Gog_
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
DJP: “You can not only say this about land, but anything that takes the form of private property, think about it…”I know, I have referred to that very same premise consistently. And it is one of my main points to the whole idea: that people come to realise that by doing: by reclaiming such a basic aspect of living that is producing food.At the moment people are hung-up on the “fact” that we need all the businesses to live. We don’t need supermarket owned markets, farms, distribution systems; we don’t need energy companies that claim ownership to oil and gas fields and that own the power stations; we don’t need the state that regulates how and what people can and cannot do in their lives. Unfortunately, the vast majority people either aren’t conscious of this or, they think it somewhere in the backs of their minds but are too scared to put it to the test.If we can give people a relatively easy way to bring out that doubt into the fore and to get people to question openly the apparent “need” that we are tricked into thinking we have of the state, the business and money then we can trigger a bigger movement somewhere down the line. Discussion groups and literature help to do this, what we need is something else-something extra-for people that do not participate or do not want to participate/feel capable of doing so for one reason or another. I’m not saying “change the message” or principles or anything of the sort. What I’m saying is change something to let more and more people realise what we want them to realise.There’s going to be little joy in relying on living conditions to reduce and people’s frustration to build up to such terrible levels that people are somehow going to spontaneously wake up one day and say “socialism is the way to go for me”.
In reference to some of the things the DJP has stated above:I have been working a medium sized “kitchen garden” and started with no capital. The tools existed prior to my moving in to the house, seeds, knowledge and everyother aspect has been donated from friends or family’s old tools etc and I have made considerable use out of all of these. I live on a farm and agree with what you say regarding the farm operation. This farm also works with a basic hand of the farmer and his son with a significant help from myself and others that live on the land. To start some kind of massive “revolutionary” gardening spree would yes, cause a need to have massive stocks of everything in abundance to achieve any kind of success. However, what I have stated is something to start from small with an aim to work up to a series of small groups doing the same later which, then naturally grow according to use and numbers involved with the culmination of further groups farer afield that can then link to prioritise, store and facilitate a range of seed production, plant propagation and so on.Land may also not be “free” however, it can be freely made available. All is needed is for the right people to say “yes”. I fully agree that only a small amount of people could be sustained at any small level. And that is the point, if people want to do it, are motivated enough, can identify problems and overcome them successfully, work together and the rest then something can be achieved.I also agree with, “If people get exposed to socialist ideas by getting involved in a socialist agriculture club then that can only be a good thing. But the same could be said of a socialist cycling club, a socialist rambling association or here’s a thought, a socialist discussion group that discusses socialism.”And quite right so: why not have a socialist cycling club, rambling association and more of the socialist discussion groups. There’s no issue with that at all and can only be a good thing indeed.While there may be restrictions associated with working such an idea within capitalism, this only lends more to the point in case. If people can achieve “this much” within capitalism, imagine what we can achieve without the need to bother with money. I’m not saying create a model for socialism, or a model of socialism, I’m saying show people what they can do now to help eachother to live without the need to generate profit and extrapolate it into the future, match it with the other areas of life: energy, sheter etc and you’ve opened up socialism to a bunch of practically minded, motivated and “enlightened” people that you otherwise may well not have.At the same time, get a cycling club and a rambling association and we can spread the socialist literature around the country quicker and in places that the even the internet cannot reach.
DJP, you state:The best projects are those that are worthwhile for their own sake while simultaneously containing an implicit challenge to some fundamental aspect of the system; projects that enable people to participate in significant issues according to their own degree of interest, while tending to open the way to more radical possibilities. Originally, I set out my idea as a different way of introducing different people to socialism through practical demonstration.”The best projects are those that are worthwhile for their own sake”I think I shall risk it and say that growing your own food on whatever level is intrinsically a good thing for multiple reasons.”…while simultaneously containing an implicit challenge to some fundamental aspect of the system…”I originally stated that one of the guiding principles would be to challenge the local monopoly of businesses selling people to buy food: eventually, if succesfull enough severely impacting the profitability of such a business. The people doing so would be challenging the fundamental assumption within capitalism that so many people still labour under that, “you have to work, to earn money to pay for food”.”…projects that enable people to participate in significant issues according to their own degree of interest…”I originally stated that the idea would look to bring as much people as possible to the “group” in many different areas, so as to foster the working understanding that people can take from the free store due to their input of effort on whatever scale (ultimately) and in whichever way: logistics, growing, tidying, cleaning, technology, teaching etc: enabling people to “participate in the significant issue”of food production in the hands of people, “according to their own degree of interedst”.”…while tending to open the way to more radical possibilities.”I originally stated that one of the idea’s principles would be to produce a practical demonstration of socialism; to show to people that are not familiar or historically comfortable with associating with the language and body of socialism as a result of adopted political/social mistruths. Some people may just enjoy the company and the outdoors, others may find it a valuable tool in experimenting with ideas, others still may find it an excellent alternative to buying their food, others still may benefit from being homeless and being able to eat for free, others again that are perfectly rich may come to some kind of “wonderful” assertion that socialism offers when they see some practical demonstration of the values, mechanics and organisation that socialism could hold after capitalism. However, others may not.Some people learn, think and foster understandings better through reading, others through listening and others again through practical experience.What I have posed is not some kind of mini-socialism-some kind of modern-middle class escapism but a different method of encouraging people to engage with socialism; in discussion; engaging with varied people; putting their otherwise bought and paid for labour to the task of something better than just “volunteering”. I am fully aware that such an initiative could not bring down capitalism and I have never said that. What I have said is that it may act as a catalyst for further “radical possibilities” in people that perhaps otherwise may have been wholely turned off from the idea of “socialism”.
At no point have I stated that it is some magical path. Nor have I said it is not necessary to organise politically. I am stating that there is the potential to organise on another level and to ask if anyone has any similar or complementary ideas.
I’m not saying anything about making money at all. I’m saying forget about making money. If you can get enough people together, with the right motivation and understanding, with the same bunch of goals in mind there is the possibility to do something much grander than what has been done before. If we can start off small for practical reasons and work up with the higher numbers of people involved, something successful could be achieved.I know that it wouldn’t work with a small number of people with a narrow goal of homestead self-sufficiency. What could work is a small number of people successfully producing what they needed, promoting the idea, framework, principles and then getting more and more people to do the same in a large-scale, linked network designed to provide for a production network increasing in scale. It could act as a catalyst for more change.
I understand what you mean when you talk of communes. However, what I am proposing is not a commune. It is a group of otherwise regular people living perhaps as ordinarily as they might have done previously, however, with an extra facet to their lives in so far as that they are apportioning a part of their daily/weekly/monthly energy output into helping to produce food for their own consumption and others. While I agree that declining material conditions will ultimately force people to look for revolution, there is always the danger that they will perhaps unwittingly get behind some other group or ideology, lead by a small leadership that seek to materialise their own ambition. It would be better, instead, to show to people through their own participation that another world is possible through their own work. Not necessarily a whole new world, compeletely alien to them-which many think socialism is due NK, China, SU etc.-but one where they can be directly in control of how things are done. While this idea may never overthrow capitalism completely, it is perhaps an aid to answering the consistent question of “well, socialism’s a nice idea, but, it’ll never work in practice”. If people can show by their own effort that they can usurp huge corporations by providing for themselves something so basic and simple as food then they may well just come to the realisation that they can actually have power over their own lives by taking real, democratic control over every aspect of their lives. This happening alongside the declining material conditions of a great many people in the UK can act as a real world example of casting-off the restriction of business, the state and capitalism to even a comparatively small extent where they can then develop their understanding and promote their consciousness to socialism. I’m not saying that it definitely will work, I’m saying it could work and we won’t know unless we try something. Just because some people attempted and failed with “communes” in the past, does not mean that there is no reason for trying to try something new now. Afterall, we say a similar thing when we correct others when they refer to Cuba, N.Kore, China etc as socialist and that previous “attempts” at socialist revolutions failed because of such and such. When they reply, “well socialism had its chance” we don’t all reply, “yeah, fair enough, you’re right, let’s not bother”. I’m aware there would be restrictions placed upon the group by capitalism such as how the party is with its payments for rent, tax and so on but we don’t call for it to be abolished because it cannot suddenly escape capitalism’s chains.
Also, you state that it would be nothing “but a demonstration of a group of people within capitalism co-operating to run an allotment”. It is arguable to state that the party and others are nothing other than “a demonstration of a group of people within capitalism co-operating to run a political society”. Considering that we cannot escape capitalism over-night, it is better to open up another front on the attack of capitalism rather than not.
I also failed to mention that considering the group would be aiming to develop above and beyond localism and according to the requirements of such a target, anyone that applied their effort to the production would be able to take from the free store. This “effort” would obviously start with the actual growing of food but the types of effort needed would develop along with the volume of production. Later, a situation may arise where there is a need for complex logistics to allow for the production/distribution of stores, bringing new people into the group, development of production etc and so there would be more methods of applying people’s effort from doing physical work, to couriering, to nightwatch, to administration, to training/teaching and so on. So, as long as the people taking “out” put some degree of effort “in” they would be free to take from the store. In reply to the above comment:I am fully aware that socialism cannot exist in one country, nor can it be in an allotment. Which, is why I state that the target would be to, over time and is practicable, to include the greatest amount of people as possible over the greatest area as possible. This way, people that do not necessarily wish/are able to do the physical “growing” there are other areas that area associated with supporting the production that allow for people to take from the store by applying their effort in a slightly different way but still towards the overall successful outcome of the production.How this is different to an “allotment” is that it would not be an allotment. It could be either hundreds of backgardens, or agricultural land on a greater scale-depending on how people decide. Initially, there would not necessarily be any great “controversy” or any massive impact upon capitalism-much as is similar to current attempts at removing capitalism. However, the idea would be designed specifically to act as a catalyst for development that would undercut one of the most significant tentricles of capitalism: that of selling food for people to live.If you eventually show people through practice that you can remove the “need” to buy all your food from people, then you show that you do not have to “buy” your energy off companies either, nor do you have to buy your clothes and so on.While people already know this and a great many of us already within the SPGB and similar organisations recognise that we are forced to engage in capitalism in order to survive, most people are not necessarily aware that we “need” to but we do not “have to”. Unfortunately, they lack a practical alternative that lies in front of their noses, especially when they have so many other distractions in their lives.What I propose is not some kind of wishy-washy grow-your-own attempt at providing a few vegetables for your salad a few months of the year but an attempt to show that people can easily work together, without profit as a goal, in a sustainable way to remove the need to have to buy food. At the moment, allotments are there for a small scale, either for the supplement of an invidual or a very small group’s consumption. What I propose is people doing away with growing in this way, but putting in effort to a production system that allows for the taking of free food. An idea that needs developement but through adoption and adaptation not by pooh-poohing and outright dismissal.
* Read: ” If, over time, less and less time go to supermarkets ” as, “If, over time, less and less people go to supermarkets…”
The email writter seems to have completely failed to realise that actual point of what socialism is. Socialism’s aim is not to give all his money to the poor that have “not worked” it is to get rid of the use of money, for as we well know: money is the root of all poverty. This former member may well be sitting in his pretty lounge decorated with all the trappings of a well paid job and it is in this case that people such as him fail to understand the problem associated with capitalism. While he is happy to swan around pretending not to be chained to his position in the capitalist system of society he is continuing to turn a blind eye to his acceptance of a perpetually exploitative method of allowing a few bullies to control the rest of us: how we live and how we die. While this person is happy with his tiny little piece of wealth and his position along the social spectrum he is just another individual happily sitting back with his feet up brainwashing himself, letting more and more people who have do not have any hope in all the universe suffer endlessly now and in the future. This is the attitude that will-if left unchecked-allow the continual stripping of the world, its people and its resources for the sake of a better living for a minority of people.
