rodshaw
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A bit quaint for today's tastes but it certainly gets the message across.I think it would sound good done in the style of, say, The Fall. That way you wouldn't really need music, just a rhythm and beat
I think there's another element as well – despite what we say about us all being in the same boat, there are a significant number of people who are 'comfortable' and who don't want radical change.
alanjjohnstone wrote:On another thread i mentioned in passing that we should be conducting opinion polls to determine our political approach and effectiveness. But of course capitalism carries out its own research to determine prevailing opinions. The latest Guardian poll makes interesting and surprising findings.Most people who don't vote do so out of anger at the political system and not because of apathy. Disappointingly though for ourselves just a quarter of the electorate believe the two major politcal parties are so similar that voting is pointless. We have always strived to highlight the fact that it is Hobson's Choice of tweedledum and tweedledumber…apparently not enough people believe that as a reason not to vote. And again only a quarter cite the fact that the political parties do not represent their views as a reason to not vote. It seems for the vast majority , the existing political parties do reflect their views and opinions, something we have acknowledged…people get what they vote for! It is more about trust that spurs on voters to choose whether to be political, hence how UKIP who are untested on carrying out election promises so far can more easily tap into the discontent and although some of its politicians have been found wanting in the ethic/honesty stakes they have so far not been too high profile as the rest of mainstream corrupt politicians have. I leave members to reach their own conclusions on how in future the Party utilise our resources and direct our own propaganda in light of the above facts. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/26/fury-mps-not-voting-pollI think it's the case that the existing parties are still idealised by some of the electorate – Labour the working man's party, Conservative the party for business, Green the party for the environment, etc. Anyone looking at past performance with any degree of seriousness must see there's little difference. Whatever people's reasons for voting or not voting, our big problem is the same – to get them to look through the glass ceiling at the bleedin' obvious. Unfortunately the vast majority of people still have the mentality that things just need tinkering with. Anything else cuts into their daily lives too much.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Lennon and leaders in his own wordshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoC83orA4ysLennon on revolution in his own words and endorsing peacefully if possible , violently if necessary ideahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRq1mp4VArAAs far as socialists are concerned, these clips are a garbled mishmash of all sorts, e.g. 'If you want to change the world, do it subtly by…bed-ins'. Yeah, right. I think Russell Brand has more idea.Holding 'Imagine' up as a socialistic song is fair enough as far as it goes (it doesn't mention anything about taking political action to get rid of the ruling class, for example, and nor does 'Working Class Hero') but we should distance ourselves from 'Lennonism'.
Maybe his comments are just a prelude to laying off some vatican employees in the interests of austerity.
BTSomerset wrote:However, directly investing in a fund does risk being associated with unsavoury activity, which would tarnish our reputation.Our reputation with whom? The pope?
Ed wrote:How does owning the means of production and exploiting the surplus value of workers make us part of the owning class?I apologize, I don't know how to answer this in a way that will not come across as completely patronizing.And how can you possibly think that by investing in stocks and shares some money which would otherwise sit in a bank account (which the bank invests in stocks and shares anyway), the party suddenly owns the means of production and exploits the working class? It beggars belief. We'll still only own the current value of the money we invested.
How does investing the money to try and get a bit of return on it make us any more part of the owning class than having the money in the first place, sitting in a bank account?And remember, folks, the value of your investment can go down as well as up.
If this post intended to make a point about the ‘ethicality’ or otherwise of investments to be made by the party, in my view it should have said so and it should be in the party business section, not the general discussion section.
So some people will be turned off these charities and look for other ways of wasting their money.'But still', others will say, 'at least some of the money gets to the people who need it'.Quite possibly – and look what good it's done. The relatively poor giving money to the very poor, and the rich onto another good scam.
mcolome1 wrote:rodshaw wrote:He's obviously a Catholic Marxist. What's not to like?A Catholic-Marxist is an incompatible combination, it is like mixing oil and vinegar, religion and socialism are incompatibles, because some reformist leftist groups are supporting him, it does not mean that the catholic church is taking another road, in any way, the left will support anybody, but he does not support the so called liberation theology. …
Er, yes, irony doesn't carry well over the internet.
What about 'full democracy'?We definitely don't want to be talking about the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. People will really think we're stuck in the past. In any case people relate 'bourgeois', if anything, with well-to-do 'middle class', so it's yet another term we'd have to start redefining. Let's not go there.
