I couldn't see anything in the forum on this so I have decided to start a new topic.

I have been arguing back and forth with an SPGB member on the internet elsewhere and thought it would be useful to go back to the horses mouth so to speak. I know this has all been done before even on other forums but would appreciate any comments even short ones. Incidently, I don't think things I have said the CWO would necessarily agree with I am just using some of what they have said as part of my ideas and understanding.

Apologies if this is a little laborious...

SPGB member posted: youtu.be (Chomsky on Leninism 2 of 2)

ME: I'm not sure if he does here but sometimes he highlights the communist opposition to Lenin and the Bolsheviks in the form of Left Communists (of course there were others like that funny group the SPGB). He also makes an interesting point that the US called Russia Socialist/Communist in part to denigrate the ideas and theories of socialism as a whole - hey, there's Socialism overthere (Stalinist terror and misery) you want that? i.e there's no other choice than capitalism and our class rule. That may seem quite obvious really but I mean like he says a lot of texts (Left Communist) weren't made available until the 1950s or much later. Some people vaguely know of Trotsky being a critic but even that is at a very superficial level - including myself. Does the 'average' worker (nowadays) know there were prior and after the revolutionary period a myriad of debates and divergences on virtually every single question regarding socialism (they probably don't that's a bit rhetorical). Is it possible to get over this, is it even necessary? I don't think the SPGB would really say yes that all tendencies and questions should be thought about and discussed in forums or such like throughtout the country if not the world, it would be instead the mantra of the SPGB case for socialism. I don't think it is far reaching enough. The SPGB wants a majority of the class to be socialists in the manner in which the SPGB see the revolution I think it can only happen with socialism as a set of ideas, theories, questions and tendencies being debated within the class on a massive scale, it almost being at the centre of life. The class doesn't need to be convinced or won over it needs to think and ask questions for itself. Feel free to add anything, anyone!

SPGB: He speaks of this in the first mainly. While I wouldn't say that working people need to be "convinced" of the virtues of socialism-since we are all aware of the negativity of capitalism in our daily lives-we do need to be shown that what we have been told and taught regarding how the world operates and why is skewed and constructed to maintain it. Once people have seen/heard what ACTUAL, GENUINE socialism is (and not the pretend soviet, Korean, Cuban or Chinese etc varieties) then people can begin to liberate their own minds and begin to push for transformation. Some may find this "path" themselves while others may benefit from outside help which, is where groups such as the SPGB can pay a significant part ie pooling resources, providing contacts and sharing discussion. The SPGB doesn't have a "brand" of socialism to push; it just offers a clear view of what socialism objectively is.

I dont agree with what you say that the SPGB having a particular mantra of socialist revolution. It is quite clear and evident that what the group professes is the scientific, realist and logical explanation of what socialism is but it does not dictate what it should be or how it should happen; instead it identifies empirically in a scientific fashion of what logically needs to occur for socialism to exist. It does not seek to produce a new "-ism" but to act as a catalyst for the very things that you suggest, based on the founding principles of socialism and away from refracting lenses of analysis that upset the "purity" found within "original" Marxist socialism that so many have become ignorant of.

ME: Hang on a sec my old china I said: "mantra of the SPGB case for socialism". Not mantra of socialist revolution. There is a difference and we both recognise it.

SPGB: The SPGB case for socialism is that workers are exploited by capitalism. Are you disputing this?

2nd SPGB comrade: Hi, the SPGB would agree that "socialism as a set of ideas, theories, questions and tendencies being debated within the class on a massive scale, it almost being at the centre of life." The SPGB (and the WSM) exists at the moment as a means for the diffusing socialist ideas and practice throughout the world by debating and discussion. The SPGB does not wish to close down debate afterall we practice the idea of free debate and discussion, we've debated with Fascists to Stalinists, from Tory to Labour, and all manner of political parties with the aim of persuading our fellow workers. Could you please clarify your last comment which the SPGB case for socialism is not necessarily compatible with a socialist revolution? Because the SPGB case is that practice and the object socialisr absolutely necessary to a socialist revolution.

ME: I think you're picking an argument where there isn't one. Perhaps you misread my initial comment, I haven't expressed myself clearly enough or it's purely the use of the word "mantra" which is the problem. Of course I think workers are exploited! The SPGB certainly have a "mantra" for what is REQUIRED for a socialist revolution their 'case for sociaism'. What part of this is being disputed? More importantly though you haven't really adressed my broader points against the SPGB view. I mean in fact it's not really against in a meaningful way it's an extension perhaps?

ME: Perhaps I'm simply imagining the practice of the SPGB and the class on a much bigger scale. I am quite capable of confusing myself and others!

SPGB: what you write doesn't make sense. From what I think I do understand from your posts you are saying that people don't have to be socialists for the current system of society to change, nor do they have to join the SPGB for change to occur and that the SPGB want their own version of socialism to exist after a specific type of revolution as designed by the SPGB? You are also saying that the SPGB's "mantra" or "case" for socialism is different, or perhaps distinct, from what you describe as "a [socialist] set of ideas, theories, questions and tendencies". What I (and most others herein I think would agree with me) say is that the SPGB does not exist at all to impulse its own "manner" of socialism or revoultion. It exists to enable socialists to come together, to discuss socialism and things related to it, to act as a forum and centre of specialist Marxist understanding so as to be able to allow more socialists to reach more socialists and potential socialists. If, which I think you may be arguing, people only need to be able to think freely and discuss things then they will find their own way towards socialism then it would be the case that socialism would have existed long ago. While I agree that people should think freely, but, sometimes people need extra help to be able to match their feelings and thoughts to that of others so as to gain common ground and understanding; it is, afterall, the mantra of The Communist Manifesto: "workers of the world, unite!". The idea is that we all come together with a shared goal of a new socialist system of society that favours people over money and eradicates the artificial inquality that is induced as a result of capitalism. The SPGB is not a political party that strives for power by extending rhetoric that voters agree with like the Russian Communist Party (et al) did in the Russian Empire. It is a party that exists as a focal point of organisation to empower people. The SPGB's "manner" of socialism is no different to Marx's which, I think we all agree, is fairly clear. So, please, clarify your point and explain what you are attempting to argue.

ME: Yes workers don't have to be socialist before acting we will wait until eternity otherwise i.e there will never be socialist revolution. As I have tried to argue before the conception of socialist consciousness held by the SPGB is idealist not Marxist or materialist, I fully agree with the CWO arguments against the SPGB in the excellent audio debate on your party website. To explain further another comrade wrote: “Marx believed that the conditions of life and work of the proletariat would force the working class to behave in ways that would ultimately transform society. In other words, what Marx said was: We’re not talking about going door-to-door and making workers into ideal socialists. You’ve got to take workers as they are, with all their contradictions, with all their nonsense. But the fact that society forces them to struggle begins to transform the working class. If white workers realize they can’t organize steel unless they organize black workers, that doesn’t mean they’re not racist. It means that they have to deal with their own reality, and that transforms them. Who were the workers who made the Russian Revolution? Sexists, nationalists, half of them illiterate. Who were the workers in Polish Solidarity? Anti-Semitic, whatever. That kind of struggle begins to transform people.” – Martin Glaberman

As Marx wrote (sorry I know it's often repeated!)

“Both for the production on a mass scale of this communist consciousness, and for the success of the cause itself, the alteration of men on a mass scale is necessary, an alteration that can only take place in a practical movement, a revolution; the revolution is necessary, therefore, not only the ruling class cannot be overthrown in any other way, but also because the class overthrowing it can only in a revolution succeed in ridding itself of all the muck of ages and become fitted to found society anew.”

2nd SPGB comrade: Your example of the Russian Revolution belies the reality that it was nothing to do with communism or socialism. The CWO argument that action come first then there's understanding is a false dichotomy. Actions may lie in speaking to fellow workers urging them to view capitalism in certain way (Marxist) and take action accordingly: democratically for socialism. Actions and thinking, talking discussing, are not mutually exclusive. Indeed understanding what the hell is going on is a very active process. Indeed it doesn't take a genious to realize that reforms has certain limits and will be defeated in the long term if it doesn't fit in with the long term need of capitalism. I think it's the very defeat of the left has left scars on the working class that they have acquesed to a greater or lesser extent to capitalism.

ME: Of course it was defeated otherwise we all be living in world wide socialism. The point is that the practical struggle is a process that can only change (and which does) workers en masse. It's not action then understanding it's understanding and change through action (practical activity). I am for talk and discussion but it has it's limits under a bourgeois mode of production and everything that entails. I am for lots and varied discussion as I mentioned earlier.

2nd SPGB comrade: This is what I mean, can you make clear what 'practical action is' as opposed to 'understanding (I take this to mean discussion, debating & reflection)' means and why is it different? After all all these exist as social facts and actions. The reason why the CWO makes a such a sharp distinction between the two is that they don't believe the the working class can actually grasp and understand therefore take the necessary action to bring about socialism. The CWO will do the thinking and the workers are lead by the nose like cattle through the exit of the slaughter house. They caricature the SPGB case that we want to go and 'convert workers one by one' to the cause. It's a plain ridiculous proposition if we could act in this way, nor do ideas work this way; via the internet, work places, or wherever workers meet and discuss ideas through out the world & take democratic action. My particular favourite of the SPGB & the CWO debate was when one of the CWO speakers announced like a true Witch Hunter that he decided that though he used to think the 'SPGB was a sincere party' but now it was really 'Schooled in Stalinism' (!), another great one was he deliberately distorted our view of the role of Trade Unions as a 'waste of time'(!) However, I'm confused when you say: "Of course it (the left?) was defeated otherwise we all be living in world wide socialism" as 'the left' despite what they say, they never where socialist, in reality?

ME: Practical action: strikes, disputes, coming up against the Forces of Order or the state generally etc. Let me take as clear as an example as I can. A worker thinks the police i.e an armed body of the state are a neutral force. The SPGB tells him they are not, he disregards it, is not convinced. He goes on strike or a protest and the police beat the shit out of him. He changes his mind about the poice and starts questioning the state and what exists and generally starts to 'think' about some things. Can you not see a process here? One that does not separate the practical act from the changes that take place? This is why workers ideas can change very quickly and en masse but it's not that they simply change from one to another idea but develop! And this is an on-going process. I don't think the SPGB understands the CWO position let alone agrees with it. I must admit when I listened to the audio recording I did laugh out loud when he said your party had been "schooled in Stalinism" very funny but I don't think true. It was over-the-top and a sign of exasperation I think with not being able to get points across, being misunderstood and so on. I meant of course the Russian Revolution was defeated. One last point, the CWO and similar groups like the ICC don't organise workers or lead them in anything but make interventions, try and learn from defeats, clarify communist politics and take part in workers struggle where they can. They are leading no one but your imagination! (I hope you laugh at that one! ; )

2nd SPGB comrade: The SPGB would fully agree with your example: 'A worker thinks the police i.e an armed body of the state are a neutral force. The SPGB tells him they are not, he disregards it, is not convinced. He goes on strike or a protest and the police beat the shit out of him. He changes his mind about the poice and starts questioning the state and what exists and generally starts to 'think' about some things.' It's the experience of capitalism that makes workers question capitalism and in that confrontation alternative ideas develop of how to organize society on a different basis, the SPGB argues that we must be in the fray expounding socialist ideas, but not only that: how these ideas can be practically implemented by the working class; democratically; without leaders; the means of production will be own the community -the world community- and produced for needs of that community. The CWO maintains that the working class is so ideologically dominated by capitalism that the vast majority simply cannot understand it unless there's a cataclysm and collapse of capitalism which 'tears asunder' this veil of capitalist ideology & which all will be revealed. It rejects the use of parliament and bourgeois democracy as a con-trick on the working class so wants nothing to do with it. The transition period if they get into power, for which they will 'intervene', will involves 'anti-terrorist units', police, money in the form of labour time vouchers, and presumably courts (as Steve Coleman pointed out). And the transition period could last for generations! The CWO sets itself up as plutocratic leaders which will effectively rule over the working class, and the Russian 'Revolution' and all the other 'revolutions' will be repeated all over again with state capitalism, one party rule & all the other crimes committed in the name of 'socialism'.

ME: Thanks that's an excellent reply and very clear. I will have to check with the CWO about the comment: "The CWO maintains that the working class is so ideologically dominated by capitalism that the vast majority simply cannot understand it unless there's a cataclysm and collapse of capitalism which 'tears asunder' this veil of capitalist ideology & which all will be revealed." - As if consciousness changes and develops all in one go so to speak because of the highest levels of mystification and so on.

I appreciate this is a long winded conversation (especially for an initial post as a forum topic) and won't be offended if people don't leave any comments!