alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A capitalist joins the ranks calling for UBIhttps://www.inverse.com/article/36277-sam-altman-basic-income-talk
Tony Clark (Labour supporter) replies to Robin's letterhttp://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1169/letters/He accuses Robin of holding a dogmatic position and he asserts that:
Quote:In the transitional period, state ownership can be one of the forms of social ownership, its socialist character determined by whether society remains on the socialist road. Social ownership reinforces socialist consciousness, but does not create or determine it. That is why it’s possible for people to believe in socialism in capitalist countries.Hopefully Robin is aware of the follow-up letter and can answer for himself…but in case his work commitments in Spain hinders his online presence, someone from the forum can respond.My own thoughts is that of Paresh…that during WW2 was America or Germany any closer to socialism because it took the economy under State command and control?But maybe i misunderstood this debate on transitions.
The Great Architect in the sky surely must be a Scotsman (or an Irishman)…who else turns water into wine. Isn't whisk(e)y the water of life, after all?And what does the Geordie God offer…Lindisfarne mead and Brown ale
Hmmmm..the fact that mouse took on a life of its own and posted so many repeated posts would make anyone other than a rationalist suspect some sort of supernatural intervention
Quote:why is there such a determination to declare Jesus did exist?Because we are increasingly seen not as an impossiblist party but simply a contrarian one.You are denying 100% something that you do not know is true or not and refusing to accept the possibility, no matter how remote, that it may have happened although like lots of events conclusive prove is missing and lacking. That is unscientific. You are leaving no exit door for you to say you were wrong if subsequently some evidence does appear that confirms such a person – a human being not a God – did exist.( http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-40556985 )We have in fact resorted to repeating a slogan Omnia Sunt Communia yet there is no record of Thomas Muntzer of having actually preached this but a hearsay claim made that he said it during torture.We attended a commemoration festival of a man and movement that was insignificant, so much so that it was overlooked by a researcher of the calibre of Karl Marx. Yet we seem to inflate the importance and take advantage of it for propaganda purposes If there was a genuine social movement for common ownership at the beginning of Christianity, then do you say we ignore this development and do not add it to the armoury of our store of knowledge that we are the last link in a long chain going back to the communism of the hunter-gatherers and that expressed itself in various ways over the ages.Nor is Christianity the only source of this demonstration of social relationship based on cooperative sharing. We have Buddhist Dhammic socialism. Even Islam possesses a tradition of socialism although it is more about an equitable distribution of wealth. Whereas we have Hinduism that lacks any socialist foundations.
WSPNZ HO is a converted garage in a surburban estate, well suited for a party of half a dozen. WSP(India) is a converted part of a private dwelling, well suited for a party of half a dozenClapham is a 3-storey (or is it 4-storey) building on a main thoroughfare in London.Is it appropriate and affordable for a declining membership of presently 300 is the issue?The membership regularly addresses this question and sometimes alternatives are raised for debate but for the time being the answer seems to be yes, 52 Clapham High St fits the bill (and there are many bills to pay) for the Party's requirements.
Why is there such a determination to declare Jesus did not exist?In no way does it affect historical materialism or Marxism or the Socialist Party of Great Britain as would be the position if the existence of God was accepted.No matter how implausible, no matter how improbable, no matter how unlikely, it is not impossible that some person existed, a Jewish preacher, one of many that existed in this era and that stories sprung up around him and that later after his death, people began to create myths and legends about him being the messiah, the redeemer, and even an actual god who offered false hope to a people, Jews at first, then to a wider population on the instigation of a follower, Paul. For political reasons, it was adopted as a state religion and all rivals and challengers which could have undermined its credibility and legitimacy were repressed and suppressed. Do we need to deny that the Teacher of Righteousness was real? Or accept that perhaps there was such a person since it makes better sense of our reading of the Dead Sea Scrolls.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teacher_of_RighteousnessAgain i also ask, why is there such a determination to distance ourselves from a religious/social movement that called for common ownership even if a minority current as was the case of the Diggers in the Levellers, so embedded over the centuries that repeated attempts have been made to deny and discredit such a presence of thought within Christianity? Shouldn't we be applauding that history and bringing it to the attention of more people, especially those who think Christian Original Sin invalidates our case.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/q.htmlI find Q credibleWhen doing the google of Q i came across the M-source, something new to mehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-SourceThere are ongoing studies of the Gnostic gospels and their origins such as Thomashttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_ThomasIt is a scientific skill with required training to identify stuff. Trying to determine authorship of Shakespeare is an example…the differences in the Old Testament from the style of writing to work out the authors, another. Forgeries are determined sometimes by the usage and frequency of certain words.
Wiki explains Origen was not canonised because of certain of his beliefs were considered hereticalhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OrigenSame with Tertullianhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TertullianSeems it's all dependent on accepting Father Son and Holy Spirit…the Trinity as you mention.Roman may be able to explain the theology but for a couple of hundred years there were plenty of schisms explained by the diverse geography of the Christian world of the time…Rome was still striving to be the centre.http://www.biblescholars.org/2013/05/heresies-controversies-schisms-early-church-part-ii.htmlThat site gives a summaryFirst time i came across all this confusion was decades ago when i read Marco Polo wasn't such a great adventurer…his journey to China was via all the Nestorian monasteries that lined the route to Cathay and i didn't know at the time about them.
I accept your caveat but he is also not a complete novice to be totally dismissed.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Stark
I linked to it on another thread a while back, but i suppose people forget…i did.https://www.gordon.edu/ace/pdf/F&EF09Stark.pdf
Quote:Did early Christianity also attract lower class converts? Of course. Even when a wealthy household was baptized, the majority would have been servants and slaves, and surely some lower status people found their way to the church on their own. The point is that early Christianity substantially over-recruited the privileged,And DaveB forgot this earlier quote
Quote:‘The Cynic Philosophers; From Diogenes to Julian translated by Robert Dobbin, 2012. On the early Christians; “ added to which, their first law giver taught them that they were all brothers, as soon as they commit the collective crime of repudiating the Greek gods, worshiping that crucified sophist himself and living by his commandments. They despise all worldly goods… and consider them common property….Dave's emphasis“The use of all things that are found in this world ought to be common to all men. Only the most manifest iniquity makes one say to the other, ‘This belongs to me, that to you’. Hence the origin of contention among men.” – St. Clement.“What thing do you call ‘yours’? What thing are you able to say is yours? From whom have you received it? You speak and act like one who upon an occasion going early to the theatre, and possessing himself without obstacle of the seats destined for the remainder of the public, pretends to oppose their entrance in due time, and to prohibit them seating themselves, arrogating to his own sole use property that is really destined to common use. And it is precisely in this manner act the rich”. – St. Basil the Great.“Therefore if one wishes to make himself the master of every wealth, to possess it and to exclude his brothers even to the third or fourth part (generation), such a wretch is no more a brother but an inhuman tyrant, a cruel barbarian, or rather a ferocious beast of which the mouth is always open to devour for his personal use the food of the other companions.” – St. Gregory. Nic.“Nature furnishes its wealth to all men in common. God beneficently has created all things that their enjoyment be common to all living beings, and that the earth become the common possession of all. It is Nature itself that has given birth to the right of the community, whilst it is only unjust usurpation that has created the right of private poverty.” – St. Ambrose.“The earth of which they are born is common to all, and therefore the fruit that the earth brings forth belongs without distinction to all”. – St. Gregory the Great.“The rich man is a thief”. – St. Chrysostom.
And the same thing with Australian AboriginesAnd how unwanted UK kids were shipped out to the colonies.And the murder of many (not thousands) of First People females was ignored as not warranting any deeper investigation. We had the Yorkshire Ripper and prostitutes were not considered deserving of police investigations and only treated seriously when he killed a non-prostitute
Even Scotland is getting in on the act.https://futurism.com/scotland-will-begin-funding-universal-basic-income-experiments/
Quote:Scotland is about to join the slowly expanding list of countries that are experimenting with Universal Basic Income (UBI). These trial-runs are exploring a variety of different ways in which citizens will receive a guaranteed salary from the government, regardless of social status or any other factor. This Scottish experiment will start small with local municipalities creating proposals to be involved. The First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, is open to the widespread adoption of UBI policies stating that it “is an idea that merits deeper consideration.”Hawaii joins the list of places which will experiment with the UBIhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/universal-basic-income-hawaii-introduction-minimum-salary-a7931221.html"The bill declares that all families in Hawaii are entitled to “basic financial security” – paving the way for a policy that would guarantee this. It also tasks several government offices with analysing the state’s economy and finding “ways to ensure all families have basic financial security, including an evaluation of different forms of a full or partial universal basic income."So still at the planning stage — as are all the others around the world.
Some on the forum will be aware that i detest the BBC news-service. As for the licence fee —it is a tax imposed on all users of a television receiving set whether BBC is watched or not. It is being extended to the internet where access to BBC Iplayer will be restricted to fee-paying users (it is already limited to UK residents)We are being obliged to pay for capitalist propaganda.These are just personal views and not held collectively by other members who may well hold opinions that the BBC has some merit deserving of public-funding for the (all-to-rare) art/science programme.
