SPGB

[robbo203]

I see this site is still confusing the SPGB with Militant

http://www.thestraightchoice.org/parties/socialist_party_of_great_britain_[the]

Check under leaflets of other parties. Didnt the SPGB have an elction leaflet in Vauxhall

 

[butchersapron]

Great picture of dannysp on his way to vote. Looks like he's had a shave as well.

 

[two sheds]

Great picture of dannysp on his way to vote. Looks like he's had a shave as well.

You're in danger of making fun of the working class there

 

[butchersapron]

The workers do not do humour. That is a capitalist whirligig.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Had another look and still can't find it. This lack of prominence and availability makes me wonder why this is? Other posters have suggested that the more involvement with reforms, demands, etc, inevitably places the revolutionary aim of socialism on the back burner. It most certainly looks that this is a trueism?

Would appreciate a copy, or a direct link here.

I've told you GD, if you want a copy of the paper it'll be a pound. PM me your address and I'll post it out, or you can subscribe. Call it a fiver a month and you'll get the magazine too,. Winner.

Btw, the what we stand for appears in every paper, magazine and book.

This is it, here.

 

[Gravediggers]

I've told you GD, if you want a copy of the paper it'll be a pound. PM me your address and I'll post it out, or you can subscribe. Call it a fiver a month and you'll get the magazine too,. Winner.

Btw, the what we stand for appears in every paper, magazine and book.

This is it, here.

Thanks for that.

 

[ernestolynch]

Is nomoney still alive?

 

[sihhi]

The SPGB beat the trotskyist candidate in Vauxhall so what does that tell us about the arguments put forward by Proper Tidy and others concerning day-to-day demands?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/e83.stm

Wow! Post of the election cycle 2010! In fact perhaps post of the year!

 

[robbo203]

I've told you GD, if you want a copy of the paper it'll be a pound. PM me your address and I'll post it out, or you can subscribe. Call it a fiver a month and you'll get the magazine too,. Winner.

Btw, the what we stand for appears in every paper, magazine and book.

This is it, here.

And does the "what we stand for" say anything about a "moneyless wageless socialist commonwealth"? Nope. Thought not. All it advocates is essentially state capitalism

 

[butchersapron]

I don't want a moneyless wageless socialist commonwealth. Now what?

 

[Proper Tidy]

And does the "what we stand for" say anything about a "moneyless wageless socialist commonwealth"? Nope. Thought not. All it advocates is essentially state capitalism

Deary me. Does it not get a little bit boring, constantly repeating the same handful of mantras over and over again? If you say 'moneyless wageless' enough times will the revolution cometh?

We refer to socialism in every publication - "a democratic society run for the needs of all and not the profits of a few".

 

[robbo203]

Deary me. Does it not get a little bit boring, constantly repeating the same handful of mantras over and over again? If you say 'moneyless wageless' enough times will the revolution cometh?

We refer to socialism in every publication - "a democratic society run for the needs of all and not the profits of a few".

That could just as easily be said by the Labour Party or the young liberals. When it comes down to specifics you clearly state that you stand for nationalisation of the top 150 companies and other state capitalist measures. You clearly envisage the retention of money and wages in your so called socialist society. I mention this only becuase you were the one who made the claim that your sect frequently referred to the need for a "moneyless wageless socialist commonwealth" in your publications. (See post 423 in which you say Where do we shy away from calling for socialism, for a "moneyless, wageless socialist commonwealth"? We state clearly in every publication that we stand for this ) When pressed for evidence as usual you cannot give any.

 

[butchersapron]

It doesn't matter what you stand for. You're human paste.

 

[robbo203]

I don't want a moneyless wageless socialist commonwealth. Now what?

You are completely at liberty not to want it. Nobody is forcing you to want it and its certainly not something that can be imposed on people from above. There now. Happy?

 

[butchersapron]

You are completely at liberty not to want it. Nobody is forcing you to want it and its certainly not something that can be imposed on people from above. There now. Happy?

I'm a worker. What's going on? Why am i missing it?

 

[Gravediggers]

I'm a worker. What's going on? Why am i missing it?

You are all ways missing it, without fail.

 

[butchersapron]

Help me then.

 

[Gravediggers]

Help me then.

I'll try. The struggle for a socialist society has to be voluntary it is a set of social relationships which cannot be forced upon people. Same as the people living in Afganistan and Iraq have little understanding of the principles of democracy their reaction is a foregone conclusion they will reject it. The same thing will happen if socialism is forced or imposed by a vanguard.

Workers have to understand that the principle framework of socialism is a society without money, common ownership of the means of living, free access to their needs, no state, no borders, no ruling class, etc.

You have given the impression here that you are aware of the party case for socialism. So why do you ask?

 

[butchersapron]

The struggle for a socialist society has to be voluntary it is a set of social relationships which cannot be forced upon people

What 'set of social relationships' do you mean?

 

[ernestolynch]

In what way are these boys different from the annekisseds though?

 

[Jean-Luc]

In what way are these boys different from the annekisseds though?

Somebody thought they weren't.

 

[robbo203]

What 'set of social relationships' do you mean?

I think Butchers knows all this. Ive twigged that he is actually an agent provocateur and all this veering between naff insults and dumbed down workerism is just a cunning ruse. Yep, he's actually the SPGB's number 1 fan and a drinking buddy of Cde Buick. You cant fool me , Butchers

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

I saw the SPGB at an election hustings, right bunch of nutters. The bloke from the platform was a classic. Started off by reading out a newspaper article from the SPGB paper from 1914 then went on to answer every question with the answer that it's all capitalism's fault. Which, of course, it is, but I think people were looking for something a tad more nuanced.

Came across as an utter crank to be honest. I see they are also ruining the p&p bulletin boards.

 

[robbo203]

I saw the SPGB at an election hustings, right bunch of nutters. The bloke from the platform was a classic. Started off by reading out a newspaper article from the SPGB paper from 1914 then went on to answer every question with the answer that it's all capitalism's fault. Which, of course, it is, but I think people were looking for something a tad more nuanced.

Came across as an utter crank to be honest. I see they are also ruining the p&p bulletin boards.

See, this is what really gets up my nose - Airy pompous generalisations writing of the SPGB as a "right bunch of nutters". You talk about being looking for something "a tad more nuanced". Well how about applying that same observation to your own comments.

You evidently dont know much about the SPGB. On the basis of a single encounter you feel entitled to express this arrogant opinion of them. Ive known the SPGB for years and while I have one or two criticisms of their case (touched on earlier in this thread) they are far from being what you make them out to be. Your comments say more about you than they ever do about the SPGB.

As a general observation, I would say that people who criticise the SPGB with snidey off-the-shelf remarks of this kind make the fatal mistake of assuming that the SPGB is some kind of monolithic organisation populated by clones. It is not. It is a remarkably diverse organisation with a healthy and vibrant internal debate going on all the time. And unlike most other the organisatioms the SPGB is not afraid to hang its dirty washing out on the line and is scrupulously democratic about doing just that

 

[JWH]

Airy pompous generalisations writing of the SPGB as a "right bunch of nutters".

Not sure you can make as earthy and colloquial an expression as "right bunch of nutters" out to be "pompous".

And as for

You evidently dont know much about the SPGB. On the basis of a single encounter you feel entitled to express this arrogant opinion of them

Well - you know - hustings are an occasion to reach out to people who might not have heard of you and wouldn't otherwise encounter you. You - and especially minor parties that can't buy ads on Facebook and Youtube - only get a single shot to interest people.

A candidate is a representative of the party - if in the course of representing the party they come across as an "utter crank", then people are entitled to think that the party consists of utter cranks, don't you think? I assume that if the poster had said "I was really impressed by his answers, the SPGB came across as a bunch of visionary geniuses", you'd hardly be jumping in to say "oh, that's just a generalisation based on a single encounter, some of us are real bellends".

I notice you're also not disputing the factual accuracy of the account or suggesting that reading old newspaper articles and blaming everything on capitalism would be an unusual or unfortunate thing for an SPGB person to do...

 

[Proper Tidy]

I notice you're also not disputing the factual accuracy of the account or suggesting that reading old newspaper articles and blaming everything on capitalism would be an unusual or unfortunate thing for an SPGB person to do...

One of them quoted a Communist Party east end branch report from 1947 the other day so probably not unusual

 

[robbo203]

Not sure you can make as earthy and colloquial an expression as "right bunch of nutters" out to be "pompous".

And as for

Well - you know - hustings are an occasion to reach out to people who might not have heard of you and wouldn't otherwise encounter you. You - and especially minor parties that can't buy ads on Facebook and Youtube - only get a single shot to interest people.

A candidate is a representative of the party - if in the course of representing the party they come across as an "utter crank", then people are entitled to think that the party consists of utter cranks, don't you think? I assume that if the poster had said "I was really impressed by his answers, the SPGB came across as a bunch of visionary geniuses", you'd hardly be jumping in to say "oh, that's just a generalisation based on a single encounter, some of us are real bellends".

I notice you're also not disputing the factual accuracy of the account or suggesting that reading old newspaper articles and blaming everything on capitalism would be an unusual or unfortunate thing for an SPGB person to do...

I can no more verify the factual accuracy of this account than can you= -though I strongly suspect that the SPGB speaker did or said rather more than this individual let on and the account is highly exaggerated for dramatic effect. How reading from an old newpaper article makes one a "nutter" I leave you to fathom and if One-Stop-Shop bothered to find out he would soon discover that the SPGB arguments are a tad more nuanced than just "blaming everything on capitalism".

However the main thrust of my argument was that on the basis of one single encounter this individual feels entitled to dismiss the SPGB as a "right bunch of nutters". Even assuming for the sake of argument that the behaviour of the SPGB speaker in question was eccentric, you cannot legitimately extrapolate from this to reach a conclusion about the nature of the organisation itself. You ask if someone said the SPGB was a bunch of visionary genuines would I demur. Too right I would!


There is a general point to be made here that the arguments and ideas of an organisation have to be seen and considered separately from the character and quirks of the protagonists in question which in the SPGB's case are as varied as the membership itself. Its just sheer irrational prejudice otherwise. I reject the main political parties as capitalist organisations that help to reinforce a despicable social system but I am sure there are many decent and well meaning folk in all of them.

Its the ideas that count, not the personalities of the mannerisms of the people who promote them

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

See, this is what really gets up my nose - Airy pompous generalisations writing of the SPGB as a "right bunch of nutters". You talk about being looking for something "a tad more nuanced". Well how about applying that same observation to your own comments.

You evidently dont know much about the SPGB. On the basis of a single encounter you feel entitled to express this arrogant opinion of them. Ive known the SPGB for years and while I have one or two criticisms of their case (touched on earlier in this thread) they are far from being what you make them out to be. Your comments say more about you than they ever do about the SPGB.

As a general observation, I would say that people who criticise the SPGB with snidey off-the-shelf remarks of this kind make the fatal mistake of assuming that the SPGB is some kind of monolithic organisation populated by clones. It is not. It is a remarkably diverse organisation with a healthy and vibrant internal debate going on all the time. And unlike most other the organisatioms the SPGB is not afraid to hang its dirty washing out on the line and is scrupulously democratic about doing just that

How was what I said pompous? That's how the bloke came across, and it wasn't just my observation but everyone else in the meeting. You could tell people just ended up feeling sorry for him in the end, and not because of his character (although he did seem a little bit of an odd job), but because of the political answers he was giving that seemed totally out of touch and off the wall. Also as he was the SPGB candidate for the local election I'm assuming the SPGB had a little thought about who they chose for the election, and it's either the case that he reflected, in general, the SPGBs politics or that the SPGB have an extremely strange selection process. But as all the other members giving out a free paper after the meeting came across in exactly the same way, I'm assuming it's not the selection process. I mean reading out an article from 1914 (with totally outdated language), is hardly likely to engage people at a local election hustings, and neither, by the way, is blaming workers and the people in the audience for the situation we are in.

You're right I don't know much about the SPGB, but JHE is right. Hustings are one of the few opportunities you have to reach out to a wider audience, and in this case the SPGB came across as a bunch of nutters. And I'm not talking about this individuals character but the way he explained the SPGBs politics and their answers to the questions that were being asked at the hustings. Rather than blame me for this, you should talk to them about why that's the case.

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

Its the ideas that count, not the personalities of the mannerisms of the people who promote them

Exactly and the ideas came across as totally off the wall. I've heard plenty of socialists speak and the best ones relate those ideas to people's every day lives and experiences. This bloke just sounded totally abstract, patronising, reptitive and tedious. And the SPGB picked him as their election candidate.

 

[robbo203]

How was what I said pompous? That's how the bloke came across, and it wasn't just my observation but everyone else in the meeting. You could tell people just ended up feeling sorry for him in the end, and not because of his character (although he did seem a little bit of an odd job), but because of the political answers he was giving that seemed totally out of touch and off the wall. Also as he was the SPGB candidate for the local election I'm assuming the SPGB had a little thought about who they chose for the election, and it's either the case that he reflected, in general, the SPGBs politics or that the SPGB have an extremely strange selection process. But as all the other members giving out a free paper after the meeting came across in exactly the same way, I'm assuming it's not the selection process. I mean reading out an article from 1914 (with totally outdated language), is hardly likely to engage people at a local election hustings, and neither, by the way, is blaming workers and the people in the audience for the situation we are in.

You're right I don't know much about the SPGB, but JHE is right. Hustings are one of the few opportunities you have to reach out to a wider audience, and in this case the SPGB came across as a bunch of nutters. And I'm not talking about this individuals character but the way he explained the SPGBs politics and their answers to the questions that were being asked at the hustings. Rather than blame me for this, you should talk to them about why that's the case.

This demonstrates exactly the point i was making. Instead of "critically examing the "political answers he was giving", telling us why you thought they were "totally out of touch and off the wall", you prefer instead to resort to self indulgent ad hominens and ridicule. The SPGB are summarily dismissed as a "bunch of nutters" when, by your own admission, you dont know much about them. Like we are really supposed to be persuaded by such hearsay. This is what I find so irritatingly arrogant. I wonder if you can even recall what the article was about which may have been highly relevant to the meeting in question for all I know.