SocialistPunk
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
gnome wrote:SocialistPunk wrote:People like Corbyn, Brand, Lucas, and others on the "left" of politics seem to care what happens to people and yet as you point out they appear to get more of a hammering from the SPGB. For daring to care? What message is that sending to potential SPGB sympathisers?
That the people you describe only "seem to care what happens to people" is precisely why they need to be exposed all the more for the hoodwinkers of the working class they truly are.Corbyn promises "Equality For All" and to "End Austerity" among the many other vague and totally unrealisable aims under capitalism and as for the clown, Brand first supports the Greens and then on the eve of the General Election tells workers to vote for the Labour Party. He doesn't know his proverbial arse from his elbow. Lucas and the rest of the 'lefty' rag-bag of con-merchants are no better.You're welcome to your new found 'friends'. The rest of us will stick to our socialist principles.
GnomeNot really sure how to respond to your…err… criticism… of the main thrust of my position. I argue that amateurish, confrontational scare tactics do not make for good propagation of socialism and what do you respond with.Your last sentence is a fair example of a "smear" tactic, in suggesting I have no socialist principles and belong with the likes of Corbyn, Brand etc.I would much prefer to discuss things in a reasonable manner, without petty accusations and association being used to detract from sensible discussion.A little question for ya. Do you honestly think the likes of Jeremy Corbyn and Russell Brand are in the same league as Ian Duncan Smith and Nigel Farage? FYI, as soon as Russell Brand announced support for Labour at the last election, I didn't bother watching his Trews videos anymore. I only had a look at his last one when Vin posted a link to it on another thread. Yeah he fucked up, but his views regarding revolution are still powerful.
ALB wrote:SocialistPunk wrote:There's nothing wrong with attacking capitalism and its supporters, I'm not suggesting the SPGB stop that. I'm just advocating a more thought out approach, considering short sharp attack/smear tactics are doomed to fail."Smear tactics". That's a serious charge. Here's how it's defined (from: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=smear+campaign)
Quote:A dirty political campaign run against your opponent, using exaggerations, lies, and/or quotes taken out of context, in an attempt to scare or disgust the public against that candidate.We have never employed such tactics.I think you should withdraw..
ALBI never looked into the meaning of the word "smear" before using it, I used it simply to denote a superficial scare tactic. However I think showing Corbyn along side Cameron and Farage is an attempt to scare or disgust, using exaggerated association and insinuation.The whole point of my commenting on this issue is because of the nature of certain amateurish tactics employed on behalf of the SPGB by some members who seem intent on the continued isolation of the party.If a certain approach is shown to not work, where is the logic in its continued use? I have yet to hear any response to this critical point, just superficial distractions to avoid facing up to that fact.Before we take this discussion any further I think it important to state that I have not criticised the party analysis of Corbyn's reformist politics. I agree and said so earlier in this thread, that should he ever get power he is ultimately powerless to make capitalism work in the interests of the working class.
Vin wrote:They way we sometimes argue our case can appear contradictory. Ian Duncan Smith's way of dealing with capitalism is to (allegedly) murder the sick and elderly but he is not to blame according to us. It is 'capitalism' guiding his murderous hand. But Corbyn is to blame for his actions, he has a free will.We let the Torie off the hook and divert our attacks on those who appear to care.And – what with the GREAT BRITAIN emphasised in our name – it turns those we wish to attract away from whateverelse we have to say.Couldn't have put it any better Vin.IDS does have a choice whether or not to take an active role in the dismantling of vulnerable peoples lives. His hand is not being forced, he chooses to do what he does because it is part of his ideology. There is no hooded phantom of "capitalism" holding a gun to his head. People like Corbyn, Brand, Lucas, and others on the "left" of politics seem to care what happens to people and yet as you point out they appear to get more of a hammering from the SPGB. For daring to care? What message is that sending to potential SPGB sympathisers?But I bet what we are getting at will fall on deaf ears and the usual dead ends will be religiously adhered to.
You slightly misunderstand what I'm getting at Alan. It's my fault as I omitted a couple of words from the sentence you quote. I had intended to include the words "simple and amateurish" in reference to the type of tactics being discussed here. However I thought them too negative, so left them out.There's nothing wrong with attacking capitalism and its supporters, I'm not suggesting the SPGB stop that. I'm just advocating a more thought out approach, considering short sharp attack/smear tactics are doomed to fail.
DJP wrote:I think this video definitely has something we should be using. Instead of pointing out why people are wrong, which only strengthens their beliefs, we should ask them to explain why they believe what they do, the process of having to come up with an explanation softens peoples viewshttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/are-all-internet-discussion-doomed?page=7Check out the video and you should realise (or perhaps not) that attack/smear campaigns don't achieve the desired effect.Time to change tactics?
The only problem with using tactics seen in some of the Facebook images and the Sept' Socialist Standard, is they don't work.Who are they aimed at? Those who already dislike Corbyn and his politics or supporters of his politics? Or perhaps some hazey middle ground of "don't knows"?Using attack tactics actually turns people off and has no effect on believers.If the SPGB are serious at recruiting supporters of "lost causes" it's time to quit the negative attack policy and use more creative and clever tactics/campaigns etc. You'd think that after one hundred and eleven years, lessons would by now be learnt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owI7DOeO_ygIt's not hard to believe that conversations like this take place.
Interesting article in yesterdays Guardian.http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results
Quote:A major investigation into scores of claims made in psychology research journals has delivered a bleak verdict on the state of the science.An international team of experts repeated 100 experiments published in top psychology journals and found that they could reproduce only 36% of original findings.The study, which saw 270 scientists repeat experiments on five continents, was launched by psychologists in the US in response to rising concerns over the reliability of psychology research.So unless the study regarding low intelligence and conservative ideology was confirmed by other research groups, it looks like there is a good chance it is probably bollocks.
Russell Brand wrote:"….what I think revolution really means, and what it literally does mean, is a change of power not using the conventional means of power. We're gonna have to come together in a different way to create that change."Six minutes in.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvoqQT41wos
Found this in The Guardian.
Quote:Labour’s Europe spokesman, Pat McFadden, said it was wrong to compare Corbyn’s views to those of Syriza in Greece.“There has been some attempt to suggest that Mr Corbyn’s campaign is a parallel of the Syriza movement in Greece, but Syriza is a firmly pro-European movement that has fought to keep Greece in the EU and the Eurozone. If Mr Corbyn comes out as anti-EU it will show there is nothing new about his politics – it is simply Bennism from the 1980s reheated. Is he going to fight for Britain as an open, outward-looking country engaged with the world or line up with Nigel Farage on a nationalist nostalgia trip?”http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/25/jeremy-corbyn-draws-fire-position-future-britain-eu-membershipBloody hell! Looks as though Corbyn wants to take Britain back to the '60s, '70s and '80s. Talk about indecision, lol.You could be forgiven in thinking there are a lot of people within the current political, economic, establishment who don't want him in charge of Labour for some reason.Anyone know what his stance is on TTIP?
Can't see any mention of sociopaths in the article, just a possible link between intelligence levels and simple political world views.So to the question, "Are all Conservatives sociopaths?", I would say a definite, no.
imposs1904 wrote:We all get that it's an attempt at a Private Eye'ish style front cover, but I'm not a fan. Vin's right: The Corbyn speech bubble feeds into the narrative being pushed down people's throats in the media right now. It's lazy and it's alienating. Some Party members just don't get it.And what's with the Cameron speech bubble and the 1870s gibe? Disraeli's One Nation Toryism was in power for the second half of the 1870s and it was a bastard sight more progressive than the class warriors currently in power. You don't have to be a historian of the 19th century to know that: A quick glance at his wiki page could have told you that.From the wiki page:Reforming legislation[Under the stewardship of Richard Assheton Cross, the Home Secretary, Disraeli's new government enacted many reforms, including the Artisan's and Labourers' Dwellings Improvement Act 1875,[176] which made inexpensive loans available to towns and cities to construct working-class housing. Also enacted were the Public Health Act 1875, modernising sanitary codes through the nation,[177] the Sale of Food and Drugs Act (1875), and the Education Act (1876).[176] Disraeli's government also introduced a new Factory Act meant to protect workers, the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act 1875, which allowed peaceful picketing, and the Employers and Workmen Act (1875) to enable workers to sue employers in the civil courts if they broke legal contracts. As a result of these social reforms the Liberal-Labour MP Alexander Macdonald told his constituents in 1879, "The Conservative party have done more for the working classes in five years than the Liberals have in fifty."Good point Imposs1904. The Tories in power today are gonna continue to overturn as many reforms, that benefit us the working class, as they can in the next five years.So the front cover of the Sept' Socialist Standard is gonna be wholly inaccurate. Unless it refers back to when Cameron was in opposition and playing the part of Mr Nice, in an attempt to shake the cold blooded Thatcher image of conservatism. But now he doesn't need to pretend.And I don't get the Farage bit, surely Farage has a favoured political historical period? But it aint easy coming up with ideas for the front page of the Standard that'll please everyone.
The anti-Corbyn images and "slogans" shown on page 17 are meant to do what exactly?They're not particularly catchy, so fail as "slogans" that fix an idea into our subconscious. They appear to be an amateurish attempt to demonize Corbyn, suggesting he is a politician who would willingly use aggressive anti working class tactics. Yet he is widely accepted as a person of integrity and principles.As Vin has pointed out, they resemble Tory propaganda. A little reminiscent of the 1997 Tory "demon eyes" Tony Blair posters, regarded by some as counter productive. Are feeble, negative propaganda tactics good for winning hearts and minds?
