ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The draft election address of our candidate in Cardiff Central in the election can be found here. 45,000 will be distributed by the post office to households in the constituency. Another 1000 will be distributed at street stalls that the local branch will be doing.
The EC did approve the text of a “generic” leaflet yesterday, i.e one for distribution outside the two consistencies of Cardiff Central and Folkestone & Hythe that the Party will be contesting.
Here is what it says (for Party members to spread on social and — anti-social — media):
“Profit or Needs, not Leave or Remain, is the real issue
This election, we’re told, is about Brexit. Whether ‘we’ will be richer or poorer, freer or more subservient if we stay in or leave the European Union, with or without a deal.
But does anyone seriously expect that Leaving or Remaining will end child poverty? Homelessness and food banks? Collapsing health and social services? Unemployment – or the mass insecurity of zero-hour-contracts? War and forced migration? The destruction of the Earth’s wildlife and natural resources? The threat of disastrous climate change?
The Brexit ‘debate’ simply obscures the real issue: a failed economic system where nothing is produced unless a profit can be made from it. Where human needs are everywhere subject to the inhuman demands of market forces. And this system will continue to rule our lives whether our new leaders are based in Brussels or London, Belfast or Edinburgh.
The Socialist Party stands for putting an end to this profit system. For replacing it with a society based on the common ownership and democratic control of the world’s natural and industrial resources.
We live in a world of potential plenty, where we could meet our needs by freely cooperating on the basis of ‘from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.’ There is no need for anyone anywhere in the world to go without what they need to live a happy, healthy and fulfilled life. What prevents this is the ownership of resources today by a privileged few and production for sale with the aim of making a profit.
The parties committed to running the market system – and that includes the Labour Party and the Greens – are making empty promises. A vote for them is a wasted vote as this system operates on the basis that making profits must always come before meeting needs, whatever those in government might want or have promised.
You can show that you reject the profit-driven market system, and want a classless society of equal men and women geared to directly satisfying people’s needs, by casting a write-in vote for “WORLD SOCIALISM” on your ballot paper.”
Can branches, members and sympathisers let Head Office know by email how many copies of this leaflet they would like.
I’ve have received four leaflets from the LibDems in the last week one introducing some non-descript nonentity as the next prime minister. Talk about delusions of grandeur. But where’s the money coming from? Are the mainstream capitalists shifting their political funding from the Tories to the LibDems? Are the Liberals about to become the party of the capitalist class as they were in the 19th century?
Meanwhile Farage and the Brexit party are standing out for the full Brexit and nothing less. That’s a mind-set we can understand as we hold out for socialism and nothing less, but at least socialism is a change worth holding out for. Brexit won’t make any difference, in fact the sort of Brexit Farage wants (leave tomorrow with no transitional arrangements) would probably make things worse at least in the short run.
According to this author who has studied Marx’s scientific notebooks that would be a misreading of his views:
I am afraid you got the wrong end of the stick there, Robbo. Dave Alton is the author of an article on page 5 of the November Socialist Standard here:
and so no Lexiteer.
One of XR’s demands is being granted. A Citizens Assembly is being set up:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50264797
XR aren’t happy because it will be examining how to get to zero net carbon emissions (in the UK) by 2050 rather than 2025 and its recommendations won’t be binding on the government.
Let’s see what it comes up with — no doubt something that will have to be feasible under the profit-driven market system that is capitalism. So that rules out the common ownership of the Earth’s natural and industrial resources and their use to produce goods and services directly to satisfy people’s needs as the only framework within which the problem can be dealt with in a rational and sustainable way.
Balanced article here entitled “Why protesters should be wary of ‘12 years to climate breakdown’ rhetoric” explaing what the IPCC meant and didn’t mean.
Yes. One is being submitted to the EC meeting tomorrow. May also be an insert in the i paper if they have a free day.
Yes, there was still a hefty property qualification to stand as an MP in 1929. £150 would have been more than a year’s wages for many workers. So, even though this was the first UK election in which women had the vote on the same terms as men (from their 21st birthday) there was a wider “democratic deficit” than today – a deficit that can never be eliminated under capitalism due to its very nature as a class-divided, exploitative society.
Fortunately, today £500 is peanuts compared with £150 in 1929, making it less onerous for us to stand in elections for parliament which, as current circumstances and events are showing, is still the gateway to political power and so needs to be taken over by socialist delegates as part of the process of establishing socialism. Which of course is the ultimate logic for a socialist party to contest elections, even if it is only a token today but a token of a course of action we think a socialist-minded working class should take.
Found it. Knew I’d seen it somewhere.
https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2019/09/our-first-prospective-candidate-for.html
Useful comment too.
Anyone would think that contesting an election was not “activity”. In fact, in the two constituencies chosen, it is the continuation of other activities by the local branches — a weekly street stall in Cardiff and consistently contesting local elections in Folkestone (as there is no free postal distribution of leaflets in local election this has involved members leafletting the wards door-to-door twice).
It is all very well being nostalgic about the past but the sort of activity the Party did in the interwar years (debates and, above all, street corner meetings) has died out. Our main activity today is distributing the Socialist Standard by post, street stalls and the internet (have a look at our lively facebook page). Besides, as you will know from your activity of putting the Socialist Standard online, the Party did adopt a candidate in the late 1920s (I am sure you will be able to pinpoint the exact date) and was only prevented from actually standing by lack of funds.
Yes. We are standing in Cardiff Central and in Folkestone & Hythe but not in London. We are waiting there to concentrate on the Greater London Regional elections next April and May.
It looks as if that loudmouth Tim Martin may be about to receive his comeuppance:
I don’t know why I still go to Wetherspoons. Well, I do. The beer is cheaper and there’s no music so you can have a proper conversation.
Talking of beer mats, this one was better …
Actually, Chris Gilligan is quite good but you have to listen first to 5 minutes or so of Kliman and the other one going on about Trump being a “proto-fascist” and the need to unite with “centrists” to oust him. I’m afraid Kliman has completely lost the plot politically. Even Gilligan has to dismiss the attempt to liken Boris to Trump.
-
This reply was modified 7 years ago by
.
There is one very odd statement in that article:
“Britain’s decision to enter the EEC stemmed from the need to protect white British national identity after Empire and, at the same time, to continue its relationships with some of its former colonies in the area (Malta and Cyprus).”
Britain joined the EEC (as it then was) in 1973. Cyprus and Malta joined only in 2014. Cyprus got independence from Britain in 1960 and Malta in 1964. So how would Britain joining in 1973 reflect a desire “to continue relationships” with these two ex-colonies? Why would it want to anyway, especially not with Malta which is pretty insignificant and had lost the strategic importance it once had?
And what’s all this about “the need to protect white British national identity”? I don’t see that that was an issue at all. The motive was economic, even if arising from the end of Empire.
-
This reply was modified 7 years ago by
