Creating class consciousness amongst the proletariat.

[Dialectical Wizard]

How to create class consciousness amongst the proletariat?

I agree with Gramsci that we should create 'organic intellectuals', working class intellectuals so to speak.

I will share a little anecdote from my personal life. I remember having a conversation about communism with some of my fellow proletarians at the factory where I worked at back then. They basically told me that communism only looks good on paper but isn't practical. They liked the idea of communism but thought that it wasn't feasible in real life. How should we tackle such rhetoric?

Of course criticizing and combating false consciousness is always the first step one should take, if one wants to create class consciousness amongst the working class. But I'm looking for more broader ideas and tactics.

[motion denied]

I have almost no experience with workers whatsoever. On the other hand, I have some with uni students.

I learned that 'apolitical' tend to not listen you preach politics. They start to respect you/listen to you when they see that you walk the walk... Not long ago some students became radicalized thanks to a big strike and the militancy of marxists, anarchists and some imbeciles pretending to be anarchists.

I think workers are not too different.

(re-reading this, I guess my answer is not helpful at all - mainly because I don't have the slightest clue of how to 'create' [what does this even mean anyway] class consciousness)

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Handouts, make everything free, just give everyone lots and lots of free shit.

[Creative Destruction]

Class consciousness is not created by self-appointed revolutionaries who are more or less divorced from the production process.

[Lensky]

Class consciousness is not created by self-appointed revolutionaries who are more or less divorced from the production process.

Lenin?

[Creative Destruction]

Lenin?

i can't tell if you're being serious.

[SHORAS]

Class consciousness is not created by self-appointed revolutionaries who are more or less divorced from the production process.

Workers who are communists are not divorced from production though.

[AmilcarCabral]

Dialectical: I remember a professor i had in college in a liberal arts course, and he said that most people, most humans are educated with the psychology of the *no*, and the psychology of the *but*. The great german philosopher Nietzsche calls this *passive nihilism* as opposed to being a tragic destroyer of old ideas and a creator of news ideas which he labeled *active nihilism*. (Nihilism, because in order to overthrow capitalist governments and replace it with socialist governments and anarchist-communist systems you have to be very nihilist and very active (active-nihilist, or tragic hero)

And most people in this world in all activities of life are passive-nihilist and not warriors. In order to be an active nihilist you have to be a warrior, life is a war, and every thing in life requires a warrior attitude (Like Lorena Bobbit a lady who cut the penis of her husband beause he was going to rape her)

But most humans are not like her, like Che Guevara, and like the revolutionary warriors of history, most humans today are white collar working class slaves who have been educated by the media, governments, institutions like UN, moral codes and moral laws that fighting is evil, that all humans should be pacific like Dalai Lama.

So having said all this: first humans, workers, poor people have to destroy their pacifism, their passive-nihilism, their lack of warrior attitude and become warriors all the time, in a permanent state of war (because for example if somebody insults you for being a communist, you should hit them, punch them fight with them, and that requires a warrior spirit).

Warrior spirit in order to defend the radical communist theories, and active-nihilist in order to destroy all current ideas, moral codes and laws and wish for a new communist world

But I think we have to wait for a powerful economic crisis like Thom Hartmann says in this interview which will be around 2016 for the working class of USA and other nations to become warriors and communist active nihilists (destroyers of capitalist values, and creators of communist values)


06WOhNgXBZw


.




.



I remember having a conversation about communism with some of my fellow proletarians at the factory where I worked at back then. They basically told me that communism only looks good on paper but isn't practical. They liked the idea of communism but thought that it wasn't feasible in real life. How should we tackle such rhetoric?

[Lily Briscoe]

Workers who are communists are not divorced from production though.

I think the point is that "class consciousness among the proletariat" isn't something that's created/imposed by the will of individuals with communist ideas or tiny groups of communists (regardless of whether they are "divorced from the production process" or not); it's something that arises through workers struggling collectively to defend their interests..

[Thirsty Crow]

How to create class consciousness amongst the proletariat?
By means of magic and psycho-active substances as basis of indoctrination.

Or in other words, class consciousness isn't something that is created by a political minority, no matter how determined and armed with the right ideas.

This doesn't mean that I find political propaganda and education useless. Far from it, but the point is that the way the question is posed betrays that fundamental misunderstanding on your part, or at least that this is very likely so.

As for radical political minorities, to follow through with the notion of the organic intellectual, they are workers themselves as well, and it is precisely here, at a workplace or at the unemployment office that contact can be established with other workers and unemployed which could lead to an org developing real bases in the class itself. However, one of the lousiest things here to do is this:


I remember having a conversation about communism with some of my fellow proletarians at the factory where I worked at back then. They basically told me that communism only looks good on paper but isn't practical. They liked the idea of communism but thought that it wasn't feasible in real life. How should we tackle such rhetoric?
There's no point to proselytizing, especially since it should be given that most probably workers' immediate experience leaves no actual room for the idea of communism, or more broadly that of radical change, to function as a kind of a notion regulating behavior to an extent. Of course, this is so due to numerous factors, and it is also clear that not all of these factors can be affected by propagating ideas (for instance, take the case of a single mom working two jobs, whom the threat of being laid off - and the ruling class definitely manages to obtain the best possibilities for that threat being very real - means a whole lot, and most probably induces a state of resignation if with serious resentment).
This approach is a complete dead end I'm afraid; and moreover, it's not up to communists to pose as the enlightened few preaching to their congregation. It's more or less always possible to take the lower route and engage fellow workers as a worker yourself, in discussion about the immediate concerns (which also facilitates breaching broader, political problems).

And as for communists, at best we can fulfill the function of facilitators in class struggle and workers' self-organization; we can't create it, nor we can create consciousness (contrary to some variants of leftist mythology). The active acceptance of the communist programme, no doubt elaborated in specific social conditions and by a specific group of people (the political organization of the class) hinges on interaction (emphasizing the role for workers' own initiative, action and understanding), and that isn't something which this rudimentary account of creating consciousness can handle well. As such, it represents a political danger.


Workers who are communists are not divorced from production though. Sure, but that is another point. To illustrate what I believe is rational and necessary in the type of argument you responded to, a communist can also be a worker, but they may engage other workers as an ideologue, preaching either broader ideas like communism itself or, for that matter, the importance of a particular sect. That's the problem.


i can't tell if you're being serious.
That's something one can be serious about no doubt. For instance, you've got folks now who speak of a merger formula with exactly this basis in mind, that of a specific social layer (their class analysis being unsure on this layer constituting a class or not) bringing ideas into the working class; the former being like a vessel for God's Light which emanates from elsewhere.

[SHORAS]

I think the point is that "class consciousness among the proletariat" isn't something that's created/imposed by the will of individuals with communist ideas or tiny groups of communists (regardless of whether they are "divorced from the production process" or not); it's something that arises through workers struggling collectively to defend their interests..

I agree. What do you think the role of communists should be?

What about the role of theory, who develops that?

[The Idler]

I agree. What do you think the role of communists should be?

What about the role of theory, who develops that?
The role of communists is to hasten class consciousness (by spreading theory that's arisen out of material circumstances) not to try and impose it.

[Lily Briscoe]

I agree. What do you think the role of communists should be?

What about the role of theory, who develops that?

These are pretty broad questions, and I'm not sure whether you are asking them in more abstract terms (e.g. 'what should the role of communists be in a revolution?'), or in a more concrete sense (i.e. 'what should the role of communists be right now?'). Assuming you mean it in the latter sense, it's a pretty huge question and one that I don't feel I have a very good answer to. I'll say off the bat that I'm not a militant in a political organization; my 'political activity' consists of participating in a discussion circle with a handful of people who've never been able to reach agreement on a whole lot, attending whatever shitty demonstrations and political actions I can make it to (which are normally a complete waste of time and make me think I'm some kind of masochist for continuing to bother with), talking to workers on picket lines and offering support in whatever small way I can during disputes, and stirring shit wherever I happen to be working at a given time (which is more an impulse than some kind of conscious 'political' effort anyway). So probably I am not particularly well positioned to answer the question in the first place, but I'll give it a shot.

Honestly, I'm skeptical that there really is much of a "role" for communists at this point. Most of the established 'communist organizations' that I know of seem pretty worthless at best IMHO. There is the whole thing that Left Communists have (and I know other political currents have similar ideas) about "intervening" in the struggles of the class, and while I think something similar to this is probably the most "useful" thing 'communists' can do at the moment, I'm kind of doubtful that it can influence much of anything with class struggle being at the level that it presently is. I guess my feeling is that, as the class struggle continues to pick up (which I think it will, in fits and starts), the conditions will become more favorable for the development of new organizations that aren't rotting out/moribund/living in the past. Maybe it's possible, where people are able to reach a 'sufficient' level of political agreement, to start building what could be the core of those organizations now. I am personally a bit skeptical about this, though. So I don't know whether any of this rambling textwall has answered your question...

As for 'who develops theory', I think communists do, but not in isolation from class struggle (and a lot of the theory that gets developed in this manner, or during periods of very low class struggle, tends to be complete garbage imho).

[reb]

Class consciousness isn't something that a person can create out of thin air. This would be like Freud's method of trying to cure his patients by telling them straight up what he thought their problems were, and meeting similar results. Class conciseness is only something that can arise out of class struggle, of every day economic struggles creating political movements.


Lenin?

Lenin's mistake and one that he dropped. History is always out pacing theory. Curiously enough, the only people who still cling to Lenin's mistake are self styled Leninists.

[SHORAS]

These are pretty broad questions, and I'm not sure whether you are asking them in more abstract terms (e.g. 'what should the role of communists be in a revolution?'), or in a more concrete sense (i.e. 'what should the role of communists be right now?'). Assuming you mean it in the latter sense, it's a pretty huge question and one that I don't feel I have a very good answer to. I'll say off the bat that I'm not a militant in a political organization; my 'political activity' consists of participating in a discussion circle with a handful of people who've never been able to reach agreement on a whole lot, attending whatever shitty demonstrations and political actions I can make it to (which are normally a complete waste of time and make me think I'm some kind of masochist for continuing to bother with), talking to workers on picket lines and offering support in whatever small way I can during disputes, and stirring shit wherever I happen to be working at a given time (which is more an impulse than some kind of conscious 'political' effort anyway). So probably I am not particularly well positioned to answer the question in the first place, but I'll give it a shot.

Honestly, I'm skeptical that there really is much of a "role" for communists at this point. Most of the established 'communist organizations' that I know of seem pretty worthless at best IMHO. There is the whole thing that Left Communists have (and I know other political currents have similar ideas) about "intervening" in the struggles of the class, and while I think something similar to this is probably the most "useful" thing 'communists' can do at the moment, I'm kind of doubtful that it can influence much of anything with class struggle being at the level that it presently is. I guess my feeling is that, as the class struggle continues to pick up (which I think it will, in fits and starts), the conditions will become more favorable for the development of new organizations that aren't rotting out/moribund/living in the past. Maybe it's possible, where people are able to reach a 'sufficient' level of political agreement, to start building what could be the core of those organizations now. I am personally a bit skeptical about this, though. So I don't know whether any of this rambling textwall has answered your question...

As for 'who develops theory', I think communists do, but not in isolation from class struggle (and a lot of the theory that gets developed in this manner, or during periods of very low class struggle, tends to be complete garbage imho).

Thanks Strix, yes I did mean the latter. However, I'm not sure there would be any difference in a revolutionary situation. I broadly agree with your assessment.

[Zukunftsmusik]

There is the whole thing that Left Communists have (and I know other political currents have similar ideas) about "intervening" in the struggles of the class, and while I think something similar to this is probably the most "useful" thing 'communists' can do at the moment, I'm kind of doubtful that it can influence much of anything with class struggle being at the level that it presently is.


The precondition for any intervention is the separation of those carrying out the intervention from those who the intervention is directed toward. Intervention takes us back again to the situation of the enlightened minority bringing revolutionary ideas.

[...]

Communism is not a product of an educated minority, even if part of the reproduction of communism is through the writing and reading of texts. Communism originates in the antagonistic nature of modern society - the contradiction of simultaneous increasing wealth and increasing poverty, precariousness, dispossession, the increasing subjugation of life to the vagaries of the market. Communism and communists are a spontaneous product of this society.

If communism originates in the proletarian condition, and struggle then this has implications for the notion of "intervention". Whereas "intervention" implies the monologue of the radical minority, communism develops through multidirectional communication and through a partisan participation.

What is usually meant by "intervention": * hand out a leaflet at a demonstration or speak at a meeting, where you regard the majority of your potential audience as imbeciles.

[...]

Communists are not heroes who bring the revolution, or dangerous intellectuals who will lead astray the "simple minded proles". Mostly we are proletarians, but not ordinary ones, or no more ordinary than all the others. We don’t have a historical role, but like many others we have the need to live differently, and the recognition that this is a possibility.

Intervention/Communication/Participation (http://www.prole.info/texts/antagonism_intervention.html)

I agree with your post over-all, but I find this text useful regarding the concept of interventions. In parts I didn't quote the text is more nuanced - you should give it a read as it's very short yet enlightening. Posted it to give flesh to your point more than anything, really.

[Lily Briscoe]

Intervention/Communication/Participation (http://www.prole.info/texts/antagonism_intervention.html)

I agree with your post over-all, but I find this text useful regarding the concept of interventions. In parts I didn't quote the text is more nuanced - you should give it a read as it's very short yet enlightening. Posted it to give flesh to your point more than anything, really.

I have read it before actually. Will try to respond when I get home from work tonight

[SHORAS]

Whereas "intervention" implies the monologue of the radical minority, communism develops through multidirectional communication and through a partisan participation.

What is usually meant by "intervention": * hand out a leaflet at a demonstration or speak at a meeting, where you regard the majority of your potential audience as imbeciles.

This is just the old 'Leninist' trope about consciousness really. And complete bollocks.
Neither of the two things in bold are necessary. Who actually holds these views?

[Zukunftsmusik]

I agree that the last phrasing isn't necessary - few people actually think this way. But the attitude exist, and even though people probably don't think "now I'm preaching to the unknowing masses", this is the way it comes off. If you look at the OP, for example, who nowhere calls the people he talks to or who needs their consciousness raised, for imbeciles. But the way they phrase the question certainly implies a division between communism and the working class - communism is something everyone - or at least a lot more people - should "understand" and desire in order to "get things going" or "make it (communism) happen". This is to get everything backwards, and to work this way in order to raise consciousness is a waste of time and effort.

I think the more important point in that text is about how communism is a movement that arises out of the antagonisms of capitalist society. This won't happen without some sort of "consciousness" being "raised", but one element (consciousness) won't create the other (struggle), it's a two-way process. This division of consciousness (in so far this is a useful concept) from struggle, or even from everyday life, is exactly where the OP, for example, does a mistake.

[RedMaterialist]

Class consciousness is not created by self-appointed revolutionaries who are more or less divorced from the production process.

Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, were all more or less divorced from the production process. And we all know what class Engels belonged to.

[RedMaterialist]

[QUOTE=SHORAS;2737788]I agree. What do you think the role of communists should be?

Here is Marx on that question:

In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole?

The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties.

They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.

The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality. 2. In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.

[AmilcarCabral]

Dialectical: You know the lack of communist and revolutionary thinking in most most poor low-wage workers of USA is like the great majority of overweight, obese fat people of America, who know that with low-calorie, low-carb diets and a painful pro-active daily exercise routine that requires pain, suffering and discipline they can lose weight, lower cholesterol levels, and prevent diabetes, heart disease and cancer. But they they prefer to continue eating a lot of junk high calorie food and living a sedentary life, because the other option of being in shape and healthy requires pain, and suffering.

And this which we are talking about right now "class consciousness" and talking about communism and radical leftists ideas in the places where we work, in public places in America (A country where most people are too shy to talk about politics in public places) requires a lot of risks, being offended, requires pain, the pain of having family problems, of being hated by our own families, by our friends, of being trashed, bashed and alienated by our closest friends. That's the pain and risks that requires for each poor american that experiences a conversion to communist ideas

And it is clear right now that most americans prefer to be ruled by Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton in 2016, than to to feel the pain of being trashed, hated and alienated by our own friends, and families for being 100% devoted to communism and for talking about the need of communism in public places as the only solution to all the economic problems that most poor americans are facing right now






How to create class consciousness amongst the proletariat?

I agree with Gramsci that we should create 'organic intellectuals', working class intellectuals so to speak.

I will share a little anecdote from my personal life. I remember having a conversation about communism with some of my fellow proletarians at the factory where I worked at back then. They basically told me that communism only looks good on paper but isn't practical. They liked the idea of communism but thought that it wasn't feasible in real life. How should we tackle such rhetoric?

Of course criticizing and combating false consciousness is always the first step one should take, if one wants to create class consciousness amongst the working class. But I'm looking for more broader ideas and tactics.

[Max]

That is so true. People know that communism is the best system of government, but they don't want to try it because it requires them to leave their comfort zone and to try something new. To ignite revolution, all we need to do is show the proletariat that it is worth it to make the change, and that life will be better once we do.

[SHORAS]

Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, were all more or less divorced from the production process. And we all know what class Engels belonged to.

I'd argue some of those weren't revolutionary but what's your point?

[SHORAS]

[QUOTE=SHORAS;2737788]I agree. What do you think the role of communists should be?

Here is Marx on that question:

In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole?

The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties.

They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.

The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality. 2. In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.

I find that almost irrelevant and pretty vague.

[SHORAS]

That is so true. People know that communism is the best system of government, but they don't want to try it because it requires them to leave their comfort zone and to try something new. To ignite revolution, all we need to do is show the proletariat that it is worth it to make the change, and that life will be better once we do.

Bollocks. Read the first page.

[AmilcarCabral]

imax: That's why communists radical leftists should also read personal empowerment type of philosophy, psychology, history and general knowledge because it requires a lot of self-power, personal empowerment to be a communist a radical leftist in USA, a country where communism and radical leftist ideas are taboos, even in the 21st Century where even the Pope talks against capitalism in his speeches. In other words in order to be a communist in the USA, you have to be like a sort of rambo and even be paranoid all the time because you will have the whole american society against you

Radical marxists, radical communists in America if they talk about communism in a social event, in a party, in their work places, they would get alienated by their own friends, families and society. And you know how most people are in USA, most people in the USA are very loyal to CNN, FOX news, church leaders, school authorities, their bosses. Even if they are republican voters, they see Obama as their king, dad and god. And most people because they feel like pieces of trash in USA as a result of a shitty life, being taxed to death, billed to death and over-worked to death, and who are super-stressed on a permanent basis, kneel down psychologically and spiritually pretty easy to the politically correct ideology (Which is loving democrats and republicans unconditionally).

And to the consensus-reality and argumentun ad populum that says something like this: "USA is a capitalist-socialist workers paradise with wealth and luxuries for all americans. And USA Armed Forces are revolutionary liberation forces like Che Guevara and FARC colombian rebels liberating people around the world"

And any anti-USA government like Venezuelan government, Cuban government, Iran, Russia are monsters and evil, and all anti-war, progressive and leftists of USA like Amy goodman, and anti-US imperialism movie stars like Sean Penn and Oliver Stone hate the freedoms of USA.

So because most americans rely on argumentum ad populum and consensus reality (What ever is believed by the majority), and not by evidence-based arguments (what is proven with scientific methods) to know what is good, and bad, what is true and a lie, being communist in USA is real hard because the consensus reality and argumentum ad populum argument about political systems is that capitalism is a great political system that creates wealth and pleasures for everybody. While communism, socialist workers states are nazi fascist dictatorships where a military dictator rules the whole nation, and leads to hunger and starvation because under communism people are only allowed to eat a couple of eggs a week

Here is a great definition of argumentum ad populum (the tool used by Americans to judge reality):

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

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so." This type of argument is known by several names, including appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy, and in Latin as argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.

Examples of arguments based on argumentum ad populum. (This fallacy is sometimes committed while trying to convince a person that a widely popular thought is true.):

Nine out of ten of my constituents oppose the bill, therefore it is a bad idea.

Fifty million Elvis fans can't be wrong.

Everyone's doing it.

In a court of law, the jury vote by majority; therefore they will always make the correct decision.

Many people buy extended warranties, therefore it is wise to buy them.

Millions of people believe in God.

The majority of this country voted for this President, therefore this president can't be wrong

The great majority of US citizens and voters support and vote for capitalist political parties and only a minority vote for revolutionary radical marxist parties. Therefore capitalism is good and communism theory is bad.


PD: By the way I would like to say something about most americans being in a permanent state of stress and something that Alan Woods, from the website http://www.marxist.com and the British International Marxist Tendency said. He said remembering something that Lenin said, he claimed that Lenin said that when humans are over-stressed and at the edge of a cliff, humans can't think rationally, scientifically and with common sense. And they would do any crazy, and take desperate solutions. Thats why Trotsky claimed that capitalists are tobogaging makind toward a disaster with their eyes closed; and most americans are over-stressed and I think that the excess of a super stress lifestyle is another impediment for communism. Because people in America also vote for the "lesser evil" of both parties every 4 years out of their painful over-stress life of being over-tired, over-depressed, over-worked, billed and taxed to death.




That is so true. People know that communism is the best system of government, but they don't want to try it because it requires them to leave their comfort zone and to try something new. To ignite revolution, all we need to do is show the proletariat that it is worth it to make the change, and that life will be better once we do.

[Max]

imax: That's why communists radical leftists should also read personal empowerment type of philosophy, psychology, history and general knowledge because it requires a lot of self-power, personal empowerment to be a communist a radical leftist in USA, a country where communism and radical leftist ideas are taboos, even in the 21st Century where even the Pope talks against capitalism in his speeches. In other words in order to be a communist in the USA, you have to be like a sort of rambo and even be paranoid all the time because you will have the whole american society against you

Radical marxists, radical communists in America if they talk about communism in a social event, in a party, in their work places, they would get alienated by their own friends, families and society. And you know how most people are in USA, most people in the USA are very loyal to CNN, FOX news, church leaders, school authorities, their bosses. Even if they are republican voters, they see Obama as their king, dad and god. And most people because they feel like pieces of trash in USA as a result of a shitty life, being taxed to death, billed to death and over-worked to death, and who are super-stressed on a permanent basis, kneel down psychologically and spiritually pretty easy to the politically correct ideology (Which is loving democrats and republicans unconditionally).

And to the consensus-reality and argumentun ad populum that says something like this: "USA is a capitalist-socialist workers paradise with wealth and luxuries for all americans. And USA Armed Forces are revolutionary liberation forces like Che Guevara and FARC colombian rebels liberating people around the world"

And any anti-USA government like Venezuelan government, Cuban government, Iran, Russia are monsters and evil, and all anti-war, progressive and leftists of USA like Amy goodman, and anti-US imperialism movie stars like Sean Penn and Oliver Stone hate the freedoms of USA.

So because most americans rely on argumentum ad populum and consensus reality (What ever is believed by the majority), and not by evidence-based arguments (what is proven with scientific methods) to know what is good, and bad, what is true and a lie, being communist in USA is real hard because the consensus reality and argumentum ad populum argument about political systems is that capitalism is a great political system that creates wealth and pleasures for everybody. While communism, socialist workers states are nazi fascist dictatorships where a military dictator rules the whole nation, and leads to hunger and starvation because under communism people are only allowed to eat a couple of eggs a week

Here is a great definition of argumentum ad populum (the tool used by Americans to judge reality):



In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so." This type of argument is known by several names, including appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy, and in Latin as argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.

Examples of arguments based on argumentum ad populum. (This fallacy is sometimes committed while trying to convince a person that a widely popular thought is true.):

Nine out of ten of my constituents oppose the bill, therefore it is a bad idea.

Fifty million Elvis fans can't be wrong.

Everyone's doing it.

In a court of law, the jury vote by majority; therefore they will always make the correct decision.

Many people buy extended warranties, therefore it is wise to buy them.

Millions of people believe in God.

The majority of this country voted for this President, therefore this president can't be wrong

The great majority of US citizens and voters support and vote for capitalist political parties and only a minority vote for revolutionary radical marxist parties. Therefore capitalism is good and communism theory is bad.


PD: By the way I would like to say something about most americans being in a permanent state of stress and something that Alan Woods, from the website and the British International Marxist Tendency said. He said remembering something that Lenin said, he claimed that Lenin said that when humans are over-stressed and at the edge of a cliff, humans can't think rationally, scientifically and with common sense. And they would do any crazy, and take desperate solutions. Thats why Trotsky claimed that capitalists are tobogaging makind toward a disaster with their eyes closed; and most americans are over-stressed and I think that the excess of a super stress lifestyle is another impediment for communism. Because people in America also vote for the "lesser evil" of both parties every 4 years out of their painful over-stress life of being over-tired, over-depressed, over-worked, billed and taxed to death.

That is a great point. In my high school, there is are some communists like myself, and it is nice to not be the only one. But i live in Cali so thats understandable. What we need to do is show the blue collar workers and the farmers of middle America that communism is the solution to the problems that we are facing today. Also, we need to get rid of the myths that surround communism, such as that there is a dictator who works for his own personal good. We need to show them that it is the people, the workers who rule, not the rich Burgoise(excuse my spelling) that control the nation, as they do in the US. Then, they will embrace communism for what it really is. Rule by the workers, for the workers.

[MarcusRib]

3d-agents com/【トゥシェtuche】3d-air-makeブラ-34カップノンワイヤーブラジャー-【Rcp】-fs-jp-7869 html
3d-agents com/ボンボンランジェリー-bonbonlingerie-alice-ハーフカップブラジャー【Rcp】-f-jp-7155 html
3d-agents com/オーバドゥaubade-コント-ルシ-シリーズ-ノンパデット-12カップブラジャー-bcd【テイスト-jp-7279 html
3d-agents com/シモーヌペレールsimoneperele-ingenue-ノンパテッドフルカップブラジャー-simo-jp-6968 html
3d-agents com/ワコールwacoal-ラゼlasee-bfa479-79g-パーソナルフィットブラ-34カップ-g--jp-7354 html

dgdyj com/p-1409-DAYTONA　ホシュウヨウHIDバルブ-H1STD[デイトナ]メーカー品番：6049DAYTONA　ホシュウヨウHIDバルブ H1STD[デイトナ]メーカー品番：60495
dgdyj com/p-5716-XAM-JAPAN-（ザムジャパン）-　Rスプロケット(リアスプロケット)　適合車種：XAM JAPAN （ザムジャパン） 　Rスプロケット(リアスプロケット)　適合車種：ZX9R(-01)/ZRX1200(01-)/ZX-12R/ZZR1200(02-)　 A6402X38T　(オートバイ用駆動系・カワサキ用スプロケット)
dgdyj com/p-2295-DAYTONA　ダクトルックエアクリーナーカバー-FORZA[デイトナ]メーカー品番：DAYTONA　ダクトルックエアクリーナーカバー/FORZA[デイトナ]メーカー品番：64811
dgdyj com/p-5394-XAM-JAPAN-（ザムジャパン）-　Rスプロケット(リアスプロケット)　適合車種：XAM JAPAN （ザムジャパン） 　Rスプロケット(リアスプロケット)　適合車種：HARLEY ALL MODEL(-99) forusespacer　 A6703X44T　(オートバイ用駆動系・ハーレー用スプロケット)
dgdyj com/p-3453-キタコ　ハイギヤードクラッチKIT　メーカー品番：307-4021770キタコ　ハイギヤードクラッチKIT　メーカー品番：307-4021770

erotik-livecam biz/プロジェクション-クロック-【掛け時計-壁掛け時計-壁時計-時計-壁掛け-置き時計-置時計-インテリ-jp-204 html
erotik-livecam biz/ニキシー管時計-me1in14-【ニキシー管-置き時計-アンティーク-おすすめ-時計-置時計-おしゃ-jp-619 html]ニキシー管　置き時計
erotik-livecam biz/電波時計-オベリスク-w438【掛け時計-壁掛け時計-掛時計-時計-壁掛け-デザイン掛け時計-電波--jp-200 html
erotik-livecam biz/掛け時計-ラタンクロック-rn002-クロック-壁掛け時計-壁-時計-掛時計-クロック-ウォールクロ-jp-375 html
erotik-livecam biz/掛け時計-活版時計リボン-ocl002【壁掛け-インテリア-おしゃれ-ラブリー-ガーリー-かわいい--jp-812 html

myfunpills com/【着後レビューで送料無料】【日本製】Small-stone-socksスモールストーンソックス-メン-jp-8758 html
myfunpills com/【期間限定★着後レビューで6372円】【正規品★即納】nativeネイティブ-jimmy（ジミー）ビ-jp-9418 html
myfunpills com/vibgyorヴィブジョー-ツイル-ステンカラーコート【メンズ-ショップコート-通勤-通学-ビブジョ-jp-8810 html
myfunpills com/【送料無料】Dieselディーゼル-losleeky-キャンバス×スエードレザー×ピッグスキン-ロー-jp-9121 html
myfunpills com/galvanizeガルバナイズ-アンサンブル-カーディガン＆ボタンダウンシャツ【メンズ-アメカジ-m-jp-8953 html

saljguld net/トルコ製のお手頃なカーペット！激安じゅうたん！160x230cm（約3畳用）ヨーロピアン 絨毯【激安卸-jp-7186 html
saljguld net/トルコ製のお得な絨毯3畳激安じゅうたん！160x230cm（約3畳用）【激安卸通販価格！ 】グリーン、-jp-7304 html
saljguld net/★衝撃価格！★ウール100％のお値打ち絨毯！超激安76％Off！ウィルトン織りカーペット1 60x23-jp-7212 html
saljguld net/ウィルトン織り-廊下敷-カーペット-高級トルコ製激安-絨毯！80x330cm【廊下マット】グリーン、-jp-7197 html]高級トルコ製
saljguld net/廊下カーペット-高級トルコ製激安67ＯＦＦ！80x420cm【廊下マット】グリーン、レッド（赤）廊下-jp-7160 html

teknopanel net/p-2333-カシオ-シーン-レディース腕時計-電波ソーラー-シルバー-SHW-1504D-7AJF]カシオ シーン レディース腕時計 電波ソーラー シルバー SHW-1504D-7AJF【fs04gm】
teknopanel net/p-2170-カシオ-シーン-レディース腕時計-ソーラー-ピンク-シルバー-SHE-4504SBD-]カシオ シーン レディース腕時計 ソーラー ピンク シルバー SHE-4504SBD-4AJF【fs04gm】
teknopanel net/p-197-【ice-phone】アイスフォン-iphonスタンド-スマートフォン-スマホ対応-ic]【ice phone】アイスフォン iphonスタンド スマートフォン スマホ対応 ice watch アイスウォッチ ブルー IPFBE【fs04gm】
teknopanel net/p-1061-【CASIO-G-SHOCK】カシオ-海外モデル-Gショック-メンズデジタル腕時計-レ]【CASIO G-SHOCK】カシオ 海外モデル Gショック メンズデジタル腕時計 レッド液晶 マットブラックウレタンベルト GD-100MS-1DR【fs04gm】
teknopanel net/p-2331-カシオ-シーン-レディース腕時計-電波ソーラー-パープル-シルバー-SHW-1504D]カシオ シーン レディース腕時計 電波ソーラー パープル シルバー SHW-1504D-6AJF【fs04gm】

tex-mix com/tory-burchトリーバーチ　バッグ-レディース-2wayショルダークラッチバッグ-ブラック-a-jp-7575 html
tex-mix com/burberryバーバリー-メンズ-クルーネックtシャツ　アッシュブルー-mccall-390459-jp-7208 html
tex-mix com/burberryバーバリー-レディース-ラウンドファスナー長財布小銭入れ付-ミリタリーレッド-lgz-jp-7566 html
tex-mix com/burberryバーバリー-ポロシャツ-メンズ-半袖ポロシャツ-ホワイト-jbstephenson--jp-7164 html
tex-mix com/リモワ-スーツケース-salsa-サルサ-スーツケース（大サイズ82l）-2輪トローリー-シルバーグ-jp-7553 html

rakuten ne jp/gold/ishiryu/menshirt htm]麻 シャツ メンズ ボタンシャツ rakuten ne jp/gold/ishiryu/menTshirt htm]半袖tシャツ 半袖tシャツ rakuten ne jp/gold/ishiryu/Long-sleevedshirt htm]シャツ 長袖 カジュアルシャツ item rakuten co jp/ishiryu/s1110/]パンプス ローヒール パンプス ローヒール

rakuten ne jp/gold/ishiryu/mensyatu htm]半袖シャツ シャツおしゃれ rakuten ne jp/gold/ishiryu/menTie htm]礼服 ネクタイ ネクタイ プレゼント

[Црвена]

"It looks good on paper," is what everyone says. They're just repeating what the capitalist propaganda has said to them. The revolution won't happen until we expose or counteract this propaganda. As Khrushchev said, we should assist (the people's) elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism.

[Comrade #138672]

Struggle guided by a revolutionary Vanguard.

[exeexe]

Let me introduce the transistor:
It has Input A and B
and output C
http://i58.tinypic.com/1zzhnkn.jpg

A genius invention which works according to a principles that we also can use to radicalise the workers.

The transistor works by having a source of electricity to give it power at B. This input is constant since its the power source. Then there is the variable input electricity coming from A. A is a signal and therefore is weak. When A is high or above a certain treshhold the transistor works in such a way that electricity will flow through C but with much more energyflow than which came from A.

So its smart you just give the transistor a weak signal and bam you got a powerful signal coming out of the transistor at C.

And in the same way we can give a constant flow of propaganda to the workers but it is only when capitalism fails (consider capitalism to be a variable signal) that the workers will rise up and become radicalized.

So it will be a combination of theory and practical observations. I dont think theory can do it alone.