Justice for Michael Brown – Justice for us All - Risparty.org

[Tim Redd]

Justice for Michael Brown – Justice for us All

The assault on Michael Brown was nothing less than murder. It was the murder of an individual and attempted murder of the Black community as a whole. These kind of police murders have been taking place since Blacks arrived in the Americas as slaves. These kind of police murders where the Black victim is unarmed are brutal messages from the powers that be that Blacks must accept their exploitation in the prevailing system of the time be it past slavery, or today’s capitalism.

There has been an epidemic of police murders even since the successes of the civil rights movement in the ‘60’s. Daily, unarmed Blacks are beat up and or shot by police officers. In just the past 5 years in addition to the “hands up” murder of Michael Brown, there has been the Fruitvale Station murder of Oscar Grant in Oakland while cuffed and on the ground, the police choke hold murder of Eric Garner in Staten Island New York. Also recently there is the St. Louis, Mo. murder of Kajieme Powell, a mentally disabled Black youth who though holding a knife was shot after he had backed up from the cops who killed him. The cops pumped 12 shots into Kajieme when use of a TASER or a single, non-lethal shot would have incapacitated and put him in a position for the cops to arrest him. And just short of murder there is the shameful, brutal beating in the face of a Black female by a California Highway Patrol cop.

The press has distributed videos where it appears Michael Brown is committing an act of petty robbery before he was shot. Even if the cop who shot him knew about the robbery, which he didn’t that in no way makes it OK for the cop to act as jury and executioner for that act. Capital murder is not the accepted punishment for petty robbery in the U.S.. Wall Street finance beasts have ripped off millions and billions from the masses, yet no one saying they deserve capital punishment for their acts. This has been accepted behavior by the police against Blacks because the life and well-being of a Black person has little significance in the racist thinking and practices present in Amerika. And lack of significance of Black lives originated from the vile institution of slavery that existed in the Southern states. From there it permeated the thinking of whites everywhere in Amerika.

While we should vigorously stand up for justice for Michael Brown, the practice of some protestors holding their arms up in the air, to demand justice for Michael Brown is not a good thing and should be ended. The practice makes the masses struggling for justice for Michael Brown appear to be giving up to the police and powerless against police murder. In reality the masses are powerful when they stand together to demonstrate and rally against police and justice for Michael Brown.

In a capitalist country like Amerika, it may be possible to end maltreatment against Blacks. But this would require such extraordinary struggle by the masses of people – Black, White, Asian, Indian and others - against the capitalist system that we would be better off raising our sights higher and struggling for communist revolution to not only end police maltreatment but to eliminate all exploitation and oppression throughout society. Given that many of the masses of people are already struggling against low wages, for better housing, for women’s equality and more, we should unite these fights with the struggle against police murder and aim to overthrow the rule of the superrich 1% with a communist revolution.

Communist revolution is all about eliminating all exploitation and oppression and it is much more capable of righting wrongs like the police murder against Blacks and Hispanics for the long term as opposed to only fighting to end police murder and brutality. Note that the struggle for justice for Michael Brown is a struggle for all peoples, not just Blacks. And if we are to make a communist revolution it will require the unity of people of all colors.

Revolutionary Internationalist Socialist Party – RISP (USA) www.risparty.org [email protected]

[Ravn]

Wall Street finance beasts have ripped off ... billions from the masses, yet no one saying they deserve capital punishment for their acts. Well, maybe they should. Make the financiers shit *their* pants. Make them watch *their* back.

[QueerVanguard]

Maybe if your website didn't look like it was made by a 12 year old in 1993, we could take your shit more seriously. Seriously, get your stuff together.

[Tim Cornelis]

^I guess you missed all the references to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism-Redd Thought to conclude that he can't ever be taken seriously. Megalomaniac would-be cult leader.

[Tim Redd]

Maybe if your website didn't look like it was made by a 12 year old in 1993, we could take your shit more seriously. Seriously, get your stuff together.

So you can't take a serious and militant stand against the daily brutality and wholly unjustified murder of Blacks and other minorities by the pig police until a web site controlled by those taking a militant stand is set up to match your bourgeois aesthetic?

If you honestly think that is what is most important in this thread, you've got a serious problem bloke.

[Tim Redd]

^I guess you missed all the references to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism-Redd Thought to conclude that he can't ever be taken seriously. Megalomaniac would-be cult leader.

You're so hung up opposing Redd Thought that you can't carry out your duties as a revolutionary who stands against the daily vicious pig repression and wanton murder of Blacks and other minorities?

Comments in favor of Redd theory dominate your thoughts so much that garbage is the first thing you have to say in this thread labeled " Justice for Michael Brown – Justice for us All" (http://www.revleft.com/vb/justice-michael-brown-p2809005/index.html#post2809005).

It isn't about the nature of the struggle against, police murder, and police brutality that you first speak about, but a petty argument against Redd Thought. You are part of the problem. You act as an agent of the bourgeoisie whether you know it or not.

[BIXX]

Its because you aren't bringing anything new to the table. Some of us have put our necks out to fight against racist murders, the police, etc... So when someone tries to come along acting as if they have the great new thing that will liberate us all its not only presuming to have all the answers but its insulting to say that all that we do was stupid and useless (for example, your analysis of holding the hands up is not only stupid but it acts like everyone who partakes is stupid). Furthermore I think there are times when it might add to the power of an image to do it. I've done it a few times when at a protest, but really it kinda depends on what I feel like doing. But acting all high and mighty about shit that I get the impression you don't participate in (protests) is stupid as fuck.

[Tim Cornelis]

You're so hung up opposing Redd Thought that you can't carry out your duties as a revolutionary who stands against the daily vicious pig repression and wanton murder of Blacks and other minorities?

Comments in favor of Redd theory dominate your thoughts so much that garbage is the first thing you have to say in this thread labeled " Justice for Michael Brown – Justice for us All" (http://www.revleft.com/vb/justice-michael-brown-p2809005/index.html#post2809005).

It isn't about the nature of the struggle against, police murder, and police brutality that you first speak about, but a petty argument against Redd Thought. You are part of the problem. You act as an agent of the bourgeoisie whether you know it or not.

Your assumption that "comments in favour of Redd theory dominaty [my] thoughts" suggest an inflated sense of self-importance. I can honestly say that I have never seen one positive comment about 'Redd theory', or in fact, that I have never heard of 'Redd Thought' before in my life. To me, this suggests that you may indeed have delusions of grandeur. And if you have, you will probably rationalise this and ignore it, but I'm going to say it anyway, I think you may need to seek some help with that. But honestly, you don't think it's a little weird to promote yourself as intellectual heavyweight equal to Marx, Lenin, Mao, when your theories aren't exactly carried by anyone other than yourself?

[newdayrising]

Tim Redd, why do you have your own thought and how does it differ from ordinary marxism-leninism? I googled it but couldn't find anything.

[Ravn]

I'm not sure what the best way to go about doing this

"Carry out your duties as a revolutionary who stands against the daily vicious pig repression and wanton murder of Blacks and other minorities".

[Tim Cornelis]

"Carry out your duties as a revolutionary who stands against the daily vicious pig repression and wanton murder of Blacks and other minorities".

Leaving aside that it's just an empty slogan*, how is that related to engaging someone with possible mental health issues?

*It is somehow criticising (personality) cult politics, which took less than a minute out of my day, that incapacitates my ability to affect racist police conduct in the United States from the Netherlands.

[Ravn]

Leaving aside that it's just an empty slogan*


Well, perhaps for you, because, *maybe* you just don't give a shit about black people. Racism & sexism are mental health issues.




*It is somehow criticising (personality) cult politics, which took less than a minute out of my day, that incapacitates my ability to affect racist police conduct in the United States from the Netherlands.

There's plenty of racism against black people in the Netherlands.
"The row over Black Pete is a part of wider ‘Afrophobia’ across Europe, it’s been claimed.
The European Network Against Racism (http://www.euronews.com/tag/racism/) (ENAR) says the controversial character is “rooted in the legacy of slavery”.
ENAR used a debate on Black Pete in Brussels on Tuesday (December 16) to call on EU chiefs to act over “structural racism in European society”.
Black Pete, or Zwarte Piet, is the companion of traditional figure Saint Nicholas in Dutch folklore.
Those playing the controversial figure blacken their faces and put on a curly wig, red lipstick and colourful clothes.
Proponents say Black Pete is a tradition (http://www.euronews.com/tag/tradition/) and not linked to racism. A survey in the Netherlands (http://www.euronews.com/tag/netherlands/) last year revealed 92 percent didn’t think the character was racist.
Supporters of the tradition include the country’s prime minister, Mark Rutte, who said: “Black Peter is black. There is not much we can do to change that.”
ENAR said in a statement to euronews: “It is high time the European Union (http://www.euronews.com/tag/european-union/) acts to address racism and discrimination against people of African descent in Europe.
“The ‘Black Pete’ debate in the Netherlands is just a reflection of the reality of Afrophobia across Europe.
“EU decision makers must recognise this reality and develop effective strategies to counter the structural racism that prevents the inclusion of so many Black people in European society.”
Swedish MEP Malin Björk said: “All European countries have these issues of Afrophobia to do away with and face up to. Traditions and culture must evolve. And in that process, the most valuable voices are those of people that experience Afrophobia. It is time to listen. To listen and to evolve!”
Scores of people were arrested in the Dutch city Gouda in November after trouble broke out during a re-enactment of the arrival of Nicholas and his Black Petes.
An Amsterdam court ruled the tradition did give rise to a negative stereotyping of black people, but this was later overturned by a higher court."


http://www.euronews.com/2014/12/16/black-pete-a-symptom-of-europes-afrophobia-warn-campaigners/

[Tim Cornelis]

Well, perhaps for you, because, *maybe* you just don't give a shit about black people. Racism & sexism are mental health issues.

Says the anti-semite!


There's plenty of racism against black people in the Netherlands.
"The row over Black Pete is a part of wider ‘Afrophobia’ across Europe, it’s been claimed.
The European Network Against Racism (http://www.euronews.com/tag/racism/) (ENAR) says the controversial character is “rooted in the legacy of slavery”.
ENAR used a debate on Black Pete in Brussels on Tuesday (December 16) to call on EU chiefs to act over “structural racism in European society”.
Black Pete, or Zwarte Piet, is the companion of traditional figure Saint Nicholas in Dutch folklore.
Those playing the controversial figure blacken their faces and put on a curly wig, red lipstick and colourful clothes.
Proponents say Black Pete is a tradition (http://www.euronews.com/tag/tradition/) and not linked to racism. A survey in the Netherlands (http://www.euronews.com/tag/netherlands/) last year revealed 92 percent didn’t think the character was racist.
Supporters of the tradition include the country’s prime minister, Mark Rutte, who said: “Black Peter is black. There is not much we can do to change that.”
ENAR said in a statement to euronews: “It is high time the European Union (http://www.euronews.com/tag/european-union/) acts to address racism and discrimination against people of African descent in Europe.
“The ‘Black Pete’ debate in the Netherlands is just a reflection of the reality of Afrophobia across Europe.
“EU decision makers must recognise this reality and develop effective strategies to counter the structural racism that prevents the inclusion of so many Black people in European society.”
Swedish MEP Malin Björk said: “All European countries have these issues of Afrophobia to do away with and face up to. Traditions and culture must evolve. And in that process, the most valuable voices are those of people that experience Afrophobia. It is time to listen. To listen and to evolve!”
Scores of people were arrested in the Dutch city Gouda in November after trouble broke out during a re-enactment of the arrival of Nicholas and his Black Petes.
An Amsterdam court ruled the tradition did give rise to a negative stereotyping of black people, but this was later overturned by a higher court."


http://www.euronews.com/2014/12/16/black-pete-a-symptom-of-europes-afrophobia-warn-campaigners/

Oh gee, you don't say! But this has nothing to do with what we're talking about, also even if we take this into account, it's still stupid. Apparently, I can't take a minute to criticise or evaluate someone trying to create a political cult (of personality) around himself for a minute without turning into a racist! What an idiot you are. Bugger off. Please don't ever reply to me, I can't be bothered with this stupidity.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

More to the point the OP seems to have a rivalry with the cult leader of the RCP (or at least he does in his own mind I suppose) who he claims stole his theory and repackaged it as his own. So in his mind he should be at the center of RCP's cult rather than Avakian. Even if he isn't mentally unstable or something like that, he certainly has some incredibly reactionary political ideas. There's no need to defend him as if he really is standing up to police brutality and Tim is attacking him for it, he's just some weirdo on the internet.

[Ravn]

Says the anti-semite!


I'm opposed to Zionism, because it's racist. Are you oppose to racism against black people, or not?




Oh gee, you don't say! But this has nothing to do with what we're talking about, also even if we take this into account, it's still stupid. Apparently, I can't take a minute to criticise or evaluate someone trying to create a political cult (of personality) around himself for a minute without turning into a racist! What an idiot you are. Bugger off. Please don't ever reply to me, I can't be bothered with this stupidity.

Denouncing a slogan calling for social justice & opposition to police brutality does not you a revolutionary make. & the same problems or similar exist in your own native country. Don't pretend otherwise. But it's more important for you to denounce somebody else for having alleged mental health issues, & on top of that, you're belaboring that point. So, "oh gee", yourself.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Ravn, don't post

[Ravn]

More to the point the OP seems to have a rivalry with the cult leader of the RCP (or at least he does in his own mind I suppose) who he claims stole his theory and repackaged it as his own. So in his mind he should be at the center of RCP's cult rather than Avakian. Even if he isn't mentally unstable or something like that, he certainly has some incredibly reactionary political ideas. There's no need to defend him as if he really is standing up to police brutality and Tim is attacking him for it, he's just some weirdo on the internet.



Avakian & Redd both denounce police brutality & that's the correct line to take. If all the so-called internet weirdos take up the correct line about a particular issue, what's the point in denouncing them as weirdos rather than affirm that correct line with whatever appropriate qualifications that are necessary?

The OP was focused on the issue of Michael Brown & police brutality. The response to that has been a lot of ad hominem. Why?

What is your problem with the following?

Redd:
"The assault on Michael Brown was nothing less than murder. It was the murder of an individual and attempted murder of the Black community as a whole. These kind of police murders have been taking place since Blacks arrived in the Americas as slaves. These kind of police murders where the Black victim is unarmed are brutal messages from the powers that be that Blacks must accept their exploitation in the prevailing system of the time be it past slavery, or today’s capitalism."

[BIXX]

Avakian & Redd both denounce police brutality & that's the correct line to take. If all the so-called internet weirdos take up the correct line about a particular issue, what's the point in denouncing them as weirdos rather than affirm that correct line with whatever appropriate qualifications that are necessary?

Because the way in which they took that line is delegitimizing of those who actually have put themselves out there. So fuck off.

[Ravn]

Because the way in which they took that line is delegitimizing of those who actually have put themselves out there. So fuck off.


Why the hostility? It's egotistic to claim legitimacy. You don't have no more a proprietary claim over the correct line than they do.

[BIXX]

Why the hostility? It's egotistic to claim legitimacy. You don't have no more a proprietary claim over the correct line than they do.
I'm not saying I'm taking the correct line, I'm saying they are insulting the folks who have actually put themselves out there, shown solidarity etc... Which I doubt Redd has really done.


Oh yeah and the hostility is because I want you to be taken in the next purge cause you suck

[Lord Testicles]

Why the hostility? It's egotistic to claim legitimacy. You don't have no more a proprietary claim over the correct line than they do.

Egotistic would be writing a couple of pages of text and then declaring an ideology named after yourself. You know, something akin to "Redd thought."

Why do you come here to shit-post, and perhaps more importantly why is that all you seem to be capable of doing?

[BIXX]

Egotistic would be writing a couple of pages of text and then declaring an ideology named after yourself. You know, something akin to "Redd thought."

Why do you come here to shit-post, and perhaps more importantly why is that all you seem to be capable of doing?
Because they are incapable of any deeper thought. I suspect liberal or libertarian.

[Tim Redd]

Says the anti-semite!



Oh gee, you don't say! But this has nothing to do with what we're talking about, also even if we take this into account, it's still stupid. Apparently, I can't take a minute to criticise or evaluate someone trying to create a political cult (of personality) around himself for a minute without turning into a racist! What an idiot you are. Bugger off. Please don't ever reply to me, I can't be bothered with this stupidity.

Given that criticism of a web site was your first and only real concern at the time, you clearly have an issue setting priorities regarding the revolutionary struggle.

[Tim Cornelis]

Given that criticism of a web site was your first and only real concern at the time, you clearly have an issue setting priorities regarding the revolutionary struggle.

You and ravn (sock puppet?) really have trouble discerning between posting on an online forum and participation in 'the revolutionary struggle'. Posting on RevLeft does not constitute a 'revolutionary struggle' and it does not influence actual events, and certainly me posting from the Netherlands doesn't affect struggles in the USA. And since your post was obviously intended to reach 'the masses' how they will perceive it is definitely relevant. It's also not very well written in that regard. In multiple ways, you are out of touch with reality. I'm not sure what the cause is.

[Per Levy]

Avakian & Redd both denounce police brutality & that's the correct line to take.

for liberals maybe, for people who call themselfs communists and revolutionarys the denounceiation of the police as an institution and the protector of the bourgeois state(and many other things) should be the "correct line" to take, wouldnt you say?


Why the hostility?

from reading this thread, mostly because your posts are shit.

[Ravn]

You and ravn (sock puppet?) really have trouble discerning between posting on an online forum and participation in 'the revolutionary struggle'. Posting on RevLeft does not constitute a 'revolutionary struggle'

Then why do you post here? You're trying to influence somebody. Where's your concern for police brutality & racist violence? It isn't all about *you*.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I think a significant amount of people post here to kill time while at work or in class. Its a discussion forum not a propaganda organ. Your last sentence doesn't make much sense as everyone seems to be in agreement with him while no one seems to be in agreement with you. You should lurk for a few weeks and get a feel for the community before trying to come in and dictate things.

[Ravn]

for liberals maybe, for people who call themselfs communists and revolutionarys the denounceiation of the police as ... the protector of the bourgeois state ... should be the "correct line"

It's not either/or.





... your posts are shit.


A lot of you guys are obviously coming from a position of over-entitlement & superficiality.

OK, your turn ...

[Tim Redd]

Those with negative remarks in this thread mainly about the OP poster are the same naysayers in nearly every thread on Refleft where they raise their voice.

In most cases when they post, it's an ad hominem attack. Their first impulse is to be negative rather than try to build and promote revolutionary theory and understanding.

They are clueless that when making revolution, the struggle against all exploitation and oppression is central and required in order to build the movement to seize power and to later abolish classes and realize communism.

They are petit-bourgeois wannabees who while not capable of really contributing positive revolutionary theory and agitation, bitterly and childishly post psychopathic and egotistical ad hominem against those who do.

I guess it should be expected that the bourgeoisie will attack revolutionary politics and its promoters in every way possible, including trying to create a poisonous atmosphere everywhere by those like the same psychopaths in this thread.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Can everyone cool the fuck down and also stop using accusations of mental illness as a slur?

If folks want to call eachother bourgeois, middle-class, or cultist, it's a little silly, but to be expected I guess. Play it silly, make political arguments, or just let the thread die a natural death please.

[BIXX]

Those with negative remarks in this thread mainly about the OP poster are the same naysayers in nearly every thread on Refleft where they raise their voice.

In most cases when they post, it's an ad hominem attack. Their first impulse is to be negative rather than try to build and promote revolutionary theory and understanding.

They are clueless that when making revolution, the struggle against all exploitation and oppression is central and required in order to build the movement to seize power and to later abolish classes and realize communism.

They are petit-bourgeois wannabees who while not capable of really contributing positive revolutionary theory and agitation, bitterly and childishly post psychopathic and egotistical ad hominem against those who do.

I guess it should be expected that the bourgeoisie will attack revolutionary politics and its promoters in every way possible, including trying to create a poisonous atmosphere everywhere by those like the same psychopaths in this thread.

These are all baseless claims.

[Ravn]

I think a significant amount of people post here to kill time while at work or in class. Its a discussion forum not a propaganda organ. Your last sentence doesn't make much sense as everyone seems to be in agreement with him while no one seems to be in agreement with you. You should lurk for a few weeks and get a feel for the community before trying to come in and dictate things.

Is it fair to assume that you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown? Is it fair to assume that social justice is a low priority for you given your incipient classist attitude expressed by your self-serving presumptions? This thread isn't about you & your narcissistic assessment of demographics. Your appeal to popularity noted. Your hypocritical demand for somebody else not to dictate things while you do so yourself noted. Since this is a political discussion group, then you're here, just like everybody else, to push some sort of line whether consciously or not.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Is it fair to assume that you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown? Is it fair to assume that social justice is a low priority for you given your incipient classist attitude expressed by your self-serving presumptions? This thread isn't about you & your narcissistic assessment of demographics. Your appeal to popularity noted. Your hypocritical demand for somebody else not to dictate things while you do so yourself noted. Since this is a political discussion group, then you're here, just like everybody else, to push some sort of line whether consciously or not.

It won't matter what your line is if you don't learn how to read a room; nobody's likely to hear it after they've booed you off the stage.:ohmy:


I understand you're feeling defensive because people didn't respond favorably to your post but moralistically attacking people doesn't really further a political discussion much. If people focused on surface things about the political arguments being made, it's probably because the articles main points were nothing new, practical, or useful for this audience. Some here might vaguely agree with some arguments or some might disagree with all the main arguments, but nothing much stood out and so the parts that people thought were odd became the focus of discussion.

If you think a political line is important, then convince people of it and why it is relevant to them. Name calling and moralistic appeals don't really work for that imo.

[Ravn]

It won't matter what your line is if you don't learn how to read a room; nobody's likely to hear it after they've booed you off the stage.:ohmy:


I understand you're feeling defensive because people didn't respond favorably to your post but moralistically attacking people doesn't really further a political discussion much.
If people focused on surface things about the political arguments being made, it's probably because the articles main points were nothing new, practical, or useful for this audience. Some here might vaguely agree with some arguments or some might disagree with all the main arguments, but nothing much stood out and so the parts that people thought were odd became the focus of discussion.

If you think a political line is important, then convince people of it and why it is relevant to them. Name calling and moralistic appeals don't really work for that imo.


Is this forum ran by people with thin skins or what? It doesn't matter if "nobody" agrees with me. I'm an adult. I didn't come here to join some Mickey Mouse club. You were perfectly fine to allow people to call another poster crazy but you're apparently afraid of people who can articulate what's wrong with that & what's wrong with some of the thinking that goes on around here. So morality is an issue. There's a lack of it on this site.

[BIXX]

I'm an adult.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gAYL5H46QnQ


I didn't come here to join some Mickey Mouse club. You were perfectly fine to allow people to call another poster crazy

This is a lie, JH was not OK with it. And for the record, I agree with him.


but you're apparently afraid of people who can articulate what's wrong with that & what's wrong with some of the thinking that goes on around here. So morality is an issue. [B]There's a lack of it on this site.

Wrong- there's too much.

[Ravn]

This is a lie, JH was not OK with it. And for the record, I agree with him.


Then why did he let it go on this long? & now you want to go on the record to *now* agree with *him*. What a sycophant.





Wrong- there's too much.

How can there be too much morality? Do you prefer nihilism? Or is it because of your incipient commitment to narcissism?

[PhoenixAsh]

Is it fair to assume that you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown?

I for one do not give a fuck about Michael Brown. I don't know him. I don't care about him. Nor do I care about him in this specific context. Michael Brown is a completely interchangeable person to me.

What I care about is that what happened to Michael Brown, and happens to countless others, happened because of the systemic nature of white supremacy/racism and because of the state as an entity and because of class society and capitalism.

Michael Brown is a mere personification of this issue for me.

Nothing we do will help him. At all.

And why MB specifically? Why not random person #7568 who was beaten and tortured somewhere else or a few months ago or a few months in the future? MB has become a label...a face to the issue. Nothing more.


Is it fair to assume that social justice is a low priority for you

Yes it is incredibly fair to assume that social justice is a low priority. Social Justice inevitable serves as a justification for the status quo by leaving the superstructures that are the root cause of the problems in tact. I focus on the superstructures and my activism is aimed at achieving that through any means..up to an including lending support to social justice initiatives when this is strategically necessary to advance the priority of ending class society.

But social justice is inherrently something that is aimed at creating a "better place" based on bourgeois morality and ideology (human rights ect...ultimately the aims of SJ are the exact same or a continuation of the ideals French Revolution) within the current system.

[BIXX]

Then why did he let it go on this long? & now you want to go on the record to *now* agree with *him*. What a sycophant.
I think you'll find that historically JH and I don't really care for o e another. Not that I despise JH or anything, just that we don't mesh.



How can there be too much morality? Do you prefer nihilism? Or is it because of your incipient commitment to narcissism?
Oh man, this is great.

I'm a nihilist, numb nuts.

[Tim Cornelis]

Can everyone cool the fuck down and also stop using accusations of mental illness as a slur?

If folks want to call eachother bourgeois, middle-class, or cultist, it's a little silly, but to be expected I guess. Play it silly, make political arguments, or just let the thread die a natural death please.

It wasn't a slur.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Ok I'm willing to engage reddthink seriously for a little while. Why does reddthink contain so many elements of liberalism, like references to "the 99%" and "corporatocracy"? What use is a concept like corporatocracy to a revolutionary movement? The same goes for "the 99%". I feel like I might be channeling rafiq a little here, but these concepts are rooted in a petit-bourgeois mindset. A term like corporatocracy is clearly meant to imply a hostility to big capitalists specifically, not capitalism as a whole. Implying, at best, a position of neutrality towards the small capitalist. Though in real world usage it is actually used explicitly in defense of small business as we all know. '99%' of America would also include small business owners, not to mention some number of big capitalists as well. Does the revolutionary proletariat share interests with small and big capitalists? Is that what your decades of revolutionary experience has taught you?

What use is this theory to anyone? Does timmy really expect us to believe that his theory represents the new hope for revolution when it actively sides, either intentionally or unintentionally, with capitalists? Either tim redd is a man so bitter over his supposed past experiences with bob avakian that he has taken to tolling the communist community online with his ridiculous angelfire-esque website, or he is so out of touch with reality he can't even formulate an actual communist position on anything. Regardless of which is actually true, tim redd is not a communist and his position on anything deserves as much attention as any other loudmouth on the internet arguing in favor of small businesses.

Fuck you tim redd, I want to fight you in a cage match.

Signed Elizabeth, Grade 4

[BIXX]

Fuck you tim redd, I want to fight you in a cage match.

Signed Elizabeth, Grade 4

The most important part of this post hahaha.

[G4b3n]

You seem like that annoying guy who is forced to leave a protest after receiving too many angry comments and stares from selling your newspapers and promoting your own agenda.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Can you imagine though, when I walk on stage in my ultimate warrior getup and lay the smackdown on this dude and his basement grade-avakianism?

Ultimate warrior was a white dude though so his persona might count as racism. But only on a white guy maybe

[Tim Redd]

Fuck you tim redd, I want to fight you in a cage match.
Signed Elizabeth, Grade 4


The most important part of this post hahaha.

If you're a right wing reactionary bourgeois provacateur. And it's clear you both are.

[Tim Redd]

I for one do not give a fuck about Michael Brown. I don't know him. I don't care about him. Nor do I care about him in this specific context. Michael Brown is a completely interchangeable person to me.

What I care about is that what happened to Michael Brown, and happens to countless others, happened because of the systemic nature of white supremacy/racism and because of the state as an entity and because of class society and capitalism.

Michael Brown is a mere personification of this issue for me.

You're clearly a sick right wing reactionary. You and your buddies in this thread shouldn't even be allowed in the "Opposing Ideologies" forum, since you are clearly fascists.

[Tim Redd]

Can everyone cool the fuck down and also stop using accusations of mental illness as a slur?

If it's true as baldly apparent in this thread, then why not state the truth? Right wing ideology and positions are a mental illness. They are so especially when they make their point in the ugly, despicable way these hooligans have done.


If folks want to call eachother bourgeois, middle-class, or cultist, it's a little silly, but to be expected I guess. Play it silly, make political arguments, or just let the thread die a natural death please.

OK, more than psychopathic, politically those in this tread who have a problem with denouncing police brutality and murder are right wing, reactionary fascists. Plain and simple.

They have no valid cover for their vile right wing opposition to the fact that I'm raising the point that police brutality and murder against minorities must be opposed, including as embodied in the specific case having to do with Michael Brown. And I'm pretty sure they'd have the same sick right wing response if I had focused on Eric Garner.

[BIXX]

Except none of that is what we've said, we've said that the things you do actually enforce police brutality.

I have shown my opposition to the police and racism in my life and on the streets- you have written down a half-baked idea that insults people. Well done.

[Ravn]

I for one do not give a fuck about Michael Brown. I don't know him. I don't care about him. Nor do I care about him in this specific context. Michael Brown is a completely interchangeable person to me.
What I care about is that what happened to Michael Brown, and happens to countless others, happened because of the systemic nature of white supremacy/racism and because of the state as an entity and because of class society and capitalism.
Michael Brown is a mere personification of this issue for me.
Nothing we do will help him. At all.
And why MB specifically?

Because the masses objected & became outraged about this particular incident because of the blatant contradictions that were readily apparent about it.

What is your mass line?** I'm not asking you to tail some spontaneous outrage BUT, while you give lip-service to being opposed to the systematic nature of oppression here, you display a callous contempt for this particular victim for no apparent reason. Do you care about any proletarians getting gunned down? & do you integrate yourself into these communities? Are you investigating the conditions of the people first hand? Are you propagating your revolutionary "wisdom" to the masses at least? Or do you prefer to just snidely sit on the sidelines & pontificate? This is the attitude you seem to be reflecting here. & you're putting that out as something "correct" when it is actually dubious. That doesn't *help* the situation, does it?

**And I do expect an answer to that question.

[Tim Redd]

Ok I'm willing to engage reddthink seriously for a little while. Why does reddthink contain so many elements of liberalism, like references to "the 99%" and "corporatocracy"? What use is a concept like corporatocracy to a revolutionary movement? The same goes for "the 99%". I feel like I might be channeling rafiq a little here, but these concepts are rooted in a petit-bourgeois mindset. A term like corporatocracy is clearly meant to imply a hostility to big capitalists specifically, not capitalism as a whole. Implying, at best, a position of neutrality towards the small capitalist. Though in real world usage it is actually used explicitly in defense of small business as we all know. '99%' of America would also include small business owners, not to mention some number of big capitalists as well. Does the revolutionary proletariat share interests with small and big capitalists? Is that what your decades of revolutionary experience has taught you?

As an aside, why are you proud to be calling yourself a "Traiter For All Ages" (and the correct spelling is "traitor" not "traiter")? It's a weird petite bourgeois hipster posing label, that gives no truly revolutionary person confidence in judging what you are about. It may titillate the bourgeois spy apparatus, but beyond that it's trash.

To get back to the issue, my knowledge of Marxism from the beginning taught me that the main enemy to be dealt with for the initial seizure of power by the revolutionary proletariat are the controllers of the large monopoly capitalist firms. That is and should be for all revolutionaries, Revolutionary Strategy 101.

And yes that means in addition to the working class, white collar petite bourgeoisie professionals, and small and medium farmers, we should also unite with the owners of small and medium sized companies. So yes that is why I use the "99%" to describe the coalition that is the base for making socialist revolution.

Later as a part of ongoing communist socialization and revolutionization of society after the initial seizure of power, we will have to transform the non-proletarian classes and strata into proletarians, thus abolishing them as strata and classes that are different from the proletariat. The timing of that after the initial seizure of power will in large part be based upon the events and state of affairs regarding the socialization and revolutionization of society in general and also in particular the degree to which the base - mode of production - has been transformed. This will be an ongoing long term process after the initial seizure of power by the proletariat. And the key to this is the state of play of the struggle of the masses against the bourgeois capitalist roaders right in the party, the government and various key institutions that exist across all aspects of society (the centrality and focus on this latter struggle against the capitalist roaders thoughout society including the party is a key tenet of Maoist Marxism).


Either tim redd is a man so bitter over his supposed past experiences with bob avakian that he has taken to tolling the communist community online with his ridiculous angelfire-esque website, or he is so out of touch with reality he can't even formulate an actual communist position on anything.

Not sure why I would post and introduce trolling ideas because of experience with Avakian. And by using your bizarre, anti-revolutionary, "Traiter For All Ages" moniker and stance in this thread, you are not nearly one I would look to for determining what is an actual communist position.


Fuck you tim redd, I want to fight you in a cage match. Signed Elizabeth, Grade 4

Really? As a revolutionary arguing positions, that's what you just had to say? What a juvenile joke you are.

[BIXX]

? Why are you proud to be calling yourself a "Traiter For All Ages"? It's a weird petite bourgeois hipster posing label, that gives no truly revolutionary person confidence in judging what you are about. It may titillate the bourgeois spy apparatus, but beyond that it's trash.

Lol, you do realize this is the internet, we are on a forum, and that a username doesn't mean shit?

God damn bruh, you're something special if you think its that big of a deal.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Then why did he let it go on this long? & now you want to go on the record to *now* agree with *him*. What a sycophant.lol, yes doxxer is my yes-person.


Doxxer is pretty much one of the most contrarian posters here and I don't think agrees with many of my political views. But it's ok and I can respectfully disagree.

I didn't "allow" this to go on, I saw this thread and attempted to make an appeal in an informal way for people to take a breath.

Politically I don't think calling people names in general is very useful (but anyone can get heated and do it) but I really don't think that revolutionaries should ever casually minimize mental illness or use it as an insult because it does a disservice to a highly marginalized and often oppressed set of people. Struggles of mentally ill folks are part of the class struggle and the struggle against oppression since capitalist societies tend to categorize anyone who can't work at the pace set by capital are just thrown away usually. Not to mention all the emotional or psychological dis function caused by the stresses of repetitive alienated work and a fucked up competitive society.

Morally I just think it's gross to kick around people who have serious problems.



How can there be too much morality? Do you prefer nihilism? Or is it because of your incipient commitment to narcissism?morality imo is subjective on a couple of different levels. I don't have a problem with people having their own moral sense for interactions. My argument against morality is that it is not a good political starting point and not politically useful.

The moralizing in this thread though backs up my claim. "If you don't agree with this line, then you must not give a shit about racism and are against the revolution!" Moralizing to cover and hide any real political debate. It's what dictators and petty tyrants do to silence debate: you're with us and our war and torture or you're with the terrorists.

Moralizing just bullies people, it dosn't allow for the growth of any real political culture or consciousness. Workers are not going to run society because someone tells them they are shitty people if they don't revolt.

Again, if you think the "line" in the article is valuable, then make a case. You won't get anywhere by name-calling and so on.

[Tim Redd]

Tim Redd[/B]]
Why are you proud to be calling yourself a "Traiter For All Ages"? It's a weird petite bourgeois hipster posing label, that gives no truly revolutionary person confidence in judging what you are about. It may titillate the bourgeois spy apparatus, but beyond that it's trash.


Lol, you do realize this is the internet, we are on a forum, and that a username doesn't mean shit?

God damn bruh, you're something special if you think its that big of a deal.

If a username doesn't mean s**t, then why use a name at all? Labeling yourself "Traiter For All Ages", would only be done by someone who doesn't take, making communist revolution and realizing a classless communist society through continuous revolution after the initial seizure of power by the proletariat, as a serious goal to be achieved. It's throws up mistrust and doubt in the revolutionary process.

[Tim Redd]

...Again, if you think the "line" in the article is valuable, then make a case...

If you think a case has to made for the OP denouncing the nationally known case of police brutality and murder regarding Michael Brown and then notes that that police brutality and murder is a general phenomena across the U.S., I wonder how you can seriously call yourself a revolutionary.

[Jimmie Higgins]

If it's true as baldly apparent in this thread, then why not state the truth? Right wing ideology and positions are a mental illness. They are so especially when they make their point in the ugly, despicable way these hooligans have done.because that's not true and this argument both minimalizes oppressed people in capitalist society who have serious problems and underestimates ruling class and petit-bourgeois ideologies.

Also it's not true that anyone here that I have read is in support of the police or racism. You are conflating people not being awed by the article or having criticisms of it with people disagreeing that oppression and repression exist!


OK, more than psychopathic, politically those in this tread who have a problem with denouncing police brutality and murder are right wing, reactionary fascists. Plain and simple. Who here has a problem with dennunciations of racism or police brutality. People were criticizing the article for other things.

Ok, ok, ok let me take a different tack and let's try and reorient this thread back to the article.

Here are my criticisms:

1. For this audience, saying that there is a war on black folks in the u.s. And it must be opposed is kinda like going to an Ayn rand forum and saying "do you guys (likely all guys on that imaginary forum) know that a=a... Isn't that a great insight?"

2. While there is a continum of oppression of black folks in the u.s. (This is a good point brought up in the article and I'd argue that historically the oppression of blacks has been the keystone of keeping the class system in order) I think it's too broad to say that the contemporary system of control is a straight line back to slavery. There are commonalities in that both are systems of control and oppression for the state, but it's too broad to have practical value or understanding. In short, the modern police/prison system of oppression have unique mechanisms and features and challenges and poltential forms of resistance. This "line" dosn't arm anyone against modern racism or the ideas that bolster it ("post-racial America" and "law and order" racism).

3. Criticizing the "hands up, don't shoot" meme is a little silly imo and misses the Forrest for the trees. Young, multi-racial groups of people are standing up to police brutality, shutting down freeways in protest, shedding illusions in the justice system and the middle class black respectable "leaders". Rather than criticizing a protest meme that we don't have any influence over anyway, just seems a bit out of touch. The article says that protesters should be doing more, but then dosn't really give much practical advice.

4. The combination of a lack of any revealing insight on the one hand (to make it interesting or informative to this audience) combined with a lack of any practical ideas about how these activists might further things in a more radical and revolutionar direction has left the article useless for trying to make any political argument to revolutionaries or for convincing non-revolutionaries being drawn into protests that revolutionary politics are needed to effectively challenge racism.

[Jimmie Higgins]

If you think a case has to made for the OP denouncing the nationally known case of police brutality and murder regarding Michael Brown and then notes that that police brutality and murder is a general phenomena across the U.S., I wonder how you can seriously call yourself a revolutionary.no, a case has to be made for why this article is useful for either revolutionaries or activists who have already denounced racism and the police. Who is the audience for this article?

[BIXX]

If a username doesn't mean s**t, then why use a name at all?
Because it makes identifying the folks who agree with you easier.

Also that is the way the forum software works.


Labeling yourself "Traiter For All Ages", would only be done by someone who doesn't take, making communist revolution and realizing a classless communist society through continuous revolution after the initial seizure of power by the proletariat, as a serious goal to be achieved. It's throws up mistrust and doubt in the revolutionary process.

You can't see that this is paranoid, or reading too much into the username, and also that its ridiculous to think this forum matters in the context of revolution?

[BIXX]

lol, yes doxxer is my yes-person.


Doxxer is pretty much one of the most contrarian posters here

Only "one of"?
:'(

[synthesis]

And yes that means in addition to the working class, white collar petite bourgeoisie professionals, and small and medium farmers, we should also unite with the owners of small and medium sized companies. So yes that is why I use the "99%" to describe the coalition that is the base for making socialist revolution.

Wait, what? Holy shit, Uma. Thanks for invalidating literally every other post you've made on this forum, it'll save us the time.

[Per Levy]

And yes that means in addition to the working class, white collar petite bourgeoisie professionals, and small and medium farmers, we should also unite with the owners of small and medium sized companies. So yes that is why I use the "99%" to describe the coalition that is the base for making socialist revolution.

so you want class colaboration with exploiters, with the small and middle bourgeoisie. who of course have no interest in a proletarian revolution as they have anything to loose and nothing to gain from that. and yet you try to bend over backwards to include these people.

what do you promise them? that their proberty wont the be socialisted after the revolution? that they can go on and exploit workers?

and what do you tell the workers who fight against the capitalist system? that they must fightt he big but not the small/middle cappies? that they should go back to work for their petit bouregoise bosses?


And the key to this is the state of play of the struggle of the masses against the bourgeois capitalist roaders right in the party, the government and various key institutions that exist across all aspects of society (the centrality and focus on this latter struggle against the capitalist roaders thoughout society including the party is a key tenet of Maoist Marxism).

first you want to ally with capitalists and than you want to fight capitalists roaders. how about not letting capitalists in and let them dominate the revolution to begin with?


And by using your bizarre, anti-revolutionary, "Traiter For All Ages" moniker and stance in this thread, you are not nearly one I would look to for determining what is an actual communist position.

Really? As a revolutionary arguing positions, that's what you just had to say? What a juvenile joke you are.

ah the irony. the sad thing that you dont realize is of course, the joke is you and many people on here have a good laugh because of you.

[Prof. Oblivion]

Who on earth is "Tim Redd" and why does he think he has some kind of breakthrough "theory"?

[Tim Redd]

Who on earth is "Tim Redd" and why does he think he has some kind of breakthrough "theory"?

Best way to find out is to read the theory: www.risparty.org (http://www.risparty.org).

[PhoenixAsh]

You're clearly a sick right wing reactionary. You and your buddies in this thread shouldn't even be allowed in the "Opposing Ideologies" forum, since you are clearly fascists.

Says the troll who is advocating class collaborationism

[PhoenixAsh]

Because the masses objected & became outraged about this particular incident because of the blatant contradictions that were readily apparent about it.

What is your mass line?** I'm not asking you to tail some spontaneous outrage BUT, while you give lip-service to being opposed to the systematic nature of oppression here, you display a callous contempt for this particular victim for no apparent reason. Do you care about any proletarians getting gunned down? & do you integrate yourself into these communities? Are you investigating the conditions of the people first hand? Are you propagating your revolutionary "wisdom" to the masses at least? Or do you prefer to just snidely sit on the sidelines & pontificate? This is the attitude you seem to be reflecting here. & you're putting that out as something "correct" when it is actually dubious. That doesn't *help* the situation, does it?

**And I do expect an answer to that question.

I know you don't because you think you have scored a point. You didn't.


1:

Aside from the fact that the following concept pretty much disproves your point. Most (and I am willing to wager all...) of us didn't know Michael Brown before he was murdered....and you now wish us to "care about Michael Brown". The only reason we heard about Michael Brown is, like you so elloquently say: he became a personification. You are saying nothing much new...or different from what I said.

I just don't care about Michael Brown as a person....because I, like you, have no fucking clue who Michael Brown is. He is and always will be...a complete interchangeable character for me. For all I care he was named Darren Bunnyfuck Idaho.

Yet you accuse me of not caring for Michael Brown for any apparent reason...but are perfectly willing to care for him for no apparent reason either.

Lets just say that I care as much about Michael Brown than I care about the people mentioned in the link in my second point:


2:

http://www.mintpressnews.com/us-police-murdered-5000-innocent-civilians-since-911/172029/

Thats 5000 specific reasons why I am wondering that you suddenly care about this specific individual and not for example...Garner.

Why don't you care about Garner, Ravn? Did he do something to you? Don't you like him? Does he look funny? I only hear you clammoring about Justice for Michael Brown and doesn't Garner deserve Justice?

So this leads me to believe that you do not actually care for Michael Brown and that Michael Brown is not the individual Michael Brown but the personification of the representation of the systemic nature of racism he has for you and all those people who rose up because they were fed up with just these blatant contradictions in the system.

Because that is why the "masses" objected & became outraged. Not because Michael Brown but because of yet another example of white supremacist violence by the state. The proverbial drop, so to speak, after countless of these similar drops before Michael Brown...NON of which you mention by name here or seem to ask for justice for.

And that brings me to next point:

3:

The fact that I don't care about a person doesn't translate or equate to not understanding the underlying issues nor does it give me an obligation to emerge myself in the specific communities.

Blatant liberal moralism of vague concepts such as "justice for deceased person X" are perhaps usefull strategic tools but packaging the message as individual struggles for justice reduces out politics to moralist sentimentalism

When is justice served for Michael Brown? When the cops are tried through the bourgeois courts? When they got a trial? When the system is reorganized? And more importantly...what good does it do Michael Brown? Besides placating our own sentimentalism and sense of self satisfaction...

Our message is not to support justice for an individual...our message is to expose the underlying structures which are the root cause of the problem just to avoid the issue becomming personal.

Nor does not caring about an individual person translate to not supporting a struggle that goes way beyond that individual person and has been in place for decades if not longer.


4:

And lip service?

I am not entirely sure you understand how this works on a forum...you don't know me...I don't know you. You do not know what I am involved in, what I do or what my activism is for you to pass judgement or make snide remarks about how I am on the sidelines of the wider struggle against systemic racism and white supremacy.

When you accuse me of paying lip service and not communicating to the "masses" (you sound like a complete tool when you use that word to describe people) you must provide some evidence of what the hell you are doing in order to not be a complete hypocrite.

Not to mention that debating the issue on a forum is per definition an "on the sidelines" position to take.

But of course you are completely right. Living more than 3000 miles from Ferguson I have not emerged myself in the local communities other than what is available from contacts in similar situations and reading...

I am so very sorry...So of course I am completely reliant on the detailed account you can give me from your visit to the black neighborhoods of....say...Ferguson including time stamped pictures of you there and...while you are at it...I am sure you can provide all personal accounts including time stamped pictures to all the place you visited and have commented on on this forum.

Right...I thought so.

I am not criticising the activism of the communities. I am critisizing your position and your role and your arguments here on the forum.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Yo where are you seeing that the correct spelling for traitor is "traiter"? I won't claim to be a spelling champ (I also won't not claim to be a spelling champ) but I've never seen it spelled like that. I got the name from some fake north korean article TAT posted, cause it sounds cool. Everything else you've posted is empty petty-bourgeois drivel that I only skimmed over briefly. Fight me

[G4b3n]

If you're a right wing reactionary bourgeois provacateur. And it's clear you both are.

Yes Tim Redd, you are the one and only revolutionary here, we are all confused bourgeois reactionaries. Now can you please gtfo so we can plot counter-revolution in peace. Kthx

[synthesis]

Yo where are you seeing that the correct spelling for traitor is "traiter"? I won't claim to be a spelling champ (I also won't not claim to be a spelling champ) but I've never seen it spelled like that. I got the name from some fake north korean article TAT posted, cause it sounds cool. Everything else you've posted is empty petty-bourgeois drivel that I only skimmed over briefly. Fight me

I was gonna ask about that too, but I think he knows that "Traitor" is the correct spelling but also seems to think that it's spelled "Traiter" in your username. (I know, it doesn't make any fucking sense to me, either.)

[Ravn]

II just don't care about Michael Brown
as a person....because I, like you, have no fucking clue who Michael Brown is.


I know he was a human being. I know he was a proletarian. If you know something about the community he came from, you would realize that saying "I just don't care about Michael Brown as a person" is disrespectful. That's just a fact. If you actually did revolutionary work, you would know that.

What's your mass line? It's not a rhetorical question.

[synthesis]

What's your mass line? It's not a rhetorical question.


You seem to be assuming that everyone on this forum is a Maoist loon, not just you and Redd. How about you rephrase your question so it doesn't come across like you're "LARPing" in, like, the most depressing way possible? Like, this is an actual quote from you:


Are you propagating your revolutionary "wisdom" to the masses at least? (http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/do-you-even-lift)

[PhoenixAsh]

I know he was a human being. I know he was a proletarian. If you know something about the community he came from, you would realize that saying "I just don't care about Michael Brown as a person" is disrespectful. That's just a fact. If you actually did revolutionary work, you would know that.

What's your mass line? It's not a rhetorical question.


I don't come from the community. Go ask them if they care for PhoenixAsh. I am sure they will all do.

If that is your platform for politics then fine...but do not pretend it is the nature of revolutionary politics or that it is relevant for measuring somebodies revolutionary credential.

Like I said...we are not here to placate ettiquette or make niceties. This is not about a specific community. We are here to abolish capitalism, class society and the structures of oppression that result from them.....not to get a sticker for politeness. We are not liberals.

Now here is another fact for you: Preciously little people inside that community knew about, let alone cared for, Michael Brown before he became the umpth victim of police violence and systemic racism...they care about him now because he became that victim. It is not about Michael Brown.


I also see you have completely dodged my question why we should not ask for justice, by name, of the other 5000 innocent cop deaths in the last decade.

[Tim Redd]

Fuck you tim redd, I want to fight you in a cage match.

Unless you're a fourth degree black belt in Taekwondo, I'll make you regret you got your simple arse in the cage.

[Tim Redd]

You seem to be assuming that everyone on this forum is a Maoist loon, not just you and Redd. How about you rephrase your question so it doesn't come across like you're "LARPing" in, like, the most depressing way possible? Like, this is an actual quote from you:


Are you propagating your revolutionary "wisdom" to the masses at least? (http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/do-you-even-lift)

Just the kind of question a revolutionary should ask.

If you're writing forum s..t trolls while pleasuring yourself, you can't understand the relevancy to making revolution.

Your cabal isn't fooling anybody. It's obvious that all 4-5 of you are right wing, troll twits.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

You expect me to believe that you had the time to develop a break through revolutionary theory for the masses of american small business owners and earn a black belt? In the same lifetime? I don't think so dude

[Tim Redd]

You expect me to believe that you had the time to develop a break through revolutionary theory for the masses of american small business owners and earn a black belt? In the same lifetime? I don't think so dude

Try me you non-productive simpleton (who couldn't properly spell his forum name).

[motion denied]

trawled

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

What is the basis for a claim like that? You don't know anything about EGTFAA-Thought.

[PhoenixAsh]

Just the kind of question a revolutionary should ask. If you're writing forum s..t trolls while pleasuring yourself, you can't understand the relevancy to making revolution.

Your cabal isn't fooling anybody. It's obvious that all 4-5 of you are right wing, troll twits.

My mass line is that your twitter account not only reads like a liberal 16 year old shouts empty slogans into the wind (praising ao progressivism) but also offers next to nothing along the line of revolutionary theory or explanation of the underlying principles involved...

[Tim Redd]

Ok, ok, ok let me take a different tack and let's try and reorient this thread back to the article.

Here are my criticisms:

1. For this audience, saying that there is a war on black folks in the u.s. And it must be opposed is kinda like going to an Ayn rand forum and saying "do you guys (likely all guys on that imaginary forum) know that a=a... Isn't that a great insight?"

The title of this sub-forum is "Ongoing Struggles". To me that means discussion of of ongoing struggles is what it's all about. If agitation (such as the OP ultimately meant for wide distribution) regarding an ongoing social struggle is not proper in such a sub-forum, why does the sub-forum exist?

Smart revolutionaries might use the article to educate and connect to the masses regarding the issue of the police murder Michael Brown and what that means about capitalism - about why socialism should supersede it. Or they would use it as a basis for discussion about what is effective agitation on the issue. Readers of RevLeft wouldn't oppose publishing the leaflet in the "Ongoing Struggles" sub-forum unless they missed its political significance as an ongoing struggle, or they were trolls intentionally trying to minimize, or oppose struggle against police brutality and murder.


2. While there is a continum of oppression of black folks in the u.s. (This is a good point brought up in the article and I'd argue that historically the oppression of blacks has been the keystone of keeping the class system in order) I think it's too broad to say that the contemporary system of control is a straight line back to slavery. There are commonalities in that both are systems of control and oppression for the state, but it's too broad to have practical value or understanding. In short, the modern police/prison system of oppression have unique mechanisms and features and challenges and poltential forms of resistance. This "line" dosn't arm anyone against modern racism or the ideas that bolster it ("post-racial America" and "law and order" racism).

Well that's your thinking, I think you're wrong to downplay the connection between the epidemic of police brutality and murder and the former existence of slavery in the U.S. I don't understand how a revolutionary would fail to see the connection. Your position is close to the right wing Fox news pundits and their ilk who downplay or ignore the effect that slavery has on the current state of racial relations in the U.S..

Also note that actual apartheid and extreme discrimination based upon the former existence of slavery held sway in the U.S. until at least the '60's and '70's. It's been almost no time since legal steps against such apartheid and discrimination came into effect. Let's note that was just legal steps, whereas improvements in actual fact have seriously been lagging.

And now given recent Supreme Court decisions nullifying Title 5 of the Voting Rights act (they negated holding the Confederate and other states to a high standard for giving Afro-Americans the right to non-discriminatory voting rights) the weight of past slavery still has major effects in oppressing and exploiting Afro-Americans to this day.


3. Criticizing the "hands up, don't shoot" meme is a little silly imo and misses the Forrest for the trees. Young, multi-racial groups of people are standing up to police brutality, shutting down freeways in protest, shedding illusions in the justice system and the middle class black respectable "leaders". Rather than criticizing a protest meme that we don't have any influence over anyway, just seems a bit out of touch. The article says that protesters should be doing more, but then dosn't really give much practical advice.

Why wouldn't revolutionaries have influence, when we attend demos, rallies and marches and distribute leaflets like the OP and when we engage people in OP like discussion at these events?

On the "hands up, don't shoot" meme", it's straightforward and simple to me, the meme reinforces a surrendering to the police, it reinforces a submit to police mentality and that is the last thing people need to be thinking.


4. The combination of a lack of any revealing insight on the one hand (to make it interesting or informative to this audience).

How do you know what is of interest to most or some subsection of RevLeft? Because you don't have interest, that is all you can speak about without doing a scientific poll to know what everyone else is thinking.


combined with a lack of any practical ideas about how these activists might further things in a more radical and revolutionar direction has left the article useless for trying to make any political argument to revolutionaries or for convincing non-revolutionaries being drawn into protests that revolutionary politics are needed to effectively challenge racism.

Well I think the leaflet's advice that communist revolution is the most effective and likely solution to the problem of police brutality and murder is very practical advice for both the already revolutionary minded and those who are not necessarily revolutionary minded, but nevertheless want to change things.

[Tim Redd]

My mass line is that your twitter account not only reads like a liberal 16 year old shouts empty slogans into the wind (praising ao progressivism) but also offers next to nothing along the line of revolutionary theory or explanation of the underlying principles involved...

Well mass line isn't about criticism of someone's position.

Mass line is about formulating a line on an issue to bring to the masses that moves the masses thinking toward revolution that: 1) uses the lingo of the masses that are attached to the issue and 2) explains an issue by using the masses current views about the issue as the starting point.

With that thought in mind perhaps you may rethink my contributions on Twitter (@tim_redd).

[Loony Le Fist]

There will not be justice for Michael Brown until we dismantle these awful social structures that lead to situations like the one Brown was involved in. Fuck society.

[Ravn]

I don't come from the community.

That isn't the issue. You don't apparently even bother to study & interact with the community. You're not prepare to learn anything from the community. & yet you know it all & can speak about its members with contempt as if you really understood where they are coming from & what they need to do. You really do need a mass line whether you realize it or not. Your theory is disconnected from your practice.

[Tim Redd]

Like I said...we are not here to placate ettiquette or make niceties. This is not about a specific community. We are here to abolish capitalism, class society and the structures of oppression that result from them.....not to get a sticker for politeness. We are not liberals.

Why in the heck do you think its being liberal to carry on political and other discussion meaningful to making revolution without also taking a steaming dump each time you and your cohorts make a comment.

How is it anti-liberal to always, make negative d..khead attacks against the persona, works, or efforts of the people with whom you are discussing issues, events and ideas?

What you and your cohorts do is self-centered, ridiculous and super bourgeois. You all embody the worst of English upper class priggery. Nose in the air, in no way ever wrong and full of disdain for whomever challenges your established beliefs. Trying to oppose liberalism by treating people and especially other revolutionaries in a vile, low life, shabby ways is not the way to defeat liberalism. It's just immature.

Even if someone is liberal we should first approach them as someone who can be won over to a revolutionary position. It isn't by being narrow and nasty against a liberal every chance you get. Not treating liberals, who may often be looking for alternatives with respect, and not treating other progressives and revolutionaries with some smattering of liberal ideas with respect is not the way to make a stand against liberalism.

Opposing liberalism should mostly be a political act of formulating good arguments against bourgeois liberal positions. The point is to try win liberals to the revolutionary position, not to drive them away. Doesn't that make common sense from a "unite all who can united" strategy in order to have a successful revolution? Duhhh.

[PhoenixAsh]

That isn't the issue. You don't apparently even bother to study & interact with the community. You're not prepare to learn anything from the community. & yet you know it all & can speak about its members with contempt as if you really understood where they are coming from & what they need to do. You really do need a mass line whether you realize it or not. Your theory is disconnected from your practice.

I am speaking in contempt of you and your notion that revolutionary intent is measured about how much you care about the individual.

I am not adressing the community and not telling the community what to do.

I am adressing you. Your behaviour. Your political position.

[PhoenixAsh]

Why in the heck do you think its being liberal to carry on political and other discussion meaningful to making revolution without also taking a steaming dump each time you and your cohorts make a comment.

How is it anti-liberal to always, make negative d..khead attacks against the persona, works, or efforts of the people with whom you are discussing issues, events and ideas?

What you and your cohorts do is self-centered, ridiculous and super bourgeois. You all embody the worst of English upper class priggery. Nose in the air, in no way ever wrong and full of disdain for whomever challenges your established beliefs. Trying to oppose liberalism by treating people and especially other revolutionaries in a vile, low life, shabby ways is not the way to defeat liberalism. It's just immature.

Even if someone is liberal we should first approach them as someone who can be won over to a revolutionary position. It isn't by being narrow and nasty against a liberal every chance you get. Not treating liberals, who may often be looking for alternatives with respect, and not treating other progressives and revolutionaries with some smattering of liberal ideas with respect is not the way to make a stand against liberalism.

Opposing liberalism should mostly be a political act of formulating good arguments against bourgeois liberal positions. The point is to try win liberals to the revolutionary position, not to drive them away. Doesn't that make common sense from a "unite all who can united" strategy in order to have a successful revolution? Duhhh.

Well, Tim Redd...I do not think it is possible to have a meaningful discussion with somebody like you. As you have quite obviously demonstrated in this thread.

I was adressing the notion Ravn made in this thread that you have to care about the individual and that that amount of care is a measurement of revolutionary zeal. But this isn't about the individual....it is about the broad system of oppression which goes way beyond Brown, Ferguson and the state of Missouri.

And you called me a fascist for opposing and questioning that position.

So no...I don't think a reasonable discussion is possible with you.


Emphasizing, on a revolutionary board or anywhere for that matter, the individual and rallying people around the cry for justice for this particular individual is NOT a revolutionary position. It maybe a tactic...(and as such feigned care btw)...but do not pretend that it is "engaging liberals and providing them with an alternative" when you measure somebodies revolutionary zeal to how much they care. If you do that then you are surrendering to the liberal method and providing them merely with more of the same rhetorical bullshit which obfuscate the root causes and the systemic nature and reduce it to an acts of an individual or group of culprits...the rotten apples...or to tweaks that need to be made in the system in order to fix it.

In order to provide people with an alternative to their current set of ideas....you have to actually show them where their current set of ideas need an alternative. In other words...in you need to actually provide an alternative.

That means adressing the notion that this is a system that makes mistakes. Addressing the notion that this is about Michael Brown. And addressing the notion that justice is possible in a system which is geared towards perpetuating systemic repression of non-whites.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Well that's your thinking, I think you're wrong to downplay the connection between the epidemic of police brutality and murder and the former existence of slavery in the U.S. I don't understand how a revolutionary would fail to see the connection. Your position is close to the right wing Fox news pundits and their ilk who downplay or ignore the effect that slavery has on the current state of racial relations in the U.S..

Also note that actual apartheid and extreme discrimination based upon the former existence of slavery held sway in the U.S. until at least the '60's and '70's. It's been almost no time since legal steps against such apartheid and discrimination came into effect. Let's note that was just legal steps, whereas improvements in actual fact have seriously been lagging.
no, this is wrong. Modern racism is not just that jim-crow was recent imo, it's that in the last 40 years racism has been reorganized in the u.s.

This is not a "lag" or "holdover", this is a new neoliberal manifestation of racial control. It's an adaptation to and backlash against the black power movement in the context of the end of the "new deal" era.


Again, the racial system of police-prisons is a new manifestation of racism (that yes, extends back to slavery) with it's own challenges. My criticism is not that slavery didn't exist, but that your argument is much too broad to be of use. It's like saying, there's been oppression as long as class society has existed. It's true but dosn't mean much for fighting capitalism, let alone fighting contemporary issues of neoliberal capitalism.

northern racism in the post-war era was about maintaining divisions in the working class and keeping blacks as 2nd class workers. Today racism is used to drive down the entire class while targeting blacks as a surplus labor force, warehousing people in prisons, as neoliberalism reorganizes production in leaner, less urban ways.



Why wouldn't revolutionaries have influence, when we attend demos, rallies and marches and distribute leaflets like the OP and when we engage people in OP like discussion at these events?Well revolutionaries won't have much influence if they go to rallies "educating" black folks and anti-racist activists that slavery existed and the u.s. Is racist.:


On the "hands up, don't shoot" meme", it's straightforward and simple to me, meme reinforces a surrendering to the police, it reinforces a submit to police mentality and that is the last thing people need to be thinking.

No, I'm saying that arguing that a protester meme used by people actively protesting the police and facing tear gas, beatings, and so on is "surrendering to the power of the cops" is completely and utterly disconnected from reality. "Surrendering to the power of the police" looks like the last 20 years, not the last month. In addition, the "hands up" thing is, imo, being misinterpreted by you. It's a meme not due necessarily to passifist ideas or as a surrender to the police but because this is what mike brown was doing when he was killed. It's analogous to people chanting "I can't breathe" -it's throwing the reality of the blatant brutality of the cops back in the face of the cops.

People don't March, riot, and protest with threats of the national guard and cops with tanks if they want to surrender to cop authority. People just do nothing if they want that. You're argument is just out of touch.



How do you know what is of interest to most or some subsection of RevLeft? Because you don't have interest, that is all you can speak about without doing a scientific poll to know what everyone else is thinking.you don't think I've done high-level analysis and statistical metrics on opinions of members here? An 8 week study, conducted with an algorithm developed at MIT that has a 73% rate of predictive accuracy and overseen by a team of 24 statisticians using the Henri Dupree model of analysis, found that most people think this article offers no insight into building a revolutionary movement against oppression.:lol:


No, you are right my basis for this is just anecdotal from talking to people on this site, talking to people at some of these protests here locally, and I guess also the reaction of everyone else in this thread.

[Ravn]

I am speaking in contempt of you and your notion that revolutionary intent is measured about how much you care about the individual.

If you're interested in a proletarian socialist revolution then how can you be contemptuous towards *any* proletarians for no good reason?**

Maybe what you're really interested in is a petty bourgeois revolution wherein the working class ultimately has to keep its place or else, just like under this system.






I am not adressing the community and not telling the community what to do.

Publicly declaring you "don't give a fuck about Michael Brown" is addressing the community. You wouldn't be doing that if you related to the community & addressed its concerns. You can't carry out any revolution w/o learning things from them, nor w/o them.

You're all theory & no practice. (& your theory is dubious because you're treating it as a doctrine, not as part of a science.)

***The victim gets shot for no good reason & you're dismissive of the outrage & the victim for no good reason. You're part of the same vicious loop of contempt for the masses.

[Ravn]

no, this is wrong. Modern racism is not just that jim-crow was recent imo, it's that in the last 40 years racism has been reorganized in the u.s.

This is not a "lag" or "holdover", this is a new neoliberal manifestation of racial control. It's an adaptation to and backlash against the black power movement in the context of the end of the "new deal" era.

It's ridiculous to claim that there's no connection between the past & the present.




[N]orthern racism in the post-war era was about maintaining divisions in the working class and keeping blacks as 2nd class workers.

That's been true for 150 years. That's nothing new. & it's also true for the South, for the same amount of time. (So, in the past it was the Dixie-crats. Now it's the Republicans with their Southern Strategy. The basic formula hasn't radically change.) & yet you insist that there is no holdover here, just new manifestations. That's just factually wrong. There's definitely an interconnection between old & new manifestations, You're just in denial.







No, I'm saying that arguing that a protester meme used by people actively protesting the police and facing tear gas, beatings, and so on is "surrendering to the power of the cops" is completely and utterly disconnected from reality.

Facing tear gas & beatings unarmed is surrendering to the power of the police in hope that the powers that be will see reason & pull back the dogs. The passivity of that is stunningly evident.







No, you are right my basis for this is just anecdotal from talking to people on this site, talking to people at some of these protests here locally, and I guess also the reaction of everyone else in this thread.

Disagreeableness does not necessarily imply disagreement since disagreeableness might indicate that there is some truth that requires the opposition to be disagreeable about in reaction to lacking a real argument. You keep trotting out this lame appeal to popularity that can't prove anything other than the fact that people are in opposition to something.

What I see here is that people are trying to shout this one guy down but can't rationally justify it. For instance, is creating a United Front necessarily class collaboration? Where was there a real discussion about that? Instead, we get ad hominem.

[Ravn]

it is about the broad system of oppression which goes way beyond Brown, Ferguson and the state of Missouri.

You need a moment of clarity. The system isn't an abstract entity that exists by itself independent of any actual circumstances.

You're like an armchair general here. Battles are taking place in several locations, not excluding Ferguson. These are where all the salient points are. You can't win the war w/o fighting these battles, including the one in Ferguson, & drawing the right lessons from them.






Emphasizing, on a revolutionary board or anywhere for that matter, the individual and rallying people around the cry for justice for this particular individual is NOT a revolutionary position. It maybe a tactic..

Look, the people are rallying around outrage on several fronts here, OK? What are you going to do about it in a practical way? Tell them all to fuck off? That all these victims are just statistics? -- One man is nothing. Viva la revolution? What's so revolutionary about that stance?








....in you need to actually provide an alternative.

To do that you actually have to communicate & interact with people. If you think you already know the solution, then you're a part of the problem.

You do seem to have an issue with chauvinism.

[PhoenixAsh]

If you're interested in a proletarian socialist revolution then how can you be contemptuous towards *any* proletarians for no good reason?**

Why should I "care"about individual proletarians for no good reason?

Why specifically MB and NOT the other 5000+ people who were killed by cops?

Your fake care is nauseating.





Publicly declaring you "don't give a fuck about Michael Brown" is addressing the community. You wouldn't be doing that if you related to the community & addressed its concerns. [U]You can't carry out any revolution w/o learning things from them, nor w/o them. [/B]

It is addressing your insane notion that somehow "care"is a measurement of revolutionary politics, understanding and zeal. You used this as a means to attack the revolutionary position of others.

YOU made this about caring for the individual rather than the underlying principles. And your care is phony as fuck. You merely design your care to use Michael Brown as a tactic and "caring" about Michael Brown...whom you knew fuck all about before this situation...and would continue to know fuck all about if he hadn't become yet another victim of the system.

It is THAT systemic nature of white supremacy and capitalism which makes people victims that I care about dissolving. Because my interests and care are not narrowed down to an individual who I don't know but to the entire class.

I am not concerned with justice for Michael Brown specifically. I am concerned with the system that systematically oppressed an entire class and entire ethnicities.



You're all theory & no practice. (& your theory is dubious because you're treating it as a doctrine, not as part of a science.

Excuse me? I think you are forgetting here who is dogmatically trying to compare the level of care we have for an previously unknown individual the center of revolutionary politics...while at the same time arguing this on the basis of it being a mere tactic.

And you are doing so in lieu of the actually revolutionary position: breaking down the system and addressing the systemic nature that leads to these situation.

Because we also have to "care".

You can't get more unscientific than that, Ravn.




***The victim gets shot for no good reason & you're dismissive of the outrage & the victim for no good reason. You're part of the same vicious loop of contempt for the masses.



I am not dismissive of the outrage. I am dismissive of your position on having to care for an individual in order to be a real revolutionary.

But I understand what causes the outrage. And it is not some liberal notion of "justice" and it is not some fluke in the system that we can repair if we cry for justice for the individual. It is the system itself that will continue to repeat these situations over and over and over again. There is NO justice in the capitalist white supremacist system. And MIchael Brown was merely the proverbial drop. If Michael Brown had not been killed that day it would have been somebody else.

It is THAT concept which I am trying to get through to you.

So it is the goal of revolutionaries to redirect the anger over what happend to Michael Brown towards the structural nature of the system....not berating somebody over the lack of care for the individual. You know...that unscientific liberal attitude you brought into this thread.



You need a moment of clarity. The system isn't an abstract entity that exists by itself independent of any actual circumstances.

And you were the one arguing Historical Materialism by saying the circumstances are the result of the system...and fought me on saying that it wasn't.

Make up your mind.

I know this. I argued this. And it is good, although a bit weird, that you finally agree with me on this...but that still does not say why we should care for Michael Brown or why the amount of caring is a measurement of revolutionary politics and praxis.


You're like an armchair general here. Battles are taking place in several locations, not excluding Ferguson. These are where all the salient points are. You can't win the war w/o fighting these battles, including the one in Ferguson, & drawing the right lessons from them.

Yes I absolutely agree. And demanding justice for the individual or saying people should care about a specific individual...are not the right lessons to learn here. But maybe it is just your lack of praxis that has you stagnant on that issue...

You seem to be forgetting that I am addressing YOU here....about YOUR politics. This has nothing to do with directing the struggle on the streets or in the community....but addressing your failed and flawed politics...so you, who are in fact in a position to actually get involved on the streets...can have the right orientation and direction for your activities in engaging the community (which you are currently not doing).



Look, the people are rallying around outrage on several fronts here, OK? What are you going to do about it in a practical way? Tell them all to fuck off? That all these victims are just statistics? -- One man is nothing. Viva la revolution? What's so revolutionary about that stance?

So like I said. Your care is nothing but a tactic...it isn't real care. It is a means to get to a certain end for you. It is however not a measure of revolutionary politics or a means to grade somebodies revolutionary politics...at all.

Use it as a tactic to engage. Fine by me. Any way to engage that works for you. But do not make the mistake of confusing that with what the revolutionary goal is.

This is exactly why I asked you why we should demand justice for Michael Brown and not the other scores of victims of police violence and capitalism.



To do that you actually have to communicate & interact with people. If you think you already know the solution, then you're a part of the problem.

You do seem to have an issue with chauvinism.

I know the solution...end capitalism and class society. If you doubt this solution...then you have no place on this forum or in the revolutionary left.

I am kind of baffled by your failure to understad this perfectly simple concept and your insistance to keep looking for a solution while we already know what direction it should take.

And yes...I defintely have an issue with Chauvinism. And you are displaying it here...in this thread.

[PhoenixAsh]

Facing tear gas & beatings unarmed is surrendering to the power of the police in hope that the powers that be will see reason & pull back the dogs. The passivity of that is stunningly evident.


You do realize that this is you being completely dismissive of the community and their struggle, right?

So how do you muster up the guts to berrate my position for not trying to understand the community and being dismissive of them but you yourself get to critisize their praxis?

:laugh:

Just wauw.

[Ravn]

Why should I "care"about individual proletarians for no good reason?

You're answering a question with a question. You stated that you don't give a fuck about somebody as a person. Why do you need to say that just to make a point that he is one of many victims? I know you are articulate & can dance around with words but your actions speak louder than them. You can run your mouth in the abstract about things but you're contemptuous of the people you have the pretense of caring about. Why is that?
Does that A in that circle stand for asshole? Or specifically adolescent?

[Ravn]

systemic nature of white supremacy ...

Enables you to be a doctrinaire dick-head doofus know-it-all. This is what you need to move beyond from. I don't assume you're incapable of doing that.

[PhoenixAsh]

You're answering a question with a question. You stated that you don't give a fuck about somebody as a person. Why do you need to say that just to make a point that he is one of many victims? I know you are articulate & can dance around with words but your actions speak louder than them.

deep sigh.

Because...like I explained at nauseum...YOU made "care" about the individual the measure of revolutionary politics.

I did not use it as a way to make the point about many victims. I said it because 1). It is true and 2). To make it absolutely clear to you that this is not about the individual and 3). Caring is not a measure of revolutionary politics.



You can run your mouth in the abstract about things but you're contemptuous of the people you have the pretense of caring about. Why is that?
Does that A in that circle stand for asshole? Or specifically adolescent?
[/COLOR][/B]

And that is just it...I don't pretend to care about people I don't care for.

I don't think it is helpfull to pretend to do so and it is dishonest and disengenuous to fake it in order to gain in-routes into a community. Although I can see the strategic use and its tactical worth.

But all that pales in comparison in hos much it really doesn't matter at all for revolutionary politics.

[Ravn]

deep sigh.

Because...like I explained at nauseum...YOU made "care" about the individual the measure of revolutionary politics.

That's what you keep claiming repeatedly as if true when I said no such thing at all. You don't evidently exhibit care towards the *community* by literally saying you don't give a fuck about one of its members. So you're not pretending your disdain, but you are pretending that you're a revolutionary. Otherwise, what is your mass line? Your disconnection with the community is a measurement of your *lack* of revolutionary zeal & intent.

[PhoenixAsh]

Yes...you actually did say that.


Is it fair to assume that you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown?

And you used it to question somebody elses revolutionary credentials.

So yes...you did. And then of course you addressed me and critisized me on exactly this position and that is why we are having this debate.

Somehow not caring about a person is, in your mind, anti-thetical to revolutionary politics.

And not...that is not the case. At all.

And there is your problem. Your political position revolves around abstract, non scientific, and ultimately extremely objective issues such as "care" and "justice" which merely obfuscate the fact that we are not actually dealing with individual cases but with the end result of class society.

It is that systemic nature and the recognition of it as well as opposing it and trying to bring that structure down that is central to the problem at hand. That ultimately is the basis of our politics and of class consciousness.

That has nothing to do with using Michael Brown as a tactic...like you are doing...and confusing it with actually "caring". Because what it boils down to is this...your "care"is fucking fake. You pretend to care so you feel better. But you don't actually care. For you it is "communicating with the community so you have to care about all its members". No. You don't.

I am perfectly able to care about a community and absolutely LOATH some if not all of its members. You think I care about each proletarian in my own community? The fucking neonazi three blocks over? No...I don't. I loath that person. Yet he is a proletarian and part of my community. I understand the mechanics that drive and motivate him. And I am combatting these mechanics...the structure that are the root cause.

You babble consistently in the other thread about the scientific nature of communism...yet you are taking the ultimate unscientific line here that you have to level with the community to be able to connect with them because otherwise you have a lack of zeal and intent.

You also seem to confuse disdain with not giving a fuck. I don't have disdain for Michael Brown...I don't look down on him....I just don't care about him or give a fuck about him. These two are not however the same. I never heard of Michael Brown...and I won't show such contemptuous arrogance as pretending to now all of the sudden care for him.

Now you argue all this in the face of using the phrase "Mass Line"...I hope you know how fucking ironic this is? Because the Mass Line is the condensed correct way of things resulting from the everry day lives of people. It is a style which is DICTATED upon communities used to gain control and power over the communities by indoctrtinating the cadres with the correct political position.

THAT is the origins of the concept of "mass line".

Now if you had known this then you could figure that my mass line would be somewhere in the neighborhood of trying to tell you....as the cadre...that your position on "care" is absolutely worthless as a revolutionary analysis and political aim.

I am not sure how this...after all these posts...can still elude you. But it takes a very special kind of stupid to not understand the discussion we are having in THIS community.

Where I am and always was addressing a very unexperience and naive member who has no fucking clue yet how to distinguish revolutionary politics from liberal mumbo-jumbo.

[Tim Redd]

...And there is your problem. Your political position revolves around abstract, non scientific, and ultimately extremely objective issues such as "care" and "justice" which merely obfuscate the fact that we are not actually dealing with individual cases but with the end result of class society.

Not caring about and fighting for justice in the individual case makes me seriously doubt you care about and want justice for the community. That combined with your "this is not connected to slavery and Jim Crow" line hardly makes you fit to be called a leftist. Come on, come clean, you're really a poser right? You adopt an anarchist persona, become a moderator and then you are in just the position to allow you to widely spout your right-wing point of view, right in the midst of a left-wing discussion forum. If that isn't the case, then you're among the world's worst revolutionaries. A few others supporting you in this thread are in that club as well.

[PhoenixAsh]

Not caring about and fighting for justice in the individual case makes me seriously doubt you care about and want justice for the community.

Think this through. You are demanding a vague concept of justice from the bourgeois state which defines justice. According to the Historical Materialist doctrine the concept of justice is a reflection of the materialist conditions and class struggle in a given age...and you are demanding the capitalist state and class to give that to a victim (for whom this vague notion of justice no longer matters at all) of the nature of the state it self and resulting from the conditions the class enforces on us. Not onl.y that...but it is a victim of the apparatus of the state which is supposed to protect and serve...the notion of justice.

How fucking stupid are you?

There is no justice. It is a liberal notion and the idea itself is obfuscating the fact that justice in a capitalist state does not actually exist and that if there even exists a concept of justice the only way this justice is going to be granted to a dead victim is by smashing that state and seeing to it that it is the last victim.

Yet...you want to placate the notion that not only is there justice within the capitalist system (fucking social democrat you are) but you are also knowingly adopting the liberal notion of individual "care". You are pretending that that once the cops responsible are somehow punished...this will make it all better.

What a worthless position for a revolutionary to take. Devoid of any vision and real alternative.



That combined with your "this is not connected to slavery and Jim Crow" line to me shows you are a poser.

Since I haven't taken that line this is yet another example of you being a complete tool.



You adopt an anarchist persona, become a moderator and then you are in just the position to allow you to widely spout your right-wing point of view, right in the midst of a left-wing discussion forum. It's vile what you do.

Lol.

Sure. It is incredibly right wing to say that the problem is not an individual injustice or that the center of revolutionary politics is not the amount of "care" but the recognition of the systemic nature of the capitalist system and white supremacy and redirecting liberal notions of justice within the bourgeois system towards that goal....because the reality is simply that this is tied to a wider issue reaching far beyond this specific case and this specific community.

But yeah....I am sure you...who already coopeted class collaboration (which is actually one of the features of fascism) and who has coopeted many liberal and social democratic notions on his twitter feed in the past....is in a perfect position to denounce me as fascist and right wing.

You are beyond ridiculous.

Now...don't you have angry letters to send about your stolen theory?

[Tim Redd]

I posted that agitation, which has been distributed as a leaflet, at recent events - rallies, demos, marches. forums, etc. - not to only appeal to liberals. I also intend for the agitation to reach advanced masses who know we need a revolution, to reach near revolutionary masses, and to reach the intermediate masses who though not seeing the need for revolution, have an open mind.

The Michael Brown agitation/leaflet was posted on RevLeft, to reach the full bore revutionary types reading RevLeft. Thus they can straight up copy it and distribute it. And whether or not they distribute it off the bat, they may want to review the line and message of the agitation and discuss the pros and cons of the agitation in order to make it more effective.

Marxists (aka those who uphold the overall validity of Mao's thinking with regard to the aims and tactics of the Cultural Revolution) accept Lenin's guidance on the strategy for making revolution. And Lenin, in "What is to Be Done" his primary work laying out how to make revolution, makes the case that creating public opinion (CPO) in favor of revolution via agitation and propaganda (detailed exposition of a single subject) should be the heart and fulcrum for building a revolutionary movement and for driving the revolution after the seizure of power so that ultimately classes are abolished so that communism is realized.

The leaflet is for use and for review on RevLeft in order to enhance the theoretical thinking of revolutionaries regarding the issues involved in the agitation.

Why wouldn't posting such a leaflet be an appropriate and desirable thing to do in a sub-forum called "Ongoing struggles"?

[QueerVanguard]

Sorry, I just can't stand these self-important, lilly white cis "leaders of the vanguard" offering up their little defenses of POC workers being abused by their cousins in the police department, as if we need their divine guidance or some shit. Tim, buddy, stop typing up lame crappy talking points on your 1992 webpage, step out of the way, and let us lead this struggle, please.

[Tim Redd]

Well that's your thinking, I think you're wrong to downplay the connection between the epidemic of police brutality and murder and the former existence of slavery in the U.S. I don't understand how a revolutionary would fail to see the connection. Your position is close to the right wing Fox news pundits and their ilk who downplay or ignore the effect that slavery has on the current state of racial relations in the U.S..

Also note that actual apartheid and extreme discrimination based upon the former existence of slavery held sway in the U.S. until at least the '60's and '70's. It's been almost no time since legal steps against such apartheid and discrimination came into effect. Let's note that was just legal steps, whereas improvements in actual fact have seriously been lagging.


no, this is wrong. Modern racism is not just that jim-crow was recent imo, it's that in the last 40 years racism has been reorganized in the u.s.

This is not a "lag" or "holdover", this is a new neoliberal manifestation of racial control. It's an adaptation to and backlash against the black power movement in the context of the end of the "new deal" era.

Recent racist repression, police brutality and murder against blacks and other minorities may be "reorganized" relative to some former state, but the nature and form of recent racist repression, police brutality and murder has its beginnings and roots in the ideological justification of the former enslavement and subsequent apartheid the black and other minority masses were subject to in the U.S.


Again, the racial system of police-prisons is a new manifestation of racism (that yes, extends back to slavery) with it's own challenges. My criticism is not that slavery didn't exist, but that your argument is much too broad to be of use. It's like saying, there's been oppression as long as class society has existed. It's true but dosn't mean much for fighting capitalism, let alone fighting contemporary issues of neoliberal capitalism.

Concretely what was so broad about how the OP agitation connected former slavery to today's repression? It did so pretty much in the way you just did in the preceding paragraph.


northern racism in the post-war era was about maintaining divisions in the working class and keeping blacks as 2nd class workers. Today racism is used to drive down the entire class while targeting blacks as a surplus labor force, warehousing people in prisons, as neoliberalism reorganizes production in leaner, less urban ways.

Actually I think what you say happened "Today" was also present in the immediate post WWII era.


Well revolutionaries won't have much influence if they go to rallies "educating" black folks and anti-racist activists that slavery existed and the u.s. Is racist.:

No, I'm saying that arguing that a protester meme used by people actively protesting the police and facing tear gas, beatings, and so on is "surrendering to the power of the cops" is completely and utterly disconnected from reality.

"Utterly disconnected"? I don't even see it as plain old disconnected.


...the "hands up" thing is, imo, being misinterpreted by you. It's a meme not due necessarily to passifist ideas or as a surrender to the police but because this is what mike brown was doing when he was killed.

Nevertheless, I think promoting the meme, puts the repressed masses in a "we must do what they demand" position. As if what the pigs demand is what we must do regardless of its justifiability. In some cases it may be proper for the masses to resist such commands from the police. And of course in those situations we will be ready and capable of making their ability to enforce their pig demands moot.


People don't March, riot, and protest with threats of the national guard and cops with tanks if they want to surrender to cop authority.

Point taken for continued study.

[Tim Redd]

Sorry, I just can't stand these self-important, lilly white cis "leaders of the vanguard" offering up their little defenses of POC workers being abused by their cousins in the police department, as if we need their divine guidance or some shit. Tim, buddy, stop typing up lame crappy talking points on your 1992 webpage, step out of the way, and let us lead this struggle, please.

What's a POC worker?

It appears you're asserting that Eric Garner was a cousin of the pigs that killed him? If not would you explain.

To make a point you need to explain specifically what at the risparty.org web site is "crappy talking points". (And perhaps you aren't aware but 70 page expositions are more than "talking points". Perhaps you can show us what you have created more than "talking points".

Finally you're hung up on lame bourgeois aesthetic criteria. You want to see what the bourgeois hipsters says is good and effective. Whereas I think what's at risparty.org is effective for what it aims to do. We plan some improvements, but unless someone can concretely point out how to really improve things, empty, my s..t don't stink, emotional drivel doesn't mean a thing.

[QueerVanguard]

What's a POC worker?

A person of color who is a worker. Simple enough?


It appears you're asserting that Eric Garner was a cousin of the pigs that killed him? If not would you explain.

Whoa.. You're waaay off, cowboy. I was saying the cops are generally the cousins of our ever so proud middle aged, cis white "Communist" vanguard leaders. You know, the chubby old farts who have been leading Communism into the ground for the past 50 years in this country and across the world. The time has come, IMHO, for the vanguard to be led by the most oppressive sections of the world, not privileged turds and their hipster children.


To make a point you need to explain specifically what at the risparty.org web site is "crappy talking points". (And perhaps you aren't aware but 70 page expositions are more than "talking points". Perhaps you can show us what you have created more than "talking points".

Actions speak louder than words. While white self-appointed guardians of POCs like you write the "70 page expositions" discussing things they've never experienced and therefore can't even understand, POCs have been taking matters into their own hands and getting shit done, or haven't you been watching the news?


Finally you're hung up on lame bourgeois aesthetic criteria. You want to see what the bourgeois hipsters says is good and effective. Whereas I think what's at risparty.org is effective for what it aims to do. We plan some improvements, but unless someone can concretely point out how to really improve things, empty, my s..t don't stink, emotional drivel doesn't mean a thing.

You want to improve things for the revolution? Get the fuck out of the way already and let us lead for a change. You're not needed, in fact you're holding shit back.

[Tim Redd]

Think this through. You are demanding a vague concept of justice from the bourgeois state which defines justice. According to the Historical Materialist doctrine the concept of justice is a reflection of the materialist conditions and class struggle in a given age...and you are demanding the capitalist state and class to give that to a victim (for whom this vague notion of justice no longer matters at all) of the nature of the state it self and resulting from the conditions the class enforces on us. Not onl.y that...but it is a victim of the apparatus of the state which is supposed to protect and serve...the notion of justice.

How fucking stupid are you?

How ignorant are you not understanding that progressive and revolutionary movements don't always demand what they are certain they can achieve. From their care and concern for justice for individuals, groups and whole strata and classes, they often make demands that express their demand for changes in society that eliminate the repression and injustice in society. Often knowing full well the goal can't be achieved until after the revolution. However raising before revolution can mobilize the masses and educate the masses to nature and working of capitalist society. So how mF stupid are you for not realizing that?

You're in a bubble of theoretically untested s..t, with your nose turned up ignoring the funk while thinking you are the best. But from what can tell there's nothing concrete to back that up.

[Tim Redd]

You want to improve things for the revolution? Get the fuck out of the way already and let us lead for a change. You're not needed, in fact you're holding shit back.

And you are doing or have done what to justify the demands of your tired, I'm an insufferable wannabe bloviation?

[Ravn]

Yes...you actually did say that.
And you used it to question somebody elses revolutionary credentials.

I asked you that question in light of the fact that Michael Brown is the subject of this thread & you were reticent to address the issue of MB, even though you chose to post comments in *this* thread. If you think this is such a non-issue, why did you do that? (It was obviously just an opportunity for you to attack Tim Redd.) So, yeah, I can question your "credentials" on that basis. Action speaks louder than words.




Somehow not caring about a person is, in your mind, anti-thetical to revolutionary politics.

It perhaps isn't antithetical to your "revolutionary" politics because you're advocating a petty bourgeois revolution in the name of anarcho-communism. That's antithetical to a proletarian socialist revolution. Your interest is really liberating individualist from capitalist exploitation. Not humanity at large. Not the working class at large.








I am perfectly able to care about a community and absolutely LOATH some if not all of its members. You think I care about each proletarian in my own community? The fucking neonazi three blocks over?


You have no good reason not to care about Michael Brown since he didn't deserve to be executed by that cop. & you had no good reason to publicly state that you don't give a fuck about him for any silly ass doctrinaire reason. & why are you running around loathing people for anyway? It's one thing not to like what people do, but it's another to dislike people just because you think you're better than they are as a person. That's just your subjective self-serving self-aggrandizing assessment.





You babble consistently in the other thread about the scientific nature of communism...yet you are taking the ultimate unscientific line here that you have to level with the community to be able to connect with them because otherwise you have a lack of zeal and intent.

I didn't say "level". I said "learn". & obviously, if you loath the people in a community, you're not respecting them as human beings, & by not investigating where they're actually coming from, & listening to what they have to say about things, you can't claim you really understand what's happening there. How scientific is that?







Now if you had known this then you could figure that my mass line would be somewhere in the neighborhood of trying to tell you....as the cadre...that your position on "care" is absolutely worthless as a revolutionary analysis and political aim.

Wiki-page time for clarity: "Mao's slogan was "From the masses, to the masses."[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line#cite_note-5) The process is said to include investigating the conditions of people, learning about and participating in their struggles, gathering ideas from them, and creating a plan of action based on these ideas and concerns of the people, and also based on an analysis of the objective conditions and in light of the revolutionary goal."

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line

Investigate, learn, participate, gather data, create plan accordingly. Instead you rather, indoctrinate, intimidate, pontificate, & cause confusion.

[synthesis]

Finally you're hung up on lame bourgeois aesthetic criteria. You want to see what the bourgeois hipsters says is good and effective. Whereas I think what's at risparty.org is effective for what it aims to do. We plan some improvements, but unless someone can concretely point out how to really improve things, empty, my s..t don't stink, emotional drivel doesn't mean a thing.

You're basically asking for academic sources for the claim that your website is ugly.


Marxists (aka those who uphold the overall validity of Mao's thinking with regard to the aims and tactics of the Cultural Revolution)

:lol:

[QueerVanguard]

And you are doing or have done what to justify the demands of your tired, I'm an insufferable wannabe bloviation?

I'm a minority within a minority within a minority. I suffer oppression from every conceivable direction in this piece of shit country. I know what the problem is and how to solve it. You, on the other hand, are part of the privileged sheltered segment of this country, a white labor aristocrat who is a beneficiary of the structurally racist and sexist power structure. All you know about oppression is what you've been told or read by POCs. For that very reason you're not equipped to lead this struggle, let alone a revolution.

[Prof. Oblivion]

Best way to find out is to read the theory: www.risparty.org (http://www.risparty.org).

Nothing new that I can see. What am I missing?

[Lily Briscoe]

hipster


hipsters

2009 wants its dis back.

What a weird thread btw.

[PhoenixAsh]

How ignorant are you not understanding that progressive and revolutionary movements don't always demand what they are certain they can achieve. From their care and concern for justice for individuals, groups and whole strata and classes, they often make demands that express their demand for changes in society that eliminate the repression and injustice in society. Often knowing full well the goal can't be achieved until after the revolution. However raising before revolution can mobilize the masses and educate the masses to nature and working of capitalist society. So how mF stupid are you for not realizing that?

You're in a bubble of theoretically untested s..t, with your nose turned up ignoring the funk while thinking you are the best. But from what can tell there's nothing concrete to back that up.

Actually this is not the basis of untested shit but the basis of Marxism, Leninism, Maoism and scientific socialism in general. But good to know that you have no clue what the fuck you are actually talking about.

And good to know you once more establish that you want to "make changes in society" rather than fundamentally alter the mode of production, end the state and class society.

So in order to educate the "masses" (how condescending) you perpetuate the false notions of justice within the system and perpetuate the individuality rather than the systemic nature of repression.

But we are the ones not understanding revolutionary politics and tactics.

check.

[PhoenixAsh]

I asked you that question in light of the fact that Michael Brown is the subject of this thread & you were reticent to address the issue of MB, even though you chose to post comments in *this* thread. If you think this is such a non-issue, why did you do that? (It was obviously just an opportunity for you to attack Tim Redd.) So, yeah, I can question your "credentials" on that basis. Action speaks louder than words.

You did not ask me that question. You used it to illustrate how you thought this showed somebodies revolutionary zeal and honesty.

This is a false notion and a liberal position. I pointed this out to you.
I have no idea how you get the idea that this is a non-issue if I took the time to point this out.

Yet you choose to be an obtuse asshat and perpetuate this debate about something which is simply common sense.



It perhaps isn't antithetical to your "revolutionary" politics because you're advocating a petty bourgeois revolution in the name of anarcho-communism. That's antithetical to a proletarian socialist revolution. Your interest is really liberating individualist from capitalist exploitation. Not humanity at large. Not the working class at large.

Lets get this straight.

YOU are the one reducing the systemic nature of oppression to an individual issue and reducing it to the amount of "care"...I am the one criticising you for this position and pointing out that it is not about the individual but about the class and society in general.

Yet all of the sudden I am the one who, according to you, wants to liberate individuals.

You are a fucking joke.

:laugh:



You have no good reason not to care about Michael Brown since he didn't deserve to be executed by that cop.

Again...you are confusing caring for with deploring the situation.


& you had no good reason to publicly state that you don't give a fuck about him for any silly ass doctrinaire reason.

I had a very good reason...to counter act your notion that YOU professed and used asininely in this thread to question revolutionary politics of others measred by the amount of care.

Which is complete and utter bullshit.

As I have shown you by using your own arguments...your amount of care is dishonest as fuck and merely a tactic you use.


& why are you running around loathing people for anyway? It's one thing not to like what people do, but it's another to dislike people just because you think you're better than they are as a person. That's just your subjective self-serving self-aggrandizing assessment.
[/quote]

Jesus Christ...you are something special aren't you?

I used loath in reference to the fascist. If I have to explain why I loath fascists...then I am not entirely sure what the fuck you are doing. And hell yeah I think I am better as a person than somebody who advocates oppression and prejudice.



I didn't say "level". I said "learn". & obviously, if you loath the people in a community, you're not respecting them as human beings,


I generally don't respect Fascists and Nazi's as human beings...no. Astute observation...



& by not investigating where they're actually coming from, & listening to what they have to say about things, you can't claim you really understand what's happening there. How scientific is that?

I understand precisely why they are what they are, why they claim what they claim.

Let me once more try to get this through your insanely obtuse skull: Individual care =/= scientific.


Wiki-page time for clarity: "Mao's slogan was "From the masses, to the masses."[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line#cite_note-5) The process is said to include investigating the conditions of people, learning about and participating in their struggles, gathering ideas from them, and creating a plan of action based on these ideas and concerns of the people, and also based on an analysis of the objective conditions and in light of the revolutionary goal."

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line

Investigate, learn, participate, gather data, create plan accordingly. Instead you rather, indoctrinate, intimidate, pontificate, & cause confusion.

Awesome...so you need wiki to explain a concept for me that you yourself profess as your opolitical basis. I am wondering why you need wiki.

But let me speak to you in your own language....since you get your political knowledge and politics from Wikipedia...I will share the wiki a bout Mass Line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line

And the following excerpt...


Despite the vast output from the CCP’s propaganda apparatus, in January 1951 the Central Committee published a directive condemning as a “principal weakness of the Party's propaganda” a failure to effectively give “systematic guidance and control of various levels of party organizations.”[2]

The directive said that “One of the inborn duties of a Communist lies in the incessant effort to carry out propaganda among the people so as to educate them, to wage relentless war against all reactionary and mistaken conceptions and principles, and to promote as well as raise the political consciousness of the masses.”[2]

The directive called for the establishment of networks of "propaganda officers"—one in every party cell—and "reporting officers" at higher levels. Propaganda activity was to be conducted among the masses under strict control and in "fixed activity programs."[2] Among other duties, propaganda officers were to maintain "constant public contact" so they could "assist the Party in the choice of propaganda matter and methods appropriate for different periods of time."[2]

So...yeah...you are wrong here too.

What a surprise.

[Ravn]

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2810245#post2810245)
You did not ask me that question. You used it to illustrate how you thought this showed somebodies revolutionary zeal and honesty.
This is a false notion and a liberal position. I pointed this out to you.
I have no idea how you get the idea that this is a non-issue if I took the time to point this out. Yet you choose to be an obtuse asshat and perpetuate this debate about something which is simply common sense.
If MB is a non-issue, or an irrelevant issue, why bother posting in this thread? Why did you answer a question that wasn't addressed to you? I asked the question to whomever was making an issue about everything but Michael Brown. & your grand response was: "I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown as a person". How is that constructive? Telling me that being concerned about an individual is liberal doesn't answer *that* question. You want to talk about common sense? Everybody can see that MB is one of many victims killed under similar circumstances for similar reasons. & everybody can see who is outraged about it an institution in the pattern.





.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2810245#post2810245)
YOU are the one reducing the systemic nature of oppression to an individual issue and reducing it to the amount of "care"...I am the one criticising you for this position and pointing out that it is not about the individual but about the class and society in general.
Carelessness does not demonstrate fortitude. You are careless in how you approach people. The system of oppression is illustrated by this individual case & noting that doesn't reduce the system of oppression to just one case. People are outraged because this individual represents an on-going attack against working class people & black working class people in particular. Regardless of whatever political tendencies of those involved in these demonstrations & any expressed here in this forum, everyone can see that there is something wrong with this system. Don't pretend that you're the only one who has figured this out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2810245#post2810245)
Yet all of the sudden I am the one who, according to you, wants to liberate individuals.
You are a fucking joke.
You do have an anarchist tendency. Anarchists are individualists, (who all see themselves as persons), & you're more likely to unite with other people such as yourself rather than anybody else. That's why you can blithely say things like: "I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown as a person". He's not like you, so he's ultimately irrelevant.

Try some critical thinking here about the mass line. You quoted the following:

“One of the inborn duties of a Communist lies in the incessant effort to carry out propaganda among the people so as to educate them, to wage relentless war against all reactionary and mistaken conceptions and principles, and to promote as well as raise the political consciousness of the masses.”[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line#cite_note-steiner-2)

This isn't Mao's line at all. His mass line is a two way street. You don't just educate the masses, the masses also educate you. (Communists don't know everything.) & reactionary & mistaken conceptions can foster themselves within the party as well as without.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Your political activity consists of arguing with people on the internet. We aren't even taking you seriously, this entire thread is people making fun of you and tim redd and you two idiots are acting like you're addressing some international congress or something. This thread lol.

I have a list of demands for the administration: tim redd and ravn will be banned and 20,000 reputation points will be deposited into my account. If my demands are not met in the next 100,000 hours something terrible will happen and it will be on your hands.

[Ravn]

You did not ask me that question. You used it to illustrate how you thought this showed somebodies revolutionary zeal and honesty.
This is a false notion and a liberal position. I pointed this out to you.
I have no idea how you get the idea that this is a non-issue if I took the time to point this out. Yet you choose to be an obtuse asshat and perpetuate this debate about something which is simply common sense.


If MB is a non-issue, or an irrelevant issue, why bother posting in this thread? Why did you answer a question that wasn't addressed to you? I asked the question to whomever was making an issue about everything but Michael Brown. & your grand response was: "I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown as a person". How is that constructive? Telling me that being concerned about an individual is liberal doesn't answer *that* question. You want to talk about common sense? Everybody can see that MB is one of many victims killed under similar circumstances for similar reasons. & everybody can see who is outraged about it an institution in the pattern.










YOU are the one reducing the systemic nature of oppression to an individual issue and reducing it to the amount of "care"...I am the one criticising you for this position and pointing out that it is not about the individual but about the class and society in general.



Carelessness does not demonstrate fortitude. You are careless in how you approach people. The system of oppression is illustrated by this individual case & noting that doesn't reduce the system of oppression to just one case. People are outraged because this individual represents an on-going attack against working class people & black working class people in particular. Regardless of whatever political tendencies of those involved in these demonstrations & any expressed here in this forum, everyone can see that there is something wrong with this system. Don't pretend that you're the only one who has figured this out.




Yet all of the sudden I am the one who, according to you, wants to liberate individuals.
You are a fucking joke.

You do have an anarchist tendency. Anarchists are individualists, (who all see themselves as persons), & you're more likely to unite with other people such as yourself rather than anybody else. That's why you can blithely say things like: "I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown as a person". He's not like you, so he's ultimately irrelevant.

Try some critical thinking here about the mass line. You quoted the following:

“One of the inborn duties of a Communist lies in the incessant effort to carry out propaganda among the people so as to educate them, to wage relentless war against all reactionary and mistaken conceptions and principles, and to promote as well as raise the political consciousness of the masses.”[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line#cite_note-steiner-2)

This isn't Mao's line at all. His mass line is a two way street. You don't just educate the masses, the masses also educate you. (Communists don't know everything.) & reactionary & mistaken conceptions can foster themselves within the party as well as without. (I specifically used *Mao"s line*)

[Ravn]

you two idiots are acting like you're addressing some international congress or something.

That's better than acting as if this forum is a frat house. But you do realize that this is actually an international forum. The more people bother to articulate things in a non-superficial way, the more people will likely get involve & contribute. Do you have a problem with that?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

You have no idea just how dumb you sound. You two have managed to miss the point of every critism directed at you in this thread. At first I thought you were trolls looking for some fun but imagine my disappointment when it dawned on me that you're both gross middle aged maoists. When was the last time redd let you out of the servants quarters?

[PhoenixAsh]

If MB is a non-issue, or an irrelevant issue, why bother posting in this thread? Why did you answer a question that wasn't addressed to you? I asked the question to whomever was making an issue about everything but Michael Brown. & your grand response was: "I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown as a person". How is that constructive? Telling me that being concerned about an individual is liberal doesn't answer *that* question. You want to talk about common sense? Everybody can see that MB is one of many victims killed under similar circumstances for similar reasons. & everybody can see who is outraged about it an institution in the pattern.



Really? Because you have been spending an awful amount of time dodging just this very issue.

After all YOU made the amount of displayed care for Michael Brown central to revolutionary politics when you used it as a basis to question somebodies revolutionary intent.

I also have not told you that care is a liberal concept instead I told you that reducing the systematic oppression to an individual problem and substitute revolutionary analysis for "care" is a liberal position.

This is not rocket science.

Your obstinate refusal to even accept this complete and utter no brainer makes it incredibly clear that your membership of this forum is not only far from honest but that you are downright trolling this site.



Carelessness does not demonstrate fortitude. You are careless in how you approach people.

Wonderful. We will put this on a tile.


The system of oppression is illustrated by this individual case & noting that doesn't reduce the system of oppression to just one case.

Except....you are. Why is that? You still have not answered my question why you are not mentioning...by name...the other 5000 victims of police brutality....



People are outraged because this individual represents an on-going attack against working class people & black working class people in particular.

Really, You don't say? That is EXACTLY what I have been telling you all this fucking time.

Good for you to FINALLY catch up.


Regardless of whatever political tendencies of those involved in these demonstrations & any expressed here in this forum, everyone can see that there is something wrong with this system. Don't pretend that you're the only one who has figured this out.

Except...I apparently needed to tell you that that is the central revolutionary line instead of your insessant worrying and BS-ing about the amount of displayed care.

So obviously it isn't that obvious...given the fact that it took you untill this post to actually admit something which you argued against for pages and pages.

Fucking asshat.


You do have an anarchist tendency. Anarchists are individualists, (who all see themselves as persons), & you're more likely to unite with other people such as yourself rather than anybody else. That's why you can blithely say things like: "I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown as a person". He's not like you, so he's ultimately irrelevant.


Not all Anarchists are individualists although there are individualist anarchists.

I can say I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown because I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown.

Your own care is dishonest as fuck and instrumentalism which is ultimately condescending...as you have repeatedly proven through your own arguments

I associate with a whole range of different people...who are nothing like me.

Giving a fuck about Michael Brown is not necessary for a revolutionary analysis or understanding of the community and the problems they face

(amount of) Care is not the central element of revolutionary politics and analysis

I don't care about a lot of people who are exactly like me either.





Try some critical thinking here about the mass line. You quoted the following:

“One of the inborn duties of a Communist lies in the incessant effort to carry out propaganda among the people so as to educate them, to wage relentless war against all reactionary and mistaken conceptions and principles, and to promote as well as raise the political consciousness of the masses.”[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line#cite_note-steiner-2)

This isn't Mao's line at all. His mass line is a two way street. You don't just educate the masses, the masses also educate you. (Communists don't know everything.) & reactionary & mistaken conceptions can foster themselves within the party as well as without. (I specifically used *Mao"s line*)

this really isn't any different from the time of Mao. So no...I don't see your point at all.

Mao did call liberalism as extremely harmfull to the revolution and compared it to a corrosive eating away class consciousness.

Mao also railed against individualism and, in his collected works writes, that focuss on the individual needs to be corrected ideologically. In his writings he also writes that individualims is partially to blame on the leaders of the community.

So perhaps....when you apply Mao-ist positions...you should be aware of the complete body of works and doctrine.

[Ravn]

YOU made the amount of displayed care for Michael Brown central to revolutionary politics when you used it as a basis to question somebodies revolutionary intent.

I'm not talking about "displayed" care. I'm talking about actual care. If you're careless in your politics then what good are they? What good are you to anybody?




I told you that reducing the systematic oppression to an individual problem and substitute revolutionary analysis for "care" is a liberal position.

That's just a straw man in the first place. You need to claim this so you can ignore my concerns.



This is not rocket science.

This is in part of what I'm alluding to here. You're careless in how you approach people. You keep repeating things like this & it's just your way of trying to talk down to other people. This is just childish.




Your obstinate refusal to even accept this complete and utter no brainer makes it incredibly clear that your membership of this forum is not only far from honest but that you are downright trolling this site.

You've used far more cuss words that I *care* to use. It's like you're trying to push my buttons so you can make this into a straight up flame war & then you can apparently abuse your authority as a moderator. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm dishonest. You keep harping on certain things here which strike me as irrelevant to what is pertinent to the topic of this thread. You don't need to tell anybody that Brown's murder is part of a system of relations. Everyone gets that in the first place whomever is outrage about it. If you can't engage with other people in a civil manner then who is the real troll here?






You still have not answered my question why you are not mentioning...by name...the other 5000 victims of police brutality....

I'm not stopping you from mentioning anybody else, & you can't make other people parrot what you want them to.



I apparently needed to tell you that that is the central revolutionary line instead of your insessant worrying and BS-ing about the amount of displayed care.

You repeatedly fail to address my concerns just to make a doctrinaire point you assumed I didn't agree with. On top of that, you don't even have a coherent mass line. Talking down to the masses & reticence in learning anything from them is a fucked up mass line.





Not all Anarchists are individualists although there are individualist anarchists.
I can say I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown because I don't give a fuck about Michael Brown.
Your own care is dishonest as fuck and instrumentalism which is ultimately condescending...as you have repeatedly proven through your own arguments
I associate with a whole range of different people...who are nothing like me.
Giving a fuck about Michael Brown is not necessary for a revolutionary analysis or understanding of the community and the problems they face
(amount of) Care is not the central element of revolutionary politics and analysis
I don't care about a lot of people who are exactly like me either.


Such hostility. (1) All anarchists are ultimately individualists. (2) That's just doubling down on being disrespectful. (& that's just the white supremacy coming out of your ass.) (3) That's a projection. It's not condescending to actually care about people. You keep saying displaying care. I mean actually care. If you actually cared about the victims of police brutality, you wouldn't be claiming a right here to say you don't give a fuck about one of them just to make a doctrinaire point. (4) You need to care about people, as well as studying & investigating the community, & learning from people (6) You can't split subjectivity from objectivity. They're a unity. (7) Maybe you have a problem with selfishness. Why are you bringing up your personal problems here?

[PhoenixAsh]

I'm not talking about "displayed" care. I'm talking about actual care. If you're careless in your politics then what good are they? What good are you to anybody?

Yes...I know you are talking about that. And they are completely seperated from a correct class analysis and revolutionary action.


That's just a straw man in the first place. You need to claim this so you can ignore my concerns.

No...actually that is exactly what happened and everybody who scrolls back can read this for themselves. So it is not a straw man...it is what I have done repeatedly.


This is in part of what I'm alluding to here. You're careless in how you approach people. You keep repeating things like this & it's just your way of trying to talk down to other people. This is just childish.

And you conclude this from the subjective interpretation you made about the way you perceive how I approached you in this thread and from that incident you create a generalization about how I approach people.

Which is fine....because you know fuck all about me.

But what is not fine is that you have...for pages...refused to accept the premisses which are the basis of the ideology you seem to support and hold up and counter argued them continuously.



You've used far more cuss words that I *care* to use. It's like you're trying to push my buttons so you can make this into a straight up flame war & then you can apparently abuse your authority as a moderator.

Really? Because you are still here aren't you? You haven't received a warning, infraction or any other sanction...did you?

So this accusation of abuse of mod authority is really just bullshit.


Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm dishonest.

Indeed. Why I said you where dishonest is because of the repeated contradictions, denials and 180's you take in your arguments.


You keep harping on certain things here which strike me as irrelevant to what is pertinent to the topic of this thread. You don't need to tell anybody that Brown's murder is part of a system of relations. Everyone gets that in the first place whomever is outrage about it. If you can't engage with other people in a civil manner then who is the real troll here?

I needed to tell you over and over and over again for the last few pages...because you continuously made this about "caring" and how "caring" is the basis of revolutionary analysis and how we need to focus on individual incidents.

So if this was so readilly apparent...the disagreement you had with me was there just for disagrements sake....

And THAT is trolling.


I'm not stopping you from mentioning anybody else, & you can't make other people parrot what you want them to.

You repeatedly fail to address my concerns just to make a doctrinaire point you assumed I didn't agree with. On top of that, you don't even have a coherent mass line. Talking down to the masses & reticence in learning anything from them is a fucked up mass line.


You have not stated any concerns other than lamenting the lack of "caring" as a basis for revolutionary analysis and politics.

You have repeatedly asked for a mass line when I have given you the mass line from the very first post: this is NOT about an individual NOR is it about caring.

Now...I am not a Maoist. So I reject the notion of Mass Line for the very reason that mass line is exactly contradictory to what you think it is.



[/LIST]
Such hostility. (1) All anarchists are ultimately individualists. (2) That's just doubling down on being disrespectful. (& that's just the white supremacy coming out of your ass.) (3) That's a projection. It's not condescending to actually care about people. You keep saying displaying care. I mean actually care. If you actually cared about the victims of police brutality, you wouldn't be claiming a right here to say you don't give a fuck about one of them just to make a doctrinaire point. (4) You need to care about people, as well as studying & investigating the community, & learning from people (6) You can't split subjectivity from objectivity. They're a unity. (7) Maybe you have a problem with selfishness. Why are you bringing up your personal problems here?


1). No...they really, really aren't
2). No...it is being honest. The basis of clear and consise communication and the basis for succesful and lasting relationships and friendships.
3). You don't display actual care.
4). I don't need to care about people at all. Get that through your head: caring about individual people is NOT required at all for revolutionary politics or tactics
5). ...you missed 5
6). Again...deep sigh...caring has NOTHING to do with revolutionary poplitics and tactics.
7). You brought it up...you seem to have a problem with honesty.

[Ravn]

Yes...I know you are talking about that. And they are completely seperated from a correct class analysis and revolutionary action.

No, they're not. Everything's interconnected.





But what is not fine is that you have...for pages...refused to accept the premisses which are the basis of the ideology you seem to support.

You mean the ideology you support coming from an anarchistic tendency. I don't support that tendency & I don't support your particular mass line. Your revolutionary analysis doesn't include learning anything from the masses. Your mission is to talk down to the masses & tell them what is correct according to your interpretation of things because you know it all. I'm opposed to that approach.



You haven't received a warning, infraction or any other sanction...did you?

You insinuated that this is exactly what you want to do. Is this the kind of treatment anybody can expect here merely because they take an unpopular position?






I needed to tell you over and over and over again

No, you don't. You're not a martyr.



... you continuously made this about "caring" and how "caring" is the basis of revolutionary analysis and how we need to focus on individual incidents.

Not *the* basis. *A* basis. We all need to learn from particular cases in order to come to a better understanding about the general situation. Are you advocating not focusing on individual cases at all on the grounds that we have everything all figured out already? That's not scientific, you schmuck.




So if this was so readilly apparent...the disagreement you had with me was there just for disagrements sake....

And THAT is trolling.

& all the vitriol is just an excuse to try to shut other people up.




You have not stated any concerns other than lamenting the lack of "caring" as a basis for revolutionary analysis and politics.

You're confirming what you're denying. Whether you like my concern or not, that's my concern. Ignoring why just to shove your dogmatic opinion down other people's throats is not revolutionary.






You have repeatedly asked for a mass line when I have given you the mass line from the very first post: this is NOT about an individual NOR is it about caring.

You given me *your* mass line which is apparently spewing dogmatism in the face of people, & using their tribulations as statistics to serve your interpretation of theory. That's a horrible mass line. & then with your anarchist tendency, it really does boil down to the individual, that is the anarchist individualists who see themselves as persons but everyone else as non-persons. You're worried about making displays of caring, rather than actually caring. You're worried about the facade you put out there being pristine & above it all.



Now...I am not a Maoist. So I reject the notion of Mass Line for the very reason that mass line is exactly contradictory to what you think it is.

"Mao's slogan was "From the masses, to the masses."[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line#cite_note-5) The process is said to include investigating the conditions of people, learning about and participating in their struggles, gathering ideas from them, and creating a plan of action based on these ideas and concerns of the people, and also based on an analysis of the objective conditions and in light of the revolutionary goal."

What exactly do you object to this? & don't quote something contrary to this & then claim it's the same thing.




3). You don't display actual care.

I'm not arguing for anybody to display anything. What I want them to do is actually care about things they should.






4). I don't need to care about people at all.

(1) That's counter-revolutionary.
(2) That's an expression of an individualist line that you were previously denying of having anything to do with.

[PhoenixAsh]

No, they're not. Everything's interconnected.

Nope. Useless rhetorical drivel. Post mathematical evidence of everything being interconnected.



You mean the ideology you support coming from an anarchistic tendency. I don't support that tendency & I don't support your particular mass line. Your revolutionary analysis doesn't include learning anything from the masses.

Actually no...this is part of EVERY revolutionary tendency. Including and especially Maoism. Now...since I already stated that I think you are both a liberal and a troll...obviously I do not conisder you to be a revolutionary and you are consistently proving this position.

I do not have to relearn already learned lessons through countless actions and mass events.

And consistently talking about "masses" makes you sound like a complete disrespectfull and especially condescending tool.

That is all completely besides the point of you NOT being the masses...but YOU are the target of my comments and arguments.




Your mission is to talk down to the masses & tell them what is correct according to your interpretation of things because you know it all. I'm opposed to that approach.

My mission attm is to talk down on your revolutionary position. Yes. I tried being nice about it. But as far as I can tell you are a trolling liberal playing at revolutionary without any practical experience or theoretical knowledge.

Again...I remind you that I have not said one single word about the tactics of the protests...everything I said was aimed and directed at YOUR political position.



You insinuated that this is exactly what you want to do. Is this the kind of treatment anybody can expect here merely because they take an unpopular position?

You don't just take an unpopular position. You are the embodyment of trolling...and argue a liberal non-revolutionary position.



No, you don't. You're not a martyr.

I do. That is incredibly obvious for the last few pages.


Not *the* basis. *A* basis. We all need to learn from particular cases in order to come to a better understanding about the general situation. Are you advocating not focusing on individual cases at all on the grounds that we have everything all figured out already? That's not scientific, you schmuck.

No...you specifically called into question the revolutionary ideology, tactics, zeal and intent of everybody who doesn't "care".

That is the litteral definition of making it THE basis.

Otherwise this whole debate started by you over this very issue was purely you being disengenous...and...again...purposefully trolling.


& all the vitriol is just an excuse to try to shut other people up.

I am not displaying vitriol. You have not a big grasp over your own language do you?


You're confirming what you're denying. Whether you like my concern or not, that's my concern. Ignoring why just to shove your dogmatic opinion down other people's throats is not revolutionary.

No...I really am not. I stated that you have NOT stated any concerns merely rejections of facts...which you later tried to turn a 180 on and blame me for.

My opinion is not dogmatic. It is a pure fact. You are the one who tries to continuously argue that care for a specific individual is a measure of revolutionary politics. You dogmatically try to shove that down the throat of this community and used it to insult and question the revolutionary credentials of people who did not agree with Tim Redd.

Yet this is not the case and so far you have utterly failed to provide any grounds for this assertion and position. Yet yoiu have continuously tried to weasel out from under having said exactly that...inlcuding trying to pin it on me.



You given me *your* mass line which is apparently spewing dogmatism in the face of people, & using their tribulations as statistics to serve your interpretation of theory. That's a horrible mass line. & then with your anarchist tendency, it really does boil down to the individual, that is the anarchist individualists who see themselves as persons but everyone else as non-persons. You're worried about making displays of caring, rather than actually caring. You're worried about the facade you put out there being pristine & above it all.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

HAHAHAHAHA.

I...whom you have consistently accused of being callous and careless...because I explicitly stated that I don't care....am now accused of being concerned about displays of caring.

No, no...that is YOUR position you have consistently taken and on which I counter argued you consistently. I have even shown you how your own supposed care was fake and dishonest as fuck ...based on the arguments you provided.

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:: laugh:



"Mao's slogan was "From the masses, to the masses."[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_line#cite_note-5) The process is said to include investigating the conditions of people, learning about and participating in their struggles, gathering ideas from them, and creating a plan of action based on these ideas and concerns of the people, and also based on an analysis of the objective conditions and in light of the revolutionary goal."

What exactly do you object to this? & don't quote something contrary to this & then claim it's the same thing.



The quote was from the same page you dolt.



I'm not arguing for anybody to display anything. What I want them to do is actually care about things they should.

Yet....you do not care. You don't. Your care is dishonest as fuck. You merely use it to gain some connection with the community. You have no fucking clue who Michael Brown is. You were never interested in Michael Brown before he became yet another victim. You were never even concerned with the community of Ferguson before.

Yet now all of the sudden you care so much about him...

Sure.





(1) That's counter-revolutionary.
(2) That's an expression of an individualist line that you were previously denying of having anything to do with.

No...it really isn't...AT ALL.

Have I? You must have shit in your eyes. I said not all anarchists are individualists. Don't try to add another straw man to your woefully inadequate debate here.

[PhoenixAsh]

Lol ;) I saw that before you deleted it Synthesis ;) And...Thnx.

[Per Levy]

dont delete posts, this thread is the funniest thread on revleft in ages and every new post makes it even funnier. redd and ravn makeing fools out of themselfs is hillarious.

i want to read this thread again everytime mass-line comes up change it with a word that would make the thread even funnier than it allready is.

but on a more serious note, if one ever wanted evidence of maoism being a petit-bourgeois ideology than this thread is the evidence one waited for. liberalism, class colaboration and pretty much spouting a lot of dogmatic bs(whats your massline?).

[synthesis]

I saw that before you deleted it

Well, that's all that really matters :wub:


but on a more serious note, if one ever wanted evidence of maoism being a petit-bourgeois ideology than this thread is the evidence one waited for.

I just now actually read this:


It perhaps isn't antithetical to your "revolutionary" politics because you're advocating a petty bourgeois revolution in the name of anarcho-communism. That's antithetical to a proletarian socialist revolution.

And it's hilarious because that is straight-up literally-in-the-most-literal-sense-of-literally what Tim Redd has actually said here, minus the a/c of course. I wonder what other gems I'm missing by skipping through all of Ravn's posts on general principle.

[PhoenixAsh]

At a certain point it becomes an addiction. You really know you shouldn't...but it is just too good to pass up on.

[Ravn]

obviously I do not conisder you to be a revolutionary


So what? That's your subjective assessment based on your need to aggrandize yourself. & I'm not here to convince you that I'm a revolutionary. That's your agenda in regards to yourself.




I do not have to relearn already learned lessons through countless actions and mass events.

That doesn't make you omniscient, does it? Your assertion is megalomaniacal.




And consistently talking about "masses" makes you sound like a complete disrespectfull and especially condescending tool.

Your grandstanding is preposterous, & childish.











You don't just take an unpopular position. You are the embodyment of trolling...

You're just looking for an excuse to ban me because your counter-revolutionary masquerade is transparent to anybody outside of your clique.









No...you specifically called into question the revolutionary ideology, tactics, zeal and intent of everybody who doesn't "care".

That is the litteral definition of making it THE basis.

That's a non-sequitur. I didn't say it was the basis. You keep saying that in order to not address the issue of carelessness. I do think you're harboring a racist intent behind saying you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown though. It's unfortunate.

[PhoenixAsh]

So what? That's your subjective assessment based on your need to aggrandize yourself. & I'm not here to convince you that I'm a revolutionary. That's your agenda in regards to yourself.

How double standard of you. You were the one judging others for that very same reason...now the tables are turned your suddenly reject my rights to do so and dismiss that right as self-aggrandization.

Meh...


That doesn't make you omniscient, does it? Your assertion is megalomaniacal.

It makes me experienced. Something you lack.



Your grandstanding is preposterous, & childish.

...but true.


You're just looking for an excuse to ban me because your counter-revolutionary masquerade is transparent to anybody outside of your clique

O who is being omniscient now? :rolleyes:


That's a non-sequitur. I didn't say it was the basis. You keep saying that in order to not address the issue of carelessness. I do think you're harboring a racist intent behind saying you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown though. It's unfortunate.

No it is not. It was the foundation of your argument to question somebodies revolutionary intent. So it is a sequitor.

I have repeatedly addressed my position of not caring. I have even repeatedly stated I don't care. Yet I have consistently proven to be very able regardless of that lack of care for a specific individual to make a revolutionary analysis of the situation which did not involve adopting liberal tropes or being dishonest.

I think nobody gives a fuck about what you think anymore. I don't give a fuck about Dillon Taylor either ( I bet you had to google that...because you don't care about him)

[Tim Redd]

I think nobody gives a fuck about what you [Ravn] think anymore.

Like your contempt for the masses as individuals and your whole argument, wrong again.

[Tim Redd]

you two idiots are acting like you're addressing some international congress or something.


What would be the problem with genuine communist congress level thinking being present anywhere? Why is that an issue for you? What you don't like correct, high quality level thinking in the genuine interest of a revolution that gives a damn about the individual lives of the oppressed masses?

Well I guess from your cabal's positions, neither you or your cabal values correct, high quality level revolutionary thinking.

Truth often often emerges in opposition to falsehood (as Mao said) and there's been a lot of truth emerging in this thread against you and your cabal's infantile, dogmatist, line of treachery against the interests of the revolutionary proletariat.

[PhoenixAsh]

Like your contempt for the masses as individuals and your whole argument, wrong again.

You don't count Tim...

[PhoenixAsh]

What would be the problem with genuine communist congress level thinking being present anywhere? Why is that an issue for you? You don't like correct, high quality level thinking and lines?

Truth often often emerges in opposition to falsehood (as Mao said) and there's been a lot of truth emerging in this thread against an infantile, dogmatist, pesudo anarcho-communist line of treachery against the revolutionary proletariat.

We love that kind of thinking. If you would have presented that kind of thinking here the debate would have taken a considerable different route. Instead however you chose to berate people for their amount of care for an individual (rather than the systemic nature and root cause) and called them fascist if they didn't express the care you so feign yourself.

Now...that in itself is of course complete idiotic nonsense which belies any notion you may have about the high quality of your thinking...but it also shows the worthlessness of your politics when you don't even correctly imply the term fascism.

And the truth indeed came out after you faced opposition.

We discovered your class colaborationism. Your co-opting of liberal ideals and moralism. Your egocentrism. Your reliance on change within the system.
And we indeed established your treachery against the revolutionary proletariat.

So...whats your actual point Tim?

[Tim Redd]

You don't count Tim...

In your snotty, 18th century, supercilious French nobility wannabe mind.

But I think most revolutionaries worldwide would think that the OP agitation that demands justice for Michael Brown, that opposes police brutality and murder in general and that points to communist revolution as solution in fact does count.

I think most genuine revolutionaries and progressives would find that it's you and your cabal who has infantile apoplexy against such agitation, that doesn't count.

[PhoenixAsh]

In your snotty, 18th century, supercilious French royalty wannabe mind.

But I think most revolutionaries worldwide would think that the OP agitation that demands justice for Michael Brown, that opposes police brutality and murder in general and that points to communist revolution as solution in fact does count.

I think most genuine revolutionaries and progressives would find that it's you and your cabal who has infantile apoplexy against such agitation, that doesn't count.

Weren't you the one who dragged me into your little drama spiel after I addressed Ravn by calling me a fascist for saying care for the indivdiual is not the basis of revolutionary politics and was subordinate to the sructural nature of the system as the root cause?

That completely devaluated any high road you may have had.

edit: Also...I don't care about the French either.

[Tim Redd]

We discovered your class colaborationism. Your co-opting of liberal ideals and moralism. Your egocentrism. Your reliance on change within the system.
And we indeed established your treachery against the revolutionary proletariat.

So...whats your actual point Tim?

When did all this happen?

[Tim Redd]

Weren't you the one who dragged me into your little drama spiel after I addressed Ravn by calling me a fascist for saying care for the indivdiual is not the basis of revolutionary politics and was subordinate to the sructural nature of the system as the root cause.

I doubt I would call someone a fascist just for asserting that "the indivdiual is not the basis of revolutionary politics and was subordinate to the sructural nature of the system as the root cause".

However it is a major problem to use the fact that: "the indivdiual is not the basis of revolutionary politics and was subordinate to the sructural nature of the system as the root cause", to take the position that one doesn't care about the individuals involved, as you and your buddy cohort do.

Life is made up of concrete, individual acts, and a determination about whether or not injustice occurred in these acts can typically be made. It can certainly contribute to and build the revolutionary movement if what happened in these individual instances is publicized and explained by revolutionaries as resulting from the nature of the capitalist system due to its need to operate based upon the exploitation and repression of the masses. In addition it can be shown based upon an individual event that communist revolution is the most effective means for preventing that and other similar acts of injustice from occurring in the future.

Your camp's position of ignoring or downplaying individual acts of exploitation and oppression (repression) passes on all the opportunities to advance revolution as I have described in the previous paragraph. That is why you all's position is deleterious to the progression of the revolutionary movement.

Pointing out that there is a systemic cause to what happens to an individual is not advanced by failing to mention, or contribute to a movement that starts by focusing on injustice that has occurred in an individual case. Certainly if a movement for an individual doesn't raise the general system wide cause, communist revolutionaries should be introducing the systemic aspects and communist revolutionary solutions into the movement that is focusing on an individual. And the OP agitation leaflet does precisely that. It links with the individual events and links the individual case to the necessity for communist revolution.


[PhoenixAsh is opposed to thinking or actions that fail to promote (-TR paraphrase)] injustice against an individual as somehow subordinate to the structural nature of the system as the root cause.

OK, where has it happened in this thread or elsewhere that I fail to attribute individual acts, or events to larger systemic functioning? If you reread the OP (original post of the thread) you'll clearly see that it points out that the the cause of the Michael Brown event is due the operation of the capitalist system. And it expounds that overthrowing the *system* of capitalism is the best and only long term way to rectify what happened to Michael Brown.


Also...I don't care about the French either.

It isn't about what you consciously care about, it's about how you and your cohort adopt and promote positions and methods of ideological argumentation on this forum that reflect the ways of the French nobility of the 18th century: snobbery, infantileism, outrageous calls to physical duels, self centeredness, using the threat of authority to censure and disenfranchise posters with positions opposite of yours, general uncomradely behavior, etc.

[BIXX]

It isn't about what you consciously care about, it's about how you and your cohort adopt and promote positions and methods of ideological argumentation on this forum that reflect the ways of French royalty of the 18th century: snobbery, infantileism, outrageous calls to physical duels, self centeredness, using the threat of authority to censure and disenfranchise posters with positions opposite of yours, general uncomradely behavior, etc.

Top kek

You're really making me want to get ableist up in the shit, you know?

[PhoenixAsh]

I doubt I would call someone a fascist just for asserting that "the indivdiual is not the basis of revolutionary politics and was subordinate to the sructural nature of the system as the root cause".

So this post never happened:




I for one do not give a fuck about Michael Brown. I don't know him. I don't care about him. Nor do I care about him in this specific context. Michael Brown is a completely interchangeable person to me.

What I care about is that what happened to Michael Brown, and happens to countless others, happened because of the systemic nature of white supremacy/racism and because of the state as an entity and because of class society and capitalism.

Michael Brown is a mere personification of this issue for me.


You're clearly a sick right wing reactionary. You and your buddies in this thread shouldn't even be allowed in the "Opposing Ideologies" forum, since you are clearly fascists.

This was in direct response that the assertion that "care for an individual person" is measurement of revolutionary politics and should form the basis of revolutionary politics.


However it is a major problem to use the fact that: "the indivdiual is not the basis of revolutionary politics and was subordinate to the sructural nature of the system as the root cause", to take the position that one doesn't care about the individuals involved, as you and your buddy cohort do.

I have never said that...you are forgetting the essential word: "care". "care for an individual person" is not the basis for revolutionary politics and is not a basis for judgement who is and who isn't a revolutionary as was asserted.


Life is made up of concrete, individual acts, and a determination about whether or not injustice occurred in these acts can typically be made.

For a given value of justice...which is in itself an extremely subjective term. And that is the issue....the notion of justice and reducing justice to the individual incident is ultimately a liberal notion that diminishes and obfuscates the notion of it being symptomatic of the systemic nature of the oppression.

For large groups of people...what happened is perfectly squarable with the notion and concept of justice. Why? Because they see the incident within the convines of class society, perceive justice within the definiion set by the bourgeois state, and perceive the incident perhaps from a position of privilege.

That notion leads to the false idea that this is symptomatic of a few rotten apples and a system that has gone awry...like a broken machine...that can be fixed with the right repairs but without addressing the actual super structure. It leads to the false notion that punishing the cops involved will actually make things a little better or holding cops more accountable for their actions will fix the underlying problems.

It won't. But this is the general notion and demand at this moment.


It can certainly contribute to and build the revolutionary movement if what happened in these individual instances is publicized and explained by revolutionaries as resulting from the nature of the capitalist system due to its need to operate based upon the exploitation and repression of the masses.

That is my entire point. Notice that you mention nothing about actually caring about the individual..,..or basing judgement of who is and who isn't revolutionary on the amount of "caring for the individual person"

You do not...because actual care for the individual is non-essential for the revolutionary analysis and for revolutionary politics.

On top of that...the notion of actually caring for the individual...is false sentimentalism. We do not actually care for the individual...but for the embodyment of what happened to that individual.

Michael Brown is only interesting one a personal level....but ultimately the focus point merely because of chance and circumstances which led this specific individual to be the next victim in a long line of victims and a long line of continued systematic repression. He was the proverbial drop. And therefore is a completely interchangeable factor.

I don't care about Michael Brown. I don't know him. I only do so because he is a publisized victim. I care what happened to him.

Even the protesters right now...by and large...don't actually care about Michael Brown. But care about what happened to him.


In addition it can be shown based upon an individual event that communist revolution is the most effective for preventing that and other similar acts of injustice from occurring in the future.

Again...we are going to differ on the notion of justice here.


Your camp's position of ignoring or downplaying individual acts of exploitation and oppression (repression) passes on all the opportunities to advance revolution as I have described in the previous paragraph. That is why you all's position is deleterious to the progression of the revolutionary movement.

Well...I don't and didn't.

What I am saying that "care for the individual" is not essential to advancing this position. I also reject the notion that displaying care for the individual is essential in communicating with the community....as I perceive this as dishonest posturing. I am perfectly able to state I don't care about Michael Brown as an individual and still be perfectly able to communicate effectively and honestly within the activism taking place or contribute to the wider discourse.

And that brings me to the next issue we have not yet addressed at all: the position of white people within this specific struggle and the role of revolutionaries in stuggle in general....which at this current point should be reduced to supporting roles instead of critisizing the initiatives and experiences as well as current praxis at this stage.


Pointing out that there is a systemic cause to what happens to an individual is not advanced by failing to mention, or contribute to a movement that starts by focusing on injustice that has occurred in an individual case. Certainly if a movement for an individual doesn't raise the general system wide cause, communist revolutionaries should be introducing the systemic aspects and communist revolutionary solutions into the movement that is focusing on an individual.

My poijt exactly. Again...notice how you never mention anything about having to care for the individual in question.

Which is the point I addressed.


And the OP agitation leaflet does precisely that. It links with the individual events and links the individual case to the necessity for communist revolution.

Yes it does. Also notice that although I have critical side notes...I have not directly entered this thread by doing so...yet you thought it extremely wise to attack me on the basis that I rejected the entire pamphlet.

The two things I do question in your pamphlet is attacking the paxis of the protesters. I don't agree with the analysis and I do not think it is a wise to focus on this specific analysis in the face of the pamphlet also emphasizing justice more than it tries to explain the root causes of the oppression and on trying to shift the focus on the system.



OK, where has it happened in this thread or elsewhere that I fail to attribute individual acts, or events to larger systemic functioning? If you reread the OP (original post of the thread) you'll clearly see that it points out that the the cause of the Michael Brown event and the way to resolve it are due to the results of the operation of the capitalist system.

That happened in the subsequent cognitive error and the resulting arguments you continued to make up until this point.


It isn't about what you consciously care about, it's about how you and your cohort adopt and promote positions and methods of ideological argumentation on this forum that reflect the ways of French royalty of the 18th century: snobbery, infantileism, outrageous calls to physical duels, self centeredness, using the threat of authority to censure and disenfranchise posters with positions opposite of yours, general uncomradely behavior, etc.

First of all this is a your utter inability to actually relate to what happened. You came here to revleft and emphasized your personal conflict with the RCP. Which is fine. I don't particularly care and I understad the emotional nature of that conflict and how it affects you.

Received some harsh criticism which may have been unfair.... but then you immediately generalized this to everybody and proceeded to slamm and dismiss everybody who had critical comments and sidenotes and wanted to engage you on a political level....you refused to engage on a political level with people and immediately began to question their politics from a position of arrogance.

The snobbery about the correct mass line, the correct political position and the obvious hurt ego about even the most legitimate criticism was astounding...and mostly came from your and Ravn's side.

Now..you engaged me pro-actively in opposition to a position you take yourself...and called me fascist for this. Not only does this show an incredible amount of hypocracy if you then step over this and call me a snobb....for consistently arguing the position you yourself take. But it also shows a weak grasp of what political terms actually mean. It is hard to take somebody serious after that...especially when their political theory and platform raises legitimate questions.

It is beyond ridiculous and is exactly why you receive so much negativity here. You communicate with the community as if you know everything better and we are merely here to agree with you and need to function as a platform that cheers you on.

In the case of Ravn his continued emphasize of Mass Line politics is laughable in the face of his refusal to actually engage honestly and trying to learn from THIS community.

Now...there has never been a threat of administrative action...that bogus and bullshit assertion is merely a means to take on some victim status to lend more legitimacy to your and Ravn's behaviour.

[G4b3n]

What would be the problem with genuine communist congress level thinking being present anywhere? Why is that an issue for you? What you don't like correct, high quality level thinking in the genuine interest of a revolution that gives a damn about the individual lives of the oppressed masses?

Well I guess from your cabal's positions, neither you or your cabal values correct, high quality level revolutionary thinking.

Truth often often emerges in opposition to falsehood (as Mao said) and there's been a lot of truth emerging in this thread against you and your cabal's infantile, dogmatist, line of treachery against the interests of the revolutionary proletariat.

Well, Geee Mr., if Mao Zedong said it, then I guess you got one heck of a point.

[Ravn]

How double standard of you.

We're not operating by the same standards. Your standard is based on anarchist individualism. (That circle A business you're into marks you as still being locked in an adolescent state of mind.) Are you a white supremacist as well? Just asking. Want to know who I'm really talking to here.







It makes me experienced. Something you lack.

Experience doing what? Self-aggrandizing yourself about your experiences, & self-proclaiming yourself as some great revolutionary? Making assertions about people you never met? Are you actually a child?







O who is being omniscient now? :rolleyes:

Just grow up. You're obviously the ringleader. Nobody else in your clique has anything substantial to say except cheer you on. You're evidently rude, boorish, & you don't bother to listen to what people actually say. You can roll all the eyes at me you want.






No it is not. It was the foundation of your argument to question somebodies revolutionary intent. So it is a sequitor.

*A* basis for my skepticism towards your agenda is your disrespect you insist on making towards a black proletarian individual. You think you're being "revolutionary". I think you're just being racist.

You're really hung up about somebody else questioning your intent but you have no problem questioning the intent of others. What narcissism!







I have repeatedly addressed my position of not caring. I have even repeatedly stated I don't care. Yet I have consistently proven to be very able regardless of that lack of care for a specific individual to make a revolutionary analysis of the situation which did not involve adopting liberal tropes or being dishonest.

How petty bourgeois of you to say so in the manner you just did. So you have a right to not care, & insist on exercising that right. But you made a "revolutionary analysis". & that makes you a revolutionary in spite of the fact that you don't care about people. You just care about other people questioning your intent. How ridiculous. Get a shrink.







I think nobody gives a fuck about what you think anymore. I don't give a fuck about Dillon Taylor either ( I bet you had to google that...because you don't care about him)

Not everybody is a sociopath like you, OK?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

You're right phoenixash is the ringleader. Hey Boss, you want I should shitpost in this thread a little more, eh?

[PhoenixAsh]

We're not operating by the same standards. Your standard is based on anarchist individualism. (That circle A business you're into marks you as still being locked in an adolescent state of mind.) Are you a white supremacist as well? Just asking. Want to know who I'm really talking to here.

Experience doing what? Self-aggrandizing yourself about your experiences, & self-proclaiming yourself as some great revolutionary? Making assertions about people you never met? Are you actually a child?

Just grow up. You're obviously the ringleader. Nobody else in your clique has anything substantial to say except cheer you on. You're evidently rude, boorish, & you don't bother to listen to what people actually say. You can roll all the eyes at me you want.

*A* basis for my skepticism towards your agenda is your disrespect you insist on making towards a black proletarian individual. You think you're being "revolutionary". I think you're just being racist.

You're really hung up about somebody else questioning your intent but you have no problem questioning the intent of others. What narcissism!

How petty bourgeois of you to say so in the manner you just did. So you have a right to not care, & insist on exercising that right. But you made a "revolutionary analysis". & that makes you a revolutionary in spite of the fact that you don't care about people. You just care about other people questioning your intent. How ridiculous. Get a shrink.

Not everybody is a sociopath like you, OK?


You do realize that this is the original post you started to rile too...right?


I for one do not give a fuck about Michael Brown. I don't know him. I don't care about him. Nor do I care about him in this specific context. Michael Brown is a completely interchangeable person to me.

What I care about is that what happened to Michael Brown, and happens to countless others, happened because of the systemic nature of white supremacy/racism and because of the state as an entity and because of class society and capitalism.

Michael Brown is a mere personification of this issue for me.

So...basically you have never had any position or actual argument.

What you did have was you...questioning several people based on their amount of caring for a specific individual because a lack of truely caring is, according to you, a sure sign somebody is not a revolutionary.

So you are right....we are not operationg on the same standards at all.

Whereas you have created some twisted deformed political position based on some post-modernist fusion of liberalism and elements of revolutionary politics which you have grabbed from reading wikipedia...I actually have a defined analysis based in revolutionary politics and grounded in actual experience.

That is all besides the point because everybody has to learn.

But it gets awkwardly (yet certainly hilariously) ironic when the person who needs to learn is continuously emphasizing the correct political line and continuously preaches about mass line....yet refuses to actually learn from the community he is engaging at that moment.

So no. I don't care about you questioning my intent....because (surprise surprise) I really don't care about you nor is you explicit accusation anywhere near based on things like actual arguments or reality. It gets however ridiculous when you question my intent based on the assertion that I am the one making the claims you have made instead of actually being the one reacting against those claims.

[Palmares]

I kept seeing "Justice for Michael Brown – Justice for... (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?t=191702)" in the latest posts and thought perhaps a lively conversation him was happening on that subject matter.

Clearly, I've stepped into the wrong room and found myself at the first congress of the "Revolutionary Internationalist Socialist Party". Whoever the fuck that is. :rolleyes:

I don't think Chairman PhoenixAsh would want me at a congress of any party but the Revleft Party, so best I escape this place immediately.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/4629348/run-away-o.gif

[PhoenixAsh]

You would be a welcome guest in any party Palmares :lol:

[Ravn]

This was in direct response that the assertion that "care for an individual person" is measurement of revolutionary politics and should form the basis of revolutionary politics.


Not "the" basis. "A" basis.




I have never said that...you are forgetting the essential word: "care". "care for an individual person" is not the basis for revolutionary politics and is not a basis for judgement who is and who isn't a revolutionary as was asserted.

If it's not *a* basis for "revolutionary politics" then why do you insist on publicly stating that you don't care about Michael Brown or Dillon Taylor? You're making a lack of care a basis for revolutionary politics. That's still making care a basis for revolutionary politics. You're a dog chasing its own tail.

& who made up the rule that care for individuals is not a basis for judgement about who is & isn't a revolutionary? You did. Also, it's very important for you that people care that you consider yourself revolutionary. This is all narcissism.


[

[PhoenixAsh]

Not "the" basis. "A" basis.




If it's not *a* basis for "revolutionary politics" then why do you insist on publicly stating that you don't care about Michael Brown or Dillon Taylor? You're making a lack of care a basis for revolutionary politics. That's still making care a basis for revolutionary politics. You're a dog chasing its own tail.

& who made up the rule that care for individuals is not a basis for judgement about who is & isn't a revolutionary? You did. Also, it's very important for you that people care that you consider yourself revolutionary. This is all narcissism.


[

Very good that you changed your position from what you have argued for the last few pages.

The last few pages..YOU made up the rule that is was a measure of somebodies revolutionary credentials. That is why I specifically stated that I dind't care for MB. Because...1). I really don't. 2). it is not a basis for discreditting revolutionary intent. 3). Individual care is not a basis for revolutionary politics.

That does NOT mean you can't find it personally important and that caring for others is a strong motivator to have revolutionary politics. But caring about specific individuals is not actually a requirement or specific feature of the politics themselves.

But as soon as you judge othersnot to be revolutionaries because they do not care or do not care enough about a specific individual (like you did) then your concept about revolutionary politics needs to be corrected.

[Ravn]

I specifically stated that I dind't care for MB. Because...1). I really don't. 2). it is not a basis for discreditting revolutionary intent. 3). Individual care is not a basis for revolutionary politics.


Why is it so important for you to publicly state that you don't care about Michael Brown?
& why are you so worried about anybody discrediting your intent? You're a narcissist poseur. Why don't you take your first world over-entitled ass & drown yourself in a tar pit where you belong.

[Lord Testicles]

I don't know what is sadder, the idea that Ravn and Tim Redd might be trolls and this is the best they can do or the idea that Ravn and Tim Redd are shit-posting with sincerity.

[PhoenixAsh]

I am not worried about anybody discrediting my intent. You discreditted others on a flawed and, more important, liberal basis while at the same time brabbeling about the correct political line and the mass line. And that is why I replied to you. In other words...I cared that you discreditted others.

It is so not so important at all. I did that because you made this thread about "really caring for Michael Brown as a person" and how that was the measure of revolutionary politics and used that to discredit other members here.

[PhoenixAsh]

I don't know what is sadder, the idea that Ravn and Tim Redd might be trolls and this is the best they can do or the idea that Ravn and Tim Redd are shit-posting with sincerity.

Of course not. But it is hugely entertaining.

[BIXX]

We aren't a clique yo. Again, you'll find that PA and I most likely disagree in almost every area, the problem is that you see anyone who agrees with someone else as part of their clique.

[Ravn]

I am not worried about anybody discrediting my intent. You discreditted others ... I cared that you discreditted others.


Like who? Your monkey boy sycophants? You're all over-entitled first world trash. You made a big hoopla about not caring about the individual victims of the system, denouncing such care as being liberal, &
yet you want everyone to care about crediting you & your other over-privileged ilk as revolutionaries. (You think you're going to lead anybody anywhere? The masses will get behind you just so they can shoot you in the back of the head. Good riddance.) This is what you spend you're time arguing about. Never mind people being gunned down in the street by the police for no good reason. You're too busy analyzing things to provide you with talking points so you can talk down to people rather than engage them as human beings. Real "revolutionary", you are. On top of that, you yourself are acting as a cop on this site & you evidently don't have a problem exercising your own brand of brutality: Lying about what other posters say. Instigating flame wars to deflect defending your indefensible line of reasoning. Threatening people with banning & then denying the threats were made. Why would you object to being called a fascist? You've done everything in your power to prove you are just that. This is what I will credit you for. You want credit, there it is.

[BIXX]

[/COLOR][/B]

Like who? Your monkey boy sycophants? You're all over-entitled first world trash. You made a big hoopla about not caring about the individual victims of the system, denouncing such care as being liberal, &
yet you want everyone to care about crediting you & your other over-privileged ilk as revolutionaries. (You think you're going to lead anybody anywhere? The masses will get behind you just so they can shoot you in the back of the head. Good riddance.) This is what you spend you're time arguing about. Never mind people being gunned down in the street by the police for no good reason. You're too busy analyzing things to provide you with talking points so you can talk down to people rather than engage them as human beings. Real "revolutionary", you are. On top of that, you yourself are acting as a cop on this site & you evidently don't have a problem exercising your own brand of brutality: Lying about what other posters say. Instigating flame wars to deflect defending your indefensible line of reasoning. Threatening people with banning & then denying the threats were made. Why would you object to being called a fascist? You've done everything in your power to prove you are just that. This is what I will credit you for. You want credit, there it is.



Where was such a threat made? I don't believe you.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I think we would all appreciate you avoiding racial epithets going forward ravn

[Ravn]

I think we would all appreciate you avoiding racial epithets going forward ravn


All humans are primates even though first world trash may think of themselves otherwise.

[PhoenixAsh]

[/B]
Like who? Your monkey boy sycophants? You're all over-entitled first world trash.[/COLOR][/B][/SIZE] [B][SIZE=5] You made a big hoopla about not caring about the individual victims of the system, denouncing such care as being liberal, &

distortion.

I have denounced reducting revolutionary politics to "honest care for the individual" as a liberal position.

I can't help it if...after 4 pages of this...you can't understand that simple concept.


yet you want everyone to care about crediting you & your other over-privileged ilk as revolutionaries. (You think you're going to lead anybody anywhere? The masses will get behind you just so they can shoot you in the back of the head. Good riddance.)

What I care about is liberals like you not twisting revolutionary positions and slandering other users....which is why I addressed you in the first place. Remember...this was before anybody made any claims about me.

So...again you are distorting.


This is what you spend you're time arguing about. Never mind people being gunned down in the street by the police for no good reason.

Ow...they don't shoot them for no reason. If you think this is simply random or incidental then yes...you again reduce the analysis to a liberal position.

And it is kind of funny that you seem to be spending the same amount of time here arguing. Just saying.



You're too busy analyzing things to provide you with talking points so you can talk down to people rather than engage them as human beings.

You do realize that you were talking down on people based on their amount of care for the individual and calling them unrevolutionary because of this lack of care....don't you? And that that is the reason why I addressed you in the first place?


Real "revolutionary", you are.

Yes. I am.



On top of that, you yourself are acting as a cop on this site & you evidently don't have a problem exercising your own brand of brutality: Lying about what other posters say.

Really? Because I have backed that up consistently with quoting your posts. So unless I somehow invaded your brain and made all those words and sentences come out...I don't think you can blame me for your own faults here.


Instigating flame wars to deflect defending your indefensible line of reasoning.

So far I have been utterly consistent in defending that line. And flame war? Come on now...you must not be here long.



Threatening people with banning

Well....I am sure you can provide us all with a link to the post where I threatened you with banning. In the mean time...while you search for that...I have the post where I explicitly stated I wouldn't after your asinine "omg I am such a victim"-hysteria of abuse of athority after I called you out on your trolling behaviour:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2810316&postcount=118


Really? Because you are still here aren't you? You haven't received a warning, infraction or any other sanction...did you?

So this accusation of abuse of mod authority is really just bullshit.

So again...false and baseless accusations.


& then denying the threats were made.

This is what you used to accuse me of abusing my authority and threatening you:


Your obstinate refusal to even accept this complete and utter no brainer makes it incredibly clear that your membership of this forum is not only far from honest but that you are downright trolling this site.

And I stand by that comment 100%

And yet...you are still here. I must really suck at abusing my authority.


Why would you object to being called a fascist? You've done everything in your power to prove you are just that. This is what I will credit you for. You want credit, there it is.


I object being called a fascist because for everybody who actually understands what that means and what fascist politics are it is obviously a false application of the term.

Also...I am not aware that I have asked for credit....but I am sure you will be able to back up your claim with a link.

[PhoenixAsh]

All humans are primates even though first world trash may think of themselves otherwise. [/SIZE]

I don't give a fuck about most primates either. Except for Bokito. Bokito fucking rules.

[motion denied]

Bokito fucking rules.

Oh. I'm #teamRavn now

[PhoenixAsh]

That is just because you don't know Bokito. This is Bokito:

http://static1.ad.nl/static/photo/2012/15/0/6/20120518105024/media_xll_1212576.jpg

Bokito has managed to escape twice in Germany and once in the Netherlands...where he jumped out of his enclosure and made abundantly clear that he didn't like people pestering him or being locked up.

(That sucked for a vistor who needed 5 years of facial reconstruction surgery...and has lasting revalidation issues. But yeah...I am not blaming the animal...and you can't but admire his unrelating search for freedom and vengeance)

[Lord Testicles]

Koko > Bokito.

Koko spends her time on intellectual pursuits not mindless violence towards Dutch hippies.

Actually, when I put it like that...

[PhoenixAsh]

Koko > Bokito.

Koko spends her time on intellectual pursuits not mindless violence towards Dutch hippies. Actually when I put it like that...

I was reading this and though: "does he realize what he is saying?" :laugh:


But yeah...Koko too.

http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/3317/223609580483d149f0e7cf2.jpg

[PhoenixAsh]

Ok...I totally have to admit that Koko > Bokito.

This is the story with Koko and the cat:


Koko (full name Hanabi-Ko, Japanese for 'Fireworks Child', because she was born on 4 July) is a female gorilla born in San Francisco Zoo in 1971. She was a rather sickly youngster and was 'adopted' by Dr Frances Patterson (known as Penny) who, having encountered a similar project involving a chimpanzee, decided to teach the gorilla American Sign Language — a project that was to become her life's work. By 1985 Koko had a vocabulary of some 500 words and used over a hundred different ones each day.

Just before her 12th birthday — she always had a party — Penny asked Koko what she would like as a gift; she replied 'cat'. That wasn't too surprising; she had had stories read to her for years, and her favourites were Puss in Boots and Three Little Kittens. Cat picture books were her favorites, other than ones with pictures of gorillas. A sturdy toy cat was ordered, but didn't arrive in time, so was saved for Christmas. But when it was given to Koko she didn't like it at all and refused to have anything to do with it. She wanted a real cat — a pet.

About six months later three kittens were brought in, having been abandoned by their mother and raised by a Cairn terrier dog. They were shown to Koko and her preference was for a tailless tabby — possibly because gorillas don't have tails either. After another visit a few days later the preference was confirmed and the kitten, after staying overnight, became a permanent resident of Penny's quarters, which were quite close to Koko's enclosure. While living with Penny, the kitten was taken to visit the gorilla each evening: and Koko named him All Ball. Later he began to visit Koko on his own, and despite Penny's apprehension and the fact that All Ball could be quite aggressive, Koko was always gentle with him and seemed to love him despite his unruly nature. 'Koko love Ball,' she signed. She treated him as her baby, carrying him on her back as she would a gorilla baby, combing and petting him and keeping him clean. She tried to teach him gorilla games, but All Ball didn’t understand them; nevertheless he received plenty of warmth, affection and attention.

One foggy morning in December 1984 All Ball was run over by a car and died instantly, having escaped from the gorilla enclosure; he was only a few months old. Koko was told straight away that she wouldn't see him again, and was distressed. News of the tragedy spread quickly, and thousands of people sent letters, cards, photos and pictures. Everyone felt that Koko should have a new kitten, ideally for the approaching Christmas.

That proved much more difficult than expected, as not many kittens were around in winter, especially Manx ones, which is what Koko had indicated she would like again. Eventually a breeder of Manx cats heard about the quest and called around his contacts until he located a litter in Southern California. There was a further delay, but eventually the kitten was ready and was delivered one day in March 1985. He was a red tabby; red is Koko's favorite color and she was delighted with him! She named him Lipstick.

This is lipstick with Koko:

http://stefanie84120.t.s.f.unblog.fr/files/2006/09/anhu_chatgorille.jpg

So I have no choice but totally agree with you Skinz.

[PhoenixAsh]

After all....I deeply care about cats.

[Ravn]

distortion.

I have denounced reducting revolutionary politics to "honest care for the individual" as a liberal position.

I can't help it if...after 4 pages of this...you can't understand that simple concept.

You're quoting yourself & attributing that to somebody else. That's a distortion, & in plain language: LYING. 4 pages of lying about what other people say is not revolutionary politics. It's fascist politics. And anybody who espouses an anarchist line is wrapped up in liberalism themselves. You're not talking to somebody born yesterday. You're the babe the woods here & I have no problem starting a fire. Take your goofy pictures of giant dark primates & shove them up your ass.

[PhoenixAsh]

So now all of the sudden you have a problem with dark primates? Weren't you the one who said all humans are primates? So basically what you are saying is that you have a problem with dark people. Check.

I don't know what to say...except...thats totally racist dude.

No surprise really.

[BIXX]

Top kek.

Also ravn, would you kind proving that PA is lying, with links to the posts that prove it, etc...

[Tim Redd]

Originally Posted by Tim Redd http://www.revleft.com/vb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2810526#post2810526)
It isn't about what you consciously care about, it's about how you and your cohort adopt and promote positions and methods of ideological argumentation on this forum that reflect the ways of the 18th century French nobility: snobbery, infantileism, outrageous calls to physical duels, self centeredness, using the threat of authority to censure and disenfranchise posters with positions opposite of yours, general uncomradely behavior, etc.

Top kek

You're really making me want to get ableist up in the shit, you know?

Whaaa? I have no idea what that means.

But I will take the opportunity to say that it's only if you are doxxing right wing pundits that your moniker has any validity. If you are doxxing progressives and revolutionaries contributing to this forum, that's a dirty pig thing to do.

Either way it's an unhealthy thing for someone to adopt such an activity as their primary screen moniker and to be proud of it. It's psychopathic and reflects a mentality that is more about, snarky and sneaky self-aggrandizement than about anything progressive, or revolutionary.

It's like you are proud to be associated with dastardly deeds, rather than using a moniker that is neutral, or even better a moniker that is progressive/revolutionary or uplifting. It's like you have a psychological problem and you're proud of it.

[Invader Zim]

Reading this thread as actually reduced my faith in humanity. Mods? Time to close?

[Palmares]

Back on the subject...

I have some favourite primates too.

Unnamed monkey who saves his homies:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/dec/22/monkey-saves-dying-friend-train-station-india-video

And Kanzi, the talking, tool-using, bonobo (who are also famous for their... sensual way of resolving disputes...):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2191964/Kanzi-bonobo-chimp-learns-create-tools--repeating-humanitys-steps-civilisation.html

[Ravn]

So now all of the sudden you have a problem with dark primates? Weren't you the one who said all humans are primates? So basically what you are saying is that you have a problem with dark people. Check.

I don't know what to say...except...thats totally racist dude.

No surprise really.


I have a problem with you posting goofy pictures of dark apes because you're obviously alluding to black people. Then you stupidly confirm it. You denounce empathy for people killed by the police as liberalism but this is what you have to say about a goddamn ape:
"Bokito has managed to escape twice in Germany and once in the Netherlands...where he jumped out of his enclosure and made abundantly clear that he didn't like people pestering him or being locked up. (That sucked for a vistor who needed 5 years of facial reconstruction surgery...and has lasting revalidation issues. But yeah...I am not blaming the animal...and you can't but admire his unrelating search for freedom and vengeance)".
You publicly state you "don't give a fuck about Michael Brown" but you have empathy for Bokito. You really are a nasty piece of work. You're no revolutionary. You're just a fascist. That's right. I'm disparaging you & your shit head friends on this site. Here's your evident mentor:

http://themoderatevoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/adolf-hitler-620-638970380-3269430-1.jpg

[BIXX]

I have a problem with you posting goofy pictures of dark apes because you're obviously alluding to black people. Then you stupidly confirm it. You denounce empathy for people killed by the police as liberalism but this is what you have to say about a goddamn ape:
"Bokito has managed to escape twice in Germany and once in the Netherlands...where he jumped out of his enclosure and made abundantly clear that he didn't like people pestering him or being locked up. (That sucked for a vistor who needed 5 years of facial reconstruction surgery...and has lasting revalidation issues. But yeah...I am not blaming the animal...and you can't but admire his unrelating search for freedom and vengeance)".
You publicly state you "don't give a fuck about Michael Brown" but you have empathy for Bokito. You really are a nasty piece of work. You're no revolutionary. You're just a fascist. That's right. I'm disparaging you & your shit head friends on this site. Here's your evident mentor:

http://themoderatevoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/adolf-hitler-620-638970380-3269430-1.jpg

Jesus Christ you're dumb. Or blinded by dogma. Or something. I don't know what it is.

[PhoenixAsh]

[SIZE=4]I have a problem with you posting goofy pictures of dark apes

you are the one bringing up the whole primate issue, mate:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2810660&postcount=153

So if you are making the connection with racism...then perhaps you have some subconscious issues to deal with yourself.

Gorilla's are usually dark. White Gorilla's are generally a genetic mutation and I believe they are relatively unique....there is only one white Gorilla that springs to mind...Snowflake.

So...you brought up the issue of primates. I post a picture of a famous Gorilla from the country I live in because somebody mentioned Bokito not being cool.

YOU in the meantime make the connection that that is meant as racism...subconsciously and consciously comparing primates with non-white people because...dark fur??

Really?

Dude...you have serious issues.




Then you stupidly confirm it. [/COLOR]You denounce empathy for people killed by the police as liberalism

Eh..no. I have stated repeatedly that reducing the systemic issues to "care for the individual" and calling for "social justice" in order to fix the problem is liberalism. Aswell as rejecting your position of denouncing people as unrevolutionary on the basis of really caring about a specific individual.

You spend more than 5 pages fighting me on this...so you should know by now unless you are simply a troll...a subconscious racist troll by the way.

I am just tying you up in this thread as a service to the rest of the community....plus I really, really want to see if I can get your trolling, racist, liberal ass to go all CAPS.



but this is what you have to say about a goddamn ape:
"Bokito has managed to escape twice in Germany and once in the Netherlands...where he jumped out of his enclosure and made abundantly clear that he didn't like people pestering him or being locked up. (That sucked for a vistor who needed 5 years of facial reconstruction surgery...and has lasting revalidation issues. But yeah...I am not blaming the animal...and you can't but admire his unrelating search for freedom and vengeance)".
You publicly state you "don't give a fuck about Michael Brown" but you have empathy for Bokito. You really are a nasty piece of work. You're no revolutionary. You're just a fascist. That's right. I'm disparaging you & your shit head friends on this site. Here's your evident mentor:

Yes...I absolute care more about animals than I do about humans. And I eat meat. So that gives you a pretty good idea...and even among animals there are millions of individual animals I don't give a fuck about.

I really care more deeply about cats though than any other animal...although I am also quite partial to owls.


****
****

The fact of the whole issue is, like I said a hundred times before, is that ultimately the amount of care for individuals is an individual motivator. It is not the basis of revolutionary politics, not the measure with which you can judge revoltionary politics (revolutionary here defined as leftwing or postleft). It is something you do because that is what you are. This is not however who I am. Or who others are.

I am not motivated by care for a specific individual whom I don't know. I am not going to fake this care in order to come across as nice...or use it as a tactic in order to gain more strategical leverage with a specific community (which by the way...is a sound tactic...but not my thing) as I find that to be dishonest.

Now...the things is...you consistently and purposefully missed the part of my initial response to you: I care about [B]what happened to Michael Brown. Most people do. In fact...the amount of people who truely care about Michael Brown as a person and an individual is probably limited to the people who knew him.

Revolutionary analysis is not reduced to the the amount of care for an individual.

The notion of "care for a specific individual" is hugely vague, subjective and no basis for any sound consistent political platform because they ultimately do not address the class or the systemic nature of class societies exploitation and oppression] and is aimed at ending class society

The same goes for social justice. While it sounds nice...social justice is not necessarilly revolutionary. Usually social justice means nothing more than some amount of equality and the protection of civil and human rights. Those are bourgeois concepts and featured heavilly in the French Revolution and American Revolutions...which were predominantly a bourgeois and petit-bourgeois revolution.

This does not mean they are worthless concepts. But they are not primarilly aimed at overthrowing capitalism or modes of oppression. The same goes for "progressive" politics. We already had that debate...so you know my position on those too and I am not going to redo that discussion.

Fascism in the meantime is not to be reduced to "lack of care about specific individuals".

Doing so is incredibly immature and shows you have no idea what you are actually talk about. And while the deifnition of fascism is a hot debate topic here with opinions differing on what that definition exactly is...NONE of the definitions mention anything about "care" let alone "care for a specific individual".


I have also rejected the notion that the situation specifically targetted Michael Brown. In fact Michael Brown is interchangeable in this context. If he had not been there...then somebody else would have been a victim. Michael Brown has had the great misfortune to become a victim and the last proverbial drop in a long line of these victims. In the last few years there have been 5000+ of these victims in the US. All are equally important or unimportant as Michael Brown is. Yet now we are calling specifically for justice for Michael Brown....which plays into the illusion that there is nothing systemic about this and doesn't link this specific incident to the other specific incidents.

It may make sense tactically to give the struggle a human feature...but here on this site, this specific community...discussing revolutionary politics. That position is ultimately useless. You seem to be having trouble distinguishing between the community in Ferguson and the community RevLeft. THey are two different entities and they are concerned with several different issues or they have a very different way of looking at the issue....and thus require a different approach.

There is another problem with demanding justice. As I have told you repreatedly...justice is ultimately a vague and extremely subjective concept. You may think you have a pretty good idea about what you think is justice. But if you are going to ask 20 people....you are going to get 20 different interpretations. Liberals have an entirely different concept about justice than conservatives...and they both have an entirely different idea about justice than communists and anarchists. And since you as a Hitsorical Materialist should realize...justice as a moral and ethical position is ultimately a reflection of the class relations to the means of production....demanding justice within a bourgeois justice system (of which the police themselves are a part) is incredibly futile.

So what do you mean when you demand justice for Michael Brown? Do you mean the cops should be held accountable? In what way? Should they be punished? How heavilly? Would this repair the systemic nature of why this happened? Or do you mean we should end class society? Which is not somthing the large majority of people calling for justice will readilly recognize as what the call for justice means.

I also have a problem with you linking criticism about your political position you put on this site with desparaging or sneering at the struggle in Ferguson. We have only addressed this tentatively in this thread...but it was actually one of the main points of criticism levelled against OP and subsequently against you when you did this.

The criticism about the specific tactics used in Ferguson and other protests by OP...is a problem. Not only do we disagree about the conclusions of OP (which you have backed and repeated) but we also think it is not the main focus of issues we should address. As something to specifically address is it less of a priority than trying to influence the ideological background of the protests towards systematic and stained opposition to the state and capitalist system.


***

That said. I am personally of the opinion that the struggle currently in Ferguson is not an issue in which white people should play any other role than supportive. This is the phase of the struggle in which white people should realize that they are part of the problem and that trying to edge into the movements being organized by the non-white communities is ultimately a reflection of the same white supremacist attitude that causes the problems in the first place. That does not mean white people do not have a role to play...but that role is not one in which we should assume we are currently on a equal position....because we are too fucking privileged to fully understand...to criticise the awakening consciousness of these communities or their tactics. Our role is to support these protests and hold protests of our own attacking white supremacy within the white communities and predominantly white institutions.

There will be a time if these protests progress and continue in which they will integrate and that equality will happen and needs to happen. But it is not now.

This does not mean this is not our struggle or a common struggle...but that means we have different roles to play.

[Lord Testicles]

You're not talking to somebody born yesterday. You're the babe the woods here & I have no problem starting a fire. Take your goofy pictures of giant dark primates & shove them up your ass.


http://www.quickmeme.com/img/22/2276c68f5d0a2963a70c6769f9796a72048e8139660b569995 15c9194d229b4d.jpg

[Ravn]

you are the one bringing up the whole primate issue, mate:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2810660&postcount=153

So if you are making the connection with racism...then perhaps you have some subconscious issues to deal with yourself.

Gorilla's are usually dark.

IN OTHER WORDS, you're not denying that you had a racist intent. I didn't make you post pictures of black apes just because I brought up primates. While you call yourself tying me up in this thread you've been all along exposing yourself as a superficial narcissistic twit. You're no revolutionary. You just parrot revolutionary rhetoric in a self-serving way. When somebody blithely says they don't give a fuck about a person *repeatedly* & then justify that by saying empathy for individuals is liberalism, then yeah, it's reasonable to question your so-called revolutionary credentials. Oh, & I noticed you hit a speed bump in your screed: "social justice is not necessarilly revolutionary. Usually social justice means nothing more than some amount of equality and the protection of civil and human rights.[SIC]" In other words, calling for social justice is revolutionary in the context of pushing towards the goal of revolution. But your contemptuous disregard for other people's human rights & well-being, (what happens to them is useful only as a statistic for your ideological agenda), while you publicly praise the right of an ape to rebel from its human captors is counter-revolutionary, & socially retarded. Instead of stinking, you got some thinking to do

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Ravn, don't post

.

[PhoenixAsh]

I am explicitly stating that the only racist intent was yours as well as it was you making the immediate racial connotation with seeing apes with black people.

Not only are you a latently racist troll...but you are also an ableist and discriminate against those with mental illness.

And no...social justice is a liberal position. It can be revolutionary but only in a bourgeois revolution....as was the French and American revolution in which these issues centered around human rights and civil liberties featured predominantly. Calling for social justice is a liberal position.

I have no disregards for human rights. Never expressed these disregards you suppose I have or anything like disregard towards human civil rights...nor did I do so with well being. At all. Nor did I ever say people do not have the right to protest, rebel, revolt or try and advance their class interests. Anywhere. Far from it.

This all stems from your liberal notion that the center of revoltuionary politics is careing for an individual. And apparently not caring for an individual means that you therefore think anything should happen to them.

This is not only because you are basically a troll who gets his knowledge from wikipedia...but also because you intentionally do not read what is being said or...which is much more likely...simply quote out of context and flip arguments that have actually been made in order to hide your trolling behaviour and lack of understanding of political terms.

[PhoenixAsh]

.

no no NO!!! :ohmy:

...you are ruining my wager of how long it will take to have him go all CAPS on my ass. There is ten euro's riding on this...its supposed to be my Christmas gratification :crying:

[motion denied]

guess who's not getting Christmas presents this year

I heard Santa doesn't like shouting...

[Ravn]

I am explicitly stating that the only racist intent was yours as well as it was you making the immediate racial connotation with seeing apes with black people.

Not only are you a latently racist troll...but you are also an ableist and discriminate against those with mental illness.

And no...social justice is a liberal position. It can be revolutionary but only in a bourgeois revolution....

Do you suffer from a mental illness? Is that your excuse? You posted pictures of black apes in a thread about a black man killed by the cops. You've gone post after post stating you don't give a fuck about him personally. His corpse only serves as a statistic for your revolution. You just got through saying that social justice is usually not revolutionary. Now you want to say it isn't revolutionary at all in the context of your political agenda. This is all double-talk. If your revolution isn't concerned about the human rights of people then it's not revolutionary. It's just business as usual with new proprietors. Duh.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Ravn is a racist and an ableist, I demand that this parasite be banned and hunted down

[Ravn]

guess who's not getting Christmas presents this year

I heard Santa doesn't like shouting...

& driving reindeer doesn't involve shouting? If Santa doesn't like shouting, he should quit his job.

[motion denied]

that's a good point

[PhoenixAsh]

Santa has a whip and raindeer are usually not white. It surprises me that you haven't linked it with racism yet...

[PhoenixAsh]

Do you suffer from a mental illness? Is that your excuse? You posted pictures of black apes in a thread about a black man killed by the cops. You've gone post after post stating you don't give a fuck about him personally. His corpse only serves as a statistic for your revolution. You just got through saying that social justice is usually not revolutionary. Now you want to say it isn't revolutionary at all in the context of your political agenda. This is all double-talk. If your revolution isn't concerned about the human rights of people then it's not revolutionary. It's just business as usual with new proprietors. Duh.

Well Grand-Dragon,

You implicitly stated in this context that we had to care about Michael Brown because he was a primate. So...basically...what is your point here? You are of course aware that primates are monkeys and apes...right?

So what was your motivation of bringing up primates in this context without any prior reason to do so in the first place,...unless it was actually racially motivated?

[Tim Redd]

Back on the subject...

Don't you mean back on to your bs? Why would anyone who's seriously trying to participate in a forum who's goal is to promote revolution have a dumb ass, zero icon like yours about twerking?


I have some favourite primates too.

Unnamed monkey who saves his homies:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/dec/22/monkey-saves-dying-friend-train-station-india-video

And Kanzi, the talking, tool-using, bonobo (who are also famous for their... sensual way of resolving disputes...):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2191964/Kanzi-bonobo-chimp-learns-create-tools--repeating-humanitys-steps-civilisation.html

This is a load of vile racist crap. You should be dragged by your fingernails across a desert, you Nazi.

[Tim Redd]

Jesus Christ you're dumb. Or blinded by dogma. Or something. I don't know what it is.

"Jesus Christ", really? If you can't realize that your buddies are racist trash, you're useless. To yourself you're clever, but if you can't see that PhoenixAsh, Traitor and Elephant boy are right wing racists, you are useless to the revolution. You may be able to do some good analysis, but in the end, your overall ability to do effective analysis stinks if you side with them in most cases on most issues. Their last few posts regarding monkeys and bonobos really demands that any true progressive, and certainly any revolutionary to heartily denounce them and their posts.

[PhoenixAsh]

"Jesus Christ", really? If you can't realize that your buddies are racist trash, you're useless. To yourself you're clever, but if you can't see that PhoenixAsh, Traitor and Elephant boy are right wing racists, you are useless to the revolution. You may be able to do some good analysis, but in the end, your overall ability to do effective analysis stinks if you side with them in most cases on most issues. Their last few posts regarding monkeys and bonobos really demands that any true progressive, and certainly any revolutionary to heartily denounce them and their posts.

You have caught us. We belong to an Anarchist Neo-Nazi Cabal of Satanic Canabalistic Necrophiliac Maosist (ANCSCN-ML) and every Sunday we come together in our respective communities to sacrifice a goat and a baby.

Now we have already established that you are in fact a fucking hypocrite.

Your buddy Ravn here posted in context:






I think we would all appreciate you avoiding racial epithets going forward ravn

All humans are primates even though first world trash may think of themselves otherwise.


Obviously and clearly bringing up primates in this thread. Now...why would he do this? It was unprompted but in a specific reply to the mention of racial epithets. So the conclusion to be drawn is that there is only one racist here....Ravn. For bringing up primates in the first place.


You didn't. Which is absolutely interesting and speaks volumes about your self serving nature and your political agenda.

Now I clearly said I didn't care about primates either. Because I carelessly took at face value what Ravn said. So no...I don't give a fuck about primates either. Except for Bokito which was the only named primate that readilly springs to mind that I care about.

And...make no mistake here...both YOU and RAVN are the only ones who seem to think "black people" when they see apes. Why is this? I think this is because of latent racist tendencies.

Now...you should seriously deal with those.

[Ravn]

Well Grand-Dragon,

You implicitly stated in this context that we had to care about Michael Brown because he was a primate. So...basically...what is your point here? You are of course aware that primates are monkeys and apes...right?


Ravens are just big black birds, not giant flying lizards breathing fire.

People should care about other people because we're dependent on each other in order to exist. *Communist* revolutionaries should care about people as people, not as faceless ciphers being acted upon, & that they should learn from the masses, not just dictate things as if they have all the answers. (If you object to the term masses, & object to care for individuals, then are you advocating not caring for the masses since the masses are an aggregate of individuals? & if you don't care about the masses, then that makes being a *communist* revolutionary, pointless.)





So what was your motivation of bringing up primates in this context without any prior reason to do so in the first place,...unless it was actually racially motivated?

One of your cohorts objected to my use of the pejoratives "First World Trash" & "monkey boy sycophants" saying one of which if not both was racist. My retort was, all humans are primates since the first world is made up of a diversity of people whose distinction from everybody else is relative affluence. That's when you started posting pictures of black apes, & jerking off about how you cared for some primates, & not for others. None of that had anything to do with emancipating humanity from anything.

[Ravn]

You have caught us. We belong to an Anarchist Neo-Nazi Cabal of Satanic Canabalistic Necrophiliac Maosist (ANCSCN-ML) "


When you're in a hole, it helps to stop digging. Here, you're wrapping the truth around a lie. Maoism doesn't have a thing to do with being an anarchist neo-nazi cabalist satanist cannibal necrophiliac. So, it's just a joke? But what's so funny about you admitting you're a pervert who falsely associates his perversions with something diametrically opposed to those perversions? You're just confirming your perversion by the very way you're admitting it.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Um no, I'm Somali and legitimately objected to being called a monkey boy you piece of shit.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Hah that sounds way angrier than intended

[PhoenixAsh]

Ravens are just big black birds, not giant flying lizards breathing fire.

Yeah...it wasn't a play on your user name.


People should care about other people because we're dependent on each other in order to exist.

Not really though.


*Communist* revolutionaries should care about people as people, not as faceless ciphers being acted upon, & that they should learn from the masses, not just dictate things as if they have all the answers.

No. They really do not have to care. Caring for people (especially specific individuals) does not in any way guarantee a political line that is revolutionary. The distinction of what makes somebody a revolutionary is dependend upon the analysis that is being made, the course of actions that is being advocated and taken and the rejection of the notion that issues can be solved within the class system. Not caring for specific individuals does not translate into not seeing them as people. Nor does it translate into seeing them as faceless ciphers.

Caring for people is a subjective motivator which is in no way a means to measure a political line.


The protests in Ferguson do not take place in a vacuum. This is not now all of the sudden "the one struggle". They are part of decades of stuggle within the wider scope of anti-state, anti-oppression and anti-capitalist protests. Saying that certain demands are liberal demands that shift focus from the systemic nature of the oppression and the real solutions to this systemic nature is not being desparaging of the protests...it is simply an accurate observation based on analysis and experience. That does not invalidate the protests. BUT If the demands and goals of the protests are not shifted towards the widening of the protests and linking it with the revolutionary goals of the overthrow of the state and class society...then these protests will peter out.

But that criticism was not levelled at the protesters. It was levelled at OP and at you. It was levelled because it is not the job of revolutionaries to co-opt liberal demands of vague notions of social justice; justice for a specific individual or change within the system....and especifally not lending voice to reducing the issue to a specific individual. If we do that than there won't be any distinction between us and liberals.


(If you object to the term masses, & object to care for individuals, then are you advocating not caring for the masses since the masses are an aggregate of individuals?

My objection to the word "masses" is that it reduces individuals to a monolithic and above all mindless entity consisting of incoherrent particles to form the whole. They are not a monolithic entity. And they are not mindless. These are individual people with individual apsirations and contibutions to make and with hope, dreams, fears. A mass is a uniform body....and becomes an abstract. Just because it denies the individual nature of humans and dehuminizes the members of that mass...I don't like the word.

I object to having to have to care for specific individuals as a given; and object to the care for specific individuals being seen as the basis of revolutionary politics or as a measure on which revolutionary politics in others should be denounced.

As I have been trying to explain to you. Michael Brown is a random person who nobody knew before he became news worthy as yet another victim of the systemic repression and white supremacy by the state. I care what happened to Michael Brown. I don't care about Michael Brown.

I can not care for a person whom I have never met; whome I don't know about and whom I only heard through from news articles. And I am not going to pretend I care in order to appease some sensitivities or to portray myself as somebody I am not.

This lack of care for Michael Brown as an individual does not negate any capacity to make a correct or revolutionary analysis; nor does it incapacitate the ability to say that what happened to him should not have happened....not...and this is really important to realize...does it dehumanize Michael Brown in any way or dismiss the fact that others might care about him. It is specifically critiguing the notion that the amount of or lack of care is a prerequisite for revolutionary analysis or the basis on which revolutionary politics of others can be denounced.



& if you don't care about the masses, then that makes being a *communist* revolutionary, pointless.)

I have not said I don't care about the masses...I have said I don't care about the term.



One of your cohorts objected to my use of the pejoratives "First World Trash" & "monkey boy sycophants" saying one of which if not both was racist. My retort was, all humans are primates since the first world is made up of a diversity of people whose distinction from everybody else is relative affluence. That's when you started posting pictures of black apes, & jerking off about how you cared for some primates, & not for others. None of that had anything to do with emancipating humanity from anything.

Yes. And instead of apologizing you brought up the term primates. Now I am sure you don't see that as racist.

But going off from that stepping stone....I explicitly told you I don't care about some primates either. The reason is simple....care is subjectively motivated. THere are (and over the course of the debate I made lists):

3 people that I care more about than anything in the world and for whom I would probably sacrifice everything. There are 17 people I really, really, really care about to such a degree that I would make serious sacrifices in order to help them if it was needed. There are 45 people I really care about. 97 people I care about. And approximately 145 people I care slightly about. After that...I could not remember anymore faces or names.

The rest of the people in the world...well...those are people that live on the same planet. I don't mind them. I don't really want anything bad to happen to them (although there are some...quite a lot actually...whom I wish very painful deaths) and objectively speaking...I have no problem helping them or being friendly with...and who knows...I may even start to care about them...but I do not currently care for them. If one of them dies...well that is sad. And I move on.

You should for a little test...open the papers obituary page of the largest city near you...can you seriously tell me you really care about all those people?

So why then would you expect me to truely care about the individual Michael Brown? Whom I never met, don't know...and have little in common with and who is about as important to me as all the other people on this planet that do not fall in the cricle of people I care about or people I hate.

[PhoenixAsh]

When you're in a hole, it helps to stop digging. Here, you're wrapping the truth around a lie. Maoism doesn't have a thing to do with being an anarchist neo-nazi cabalist satanist cannibal necrophiliac. So, it's just a joke? But what's so funny about you admitting you're a pervert who falsely associates his perversions with something diametrically opposed to those perversions? You're just confirming your perversion by the very way you're admitting it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v181/DesuShogun/facepalm.jpg

[Ravn]

Um no, I'm Somali and legitimately objected to being called a monkey boy you piece of shit.

I called all the minions of Phoenix Ash monkey boy sycophants. Phoenix Ash is the organ grinder, & you are all his monkeys dancing on a leash to his tune. There's nothing ethnic specific about it. You all behave like frat boys in a circle jerk.

If you're actually black why would you align yourself with a First World scum-bag who denigrates a black victim to score rhetorical points in his bid for ideological purity? That would make you a self-hating monkey boy sycophant, or if you prefer, Uncle Tom.

So now what, ethically challenged, gradient of stupidity? Can you muster anything more articulate then this frat boy nonsense of yours?

[Comrade #138672]

This is a pretty odd thread, in multiple ways.

[Ravn]

People should care about other people because we're dependent on each other in order to exist.
Not really though.


So, did you produce that device you use to post your unfortunate screeds with? Did you produce the clothes on your back? The food that you stuff into that pie hole of yours? Do you treat the sewage that comes out of your dishonorable asshole? No, you didn't. You rely on the labor of others to provide you with all those things. So, don't sit there & pretend you're not dependent on others in order to exist.





My objection to the word "masses" is that it reduces individuals to a monolithic and above all mindless entity consisting of incoherrent particles to form the whole.

The masses are an aggregate of individuals. That's an aggregate of minds. It's a unity of the one & the many. You can't separate the parts from the whole. It's your view of the masses that is incoherent.

[PhoenixAsh]

I called all the minions of Phoenix Ash monkey boy sycophants. Phoenix Ash is the organ grinder, & you are all his monkeys dancing on a leash to his tune. There's nothing ethnic specific about it. You all behave like frat boys in a circle jerk.

If you're actually black why would you align yourself with a First World scum-bag who denigrates a black victim to score rhetorical points in his bid for ideological purity? That would make you a self-hating monkey boy sycophant, or if you prefer, Uncle Tom.

So now what, ethically challenged, gradient of stupidity? Can you muster anything more articulate then this frat boy nonsense of yours?

Yes....because not giving a fuck about a specific individual means you denigrate them because of their skin colour... :rolleyes:

...really...

The fact remains that throughout this thread you bring up racist imagery, slurs against diabled people, slurs against mentally challenged people and call for ethnic nationalism....while propagating liberal political ideals, advocate change to the system instead of revolution, criticising the protests for their tactics, reduce systemic oppression to a single individual incident, displayed a huge amount of ignorance to political definitions and movements...and deprive the people of their individual identy by reducing them to "masses"....while at the same time whining about mass line politics while refusing to actually engage and learn from the community you are in.



Your entire problem with me is that I refuse to accept your notion that the amount of care for a specific individual is the measure of revolutionary politics....or anything other than subjective motivators

My refusal to accept a call for justice within a bourgeois system as anything else than misguided.

My refusal to accept social justice as anything else than a liberal bourgeois notion.

My refusal that the system can be "changed" from within.

And my refusal to accept co-opting liberal demands and notions in lieu of advocating the widening of the protests and linking them with the aim of overthrowing the state and class society.


You have spend over 6 pages disputing these points that should be a given fact for anybody who is not a liberal...but sure....I am the asshole.

:laugh:

[PhoenixAsh]

So, did you produce that device you use to post your unfortunate screeds with? Did you produce the clothes on your back? The food that you stuff into that pie hole of yours? Do you treat the sewage that comes out of your dishonorable asshole? No, you didn't. You rely on the labor of others to provide you with all those things. So, don't sit there & pretend you're not dependent on others in order to exist.

Actually I don't need to rely on the labour of others for a whole range of things. Also...I estimate that for all the things I own or use...I only rely on a really, really small fraction of the world population. So what is your point here?

Nor does any reliance means I need to actually care about the individuals making them.

You are getting ridiculous in your crusade to make "caring for an individual person" the basis of revolutionary politics.



The masses are an aggregate of individuals. That's an aggregate of minds. It's a unity of the one & the many. You can't separate the parts from the whole. It's your view of the masses that is incoherent.

We are the BORG...prepare to be assimilated.


I start by not viewing large groups of people as masses and realizing that the large group of people consists of individuals and groups with certain tendencies and interests instead of reducing them to a uniform entity and force untiy beyond the reason why they have gathered.

[Ravn]

The fact remains that throughout this thread you ... call for ethnic nationalism....advocate change to the system instead of revolution


Actually, I'm calling for proletarian socialist revolutions. Given your anarchist tendency, you would have objections about the establishment of a socialist state which would then render a DOTP impossible. So, the revolution your anarchist line would ultimately lead to would be a petty bourgeois revolution. (That you haven't figured that out yet is all the more the pity.) & your PC grandstanding is a joke. One minute you're saying you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown. The next you're literally making paeans to an ape. & when the subject of Zwarte Piet was brought up, you were dismissive about that issue even though that's literally in your neck of the woods, & given the season, topical. So, the ethnic nationalism that's the real problem here is your incipient White Supremacism.

You say I'm not willing to learn from this "community". The real problem for you is what is easily discernible about this "community" when critical thinking is applied.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/12/05/4-reasons-to-reject-the-racist-dutch-tradition-of-zwarte-piet/

"Though a vast majority of the Dutch population support it, there's an increasingly vocal activist community that wants the rest of the country to wake up to the awkward bigotry embedded in the Zwarte Piet character....

"...consider the Dutch history of slavery (http://www.vqronline.org/who-zwarte-piet) and the nation's considerable role in establishing that grim trade across the Atlantic."

[Ravn]

Actually I don't need to rely on the labour of others ...I ... rely on a ... fraction of the world population. So what is your point here?

Congratulations. You just confirmed your reliance on the labor of others, specifically the laboring classes. You're a member of a global community that is interdependent. Are you sure you're not a petty bourgeois social democrat rather than the communist revolutionary you insinuate you are?

[Ravn]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v181/DesuShogun/facepalm.jpg
"Who was Che Guevara? When we speak of Che Guevara, we also mean somebody else who poses as a Marxist, in comparison to whom, in our opinion, Che Guevara was a man of fewer words. He was a rebel, a revolutionary, but not a Marxist-Leninist as they try to present him. I may be mistaken—you Latin-Americans are better acquainted with Che Guevara, but I think that he was a leftist fighter. His is a bourgeois and petty-bourgeois leftism, combined with some ideas that were progressive, but also anarchist which, in the final analysis, lead to adventurism.
The views of Che Guevara and anyone else who poses as a Marxist and claims "paternity" of these ideas have never been or had anything to do with Marxism-Leninism. Che Guevara also had some "exclairicies" in his adoption of certain Marxist-Leninist principles, but they still did not become a full philosophical world-outlook which could impel him to genuinely revolutionary actions.
We cannot say that Che Guevara and his comrades were cowards. No, by no means! On the contrary, they were brave people. There are also bourgeois who are brave men. But the only truly great heroes and really brave proletarian revolutionaries are those who proceed from the Marxist-Leninist philosophical principles and put all their physical and mental energies at the service of the world proletariat for the liberation of the peoples from the yolk of the imperialists, feudal lords and others."




https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/1968/10/21.htm

[PhoenixAsh]

Actually, I'm calling for proletarian socialist revolutions. Given your anarchist tendency, you would have objections about the establishment of a socialist state which would then render a DOTP impossible. So, the revolution your anarchist line would ultimately lead to would be a petty bourgeois revolution. (That you haven't figured that out yet is all the more the pity.) & your PC grandstanding is a joke. One minute you're saying you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown. The next you're literally making paeans to an ape. & when the subject of Zwarte Piet was brought up, you were dismissive about that issue even though that's literally in your neck of the woods, & given the season, topical. So, the ethnic nationalism that's the real problem here is your incipient White Supremacism.

Actually you are twisting the facts again like the good troll you are.

YOU were the one using racial slurs by comparing non-white people to monkeys and tried to justify that obvious racist attitude by asininely trying to explain that all humans are primates so there is not really a problem of you making that comparison. Not anybody else; YOU.

YOU also used the word "retarded" which is an ableist slut against people with mental problems or learning problems. Not anybody else; YOU.

This is after you heavilly endorsed criticism over the tactics used by the black community in Ferguson. Co-opted liberal and bourgeois notions such as "justice"; "change within the system"; "social justice" and by reducing the struggle to an individual. Besides Tim Redd not anybody else; YOU

YOU have consistendly tried to link radical leftwing revolutionary principles that are really a no brainer via liberal emotionalism and sentimentality to racism and disdain. In the process you have flip-flopped more on your arguments than the US congress. And on top of that get your political terminology and knowledge directly from wikipedia. Which causes you to whine about mass line while obstinately refusing (for the umpth time while you are on this board) to actually learn from people who know what the fuck they are talking about on topics where it is clear you have no knoweldge or experience what so ever.

YOU are the one consistently trying to question experience and activity based on the fact that I am posting on a forum. Conveniently ignoring that you do pretty much the same and while pretending that you actually know what the fuck you are talking about as if you have ever even been in violent protests. Now I am not going to do the traditional revolutionary dick measuring contest by actually countering your notion with what I have been and am involved in...because there is a very real chance that you are simply a cop infiltrator to this site trying to poison it with your reactionry drivel...just rest asured that I know for a fact that you are just one big poser by the very ill conceived and terrible condescending advice you give here for activism.

Incidentally....my position on Zwarte Piet has been published here before and you do not have a leg to stand on there...at all. So it is incredibly funny to see you try to exploit every possibility to white wash the fact that you have compared a non-white person to a monkey and tried to justify it by bringing up the notion of primates. Now you are trying to use ethnic generalizations to support a red herring argument that only makes you that much of a sadder failure.

In the meantime you profess yourself a, nominal, supporter of an ideology which is litterally riddled with condescending the working class and is directly responsible for implementing capitalism under the guise of socialism while repressing any and all protests and demonstrations from the working class in order to maintain the interests of the extremely wealthy ruling elite.

Now....for all your bluster....you have completely and utterly failed to show WHY it is an obligation for a revolutionary to actually care about a very specific individual. And how your arguments as to why you think you really care about Michael Brown are not complete bullshit, hypocritical lies that have nothing to do with the person MIchael Brown...but everything with opportunistic political correctness.



You say I'm not willing to learn from this "community". The real problem for you is what is easily discernible about this "community" when critical thinking is applied.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/12/05/4-reasons-to-reject-the-racist-dutch-tradition-of-zwarte-piet/

"Though a vast majority of the Dutch population support it, there's an increasingly vocal activist community that wants the rest of the country to wake up to the awkward bigotry embedded in the Zwarte Piet character....

"...consider the Dutch history of slavery (http://www.vqronline.org/who-zwarte-piet) and the nation's considerable role in establishing that grim trade across the Atlantic."


Yes....funny thing though. I am part of that small vocal community. Little snag in your little idiotic notion that you think you actually know me because I am white and Dutch.

Interestingly...I do know the likes of you.

Aand you have continously dodged the arguments against you with liberal sentimentalist garbage. Now...go back to strom front and entertain the members there with your analogy of black people to monkeys.

[motion denied]

I love how Enver the Hoxha talks about freeing the proletariat from imperialists and feudal lords.

Praise the scientific science of Marxism-Leninism!

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I called all the minions of Phoenix Ash monkey boy sycophants. Phoenix Ash is the organ grinder, & you are all his monkeys dancing on a leash to his tune. There's nothing ethnic specific about it. You all behave like frat boys in a circle jerk.

If you're actually black why would you align yourself with a First World scum-bag who denigrates a black victim to score rhetorical points in his bid for ideological purity? That would make you a self-hating monkey boy sycophant, or if you prefer, Uncle Tom.

So now what, ethically challenged, gradient of stupidity? Can you muster anything more articulate then this frat boy nonsense of yours?

Uncle Tom is an insult for an african-american not a somali. The fact that you don't know the difference is both to be expected and a good example of why no one cares what you think; not about michael brown and not about proletarian revolution. The future of radical politics in this country is not tied up with ignorant old white people who need to shut the fuck up and get off their soap box.

[Ravn]

Actually you are twisting the facts again like the good troll you are. YOU were the one using racial slurs by comparing non-white people to monkeys and tried to justify that obvious racist attitude by asininely trying to explain that all humans are primates so there is not really a problem of you making that comparison.

All humans are primates, but not all primates are human. (How can you then conclude that this is a means to slur non-white human beings? Who's making that comparison here?) This whole monkey thing started because I referred to your supporters as monkey boy sycophants because they act like frat boys jerking each other off. The allusion is sexual. A cohort of yours objected to this terminology, & apparently to the term First World trash. He might have construed that trash referred to white people but it's a slur against a social strata, not a race, because First Worlders represent the affluent section of the world's masses. If you're going to accuse me of something, get it right.

You spent pages here repeatedly literally saying you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown in utter defiance to the notion of seeing him more than just a statistic. Then you post pictures of black apes saying how you personally cared about certain ape individuals & praised their antics. (How motherfucking PC was that, dumb-ass?) Did you forget who this thread is about or did you do that in defiance to that subject? You may find the term "socially retarded" indefensible but that aptly describes your actions here. & since you rather not have the obvious pointed out to you, you're lobbying to get rid of the whistle blower. That's going to solve your confusion, isn't it?





I am white and Dutch.

Big deal. So what. Origins don't determine one's outlook. & face it, the world can get along w/o your paternalism, fatuous as it is.

[Ravn]

Uncle Tom is an insult for an african-american not a somali. The fact that you don't know the difference is both to be expected ...

It has an African-American origin but it's applicable to any black person who sells out to white people. & think about it. You're blade-running for a politically equivocal self-described white Dutchmen. You do recognize that the Netherlands was formerly a big slave trading country, & also a world colonizer. South Africa is one of the by-products of that. I doubt that you're black but if you are, that's all the more the pity. Watch out from whom you jump in bed with!

[PhoenixAsh]

All humans are primates, but not all primates are human. (How can you then conclude that this is a means to slur non-white human beings? Who's making that comparison here?) This whole monkey thing started because I referred to your supporters as monkey boy sycophants because they act like frat boys jerking each other off. The allusion is sexual. A cohort of yours objected to this terminology, & apparently to the term First World trash. He might have construed that trash referred to white people but it's a slur against a social strata, not a race, because First Worlders represent the affluent section of the world's masses. If you're going to accuse me of something, get it right.

Yes and in your white supremacist thought you assumed everybody here is white....not thinking for a minute your insult could have racist impact.

You are actually the only one, after having breached the subject, to link anything with racism. Apparently...as I said...not only do you make active comparisons with mokeys, justify this with biological arguments of humans being primates...but also when you see an ape...immediately link that to black people.

You do not have a leg to stand on here.

There is no amount of justification to white wash what you did. You opened that can of worms. You live with the consequences.



You spent pages here repeatedly literally saying you don't give a fuck about Michael Brown in utter defiance to the notion of seeing him more than just a statistic.

The notion that not giving a fuck about a specific individual reduces them to statistics is yours. It is an insane notion because you have no understanding of the meaning of "care".

The reason why we have this discussion is that you are the one trying to force a liberal notion of "care for individuals" on revolutionary thought and see this as the main ingredient. YOu go out of your way to endorse liberal ideology here as a means to judge revolutionary politics.

This is a confused position based on sentimentalism. And speaks volumes about you.



Then you post pictures of black apes saying how you personally cared about certain ape individuals & praised their antics. (How motherfucking PC was that, dumb-ass?) Did you forget who this thread is about or did you do that in defiance to that subject? You may find the term "socially retarded" indefensible but that aptly describes your actions here. & since you rather not have the obvious pointed out to you, you're lobbying to get rid of the whistle blower. That's going to solve your confusion, isn't it?

I think it is not only indefensible...I also KNOW that it is against the rules to use the word in such a denegrating way.

But you conveniently side stepping the fact that you are the one who brought up monkeys and primates in a thread about a black person. But that of course was entirely different... Yeah sure. And now you are trying to blame-shift by attributing a racist connotation where there is only 1 racist here: you.

You are beyond pathetic and the only reason I have been dealing with you for the last few pages is for entertainment purposes and a morbid curiousity of the dumb shit that you will think up next....and more importantly because there is a bet running wether or not I can outlast you.



Big deal. So what. Origins don't determine one's outlook. & face it, the world can get along w/o your paternalism, fatuous as it is.

Really? Because you tried really hard to make just that very same suggestion here that origins DID determine outlook when you tried your "guilt by association" accusation there.

One thing is most definately for sure. You have contradicted yourself so often and so systematically here that any legitimacy you may have had when you joined the forum is gone. What endures is the empty pathetic shell of some liberal loser trying to be edgy and assembling a troll persona based on wikipedia searches.

Now I know life in your suburb is really, really boring and that Strom Front is a little too hardcore for your priviliged ass....so this site is an easy mark.



In the meantime...you still have not addressed the following issues:


Your entire problem with me is that I refuse to accept your notion that the amount of care for a specific individual is the measure of revolutionary politics....or anything other than subjective motivators

My refusal to accept a call for justice within a bourgeois system as anything else than misguided.

My refusal to accept social justice as anything else than a liberal bourgeois notion.

My refusal that the system can be "changed" from within.

My refusal to accept your criticism of tactics used by the people on the ground actually protesting this

And my refusal to accept co-opting liberal demands and notions in lieu of advocating the widening of the protests and linking them with the aim of overthrowing the state and class society.

[PhoenixAsh]

It has an African-American origin but it's applicable to any black person who sells out to white people. & think about it. You're blade-running for a politically equivocal self-described white Dutchmen. You do recognize that the Netherlands was formerly a big slave trading country, & also a world colonizer. South Africa is one of the by-products of that. I doubt that you're black but if you are, that's all the more the pity. Watch out from whom you jump in bed with!

And here we have you

1). Condescending a person based on race (the very same person you called monkey boy and tried to justify it by bringing up primates)
2). Endorsing further ethnic nationalism
3). Making presumptions and allegations about an individual based on historic origin
4). Assuming that the person is stupid rather than a knowledgeable individual with far more experience and devloped politics in his little pinky than you in your entire body.

This shit doesn't get more surreal than this.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

lol is this idiot seriously trying to whitesplain something to me right now. I cant believe this thread has gone for 11 pages.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

I issue infractions to Tim Redd and Ravn for being massive idiots.

Thread closed.

Well, or so I imagine...

[PhoenixAsh]

Thread closed.

Well, or so I imagine...

Honorary MOD for a post...


Done.


Thread closed because Kill all the Fetusses said so

And frankly I have indulged in and contributed to this morbidly entertaining madness way too long.

With that I guess I am losing my bet. Damn it.

[PhoenixAsh]

One more post as a tribute to all who sticked with it so long:


cK3vi4tC100