robbo203
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Darren Well, Im not talking about super-profits but profits but you might be on to something here…. I first came across this wacky idea in D R Steele’s From Marx to Mises and wondered then – WTF is the guy on about? How the hell can a business survive in a competitive market environment without profit. Unprofitable businesses go down the pan, don’t they? Well apparently not according to Steele. What is usually called profit he calls “interest”. Profit is something you get over and above interest and you get it by outguessing the market and thereby benefiting society by an “unusually percipient of lucky allocation of resources” (p420). In a perfectly competitive market – which as you suggest is wholly unrealistic – the opportunity for doing that disappears and hence also profit. So profit according to this logic only arises in an imperfect or distorted market and the alleged benefits to society that such a profit entails which makes it sound like Steele should be advocating imperfect and distorted markets it profit is so advantageous and beneficial to society… Where did this particular usage originate from? And what lies behind it I wonder? I know it crops up in Mises but I think it also appears in Walrus’ writings. Does anyone have any ideas? Cheers R
There is quite a bit of this around – so called market anarchism, Some of these free market anti capitalists get quite offended if you accidently call them anarchocapitalists. Ive been having a crack at them over on libcom recently. One guy pointed me in the direction of a mutualist blog and the mutualist journal. I have come across Kevin Carsons stuff at mutualist.org before. A curious mix of ideas. For instance Carsons sees merit in both the LTV and the subjective theory of value as well. and seeks to combine them. He’s quite hot on Marxian primitive accumulation theory too and at times sounds like a Marxist in his condemnation of capitalism. I wonder if the SPGB has done any stuff on modern day Mutualism a la Carsons and the Left Libertariuan crowd – as opposed to Proudhon
Darren
Well, no not quite – SPOPEN is for party members only. WORLDINCOMMON, on the other hand, is for anyone who perceives themselves to be part of the non-market anti-statist sector including, of course, WSM folk. I suppose the equivalent of SPOPEN would be the COMMONER forum which is the internal forum of the World in Common Group and only members of the group are on this particular forum. Incidentally, WSM members are of course welcome to join the group which is in no sense a political party in competition with the WSM. Some people in WiC are active in other organisations and so it should be. WiC is just an unbrella organisation for the broad non market anti statist sector
What I was suggesting as one option – no 1 above – was to change the terms of reference of the WSM forum so that it would be similar to the terms of refrence of the WORLDINCOMMON forum. In other words, non WSMers could continue on it but not people outside the non market anti statist sector. Thats one option . The other is to keep the WSM forum as a completely open forum. If thats what you want to do then i have suggested some ways in which to deal with the problem of the anarcho capitalists on the forum
Ray
As I understand it, the WSM does not belong to just the SPGB but all the companion parties. I would imagine it is a good idea to have some overarching fourm of some sort for the entire WSM. The format may be a bit old fashioned, as you suggest but then I remember some months ago urging that WSM forum should change over to the format used by REVLEFT which I think is vastly superior in so many ways – not least because the sheer number of facilities available on it . For example you would have your own personal page which allows all sorts of interactions to happen on a one to one basis. Also special interest groups can be set as well which could be quite useful e.g. people interested in , say, Marxian economics or environmental issues could set up subgroups catering for these interests. Have a look at REVLEFT and see what you think..(Of course, its no longer possible to join REVLEFT but thats another matter)
RobinThis is frustrating. I read again on SPOPEN today talk of banning people like McDonagh from the WSM forum. I dont think that is going to serve any useful purpose at all. Simon’s argument on SPOPEN is unconvincing. If you are going to have an open forum then you cannot complain if hostile posts appear. The real question is how you deal with them and whether there is a case for an open forum at all. I still think there is. Wicopendebate failed as an open forum because it is was unable to deal with disruptive posters effectively. So it succumbed to incremental decline. The WSM forum, being much bigger , has a much better chance of suceeding and indeed of turning what seems to be an inconvenience and a disadvantage into a distinct advantage
Here’s my advice to you guys which you can take or leave as you wish
1) Turn this forum – the SPGB forum – into something akin to the Worldincommon forum limited to members and sympathisers only. State this explicitly in your terms of reference like worldincommon has done
2) Maintain the WSM as an open forum. Allow nutjobs like McDonagh to post but only answer their posts obliquely in the way Ive described earlier so that in no way does it seem that the various outlandish claims they make have been allowed to go uncontested. The point would be to demonstrate convincingly that the socialist case trumps over the freemarketeers every time. The onus is not on them to present a more reasonable line of argument but on us to demonstrate how wholly unreasonable their argument actually is. That will earn the WSM kudos no end – rather than just running away form what is after all a batty argument
The WSM forum is not “drifting”. People need to get this idea out of their heads. It is taking on a distinct direction and purpose and the level of posting is actually quite good. Its the input of members themselves that can help ensure that the benefits accrue to the socialism movement itself. The opportunity is there – make use of it! It just strikes me as being silly and negative complaining about what is happening on the WSM when you are not exploiting the opportubnity to take on your political opponents (this from a party that says it will even debate against the fascist BNP). Try to imagine what the WSM would look like without any opposition. It would be dead as a dodo.
It is controversy – thinking outside of the box – and opposition that sparks interest – not dull conformiity. Look, it even works over on SPOPEN! . And talking of which I would be grateful if someone (Adam perhaps ? ) could post this on SPOPEN to stir things up over there even more
Cheers
RobinI see that Adam has copied part of my post above (No.17) on SPOPEN . Not being able to respond on SPOPEN might I respond here?
The point that I was trying to make is a simple one: If you allow people like Tet and McDonagh to dominate the WSM forum by simply not responding to them then the forum is going to become an increasingly unattactive place for visitors and members to be. Its a vicious circle. The more you ignore them and pretend they dont exist the WORSE the problem will get. THAT is the lesson of Wicopendebate.
Wicopendebate was a relatively small forum . At its height it had about 60+ members. So it was much easier for such a forum to become completely dominated by disruptive elements. The WSM forum is many times the size of Wicopendebate. There are more than enough members to easily deal with the anarcho-capitalist brigade through the sheer weight of numbers.
You have 2 options as I said. Either you turn the WSM forum into something like the Worldincommon forum – which is restricted to people who belong to the non-market anti-statist sector OR you maintain the WSM forum as a completely open public forum – like Wicopendebate was.
If you opt for the latter course of action then please accept this as a word of friendly advice. Ignoring people whose views you strongly object to is not going to work as a strategy. All that will mean is that they will think they have won the argument and this – I can guararantee from bitter experience – will only inspire them to ram home their message with even greater determination. This is basically why Paul’s suggestion above is misconceinved.
Now there is a halfway house solution which is to deal with the posts of anarcho-capitalist in an oblique or indirect fashion which I touched on earlier. I have started using this approach and I think you will begin to see that it will work in the end. .
With that in mind I urge people here to become active in the WSM forum and, if they have left, to rejoin it and try out what I have suggestedjondwhite wrote:According to the facebook group you need to try and reset your password. There was an opportunity during a break in the downtime but I don’t think it worked for anyone then.
My problem seems to have been the ” string verification” code thingy where you type in letters or numbers to verify that you are human and not an automated spamming machine. This facility could not be opened up so I could not complete the task of resetting my password.
What you are saying gives added weight to my suspicion that Revleft has effectively engaged in a mass lockout of numerous individuals out of favour with the Board Administration. What it wants basically it seems to me is a compliant user base not into shit stirring and the like. Ive always felt that the bans and restriction the mods imposed on various people were often way over the top and unnecessary.
If my my suspicions are right then this can mean one thing for Revleft as the world’s leading left wing forum (reputedly) – its going to go downhill all the way . Not just in numbers but in terms of the quality of debate. Ive joined RedMarx as have many of the other “undesirables” – ex Revlefters – and already Ive noticed a big difference in the qualityI have been active in Revleft on and off since 2006. Last year I started up a subgroup called For Genuine Free Access Communism which grew to over 75 members before some idiot on the Admin team accidently deleted it. I restarted the group recently and at last count it had 21 members
With Revleft being down very recently, I was unable to access my account. When the site was back in business I tried to log on but found to my dismay that I could not. I tried to get a new password but had no luck with that at all. I could not even use the contact facility for some weird reason to find out what was going on
If there is anyone here who is on Revleft who could possibly contact the admin team and find out what is going on I would be most grateful. I have a suspicion that this could be a lock-out but it might just be a technical hitch. of some sort. My username is robbo203
cheers
RobinDJP wrote:Seems to me the WSM forum is a dead donkey. There’s been more conversaion ABOUT the forum than actual discussion on it. No-one really uses yahoo-groups these days and I wouldn’t be that suprised if yahoo pulls the plug soon.
I’ve been having better disussions on various facebook groups these days. If this online forum will catch on time will tell, I may make some changes so users can comment on articles without registering, but as far as the WSM yahoo group is concerned I think we should let it die a death, if it hasn’t died already.Dave
I think you are mistaken. Your comments remind me of something that Mark Twain was supposed to have said – about “reports of my death being premature” or something like that. I would say that actually the WSM forum, in terms of the volume of posts and the numbers of contributors, is actually doing rather better than this one. Its not true that “no one really uses yahoo groups these days”. I am on about 30 such groups and I can assure you that some of them , at any rate, have maintained a consistently high level of posting. Whether Yahoo is about to pull the plug on its groups I do not know. What makes you think this?
In any event, the basic problem that I have talked about in previous posts still remains whatever the particular format or forum you adopt: how to deal with disruptive individuals like Donut and Tetrapak. We cant just ignore them – or rather we cant just ignore the ideas they put forward. I reject the argument completely that in dealing with these ideas one is somehow “distracting attention away from the case for socialism”. On the contrary., it is through dealing with their arguments that the case for socialism becomes manifest. If you change the subject to something else all that will happen as that they will use the new topic of conversation for their own purposes.
So you have a simple choice. Do you restrict membership of a forum to only sympathisers and party members or do you allow hostile critics. If you do allow the latter , how do you handle their hostile criticism? Now I have suggested an approach which I think goes some way towards meeting Paul’s suggestion that we ignore the trolls completely – the oblique or indirect approach – but without ignoring the ideas they put forward . Ive started to apply this approach to Tet and Donut becuase I think they are both beyond ther pale. Ive not extended this approach to Bob Howes because I do not think he can be lumped with the former in any way . He is confused on many points but his heart is often in the right place and he has declared his sympathy for socialism on numerous occasions. I wish people here would not jump on the guy in quite the way they do sometimes. It serves no useful purpose. With Tet and Donut on the other hand we are into a quite different ball game
So what are you going to do then? There does not seem any sign of the WSM forum dying a death. To contrary it seems quite robust and healthy at present. Would it not be a good idea then to make more use of it but to use it in a more appropriate fashion along the lines I have suggested above? The nuisance effect of one or two posters would simply be drowned out if more members actually participated in the forum rather than simply complained about how those creating as nuisance have come to dominate it and then leave the forum allowing this dominance to increase. A self fulfilling prophecy if ever there was one.OK look here’s how I think it is.
First of all I can understand totally the kind of reaction that some comrades here have expressed in relation to the likes of Tet and McDonagh seeking to hog the discussion on the WSM with their utter inanities. Particularly the latter who must surely count as serious candidate for the most insufferable bore in the entire history of this planet, commencing with the neolithic period. Part of my motivation for engaging with these people has been a determination on my part that these people should not hog the discussion or that their crappy nonsensical free market nonsense should not be given free rein to dominate the discussion
Here I am talking from bitter experience. Adam suggested I go off and create a forum in which to engage these individuals in debate rather than on the WSM forum. Well you know what, Adam? Thats already been tried. In WIC we had such a forum. It was called WICOPENDEBATE of which I was moderator . It was more or less completely dominated by Mr Donut in the end. Everyone lost interest and did what some here advised FInally the WIC group decided it had to close down the forum as it was not serving the purpose for which it was intended . It had become a mouthpeice for the mad marketeer and little else.
This is what made me resolve that Im fucked if I am going to let these idiots do the same with the WSM. OK, so Im not a member of the WSM anymore but I do find it a little surprising that it should be a non member who seems to have taken up a more resolute and determined stance on the question of the WSM forum than most members. See, I have been following the discussion on the WSM forum over on SPOPEN , Adam, in which you talk of being “stabbed in the back” by a fellow member (Alan). I know exactly how that feels when after all the effort Ive made to defend the socialist position on the WSM forum and to promote the WSM on other forums like REVLEFT that I should then learn that a member of the WSM – namely yourself – can even think in terms of suspending me from the forum for “feeding the trolls”.as someone put it A very comradely gesture, I must say, and my back is still suffering from the open wound inflicted
As I see it you guys have but 2 options
1) Expel people like Tet and the Donut from the forum. This could be problematic unless you were to democratically redefine the terms of reference of the forum itself. For example, in WiC we have 2 forums – previously 3. One is for WiC members only- the COMMONER forum , the second is for individuals who percieve themselves to belong to the non market anti statist sector – the WORLDINCOMMON forum . And the third is – was – was the no-holds-barred-completely-open-to-all WICOPENDEBATE forum. What you could do is to make the WSM forum something like the WORLDINCOMMON forum but bear in mind what that would entail. Not only would it entail preventing mad marketeers from entering the forum but also mild mannered but somewhat confused reformists of all stripes as well as your basic Trot or Leninst type. If you dont want to debate with such people thats fine but be aware what all this means is all Im saying.
2) Allow people like Tet and the Donut to remain but develop a strategy to effectively counter their disruptive interventions (incidentally I do wish people would stop putting the likes of Bob Howes or Nick Tapping in the same boat as Tet and Donut – they are nothing like them even if some of Bob’s ideas are distinctly dotty – like the circle city idea). Let me say staight away that debating with people about free market ideas is NOT a diversion from the socialist case. Ive noticed this objection coming up time and time again but it is simply not true. Get this idea out off your head once and for all. Actually , to the contrary, I strongly maintain that arguments like the Economic Calculation Argument are an extremely useful heuristic tool with which develop and build upon the case for socialism. Dealing with it enables us to call into question all those kinds of ill- informed claims one keeps hearing such as that socialism would be some massively inefficient bureaucratic nightmare and so on – claims that in truth apply rather to market capitalism
But how to develp a strategy to counter theanarcho-caps? Well for a start I dont think Paul’s suggestion would do much good – that we only post on, and respond to, subjects unrelated to the ideas of the mad marketeers. This is running away from an argument rather than confronting it. It comes across as weak kneed and ineffectual in face of the brazen claims made by the latter. It suggests that we have no argument that we can make against them when we most certainly have.
This is what I suggest and here Ive learnt from my own experience of dealing with the likes of Donut – donrt respond to their repetitive nonsense directly. In Donut’s case there is absolutely no point – I am now firmly convinced – becuase the guy is simply incapable or actually engaging with anyone else’s argument. What you might want to do instead is just post something that counters the free market arguments without entering into a discussion with or even referring to the exponents of these arguments on the forum itself. This is the indirect option
Another option is to directly deal with and refer to the arguments presented by the mad marketeers but to dpo so in a manner that deals with them in bite sized bits, one at a time, in a coldly factual sort of way. An excellent example of this is Bill’s davastating point about Inca society. You can tell it completely phased the Donut who didnt know how to respond to it, kept promising he would but then conveniently dropped the subject . An accumulation of highlly effective little posts like this will do wonders to convey the impression to the casual visitor that the case for socialism is vastly more compelling and logically argued than the crap thrown at it by the mad marketeers.Its what I call the “hollowing out “strategy. You nibble away in incremental fashion at the individual propositions from within, forcing their proponents to attend to these and bringing about the subsequent collapse of the whole surperstructure thereafter – at least in the eyes of the onlooker – when it comes to be seen as being based on a series of claims each of which is utterly lacking in credibility. Once the props fall one by one, the argument as a whole will fall – sooner or latter.
And this is the point isnt it.? We shouldn’t really be complaining if our opponents present some crappy piss poor case. Thats utterly absurd. Its very bad psychology in my view To the contrary it is actually a great opportunity to demonstrate how much more compelling and powerful is the case for socialism than any rival. We should be making hay whille the sun shines, capitalising ( if I might use the expression) on the interest shown . Removing ourselves from the debate on the grounds that one cant really be arsed with having to deal with such arguments becuase they are so offensive ive to the ear and the eye, is actually pretty defeatist and shortsighted. Its shows a plodding lack of imagination, an inability or unwillingness to use one’s initiative and this I think is part of the problem with WSM at the present time, sad to say. It is too staid, too conservative, too concerned about feeling comfortable within its own four walls that it is constantly losing sight of the bigger picture. And, yes I know, me telling you a few hometruths is probably going to mean anything else I suggest is automatically discounted. But what the hell – I can only speak as I find – and, whatever you might think, I still very much have your own interests in mind at bottom and thats the truth of it.. The SPGB is still the one political party that stands head and shoulders above any other even though I am not , and cannot be , a member.
So thats how I see it then – either you modify the terms of reference of the WSM forum with all that this entails, or you consciously develop an effective strategy that involves not simply ignoring the claims of mad markeeters but using them to your advantage in the ways I have suggested. Letting things just drift as they are is not really on the cards.
I have resolved quite recently that I am going to take my own advice from here on and ignore the likes of the Donut and Tet while still obliquely countering their arguments. I suggest this is what others here do too rather thanleave the forum. The “discipline” that Dave alludes to on the subject of ignoring them relates to them as individuals but it cannot possibly relate to the basic arguments they represent. If you ignore that then they already won the argument and you might as well pack up and go home
PaulB wrote:robbo203 wrote:As an experiment why not just try taking on one or two of their claims in bited sized fashion.
And as an experiment, Robin, why don’t you just stop feeding the trolls?
It wont work Paul, trust me on this. I know for a fact that what will happen is that the forum will then become dominated by the anarcho caps exchanging ideas between themselves. Then you would end up having to choose between either closing down the forum or banning them which would not be particularly democratic and would not look good at all.
My suggestion is much better. Look upon these interventions by the anarchocaps in a positive light as an opportunity and a heuristic tool. The idea that they draw attention away from the socialist case is rubbish frankly if you have been following the debate. The only way in which such attention might be drawn away is if nobody bothers to respond to them with the case for socialism. Adam’s argument that we demolished them 20 years ago so why go over old ground, is equally invalid for reasons that I pointed out in my post on the forum. According to that argument we might just as well have never debated, say, the Labour Party after 1910 or whenever it was when we first we “demolished” them as well!
Do not underrate the influence of the free market brigade. Adam’s remark that they are now just an eccentric irrelevance is dangerously misguided and way off the mark in my view. They are far more influential than he seems to imagine and their ideas need to be ruthlessly countered at every opportunity. The WSM has a unique argument to bring to bear against them. Here is its opportunity to shine and to influence..PaulB wrote:
Would Party members please resume posting on the WSM Forum. Not in reply to McTet but on some other issues (ANY other issues would do). I’ve tried to get discussions going, but without success. I wonder how many non-members are still bothering to look at the forum, given how boring it’s become.
Perhaps it only appears “boring” precisely because of the non participation of members in the debates going on. Its a self fulfillling prophecy, in other words.
Strewth, I can’t understand you guys sometimes. The anarcho cap arguments are piss poor and feeble and you are complaining about them hogging the discussion when you have more than ample opportunity to floor them,again and again and again, with scintillating, incisive and above all very interesting socialist arguments that will demonstrate conclusively to each and all the superiority of the socialist case. And yet here you are turning down such a heaven sent oppportunity! Nope, I just dont geddit at all.
Cmon guys – get in there and do the job! Stop complaining and taking on this plaintive “passive -reactive” role, As an experiment why not just try taking on one or two of their claims in bited sized fashion. Bill has produced some brilliant short snappy posts – like his example of the Incas refuting the claim that a large scale societies cannot exist without money. This is the sort of stuff that any curious onlooker would appreciate and doubtless the contrast with the waffle offered up by our free marketeers would not be lost on themNod Glodnig wrote:“Not even an end to world hunger and the threat of ecological disaster? Well poor braindead old you.” Obviously every thinking person does. How one achieves that, is another matter.
There is enough food on this planet to feed everyone. The problem is distribution – and starvation occurs usually in war-torn or corrupt countries that prevent this – plus no infrastructure like roads, petrol stations and transport to get it there.
This is true but this itself is part of a larger problem that is capitalism and the priorities it pursues which often promote corruption and sometimes warNod Glodnig wrote:Many countries produce surplus foodstuffs that they dump onto the world market to keep the price locally high – to please their farmers. This to me is a good solution, who cares how it comes about, if it gets food to the mouths of people who need it.
Dumping food on world markets can sometimes simply have the effect of transferring the problem elsewhere. If I remember correctly, India’s decision to reverse its policy on food exports a number of years ago had adverse consequences for a number of other food exporting countries whose farmers suffered as a result. As it happens much of the food surpluses at the time succumbed to spoilage because of inadequate warehousing facilities due to poor funding. It is also well known that well intended charitable efforts at delivering food to people who desparately need it such as in times of drought can undermines efforts to to revive farming locally. Such is the perversity of the market system
Apart from that, there is the literal dumping (meaning destruction) of food. – not just at the retail end of the supply chain as when supermarkets dump stuff in skips etc but at the production end as well. Locally , here in Spain Ive seen tons of cherry tomatoes rotting in the barrancos around the grotesquely ugly greenhouse belt along the coast between Adra and Almeria (the only other man-made structure you can see from outer space – apart from the Great Wall of China, apparently). These greenhouses proliferating like a cancer are a particularly vivid illustration of the utter irrationality of market capitalism and the ecological disasters it brings in its train. Many of the greenhouses now stand empty. Ilegal wells having drained the acquifer have enabled an inrush of sea water to fill the vacumm leading to salinisation of the water supply.. The surrounding countryside has been affected too and as the vegetation suffers erosion sets in, compounding problems
There is of course also the deliberate withdrawal of agricultural land prompted by apparent overproduction in the form of food surpluses. Millions of hectares of land have been affected by this within the EU alone.Nod Glodnig wrote:Ecological disaster – another subject. One that I have been active in my own little way for many years.
Good . So you are not quite of the Im-alright-Jack-And-Stuff-The Rest-Of-You persuasion that came across strongly in your original post. Glad to hear of it!J Surman wrote:This seems a rather strange communication coming from out of the blue. I’m wondering what motivated ‘Nod’ to write in at this time, perhaps he’ll tell us more if he wants any serious replies.
Just one point, what’s his opinion on the really nasty parasites who cause so much death and destruction around the world while they’re focussed on their never-ending quest for accumulation?
Yes very strange indeed, He is almost a parody of your stereotypical Daily Mail reader – with his complacent, self-satisfied , I’m-all-right-Jack–and-stuff- the-rest -of-you attitude . And the guy clearly doesn’t have much of a clue about socialism either with his objection to distributing his hard-earned cash to others, who have contributed nothing to society, for the sake of equalisation.
It just doesn’t add up . The chirpy familiarity – “Hi Guys! (and Dolls)” – and the odd Marx quote suggesting someone who has done a little reading around and whose outlook on life is a little broader than singlemindedly getting on in the rat-race, making loadsa money and dying of a pre retirement heart attack, just doesnt seem to sit easily with the naff and drearily predictable sad sentiments of your typical right-up-your-own-backside egotistical type. “Look at me!. Look at what a success I am, having got where I am through sheer graft.. Why should I share what I have achieved with you. So fuck of!!”. Strewth, give us break.. This is , well., so passe, luv. Gordon Gecko said it all back in the 1980s and we’ve moved on since then.
But what intrigues me is why reestablish contact with an organisation with you were evidently only very fleetingly acquainted all those years ago and with which you today have so little in common. Now there’s a mystery. Perhaps Mr Mystery Man should tell us more about this voyage of self discovery he has seemingly embarked uponI posted something from Yahoo news on Revleft about Clarksons’s comment on shooting strikers. To be fair though it does seem that Clarkson’s comment was somewhat taken out of context – it was just his feeble and rather tasteless attempt at being satirical . Someone on Revleft reproduced part of the transcript of the intereview which I had not seen before and it seems clear from this that the guy was only joking. This was not particularly obvious from the Yahoo News article which so incensed me to begin with Still it doesnt make him any the less an overpaid buffoon with a seemingly limitless capacity for sticking his foot in his mouth
PaulB wrote:
I think there’s no point in ‘discussing’ with McTet. Ignore them, and return the WSM Forum to dealing with the Socialist case.Hi Paul
I dont quite understand your argument. Yes, the McDonagh/Tet double act can be exasperating at times and, yes, they are a prize pair of twits but it is actually through dealing with their sundry claims that the strength of the socialist case becomes all the more evident. Ironically, they are doing socialists and the WSM a big favour by exposing the utterly nonsencial basis of their objections to socialism and this is something which no reasonably balanced or sensible outside observer could fail to notice. Like I said , the point of taking on such people is not to convert them; it is for the benefit of those looking in on the debate and we should not forget that. (It also benefits us by sharpening our debating skills but that is a lesser concern)
You should be capitalising on the opportunities presented by the likes of McDonagh and Tet. Grind the buggers down with logic and facts, Dont just ignore them. Ignoring them only sends out the message that you have no confidence in your own ideas whereas socialists have every reason to feel hugely confident
