SPGB – never heard of them
- This topic has 53 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Before my time but there was someone who spammed on behalf of the Party. Somebody else can explain the outcome. Actions have consequences and we should always be prepared for them. As i proposed, we do have an alternative strategy as an option…
In tend to stress it is a post capitalist society and this makes it esier ot respond to the usual gibes about the soviet union, as being post feudal. Use these two quotes and finish up,to illustrate the latter point,"State capitalism would be a step forward for us." (Lenin)"What you have is state capitalism." (John Foster Dulles to Nikita Khruschev)Engels and Marx would have no problem seeing that as a bourgeois revolution without a huge emerging bourgeois capitalist class, the intelligentsia and state stepping into the breach.Real Marxists in the UK the S.P.G.B. called it state capitalism in 1918.The archives are here,http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/archive
Quote:The half-emptiers do have a knack of choosing counterproductive thread titlesChoosing a title to gain over 30 posts to discuss our strategies for socialist activity i don't consider to be counter-productivity…or has everything that can be said, has been said and no more discussion will bear any fruit….even if it has produced a propaganda proposal from myself for the Party to participate in… a Mayday media campaign …If everything i posted never involved what i consider positive suggestions to replenish the half-empty glass then i may well be accurately described as a mere moaning minnie…but a look over the history of this forum will demonstrate that i always try to make proposals that are productive…some might be considered inappropriate…others though can be seen as pretty tame and mundane ideas for the party to accept…Nor as some say i talk the talk but don't walk the walk…i do try to contribute to party activity and party business the best i can, considering my situation. I don't think it is counter-productive to advocate some reflection on the business of making socialists and maybe…just maybe …gain some new insight….Or are we infallible like the Pope? Or as i said….do we believe even if there is nothing new to debate, and for others it might not be pointless to cover old ground and perhaps ensure that we never missed something or emphasised or made it a priority. .
Lenin Decision Of The C.C., R.C.P.(B.), January 12, 1922 …on the other hand, the socialised state enterprises are being put on what is called a profit basis, i. e., they are being reorganised on commercial lines, which, in view of the general cultural backwardness and exhaustion of the country, will, to a greater or lesser degree, inevitably give rise to the impression among the masses that there is an antagonism of interest between the management of the different enterprises and the workers employed in them. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/dec/30.htm
Sorry, Alan, but it's not the discussion I'm objecting to but the title of threads. I come back from being out, christmas shopping or from the pub (as now) or whatever, turn on my computer and see that the top item on the main section of the forum is headed "nobody has heard of us", "why are we not making progress", "why are we so small" and other moans and just wonder what all those people attracted by Vin's tweets think. Surely you can think of some better title for a thread on activity?
Talking about my tweets the one with our logo and objective on is receiving many likes and retweets. I should have put a link to this site on it but I usually include @officialSPGB in my tweets anywayI have just received 18 likes and or retweets in as many minutes. Does anyone know this account https://twitter.com/RafaelStepanianProfile "MONEYLESS, CLASSLESS, STATELESS COMMUNITIES OF HUMANITY IN COOPERATION FOR OUR COMMON NEEDS AND WELL BEING. CAPITALISM IS INHERENTLY EVIL." retweets me to 8000 followers surely a member?While I am on the subject the official twitter acount receives even more retweets
Yes, I know him. By coincidence just been speaking on the phone to him to invite him to the West London branch social on Tuesday.
alanjjohnstone wrote: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=1This has a funny smell about it. He says he was not aware of, and goes on to refer to us. This means he'd been informed of our existence before making his statement, but chose not to investigate us further. It looks like a deliberate exercise to belittle us.
One former member remarked many years ago that we are probably better known than we think, but we are not known socially.
I don't read that into the thread, Rodman. Spikeymike #51 "PS: The 'Socialist Party' you joined is not I presume 'The Socialist Party' as in the SPGB – the latter party has a pretty good website dealing with some basic anti-capitalist ideas though neither organisations are anti-parliamentary."Ghostwhistler #53 "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."Auld-Bod #61 "You asked if socialists entering parliament had been tried before. Though I have strong reservations about the SPGB, in the December issue of their monthly journal, ‘Socialist Standard’, is a good article – ‘Cooking the books – You can’t buck the market but you can abolish it’, which debunks the Labour Party and all socialists, who wish the reform (or patch up) capitalism. It’s on their website."These are the only messages which mention ourselves. All Ghostwhistler's references to Socialist Party or SP on this thread are in relation to SPEW. So i think your suspicion is a bit misplaced. And as you see the title of this thread is part of a direct quote which i thought pertinent for us to try and understand better.
Quote:"One former member remarked many years ago that we are probably better known than we think"Personal anecdotal evidence i have of this is when i re-joined and turned up at a protest with leaflets someone was pleasantly surprised that we were still in existence. He was well acquainted with ourselves from outdoor soapbox meetings but once those ended, he no longer saw our presence and presumed we had disappeared from the poliical arena. This happened a few times…Another personal story was while working alongside and talking with a work colleague, he mentioned an incident from about 20 years previous when a "socialist" on a soapbox singled him out from the audience, declaring dummies in the shop-windows are better dressed so who was the real dummy (and considering himself to be a dapper dresser, he was sort of affronted…) After all these years he still remembered the comment and now considered how insightful it was. He was, however, not aware of the Party's name nor knew that i was a member and was well acquainted with the speakers analogy to recognise it…(his description of the speaker being bearded didn't help to identify who the speaker actually was)…it was something that had stuck with him all that time…An anarchist comrade in the Wobblies when he heard i re-joined the SPGB wasn't surprised at all. He knew the party well enough to say that there was something unique about the SPGB… ex-members often return to the Party like prodigal sons …Your ex-member is right…we do punch above our weight…but do we still dance like a butterfly and sting like a bee as we once did in the past? What i am trying to always say, is we need an effective alternative to those outdoor meetings…social media on the internet seems the only option available to us so are we devoting as much resources to those as we relatively once did going around the country to Speakers Corners with our platform. Idf the answer is as i argue, no, then that lapse must be addressed as a priority. We have the cash, let us use it where it is needed.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Spikeymike #51 "PS: The 'Socialist Party' you joined is not I presume 'The Socialist Party' as in the SPGB – the latter party has a pretty good website dealing with some basic anti-capitalist ideas though neither organisations are anti-parliamentary."Ghostwhistler #53 "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."Auld-Bod #61 "You asked if socialists entering parliament had been tried before. Though I have strong reservations about the SPGB, in the December issue of their monthly journal, ‘Socialist Standard’, is a good article – ‘Cooking the books – You can’t buck the market but you can abolish it’, which debunks the Labour Party and all socialists, who wish the reform (or patch up) capitalism. It’s on their website."These are the only messages which mention ourselves.Now we learn that 2 out of the 3 who were discussing us had heard of us and looked on us relatively favourably
alanjohnstone wrote:And as you see the title of this thread is part of a direct quote.No, it isn't. He said "haven't heard of them" rather than "never heard of them", which is not so dismissive. Nor so gloomy. Half-fullers would have titled this thread "SPGB — pretty good website" or "SPGB — good articcle".
ALB, as well you know, Spikeymike, is an ex-member from the 60s and 70s. Auldbod is an anarchist of many years from Scotland who knows the Party from there …hardly typical if you seeking a poll. Okay, be as pedantic as you wish that i misquoted the poster but it is very much a distinction without a difference. Both are equally dismissive the way i read it…but perhaps i am wrong…others may detect a softening of tone in the difference of words but i don't. The point and i will repeat this…We were not the first or even the next port of call for someone who wished to discover and explore socialism…that despite being the oldest existing socialist party and the second oldest political party in the country …he hadn't heard of us……(and by following the thread he never showed any interest in correcting that omission although he may well have for all i know) We can either say…the problem is his own for not doing his research more fully…Or that for some reason we are at fault for not being on the radar of someone seeking to investigate socialism….(despite as another thread reminds us the most looked up word in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary)Without attributing blame to him, i have suggested at one time in our history, in many major cities in the UK, we had a presence because there were public forums where we could address fellow-workers directly. It brought us exposure. And as they disappeared, knowledge of the party has grown less and we have not sufficiently compensated. Bookshops and libraries do not stock our journal like they used to and for the street-selling of the Standard, a couple of branches – and all due credit to them – conduct the occasional lit stall but circulation is nothing like it used to be. Facts as i see them that just might be unwelcomed and unpleasant for other members.I have been consistently suggesting two things over the last several months, much to the chagrin of some…That we begin the process of rebranding ourselves as an organisation…And that we begin to devote far more resources to making ourselve better known on the internet.Doom and gloom, Private Fraser, glass half-empty pessimism, Moaning Minnie are descriptions that i accept in the comradely fashion i hope they are handed out but when it comes down to it, i'm still inside the tent pissing out, not on the outside, pissing in. And i won't be going away any time shortly, nor are my views and opinions upon the party and how it expresses its socialist case going to disappear from my comments on here even if others think they present only negative conoctations about the Party for any visitor to this discussion list. As my very opening words to this thread was…i was taking advantage of a lull in posts, no doubt because people were out xmas shopping or having festive drinks or whatever, to kindle some interest in something that crossed my horizon…someone interested in socialism who had heard of the SWP and Militant SPEW but never heard of us. Surely that should be a concern. Surely it was worth trying to raise some discussion on that fact by quoting…(ok, very slightly misattributing his words but certainly not misunderstanding their import) somebody's experience.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Quote:"One former member remarked many years ago that we are probably better known than we think"Personal anecdotal evidence i have of this is when i re-joined and turned up at a protest with leaflets someone was pleasantly surprised that we were still in existence. He was well acquainted with ourselves from outdoor soapbox meetings but once those ended, he no longer saw our presence and presumed we had disappeared from the political arena. This happened a few times…
This is a rather patronising attitude for that person to take. He would only show 'interest' in us as long as we had a strong profile–not being prepared to join. In other words, he was just a groupie.When, or if, socialism is established these people will climb out of the woodwork and declare they were 'with us all the time'! Meanwhile we continue to do the donkey work.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.