alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Just to counter the iea that i am some sort of pessimist and do not see a future for the Party i recall reading in Thompson's history of the IWW that by the late 1950s its membership had dropped to under a hundred. It revived somewhat, although not to the numbers or resources of the early 20th C.Of course, for a union which is less restrictive in its membership admittance, recovery is easier. It also benefited from a rise in political activity of the 1960s which brought younger blood from the student groups into the IWW.Who is our audience? Do we use a scatter-gun type of campaign aimed at netting everybody or should we be more target-specific and selective in our campaigns. We have the experience of election leaflets which is the example of the first target…tens of thousands of leaflets to the general public.Those involved can say how effective that was.An example of the second is choosing journals we believe have a readership that may include some who are sympathetic to our ideas for leafleting. It appears to be much more successful…250 follow-ups according to Gnomes latest figures.So does it follow we become even more focused on our "ideal" congregation to appeal to? If so, what is it? When the mail-out ends, we should know exactly which magazines is the most responsive and concentrate on repeat leaflet inserts. I am sure that is the strategy which is being pursued.Tim in a past post did voice hope that we would increase physical public meetings. I joined in the 1970s due to 7 Days for Socialism, a series of public meetings so there was ample opportunity to cover much of the Party case and not just bits of it. In my absence, there was University Challenge which from all accounts was also a successful venture.Can we mount similar and use press advertising to promote them? I'm not so confident. We now have a limited number of proficient public speakers and they cannot cover the whole UK, especially in regions without an existing strong Party presenceI note that branches can bill HO for adverts in local press, but i don't think coordinated and systematic press publicity is being done by any branch.We can turn around the decline but it does mean deciding how it can be done and that is where our attention should be centred
I said i will not nit-pick but i have to disagree, Brian, with your last post simply because you neglected to note my caveat – "Now eliminate those functions that can be carried out equally as well by alternative methods that does not require a substantial premises on a high-cost thoroughfare."I can equally assert, accepting your logic, that no party branch can function without its own premises – and you know that isn't true. Glasgow is AFAIK the only branch that did have its own premises. Perhaps there were others. You mix desirability up with necessity.Premises are not essential for a political party such as ourselves. We can re-organise without the need for a HO. We existed for a long time before we owned premises. And has the expected benefits of acquiring one matched the reality?
And your quote seems to justify my concerns, ALB …that you cite a 1943 document (that is over 60 years ago)…which explains that our explanation calls for working class action on the industrial field.I think you have directed us to something that has to be addressed – we ceased repeating it when we should be constantly underlining it in our replies about taxes. This article is an example of what i fear misrepresents realityhttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/depth-articles/state/taxation-myth
Quote:When there are tax reductions this will be a major factor in stiffening the attitude of the employers. With tax increases, this stiffens the pressure of the workers for higher wages, especially when unemployment is low. It should be noted that this tendency for workers to receive the value of their labour power is helped by trade union action. …Of course, this will not happen automatically, but as a result of an economic tendency for the working class to receive the value of its labour power.Can you understand why i consider this tone of passivity is mistaken ?.."helped" and it is a "tendency" not that it is dependent upon and requires class struggle to achieve the value of our labour -power.Some consider that we are out of touch with the feelings and sentiments of our fellow-workers. I'm hoping that by re-focusing and re-emphasising the class conflict nature of our taxation analysis, this is somehow addressed. When taxes feature in the news and media, i think it not for us to claim it is nothing of our concern because in the long run, things will get sorted out but as that linked article does, we don't spell out how, so i think we do have a class interest in tax rates on wages.
Not so different from my own appraisal, Brian, and i won't nit-pick over your list.Now eliminate those functions that can be carried out equally as well by alternative methods that does not require a substantial premises on a high-cost thoroughfare. I shall repeat my earlier position, i support us possessing HO when and only when it is used to its full potential and contributes to its own upkeep.I was a bit sceptical about Cde Allen's suggestion of re-locating our activities to other floors and renting out the more commercial parts of the building but i am increasingly attracted to the idea, particularly since one major criticism that it meant the Party adopting a role of land-lord has been off-set by its decision to become investors – the matter of principle has been breached.Vin., i'm not so sure of where or when i learned of it, but our possession of members records on paper has to do with privacy laws and computers. I'm sure someone else can clarify.
And ALB, if there isn't that necessary trade union action…and it does seem like it is lacking…what can our fellow workers expect?…Isn't it our wages driven to subsistence levels…or at least for large sections of it, the unorganised and the weakly organised.So they on minimum/living wages because of the tax allowance system escape the burden of tax (correct and clarify me on that issue)…But what about those earning above that level. Does the wage of the skilled and organised really reflect its value and doesn't fall because of taxation. What i am trying to highlight is that in our customary responses to the question of taxation and where the burden lies, we do have a tendency to omit that class struggle MUST take place to counter the effect of high taxation. We cannot be seen or heard of offering a passive explanation …of workers being spectators…We tend to take it for granted that resistance is expected…but does the "perturbations and difficulties of civil relations" occur on a collective class level…I think i am advocating that when we explain taxation, we must always add agitation for industrial action.
Mea Culpa on which branch uses HO…changes nothing though, does it, except reveals that my memory sometimes fails me.Thanks for that additional information, Gnome. I forgot about the evening set aside to sticking labels and stamps to the Standard subscription, I should have mentioned the clerical aspects of HO being an office. The treasurer sits at the desk with receipts and accounts, the general secretary (when we have one) sits at a desk and replies to the mail. But this does not negate the proposition that other methods of administration and operation of a political party does not necessarily require a premise, or a building the size of No.52 to perform all those functions. Certainly at the level of a few hundred SPGB members. In the future, we will be presented with the stark choice, to trim our costs and dispense with luxuries. I think HO will always be at the top of the table, each time we face bills for its upkeep. And I have already made it plain, much against the popular will, i grant you, that i consider the print copy of the Standard superfluous…which removes yet another need of HO.
Quote:An alteration in the mode of taxation may cause a momentary disturbance, but will notchange anything in the long run.Now how do we determine the length of time of "the long run"? Isn't our argument that if taxation was raised on the working class wage, it would eventually be clawed back via the class struggle. But this is not an automatic process, is it? It depends as always on the respective strengths of the antagonists…we, the workers, and them, the bosses. Is it not equally true to say that imposing higher taxes on the working class, on the short run this benefits the capitalist class, and the longer they can subdue workers and their unions, the longer they maintain an advantage. For that time period, no matter how short, doesn't the working class bear the burden of taxation until it can recoup the real wage. As workers exist from pay-packet to pay-packet is it not misleading to imply that they do not immediately suffer when higher taxes are imposed and that our message should always emphasise that only by defence of the real wage can we mitigate the level of taxation…if the State raises the tax…you strike for more pay. However, this is illegal, isn't it? No political strikes against the government are permitted, only so-called legitimate disputes with employers. I think i said i have no sense for algebra…But if you cut the taxes the employers pay via corporation tax – the proportion of tax revenue going to the State via income tax is increased. And if they raise income tax to compensate for the low corporation tax, the bosses need not compensate its work-force would be a case i would make. Getting the full value of our labour-power is only by industrial muscle…But right now….does that exist? Or does it require to be re-built and that takes time.
Gnome, remind me of the former HOO who said that there was very little to do in the job for a volunteer much less a paid position?I happen to disagree if the job was carried out as fully as it should. The remit of the HOO should not be some sort of care-taker's jobBut it does go some way to support BrianG's case of the present usage of HO, that it is underused and its proper potential not utilised, so his criticism that it is symbolic shouldn't be so easily dismissed. I think we have to make sure HO is the head of the party nationally and not simply a London/Home Counties branch office.As a user of HO, perhaps you can add to this list of its functions:An afternoon once a month for EC meeting of now about half-a-dozen personsAn evening once a month for West London Br of now half-a-dozen personsTwo weekends a year for AC and AGMAccommodation and meals for attendees of those.The venue for the occasional public meeting (with refreshments) perhaps once a month on average.The depository of our Party recordsThe depository for our archivesThe depository of our seldom-used but rich libraryStorage for some audio/visual equipment and computersA Christmas Social.If a cost-benefit analysis was applied to HO, with the alternatives available to it, some cannot be blamed for seriously questioning if we were getting real value for money.
Came across this storyhttps://www.citylab.com/life/2017/11/the-extreme-amazon-bidder-just-got-real/546857/
Quote:Chicago, which, under state law, could redirect between 50 and 100 percent of the income taxes incurred by Amazon employees right back to Amazon. ..These personal income tax diversion programs (nicknamed “paying taxes to the boss”) might seem tantamount to highway robbery, but they’re totally legal in 17 states, including Illinois. In fact, many states recently passed such laws allowing these offers in anticipation of just this sort of incentive package…“Diverting income tax revenues—or any tax revenues—directly to privately held corporations I think is a step away from democracy; a step away from responsible governance,” said Matt Gardner, senior fellow at the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy. “And a step toward having unelected government officials like Jeff Bezos.”I think this brings us back to or very basics, Marcos.Are we a political party or are we a study/educational group?Deciding which determines how we should organise and agitate.I actually think relatively, we have been performing better at the former than we have been doing with the latter.Using our cash resources we could actually buy ourselves a bigger presence in the electoral process.But with a lack of members, engaging in teaching socialism is a bit more difficult. We cannot run many classes with local lecturers. It has to be done through the web and by online videos. We could, as i said previously, design live interactive internet courses using members who are particularly knowledgable and informed.But again i return to demographics…our members are ageing and ailing…We are losing scholars in socialism.
https://www.alternet.org/books/where-did-we-get-idea-human-beings-are-superior-all-other-creatures
Quote:Aristotle, who believed that logic and reason ruled the universe. Only man possessed a rational mind, and this made him supreme. Animals lacked reason and therefore were inferior. "Plants exist for the sake of animals, and brute beasts for the sake of man—domestic animals for his use and food, wild ones for food and other accessories of life, such as clothing and various tools. Since nature makes nothing purposeless or in vain, it is undeniably true that she has made all the animals for the sake of man." Aristotle envisioned the universe as a Great Chain of Being, built on a vertical hierarchy of power. Humans were in the top slot, followed by land mammals, then dolphins, reptiles, birds, amphibians, and fish. At the bottom were rock and earth…St. Thomas Aquinas explicitly explained that men should not worry about killing or causing suffering to animals because they had no souls and were as dumb as trees. We wouldn’t feel bad about cutting down trees, would we?In sum, it was St. Thomas Aquinas who allowed the guilt-free usage of animals. “Charity” does not extend to “irrational creatures,” he wrote. And “humans have no fellowship with animals.”Quote:To me the logic of the party's case was indisputable and these 'movements' would see that. I saw the world socialist movement acting as a catalyst '. Praised by workers for our a 'socialist university'. We would encourage these new happenings and help them develope socialist consiousness.I referred to this attitude. If our case is unchallengeable, we have to blame …who or what …for its failure? That is our quest.Marcos would concur that we should be more of a 'socialist university'.As for your final comment, you seem to forget our 'hostility' clause. People tend not to take advice from avowed foes and in particular rival organisations. They quite correctly see the real motive…to poach members rather than assist them in growing in their strength.I'll keep saying this…i don't know the answer…but i think we can find them by calling upon all the Party's intelligence acting in unison in a long and sometime painful process.
Vin, as you know from past posts i have called for online (and branch) discussions leading to a face-to-face conference so differing views can confront one another directly and seek to reconcile those differing views and produce something concrete for the ensuing party poll to act upon.The remit being a very wide one with many of the Party's "holy cows" once more up for debate and even eventually involving outside parties, and i don't mean our companion parties, first as observers to determine sincerity and then as full participants.I have suggested reconstituting the Party – relaunching ourselves as Version2, perhaps after a beta trial, if need be.I am doom and gloom, Pvt Fraser, because someone has to be that role. What is missing in the Party is the optimists. It seems we are all fatalists…letting events lead us to extinction and only addressing issues that only postpone the date of our demise.I think we are up against a psychological resistance. Fear of change i.e. fear caused by recognising why it is needed (admitting, in effect, our weaknesses) and what it might mean (questioning our present position and then re-aligning our politics), is a genuine human frailty. It is easier done collectively rather than the trauma of individually fixing ourselves. We are, after all, social animals. It is why i'm not so sure that your suggestion of what amounts to a breakaway discussion is the right one. People have to be willing to engage in this transformation and cannot be herded or driven into it. That is the basis of our socialism…voluntarism. The Party as a whole must change. If we lose a few on the way as we did with Social Studies – so be it – regrettable but perhaps inevitable.Those of us who have changed our politics in the past, know how scary it is, but we also realise that it is a necessary step to make. I re-joined because i saw elements of change within the SPGB having been absent for several years and i rejoined because i thought what minuscule effect i could have, might help slow the decline. BrianG can recall my explanation…i felt sorry for the Party. And those who don't try their utmost now to change things will be sorry when the Party disappears…and it will. One comrade gave me his estimate of another 15 years. The smaller we get, the more personal will the disagreements become. We will self-implode. Not to mention the logistics of sustaining our infrastructure. i need not remind anyone, the fewer shoulders that bear the task we all joined to undertake – building the socialist movement and establishing a socialist society.One thing in favour of our smallness…whatever mistakes we make will not impact significantly on the greater realities facing the working-class and humanity. In other words, we can get away with experimenting and exploring and trialling because the class struggle, our fellow-workers, cannot suffer if we make the wrong choice. And we are of the manageable size that adapting and adjusting can be achieved without serious consequences.
I was going to post on our reserve banking thread but perhaps here is just as appropriate“Venezuela will create a cryptocurrency,” backed by oil, gas, gold and diamond reserves, Maduro said http://fortune.com/2017/12/04/cryptocurrency-new-venezuela-economy/
