Showing posts with label Marxism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marxism. Show all posts

Jul 22, 2011

Climate Change, Social Change: Reading List

Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal has collected  together articles by the main featured international speakers who will be attending the World at a Crossroads/ Climate Change, Social Change Conference in Melbourne in September-October. There are also a range of links that gather together articles that deal with particular enviromental topics.

These resources provide excellent background reading for the issues that will be discussed at the conference.






To find material on other issues, please use the search engine on the Links site .

Jun 5, 2011

Carbon Commodity Song -- Don't ask me what Carbon is. Don't ask me my advice. I've no idea what Carbon is: All I have learned is its price.

Die Massnahme (The Measures Taken or The Decision) was the first of Bertolt Brecht's "learning" plays. It is a heavily didactic perhaps -- even  a tres propagandistic (egads!) and shocking -- but is nonetheless beautifully conceived and written with music by Hans Eisler.

It premièred at the Berlin Schauspielhaus in 1930.

I've been long time interested in these learning plays which Brecht called lehrustucke .  I am familiar with them in a way that many other humans would not be. I got myself a niche perhaps -- a   lehrustucke familiarity.
The Lehrstücke (plural form; singular: Lehrstück) are a radical and experimental form of modernist theatre developed by Bertolt Brecht and his collaborators from the 1920s to the late 1930s. The Lehrstücke stem from Brecht's Epic Theatre techniques but as a core principle explore the possibilities of learning through acting, playing roles, adopting postures and attitudes etc. and hence no longer divide between actors and audience. Brecht himself translated the term as learning-play[1], emphasizing the aspect of learning through participation, whereas the German term could also be understood as teaching-play. 
That said there is a song in The Measures Taken that captures, what I think is, the essence  of the Carbon Trading or Carbon Taxing schemata.

It could be rewritten as:
Don't ask me what Carbon is.
Don't ask me my advice.
I've no idea what  Carbon is:
All I have learned is its price.
The point being, as Marx noted, that capitalism fetishizes commodities 
In Marx's critique of political economy, commodity fetishism denotes the mystification of human relations said to arise out of the growth of market trade, when social relationships between people are expressed as, mediated by and transformed into, objectified relationships between things (commodities and money).
Now as sure as  the pope is catholic and a bear shits in the woods (or vice versa),  the Carbon trading scheme is capitalist mystification in over drive.   It preserves this obscurantism so that the physical properties of the commodities -- such as their  congealed carbon emissions content -- are obscured by their price which is arbitrarily set.  It is not the price of a commodity that should be the rule but how, by whom and why it is produced.
"There it is a definite social relation between men, that assumes, in their eyes, the fantastic form of a relation between things. In order, therefore, to find an analogy, we must have recourse to the mist-enveloped regions of the religious world. In that world the productions of the human brain appear as independent beings endowed with life, and entering into relation both with one another and the human race. So it is in the world of commodities with the products of men’s hands. This I call the Fetishism which attaches itself to the products of labour, so soon as they are produced as commodities, and which is therefore inseparable from the production of commodities. This Fetishism of commodities has its origin, as the foregoing analysis has already shown, in the peculiar social character of the labour that produces them." - Karl Marx, Capital Vol. 1, chapter 1 section 4 
The complication is that we are not allowed to decide  how, by whom and why a commodity is  produced because our 'democracy' doesn't extend that far. We are sentenced in the face of a major emergency for humanity to passivity before the fickleness of market driven  supply and demand.

As Brecht noted in The Measures Taken -- to a catchy tune by Eisler (which I cannot share with  you online but I can hum it if pressed) -- the capitalist doesn't give a damn about any carbon thing just so long as it is trade-able for a profit.

Thanks to David Henry for the tip to this vid 
(Archer is a world renowned Australian Brecht interpreter. As is, ironically Nick Cave.

 Song of Commodity/Supply and Demand

Rice can be had down the river.
People in the remoter provinces need their rice.
If we can keep that rice off the market
Rice is bound to get dearer.
Then the men who pull the barges must go short of rice
And I shall get my rice for even less.

By the way, what is rice?

Don't ask me what rice is.
Don't ask me my advice.
I've no idea what rice is:
All I have learned is its price.

In winter time the coolies need warm clothing.
Then you must buy cotton so that
You can keep cotton off the market.
When a cold spell comes, then clothes get more expensive.
Our cotton spinning mills pay too high wages.
And cotton's too plentiful in any case.

By the way, what is cotton?

Don't ask me what cotton is.
Don't ask me my advice.
I've no idea what cotton is:
All I have learned is its price.

Working men need too much feeding
And this makes a man's work dearer.
To provide for his feeding you need women.
Our cooks can make a meal cheaper but look at
Those eaters making it dearer.
And we could use more men here in any case.

By the way, what is a man?

Don't ask me what a man is.
Don't ask me my advice.
I've no idea what a man is:
All I have learned is his price.


The translation I prefer:

Performed by Maria Tegzes, vocals, and Geoffrey Burleson, piano and arrangement. 

Jun 9, 2010

VIDEO Origins of CHAT - German Philosophy -- Andy Blunden

Talk given at the Monash University Monash Education Research Community, by Andy Blunden . The talk is the first of a two-part seminar for the International Course on Cultural Historical Activity Theory. It covers the contributions to this current of thought derived from Descartes, J G Herder, Goethe and Hegel. Part Two, to follow, deals with Marx.


Cultural-historical psychology (also called the school of Vygotsky, sociocultural psychology, socio-historical psychology, activity theory, cultural psychology, cultural historical activity theory, and social development theory) is a theory of psychology founded by Lev Vygotsky at the end of the 1920s and developed by his students and followers in Eastern Europe and worldwide.

Apr 4, 2010

AUDIO Clara Zetkin--Revolutionary Leader

MP3 recording of a workshop delivered by John Riddell on the life of Clara Zetkin at the Socialism 2009 conferences in Chicago 

Clara Zetkin (née Eißner; 5 July 1857 - 20 June 1933) was an influential socialist Germanwomen's rights. Until 1917, she was active in the Social Democratic Party of Germany, then she joined the Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany (USPD) and its far-left wing, the Spartacist League; this later became the Communist Party of Germany (KPD), which she represented in the Reichstag during the Weimar Republic from 1920 to 1933.

Popout

Jan 23, 2010

Dave Holmes: Arguments for Socialism

I've intended to do a left blog roundup for sometime but blogging on the Australian far left is a cottage industry engaged in by very few. Why this should be the case isn't very clear -- but the fact is that blogging isn't a standard communication medium this far to the  left.

Nonetheless, one of the newest blogs on the block  is a project begun by Dave Holmes -- who was, until its very recent merger with the Socialist Alliance, a long time leader of the DSP.(Right, Dave in the early seventies).

However,  the new trend in my neck of the political woods is to use the blogging platform to archive talks and newspaper articles (more on this in a  later post)that are delivered at forums and conferences  or published in Green Left Weekly (especially in their unabridged form before the GLW editor started cutting.)

Fortunately, this is what Dave Holmes is now doing.

His blog, Arguments for Socialism, is a selection of such items going back 19 years, and  comprise a running commentary on many topics that Dave, with his usual skill, addresses from a considered Marxist POV.

Besides contributions to history and political strategy & theory, the archive includes the introductory Arguments for Socialism series which has been published in Green Left Weekly.

This stuff is all great value so bookmarking the site is sure to enhance  your   reference resources on a range of key topics. Since Dave is always a very accessible writer and speaker, surfing his clearly presented archive and reading any items that take your fancy  is sure to be  time well spent

A sample listing from
Arguments for Socialism

Jan 22, 2010

VIDEO John Bellamy Foster - The Crisis of Capital: Economy, Ecology and Empire

Professor of sociology and editor of Monthly Review, John Bellamy Foster, talks about the triple crises facing the people of the United State today in the economy, the environment, and in the imperial wars and occupations in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond.


John Bellamy Foster - The Crisis of Capital: Economy, Ecology and Empire from pdxjustice Media Productions on Vimeo.
by pdxjustice Media Productions

Jan 18, 2010

How should the left organise?

[Since I am occasionally engaged in online fracas and am known to comment at length I  have adopted the habit of archiving my interventions as a sort of running notation of my developing POV.  Here is one that I've dug up because it made more standalone sense than the many others. It was posted as part of an online comment thread to one of Derek's posts.]

 Derek Wall (Socialist Unity)Leninism is not what you think it is:


Just been blogging about the SWP crisis, its a wider crisis of a kind of Marxist political organisation that in my view simply does not work. I have never been a Leninist but Lenin may have been very different in his approach to what is normally imagined. The ever excellent Dave Riley let me know about this article, its food for thought, let me know what you think and lets not just use this as an excuse to bash each other. How should the left organise? 




If I can add a few comments…

(1)The complication of “Leninist Party” politics is that it is carried out by organisations who believe that they are indeed a “Leninist Party” without any reference to the actual living situation they may be at.They could be 5, 50, or 1500 members but they all presume they are working at Leninist best practice regardless of how embedded they are in the working class.They are “Leninist” because they say so.

(2)What’s happened through the sponsorship of Trotsky and the counterposition of “Trotskyism” to “Stalinism” is that programatic questions have been elevated to a level of some sort of Jungian archetype which only the ordained have access to.This idealist approach — one devoid of the living test of day to day struggle and roots in the class –is totally at odds with the approach of a dedicated Marxist materialism. It only leads to a cottage industry of boutique socialist patents competing with one another.

(3)In my experience of party organisations operating under ‘Leninist’ first principles there is always a sharp tension between being too tight and being too loose. This conundrum is always tied to the question of exclusivity and the overbearing pressure to maintain ‘party’ ‘norms’. I think this is real such that small parties tend to flip and flop between opening up and closing down/reaching out and returning to the bunker. One example I can think of is the response of the SP/CWI when it left the British Labour Party. Thereafter followed a relaxing of approaches to other currents and a dedicated reach out internationally.But in the wake of the loss of most of its Scottish section (which formed the SSP) and a dispute and falling out with its section in Pakistan (The Labour Party of Pakistan) the SP/CWI turned inward and retraced its steps to the bunker. Even the whole rationale of its “united front of a special find” melarky by the English SWP is premised on this tension — that there is a threshold and once passed you dilute/liquidate your politics and cease to be revolutionary. This spectral fear is what haunts almost all the parties of the far left. It is developed as a response to surviving the long haul and counterposing your politics to Stalinism in a position of isolation in the working class. This is, if you like, the conditions and responses that congeal as sectarianism.

(4)After years of surviving the long detour the conditions we now face — with the self evident deference of social democracy to neo liberalism, the world wide collapse of Stalinism in the wake of 1989, the biggest economic crisis capitalism has faced since 1929, and a major ecological catastrophe bearing down on humanity — the conditions under which we operate has changed greatly so that there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the comfort of ‘business as usual’ will suffice. Old habits die hard. Old cultures persist. The far left, in fact, becomes entwined in and entrapped by its own rhetoric. While there may indeed be more than one way to proceed, as socialists, Marxists and activists we must know that left unity is our most powerful weapon. But how we proceed to do that — regroup the left — requires not only reach out ways and means but a considerate re-formatting of our own internal perspectives. It is in this context that the study of Lenin has taken another course — away from just referencing his writings into a more considered and broader approach to the actual history of the Bolskevik party; and as Kellog (and Liebman) argues it is not what we may have thought.

(5) What divides the far left today — if we put aside the shibboleths born as they were in the context of the Cold War — are tactical questions.Essentially day to day that’s always tended to be the case.Nonetheless even with those differences in mind what divides us is very small indeed given what unites us. And what specifically unites us is that despite the rigors of the last few decades we collectively enter the 21st century as committed revolutionists with skills and savvy but without the large numbers adhered to our banner.

(6) That doesn’t mean we enter a mea culpa historical moment. What it does mean is that we shift our perspectives and open up our politics like no other time in our historical experience. And, if you like, our task is adapting what we know of “Leninism under Lenin” to the challenges of the here and now. Personally and theoretically this is a major challenge because the new conditions we may choose to embrace don’t lend themselves to easy schemata. NOR is it an excuse to embrace a free fall liquidation of our hard won organisational and political assets. The dialectics of this change are very complex and in each country they are likely to follow different paths as no one size is gonna fit all.We also face the complication that a ruling on early experiments in this new Left politics has not reached a consensus in the way that in the 1920s the far left wanted to replicate the experience of the Bolsheviks and , as Kellog points out, were encouraged to import it as a one size fits all party template.

(7) It is not our role to rejig the politics of social democracy and create a left-of-Labour Labour Party. Some on the left believe that and with the example of Germany and Die Linke as well as the rise of Green Parties internationally in front of us we should junk all the criteria of revolutionary socialism for the sake of a very much broader and very much softer political relevance buoyed up be a dedicated electoralism. But is that what we want — a sort of stage-ist approach to generating revolutionary politics? Marx via the route of practical reformism? A corollary of this perspective is the belief — that today dedicated broad socialist parties cannot be built and win mass support. This is the view of the SWP I’m sure (even if it is not stated)and is no doubt the standard response of most left orgs while en route back to the bunker. But if you check, the approach of Lenin was very different while still adhering to the core goal of socialist revolution. I remember one quote from whoever that tells us so much, ” You all know Lenin forged a great revolutionary socialist party, but you don’t realize what he had to forge it with.” And inherent in the outlook of the far left orgs is a elitist fear that straying too far from programatic purity etc only serves to dumb down our politics.

(8)While we are all familiar with the role of imperialism and the way the reformism gutted the 2nd International but really is that what we should allow to haunt us? The drowning of the 2nd International in competing jingoistic reformist currents occurred in a very precise context of world history. While similar conditions may prevail today, we are here requesting of currents who have survived the political challenges of the last few decades, and remained revolutionary, to lead this new process of broadening out. That’s a big difference. To not see it in those terms only encourages a certain functionalism — a belief that these new parties will arise because the space exists for them to do so. But then, taht space can be filled just as ‘functionally’ by outfits like the BNP. So who leads this process is crucial to what sort of party is created.

Comment by Dave Riley — 27 December, 2009 @ 3:23 am


Nov 28, 2009

Leggoland and the far left

Now and then I seek intellectual entertainments and will ferret around for a profound thought. And what could be more profound than a thought about thought.Take it away , Lev:
Thoughhttp://c4.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/57/m_cd8b3f013c834984ba1f3e3929fb26bf.jpgt is born through words. . . Consciousness is reflected in a word as the sun in a drop of water. A word relates to consciousness as a living cell relates to a whole organism, as an atom relates to the universe. A word is a microcosm of human consciousness." Lev Vygotsky (from Thought and Language)
In part this penchant we humans have to deploy words as tools to think with may explain some of the inability of the far lefts to relate to one another.

Perhaps you are thinking that surely all the far lefts speak the same language -- the language of Marxism?

Yes...and no.

In my experience each  left tendency has its own cant and its own patented world view that is sustained by using language as a sort  of Leggo. Before you can build the next floor, the next level of the thinking construction (often referred to as "the program"), you have to presume that another rests below it and that for all intents and purposes we are all speaking the same language sitting on the shoulders of the "words" -- especially buzz words -- that have gone before.

The complication being that inasmuch as you are isolated from the main business of society you tend to enclose and turn inwards as much with your outlook as your language.In part this explains some of the inability to win an argument on the far left because to concede one point here and there may bring down the whole house of cards.Rather than allow that to happen , many groups will establish shibboleths in order to defend their conceptual identity from all comers. These act as struts to hold the Leggoland in place being so sacred that they become identifiers akin to architectural styles. I guess you could call them 'kit' homes.

This may all seem a bit of a wank. And I guess I have to plead guilty .

But a recent post on Splintered Sunrise -- and Ireland based blog -- tackles this habit -- I guess it's  a habit -- with a telling critique of language deployed by the British Socialist Workers Party. Currently experiencing a bit of an internal faction fight, the SWP disputation is so rhetorically strong  that Splintered Sunrise has a field day  pulling out the threads and unraveling them.

It may all seem a bit esoteric as you may not have one iota of interest in a barney in a party at some distance to your self, over matters you have no familiarity with. Granted that that is a drawback. Nonetheless what Splintered Sunrise does is approach the challenge posed by the dispute with such a sharp eye for contradictory use of language and the mismanagement of fact  that I think we can all learn from the approach.
I find reading SWP Pre-Conference Bulletins something of an enervating experience, requiring you to work yourself up into that willing suspension of disbelief that dramatists aim for. There used to be an awful lot of ringing declarations of the party’s infallibility; statements so sweeping you would hope (usually in vain) that the more bumptious element wouldn’t take them literally; and libertyvalanced versions of events that you were sure didn’t happen like that. The factional situation this time round at least means there are two sides doing the libertyvalancing, and the claims of infallibility has been replaced by an acknowledgement that yes, some minor mistakes were made, but it was all the other lot’s fault. If you remember the polemics between Taaffeites and Grantites when Militant split, it’s a bit like that. There are also some good (and one or two quite strange) contributions from further down the hierarchy, which unfortunately will probably get lost in the mix.
Essentially what Splintered Sunrise is seeking is a return to materialism. This is why SS prefaces his comments with, what seems,a digression on György Lukács.

 That may seem tenuous except that I think SS has a strong point: to make  that this left which insists  that  it is loyal to the materialism of Karl Marx is infected  limb and branch with a gratuitous idealism. and  it is blithely unaware of how much its assessments of   and its   interventions in everyday reality are ruled and formatted by a the aspirations embedded in  ideas rather than the  actual occurrences. It's a  sort of doublethink.  Templated first in a mindset and imposed on reality via so many schemata that it is now so very difficult to grasp the living real world because there is so much cant in the way.

Nov 10, 2009

VIDEO Low wage capitalism




Fred Goldstein talks of his new book Low-Wage Capitalism with a compelling analysis of global corporate capitalism, a system demonstrably unfair, irrational, and painfully unstable.

Low-Wage Capitalism describes in sweeping detail the drastic effect on the working class in the United States of new technology and the restructuring of global capitalism in the post-Soviet era. It uses Karl Marx's law of wages and other findings to show that these developments are not only continuing to drive down wages but are creating the material basis for future social upheaval.

The analysis rests on three basic developments in the last three decades:

  • The world's workforce available to exploitation by transnational capitalist corporations doubled in the wake of the collapse of the USSR and Eastern Europe.
  • The technological revolutions of the digital age, in both production and communications, have allowed transnational corporations to destroy high-wage jobs and simultaneously expand the global workforce to generate a worldwide wage competition.
  • The decline in the economic condition of the workers, driven by the laws of capitalism and the capitalist class, is leading to the end of working-class compromise and retreat and must end up in a profound revival of the struggle against capitalism.
While the book concentrates on changes in the U.S., restructuring is a world phenomenon. Goldstein's general analysis also applies to the imperialist countries of Western Europe and Japan. The book discusses how:


  • Advanced processes of production promoted by the corporate giants in low-wage countries have changed the international division of labor within world capitalism.
  • The "national wage" is being supplanted by an international determination of wages as worldwide wage competition lowers the floor.
  • Since the late 1970s, the vast majority of U.S. workers have seen a decline in wages and living conditions as permanent, high-paying jobs with benefits disappear.
  • The rise of the multi-earner family represents a hidden, class-wide wage cut for U.S. workers.
  • Restructuring and technology have especially impacted on African-American workers.
  • Women have flooded into the workforce, most at low-wage jobs, in order to survive.
  • Increased exploitation of Latin@s and other immigrants is an integral part of globalization.
  • Highlights from past struggles provide a guide to future action and organization.
  • It takes a broad workers' movement to fight for the economic and social needs of all.
  • Breaking out of the traditional capital-labor relationship is essential to the defense of the multinational working class in the era of low-wage capitalism.
Presented in May 2008 at the international conference in Cuba on "The work of Karl Marx and the Challenges for the 21st Century." Now expanded into a full book, Fred Goldstein lays a basis for workers to understand and respond to the deep crisis rocking the world economy.

Oct 4, 2009

VIDEO:robots vs luddites

Why would a Luddite break a machine? What is the social significance of software piracy? These questions and more are pondered in this brief discussion of the concept of the "forces and relations of production" in Industrial Revolution and the Information Revolution.

Full text at Kapitalism 101 . This is another great Marxism resource from Brendan Cooney (pictured right) . I agree with Cooney's perspective and the way he poses challenging questions.
We have a lot of work to do in our time. These tectonic shifts in the forces and relations of production have coincided with global economic crisis and environmental crisis. At such times the future is uncertain. Anything can happen. If the left is to seize the initiative in the 21st century it has much theoretical work to do examining the trajectory of these new forces and relations of production and discerning what sort of possibilities they present for radical breaks from the present order.





Oct 1, 2009

VIDEO: David Harvey -- The Crisis Now

The ever-engrossing David Harvey, speaking at the UK SWP's 2009 Marxism conference in July, addressing the current status of the global economic crisis.



David Harvey also teaches a course on Marx's Capital, the video and audio of which are online at his website.

Tip: Red Wombat.

Sep 26, 2009

VIDEO: From Eisenstien to YouTube Cinéma vérité via Marx

A Very Public Sociologist offers a informative introduction to early Soviet cinema.

Phil's post touches on the great film directors such as Sergei Eisenstein and references this sequence (below) which is the famous scene on the Odessa Steps. To my knowledge the sequence has been replicated in part a few times -- by Akira Kurosawa and Brian De Palma (The Untouchables), to name two.

The summary of Eisenstein's cinematic approach is very useful:

Eisenstein mounted his shots and joined them along various formal and thematic conflicting parameters - straight shots juxtaposed to diagonal ones, light/dark shots, and conflicts in the direction and rhythm of motion (right-to-left to left-to-right), camera distance conflicts (long shots to close-ups, etc). Through these juxtapositions of brief shots, which had a physiological effect on viewers, Eisenstein forged emotions and ideas. For him the illusion of continuity and the focus upon individual heroes encourage an anti-revolutionary false consciousness.

His most comprehensive and effective use of the conflict montage can be found in the Odessa steps sequence in Battleship Potemkin.The scene consists of a dazzling series of conflicting shots and editing that powerfully convey the horror caused by Tsarist troops walking in formation down the Odessa steps while shooting and dispersing a crowd of protesters. Such cinematic attractions over thematic concerns lead the spectator in the direction desired by the director.
He then goes on to compare Dziga Vertov to Eisenstein in a descriptive summary passage:
Vertov's oeuvre was different. He believed only documentary shots of real-life situtations in revolutionary societies can the truth be revealed. He tried to follow Marx and Engels who wrote "the turning of history into world history is not indeed a mere abstract art on the part of the self-consciousness, the world spirit or of any other metaphysical spectre, but a quiet material, empirically verifiable act." For Vertov "we hold the ability to show and elucidate life as it is, considerably higher than the occasionally diverting doll games that people call theatre. Vertov constantly compared the fiction film to witchcraft and drugs since for him fiction was nothing but a reflection of ideologies whose function was to turn the spectator away from his awareness of the real processes of production and from truth. He therefore disliked Eisenstein's fictional recreation of events, and called for the allocation of funds to documentary rather than fictional films. In shooting, Vertov preferred the use of candid cameras in places where his presence would go unnoticed. Only in such a manner can the filmmaker make "the invisible visible, the unclear clear ...; making falsehood into truth."
This may seem to suggest that Vertov was a bit of an ideological nutter. Nonetheless, his influence has been massive and if you watch the opening (many) scenes in Man with a Movie Camera (see clip below)-- driven by a powerful musical score -- it's easy to see why.

I guess you can call this 'revolutionary cinema' on several levels -content, style, influence -- but now that we are in the YouTube age and we all can so easily become men or women with our own movie cameras (and video editing programs that are many times easier and more powerful than any thing the Soviets ever had) , what are we supposed to think about these early cinema radicals, imbued as they were with a desire to make Marxism aesthetically practical ?

This was a preoccupation for many artists in the twenties and thirties and the quest extended to Erwin Piscator and Bertolt Brecht in theatre, Kurt Weill and Dmitri Shostakovich in music -- to name but a few.

So when we come to today's digital options I wonder if we can draw any inspiration from Marx via these pioneering and so influential originators? Is the pursuit of style and form just an indulgent wank? Or is there some new conjuncture possible as we embrace the digital age online and learn to master its tools?

I think there is. Just as the 1936 essay by Walter Benjamin -- The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. -- predicts the democratic potential the digital universe offers us, maybe it's time we began to think this issue through with a bit more verve than simply marveling at the creative era that was ushered in by the 1917 Russian Revolution.

What we need to do , I guess, is create our own version of Cinéma vérité even if its just for the sake of 10 minute grabs on YouTube. All we need do is develop an attitude and style that ticks all the boxes we want to tick.

What could be easier? So off you go: go shoot some cinema.


The Odessa Steps sequence from Battleship Potemkin



Man with a Movie Camera : Opening


Sep 15, 2009

VIDEO:Vygotsky’s Critique of Psychological Science.

Melbourne based Marxist philosopher , Andy Blunden, has written and published on line an essay introducing the work of Marxist psychologist Lev Vygotsky.

Blunden's essay is rather dense but it ticks all the Vygotskian boxes and while it may not be the easiest introduction to Vygotsky, it nonetheless captures the rigor and scope of the perspective he advocated.

Here are a few quotes that Blunden lifts from Vygotsky's works which give you a taste of his contribution to psychology:
“When our Marxists explain the Hegelian principle in Marxist methodology they rightly claim that each thing can be examined as a microcosm, as a universal measure in which the whole big world is reflected. On this basis they say that to study one single thing, one subject, one phenomenon until the end, exhaustively, means to know the world in all its connections. In this sense it can be said that each person is to some degree a measure of the society, or rather class, to which he belongs, for the whole totality of social relationships is reflected in him.” (Vygotsky 1997b)

[Blunden:This could be taken as an argument for the idiographic approach, but he goes on in what is the final paragraph of his most famous work:]


“The consciousness of sensation and thinking are characterised by different modes of reflecting reality. They are different types of consciousness. Therefore, thinking and speech are the key to understanding the nature of human consciousness. If language is as ancient as consciousness itself, if language is consciousness that exists in practice for other people and therefore for myself, then it is not only the development of thought but the development of consciousness as a whole that is connected with the development of the word. Studies consistently demonstrate that the word plays a central role in the isolated functions but the whole of consciousness. In consciousness, the word is what – in Feuerbach’s words (Feuerbach 1972) – is absolutely impossible for one person but possible for two. The word is the most direct manifestation of the historical nature of human consciousness.

“Consciousness is reflected in the word like the sun is reflected in a droplet of water. The word is a microcosm of consciousness, related to consciousness like a living cell is related to an organism, like an atom is related to the cosmos. The meaningful word is a microcosm of human consciousness.” (Vygotsky 1987: 285)


VYGOTSKY IN PRACTICE: Lois Holzman interview for Lev Vygotsky: One Man's Legacy Through his Life and Theory


Piaget & Vygotsky in 90 seconds
A key point is made. You cannot miss it.Tis is the great divide -- a divide to which Noam Chomsky's linguistic work has contributed ... on Piaget's side.

Jun 30, 2009

DSP makes major turn towards building the Socialist Alliance

The Democratic Socialist Perspective decided at its June National Committee meeting to make a major turn towards building the Socialist Alliance. .

As Peter Boyle said when he delivered the report to the gathering:
We’ve been held back for far too long already, first, by the hesitations of former Socialist Alliance affiliates and then by the former minority in the DSP. It was the responsible thing to take some time to deal with the destructive factional split in the DSP but that is behind us now and it is time we moved forward to build the Socialist Alliance as a bigger, more influential and more working class-based socialist organisation, than any currently in existence in Australia.
Important opening for the left in Australia
After exploring the current political context Boyle then reviewed the history of the Socialist Alliance and the DSP's engagement with it:

The unprecedented unity of these left groups,[within the Socialist Alliance] which until then had spent lots of energy criticising each other, made a significant impact on the much broader layer of left activists who had not joined any of the pre-existing socialist groups. Hundreds of them joined the Socialist Alliance, quickly becoming the majority of its members. Among those who joined were a number of militant trade unionists – shop-floor delegates as well as a few elected leaders of militant unions, some leading indigenous activists, activists from other social movements and some left-wing intellectuals.

This was an important opening for the left in Australia, which was (and remains) small and relatively isolated in the labour movement. Would the left seize this as a chance to build a multi-tendency socialist party with a significant connection to the labour movement and other key social movements? This was clearly the wish of the large majority of Alliance members who were not members of any of the founding affiliate groups, and the DSP agreed with them. However, all the other affiliated revolutionary socialist groups disagreed. Each thought their own “correct” programs would be liquidated if they built the Alliance as our common party. They could conceive of the Alliance only as a site for their “real” revolutionary parties to intervene in or, at best, as a “united front of a special kind”.

This view is sectarian because it spurned a chance to unite politically with a broader layer of left leadership in the movements. We have learned to treat the question of left unity seriously and not to play with it. Those who play with unity always pay a political price.

By the Socialist Alliance’s May 2005 national conference, it was clear that all the other revolutionary groups affiliated to the Alliance were opposed to taking the Alliance forward. At most, they were willing to participate in the Alliance as a loose electoral front in which a minority retained veto powers by right of their group affiliate status. They began to pull back even the relatively modest resources they had put into the Alliance. By 2007, all the founding affiliates aside from the DSP and Resistance had formally left the Alliance.

The unwillingness of the other affiliates to really build the Socialist Alliance added to the cost on the DSP of keeping the project going – and made it harder for us to see how to move forward.

The DSP then underwent a protracted three-year-long internal faction fight, which took significant energy away from building the Socialist Alliance, Resistance and the DSP. Basically this faction fight was an expression in the DSP of the same sectarian political response of the departing Socialist Alliance affiliates.

But through all this the majority of the non-affiliate group membership of the Socialist Alliance continued to see the Alliance as their party. This resilience of Socialist Alliance is extremely valuable especially in the context of the Australian political landscape (in which it has most often been hard work to recruit and retain serious socialist activists). It is a strong reason why DSP members now need to focus on building the Socialist Alliance as our new party.
The SA today

He then summarized the state of the SA today:

Each one of the small socialist groups outside the Socialist Alliance say they'll be in a new left party if what is on offer is a new mass party. Indeed, they'd be in such a party even if its politics was reformist or liberal. The Socialist Alliance is not a mass party, but it is an opportunity to regroup the willing left around a developing class struggle program. It is already the biggest and most influential socialist organisation in Australia and it continues to regroup the left. Non-DSP members remain a majority of the paid up membership of the Socialist Alliance. So it is a party significantly bigger than the DSP or any other socialist left organisation in Australia today. And with the total efforts of our comrades going into building it, the Socialist Alliance can be even bigger than it is today.
The National Committee meeting unanimously decided that the DSP:
  1. Elects an NE charged with the tasks of investigating and preparing a plan for the merger of the DSP into the Socialist Alliance and to lead a discussion with Socialist Alliance about such a prospective merger.
  2. Opens written and oral pre-Congress discussion from the plenum (ie: national committee meeting).
  3. All DSP branches and districts should attempt to organise as much of their work as possible in the period leading up to the Congress (in January 2010) through the Socialist Alliance branches, districts and caucuses/committees.In this time, the DSP branches and/or districts should meet as needed to facilitate this shift and organise pre-Congress discussion and other preparations for the Congress.
  4. We cease producing the DSP national newsletter and offer to transfer that effort into producing a Socialist Alliance national newsletter.
  5. The DSP NC in October 2009 should re-assess these arrangements and make proposals for the Congress.
Boyle then concluded:
These measures will leave the January 2010 Congress with the full option of altering or reversing these perspectives. It also reserves to the Congress the question of what form, if any, the DSP should continue to take after that Congress. The October National Committee plenum should make proposals on these matters.
Read the full report: Party-building perspectives report (June 2009 National Committee plenum) delivered by Peter Boyle on behalf of the DSP National Executive and adopted unanimously by the DSP National Committee (NC) on June 7.

Jun 25, 2009

Whither Iran?

This analysis by Babak Zahraie is comprehensive and enriched by a considered historiography. Book mark the site and study it at leisure.
Whither Iran? by Babak Zahraie
Babak Zahraie was editor of the weekly Kargar (Worker) published from 1979 to 1982 in Tehran for which he was incarcerated from 1983 to 1989 in Iran. On April 11, 1979, debated Abol Hassan Bani-Sadr (first president of the Islamic Republic) before a live TV audience on the topic of Islamic economics vs. socialist economics. The debate was viewed by 22 million people. Spoke at meetings which were attended by many thousands during the first years of the Iranian Revolution explaining proposals of the independent working class & socialist politics for various social, economic, political, and cultural problems faced by the country.

Apr 17, 2009

PSM Comrade Saraswathy's speech to final session WAAC conference

This is Deputy Chairperson of the Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSM) Comrade M Sarawathy's speech to the final plenary of the World At A Crossroads conference. She is long-term organiser of plantation workers, urban settlers and women workers in Malaysia, and founder of the Textile Union at Imperial Garment.

Red Salute from Malaysia to all the friends & comrades ! Socialist Party of Malaysia thanks DSP / Socialist Alliance & Resistance for inviting us for this valuable World at A Crossroads conference.

One of the most widely known truths today is that capitalism is in deep crisis of its own making . The endless search for greater and greater profits with complete disregard for people and the planet , has inevitably in crises which capitalism itself cannot solve.

The clock cannot be turned back on global warming which has resulted in major changes to temperatures and natural phenomena ,and which poses a serious threat to future life on earth.

Capitalism has also resultad in a crisis of resources. The resources of the world have been exhausted and depleted by unplanned production and wasteful exploitation .Peak oil production has been reached and we face the prospects of a world that is short of energy resources.


Currently we are all in the midst of a worldwide economic recession that is entirely created by the capitalist system .thanks to global capitalism no country in the world is spared. Workers are losing jobs in millions ; there is a widespread homelessness and misery. The recession has and is going to create massive poverty. World poverty figures are going to skyrocket.Of course, the capitalist- run media mourns not about the huge suffering of the people but about the bankruptcy of financial institutions such as Lehman Brothers and the drop in the billions owned by the billionaires.And about the billions being pumped in by capitalist governments to save the capitalist system.

The constant warming is that this is going to be the worst crisis in 80 years ,and even worse than the recession of the 1930s .For us socialists this means a long period of suffering and deprivation for the people ,brought about by the ruthless profits first and greed – driven system.


But this very bleak period also is a period of great hope, having created the objective conditions necessary for ending capitalism .Widespread unemployment and poverty also means widespread disenchantment and anger. We have the opportunity to create awareness
among workers y exposing the capitalist system – as a system that rides on the super exploitationand repression of workers. We have the opportunity now to create awreness about the socialist system.We have the opportunity to empower workers .I think we will all agree that the objective conditions are ready for a change.But are we ready to use this opportunity to fight for a socialist future ?

I would like to propose some actions we should take in order to be able to respond to the crisis of capitalism.

1. Sinking our differences

One of the biggest obstacles in the way to a concerted fight against capitalism is the factionalism among the left .Many groups seem to be more concerned about the correctness of their ideology and position rather the onslaught of capitalism and how the left will need a joint response to it. There is a need to unite on our similarities as socialists, oppressed to an inhuman system where the majority remains oppressed,and commit ourselves to struggle for socialism with the working class .There is a need for continuous dialogue over our defferences as we work togather.There is an urgent need for us to think of the challenges and kind of socialism in the 21stcentury and how to arrive at it. And to realize that capitalism is still strong and will will come
back after the recession only because the socialists wasted their opportunity. Human history of working class will never forgive us if we continue divide ourselves!

2.Venezuela and Latin America

We need to look at Venezuela and Latin America ,Non -socialists are achieving what socialists have failed to achieve in decades .Socialism is being introduced in ways never imagined before. What lessons can we learn from Latin America which we can apply in the struggle in our own countries ?

3. We have to work

We have to go the ground and agitate as Che says.Engage the working class in struggles , empower them – we gain the democratic space to enhance our struggles.We have to write pamphlets for workers to understand,have workers discussion – to create awareness and urge them into action. We have to harness the anger and frustration of the workers and make people aware that mankind is not doomed to suffer under the capitalism system for ever.Socialism doesn't drop from the sky!

As Rosa Luxemberg has said , the choice facing mankind is Socialism or Barbarism.There will be great anger and dissatisfaction with the existing economic system.Our role is to turn this frustration into a political struggle for a socialist society.

Long Live Socialism !
Working Class Of The World Unite !
Hidup Perjuangan ! Hidup Sosialisma !

Ian Angus speech at final session WAAC conference

Speech by Ian Angus, Associate Editor of Socialist Voice (Canada) at the final session of the World at a Crossroads Conference in Sydney, Australia, April 12, 2009.

Good afternoon.

I want to begin by thanking the Democratic Socialist Perspective, the Socialist Alliance and Green Left Weekly for inviting me to participate in this inspiring event. I have of course known of your work from afar – Green Left is one of the very best English-language socialist publications in the world – but this is my first visit here, and I have to say that your work and your dedication is even more impressive close up. I and the other comrades from Canada have been extremely impressed with the conference – and the many comrades I have met from other countries have said the same thing.

Socialist Voice is a small current in Canada, a network rather than an organization, that is committed to rebuilding and regrouping the left on a nonsectarian basis. This conference has been an invaluable contribution to that process. It was an opportunity for us to meet and exchange ideas and experiences with activists not only from Australia, but from many countries. With this event, the DSP has set an example of practical, working internationalism that we can all learn from, that all of us, in our home countries, should report, explain, and above all emulate.

There are many academic conferences on Marxism these days, but this has been a conference of activists, of people of people who are actually fighting on the front lines, for climate justice, for indigenous rights and sovereignty, against imperialism, and for workers power. If there is one thing that has been crystal clear at this meeting, it is that the revolutionary left now faces new opportunities to grow, to build and lead struggles far beyond what has been possible for some time. We need to break out of traditional ways of operating, to escape business-as-usual, to find ways to work with individuals, groups and social layers beyond our usual circles of influence.

And, as a comrade said in this room yesterday, there is no justification any more – if there ever was – for backbiting, bickering and gossip. Why? Because we have a world to win, a world to change – and that task is just too important for us to waste time with petty foolishness. The goals that unite us are vastly more important than any differences we may have.

In Canada, where the neoliberal offensive and the collapse of the socialist bloc severely weakened the Marxist left, we are rebuilding – not as quickly as we’d hope, but nevertheless we are moving forward. We owe the DSP a great debt for the example they have set. We have published Green Left articles in Socialist Voice, and we’ve been pleased and honoured that Green Left and Links have seen fit to publish some of ours.

In my remarks this afternoon, I want to particularly address a challenge to the comrades who are here from outside Australia. It’s too easy for us to sit back and let the DSP organize conferences we can attend, to let the DSP write articles we can reprint, to let the DSP organize international brigades, and so on. What I would like to see as a result of this conference, is for all the comrades who are here from outside Australia, to commit themselves to extending this practical, working internationalism.

Some of us come from very small groupings, some from fast-growing revolutionary parties – but all of us have a role to play in building a working international movement.

What we need to do above all is to create ever more opportunities to do what we’ve done this weekend, to share experiences and ideas on a continuing basis.

For example, I was very pleased to be able to spend a week before this conference speaking on climate change in several Australian cities, and in the process meeting and learning from a wide range of climate crisis activists. We need to do much more of that, not just on a bi-lateral basis, but multilaterally. It would be wonderful if a conference like this could be organized in India, or South Africa, or even, one day, in Canada. Not all of our organizations have the resources to do that today, but we can all begin moving in that direction.

We also need to expand our exchange of articles, documents and publications. The Internet is a great resource that we do not use nearly enough. When the comrades in India publish a pamphlet, for example, it could be instantly available for printing in other countries – that wouldn’t require huge effort, but it would greatly expand the resources all of us can call on. ==

Much of the most important revolutionary thought and analysis in the world today is being developed and published in Spanish – in Cuba, Venezuela, and Bolivia. Through cooperative efforts, we could expand the amount of that material that is well translated and widely disseminated, perhaps in printed form, but definitely in electronic form.

I’m very sure there are other ways that we can expand the exchange of ideas and experiences. To some degree, what we need to do is simply to consciously and deliberately take advantage of tools we already have – website, discussion forums and so on. But more than that, we need to make a commitment to allocate real resources, to expand our own material contributions to the practical internationalism we’ve seen here.

Please understand, I am not in anyway suggesting that we need or should create a new international organization. None of us wishes to be, and none of us should accept, any kind of “leading party” or international centre.” No toy internationals, no standardized international tactics. That hasn’t worked in the past, and we know it won’t work now.

But we also know that every current, every group, and every individual in this room, has much to offer and share, and that each of us will be stronger if we can share the work with others. We will build an international movement not by setting up artificial structures, but by finding every possible opportunity to exchange visits, articles, experiences, concrete support, and more. My challenge to the international guests here – and I definitely include my comrades from Canada – is that we move beyond accidental and occasional collaboration, towards a deliberate effort to work together on a regular and continuing basis.

Comrades, this conference could not have been better named. The world IS at a Crossroads. The choice between socialism and barbarism has never been so stark, or so immediate, or so pressing. All of us are conscious of what a huge task we face, of the immense responsibility that rests on our shoulders, on the shoulders of the publications, groups and parties we are part of.

We have an historic obligation to do everything possible to build a global movement to rid the world of capitalism forever. This meeting is a step towards that sacred objective, and I urge everyone here to build on this success, to make practical internationalism a key part of all of our political work in the coming year.

Together — and only together — we can win.

Thank you.

Apr 15, 2009

Ian Angus: World at the Cross Roads , a meeting of people on the front lines.

Ian Angus (pictured right),who edits the excellent Climate & Capitalism blog , summed up his Australian tour with a parting note on the GLW list.


I'm about to head back to Canada after more than two weeks in Australia. I want to thank the comrades of the DSP, Socialist Alliance, Resistance, Ecosocialist Network, Green Left Weekly and others who made my visit such a valuable experience.

I started out by visiting and speaking on climate change in four cities -- Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Hobart. The meetings varied in size, but in every city the audience include new young people who were keen to get involved, as well as activists who are playing leading roles in the Climate Emergency campaign. From a distance, it has been my impression that Australia is really setting the pace for building a climate change campaign in the wealthy countries -- up close that's very clearly true.

The talk I gave during this tour was recorded by a radio station in Adelaide --the audio is available online here:

Then I went to Sydney for the World at a Crossroads Conference organized by DSP, Green Left and Socialist Alliance. I attend a lot of conferences -- this was by far one of the best I've been to in years.

It was this a meeting not of academics or sectarians, but of people who are actually fighting on the front lines, for climate justice, for indigenous sovereignty, against imperialism, for workers' rights and more.

In addition to hundreds of Australians (the official registration count was 440) there were communists from many other countries -- I counted guests from 14 countries on the speakers list, and there were more I was able to speak to and share experiences with informally. The international speakers included governmental representatives from Cuba, Venezuela and Vietnam.

Conference photos here:

If there is one thing that was crystal clear at this meeting, it was that the revolutionary left today faces opportunities to grow far beyond what has been possible for some time. Our resources are still small, but we have enormous potential. The big challenge before us, I think, is to break out of our traditional ways of operating, to reach out to new radicals who don't speak the traditional "left language," and to work with them to create a new radical and global left.

Once again, thanks to the comrades who organized this conference and my tour, and who were so welcoming on a political and personal basis. I look forward to working with you on an ongoing basis.

Ian Angus
Editor, ClimateandCapitalism.com
Associate Editor, SocialistVoice.ca

AUDIO: Michael A. Lebowitz. -- What would Marx say?


Is it time to dust off a copy of Das Kapital and revisit Marx´s analysis of capitalism's ills?
Late Night Live hosted a discussion with Michael A. Lebowitz.

Lebowitz was a guest speaker at the World at the Crossroads Conference in Sydney on the Easter weekend and is now touring other centres.


Popout

Guests
William Coleman
Reader at the School of Economics of the Australian National University; editor of Agenda: a Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform

Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor emeritus of economics at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada

Further Information

The Path to Human Development - Michael A. Lebowitz
Publications

Title: Beyond Capital, Marx's Political Economy of the Working Class
Author: Michael A. Lebowitz
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan (Second Edition, 2003)


Apr 14, 2009

450 attend international conference!



April 13 - Around 450 people attended the exciting international conference - World At a Crossroads: Fighting for Socialism in the 21st Century - over the weekend. Many stayed on for the national conference of Resistance, socialist youth organisation, held on the Monday. Nearly 30 people attended from Wollongong, including Jay Fletcher, Jess Moore & Paola Harvey who presented talks at the conferences. It was an amazing experience in terms of learning but also for networking - with activists present from every continent around the world. While the many crises faced by capitalism - ecological, economic, political etc - were discussed at length, the conference ended on an inspiring note. There was a real optimism that if people and the oppressed unite in struggle, we can certainly change the world and put people and the planet before the needs of profit. For more information and pictures check out http://www.worldatacrossroads.org/
Source: Illawarra SA blog