[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

If i was in the Leave camp i would highlight that we have Cameron/Obama effectively endorsing the EU/TTIP agreement before it is agreed.

After leaving Britain Obama flew on to Germany where one of the subjects discussed was this. But it is by no means a done deal. In fact it may never happen because of vested business interests in both the US and the EU:

Quote:

Barack Obama makes a valedictory visit to Germany Sunday to see his "friend" Angela Merkel, but their show of unity looked unlikely to curb opposition to their plans for a transatlantic trade pact.Obama will jet into the northern city of Hanover for a final bilateral visit to Europe's biggest economy.One of the headline goals of the trip is to advance negotiations on what could become the world's biggest free trade agreement, the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).Both sides say they aim to see it finalised, at least in its broad outline, before Obama leaves office in January.However Merkel's economy minister Sigmar Gabriel cast doubt on those ambitions Sunday, warning the deal "will fail" if the US refuses to make concessions in the protracted talks."The Americans want to hold fast to their 'Buy American' idea. We can't accept that. They don't want to open their public tenders to European companies. For me, that goes against free trade," Gabriel, a Social Democrat who is also Germany's deputy chancellor, told business newspaper Handelsblatt.

If I was the Leave campaign I'd concentrate on all they've got left — the fact that Cameron's deal with the EU did not achieve the reform of the EU he promised but then you have to think that immigration is the problem. That's what they are likely to concentrate on from now on, now that their "better trade deals" argument has been punctured,. It's going to be Immigration, Immigration, Border Controls and we don't want to be told how to vote by a "half-Kenyan".

[ALB]

Interesting but I thought Nuit Debout claimed that it didn't have any "demands" so what demands are those questioned supporting or opposing?

[ALB]

ALB wrote:

It is still the case, though, that it is not regarded as too significant as it does not involve people in their places of work and that one of the "illusions" it is said to carry is its concern for democratic forms — which of course is precisely what we find encouraging in it. But then we are not ultralefts.

Here's an example (a summary of something from a prominent ex-member of the ICC):

Quote:

Nuit debout certainly appears to respond to a growing discontent and questioning, as did the other earlier movements to which R.V. refers. The question is, as he says, to see the movement spread to the working class itself, but especially to go beyond calls for "real democracy" (whatever that means) and forge a direct link between the growing precarité and the laws of motion of capital itself: to shift the discussion from the absence of democracy to the abolition of value and its social forms.

[ALB]

Who are these non-entities?

[ALB]

Of course British capitalism will survive in the event of an OUT vote and adapt, probably ending up like Norway (with access to the single EU market but no say in its rules) but, given its economic weight, something less unfavourable maybe. It wouldn't be the end of the world for them even if it doesn't make complete economic sense from their point of view.PS Some of the OUTers also want to sign up to TTIP but on their own.

[ALB]

It's all over. At least the argument is (from the point of view of the overall interest of the UK capitalism, that is).  For them staying in is a no-brainer, reinforced by what Obama just said:

Quote:

On trade, he took aim at one of the main "Out" arguments — that Britain could easily negotiate deals and get better terms on its own. The United States would regard a deal with the EU as a higher priority than a separate agreement with a much smaller market such as a stand-alone Britain, Obama said."It's fair to say that maybe some point down the line there might be a UK-US trade agreement but that's not going to happen anytime soon because our focus is negotiating with a big bloc, the European Union, to get a trade agreement done," Obama said."And the UK is going to be in the back of the queue, not because we don't have a special relationship but because given the heavy lift on any trade agreement, us having access to a big market with a lot of countries rather than trying to do piecemeal trade agreements is hugely efficient."

UK capitalism is obviously in a better position to get a favourable deal in trade negotiations with other countries and blocs as part of a larger bloc than as a country on its own(on the old trade union principle that "unity is strength") . The only reply that the two buffoons who are leading the Out campaign can come up with is bluster about those who don't agree that Britain going it alone would get better trade deals of lacking confidence in "Great" Britain.It's only a passing show as far as we're concerned of course but we can still rate the two sides' (capitalist) arguments..

[ALB]

Further comments on this ultraleft forum are not so unfavourable. For instance:

Quote:

We must not confuse the recuperation with the dynamic that is present in the movement. I think it is inscribed in a deep and generalised reflection on the perspectives offered by the capitalist mode of production. Even if this reflection is often confused and carrying illusions, we should not remain blind to what is most basic in this dynamic.

It is still the case, though, that it is not regarded as too significant as it does not involve people in their places of work and that one of the "illusions" it is said to carry is its concern for democratic forms — which of course is precisely what we find encouraging in it. But then we are not ultralefts.

[ALB]

ALB wrote:

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Whatever happened to Richard Cummings, BTW? Does anybody know?

He's rumoured to have converted to Anglicanism

Actually, it's worse. He's actually become an Anglican priest, joining two other ex-members, the Rev Toby Crowe and the Rev Andrew Wilkes. If we are to be an Anglican seminary who's next? Mind you, as churches go, that's the best as in it anything goes and you don't even have to believe in god. The Rev Wilkes voted for us in the 2014 European elections and actually applied to rejoin (hope Robbo isn't following this thread).

[ALB]

I posted a question about Nuit Debout on a French-language ultraleft discussion forum I'm on and got two replies.Both confirm that it is a part of the more general discontent over the French government's attempt to revise the Labour Code and end "jobs for life". Below is  a rough translation of what they say.One quotes a letter written by Henri Simon (who was associated with the old Solidarity group in Britain in its day) on 8 April:

Quote:

Since a week, separate from but more or less linked to this movement, some militants are trying to benefit from the confused situation to launch an Occupy-style movement. Under the label "Nuit Debout" they have started an occupation of the Place de la Republique (at least, of 25%  of it given the small number of participants) each night with open discussions. Up to now they have only assembled a few hundreds (perhaps a thousand some evenings) for the denates which have not led to any concrete actions. Nevertheless they persist hoping that some event will come to give an impulse to their project, such as for instance the "grand" demonstration planned for tomorrow.

The other from a couple of Bordigists calling themselves "Robin Goodfellow" attributes the publicity about them to media looking for something different during an ordinary labourstrike and demonstration movement. On this latter they say more or less the same as us:

Quote:

That, 48 years after the "victory" of May 1968, there is a need to mobilise to stop a lengthening of the working day and a decrease in wages says a lot about the deadend of reformism and the fact that as long as the capitalist mode of production is not abolished no "reform", even one obtained at the cost of a massive general strike, can bring about a durable improvement in the lot of the proletariar.

[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Whatever happened to Richard Cummings, BTW? Does anybody know?

He's rumoured to have converted to Anglicanism and to be working in the City but we shouldn't be discussing all this here, should we?

[ALB]

Private Fraser rides again !

[ALB]

There was (yet another) anti-austerity march in London yesterday organised by the Peoples Assembly, Stop the War and CND, at which the chant "Cameron Out" went up without indicating who they wanted "In" (no doubt Jeremy rather than Boris) as if changing the Prime Minister would change anything. Some of our "The problem is not the Tories … It's capitalism" leaflets were handed out.There's also elections to the Greater London Assembly going on at which we're standing 3 candidates. Other members were involved in activity in connection with this. See:http://spgb.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/another-saturdays-stalls.htmlVoilà tout.

[ALB]

This seems to be more a by-product of the French government's attempt to water down labour laws and therefore probably just a French national phenomenon not likely to spread to other countries, whereas Occupy was a reaction to the Great Crash of 2008 and so more global as a reaction against an effect of world capitalism.

[ALB]

Two letters have been published in the local press in the South West constituency.This in the Surrey Comet on 8 April:

Quote:

Green Party mayor candidate Sian Berry has a point (Surrey Comet, April 1) when she says that the present model for providing so-called affordable housing, as housing at a rent or price below the going rate, isn't working as it is based on signing "big deals with developers". These deals have to allow the property developers to make a profit but the more below-market-rate housing the mayor requires them to provide in any project the less their profit. So there are limits as to how far they can be pushed. If they aren't allow to make enough profit they will just walk away. Not enough profit, no production. That's the way the capitalist system works and why it should be replaced by a society based on common ownership and democratic control, which will allow production, including of houses, for use instead of for profit. Adam Buick, Socialist Party candidate GLA South West constituency.

And this in the Richmond and Twickenham Times on 15 April:

Quote:

George Galloway (RTT, April is right to pick up on Sadiq Khan's promise to be "the most pro-business Mayor ever". This shows that Labour, even under Corbyn, still wants to be seen as better managers of the capitalist system than the Tories. But capitalism can never be run for the benefit of those who, in Galloway's words, "work for businesses". This is why it needs to be replaced by a system based on common ownership and democratic control not production by profit-seeking businesses. Adam Buick, Socialist Party candidate GLA South West constituency

[ALB]

Actually it presumes they are men, which has not always been the case

[Author]

Posts