Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Bob Andrews wrote:What evidence is there that Kropotkin was an influence on the founders of the WSM? Anarchists were anti-marxist even before the capitalist class sat up and took notice. Kropotkin at one time describing Bismarckism and Marxism as 'two sides of the same coin'. Which might help to clarify why he did not oppose the First Great War.
Apologies if this is also straying slightly off topic, but The Clousden Hill Free Communist and Cooperative Community was founded about 200 yards from the house I was born and brought up in and which Cde Kilgallon senior (my mother) still lives.Rumour has it that Kropotkin and Tom Mann were regular visitors and sometimes went for a drink at the Clousden Hill Hotel (where I made my debut as a drinker and whose football team Clouden Hill Celtic (139 appearances 3 goals, two broken legs (not mine) I later played). As a child I used to play in the derelict house which formed part of the commune and made tarzan swings from the decaying roof. Perhaps Kropotkin had a sub conscious influence on me?http://www.ic.org/wiki/clousden-hill/
Daniel Cotton wrote:check out Solidarity, a socialist party working in Australia to tear apart the brutality of colonial capitalism: http://www.solidarity.net.au/aboriginal/capitalism-and-aboriginal-oppression/And no doubt introduce the brutality of Leninst dictatorship!
ALB wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:ALB wrote:That's assuming that he ever "was" when there's no solid evidence for vthis. Quite the opposite, only forgeries.Absence of evidence isn't necessarily evidence of absence, as they say.
True, but the only evidence is stories written down years later and forgeries by christian monks. No non-christian mentions him as a historical figure, only a cult based on a person called "Jesus". Redeemer cults, of which original christianity was one, were common in the Hellenistic world.Here's a review of a book on the subject from 1911:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1910s/1911/no-80-april-1911/did-jesus-ever-liveSee also Nicholas Walter's reply here:http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/jesus-christ-myth-or-reality-1980.html
Josephus (possibly) referenced Jesus, so it's' not completely accurate to say that it is definite that a non-Christian writer never mentioned him as a historical figure.
DJP wrote:Did the material conditions for communism exist in 1848?I think you could say the material conditions existed to consider that communism was a possibility in the not too distant future.
ALB wrote:That's assuming that he ever "was" when there's no solid evidence for vthis. Quite the opposite, only forgeries.Absence of evidence isn't necessarily evidence of absence, as they say.
Perhaps I can put it in my own somewhat crude and simplistic way:I go to work with an apple in my lunch box. When I get to work my mate Bob says he has no apple. As I don't really fancy the apple today, I give Bob my apple and write down in my diary, "Bob owes me an apple".Bob decides he's rather have a pork pie from the canteen (wise man is my mate Bob) and gives Sally the apple on the agreement that she will give Bob an apple back tomorrow. Bob makes a note in his calendar for tommow "Sally one apple".Sally walks off and sees Julie who is diabetic and badly needs some food. Sally agrees to give Julie the apple, but being as tight as a frog's back passage wrties a post it note on Julie's computer saying "you owe me an apple!!!!"It doesn't really matter that a long streak of miserable, paralysed piss, called a work place auditor, comes in looks at the various entries and decides there are three apples, in reality there's still only one fucking apple!
ALB wrote:Since staying in the tariff-less and friction-less single market is in the overall interest of the British capitalist class, there can only be two explanations for the behaviour of the Tory Breshiteers: either they are using popular prejudice to further their careers and climb further up the greasy pole or they are stupid (or both of course). Business chiefs are beginning to get fed up with them — sometimes their political representatives get out of hand and bugger things up for them. This could be a case in point.it might be argued that some elements of the capitalist class have no real interest in a tariff free and frictionless single market. For some small capitalists the hassle and cost of European regulation may outway the benefit. Not all businesses export and import. In my opinion the Brexit debate is one between big capital and small capital. In the short term small capital has won. In the long term big capital will always win out over small capital.
robbo203 wrote:I have noticed recently a disturbing trend on some of the lefty forums I frequent – posts enthusiastically promoting much the same the kind of arguments you might expect to find in a reactionary Right wing-outfit like the National Rifle Association (NRA). On one such FB site contributors were invited to voyeuristically share information about guns in their possession and from exchanges with some people on that site it was clear that they took the view that socialism could only ever be achieved by an armed uprising. To oppose such an idea was casually dismissed as a case of liberal squeamishness. On another site, historical precedent was cited as reason enough for this leftist veneration of guns. See this post for example with the caption" Guns are fine — racism is not’: Armed redneck lefties are waging a different kind of war on Fascism" (http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/guns-are-fine-racism-is-not-armed-redneck-lefties-are-waging-a-different-kind-of-war-on-fascism/). The so called “Battle of Blair Mountain” in 1921 rsulted in over sixty workers losing their lives , almost 1,000 miners being arrested and, subsequently a precipitous decline in union membership but who cares about the costs involved when there is the romance to be savoured of taking on the state in a headlong exchange of bullets I dont know if this is a peculiarly American phenomenon – this leftist fantasising over guns – but opposing it as I do has got sod all to do with holding certain Liberal scruples. ("Liberal" like the word "fascism" has become little more than a swear word to be presented in lieu of any kind of plausible argument). I oppose glorifying gun culture because I do not believe the ends and the means can ever really be separated and I do not want to live in a society in which the gun has the final word and where "might is right". A leftist worshipping of gun culture will only reproduce the latent and manifest authoritarianism of the reactionary Right itself but then that streak of authoritarianism has always been there in the case of the Left in the guise of the Leninist vanguardist theory. It is anathema to a Marxist position that the emancipation of the working class can only be carried by the working class itself and not from above That apart, the whole idea is pointlessly provocative and doomed to backfire. What we will end up with is one bunch of thugs shooting up another in a mindless game of tit-for-tat with nothing much of substance to distinguish them apart from their respective left and right wing sounding labels. Quite likely some of these will degenerate even further into mafia – type business outfits intent upon enriching themselves at the expense of those they prey upon and extort. It is not as if this hasn’t happened before – the transition from fiery radical to self-aggrandising sleazeball cynically using one's political connections simply as a means of accumulating wealth As for the modern state – certainly in any of the advanced economies of global capitalism – there is absolutely zero chance of this ever being overthrown by a bunch of would be Left wing generals plotting military coups from the comfort of their parents back garden shed. I despair when I read stuff like this. Has the Left learnt nothing from the past? Is it forever doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past when nothing was really achieved except to reinforce the very system that finally co-opted them into the ranks of the apathetic and the compliant when it did not consign them to some anonymous grave?It's an old quote, and I can't remember which party member said it but it runs along the lines of "a gun is a metal tube with a member of the working class at end"
Major McPharter wrote:I must agree, i prefer to meet up face to face and shake hands with old comrades. Even if it is only say every 3 month it would be nice for a chat and a cup of tea or maybe something stronger.I'm with you Harley, bollocks to tea!
Vin, my view is that we have to be very careful on this change. It could be one of the biggest changes the party has undertaken and we need to get it right. I know that a lot of members are comfortable on line, however there is a significant minority who are not. We need to be very careful not to disenfranchise them.Personally I woulld favour a nationally based party in terms of some aspects of the party membership, with a branch structure which covers other areas of party activity.In my opinion branches are very useful iin terms of organising propaganda meetings, running stalls, membership applications, etc. I think it would be useful to go back to a situaton where branches could be financially independent to some extent, retaining and controlling more money, in order to aid flexible decision making, for instance in situations where propaganda opportunities come up at short notice. Also having experience of both on line meetings and face to face meetings, I am strongly of the opinion that where possible face to face meetings are far, far superior.There are however areas where a national organisation would be more beneficial, for instance resolutions for conference, ADM, etc. If for example a resolution, change to rule, etc. could be submitted by a set number of members, for argument's sake say 8, from anywhere iin the party, I think it would have the advantage of encouraging more debate within the party and would probably result in better resolutions.How it would work out in practice needs careful thought and planning, we can't afford to screw this up. I can invisage a situation where this goes wrong and it acts as a mortal blow to the party.
LBird wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:L BirdThis is a serious question. As you clearly do not agree with or have any sympathy with the views of the SPGB, why on earth do you spend so much of your life on this site?You clearly think we are not a party putting forward a Socialist Programme, you clearly think whatever we do we cannot develop beyond the limited influence we have on the working class and you clearly think we are all as thick as mince.And here's a serious answer, Tim.I clearly do agree with much of what the SPGB says that it stands for: socialism, end of money, democracy, Marxism, etc. alanjjohnstone seems to think that, perhaps some day, I'll join the party (though perhaps he's changed his mind over time).It's when we get to the detail of what you're claiming to be socialism, democracy, Marxism, that the problems arise. I think that if you did put some emphasis on those issues, that you have the potential to grow as a party (which is going to be needed in the future, at some point, when a Labour government fucks up).But your (and I mean all the posters here) understanding of socialism, democracy and Marxism is so far removed from, well, socialism, democracy and Marxism, that I'm forced to argue the point.I don't think that you're 'all as thick as mince', but I do think that none of you have any idea about what Marx was up to.The dominant ideology seems to be some form of bourgeois individualism, and a desire to see a 'socialism' based upon the myth of 'Individual Freedom'. It's nothing to do with democratic social production or Marx.
Thanks for an honest reply, I appreciate it.The point of this forum, at least as I see it, is to help in the process of enabling people to develop Socialist consciousness and to debate issues that relate to that.If your ongoing contributions had been based on the idea that we were for want of a better phrase "your enemies" then I could see no fruitful point in engaging in debate with you, considering how long the debate was going on. I appreciate that you have honestly held points of disagreement with us, however I am heartened to hear that you recognise the areas where we agree.I also understand that you have spent time in Trotskyist and Leninist organisations and that they are very different from the way we organise politically. I hope it is clear in the discussions that have taken place that we are unlike those kind of elitist and leadership driven organisations And I can fully understand your reticence with regard to internal party democracy, considering that experience. I hope it is also clear that we are very different to organisations like that.
L BirdThis is a serious question. As you clearly do not agree with or have any sympathy with the views of the SPGB, why on earth do you spend so much of your life on this site?You clearly think we are not a party putting forward a Socialist Programme, you clearly think whatever we do we cannot develop beyond the limited influence we have on the working class and you clearly think we are all as thick as mince.Your actions remind me of a teenage boy who keeps calling at a teenage girl's house just to tell her that he's not in love with her, he doesn't really fancy her, he doesn't want to go out with her, etc, etc. but who then asks if he can come around tomorrow just to say the same things again.I can only think that you're secretly in love with us and can't bring yourself to pop the question.
LBird wrote:Yeah, even I laughed at that, Tim!I can't help feeling, though, that if you put as much time and effort into understanding Marx, as you did with your post, you'd start to get to grips with his social productionism.Anyway, brightened up my day! Cheers!Thanks for your very gracious reply
The Scene – The Reading Room of the British Library.The time 2.35pmDateline 21-07-1871Amidst the dust and books of the reading room sits a man with a white beard and a slightly darker moustache.He mumbles to himself in German as he works his way through the pile of books he is reading. Under his breath the words “Das dumbkopf Prudhon, ein scoundrel!!! Ya, Ya, ein scoundrel!A young man strolls casually past the man’s desk, pauses and then speaks with a slight Liverpudlian accent.Young Man “Oh Hiya Karl, fancy seeing you in here!”Karl Marx muttering under his breath “Oh Jesus, not him again” and then out loud with a strained politeness “Oh Ya, Hello Herr Bird”L Bird (for ‘tis he) “I’m really surprised to see you here, I was just wandering past, you’re the last person I expected to see”Karl Marx “Yah, really, viz, dis comment you surprise me, you were “just wandering past” yesterday, and the day before, in fact every day for ze last three bleeding veeks!”L Bird“Hey Karly, you’ve got such a sense of humour. That’s probably why we’re bezzies, yeah”Karl Marx“Nein, nein! Please stop wiz all of this bezzies, ya. I am acquainted wiz you und zat is it, yah! Und also stop viz der Karly”L. Bird“Ha, ha, Karly, you are such a card. It’s just you and I agree on so much, I mean at times you would think we’re practically one mind. I suppose I’m the only one in the world who really knows you.” (L Bird starts humming the melody of “I know him so well”)Karl Marx“L Bird! You are briefly acquainted viz my writings, you have made some schoolboy errors in your understandings of mein theories, dis does not make you mine intellectual interpreter or mine bezzie, now if you vould excuse me I haf some important work to complete.”L Bird(gazing longingly into Karl’s eyes), “ Karlykins has anyone told you how beautiful you are angry?”Karl Marx“L Bird, vill you just fu…… “(Marx’s sentence stops when he hears a cough behind him, he turns and then speaks again to the source of the cough) “Ahh Freddie, how good to see you, my friend. What news of our work?”Friedrich Engels“Karl glad I found you.” (Turning slightly towards L Bird he nods briefly and grunts a curt greeting to our Liverpudlian hero)Karl Marx“Ya, Ya tell me has the post brought any news of the development of the movement on the continent, is there news of any further publishing of our articles?”Friedrich Engels“Unfortunately there is no news in the post this morning, my dear comrade. I have been asked to deliver a message to you, I couldn’t see that it was important but I have made haste to find you.”Karl Marx “Ya, Ya, my dearest, oldest friend (a tear of sorrow is seen to appears in L Bird’s eye) tell me the news.”Friedrich Engels“Vell it vos a very strange message from your housemaid Helene Demuth. She said I needed to tell you that as it was such a beautiful day, Jenny had taken the children to Brighton for the day. She was obviously knew that you would want to know they would have a nice sunny day for their outing because she told me to let you know the coast is clear. She is such a thoughtful woman.”Karl Marx (excitedly)“Yaaaah, Yaaaah, ding dong, you are right ein very thoughtful woman und if I may say so, very inventive as well! Tell me Freddie, was Helene wearing the nice maid’s outfit I bought her?”Friedrich Engels “Ya, ya, funny you should mention that, she vas and that i should let you know that she vas. She also said that I should tell you that she was going to be using ze feather duster today and that she might need you to help. I think she wanted to clean up your old military uniform, she certainly said something about giving your helmet a right good old polishing”Karl Marx“Mein Gott, woof woof, down boy, I must get back home as quickly as I can Freddie can you put these books away for me?” (at this Marx rushes from his seat) L Bird“But Karl, Karl, we were having such a lovely time talking about how much of an inspiration I was to you, please don’t go, I want to talk to you about voting on gravity”L Bird(turning to Engels) “I know we don’t agree on a lot of things, but I’m sure you agree with me that it’s fantastic how Karl is so keen to break down the barriers of the sexual division of labour and help out with what some people think of as women’s work”Friedrich Engels“ya, ya, most of the time L Bird you talk a load of old cobblers, but on this occasion I must agree, Karl is an inspiration to all of us”
