lindanesocialist
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
How does 2(b) (i) apply to the SSPC, IC committee and not to the AVDoes the EC intend to continue changing the rules? Or should it wait for the membership to do that?
jondwhite wrote:Incidentally, what did the Video Production Committee produce in the five years of its existence (2002-2007)? As I understand it, 'Capitalism and Other Kids Stuff' was not produced by the Video Production Committee.mmmm that explains a lot
SocialistPunk wrote:It seems we have a Socialist Party member who either doesn't want to follow the rules of this forum, yet still wants to post. Or who thinks the rules are wrong.You must realise SP that you are at this moment breaking the rules. So it seem there is more than one socialist party member"Who doesn't want to follow the rules, yet still wants to post.
Banksy is simply saying that people who follow rules do more harm than people who don;t. It is a historical fact. Are you suggesting that the SPGB members who refused to join the war and thus broke the rules should nevertheless have killed Germans untill someone came up with some alternative rules? Can't agree with such logic I'm afraid
SocialistPunk wrote:But breaking rules without offering alternative ideas, solutions, etc, is in essence a meaningless display of the egoism of individualist anarchism.So follow rules right or wrong? 'I was just following rules' is suffucient justification?
What about a video on seeing the world through socialist glasses. Hasn't been done – more than 2 million views? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKJO06CYxdA
lindanesocialist wrote:What is the situation with the video on the front page of this forum "Capitalism and other Kids Stuff"Anyone have the relevant EC resolution regarding this. Is it 'Official'?Just joined spintcom and found this as the most recent message Wasn't 'Capitalism and Other Kids Stuff' published online before the EC refused to endorse it in April 2005 Item 9.2(ii)? Following this, the producers were appointed (after self-nominating) to the video committee requesting a £5k budget, there were DVDs produced and sent to companion parties, multiple branch screenings, adverts in Socialist Standard ever since, the DVD is still available to order from the website and in fact the video appears on the front page. Is this how the rules on unauthorised videos are to be interpreted? Vin's budget NIL
SocialistPunk wrote:Yep, including TZM within the Party hostility clause is most definitely a mistake. Sure there are differences but there are more commonalities.Exactly – I would replace our existing video, with this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EkMjTnWk14
What is the situation with the video on the front page of this forum "Capitalism and other Kids Stuff"Anyone have the relevant EC resolution regarding this. Is it 'Official'?
SocialistPunk wrote:It's the year 2016. Quite simply it's time for the Party to bring this issue into the digital age.We agree. And taking the initiative Vin is producing a short video on the subject of Party videos to be distributed to all branches and members.Watch this space
Young Master Smeet wrote:or by an authorised sub-committee.Like an AV Committee?Vin worked on the video after being nominated by a branch onto the AV Committee. The present AV committee member approves of the video. Or so vin informes me. So the Video did not need EC stamp of approval after all?But just to make sure, Vin nevertheless submitted the video to the EC after many party members, including the AV committee, Howard Moss, Dave Chesham, Alan Jonson, Joe and Steve Davison, KRSB, NERB and the Partty's unofficial twitter accounts and blogs et al all had their say and all agreed it was pretty good. Now two members step forward rubbishing it.
