Are physical meetings the best form of democratic control in 2015?
- This topic has 60 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Yes of course you are right about the general level of cynicism out there. I just hope we can hold onto the Internet and keep it the way it is. Hopefully the net itself is just too vast to control?"The fact is overwhelmingly people haven't a clue of even the existence of the SPGB let alone what it stands for." Yes you are completely right about this as well. Mores the pity. I recently watched a crazy documentary on BBC4 about this middle class guy with too much money and time on his hands who went over to India to seek "enlightenment". The idiot ended up hanging about with these "Sadhu's" or so called "Holy men". Their behaviour is seen as normal and righteous in modern day semi-Feudal India but here in Europe these loons would be sectioned under the mental health act. At one point the camera panned to the sight of some crazy mad fuck who (in order to please the Gods) had decided to walk about with his right arm raised in the air all day long. Worse than that this silly cunt had been floating about like this for the past 40 years to the extent that you could see his arm was permanently locked in this position! Yet if only the party changed it's ways then this vegetable and some of the 30 million other Sadhu zombies might at some point be able to join the WSP in India.I also watched another show about Sikhism and "Partition" which was equally depressing. Whilst Sikh behaviour isn't perhaps as extreme as the Sadhu lunacy, clearly the Sikh sensibility is as consumed with hatred and loathing as the hearts and minds of paranoid Jews, vengeful Moslems and do-gooder Christian arseholes. I hate all of these cunts no matter which "faith" they adhere to because they subscribe to a belief system which dresses murder and torture up as "God's Love". Sick pathetic fucks the lot of them. I say fuck their pity, charity and "love". As a gay man I can tell you if these cunts had their way my life would be snuffed out. Pronto! Yet their leaders are the biggest kiddie fiddlers and whoremaisters walking. PLEASE!I guess the idea is that once these pedlars become members they'll soon see the error of their ways because there'll be plenty of "real" Socialists there to guide them so they can become fully fledged athiest members. NOPE! Such an enterprise would be a disaster for an organisation which is already dying on it's feet. I'm stating the obvious here in saying that you would immediately see mass resignations and cancellations of membership from genuine Socialists and if not that then the emergence of several splits and opposing camps within the WSM were these wankers ever to be admitted. Eventually you'd have a situation where the party would end up as a "Broad Church" with religious members outnumbering real Socialists. Religion is about one thing and one thing only no matter how they try to camouflage it…MONEY AND HATE. Well that's two things but you get me. I don't know who I hate more…religious cretins or lefties. It's not just your local Anglican arsepiece down the road were talking about here but every phony religious bastard of whatever hue. Do you seriously want these people spreading their poison within the realms of the SPGB/WSM? It's not as if there are throngs of sky pilots queueing up outside head office waiting to join. For me the whole thing smacks of desperation and a frustration that the party has made very little headway in the last century. I see the world as fully Capitalist in the way it is structurally organised but at the same time there are vast areas of the globe which are still stuck in a kind of Feudalism. There are billions whose lives exist in a moral and intellectual universe which is about 500 years behind the times. Surely the object would be to preserve the Party as a bastion of radical thinking, unsullied by any religious hocus pocus mania so that it can shine a light. The only torch of Socialism on Earth. A pilot light on a wee peep at the moment yes but expect the gas to be turned off once any of the faithful are admitted. Anyway rant over for now.PS Excuse my French but I love swearing. It just seems to add metaphysical weight to a sentence. HahaCheers Ray (Mr ANGER!!!)
Without getting too sidetracked, you don't have to think lifting the ban is a good idea to acknowledge that the bar on the religious minded hasn't yet led to a mass socialist party we seek. Personally I think there are other issues hopefully to be addressed in ADM.
jondwhite wrote:Without getting too sidetracked, you don't have to think lifting the ban is a good idea to acknowledge that the bar on the religious minded hasn't yet led to a mass socialist party we seek. Personally I think there are other issues hopefully to be addressed in ADM.I think lifting the ban would help significantly but I don't think it is some kind of magic bullet as JPR put it. It won't instantly make for mass appeal since there are other factors involved in the Party's poor performance. Nevertheless I urge comrades to seriously consider the suggestion On another matter I've just come back from the Socialism versus Capitalism FB site (see my previous post) . The place is mayhem, just buzzing with responses and I can't keep up. I see Comrade Alan Hendrie has just posted stuff linking to SPGB material and is already getting responses. It just illustrates the kind of opportunities that are available. The SPGB could and should avail themselves of these opportunities and make far greater use of the internet than it does as Vin suggested. As an experiment why don't folk here converge on that particular FB, blitz it continually for a short period of time and see what comes of it. Just as an experiment. You might be pleasantly surprised!
Isn't Facebook just a gigantic surveillance tool and a vacuum…the total antithesis of a "Social Network and a vast depository leading to nothing? This is what the mad songwriter Laurie Anderson has to say about it when she says "Capitalism is a Disaster for Human Relations". http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/sep/10/laurie-anderson-on-death
robbo203 wrote:ALB has suggested that "This is becoming a thread not just for Private Fraser, but for Jeremiah, Cassandra and Moaning Minnie" Well I might be a Moaning Minnie for going on about how the Party pigheadedly (perhaps I shouldnt mention pigs in this polite company) and shortsightedly refuses to even consider changing the way it does things or thinks about things but I am far from being a pessimist. Quite the opposite – the opportunities for putting across socialist ideas are expanding not contracting and I disagree with SP when he says "But haven't you heard Ozzy, millions of workers know about our socialism and reject it" – unless of course he is being ironic which I assume is the caseI was being ironic Robbo. Some months ago there was a discussion on this forum about party progress and a party member insisted millions of people had heard the SPGB/WSM case for socialism and delibertely rejected it.I disagreed, as like you I'm of the view that not that many people in the real world have a clue of the existence of the SPGB/WSM. I also tend to agree with you that numbers count, that an extremely small political party advocating pretty far out ideas is not taken seriously by those who get a fleeting glimpse.
robbo203 wrote:People don't so much reject the SPGB having heard the case. The fact is overwhelmingly people haven't a clue of even the existence of the SPGB let alone what it stands for. And the relatively tiny number of people who do know what it stands for, largely reject the SPGB because they think it is too small to make credible progress (a self fulfilling prophecy) or because of silly pointless policies that the SPGB inflicts on itself such as its bar on religious socialists which handicaps its own growthLike you I'm encouraged by the current climate of political cynicism and mistrust.
SocialistPunk wrote:I was being ironic Robbo. Some months ago there was a discussion on this forum about party progress and a party member insisted millions of people had heard the SPGB/WSM case for socialism and delibertely rejected it.I disagreed, as like you I'm of the view that not that many people in the real world have a clue of the existence of the SPGB/WSM. I also tend to agree with you that numbers count, that an extremely small political party advocating pretty far out ideas is not taken seriously by those who get a fleeting glimpse.Yes. I seriously doubt whether 99% of the population have even heard of the SPGB, or consciously recognise/remember the name – let alone have a clue about what the SPGB stands for. I have just been experimenting these past few days with this FB page which I mentioned earlier called "Socialism v Capitalism" just to see what kind of response making socialist posts on that site might elicit. There is just no way I can keep up with the responses. The traffic is awesome for a relatively small site of just under 7000 members. A few comrades have responded to my suggestion that people join this site in an attempt to blitz it with socialist ideas and see what comes of it. A few more comrades would not go amiss. This is just one site I came across by accident and judging by the number of "likes" I've had I would say quite a few people are receptive to socialist ideas. There are probably thousands of other sites like this. The SPGB is barely scratching the surface. Vin is absolutely right about the potential of the internet. Physical meetings are fine as far as they go and you don't have to choose between one form of activity and the other. But there is obviously far more scope for activity via the internet not just once a month or whatever but on a daily basis and by members who might not otherwise be able to get to physical meetings. If you want to keep the Party from declining you have to get members involved and active. Though I am somewhat out of touch with what goes on in the Party these days it does not appear to me to be very proactive in getting members involved. It seems to be rather laid back and complacent but I might be wrong It would probably pay dividends for the Party to think of a coordinated and relatively large scale campaign of internet activity focusing on a number of pre selected sites – like the one above
I would have thought it would pay good dividends to scour reddit.com to, but for me I try to spend less time on forums mailing lists as possible, for now.
robbo203 wrote:(is it even "only progressing slowly" ? I thought the membership was, actually, slowly falling in absolute terms)Reluctant as I am to keep this thread alive in view of the turn it's taken, here's some details of the numbers of members joining for the past 8 years from a recent Membership Application Committee report:
Quote:2008: 102009: 10 2010: 11 2011: 9 2012: 172013: 21 2014: 29 2015 (to date): 21Seeing as the online membership form was set up late October 2011 it seems to have had a dramatic effect. Has the option of online subscription had a similar effect on subscriptions to the Standard?
DJP wrote:Seeing as the online membership form was set up late October 2011 it seems to have had a dramatic effect.The online facility does appear to have increased the number of applicants and subsequently those being accepted into membership. It has not, as yet it seems, translated into an increase of those participating in collective party activity.An item for discussion on this question appears on the Autumn Delegate Meeting agenda:”How can we encourage members who join the party online via the Membership Applications Committee to become more directly involved in party activity?”http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/world-socialist-movement/adm-2015-agenda-and-timetable
The Membership Applications Committee (MAC) make that point explicitly:
Quote:Below are the figures we have available for successful membership applications since 2008 (we do not have figures going further back). Website applications began in 2009 and show an increase from 2013 onwards after a ‘Join’ tab was added to the Party’s homepage rather than having to be looked for elsewhere on the site:2008 102009 10 (4 via MAC)2010 11 (7 via MAC)2011 9 (3 via MAC)2012 17 (15 via MAC) (out of 20 applications via MAC)2013 21 (15 via MAC) (out of 52 applications via MAC)2014 29 (23 via MAC) (out of 76 applications via MAC)2015 (to date) 21 (18 via MAC) (out of 53 applications via MAC)As to subscription to the Socialist Standard, I don't think it has had any effect. However, we don't know how many more may be reading the Standard online. In fact, the editorial committee has been asking for a way of measuring this to be found. Perhaps by requiring people to sign up for free to read it? Only that may reduce the number of actual readers.
All UK-based applicants or have any come from overseas? Wouldn't it be possible to determine the proportion of UK readers and foreign-based readers of the Standard by URL
alanjjohnstone wrote:Wouldn't it be possible to determine the proportion of UK readers and foreign-based readers of the Standard by URLAccording to our Google Analytics account in 2014 35% of visits where from the US, 26% from the UK. The rest are from all around the world or unknown.
The problem is transferring our democratic organisation to the internet. I don’t think there is anything in the rule book for internet organisation so until there is then we should apply our existing principles.This forum is a meeting of members.If members held a physical meeting would we allow the EC or one of its sub committees to appoint a chairperson ? Another example :Today a member appointed by a sub committee of the EC came uninvited onto a branch section of the forum and accused a branch member of being a liar.https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/regional-branches/north-east/forumCould he have done this at a physical meet5. Members have the right to attend at meetings of Branches other than their own, and speak with the permission of the Branch, but shall not have the right to vote thereat. Central Branch members, however, shall be informed of a party vote and forwarded a voting paper and shall be allowed to vote through the post or at any one Branch meeting on production of membership card. All members may attend the meetings of the Executive Committee, Delegate Meetings, or Conferences, and with permission may contribute to the discussion.
A contribution to this general theme from ex-comrade Steve (now Professor Stephen) Coleman:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqJO_CUXe-I
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.