Members against Materialism
- This topic has 51 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
ALB wrote:LBird running wild on yet another thread as people feed him.Tim Kilgallon wrote:to be fair, Walford did come up with one reasonably funny joke, which was – A Martian lands in Clapham High Street, knocks on the door of number 52 and says "take me to your leader"
Actually, wasn't the punchine rather "Take me to your non-leader" ?
ALB, I can praise Engels for some things, and have done, because Engels is a mixture of Marx's 'idealism-materialism' and bourgeois 'materialism'. I've said this before, and given from Engels quotes that are 'idealistic-materialistic' in Marx's sense.What's more, I've given quotes from Marx that support Engels' 'materialism', too.The real question for workers looking for an ideology in the 21st century, is whether to continue to follow 'materialism', which points in the direction of Engels-Kautsky-Lenin, or to attempt to make sense of Marx's very obscure writings, and formulate a philosophical approach commensurate with our purpose of building class consciousness and confidence in workers, and will provide us with a sound basis for the democratic control of the means of production.Materialism does not now, never has in the past, and cannot do so in the future.Unless you can explain how workers can control maths and physics, then you can't provide any direction for those workers looking for answers to how they can control the means of production.From what I can tell, the SPGB intends to let workers to run factories and offices, where they can produce widgets, but keep the production of ideas in the hands of a minority, the elite who have the confidence, ability, education and interest to do so.This is not socialism.Socialism is a society in which the majority have the confidence, ability, education and interest to produce, not only 'tangible objects', but also their own ideas.And our role as socialists is to participate in the organic development of our class.It's become clear to me that the SPGB does not share that aim.
ALB wrote:Yes, but you fed him whiskey and prozac. I just slap him down once and then ignore himYou haven't got the intellect to slap anyone down, ALB.You're merely a sad disappointment. And your ignorance is shocking, frankly.
L Bland wrote "The SPGB intends to……………Keep the production of ideas in the hands of a minority" – So the production of ideas, in Bland's opinion must currently be in the hands of a minority. so if the production of ideas is controlled by the "educated elite" how then can the production of ideas be taken from them? If only they produce ideas, which of them produced the idea of Socialism and why didn't they keep it to themselves?Bland clearly considers himself to have, quote the confidence, ability, intelligence and interest to produce his own ideas, is he therefore part of the minority who produce ideas. If he isn't then how did he produce the ideas he has. Happily the reality is somewhat different. Workers all over the globe have the confidence, ability, intelligence and interest to develop their own ideas, without the elitist help of our latter day Lenin, L Bird.
ALB wrote:Yes, but you fed him whiskey and prozac. I just slap him down once and then ignore himWhat sort of a comment is that?I suppose you find clinical depression hilarious. I hope you never have to deal with itI would have thought comrades wouldn't mock me or I wouldn't have said anyting
Vin, I think it was a friendly jest from Adam, following your comments on another thread. I'm sure it wasn't meant to offend
Don't try to think too hard, Tim, the effort shows.You wouldn't recognise a philosophical idea if it ran up to you and bit you on the arse.And you still don't say how workers can control the means of production, if 'matter' speaks only to the SPGB elite.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:Vin, I think it was a friendly jest from Adam, following your comments on another thread. I'm sure it wasn't meant to offendI'll let him off then
Unfortunately, my feathered friend, your elite view of yourself reveals itself so readily, sadly it is just as easy to see your overwhelming need for intellectual recognition. This does make me wonder where your deep seated sense of low self esteem comes from, your apparent need to be recognised as an all conquering genius. You need to know that we are here to help you. We feel your pain, it's ok to share it with us we understand. Was it your friendless childhood, the family who kept moving without telling you? Getting your packed lunch given to you wrapped in a road map? The family pretending that they only spoke Swedish, just to avoid talking to you? it must have hurt so much.I can imagine you, sitting with your imaginary friend Mr Bucket, him telling you how clever you are. Then even Mr Bucket got pissed off and hung himself.But you need to know, that's all behind you, you're amongst friends here. Me, Vin, YMS, ALB, etc. we might seem like we think you're a bit of a bellend, but honestly, we think you're really, really, clever. Honestly, cross my heart and hope to die. So snuggle down tonight, safe I the knowledge that after all these years you were right, you're dead clever, honest.Much loveTim
Reminder: 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages.
Dear ModeratorApologies. On re-reading my post, it may come across that I was trying to be disingenuous with my comments. In retrospect, using words like: low self esteem, friendless and bellend,. could be interpreted in a different way than I intended, if this is the case, please accept my withdrawal of those terms. So just to be clear, it is not my view that L Bird is a friendless, bellend who suffers from problems associated with low self esteem. I hope that clarifies the matter,.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:Dear ModeratorApologies. On re-reading my post, it may come across that I was trying to be disingenuous with my comments. In retrospect, using words like: low self esteem, friendless and bellend,. could be interpreted in a different way than I intended, if this is the case, please accept my withdrawal of those terms. So just to be clear, it is not my view that L Bird is a friendless, bellend who suffers from problems associated with low self esteem. I hope that clarifies the matter,.A reminder is not aimed at any one user in particular but at all users. But hey if other users expressed the same humility as your good self it would make moderation a lot easier.
moderator1 wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:Dear ModeratorApologies. On re-reading my post, it may come across that I was trying to be disingenuous with my comments. In retrospect, using words like: low self esteem, friendless and bellend,. could be interpreted in a different way than I intended, if this is the case, please accept my withdrawal of those terms. So just to be clear, it is not my view that L Bird is a friendless, bellend who suffers from problems associated with low self esteem. I hope that clarifies the matter,.A reminder is not aimed at any one user in particular but at all users. But hey if other users expressed the same humility as your good self it would make moderation a lot easier.
How obsequious (new word I learned from a forum member) I was suspended on a number of occassions for directing questions to the moderator. As Tim and others now do this freely, do I receive an apology from the Internet Committee for my suspensions and can I also direct posts to the mod in future?By the way mod: humility? Re read the post
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.