steve colborn
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Alan,I may have appeared as one of those who looked like they were overegging the pudding somwhat with respect to Brand. I can assure you, such was not my mindset.This aside, it was and is refreshing, to see "revolution" and Marx also, in the public spotlight. A chink of light assuredly but one that mayhap, the Party can turn to an advantage Stevie C.
If the EC is intending to discuss, "the question of whether or not the EC can reject an applicant, whoaccepts the Object and Declaration of Principles, on other grounds", then a whole big can of worms is about to be opened!What criteria are to be used? Are subjective and or personal opinions to be included in any decision? As the title of this thread is, "Why would membership of the SPGB be refused", what do members of this site think.Is an applicants "previous" to be taken into consideration? If so, what categories of "previous", are to be considered fair, to be considered? Is it to be considered, that not even Capitalist jurisprudence allows "previous" to be taken into account.Is that the end? What if it is discovered that someone, inside the Party has "previous" and that that, "previous", is considered heinous enough, by enough people, to warrant retrospective action! Can action be taken, "after the fact"?Ramification comrades! I have been intimately involved in the events leading up to this decision. Nothing happened to warrant an event of this magnitude. Hopefully, common sense will prevail and if all the "facts" are taken into account, then I am confident this will be the case. Steve Colborn.
Sorry Admice, I keep forgetting that Caps are considered shouting, rather than used to "stress" a point. As to "twisting to make Marx right", or "towing the party line", I cannot agree with that position.In Capitalism, if firms do not take R+D seriously, then one thing will happen, their competitors will and those firms "standing still" will be swallowed up. Invention and innovation is a "must", given the competitive nature of Capitalism Regardless of mans "nature", this is about the "nature" of Capitalism". Efficincy for a Capitalist firm, is about cutting, or keeping costs, down.Never knew there was a party line, by the way. If there was, I'd probably be one of the last people to follow it. As someone who first joined the Party 32 years ago, I did so because I agreed with the analysis of present day society they put forward and their analysis of why it needed changing. Opinions I have seen no reason to change.I would really like to know, finally, why you think my "thought" is'nt independent now! Quite a few peeps would probably say, it was too independent already. Stevie C.
OOps made a mistake.I should never try to multitask. Please ignore the above post. YFS Steve Colborn.
I'm not complaining, but how has a post, I sent to the "capitalim creating abundance" thread, appeared on this thread? I'm not complaining, because the post merits wider dissemination! I would just like to clarify the technical reasons, as to how this has occured? Steve Colborn.
Admice, poverty is, "hunger". Hunger comes directly from "poverty"! If one is not "poor", then one can afford the means to maintain oneself in bodily "health". Poverty being the issue, also translates to, demand for energy, clean water, for food or sustenance, rather than "land suitable for farming".In a world, commonly owned by us all, the arable land condusive to this activity, would belong, to us all. As science has proved, this land is sufficxient to provide the dietary requirements of at least, 4 times the present population of the earth.So what do we, as class conscious individuals, make of this? We have no alternative, other than to conclude that, "we need to radically change the basis that society is organised on". From a system of, "production for profit", to a system based upon, "production for direct human use". Socialism, Communism, Free Access, whatever one wants to call it, or is your "buzzword" of the moment.Get real, get aware and get active, class consciously that is. Tell leaders to go, "follow themselves". Tell intellectuals to go, "understand themselves", and tell workers to have enough faith in themselves and their knowledge, to "trust themselves". And while I'm at it, tell Capitalists to go and "fuck themselves"! Save us the bother.Steve Colborn.
"I think rather than "capitalism had created the material conditions for abundance and thus for the socialist transformation" it's the assembly line, mass production and technological advance that created that".But who, or what, were the drivers of this technological advancement? The assembly line, etc etc. It was the Capitalist system, ensuring that productive methods were even more, profitable. It was in the interests of Capitalists to do this. They did not create these conditions because they gave a tinkers cuss, about us, the workers, our conditions of living! They did not raise the levels of production so they could satisfy our "needs".Everything, in any given epoch, springs from the present mode, (existing then) of the mrethod of production. In Capitalism, it is "production for profit". Things are not produced for their, "use" value. They are produced in the expectation of, "profit". If profit will not accrue, production will not start.This is what Capitalism is predicated on. It is the reason, Capitalism wil not, nor ever can, be run in the interests of "EVERYONE" but only the interest of the "tiny", Capitalist, minority.Once one understands this "basic" tenet, one can understand Capitalism, our place, as a class within it and the only viable alternative, out of it, "production for direct human use", which production is under the auspices of us all, for us all, in the interests of, "US ALL".Steve Colborn.
Indeed Ed and Vin. Anything to get contact between members and sympathisers going. Overcoming any feelings of isolation. Steve Colborn.
Hi Brian,I do not think "transparency of the party decision making process", is all the lads were talking about. It is also about providing a "place", where the far flung members of Central Branch, can come together to discuss and confer, much as members of "branches" do at their regular meetings. To widen democratic inclusivity. Steve Colborn.
All the discourse of "workers councils" this, parliament that, is merely so much chat. As has been said, innumerable times, what pertains at the time of a societal change, we can only speculate on. We can say that, having a majority of delegates in parliament and in like institutes aroiund the world, that are there with a mandate for change, will give legitimation to a revolution. To try and use ideas that surrounded the 1917 revolution, simply will not wash. When Socialism is brought about, it will be by a "class conscious", "self aware" majority, fully aware of it's class position and of what is necessary to bring about it's emancipation. It will not be based on a minority cadre of so called professional revolutionaries, leading the masses. Masses, moreover, who do not even have a clue about the society they inhabit, never mind what is being suggested to replace it.The Socialist Party have no interest in gaining "power", nor in "exploiting" anyone. It's aim, it's sole aim, is to propogate Socialist ideas. To disseminate them to the widest possible audience, to spread consciousness as to what is possible. As more workers join the movement for an alternative society, so they will bring fresh ideas on how to achieve our goals and add fresh impetus to the struggle.What is most assuredly the case, is that as long as we have Capitalism, with all it's structures, workers will continue to be exploited and used as adjuncts to the lust for profit for the few. Steve Colborn
Every time Owen came close to making a point, the fat balding, ginger headed Scottish arse interupted. Why invite on a guest, when all you will do is fuck up his relevant contribution? Answers on a postcard to ginger Neil! Steve Colborn.
Pro-Capitalist political parties, Tory, Labour, Libdem etc etc, all, without exception tell us, the workers, they agree with the right to withdraw "our" labour, that is, until we decide to do just that. Then it is, "oh look at those selfish union shits, putting patients, victims of fires, schoolchildren etc etc, at risk, or beneath their own petty greed!The rub is, these creeps get away with it. More depressingly, they get ignorant members of the working-class to fall for this emotional, bullshitting crap!What about these two faced shits, admitting that it is they, by putting the profits of a few, before the interests of the majority, who are putting people at risk, and beneath the greed of a tiny minority? Steve Colborn.
Whenever I have stood as an SPGB candidate, the first thing I said, whether in letters to the press re my candidature, in the manifesto, or face to face was, we only want your vote, if you understand and agree with the aims of the SPGB, ie, getting Socialism. Cuts out all the bullshit dont you think?After all, As a member of the SPGB, I was not a member of the, "I'll push any issue that will get me votes party"! Steve Colborn.
The UNITE union, in the Grangemouth dispute, are being accused of "bullying tactics, because some of it's members protested near the house of one of the bosses of INEOS. Cretinous Cameron is even calling on Labour to investigate this affair!INEOS wanted workers to take a pay cut,sign a no-strike agreement and agree to redundancies. Their "negotiation tactic", if you can call it that, was to tell workers, either agree to this or we will shut the plant. Citing the harsh economic climate, for the need to take this action. (Obviously the Bigwigs at INEOS either have not heard, or dont believe, the claims of Cameron and Osbourne that the UK is coming out of recession).Are the actions of INEOS bosses not bullying and blackmail? Should not Cameron call for INEOS to be investigated?It is yet another example, of the unfair playing field, that is Capitalist industrial relations. It is yet another reason Socialists, must stand outside of this arena and call for "The abolition of the Wages System and not be caught up in the Political Arena, with calling for more crumbs from our masters table. Steve Colborn.
The job of Socialists, is to spread the idea that society can be organised in a way other than Capitalism. A way that puts the interests of "all" mankind first, not just that of a few social parasites.If a Socialist Party were to get involved in every reform movement, not only would it leave Capitalism basically intact, (there is always another Capitalist reform issue around the corner) but it would so dilute the time Socialists give, to actually fighting for and talking about, Socialism, as to make the real reason for the existence of The Socialist Party and it's message, no more than a side issue. Steve Colborn
