alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Quote:I said that the basic income is "basically a socialist idea"
I think some will feel there is a risk that a reform which will only be passed if it fits in with the agenda of the employing class, will have sufficient built-in constraints that it will fail to satisfy the expectations and hopes of our fellow workers and as the reform was made in the name of "socialism" and promoted by those calling themselves "socialists" then the subsequent disillusionment and disappointment will not be with capitalism and the owning class but with the actual idea of socialism and those recognised to be "socialists".I dare say other will predict that the reform will be established by a rising class conflict, forcing the government into conceding UBI and therefore it will be seen as a stepping stone reform towards something better and not view it as a reform by the privileged class to divert a potentially revolutionary and not just merely a militant workers movement.I'm sure other analyses can be suggested. Reforms are a murky business and there is always unintended consequences…maybe for us and maybe for the bosses…Whatever happens, we should have created a convincing case that urges fellow workers to seek the full pie and not just a bigger slice of it. How exactly, i leave to better minds than myself.
Nice to have you drop around again, Stuart, to check up on us and still see if there is a pulse beating in the old organisation.Once an SPGBer, always an SPGBer to some extent, no matter how small, eh? UBI i certainly a popular panacea right now. Most of the progressive websites i visit to gather material for the blog has featured sympathetic articles on the topic. Usually combined with worker-owned collectives as the "socialist" alternative. Even YMS has suggested a form of UBI may well be introduced as a temporary but necessary first phase of socialism as it emerges from the womb of capitalism.I think i concur with the other members if UBI is introduced it will be in the form that is acceptable to the ruling class and for the purpose of mitigating the cost of the up-keep of the increasing and unavoidable numbers of casualties of the class war, automation being one field of battle.But i note McDonnell is suggesting it may be included in the next Labour Manifesto although that is far from being settled. As with the minimum wage and the living wage our struggles will still continue in demanding a decent level of UBI, calling for increases and more than likely, resisting cuts. If the ruling class cannot defeat us, then they will dip into their bag for other tools to accomplish the same aim by another method…perhaps using inflation…Anyway, don't be a stranger, Stuart…there will always be a welcome for the return of a prodigal son…Same goes to you, too, Robbo.
Is there any difference in supporting nationalisation and municipalisation. Granted it is about difference in size but can it also be about the definition of community and its extent.Can we perhaps envisage that possibly some city/town councils may well have voted in a majority of socialists before other towns catch up. What will they be doing? Twiddling their thumbs waiting for the General Election and perhaps other local elections, we have Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament and the smattering of mayor elections or will they begin to initiate and inaugurate changes in democracy and production and distribution. Council rents and rates abolished, will citizens be out there with their shovel and spades filling in the road pot-holes…building council houses…taking control of their communities…but what if it is several months of capitalism still to endure…will the council cash in their bonds and stocks and shares fr cash to pay money to the workers… The Trots talk of uneven development – is this a valid criticism?
Didn't take long, did it? Scarcely 4 weeks and Khan's election promise is broken.http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/08/sadiq-khan-london-fares-promise-public-transport-mayor-election
Quote:workplaces transformed from contracts of service into partnership agreements.I well understand that another term once used for socialism was cooperative commonwealth – which combined your own view and Robbo's into one definition.But again i fear the potential time-scale of this orderly transfer (transition).Just what do we do when those partnerships(coops, i think is the more common word for such unless you thinking of the partnership in John Lewis Partnership) begin competing against one another for existence with one another? Another thought is how close is this to the Guildford Road that as the revolution nears such organisations will be increasingly in operation. Are you and Robbo now in agreement? I fear we are getting very close to Richard Wolff and Gar Alperovitz in suggesting something much less than socialism as our practical baby-steps politics.I see the rise of workers and community councils more as weapons in class war that do actively dispossess the ruling class than simply just an emerging means of administration and as we do have some empirical historical evidence to go by, these act as the "dictatorship of the proletariat" and begin the process of socialisation of production and consumption which in some cases abolished money and wages. The mom and pop corner-shop, i think, as YMS does, can be ignored as having no or little impact on the social changes taking place. But in the developing world, it is not the industrial-scale farms that provide food as it is in the UK and elsewhere but small family-owned farms the mom and pop small-holdings catering for the immediate market of the district.Are we being to Euro-centric and parochial by not discussing how (for the want of a better word because i technically don't think they are) – the peasants are involved in socialism? Didn't Luxemburg have something to say on the issue that could be thought of as a less than a libertarian policy?
I fear for my own health when the Chilcot Report comes out and the media bends over backwards to justifyand whitewash Liar Blair bleating "wasn't me, guv, just an innocent mistake anybody could have made and anyways he deserved what was coming to him and we gave it to him so pat me on my back and i promise i won't do it again, except when i agree with Libya and Syria."
This news item of a small "war" or at least a raiding attack 6000 BC may be of interest to some on this threadhttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/07/french-archaeologists-unearth-bones-6000-year-old-neolithic-massacre
Quote:So, for some weeks or months, the easiest thing to do is leave money circulating…those things that can quickly be made free access will be, housing, transport, etc. those things that are less important or more niche would continue to circulate with a dwindling supply of pretend-money tokens or somesuch.Why we work and want money is not really for niche-market consumerism, although some of the hedonistic younger generation without responsibilites other than for themselves believes it is simply to furnish themselves with fashionable clothes and limitless supplies of alcohol and drugs, but rather food and shelter and transport – those goods you declare will be free (albeit, initially rationed to some degree) Where is Bob the Greengrocer going to acquire his fruit and veg – particularly those out of season. It is why i can fully agree with your statement "Since the bureaucracy for markets exists already, lets use that, rather than making a new one."We'll use the expertise of the socialists within Walmart, Tesco, Tyson and all the other transnationals. And the obvious place will be at the bottom of the pyramid – the distribution warehouses and the ordering departmentsI'm not convinced of this "weeks or months" I think it perhaps be a recipe for years and possibly decades unless there is a deliberate and purposeful campaign for change. I fear there exists a determinist mechanical breakdown model under the surface of this natural withering away of prices and money – i have to think that there requires human intervention to make change – as someone here says – stones don't make history. We require social activity to end capitalism.
The Guardian pre-empts the Chicot Report to defend Blair. It is Blair who is "frustrated" by the delay in the publication. It is Blair who with his "well-known skills at prediction' will divert attention from WMD to regime change. Blairites blame Corbyn for treating Blair as a war-criminal. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/06/blair-camp-readies-its-defence-to-chilcot-report
Quote:"Trust and ye shall be betrayed.” After all the lessons of the past the same “leaders" were entrusted with power, and acted along the same lines as before. Which was to be expected. The workers have still a fair road to travel before they will get rid of the superstition of "Leadership" or the dope of "good" and "bad" leaders. But the splendid solidarity of the rank and file, along with their steady refusal to follow the maniacs who advise the formation of "Workers' Defence Corps" and other methods of crude force, are healthy signs of the beginnings of an understanding of their slave position that forms the first step in the work of establishing Socialism.What more valuable lesson was there to learn than this one…but one that was sadly forgotten.I often find criticisms of our criticisms don't quite encompass the importance of the implications of them. When we call for the rejection of leadership, we are not calling for faith in the electoral system but the same self-organisation and self-activity the correspondent is also seeking.
I find that the correspondent protests too much"The workers in combined actions , working, co-operating, in spreading support brings more workers to see in reality the latent power of their own class unleashed…"Yes i can agree with this and the General Strike article does touch upon this angle sympathetically. And the article does confirm the conclusion of the correspondent'The[re] is no guarantee of immediate advance to revolution and workers taking the power… raising the needed spirit of organizing as a wider , united class. "Wheras we stated "When we speak of the general strike we are not concerned with the general strike of a single trade union but of all workers. The movement is no longer a trade union movement but has become a class movement."I reread the Root and Branch pamphlet on the Seattle General Strike and that too had to dampen down romanticism. http://struggle.ws/hist_texts/seattle1919_p2.html"neither the strike committee nor the rank and file of the workers ever intended revolution….the reason which was the simplest and the most important. The vast majority struck to express solidarity. And they succeeded beyond their expectations…"The British 1926 had the exact same purpose but it failed miserably. Regards one point in his criticism of our attitude on soviets. The workers councils did just step onto history in 1917 in Russia. Unlike 1905, the 1917 soviets were the creation of political parties, hence not one factory delegation in their inaugural meeting
I will concede that nationalism is a very slippery concept. It is not as simple as my sloganeering makes out. We have the UK – a union of 4 nations – frequently involved against one another in civil wars, often with religious differences as the pretext but which can still produce a UK nationalism. Certainly there is still an on-going rivalry between the petty nationalisms of the component countries of the EU and that of the EU bureaucracy which is often at loggerheads with individual nations – (Greece?). I think you are right, there is racism and islamophobia bigotry in the policies of many nations and that is shared in many respects. The Slovak president made a very significant distinction between Ukrainian refugees and those from the Middle East. I read the first page of your link….bit too long to fully read, right now, i'll make time later, but it talks about the need for commonality in the creation of a nation. I think we have that beginning so we can talk of the emergence of European nationalism – A European foreign policy – European economic policy- European human rights, European crime policy – a European army and many other European institutions either arising or solidfying their presence.But i think because i am not in the UK and because i am not in Europe, i view (and i think i made that bias clear), UK and Europe rather differently from those inside. I recall your support for EU because of the mobility of labour issue. But that is only seen through the prism of an EU national, not from a world view of Africans and Asians. We have managed and controlled mobility of labour for non-EU folk. A bigger prison cell as you once said but one that millions would love to break into, not out from. Fortress Europe is a collective policy agreed by Europeans. The tariff and customs walls is another and i have read many developing nations and particularly small farmer groups protest that the IMF representing the interests of the European corporations demand free trade from them but exclude them from entry to the European market. (some ex-colonies, i believe, still have special privileges)In the context of being part of the World Socialism Movement, not British or European workers, but part of the world's working class, there exist sectional self-interests we have to combat, so i think we have to highlight the global divisions that exist and which the EU actively reinforces. The usual reposte is still valid…would you rather have a quick death or a lingering slow one? Smallpox or Cholera?We expose anti-immigration myths about EU migrants from the native-born and we have to do equally the same for non-EU migrants and attack the EU as an entity that maintains the myth of "us" and "them" – and that separation is the basis of all nationalist ideas. I refer you to this latest SOYMB blog-post. http://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/06/excluding-poor.html
It certainly made sense to the Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orban, to say “Those arriving have been raised in another religion, and represent a radically different culture. Most of them are not Christians, but Muslims,” he said. “This is an important question, because Europe and European identity is rooted in Christianity. Is it not worrying in itself that European Christianity is now barely able to keep Europe Christian? There is no alternative, and we have no option but to defend our borders.”And there is part of your answer, What are the shared features of this identity? from the horses mouth – religion.Slovakia's Prime minister Robert Fico explained "Multi-culturalism is a fiction. Once you let migrants in, you can face such problems," Czech President Milos Zeman “The experience of western European countries which have ghettos and excluded localities shows that the integration of the Muslim community is practically impossible,” Zeman said in a televised interview. “Let them have their culture in their countries and not take it to Europe, otherwise it will end up like Cologne,” he added, referring to the mass New Year’s Eve assaults on women in Germany and elsewhere.Zeman claimed the influx was masterminded by Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, saying the Islamist group was using money from several states to finance it in a bid to “gradually control Europe”.It certainly makes sense if you are non-European and want to gain entry.
Quote:I do not understand this strange reluctance to speculate,Once more, Robbo, i have to exclude myself from your criticism.
Quote:It relates to my oft-repeated suggestion that we could benefit from a propensity to be more descriptive in our projections. Who want to buy a pig in a poke…To paraphrase Andrew Neil …we are what we say we are on the tin…but shouldn't we also add ingredients to the nameAnd in another post
Quote:I think we can imagine various scenarios and speculations that do not demand we are shoe-horned into fixed pre-determined futures.And my emphasised passage echoes your own caveat
Quote:It is NOT to arrive at some collective formalised position on the nitty gritty of what a future socialist society would entail.KAZ compares us with the geeks of Zeitgeist who seem to be tackling the problem of translating the technical and productive potential into future possibilitiess. To be honest, even though Zeitgeist is little known, i would put money on it that globally they are better known than we in the WSM. So do i dare say it – they are doing something we aren't. If cook-books aren't to be endorsed, why were so many on the forum interested in the News From Nowhere radio-play…why bother with it. Perhaps because it did serve some constructive purpose and also showed that one criticism that blueprints often made that they are easily redundant by time —- but that they can also be updated and modernised to fit new times. Which reminds me of rationing since somebody said no mention of mobiles in the News From Nowhere adaption – won't cell phone be in temporary short supply as we humanise the conditions in the Congo where coltan is mined?
Quote:What shortages are we envisaging?I'm not really sure because i don't know how things stand – on a world scale.Once more i think we are being a bit parochial in the debate. We face a planet where there is a shortage of things – albeit an artificial one. We'll have an immediate task of re-distibution which may mean re-directing what we have to those in more need. Pieter Lawrence when addressing the issue argued that before we reached a steady state economy of zero-growth, there will be a period of very active growth to address the problems of poverty and lack of resources across of the globe. "First, there would have to be urgent action to relieve the worst problems of food shortages, health-care and housing which affect billions of people throughout the world.Secondly, longer term action to construct means of production and infrastructures such as transport systems for the supply of permanent housing and durable consumption goods. These could be designed in line with conservation principles, which means they would be made to last for a long time, using materials that, where possible, could be re-cycled and would require minimum maintenance.Thirdly, with these objectives achieved there could be an eventual fall in production, and society could move into a stable mode. This would achieve a rhythm of daily production in line with daily needs with no significant growth. On this basis, the world community could live in material well-being whilst looking after the planet."For sure there are many interim ad-hoc improvisations that can be made to mitigate some shortage problems. For sure, there may be various degrees of gradual substitution and repllacement on unsustainable climate changing technology. But perhaps socialism will arrive when we have no such luxury as time and dramatic change would be called for. The last comment is the most pertinent – the psychological one – would a people who had strived and struggled for socialism so determinedly and doggedly sabotage it by imposing individualistic/sectional demands upon the social system. I think not.
