steve colborn
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
steve colborn wrote:The problem is Adam, that the Front cover of this months Standard, probably dissuades some from looking at the "sweetmeats" inside. Gnome tells us;No evidence whatever of this 'dissuasion' at the Kent Miners' Festival today. Four copies of the September Standard sold (besides other literature) and several amicable conversations held on the Corbyn 'phenomenon'. Luckily, not all workers are taken in by the radical sounding rhetoric of these new pretenders.So thats 4 September Standards plus, several (several could mean as little as 3/4) amicable conversations on the Corbyn 'penomenon'. Not nearly enough for a representative survey is it Gnome?But you are missing the point I, along with others are trying to make. Personally, I could'nt give a flying fuck about Corbyn, I see him as another cul-de-sac that only results in workers being lead up a blind alley! No, its those he is enthusing, enthusing in their thousands that I and others are concerned with. Even the possibility that these enthused individuals (a lot of them young people) could be put off our message, before they even get to read it, by what, to some of us, is a snide attack on Corbyn, is saddening and depressing.There "are" good articles inside but unless one is a member already, of The Socialist Party, these young members of our class could be put off by a seeming attack on someone they see as offering something different. Why could'nt the front page have been "less" confrontatory? Remember, we are'nt talking about fully politically aware Socialists here. But no, give them both barrels, before we even "get them into range"! Very astute thinking Dr Venkman.
ALBOfflineJoined: 22/06/2011Send PM steve colborn wrote:Been looking at the front pages of the Standard. Whilst not agreeing with the overall stance of Corbyn, what we cannot say, is that he has failed to energize people about politics, he has.The good news is that is precisely not what we say on the inside: Quote:While we welcome that more people are becoming politically involved and are looking for alternatives, it would be a mistake to follow Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, otherwise we may well end up going back to the 1970s, rather than moving forwards to abolish capitalism and establish real socialism.OK, it doesn't say JezWeCan The problem is Adam, that the Front cover of this months Standard, probably dissuades some from looking at the "sweetmeats" inside.That is the point myself and I suspect SP and Vin are getting at
When will we, as a Party, stop limiting our audience? Every time someone such as Brand, Corbyn (who will be the next), comes along, we trip over ourselves to alienate those who look at alternative ideas and say “hey, thats fresh thinking”.
We should be in the Van saying, “if you think thats fresh thinking, what about this?” A world without boundaries, withAre we asout class distinction and all that that entails. Where the world and everything in and on it, belongs to us all, in common.
Would’nt it be nice where food is produced to eat, houses to live in ETC ETC ETC.
This is the approach we should take. Instead of spending the vast majority of our energies, saying what we disagree with Corbyn, and Brand about. Are we ashamed of our ideas or what?
I agree with Vin’s and SP’s train of thought.This months Standard front cover is overly proscriptive of Corbyn. Like Brand before him, we appear intent on putting the boot into people who, whilst not being Socialists, have clear water between their ideas and that of the Tories. Ideas, that if we could connect with those whom Corbyn and Brand amongst others, have energized into considering alternatives, we could place our unique and distinct ideas before this, wider, audience!
Been looking at the front pages of the Standard. Whilst not agreeing with the overall stance of Corbyn, what we cannot say, is that he has failed to energize people about politics, he has.
If only we could concieve of a way to tap into the interest he has generated. Granted, hes not a Socialist and his mantra of nationalise this, nationalise that has, as the front page of this months Standard points out, in a roundabout way, been tried and failed but he has pushed the door ajar and we need to find a way to push it all the way open.
Lovely, quite Orwellian in depth and scope. I can see UK governments taking heed of this kind of development.
OOps, expecting this post to be reported, wonder who it will be? By the way and in accord with the thread, what about those "rigging" the ballot, by ditching our leaflets? Thereby not giving their fellow workers the chance of a fair purview of an alternative?
Oh the joy of it, "let ye without sin, cast the first stone" Halelujah Brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Actually Richard, you haven't addressed the issue, why should we, Socialists, Revolutionaries, forego our rights to use "OUR" language?They have not, tainted it from where I stand and I'm not prepared to allow them to disavow "my" use of these terms, going forward!!! That clear enough for you?
Alan, you talk about protest, IE when we were disallowed the use of the "Platform" as duly accredited Election Candidates. Myself, personally, had decided that if I was denied the "Platform" at the husting I attended, as a "Minor" candidate, that I would not allow the husting to go ahead. Indeed, I had phone numbers pre-programmed into my mobile, so I could, in a short space of time, contact the Media, to get publicity.In the end, it proved unnecessary but you never know!!!
I started on this path, 33yrs ago. I've been through it. I understand the pros, the cons. I understand that "baggage" comes with "words", with terminolgy. However, when do "WE", start setting the "agenda", not merely being reactive?Are you a "Member"? If not why not? If not, you do know that sitting on the fence, as well as being an exercise in futility, gets you spelks in ur arse?
The Party, for as long as I've been a Member/sympathiser, has always been backwards, in coming forwards in using/accepting new technology/means of propogating "our" case!Vin, keep doing what you are doing and "run" with it mate. You have mine, and I suspect the Branches support.Up the workers!!!!!!1
As part of The Socialist Party case, it is getting folk to understand that Socialism/Communism have never been tried and why!As a member in the 80's, I remember we had the same discussion, not using the terms Socialism, Comrade, Communism, ETC ETC because of their tainted misinterpretation, by our fellow workers.If we cannot even get across to our fellow workers, that these terms have been misused, what chance of getting them to understand and agree with, the need for a differntly orientated Social System?I'll stick with the original terms for now, thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
