[Young Master Smeet]

I'll bring this here (and hopefully move the thread up the list), just to contrast what seems to be happening in Turkey & Brazil with my comments above about plebeian as opposed to proletarian politics.https://theconversation.com/fare-game-buses-and-football-fuel-protest-in-unequal-brazil-15325

Quote:

So what does it all mean? There is a strong possibility that the protests will fade, and life will carry on as usual. The movements are outside of traditional political groups, unions and organisations, so whether they can form a formidable power bloc remains to be seen.

In contrast to dictatorships, democracies can see off such uprisings, because, eventually, they can point to the support of the inactive majority and can always go to the polls to demonstrate the isolation of the insurgent crowds.One thing that comes from the above article is that, in the case of Brazil, it is not the poverty so much as the feeling of not sharing in the growth, which points again to the idea that economic slumps don't help the socialist case (in fact, the opposite, they seem to be the key to disciplining the workers).And, just to stick to the ETUC theme of the thread, it seems they have put their colours firmly on the mast:http://www.etuc.org/a/11263

ETUC wrote:

The Executive Committe of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) is following the unfolding events in Istanbul, Ankara and other Turkish cities with great concern. The European trade union condemns the disproportionate and unacceptable use of force by the police.This current repression brings to mind a similar reaction against a rally, held in Taksim Square on 1 May, celebrating Labour Day as was the case in many other places around the world. The ETUC supports those who are fighting for the respect of democratic social and trade union rights and against creeping authoritarianism in Turkey. The ETUC Executive Committe calls on the Turkish Government to respect fundamental international rights and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.The ETUC will stay in close contact with its affiliates to determine what action to take, if necessary, to ensure the respect of these rights in Turkey.The ETUC notes positive signal from parts of the Turkish Government to engage in dialogue.

 And, a useful bit of background:http://www.etuc.org/a/10150

ETUC wrote:

05/07/2012Lire la version française“Stop attacks against trade unions in Turkey”, demand European and international trade unionsWe have in recent weeks witnessed an unprecedented wave of repression against Turkish trade unionists. At least 73 members of the public sector trade union KESK are currently in prison, some without charges. Others, such as the President of KESK, have been released on bail. The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) has raised the issue on several occasions with the Turkish government and the European authorities, denouncing the attacks against affiliates of several Turkish member confederations.

Apparently the "international community" did stay silent until the protests erupted.

[Young Master Smeet]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22932330

Quote:

The Co-operative Bank has unveiled a rescue plan to tackle the £1.5bn hole in its balance sheet.Most of the capital to be used to plug the hole will come through a "bail in" – a process where bond holders will be offered shares in the bank.The deal will result in a stock market listing for the group.

Robert Peston notes:

Quote:

That said, many will argue that the culture and practices of the bank are bound to change once its shares are owned by commercial investors – even though the Co-op Group will retain a controlling majority stake in the bank.[…]Co-op Group says the bank will henceforth concentrate on providing banking services to individuals and small businesses, and will pull out of banking for "larger corporate and commercial customers with complex product and servicing requirements".In general, the bank will be more focussed on making profits because of the "need to generate an appropriate return on equity".

Although, the point is, that the bank has always focused on making a profit, that's what co-ops do: it's just a question of who gets the profit.  The capital is in the hands of the capitalists, and the bank needs capital to keep going.

[Young Master Smeet]

Even footballers jobs aren't safe: https://theconversation.com/robocup-2013-new-moves-to-keep-players-on-the-ball-14287 

Quote:

In just a few weeks, soccer-playing robots from around the world will converge on Eindhoven in the Netherlands to compete for the prestigious RoboCup 2013. With around 2,500 particpants, competition is sure to be tough – just have a look at the final from last year’s RoboCup in Mexico City.

 Watching the videos is truly staggering:http://www.robocup2013.org/middle-size-league/ 

[Young Master Smeet]

That kind of was my point, that this is the limit of 'formal democracy', and only raw strength of numbers and power will settle the issue: a dictatorship from either side would be a bad outcome.  De Gaulle weathered the street protests, but the movement put down markers and the French workers still have protections we don't.  I suppose it comes back to the old 6th Form debating saw:

Saw wrote:

If the community democratically voted to put you to death, would you accept the result?

The equally old, and obvious dodge being:

Dodger wrote:

If they voted to put me to death, they'd succeed, there's more of them than there is of me.

Which contains the slightly more sensible point that after the vote comes the test of strength, democracy in its fullest extent (between friends) relies on ongoing willingness to stay together.  Democracy between enemies is counting guns and cutting out the fight.As far as I can see, AKP is just the Turkish Fianna Fail (or even our Tories).

[Young Master Smeet]

I suppose that means that  Militant should now be calling for the nationalisation of the Top 10 companies these days.

[Young Master Smeet]

It certainly seems like a naked arm wrestle, with lots of resonances of Paris '68.  The AKP government, however reactionary, is democratically elected (As far as I understand), except that it relies on a large conservative rural vote.  The worry I have is that some of the protestors would support a dictatorship in the name of liberalism and secularism.  To the extent that the riots put down a marker, and a show of strength, they may protect a bit of open space in the large cities, though.  Maybe a good outcome would be more municipal autonomy, although I believe local government in Istanbul is AKP controlled.A source of mine tells me that the British government are relaxed about the situation: riots happen and are contained, seems to be the view (the example of Sweden was used, although that was a much more localised experience, Turkey seems to have spread).

[Young Master Smeet]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10093409/How-best-to-fix-the-Co-op-Bank.html

Quote:

Studying the figures provided by several large European and Asian banks, including British lenders such as Lloyds and HSBC, Barclays found that, on average, banks predicted a probability of default on their lending books that was 51pc higher than what they actually experienced.As comforting as this conservatism is, the worrying implication is that banks are rather poor assessors of their own risks.

After all, the primary function of creditors is supposed to be risk management, this seems to be the capitalist economic calculation problem in evidence: they're just guessing.  Which in the light of this point:

Quote:

The ripple effects of Moody’s decision to downgrade Co-op Bank’s debt by six notches to “junk” status last month are still being felt, as some large depositors look to move their cash out of the bank. “You might not think much of the ratings, but institutions like local councils have a fiduciary responsibility to not leave taxpayers’ money in a bank where there are any questions about its solvency,” said one London-based banks analyst.

means that substantial effects can occur because of flighty responses to bad news (and rationally so).Frankly, I think the Co-op is going to get out of this intact:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22754201Suggests that the stake of the Bank of England in it will mean it will have to resolve any problems deliccately, but also means that the gap is being plugged by state fund (a very mutual solution).

[Young Master Smeet]

A rising organic composition of capital would be compatible with both continuing/increasing capital accumulation and falling employment (especially if part of the rise is due to a fall in variable capital).  Surplus population wouldn't be a new phenomena within capitalism, save that nowadays the option of emigration is much more problematic than it was.  The mega slum model is before our eyes of how it's managed elsewhere.I think, though, what is more likely is an increased rate of churn, where once it was a once in a lifetime event to have a job mechanised out of existence, we may see repeated instances.  The key phrase in the Spiegel article you linked to was that the rate of jobs being destroyed was higher than the rate of the creation of new ones, which I think could be the equilibrium position, meaning there will just be a time lag between job loss and new opportunities.

[Young Master Smeet]

http://newsroom.melbourne.edu/news/scientists-narrow-global-warming-range

Quote:

The paper, led by Dr Roger Bodman from Victoria University with Professors David Karoly and Peter Rayner from the University of Melbourne and published in Nature Climate Change today, found that exceeding 6 degrees warming was now unlikely while exceeding 2 degrees is very likely for business-as-usual emissions.

The uncertainty between models (and the range of changes) has always been grist for the mill of the AGW skeptics, although I can see some people breathing a sigh of relief over 'only 2 degrees'.An example of the threats we face can be seen here:https://theconversation.com/climate-change-threatens-global-fish-stocks-14293

Quote:

Ocean warming has already affected global fisheries in the past four decades, a new international study has found, driving up the proportion of warm-water fish being caught and posing a threat to food security worldwide.[…] “Continued warming in the tropics to a level that exceeds the thermal tolerance of tropical species may largely reduce catch potential in this region.”

[Young Master Smeet]

And in the counter corner:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22686180

Quote:

The organisation, which conducts research into retail, technology and crime, says this would equate to 62,000 shops closing down.  The CRR believes large areas of the UK's High Streets would become housing. It also says as many as 316,000 workers would lose their jobs.

Not all of those jobs would be lost forever, and some would be redeployed, but the warehouse robotisation could see unskilled labour finding it ever harder to find work.

[Young Master Smeet]

Well, one view could be that Islam was formed as a counter hegemonic ideology: Mohammed gathered together the second sons and other political 'out' groups of Mecca.  This, apparently, is a recurrent motif of Islam.  Without wishing to be thought of as quoting our own Prophets, I've found the following by Engels suggestive:

Fred wrote:

A peculiar antithesis to this was the religious risings in the Mohammedan world, particularly in Africa. Islam is a religion adapted to Orientals, especially Arabs, i.e., on one hand to townsmen engaged in trade and industry, on the other to nomadic Bedouins. Therein lies, however, the embryo of a periodically recurring collision. The townspeople grow rich, luxurious and lax in the observation of the "law." The Bedouins, poor and hence of strict morals, contemplate with envy and covetousness these riches and pleasures. Then they unite under a prophet, a Mahdi, to chastise the apostates and restore the observation of the ritual and the true faith and to appropriate in recompense the treasures of the renegades. In a hundred years they are naturally in the same position as the renegades were: a new purge of the faith is required, a new Mahdi arises and the game starts again from the beginning. That is what happened from the conquest campaigns of the African Almoravids and Almohads in Spain to the last Mahdi of Khartoum who so successfully thwarted the English. It happened in the same way or similarly with the risings in Persia and other Mohammedan countries. All these movements are clothed in religion but they have their source in economic causes; and yet, even when they are victorious, they allow the old economic conditions to persist untouched. So the old situation remains unchanged and the collision recurs periodically.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894/early-christianity/index.htmI'd also suggest that, without straying too far into psychology, the strictness of the Islamic God might well appeal to someone with a fragile self identity, or living in a precarious world. It does seem Islam has slipped in as the replacement for Maoism, a universal counter message to the modern world, that promises an authentic life, grounded in the reality of ritual.

[Young Master Smeet]

I think part of that is that the critique by atheism begins and ends with 'there is no god, and Allah isn't his name.'  The materialist critique goes further and says that ideas have no independent substance and it is dangerous to reify ideologies (as both opponents and detractors would like to do).  These apparent auto-jihadists would probably find a cause to be violent even if Islam didn't exist, it just provides a map for their actions and a means to comprehend their desires.   Thorough going critical materialism is the ultimate riposte to Islamist ideologues because it essentially says that doctrine is irrelevent.

[Young Master Smeet]

Well, what they got, apparently:https://theconversation.com/a-global-abomination-woolwich-and-the-politics-of-violent-images-14575

Quote:

Research on school shootings helps explain what this might mean. This work emphasises that media affect how real violence works as a symbolic phenomenon. There is a “performative” aspect to this particular form of mass murder. According to their own posthumous accounts, shooters are often acting out their rage against people and society. The promise, and even the certainty of media notoriety lends a distinct shape to their actions. Cho-Seung Hui, for example, stopped in the middle of the Virginia Tech murders to film a monologue, which he then delivered to NBC. When it comes to school shootings, the crime and the media event are often hard to separate.

This article draws interesting comparisons with the Rot Armee Faktion (RAF):https://theconversation.com/terror-on-the-streets-of-london-but-dont-jump-to-conclusions-yet-13883

Quote:

This isn’t new of course – in the 1970s the Red Army Faction claimed some of its violent bombings in West Germany were carried out on behalf of the Vietnamese people. It also justified its actions from the ideas of Karl Marx. Yet none of the group had been to Vietnam and one of the principal leaders – Andreas Baader – didn’t even read Marx until after he had been imprisoned.

Interesting is the idea of "non-negotiable, sacred beliefs" being at the core of such ideologies.I think anyone involved in fringe politics will have met at least one person with potentially violent fantasies, and dreams of being the saviour, the hero: currently global jihad is the sacred idea that spurs such people beyond fantasy into action, whereas back in the 7's the narrative was global communism, which lead to the RAF.However closely this event is linked to decentralised terrorism, I think it's more reassuring than any truly organised campaign (however horrific the actual attack is).

[Young Master Smeet]

https://theconversation.com/what-went-wrong-for-the-co-op-bank-14308This article seems to be pointing the blame at over-ambition and expansion:

Quote:

But in recent years the bank became increasingly ambitious and expansionary.This was most vividly demonstrated when it took over the Britannia Building Society in 2009. At that time, Britannia was the second biggest building society in the UK. The business plan was to build a mutual bank that could start to take on the plc banks like HSBC and Barclays. This strategy found favour with many commentators and politicians who, in the wake of the 2007/08 financial crisis, were keen to have more competition in the financial services market and to see ethical banking succeed.

Interestingly, Britannia was also a mutual organisation (so it slightly surprising that it's loan book was not transparent, unless they didn't know how based it was neither).  Upton's conclusion is telling:

Quote:

It tried to expand too quickly, and it took over an organisation without properly considering the value of the purchase. These are mistakes any business can make.

The mistakes that can cause untold misery for thousands of people.

[Young Master Smeet]

But an important part of any discussion is being clear where you're coming from.  It would be inconceivable for someone turning up to a biology conference to be attacked for thinking they know the answers.  Now, fundamental premises are divisive, but they need to be sought out early, rather than eluded and hidden.  That's one reason why I abhor consensus systems.  I have no objection to Left unity or Occupy, save to state the simple fact that to get what they want they will need to use political action to abolish market relations: it's our job to say that.  We won't try and join and demand faction rights, observer status, affiliate status (etc.) we just say we have our opinion: it is different from yours.  Hopefully, if I can find a contact in North London, my branch will try and hold a debate with Left Unity, and say that.

[Author]

Posts