J Surman
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
To add to my previous post, I just found this;http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/juancole/ymbn/~3/ckWD3Kaj1m8/turkish-majorities-policies.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=emailfrom Informed Comment which says something similar but also adds some figures from a public opinion poll showing the cross section of Turks and how they feel about various aspects of govt policy. There's definitely a huge deficit of democracy and that is repeated to me over and over by friends and neighbours.
The article below is from Taksim Square from a guy who says he's a union member. He calls it an 'occupy' movement and certainly at the moment the square is being occupied.http://truth-out.org/speakout/item/16741-like-a-tree-like-a-forest-in-taksim-squareThe media here is covering little of what's happening around the country but social media is filling many gaps.I think what the guy is saying is a pretty accurate account of the different kinds of people involved. Anger has been building up against the PM Erdoğan and his overly dictatorial stance for some time now. Some reasons: involvement in Syria – very unpopular; tightening of rules re alcohol – starting 2 or 3 years ago when Istiklal Caddesi's street cafes/bars were forbidden to serve alcohol outside and now some new countrywide restrictions; that the PM should be involved in what is built where in Istanbul, why he is being the spokesperson; two youngsters reprimanded in the Ankara metro for kissing in public (which caused immediate protests of public kiss-ins; Taksim Square has been a public space since the foundation of the republic – the first tree was planted by Atatürk and the PM is determined to make it a private space (like UK shopping malls) – it has also traditionally been used for protests and for May Day demos. So these are a few things that have built up leading up to what's happening now in towns all across the country. There are lots of other things too, a real mixed bag and the media is tightly controlled and/or self-censored too.Calls now are mixed but generally for the fall of the govt or the removal of the PM (who's out of the country now for a few days visiting N.Africa).It will be interesting to see what happens today and tomorrow as there's been a union call for a 2 day strike. On TV Russia Today has reasonable coverage -( you can watch RT online if there's no satellite coverage – is it banned in UK like Press TV is? They also do reasonable coverage.)The smaller political parties, CHP, BDP have been calling for some time for a 3% threshhold to replace the longstanding 10% which effectively keeps them from getting significant seats in parliament.
SocialistPunk wrote:I get where you're coming from JS, but the religious zealots are far from bored with the likes of us.Just trying to inject a little humour into a seriously taxing matter!
I don't know about anyone else but I'm getting bored to death by God so they'll soon be able to add one more to the total.
Please make sure some are sent to the summer school at Birmingham. I, for one, would like one. Thanks.
Thanks for the info Matt. I've usually just blamed our super-slow 2G mobile connection for time outs etc.Now I'm hoping to be able to give you some good news in a couple of weeks or so.All the best, Janet
This one is apposite:http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/climateandcapitalism/pEtD/~3/yaiVisu9h0k/-put her funeral out to tender (Ken Loach)
From matches to dispatches –We live in the 'dead centre' of the village, next to the graveyard. Whenever there's a funeral the lane is packed with every form of transport you can think of and all the men arrive on foot, 3-up on a moped, crammed minibuses, cars, vans, push bikes and a string of tractors, with and without trailers full of men. The corpse usually arrives on one of the trailers. 30 minutes later it's all over, back to work, get on with the day. A very simple affair but with huge community support for the family concerned.
SussexSocialist wrote:And isn't marriage a choice now, I don't remember the state or any other capitalist institution forcing anyone I know to get married now or in the past….?You're right in that it isn't or wasn't mandatory, however social pressures because of the way various institutions are/were organised have been a large part of the problem. No doubt attitudes have changed enormously in the last 50 years but the 'swinging sixties' weren't as free and easy as some may imagine. Access to housing, the contraception pill, a double room in a hotel, giving birth to and raising 'bastard' children, adopting or fostering children – so much easier for married couples. I would certainly see negative reasons like these for some to let go of their principles.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Also i think we are being very parochial in the debate, associating marriage with our own UK culture. So i will widen marriage.Re 'being parochial' my view point on this is that we should endeavour to focus as widely as we can in each and every subject we discuss, remembering we are a tiny part of the global working class with myriad different cultures and norms.Taking a very broad world-wide view we have to recognise the R word factor too. Religion plays an enormous role in the institution of marriage. Polygamy, still practised widely, is another example of patriarchy – if the man can afford it he can have four (I think) wives and umpteen concubines. Egalitarian it is not.Without economic restraints or social pressures I can't imagine any kind of law being applied to marriage. If a couple did decide to separate after having committing to each other previously what would the divorce or separation document consist of?
http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1910s/1910/no-76-december-1910/case-free-love-some-capitalist-hypocrisies-exposedDon't understand how this happened – This link to a relevant article in the Socialist Standard from 1910 came by e-mail in response to a post but I don't see it on the forum thread. It says what we've been saying, and more.Thanks to the one who posted it. No need to explain!
steve colborn wrote:!In a sane society, one would not even have these, "rites", or ceremonies. What fucking business, personal or, "socially acceptable", has it to do with anyone else, apart from the two people involved?ISteve.Just replied to SS and then saw your post Steve.Thanks for that. I would probably have voiced it more as you have done if I were face to face! However, the message is similar.
SussexSocialist wrote:, so why generally do we propose or suggest that marriage (for example) should be ditched because of the way it is run now?'marriage' – from the oxford dictionary: The formal union of a man and a woman, typically as recognised by law, by which they become husband and wife.As the world is ordered now this is one of the laws I have had particular objection to for decades, long before I discovered the socialist party. Quite how the laws of marriage affect women in the UK now I don't know, having been out of the country for 15 years, however 'typically as recognised by law' I have always found a total irritation and an attack on my freedom. I, and many others like me – men too – want simply to be free to choose, without any ceremony, formal or informal, to live with their chosen partner. Within capitalism, of course, we are obliged to register this or that so that all authorities are aware of our joint habitation so they can take their pound of flesh.The difference I see in a socialist system would be that we would have that freedom. And I don't see why others shouldn't have their freedom to commit – formally or informally – if that's what they choose. So, it's freedom of choice, freedom of action, not to be regulated and expected to conform especially in areas that don't affect third parties. I don't see this as throwing out the babies with the bath water but I do see it as ditching an awful lot of bureaucracy.I also expect for us all to have much more active involvement in the organisation of our new society, not to have 'leaders who know best' to decide what we all must do in any and all situations. As a collection of individuals I believe we do have many thoughts and ideas as to how the way ahead can be. The reason it's not 'concrete' is simply that we're not at that stage yet.
