alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Indeed, capitalism (to our cost) is a flexible system that can recover from blows in the class struggle and make the gains of the working class only a temporary respite. We understand that there are many palliatives that can be conceded by the capitalist class because they do not threaten their existence. YWhat they give with the right hand, they can take with the left..But does this mean we do not, as a class, strive for the occasional victory in the class war that circumstances might through up in our favour and as a political party of the working class shouldn't we applaud the organisation and resistance and sometimes success of our fellow-workers to instill confidence for the even bigger battle for socialism. Our founders, seemed to have a fairly nuanced attitudes to reforms otherwise why did they publish this article.https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1900s/1905/no-10-june-1905/revolutionary-reform
Quote:“Although the bettering of the conditions of existence by way of political reform is impossible, it is not the same as regards the conditions of fighting, and it appears to us to be possible to make easier the struggle of the proletariat against the capitalist middle-class.We do not here make a specious distinction. To distinguish between the conditions of fighting and the conditions of existence is not to split a hair. The difference is real… Some reforms would render the attacks of the proletariat more powerful, those of its adversary weaker, and would make the effort easier and more efficient.”As another article says:
Quote:“Mr. Bostock is, therefore, completely in error in assuming that in showing the unsatisfactory nature of reforms in themselves, and their utter futility as solutions of what is called the "Social Problem," the S.P.G.B. is necessarily hostile toward all reforms, and considers them as being in every case inevitably "detrimental to working-class interest." Even were the capitalists omniscient and of one opinion on. every point, it would still remain a fact that they are compelled by economic development to weaken their stronghold. Our enemies are forced, as it were, to dig their own graves, and it is by no means our policy to prevent them doing so. We should, indeed, be traitors to our cause did we not endeavour to make it profit by every mistake and every point of weakness of the enemy.”https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1910s/1911/no-83-july-1911/socialist-party-and-reformsPerhaps, someone can help me with the source…a working class that declines or refrains from engaging in the class struggle is not worth its salt in the struggle for socialism.
What a socialist MP or local councillor did when elected I always thought was a settled question within the party. I cited the SPC attitude, in an earlier post. Perhaps these two quotes from the SS might also be helpful to clarify our position.
Quote:Regarding Parliament, the answer, in brief, is that a minority of Socialist M.P.s would vote for or against measures introduced by other parties, or refrain from voting, in accordance with the Socialist Party's view as to which course would be in the interest of the working class and Socialism. To use our correspondent's own words, they would vote for certain measures "as giving the workers some small benefit, whilst at the same time pointing out that Socialism was the only satisfactory solution to the problem."A minority of Socialist M.P.s would obviously not vote against a measure which simply raised old-age pensions, or raised wages, or helped trade union organisation, or made it easier to carry on Socialist propaganda or organisation.Quote:He asks : "What actions would a member of the S.P.G.B. adopt on the Board of Guardians, seeing that these institutions exist to issue out charity, thus tending to keep the workers quiet and helping the capitalists by administering capitalist law."…Does "Revolutionist" seriously hold that starvation makes Socialists, or that Socialists cease to be Socialist when they receive "charity" from the Boards of Guardians?http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1920s/1928/no-286-june-1928/socialists-and-local-governmentWhat is in the interest of fellow workers i touched upon the necessity of reviewing how our EC and branch operates oversight of our elected members when that time comes. I see no advantage in guessing the actions of a vibrant active branch or EC capable of getting members elected. I can imagine it is like comparing oranges and apples to make any comparison with todays EC/branch and those future ones.
well done for those who turned out. Shame we never had special leaflet themed for the event addressing the protesters concerns to distribute. I am sure we could have produced a leaflet that with some important caveats could have associated the NHS with "to each according to needs".
Quote:You are living in the world of Smith and Marx where the commodities (products) of labor were thought to be the base of the economy.Maybe this is worth reading if you have not already read and dismiss its analysis. If the latter, where do you disagree?https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1876/part-played-labour/
John, what makes the concept of socialism radical and revolutionary and, in turn, makes your own proposal into a relatively conservative reform is that socialism is the abolition of the exchange economy thus without buying and selling, there is no need for any medium of exchange such as money or even labour-time tokens. Society has no need for GRB to produce rationally and sustainably and to distribute justly and fairly.That is the stark truth which makes your idea superfluous and unecessary. And i'm afraid when somebody's world-view is shown to be a false vision – it hurts and takes time to re-evaluate your beliefs. But hopefully you can accept you may simply be wrong. Ours is not an arrogant position, even if it might sound as we are all know-alls and possess all the answers but having been in existence for 114 years, we have learned some things about capitalism. Maybe you think we have it all wrong and haven't learned any lessons after over a century of politics. In such a case, we invite you to prove we are mistaken and provide us with your evidence. Convince us you are right.Meantime, I suggest that you explore our website, John, and read the numerous articles and also dip into our archives since there has been many proposals about changing the form of economics, Major Douglas social credit being one, which became popular and were critiqued by ourselves.Try perhaps for starters reading an article of mine which may spur a few specific questions from yourself that we can respond to more positively.https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2015/no-1327-march-2015/socialism-keeping-it-human-family
If they did introduce such a system of machine voting, ALB, i'd imagine Parliament would have a period of consultation and invite opinions. Isn't that the usual approach to such things?Should the Party formally make a submission that such a measure as a facility for a blank vote is included in the technology, in your view as a member of the election committee involved directly in such affairs?Or would that be succumbing to reformism, which may be the conclusion of some members…we would be guilty of petitioning the State for an improvement in bourgeois democracy?
Quote:problem is the state governments aren't giving the federal government the information they request on illegal immigrants who have commited crimes. You can say some states are attempting to prevent the federal government from enforcing the law on immigration by witholding information but the feds are the ones who are supposed to enforce it. its just political games some governors are pulling to get lib votes and in the process pissing off the fedsThis is a bit anecdotal coz i haven't the time right now to provide proper links.In Nazi Germany during the Soviet Invasion police regiments were called upon to execute Jews. One author studied a regiment recruited from liberal moreorless anti-Nazi Hamburg and found that they carried out their orders to the letter rather than be inefficient and reluctant. Off-hand I think the book was called "The Willing Executioners"Whereas the Nazi governor of Denmark when ordered to get rid of the Jews, let them all escape to Sweden and replied when disciplined…"What did i do wrong…i got rid of the Jews, didn't i?"My point is that we can bend the law or ignore the law if we so wish , exactly as you said previously. The sanctuary cities are being humanitarian compared to those states such as Arizona who sought to rigourously enforce immigration laws. It is not merely political games for votes. After all undocumented immigrants despite Trump's so-far unverified allegations don't vote. It is rather compassion. California’s immigrant population has grown, its crime and violence rates have plummeted. In 1980, census figures show, California’s population was 24 million, and two-thirds of it was non-Latino white. Today, the state’s population of 40 million is 40% Latino, 13% Asian and only 38% white. Over the last two decades, California has seen an influx of 3.5 million immigrants, mostly Latino, and an outmigration of some 2 million residents, most of them white. An estimated 2.4 million undocumented immigrants also currently live in the state.according to data from the FBI, the California Department of Justice, and the Centers for Disease Control, the state has seen big drops in every major category of crime and violence that can be reliably measured. Since 1980, California’s rate of reported crime overall has fallen by 62%. The state’s criminal arrest rates, too, have fallen considerably, by 55% overall, and by 80% among people younger than 18 — a population, it is worth noting, that is now 72% nonwhite.More specifically, the rate of violent crime in California has fallen by an impressive 50% in the same period. This includes drops in robberies (65%), homicide (68%), and rapes and assaults (more than 40%). That last figure is even more remarkable when you consider that the legal definitions of both assault and rape were expanded during these years. (The state’s rate of violent crime did rise slightly in 2015 and 2016, but overall is still at a roughly 50-year low.)Also telling is the state’s reduction of violent deaths, a category that groups homicides with non-criminal fatalities such as accidents and overdoses from illicit drugs. Before the early 1990s, California had one of the country’s highest rates of violent death. It has since fallen by 18%, and did so as the average rate of violent death across the rest of the country rose 16%. Overall, Californians are 30% less likely to die a violent death today than other Americans.Compared with averages in all other states, California now has 33% fewer gun killings, 10% fewer murders overall, and 30% fewer illicit-drug deaths. When overdoses from illicit drugs rose 160% in the rest of the country, between 1999 and 2015, they rose only 27% in California.The murder rates in the state’s largest cities — all of which are “sanctuary” jurisdictions and therefore, by Trump’s logic, the most dangerous — have plummeted by 74%, and are now well below those of large cities elsewhere in the country.And just to be cautious and put a caveat on those statistics let us be aware that undocumented immigrants are reluctant to officially report crimes against themselves for fear of deportation so perhaps the rates are mis-leading.“Every time a criminal goes free because the victim fears deportation and the police, we are all a little less safe,” De León said in a statement. “Fear and mistrust are obstacles to the administration of justice.”So, indeed, let us protect all the vulnerable.
TWC, well spotted. i was even more incorrect due to my misreading. Spoiling your ballot is not crime at all in ItalyBut i still await an answer to what we will do when the ballot paper and pencil is done away with and from what i see, the only alternaative with electronic voting being proposed is a None Of The Above option.
Yet another issue came to mind. Our party rule as a general guideline is okay but is it sufficient?
Quote:ELECTORAL ACTION – National and Local27. Candidates elected to a Political office shall be pledged to act on the instructions of their Branches locally, and by the Executive Committee nationally.It may have a moral strength but legally i don't believe it has any standing. Once elected, any MP can renounce any pledge and there is little the Party can do except expel him or her from the Party. I did read once from someone (ALB?) we could have every elected MP pre-sign an undated application of the Chiltern 1oos and if he became a maverick, the party would only need to fill in the date. How effective this would be i have no idea and i also don't know how this problem could be handled in other countries. Protection of an MP independence is sacrosanct in our Parliament and there exist laws concerning outside pressure applied to him or her. We may well face contempt of parliament charges by enforcing our control of an MP.Another issue is that it would mean the EC/branches having to re-organise themselves dramatically so that it could over-see and instruct their councillors/MPs. Decisions made by our elected delegate will come fast and furious at times, not permitting full debate and discussion at branch level and i am sure some of our delegates actions will be mistaken misjudgements in conflict with the branch position, perhaps.Maybe each branch will be required to have a political sub-committee operating daily so how will those vounteers be recompensed for lost wages and their time and expenses and even so, how can the general membership of the branch participate fully.
Just another thing that has struck me…with the increase use of the electronic voting machines across the world, can someone explain how the protest spoiled ballot paper can be exercised by ourselves?I think different countries have different approaches. In some states of the USA a written ballot paper can be demanded. There can be no spoiled ballots because the computer will not permit it. However, if the legal structure in a jurisdiction requires the option to spoil a ballot or allows for protest votes, a button can be added in some programs to give electors the option to cast a protest vote (or decline to vote). – a situation where we can as ALB suggested, have a reform that is of benefit to our party directlyThis article might be of use, nb Italy makes a spoiled paper a crime.http://subs.emis.de/LNI/Proceedings/Proceedings205/273.pdf
Quote:shall repudiate any associated salary or other benefits.Let us look at experience of a minority party in the devolved Scottish parliament.The elected SSP members took what they called the average living wage and then donated the substantial left-over to the SSP coffers. Wouldn't the party lose out a potential financial gain.The elected SSP members were entitled to public money for the full-time employment of assistants/researchers (other SSP members) who could use the extensive resources and gain access for the SSP member to government archives and library. Wouldn't the party lose out on the benefits of strengthening our case for socialism through the use of party access to the civil service and State organisations in providing facts and figures.The elected SSP can ask and demand answers from the government. Would our propaganda not benefit from the nature of those questions and replies of the government ministers?I am sure i will have missed out other advantages of being an elected official, such as promotion of the socialist case via the press, although that could be disputed, i suppose. I think the policy of the SPC member who was elected to one of the local parliaments in Canada is the one we should follow.
Quote:When I voted on the last division I did so because I saw an opportunity to benefit a few of my class, the laborers in the construction camp. There is no opportunity to get anything for the workers on this vote, and I shall not vote. On every vote where there is no opportunity to get something for my class, I shall not vote. On every vote where there is no opportunity to get anything for my class, I shall leave the House and refrain from voting.If there is an opportunity to benefit fellow-workers, i'm not so sure they would appreciate us spurning it.But then there is an issue on what we would do for all the indivual and personal grievances and petitions an MP receives from his or her constituents?
I read thd Shaw article and there are some information about abundance and the potential for more abundance in there that should be better known by people.Too often we are told that there is not sufficient resources to go around whereas the truth is that the world is a possible cornucopia…and this has been known for decades. Let me quote Sylvia Pankhurst from 1923 for you , John.
Quote:Socialism means plenty for all. We do not preach a gospel of want and scarcity, but of abundance…We wish to abolish poverty and to provide abundance for all. We do not call for limitation of births, for penurious thrift, and self-denial. We call for a great production that will supply all, and more than all the people can consume. Such a great production is already possible, with the knowledge already possessed by mankind. To-day production is artificially checked, consumption still more so.Even earlier, Marx's son-in-law was advocating the right to be lazyWhat i question is the necessity of your proposal and suggest it is over-complicating the answer to the issue. Isn't what we argue for, a far more simpler solution for achieving the same goal? Perhaps you could critique our case for free-access socialism and explain what we have wrong, John
