AHS
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
robbo203 wrote:By the time you have 51 percent unambiguosly supporting socialism, the bulk of the remaining 49 percent are not likely to be that far off from a socialist standpoint. The growth of a socialist movement, if it happens, is likely to have a profoundly selective influence on the opposition to socialism itself, dragging it in the direction of socialism and altering the entire social climate in which socialist ideas are being put and in a way that would make people much more receptive to these ideas.
But we won't get even get to those 51% if those socialists who are elected to an assembly aren't prepared to vote for or support anything other than socialism. Presumably they will have to be seen do something in the interest of the working class, even in the run up to socialists gaining a majority. This is of course where our party's programme is non-existent. We have nothing to offer but full blown socialism.
I have had a look at the German, a PDF of which can be found at http://ciml.250x.com/sections/german_section/sozialdemokratie/bebel/bebel_reichstagsrede_zum_sozialistengesetz_1878.pdfMarx is commenting on a speech by Count Eulenburg, Minister of the Interior, in the Reichstag. The text is very confusing, as it's at times hard to distinguish quotation from commentary, and I didn't have much time to spend on this.However, the translation is accurate, though the statement in question is part of a much wider discussion. That said, there is no doubt that it raises the possibility of the working class winning a parliamentary majority.AlexanderP.S: The German reads"Friedlich" kann eine historische Entwicklung nur so lange bleiben, als ihr keine gewaltsamen Hindernisse seitens der jedesmaligen gesellschaftlichen Machthaber in den Weg treten. Gewinnt z.B. in England oder in [den] Vereinigten Staaten die Arbeiterklasse die Majorität im Parlament oder Kongreß, so könnte sie auf gesetzlichem Weg die ihrer Entwicklung im Weg stehenden Gesetze und Einrichtungen beseitigen, und zwar auch nur, soweit die gesellschaftliche Entwicklung dies erfordre. Dennoch könnte die "friedliche" Bewegung in eine "gewaltsame" umschlagen durch Auflehnung der im alten Zustand Interessierten; werden sie (wie der Amerikanische Bürgerkrieg und [die] Französische Revolution) durch Gewalt niedergeschlagen, so als Rebellen gegen die "gesetzliche" Gewalt. (empasis added)
ALB wrote:Some people said that a Brexit vote would unleash a carnival of xenophobia. Unfortunately it seems to be happening. And now whether or not to "Send 'Em Back" has become an issue in the Tory leadership contest whereas it never was in the referendum campaign, only "Stop 'Em Coming In".It is a shame that our party wrote off this referendum as little more than a squabble between different factions of the capitalist class.British workers will find it harder to unite with workers of all countries and make common cause with them, if they are no longer working side by side with them.Large sections of the working class were taken in by the Brexiters' lies. The SPGB's 'northing to do with us' approach was absolutely the wrong way to go.If nothing in the real world of politics ever has anything to do with us, why would the workers at large want anything to do with us?
For information, this is my union’s official position:
“The GMB have taken a position of ‘angry yes’. We know the EU isn’t perfect, there are plenty of problems with it, but so many of the rights we’ve fought for over the years are guaranteed by Europe. So we’ll fight to make Europe a Europe that works for working people, not big businesses, but we can only do that from within, not by leaving. There’s too much at risk.”
Brian wrote:You claim to have read our statement on the EU referendum. If so you need to weigh up your assumptions above against this little gem, "A State can choose that its government and parliament take the decisions required to comply with capitalism’s basic economic law (as the leavers want) or it can delegate some of these decisions to some inter-governmental body (as at present and as the stayers support), but in the end it doesn’t matter who makes the decision. Nor where, whether London or Brussels. the decision is made."The EU referendum is, like our statement explains, just another political and economic argument amongst the boss class. For those who are supportive of either side of this argument by default they are also supportive of capitalism.While the EU referendum may indeed be just another argument amongst the "boss class", the EU constitutes a much wider arena for the class struggle than the UK does. Do we wish to fight the good fight only here in the UK or at a European level? After all, the European level is one step closer to the world level.For me the referendum is about the size of the arena, parliamentary and otherwise, within which to make the case for socialism. Wanting to carry on the fight for socialism within the EU is NOT being supportive of capitalism. After all, do we not want this party to have a place at the table? Folding one's arms and saying "nothing to do with me" is being supportive of capitalism.
Alan, I hear what you are saying, but I no more approve/support/condone those aspects of the EU than the SPGB does when putting up candidates in the EU elections.I think SPGB will be better able to put its case with GB remaining inside the EU than outside it.
I strongly believe that a case for World Socialism by democratic means is made more easily within a political system which already strives to overcome national boundaries, not merely in the interests of capitalists. Younger people already have a much stronger sense of being European or even of being citizens of the world (including my '60s generation). This issue is too important to waste on a merely symbolic write in vote. As a committed World Socialist, I will vote to remain in the EU, as I see the EU as a vehicle which in the long term can be utilised by the working class in the interests of World Socialism.
Alan, not necessarily, but I think we need to debate at length whether we can pursue our party's aims better inside or outside the EU. Would we like to see a SPGB MEP make the case at a European level? I do not see the benefit of simply saying that this is merely a struggle between two or more capitalist factions in which we will have no part. It's not the Great War.
Given that we hold that world socialism can be achieved by democratic means using the parliamentary process, then would we not want to be able to pursue that goal within a larger parliamentary entity, in this case, the EU, than within a smaller one, such as the UK? And do we think so little of the good the EU has done for human rights? And while the free movement of people/workers does serve some sections of the capitalist class (the pro-EU one), is the free movement of people not generally a benefit? I, for one, would hate to find myself outside the wider union of peoples that is the EU. A vote to stay in Europe is hardly a vote for capitalism.
