Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
So, because he came before later discoveries, which do not refute his theory of descent through modification in the least, Darwin is to be rejected?
So we might as well not mind the evangelists, who, after all, do not have a problem with DNA?
There’s nothing about DNA in Marx either, and Kepler never mentioned quantum mechanics, so he is now void too.
So, Lizzie, only parties that have sway should be supported, even if the reasons they have sway and are popular are wrong?
If something is the right answer, i will continue to support it even if nobody else does.
Or should we say 2+2=5 were the majority to say that’s correct?
Following the majority down popular dead ends will make you popular, but you’ll end up at a dead end just the same.
Even so, everyone in my neighbourhood will vote Tory, including the poorest. I had to do jobclub-type duty and would overhear the others on the dole talking, moaning about the misery of their lives. But they always voted Tory, as they put it: “That’s a given.”
The same phrase was used about having voted Brexit: “Of course! It’s a given.”I still think the Tories will win.
” Lizzy’s “non-derisory” results can never be permanent attainments. The history of capitalist elections reveals them to be volatile, and capable of spiriting away as capitalism turns and twists.”
True. But there is no collective historical memory amongst the workers. As a young man said to me, “I shall vote Labour because i don’t remember a Labour govt.”
So when they tire of Punch, they vote for Judy, and then back to Punch, ad infinitum.https://images.app.goo.gl/gWMQikaPi4bbeotS9
“It must be a tough life being the only cultured genius in the village.”
I agree, DJP.
And i too have always thought and hoped that if socialism happens, it will be a majority which is ignorant of us. And then, at last, we can get some well-earned rest.
Well of course the mechanisms are there.
The RATIONAL is all in place to see. But the irrational still holds sway. And if leaflets, which one can peruse at leisure in one’s home, make no difference, then what hope or time given in trying to explain to busy “rat-race” workers the ins and outs of socialist history and the differences between us and the Bolshevik Left etc?
A beer over the head is the likely response.But that’s my point. Why couldn’t they vote for socialism? Because they didn’t, and that’s what needs looking at.
Because, if reason is all it takes, and most people are rational, then our 100,000 leaflets should rationally produce 100,000 socialists.
But they persist in voting irrationally, even when they know of our existence.And more environmental disaster.
By dread i mean having to face that the responsibility is theirs and cannot be left to politicians.
In fact, i have had two people tell me, after reading the Standard, that socialism is evil.
Everyone i’ve given the Standard to has rejected our message.
We can repeat our case until we’re blue in the face. If knowing about us was enough, they’d become socialists. But they are so immured in their helplessness that they do indeed dread the obligation to do anything other than give to charities and vote for leaders to take on the burden.
If reason was enough, we should get nearly 100% positive response from our election leaflets. But we’ll get practically zero.
A more apt illustration:
