alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A group of US environmental activists, dubbed the Valve Turners, engaged in non-violent civil disobedience targeting the oil industry have been listed in internal Department of Homeland Security documents as “extremists” and some of its members listed alongside white nationalists and mass killers.
In its recent intelligence bulletin evaluating domestic terrorism threats between 2018 and 2020, the department included the Valve Turners and described the group as “suspected environmental rights extremists.” It also listed two of the group’s members alongside violent white supremacists and other extremists who have engaged in mass killings, including the man behind the racist 2015 slaying of nine black churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/13/us-listed-climate-activist-group-extremists
LBird, as I said, Dissident Voice website is accessible to any with something relevant to say.
I’m sure you can write a full rebuttal of Pena for it to publish and in doing so adding to the Marxist case in the media.
In my case I simply am not qualified enough to offer a detailed refutation other than some simple bullet points so am reluctant to engage in a academic polemic which is why I am urging those more erudite and articulated to engage in it.
The Bishop of Detroit
“…I call on Catholics in the military, including chaplains, as well as all who work for the military or any branch of the armaments industry to heed Pope Francis’s call to set aside the futility of war. All Catholics should refuse to kill and should refuse cooperation with United States wars. Catholic taxpayers should make every effort to avoid paying for war and weapons. Rather, embrace Jesus, who calls us to love our enemies, put up the sword, and take up the cross….”
How many will listen?
Another Labour Party group emerges taking on the persona of anarchist
https://blackroselabour.uk/about/
Why are libertarian socialists organising in the Labour Party?
Despite our recognition that there is no parliamentary or statist route to emancipatory socialism, some libertarian socialists choose to participate in the parliamentary system in order to mitigate the damage caused by capitalism and the state. It is a recognition of the fact that extra-parliamentary socialist organising is made substantially easier when you aren’t worried about the roof over your head or about your healthcare being taken away; i.e. under a progressive Labour government.
However it is important to not allow parliamentary and electoral work to take up the majority of our time and energy, but rather devote our efforts towards organising fellow workers in and supporting trade unions, organising tenants in tenants’ unions, engaging in anti-fascism, and being involved with community and mutual aid projects. This is the vision of leftist organising we wish to promote amongst the Labour Party’s 500,000 strong membership, because we believe in their capacity to truly make a difference in our communitieshttps://blackroselabour.uk/faq/
Their recommended reading list includes Kropotkin, Bookchin, Chomsky, of course, and Emma Goldman
They say they draw inspiration from the Libertarian Socialist Caucus in the Democratic Socialists of America. In fact I go as far as to say it is a clone of it.
As they say, if he claiming to be a Marxist and socialist, when we have friends like him, who needs enemies.
I found it verbose, full of academic language, and it seems he is seeking the reputation as someone who has refuted Marx, despite many of the arguments he presents being old discarded ones jazzed up with a “green” over-tone.
I’m sure you criticisms could easily be expanded to more than four points.
Yes, LBird also adds something useful for a rebuttal.
As I said, Dissident Voice is one of those few websites that welcomes articles and if you do respond, it would carry your rebuttal. It would reach an audience out with our customary circle. A link to the WSPUS would also boost its name-recognition.
And then the Standard can have a introductory note in a later issue.
Climate change protesters face the introduction of draconian laws
https://www.dw.com/en/anti-protest-laws-and-litigation-take-aim-at-climate-activism/a-51701293
The home secretary, Priti Patel, has defended anti-terror police for putting the Extinction Rebellion environmental protest group on a list of extremist ideologies, saying it was important to look at “a range of security risks”.
While accepting that XR was not a terrorist organisation, Patel told LBC radio that such assessment had to be “based in terms of risk to the public, security risks, security threats”.Asked if she believed XR was a terrorist organisation, Patel replied: “No, they’re obviously a protest organisation. But everything has to be based in terms of risk to the public, security risks, security threats. That is based on information from the police, and various intelligence that we will receive. That’s the proper thing to do. You develop your policy approach accordingly.”
I know self-government can have different meanings – one being independence for a colonial state, for instance – but I was more directing the question to this query
Dear Editors,
Does anyone agree with me that it is not just a Socialist World which we should be aiming for but one which is ‘Self-Governed’?
Of course, this More Advanced Society (in which there are no more wars) would still be run according to the Socialist principles of common ownership, democratic control and production for need – along with those of, from Ecology, respect for nature, sustainability and diversity and, from Anarchism, mutual aid, voluntary association and self-management – but it would be founded upon the spiritual understanding that there is ‘only one of us here’, i.e. One Self, and that, therefore, ‘Self-Government’ must be the next logical step forward in the cultural and political evolution of the human race. For is it not true that ‘The Social Revolution’ is more likely to be achieved not by force of argument and/or fear of the alternative but when the notion of ‘Unity/We Are All One/Everything Is Connected’ has entered ‘The Collective Consciousness’?
Yours for radical change,
Colin Millen, Sheringham, NorfolkReply: Yes, we suppose that, insofar as “self-government” means the same as democracy, socialism could be described as “self-government”, though “self-administration” might be better. However, “self” is not to be taken, as you seem to, too literally as referring to a single entity, linking all humans, which has its own consciousness. That would be mysticism, which we can’t accept. On the other hand, to recognise that all humans are socially interdependent and form part of a greater whole, whether the whole of humanity, all living things, or all nature, is to recognise reality and will no doubt be part of the consciousness of the people of world socialist society—Editors.
Another inference is from William Morris and the Hammersmith Socialist Society
“. . . it should be our special aim to make Socialists, by putting before people, and especially the working classes, the elementary truths of Socialism; since we feel sure, in the first place, that in spite of the stir in the ranks of labour there are comparatively few who understand what Socialism is, or have had opportunities of arguing on the subject with those who have at least begun to understand it; and, in the second place, we are no less sure that before any definite Socialist action can be attempted, it must be backed up by a great body of intelligent opinion – the opinion of a great mass of people who are already Socialists, people who know what they want, and are prepared to accept the responsibilities of self-government, which must form a part of their claims.”
Would it be amiss of a socialist to describe socialism as a system of self-government?
They finally got there and admitted the cause was some trigger-happy military unit
Iran has admitted “unintentionally” shooting down a Ukrainian passenger jet, killing all 176 people on board. An investigation found that “missiles fired due to human error”, President Hassan Rouhani said. He described the crash as an “unforgivable mistake”.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-51073621
I was not making a defence of anarchism but merely highlighting an anomaly in our own rule-book. Rule 27 is not enforceable, nor would I say practicable.
Can we really micro-manage our MPs and councillors?
In fact, expulsion from the Party may well be grounds for contempt of parliament as could targeting a campaign against a particular “rogue socialist” MP
I accept what happens outside of Parliament is as important as inside.
Howard Zinn expressed it well:
“What matters most is not who is sitting in the White House, but “who is sitting in” — and who is marching outside the White House, pushing for change.”
In the USA, we presently face a great many obstacles to constitutional change. Even the Democratic Party suffer from widespread voter exclusion and gerry-mandering by the Republicans so we can expect similar a hundred-fold, nay a thousand-fold.
But as you say, there ways and means around it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initiatives_and_referendums_in_the_United_States
An example of legitimacy is how the Hong Kong protesters used local elections to express their political will. But they lacked political power to exercise.
There is a demand for a “peoples assembly” on climate change
France has now got one
A randomly selected citizens’ assembly that has been promised more power than any other – the ability to set Emmanuel Macron’s policy on cutting carbon emissions. In the coming months, the citizens must draw up a series of far-reaching policies on how France can cut carbon emissions by 40% before 2030. Macron has vowed their policies will then be put to parliament “unfiltered”, transformed into executive decrees or even used as the basis for a referendum.
“This is not a consultation asking for people’s views, we’re asking them to produce concrete, structural measures, that’s what’s original,” said Julien Blanchet, who is overseeing the process.
The process is being closely observed from abroad – particularly by the UK, which begins its own form of citizens’ assembly later this month.
Counter-terrorism police placed the non-violent group Extinction Rebellion (XR) on a list of extremist ideologies that should be reported to the authorities running the Prevent programme, which aims to catch those at risk of committing atrocities.
The climate emergency campaign group was included in a 12-page guide produced by counter-terrorism police in the south-east titled Safeguarding young people and adults from ideological extremism, which is marked as “official”. XR featured alongside threats to national security such as neo-Nazi terrorism and a pro-terrorist Islamist group. The guide, aimed at police officers, government organisations and teachers who by law have to report concerns about radicalisation.It says that issues to look out for include people who speak in “strong or emotive terms about environmental issues like climate change, ecology, species extinction, fracking, airport expansion or pollution”.
In the guide, people are advised to listen and look out for young people who “neglect to attend school” or “participate in planned school walkouts” – an allusion to the school strikes for the climate. The document also flags young people taking part in non-violent direct action, such as sit-down protests, banner drops or “writing environmentally themed graffiti”Explaining why it is considered a threat, it states: “Anti-establishment philosophy that seeks system change underlies its activism; the group attracts to its events school-age children and adults unlikely to be aware of this. While non-violent against persons, the campaign encourages other law-breaking activities.”
Hate to say it but Kaz has raised a valid point about Parliamentary rules.
During a “transition period” where the SPGB has made strong progress and have elected several MPs but still remain a minority – a growing minority but not a majority nevertheless there will be many difficult dilemmas for the party to face such as support for specific reforms, particularly some where there might not be a consensus on the benefits to the working class and votes in the House of Commons do not coincide with our EC meeting timetables. We also have experience of local branches being in disagreement with the Party nationally and again our means of resolving such disputes is rather convoluted and cannot rein in MPs or local councillors
I recall one controversary is taking the oath of allegiance to the monarch – well the SSP did so in Scotland and had their fingers crossed behind them as they took the oath. A minor issue but we do face human frailty – rogue individuals.
An MP is not a delegate and is under no obligation to follow our Rule 27. “Candidates elected to a Political office shall be pledged to act on the instructions of their Branches locally, and by the Executive Committee nationally.”
There are ample examples of MPs ignoring Party Whips, and switching Parties and remaining MPs.
The best answer I so far heard is that once elected, an SPGB MP signs an undated application for the Chiltern Hundreds but that is no guarantee…he or she simply can “unsign” it.
As always we are left with the ultimate answer…workers outside parliament will take action to express the illegitimacy of their MP. But once more anarchists will say the SPGB endorsed the ballot in the election which invested the MP with the authority to “act” for himself. And to rely on extra-parliamentary actions shows the superfluous nature of the necessity of going through Parliament.
There is a parliamentary process that we can recall an MP with a petition of I think 10% of the constituency to have a new election but it is limited to MPs who commit criminal acts, not breaches of Party rules.
BTW, I’ve just been plagiarising Eugene Debs for our Scottish blog and surprised at how his views overlap with our own “it is the case, not the face”
“The Socialist Party is the only party that does not want a vote that is not intelligently cast. The popularity of a candidate is against him rather than for him in the Socialist Party. No vote is wanted on account of the personality of a candidate. It is the value of the socialist principle that is taught and emphasized, and if this is not understood and approved the vote is not wanted. Mere disgust with other parties is not accepted by socialists as sufficient reason to encourage the voting for the Socialist Party. Such votes are unreliable, deceptive and misleading. The men who cast them are apt to desert at the very time they are most needed. Any vote that is subject to the influence of personal considerations is so vacillating that it is of no use in the constructive work of a revolutionary political movement. Better a few united on the solid basis of principle, than ten times that number thrown together on the shifting sands of personality. In conventional political party circles, principle is subordinated to personality. “Who are the candidates?” is the all-absorbing question. The people, like helpless children, are forever looking for some “great man” to watch over and protect them. In the Socialist Party principles are paramount; the candidates are the last and least consideration. The supreme question is, “What are the principles?”
The Socialist Party is not on the look-out for some charismatic leader to follow to the fabled promised land, nor does it expect any so-called “great man” to sacrifice himself upon the altar of the country for their salvation. They have made up their minds to be their own leaders and to save themselves. They know that persons have deceived them and will again, so they put their trust in principles, knowing that these will not betray them.
The Socialist Party addresses itself to the working class, seeking to develop the knowledge of that class, while it appeals to the ballot for the realisation of its cooperative commonwealth.”
(a few tweaks here and there from the original)
We should not forget how the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian airliner, or how the Russians (or its allied militia) shot down Air Malaysia jet over Ukraine.
But this seems just too much of a coincidence to be just an accident. And it being a deliberate ploy of either US or Israel is to convoluted.
If I was searching for any conspiracy I would investigate the possibility that US electronic counter-measures put into action when its spy satellites spotted the ballistic missile launches confused Iranian ground to air-defence radar systems with the result a non-threat on their screens became a threat.
