[ALB]

It seems we may have jumped the gun here in assuming that the election will result in the continuance of the outgoing "austerity works" government. There seems to be the possibility of a "left of centre" one led by the PS and  supported by the CP and the Left Bloc:http://news.yahoo.com/portugal-makes-no-headway-forming-government-093106426.html

Quote:

The Left Bloc campaigned to renegotiate the national debt and end austerity measures, while the Communist Party wants Portugal out of the eurozone, but both say they are willing to give up those policies in order to keep Passos Coelho from returning to the prime minister's office in Lisbon's Sao Bento palace.

Not that it will make all that much difference.

[ALB]

I see Critisticuffs are organising a meeting/workshop on Corbyn at which they will dissect his programme:

Quote:

# What does Corbyn want? #Wednesday 21 October 2015, 7pmMay Day RoomsJeremy Corbyn's successful campaign to run the Labour Party and his hope to lead the State inspired many people: a few hundred thousand registered to join or support the party and Corbyn spoke to packed meetings. The response of some on the left has been critical, or at least pessimistic, about Corbyn being able to implement his policies as somehow big business and its allies will prevent him from doing so. A variant suggests he will be prevented by the “Labour Party machine”. Others say that although he is generally going in the right direction, on some issues he does not go far enough. Still others insist that all real change must come from below and that the success of Corbynism will take people away from focussing on pursuing such change into the dead end of parliamentary campaigning.In this workshop we want to investigate what Corbyn actually says he wants to do in terms of social and economic policy laid out in his policy paper “The Economy in 2020”. His goals are not something we think is good at all regardless of whether they are impossible to achieve. It is not that it doesn't go far enough or represents a distraction from the right means of pursuing the same goals: his programme is fundamentally hostile to the interests of those who want to live in a world based on human needs being satisfied instead of one where poverty is made its organising principle.1. We will look at how Corbyn thinks about the way in which wealth is produced in this society. We will argue that understanding how wealth is created is crucial to any political movement that wants a better society: we will show that despite Corbyn also appearing to start from this premise he never addresses the issue.2. We will argue that as a result of his mistaken thinking about the nature of wealth in this society, Corbyn agitates for a programme that calls for the increase of wealth from which workers are widely and systematically excluded.3. We will look at the fact that Corbyn perceives the necessity to use the capitalist state to provide a “fair share” to workers in the society reliant on this form of wealth creation. Contrary to what Corbyn thinks, we will argue that any such programme of state intervention must guarantee that the poverty of workers continues as its first principle.4. Finally we will look at how and why it is easy for Corbyn to arrive at the view that the State he wishes to run can be transformed into an organisation whose purpose is the welfare of all the people in this society. We argue that Corbyn will find that such welfare must necessarily preserve the poverty he wants to abolish and that the role he wishes the State to have is not one it can realise

I imagine they will be saying that the "growth" Corbyn wants will be the growth of wealth in the form of exchange value and capital which implies the extraction of surplus value from workers and so their exclusion from ownership and control of the means of production, i.e their "poverty". 

[ALB]

SocialistPunk wrote:

Are there any quotes from Marx, whereby he outlines socialism/communism as being a society of common ownership and democratic control of the worlds resources, by and for the community?

Some references are given in this article:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1970s/1973/no-832-december-1973/marxs-conception-socialism

Quote:

Natural resources and the man-made instruments of production would be held in common: Marx speaks of "a community of free individuals, carrying on their work with the means of production in common" (Vol. I, p. 78) and, in his Critique of the Gotha Programme, of "the co-operative society based on the common ownership of the means of production" (p. 22) and of "the material conditions of production" being "the cooperative property of the workers themselves" (p. 25). It is significant that Marx never defined communist society in terms of the ownership and control of the means of production by the State, but rather in terms of ownership and control by a voluntary association of the producers themselves. He did not equate what is now called "nationalisation" with Socialism.

Marx also talks about "cooperation and the possession in common of the land and of the means of production" at the end of Chapter 32 of Volume I of Capital.

[ALB]

Another statement from the "moderates":

Quote:

Al- Fateh Army said, “we call all the mujahedeen in Hama to inflame the fronts within their areas in order to make the Muslims legions meet in Hama liberating it InshaAllah, and that al- Fateh Army declares the charter of this blessed battle as follows:“Any fighting group, whether it is of Nusayri (Alawites) or Rafedah (Shiites) or Daesh (Islamic State) encounters al- Fateh Army is going to be fought until we liberate the whole land of al- Sham God willing, we ask out Ummah to help us by your faithful prayers that Allah grants us a clear victory and that Allah assists us with his own soldiers.”

[ALB]

I thought it quite clever since that what Trots do.

[ALB]

"Moderate" leader calls for sectarian war against the Alawite minority in Syria:http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/201792#.Vhy1pG6ebTQ

[ALB]

Another one, from Saturday's i paper:

Quote:

US broadcaster leading leftwinger a dance (7)

[ALB]

I wouldn't believe a word you read about Syria in the Daily Express. They just make things up and then add 'according to reports' or 'reportedly'. Here 's two recent examples:http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/611157/Russia-Turkey-jet-plane-shot-down-airspace-Syria-ISIS-Islamic-Statehttp://www.express.co.uk/news/world/609757/Putin-ISIS-Islamic-State-Syria-Raqqa-troops-soldiers-air-strike-jets-militaryIt's like the Daily Star.

[ALB]

There is something odd about this. It's reasonable enough to charge someone with action detrimental for voting for another party (we'd do that, so would most other parties) but how is the ex-member in question misusing our blog?Also, I know companion parties have complete autonomy, but this is not in accordance with our tradition and practice:

Quote:

That the party summarily rejects Dipak Kumar Bhattacharya’s resignation plea along with all allegations and directly expels him from the party Membership.

Wouldn't we just let a member resign if they wanted to (in fact I can recall two cases where a member resigned after voting for another party and we left it at that)? And certainly our EC doesn't have the power to "directly expel" a member.

[ALB]

A contribution to this general theme from ex-comrade Steve (now Professor Stephen) Coleman:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqJO_CUXe-I

[ALB]

What about austerity (as government cutting its spending) being an economic necessity (because in a slump its tax revenue falls — the budget deficit is not a myth) but that the choice of what spending to cut is a political one reflecting ideology.?For instance, the Tories' benefit cuts didn't have to spare the retired and make them all fall on those of working age not working (now to be extended to the working poor too). They could have cut pensioner's benefits and so cut non-pensioner benefits a little less but chose not to because they know that pensioners vote Tory more than the unemployed and the disabled.  They could also have increased tax on the incomes of the better-off (this wouldn't have affected profits as it's a tax on consumption) but chose not  to as these again are the people that vote for them. In theory, a different government could have applied the economic necessity of austerity in a different way, as the Syriza government in Greece tried to do and may still be.But of course as socialists it's not our business to get involved in arguments over where the axe should fall.

[ALB]

I like the reported answer of the anti-Islamist candidate in last year's presidential election there (who won in the end) to the question "what is the difference between you and your Islamist rival?": a thousand years.

[ALB]

There's a local council by-election in Northfield Brook ward (part of the Blackbird Leys estate) in Oxford on 22 October. TUSC are contesting it. Their leaflet shows they are trying to jump on the Corbyn bandwagon:

Quote:

WE NEED TO BACK CORBYN'S CALL TO STOP THE CUTS IN OXFORD! VOTE JAMES MORBIN

is its headline. And

Quote:

Labour, under their new leader Jeremy Corbyn stands clearly against cuts. Sadly this has not filtered down to Labour Councillors in Oxford yet (….) We call on Oxford Labour council and all councillors to back Jeremy Corbyn's call to stop the council cuts. We will back 100% any councillor who refuses to vote for cuts.

So this is going to be their tactic from now on, instead of calling for a Labour Party Mark 2.  Whether it will work is another matter. Their problem is that Labour doesn't need their support.The leaflet also calls on people to join the "Socialist Party" which is says supports TUSC. We don't of course and members and sympathisers will be leafletting the ward urging people who want a system "where the places where wealth is produced will no longer be owned by profit-seeking businesses but will be owned and democratically controlled by all" to write "WORLD SOCIALISM" across their ballot paper.

[ALB]

Brian Morris's last talk was also published in the Socialist Standard:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2013/no-1311-november-2013/karl-marx-anthropologistAnd here's a review of one of Yehudi Webster's books:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1990s/1999/no-1140-august-1999/book-review-does-race-exist

[ALB]

Heard from a member of our Advertising Committe yesterday that the Morning Star is refusing our adverts apparently because we didn't support Corbyn's campaign to become Labour Leader. It's not clear whether this is an official political position by the paper or just a personal decision by somebody in their advertising department.

[Author]

Posts