Comments for Under the Ocular Tree

Comment on The SWP Scandal by Socialist Wanker | The Chair Leg of Truth

Socialist Wanker | The Chair Leg of Truth — Fri, 17 May 2013 18:47:19 +0000

[…] to Jim Jepps’ ever-growing link list, from which a couple of the items below are pilfered, or to Mikey’s tabloid version. Apologies this is so un-chronological, with stuff from January through to […]

Comment on Why there should be no such thing as society by Andrew Murphy

Andrew Murphy — Tue, 07 May 2013 19:19:32 +0000

“No man is an island.”

John Donne

Comment on The SWP Scandal by Socialist Wanker | Poumista

Socialist Wanker | Poumista — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 18:25:54 +0000

[...] Jim Jepps’ ever-growing link list, from which a couple of the items below are pilfered, or to Mikey’s tabloid version. Apologies this is so un-chronological, with stuff from January through to [...]

Comment on Boris Johnson: Enemy of Freedom by Beakerkin

Beakerkin — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 01:20:38 +0000

I am not certain that commercial speech and political speech have the same protections.
If this was a purely political ( albeit daft and offensive) then you are correct. Did the ads attempt to steer people to a specific treatment? If so then the context is different as commercial speech.

Comment on Philosophers and bizarre thought experiments, No. 1 by A Problem with Democracy | Under the Ocular Tree

A Problem with Democracy | Under the Ocular Tree — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 19:03:09 +0000

[...] have previously commented on my interest in thought experiments. Michael Huemer has posed an compelling one in his recent [...]

Comment on Akiva Orr 1931-2013: An Obituary by Beakerkin

Beakerkin — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 14:01:27 +0000

In reality most of us want the same things we differ on how to get there.

It was an excellent tribute.

Comment on The SWP Scandal by Beakerkin

Beakerkin — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:08:06 +0000

If one ever doubted Orwell those doubts are erased. There is something odd about a group
allegedly focused on workers rights devolving into something of a toxic work place. However,
there is something human about those talking about Eden creating Hell.

As I don’t believe in Eden maybe I am missing something. I just see human nature as a battle
to do our best in a world with no perfect answers. Sometimes we get it right and sometimes we fail. Oddly the quickest way to fail seems to be to get married to a single solution for all of life’s problems or to give absolute power to anyone.

Comment on The SWP Scandal by SWP crisis: who is saying what « Jim Jepps

SWP crisis: who is saying what « Jim Jepps — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:26:38 +0000

[...] Under the Ocular Tree links to all the Harry’s Place articles, mainly by Michael Ezra. [...]

Comment on The SWP Scandal by Beakerkin

Beakerkin — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 01:22:47 +0000

I understand the need for conformity as when one signs on they are literally waiving intellectual freedom. In a dictatorship these ethical violations real or imagined can be dealt with via a show trial or a stint in the gulag.

Essentially due to the concentration of power at the top there is no way for those at the bottom to remedy this do to a culture of nepotism/cronyism that appears to reinforce itself.
Thus despite the efforts of vocal opponents the probability of a scoundrel falling on his sword for the health of the party is zero.

In a nutshell it is either shut up or leave.

The probable outcome seems an exodus and a split into a few factions.

Ultimately, on a larger level this is why countries ruled by this belief can not reform. The corruption must fester uncontrolled and all the axioms on uncontrolled power have proven correct. Yet one part just escapes my grasp.

How come monarchism on the whole doesn’t produce the same body counts. Maybe part of it is that the technology wasn’t available at the time. Why does Communism seem to produce
body higher body counts if the the authoritarianism is more or less at similar levels. Perhaps
monarchy is not as applicable as a theocracy and history has few modern examples of pure theocracy to base a comparison.

Comment on The SWP Scandal by Michael Ezra (@MichaelEzra)

Michael Ezra (@MichaelEzra) — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:31:54 +0000

When there are ideological or other major differences in Trot Parties for whatever reason, the party usually splits. In the UK in 1985, a Trot party, the Workers Revolutionary Party, suffered its own sex scandal as the leader, Gerry Healy, was accused of sexually abusing 6 young females in his party. The party had been held together for decades by Healy (if we include its period as the Group and the Socialist Labour League). When the scandal broke, the party split. Within a few months there was another split and within a few years there were numerous more splits.
Inside major political parties in the US such as the Republicans or Democrats, or in the UK such as Labour or Conservatives, party members are allowed to hold differing views from the Party position. This is not deemed possible by many Trot groups. “The party is always right” is a mantra quoted following Trotsky himself. Factions are highly restricted and,if allowed, must dissolve, after their position is debated at conference. If the minority does not fall in line with the majority,they are either expelled or they split. The reason the far left is so fragmented is largely due to this. A small ideological difference on the position taken on Cuba or anything else can ultimately end up with such a split.