Robbo in the Weekly Worker

[alanjjohnstone]

Robin Cox's excellent response to criticism of the SPGB.

http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1178/letters/

Strange that it takes an ex-member to argue on our behalf especially since i had drawn attention to the WW mention of ourselves and invited members to answer it.

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Robin Cox's excellent response to criticism of the SPGB.http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1178/letters/Strange that it takes an ex-member to argue on our behalf especially since i had drawn attention to the WW mention of ourselves and invited members to answer it.

Horses for courses.  Who better "to argue on our behalf"?  I for one couldn't have remotely come close to matching Robin's response.

[jondwhite]

I've give it a miss since they started writing Alan Buick [sic] and crediting Robin Cox as SPGB. Letters is dominated by Steve Freeman, Gerry Downing etc. Even the articles aren't as exclusive or insightful as they used to be.

[alanjjohnstone]

JDW, that is the point…for anyone outside looking in, Adam, myself and Robbo (okay, yourself in the past) seem to be the SPGB.Perhaps the weakness of WW is that correspondence is from the "usual suspects" as you say but it does give us an opportunity for our case to be heard. This week, Steve Freeman reiterates the self-determination of nations mantra.

Quote:

The class struggle between the Spanish ruling bourgeoisie and Catalan petty bourgeois nationalism – the kingdom versus the republic – is vital for the development of the revolutionary democratic working class.

He then goes on to shoot himself in the foot

Quote:

The Iraqi Kurds won their referendum and are backed up by the armed Peshmerga.

The Iraqi tanks out-gunned the Peshmerga and they fled Kirkut. Even worse, he makes an analogy with the Easter UprisingSurely, someone else within the Party can answer him?

[ALB]

Could do but isn't he just a one-man band?

[jondwhite]

There is also the issue of Weekly Worker hosting guest writers to portray openness but never agreeing to SPGB guest articles.

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Surely, someone else within the Party can answer him?

As individual members and as a party we have to decide the most productive use of our time and resources. Most workers are not interested in a debate between The Judean People's Front and the Peoples Front of Judea.  It's just my personal opinion I have developed of late. The more we argue with lefties, the more we are associated with them.  

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

There is also the issue of Weekly Worker hosting guest writers to portray openness but never agreeing to SPGB guest articles.

Has anyone actually submitted any and if so on what topic? If refused, what was the content of the refusal?

Quote:

Could do but isn't he just a one-man band?

According to wiki it has WW 20,000 online visitors and 500 hard copy in print. Matt talks of the USP and i think WW's is that it is its good gossip content on the Left. We aren't out to convince one letter writer but the readers of the letter page

Quote:

As individual members and as a party we have to decide the most productive use of our time and resources. Most workers are not interested in a debate between The Judean People's Front and the Peoples Front of Judea.

You may be right Vin, but most workers don't read WW. Its audience is those who already call themselves socialist. We may be hitting our heads against a brick wall trying to convince them they hold mistake views but does it mean we cease confronting the Left directly.If so, (and i am not saying we should or not,) then we are drawn to the conclusion we should examine our entire approach, including the terminology we use and our focus.But regards the time and resources required, a letter to WW is minimum and would not distract from other Party activity. No postage stamp is needed.My reason for not responding is stated in the other post… As for other topics in WW, we just published a book and a letter critiquing an article or letter on the Russian Revolution could contain a reference to that book – a bit of free advertising

[Bijou Drains]

Vin wrote:

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Surely, someone else within the Party can answer him?

As individual members and as a party we have to decide the most productive use of our time and resources. Most workers are not interested in a debate between The Judean People's Front and the Peoples Front of Judea.  It's just my personal opinion I have developed of late. The more we argue with lefties, the more we are associated with them.  

I couldn’t agree more. Although we need to provide an alternative to the “Dave Sparts”, The difficultly is that we risk guilt by association. That’s not to say we shouldn’t take them on, but that we need to be careful not to magnify the disputes on the Weakly Working letters page into something that really matters in the ongoing class struggle.

[jondwhite]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

As for other topics in WW, we just published a book and a letter critiquing an article or letter on the Russian Revolution could contain a reference to that book – a bit of free advertising

better still, send them a copy to review. Likely to be hatchet job but maybe any publicity would be good publicity.

[Anonymous]

jondwhite wrote:

alanjjohnstone wrote:

As for other topics in WW, we just published a book and a letter critiquing an article or letter on the Russian Revolution could contain a reference to that book – a bit of free advertising

better still, send them a copy to review. Likely to be hatchet job but maybe any publicity would be good publicity.

Isn't that why we have a Media Committee?   It would be nice to hear what the three comrades are doing.

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

The difficultly is that we risk guilt by association.

I'm not sure if comrades understand where this position leads to. I mentioned it may mean changing our language but if we are to avoid guilt by association, it requires a complete separation from the word socialism, our association with the ideas of Marx and Engels and a lot more besides.As regards to

Quote:

we need to be careful not to magnify the disputes on the Weakly Working letters page into something that really matters in the ongoing class struggle.

my original recent letter was to draw attention to anti-nationalism and to place Marx and Engels support for certain nationalist movements into perspective – and in today's context it is anti-socialist.Steve Freeman may be a one-man band but he does present the case of many left-nationalists who give support and succor to openly pro-capitalist nationalists. (Freeman even avocates such a policy in his letter). That question is at the centre of working-class politics today across the world. Scottish and Catalan separatisms are not aberrations but reflective of what people are thinking right now in many countries. We most definitely must take them on. There is no prevaricating about the question.We cannot offer those left-nationalists who claim to be socialists and Marxists any legitimacy by being silent and letting them off the hook.

[moderator1]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Quote:

The difficultly is that we risk guilt by association.

I'm not sure if comrades understand where this position leads to. I mentioned it may mean changing our language but if we are to avoid guilt by association, it requires a complete separation from the word socialism, our association with the ideas of Marx and Engels and a lot more besides.As regards to

Quote:

we need to be careful not to magnify the disputes on the Weakly Working letters page into something that really matters in the ongoing class struggle.

my original recent letter was to draw attention to anti-nationalism and to place Marx and Engels support for certain nationalist movements into perspective – and in today's context it is anti-socialist.Steve Freeman may be a one-man band but he does present the case of many left-nationalists who give support and succor to openly pro-capitalist nationalists. (Freeman even avocates such a policy in his letter). That question is at the centre of working-class politics today across the world. Scottish and Catalan separatisms are not aberrations but reflective of what people are thinking right now in many countries. We most definitely must take them on. There is no prevaricating about the question.We cannot offer those left-nationalists who claim to be socialists and Marxists any legitimacy by being silent and letting them off the hook.

A very interesting article on this subject:  https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-risky-is-it-really/201108/cool-dudes-hot-temps-the-climate-change-argument-isnt-about-the

[alanjjohnstone]

I read this link but find it difficult to understand

Quote:

We have to frame the issue in ways that work within everybody's underlying cultural/tribal perspectives. We have to realize that answers are more likely to be found, and solutions are more likely to be reached, if the goal is finding common ground,

What common ground is there between supporters of socialists and capitalism? Our respective positions are diametrically opposed and irreconcilable. We cannot compromise or offer concessions. 

Quote:

Trying to get somebody to change their mind on …any of the polarized issues of the day, is in effect asking them to change their underlying self-identities

And that is what we do, isn't it? Try to raise consciousness and undermine various ideologies held by our fellow workers like nationalism, religion. We do ask them to change because if they bring their prejudices with them it is suicide for the socialist movement. It is all very nicey-nicey sentiments but i have enough experience to know that it is hard to find a way to tell somebody they are wrong – invariably it is taken personally. I think we have touched on attitudes on other threads, how to communicate and conduct constructive exchanges. It does begin with language and choosing the right words to say. Face-to-face much depends on body-language but in written mediums and the internet, so many other things crop up to thwart criticisms being received as non-threats.Sometimes i simply don't know how to treat people i discuss – (or is the truth, argue) – with. Even wen it is the comrades on  this forum and in the Party  

[Anonymous]

I think we must meet head on and combat all the nonsense from anarcho-caps to leftie drivel. It is challenging to say the least, but the satisfaction surely is in seeing off the opposition and knowing that there are more readers of contributions getting some 'food for thought', than contributers reproducing capitalist 'truisms'. This is work that anyone with an internet connection can play a part in doing and I am very disappointed I do not see more comrades in my travels.

[Author]

Posts