alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
"i recognised something that you failed to because you didn’t have the same personal experience or political encounters – LU’s similarity with the Scottish Socialist Party, which had a more significant impact than LU has had so far….." Highlighted this time for you.For many in Scotland the reason LU has not really taken off depite the odd group is that here we have been there and seen the optimism from previously non- politically active, seen the enthusiasm of the already politically aligned to for "unity" , heard the radical barn-storming speeches, read the glowing testimonies from its advocates in the arts media and culture, and we have already been offered all the wonderful reforms and policies when they stood for election. The impetus and momentum had already slowed down to a stand still, long before the Sheridan debacle. I'm talking from a position where friends and union collagues had eagerly embraced the SSP, using much the same arguments as yourself now use. My own CWU branch endeavoured to affiliate (but legally having to settle instead to financial donations) as did the RMT in Scotland support the SSP, a connection with the labour movement LU is still to develop but may benefit from a demise of the TUSC but i somehow doubt it. The truth of the matter is that the working class is not yet conscious or confident of its own power politically, and is not yet detached themselves from the pro-capitalist parties of reform which the SSP and now the LU are now simply radical manifestations of. I had more understanding and sympathy of your support for Occupy, even if we differed on whether it should be uncritical or critical support because of this aspect of creating a much needed urgency and when LU began it seemed as if many in Occupy had learned the lesson of the necessity of political organisation but the crossing over has been disappointing overall, despite some positives. LU is not a new model political party but simply a revamped and rebranded old one. Same as the SSP turned out to be.
I had a long theoretical spiel drafted but what's the point, – a Jehovah Witness arguing with Mormon ? I will only quote two bits from it …..I myself made this comment “ i hoped that LU succeeds since we are in urgent need to resist the present capitalist offensive and engage more people in that resistance. I hope the trade unions can make their own contribution in this mobilisation. i hope against expectation…” I argued for more engagement with LU “Why i am keen that we actually attend and address LU directly is that they should have the full possible alternatives to choose from. The choice of political strategy should always be up to the working class, they make their own bed and must sleep in it, and suffer the consequences of wrong decisions but we cannot allot blame to them if they are not given the option of accepting or rejecting our case. Once again it will be our own lapse in not providing the necessary information and propaganda and engaging more fully in discussions and debates.” Of course, i was being partisan but that is not shameful when done openly and we don’t disdain to conceal our views and aims as someone once said. I shared your disappointment…simply earlier. But yes i was sceptical of its possibility of success, not because i possessed the powers of Nostradamus but because i recognised something that you failed to because you didn’t have the same personal experience or political encounters – LU’s similarity with the Scottish Socialist Party, which had a more significant impact than LU has had so far……….“the atmosphere in Left Unity is far less poisonous than it is in the SPGB. If everyone hates each other, they're remarkably good at hiding it.” [SW] …. Not capable of hiding it for very long, were we…..
An ex-comrade travels and his travails “The result is that we now have a new party of the left worthy of the name. We established it in an honourable and comradely and highly organised and well disciplined way, without all the usual lefty infighting and mudslinging and ranting and factionalising.” December 3, 2013 “Disappointed to hear that yet again debates are being swung by the silly and offensive old left tactic of declaring the opposition in cahoots with fascists and Tories” April 3, 2014 “I would warn anyone interested in the citizens income idea to ignore Mr Penney. He’s just a loudmouth spraying abuse and dogma.” April 5, 2014
Lokking forward to these installments. Also hoping that it receives a much wider audience than just this forum. We should locate Australian labour union websites and seamen history websites to link these to once fully transcribed and online Another future project. Wish you well in your venture, twc.
I was intending to support your argument via an Edinburgh Branch member's personal blog, Patience and Perseverance (and you can piss a hole through a stone, as he used to say) but arggg… when i went to his blog to get the link i noticed he has now added a rider to his blog title – "but now i'm beginning to wonder what for" http://patienceandperseverance.blogspot.com/
Good to get links to other reports. I was hoping to get them . As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Two local election candidates in Barnet but the comment from Nick Wrack echoes what you say"Are they standing as Left Unity?" StuartW may well indeed be disappointed not by the defeat but by its association with Social Credit and right wingers and the implication that he as a proponent of Citizen;s Income "doesn't understand how capitalism works" !! as John Penney explained in his comment on LU website. Can't say i disagree too much with it except of course that a "socialist" welfare state is the alternative! "Comrades, come on now ; the Citizen’s Income/UBI project has been debated for many, many months by LU supporters and others online . There was a discussion/debate on the subject ALL morning at the special Economy Policy workshop in London on 2nd March – to which all LU members were invited to attend. Only 18 turned up to do so !Those of us on the Economy Commission who have indeed investigated the Citizen’s income/UBI concept in considerable depth, including its roots in the very politically dodgy, eccentric ,”Social Credit” Movement of the 1930′s, and its more current solid base amongst the most right wing neoliberal “abolish the provision of any state provision of welfare services – just give every citizen a small equal cash handout instead – regardless of either their personal wealth or personal needs” libertarian free marketers.We stand by what we said at Conference – Citizen’s Income, in its “leftish version” is an ideological con – a diversion from the struggle to create an all embracing Welfare State on a socialist basis. It would not protect disabled people in particular – but indeed, beyond the small Citizen’s Income “survival ration” leave them totally bereft of support from a gutted welfare state. In an all embracing Welfare State, a Citizen’s Income, is simply unnecessary – as support would be provided on the basis of NEED – regardless of the personal income of the individual requiring support.It is quite understandable in the present circumstances of vicious attacks on the poorest and most vulnerable in society , particularly the “capability assessment” ATOS assaults of recent years, the Bedroom tax, etc, that those most under attack, particularly the disabled, are attracted to concepts like Citizen’s Income. Looked at in depth however it should quickly become clear why this concept is most popular on the libertarian capitalist Far Right as a means to destroy universal unlimited welfare provision. When carried over into Left politics it is simply a distracting red herring to our task of rebuilding and deepening our Welfare State , and fighting for the wide raft of radical transformative policies detailed in our now adopted LU Economic Strategy.The Citizen’s Income concept WAS debated, investigated in depth, considered by the Conference – and rejected outright. And quite rightly. We should leave it as a dodgy project to the Lib Dems, Greens, Blue Labour ,Tories, and the neoliberal Far Right. It is a fundamentally non-socialist concept – and one which simply wouldn’t WORK in pure economic terms either." StuartW replies "I’m glad (in a way) to hear that the debate over the basic income was inadequate. I guess that means that people can think again and get it passed at a future conference. Disappointed to hear that yet again debates are being swung by the silly and offensive old left tactic of declaring the opposition in cahoots with fascists and Tories, as with the shameful women’s quota debate last time round. This is not in accord with our declared intention of doing things differently. It’s actually true that some on the right support a basic income – but then there are equally plenty of Tories who would be in full support of “full employment”, as would Stalinists. I hear gulags were working at their full economic potential…" Ah, well…disillusionment sinking in;…fellow "comrades" being old left and Stalinist by inclination…
In regards to religion and materialism, and in an effort not to preach to the converted, i managed to post the following on an Indian based website with a wider-ranged audience than this forum. No doubt there will be parts to quibble about but it part of a longer project to advance the socialist case, articles on war and leadership have already been published and future ones intend to be nationalism, reformism , and utopianism culminating in an open letter. http://www.countercurrents.org/johnstone040414.htm Our Object and Principles add up to absolutely zero if they are not known. They add up to zero if action does not take place to implement them. If we are unsuccessful in communicating their correctness and do not succeed in convincing people to strive for them, then we are little different from those Engels describe in his German Peasant Revolution, premature. We can argue for platitudes that nothing can stop a movement when it's time has come…but many appear to subscribe that our moment has come…if so…where is the evidence?…The material conditions are certainly here, the crises of capitalism are intensyfying to the point that the existence of life itself is now an issue , but it appears as Royden does touch upon , we over -estimated its impact on ideas. We have not dismissed historical materialism …simply over-estimated the speed and strength it would have on class consciousness and socialist development. The cold fact is that in relation to the number of workers in the world (they are increasing not just by population growth alone but by the proletarisation of rural peasantry) , there has been a regression and retardation in the present year of 2014 than what was the state in 1904. The percentage and proportion adhering to scientific socialism is significantly less, even though the means and methods of communication and education has grown more available. Roydens questions about if we are reaching out to fellow workers effectively still stands. At this present time i see no alternative to the current WSM strategy but it doesn't mean i accept that there isn't one and i won't stop looking and investigating, beginning with a continual self-assessment and self-evaluation of our organisation.One point i might raise now is calling miniscule groups of socialists "political parties" actually honest or beneficial if they are not performing as political parties. Should we call ourselves socialist study groups (Ouch! that reminds us of another imperfect part of the D of P, adherence to it doesn't mean unity ) or education classes and be realistic in our ambitions? There is at present a call for an online Communist Manifesto readers group. Wouldn't promoting that style of orgainising be perhaps more fruitful for some of us in the world socialist movement rather than demanding 100% agreement to the D of P?
As an aside, WW has had two good articles on political freedom last week and this week on the banning of the SWP in a number of universities , with this week's article extended to include a discussion on the rights of the Right-wing to free association. Its particularly relevant to the recent criticism we face with debating UKIP from those on REVLEFT.I wonder where LU stands?
Weekly Worker has a report on the LU conference and one thing it cannot help but remark upon is the emergence of a "right" and "left" so now it can hardly be called Left Unity, but another Left Mish-mash.All this sectionalist/intersectionalist debate left me puzzled, obviously a debate that has passed me by.http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/1004/left-unity-moderate-party-takes-shapeIn the recent Guardian Q and A by Ken Loach, i was struck by the lack of answers from him. He appeared only to reply to questions that already contained the answers which he agreed with. Perhaps it was my mistaken perception but i don't think so. Like ALB i am no longer surprised that LU are reluctant to put their programme to the test in an election. The claimed 1500…or at least those not already aligned in other political organisations…what would that be ..1000?…would indeed have been better joining en masse the Green Party, as occasionally conceded in the sense that their next best choice was voting Green in certain parts of the country.
i forget what biography i read it in but it concurred with that view, describing Liebknecht as somewhat romantic and gung-ho about it and Luxemburg doing her utmost to discourage it. I think we should also be wary of calling it the Spartacus Uprising…The Revolutionary Shop Steward organisation was more in the fore and if i recall correctly they were pressed into it as self-defence by mounting provocations.
This may be of interest The Zero Marginal Cost Society by Jeremy Rifkin. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/03
Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Liam Fox was one of the first journalists allowed access to the Manus Island detention centre since it re-opened. Of his visit he said: "I've seen many shocking things as a journalist. The inside of the Manus detention centre is among the most confronting."…The greatest deception perpetrated by the Australian government is that the country is being flooded with boat arrivals. The reality is that sea-based asylum seekers arrive in a trickle, not a flood – a little more than 60,000 people have arrived by boat in the past 40 years. This is the same number as visa overstayers – mostly from the US, Britain and Ireland – who were estimated to be in Australia in 2011. But, for more than a decade, in Australian politics, asylum seekers have made a very convenient political tool with which to scare up votes. A cable obtained by WikiLeaks says an unnamed "key Liberal Party strategist" told US diplomats in November last year that the issue of asylum seekers was "fantastic" for the coalition and "the more boats that come the better". The cables show that a close adviser to Mr Rudd failed to persuade him to use the government's powers "to calmly and rationally put the issue in perspective" by acknowledging that only a small number of asylum seekers were arriving by boat compared with tens of thousands overstaying their visas each year. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/03/pacific-solution-solved-austral-201433113844238975.html
Really i think we are talking at cross purposes…i accept Dietzgen that ideas do become actual material factors and ideas produce action (or in some cases inaction)And as i said , i can sympathise with Roydens view. The SPGB, SPC, the WSPUS, the WSPIreland, the WSPIndia, our hopes for Africa and the Ukraine. Hmmm…??Where is the evidence we are a reflection of a growing socialist consciousness in the world as capitalism itself widens its tentacles. Occasionally we see a similarity in views with others and seize hold of it as a drowning man clutches at another for rescue. I believe John Crump, in his studies of Japan, sought to research the rise of capitalism in Japan and the corresponding rise of socialist thought that should occur. I stand to be corrected, but he found none, instead the socialist ideas were an import from outside, not a development of capitalism.But i am optimistic since i claim no powers of prophesy. I only respond and react to how i perceive the world and that was brought to me through the human agency of fellow comrades of the SPGB, something unique in my life-experience and daresay just as specific to the personal histories of many others, chance encounters, family connections etc etcPerhaps i am, and the SPGB are, mere accidents of history, incidental to the flow of social evolution. I claim no great insight or knowledge. I leave the philosophying to others and seek practical activity in the world, in the circumstances i am in now, and concentrate my mind upon what we can do with our limited and decreasing membership. But i do understand and acknowledge reality and it gives no cause for undue confidence.DOOM…DOOM…AND THRICE DOOM !!If it's "Socialism or Barbarism?" , what odds are the bookies giving?
"McCluskey implied that a newly formed Workers’ Party would then join the Liberal Democrats and others in campaigning for MPs to be elected under a system of proportional representation , to give the new party a better chance of gaining a toehold in Parliament."That's given Left Unity/TUSC the boot then !! “I’ve always taken the traditional position of being opposed to PR,” Mr McCluskey said. “That’s because I thought that Labour would never get into power [under PR] and we’d never get a socialist Valhalla. I’ve given up on my socialist Valhalla, so I’m now rethinking my position on PR. If a new party emerged, a new Workers’ Party, then you may well find that I’m in favour of PR.”http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/unite-union-boss-len-mccluskey-threatens-to-launch-party-to-rival-labour-9231266.html
