The WSM and the future identity of the SPGB and SPC

[Anonymous]

LBird wrote:

gnome wrote:

To the best of my knowledge the SPGB has never taken advice from non-members and hopefully never will.

oooo! Never taken advice from the class, eh?

So, not only are you the only 'communist' in the village but now you want us to take advice from a working class that presently supports, or least acquieses in, the continuation of class society.  Don't think we've got much to learn there somehow.

[LBird]

gnome wrote:

So, not only are you the only 'communist' in the village…

Well, I certainly seem to be the 'the only communist on this site', because whenever I raise the question of 'democratic class control' (of party, 'science', 'matter', etc.), everybody else seems to pull a face.'Communism' (or 'socialism') here seems to mean only economic control.As if everything else can be reduced to 'the economic' – ideas, ethics, morality, beliefs, culture.Only the simplest Engelsian thinks that there is a one-way relationship between economics (or production) and the rest of human activity.So, 'GB' has no bearing upon the issue of class consciousness.

[Anonymous]

LBird wrote:

Well, I certainly seem to be the 'the only communist on this site', 

 And any other site, for that matter.

[LBird]

Vin Maratty wrote:

LBird wrote:

Well, I certainly seem to be the 'the only communist on this site', 

 And any other site, for that matter.

Well, your rather limited range of experience of 'communist' (Leninist 'truth', the single interpretation) would lead you to suppose that, wouldn't it, Vin?User placed under moderation for 3 days for breaching Rule 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages. 

[Anonymous]

LBirdIs your "science" going to take over this thread as well as every other? 

[steve colborn]

gnome wrote:

To the best of my knowledge the SPGB has never taken advice from non-members and hopefully never will.

ALB wrote:

But I think we'd have to bonkers to completely abandon our long-standing full name. Even though this would not be a break with our past it would be perceived of as such.

Absolutely right and for what good reason?  In a desperate attempt to appeal to more workers who otherwise don't understand or want socialism?  It didn't work back in 1988 and it's not going to work now.Apart from the full name the party has, over its history, used the shortened name form and will continue to do so, and, of course, the acronym, by which we are probably better known, especially by workers who know anything at all about politics.This is the party's new fascia sign.  Get used to it.    "This is the party's new fascia sign.  Get used to it."

  Well it is for now, but as we all know, nothing lasts forever, or at least I hope it doesn't, cos if it does, we are fucked, if Capitalism last' forever.As for not taking "advice" from "non-members", I'm afraid you are wrong! We take advice from "tech" experts. We paid for, and accepted the "advice", of the guys who did "our" PEB. did we not?When all comes to all, we can be insular, or we can be outward looking and we can try to "engage", with our fellow "workers"! Guess which approach I favour?

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

Also, I would like to know, maybe from Alan or SocialistPunk, if there is any evidence that use of 'Great Britain' in the party name is actually holding the movement back. Are you being told this? Is it putting people off joining?

My personal anecdotal evidence is that it does raise preconceptions about the party. Nor is it rare for it to be mentioned. Several times in the referendum debate our name has been cast up as some sort of proof that we are indeed a unionist party. So, yes, i am being told this.It was from previous accusations of the jingoistic flavour that i checked and discovered the link between Great Britain and Lesser Britain, (France Brittany) which many of us use to justify the title but lets be honest, i doubt the 1904 founders were using Great Britain as geography but the politcal constitutional connotations for its use. Does it put people off joining. I don't know. What it may do is put people off investigating us further and it doesn't assist in giving it a wider reception internationally that the designation World Socialist Party may do. Gnome knows my feelings about spending money on HO so the facia stays until it flakes and splinters and needs replacing, then we can again decide a new design and personally i don't mind it at all… As i have said in my posts, it not simply a matter of re-naming ourselves. As Gnome and others said it didn't have any significant impact dropping the GB. In the past we may hve ben better known by our abbreviation …in the days of open air meetings…but workers (even informed workers) knowing of us but more importantly understanding what we stand for, i do not take as a given these days. A new generation has grown up…and the SPGB, the Socialist Party of Great Britain, doesn't exist for them and if by some fluke they have heard of us , it is for the wrong reasons, and also more likely they confuse Socialist Party with SPEW. As i suggested there is a easy way of ascertaining the reality …simply ask folk.  We could do it ourselves or we could hire a professional pollster.  There is absolutey no need to be working in the dark. No, a re-naming of ourselves is not suffice in itself to re-kindle our hopes. We need a new image, a re-branding of our content and ideas, and a new way of organising that goes beyond the parochial geography of whatever state we happen to be resident in and a movement that encapsulates the politics beyond borders that the internet has technologically offered an opportunity for us to utilise. The new WSM website is perhaps a spring board. The Blog committee too has raised the possiblity among ourselves of expanding and re-styling the SOYMB into a fully functioning WSM blog. As i said we can do things in stages , one step at a time, to see if they work or need tweaking and improving. Dropping our name may well be one of the last acts. Again, i like to ask about how the WSM structure arose and what sort of decision making process was involved in it being adopted.

[ALB]

gnome wrote:

To the best of my knowledge the SPGB has never taken advice from non-members and hopefully never will.

I don't think this is true as we have sought outside advice on occasions, e.g legal opinion. What has never happened is non-members taking part in any vote. In this particular case we have two non-members, even potential members, putting forward arguments that are held by some members. So, their arguments need to be addressed anyway, but shouldn't our advice to them, then, not be "mind your own business" but "why not join and have a vote in what we decide?"

[Anonymous]

ALB wrote:

gnome wrote:

To the best of my knowledge the SPGB has never taken advice from non-members and hopefully never will.

I don't think this is true as we have sought outside advice on occasions, e.g legal opinion. What has never happened is non-members taking part in any vote. In this particular case we have two non-members, even potential members, putting forward arguments that are held by some members. So, their arguments need to be addressed anyway, but shouldn't our advice to them, then, not be "mind your own business" but "why not join and have a vote in what we decide?"

It should have been patently obvious that I wasn't referring to the receipt of legal, technical or even bricklaying or plumbing advice for that matter. And as far as encouraging non-members to apply for membership this I have done on many occasions.  See here, for example:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/world-socialist-movement/wsmspgb-strategy-2014?page=2#comment-15651But until such time as they do…

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

 it not simply a matter of re-naming ourselves. We need a new image, a re-branding of our content and ideas, 

 As I have said elswhere, the party's sites and publications use various logos and styles. If we wanted to put people off then that is the ideal way of doing it.The party needs a single name, written in a single style, with a single logo and they should identify the party on all publications and sites. I don't know how you can  'legistlate'  for such a thing but surely the members who run the sites and publish party literature can see the common sence in a common presentation of the party's name.A single 'corporate' design/logo.    

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

No, a re-naming of ourselves is not suffice in itself to re-kindle our hopes. We need a new image, a re-branding of our content and ideas, and a new way of organising that goes beyond the parochial geography of whatever state we happen to be resident in and a movement that encapsulates the politics beyond borders that the internet has technologically offered an opportunity for us to utilise. 

I have to say that as some one who rediscovered the party more recently I was struck by a shift in emphasis from"We seek to take into common ownership the earth and its resources, organise production for use and not for the market. A consequence of this is that money will become obsolete as we will not need it to access goods and services"To;'We seek to abolish money, classes and states' I believe the first would attract interest whereas the second appears – at first sight – to be nuts and a put off. Just an opinion. If I was asked what the party stood for by a visitor at a branch meeting,(or a TV interviewer)  I would say the first, because basically I don't stand for the second.  

[SocialistPunk]

Gnome wrote:

To the best of my knowledge the SPGB has never taken advice from non-members and hopefully never will.

What a ridiculous statement for a socialist to make. This statement sees non party members, that must by definition include ex-members, non party socialists, sympathisers and supporters, as empty vessels with little to offer. By this  admission the SPGB must exist in a self perpetuating socialist vacuum, separate from the influence of the outside, material world.I have to ask Gnome what he thinks this open forum is for? I had assumed it was to allow non party members, socialist or otherwise, to take part in discussions and learn about the WSM/SPGB from party members? What a teacher!I didn't see any signs on the site saying "Any non SPGB input or suggestions will be duly ignored, as SPGB members know everything." Heaven forbid an outsider may have some good ideas or opinions.

Gnome wrote:

now you want us to take advice from a working class that presently supports, or least acquieses in, the continuation of class society. Don't think we've got much to learn there somehow

LBird hit the nail on the head when he spoke of Leninism. The idea that non party members have nothing worthwhile to offer in terms of ideas and contributions is pure anti socialist Leninism. If I was a party member I would be embarassed to think such garbage could be spouted by a fellow socialist.Last time I checked I was still a member of the working class, and I was at one time a member of the SPGB. But by Gnomes standards I have nothing worth contributing, no ideas, nothing worth listening to. I am a mere capitalist supporting ignorant worker, along with all the other non party socialists out there.I ask Gnome, when he was outside the party for some years, did he cease to be a socialist? Were his thoughts and ideas worthless?Adam puts it more comradely in the quote below.

ALB wrote:

 In this particular case we have two non-members, even potential members, putting forward arguments that are held by some members. So, their arguments need to be addressed anyway,

[steve colborn]

I agree with the post SP. I have spent time outside the Party, during that time, my output of Socialist letters, my putting the case to fellow workers never ceased. I may not have had the "title", Party member after my name but was a Socialist nonetheless. I continued to come up with ideas and ways to put the case.Yes, I am one of those members Adam refers to and no, I do not dismiss non-members ideas as irrelevant and worthless. I embrace ideas, where ever and from, whomsoever they come from!

[jondwhite]

ALB wrote:

gnome wrote:

To the best of my knowledge the SPGB has never taken advice from non-members and hopefully never will.

I don't think this is true as we have sought outside advice on occasions, e.g legal opinion. What has never happened is non-members taking part in any vote. In this particular case we have two non-members, even potential members, putting forward arguments that are held by some members. So, their arguments need to be addressed anyway, but shouldn't our advice to them, then, not be "mind your own business" but "why not join and have a vote in what we decide?"

Actually George Walford observed this attitude in some members in 1984

Quote:

I have had members tell me this directly. They have said, almost in these words: ‘We know these people have not understood the case because if they had understood it they would have accepted it.’As you can imagine, it takes a good deal to leave me speechless. But that did, the first time I heard it. The blind, unthinking conceit of that answer! If you disagree with the Socialist Party that shows you don’t understand them. They have nothing to learn from anybody. There is no possibility of anybody knowing more than they do and no possibility of them being wrong. They hold the Truth, the whole Truth and the perfect Truth. The only thing the rest of us can do is sit at their holy feet and hope some of their pearls of wisdom will drop into our hungry little mouths.

http://gwiep.net/wp/?p=387As a member myself, I don't regard it as the correct approach. To state the blindingly obvious, Marx himself was not a member yet we learn from him and yes some of Marx's writings were first published AFTER the formation of the SPGB. And no, the answer is not just to 'support whatever the working-class do' OR 'join us' (although the latter would be good) but to meaningfully learn from the class. Open primaries for SPGB committees (in the US, the two main parties register their supporters or anyone who wishes to be registered) would be a good way to demonstrate the SPGB acting in the interests of and accountable to the working-class whilst maintaining the no compromise principle. The SPGB ought not to be partyist in the way the Anarchist bookfair think all parties are. The party does not supplant society.

[jondwhite]

Incidentally, there was a 'World Socialist Party of Canada' distinct from the companion party the 'Socialist Party of Canada' but with the same politics in 1968 I think.

[Author]

Posts