14th November Movement for Left Unity

[phildwyer]

A better world / social revolution / full communism.

Take yer pick.

I'll take the lot please.

But the abolition of capitalism is the precondition for all of them.

Therefore we should forget this quibbling about who is on the "left" and who is on the "right." These are silly words. The only thing we should care about is who is pro-capitalist and who is anti-capitalist.

 

[chilango]

I'll take the lot please.

But the abolition of capitalism is the precondition for all of them.

Therefore we should forget this quibbling about who is on the "left" and who is on the "right." These are silly words. The only thing we should care about is who is pro-capitalist and who is anti-capitalist.

*shakes head and walks away*

Sorry Phil. I'm not gonna indulge you on this.

 

[phildwyer]

*shakes head and walks away*

Sorry Phil. I'm not gonna indulge you on this.

Suit yourself. I was assuming from this that you were also starting to think beyond the Left/Right terminology:

Aye. the left was only ever the means, never the end.

And tbh I can't really see what else you might have meant. But maybe there is something I've missed.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Suit yourself. I was assuming from this that you were also starting to think beyond the Left/Right terminology

What does this actually mean? What terminology do you think would be more useful and for what purpose?

 

[phildwyer]

What does this actually mean? What terminology do you think would be more useful and for what purpose?

As I say, I think pro- or anti-capitalist would be better, as it would identify the truly significant ideological and political division more accurately than the C18th spatial metaphor.

One problem with the Left/Right terminology is that it allows subsiduary matters to obscure the main issue. I think the "Left's" involvement in identity politics has caused all sorts of problems in this regard. We can see it all over these boards, and all over every similar discussion group or political movement: everyone furiously scrutinizing each other's words for some verbal slip-up that might reveal them as "really" on the "right" because of some secret or unconscious prejudice or other. And pretty soon we're in a situation where "Left-wing" just means "tolerant" or "nice" or "decent" (as people here tend to put it). The term loses all significance.

The real problem is capital. Nothing else will be solved until that is solved. So I think we should concentrate on the real problem. And the Left/Right metaphor is a distraction from that.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

As I say, I think pro- or anti-capitalist would be better, as it would identify the truly significant ideological and political division more accurately than the C18th spatial metaphor.

One problem with the Left/Right terminology is that it allows subsiduary matters to obscure the main issue. I think the "Left's" involvement in identity politics has caused all sorts of problems in this regard. We can see it all over these boards, and all over every similar discussion group or political movement: everyone furiously scrutinizing each other's words for some verbal slip-up that might reveal them as "really" on the "right" because of some secret or unconscious prejudice or other. And pretty soon we're in a situation where "Left-wing" just means "tolerant" or "nice" or "decent" (as people here tend to put it). The term loses all significance.

The real problem is capital. Nothing else will be solved until that is solved. So I think we should concentrate on the real problem. And the Left/Right metaphor is a distraction from that.

What do you mean nothing else will be solved until capital is?

 

[Lo Siento.]

As I say, I think pro- or anti-capitalist would be better, as it would identify the truly significant ideological and political division more accurately than the C18th spatial metaphor.

One problem with the Left/Right terminology is that it allows subsiduary matters to obscure the main issue. I think the "Left's" involvement in identity politics has caused all sorts of problems in this regard. We can see it all over these boards, and all over every similar discussion group or political movement: everyone furiously scrutinizing each other's words for some verbal slip-up that might reveal them as "really" on the "right" because of some secret or unconscious prejudice or other. And pretty soon we're in a situation where "Left-wing" just means "tolerant" or "nice" or "decent" (as people here tend to put it). The term loses all significance.

The real problem is capital. Nothing else will be solved until that is solved. So I think we should concentrate on the real problem. And the Left/Right metaphor is a distraction from that.

You know there's plenty of Nazis who'd put themselves down as anti-capitalist, right? (Not to mention all the communist anti-capitalists who would cheerfully have the likes of me shot as soon as they'd finished with capitalism, or sooner should the need arise, oh and the anti-capitalist who just think everything will be fine if we turn all the important companies into state capitalist enterprises)

 

[phildwyer]

What do you mean nothing else will be solved until capital is?

At the most obvious level, I suspect capital will soon make the world uninhabitable by human beings unless it is stopped.

 

[phildwyer]

You know there's plenty of Nazis who'd put themselves down as anti-capitalist, right? (Not to mention all the communist anti-capitalists who would cheerfully have the likes of me shot as soon as they'd finished with capitalism, or sooner should the need arise, oh and the anti-capitalist who just think everything will be fine if we turn all the important companies into state capitalist enterprises)

But these are reasons to focus on their attitudes to capital, and to identify what is truly anti-capitalist and what is not.

For example, I don't believe racists can be genuine anti-capitalists because they misidentify the causes of the problems to which they react. I don't think state capitalists can be genuine anti-capitalists because they merely replace the boss with the state. And so on.

The point is that the crux of the debate should be how capital can most effectively be opposed.

 

[Lo Siento.]

But these are reasons to focus on their attitudes to capital, and to identify what is truly anti-capitalist and what is not.

For example, I don't believe racists can be genuine anti-capitalists because they misidentify the causes of the problems to which they react. I don't think state capitalists can be genuine anti-capitalists because they merely replace the boss with the state. And so on.

The point is that the crux of the debate should be how capital can most effectively be opposed.

Right so. This is a dwindling alliance, isn't it? I mean the Labour Party and the Leninists are gone. We're left with the unaligned & the anarchists essentially.

 

[phildwyer]

We're left with the unaligned & the anarchists essentially.

Obviously we've got to purge the anarchists.

 

[chilango]

Suit yourself. I was assuming from this that you were also starting to think beyond the Left/Right terminology:.

No.

I'm talking more about "the left" being a vehicle to achieve certain goals. I think that, unfortunately, it is no longer seen that way by many of those within it, but that it (or it's maintenance) has become a goal in and of itself.

I don't go along with your "beyond left and right" stuff.

At all.

Though clearly it's neither the Cold War nor 18th c France anymore so of course a simple binary cannot express the political spectrum. However this terminology is not an area or issue I have any real interest in discussing, I don't find it particularly important, and past experience has shown most people spouting the "beyond left and right" stuff to be dodgy fuckers.

But, yeah, others may wish to argue the toss with you on this, I haven't the energy or inclination. Sorry.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

At the most obvious level, I suspect capital will soon make the world uninhabitable by human beings unless it is stopped.

Really? And what makes you think that?

 

[phildwyer]

Well all I can say it that there is an obvious contradiction between this:

I'm talking more about "the left" being a vehicle to achieve certain goals. I think that, unfortunately, it is no longer seen that way by many of those within it, but that it (or it's maintenance) has become a goal in and of itself.

And this:

I don't go along with your "beyond left and right" stuff.

 

[phildwyer]

Really? And what makes you think that?

Capitalism requires exponential growth in a world of finite resources.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Define growth, define resources, and define finite.

 

[DownwardDog]

[reposted from the SWP squabbles thread as it's more relevant here]



12 years ago, I was in the youngest 20% of the audience. Five years ago I was in the youngest 20% of the audience. A few weeks ago I was in the youngest 20% of the audience.

Classic population profile of catastrophic defeat.

 

[phildwyer]

Define growth, define resources, and define finite.

You first.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Edited double justification

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

You first.

You're the one making an assertion, I'm asking you to provide some structure to it so I can judge whether it is worth engaging in further enquiry

 

[phildwyer]

You're the one making an assertion, I'm asking you to provide some structure to it so I can judge whether it is worth engaging in further enquiry

OK, it's just that it seems a bit obvious.

Growth: increase in value.
Resources: the world.
Finite: the world cannot expand indefinitely as value can.

 

[Pickman's model]

You're the one making an assertion, I'm asking you to provide some structure to it so I can judge whether it is worth engaging in further enquiry

it's dwyer so it's not

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

OK, it's just that it seems a bit obvious.

Growth: increase in value.
Resources: the world.
Finite: the world cannot expand indefinitely as value can.

Ah you're a materialist then?

 

[phildwyer]

Ah you're a materialist then?

You're going to have to walk me through your logic with regard to this one.

 

[Pickman's model]

Ah you're a materialist gobshite then?

corrected for you

 

[phildwyer]

it's dwyer so it's not

Down boy.

 

[redcogs]

Oh dear, i seem to have missed a history in this matter. Anti cap leftist, over and out.

 

[Pickman's model]

Down boy.

you seem to be labouring under the delusion you're some top debater. you're not. you're a tosser.

 

[phildwyer]

you seem to be labouring under the delusion you're some top debater. you're not. you're a tosser.

Shut up, fool. We're trying to have a discussion here.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

You're going to have to walk me through your logic with regard to this one.

Resources-the world?