alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think you have brought up an issue on approach that we should always keep at the forefront of how we write. And i'm not quite certain we are too guilty of this. Many articles i have read begin by a neutral history and exposition of the problem and acknowledge positions held by our critics.But somehow, i have a niggling feeling that it is a bit simplistic.I say this because i have tried to engage those who have conspiratorial beliefs in the assassination of JFK, (a pet hobby of mine) from ridicule of their ideas (not to be recommended) to respect for their theories (and in the process providing some undeserved legitimacy). But when many are fixated to facts that are not facts that have been proved not to be and are simply not accepted – i hit the wall of irrationality. They simply shift the discourse to some other irrelevancy of unprovable assertion.At work i once spent a whole night-shift debating the time required to shoot…and despite the testimony of colleagues who were all ex-soldiers and understood the efficiency of a bolt-action rifle and recognised it was possible…my antagonist merely then changed the topic to why did LHO shoot after the car had turned and not when it was approaching..as if anyone could get into the mind of LHO on the timing of his shot but it sufficed to maintain denial and a leave his confirmation bias intact.What i have learned is to always treat people with civility. On this forum, i sometimes think lack courtesy to those who hold different opinions to ourselves. We (perhaps rightly) hold one another to high standards but should we expect others to match our understanding. Should we not be prepared to lower the bar on occasions?I find we are very prone at high-lighting differences rather than pointing them out and trying to reach some sort of agreement and then discuss where we diverge.
Bernstein did have the decency to stand by his socialist anti-war principles and was a founder member of the Independent Social Democratic Party alongside Kautsky Leibnecht and Eisner.
The ICC speak for themselveshttp://en.internationalism.org/ir/96/leninistshttp://en.internationalism.org/ir/97/leninists2
Perhaps. Perhaps not.I however find that despite differences and in particular analysis of history, i find some degree of agreement which could be built upon.
In the Scottish context, the SNP has a degree of income tax autonomy and can raise or lower taxation. But as we just seen, even to finance the ending of the public sector pay-cap, they are unwilling to exercise this discretionary power they possess.It can also change other minor taxes such as the airport taxOne thing is certain, cutting income tax will not be an option for the SNP.One additional aspect since 2014 is that the SNP hopes from Brexit to capture many of the responsibilities that were originally the EU's and thus increase its devolved powers.
And another short-coming is his conclusion that Corbyn and the rise of a re-newed left will resolve Scottish nationalism.
A rather unsympathetic article to Catalonian and Scottish separatism that might resonate with world socialists (although one failing is to equate all Scots with wealth of the nation)https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/11/catalonia-the-revolt-of-the-rich/
Quote:the left does not dare to openly say that the nationalism of minorities in no less damaging for the working class cause than any other nationalism.A fairly humourous but very insightful and informative video on Puerto Ricohttps://youtu.be/658YZO_CmOk
I believe ALB has one or two articles published in it such as about Dietzgen so it will be a useful link
Rather than start a new thread, i thought it better that we explore what other people think socialism is on an existing thread.https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/oct/09/socialism-with-a-spine-the-only-21st-century-alternative
Quote:But what do today’s resurgent socialists mean by socialism? It’s easier to see what they dislike than to describe a socialist policy agenda. Most obviously, socialism implies an unqualified rejection of the system of financial capitalism (variously called neoliberalism, market liberalism or, in Australia, economic rationalism) that emerged from the economic chaos of the 70s….More significantly, contemporary socialism repudiates the vaguely humanised capitalism marketed as the third way. It’s a break with those social democrats and liberals who embraced, or capitulated to, the politics of austerity in the wake of the GFC, such as the New Labour of Blair and Brown, PASOK in Greece and the Dutch Labour party, and, most importantly of all, the Clinton Democrats in the United States…there’s no detectable enthusiasm for a centrally planned economy like that of the former Soviet Union or Mao’s China. Communism is a distant and discredited memory, even for those old enough to recall the days when it seemed like a possible alternative.As it is used today, the term socialism does not reflect a well-worked ideology. Rather it conveys an attitude that could be described as “unapologetic social democracy” or, in the US context, “liberalism with a spine”. It’s expressed in support for proposals that break with the cautious incrementalism of the past, and are in some cases frankly utopian: universal basic income, free post-school education, large increases in minimum wages, and so on….To develop a serious socialist alternative, we need both to look backwards to the social democratic moment of the 50s and 60s, and forwards to the prospects for a genuine sharing economy based on the internet and other technological advances…The first step in this regard is to revive a term that was widely used and is still relevant to describe the economy of the mid-20th century: the mixed economy. This phrase refers to an economy with major roles for both public and market provision of goods and services. Typically, the public sector provided infrastructure such as electricity, water and road networks, and human services such as health and education. Most of our existing assets in these fields were built up under public ownership. The market sector provided consumer goods, and the wholesale and retail trade networks needed to distribute them, along with a wide range of services…A socialist program would allocate much less economic activity to big business, and more to other forms of organisation.As you can reaad, this could easily have been added to the Corbyn thread. An idealised reformed capitalism that the author seemingly rejected as the "third way"…should this be now called the fourth or fifth way…
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41544849Remain in Spain demonstration…not as impressive as the separatists but still a big protest.
Ellen Brown adds her support for the UBIhttp://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/42155-how-to-fund-a-universal-basic-income-without-increasing-taxes-or-inflation
