Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi L Bird, glad to hear that you’re still about, hope all is well with you and yours, commiserations re Klopp’s departure.
Re Baltrop’s quip, I think this over states the influence that Lenin had on the growth of interest in the ideas of Marx since his death and understates just how much influence Marx’s ideas had become influential.
If no successful Bolshevik coup took place, it would not stop the spread of the ideas of the Left Mensheviks and some of the SRs, who were heavily influenced by Marx.
Similarly, a Bolshevik failure would not have stopped the ideas of Rosa Luxembourg, Karl Liebknecht, the USPD and the Spartacus League being influential in Germany.
What would have happened to the left leaning organisations in the UK, would the failure of the 2nd International led to more of them taking heed of the SPGB, etc?
On an academic side, the influence of Marx was growing in areas such as Economics and Sociology and the depth and range of Marx’s work in comparison with the likes of Lassalle, Duhring or Proudhon. The influence of Marx’s work in the SPD was such that Weber included Marxist and quasi Marxist arguments prior to 1917. Durkheim died in 1917, but clearly was familiar with Marx’s ideas. So the idea that no Lenin would mean no discussion of Marx, would mean there was no discussion of Weber.
All of this is counterfactual history, obviously. But my guess is that if the Bolshevik coup had failed, Marx would continue to be an influential figure, perhaps less well known than present, but perhaps more accurately portrayed. As to Lenin, without a successful Bolshevik coup, his work probably wouldn’t have ended up in the “dustbin of history”, but he might be seen as a romantic failure. I am pretty sure that no one would be ploughing through the collected works of Lenin, if in fact they had ever been collected, which I doubt.
Labour MP suspended for making link to genocide in Gaza.
Am I the only one that thinks the whole genocide debate is a little ridiculous. Is the slaughter of millions of people in the trenches of World War One somehow less dreadful than the dreadful slaughter in the Nazi death camps. Is it ok to kill and maim as long as there is no racial motivation?
I’m not sure that the citizens of Coventry and Dresden will be thinking, “my family and friends were incinerated by weapons of war, but at least I have the comfort that they weren’t part of a genocide”.
Is domicide somehow better than genocide?
I understand the fact that the possibility of a nuclear holocaust creates fear and stress, TM, and I wouldn’t want to trivialise that in any way, however it is also important to look at things from as close to our understanding of reality as we can.
In terms of nuclear bunkers, ask yourself if you had squillions to spend would you consider buying a nuclear bunker? It might at least something that you considered, you might not go for that option, but if you did, it would not mean that you thought the holocaust was about to arrive, you might just think it might be better to have the choice.
In terms of lead up to a nuclear war, I can’t imagine that there would ever be a full scale nuclear war without notice. The most likely scenario would be that small scale regional wars which grow and escalate, before any possibility of nuclear strike. If that was being considered the likelihood of mass protest and other action would probably precipitate changes in government, changes in approach.
In any event I would think it unlikely that the chain of command would follow orders to destroy themselves, their family, etc.
There have been lots of examples of this including von Choltitz refusal to destroy Paris
Personally I think the war in Ukraine has led some parts of the various state machines of some countries to start to think that because the Ukrainian war has been fought in a conventional way and that there has been no resort to Nuclear weapons, perhaps smaller scale conventional European wars are a threat, option, possibility or more worryingly an opportunity.
That is to say that if perhaps the Russians and their allies are starting to think there is a possibility that non nuclear war is possible where the scale is relatively small and that there may be some advantages gained (gaining the Donbas, perhaps even getting parts of Moldova, reuniting with Kaliningrad etc.) and it might be worth a go. Let’s face it that is what the Western block have been doing over decades (Kosovo, etc.)
On the other side the Western block may well be starting to think that perhaps the greatly feared Russian army is not as fearsome as they thought, seeing that it has been bogged down and in some cases pushed back by the Ukrainians (all be it with Western arms), and perhaps there may be gains to be had in the East or at least to neutralise the threat there.
The worry is that they both seem to be making the assumption that neither side will get to the point where they decide enough is enough and press the button.
I think that generally the Party takes too logical view about war and that was is fought for specific gains. The reality is that war is fought for possible gains. The German state took a gamble in 1939, the Japanese state took a gamble in 1941, neither state gained what they thought they might gain, but there was a chance.If capitalists were always wise about the outcomes of their gambles there would be no business failures, no need for bankruptcy laws, no need for limited liability companies, etc. etc. The whole culture of capitalism promotes risk taking. Sadly those who take the risks get all of the gains, whilst those who suffer when the risk taking goes wrong are the Working Class.
Going back to the original post therefore, perhaps the super rich setting up elaborate Nuclear Bunkers are the equivalent of them putting some of their wealth into Limited Liability Companies. They don’t want their companies or their war mongering to go tits up, but if it does don’t worry the Proles will pay the cost.
Doesn’t seem like a large portion of the German Capitalist class suffered too much following the failure of their gamble in 1938:https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/may/18/nazi-billionaires-book-hitler-bmw-porsche
I went to the Stop the War meeting at the Tyneside Irish Centre last night, if that’s the opposition to it, it is rather dismal.
I think in total maybe 20 people there in total. A few Morning Star old timers who I recognised as ex CPers from yesteryear, and the usual group of displaced Trots (ex SWPers, expelled Militants, even an ex 1980s RCP bloke who hadn’t joined the neocons).
Most of them seemed to be looking for a leader to act as their new Lenin/Trotsky and to help them re enact the October Revolution (with them playing a prominent part)
At the entrance there was a bloke from Counterfire. I’ve got to be honest I had no idea who they were (to be fair when I gave him an older copy of the Standard and our leaflet, he didn’t know who we were either).
Using my legendary skills of wit and repartee, I found out that they were the ex SWP rump of Trots who still thought that the SWPs “turn to Islam” was the correct call.
As I said, I did a swap for his one page news sheet for a copy of the Standard, but I have a feeling that I was robbed.
As it happened, at the same time as the Stop the War meeting there was also a leaving do for an old time union convenor going on at the same time at the Irish Centre as well, which I didn’t know about.
Coincidentally I knew a couple of the people who were going to the leaving party and was having a bit of a laugh and crack with them, as well as a couple of other people I knew ‘cos I’ve been a member at the Irish centre for years.
At this point Lindsey German walked in with all her acolytes and disciples and seemed to think we were the welcoming committee for the The Stop the War meeting, with her taking the role of the new Lenin (or maybe Rosa Luxemburg).
She seemed genuinely disappointed that nobody knew who the feck she was. (I recognised her but said nowt) and swept upstairs to the pre booked meeting room.
Positive out of the negative was that I managed to sell two copies of the Standard from the Union leaving do and gave a half dozen of our leaflets to them.
I also distributed about another half dozen leaflets who came to the Stop the War meeting as well.
I’ve got to be honest and say that I didn’t have the heart to listen to the usual bollocks that the sub SWPers from the Stop the War mob were likely to come out with.
Obviously the working class need to oppose all capitalist wars, but the manipulative group of egocentric Lenin wannabes at the top of the Stop the War movement are not going to be part of the end to those wars.
So rather than that I went down to the main bar and had a couple of pints with an old fellow I know there.
He thinks that Kerry are going to win the All Ireland Football Championship. He might be right, but surely it’s got to be be Mayo’s turn, finally!
Always decent pint of Guinness at the Irish Club!
Here’s one which, to me, clearly spells out class antagonism.
I used to live in a street which clearly had a dividing line between one side of the street and the other.
One side 8 bedroomed leafy toryville and the other side a typical Tyneside terrace. Guess side I lived on.
The guy opposite me was a self entitled arsehole (is it politically correct to describe someone as a stuck up ponce, these days, if so that is what he was/is.)
On rememberence day he used to put on his fucking RAF uniform and put a bleeding Union Jack on his garage, what a twat.
Anyway, I used to blast this through the open window on a Sunday afternoon just to cause him discomfort. Might not have been particularly politically constructive, but it cheered me up.
The happy ending is that his wife ran off with the gardener, took the kids and screwed him for his pension. Happy days.
“Levels of intelligence have little or no influence on political ideologies.”
Surely if you wished to decide if there is if there is any relationship between intelligence and political ideologies it would first necessary to define intelligence, and if a connection did exist, so what.
I have observed that some of the most conventionally intelligent people I have met in my life (people with very high academic qualifications, high level roles, great levels of responsibility) have done some of the stupidest things believable. I have also worked with people with quite severe learning disabilities (i.e. an IQ range of 20-35) who have had a level of quite extra ordinarily level of emotional intelligence and interpersonal sensitivity.
People tend to make the assumption that because a person has understanding and skills in some area, they would have similar understanding and skills in another specific area.
This seems to be very much the case in the political field. If a musician is able to produce breathtaking music or lyrics that touch us, people often make an assumption about their personal and or political views or behaviours. We don’t regularly make the same assumptions about other areas.
It would be considered absurd to think that because Bob Dylan has produced some fantastic music and lyrics, I would consult him with regards to the best way to fertilise my allotment and be disappointed that his insights were limited or wrong, but we regularly seek out the political views of our artistic heroes, quite why, I have never been able to fathom.
It is important to divorce the art, the science, the philosophy, the football skills, etc., from the artist, the scientist, the philosopher, the footballer.
“The government is full of highly educated and intelligent people”
If you’re referring to the elected members of the government, educated – agreed, intelligent – perhaps not.
“If you want to go further by wreaking punishment on him, then admit that that is to soothe the anger and hatred you feel and is about you, not him.”
As I said in my posting, I am not supporting punishment, just pointing out that perhaps you are wrong in saying that punishment doesn’t work.
It may not work on the recipient of the punishment, but the evidence is fairly clear that it does work on many observers of punishment. The reason I am refraining from perloining several bottles of malt whisky from my local Sainsburys (and a large pork pie to accompany it) is not because I feel any moral compunction regarding Messers Sainsbury. It is purely because of the chance that I might get caught and face the punishment and the consequences (loss of job, career, etc.). This is the only thing which stops me from robbing the place blind.
“Hobbes supported the death penalty whilst being a Necessarian and denying free will. He supported it on the grounds of deterrence, which we know does not work.”
We know it did not work in the case of those who committed murder, we do not know if it worked in the case of those who did not.
I am not making a case for punishment, however there is an argument that punishment is not there for those being punished, it is there for those who observe the punishment!
In any case, it is often said that general disapproval from the communinity will be enough to deter anti social behaviour in a Socialist society, is being disapproved of just a mild form of punishment.
TM “ you are not cognisant of the laws of motion that rule matter, including your brain, senses and nervous system”
I’m pretty cognisant of basic Newtonian physics, which I think you are referring to. I spent a number of years studying it.
The point made in the link I made is that quantum mechanics demonstrates, as I understand it, appears to show that Newtonian models do not adequately explain quantum level.
So the idea that the Big Bang was a little like cueing off a gigantic snooker game, where the initial explosion set off a course of motion that was inevitable from the beginning does not appear to fit into the experimental data.
Looking further into the way that fundamental particles appear to behave, it appears that reality is very different, at this level of scrutiny, from the standard 19th century explanations for matter and motion.
The reality, if we ever approach understanding it, appears to be a great deal weirder than we think.
Thomas More and Jarvis
I could reply by saying “you would say that, wouldn’t you”. It would be a cheap shot, so thankfully I didn’t use that quip.
However, even if I did, I’m sure you two, of all people, would be the last to blame me.
Risking the moderators’ wrath (perhaps they don’t have a choice in the matter), you might find the article below interesting.
https://aeon.co/essays/heres-why-so-many-physicists-are-wrong-about-free-will
To be fair, I’ve had motor insurance since I was 19.
Doesn’t mean I thought I’d end up being killed on the road.However, logically, if you’ve got the money to spare, even if I didn’t think the apocalypse will be coming, anyone would have a back up plan.
That said, given that you think that we have no free will and that it’s all preordained, why worry?
