Economic democracy: the need for a vision

[One_Stop_Shop]

I surrender.

 

[JimW]

 

[Random]

I surrender.

Aha, a Petainist, eh?

 

[Carousel]

I sometimes get the feeling that you aren't really interested in political activity...

And when I get that feeling
I want sexual healing
Sexual healing, oh baby
Makes me feel so fine
Helps to relieve my mind
Sexual healing baby, is good for me
Sexual healing is something that's good for me
Whenever blue teardrops are falling
And my emotional stability is leaving me
There is something I can do
I can get on the telephone and call you up baby, and
Honey I know you'll be there to relieve me

 

[The39thStep]

And when I get that feeling
I want sexual healing
Sexual healing, oh baby
Makes me feel so fine
Helps to relieve my mind
Sexual healing baby, is good for me
Sexual healing is something that's good for me
Whenever blue teardrops are falling
And my emotional stability is leaving me
There is something I can do
I can get on the telephone and call you up baby, and
Honey I know you'll be there to relieve me

There are quite a few given the opportunity who would want to relieve you, and in that process, us.

give me hope Joanna

 

[Joe Reilly]

I dunno. The BNP haven't moved beyond their natural constituency. Alf Garnett vs Wolfie Smith innit.

Edited to add: From Reich to Perlman etc etc. The discussion on the continuing appeal of nationalism is well rehearsed.

Well that depends on who what you consider their 'natural constituency' to be?

Up until the late 1990's their consituency, centered entirely in the east end. Then they took over 20 per cent of the vote in council by-election in Bexley. Thereafter they took council seats in Burnley. And elsewhere. This year as well as the election of two MEPS, they also took 3 county council seats. So whatever you thought their natural constituency might have been they have clearly moved beyond it. And again whatever way you look at it their gains cannot honestly be described as 'modest'.

 

[tbaldwin]

By elitist I mean the way it's written. I just don't think it's very accessable for most people and it's too full of jargon and references that aren't accessable either.

I also also think there is a slight feeling of a small group of people having to be the intellectuals and then presenting ideas so they can gradually spread, rather than thinking that ideas will come out of working class struggle.

Spot on.
At least in my opinion.

The IWCA may be very critical of other orthodox left groups but when it comes to top down views how different are they really?

 

[Carousel]

Well that depends on who what you consider their 'natural constituency' to be?

Yeah fair enough. Like I say, Alf Garnett Tory types really. It’s a bit like the late 70’s with the NF. Those whiney losers have a respectable party to vote for again. You know what I mean? Like they’ve been given social permission to vote for a proper Brit protectionist party rather than scary skins causing aggro.

 

[The39thStep]

Spot on.
At least in my opinion.

The IWCA may be very critical of other orthodox left groups but when it comes to top down views how different are they really?

what are top down views?

 

[Red O]

I think you are taking what I'm saying the wrong way.

I just don't think the ideas are new or that the piece saying anything new.

Also you have gone a long winded route to suggest that I'm saying working class people can't understand complex ideas. As a working class person myself that would be a strange thing to say, and, of course, I wasn't. But the fact is that there are ways of writing that are more accessable than others and personally I think the piece is a bit poncy and seems to be suggesting that an intellectual elite need to set down the ground work for the working class. Maybe I'm wrong on this, and as someone who thought the IWCA was quite a good organisation, hope I am.

Yes, you are wrong on that point.

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

Views that come from the top.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Views that come from the top.

the top of what?

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

the pops.

 

[Joe Reilly]

Spot on.
At least in my opinion.

The IWCA may be very critical of other orthodox left groups but when it comes to top down views how different are they really?

The author of the document in question is a 30 year old building labourer, currently unemployed. The IWCA's public face, Stuart Craft, works 12 hour shifts as a coach driver...just how much more bottom up do you want?

 

[yield]

I thought it was interesting. I'd never heard of Dahl, Chang or Humboldt and didn't know much about Hayek and Friedman.

I already knew about Attlee/Fabians being middle class and that Engels used to ride with the Cheshire hounds.

The body of the article reminds me of participatory economics not that I could explain it well.

Surprised how keen he seems on Chomsky.

What Hayek did was to destroy the democratic essence of classical liberal ideas in order to provide a philosophical justification for, and defence of, private, undemocratic, top-down control of the economy and the means of production, cloaked in the Enlightenment ideal of individual freedom.

...

For Hayek, and those who share his anti-democratic mindset, the Enlightenment project is complete. For those of us who don’t, like Chomsky, there is another step to go:

“And if there is something degrading to human nature in the idea of bondage, as every spokesman for the Enlightenment would insist, then it would follow that a new emancipation must be awaited, what Fourier referred to as the “third and last emancipatory phase of history” -the first having made serfs out of slaves, the second wage earners out of serfs- which will transform the proletariat into free men by eliminating the commodity character of labour, ending wage slavery and bringing the commercial, industrial and financial institutions under democratic control [italics added]“

It could've done with a better editor. How many times did I read vision? Threatened to descend into a mix of business speak and complex language.

Overall I thought it’s a good self-critical piece. I like the idea of reappropriating liberalism. Look forward to reading the next one.

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

That was my problem about it, the business speak and complex language and an underlying elitist feel. That doesn't equate to working class people not understanding stuff, as one poster has already pulled out the bag, it means that some people can write in a way that is generally not very accessible and some politics, however intentioned, can end up like that.

Also I don't necessarily care if the person who wrote it is a labourer or coach driver. I know working class people who have got involved in politics and become elitist and pompous. I'm not saying the people you mentioned are, I don't know them, but just saying your background doesn't necessarily stop you from becoming like that. Look at certain people in new labour.

 

[JimW]

That was my problem about it, the business speak and complex language and an underlying elitist feel...

You need to make a case for this if you expect anyone to agree - your subjective "feel" doesn't make it so. What's 'elitist' about setting out your case and backing it up?

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

The whole way it reads to me, the language used and the case that a group of intellectuals need to write up what needs to be done and spread it among the working class. Others on here seem to agree to a greater or lesser extent.

We'll see what happens. As a kind of supporter of the IWCA up to now I hope I'm wrong. I guess a lot depends on the second article.

Another thing I wanted to ask about the IWCA is why more of their supporters don't build the orgnisation where they live. Why is the only active group in Oxford? Or are there others?

 

[JimW]

...the language used and the case that a group of intellectuals need to write up what needs to be done and spread it among the working class...

That seems to me the bit where you're making the leap; any attempt to set out your case in detail is going to be elitist if that's your standard. You say 'a group of intellectuals', I say 'some working class people thinking things through'. If you substituted a set of bullet point easy-to-digest slogans instead the response would be it was a bit thin or not worked out. I don't see any suggestion that this is going to be printed up to a leaflet and stuffed through doors.

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

ok, maybe you are right. Lets have a look at the second document when it comes out.

 

[The39thStep]

That was my problem about it, the business speak and complex language and an underlying elitist feel. That doesn't equate to working class people not understanding stuff, as one poster has already pulled out the bag, it means that some people can write in a way that is generally not very accessible and some politics, however intentioned, can end up like that.

Also I don't necessarily care if the person who wrote it is a labourer or coach driver. I know working class people who have got involved in politics and become elitist and pompous. I'm not saying the people you mentioned are, I don't know them, but just saying your background doesn't necessarily stop you from becoming like that. Look at certain people in new labour.

New Labour is the last place you find any working class people

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

That is largely the case now. But you do find people who came from working class backgrounds but who are now pompous, elitists who think they know what is best.

 

[The39thStep]

That is largely the case now. But you do find people who came from working class backgrounds but who are now pompous, elitists who think they know what is best.

so what?

what was pompous and elitist about the article compared to any other contribution?