jondwhite
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
jondwhite
ParticipantThe first review is herehttps://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/feb/12/the-young-karl-marx-review-communist-bromance-raoul-peck
jondwhite
ParticipantLeftOfNorthWest wrote:We believe that socialism will be a wageless, moneyless, free-access society It's mainly this aspect I'm struggling to come to terms with, please understand that my intentions when I joined this forum was not to ridicule, insult or even challenge the beliefs and ideals of other socialists and I was completely unware that different socialist partys could have such contrasting perspectives, up until now I had always seen the moneyless society aspect as communism rather than socialism whilst I agree that its a fairly good idea in principle I am sceptical of how many people would happily do away with their hard earned life savings which they may have intended to leave there children to give them a head start in life. The idea of reforming capitalism so that it meets to needs of society rather than line the pockets of greedy few seems an ideal that more people would vote in my opinion.Our object puts quite a different emphasis on what we want
Quote:The establishment of a system of society based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of the whole community.And Wilhelm Liebknecht on Socialism and Ethics;
Quote:Pity for poverty, enthusiasm for equality and freedom, recognition of social injustice and a desire to remove it, is not socialism. Condemnation of wealth and respect for poverty, such as we find in Christianity and other religions, is not socialism. The communism of early times, as it was before the existence of private property, and as it has at all times and among all peoples been the elusive dream of some enthusiasts, is not socialism. The forcible equalization advocated by the followers of Baboeuf, the so-called equalitarians, is not socialism.In all these appearances there is lacking the real foundation of capitalist society with its class antagonisms. Modern socialism is the child of capitalist society and its class antagonisms. Without these it could not be. Socialism and ethics are two separate things. This fact must be kept in mind.Whoever conceives of socialism in the sense of a sentimental philanthropic striving after human equality, with no idea of the existence of capitalist society, is no socialist in the sense of the class struggle, without which modern socialism is unthinkable. To be sure Bernstein is nominally for the class struggle – in the same manner as the Hessian peasant is for “the Republic and the Grand Duke.” Whoever has come to a full consciousness of the nature of capitalist society and the foundation of modern socialism, knows also that a socialist movement that leaves the basis of the class struggle may be anything else, but it is not socialism.This foundation of the class struggle, which Marx – and this is his immortal service – has given to the modern labor movement, is the main point of attack in the battle which the bourgeois political economy is waging with socialism.jondwhite
Participanthaha great
February 10, 2017 at 7:34 pm in reply to: Can left wing socialists and right wing populists cooperate? #124838jondwhite
ParticipantLending support to populist leaders means you're in a worse (at least psychologically) position for taking power back from them at the next opportunity.The surest footing for socialism is popularity on its own merits.Something like what you're proposing happened in the US when officially meeting with FDR set the Socialist Party of America on a downward spiral from which it never recovered. It decimated their vote.https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2016/no-1343-july-2016/spa-dashed-rocks-compromise
February 10, 2017 at 4:11 pm in reply to: SPGBers- Socialists – Non-Socialists and Anti- Socialists #114316jondwhite
Participantjondwhite wrote:DJP wrote:jondwhite wrote:Can anyone tell us a bit more about the stance on elections of junge linke gegend kapital und nation? Their London affiliation was wine and cheese who produced the journal kittens. Didn't junge link come from electoral parties?Perhaps you could try asking them yourself?
I emailed them on your suggestion in English but got no reply as of yet.
I got this response from Gruppen Gegend Kapital und Nation.
Quote:I couldn't give you a full account of the differences, simply because I don't know the SPGB's position that well overall. I do appreciate about the SPGB that it takes a quite principled stance against nationalism and puts a strong emphasis on education, as far as I understand it. However, I'd assume that a key theoretical difference would be how we understand what an election is. That is, I doubt the piece you're quoting from would be agreeable to the SPGB. Are you're thinking of "Die Linke" when you assume that Junge Linke came from an electoral party? "Junge Linke gegen Kapital und Nation" was never affiliated with that party. The name collision was one of the reasons for the renaming. In ancient history, Junge Linke came fromhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JungdemokratInnen/Junge_Linke Critisticuffs are indeed a separate group, if only for the fact that it's based in the UK and not everyone speaks German.jondwhite
ParticipantInterested account from Barry McNeeney
jondwhite
ParticipantWhat about a debate with Black pigeon speaks Editor-in-Chief: Heather Jones? She featured on Channel 4 news last night?
jondwhite
ParticipantWelcome back Alan.
February 9, 2017 at 10:37 pm in reply to: Democratic Socialists added 1000 members in 2 days following election #123204jondwhite
ParticipantVin wrote:So why is the real socialist party not growing? Are we doing something wrong?While membership of the real socialist party is low, then, without wishing to sound too negative, there's always room for improvement.
February 9, 2017 at 10:33 pm in reply to: Democratic Socialists added 1000 members in 2 days following election #123203jondwhite
Participantjondwhite wrote:From 6,500 members in May 2016 to 14,000 members in November 2016 to 16,000 members todayhttp://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/02/americans-joining-socialist-groups-trump-170205083615002.htmlAlso Rolling Stone cover it toohttp://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/how-democratic-socialists-are-building-on-bernies-momentum-w465452
February 9, 2017 at 9:39 pm in reply to: Democratic Socialists added 1000 members in 2 days following election #123199jondwhite
ParticipantFrom 6,500 members in May 2016 to 14,000 members in November 2016 to 16,000 members todayhttp://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/02/americans-joining-socialist-groups-trump-170205083615002.html
jondwhite
ParticipantI liked this articlehttps://workersspatula.wordpress.com/2017/01/30/17-year-old-building-own-cult-of-personality/
jondwhite
ParticipantThe thought has crossed my mind too. The venue would have to be somewhere with high security.
jondwhite
ParticipantFootage has emerged of Trump telling Jorge Ramos a journalist from Univision to get out of his press conference in 2015http://metro.co.uk/2017/02/01/footage-emerges-of-trump-aide-telling-journalist-get-out-of-my-country-6420534/
jondwhite
ParticipantALB wrote:Found Rollings's "Potrait of a Consistent Party" here:https://www.scribd.com/document/120552015/portrait-consistency-peter-rollings-1970s-pdfCheers, couldn't find it myself.
-
AuthorPosts
