J Surman
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Agreed, coal is bad. So is the mining, refining and burning of other fossil fuels. The article talks about accidents from nuclear power production. There is much more to it than that. There is no solution to the disposal of nuclear waste – one reason why so much depleted uranium is currently used for production of weapons for the military – pass the problem on. We are all gradually accumulating more radiation in our bodies with detrimental effects. However we can only brush the surface of this topic here. As the decades have passed I have become more convinced that nuclear power should not be part of our future.
Re nuclear power, I would recommend reading anything by Helen Caldicott, founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility, who has spent 30+ years trying to educate people internationally about the medical dangers of nuclear power etc, (‘Nuclear Madness’, ‘The New Nuclear Danger’, ‘If you love this planet’ or google her)Today I picked this up: http://www.countercurrents.org/alvarez240412.htm which explains how much more serious the effects of the Japanese nuclear disaster – still progressing – are compared with those of Chernobyl.My feeling is that, although removing the profit motive from any industry, nuclear, fossil fuel or alternative energy will certainly have a massive positive effect on safety practices, the mass of information we have against the use of nuclear energy needs to be more widely understood and dispersed. There really is no way that this can be safe for life or planet.
I don’t think he’s into religion as such but more into eastern philosophy and meditation. That aside it’s very refreshing to read such an article.
J Surman wrote:Any chance of you and Alan returning to Kent?Would we get appearance money?Seriously, even if we wanted to, and we don’t, couldn’t afford it – we’re economic migrants.But see you in July at Harborne.
Comrade Marie Chesham, suffered a fall within the past week which has left her with two fractures of the vertebral column. Dave, Please give Marie my, and Alan’s, very best wishes for a speedy recovery and a pain-free convalescence.
The billions may well be convinced that they have been and continue to be screwed by the capitalist system. Unfortunately it doesn’t mean they know (apart from wanting rid of it and its effects on them) what they want in its place or how to achieve it. As noted above by DJP, there is no overnight solution but there is a wealth of information to be found on the world socialism, SPGB and associated websites for those who are seriously seeking to achieve the viable alternative.
Thanks for your comments. I think I was drawn into being enthusiastic about the Jameson interview because, as you said, it’s good to see Marx being discussed, and it appeared to be a positive view.I have recently worked my way through David Harvey’s ‘A Companion to Marx’s Capital’ which he recommends reading together with ‘Capital’ so it’s a very time consuming commitment, and I can’t say i stuck to the original goal, however i did make a note that I must get back to it again some time! It would be more fruitful within a group, I’m sure – as the proposed sessions I recently read about soon to begin in London.Re Wheen, I’ll maybe get to him later as, thanks to DJP, I have more reading matter lined up on the subject. I have downloaded the ones he suggested and will be getting to them soon.
gnome wrote:No problem.Thanks.
gnome wrote:You simply click on “quote” at the bottom of the person’s post to whom you wish to reply.Like this?
gnome wrote:Any text you do not wish to quote in your reply can be deleted.Thanks again.
gnome wrote:Simples-ish!
BTW, I take it you read the full article here:-http://unityaotearoa.blogspot.com/2012/01/towards-ecosocialism.htmlYes I have, but on which portion to comment?Re the latter part and the proposed ‘realignment’ to ecosocialism: it strikes me as an opportunistic attempt to appeal to a wider audience. Let’s face it we all wish to see growing numbers developing social awareness and heightened consciousness of our situation as the working class, however this looks like a major shift in emphasis rather than a small shift on one aspect of policy.As for the SPGB/WSM I think we simply see what others regard as ‘single issues’ as parts of the whole logic of the capitalist system. Ecology is very much a part of socialism but if one starts incorporating prefixes to each and every part it’d be an awfully long and difficult to pronounce name.(By the way, if you have time to instruct me on how to put quotes in a box for clarity I’m a willing student.)
Re the SWP – or more particularly the New Zealand Workers Organisation, I’ve just seen this link which says they are moving away from Trotsky to ecosocialism.http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/climateandcapitalism/pEtD/~3/anLSwmZ50s0/I’d be interested in feedback, not that it makes any difference to us per se – but what does the SWP make of it?(By the way Gnome – sorry if you have to copy and paste the link, for some reason my browser insists i perform a 2-part operation, which I meekly do!)
If you look back I didn’t say ‘abolish’ money. I don’t promote the abolition of money but socialism is a move to a totally differently structured system/world society which will have overcome the need for money (because of common ownership etc etc etc – don’t need to go into all that just now). So I see it more as not ‘presenting the conclusion first’ but offering ways of visualising the alternative, ie socialism. We’re often accused of spending more time criticising capitalism than laying out what socialism is and this would be one way of countering that. In explaining how , when money is not a consideration, housing will be affected, it can include all manner of arguments: the relations of building labour with capital – as covered in ‘The Housing Monster’ plus things starting from free access to housing for all, dealing with substandard housing, suitable infrastructure, discussion about urban v rural, etc etc.”Start from a commonly experienced social problem and show how the causes run back to the same thing…” you wrote – yes, this is pretty well what I was suggesting. Cause – capitalist system: effects – numerous and negative: remedy – a socialist revolution. Thanks for the ideas you were ‘just throwing around’.RE ‘The Housing Monster’ I read it soon after you’d posted about it a couple of weeks ago(?). It raises some very good points, as do the others on the site. http://prole.info/ Well worth a look as are the various other pages . I’m not good with labels and don’t like attaching them but I suppose this one is anarcho-communist. Please put me straight if I’m wrong.
I was hoping to attract some interest in exploring this subject. When we’re talking to anyone who is ignorant of what socialism is, or who is uninformed/misinformed it seems a good idea to try and come at it form a standpoint from which they identify. If someone suggests the answer to not enough money is to have more, there’s a way in to talking about why that isn’t logical, why that can’t work. Most people haven’t come across the concept of a moneyless world so it’s a huge shift in thinking that’s required both on their part and on ours if we’re to put it to them in a way they will want to consider it.
Absolutely. I agree with you.What Im interested here though is how to demonstrate the many benefits of a socialist system, how to get across to the many who can’t or won’t contemplate how it will be without money as this seems to be a common stumbling block. I was trying to express it (it’s money, or the lack of it–) in the way that many out there see it.
