alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." – John Quincy Adams
For those who have yet to watch Russel and Eddie show. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDZm9_uKtyoWhatever his intent, Brand simply offered an Establishment figure who from his family, educational and job background skilled in debate, a vehicle to expand and justify his views, with Brand offering a counter-argument that would not be a socialist. Brand, simply, let Miliband off the hook too often and i felt was supportive of Miliband's position. "Banks are a good thing…energy companies…"Whatever happened to Brand's fundamental anti-capitalism. He treated Miliband as an ally, even if he has got differences, not as a class enemy as Miliband effective is…Sadly disappointed by Brand in this clip…He should have been reading from a list of Labour Party collaborations and failures ..If Miliband has economic sovereign power on world-wide economics then why didn't Brand hold Miliband responsible if that is so and accuse Miliband culpable for the crisis…
I think this Standard article tried to explain an aspect of "high-waged workers"
Quote:those who play for the first teams of clubs (rather, businesses) in the Premier League, are paid fabulous amounts of money, by working class (if not capitalist class) standards. What is their income? Is it wages? Not really. It’s more like rent. Rent is paid whenever there is a natural monopoly in something that cannot be increased, normally land, mineral deposits, waterfalls and other natural features that can be employed in production. The rent of land and natural resources is essentially fixed by the paying demand for it. The higher the demand, the higher the rent.As Arsène Wenger pointed out, “you normally need special qualities to be a strong footballer”. It is these “special qualities – which are a sort of natural resource that cannot be increased – that enable the best footballers to command so high an income, but as rent rather than as the price for the mere sale of their labour power. Their income is so high because the demand for their talents is so high, Premier League football being Big Business with, thanks to television, a huge market.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2006/no-1221-may-2006/cooking-books-2-footballers%E2%80%99-wagesAs you say…all shapes and sizes, particularly incomes…How often have we heard the refrain …pensioners…they are just same as capitalists living idle lives off investments of their occupational pension funds (or private annuities)…Whatever happened to we were all going to be capitalists…SID, ?
YMS, not sure i fully agree with your observation on Campbell.
Quote:Brand won’t decide the outcome of the election. The politicians will, by what they say and do, and above all the public will, by what they make of what the politicians say and do.For a spin doctor he endows the media with very little power in influencing what the poilicians say and do or how the public view whats said and done by politicians.I think there is a case that media determines elections to a vast extent, historically from the times of Hearst, to the Zinoviev Letter, to the more recent Sun That Won It against Kinnock and also Murdoch's approval of the SNP here north of the border. It is not accidental is it, this omission? He never ceases to spin and ho wants to expose himself as part of a profession that is pulling the strings of the puppets?
I don't think we think ourselves as so perfect that we are beyond self-reproach. I merely wished to emphasise (as i have done previously) that we don't demand 100% adherence to non-core ideas and as far as i am concerned your views does not merit denial of membership…."Thinking is not and never has been a violation of socialist discipline."The point of referring to Rab was what i considered was his broader appeal to attracting new members. It maybe that your own insistence upon "not having read either Marx or Engels regarding 'materialism'." may be imposing academic Marxism…for instance , i have never read Engels Dialects of Nature, although i have seen many references to it…should i wear sack-cloth and ashes and self-flagellate because of that ignorance?I recall a debate long time ago about how we should actually write about socialism to convey the idea better to readers…and there was an interesting exchange on how politicos simply don't write simply…there apparently is a science to it but i forget the analysis name but any article can be submitted to it and come up with a readability score…i now hazard to suggest another mistake is expecting such a comprehensive knowledge when only a relatively few ideas are really necessary…One Edinburgh br member decided the important think was to get members then educate them…in practice it was a disastrous policy …because i think the promised education was never forthcoming…either through the branch lack of facility or the new members reluctance to participate…(in the IWW i witnessed the Little Red Card Member…someone with no interest in action but happy to show his membership card as proof of something)Anyway, Rab got his Declarion of Principles down to the basic skeleton of socialism, maybe we should endeavour as i think Robbo suggests, we do something similar…its worth thinking about
Quote:An Open Letter was written and printed to Brand and the silent response was deafening.I'm not convinced that he would have seen this open letter so i put no store by not getting response from him to it. Perhaps we should offer him an interview in the Socialist Standard, reminding him that Tony Benn deemed us worthy of such. I'm also pretty sure if i understood communism as most folk do (and that includes the vast majority of Lefties) i would dismiss communism too as crazy but he has been influenced by David Graeber who perhaps not identical to ourselves is well aware of non-exchange economies and voluntary co-operative societies and surely has discussed such with Russel.
Robbo
Quote:“retaining only what is absolutely essential to ensure the socialist integrity of the organisation.”We all understand the need to have a common acceptance of core beliefs to be an effective political organisation that doesn’t become a nebulous broad church that is for everything and nothing and is anything anybody wants it to be, where all can find a “home”…the Labour Party , perhaps.I found this book by of the WSPUS Isaac Rab “Life and Letters“ (online free at http://file27.pastebooks.org/pdf/role-modeling-socialist-behavior-the-life-and-letters-of-isaac-rab_1k4h3m.pdf ) of interest as it is the experience of a socialist striving for success in the sterile soil of "American way of life" in its heyday and his own attitude to what it means to be a socialist“Let's define a socialist. It is not how scholarly he may be in Marxism and the sciences. He may never have read a word of Marx or socialist literature. He simply needs to realise that: 1. Capitalism can no longer be administered or reformed in the interest of the working class or of society. 2. Capitalism is incapable of eliminating poverty, wars, crises, etc. 3. Socialism can solve the social problems confronting society today, since the material conditions are ripe for socialism, save the lack of a socialist majority.”To be more exact, I think all potential members would agree the following:The conscious, majority, political nature of the socialist revolution; Conception of History; the Law of Value; the Class Struggle; attitudes on leadership, reformism, and religion; the general nature of socialism as a system of society.However a socialist does not necessarily require an academic's grasp of Marxian economics such as perhaps the distinction between “labour” and “labour power.” Understanding this distinction is not an acid test of whether a person is a socialist or not! (However, it is true that there is a distinction between these two terms when it comes to describe the nature of capitalist exploitation.)The acid test of socialist convictions hinges on such factors as:Capitalism cannot be reformed or administered in the interest of the working class or of society;Capitalism, as a social system, is in the interest of the ruling class (albeit that capitalism, historically, is an essential stage of social evolution);Socialism is the solution to the social problems and irreconcilable contradictions of capitalism;Socialism cannot be rammed down the workers’ throats against their wishes;The socialist victory is dependent upon the fervor and enthusiasm of the determined, conscious socialist majority. These are the characteristics of a socialist; a coupling of the head and the heart, theory coupled with action.A socialist is one who recognizes and realizes that capitalism can no longer be reformed or administered in the interest of society or of the working class; that capitalism is incapable of eliminating poverty, war, crises, etc.; and that the times call for arousing the majority to become socialists to inaugurate socialism, now possible and necessary.”I think his attitude would be a more inclusive approach to take but yet preserves the "purity" of the partyAs he says [particularly directed at for LBird )“Socialists welcome critical and searching questions. Thinking is not and never has been a violation of socialist discipline. Socialists are not dogmatic sectarians who are blindly and religiously faithful to socialist conclusions despite the lessons of unfolding experience. Should an examination of the real world prove the case for socialism to be invalid, it would be a serious reflection on those who continued to be socialists. That is why socialists are open-minded, in contrast to being broadminded. They do not tolerate exploded myths and superstitions. Yet they should be patient with individuals groping to find out what the score is. Especially is this true in a day and age when the material conditions of existence are ripe for socialism with the sole exception of maturity of social and political thinking. The only thing standing in the way of socialism today is the lack of socialists.”“The party is not going to emancipate the workers or do anything for them. There is no dichotomy or separation of the workers and the party. Abraham Lincoln was on flimsy ground when he spoke of “government of the people, by the people, and for the people,” because all governments are rooted in antagonisms of interests, YET it would be quite valid to say that the socialist party is the party of the workers, by the workers, and for the workers. The real socialist party cannot be apart and distinct from the working class; it has to be comprised of the whole human community. That is the general nature of any socialist party.Without in any sense implying that quoting The Communist Manifesto is, of itself, proof of anything, nevertheless, the Manifesto phrases this matter very well: Section II starts off that (the party) “always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole” and ends with “the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy.” In other words, the work of emancipation, the transformation of capitalism into a socialist society, the transfer of the means of living from the hands of the parasites into the hands of society as a whole, is the conscious, majority, and political action of the working class — the socialist party. The state does exist; it is the central organ of power. Title and deed to its ownership rests in the political control by the ruling class. The state is the instrumentality of class control. When the workers finally wake up, they will use their party to change the “civitas” of propertied society into the “societas” of communal society.Today, working-class understanding is at a very low ebb, therefore the membership in the WSM is puny. It is ridiculous to think of a rivalry between socialist parties competing to emancipate the workers. Should another genuine socialist party appear on the scene, immediate steps would be taken to merge. Herein lies the emphasis on the distinction between “socialist” in quotes and socialist in its scientific, revolutionary context. In fact, the thing that distinguishes the companion parties from all other alleged “socialist” parties is that we stand alone on being organised exclusively for the abolition of capitalism by the workers. ( not all socialists are members of the companion parties. There are many, many socialists who are not attached to any socialist party. But this has no bearing on the historic nature of the socialist party. There are innumerable factors to account for individual socialists not being members of a socialist organization, but to focus on this out of its context is only to confuse and confound the understanding of the nature of a socialist party.) There have been ups and downs in membership, in enthusiasm, and in organisational work. Many of these situations can be traced to personality clashes, personal problems, disappointments leading to discouragement, and the fact that we are all human beings with human failings and limitations. Possibly the biggest factor is that we are few in numbers and turn in on ourselves, instead of outwards in much-needed organizational and propaganda activity. Situations do arise because of emotional stresses and strains. Differences have assumed paramount importance. The objectives of socialism itself are reflected in the very nature of our organisational procedures, in much the same way as the other “socialist” parties’ organisational procedures reflect their concepts of leadership, dictatorship, etc. This is the salient item to bear in mind: there is a justifiable fear of emasculating scientific, socialist principles, based upon the evidences of the real world. Were the doors opened wide to mere sympathisers and well wishers, or those with non-socialist or even anti-socialist concepts, we would soon cease being a socialist party.”“Nor are we primarily concerned with the economic phase of the class struggle (unions) although we are always prepared to fight the economic struggles between the wage slaves and their parasitic masters over the division of the wealth produced by the workers. We are also always prepared to fight for civil liberties. Workers who are satisfied, contented slaves are poor prospects for socialist revolution. The fight for civil liberties is basic, just because democratic forms are powerful tools for socialist victory.”Apologies for length extracts (or paraphrasing in some bits) and i hope we haven't strayed too far from the thread topic
Ah, Ozy, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.Lets be realistic..if Brand associates with any particular political party (even a meeting with Miliband has been detrimental) he will alienate a section of his audience..there will be a long line of other political parties and campaigning groups ahead of us who will be more in favour of Brand's own opinions than we are, if the truth is to be told…I emailed the taxi driver Chucky Mark for an opportunity…no reply from him …but sadly i later saw videos of him endorsing the SNP and giving Tommy Liar Sheridan a political platform to spout his nonsense…ChuckyMark is simply not on the same wavelength as us when it comes down to it, even if expressing some views we can be sympathetic with…i would hazard a guess it is the same with Brand when push comes to shove in a political exchange…Both are entertainers, first and foremost, using their occupational skills and talents for advancing their politics, and not only are we divergent politicallyy, we aren't "show-business" enough (as yet) to compensate for the political differences we hold…I rather we thought about how we create our own media impact so that those people come to us and we don't go cap in hand to them…"please, Guv, gies an interview"Not an easy solution and not a fast one either..But after the election we have to address our lack of media exposure, mainstream and social….an occasional one or two minute news item simply is not suffice to explain where we stand and ask all the very obvious and expected questions…i don't blame people for not knowing about the SPGB and its ideas…and their "naive", "simplistic" questions (as we sometimes think of them) are not to be brushed aside…but have to be addressed …and in a way that captures peoples imaginations and counter their preconceptions and misconceptions.I dare say we have some cash left in the coffers …we have to make some hard choices on how to spend it
It is "perceived" as a problem and truthfully i think the reason it is is far deeper than simply accusing politicians of stirring up the hate and division and the media seeking readers. It is one of those mind-sets of our fellow workers that is embedded through generations of indoctrination…and i dare say there is a case that fear of strangers might well be part of our DNA but as point out genetics doesn'r determine attitudes because it can be over-ridden.On the blog i had occasion to reply to an anti-immigrant comment and i raised the issue of German unification and how because political will existed the 2 trillion euro cost of integrating the Ossies into the Wessies economy was acceptable …Of near on a million Ossies, mostly unskilled migrating to the what was West in a very short time span of 3 years was relatively coped with (not without critics…2004 poll of wessies showed a quarter thinking re-unification was a mistake but i didn't detect any political party effect, no send them home party…the immigration threat was perhaps re-directed against non-Germans) I also mentioned the situation of the 2 million boat-people from Vietnam receiving a very different attitude from whats so often called the "world community" tothe current refugees fleeing conflictYou are right that there is no significant real problem with people moving around the world but as i say i don't think we should simply say it is all down to media hype and political manipulation…they exacerbate the situation perhaps but we have a much harder task ahead of us of challenging rooted racism and xenophobia…and yes one starting position is to deny the validity of the discourse .But as you know i have a very personal stake in the issue of visas and rights of residency…How can i ascribe to any policy that restricts peoples movement when i want to take full advantage of the very same thing. How can one of my ex-pat acqaintances not see the foolishness of his own UKIP membership.Strange though…the opening UKIP statement about BIG BUSINESS being culpable for immigration was partly echoed by Kevin later on in the interview placing the blame on capitalism. It shows how populism taps into elemental truths …the Hitlerite Strasser national "socialism" reflected by NO2EU
Many thanks for that. Uploaded to our blogs now My next question is we have now got several different tv clips…i'm wondering if with some clever editing and cutting, we could create a totally new one, using our own voice-overs as questions or observations or comments that the speakers will appear to be answering…the ai being to offer a fuller more comprehensive presentation of our ideas…reinforcing certain points such as no leaders. Couldn't someone with the software play around and see if its possible if at a loose end one of those days?I suggested the same for the Kids Stuff video…Rather long but i'm sure their are bits of Paddy's explanations that can stand alone as trailers sort of so easier to post and then link to the long version.
Quote:Well that can't be a bad thing, keep at it. Though in all honesty I can't see that on it's own making much difference. I hope I'm proved wrong.May I quote Howard Zinn to possibly elaborate
Quote:“We don’t have to engage in grand heroic actions to participate in the process of change. Small acts, when multiplied by millions of people can transform the world”I'm sure we misinterpreted your comment and it was not meant to be as dismissive as it seemed.
Is that a different clip from the one already posted?Living in a foreign land means i cannot access BBC IPlayer and watch it. (There is a proxy URL website that i could use but i lost the link to it)If it is different and longer interview i will impatiently await the You Tube upload
Read the Q and A and very impressed with the originality of your responses, YMS. Just one small point, surely, you should have elaborated that it was merely your own personal view that bus drivers should desist from changing at Holloway Road rather than in the depot, at least, until the Party as a whole makes a collective decision on the issue through conference debate and party poll …It's not like i want to micro-manage or anything like that, is it but i may wish to place an amendment on what would be the best bus-stop for the drivers' switch-over asa reformist compromise
I read the PDF and i found this paper very promising and i like how it is bilingual.I hope it succeeds and expands and becomes more regular. Maybe the Party/London branches could help out by ordering several copies and giving a donation to cover the cost of them and stocking it alongside all our literature at HO…A bit of practical help with little effort required to help workers trying to organise themselves – something to we encourage and promote.
