Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?
- This topic has 621 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Vin wrote:gnome wrote:It doesn't give any credence to the criticism of the front cover expressed by a tiny but vociferous minority.
So where is the majority in favour of the front cover?
Never heard of the 'silent majority'? Most comrades I know are far too busy being wage-slaves and/or undertaking much needed party work (or simply just getting on with their lives) to spend all their waking hours viewing and posting on forums.
gnome wrote:Vin wrote:gnome wrote:It doesn't give any credence to the criticism of the front cover expressed by a tiny but vociferous minority.So where is the majority in favour of the front cover?
Never heard of the 'silent majority'? Most comrades I know are far too busy being wage-slaves and/or undertaking much needed party work (or simply just getting on with their lives) to spend all their waking hours viewing and posting on forums.
So how do you know they are in favour of the front cover?How come some wage slaves have the time a and some don't? Or are you and I capitalists with nothing better to do.?Posting on forums is important party business, you do a lot of it yourself.
Vin,He doesn't. He's just pushing buttons because he can't provide any thought out counter argument to what we are saying.In fact if you review the discussion, there are more party members criticising some of the stuff being put out in the name of the SPGB.
SP, i hope you do understand that not all on the Left and not all in the Corbyn camp will be receptive to our ideas. As DJP says, our position is guaranteed to be unsettling for those who have utter faith in labourism and trust in leaders. So when we do provoke a reaction such as petty vandalism against our HO then i do see it as a sign that our argument has had a result at reaching some who can only answer with an infantile play of words on our name. I offered 3 responses. Going public and giving the gutter press another excuse to smear Corbyn would be the worse option. Going to Private Eye would be continuing their coverage on and hopefully showiing we pay the price for our principles yet still stand firm . I doubt a private message to Corbyn would even be acknowledged by his office much less read by him but it does offer an opportunity for him to apologise on behalf of those acting without his encouragement and show that he is indeed a person of honour despite our political differences. My prefered option is to forget all about it. That we make sure our insurance premiums are paid in case we are subjected to a more serious act of revenge. I am confident that our cynicism and scepticalism about Corbyn will prove right and ample opportunities will arise in the future to expose Labour and his views . My only conecern is that we do in a consistent fashion and with the same sincerity and integrity that Corbyn is getting all the kudos for. The price we pay will be the ire of those unwilling to accept criticism. There is no easy way to tell someone they are wrong and mistaken and are victims of false hope, and prone to delusions. Nobody thanks you for saying they have been conned and sold a pig in a poke but it is our task to let the cat out of the bag …(how i love to mix metaphors).I have not joined in the denounciations of the front cover, not because i like or dislike it, but because i have confidence in our lay-out team that they know what they are doing (and i am sure they are aware and will take on board other member's thoughts for future issues). I will give them the full respect of not instructing them on how to do their job. I will let them have some degree of artistic licence and not impose my own opinions. We have delegated the responsibility to them to design a magazine that has an effect and impact. I am prepared to overlook the occasional lapse in judgement IF there has been one.Needless to say, though, i personally see a future SS cover of a photo-shopped picture of Corbyn on bended knee before the Queen which he will have to do to join the Privy Council and the well-known phrase to express the irony. "The great appear great because we are on our knees: Let us rise."
Quote:and intimidatory tactics reported to have been shown by independantists in Scotland towards those who disagreed with them.albThe most important word there is "reported"The Yes campaigners were accused of intimidation by the media but i think it was more a part of a unionist press smear against them. Emotions ran high and some exchanges on both sides were passionate especially on social media but violence or acts of vandalism, not that much. The debate never ever degenerated into street fighting except for the acceptable sabotage of posters and some heckling by both sides. Except for one incident where the Yes campaigners were attacked in George Sq. by No campaigners, mostly loyalists colloqually known as "The Huns" than actual No voters and that was AFTER the referendum result. I missed the actual event by a few hours and when i earlier passed by, the Yes voters were still in high spirits and very much like Scottish football's "Tartan Army" were celebrating and accepting defeat rather graciously. Similarly, "reports" of intimidation was repeated in the press about Corbyn's followers but despite the occasional act such as was inflicted upon ourselves, i think it was all part of the smear campaign to depict them as extremists.
alanjjohnstone wrote:The most important word there is "reported"Actually, I nearly wrote "widely" reported and could have added "credibly". I don't think it was a smear as that's what nationalism in particular lends itself to. I haven't heard any cases of this sort of thing being reported during Corbyn's campaign. If it had been you can be sure that the press would have picked it up and exaggerated it. The incident regarding our head office will have been the work of a lone nutter.
ALB, we will just to have to agree to disagree on our different perspecitives of what happened.You may well place your faith in the London-based press that you read, all of whom supported the No vote, and the tv coverage that academic review of exposed as possessing a No bias , however, i suggest that the lack of police or legal action makes it doubtful that it was a serious concern.As i said the only violence that i am aware of was initiated by the No supporters when the referendum was over and done with. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/glasgows-george-square-turns-ugly-4290576I did try to distance the No campaign from this by saying it was instigated by loyalist fans of Rangers and their allies in the SDL nand other right wing neo-fascist groups.Heckling Jim Murphy on his staged walk-abouts, i am afraid i view as fair game.But if anecdotal evidence is worth anything , i saw on numerous times rival campaigners with their stalls set up quite close to eachother, at times almost alongside. and the badges and stickers of both sides being worn by countless people so they as individuals didn't seem to feel any threat or intimidation by displaying their allegiences in public. In regards to allegations of intimatory tactics of pro-Corbynists, the press tried to exaggerate social media online exchanges into threats as they did in Scotland. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-supporters-accused-of-launching-snpstyle-cyber-attacks-on-labour-leader-rivals-10452587.htmlEdit – i should add that my eye-witness account was based only upon visits to three places, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dunfermline. Perhaps elsewhere there were more friction but i can't recall hearing or reading about anything of import.
Another shot in the foot by Corbyn…http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34288573
But hope on the horizonA third of SNP voters may return to Labour http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/19/third-snp-voters-more-likely-back-labour-jeremy-corbyn-poll
alanjjohnstone wrote:But hope on the horizonA third of SNP voters may return to Labour http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/19/third-snp-voters-more-likely-back-labour-jeremy-corbyn-pollWhich is bad news for us in respect of their maturity and lack of class consciousness. Unfortunately, we do not have the human resources to take advantage of this swing in political allegiance.
alanjjohnstone wrote:SP, i hope you do understand that not all on the Left and not all in the Corbyn camp will be receptive to our ideas. As DJP says, our position is guaranteed to be unsettling for those who have utter faith in labourism and trust in leaders. So when we do provoke a reaction such as petty vandalism against our HO then i do see it as a sign that our argument has had a result at reaching some who can only answer with an infantile play of words on our name. I offered 3 responses. Going public and giving the gutter press another excuse to smear Corbyn would be the worse option. Going to Private Eye would be continuing their coverage on and hopefully showiing we pay the price for our principles yet still stand firm . I doubt a private message to Corbyn would even be acknowledged by his office much less read by him but it does offer an opportunity for him to apologise on behalf of those acting without his encouragement and show that he is indeed a person of honour despite our political differences. My prefered option is to forget all about it. That we make sure our insurance premiums are paid in case we are subjected to a more serious act of revenge. I am confident that our cynicism and scepticalism about Corbyn will prove right and ample opportunities will arise in the future to expose Labour and his views . My only conecern is that we do in a consistent fashion and with the same sincerity and integrity that Corbyn is getting all the kudos for. The price we pay will be the ire of those unwilling to accept criticism. There is no easy way to tell someone they are wrong and mistaken and are victims of false hope, and prone to delusions. Nobody thanks you for saying they have been conned and sold a pig in a poke but it is our task to let the cat out of the bag …(how i love to mix metaphors).I have not joined in the denounciations of the front cover, not because i like or dislike it, but because i have confidence in our lay-out team that they know what they are doing (and i am sure they are aware and will take on board other member's thoughts for future issues). I will give them the full respect of not instructing them on how to do their job. I will let them have some degree of artistic licence and not impose my own opinions. We have delegated the responsibility to them to design a magazine that has an effect and impact. I am prepared to overlook the occasional lapse in judgement IF there has been one.Needless to say, though, i personally see a future SS cover of a photo-shopped picture of Corbyn on bended knee before the Queen which he will have to do to join the Privy Council and the well-known phrase to express the irony. "The great appear great because we are on our knees: Let us rise."Alan,I of course fully understand that not all on the left, especially the Labour "left" will be receptive to our version of socialism. But it's even less likely to appeal to the "right".I think you misunderstand what myself, Vin and a couple of others (of whom I thought you were one) are getting at. It's not the thought out criticism, of which the Socialist Standard, for the most part, does very well. In fact, by itself I don't have a major problem with the front cover of the Standard, but in conjunction with the crude anti-Corbyn visual campaign on party social media sites, it was the straw that broke the camels back for me.The issue is two fold. Firstly a lack of ability to identify a target audience (or perhaps not?). Secondly identifying the best methods to draw people in and hopefully investigate further. Ultimately I'm trying to get closer to an understanding of how better to communicate the message.Unfortunately I think there is an element in the SPGB who like nothing better than to irritate the "left".The sticker on HO window is a perfect example of getting a crude reaction in return for a crude campaign. It's unlikely the person/s involved looked any further than the anti-Corbyn images circulating social media and on the front of the Socialist Standard. You reap what you sow.People with progressive social attitudes are more likely to be drawn to our position. Like it or not those people are usually found on the "left" of the political spectrum.I've yet to hear a coherent counter argument.
I agree with Socialist Punk, though I'm not a member here. As I've pointed out numerous times, the arguments used by the SPGB to try to debunk redistributive capitalist policies appear to rest on the same economic framework as right-wing, or conservative style economics. I know that many people here believe they understand capitalist economics just as well (or better) than everyone else – there's no need to explain to me why left-wing capitalism can't work – that's not why I'm posting here.I don't know how successful you guys are in using these arguments with people in real time, but I imagine you would have as much success as if you were persuading Labour-left voters to support UKIP… if UKIP didn't have a charismatic leader. For me and my friends, it's a bit like water off a duck's back. Your mileage may vary of course.What I would find much more compelling and interesting would be opinions and viewpoints that aren't shared with the Conservative Party and the right-wing press. For example, how the process to transform our society from capitalism to socialism would work… what it would look like… what would the attempts by capitalists to resist it look like… what kind of 'critical mass' would be the tipping point at which the transformation would begin… how would the society work… why a moneyless wageless economy is necessary…… and so on. Many of these topics are discussed in articles on this website, I'm sure. You guys have your own strategy, and maybe you are having more success with it than I imagine. I'm just voicing my take on it. A front cover article about one of the issues I mentioned would make me feel much more intrigued to buy/read the article – that is, if the article was saying something about socialism. As it stands, my reaction is "Oh look, people who claim to be socialists are saying 'back to the 70's' just like the right-wing press. Weird."
SP and Lanz, i have more than just a few times on various threads suggested that we have to counter with theory…play the ball, as DJP so rightly put it…This i think is accepted by everybody on the forum…And the discussion and debate has been, is just how to make that theoretical counter-attack effective. To take advantage of opportunities that are (and have been for a while now) opening up to us.I have suggested we re-write some basic economic texts and update them to turn them into contemporary critiques. But i have weaseled my way out of any personal obligations by stating that i am not as versed as some others in the party on economics. So i wish to delegate the responsibility. And those who have followed the trend within all my posts over the years will also know that i seek to develop the "heretical" proposal of a blueprint…to detail the socialist project more concretely and descriptively as the wider approach to our propaganda and publicity. It can therefore be built upon the sound-bites of Corbyn and call for the need to go a lot further if Corbyn's homilies are to be actually heeded. It is not for us to endorse Corbyn's views but for him and his supporters to endorse our own, which are based and founded on genuine socialist ideals and rooted in the tradition of socialism. Therefore we have to put our principles forward and make our case heard. Again, it is acceptable for members not to agree wholeheartedly with one another upon how to do it and have different opinions upon how to do this for the best effect. Again, putting into practice contrasting styles will offer something empirical to deduce future methods and tactics fromAnd there is no sure-fire means of doing this successfully…it is trial and error…If members think we have fallen short, it is encumbent upon them not to just identify the failure but to try and remedy it…and that is not an easy task …Again i am on record suggesting we need a dedicated conference…not just a work-shop on key messages which is certainly welcomed, don't get me wrong, but something deeper and more fundamental, tackling the roots of the matter, where we do not exclude such drastic options as re-naming ourselves and (only imho) making clear and clarifying the perennial problem of how to express our position of supporting reforms and actual resistance but yet not supporting reformism.And i'm afraid all this has to be done under the auspices of a conference that does more than plant the seeds of new ideas but puts conclusions into practice and not let them lie fallow. Democracy is about possessing the power to carry out decisions, not just making them. And, btw, if the truth is to be told, i'm all for the return to the 1970s, because it was when i first encountered the SPGB and there was an air of confidence as branches grew in number and in strength. I would have embraced it …and i would have also said…1870s…the Paris Commune a victory in defeat Was it Imposs1904 who showed that the 19th C era had many other victories for workers
alanjjohnstone wrote:But hope on the horizonA third of SNP voters may return to Labour http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/19/third-snp-voters-more-likely-back-labour-jeremy-corbyn-pollActually, I think a left turn under Corbyn might well help the Labour Party at all elections except a general election (very few see him as prime-ministeriable, not even us I suspect, not that that's a criticism of the man considering what you have to be to aspire to be prime minister). We'll see after the regional (London, Scotland, Wales) and local elections next May.Meanwhile the pathetic Liberals think they can gain by stealing the pro-business, pro-austerity, anti-welfare clothes of Corbyn's defeated rivals.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.