[robbo203]

moderator1 wrote:

alanjjohnstone wrote:

One question has now been answered – what chemical was used http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39648503

Quote:

"Incontrovertible" test results show sarin gas or a similar substance was used in the chemical weapons attack in Syria earlier this month, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) says.

Now the matter of what is settled it is now the questions who and why?

Now that the investigation has identified the chemical as sarin the finger must pointing at Assad. As for the why is that relevant in a war situation?

 According to RT at any rate the evidence shows that it could not have been Sarin. With Sarin the victims' pupils are supposed to dilate whereas in this instance the pupils of the victims appear to have contracted. A further point is that Sarin is supposed to be an odourless gas, yet people in the vicinity reported a smell of some sort Personally, though one can never be absolutely sure, I think that, on balance, the weight of evidence points to this being a false flag operation – particularly since Assad had nothing to gain by such a chemical attack and a lot to lose as we have seen

[robbo203]

ALB wrote:

In any event, the disappearance of money was discussed by the Bolsheviks in the early days after their coup.

  Yes,  I wouldnt dispute that.  Didnt Stalin  in his 1906 work on Anarchism say something similar – about a socialist society being a moneyless society? However, the question is whether the period of "war communism" represented a genuine attempt, as some have claimed,  to institute a moneyless communist society.  Somewhere in my chaotic computer filing system I have a copy of the front page of – I think-  the New York Times dating from that time which talked of the Bolsheviks wanting to abolish money.  I will try and track it down..The conservative historian, Richard Pipes, argued that "War Communism" was not simply a 'temporary measure' but an ambitious attempt to introduce "full-blown communism."  (The Russian Revolution, Fontana, 1992).  Likewise the anarcho-capitalist,  Murray Rothbard, claimed in his essay "The Death Wish of the Anarcho-Communists" that: The Russians, after trying an approach to the communist moneyless economy in their "War Communism" shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution, reacted in horror as they saw the Russian economy heading to disaster. Even Stalin never tried to revive it, and since World War II the East European countries have seen a total abandonment of this communist ideal and a rapid move toward free markets, a free price system, profit-and-loss tests, and a promotion of consumer affluence.(The Libertarian Forum, January 1, 1970.) Personally I think this is a load of tosh.  I dont believe  there was a genuine attempt  to institute communism although it was politically expedient for both the Bolsheviks and their opponents to suggest that such an attempt was being made.  But even if a genuine attempt had been made there is simply no way it could have succeeded – not for the reasons advanced by the likes of Rothbard and co but rather becuase the preconditions for a comunist society were wholly lacking at the time 

[robbo203]

The data suggests that 1 in 7 workers are self employed in the UK.  Historically this fraction has been declining giving credence to Marx's speculations about the petit or petty (the latter is the english vulgarisation of the  french word for small) bourgeoisie being progressively absorbed into the wage earning proletariat – although more rcently this trend has reversed and seems to be associated with the effects of recession.Here in Spain I think the pecentage is slightly higher and while the official unemplyment rate is also comparatively high, it must be borne in mind that there is a quite a flourishing black economy which is not possible – at least to the same extent – in a closely monitored Big Brother  state like the UK. This would tend to bump up the numbers of self employed

[robbo203]

Mike Foster wrote:

The publication from 2015's Summer School is already available from the online shop: http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/catalog/non-party-publications/new-perspectives-socialism and I'll look into making last year's one more widely available.

 I didnt realise there was a category called "non-party publications" with a paywall in place. What is the rationale for this?  Would it not be better to make these 3 publications, party publications, with full access to contents as per the Marxism Revisited pamphlet also based on a summer school?  I think visitors to this site would benefit from a wider selection of material being made available and, as mentioned, I do refer people quite often to this site and its stock of literature – as, I imagine, do other people here

[robbo203]

Mike Foster wrote:

Thanks for your suggestions, robbo203. The remaining talks are still being planned, and I'll see if your thoughts can be incorporated into them.The last two Summer Schools have been accompanied by pamphlets which include versions of some of the talks (and most recent Summer Schools have had special publications), so there's a chance that something similar will be produced again this year… 

 Hi Mike Yes, it would be useful to produce a transcript of the talks in a proper pamphlet form.  I have often had occasion to refer people interested in socialist ideas who I have met through the internet forums and the like  to the "Marxism Revisited" pamphlet based on the summer school  of 1998 What are the two most recent pamphlets you refer to based on talks given at summer schools? Shouldnt they be listed as part of the pamphlet stock on this site?  The SPGB suffers from a real dirth of recently published pamphlets in my view.  This year you have an opportunity to produce a new pamphlet on the environment and I would urge you to seize that opportunity….

[robbo203]

rodshaw wrote:

I think that wage and salary are commonly understood to cover different types of income, the latter being more 'middle class' than the former, probably paid monthly rather than weekly. By using both we include both types of worker.Self-employed income is a bit more problematic and to include it we'd probably have to use more words not less. Unless we used 'income' to cover everything. But then we'd probably have to use more words explaining that we excluded capitalist income, or income from shares etc.Pensioners are another category not strictly being paid a 'wage or salary' (although we regard a pension as deferred wages, which in itself takes more explaining).Rod

 I guess "earned income"  would cover every contingency but then "abolition of earned income" doesnt have quite the same ring to it as "abolition of the wages system"…

[robbo203]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

As someone who makes extensive use of our archive material, some things become very noticeable.In nearly every article we publish we talk of "work for wage or salary".It is repeated ad nauseum in our literature .."work for wage or salary…work for wage or salary….."Can't we use one or the other and not be deemed imprecise. I prefer wage.And what do we use the recompense that the self-employed in the gig economy get?

 Indeed.  Many on the Left talk of the self employed as a distinct class separate from, and outside of, the working class – the so called petit bourgeoisie or small capitalists in the traditonal sense – although more recent usage e.g Nico Poulantzas 's  – widens the meaning of that term to include also  the non productive salariat. e.g.  bureaucrats of all kinds. I dont find that argument particularly persuasive,  As a self employed person I regard myself to be fully a member of the working class.  The notion that I am somehow a member of the (petit) bourgeosise by virtue of the fact that I own small sums of capital – to wit, a 7 year old strimmer, 3 chainsaws and an assortment of garden tools – is frankly laughable considering that many blue collar workers on a regular waged income – probably possess a lot more capital tucked away in various financial investment schemes and savings accounts than I have ever had! But if I dont technically earn a wage perhaps the old Marxian slogan "abolition of the wages system" needs to be re-jigged to be made more relevant to workers like me

[robbo203]

I would be disappointed if some of the other remaining talks did not touch on the subjects of 1) the theory of externalities  and 2) the structural waste of capitalism. The latter, focussing on socially useless forms of work under capitalism – not just the role of the military – is a particularly salient feature of the case for socialism and indeed provides a uniquely socialist insight into the whole question of the sustainable use of resourcesIs there any indication that these subjects might be covered at the Summer School?  Also, will transcripts of the talks be made available perhaps in a pamphlet form as happened in the case of the previous Summer School on Marxism?

[robbo203]

Steve-SanFrancisco-UserExperienceResearchSpecialist wrote:

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Quote:

Maybe you should call him up and tell him he doesn't know socialism

Give me his personal phone number and i will, and i'll use the words of Eugene Debs to explain socialism to him. 

His personal phone number is an interesting example of a resource (his phone number) that is nominally free for anyone and the information that is his phone number is not private property.  BUT, still you and I do not have access to his phone number.  So here's an example of what will happen in a world where there is no scarcity and no property and free association.  Notice that Bernies private phone number is free and cost nothing to give away copies of it.  likewise in a world where there is no property as socialism requires, you would still not be able to get bernies phone number.  So under capitalism or socialism you personally can't get bernies phone number for the same reasons that have nothing to do with capitalism or socialism.  How socialism addresses this "free on paper and no scarcity in principle" vs "nominally free but actually very hard to find and knowing someone who can find his phone number makes it a  scarce resource in practice."So I think we need to talk about what it means to not have property and and how socialism addresses the problem of finding bernies phone number.  As usual I have an exchange theory explanation of this that distinguishes explicitely accessiblity and other kinds of concerns while avoiding the property vs no-property false dichotomy in your thinking.  Things can have other states besides owned and not owned.  They can be accessible or innaccessible.  items on the store shelf, such as bernies phone number,  can be hidden or promoted without being property.   A theory of capitalism and socialism that acknowledges these differences in ownership definitions seems essential to me, but I haven't read anything here about this sort of problem or solutions to the problem of finding bernies phone number. 

 I think it has already been explained to you several times  that by "private property" is meant "means of wealth production", not personal possesions,  and that by "exchange" is meant "quid  pro quo market exchange". These features cannot logically exist in a society in which the means of producing of wealth are owned in common – by everyone.  So "property vs no-property" is hardly a false dichotomy unless you chose  not to understand what is meant by property in the economic sense

[robbo203]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

No, i don't think it is a crack-pot idea but i do believe it will be easily defeated but it will not be the first time the party has been dinosaurs and refused to recognise that times are a-changing. We have an opportunity to make the monthly Standard an online weekly or even a daily propaganda medium – the aspiration of our founding members for the Socialist Standard …a daily commentary on capitalism and a daily advocacy of socialism. One which goes beyond even their imagination in that it can incorporate video and music and podcasts. We struggle to find outlets for the Standard yet we have a world-wide platform that is forever growing and becoming more accessible. It is not a time for sentimental attachments and nostalgia for days gone by.YouTube has replaced Hyde Park Speakers Corner. I think there is an amendment which will ensure a yearly printed omnibus of the Standard. Although it is not specific, i think it should be the "Best of.." and not necessarily annually…it could be twice a year or quarterly.Surely, a de facto published book a few times every year is a good substitute and alternative and maybe – just a maybe- a better chance of getting it on the shelves commercially.And when a hard-copy is required for any special events, it would not be difficult to print a Special edition of the Socialist Standard with a dedicated theme and as i have said before – hand it out free. What is embarrassing is our leaflets that we distribute, always very general and because of the demand of space, omitting much of our case and its nuances. Those who remain fixated of the printed Standard,  apart from the occasional street stall, have any member or branch did what was regularly done in the past – stood on the street-corner selling it? I think this will be something we will return to every few years and when we do eventually adopt an e-zine format for the Standard we will be Johnny-come-latelys with all the associated problems.

 No I would respectfully disagree Alan The case for retaining the printed version of the Standard does  not in any way detract from the need to fully exploit the internet.  In fact, there is already. in effect, an e-zine version of the Standard which appears every month on this site. Rather,  the argument is that there enormous danger in the SPGB becoming mainly, if not entirely, an internet-based organisation.  I predict it will lead to an increased sense of atomisation and alienatiom among the membership leading to a significant decline in said membership without the solid underpinning of physical activity.  And so much of the actual physical acitvity that the SPGB does is bound up with the existence of printed SS as the main bearer of socialist ideas by the organisation.  If you remove the printed SS, you cut out a substantial part of what makes the SPGB what it is.  The internet cannot really substitute for face to face interactions Let a thousand flowers bloom, I say.  Of course,  develop the internet side of things but also develop the real world physical approach to activity as well.  For starters, seriously think about a new campaign to promote the SS via retail outlets and coordinate  this with the wider advertising campaign in various newspapers/journal that I have heard about  which is about to be launched.  But you can't really encourage  people to get in touch with you without some kind of inducement – namely the special offer of 3 free issues of the SS in printed format.  That is another very powerful reason for retaining the printed version of the SS –  It provides much more significant feedback data than any amount of anonymous internet hits

[robbo203]

I guess I imagined that that the decision to shut down the Socialist Standard in its present format was a foregone conclusion and for which reason a campaign to "Save the Socialist Standard" had been launched.  Hence my sense of dismay.  I am mightily relieved to hear that it is simply a proposal by a branch that is up for discussion amd a vote at conference.  I would urge the comrades behind this proposal to think again – to widen their thinking about the role and significance of a journal like the Socialist Stadard to an organisation like the SPGB.  This is a clear case of the folly of adopting a narrow accountants approach to the subject.  The availability of the SS in a physical form is closely bound up with all sorts of other activities that make the SPGB what it is and without which, I believe, the organisation would succumb to an irreversible decline Literature lies at the heart of socialist political activity and with that in mind, I would I seriously recommend the SPGB think about my earlier suggestion – about  signficantly stepping up the output of pamphlets in particular and publishing much more in the way of "position papers" and educational documents such as those featured on this site,  I can assure you these items are enormously helpful to individuals first coming into contact with socialist ideas as I know from my own interactions with such individuals having referred them to this site

[robbo203]

I think discontinuing the printing of the SS  would be frankly disastrous for the SPGB and  would sharply diminish its profile in all sorts of ways.  Think of all the kinds of actvities that are actually facilitated by having physical copies of the SS around, What would be the point in going to political events and possibly meeting people on the same wavelength there without a supply of SSs? It would reduce the SPGB to a collection of atomised computer nerds  It would also reduce both the usefulness and  the incentive to hold public meetings when youve got no literature  available at such meetings for visitors to browse through If SS sales are declining you need to be thinking of ways to arrest and reverse this decline  rather than abandon the SS in its current format.  The Party has a fair bit of money.  How about using some of it in a big campaign to get retail outlets throughout the UK stocking it on very favourable terms to them?Seriously, this is a crazy idea. Who thought of it? Have they thought of all the ramifications for other kinds of activity?  I believe the SPGB is currently mounting a campaign to raise awareness of the organisation.  Well, how are you going to respond to enquirers who write in in the absence of the 3 free copies of the SS offer.  What are you gonna do? Refer them to the the website? What incentive would there even be for them to write in if they can simply google "SPGB".   The volume of contacts and interactions will diminish significantly if you become little more than an internet phenomenon.  Obviously I am not  saying dont make full use of the internet but dont abandon the more "physical" approach in the process.  These thing should complement not preclude each other While Im on the subject what about pamphlets?  Frankly the Party should be churning these out every year – a dozen or so at least per year.  If a tiny outfit like the Libertarian Alliance can produce literally 100s of pamphlets covering all sorts of subjects, topical and otherwise then, for sure, so can the SPGB. Think Big and adapt. You are selling yourself short with all this negativity.  Its as if the SPGB doesnt believe in itself anymore.  With the wholesale decline of the left and its attachment to state capitalism the SPGB should be gaining ground not losing it,  It should be standing out as a beacon of socialist enlightenment, a  vibrant  centre of socialist research and debate  and an increasingly well known reference point, nationally and internationally,  for any worker beginning to show an interest in socialism.  But it is not .  Why not?

[robbo203]

Sympo wrote:

ALB wrote:

"How could it since 10 small potatoes can't weigh the same as 10 large ones, can they?"I think what I am trying to ask is "does a potato that weighs 1.5 gram have the same value as a potato that weighs 1 gram?"If the answer is "yes", how is the value of potatoes relevant at all to its price, seeing as the price of potatoes differ depending on the weight of them? As I see it right now, all potatoes take the same amount of labour time to socially produce."Incidentally, to complicate things, commodities do not generally exchange at their labour-time values but tend to sell at what Marx called their "price of production" which is the monetary cost of producing them + a markup for the average rate of profit."Yes, I believe you mentioned this in my thread "A few questions regarding economics". I should read up on that.

I think the point is, Sympo, that value is a social average so it doesnt really matter in the end that a 1.5 gram potato and a 1 gram potato have a different price despite having – supposedly – the same  embodied labour content. It is only in the long run and in the aggregate that prices correspond to values to the extent that supply and demand work to cancel each other as an influence on the  price of potatoes. But even that is not the whole picture given the tendency for the rate of proft to equalise across different branches of industry despite differences in the organic composition of capital between them That is another factor that works to ensure that the price of a commodity will tend to diverge from its value 

[robbo203]

gnome wrote:

ALB wrote:

West London branch, in conjunction with comrades living there and elsewhere in Surrey, is standing a candidate in Guildford in the county council elections in Surrey where in the 1980s there was a very active Party branch. Although Surrey was part of the South East Region for the 2014 Euroelections, it was the only country where we didn't arrange for Royal Mail to distribute our election manifesto, which is one reason why we will be using the wording of that manifesto. But we'll have to distribute it ourselves since there is no free postal distribution in local elections.

This is the leaflet we'll be distributing in Guildford.                                                                                                                                                                                                             

 Good leaflet – snappy short with just enough information to make one want to read more.  I would be interested to know what sort of response this leaflet elicits  And if you come across anyone who might remember Guildford Branch back in the 1980s….

[robbo203]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

 If elected and when it comes to elections, it may well be our best chance at the present time, would we be drawn into the swamp of reformism…and perhaps the most mundane of them — where to put park benches and litter bins but maybe other responsibilities that we might highlight more the socialist future link – local allotments and playing fields…the sharing of the commons

 Would this really amount to reformism though?  Not that I am suggesting a socialist party should stand on any other ticket than establishing a socialist society.  But reformism to me signifies an attempt to modify the  workings or behaviour of capitalism as a socio economic system.  It is more to do with the economic policies of the central state than where  to locate a litter bin in your local Parish. I dont think it is being "reformist" to suggest that the bin might be better placed outside the local comprehensive school so the kids having an illicit ciggie can drop their butts in it

[Author]

Posts