Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?

[alanjjohnstone]

No, you don't get off that easily. If your differences are not about the ideas but the application of them, then the task is to change the party. If we are not succeeding as educators or agitators or organisers then those weakness must be addressed. But i think you suggest the disagreement is more than that.Reformism V. Reforms…Often i encounter folk who are activists in various campaigns and  believe that membership excludes them from trying to mitigate the effects of capitalism upon themselves or others. As a party we do not advocate a list of palliatives and ameliorations, nor do we say that creating such a platform of changes bring socialism closer to being achieved  – but that it would transform the party from a socialist party into something else. But we do recognise that people need to defend themselves against the nefarious impact of the capitalist system or that they have a need to improve or better their living standards within it. We view that there exist other organisations more suited and better fitted for this than ourselves – trade unions, charities, ginger groups of all kinds. As an individual we do not have a proscription on being active within those. For sure, it means dividing an individual's time and energy and resources but that is something an individual member must weigh up We are a voluntarist organisation therefore there is not coercion into activity for it. Reformism, itself. Does it create stepping stones to socialism? Does it build consciousness? Should we engage in advocating those changes…construct a list…and it would be an extremely long one …a very very long one …and declare the party are in favour of those and will act and campaign for them….something highly unlikely to actually every materialise considering our low membership and the demands required to accomplish any progress in achieving reforms. So i think it is simply tokenism. Perhaps we can develop a hierarchy of reform demands…place the more deserving more prominently in out publicity and participation. I don't think it would practical. Conferences would be endlessly debating issues of expressing the different support to be given to the various reforms…all of which are fully commendable in themselves….Ah, that just may be a problem, some might not be and have a back-fire effect or possess unintended consequences…and we would be complicit in those failures as an organisation, not as the failing of an individual's insight.Of course, i am not referring to those Trotskyist transitional demands made upon capitalism that are supposed to be designed to actually never be effective since they are impossible to be compatable with socialism and are aimed at showing workers the futility of reform, and are seen as the bait to increase interest in socialism and draw more members who will be re-educated into understanding the contradictions of capitalism and from their campaigning will acquire the skills to communicate more directly with other workers…who ssomehow will overlook the deceit in being incited to support reforms that are not possible within the present society and are not informed of that limitation…Sorry Stuart, for saying the obvious to you because you have heard this all before and anyway those might not even be the principles you disagree with and think are incorrect in the SPGB. However, I'm simply trying to elicit just what you feel are the important lessons we should have learned and should be putting into practice.It is vital,imho, that this party does not rest upon its legacy (and legacies!) and keeps reviewing its interactions with people. Your sympathetic and sincere feedback is simply one bit of info (that may or not may be a true reflection of the situation) but is still a piece of the jig-saw we have to put together.Finally, which actual parties offer better insight, clearer education and more effective praxis than ourselves? What are your recommended alternative organisations? 

[stuartw2112]

Thanks for your interest Alan, but I have discussed my views on these things many times, and my ideas about them are always changing (which I don't think is a bad thing), and anyway to continue the discussion would derail this thread. So to get back on topic, would the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party be, on the whole, a good thing or a bad thing from a progressive, socialist point of view? For me, especially having jus watched his performance on the Marr show, the question answers itself. His election would change the whole narrative – the whole structure of what it is and is not possible to talk about in polite company – a necessary first step if any bigger changes are to become even thinkable yet alone doable. 

[Young Master Smeet]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02y2ffnSome quotes from the transcript:

Quote:

JEREMY CORBYN:(over)… where there are natural monopolies like Royal Mail, like the railways, it seems to me counterintuitive that we spend a great deal of money on investing in railway infrastructure, billions, and we then hand it over to train operating companies to run it. I think it is much better if we bring the railway system as a whole into public ownership. It’s not some extreme position. It’s supported on opinion polls by 60 to 70 per cent of the electorate.

Quote:

ANDREW MARR:Which reminds me slightly of the old days of Tony Benn, the alternative economic strategy and all of that. If I’d asked Tony Benn what his politics were and asked him about Marx, I think what he would have said is Marx was right about a lot of economics and wrong on the politics and his politics came from the English radical tradition, the Levellers and so forth. Is that by and large where you come from too?JEREMY CORBYN: Where … Well Marx obviously analysed what was hap pening in a quite brilliant way and the philosophy around Marx is absolutely fascinating. Does it all apply now? Well obviously philosophy applies at all times. Do we then take that as a way in which we ensure that people have reasonable security in their lives through public ownership of the major monopolies, then I think that is a fair point to look at. It’s not unpopular with the public. We’re after all subsidising the railway system to a massive degree. The nuclear power industry expects us to pay for their clean-up costs when they decommission nuclear power stations. The water industry are constantly sniping around wanting support for new  infrastructure projects. If we’re investing in infrastructure, then we the public should get the benefit of it.

Quote:

ANDREW MARR: Do you regard yourself as a Marxist?JEREMY CORBYN:(sighs)That’s a very interesting question actually.ANDREW MARR: Thank you.JEREMY CORBYN:I haven’t thought about that for a long time. I haven’t really read as much of Marx as I should have done. I’ve read quite a bit, but not that much, and I think Marx’s transition of history and the analysis of how you go from feudalism to capitalism and move onto a different stage is fascinating. So we all owe something to him. Probably inside you, even you do. You think you do?ANDREW MARR:(over)Well I remember Francis Wheen said we should regard Marx as a great Victorian novelist, a great observer of the scene, and I think I would probably go along with that

[ALB]

A leading article in today's Times interprets the above as Corbyn

Quote:

believes Britain has not learnt its lessons from Karl Marx.

The key phrase for us (of cours) is:

Quote:

I haven’t really read as much of Marx as I should have done.

Looks as if the Labour Party is going to annul the election if he wins anyway.

[LBird]

ALB wrote:

The key phrase for us (of cours) is:

Quote:

I haven’t really read as much of Marx as I should have done.

From what I've read of Marx, ALB, I think that that quote from Corbyn also applies to the SPGB.So, it is a 'key phrase for' the SPGB, but not in the way you mean it.If fact, the quote really should be aligned to:

SPGB Materialists wrote:

We have really read too much of Engels than we should have done.

[ALB]

Trying to track down the origin of the Times's distortion of what he said, here's what he said immediately after what Andrew Marr said about Francis Wheen and Marx:

Quote:

Well, he was an observer rather than a doer although towards the end of his life his family got quite involved in doing things. But he was essentially a fascinating figure who observed a great deal and from whom we can learn a great deal.

An observation no doubt shared by many who wouldn't consider themselves to be "Marxist". In fact I think Corbyn was trying to make the point that to some extent "We're all Marxists now". But look how the Times twists this into a statement that

Quote:

Britain has not learnt its lessons from Karl Marx.

He may or may not believe that but that's not at all what he said. I know Stuart will defend his profession but this is scumbag journalism.Corbyn is wrong about Marx as Marx was a "doer" as well as an "observer". From 1843-1848 and again, during the period of the First International, from 1864-1872.

[Young Master Smeet]

http://labourlist.org/2015/07/education-is-a-collective-good-its-time-for-a-national-education-service/He fleshes out more policies:

Quote:

In a fast-changing world where new technology is making new industries and making others obsolete, we need an education system – a lifelong learning service – that offers new skills and understanding throughout our working lives….In 2020 we should start by reversing the cuts to the adult skills budget and expand it into a lifelong learning service by adding 2% to corporation tax (still comfortably the lowest in the G7). This funding would be hypothecated to expand adult learning into a lifelong learning education resource. The extra tax revenues brought by a high skill, high productivity and high pay economy will fund further expansion.A National Education Service will give working age people access throughout their lives to learn new skills or to re-train. It should also work with Jobcentre Plus to offer claimants opportunities to improve their skills, rather than face the carousel of workfare placements, sanctions and despair. We need a return to ambitious joined-up government.

Actually, I recall this being a flashpoint issue in the election: we were at an FE college that seemed to be facing heartbreaking levels of cuts (it's students had a lot of learning disabilities and seemed to come from some very marginalised communities).  I was insistent that education should be for its own sake, not to feed the labour market.What's even more heartbreaking, is what he is proposing is hardly that radical at all really, and just shows how little we matter in capitalism. (and yes, the cuts to FE are a scandal, that will haunt for years to come).

[moderator1]

Reminder: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

[alanjjohnstone]

Proabably you are right, Stuart…it would derail the thread. But i was genuinely interested for the mercenary reason i am curious where you think we are going wrong and what we could do to correct it. Certinly as you say you have raised our differences before but i don't think i have read them in an actual statement of your own beliefs, more a collection of remarks and comments and observations to other peoples positions that is why i sought a clearer account of your opinions. I remain a cynic and a sceptic regards Corbyn. Sanders is offering a similar serious challenge to Clinton in America….As being pointed out …any chance of victory or any chance that their policies will prevail will be sabotaged by the class interests in both Labour and the Democrats… or are we now saying contrary to our D of P that political parties are NOT expressions of class interests. We witness it now…donors withdrawing funds (and the Tories will tighten up on union donations) and constitutional threats to the leadership contest. "I came to Socialism through Marxism… I found it illuminating in so many ways; in particular, my perception of the relationship between people and the society in which they live, was irreversibly altered." Tony Blair  I certainly most definitely accept that Corbyn is much more sincere than the mealy-mouthed office-seeking opportunist Blair was and is. Sure it is all interesting to watch and listen to and read about especially when it highlights the biasism of the media and shines a light on power politics. That is the way we should treat it…an example of democracy NOT in action. It also means a change in narrative as Stuart says in regards the Labour Party  …It means we will have to re-edit and re-issue all our old pamphlets again and repeat all the old arguments that we thought were to be consigned to the archives. We really will be required to re-read all the things what we said about the Labour Party in the past…and that is a lot.  

[stuartw2112]

Since you asked Alan, my current beliefs are something like this: that socialism, as defined here, is probably not possible, even with the best will in the world, but that nevertheless the world needs radical change, along "green" and "spiritual" lines, or along any lines towards a more compassionate world. So I'm roughly in Russell Brand's camp (though I'm a supporter and member of nothing at the moment). You'd better start another thread if you'd like to discuss this though. Cheers

[jondwhite]

Conservative Home discuss Jeremy Corbyn's discussion of Marxism with Andrew Marr.http://www.conservativehome.com/video/2015/07/watch-is-jeremy-corbyn-a-marxist.html

[imposs1904]

stuartw2112 wrote:

Since you asked Alan, my current beliefs are something like this: that socialism, as defined here, is probably not possible, even with the best will in the world, but that nevertheless the world needs radical change, along "green" and "spiritual" lines, or along any lines towards a more compassionate world. So I'm roughly in Russell Brand's camp (though I'm a supporter and member of nothing at the moment). You'd better start another thread if you'd like to discuss this though. Cheers

Stuart, don't sell yourself short. Put your boots in the Rob Newman camp if will insist in going in that direction. PS – Cheers to Alan and your good self for a fascinating thread/read.

[stuartw2112]

 Thanks Imposs! Last I paid attention Rob Newman was doing amusing impressions of Bez. Is he to the left of that now?!

[alanjjohnstone]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/28/harriet-harman-we-are-weeding-out-bogus-labour-leadership-votersAnd we can expect as much balance and fairness from the Party's bureaucrats as was received regards Stevie Deans and Falkirk/Grangemouth local activists got. 

[imposs1904]

Interesting and thoughtful article by a Labour right-winger who believes that Corbyn will probably win the leadership election. The article also dismisses the scare stories from the tabloid press about an orchestrated entrist campaign being conducted by left-of-labour types to elect Corbyn as leader:http://labourlist.org/2015/07/where-is-jeremy-corbyns-support-coming-from/

[Author]

Posts