SocialistPunk
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi ALB,So it would seem that the party has a few members who, think it ok to act in a manner that is likely to give other organizations (TZM, Occupy) a bad impression of the SPGB. It looks like damage has been done to the party reputation. And you say you're not sure what can be done?Come on! If the party has people who damage its rep, are those people needed, especially in these difficult times?Could the behaviour that is being described be deliberate? It is well known that disruption tactics are used by the state to tar organizations with bad reps etc.
Hi Alan,I agree with the sentiment about it not being the SPGB bringing about socialism. From what I have read of Ozymandias's experience at summer school I feel that I wouldn't want socialism with such prejudiced attitudes.But you seem to be missing my point about my activity and forming a branch. I do contribute (I hope) if only in a small way, to promoting socialism. However I feel unable to contribute to the inevitable hard work involved in making a North East branch a viable concern. I used to be very active in the branch before I left, unfortunately I could not do so today.I fully accept the intellectual side of socialism, some enjoy it. I used to. But having worked hard in a branch doing the usual activity that is probably still done today, I am more concerned with trying to find ways of making the message more relevant and effective for a 21st century audience. I apologize (not referring to you) to members if they feel my criticism is invalid and see only someone who "talks the talk" but is unwilling to "walk the Walk". I wish it were different.By the way for those who think I am unaware, I saw and enjoyed "Capitalism and Other Kids Stuff" when it first came out.Some will no doubt have a go at me for saying this, but TZM is socialism. Where it differs from the SPGB approach, is it speaks to new generations and their fears of environmental destruction and the unsustainability of the present system. It deliberately avoids references to socialism, Marx and class consciousness. I could be wrong, no doubt I will be put in my place by someone. (But if you do, I have no problem with that, do it calmly)I think the two views should be linked in some sort of "one aim ,the same" umbrella. Bridges should be built.I am sorry I missed your post about Irish Workers Solidarity Movement in all the excitement sometimes we don't see the wood for the trees. I'll check it out and get back to you later.Bloody hell I sound more like a hippy than a punk.But I never could stand stereotyping and I always think it important to ask questions and challenge cherished beliefs.
Hi HollyHead,This is your full post.
HollyHead wrote:A question:If we were a much larger and more attractive party in the past than we appear to be currently what is we were doing then that we are not doing now? Posts #20 and #21 above rehearse many of the concerns that have been discussed in the party since Pontius was a pilot. Many of them are real and I don't believe that any member really thinks that everything is OK with the way things are. Rather the impression I get is one of the membership at large looking to the critics (from both inside and outside the party) to come up with worked out and costed alternatives (including a list of comrades willing to do the work necessary to put it into effect.) A suggestion:Party members should please abandon the practice of passing pious resolutions — what the late former comrade Cyril May used to call "duck shoving". You know the kind of thing — exciting and/or adventurous plans for party activity to be carried out by someone else (almost always the EC).At the time I was unsure if your post was a general observation or not. Still unsure.But I did reply, I asked you then and you didn't get back. As did OGW and Northern Light.Your reference to critics inside and out, seems it could be a "put up or shut up" gesture? Along with your "A suggestion". Probably where the misunderstanding has come from.Now OGW did state that when he was in the North East branch, they did a lot of graft without looking to the EC. Likewise when I was in the branch we also did a lot of work ourselves.So both OGW and myself are capable of "walking the walk".Lets not make this an issue.
Hi Ozymandias,You are spot on.I am particularly appalled at your report about the homophobia. When I came across socialism as a young punk, it spoke to me, I saw it as a way of bringing to the fore the best in humanity, tolerance, understanding, freedom of expression etc. I expected fellow socialists to have freed themselves of the bullshit of everything that is wrong in society today.From what I have seen and heard recently, I think I must be thinking of some other socialism. It looks as though some in this party are still weighed down with todays bullshit. The pathetic attitude of the party to the Occupy speaker at summer school is a classic example of what I have been trying to get across about the party image and approach. TZM and Occupy are made up of people who are looking for something better.To sneer, attack and ignore them because they are not members of a genuine socialist party, not like "us", is petty and self defeating.I am pleased to see that there are others out there who can see what I can see. If more speak up, maybe something can be salvaged from the wreck.
Hi Hollyhead,When I joined the forum there were a few who I thought were unconstructive and unnecessarily critical. It has lead to this exchange. This kinda thing is the reason I started the debate about party image and approach. Someone didn't get it, and the rest is history.I think OGW has a point here. As far as I am aware he wants some explanations as to how this thing got so out of hand, given it was supposed to be a debate about this very thing. I think he should be taken seriously, as it is a valid point that needs addressing in a democratic organization.I again make an appeal to the silent majority on this forum and in the party. Are you allowing this site, a window into the socialist party to be dominated by people who sneer, swear and act aggressively? Is this to be the image of the party?To an outsider it will be off putting. But if it leads to positive change, it will benefit the party in the long run.
I wish to thank the forum members who came to my defence yesterday.If I had been available at the time their intervention would not have been needed, I would have had a few things to say in my defence. As it stands now, I am not allowed to reply to the less than constructive comments made against me yesterday, as any attempt to do so may lead to disciplinary action.I am reasonable enough to accept that.I wish to say if I were allowed to reply ,I would be able to refrain from using certain colourful language.I now consider the unpleasant incident to be behind us and I bear no grudge or ill will to any member. We need to get on with the business at hand, even if it means ruffling a few feathers.Now as far as I can tell OGW does not deserve the treatment he has received. His only crime, has been in trying to establish some continuity regarding forum conduct and discipline. He has been a somewhat frustrated with the outcome, but who can blame him?
Well now Ed, we are in a pickle.If you think altering the party approach to appeal to a wider audience is dumbing down, I think the problem lies in your attitude. I never suggested dumbing down the party case. We just need to make it more accessible.How we deal with individual one to one interaction is our own business and I am sure many will find a multitude of ways to deal with this.Now if you were to go into most workplaces or social settings and start using longwinded jargon and arguments and going on about the proletariat, and the bourgeoisie, I bet you any money you would be labeled as a crank. You wouldn't get through.Now just because people can use longwinded, word and arguments, doesn't automaticaly mean there is any substance behind them.Take Gyles Brandreth as an example. He is known as a word smith, he loves and uses long words and phrases, all well and good. But I am pretty sure that he would be unable to grasp the basics of the socialist case?It's all well and good sounding clever, but if it fails to communicate a simple message, then it is a waste of time and energy.
I must apologise for my last post. I can only think I must have been in "forum mode".It looks pretty crap, doesn't it?Since I joined this forum I have seen a lot of this kind of behaviour.I'll say it again, it doesn't look good on a public forum.
I am not in the least bit surprised you don't get it Ed. I am finding a lot of it on this forum.I am not being critiical of individuals. Not yet anyway!So you accuse my appeal to considerate behaviour on this forum and avoiding the use of agressive intellectual words and waffle, as dumbing down?You are right, oh wise one. I am a mere socialist sympathiser an ex member and not worthy of respect? How could I be so foolish to think that I could challenge the authority of the Guardians of all socialist knowledge?For starters I was not referring to how socialists conduct themselves in their own time. Most of my criticism comes from looking at this forum. The smart arsed jibes, and know it all self congratulating. It looks poor.But I seem to recall you sneering at observations before.I suppose if we do so well on an individual basis, we don't need a party.Hang on, what's that I can hear? Yes I think it is the hundreds of socialists Ed has managed to convert all by himself. I hope there are enough membership forms to go about.Now when you are ready to discuss things constructively?
Hi Ed,When I mentioned viral e-mails, I don't mean getting a company involved to do spam e-mails etc.I mean we put together a humorous message about a topical issue. We start by sending it to party members, who in turn send it to one or two (or more)of their friends etc. If people like them they may pass them on, it's that simple.My uncle used to send me right wing ones, jibes at imigrants, little known "facts" etc. Whether he was fully aware of their origins and purpose, I will never know. I never passed them on, but some do.
Hi HollyHead,Not sure if your post is aimed at me or others on this forum? Maybe I put it badly on my post, but I see the party of the past, doing better because the political environment was more conducive to class conscious politics via the Trade Union movement. Now Trade Unions are pretty much exhausted, but not dead, the arena for political discussion and awareness has changed, and so the traditional recruiting ground has gone. Couple that with the parties inability to adapt to the changing climate, and we have an extinction event on the horizon. I could be wrong?You may have also missed my real frustration at how members often conduct themselves here and in the real world.Intellectual waffle and aggressive criticism do not win any popularity contests. I am afraid it boils down to the cliche of winning hearts and minds. If the party chooses to ignore this then all the activity, old and new will not change a thing.The party (ie members) needs to take a long hard look at itself. Is aggressive criticism the better approach, has it worked well to date. Or is it time for a less aggressive, more interactive, nurturing, educational approach.I know that party members often don't get on or see eye to eye, but it must be remembered that socialist awareness concerns itself with one thing, finding a way to bring about world socialism. That means putting differences to one side, and finding ways of making others aware of the alternative on offer. As for me coming up with worked out costed alternatives, I thought this party was a democratic party with no leaders?Hell, if you want to change that approach, I am sure it would attract a few people from the left.I have ideas. But when I was in the party, I often felt my ideas were not welcome. I tried, I gave a lot of precious time, for what?
You got the GB sentiment spot on OGW.Never could understand why a self professed internationalist socialist party used GB in the first place or have kept it for so long?I seem to recall hearing about that when I joined, the way I heard it, a lot of members objected to ditching the GB part as they thought that would lead to a loss of legacies. How short sighted? I think the GB bit has had a negative effect on the party image, it makes me cringe when I say it.If the party got shot of the GB bit I would rejoin tomorrow.Having never been to head office, I don't know the layout, size etc. But is ALB suggesting converting some of head office into a socialist cafe? If so it is a dynamite idea.DJP mentioned short films for the net, YouTube being the ideal place.1) Viral e-mails (not sure if that is the right term, the ones that you pass around) with humour and a message. The right wing seem to use this a lot, peddling their racist bullshit.2) Festivals of all types are big these days, Glastonbury has a political field called Left Field, I think. It would cost a bit I imagine for a stall, but it could help improve the image and profile of the party. And whoever the lucky volunteers were, would have a great time as well.3) I know some members, I recall back when I was in the party, think that elections are ineffective, but in my experience they were a great way to focus branch activity. As well as potentialy gaining a decent amount exposure.4) I am hoping to set up a small scale printing workshop, T-shirts, posters, artwork etc. If I get it set up (uncertain if we are moving house or not, will know next year) I would be willing to print shirts and posters etc for the party at cost price.I'll keep on thinking.
gnome wrote:Quite a few allusions here and from other folk but not one person yet has made any concrete analysis of what they think is wrong with the party and having done so suggested any remedies. We all genuinely want to hear why the SPGB is "in decline" if indeed it is.ALB wrote:I don't think anyone on this forum has expressed the view that "everything is ok", have they?Incidentally, I don't think the party is in a worse state than when you left (the 1990s/early 2000s)DISCLAIMER.The following statement refers to the views of the writer, following discussions with two socialist friends, one a party member. In no way is it meant to claim any authority over the subject. If you are of a mind that the SPGB has no need to alter it's image or approach, please do not read any further as the following may contain views that are likely to cause offense. ______________________________________To put it simply, the SPGB is not in good shape. Despite what some members think 332 members is not a good enough number for a revolutionary party to carry out effective propaganda. Consideration must also be given to the fact that not all members will be active.So what's going on, how does an organization with such a powerful, undeniable case end up here?I do not pretend to know much of the history of the party, but it has been mention that 600 – 700 members existed in the 1980's. Is that the largest membershipin the party history?But it is the 1980's that I believe lie the roots of the parties present problems.The 1980's saw the biggest, successful attack on the Trade Union movement in this country. The Tory government set out to change the economic landscape of Britain, from industrial to service and financial.Vast numbers of jobs vanished in the heavy industries, steel, ship building and coal mining. Whole communities up and down the country were left devastated practically overnight. The eighties were grim for many families.So here we are in a situation where the traditional base for Trade Union working class conscious politics is wiped out. The communities and amenities, often Union centered (working mens clubs and activities etc) became fragmented and eventually all but vanished.The town I live in has changed dramatically, community life is all but non existent, of the six or seven working mens clubs only one remains, the community activities and events are small and scarce in comparison, the once many pubs are few and far between.At the same time as the decline in industrial communities, another tactic was being implemented to fragment the working class. Workers were encouraged to become "middle class" home owners, the media heavily promoted the idea that Unions and working class politics were outdated and irrelevant in the new "middle class" Britain. New technologies and arenas of communication and entertainment emerged. New pressures and distractions where being heaped upon the working class in Britain.So by the time I joined the SPGB in 1996/97 the traditional breeding ground for working class conscious politics, "Labour socialist" as well as genuine socialist, had withered dramatically. My socialist education was a by product of the 1980's, manifesting itself in joning the party because of personal reasons.During my late teen, early twenties (20yrs in 1991) experiences based largely around music, (I never came across the party) I noticed a surge in single issue politics, the environment and anti-racism, most noticeable. Meanwhile the SPGB, although active seem to have been unable to cope (adapt) with the changes and as a consequence have struggled to attract new members in numbers sufficient enough to counter the natural losses in membership (ahh hindsight).Half a dozen ageing political intellectuals in a dusty pub backroom is hardly likely to appear relevant and attractive to most people let alone younger generations. Then there is the attitude, that appears to dominate. Cynical and critically agressive. Very off putting.I came across an earlier thread fro 2011 by accident recently, "socialism at your fingertips". A forum member put forward an idea of using allotment/garden style co-operatives to connect with the community. Out came the sabers, cutting the idea to shreds. Now I don't think socialism will come about via such programmes, it was a half decent idea to connect with people. The critics obviously thought dusty pub back rooms a more engaging environment? Thankfully some members thought the idea worthy of constructive discussion. Perhaps with party support and organization such a project could be undertaken. It would probably fail, but it would demonstrate a willingness to try to engage with people in the real world, and may even generate positive publicity?I am not putting this forward as a solution, merely to highlight a rather ugly aspect of party image. An image of clinical, critical, often aggressive cynicism. It has been long understood in educational circles that pupils who are nurtured, encouraged and allowed to explore new ideas and approaches to their own education and development, fair better than those who are pushed and bullied.The future of any organization lies in it's ability to attract new members!I will end this here as I am aware it is rather long. There is more to say.
Hi Brian,I never meant to imply that only branch activity is relevant. I could still (and sometimes do) participate on an individual level.My conundrum would only arise if I were to participate in trying to revive the branch. It would no doubt take a lot of effort to make it a going concern and I would feel the need to get heavily involved, but be unable to for health reasons.It would be a conundrum for me, but you seem unable to appreciate. I didn't expect otherwise.It is why I made the reference to giving some of my best years to party activity. Those days are gone, given freely but never to return.I am almost of a mind to think that I wasted those years, given that the party is in worst shape now than when I left, with many on this forum thinking everything is ok.You are right in saying this forum is important, for the very reasons you give.
Hi ALB,I had an idea the call to arms would show itself sooner or later.Again I will say I joined this forum to find out if the party had made any progress with its approach, image etc. I was looking for some sign of progress, as I am still in two minds about rejoining (if I wasn't I wouldn't be here now).The problem I have, is as far as I can tell the party is still stuck.Now I gave my some of my best years to the party in the period I was an active member of the North East branch.Let me explain in more detail.I have a rather unpleasant genetic disease called Cystic Fibrosis. I am surprised I have made it this far (41 years). Most of my limited available energy goes into keeping myself as healthy as I can, for as long as I can. What energy I have left, I engage in trying to enjoy the time I have won back from my DNA.The question then becomes, do I wish to engage anymore time than I am now, in trying to convince party members they need to alter the approach? This would inevitably require me having to put my money where my mouth is, so to speak and having to engage in activity that would put a drain and strain on my energies and so my CF.I could be an inactive number. Not a problem if I just became party member "333". But if I became a branch member I would feel a need to get involved.A bit of a conundrum, as you may or may not appreciate.
