alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Quote:There are a lot of people who will have to be 'forgiven' if we are to achieve a majority. I hope Brand, Tomlinson and Scarghill become socialists and join the WSM. I have no desire to be in a small party of unforgiveness
As i jest on the other thread Vin, it might even include the Pope one day. And who better to forgive our new comrades' past sins than he.
In case anybody missed it, an interview with Ricky Tomlinson which some will find interesting of another politicalised comedianhttp://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/dec/27/ricky-tomlinson-interview-im-a-whingeing-scouser
Perhaps this Marx will disagreehttp://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/cardinal-marx-pope-francis-has-pushed-open-doors-church
Obviously not all the Pope's followers are on Twitter…there are over a billion who claim to be at least nominally RC. But for those who want to understand the politics of the Catholic Church, you can read James Connolyhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1908/09/cathsoc.htm
Quote:the man who imagines that in the supreme hour of the proletarian struggle for victory the Church will definitely line up with the forces of capitalism, and pledge her very existence as a Church upon the hazardous chance of the capitalists winning, simply does not understand the first thing about the policy of the Church…when it realises that the cause of capitalism is a lost cause it will find excuse enough to allow freedom of speech and expression to those lowly priests whose socialist declarations it will then use to cover and hide the absolute anti-socialism of the Roman Propaganda.In other words, we may well find ourselves with strange bed-fellows on the morrow of the social revolution
SOYMB blogged earlier this month with this post and picture about the Vatican's wealthhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2014/12/how-rich-is-vatican.htmlBut i still remember Anthony Quinn in that movie …The Shoes of the Fishermanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shoes_of_the_Fisherman
To the Pope's anti-poverty and anti-inequality campaign we can add his environmental concern In October he told a meeting of Latin American and Asian landless peasants and other social movements:
Quote:“An economic system centred on the god of money needs to plunder nature to sustain the frenetic rhythm of consumption that is inherent to it. The system continues unchanged, since what dominates are the dynamics of an economy and a finance that are lacking in ethics. It is no longer man who commands, but money. Cash commands.http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/27/pope-francis-edict-climate-change-us-rightwing
An anarchist critique of Cuba with a side-swipe at Marx and the Internationalhttp://dissidentvoice.org/2014/12/an-anarchist-critique-of-the-cuban-revolution/
But before you yourself provide the link about Cuba http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2008/no-1250-october-2008/cooking-books-1-cuba%E2%80%99s-wage-system
As you say, very standard, yet too obvious for the apologists to admit. What's that biblical saying about the mote in the eye? Another exposition of the wages system by a Chinese source reiterating "to each according to work"http://marxistphilosophy.org/xue.pdf
i came across this article on the "smart factory"http://www.sdcexec.com/news/11796052/the-market-is-segmented-into-technology-as-product-lifecycle-management-manufacturing-execution-systems-and-industrial-automation
Quote:In the age of digital world, the smart manufacturing or smart factory is a bridge between the physical and digital world. The new age of industrial revolution is moving towards the cyber world in which every part of the value chain will be connected with in each to ensure informed manufacturing with zero defect and no time lags. The smart factory represents the absolute pinnacle of technological and manufacturing development, a perfect integration of high-tech tools and high-tech machinery.The article is sort of disappointing in that is merely a reference to a report and has no link except the title but i am sure if anyone is interested in deeper analysis, it can be tracked down
Perhaps Farage is a bit parochial choice, applicable only to the UK scene…In Spain it would be maybe Pablo Inglesias of Podemos, other individual countries will have their own particular person. Can i suggest a more global impact was made by Pope Francis and his papal reforms and pronouncements?Or even Putin as a mainstream leader on the world stage.
In this debate about Brand let us not forget that the meaning of the word socialism has always been a contested one, right from the beginning. This is why Marx nd Engels went to such pains in the Communist Manifesto to distance themselves from the various currents of "other" socialists and spell out what they meant by the term.Our task, as i see it, and just as how Marx and Engels saw their own task within the workers movement, is to concentrate on ensuring that our version becomes the prevailing one and like it or not this means disagreeing with other well-meaning people and rejecting well-intended proposals, and then acquiring these unjust labels of dogmatism and sectarianism. It is unfortunately not an approach that guarantees popularity for us and i think we can safely say that Marx and Engels also suffered for a long time the same marginisation. It was only when they became actively involved, for instance, in the Communist League and later the First International that they acquired a certain amount of influence, often indirectly such as through the proxies of other people eg Kautsky. It wasn't the face that mattered, it was the case (albeit Marx's ego did suffer when Hyndman declined to name him as his source), It was more important to get over the ideas than being a well known personality. The famous Gotha critique, after all, was a private circular not for publication.I simply saying all this to suggest that we should think out the box concerning spreading our views. Our own Party interests can perhaps become secondary if there is a benefit for the promotion of the idea of free access socialism rather than the namby-pamby half-measures passing for a genuine socialist goal.
i think some may have forgotten an earlier contribution of mine to this thread when i said that Brand is being permitted ample publicity because he is simply an individual and not part of any structured political movement. While he continues to simply be a personality without a party, the Establishment can afford to allow him access to the media. (Perhaps in the hope that in due course he will have enough rope to hang himself, but who knows, it simply might be for the mercenary reason that he is good entertainment and nothing more). He is no real threat, no matter how on the ball he might be with his observations and criticism, just as many others have in the past have been or have we forgotten how the Beatles handed back their OBEs in protest at the system (and forget how the passing of years allowed one of them to be be re-absorbed and given a knighthood) I suggest that if Brand ever puts his criticism into a concrete form…either as an organised party with a manifesto or become identified with a party, like the Greens, that begins to attract members he will quickly find himself shut-down and silenced. Despite those on the thread who argue he is "politicalising" many people who otherwise wouldn't be, the simple fact is how can we judge this when there is no way of evaluating any possible increase in consciousness, because no one is signing up for a political oragnisation , but instead merely as someone said likes on Facebook and that is a very dubious measure of political awareness. While Brand remains politically unalligned and elastic in his politics he will carry on drawing support and sympathy Once he takes a more clearly defined political step, what happens to that audience when he has the full venom of the media hacks upon him, is a question i would like to know the answer to. I hopefully await the SPGB to face a similar challenge when we have some "media superstar" as an active member and who begins to use his or her publicity status as a platform for socialist ideas.
Quote:Involving yourself in the here and now struggles doesn't mean you can't advocate socialism. Surely the fact that workers have the capability to organise and empower themselves supports our case for socialism being a global system of people working together for the inclusion and betterment of all?…Someone, somewhere on this forum, said something along the lines of SPGB propaganda being more like a sign to let those who have already found socialist ideas for themselves, know the Party exists.This is easier said than done. As Vin said;
Quote:we have been saying it for more than 100 years but not many have heard us.I think we have been repeating ourselves and going around in circles. Let us for the sake of the argument accept that Brand is creating an audience where the message of socialism resonates more receptively, this still leaves the big question, just how do we as a party connect with those people in a way that they heed our case rater than those of the Left and Labourite reformists who too recognise that Brand is drawing in something to tap into?When Brand is seen endorsing the Greens and not ourselves, how do we attract attention to our own answers to the social problems such as New Era, which i'm not sure we have other than our moral support whereas Brand offered tangible support for their morale, publicity. I don't see very much point to this discussion thread over Brand and his impact unless we begin to explore actual approaches that we should be making instead of generalisations. But what specificsally is something i hold my hands up to that i have few ideas…so l'm looking for suggestions on these. Something that can be placed before the party at conference, something on paper we can debate, proposals that we can turn into reality.2015 will be a year of the biggest electoral activity the party has engaged in ever AFAIK, and we have to focus on how to make that effective but more importantly, to have it sustained long after voting day. It is time for practical action.For example, Vin, i would like to see you concentrate once again on your flash animation/music which was extremely positive and we should begin to seriously link to its message on our websites and the various discussion lists we visit, getting others to reay it also. That is what i mean…something concrete that you do, rather than this wishful thinking about the Brand Effect. Its all about promoting our own unique brand, isn't it !
What Pablo forgets to mention is that "bald guy" stole the slogan from his rivals, the SRs and 1905's independent soviets were as far away from his ideas as possibly can, and the popular feeling was always with them and when it was put to a count the bald guy engineered a coup to make sure that the people didn't get what they voted for, the SRs. So he is correct in one sense when he said " politics is about strength, it is not about wishes or what we say in assemblies."But i think he understands the bigger picture, as you indicate. That we have not reached the minds and hearts of the majority.Workers require the self-confidence in that they can prevail and that is exactly what is lacking these days. The goal is not seen as achievable or even feasible. Party it is because we do not relate to our class in inspiring and sharing the same aspirations …So often that is exactly the problem…too many seek other choice of politics…Even simpler slogans as we see in Germany and UK…"kick out johnny foreigner and all will be well."Our task (and again as he points out about the reality, we are insignificant) is to get the discourse onto the right track towards a debate on the actual road we should be taking as a class. I have no pat answers to offer. I don't know how we can change the discussion. But i think Solidarity had it generally right.
Quote:Meaningful action, for revolutionaries, is whatever increases the confidence, the autonomy, the initiative, the participation, the solidarity, the equalitarian tendencies and the self -activity of the masses and whatever assists in their demystification. Sterile and harmful action is whatever reinforces the passivity of the masses, their apathy, their cynicism, their differentiation through hierarchy, their alienation, their reliance on others to do things for them and the degree to which they can therefore be manipulated by others – even by those allegedly acting on their behalf.This should be guiding our attitude as regards Russel Brand and other things such as some in the environmental campaign, Zeitgeist and many others.
