The Socialist Party v. The SPGB – what are the differences?

[wiscalatus]

What are the key differences here?

I've had a look through the general info in the 'about us' section so do have the overview, but would you say that the SP is more of a 'reform of capitalism' type party?

And how about the TUSC, are you in it, and if not, then why not?

Thanks

[ALB]

wiscalatus wrote:

What are the key differences here?

This article explains the origins and policies of "SPEW" and how we differ from them:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1990s/1997/no-1110-february-1997/militant-dishonesty

wiscalatus wrote:

I've had a look through the general info in the 'about us' section so do have the overview, but would you say that the SP is more of a 'reform of capitalism' type party?

Yes

wiscalatus wrote:

And how about the TUSC, are you in it, and if not, then why not?

We are not in it. TUSC is a project, fronted by "SPEW" and funded by Bob Crow of the RMT union, to try to create a Labour Park Mark 2, i.e a trade union based reformist party. But why try to repeat a formula that has already been tried and failed?Hope this helps.

[jondwhite]

the policies of TUSC look very weak, sometimes vague phrases, sometimes highly specifichttp://www.tusc.org.uk/policy.phpApart from different goals which don't really even overlap, this approach has been tried many times before and failed e.g. Independent Labour Party throughout the 20th Century, Socialist Labour Party in the 1990s, Socialist Alliance and then Respect in the 2000s. Since the late 20th Century, through recessions and booms, the electorate have understood it and rejected it.

[alanjjohnstone]

Short history of the SPGB here http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2007/07/anglo-marxism-spgb.html

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Short history of the SPGB here:http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2007/07/anglo-marxism-spgb.html

And how we are different here:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/how-spgb-different

[wiscalatus]

Thanks for the info.So if you are opposed to all forms of public ownership, then what do you propese for infrastructure projects, the NHS and the police/military??

[wiscalatus]

Does the Socialist Party (England and Wales) have different views on immigration to the SPGB?Hard to get a definintve answer from the SPEW on this one.Thanks

[jondwhite]

From a purely chronological perspective the question for any 'socialist' groups formed after 1904 is why they did not join the SPGB.You won't get a definitive answer from SPEW on immigration because they happily lend their support to fronts such as No2EU arguing for a sort of 'fortress Europe'.An article from the a small Leninist group here explains some of the issueshttp://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/793/nationalist-common-sense

[wiscalatus]

ok, so how about the 'fortress Europe' idea – ie: Europe as a Socialist state. Would you agree with that idea?

[ALB]

wiscalatus wrote:

Does the Socialist Party (England and Wales) have different views on immigration to the SPGB?Hard to get a definintve answer from the SPEW on this one.Thanks

Yes. Our views are being explained in the other thread, on immigration. SPEW's position on this is ambiguous. Their strategy at the moment is to seek the support of trade union militants and officials and are well aware of the trade union defence of "British Jobs for British Workers" (similar to the case you have been arguing) — trade unions represent only a section of the working class, their members, sometimes at the expense of other workers. So, in order to appear "credible" to their target audience, they don't demand an end to immigration controls.  Here's in a document for their conference this year, is how they explain their position on this:

Quote:

We staunchly oppose racism. We defend the right to asylum, and argue for the end of repressive measures like detention centres.At the same time, given the outlook of the majority of the working class, we cannot put forward a bald slogan of 'open borders' or 'no immigration controls', which would be a barrier to convincing workers of a socialist programme, both on immigration and other issues.Such a demand would alienate the vast majority of the working class, including many more long-standing immigrants, who would see it as a threat to jobs, wages and living conditions.Nor can we make the mistake of dismissing workers who express concerns about immigration as 'racists'.While racism and nationalism are clearly elements in anti-immigrant feeling, there are many consciously anti-racist workers who are concerned about the scale of immigration.We have to put forward a programme which unites the working class in dealing with the consequences of immigration.Crucially, we argue for the rate for the job for all workers, regardless of what corner of the world they originate from, explaining to workers born in Britain that this is the only effective way to counter 'the race to the bottom'.

Make of it what you will, but it seems a bit of a concession to popular prejudice (even if, given capitalism, it is unrealistic to expect  any government  to abandon all immigrant controls and so pointless to campaign for this).

[ALB]

wiscalatus wrote:

ok, so how about the 'fortress Europe' idea – ie: Europe as a Socialist state.Would you agree with that idea?

No. We stand for a world without frontiers in which there will be no nation-states but a united world, no doubt divided for administrative purposes into regions. The EU is at the moment an inter-governmental organisation formed by capitalist states to set up and administer a single, common market. Some of the member-states see it as an embryo European capitalist state to challenge America, Russia and China for world domination, but the current world capitalist crisis seems to have stopped movement in that direction.While we are opposed to the EU as a capitalist institution we are not in favour of campaigning for Britain to withdraw. In or out, Britain would remain capitalist, so this would make no difference to the problems facing the majority class of wage and salary workers as these problems are caused by capitalism not the EU.SPEW, on the other hand, supported the xenophobic "No2EU" campaign during the 2009 Euro elections and will probably do so again in next year's, so dancing to UKIP's tune. We wont. We we'll be campaigning for World Socialism.

[ALB]

wiscalatus wrote:

So if you are opposed to all forms of public ownership, then what do you propese for infrastructure projects, the NHS and the police/military??

We are opposed to all forms of minority ownership, of which so-called "public" ownership, i.e. government ownership, is one. Government-owned industries are not the abolition of capitalism, but state capitalism. What we stand for is the common ownership of the means of production, which is a state of affairs where no individual or groups of individuals owns productive resources. They belong to no one, but are democratically run in ways that society decides. That's socialism, the alternative to both private and state capitalism.In socialism, there will of course still be infrastructure projects but these will be decided democratically and, once adopted, the physical resources needed to carry them out will be brought together. They won't needed to be "funded" or "financed" as there'll be no need of money or finance in a socialist society (what LBird has called "free access communism").In socialism there'll be a completely free Heath Service along with all other completely free services: housing,education,  transport, utilities, restaurants,etc.There won't be any armies or navies. Nor a police "force" though there might well be teams to investigate violent deaths along the lines of today's train and air crash investigators.

[wiscalatus]

Ok, so how will the geographical territory of the UK respond to attack from an outside power, say one region that chose not to go along with the World Socialism idea? 

[ALB]

wiscalatus wrote:

Ok, so how will the geographical territory of the UK respond to attack from an outside power, say one region that chose not to go along with the World Socialism idea?

Oh dear !

[wiscalatus]

what, and that is your answer?

[Author]

Posts