KAZ
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Do I find SPGB meetings extensively advertised on the Facebook group (the one I haven’t been banned and blocked from? No I do not. Case proved. “Discourage someone from posting in the future”. Ho ho ho. Open to all unless these fuck you off. Begins with c. Ends in t.
“Party sanctioned blog” – holy fucking Jeremy Corbyn! Now I remember why I fucked off. Too scared to take a shit unless the Committee has passed a (bowel) motion on it. Anyway, socialism for 12 year olds. No. Just no. I had one and the mere presence of the Socialist Standard in the house probably accounts for his raving Nazism now. That and his lame ass dipshit lefty mother. Since she’s now turned terf, he’ll probably be a she next week. However if you *really* must, one of the various graphic novels would be a good present for the average (non-fucked up) late preteen. The Rosa Luxemburg one’s supposed to be good. I wouldn’t know. I read comic books for fun. ZJW: Your suggestions are the worst I’ve ever heard. You do remember what being a 12 year old was like right? Can you imagine what the fat little shit’s face will look like when they rip off the paper and see…SolFed’s Fighting for Ourselves. “Thanks Unk. My best present ever.” On second thoughts – yes. SolFed’s Fighting for Ourselves. Highly recommended for any fat little shit.
Thanks for promoting this Mister Alan. I should say that Saturday’s meeting (anti-Corbyn) was well attended (even if the discussion came to be dominated by Kurdistan junkies – one of the penalties of the traditional meeting) – from personal experience I think this is almost entirely down to promotion on Facebook. Although the SPGB hasn’t got any public meetings coming up, I think it might well be worth you guys bearing this in mind.
AHS wrote:But we won't get even get to those 51% if those socialists who are elected to an assembly aren't prepared to vote for or support anything other than socialism. Presumably they will have to be seen do something in the interest of the working class, even in the run up to socialists gaining a majority. This is of course where our party's programme is non-existent. We have nothing to offer but full blown socialism.Isn't the logic of the above *exactly* the motivating power of common or garden reformism in the first place? Lordies! Why don't you drop the whole Upton Park thing? It's damn stupid – a hundred year old compromise that no one can be arsed to change. The defence of it ties the dozen or so members who actually understand it up in verbal knots not unlike Stalinists and their 'Dialectical Materialism'. If an SPGBer was actually elected (not beyond the bounds of possibility) its implementation would be totally impractical. And holy shite! Imagine the furore if they were elected for the right reason. You voted for Socialism. You got…Reforms. Despite what Robbo says, at least to Joe Average, there is no difference between voting for reforms and reformism. Either the ticket for the Full Communism Express or the pass to Reformtown and back.
ALB wrote:Were you ever in the SPGB?[/quote]Yes indeed. And what I am trying to do now is follow through on the aim and principles of the SPGB (not purely the D of P, but in general). Namely, is that aim, are those principles, in line with the adopted strategy – electoral politics? Having considered it thoroughly, I think not only are they incompatible but such a strategy is positively harmful to the cause. Of course, I'm also playing devil's advocate and doing you lot a favour by putting forward contrary opinions. No one else dare!
I may be mistaken about seeing Kropotkinalia being listed in early Standards. Just a recollection. I can't check as I sent all my copies back to base. It was either them or my 2000ADs.
Bijou Drains wrote:If Parliament didn't have any use or power, then why would capital spend so much money ensuring that its lackeys are elected to parliaments and national assemblies the world over. Capitalisits don't generally spend money of they don't have to!Legitimation. Persuades people they actually have a voice in running things. Less fuss if the slaves think they're free. The faith in 'actually existing democracy' is a really massive impediment to achieving socialism.
ALB wrote:Of course today the "period of proletaran rule", i.e the use of the state by the socialist-minded, democratically-organised workng class majority to abolish class society by dispossesing the capitalist class, could be passed through fairly rapidly. But of course it has to exist for however short a period as that's what political action to establsh socialism involves.Y'see, that's what worries me about the SPGB and the use of Parliament. You're actually admitting here, quite reasonably, that there will be a "Transitional Period". What prevents this from becoming prolonged indefinitely? Perhaps the 'economic circumstances' aren't 'right for socialism'? Will they ever be until we have Star Trek type replicators (ie. never)? What about that 49.9 reoccuring % who didn't "vote for socialism"? Not just the capitalists but their whole brain dead crew. Are they just going to disperse quietly and return to their homes? And more to the point, what about the 50%+1? Are they really going to be fit to take over running their lives? With all the emphais on the electoral won't they still be, as Lenin said, "people as they are now, people who cannot dispense with subordination and control, and foremen and accountants"?
Enough of my ramblings though. A bit of mess about and manhandling a minister hardly amounts to illegalism or propaganda of the deed. More like your regular protest. At least it's directed at the right people – unlike illegalism. Other times they've gone way overboard but Greeks have a tendency to do that (little bit of racism there). The point about Exarchia is that it is a "liberated area". Something like a big squat. I'm not saying it's going anywhere (Freetown Christiania probably shows it's ultimate fate – not snuffed out but 'redeveloped' – yuppified – with the connivance of its residents) but these sort of alternative communities are quite harmless and possibly beneficial.
"r-r-revolutionary": Any idea where that SPGB meme comes from? Never heard it anywhere else. I think of Terry the Tiger (or whatever his name was, I don't pay a lot of attention to adwerts) – "they're g-r-r-eat!" but I think it might be older than that.
Still, the anarchists of Exarchia did throw Yanis Varoufakis out of his favourite restaurant. They can't be *all* bad.
Threw stones at the riot police, did a sit in at the local paper and set fire to a dumpster. Dawn is near.
ALB wrote:It is not true, eiher, that anarchism is a subset of socialism. Some anarchists do stand for socialism (as a classless, stateless, moneyless, wageless society) but only a minority.Well, aye, but that would equally apply to the majority of bods calling themselves socialist! Self-labelled anarchists have always been pretty diverse, both in principles and tactics, but if we take the 'big men' (the equivalent of Marx) – Kropotkin and Bakunin – would fit the bill. The same could be said of the organised anarchist groups in this country, both historically and contemporary. Personally, I think it is no coincidence that the SPGB stall at the London Anarchist Book Fair was busy, busy, busy (SS sold out I believe). 'Propaganda of the deed' and 'illegalism' – obviously there were dicks back in the day too.
Rusty Pigfumbler wrote:No one put it better than Stalin: 'Some people believe that Marxism and Anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics…This is a great mistake. We believe that Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies.' The founders of the Socialist Party would have endorsed this.Gurgle! Splutter! Not sure if quoting that murderous old red fascist is an appropriate way to back up SPGB principles and policy. Like the SPGB, anarchists certainly were the enemies of Stalin's 'Marxism' even if some collaborated with it (they all came to sticky ends). The true enemy of all socialists (anarchists being a subset) is capitalism, although some seem to have trouble recognising this. If the Founders really did endorse this sentiment, incidentally, why would they be selling literature by Kropotkin – the 'Anarchist Prince'?
Mike Foster wrote:Personally, I'd like more dialogue with anarchist groups, in the spirit of learning about different approaches and perspectives.Mike: With one or two exceptions, I honestly don't think the modern anarchist movement has much to teach the SPGB. It's pretty toxic to be honest. One problem that we do share, however, is a participation problem. In terms of organisation, the new ACG is making attendance at full meetings (ADM/ Conference equivalent) compulsory (ie you have to have a good excuse not to be there) – in the same way that SPGB EC members are supposed to attend EC meetings – and abolished formal delegation (you can forward your views via any member who is attending). I'm not suggesting the SPGB does this but seems like a good idea to me. It also avoids the problem of using delegate status to legitimise your own views. I've probably done this in the past before.
