Socialism |OT| The Dawn of a Red Era

Lafiel · Jan 15, 2018

pigeon said:
If you believe that socialism just won't work in a free democracy that's a pretty good argument for not having socialism.

You should reconsider this position. It is a good way to ensure that people who agree with you on a moral level are motivated to prevent you from having any influence.

You do realize repression is a inherent feature of the capitalist state?

If you can't understand the power dynamics that exist in society then this conversation probably isn't going go anywhere. And we will just have to agree to disagree. As a socialist I think the only way we can change society is to challenge power and not submit to it.

pigeon · Jan 15, 2018

Lafiel said:
You do realize repression is a inherent feature of the capitalist state?

So shouldn't we seek to remove that, rather than replacing it with different flavors of repression?

Lafiel · Jan 15, 2018

pigeon said:
So shouldn't we seek to remove that, rather than replacing it with different flavors of repression?

That's pretty much the idea - but I'd ask - if you really do believe that we can just peacefully transition to Socialism. You can be part of the negotiation crew with the capitalist class if the revolution ever kicks off and we will see how far you get. My position is pretty clear in that I'm all for a peaceful transition to socialism and it's absolutely the preferred option, but I know the reality of the situation is it won't happen, and any revolutionary upsurge in society will have to be prepared to defend itself with force.

Mezentine · Jan 15, 2018

Lafiel said:
That's pretty much the idea - but I'd ask - if you really do believe that we can just peacefully transition to Socialism. You can be part of the negotiation crew with the capitalist class if the revolution ever kicks off and we will see how far you get. My position is pretty clear in that I'm all for a peaceful transition to socialism and it's absolutely the preferred option, but I know the reality of the situation is it won't happen, and any revolutionary upsurge in society will have to be prepared to defend itself with force.

See, I don't disagree with any of this, particularly the possible requirement of violence as a mechanism to topple existing structures, but specifically when it comes to the statement "repression is going to have to play a part in any socialist state in the future": if the former rich and powerful, the former elites, still wield enough political influence that open democracy leads to the dissolution of the socialist organization, you've got a bigger problem that needs dealing with that can't and shouldn't be solved by "and now no-one is allowed to run against the Party". This sort of leads us exactly in the direction I alluded to before, where the interests of the party and the interests of the people are assumed to be synonymous, which keeps not going well.

That's not a trivially easy problem to solve, and if you give the benefit of the doubt to most failed movements so far not being able to figure it out is exactly why shit went bad, but its one that we do need to solve

pigeon · Jan 15, 2018

Lafiel said:
That's pretty much the idea - but I'd ask - if you really do believe that we can just peacefully transition to Socialism. You can be part of the negotiation crew with the capitalist class if the revolution ever kicks off and we will see how far you get. My position is pretty clear in that I'm all for a peaceful transition to socialism and it's absolutely the preferred option, but I know the reality of the situation is it won't happen, and any revolutionary upsurge in society will have to be prepared to defend itself with force.

At the moment I'm still pretty dubious on whether we can avoid ethnonationalist fascism, let alone get all the way to socialism, so I'll have to get back to you on that.

But there's a pretty big difference between "a society attempting to bring about socialism may need to respond to reactionary violence by the collapsing capitalist system" and "Mao was right to starve 18 million people, they were all kulaks anyway."

Lafiel · Jan 15, 2018

Mezentine said:
See, I don't disagree with any of this, but specifically when it comes to the statement "repression is going to have to play a part in any socialist state in the future": if the former rich and powerful, the former elites, still wield enough political influence that open democracy leads to the dissolution of the socialist organization, you've got a bigger problem that needs dealing with that can't and shouldn't be solved by "and now no-one is allowed to run against the party".

That's not a trivially easy problem to solve, and if you give the benefit of the doubt to most failed movements so far not being able to figure it out is exactly why shit went bad, but its one that we do need to solve

I think in history we actually do know what went wrong with a lot of authoritarian practices of China and Russia . A simple way of looking at it is that they used repression and force for the benefit of supporting the privileged bureaucrats in their respective parties and it wasn't for the purpose of building working class power. In fact they played a clear role of hindering it in both cases. I also just think some of the liberal opposition to these arguments to be problematic in a sense because it forgets that a lot of liberation movements such as civil rights, the fight against apartheid actually had to use violence against their oppressors to move forward. And I'm certainly not some tankie who fetishises this stuff, because I loathe violence and would prefer a world without it, but self-defense and using force and violence in support of your own liberation isn't wrong. It reminds me of how Palestinian resistance gets vilified for being anti-democratic and not being conductive to so-called "dialogue" to peace with Israel. Fuck that shit tbh.

Mezentine · Jan 15, 2018

Lafiel said:
I think in history we actually do know what went wrong with a lot of authoritarian practices of China and Russia . A simple way of looking at it is that they used repression and force for the benefit of supporting the privileged bureaucrats in their respective parties and it wasn't for the purpose of building working class power. In fact they played a clear role of hindering it in both cases. I also just think some of the liberal opposition to these arguments to be problematic in a sense because it forgets that a lot of liberation movements such as civil rights, the fight against apartheid actually had to use violence against their oppressors to move forward. And I'm certainly not some tankie who fetishises this stuff, because I loathe violence and would prefer a world without it, but self-defense and using force and violence in support of your own liberation isn't wrong. It reminds me of how Palestinian resistance gets vilified for being anti-democratic and not being conductive to so-called "dialogue" to peace with Israel. Fuck that shit tbh.

Yeah sorry I edited my post to be a bit clearer, but I'll elaborate more now: I think there are critical differences between the use of violence as a force to seize power and depose existing ruling structures and the use of violence to maintain power once it is held (and further differences in the form of violence, whether its carceral, confiscatory, or bodily, etc). I get that its not really a clean line, that you don't just "win" and all the old bad things go away, but I think its super important that we be aware of that difference, and its why I really don't like guillotine jokes, frankly. Because the public execution of someone who is at your mercy is such a different thing from the death of someone in the chaos of a power transition, and when people joke about it it really skeeves me out

That's a bit of a tangent, to address the main point: I think its worth examining how privileged bureaucrats become as such, especially if they were formerly of the revolutionary movement. I think you can make a good case that the very form of the role warps whoever holds it (all power corrupts, etc) which gives us three sort of outcomes: either you build a system without any bureaucrats (I'm skeptical it can be done without an incredibly high degree of locality, and even then), you give the bureaucrats high authority and the force to back it up (and they use it, because they will use it, as we have seen), or you have robust bottom-up "Democratic" mechanisms of control (and you open yourself to former powerful interests influencing the population to serve themselves)

Bonen no Max'd · Jan 15, 2018

pigeon said:
At the moment I'm still pretty dubious on whether we can avoid ethnonationalist fascism, let alone get all the way to socialism, so I'll have to get back to you on that.

But there's a pretty big difference between "a society attempting to bring about socialism may need to respond to reactionary violence by the collapsing capitalist system" and "Mao was right to starve 18 million people, they were all kulaks anyway."

I used to not be a tankie until I learned about Mao's policy on birds tho

this is why I think socialism must win

sphagnum · Jan 15, 2018

Jam said:
My understanding of Catalonia is that it was inherently anarchy. While some socialism and communism occurred in the time period it wasn't really state-scaled and was more free form anarchy, I don't think there was a huge collectivism applied. But again, this isn't my area and the other guys in this thread know far more about this than me which is why I'm coming in here to be educated. Thanks for being honest at least, a lot of 'socialists' I occur in my real circles are just pseudo-intellectuals who'll argue around points incessantly because muh collectivism is the best ideology.

I think the Russians got really close to it in the earliest days of the USSR but the Bolsheviks banning all opposition and making sure they were in control of the nomination and voting process prevented it from being "real socialism". Had they allowed free elections within the soviets/workers' councils they would have successfully pulled it off. From there we would have been able to see just how well soviet democracy would actually work.

-----------------------

Happy MLK Day everyone. Time to remember some words by Dr. King:

"You can't talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can't talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You're really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry. Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong with capitalism. There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism."

And, subquently, Lenin:

"During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes constantly hounded them, received their theories with the most savage malice, the most furious hatred, and the most unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander. After their deaths, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons, to canonize them, so to say, and to hallow their names, to a certain extent, for the 'consolation' of the oppressed classes, and with the object of duping the latter, while, at the same time, robbing the revolutionary theory of its substance, blunting its revolutionary edge, and vulgarizing it."

syndicalist · Jan 15, 2018

That Chelsea Manning thread is vile. The conspiracy theory darts that these people throw to connect her and other lefties to Putin. I sometimes can't believe it when I'm reminded of the level of hysteria surrounding the Russian-interference business. It's pretty frightening, really.

I really hope it's just a matter of me focusing far too much on people who are far too online.

SegFault · Jan 15, 2018

that manning thread got WORSE than the last time i mentioned people thinking anyone going against the status quo of the democratic party was a russian stooge.

it's mind blowing.

Deleted member 2620 · Jan 15, 2018

The Manning thread is genuinely depressing.

manchego obfuscator · Jan 15, 2018

syndicalist said:
That Chelsea Manning thread is vile. The conspiracy theory darts that these people throw to connect her and other lefties to Putin. I sometimes can't believe it when I'm reminded of the level of hysteria surrounding the Russian-interference business. It's pretty frightening, really.

I really hope it's just a matter of me focusing far too much on people who are far too online.

I'm pretty sure it is. Online spaces are prone to an overheated, tribalistic discourse that makes post-2016 divisions seem and feel larger than they actually are in reality. Unfortunately, said tribalism isn't actually symmetrical in practice, which makes things even worse; lord knows there are people on the left who are overly invested in grievances from the 2016 primary and generally dunking on libs just for the hell of it, but they don't have an entire left-wing institutional infrastructure that regularly amplifies and even actively engages in that sort of tribalism the way the center-left does.

As for Russia: I think it's clear that Greenwald and others on the left were wrong to downplay it as much as they did. But it's also clear (well, it should be) that Trump couldn't become president without thoroughly American institutions having failed very badly for many years, and that whatever Russia did merely took advantage of those preexisting failures. Monomaniacally fixating on Russia is a convenient way to absolve those institutions of responsibility, and that's precisely why it's so appealing.

House_Of_Lightning · Jan 15, 2018

pigeon said:
At the moment I'm still pretty dubious on whether we can avoid ethnonationalist fascism, let alone get all the way to socialism, so I'll have to get back to you on that.

But there's a pretty big difference between "a society attempting to bring about socialism may need to respond to reactionary violence by the collapsing capitalist system" and "Mao was right to starve 18 million people, they were all kulaks anyway."

I am slightly more sympathetic to the Chinese experience and Mao than I am to Stalin. There are plenty of things to criticize Mao for (Adventurism, Personality Cult, Third Worldism/Three Worlds Theory, Richard Fucking Nixon, etc), and while the results of these campaigns are worth reflection and harsh criticism, they are their own separate events.

While not defending the results, the Great Leap Forward is the result of dogmatic "progressivism", in this case the absolute faith in the masses as a nebulous concept, and hundreds of years of the Chinese ruling class specifically denying knowledge of basic biology and chemistry to the Chinese people resulting in ignorant decisions made with no understanding of the consequences.

The GLF was an attempt to break away from the stratification of the industry/proletarian and agricultural/peasant divide that took over the Soviet Union. The Chinese wanted to avoid the reinforcing of class boundaries, the political stranglehold of centralized planning, and the creation of the market economy that had become entrenched in the USSR post Lenin. The Chinese saw the divide between the countryside and the city in the Soviet Union and in that they saw the economic problems that China had faced itself under the Dynasties. The Soviet Model did not address or solve their primary economic needs. And the result was "Birds are eating our crops? Kill the birds. We need more steel? Make pig iron." The scientific processes and side effects were simply unknown and the expertise completely lacking to understand. Areas with Cadre who know how to smelt iron and properly maintain fields saw less significant catastrophes than those areas that had no knowledge at all.

The GLF and the Cultural Revolution is an interesting contrast to the Holodomor and the Purges.

In regards to Violence, violence is unescapable. Violence in service to an immediate political ends and done so with mass political power is different than the desperate violence with no political outcome other than replacing political power with absolute power via a monopoly of force.

This is why the GLF and CR isn't a 1:1 comparison to Holodomor and the Purges. In regards to the GLF and CR, one was a mass attempt at societal change made through the choices of ignorance rooted in a historically designed withholding of education and the other was a mass uprising against the State as it existed/was expected to exist. Maoism in the sense of the GLF and the CR was a significant "break" from and against Stalinism.

Holodomor and the Purges were State Terror against the proletarian, intelligentsia, peasantry, the enlisted, and race/ethnic targets ("enemies of the people") for the single goal of ensuring State power and privilege in a political situation that saw it waning. It was systemic violence.

Supplementary reading:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1969/02/27/a-special-supplement-reflections-on-violence/

The issue concerning modern Khrushchevism/Maoism is the replacing of the proletarian revolution with military adventurism. The latter always romanticizes the noble soldier and the violence used in their goals and their campaign and it ultimately resembles/morphs into the same "patriotism" pretenses that give rise to the systemic violence practiced by every State.

Most Maoists, however, don't understand the break between Mao and Stalin and just adopt all the Stalinist State Capitalist shit and add a heaping spoonful of military fetishization on top of it (Which, when you think about it and given Stalin's overtures to patriotism and military romanticism, that form of "Maoism" isn't unique to Mao at all and is just Stalinism "With a Chinese Face")

House_Of_Lightning · Jan 15, 2018

Also, discussions of Socialism and Democracy need to quantify what one means when they say Democracy.

Mezentine · Jan 15, 2018

House_Of_Lightning said:
Also, discussions of Socialism and Democracy need to quantify what one means when they say Democracy.

For the purposes of very very high level discussion I'll define it as "mechanism/s by which the population of a social order can peacefully revoke their consent to be governed by a particular individual, party, or in a particular manner"

There are obviously a lot of words in there like "population", "governed", and "manner" that need further definition and I think that is exactly how various forms of democracy get defined obviously.

"The US is not very good at this" and "Russia and China are both unacceptably bad at this" are both statements that can be true

House_Of_Lightning · Jan 15, 2018

I think any formal definition and method for "enacting" a democratic process ultimately impedes the act of democracy. The excuse of maintaining the "sanctimony" of the ritual itself often becoming the more important matter than the democratic result itsself.

Lime · Jan 15, 2018

syndicalist said:
That Chelsea Manning thread is vile. The conspiracy theory darts that these people throw to connect her and other lefties to Putin. I sometimes can't believe it when I'm reminded of the level of hysteria surrounding the Russian-interference business. It's pretty frightening, really.

I really hope it's just a matter of me focusing far too much on people who are far too online.

SegFault said:
that manning thread got WORSE than the last time i mentioned people thinking anyone going against the status quo of the democratic party was a russian stooge.

it's mind blowing.

Tain said:
The Manning thread is genuinely depressing.

Everything post-Trump has just reminded me of the time I innerly despised the US for George W. Bush and the public support of him. Liberals are just as imperialistic and pro-war as the openly fascists, and they are just as easy to deflect and project from the very own problems that give rise to the pain and suffering that the US as a society inflicts domestically and internationally upon millions of people. The whole 'Putin is behind it all!!!" is the psychological mechanism to externalize and project the problems with the US onto an exterior threat, so that they don't have to face the murder and torture that all citizens in power are complicit in.

Watch liberals think that the problems end with Trump. Watch liberals forget all about the bad shit embedded into the fabric of US society, such as the prison industrial complex, wealth inequality/capitalism, war crimes, mass surveillance, healthcare, etc.. Watch liberals white-wash George W. Bush, despite him being a war criminal (oh wait, they've already done that).

I get so furious about this casual approach to murder of non-US citizens and the perception of Manning just underscores how horrible these pro-war liberals can be.

Mezentine · Jan 15, 2018

House_Of_Lightning said:
I think any formal definition and method for "enacting" a democratic process ultimately impedes the act of democracy. The excuse of maintaining the "sanctimony" of the ritual itself often becoming the more important matter than the democratic result itsself.

That's partially why I was trying to go as broad as possible with the definition and get to what I think is the essential point, which is that the people who are governed can act in a way to reject the current leaders of power without having to resort to a coup

Mezentine · Jan 15, 2018

Lime said:
Everything post-Trump has just reminded me of the time I innerly despised the US for George W. Bush and the public support of him. Liberals are just as imperialistic and pro-war as the openly fascists, and they are just as easy to deflect and project from the very own problems that give rise to the pain and suffering that the US as a society inflicts domestically and internationally upon millions of people. The whole 'Putin is behind it all!!!" is the psychological mechanism to externalize and project the problems with the US onto an exterior threat, so that they don't have to face the murder and torture that all citizens in power are complicit in.

Watch liberals think that the problems end with Trump. Watch liberals forget all about the bad shit embedded into the fabric of US society, such as the prison industrial complex, wealth inequality/capitalism, war crimes, mass surveillance, healthcare, etc.. Watch liberals white-wash George W. Bush, despite him being a war criminal (oh wait, they've already done that).

I get so furious about this casual approach to murder of non-US citizens and the perception of Manning just underscores how horrible these pro-war liberals can be.

I don't disagree with this and don't have anything other to say other than that its also a bit maddening watching parts of the left act like Russian interference had nothing to do with the outcome of the election because they absolutely have to believe that Clinton's loss was evidence of "the population rejecting neoliberalism" and acknowledging that Russian actions might have tipped the scales complicates that narrative and forces us to face the more depressing reality that a lot of this country, including a good chunk of "the proletariat" is just fucking cancerous and another chunk is apathetic and more than eager to enjoy the fruits of violence and exploitation themselves (ourselves)

Our problems are so much more "the people" than we really want to admit, and figuring out how we actually face that is maybe the thing I am trying to personally grapple with.

pigeon · Jan 15, 2018

Mezentine said:
I don't disagree with this and don't have anything other to say other than that its also a bit maddening watching parts of the left act like Russian interference had nothing to do with the outcome of the election because they absolutely have to believe that Clinton's loss was evidence of "the population rejecting neoliberalism" and acknowledging that Russian actions might have tipped the scales complicates that narrative and forces us to face the more depressing reality that a lot of this country, including a good chunk of "the proletariat" is just fucking cancerous and another chunk is apathetic and more than eager to enjoy the fruits of violence and exploitation themselves (ourselves)

Our problems are so much more "the people" than we really want to admit, and figuring out how we actually face that is maybe the thing I am trying to personally grapple with.

That would also require acknowledging that lots of poor working class people will never be socialist allies because they're white supremacists and white supremacy is incompatible with an intersectional socialist country, so

manchego obfuscator · Jan 15, 2018

Mezentine said:
I don't disagree with this and don't have anything other to say other than that its also a bit maddening watching parts of the left act like Russian interference had nothing to do with the outcome of the election because they absolutely have to believe that Clinton's loss was evidence of "the population rejecting neoliberalism" and acknowledging that Russian actions might have tipped the scales complicates that narrative and forces us to face the more depressing reality that a lot of this country, including a good chunk of "the proletariat" is just fucking cancerous and another chunk is apathetic and more than eager to enjoy the fruits of violence and exploitation themselves (ourselves)

I agree that it's important to acknowledge Russia's role in the election and to avoid focusing only on the explanations for Clinton's loss that reinforce our existing worldview, but I don't quite follow the logic of the bolded portion. If anything, attributing the election outcome to the hand of a foreign power seems like it should do the opposite, simplifying the narrative by making it easier to avoid confronting homegrown American white supremacy - those Rust Belt voters didn't really mean to vote for a racist candidate, they were just duped into doing so by Putin!

More generally (and note that I'm not thinking of you in particular here), it seems to me that the "arguing that [insert factor other than racism here] is responsible for Clinton's defeat is an apologia for racism" argument is only ever applied to those factors that align most closely with leftist critiques of Clinton, particularly economics. Not sexism, not Comey, not the media, and certainly not Russia, even though none of those is directly related to racism, either.

Lime · Jan 15, 2018

Mezentine said:
I don't disagree with this and don't have anything other to say other than that its also a bit maddening watching parts of the left act like Russian interference had nothing to do with the outcome of the election because they absolutely have to believe that Clinton's loss was evidence of "the population rejecting neoliberalism" and acknowledging that Russian actions might have tipped the scales complicates that narrative and forces us to face the more depressing reality that a lot of this country, including a good chunk of "the proletariat" is just fucking cancerous and another chunk is apathetic and more than eager to enjoy the fruits of violence and exploitation themselves (ourselves)

Our problems are so much more "the people" than we really want to admit, and figuring out how we actually face that is maybe the thing I am trying to personally grapple with.

I am certainly not discounting any influence as such and I don't know why some people are lead to believe that "leftists" are denying the importance of a foreign country meddling to various extents with another country's election.

But the volume that especially mainstream media (ugh I hate that term) blow up the issue and the delusion that liberals think that the major offense is Russia using bots and social media to influence an election and not the hyper-capitalist, white supremacist society that is it, is eye-rolling and it actively removes the blame from the US as a society to an external enemy. And the consequence is that energy and attention is spent on a Russian boogeyman, and you end up with tinfoil hat liberals who see Russian Agents everywhere (like we see in the Manning thread). And that's not addressing the hypocrisy of liberals suddenly caring about the validity of elections after the countless times that US empire has fucked over so many democratic processes in the name of imperial capital.

But I don't really care about Putin or whatever the story is, I'm only talking about the liberal handling of the Trump and the failure of US society: it just tells me that they don't really care about their own problems and the reasons for why hundreds of millions of people suffer. Same thing with 9/11, there is no pause for reflection, just immediate action and unapologetic mass-murder.

pigeon · Jan 15, 2018

manchego obfuscator said:
I agree that it's important to acknowledge Russia's role in the election and to avoid focusing only on the explanations for Clinton's loss that reinforce our existing worldview, but I don't quite follow the logic of the bolded portion. If anything, attributing the election outcome to the hand of a foreign power seems like it should do the opposite, simplifying the narrative by making it easier to avoid confronting homegrown American white supremacy - those Rust Belt voters didn't really mean to vote for a racist candidate, they were just duped into doing so by Putin!

More generally (and note that I'm not thinking of you in particular here), it seems to me that the "arguing that [insert factor other than racism here] is responsible for Clinton's defeat is an apologia for racism" argument is only ever applied to those factors that align most closely with leftist critiques of Clinton, particularly economics. Not sexism, not Comey, not the media, and certainly not Russia, even though none of those is directly related to racism, either.

I don't generally see people talking about those other causes also saying that racism isn't a problem or a moral failing. When I do I am pretty critical of them!

Lime · Jan 15, 2018

On a lighter note:

Deleted member 721 · Jan 15, 2018

Today is 99 years of the death of Rosa Luxemburg.

manchego obfuscator · Jan 15, 2018

Eylos said:
Today is 99 years of the death of Rosa Luxemburg.

Tragically murdered by Bernie Sanders, RIP

Lafiel · Jan 15, 2018

manchego obfuscator said:
Tragically murdered by Bernie Sanders, RIP

And has received a good deal of character assassination by the stalinists.

Also people who like comics should read the graphic novel autobiography of Rosa https://www.versobooks.com/books/2036-red-rosa it's brilliant and has fantastic art-work.

sphagnum · Jan 16, 2018

Fun thread in OT right now but it's exhausting how many people still think "communism = drone workers".

Deleted member 721 · Jan 16, 2018

sphagnum said:
Fun thread in OT right now but it's exhausting how many people still think "communism = drone workers".

Edited: because i Changed my mind

Deleted member 721 · Jan 16, 2018

Here's a good article on that subject
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2012/12/the-red-and-the-black

Dr. Benton Quest · Jan 16, 2018

sphagnum said:
Fun thread in OT right now but it's exhausting how many people still think "communism = drone workers".

It's exhausting having to constantly teach even the most basic tenets of socialism.

The propaganda is strong.

Also, are there actual tankies in here?

Mezentine · Jan 16, 2018

Oh boy that Black Rock article is good for a laugh

Dr. Benton Quest said:
It's exhausting having to constantly teach even the most basic tenets of socialism.

The propaganda is strong.

Also, are there actual tankies in here?

We just had one get banned but that's about it

House_Of_Lightning · Jan 16, 2018

That was the second one IIRC.

Sou Da · Jan 16, 2018

For the record I'm just going to chime in and say that the American public at large will never give a single damn about who we kill abroad.

Bonen no Max'd · Jan 16, 2018

Speaking of US disinterest in foreign casualties, someone in my politics of war class just referred to the Saudi intervention in Yemen as motivated by concerns for human rights ugh

Mezentine · Jan 16, 2018

Eylos said:
Here's a good article on that subject
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2012/12/the-red-and-the-black

This is the most I have ever agreed with a piece from Jacobin, and I agree with it a lot. It expresses, in the exact same way that I try to, what I consider the problem of "locality" with any anarchist proposal to largely abolish institutional mediation of production and consumption, as well as how any replacement for a capitalist-based free-market system must be structured to still enable competitive dynamics.

I'm actually probably going to cite this piece frequently in the future, so closely does it align with my thoughts on these exact matters. Even its final proposal is in some ways isomorphic to my pet cause of nationalizing rentable property. (and much like the questions I'm trying to answer in my proposal, the question of "who leads the public firms" in theirs looms over the entire thing. A difficult problem to solve)

House_Of_Lightning · Jan 16, 2018

They're correct in that the Left shouldn't be concerned with end of history endpoints, but the Left is rife with immediate and Utopian solutions.

CHEEZMO™ · Jan 16, 2018

Neat thread

Deleted member 721 · Jan 17, 2018

Next week, day 24, Will be an important day to latin America, ex-president from Brazil (labor party) Lula can Go to Jail, he's in First in the pools to Win the election this year.(Second place is a fascist pro Trump).

The court case looks like judicial persecution because he would win the presidential election.

Why thats important?

Even thought his government is Center-left, and in many points he's pro bankers and a light neo-liberal. He's one of the biggest leaders of the left in latin America. Without him, there's a considerable chance that who would Win is the fash. And when something happens in Brazil there's a tendency in history that many latin american countries could follow a similar Path.

What Will happen next week?

He's going to Jail i dont have a doubt, the right Wing really hates the Guy, and the judiciary Specialy in the south where the court case is (whitest part of Brazil) IS extremely conservative. Lots of supporters Will be there and police Will be there in Full force. There's a possibility that things can get ugly.

What Will happen after?

No one knows, the scenario for the Future looks Chaotic. I believe that the Center left and left should unite against the fash, but that Will probably not happen. You guys already know, internal infight in the left is something usual. How the left organize itself on Brazil after this, Will be decisive to the Future of latin America.

House_Of_Lightning · Jan 18, 2018

https://libcom.org/library/militancy-ojtr

Militancy: highest stage of alienation

A critique of the role of the political militant, its misery and arrogance; written by Dominique Blanc and published by the OJTR in France, 1972.

Since the occupation movement of May '68, we have seen a whole collection of small organisations which claim to follow Trotskyism, Maoism or anarchism, developing to the left of the Communist Party and the CGT.1 Despite the tiny percentage of workers who join their ranks, they pretend to compete with the traditional organisations for control of the working class, of which they proclaim themselves the vanguard.

The ridiculousness of their pretensions might make you laugh, but laughter is not enough. It is necessary to look deeper, to understand why the modern world produces these bureaucratic extremists, and to tear away the mask of their ideologies in order to reveal their true historical role. As far as possible, revolutionaries must distance themselves from leftist organisations, and show that far from threatening the old world order, the action of these groups can at best only lead to its reconditioning. Starting to criticise them prepares the ground for the revolutionary movement, which will be obliged to liquidate them, or else risk being liquidated itself.

Leftist militancy primarily affects those social categories which are in the process of accelerated proletarianisation (high-school pupils, students, teachers, socio-educational personnel....), who have no possibility of fighting concretely for short-term advantages, and for whom to become truly revolutionary presupposes a very profound personal reassessment. The worker is much less complicit in his social role than the student or teacher. For the latter, being militant is a compromise solution which enables them to shoulder their fluctuating social role. In militancy they find an importance that the deterioration of their social standing denies them. To call themselves revolutionaries, to occupy themselves with the transformation of the whole of society, permits them to minimise the transformation of their own social status and personal illusions.

Deleted member 721 · Jan 18, 2018

Thats directed to what i Talked or only a New subject?

sphagnum · Jan 19, 2018

CHEEZMO™ said:
Neat thread

Here's an update from a couple hours ago, seems like the state is cracking down (obviously) :

It's been a hard silence for the past 5 days since Operation PUSH launched a statewide prisoner strike in the FL Department of Corrections prison system (FDOC or FDC) coinciding with Martin Luther King Day.

Information from prisoners is coming in at a much slower pace than people on the outside had anticipated, but reports are slowly and steadily making their way through the walls, despite many obstacles.

Thus far, we've heard from prisoners that there has been active participation or repression of some sort in the following prisons: Santa Rosa, Jackson, Gulf, Hamilton, Avon Park, Franklin, Holmes, Everglades, Reception and Medical Center at Lake Butler, Liberty, Lowell, Columbia, Florida State Prison, Suwannee, Calhoun, and Martin. (The list is growing by the day.)

A common theme among report backs is the attempt by the DOC to sever communication in order to create the perception of inactivity and break the spirits of those participating in the strike. Key contacts inside have reported being threatened by administration with harsher retaliation if correspondence with advocacy groups such as Fight Toxic Prisons and Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee continues.

According to prisoner reports, some facilities have shut off state phone service as of Tuesday, January 16. A Security Threat Group (STG) investigator employed at a prison in the panhandle confirmed that multiple prisons across the state were placed on lockdown in preparation for the strike. Shakedowns have occurred where independent means of communication were confiscated and their alleged owners/users were thrown in solitary confinement.

...

This repression has made it hard to quantify participation, and word of the widespread support and solidarity actions are only now beginning to trickle in through news reports and letter writing events occurring all over the country.

...

Over the coming weeks, organizers on the outside with IWOC and FTP will be gathering correspondence from the inside and releasing periodical updates, coupled with individualized support campaigns, as we have been doing over the past 2 years.

Several hundred strike support yard signs were printed for statewide distribution and a new phone zap campaign has been released.

The DOC is pretending to ignore Operation PUSH by issuing meaningless statements and attempting to confuse people over canteen prices (citing the cost of a single soup, when prisoners' statement referred to cost for a case.) Make no mistake. They are far from ignoring the strikers, and it is far from over.

January 15 in Florida was a major step in building up the movement to end prison slavery that is brewing on a national scale. It has sown seeds for the months ahead. Prisoners in Texas have already called for renewing the celebration of the Juneteenth abolitionist holiday and spreading it into prisons worldwide. We are considering Operation PUSH as important and necessary groundwork for making that successful.

In the meantime, keep in touch via Support Prisoners And Real Change, Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee, and Fight Toxic Prisoners.

https://incarceratedworkers.org/news/update-operation-push-florida-department-corrections-11918

Mezentine · Jan 19, 2018

sphagnum said:
Here's an update from a couple hours ago, seems like the state is cracking down (obviously) :

https://incarceratedworkers.org/news/update-operation-push-florida-department-corrections-11918

Godspeed. Its hideous how toxic the prison system is but also how genuinely impossible it seems to gather popular traction behind reform. This always feels like a battle that's going to be won by inches because of how many people revolt if you try to bring it national

sphagnum · Jan 20, 2018

Various updates.

First, Chelsea Manning had given her first interview about her Senate candidacy:

few weeks after Chelsea Manning was released from military prison, having served seven years of a 35-year sentence for leaking official secrets, she came to a terrible realization. "I was out, but I saw that while I had been away, the prison had moved out here as well. That's how I feel. I feel like I haven't left, we've just exchanged prisons."

That grim assessment, that even in freedom she was trapped within a prison, dawned on her as she walking one day through the streets of Brooklyn. The New York borough has a reputation for hipster cool, but she was shocked to see so many heavily armed police.

"There was this immense police presence and they were militarized. I've been part of an occupying force in a foreign country, and I know what that looks like. That's what I saw in Brooklyn – an occupying force."

Her powerful fear about what America has become in the seven years of her incarceration, combined with an equally powerful determination to do something about it lies behind Chelsea Manning's announcement this week that she is running for a US Senate seat.

...

Manning says she is putting her faith in victory in the local activist and student groups with whom she has been building connections since her release. "We are not doing a centralized ground game, we are waiting for local communities to come to us. I will come, and I will listen."

Does she fear that she could crash and burn, as the Black Lives Matter celebrity DeRay Mckesson did when he contested the Democratic primary for Baltimore mayor in 2016, coming in sixth with just 2% of the vote?

"Baltimore is a deep-rooted city with a very active activist community, and I don't think DeRay utilized that," she replied. "I'm not going to criticize a friend of mine, but at the same time we are talking to local people in Maryland, and we are taking the time."

...

Manning calls her politics "radical anti-authoritarianism". Asked to explain, she grew animated, her voice crescendoing: "The United States has the largest and most expensive military in the world, but we always want more. We have the largest prison system in the world, yet we want more. We have the largest and most sophisticated intelligence apparatus in the world by far, and still we want more. How much is enough? That is my moment – we need this to stop."

Though she says she has no animus towards Cardin – "I voted for him twice" – she sees him as part of the problem. She points to the Israeli Anti-Boycott Actthat he championed that has been widely criticized for attempting to stifle protests against Israeli settlements.

In her first campaign statement, Manning mentions three core policy areas: criminal justice, healthcare and immigration. In each, she pitches herself strikingly to the left of Bernie Sanders. Prisons should be closed and inmates released; all hospitals should be free at the point of use, no questions asked; US borders should be open.

...

And she does not mention Donald Trump.

Why no reference to the man who for many progressives has become the embodiment of evil?

"All our problems are personalized into one individual, but it's a systemic problem. Our broken immigration system didn't pop up overnight, it was a machine built over decades by centrists from both sides."

...

Attack lines that she is certain to face on the campaign trail have already begun to be aired. She is a traitor to her country, is the most predictable iteration, followed by conspiracy theories that she is in the pay of the Russians attempting to destabilize a sitting Democratic senator.

Again she appears unfazed. "Everybody is a traitor these days. James Comey, Hillary Clinton, Trump, Obama … the word has no meaning any more. Any form of 'I don't agree with you' becomes 'treason', and in that kind of society we can't have debates."

WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, to whom she leaked the documents in 2010, are also certain to be invoked against her. What does she say now of WikiLeaks?

"I made a decision in 2010 to release the documents. I reached out to the New York Times and the Washington Post, I ran out of time, and that was the decision I made. I can't change that."

Has she had any contact with Assange since the data transfer?

"No. Zero."

...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/19/chelsea-manning-interview-wikileaks-senate-maryland

So, in summary, she's running on a platform of UHC, open borders, ending the police state, and anti-imperialism. She would rather talk about underlying problems then see Trump as the direct source of all evil. She seems (?) regretful about having provided the info to Wikileaks specifically and does not talk with Assange, but the interviewer doesn't press her about how she actually feels about him.

I do believe her comments brushing off the traitor thing will be taken by liberals as further evidence of her being a Russian plant, but I get what she meant - she doesn't care if she gets called a traitor because everyone gets called a traitor by someone somewhere else on the political spectrum. There's no way she can win on this platform and she must know that, so I take it she's trying to push the Overton window by exploiting the primary process.

Second, Turkey is stepping up its attacks on Rojava:

The shelling of Afrin region came from Hatay province, Turkish state media said, as troops massed on the border.

The Russian foreign minister has denied reports that Russia is withdrawing its forces from the area.

Turkey has for months said it would clear Kurdish YPG fighters from Afrin, under Kurdish control since 2012.

Turkey regards the YPG as a terrorist group.

Syria has warned against an incursion , threatening to shoot down Turkish jets.

Turkish Defence Minister Nurettin Canikli said the shelling was the "de-facto start" of a planned invasion of Afrin.

...

Russian consent is essential for any Turkish operation. Moscow is a key ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and has a contingent of soldiers at the airport in the centre of Afrin.

On Friday, the Anadolu news agency reported that Russian military personnel in Afrin were leaving in groups.

But the Russia's Sergei Lavrov later denied the reports.

...

www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-middle-east-42747702

Third, just thought this was an interesting serve-the-people tactic by DSA from last year:

How does the socialist left build a mass plan to take back the country? Flu shots and brake lights.

What better way to evangelize a socialist future for America than giving people the things they need for free?

Last weekend in Pittsburgh, the local chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America stood out in the cold, tools in hand, fixing brake lights for anybody who needed it. It cost the socialists about $3 a pop — a worthy expenditure for keeping those who can't afford even cheap repairs from a run-in with the police.

"We know what can happen if someone is pulled over by the police, how easily and quickly things can escalate and become deadly," Arielle Cohen, co-chair of Pittsburg DSA, said in an interview. "So we want to provide a way to get people to not be stopped by police and have unnecessary interaction."

...

Five hundred miles away in Dallas, at the same time as the Pittsburgh brake light clinic, another DSA chapter was posted up in a predominantly hispanic neighborhood, administering almost 50 flu vaccines to promote single-payer health care.

"There's a gap that for-profit health care systems, there's a gap where if people don't have a job or are underinsured," Valerie Davis, an organizer with DSA North Texas, said. "For service workers, paid sick leave isn't available to everyone, so being sick for a week is your paycheck."

...

https://m.mic.com/articles/186172/h...country-flu-shots-and-brake-lights#.N6IQIfAW2

sphagnum · Jan 21, 2018

Dammit chelsea

Deleted member 721 · Jan 21, 2018

What happened?

(I always think in soccer when i read this name)

sphagnum · Jan 21, 2018

Eylos said:
What happened?

(I always think in soccer when i read this name)

Chelsea Manning, the whistle-blower who gave Wikileaks all that Iraq War info years back and got stuck in prison until Obama later commuted her sentence, got caught palling around with alt-right figures. There's a thread about it.

House_Of_Lightning · Jan 21, 2018

She went to an Alt Right convention. She either did it out of curiosity and wanting to confront/interact with her adversaries or she did it to "troll" them.

The former is generally something someone who wants to govern would do but it really pissed off some of her supporters. I say supporters and not her "base" because it looks like the majority of her vocal support can't vote for her.

If it's the latter, no serious politician should be playing stupid twitter troll games.

Either situation makes her and her supporters look bad to the actual voting constituency.

Deleted member 2474 · Jan 21, 2018

I want to believe in her but pictures of her clearing an escape room with alt-righters are pretty upsetting.

Socialism |OT| The Dawn of a Red Era

What tendency/ideology do you best align with?

Anarchism

Marxism

Marxism-Leninism

Left Communism

Democratic Socialism

Social Democracy

Other

User requested account closure

Self-requested ban

Self-requested ban

Self-requested ban

Banned for use of an alt account

Banned for use of an alt account

Banned for use of an alt account

User-requested account closure

User-requested account closure

User-requested account closure

Resettlement Advisor

Self-requested ban

Self-requested ban

User-requested account closure

Self-requested ban

User-requested account closure

User-requested account closure

Self-requested ban

Account closed at user request