Socialist Studies 25 years
- This topic has 138 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Tim Kilgallon wrote:I still can't remember the name of D'Arcy's miserable mate. He had a face like a well smacked arse when the heathens of NE branch turned up, with our "strong regional accents".
Harry Baldwin?
Sad to read about some of the older ex-comrades attitudes towards homosexuality because I just posted an excellent article from the January 1978 Socialist Standard on the net that exhibits an excellent understanding of the issue at hand:http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2016/09/politics-and-homosexual-liberation-1978.htmlAnybody know what happened to Paul Moody, the author of the article? He wrote a number of good articles for the Standard in the late 1970s.
gnome wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:I still can't remember the name of D'Arcy's miserable mate. He had a face like a well smacked arse when the heathens of NE branch turned up, with our "strong regional accents".Harry Baldwin?
No not him, just came back. Cyril Bloody May!!!!!!!
Tim Kilgallon wrote:gnome wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:I still can't remember the name of D'Arcy's miserable mate. He had a face like a well smacked arse when the heathens of NE branch turned up, with our "strong regional accents".Harry Baldwin?
No not him, just came back. Cyril Bloody May!!!!!!!
He had the look of an Easter Island statue, that had been "digitally penetrated" and really wasn't enjoying it.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:gnome wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:I still can't remember the name of D'Arcy's miserable mate. He had a face like a well smacked arse when the heathens of NE branch turned up, with our "strong regional accents".Harry Baldwin?
No not him, just came back. Cyril Bloody May!!!!!!!
Cyril May was the member who Harry Young once described as a "dilettante playboy". OK, tautological and misuse of a noun but you get the picture…
I’m surprised the SPGB hasn’t savaged you over your – no doubt democratically arrived at – decision to play the stock market. I don’t know if investing in eco-entrepreneurs and green capitalists amounts to ‘representing’ the capitalist class, but it might be argued that the scheme scuppers your clause 7.
Would a minority of the membership who were unhappy with this development and who behaved in a ‘non-democratic’ manner, be written off as non-socialist renegades?Twford John wrote:I'm surprised the SPGB hasn't savaged youBut we are the SPGB so how can we savage ourselves?I knew he was a troll from the start.
A minority opinion was that we buy gold bars but another minority opinion suggested that we instead buy platinum,Another minority said we go down to the casino to the roulette table and place the lot on red – but i got out-voted.
gnome wrote:No not him, just came back. Cyril Bloody May!!!!!!!Vin said He came and spoke in the NE I remember. Wasn't as friendly as Cdes Slapper and Coleman. Harry Young came up, too. He was invited to (the now) Sunderland University to talk on his experience of 1917. (Orgaised by my good self)When we approached the door of the meeting Harry was allowed in handed a glass of sherry and the door was slammed in our faces. I waited briefly for my comrade to come out and protest but the little shit didn't.You can guess how North east members voted on their expulsion..It was reported to members later that he had commented, 'Workers in the North East are only bothered about their beer and bingo" To which Steve Coleman replied " So what! Better than sitting reading Shakespear."They were an arrogant bunch
lindanesocialist wrote:gnome wrote:No not him, just came back. Cyril Bloody May!!!!!!!Vin said He came and spoke in the NE I remember. Wasn't as friendly as Cdes Slapper and Coleman. Harry Young came up, too. He was invited to (the now) Sunderland University to talk on his experience of 1917. (Orgaised by my good self)When we approached the door of the meeting Harry was allowed in handed a glass of sherry and the door was slammed in our faces. I waited briefly for my comrade to come out and protest but the little shit didn't.You can guess how North east members voted on their expulsion..It was reported to members later that he had commented, 'Workers in the North East are only bothered about their beer and bingo" To which Steve Coleman replied " So what! Better than sitting reading Shakespear."They were an arrogant bunch
2nd Warning: 8. Do not register or operate more than one account without first obtaining permission from the moderators. Do not share your password with others or allow anyone else to use your account. Do not use your account to post messages on behalf of any suspended user, without prior permission from the moderators.
I deeply regret allowing Vin to reminisce with other comrades, regarding The Socialist Studies Group. Although I was there myself, Vin has a better memory of the occassion as he was very active at the time of the expulsions.I will not allow Vin to express his opinion via this account again.
I see why you would feel uncomfortable about Socialist Party Investments and wish to pass it off as a joke. It wasn’t my purpose to embarrass you. What I am trying to get at, and I should have used a less sensitive example, is: do you believe that democracy is, as it were, a trump card. That if a majority of the membership supports a proposal, no matter how preposterous ( and a revolutionary party making capital investments does appear pretty preposterous ),then the democratic decision overrides everything else?
Twford John wrote:decision to play the stock marketTwford John wrote:making capital investmentsAssuming for the moment that you are sincere, on what basis do you make your claim that we have decided to do these things?
Twford John wrote:…do you believe that democracy is, as it were, a trump card. That if a majority of the membership supports a proposal, no matter how preposterous …then the democratic decision overrides everything else?I'm not a member of the SPGB, TJ, but the simple answer to your question, for any democratic socialist, is 'Yes'.The alternative is to accept that an elite have the power of determining 'preposterousness'.That you hold this elitist belief seems to be implied by your question.
Twford John wrote:I see why you would feel uncomfortable about Socialist Party Investments and wish to pass it off as a joke. It wasn't my purpose to embarrass you. What I am trying to get at, and I should have used a less sensitive example, is: do you believe that democracy is, as it were, a trump card. That if a majority of the membership supports a proposal, no matter how preposterous ( and a revolutionary party making capital investments does appear pretty preposterous ),then the democratic decision overrides everything else?I see no reason why a Socialist Party should feel uncomfortable about making capital investments.We bought our head office many years ago and and the value of the property has risen consideably. Are you suggesting that we should have not made that capital investment and paid rent, or do you think that we if and when the property is sold we should only sell it at a price that reflects the price we paid adjusted for inflation?Similarly we have retired members who no doubt have pensions partly paid by investments in stocks and shares, should they disinvest, or should we not accept any monies donated by them.If we have capital and we can use it to increase the money we have to plough into revolutionary activity, why should we not? We are not a bunch of moralistic zealots who are attempting to live a socialistic life within the capitailist system, wearing hair shirts and beating our backs with wet copies of Das Kapital. We are realists who realise, that unfortunately we have to live in a capitalist world. If we can subvert some of it to increase revolutionary activity, all well and good!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.