Is the left in north america worthless?

[Mo212]

One thing I have noted about people on the left is that as human beings they seem too individualistic, sensitive, weak and generally foolish to get anything done.

If the left is serious about challenging capitalism it would have to get serious about it in terms of financing and also start attacking the financial system itelf (i.e. causing financial crisis en masse). Since merely writing tracts and spewing verbiage on forums is not going to effect any kind of real change.

There are many ways to exploit the capitalist system to gain financing to challenge the beast, without serious money behind any movement I don't think the left will be able to contend with mass distraction and the level of technology that has softened the blow of capitalism for many people around the world.

Especially in north america, the average north american is so bloody stupid it's funny. Too many people in the US and Canada seem tremendously naive, soft, easily riled up, individualistic, scared and weak.

I've talked with various groups before and they seem way too into themelves and their own little corners of reality. The left seems to me to want to live the bourgeouis life of self fulfilliment and distraction but are not ethically responsible enough nor have the mental fortitude to really effect any kind of change, they are unwilling to make the necessary personal or financial sacrifices.

It seems too many people have taken ideology as religion (Sexism, femnism, etc, etc) and are so out of touch with reality they can't get anything done.

[Muzk]

So basically, you live somewhere in europe and get nothing done but brag about the north americans getting nothing done?

Plus, the difficulty would be like 3 stars higher than other nations
I just HAVE to defend them on this :D


............

By the way its not the "leftists" that do the change, it's the proletariat itself, a class, we are only here to light the fires of revolution! For Sta.. err.. Trotsky!

[Plagueround]

So basically, you live somewhere in europe and get nothing done but brag about the north americans getting nothing done?


My guess is Canada.

[9]

What a joke of a thread. It's like an attack, but carefully tailored so not to name any names or be direct enough as to specify precisely what is being attacked.

[Mo212]

What a joke of a thread. It's like an attack, but carefully tailored so not to name any names or be direct enough as to specify precisely what is being attacked.

I wasn't attacking anything other then the fact that people who identify themselves as left criticize and complain but they aren't really serious about making the personal and financial sacrifices necessary to do so.

[Mo212]

My guess is Canada.

That's easy being an admin with DNS lookup.

[Mo212]

By the way its not the "leftists" that do the change, it's the proletariat itself, a class, we are only here to light the fires of revolution! For Sta.. err.. Trotsky!

Except this is naive position given the advancement of technology softening the blows of capitalism and the constant propaganda reinforcing tech/progress/lifestyle advancement = capitalism.

[Muzk]

The fall of capitalism is inevitable, we simply don't know when it will happen :tt1:

But wasting our life time waiting for something does no good! Comrades!

... BTW not all the "leftists" are rich little anarcho kiddos trying to rebel in their teeny age <_< Where did you read that? ;_; AND NO WE ARE NO CAPITALISTS

[ls]

Seeing as the recent militancy in the USA has proven you are wrong, I don't see what you're saying, not that it must be recent to prove you wrong (the IWW struggle in the states was in a much more reactionary time where political persecution was at its highest) but whatever, dunno why I'm responding to your shit.

Oh yeah and
Since merely writing tracts and spewing verbiage on forums is not going to effect any kind of real change. makes you sound like a complete dolt, especially as you're from NA yourself (Canada as the terrible admin with DNS lookup pointed out). ;)

[Mo212]

Seeing as the recent militancy in the USA has proven you are wrong, I don't see what you're saying, not that it must be recent to prove you wrong (the IWW struggle in the states was in a much more reactionary time where political persecution was at its highest) but whatever, dunno why I'm responding to your shit.

Oh yeah and makes you sound like a complete dolt, especially as you're from NA yourself (Canada as the terrible admin with DNS lookup pointed out). ;)

Well I may have come off the wrong way but I don't see how my observations are in dispute, I can't be the only one that many people within the left are just not all there.

[ls]

Well I may have come off the wrong way but I don't see how my observations are in dispute, I can't be the only one that many people within the left are just not all there.

What this I don't even?

[9]

I wasn't attacking anything other then the fact that people who identify themselves as left criticize and complain but they aren't really serious about making the personal and financial sacrifices necessary to do so.

The left doesn't gain strength because a bunch of lifestylists decide to make financial sacrifices for their politics. I'm curious if you have read any Marx, but I already know the answer to that question, really. On the contrary, the workers' movement gains strength when people come to see that capitalism is not in their interests. So the whole idea that capitalism is going to be overthrown by a bunch of people acting against their interests is really a bizarre analysis to say the least.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

I think that, in the US at least, the general sentiments of a working class left are there. But it needs to be magnetized and flowing in the same direction before it can become a force to be reckoned with.

There is a student left, an african american left, a disgruntled seniors left, a hispanic left, a guy who lost his house and lives in his car left, a left in a town that shut down employers 1, 2, and 3 (and 4 and 5 and 6) when the commodities market plummmeted, the left of the woman working 3 jobs for a crappy apartment, the left that was GMs workforce, the left that graduated college 3 years ago and realized all they had was a $40k+ piece of paper, a left that sees its kids go to schools and not learn anything, a left that is sick and tired of sitting in traffic jams for hours on end, a left that would like to see the San Gabriels once and a while, a left that just left the Army after doing a tour and has absolutely nothing promised and is back in the trailer park, a left that declared bankruptcy because their 1 year old needs chemo, a left that can only afford groceries with a credit card, a left that's slowly begining to realize something is wrong --- and nothing is tying them together.

[AvanteRedGarde]

There's a left in the U.S. I honestly wasn't aware.

[ls]

There's a left in the U.S. I honestly wasn't aware.

Well there are a lot of 3rd worldists in the USA, you seem like one of them so ya know..

[Scary Monster]

I think that, in the US at least, the general sentiments of a working class left are there. But it needs to be magnetized and flowing in the same direction before it can become a force to be reckoned with.

There is a student left, an african american left, a disgruntled seniors left, a hispanic left, a guy who lost his house and lives in his car left, a left in a town that shut down employers 1, 2, and 3 (and 4 and 5 and 6) when the commodities market plummmeted, the left of the woman working 3 jobs for a crappy apartment, the left that was GMs workforce, the left that graduated college 3 years ago and realized all they had was a $40k+ piece of paper, a left that sees its kids go to schools and not learn anything, a left that is sick and tired of sitting in traffic jams for hours on end, a left that would like to see the San Gabriels once and a while, a left that just left the Army after doing a tour and has absolutely nothing promised and is back in the trailer park, a left that declared bankruptcy because their 1 year old needs chemo, a left that can only afford groceries with a credit card, a left that's slowly begining to realize something is wrong --- and nothing is tying them together.

you nailed it in the head, mr. abe. I was gonna say somethin to this effect. What country are you from? I live in california usa, and including myself, i know many people who experience many of these things. everyone over here complains about these things all the time! yet no one ever organizes against it. It seems people have this feeling of futility or powerlessness or somethin, due to being unaware about how much collective power they have.

i mean, i would tell them (coworkers, friends, family) what socialism and communism is all about, and they are always interested. but they really can be self-absorbed and individualistic. Tell me, how socially conscious are your people in other industrialized countries like the UK, russia or whatever? because many here are just too preoccupied with Myspace, material things (iphones, clothes, playstation 3s and whatnot), getting through the day, feeding their family, and entertainment. and honestly, gettin through the day here can be a real *****. government provides only crumbs through welfare. i mean, my ex (who worked her ass off at starbucks makin 9 bucks an hour) and her 11 year old son only got 150 dollars a month in food stamps. this is why me merely informing them of different social systems wouldnt do any good.

So this brings me to a question: Just what kind of action exactly is needed to get people into political action?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Seeing as the recent militancy in the USA has proven you are wrong

To answer the OP, only Canada is lagging behind, ironically. Yes, there are more prominent left-Blairite sentiments, but the actualy left in Canada tails that of the US.

[Mo212]

What this I don't even?

The missing word was "See's" :P

[Mo212]

The left doesn't gain strength because a bunch of lifestylists decide to make financial sacrifices for their politics. I'm curious if you have read any Marx, but I already know the answer to that question, really. On the contrary, the workers' movement gains strength when people come to see that capitalism is not in their interests. So the whole idea that capitalism is going to be overthrown by a bunch of people acting against their interests is really a bizarre analysis to say the least.

I don't think you really understood what I said, this is not about about merely lifestyle. In order to effect change, that means more putting your money where your mouth is. And left supported outlets do require money to function in society. Not only that the left could do serious economic harm to companies as forms of protest instead of just being a lot of talk. i.e. purposely defaulting on credit cards, etc, etc, on masse.

Places like monthly review also require money to keep functioning, I'm talking about the actual cost of effecting serious change.

http://www.monthlyreview.org/

[Bud Struggle]

There is a student left, an african american left, a disgruntled seniors left, a hispanic left, a guy who lost his house and lives in his car left, a left in a town that shut down employers 1, 2, and 3 (and 4 and 5 and 6) when the commodities market plummmeted, the left of the woman working 3 jobs for a crappy apartment, the left that was GMs workforce, the left that graduated college 3 years ago and realized all they had was a $40k+ piece of paper, a left that sees its kids go to schools and not learn anything, a left that is sick and tired of sitting in traffic jams for hours on end, a left that would like to see the San Gabriels once and a while, a left that just left the Army after doing a tour and has absolutely nothing promised and is back in the trailer park, a left that declared bankruptcy because their 1 year old needs chemo, a left that can only afford groceries with a credit card, a left that's slowly begining to realize something is wrong --- and nothing is tying them together.

So when do these things stop being personal problems and start becoming societal problems? Is the problem here really just a problem of economics or is there something deeper going on?

There is certainly a fragmentation of society and an isolation of the individual that certainly goes farther than just a worker's alienation from his work. Now if Communism could address that issue I think it could make a lot of progress in America.

[RGacky3]

I'm sorry, but do you have any examples of wars being vihemently protested BEFORE it started? So far I only have the United States, or a Labor movement that persovered after so much violence in the first world? The United States again. What other country has so much solidarity between the local leftists and the immigrant community?

As far as I can tell the left in the US is one of the most violently attacked yet has achieved much more than others.


There is a student left, an african american left, a disgruntled seniors left, a hispanic left, a guy who lost his house and lives in his car left, a left in a town that shut down employers 1, 2, and 3 (and 4 and 5 and 6) when the commodities market plummmeted, the left of the woman working 3 jobs for a crappy apartment, the left that was GMs workforce, the left that graduated college 3 years ago and realized all they had was a $40k+ piece of paper, a left that sees its kids go to schools and not learn anything, a left that is sick and tired of sitting in traffic jams for hours on end, a left that would like to see the San Gabriels once and a while, a left that just left the Army after doing a tour and has absolutely nothing promised and is back in the trailer park, a left that declared bankruptcy because their 1 year old needs chemo, a left that can only afford groceries with a credit card, a left that's slowly begining to realize something is wrong --- and nothing is tying them together.

That is true, but more and more they are comming together, I think back in the early 20th century.

Now right now I live in Northern Europe, where being moderate leftist is the norm, (what I mean by moderate leftist is social-demorcat, envirmentalist and so on and so forth, the type of guy Big Bill would would describe as someone who leaves the room when a fight brakes out), and here the struggle is almost non existant, (as far as I can see), in the US the people and the workers have to struggle against a much stronger power.

SO give some props, where props are due.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

To answer the OP, only Canada is lagging behind, ironically. Yes, there are more prominent left-Blairite sentiments, but the actualy left in Canada tails that of the US.

The U.S. is a more populated country and has higher population density. Furthermore, there are many factors (outside of the people) that cause varying levels of discontent.

I mean, come on. Is the OP (or anyone) really arguing that Canadian born citizens are less prone to revolution by virtue of their birth? Or that Americans are somehow "specially" incompetent. People are people. It's the material circumstances that influence how revolutionary and area is.

In other words, the OP is kind of asking the wrong questions. Instead of assailing the stupidity/incompetence (or whatever you are accusing the average American of being) maybe examine why people aren't revolutionary.

The revolutionary movement is probably failing because it's primarily focused on amassing numbers. This is simply a process of collecting people who already agree with you. Education is a big player in how to achieve a more leftist society.

[Forward Union]

Is the left in north america worthless?

Insofar as if North America fell to a communist revolution it would not be in a position to win a cold war against international capitalism.

[Havet]

If the left is serious about challenging capitalism it would have to get serious about it in terms of financing and also start attacking the financial system itelf (i.e. causing financial crisis en masse). Since merely writing tracts and spewing verbiage on forums is not going to effect any kind of real change.


How is creating unemployment, poverty and more excuses for the State and the capitalists to control our lives a worthy cause? Because that is the result of a financial crisis.

[Mo212]

How is creating unemployment, poverty and more excuses for the State and the capitalists to control our lives a worthy cause? Because that is the result of a financial crisis.

I'm not saying many of the left's ideas are not worthy, obviously anyone who takes ideology to any extreme and can't understand why they were espoued in the first place, is not a serious intellectual anyway. I'm saying that human beings as a whole in north america seem too individualistic, selfish and divided against themselves to accomplish much of anything.

[Havet]

I'm not saying many of the left's ideas are not worthy, obviously anyone who takes ideology to any extreme and can't understand why they were espoued in the first place, is not a serious intellectual anyway. I'm saying that human beings as a whole in north america seem too individualistic, selfish and divided against themselves to accomplish much of anything.

Funny way to dodge my question.

How is creating a financial crisis en masse helpful to anybody?

[AvanteRedGarde]

Maybe Americans are just reactionaries who support and are supported by imperialism. This would place the conversation in the realm of science and outside that of discussing "incompetency" of the left.

[Mo212]

Funny way to dodge my question.

How is creating a financial crisis en masse helpful to anybody?

Because people are only driven together in crisis, note that all great changes were more often then not the cause of crisis in one's economic or political situation, therefore it's to the left's benefit to cause as much real mischeif as possible.

[Durruti's Ghost]

Because people are only driven together in crisis, note that all great changes were more often then not the cause of crisis in one's economic or political situation, therefore it's to the left's benefit to cause as much real mischeif as possible.

So that we can be correctly blamed for the crisis by the ruling class and used to justify a fascist reaction?

The capitalists do a fine job of creating scapegoat groups on their own. We don't need to volunteer to become one.

[hefty_lefty]

Agitation is great, and as much as a complete collapse of the economic world tickles my fancy, it is the working class that suffers most.
God forbid the ensuing revolution doesn't work, the working class having lost everything, will lose all faith in 'liberation'.

Nothing worse than having to crawl back to the capitalists for help...

Mo Mischief, you must be even newer to revolutionary thought than I.
Stick to toilet-papering your neighbours trees.

ScaryMonster, you said...
It seems people have this feeling of futility or powerlessness or somethin, due to being unaware about how much collective power they have.

However true, when it comes to large capitalist nations like America an armed resistance would never work unless the military itself was on our side.
Unless you are suggesting a political coup? But if capitalism was truly threatened violence would be inevitable and perhaps north americans just aren't willing to fight.

[Rosa Provokateur]

One thing I have noted about people on the left is that as human beings they seem too individualistic, sensitive, weak and generally foolish to get anything done.

If the left is serious about challenging capitalism it would have to get serious about it in terms of financing and also start attacking the financial system itelf (i.e. causing financial crisis en masse). Since merely writing tracts and spewing verbiage on forums is not going to effect any kind of real change.

There are many ways to exploit the capitalist system to gain financing to challenge the beast, without serious money behind any movement I don't think the left will be able to contend with mass distraction and the level of technology that has softened the blow of capitalism for many people around the world.

Especially in north america, the average north american is so bloody stupid it's funny. Too many people in the US and Canada seem tremendously naive, soft, easily riled up, individualistic, scared and weak.

I've talked with various groups before and they seem way too into themelves and their own little corners of reality. The left seems to me to want to live the bourgeouis life of self fulfilliment and distraction but are not ethically responsible enough nor have the mental fortitude to really effect any kind of change, they are unwilling to make the necessary personal or financial sacrifices.

It seems too many people have taken ideology as religion (Sexism, femnism, etc, etc) and are so out of touch with reality they can't get anything done.

Too individualistic and sensitive? Well excuse us for being human. As for weak; Seattle '99 and Chicago '09 proved that when it comes to making the G20 a hassle, we Americans are pretty good at what we do.

The Left is serious for the most part I guess but in-fighting, ideology (Trotskyists and anti-Revisionists are the worst), and lack of cash and general interest gets in the way. We write because these days blogs and web-media is HUGE and a great way of sharing ideas. As for the forum; it's a great place to bounce around ideas, share experience, discuss things, etc.

No shit, you need money to run an organization? Whodda thunk?


Anarchist: "HEY GUYS, LISTEN TO THIS! APPARENTLY WE NEED MONEY".
Comrades: "Oooohh" *all start nodding in enlightened agreement*



You know what else is funny, the British monarchy. Doesn't make the Brits stupid for having it, it's just kinda out of their hands.


Self-fulfillment is bushwa. So fuckin what. If I can't make something I want out of my life then what point is there to fight for anybody or anything elses ability to do the same. Anarchy has gotta include some self-fulfillment, some passion and individualism. Otherwise we're just a bunch of Borg with black and red arm-bands.


Sexism isn't an ideology, it's a form of discrimination. But what do I know, I'm just a stupid American right:rolleyes:

[Rosa Provokateur]

... BTW not all the "leftists" are rich little anarcho kiddos trying to rebel in their teeny age <_<

Awww... it's a good way to start though right? ....Guys? :crying:

[Rosa Provokateur]

Seeing as the recent militancy in the USA has proven you are wrong, I don't see what you're saying, not that it must be recent to prove you wrong (the IWW struggle in the states was in a much more reactionary time where political persecution was at its highest) but whatever, dunno why I'm responding to your shit.

Oh yeah and makes you sound like a complete dolt, especially as you're from NA yourself (Canada as the terrible admin with DNS lookup pointed out). ;)

Kudos to ls:D

Let's hear it for international solidarity
<(^_^<(

)>^_^)>

<(^_^<(

[Rosa Provokateur]

The left doesn't gain strength because a bunch of lifestylists decide to make financial sacrifices for their politics. I'm curious if you have read any Marx, but I already know the answer to that question, really. On the contrary, the workers' movement gains strength when people come to see that capitalism is not in their interests. So the whole idea that capitalism is going to be overthrown by a bunch of people acting against their interests is really a bizarre analysis to say the least.

Yeah, the Bolsheviks tried it and look what happened there.

[Mo212]

The Left is serious for the most part I guess but in-fighting, ideology (Trotskyists and anti-Revisionists are the worst), and lack of cash and general interest gets in the way.

But the left's actions and immaturity betray the fact that it isn't serious, you can't be serious and fighting amongst yourselves, adults put aside their differences for the greater purpose. Too many on the left are stuck in a state of permanent adolescence.

[Havet]

Because people are only driven together in crisis

Care to back that up?



Note that all great changes were more often then not the cause of crisis in one's economic or political situation, therefore it's to the left's benefit to cause as much real mischeif as possible.

You mean like This Great Change (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine)?

Causing a lot of mischief is flawed because:
- You can't make sure people will act towards a real change (if anything, I have the Great Depression as a proof).
- Even if you manage to start a revolution, you can't guarantee it succeeds. What happens to the people then? Go crawling back to capitalists? You think they will not be shot on sight?
- Cost Expensive, both in material costs and in human lives.

[Mo212]

Care to back that up?

What are you a moron? We have the rights we do because people fought for them. i.e. social security, freeing the slaves, 40 hour work week.





You mean like This Great Change (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine)?

Which means absolutely nothing, one can use mischeif as a form of political protest, since merely walking around holding signs doesn't effect change. But economically causing loss or damage certainly does. All change has risks associated with it, if our ancestors thought like you we'd still all be slaves.

[Bud Struggle]

Which means absolutely nothing, one can use mischeif as a form of political protest.

Mischief is the protest of children; revolution is the protest of men and women.

[Led Zeppelin]

Mischief is the protest of children; revolution is the protest of men and women.

You have a Dennis Miller quote in your sig and own a business while continually defending capitalism whenever you get the chance; don't falsely preach revolution.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

The Left is serious for the most part I guess but in-fighting, ideology (Trotskyists and anti-Revisionists are the worst),

I firmly believe that these groups and they're petty squabbles are of no significance. If no worker knows of a workers party, nobody should give a shit if it splits because of a disagreement over the 1923 decision of the Fedrokaskolavinshov soviet to ban people from letting their dogs urinate in public.

Fuck all that. Sure, the Russian Revolution should be viewed differently. But thats a side issue, not a platform.

As for the money part, well yeah.

[Mo212]

Mischief is the protest of children; revolution is the protest of men and women.

You should read more Joseph Schumpeter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Schumpeter

Schumpeter's theory is that the success of capitalism will lead to a form of corporatism (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Corporatism) and a fostering of values hostile to capitalism, especially among intellectuals. The intellectual and social climate needed to allow entrepreneurship (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Entrepreneurship) to thrive will not exist in advanced capitalism; it will be replaced by socialism in some form. There will not be a revolution, but merely a trend in parliaments (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Parliament) to elect social democratic (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Social_democratic) parties of one stripe or another. He argued that capitalism's collapse from within will come about as democratic majorities vote for the creation of a welfare state (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Welfare_state) and place restrictions upon entrepreneurship that will burden and destroy the capitalist structure. Schumpeter emphasizes throughout this book that he is analyzing trends, not engaging in political advocacy. In his vision, the intellectual class will play an important role in capitalism's demise. The term "intellectuals" denotes a class of persons in a position to develop critiques of societal matters for which they are not directly responsible and able to stand up for the interests of strata to which they themselves do not belong. One of the great advantages of capitalism, he argues, is that as compared with pre-capitalist periods, when education was a privilege of the few, more and more people acquire (higher) education. The availability of fulfilling work is however limited and this, coupled with the experience of unemployment, produces discontent. The intellectual class is then able to organise protest and develop critical ideas.

In Schumpeter's view, socialism will ensure that the production of goods and services is directed towards meeting the authentic needs of people and will overcome some innate tendencies of capitalism such as conjecture fluctuation, unemployment and waning acceptance of the system.[5] (http://www.revleft.com/vb/#cite_note-4)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Schumpeter

[The Accomplice]

I think that, in the US at least, the general sentiments of a working class left are there. But it needs to be magnetized and flowing in the same direction before it can become a force to be reckoned with.

There is a student left, an african american left, a disgruntled seniors left, a hispanic left, a guy who lost his house and lives in his car left, a left in a town that shut down employers 1, 2, and 3 (and 4 and 5 and 6) when the commodities market plummmeted, the left of the woman working 3 jobs for a crappy apartment, the left that was GMs workforce, the left that graduated college 3 years ago and realized all they had was a $40k+ piece of paper, a left that sees its kids go to schools and not learn anything, a left that is sick and tired of sitting in traffic jams for hours on end, a left that would like to see the San Gabriels once and a while, a left that just left the Army after doing a tour and has absolutely nothing promised and is back in the trailer park, a left that declared bankruptcy because their 1 year old needs chemo, a left that can only afford groceries with a credit card, a left that's slowly begining to realize something is wrong --- and nothing is tying them together.

This!

I'd like to add that education is key in my opinion. All the ingredients are there for a massive workers revolution. We just need to put a lot of effort on educating them on why the current system has no interest in their well being and why it is important for all to work together on dismantling the system.

[Havet]

What are you a moron? We have the rights we do because people fought for them. i.e. social security, freeing the slaves, 40 hour work week.

And by creating a financial crisis en masse you will be forcing people into losing many of those so called "rights". Employers will have to cut social benefits, increase work hours and underpay, else they go out of business.

If you think purposelessly creating discomfort in the working class just so they "wake up" and begin a revolution as a good strategy, you're the moron.


Which means absolutely nothing, one can use mischeif as a form of political protest, since merely walking around holding signs doesn't effect change. But economically causing loss or damage certainly does. All change has risks associated with it, if our ancestors thought like you we'd still all be slaves.

Slavery abolition was not started by slaves, especially in America. It was started by the people in power, who (rightfully) thought slavery was unfair and did not tolerate the southern states seceding so they could keep the slaves. Read up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_civil_war).

[Plagueround]

Slavery abolition was not started by slaves, especially in America.

Yes it was, they just lacked the political and economic might to make it possible. But they didn't just sit around docile and scared waiting to be saved. Read up. (http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/zinnslaem10.html)

[Havet]

Yes it was, they just lacked the political and economic might to make it possible. But they didn't just sit around docile and scared waiting to be saved. Read up. (http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/zinnslaem10.html)

Like I said, read up. From your source:


Hence, it was Abraham Lincoln who freed the slaves, not John Brown. In 1859, John Brown was hanged, with federal complicity, for attempting to do by small-scale violence what Lincoln would do by large-scale violence several years later-end slavery.
With slavery abolished by order of the government-true, a government pushed hard to do so, by blacks, free and slave, and by white abolitionists-its end could be orchestrated so as to set limits to emancipation.

I won't deny there were some revolts here and there, but the force that really ended it up was the State (not that i think only a State could end slavery, but this IS how it happened).

[RGacky3]

I won't deny there were some revolts here and there, but the force that really ended it up was the State (not that i think only a State could end slavery, but this IS how it happened).

Almost all the time, anytime the State does some civilizing, it is after the public have fought for it for a long time.

[Havet]

Almost all the time, anytime the State does some civilizing, it is after the public have fought for it for a long time.

Yeah, exactly. and many times, it was the State itself that was preventing the public from gaining what they wanted after such a long struggle (The State does this to protect some class interests, for eg).