Whats the most popular socialist website?

[Blanquist]

I've been looking in alexa and the closest I've come is wsws.org with a 36,206 global rank.

[daft punk]

well, it doesn't deserve it. There is some good historical stuff on wsws, but some bollocks as well.

Socialist World is far better.

[Prinskaj]

Why would you look for a website in terms of popularity and not quality?

[daft punk]

Maybe he wants to advertise?

[hatzel]

Blanquists don't need to advertise; they just make it happen...

[KurtFF8]

Socialist World is far better.

Isn't that your own organizations publication?

[daft punk]

Isn't that your own organizations publication?

No, I actually support a crummy little sect with some well dodgy ideas, but it's so rubbish I thought perhaps I might pose as a CWI supporter to try and gain a bit of credibility.

[u.s.red]

Why would you look for a website in terms of popularity and not quality?

Quantity changes quality

[daft punk]

Quantity changes quality

:laugh:

Unfortunately not in the case of wsws!

[KurtFF8]

No, I actually support a crummy little sect with some well dodgy ideas, but it's so rubbish I thought perhaps I might pose as a CWI supporter to try and gain a bit of credibility.

I just think it's good to have full disclosure in these kinds of conversations

[daft punk]

I just think it's good to have full disclosure in these kinds of conversations

Lol! I have CWI listed as my organisation.... see here on the right of the page -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> ^

and if you go to Socialist World you see this:

http://www.socialistworld.net/img/FlagHead5.png

[TheGodlessUtopian]

In the U.S the PSL's website (http://www.pslweb.org/) is rather popular.

[daft punk]

I don't like it.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I don't like it.

If you are talking about the PSL than I agree.... Marcyism isn't my thing.

[l'Enfermé]

Blanquists don't need to advertise; they just make it happen...
Hahah! Didn't anyone else get the joke?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Hahah! Didn't anyone else get the joke?

Nope, I didn't.

[daft punk]

If you are talking about the PSL than I agree.... Marcyism isn't my thing.

All I know is they think Cuba is a democratic socialist country, and also they say very little about the USSR, sorta sitting in the fence, with virtually no references to Stalin or Trotsky. Seems a bit mixed up.

I wouldnt wanna sound sectarian though.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

All I know is they think Cuba is a democratic socialist country, and also they say very little about the USSR, sorta sitting in the fence, with virtually no references to Stalin or Trotsky. Seems a bit mixed up.

They support the USSR as a socialist society in general, kinda taking the best out of each epoch. There was a link to an article they wrote but I don't think it is any longer on the site.

[Q]

Socialist World is far better.

On the subject of CWI sites: Visually, I like the website of Liberdade, Socialismo e Revolução (http://www.lsr-cit.org/) a lot, which for the occasion seems to be amended to reflect international women's day. Xekinima (http://www.xekinima.org/) also has a good looking piece, which despite the gray, is rather unique.

They have some real talents there.

[daft punk]

I like the grey, white hurts my eyes. I have a grey background to Socialist World but I had to put it there myself.

[KurtFF8]

Lol! I have CWI listed as my organisation.... see here on the right of the page -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> ^

and if you go to Socialist World you see this:

http://www.socialistworld.net/img/FlagHead5.png

It just comes off as a bit silly to be like "well my organization's paper is better!"

Of course you would think that.


All I know is they think Cuba is a democratic socialist country, and also they say very little about the USSR, sorta sitting in the fence, with virtually no references to Stalin or Trotsky. Seems a bit mixed up.

I'm curious as to what other RevLefters think about this "criticism" of the PSL of yours. It would seem to me that most folks on this site who have to deal with sectarianism based on political battles of the 1920s would see it as a breath of fresh air to have a Marxist organization not focus on Stalin or Trotsky, yet you see this as a weakness.


They support the USSR as a socialist society in general, kinda taking the best out of each epoch. There was a link to an article they wrote but I don't think it is any longer on the site.

Not this one? http://www2.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=14810

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Not this one? http://www2.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=14810

Yup, that was the one! I hadn't read it in so long I assumed it was deleted (I find it a hassle to search through the archives).

[Deicide]

What do you people think of ''In defence of Marxism''

?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

What do you people think of ''In defence of Marxism''

?

I actually get that newsletter in my inbox but have yet to take the time to read it.

[daft punk]

It just comes off as a bit silly to be like "well my organization's paper is better!"

Of course you would think that.

You seem to think I think Socialist World is best because I support it. That may be the case for others on here, but with me, it's the other way round. I support the CWI because they are the best socialist organisation. All the other have different flaws.



"All I know is they think Cuba is a democratic socialist country, and also they say very little about the USSR, sorta sitting in the fence, with virtually no references to Stalin or Trotsky. Seems a bit mixed up. "

I'm curious as to what other RevLefters think about this "criticism" of the PSL of yours.

Really? Why don't you just give us your opinion?


It would seem to me that most folks on this site who have to deal with sectarianism based on political battles of the 1920s would see it as a breath of fresh air to have a Marxist organization not focus on Stalin or Trotsky, yet you see this as a weakness.

I doubt it. And if they do they are clueless. If you think the Stalin/Trotsky thing is sectarian then you understand zilch.

The Stalin /Trotsky thing isnt even particularly about theory, Stalin had no theory. It is about the basics of Marxism being proved right by events, it is about the material circumstances of the 20th century. And there are many valuable lessons for those willing to study.

Finally, it is about being able to reassure the public that Marxism in practice is not a Stalinist-type dictatorship, which is about as attractive to Joe Bloggs as a violent kick in the nuts from David Beckham.



GodlessUtopian:
"They support the USSR as a socialist society in general, kinda taking the best out of each epoch. There was a link to an article they wrote but I don't think it is any longer on the site. "
Not this one? http://www2.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=14810


Hey, want me to pick through the article Kurt?

You know, I don't have to pick on you, but I think you like it, in a kinda masochistic way. Amirite?

Funny thing is, you say we should ignore history, and then post a link to an article that begins:

"Some progressive people argue that given the fact that nearly two decades have passed, the issue of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is now an irrelevancy. We think otherwise. "

This article is highly amusing. The USSR was great, a socialist country (no mention of purges - shh!). So why did it cease to be? Because "this traitorous group dismantled the Soviet Union itself".

Before that we are told:
"In 1989, the Gorbachev leadership broke the alliance with the communist governments and militaries in Eastern Europe leading to capitalist counter-revolutions in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Rumania and East Germany, and the disintegration of Yugoslavia."
Well, that was an in-depth analysis! That explains everything!


So, it was Gorby wot done it.

Never occurred them to wonder how one man and his clique could dismantle a 'socialist state' and turn it back to capitalism.

What sort of 'socialism' is it, if it can go back to capitalism on the whim of it's 'leader'?

No mention of the workers uprisings crushed by the Stalinists, which were not at all pro-capitalist as alleged. These could have led to democratic socialism, and if that had happened the USSR etc would be socialist today and so would the rest of the world:

Hungary 1956 – the dreams and the distortions


"“Effective power”, wrote Peter Fryer, the correspondent for the ‘Communist’ Daily Worker, “was divided between the Nagy government…and the armed people” (‘Hungarian Tragedy’). To nail the lies being spread by his own party, and ‘Communist’ Parties world-wide in unison, that the fighting was led by fascists and capitalist counter-revolutionaries, Fryer asks, “Who held the arms? Fascists? No, the people who had done the fighting, the Freedom Fighters, the workers of Csepel and Ujpest, the students, teen-age boys and girls…the soldiers who had exchanged the red star of servitude for the red, white and green ribbon of liberty.
“Were reactionary forces becoming more active? Of course they were. Was there a danger of counter-revolution? It would be senseless to deny it…But the danger of counter-revolution is not the same thing as the success of counter-revolution. And between the two lay a powerful and significant barrier – the will of the Hungarian people not to return to capitalism.
“Bruce Renton of the New Statesman and Nation explained: ‘Nobody who was in Hungary during the revolution could escape the overwhelming impression that the Hungarian people had no desire or intention to return to the capitalist system’”"



http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/2494

[daft punk]

What do you people think of ''In defence of Marxism''

?

The IMT? They split off from the CWI. They wanted to stay in the Labour Party. They kinda lost their way. It's a good site for some historical articles though.

[KurtFF8]

You seem to think I think Socialist World is best because I support it. That may be the case for others on here, but with me, it's the other way round. I support the CWI because they are the best socialist organisation. All the other have different flaws.

I would imagine that most people think that their organizations are better, which is why they joined them in the first place.



Really? Why don't you just give us your opinion?

Ah yes, so we can get in a long argument about Trotsky and Stalin, which is your favorite topic.


I doubt it. And if they do they are clueless. If you think the Stalin/Trotsky thing is sectarian then you understand zilch.

The Stalin /Trotsky thing isnt even particularly about theory, Stalin had no theory. It is about the basics of Marxism being proved right by events, it is about the material circumstances of the 20th century. And there are many valuable lessons for those willing to study.

Finally, it is about being able to reassure the public that Marxism in practice is not a Stalinist-type dictatorship, which is about as attractive to Joe Bloggs as a violent kick in the nuts from David Beckham.

The idea that these battles aren't sectarian baffles me. Even your summary here contains coded attacks against non-Trotskyist groups! You seem unable to carry on in a thread without finding a way to denounce Stalin.





Hey, want me to pick through the article Kurt?

You know, I don't have to pick on you, but I think you like it, in a kinda masochistic way. Amirite?

I actually find it quite annoying and wish you wouldn't try to drag every conversation into a polarized battle that has lost much relevancy in this century.


Funny thing is, you say we should ignore history, and then post a link to an article that begins:

I didn't read anything you wrote past here because you are just appealing to a straw man. Where have I said we should ignore history exactly?

[daft punk]

I would imagine that most people think that their organizations are better, which is why they joined them in the first place.




Ah yes, so we can get in a long argument about Trotsky and Stalin, which is your favorite topic.



The idea that these battles aren't sectarian baffles me. Even your summary here contains coded attacks against non-Trotskyist groups! You seem unable to carry on in a thread without finding a way to denounce Stalin.






I actually find it quite annoying and wish you wouldn't try to drag every conversation into a polarized battle that has lost much relevancy in this century.



I didn't read anything you wrote past here because you are just appealing to a straw man. Where have I said we should ignore history exactly?

as usual, zero content, zero understanding, nothing to see here. Totally devoid of any reason, knowledge or purpose.

[Lobotomy]

I wouldnt wanna sound sectarian though.

You? Never.

[daft punk]

You? Never.

who are you?

[marl]

Although the actual organization is questionable (at best), I really enjoy reading WSWS. Liberation News is pretty lackluster, but I like the PSL overall.

[KurtFF8]

as usual, zero content, zero understanding, nothing to see here. Totally devoid of any reason, knowledge or purpose.

Glad to see the personal attacks are something you want to keep up too

[Ostrinski]

If the PSL don't have a stance on Trotsky or Stalin, that is a good thing. Period.

[Kassad]

World Socialist Web Site (www.wsws.org) and In Defense of Marxism (www.marxist.com) carry relatively high-quality articles and their websites tend to be visually appealing, which does matter whether or not people choose to admit it. Text isn't the only thing that engages readers.

PSLweb.org carries some good articles as well, but I wish they'd focus more on theory at times. Workers Vanguard, the newspaper of the Spartacist League (www.ICL-FI.org) is one of my favorite newspapers out there. It carries some of the best descriptions of the reformist left out there.

Those are the websites I tend to check daily. That's just me. Sorry you've had to deal with the pissing matches between socialist groups on here.

[KurtFF8]

Indeed, the pissing matches are getting old. Although daft has been trying to argue with me (aka make me get in an argument about Trotsky) for some time now and this is just a continuation of that.


PSLweb.org carries some good articles as well, but I wish they'd focus more on theory at times.

While I certainly agree that more theory would be good, I'm wondering what in specific you would want the PSL to focus on in terms of theoretical work

[piet11111]

I read wsws because of their daily updates and marxist.com for the more in-depth articles.

But i don't always agree with their conclusions but as informative pieces about stuff i normally wouldn't hear about they do their job.

[Grenzer]

World Socialist Web Site (www.wsws.org) and In Defense of Marxism (www.marxist.com) carry relatively high-quality articles and their websites tend to be visually appealing, which does matter whether or not people choose to admit it. Text isn't the only thing that engages readers.

PSLweb.org carries some good articles as well, but I wish they'd focus more on theory at times. Workers Vanguard, the newspaper of the Spartacist League (www.ICL-FI.org) is one of my favorite newspapers out there. It carries some of the best descriptions of the reformist left out there.

Those are the websites I tend to check daily. That's just me. Sorry you've had to deal with the pissing matches between socialist groups on here.

I agree, In Defence of Marxism has some very good articles, but there is also a smattering of ultra-sectarian Trot crap there too. If you care to take the time to sort out the gold from the crap, it's very much worth the time taken to sift through it. In particular, I was surprised that they are doing an in depth analysis of religion and focus on Kautsky's The Foundations of Christianity(very good read in my opinion). Basically my problem with this site is when it comes to opposing ideologies. They tend to use very intellectually dishonest and pathetic straw men to discredit anyone other than Trotskyists to the point of it being sickening. Not even the Hoxhaist party American Party of Labor resorts to such low slanders(to which I must add that this party's blog, Red Phoenix, is pretty good even after considering that they are Stalinists. I still read it on occasion).

I also subscribe to the Worker's Vanguard. They have some pretty interesting perspectives at times, though I do object to certain things quite vehemently like their support of Soviet imperialism. If only they could completely root out the residual Marcyite taint in some of their positions, then they could probably be considered one of the best Trotskyist groups in the US. The Sparts are quite active around here and it was actually someone out selling the newspaper that was my first exposure to communism.

[Q]

Seeing how this thread developed, I'll chime in and add the Weekly Worker (http://cpgb.org.uk) site. They have a weekly update (every Thursday) and their commentary on political events is nearly always interesting. They also feature quite a bit indepth articles and carry an open platform where comradely debate can occur and where disagreements are published. Lastly, their political agenda is that of a regroupment of the left and as such focus quite a bit on the existing left, particularly the bigger groups around. For this last point, many comrades sadly toss it away as a "gossip sheet" instead of engaging with it.

[TrotskistMarx]

Here are my favorite leftist news websites and party sites:

http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/
http://www.cc-ds.org/
http://www.cpusa.org/
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
http://www.frso.org/
http://www.politicalaffairs.com
http://www.trotsky.net
http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/
http://www.socialism.com/drupal-6.8/
http://www.gpus.org/
http://www.iww.org/
http://www.internationalsocialist.org/
http://www.internationalist.org/
http://www.thelaborparty.org/
http://www.laborstandard.org/
http://www.lrp-cofi.org/
http://www.lrna.org/2-pt/rc.html
http://adams.patriot.net/~cnc/lgn.htm
http://www.leftturn.org/
http://www.nbufront.org/
http://www.newdemocracyworld.org/
http://www.newsandletters.org/issues/2011/Nov-Dec/index.asp
http://www.pslweb.org/
http://www.plp.org/
http://www.socialdemocrats.org/
http://www.socialistaction.org/
http://www.socialistalternative.org/
http://www.slp.org/
http://socialistparty-usa.org/
http://www.debsiantendency.org/
http://www.greenparty.org/index.php
http://the-spark.net/
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com
http://www.chavez.org.ve
http://www.wsws.org
http://www.marxist.com
http://www.socialistworker.org
http://www.commondreams.org
http://www.counterpunch.org
http://www.alternet.org
http://www.marxists.org
http://abqrazaunida.blogspot.com/
http://www.uspacifistparty.org/
http://www.usmlo.org/
http://www.progressiveparty.org/
http://www.workerscompass.org/
http://www.workersdemocracy.org
http://www.socialistappeal.org/
http://www.workersparty.org/
http://www.socialism.org.i8.com/
http://workersolidarity.org/
http://www.workers.org/




I've been looking in alexa and the closest I've come is wsws.org with a 36,206 global rank.

[Ostrinski]

Any of these sites do videos? Sometimes I don't feel like reading.

[Q]

Any of these sites do videos? Sometimes I don't feel like reading.

The Weekly Worker group maintains a Vimeo page (http://vimeo.com/cpgb/) that has 84 videos on it thus far, on a wide range of topics. And there is also a podcast (http://cpgb.podbean.com/) with commentary almost every week.

[TrotskistMarx]

Indeed http://www.marxist.com is very good and http://www.wsws.org I also check the progressive alternative news sites such as http://www.counterpunch.org, http://www.commondreams.org and http://www.informationclearinghouse.info for news about the Middle East conflicts


.



World Socialist Web Site (www.wsws.org) and In Defense of Marxism (www.marxist.com) carry relatively high-quality articles and their websites tend to be visually appealing, which does matter whether or not people choose to admit it. Text isn't the only thing that engages readers.

PSLweb.org carries some good articles as well, but I wish they'd focus more on theory at times. Workers Vanguard, the newspaper of the Spartacist League (www.ICL-FI.org) is one of my favorite newspapers out there. It carries some of the best descriptions of the reformist left out there.

Those are the websites I tend to check daily. That's just me. Sorry you've had to deal with the pissing matches between socialist groups on here.

[Grenzer]

Any of these sites do videos? Sometimes I don't feel like reading.

Yes, the CPGB (http://vimeo.com/cpgb) does. There are dozens of videos, and some are several hours long. They tend to be of excellent quality in my opinion.

I will echo Q in recommending the Weekly Worker, I'm surprised I forgot that one. They have some very unique perspectives, and in all cases, well thought out. They seem to be non dogmatic and non sectarian and don't subscribe to a particular tendency, though if you had to pin something on them it would probably be Orthodox Marxism. Even if I don't agree with all their conclusions, it's very interesting to read, and I guarantee you will have a hard time finding a place that offers similar views(as opposed to dozens of sites offering slightly varied orthodox Trotskyist or Stalinist perspectives).

Edit: Damn, Q beat me to it.

[Q]

As a sidenote: I also subscribe to the Weekly Worker (yes, I prefer to read from paper) and I pay only 60 pounds a year. To point out how little money this is: The normal price is 1 pound, they have around 50 issues a year and post stamps are added to it to post to the Netherlands.

Actually, I get an extra issue for free, as I know someone who is also interested in reading this stuff and pass it through. So, I cost them actually 2 pounds for the paper and 1.80 for the post stamps a week. Yet, not a single time was I requested to get an extra subscription.

That attitude is rare on the left and I find it precious.

I actually do support them more than just the fiver each month for the subscription, but that has only been a recent thing and totally on my own initiative.

[daft punk]

Originally Posted by KurtFF8 http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2382609#post2382609)
"I would imagine that most people think that their organizations are better, which is why they joined them in the first place.


Ah yes, so we can get in a long argument about Trotsky and Stalin, which is your favorite topic.


The idea that these battles aren't sectarian baffles me. Even your summary here contains coded attacks against non-Trotskyist groups! You seem unable to carry on in a thread without finding a way to denounce Stalin.


I actually find it quite annoying and wish you wouldn't try to drag every conversation into a polarized battle that has lost much relevancy in this century.

I didn't read anything you wrote past here because you are just appealing to a straw man. Where have I said we should ignore history exactly? "

Glad to see the personal attacks are something you want to keep up too
Nothing personal, just a fact. The interesting bit is that you have no idea why the Trotsky/Stalin debate is not sectarian.


If the PSL don't have a stance on Trotsky or Stalin, that is a good thing. Period.

Yeah, wonderful. Lets not have a stance on anything.


Indeed, the pissing matches are getting old. Although daft has been trying to argue with me (aka make me get in an argument about Trotsky) for some time now and this is just a continuation of that.


Lol! I gave up on that years ago. I am not that cruel or bored anyway. You cant even see the point of the debate, let alone bring yourself into any debate concerning Stalinism.




I also subscribe to the Worker's Vanguard. They have some pretty interesting perspectives at times, though I do object to certain things quite vehemently like their support of Soviet imperialism. If only they could completely root out the residual Marcyite taint in some of their positions, then they could probably be considered one of the best Trotskyist groups in the US. The Sparts are quite active around here and it was actually someone out selling the newspaper that was my first exposure to communism.
The Sparts support soviet imperialism? Fuck me.


Seeing how this thread developed, I'll chime in and add the Weekly Worker (http://cpgb.org.uk/) site.

The Weekly Worker

I also subscribe to the Weekly Worker

It's a hat trick!

[Grenzer]

The Sparts support soviet imperialism? Fuck me.

Indeed, they are quite vocal in their support of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, in which they suspend all reason and common sense which they seem to otherwise ordinarily possess. The Marcyites are the only sect on the left which support this action(if you don't count Brezhnevites, which I do not)

Even the Hoxhaists and Maoists recognize this as imperialism. The Spartacists should be considered an embarrassment to Trotskyism on this issue.

[Q]

It's a hat trick!

Hey mister Pot, meet Kettle.

[ParaRevolutionary]

Glad to see the personal attacks are something you want to keep up too

Theyre the RevLeft way.

[Kassad]

Indeed, they are quite vocal in their support of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, in which they suspend all reason and common sense which they seem to otherwise ordinarily possess. The Marcyites are the only sect on the left which support this action(if you don't count Brezhnevites, which I do not)

Even the Hoxhaists and Maoists recognize this as imperialism. The Spartacists should be considered an embarrassment to Trotskyism on this issue.

Well, there's different perspectives to this. The Spartacist League didn't believe that the Soviet Union was capitalist at the time. They viewed it as a degenerated workers' state and they believed that the Red Army could spread the gains of October to Afghanistan, which in many ways it did. The issue isn't just "oh, they don't see them as imperialist" and that's it. Also, their defense of the Soviet intervention is justified in a much different way than the Marcyite perspective.

[Искра]

I read these:
http://en.internationalism.org/
http://www.leftcom.org/
http://leftcommunism.org/spip.php?article302&lang=en
http://www.quinterna.org/lingue/english/0_english.htm
http://www.tapaidiatisgalarias.org/?page_id=105

also: http://www.libcom.org is really good for daily news, because most of this sites concentrate on analysis and even they write shorter articles they are not so up to date

[daft punk]

Indeed, they are quite vocal in their support of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, in which they suspend all reason and common sense which they seem to otherwise ordinarily possess. The Marcyites are the only sect on the left which support this action(if you don't count Brezhnevites, which I do not)

Even the Hoxhaists and Maoists recognize this as imperialism. The Spartacists should be considered an embarrassment to Trotskyism on this issue.

All I know about the Sparts is they are Trotskyist and have one or two good historical articles, like on Kronstadt.

Not sure I would call the Russian invasion of Afghanistan imperialism as such, but I suppose you could stick it under that umbrella. I certainly wouldnt have supported them going in even though the Afghan regime did ask them to.

I'm a bit confused though, the Sparts arent Marcyites are they? The Marcyites are this PSL Stalinist-lite thing, right?