jondwhite
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Videos from Communist University have been uploaded CU 2012: The real Lenin and the sectarian caricature6 days ago
I rather scroll and have the ability to search within a page, print a single page, copy into a single document than click 26 times and run 26 different searches or copies and pastes within each page. Seperate pages is what web presences going for page ads use. On the old site, it was divided into only about three pages.
A radio interview between Cornell West and Bob Avakian from the tourhttp://basicsbustour.tumblr.com/post/33005446888/new-and-breaking-news-cornel-west-interviews-bob
The CPGB fringe might have seemed strange to some if it was interpreted as a debate since it was actually a single-issue single-speaker talk.
Maybe no-holds barred debate as entertainment is the most useful form of debate? Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly debated satirical news presenter of Comedy Central's the Daily Show – Jon Stewart last night. Here is the videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5ESZOFwm9A
I just watchedhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/9403559.stmand it sounds like debates are;good for TV,good for turnout,but unproven for changing minds that are already made up.I also noticed in America thathttp://freeandequal.org/are hosting presidential debates with third-party candidates on October 23. Looking forward to that.
What I find hard to understand about the Labour Theory of Value and especially reading Capital is the LTV is not contrasted with any other theory. So the subjective theory of value was unknown to me. Before I started working I might have agreed with the STV but I definitely feel exploited at work (doesn't everyone). Maybe its just my particular style of learning but I like to understand proponents and opponents before I can make a judgment. Some people seem to just read Capital and agree with the LTV. I had never heard of an alternative before, though I haven't read much economics. I take it mainstream economics agree with STV but don't seem to talk about theories of value anyway.
Why are they destroying it? Surely any socialist/communist group could make a play to take it off their hands?
With regard to "Something wrong with the party's case and/or its methods", contrary to the attitude of some determinists there absolutely is room for improvement by dispensing with traditional approaches but not in a non-materialist direction for liquidationist reasons.
I'm afraid I don't think we all think we could be doing better. I think we could, but have encountered views that it is a case exclusively of economic circumstances. Or obliviousness to our propaganda presentation under the cover of the primacy of our ideas which would fail Marketing 101.Robbo's right that there's a theoretical case that – though the SPGB are more materialist than anyone else, there's a lack of materialism about their own traditional approach.However I don't think religion is the problem, rather the religious adherance to the efficacy of the approach of propaganda through debates, leafleting etc. More effective attractive propaganda (through the same mediums as SPGB e.g. magazines, meetings, summer schools etc.) is a big reason why the SWP is larger – **not** for admitting religious people – though some jettisoning of principles in favour of Old Labour populism ("We hate Tories" etc.) is a factor too.
