Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
In what sense does it matter to you? I'm quite good actually. Just had to phone the DWP up again the other day to perform routine checks. might be reassessed again and possibly have my dole cut a bit. pretty similar to labour, who still want to lock up 'schizos and spastics' we're not hearing of any reforms to the mental health act are we?

As in, I'm being absolutely charitable here, I'm genuinely curious in what way it matters to you.
You're asking me why the general socioeconomic condition of the country I live in matters to me? Do you think I'm a millionaire or something?

God knows the party has its faults but if you can't see any difference then I don't think you're looking very hard. "Corbynism was the true victory of Thatcherism" - OK I'm gonna file that one next to "democracy is Stalinism".
 

thirdform

Active member
you didn't answer my question.

You're not a millionaire, but that's not relevant. you seem to be doing fairly ok under tory rule no? do you believe the tories are dragging the country to economic ruin because I don't believe they are. They are for us, of course, but in terms of the national capital, things have been looking up since the technical end of austerity. of course we can ask who disposes of that national capital, but what makes you believe that labour is going to change that? What makes you think that any form of economic nationalisation won't trigger capital flight like it did in France in the 1980s? You're a remainer, so what would make you think that the ordoliberalist EU (I.E: the strong state and the free economy) would even remotely capitulate to a bennist fantasy? Does Britain even have the manufacturing capability to power such an initiative?
 

vimothy

yurp
Xinjiang embraces cultural diversity and inclusiveness, and upholds mutual learning among cultures. The region fully respects and protects folk cultures, thus realizing the harmonious coexistence of different cultures and enabling the effective protection and preservation of the best traditions of all ethnic groups.
its ironic to consider that a nominally communist state should be protecting these reactionary social institutions - a policy closer in tone to the patronising tolerance one might expect to see from a western democracy. like the superficial tolerance of liberal democracies, the protection of the "communist party of china" conceals (and legitimises) a more fundamental reality, that of the dissolution of traditional culture in the solvent of global capitalism (in which the communist party of china is a major player).
 

thirdform

Active member
Not to mention that radical islamism is a symptom of the decay of any communal bonds in global capitalism.

That being said the US is a major contributor to the rise of this nauseating archaism, not, as the bourgeois dilettantes would have it by directly arming them, in fact its far more sinister, that goes against US interests, but by attacking the nerve centres of the world revolution.

Any Marxist worth their salt would realise that we were closer to communism in 1921-1927 than we were in 1968, than we are in the 2010s. Which is hilarious when you cherry pick quotes from Marx to justify... Bernsteinian revisionism, of all things!
 

thirdform

Active member
For us capitalism is not defined by the banality that a small percentage are rich and a large percentage are poor, much less by the equally banal stupidity that goes along the lines of there is a private initiative and a public sphere and the workers must reclaim that public sphere.

No, capitalism is *the history of* the dispossession of the agricultural proprietor and the socialisation of production. crises thus happen when *the individual character of appropriation* (note the actual appropriation itself is not individual!) comes into conflict with the social nature of production. Capitalist production is planned, but in the abstract exchange process, it appears to the capitalist as individual and the producer appears to the capitalist as free, when the suppression of the producers freedom is a necessary phase we have to go through in this rotten civilisation to abolish all tools of land, all means of production and all separations between producer and consumer. In short, a wholesome return to usufruct. this is why a communist party can only erect the global class state that will disappear when the rational plan for the entire human species is realised in total kind.
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
you didn't answer my question.

You're not a millionaire, but that's not relevant. you seem to be doing fairly ok under tory rule no? do you believe the tories are dragging the country to economic ruin because I don't believe they are. They are for us, of course, but in terms of the national capital, things have been looking up since the technical end of austerity.
Uh well how the fuck would you know whether I'm doing "fairly OK" or not? I've got a job - for now - and somewhere to live, so hurrah for me, I guess. The great majority of people who work are worse off than they were 10 or 15 years ago and the difference is even starker for people who don't or can't work - I'm sure you don't need me to tell you about that. I've had periods of unemployment where I've been quite deliberately fucked around to prevent me from claiming benefits. And most of this is due to specific policies brought in since 2010. That's why I find it bizarre to insist it doesn't matter who forms the government.

To be honest I find it hard to believe you're arguing entirely in good faith what with this and all the pro-Brexit stuff. Is there some deep-seated ideological argument here or is just contrarianism and a need to oppose THE LIBZ on every possible point?
 

thirdform

Active member
Uh well how the fuck would you know whether I'm doing "fairly OK" or not? I've got a job - for now - and somewhere to live, so hurrah for me, I guess. The great majority of people who work are worse off than they were 10 or 15 years ago and the difference is even starker for people who don't or can't work - I'm sure you don't need me to tell you about that. I've had periods of unemployment where I've been quite deliberately fucked around to prevent me from claiming benefits. And most of this is due to specific policies brought in since 2010. That's why I find it bizarre to insist it doesn't matter who forms the government.

To be honest I find it hard to believe you're arguing entirely in good faith what with this and all the pro-Brexit stuff. Is there some deep-seated ideological argument here or is just contrarianism and a need to oppose THE LIBZ on every possible point?

If this is really do to specific policies *voluntarily* brought in by the tory government, then why is the labour party worse off than it ever has been? why are a significant amount (over 30%) people hit hardest by austerity voting libdem or tory? Are you going to condescendingly tell me it's because of russian interference or brainwashing? Are you? because that would be more owning the libs than your frothing ragebaits.

The fact is, we know that yes, the tories signed up for austerity voluntarily. But they didn't just sign up for it out of Etonian sentiment. They were still *compelled* to sign up for it through the systemic crisis. had they not signed up earlier, the eurozone would eventually force it on them. If the eurozone wouldn't force it on them, then the internal manoeuvrings of parliamentary politics would lead to it.

So far your argument seems to revolve on the labour party being able to oppose the EU, US, China, Russia, it's own domestic business elite, the right wing of the labour party, the liberal democrats, the continuing falling rate of profit, the huge swathes of reserve labour, etc etc.

Ok, I grant that. But what, what have labour done to make that vision even vaguely plausible? instead condescending to me, better treat me as an uneducated brute who knows nothing. tell us how labour is going to get us out of this mess. Tell me how your job will be more stable under labour. because you haven't, you've just deflected and made Corbyn out to be the saint who is mislead by the bad antisemites and the bad anti-imperialists. Might it be that Corbyn's very ideological malleability and indecisiveness makes him perfect for a british political establishment which does not have mass social bases to rubberstamp their policies? Even the tory party iis going to shrink to a ghost party in the nexxt 5-10 years. We're talking 140000 members in 2019.
 
Last edited:

thirdform

Active member
this is like the condescending shit in 2011 about how we were all mislead by the NO campaign in the AV referendum. ok, given that disinformation and deception is a tacit standard in politics, and given that it is literally impossible to abolish, what are you gonna do about it?

So far all you seem to be doing is acting like an angry incel bloke that you constantly castigate.
 

thirdform

Active member
Of course I'm not arguing in good faith. That is the liberal creedo. politics is war by any other means. I'm arguing on your terms. I'm giving you exactly what you want. If I was really as ideologically pure as you say I'd dismiss you as a lost cause.

I am anti-corbynism but even in 2015 I had a tiny tiny infinitecimal hope there might have been a push to the left. that's why I wanted to see it run its course. But the exact opposite of this happened. Your party has killed the organised left. it has been liquidated and finely sieved. Like I'm not sure why you're trying to paint me out as someone with power. Your side is the one who has power. Don't blame me if they are incompetent, that ain't my problem.
 
Last edited:

thirdform

Active member
people like canary, chris williamson, squoukbox, Eleanor Penny, Grace Blakeley, Aaron Bastani, Seamus Miln, Andrew Murray, etc etc had the most nominal of presences in the internationalist left. yes, we all knew about them, but they were totally impotent. The canary woman was even hanging out with Richie Allen on his David Icke show. It is the labour party that created this artificial battle.

these people backed corbyn because he made socialism out to be this pliable nice things that good people do to good people and capitalism as bad things bad people do to good people, these management consultants and oxbridge diplomats then restricted the more switched on wing of the party, and then when john lansman dares to contravene the leadership this arsenal of red brown muck is pounced on him. This then forced Lansman to hold onto momentum via the most unrepresentative means. there is a real real disconnect between pro-corbyn labour party supporters and corbynists. Something you superficially seem to trying to illustrate but you have access to part of the disposal products of intellectual production. Instead of using that like we are you are trying to play this game of the good christian.

All this rigged economy stuff coming from even Blakeley and co. is straight out of a 1920s nazbol pamphlet.
 
Last edited:

luka

Moderator
Im probably going to get assassinated by the Chinese government for this but last week I think it was a group of ancient wizened but very venerable old chinese people approached me and explained they were veterans of the yellow umbrella movement and they were in London to protest over the proposed change to the extradition laws. They told a lot about the umbrella protests and about the meaness of the uk government with regard to passports and about what the change in extradition law would mean. I was very touched actually. Genuinely humbled and also quite concerned. They weren't very robust looking and clearly not rich either.... anyway. ...
 

luka

Moderator
They wanted me to write a poem about freedom and standing up to power and stuff so I wrote a very powerful thing of course pressing all the right buttons snd they took loads of pictures and then recorded a very rousing rendition of my very powerful poem and posted it to the yellow umbrella facebook page etc so I directly inspired all those courageous people to take to the streets and win their temporary reprieve
 
Top