ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You are right. Hallam sees his Common Sense in the 21st Century as a modern-day version of Tom Paine’s book, and says so explicitly.
This makes the political philosophy behind his justification for engaging in civil disobedience, ie not obeying the law, surprisingly old-fashioned. It’s based on the ‘social contract’ theory of the origin of government that underlies the 1776 American Declaration of Independence. This famously declares that all humans have “certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,”
adding
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”
Hallam subscribes to this myth that government exists to serve and protect its citizens and argues that, in not doing enough to protect its citizens against climate change, the government has failed in its ‘duty’ and, worse, has betrayed those they are supposed to protect. Hence their “natural right” to “rebel” against it — and Hallam’s strategy to overthrow the existing political regime and institute “new government”.
As you point out, this right to rebel was also (though for a different reason) claimed by many who took part in the riot on the Capitol in January last year.
I am not sure if the German Letzte Generation group use the same argument to justify their “rebellion”.
Letzte Generation is inspired by Roger Hallam, the chief ideologist and strategy of Just Stop Oil. Here is his view of how civil disobedience by only about 3.5% of the population can bring about “regime change”:
“We must adopt the most successful model for regime change shown by the social scientific research – the civil resistance model. This involves mass participation civil disobedience: tens and hundreds of thousands of people blocking the centres of cities to demand change. There are a number of tactical options, but the main process is as follows: • The people conduct mass mobilisation – thousands need to take part. • They amass in a capital city where the elites in business, government and the media are located. • They break the law – they cross the Rubicon. Examples include blocking the roads and transport systems. • They maintain a strictly nonviolent discipline even, and especially, under conditions of state repression. • They focus on the government, not intermediate targets – government is the institution that make the rules of society and has the monopoly of coercion to enforce them. • They continue their action day after day – one-day actions, however big, rarely impose the necessary economic cost to bring the authorities to the table. • The actions can have a fun atmosphere – most people respond to what is cultural and celebratory rather than political and solemn. After one or two weeks following this plan, historical records show that a regime is highly likely to collapse or is forced to enact major structural change. This is due to well established dynamics of nonviolent political struggle. The authorities are presented with an impossible dilemma. On the one hand they can allow the daily occupation of city streets to continue. This will only encourage greater participation and undermine their authority. On the other hand, if they opt to repress the protestors, they risk a backfiring effect. This is where more people come onto the street in response to the sacrifices of those the authorities have taken off the street. In situations of intense political drama people forget their fear and decide to stand by those who are sacrificing themselves for the common good. The only way out is for negotiations to happen. Only then will a structural opportunity open up for the emergency transformation of the economy that we need.”
This is taken from his 2019 manifesto Common Sense in the 21st Century.
There is evidence that in his mind the action started by Just Stop Oil at the beginning of October —and in Germany currently — could be the beginning of a movement he expects could rapidly bring about regime change.
In his manifesto he also declares:
“We should not make the mistake of thinking ‘the people have to rise’ in the sense of the majority of the population. We need a few to rise up and most of the rest of the population to be willing to ‘give it a go‘.”
I can see why the German secret police don’t take this seriously. Because it isn’t serious in the sense that it is not going to happen. Also because it is open and non-violent. But that doesn’t detract from the fact that the declared aim is “regime change” by minority action.
Added to the Harry Young Marxist Internet Archive article on the Labour Party’s 1945 election manifesto “Let Us Face the Future”:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/young-harry/1945/labour_programme.htm
It looks as if Zahawi’s comment might not have been a one-off slip but could have been the start of a coordinated campaign to discredit the RMT as Putin supporters.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/communist-and-kremlin-supporters-lead-the-rmt-r0cpr52xm
”the Dzhokhar Dudayev Battalion, Sheikh Mansur Battalion, and the Separate Special Purpose Battalion in the Ukrainian army.”
Gangs of cut-throats (literally), fighting for Democracy, the Rule of Law, Good against Evil, etc, etc. But at least they are “our” cut-throats.
Incidentally, didn’t their sort as like the Ukrainian nationalists also fight for Hitlerite Germany in the Second World Slaughter?
There is another group in Germany that is seeking to overthrow the government there but not by means of a violent coup. They are planning to do this by the non-violent civil disobedience. But it is still minority action and so undemocratic. Like Just Stop Oil (who they are linked to and share the same ideology and strategy), they think they can overthrow the government with about 3.5 percent of the population engaged in such action.
https://letztegeneration.de/en/
The German secret police, however, don’t take them seriously:
https://amp.dw.com/en/german-last-generation-group-not-a-threat-to-democracy/a-63789202
With all these detailed and seemingly endless refutations of Russian propaganda we are forgetting Karl Liebknecht’s slogan that “The Main Enemy is At Home”. That means, in this instance, concentrating more on attacking the propaganda put out by NATO and its proxy in Kiev. It certainly means not using this propaganda to refute Russian propaganda.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/liebknecht-k/works/1915/05/main-enemy-home.htm
My virtue signalling: a NATO country must not be allowed to win the World Cup. If Russia has been excluded so should they have been.
Morocco have just disposed of Spain. Switzerland can kick out Portugal tonight. Brazil’s task to get rid of Croatia and Argentine to get rid of the Netherlands. That leaves England and France. The greater evil is of course England since they don’t want to hear any talk of peace. France can be dealt with at a later stage.
If you want to mix politics and sport ….
A rather more rational capitalist view than usual on the war and about how it could end and why it might have never started:
https://www.jns.org/opinion/it-is-in-americas-interest-to-end-the-war-in-ukraine/
It seems that Brown and Starmer are making the same mistake as the Scots, Welsh and Irish nationalists — that the problem is where decisions are made (London not Edinburgh, Cardiff or Dublin) rather than what decisions capitalism’s political administrators (what Zeitgeist has described as capitalism’s middle management) are obliged to make (not undermining profit-making).
But changing who makes these decisions, and where, won’t make any difference to the way capitalism operates. Which means that their proposals are utterly irrelevant and not worth the paper they are printed on. Those who say that there are more important problems to be dealt with are right.
It remains to be seen if a future Labour government really will abolish the House of Lords. They’ve been promising to do that since 1910 but despite numerous terms in office have somehow never got round to it. The chances are they won’t.
It is not so much telling “the government to look after the needs of the British(!) people” that is pathetic (even if it is naive) as imagining that the government will or can do this.
That’s not the way capitalism — the so-called only game in town — could work. Its priority is making profits to accumulate as capital. That comes before meeting people’s needs. In fact meeting people’s needs doesn’t even come second as preparing for war (so-called “defence” comes before it.
People’s needs are met to some extent of course but far from adequately while those without an income of their own that is not enough to keep them alive have to rely on meagre government handouts or food banks, warm spaces and other forms of charity.
The fact that so many simply cannot afford to pay for heat and light is an indictment of capitalism and one of the reasons socialists are socialists and why we want to see it replaced by a system based on the common ownership and democratic control of the productive resources on which society survives. Then there can be production directly to satisfy people’s needs and everybody’s needs will be met.
That’s the weakness of your position. You reject, and even deride, this as the way-out. And so end up seeing food banks and warm spaces as the best we can hope for or at least great victories.
This is about coming together to tell the government to look after the needs of British people, and not the needs of wealthy oil and gas companies.
Oh dear. So this is what playing the only game in town comes down to. Telling the government to look after people’s needs. Pathetic.
I don’t think Don’t Pay can claim all those as “strikers”. The vast majority will be people who simply cannot afford to pay.
On their website they say;
“No individual, no organisation and no political party is coming to save us – it’s up to us to defend our communities and take back power from the profiteers fuelling this crisis.”
Another articles says what they did in 3 December.
But my local council — run by the LibDems also runs such warm spaces:
https://www.richmond.gov.uk/services/cost_of_living_hub/warm_spaces/warm_spaces_charter
After food banks, warm spaces. What an indictment of capitalism, supposedly the only game in town. But it also looks as if “community activism” is not a game in town either. If socialism is impossible, as you claim, the only game would seem to be common or garden reformist politics.
Incidentally, what did you do on 1 December? Cancel your DD or what?
I am still not clear what “striking” was supposed to be. I didn’t pay on 1 December for the simple reason that I hadn’t been sent a bill to pay (I expect it will arrive in January). I suppose it could mean cancelling any direct debit (if you were foolish enough to sign one for your energy company). The consequence of that will be that you, too, will receive in January a paper bill to pay.
So we will need to wait till January to see how many people burn their bill for the last quarter of 2022.
I think all the posts here refuting the propaganda from our resident Voice of Moscow may give the impression that we are anti-Russia in particular whereas we are against both states.
They are both as bad as each other. I suspect there is less freedom of speech in Ukraine than in Russia. In Russia you can’t call the war a war but in Ukraine you must call it a war and it’s a criminal offence to call it anything else, eg an inter-ethnic conflict, and also to call for peace talks. There are dozens of elected MPs in jail there for this.
Now they have started persecuting priests who don’t toe the line as well as discriminating against Russian speakers under their “de-Russification” policies.
Imagine the outcry if Russia pursued a policy of religious persecution and discrimination against a linguistic minority. But they are “our bastards”.
I note that the Arch Witch Doctor of Canterbury was in Kiev recently. I am not sure whether or not he blessed the bombs Britain has sent Ukraine but might as well have gone. They tend to do this sort of thing in war.
