Young Master Smeet
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The old Soviet Union had a great way of rigging those elections: they'd ensure there was only one CP endorsed candidate, and declared that people could vote against them, but a blank paper counted as a vote for. So, anyone who actually went to the ballot booth to cast a vote could only have been voting against, and come to the attention of the authorities. So, an apparently formally democratic system (being able to vote against) was turned into a weapon of domination.
The problem is, the question of legal title: the shares would have to legally belong to someone (so long as property exists), and if vested in the hands of hte state, it could be sold: or if held by a trust, the state could use legislative power to enfore sale (as they did with the enclosure of the common land).I don't see how voting on use of money can work, since once you spend it, it belongs to an individual who will have legal control of it.Technology does pose a problem for the rulign class, but it's not an insurmountable one.
The BBC lies, but since some parts of our masters rely on it (like the monitoring service) for info, and because it is more instiututionaliosed (and thus furtehr from personal control of individual capitalists) it has a certain arms length freedom. It is biased towards concensus, incumbants, etc. and it is often in cahoots with the foreign office, but it's not a naked propaganda effort like RT. The truth is out there, and can only found between comparing versions of stories of different outlets.
Incidentally, the night of any key vote is going to be a big old demo: London is home turf for a remaion crowd: leave will have to bus theirs in, and the cops'll have to keep them apart and away from Parliament. That'll be a fun night.
Quote:The Deputy First Minister Mr McGuinness declined to rule out the party’s MPs attending Westminster to vote against it, telling a Stormont press conference: “Who knows where all of this is going to end up? There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that all of us face immense challenges that lie ahead.Time to resurrect Marxism-ROFLMAOism
Previously union executives could weild block votes: so the T&G (as was) General Secretary would cast 1,000,000 votes on behalf of members.
When me and the current Assistant sec did a review of party democracy, we looked at delegable proxy voting, which I beleive is actually used now by Pirate Parties.In that case, instead of branches, you'd have people attending a conference who have secured proxy mandates from other members (possibly at a meeting, or online, via a mailshot or whatever).
The issue is that unlike, say, the AV referendum, Parliament did not write into law what the result of the referendum would be: so, in law, it had no practical effect (the effect is moral only). Since The Single European Act enshrines rights and EU law into UK law, the argument was that Articlae 50 by Royal Perogative would amount to law making by Executive Fiat, and only Parliament can make law.The US constitution is:
Quote:The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.[3]In the UK, a majority of a quorum (I believe 100) of MPs can do the job.
Prior to 2015 you had voting by sections, MPs, Unions, Members+affiliates. So an MP would have three votes, once as an MP, once as a trade unionist and once as a member.
ALB wrote:I don't agree that the second has "only the veneer of democracy" but there is some truth in the claim that it leaves individuals "atomised" which can lead to them voting on the basis of their own personal prejudgements without the benefit of hearing or bothering to read about the discussion. In any event, that seems to be the situation we are evolving towards.I suppose the other option is to have voting at regional conferences (or branches) and not have the central conference.A suitable replacement for the branch could be the activity group: so members could join the AV group, the Elections Group, the Socialist Standard Group, etc. and pick their activity. The main suggestion I'd have, though, is scrapping departments, and handing reponsibility to branches or such groups (e.g. Birmingham Branch is Summer School Branch at the moment)…
I recently saw a Labourite on twitetr complain that public schools are the biggest cause of inequality. She was right, obviously, the Duke of Weswtminster is only rich because he went to Eton…Also, a review from Class War:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4xOZuWLpFUVery much criticising the film for not being a different film. He's right that unlike other Loach works, there is no struggle (nor one of his traemark debate scenes).
I don't know where I put the quote, but they're basically going back to Ramsay MacDonald and the idea of the state recapturing its due revenue from the wealthy. How terrifyingly leftwing…
1: Banks are no pinzi schemes. If I have a contract with you to pay £100 tomorrow, you have an asset worth £100 that's as good as cash itself. I don't need to currently have£100 in my pocket, just a reasonable expectation that I could when the debt falls due.2: This is enforceable, as it's a matter of contract, and if deliberately denied, it amounts to fraud. Governments will, thus, enforce terms of an IOU (so long as the debt contract is suitably transfered).3:The point is that wealth is created in the real economy, and banks are not the problem: we are exploited because of wages, not because of money. We could be paid in apples and it would still be exploitation.
Cooking the books wrote:Don’t ask us what an ’entrepreneurial state’ is. It sounds like a state that will help entrepreneurs.The Entrepreneurial State (Anthem Other Canon Economics)by Mariana Mazzucato (Author)
Quote:This bestseller from leading economist Mariana Mazzucato – named by the 'New Republic' as one of the 'most important innovation thinkers' today – is stirring up much-needed debates worldwide about the role of the State in innovation. Debunking the myth of a laggard State at odds with a dynamic private sector, Mazzucato reveals in case study after case study that in fact the opposite situation is true, with the private sector only finding the courage to invest after the entrepreneurial State has made the high-risk investments. Case studies include examples of the State's role in the 'green revolution', in biotech and pharmaceuticals, as well as several detailed examples from Silicon Valley. In an intensely researched chapter, she reveals that every technology that makes the iPhone so 'smart' was government funded: the Internet, GPS, its touch-screen display and the voice-activated Siri. Mazzucato also controversially argues that in the history of modern capitalism the State has not only fixed market failures, but has also shaped and created markets, paving the way for new technologies and sectors that the private sector only ventures into once the initial risk has been assumed. And yet by not admitting the State's role we are socializing only the risks, while privatizing the rewards in fewer hands.http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/questions-and-answers/Everything you always wanted to know about CETA.
