Tuna Sub and a bag of Seabrook's cheese and onion crisps, and then a grande latte with an extra shot in Caffe Nero.
During the biggest crisis of capitalism of our generation, why is the UK anarcho-left not growing?
- Thread starter Random
- Start date
Tuna Sub and a bag of Seabrook's cheese and onion crisps, and then a grande latte with an extra shot in Caffe Nero.
Nice one.
Just keeps getting better.
I hope you're going to brush your teeth before speaking to anyone!
Not knowingly
Just went back to work, couldn't give a toss.
Single-handedly keeping the spirit of punk alive.
you anarchist
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I wish you'd regime change your diaper.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
loads of people seemed ok with it till we wiped them out and nicked their land. Mind, the lack of wi fi might do my nut in
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I think the general fuckup began when we moved past hunter-gatherer.
@DC: no wifi, but you'd be sitting in the men's hut half the day, smoking ganja...
@DC: no wifi, but you'd be sitting in the men's hut half the day, smoking ganja...
I don't buy it. It's a western liberl fetishisation. The noble savage and all that.
Bullshit. I'd not have lived to the age of 1 in a society like that. I detest deep greeners for this sort of sloppy neo hippy crap too.
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Google the number of hectares required by a hunter-gatherer in a temperate climate.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
You don't have to believe it; but I do. And while I'm happy to hear that you have survived past age one, it isn't necessarily the case that what's good for you personally, is what's best for humankind as a whole.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
Exactly. The only thing you can do to 'solve' the problem with excessive power bases, is to develop a system of checks and balances to mitigate it.
Even if the people were able to take control of the political arena these checks would be difficult to impose. Just look at the HoL reform, a key check needed on the power of the HoC, which all parties put into their manifestos, and yet again it fails because they don't want check on their power, their elitist model works where they are all-powerful.
The Left has many ideas as to how to fix the system, but they are all without input from those in power already.Why would they go along with policies which hinder their advantages? They will vote Conservative. But as has been mentioned here the numbers should work against them.
The dispossessed and marginalised might well be keen on a change in policy, but the Left seem unable to make up its mind on policy after the failure of past efforts. Its basic premise seems to be that we must have a revolution, rather than an evolution (the Conservatives 'solution'). And so we are left with stalemate with the winners keeping quiet, and the poor suffering greatly. The status quo by default.
The vote for change will have to be more than 'Not Conservative'. We did that in 1997, and Labour was unable to do more than organise (expensive) finance for some key services while leaving the main structure intact.
JimW
支那暗杀团
I'm no fan of the over-romantic bollocks either (plus it's not an option whatever the case), but people often go the other way refuting it - hunter gatherer societies were often pretty healthy and reasonably nourished (this is the classic study), the real crisis in infant mortality and morbidity comes after the agricultural revolution by and large - denser populations, tendency of population to expand faster than resource base, lots of diseases that come with animal husbandry etc.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
It might be the only option, in the event of nuclear war, comet strike, supervolcano eruption, megavirus etc.
JimW
支那暗杀团
I was meaning a conscious option which doesn't involve lots of people dying - not much of a sales pitch if you're telling people they have a 9 in 10 chance of dying but if they do get past that we're back in Eden.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
Our technological development has enabled a vast population to result. People want to have as many babies as they can, while the NHS is doing a good job keeping the existing population going for longer. This results in greater competition for jobs. We could organise the workers better to ensure that they can extract better wages from the companies, but at what cost? In a globalised, competitive world there is always a cheaper alternative, and maybe this very collective bargaining will cause an uncompetitive industry to close, moving into more productive areas (or more likely to just go bust and live off the safety nets of benefits).
Meanwhile prices continue to rise inexorably.
Meanwhile prices continue to rise inexorably.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
unionise everyone then
JimW
支那暗杀团
That's why people dismissed the idea of socialism in one country, they were well aware of capital's tendencies even before the current phase of globalisation.
But capital is exhausting its reserves in this sense too; having built all the infrastructure in China it won't be long until the very cheap pool of labour is exhausted, signs are that the end has begun, as it were. There's a couple of other places to go but in the end there'll be nowhere left to relocate the crisis to. Which is not to say that would also involve a dropped standard of living or much worse for many in the first world.
As an aside, never been any problem with an excessive birth rate in the UK in recent memory, has there? Thought we'd be in steady slow decline without immigration.
But capital is exhausting its reserves in this sense too; having built all the infrastructure in China it won't be long until the very cheap pool of labour is exhausted, signs are that the end has begun, as it were. There's a couple of other places to go but in the end there'll be nowhere left to relocate the crisis to. Which is not to say that would also involve a dropped standard of living or much worse for many in the first world.
As an aside, never been any problem with an excessive birth rate in the UK in recent memory, has there? Thought we'd be in steady slow decline without immigration.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
Sounds fine - automatic membership to a single union for each type of job/part of economy. Still it would be difficult to organise a strike which was effective, but say that it happened and the workers were routinely given a wage rise every time, then the company would still be in competition with a similar system elsewhere where the productivity might be higher due to lower costs of transport (say). Then the original company will still go bust, throwing everyone onto the job market.
Any alternative would have to address the price of living and the fact that we have privatised many parts of our economy which help our productivity (eg transport, utility bills, etc)
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
what do you think I meant by 'everyone'? I mean everyone. from PRC to Kerala. the lot.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
I see, so you are suggesting that a car worker in China should be in the same union as a car worker in Sunderland?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
IWW
Shippou-Sensei
4:1:2.5
they shouldn't be in the same union
there should be no need for a union.
there should be no need for the idea of being of one nation or region
all divisions weather regionally or economically are but refelctions on the sad nature of the human condition
there should be no need for a union.
there should be no need for the idea of being of one nation or region
all divisions weather regionally or economically are but refelctions on the sad nature of the human condition
Similar threads
