jondwhite
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
BBC to host Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage TV debatePerhaps a journalist would like to report on our debate since there is national television interest in the debate between the Deputy PM Nick Clegg and UKIP's leader Nigel Farage on 7pm on 2 April?
There was also one report about Lord Cowdray from February 15 in the Timeshttp://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/naturalresources/article4006067.eceRemember the claim that fracking is not a class issue? Well it looks like I've been reading the wrong rag because the Times article (and the business section no less) begins as follows;
Quote:Anybody ready to fight the class war? Geoff Davies is. The chief executive of Celtique Energie wants to frack in the South Downs National Park, even if it makes him the most unpopular man in West Sussex.The straight-talking Lancastrian has no time for the wealthy nimbies trying to sabotage his plans. Hostile local landowners, led by Lord Cowdray, have blocked the shale gas explorer at its drilling site near the sleepy village of Fernhurst. Such opponents are “selfish and unpatriotic”, he says, for wanting to deprive the country of the economic boon that shale gas could provide.The landed gentry should remember the class issue that the Times alludes to here. The capitalists, both industrial and financial are the ruling class now, the time when landowning aristocracy were in charge has long gone.This doesn't mean (as might be characterised) socialists claiming that individual workers can't gain from fracking or that individual capitalists can't suffer from fracking but this analysis is one of society as individuals. As a whole class, ruling classes will gain and the rest will come second. This is their criteria for introducing and using technology. For socialists, the most important division in society is not between those supporting technology (safe or otherwise) and all the rest. Socialists have a very specific attitude to the means of production and its not that technology fixes the problem. Nor even is it that nimbys are the obstacle, as one book review states
Quote:'Proudhon came to fame in 1840 through a pamphlet What is Property? in which he declared that “property is theft”. Actually, this wasn’t as radical it might seem since what he was criticising was the private ownership of land.'Book Reviews: “Property is Theft!”, “Marxism and World Politics”
How about a 'workers party' as supporting those that are 'hard-working'? This gets claimed which could be a reasonable definition of a 'workers party'. If the Tories want this definition then they can have it. All that would really mean though is they are pro-wage slavery and the lower the price of wages the more people in wage-slavery or these days zero-hours-no-wage slavery. I think I would prefer the right to be lazy.
What is a workers party anyway? Various definitions have been put forward, particularly by Old Labour supporters, most of which are so meaningless as could equally apply to the Conservatives.One that workers elect?In the last general election in 2010, 10,703,654 voted (out of an electorate of 46,107,152) for the Conservatives, which was more than any other party.One that workers join?In 2013, the Conservatives reported 134,000 members (against Labour's 187,000).One with policies that workers want?Many workers would say they want low prices and low taxes. This may be a democratic wish but it is spurious.One that trade unions affilate to with special voting privileges?Trade unions are sectional bodies existing to better conditions for their members, which political party trade unions support is not indicative of the interests of the working-class as a whole.The only definition that would be any use is a workers party is one that is in the interests of the working class. For me that is the SPGB.What this Tory rebrand really means is they know that society is divided between classes, but that they regard the role of the working-class as voting-fodder in the biggest bloc possible in the same way Labour has done in the past and does do in the present.
If you've got a claim that we were created, and another claim that we evolved, unless you think they are both correct, then how would you assess these claims? What's creation got going for it? Scripture? There are plenty of works of fiction in bookshops.
This is called 'The March of Progress' and is the most famous scientific illustration.While it shouldn't be as linear (or deterministic) as depicted it is nevertheless useful looking backwards from the present to see the similarities to us from earlier creatures.An interesting article on it can be read here.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_of_Progress#Original_intent
Pick your battles. The SPGB hostility clause promises to wage war on all other parties but it doesn't mean necessarily being personally belligerent. Some things aren't worth losing friends over and friendship networks are a powerful influence on people's thinking. also the Internet is full of trolls.
So to try and summariseUnderconsumptionists or overproductionists consist ofMonthly Review, Magdoff and Bellamy-Foster following Baran and SweezyThe leftDisequilibrium theorists of crisis consist ofAndrew Kliman, Marxist-HumanistsSPGBSocialist Studies
I don't expect identities to be published publicly online but it might be a good idea to know who the mods are, at least for the benefit of party members.
Geldof and Bono may be deluded to call for aid, but anti-aid free-marketeer Dambisa Moyo is educated enough that she should know better. According to Wikipedia Moyo
Quote:[Dambiso] Moyo worked for the World Bank as a Consultant and at Goldman Sachs where she worked in the debt capital markets and as an economist in the global macroeconomics team. In 2013, Moyo was awarded the [Friedrich] Hayek Lifetime Achievement AwardEven Bill Gates disagrees with Moyo
Quote:In a 2013 interview Bill Gates was asked for his views on Dead Aid's illustration that aid "keeps the economy crippled….[with] the money not being used to make businesses sustainable in Africa". He claimed to have read the book and stated "books like that – they're promoting evil"
