Do you think most americans will be more interested in politics in the coming crisis?

[AmilcarCabral]

We all know that in order for socialism to become a reality, there needs to be an objective revolutionary socialist situation in America. But in order for an objective revolutionary socialist situation to take place, the great majority of people of the country would have to love politics a lot more.

Right now if you see with your own eyes, the people who live around you, your friends, families, co-workers, are totally away from the world of economics, politics and international politics. Most americans do not even watch mainstream capitalist TV news and do not even read mainstream capitalist news papers and capitalist on-line newspapers.

But according to many economists and even to a CIA economy statement, the US economy will get pretty bad, there might be a powerful devaluation of the US dollar (you can find info here http://www.dollarcollapse.com/) sending food prices to the moon and increasing hunger in large percentage of the population of the country.

Having said all this about how food will get real expensive. Do you think that between 2015 and 2022 americans will be more interested in economics, in politics and in the nature of The Democratic Party, The Republican Party and the other alternative anti-war parties?

Because from my own humble experience, the only americans who are interested into politics all these years after 9-11 are the people who are into conspiracy theories, the leftists, the anti-war movement, immigration reform movements. The people who read alternative news websites, the young people who are all day connected to the internet. But this is just a minority.

Outside of the computer, outside of the internet, if you see with your own eyes in any city of USA, you just see people doing their regular business as usual. As a famous quote by Robert Browning that says: "God is in his heaven, all is right with the world." -Robert Browning

So, do you guys think that there will be radicalization toward the left, of most american people in the near future? Maybe that will be the time when there might be a chance for the leftists to become popular and be an option of political power in USA


.

[IBleedRed]

I hope so. Despite our virtual non-existence nowadays, the radical left played a very important role in early American labor struggles. Before WW2, we were a large enough force to scare the establishment! We will, of course, argue over whether or not figures such as Eugene V Debs were genuine socialists, but the point is, nowadays "socialism" doesn't even appear in American political discourse in any serious way. Back then, the socialist and communist parties had hundreds of thousands of members, and Debs garnered more than 900,000 votes in the 1912 election!

There was a leftist resurgence during the Vietnam War era, but not the sort of revolutionary leftism that we need in order to make a difference. However, understanding the strategies that worked back then will be important in formulating new strategies for the future. On the positive side, it appears that more young Americans have a positive opinion of socialism than the older generations, although I bet most of them think socialism = the Scandinavian model (social democracy).

The American working class has loads of potential. The important thing to do is not to alienate members of the working class (and many of us are members of the working class, remember that) by being condescending or exclusive. I also think it's a huge mistake to ignore members of the military. Although the military as a whole might be a reactionary institution, most of its members are people from working class backgrounds and if there's a chance we can connect with them, we need to do so.

[the debater]

I don't believe a violent revolution is the way to go, at least not for the wealthy countries of the world. For one thing, a violent revolution will not necessarily succeed, and if it does succeed, it may not last for very long, without a "post-game" plan. Once a violent revolution has succeeded, a new government and constitution would have to be immediately formed before the bourgeois enemy would be able to recover. Likewise, the bourgeois would still have access to the media, to the major news outlets, and would still be able to paint violent revolutionaries as idiot hooligans who are just rebellious young people without jobs. That's not going to be a good look at all! We are not living in Karl Marx's era. Times have changed, and thus, our methods may have to change as well to a certain extent. In addition to fighting the socialist fight, there are side issues we would have to address to get more working-class people on our side. We'd have to basically eliminate racism and ethnicism, we would have to eliminate homophobia, we would have to get more working-class people on-board with religious tolerance. And also, we would have to eliminate nationalism and patriotism. What I'm basically trying to say in this post is, there's a lot of shit we have to worry about. Possibly all at the same time!

I still believe the first step we should take as leftists is to get more city mayors who are socialists themselves. Once they get elected to their respective cities, they implement socialist policies which are vastly successful. Once this occurs, socialism immediately starts get a more positive image nationwide and globally among the working class and ordinary citizens. While this is going on, global attitudes towards homosexuality, religious tolerance, racism, etc, etc are hopefully improving, thus preventing the bourgeois from being able to use these issues to divide the global proletariat to stave off a socialist revolution in a last-ditch effort. At this point in time, we've basically won the conflict, and at this point, it's simply a matter of making sure that socialists worldwide stick together. One question I would have though, is how to help socialists in poorer countries ruled by dictators? How would we help them achieve socialism, and bring down their corrupt leaders? How exactly would the different countries of the world respond to a possible global revolution? What about the Middle East? What about China? What about Russia? What new issues would we run into that I haven't thought of in this thread? What did I overlook? Have I gone wrong anywhere?

[AmilcarCabral]

Ibleed: Great analysis of the state of the left. The other day i was watching a video of an argentinian leftist professor Atilio Boron, who said that in the near future, the capitalist right-wing ruling class of most nations, will try to finance, and support social-democratic parties, center-leftist parties, as a way to fool the masses in pre-election campaigns, so that the masses vote for those social-democratic parties thinking of them as authentic leftist parties.

You know living a wealthy lifestyle is real good, being wealthy is good, and having lots of millions of dollars is real nice and good. And the rich rulers do not want to quit that lifestyle. They do any thing in this world in order to continue living a life of vacation cruise ships, pleasures, parties and a paradise on earth.

And that statement by that professor of the capitalist wealthy class of trying to rule nations, not thru right-wing parties anymore, but thru social-democratic parties must be taken seriously by the authentic left. Who knows if even The Green Party is financed by rich wealthy billionaires.

I think that the rich oligarchs of the whole world in the near future will quit hiring right-wing parties and will now move politically toward the social-democratic center-left. Because they are smart and they know that most people in this world will not vote for right-wing parties anymore. So by hiring center-leftist parties they can continue being in power without the threat to their wealthy and their paradise on earth of marxist authentic leftist organizations.

That's why i have said in many posts in this forum, that one of the most powerful enemies of the authentic left of USA is the progressive liberal social-democrat centrist-leftists politicians and organizations such as The Green Party, Ralph Nader, The Nation Magazine thenation.com, Bernie Sanders, etc.



I hope so. Despite our virtual non-existence nowadays, the radical left played a very important role in early American labor struggles. Before WW2, we were a large enough force to scare the establishment! We will, of course, argue over whether or not figures such as Eugene V Debs were genuine socialists, but the point is, nowadays "socialism" doesn't even appear in American political discourse in any serious way. Back then, the socialist and communist parties had hundreds of thousands of members, and Debs garnered more than 900,000 votes in the 1912 election!

There was a leftist resurgence during the Vietnam War era, but not the sort of revolutionary leftism that we need in order to make a difference. However, understanding the strategies that worked back then will be important in formulating new strategies for the future. On the positive side, it appears that more young Americans have a positive opinion of socialism than the older generations, although I bet most of them think socialism = the Scandinavian model (social democracy).

The American working class has loads of potential. The important thing to do is not to alienate members of the working class (and many of us are members of the working class, remember that) by being condescending or exclusive. I also think it's a huge mistake to ignore members of the military. Although the military as a whole might be a reactionary institution, most of its members are people from working class backgrounds and if there's a chance we can connect with them, we need to do so.

[Ele'ill]

I don't believe a violent revolution is the way to go

what makes you think there will be a choice


I still believe the first step we should take as leftists is to get more city mayors who are socialists themselves. Once they get elected to their respective cities, they implement socialist policies which are vastly successful. Once this occurs, socialism immediately starts get a more positive image nationwide and globally among the working class and ordinary citizens.

but don't you need the last part in order to successfully carry out the first and if you had the last you wouldn't need the first

[IBleedRed]

AmilcarCabral: I couldn't agree more that the Democratic Party and bourgeois leftists are the biggest threat to workers' emancipation. They undermine genuine working class struggle by insisting that the working class can be reconciled to capitalism.

Social democrats are as dangerous as fascists IMO

[Tim Cornelis]

I think your analysis is rooted in an idealist perception of social change and development. There needs to be, as you say, objective conditions for socialism -- which are attained (wage-labour, socialised production, etc.). What you refer to are the subjective conditions, social consciousness, or specifically class consciousness.
There is no need for people to "love" politics for revolution to happen. I can't imagine the workers in Russia 1917 "loved" politics any more than people do now, in terms of reading political texts and literature (literacy rate adjusted).
I would say there's three categories, the political subsection of the population (following politics closely, reading political literature -- rule of thumb, member of a political organisation), the semi-political subsection (follows the news, knows basic politics -- rule of thumb, votes), the apolitical subsection (rule of thumb, doesn't vote, apathetic). Of course, there are various gradations on this fluid spectrum. This is largely determined by the personality of people and so wont change even if the subjective conditions result in a potentially revolutionary situation. Fortunately, there is no need for people to look into Marxist or anarchist theory, as the expropriation of property is instinctive in revolutionary situations as we saw in Argentina ca. 2002, for instance.
Take the situation in Greece. Presently, it appears to be in a period of protest fatigue but a few years back you had common people, semi-political people, protesting and in the streets. They didn't read Rand, Marx, J.S. Mill, Rawls, or Bakunin, they just instinctively felt exploited and abused, and they certainly didn't "love" politics. If anything they hated it. There was some news of neighbourhood committees in Greece seeking to elevate the financial burden by reconnecting households to power and such self-organised instruments of common working people. This, again, was not based on some political theory, but instinctive.

[Ritzy Cat]

In America, unfortunately, young people are not very involved in politics.

However, I found this chart that shows them by activity:
http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/15--The-Internet-and-Civic-Engagement/2--The-Current-State-of-Civic-Engagement-in-America/~/media/37C4643258B745A794DCDDC3FA97C17F.jpg?w=530&h=527&as=1

The article here states:
http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/15--The-Internet-and-Civic-Engagement/2--The-Current-State-of-Civic-Engagement-in-America/2--Participation.aspx

"Nearly two-thirds of all Americans have participated in some form of political activity in the past year. Just under one-fifth engaged in four or more political acts on a scale of eleven different activities."

Unfortunately, the activities that would be responsible for advancing a potential are the least widespread acts of political participation in USA. However, perhaps we can assume that those numbers will be multiplied in a revolutionary time period, but there is no way of guaranteeing that.

Unless very prolific things happen, most Americans tend not to care very much. In my daily life I see people who just toil through their wage labor-jobs, basically accepting it, and they don't seem to have a drive to change anything. I think the reason being is that it won't yield any guaranteed benefits.

We have to inspire the proletarian class that things CAN and WILL change. The revolution has its roots in inspiring, then they will not only be class-conscious - but they will CARE about their class-consciousness.

[Sabot Cat]

I think U.S. residents will, for the most part, continue to be apathetic obstacles to revolution while the U.S. media and military will remain belligerents against communists worldwide. The United States is effectively a lost cause; it's unlikely to be the place of any proletarian revolution in the near future, at least.

[IBleedRed]

I think U.S. residents will, for the most part, continue to be apathetic obstacles to revolution while the U.S. media and military will remain belligerents against communists worldwide. The United States is effectively a lost cause; it's unlikely to be the place of any proletarian revolution in the near future, at least.
That's a depressing assessment, but you're probably right. One of the problems is that the United States is just so big, not only in land area but population as well. Coordination is therefore much more difficult.

I still think revolution needs to start in the most advanced capitalist countries, though. I think France has serious potential. A workers' revolution in France might just set off the rest of Europe.

[Ritzy Cat]

That's a depressing assessment, but you're probably right. One of the problems is that the United States is just so big, not only in land area but population as well. Coordination is therefore much more difficult.

I still think revolution needs to start in the most advanced capitalist countries, though. I think France has serious potential. A workers' revolution in France might just set off the rest of Europe.

I agree, France might be a likely starting place for revolution. While Hollande isn't exactly desirable for the revolution, the revolutionary leftist presence is stronger in France than in other European countries.

Not only that, but it does also have some history in this realm with the Paris Commune and whatnot.

[Wonton Carter]

I really really hope so, but I doubt it. Americans that aren't on the far-right are extremely apathetic when it comes to politics. I'm trying to get people more involved, but it's almost like people are actively scared of even voting at this point.

[AmilcarCabral]

Hi Ibleed: Yeah you are right !!

I have 2 theories on why we don't have a socialist revolutionary situation in America.

Theory # 1 is that most americans think that the US Imperialist government will always provide wealth for all americans.

My theory # 2 is fear against the US government.

Theory # 1: And I would like add something to this debate about the causes of the extreme anti-politics, anti-change, anti-reality, anti-news, anti-reading newspapers, anti-knowledge of what is going on in this world of most average joes and janes. I know that it is real hard to get into the brains of all average american joes and janes out there, because it is real hard to inspect and know what they are thinking, how they feel. But from my own personal humble perspective, I think that most people in USA maybe have this chauvinist nationalistic-imperialist idea (Like the citizens of The Roman Empire), that because the USA is the modern Roman Empire and military king of this world. The USA Armed Forces will prevent the decrease in the living standards of even the oppressed 60% of the US population, because the imperialist wars for oil, wealth and land that the US Armed Forces have been doing after 9-11 and even before 9-11, have been providing food-stamps, subsidized basic foods which manage to keep the prices of basic foods that oppressed american families buy at grocery stores (eggs, chicken, milk, butter, cheese, rice, bread etc).

And that the US Imperialist military armed forces invader fascist Roman Imperialist type of government is really a sort of welfare socialistic imperialistic government that invades other countries in order to steal the wealth of other countries to trickle that wealth to the 100% popuilation of the USA.

And I think that's a major factor in dictating and determining the anti-political mentality of all americans. And the reason of why most americans are totally divorced from news and politics and are extremely concentrated in private non-political affairs like professional sports games, movies, their family affairs, their own children, their lawns, their cars, their houses etc.

Theory # 2: My other speculation and hypothesis is that most US citizens hate The Democratic Party, hate Bill Gates, hate Donald Trump, hate the concentration of wealth and luxuries in a few, hate the republican party and capitalism with a passion and would love a socialist direct democracy of wealth for all americans. But it is fear that prevents them from exercising that hatred toward capitalist class in a real socialist revolution.

FEAR, BEING SCARED OF US GOVERNMENT MIGHT BE THE GREAT DESTROYER OF AN OBJECTIVE COMMUNIST REVOLUTIONARY SITUATION IN AMERICA. FEAR IN MOST OPPRESSED AMERICANS

The paraphernalia of fear-mongering, exercised against all US citizens by the intimidating fascist national police departments. The clear examples of how Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden have been harassed by US government. and many other scare terrorist tactics used by US government against anti-war activists and progressives


.

,



That's a depressing assessment, but you're probably right. One of the problems is that the United States is just so big, not only in land area but population as well. Coordination is therefore much more difficult.

I still think revolution needs to start in the most advanced capitalist countries, though. I think France has serious potential. A workers' revolution in France might just set off the rest of Europe.

[DoCt SPARTAN]

There was so much Cold War anti-communist propaganda in the US. It rotted itself so deep in the veins of the American people that i cant see the majority of people really coming in touch with socialist politics. At least until those cold war generations start dying off.

It is sad to day of the lack of interst in poitics in the youth of america. Just walking in my school today, all the kids are to focused on getting their iphones and Nike sweatshop shoes then caring about the future of the planet. And not to reconize the sick imperialist government that rules them. They're brainwashed in a sense with consumerism and materialism!

[JudasMaiden]

There was so much Cold War anti-communist propaganda in the US. It rotted itself so deep in the veins of the American people that i cant see the majority of people really coming in touch with socialist politics. At least until those cold war generations start dying off.

It is sad to day of the lack of interst in poitics in the youth of america. Just walking in my school today, all the kids are to focused on getting their iphones and Nike sweatshop shoes then caring about the future of the planet. And not to reconize the sick imperialist government that rules them. They're brainwashed in a sense with consumerism and materialism!

I think it is the same at almost all schools, public or not, elementary, middle, or high school. At my school, they also like to get into fights and glorify them and insult others even due to their skin color, ethnicity, or grade level (they specifically dehumanize freshmen). I think the United States of America should instead called "Divided People of Earth". The only people I know that are into politics are the teachers (which I do hang out with sometimes and my Biology teacher is quite a leftist) and my friend Henry, but even there, my friend Henry is not really a leftist. Most of the students at my school seem to care about shoe brands or the newest Vine rather than a workers' strike in Vietnam and the embargo against Cuba.

[Comrade #138672]

Yes, people will get more involved in politics as the situation gets worse, because they have to.

[The Fonz]

I think in the US people are apathetic simply because they can be. But in terms of political activity if even 2% of workers in the US did organize themselves in a political fashion it would neccesarilly be in opposition to the state. Therefore i think we would witness something like cointelpro on steroids maybe more akin to events we have seen in latin america such as in Colombia. Because IMO electoral politics where you get to choose between to slightly different political parties who already themselves have made state policy are resistant to progressive change and one dosent have to be well read in leftist literature to realize this. The two party system to me is more similar to say Mexicos PRI "authoritarian democracy" than say a western european parliament, its just the system hasnt had a challenge to its power which would display its increasingly evident repressive character(NSA etc..). But you can only beat an animal into a corner for so long before it strikes back, so yes eventually i think we will see a fight back by US workers. Also i think whats more likely to happen sooner because of the changes in the global and domestic economy we will see that liberalism is no longer capable of coping with finance capital and the changing class structure of US society with the disintegration of the privleged section of the working class(or "middle class"). I think the US state is gradually evolving into something fundamentally different and worse than what it has previously been in the past. With that said it could either propel or stagnate working class politics, but imo the fight back is enevitable whether its 20 or 50 years from now.

[Wonton Carter]

I think the US state is gradually evolving into something fundamentally different and worse than what it has previously been in the past. With that said it could either propel or stagnate working class politics, but imo the fight back is enevitable whether its 20 or 50 years from now.

This is my view on the matter, largely. I feel it's gonna happen. People are starting to get real fed up. The internet has helped to create a more compassionate and caring people, people who are more understanding of the worker's plight, and wishes to help them. It was over the process of many months that I became a leftist. I think the communist movement will see a huge revival soon, and hopefully a revolution afterwards.

But there are still a LOT of apathetic people out there. We gotta inform them on these issues.

[Sea]

consumerism and materialismNever, ever, ever, ever confuse these two. Materialism and consumerism are not the same thing. Consumerism is a result of private property, materialism is a philosophical standpoint.

[Rafiq]

The time for action should be now, before this alleged crises. Remember how in Russia, the Left was strong before the crises. What a crises does do is lead to the triumph of degenerate forms of bourgeois ideology.

[Prometeo liberado]

I don't believe a violent revolution is the way to go, at least not for the wealthy countries of the world. For one thing, a violent revolution will not necessarily succeed, and if it does succeed, it may not last for very long, without a "post-game" plan. Once a violent revolution has succeeded, a new government and constitution would have to be immediately formed before the bourgeois enemy would be able to recover. Likewise, the bourgeois would still have access to the media, to the major news outlets, and would still be able to paint violent revolutionaries as idiot hooligans who are just rebellious young people without jobs. That's not going to be a good look at all! We are not living in Karl Marx's era. Times have changed, and thus, our methods may have to change as well to a certain extent. In addition to fighting the socialist fight, there are side issues we would have to address to get more working-class people on our side. We'd have to basically eliminate racism and ethnicism, we would have to eliminate homophobia, we would have to get more working-class people on-board with religious tolerance. And also, we would have to eliminate nationalism and patriotism. What I'm basically trying to say in this post is, there's a lot of shit we have to worry about. Possibly all at the same time!

I still believe the first step we should take as leftists is to get more city mayors who are socialists themselves. Once they get elected to their respective cities, they implement socialist policies which are vastly successful. Once this occurs, socialism immediately starts get a more positive image nationwide and globally among the working class and ordinary citizens. While this is going on, global attitudes towards homosexuality, religious tolerance, racism, etc, etc are hopefully improving, thus preventing the bourgeois from being able to use these issues to divide the global proletariat to stave off a socialist revolution in a last-ditch effort. At this point in time, we've basically won the conflict, and at this point, it's simply a matter of making sure that socialists worldwide stick together. One question I would have though, is how to help socialists in poorer countries ruled by dictators? How would we help them achieve socialism, and bring down their corrupt leaders? How exactly would the different countries of the world respond to a possible global revolution? What about the Middle East? What about China? What about Russia? What new issues would we run into that I haven't thought of in this thread? What did I overlook? Have I gone wrong anywhere?

What makes you think that power will just be casually handed over without struggle? That the bourgeois will not use their powerful militaries to bring us to our collective knees? Violence is an almost a necessity.
You want Mayors? Good luck at that.
After exterminating the bourgeois I for one don't want a "state" with all that comes with it.
Sounds a lot like a kindler gentler version of what we have now.