stuartw2112
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Prodding an app on an iPhone is currently unthinkable without mines, infrastructure spending, agriculture, oil production and distribution, you name it. Is all this going to be provided for free too?
Much as I like Paul Mason, and will read his book with interest, I find his thinking on this pretty hard to swallow, for much the reasons Adam says. We're supposed to believe that free software, cheaper cab rides, blogs and yoof gormlessly gawping at the celebrity chatter and drivel on their iPhones herald a bright new future? Must be getting old, but I just can't see it.
And there ends another bombing raid from me for now. Thanks for the chat, hope to see you all again somewhere down the road. Cheers
We all actively support capitalism by buying things and working. But there is no alternative on that front. When it comes to alleviating suffering, though, we do have a choice. To blame those who choose to act for social ills beyond their control, while claiming moral superiority for doing nothing, is grotesque.
It's a very good point, Vin, and will take us back to the subject of this thread. Children, and indeed adults, *are* going hungry in this country, if not exactly starving. The churches have organised a network of food banks to feed them. Russell Brand has put his own money into setting up a cafe to help others who are suffering. What have the "revolutionaries" done? Written a devastating pamphlet? (Not a personal attack. You might have done far more than they have, or I have, for all I know. Just making a point.)
Twc's question is incoherent and is probably, like any conspiracy theory, set up so as to be always right by definition. But if it can be answered, there are thousands of examples. What are trade unions for but haggling over which share of the wealth will go to workers and which to its "rightful owners"?
I've been banned with no warning for nothing – the moderators need reining in or sacking. All discussion spins away from the point – it's the nature of it.
If the party took the same attitude to reformist campaigns and social activism of all kinds as it does to the trade unions (and why not, since the unions are often leading them anyway), then I would no longer have any problem with its position or attitude or politics. Speed the day!Funny you should mention Pieter. I always think of him when talking about reformism. Once he was telling me about the (reformist?) campaign he had been involved in to save the local bus service. You'd really have to be mad to oppose or not get involved in supporting such things, which Pieter might well have said, though I can't quite remember!
"But membership in a socialist group ought to complement our practical work – not compete with our activism, nor drag us into sectarianism."Thanks Alan. I particularly agree with and applaud the quote above. In my (limited) experience, it is a tricky thing to do, particularly in our age, where membership of a political party is viewed with suspicion if not outright hostility. But then, why are they suspicious? Perhaps they suspect that those members are there with ulterior motives of their own. And let's be honest – they're absolutely right! But then they're there with reasons of their own too. As you say, there are no easy answers.I think there is a general lack, in the discussion on this thread, and in the party generally, of what might be called "scientific socialism". In other words, let's not concern ourselves too much with our creaky old theory and our ideas about the future and how to get them over to others or put them into effect. That's utopian socialism (which I'm not abusing, I think it has its place, and wish very much that our society had more of a place for it). What about, instead,trying to identify the trends and movements and forces in our contemporary society, economic, social and political, and ask which of those we might like to encourage, support, get involved in, cheerlead, etc. And when doing that, don't be too abstract about it. Marx wrote volume I of Capital, as no one can deny, but did he, when he turned to write about contemporary social affairs, the Paris Commne say, just dismiss it all as so much rubbish that was bound to fail when you consider the law of value, then nature of commodities, etc, etc? Of course I've not done all that much towards what I'm recommending, but who is doing it? Paul Mason is one perhaps. I don't buy everything he says, but his whole approach is more Marxist than any other Marxist I'm aware of. His blog and Twitter feed is a must-read (and his books are pretty great too). http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-blog/(And yes, I know he's an old trot.)Final warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.This user is suspended for an indefinite period.
If you're confused, twc, I should point out something too few party members seem to understand. Autodidacticism does not have a single endpoint; not everyone who disagrees is a fool or a knave.2nd warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.
Thanks TWC. If I hadn't been either a member or sympathiser of your party for the past 15 years, and been reading Marx over that time till my eyes bled, I might even have found it enlightening. As it is, I'll keep on fumbling around in the dark.Cheers1st warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.
If I may, I'll pick up on one of Robin's points – namely, that "reformism" is liable to be co-opted by capitalism. Well, as I learnt in my very earliest days in the SPGB, thanks I think to a book Adam tipped for me (see the bottom link below), capitalism isn't actually a thing. Capitalism can't coopt our reforms, it can't do anything. Capitalism is what we do everyday. The only hope that capitalism will end or change into something else is if or when billions of people around the world start doing something else instead. The question then, what kinds of activities best enable us to do things differently? "Revolutionary" stuff or "reformist" stuff? The question answers itself. Finding better things to do is the transition to socialism.http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2013/07/the-transition-to-socialism.htmlhttp://theoryandpractice.org.uk/library/reproduction-everyday-life-fredy-perlman-1969
The term has no meaning! But yes, I suppose in the party's eyes that's exactly what I've become. What's the alternative?!
