Brian
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Going by the blurb I imagine that is precisely the argument they are looking for. On the other hand if a socialist were to be in the audience they would argue 'This what you can expect from representative democracy where the politicians are mere puppets of the capitalist system '. Or, 'How can you have a democracy when a minority own the means of living?'
One thing to remember is we only have three minutes to get the socialist case across. In Wales the PPB goes out on four TV Channels. That is if we are able to get a translation in welsh sub-titles available for S4C in time. Also all PPB go out on the BBC ipod.According to my welsh dictionary the translation for World Socialist Movement is Byd Sosialdaidd Symudiad.Finally, Swansea Branch would have no trouble finding four candidates to stand. And distribute thousands of our manifesto, or election address. Not that this needs to be in english and welsh – just english will do for this particular experiment – despite the fact we will have some stick from the welsh speaking minority. But better that than paying lip service to the language by having certain sections in welsh.
Full script here: http://www.rts.org.uk/rts-huw-wheldon-memorial-lecture
Brian wrote:ALB wrote:The capitalist class would really have to be on their last legs to offer this which would undermine the wages system. I imagine that the mass socialist movement of the time would reject it with contempt and say they want nothing less than the unconditional surrender of the capitalist class. It's conceivable, I suppose, that they might say: we'll take the slice of bread but we still want the bakery and the wheatfields.Precisely, but with the offer being forced on the working class we would still have a fight on our hands in persuading a majority this measure is a last ditch attempt to divide and distract them from the socialist objective. I assume we would point out that in the long term its unsustainable and will eventually be withdrawn, and then wait for the inevitable to happen.
Which on reflection could well mean a reform *and* revolution situation arising, albeit purely on the 'speculative' dynamics of class struggle.
ALB wrote:The capitalist class would really have to be on their last legs to offer this which would undermine the wages system. I imagine that the mass socialist movement of the time would reject it with contempt and say they want nothing less than the unconditional surrender of the capitalist class. It's conceivable, I suppose, that they might say: we'll take the slice of bread but we still want the bakery and the wheatfields.Precisely, but with the offer being forced on the working class we would still have a fight on our hands in persuading a majority this measure is a last ditch attempt to divide and distract them from the socialist objective. I assume we would point out that in the long term its unsustainable and will eventually be withdrawn, and then wait for the inevitable to happen.
steve colborn wrote:Nope, don't quite agree. I can never see a situation where we will be faced with a "reform and revolution" option. I can see a time when it could be, "behave or it's a bullet in the head" though. Stevie C.How can you be so sure that reform and revolution will not be an option when class consciousness is so near the tipping point that a major concession may have unintended consequences and tip the balance in our favour? We are well aware that a major obstacle to the socialist case is due to the fact that the 99% are literally locked into the effects of wage slavery to such an extent there is little time to think on an effective escape route from their bondage. Indeed the best they can do is look for pallatives to ease the burden of financial survival.An unintended consequence of UBI – when the threat of financial survival is no longer an issue – could provide the space for socialists to gain a majority.I'm not saying that we should support UBI here and now. But what I am saying is there may come a time, given the circumstances and conditions (when we are nearly there so to speak), and also the dynamics of class struggle, may well force us accept such a major reform. Simply because its obvious in order to obtain that essential majority the workers need the space and time to come over to our side. And UBI does seem to provide just that necessary ingredient.Obviously if such a situation should ever arise, we wont be standing still but making hay whilst the sun shines.Hope I've made the picture I'm projecting more clearer.
mcolome1 wrote:There is not any reform able to challenge capitalism. Most reforms given to the workers by the capitalists have been reversed.I'm not saying reforms challenge capitalism. The type of challenging scenario I'm referring to is when there is clear evidence of the working class making headway on gaining a socialist consciousness. There is not quite a majority but it seems to represent a political challenge. What we have suggested could happen – in such circumstances and conditions – is the capitalists offering some major economic reforms to stall and distract the momentum for a working class majority.Given this state of affairs what would be our position if what was on offer is something like the universal basic income? In short, with a change in the dynamics of class struggle the question of reform or revolution is made redundant and could possibly be turned into reform and revolution.
All this discussion relates to the here and now and has steared clear of the dynamics of social change. What about the possibility of economic reforms being on offer when there's evidence of major challenges to capitalism? Can we safely assume that given such circumstances and conditions the capitalists would be offering some major economic reforms, like for instance the Universal Basic Income? If so what would our position be then?
Seeing that this thread has gone off-topic I've started a new thread titled 'What can we learn from our election activity?My apologies for starting the the off-topic discussion.
BTSomerset wrote:steve colborn wrote:I remember approximately 15 years ago, sending detailed guidelines of the work that should be undertaken, over a 2 or 3 year period, to prepare the ground for contesting elections. It was lost in a sea of apathy and disinterest. The same work was undertaken by comrades in the NE, from which benefits are still being garnered.Hi Steve,Do you mean that you produced a document? If so, I'm sure other members, and myself, would be interested in seeing the guidance produced.Kind regards,Bob.
I'll second that. CC to Howard Moss and myself.
Although we have had our differences Steve and myself are on the same wave length when it comes to understanding the need to consistently contest elections. Once a branch decides to contest any election they should not let go of the fact that consitentcy illustrates to the electorate that what we have to say is a serious message and that we are not a temporary feature on the political landscape.In this respect I'm hopeful that the party can organise a party political broadcast for the euro elections in Wales. Swansea Branch are in dire need to get back into election activity. And if the broadcast becomes a reality its my intention to ensure the branch contests the euro every time.Simply because we need the practice in how to get the message across to a disaffected working class in 3 minutes flat! Without that essential practice socialist theory counts for nothing. Party strategy is based on preparing the producers to challenge the the political system of capitalism. And in this respect there is plenty of work to be done in improving our efforts.Hopefully, an election in the North East will bring the members to their senses. You can only but try.
Vin Maratty wrote:Brian wrote:No there is nothing in the rules which requires a response to a double negative!Brian, Not sure what you mean?
I was referring to use of the word 'not' twice in a single sentence – its a double negative – which is impossible to respond too. It had nothing to do with the EC twice rejecting your membership application. Like I've said previously I can see this going to a party vote.In the meantime there is nothing to stop you helping others in the North East getting a regional branch organised. Its was a sad day for me when the old branch members failed to put aside their differences and gradually pulled out of activity. Indeed if they had continued contesting elections the probability is I would have still been on the Election Committee helping you out in any way I could.Adam, John and myself had many a long talk at HO on how to go about improving your election activity. Its all water under the bridge but enjoyable because me and John especially were always trying to push the boundaries with the EC. Adam was more cautious then due to the costs for colour printing, etc!Once the branch is up and active learn how to pace yourselves. Don't let over enthusiasm and impatience get the better of you. Otherwise the branch will burn itself out again!
Vin Maratty wrote:I have just read the EC minutes of December 2013. Would it not be fair to say that the SPGB need not give reasons for refusal into the socialist movement? I don't think there is anything in the rules that requires this.No there is nothing in the rules which requires a response to a double negative!
admice wrote:Good, yay. You had your oopportunity to get rid of me, too bad you didn't take it
Why should we get rid of you? Since when have you broken any of the guidelines and rules? Serious challenges to our case do not represent a breach of the guidelines and rules. In fact we welcome them!
dedelste wrote:I have some disagreements with you, and I am not convinced the society you are aiming for could actually work, but neither am I convinced it couldn't.My main question, though, which I'm sure you've heard before, but I haven't seen answered, is what makes you think that your approach will ever achieve a worldwide super-majority for socialism? I may be wrong, but your party doesn't seem to have grown any in over one hundred years. Do you feel like things are going reasonably, or is something wrong with your tactics? In the end, do you ever doubt that you will ever succeed, even if you're right about everything else? I actually admire working for something you will never live to see, but not for something that will never happen at all (virtually anything "can" happen, I think, but that's not an adequate standard to me). People who take a rational, scientific approach have to consider empirical evidence, don't they? Anyway, I'd like to know what evidence you see that you will ever win politically.Like socialism itself our "approach" has never been tried. Why you may ask? Firstly, because it depends on class maturity when the working class transforms itself into a class for itself and becomes class conscious of its class position. Secondly, unlike previous changes in the mode of production the socialist revolution is going to be a conscious revolution. Thirdly, in order to change the social relationships of present society the working class have to change their mindset by withdrawing their support for capitalism.This means in effect that without a socialist minded working class majority you are not going to have socialism. The major question is how do the working class register their support for socialism and likewise express the major change in mindset?The short answer is for them to get more involved with the class struggle economically and politically. The long answer is: 1. They understand the purpose, temporary nature and logic of reforms. 2. They set up their own organisations based on the principle of direct participatory democracy with transparency, accountability and delegation the prime drivers for the goverance of the organisation. 3. They directly challenge the political system of capitalism through the ballot box.Being critical thinkers we are never 'reasonable' over our progress and as for 'tactics' we leave that to the left wing who are well versed in a frequent change of position. Our approach is based on the strategy outlined above which does not require any tactical adjustment.There is no 'evidence' that we are ever going to win politically, and socialism is not inevitable. But there is evidence that the working class is becoming more aware of its class position in capitalism. For instance despite its failings the Occupy Movement and its voicing of how the 99% are treated in capitalism went viral. Then there's the advent of TZM who also advocate production for use and free access. They prefer to call it a resource based economy but its very similar to socialism. With the withdrawal of reforms the workering class are at last coming to recognise they are of a temporary nature. The left wing are a spent force in regards influencing the workers. Last but not least discrimination of all types is on the defensive.
