The USA is moving at a fast speed toward a revolutionary situation

[TrotskistMarx]

Dear friends, my sister and her husband, are facing a hell on earth, they are about to be kicked out of their house, to live in the streets. Just like Thomas Jefferson predicted that americans citizens some day in the future were going to be kicked out of their own houses by capitalists to live in the streets. They are literally unable to pay all their utility services, basic services and needs, and they are about to be kicked out to live in the streets. Many people in America I think are facing that same situation. Here is one of the latest articles written by Alan Woods of http://www.marxist.com about the coming revolutionary situation to USA. Alan Woods claimed that because USA doesn't have a welfare social-democrat populist reformist government like Norway, Ecuador, and other countries that have nationalized free health care, free universities and higher social spending than the USA has, that along might for USA toward a revolutionary situation faster than the countries with higher social spending.

Here is the latest analysis of USA by Alan Woods:

The USA

The USA itself came close to defaulting on its $14.3 trillion public debt in August 2011, when the Obama administration patched up a last-minute deal to raise the debt ceiling. The crisis caused an open and bitter split between the Republicans and Democrats, who represent different layers of the capitalist class.

Until recently, nobody mentioned the huge debts of the USA. But now that has changed, since the rating agency Standard & Poor's announced in August 2011 that it was downgrading the U.S. credit rating to AA+ from its top rank of AAA. Moody's said it was also considering cutting the U.S.’ AAA debt rating, citing the rising possibility that the U.S. could default on its debt obligations.

The U.S. government currently runs a $1.5 trillion budget deficit, requiring it to issue debt in the form of treasury bills, bonds and other securities. The overall public debt of $14.3 trillion is a sharp increase from the $10.6 trillion when Mr. Obama took office in January 2009. Most is held by the public, with the rest held in U.S. government accounts.

This was not the first time that Congress has voted to raise the debt ceiling, giving government access to the cash it needed. It has voted to raise the U.S. debt limit 10 times since 2001. Since May, the U.S. federal government has used spending and accounting adjustments, as well as higher-than-expected tax receipts, to continue operating. U.S. Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke has said a default would cause a “major crisis”. This is an understatement. A U.S. default would be the scenario for Armageddon in the world money markets.

Although both bourgeois parties defend the interests of the capitalist class, they had different ideas on how to go about this defence. The Republican Party wanted deep cuts. Obama was prepared to accept cuts but wanted to appease the working class by increasing some taxes on the rich. But this is anathema to the Republicans in Congress, who were under the pressure of the Tea Party fanatics who want no taxes at all. In the end they were forced to reach a deal by raising the debt ceiling, as they have done previously. But the vote was tied to over $1 trillion in automatic cuts that have now been triggered by the failure of the so-called “Super Committee” to agree on even steeper cuts.

Up until now, the dollar has held up because it is seen as a “safe” haven for money in a time of global financial and monetary instability. But if the U.S. deficit persists, confidence in the value of the dollar will fall, bringing a sell-off of dollars and a sharp fall of its value. The Federal Reserve believes the odds of a U.S. recession in 2012 are more than 50/50. According to Fed economist Travis Berge, “Prudence suggests that the fragile state of the U.S. economy would not easily withstand turbulence coming across the Atlantic. A European sovereign debt default may well sink the United States back into recession.” It is for this reason that the Americans are so concerned about Greece and the future of the euro. Thus far the attention of the money markets has been concentrated on Europe. But a collapse of the euro would immediately throw into relief the real weakness of the dollar.

From Wisconsin to Wall Street

The economic crisis falls with special force on the USA, and will have its most dramatic effect there. There has been very little hiring in the so-called recovery. In fact, there have been fewer jobs created than are needed just to keep up with population growth, let alone to make up for the over 8 million that were lost at the height of the crisis. During the 3rd quarter of 2011, there were 1,226 extended mass layoff events, involving 184,493 worker firings. And that’s considered an improvement on the recent past.

What economic growth there has been has come through an increase in exploitation of the existing workforce. The extraction of both absolute and relative surplus value has increased in the recent period. In other words, fewer workers are working longer and harder for less pay. That leads to GDP growth and more profits. But it does not lead to jobs. The official unemployment rate is 9 percent, but the real figure is likely twice that. Millions are no longer even counted as they are no longer looking for work. There are five unemployed U.S. citizens looking for each job vacancy. That does not include those who have given up the search for employment. 14 percent now rely on food stamps and U.S. poverty is at record levels.

At the same time the Fortune 500 List shows that in 2010, profits for the Fortune 500 grew by 81 percent. These 500 companies and their subsidiaries generated nearly $10.8 trillion in total revenues, up 10.5 percent from 2009. This is out of a total GDP of $14.7 trillion. That means that these 500 companies along generated 73.5 percent of the total U.S. GDP. This is how concentrated wealth is in America. Just the top 10 companies in the Fortune 500 employ over 4 million workers.

All this explains the collapse of support for Obama and the Democrats in the midterm elections. There is growing discontent and it is finding a voice and a practical expression. The mass protests in Wisconsin showed that something is changing in the USA. These were unusual because normally, people just protest for a day and then go home. But inspired by the Egyptian events, the protests grew to massive proportions, with tens of thousands on the streets of Madison, backed by fire-fighters and policemen protesting in solidarity, many of the latter with “cops for labor” inscribed on their backs.

Among the slogans shouted were: “Fight like an Egyptian!” and “From Cairo to Madison, Workers Unite!” In October 2010, he AFL-CIO organised a labour march on Washington DC. This was the first nationwide labour demonstration since 1981. The union leaders wanted to turn it into a pro-Democrat rally but that found no echo among the workers.

Subsequently, the USA was rocked by demonstrations “against corporate greed”. These protests, organized by the spontaneously-created Occupy Wall Street movement, are beginning to cause concern in the ranks of the bourgeoisie. The New York Times Sunday Review carried an editorial (8 October, 2011), which is worth quoting at length:

“At this point, protest is the message: income inequality is grinding down that middle class, increasing the ranks of the poor, and threatening to create a permanent underclass of able, willing but jobless people. On one level, the protesters, most of them young, are giving voice to a generation of lost opportunity. (...)

“The protests, though, are more than a youth uprising. The protesters’ own problems are only one illustration of the ways in which the economy is not working for most Americans. They are exactly right when they say that the financial sector, with regulators and elected officials in collusion, inflated and profited from a credit bubble that burst, costing millions of Americans their jobs, incomes, savings and home equity. As the bad times have endured, Americans have also lost their belief in redress and recovery.

“The initial outrage has been compounded by bailouts and by elected officials’ hunger for campaign cash from Wall Street, a toxic combination that has reaffirmed the economic and political power of banks and bankers, while ordinary Americans suffer.”

It is a myth that the people of the United States are naturally reactionary. Let us recall what the Bible says: “For the first shall be last and the last shall be first.” That is pure dialectics! Precisely because the American workers have been politically more backward than the European workers, they can jump over their heads.

CNBC howled that the protesters “let their freak flags fly,” and are “aligned with Lenin.” Unfortunately, this judgment is a little premature. The protesters—at least most of them—are not yet aligned with Lenin. But they are learning from experience. And a few blows from a policeman’s club teach them more about the precise nature of the capitalist state than a reading of State and Revolution.

While the American workers do not have a mass labour party, they also do not carry the weight of a reformist leadership which uses its authority to hold back the workers, as is the case in Europe and elsewhere. They are fresh and lack the reformist and Stalinist prejudices of the European workers. The American workers can therefore develop very quickly once they start to move.

This can already be seen in the Occupy movement. The brutal police repression with which the movement in Oakland was met also shows how frightened the U.S. ruling class is of the revolutionary potential of such a movement. An indication of what can come was seen in the call for the general strike in response to the brutal police repression, an extremely positive step in the right direction, showing an instinctive awareness on the part of the youth of the need to link up with organised Labour. This was the first time for 70 years that the idea of a city-wide general strike was discussed openly by sections of the trade union movement in the United States.

The Occupy movement is in fact just the tip of the iceberg of a much more widespread current of opposition. The defeat of the anti-trade union law through a referendum in Ohio in November 2011 was another indication of this. The vote of 61 percent to reject the legislation represented a major victory for organized labour, which harnessed its significant resources to help achieve the result. This shows the real mood developing among U.S. workers.

It was Marx and Engels who raised the perspective of a labour party to break the workers from the parties of the bourgeoisie. The creation of such a party will be a historic event in the United States. Even if founded on a reformist programme, it will be a magnet that will immediately attract unionized and non-unionized workers, the youth, blacks, Latinos, women, and the unemployed. Under the conditions of social crisis, an American labour party can move sharply to the left, developing rapidly in the direction of centrism


LINK OF COMPLETE ARTICLE: http://www.marxist.com/world-perspectives-2012-draft-3.htm



.

[NoPasaran1936]

I don't think it is, whilst there may have been a minor rise in class consciousness when Occupy was its peak, I don't think Marxism was dominant in their goals, mainly reformism. The right-wing sections of society are making their push in wake of the U.S Presidential system in November, which could compromise any rise in class consciousness.

No marxist party has enough strength to push Marxist arguments forward to mainstream debate (that's the case in most countries). I just can't see any pre-revolutionary symptons in the U.S, only reactionary.

[marl]

I don't think it is, whilst there may have been a minor rise in class consciousness when Occupy was its peak, I don't think Marxism was dominant in their goals, mainly reformism. The right-wing sections of society are making their push in wake of the U.S Presidential system in November, which could compromise any rise in class consciousness.

No marxist party has enough strength to push Marxist arguments forward to mainstream debate (that's the case in most countries). I just can't see any pre-revolutionary symptons in the U.S, only reactionary.

The peak of Occupy was the beginning of the beginning. Of course the right-wingers are making their push - the system is built for them.

The concept of the vanguard party is completely irrelevant to the current state of the US.

[Ostrinski]

When revolution finally comes to the US, Occupy will be irrelevant.

And of course the vanguard party is relevant in the US.

[ParaRevolutionary]

I have the feeling that a revolution is brewing.

[Agathor]

My commie sense is tingling.

[bricolage]

It's definitely nowhere near a revolutionary situation. It's also pretty demoralising for those that are constantly berated by left groups that revolution is just around the corner when it doesn't actually happen.

[The Douche]

Seriously, Greece has been in a state of somewhat generalized upheaval and periodic revolt for, what, like 10 years now?

Revolution is not just around the corner in the US, despite how much we might want and need it.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

Seriously, Greece has been in a state of somewhat generalized upheaval and periodic revolt for, what, like 10 years now?

Revolution is not just around the corner in the US, despite how much we might want and need it.

Greece is a very different situation. The Greek people know and perceive this destruction as Imperialism, and it is. German capitalists stagnated their workers' wages while the rest did not, bringing industry to Germany. The people of the US are a lot less indoctrinated in some ways than people of Europe and have different experiences. Greece especially has undergone tons of social, political and economic crises in its history, and this one is perceived very much as foreign countries robbing and destroying Greece. The USA is the richest country in the world, it rides on the top, yet, its people live like shit. This crisis in the US (and global Capitalism for that matter) has no way of recovery, other than State intervention what it looks like now since Obama signed the "National Defense Preparedness Executive Order". So, it does look like an objective revolutionary situation is coming, and Occupy movement most likely had a lot of success of getting the main people of America into thinking that there actually are such things as classes, the beginning of class consciousness. My worries are a lot more that when a bad situation comes, the governments will step in and create 'State Capitalism in the interest of Capital' and smash down any revolutionary opposition. It seems like a lot of people feel there is quite a big change about to come, a lot of normal non-political people think this as well.

[Deicide]

The biggest problem with a ''communist'' revolution in the USA.. is that a ridiculous amount of people own guns, the reactionaries (there's a shit load of them) would go berserk.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

Its the fact that the US has been in steady decline and further income separation since decades. I personally see the US as being the most possible place for revolution, most Americans seem quite lost, hopelessness seems to be quite wide and they have a healthy disdain for the State. So when the situation deteriorates even more (in case of a war w/IRan, leading to oil shortage; or in case of further bank crashes and credit freezes), the US is IMO the most favorable for radical leftism. "Ultra-Left-Scum" and hopefully party organisation.

[bcbm]

i think its just as nonsensical to say 'revolution is right around the corner!' as to say 'there is no chance of revolution right now!' we don't know, conditions can change rapidly. paris in april 68 was just another month, or in cairo december 09. hell i think most of us thought occupy was going to fizzle before it started so that gives you an indication of how good our clairvoyance is.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

The biggest problem with a ''communist'' revolution in the USA.. is that a ridiculous amount of people own guns, the reactionaries (there's a shit load of them) would go berserk.

Yeah maybe, but in situations where the rednecks' kids cannot be fed and his boss fires him, and he sees ultra-left organisation building working and communist agitators explaining class differences, most people would listen in such a situation. You underestimate the lack of political zeal of Americans, besides the constant propaganda in the US against socialism, more than half of 18-30 year olds see the word Socialism positive. There is a definite exploding trend for social justice for younger people, so in maybe 10 years there will definitely be quite a lot of fertile ground. Besides, workers are the majority of the population, and normal shopping stores have guns there.

[the last donut of the night]

i wish

[The Douche]

I think some people are kind of exaggerating the conditions in the US.

I live in a semi-rural area, I work in a totally non-essential job, a tattoo shop. While we're not as busy now as we were 5 years ago, we're all still making money.

Don't get me wrong, the economy of the US is in bad shape, and there are lots of people suffering, but its not like there is about to be blood in the streets.


In the US there is not much of a social safety net to be rolled back (which is whats happening in europe, and what is mobilizing lots of people), so the kind of struggle we're facing and the movement we need to build, will be very different from others around the world.

And I don't see how somebody can sit here and say, seriously, that revolution is fast approaching in the US.

[l'Enfermé]

Seriously, Greece has been in a state of somewhat generalized upheaval and periodic revolt for, what, like 10 years now?

Revolution is not just around the corner in the US, despite how much we might want and need it.
Exactly.

[Martin Blank]

And I don't see how somebody can sit here and say, seriously, that revolution is fast approaching in the US.

I would not say that a revolution is imminent, but I am of the opinion that the U.S. is entering an objectively revolutionary period. We are seeing the material conditions emerge: the exploiters no longer willing to rule in the old way, the exploited no longer willing to be ruled in the old way, the polarization and arraying of antagonistic forces along class lines. However, even with these objective conditions in place, it would be a mistake to assume a revolution was "around the corner". There is still the subjective element: the mass proletarian party-movement -- the "association of all revolutionary fractions and factions of the working class", united around a program/platform for revolution.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Maybe a Ron Paul "Revolution". However anything leftist, I seriously doubt.


I believe that a civil war is more likely than an actual revolution. Too many different ideologies floating around at the moment.

[The Douche]

I would not say that a revolution is imminent, but I am of the opinion that the U.S. is entering an objectively revolutionary period. We are seeing the material conditions emerge: the exploiters no longer willing to rule in the old way, the exploited no longer willing to be ruled in the old way, the polarization and arraying of antagonistic forces along class lines. However, even with these objective conditions in place, it would be a mistake to assume a revolution was "around the corner". There is still the subjective element: the mass proletarian party-movement -- the "association of all revolutionary fractions and factions of the working class", united around a program/platform for revolution.

I think that late-stage capitalism is essentially one giant potentially revolutionary period.

I mean, hell in 1968 there wasn't even really a crisis of capital.

I think there are currently developments going on in the US which are hopeful, and possibly signal the resurgence of militant class politics. But I don't think anything is guaranteed, assured, or "fast approaching".

[gorillafuck]

I feel like if there was a revolution now I would be a double agent and operate under the payroll of different sides

fuck you guys

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

I feel like if there was a revolution now I would be a double agent and operate under the payroll of different sides

fuck you guys
What the heck is your problem?

[Mr. Natural]

Damn! I purchased Alan Woods' and Ted Grant's Reason in Revolt yesterday, and today I read this amazingly out-of-touch analysis of the situation in the US by Alan Woods.

Damn, Alan! Damn, damn, damn! How could you write such crap?? There is no radical political awareness in the US; if there's to be a "revolution," it will be to an Orwellian nightmare state.

It is the job of the left to create radical political awareness and groups, and this hasn't happened, either. OWS is exhibit A for this failure. In a near-year of protests against the giant corporations, Wall Street, criminal home foreclosures, etc., etc., the underlying capitalist system has yet to be called into question. This should be unbelievable, but in the US it is my daily deja vu.

IMO, the task of the left as OWS warms up with the spring is to trace all the problems OWS raises to their capitalist roots. Currently, there is no American awareness that capitalism is cashing in life on Earth.

Capitalism is a system, dammit, and its globalization means that it has now enveloped all forms of life on Earth. The US is the imperial center of this system, and acts as its international economic, political, and military bludgeon. The American people have therefore been captured in mind and body to the greatest extent of any peoples, and unknowingly think and act as capitalism's "parts."

This awful situation can be turned around, but not by ignoring its ugly realities. In the meantime, please feel sorry for Mr. Natural and other American comrades who will spend the next half-year watching a political contest between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. We will be suffering deeply.

Alan Woods: Get thee to a political re-education center.

[The Douche]

What the heck is your problem?

My dude is just trying to get paid!

[aty]

No, it is not. It looks better than 10 years ago but.

The revolutionary period in 1917-1920 had been organized for 60 years by Karl Marx and other socialists.
The minor revolutionary period that started in 1968 had been organized since the end of the second world war. Italy is a fine example you can analyze how you build a revolutionary situation. It takes a lot of time and takes many years.

US dont even yet have a strong tradition of workers movement like countries in Europe. But that can also be some kind of advantage today...

Greece have been organizing people for years now. First in 2008 they had an insurrection but it was not even close to a revolutionary situation. Now in 2012 you can maybe call it a revolutionary situation, but the workers are no where near organized for a revolution, yet. If it continues like this maybe in 5 years we can see a start of workers councils forming that will be brutally stopped by the state. And then after some more organizing maybe the workers councils will take control, when they have brought down the state.

[TrotskistMarx]

You are right, I think that the economic system of USA always can find away for people to at least eat and get some basic survival needs in order to prevent a psychological desperation in the masses. All the food banks that exist in the USA and many other things that people do, like garage sales prevent a revolutionary situation. Another thing in America that is a big big impediment for a revolution is the super-strong power of the police, and the monopoly of armed forces, including the FBI, CIA and all that are really things that kill the motivation of americans, not only to protests, to rebel and to riot in the streets. But the fascistic power of the whole national police armed forces of America is so evil, so abusive, so fear-mongering and so terrorizing, that many americans reject the idea of placing a politics bumper sticker in their cars.

The terrorist power of the police armed forces of USA is so strong, that many americans don't even like to support Ron Paul. Because even Ron Paul is too radical, and is considered an "extremist" for the police deparments.

According to a commentator in The Russia Today News Network, he claimed that because the US government and its ruling class are so militarily prepared to crush any revolution. That the only option that he saw for USA is for the left to wait for the economy of USA to default and collapse. And maybe when the whole country is economically destroyed, maybe it will be easier for the majority of americans to support a marxist leftist option as the onlys salvation for all americans


.



It's definitely nowhere near a revolutionary situation. It's also pretty demoralising for those that are constantly berated by left groups that revolution is just around the corner when it doesn't actually happen.

[TrotskistMarx]

Workers-control: I liked something that Alan Woods said in the link of his analysis that i postedhttp://www.marxist.com/world-perspectives-2012-draft-3.htm . Alan Woods claimed that countries that do not have sort of Norway welfare regulated capitalist system with lots of social programs, social spending. Can maybe see a socialist revolution a lot easier, than the social-democrat governments of this world like Norway, and some left-leaning social-democratic governments of South America that do not have a neoliberal-capitalist system, but they still have capitalism, but it is a social-democrat capitalism with higher social programs. What I mean is that in those nations that still have capitalism, but with lots of great social welfare programs like free food, free medicines, free doctor's appointments as part of a nationalized universal health care. Subsidized electricity and basic utility services, very cheap university degrees or totally free university degrees, like in Argentina, where the Buenos Aires University is totally free for Argentinian citizens.

So it is very easy to see that in those countries with a Norway welfare regulated capitalist system, it is harder to see a revolution. As opposed to countries with a Neoliberal Economic Model like Mexico, USA, Colombia etc. Because in nations with a neoliberalism model, there is more suffering, more pain and more poverty in the majority of its citizens. Since there are very little free social programs. So the salaries of workers in neoliberalism economies are really not enough for they sustain themselves. Because in nations with neoliberal models every thing for the basic survival must be bought since every thing is totally privatized.

.


.



Greece is a very different situation. The Greek people know and perceive this destruction as Imperialism, and it is. German capitalists stagnated their workers' wages while the rest did not, bringing industry to Germany. The people of the US are a lot less indoctrinated in some ways than people of Europe and have different experiences. Greece especially has undergone tons of social, political and economic crises in its history, and this one is perceived very much as foreign countries robbing and destroying Greece. The USA is the richest country in the world, it rides on the top, yet, its people live like shit. This crisis in the US (and global Capitalism for that matter) has no way of recovery, other than State intervention what it looks like now since Obama signed the "National Defense Preparedness Executive Order". So, it does look like an objective revolutionary situation is coming, and Occupy movement most likely had a lot of success of getting the main people of America into thinking that there actually are such things as classes, the beginning of class consciousness. My worries are a lot more that when a bad situation comes, the governments will step in and create 'State Capitalism in the interest of Capital' and smash down any revolutionary opposition. It seems like a lot of people feel there is quite a big change about to come, a lot of normal non-political people think this as well.

[bcbm]

It is the job of the left to create radical political awareness and groups, and this hasn't happened, either. OWS is exhibit A for this failure. In a near-year of protests against the giant corporations, Wall Street, criminal home foreclosures, etc., etc., the underlying capitalist system has yet to be called into question. This should be unbelievable

almost a whole year!

[TrotskistMarx]

I think that we are all forgetting one big element in this debate about a revolution in USA. That element which is an impediment for a revolution in the USA are the christian right-wing zionist church denominations all over the country. I think there are lots and lots of christian zionist denominations and church groups that preach a pro-war message, pro free market message, pro-US nationalism and exceptionalism message all over the USA. And millions and millions of american citizens are loyal supporters of the catholic and christian right-wing status quo establishment christianity. And those churches are a lot more favorable to Rick Santorium and Mitt Romney, than to Stewart Alexander, The Green Party or any other third party. Remember that The Republican Party funds right-wing churches as a tool to sell their fascist imperialist pro-war agenda.

So the christian status quo churches I think are a great impediment for a socialist workers class-revolution in America.

PS: Another impediment is the 7 most important capitalist TV news channels of USA: CNN news, FOX news, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, Noticiero Univision and Noticias Telemundo


.


.



Damn! I purchased Alan Woods' and Ted Grant's Reason in Revolt yesterday, and today I read this amazingly out-of-touch analysis of the situation in the US by Alan Woods.

Damn, Alan! Damn, damn, damn! How could you write such crap?? There is no radical political awareness in the US; if there's to be a "revolution," it will be to an Orwellian nightmare state.

It is the job of the left to create radical political awareness and groups, and this hasn't happened, either. OWS is exhibit A for this failure. In a near-year of protests against the giant corporations, Wall Street, criminal home foreclosures, etc., etc., the underlying capitalist system has yet to be called into question. This should be unbelievable, but in the US it is my daily deja vu.

IMO, the task of the left as OWS warms up with the spring is to trace all the problems OWS raises to their capitalist roots. Currently, there is no American awareness that capitalism is cashing in life on Earth.

Capitalism is a system, dammit, and its globalization means that it has now enveloped all forms of life on Earth. The US is the imperial center of this system, and acts as its international economic, political, and military bludgeon. The American people have therefore been captured in mind and body to the greatest extent of any peoples, and unknowingly think and act as capitalism's "parts."

This awful situation can be turned around, but not by ignoring its ugly realities. In the meantime, please feel sorry for Mr. Natural and other American comrades who will spend the next half-year watching a political contest between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. We will be suffering deeply.

Alan Woods: Get thee to a political re-education center.

[ckaihatsu]

I believe that a civil war is more likely than an actual revolution. Too many different ideologies floating around at the moment.


'Civil war' implies a severe split between factions of the ruling class, and typically over the high-level question of exactly what mode of production to use to exploit the working class (slavery vs. free-labor).

It *is* possible that we're seeing such a civil war developing in *Syria*, as the geopolitical epicenter of the crisis of world capital. (And if Syria is the "epicenter" of the world's body politic, then Greece is the "asshole" and the U.S./NATO continues to be the "crown".)

Syria could very well turn out to be the "brick wall" facing the U.S./NATO military juggernaut -- if, given that real economic growth has already withered away, the military machine *also* loses momentum, a severe rift could develop (and is arguably *already* developing) between the financial-political elite and the military leadership. (The reasoning being that capitalism has to revert to strict primitive accumulation, as through neo-colonization, but the military is unable or unwilling to do such "dirty work".)

[Red Rabbit]

I feel like if there was a revolution now I would be a double agent and operate under the payroll of different sides

fuck you guys

Assuming either side would want to employ you? :p

[Mr. Natural]

Yes, bcbm, in a year of major protests with much potential in the US, the left has failed to even bring capitalism into the discussion, as best as I can tell. This is a major failure.

The left has historically failed and is currently failing everywhere. Conscientious comrades must ask: Why?

This conscientious comrade believes it is the rejection of the materialist dialectic or its confinement to method and socio-historical analysis and presentation that has taken the life out of Marxism and revolutionary processes. The materialist dialectic needs to be developed, not ignored, and the new sciences of organization show the way forward.

[The Douche]

Yes, bcbm, in a year of major protests with much potential in the US, the left has failed to even bring capitalism into the discussion, as best as I can tell. This is a major failure.

The left has historically failed and is currently failing everywhere. Conscientious comrades must ask: Why?

This conscientious comrade believes it is the rejection of the materialist dialectic or its confinement to method and socio-historical analysis and presentation that has taken the life out of Marxism and revolutionary processes. The materialist dialectic needs to be developed, not ignored, and the new sciences of organization show the way forward.

Oh man, if only we had sold more newspapers, the revolution would've happened!



Yeah, capitalism was totally never discussed as an issue at any occupation, anywhere, at any time. Fucking nailed it, bro.

[gorillafuck]

Yes, bcbm, in a year of major protests with much potential in the US, the left has failed to even bring capitalism into the discussion, as best as I can tell. This is a major failure.

The left has historically failed and is currently failing everywhere. Conscientious comrades must ask: Why?

This conscientious comrade believes it is the rejection of the materialist dialectic or its confinement to method and socio-historical analysis and presentation that has taken the life out of Marxism and revolutionary processes. The materialist dialectic needs to be developed, not ignored, and the new sciences of organization show the way forward.capitalism has definitely been brought to the discussion at certain occupies. the media just does not show that.

and you definitely do not need to know dialectics to bring capitalism into the discussion.


Assuming either side would want to employ you? :poh, they'd want to employ me.

[TrotskistMarx]

Hi, I think that one of the main reasons of why the left of USA has failed to bring capitalism into discussion and a socialist workers-government as a solution for the economic crisis in USA, Europe and other parts of the world. Is really that the left of USA and in other countries is very economically weak, very poor. And instead the left that is taking over in most countries as an alternative to right-wing parties is really the progressive reformist social-democrat regulated-capitalism political parties such as The Socialist Workers Party of Spain (PSOE), The Socialist Party of Greece, and here in USA The Nation Magazine, The Green Party, Commondreams.org, alternet.org democracynow.org and the reformist-capitalist politicians, thinkers and writters-celebrities of America such as Dennis Kucinich, Naomi Klein, Michael Moore, Norman Solomon, Berny Sanders, Jesse Jackson, Paul Krugman, Amy Goodman, Jeremy Scahill.

While the real left such as the marxist political parties are a lot weaker in media power, in economic power, in political power and literally unknown to the masses in USA and in most countries of the world


.

Yes, bcbm, in a year of major protests with much potential in the US, the left has failed to even bring capitalism into the discussion, as best as I can tell. This is a major failure.

The left has historically failed and is currently failing everywhere. Conscientious comrades must ask: Why?

This conscientious comrade believes it is the rejection of the materialist dialectic or its confinement to method and socio-historical analysis and presentation that has taken the life out of Marxism and revolutionary processes. The materialist dialectic needs to be developed, not ignored, and the new sciences of organization show the way forward.

[Martin Blank]

I think that late-stage capitalism is essentially one giant potentially revolutionary period.

I mean, hell in 1968 there wasn't even really a crisis of capital.

Well, the epoch of imperialism itself is one of wars and revolutions, where capitalist society ambles between a precarious equilibrium and objectively revolutionary periods that emerge roughly once every generation or two. The longest gap has been the most recent, between the end of the last period in 1974 and the opening of this period in 2012. There would likely have been a revolutionary period in the early-to-mid 1990s, but this was staved off by the period of accumulation that opened with the collapse of the USSR and "people's democracies".


I think there are currently developments going on in the US which are hopeful, and possibly signal the resurgence of militant class politics. But I don't think anything is guaranteed, assured, or "fast approaching".

Agreed. There is never a guarantee on such things. No revolution is inevitable.

[bricolage]

Well, the epoch of imperialism itself is one of wars and revolutions, where capitalist society ambles between a precarious equilibrium and objectively revolutionary periods that emerge roughly once every generation or two. The longest gap has been the most recent, between the end of the last period in 1974 and the opening of this period in 2012.
I agree with the point you are making here but if I could argue with the dates I think what began with May 68 in France and the Hot Autumn in Italy (but maybe before) really lasted up to the Winter of Discontent in 79 but more importantly the defeat of the workers movements in, for example, the Iranian revolution of 79, the final late 70s victory of the Italian state through the years of lead, and the Polish strikes of 80. It was only in the mid 80s, symbolised by Thatcherism and Reaganomics that the neoliberal reaction really took hold however prior to then (hence after 74) it was still possible for the working class to change the balance. Also I think we can say the period opened prior to 2012 spearheaded by the movements in Greece.

[~Spectre]

I feel like if there was a revolution now I would be a double agent and operate under the payroll of different sides

fuck you guys

http://blogseriestele.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/sans-titre-1.jpg

[Die Neue Zeit]

I would not say that a revolution is imminent, but I am of the opinion that the U.S. is entering an objectively revolutionary period. We are seeing the material conditions emerge: the exploiters no longer willing to rule in the old way, the exploited no longer willing to be ruled in the old way, the polarization and arraying of antagonistic forces along class lines. However, even with these objective conditions in place, it would be a mistake to assume a revolution was "around the corner". There is still the subjective element: the mass proletarian party-movement -- the "association of all revolutionary fractions and factions of the working class", united around a program/platform for revolution.

Funny I have to agree with cmoney's caution here, comrade (except on the second part). I'm not a big fan of the Marxist usage of the words "objective" and "subjective."

The exploiters may no longer be willing to rule in the old way, but the exploited are still willing to be ruled in the old way (because there's no talk of, for example, wholesale constitutional change, whether through lots of amendments or Bolivarian-style, for starters).

There is growing antagonism between "the authorities" and "the masses," but like you said, there's no mass worker-class party-movement, let alone one commanding majority political support, and there is no breakdown in the internal confidence of the state organs.

At best, this means mere regime change.

[TrotskistMarx]

I was talking with this guy from Facebook about a change in USA and there seems to be a deep-rooted ingrained libertarian thinking in the DNA and subconscience and conscience of most americans that are angry against the traditional political parties (The Democratic Party and The Republican Party) for their inability to lower inflation, to lower food prices, gasoline prices and for wars, corruption and concentration of wealth in a few, and poverty in the majority.

However I suspect that the majority of people in America who have a justified anger against Democrats and Republicans are looking toward liberatarian ideology as a solution for their poverty within their families and loved ones.

Others in USA for decades relied on churches, and others on psychology reading such as self-help books. And others who hate politics, who hate religion what they do is try to find a solution thru "side businesses" or "independent home businesses".

And only a minority of the population of the USA like us here, rely on socialism, marxism as a solution in order to reach self-realization some day when a marxist political party rises to The White House. Because all of us here know that the only way that we and our loved ones and families can get out of poverty in the United States is not with playing lotto, it is not by going to church, it is not with e-bay businesses, or with libertarianism.

But the only real way is by a Marxist Political Party rising to The White House thru elections or thru a revolutionary coup de etat by US Marxist Marines, in coordination and combined with civilian marxists in the streets supporting the marxist coup de etat against the capitalist US government

.


Funny I have to agree with cmoney's caution here, comrade (except on the second part). I'm not a big fan of the Marxist usage of the words "objective" and "subjective."

The exploiters may no longer be willing to rule in the old way, but the exploited are still willing to be ruled in the old way (because there's no talk of, for example, wholesale constitutional change, whether through lots of amendments or Bolivarian-style, for starters).

There is growing antagonism between "the authorities" and "the masses," but like you said, there's no mass worker-class party-movement, let alone one commanding majority political support, and there is no breakdown in the internal confidence of the state organs.

At best, this means mere regime change.

[Martin Blank]

I agree with the point you are making here but if I could argue with the dates I think what began with May 68 in France and the Hot Autumn in Italy (but maybe before) really lasted up to the Winter of Discontent in 79 but more importantly the defeat of the workers movements in, for example, the Iranian revolution of 79, the final late 70s victory of the Italian state through the years of lead, and the Polish strikes of 80. It was only in the mid 80s, symbolised by Thatcherism and Reaganomics that the neoliberal reaction really took hold however prior to then (hence after 74) it was still possible for the working class to change the balance. Also I think we can say the period opened prior to 2012 spearheaded by the movements in Greece.

I understand why you're using those dates, but I tend to think that, internationally, the revolutionary period that opened at the beginning of 1968 ended by December 1974. Economically, the beginning of equilibrium began as the world's capitalist markets began to recover from the dual effects of the 1973-74 stock market crash and 1973-74 oil embargo. Politically, the second Wilson government in Britain, the Ford administration in the U.S. and the Giscard administration in France stabilized the authority of capitalist rule and resolved the "illegitimacy" issues that came from Heath, Nixon and Pompidou. By the late-1970s, the ruling classes were re-taking the offensive. "Shock therapy" imposed by Carter and Volker in the U.S. was the prologue to the rise of Reagan, Mitterand and Thatcher.

The period of 1974 to 1979 was more one of transition and aftershocks, of which the "Winter of Discontent" was only one; the national (U.S.) coal miners' strike in 1977, where mine workers burned copies of President Carter's Taft-Hartley "back-to-work" order (and the tentative agreement worked out by the UMWA union and the BCOA bosses), was another. By the time of Reagan's breaking of the PATCO strike in 1981, reaction was already in full swing. Thatcher's crushing of the NUM strike was almost anti-climactic in an historical sense; for the ruling classes, their ability to re-stabilize and resume the offensive politically and economically in the late-1970s, led by Washington and Wall Street, made the British miners' position untenable.

Incidentally, the "Black Monday" crash of 1987 was supposed to be the prologue to another crisis that began in 1990, much like the market crash of 1964 and the credit crunch of 1966 were preludes to the economic crisis of 1970-1974. But the implosion of the USSR and "people's democracies", and the further opening of China to world capitalism, squelched the entry into a revolutionary period, both politically and economically, as well as the drive to imperialist war that was simmering below the surface. Instead of a crisis and revolutionary period opening, equilibrium was extended through a period of accumulation and the beginning of the technological revolution. The culmination of that period, "globalization", began to see some of the objective elements of a revolutionary period begin to take shape.

The ascent of corporatism as the form of capitalist rule outlived the growing polarization brought by the "anti-globalization" movement and gained "legitimacy" as a by-product of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, further extending the gap between revolutionary periods. However, that political "legitimacy" was filmy and fleeting, as was the speculators' economy that began in the late-1990s. The Panic of 2008 and the credit crunch of 2009-2010 began the march toward a revolutionary period, with Greece being the foreshadow of what was to come -- just as Watts, Newark and Detroit were foreshadows for the revolutionary period that opened in 1968.

The year 2011 was a transitional year. The exploiting and oppressing classes had already made clear that they were unwilling and unable to rule in the old way a decade before, and reinforced that in every successive year with the whittling away of rights that were taken for granted during the previous periods of bourgeois democracy. The introduction of austerity worldwide, beginning with the credit crunch of 2009-10, began the process of the polarization of society along class lines, but it took the combination of the Wisconsin Winter, Arab Spring, Spanish Summer and Occupy Autumn to begin to see the working class decide they were no longer willing or able to be ruled as the exploiting and oppressing classes wished.

By the beginning of this year, you already had some advancing sectors of the working class taking this stance; the process has not yet reached the tipping point, meaning that a sudden redirection by the ruling classes could still stop the revolutionary period from maturing in the coming months and years, and pushing it off for an indeterminate period of time. But this currently appears to be highly unlikely; it would take a return to the 1930s-style "people's fronts" (e.g., the "union sacrée" in France, the New Deal in the U.S., "Clause Four" Labourism in Britain) to be able to put it off for any longer than a few years ... and even then that's no guarantee.

Fuck, this turned out to be a lot longer than I expected. But I guess it's good for people to know why I'm saying what I am.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

No, it is not. It looks better than 10 years ago but.

The revolutionary period in 1917-1920 had been organized for 60 years by Karl Marx and other socialists.
The minor revolutionary period that started in 1968 had been organized since the end of the second world war. Italy is a fine example you can analyze how you build a revolutionary situation. It takes a lot of time and takes many years.

US dont even yet have a strong tradition of workers movement like countries in Europe. But that can also be some kind of advantage today...

Greece have been organizing people for years now. First in 2008 they had an insurrection but it was not even close to a revolutionary situation. Now in 2012 you can maybe call it a revolutionary situation, but the workers are no where near organized for a revolution, yet. If it continues like this maybe in 5 years we can see a start of workers councils forming that will be brutally stopped by the state. And then after some more organizing maybe the workers councils will take control, when they have brought down the state.

There is a hospital in north of Athens in which the workers just called out the soviet. I much more think that there will be the beginning of parallel governments really, things have changed, i don't think our european states are about to violently smash any worker councils, yet. But i suspect by 2020 the euro problem will have to find some kind of answer and until then we could see a massive rise on parliamentary "socialist" left parties.

[Die Neue Zeit]

But the only real way is by a Marxist Political Party rising to The White House thru elections or thru a revolutionary coup de etat by US Marxist Marines, in coordination and combined with civilian marxists in the streets supporting the marxist coup de etat against the capitalist US government

What are you talking about? :confused:


No, it is not. It looks better than 10 years ago but.

The revolutionary period in 1917-1920 had been organized for 60 years by Karl Marx and other socialists.

The revolutionary period began in the late 1900s, not in 1917.


The minor revolutionary period that started in 1968 had been organized since the end of the second world war. Italy is a fine example you can analyze how you build a revolutionary situation. It takes a lot of time and takes many years.

True, but 1968 wasn't the marker for any revolutionary period.


If it continues like this maybe in 5 years we can see a start of workers councils forming that will be brutally stopped by the state. And then after some more organizing maybe the workers councils will take control, when they have brought down the state.

Except that workers councils out of the blue can't sustain the public administration.

[TrotskistMarx]

Dear friends, watch this video I just found about a revolutionary situation. From the marxism 2011 forum


7iGRu3kCoVg






What are you talking about? :confused:



The revolutionary period began in the late 1900s, not in 1917.



True, but 1968 wasn't the marker for any revolutionary period.



Except that workers councils out of the blue can't sustain the public administration.

[Proukunin]

I believe that our Earth as a whole is in economic downfall and has been for many of years, of course that's obvious.

But I'm not certain about revolutionary tension happening in the US for at least 5 years. Now I could be totally wrong and if I am then let's hope that the revolution isn't a Ron Paul revolution hell bent on privatizing everything and repealing the civil rights act.:laugh:

No, but all jokes aside, I really hope the American people can come to an agreement and become class conscious together..especially the working class families in the south where I live. That's the only thing i'm worried about when it comes to talking about a revolution in the States. We'd have patriotic southerners out for our blood.

I think that maybe towards the end of this decade and the beginning of the next, revolutionary situations will arise and the youth along with class conscious people will have an uprising. Hopefully it doesn't suffer the same fate as the Weather Underground or other factions throughout those revolutionary times

[zonmoy]

Sadly I think that the brainwashed masses in the states are more likely to create a fascist takeover than a socialist one.

[ckaihatsu]

And only a minority of the population of the USA like us here, rely on socialism, marxism as a solution in order to reach self-realization some day when a marxist political party rises to The White House. Because all of us here know that the only way that we and our loved ones and families can get out of poverty in the United States is not with playing lotto, it is not by going to church, it is not with e-bay businesses, or with libertarianism.

But the only real way is by a Marxist Political Party rising to The White House thru elections or thru a revolutionary coup de etat by US Marxist Marines, in coordination and combined with civilian marxists in the streets supporting the marxist coup de etat against the capitalist US government


Um, yeah, so can I 'Like' that on Facebook -- ?


x D


Seriously, though, I think the reason why people in the U.S. are more individualistic is because the country *doesn't* have traditionalism to fall back on, even though it tries to. The rest of the world expects "us" to be the ones with our faces to the wind, and it's a certain special privilege and responsibility -- just look at the foreign currency that's historically come flooding in, if you want evidence.

Obviously this goes right to "our" head, and hence, American Exceptionalism, but it's still not excusable.





The exploiters may no longer be willing to rule in the old way, but the exploited are still willing to be ruled in the old way (because there's no talk of, for example, wholesale constitutional change, whether through lots of amendments or Bolivarian-style, for starters).

There is growing antagonism between "the authorities" and "the masses," but like you said, there's no mass worker-class party-movement, let alone one commanding majority political support, and there is no breakdown in the internal confidence of the state organs.





But the only real way is by a Marxist Political Party rising to The White House thru elections or thru a revolutionary coup de etat by US Marxist Marines, in coordination and combined with civilian marxists in the streets supporting the marxist coup de etat against the capitalist US government


I'll venture to say that the U.S. has to be taken out of its privileged role in the world and brought down to everyone else's level. That would go a long way towards fostering a sense of equanimity with the peoples of the world and could open up a consciousness of political wholeness rather than exceptionalist "leadership", even if of the "revolutionary" kind that's meant strictly for the U.S. only.

[Mr. Natural]

Chris (CMONEY), I'm not saying that various left groups haven't attempted to discuss and confront capitalism, but that they have failed and for the ususal reasons. Marxism still lacks a revolutionary organizing theory. This may sound preposterous, but think about it. Historically, Marxism has advocated organizing for socialism against capitalism, but has never had a theory that shows how to organize a revolutionary process or the socialist/communist society to be created. Soviets? What is the pattern of organization of a soviet? Or a commune or a revolutionary party engaging OWS in the US?

The materialist dialectic developed and employed by Marx and Engels understands life and society as the organic, systemic processes that they certainly are. This materialist dialectic brings living organizational relations into Marxism and the analysis of capitalism. Life and society and revolution can thus "come alive" in the ordinary mind, and capitalism's malignant relations can be "seen" and understood.

However, the materialist dialectic in its present form is a klunky, popularly unusable muddle, unless you possess the towering intellect of a Marx or Engels. Here the new science(s) of organizational relations must now be employed if the materialist dialectic is to become a usable revolutionary mental tool.

And such a tool has already been created: I call it "Capra's triangle." This triangle models the organizational relations of the systemic processes of life, community/communism, and revolution.

Talk is cheap, especially nowadays. The radical intellectual realization that capitalism is the root of our problems can only emerge from being consciously immersed in various forms of community organized in the pattern of life in opposition to capitalism. Both hands and heads must be engaged; newspapers and talk are only aids to this process.

I'm not saying comrades aren't trying. I'm stating the obvious: we aren't succeeding. Most important: the organization of life and revolution is now available to we who must organize.

Zeekloid, We most definitely do need to know dialectics (systemic, organizational relations) to "bring capitalism into the discussion." Marx and Engels thought so.

Western Marxism either rejects the materialist dialectic or divorces it from natural relations and confines it to socio-historical analysis and presentation. This absent or lifeless dialectic cannot work, and hasn't.

My red-green, dialectical best.

[ckaihatsu]

Marxism still lacks a revolutionary organizing theory. This may sound preposterous, but think about it. Historically, Marxism has advocated organizing for socialism against capitalism, but has never had a theory that shows how to organize a revolutionary process or the socialist/communist society to be created. Soviets? What is the pattern of organization of a soviet? Or a commune or a revolutionary party engaging OWS in the US?


MN, with all due respect, I think your concern here is valid, and it points to a certain "informalism", shall we say, around a methodology and discipline for socialist organizing.

But an *emphasis* on this borders on formalism and on being academic. I'll remind you, and the reader, that there continues to a ubiquitous *politics* at any given moment, which at times may shift as far left as supporting striking Republic workers in Chicago, or the Occupy movements in the streets, or the protesting Egyptians in Tahrir Square.

All that one really needs to be political are *demands* -- the part you're addressing is about how to *agitate* and *coordinate* for certain demands so that they become synonymous with mass consciousness. I realize we're not being thrown back into our seats by the velocity towards revolution, but at the same time the point should be to empower *broadly* and *not* call for a 'philosopher king' to emerge from our ranks with a definitive organizational theory.

In other words, *relax*, do what you can, add to revolutionary politics and the struggle as you can, bring others up the same way, and remember that we're all on the same planet here.

[TrotskistMarx]

fkEU3JjNARs
One of the latest revolutionary videos from The Boss

One of the main impediments for the creation and formation of a united socialist pole, united leftist front in the USA is the behaviour patterns of most regular americans. The USA is a country of introverted, social-phobics, agoraphobics, avoidant, shy, narcissists, apathetic, unfriendly, pessimists, skeptical, closed-minded, negative, group-narcissists, family-narcissists, very sectarian people. As opposed to the venezuelans, the cubans, the haitians, the people of spain, the italians, argentinians, the chinese, the russians and people from other societies who are extroverted, friendlier, more communicative, more open minded toward strangers, more curious about knew knowledge and are totally different from the social-phobic, avoidant, anti-social, narcissist, negative, pessimist spirit and behaviour patterns of americans. Maybe the excess of nationalism of the manifest destiny ingrained in the brains of americans, the lies of the pledge allegiance, the ultra-patriotism, the extreme love for the american way of life, while hating other ways of lives of other societies

As long as americans continue with their "self defeating personality disorder", this country will never see people supporting any leftist movement. Heck in America don't even support Ron Paul

Living in the USA surrounded by so many negative people with suicidal tendencies, feels like being inside the sinking Titanic, with only a few who would love to be saved from sinking. While the majority is waiting to sink and collapse with the Titanic waiting for their death.

I don;'t know if its the media, the movies, the education system, but there has to be something in the USA that makes people real negative and real suicidal. Because not rebelling, not revolting and not supporting any anti-war option, anti-corporate option and supporting the mainstream politicians such as Obama, Rick Santorium and Mitt Romney in America is being suicidal.

So I think that people have to experience a metamorphosis and radical change from their self-defeating personality disorder, and pessimism toward an active-nihilist, optimist, positive outlook on life. There has to be a spiritual, psychologic revival in USA maybe with the help of progressive artists like Tom Morello, Bruce Springsteen etc.


.



MN, with all due respect, I think your concern here is valid, and it points to a certain "informalism", shall we say, around a methodology and discipline for socialist organizing.

But an *emphasis* on this borders on formalism and on being academic. I'll remind you, and the reader, that there continues to a ubiquitous *politics* at any given moment, which at times may shift as far left as supporting striking Republic workers in Chicago, or the Occupy movements in the streets, or the protesting Egyptians in Tahrir Square.

All that one really needs to be political are *demands* -- the part you're addressing is about how to *agitate* and *coordinate* for certain demands so that they become synonymous with mass consciousness. I realize we're not being thrown back into our seats by the velocity towards revolution, but at the same time the point should be to empower *broadly* and *not* call for a 'philosopher king' to emerge from our ranks with a definitive organizational theory.

In other words, *relax*, do what you can, add to revolutionary politics and the struggle as you can, bring others up the same way, and remember that we're all on the same planet here.

[Drosophila]

I don't think it is, whilst there may have been a minor rise in class consciousness when Occupy was its peak, I don't think Marxism was dominant in their goals, mainly reformism. The right-wing sections of society are making their push in wake of the U.S Presidential system in November, which could compromise any rise in class consciousness.

No marxist party has enough strength to push Marxist arguments forward to mainstream debate (that's the case in most countries). I just can't see any pre-revolutionary symptons in the U.S, only reactionary.

I would hope that a far-right wing takeover of the Executive and Legislative would bring about some sort of revolutionary spirit, hopefully this time more radical than "Occupy".

[ckaihatsu]

Hey, this is fun and everything, and many of your cultural observations may be onto something, as mine may be as well, but I think what's of significantly more significance is the *economic era* that we're living in -- one of a *dependence* on hyped speculative financial bubbles, government corporate handouts, and no societal plan for the future.

If the general population would be more vocal about *this* reality that hangs over all of us we might get somewhere by having a common ground of understanding, at least.

Also -- I meant to include the following with my post at #29, regarding society's 'mode of production' -- please note that there's a universal material hierarchy, based on objective scale of magnitude, for how our social consciousness is determined. Economic factors certainly are more significant than cultural ones.


[1] History, Macro Micro -- Precision

http://postimage.org/image/34mjeutk4/


[22] History, Macro Micro

http://postimage.org/image/35q8b6o84/

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

One of the main impediments for the creation and formation of a united socialist pole, united leftist front in the USA is the behaviour patterns of most regular americans. The USA is a country of introverted, social-phobics, agoraphobics, avoidant, shy, narcissists, apathetic, unfriendly, pessimists, skeptical, closed-minded, negative, group-narcissists, family-narcissists, very sectarian people. As opposed to the venezuelans, the cubans, the haitians, the people of spain, the italians, argentinians, the chinese, the russians and people from other societies who are extroverted, friendlier, more communicative, more open minded toward strangers, more curious about knew knowledge and are totally different from the social-phobic, avoidant, anti-social, narcissist, negative, pessimist spirit and behaviour patterns of americans. Maybe the excess of nationalism of the manifest destiny ingrained in the brains of americans, the lies of the pledge allegiance, the ultra-patriotism, the extreme love for the american way of life, while hating other ways of lives of other societies

As long as americans continue with their "self defeating personality disorder", this country will never see people supporting any leftist movement. Heck in America don't even support Ron Paul

Living in the USA surrounded by so many negative people with suicidal tendencies, feels like being inside the sinking Titanic, with only a few who would love to be saved from sinking. While the majority is waiting to sink and collapse with the Titanic waiting for their death.

You sound like you need new friends.

Look, while you may find the kinds of social etiquette endemic to the USA to be baffling and bizarre at times (I certainly do), I think it's a mistake to make some kind of psycho-analytical leap and declare that to be the barrier to revolution in the US.

I mean seriously, if you think Yanks are introverted and "negative", then what does that make the average Brit, famous among Americans for the amazing depths of their cynicism and world-weariness? We've got self-deprecation down to an artform.


I don;'t know if its the media, the movies, the education system, but there has to be something in the USA that makes people real negative and real suicidal. Because not rebelling, not revolting and not supporting any anti-war option, anti-corporate option and supporting the mainstream politicians such as Obama, Rick Santorium and Mitt Romney in America is being suicidal.

America is the Land of Success, and if you're not succeeding (i.e. earning stacks of cash) then you're either a worthless bum or a Dirty Communist!

Such narratives are shamelessly and blatantly promoted in spite of all the evidence otherwise.


So I think that people have to experience a metamorphosis and radical change from their self-defeating personality disorder, and pessimism toward an active-nihilist, optimist, positive outlook on life. There has to be a spiritual, psychologic revival in USA maybe with the help of progressive artists like Tom Morello, Bruce Springsteen etc.

If there is to be a meaningful change in social attitudes in the US, then it will come about through a combination of changing material conditions and agitation by conscious political agents from mainly the working class, rather than well-remunerated musicians.

At the moment the loudmouth wingnuts have centre stage, and while that serves to shape political discourse for the time being, their rhetoric is quite simply totally at odds with reality and when it comes to the crunch (whether that crunch is a personal economic crisis or something greater), people have at least a vague sense where of where their class interests lie, even if it hasn't yet gone far enough for our liking.

[OHumanista]

I would not say that a revolution is imminent, but I am of the opinion that the U.S. is entering an objectively revolutionary period. We are seeing the material conditions emerge: the exploiters no longer willing to rule in the old way, the exploited no longer willing to be ruled in the old way, the polarization and arraying of antagonistic forces along class lines. However, even with these objective conditions in place, it would be a mistake to assume a revolution was "around the corner". There is still the subjective element: the mass proletarian party-movement -- the "association of all revolutionary fractions and factions of the working class", united around a program/platform for revolution.

This. I think the US is MOVING towards a potentionally revolutionary situation. It's not there yet and I don't know how much time it will take or if it will even get there. All I do know is that some opportunities for change are emerging.

My greatest doubt however lies in the ability of the american left to react to these changing times. It's weak, divided, stagnant and sometimes even borderline lunatic (fringe/cultish groups). It needs to seize the moment and use it to make its positions significant nationwide. Wheter they will able to do it or not is entirely the responsability of its organisations and members. (hard as the task may be)

[Althusser]

The biggest problem with a ''communist'' revolution in the USA.. is that a ridiculous amount of people own guns, the reactionaries (there's a shit load of them) would go berserk.

Oh shit... that would be quite a spectacle. It reminds me of this quote:

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

- Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
(Japanese Navy)

[Althusser]

If someone like Newt Gingrich had his way in US government, public schools would all be privatized in order to keep the poor uneducated and stuck where they are, all unions would be completely crushed, child labor laws along with all government regulation would cease to exist, and we'd have a lot of pissed off people with a lust for corporate blood.

Vote Gingrich 2012 if you want a speedy end to capitalism.:laugh:

[TrotskistMarx]

I think you are right. Alan Woods from http://www.marxist.com have a theory about revolutions. They claim that neoliberal-capitalist systems are closer to see a revolution than Norway welfare regulated capitalist systems. He claimed that in capitalist countries with higher taxes on the rich and higher social welfare programs, its population is not so desperate and can live well within a capitalism with nationalized health care, free universities and subsidized basic services.

While neoliberal capitalist nations that do have social welfare services, but on a lower scale than Norway, Venezuela, Argentina etc. its populations are more desperate, because in neoliberalism economies, every thing is privatized, which automatically makes basic needs and life a lot more expensive. And USA has neoliberal model.

And that's why the pro-privatization, pro-neoliberalism comrades of The Republican Party are more loyal to Karl Marx, than The Democratic Party. And there is something really ironic about Republican’s hatred of Marxism. Years ago Marx predicted capitalism would collapse. The reason - workers would rebel. Why? Karl Marx's theory claimed that with capitalism the wealthy exploit workers by buying their labor and then giving them a smaller and smaller cut of the pie. The rich get richer, the poor poorer and eventually workers have had enough. In the US, what Marx failed to see was the organized labor movement and federal government policies. Both had the goal of fairness for workers, leveling the playing field, and thereby strengthening capitalism. This scenario actually occurred in the early 1900’s as unions became established and the government enacted legislation protecting workers’ rights. Republicans at the time fought it all tooth and nail. It’s as if they wanted to see Marx’s predictions play out!

Today I’m reminded of these early days. The divide between rich and poor in our society has never been greater. And the Republican response - same old same old. That party has little concern for wealth disparity. It opposes tax increases for the rich. It opposes practically any legislative attempt to control the excesses of corporate and banking interests. And, Republicans are hell-bent on destroying organized labor. Marx would say that if this isn’t reversed, prepare for an upheaval.

And the irony- it’s the Democrats who go furthest in deflating Marx’s predictions and protecting capitalism.






If someone like Newt Gingrich had his way in US government, public schools would all be privatized in order to keep the poor uneducated and stuck where they are, all unions would be completely crushed, child labor laws along with all government regulation would cease to exist, and we'd have a lot of pissed off people with a lust for corporate blood.

Vote Gingrich 2012 if you want a speedy end to capitalism.:laugh:

[Die Neue Zeit]

Chris (CMONEY), I'm not saying that various left groups haven't attempted to discuss and confront capitalism, but that they have failed and for the ususal reasons. Marxism still lacks a revolutionary organizing theory. This may sound preposterous, but think about it. Historically, Marxism has advocated organizing for socialism against capitalism, but has never had a theory that shows how to organize a revolutionary process or the socialist/communist society to be created. Soviets? What is the pattern of organization of a soviet? Or a commune or a revolutionary party engaging OWS in the US?

You're so wrong here. At least one strand of Marxism already has a revolutionary organizing theory and, tied to this, a revolutionary strategy. It is having a slow revival since the mid 2000s, but it is there: adapting to modern circumstances none other than raw Orthodox Marxism.

[ABMarx]

I don't think it is, whilst there may have been a minor rise in class consciousness when Occupy was its peak, I don't think Marxism was dominant in their goals, mainly reformism. The right-wing sections of society are making their push in wake of the U.S Presidential system in November, which could compromise any rise in class consciousness.

No marxist party has enough strength to push Marxist arguments forward to mainstream debate (that's the case in most countries). I just can't see any pre-revolutionary symptons in the U.S, only reactionary.

I totally agree with this; it's reactionary, not revolutionary; and unfortunately it won't last. The Occupy-movement, although it's still going, has significantly died down. The numbers just aren't there. Too bad, really.

[ckaihatsu]

There's hardly any broad-based enthusiasm for electoral politics this time around -- people have obviously become disaffected by Obama's numerous about-faces since his presidential campaign, and I think they know by now that the Republicans would definitely not be any better.

I'll add that -- just from casual glances at the news -- there's seems to be even more of a dearth of issues than ever before. The electoral races so far have taken on a contest-only quality that might be compared to the showcasing of pre-chosen bureaucrats for the politburo, or something like that....

[eyeheartlenin]

Damn! I purchased Alan Woods' and Ted Grant's Reason in Revolt yesterday, and today I read this amazingly out-of-touch analysis of the situation in the US by Alan Woods.

I believe it was CWI, a rival Grantist group, that published an extensive refutation of Reason in Revolt, which may still be available, demonstrating that Woods' and Grant's book was full of junk "science." EDIT: The book is, "Science, Marxism and the Big Bang: A Critical Review of 'Reason in Revolt,'" by Peter Mason, available at amazon.com, for about $6 used.


Damn, Alan! Damn, damn, damn! How could you write such crap?? There is no radical political awareness in the US; if there's to be a "revolution," it will be to an Orwellian nightmare state ....

Capitalism is a system, dammit, and its globalization means that it has now enveloped all forms of life on Earth. The US is the imperial center of this system, and acts as its international economic, political, and military bludgeon. The American people have therefore been captured in mind and body to the greatest extent of any peoples, and unknowingly think and act as capitalism's "parts."

This awful situation can be turned around, but not by ignoring its ugly realities....

The last two sentences of the quote (from "The American people"... to ..."its ugly realities") immediately above are eloquent statements of the facts as I see them. If Woods really wrote that the US is headed towards a "revolutionary situation," that statement is sheer lunacy and just demonstrates Woods' total ignorance of the US, among other things.

[Raó i força]

I take from Kerbo the notion that because of deep roots of individualism it is so dificult to carry on a revolution in USA, it might keep high levels of inequality for a long time without political class struggle, but it could degenerate in vandalism as we've seen in London and Paris suburbs.

I don't stick myself on that basic mecanicism which tells that objective conditions are always the prelude of subjective consciousness. Because of that reason and many others I think that the global revolution that is gonna start soon will be initially held in periferic and semiperiferic (or the periferia of the center) countries, such as Greece, Chile... because of historical political inestability, a very conservative bourgeoise (rentist, financial... not productive), and not perspectives of reform (high concentration of capital and political power, dualization of society).

I will end my message telling you that tomorrow a general strike is taking place in the spanish state, i don't know if you really know the situation here, we're 25% unemployed (40-50% between we the young people), and the last three years have been so difficult, first with a socialdemocratic party compliant to the markets and now with one of the most autoritarian right of Europe. Last year we got our own "Occupy wall street" movement but now it is quite weak but its given us hope, even being pretty postmodern and keeping that absurd mantras of "peace" and all that bullshit. As a young what I see the most problematic is the neoliberal thinking which has penetrated deep in the minds of my generation. The problem is mainly that of the class-consciousness, I think it may be also the case for the USA.

PS: Excuse my english. We're working on it. Waiting your responds.

[9]

Anyone who thinks the USA is anywhere even remotely close to a revolutionary situation is, in all likelihood, a full-blown mental case.

[Mr. Natural]

Comrades, I'm finding this to be a worthwhile thread with many posters, and hope we will keep it on its current comradely, valuable track.

ckaihatsu, Good to run into you again, and not in a head-on collision. As for the organization of life and society I constantly promote, it's not very formalistic or academic at all. All of life (thus healthy societies) has the same pattern of organization--the pattern by which matter self-organizes into a living system and the life process on Earth. This pattern has existed for four billion years! It's real!

And we really need to get to know and use this universal pattern of organization of matter/people (people are matter). Thus a healthy soviet, commune, or Marxist political party would have the same underlying pattern of organization but different forms and practices. A soviet would also have the same pattern of organization as my dog or one of its fleas.

You want me to relax?? C'mon, ckaihatsu, I'm a red-green revolutionary and nothing is happening!!

DNZ, If Orthodox Marxism already has a viable revolutionary organizing theory, why is the left so fragmented and disorganized?

My red-green best.

[ckaihatsu]

ckaihatsu, Good to run into you again,


Cordial greetings once again, MN.





and not in a head-on collision.


No, never, and only tangential at worst.





As for the organization of life and society I constantly promote, it's not very formalistic or academic at all.


As long as it's not fetishized -- that's my only concern here. (That would be an over-inclination towards 'pattern', at the expense of 'material' and 'process', according to your triangular framework.)





All of life (thus healthy societies) has the same pattern of organization--the pattern by which matter self-organizes into a living system and the life process on Earth. This pattern has existed for four billion years! It's real!




And we really need to get to know and use this universal pattern of organization of matter/people (people are matter). Thus a healthy soviet, commune, or Marxist political party would have the same underlying pattern of organization but different forms and practices. A soviet would also have the same pattern of organization as my dog or one of its fleas.


Great -- I don't disagree, but not everyone will readily see the parallels in what you're saying. Not to be dismissive, either, but myself and others have critiqued you elsewhere on RevLeft for being on the vague side regarding specifics.





You want me to relax?? C'mon, ckaihatsu, I'm a red-green revolutionary and nothing is happening!!


Fair 'nuff, MN -- I appreciate and am inspired by your enthusiasm.

[Die Neue Zeit]

DNZ, If Orthodox Marxism already has a viable revolutionary organizing theory, why is the left so fragmented and disorganized?

My red-green best.

Orthodox Marxism places less premium on "theory" than on strategy. Part of the answer to your question lies in the fact that the wrong strategic line is pursued. Another part of the answer lies in how these organizations are organized: the wrong way, tailored to the wrong form of organization, thus not conducive to growing a worker-class movement.

[TrotskistMarx]

Indeed, i judge societies not only by economic objective conditions and not only because of the mechanicist historical materialist theories. But also by the behaviour patterns of that society. I've been in other countries, and lived in other countries outside of the USA, and the people of the big cities of other countries are a lot friendlier, more communicative, more open minded, more outgoing and have higher levels of hospitality than average americans.

Here in USA even celebrities get depressed, the USA has been for a long time a very negative society, americans are very very skeptic. For example the behaviour patterns of most venezuelans, argentinians, spain citizens, cubans are a lot more open minded, less sectarian, and more open to new ideas and to different races and nationalities than americans.

The levels of friendliness, solidarity, unity, cooperativism are higher in the behaviour latin americans than in the behaviour of US citizens. Americans are just too anti-social, too social phobics, too group-narcissists, too sectarian, too unfriendly and even too evil for most americans to open their hearts and minds to socialism and to socialist parties.

Americans are so weird, so strange, so eccentrics, so skeptical, so closed-minded, so nihilists, so self-destructive and so full of negativism, that according to polls people in America are still supporting Obama, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingritch, Rick Santorium, a lot more than third parties and anti-war options like Kucinich and Ron Paul. This country is so psychologically and emotionally doomed. Something has to give !!







I take from Kerbo the notion that because of deep roots of individualism it is so dificult to carry on a revolution in USA, it might keep high levels of inequality for a long time without political class struggle, but it could degenerate in vandalism as we've seen in London and Paris suburbs.

I don't stick myself on that basic mecanicism which tells that objective conditions are always the prelude of subjective consciousness. Because of that reason and many others I think that the global revolution that is gonna start soon will be initially held in periferic and semiperiferic (or the periferia of the center) countries, such as Greece, Chile... because of historical political inestability, a very conservative bourgeoise (rentist, financial... not productive), and not perspectives of reform (high concentration of capital and political power, dualization of society).

I will end my message telling you that tomorrow a general strike is taking place in the spanish state, i don't know if you really know the situation here, we're 25% unemployed (40-50% between we the young people), and the last three years have been so difficult, first with a socialdemocratic party compliant to the markets and now with one of the most autoritarian right of Europe. Last year we got our own "Occupy wall street" movement but now it is quite weak but its given us hope, even being pretty postmodern and keeping that absurd mantras of "peace" and all that bullshit. As a young what I see the most problematic is the neoliberal thinking which has penetrated deep in the minds of my generation. The problem is mainly that of the class-consciousness, I think it may be also the case for the USA.

PS: Excuse my english. We're working on it. Waiting your responds.

[Mr. Natural]

ckaihatsu, Thanks for your comments. You may understand what I'm trying to present--the triangle especially--better than anyone else on these sites. I don't know that anyone else even looked at the triangle, which I presented in a somewhat different way at PinkMarx on Dec 29 in the "Dialectics as Natural Organization" thread.

Life has a universal pattern of organization, and life is revolutionary: bifurcation points, phase transitions, and the phenomenon of emergence. Understand the life pattern and, say, bifurcations as revolutions, and you are an aware red-green, materialist and dialectical, highly capable Marxist revolutionary.

The triangle's three elements--Pattern, Matter, and Process--are reductively extracted from what is an inseparable unity of life's pattern of organization. The Pattern is that of a network, Matter is physical stuff, and Process is a living system's life activity--the living relations that keep it going. These three elements are inseparable, as noted, and being/doing are united in a living system.

So, if there is "an overinclination towards 'pattern' at the expense of 'matter' and 'process'," as you suggested, then I have misrepresented or you have misunderstood.

Yes, everyone finds me "vague," but I'm presenting the organizational relations that give rise to life's living details. The triangle works by enabling persons to recognize life's pattern and organize their minds in life's pattern. Those persons can then survey their situation and, in company with others, re-design their lives in the pattern of life and community/communism. All living systems are self-organizing, and the triangle enables persons to self-organize and create the details of their lives.

It is easy to provide the details of a living form of community created with the triangle: just arrange the people and the materials deemed necessary in a network pattern that integrates them with their activity. It has been awhile since I mentioned this, but a formal brainstorming session models the sort of mental revolutionary organizing process the triangle offers.

So, let's say we have a dozen comrades who want bring the question of capitalism to the fore at Oakland OWS. We meet, brainstorm, decide on a project, and comrades arrange themselves and whatever materials they need in an "internal" network that is seamlessly integrated with their "external" project. Thus we might decide to present a series of skits at OWS events that reveal one by one the capitalist roots of the various evils OWS is protesting. Cops, media, corporations, government, subprime mortgages, etc., would all get their skit, and these skits would increasingly reveal capitalism as The System from hell.

So we will have self-organized ourselves and our stuff into an internal/external living system, and that is the pattern of life on Earth. As for the actual details of the skits, the dialogue, etc., I'll leave them up to your imagination and the comrades.

Hmmm. In reading the above, it seems a bit vague, doesn't it? Well, my poor presentation aside, life's organization appears as vague to human consciousness, while the things that emerge from organization appear as precise. Hmmm.

My precise red-green best to you.

[ckaihatsu]

ckaihatsu, Thanks for your comments. You may understand what I'm trying to present--the triangle especially--better than anyone else on these sites. I don't know that anyone else even looked at the triangle, which I presented in a somewhat different way at PinkMarx on Dec 29 in the "Dialectics as Natural Organization" thread.


Do you have a link to this thread?





Life has a universal pattern of organization, and life is revolutionary: bifurcation points, phase transitions, and the phenomenon of emergence. Understand the life pattern and, say, bifurcations as revolutions, and you are an aware red-green, materialist and dialectical, highly capable Marxist revolutionary.


Yes, I agree that an understanding of dialectics and complex dynamics is a crucial part of a contemporary scientific base of knowledge these days, and it encompasses concepts that revolutionaries deal with in political matters as well.





The triangle's three elements--Pattern, Matter, and Process--are reductively extracted from what is an inseparable unity of life's pattern of organization. The Pattern is that of a network, Matter is physical stuff, and Process is a living system's life activity--the living relations that keep it going. These three elements are inseparable, as noted, and being/doing are united in a living system.


Yes, I do appreciate the value and significance of frameworks like these, including this one, and I've developed some of my own.

My degree and background is in education, so you're "speaking my language" with all-encompassing concepts like these.

These frameworks have *sociological* value in that they are able to generalize to abstraction what is valid for any of us.

You may recall this post from February:





[D]ialectics at the personal (or organizational) level -- basically two nested triangles that each serve as triple-pairings of dialectical pairs, on the rectilinear plane of scale vs. time.


[conclusions <==> policy, policy <==> practice, and conclusions <==> practice]


-- circumscribed by --


[history <==> theory, theory <==> plan, and history <==> plan]




http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2355124&postcount=14


I'll offer that your triangle,





The Pattern is that of a network, Matter is physical stuff, and Process is a living system's life activity


may be structured and described in like terms, as:


[Pattern <==> Matter, Matter <==> Process, Process <==> Pattern]





So, if there is "an overinclination towards 'pattern' at the expense of 'matter' and 'process'," as you suggested, then I have misrepresented or you have misunderstood.


Well, in the triple pairings of dialetical pairs that I have suggested for your elemental "nodes" it *would* be possible to over-emphasize one at the expense of the other two, which is what I've noted from your coverage of the topic.





Yes, everyone finds me "vague," but I'm presenting the organizational relations that give rise to life's living details. The triangle works by enabling persons to recognize life's pattern and organize their minds in life's pattern. Those persons can then survey their situation and, in company with others, re-design their lives in the pattern of life and community/communism. All living systems are self-organizing, and the triangle enables persons to self-organize and create the details of their lives.


Yes. You may also want to include that this is as an "antidote" to the prevailing structure of social *hierarchy* oriented in the direction of profit-based valuations.





It is easy to provide the details of a living form of community created with the triangle: just arrange the people and the materials deemed necessary in a network pattern that integrates them with their activity. It has been awhile since I mentioned this, but a formal brainstorming session models the sort of mental revolutionary organizing process the triangle offers.




So, let's say we have a dozen comrades who want bring the question of capitalism to the fore at Oakland OWS. We meet, brainstorm, decide on a project, and comrades arrange themselves and whatever materials they need in an "internal" network that is seamlessly integrated with their "external" project. Thus we might decide to present a series of skits at OWS events that reveal one by one the capitalist roots of the various evils OWS is protesting. Cops, media, corporations, government, subprime mortgages, etc., would all get their skit, and these skits would increasingly reveal capitalism as The System from hell.




So we will have self-organized ourselves and our stuff into an internal/external living system, and that is the pattern of life on Earth. As for the actual details of the skits, the dialogue, etc., I'll leave them up to your imagination and the comrades.

Hmmm. In reading the above, it seems a bit vague, doesn't it? Well, my poor presentation aside, life's organization appears as vague to human consciousness, while the things that emerge from organization appear as precise. Hmmm.


If you don't mind my stepping into the teacher role here, I'll further suggest that you devise one or more concrete *examples* to go with this part so that it may be better understood -- the "personal situation" could be one, and the "OWS skit" could be another, etc.

I don't know how you may want to ultimately present all of this, but what comes to my mind would be a graphic or info sheet, like my other works.





My precise red-green best to you.


All the best, MN.


Consciousness, A Material Definition

http://postimage.org/image/35t4i1jc4/

[x359594]

A very interesting discussion.

I was in Honolulu, Hawai'i on the first Vietnam War Moratorium Day on October 15, 1969. City and state workers went on strike, the dock workers were on strike, the University of Hawai'i was shut down. On the mainland millions observed Moratorium Day. I thought then that this was the beginning of a revolution, and the next step was for the armed forces to refuse to continue fighting. It never happened, and there was no revolution. Instead, after a second Moratorium Day on November 15, with fewer participants, the government stepped up repressive measures culminating in May 1970 with the killings at Kent State and Jackson State following the US invasion of Cambodia.

In the US economic hardship does not necessarily lay the groundwork for revolution. If that were true there would have been a revolution in 1931 after two years of the Great Depression, this at a time when socialism was seen by many as a real alternative to capitalism.

It seems to me that a revolution in the US today would have to be tied to the collapse of the "Empire of Bases," the 800 plus offshore forward positions of the US military. For example, if the people of Okinawa over ran the Futenma Air Force Base and closed it down, then we'd see rebellions all over Asia where these bases are hated by the local populations. Only imperial collapse will lead to revolution in the US in my view.

[TrotskistMarx]

Cool philosophical insight and comments about the evolutionary, revolutionary and will to power changes in all living species and in the whole world. Even the great philosopher F. Nietzsche in his book "Human all Too Human" wrote that some day humans will be so smart, that states, governments will not longer be possible. He claimed that some day there won't be governments, because humans will reach a smarter state. I think that will be in the communist-anarchist government-free stage. After the workers-dictatorship-socialism stage. Indeed things keep changing however it seems to me that the excess of movies, entertainments, hobbies, telenovelas in Mexico, talk shows and all that are like the heavy rock that Sisifus was punished to carry on an upward hill mountain by the greek gods, because the excess of mind-manipulative effect of the media in this world is a big impediment against the ideology of socialism in the whole world


.




ckaihatsu, Thanks for your comments. You may understand what I'm trying to present--the triangle especially--better than anyone else on these sites. I don't know that anyone else even looked at the triangle, which I presented in a somewhat different way at PinkMarx on Dec 29 in the "Dialectics as Natural Organization" thread.

Life has a universal pattern of organization, and life is revolutionary: bifurcation points, phase transitions, and the phenomenon of emergence. Understand the life pattern and, say, bifurcations as revolutions, and you are an aware red-green, materialist and dialectical, highly capable Marxist revolutionary.

The triangle's three elements--Pattern, Matter, and Process--are reductively extracted from what is an inseparable unity of life's pattern of organization. The Pattern is that of a network, Matter is physical stuff, and Process is a living system's life activity--the living relations that keep it going. These three elements are inseparable, as noted, and being/doing are united in a living system.

So, if there is "an overinclination towards 'pattern' at the expense of 'matter' and 'process'," as you suggested, then I have misrepresented or you have misunderstood.

Yes, everyone finds me "vague," but I'm presenting the organizational relations that give rise to life's living details. The triangle works by enabling persons to recognize life's pattern and organize their minds in life's pattern. Those persons can then survey their situation and, in company with others, re-design their lives in the pattern of life and community/communism. All living systems are self-organizing, and the triangle enables persons to self-organize and create the details of their lives.

It is easy to provide the details of a living form of community created with the triangle: just arrange the people and the materials deemed necessary in a network pattern that integrates them with their activity. It has been awhile since I mentioned this, but a formal brainstorming session models the sort of mental revolutionary organizing process the triangle offers.

So, let's say we have a dozen comrades who want bring the question of capitalism to the fore at Oakland OWS. We meet, brainstorm, decide on a project, and comrades arrange themselves and whatever materials they need in an "internal" network that is seamlessly integrated with their "external" project. Thus we might decide to present a series of skits at OWS events that reveal one by one the capitalist roots of the various evils OWS is protesting. Cops, media, corporations, government, subprime mortgages, etc., would all get their skit, and these skits would increasingly reveal capitalism as The System from hell.

So we will have self-organized ourselves and our stuff into an internal/external living system, and that is the pattern of life on Earth. As for the actual details of the skits, the dialogue, etc., I'll leave them up to your imagination and the comrades.

Hmmm. In reading the above, it seems a bit vague, doesn't it? Well, my poor presentation aside, life's organization appears as vague to human consciousness, while the things that emerge from organization appear as precise. Hmmm.

My precise red-green best to you.

[TrotskistMarx]

You are right, in fact some times the oppressed poor class of rich developed countries are a lot more revolutionary than the oppressed poor class of poor smaller countries. It seems to me that maybe the more knowledge people have the more revolutionary and the higher living standards the more revolutionary, (less conformists) and the more they complain. As opposed to the poor oppressed class of poorer countries that have lower standard of living, and less knowledge and all that leads to more conformism and higher happiness levels. That's why some leftist writters have claimed that socialism will be realized first in developed capitalist nations, and then spread to poorer nations.

PS: By the way A Marxist Professor told me that the latin american social-democrat populist reformist state-capitalist nations like Cuba, Venezuela, Uruguay, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Dominican Republican, and Paraguay are really "anomalies" like he labeled them. He claimed that the whole world is still in the grip and economic control of the right-wing class.

.





A very interesting discussion.

I was in Honolulu, Hawai'i on the first Vietnam War Moratorium Day on October 15, 1969. City and state workers went on strike, the dock workers were on strike, the University of Hawai'i was shut down. On the mainland millions observed Moratorium Day. I thought then that this was the beginning of a revolution, and the next step was for the armed forces to refuse to continue fighting. It never happened, and there was no revolution. Instead, after a second Moratorium Day on November 15, with fewer participants, the government stepped up repressive measures culminating in May 1970 with the killings at Kent State and Jackson State following the US invasion of Cambodia.

In the US economic hardship does not necessarily lay the groundwork for revolution. If that were true there would have been a revolution in 1931 after two years of the Great Depression, this at a time when socialism was seen by many as a real alternative to capitalism.

It seems to me that a revolution in the US today would have to be tied to the collapse of the "Empire of Bases," the 800 plus offshore forward positions of the US military. For example, if the people of Okinawa over ran the Futenma Air Force Base and closed it down, then we'd see rebellions all over Asia where these bases are hated by the local populations. Only imperial collapse will lead to revolution in the US in my view.

[ckaihatsu]

---





[S]ome times the oppressed poor class of rich developed countries are a lot more revolutionary than the oppressed poor class of poor smaller countries. It seems to me that maybe the more knowledge people have the more revolutionary and the higher living standards the more revolutionary, (less conformists) and the more they complain. As opposed to the poor oppressed class of poorer countries that have lower standard of living, and less knowledge and all that leads to more conformism and higher happiness levels. That's why some leftist writters have claimed that socialism will be realized first in developed capitalist nations, and then spread to poorer nations.





The majority of people spoil their lives by an unhealthy and exaggerated altruism—are forced, indeed, so to spoil them. They find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this. The emotions of man are stirred more quickly than man’s intelligence; and, as I pointed out some time ago in an article on the function of criticism, it is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering than it is to have sympathy with thought. Accordingly, with admirable, though misdirected intentions, they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are part of the disease.




[O]n the other hand, there are a great many people who, having no private property of their own, and being always on the brink of sheer starvation, are compelled to do the work of beasts of burden, to do work that is quite uncongenial to them, and to which they are forced by the peremptory, unreasonable, degrading Tyranny of want. These are the poor, and amongst them there is no grace of manner, or charm of speech, or civilisation, or culture, or refinement in pleasures, or joy of life. From their collective force Humanity gains much in material prosperity. But it is only the material result that it gains, and the man who is poor is in himself absolutely of no importance. He is merely the infinitesimal atom of a force that, so far from regarding him, crushes him: indeed, prefers him crushed, as in that case he is far more obedient.




The Soul of Man Under Socialism, by Oscar Wilde

http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext97/slman10h.htm

[seventeethdecember2016]

The biggest problem with a ''communist'' revolution in the USA.. is that a ridiculous amount of people own guns, the reactionaries (there's a shit load of them) would go berserk.
Although I rarely agree with Deicide, it is most likely that the US would go in a Reactionary path than a Revolutionary path.
Just look at what the Tea Party and the Conservatives have been doing to any Progressive policies. If Obamacare, as they call it, gets overturned, we'll catch a glimpse of what forces we'd be up against.
In my opinion, let the Liberals deal with it, and if they successfully place favorable conditions for the Revolution, we'll then start our rise.

Besides, if the Revolution started now, we'd be mowed down with bullets.

[ckaihatsu]

The biggest problem with a ''communist'' revolution in the USA.. is that a ridiculous amount of people own guns, the reactionaries (there's a shit load of them) would go berserk.




Although I rarely agree with Deicide, it is most likely that the US would go in a Reactionary path than a Revolutionary path.
Just look at what the Tea Party and the Conservatives have been doing to any Progressive policies. If Obamacare, as they call it, gets overturned, we'll catch a glimpse of what forces we'd be up against.
In my opinion, let the Liberals deal with it, and if they successfully place favorable conditions for the Revolution, we'll then start our rise.

Besides, if the Revolution started now, we'd be mowed down with bullets.


In light of the recent history of Egypt, Libya, and now Syria, it's easier than ever to equate 'revolution' with 'armed rebellion', but a genuinely communist-type revolution would not be focused on *militarism*, but rather on *class consciousness* and *control of the workplace* as its politics.

This means the locus of struggle would not be a geographical / peripheral *neighborhood* like Homms, but rather mass-organized mass struggle around major industrial *points of production* like factories.

[Luís Henrique]

i think its just as nonsensical to say 'revolution is right around the corner!' as to say 'there is no chance of revolution right now!' we don't know, conditions can change rapidly. paris in april 68 was just another month, or in cairo december 09. hell i think most of us thought occupy was going to fizzle before it started so that gives you an indication of how good our clairvoyance is.

This.

At the moment, there are no signs of an incoming revolution in the United States. Or there are, but we can't see or understand them yet.

The situation however is extremely fluid, because the rulling class, in the United States as elsewhere, seems unable to understand the current crisis, and much less of finding solutions for it (Lenin said that the capitalists can buy themselves out from any crisis, as long as they can make the working class pay for it. Problem is, they are sure making us pay their bailout - but this doesn't seem to be helping them put an end to the crisis).

This shouldn't be understood as a mere stating of the imprevisibility of all things social. Five years ago, it would be safe to say that there was no actual possibility of upheavel in the United States in any foreseeable future. Now, as opposed to then, this is no longer safe. The situation is unstable.

(What forms, and even what content, any explosion of popular wrath in the US may take, is a different issue. Other things remaining unchanged, it is quite possible that revolt against the capitalist reality of the United States takes the ideological form of a "pro-capitalist" rebellion against the "socialism" of big business and corporations...)

Luís Henrique

[ckaihatsu]

(What forms, and even what content, any explosion of popular wrath in the US may take, is a different issue. Other things remaining unchanged, it is quite possible that revolt against the capitalist reality of the United States takes the ideological form of a "pro-capitalist" rebellion against the "socialism" of big business and corporations...)


Could this possibly mean the petty-bourgeoisie "casting" a "deciding vote" on the balance between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat -- ?

[Mr. Natural]

ckaihatsu, Others, I can't post links or do anything other than post text, so if you want to engage that triangle at PinkMarx, you'll have to go on site on the date and in the thread I mentioned. Miguel recently attempted to intro his systematic, FEQ dialectic there and got no response, and Capra's triangle was ignored, too. I'm about to join a computer class so I can communicate better.

I looked at your links and your triple-paired dialectic, and believe the simple triangle I envision but cannot draw serves better. It just needs to be emphasized that its elements are reductively extracted from the inseparable unity of life's universal pattern of organization.

I appreciate your recommendation of more examples. I need to hear such stuff, for I struggle with determining the best means of engaging others. I need to find out what others can see and hear, for the triangle's emphasis on deep organization apparently enters a "paradigm shift zone" for human consciousness. It enters the "vague and slippery" zone of living organizational relations, while human perception grabs ahold of "things."

I am now almost convinced that looking at deep organization, especially a universal pattern of organization of the systems of life, constitutes a mental barrier/paradigm shift in consciousness for all. I don't know that such a matter has even been approached before, but the science underlying this project is real.

Are you familiar with Alexander Bogdanov, ckaihatsu? Others? He was a Machist-Bolshevik who proposed a universal science of organization, but I don't believe he envisioned a universal pattern for this organization. Capra discusses Bogdanov at length, and the triangle is this universal organizational pattern.

If the above is true, then we can develop a popularly usable materialist dialectic right here at Revleft. All it requires is that the science is correct and that there are some comrades who will engage with open but critical minds.

TrotskistMarx, The Marxist professor is correct. Capitalism's globalization--its systematic envelopment of life on earth--currently rules South America's various "progressive" regimes, too. We gotta do something about this.

My red-green best.

[TrotskistMarx]

WOW !! these comments that you wrote are very good and right on the money, very relevant to the poor oppressed class of USA and other countries. About how people in the poor classes are living in a sort of learned-hopelessness, learned-helplessness, and they are emotionally and psychologically and even physically (because of an excess of physical tiredness) in the middle of what economists call "The viscious circle of poverty". You see the average poor people in America and how they let themselves get real ugly, real obese, and how grungy, and careless they dress. I read an article in http://www.financialsense.com talking about how people are even going out to supermarkets to do their groceries in dirty pajamas. The writter said: "What the hell is going on in America?"

And physical image, physical looks is not elitism at all. Maybe the media, education, churches, and the system in USA has been mind-manipulating people into the idea that being important, having a great physicallity, a great healthy image and healthy symmetry is *elitist* and *anti-democratic*. There is a wrong notion of what really equality means in America, and what democratic means, which is really economic democracy. People in USA and in many other countries have this feudalist, monarchist, oligarchic thinking that the only ones who deserve to look great, to be great, to live a great life are Obama, Donald Trump, Jennifer Lopez, Alex Rodriguez, Justin Beiber, Shakira, Julio Iglesias, doctors, lawyers, politicians, bank managers, insurance company managers, etc. While the rest of USA, the average joes and janes, the delivery drivers, the Wal Mart employees, the Mcdonalds, Burger King workers, truck drivers, taxi drivers, floor cleaners etc. do not really have to worry about their physical image, their bodily gestures, and manners, their education and their personal power. What a hell of *conformist drones*

These are the comments that point to this in a good way, about the extreme self-defeating, self-mutilation and lack of wanting wealth, lack of need of great living standards in the great majority of joes and janes of USA and many other countries:

The majority of people spoil their lives by an unhealthy and exaggerated altruism are forced, indeed, so to spoil them. They find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this. The emotions of man are stirred more quickly than man’s intelligence; and, as I pointed out some time ago in an article on the function of criticism, it is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering than it is to have sympathy with thought. Accordingly, with admirable, though misdirected intentions, they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are part of the disease.

On the other hand, there are a great many people who, having no private property of their own, and being always on the brink of sheer starvation, are compelled to do the work of beasts of burden, to do work that is quite uncongenial to them, and to which they are forced by the peremptory, unreasonable, degrading Tyranny of want. These are the poor, and amongst them there is no grace of manner, or charm of speech, or civilisation, or culture, or refinement in pleasures, or joy of life. From their collective force Humanity gains much in material prosperity. But it is only the material result that it gains, and the man who is poor is in himself absolutely of no importance. He is merely the infinitesimal atom of a force that, so far from regarding him, crushes him: indeed, prefers him crushed, as in that case he is far more obedient.



.




---

[Stadtsmasher]

America is about to be blindsided by hard-left socialism, because after the collapse of Capitalism it is the only viable answer.

Its going to be beautiful.

[ckaihatsu]

[P]eople in the poor classes are living in a sort of learned-hopelessness, learned-helplessness, and they are emotionally and psychologically and even physically (because of an excess of physical tiredness) in the middle of what economists call "The viscious circle of poverty".


Well, while it's tempting to issue forth quick pop-sociology opinions on why (cultural) things are the way they are, I'll refrain.

Needless to say, though, the lack of access to necessary things causes people stress, and stress leads to the learned-helplessness, learned-hopelessness vicious spiral you mentioned.

I'll add that the capitalist system is most suited for 'primitive accumulation', meaning the initial sourcing of raw materials and rudimentary monetary (silver-based) social organization for coordinating such. Society has far surpassed the need for this primitive mode, though, and so we now have a world society with mountainous built-up stores of wealth from past labor expended, but are still compelled to act in overly individualistic, yet passive, ways in the economy since that's how it still functions.





It is from Potosí that most of the silver shipped through the Spanish Main came. According to official records,[citation needed] 45,000 short tons (41,000 metric tons) of pure silver were mined from Cerro Rico from 1556 to 1783. Of this total, 9,000 short tons (8,200 metric tons) went to the Spanish monarchy. Due to such extensive mining, the mountain itself has diminished in height; before the mining started it was a few hundred metres higher than it is today.

Indian laborers, forced by Francisco de Toledo, Count of Oropesa through the traditional Incan mita institution of contributed labor, came to die by the millions,[2] not simply from exposure and brutal labor, but by mercury poisoning. In the patio process the silver-ore, having been crushed to powder by hydraulic machinery, was cold-mixed with mercury and trodden to an amalgamation by the native workers with their bare feet.[3] The mercury was then driven off by heating, producing deadly vapors.

According to Noble David Cook, "A key factor in understanding the impact of the Potosi mita on the Indians is that mita labor was only one form of work at the mines.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potos%C3%AD

[ckaihatsu]

ckaihatsu, Others, I can't post links or do anything other than post text, so if you want to engage that triangle at PinkMarx, you'll have to go on site on the date and in the thread I mentioned.


It's okay -- no biggie.... Just if you had it handy....





I am now almost convinced that looking at deep organization, especially a universal pattern of organization of the systems of life, constitutes a mental barrier/paradigm shift in consciousness for all. I don't know that such a matter has even been approached before, but the science underlying this project is real.


Good luck with your efforts, then, MN -- the only other thing that comes to mind is something I'm sure I've mentioned before:


Complexity Pages

A non-technical introduction to the new
science of Chaos and Complexity

http://complexity.orconhosting.net.nz/intro.html

[tanklv]

You are right, I think that the economic system of USA always can find away for people to at least eat and get some basic survival needs in order to prevent a psychological desperation in the masses. All the food banks that exist in the USA and many other things that people do, like garage sales prevent a revolutionary situation. Another thing in America that is a big big impediment for a revolution is the super-strong power of the police, and the monopoly of armed forces, including the FBI, CIA and all that are really things that kill the motivation of americans, not only to protests, to rebel and to riot in the streets. But the fascistic power of the whole national police armed forces of America is so evil, so abusive, so fear-mongering and so terrorizing, that many americans reject the idea of placing a politics bumper sticker in their cars.

The terrorist power of the police armed forces of USA is so strong, that many americans don't even like to support Ron Paul. Because even Ron Paul is too radical, and is considered an "extremist" for the police deparments.

According to a commentator in The Russia Today News Network, he claimed that because the US government and its ruling class are so militarily prepared to crush any revolution. That the only option that he saw for USA is for the left to wait for the economy of USA to default and collapse. And maybe when the whole country is economically destroyed, maybe it will be easier for the majority of americans to support a marxist leftist option as the onlys salvation for all americans.

Ron Fucking Paul?!!! Are you serious? Ron Paul is a racist, homophobic, greedy 1%'r asshole. He may be "correct" twice a day - just like a clock - but he is batshit insane and did I mention he is a complete asshole?

Ron Paul is dismissed as "crazy" and a "nutjob" BECAUSE HE IS!!!

[tanklv]

Oh shit... that would be quite a spectacle. It reminds me of this quote:

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

- Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
(Japanese Navy)

It's not just "the reactionaries" - almost EVERYONE in the US of today is a "gun nut" - and that includes a significant number of "the left".

The "reactionaries" on the right will be plenty surprised at just how many on "the left" are likewise armed to the teeth...

The only truism I see is that too many Americans have a "gun fetish" and are extremely cowardly to be afraid of everyone and everything all the time.

That is one reason I support our 2nd Ammendment - only I just don't feel afraid and terrorized all the time to warrant the purchase or owning of any firearms...yet...

[tanklv]

I totally agree with this; it's reactionary, not revolutionary; and unfortunately it won't last. The Occupy-movement, although it's still going, has significantly died down. The numbers just aren't there. Too bad, really.

Oh for chrissakes - the Occupy movement only started for THREE MONTHS before winter set in and is hibernating. It is already beginning to stirr again, and will be in full bloom come spring and summer.

All observations about it's "death" couldn't be more wrong and ignorant.

[Psy]

Besides, if the Revolution started now, we'd be mowed down with bullets.
With how disgruntled US troops are at their chain command there is a decent chance that revolution would cause a significant chunk of the US armed forces to defect to revolutionary armies against the US armed forces.

[seventeethdecember2016]

With how disgruntled US troops are at their chain command there is a decent chance that revolution would cause a significant chunk of the US armed forces to defect to revolutionary armies against the US armed forces.
Well in 2012 terms, and perhaps historical terms, you're not a real revolution until someone recognizes you as one.
Who would recognize this as an American Revolution?
The UN? Nope, seeing that they get over half of their funding from the USA.
China? Not likely seeing that their economy is largely based on American Funding.
Cuba? Probably, for whatever it is worth.
Russia? Nope, they'd be laughing saying 'oh now they want to become Socialist.'
Europe? Nope, they'd want 'Democracy, Compromise, and Diplomacy to prevail.'

We need a 5th International that has a lot of influence and is recognized by several countries before such a thing is to occur.

[Manic Impressive]

Well in 2012 terms, and perhaps historical terms, you're not a real revolution until someone recognizes you as one.
Who would recognize this as an American Revolution?
The UN? Nope, seeing that they get over half of their funding from the USA.
China? Not likely seeing that their economy is largely based on American Funding.
Cuba? Probably, for whatever it is worth.
Russia? Nope, they'd be laughing saying 'oh now they want to become Socialist.'
Europe? Nope, they'd want 'Democracy, Compromise, and Diplomacy to prevail.'

We need a 5th International that has a lot of influence and is recognized by several countries before such a thing is to occur.
You are thinking in bourgeois terms. "recognising countries and revolutions" :rolleyes: You want the bourgeoisie to recognise you as official? The only people who need to recognise a revolution is the working class. urgh this says so much about your ideology.

[seventeethdecember2016]

You are thinking in bourgeois terms. "recognising countries and revolutions" :rolleyes: You want the bourgeoisie to recognise you as official? The only people who need to recognise a revolution is the working class. urgh this says so much about your ideology.
No, I was simply suggesting a modern tactic. You are correct that this is a Bourgeois tactic, but that is what is considered modern.

This tactic won't end up in bitter defeat, and defeat is the greatest agony known to man. Is a Revolution worth it if there isn't victory? NO!!! What a waste of lives! In the end of the day, we won't be razed in bullets as I have previously suggested.

The Anarchist tactic has to be one of the most self destructing of the Revolutionary tactics. It has a nearly 100% failure rate, and I refuse to be part of such a thing. There is always the Unionist option to Anarchism, but that still offers insecurity in the long run.

[Manic Impressive]

I'm not an anarchist so I would agree with you that most anarchist tactics that I know of are fairly benign. But shit no one's tactics have worked so far :lol:

It's also refreshingly honest of you to admit that you'd be willing to use bourgeois tactics to install your party in government.

[seventeethdecember2016]

I'm not an anarchist so I would agree with you that most anarchist tactics that I know of are fairly benign. But shit no one's tactics have worked so far :lol:

It's also refreshingly honest of you to admit that you'd be willing to use bourgeois tactics to install your party in government.
As an example, Nepal had a 10 year long Maoist civil war.
Fighting destroyed the country's development and stability, and thousand of people died.
In 2006, there was a ceasefire and the Maoists were allowed to take part in elections, and the monarchy was eventually abolished.

In 2008, Nepal had their first Democratic elections.
The Maoists and Marxist-Leninists won about 70% of the seats in their government.

How is what I'm proposing any different from this, of course excluding the 10 year civil war(I cower at bullets).

If there was a Revolution in my country, I'd do something like this.

Oh my Gosh!!! The Revolution is coming?? Time to hide and destroy all incriminating evidence of my treachery to the American state!
Now that I've done that, it's time to cower under my bed. Hopefully we'll win.

[ckaihatsu]

With how disgruntled US troops are at their chain command there is a decent chance that revolution would cause a significant chunk of the US armed forces to defect to revolutionary armies against the US armed forces.


I would think that much would have to build up to this kind of event first -- if it was a quick mass defection then that would be more of a crude power struggle, and it would not necessarily be revolutionary on its own. As you're mentioning, there would have to be an already-existing revolutionary movement that soldiers could identify with as a way of making the break.

Right now it's worth mentioning Bradley Manning since his case is related to Wikileaks and the process of public oversight on the government and military that its public monies are used to fund.

[Psy]

I would think that much would have to build up to this kind of event first -- if it was a quick mass defection then that would be more of a crude power struggle, and it would not necessarily be revolutionary on its own. As you're mentioning, there would have to be an already-existing revolutionary movement that soldiers could identify with as a way of making the break.

Right now it's worth mentioning Bradley Manning since his case is related to Wikileaks and the process of public oversight on the government and military that its public monies are used to fund.
Go back to the great railway strike of 1877 and the National Guards sent to put down the growing railway strike had wide spread surrendering and defecting of National Guardsmens and the strike only failed because it didn't grow fast enough so the US Army was able to focus its man power and snuff it out through violence.

[MotherCossack]

The biggest problem with a ''communist'' revolution in the USA.. is that a ridiculous amount of people own guns, the reactionaries (there's a shit load of them) would go berserk.


it sounds almost very funny.....
if we all lived in a cartoon with roadrunner and silvester and tweety!

except that we dont.... perish the thought...
US + any revolutionary force + loadsa gun-wielding nutcases= carnage.

or:
US =many various nutcases with guns
revolutionary nuts with guns+ reactionary nuts with guns= loadsa guns, loadsa shooting and loadsa death.

[Martin Blank]

it sounds almost very funny.....
if we all lived in a cartoon with roadrunner and silvester and tweety!

except that we dont.... perish the thought...
US + any revolutionary force + loadsa gun-wielding nutcases= carnage.

or:
US =many various nutcases with guns
revolutionary nuts with guns+ reactionary nuts with guns= loadsa guns, loadsa shooting and loadsa death.

All things considered, I'd rather everyone have guns than there be any kind of strict restriction of firearms. Any kind of strict "gun control" would mean that only soldiers, cops, criminals and fascist gangs would have them. It would only reinforce the ruling classes' asserted right to a monopoly on the use of force.