Weekly worker letter
- This topic has 40 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1128/letters/
There has been a reply to an earlier letter of mine. It raised so many issues that it would require the whole newspaper to respond to, so i limited the scope of my reply to the original point on markets which i have now sent off
His answer to my letter offers plenty of opportunities to explain our case, I have not dealt with the Marxist validity of any of his epigones, but more importantly not his criticism of the Party.
I remained focused on the market and non-market socialism disagreement.
It would be a good idea if someone specifically addressed his analysis of the SPGB which he takes the usual pot-shots at.
Good work Alan ! The lead letter attacking us and Marx together, though I see you've met your match in making short contributions.I'll write something about the absurdity of the claim that Marx was not against commodity production, when his criticism of this is the essence of his economic writings and even of his philosophical stuff about alienation. For him, capitalism was the highest form of commodity production, where everything including human labour power becomes a commodity. So the abolition of capitalism is the abolition of commodity production and all that goes with it (markets, money, wages, etc). "Market socialism" is an oxymoron and so are those who advocate it.I'll leave to Robbo (hope you're reading this, Robbo) to deal with Sharpe's (and von Hayek and von Mises's) claim that you can't organise the production and distribution of wealth rationally without having recourse to markets.
If you do, Robbo, PM me so i can send you copy of my letter which is a rip-off some of your own ECA articles so we don't duplicate our replies. Or anybody else, for that matter
alanjjohnstone wrote:If you do, Robbo, PM me so i can send you copy of my letter which is a rip-off some of your own ECA articles so we don't duplicate our replies. Or anybody else, for that matterHi Alan Yes by all means send me a copy of your latter so I can have a crack at Mr Sharpe. Cheers-
Good of WW to publish our letters, and i note Vin got one in too. (We might suggest a full article one day if we ask very nicely…perhaps next year for the Russian Revolution.)Tony Clark also added a reply which i intend to answer.1. I'll challenge the association he makes with of dictatorship with Marx …2.No idea where he got the idea that we dismiss energy technology revolution for circulation of money, but i suppose he means M-C-M..or whatever…he's disregarding Marx's whole theory of material conception history. i'll dig out that Marx steam quote reflecting society thingy and put an end to his make-believe Marx…3. Then add conciliatory conclusion agreeing on the futility of changing Labour.
Someone could take advantage of Dave Douglass opening in his letter on anarchists standing for election…And his deliberate omission of our approach to it rather than credit and commend Ian Bone
Goodness…that Kautsky article is a long one and fairly comprehensive. I need to re-read it, though. I think JonD keeps referring the CPGB as modern Kautskyites rather than Trots.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Good of WW to publish our letters, and i note Vin got one in too. (We might suggest a full article one day if we ask very nicely…perhaps next year for the Russian Revolution.)What a fantastic concerted effort by Robin, Adam, Alan and Vin. Top Marx.http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1129/letters/
I have sent off my reply to Tony Clarke, If anyone is curious to know what so to determine the content of their own, they can PM
Is the John Holliday who has a letter on the wars in the Middle East under the title "Barbarism" not also a former Party member?
ALB wrote:Is the John Holliday who has a letter on the wars in the Middle East under the title "Barbarism" not also a former Party member?Yep and he has posted here on this forum once too.
Wasn't it contesting a Pathfinders article on fracking in the SS? Anyways, is anybody up to comment on Dave Douglass letter on anarchists voting?I would offer a friendly sympathetic letter but i have already used my reply on Clark who i just relaised i spelt Clarke. (What's the betting he pulls me up on it.)http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1129/letters/But i have to give CPGB/WW credit for their letter policy. Can anybody imagine SWP's Socialist Worker being so generous with their space? Kudos to the WW editors.
alanjjohnstone wrote:http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1129/letters/But i have to give CPGB/WW credit for their letter policy. Can anybody imagine SWP's Socialist Worker being so generous with their space? Kudos to the WW editors.Vin said:Perhaps they agree with our argumentMy explanation of exchange value was minimum, leaving out the all important 'socially necessary' bit. But I hope I got my main point across vis a vis That in a market system a workers labour power is a commodity…..
jondwhite wrote:ALB wrote:Is the John Holliday who has a letter on the wars in the Middle East under the title "Barbarism" not also a former Party member?Yep and he has posted here on this forum once too.
The article he provides a link to, arguing that the conflict in Syria is at least in part a "pipeline war" is quite good.http://armedforcesjournal.com/pipeline-politics-in-syriaIt would seem to explain why Saudi Arabia and Qatar support one side and Iran the other. Not really Sunni v Shiite. That's just to get workers to go out and die for one ruling class or the other.
Just so folk know the pipeline motive for the ME conflict has not been ignored by the blog. We posted back in Augusthttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/08/syrias-pipeline.htmlBut first mentioned even earlier in 2013http://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2013/05/buying-civil-war.html
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.