robbo203
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
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
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
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
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?
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
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….
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 commonsWould 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
Something here on the role of the "White Helmets" – by the sound if it, a sort of Al Queda/ISIS amateur dramatic society much adored by some in the Western media for their compelling performances http://theduran.com/warning-disturbing-images-white-helmets-busted-killing-babies-in-pr-stunt-to-start-war-in-syria/
imposs1904 wrote:Excellent article by Robert Barltrop from 1971:Link The Permissive SocietyYes that is indeed an excellent article, The point that Barltrop makes about eras being defined by the perceptions of the ruling class (or as Marx would have itm the ruling ideas are those of the ruling class) is true enough but, as he also suggests, it is not uninfluenced by the experiences of the working class. For instance, in the wake of the Great Depression there was a tendency to tone down displays of conspicuous consumption because it was seen to be somewhat provocative and unseemly in the face of mass hardship. Its a two-way process of adjustment this ever shifting relationship between the capitalists and the workers
alanjjohnstone wrote:.As i touched on earlier, we cannot ignore that it is North Korea that is the real target. A gesture that cannot be retaliated by Syria but if directed upon Korea, i think they would seek revenge.It looks like the Chinese are now preparing themselves for a US attack on North Koreahttp://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/china-moves-150000-troops-and-medical-supplies-to-north-korean-border-in-case-us-attacks-kim-jong-un-regime/ar-BBzFB5g?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartandhp If such an attack came I wonder what pretext would be manufactured by Trump and his merry band of war crimminals. Firing a few dud missiles into the sea, though "provocative", is probably not enough to constitute a casus belli and as for human rights violations, well, considering the US is in bed with some of the very worst human rights violaters – Saudi Arabia for example – that is gonna be a tricky one to pull off in the eyes of increasingly skeptical public Capitalist politics is just a very bad form of theatre.
ALB wrote:The more I think about it, and I'm not normally into conspiracy theories, the more I think that there is something odd about that chemical attack. It had no advantage for the Syrian government, which was just about to be rehabiltated, and every advantage for those states that want "regime change" there, i.e the installation of a pro-West regime. My betting would be that the Turkish intelligence services would have been more likely to have staged it than the Syrian government.Yes Im inclined to agree. The Russans, for one, would be hopping mad if it as discovered that regime was in fact responsible. I think a lot of people are skeptical. I posted something this morning in response to the MSN article mentioned in above (post 38) in the commentary section and was gobsmacked this evening when I came back from work to find that it had got 83 likes, Hopefully its a sign of the times – that people are not going to be so easily conned by the warmongers
The warmongering scum on all sides are at it again – ratcheting up the stakes and increasing the odds in this war of words that could all too easily become a war of horrendously deadly weaponry, if they are not careful, that could wipe out most, it not all, of humanity. Developments can take on a momementum of their own once we cross the line when all rationality breaks down and the irrationality of the war machine takes over http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/syria-crisis-russia-raises-prospect-of-war-if-it-is-given-g7-ultimatum-as-it-mocks-boris-johnsons-no-show/ar-BBzCkUy?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartandhpThese irresponsible idiots need to understand once and for all that this world is not theirs to play with in this cynical and desparately dangerous game of one-upmanship and macho posturing
mcolome1 wrote:Others sources like Forbes and the Economists have indicated that in 2018 the Chinese economy will overtake US. The IMF is referring to the size of the Chinese economy, but others sources have also indicated that it is going to be larger in size, in investment and in millitary power, and spheres of influences. China already made an offer to Meixco in case that Nafta failsNot too sure about military power though. China has a long long way to go before it will catch up with the US in military spending. The US Military spending is about 2 1/2 times the size of China's and as a percentage of GDP its also greater.Here is an interesting list of the top miitary spenders, The surprise for me was Saudi Arabia which even beats Russia into third place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
John Pozzi wrote:.Rear money, i.e., GRB ecos, signify the universal value of the product of nature, i.e., the generation of biomass in an ecosystem, usually expressed in units of mass per unit surface (or volume) per unit time, for instance, grams per square metre per day (g m−2 d−1). The mass unit may relate to dry matter or to the mass of carbon generated. Productivity of autotrophs such as plants is called primary natural productivity, while that of heterotrophs such as animals is called secondary productivity.Secondary production is the generation of biomass of heterotrophic (consumer) organisms in a system. This is driven by the transfer of organic material between trophic levels, and represents the quantity of new tissue created through the use of assimilated food that everyone consumes.Oh dear. What on earth are you on about? This has got nothing to do with money. Money is a social institution grounded in an exchange or private property-based economy, The transfer of organic materials between trophic levels is not some kind of quid pro quo property transaction. I know there is a tendency to resort to metaphors when talking about nature or natural processes but the lion is not really the "king of the animal world". You do know that dont you?
John Pozzi wrote:.Real money values the product of nature, i.e. natural resources, the basis of our economy.John Pozzi, your comments are becoming more and more bizarre and surreal. Do you know what money is and what it signifies? How is it a product of nature? Natural resources are not money, for heavens sake, though they can be bought and sold for money and that only relatively recently in human history
