World economy fundamentally unsound?

[Random]

To be honest I don't think you'll ever get an exact definition, just like you'll never get an exact definition of who is working class, middle class or lumpen. But just because there are blurred edges doesn't mean terms aren't still useful.

For instance everyone knew what Bob Crow was saying when he said about the TUC wanting a Banjo player over a striker.

What about a vague definition to start.

 

[cockneyrebel]

I'm a big fan of Bob, and can't remember the last time I disagreed with anything he's said to the right wing tossers of the TUC, but that really was an unhelpful comment.

Come on it was just a joke. The RMT is a powerful union, I think even the most senstive member of the musician union would recognise that their "industrial muscle" is pretty much zero. It was an outrage that their union replaced the RMT and a small joke is neither here nor there.

What about a vague definition to start.

I'll think about it.

 

[glenquagmire]

Joke or not, having your entire industry dismissed out of hand by another union leader is unlikely to engender feelings of solidarity.

I would have voted for the RMT by the way.

But I also know quite a few musicians.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Joke or not, having your entire industry dismissed out of hand by another union leader is unlikely to engender feelings of solidarity.

But it's not dismissing the music industry it's just a joke that recongnises the reality that the musician's union has almost zero industrial strength, I'm sure the members of the musician's union recongnise that. It's hardly a massive insult, it's just a fact.

 

[glenquagmire]

Have you spoken to any MU members about their feelings on Bob Crow's comment?

 

[cockneyrebel]

No I haven't and that's a fair point. But if I was a member it wouldn't bother me. It was just a joke at the relative industrial strength of the RMT compared to the musicians union.

OK someone might take that as a slight and maybe from that point of view he could of said it another way, but have to say that I think someone would have to be very sensitive to be pissed off by it.

The main thing to be pissed off about is that the TUC has kicked off a powerful and militant union and replaced it with a union hardly anyone has heard of and which has virtually no power at all. That's not being disrespectful, it's just a fact.

 

[glenquagmire]

I take your point and was equally annoyed about the TUC replacing the RMT with the MU.

However, there are more tactful ways of putting things, and referring to all the MU's members dismissively as "banjo players" is not one of them. What if the RMT dismissed a group of lower-skilled workers as "just bin men"?

 

[mk12]

Random was clearly taking the piss. Given that you had a go at me for criticising DF on the other thread (and in that case it wasn't taking the piss but what I saw as his political cynicism disrupting threads) I think you should have a bit of consistency.

Anyway sorry, this is probably disrupting this thread, which has got some interesting points. Cheers for the links you put up earlier by the way.

Just out of interest mk12 how would you describe yourself politically now days?

he was taking the piss out of urbanrevolt's politics. Not his "cynicism".

Anyway what is wrong with working class people learning from previous struggles and passing on what we've learned as a resource to the next generation? Is that too elitist or something?

Nothing. How you get from this to a Leninist, vanguard party I don't know.

 

[cockneyrebel]

he was taking the piss out of urbanrevolt's politics. Not his "cynicism".

I suppose that's where we have a difference of opinion. When I criticise people for being cynical I mean politically cynical (after all I don't know them on a personal level). I don't think that's personal, but a political trait that some people have and indeed probably everyone has had at different times and to different levels.

But as with Donna, random is basically making one line quips which I don't think help debate. It's not a serious way to engage with someone.

However, there are more tactful ways of putting things, and referring to all the MU's members dismissively as "banjo players" is not one of them. What if the RMT dismissed a group of lower-skilled workers as "just bin men"?

I take your point but I don't think the analogy is the same. If someone calls lower skilled workers "just bin men" it would be a commnet involving snobbery. Referring to the musican's union as banjo players is a bit dismissive, fair enough, but it's a joke about their industrial strength not their status in society. While there might be a better way of going about it, it's not nearly as insulting and is actually true in terms of them having no real power. But as said, while I don't think it's a big deal (especially compared to what the TUC leadership was doing), it might have been a bit better put.

PS It might have been worst than originally thought. He might have been talking about the old banjo string in which case in a round about way he might have been calling them wankers

 

[glenquagmire]

I take your point but I don't think the analogy is the same. If someone calls lower skilled workers "just bin men" it would be a commnet involving snobbery. Referring to the musican's union as banjo players is a bit dismissive, fair enough, but it's a joke about their industrial strength not their status in society. While there might be a better way of going about it, it's not nearly as insulting and is actually true in terms of them having no real power. But as said, while I don't think it's a big deal (especially compared to what the TUC leadership was doing), it might have been a bit better put.

PS It might have been worst than originally thought. He might have been talking about the old banjo string in which case in a round about way he might have been calling them wankers

I'm not so sure. As I say, I know quite a few people who work in the music industry (and no, I'm not talking about lining up coke for J Lo) and it is a real persistent problem: not being taking seriously as workers making a living. I would disagree that Crow's statement was aimed at their industrial strength and it was more in line with dismissal of them as workers.

If Crow was indeed talking about the old banjo string, he could have been referring to most of the people on the platform.

 

[cockneyrebel]

and no, I'm not talking about lining up coke for J Lo

If you do see any jobs like this can you PM me please

not being taking seriously as workers making a living. I would disagree that Crow's statement was aimed at their industrial strength and it was more in line with dismissal of them as workers.

Fair enough. And I agree that you shouldn't be dismissive. If he wasn't talking about their industrial strength (which is how I took it) then that is a bit more out of order. But I suppose we won't know unless someone asks him!

 

[Random]

how's that definition of 'industrial worker' coming along? I'll take anything as a start

 

[fanciful]

It's really straightforward, its a worker who works in an industry, traditionally understood as a factory or similar massive industrial centre.
So its not a musician, or media worker or student.
Will that do you?
And to explain why it matters, lets take the experience of two recent disputes. The RMT strike, of around 2,000 members and the Karen Reissmann NHS dispute of around 800. Both were comparable in levels of determination and militancy, and not that far apart in terms of numbers but one strike won after 8 hours and cost business an estimated £50 million and one strike is no further forward after 6 days of solid action.
Can you guess which one is which?

 

[cockneyrebel]

Have you got a definition?

 

[cockneyrebel]

From wikipedia:

Industrial labour is labour in industry, mostly understood as manufacturing, but can include related service workers, such as cleaners and cooks.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Again from wikipedia:

Six weeks after formation of the Asiatic Exclusion League, the Industrial Workers of the World was formed in Chicago, created as a rejection of the narrow craft unionism philosophy of the AFL. From its inception, the IWW would organize without regard to sex, skills, race, creed, or national origin.

 

[fanciful]

I should add the autonomist Marxists must also have a definition of an industrial worker, because they say they are no longer the centre of the class struggle, or production under capitalism, but are on a par with "housewives", "students" and "peasants."

 

[ska invita]

Can anyone really put their hand on their heart and say they truly understand economics?

I get some of the basic principles, but it seems that beyond that there is a lot of teabags and prevailing winds involved - particularly in predicting the future.

That said I think climate change will drastically change the economy - as a conservative critic of the climate change debate said the other day - "Climate change is the new Socialism". Which is true.

Once climate change really kicks in there will be lots of new regulations that will severely cripple capitalist practices of old, and the economy will have to adapt to fit this new leaner model. The end of capitalism as we know it...? I think so.

When will this happen? In a bit!

 

[urbanrevolt]

he was taking the piss out of urbanrevolt's politics. Not his "cynicism".



Nothing. How you get from this to a Leninist, vanguard party I don't know.

Yeah but if you think that you quite clearly don't know my politics

I'm not at all arguing that the revolutionary organisation is some kind of brain of the class with the rest of the working class not having one or whatever.

We're saying that it is possible for workers to learn through struggles, to share such knowledge as a resource for future struggles and future workers- the revolutionary organisation should aspire to be one aspect of that.

How you get from that to some kind of steretype of vanguardism would be a mystery- though to be honest several parties calling themselves socialist, leninist, communist, working class whatever have been arrogant know-alls. We're actually arguing that the party or group should be completely different from that and if that shatters the stereotypes of anti-party types then so be it- you're welcome to your stereotypes we'll get on with trying to build fighting organisations of the class but also if anyone who in thre past has been understandably suspicious of socialists wants to judge us they should judge us in action, by our deeds, and not make prejudiced assumptions in my opinion

 

[mk12]

I am interested in how PR are different to all the other Trotskyist parties of the last 100 years. PM me if you want.

 

[cockneyrebel]

I am interested in how PR are different to all the other Trotskyist parties of the last 100 years. PM me if you want.

I don't think it really matters if PR is unique or not and there are so many different strands of trotskyism, let alone marxism. The same good be said of any other brand of left politics be it autonomous marxists, IWCA type methods, reformism, stalinism etc

As said in a post above, I think it would be hard to have any original political stance that had never been tried before, but what's important is to take the best of what has gone before (stand on the shoulders of giants as Tony Cliff once said!) and try and link these ideas in with practical work and struggle.

But of course no one group will have all the answers, far from it. That's why it's always important to remember you might be wrong and that you always need to keep learning from working class struggle.

 

[Random]

It's really straightforward, its a worker who works in an industry, traditionally understood as a factory or similar massive industrial centre.
So its not a musician, or media worker or student.
Will that do you?

Cheers, it's a start. So it sounds a lot like what has been called the 'mass worker'. And your group thinks that concentrating on people who work in such 'massive industrial centres' is the most important strategy, right?

 

[Random]

I'm not at all arguing that the revolutionary organisation is some kind of brain of the class with the rest of the working class not having one or whatever.

We're saying that it is possible for workers to learn through struggles, to share such knowledge as a resource for future struggles and future workers- the revolutionary organisation should aspire to be one aspect of that.

When you say 'the revolutionary organisation' do you really mean you think there's only one, or what? Maybe there's several rev orgs, which function as various brains of the class. Like a dinosaur that has a brain in its tail as well, majybe? Just wondering about your attitude towards revolutionary pluralism.

 

[cockneyrebel]

When you say 'the revolutionary organisation' do you really mean you think there's only one, or what? Maybe there's several rev orgs, which function as various brains of the class. Like a dinosaur that has a brain in its tail as well, majybe? Just wondering about your attitude towards revolutionary pluralism.

Actually you're just taking the piss, but never mind eh.

I'm sure you have all the answers and correct strategies.

 

[urbanrevolt]

I am interested in how PR are different to all the other Trotskyist parties of the last 100 years. PM me if you want.

As CR says, I don't think we're claiming to be unique but what we are trying to do is break with marxism as dogmatism and catastrophism- the idea dominant in mnay left groups that capitalism is about to collapse. We think it's more complex than that and that there are lots of problems and issues that both the left and the workers' movement need to grapple with- why is the left so weak? Why are workers' organisations os weak? How do we address those problems?

We don't at all claim to have all the answers or proclaim the way forward is join our group- it may be part of a way forward but the re-elaboration of marxism and the rebuilding of working class politics is going to be a big job, requiring debate, discussion and formation of new alliances on the left, rank and file networks of workers on struggle etc. etc.

We want to break with the idea that all you have to do is join the group- we're not claiming an exclusivity on the truth.

Possibly a lot of other groups/ individuals say likewise. If so, good. Let's work or at least dscuss together not necessarily to win one another to our groups but in a shared political project.

On industrial workers- it clearly is very important to relate to forces which have the most clout and have a unified workers' movement. Is a strike by the RMT more important than an antiracist struggle or care home workers' strike or campaign against domestic violence in itself in terms of the importance of the people or issues involved? No. All are important in creating a new society. We are arguing though for linking up issues so that the RMT for example or the CWU or other workers in important strategic positions are won to this alliance, won to antiracism, antisexism, so that in the struggle to unite the working class, in the struggle for immediate and transitional demands and against racism, homophobia, other prejudice we create a working class proud and confident of itself on the asis of equality and freedom for everyone.

 

[urbanrevolt]

A small example of this could be the decision of an RMT branch to hold a national meeting on Trade Unions Against Immigration Controls, that some of our members have been involved in, and to try to draw in wider support for this from the whole of the RMT and other unions,

 

[Random]

Actually you're just taking the piss, but never mind eh.

I'm sure you have all the answers and correct strategies.

Are you going to get in a huff every time I make a joke?

 

[Random]

On industrial workers- it clearly is very important to relate to forces which have the most clout and have a unified workers' movement.

Which raises the question - what do already-organised and powerful worker groups like the RMT need a trotskyist group for? I don't think you need to break them from catastrophistic Marxism, fopr example.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Are you going to get in a huff every time I make a joke?

Yes comrade, this is a serious business

 

[cockneyrebel]

Which raises the question - what do already-organised and powerful worker groups like the RMT need a trotskyist group for? I don't think you need to break them from catastrophistic Marxism, fopr example.

I suppose that comes down to the debate about syndicalism and whether you need a political party.

Obviously I'd say you do (although PR is also obviously not a party, but a small group of activists).

I'll probably get hammered for this from you and random/mk12 but there is truth in the fact that unions can become quite narrow in their outlook. I think a political party can help in pushing wider struggles forward and move away from sectional interests that can arise in trade union struggles.

But this also raises huge questions (that we've probably done before) about these kind of things:

Revolutionary party vs loose knit organisations
Workers state vs federations
Revolutionary programme vs IWCA type method vs RESPECT/CNWP method

Out of interest as you and mk12 are both supporters of the IWCA how do you see the IWCA method developing into the eventual overthrow of capitalism? Or, like LLETSA, do you think that the overthrow of capitalism is all but impossible.

Does LLETSA post on here by the way? While I find he can be very politically cynical he also puts forward points that a lot of the left find uncomfortable, party because he makes people face up to defeats and the weak position that the left and the working class are in at the moment.

Maybe someone could ask him to give this thread a visit!