[ALB]

mmmmmmm… not so sure about this. Training people to express more competently a mistaken view of what "socialism is.

[ALB]

We seem to have jumped the gun here as while some will have more deducted from their take-home pay others will have less, so more of a "redistribution of poverty" budget:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-42358522

[ALB]

Real wages are going down at the moment, so any effect could take the form of wages not going down so much. In any event, we're (supposed to be) talking about the long — and in the long run a lot of individual workers get a salary increment. Difficult to disentangle the effects and counter-effects but trade union pressure is likely to be the most decisive.

[ALB]

Actually, we get cheques in the post every day. And not just from old foggies who are not online but also from others who, for security reasons, don't do online banking. On the other hand we are getting an increasing number paying by Paypal (which, incidentally, is managed by a comrade somewhere in the middle of Yorkshire) and encouraging this. I agree we ourselves should be able to make online payments but there are difficulties which the outgoing Treasurer will be able to explain. You wouldn't believe the number of hoops that we, as legally an unincorporated association, had to jump through to open an investment account.By the amount of self-flagellation that goes on here you'd think we were catholic monks or shiite muslims.

[ALB]

Actually the work of Treasurer is not much more than that of any club treasuer except that there are returns that have to be made to HMRC and the Electoral Commission by deadlines otherwise we get fined (and have been). It's just that it requires someone with a liking for, or rather not disliking, money figures. Difficult to find amongst socialists. We also need suitable software, but that's easily fixed.

[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Or a combined paid position, Brian….two birds with one stone

We agree on something, Alan. Yes, a combined General Secretary/Treasurer also doing the work of the Head Office Organiser and Enquiries Committee. Paid, but not necessarily employed. That was the idea behind the Investment Committee — to provide a regular income to pay someone rather than (of course) getting a better rate of interest on our legacies.

[ALB]

There's nothing new in this idea. A candidate calling for this stood against us in Battersea in the general election:http://www.wandsworthguardian.co.uk/news/15301500.The_new_Macron__Independent_hopeful_for_Battersea_calls_for_new_centrist_party/He got 1234 votes (2.2%) and lost his deposit, though he did rather better than us. But who the fuck is Chris Deerin? Sounds like some jumped-up journalist convinced of his own self-omportance. Anyway, unlike Deerin, Coghlan is putting his money (wherever it comes from) where his mouth is:https://www.ft.com/content/ec334a98-af55-11e7-aab9-abaa44b1e130Interesting (or not) act in sideshow of conventional politics, I suppose, since we have to keep up with these things on the basis of know your enemy.

[ALB]

What's interesting about that list is that there are over 30 different members on it. So the volunteers are there. It is just that no one wants to be treasurer or general secretary at the moment. 

[ALB]

Thanks, Dave. I thought it must have come from Anti-Dühring

Engels wrote:

…. in time to come there will no longer be any professional porters or architects, and that the man who for half an hour gives instructions as an architect will also act as a porter for a period, until his activity as an architect is once again required. A fine sort of socialism that would be—perpetuating professional porters!

It is a better quote to illustrate the point that in socialism people will no longer be tied to doing the same work all day, month in month out, year in year out. A better quote in fact than the more frequent one about hunting in the morning, fishing in the afternoon, etc  which is less realistic (and offends our vegetarian friends).

[ALB]

I have only got round to reading the first section on the elimination of hierarchy which is based on a single quote from Marx taken completely out of context:

Quote:

Equality and equivalence of all kinds of labour insofar as they are human labour in general, this secret of the expression of value can be deciphered only when the idea of human equality has already acquired firmness of a popular prejudice.

This is taken from the last paragraph of section 3 on "The Equivalent Form of Value" of the opening chapter of Capital on "Commodities". Here is the whole paragraph:

Marx wrote:

There was, however, an important fact which prevented Aristotle from seeing that, to attribute value to commodities, is merely a mode of expressing all labour as equal human labour, and consequently as labour of equal quality. Greek society was founded upon slavery, and had, therefore, for its natural basis, the inequality of men and of their labour powers. The secret of the expression of value, namely, that all kinds of labour are equal and equivalent, because, and so far as they are human labour in general, cannot be deciphered, until the notion of human equality has already acquired the fixity of a popular prejudice. This, however, is possible only in a society in which the great mass of the produce of labour takes the form of commodities, in which, consequently, the dominant relation between man and man, is that of owners of commodities. The brilliancy of Aristotle’s genius is shown by this alone, that he discovered, in the expression of the value of commodities, a relation of equality. The peculiar conditions of the society in which he lived, alone prevented him from discovering what, “in truth,” was at the bottom of this equality

It is clear that what Marx is saying here is that Aristotle could not have worked out the concept of "equal human labour" because he was living in a society based on humans not being equal (as some were chattel slaves); this had to await the coming of a society in which all humans were regarded and accepted as being equally owners of commodities (capitalism !). It had nothing to do with any "popular prejudice" about all humans being equal in the sense of having equal capacities which you then go on (and on) to criticise as ridiculous. Which it is. That humans have different capacities is well expressed in the longstanding socialist slogan of "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs".It's annoying that you didn't give the exact source of the quote (hopefully, not because you wanted to make it difficult for your readers to track it down and discover how you have distorted it).There's another quote, this time from Engels, that you don't give a precise source for:

Engels wrote:

… a person who gives instructions as an architect for half an hour, will also push a trolley for some time, until his activity as an architect is needed once again. Fine sort of socialism that perpetuates professional pushers of trolleys!

As it's a good quote that well expresses the socialist viewpoint can you supply the source?

[ALB]

Brian wrote:

I can reveal that ISOLATION is one pattern – amongst others – I have observed from the responses.

That is not surprising as the great bulk of members who have joined over the past ten or more years have joined via the internet rather than in person via a geographical branch (which, incidentally, given the turnover of members could be a quarter or more of the membership). They could well be on average younger than the present active members.This suggests that the internet is probably their preferred method of communication, If so, it's here that we will need to make some changes, e.g. internet forums (friendly ones). People here have suggested streaming EC meetings. Not sure that's a good idea as they are not that interesting. If we're going to stream anything it should be public meetings or interesting internal discussions.As I've said, it will be interesting to see what the survey turns up from these members who joined via the internet. Hopefully sufficient of them will have replied so we can see if there's a pattern.

[ALB]

Or an EC composed of branch delegates?

[ALB]

We are nowhere near there of course !  Actually, the idea of a Ways and Means Committee is a good one. There used to be a a General Purposes Committee that met between EC Meetings but it didn't work properly and got abolished, but could be revived if the EC were to meet quarterly. But let's wait and see what the Ad Hoc Organisation Committee come up with. The Party is not short of money either and won't be for years (read Private Eye to know how much we have). In fact, we've got enough to engage a full timer who could do all the work at Head Office and more. Again, wait for the report.

[ALB]

You mean like it was said to be in the last years of the old USSR: you pretend to pay us, so we pretend to work.

[ALB]

Thanks, Alam. There are a couple of other referencse to the SPGB "intervention":

Quote:

For the SPGB, the degeneration of the RR proved Marx correct: the workers could not establish communism in a backward country. Lenin’s last articles were full of disillusionment – he realised he’d made a big mistake.

Quote:

The Russian Revolution failed. True, the working class, through its soviets, through its party, smashed the bourgeois state and established, for a short time, a dictatorship of the proletariat (only the Socialist Party of GB regarded this as a bourgeois revolution and a Bolshevik coup).

Re the March revolution which overthrew the Tsar, the Socialist Standard of 1919-21 saw this as a failed bourgeois revolution in that, although the Tsar was overthrown, the Russian capitalists were unable to establish their stable rule and were overthrown by a determined minority that was able to stabilise the situation. Not that it could establish socialism. In fact, it could only restore the economy and get production going again on a capitalist basis, as, once the civil war was over, Lenin came to recognise (and which earned him a relatively favourable obituary in the Socialist Standard).

[Author]

Posts