DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
To get to the beginnings of socialist thought you have to go to the beginnings of capitalism, and that is found in the 100 or so years leading up to the civil war in England. Writers like Winstanley are important historically, though I don't think they where that well known until the 20th century. There's loads of books about them and they are mentioned in the Clifford Harper book. The Cole one doesn't seem to go that far back.. I've not read it so don't know how good it is…
For an account of the 19th and 20th centuries the book "Non-Market Socialism in the Ninetieth and Twentieth Century" by Crump and Rubel is well worth a look.Also Clifford Harpers "Anarchy: A Graphic Guide" for the anarchist perspective and amazing illustrationshttp://libcom.org/files/anarchy-graphic-guide-clifford-harper.pdf
SocialistPunk wrote:Couple of examples of The Socialist Party of Great Britain going by the name of a rival err…socialist organisation. What's with that? I always thought the abbreviated version of the Party name was The Socialist Party?SPEW uses "The" Socialist Party to… But in elections we are the only ones allowed to use Socialist Party. SPEW use Socialist Alternative…
Vin wrote:Surely it is within the remit of the IC as an appointed committee to give some guidance to the member(s) running a party internet account?If you have any suggestions about how we should be using twittter you'd be better of making them directly to the person who operates the account rather than posting them here…
SocialistPunk wrote:Is the Party Twitter account actually being used?Yes, here it is:https://twitter.com/OfficialSPGB
Vin wrote:but it would be decided by the Internet Committee.No it wouldn't. Twitter is managed by a co-opted member not on the committee, we let him get on with it…
Vin wrote:Has there been a decision made regarding this?I don't know, it's not anything to do with me…
Vin wrote:WE could start by using The Official SPGB twitter account to follow and retweet the Artist Taxi Driver, Russell Brand etc. At the moment we only follow four people.I'm not sure if we should. Wouldn't this amount to supporting reformists?
robbo203 wrote:Kliman belongs to the (somewhat dodgy) "falling rate of profit" school of thought..Depends what you mean here, there isn't really a single "falling rate of profit" school, If you think he can be lumped with those that prophesied the collapse of capitalism because of this you're flat wrong.See these three articles, including an interview with him, in the Standard…http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2014/no-1316-april-2014/relevance-marxian-economics-todayhttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2014/no-1324-december-2014/book-reviews-population-10-billion-failure-capithttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2014/no-1313-january-2014/book-reviews-revolution-will-be-hilarious-can-inc
oldrevolution wrote:May I go as far as to suggest a possible first step? something along the lines that as Socialists, in a world powered by an economy of greed and fuelled by debt, we should avoid supporting the banking system by not taking on loans,finance,credit ect. Thus reducing the illusionary concept of created money, whilst encouraging utilisation of need above want, or to give it a modern spin, environmentalism and self sufficiency.Unfortunately this would be pushing in the wrong direction.Capitalism is a system fuelled by the extraction of surplus labour not by debt. Promoting such a scheme would be another pointless excercise that distracts from the real tasks. Socialism is not "self suffciency" (there cannot really be such a thing) but extending the socialised nature that already exists in production into the sphere of distribitution. (i.e all that is produced is already the product of the whole of society so we wish to make it the property of the whole of society as well).
raj wrote:I believe David Dundales recent articles in Israel regarding "why stealths dont hit the target".No doubt because this is just another Dundale sock puppet account..
alanjjohnstone wrote:I'd ask them for their most convincing piece of evidence which proved to them that it was not Oswald alone and then i provided the answer to that "evidence"…that was they asserted was not actually true, (usually the magic bullet , or the timing of the shots) …that it was based upon wrong information…or it didn't happen the way they said it did…that contrary statements and evidence have been offered that are more plausible ..but every time i answered their "definitive proof" ….they'd produce some other so-called fact to be answered…irrelevant factoid after factoid..and the same process was repeated and repeated and repeated…Until it simply got to the stage that it was a conspiracy because it was so successful in being covered up and we'll never know the truth …There's an excellent account of this kind of thinking here (it starts at about 28 minutes in), a lot of this is caused by a failure to take into account how our thinking processes work..https://soundcloud.com/youarenotsosmart/046-inbetweenisode-11-steven-novella
