Negative campaigning vs Positive campaigning

[jondwhite]

Is it worth breaking off negative campaigning compared to positive campaiging into a separate topic from the Corbyn one?

[alanjjohnstone]

Dead toddlers wash up on the beach and we consider Corbyn's attempt to become Labour Party leader as the main topic to discuss. Is this the right priority for the Party…a world socialist party?  

[ALB]

I think the distinction is more between "instrumental" and "expressive" action, as the late comrade Jack Bradley used to insist. Here's a definition of the two:

Quote:

Instrumental action refers to action as an attempt to influence the social and political environment; expressive action refers to action as an expression of people's views.

And an article illustrating the difference:http://beautifultrouble.org/theory/expressive-and-instrumental-actions/We've a tendency to unconsciously go for "expressive action". Which is conforting for us but not so effective in getting our ideas across to others.

[SocialistPunk]

Alan,I notice on the first page list in general discussion you have discussion titles "Ursula Le Guin on Muray Bookchin", "The rise of RISE", "Muslim McCarthyism on the theatre stage", "Spain 1937 – Spain turns", "The Statesman and Marx" and lastly "Nasty Labour, New Labour, Old Labour".Why not set up a discussion about the desperation that drives people to risk everything in search of safety in other countries? 

[SocialistPunk]

Regarding negative and positive campaigning, two questions spring to mind.1) What is the aim of the campaign?2) What constitutes negative and positive, when it comes to SPGB campaigns? Any others?

[alanjjohnstone]

SP, i have contributed to the SOYMB/Socialist Banner blog and have particularly concentrated on immigration…not merely the current refugee crisis but the Roma and the Eastern European movement of people. The blog tries not to differentiate between political or economic refugees, nor has it solely concerned itself with Fortress Europe but have highlighted the South African xenophobia, the treatment of the Asian boat people by Australia, the persecution of Rohingya muslims. (Some of my Material World articles have also focused on those topics)To be honest and this will raise the hackles of members, i get a feeling sometimes that rather than being part of the WSM, a "Little Englander" attitude persists amongst a few of us…for world socialists we do tend to be slightly parochial in what is popular on this discussion list.  I know it is difficult but recently i drew attention to Islamophobia by the State, and the response was let's not get involved in debates about civil rights and free speech for it may lead to a view that we are sympathetic to muslim fundamentalism and we won't benefit from that impression. A problem confronting a few million fellow workers in the UK casually dismissed because of their religion. Nor is it just religion . You cite a thread i created ..the creation of a new left nationalist party in Scotland, you may also note that nobody cared to comment upon it. The Corbyn factor of the re-politicalisation of people as i have referred to previously, is not an isolated event and the Referendum in Scotland was an expression of it. Sadly, we failed to interact again with a political development of the workers. We could easily have highlighted the negativism of nationalism but still addressed the reasons and causes of its popularity when there is an apparent vacuum of alternatives . But to bring this back to the relevance of this thread…negativism can be reflected by omission…And the plight of fellow workers seeking refuge and safety and security and stability in their lives has been unfortunately missing from the forefront of our propaganda, given its importance at a world level. It too presents a problem of challenging the popular opinion and confronting fellow workers with what they deem as unpalatable truths.ALB is right, we have been lacking in instrumental action….being part of the political educational of our fellow workers and that means placing ourselves in the front line where our socialist case is not going to receive a warm welcome but indeed a hostile one. I briefly read the article ALB linked to and short as it is, it is a reminder of what politics is all about.I have argued for a multi-directional approach, no one size fits all…it says "Expressive and instrumental are therefore not mutually exclusive",. It says "concrete actions are designed to have a tangible impact on a target."…i have previously said that we should be actively campaigning with pickets and protests, no matter how small but more theatrical the better to attract attention to our case…Too often we have relegated ourselves to the sidelines of social protest for social change. Even marching on May Day was voted down this year. We exclude ourselves from involvement in peoples' politics (for want of a better phrase). IMHO, it seems we have no confidence in the correctness of our interpretation of the socialist case or hold the conviction that our ideas would prevail that we rarely put it to the test by placing ourselves alongside the rival organisations' theories,  so we restrict ourselves to the already converted, the choir that sing from the same hymn-book. Today, you meet the cynical sceptical Alan, SP

[SocialistPunk]

AlanI'm well aware of your articles on SOYMB. I also know that discussion does not take place there, though I don't know why. That's why I suggested you start a specific thread here, to encourage discussion on a discussion forum.Yes, omission can be negative. Like you, I think the SPGB miss a trick or two when it comes to connecting with grass roots, for want of a better phrase, protest movements. The word, aloof, is appropriate, and I think it is why the WSM movement get left behind every time. Instead of complaining about reformists not seeing the light and joining us, we (and I include myself in with the SPGB) need to be out there, a part of those movements. It's the only way to connect with people who are starting their journey to enlightenment.Instead of attacking, we need to be drawing people in. I'm filled with hope that there are people in the SPGB who can see that change is long overdue. We owe it to ourselves and our class as a whole.

[jondwhite]

Expressive vs instrumentalist is an interesting distinction but negative versus positive is still a factor because you could have negative instrumentalist campaigning (here's why our opponents are bad), and positive expressive campaigning (simply waving a banner for socialism). Perhaps both are needed.

[Anonymous]

Cdes I would like to prepare something for submission and consideration at the Workshop on “Key Messages and a Communication Strategy”I would appreciate contributions from forum members  to help me prepare. Please PM me. Please to the point and not too long winded.I think SP’s and ALB’S posts are a good start:

SocialistPunk wrote:

Regarding negative and positive campaigning, two questions spring to mind.1) What is the aim of the campaign?2) What constitutes negative and positive, when it comes to SPGB campaigns? 

 

ALB wrote:

I think the distinction is more between "instrumental" and "expressive" action, as the late comrade Jack Bradley used to insist. Here's a definition of the two:Quote:Instrumental action refers to action as an attempt to influence the social and political environment; expressive action refers to action as an expression of people's views.And an article illustrating the difference:http://beautifultrouble.org/theory/expressive-and-instrumental-actions/We've a tendency to unconsciously go for "expressive action". Which is conforting for us but not so effective in getting our ideas across to others.

Vin wrote:

We need to get workers 'support' by concentrating on an attack on the horrors of capitalism and its overt supporters. We will not gain support from workers by waging war on them.I use the term 'support' in that they may not yet support our solution but support our criticism. 

 

[Author]

Posts