robbo203
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In fact, most of the movement’s participants recognize that implementing the “net Zero by 2025” is not realistic within the capitalist framework, and therefore expect Citizens Assemblies to advise government to “Change System”- their common slogan. If abolishing capitalism is a reform – I am all for such reformism! In which case, we should be standing with the XR, not criticize their approach.
Hi Schekn
Just to clarify – are you saying XR’s approach is to try to exert pressure via CAs on capitalist governments to “Change System” when the very function of these governments is to uphold and maintain the system that is a largely responsible for anthropogenic climate change. If so, I dont see the point in this. If its not realistic to implement net “Zero by 2025” then it is most certainly not realistic to expect capitalist governments to abolish capitalism!
Also, I vaguely remember having touched on this before but what do members of XR mean by “The System” and what do they propose to put in its place? I strongly suspect most members of XR think capitalism equates with the free market or neoliberalism and that the alternative to capitalism is just more state intervention albeit of a benevolent greenish kind. Am I wrong in suspecting this? I hope so but the depressing thought occurs to me that I may not be all that far of mark….
Hi Brian
Yes I think labour share generally refers to the income of the total labour force which includes both productive and unproductive workers (the latter being financed out of surplus value). If you look only at productive workers such as in the case of manufacturing sector I mentioned above, the difference between the value of what they receive in wages and the value of what they produce will be significantly higher meaning their percentage share of their value added product will be significantly lower compared with “labour share”. This is because some of this surplus value will have to go towards financing unproductive workers who themselves dont produce value but are nevertheless vital to operate capitalism
I wonder if you or anyone else have specific links that can through light on this matter. I am trying to put together a thoroughly convincing case based on empirical data to demonstrate the reality of capitalist exploitation. Capitalist apologists of course seek to deny this by claiming that an economic surplus is required to purchase non labour inputs such as machinery forgetting that these non labour inputs are only made by the workers in other industries. The money which the capitalists appropriate through the sale of commodities does not conjure a machine out of thin air. It has to be produced using labour
But then capitalism’s apologists seem incapable of being able to see the wood for the trees and so they will only focus on what is going on in a single firm not the wider economy
LBird All Matt was suggesting was bring the matter up under another topic heading.. Perhaps make a new thread if you cant find an old one that suits
“Bad Psychology: Why Climate Change Won’t Be Solved by Better Decisions at the Supermarket” https://areomagazine.com/2019/10/01/bad-psychology-why-climate-change-wont-be-solved-by-better-decisions-at-the-supermarket/
We have substantial difficulties, we need to adapt to a different way of political activity, however we are starting to make progress.
Yes indeed Bijou. It is my perception – right or wrong – that the SPGB is actually growing albeit at a snails pace. The challenge is how to adapt to the new circumstances we face , how to engage members in new forms of activity that transcend traditional branch-based activity. The internet is key to this since that is where the overwhelming majority of new members come into contact with us
Hi David
The Party raises money (which it has to since we live in a capitalist world) through a variety of methods – membership dues, donations, legacies and sales. Dues are voluntary and we try to keep the price of stuff we sell – literature and accessories – affordable as possible or to at least cover costs
Meetings are on principle free to all but some events such as the Summer School carry a charge because of the cost of accommodation and food. If you do get the opportunity to get to Summer School or weekend residential events such as that organised by Lancaster branch recently, it will be well worth going
If you have other ideas of raising money to carry out socialist activity then yes of course other members would be interested in hearing about this. You can bring up this ideas here or on SPINTCOM or by circulating branches (see contact details in the Socialist Standard).
To be honest though I dont think money is the big problem. The Party has quite a healthy bank balance at the moment to finance activity, mainly as a result of legacies. I think the big problem is how to encourage more members and sympathisers to become more ACTIVE.
There has been a marked shift in the way people join the SPGB and this has affected the pattern of party activity. Overwhelmingly now it is through the internet that people join. There has been a corresponding decline in physical branch activity.
In my opinion what the SPGB needs to do is two things
- encourage more internet-based activity by members from “reading classes” (there is a facility on this forum which is hardly used at all) through to publicity campaigns (like the “ten minutes a month for socialism” campaign). Everyone new member joining should be assigned a “buddy” to keep in touch with over the internet if not physically. A buddy system will break down the sense of isolation which is so corrosive of party activism.
- develop new innovative ways to encourage physical one to one interactions. Branch meetings, though necessary, are not enough. The Lancaster branch initiative referred to above points to one possible way ahead. Video conferencing is another
There is a lot more I can say on the subject but I would be interested to hear your views…
Its a relief to see support for the far right Vox party is dropping. The rise of this ultra right deeply racist organisation particularly in parts of Andalucía such as Almeria province where there are thousands of illegal migrants working in the greenhouses, was quite a disturbing development…
Yeah that about sums it up, Adam. This might be of interest….
https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/09/26/inenglish/1569505850_681434.html
Read this online pamphlet while I was away. It is very good. I know it is on the WSPUS site but we should consider promoting it too. In any event those here who haven’t read it yet should.
Absolutely agree with this. I have been linking to this pamphlet on various FB sites to which I belong. Other comrades should consider doing the same.
This has contributed to an increase in publicity contacts which the WSPUS is now enjoying out of which future applicants for membership may well materialise. It also benefits the SPGB because the American Party has prominently displayed on its website the offer of free literature, meaning the 3 month free subsription to the Socialist Standard
By each companion party helping each other, they also help themselves…
Apologies for being a doomsayer again But some things require said and we cannot go on acting under delusions that everything is alright. It is not just climate activists that are talking about a looming existential threat – we also face the same extinction risk.
I think I’ve said this before Alan but at the moment it seems the Party is actually growing albeit it at a snails pace – at least in the last few years. Somebody correct me if I am wrong. The problem is that there has been a decline in traditional party activity which is ongoing. The great majority of new members come via the internet and there is little actual face to face interaction within the membership as such.
I applaud the suggestions of Paddy and Bijou promoting an increase in face to face interactions. This is one prong of a strategy for future growth. The other prong is to seek ways to engage new members right from the very start in internet activity, the very activity through which they came into contact with the SPGB.
If we focus on these two prongs the future will be a lot brighter
And no more excuses for this apathy, please. Lets have suggestions instead of how to kick start members out of their malaise. Robbo’s suggestion of 10 minutes a month for action on the internet, has fallen on stony ground.
With absolutely minimal effort it is starting to yield decent results. In the case of the American Party, for example we are starting to get a flow of publicity contacts asking for free literature in response to publicity concerning the new pamphlet they have just brought out. It really doesn’t take a lot of effort. If even just 50 members got involved in this scheme on a regular basis – maybe 3 or 4 hours a month rather than just 10 minutes – it could transform the prospects of the Party. This is within our grasp but members dont seem to realise this. There is little or no sense of self belief in themselves and in what they can achieve. So we continue to achieve little. A vicious circle. Sad but true….
Sorry about the few grammar spelling mistakes in the above post. I see the edit facility has just recently disappeared. Any ideas why?
LBird I simply mean by “scrutiny” by answerable to some democratically elected body. As an analogy the SPGB has a democratically elected Executive Committee which is controlled by conference and party polls. There are also various sub Committees under the overall control of the EC whose members are nominated by branches
For example, I’m on one of these Committees – the Publications Committee, We operate within the broad terms of reference laid down for this Committee. Ultimately if we want to get a new pamphlet published we have to seek the permission of the EC for this and the final text also needs EC approval. But we also initiate a lot of things ourselves within these guidelines so that what you end up is a fairly productive and fruitful two way interaction between us and the EC and also with other comrades who we see to commission as writers of new pamhlets
I haven’t given much thought to the precise make up to the democratic structure of decision-making in socialism but I guess there would be the different spatial levels of decision-making referred to – local , regional and global – with corresponding bodies of delegated and recallable members charged with carrying out the wishes of their particular constituencies. In the case of the global body or parliament I imagine it would have a relationship towards specialist global organisations like the FAO, not unlike that of the SPGB EC to its subcommittees
