[Bijou Drains]

LBird wrote:

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

So tell me L Bird, in the "communist society" you propose, we have a world wide vote on a scientific theory. For arguments sake let's take the theory of what causes thunder.The vote are cast and the "truth" is decided along the lines of discharge of electrons between clouds, etc. However I'm still of the opinion that it's caused by a big guy in the sky with a hammer called Thor.What happens to me? Am I carted off to a idealist-materialist reeducation camp to ensure I acknowledge "the truth". Also how long do I have to wait before we can have another vote?

Tim, stay out of it – I can't take your inability to discuss sensibly. I'll only end up getting banned, because I'll talk to you like one talks to a dimwit, and I shouldn't treat you like that, so I won't reply to your stupidities any further.If you don't like it, complain to the mods.

I take it you think I'm too stupid to take part in this conversation and I should leave it to an elite, such as L Bird to take part in the debate. Who's the Leninist now. With your narcissistic retort, me thinks your chronic low self esteem is starting to show itself.Alternatively you could just answer the question.

[Bijou Drains]

So tell me L Bird, in the "communist society" you propose, we have a world wide vote on a scientific theory. For arguments sake let's take the theory of what causes thunder.The vote are cast and the "truth" is decided along the lines of discharge of electrons between clouds, etc. However I'm still of the opinion that it's caused by a big guy in the sky with a hammer called Thor.What happens to me? Am I carted off to a idealist-materialist reeducation camp to ensure I acknowledge "the truth". Also how long do I have to wait before we can have another vote?

[Bijou Drains]

Steve-SanFrancisco-UserExperienceResearchSpecialist wrote:

I don't know where this goes, but I have an algorythim to legally win any election you want.  It's a bit of social engineering with a digital currenty solution to motivating supporters, that I discovered as a corrallary to my Unviersal Values Exchange System Protocols that I've been working on as a method of relacing money with something more perfect that could serve communism better than the capital goods based dollar.  Anyway, here's a tweet that would have given us bernie sanders for president if only it had been tweeted 6 months before the democratic primary.  this one tweet has the ability to exponentially multiply supporter turnout and engagement.  as well as covert undecided and even opositional views to the cause of Bernie Sanders.  Um, it would also work for republicans or democrats or socialist who want to win an election.  So Here's a peek at how I could have won the election for Bernier Sanders as president, if only I'd thought of it sooner.   

Quote:

I will give 1 hour of my time to anyone who votes.  Just send me a photo of your ballot stubs as proof.  You can vote any way you want and you can’t tell me how you vote.  I’m just rewarding you for your efforts to vote because I want you to vote and I want to prove it with an hour of my time.  Tell me what you want me to do for 1 hour and I’ll upload photo proof that I did what you asked.  See my public history and comments and ratings for my past 1 hour promises to others.  They’ve asked me to do some strange things with my 1 hour like quack like a duck while reading marx on a video cam channel, but whatever you want is cool with me.  I’d like to spend an hour planting a tree to picking up letter in a park if it’s nearby or something that helps the public good.   Tweet your photo and request to  #Bernie.coin.time.value.exchange.offer.133215342  I’ll reply with a link and estimated completion time for your 1 hour hour and you can come back and check the status and see how many favors I’ve done lately and how far you are in the list.  Also, I might trade my 1 hour favor with others who owe me time favors too, if that gets it done for you faster.  If you’re nearby one of my friends I could do some grocery shopping for you or something like that.  If you vote on the best 1 hour favor someone ask me to do you can win prizes and more hours of me doing whatever you want (within reason). For legal tax and voting law reasons there can be no exchange of property of monetary value, so don’t ask for money or ask me to write you a check or make any commitments with my 1 hour of service to you.  Public Notice: This exchange offer is valid only for registered democrats or independents.  Additionally, to qualify you must have at least 1 tweet in your twitter history favorable to Bernie Sanders and include a link to it.   (this is legal a way to prove that they likely voted for Bernie Sanders in the Primary). In your tweet, you must state your voter registration, link to your Bernie tweet, and a photo of your ballot entry for your entry into our contest to be valid.   

p.s. sorry if this is off topic. I'm not sure where something general and revolutionary would best fit in your discussions choices.  Please let me know where I should post this sort of information on your Board if this is the wrong place.  Sorry for the inconvenience I'm giving mods permission to move this for me in advance and my thanks for a PM telling me where they move it too. 

The price of LSD must have hit an all time low in San Francisco following Trump's election 

[Bijou Drains]

robbo203 wrote:

LBird wrote:

robbo, the simple answer to your predicament is to realise that we don't share the same political ideology.I'm a Democratic Communist, influenced by Marx's ideas about 'social production', and the democratic control of that production.You believe something else.I can't explain my views from your perspective, only from my own.If you don't accept my Marxist viewpoint, that's fine by me. If you don't think all social production should be democratically controlled, that's fine by me.I'm more interested in discussing these democratic ideas about social production with socialists who are influenced by Marx.Quite frankly, your ideological focus on 'Opportunity Costs', 'specialists' and 'individuals' is irrelevant to me, and my views about social revolution, workers' democracy and socialism. My views, similarly, will be irrelevant to you.Why not take up your discussion with someone who shares your ideology?

So, once again, yet another famous LBird cop-out… You know, the idea that you can just dismiss the question of opportunity costs as ideological and something to be ignored is really quite silly.  Opportunity costs are unavoidable in life and in any conceivable kind of society.  I agree there is an ideological aspect to them inasmuch as they involve choices but that is a different matter.  The point is that you cannot avoid having to make such choices however ideological these choices are. There is nothing "Marxist" in dismissing the concept of opportunity costs.  In fact if Marx were a member of this forum I could well imagine him now  in front of his  laptop furiously  firing off a post in that characterisically brusque manner of his, branding LBird as an idealist nincompoop who has no grasp of basic economics Opportunity costs are everywhere.  If you LBird decide to respond to this post,  the opportunity cost of you doing so is to forego that game of snooker you promised you would play with your mates down at the pub.  If a socialist society decided to build a bridge out of 20k tonnes of some metal alloy then the opportunity costs of that is to do without all those tractors you could have manufactured out of all this metal alloy.  If Jill decide to take a 5 year degree course to become a competent neurosurgeon then the opportunity cost of that is to abandon the idea of becoming a competent and trained up geophysicist  able to decide whether some obscure theory in geophysics is true or not And finally – on what grounds do you imagine I do not support the idea that "production should be democratically controlled"???  I do and I have said so.  Howeever that idea is TOTALLY TOTALLY TOTALLY different to the idea we are talking about here which is the idea of "democratically determining whether scientific theories are true". I feel I need to capitalise these words and repeat them  to bring this to your attention. Why is it that whenever we have this discussion you always scurry back to the comfrot zone of appealing to the idea that production should be democratically controlled when this is NOT – repeat NOT – what I am calling into question?? You are trying to couple this idea with your own idiosyncratic idea which is nowhere to be found in Marx that scientific theories should be democratically voted upon, Ive seen through your tactic LBird and it wont wash….

Robbo, your whole argument is completely fallacious. Are you honestly expecting the members of this forum, to swallow this disingenuous nonsense whole? The very idea? I can't believe that a contributor with such a consistent track record of well developed and consistent argument would have the temerity to think that we would seriously believe that L Bird had a mate?Shame in you

[Bijou Drains]

Bob Andrews wrote:

They also have a pair of bicycle clips said to have been worn by Jack Fitzgerald, which they intend to sell on e-bay. Who –  apart from jondwhite –  would be daft enough to buy them? If Fitz were alive today to witness all this he would turn in his grave.

Perhaps there's an old tube of Harry Young's haemorrhoid cream knocking about at Head Office. Might make a few bob for the Party on eBay?

[Bijou Drains]

lindanesocialist wrote:

Take time out and calm down, your contributions to this forum would be missed. 

its a shame, Linda, that Vin did not take on board your very wise words. If he had done perhaps we wouldn't be in the situation we now find ourselves.Whilst I have no wish to rehash past difficulties, perhaps Vin might reflect on how far his intemperate responses and reactions have contributed to the present situation.Whilst I have been somewhat critical of the ways in which the Mods have handled some of the issues. I think Vin also needs to understand that if he is going to make the kind of "little Hitler" remarks he has made, then it is not unnatural that those he makes those remarks about will feel annoyed and offendedI think it is terribly sad that a valued contributor to this forum feels that they can no longer contribute to this forum because of some of the accusations that have been flung about by contributors. In my opinion we all need to be conscious of the impact of our contributions and we all need to be aware of our responsibilities as Socialists, to our fellow Socialists and to our movement.

[Bijou Drains]

Nice to see you have entered the spirit of solution focussed approaches,  Brian. Also good to see that the Mods are able to liaise and come to a joint position at such speed. Cynics might think that you are expressing your individual view on my suggestion, perish the thought.I disagree with what you say about the moderators view of the rules. I recall Mod 2 and I having a lengthy conversation about the very subject. I also think it is confusing when you appear to conflate the IC and the moderators. Surely the Mods make decisions about Moderation not the IC. The view of the IC is about as relevant as the view of my cat (although he hasn't as yet expressed a strong opinion)Similarly in the original post Mod 2 states "any queries and complaints against the decisiions or actions of the moderators should be by PM. Actually rule 15 states "queries or appeals about particular moderation decisions should be sent to the moderators by private message".Actually in the rule there is no mention of actions or complaints. I would respectfully suggest that if the moderators (and this statement was agreed to by Mods 1, 2 and 3) are going to "enforce the rules " and "apply the rules" they should have some bloody idea what the rules actually are!!!! So just to be absolutely clear about the rules (which you think do not need to be amended) I cannot query a decision, for example "Mod 1 why did you make that decision" but I can "complain" about a decision, "I think that was a stupid decision Cde Moderator" and I can also make comment on an action the moderators have taken for example "I think you made a complete tit of yourself there Cde Moderator". I am also perfectly free to comment on an action of the moderators "I think your action in banning Cde X was a complete parcel of shite" You see the thing is, it is vey easy to go down a pedantic and rule focussed approach. Surely it would be better to draw back, reflect on the best way forward for the party and attempt to implement a decision that reflects common sense .

[Bijou Drains]

jondwhite wrote:

There is a new trend for opponents of Trump and Brexit to wear safety pins to

Quote:

to identify themselves as allies in the fight against intolerance, and to show solidarity with women, LGBT people, immigrants, and people of color feeling frightened by Trump’s presidency and the vitriol that some of his supporters display. The safety pin was adopted in England after the Brexit vote, as immigrants and people of color found themselves increasingly subject to racist attacks, serving as a visual symbol indicating that the wearer supports tolerance and stands in solidarity with marginalized groups.

Punk Rock lives. Does this mean I can dust off my bondage pants and leather jacket?

[Bijou Drains]

SocialistPunk wrote:

Linda, why is it you keep omitting certain facts? Could it be that the facts you consistently skirt around, are the ones that don't sit easily in your narrative?Vin was issued with the indefinite suspension by moderator1 from this forum in March of this year. Vin would have been told of the appeal process, of which he knew from previous suspensions. Yet he chose not to pursue the matter.When Vin was suspended in March 2016, there was only moderator1, monitoring the forum. Meaning moderators 2 and 3 were not involved in Vin’s suspension.June 2016. The IC informed the EC that they would not handle any more communication from Vin.July 2016. The EC made a decision to deal with all communication from Vin that was sent to the IC. Meaning Vin's appeal would be handled by the EC.August 2016. Vin publicly asked the three moderators to reinstate him on the forum. The decision made was that he be advised to follow the existing appeal process, that any other member would be required to do. So despite your claim, the three moderators did not suspend Vin. Perhaps Vin thought the existing appeal process should not apply to him?September 2016. Vin finally engages with the appeal process and sends a request to the EC, asking them to reinstate him on the forum. Meaning Vin left it 6 months before setting in motion the appeal process, to challenge his suspension.No explanation as to why Vin left it six months to appeal his suspension has, as far as I can tell, ever been given. Instead, we’ve had eight months and counting, of yourself and at times Vin, using this forum as a means of circumnavigating the appeal process, often resulting in uncomradely comments and accusations. the latest being, that the IC have deliberately ignored an EC instruction.

I think part of the issue here is that both sides are taking entrenched positions, which frequently refer to past indiscretions (on both sides) and which very rarely appear to focus on a preferred outcome. I think it is important to stress that this has been exacerbated by the lack of EC minutes, which would have clarified things on both sides and provided a means of moving forward.In this context I can understand that Vin would feel frustrated at not being reinstated, despite a rumoured decision by the EC to that effect, however I can also understand that The Mods have a requirement for instruction as well.  I think it is fairly clear that the best outcome for the party is that we find a way of putting all of this unedifying crap behind us.I think, (taking into account Vin's understandable frustration at not hearing from the EC) that despite the alleged glove puppet incident, and in the interests of moving forward, it is appropriate that Vin's ban be lifted.I also think that  Vin should agree publicly to abide by moderation decisions and the rules as they currently stand, (including disputes about moderation) I also think referring this back to the EC only creates more work for the EC when they (and we) should be concentrating on more important things.If both sides are hoping for complete vindication, then they both really need to understand that that will never happen,  nor is it important or desireable. I also think that this dispute is a clear indication that the current rules are not functioning appropriately (which the Mods have openly agreed). It is to be regretted that the time taken up with this dispute and with point scoring on both sides, has meant less has been available to be used more productively and cooperatively creating a better set of rules Can I suggest a way forward would be for the Mods to reinstate Vin, as soon the EC minutes are published. For the Mods to issue a warning to Vin re the use of duel accounts. For Vin to accept this warning and undertake not to use a duel account again. For the "Machiavelli" account to be closed. For  Vin to publicly withdraw the comments made on the Machiavelli account. For Vin to abide by the rules as they currently stand and thus we free up the Mods time to get on with amending the rules.

[Bijou Drains]

Young Master Smeet wrote:

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

I'm not sure how familiar cdes Marraty and the comrades who take the role of Mods are with Eric Berne's theory of psychological games. However they may find Stephen Karpman's development of this theory and in particular his concept of the "drama triangle" particularly enlightening.

I've been reading up about this, and it's highly suggestive and useful.  One thing I'd say is that we need to find a way to cut down on drama.  Rules 14 and 15 provide one such route, asking would be "rescuers" to keep their nebs out. Generally accepting the omerta on moderation decisions may help any "victim" in the triangle to re-oriientate themselves as creators, focusing on creating socialist content, and seeing their challenge as to to not bring down the sanction of the moderator.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karpman_drama_triangleI think we all need to work together to get away from drama, nad back to socialism.

whilst I'm happy to see you've found Karpman's work useful. I would say the Wikipedia entry is a bit superficial.The Drama Triangle is a transactional game and the resolution of games is to reject stylised communication in favour of open honest frank communication.The suggestion that rescuers keep out doesn't really help that. It must be remembered that in the TA model games are played from a sub conscious place and the players are unaware of their actions.Another element of the Karpman Triangle is that at any given time all of the players can swap. The victim can get annoyed at some element of the process and start to persecute the rescuer, who then becomes the victim, they can then look to the persecutor to rescue them, and off we go again, in different positions. Berne's work on Transactional Analysis is fascinating, however a bit like old Charle Marx, it's better to read his original work than some of the interpretations of his work by others. That said TA Today is a really good introductory text.

[Bijou Drains]

mcolome1 wrote:

I would prefer to have in this forum a proletarian agitator, than a bourgeois  provocateur, and a capitalist lover.

[Bijou Drains]

moderator1 wrote:

Reminder: 14. Rule enforcement is the responsibility of the moderators, not of the contributors. If you believe a post or private message violates a rule, report it to the moderators. Do not take it upon yourself to chastise others for perceived violations of the rules.

Hi Mod 1I'm not sure if the above post refers to me, however, just to be ABSOLUTELY CLEAR  Mod 1 I did not take "responsibility" for rule enforcement, Nor did I state that I believed that any post violated any rule. Similarly I did not "chastise" anyone for anything. (I gave up chastising when I left the Catholic Church). I also want to make it clear that I'm not questioning a moderation decision, merely expressing surprise. I assume it is within the rules of the forum to be surprised. life would be very dull without surprises.

[Bijou Drains]

I don't understand how both Vin and Linda can both be considered sock puppeteers. Surely this would require them both to have their hands up the poor puppet's orifice. Surely such cruelty is beyond even a Mackem?

[Bijou Drains]

Steve-SanFrancisco-UserExperienceResearchSpecialist wrote:

Socialism will fail is sex is not used for group cohesion?   Yes and here's why.  . . look at the world socialism declaration of principles.point 7) That as all political parties are but the expression of class interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically opposed to the interests of all sections of the the master class, the party seeking working class emancipation must be hostile to every other party.point The Companion Parties of the World Socialist Movement, therefore, enter the field of political action determined to wage war against all other political parties, whether alleged labor or avowedly capitalist, and call upon the members of the working class of each country to muster under its banner to the end that a speedy termination may be wrought to the system which deprives them of the fruits of their labor, and that poverty may give place to comfort, privilege to equality, and slavery to freedom.http://www.worldsocialism.org/english/object-and-declaration-principles  the website declaration of principles is anti-sex.  In the make love not war bias of cultural norms it uses language like "hostile" and "wage war" from the patriarch lexicon.  So socialism without sex or matriarchy seems to devolve into tribalism imperatives at least here at world socialism website.  Conversely, in a society where sex was used for group cohesion, we wouild have a pro-sex bias to language usage and choosing words from the Matriarch lexicon.  Instead of "wage war" our declaration would say "seduce".  and instead of "hostile", our declaration would say "subvert".  And the difference it makes is significant.  A small group of people can seduce a larger group of poeple successfully with words or entertainment, or knowledge or yes even sex very successfully. But a small group of people can not "wage war" against a larger group of people successfully.  So the sex opposition in our cultural and linguistic norms leads us to see solutions in a way that leaves the solutions for small groups to seduce larger groups to their way of thinking as not an optioin for socialism.  I see the attitude in the declarations of principles as the attitude that works well only for a larger more powerfull group with the ability to enforce their will on a less powerfull minority they seek to destoy.  That's how war works.  you need superior numbers and power.  BUT,  In a world where sex was used for group cohesion, I'd see the attitude in the declaration of principles as the atttidue that works well for a smaller less numerous and less powerfull group that seeks to seeks to co-opt or seduce a larger more powerfull majority.  that's how seduction works.  You benefit from being a smaller number and don't need to force people or events against their will.   P.s. on a related note, how is it possible to agree with this declaration of principles to "wage war" legally?  Presumably they just meen figuratively "wage war" because literally wouild get this board shut down by govt.  The langauge in the declaration of priciples is confrontratioinal and aggressive and not inclusive. it's the attitude of chimps beeting their chest proving their determination and threats.  Why can't it be the attitude of bonobo's luring in outsiders and seducing them to be supporters?  .  

interesting that this poster is tolerated, whilst clearly posting material which is off topic, disruptive and clearly aimed to disrupt 

[Bijou Drains]

Steve-SanFrancisco-UserExperienceResearchSpecialist wrote:

ALB wrote:

I have to confess that I started reading your post but then gave it up as a waste of time.

thanks for trying.  Sorry it was a waste of your time. I have to confess I have the same experience with about 80% of things  Mcolme1 suggests i read.  Would you like me to try reading anything you spent about 2 hours writing? 

Have to say Steve, I have experienced the same sensation as ALB when reading your posts. To be honest I'd find a paper cut on my bell end to be less painful.

[Author]

Posts