jondwhite
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
There's no technical barrier to EC meetings being broadcast online live.Indeed meetings with SPGB speakers at TZM have probably been broadcast online live already on livestream or ustream.The full 'Deconstructing the Socialist Party (2000)' document can be read herehttp://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/spopen/conversations/messages/3704
The Weekly Worker have announced their "Communist Platform" within "Left Unity"http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/981/left-unity-communist-platform-formeddetailed herehttp://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/981/communist-platformI can't see this going anywhere, as signatories to the "Socialist Platform" may no longer trust them. Effectively "Communist Platform" may consist of their groups members alone.
According to this article some members of Left Unity are critical of talking politicshttp://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/980/left-culture-politics-for-dummies
Neither are loads of other groups allowed to have stalls inside the bookfair considered properly anarchist. Lots of leftcoms run stalls and meetings there, on the technicality that they say they are not a party.
Quote:The Labour MP Paul Farrelly said the Mail's "disgraceful smear" was linked to Ed Miliband's backing of an independent press watchdog that would limit the involvement of newspaper owners."The Daily Mail continues to plumb new depths in its attacks on both Labour and Ed Miliband, he said. "People should be under no illusion that this campaign of intimidation is not just political, but highly personal – because Ed has come out strongly for a truly independent press watchdog, not controlled by the likes of Mail editor Paul Dacre."This disgraceful smear of Ed's dead father shows once again what a mockery it is for the Mail's editor to have overseen the code on standards at the discredited Press Complaints Commission. The sooner our media moves on from this sort of behaviour, the better."As unlikely as ephemeral temporary strike committees sound, something called a pop-up union is reputed to have been formed by Occupy Sussex in Sussex University quite recently where existing trade unions already existed. Whether this is anything more than an isolated incident remains to be seen. This is something I'd like analysed in the Socialist Standard.
Weren’t there SPGB members who argued unions could not increase wages beyond a certain value, instead only able to stop wages from falling below a certain value?
Also if the ICC believed unions were trying to reduce their own membership, this notion seems a bit far-fetched.
Well, if there are any users joining the forum in opposition to the party which might include propagandising their event, then why would they?
Well, what about users of the forum who are non-members or even regard themselves as opponents of the party for example? Why should they participate if the forum is only for a propaganda advantage for the SPGB? Could members of the party even be interested in the ideas of the organisations of non-members without going to sell/distribute party literature?If the forum is supposed to be relatively one-way, like a conveyor belt of party ideas to the class, then you'd be better off with a mailling list. It would be less cumbersome than an extended prefix that members are obliged to use but non-members aren't or don't.
