Argument against the idea of the USA becoming more fascist

[FiziKx]

My responses are based on an image that I saw on this site about the United States becoming more fascist. I, personally, believe that the United States is actually becoming more Socially Democratic in nature and will explain why below:

>Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
This is real (blind nationalism), but thats with a lot of the people, not the democratic cosmopolitans like me who are supportive of a strengthening UN and all that. Most democrats, in a way, support that even though it is far off.

>Disdain for Human Rights
No. There is a dwindling ratio of uneducated conservatives to intellectuals, and with such, more progressive human rights measures are being enacted (labour laws, abortion, freedom from slavery, right to fair trial, etc)

>Identification of Scapegoats/Enemies
Scapegoats, no. International alliances/enemies, yes. But this is what every country does in order to protect their people. We don't place blame on certain groups--if you think otherwise, you are a conspiracy theorist who just has no trust in the people who are -elected- by -we- the people into power.

>Supremacy of the Military
It is not wrong to use a somewhat powerful force (although still only 4th or 5th largest force in the world) that stands for liberty and justice to help promote those just ideals in places where fascism and an insane disregard for human life runs rampant. We are not in a military state here at home, and we never will be.

>Rampant Sexism
Not at all. Ever since the mid 1900's women have been becoming more integrated into society and are being given more rights than ever. Abortion is rapidly gaining public support with people everywhere showing just how true this is.

>Controlled Mass Media
The press, radio, television and Internet are all mediums of support for free speech. Bills like SOPA will never pass as long as intellectual thinkers and progressives are in office (which they will continue to be, according to trends), and your inherent right to free speech or to choose what to believe will never ever be trodden upon. There is media bias, but that is indicative that there is hardly any control over the media because of such varied opinions.

>Obsession with National Security
The world has become a place where all life could be destroyed 100 times over in under an hour. I, for one, am glad that the government looks out for the security of its citizens.

>Religion and Gvnmt Intertwined
It is becoming less so with each passing year. Secularism is on the rise in this nation, and it can be seen. However, there will always be that ridiculous minority who think otherwise, and we can do nothing about them. Even so, it is their right to believe what they choose, even though they will make no impact on the future.

>Protected Corporate Power
If a person wants to do business, it is their right in this nation to try and take their idea and turn it into something that that person benefits from. That's what both the beauty and critical hatred of capitalism stems from. This right should be protected, as should corporations to a certain extent. However, they should not be protected as people, and gladly, they aren't. Corporations do not run the government. There are balances in place so that one group cannot independently fund an entire campaign and get their person into office to protect them and their interests only. That is the beauty of our Democratic Republican/Federal Republican system, and the founders of the country were -very- careful with this issue. Plus, more and more regulations are being placed on companies whenever left-leaning politicians are in power to protect the people and the environment. Its the right wingers that need to be watched when pertaining to this issue.

>Suppressed Labor Movements
Not at all. Unions are present -everywhere- and it is your right to gather and protest. Actually, a recent show of the tolerance of protests and movements pertaining to economics and labor is the 'Occupy' Movement. These people are allowed to continue doing what their doing so long as they don't break any existing, and perfectly rational, laws.

>Disdain for Art and Intellectuals
No, not at all! The United States has some of the best galleries, exhibits, and universities in the world. The educational system may be screwed up where you live, but education is a state-level issue at the moment when not taking into account programs like No child left behind, which was ridiculously created by, once again, a right winged conservative.

>Obsession with Crime and Punishment
A good justice system does not equal a power-hungry group of psychopaths. Again, I am glad that crime is dealt with quickly. If a law is broken, the person who breaks the law gets a fair trial in -every- case, and is sentenced based on the outcome of said trial. It is a fair system that has been in place since the first days of the nation.

>Rampant Corruption
Again, this comes down to conspiracy theorists and trust. Most government officials are not corrupt, but the ones who are are often ousted or brought to light through media scrutiny--which is a benefit of such freedom of the media. Of course, there will always be some corruption somewhere, but in the majority of cases, elected officials truly try to be good representatives of their constituents.

>Fraud Elections
No. No. No. It doesn't happen, plain and simple.

>Private control of wealth
Part of the capitalist economic system, which, with increasing numbers of social policies being implemented that help to ease the differences/gaps in the classes--this allows everyone to get by while still allowing people to use their ideas and abilities to move up in life.

---

The main issue with my argument that was brought up when I first made it was that the person disagreeing with my claim had little faith in the people in power and would prefer full personal privacy to even quite a raise in the potential of injury of the US citizens (through things such as public attacks by enemies of the state or people).

The problem here is obviously either an overwhelming naivety or an inherent and impossible-to-understand distrust of people in power, even though -we- elect them as a people.

Also, when arguing the government's duty to provide and protect it's populace, a question that begs to be asked when regarding such issues is 'What is the real definition of freedom?' I personally believe that many disputes about the topic above (ones, for example, having to do with privacy vs. protection) all trace their roots back to that one simple question.

Now, the answer may seem obvious to yourself, but let me show you an example to show that this question may not be so obvious:


In the mid-late 1900s, a United States citizen was visiting the USSR and takes a taxi cab to his destination. En route, the taxi driver pulls the vehicle over in a back alleyway and asks the American if he has any blue jeans that he could buy. The American at first is shocked by the question, but then tilts his head to the side and responds: "You can't buy blue jeans here? We really are freer than you in the USA." The taxi driver shakes his head for a moment and then replies: "Sure, I may have to buy many of the things that I want on the black market and may be unable to get some of my desired products at all, but we are given all of that which we absolutely need. If we are hungry we are given food to fill ourselves. If we are ill, we go to a clinic and get treated. Therefore, because I can live my life free of all fear of not being able to take care of myself and my family--I am more free than you."

Who is more free in this case? I would support the Soviet in this case, because I believe freedom from fear is a truer form of freedom than the freedom to do exactly what you wish all of the time without government intervention... however, it could definitely be argued either way. Anyway, this relates back directly to the complete personal privacy vs. government protection issue. In my honest opinion, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Also, in any case, the government here will absolutely not ever go so far as to step into your personal lives (unlike in the scenario above's USSR) any more than it absolutely must to protect as many lives as possible.

[Doflamingo]

We don't place blame on certain groups--if you think otherwise, you are a conspiracy theorist who just has no trust in the people who are -elected- by -we- the people into power.

I... I don't even know how to respond to this... :laugh:

[Ostrinski]

Enjoy your restriction.

[Franz Fanonipants]

snrk yeah because fascism has a checklist that involves bourgeois rights being denied

[Ostrinski]

This thread has re-affirmed that social democrats are not allies.

[LOLseph Stalin]

This really isn't true at all. Sure, women in the US have more rights than women in, say, Saudi Arabia. However, you have the Republican party trying to trample of the rights of minority groups and women.

When was the last time you've heard of the US govt not supporting monitoring mosques? When was the last time you've heard of the Republican party not wanting to take away women's birth control and restrict immigration? When was the last time somebody wasn't arrested for smoking a joint? When was the last time somebody wasn't arrested for protesting in a public place? I could go on, but I think you get the idea...

[Prometeo liberado]

what the...how come...but..........REALLY?

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'm not sure how you expect this board to take you seriously when you post things like this:


>Obsession with Crime and Punishment
A good justice system does not equal a power-hungry group of psychopaths. Again, I am glad that crime is dealt with quickly. If a law is broken, the person who breaks the law gets a fair trial in -every- case, and is sentenced based on the outcome of said trial. It is a fair system that has been in place since the first days of the nation.

Really? Every case, huh? :rolleyes:

Also most people on this board wouldn't classify the USA as either a fascist state, or as a state transitioning into fascism.

[Franz Fanonipants]

tl;dr - america is ok guys really

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

If anyone needed proof that social democrats are reactionaries...

[#FF0000]

No. No. No. It doesn't happen, plain and simple.

motherfucker have you seen the gerrymandering that goes on in some of these states

and have you not heard of the maine caucus?

ignorance abounds

[Rusty Shackleford]

what the fuck am i reading

[TheGodlessUtopian]

what the fuck am i reading

...what one gets when idealism is combined with ignorance.

[l'Enfermé]

No one bothered to write a well-written response! That's no good.

I will write something later just to be fair to the guy.

[RGacky3]

This guy did'nt make ANY arguments or no historical context, he's really just ignoring history.

[#FF0000]

these 'principals of fascism' are bullshit anyway tbh

[Franz Fanonipants]

these 'principals of fascism' are bullshit anyway tbh

they're from an eco article right?

basically name of the rose owns

[Tim Cornelis]

Fascism is based on palingenetic ultranationalism. This is ultranationalism based on staging national rebirth inspired by some imagined golden age in the national history. For example, North European fascists would use viking and nordic symbolism, and often presume Scandinavian brotherhood. Italian fascists are inspired by the Roman empire.

America's historical golden age, however, was that of classical liberalism. Thus, the American equivalent of fascism is Constitutionalism, which is not fascist at all. America, of all Western countries, has the lowest risk of becoming fascist. This is ironic since many, liberals, conservatives, and socialists, often claim America is turning fascist and are almost obsessed with fear over fascism in America.

[Astarte]

In the USA capital and state power are combining at a higher rate than ever - private capital is even manufacturing the Tea Party as reactionary shock troops to fight for the interest of the huge capital.

"Super-PACs" in which capitalist can donate as much capital, anonymously as they want to their political puppets, "Voter-ID" legislation, a debate on whether or not the whim of the employer allows or disallows health insurance paying for contraception - All these things tell me, if we are not heading to classical fascism, then we are heading to some kind of world were the corporations have even more unbridled power over all aspects of society.

Yesterday while I was on the road I saw some fat slimey motherfucker in new 2012 Suburban with a license plate with "AYNRAND" in it. During the superbowl I was witness to commercials where corporate powers combined their propaganda message i.e. the "General Electric makes the turbines that allow for Budweiser beer to be produced" commercial..

Sorry OP, there is no way the corporations are getting any weaker, or the USA becoming more "Social Democratic".

As for "Constitutionalism" in least danger of becoming fascist - I think that is bunk - Constitutionalism and classical liberalism are just dogmas of Capital. Capital can and will use these dogmas, and contort them into fascist positions as it sees fit to defend state power, just like ruling classes have done with every other ideology. Again, the Tea Party show its an alternative type of fascism based on "rugged individualism" rather than the collectivism of European Fascism, exactly because that is what is in vogue according to US history.

[Guy Incognito]

This thread has re-affirmed that social democrats are not allies.

I think they're just idealistic and hopelessly naive, but mean well. They do seem to genuinely care about the plight of the worker, and I feel are a group that we could reach, as opposed to openly despise (which gets us nowhere...). The same goes for liberals, left-libertarians and the like. Treating them as if they're the enemy, because they don't have the right mindset (appease/reform instead of revolution) I feel is harming the movement. They are not reactionaries or fascists. They could be redeemed when the time comes. We can teach them the way to truly free themselves and their fellow workers.

[El Oso Rojo]

"Disdain for Art and Intellectuals
No, not at all! The United States has some of the best galleries, exhibits, and universities in the world. The educational system may be screwed up where you live, but education is a state-level issue at the moment when not taking into account programs like No child left behind, which was ridiculously created by, once again, a right winged conservative."

For Artworks that express something different from their view point

[Lenina Rosenweg]

[QUOTE=FiziKx;2383578]My responses are based on an image that I saw on this site about the United States becoming more fascist. I, personally, believe that the United States is actually becoming more Socially Democratic in nature and will explain why below:

>Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
This is real (blind nationalism), but thats with a lot of the people, not the democratic cosmopolitans like me who are supportive of a strengthening UN and all that. Most democrats, in a way, support that even though it is far off.

read up on the myth of liberal interventionism

>Disdain for Human Rights
Forms of torture are being openly upheld.Polivce brutality in inner cities is rampant. Have you been following the Occupy movement at all.Yes human rights has vastly improved, domestically at least, and for some people, after mass pressure from below.

>Identification of Scapegoats/Enemies
Have you been following the news at all during the past few years? Polive spying/profiling Muslims? The intense coded racism of the Republican candidates. Sexism and homophobia of the right wing? Have you heard of a guy named Tyler Clementi?

>Supremacy of the Military
It is not wrong to use a somewhat powerful force (although still only 4th or 5th largest force in the world) that stands for liberty and justice to help promote those just ideals in places where fascism and an insane disregard for human life runs rampant. We are not in a military state here at home, and we never will be.

What? All I suggest is that you read Noam Chomsky, John Pilger and many other left critics of US foreign policy. Again, it may helpful to follow the news and current events.

>Rampant Sexism
Not at all. Ever since the mid 1900's women have been becoming more integrated into society and are being given more rights than ever. Abortion is rapidly gaining public support with people everywhere showing just how true this is.

Rush Limbaugh. Again, it may be helpful to follow current events.

>Controlled Mass Media
The press, radio, television and Internet are all mediums of support for free speech. Bills like SOPA will never pass as long as intellectual thinkers and progressives are in office (which they will continue to be, according to trends), and your inherent right to free speech or to choose what to believe will never ever be trodden upon. There is media bias, but that is indicative that there is hardly any control over the media because of such varied opinions.

Its obvious the corporate media is tightly controlled.Just compare what you hear on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Fox with the World Socialist Website, The Real News Network, Counterpunch, even Al Jazeera. Its like night and day

>Obsession with National Security
The world has become a place where all life could be destroyed 100 times over in under an hour. I, for one, am glad that the government looks out for the security of its citizens.

Due to US nukes.How is the devastation of much of the "Third World" bringing us "security"?

>Religion and Gvnmt Intertwined
It is becoming less so with each passing year. Secularism is on the rise in this nation, and it can be seen. However, there will always be that ridiculous minority who think otherwise, and we can do nothing about them. Even so, it is their right to believe what they choose, even though they will make no impact on the future.

Again, I would suggest you follow the news and current events. This may be helpful for you to understand our world.

Apart from policy (including the roll back of women's rights and a Republican presidential candidate openy calling for a theocracy) ever notive hoe each US president increasingly wraps themselves in religion?In a speech last year Obama mentioned "God" over 20 times. This open religiosity would have been inconceivable 30 years ago.

Extremist Christian fundamentalist groups have a powerful and growing influence in branches of the US military, esp the Air Force.

>Protected Corporate Power
If a person wants to do business, it is their right in this nation to try and take their idea and turn it into something that that person benefits from. That's what both the beauty and critical hatred of capitalism stems from. This right should be protected, as should corporations to a certain extent. However, they should not be protected as people, and gladly, they aren't. Corporations do not run the government. There are balances in place so that one group cannot independently fund an entire campaign and get their person into office to protect them and their interests only. That is the beauty of our Democratic Republican/Federal Republican system, and the founders of the country were -very- careful with this issue. Plus, more and more regulations are being placed on companies whenever left-leaning politicians are in power to protect the people and the environment. Its the right wingers that need to be watched when pertaining to this issue.

Right. I assume you have a high paying job at some right wing think tank.

>Suppressed Labor Movements
Not at all. Unions are present -everywhere- and it is your right to gather and protest. Actually, a recent show of the tolerance of protests and movements pertaining to economics and labor is the 'Occupy' Movement. These people are allowed to continue doing what their doing so long as they don't break any existing, and perfectly rational, laws.

http://www.salon.com/2012/03/05/the_cost_of_americas_police_state/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_budget_protests

Do try to keep up.

>Disdain for Art and Intellectuals
No, not at all! The United States has some of the best galleries, exhibits, and universities in the world. The educational system may be screwed up where you live, but education is a state-level issue at the moment when not taking into account programs like No child left behind, which was ridiculously created by, once again, a right winged conservative.

Right, you are probably working for a Democratic Party iberal NGO.The US is famously anti-intellectual. Our public school system is being destroyed and privatized. Its not a "few right wing politciamns" its the systemic process of the capitalist crisis.

Libraries are being closed and/or downsized. Museums and high culture are a social ornament for the wealthy, that's what they've been designed as.

>Obsession with Crime and Punishment
A good justice system does not equal a power-hungry group of psychopaths. Again, I am glad that crime is dealt with quickly. If a law is broken, the person who breaks the law gets a fair trial in -every- case, and is sentenced based on the outcome of said trial. It is a fair system that has been in place since the first days of the nation.

Right, you're an upper middle class white guy. You've never been harassed by the cops, never been profiled, never even got puled over by surly state troopers. You know nothing about the destructive effect of the "war on drugs" giving the US the largest prison population, per capita, in the world.

>Rampant Corruption
Again, this comes down to conspiracy theorists and trust. Most government officials are not corrupt, but the ones who are are often ousted or brought to light through media scrutiny--which is a benefit of such freedom of the media. Of course, there will always be some corruption somewhere, but in the majority of cases, elected officials truly try to be good representatives of their constituents.

Do you have the slightest inkling of the massive coruptuion and control the FIRE sector of the economy has?

>Fraud Elections
No. No. No. It doesn't happen, plain and simple.

Have you ever heard of a man named Al Gore?

>Private control of wealth
Part of the capitalist economic system, which, with increasing numbers of social policies being implemented that help to ease the differences/gaps in the classes--this allows everyone to get by while still allowing people to use their ideas and abilities to move up in life.

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

Probably you are working for some liberal NGO or Dem Party group and you are paid to write this dreck.You have no idea whatsover what most people are facing.

[Ostrinski]

I think they're just idealistic and hopelessly naive, but mean well.Everyone thinks they mean well, isn't that the point of having ideological opinions?


They do seem to genuinely care about the plight of the workerCaring as an appeal to emotion is irrelevant on an ideological level. You could "care" about the plight of the workers under any ideological banner, that isn't the point. The point is to figure out a solution to best address the interests of the proletariat. We understand that the purest expression of any class's interests is the seizure of political power. The social democrats, on the other hand, have more reservations for particular systems than proletarian class interest in and of itself. In this sense they are no better than anyone else.


and I feel are a group that we could reach, as opposed to openly despise (which gets us nowhere...).Proletarian revolution is not expressed through bourgeois politicking. There is no one to "reach," except for the working class itself.


The same goes for liberals, left-libertarians and the like. Treating them as if they're the enemy, because they don't have the right mindset (appease/reform instead of revolution) I feel is harming the movement. They are not reactionaries or fascists. They could be redeemed when the time comes. We can teach them the way to truly free themselves and their fellow workers.Technically anyone who does not believe in the pursuit of proletarian revolution, and therefore holding reservations for bourgeois society, is an enemy. Sure some of them can be "converted," whatever that means in any practical sense, but class consciousness does not develop on ideological lines, it develops along interest lines.

[ParaRevolutionary]

All of your points are not unlike those raised by right wingers.

[Franz Fanonipants]

lawl @ the idea of reading noam chomsky overturning the liberal shit in the OP

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Chomsky worked for me. Whatever his drawbacks, Chomsky's devastating critique of US imperialism is spot on.He has helped radicalize several generations of youth.

He has limits of course but his work has been very valuable.

[Prometeo liberado]

[QUOTE=Guy Incognito;2384208]I think they're just idealistic and hopelessly naive, but mean well. They do seem to genuinely care about the plight of the worker, and I feel are a group that we could reach, as opposed to openly despise (which gets us nowhere...). The same goes for liberals, left-libertarians and the like. Treating them as if they're the enemy, because they don't have the right mindset (appease/reform instead of revolution) I feel is harming the movement. They are not reactionaries or fascists. They could be redeemed when the time comes. We can teach them the way to truly free themselves and their fellow workers.

You have got to be kidding me! How can you say in one sentence that they are "hopelessly naive" and then say "They could be redeemed when the time comes"? Do you read this stuff before posting? The time has come and gone too many times and with the same backstabbing results. And reactionaries are exactly what they are. When push comes to shove and real change is on the line liberals will always turn and run. Here's a news flash for you, they don't want systemic change they want to reform capitalism! Wolf in sheeps clothing mean anything to you? My idea of revolution is not a group hug. Go peddle this nonsense to outside of the suburbs and see where it gets you. My day is already starting off bad and now this? Please!

[Guy Incognito]

Everyone thinks they mean well, isn't that the point of having ideological opinions?

Objectivists and most other reactionaries do not mean well. They mean us all great harm. They wish to make us slaves that they do not have to feed.


Caring as an appeal to emotion is irrelevant on an ideological level. You could "care" about the plight of the workers under any ideological banner, that isn't the point. The point is to figure out a solution to best address the interests of the proletariat. We understand that the purest expression of any class's interests is the seizure of political power. The social democrats, on the other hand, have more reservations for particular systems than proletarian class interest in and of itself. In this sense they are no better than anyone else.

Emotion is what motivates us. Drives us. It is what makes me hate the capitalists for what they've done to the working class. It's what will hopefully feed us, and sustain us when they finally come for us. Or we for them. Emotion is also what makes use of pro-worker propaganda. It's what draws most of us to the cause. Without emotion, we would all be clamoring for objectivism, as we would not "care" for our brothers and sisters around us. Seizing political power will take numbers. Numbers we don't have because of our bellicosity towards other left organizations and ideologies.


Proletarian revolution is not expressed through bourgeois politicking. There is no one to "reach," except for the working class itself.

And by closing the movement off to any workers who do not already subscribe to our methods? You doom it. Popular support of the workers is needed. It is the ONLY way. And they are not supporting us as it is right now. Condemning any who are not already properly educated is a fools errand.


Technically anyone who does not believe in the pursuit of proletarian revolution, and therefore holding reservations for bourgeois society, is an enemy. Sure some of them can be "converted," whatever that means in any practical sense, but class consciousness does not develop on ideological lines, it develops along interest lines.

You find them an enemy, though they wish for the same end, because they don't agree with the means. Tell me, did you start as a socialist as your political ideology? Or did you progress to it by way of the less revolutionary ones? They are a means to socialism. They were for me.

[Guy Incognito]

[QUOTE=Guy Incognito;2384208]I think they're just idealistic and hopelessly naive, but mean well. They do seem to genuinely care about the plight of the worker, and I feel are a group that we could reach, as opposed to openly despise (which gets us nowhere...). The same goes for liberals, left-libertarians and the like. Treating them as if they're the enemy, because they don't have the right mindset (appease/reform instead of revolution) I feel is harming the movement. They are not reactionaries or fascists. They could be redeemed when the time comes. We can teach them the way to truly free themselves and their fellow workers.

You have got to be kidding me! How can you say in one sentence that they are "hopelessly naive" and then say "They could be redeemed when the time comes"? Do you read this stuff before posting? The time has come and gone too many times and with the same backstabbing results. And reactionaries are exactly what they are. When push comes to shove and real change is on the line liberals will always turn and run. Here's a news flash for you, they don't want systemic change they want to reform capitalism! Wolf in sheeps clothing mean anything to you? My idea of revolution is not a group hug. Go peddle this nonsense to outside of the suburbs and see where it gets you. My day is already starting off bad and now this? Please!

Fine then, I assume you'll be purging all those who weren't in full support of the movement from the beginning? Who will be left eh?

[Prometeo liberado]

[QUOTE=
Fine then, I assume you'll be purging all those who weren't in full support of the movement from the beginning? Who will be left eh?

You still don't understand these people. Purge? Please! You are making the assumption that they would hang around if shit went down. There is a reason why they are fence sitters. Liberals have a vested interest in capitalism. Ask one democratic socialist if they support workers ownership of the means of production. I wouldn't waste my time purging that, it will cannabalize itself.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

They are not reactionaries or fascists.

Social democracy is Third Way and corporatist. A good argument could be made, moreso than as regards the United States in its present form (a police state does not fascism make) that it is indeed fascistoid.

[Guy Incognito]

[QUOTE=Guy Incognito;2384256]

You still don't understand these people. Purge? Please! You are making the assumption that they would hang around if shit went down. There is a reason why they are fence sitters. Liberals have a vested interest in capitalism. Ask one democratic socialist if they support workers ownership of the means of production. I wouldn't waste my time purging that, it will cannabalize itself.

People are fence sitters because they don't see us winning. They don't want their families to be rounded up and shot. There are many democratic socialist workers who will answer "Yes" to that (if not damn near all) because it's in their class interest. But you won't find a politician who will, because they're spineless creatures who only want to keep their job (which they will immediately lose, as the capitalists would attack them with everything they had).

[Ostrinski]

Objectivists and most other reactionaries do not mean well. They mean us all great harm. They wish to make us slaves that they do not have to feed.But they see themselves as meaning well, was the point. 'Meaning well' is hard to define, it's a very subjective statement.


Emotion is what motivates us. Drives us. It is what makes me hate the capitalists for what they've done to the working class. It's what will hopefully feed us, and sustain us when they finally come for us. Or we for them. Emotion is also what makes use of pro-worker propaganda. It's what draws most of us to the cause. Without emotion, we would all be clamoring for objectivism, as we would not "care" for our brothers and sisters around us. Seizing political power will take numbers. Numbers we don't have because of our bellicosity towards other left organizations and ideologies.It is not emotion or "care for our brothers and sisters" that drives the revolution. You are right in that it makes for good propaganda, but its usefulness ends there, I'm afraid. Emotion is largely circumstantial as emotional responses vary by individual. To say that such a thing is the foundation of revolutionary consciousness reeks of idealism. It is in fact the shitty plight of the proletariat under capitalism that propels them into crushing it and establishing themselves as the ruling class. Class egotism, if you will.


And by closing the movement off to any workers who do not already subscribe to our methods? You doom it. Popular support of the workers is needed. It is the ONLY way. And they are not supporting us as it is right now. Condemning any who are not already properly educated is a fools errand.Precisely. The proletariat as a class contains dormant revolutionary potential. Social democracy as a methodology cannot facilitate the true expression of proletarian revolution as it upholds participation in bourgeois productive arrangements and governmental structures, i.e. bourgeois society. This is the solid contradiction that deems revolutionary socialism and social democracy as irreconcilable.


You find them an enemy, though they wish for the same end, because they don't agree with the means. Tell me, did you start as a socialist as your political ideology? Or did you progress to it by way of the less revolutionary ones? They are a means to socialism. They were for me.They don't seek the same end, though. They don't seek to overthrow the capitalist mode of production or to achieve proletarian dictatorship. They seek capitalism with a human face.

I started out as an anarchist, for purely superficial aesthetic reasons of course, but it's irrelevant because there are conservatives, fascists, and libertarians that have become socialists. By this logic we could say that any of these are "gateways" to socialist consciousness.

[Krano]

Lol Liberalism.

[Deicide]

Chomsky worked for me. Whatever his drawbacks, Chomsky's devastating critique of US imperialism is spot on.He has helped radicalize several generations of youth.

He has limits of course but his work has been very valuable.

He influenced my vehement ''anti-stalinism'' and anti-authoritarianism.

[Guy Incognito]

But they see themselves as meaning well, was the point. 'Meaning well' is hard to define, it's a very subjective statement.

Point taken. (Though I still don't agree on objectivists, as they specifically do NOT mean well for others, and see it as a failing and are only for the self).


It is not emotion or "care for our brothers and sisters" that drives the revolution. You are right in that it makes for good propaganda, but its usefulness ends there, I'm afraid. Emotion is largely circumstantial as emotional responses vary by individual. To say that such a thing is the foundation of revolutionary consciousness reeks of idealism. It is in fact the shitty plight of the proletariat under capitalism that propels them into crushing it and establishing themselves as the ruling class. Class egotism, if you will.

I don't agree that egotism is not emotional or does not CAUSE emotional responses, but I can see what you're saying.


Precisely. The proletariat as a class contains dormant revolutionary potential. Social democracy as a methodology cannot facilitate the true expression of proletarian revolution as it upholds participation in bourgeois productive arrangements and governmental structures, i.e. bourgeois society. This is the solid contradiction that deems revolutionary socialism and social democracy as irreconcilable.

They don't seek the same end, though. They don't seek to overthrow the capitalist mode of production or to achieve proletarian dictatorship. They seek capitalism with a human face.

I don't think that they are. I think that they DO want the workers to control the means of production, but are going about it in a foolish way. They are pragmatic, and cowardly, but have done more for the workers in their countries than any others have barring Cuba (economically). It's not enough and never will be until we have true communism. I think they are trying to get us there, a pitiful step at a time. I don't think they realize the capitalists will never allow it to happen that way.


I started out as an anarchist, for purely superficial aesthetic reasons of course, but it's irrelevant because there are conservatives, fascists, and libertarians that have become socialists. By this logic we could say that any of these are "gateways" to socialist consciousness.

Exactly. And I think this is why we shouldn't be driving them away. All or nothing gets us nowhere. Win them over, increase our numbers. A unified workers front is far more formidible than scattered groups that the capitalist media can easily lable as "fringe".

[Franz Fanonipants]

he influenced my vehement ''anti-stalinism'' and anti-authoritarianism.

pressing issues in the year 2012

[Deicide]

pressing issues in the year 2012

Suck off a horse you mug.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Suck off a horse you mug.

nice comeback to the total fucking irrelevancy of your stalin-haunted world

[Deicide]

nice comeback to the total fucking irrelevancy of your stalin-haunted world

Thanks Buddy.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Thanks Buddy.

i have decided that reading noam chomsky really affirmed my commitment to anti-jacobin activism

e: i have decided that reading christopher hitchens has cemented my opposition to lord gilgamesh and all ur-centered regimes

[Rusty Shackleford]

somewhere, there is someone who loses sleep at night over the fear of Stalin's silhouette appearing on their bedroom wall across the window when lightning flashes.

[Deicide]

i have decided that reading noam chomsky really affirmed my commitment to anti-jacobin activism

e: i have decided that reading christopher hitchens has cemented my opposition to lord gilgamesh and all ur-centered regimes

I'm enjoying your display of nerd rage.

[Franz Fanonipants]

somewhere, there is someone who loses sleep at night over the fear of Stalin's silhouette appearing on their bedroom wall across the window when lightning flashes.

I am against all this communist authoritarianism!

[Ostrinski]

There is something to be said about Chomsky's work on American foreign policy and media censorship. It's thorough, well-researched, etc.

But his anti-authoritarian ethical absolutism is repugnant while still laughable.

[Deicide]

somewhere, there is someone who loses sleep at night over the fear of Stalin's silhouette appearing on their bedroom wall across the window when lightning flashes.

That'll be me.

[Franz Fanonipants]

I'm enjoying your display of nerd rage.

pinche menso you don't even understand whats going on

[Franz Fanonipants]

There is something to be said about Chomsky's work on American foreign policy and media censorship. It's thorough, well-researched, etc.

But his anti-authoritarian ethical absolutism is repugnant while still laughable.

manufacturing consent is p. good but his foreign policy work reeks of amy goodmanesque well-meaning but ultimately wrongheaded liberalism. w/out a strong critique of capital (which the man entirely lacks) you can be on the "right side" of something for all the wrong reasons.

[Deicide]

pinche menso you don't even understand whats going on

You're acting out in a nerd rage fuelled hissy fit. And generally being an asshole. But it's because your ''primitive''.

[Franz Fanonipants]

You're acting out in a nerd rage fuelled hissy fit. And generally being an asshole. But it's because your ''primitive''.

lookit dis nub

[Guy Incognito]

You're acting out in a nerd rage fuelled hissy fit. And generally being an asshole. But it's because your ''primitive''.

Have...have you ever read one of Franz's posts? I can assure you it's not nerd rage. I'm pretty sure he's having a merry time fucking with you.

Also, "primitive" is extremely reactionary, you may want to curb that.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Where else in most high schools today are kids going to learn about imperialism and the nightmare the US has wrecked on the world? Do you know how filled with indoctrination US schools are? Noam Chomsky has done and is doing an incredible public service.

Okay, so Chomsky's economic analyses is half assed, he's not a Marxist, and he spends too much time refighting the Spanish Civil War (although I agree with him on this one). He doesn't fully break with the Democratic Party and his famous talk at Occupy Boston was excellent right up to the end, when it nosedived off a cliff.

The guy's still a hero in my book.

I do not understand leftist animosity against Chomsky.

[Guy Incognito]

somewhere, there is someone who loses sleep at night over the fear of Stalin's silhouette appearing on their bedroom wall across the window when lightning flashes.

The man had one impressive silhouette... But I'm thinking it's the idea of purges and soviet style concentration camps for millions (or, if worldwide billions...) that make folks wary of authoritarianism.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Where else in most high schools today are kids going to learn about imperialism and the nightmare the US has wrecked on the world? Do you know how filled with indoctrination US schools are? The guy has done and is doing an incredible public service.

Okay, so Chomsky's economic analyses is half assed, he's not a Marxist, and he spends too much time refighting the Spanish Civil War (although I agree with him on this one). He doesn't fully break with the Democratic Party ad his famous talk at Occupy Boston was excellent right up to the end, when it nosedived off a cliff.

The guy's still a hero ni my book.

I do not understand leftist animosity against Chomsky.

i like all the backflips you have to do to defend a guy who is a shitty thinker.

anyways, i am sometimes a public school teacher. maybe you reds who want to ***** and whine about indoctrination or whatnot should become public school teachers as well rather than hero-worshipping some ridiculous liberal.

[Deicide]

Have...have you ever read one of Franz's posts?
Yes. Why?


I can assure you it's not nerd rage. I'm pretty sure he's having a merry time fucking with you.

Moaning on the internet isn't fucking with anyone. It's entertaining to watch him rage at Chomsky. The whole ''anti-Chomskyism'' on the left is entertaining.


Also, "primitive" is extremely reactionary, you may want to curb that.

I mentioned that to annoy him. We had a disagreement on a previous thread.

[Franz Fanonipants]

I mentioned that to annoy him. We had a disagreement on a previous thread.

expert trolling itt

[Rusty Shackleford]

new way to troll revleft. post ultra liberal position and watch revlefters eat each other alive over some dead argument from the last century.

[Ostrinski]

I thought NGNMNMHNN or whoever it is was the only one on revleft who really liked Chomsky.

[Franz Fanonipants]

I thought NGNMNMHNN or whoever it is was the only one on revleft who really liked Chomsky.

nah homie a lot of people love the guy

too bad he is a cia mole

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Wasn't Marx a CIA mole? I remember he did say something about the Old Mole coming up to grub or whatever, I'm sure there's some tie in there.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Wasn't Marx a CIA mole? I remember he did say something about the Old Mole coming up to grub or whatever, I'm sure there's some tie in there.

no bro marx was an unmodified homosapien

[Guy Incognito]

Chomsky's work helped me transition to Socialism. He's a gateway progressive who is too afraid of being ridiculed by the university circut to go all the way.

I agree with Franz though, we should be teaching children to mitigate the damage the capitalists do to them in the early years.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

The OP is bullshit, the responses are all bullshit, this entire thread just caused a storm of bullshit. We went from American "fascism" to Noam Chomsky and Stalin shadows. Goodbye posters on this thread, I'm going anywhere else.

[Franz Fanonipants]

The OP is bullshit, the responses are all bullshit, this entire thread just caused a storm of bullshit. We went from American "fascism" to Noam Chomsky and Stalin shadows. Goodbye posters on this thread, I'm going anywhere else.

peep anything communitybeliever posts to it owns

[Deicide]

new way to troll revleft. post ultra liberal position and watch revlefters eat each other alive over some dead argument from the last century.

You only need to mention Noam Chomsky (preferably praise him a bit, if you want the full effect) to get someone raging. As this thread has demonstrated. The mods should obliterate this thread. The OP isn't coming back.

[Franz Fanonipants]

You only need to mention Noam Chomsky (preferably praise him a bit, if you want the full effect) to get someone raging. As this thread has demonstrated.

hey dummy what you are interpreting as rage is contempt

[Deicide]

hey dummy what you are interpreting as rage is contempt

You were fun to laugh at initially. But now, you're as entertaining as the smelly shit that came out my anus this morning. You've served your purpose, you almost annoyed me, settle down now.

[Leftsolidarity]

All I did was read the OP and then this last page. I don't know how we are arguing with each other. Doesn't make too much sense to me. The OP is obviously an ignorant liberal troll with no grasp on reality. I don't see why we are at each other's throats.

[Franz Fanonipants]

You were fun to laugh at initially. But now, you're as entertaining as the smelly shit that came out my anus this morning. You've served your purpose, you almost annoyed me, settle down now.

lawl and this motherfucker's talking about nerdrage

[Deicide]

All I did was read the OP and then this last page. I don't know how we are arguing with each other. Doesn't make too much sense to me. The OP is obviously an ignorant liberal troll with no grasp on reality. I don't see why we are at each other's throats.

Franz has emotional problems, I'm acting as his new councillor, we're currently having a little chat.


lawl and this motherfucker's talking about nerdrage

It's okay bro, pm me.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Franz has emotional problems, I'm acting as his new councillor, we're currently having a little chat.

i think you're still doing trolling wrong

[OnlyCommunistYouKnow]

So much fail.