Russell Brand

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

Sort that out, solve the riddle of the Sphinx, the Gordian Knot, the Rosetta Stone and we've cracked it!!!

I always refer to the question of how socialist consciousness arises as the Holy Grail of socialism.

Quote:

Consciousness tends to expand exponentially rather than arithmetically

When you stand alone, you really do stand alone. Our herd instinct?

Quote:

Part of the reason why many are currently reluctant to become socialists or work for socialism  is that they think it is just not credible in the sense that it is not going to happen in their lifetime. So why bother.  This of course then becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

It is why our advocacy for socialism we must include an immediancy within it. That emphasis is placed on the possibility NOWI am often accused of seeking a model, a blueprint and i am guilty of that because people want to see practical proposals and need these concrete points to argue and elaborate upon to fix their minds upon something more firmly. When we build a house we discuss with the architect and the builders…when we buy off-plan we have the designs on paper and pictures to study …we don't commit to abstract…it'll have two bedrooms and a living room generalisation. When we say it isn't possible to outline daily life in socialism, we de facto confirm what all the other people say…it is something for the far off future…for my grandkids if they are lucky.

Quote:

Some people may be inherently more conformist or unwilling to break the mould and may therefore require the presence of many more socialists around them before they feel secure enough to begin to make a move in the direction of socialism

Erich Fromm's Fear of Freedom ?…Who wants the burdens and responsibility of the whole world upon their shoulders…we need trust that others will share the load….the loss of trade union militancy and unity may in a way reflect this collective will-power we require to displace capitalism and take on the running of a whole new society. …The capitalist case that there has to be politicians  leaders…or scientists and technocrats…,is indeed a get out clause for the serious business of assuming your own self-liberation and emancipation…much better being a spectator than a participant and easier to shout criticism from the stands and blame the players or the manager's strategy (to use a football analogy) for failure to score our goal. I think we need to make socialism realisable in the minds of people now that it is viable technologically.If we can detect the cause of the malady we can begin to think of the cure and the treatment needed. …At the moment to return to my earlier medical remark…our current and future activity must "not do harm".On the other hand…We can't sit on our hands and do nothing and just believe in the socialist faith and repeat the prayers of the traditional socialist creed like some Gregorian chant…  

[LBird]

Ozymandias wrote:

Btw the guy (Lbird?) who lumped the SPGB in with all the other arseholes calling themselves socialists is wrong. The SPGB  has never bulshitted a worker in its 111 year history. It's is the anthithesis of bullshit mate. You're the bullshit artiste.

And you're the member of a party that still thinks that rocks talk to humans?I'm the non-member desperately trying to reason with the 'materialists' who argue this, and who refuse, on the grounds of bourgeois scientific principle, to allow workers to elect knowledge." 'Democracy in the production of scientific knowledge and truth'? That's bullshit, LBird!"My 'bullshit', Oz, involves radical democracy within all productive activities of humans.Your 'bullshit' consists in pretending to be a democrat, like the SPGB, whilst having already decided that you won't have workers determining the truth of reality. Because 'reality' speaks to the party.The key here is for workers to decide who's the bullshitter – whilst I'm "the bullshitter", materialists like you will continue to infect those within our class, who come to some form of disquiet with capitalism, with the myth of materialism.111 years and counting, Oz.1st warning: 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]

I want a  vote on if Lbird is bullshitter…its the only democratic way to determine the truth…Who votes and how they vote?Wasn't that Robbo who said LBird was bullshitting because he doesn't explain the way we vote on such questions as correctness of ideas….So its up to me to undemocratically define democracy but  i have only an ideological position on it …i don't think bullshit exists …just contrary opinions of reality….waffle waffle twaddle blah blah..name-calling …fiddlysticks …give me that tab of acid…i want more of what's real …BREAK-THROUGH…BREAK-DOWN…BREAK-UP…Slam the brakes on…chibber chibber, warble warble…Am i off-topic, moderator1…Keep me on the straight and narrow…faaa…lll…ing…….1st warning: 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.

[LBird]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Wasn't that Robbo who said LBird was bullshitting because he doesn't explain the way we vote on such questions as correctness of ideas….

By the same token, then, any worker can criticise the SPGB for not explaining how socialism will work.The SPGB, quite rightly in my opinion, follows Marx's lead, and insists that the actual functioning of socialism must be a future decision for the class conscious workers, and refuses to give a 'blueprint' for socialism.It's the principle that 'socialism is democratic' that is insisted upon.If robbo wants to know how 'democracy in science' will work, let him suggest some ideas.The real problem is not 'the working', for robbo, but the very principle.He's not a democrat, but an individualist; he doesn't want workers' power, but 'free individuals'; he doesn't want democracy in science, but wants to rely on those special individuals, the elite-experts, who pretend to have a special method, that is not democratic, that tells them the truth.What's more, I, like Marx, talk about 'theory and practice', not about 'correctness of ideas'.But robbo's elitist, individualist smoke-screen is doing its job.I can't say it clearer: as a point of principle, any questions about 'truth' in a Communist society must be determined by that society. And as that society will be a democratic society, it follows that those determinations of 'truth' must be democratic.Once this principle is established, the discussions about 'how' are on the same footing as those about the 'how' of socialism.2nd warning: 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]

Quote:

The SPGB, quite rightly in my opinion, follows Marx's lead, and insists that the actual functioning of socialism must be a future decision for the class conscious workers, and refuses to give a 'blueprint' for socialism.

This is usually the answer offered but i'm increasingly finding it questionable. As i said on another thread, it is another excuse for deferring the revolution to an indeterminate future, of declining to debate and discuss vital aspects of socialismI want socialism NOW. I consider myself a class conscious worker NOW. Am i being denied the democratic right of beginning that revolution now? Sure it is a collective projected of all of society but as we always say it does start with a minority. We begin as individuals rejecting socialism so i take on board your accusation of individualism and plead guilty but we soon discover others sharing similar ideas and go beyond the individual and we develop into a political party, one that begins to reflect our class and our society as it grows in number and merges with all the other campaigning social movements produced by workers. For sure, we have not reached that snowball/avalanche level of mass organisation yet but we put into practice the "blueprint" of socialism as the structure and the decision making of our party. We create our rules and principles as a mirror of socialist democracy. And it is amended and it is made malleable so that it incorporates the experience and the knowledge gained …or at least it has the capacity for that.If we want socialism NOW, and not at an undetermined future date, we must show how it works and how we would begin to implement it including the democracy in its decision-making that we are professing. We can lay down the skeleton features for other workers to put flesh on to as we swell in numbers and acquire more and more input from wider and wider sections of our class. In some situations it may well be speculation but isn't that those scientists do, present hypotheses and theories that are either disproved or on the other hand if declared valid are elaborated upon and added to, the gaps filled up, the bar raised higher. Marx has been quoted so lets remember he was himself not beyond presenting his blueprint of  labour time vouchers and phases with the Gotha Programme albeit it was for private circulation…an anethema for a democrat and in contradiction to his Communist Manifesto …that communists distain from concealing their views and aims. I'm happy to say that certain parts of the State will remain…the statistical branch, the welfare/scientific departments of agriculture and health and what-not. I am happy to include international bodies into the framework, UN's WHO, UNESCO and make use of integrate the many NGOs, Oxfam and the like that exist plus all the professional/trade bodies that at the moment administer aspects of capitalism – the FAA on air transport, for instance (i use that as an example for the simple reason when i was a humble air traffic control assistant i saw the world-wide co-ordination and co-operation required to get from A to B through the air. I then later worked for British Rail and again witnessed the collaboration and liaison to get from A to B safely, despite the differences in technology) I think we need to identify and quantify how we will transform capitalism into socialism, since we argue that we are not intending to build on the ruins of the old system but socialise their foundations. We have to say how. We have to present a picture and we all know the saying …a picture is worth a thousand words…so i am for these symbolic wheels of the IWW or the SLP SIUs, i'm sympathetic to those who describe a model …Parecon and Inclusive Democracy…even if the content of their specific models is not what we would recommend or outline. But they embark upon that process…putting meat on to the bone and giving something more physical and concrete for people to envisage as a possibility. Perhaps what i am trying to say is that The Zeitgeist Movement offered us a more detailed vision of what is possible and it is our task to make it a political movement of change which it is not. Let's admit facts… or realities if you prefer that term…TZM have out-membered us and had a bigger impact than ourselves world-wide. Perhaps it is because of their looser, more elastic definition of member but i think most adhere to their core idea of a new type of world…very much alike to our own aspiration.What;s Brand's success? I'd say it is relating ideas of a future revolution to the present. Okay, we can all dispute that much of his "revolution" isn't exactly system-change but nevertheless he does say what we think is impossible, is possible…things need not be what they are…we are capable of making and shaping in our own interests and  for our own benefit. He inspired. Now let us be truthful and look at ourselves…Are we inspiring others right now? Dietzgen and Pannekoek talked of consciousness in semi-mystical terms such as spirit…so he shared some aspects of Brand..others such as Reich and Fromm evoked the psychological influences ….They all sought that we make the revolution personal…that we personally take possession of the responsibilities and the aspirations of socialism and organise to share those with other socialists and educate the non-socialists but always agitating for socialism — education , organisation agitation..the three legs of socialist movement. We must foster confidence in ourselves as the agent of change…ourselves meaning us as individuals , party members, union members, and members of our class.I'm happy to incorporate what we know anthropologically sociologically with what we know of the socialised management of capitalism…their supply logistics chain, from farm to shelf, from production unit to retail outlet and make those political objectives and if people seek examples to hold up a proper socialist free at point of delivery NHS service or education system as something to show a socialist system is feasible and achievable.I'm not for a monolithic political movement based upon commandments cast in stone ..a monument…but an organic party with a small p in the way Marx described the socialist party…argung and debating amongst themselves as scientists do…undermining sacred cows to advance knowledge. (And i have always defended LBird for his role in doing that on various threads…kick-starting us into re-considering our positions – doesn't mean he is right on everything, though, …nor i… or you…or her …and certainly not Brand)Hope the above elucidation goes a way to show where i stand on how i consider the revolutionary process should be like….giving you a blueprint of my political stance …my ideology, Lbird   2nd warning: 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]

Russel Brand endorses Labour and Miliband, the SNP and Lucashttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/04/russell-brand-changes-mind-about-voting-and-urges-support-for-labour

[alanjjohnstone]

A sad end to Brand's political odyssey …His words will come back to haunt him if Miliband becomes prime minister…but what good is it to say  "we told you so"

[alanjjohnstone]

We have to find a way to break this cycle of "lesser evilism"…I'm open to suggestions …

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Russel Brand endorses Labour and Miliband, the SNP and Lucashttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/04/russell-brand-changes-mind-about-voting-and-urges-support-for-labour

 Yes I noticed. I posted this on the wrong thread: 

Vin wrote:

Brand is now calling on all his 'followers' on twitter to vote labour, obviously believing (like the internet committee) that 'follower' on twitter means support. I think he underestimates his twitter 'followers'This has probably been planned all along 

[Victor]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

We have to find a way to break this cycle of "lesser evilism"…I'm open to suggestions …

I think I speak for the democratic majority when I say we haven't got an f-ing clue mate.

[Victor]

Vin wrote:

Brand is now calling on all his 'followers' on twitter to vote labour, obviously believing (like the internet committee) that 'follower' on twitter means support. I think he underestimates his twitter 'followers'This has probably been planned all along 

Are we allowed to use the word 'wanker' on this forum?

[alanjjohnstone]

I'm not one for conspiracies so i doubt it was pre-planned …however Miliband or his advisors are campaign savvy and even without being endorsed being seen seeking a dialogue with Brand was beneficial. Much more than what Miliband had hoped for.  I think we never expected Brand to be so naive as to believe the soft-soap and drop all pretence of a principled position. I don't know if the joke is on him or on us but Miliband triumphed. He can now join with Billy Bragg, Eddie Izzard and go on the streets to plead for votes for Labour. But once again we face the situation that the promise of reforms…nay, not even those, but merely a promise that they would listen…was suffice to garner Brand's support. It matters little that he himself pledges to continue the resistance – he handed the loaded gun over to a class enemy and helped aim it at the working class…it matters little it will not be him who pulls the trigger. From now on, Brand's fingerprints are all over future Labour (and SNP) policies. We have to be sure to hold him accountable when the time comes and the consequences of his submission to the political party machine becomes evident.But as i said…it isn't the first time, nor the last time, workers have been forced into a corner where the options offered is cholera or the smallpox…and we have never managed to break through this barrier to understanding…It is all related to what's been said on the other threads …We need to begin to offer an effective opposition ourselves. This episode with Brand demonstrates the problem if we substitute a proxy.As i said, i'm here to learn if there is a way…a practical way that we can begin to apply 

[Anonymous]

I don't think he would have met with Brand if he didn't already know thaat he would receive support. That would be folly 

[Young Master Smeet]

I think the lesson is be wary of celebs and remember the importance of the party as a tool of clarity and control: we control our collective message, we can't control celebrities.We should welcome anyone who contributes to consensus breaking, and whose words and topics give us an 'in' into conversation.  That's it.A late member, as an aside, used to know JP getty,. the billionaire, and send him socialist literature.  That didn't do any good neither.

[alanjjohnstone]

Yup, Victor…i confess to cluelessness …hence my pleas that we get together and think about it all…and leave no stone unturned…even a monument can be made to move if need be.  It could be age getting to me but the trend is downwards….and that has to be reversed…We simply can't wait for history to help…and say , well, material conditions of the class struggle always leads to an eventual upswing and recite short periods from the labour movement's past …it's people that make history…and they are abdicating that responsibility of directing the changes to the ruling class and their interests.

[Author]

Posts