alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Former Health Secretary Andy Burnham has hired lobbyists with connections to major pharmaceutical companies and private healthcare providers to work on his campaign.Either it is their professional connections with those seeking health service privatisation or their expertise at lying on behalf of them, Burnham seeks. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/andy-burnham-how-the-defender-of-the-nhs-cosied-up-to-big-pharma-10317258.html
Came across thishttp://stuartjeannebramhall.com/2015/06/06/the-elite-cabal-behind-the-jfk-assassination/"Based on eye witness testimony, he identifies each of eight snipers by name and US intelligence role. Altogether sixteen shots were fired in four stages…."…Now that makes me wonder a bit…if all 16 shots had been on target which they should have been since they were professionals, why have LHO as the lone gunman patsy to explain away all those shots? That supposed "magic bullet" would have miraculously turned into 16 of them…Perhaps the answer is in the movie, but i can't face watching over three hours…Maybe some one can proxy for me.
If the parameters of this thread is merely to critique another member's individual thoughts on his experiences from hustings in the election then i bow out for i believe there are far greater questions to be posed and answers attempted as i have several times suggested.Howard's viewpoint could have been a springboard but i fear i would soon be off-topic by bringing in extraneous material.I'll, follow the contributions with interest and be curious to discover the disagreements over Howard's discussion document which arises.
SPGB COMMUNICATION STRATEGY…i think that make the thread all-encompassing And as Howard's comments is based upon his experiences of being a candidate in the general election, i think they may well similarly apply to the London elections…perhaps he might explain if they are applicable or not. If we are serious about creating a communication strategy, we have to choose the medium ..should it be elections…should it be expensive elections …or are there other forms of campaigning that may bear more fruit? That surely is a question that has to be raised if we are talking about communicating not only general socialist ideas but articulating Socialist Party principles which i think was the criticism of Glasgow Br and London of his tv appearance. I don't think we should box ourselves in by limiting the scope of the debate which i think the Outsource meeting and subsequent report did. We can widen it online and as you have seen despite endeavours to contain and direct threads, they take on a life of their own and often aren't diverted but on the contrary centre upon the core issues as they develop from exchanges… i should know because many of my comments never head in the direction i hope. But i think Vin may well have his own opinion on what the thread to focus upon and he was the one who started it after all…and i may have usurped the thread from what he intended it to discuss….
For the time being i think this is the best place to discuss the London elections until the party makes a decision on its position to staanding.First the costs, excluding printing and publicity and i presume a new video, The deposits are £1,000 for the constituency seats and £5,000 for the list, both with a 2.5% threshold for retention, and £10,000 for the mayoral race, where there is a 5% threshold.Then let us see what Left Unity have discussed. http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1062/standing-in-londons-elections/
To get the debate off i have cut and pasted two comments i made on the other thread which are appropriate to this one.Quote:"We believe in preaching our Marxian view of capitalism wherever we can get hearers; but when we find that people get tired listening to the same old grind week after week, and then refuse to support our gatherings, we must, if we still preserve our sanity, change our tactics." John McleanHe never did have the right answer but he did pose the right question Members are wondering to themselves what our future approach should be for the Party campaigns and presentation.This article about why people don't care about climate change could apply to our selves, why they don't care a shit about socialismhttp://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/a-psychologist-explains-why-peopl… Quote:We need to apply a mix of strategies that hold the potential to dissolve the polarization: use social networks, supportive framings, simple actions, stories, and signals. We start by changing the messengers to people that are inside non-polarized social networks such as sport teams, churches, neighborhoods, towns, and cities. Second, we avoid doom, cost, and sacrifice framings, and talk about the issue in terms of opportunity, insurance, risk management, health, and resilience…. Fourth, and most important, we tell new stories of the dream, not the nightmares. We must describe where we want to go, such as smarter green growth, happier lives, and better cities, stewardship rather than dominion, and re-wilding nature by allowing its resilience to flourish again….Humans will act for the long-term when conducive conditions are in place. Therefore, all climate communicators need to assist building the necessary social norms, supportive frames, simple actions, new stories, and better signals.(my emphahsis)
I'm not so sure about the author Tim Worstall's credentials, he seems to be more a political promoter than a scientist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_WorstallBut he does have the appropriate work experience, being a trader in rare earths such as scandium
Members are wondering to themselves what our future approach should be for the Party campaigns and presentation.This article about why people don't care about climate change could apply to our selves, why they don't care a shit about socialismhttp://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/a-psychologist-explains-why-people-dont-give-a-shit-about-climate-change/
Quote:We need to apply a mix of strategies that hold the potential to dissolve the polarization: use social networks, supportive framings, simple actions, stories, and signals. We start by changing the messengers to people that are inside non-polarized social networks such as sport teams, churches, neighborhoods, towns, and cities. Second, we avoid doom, cost, and sacrifice framings, and talk about the issue in terms of opportunity, insurance, risk management, health, and resilience…. Fourth, and most important, we tell new stories of the dream, not the nightmares. We must describe where we want to go, such as smarter green growth, happier lives, and better cities, stewardship rather than dominion, and re-wilding nature by allowing its resilience to flourish again….Humans will act for the long-term when conducive conditions are in place. Therefore, all climate communicators need to assist building the necessary social norms, supportive frames, simple actions, new stories, and better signals.(my emphahsis)
Quote:"We believe in preaching our Marxian view of capitalism wherever we can get hearers; but when we find that people get tired listening to the same old grind week after week, and then refuse to support our gatherings, we must, if we still preserve our sanity, change our tactics."John McleanHe never did have the right answer but he did pose the right question
Israel's latest PR spokesperson, Tony Bliar, promotes the "Right Way" for his old party
Quote:“The public always looks for a leader who is going to lead the country and can rise above their party. If you retreat into your comfort zone, you lose — that’s the lesson of 100 years of our history…I don’t see any evidence that [the country] has shifted to the left … the Labour party has to have an alignment of strategy and tactics and that strategy has to be based on the centre ground – not splitting the difference between progressive and conservative positions but a radical centre in which you are able to take decisions for the future of the country…a strong Labour party occupying the centre ground operates a gravitational pull from both left and right.”"Workers in countries such as India are always organizing strikes & trying to build revolution." Yes, you are spot on…workers WITH jobs and therefore possessing some industrial muscle, not the destitute hungry who lack any means of resistance and who have no reserves to sustain a strike much less a revolution. If the revolutions are being constantly suppressed by such bodies as the CIA and Western countries , then surely we should be concentrating our resources in educating workers in those places to have the revolution because it is they who determine the outcome elsewhere in the world.
Quote:If they were hungry & impoverished they would be more motivated to understand why socialism is essentialWant to explain to me why there are never revolutions taking place whenever famine ravages a region of the world, and instead just dejection, desolation and despair prevails? After all, about a billion people are hungry right now yet we do not witness the upsurge in revolutionary consciousness you say should be the result. Socialists stand for a liberatory and emancipatory social revolution. It is a creative process to be built on hope and promise of constructing a new type of society. The working class are the agents of this because it is we who are the producers who can provide the wherewithal and necessities of abundance to the world. BTW, you have never responded to my own earlier comment…Hugo Chavez's committment to the democratic process. Nor answered why according to your logic we shouldn't be nihilistically encouraging more suffering and distress to "revolutionise" our fellow workers.
Quote:Hungry stomachs are the backbone of every proletariat uprising & revolution, not bloated stomachs.I usually quote James Connolly pessimistic view on trade union action..and he should know having been one of the leaders of the 1913 Dublin Lockout"Empty bellies up against fat wallets"How do you judge Paris 1968? Socialism, i think, will be inspired from aspiration not desperation.But if we take what you say is correct (which we don't)…then we should all be working against the working class, ensuring that they suffer and are in a constant dire condition of deprivation to spark the activism you so much seek. ALB has already questioned the actual historical accuracy of your comparisons but i in partiicular draw attention to Venezuela which you cite…can i merely suggest you look at the history of Chavez before you disparage elections and note the importance he chose to place upon them after his own failed earlier coup d'etat and then those subsequent attempted ones against him.
Andy Burnham’s position as the union choice to be the next Labour leader has taken a knock after he was jeered and booed by delegates from the third biggest union.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leadership-contest-andy-burnham-jeered-by-union-members-at-hustings-10308837.html
The multi-billionaire owner of luxury jewellery company Cartier has revealed his greatest fear – robots replacing workers and the poor rising up to bring down the rich. Speaking at the Financial Times Business of Luxury Summit in Monaco (obviously), the fashion tycoon told his fellow elite that he can’t sleep at the thought of the social upheaval he thinks is imminent.According to Bloomberg, Johann Rupert told the conference to bear in mind that when the poor rise up, the middle classes won’t want to buy luxury goods for fear of exposing their wealth. He said he had been reading about changes in labour technology, as well as recent Oxfam figures suggesting the top 1 per cent of the global population now owns more wealth than the other 99 per cent.
Quote:“How is society going to cope with structural unemployment and the envy, hatred and the social warfare?” he said. “We are destroying the middle classes at this stage and it will affect us. It’s unfair. So that’s what keeps me awake at night.”South African Rupert was estimated by Bloomberg to have amassed a fortune of around $7.5 billion from brands including Cartier, Chloe and Vacheron Constantin.
