Initiative for change

[hefty_lefty]

Hello fellow leftists, I just joined the forum and I wish to pick your brains, see where some of you stand on the topic of realistic change, specifically concerning the western world...

What do you think the best way to bring about change in a population that is entrenched in materialistic, capitalist ideals, like that of North America.
The opportunities in other parts of the world are already there, socialism being a historical part of their countries.
Here in North America, being founded on merchanitilism, on individual opportunity, and a general acceptance (or even the encouragement) of personal wealth, how can we change the minds of the masses?

People are suspicious of socialism here, it is a system that they fear will take their freedoms away...and will it?

I, personally am tired of capitalism, it is a stress that I wish to do without, but the 'american dream' has been so cleverly formulated and delivered that it has affected our social and psychological behaviour.
We cling to it even as it ails, like a cub not willing to leave its dead mothers side.

[KarlMarx1989]

see where some of you stand on the topic of realistic change, specifically concerning the western world...
OK. I live in the Imperialist States of christian-America. I believe that with counter-protests against these right-wing people would be rather useful. Also, protests against gatherings of right-wing people I think should also be done. However, for this to be done I think we need to be great in numbers. We should go on location, find out where these people are protesting / gathering against "socialism." I understand that they know nothing about actual socialism but I think the first step is to get them out of the way.

I think that workers' unions should start speaking out more and more people should be dedicated to creating propaganda of our own that specifically focuses on human-equality, not concentrating on 'why Socialism is better than Capitalism.' That is already known by many and you can't change the minds of Capitalists. The propaganda should more explain why Socialism would make people more equal and it would make everything better in a dying Capitalist world. It should explain that even though Capitalism has succeeded for christian-America in the past, it is deteriorating the country and why Socialism would improve life for everyone.

I also think that protests at catholic churches should commence to try to put an end to that side of fake christianity. Too many people are ruling christian-America with this (ab)use of christianity which is not the way that their 'messiah' actually taught. A lot of them are contradicting much of what Biblia Sacra teaches them to do. Protests should also be done against televangelists and "mega-churches." We should also try to get Christians, who actually follow their messiah's teachings, involved in this.

That's just that start of it all, though.

[The Douche]

The dominant countries in North America do have socialist histories. Capitalism isn't strong here because of magic. We have to build a revolutionary movement here, just as our comrades do all over the world. And those movements aren't built through protests and summit hopping. We have to build real relationships with the people around us and form real communities of resistance, I don't think anybody can tell you how to do that. Its something we need to figure out, for ourselves, individually.

[hefty_lefty]

Does socialism not base itself on the interests of the majority? The middle class is by far the largest of the classes, and it is this group that must be convinced of change.

When I hear of non-enlightened people speak of anti-capitalist 'protests' or 'demonstrations' it leads me to believe that they think we are social-terrorists attacking the fabric of their personal freedoms.
To many we are the enemy of democracy, of free speech, and individuality....is this true?

Protests...seems so '70's, do people still pay attention to protests? It seems more a nuisance than an effective way to bring a new light to socialism. I understand some here could be considered somewhat...radical, but the stigma attached to socialism is what hinders it most.
Violent revolutions, power struggles, oppression and quite often totalitarianism.
We may come off 'too strong' and end up scaring those we mean to liberate.

I am far from a solution, but I think we need a real political model and not just an abstract idea of peace and equality.

I believe socialism can be democratic in nature, and perhaps it is essential to its succesful realization.

[The Douche]

Actually the working class is the largest class.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Does socialism not base itself on the interests of the majority? The middle class is by far the largest of the classes, and it is this group that must be convinced of change.

When I hear of non-enlightened people speak of anti-capitalist 'protests' or 'demonstrations' it leads me to believe that they think we are social-terrorists attacking the fabric of their personal freedoms.
To many we are the enemy of democracy, of free speech, and individuality....is this true?

Protests...seems so '70's, do people still pay attention to protests? It seems more a nuisance than an effective way to bring a new light to socialism. I understand some here could be considered somewhat...radical, but the stigma attached to socialism is what hinders it most.
Violent revolutions, power struggles, oppression and quite often totalitarianism.
We may come off 'too strong' and end up scaring those we mean to liberate.

I am far from a solution, but I think we need a real political model and not just an abstract idea of peace and equality.

I believe socialism can be democratic in nature, and perhaps it is essential to its succesful realization.
What do you mean by democratic, Comrade? Democracy does not have to have anything to do with politics at all, a people's war is always entirely democratic, yet it is not based on a political model as such. I am wholly opposed to what is generally referred to as democracy, but I believe in nothing more than majority rule. If we come across as too strong, well, then we come across as too strong, not many dedicated socialists are going to give up their ideals just because the capitalist media has told a few lies about us in the past.

[Radical]

Does socialism not base itself on the interests of the majority? The middle class is by far the largest of the classes, and it is this group that must be convinced of change.

When I hear of non-enlightened people speak of anti-capitalist 'protests' or 'demonstrations' it leads me to believe that they think we are social-terrorists attacking the fabric of their personal freedoms.
To many we are the enemy of democracy, of free speech, and individuality....is this true?

Protests...seems so '70's, do people still pay attention to protests? It seems more a nuisance than an effective way to bring a new light to socialism. I understand some here could be considered somewhat...radical, but the stigma attached to socialism is what hinders it most.
Violent revolutions, power struggles, oppression and quite often totalitarianism.
We may come off 'too strong' and end up scaring those we mean to liberate.

I am far from a solution, but I think we need a real political model and not just an abstract idea of peace and equality.

I believe socialism can be democratic in nature, and perhaps it is essential to its succesful realization.

Socialism can not be achieved through bourgeoise democracy. Violence is almost inneviatable. To act through bourgoise democracy is to betray Marxism and the dictatorship of the proletariat. Revolution is needed to ensure the construction of Socialism.

[hefty_lefty]

Firstly, Radical, I'll reply to you.
As much as I am excited by a revolution, there is always another to follow the first. People do not stay happy, people change, they evolve and so do their needs and desires.
Here we are still trying to be true to Marx and Lenin, nealrly a hundred years later.

Red Son...
Majority rule is great until you lose the majority, and then what is left to do but attempt to rule by force.
The examples are written in history.

The people must support their leaders, and they should be allowed to choose them, without the people's blessing government means nothing.

What I am trying to say is that people must choose socialism, it cannot be forced upon them and succeed.

And Red Son, many terrible things have been done in "the best interests of the working class", it is not all lies.

All this aside, I believe socialism is the only way, the natural outcome of society. I do not question socialism, I only question people's intentions.

[Spawn of Stalin]

The problem with bourgeois democracy is that it allows for bourgeois media to exist. When the bourgeois media exists it does a very good job of telling people what to think, as you may have read in another thread The Sun recently switched allegiance (http://www.revleft.com/vb/sun-turns-tory-t118750/index.html) from the "left", over to the right, this is going to cost Labour a lot of votes, it's likely we'll have a Tory government by next year. With this in mind, will there ever be a "democratic" country where a single government is in power long enough to actually achieve anything? It's unlikely, even the South African ANC's support has been waning in recent years. If Lenin and Stalin had allowed the bourgeois media to run wild in the Soviet Union, they would have been voted out due to the lies of pro-capitalist journalists, that's a fact, but no, instead, they both had glorious premierships and made an untold number of progressive changes to society. The things that Lenin and Stalin did could never happen in a bourgeois democracy, people only get bored of their leaders when the media tells them to.

[hefty_lefty]

The press is an issue, afterall media is the greatest influence at least here in North America.
Tv has become a brain numbing epidemic of staggering proportion, for me it is nearly intolerable.

So the press has to be held accountable for its actions, I agree, like the rest of a socialist system it has to face consequences if it deviates from the truth.
But how do we uphold truth? Who would decide what is truthful or not?
Sometimes the truth would make a valid point against socialism, would you dismiss the truth then?

[STJ]

It wont change until people views about what really matters in life change.