ISO, pro-imperialism and stupid.

[Fungy]

There has been a lot of crap posted recently on the ISO's rag, Socialist Worker. Probably the most hysterical stuff has been the ISO claiming the US government is pro-Gaddafi, and is protecting him. To quote from their articles:


Chants alternated between English and Arabic as megaphones changed hands, and the crowd, with a heavy presence of Libyan Americans, raised criticisms not only of Qaddafi and his murderous regime, but of the Obama administration. The chant, "Obama, where are you? Gaddafi must go!" was followed by the more pointed, "Obama must know! Gaddafi must go!" The connection between Western complicity with despotism in the Middle East was unmistakable.

socialistworker.org/2011/02/28/rallying-libyan-people

This was actually published today. So not only is the ISO printing, today, when the US has all but committed to invasion, and some news sources are actually stating there are hundreds of US, British, and French troops already there*, ISO is still printing this shit.

*globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23426

[Chambered Word]

There has been a lot of crap posted recently on the ISO's rag, Socialist Worker. Probably the most hysterical stuff has been the ISO claiming the US government is pro-Gaddafi, and is protecting him.

How is this hysterical at all? I wouldn't go so far as to say that the US have been explicit supporters of Gaddafi, but it's no secret that they have co-operated together in business, nor is it news that Gaddafi offered to aid the war on terror.


To quote from their articles:


Chants alternated between English and Arabic as megaphones changed hands, and the crowd, with a heavy presence of Libyan Americans, raised criticisms not only of Qaddafi and his murderous regime, but of the Obama administration. The chant, "Obama, where are you? Gaddafi must go!" was followed by the more pointed, "Obama must know! Gaddafi must go!" The connection between Western complicity with despotism in the Middle East was unmistakable.

And the West has certainly been complicit with despotism in the Middle East.


This was actually published today. So not only is the ISO printing, today, when the US has all but committed to invasion, and some news sources are actually stating there are hundreds of US, British, and French troops already there*, ISO is still printing this shit.

*globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23426

While the US tries to exploit the situation in Libya, the ISO are printing articles about Libyan protesters chanting anti-US slogans. What's your point?

[Os Cangaceiros]

The OP reminds me of a more belligerent version of Soviet Dude.

[Savage]

It isn't just that the ISO is objectively wrong on this issue; it's that their distorting this situation to make it seem as if imperialist powers are not about to go to war against another oil-rich nation to exploit their resources by toppling another indigenous government.

I'm sorry but this has already happened:

http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2011/02/24/libya-placed-billions-dollars-banks-wikileaks/

http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/November/20071129144104cpataruk0.800152.html

http://www.wttlonline.com/ht/a/GetDocumentAction/id/23354

http://www.buyusa.gov/libya/en/doingbusinessinlibya.html

http://www.theundergroundinvestor.com/2006/10/a-the-drc-and-libya/

http://www.washington-report.org/archives/march01/0103054.html

[resurgence]

I cant stand Trots in general but the ISO is NOT pro-Imperialist.

[resurgence]

*globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23426

"Globalresearch" are weirdo rightists of some bizzare description who really get off on their conspiracy theories. I wouldnt take them seriously.

[Chimurenga.]

"Globalresearch" are weirdo rightists of some bizzare description who really get off on their conspiracy theories. I wouldnt take them seriously.

Press TV confirms it: http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/167578.html

[Iraultzaile Ezkerreko]

There has been a lot of crap posted recently on the ISO's rag, Socialist Worker. Probably the most hysterical stuff has been the ISO claiming the US government is pro-Gaddafi, and is protecting him. To quote from their articles:



socialistworker.org/2011/02/28/rallying-libyan-people

This was actually published today. So not only is the ISO printing, today, when the US has all but committed to invasion, and some news sources are actually stating there are hundreds of US, British, and French troops already there*, ISO is still printing this shit.

*globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23426

Wow, that one brain cell is straining really hard to create a synapse. That must hurt.

SW, and especially what you quoted, is not "pro-imperialist". They're merely commenting that people are making connections between Gaddafi and the West. Just because the US has given up on Gaddafi doesn't mean he didn't make every concession possible to the US in order to maintain their support for his regime. Saying Libya under Gaddafi is an anti-imperialist regime is like saying Panama under Norriega was anti-imperialist. Sure, it's fucked up and wrong that US might intervene, but it doesn't change the fact that the US is just removing a US sponsored stooge.

Oh, and lastly, are you familiar at all with how the process of publishing articles works? You write something, it gets checked and edited, and then posted with the next update. Sometimes what gets posted lags behind the new revelations, it happens, we're not all linked up to some sort of satellite neural lilnk that shares informationto everyone immediately. Expect an article about the US to be coming soon, but don't immediately label someone as pro-imperialist just because you support pseudo-stalinist political parties who support violent and repressive capitalist police states. The people of Libya can not move towards socialism under the thumb of a violent and erratic psychopath who continually gave more and more to the US for their support, the people of Libya must throw off that yoke of oppression and govern themselves. Socialism can not be handed down from on high by some violent dictator, but must be erected from below by the people themselves.

[MarxistMan]

Hello, some months ago a member and supporter of the site http://www.wsws.org (World Socialist Website) which is a Trotskist organization told me that the people of Socialist Worker and ISO http://www.socialistworker.org/ along with its leaders such as Alan Maass, Heather Rodgers and others are part of the bourgeoise-reformist, Middle Class left, college bourgeoise liberal left.

And not part of the Marxist, Leninist, Trotkist, Maoist left such as the people of The Workers World Party, Socialist Appeal, Socialist Action, Bob Avakian, and other leftist political party of America that reject social-democracy, progressive liberals such as Michael Moore, Naomi Klein, and others non-marxist leftist celebrities such as Paul Krugman, Norman Solomon and Amy Goodman.

So it is fair to state that the folks of http://www.socialistworker.org are just like the writters of progressive liberal, social-democrat sites like Commondreams and The Nation Magazine

.


There has been a lot of crap posted recently on the ISO's rag, Socialist Worker. Probably the most hysterical stuff has been the ISO claiming the US government is pro-Gaddafi, and is protecting him. To quote from their articles:



socialistworker.org/2011/02/28/rallying-libyan-people

This was actually published today. So not only is the ISO printing, today, when the US has all but committed to invasion, and some news sources are actually stating there are hundreds of US, British, and French troops already there*, ISO is still printing this shit.

*globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23426

[MarxistMan]

The people of http://www.globalresearch.ca are not rightists at all. Where did you get that? They are not marxists, leninists, and trotskists. I think that a leftist-marxist shouldn't take Marxism like a religion. You can read an Ayn Rand book, and wear a Sarah Palin T-shirt and that doesn't mean that you are a pro-capitalism. I listen to Alex Jones, read Jeff Rense site and other conspiracy theory articles, and i still hate capitalism

.



Press TV confirms it: http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/167578.html

[Blackscare]

Hello, some months ago a member and supporter of the site http://www.wsws.org (World Socialist Website) which is a Trotskist organization told me that the people of Socialist Worker and ISO http://www.socialistworker.org/ along with its leaders such as Alan Maass, Heather Rodgers and others are part of the bourgeoise-reformist, Middle Class left, college bourgeoise liberal left.

.

As someone who has actually been to an SEP meeting (this is the party that puts out WSWS) I would not take their opinion on any party as the truth. They are some of the most vile sectarians around. They spent more time attacking me (the only new visitor to their meeting in quite a while, so they say), right off the fucking bat, and calling me a Pabloite (which I had never even heard of before), than actually trying to find points of agreement or anything productive. Even just making a new visitor feel welcome and trying to entice them to learn more about their worldview.


All of their literature (on top of being old and yellowed and clearly much older than me) was aimed at attacking other Trotskyite micro-sects, the 'renegade' worker's revolutionary party, Gerry Healy speeches, etc. They're split historians, really, and their worldview is colored by that.



I don't know much about the ISO, but I will say that trusting an SEP affiliate's opinion regarding other political parties is beyond foolish.

Also the bit about the ISO being college leftists is hilarious, literally everyone there was either some sort of teacher or some sort of student, and if not just really old and selling shit.

[syndicat]

And not part of the Marxist, Leninist, Trotkist, Maoist left such as the people of The Workers World Party, Socialist Appeal, Socialist Action, Bob Avakian, and other leftist political party of America that reject social-democracy, progressive liberals such as Michael Moore, Naomi Klein, and others non-marxist leftist celebrities such as Paul Krugman, Norman Solomon and Amy Goodman.

So it is fair to state that the folks of http://www.socialistworker.org (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.socialistworker.org) are just like the writters of progressive liberal, social-democrat sites like Commondreams and The Nation Magazine



No, this is not a "fair" conclusion but a weird sectarian distortion of reality. WWP, RCP, et al are part of what I'd call the "bureaucratic class" left since what they advocate is that the capitalists be replaced by a new boss class, a bureaucratic class to dominate and exploit the working class.

[RED DAVE]

You can read an Ayn Rand book, and wear a Sarah Palin T-shirt and that doesn't mean that you are a pro-capitalism.No, but it means you have a lousy sense of humor.

RED DAVE

[Lucretia]

In fairness to the ISO, things are developing so rapidly in North Africa that it is difficult to get a good handle on things. But in fairness to the OP, the ISO was wrong in this specific case, and is wrong in a surprising number of their political analyses (the SEP is absolutely right in criticizing the ISO's understanding of the role of trade unions in the Wisconsin struggle). I agree with the ISO's general theoretical orientation and would probably join them if their positions on so many of these issues did not strike me as precisely what somebody else in this thread called them: naive left liberalism.

[KurtFF8]

No, this is not a "fair" conclusion but a weird sectarian distortion of reality. WWP, RCP, et al are part of what I'd call the "bureaucratic class" left since what they advocate is that the capitalists be replaced by a new boss class, a bureaucratic class to dominate and exploit the working class.

Do they advocate this or are the conclusions of their version of Socialism lead to this in your opinion? (Important distinction)


In fairness to the ISO, things are developing so rapidly in North Africa that it is difficult to get a good handle on things. But in fairness to the OP, the ISO was wrong in this specific case, and is wrong in a surprising number of their political analyses (the SEP is absolutely right in criticizing the ISO's understanding of the role of trade unions in the Wisconsin struggle). I agree with the ISO's general theoretical orientation and would probably join them if their positions on so many of these issues did not strike me as precisely what somebody else in this thread called them: naive left liberalism.

Of course things are developing rapidly and it's difficult to have the best analysis at this point. This is why we should be critical of the way the ISO has written on it. Their recent polemic against the PSL and WWP criticized them for urging caution on supporting the opposition (the PSL, for example cited how we don't yet know the political makeup of it, and warned of US intervention). The ISO ended up ignoring the potential for US intervention and accused groups like the PSL of being "Gaddafi apologists"

[RedHal]

I cant stand Trots in general but the ISO is NOT pro-Imperialist.

no, not openly pro-imperialists, but liberals are easily led along imperialist lines

[Geiseric]

I have a friend who knows alot of ISO, and they really just focus on increasing their membership and nothing else, like they don't organise protests, strikes, whatever. Just membership and their newspaper. ISO also supported Obama. The logic I heard about this was that he'll mess up so bad, people will be radicalized against capitalism, and will be open to socialism etc. It doesn't take a college professor to see the holes in that logic, seeing as people can be turned even more right wing by the 'liberal' capitalists, as well that they're letting things get worse, which is kind of a crappy strategy imho.

[Rusty Shackleford]

I have a friend who knows alot of ISO, and they really just focus on increasing their membership and nothing else, like they don't organise protests, strikes, whatever. Just membership and their newspaper. ISO also supported Obama. The logic I heard about this was that he'll mess up so bad, people will be radicalized against capitalism, and will be open to socialism etc. It doesn't take a college professor to see the holes in that logic, seeing as people can be turned even more right wing by the 'liberal' capitalists, as well that they're letting things get worse, which is kind of a crappy strategy imho.

theres a word for it
Opportunism

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Those making these demands believe sanctions to be a solution that will force Qaddafi out and stop the killing without infringing on the sovereignty of the Libyan people. But a majority believes that no foreign country, especially the U.S., should intervene in Libya, since it would be doing so to guarantee its own economic and geopolitical interests, not the sovereignty of the Libyan people. One thing is certain--everyone made it loud and clear that Qaddafi must go.

How is the ISO being "Imperialist" here??? It seems like their problem was with people casting aspersions on the Libyan protesters without all the information.

It did seem like there were double standards between how the revolution in Libya and the revolution in Egypt and Tunisia, when I think it's really too early to determine the exact class base of any of these revolutions, and whether or not outside forces will be able to hijack them. And it's not like the West is any more likely to try to hijack Libya's oil than Egypt's canal, so I don't think there's a greater danger of Imperialists "Hijacking" the Libyan revolution unless Gaddhafi keeps making the same blunders.

[Comrade Ian]

I have a friend who knows alot of ISO, and they really just focus on increasing their membership and nothing else, like they don't organise protests, strikes, whatever. Just membership and their newspaper.

You're friend doesn't know shit about the ISO, we do an insane amount of movement work and have been heavily involved in Union struggles (We're one of the driving forces behind building the Educators for a Democratic Union reform caucaus in SF and in some other places around the country) as well as the huge protests/movement around the budget cuts. Particularly last year in my own branch in Santa Cruz we put our future on the line resisting riot police to defend an occupation of the main administrative building which you're organization denounced and refused to participate in. We were extremely active in the defense campaign around the first California occupation of the wave, that of the Graduates Student Commons at UCSC, and we were a driving force behind building the strike here last March 4th that shut down campus, gave every worker a day off with full pay and was considered to be the most advanced action of the anti-cuts movement in California so far.


ISO also supported Obama.Incorrect, we did not support Obama at all and in fact not voting for Democrats is basically a requirement of membership in the ISO. We did think that his election would give confidence to unions and social movements as it did in the leadup to the inauguration (Republic Windows/Doors) but we considered his betrayals to be inevitable (Though we perhaps underestimated the extent to which he would drive to the right) and never "supported Obama".


The logic I heard about this was that he'll mess up so bad, people will be radicalized against capitalism, and will be open to socialism etc. It doesn't take a college professor to see the holes in that logic, seeing as people can be turned even more right wing by the 'liberal' capitalists, as well that they're letting things get worse, which is kind of a crappy strategy imho.We never made that arguement or any arguement along those lines, you merely have demonstrated your own complete ignorance of the actual politics/positions of the ISO. You might want to try actually reading SocialistWorker.org online instead of relying on hearsay.

[Rusty Shackleford]

In the realm of education struggle, the ISO does pull some good stuff off. cant deny it.

[RED DAVE]

According to a friend of mine, a very experienced leftist who lives in Madison, the ISO was one of the only groups that had any serious presence at all.

RED DAVE

[Geiseric]

Huh. Well I was incorrect. However the ISO was big enough to organise anti-war demonstrations when the Iraq Invasion broke out, and I heard that they didn't. By the way, these are based off things i've heard from somebody else, I didn't have any strong feelings one way or another.

[Devrim]

There has been a lot of crap posted recently on the ISO's rag, Socialist Worker. Probably the most hysterical stuff has been the ISO claiming the US government is pro-Gaddafi, and is protecting him. To quote from their articles:


Chants alternated between English and Arabic as megaphones changed hands, and the crowd, with a heavy presence of Libyan Americans, raised criticisms not only of Qaddafi and his murderous regime, but of the Obama administration. The chant, "Obama, where are you? Gaddafi must go!" was followed by the more pointed, "Obama must know! Gaddafi must go!" The connection between Western complicity with despotism in the Middle East was unmistakable.

socialistworker.org/2011/02/28/rallying-libyan-people

This was actually published today. So not only is the ISO printing, today, when the US has all but committed to invasion, and some news sources are actually stating there are hundreds of US, British, and French troops already there*, ISO is still printing this shit.

*globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23426

I think that the ISO are drawing a connection here that I wouldn't make from those slogans. They say that it shows 'Western complicity with despotism in the Middle East', and criticises the US, but to me it seems like people calling for intervention, and what they are criticising is that the US hasn't intervened.

Devrim

[Jimmie Higgins]

According to a friend of mine, a very experienced leftist who lives in Madison, the ISO was one of the only groups that had any serious presence at all.

RED DAVEI know folks from Solidarity were there as well. But we did have speak-outs INSIDE the capital building - awesome.


I have a friend who knows alot of ISO, and they really just focus on increasing their membership and nothing else, like they don't organise protests, strikes, whatever.

But seriously, if we aren't being accused of "only selling papers" then we are accused of "taking over movements". We can't be doing both. Sure we want to win people to our politics and our group - what left-winger doesn't want to expose more workers and activists to left-wing politics or try and organize them. Our short-term goal is trying to help rebuild a left in the US and we think our politics can help that project and so we try to win both recruits as well as movement allies who may not join, but want to work together.

But to the real political issue here: supporting the protesters does not mean supporting a US intervention. We have been on solidarity protests with activists in the US and argued against US intervention - in fact the solidarity protests can be the building blocks of building an opposition at home to a US intervention in Libya. We also don't support imperialism when it is introduced from the Libyan regime.

What strange logic for leftists who are criticizing us: the people can only choose between 2 bosses, an American one or a Libyan one. Revolutionary lesser-evilism? We support the protesters not the regime or their new imperialist friends from the last decade (who've abandoned him only because he can't control the population anymore) in the US and Italy. If/When the US intervenes, it won't be because they want regime change, it will be because they don't want to loose control of that area... that their frenimey did such a good job of controlling. If the US wanted just to replace the regime, all they'd have to do is wait a week because there's no support in Libya right now - but the US is afraid of what might replace the regime and that's why they are going.

We plan to have full membership support of both the ANSWER and other big anti-war protests coming up, and "US out of the Middle East and Africa" as well as showing that democracy can only come from the people struggling there, not imposed from above, will no doubt be some of what we are saying.

[redasheville]

Huh. Well I was incorrect. However the ISO was big enough to organise anti-war demonstrations when the Iraq Invasion broke out, and I heard that they didn't. By the way, these are based off things i've heard from somebody else, I didn't have any strong feelings one way or another.

I know much of the leadership of your organization. The wife of the leader of Socialist Organizer is a member of the union caucus that comrade Ian mentioned. I am in that caucus, as well.

Since our organizations have been allies at various points, I don't think it is very principled to mouth off completely unfounded hearsay about the ISO. I know at least one leading member of Socialist Organizer that would completely disagree with just about everything you've said about us. Just saying.

[MarxistMan]

black: you are right, the trotskists of http://www.wsws.org are also anti-Hugo Chavez. They hate Hugo Chavez with a passion. Thanx a lot for your great opinions and comments about WSWS.ORG

I dont understand how can the people of WSWS.ORG be so perfectionist, I might be labeled as a crazy leftist because I support anarchism, maoism, leninism, trotskism, luxemburgists, Evo Morales, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and other leftist movements and parties at the same time.

The world left needs to unite. If the left doesn't unite, we will always have oligarchic-plutocratic governments in Mexico, USA, Europe and the whole world

.




As someone who has actually been to an SEP meeting (this is the party that puts out WSWS) I would not take their opinion on any party as the truth. They are some of the most vile sectarians around. They spent more time attacking me (the only new visitor to their meeting in quite a while, so they say), right off the fucking bat, and calling me a Pabloite (which I had never even heard of before), than actually trying to find points of agreement or anything productive. Even just making a new visitor feel welcome and trying to entice them to learn more about their worldview.


All of their literature (on top of being old and yellowed and clearly much older than me) was aimed at attacking other Trotskyite micro-sects, the 'renegade' worker's revolutionary party, Gerry Healy speeches, etc. They're split historians, really, and their worldview is colored by that.



I don't know much about the ISO, but I will say that trusting an SEP affiliate's opinion regarding other political parties is beyond foolish.

Also the bit about the ISO being college leftists is hilarious, literally everyone there was either some sort of teacher or some sort of student, and if not just really old and selling shit.

[MarxistMan]

--Wpz4NAHtY
A socialist song to celebrate socialism


I was wrong about ISO, i love ISO and the folks of http://www.socialistworker.org the world-left needs to unite

.



I know much of the leadership of your organization. The wife of the leader of Socialist Organizer is a member of the union caucus that comrade Ian mentioned. I am in that caucus, as well.

Since our organizations have been allies at various points, I don't think it is very principled to mouth off completely unfounded hearsay about the ISO. I know at least one leading member of Socialist Organizer that would completely disagree with just about everything you've said about us. Just saying.

[Chambered Word]

I dont understand how can the people of WSWS.ORG be so perfectionist, I might be labeled as a crazy leftist because I support anarchism, maoism, leninism, trotskism, luxemburgists, Evo Morales, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and other leftist movements and parties at the same time.

Why is this necessarily a good thing?

[Kassad]

I would trust something posted on SocialistWorker, despite how poor of an analysis it might be, over an article on WSWS any day of the week.