Hi fellow comerades!

[OneSolution]

Hello everyone,

I just registered at the forum and tought I'd introduce myself. :) I'm 25 year old (young) man living in Belgium.(ex journalism, ex-social work and ex-social cultural work student, which neither of these studies I sadly - due to circumstances - could finish.) Who is propably going to try to find a job now with my secondary education degree, due to not receiving support from my parents anymore for my education. But anyway, I won't go into too much detail about personal stuff.. I'll skip to the reason why I tought I' joined this forum..

About a year and a half ago at high school college I got in touch with 'the Active Left Students', the student/pupil organisation of the Left Socialist Party (LSP) which is the Belgian Sectian of the CWI (Committee for A Workers International) a revolutionary left party with Troskyist roots. Since about a year ago I also joined this party and became a (fairly) active member of it. I have since then talked alot with other members about our ideas, about the alternative of socialism, marxism, the need for a revolution, throle of the government, etc.. (I didn't really know alot about these topics before).

And now I can say I'm pretty much convinced off the necessity and the benefits of a democratic socialist society instead of a parlementary democracy. Allthough I'm not fully convinced of the need for a communist/anarchist society just yet. But this could still change in discussion, and depending on what you view under it.

Anyway, here in Belgium we have been pretty active lately (like most sections prob worldwide). We have had our anti-racism (blokbuster) campaign, founded the pro-choice (for the right of abortion) opposed to the radical right pro-choice movement, done several campaigns during the communal elections at the end of last year (where we sadly, together with 'Rood!', consisting of former marxists/socialists who did entrism in the sp.a (social democrats) just got 1,5% at most in most cities, which isn't enough to get a seat..

Since then I've also been reading several books (started with the Communist Manifest, chapters of the Capital, biography of Leon Trotsky, now about to delve myself into 'History of the Russion Revolution,..) Allthough I'm now a member of this party I still stay, and always have been critical towards our organisation and our ideas, and I try to learn as much as I can and not accepting everything for sweet cake (that's an expression in dutch, not really sure or it exists in English but anyway).

We also have been very active around our (anti communicipal administrative penalty's - TegenGAS/Gasvrij campagne in Dutch) campaign which is also an example off the growing reppresion in our and other country. And we feel that the struggle is rising allthough we haven't yet seen that in increasing votes for our party, but the PVDA (the Workers' Party of Belgium), former maoist/marxist-leninist/stalinist (which they took distance of right now) does is getting more votes but they have also lowered their program and are almost reformists now (which is also a way to work towards a better world, but hey, I'll leave everyone to their own ideas..)

I still am certainly open to other ideas like anarchism and communism, which I don't know that much about myself yet.. But that anyway is one reason I joined this forum, to read, discuss and learn more about these topics. The other reason is I want to share my experiences in class struggle and protest, social action, and resistance against the increasing popularity of right wing, reactionary sometimes neo-facist parties (like Golden Dawn in Greece), the increasing repression, etc.. from my country with other like-minded people.

I saw in another post that there is a booklist and a learning section so that will surely come in handy too (looking forward to check out and join the discussion on the forum.

I just realise I wrote a pretty long introduction, sorry for that! xP

See you on the forums!

[Alonso Quijano]

Welcome Comrade.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[Queen Mab]

Hi


About a year and a half ago at high school college I got in touch with 'the Active Left Students', the student/pupil organisation of the Left Socialist Party (LSP) which is the Belgian Sectian of the CWI (Committee for A Workers International) a revolutionary left party with Troskyist roots. Since about a year ago I also joined this party and became a (fairly) active member of it.

And now I can say I'm pretty much convinced off the necessity and the benefits of a democratic socialist society instead of a parlementary democracy. Allthough I'm not fully convinced of the need for a communist/anarchist society just yet.

You remind me of a certain Seattle councillor. :laugh:

[Q]

Welcome :)

If you have political questions, you can ask them in the Learning forum. That's why it's there after all!

If you have questions about your account, don't hesitate to send me a PM or ask here.


And now I can say I'm pretty much convinced off the necessity and the benefits of a democratic socialist society instead of a parlementary democracy. Allthough I'm not fully convinced of the need for a communist/anarchist society just yet. But this could still change in discussion, and depending on what you view under it.
This leads me to wonder: What exactly do you think "communism" is? How does it differ from "democratic socialism" and what is that also in your view?


Since then I've also been reading several books (started with the Communist Manifest, chapters of the Capital, biography of Leon Trotsky, now about to delve myself into 'History of the Russion Revolution,..) Allthough I'm now a member of this party I still stay, and always have been critical towards our organisation and our ideas, and I try to learn as much as I can and not accepting everything for sweet cake (that's an expression in dutch, not really sure or it exists in English but anyway).
I recommend to read the entirety of Capital, preferably in a reader group so you can exchange ideas and reflect on the book. I'm having a readergroup myself on it in the Netherlands and we also have a Belgian LSP comrade in it. We started somewhere in April and we' ve been moving at a steady pace through it (with some breaks) and we're at about half book 1 now.

Understanding the whole argument enriches your knowledge about society so much, so I strongly recommend it. It's not all that difficult once you get beyond the first few chapters :)


I still am certainly open to other ideas like anarchism and communism, which I don't know that much about myself yet..
The CWI historically has tended to avoid the word "communism", so I can see where your question marks come from. But fact of the matter is that Trotskyism is a communist current and the CWI is a communist organisation. Then we have a whole different debate about what socialism and communism mean exactly, but I'm sure we can tackle that.


I saw in another post that there is a booklist and a learning section so that will surely come in handy too (looking forward to check out and join the discussion on the forum.
I've also created a "startup reader list" (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=7728) a while back that you might find helpful :)


I just realise I wrote a pretty long introduction, sorry for that! xP
No problem at all! I rather enjoy good introductions as a mod of this subforum :)

[OneSolution]

Welcome :)
This leads me to wonder: What exactly do you think "communism" is? How does it differ from "democratic socialism" and what is that also in your view

Well, except the Communist Manifest I haven't read alot communist literature. But out of some discussions I had with a representative of our party I remember, he gave me the example, that in a communist society there would be no private property (well only for some stuff like your home/car I guess), and that everything would be produced by the state (which would also be under democratic control) and for the common good of the people. And also that there wouldn't be no need for a form of economie where money is needed, there would be enough for everyone.

That everything would just be produced by the needs of society. That are some examples he gave me of communism but with not alot of background why that would be a good thing or why it should be like that. Since then I got a bit sceptical about what I tought (with the information I had then) was communism.

Because I find it weird to think that everyone would just share the food and products. Without any form of greed or people wanting to abuse the system. With that picture of communism he gave me I tought it seemed a but unrealistic/utopical. I think there will always be people who want to have more power/money then someone elles. My view of what communism is is prob quite limited as you can see. :p

About what I think democratic socialism is, is that in first instance there is a workers democrazy, or democrazy of the people so to speak, where elected people don't get overpayed but just get payed like the average person. They should also be permanently removable by the basis if they don't act accordingly. (Who these people with the right to 'remove' an elected person is also a question I pose myself, is it then the working class who get's to chose what should be done, should the former beourgois also get a hand in it..?)

Anyway, I don't know yet in detail how it should be. But what I'm sure off is that it should be a more direct democrazy where people in some way have more input and control about the decissions made, rather then just the government supporting the wishes of the richest people/company's/manager's, ceo's. Ofcours it should be the other way around. But there should be more balance. Now society is making the workers porer and the manager's/multi-miljonairs/higher classes richer.

A second point that I think also means democratic socialism is the nationalisation of the key sections of the economie. All production facilities would be in hands of the state. So there can be a planned based economie owned by and producing in function of the majority of the people. Not the 'figularly speaking' 1%.

That's about the 2 most important parts I think. Hmm, I do feel that my knowledge is pretty limited so I should prob do some more reading on it. :)



I recommend to read the entirety of Capital, preferably in a reader group so you can exchange ideas and reflect on the book. I'm having a readergroup myself on it in the Netherlands and we also have a Belgian LSP comrade in it. We started somewhere in April and we' ve been moving at a steady pace through it (with some breaks) and we're at about half book 1 now.

Ok, I might do that soon! Where are you, and the LSP comrade from in the Netherlands/Belgium, if I can ask..?



The CWI historically has tended to avoid the word "communism", so I can see where your question marks come from. But fact of the matter is that Trotskyism is a communist current and the CWI is a communist organisation. Then we have a whole different debate about what socialism and communism mean exactly, but I'm sure we can tackle that. I'm aware that we are a communist organisation but I'm not sure yet what the exactly means.. *feels stupid*



I've also created a "starup read list" a while back that you might find helpful :) Will check it out, thanks!

[Q]

Well, except the Communist Manifest I haven't read alot communist literature. But out of some discussions I had with a representative of our party I remember, he gave me the example, that in a communist society there would be no private property (well only for some stuff like your home/car I guess), and that everything would be produced by the state (which would also be under democratic control) and for the common good of the people. And also that there wouldn't be no need for a form of economie where money is needed, there would be enough for everyone.
Under communism there would be no state apparatus in the sense that we know it today. It would be society running itself, collectively and democratically. Money would indeed no longer be needed (Capital explains what money really is by the way, highly illuminating) as there would no longer be production based on exchange value but on rational planning.


That everything would just be produced by the needs of society. That are some examples he gave me of communism but with not alot of background why that would be a good thing or why it should be like that. Since then I got a bit sceptical about what I tought (with the information I had then) was communism. You scepticism is of course justified, with the experience of Stalinism behind us. This is why communists must be clear that the USSR was actually anti-communist: It was diametrically opposed to what communists stand for. What the USSR then was or why it became that way is then subject for further debate.


Because I find it weird to think that everyone would just share the food and products. Without any form of greed or people wanting to abuse the system. With that picture of communism he gave me I tought it seemed a but unrealistic/utopical. I think there will always be people who want to have more power/money then someone elles. My view of what communism is is prob quite limited as you can see. :pThis is where democracy and a culture change come in. Yes, certainly in the beginning of the transition, there will be greedy people who try to abuse the system. In my opinion a culture of socially isolating those people, peer pressure, etc would be helpful in correcting such behaviour. Furthermore, without money, hoarding will be nearly impossible, especially on the scale we see today. And that's the thing: Capitalism is structurally encouraging corruption, hoarding and greed. By abolishing it, we solve most of these problems. The persistent singleton that remains will be ignored by society and, therefore, is powerless.


About what I think democratic socialism is, is that in first instance there is a workers democrazy, or democrazy of the people so to speak, where elected people don't get overpayed but just get payed like the average person. They should also be permanently removable by the basis if they don't act accordingly. (Who these people with the right to 'remove' an elected person is also a question I pose myself, is it then the working class who get's to chose what should be done, should the former beourgois also get a hand in it..?)The CWI publically defends a soviet model of democracy, but this has inherent problems (the first two posts in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/epub-collective-decision-t180663/index.html?t=180663) for extensive explanation). The inherent problem with what we think "democracy" means runs deeper and is actually one of the greatest political forgeries the bourgeoisie ever accomplished: Elections are anti-democratic, they are inherently an oligarchic mechanism. This article of 2009 (http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/788/democracy-or-oligarchy) by Paul Cockshott (also a Revleft user) explains the issue well and also delves into what democracy actually is: A form of lottery that actually accomplishes society ruling itself. Moshé Machover wrote a more extensive essay on the same subject that I linked already.


Anyway, I don't know yet in detail how it should be. But what I'm sure off is that it should be a more direct democrazy where people in some way have more input and control about the decissions made, rather then just the government supporting the wishes of the richest people/company's/manager's, ceo's. Ofcours it should be the other way around. But there should be more balance. Now society is making the workers porer and the manager's/multi-miljonairs/higher classes richer.Elections inherently favor a small elite. Therefore "bourgeois democracy" or "parliamentary democracy" is a misnomer. We live in an oligarchy. Does this exclude work in parliament? I don't think so (http://www.revleft.com/vb/parliamentary-democracy-undemocratici-t184283/index.html?p=2679431#post2679431).


A second point that I think also means democratic socialism is the nationalisation of the key sections of the economie. All production facilities would be in hands of the state. So there can be a planned based economie owned by and producing in function of the majority of the people. Not the 'figularly speaking' 1%.I don't think nationalisations are by definition a great idea or even socialist. As I explain here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-socialism-one-t184088/index.html?p=2677253#post2677253), it could actually hurt our cause. Far more important is that we start thinking on, at least, a continental level for starting a positive alternative to capitalism.


That's about the 2 most important parts I think. Hmm, I do feel that my knowledge is pretty limited so I should prob do some more reading on it. :)No problem at all comrade. Just remember to keep learning, ask question, stay critical! It's important to note that no one group has "the Truth" (tm), but that life and society constantly changes and are in needof continued critical reflection. This is the basis for the scientific method Marxists claim to adhere.


Ok, I might do that soon! Where are you, and the LSP comrade from in the Netherlands/Belgium, if I can ask..? I'm from the Maastricht region. But we live pretty dispersed, so we only occasionally hold meetings in Utrecht. Most of the time we hold Google Hangout meetings.


I'm aware that we are a communist organisation but I'm not sure yet what the exactly means.. *feels stupid*No reason to feel stupid comrade, we all had to start!