Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Young Master Smeet wrote:My preferred Hitchen brother has written a piece about his time as a Trotskyist (Chris never recanted his support for Leon, again, advantage Peter). http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/take-it-from-an-ex-trot-labour-neednt-worry-about-trotskyists/ Quote:They were ‘entryists’, who joined Labour because they hated it and wanted to take it over. As soon as anyone knew this was going on, it was more or less bound to fail. But in any case, Trotskyism was always too narrow and too romantic to succeed. Stalin, the cynical bureaucrat and master of manoeuvre, ended up as the head of a superpower. Trotsky, orator of genius, inspired general, superb journalist and true believer, ended up being murdered by one of Stalin’s agents in a suburb of Mexico City. Both men, I should stress, were merciless killers. But one understood politics and the other didn’t.
I always find it really funny that so many Trotskyists are now lauding Cuban "Socialism", heading up "hands off Cuba" campaigns and praising Castro, considering that Ramon Mercador (Trotsky's killer) was welcomed to Havana by Castro with open arms and much celebration, following his release from prison. They clearly don't "do" history.
This is starting to look a little farcical. The way the "judgment" on Vin has been made has set the three Mods up as a Star Chamber. We have the guilty verdict, but we don't have any reasoning for the verdict, we have the sentence "contrition", what about fair process, has Vin been able to put his side of the story, it appears not, has he the right of appeal against he "sentence" apparently not, he has the bizarre option of being contrite.In English law there is the concept of "natural Justice".Natural justice is identified with the two constituents of a fair hearing, which are the rule against bias (nemo iudex in causa sua, or "no man a judge in his own cause"), and the right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem, or "hear the other side"). Clearly the question here is as much about the decision to ban Vin as it is about his behaviour on the boards, so quite clearly at least one of the mods has been a judge in his own cause, secondly Vin has not been given the right to any kind of hearing, never mind a fair one.The right to a fair hearing requires that individuals should not be penalised by decisions affecting their rights or legitimate expectations unless they have been given prior notice of the case, a fair opportunity to answer it, and the opportunity to present their own case. Quite plainly the process that has been used here meets none of these criteria. Surely the type of process that Democratic Socialists use as part of their dealings, should be demonstrably fairer, more transparent and more accessible than the "Justice" meted out by Capitalist Law.As a way forward can I suggest Father Ted, Father Jack and Father Dougal (aka as Mods 1, 2 & 3) take a step down from their pearly thrones and have a think about how they have gone about this process and then come up with a just, generally acceptable and efficient way to handle bans and appeals against bans, which meets the rules of natural justice at the very least.On Vin's side, if he could acknowledge that he has stepped out of line at times, has been very offensive, at times and has been provocative at times, I'm sure this would help. If he could also agree that he will try very hard not to be as difficult, accept that the mods have a difficult job to do and agree to try and stop being such a little "worky ticket" (he knows what that means). Perhaps all parties could agree to move forward, with Vin's right to post restored and some form of sanity restored.As I am also a "recovering Catholic" I can see Vin's point about the use of the word contrition, however from my experience of Catholicism, he should just be glad he was only asked to make an act of contrition, One of our priests liked the lady parishioners to show their contrition by having a quick blow on the "pink oboe", p.s. Vin, I miss Kevin a lot as well, but he would be chuffed to know that Socialist activity is restarting in the North East
gnome wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:gnome wrote:The second link shows my very good friend and fellow-member of the Premises Committee at the time, Harry Walters, at Speakers Corner in London.Did Harry have the loudest voice the Party has ever produced?
Harry's voice was quite loud but not exceptionally so if my memory serves – his enunciation and delivery was particularly good so nobody could ever say that they couldn't understand what he was saying. He was a good indoor speaker as well – his specialist subject being Anthropology.
I seem to recall attending HO for ADM in the early 80s as a very callow youth, it was probably the first time I spoke at a party conference/meeting, and Harry very kindly took me to one sde at teh end of the day and explained how to project my voice by directing his to various parts of the room and altering the volume. I think he made the windows shake at one point.
jondwhite wrote:There is also Poles Apart?both are sold on DVD herehttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/catalog?quicktabs_store=2#quicktabs-storeFrom the description on this very website:"Capitalism and Other Kids' Stuff is a DVD from the Socialist Party of Great Britain
A couple of links that the current EC might find useful:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arse_(district)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbow
hallblithe wrote:The shoulder of mutton was attached to a living animal. The technology exists to grow meat, which is preferable in my mind as no suffering is involved. I could not kill an animal in order to eat it and by being Vegan no one does this dirty work for me. I 'police' what I consume and do not expect others to do likewise, i.e., they choose for themselves if they eat fish, insects or any other animals. With regard to honey, I believe the Vegan Society (UK) once considered consumption of this animal product acceptable, but now do not. You can read why most Vegans eschew honey here.Whilst I wouldn't particularly enjoy killing the animal the shoulder of mutton was attached to, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it and if through my actions several others were fed as well, I would consider it a social useful thing to do. As to the shoulder of mutton, cook it long and slow, with a little bit of water in the bottom, covered with foil, on a low heat. Or alternatively mince it up with lots of white and black pepper, a small amount of stock and make scotch mutton pies with it. Bloody lovely.
gnome wrote:The second link shows my very good friend and fellow-member of the Premises Committee at the time, Harry Walters, at Speakers Corner in London.Did Harry have the loudest voice the Party has ever produced?
Young Master Smeet wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:Is Resolution 6 in conflict with Resolution 7? Perhaps the Party's pet barrack-room lawyers can say whether a committee such as the internet or blog committee can ignore seeking EC approval as stated in Resolution 7.No, resloution 6 says that the EC can delegate it's authority to act per resolution 7.Strictly, what should be happening is a treatment for a proposed video should be circulated, followed by a script, followed by a rough cut: the division between content and layout (per the SSPC) should be observed.More generally, repeated conference resolution that we should put the positive case for socialism (so no starving babies pictures of the Shave the Children kind).
Surely the positive case for Socialism is that there would be no starving babies! I don't think the conference motions suggested that there should be a complete moratorium on any mention of the negative aspects of capitalism, in any case the dispute about the video then goes down to one about style rather than content. I don't think the purpose of the EC is to act as art critic to the party!Interesting though that the EC should rule that effectively no videos, that could be construed as being from the Party, should be published without EC approval, yet they have never raised the slightest concern that "Capitalism and Other Kids' Stuff" has a direct link form the party's official website, even though it has never been officially approved by the EC. I have no problems with Capitalism and Other Kids Stuff" (despite Paddy's strong regional accent), however it seems to me that the decision made by the EC are inconsistent, ill informed and erratic.
Not all meat is intensively farmed, or could it's production be easily swapped for vegetarian options. For instance a great deal of sheep live in the Cheviot Hills, but I can't see anyone getting a bloody big combine harvester up Hedgehope Hill. I do agree that there is waste in industries such as this, lambs are produced for the market, but Mutton is hardly seen in the shops, for instance. Nothing wrong with a nice shoulder of mutton, when you can get it.As another example, although it is clear the fishing industry can be destructive in it's present form, would the Vegan enforcers in a Socialist Society stop me from going down to Tynemouth to catch a couple of fresh mackerel for my tea?
That motion could reasonably be construed as covering a great deal of the posts on this site. For exaple, if I publish the minutes of our branch meeting on this site, how could that not be construed as being published by the SPGB. This site is publicly accessible, so according to that interpretation I have breached Rule 17.When Rule 17 was created, those creating it did not have the internet, desk top publishing, websites, blogs, etc. This rule, or the interpretation of it, needs to be changed and changed quickly as such an interpretation would put the kiss of death on about 90% of the current activity taking place in the party.
Interesting link between the SPGB and the fall of Militant in Liverpool, the District Auditor who brought the whole fiasco of Militant Liverpool down, was the Brother of a current member of the SPGB and the Uncle of another.He is often reported to have been called Tim or Timothy McMahon, in fact he was Thomas Irving McMahon and was given the nickname Tim from his initials, I know that because he was my Uncle Tommy. Strangely the press never picked up on the fact that his sister, my mother, who was at that time still in the Labour Party, was a councillor in on North Tyneside Council at the time, which was similarly refusing to set a rate.Thankfully she took her son's advice, turned her back on reformism and became a Socialist!
jondwhite wrote:Well there is this forum World Socialist Movement section, the meetuphttp://www.meetup.com/The-Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/Where you can even discuss SPGB activity herehttp://www.meetup.com/The-Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/messages/boards/There is also the yahoo mailing lists, facebook, twitter? etc. ….I don't think there is a shortage of places to discuss arranging activity between local members and supporters.All of those places are there and that's fine, however by common acknowledgement the forum is by far the most easily accessible site we have, it is has by far the most traffic, To be honest the post I made about this has created more response than the meet up page has had in months!The forum is the only area for discussion linked to the party's main website and it is by far the most visible discussion area we have. If you did a cost benefit analysis, what would be the cost of having another section on the forum, practically negligible, what would be the benefit? A more visible presence for party activity for members and visitors, with the possible benefit that it might stimulate more party activity. What is the possible risk? A little area of the forum that no one goes to, there are three of them at the bottom of the forum already and it doesn't seem to cause much difficulty.As to the suggestion that has been made previously that the calendar area carries out this function, have you ever tried having a discussion with a calendar?I struggle to understand the current in the party that continually objects to new ideas, especially when those new ideas don't impinge upon the way that others in the party carry out their activity.
