alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Am i right in recalling that they once in the past did away with the dividend, replacing it with stamps, with the only part of the co-op retaining the divi being the co-op funeral directors which wasn't much use to the deceased !! Indeed they are not only advocating it but some actually believe its a new idea !!! But will the lesson be learned? Can we effectively counter its nefarious spread within "radicals"? I know i often suggest special propaganda efforts on specific topics but again does not these co-op shemes warrant special attention with a pamphlet, or special devoted issue of the Standard that could be quickly produced into a pamphlet. – the COP-OUT OF THE CO-OPTED CO-OP as an alliterative title.Again i don't think it would take that long to compile a decent-length text. Maybe a joint venture with Andrew Kliman who has also produced critiques of those proposals by Wolf etc.
All i would like to say about this thread is that Rosa has done an admirable job arguing her position and members of the list have responded constructively to her critique, if not always agreeing with it, eliciting further explanations and adding further knowledge to the topic. If dialectics simply mean discussion then it has been a fine example of dialectics is action It has been an example of comradely debate that should be commended. Everybody give themselves a pat on the back. Shame about your reluctance to agree with the SPGB case , though, Rosa. Perhaps you will as LBird hopes engage in that discussion some other time.
It seems there does appear to be a re-accessment of economics in academia. Another article herehttp://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/nov/10/economics-lecturers-accused-university-courses "The Treasury is hosting a conference in London on Monday to discuss the crisis in economics teaching, which critics say has remained largely unchanged since the 2008 financial crash despite the failure of many in the profession to spot the looming credit crunch and worst recession for 100 years.Michael Joffe, professor of economics at Imperial College, London, said he was disturbed by the way economics textbooks continued to discuss concepts and models as facts when they were debunked decades ago." I contacted Post-Crash Economics with a blog submission which was politely declined but they did say they are happy for some sort of meeting to be held with ourselves. Hopefully Manchester Br can follow it up. But perhaps we could meantime re-vamp an economics pamphlet, bring it up to date with recent events. As i suggested, it can be emailed to all the various university economic departments. I am sure there is a address list available to make it possible.
A follow up letter was sent by Adam Buick that was later printed: Duncan Hallas, in his article Do we support reformist demands? (IS54), has got his history wrong. The Socialist Party of Great Britain has never opposed trade-union action as ‘reformist’. Far from it; right from the start in its original manifesto the SPGB declared that it was in agreement with “working-class action on the industrial field when based on a clear recognition of the position of the workers under capitalism and the class struggle necessarily resulting therefrom”, but that it was opposed to “all activities of unions in support of capitalism or tending to sidetrack workers from the only path that can lead to their emancipation”. In our view trade-union action is necessary under capitalism, but is limited by being of an essentially defensive nature. To overcome this limitation the workers need to organise themselves into a socialist political party aiming solely at the capture of political power to establish socialism (i.e. the so-called maximum programme). I hope you will have the decency to publish this letter as an apology to the hundreds of SPGB members, past and present, who have been, and are, active trade unionists, shop stewards, staff representatives, etc. Yours for World Socialism,Adam Buick [Reply] Comrade Buick is correct. In compressing the argument I see that I may have given the impression that the SPGB was opposed to participation in trade-union activity. This is not true. The point I was making was that the SPGB rejected the SLP strategy of ‘socialist industrial unionism’ as not essentially different from political reformism.Duncan Hallas
Done…lets have the others on this thread doing the same now. We might not succeed in getting a voice but at least somebody at the other end will be asking "who the f**k are they?" and checking us out. "Having followed your recent coverage on Brand and revolution and voting i wondered why it had not occurred to your programme to elicit the views and opinions of the oldest existing socialist party in the UK that has been advocating revolution by the ballot box since 1904. Paxman has not considered its members worthy of interview and the BBC has deemed that they are not deserving of air-time so perhaps your programme could put things to right. They are easily contacted through their website."http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/
I had an exchange on Libcom over Grangemouth, basically arguing that the union in the best interests of its members had to concede which did not go down well with the Left Communists who see every capitulation as proof that unions being anti-worker even if the outcome is suicidal and self destructive. I argued that it was not UNITE's role to fight on behalf of the whole of the class, because that was the job of a political socialist party to advance the industrial battle onto the political field. http://libcom.org/forums/news/grangemouth-refinery-shut-800-jobs-lost-23102013#comment-526809 I note Richard Seymore of the Lenin's Tomb blog writing in the Guardian also accepts the reality of the lack of power of the unions in regards to Grangemouth and aims his fire in the correct direction – against management not the union. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/09/ineos-unite-union-grangemouth-oil-refinery
Just been reading your link. What's it with the posties and philosophers. My colleague at work when i worked for Royal Mail held an honours degree in philosophy, too.
I'm convinced as Ed, Vin and LBird are now of the worthlessness of dialectics (diamat?) as shown by Rosa. However i don't care to study it in the depths she has had, to disprove it (even if i was capable – which i'm not), or engage in debate like the length of this thread for that matter, to challenge it . So in a few sentences, in words of few syllables, what will i answer the next time the mention of dialects comes up that will be an immediate, effective put-down that cannot produce any sort of dialectical come-back? "But I read that one of the reasons you started your project was that those high in the party heirarchy where using terminology from "dialectics" to hoodwink lower party minions into doing there bidding."Come on, Rosa, dish the dirt. What party, what party leaders, what bidding? "In that case the problem is more one of hierarchical / leninist party models then of "dialectics" per se. I think you have been avoiding the real issue all along.." Let's move on from the philosophical abstract to the practical concrete!! That's what politics is about, isn't it, the materialist reasons for ideas and actions!
Send the programme producer an email requesting that he or she should invite us on to the show. Post the email address and others can also join in and make it a small campaign for the oldest socialist party in Britain calling for revolution to get some air-time.
If UK leave the EU, Nissan may leave the UK http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24859486
"I'm confused. You support this guy? Which was one of your members?" No, he has never been a member but he being an anarcho-communist, some of his ideas over-lap with our own. And he has voiced sympathies for our party before. We have debated him which ws quite comradely and is available to watch on video http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/video/which-way-revolution I was simply playing Devils Advocate that i thought the little icon signified. No doubt if he does stand it will not go unmentioned in our journal and blogs.
Should Ian Bone stand, should we endorse his candidancy?? Part of the reason for the detention and interrogation of Miranda, Greenwald's partner, given by the authorities, was that his political opinions and views were seen as grounds for suspicions and therefore covered by legislation
The extremist Wahabbist regime of Saudi Arabia is stepping up its intervention in Syria by creating a proxy army. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/07/syria-crisis-saudi-arabia-spend-millions-new-rebel-force Saudi Arabia is preparing to spend millions of dollars to arm and train thousands of Syrian fighters in a new national rebel force. Sources say the intensifying Saudi effort is focused on Jaysh al-Islam (the Army of Islam or JAI), created in late September by a union of 43 Syrian groups. It is being billed as a significant new player on the fragmented rebel scene. The Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, is also pressing the US to drop its objections to supplying anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles to the JAI. Jordan is being urged to allow its territory to be used as a supply route into neighbouring Syria. Said one senior western official. "It's a political step. These new rebel formations seem to be relabelling themselves and creating new leadership structures. It's part of a quite parochial political game – and above all a competition for resources." "The Saudis and Qataris lack the means to shape insurgent groups," suggested Thomas Pierret of Edinburgh University. "They have a lot of money but very poor intelligence and human resources and organisational skills. They are very dependent on the western military. They are too used to having relationships with clients and using personal networks. "That's why they've been forced to turn to Syrian groups which already have military credibility. They are becoming less selective and more realistic and putting aside their reservations about who they support. But I doubt they are able to unify the whole thing. The Saudis say 'you should unite and we will give you money.' But some will end up getting more money than others and the coalition will break apart."
But the first step is a re-awakening in workers" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl4OIeGQlmI
Part of the problem arose from too hasty decisions and actions being taken in the first place. Unfortunately, the party's problem is the opposite – procrastination.You will be aware of the EC invitation to members to comment on the requirements for membership . Despite my feelings of sympathy for you (and Vin), i await the outcome of those deliberations. After 32 years of activity for socialism inside the party, some more months of activity outside the party, is that too much to ask for right now, so that the democratic process of the party that we all value highly can take its course. (I have already submitted my recommendations)
