jondwhite
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I don't think the libdems would run like this anyway. IIRC delegates can vote for policy at conference, but leaders can ignore it. Tuition fees for example.
I think conducting business meetings face to face may be a bit antiquated, but talks are still better face to face. I'm not convinced branches are redundant either. Making the World Socialist Movement a bit more formally organised would be good though.
As written in early issue of the Standard (and republished in the SOYMB book) – 'Democracy is not an end in itself, but a means to an end; and for us that end in Socialism'This is not necessarily a defence of SS.
Yes but a 'front' group is something other than it purports to be e.g. Stop the War Coalition, Stand Up to Racism etc. A Friends of Socialist Party or Socialist Standard Readers Group would be just what it says on the tin.
Well supporters attend branch meetings, are subscribed to the website mailing list, and robbo was/ is part of the World in Common group.
The ballot committee have reported results on the motion put to conference 2017
Quote:“That the print Standard be discontinued from January 2018 and the online Standard become the Party's official journal.”the motion was unamended and 11 members were in favour and 89 against. The motion was lost.I can see the need for the websites to stay, should the motion or a similar one return.http://savethesocialiststandard.tumblr.com/http://savethesocialiststandard.blogspot.com/
rodmanlewis wrote:Vin wrote:Example: Removal of public service pay cap? Is this an example of a reform socialists can support?We won't be in a practical position to support (or oppose) such a reform until we have delegates in parliament.
That sort of runs the risk of implying socialist delegates might act against what is said in party literature including the Standard every month. We're against war, religion and exploitation, elected delegates will act accordingly and this can be stated in advance.
LBird wrote:jondwhite wrote:Quote:An epic story of courage, genius and terrible folly, this is the first history of how the Soviet Union's scientists became both the glory and the laughing stock of the intellectual world.Simon Ings weaves together what happened when a handful of impoverished and underemployed graduates, professors and entrepreneurs, collectors and charlatans, bound themselves to a failing government to create a world superpower. And he shows how Stalin's obsessions derailed a great experiment in 'rational government'.jdw, does this book address the issue of democracy in science, and how the Stalinists denied it (as they did in the polity), or is it the usual bourgeois propaganda about 'Socialism = Stalinism'?If it does the former, I'll get a copy.
I don't know. I'm afraid it is still on my books to read list. The last topic I started about it here got no replies. There are other books I found by googling science and democracy including one from MIT.
Quote:An epic story of courage, genius and terrible folly, this is the first history of how the Soviet Union's scientists became both the glory and the laughing stock of the intellectual world.Simon Ings weaves together what happened when a handful of impoverished and underemployed graduates, professors and entrepreneurs, collectors and charlatans, bound themselves to a failing government to create a world superpower. And he shows how Stalin's obsessions derailed a great experiment in 'rational government'.I have come across some recent references to 'the magic money tree' in respect of the £1 billion found for the DUP to prop up the ToriesThere's no magic money tree – unless you're making a deal with the DUPalso thisQueen to receive £6m pay increase from public funds – BBC News
Vin wrote:jondwhite wrote:It's not a SPGB slogan and I don't think its specific enough for us anyway.Any ideas?
'Against war, no exceptions.''The only socialists on the ballot''All our members are equal''Abolition of the wages system''Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains''No compromise, no political trading''The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole.' 'Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.' 'the greatest sectarians and the biggest brawlers and rogues are at certain moments the loudest shouters for unity. Nobody in our lifetime has given us more trouble and been more treacherous than the unity shouters.'
