jondwhite
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Prizes are valuable if they have a commodity (e.g. money, something to put on your next job application) with them. I could award you the prize of "healthiest living poster on this forum", but it would have no value.
If Camden and North West London had remained, do you think membership would have increased, decreased or stayed the same?
E-mail the EC as you wish, but we're not the Stasi, members aren't guilty by association with members who join other parties.
Vin wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:You may have 40 years of personal comradeship with ex-Cde Colborn, Vin. I do not. I am under no obligation to show similar restraint as yourself in regards to this embarrassing affair.I agree cde Colborn should have resigned before standing for another political party but our aim should be to win him and others like him back to the party. and that includes Labour members and members of the Seaham Community Party. Our aim is to attract a majority of the worldIt does not help the party or our case for world cooperation to appear bitter, vindictive and unforgiving and will certainly not result in Form As from Seaham. Especially, if they find out how nasty and negative we can be against local community organisatons and ex members.This is how it will appear to observers. The branch should simply ask for an expanation and his voluntary resignation. He knows the rules.
Well when founding members EJB Allen and TA Jackson joined other parties, Jack Fitzgerald held public debates against them. In the case of EJB Allen, there were at least two debates.However, whilst not making it personal, when SPGB members join other parties (never mind standing as candidates) if indeed that is the case here, then they should be expelled, voluntarily or otherwise. That doesn't mean we need to operate Stasi methods of informing on other members who might possibly have known.
Here's a 'Why I Joined the DSA'https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/69brph/why_i_joined_the_democratic_socialists_of_america/
The metrics the SS report to measure circulation are more focused on where they go than how much readers are prepared to pay. This would be considered unusual in the industry especially for prospective advertisers;subscribers (366 + 73 overseas – at any price point)copies sent (911).at most, branches are subsidising 219 but that might remain a mystery and since each issue is sold at a loss (especially to branches) anyway, its a moot point.I contacted Socialist Review for circulation but got no reply.
As for the annual £80k we roughly spend;£24k was spent on contesting two constituencies in 2014 Euro-elections.£15k is spent annually on council tax and use head office around thirty days a year.£12k is the net cost of the Standard after postage with some subs free or paying as little as 83p an issue.
Vin wrote:jondwhite wrote:The movers said "print is in terminal decline" and talked of inevitability in their supporting statement which sounds determinist (and wrong) to me.That is 'fatalism' or 'inevitablity'. you allude to. We would have no science without determinism, so let's not get it a bad name.
The supporting statement included
Quote:socialists are nothing if not realists, and will recognise the grim inevitability of a resolution like this. Print sales are in terminal decline right across the news media,The SSPC report states
Quote:Total sent through post: 911 (previous year 925)The movers said "print is in terminal decline" and talked of inevitability in their supporting statement which sounds determinist (and wrong) to me. I think there are a few things off the top of my head;Content – at last ADM concerns were raised but basically there should be less Russell Brand and David Bowie sycophancy.Layout – the order of articles hasn't changed for around 10 years, it should be seriously considered.Price – the cover price has been half that of Socialist Review (same frequency and length) and incredibly even a pound less than Big Issue. Without a margin – big distributors won't take us on.Why hundreds of monthly subscribers should have the frequency reduced, I have to admit baffles me. To save money? What business reduces supply to below demand? Why is Morning Star able to print daily? Socialist Worker is weekly. Even the tiny AWL and Weekly Worker print weekly.
I have uploaded the fractious conference report for 1986 herehttps://archive.org/details/SpgbConferenceReport1986redacted
I have uploaded the conference report for 1959 herehttps://archive.org/details/SpgbConferenceReport1959One extract to delight Alan, from Wood Green and Hornsey branch commenting;
Quote:'We start from the fact that our present H.O., in a southern suburb far away from the commercial, educational and political centre for London, cost £4,000 in a dilapidated condition. Because for most members, a major journey is involved in getting there, it is not used to anything like its full extent. The 1957 conference was quite definite in expressing a desire for a central H. O., but now two years later, we are still stuck at Clapham.'…AFAIK the only suggestion that item was 'not in order' was a strawman argument put forward by the movers when asked for branch minutes.The item to 'rescinds Paragraph d of the 1990 Conference resolution separating layout from editorial control, as no longer being necessary.' however, should have been ruled out of order as inaccurate.As has demonstrated (by Jacobin in particular) there's no reason print publications can't reverse declining circulation, even growing circulation and turning a profit.
The deadline for the HM London Conference has been extended until 15 May.CALL FOR PAPERSRevolutions Against Capital, Capital Against Revolutions?http://conference.historicalmaterialism.org/index.php/hmlondon/annual14/schedConf/cfp
Indymedia UK has closed down. Add that to Freedom Newspaper and The People (SLP) who also tried online only. Meanwhile the Morning Star and Socialist Review continue in print.
