Mike Foster
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think that we should be grateful to the CCS for their efforts, which have surely contributed to our relatively favourable result in Oxford. On the issue of clause 7, the CCS is not a party, it's a discussion group, and therefore even less deserving of hostility.
Here are a few words from Jonny of the Communist Corresponding Society, who has kindly been helping to promote the SPGB in Oxford. "Ah, it's great fun doing stalls for SPGB. Obviously, I often advocate communism in CCS meetings and articles, and in conversations with friends and colleagues, but I rarely have the opportunity to call out "Abolish money! Vote socialist!" at random passersby in the street. We noticed that there was relatively little interest from punters when we were just saying things like "Vote socialist" or "support the socialist party", but once we started talking about the abolition of money, the wages system, capitalism, and making all goods free, we got quite a lot of reaction, some of it positive, some of it argumentative, some of it amused.We particularly enjoyed proclaiming "If you agree that money should be abolished, support your local Socialist Party candidates in the European Elections; otherwise, do not!""The Communist Corresponding Society is a discussion group which runs always-interesting meetings in Oxford. The format and approach is very similar to SPGB meetings, with an opening talk by a speaker and then discussion with the audience. Their meetings are definitely worth going along to.
Preparations for Summer School are going well. As well as the talks, discussions and socialising, there are a few extras in the pipeline. Everyone coming along will receive an exclusive publication which looks at how wars have been represented on film, and the exhibition on the SPGB during the Second World War is also taking shape. There are still places available, so please make a booking for the highlight of the SPGB calendar!On robbo203's point, you're welcome to come along and raise those issues yourself! I've also heard that the apparent decline in violence can partly be attibutable to lead no longer being used in petrol and paint, with the implication that lead fumes have a violence-inducing effect on the brain.
Preparations for Summer School are well underway, and more details will be revealed soon.At the event, there will be a small exhibition of the Party's response to the Second World War (hopefully alongside the display about the Party's response to the First World War, which I've nicked the idea from!). If anyone has any material which could be included in this, such as details of any Party conscientious objectors, reports on public meetings at the time etc., then please let me know. Many thanks!
If using this soil was just symbolic of the fighting, it would be easier to understand. But this goes beyond that to the same kind of thinking which gives us homeopathic 'remedies' or 'halal' meat. A very odd kind of fetishism.
Warwick University would cost £280 per person for a 48hour stay, including meals, accommodation and conference facilities. This is about twice as much as we are charged at the usual venues, although no doubt the facilities are very nice.
I put it as 2-1 in favour of Fircroft, but yes, that's not a very wide range of views either. I've already asked for this to be on the next EC agenda, and get specific costings for Warwick University and Ruskin College, but there's a chance that we'll lose availability at our usual venues.
I'll book Summer School 2014 with Fircroft College tomorrow, unless there are any other views. Of those who've made comments, it seems that Fircroft is marginally more popular.
I don't think summer school needs to be in London. Summer School has been held in the Midlands partly because it's a central location potentially easier and cheaper for more people to get to. Also, having it away from London helps to broaden the Party out from having the majority of its events in the capital. If summer school was held in London, presumably there would be more people who'd just attend as day visitors (as someone who lives in London might be less likely to bother with booking accommodation). So, I think it would turn out more like a day school, with some attendees doing it as a residential weekend. This would give it a different feel to when we've all been staying in a bubble like Fircroft or Harborne Hall. So, I don't have any objections to a summer school held in London. But, as it would have a different feel to those held in Birmingham, it should be in addition to, and not instead of.I'm not sure if summer school needs to be in a university. Surely we can go with any venue with meeting rooms, meals, accommodation, transport links etc?Warwick university would be a great venue, but we'd need extra funding confirmed before booking there, as pointed out by gnome. I've been able to work within the current subsidy (£50 per pesron, on average) without turning anyone away from summer school who's wanted to attend but can't afford to. Despite advertising summer school more widely each year, the tendency has been for it to be attended more by a hardcore of regulars recently. So, the advertising hasn't led to an increase in new attendees, who instead have usually heard about summer school by word-of-mouth. So, I'm not sure how many extra people would attend if the subsidy was increased. Maybe if we advertised it with a much bigger subsidy in future we'd get more attendees. If we did get a significant amount of more interest, we'd need a larger venue than Fircroft or Harborne Hall (unless people fancy sharing rooms).Personally, I'd say that any major changes to summer school in terms of cost, subsidy, format etc should start in 2015. This would give us more time to agree these changes, as I really need to book a venue for 2014 before the end of the month before availability goes. Anyone new coming in to the organising of summer school would also have an easier introduction if we followed the tried-and-tested format for another year, before starting something new the next.I'll ask for discussion of summer school to be put on the next EC agenda.
It seems that Warwick University would be too expensive as a venue, and Fircroft and Harborne Hall are likely to be more-or-less the same cost (within a couple of hundred pounds, at a guess). Any other views as to which venue people prefer?
Thanks for the suggestions – I'll enquire at Warwick University and Harborne Hall. Warwick might be more difficult to get to by train and looks more expensive. The B&B rates there are at least £78 per night in September (the website wouldn't let me check rates in June or July), which is twice as much as Fircroft before taking into account the use of conference facilities. Harborne Hall will probably work out more expensive than Fircroft (it was £400 more last time), and there were some issues with the accommodation. My personal preference is for Fircroft, despite the alcohol ban and breakfasts.I'm in favour of increasing the subsidy. Up to now, I've been able to work within the existing subsidy while also ensuring that anyone who wants to go has a place. So, even if there is no increase we can still work with existing arrangements.I won't bother trying to avoid a clash with Marxism, based on the helpful posts above.
Well, it's all over for another year. Thanks, everyone, for making it to sunny Brum, and I hope you had an enjoyable and interesting weekend. There'll be a write-up of the event, and talks will be available to listen to in due course.
