KKE (Communist Party of Greece) for beginners

[artanis17]

Hi I just want to learn your opinions about this party. I do not have much info about it myself. This is why I can not set my attitude towards the party.

1) For which particular ideology do they stand for ?

2) What are their basics ? Their attitudes towards different issues of capitalism also nationalism, religion and other questions.

3) How do they react to latest events in Greece ?

4) Your opinions about KKE

5) Are there any other communist movements in Greece ? Where can I read about them ?

Answer the way you wish please and I just need brief info.. You don't need to do it as numbers.

[Искра]

1) Eurocommunism.
2) Against-EU, Greek nationalist, promoting state capitalism etc.
3) They attacked working class to protect parliament.
4) They are bunch of opportunists scum.
5) There are some Trot coalitions and small anarchist and left-com organisations.

[Tommy4ever]

1) Eurocommunism.
2) Against-EU, Greek nationalist, promoting state capitalism etc.
3) They attacked working class to protect parliament.
4) They are bunch of opportunists scum.
5) There are some Trot coalitions and small anarchist and left-com organisations.

1) The KKE is actually the portion of the Greek Communist Party that was against Eurocommunism. Its clearly more radical than that tendency ever was, but neither can it be seen as having a wholly revolutionary ideology.
2) Reasonably accurate.
3) Pretty sure the PAME supporters represented a vastly larger portion of the working class than the rag tag bunch of anarchists ....
4) No need to be whiny.
5) There are some more hardline M-Ls, a few parliamentary left of PASOK groups and as you said the anarchists (are there any Left-Com groups of any note in Greece?) .

[Paulappaul]

3) Pretty sure the PAME supporters represented a vastly larger portion of the working class than the rag tag bunch of anarchists ....

This is probably true, but it doesn't make protecting parliament okay in my book.

[The Douche]

I will lock this thread down with a quickness if it becomes another mindless debate about the parliament attack.


The characterization of that event being "rag tag anarchists" is factually incorrect, and I consider it to be flame-baiting.

[Tommy4ever]

This is probably true, but it doesn't make protecting parliament okay in my book.

But it does make the claim that they protected it from ''the working class'' bullshit.

[The Douche]

But it does make the claim that they protected it from ''the working class'' bullshit.

You guys are gonna get this thread locked, just sayin...

[Omsk]

Cmoney,why not let dicussion flow,you can always close the thread if things get out of order.

[KurtFF8]

Hi I just want to learn your opinions about this party. I do not have much info about it myself. This is why I can not set my attitude towards the party.

1) For which particular ideology do they stand for ?

2) What are their basics ? Their attitudes towards different issues of capitalism also nationalism, religion and other questions.

3) How do they react to latest events in Greece ?

4) Your opinions about KKE

5) Are there any other communist movements in Greece ? Where can I read about them ?

Answer the way you wish please and I just need brief info.. You don't need to do it as numbers.

1) They are Marxist-Leninist and seem to have been quite influenced by the "Eurocommunist" turn.
2) They claim that they want the means of production to be owned by the working class of Greece.
3) They are very influential in the PAME, which is a large trade union. They've had serious issues with the anarchists in Greece and often attack the black bloc in Greece as being made up of provocateurs which has caused anarchists there and here to oppose the KKE.
4) Personally, I think that they are an important organization in Greece and can help the working class movement become more revolutionary. I do think that their attacks on anarchists are asburd, however and that they need to find a different/more productive way to address those issues.
5) I'm not sure, perhaps some Greek comrades can point you in the right direction there.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Cmoney,why not let dicussion flow,you can always close the thread if things get out of order.

i agree with cmoney. The OP wanted to have a discussion about the KKE for people who don't know much about the party. Not a discussion about the October 20th conflict.

[The Douche]

Cmoney,why not let dicussion flow,you can always close the thread if things get out of order.

Isn't that exactly what I'm doing?

I just wanted to make it clear that I'll close the thread if it falls apart, which I, unfortunately, expect it to, and hopefully that warning will help the thread stay on topic.

[Omsk]

Isn't that exactly what I'm doing?



Well,your making threats a bit,it sounded like you were going to close the thread in a number of posts.

But nevermind,lets not derail it.

[artanis17]

When I search for Eurocommunism I get:


Eurocommunism was a current among the Communist Parties, mainly in Europe, from 1968 up to the early 1980s, which sought autonomy of their own national parties relative to the leadership claims of the Soviet and Chinese parties or each other, being particularly critical of the lack of internal democracy in the Communist movement.The failure of the Communist Parties to win the leadership of the Student Protest Movement and the Women's Movement caused many in the Communist Parties, especially in Europe, to argue that the Party should orient to these movements and broaden their base outside of the organised working class, and give less emphasis to defence of the Soviet Union.

Now that USSR is no more what is aim of Eurocommunism ?

[safeduck]

were they protecting the parliament? or protesting?

[FSL]

If anyone can point to any "eurocommunist" elements in the party's ideology instead of just repeating it, that would be nice. In all honesty, it's about as non-eurocommunist as it gets.



1) For which particular ideology do they stand for ?

2) What are their basics ? Their attitudes towards different issues of capitalism also nationalism, religion and other questions.

3) How do they react to latest events in Greece ?

4) Your opinions about KKE

5) Are there any other communist movements in Greece ? Where can I read about them ?
1) Marxism-Leninism
2) Capitalism needs to be overthrown. This demand is ripe now subjectively, in every country, regardless of how strong the movement is there. Parties should have a policy that promotes this aim. Social-democracy or a "left" management of capitalism are a delusion, they can't offer us anything. Unity on a "leftist" agenda that puts forward things like "dealing with the greedy bankers" are often just a way to have communist parties effectively deny their aim, even dissolve. Opportunistic tendencies that promote these should be fought.
It is internationalist, it has established relations with the communist parties of all neighbouring countries. In a recent event held in Turkey to commemorate the execution of 15 leading turkish communists in 1921, the party's gc visited and gave a speech. Regarding immigrants living in Greece, it is in favour of them being legalized, have their language taught to their children at schools etc
It endorses dialectical materialism therefore, it's a party promoting atheism. There are many orthodox christians though (the religion of the majority here) it works with.
3) If you mean the flames and clashes, it considers these kind of things to be what the state aims for as a way to disperse the crowd and to frighten it. It believes that a sizable amount of the people leading these riots are people doing their job and that the rest are naive in thinking change can come that way.
4) It's one of the communist parties that deserve their name.
5) There is Syriza, Antarsya as well as some smaller maoist/trotskyist/anarchist groupings.
The first two are coalitions of small parties (Within Syriza there is one large party too but it doesn't describe itself as communist), some of which are trotskyist or maoist or generally "close to communism".

http://www.antarsya.org/
http://www.syriza.gr/

These are their web pages, maybe you can catch a thing or two using google translate.

[artanis17]

If anyone can point to any "eurocommunist" elements in the party's ideology instead of just repeating it, that would be nice. In all honesty, it's about as non-eurocommunist as it gets.



1) Marxism-Leninism
2) Capitalism needs to be overthrown. This demand is ripe now subjectively, in every country, regardless of how strong the movement is there. Parties should have a policy that promotes this aim. Social-democracy or a "left" management of capitalism are a delusion, they can't offer us anything. Unity on a "leftist" agenda that puts forward things like "dealing with the greedy bankers" are often just a way to have communist parties effectively deny their aim, even dissolve. Opportunistic tendencies that promote these should be fought.
It is internationalist, it has established relations with the communist parties of all neighbouring countries. In a recent event held in Turkey to commemorate the execution of 15 leading turkish communists in 1921, the party's gc visited and gave a speech. Regarding immigrants living in Greece, it is in favour of them being legalized, have their language taught to their children at schools etc
It endorses dialectical materialism therefore, it's a party promoting atheism. There are many orthodox christians though (the religion of the majority here) it works with.
3) If you mean the flames and clashes, it considers these kind of things to be what the state aims for as a way to disperse the crowd and to frighten it. It believes that a sizable amount of the people leading these riots are people doing their job and that the rest are naive in thinking change can come that way.
4) It's one of the communist parties that deserve their name.
5) There is Syriza, Antarsya as well as some smaller maoist/trotskyist/anarchist groupings.
The first two are coalitions of small parties (Within Syriza there is one large party too but it doesn't describe itself as communist), some of which are trotskyist or maoist or generally "close to communism".

http://www.antarsya.org/
http://www.syriza.gr/

These are their web pages, maybe you can catch a thing or two using google translate.

Thank you comrade. So how does KKE plan to overthrow capitalism ? As far as I know it should only happen by revolution and not by election.

And I did not understand this part very well:


3) If you mean the flames and clashes, it considers these kind of things to be what the state aims for as a way to disperse the crowd and to frighten it. It believes that a sizable amount of the people leading these riots are people doing their job and that the rest are naive in thinking change can come that way.

What do you mean by "people doing their job" ?

Do you mean that it is a state provocation ? I don't understand that part.

[The Douche]

Thank you comrade. So how does KKE plan to overthrow capitalism ? As far as I know it should only happen by revolution and not by election.

And I did not understand this part very well:



What do you mean by "people doing their job" ?

Do you mean that it is a state provocation ? I don't understand that part.

Yes, the KKE's position on anarchists and others involved in the street fighting and arson is that they are police agents, and fascists, and individuals duped by them.

[FSL]

Thank you comrade. So how does KKE plan to overthrow capitalism ? As far as I know it should only happen by revolution and not by election.

Yes you do need a revolution that will overthrow this state and set a workers' one. Just by winning elections you don't get that.
Of course, for a revolution to happen you need the workers to want it, it won't be the work of a party.




What do you mean by "people doing their job" ?

Do you mean that it is a state provocation ? I don't understand that part.
Some of them are policemen "dressed up" as protesters. Others can just be people like private goons. For example, yesterday football fans had arranged to participate in these demos.

Now, organized football fans -people in eastern european countries might be more familiar with this- are often not the best of people. Businessmen who own teams use them as a political tool exactly because these teams are popular with people. They can use organized fans, who even protest over these things, to have the state give them land for pennies, land they can build a football stadium on and reap profits through that and other stores etc.
These "fans" end up looking more like the owner's bodyguards and their job is just to be passionate about the team and him. There are often knife fights among fans of opposing teams, these people have been turned into mindless fanatics organized in gangs.

So yesterday for the first time organized fans agreed to participate in the demo. Two people who were momentarily arrested for causing damage and then released were fans of "Iraklis" in Thessaloniki. Who's to say that some of those rioting in Athens weren't also there after being told to do so?

[FSL]

Yes, the KKE's position on anarchists and others involved in the street fighting and arson is that they are police agents, and fascists, and individuals duped by them.

The word is "provoked".

[The Douche]

The word is "provoked".

I think my word applies. You're suggesting that there are some good-hearted and well meaning, legitimate revolutionaries, who are tricked by police and fascists into action.

[FSL]

I think my word applies. You're suggesting that there are some good-hearted and well meaning, legitimate revolutionaries, who are tricked by police and fascists into action.

Into the wrong kind of action, that's about it.
By saying duped however you make it seem like that (for those saying it) the people participating are good-hearted, well meaning and dumb.
There are many legitimate reasons to be angry, one isn't tricked into that. One is provoked to express this in a way that will have the opposite of the desired effect.

[The Douche]

I think your word still carries the implication that anarchists are naive. But perhaps thats just because of the difference in our languages.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Learning questions to consider:

1) What is the history of the KKE with respect to the military dictatorship?
2) What is the history of the KKE with respect to coalition governments at the national or lower levels?

[As others informed me here, their record on #2 is spotty.]

[GoddessCleoLover]

KKE had a full honorable history in opposing the military dictatorship. The year after the coup (1968) was when the big split occurred in the KKE. It was on the issue of the USSR's attempt to dictate the line of the party in the aftermath of the invasion of Czechoslovakia, if I recall correctly.

[Tommy4ever]

When I search for Eurocommunism I get:

Now that USSR is no more what is aim of Eurocommunism ?

Eurocommunism was not only about independence for national Communist Parties from Moscow, but was also about an ideological shift to the right. Basically groups who supported Eurocommunism took social democrat positions but continued to call themselves Communists. Most even dropped the tag 'Communist' after the fall of the USSR in 1991 which basically destroyed the prestige of the name almost entirely in Europe.

Calling a modern party 'Eurocommunist' is basically a slur, accusing it of being Communist by name but social democrat by nature.

[Crux]

2) What are their basics ? Their attitudes towards different issues of capitalism also nationalism, religion and other questions.

I know a couple of their members in parliament voted against removing the section "religion" from the national ID card. I think it is fair to suggest some conservative attitudes prevail in this party, as is the case with similar parties around the world. Although they by no means seem as bad as the KPRF in this regard though.

[FSL]

We have eurocommunist parties. AKOA which is in Syriza and Communist Renewal in Antarsya, a split of the first. AKOA was itself a split of the Communist Party of the Interior which is how eurocommunists called themselves to show "they aren't taking any orders from Moscow".
http://www.akoa.gr/ It's banner still has the hammer and sickle on top of a greek flag, much like the interior party did.

In practical terms they do end up looking more like vaguely "progressive" and less like communists.





1) What is the history of the KKE with respect to the military dictatorship?
2) What is the history of the KKE with respect to coalition governments at the national or lower levels?
1) Many of its members were exiled back then in greek islands (Makronisos, Gyaros etc). It was then part of EDA and there were no functioning party organizations, they had been shut down in 1958, so that\s why there was little to none immediate resistance to the army taking over
It's line was quite rightist at the time after what had happened to its previous leadership -and many of its members- following the 20th Congress of the CPSU. In 1968 when the eurocommunists were expelled a "reconstruction" effort sort of began even while being illegal.
2) There was a coalition government in Greece in 1989. I'll give its context:

Greece has this complex system of punishing members of government for scandals. After two parliamentary periods ( one parliamentary period is the time between two elections) their crimes are erased. That's supposedly to not encourage one government always going after the previous one but it only enxourages corruption.
Pasok in the 80s was elected on a leftist-antiimperialist radical agenda but pretty soon it changed course. It served many interests though, promoted many businessmen close to it and built a power base among people through government handouts.
In 1989 and with Pasok governing for 8 years a huge scandal emerged that involved even the Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou (son of George Papandreou, prime minister in 1944 when he and the British put down the December uprising and father of George Panadreou, our previous prime minister). He changed the electoral law to make it proportional so that the opposition would need almost 50% to gain a majority. If they couldn't get a majority, he thought, new elections would keep coming and whatever responsibilities he had would be anulled.

The Communist Party was practically begging Pasok for a coalition government in 1981 and after that, one that would lead to "actual change". That was nothing new at the time, just common practice, supported even by the Soviet Union. Communists in France at the time were also governing with Socialists. It also often supported common candidates with Pasok in local elections to defeat the "candidates of the right".

When the coalition was agreed with the conservative party to form a short-term government solely to take those charged with crimes to justice there are two things that matter. One is that focusing on corruption and trying to portray yourself as one bringing the rule of law is wrong. Corruption stems from the system and that should be explained. Bourgeois Justice wouldn't want to fight it. And in fact it didn't as politicians survived the trials.

On the other hand though it became the breaking point between the communist party and Pasok. That's what it offered, taking that decision was the result of people in the communist party becoming sick with basically being nominal opposition to a party that became more openly bourgeois as time went by. Only then did it become clear that there wouldn't be any repeat of the events in France here. It worked out for the best I'd say.

[Die Neue Zeit]

2) There was a coalition government in Greece in 1989. I'll give its context:

Greece has this complex system of punishing members of government for scandals. After two parliamentary periods ( one parliamentary period is the time between two elections) their crimes are erased. That's supposedly to not encourage one government always going after the previous one but it only enxourages corruption.
Pasok in the 80s was elected on a leftist-antiimperialist radical agenda but pretty soon it changed course. It served many interests though, promoted many businessmen close to it and built a power base among people through government handouts.
In 1989 and with Pasok governing for 8 years a huge scandal emerged that involved even the Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou (son of George Papandreou, prime minister in 1944 when he and the British put down the December uprising and father of George Panadreou, our previous prime minister). He changed the electoral law to make it proportional so that the opposition would need almost 50% to gain a majority. If they couldn't get a majority, he thought, new elections would keep coming and whatever responsibilities he had would be anulled.

The Communist Party was practically begging Pasok for a coalition government in 1981 and after that, one that would lead to "actual change". That was nothing new at the time, just common practice, supported even by the Soviet Union. Communists in France at the time were also governing with Socialists. It also often supported common candidates with Pasok in local elections to defeat the "candidates of the right".

That's still bad enough for me. "Begging" for coalition? Coalitions aren't really a matter of "tactics":

http://johnriddell.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/a-workers-government-as-a-step-toward-socialism/

http://johnriddell.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/the-comintern’s-unknown-decision-on-workers’-governments/

[FSL]

That's still bad enough for me. "Begging" for coalition? Coalitions aren't really a matter of "tactics":

http://johnriddell.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/a-workers-government-as-a-step-toward-socialism/

http://johnriddell.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/the-comintern’s-unknown-decision-on-workers’-governments/

It's considered bad by the party as well, after 1991 (when almost half of its members, those who wanted to liquidate the party like in Italy, were purged) it's on a much different course, the one I describe in the first post.

[FSL]

I know a couple of their members in parliament voted against removing the section "religion" from the national ID card. I think it is fair to suggest some conservative attitudes prevail in this party, as is the case with similar parties around the world. Although they by no means seem as bad as the KPRF in this regard though.

The party is atheist, those would be people working with the party.


And seriously, do you care about anything else besides who's religious or "conservative"? 90% of your critique on others involves just that.

[Die Neue Zeit]

It's considered bad by the party as well, after 1991 (when almost half of its members, those who wanted to liquidate the party like in Italy, were purged) it's on a much different course, the one I describe in the first post.

Let's see what happens next. The likes of Arthur Bough are already dismissive:


The polls show that the Greek Stalinists, together with the Greek Trotskyists, and others to the left of PASOK could become the largest group in Parliament. A couple of days ago, on Newsnight, Paul Mason estimated that the parties of the Left could have around 44% of seats in Parliament.

In that case, last night's vote is even more meaningless, as support for the Left is likely to rise even more between now and elections in April. Although, there are significant differences between the Stalinists, and the parties to their Left, and on past experience, the Left should treat the Stalinists as though they were a bourgeois party, because they are likely to sell-out the workers, if they feel they may be able to do some kind of bureaucratic deal, to avoid a revolutionary development, at another level, the parties of the Left should be able to establish a minimum of agreement, on the basis of overturning the proposed austerity measures.

[citizen of industry]

From where I stand, they look just like the JCP. Stalinist, they seem to fear and oppose the working class to defend whatever positions they've managed to get, allying themselves with government to protect their positions. Abandoning revolutionary politics in favor of parliamentarism. A big union federation affiliates to them, so you can assume the leadership of the federation are party members, and therefore take conservative roles like abandoning revolution in favor of "democratic revolution" a.k.a. supporting our parliamentary games so we can collect a living representing "working class" politics. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but being on the other side of molotav cocktails defending the government while supposedly representing the proletariat screams stalinism.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

From where I stand, they look just like the JCP. Stalinist, they seem to fear and oppose the working class to defend whatever positions they've managed to get, allying themselves with government to protect their positions. Abandoning revolutionary politics in favor of parliamentarism. A big union federation affiliates to them, so you can assume the leadership of the federation are party members, and therefore take conservative roles like abandoning revolution in favor of "democratic revolution" a.k.a. supporting our parliamentary games so we can collect a living representing "working class" politics. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but being on the other side of molotav cocktails defending the government while supposedly representing the proletariat screams stalinism.

JCP is more eurocommunist (social-democratic) if anything (I guess the KKE leans in this direction too, or perhaps more towards a vague general Brezhnevite/Marcyite type deal, judging from their writings on history and the SSSR). Though I guess you're using that warped definition of what constitutes this "Stalinism" as basically "everything that calls itself socialist but I think bad"...

[Crux]

The party is atheist, those would be people working with the party.


And seriously, do you care about anything else besides who's religious or "conservative"? 90% of your critique on others involves just that.
What a riposte. Too bad it is completely unfounded. I do not hold any ill feelings toward religious people in general. However self-proclaimed communists bending their back to religious conservatism is another issue. getting a little desperate are we, comrade? So what do you have to say about the issue itself? I think it says something about the KKE generally.

[FSL]

Let's see what happens next. The likes of Arthur Bough are already dismissive:

And who is this man that's making these well-informed accusations?

[FSL]

What a riposte. Too bad it is completely unfounded. I do not hold any ill feelings toward religious people in general. However self-proclaimed communists bending their back to religious conservatism is another issue. getting a little desperate are we, comrade? So what do you have to say about the issue itself? I think it says something about the KKE generally.
You sure seem like you hold ill feelings towards religious people. In fact it seems like they're the only thing you ever think about.

And desperate about what? There is no issue. It was explained to you what the position of the party is, you just keep on going because you're on a crusade.

[aty]

Some of them are policemen "dressed up" as protesters. Others can just be people like private goons. For example, yesterday football fans had arranged to participate in these demos.

Now, organized football fans -people in eastern european countries might be more familiar with this- are often not the best of people. Businessmen who own teams use them as a political tool exactly because these teams are popular with people. They can use organized fans, who even protest over these things, to have the state give them land for pennies, land they can build a football stadium on and reap profits through that and other stores etc.
These "fans" end up looking more like the owner's bodyguards and their job is just to be passionate about the team and him. There are often knife fights among fans of opposing teams, these people have been turned into mindless fanatics organized in gangs.

So yesterday for the first time organized fans agreed to participate in the demo. Two people who were momentarily arrested for causing damage and then released were fans of "Iraklis" in Thessaloniki. Who's to say that some of those rioting in Athens weren't also there after being told to do so?
Oh, come on!
I have personally talked to ultras from Panathinakos, they have a strong left wing sentiment and are active in political groups, not just in the football stadium.
Now they have managed to organize working class football supporters in the struggle. Maybe your problem with them is that they are aligned to anti-authoritarian groups?
They have fought the state and their own club for years in the streets and you try to make them into agents of the state? That is ridiculous.

Panionios also take part every year in antifascist football tournaments.

[FSL]

http://www.sport-fm.gr/article/528935


The article is in greek. It speaks of a meeting of hundreds of Panathinaikos and Olympiakos fans to beat up, maybe kill each other, three weeks ago. There were knives, molotov cocktails, clubs and so on.
If that's your idea of revolutionary consciousness please say so.

[Crux]

You sure seem like you hold ill feelings towards religious people. In fact it seems like they're the only thing you ever think about.

And desperate about what? There is no issue. It was explained to you what the position of the party is, you just keep on going because you're on a crusade.
That members of your party in parliament voted against removing reactionary legislation. That is the issue.

How does it "seem" that way? When and where? You are so obviously clutching for straws it is almost embarrassing.

[FSL]

That members of your party in parliament voted against removing reactionary legislation. That is the issue.

How does it "seem" that way? When and where? You are so obviously clutching for straws it is almost embarrassing.

It seems that way because that's all you ever talk about. Even now the only critique you're making revolves around that. CPRF, the same. It's never about production relations, it's never about one's position on revolutionary change. It's always a priest or something.


I told you that party members voted to have it removed. You being on a crusade to crash all things religion-related were probably too busy to read my answer.
That's what party members did. People the party cooperates with who aren't communists but agree with them on a number of things have the right to their own opinion. Democratic centralism doesn't apply to them because, guess what, they aren't party members.


Now if you think that being a communist means nothing more than some major anti-religious campaign targetting even the smallest of things, you' re wrong. If you think an "honest communist" would push away all religious people, even the ones who think that workers are being robbed by capitalists and that a revolution to overthrow them is needed, simply because they like to pray, you're wrong again.

[Crux]

It seems that way because that's all you ever talk about.[/qoute]
Really? So you're not just talking out of your ass? Then I suppose you have some kind of proof that it is "all I ever talk about". Or else perhaps you should withdraw that remark entirely and admit you are full of shit.

[QUOTE] Even now the only critique you're making revolves around that. CPRF, the same. It's never about production relations, it's never about one's position on revolutionary change. It's always a priest or something.
No. Again this is bullshit. But I understand you are a dear friend of the KPRF. But anyway let's not jump on your pathetic little diversion.



I told you that party members voted to have it removed. You being on a crusade to crash all things religion-related were probably too busy to read my answer.
No you did not. You said "those would be people working with the party", which to me seems that you are trying to imply that they are not elected members of the KKE. When they are. So apprently you do not even bother to read what you yourself writes.


That's what party members did. Now people the party cooperates with who aren't communists but agree with them on a number of things have the right to their own opinion. Democratic centralism doesn't apply to them because, guess what, they aren't party members.
And here we go again. Who are these non-member elected KKE parliamentarians?



Now if you think that being a communist means nothing more than some major anti-religious campaign targetting even the smallest of things, you' re wrong. If you think an "honest communist" would push away all religious people, even the ones who think that workers are being robbed by capitalists and that a revolution to overthrow them is needed, simply because they like to pray, you're wrong again.
Only this bears no resemblance to anything I have said. Ever. I was merely making a comment on the issue since it was brought up in the question. And not a very agressive one at that. But apparently I struck a nerve.

[aty]

http://www.sport-fm.gr/article/528935

The article is in greek. It speaks of a meeting of hundreds of Panathinaikos and Olympiakos fans to beat up, maybe kill each other, three weeks ago. There were knives, molotov cocktails, clubs and so on.
If that's your idea of revolutionary consciousness please say so.
That is football not politics. In my country there are also many comrades involved in fighting at football. The football stadium is/was a very important part of the antifascist battle in many cities. If you have not noticed a lot of the terraces are also political.

[FSL]

You said "those would be people working with the party", which to me seems that you are trying to imply that they are not elected members of the KKE. When they are
I'm clearly saying for the umpteenth time that they are not members of the party at all, they have no party membership, communist or otherwise.
Why do you find it confusing? They're independents who work with the party. Currently there is one such person in parliament.



Only this bears no resemblance to anything I have said. Ever. I was merely making a comment on the issue since it was brought up in the question. And not a very agressive one at that. But apparently I struck a nerve.

You were merely making about one hundred posts.

[Crux]

I'm clearly saying for the umpteenth time that they are not members of the party at all, they have no party membership, communist or otherwise.
Why do you find it confusing? They're independents who work with the party. Currently there is one such person in parliament.
Well interesting allies you have then. So there were no party members voting against the law, only people sitting on a KKE mandate that you ally with?




You were merely making about one hundred posts.
And as I said, show me when and where or drop this bullshit and admit you're full of it. I do not take kindly to false accusations, especially not when they are used as a way for you to try and weasel yourself out of the real argument. An argument, I might add, which I did not see as the main argument, only something symptomatic and something that is true of other parties as well. We had a supposed member of KPRF on here recently that admitted they are homophobic (and previous members on this forum have been banned for homophobia and nationalism). Now as I said I do not think the KKE is as bad as the KPRF. But this does bring up an additional question what is your stance on LGBT-issues?

[FSL]

Well interesting allies you have then. So there were no party members voting against the law, only people sitting on a KKE mandate that you ally with?
Yes, they are very interesting, thank you.




And as I said, show me when and where or drop this bullshit and admit you're full of it. I do not take kindly to false accusations, especially not when they are used as a way for you to try and weasel yourself out of the real argument. An argument, I might add, which I did not see as the main argument, only something symptomatic and something that is true of other parties as well. We had a supposed member of KPRF on here recently that admitted they are homophobic (and previous members on this forum have been banned for homophobia and nationalism). Now as I said I do not think the KKE is as bad as the KPRF. But this does bring up an additional question what is your stance on LGBT-issues?
This independent that sits on a KKE mandate and likes to pray? She's a lesbian. See how interesting she is?

Though I'm negative towards marriage for myself I'm ok with them having a union if they like. I have a very negative perception on what passes as a "lgbt movement" though. At least here it's just a bunch of "trendy" magazines sponsoring an event once a year. From what I've seen gay parades seem to make a mockery out of these people's demands rather than anything else.



Just so you know, the fact that the first thing to "interrogate me" about after religion is lgbt-issues, doesn't make me think that much differently of you.

[Crux]

Yes, they are very interesting, thank you.

This independent that sits on a KKE mandate and likes to pray? She's a lesbian. See how interesting she is?
And she voted against? See now you are again being evasive.


Though I'm negative towards marriage for myself I'm ok with them having a union if they like. I have a very negative perception on what passes as a "lgbt movement" though. At least here it's just a bunch of "trendy" magazines sponsoring an event once a year. From what I've seen gay parades seem to make a mockery out of these people's demands rather than anything else.



Just so you know, the fact that the first thing to "interrogate me" about after religion is lgbt-issues, doesn't make me think that much differently of you.Yes, I can't imagine why someone such as yourself would be derisive on LGBT-issues. :rolleyes: But thanks for helping illustrate my original point. I am not "interrogating" you, I merely made an observation, but again apparently this issue is very very touchy for you so. We can discuss other issues if you feel these are subjects you cannot debate rationally without succumbing to strawmanning. But I am curious why do you oppose equal rights for same-sex couples?

edit: There are very legitimate criticism about the commercialization of Pride, but the kind coming from you sounds horribly similar to what conservatism spew who are afraid to publicly state what they think. I suppose you are unaware of the origins of Pride, the stonewall riots etc?

[FSL]

And she voted against? See now you are again being evasive.

Yes, I can't imagine why someone such as yourself would be derisive on LGBT-issues. :rolleyes: But thanks for helping illustrate my original point. I am not "interrogating" you, I merely made an observation, but again apparently this issue is very very touchy for you so. We can discuss other issues if you feel these are subjects you cannot debate rationally without succumbing to strawmanning. But I am curious why do you oppose equal rights for same-sex couples?
How am I being evasive and how am I opposing equal rights?

I wasn't derisive on lgtb issues, I was disagreeing with how gay parades organized by magazines and hip music stations portray them. Must I like that? Is that also part of your "are you a decent communist or not" test?

[Tommy4ever]

Majakovskij, why has your root of attack against the KKE here been based upon the issues of religion and LGBT issues and not the KKE's class position? The former issue is not really something important or at all wise for a modern socialist party to fight against (why alienate potential allies at a time like this?) whilst if you care about LGBT issues more than class politics then you are, quite simply, not a communist, you are a liberal.

It should be quite clear why FSL is getting irritated. The real and only question you should be asking yourself about the KKE is do they further the interests of the working class or do they not? If they do then they are a good thing, if they do not then they are a bad thing. Its as simple as that. That is the debate you should be having with FSL, not whether they MPs opposed some bill over stating religion on an ID card or if they have have organised enough LGBT marches this year.

[Crux]

How am I being evasive and how am I opposing equal rights?

I wasn't derisive on lgtb issues, I was disagreeing with how gay parades organized by magazines and hip music stations portray them. Must I like that? Is that also part of your "are you a decent communist or not" test?
No, as you can see I also made an edit to my previous post adressing that. However you are opposing equal rights. You are opposing marriage rights.

You are being evasive in that you do not concretly adress the issue of the ID cards vote viza viz people elected on a KKE mandate, en bloc with the KKE.

[Crux]

Majakovskij, why has your root of attack against the KKE here been based upon the issues of religion and LGBT issues and not the KKE's class position? The former issue is not really something important or at all wise for a modern socialist party to fight against (why alienate potential allies at a time like this?) whilst if you care about LGBT issues more than class politics then you are, quite simply, not a communist, you are a liberal.

It should be quite clear why FSL is getting irritated. The real and only question you should be asking yourself about the KKE is do they further the interests of the working class or do they not? If they do then they are a good thing, if they do not then they are a bad thing. Its as simple as that. That is the debate you should be having with FSL, not whether they MPs opposed some bill over stating religion on an ID card or if they have have organised enough LGBT marches this year.
Oh jesus fucking christ. I made one comment about a very specific issues, that is greek ID cards having the carriers religion listed on them. Members of KKE's aprliamentary group disgracefully voted against tearing these up. It is FSL who has made a big issue out of this with his strawman bullshit, which quite frankly pisses me off and I expect him to retract it.
There are certainly other issues thatcan be discussed about the KKE as well, their sectarianism, their relatively populist rhetoric, their union work etc. And the former certainly is important as it is blatantly reactionary legislation. And because I raise the issue of LGBT rights now apparently I am liberal? I'm sorry no, I am a revolutionary, being a revolutionary means being at the forefront on all issues not lagging behind in the conservative backwaters. And you have no right to say what debates I should or should not have. Take that patronising attitude elsewhere.

[FSL]

No, as you can see I also made an edit to my previous post adressing that. However you are opposing equal rights. You are opposing marriage rights.

For who, for me?
Or maybe you're angry I said same sex couples should have a union? Are you so keen on marriage? Are you a republican?



You are being evasive in that you do not concretly adress the issue of the ID cards vote viza viz people elected on a KKE mandate, en bloc with the KKE.
Yes, she voted against. Everytime she's elected she also takes an oath on the bible and she makes a cross with her fingers when priests come to "bless" the parliament. Those are about all the things where she hasn't followed the party line in 10 years, even though to her it's simply a matter of choise since party discipline doesn't apply.

Should I be against having such alliances with people? I'm not, I think it's great.

[Crux]

For who, for me?
Or maybe you're angry I said same sex couples should have a union? Are you so keen on marriage? Are you a republican?
I am keen on equal rights. I will gladly have a debate with you on this once you are mentally mature enough to handle it. But just for the sake of argument allow me to make a comparison. I do not support parliamentarianism, that is working exclusively to parliament and believing that to be the main vehicle of change, but I support voting rights for all.




Yes, she voted against. Everytime she's elected she also takes an oath on the bible and she makes a cross with her fingers when priests come to "bless" the parliament. Those are about all the things where she hasn't followed the party line in 10 years, even though to her it's simply a matter of choise since party discipline doesn't apply."Those" so there's more thing's? And even though you clumsily try to push that label on me I by no means oppose people being religious. My organization for example supported Plinio de Arruda Sampaio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pl%C3%ADnio_de_Arruda_Sampaio) in the last presidential election in Brazil. Just to take one example.


Should I be against having such alliances with people? I'm not, I think it's great.You think it is great because she voted against removing religion from the I.D cards? Granted we do not always get "perfect" allies, but I think you yourself have already quite well demonstrated, by your posts here, my original statement. Also again please show me where I have made a hundred posts crusading against religion. Oh you can't? Then retract that statement.

[Kornilios Sunshine]

I will answer this as a KKE member and I don't wanna get flamed.

1)Their ideology is Marxism Leninism and Stalinism. They support the Soviet Union on the Lenin and Stalin era. They support Cuba's current state and are Castroists and Guevarists. They do not support Mao and they are against Anarchism, Ultra Left and Trotskyism.
2)They are strongly against any form of Nationalism and Chauvinism. While there are members on the KKE who are Christians, the KKE does not really support religions. The thing they are opposed to strongly also is the EU because it is one of the reasons why Greece is in poverty.Above all, KKE wants a society free of capitalism and with no spots of worker unfairness. But this will be done only when the Greek rise up.By the way, they are strongly opposed most to the SYRIZA party which is a bunch of opportunists.
3)Reactions of the KKE about the events in Greece are not really similar to those of the other parties. As far as the riots on 12/2 are concerned they blame that those who started it where cops.
4)I think the KKE is fairly called communist. It has been proved a patriotic party in the Civil War and its members never gave up on any time when they were tortured and were treated fascist.
5)I can't really say there are communist movements in Greece such as KKE but there is ANTARSYA.

[Yazman]

Moderator action:

Cool it guys, tone it down a bit. Let's avoid flaming and shit talking.

Majakovskij, as a moderator you should know better than to flame people yourself. Don't do it again. I understand you're a bit annoyed due to the circumstances of the debate, but there's no need to flame other users. Just look over your post and omit that stuff next time.

To everybody though, this is getting heated up a bit. Be civil please.

This post constitutes a warning to Majakovskij.

[Sir Comradical]

1) Social-democracy & social-patriotism in terms of the policies they push as a parliamentary party. Marxism-Leninism in terms of their ideology.
2) In practice they're a social-democratic euro-skeptic party. Ideologically they're anti-capitalism, their nationalism is mild lefty nationalism.
3) Supportive in words of course, but the storming parliament issue has already been covered.
4) A party that had the chance to seize control of Greece after WW2 but didn't because they were led by the traitor Zachariadis who betrayed ELAS and was quite rightly hanged by comrade Krushchev after the 20th Party Congress.
5) There's a strong anarchist current made up of kids whose grandparents most likely fought the fascists, but these kids hate the KKE for legitimate reasons. In my opinion, they call themselves anarchists only to distance themselves from the KKE. In Greece it's not uncommon to find anarchists who defend the USSR for example.