rodshaw
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I don’t really understand some of the UK figures. “The science” is somewhat contradictory. On the one hand for several weeks the graphs have been showing a slight daily increase in new cases, back to around 1,000 now (and the actual number of new cases will be significantly higher, though this isn’t being concealed), but if so how can the magical R number as low as 0.8 to 1?
“What specific measures might be taken do you think?”
It could be argued that the conditions for the spread of a virus like Covid, at least to fatal pandemic proportions, wouldn’t be there in the first place – no overcrowding, general bad health etc. And no encroachment of humans on animal “territory”.
I’m sure there would be an efficient testing and tracing system in place right from the word go, and there would be no trade-off between health considerations and the need to keep business moving. So all that might be needed would be a handful of very localised “lockdowns”.
Any lockdown recommendations would obviously need the agreement of the local population affected but why wouldn’t they?
Hospitals would be much more able to cope right from the start – no shortages of space or PPE etc. At least I would hope so. I would envisage every local community having its own supply of PPE on a pretty much permanent basis.
And then of course there would be no cover-ups as nobody would be trying to cover their backs or have anything to gain from hiding information. Not to mention the lack of competition for who could produce a vacccine that was profitable.
Governments round the world have been following the dictates of profit and opening up too soon. And they know full well that only some people are going to obey the rules. And who can blame them? Messages about the spread of the virus have been mixed to say the least. We do know that now cases are on a gradual rise but I suspect it’s nothing like we might see in winter.
On Saturday night four of us went to a pub for a meal. This was my first time at an eatery since the pandemic started. They were observing the rules in that you had to sanitise your hands, sign in and sit outside because there wasn’t enough room for social distancing inside. But there the precautions ended – the pub’s garden area was pretty crowded and nobody was really keeping any distance, which would have been nigh on impossible. Actually I was pretty scared and my first instinct was to run – especially living as I do in Northampton, which is on the list of potential hotspots.
But how much danger was I really in? Frankly I have no idea. All I keep thinking back to is that a socialist society would in all probability never let a virus get to these proportions, it would be nipped in the bud at source.
It’s one news purveyor taking a dig at another. Is there any news source we can go to which isn’t biased?
At least the BBC doesn’t pepper you with intrusive adverts (though it does spend a lot of time advertising itself).
No doubt most people on this forum have had Jehovah’s Witnesses knocking on the door. Last time a pair came round, for a split second we hit common ground. One of them thrust a leaflet under my nose and the conversation went something like this:
JW: Some people think the world is getting better, some think it’s getting worse and some think it’s about the same. What do you think?
Me: I think the world would be a far better place if we abolished the capitalist system and established a world where all resources are held in common.
JW (glancing at his mate): Well, I think we could go along with that.
Me: Well, you need to join the World Socialist Movement then.
JW: Ah well, we’re Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Me: I also disagree with all forms of religion.
Whereupon they scuttled off.
Ah well, at least whoever edited it down will have heard the full message. We can’t really hope for anything to get through when they cut each contribution down to about 5 seconds.
That’s right, keep the damn foreigners at bay. With all the security checks in place now anyway, it’s been bad enough getting in or out while in the EU.
I don’t get it – aside from it being bad for the general public going on holiday, surely this can’t be good for business travellers either?
“…no country in the world has ever claimed to have established communism.”
Whether they have claimed it themselves or not, they are/were seen as communist in popular eyes, rather than socialist, and in newspaper articles, TV programmes and the like, the word communism rather than socialism is generally equated with repressive state control.
Hi Johan,
I doubt very much the Netherlands would go bankrupt but unfortunately governments always put costs ahead of human health and wellbeing because they support the capitalist system which is based on profit-making and cost-saving.
But in the properly socialist or communist world that we advocate (for us the words are interchangeable) there would be no governments to tell us what to do. Instead, decisions would be made democratically by the whole community, based on the best evidence available.
In socialism there would be no money because all resources would be commonly owned. Health and wellbeing would be given priority and those who needed extra care would get it. There would be no monetary cost, and healthcare like everything else would be determined by people’s self-defined needs.
I have a suspicion that by far most people who profess a religion in the statistics are not very devout. They mostly do their worship for social/family or ‘just in case’ reasons.
Before world revolution can come about people’s ideas need to change on a huge scale. Otherwise it’s minority action imposed on the majority. There’s no way it will take people by surprise. That doesn’t mean we all have to be experts in political theory but people will certainy have to be aware of their position under capitalism and have the desire to change it.
The campaign for socialism might in the meantime take people by surprise if it ‘goes viral’ (when it might still be only supported by a minority). The change from a small minority into a substantial majority might happen very fast and leave some of us reeling – the capitalist class most of all, let’s hope.
”Now, when socialists are so very few, a higher degree of understanding of the workings of capitalism and the course of history are required of socialists (at least of organised socialists). This need not be the case when the socialist movement takes off and begins to become a mass movement.”
Maybe this would become true as the practice of socialism became more relevant than the theory. If you’re establishing more democratic workplaces, helping to get food to those who need it, building a more eco-friendly environment, etc., it doesn’t really matter what your religious views are.
But I don’t think membership would grow significantly, if at all, if we dropped the religion question. It would probably fall as some people would be bound to leave.
