steve colborn

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,246 through 1,260 (of 1,276 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Billy Bragg #89720
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Oh and johndwhite, I think my post was well mannered, considering what I was actually going to comment about this cretinous moron. And moreover, I,m not representing the party on this site but my own views. If I want to represent the party, I’ll do it on a public platform, at a meeting, or with an article in the standard!
    Enuff said!

    in reply to: Billy Bragg #89719
    steve colborn
    Participant

    So accordin to you, SS you “don’t believe he has ever set his stall out as a overtly politicised artist pursuing political ends through music.”
    Well thats intereting, as the following suggests,
     
    Red Wedge

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
    Jump to: navigation, search

     

     
    Red Wedge was a collective of musicians who attempted to engage young people with politics in general, and the policies of the Labour Party in particular, during the period leading up to the 1987 general election, in the hope of ousting the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher.
    Fronted by Billy Bragg (whose 1985 Jobs for Youth tour had been a prototype of sorts for Red Wedge), Paul Weller and The Communards lead singer Jimmy Somerville, they put on concert tours and appeared in the media, adding their support to the Labour Party campaign.

    “Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge”, a 1919 lithograph by Lissitzky
    The group was launched on 21 November 1985, with Bragg, Weller, Strawberry Switchblade and Kirsty MacColl invited to a reception at the Palace of Westminster hosted by Labour MP Robin Cook. The collective took its name from a 1919 poster by Russian constructivist artist El Lissitzky, Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge. Despite this echo of the Russian Civil War, Red Wedge was not a communist organisation; neither was it officially part of the Labour Party, but it did initially have office space at Labour’s headquarters. The group’s logo, also inspired by the Lissitzky poster, was designed by Neville Brody.
    Red Wedge organised a number of major tours. The first, in January and February 1986, featured Bragg, Weller’s band The Style Council, The Communards, Junior Giscombe, Lorna Gee and Jerry Dammers, and picked up guest appearances from Madness, Heaven 17, Bananarama, Prefab Sprout, Elvis Costello, Gary Kemp, Tom Robinson, Sade, The Beat, Lloyd Cole, The Blow Monkeys and The Smiths along the way.
    When the general election was called in 1987, Red Wedge also organised a comedy tour featuring Lenny Henry, Ben Elton, Robbie Coltrane, Craig Charles, Phill Jupitus and Harry Enfield, and another tour by the main musical participants along with The The, Captain Sensible and the Blow Monkeys. The group also published an election pamphlet, Move On Up, with a foreword by Labour leader Neil Kinnock.
    After the 1987 election produced a third consecutive Conservative victory, many of the musical collective drifted away. A few further gigs were arranged and the group’s magazine Well Red continued, but funding eventually ran out and Red Wedge was formally disbanded in 1990.
    So, according to you SS, he never ” set his stall out as a overtly politicised artist pursuing political ends through music.”
    The above proves differently. Gonna have to read up on facts before jumping in with boths bfeet MARRA.
    He used and uses hi popularity to support the anti working-class, pro capitalist Labour Party and gets and deserves my utter contempt. Thick numpty he is.

    in reply to: Materialism, Determinism, Free Will #89735
    steve colborn
    Participant

    If you can get hold of a copy of Vin Marattys dissertation “Is Marxism a determinist ideology” do so. Its a good read.

    in reply to: The Religion word #89266
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Having read all of the posts on this thread, I find myself unable to find an instance where northern light lied about their views! Nor misrepresented them for ulterior motives.
    Nor can I find where NL advocates reforms or reformism.
    Why  can’t we take a fellow worker at his word? Lets get back on topic.

    in reply to: Billy Bragg #89715
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Billy Bragg? mmmmmmmm, the archetypal new working class leader. No understanding of a possible future society, make cash now, by writing supposed working class, anti-establishment, trite, tripe!Good old billy. what, in North east parlence, we call a, FUCKWIT.And BILLY, if you read these posts, we know you’re not a MARXIST, whatever that means, nor a Socialist. Just an ex worker with NEW cash, being a purveyor of crap.Made you rich, so why get involved in the struggle?And a TWEET? keep chirping dick head.

    in reply to: The Religion word #89236
    steve colborn
    Participant
    Ed wrote:
    Except there must be a rational explanation based in science. The issue is whether the event can be explained within the context of our current level of scientific understanding or not. It would be arrogant of us to think we have reached the pinnacle of scientific discovery it’s also clearly not the case. However, this does not mean that we should resort to primitive reasoning declaring that unknown science is magic or the work of God or spirits.

    Totally agree Ed. Just because our level of scientific understanding is not up to the task at the moment, does not mean that that, will always be the case.As to the end of your comment, all I will say is, that northern light in particular never alluded to, “unknown science is magic or the work of God or spirits”, nor did he want to resort to primitive reasoning.

    in reply to: Sick Societies #89693
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Why dont you go back to the thread that originally encompassed this debate Jonathan? This is 2 threads you’ve migrated this discussion to!

    in reply to: SPEW #89705
    steve colborn
    Participant

    WTF is this?

    in reply to: The Religion word #89228
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Because one has an inexplicable experience, which causes them pause in their otherwise, so-called, logical view of society, doesn’t mean they are GOD BOTHERERS!IT means just what it says on the tin, they have had an inexplicable experience. If looked into, these experiences may, or may not, have a RATIONAL explanation. It does not, instantly lead to the conclusion that these people, drop to their knees and pray to a GOD, or GODS.

    in reply to: The Religion word #89205
    steve colborn
    Participant

    That is why we need this discussion. I do not wish to put words into the mouth of northern lights, but I presume if he were to join the party and subsequently put the case for socialism, religion would be a non-issue. As he says, his religious views, whatever they are, are his PERSONAL views, full stop.

    in reply to: The Religion word #89203
    steve colborn
    Participant

    The discussion on religion and party membership is, as has been proved on this thread, a difficult and and oft times, divisive one. On the one hand a non-materialist base for considering society, on the other, a “materialist conception of history” and the world around us. CONUNDRUM.
    What we do know, is that it would appear that members of the party and northern lights, robbo and quite a few other non-members, have one thing in common, a detestation of the insane capitalist system and a concommitant desire to end it.
    It has not been beyond the wit of man to accomplish the many brilliant things that have been managed over the centuries, with more to come. Therefore, I believe that is not beyond the with of socialists both within and without the party to square, this most troublesome of circles.
    This discussion should be used as a base for this. A discussion put, in a spirit of amity and comradeship. With both eyes kept on the ultimate goal, a better society, whatever it may be CALLED.

    in reply to: The Religion word #89181
    steve colborn
    Participant

    I would just like to echo the sentiments of OGW and northern light. He was my friend and my life was made poorer for his loss. Indeed, The Socialist Party in the N.East was poorer for his death.
    An intelligent, thoughtful, gentle man but what a socialist. I wish he was still alive, I miss him.

    in reply to: Minimalism #88964
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Jonathan, you originally stated;
     
    “And I’m afraid you did suggest that socialism will involve an increase in production on all fronts. That’s what I’ve been questioning.”
     
    You never retracted this false assertion, even though it was proven incorrect and was merely your ASSUMPTION, of what OGW meant.
     
    Now you make up even more delusional clains;   “How you interpret OGW’s initial comment is your own business, Steve. In the absence of any qualification whatsoever to his suggestion that Marxist socialism will involve an increase in production my interpretation was valid. My argument has been that socialism will increase production where necessary and reduce or halt useless production. OGW disagrees and wants a socialist society so that we can produce even more useless shite that damages the planet and serves no-one’s interests. Or perhaps you want to argue that OGW didn’t suggest that he’s a socialist because he wants – among other things – to gorge himself on even more Big Macs?”
    Your words again, not OGW’s.
     
    But now you will not back up your initial assertion, you have gone from claiming OGW wants production increasing on ALL fronts, to merely an increase in production.
    Furthermore, where, anywhere, did OGW want production of, as YOU say,  more useless shite. Once again, I have read the previous posts and cannot find a single instance to back up this claim.
    Also, you state, “How you interpret OGW’s initial comment is your own business, Steve.”
     
    In actual fact, I did not interpret his words. They were expressed quite clearly, with no need for interpretation. Once again, here are his OWN words,
    “I guess noone was interested in the Marxist view of production and consumption. If your motivation is to have a revolution in order to reduce production and consuption it has nothing to do with marxist socialism”
    Can you not see, that the insults came from you, in your unjustified assertions of things that were never written? Claiming what was never written and using this to perpetuate this argument, YOU generated.
    Stop INFERRING WHAT WAS WRITTEN, OR MEANT, just read what was written.
    It is YOU Jonathan, who has been AGGRESSIVE and INSULTING from the outset. Not only towards OGW but to myself as well, a stance, neither warranted nor welcomed. It is you, Jonathan, that has let your bias and prejudice for and towards minimalism, et you to act like a pouncing cat on a mouse. Only these mice aint mice, but intelligent, self-aware SOCIALISTS, who will not be cowed by your, less than polite verbosity.
    I do not debate with people who listen to what I say then completely change it. You were wrong, you are wrong, yet you continue to pursue this error with the tenacity of a lemming running for the cliff edge.
    QUITE FRANKLY, Jonny Boy, I have better things to do. Whether OGW continues trying to point out your error, is his prerogative, as for me!!! I think I’ll continue trying to get socialism, I’m outa here.
     
    Is there any part of this statement that mentions increases in production, either in singular aspects or ACROSS ALL FRONTS, read it carefully now JONATHAN,
     
    “I guess noone was interested in the Marxist view of production and consumption. If your motivation is to have a revolution in order to reduce production and consuption it has nothing to do with marxist socialism”
    Any part at all JONATHAN? thought not.

    in reply to: Minimalism #88957
    steve colborn
    Participant

    This is not an academic exercise, nor an exercise in semantics. Who can twist and turn  like a gymnast the best. No-one is point scoring. I would imagine we all want the same thing? a world that is not Capitalism.
    Here endeth the lesson. Lets get over ourselves and get the ultimate over capitalism, IT’S END.

    in reply to: Minimalism #88956
    steve colborn
    Participant

    What one can infer, by your posts, is that, with your minimalist views you do, in fact, imagine a reduction of production and consumption! Or is that a SHAMEFUL misrepresentation of YOUR views?  “it is blatantly obvious from OGW’s statement that he thinks that a socialist revolution will necessarily increase production. I’ve merely suggested that that won’t be the case.” And it is blatantly obvious from OGW’s comment, that neither did he, one way or another.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,246 through 1,260 (of 1,276 total)