Forum Replies Created
“So says someone who is obviously ignorant of graphic design. It can literally sometimes take many hours to find an uncopyrighted suitable image. That together with the variable quality of images (if you can find a suitable one) makes the process incredibly tortuous on occasion.”
I agree there can be problems with the images. However, these would occur whatever the print size.
I’m not complaining about the use of illustrations. Just making the point that the size of the illustration should determine the print size of the article. But regardless of the size of the illustration the print size remains the same throughout the publication. Which means the primary purpose and default position of the use of illustrations is to fill space and not convey a means of reinforcement to the text.
The use of continuous small print also means those with sight problems can find some articles a strain and tiresome. Have you ever thought of doing a straw poll on the size of the print?
Robbo perhaps if send Dan your response he might join the forum!
“Your post is not very effectively communicating your message. I suggest that we need to design for a post capitalist/socialist economy. So there is room for discussion”.
It is basically saying ‘don’t scare the horses’ in my view.
Or is it saying ‘the description is fine but the definition of the design is insufficient to persuade me to become a socialist’?
The problem we have had with elections is contacting those who voted for the socialist case. However, with very few make an enquiry on the socialist case we have to find another means for them to contact us. This is where the street stalls provides the means for them to step forward and say ‘I voted for socialism’.
We’ll be back on the stall tomorrow expecting this to occur, or at some time in the future.
but such activity doesn’t necessarily have to tie in with electoral activity.
Depends on whether or not you are determined that the socialist message should be taken seriously and represents not just a political challenge but also a condemnation of capitalism. This perspective becomes proof positive during an election.
The socialist message is not about complaining on why the majority don’t get a fair shake of the cherry tree. It’s about applying critical thinking and then mounting a positive and serious challenge so a majority ultimately conclude that capitalism is unable to deliver on human needs.
- This reply was modified 4 years, 1 month ago by Brian.
The three comrades in Cardiff have been running a stall every Saturday (weather permitting) 1300 -1500 since March 2018. During that time we’ve sold over a £100 in literature, given away loads of back issues of the SS and SOYMB, handed out hundreds of leaflets and had dozens of conversations with members of the working class.
Cardiff is a multicultural city and relatively high on the tourist agenda attracting visitors from all over the world. And we have a prime spot at the junction of a main train station and bus route with relatively high levels of footfall.
The three of us agree that the stall is far more productive than holding public meetings in that it provides: The opportunity to directly interact with members of the working class; after the initial outlay expenses are minimal; the party name is visible; we are being pro-active rather than re-active, instead of us waiting for the working class to approach us through public meetings we are approaching them; we have become a regular feature with several people making return visits for a friendly chat.
Nevertheless, we have so far failed to attract any new members, but that said it is early days and we knew from the kickoff this would take time. However, the stall is only part of our activity for we also attend protests and demo’s to hand out literature. Eventually, we also intend to film some of the conversations for distribution on youtube.
During many of these conversations we’ve been asked “Will we be standing in the next general election?” and the answer has always been “YES most certainly”. And lets face it although we’ll attract few votes at the very least the ballot will confirm there are X amount supporting the case who hopefully will end having a conversation at the stall, and maybe become members.
We can only keep trying and personally I find the stall enjoyable and interesting. Besides that I refuse to sit on my arse contemplating should we or shouldn’t we contest the general election.
Yours For Positive Socialist Activity
Not sure whether this might help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPjrFjAxwlw
In my opinion when you are trying to measure “labour share” you can either measure it at the point of production, or you can do a total labour share so it configures the amount spent on social security, medical care, education etc so it includes the generalised and true cost of production viz variable capital.
Best of luck.
Alan gazing at his navel and failing to recognise that I took the opportunity to stoke up a message that relates to why we don’t take sides on issues which are are not of our concern and not in our interest. The capitalist class are divided on the issue of maximising the rate of surplus value. However, whichever direction they eventually decide to take – in or out of the EU – they require the support of the working class.
This being the case we need to focus on the message that socialists are not interested in any arguments concerning our exploitation. But we are interested in how to end exploitation.
You must be kidding? If parliament was to have a full and frank discussion on Brexit the first item on the agenda would be on the question whether or not the capitalist maximise the rate of surplus value in or out of the EU?
That is not going to happen because it would reveal an unwelcome truth that in actual fact the proposition on the table is to gain the support of the working class on how best they can be exploited.
If the solution won’t be “economic” (in terms of money costs, prices, etc) but technical, a question of organisation and conscious choice this obviously means stating socialist society will economise in a material sense rather than in a value sense.
Wow it seems my question has stimulated a flurry denials that socialism will be confronted with scarcity. “I fail to see how socialism will not be economising on scarce resources.“ With many of them conflating scarcity with artificial scarcity.
If this is the case how do we explain that finite resources is not a problem when its a fact of life that all modes of production, even when a value relationship has been abandoned and replaced with production for use and free access, are confronted with scarcity. And there will still be occasions when not all needs and wants will be met?
In other words, “political economy” and “economics” only exist under capitalism and there is no such thing as “socialist economics”. It’s a contradiction in terms as socialism will not be an economy.
I fail to see how socialism will not be economising on scarce resources.
And as we know many outcomes of capitalism do not turn out to be “reasonable” with unintended consequences resulting in a negative or a positive.
Capitalism has just dropped an atomic bomb in the Bahamas There is nothing left. It looks like Hiroshima and Nagasaki