steve colborn
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Do we really have time to "convince … the working class of the need for socialism"? At what point does this need become urgent and/or reach crisis levels? And why do we tolerate any measure of it to begin with?Well, let us put it this way, unless the "working class" are convinced of the need for Socialism and moreover understand the need for it and cooperate in bringing it about, it will never happen. What is "your" proposal, to deal with this "urgent crisis"? Violent revolution, where the fighting is done by someone else, but the "Leaders" shout encouragement from the rear! From the rear of the fighting or from the leaders rear ends is a moot point.So given your first paragraph, does that mean the conditions and consequences of capitalism we are currently experiencing are at tolerable levels? Nowhere, in Vin Marattys first paragraph, is there any inference of "tolerable levels" of whatever! within Capitalism. Stevie C.
Read the links from the post above and I must say this person makes some pretty hefty assumptions. I might in fact think, that Socialism can be brought about peacefully but I do not know how this makes me a pacifist. As I am most assuredly not. It is folk like this, who do not realise how truly powerful class consciousness and the concommitant understanding, really is! Nota Bene. Stevie C.
There have been no Socialist uprisings, anywhere, at anytime. Once one has a "Socialist understanding", there comes a corollary understanding, a broader prospective if you will. It is an understanding, that with a "Socialist perspective, so many avenues of thought come to mind. The realisation that if you, as an individual worker, have achieved such a level of consciousness, there is no reason why any other worker cannot do the same. It is an understanding that there are, in fact, certain preconditions that are necessary, before a Socialist transformation can take place. The primary one, at this historical time, as opposed to 1917 Russia, is not the ability to fulfill the needs of all workers, which exists now but not in Russia at that time but is, a "class consciousness". An understanding of what is going on today, Capitalism. Of what is wrong with Capitalism and why it cannot be made to work in 'workers' interests but further, to understand that there is, in fact, an alternative! An alternative where, we all as free and equal individuals, possess the world and everything in and on it. That as we take freely of the store of wealth, we realise, as self aware class conscious individuals, that we must give of our time to fill this store of wealth. That in a society of class conscious individuals, leaders would be unnecessary. All one would have, is an administration of things, not people. That Socialism/Communism, call it what you will, would be a totally democratic society. Where every decisions that affected "you", "you" would have a say in…………… This post is only a start. How do you all think mass class conscious would affect Capitalism and down the road, how would it influence a future, Socialist society????????????? Stevie C.
As a statement of fact. Feb EC minutes; (b) Form F for Steve Colborn (Central Branch, resigned, personal reasons)Motion 7– Shannon and Field moved the EC defer the Form F for one monthto give Cde Steve Colborn an opportunity to reconsider. Carried: 6-2-1. March EC minutes; iii. Re x3b (Form F for Cde S Colborn), including Motion 7 ("That the EC defer the Form F for one month to give Cde Steve Colborn an opportunity to reconsider.") It was agreed to deal with this item in section 3. Forms A and F (b) Form F for Cde S Colborn (Central, resigned) A. E-mail from Cde Colborn (16 February): I am sending this e.mail as clarification that I still wish to resign from the Party. Moreover, I feel that the decision to defer my Form F was done without my permission, or prior discussion with myself. I feel that on this issue, I made my feelings abundantly clear. Therefore, please present my Form F before the March E.C. with a stress on the fact that I certainly do, wish to resign. B. E-mail from Cde Colborn (18 February): I feel I must point out that I did not in fact resign for personal reasons. I resigned because of fundamental disagreements with the moderation of the SPGB forum and moreover, that I could no longer countenance the unjust and unfair moderation of certain comrades, whilst, at the same time, other members seemed to be impervious to moderation no matter what their actions. I take this decision with regret but nonetheless I take it. Keep spreading the message Comrades. Motion 9– Browne and Craggs moved that at his repeated insistence, the postponed resignation of Cde Steve Colborn be accepted. Carried: 9-0-0. Nowhere, in the Minutes, was any referenced intention to charge myself, or suggestions of the same, or the possibilty of the act, to charge me with action detrimental! My disagreement was with "forum moderation, as can be clearly seen with the above, " I resigned because of fundamental disagreements with the moderation of the SPGB forum" etc etc. That I have re-submitted my Form A, is down to one reason and one alone, that the Forum is being moderated in a more egalitarian way and that the issues I took issue with, appear to have been resolved. As this thread states, "Why would membership of the SPGB be refused"? There is no reason whatsoever, for my Form A to have been refused. Unless, other criteria were being applied and that can only be 1/ personal animosity, 2/previous, neither of which hold water. As the facts above prove.I would expect, as the title of this thread is quite specific and my post holds to it, that this post is not, nor will be, "proscribed". Stevie C.
If anyone would like to peruse the Feb EC minutes, they will find that I was asked to reconsider my Form F and an EC resolution was moved, seconded and passed to this end. The Form F being defered until the March EC meeting. No mention, or even allusion regarding "action detrimental" was even floated. So what cloud was it that I was supposed to have left under? Who suggested that there was any "cloud of suggestion that I may have been open to a charge of action detrimental"? and therefore this was my reason for resignation!Nothing could be farther from the truth, which is bourne out by the facts. And no, I am not confusing "infamous" with "notorious", although some may be.So unsubstantiated assertions are now "facts"! Myth and fable, are now reality! Stevie c.
JD Mac 29:26 AM on 16/11/2013A man dressed as though attending dinner upstairs at Downton addresses us about austerity from a sumptuous banqueting suite. Problem is that "luvvie", "lickspittle" that I am, I have to admit that I enjoy a visit to a stately home and love libraries lined with expensive, interesting old books and displaying works of art. However, I wish that the vast resources of wealth created by capitalism could be employed other than in the pursuit of conflicts throughout the world. Cameron once talked of "Big Society", mute on that now, and "we are all in it together", that too seems to have been put to bed. B and C having the sort of debate that is worth a read, both making valid points without resorting to name calling, or long personalised rants.
Actually Admice, I was being a mite blase. As someone whose minor was in Sociology, I also am inquisitive enough to wonder why less women appear in the ranks of a political party. Especially this revolutionary Socialist Party. It may have something to do with the differing social conditioning men women undergo! It is only fairly recently, that a womans place in society has been seen as more than merely an adjunct of men. I can see the differences between men and women, the superficial difference of black and white, understand that individuals have differences in sexuality, but what I was getting at was, that for me personally, the most important thing is, whether or not one is class conscious and from that viewpoint, to me at least, all else is, ephemera.I,ve never been overburdened with the discriminatory impulses our betters would have us accept, that help to keep us, as a class, divided. Stevie C.
One tries ones best Ozy : ) And the discussion with my fellow worker turned out rather well to. No verbal bludgeon or condescension, finishing on a quite convivial note. Stevie C.
Banished7:23 PM on 15/11/2013Thank you @stevecolborn, for the good wishes. Clearly we disagree, but, such is life. I accept, one is never too old to learn, and I always try to have an open mind.
Banished5:16 PM on 15/11/2013Hi @stevecolborn, I own up to being a member of the human race (not one of the richest 1% as far as I know). But, I am honest. Honest enough to admit, that, being human, I do "suffer" from "human nature", and, I am greedy. I am aged 66, in my life, I have met many, many people, of different ethnic backgrounds and different "socio-economic class". I actually find it delightfully re-assuring that we are all so much alike. stevecolborn7:10 PM on 15/11/2013Hi Banished, I to am a member of the human race. I must say, if greed is "human nature", then 99% of us are not very good at it! In fact, just look at all the charitable giving, even in the current economic climate of austerity we are currently undergoing.In a society such as the one we live in, I find it reassuring how little selfishness and greed there actually is and how cooperative humans really are. Be well.
Banished3:38 PM on 15/11/2013 OK @stevecolborn, I understand the plan now. It sounds absolutely fabulous. How are you going to overcome human greed?, how are you going to motivate people to do anything? stevecolborn4:50 PM on 15/11/2013 Hi Banished. When you talk about human greed, you can only be talking about the tiny fraction of the worlds population, who have taken the whole world and everything in and on it, into their own private possession. Because you cannot be talking about the 99% of the population who, for a pittance that wages are, produce everything now, from a pin to a computer, and whose wages are, in the majority of cases, barely sufficient to keep body and mind together. If this vast majority are prepared to create the wealth we, as human beings need to exist, for the aforementioned, paltry sum, then in an alternative society, where they would have free access to the fruits of their labour, which would more than adequately fulfil their needs, then I suggest to you that this would be all the motivation needed.By the way, two questions to you. Are you, yourself, one of these who are greedy?And why if humans are so greedy, have they allowed this tiny minority of Capitalists to basically, steal the world?
Banished9:22 AM on 15/11/2013 @stevecolborn, seemed like a simple question to me, the possible answers being Yes or a list of one or more countries/states where your proposed system has been implemented. Your list could have included ANY country in the world, not just the limited few I mentioned phillo11:24 AM on 15/11/2013 The soviet union wasn't socialist/communist. That's news to me comrade. stevecolborn11:32 AM on 15/11/2013 My answer is quite explicit in its interpretation and it is not "my proposed system". As the 3 mentioned countries had/have nothing to do with Socialism/Communism, neither did/do any other self proclaimed countries.Marx, Engels, Morris and others would agree with this statement but the likes of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin etc who have done nothing but distort and subvert the ideas of Marx et al, would argue differently.The proof of the pudding is, however, in the eating. Marx and others, advocated a classless, moneyless (no means of exchange) world society, based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means of producing and distributing what we, as human beings, need to live.Up until the present day, this has clearly not been attained/achieved. But just because something has not been tried, does not mean it is impossible. The world was once dominated by Feudalism but no longer. The un-famous Colborn.
