alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I'm no friend of the BBC. They are very skilled in their manipulation and we should not fool ourselves that they are our "friends". Has anyone wondered why our interview was conducted so early in the election campaign. A matter of get it over with as soon as possible, and let's get back to "serious" debate, mezinks?Not being a daily avid watcher of the Daily Politics show, can someone tell me what other minor parties were interviewed before and since, this time around?I think some pundits would say that because it was well in advance of the election, the influence of it was intended to be of minimal effect.i await our appearance on Newsnight, the main news plus national and local radio…When Danny is invited on to Questiontime and has David Dimbleby quizzing us, then perhaps i will consider we have "friends" in high paces. But i am not looking a gift horse in the mouth…i'll accept any access to the media, no matter how brief but don't expect me to be grateful for a drop in the ocean. We have to create our own publicity, not rely upon the BBC to give us a platform.
Any poll we should conduct must have a positive outcome for ourselves…and i think there would be if we ask if people accept or reject…(could be the usual polling scale…from strongly agree to strongly disagree)…for all the various values of socialism and the actual practice of socialist society.
As with all generalisations, there can be some exceptions. With every statement we present in the case for socialism, there are caveats and nuancesThe point that some CEO are rewarded far in excess of a wage or salary via share options and perks and pensions has been a point made in the past. (btw, how i hate the term compensation – just what sacrifice or injury is being made by them) Ultimately the owners in the vast majority of businesses are the share-holders but again, the majority of those are institutional such as pension funds. We witness the difficulty they have in controlling CEOs and the Board and success is seldom and always deserving of a FT report of a stock-holder "rebellion" at some AGM or other. But when we say workers run society from bottom to the top, it means without our contribution and consent, nothing – absolutely nothing – can be accomplished by the owners of capital. We create the wealth and we carry out the process of wealth-creation, albeit under the orders of the CEO and the enterprise owners who have the authority but do not have the requisite knowledge often to do so themselves. How many are trained accountants or actuaries? These are employees highly paid for their professional and technical advice. The Chairman is simply the punter in the bookie shop determining his bet from the odds, the tipsters and those who publish the form. Without that necessary info, how many would be winners, certainly none of the hedge-fund managers.Nothing wrong with being exact in our language, but with words as always, people have their own understanding. Sometimes they are wrong, sometimes they are right. I think the meaning of "working people run society from top to bottom" is clear enough, just as "workers create all wealth" is a truism.
I'm sure we can all give our tuppence worth in how we would have dealt with the questions on Daily Politics but i think we all have a core message to offer. Danny has his…socialism as the human family angle which i think resonates very well but he could only offer it at the tail-end of the interview and was pressed for time.Danny did a lot better than i would have and a lot other members, tooPolly Tonybee touched on the early christian communism and coincidentally one of members in on Libcom, participating in a healthy constructive debate on that exact topic.
Whatever….we should not let it pass without an official comment by ourselves. A press release statement should be sent forthwith to the BBC and the radio reporters detailing briefly the short history of the usurpation of our name and that the issue was decided legally by the electoral commission.
Quote:Unless you can clearly state 'who' 'consciously applies' and 'how' they do soAnd you LBird are overlooking my earlier statement that the "who" and the "how" is actually being undemocratic by usurping the power of the people by decreeing the "who" and the "how" in advance (and so would we be). I suggested that it is simply a speculative venture to discuss that issue when we do not know, nor can fully understand, the circumstances of the unfolding socialist revolution that would usher in the next society which will determine the evolution of the different democratic processes that will arise around the world to administer and run society. All we can do is generalise right now. Except, of course, in the manner of our own party organisation where we have gone beyond mere words and created a structure that we claim is fit for purpose in that it reflects our aspirations of a non-hierarchial, leader-free system of decision-making.Will it be the model for the mass socialist party which will be necessary for the future? Some say it is but at the embryonic stage. Others suggest we will eventually merge with as yet an unborn organisation. But i have not the power of prophecy so i go with the "what is" and what "can be."For the time being, the SPGB is the best there is.If something better comes along, you will witness a migration of members because our attachment to the SPGB is not religious but utilitarian, it is simply a tool but one what we hope will become a weapon. Many of us have left the Party previously but are returning members (YMS and myself) or ex-members who remain linked (Robbo). Surely that should be an inkling that we view the Party as possessing something of value that over-rides its weaknesses.
I'll take your latest post as one of waking up on the wrong side of the bed by its relatively uncomradely tone and patronising language, LBird.As i said, in my posts, it will be future society that will determine the democratic processes (and there will be many of these, not just a single universal system of workers' democracy) of administrating society, not yourself or ourselves in advance with premature speculations on means and methods although we can engage in healthy debate and speculation. The generation that has the task of making socialism work, is different from ours that are striving to overthrow capitalism so it can be built. ( i think you and Robbo are surprisingly agreed that certain means must prefigure in the ends and that partially led to his resignation from the SPGB) As for your putting meat on the bones of what is "workers' power", i have repeatedly appealed for the discussion to be based more upon practical descriptions of how the embryonic "workers democracy" should manifest itself. But to continue your metaphor, in this debate you are adding chili powder to the bones that some find too spicy as to make it unpalatable. As for Hawkings, his insistence upon using a Dalek-voice machine when he could be communicating with Cary Grant clarity to convey his message is enough to make me question him.
Apologies, a late-comer posted and it bumped up the post so i took it to be a new one…I wonder if they are still going?
Quote:I'm always surprised that there is so much reticence for others to mention "workers' power", 'democratic production', 'social individuals', even Marx, when it comes to these discussions.Perhaps not in these exchanges with yourself, LBird, but they do feature very much in our promotion of socialism. Just take a look at the archive of our blogs, particularly Socialist Courier.But i do favour the term "people power" and "power to the people" to "workers' power", a hangover from my John Lennonist years.
I am sure it is all in hand but can we have a Party election statement on spoiling the ballot paper for those outside the seats we are contesting.I was also reliably informed that the tactic of election stickers was quite successful but again i am teaching my granny to suck eggs.
I'm looking forward to the customary Daily Politics interview with Andrew Neil. We can also expect a Welsh tv appearance too.
I unconditionally withdraw anything that could be taken as disparaging against Eileen.You are very right Vin, we should not drag anybody else into this now the matter has been settled that no-one on this thread was aware of what was taking place that the Party could have been fore-warned But what is indeed missing on this thread is ex-Comrade Colborn response, defending not his politics which Robbo may be interested in hearing but to explain the manner of his departure from the Party which now involves expelling him unless he submits his resignation. He knew the rulebook but chose to flout it. He was approached to stand locally in the recent council elections as the SPGB candidate but he failed to reply to the e-mail. That was his opportunity to do the honourable thing and declare his intentions.You may have 40 years of personal comradeship with ex-Cde Colborn, Vin. I do not. I am under no obligation to show similar restraint as yourself in regards to this embarrassing affair.
Quote:Good point but it is only one person that is making us look like a weird sectarian stalinist clique. Not a great advert for the party, though.Ohhhh…Pleeeeeeeze…less with the drama…and get real. Again, i am in wonderment that anyone would think ex-Cde Colborn's actions would not lead to repercussions and consequences or that other members would not be indignant at the ex-comrades duplicitous behaviour.
Vin, a very simple question was put to you and Linda to answer, by myself. Did it never occur to you that it would be asked, once you posted the details without any condemnation or criticism? I certainly make no apologies for raising the question and i breached no forum guidelines in doing so, therefore, you doth protest too much.But you have now answered it in #63 and i fully accept that you were totally unaware in advance that ex-Cde Colborn was standing for another political party until you saw it in the election results or otherwise was informed. But you have signalled yet another question. Is Eileen Colborn a member of the Party? I have a vague recollection she might be. I could well be mistaken though. I have known many who have left the SPGB for other organisations but they had sufficient respect for the Party to resign beforehand and not let it be learned second-hand.Thus, I do not withdraw any uncomplimentary remark aimed at ex-Cde Coborn. Robbo, i think you may find that the Independent Working Class Association (IWCA) serves more a model for those who wish to engage in local community radical politics than the SCP.
