Toward real Socialist/Communist Discourse

[h9socialist]

Hell, I'll probably be terrorized for this. I used to love this web-site. But now I have only been able to participate in this demeaning category called "Opposing Ideologies" for well over a year. I am a Communist, (and member of the Party of John Reed) and an activist against the capitalist and it's hegemony. I believe in revolution to rid the world of the evil of capitalism. And yet the people who run this web-site put me in the opposing ideologies category because once I begged some pragmatism.

It is an awful statement that the LARGEST community at this web-site should be called "Opposing Ideologies." Obviously, when so much is dedicated to "opposing ideologies" there is something wrong with the prevailing leadership. In my home town socialists and communists and other radicals work together in their opposition to capitalism and the evil that it wreaks. And yet here, in a place that should be a haven for socialists and communists to work together we consign so many comrades to ostracism because some part of the hierarchy that runs this site has a rigid and narrow interpretation of what our movement is.

We never get anywhere like this.

[ZeroNowhere]

Aw.

Wrong thread.

[hatzel]

You'll want to go over here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/unfair-restriction-v-t140025/index.html) and tell us why you shouldn't be restricted. And then the answer will be "you haven't even posted on this site in over a year, how the hell are we supposed to know what your position is?" And then you'll have to wait a few months, making posts, before you can appeal again. Or you could just cut out the first appeal, because it won't do anything anyway. And also don't make these crybaby threads, we have more than enough of them already...

[ZeroNowhere]

This whole system of restrictions is disgusting and reminds me of the mass restrictions of Stalin's era, especially the mass atrocities committed against Trotskyists and such through rampant bureaucratic restriction tacitly or explicitly encouraged by the ruling clique.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Hell, I'll probably be terrorized for this. I used to love this web-site. But now I have only been able to participate in this demeaning category called "Opposing Ideologies" for well over a year. I am a Communist, (and member of the Party of John Reed) and an activist against the capitalist and it's hegemony. I believe in revolution to rid the world of the evil of capitalism. And yet the people who run this web-site put me in the opposing ideologies category because once I begged some pragmatism.

It is an awful statement that the LARGEST community at this web-site should be called "Opposing Ideologies." Obviously, when so much is dedicated to "opposing ideologies" there is something wrong with the prevailing leadership. In my home town socialists and communists and other radicals work together in their opposition to capitalism and the evil that it wreaks. And yet here, in a place that should be a haven for socialists and communists to work together we consign so many comrades to ostracism because some part of the hierarchy that runs this site has a rigid and narrow interpretation of what our movement is.

We never get anywhere like this.

I think the way you presented this is overly-dramatic, but I also don't totally disagree with you. The only people who are really "repressed" on this site in a systematic way are racists and trolls and fascists - all are banned and I agree with that policy. I think the problem with O.I. is mostly the name and the "restricted tag" which makes it sound like a punishment rather than what it really should be which is a way for people who agree to certain basic points of unity (i.e. non-restricted radicals who believe a revolution by workers is necessary) to discuss politics without having to justify the whole concept of socialism or revolution or the importance of the working class in every topic.

When I first posted on this site years ago, Bush and the wars were still popular with Republicans and so the vast majority of OIers were right-wingers of some kind. Now we get the occasional tea-partier, but they seem to get bored and leave quickly. Now a lot of the regular OIers seem to be other leftists who might have one position out of step with most of the left or are liberal/progressives or whatnot. Personally I think "OI" is a little to hostile at a time when many new people might be looking into radical politics but not convinced... yet. So I'd be in favor of changing the name to "non-revolutionary" or "Other Ideologies" to make the separation seem less like a punishment and encourage more dialogue with progressives or social democrats.

[Dunk]

And I stand by what I said on Democratic Underground. Obama is not the problem -- I happen to think he's a fairly good guy...I am roughly of the same mindset as Michael Moore...
I also know that if you want to boycott every capitalist in this world today, you'll starve to death. Well, there will be people who will have health care because of last night's vote -- and they don't give a shit about your pie-in-the-sky revolutionary ambitions.

And yes, I believe in a "visionary gradualism" that Michael Harrington discussed in his last book "Socialism: Past and Future. If we lived in Cuba in 1959, I'd say that was bullshit. But I live in the U.S. and a revolutionary apocalypse is not exactly imminent. And socialism itself will not spring forth in an instant orgasm of revolutionary fervor. It will happen through vision, through values and through perseverance. And this is the most explaining I've done in a long time . . .


Stop trashing Obama. This is a battle we have to win! The reforms can be tweaked later. This is the best chance we've ever had! Don't fuck it up!...Come on folks, it's time to rally and get this done!

The mods aren't Stalin's KGB, OI isn't a gulag, restriction isn't an ice pick, this is a site for the revolutionary left, and h9socialist is not a revolutionary leftist. Unless h9socialist has changed. In which case, RabbiK has the best advice for h9socialist.

[Manic Impressive]

You'll want to go over here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/unfair-restriction-v-t140025/index.html) and tell us why you shouldn't be restricted. And then the answer will be "you haven't even posted on this site in over a year, how the hell are we supposed to know what your position is?" And then you'll have to wait a few months, making posts, before you can appeal again. Or you could just cut out the first appeal, because it won't do anything anyway. And also don't make these crybaby threads, we have more than enough of them already...
What's all this us and we shit? It makes you sound like you think you have any influence over how the forum is run :lol:

[hatzel]

It makes you sound like you think you have any influence over how the forum is run :lol:

I am myself the head of the anarcho-trot conspiracy, the infiltrator, the mighty elder of the ZOF (that's Zionist Occupied Forum, by the way); the so-called admins, who are in truth nothing but puppets, act as per my whim and command. Do not underestimate my power, boy!

...also I've clearly been overcome by some kind of...community spirit, 'we're all in this together' kind of thing. The use of the word 'we' has the effect of making it seem as though we, as an online community, are welcoming, are united, and that we will all be paying attention to h9socialist, listening to what he has to say and taking it into account, as he is such a vital cog in the machine that is RevLeft. I think this is a nice approach. It will surely make him seem at home here. And when he comes back again next year, for his annual crybaby post, he'll remember how much we value his contributions and insightful arguments :)

http://rlv.zcache.com/queen_victoria_we_are_not_amused_poster-p228460311490154127trma_400.jpg

[Thirsty Crow]

Wow, a Communist who advocates (self)censorship with respect to a bourgeois head of state, who has handed out de facto subsidies to the financial institutions which bear part of the responsibility for the crisis.