Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
If Malcolm had only changed the word negro to worker in the second clip, he would have been completely on the money.
P.S Lizzie45, at times you can be very cynical, pedantic, provocative and argumentative, are you absolutely sure you are not a member of the SPGB? 🙂
It’s a bit sad that this particular thread is being derailed by a cruel comment.
Although I only knew Alan on line or through emails, etc. it was clear that Alan was a very kind and personable bloke.
Anyway, Paula, Alan posted this version of the song a few years ago and he said he found it demonstrated the emotional impact of mass singing, I agree.
Wonder why the media continues to describe both the Reclaim Party, Reform Party and UKIP as populist parties, given that Reclaim got 2.3% and UKIP got 0.2% at Uxbridge, Reform got 3.7% in Selby and Reform got 3.4% and UKIP got 0.7% in Somerton and Frome. Doesn’t seem to me that they’re that popular.
Maybe we should describe ourselves as a Populist Socialist Party????
There is a huge irony that Nigel Meringue has claimed that his “politics” are the source of discrimination.
He has campaigned loudly against the ECHR and the Equality Act and argued that employers should be make the decisions that businesses make should be based on their own individual judgements.
Suddenly because the owners of Coutts decide that he’s a first class bell end and having him as a customer has an impact on them, it’s not fair and against his rights.
He’s always reminded me of the kind of big mouthed arseholes that spend most of their lives standing on the end of golf club bars, telling anyone who cares to listen that “the solution’s simple, blah, blah, blah”
What a twat
The Labour Mayor in question (Jamie Driscoll) spoke at the Jarrow Rebel Town rally held a couple of weeks ago.
He made a well received speech covering “revolutionary” demands such as an integrated transport system with a cross area ticketing system, renationalising the rail system, attracting more jobs to the North East, etc. I think the kings of Capital were quaking in their collective boots.
It seems that even this small beer “sewer Socialism” needs to be stamped out in the Starmerist system, for fear the readers of the Daily Mail kick up a fuss.
Even for the Labour Party Starmer marks a low water mark.
Ironically I was having a chat with an ex Militant member later on that day. I reminded him that he told me (following the Militant Party line at the time) that when Roy Hattersley won the Labour Deputy Leader’s race against Benn, this would be the last time the right wing of Labour won an election ever again, citing the usual “collapse of capitalism” “a revolutionary turn” “the awakening of the Working Class” “the strength of the Militant throughout the country” and the rest of the usual bollocks.
His response was that “at least we were doing something practical”
The working class must be overjoyed.
To be fair, I’d happily offer my vote for a sausage roll, but it would have to be a good one, none of this Greggsies shite.
Alb reported – “We met the Tory candidate, local councillor Steve Tuckwell. A Tory leaflet from local councillors in one ward had stated that they were involved “providing fruit and vegetables free to members of the public outside the Temple on Crowley High Street”. Intrigued by this unusual endorsement of free distribution from an unexpected source, as the time given was Tuesdays at 2pm, we decided to investigate.
It turned out to be an ordinary food bank but this was a special occasion. The Tory candidate was there, accompanied by an actual Tory MP (Bob Blackman for Harrow East).”
I would have thought that might be considered sailing a little close to the legal wind
“The Representation of the People Act 1983, section 113
(1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of bribery.
(2)A person shall be guilty of bribery if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf—
(a)gives any money or procures any office to or for any voter or to or for any other person on behalf of any voter or to or for any other person in order to induce any voter to vote or refrain from voting, or
(b)corruptly does any such act as mentioned above on account of any voter having voted or refrained from voting, or
(c)makes any such gift or procurement as mentioned above to or for any person in order to induce that person to procure, or endeavour to procure, the return of any person at an election or the vote of any voter,
or if upon or in consequence of any such gift or procurement as mentioned above he procures or engages, promises or endeavours to procure the return of any person at an election or the vote of any voter.”
Might be worth contacting the local bobbies and seek their opinion on this practice
“Try reading any of the the “Theoretical Journals” of any of the the leftist or Trotskyist parties and you’ll find they’re all completely impenetrable due to their unreconstructed and inaccessible use of quasi Marxist word salad.”
————————————————————————————————————BD, would you include New Left Review in this?
____________________________________Strangely enough I just read the article below about language and culture:
https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/decapitalizing-culture
I think generally the NLR is not nearly as bad as some of the one produced by political parties, although to be fair I was referring to the journals of the leftist parties and the NLR is not tied to any particular party, as far as I know.
“ But when you use words like idealism, materialism and socialism you are not getting a point across to most people. Not without circuitous philosophical and historical explanations, by which time they’ve already been inwardly yawning for a while”
Which is why I choose the language I use carefully and I try to select the language use to fit the person I’m talking to.
When I speak to a labourist I would describe myself as a libertarian socialist, to distinguish me from their concept of socialism. I might use the term socialist rather than using the term communist when I speak to a Stalinist.
If I am discussing materialism with a professor of philosophy my use of the term will be different to the way I use the term with an 18 year old.
To me one of the joys of the Socialist Standard is that over the years, it has always been readable whilst still being technically accurate.
Try reading any of the the “Theoretical Journals” of any of the the leftist or Trotskyist parties and you’ll find they’re all completely impenetrable due to their unreconstructed and inaccessible use of quasi Marxist word salad.
Considering our history we might be expected to be follow that trend, however whilst our political principles are unchanging, the way we express it might change. For example early copies of the Standard talk about “the masters” or the “master class”, using those terms today would be incomprehensible to most readers today.
But it’s not just politics, a few years ago I was working with a young person and I said I liked R and B, apparently to the young generation this doesn’t mean Leadbelly, John Lee Hooker or Howlin’ Wolf, but means a load of manufactured horse shit filled with auto tune music, who knew?
A colleague who was working in America stated during a meeting that he was “never more happy than when I have a fag in my mouth”, which was a bit of a conversation stopper.
Despite what TM says, the widespread use of print and even more the internet actually slows language change.
Chaucer to Shakespeare roughly 200 years, the difference is massive. Shakespeare to Jane Austen again roughly 200 years, big difference but not as big as Chaucer to Shakespeare. 300 years from Austen to present day, Austen’s work is a little difficult to the modern reader but not unintelligible.
Language change is actually slowing down. The nature of capitalism means the homogenation of language, the death of dialect and variation, the sterile conformity of language, rather than the development of new ways of expressing and understanding the world we live in.
Language has two forms, internal and external. If I can’t tell you what I mean, it stands to reason that I can’t tell myself what I mean. Language change and usage is an attempt to further develop our internal and external understanding of the world we live in.
We should rejoice that despite the way that society attempts to restrict language to the benefit of class society, new language forms break down the barriers to expression and connection
Perhaps TM could guide me in my use of language.
When the queen pegged out should I have said:
a) one less of the bastards
b) one fewer of the bastards
c) It didn’t really matter because I managed to put my point acrossFound this on t’internet, haven’t gone through it with a fine toothcomb but makes several mentions of the party and makes one reference to ALB. The author states at one point that “The Bordigists and the SPGB championed a super-Marxian intransigence in theoretical matters.” If any one out there can explain to me what the f… that means I would be very grateful.
https://www.democracynature.org/vol7/ojeili_intellectuals.htm
ALB – “He fancies himself as a latter-day Churchill. He may well turn out to be because the current Ukrainian offensive seems to have a similarity with Churchill’s disastrous Gallipoli campaign during the first world slaughter.”
From the Eighteenth Brumaire – “Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce”.
Churchill had large elements of tragedy, Bojo has all the elements of farce.
The historical fact is that all language (like culture) is in a process of continual change. Definitions, meanings, spelling, pronunciations, grammar, usage have continually changed and have done throughout human history. Old English (itself an amalgam of the language of the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, etc|) is unrecognisable to modern English speakers.
For example a change in usage I did not know about in usage I did not know about until recently is the use of the word terrific in its current usage. Originally the use of terrific was linked to terror and terrify in the same way as horrific is linked to horror and horrify, it changed around the mid 19th century to its current usage of something that was good or exciting.
There is no such thing as proper English, any more than there is a proper version of chilli con carne.
The French Academie Francaise have tried (in vain) to regulate the way in which the people make use of their language, being especially upset about the way in which English is changing the use of French. Ironically they do not have same concern for other languages used in France. The Académie Française intervened in June 2008 to oppose the French Government’s proposal to constitutionally offer recognition and protection to regional languages (Flemish, Alsatian, Basque, Breton, Catalan, Corsican, Occitan, Gascon, Arpitan, etc.)
In my view, the whole idea of there being “proper language” is a bourgeois fantasy and is another attempt of attempting to divide and conquer. The idea that there is a uniform language that fits in to the national boundary is part of the nationalist fantasy of there being a group of “people” that can be defined by their language group.
I was told for years that my dialect was “wrong” was “slang” or was a sign of lack of education or culture, because my dialect didn’t fit in to the idea of “proper English”, the irony being that it was closer to Old English than most other English regional dialects and was less impacted by the great vowel shift. I still look a house a hoose, a mouse a moose, wear byuts not boots, drink beor not beer and call a table a chebble, just like Chaucer.
To be fair they have put forward the following proposals, thought Loony at the time:
Passports for pets
Abolishing dog licences
Getting rid of the 11+
24 hour drinking
Legalising commercial radio
Voting at 18Their latest manifesto says
26m tonnes of waste plastic bottles are discarded every year in the UK of which only 45% are recycled. The Loony Party has the answer.. Stop making them..
Before you ask…We have found an alternative. Its called glass.
Seemed more switched on than the other contenders at Oxbridge
