Jack_higgon
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I struggle to believe Russia actually intends to conduct a full scale invasion of Ukraine. Their annexation of Crimea caused enough of a diplomatic shit storm to occupy the Kremlin for years, and that operation at least had a presence of deniability.
The question, then, is who are these sabre rattling manoeuvres actually targeting?
It’s fair to say that in a future Socialist society, there’d be a lower risk of pandemics – simply because the priority would be people’s welfare rather than corporate profit.
As for the question of how we respond to the current protests – in my view, you can either be against vaccines or lockdown, but not both. We should recognise people’s natural desire for freedom and self-determination (which properly expressed should lead them to Socialism). However, I think we do need to emphasise that freedom comes with a responsibility to others. Even in a future Socialist world, we’ll have to be willing to do things we’d rather not, for the overall benefit of society.
ALB: “It leads to the struggle against those designated “fascist” being considered more important than the struggle for socialism…
Capitalism, not fascism, is the enemy.”Would the Socialist response not be that fascism is merely a subset of capitalism, and that the only way to ensure fascism dies (and stays dead)is through the abolition of capitalism?
I can think of many things to call them, but I probably shouldn’t write them in a public forum!
Genuinely though, I’m not sure what the harm is in calling today’s hard right fascists. It might not be strictly accurate in terms of summarising their views, but it conveys sufficient meaning in a concise phrase.
Funny how people can put their differences aside in the name of preserving the life they’re used to – I guess people are inherently a bit conservative in that way.
What would be the Socialist position on the issue of lockdowns, mandatory vaccination and the like? Personally I think these are extraordinary times, and extraordinary measures are required.
However, it’s fair to say that a lot of governments have responded poorly, and I’m always wary of handing more authority to the state. If the War on Terror has shown anything, it’s that the state is very hesitant to stop using extraordinary powers once the apparent crisis has passed.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/21/climate-denial-far-right-immigration
A new direction for the hard right? I’ve noticed that some nationalist organisations are trying to project their views through the lens of climate concern, both to latch onto the current crisis and to detoxify their ideas in the eyes of the general public. I wonder if that will be a key part of any resurgent right?
That’s what I find most aggravating about all of this – the complete lack of effort to address the root causes of migration. If richer nations really wanted to stop people coming to the West, they could co-operate and come up with 100 different ways to make sure no one had to undertake a dangerous trek across half the world in search of safety. Instead, rich countries are content to ignore the issue until it’s become prevalent enough for them to exploit for political gain…
And ironically, what’s the best way to stop immigration? World Socialism, since in a socialist world no one would ever be forced to leave their homes in search of work! (Also, the abolition of nation states would render the concept of migration meaningless…)
Ah, that’s not bad – from the images I’d seen of Glasgow over COP26, it looked to be awash with all sorts of different groups and protests, all vying for attention!
To be fair, 1:25 isn’t a bad conversion ratio – especially considering that the poor passers by at COP were probably bombarded on all sides by Marxist leaflets!
I’d be interested to hear if there was anything that people felt made us stand out from the other parties’ there? Obviously the SPGB has quite different ideas than the other leftist parties at COP, but that might not be apparent to most!
Honestly, I don’t think we’re to blame for our present position. Even if we had said all the right things at all the right times, the SPGB still stands against pretty much every other political or non-political organisation. That challenge alone is almost insurmountable.
But if we recognise the challenge we face, how best are we to achieve the object of the Party? Are we supposed to be a mass electoral party as originally intended, aiming to win a majority of votes and thereby institute socialism? Or are we a repository of wisdom, preserving the purest form of Marxism until the people are ready to embrace it?
I’m not necessarily saying that those are the only two options, but that does seem to be the dichotomy at the heart of today’s SPGB. In some ways we’re quite an intellectual, elitist organisation, yet we aspire to be a mass electoral organisation of the working class.
So in short, I haven’t got any concrete suggestions about how to bring about the speedy creation of World Socialism. What I would say is that we probably need to be honest about the function of this Party, and from there consider our next steps.
I may have missed that debate on what to call the party, but I do think having a World Socialist Movement divided along national lines is a bit counter-intuitive. The internet has given us the capacity to create a truly global organisation in a way not possible before, and wouldn’t a genuine World Socialist Movement complete what was started way back in the First International?
I suppose the party is in this weird place of being a quite conservative radical organisation. Being over a century old creates a certain amount of institutional inertia, and I get why people wouldn’t want to abandon long-standing Socialist traditions. But if I was to be brutal, I’d say that it does seem like the SPGB is at risk of just fading away at present.
Maybe I’m just being a troublemaker, but I’d be interested to hear if anyone thinks the SPGB’s current MO will ever win the world for the workers?
I suppose you can’t say fairer than that! The SPGB has never exactly been a massive organisation, as far as I can tell, but it would be a bit of a pity if the monument finally crumbled.
That always seems to be case with mass movements in this country. At most, they result in large marches heavily populated by Trotskyite recruiters. Then, when their demands are once again ignored by the state, they drift apart as people lose faith or find a new, more exciting cause. I wonder how long the fervour caused by COP26 will persist?
