alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I'm not clear what you mean by this. Could you re-phrase.
Quote:As with Anders Breivik, this man would not differentiate us from his victim.Well, if people think it is a bit harsh then i agree it is but the twitter should stand its ground.Jo Cox was killed by someone encouraged or inspired or reinforced by Farage's nationalistic sloganeering and we should not be reticent in saying so.A word of condolences may not be amiss and that political terrorism be recognised as it is although i am betting that in the end he will be simply judged to be a deranged individual, and not that his ideas are deranged, shared to a degree by thousands of cheering fans in France and who cares about Northern Ireland's victory in the UK media.
Support for the UBI from an American Friedmanite in the Wall St Journal that is also worth a read for another sort of vision. http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-guaranteed-income-for-every-american-1464969586
Quote:A UBI would present the most disadvantaged among us with an open road to the middle class if they put their minds to it. It would say to people who have never had reason to believe it before: “Your future is in your hands.” And that would be the truth.Murray is the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. His book advocating a universal basic income, “In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State,” was first published by AEI in 2006. A revised edition will be out later this month.
Something to read on the UBI from: MIT Technology Review magazinehttps://www.technologyreview.com/s/601499/basic-income-a-sellout-of-the-american-dream/The topic is certainly a very popular one these days and establishing our own analysis seems a worthy venture.
Another video of her lies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI
Quote:The bizarre thing is, that anonymous poster obviously thinks the Party has lost its way because free discussion is taking place on a variety of subjects on various online media.Nor has he ever thought that sometimes playing Devil's advocate is a means of eliciting the necessary exchanges to further the case for socialism. I will readily accept criticism that i am perhaps not asking the right questions to get the important and vital answers we need to improve and promote our presence within the workers movement. But our current political trajectory has to be seriously questioned and answers found to our present stagnation and inevitable decline as a political party. I will happily have any of my proposals shot down in flames if better alternatives are offered. They are not issues of principle.
Wasn't one of the Swiss concerns was that UBI would attract more migrants, Stuart?Would the implementation in the UK also attract this nationalist resistance to "foreigners" being eligible and claiming the UBI. Surely, just like the existing benefits system, one of the limitations would be the government imposing time-periods for newcomers to be eligible to claim a UBI.Would this then encourage a two-tier workforce…those who are forced to toil because they are excluded from the UBI and those who receive "free money".Can you envisage a work-place where migrant workers want to strike for decent wages and the indigenous workers oppose industrial action because they have the cushion of the UBI?Is the UBI the seed of dissension between newcomers and native workers? Just a thought that occurred to me for you allay my fears that perhaps we would truly have the emergence of Engels aristocracy of labour.
I couldn't get to the New Yorker link. I'll try later.I'm sure you have read this critique mentioned earlier but just in case you missed it https://gegen-kapital-und-nation.org/en/what-wrong-free-money/What i think is utopian is that our ruling class will offer us free money without strings and without conditions and that they haven't anticipated your positive spin of the empowerment it could possibly offer workers (it reminds me of Lenin saying we support the Labour Party like a rope supports a hanging man and expect the Labour Party not to have read it and let the CP affiliate). I have rarely believed our masters are so stupid and dumb.It is like shorter working hours…no matter how convincing the case is made for it in increased productivity, worker morale etc and no matter how often it is endorsed by employers as a good thing, it never gets further than a few pilot projects…the Swedish 6 hour a day is far from being the norm and the French who do possess a shorter week than most, are having it clawed back.But tell me, is the ruling class united behind UBI …Whats the stats pro- and anti- on the issue, where are the division lines between them on UBI?
An anonymous comment has been placed on the Socialist Courier blog raising the issue of my personal opinions about the party posted on this thread and so i post it and my reply here for those who may wish to continue the discussion: Anonymous1:40 pmReading your contribution to the 'Excellent Video' thread. Have you not thought of resigning from the Socialist Party and joining these people? You have urged a name change, selling no.52 and putting the Standard wholly online.It seems you are determined that the SP should hand in it's political resignation which, given what kind of organisation it is these days wouldn't be a bad idea. So, all power to you!ReplyDelete ajohnstone12:41 amThis is a blog of the Edinburgh and Glasgow branches of the Socialist Party. Where exactly on this blog, or any other blog published on the internet under the name of the Socialist Party, has such proposals ever been made? Does any such suggestions appear in the above article which you have felt a need to add a extraneous comment, for instance?The Socialist Party is proud of its democracy and its facilities for internal debate and discussion and has various forums where individual members can raise issues and matters and exchange views and opinions with other members. And that is exactly what they are, personal perspectives, until the Party goes through a political decision-making process on any possible proposals for change to the way the Socialist Party conducts its business and campaign for socialism. Or do you advocate suppression of dissenting voices regards to how we act and present ourselves in public and the imposition of some sort of a party-line when it comes to debate and discussion within the Socialist Party? In future, please take your concerns about a blogger's relationship to the Socialist Party and its future to the appropriate forum webpage where i am sure your contribution will receive the fuller response that you seek. In future, please restrict your comments on this blog to the content posted on this blog."
Quote:you'd have to not just show the flaws in their system but propose instead a practicable and workable alternative. I know you believe you have that, but I'm afraid that it has already been laughed out of the court of public opinion. I'm not saying that was a correct move on the part of the mockers. But I am saying that a mocking attitude is precisely the wrong one if you would be heard. People in glass houses and all that.When has it been the responsibility of socialists, Stuart, to fix the host of problems of capitalism, the primary one being the wages system and wage slavery? As you say we believe we already have the practical and workable alternative and public opinion has always been against it. Nothing new there. Isn't Adam simply pointing out that any UBI will always be framed within the tight parameters that capitalism will permit and shown that is indeed the case.Your case is to make the case that the UBI legislation will be passed just the way you envisage it, not in a way to benefit the ruling class and mollify the working class. I think you have already suggested in another post that to gain the UBI will not mean a great class struggle so how exactly do we make a permanent improvement in the implementation of the UBI. If it is a practical reality how is it going to be proposed and by whom? How do you see it fitting in with trade unions? I am a cynic and need persuading of this feature of capitalism. Whatever they give us with one hand, they will take from another. Or as others say, they will rob Paul to pay Peter. I need you to convince me, Stuart, of no unintended consequences. As been raised on the other thread…why should i take the leap into the dark and form alliances with my employers by convincing them of the worth of the UBI to their company balance books and how it will reduce their contribution to the upkeep by the State of the workers and non-workers.
Quote:It means that a certain proportion of my wages are now guaranteed by the state without condition.Isn't that that the same with the minimum wage, Stuart? If i'm paid 20% above the minimum wage, that means 80% of my pay is guaranteed by law, doesn't it? But possibly all the concessions under UBI will be harder to remove in the likelihood of the next recession but i am not sure of that.
Quote:would embolden me and my fellow workers when pushing for better pay and conditions or for more interesting and varied work, or more of a say in the running of the business, or in when I turn up, etc, etc.Doesn't our class position already provide these motivations and has done for a few centuries and the alternatives laughed out of the court by the more feasible policies…national insurance…welfare state…? All eaten away. I know the implication is that the level or even existence of the UBI will be deemed untouchable, much like the NHS is, but will it be? Aren't we always going to pay the price of our ruling class mistakes in some way or another? If McConnell includes it in the next Labour Party policy, i want to check out all the small print and ignore the grand promise, not taking anything for granted from those who have a dubious record of representing workers' interests …isn't that wise?So, yes, let's not mock until we see what is on offer…So far Switzerland hasn't endowed too much confidence and nor have the other nations who have reached the stage of airing the possibility of UBI in theory.
Quote:has the Party officially tried any attempt at extending the hand of friendship with these people?I think we have tried to become closer to Zeitgeist in the past…showing their movies, inviting their speakers to address meetings ( but they are a nebulous lot), and us participating in their own media PaddyS was interviewed on their online radio station….Zeitgeist is more an amalgam of individuals in a fluid organisation rather than a political party but we shouldn't simply give up even if our open hand of friendship is ignored or even spurned. Perhaps the Sanders phenomenon making socialism a more respectable word has brushed off on some of the Zeitgeist activists who previously shied away from socialist/marxist terminology. Maybe their position has shifted a little to our favour But we did ourselves no favours by designating them a political rival…I'll leave others to recite the conference decision which i would have to search out in the archives to cite accurately but i wasn't too enmoured by the conference decisionFor sure you cannot force others to be your friends but we can set up opportunities that do bring us closer together and it will often take more than a few efforts to gain trust. I'm patient and persistent and think we should persevere.One thing we always have in our favour as a party is our political integrity and we should highlight that much more particularly when we have honest differences…we won't thrust our views down other peoples throats just for a result.
I'm the doom and gloom merchant, Adam…don't you go trying to steal my thunder with negative thoughts…We can still make use of their work and creativity as i suggested by posting their and i'm not talking about mergers but recognising where we agree and don't agree and perhaps going on to sharing some resources if the differences are not fundamental ones.. We could have joint meetings/workshops if we acknowledge that the hostility clause need not apply and could share the same platform. All i am suggested right now is some comradely cordial relationships and i'm pleased Brian is endeavouring to establish that at a personal level although i think it could be more worth-while if we later approached alike organisations as an organisation.
The video is among many that we could recommend and most were put online under the creative commons conditions which means we can include it on our own website, so why don't we? For an organisation that seeks common ownership, isn't it strange we won't make use of videos (or articles) that are not solely our own party property?Why the reluctance to acknowledge that there are others on our own wave-length? That was the real intent of my question. I find it incongruous that we cannot make use of others tools when our aims and often our means coincide. I find it strange that we cannot form links and cooperation with others.Do we have to be 100% in agreement? Isn't it enough to concur on 90%, particularly when the 10% difference may not even be on core principles but merely style of communication such as use of language or the baggage we all carry.
Quote:Goes to show we are not aloneIf we are not alone, why do we go it alone, Brian?Who is it incumbent upon to seek unity if we share core principles and basic ideas – them or us?
It is a good idea for branches to increase the social side for the membership by organising branch outing to such events. Usually, there is a discount for bulk ticket purchase.We once did it in Edinburgh branch – visit to the theatre. Stimulates discussion for the next branch meeting instead of the dull procedurals accepting minutes and noting minutes
