This page is an experiment in finding a new way of communication, based on an older one which faded out several generations ago, but with the internet era, should - should - be possible to breath new life into.
The idea is to dedicate an entire page which is more of the nature of a critical, questioning political journal rather than a 'forum'. I think this would make any forum into something does not exist anywhere at the moment. This is what I call a 'dialogical journal'. A dialogical journal would be a journal in that people would be expected to contribute serious and well-written essays, however short. But it would be a dialogical journal in that readers or other writers would also be encouraged and expected to write essays in response - and not just very short 'comments'.
Alternatively, this page could be utilised to combine the submission of both links to published articles or essays - and promotes essay length responses or reflections on both? e
This page is not intended to be used in the way that Facebook is. My problem with FB is that whenever I post a serious essay, or even just a link to a media article, the responses are always no more than mere written soundbites. My problem with journals - like Telos, or the old New Left Review - which did serve a very valuable purpose, is that, like most journals, even today's on-line scientific journals, they did not offer the opportunity for responses to essays which themselves took the form of essays - and not mere off-hand 'comments' or 'letters to the editor'.
At Lenin's time, things were different. Like Marx, he wrote countless essays in direct dialogical response to those of others. With the internet this would again be possible, but only in the form of what I call a serious 'dialogical journal' i.e. an on-line journal which allows facilitates an in-depth dialogue between writers and readers of articles.
I would love for SWPE members, supporters, readers of the site, people with opposing views - anyone, in fact who wishes to contribute to what is intended to become in some form, a 'Journal of Progressive Nationalism'.
Peter Wilberg
So how will this work?
Using the comments box below, please submit a mini-essay which is directly related to the subject above. Your comment will then be cut and pasted into the body of this page, (finishing with the name you choose, as a way of keeping it clear as to who is writing each piece) and added to as more comments come in - with the idea of keeping the dialogue flowing and allowing for the deeper exploration of ideas. The SWPE way is one of openness and free exchange of thought. Together we can learn from each other and move forward in a living sharing of thought. The format of the Dialogical Journal allows for in depth analysis, argument and counter argument.
So to get the ball rolling, back to Peter again, to get things started:
Using the comments box below, please submit a mini-essay which is directly related to the subject above. Your comment will then be cut and pasted into the body of this page, (finishing with the name you choose, as a way of keeping it clear as to who is writing each piece) and added to as more comments come in - with the idea of keeping the dialogue flowing and allowing for the deeper exploration of ideas. The SWPE way is one of openness and free exchange of thought. Together we can learn from each other and move forward in a living sharing of thought. The format of the Dialogical Journal allows for in depth analysis, argument and counter argument.
So to get the ball rolling, back to Peter again, to get things started:
As for links to articles, I have one I would both like to submit and to write on from off-guardian.org
What I liked about it was the way it raised the whole issue of 'progressive nationalism' versus 'reactionary nationalism'. This was a subject very much alive when Lenin wrote 'Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism' (and indeed forms a large section of it). But as a decidedly ex-Stalinist I also think the issue also demands requires some hard historical rethinking when it comes to comparing National Socialism on the one hand and Stalinism on the other - and the causes and nature of the war between them. But of course what is most important is that the whole issue of progressive vs reactionary nationalism, and how to define them, is also an issue very much alive again today - and therefore one I very much look forward to writing on myself - albeit only for politically intelligent readers like yourself and your comrades! A preliminary definition of progressive nationalism: national, socialist, and therefore necessarily monetarily sovereign, but also non-racist and protective of national minorities - even whilst being fundamentally assimilatory in relation to national values, laws and cultures.
Peter Wilberg
Socialist England Representative22 December 2016 at 13:02
This page is a good idea - in depth articles on important issues responded to with equally in depth articles. It sounds like a fairly obvious thing to develop. It's a symptom of our 'soundbite age' that it actually seems so radical. Having said that I haven't the time for an in depth article at the moment, I just thought I would stick my toe tentatively in the deep red water for now. For what it's worth, if I were French, I would certainly follow the PCF advice re' voting in the first round of the Presidential elections, and switch to Le Penn in the second round should the choice be between her and the mainstream Conservative candidate. How could any revolutionary, whether they class themselves as Left, Right, or Third Positionist, not choose this course of action. The Establishment has at last suffered severe political setbacks this year. We need this process to continue, even if it means diluting our ideological purity (which has never got us very far, let's be honest) in the first place.
Socialist England Representative.
Socialist England Representative.
