Blake's Baby
3rd February 2013, 13:33
From the other thread (these posts have been re-ordered), which has perhaps gone to far to be salvaged:
High time for a republic I'd say!
... Some of us have cast doubt on the almost automatic assumption that the abolition of the monarchy would necessarily strengthen the working class and our struggles.... we doubt the validity of the slogan of the democratic republic...
... if Q had said that he wanted the working class to abolish the monarchy today and capitalism tomorrow, I wouldn't have such a problem. What I have a problem with is 'high time for a republic' expressed as a political demand...
I'd have fewer problems with Q's original post if he'd said 'it's high time time the working class overthrew the monarchy, and after that, the whole capitalist system'. But he didn't. He called for the establishment of a republic, which is not a revolutionary demand, it's not even a reformist demand, it's just a demand for a redecoration of the prison...
... the goal of ending capitalism and for working class rule have to be mentioned in any serious commentary on this issue.
The abdication does however create a nice opening to start a discussion on this subject, a discussion that communists have much to add to, don't you think?
anytime to be annoying to the state is a good one...
maybe nothing revolutionary but still nice to do our best to fuck shit up, if only for entertainment purposes.
So, concrete question amid all this 'debate'? What should dutch communists who care about this (all 5 of them) supposedly do or have to do with this whole thing and what will any of it matter re. the elaboration of the communist project? Addressing that seems a precondition to even debating something like this I'd say. I can come into Psycho's remark of 'it presents an opportunity to cause a ruckus and act as a springboard for whatever we want to address', but that's something different from the monarchy/republic/whatever debate.
... 'what should the attitude of communists in the Netherlands (and by implication other monarchies) be to the continued existence of the monarchy or its replacement by a bourgeois republic?'...
Seems to me that these are the important aspects of this. And I make no apologies for keeping on at this, even though I'm not Dutch, because it's not just a question for communists in the Netherlands or even the working class only in the Netherlands, the principles involved are equally applicable in the UK, as well as Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Spain and Japan, and I'm sure there are other monarchies as well - from memory, Lesotho and Thailand are both monarchies, I'm not sure where else is, and there are the various European Grand Duchies and such like (Luxembourg, Monaco etc).
So, does something like the abdication of a monarch open up opportunities to discuss perspectives for the future that go beyond monarchy/republic? Or is the monarchy/republic debate in itself an attack on capitalism and the state?
High time for a republic I'd say!
... Some of us have cast doubt on the almost automatic assumption that the abolition of the monarchy would necessarily strengthen the working class and our struggles.... we doubt the validity of the slogan of the democratic republic...
... if Q had said that he wanted the working class to abolish the monarchy today and capitalism tomorrow, I wouldn't have such a problem. What I have a problem with is 'high time for a republic' expressed as a political demand...
I'd have fewer problems with Q's original post if he'd said 'it's high time time the working class overthrew the monarchy, and after that, the whole capitalist system'. But he didn't. He called for the establishment of a republic, which is not a revolutionary demand, it's not even a reformist demand, it's just a demand for a redecoration of the prison...
... the goal of ending capitalism and for working class rule have to be mentioned in any serious commentary on this issue.
The abdication does however create a nice opening to start a discussion on this subject, a discussion that communists have much to add to, don't you think?
anytime to be annoying to the state is a good one...
maybe nothing revolutionary but still nice to do our best to fuck shit up, if only for entertainment purposes.
So, concrete question amid all this 'debate'? What should dutch communists who care about this (all 5 of them) supposedly do or have to do with this whole thing and what will any of it matter re. the elaboration of the communist project? Addressing that seems a precondition to even debating something like this I'd say. I can come into Psycho's remark of 'it presents an opportunity to cause a ruckus and act as a springboard for whatever we want to address', but that's something different from the monarchy/republic/whatever debate.
... 'what should the attitude of communists in the Netherlands (and by implication other monarchies) be to the continued existence of the monarchy or its replacement by a bourgeois republic?'...
Seems to me that these are the important aspects of this. And I make no apologies for keeping on at this, even though I'm not Dutch, because it's not just a question for communists in the Netherlands or even the working class only in the Netherlands, the principles involved are equally applicable in the UK, as well as Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Spain and Japan, and I'm sure there are other monarchies as well - from memory, Lesotho and Thailand are both monarchies, I'm not sure where else is, and there are the various European Grand Duchies and such like (Luxembourg, Monaco etc).
So, does something like the abdication of a monarch open up opportunities to discuss perspectives for the future that go beyond monarchy/republic? Or is the monarchy/republic debate in itself an attack on capitalism and the state?