the content of the message anyways as I mentioned might happen on the topic of democracy
They’ll find fault with whatever we say or whatever we call ourselves. We”ll be accused of disguising ourselves with false labels
So maybe the best thing we can do is to follow the advice “Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims.”
But perhaps we should pay more attention to how we express socialism.
Is Fully Automated Luxury Communism the way to go?
Or by advocating post-scarcity super-abundance are we picking a fight with the environmentalists and anti-consumerists?
Or can we acquire an audience that has been brought up on fear of new technology but understands the amazing technical versatility of the mobile phone?
Can we suggest a name of a new society that makes hope and anticipation something tangible?
We can continue using this word but by far the majority of the world’s population understand Socialism to mean different to what we know it to mean. Thus, the mere mention of the word creates a barrier to those who are averse to the what they believe Socialism is.
I dont think this is necessarily true – or at least not of everyone. In America for example the word ‘socialism’ appears to elicit a positive reaction from a growing number of people. True, what they understand by the term is in almost all cases not what we understand by the term but we are talking here of people’s emotional disposition to the term that allows them to become receptive to what we have to say. In a sense, far from creating a barrier it removes one – the emotional barrier – more than any other term I can think of (most of which would probably not evoke much if any emotional response and come across as meaningless or bland).
The term socialism at least stirs something in people and, for some , this could work to our advantage. This links up with a belief of mine that to be more effective we need to adopt a more targeted approach. The people most likely to respond positively to the term socialism – even if they dont share our definition of it – are likely to be those most receptive to what we have to say anyway and therefore are most likely to constitute our prime target group.
But even in the case of people who respond negatively to the term socialism, this could work to our advantage as it provides us with a way in to discuss with them what the term really means or should mean in our view. The point is that the term socialism elicits strong emotion, either way, and this is the criterion we should use in selecting a term. An over-rationalistic cum technocratic approach to the matter is based on the false promise that there is some sufficiently neutral term out there that can accurately capture what we have to say and draw in people in their thousands by virtue of its own intrinsic appeal
Alan wrote:
Is Fully Automated Luxury Communism the way to go?
No. For a start, there doesn’t have to be “full automation” before communism/socialism can be established (otherwise it would be years away). Second, that everybody should live in “luxury” isn’t necessary either, bearing in mind the dictionary definitions of the word. “Abundance” or “plenty” is ok, but “luxury” is overdoing it. And the “hair-shirt” brigade you’ve been cultivating over climate change would be put off. 🙂
On the other hand, “Sufficiently Automated Abundance Communism” isn’t all that snappy.
What about “World of abundance”?
“A World of Plenty” has the same nice ring about it, too.
Less so “Cornucopia Communism” or “Cornucopia Socialism” but an apt title for a pamphlet or article.
Bookchin was on the right track with “post-scarcity anarchism”…so “post-scarcity socialism”?
There is a slogan that most have heard, ever since childhood, and I am surprised it is not used much more often politically
“All for one. One for all”
(from the Three Musketeers by Dumas that many if not read at least seen one version of all the movies made)
Alternatively
“All for All”
It’s shorter and is straight to the point.
Another e-mail that I think should be posted here
Greetings Comrades,
Our New Zealand members raise tough points about socialist growth or lack there in, and I’m sure we’ve all had searching thoughts wondering much the same; however, I don’t think reflecting that our difficulties are completely internal, or messaging is off, completely warranted.
If we account for the massive concentration of media in the hands of the swindling class it’s little surprise workers worldwide are kept well blinkered with noses to earning money to pay debt for things advertisers indoctrinate the populace, cradle to grave, they/we ‘need.’
Things to think about locally ‘in the mean time’ that myself and others do to increase levels of worker understanding and resilience living through the mayhem of crapitalism while we are stuck with it, are:
Set up a worker skill share and teach each other ways to minimize the impact swindlers have on us – i.e., carpentry, welding, bike and auto mechanical repair, food security / wildcrafting, beer and bread making, much to do with the ‘rural economy’ such as the Ruskin/Morris/IWW crowds promulgate in the UK and North America.
https://williammorrissociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Citizenship-Workshop-final-compressed.pdf
https://us.eventbu.com/portland/pdx-gdc-diy-plumbing-workshop/5853593There are others sites if you Google ’em.
Resist participating in the circulating rate of capital as much as you can; capitalist make their dosh by realizing their swindling gains when they squeeze out profits from sale of worker-made commodities in exchange for cash money. The swindlers then reinvest part of that profit to do it all again (as we well know), to continue living out their ignoble parasite lifestyles off the backs of us, the wage-slave workers who rent out our labour power to the (hopefully) highest payer. If we interrupt this circulating rate of capital – and the buggers can’t get their locked in profits out through the cash nexus, well you’ve just done an extra injury to the rogues. NB – try to wean yourself, family members, and friends off needing loads of cash to pay debts and paying for things you can live without, like ‘5 minute wonders,’ etc.
Use public services like libraries and other useful public services and avoid going shopping too much. Thing about using public services they are most often non-profit or free, they don’t readily feed the beast of monopoly capital (you can follow the money on that one to check it out for yourselves), and when you’re doing more free stuff (hopefully fun) you are not helping the swindlers cash in.
Get outdoors and enjoy the Earth’s natural beauties (what’s left of them and while they are here). This is not only free but good for us, and I find I meet the best sort of folk on such outings – folk who very often know the general score about what a crappy (dis)civilization we actually exist in; and wouldn’t you rather spend time with folks like this than with purblind curmudgeons who barely know what capitalism is, or worse, support it!?
Keep punching Comrades; we ain’t gone get what we want being faint of heart.
Be well, till soon, and yfs,
John [A.]
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.