DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Give this one a shothttp://theoryandpractice.org.uk/library/sects-and-vanguards-labor-movement-jonathan-ayres-1939
I like most of Brendan Cooney's stuff. His new introduction to value and price seems pretty clearly written to me:http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/value-price-a-draft-script/
twc wrote:The base is "social being".The superstructure is "consciousness".The determinism is "base determines superstructure".It's the first time I've heard "base-superstructure" defined in this way. However you're definition begs the question "what determines social being?"I'm also concerned that your physics may be over 100 years out of date. I await the next installment.
I've just found a module which should be able to this. I'm planning to do a bunch of development stuff on the site in the new year so will try it out then. http://drupal.org/project/comment_mover
It is possible to move whole threads to the rubbish bin. Moving single comments is not easily achievable at present.
SP: So deleting threads is "censorship" and bad but outright bans are not "censorship" and good?Think about it this way:Suppose I was to continually post messages about stripping down transit gearboxes into the 'pizza makers forum'. Wouldn't the persistent distraction be an obstruction to the free speech of those who joined the 'pizza makers forum' because they want to know how to make pizzas? How would the moderators of the pizza forum best deal with the episode? Engage in a long discussion on why it is anti-social to post messages about transit gearboxes in forums meant for the discussion of pizzas? This would only contribute from the further derailing of the discussion of pizzas and further encroach on the free speech of those who came to discuss pizza. In certain circumstances it seems simple deleting or moving of posts is the most effective and least disruptive way of dealing with the issuesOn our forums there are no topics which are banned from discussion. All that is required is that posters stick to the rules which are necessary as it is a social space.If you follow your argument against "censorship" to its logical conclusion you would have to argue that we should print every submission sent to the socialist standard, for example.We do and should control the content of party publications. We do not prevent people from issuing their own publications which would be censorship in the real sense.
ALB wrote:For some reason this (and another book review) don't appear in the html on-line version.If you have the texts for these this can soon be rectified.
TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:Members were attacked and abused and nothing was being done about it.Numerous warnings where given and in the end 2 members temporarily banned, how this amounts to 'nothing being done' is beyond me.However. Comrade, it's time to move on!
TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:I am moderated for 'quoting' the abuse and saying that it should be stopped. I was the member calling for moderation and I still am.With all due respect, reposting abuse only inflames the situation and commenting on moderation or calling out for the moderator in-thread only derails the topic further. Previously the guidelines and appeal process where not adequately displayed on the site. If everyone sticks to these there should be no need for moderation in the first place.
Hi SP,I may reply in more depth later on. But for now can I ask you if you are in favour of any kind of moderation on the forum at all?Moderation and censorship are not necessarily the same thing, however. But to explain why would require a longer post which may, or may not, come later.
SocialistPunk wrote:Having never seen OGW's post, I have no choice but to accept that the moderator has made the correct decision to delete his post.You are right. However there is a right to appeal, and as this has been used correctly ,the internet department is looking into this right now.
..But the prices given for 1 and 2 in the list are production costs, not market prices – they are not (yet) marketable commodities.
Perhaps listen to the Hardy talk on the labour theory of value.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/audio/labour-theory-valueOr if you have any specific questions I could try to answer them
In a nutshell….
Hardy wrote:[..]it should be recognised that there is an economic basis and that it produces a superstructure corresponding to it, but these various aspects of the superstructure interact with each other, and all of them react on the economic basis itself, so things are not simply in a watertight compartment like economic basis and the rest, nor should it be thought that the rest is simply the result of the economic basis.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/study-guides/materialist-conception-history
