alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
We all remember how the BBC ended reports from Saddam's Iraq with the qualification that it was under Iraq government restrictions. Less known is that Israel too operates gagging laws on the foreign media that is never acknowledged when reporting. http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/08/01/israels-military-censors-demand-prior-review-nyts-gaza-reportingOf course i believe similar practices is done in Afghanistan where BBC reports were vetted by the army.
Quote:Lord Browne of Madingley, the former CEO of BP, who now heads Cuadrilla (the only UK firm which has used modern fracking methods), said recently: “It will take five years and the drilling of 20 to 40 fracking wells to judge whether the UK has a viable shale gas industry…"…..There is also the fact that no one has tested shale fracking like the USA has. There, it hasn’t transferred as easily as expected. It is still extremely expensive to do, and the UK has nothing like the lower risk profile that the US has developed.I see Weekly Worker took a leaf out of our own book by delving into the myths of the supposed Scottish nation.http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1021/nationalist-myths-are-not-marxism/Just perhaps slightly better than yours truly's effort and well worth the read.
Via Libcom, this Commune article is a good article exposing the SWP stand on the Independence ref..er?…en..dumb.It is another call for a boycott of yes or no. http://thecommune.co.uk/2014/07/20/is-a-yes-vote-for-an-independent-scotland-a-revolutionary-tactic/It is a shame that the boycott/spoil ballot position couldn't have been a bit more coordinated by more cooperation.
Our blog has highlighted the situation of the tea workers here http://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2014/02/tea-plantation-slavery.htmlhttp://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2010/08/sweet-cup-of-tea.htmlhttp://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2012/01/capitalism-not-our-cup-of-tea.htmlYou may also be interested in this general post on Indiahttp://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2014/03/we-claim-world.htmlFor a full list of our blog articles on Indiahttp://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/search?q=india
I think you are right on that.I believe he thinks it is the more realistic option in that Jewish Israelis will not accept a one state solution which means they would be in a minority of the population so no agreement would ever be forthcoming.Its a valid criticism and problem which a couple of our own articles have also mentioned.So the Two-State "bantu-stan" scenario is not viable in creating a real alternative aPalestinian state.This leaves the sad reality that no peace will come until there is wider change in the world…a socialist revolution. Depressing since that likliehood isn't on the cards in the near future but it seems to be the only way the wars will cease recurring….
I've got a lot of time for Norman Finkelstein. He is no puppet of anybody as seen by his criticism to the Palestinian soldarity's campaign BDS – Boycott Divest Sanctions – much to the consternation of the "liberals" and "leftists" so i value his opinion as an independent thinker even more.
It is incredible the BBC way of reporting.http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28578633In regards to the Israeli destruction of a UN school sheltering civilians the BBC headline is "Israel will probe shelling" and if *they*, mind you, find themselves culpable, they will say sorry.And of course the customary caveat"A government spokesman told the BBC: "We have a policy – we don't target civilians" – but tell that to 1300 civilians dead, that they were all just mistakes….It was missed by me but the UK is to send "full battle group" to Poland to take part in NATO manouvers but of course that rates an aside by the BBC and not a headline.http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-28577904Note "unprepared" is apostrophed, threat isn't which means the BBC concurs that the Russian threat is genuine.
Another article that discusses this http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/07/30/Zero-Marginal-Cost-Society-and-End-GDP
This article, if i read it right, says a good welfare state disproves Piketty, well, at least in Ireland's case. http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/why-piketty-s-inequality-arguments-don-t-apply-to-ireland-1.1881531That nagging feeling i get when i read something i think is suspect is with me again in this apparent rebuttal. But if true then it is once more strengthening the case of the reformists, so either pro or anti-Piketty we are not seeing much thoght given to socialism
David Cameron answers SocialistPunk's question
Quote:"We are not about to launch a European war, we are not about to send the fleet to the Black Sea, we are not looking for a military confrontation"http://rt.com/uk/176824-cameron-world-war-ukraine/But it could all be just a double-bluff
It seems that the 1% or perhaps the 0.1% or maybe even the 0.01% recognise the political advantages of reducing inequality to save themselves. http://www.valuewalk.com/2014/07/paul-singer-warns-of-social-unrest-if-inequality-unaddressed/http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/07/29/Why-Rich-Should-Call-Income-RedistributionCan be added to Steve Keen quote i provided earlierOf course, you are right, whether Piketty deliberately set out to reveal the extent of inequality and the future trend if action is not taken to defend the privileged few is up for debate. But intentionally or not the objective result of his work is it is being used as a theoretical justification for just that, side-tracking any possible hope socialist have of exposing capitalism as inherently flawed and beyond repair …Now we have all sorts out to save capitalism and maintain a socially acceptable level of inequality and inherited wealth and all citing Piketty. I think we have been a bit tardy in formulating a response…(maybe the upcoming Standard has an appropriate article)…but we should have issued a statement and used the Media Committee to disseminate it, high-lighting the conclusion you reached about the book being inconsistent in its conclusion and placing it alongside the under-consumptionist theories as mistaken remedies for government intervention to mend capitalism. Certainly just as Occupy and Brand have done, Piketty has created openings for ourselves to take the opportunity to take advantage of for our own views…but even allowing for the fact that we have limited audience, we aren't making enough of even that. A door might have opened but we havn't got a foot in to stop it being slammed in our faces. A detailed rebuttal of Piketty is required and needs to be disseminated widely i would have added quickly , but that is too late now. This wealth tax idea and the earlier Robin Hood/Tobin tax will be peddled far and wide as a non-revolutionary alternative to fix the system.
George Monbiot endorses the Greens and cites Piketty.http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/29/rich-wealth-good-inequality-green-partyPiketty's own self scepticism about his solutions is simply brushed aside as a mere technicality
Quote:"…this is seen as one step towards the ideal position: a global wealth tax, that treats capital equally, wherever it might lodge. Rough as this proposal is, it will start to challenge the political consensus and draw people who thought they had nowhere to turn… You wanted a progressive alternative? You’ve got it."Socialism as an alternative?? …er…umm…Piketty has given new life to every reformist out there. Capitalism can now be re-born. He has done a "Keynes" on socialism and temporarily set back any progress as people now begin to struggle futilely for tax reform. Some say (well Lbird would and me) that was indeed his purpose and motivation and intention because of his own ideological political position and it has not been an unintentional consequence of his "neutrality" as a "scientific" researcher.
i suggest the Media Committee again submit another protest in that there is only one "Socialist Party" the shortened version of the Socialist Party of Great Britain recognised by the Elecotoral Commission and that is ourselves and therefore the confusion has not been remedied by the Times.In future they must use the full name of the Trotskyist group "Socialist Party of England and Wales" and even then it should qualify it by adding "previously known as Militant" to avoid misunderstanding.
