KAZ
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“not that funny” for shure. but one would think any attempt at humour would be greatly appreciated, making a break from the self-important pseudo-intellectualism passing into plain bigotry that passes for socialist commentary these days. had an ICCabod at the meeting yesterday. outdid in self-importance and pseudo-intellectualism any SPGBer ever. he needed a visit from a petroleuse.
Cheers. That came up on my laptop but not on my tablet. These things is funny. Looks like a Party member don’t she?
Marx was never naturalised was he? I think that would disbar him on the nationals. Locals were based on property so maybe for them. Women could vote in locals back in Marx’s time. Don’t tell the wimmin that though. Spoil their stuffragette party.
The thing about censuses (or censi) is that they are linked to nationalism and capitalism. They appear with the centralised state and become increasingly detailed with the rise of capitalism. Is it unreasonable to assume that on the demise of the state and capitalism, the census will vanish?
Proudhon was a knobend.
I believe the census question is titled “ethnicity” rather than “race”. I thought Ethnicity was a town in America until I drank deep of the waters of tranquility.
Will there be censuses (censi?) under scrotcialism?
prof! them ain’t gender benders. them is young people. that’s far worse. is there an identity that lets me mouth off about kiddies?
yes, well, entering into the debate is a step too far. then you got to choose which brand of idpollers to support? old line feminists, who don’t want “blokes” in their precious bogs, or 33rd wavers? two genders, both of whom wear trousers and swear, or 233? i believe, we should all follow the wise words of chairman vic: “it’s no socialism”.
Cheers for that share DJP. I tried to share on the party facebook sites but got the naysay (least I thinks I did). Heard you having a “transgender debate”. That be fun. Ho ho ho.
Now they seem to be commercialising the knowledge they acquired from us.
“Funny” is a bit of an understatement given the self-evident willingness of these two to be used as paid mouthpieces for the most reactionary elements of the ruling class. At least their message will only get through to those already convinced of the need to soak the poor. Why on earth would you consider them less of enemies than the mugs who go Labour though? Social democracy is the greater enemy
AlJo asks:
And my problem is that I don’t understand what is now become hysteria about it from the normally conservative scientific community and governments who primary care is usually solely about the health of their economy than with the health of their citizens. What is the threat that has got the callous capitalist class so concerned, very much more so than ever before?
Perhaps yesterday’s steepest one day drop in the stock market since 1987 might be a good reason why governments are making a fuss about the Corona. Focusing on disease, even on the perceived deficiencies of the response, deflects attention from economic problems. Health of the economy comes first.
Well, I’ve certainly stirred something up here haven’t I? Hardly surprising, you genuinely don’t like the idea of socialist government but that’s what the method entails. Denials are always the worst.
“In depth analysis”: No. Sorry. You have to do this yourself. I’m not doing it for you. Take the Party case and apply it.
“Your group does this.” Well, yes it does doesn’t it? As a “put up with it” it beats by miles the dreadful stuff I had to put up with in the SPGB.
“Rules. Schmules. They don’t apply to us.” This is very much the Party ethos in a nutshell. It is unique. Why? Because it says it is. Nope.
Like I say, you really haven’t thought this all through. Yes, I’ve read all the wretched pamphlets and come up with a more in depth analysis than you have. Delegation, for instance, is not how parliament works. If you are not interested in playing bourgeois games, do not start playing them.
Which is a long way from the question of socialist government. Some of you blokes are in such denial. You use the system, you have to follow its rules. This inevitably involves forming a socialist government, with a socialist prime minister and a socialist cabinet. You like? No. Too damn bad. Freddy knew a fing or two.
“Not on our wavelength at all.” Lumme lawks! In fact, the trouble the femmos have recently caused in the SPGB is exactly on the wavelength of the radical liberals masquerading as anarchists. Except about 20 years postdated. They’re the conservative wing of identity politics now. These days it’s all about transgender rights (no transgenders allowed to actually speak though just in case they say the wrong thing) and pretending prostitutes are the Grand Army of Sexual Liberation.
I note that you have carefully placated your feminist wing with a committee. An excellent strategy involving long grass and a foot moving forward (to use the current vernacular). Safe spaces are a good policy too. Once the ladies are out of the room, the blokes can swear and fart. Trouble with you goys is that some of your women will want to come into the men’s area just to be difficult.
something something patriarchy something
Well, if you can get there, remember to bring a watering can.