Protests in the US

[Impulse97]

I've been reading up on all the protests across the nation and I was wondering if anyone knew anything about any in Illinois.

I really want to go to one but it seems none are close enough.

Many thanks.:hammersickle::che::hammersickle:

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

MoveOn.org issued a call for rallies at all 50 statehouses this Saturday 26 February: http://pol.moveon.org/callforaction/

AFL-CIO has also been holding solidarity rallies around the country.

A mobilization of the movement on a national scale would really be empowering.

[Property Is Robbery]

If you're near Chicago you could contact the local Party for Socialism and Liberation branch. They're usually organizing something and I would be surprised if they didn't have an anti-war protest March 19th.
Chicago, IL
[email protected]
773 920-7590
3334 W. Lawrence #202
Chicago, IL 60625B

[bcbm]

if you're in ne illinois, madison isn't that far...

[Smoochy The Rhino]

A mobilization of the movement on a national scale would really be empowering.

Or it would destroy the US Economy. Like it or not, until the Communist Revolution the economy works in certain ways. One of the things that needs to happen is there has to be enough money flowing in for money to flow out of the states. If there isn't enough money coming in for the state to pay it's workers, it's going to go horribly into debt, fire a bunch of employees, drop the pay of employees alot, or cut services. The Governor of Wisconsin is pretty clear: less pay for teachers, or less teachers. By making sure the teachers get paid the same, you'd be forcing massive lay offs. Less teachers means less educated people. Less educated people means people that are easier to be ripped off in the future, by say, working in the capitalist system and not realizing they're being ripped off. It also tends to mean that overall levels of wealth will go down. Lower wealth and education levels in the US will push more and more people into poverty. Which happens to make the economic elite happy.

So, supporting continued pay levels for teachers, you're helping out the capitalists.

[Kassad]

I've been reading up on all the protests across the nation and I was wondering if anyone knew anything about any in Illinois.

I really want to go to one but it seems none are close enough.

Many thanks.:hammersickle::che::hammersickle:

A sizable part of the Chicago branch of the Party for Socialism and Liberation has been in Wisconsin struggling with the workers there. There's still plenty of time to get involved and build solidarity actions in Illinois, so I would give them a call. Here's some contact information:

[email protected]
773 920-7590

If you have any trouble getting in touch, let me know. :)

[x359594]

...The Governor of Wisconsin is pretty clear: less pay for teachers, or less teachers. By making sure the teachers get paid the same, you'd be forcing massive lay offs. Less teachers means less educated people. Less educated people means people that are easier to be ripped off in the future, by say, working in the capitalist system and not realizing they're being ripped off...

Your logic is not grounded in history and seems to be the logic of the capitalist system you decry.

Should massive layoffs occur, it's hard to believe that teachers, students and parents would supinely accept their fate. Look at what's happening right now. Resistance on a massive scale, and the creation of parallel institutions is a real alternative. The model is near at hand. For nearly 100 years there were in fact fewer teachers for Black communities in the South than for white ones. This state of affairs obtained until the 1960s when Freedom Schools were established. If poor blacks can create alternatives in the face of violence so can working class whites.

[MarxistMan]

DEAR FRIENDS !! It is time for a scientific plan, and for action in USA. Because for revolutionary change to take place in the United States, three conditions need to be in place:


1- The broad masses of people - workers, the oppressed nationalities and others who are held down by the monopoly capitalists - need to arrive at the conclusion that they are unable to live in the old way, and need to be willing to fight to bring the old order to an end.

2- The ruling class needs to be in real crisis, where it is divided against itself and unable to continue with business as usual.

3- And, finally, there needs to be a strong revolutionary organization, a new Socialist Workers Party that is capable of navigating complex political situations and that can lead the fight to establish working class political power.

In the U.S. today, none of these conditions exist. In my view, it is the central task of revolutionaries to create a new workers party - a political party that is serious about revolution in this country.

Such a party cannot be proclaimed or declared into being. It will be the product of bringing together or fusing Marxism with the workers movement. In a practical sense this means that a substantial section of the activists, organizers, and leaders need to take up the science of revolution, Marxism-Leninism, in order to build a workers party, that is in fact the advanced and organized detachment of the multi-national working class. This process will be the result of an organized effort, and it cannot come about spontaneously.

Building a new revolutionary party is a long-term project that requires perseverance and determination. It is not something that can be done in isolation from the people's struggle and movements. The party building work should be placed in the context of our three objectives: To win all that can be won while weakening our enemies; Raise the general level of consciousness, struggle, and organization in our immediate battles; and Win the advanced to Marxism-Leninism, thus building revolutionary organization.

The tasks of revolutionaries in relationship to building revolutionary organization change based on the development of the objective situation. Right now there are very few Marxists in the U.S. While the job of uniting them is an important one, this is not key to party building. Finding new socialists in the course of the struggle is the thing to do.

It is possible that an upsurge of the national movements will lead to the creation of Marxist organizations based among a specific nationality, as happened in the late 60's and early 70's. If this takes place again, it would mean prioritizing the principled unity of leftist organizations. Likewise if polarization in society due to the decline of U.S imperialism, or radicalization of a section of one or more social movements creates a layer of activists who are revolutionary minded, this in turn will affect the content of party building efforts.

Expanding the scale and scope of revolutionary organization with the long term goal of building a new socialist workers party is closely linked with the construction of a united front against monopoly capitalism. The organizational capacity and political understanding a Marxist party provides is the vehicle for working class leadership, and the scaffolding for the united front against monopoly capitalism.






.



I've been reading up on all the protests across the nation and I was wondering if anyone knew anything about any in Illinois.

I really want to go to one but it seems none are close enough.

Many thanks.:hammersickle::che::hammersickle:

[Smoochy The Rhino]

Your logic is not grounded in history and seems to be the logic of the capitalist system you decry.

Is a stupid population not easier to control and manipulate? And how does my post sound capitalistic?


Should massive layoffs occur, it's hard to believe that teachers, students and parents would supinely accept their fate. Look at what's happening right now. Resistance on a massive scale, and the creation of parallel institutions is a real alternative. The model is near at hand. For nearly 100 years there were in fact fewer teachers for Black communities in the South than for white ones. This state of affairs obtained until the 1960s when Freedom Schools were established. If poor blacks can create alternatives in the face of violence so can working class whites.

So, me saying that supporting the laying off of (-insert however many teachers would be fired-) sounds like the logic of a capitalist, but you basically saying that creating private schools supports labor? Am I missing something here?

[x359594]

...how does my post sound capitalistic?...

It sounds like Margaret Thatcher's "There is no alternative." I responded with "Another world is possible."


...you basically saying that creating private schools supports labor? Am I missing something here?

Yes, you are. Freedom Schools were not private. They were free to all, and the teachers were paid according to their need by the community. Solidarity forever comrade.

[Victus Mortuum]

They don't need to fire teachers or cut pay - even within the capitalist framework. They could raise taxes.

[Ele'ill]

Portland, Oregon

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2011/02/406418.shtml

Portland Solidarity with Wisconsin Workers!
Friday 4pm
DIRECTOR PARK, 877 SW Taylor

[Smoochy The Rhino]

It sounds like Margaret Thatcher's "There is no alternative." I responded with "Another world is possible."

I didn't say 'there is no alternative', the governor of Wisconsin did. If you think you could possibly find some way to gain enough control over the state of Wisconsin to force him to do anything other then what he wants (if I'm not mistaken it would take a 2/3 vote in the state legislature, unless there was a violent revolution, which I wouldn't bet money one), then go for it. Working within the Capitalist system there are plenty of alternative solutions, and there is of course moving into Socialism, but I don't think that will happen in the next ten years.


Yes, you are. Freedom Schools were not private. They were free to all, and the teachers were paid according to their need by the community. Solidarity forever comrade.

The teachers would be getting paid their need by the state, but are complaining about that. And freedom schools would be all but impossible these days since state approval would be needed in order to call it a school. And if it wasn't a 100% private school, the state would still have to pay for it.

[x359594]

...freedom schools would be all but impossible these days since state approval would be needed in order to call it a school. And if it wasn't a 100% private school, the state would still have to pay for it.

The empirical existence of such schools here in the Los Angeles area contradicts this assertion. These kind of schools also exist in Hawai'i.

[RED DAVE]

Or it would destroy the US Economy. Like it or not, until the Communist Revolution the economy works in certain ways. One of the things that needs to happen is there has to be enough money flowing in for money to flow out of the states. If there isn't enough money coming in for the state to pay it's workers, it's going to go horribly into debt, fire a bunch of employees, drop the pay of employees alot, or cut services. The Governor of Wisconsin is pretty clear: less pay for teachers, or less teachers. By making sure the teachers get paid the same, you'd be forcing massive lay offs. Less teachers means less educated people. Less educated people means people that are easier to be ripped off in the future, by say, working in the capitalist system and not realizing they're being ripped off. It also tends to mean that overall levels of wealth will go down. Lower wealth and education levels in the US will push more and more people into poverty. Which happens to make the economic elite happy.

So, supporting continued pay levels for teachers, you're helping out the capitalists.Unless you have a very misplaced sense of irony, I think you're on the wrong website.

RED DAVE

[Smoochy The Rhino]

The empirical existence of such schools here in the Los Angeles area contradicts this assertion. These kind of schools also exist in Hawai'i.

I cann't find any information about their existence since the mid-seventies. Source please?

[Kotze]

Great start on this forum, Smoochy! :lol:
One of the things that needs to happen is there has to be enough money flowing in for money to flow out of the states. If there isn't enough money coming in for the state to pay it's workers, it's going to go horribly into debt, fire a bunch of employees, drop the pay of employees alot, or cut services.Ah, I guess the reason people reacted to your text like Margaret Thatcher might have said it is that they didn't notice you are talking about a more regional level here, and you believe a change on a bigger scale has to happen?

Anyway, even below national level it's not necessary to have $ flowing in to pay workers, one can also issue tradeable tax credits for taxes paid on that level. ;)

[bcbm]

Or it would destroy the US Economy.

we can only hope

[Smoochy The Rhino]

Great start on this forum, Smoochy! :lol:

It isn't my fault no one noticed my post in the introductions forum.


Ah, I guess the reason people reacted to your text like Margaret Thatcher might have said it is that they didn't notice you are talking about a more regional level here, and you believe a change on a bigger scale has to happen?

Sort of. More like, "until there's an actual Communist Revolution, you have to think about whether or not support for a particular labor movement will actually help the Capitalists, and this is one of those times where supporting the movement would be a bad thing"

Let's look at it another way (it might help my position out a little). The Governor has said that the only choices he's going to look at are less pay for teachers, or less teachers. While there are plenty of good alternatives (even working within the Capitalist system), this is what the Governor has decided are the only choices. So, when talking about what options should be looked at, one should focus on those two options as the only possibilities.

So, if teachers are fired one of two things is going to happen. The first is the student:teacher ratios will sky rocket, 'non-essential' classes will be cut, and in general, all of those things that decrease how smart students are will suddenly show up. In effect, making the next generation of Wisconsinites dumber. Dumber students are easier to manipulate into working passively for Capitalism.

The alternative is the creation of Freedom Schools. Which would require the approval of the Governor of Wisconsin in order to meet the state and federal education mandates. And he would probably deny their creation out of spite, which is probably the same reason he refuses to do anything rational about the state's income problem.

And then there is the possibility of the state dropping teacher's income. If that happens, the students would be getting basically the same education. But, the teacher's unions would be pissed. Probably more pissed off then if there were massive layoffs (which seems to be what they would prefer anyways).

So, ultimately the choice is to make life easier for capitalists in a few generations by dumbing down the future workers, or piss off trade unionists who might then become revolutionary.

[Sentinel]

Imo, this thread should be in Ongoing Struggles rather than here as it deals with protests rather than union struggle, even though it was what caused them.