[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

But it is nice that the Greens refer to some history recalling th 1906 election.

Yes, but typically inaccurately. Nearly all the 29 Labour MPs elected in the 1906 General Election were elected as a result of an electoral deal with the Liberals, not in opposition to them as Sinclair suggests.At that time some constituencies elected 2 MPs. The deal was that, in some seats, there would be one Liberal and one Labour candidate whose supporters would cast their second vote for the other party. The Labour MPs, elected with Liberal support, then formed themselves into the Parliamentary "Labour Party" and generally supported the Liberal government. To get any more representation in parliament the Greens would have to do a deal with Labour or the LibDems (as they probably already have done at local level).Interesting article, but I think many "leftwingers" have already been voting Green in elections. At least that's what we discovered in the London Assembly and local council elections we've contested.  For instance, prominent SWPer Paul Holborrow admitted voting Green (rather than Socialist) in Lambeth & Southwark in the 2012 GLA election (but would we have wanted his vote anyway?). The person who chaired a TUSC election meeting in Merton & Wandsworth where we also had a candidate told us he was doing the same.I hadn't realised that Russel Brand had modified the rigid anti-vote stance he took in the interview with Paxman:

Quote:

Writing in the Guardian, Russell Brand urged people not to vote: "The only reason to vote is if the vote represents power or change. I don't think it does." However, he ended the article arguing "I believe in change… A system that serves the planet and the people. I'd vote for that."[emphasis added]

Not that the Green Party stands for that. They stand for an impossible small-scale capitalism.

[ALB]

Surely you were not expecting Robert Peston to explain value within capitalism, were you?Anyway, as value is an expression of a social relationship (between people organised in separate units producing goods and services for sale) once this social relationship is ended (through the establishment of the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production by society as a whole) value disappears. Simple. Anybody can understand that, can't they?

[ALB]

edmundpotts wrote:

Hello all,I'm a member of the steering committee of the Socialist Platform within Left Unity. I noticed the letters written into the CPGB's Weekly Worker by Adam Buick and Alan Johnstone, which seem to express interest in a discussion about similarities between our projects. I'd be more than happy for either Adam or Alan [or any other SPGB member] to email me as the point of contact for such discussions. My address is edmundpotts gmail com

For the record, here's Edmund Potts observations on the founding conference of "Left Unity" and how he sees the future of those who initiated the "Socialist Platform".http://www.independentsocialistnetwork.org/?p=2644

[ALB]

Is this the sort of thing people here have in mind:http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/aug/31/ask-grown-up-pocket-moneyOr they could get together to establish free access and so the need for money and bringing about the end of value (real revolutionary socialism).

[ALB]

This has already been translated into French by a sympathetic website and can be found here:https://bataillesocialiste.wordpress.com/2014/01/04/2014-annee-de-la-xenophobie/

[ALB]

Someone said at the EC Meeting yesterday that he liked this as an election broadcast:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iulqp9xlCFg

[ALB]

J Surman wrote:

Let's bore I say!

But that's what the Trotskyists say when they "enter" the Labour or any other party..

[ALB]

DJP wrote:

we are bound to copyright laws…

That's an important point. And it's not all a Party Election Broadcast is bound by. Here are the "production guidelines" for broadcasts for the Scottish Referendum in September. Those for the European elections in May will be similar, only substitute "Party" for "D.Org" (Designated Organisation):

Quote:

All broadcasts must observe the law – for example, on copyright, libel, contempt, obscenity, incitement to racial hatred or violence.All broadcasts must comply with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code , and the provisions of the BBC Editorial Guidelines, that relate to harm and offence (Chapter 5 of the BBC Editorial Guidelines) and fairness and privacy (Chapters 6 & 7 of the BBC Editorial Guidelines), having regard to the political context of the broadcast.Subject to the matters set out above, accuracy is the responsibility of the D.Org making the broadcasts.The D.Org responsible for the broadcast will indemnify the broadcaster for all legal or regulatory actions resulting from the contents of the referendum broadcast.Impartiality is achieved over the series of RCBs as a whole, according to the designation of the Electoral Commission. There is, of course, no obligation on the D.Orgs to achieve impartiality within each broadcast.An extract of recordings of the parliamentary proceedings of Parliament at Westminster , the National Assembly of Wales, the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly may be used only if it features a speech by a member supporting that D.Org and the member's consent has been obtained. Wide shots of the chambers of the National Assembly of Wales, Scottish Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly are allowed, but wide shots of Westminster are not.Extracts from party conference speeches featuring a supporter of the D.Org and with the speaker's consent may be used and can be bought in the normal way from the broadcasters.Archive or news clips of members of any other D.Org should not be included. This applies to both visual and audio material alike. Undistorted stills are allowed.No member of the public should be featured prominently or in an identifiable manner in a broadcast, without that person's explicit consent.  This includes the use of all footage (including archive or “stock”shots) where individuals are identifiable, to make or illustrate a specific political point or policy, or to suggest that such persons support that particular point or policy.  Broadcasters may require the D Org to produce confirmation of that consent.Shots which include broadcasters in vision or in voice are not permissible.The use of actors in a broadcast must be made clear to the audience if there is any possibility that the audience could be confused or misled by their appearance. The same applies to reconstructions.D.Orgsmust consult with individual broadcasters at least one week before transmission if they are planning to use any phone or text numbers. No revenue-generating telephone numbers are to be used in a broadcast. Appeals for members of the audience to contact the designated organistion at the end of the broadcast by telephone, e-mail etc are allowed but direct appeals for funds as in, “Have your credit cards handy”, are not.RCBswhich closely mimic the format of established programmes on any channel, particularly news programmes, run the risk of misleading the audience and therefore they must be clearly labelled throughout.Straight news footage featuring prominent supporters of the D.Org making the RCB may be purchased from broadcasters in the usual way but clips which identify the programme in which they featured, on screen logos, theme music or the voice or face of a presenter/reporter will not be allowed, nor will footage featuring supporters from the opposing D.Org.Format Broadcasts should be delivered on digi-beta tapes in widescreen format (16×9 full height anamorphic). The sound can be in mono or stereo. Two digi-beta tapes should be delivered together with two VHS or DVD copies

As can be seen, producing an election video is a lot more complicated than producing something for Youtube. But the election  and audiovisual committees are on to it.

[ALB]

Nobody is being snubbed or disingenuous. We are a democratic organisation and make decisions in an ordered and democratic way.The election committee made a recommendation to the EC (to drop the project), which the EC rejected. Two members came forward offering to take over from the stage that had been reached, i.e. where there was an almost finished script that had been worked on by a number of members on a dedicated mailing list (members of the audiovisual and election committees plus some members of South West Regional Branch). So the project is continuing. As I said, the script has been finalised and other work is continuing.It was always the intention that, after the election, the video should be adapted to be used as a general Party video. We are urgently in need of these. There exists a second script which was not retained but which could be used to make a general video. Somebody is needed to work on that.

[ALB]

Let's not get wires crossed or duplicate work. Two or three comrades are already working on the election video (and, contrary to what has been suggested, they do have experience of film-making and sound recording and access to animation). The script has been finalised and work has started on the story board.The focus of the broadcast was decided at the August EC Meeting, on a recommendation from the election and audio-visual committees:

Quote:

That any broadcast should focus on two topics:– How life in a socialist society would benefit (providing specific examples) the individual worker.– Socialism is a worldwide social system.

The EC will get a progress report tomorrow.

[ALB]

It seems that he really is going to go ahead with this:http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2013/12/29/thinking-of-bing-a-class-war-candidate-want-to-meet-the-rest/

[ALB]

I still say it's a good thing that "socialism" is no longer a dirty word even if it is not being used properly. Given our approach and the language we use it can only be to our benefit if words like "socialism", "capitalism" and "revolution" are coming back into political circulation after they were mockingly dismissed by capitalist ideologues following the collapse of the Russian state capitalist empire twenty or so years ago.

[ALB]

Mind you, perhaps there is a reference to some of us after all:

Quote:

a membership consisting of sartorially challenged older males

[ALB]

Why should we complain about being left out of Trotwatch list? I'd be more concerned if we were included in it.

[ALB]

I don't know why we are considering machine translation for things in Welsh when we've already got material in Welsh and have native Welsh-speakers in the Party. There's this on the WSM website:http://www.worldsocialism.org/noneng/wal1.phpIt was originally published in the July 1969 Socialist Standard as a bi-lingual editorial. In English the title was "Socialism: One World". This was to mark Prince Charles's invesitature as Prince of Wales. On the front page he was portrayed as a puppet wearing a number of badges which said "LoveThy Betters", "Divide & Rule" and "Have you had a leek today?"I'm sure the Object will have been translated into Welsh, probably by the late Comrade Vic Brain who wasn't just a native Welsh-speaker but also some sord of bard who wrote poetry for the Eisteddfod.I think YMS's machine translation of our name gets the word order wrong (as machines do). We are PLAID SOSIALAIDD PRYDAIN FAWR (Pity we can't drop the "fawr"). Or more accurately: Y BLAID SOSIALAIDD PRYDAIN FAWR. Here's the site of the Welsh Communist Party. Note that their name is: Plaid Gomiwnyddol Cymru.And here's an example of one of their Party Election Broadcasts:http://www.welshcommunists.org/index.php?page=cybroadcastNot that I think we should attempt something like this.The Labour Party is: Plaid Lafur. Scargill's SLP is Plaid Lafur Sosialaidd.

[Author]

Posts