The WSM and the future identity of the SPGB and SPC
- This topic has 193 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
ALB wrote:Actually we are known well outside the hard left. Amongst the soft left too and beyond them to people who are interested in politics generally and of course labour historians. And there are many other writers, essayists and bloggers like the one Vin has drawn attention to on another thread some of whom will be ex-members. I agree that this is still only a small percentage of the population in general but it's the same minority which would be interested at first in some new (ly named) party. So why throw away the progress we have already made in getting known amongst such people? It would be bonkers to change our name and throw all this away. I mentioned before what I think is the way forward. It's to keep our official name (with its history) but emphasise more that we are part of a World Socialist Movement, a name we have also registered with the Electoral Commission and used on the ballot paper for the recent Euroelections.We have also registered "World Socialist Party (UK)" as a variant of our name and so could use this on the ballot paper now without having to change our full name.The words "World Socialism" are also on the emblem, to go against our candidates' name on the ballot paper, which is presently under consideration and which will also be registered with the Electoral Commission.
Is it important if the Party is known among the hard, middle or soft left, they're not hammering at head office to join or help bring about a socialist revolution. They are in it for their own sake, not for the workers of the world. Has the left knowing about the SPGB all these years put a stop to the decline of the Party?As for any sympathy with any academics etc there might be mileage that could be exploited in why the SPGB should be changing names after 110 years.Lets face it it's not even a radical change, World is put in front of Socialist Party and (GB) is put in brackets, and as ALB says there already exists a variant using UK instead of GB, registered with the electoral office. But having half a dozen identities is rather ridiculous and I have to question the mindset that thought it a good idea to cover all bases with different names. Reminds me of the Mad Hatters tea party.
ALB wrote:It would be bonkers to change our name and throw all this away."Bonkers" is a good word to describe the Party approach to names and identities so far, and it is to the credit of Kent and Sussex Regional Branch to get to grips with it. And as I don't expect the SPGB members to go for a alteration to the name at least some consistency can be found.So to summarise the defence of the status quo, we have1) Known to the left and those with political OCD2) Known to political bloggers and essayists3) "Bonkers" to throw away the aboveAt some point in the future the WSM will grow with more and more World Socialist Parties springing up and it is my view that at some point there will be murmuring of elitism aimed in the direction of two parties that insisted on keeping their traditional identities. I see those two parties for the sake of solidarity and equality, changing their identities to outwardly reflect that of the majority of World Socialist Parties. There will be no room for even a whiff of elitism in the form of conservative tradition within the WSM. If that day comes, it will be more painful for the two minority parties. If the SPGB were to take that step today, (and I don't mean before the general election) it would be easier considering the low membership and stable finances. All sympathisers and interested academics and essayists could be notified, of the upcoming change.The press department would kick into high gear putting out press releases telling of the 110 year old party adapting its name in solidarity with the growing WSM. It could be the biggest relevant publicity drive the Party has ever known. The history and identity of the Party could be legally secured. In reality the SPGB has more to gain than lose,
Just to repeat…there exists a tendency to concentrate on the label on the can, rather than the can's contents.A re-brand of the Party image has to go alongside a new recipe of what socialism actually is. A new packaging, by all means, but also a new improved flavour to go with it.Why was the 60s politically optimistic…because socialism started to include the questions of everyday changes to our lives as it did when socialism was first discussed in the 19thC. ALB may well be right that some do know of us by name …but how many of those actually really know what we are made of – a helluva lot less. Our ideas are misunderstood, misinterpreted, misrepresented and on occasion deliberately maliciouslly misled about.We do carry the burden as JonWhite indicates…of an Edwardian image…i'm all for respecting our past and our history but we have to incorporate the present, however, most of all, we must be viewed as a viable future.We require to develop a continuous sustained strategy of promoting ourselves as the party with revolutionary ideas that inspires the imagination. A new shop-front, a new emblem, a new variant of our name are merely bits of the process that we need to adopt.
Just a thought, but without a conference resolution I don't think "Of Great britain" can appear on a logo. the extant resolution is to prefer "The Socialist Party" where confusion isn unklikely to occur. Since a logo is used on all occasions, I think that applies, and, specifically, as the Millies can't contest elections as the Socialist Party, on a ballot paper we have to prefer the non-Great Britain version.
I think we need to draw a distinction between our "emblem" on the ballot paper (which is an immediate issue) and a general logo (which has been discussed for over 20 years without being able to come to a decision).We are registered with the Electoral Commission to contest elections under our full name of "The Socialist Party of Great Britain". They will not let us use or register as a variant "The Socialist Party". What we can use (and do) is "The Socialist Party (GB)". I suppose, because we have registered "World Socialist Movement" as a variant, we might be able to get away with our emblem saying "The Socialist Party World Socialist Movement". Also, we are entitled to register three different "emblems", so we could register both.This is an immediate issue that needs resolving before next year's general election and cannot wait for a Conference resolution but we could get an indicative vote at ADM in a couple of weeks. Unlike the less immediate but still important issue of a general logo and the not at all immediate issue of a complete change of name.
Entirely agree YMS and that fits in nicely with Adam mentioning the use of the Party abridged version of our name. I could be wrong but the Party Poll requiring the use of the shortened version of the Party name, unless confusion were to occur and the full name on legal documents ETC, has never been overturned! So why are some still using the full Party name?
2008 Conference resolution wrote:It is encouraged to use the abbreviated form 'The Socialist Party' in any other context where confusion with other similarly named organisations is unlikely. This resolution supersedes the 1986 and 1988 Conference resolutions respecting the use of the Party's names."(emphasis added)
Young Master Smeet wrote:….where confusion is unlikely to occur.The possibility of confusion occuring is always likely. See here, for a very recent example:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11077637/Ukips-radio-rant-candidate-Elizabeth-Jones-worse-than-Katie-Hopkins.html
There is also the issue AlB has brought up several times on various threads, regarding the Party poll in 1992, I believe, that ratified the Party's decision to use The Socialist Party whenever possible. ALB also mentioned that a Party poll can only be overturned by another Party poll.There is a lot of confusion and complication regarding the Party name, I suspect some of it has come about as a result of not wishing to lose ground to the left wing on matters relating to socialism. That would explain why a small party have half a dozen socialist identities?[edit] I see you got the Party poll issue in before I'd finished my typing Steve. A very valid point of Party rules as far as I can tell
I too like the Edwardian logo, and I think this ballot paper emblem is a nice update on the design, but would be improved with the registered name World Socialist Party (UK) around the outside. This could then also be adopted as a party logo, and used on all SPGB material. Once the logo has been used in this way, the name World Socialit Party (UK) would be recognised as the Socialist Party of Great Britain.
If confusion "is always likely" doesn't that make the 2008 resolution wording a bit pointless.It should have said something along the lines of "As confusion is always likely, the Party should use the full name in all situations".
As I said, it can't occur on a ballot paper (and I don't agree it's always likely to occur generally). Socialist Pubnk is right, we have to read the motion in such a way as to make it effective.
ALB wrote:I think we need to draw a distinction between our "emblem" on the ballot paper (which is an immediate issue) and a general logo (which has been discussed for over 20 years without being able to come to a decision).We are registered with the Electoral Commission to contest elections under our full name of "The Socialist Party of Great Britain". They will not let us use or register as a variant "The Socialist Party". What we can use (and do) is "The Socialist Party (GB)". I suppose, because we have registered "World Socialist Movement" as a variant, we might be able to get away with our emblem saying "The Socialist Party World Socialist Movement". Also, we are entitled to register three different "emblems", so we could register both.This is an immediate issue that needs resolving before next year's general election and cannot wait for a Conference resolution but we could get an indicative vote at ADM in a couple of weeks. Unlike the less immediate but still important issue of a general logo and the not at all immediate issue of a complete change of name.Adam,BTSomerset already pointed out that they found the array of diferent socialist identities confusing, so what do you suppose using something along the lines of "The Socialist Party World Socialist Movement" might do? More confusion. If SPGB was used at the Euro elections then it would be better to stick to that at the upcoming general election.What I and BTS (with sympathy from Alan) are suggesting is that the Party makes things a whole lot simpler and more loaded up with meaning. By adopting permenently World Socialis Party (…). It could be (UK) as already exists or it could be (GB).I'm sure the historical identity of the Partycould be protedted legaly.As BTS points out it wouldn't take long for sympathisers etc to get used to the name change, especialy if the Party makes a huge effort in going public about it.I've never advocated a rush for a name change, as it is an issue that needs a lot of discussion. It is only my intention to debate the pros and cons of the issue. So far there is not a lot of solid reasoning coming from the supporters of the status quo.As to a logo. A great idea, but while the question of The Socialist Party or SPGB is still undecided, it makes no sense to launch into hastily deciding one for the upcoming elections, until a full Party debate can be undertaken (unless it already has). If a full Party debate has not been undertaken, a scenario may arise where the supporters of one side of the debate get extra undemocratic leverage.
SocialistPunk wrote:If a full Party debate has not been undertaken, a scenario may arise where the supporters of one side of the debate get extra undemocratic leverage.That's a little rich coming from someone who's not a member but has prolific forum leverage nonetheless.A full Party debate has been undertaken over recent decades, incessantly, and the outcome, with the exception of an aberrant period which resulted in the loss of two branches and over 40 members, has been consistent.
1986 Party Poll wrote:Are you in favour of changing the name of the Party to World Socialist Party (Britain)? Lost 72-2292014 Conference resolution wrote:In furtherance of the resolution of Conference 2008 this Conference resolves that the full name of the Party be included on the HO fascia. Carried 61-38Thank you very much Gnome, I never would see myself as having any kind of leverage over Party decisions whatsoever. I am simply a guest of the Party on an open forum.Everyone on this forum is already aware that you like to make a big deal about non Party members offering views about the Party.
2008 Conference resolution wrote:"It is encouraged to use the abbreviated form 'The Socialist Party' in any other context where confusion with other similarly named organisations is unlikely. This resolution supersedes the 1986 and 1988 Conference resolutions respecting the use of the Party's names."Nothing is said about there always being confusion, so we will not use the abbreviated version!Since 2008, there has been a consistent disregard to the above conference resolution. Members have just done what they "feel" like.If the Party had been consistent in implementing the 2008 Conference resolution, it is my considered opinion that much of the heat may have been taken out of the call for a "name change"! It wasn't and ergo, there is.Those who deem a "name change" unimportant, unnecessary and/or irrelevant, consistently push the following;1986 Party Poll wrote:Are you in favour of changing the name of the Party to World Socialist Party (Britain)? Lost 72-2292014 Conference resolution wrote:In furtherance of the resolution of Conference 2008 this Conference resolves that the full name of the Party be included on the HO fascia. Carried 61-38However there is never as much stress put on, as already stated above, "It is encouraged to use the abbreviated form 'The Socialist Party' in any other context where confusion with other similarly named organisations is unlikely. This resolution supersedes the 1986 and 1988 Conference resolutions respecting the use of the Party's names." Wonder why?
SocialistPunk wrote:Everyone on this forum is already aware that you like to make a big deal about non Party members offering views about the Party.Spot on, Cobber. Those who have so much apparent interest in the Party and concern about its affairs and wellbeing should apply for membership.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.