alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
May raise a wry smile of amusement this articlehttp://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2015/07/29/dangerous-radicalisation/
Never let a hungry ghost into an all-you-can-eat buffet, a restaurant model that would surely guarantee bankruptcy if customers did possess an infinite belly…(even though i have on occasions tried to prove them wrong and failed). But i know you are speaking about spiritual hunger…
Quote:"Physical hunger doesn't bother us. It's easy to take care of, to find something to eat that satisfies the hunger. Spiritual hunger, however, is another matter. The more we eat, the more we hunger. This is the problem we're caught in- being annoyed, pestered, bothered, agitated by spiritual hunger. When nothing annoys the mind, that is true happiness."http://www.suanmokkh.org/archive/arts/ret/haphung1.htm#EndlessHunger(Perhaps of interest to you, Suan Mokkh was just a hour or so car trip away from my late wife's home. I visited it twice in the 90s but just for a shady picnic spot. I did buy a selection of their lit to read, though)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/28/harriet-harman-we-are-weeding-out-bogus-labour-leadership-votersAnd we can expect as much balance and fairness from the Party's bureaucrats as was received regards Stevie Deans and Falkirk/Grangemouth local activists got.
Quote:So where does Nove undermine the case for free access? Where does DRS convince you that the SPGB are wrong?Not sure you actually addressed these two questions i asked so that we can have somethng concrete to focus upon. I want others to join in with this topic thread, if they don't, you and i might as well just meet some time in the future when i'm back in the UK for a pint or two or three and exchange opinions (hopefully your call for a more spartan lifestyle choices won't include temperance and i expect you to get the first round in!) so i won't in this post try to answer the position you just made. I'm sure you know what the expected replies will consist of so i will be interested in you providing the evidence to disprove them and back up your case.
Quote:"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong." Arthur C ClarkeWhat is your age right now, Stuart? Are the wrinkles beginning to appear and the hair starting to go grey and disappear? This opinion of Stuart's is shared by overwhelmingly by many – the common sense argument against us that takes many forms – and it is no wonder from almost the birth of socialism the "impossiblists" have been a minority while the "possiblists" took charge of the labour movement, then took control of governments and nations, and achieved…what, exactly?…certainly not what has been perfecttly "possible" rather a lot less than than that potentially possible. Von Mises has been the father of the case against free access. Others followed on. Nove's book title should be the focal point of our argument…the feasibility….Have we done enough to counter Nove's views? From references on the web, definitely not. I certainly have not read enough of him or his ideas but nor had he studied the SPGB unlike David Ramsay Steele, our ex-member and proponent of anarcho-capitalism. Why Stuart considers him as an authority i am not sure since advocates of a version of a capitalism that is impossible to achieve and based upon an ahistorical analysis of the past. I have read the exchanges he has had with ALB and Robbo and what resulted, imho, was a strenthened case for free access socialism since we had to face his challenges and rebut them. I think the Party succeeded. Obviously, you do not, Stuart.So where does Nove undermine the case for free access?Where does DRS convince you that the SPGB are wrong?Of course, there are host of others who argue for "market socialism" or mutualism rather than anarcho-communism. And then there are those who suggest that aspects of lower phase of socialsim ie labour time vouchers will exist for a substantial period. Free access will never be offered a free-ride as the only alternative.As for "green" and "spiritual" these descriptions are where i think the Party has failed and could do better. Both Dietzgen and Pannekoek used the term spiritual as descriptive ways of describing a certain desirable consciousness. If for instance i said "the SPGB seek the spirit of solidarity." We could do more to create a sense of socialist spirituality…More of an emotional appeal…to be more artistic in the way we express our ideas. I think there has been a reluctance for the party to use the term eco-socialist to express the necessary ecological sustainability of socialist society..our green side rather than red side.As i said about reforms, there are many battles members of the Party could/should be fighting, many of those are within the environmental issues. But each battle is a localised one, and the victory – if there is one – partial and more often than not, pyirrhic. But we cannot distance ourselves from those who seek life-changes and world-changes. Our problem is one of communication and the failure to convey what is required for real change to be accomplished. We have not sufficiently interacted with the environmentalist movement as much as i personally would have wished.But in another post, i don't consider it to be fundamental disagreement that require resignation. Changing the image and impression the Party gives to others is something members can do from within the Party.There is little wrong in our message, just in the way we tell it. That may be a little too simplistic a response for you, Stuart,…not enough those intellectuals that only get cited to achieve PhDs (a dig at Mason's constant references to authorities i don't think anybody had a scooby-do about. Gorz was the only one i would guess was apopular read) but rectifying it is certainly complicated enough and a big enough challenge. I think we should return to the basic problem of identification with socialism – common sense – and develop the many common sense views we hold on the importance of community…or more accurate …communities plural where people can see socialist ideas at work. We also sometimes neglect the need to call for the full development of the individual which was something Marx emphasised as a positve feature to articulate in a lot of articles Mason, Robbo aren't too far of the mark…we should use such cooperative and self-help relationships as signs of times to come, not only as strategies to survive capitalism and certainly not as solutions to societal problems. But as sign-posts.
The economic instability in China has not gone awayhttp://www.bbc.com/news/business-33671459Shares in mainland China have recorded their biggest one-day fall for more than eight years following a sell-off. Profit at China's industrial firms dropped 0.3% in June from a year ago. factory activity in July saw its worse performance for 15 months.
Proabably you are right, Stuart…it would derail the thread. But i was genuinely interested for the mercenary reason i am curious where you think we are going wrong and what we could do to correct it. Certinly as you say you have raised our differences before but i don't think i have read them in an actual statement of your own beliefs, more a collection of remarks and comments and observations to other peoples positions that is why i sought a clearer account of your opinions. I remain a cynic and a sceptic regards Corbyn. Sanders is offering a similar serious challenge to Clinton in America….As being pointed out …any chance of victory or any chance that their policies will prevail will be sabotaged by the class interests in both Labour and the Democrats… or are we now saying contrary to our D of P that political parties are NOT expressions of class interests. We witness it now…donors withdrawing funds (and the Tories will tighten up on union donations) and constitutional threats to the leadership contest. "I came to Socialism through Marxism… I found it illuminating in so many ways; in particular, my perception of the relationship between people and the society in which they live, was irreversibly altered." Tony Blair I certainly most definitely accept that Corbyn is much more sincere than the mealy-mouthed office-seeking opportunist Blair was and is. Sure it is all interesting to watch and listen to and read about especially when it highlights the biasism of the media and shines a light on power politics. That is the way we should treat it…an example of democracy NOT in action. It also means a change in narrative as Stuart says in regards the Labour Party …It means we will have to re-edit and re-issue all our old pamphlets again and repeat all the old arguments that we thought were to be consigned to the archives. We really will be required to re-read all the things what we said about the Labour Party in the past…and that is a lot.
No, you don't get off that easily. If your differences are not about the ideas but the application of them, then the task is to change the party. If we are not succeeding as educators or agitators or organisers then those weakness must be addressed. But i think you suggest the disagreement is more than that.Reformism V. Reforms…Often i encounter folk who are activists in various campaigns and believe that membership excludes them from trying to mitigate the effects of capitalism upon themselves or others. As a party we do not advocate a list of palliatives and ameliorations, nor do we say that creating such a platform of changes bring socialism closer to being achieved – but that it would transform the party from a socialist party into something else. But we do recognise that people need to defend themselves against the nefarious impact of the capitalist system or that they have a need to improve or better their living standards within it. We view that there exist other organisations more suited and better fitted for this than ourselves – trade unions, charities, ginger groups of all kinds. As an individual we do not have a proscription on being active within those. For sure, it means dividing an individual's time and energy and resources but that is something an individual member must weigh up We are a voluntarist organisation therefore there is not coercion into activity for it. Reformism, itself. Does it create stepping stones to socialism? Does it build consciousness? Should we engage in advocating those changes…construct a list…and it would be an extremely long one …a very very long one …and declare the party are in favour of those and will act and campaign for them….something highly unlikely to actually every materialise considering our low membership and the demands required to accomplish any progress in achieving reforms. So i think it is simply tokenism. Perhaps we can develop a hierarchy of reform demands…place the more deserving more prominently in out publicity and participation. I don't think it would practical. Conferences would be endlessly debating issues of expressing the different support to be given to the various reforms…all of which are fully commendable in themselves….Ah, that just may be a problem, some might not be and have a back-fire effect or possess unintended consequences…and we would be complicit in those failures as an organisation, not as the failing of an individual's insight.Of course, i am not referring to those Trotskyist transitional demands made upon capitalism that are supposed to be designed to actually never be effective since they are impossible to be compatable with socialism and are aimed at showing workers the futility of reform, and are seen as the bait to increase interest in socialism and draw more members who will be re-educated into understanding the contradictions of capitalism and from their campaigning will acquire the skills to communicate more directly with other workers…who ssomehow will overlook the deceit in being incited to support reforms that are not possible within the present society and are not informed of that limitation…Sorry Stuart, for saying the obvious to you because you have heard this all before and anyway those might not even be the principles you disagree with and think are incorrect in the SPGB. However, I'm simply trying to elicit just what you feel are the important lessons we should have learned and should be putting into practice.It is vital,imho, that this party does not rest upon its legacy (and legacies!) and keeps reviewing its interactions with people. Your sympathetic and sincere feedback is simply one bit of info (that may or not may be a true reflection of the situation) but is still a piece of the jig-saw we have to put together.Finally, which actual parties offer better insight, clearer education and more effective praxis than ourselves? What are your recommended alternative organisations?
Then it is my mistake, Stuart, in assuming that you have, so my apologies. I shouldn't put other peoples words into your mouth. Obviously i have to agree with you, the party is wrong…but only in a few aspects of how it projects its ideas … which in my own feeble efforts i am trying to direct the attention of my comrades to…it could be that i am wrong myself…but in the basics, nope, i think the party is fundamentally correct in its principles, otherwise i wouldn't have re-joined and remained a member. I think the problem is one of appearance rather than substance and we should address the question of our identity and manner of communication. You will no doubt believe our malaise is far deeper and goes to the core of our ideas and ideals. Having engaged in all the various debates and discussions over time i have not been convinced of the need to resign and enrol in another party. My interests on the political sphere is served as best as it can be in present circumstances by the SPGB. But who knows what the future holds and what conditions may arise. Perhaps the best way at looking at it, is that the Party is less wrong than the alternatives, whereas you will say there are other parties that are perhaps more correct but not enough for yourself to actually join them…(i'm assuming after you left LU you didn't sign up another despite the opportunity of a 3-quid vote for the Labour Party leader.)If you are correct and we are wrong, perhaps you can describe the damage we are inflicting upon our fellow workers.
Quote:The living movement always appeals to the young, and the mark of a living movement is its ability to attract the young. Wherever you see a party anywhere that has no young people, you can say for sure that its prospects are dim. The experienced troops of every army, even the best, always need renewal and replenishment.– James Cannon, the American Trotskyist of the Socialist Workers Party, words for ourselves to heed
Stuart often criticises ourselves as purists and uses the term as an epithet rather than a virtue. We suffer from the vice of actual unity in our objective and an agreement in the means to that goal. Again he seems to view this as a crime even though this consensus is reached voluntarily without coercion. What is the alternative?An organisation such as the Labour Party that includes openly pro-capitalist reformists with genuine advocates of the working class in one political organisation simply introduces a form of the class struggle into its own ranks. Splits and internal clonflict is to be expected and such internecine struggles are dissipating and emasculating. They distance actual supporters and voters with their organisational disputes. If Jeremy Corbyn prevails,Labour is threatened by the withdrawal of donations, refusal of MPs to serve in government and even another SDP party.If Jeremy Corbyn is defeated, he has either brought disillusionment and despair to activists or legitimised the conciliators with capitalism camp and provided them with foot-soldiers for the next election.For me, the only important issue is can we benefit from the fall-out. Can we attract those sincere pro-working class members of the Labour Party, can we draw the traditional voters of Labour to our position of ant-capitalism.I am minded of Glasgow and of two class-conscious members of the Labour Party. One joined the Socialist Party. One joined the International Socialists (but acknowledged the educational role of the SPGB). We should be concentrating our activity in being a welcoming and receptive home for those who have come to reject Labour and we should be ensuring they do not slip under the influence of the orthodox Left. A tough task. But the first thing is to make sure they actually do know there is an alternative to both. We have to accept that many still do not know of our existence, much less our principles. We have to raise our public profile with publicity.
An opportunity for our media committee (hint hint ) to issue a SPGB press release that the leader of the Labour Party is none of our business….that we want to remove the organ grinder – capitalism – not choose its monkey…or at least something along these lines…
More news of how China is endeavouring to suppress its Uighur population. http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/07/governments-playing-political-ping-pong-with-chinas-uyghurs/
A cloud with a silver lining One of the biggest losers appears to be John Paulson. After the Greek government, his Paulson Special Situation Fund is the second-biggest shareholder of Piraeus Bank, which is one of the largest financial firms in Greece. Piraeus holds nearly a third of all Greek deposits. Over the weekend, the Greek government closed banks in Greece in order to prevent their collapse. Panicked depositors had already pulled roughly a billion euros out of them. Paulson’s fund said it owned 6.6% of Piraeus at the end of the first quarter, which was the last time the fund filed its holdings. Greece also closed its stock market Monday, so shares aren’t trading. But as of Friday, the bank’s stock price, which had fallen 56% this year, was $0.40. It would certainly be lower today. Paulson could lose as much as $161 million on the investment.There there’s Athens Water. Paulson put $137 million into the utility just a year ago, hoping to cash in on the fact that the monopoly was going private. That didn’t happen. And now Athens Water is having trouble collecting its bills from the government, which is out of cash. Paulson has already lost about $75 million on the investment, and he could lose much of the rest. http://fortune.com/2015/06/29/john-paulson-greece-puerto-rico-hedge-funds/
YMS, i stand corrected, if this story is more than just promotional and is more practical.http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33656489
