Being pro-independence

358 posts / 0 new
Last post
Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:00
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
So, if this racist policy would be so effective in helping these nebulous 'bosses maintain control', why isn't it happening?

We're not talking about 'racist asylum policies' yet...you've made the claim that racism is an effective tool to divide 'the workers'. there's a zero evidence pattern re-asserting itself here, sadly.

Don't racist asylum policies count as racism?

of course they do. You've introduced the idea of states using racism as an overt policy to control its population. One policy on who is allowed to enter a country does not equal a racist policy designed to keep the entire population of the host country under control.

Well, because it helps stir up hatred of minorities amongst the host population, thereby preventing them from seeing their real enemies amongst the boss class, and thereby making it easier to manipulate them, thereby keeping them under control. Satisfied?

Quote:
Your response to the three examples could charitably be described as risible, by the way. On two you 'asuume it wasn;t done for altruistic reasons' and in the third there's some vague wafting nonsense about Lithuanians hating Russians.
Quote:
So, I'm not the one justifying chauvinism, but please provide evidence that Lithuanians love the Russians and haven't got racist asylum policies and Iceland and the faroes love the Danes, I'll be glad to read it.

It doesn't work like that- you've made the claim that all independence movements lead to an upsurge in 'racism', it's up to you to provide the evidence to back it up. I'm still waiting, although I fancy it'll be a long wait.

Ah well, you'll just have to trust me on it.

Quote:
But, hey, you can't be arsed reading around the subject or finding out more about it....must be great when you just, er, 'intuitvely' know all your hunches are right.
Quote:
It certainly is

As to your point about 'Scotland just being northern England now'- that's what you might wish for, but it ain't my experience.

No, it's the truth.

Quote:
As to your last two 'observations', I'll leave you to nurse your delusions to keep them warm.

These aren't delusions, and believe me, I know.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:00
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

How about that for a rallying cry. sad

Pretty wanky

True.

Show me a political slogan that isn't, mind.

sad

Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:04
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
1. Hmm, because it will, don't you pay attention to the world around you? We're talking realpolitik here, they won't give up their power just because they're Scottish. And if they say they will, you should be really, really sceptical, you'll be saying we should believe everything politicians say next.

1. Well, I prefer a bit of belief in the possibility that things may get better at some point. It seems to me a little more bearable than the default setting of world weary cynicism.

There's the other one.

Quote:
LOL- where do I deny that realpolitik is a factor in contemporary Scottish politics in this quote?

Well, I said earlier you said I was being too cynical, check back if you want, but aren't you denying realpolitik here? Aren't you saying "trust the bosses, they're our friends, if you build it, they will come"?

Quote:
Your much vaunted 'intuitions' must be suffering from a little interference tonight, old boy. :)

What intuitions are these?

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Aug 16 2005 21:05
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

As to material change...

1. policy decision making closer to home

2. policy decision makers better known by having to live in the communities they work in and be subject to instant recall by those communites if they do nothing

3. Focused attack on long term structural and social problems, properly funded, administered by those who've kept going for years on zero Uk govt. investment (locally run addicition programmes, immediate end to pisspoor care in the privatised community schemes, etc)

As to the rest of it- you must have a great crystal ball to be able to predict all those things. Or an over-active imagination. or your evening hubbly-bubbly's disagreed with you.

I must say, for such a boldly self-proclaimed intellectual polymath, I expected more.

1. So mediated by a Scottish boss rather than an English one? Why is that useful?

2. So the 'policy makers' would live on council estates? They wouldn't live in communities of other people from their social stratum? Wouldn't send their kids to the same schools? What on earth makes you think that?

3. That is an assertion, a view revealed by a crystal-ball gaze of your own.

A common anarchist critique of representative democracy, that I'm sure you've seen countless times before, is that people can and do say what the fuck they want in 'oppositon'- but when in power their 'radicalism' becomes somewhat tempered by the threat of capital flight, and the need to appeal both to foreign investment and the local business class. What about this case makes you think that these pressures would not affect the replacement of Westminster-rule with Edinburgh-rule?

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:05
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
So, if this racist policy would be so effective in helping these nebulous 'bosses maintain control', why isn't it happening?

We're not talking about 'racist asylum policies' yet...you've made the claim that racism is an effective tool to divide 'the workers'. there's a zero evidence pattern re-asserting itself here, sadly.

Don't racist asylum policies count as racism?

of course they do. You've introduced the idea of states using racism as an overt policy to control its population. One policy on who is allowed to enter a country does not equal a racist policy designed to keep the entire population of the host country under control.

Well, because it helps stir up hatred of minorities amongst the host population, thereby preventing them from seeing their real enemies amongst the boss class, and thereby making it easier to manipulate them, thereby keeping them under control. Satisfied?

not really, no. I'd have thought the 'boss class' would be more satisfied by letting all comers in and paying them even worse wages. Such as those who exploit illegals in sweatshops in the east End of London and the North, for example, until they're busted and jailed, by the judicial arm of the, er, 'boss class'.

Quote:
Your response to the three examples could charitably be described as risible, by the way. On two you 'asuume it wasn;t done for altruistic reasons' and in the third there's some vague wafting nonsense about Lithuanians hating Russians.
Quote:
So, I'm not the one justifying chauvinism, but please provide evidence that Lithuanians love the Russians and haven't got racist asylum policies and Iceland and the faroes love the Danes, I'll be glad to read it.

It doesn't work like that- you've made the claim that all independence movements lead to an upsurge in 'racism', it's up to you to provide the evidence to back it up. I'm still waiting, although I fancy it'll be a long wait.

Ah well, you'll just have to trust me on it.

i don;t need to- so you'll forgive me if I don't.

Quote:
But, hey, you can't be arsed reading around the subject or finding out more about it....must be great when you just, er, 'intuitvely' know all your hunches are right.
Quote:
It certainly is

As to your point about 'Scotland just being northern England now'- that's what you might wish for, but it ain't my experience.

No, it's the truth.

Quote:
As to your last two 'observations', I'll leave you to nurse your delusions to keep them warm.

These aren't delusions, and believe me, I know.

It's 'the truth' and 'you know'. wtf? Are you claiming to be some all knowledgable shaman or some such now? Anyway, they're your delusions and you're welcome to their company.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:09
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
1. Hmm, because it will, don't you pay attention to the world around you? We're talking realpolitik here, they won't give up their power just because they're Scottish. And if they say they will, you should be really, really sceptical, you'll be saying we should believe everything politicians say next.

1. Well, I prefer a bit of belief in the possibility that things may get better at some point. It seems to me a little more bearable than the default setting of world weary cynicism.

There's the other one.

Quote:
LOL- where do I deny that realpolitik is a factor in contemporary Scottish politics in this quote?

Well, I said earlier you said I was being too cynical, check back if you want, but aren't you denying realpolitik here? Aren't you saying "trust the bosses, they're our friends, if you build it, they will come"?

I did call you cynical. Calling you cynical does not imply a denial of the existence of realpolitik.

And no I'm not saying trust 'the bosses they're our friends' at all, though obviously it would be easier for you if I was.

Quote:
Your much vaunted 'intuitions' must be suffering from a little interference tonight, old boy. :)

What intuitions are these?

the ones you refer to on the last page which allow you intuitively to perceive 'the truth' of any given political question, even if you know fuck all about it.

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Aug 16 2005 21:11

And can you can the simplistic straw-man characature of 'anarchist' positions please?

1. The 'boss class' is a short-hand. It is not a homogenous block, but a feuding mass of people whose interests occasionally coincide, but whose framework of power is common.

2. Anarchists are revolutionaries, yes, but not in the sense that they want a civil war tomorrow- we want to develop the tendencies within the class towards self-organisation. We think that these tendencies, amplified and circulated, will lead to repercussions from those whose social and political power is threatened, and we thik that they would use the armed might of the state to dispossess people of their newfound counter-power. Don't trivialise other people's positions to wanting a violent revolution tomorrow- you want others to stop presenting you as a nazi (as you fucking well should!), so give others the same courtesy

Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:15
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:

Well, because it helps stir up hatred of minorities amongst the host population, thereby preventing them from seeing their real enemies amongst the boss class, and thereby making it easier to manipulate them, thereby keeping them under control. Satisfied?

not really, no. I'd have thought the 'boss class' would be more satisfied by letting all comers in and paying them even worse wages. Such as those who exploit illegals in sweatshops in the east End of London and the North, for example, until they're busted and jailed, by the judicial arm of the, er, 'boss class'.

But if they let them all in, and didn't stir up race hatred, then they couldn't stop the masses from organising together, by class, across race boundaries, see?

Quote:
Ah well, you'll just have to trust me on it.

i don;t need to- so you'll forgive me if I don't.

Not as if I need to trust you on Russian/Lithuanian altruism.

Quote:
[b]It's 'the truth' and 'you know'. wtf? Are you claiming to be some all knowledgable shaman or some such now?

Yeah baby yeah.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:16
pingtiao wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

As to material change...

1. policy decision making closer to home

2. policy decision makers better known by having to live in the communities they work in and be subject to instant recall by those communites if they do nothing

3. Focused attack on long term structural and social problems, properly funded, administered by those who've kept going for years on zero Uk govt. investment (locally run addicition programmes, immediate end to pisspoor care in the privatised community schemes, etc)

As to the rest of it- you must have a great crystal ball to be able to predict all those things. Or an over-active imagination. or your evening hubbly-bubbly's disagreed with you.

I must say, for such a boldly self-proclaimed intellectual polymath, I expected more.

1. So mediated by a Scottish boss rather than an English one? Why is that useful?

Why isn't it? Your question is based on the view that all bosses are the same regardless of where they are, what business or service they are engaged in, and what their outlook on life is. A sweeping assertion in my view.

2. So the 'policy makers' would live on council estates? They wouldn't live in communities of other people from their social stratum? Wouldn't send their kids to the same schools? What on earth makes you think that?

That's the kind of Scotland I'd want to see. I don't think that if we all just sit back and wait patiently it'll happen. there'd be no public schools either, so yes, their children would go to the same school as everybody else.

3. That is an assertion, a view revealed by a crystal-ball gaze of your own.

It's not totally an assertion- much of what I say in point three can be found in the policy documents of parties advocating independence for Scotland (Greens, Trots, Nats). Some of it isn't, but this debate has been conducted in very abstract terms.

A common anarchist critique of representative democracy, that I'm sure you've seen countless times before, is that people can and do say what the fuck they want in 'oppositon'- but when in power their 'radicalism' becomes somewhat tempered by the threat of capital flight, and the need to appeal both to foreign investment and the local business class. What about this case makes you think that these pressures would not affect the replacement of Westminster-rule with Edinburgh-rule?

I'd look at the social democratic systems of Scandinavia- which has, historically, seen a combination of a strong state with striong public services locally administered. I'm not aware of mass capital flight in response.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:18
pingtiao wrote:
And can you can the simplistic straw-man characature of 'anarchist' positions please?

I shall gladly do so when I am extended a similar courtesy. Have you read the last 17 pages?

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Aug 16 2005 21:19

no, but i'm engaging now.

I'll try and read it though.

Although just because others are being intellectually lazy....

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:20
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:

Well, because it helps stir up hatred of minorities amongst the host population, thereby preventing them from seeing their real enemies amongst the boss class, and thereby making it easier to manipulate them, thereby keeping them under control. Satisfied?

not really, no. I'd have thought the 'boss class' would be more satisfied by letting all comers in and paying them even worse wages. Such as those who exploit illegals in sweatshops in the east End of London and the North, for example, until they're busted and jailed, by the judicial arm of the, er, 'boss class'.

But if they let them all in, and didn't stir up race hatred, then they couldn't stop the masses from organising together, by class, across race boundaries, see?

Organising together on £2 an hour, working a 65-70 hour week? Pull the other one. I thought I was supposed to be the naive one in this debate.

Quote:
Ah well, you'll just have to trust me on it.

i don;t need to- so you'll forgive me if I don't.

Not as if I need to trust you on Russian/Lithuanian altruism.

I'm not asking you to. I'm confident enough in the studies I've done on the question, in which you seem remarkably disinterested.

Quote:
[b]It's 'the truth' and 'you know'. wtf? Are you claiming to be some all knowledgable shaman or some such now?

Yeah baby yeah.

roll eyes

Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:21
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
Quote:
Your much vaunted 'intuitions' must be suffering from a little interference tonight, old boy. :)

What intuitions are these?

the ones you refer to on the last page which allow you intuitively to perceive 'the truth' of any given political question, even if you know fuck all about it.

I never used the word intuition though

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Aug 16 2005 21:26
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

1. So mediated by a Scottish boss rather than an English one? Why is that useful?

Why isn't it? Your question is based on the view that all bosses are the same regardless of where they are, what business or service they are engaged in, and what their outlook on life is. A sweeping assertion in my view.

Do you think that the following is an accuratedesription of a pressure that acts within capital:

Bosses want the most amount of work for the least amount of money, workers want the least amount of work for the most amount of money

??

Of course individual bosses can choose to buck this- can pay over the odds for a particular skill, can give better conditions, can choose not to close down a factory to reinvest elsewhere... but this is a pressure that exists everywhere within capitalism. Yoiu seem to be focussing on the possibility of an individual boss decoupling their actions from their material interests, and ignoring the systemic pressures that dictate the direction the whole moves in...

Quote:

2. So the 'policy makers' would live on council estates? They wouldn't live in communities of other people from their social stratum? Wouldn't send their kids to the same schools? What on earth makes you think that?

That's the kind of Scotland I'd want to see. I don't think that if we all just sit back and wait patiently it'll happen. there'd be no public schools either, so yes, their children would go to the same school as everybody else.

That is also a Scotland I, and everyone on this board, would like to see in preference to the one we have now- capitalist though it would be. You have yet to show how on earth that could come out of Independence. In the meantime I'll file it under 'naive and unrealistic'...

Quote:

3. That is an assertion, a view revealed by a crystal-ball gaze of your own.

It's not totally an assertion- much of what I say in point three can be found in the policy documents of parties advocating independence for Scotland (Greens, Trots, Nats). Some of it isn't, but this debate has been conducted in very abstract terms.

A common anarchist critique of representative democracy, that I'm sure you've seen countless times before, is that people can and do say what the fuck they want in 'oppositon'- but when in power their 'radicalism' becomes somewhat tempered by the threat of capital flight, and the need to appeal both to foreign investment and the local business class. What about this case makes you think that these pressures would not affect the replacement of Westminster-rule with Edinburgh-rule?

I'd look at the social democratic systems of Scandinavia- which has, historically, seen a combination of a strong state with striong public services locally administered. I'm not aware of mass capital flight in response.

Re: Green party: check out catch's critique of it elsewhere on the site

re: your last para, food for thought, thanks.

Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:27
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:

But if they let them all in, and didn't stir up race hatred, then they couldn't stop the masses from organising together, by class, across race boundaries, see?

Quote:
Organising together on £2 an hour, working a 65-70 hour week? Pull the other one. I thought I was supposed to be the naive one in this debate.

Well, what about the entire history of the workers movement, they organised under such conditions?

Quote:
Ah well, you'll just have to trust me on it.

i don;t need to- so you'll forgive me if I don't.

Quote:
Not as if I need to trust you on Russian/Lithuanian altruism.

I'm not asking you to. I'm confident enough in the studies I've done on the question, in which you seem remarkably disinterested.

Probably exhibiting academic blindness

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:29
revol68 wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
revol68 wrote:
why would it be better though? What would materially change for people? They would still have to go to workin some god awful call centre? or escape the grinding boredom of life under the rule of the commdoity by drug abuse, or if they're lucky they might get to work for the a new expansive Scottish tourist board. Mean while when the "great" results they hoped to achieve through independence fail, they will be left even morecyncial, atomised and burnt out.

As to material change...

1. policy decision making closer to home

2. policy decision makers better known by having to live in the communities they work in and be subject to instant recall by those communites if they do nothing

3. Focused attack on long term structural and social problems, properly funded, administered by those who've kept going for years on zero Uk govt. investment (locally run addicition programmes, immediate end to pisspoor care in the privatised community schemes, etc)

As to the rest of it- you must have a great crystal ball to be able to predict all those things. Or an over-active imagination. or your evening hubbly-bubbly's disagreed with you.

I must say, for such a boldly self-proclaimed intellectual polymath, I expected more.

are you on the Edinburgh Brown??

Do you think Scottish Independance will mean any of that?

1.Decision making closer to home doesn't necessarily mean better, infact with a smaller nation state it can become worse, eg perosnalities become more important, local business men gain influence and nepotism gets worse, local councils are much more "corrupt" than higher tiers because it takes a lot more to bribe at such a high level.

2. When the fuck is this going to happen? Do you really see Scottish Independence leading to some sort of "Paris Commune"? What would be the driving force for such a development? Do you think scottish capital would let this happen, and if it did what do you think foreign capital would have to say?

3. Why would an independent scottish executive give a fuck about these things anymore than Whitehall? Don't you think they've got these problems in London? Do you think they get anymore funding than the ones in scotland?

1. 'Do I think Independence will mean any of that'...yes, potentially. It will be a hard struggle to win these things and not all of these battles will be won, but yes, I think it possible given time.

You seem to be in possession of evidence of high level corruption in local councils. Can you provide examples, or are you merely speculating?

In any case you're presenting all of this as grimly inevitable. the more people that there are involved in a democratic process, and the stronger a political culture is in general, the less easy it is for corruption and nepotism to flourish, in my view. Surely you regard more participation and involvement in the political process as a good thing?

2. The driving force would be the people themselves. I don't imagine foreign or 'British' capital will like it very much. Does that mean we shouldn't try it, because capital might not like it? I'm sure that's not what you mean, but....

3. Why shouldn't it?

As for London, I know that they do have similar problems, on a larger scale, having spent five years myself in the city. I'm not aware of the funding arrangements in London. Nationally, though, Scotland, through oil, has contributed £30 billion net to the British Exchequer since 1979, and doesn't see a whole lot of it back. [/b]

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:30
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
Quote:
Your much vaunted 'intuitions' must be suffering from a little interference tonight, old boy. :)

What intuitions are these?

the ones you refer to on the last page which allow you intuitively to perceive 'the truth' of any given political question, even if you know fuck all about it.

I never used the word intuition though

I don't recall you dissenting from it either.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:32
pingtiao wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

1. So mediated by a Scottish boss rather than an English one? Why is that useful?

Why isn't it? Your question is based on the view that all bosses are the same regardless of where they are, what business or service they are engaged in, and what their outlook on life is. A sweeping assertion in my view.

Do you think that the following is an accurate desription of a pressure that acts within capital:

Bosses want the most amount of work for the least amount of money, workers want the least amount of work for the most amount of money

??

Of course individual bosses can choose to buck this- can pay over the odds for a particular skill, can give better conditions, can choose not to close down a factory to reinvest elsewhere... but this is a pressure that exists everywhere within capitalism. Yoiu seem to be focussing on the possibility of an individual boss decoupling their actions from their material interests, and ignoring the systemic pressures that dictate the direction the whole moves in...

Quote:

2. So the 'policy makers' would live on council estates? They wouldn't live in communities of other people from their social stratum? Wouldn't send their kids to the same schools? What on earth makes you think that?

That's the kind of Scotland I'd want to see. I don't think that if we all just sit back and wait patiently it'll happen. there'd be no public schools either, so yes, their children would go to the same school as everybody else.

That is also a Scotland I, and everyone on this board, would like to see in preference to the one we have now- capitalist though it would be. You have yet to show how on earth that could come out of Independence. In the meantime I'll file it under 'naive and unrealistic'...

Quote:

3. That is an assertion, a view revealed by a crystal-ball gaze of your own.

It's not totally an assertion- much of what I say in point three can be found in the policy documents of parties advocating independence for Scotland (Greens, Trots, Nats). Some of it isn't, but this debate has been conducted in very abstract terms.

A common anarchist critique of representative democracy, that I'm sure you've seen countless times before, is that people can and do say what the fuck they want in 'oppositon'- but when in power their 'radicalism' becomes somewhat tempered by the threat of capital flight, and the need to appeal both to foreign investment and the local business class. What about this case makes you think that these pressures would not affect the replacement of Westminster-rule with Edinburgh-rule?

I'd look at the social democratic systems of Scandinavia- which has, historically, seen a combination of a strong state with striong public services locally administered. I'm not aware of mass capital flight in response.

I shall look up catch's critique and respond to the rest of yr post tomorrow. Thanks.

Re: Green party: check out catch's critique of it elsewhere on the site

re: your last para, food for thought, thanks.

Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:34
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

I don't recall you dissenting from it either.

I do, I base my ideas on perception of reality, not intuition.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:35
revol68 wrote:
look pingtiao the reason people cna't be arsed is ccos this issue has been done to death and with more sophiscated nationalist positions than Good Old Soldier is proposing.

oh, pardon me. I'd hate to intrude on your private party.

What I fail to grasp is where the dynamic for this "new scotland" will come from? I mean it seems to rest on the fact that alot of electoral parties are in favour of independence but where will the impetus to get rid of inequality come from? Where will these radical federalist proposals come from and more importantly whose going to implement them?

In point of fact such 'radical federalist proposals' have been part of mainstream discourse in Scots, Welsh and Cornish nationalisms for over 30 years now. If you choose to ignore them in favour of your cliches regarding the 'boss class', and 'dividing the workers', then you've only yourself to blame.

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Aug 16 2005 21:37

Here is the Green Party critique http://libcom.org/thought/approaches/green-party/index.php

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:38
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:

But if they let them all in, and didn't stir up race hatred, then they couldn't stop the masses from organising together, by class, across race boundaries, see?

Quote:
Organising together on £2 an hour, working a 65-70 hour week? Pull the other one. I thought I was supposed to be the naive one in this debate.

Well, what about the entire history of the workers movement, they organised under such conditions?

Hmmn. Maybe Annie Besant and her comrades did in 1889. What might be termed as the 'working class' is just a tad more varied and experiencing a much wider spectrum of pay and conditions than back then. As I remember too, Annie Besant didn't organise a strike with her union under immediate threat of arrest & deportation by the authorities, or physical violence and false imprisonment by her employers.

Quote:
Ah well, you'll just have to trust me on it.

i don;t need to- so you'll forgive me if I don't.

Quote:
Not as if I need to trust you on Russian/Lithuanian altruism.

I'm not asking you to. I'm confident enough in the studies I've done on the question, in which you seem remarkably disinterested.

Probably exhibiting academic blindness

yes, you probably are.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:39
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

I don't recall you dissenting from it either.

I do, I base my ideas on perception of reality, not intuition.

As do I. Glad we've cleared that one up.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:42
revol68 wrote:
the fact you can even talk about Cornish nationalism with a straight face has put any sort of rational deabte out the window.

What a rigorous, all-encompassing, critically engaged critique you've produced there!

I've no doubt universities will be queueing up to attract such an obviously dazzling talent as yours.

roll eyes

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:43
revol68 wrote:
Quote:
Nationally, though, Scotland, through oil, has contributed £30 billion net to the British Exchequer since 1979, and doesn't see a whole lot of it back

alas the petit bourgeois nature of Nationalism raises it's nasty stingy clinging little hand!

it's our oil money and no one elses!

fucking pathetic, it's the same sort of shite than drvies those Catalan nationalist fuckwit.

Once again. I'm bowled over by the stark clarity & compelling force of your reasoning.

on that note I'm off to bed. You've produced so many new insights into this question, revol68, that I doubt I'll be able to sleep for many hours as I ponder your unquestioned wisdom, based on such rock solid and unimpeachable foundations...

Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:45
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:

Well, what about the entire history of the workers movement, they organised under such conditions?

Hmmn. Maybe Annie Besant and her comrades did in 1889. What might be termed as the 'working class' is just a tad more varied and experiencing a much wider spectrum of pay and conditions than back then. As I remember too, Annie Besant didn't organise a strike with her union under immediate threat of arrest & deportation by the authorities, or physical violence and false imprisonment by her employers.

No, striking was illegal and you could be deported to Australia for it. What about all the attacks on striking workers in the 19th century? What about the Pinkertons in America, strike-breakers hired by employers to physically assault workers?

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:47
revol68 wrote:
Just out of interest what do you teach? Transgressing the Hermeutics of Gender Narrative in Scottish Culture: Jimmy Cranky.???

None of your fucking business. Again. Anyway, you're obviously so much brighter than me, I can't imagine why you're so interested....

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 16 2005 21:49
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:
Bodach gun bhrigh wrote:

Well, what about the entire history of the workers movement, they organised under such conditions?

Hmmn. Maybe Annie Besant and her comrades did in 1889. What might be termed as the 'working class' is just a tad more varied and experiencing a much wider spectrum of pay and conditions than back then. As I remember too, Annie Besant didn't organise a strike with her union under immediate threat of arrest & deportation by the authorities, or physical violence and false imprisonment by her employers.

No, striking was illegal and you could be deported to Australia for it. What about all the attacks on striking workers in the 19th century? What about the Pinkertons in America, strike-breakers hired by employers to physically assault workers?

errr....you could be deported to Australia in 1889 for going on strike?

Why weren't the Bryant & May match girls deported en masse, then? To say nothing of other organised Union strike leaders at the time?

Bodach gun bhrigh's picture
Bodach gun bhrigh
Offline
Joined: 7-07-05
Aug 16 2005 21:52
The Good Soldier Svejk wrote:

errr....you could be deported to Australia in 1889 for going on strike?

Why weren't the Bryant & May match girls deported en masse, then? To say nothing of other organised Union strike leaders at the time?

In the 19th century, yes.

The Good Soldie...
Offline
Joined: 1-08-05
Aug 17 2005 08:19
revol68 wrote:
no seriously im interested in what u teach.

i mean it patently isn't anything involving critical theory as one would hope you'd have a better grounding in Marxism. And it couldn't be History cos your understanding of the central role Scotland had in the British Empire is somewhat lacking. Im guessing it might be some liberal ole balls like Conflict Resolution Theory or perhaps something involving Goverment structures?

One day your rather juvenile undergraduate certitude will leave you.

Given that this thread has hardly touched on the role of Scotland in the British Empire, focusing instead on contemporary C20th/21st manifestations of nationalism, I'm at a loss to understand how you could have arrived at the conclusion that my understanding of Scotland & Empire is 'lacking'.

I don't share your viewpoint. On that basis you dismiss me 1 as'thick' 2. express astonishment that I could possibly so the job I do 3. promise to 'show me up in class' 4. announce loudly to the casual reader how amazingly intelligent you are. Two things: universities do a lot more than 'critical theory' and 'history' in case you hadn't noticed, and secondly, given your pathetic conduct in this thread, I'd suggest you've a great deal of growing up to do.

Finally, and for the third time, I have no intention of discussing my work or my background with you. You can ask as many times as you like, but I shall be ignoring future questions of this sort completely.