alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Trump renews the anti-muslim campaign and now joined in it with Carsonhttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34308716The US has a long history of religious bigotry in their elections…Kennedy was the first Catholic elected, and in many homes outside the US, his photo was alongside that of the Pope
Syriza win the General Electionhttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34307795A mandate for what , though?
A modern historian's take on ithttp://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/curragh-mutiny-had-disastrous-effect-on-discipline-in-the-british-army-1.1734239The SPGB takehttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1920s/1929/no-294-february-1929/parliament-and-army-curragh-%E2%80%9Cmutiny%E2%80%9DA related Forum discussion on this topic http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/capitalism-sucksAs we often say the most effective strike is the one that didn't happen – the threat of industrial action was sufficient. In the same way, the military can carry out their coup by simply raising the prospect of one if it changes policy. But again i think the most obvious and likely "coup" will be Corbyn's own Labour Party MPs rebellions in the Commons which will force his hand much sooner to either back down on many of his principles or split the PLP.Their conference just might be worth observing this year and the coming years
Just what will the outome be if half the shadow cabinet and the many MPs support Cameron on a no fly zone?How will a free vote avert the implosion?Where does it leave the Parliamentary Labour Party if Labour Conference endorses the Corbyn left wing policies. Perhaps he'll not test their popularity?It seems just as Labour might pick up the vote lost to SNP , they will again hand the SNP role of being the government's opposition in Parliament.
Usually they use the services of some retired army general – this is apparently a statement of a currently serving general http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-army-could-stage-mutiny-under-corbyn-says-senior-serving-general-10509742.html
Quote:The general staff would not allow a prime minister to jeopardise the security of this country and I think people would use whatever means possible, fair or foul to prevent that. You can’t put a maverick in charge of a country’s security. There would be mass resignations at all levels and you would face the very real prospect of an event which would effectively be a mutiny.”This is of course can be seen as just a part of the smear campaign against Corbyn … We've seen nothing like what it will be like in the run-up to a general election and what about an actual Corbym government.
ALB, a couple of months ago i don't think too many would have anticipated such a situation in the Labour Party…Which means i cannot imagine how we can predict a couple of years down the line for them. Even next years elections strains our powers of prophecy. But i have seen online the first signs of disillusionment already…someone questioning Corbyn's failure to attend in person the Stop the War conference…and the same person posted a picture of Corbyn and McDonell posing with the flag of the Free Syrian Army as if it was freedom fighters and questioning their foreign policy knowledge.
Again i'm on record as supporting e-democracy within the WSM using Skype or similar, Vin.I understand your concerns but i wish to go further than even you do to include all companion parties and beginning with EC meetings being accessible live on the netObviously the debate i seek has to start at branch level but the format of the conference i envisage may not even be based on branch delegations since i see the widest discussion, not simply a delegate repeating parrot fashion a branch decision as sometimes happens at Conference/ADM. I'm sure we can develop a more flexible form of one-off discussion conference although personally i'm a bit vague on its structure myself.But as DJP says…everybody gets a say on decision making via a postal ballot which means those who are not on the internet and therefore cannot have the privilege that you and i possess to follow exchanges on the forum and elsewhere nor free to attend physically conference still have their part to play.I think the report of the conference contributions regardless of the outcomes should be made into a pamphlet to show how we decide principles and positions democratically and people can evaluate the arguments made by various people. If you have a complaint about not being able to attend conference because of distance, think about us living overseas and there are now a fair number of us i'm guessing…
SP and Lanz, i have more than just a few times on various threads suggested that we have to counter with theory…play the ball, as DJP so rightly put it…This i think is accepted by everybody on the forum…And the discussion and debate has been, is just how to make that theoretical counter-attack effective. To take advantage of opportunities that are (and have been for a while now) opening up to us.I have suggested we re-write some basic economic texts and update them to turn them into contemporary critiques. But i have weaseled my way out of any personal obligations by stating that i am not as versed as some others in the party on economics. So i wish to delegate the responsibility. And those who have followed the trend within all my posts over the years will also know that i seek to develop the "heretical" proposal of a blueprint…to detail the socialist project more concretely and descriptively as the wider approach to our propaganda and publicity. It can therefore be built upon the sound-bites of Corbyn and call for the need to go a lot further if Corbyn's homilies are to be actually heeded. It is not for us to endorse Corbyn's views but for him and his supporters to endorse our own, which are based and founded on genuine socialist ideals and rooted in the tradition of socialism. Therefore we have to put our principles forward and make our case heard. Again, it is acceptable for members not to agree wholeheartedly with one another upon how to do it and have different opinions upon how to do this for the best effect. Again, putting into practice contrasting styles will offer something empirical to deduce future methods and tactics fromAnd there is no sure-fire means of doing this successfully…it is trial and error…If members think we have fallen short, it is encumbent upon them not to just identify the failure but to try and remedy it…and that is not an easy task …Again i am on record suggesting we need a dedicated conference…not just a work-shop on key messages which is certainly welcomed, don't get me wrong, but something deeper and more fundamental, tackling the roots of the matter, where we do not exclude such drastic options as re-naming ourselves and (only imho) making clear and clarifying the perennial problem of how to express our position of supporting reforms and actual resistance but yet not supporting reformism.And i'm afraid all this has to be done under the auspices of a conference that does more than plant the seeds of new ideas but puts conclusions into practice and not let them lie fallow. Democracy is about possessing the power to carry out decisions, not just making them. And, btw, if the truth is to be told, i'm all for the return to the 1970s, because it was when i first encountered the SPGB and there was an air of confidence as branches grew in number and in strength. I would have embraced it …and i would have also said…1870s…the Paris Commune a victory in defeat Was it Imposs1904 who showed that the 19th C era had many other victories for workers
But hope on the horizonA third of SNP voters may return to Labour http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/19/third-snp-voters-more-likely-back-labour-jeremy-corbyn-poll
Another shot in the foot by Corbyn…http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34288573
ALB, we will just to have to agree to disagree on our different perspecitives of what happened.You may well place your faith in the London-based press that you read, all of whom supported the No vote, and the tv coverage that academic review of exposed as possessing a No bias , however, i suggest that the lack of police or legal action makes it doubtful that it was a serious concern.As i said the only violence that i am aware of was initiated by the No supporters when the referendum was over and done with. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/glasgows-george-square-turns-ugly-4290576I did try to distance the No campaign from this by saying it was instigated by loyalist fans of Rangers and their allies in the SDL nand other right wing neo-fascist groups.Heckling Jim Murphy on his staged walk-abouts, i am afraid i view as fair game.But if anecdotal evidence is worth anything , i saw on numerous times rival campaigners with their stalls set up quite close to eachother, at times almost alongside. and the badges and stickers of both sides being worn by countless people so they as individuals didn't seem to feel any threat or intimidation by displaying their allegiences in public. In regards to allegations of intimatory tactics of pro-Corbynists, the press tried to exaggerate social media online exchanges into threats as they did in Scotland. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-supporters-accused-of-launching-snpstyle-cyber-attacks-on-labour-leader-rivals-10452587.htmlEdit – i should add that my eye-witness account was based only upon visits to three places, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dunfermline. Perhaps elsewhere there were more friction but i can't recall hearing or reading about anything of import.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34287362Using parliamentary jiggery-pokery, the right-wing Abe has got his wish, a free hand in expanding Japan's miltary role
Quote:and intimidatory tactics reported to have been shown by independantists in Scotland towards those who disagreed with them.albThe most important word there is "reported"The Yes campaigners were accused of intimidation by the media but i think it was more a part of a unionist press smear against them. Emotions ran high and some exchanges on both sides were passionate especially on social media but violence or acts of vandalism, not that much. The debate never ever degenerated into street fighting except for the acceptable sabotage of posters and some heckling by both sides. Except for one incident where the Yes campaigners were attacked in George Sq. by No campaigners, mostly loyalists colloqually known as "The Huns" than actual No voters and that was AFTER the referendum result. I missed the actual event by a few hours and when i earlier passed by, the Yes voters were still in high spirits and very much like Scottish football's "Tartan Army" were celebrating and accepting defeat rather graciously. Similarly, "reports" of intimidation was repeated in the press about Corbyn's followers but despite the occasional act such as was inflicted upon ourselves, i think it was all part of the smear campaign to depict them as extremists.
