SPGB – never heard of them
- This topic has 53 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The festive season seems to have affected the frequency and numbers of posts on the forum overall. So i migt as well take advatage of the lull to highlight this bit i recently read on Libcom.
Quote:I am avowedly anticapitalist….The only socialist parties I'm aware of are the SWP and the Socialist Party. If there's a separate group called the Socialist Party of Great Britain then, assuming it's not the latter, I haven't heard of them. I'm talking about the group formed from Militant.http://libcom.org/forums/theory/learning-curve-10122015?page=1
This focuses us on one of our problems. We are NOT getting our message communicated out there despite our efforts. Is this poster on Libcom an aberration? From his other comments on the Libcom thread he is a newbie to political activity and his first port of call was not ourselves but SPEW.
With New Year approaching, perhaps it is time for Party members, as we party, to produce some New Year resolutions for 2016 to develop an SPGB presence in the public's consciousness.
Well you might say if they've not heard of us, that is our fault, but if they reject us that is their fault.In the case of a single offhand one-line comment made in the context of longer comment in a only semi-related topic I think it is hard to draw broader conclusions.The electoral commission recently said SPGB is not a common widely known acronym, can we draw conclusions from that or both comments in light of the others?I recently re-read George Walfords Socialist understanding 1980 which challenged this notion that awareness alone is the problem
Quote:Television has not been used, but there is no reason to think it would produce a different result. (If television does, as it is sometimes said to do, exert a non-rational influence then it is an influence the SPGB does not want; it relies on rational exposition of its case)The various leftwing group appear at marches with banners that sometimes appears on TV and newspapers. We don't do that but we should, if we have willing and able members.Another option, two members should dress as Batman and Robin and climb a large building in london to complain about our anonymity. Who hasn't heard of 'Fathers for Justice', Better still do what I have been attempting. Get Russel Brand, Corbyn or someone in the public eye to draw attention to us.If you can take the consequences of being accused of being obsequious by other cdes.
jondwhite wrote:Corbyn's Form A is in the post now.Never mind the application questionaire.Has he got a batman costume?
On a more serious note, if you think high profile individuals are the answer, that would be at variance with historical materialism. On the other side of the coin, if you think the only thing standing in the way of socialism, the only problem if you like, is high profile individual (Labour) leaders, that would also be at variance with historical materialism. Ordinary men and women make their own history.
jondwhite wrote:On a more serious note, if you think high profile individuals are the answer, that would be at variance with historical materialism. On the other side of the coin, if you think the only thing standing in the way of socialism, the only problem if you like, is high profile individual (Labour) leaders, that would also be at variance with historical materialism. Ordinary men and women make their own history.I think you have misunderstood my point. I am talking about publicity. In any case it does not go against my interpretation of the MCH (a theory produced by a high profile individual. They don't come any higher than Karl MarxShouldnt we disassociate ourselves from Karl Marx? A worker who 'makes it' and draws attention to a revolutionary organisation is not a 'great man', nor was karl marx a great man for writing capital and revealing the true nature of capitalism. But they can and do contribute. While I am on the subject, this discusion about who is and who isn't a socialist and who deserves our blessing is extreme sectarianism.
I'm not saying we shouldn't give random high profile celebrities as fair a hearing as the man on the Clapham omnibus. Or that a default position of 'we hate everyone and we don't care' doesn't come across as a repellant. Or that 'the world is against us' so close ranks and close minds, comes across as presumptious and paranoid.Personally I believe Brand has long since burned his bridges urging votes for Green (and against the SPGB in Brighton) and Labour but this is not about him specifically.If Charlotte Church/Russell Brand/Jeremy Corbyn/[insert random high profile celebrity here] called a press conference tomorrow and said 'I've joined the SPGB and I want all my followers to do the same', for arguments sake even supposing the followers were all admitted, what would that achieve? What would happen if said celebrity changed his/her mind and resigned? What if you thought a celebrity explaining our case was better publicity? Well our case has been explained on BBC Daily Politics and why should we want members who take the word of a celebrity over our candidate?Publicity alone is not the problem and certainly not publicity from any particular individual celebrity or other high profile person.
I must not be expaining myself very good.People have to knwow w exist before they can know what we stand for. That is all I am saying; nothing more. An advert in the guardian doesn't mean the guardian is socialist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj3GH5myc3MWhy are people against this?
jondwhite wrote:If awareness is the only thing we need, why do any workers who hear the case reject it?I didn't say that. I am addressing the OP1 the vast majority of workers have never heard of our existence.2 Logically we need to make the vast majority of workers aware of our existence3 how do we do that?
I know what you meant Vin, and I think johndwhite misunderstood if he thought you meant that awareness is the only thing we need. Of course it's not, but it's a prerequisite – not necessarily awareness of the SPGB as such, but of the idea of world socialism.Workers who hear the case reject it because it's not respectable, it hasn't got critical mass. I think that if any high profile celeb started advocating socialist ideas, and specifically joining the SPGB, it would be bound to make more people prick up their ears. The important thing would be whether they could retain their socialist ideas independent of the celeb, detach themselves from being a follower.Having said that I can't see any such celebs doing anything as infra-dig as joining the SPGB. It would probably send their careers plummeting.
More evidence that awareness is not the problem for socialismhttp://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/dec/16/socialism-most-looked-up-word-2015-merriam-webster-bernie-sanders?CMP=twt_gu
jondwhite wrote:More evidence that awareness is not the problem for socialismhttp://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/dec/16/socialism-most-looked-up-word-2015-merriam-webster-bernie-sanders?CMP=twt_guAre we talking about socialism or 'socialism' This doesn't indicate awareness of the SPGB as a party
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.