Obviously John Dixon was irritated ...

... with me, he accused me of misrepresentation when I referred to his recent blog entry entitled Decentralism and the EU, I wrote at various locations "the constitutional conundrum that the ex-chair of Plaid fails to comprehend" (or similar).

The brief correspondence can be found here, I have copied it below for the record ....

John DixonFeb 5, 2012 02:21 AM

"the constitutional conundrum that the ex-chair of Plaid fails to comprehend."

I think you should re-read what I wrote. I didn't say that I failed to comprehend it, merely that socialism and decentralism can sometimes lead in different directions, and that it can be difficult to bridge the two in practice. Disagreeing with me is your right, which I respect, but this is misrepresentation.

JohnFeb 5, 2012 03:38 AM

Is it, I wonder ...

... it was your "As a result, to an extent, those of us who advocate decentralist socialism have got away with it for years without really having to put the flesh on the bones. Plaid’s review has recommended doing some work on that – I look forward to seeing it, but suspect that it will be easier to recommend than to achieve."

and ...

"That need for a strong central redistributive policy is really the reason for supporting the continuation of EU structural funding. It doesn’t make the EU a socialist organisation; far from it. But it’s hard to see how a fully decentralist model works to enable fairness without such supranational structures. And that creates a dichotomy."

... if you think I have misrepresented you I am sorry, but how else would I interpret the conflict of opinion I read on your words.

There is a document that describes "A Decentralist Manifesto" by Ralph Borsodi, this is such a perfect description of the path Plaid would take if it dared, you can read it at ...

http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/borsodi-ralph_decentralist-manifesto.html

... this particular document describes decentralist socialism perfectly, and to be frank, it could carry this old liberal with it, except for one very small part ... where it describes :

"This manifesto is submitted to the thoughtful and concerned men and women of the world urging them to assume the intellectual and moral leadership of mankind in order to replace those who have demonstrated incompetence, lack of vision, greed, bigotry and brutality."

... take away the irrelevance and you are left with :

"... assume the intellectual and moral leadership of mankind in order to replace ..."

... no democracy you see, something that is dear to me.

To expand my thoughts, where Ralph Borsodi dismisses democracy my mind turned to nationalism of the past, not the horror stories but the political outcomes, what will be left for nationalist Wales if ever Wales became independent.  Would there be a need for the politics of Plaid, it would have achieved its primary aim, what else is there ..........

............ well if the Plaid constitution is to be believed there is no plan for a plural society, and there lies the primary problem with nationalist politics, there is rarely room for other politics, Plaid by its own volition excludes other competing politics.

Communist it is not, Syndicalism it is, Alan Sandry's vision of Plaid, ...

... and if you consider the words of Plaid through their on-line support, you quickly come to the conclusion there is no halfway house between where we are now and independence.

What is syndicalism to the man or woman in the street, it is not the co-op or the John Lewis Partnership, although Plaid voices would sooth the voters with pink and fluffy warm and fuzzy bullshit, it is a world where there is a social order based on workers organised into production units, sounds like communism but without "The State".

There is no one in charge, the google effect will tell you that "... multiple non-competitive categorised units to negotiate and manage an economy", sounds like anarchy, but the Plaid model has a twist in its tail, there is political control, the Plaid key that Alan Sandry calls "Decentralised Socialism", there is no document that describes exactly how Plaid intends to apply this economic and social doctrine, though if you couple Syndicalism with the only document that describes "Decentralised Socialism", it is possible to visualise the "New Order" so loved by Plaid's more radical support.

Decentralised Socialism may be introduced with the words of Ralf Borsodi ...

"The leadership which the priests lost to the warriors, the warriors to the kings, the kings to the business men, the business men to the financiers, and which the financiers are now losing to the politicians, must be assumed by a group which sharply distinguishes between the exercise of influence and the exercise of power. The minority of concerned and thoughtful teachers and .writers, of poets and preachers, of artists and scientists, of physicians and lawyers, who constitute the real leadership of any society, must be. reborn."

... there we have the politics of Plaid, the politics of the crachach ...

"Every child must be taught all that is essential to their humanization -- a useful craft and the cultivation of the Earth; the practice of domestic arts; to read, write and use numbers. All must be imbued with the basic virtues -- the love of nature, of beauty, and of mankind without regard to race, religion or nationality.

... there is an assumption that the intellectual and moral leadership of "Wales" can only be found within the Plaid ranks, the thoughtful few, a new aristocracy with its feet firmly planted in a perverse vision of domestic tranquillity, a life without liberty..."

For those who vote Plaid, welcome to this brave new world, just hope your children are to one of the few thoughtful people, lets hope they are not free spirits, lets hope they are not of the liberal tradition.

This world envisaged by the nationalists, separatists, Plaid Cymru, is not democracy.