alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Dave, I have been characterized as the pessimist of the Party for highlighting this decline in membership and that the demographic nature of the Party ie the age and often infirmity of the existing members. So as the saying goes, no need to teach your granny to suck eggs. Any ideas on activity from me is made in the full knowledge that we cannot involve great numbers. But until i’m persuaded that it has got to just one man and his dog, I cannot help but propose publicity-seeking political activity.
I have made a number of suggestions to orientate the Party into activities that can make members “armchair revolutionaries” with the laptop as their weapon. None appear to resonate sufficiently with members and when I read the latest report of Conference, it seemed we are still in denial about the state of our organization. In fact the most promising developments is the transformation of a social party into a social club. (I cite Lancaster’s get-together and Manchester’s regular walks, as examples)
I see no actual change in the style or substance of any adaptation or adjustment to the Party that takes into account that we can no longer fully function as an effective political party, albeit we presently have the funds to engage in periodic electoral activity. But it is disappointing that some branches deign to even engage in that.
The interest and involvement of other Party members in this forum is reflective of a deep ennui within the Party. More seem happy to talk to one another on Spopen and Spintcom rather than engage with a potential wider audience. WSM Forum although still extant is visited by less than a handful of long-time sympathisers
Your own branch at one time showed very healthy signs of growth and I wonder what you were doing right but also what caused it to stall and then go into reverse. There must be a lesson to be learned.
Bijou on the forum here has made a proposal which I don’t think he has formally followed up on by delivering it to the EC for debate. But why aren’t branches responded to his appeal. The only feedback has been you, me and Robbo, so at least there are four who seek new ways of
Back to the original problem. No members – no activities – no members.
If we cannot attract interest then we should re-consider our role.
The Summer School (run by only one person, it seems) from all appearance seems relatively successful. Many left groups concentrate on such events – the SWP and the CPGB – inviting notable non-members to lecture and in doing so creates a presence that they punch above their weight.
I already begun a search of events we could link to and it brought me to the local Socialist History groups who host meetings.
There are strategies available that do not require numerous members, we got to identify them and focus upon getting the few able-bodied members to engage in them.
“3.5% of the population to achieve system change”
Somewhere on the forum is a discussion on this. My position is for socialism it will not require an actual numerical majority, but the 3.5% needs to be more 35%
“using ideas such as “Momentum-driven organising” to achieve this.”
Is that Labour Party’s Momentum they wish to emulate? If so what actually is that organizing style? I’m a bit out of the loop
“we welcome everyone and every part of everyone”
I think you have already had a few comments on this thread concerning suitable allies and bed-fellows. It always takes two tango.
So agreement of 6 out of 9 isn’t too bad
But they themselves seem to fall down on their aspirations if as you seem to suggest that their power-structure is not transparent. Again as I implied in another post, this is probably a consequence of their protest strategy – surprise and the unexpected.
But for how long can they keep out the police-spies and agent provocateurs. Once XR is penetrated, its tactics are more easily undermined, and even manipulated.
Open public meetings with direct elections and delegate democracy within the groups has to appear, if it is to be more permanent. Again Jo Freeman’s Tyranny of Structurelessness is the basic text on this aspect of political organization.
Related to my earlier post
A new group calling itself Animal Rebellion is joining forces with Extinction Rebellion to stage sit-ins and block roads in London for two weeks in October.
Alex Lockwood, an Animal Rebellion organiser and spokesman, told The Independent: “The destructive nature of the animal agriculture and fishing industries are contributing hugely to the climate emergency – they are a leading cause of carbon emissions. This isn’t scaremongering by animal activists, this is respected organisations like the UN, the IPCC and the Food, Farming and Countryside Commission of the RSA saying we must switch to plant-based diets.”
He added they were “deeply sorry” for any inconvenience to the public.
“Like Extinction Rebellion, we are collectively of the view that, given the failure of world leaders to date, disruption is now necessary to get anything like commensurate change. If there was a better, less disruptive way of doing this we would do that instead.”This forum has had a long exchange on veganism and I think agreed that the future diet of society will most likely be flexitarian, a lot more veggies and beans but with some meat treats, perhaps more chicken rather than beef.
I also think the forum was a bit negative on the success of forcing a specific diet down the throats of an unreceptive public even if the power of the State with taxes was applied. Is it working with cigarettes. In some developed countries, yes smoker numbers have gone down, but the tobacco industry has simply shifted its markets to where they can get away with building a new generation of nicotine addicts.
I did see that Goldsmiths University was removing beef from their menus. Perhaps such decisions will grow and spread.
As with the sugar tax I have seen some movement from the soft drinks corporations. As diabetic I see more no-sugar colas on the shelves.
I patiently but eagerly await for Socialist Rebellion to emerge…it may take a while
Ominous reports that China is massing troops close to Hong Kong in preparation for “apparent large-scale exercises.” The People’s Armed Police forces are mandated by Chinese law for “dealing with rebellions, riots, serious violent and illegal incidents, terrorist attacks and other social security incidents”.
Alexandre Krauss, a policy adviser for the EU’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, called it a sign that “something extraordinarily bad is about to happen”
The 1905 soviets arose spontaneously and independently of the political parties. The situation was quite different in 1917.
Lenin never ever advocated power to the soviets. His lesson of 1905 was that the soviets were to be an appendage to the political parties (as they became)
http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1907/5thdraft/6.htm
“…if Social-Democratic activities among the proletarian masses are properly, effectively and widely organised, such institutions may actually become superfluous…that a most determined struggle must be waged against all disruptive and demagogic attempts to weaken the R.S.D.L.p. from within or to utilise it for the purpose of substituting non-party political, proletarian organisations for the Social-Democratic Party…that Social-Democratic Party organisations may, in case of necessity, participate in inter-party Soviets of Workers’ Delegates, Soviets of Workers’ Deputies, and in congresses of representatives of these organisations, and may organise such institutions, provided this is done on strict Party lines for the purpose of developing and strengthening the Social-Democratic Labour Party…”
Conditions in Russia weren’t ripe for a socialist revolution there. We all know people don’t like being told “we told you so”. But, the SPGB actually did and it was not from hindsight but by exercising Marx’s Material Conception of History. What’s the point of a theory if it is not put into practice?
Victor Serge argues that the Russian Revolution did indeed possess the seed of Stalinism within it, but he adds that it also contained many other more fruitful seeds but the SPGB said that the soil was barren and infertile for those to flourish. We were right.
“…there was going to be something at Heathrow…”
I recall the possibility of XR flying drones over the airport was once expressed and I always assumed that this was a proposal by just one element and later read that it was rejected.
A wise decision on safety grounds but if blockading some bridges and roads distances sympathy for XR as ALB maintains (I shy away from such a conclusion) then occupying the airport terminals and airline check-ins won’t be a threat to safety but won’t make too many friends either. Curious to know if travel insurance would cover such flight delays.
This brings us to criticism directed at Occupy a few years ago. Because as you yourself have experienced the structurelessness of XR may well assist in its security since flash-crowds are not easily infiltrated or their events contained and controllable.
But it also challenges its accountability.
Who does a group of XR activists answer to? Who authorises it and permits its actions in the name of XR? Can we create a SPGB XR group, for example?
This is a related article of interest. It seems this discussion list reflects a general debate on the subject of population by a quarter I had no idea existed
We have thought of the deep greens and primativists to be the fringe even the misanthrops (who i can’t help associate the term with werewolves) but, lo and behold, there exists the fringe of the fringe – the anti-natalists.
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-49298720
“…Fuelling anti-natalist arguments in recent years is an increasing focus on the environment and the potentially devastating effects of climate change.
Judging from posts in the anti-natalist groups, there’s clearly a large overlap between their ideas and environmental activism.
“I feel that it is selfish to have children at this time,” adds Nancy a vegan, plastic-free, animal rights enthusiast and yoga instructor from the Philippines.”The reality is that the children being born into the world are creating more destruction for the environment.”…In a Facebook group called “very angry anti-natalists” a petition is being shared which they hope to send to the United Nations. Its title is “Overpopulation root of the climate catastrophe – worldwide birth stop now.” So far it has 27,000 signatures… At times the rhetoric sounds like selective breeding – or eugenics…”As for the conventional attitude to population, the article explains
“…But will an increasing population necessarily lead directly to environmental disaster? According to the BBC’s Global Population Correspondent Stephanie Hegarty, it’s hard to say, because the future is so difficult to predict.
“According to scientific projections, due to economic development and dropping fertility rates, the population of the world is likely to plateau at about 11 billion in 80 years,” she says. “Whether the planet can sustain that or not – we do not know.
It’s also very difficult to predict how many people the planet can sustain because it’s all about consumption. And that means everything from air, water, food, fossil fuels, wood, plastic – the list goes on and on,” she says. “Clearly some of us are consuming a lot more than others. A family of 12 in a country like Burundi will consume less, on average, than a family of three in Texas. There are so many factors that are going to be changing over the next decade and the next century that we can’t predict right now.”FYI
I wonder how long it is going to take XR to copy-cat the democracy protesters occupation of Hong Kong’s airport and shut it down
https://apnews.com/a4ad41c1f940459f810111ddc2eea825
Certainly, air travel is on the XR hit-list
And will the UK follow China’s hints that they will treat demonstrators as “terrorists”
54% said they agreed with the statement: “Boris Johnson needs to deliver Brexit by any means, including suspending parliament if necessary, in order to prevent MPs (Members of Parliament) from stopping it.”
46% disagreed with the statement.
Support for the Conservative Party had risen by 6 percentage points to 31%, compared with 27% who said they would back the opposition Labour Party.
The good and the bad
“…If global population stabilizes at 8.5 to 10 billion people, the next 50 years may be the final episode of rapid global agricultural expansion. During this period, agriculture has the potential to have massive, irreversible environmental impacts. The minimization of these impacts, while providing sufficient and equitably distributed food, will be a great challenge. Although there are likely to be mechanisms and policies that can reduce, or perhaps reverse, many of the trends that we have identified, these solutions will not be achieved unless far more resources are dedicated to their discovery and implementation…” [my emphasis]
“…It is clear that further improvements in HANPP efficiency are likely to lead to a further increase in agricultural inputs and aggravate environmental pressures, at least if they are based on the currently predominant technologies...” [my emphasis]
As always, the possibilities and potentials are there but political will is what is required. Are we confident that capitalist-driven policies will be sufficient? Socialists are not. Having skimmed a few of the articles, which require deeper reading, what strikes me is that we advocate production for use, and I don’t actually believe this is a concept many of the authors fully understand…there remains a focus on the continuing role of cash-crops and international trade.
But to be perfectly truthful and I have said it on this forum many times when it comes to mathematical explanations, my mind goes blank.
Many thanks for drawing our attention to this concept and I have begun reading through what is available on the web on the subject (damn these websites raise pay-walls). I am presently reading
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08a7ded915d622c000775/LDPI-05-temper.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08a7ded915d622c000775/LDPI-05-temper.pdf
and later will no doubt find others.
Watch this space
Bolton informs Boris, that Britain will become a colony of the USA.
Perhaps that is a bit too much of a hyperbole but if the UK expects some sort of generous trade deal that benefits British interests, they are in for a very big shock.
Perhaps a satellite state of the United States might be a more accurate depiction of the new “special relationship”
But just to add, how capitalism is always in flux and rarely can be predicted
