Tea Partiers Mock Parkinsons Victim

[Dogs On Acid]

6ik4f1dRbP8

Social Darwinism anyone?

Sick fucks.


The hero speaks:

MfvnNzgQy7Q

lsHZnc9qcMQ

[ВАЛТЕР]

Poor man, I feel ashamed to be considered the same species as those Teabaggers...It's disgusting how they treat somebody who in their eyes is a "lesser" human being because he cannot afford medical care.

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

Not surprising, I think it's safe to say, I don't even have to hear the rest of the stories associated with the party, I just need to hear the mention of their name and I can assume whatever it is will piss me off and is complete and total bullshit. Had I been there, I would have personally beat the fuck out of each and everyone of them.

Another reason why people should join my Donner Party (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=801), this shit seriously can not stand and I'm sick of hearing stories about shit like this; these people need to be put in check and quickly. I would have given the man a hand out as in kicking their asses, a hand to help him off the ground and a hot meal. Fucking disgusts me to my core.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Did anyone else notice the accusations that the man was a "communist"?

Also, this man is a former Nuclear Engineer with a Doctorate degree from Cornell.

This man probably has an IQ higher than all of those Teabaggers combined...

[Dogs On Acid]

This man probably has an IQ higher than all of those Teabaggers combined...

:lol:

That's not too hard

[Sir Comradical]

Did anyone else notice the accusations that the man was a "communist"?

Also, this man is a former Nuclear Engineer with a Doctorate degree from Cornell.

This man probably has an IQ higher than all of those Teabaggers combined...

This is when you send in the tanks. Maybe one day some of these hostile tea partiers will go broke paying for their medical expenses.

[ВАЛТЕР]

I couldn't imagine being there to witness this. There is no telling how I would react...
One thing I hate is people harassing others, I just cannot stand bullies. If a man is sick the last thing on earth he needs is a bunch of fucking idiots harassing him.

[Zostrianos]

My hope is that those fuckers lose their jobs and eventually find themselves on the street with some serious disease that requires expensive treatment, and see them beg for help. I'd love to be there and tell them "Wait a minute, I thought you liked capitalism! You should be happy then. You don't work, you die"

[Revolution starts with U]

Columbus Dispacth? I take it this happened in Ohio?
I wish we had less (of my extended family) reactionary people in this beautiful countryside :(

[RadioRaheem84]

Why do they act like people do not work? They're always wailing about having to work to earn what you deserve, but people are working, very hard, but medical costs are so expensive. They're also paying into a system, so it's not like they're receiving a handout.

What is so fucking hard about understanding that? What handouts are they talking about?

I fucking hate the reactionary middle aged pissed off racist males that dominate that sick as hell movement.

[El Louton]

My hope is that those fuckers lose their jobs and eventually find themselves on the street with some serious disease that requires expensive treatment, and see them beg for help. I'd love to be there and tell them "Wait a minute, I thought you liked capitalism! You should be happy then. You don't work, you die"

Then they'll dream of Universal Health Care!

[RadioRaheem84]

Then they'll dream of Universal Health Care!

Some of them accept the cards they draw. They die not blaming the system.

Reminds me of the guy waiting to die in Sean Penn's Dead Man Walking, on death row and still blaming himself and himself only.

[Nox]

Those teabaggers are just begging for everyone to hate them.

[MattShizzle]

It's a common right wing myth that hard work leads to success.

[Rafiq]

These bourgeois snakes cannot be delt with using peaceful means. They must be purged and crushed.

That man who was exerting dominance over him by throwing money at him, I would like to see how powerful he feels after we confiscate his property and throw him in a labor camp. Then we will see who gets the last laugh

[Dogs On Acid]

These bourgeois snakes cannot be delt with using peaceful means. They must be purged and crushed.

That man who was exerting dominance over him by throwing money at him, I would like to see how powerful he feels after we confiscate his property and throw him in a labor camp. Then we will see who gets the last laugh

Not sure if you're new to this whole Communism thing, but most of us don't take forced labour very kindly.

[RadioRaheem84]

I would like to see how powerful he feels after we confiscate his property and throw him in a labor camp. Then we will see who gets the last laugh

Labor camp? :confused: No, comrade. No.

[Rafiq]

You know what I mean. I don't actually mean throw him in a labor camp. I mean his power would be nothing in the face of a Proletarian dictatorship

[RadioRaheem84]

You know what I mean. I don't actually mean throw him in a labor camp. I mean his power would be nothing in the face of a Proletarian dictatorship

dictatorship of the proletarian /= Proletarian dictatorship

[MustCrushCapitalism]

These people should be killed. What utter douchebaggery.

[Dogs On Acid]

These people should be killed.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VAW-47FNNiA/TeuV3rpnAaI/AAAAAAAABlM/X2Q4XUghDkc/s1600/q-icon-no.gif

[Rafiq]

If you think a non violent revolution is possible, if you think that moderate state terror is going to be avoided, you're naive and you need to study some history.

[Dogs On Acid]

If you think a non violent revolution is possible,
It is. That doesn't mean I don't support a violent revolution, but killing people unnecessarily is counter-productive.

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


if you think that moderate state terror is going to be avoided,
I'm an Anarchist. Keep your State.


you're naive and you need to study some history.
you're naive in resorting to Ad Hominem.

[Smyg]

I'm an Anarchist. Keep your State.


'State? No thank you, I'm quite full at the moment.'

[ColonelCossack]

At the risk of some kind of infraction, I would not feel any guilt at all from driving a T-34 straight into them. Not saying that's right... just saying i probably wouldn't feel guilty about it. Actually, fuck it. They deserve it.

Holy shit... do I sound like Azula? :blink:

[Susurrus]

I was waiting throughout the video for the guy to reveal that his cane had a sword in it, and then proceed to kung-fu his way through the crowd.

[Dogs On Acid]

I was waiting throughout the video for the guy to reveal that his cane had a sword in it, and then proceed to kung-fu his way through the crowd.

http://www.wholesalesecuritysupplies.com/images/G2003.jpg

[Rafiq]

It is. That doesn't mean I don't support a violent revolution, but killing people unnecessarily is counter-productive.

Who the hell is advocating killing people unnecessarily?



I'm an Anarchist. Keep your State.


I'm pretty sure you're a Bourgeois-Liberal moralist.


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

I'm a Communist. Keep your liberal Ghandi horse shit.

That's not a revolution, and guess what, it failed anyway in the end.

[Rafiq]

I was waiting throughout the video for the guy to reveal that his cane had a sword in it, and then proceed to kung-fu his way through the crowd.

:ohmy: he should not have done that, Chomsky sais violence is bad :ohmy:

[Susurrus]

Chomsky sais violence is bad

Source?

[Rafiq]

Source?

dogs on acid

[Susurrus]

Alright then.

But for the record:

"Of course, everybody says they're for peace. Hitler was for peace. Everybody is for peace. The question is: 'What kind of peace?'"

"Non-violent resistance activities cannot succeed against an enemy that is able freely to use violence. That's pretty obvious."

"Mass non-violent protest is predicated on the humanity of the oppressor. Quite often it doesn't work."

"No less insidious is the cry for 'revolution,' at a time when not even the germs of new institutions exist, let alone the moral and political consciousness that could lead to a basic modification of social life. If there will be a 'revolution' in America today, it will no doubt be a move towards some variety of fascism."

[Aleenik]

These bourgeois snakes cannot be delt with using peaceful means. They must be purged and crushed.

That man who was exerting dominance over him by throwing money at him, I would like to see how powerful he feels after we confiscate his property and throw him in a labor camp. Then we will see who gets the last laugh
These people should be killed. What utter douchebaggery.What those Tear Partiers did was wrong, but you guys are sick. The fact that I share the same message board with the likes of you two is saddening. You guys are just spewing hate and violence wrapped in a different ideology than theirs. It doesn't make it any prettier.

[#FF0000]

you guys are really insufferable and no actual working person would have anything to do with you

[Misanthrope]

Rafiq's thought process when someone disagrees with him advocating unnecessary violence and labor camps in extreme detail.

1. "You're a bourgeois liberal, not a true communist like me.
2. "Once the revolution comes, I'm going to personally kill you, damn liberal"

[Dogs On Acid]

Who the hell is advocating killing people unnecessarily?
You.


I'm pretty sure you're a Bourgeois-Liberal moralist.

I think you're a basement communist. Have you ever been to a protest? A party meeting? A demonstration?


I'm a Communist. Keep your liberal Ghandi horse shit.
My Liberal horse shit won't alienate fellow workers from a psychopathic genocide you seem to support.


That's not a revolution, and guess what, it failed anyway in the end.
It WAS a Revolution. And did NOT fail. The construction of Socialism did, which was a project shortly after the Revolution.


Anyway, take my word, just try telling your co-workers that when revolution comes you will personally crush and purge any incidence of right-wing workers.

You will scare them off from our ideology.

[Rafiq]

I don't advocate genocide, one. I said the State will have the power to throw that man in a labor camp, that is what I meant. I wasn't actually advocating throwing him in a labor camp. I was demonstrating how powerless he would be.

Secondly, that man was not a worker. He was an accountant (I have a source).

If the bourgeois resistance will try to sabatoge the revolution with violent means they will have to be purged and crushed. That, by no means is an indication that we will kill people because they disagree with us.

I know you think I am just sounding like a crazy Stalinist when I call you a Bourgeois-Liberal Idealist. But actually think about those three words and why I would apply them to you.

As for accusations of me being a basement communist, I take it you are talking out of your ass so I won't reply.

[Dogs On Acid]

I don't advocate genocide, one. I said the State will have the power to throw that man in a labor camp, that is what I meant. I wasn't actually advocating throwing him in a labor camp. I was demonstrating how powerless he would be.

Secondly, that man was not a worker. He was an accountant (I have a source).

If the bourgeois resistance will try to sabatoge the revolution with violent means they will have to be purged and crushed. That, by no means is an indication that we will kill people because they disagree with us.

I know you think I am just sounding like a crazy Stalinist when I call you a Bourgeois-Liberal Idealist. But actually think about those three words and why I would apply them to you.

As for accusations of me being a basement communist, I take it you are talking out of your ass so I won't reply.

Accountants aren't workers?

Man, with all due respect, just shut the fuck up.

[Rafiq]

Accountants aren't workers?

Man, with all due respect, just shut the fuck up.

I mean not an accountant, some firm owner or some owner of a lawyer business, I forget, he was an employer though, I know this because I know the person he fucking fired.

Perhaps it'd be best you shut your fucking mouth and think before jumping to such obscure accusations, like most of the LeftLibertarian users here did.

I mean do you know how incredibly stupid you sound right now with that last post? Man, I'd be embarrassed if I was a piece of shit like you who told someone to shut the fuck up when they didn't know what they were talking about.

[Dogs On Acid]

I mean not an accountant, some firm owner or some owner of a lawyer business, I forget, he was an employer though, I know this because I know the person he fucking fired.

Perhaps it'd be best you shut your fucking mouth and think before jumping to such obscure accusations, like most of the LeftLibertarian users here did.

I mean do you know how incredibly stupid you sound right now with that last post? Man, I'd be embarrassed if I was a piece of shit like you who told someone to shut the fuck up when they didn't know what they were talking about.

Thank you for your input. Now stop fucking up the thread and go away.

[Rusty Shackleford]

lets see how they act once they've been hobbled and left on the streets with no job.

[Rafiq]

lets see how they act once they've been hobbled and left on the streets with no job.

Most of the people there were business owners and not proletarians so they don't have to worry about losing their jobs.

Dogs on acid, on the other hand, is revealing himself to be a class collaborationist and somehow wishes to align our politics with that of the petite bourgeoisie in the name of some Anti-Authoritarian ethical populism. This has been most notibally endorsed by none other than Noam Chomsky.

[Rafiq]

Thank you for your input. Now stop fucking up the thread and go away.

You've been here for like three months. You have no right telling me to go away when you're the one who isn't even as acquainted with revolutionary politics as I am, or this forum, for that matter. Say you were a long time user, I wouldn't even be replying to your post right now.

[Tim Cornelis]

@Rafiq
Will you please stop telling people the following:
1) "I'm leftier than thou"
2) "Moral arguments/ethics are for bourgeois-liberals"
3) "I will crush all resistance mercilessly"

[Dogs On Acid]

I mean not an accountant, some firm owner or some owner of a lawyer business, I forget, he was an employer though, I know this because I know the person he fucking fired.

Perhaps it'd be best you shut your fucking mouth and think before jumping to such obscure accusations, like most of the LeftLibertarian users here did.

I mean do you know how incredibly stupid you sound right now with that last post? Man, I'd be embarrassed if I was a piece of shit like you who told someone to shut the fuck up when they didn't know what they were talking about.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xVdeIhoXypY/TavmTIUp2cI/AAAAAAAAAPw/w34OhR4qR-0/s320/Facepalm.jpg

[Rafiq]

@Rafiq
Will you please stop telling people the following:
1) "I'm leftier than thou"
2) "Moral arguments/ethics are for bourgeois-liberals"
3) "I will crush all resistance mercilessly"

Please provide citations for 3) and 1).

As for 2), most of the time it's actually true.

[Rafiq]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xVdeIhoXypY/TavmTIUp2cI/AAAAAAAAAPw/w34OhR4qR-0/s320/Facepalm.jpg

Behold, Dogs on Acid;s greatest method of debate: Posting pictures that apparently represent how he feels, which, to be honest, most people could give fuck all about.

[Dogs On Acid]

I hereby officially declare this thread derailed by someone with a personal grudge.

[#FF0000]

Behold, Dogs on Acid;s greatest method of debate: Posting pictures that apparently represent how he feels, which, to be honest, most people could give fuck all about.

It is better than yours, which is to cry like a dumb baby and get offended at everything.

stop


posting

[ВАЛТЕР]

These kinds of people would more than likely be against any kind of revolution, they are too detached from the plight of the common man to understand...chances are they would take up arms against us...

[Dogs On Acid]

These kinds of people would more than likely be against any kind of revolution, they are too detached from the plight of the common man to understand...chances are they would take up arms against us...

It all depends on their class consciousness. Right now it's near inexistent, but with the Wall Street Protests we can see evolution in American behavior.

In the best case scenario things will take off from the Occupy Wall Street and develop into more protests.

[ВАЛТЕР]

At the current state of consciousness, yes. But we can see an evolution in behavior.

Protesting against the Capitalist system they are brainwashed to support.

Agreed. We cannot make judgments in the now for something that will take place later. Who knows, maybe all of them will become proletariat, and be revolutionaries of the highest caliber. However, from the looks of it, this won't happen any time soon. :/

[Tim Cornelis]

Please provide citations for 3) and 1).

As for 2), most of the time it's actually true.

This is what I found very quickly:

"If the bourgeois resistance will try to sabatoge the revolution with violent means they will have to be purged and crushed."

"You have no right telling me to go away when you're the one who isn't even as acquainted with revolutionary politics as I am"

[Susurrus]

This has been most notibally endorsed by none other than Noam Chomsky.

Why do you keep randomly bringing up Noam Chomsky in debates?

Also, there's a middle ground between advocating non-violence and submission and advocating for an authoritarian state with labor camps. Disagreeing with one does not necessarily mean supporting the other.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Most of the people there were business owners and not proletarians so they don't have to worry about losing their jobs.



it was more along the lines of a hypothetical comment.



Of course, when they lose their businesses if recession hits again in the next quarter or so they probably will still sing the same tune but become even more extreme.



as for the whole discussion about suppression of counterrevolutionary movements or people. yes. suppress the shit out of them. No revolution won by letting its opponents and reactionaries freely exist and participate in the political process. that would immediately negate a revolution.

[Rafiq]

It is better than yours, which is to cry like a dumb baby and get offended at everything.

stop


posting

Piss off

[Rafiq]

Why do you keep randomly bringing up Noam Chomsky in debates?

Also, there's a middle ground between advocating non-violence and submission and advocating for an authoritarian state with labor camps. Disagreeing with one does not necessarily mean supporting the other.

I'm sorry, I am simultaneously dealing with a Chomsky thread too, so it is understandable as to why I'm mentioning him. I keep forgetting that Chomsky has nothing to do with this thread.

Of course there is a middle ground. I don't even agree with labor camps. Again, my original post was in between a joke and a point I tried to make.

My criticism came when Dogs on acid got offended by the joke, which uncovered his true Bourgeois Moralist colors.

[Nox]

I hope the people in that video (except the guy with Parkinson's) suffer from Parkinson's in the future, and get surrounded by an angry mob of 'Libertarians' who call them Communists and throw money at them.

[Agent Equality]

I weep for the day that someone such as rafiq tries to get involved in the revolution. It'll be Stalin all over again:crying:

[Commissar Rykov]

This thread is amusing for it displays both extreme sides of the Far Left in one place. I give props to the posters for that it is indeed a rare event.

[ColonelCossack]

Man i don't want to get too involved in this


But I will say that morality and ethics arguments strike me as quite idealist.

[Rafiq]

This thread is amusing for it displays both extreme sides of the Far Left in one place. I give props to the posters for that it is indeed a rare event.

Describe 'Far Left' and tell me what entitles you to decide what is extreme and what is not?

A lot of bourgeois political scientists would refer to you, a Revolutionary Socialist, as a far leftist.

If you haven't noticed, I don't like the Idealists and the Moralists on this site, whether they identify themselves as Stalinists or as Anarchists, or whatever.

[Commissar Rykov]

Describe 'Far Left' and tell me what entitles you to decide what is extreme and what is not?

A lot of bourgeois political scientists would refer to you, a Revolutionary Socialist, as a far leftist.

If you haven't noticed, I don't like the Idealists and the Moralists on this site, whether they identify themselves as Stalinists or as Anarchists, or whatever.
Far Left would describe the entirety of this site. Are you always so aggressive? I would suggest taking a breather before your heart explodes from attacking everyone in all directions.:sleep:

[Dogs On Acid]

Nothing personal, but the fact that there are people with an ideology like Rafiq is the reason i'm anti-authoritarian.

I don't want to be purged for being considered a "Bourgeois Liberal Left-Libertarian Chomskyist Class-Collaborationist Unknowledgeable Idealist Newbie Piece of Shit" by some authority, and get killed in the process.

[Aleenik]

Nothing personal, but the fact that there are people with an ideology like Rafiq is the reason i'm anti-authoritarian.

I don't want to be purged for being considered a "Bourgeois Liberal Left-Libertarian Chomskyist Class-Collaborationist Unknowledgeable Idealist Newbie Piece of Shit" by some authority, and get killed in the process.I agree. I like to consider myself a peaceful person. I believe no one should be purged or put into labor camps. That is just pure wrong. No matter how people try to wrap it up, I firmly believe nothing can justify it. That is why I dislike 'great Communist' like Stalin and Lenin. I don't support a dictatorship of (More like over imo) the proletariat. The state, from my point of view, is an entity of violence and oppression and thus must be abolished.

[Susurrus]

Such cases like this should be dealt with by the people through soviets or some other form of direct democracy.

[Rafiq]

Nothing personal, but the fact that there are people with an ideology like Rafiq is the reason i'm anti-authoritarian.

I don't want to be purged for being considered a "Bourgeois Liberal Left-Libertarian Chomskyist Class-Collaborationist Unknowledgeable Idealist Newbie Piece of Shit" by some authority, and get killed in the process.



You wouldnt be purged for that, youd just be made fun of.

[Thirsty Crow]

I agree. I like to consider myself a peaceful person. I believe no one should be purged or put into labor camps. That is just pure wrong. No matter how people try to wrap it up, I firmly believe nothing can justify it. That is why I dislike 'great Communist' like Stalin and Lenin. I don't support a dictatorship of (More like over imo) the proletariat. The state, from my point of view, is an entity of violence and oppression and thus must be abolished.
Just to clarify one simple point: if you do not support the dictatorship of the proletariat, then you do not support communism.

To explain a bit further: no society can begin to institute new relations of production and wider social relations, beyond the capitalist relations of production (which are abolished in the process of social transformation which we call "revolution"), without the working class and its allied social groups being constituted as the ruling class. This means that workers' organizations and organs of direct rule (soviets, workers councils and territorial councils) are fomed, which implies a total breakdown in bourgeois class rule. Moreover, proletarian political rule, which is the crux of the DotP and a necessary condition for global communism to be established, cannot allow for the possibility of counter-revolution, which means that bourgeois political organizations are to be banned.

This is what the term entails, and anybody who opposes the direct takeover of political rule by the working class as a class (and not by means of a "vanguard" detached from the workers themselves) also opposes a realization of possibilities for the creation of a new society.

Oh yeah, and rafiq should stop trying so hard to sound knowledgable by blatantly abusing terms which are not appropriate for the discussion at hand (pretty much all he does here, in fact). One little illustration: if any kind of an ethical concern with issues arising from the conuest of political power by the proletariat is deemed "idealist", "moralist", and suited for a bourgeois/petite bourgeois worldview, if not a symptom of it, then concrete criteria, in the form of an open, elaborated ethical standard freely discussed, for deciding which actions should armed workers take. And we all, collectively need such criteria, something which is completely out of scope of such idiocy as peddled by rafiq.
I know, it's all nice and cute to practice materialism in analysing and talking about the historical development and contemporary class relations and class struggle. Of course, that should be promoted. But fuck me if the value perspective - the ethical perspective - can be severed from considerations so vital as is the consideration of organized violence.

[Aleenik]

Just to clarify one simple point: if you do not support the dictatorship of the proletariat, then you do not support communism.That's not true.

[Thirsty Crow]

That's not true.
Really? How could I know that it is so when you didn't offer any arguments (assertions are not arguments)?

Maybe if you bothered reading what I wrote about what exactly constitutes the DotP, you would realize why opposing the class as a class taking power necessarily involves opposing global communism.

[Aleenik]

Really? How could I know that it is so when you didn't offer any arguments (assertions are not arguments)?

Maybe if you bothered reading what I wrote about what exactly constitutes the DotP, you would realize why opposing the class as a class taking power necessarily involves opposing global communism.What do you want me to say? Read up on those who oppose the DotP? I believe the state and capitalism should be abolished simultaneously or at least near simultaneously. Also, thanks, but I read what you wrote.

[Rafiq]

Oh yeah, and rafiq should stop trying so hard to sound knowledgable by blatantly abusing terms which are not appropriate for the discussion

I'm not (or ever have) tried to sound Knowledgeable. Perhaps you come to such a conclusion because you may think I am knowledgeable (something I immodestly deny). Thank you, you're so flattering.



One little illustration: if any kind of an ethical concern with issues arising from the conuest of political power by the proletariat is deemed "idealist", "moralist", and suited for a bourgeois/petite bourgeois worldview, if not a symptom of it, then concrete criteria, in the form of an open, elaborated ethical standard freely discussed, for deciding which actions should armed workers take. And we all, collectively need such criteria, something which is completely out of scope of such idiocy as peddled by rafiq.


of course ethics are not inherently Idealist. But Bourgeois morality thrown at me in situations where it simply isn't needed is Idealist. Especially what assumptions like:

"Oh big bad Rafiq wants to kill everyone! He wants to purge people who don't agree with him! He wants to throw people in labor camps even though he said he was joking! But I take that joke to offense because I'm a Bourgeois Moralist!" etc.

As if I am going to be in power anyway. I am, with historical examples, simply stating what will probably happen. Revolutions are inherently authoritarian. A period of Authoritarianism after a revolution is inevitable. I could be dead tommarow and nothing will change.


I know, it's all nice and cute to practice materialism in analysing and talking about the historical development and contemporary class relations and class struggle. Of course, that should be promoted.

You act as if Materialism is some side-activity. Materialism is the core basis of Marxism, without Materialism Marxism falls to pieces. A Materialist analysis is not a game. It is vital to the understanding of human history and it is essential for us to learn from our mistakes using it.



But fuck me if the value perspective - the ethical perspective - can be severed from considerations so vital as is the consideration of organized violence.

Tell me, I, as a Materialist, why would I want to do something unethical (in proletarian terms) with organized violence? Do I see an interest for the working class to murder innocent people? Do I subscribe to a tendency that is even remotely similar to that of the Idealist-Bourgeois Pol Pot?

Do you even know what Revolutionary State Terror is? It has nothing to do with murdering non violent people. If you think that after a revolution rainbows will arise out of the midst and everyone will sing and dance you are wrong. There will be a period of terrible, terrible war. The Bourgeoisie will not stand down. They will murder every human being on Earth before they do that.

A lot of users here do not understand the seriousness of what a revolution could be. If a revolution could exist without violence and authoritarianism than I would love it. I would want it more than anything. I won't be delusional though, I know that it isn't realistic and it isn't possible.

A lot of you Stalinists are simply "Being Neutral" because neither side is Stalinist. Here's the difference between me and you:

I don't agree with people based on their tendency, I don't take sides based on my "tendency" .

I hate this mentality that you guys posses. You are implicitly disagreeing with me merely on a basis of your Ideology. If you provided me with a concrete, detailed refute to my posts than I would understand. But you didn't do that, you merely played the "Boo Hoo Rafiq hates Morals" card.

[#FF0000]

Revolutions are inherently authoritarian

hey guys I know engels said this once but engels was sort of a dipshit a lot of the time. violence committed against those with power is not authoritarianism please stop saying this thanks

[Hiero]

Rafiq, all you expressed in your first post was your masochist fantasy. I have been told by older Communists that back in the day when ML parties were at their height in the West comrades used to say all the time "just wait untill the revolution, you will get yours". Well the revolution never came and thoose comrades died of all age. This isn't the 1930s, your time is not going to come and there is not going to be a revolutution were you get to arbitrarily throw people into labour camps because they hurt someones feelings.

Yeah sure it feels good to say "you'll get yours", "well throw you in the gulags" but it is complete unrealistic.

[Rusty Shackleford]

hey guys I know engels said this once but engels was sort of a dipshit a lot of the time. violence committed against those with power is not authoritarianism please stop saying this thanks
i think it is in a different context.


revolution is authoritarian. a revolution is when a class topples another class for total control. a revolution is when the ruling class is smashed and its institutions decimated. a revolution is the establishment of the dictatorship of a formerly underclass.

[Thirsty Crow]

What do you want me to say? Read up on those who oppose the DotP? I believe the state and capitalism should be abolished simultaneously or at least near simultaneously. Also, thanks, but I read what you wrote.
I don't want you to say anything except for the concrete criticisms of what I wrote with reagard to the necessity of the DotP - which is not synonymous with the anarchist concept of the state (something you fail to note). I agree that the bourgeois state must be dismantled and that a new form of governance, suitable for the building of (global) socialism, must be formed. I base my position on this issue on the concrete existence of workers' and territorial councils, open to the acitvities of political organizations which unconditionally accept the abolition of capital and the before mentioned as the social and political ground for the creation of a new society.



I'm not (or ever have) tried to sound Knowledgeable. Perhaps you come to such a conclusion because you may think I am knowledgeable (something I immodestly deny). Thank you, you're so flattering. Your reference to your knowledge with regard to revolutionary theory, alongside the almost obssessive invocation of idealism and moralism in your posts in capital letters, tells me otherwise. But ok, that's hardly a relevant point.




of course ethics are not inherently Idealist. But Bourgeois morality thrown at me in situations where it simply isn't needed is Idealist. Especially what assumptions like:

"Oh big bad Rafiq wants to kill everyone! He wants to purge people who don't agree with him! He wants to throw people in labor camps even though he said he was joking! But I take that joke to offense because I'm a Bourgeois Moralist!" etc. I don't think that silly exaggerations, based on a misunderstanding probably, on a message board necessitate that the term "bourgeois morality" be thrown around. It doesn't serve any purpose other than name calling.


As if I am going to be in power anyway. I am, with historical examples, simply stating what will probably happen. Revolutions are inherently authoritarian. A period of Authoritarianism after a revolution is inevitable. I could be dead tommarow and nothing will change. Your misusing the term (authoritarianism). It has nothing to do with ne[cessary repression of counter-revolutionary elements following the breakdown of the bourgeois state and cementing proletarian political rule.




You act as if Materialism is some side-activity. Materialism is the core basis of Marxism, without Materialism Marxism falls to pieces. A Materialist analysis is not a game. It is vital to the understanding of human history and it is essential for us to learn from our mistakes using it. I'm hardly acting as if materialism in analysis and concrete politics is a "side activity". Im only pointing out that materialism is not a magic solution for every kind of problem arising from revolutionary practice (and surely there's a whole host of problems here). It's all to easy to call for materialism (and preferably, for the application of an cannonized ideology) without bothering to critically assess every aspect of the situation.





Tell me, I, as a Materialist, why would I want to do something unethical (in proletarian terms) with organized violence? Do I see an interest for the working class to murder innocent people? Do I subscribe to a tendency that is even remotely similar to that of the Idealist-Bourgeois Pol Pot? I don't know why would you want to do something like that, and I don't care as I didn't even presume that the topic of this debate should be what would you want to do.


Do you even know what Revolutionary State Terror is? It has nothing to do with murdering non violent people. If you think that after a revolution rainbows will arise out of the midst and everyone will sing and dance you are wrong. There will be a period of terrible, terrible war. The Bourgeoisie will not stand down. They will murder every human being on Earth before they do that. Oh, nice, catastrophism of sorts. Really hyperbolic, too. Do you think that the capitalist class will invoke that four riders of apocalypse to their side?

But seriously, I don't think you should attribute such views to me. I didn't express them, so that would be a straw man.
First of all, the scale and intensity of the conflict are soemthing which cannot be known in advance. They depend on a whole host of variables, and it's reasonable to assume that there is also a possibility for a minimization of organized violence in the form of outright war, be it civil or international.
Secondly, yeah, I know what state terror is, and I also know how easy it is for oppositional elements from within the workers' movement to be swallowed by this phenomena. That's the whole point.



I hate this mentality that you guys posses. You are implicitly disagreeing with me merely on a basis of your Ideology. If you provided me with a concrete, detailed refute to my posts than I would understand. But you didn't do that, you merely played the "Boo Hoo Rafiq hates Morals" card.
I honestly have no fucking idea how did you come up with this incoherent rant when responding to m post.
I'm not a Stalinist.
I also didnt play any card. I just called you out on your simplistic insistence on throwing terms around.

[Rafiq]

Rafiq, all you expressed in your first post was your masochist fantasy. I have been told by older Communists that back in the day when ML parties were at their height in the West comrades used to say all the time "just wait untill the revolution, you will get yours". Well the revolution never came and thoose comrades died of all age. This isn't the 1930s, your time is not going to come and there is not going to be a revolutution were you get to arbitrarily throw people into labour camps because they hurt someones feelings.

Yeah sure it feels good to say "you'll get yours", "well throw you in the gulags" but it is complete unrealistic.

I was Joking.