ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Just checked and it seems that the famous article was not in fact written by Barry McNeeny. He didn't join the Party till 1974. The article was signed B.M. There was another member with these initials who wrote articles for the Socialist Standard. So BM will be Brendan Mee ( I think he was a member of our then Bolton branch).Here's another of his articles (correctly attributed):http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1970s/1973/no-823-march-1973/poison-nationalismThis article on "Lenin and the State", which makes it quite clear that we have nothing to do with Leninism, is also by him (but wrongly attributed):http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1970s/1972/no-820-december-1972/lenin-and-statePS These misattributions will have to be corrected on on archive site.
LBird wrote:Just for ALB to read, once again.The obsessive refuser has just shot himself in the foot again. I read that article long before he did as I was a member of the editorial committee at the time and can assure him that it went in with the full approval of the committee. He should also read the article on the following page on "Men, Ideas and Society":http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1970s/1973/no-829-september-1973/men-ideas-and-societyHe will see that it ,too, specifically repudiates the view
Quote:that the brain is a kind of camera photographing the worldOn the other hand, some people's brains seem more like a gramophone record.
LBird wrote:the SPGB now has a pretty mainstream Leninist view about 'matter'Why do we continue to entertain this obsessive who continues to tell lies about us despite us repeadtedly refuting them. For instance:https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/why-we-are-different?page=1#comment-36702
robbo203 wrote:What ever happened to Barry?Apparently he's a railway enthuisiast:https://www.flickr.com/photos/brizzlebornandbred/7991733619Not that that's a barrier to being a member. There are other trainspotters in the Party.
There's also this, also drafted by Barry McNeeney:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/study-guides/science-and-socialist
Found Rollings's "Potrait of a Consistent Party" here:https://www.scribd.com/document/120552015/portrait-consistency-peter-rollings-1970s-pdf
Peter Rollings was also a member of the Socialist Party for a while and probably a secret Walsbyite at the same time. It was assumed that he joined the Party to do his sociological study of the Party and its members in the same sort of way that an anthroplogist studying a primitive tribe lived like them. But, of course, to join he had to show he understood the Party case. He actually wrote two good articles that appeared in the Socialist Standard in 1963 (hint, hint, Imposs):Charity begins at work (June 1963) and Man's degradation (September 1963).I think his draft PhD thesis on the Party is somewhere on the net. I'm sure JohnD will know where.
There was a review in the June 1986 Socialist Standard of this book which tried to use us as an example of how some political organisations were like cultish religious groups. It's not on line but you can get an idea of the slapdash nature of the "research" from these passages quoted in the review:
Quote:According to Jones, we are "mainly skilled workers and in particular building workers" with "little evidence of any young intellectual element drawn from the universities" and we are "more likely to be primary school teachers with a non-university background."As the reviewer, Howard Moss, remarked, "Anyone who is a member of, or closely associated with the Socialist Party will be smiling ..".The author, who did actually interview a few members, had to concede that
Quote:members certainly do not appear to be aggressive or misfits or in any way eccentric.The question of leftwing political cults was discussed in 2005 in this article in the Socialist Standard:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2005/no-1215-november-2005/cult-professional-revolutionary
Surrey Green Party appear to be against the referendum:http://redhillgreens.org.uk/2017/01/5422/#more-5422
Meanwhile in another part of Brixton ….http://www.standard.co.uk/stayingin/tvfilm/the-cult-next-door-bbc2-documentary-tells-story-of-brixtonbased-cult-the-collective-and-leader-a3450966.html
Ah, but what is the "working class"? Not just industrial workers of course, but anyone obliged by economic necessity to go out and try to sell their ability to work on the labour market, i.e , with their dependents, over 90% of the population in this part of the world.
Quote:The alternatives to all that may not be very exciting but they are essential. Those of us who advocate a revolution to establish a society based on the principle from each according to ability to each according to need, whether we call ourselves anarchists, communists, socialists or whatever, need to maintain a revolutionary intransigence, serving as a class memory – the “thin red line” so to speak.But also, we need to be practically engaged in struggles as and when they arise – involved, whether active within or supportive externally to those “oases” of class struggle I mentioned earlier. This also means being proactive in things such as residents’ groups, claimants’ organisations, autonomous workplace activity… or by establishing or re-establishing such organisations but without repeating past mistakes.Nothing wrong with workers, including revolutionaries, taking part in these sort of groups, but this is defensive and reactive (like the unions). And there are dangers in an organisation doing this, both for the struggle and the organisation.Best for revolutionaries to concentrate on the "thin red line" part. Anyway, what happened at the meeting?
The total amount of "money" in existence doesn't have to equal the total amount of debts to be settled any more than it has to equal the total amount of prices to be realised — because, of course, money circulates. So this is not necessarily a problem.But there is another aspect: how is "total debt" is calculated? There could be(and probably is) a lot of double and more counting going on, as this commenter has pointed out:
Quote:Are we sure that debt numbers are not double/triple/quadruple counted? It seems that the more intermediaries, the more debt (which can still be a problem) which can create a problem nonetheless but a different sort of problem (counterparty risk). What I mean is that if A lends to B at 3% then B lends to C at 5% then C lends to D at 7% and D lends on to E at 9%, is that counted as 4 units of debt when in actuality only one unit must be serviced?Confirmatio in a piece in today's Times that what appears in Hansard is not necessarily what a MP actually said but rather what they meant to say:
Quote:Hansard reporters, of course, have long "improved" the language of British politicians. One Hansardista recalled a speech by an elderly Tory in which she could make out only two words clearly: "cold war". The rest of his oration was gibberish but she created what she thought was his argument and sent it down for his approval. His only change was to capitalise cold and war.
