Socialist Action in Modern America

[Lardlad95]

"The future belongs to those who prepare for it today". -Malcolm X (1925 -1965)

It is out of love that I fight, for those who are blind to their opression. Blind to the lies, to the injustices that lay before them, and the misery that creeps upon them in the dark. It is out of frustration that I write, never sure how to tell those people whom I care so much for what must be said. It is out of anger that I come to you my brethren, my comrades in this struggle. And as I look upon the world which my heart yearns to embrace I can not help but feel that I have failed it. A failure at age 16, a failure before I could see the fruits of our labors, and all because the people will never taste the fruits of theres. It drives me mad to think that for all my talk, for all my sleepless nights I am no closer to my revolution than when i began the journey. 3 years is how long I've traveled, and though I expected nothing to come quickly, if at all, I still find that I have squandered these years in trivial ideological squabbles.

I do not like an uncertain future, a destitnation I can see but a path that is hidden. I can not reach that destination with no path, and the longer I behold the prize the more it pains me that I have yet to move. So I call upon my brothers and sisters in the struggle to help clear the path,or better still to forge out own.

I have tremendous respect for my predecessors, for Che and for Debs, for Malcolm and for Huey. Those who have come before me, striving for a better world. And I make it my mission to see that they have not died in vain. I find that I can no longer accept the hackneyed phrases we utter to reassure our selves "it will come one day". That is no longer good enough, though I'm not sure it ever was.

I once proposed a course of action, only to be called a media whore. Why? Because I do not believe that Grass Roots action should be our only tactic. I still don't. My good friend Redstar called it "A Plan for Unconditional Surrender". With all due respecy my friend, what do you honestly believe we are accomplishing by only utilizing the grass roots? What are we doing by slipping deeper and deeper into the underground, so deep that we have become nothing more than a joke, a laughing stock on the political spectrum?

They attack us and we are not there to refute them. They mock us and we are not there to return fire. We have become a relic, a thing of the past to be exaimened, not considered. Popping out from our hiding places every now and again to protest this and that Capitalist action.

You do not gain power by being invisible. You do not achieve sucess by claiming that every thing will turn out fine, eventually.

I take back my earlier assertion, that we must abandon the grass roots and embrace the mainstream to gain support. INstead I offer this, you do not gain support by existing in the shadows, you do not gain support by abandoning your history. So this is what I say to you, it takes a balanced hand to make this work.

We can not continue to rely only on our underground tactics as we have in the past, however I wouldn't want us to become elitists. Thus I submit my course of action.

1. Maintain all grasss roots Opreations

All that we have been doing thus far we do now, however we must strive harder to make these things palatable to the common man. We present our arguements in a manner that will make us look legitamat. As of right now we do not look legitamate, this is a problem we must fix. Common people look upon us as radicals who don't live in their world. We must rebuild the connection we once had with them. We can no longer make the wild accusations, and burn the effigies.

The more we relate to the common man, the more they will come to us. And if you have 1 man who can relate to the common person recruiting for you, he will bring in 5 more, and they will bring in 5 more each, and so on and so forth.

We've become out of touch with the people, this used to be our strength, and we forgot this.

2. Our organizations must do more for the public.

The Black Panther Party, once established free breakfast proframs for poor youths. They set up free medical clinics. They had food programs for poor families. Then it all fell apart. While the ending wasn't desirable, the idea was. If we draw the people in with a service they need, they will be more willing to listen to us.

Not only this, but if we get media coverage all the better. I know the bougie media is not our best friend. But it will give us a chance to get our messege out there. I realize that this souldn't be the focus of the programs, but we do need to get our messege out to a larger audience.

3. Our organizations need to become more powerful

How do we do this? We do this by creating organizations that do more than just organize protests and hand out pamphlets. I will suggest ways to increase this power.

A: Start Buisnesses.

Now before you shout me down for giving into the capitalist system. Lets face facts people, we can not survive if we do not have the funds to. Dues are fine and all but growing requires more money than we are recieving. Now the buisnesses I will propose are not typical cappie buisnesses.

a. Grocery stores in Poor Neighborhoods.

Yes, Krogers, Pick and Save, Food Lion, and any other chain seems like it has the ability to lower their prices to the point where they can drive us out...but consider this.

These chains have to pay their employees. But if we get volunteers from the parties to work at these places for free, we've aleady eliminated part of the costs. The volunteers aren't paid, they simply work their because o their commitment (we've always aid the people would do this haven't we?).

Then we try and find the best quality food at the lowest prices. Thus all we have to worry about is making a enough to the point where we break even.

Now I know that if we break even it wont seem like we are making any money, however we still own the store, and thus our parties become powerful by owning something that effects the economy of the community.

The only thing we must worry about is paying for the land it's self.


b. Low Rent Apartment Complexes.

Once again the power of socialist volunteers comes to our advantage. We get volunteers to maintain the building, acting as supers/repair men.

We find apartment buildings, renovate them, then rent them out to low income families at very low prices. Thus we offer them housing options that are well within their means and since our people will be in constant contact with them we can help them grow in understanding of our messege.Also we will be able to offer services, day care, education programs, etc.



This way we have a way to help out the common person and create a way to make our parties more powerful.


I'm sure there are other buisnesses we can start but I see these as the two that have teh best chance of sucess.


B. Get members into prominent positions.


I want to see party members that are well educated..Ph. D. level, with jobs at major colleges and institutions. These are the types of people we need.


a. Economists.

Our parties need more economists. We need people going to college, learning these things so we can figure out ways to answer our capitalist counter parts. The more you know about how the enemy operates, the better chance you have at defeating him.

b. Politicians

Political Scientists and the like will help us manuever through the political playing field. Everything else is pretty much self explanitory.

c. Lawyers.

Once again the more you know about how the enemy operates the better off you are.

d. Buisness Majors.

We must see why certain things work in the capitalist world and be able to adapt them for when the people take over industries and buisnesses.



This is just a general plan I have for the future of the movement, one of progression. Instead of just simply sitting around and politicing all day.

I know most of you are in favor of revolution, but if we can subvert their power from below, why not?

Now I understand that as Redstar once put it "the revolution is not about charity". Thats fine, however what are we doing with our resources right now? Not a thing, we aer wasting our energy when we could be using it. We can make the future better while still working in the present.

They can arresst us for plotting against the government, they cant however arresst us for creating low income apartment complexes.I do not wish to hurt anyone, only to help. Toppling capitalism is a two fold process. Malcolm X said it takes the bullet not the ballot. But remember without Martin Malcolm's movement would ahve been less effective, and without Malcolm MArtin's would have been less effective. It takes the agressiveness and passion of the revolutionary, and the progression and compassion of the evolutionist. The reason I fight is not because I hate the opressor, but because I love the opressed.




*Note*: I do not suggest that this is a final detailed plan. Only an outline for one. Hopefully I will one day be able to implement my ideas. The reason for this change of heart that i"ve had is that as I said above I realized that it takes both the bullet and the ballot to suceed, niether would be sucessful on their own.

[Lardlad95]

As a follow up to my plan. I would like to give a breif account of how I plan to implement my ideas.

1. A Marxist Coalition...(of the willing)

It's obvious (che-lives is a perfect example) that there are dozens of leftist factions that exist. If we were all to pool the resources from the various organizations these thing would get done with better efficiency. WE've seen the turn outs that we can get when we all decide t protest something, so lets see if we can't get turnouts for actually getting some things done.

With all the seperate organzations working on this project the vlunteer staff will never be swamped with work, money will be more readily available. Also we get input from several different positions. Now on the one hand this could be a drraw back, however I feel debate always improves the outcome.

Another advantage is that by unifying, atleast on these projects, we gain strength in numbers.


2. Utilization of Newley Educated members and skilled members.

Okay remember how I talked about members becoming educated in various areas?

Well There is reason for this. Those who take buisness will be able to help us maintain our various projects. Lawyers will also help us with the real estate ventures. This way we can find ways to maintain these buisnesses and still provide the people with low costs.

As far as skilled members, we find members who are skilled in carpentary, or construction, etc. To help us renovate and maintain the apartments. And if they have any other skills we utilize them as well.


These are just two ways I see getting these thing simplemented. Any other ideas on projects are welcolmed

[STI]

Well, that was certainly thorough. I can tell you that I don't have time to read the whole thing, but what I saw I liked.

Keep up the good work

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 10:52 PM
Well, that was certainly thorough. I can tell you that I don't have time to read the whole thing, but what I saw I liked.

Keep up the good work
I will I will.... though i was hoping fo more debate. I mean I'd really like to work the bugs out of this thing

[antieverything]

I agree that more radicals need to make their voices heard in the mainstream areas of the academic world.

The idea of radical volunteer armies seems both realistic and, dare I say, heartwarming. LOL.

[STI]

1. A Marxist Coalition...(of the willing)

Heh. I like the "of the willing" part. A bit of a parallel, perhaps?


Overall, I thought it was really good. A major problem, though, is that mainstream media has lost a lot of credibility, even with the non- lefties. Independant Media Centres (IMCs) are growing in popularity. This was shown during the globalization protests throughout the last 5 years. The viewer- base of IMCs went through the roof.

Also, in trying to get mainstream media coverage, we run the very real risk of being labelled as either:

a) Radicals; which would discredit us, or

b) "Reds", "Commies", "Terrorists", "etc", which may very well stir up public resentment toward us.


Also, I think we should be very committed to reviving the labour movement in North America. After all, these are the people we're fighting, for lack of a better way of putting it, "on behalf of". These are the guys who can really get things done when they put their weight into it.

We need to include more than just "socialists", "anarchists", and "communists". Showing evironmentalists, animal- rights activists, human rights activists, etc. that capitalism not only perpetuates, but causes the problems they fight against, would be beneficial.

Creating a party which participates in elections, and therefore spreads its message and might even gain power for itself, would be another good idea. Implimenting/ advocating reforms (don't call me a reformist. I don't believe that reforms are the only thing worth doing.) which benefit the working class would increase our popularity.

I agree that one of the best ways of winning over the minds of individuals is to help them, as the Panthers did. Good insight.

Having members with a lot of education would be a great idea. We'll look much more credible when we have "Dr." Smith, the political scientist advocating our party than if we had "Mr." Smith, the factory worker who lost his job when his factory closed and moved to Mexico. Not that Mr. Smith is any less important than Dr. Smith, but Dr. Smith will be much more appealing to the average, uneducated individual.

In the later stages, placing willing party members in the police and military, in hopes that they'll be promoted to high ranks, would be a good idea. The insurrection would be a lot easier if one of the generals in the U$ army is fighting on OUR side for a bloody change.

.... That's all for now. Great post, great thoughts, AMAZING introduction.

Again, keep up the good work *thumbs up

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:01 PM
I agree that more radicals need to make their voices heard in the mainstream areas of the academic world.

The idea of radical volunteer armies seems both realistic and, dare I say, heartwarming. LOL.
I knew it would...

[Lardlad95]

Heh. I like the "of the willing" part. A bit of a parallel, perhaps?

The Right has always been rather good at rhetoric, I thought I'd steal a bit of Bush's speech writers magic...oh wait that state of the union sucked...never mind


Overall, I thought it was really good. A major problem, though, is that mainstream media has lost a lot of credibility, even with the non- lefties. Independant Media Centres (IMCs) are growing in popularity. This was shown during the globalization protests throughout the last 5 years. The viewer- base of IMCs went through the roof.

There is no doubt in my mind that IMC's are going to be a valuable tool in the future. IN fact I more than encourage our use of these outlets, I demand it. Mainly because thiis si teh area where we'd best get to express our views. However with the mainstream media we'd atleast reach a larger audience. Which is good, any publicity is good publicity because it will have to interest someone, even if it isn't a huge number.



Also, in trying to get mainstream media coverage, we run the very real risk of being labelled as either:

a) Radicals; which would discredit us, or

b) "Reds", "Commies", "Terrorists", "etc", which may very well stir up public resentment toward us.

You are correct on part "a". We will be labeled as radicals, I've seen it happen th few times we have been covered by the mainstream. however another thing I noticed was that our presence was few and far between. The more media play we get, the better our chances of actualley being able to say wat we are really about. Granted of course we get on shows were we can actualley talk, CNN would be a good place to start(once we get to national) because the interviewers there aren't as cutthroat as those on fox and MSNBC(IE Tim Russert) we can work our way up to there.

My whole point is that we already know the media wont give us a fair shake the first dozen times around, but we must be persistant.

On part "b" I happen to disagree. By the time I am 30 most of the people who were concious of the cold war will be 40+ Alot of those who ere seriosuly involved will be well over 60.

The youth has not had the propaganda ingrained into them because the establishment hasn't had to. As of now we aren't a threat, so they don't feel a need to drench them with anti leftist bullshit other than the bare minimum they used to. the words communist and socialist will no longer carry the weight they once did



Also, I think we should be very committed to reviving the labour movement in North America. After all, these are the people we're fighting, for lack of a better way of putting it, "on behalf of". These are the guys who can really get things done when they put their weight into it.

I agree. The Two major parties in the US have hijacked the common man. The republicans have the traditionalist hardworking american vote, and the democrats have the labor vote.

If we can revive the labor movement and get them to fight with us as they once did we have a better chance, so i wholeheartedly agree with your assertion


We need to include more than just "socialists", "anarchists", and "communists". Showing evironmentalists, animal- rights activists, human rights activists, etc. that capitalism not only perpetuates, but causes the problems they fight against, would be beneficial

Good point. I hadn't considered enviromentalists, animal rights activists, etc. But I was willing to include any one on the left who was willing to help. But thank you for reminding me of the other groups who we can utilize. A unification of the left involves everyone on teh left, not just Marxists.


Creating a party which participates in elections, and therefore spreads its message and might even gain power for itself, would be another good idea. Implimenting/ advocating reforms (don't call me a reformist. I don't believe that reforms are the only thing worth doing.) which benefit the working class would increase our popularity.

Well many here belong to such parties, I myself belong to A democratic socialist party. The problem of course is that we simply lack the numbers to participate nationally. Whats sad is that my party is one of the larger ones in the US.I believe that by unifying the left we can back more progressive people, the same way socialists and even some communists backed nader.

I'd preffer of course if it was one of our own(truly one of our own) but aslong as we become a large force in teh nation that just happens to be divided into several groups.


I agree that one of the best ways of winning over the minds of individuals is to help them, as the Panthers did. Good insight.

I spoke with my mother before writing this, she was a former panther.


Having members with a lot of education would be a great idea. We'll look much more credible when we have "Dr." Smith, the political scientist advocating our party than if we had "Mr." Smith, the factory worker who lost his job when his factory closed and moved to Mexico. Not that Mr. Smith is any less important than Dr. Smith, but Dr. Smith will be much more appealing to the average, uneducated individual.

That is exactley what I mean to accomplish. I don't deny that mr. smith is an important/knowledgable person...but we do sound more credible. Not that we should look only for titles. But to be honest, when some one has a phd next to their name people take it more seriously. It's a shame, it shouldn't be that way, but it is.



In the later stages, placing willing party members in the police and military, in hopes that they'll be promoted to high ranks, would be a good idea. The insurrection would be a lot easier if one of the generals in the U$ army is fighting on OUR side for a bloody change.

I didn't even think of that...that is a wonderful insight. Should the revolution arrive you are right having people in positions of power would be a great assest, and it would make transition ALOT easier



.... That's all for now. Great post, great thoughts, AMAZING introduction.

Again, keep up the good work *thumbs up

Thank you, especiall about the intro

[STI]

On part "b" I happen to disagree. By the time I am 30 most of the people who were concious of the cold war will be 40+ Alot of those who ere seriosuly involved will be well over 60.

The youth has not had the propaganda ingrained into them because the establishment hasn't had to. As of now we aren't a threat, so they don't feel a need to drench them with anti leftist bullshit other than the bare minimum they used to. the words communist and socialist will no longer carry the weight they once did


I don't know about you, but when I use the word "communist" in class, it's like I blasphemed the holy name of Eminem or something. I'm 16, and have lived most of my life outside the cold war.

It wasn't just during the cold war that "anti- red" propaganda existed. During the 30s and 40s, when people were starting to look outside capitalism for an answer to the economic problems of the times, a huge anti- communist campaign was launched against union organizers. A prime example would be found in "The Grapes of Wrath". The term "red" is thrown around quite a bit and has a very negative connotation.

Besides, how hard would it be to start up another anti- communist campaign, especially with the anti- communist sentiment present in so much of the population.

[bunk]

yeh i have to admit that the we might be labelled as terrorists.. Think about how Bush uses that word for fighters going to fight in Iraq against an army that legally shouldn't be there.

[Lardlad95]

I don't know about you, but when I use the word "communist" in class, it's like I blasphemed the holy name of Eminem or something. I'm 16, and have lived most of my life outside the cold war.

What I meant by the time our generation is thirty, I was reffering to the fact that we'd be trying to influence the new youth, not our peers.



It wasn't just during the cold war that "anti- red" propaganda existed. During the 30s and 40s, when people were starting to look outside capitalism for an answer to the economic problems of the times, a huge anti- communist campaign was launched against union organizers. A prime example would be found in "The Grapes of Wrath". The term "red" is thrown around quite a bit and has a very negative connotation.

But most of the people from that era are becoming irrelevant in politics. As are their children.



Besides, how hard would it be to start up another anti- communist campaign, especially with the anti- communist sentiment present in so much of the population.

It wouldn't be but we need to start learning from our mistakes and learn how to counter it properly

[Rasta Sapian]

I think that you guys are moving in the right direction!

And I agree that the word communism, has a tarnished reputation and would be difficult to raise mainstream support for future ventures!

Thats why we need a new Manifesto..... A Universalist Manifesto, needs to be written, including true marxist sociaist-political idealism, but taking it to another level, to compete with modern day Globalism and Impirialism, things have changed in the world, we need a new word to promote capitalism and a new manifesto as well to be spread to the masses....... with the new knowledge being spread, people can unite across borders and within borders! Communes will start being built! A worldwide political movement will arise! And with or without revoltion the world will awaken to a new purpose on the planet!

And yes, your intellectual knowlege and philosophies are needed, start now! on a specific topic for reform, economic, political, environmental, social, militant, etc.
Together we can produce a new Manifesto, for todays masses!

Lets start over fresh with new ideas for the future of the mankind and our place on the planet, think about the future generations and what the world could be for them, not the way things are going now!

Use marx as a guide if you need one, there are many other great philosophers as well!
Once the Universalist Manifesto is complete, we will be taking that first step towards change!

Peace love and unity my commrads!

[Rasta Sapian]

edit: a new word for communism = universalism, promoting socialist ideals, and anti-globalization

[VukBZ2005]

Originally posted by Rasta [email protected] 11 2004, 09:18 PM
I think that you guys are moving in the right direction!

And I agree that the word communism, has a tarnished reputation and would be difficult to raise mainstream support for future ventures!

Thats why we need a new Manifesto..... A Universalist Manifesto, needs to be written, including true marxist sociaist-political idealism, but taking it to another level, to compete with modern day Globalism and Impirialism, things have changed in the world, we need a new word to promote capitalism and a new manifesto as well to be spread to the masses....... with the new knowledge being spread, people can unite across borders and within borders! Communes will start being built! A worldwide political movement will arise! And with or without revoltion the world will awaken to a new purpose on the planet!

And yes, your intellectual knowlege and philosophies are needed, start now! on a specific topic for reform, economic, political, environmental, social, militant, etc.
Together we can produce a new Manifesto, for todays masses!

Lets start over fresh with new ideas for the future of the mankind and our place on the planet, think about the future generations and what the world could be for them, not the way things are going now!

Use marx as a guide if you need one, there are many other great philosophers as well!
Once the Universalist Manifesto is complete, we will be taking that first step towards change!

Peace love and unity my commrads!
I'm good at writing stuff like that -- i would like to write a Manifesto,
that will inspire the masses to rise up against Capitalism!

[STI]

/ i'm not sure whether or not he was being sarcastic or just naive.

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by Rasta [email protected] 11 2004, 09:18 PM
I think that you guys are moving in the right direction!

And I agree that the word communism, has a tarnished reputation and would be difficult to raise mainstream support for future ventures!

Thats why we need a new Manifesto..... A Universalist Manifesto, needs to be written, including true marxist sociaist-political idealism, but taking it to another level, to compete with modern day Globalism and Impirialism, things have changed in the world, we need a new word to promote capitalism and a new manifesto as well to be spread to the masses....... with the new knowledge being spread, people can unite across borders and within borders! Communes will start being built! A worldwide political movement will arise! And with or without revoltion the world will awaken to a new purpose on the planet!

And yes, your intellectual knowlege and philosophies are needed, start now! on a specific topic for reform, economic, political, environmental, social, militant, etc.
Together we can produce a new Manifesto, for todays masses!

Lets start over fresh with new ideas for the future of the mankind and our place on the planet, think about the future generations and what the world could be for them, not the way things are going now!

Use marx as a guide if you need one, there are many other great philosophers as well!
Once the Universalist Manifesto is complete, we will be taking that first step towards change!

Peace love and unity my commrads!
...Hmm...Not to offend but I"m not sure if you were being sarcastic or genuinely supportive.

If you is the Former, we truly do need to start rethinking hoe we get things done. even if it isn't through my plan, tthrough some plan

If it's the latter, thanks for the support

sorry if I imisunderstood you

[Rasta Sapian]

maa maa maa misunderstanding? :huh:
na no not at all bro....

I was just saying that if you were a like minded person you could start writing some of your ideas down! Possibly something new, for change. Something to inspire others to make a change for the future and for everyone, uniting the masses for a common goals, promoting a new idealism for the masses, toi comprende mon amie? amigo?

can i getta what what.... P to the E to the A to the C to the E, to the on EAR to the TH.
Just a bitta good will mon, ya dig?


peace yall universalism is the shinizm for the risin role for my mortal soul..... <_<

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by Rasta [email protected] 17 2004, 09:25 PM
maa maa maa misunderstanding? :huh:
na no not at all bro....

I was just saying that if you were a like minded person you could start writing some of your ideas down&#33; Possibly something new, for change. Something to inspire others to make a change for the future and for everyone, uniting the masses for a common goals, promoting a new idealism for the masses, toi comprende mon amie? amigo?

can i getta what what.... P to the E to the A to the C to the E, to the on EAR to the TH.
Just a bitta good will mon, ya dig?


peace yall universalism is the shinizm for the risin role for my mortal soul..... <_<
I&#39;ll be writing down some inspirational ideas very soon.

[STI]

Originally posted by Rasta [email protected] 17 2004, 09:25 PM
maa maa maa misunderstanding? :huh:
na no not at all bro....

I was just saying that if you were a like minded person you could start writing some of your ideas down&#33; Possibly something new, for change. Something to inspire others to make a change for the future and for everyone, uniting the masses for a common goals, promoting a new idealism for the masses, toi comprende mon amie? amigo?

can i getta what what.... P to the E to the A to the C to the E, to the on EAR to the TH.
Just a bitta good will mon, ya dig?


peace yall universalism is the shinizm for the risin role for my mortal soul..... <_<
Ok. Just wanted to make sure my interperetation of what you said was clear.

[roman]

Yes.. maybe all the different factions on che-lives can pool their resources and buy grocery stores.. how inspiring..

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 07:36 AM
Yes.. maybe all the different factions on che-lives can pool their resources and buy grocery stores.. how inspiring..
1. I&#39;m not talking about the people on che-lives.

2. Do you know what sam&#39;s club is? Do you know about their "low, low prices" and how they sell in bulk. Do you know that this causes people to buy huge amounts of food that they won&#39;t end up using and have to throw away? Do you know that this means working class people will loose money?

3. Do you know what a government housing project is? Do you know what gentrification is? Do you know what it&#39;s like to live in slums? Do you know how hard it is for a working class person to get good living space?

Heres an idea, stop being so cynical and try to get what I"m saying.

[STI]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 07:36 AM
Yes.. maybe all the different factions on che-lives can pool their resources and buy grocery stores.. how inspiring..
I totally agree with LL on this one. If you have a meaningful criticism of anything that was said here, by all means, let us know. But don&#39;t just say sarcastic things in an attempt to make your defeatist attitude sound valid.

[Eastside Revolt]

I agree fundamentally with what you are trying to say.

I&#39;d like to add though that (in my opinion) socialism has to start grassroots in the west. I don&#39;t know about you (maybe I live near to too many rich people and lumpens) but the majority of mature people I come into contact with, genuinley consider socialism to be "terrorist".

What you said that I found to be quite important and true, is that we need to be out in the streets helping the communities. This in practicality envolves grassroots planning, as I hope you would agree. I don&#39;t know if you can think of a way to possitively impact a community, without a decent-sized group.

I agree. Organisation is definitely key, and the fact that we need to impact and influence the masses should be part of that organisation. As opposed to following an ideology without wheels.

[Guest1]

I like your ideas, but I think the projects should go much further in implementing our ideas on the ground.

For example: the volunteer workers. Why? Why not give every worker who works for us the chance to run the store Democratically with his/her peers and split the profits? If they vote to give us a portion of the profits (they definitely will), great. If not, it will become a contractual rent effectively, they may run it as they wish but ownership reverts to us the moment they establish wages or a boss.

Next, why not link up with unions and try to establish a presence there, but for the purposes of purchasing the business on behalf of that union? I have been thinking about this for a while, unions could use their strike funds, along with extra funds provided by the organization (under the same contract as above) to purchase the factory and collectivize it.

Creating the facts on the ground would be very productive. I think that as long as we stick to creatingt he society as we work, we should be fine.

As for media coverage, that doesn&#39;t hurt, but it&#39;s not half as important as the street buzz created when a minimum wage worker suddenly earns a portion of the profits instead of a shit wage.

[shyguywannadie]

I fundamentally like the idea, sounds good, everything thing helps the course. :)


Except fopr my spelling/grammer :(

[SittingBull47]

ok. How about creating a seperate board, a board for leftists everywhere with certain agendas? This way you can screen people and take a count of support.

[STI]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 01:56 PM
ok. How about creating a seperate board, a board for leftists everywhere with certain agendas? This way you can screen people and take a count of support.
Um...I think that&#39;s what this board is.

...unless my entire life up to this point has been a lie :unsure:

[Kaan]

[QUOTE]I don&#39;t know about you (maybe I live near to too many rich people and lumpens) but the majority of mature people I come into contact with, genuinley consider socialism to be "terrorist".

If the name bothers people, then don&#39;t use the name. Put your ideas in a shiny new package, the capitalists do that shit all the time. They call imperialism the war on terror and people eat that shit up with a spoon. If everybody gave up such fierce loyalty to their label and just tryed to get their ideas across, then you wouldn&#39;t have so much hesistance from others. It is the word communism/socialism/anarchy that gets people all worked up, cause a lot of people simply dont know what these things mean.

I agree with the general idea of the original post, but in regard to the idea of opening up the grocery stores and apartment complexes, you would need a pretty big organization if the projects were to be done purely by volunteers, either that or a rich patron to support the whole thing, which is of course a bad idea.

Just a thought: We could call the store Commu-Mart&#33;

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 07:04 AM
I agree fundamentally with what you are trying to say.

I&#39;d like to add though that (in my opinion) socialism has to start grassroots in the west. I don&#39;t know about you (maybe I live near to too many rich people and lumpens) but the majority of mature people I come into contact with, genuinley consider socialism to be "terrorist".

What you said that I found to be quite important and true, is that we need to be out in the streets helping the communities. This in practicality envolves grassroots planning, as I hope you would agree. I don&#39;t know if you can think of a way to possitively impact a community, without a decent-sized group.

I agree. Organisation is definitely key, and the fact that we need to impact and influence the masses should be part of that organisation. As opposed to following an ideology without wheels.
I agree with your entire statement, the problem of course is organization. Our current parties have a revolving door system. Mainly because the average member isn&#39;t doing anything. I believe however that with a marxist coaliton we could be more effective and utilize all of our resources not just the currentl active members. The more action we have the more lazy members like my self will want to get involved.

And you are right the grass roots is key. I&#39;ve lived in both horrible poverty (trailer parks and ghettos) and I&#39;ve lived in the suburbs. both classes see socialism and communism as a threat. BUt I have a feeling that the youths of both populations are open minded enough to learn.

[Lardlad95]

For example: the volunteer workers. Why? Why not give every worker who works for us the chance to run the store Democratically with his/her peers and split the profits? If they vote to give us a portion of the profits (they definitely will), great. If not, it will become a contractual rent effectively, they may run it as they wish but ownership reverts to us the moment they establish wages or a boss.

Good idea, my only concern is that socialism isn&#39;t widely understood. So I fear that people would take advantage of the system because they 1) aren&#39;t used to it or 2) don&#39;t understand it...yet. This is why I wanted socialist, communist, anarchist, leftists, etc. volunteers until we perfected the system. I work in a grocery store and I&#39;m positive that if kroger were to divert to a system of democracy it would break down, especially since it hasn&#39;t been done before and the employees aren&#39;t used to it. THere is no doubt in my mind that people could adapt, but not at such as fast rate.

Though your idea is interesting, and if you were to give me a more detailed explanation of the plan I&#39;d love to hear it. The only reason I&#39;m skeptical is because I&#39;m simply lookin at the surface, so give me a little more depth.


Next, why not link up with unions and try to establish a presence there, but for the purposes of purchasing the business on behalf of that union? I have been thinking about this for a while, unions could use their strike funds, along with extra funds provided by the organization (under the same contract as above) to purchase the factory and collectivize it.

I love this idea. Especially since Grocery unions aren&#39;t particularly strong at the moment. Though my union is about to strike in a few weeks, and though I&#39;m not a member yet ( I have to wait) I&#39;m still striking to show soladarity.
]
Anyway I really like this idea. Especially since I think unions are organized enough to the point where the transition would be done efficiently.




As for media coverage, that doesn&#39;t hurt, but it&#39;s not half as important as the street buzz created when a minimum wage worker suddenly earns a portion of the profits instead of a shit wage.

Good point

[Kaan]

Problem with the idea of low rent apartments. What happens if for one reason or another the people who rented an apartment didn&#39;t pay rent? Would you evict them? If so I don&#39;t see how this would be any better than the common landlord.

[God of Imperia]

why not send someone from us who has a ph.D in economics to talk with, try to work something out, so we can see what the problem is, a lack of money (or jobs) or just that they&#39;ve waisted all of their money on useless things ... Then you should have a good talk about how you spent your money. If it is the lack of money, you can think of possibility&#39;s to work things out, helping them finding a job and things ...

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 03:55 AM
I have tremendous respect for my predecessors, for Che and for Debs, for Malcolm and for Huey.
Are you comparing yourself to Che Guevara and Malcolm X etc.


And I make it my mission to see that they have not died in vain.

What do you do?


I find that I can no longer accept the hackneyed phrases we utter to reassure our selves "it will come one day". That is no longer good enough, though I&#39;m not sure it ever was.

The phraze, "it will come one day" although very vague is not a statement of idealism. Marx called it Historical Materialism. Communism is an inevitability. So regardless of whether or not you think it is "good enough" it is a historical certainty.


I once proposed a course of action, only to be called a media whore. Why? Because I do not believe that Grass Roots action should be our only tactic. I still don&#39;t. My good friend Redstar called it "A Plan for Unconditional Surrender".

He was right. What you propose is that those people have absolutly nothing to do with freeing themselves from the fact they "are blind to their opression. Blind to the lies, to the injustices that lay before them, Fighting someone elses struggle on their "behalf" for what ever reason has not and can not lead to anything other than tyranny or revision. How is this liberation? Of course it isnt. You can not exclude the people you want to free. Working class, or oppressed action must come from the working class and oppressed. Although it may seem glamarous and oh-so rightous to lead the revolution, we are not here to indulge our egos but to do what is right. What is right is educating and organizing working class people to fight a revolution which is ultimatly theirs. Working class struggle is far more profound than whether or not you want to free people from "the misery that creeps upon them in the dark."


With all due respecy my friend, what do you honestly believe we are accomplishing by only utilizing the grass roots?

Class consciousness , a new found confidence which will ultimatly lead to a fundamental change in society.


What are we doing by slipping deeper and deeper into the underground, so deep that we have become nothing more than a joke, a laughing stock on the political spectrum?

We are not a laughing stock. Except for those in power who wish to undermine us. To the working class people you are wanting to exclude from their liberation actually want an alternative. They just don&#39;t believe us when we say ours can work. Our job is to convince them. That is not "slipping deeper and deeper" it is the path in the right direction. It&#39;s hard work, and it will not be easy, but it is the right direction nonetheless.


They attack us and we are not there to refute them. They mock us and we are not there to return fire. We have become a relic, a thing of the past to be exaimened, not considered. Popping out from our hiding places every now and again to protest this and that Capitalist action.

Actually, the Anti-capitalist movement and ma class action organizations do considerable amounts of work in communities and on the streets. There are movements there to refute and to return fire. They just to get bigger. These protests you are so quick to dismiss are actually massive demonstrations, carefully and professionally organized. In Genoa, the revolutionary elft from across the whole of Europe sat down together at the European Social Forum the day before the event to discuss with each other tactics etc. Where we you? These protests are actual proof that class actionists can organize on massive scales and frighten the establishment. That is their goal, and they have been phenomenally succesful.


You do not gain power by being invisible. You do not achieve sucess by claiming that every thing will turn out fine, eventually.

I am from the UK, and when I was there last the revolutionary left was very visible. Not very big, but visible. The point is to make it grow.


I take back my earlier assertion, that we must abandon the grass roots and embrace the mainstream to gain support.

Glad to hear it.....


you do not gain support by abandoning your history.

What does this actually mean?


We can not continue to rely only on our underground tactics

What underground tactics?


We present our arguements in a manner that will make us look legitamat.

We don&#39;t need or want to look legitimate, we want to be right. We are right. We should not pretend to be anything other than right, regardless of whether we look "legitimate" or not. What does "legitimate" mean anyway? All inclusive? Voter sensitive?


Common people look upon us as radicals who don&#39;t live in their world.

We are radicals and we do live in their world. That&#39;s exactly why we want to change it. We just have to work to get people to see and udnerstand that what we are saying is logical and for their benifit.


We must rebuild the connection we once had with them. We can no longer make the wild accusations, and burn the effigies.

Can you explain this please?


The more we relate to the common man, the more they will come to us.

We do relate to working people. Surely that is the point.


The Black Panther Party, once established free breakfast proframs for poor youths. They set up free medical clinics. They had food programs for poor families. Then it all fell apart. While the ending wasn&#39;t desirable, the idea was. If we draw the people in with a service they need, they will be more willing to listen to us.

This I agree with you on fundamentally. I have often used this same story to make this same point. Any movement must do work like this inside communities with the explicit purpose of educating. But educating by forcing capitalism and the bourgeoisie to justify itself. Which it can not? It can not justify why people dont have free health clinics, it can not justify why schools are collpasing, and while a movement is their building these schools etc, we are demonstrating a profound thing to people. They can do it on their own&#33;


Not only this, but if we get media coverage all the better. I know the bougie media is not our best friend. But it will give us a chance to get our messege out there. I realize that this souldn&#39;t be the focus of the programs, but we do need to get our messege out to a larger audience.

We can not rely on the bourgeois media to portray us well. As the movement grows, eventually they will turn against us. We have to build our own media outlets. Papers, magazines, graffiti, posters..agitation.


A: Start Buisnesses.

It is a fair enough idea. But one that communists are not very good at. It has been tried, and has failed miserable. Anarchists and Communists dont make good capitalists.


B. Get members into prominent positions.

We can not change anything through present political, economic or academic structures. These positions are in place to propogate a specific agenda. As soon as these people amount significant power, although it would never get that far, they wiull be "dealt" with by the appropriate arm of the state. The ruling class are not going to allow people to take power from them legally. They can, "legally" find loop wholes to get rid of you.

What good will lawyers and business majors do to a working class struggle? The only way to create real, lasting working class liberation and a free society is by educating the working class and oppressed to take control for themselves. There is no other option. It may take decades or even centuries, but that&#39;s just tuff on us. We are not here to define the struggle, the struggle defines us. The struggle does not revolve around us, we revolve around the struggle. Do what&#39;s right, not what&#39;s easiest.


This is just a general plan I have for the future of the movement, one of progression. Instead of just simply sitting around and politicing all day.

Progression for who? For what? Not for the working class. None of these bouregois revisions, im sorry, but that&#39;s what they are, are going to lead to anything other than, a bourgeois revision.



I know most of you are in favor of revolution, but if we can subvert their power from below, why not?

But we can&#39;t. They control the system you want to subvert them with. They only choice, and it isnt a nice one, is to smash the system and to create a new one. The system, state and economics of our society are intertwined around the ruling class. It is imbedded in them. We can not reform it or use it to subvert them. They are the system, they are the state, they6 are the economic system. They own our schools and our political institutions. They control the police, the army, the stock markets. They control the world. We can no change society by becoming one of them. It just doesnt work&#33;


Now I understand that as Redstar once put it "the revolution is not about charity". Thats fine, however what are we doing with our resources right now? Not a thing, we aer wasting our energy when we could be using it. We can make the future better while still working in the present.

Again, Redstar was right. It isnt about charity, its about doing what we are forced to do. The ruling class are not going to sit back and let us "subvert" their system. We have to fucking smash it with a big sledge hammer.


They can arresst us for plotting against the government, they cant however arresst us for creating low income apartment complexes.

But as soon as they realize what your doing, they will create a law to stop it.


I do not wish to hurt anyone, only to help.

No one wants to hurt anyone. We are just not left with any choice. In a revolutionary situation, we will have to defend ourselves. When your little plan has developed to a point where it challanges the establishment, the establishment will try and stop it. What do you do then? Have a peaceful demonstration? They will come and beat you. When they see your movement is getting too big, they will just arrest you, exile you or even kill you. They will not go without a fight. Ultimatly, what ever road you go down, it will lead to a violent confrontation, which you will have to make a choice at. Either fight and succeed, or go home. Why dont we just cut the shit and get on with what we all know we are going to have to do anyway.


The reason I fight is not because I hate the opressor, but because I love the opressed.

They don&#39;t need you to love them. They need you to empower them.

[AC-Socialist]

LardLad,

You certainly are the man with the plan and I commend you most highly for it. Essentially I agree with you, organization and amalgamation are the keys to the struggle, and those combined with education seems both the most efficient and logical means. However I am very sceptical about the "alliance".

I am afraid of ideologies becoming so diluted under such an alliance that the policies may appear weak and ineficient. As an economics student I am all too aware of the varied opinion and ideas of different people, even those who bracket themselves under identical labels. Even with similar ideology people still have different ideas for implementing there thoughts. The left, unfortunatly, is very much victim to this. A perfect example of this being the inevitable dissolusion of the British Socialist Alliance, who&#39;s aim was to being together all socialist resistance in unity, but who fell far short of realizing this.

Essentally what I am saying is that with an alliance an agreement on policy must be made, it should be a compromise, but not a mixture where ideological strength and efficiency is sacrificed for the sake of satisfying the ideals of all the members, or "ideological purity"

[STI]

I am afraid of ideologies becoming so diluted under such an alliance that the policies may appear weak and ineficient

What I&#39;m more afraid of is a bunch of Leninists hijacking everything and leaving us with another USSR.

[STI]

*Bump*. I&#39;d like to find out what more people think about the stuff in this thread.

[Guest1]

Well, though I agree with TAT in principle, I still think the plan is workable.

It just needs some tweaking. It&#39;s not exactly a plan to take over, it is more a plan for building the working class consciousness you speak of.

That&#39;s why I think it should be more concentrated on applying our ideology in everything we do.

You should abandon the part about entering into politics, that&#39;s not necessary. What is necessary is establishing "pockets of Communism" in the Capitalist system. Establish collectivized workplaces and you have injected the system with an uncontrollable ideological virus.

You would only need to establish a few, eventually, people will begin reclaiming their unions and collectivizing their own workplaces.

This wouldn&#39;t be an attempt to lead anything, it would just be doing your part while understanding that it is all in the workers&#39; hands.

As for the collectivized groceries. You need to have much more faith in the workers if you want to establish Communism. Sure, it might not work at first, or it might nto work everywhere, but you&#39;re there to help. It is your job to speak to the workers before collectivization and provide as much help as you can. Teach them the basics of running the place, ordering products, keeping the finances, etc...

It won&#39;t take very long. Besides, if Democracy works for a country with 330 million people, why shouldn&#39;t work for 5 or 10 grocery workers?

[Lardlad95]

Are you comparing yourself to Che Guevara and Malcolm X etc.

Are they not your predacessors too? They came before you. They fought for the same struggle you are. They preceeded you in that struggle. Thus they are your predacessors.


The phraze, "it will come one day" although very vague is not a statement of idealism. Marx called it Historical Materialism. Communism is an inevitability. So regardless of whether or not you think it is "good enough" it is a historical certainty.

It is not the phrase it&#39;s self. It is the implication that goes along with the phrase. I agree that communism is innevitable, but that doesn&#39;t mean that we just sit back and watch it materialize out of thin air.


He was right. What you propose is that those people have absolutly nothing to do with freeing themselves from the fact they "are blind to their opression. Blind to the lies, to the injustices that lay before them, Fighting someone elses struggle on their "behalf" for what ever reason has not and can not lead to anything other than tyranny or revision. How is this liberation? Of course it isnt. You can not exclude the people you want to free. Working class, or oppressed action must come from the working class and oppressed. Although it may seem glamarous and oh-so rightous to lead the revolution, we are not here to indulge our egos but to do what is right. What is right is educating and organizing working class people to fight a revolution which is ultimatly theirs. Working class struggle is far more profound than whether or not you want to free people from "the misery that creeps upon them in the dark."

It&#39;s excluding people when you are trying to make sure that they aren&#39;t being cheated out oof the low wages they are being payed in regards to rent and buying food to feed their children? I&#39;m all for people being educated, but I&#39;m also for them not being forced to live in sub human conditions. Do you disagree with that? Or are you one of those sadistic communists wo wants conditions to get horrendous so people will be more open to your messege. People come first, and if I can help them now I will. I don&#39;t want to lead the revolution, I don&#39;t want to be some glorious figure. I want people to pay fair rent for humane houses instead of living in squalid filth like so many people are forced to do.

I never wanted to keep the working class out of the revolution. I just don&#39;t like seeing them living in projects and ghettos and trailerparks, because believe me it isn&#39;t a fun life.


Class consciousness , a new found confidence which will ultimatly lead to a fundamental change in society.

We don&#39;t seem to be doing a whole lot of that. atleast no in America. It may be different across the pond. But the Socialist movement isn&#39;t exactley a force to be reckond with...yet. Especially when popular culture creates a generation of poor people who are materialistic and can&#39;t afford to be.

I never said we can&#39;t use grass roots methods, but we can&#39;t rely solely on them.


We are not a laughing stock. Except for those in power who wish to undermine us. To the working class people you are wanting to exclude from their liberation actually want an alternative. They just don&#39;t believe us when we say ours can work. Our job is to convince them. That is not "slipping deeper and deeper" it is the path in the right direction. It&#39;s hard work, and it will not be easy, but it is the right direction nonetheless.

Then fucking convince them. Anything you can do to get more and more people aware of the working classes strength then do it, I support you 100 percent. But just because you do it 1 way that doens&#39;t mean it&#39;s the onl way. My entire point is that we need to utilize every available resource.

And yes we are a laughing stock, atleast on the political spectrum. The major media can take cheap shots at us because we aren&#39;t there to defend ourselves. And guess who watches the major media outlets? Working class people.


Actually, the Anti-capitalist movement and ma class action organizations do considerable amounts of work in communities and on the streets. There are movements there to refute and to return fire. They just to get bigger. These protests you are so quick to dismiss are actually massive demonstrations, carefully and professionally organized. In Genoa, the revolutionary elft from across the whole of Europe sat down together at the European Social Forum the day before the event to discuss with each other tactics etc. Where we you? These protests are actual proof that class actionists can organize on massive scales and frighten the establishment. That is their goal, and they have been phenomenally succesful.

I apologize for trivializing all the hardworking people who work to make sure these demonstrations get carried out. And I apologize for implying that these things don&#39;t get people involved. But this is what we&#39;ve always been doing. And these things attract people who are inclined to believe in socialism anyway. They don&#39;t attract the middle of the road people. They don&#39;t make the right wingers question themselves. For the most part you&#39;ve go the leftists and the liberals and so on coming to these things when we all knew they would, provided they were informed about the matter.

That isn&#39;t to say they aren&#39;t a valuable tool because demonstrations are, I&#39;d just like to see a variation in the actions we take.


I am from the UK, and when I was there last the revolutionary left was very visible. Not very big, but visible. The point is to make it grow.

In america the revolutionary left isn&#39;t very visible at all, atleast not more than a few times a year. I agree we need to make it bigger, we just disagree on how to do it.


What does this actually mean?

Most of the things we do now we&#39;ve been doing for a long long time.


We don&#39;t need or want to look legitimate, we want to be right. We are right. We should not pretend to be anything other than right, regardless of whether we look "legitimate" or not. What does "legitimate" mean anyway? All inclusive? Voter sensitive?

If people won&#39;t listen then it doesn&#39;t matter if yor right or not because they wont hear you. And by legitamite I simply meant that we need to get in touch with the common person, something I feel we&#39;ve lost.


We are radicals and we do live in their world. That&#39;s exactly why we want to change it. We just have to work to get people to see and udnerstand that what we are saying is logical and for their benifit.

But is that how they see us? The common person (speaking atleast in America) believes that freedom is good old fashioned American freedom, that communism wants to take that freedom away. To them we don&#39;t share the same values. And I don&#39;t want to generalize the common man, but years of propaganda does tend to effect people. We must find a way to make sure that the common man hears us. And they may not respond through demonstrations and the like, if they all did these massive demonstrations would be alot more massive.

Not to mention the youth is growing more and more materializtic, communism would hinder that. But instead of hearing us out, they hear "you can&#39;t own X and you can&#39;t own Y)


Can you explain this please?

Somethings we say seem to be outrageous and sound conspiracy theoryish.... Thats not to say that we are wrong. But people can be pretty skeptical. We&#39;ve got to find a way to make out claims sound legitimate. Think about it, if Bill O&#39;rielly lays down a statistic people will believe him no questions asked(unless they don&#39;t like bill) now if we do the same tthing, some will right it off as a made up statistic or an exxageration or a lie. Why? Because in some instances we&#39;ve been grouped with lunatics, a testament to how well the establishment can lie.


We do relate to working people. Surely that is the point.

I don&#39;t see it. Talking with working class people, their beliefs conflict so much with our own. What they want seems to be different from what we want.


This I agree with you on fundamentally. I have often used this same story to make this same point. Any movement must do work like this inside communities with the explicit purpose of educating. But educating by forcing capitalism and the bourgeoisie to justify itself. Which it can not? It can not justify why people dont have free health clinics, it can not justify why schools are collpasing, and while a movement is their building these schools etc, we are demonstrating a profound thing to people. They can do it on their own&#33;

I agree. One person I spoke to said something that I really liked. He asked me why I suggested using SP/CP volunteers when we could get people from the community to do it. The people from the community seems like a better idea. After all if they do it for themselves they&#39;ll realize their own potential.


We can not rely on the bourgeois media to portray us well. As the movement grows, eventually they will turn against us. We have to build our own media outlets. Papers, magazines, graffiti, posters..agitation.

Oh I agree, but I still suggest getting on the establishment&#39;s media. Sure they hate us, but any outlet where we can get a messege out or one of our comrades can appear is perfectly fine.


It is a fair enough idea. But one that communists are not very good at. It has been tried, and has failed miserable. Anarchists and Communists dont make good capitalists.

I wouldn&#39;t imagine that they would. However I never planned on running it like a capitalist would.


We can not change anything through present political, economic or academic structures. These positions are in place to propogate a specific agenda. As soon as these people amount significant power, although it would never get that far, they wiull be "dealt" with by the appropriate arm of the state. The ruling class are not going to allow people to take power from them legally. They can, "legally" find loop wholes to get rid of you.

Let them, that just adds more fuel to the fire. When they do this to you, then you become an example of why the system must change. You show the working class people that tthis system does not benefit them. You show them that no matter how hard they try to achieve something in this system, the system will only ruin them. THus they realize that they have no other choice than to rise up and take their destiny into there own hands.

Not to mention we may get lucky and get one of our own in a position of power.



What good will lawyers and business majors do to a working class struggle? The only way to create real, lasting working class liberation and a free society is by educating the working class and oppressed to take control for themselves. There is no other option. It may take decades or even centuries, but that&#39;s just tuff on us. We are not here to define the struggle, the struggle defines us. The struggle does not revolve around us, we revolve around the struggle. Do what&#39;s right, not what&#39;s easiest.


Because in my opinion to be beat the system you must know the system. Like for instance if the cappies did find some way to lock a socialist up, and we have a lawyer on hand then we will know how exactley our comrade was screwed over. Then we can show the people how corrupt the system is. Proving the system is corrupt using a person who knows the system is alot better than claiming it&#39;s corrupt. The same goes for buisness.

Also I disagree. Revolution in my opinion is the last option, if the people can organize themselves to throw the government out violently, then there is no doubt in my mind that thtey can do it peacefully.


Progression for who? For what? Not for the working class. None of these bouregois revisions, im sorry, but that&#39;s what they are, are going to lead to anything other than, a bourgeois revision.

Thats your opinion and you have a right to it. I just happen to think that all teh hardline revolutionaries are looking for the easy way out.


But we can&#39;t. They control the system you want to subvert them with. They only choice, and it isnt a nice one, is to smash the system and to create a new one. The system, state and economics of our society are intertwined around the ruling class. It is imbedded in them. We can not reform it or use it to subvert them. They are the system, they are the state, they6 are the economic system. They own our schools and our political institutions. They control the police, the army, the stock markets. They control the world. We can no change society by becoming one of them. It just doesnt work&#33;

Revolution is certainly an option. It&#39;s a last resort in my opinion, and frankly if we don&#39;t have to lose any live then thats a better option that letting people kill themselves.


But as soon as they realize what your doing, they will create a law to stop it.

And when they do I&#39;m sure teh people who were going to benefit will be very pissed off that they&#39;ll be going back to live in projects. So hey, it may speed the revolution up a bit.


No one wants to hurt anyone. We are just not left with any choice. In a revolutionary situation, we will have to defend ourselves. When your little plan has developed to a point where it challanges the establishment, the establishment will try and stop it. What do you do then? Have a peaceful demonstration? They will come and beat you. When they see your movement is getting too big, they will just arrest you, exile you or even kill you. They will not go without a fight. Ultimatly, what ever road you go down, it will lead to a violent confrontation, which you will have to make a choice at. Either fight and succeed, or go home. Why dont we just cut the shit and get on with what we all know we are going to have to do anyway.

So that means we should just get straight to the fighting? If what you say is true then you take your path and i"ll take mine and we&#39;ll both be killed in the middle.



Also let me add this. We will always disagree about the means to get o an ends. The point however is that we support the same ends. That is why comrade, I support you in what ever you do. If your aim is to help the people realize that they control their own destiny, and that they are more powerful than teh system which orpesses them, then I support you. And if somewhere down the line it turns out I was wrong I&#39;ll pick up a gun and fight along side you and my brother. I&#39;m headed towards the same destination as you, we are just taking different paths.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 05:19 AM
I agree that communism is innevitable, but that doesn&#39;t mean that we just sit back and watch it materialize out of thin air.
That wasnt what I was suggesting.


It&#39;s excluding people when you are trying to make sure that they aren&#39;t being cheated out oof the low wages they are being payed in regards to rent and buying food to feed their children?

But these people are not stupid, they are not children. The world belongs to them, it is their responsability to change it. Me and you can not change it for them, what will that achieve accept more of the same.


Or are you one of those sadistic communists wo wants conditions to get horrendous so people will be more open to your messege.

No. I believe that communism can only happen if people want it. Not if they are told to want it.


I never wanted to keep the working class out of the revolution. I just don&#39;t like seeing them living in projects and ghettos and trailerparks, because believe me it isn&#39;t a fun life.

Yes it&#39;s a horrible situation and we have to change it. But to what do you want to change it?


We don&#39;t seem to be doing a whole lot of that. atleast no in America. It may be different across the pond. But the Socialist movement isn&#39;t exactley a force to be reckond with...yet.

True, but it can grow, we just have to be dedicated to making it bigger. In the right way and for a well defined purpose. Communism.


Especially when popular culture creates a generation of poor people who are materialistic and can&#39;t afford to be.

But there are also groups of young people who are not materialistic. Who are idealistic and want change, who read books and care about things and who dont care that they cant afford things. It is thes people who are important at the moment. Worry about getting them on board and organizing and then move out.


I never said we can&#39;t use grass roots methods, but we can&#39;t rely solely on them.

No other method will achieve what we want.


just because you do it 1 way that doens&#39;t mean it&#39;s the only way. My entire point is that we need to utilize every available resource.

But we have to make sure that those resources are going to achieve what we want. Using bourgeois politics or capitalist methods of fundraising may seem logical, but will they achieve what we want. Utlimatly they wont.


They don&#39;t attract the middle of the road people. They don&#39;t make the right wingers question themselves. For the most part you&#39;ve go the leftists and the liberals and so on coming to these things when we all knew they would, provided they were informed about the matter.

Again this isnt true. The Stop the War coalition brought in a broad spectrum of people. Things such as these campaigns do make people question things, that is why they are so important.

However, the point was that you said there is nothing which challanges capitalism. That isnt true. There is. Maybe it isnt huge, but it challanges capitalism and frightens the establishment. These groups also do a lot of work in the communities and do attract people.

Working class mentality isnt easy to catch, and that is why these groups are vital in building up some kind of link between us and them.


In america the revolutionary left isn&#39;t very visible at all, atleast not more than a few times a year.

That dosnt mean you should start using bourgeois methods, it means you should work harder.


I agree we need to make it bigger, we just disagree on how to do it.

But your methods are antithetical to working class struggle. You can not use bourgeois politics to achieve communism. It isnt possible. No matter how much you believe it is.


Most of the things we do now we&#39;ve been doing for a long long time.

Going into the community and setting up community projects which challange the system are a good way of building support. In many communities things dont work because the system dosnt work. If you go into those communities and make those things work independently of the system then you are proving something to people and challanging the system. It is an effective method. Again, it requires hard work and patience. Things which I fear many people on here do not have.


If people won&#39;t listen then it doesn&#39;t matter if yor right or not because they wont hear you.

People are not happy. No matter how much stuff the have. Speak to any worker about his job and his life seriously and he will not tell you he enjoys working in a factory or being a post man. he will tell you "what else could I do." Our job is to put that into perspective.


And by legitamite I simply meant that we need to get in touch with the common person, something I feel we&#39;ve lost.

No. I just think you dont belong to a group which is actually doing things. Where in the US are you from?


But is that how they see us? The common person (speaking atleast in America) believes that freedom is good old fashioned American freedom, that communism wants to take that freedom away.

But these are abstract arguments, better saved for drunken nights in a bar or at a dinner party. What is important is to show them that capitalism dosnt work. Go into communities, not armed with some ideological rhetoric, but solutions to problems. The rest will come naturally.


To them we don&#39;t share the same values.

Then show them they are wrong.


And I don&#39;t want to generalize the common man, but years of propaganda does tend to effect people.

But those effects are only superficial. They can change.


We must find a way to make sure that the common man hears us. And they may not respond through demonstrations and the like, if they all did these massive demonstrations would be alot more massive.

Two million people marched the streets of London against the war....TWO MILLION&#33;&#33;&#33;

There are ways and there are methods, you just have to pick the right ones&#33;


Not to mention the youth is growing more and more materializtic, communism would hinder that. But instead of hearing us out, they hear "you can&#39;t own X and you can&#39;t own Y)

You belong to the wrong scene. There are many young people, thousands, tens of thousands, who do not think and act like this. Go to any rock club or festival. Go to any park in the summer and you will see, somewhere, hiding in the back, young people getting stoned and discussing politics. There are many young people who care.


Because in some instances we&#39;ve been grouped with lunatics, a testament to how well the establishment can lie.

Get face to face with a worker and speak to him human to human without prentions or a sense of superiority and 9 times out of 10 they will listen to you. They may ot always agree, but they will listen. People are not as stupid as you are making them out to be. I am sure they have preconceptions, but if you prove yourself to people they will think differently.


I don&#39;t see it. Talking with working class people, their beliefs conflict so much with our own. What they want seems to be different from what we want.

Working and oppressed people do not want anything other than being secure and safe. Maybe they want to have a nice car and a holiday, but they just want to not starve or be homeless. They have no wants for some ideologically opposed society, they just want to be happy. Just like me and just like you.

If you sit down and start talking about abstract theory, then they will most probably disagree with you, and most probably you&#39;ll walk away from it feeling dejected and disillusioned, most probably not because they think your idea is bad, but because they dont think what you want is achievable.

When explained to face to face what communism is, most will say "its a great idea, but itll never work." Fine. Then show them it does. Dont talk about abstract theory, just go into the community and organize things. Organize community centres, find out what will make their communities better and do it&#33;


I wouldn&#39;t imagine that they would. However I never planned on running it like a capitalist would.

We live in a capitalist world. You will still need to employ people, you will still have to have productivity to make money, you may need to fire people, be strict with people. You have to make a profit...the very thing you want to destroy. Communists and anarchists do not make good capitalists.


Revolution in my opinion is the last option,

That&#39;s the point. It isnt an option. Its a fact. Pure and simple&#33;


I just happen to think that all teh hardline revolutionaries are looking for the easy way out.

Hardline revolutionaries? It isnt a question of being easy, its just a different perspective. I understand the nature of the ruling class, you dont. Violence is going to happen when we want fundamental change. It is a shit thing, but then the ruling class are pretty shit.


So that means we should just get straight to the fighting? If what you say is true then you take your path and i"ll take mine and we&#39;ll both be killed in the middle.

Get out of this mind block that I am some kind of blood thirsty revolutionary who wants to build the barricades and throw molotov cocktails at everyone. I am not&#33; I simply recognize the nature of the ruling class and the state. I understand that not matter how peaceful we are going to be the ruling class will use force at some point to stop us. It&#39;s simply a fact. It is not me who wants, it is the ruling class who will just do it&#33;

[Lardlad95]

But these people are not stupid, they are not children. The world belongs to them, it is their responsability to change it. Me and you can not change it for them, what will that achieve accept more of the same.

I"m part of the working class, therefore it&#39;s my responsibility also. Looking back on this post I noticed that we&#39;ve both spoken of the working class as if they are a seperate entitiy unto themselves. I can&#39;t speak on your history, but I&#39;m from a working class background, so I&#39;m not sure why I spoke of them seperately.


No. I believe that communism can only happen if people want it. Not if they are told to want it.

I can agree with this.


Yes it&#39;s a horrible situation and we have to change it. But to what do you want to change it?

A situation where the working class is self sufficient and housing companies don&#39;t exploit them.


True, but it can grow, we just have to be dedicated to making it bigger. In the right way and for a well defined purpose. Communism.

I agree, but we disagree on the "right" way.


But there are also groups of young people who are not materialistic. Who are idealistic and want change, who read books and care about things and who dont care that they cant afford things. It is thes people who are important at the moment. Worry about getting them on board and organizing and then move out.

From observation, not professing any scientific polls, these people seem to be a minority. The minority is important, but we need the majority too.


No other method will achieve what we want.

How can you say this when we&#39;ve never tried anything else?



But we have to make sure that those resources are going to achieve what we want. Using bourgeois politics or capitalist methods of fundraising may seem logical, but will they achieve what we want. Utlimatly they wont.

Nice spin.



Again this isnt true. The Stop the War coalition brought in a broad spectrum of people. Things such as these campaigns do make people question things, that is why they are so important.

However, the point was that you said there is nothing which challanges capitalism. That isnt true. There is. Maybe it isnt huge, but it challanges capitalism and frightens the establishment. These groups also do a lot of work in the communities and do attract people.

Working class mentality isnt easy to catch, and that is why these groups are vital in building up some kind of link between us and them.

Perhaps you are a bit more optomistic than I am. You are right that there are things that chellenge capitalism, but frightens the establishment? Care to elaborate on how scared they are, or how they are scared.

You are right, Groups like the ones you mentioned do make a difference. I suppose I just see the glass as half empty at the moment.


That dosnt mean you should start using bourgeois methods, it means you should work harder.

That also doesn&#39;t mean you do the exact same shit we&#39;ve been doing since Debs ran. IT&#39;s time for some revamping. Maybe my answers aren&#39;t the best out there, but atleast I&#39;m trying to get people to think about maybe finding fresh ideas.


But your methods are antithetical to working class struggle. You can not use bourgeois politics to achieve communism. It isnt possible. No matter how much you believe it is.

If I honestly thought these methods were bourgeois do you think I&#39;d suggest them?
Simply because you think these things are bourgeois that doesn&#39;t mean they are. You have a right to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree.


Going into the community and setting up community projects which challange the system are a good way of building support. In many communities things dont work because the system dosnt work. If you go into those communities and make those things work independently of the system then you are proving something to people and challanging the system. It is an effective method. Again, it requires hard work and patience. Things which I fear many people on here do not have.

That depends on what you mean by effective. How would you compare the movement now with the early 1900s or the 60s and 70s? How would you gauge the strength of our organizations? Both in relation to the past and in relation to other types of parties and organizations.


People are not happy. No matter how much stuff the have. Speak to any worker about his job and his life seriously and he will not tell you he enjoys working in a factory or being a post man. he will tell you "what else could I do." Our job is to put that into perspective.

That is our job, the problem is alot of people don&#39;t see their lives as they truly are. Then again this part of the discussion may be due to a culture gap. American culture is very very materialistic.



No. I just think you dont belong to a group which is actually doing things. Where in the US are you from?

I"m not from anywhere, I travel alot. I do however belong to the SP which does a hell of a lot of organizing, demonstrations, going to communities, talking with workers and students and so on and so forth. However I think that when people go to these demonstrations they tend to get an inflated ego. If I see alot of people at my demonstration or some people actively listen to what I have to say I&#39;m going to get a distorted sense of reality instead of putting things into perspective.


But these are abstract arguments, better saved for drunken nights in a bar or at a dinner party. What is important is to show them that capitalism dosnt work. Go into communities, not armed with some ideological rhetoric, but solutions to problems. The rest will come naturally.

No first I have to convince them that the problems actualley do exist. Then I can offer solutions. Alot of the people I talk to simply don&#39;t see the problems that exist. I&#39;m willing to do both of these things of course. I"m just saying that to some the problems that do exist aren&#39;t even in their radar.


Two million people marched the streets of London against the war....TWO MILLION&#33;&#33;&#33;

Proof that people can be organized, I never said they couldnt. But there were cappies that were against the war. Unless this march was entirely done by marxists and the like, in which case I&#39;m very impressed.



You belong to the wrong scene. There are many young people, thousands, tens of thousands, who do not think and act like this. Go to any rock club or festival. Go to any park in the summer and you will see, somewhere, hiding in the back, young people getting stoned and discussing politics. There are many young people who care.

What good do I do by talking with the ones who are already into socialism or the left in general? The materialistic ones are part of the working class too, they need to see the potential of the working class just as much as anyone else.

Besides I&#39;m not really into rock, atleast not new rock.


Get face to face with a worker and speak to him human to human without prentions or a sense of superiority and 9 times out of 10 they will listen to you. They may ot always agree, but they will listen. People are not as stupid as you are making them out to be. I am sure they have preconceptions, but if you prove yourself to people they will think differently.

I never thought people are stupid, I just realize that the cappies have done a good job of convincing people that we are fanatical freedom haters. I never said people wont listen, I just said that we have a huge hurdle to over come in this aspect.


When explained to face to face what communism is, most will say "its a great idea, but itll never work." Fine. Then show them it does. Dont talk about abstract theory, just go into the community and organize things. Organize community centres, find out what will make their communities better and do it&#33;

I usually don&#39;t talk about theory with people, other than people on che-lives. Of course I&#39;m currently in Tennessee so it probably would have been hard anyway. I explain all the time what communism really is, what socialism really is. Very rarely will I go into theory and only if the person seems to be a person who&#39;d be interested in theory. I think the trouble comes from proving that it works.


We live in a capitalist world. You will still need to employ people, you will still have to have productivity to make money, you may need to fire people, be strict with people. You have to make a profit...the very thing you want to destroy. Communists and anarchists do not make good capitalists.

Who said anything about making a profit? How do non profit organizations stay afloat? In there lies the answer.




Hardline revolutionaries? It isnt a question of being easy, its just a different perspective. I understand the nature of the ruling class, you dont. Violence is going to happen when we want fundamental change. It is a shit thing, but then the ruling class are pretty shit.

Oh I don&#39;t? Why because I don&#39;t agree that I need to shoot someone to be sucessful? IF the working class wants fundamental change they&#39;ll vote for and create it peacefully. If the cappies stop this then they&#39;ve violated their very own system in which case revolution would be warranted.


Get out of this mind block that I am some kind of blood thirsty revolutionary who wants to build the barricades and throw molotov cocktails at everyone. I am not&#33; I simply recognize the nature of the ruling class and the state. I understand that not matter how peaceful we are going to be the ruling class will use force at some point to stop us. It&#39;s simply a fact. It is not me who wants, it is the ruling class who will just do it&#33;

If thats how it&#39;s going to be then so be it. Like I said I never ruled out revolution, I simply think we should try all of our options before we get to fighting.

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 5 2004, 08:54 PM
Well, though I agree with TAT in principle, I still think the plan is workable.

It just needs some tweaking. It&#39;s not exactly a plan to take over, it is more a plan for building the working class consciousness you speak of.

That&#39;s why I think it should be more concentrated on applying our ideology in everything we do.

You should abandon the part about entering into politics, that&#39;s not necessary. What is necessary is establishing "pockets of Communism" in the Capitalist system. Establish collectivized workplaces and you have injected the system with an uncontrollable ideological virus.

You would only need to establish a few, eventually, people will begin reclaiming their unions and collectivizing their own workplaces.

This wouldn&#39;t be an attempt to lead anything, it would just be doing your part while understanding that it is all in the workers&#39; hands.

As for the collectivized groceries. You need to have much more faith in the workers if you want to establish Communism. Sure, it might not work at first, or it might nto work everywhere, but you&#39;re there to help. It is your job to speak to the workers before collectivization and provide as much help as you can. Teach them the basics of running the place, ordering products, keeping the finances, etc...

It won&#39;t take very long. Besides, if Democracy works for a country with 330 million people, why shouldn&#39;t work for 5 or 10 grocery workers?
Well put. THe point isn&#39;t so much a plan for take over as it is a plan to uplift communities.

I&#39;m still for peaceful means for taking over, but this plan isn&#39;t really a take over plan.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 03:52 AM
I agree, but we disagree on the "right" way.
But there is only one right way. Regardless of opinion. That way is to build a mass movement which is prepared to challange capitalism and defend itself, using violence if necessary to remove the ruling class from power and create a communist society.


From observation, not professing any scientific polls, these people seem to be a minority. The minority is important, but we need the majority too.

These people are key to building a movement. They may not be a majority, but they are a group of people already at a lçevel of consciousness you desire. You should find these people, organize them and then use them to branch out.

Your logic makes no sense. So they are conscious to some degree therefore they should be ignored? They need to be organized to join you in building.


How can you say this when we&#39;ve never tried anything else?

Using bourgeois democracy, having academics and business&#39; has never worked. Why is your plan any different?


Nice spin.

I don&#39;t understand?


Perhaps you are a bit more optomistic than I am.

You are no good to the movement if you are not optimistic.


frightens the establishment? Care to elaborate on how scared they are, or how they are scared.

Look at the reactions to the anti-capitalist demonstrations in Genoa and in Seattle and Prague. In Genoa the police shot dead a demonstrating anarchist. They put 2 mile parametre fences with missile silos and armed soldiers around the G8 meeting place. These are not the actions of an establishment who are comfortable with their power. They are the actions of a terrified ruling class who will use any force necessary to remain in power.


That also doesn&#39;t mean you do the exact same shit we&#39;ve been doing since Debs ran.

But it works albeit slowly, but it does work. You just have to build build build. Not sit and mope about how things are not working.


IT&#39;s time for some revamping. Maybe my answers aren&#39;t the best out there, but atleast I&#39;m trying to get people to think about maybe finding fresh ideas.

There are groups and organizations out there with new ideas. You are not the only person in the world who wants to make the fight effective.


If I honestly thought these methods were bourgeois do you think I&#39;d suggest them?

Running in bourgeois elections to gain bourgeois power is a bourgeois method. Fact&#33;


Simply because you think these things are bourgeois that doesn&#39;t mean they are. You have a right to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree.

It isnt a question of opinion it is a quesiton of fact. Disagree all you like, it isnt going to change the fact.


That is our job, the problem is alot of people don&#39;t see their lives as they truly are.

Define "truly." People know that their lives are shit. You change that by showing them what it is that is making their lives shit.


No first I have to convince them that the problems actualley do exist.

They know there are problems. They know that their lives are not good. They know this. My mother knows it, the worker in the factory knows it, the unemployed person in the unemployment line knows it. They know it all to well. They just dont know why it is or if they can change it.


What good do I do by talking with the ones who are already into socialism or the left in general?

Because you can organize them into action. The fight is easiest with them and at the end of it you have built the movement and got more people to do the hard work. Logical.


The materialistic ones are part of the working class too, they need to see the potential of the working class just as much as anyone else.

Right.......?


Who said anything about making a profit? How do non profit organizations stay afloat? In there lies the answer.

You said that we should set up business to make money.


Oh I don&#39;t? Why because I don&#39;t agree that I need to shoot someone to be sucessful?

In short, yes.


IF the working class wants fundamental change they&#39;ll vote for and create it peacefully. If the cappies stop this then they&#39;ve violated their very own system in which case revolution would be warranted.

And you don&#39;t think that a revolution is warrented right now. Look out of your window. The ruling class are fucking us over. We can not entertain bourgeois politics. We can not attain any significant power through getting elected into parliment. It&#39;s a pipe dream, it&#39;s idealism. It has never and will never work. Ever ever ever&#33;&#33;&#33;

[Lardlad95]

But there is only one right way. Regardless of opinion. That way is to build a mass movement which is prepared to challange capitalism and defend itself, using violence if necessary to remove the ruling class from power and create a communist society.

Thats exactly what I"m saying "IF NECASSARY" if it&#39;s necassary then I have no problem with revolution


These people are key to building a movement. They may not be a majority, but they are a group of people already at a lçevel of consciousness you desire. You should find these people, organize them and then use them to branch out.

Your logic makes no sense. So they are conscious to some degree therefore they should be ignored? They need to be organized to join you in building.

I realized when I was typing that statement how youd reply. I never meant they should be ignored, I&#39;m just concerned with those who aren&#39;t "concious" as well.


Using bourgeois democracy, having academics and business&#39; has never worked. Why is your plan any different?

THere is a difference between getting a single legislator elected, and an entire population that is voting for substantial change in every walk of life. Entire nations that want change that are willing to vote out the old system.

ALso how may I ask is your revolution any different than the Russian or Chinese revolutions?



You are no good to the movement if you are not optimistic.

I&#39;m not un-optomistic, I&#39;m just less optomistic than you, for the time being


Look at the reactions to the anti-capitalist demonstrations in Genoa and in Seattle and Prague. In Genoa the police shot dead a demonstrating anarchist. They put 2 mile parametre fences with missile silos and armed soldiers around the G8 meeting place. These are not the actions of an establishment who are comfortable with their power. They are the actions of a terrified ruling class who will use any force necessary to remain in power.

It seems to me that a scared government wouldn&#39;t do more to anger the militants. A scared government tries to subvert the movement, to make it look bad, to steal it&#39;s ideas. Much like the German government did int eh late 1800&#39;s and the American government did in the early 1900&#39;s.

A scared government doesn&#39;t try to piss off the people, because the people make a movement stronger.


But it works albeit slowly, but it does work. You just have to build build build. Not sit and mope about how things are not working.

I&#39;m not moping, I&#39;m thinking outside the box


There are groups and organizations out there with new ideas. You are not the only person in the world who wants to make the fight effective.

Never said I was. Like I said, my answers may not be the best. But the point is we need to come up with ideas, and people do and I applaud them for doing so.




Running in bourgeois elections to gain bourgeois power is a bourgeois method. Fact&#33;

So if it were a Communist election and a Capitalist ran would he be using a Communist method to gain communist power?


Define "truly." People know that their lives are shit. You change that by showing them what it is that is making their lives shit.

Depends on why they think their lives are shit. If they think it&#39;s because they didn&#39;t get the spinners on their car then I don&#39;t think they are really focused on actual hinderances in their lives. now if they are complaining about shitty health care and low wages then yeah I can show them why their lives are shit


They know there are problems. They know that their lives are not good. They know this. My mother knows it, the worker in the factory knows it, the unemployed person in the unemployment line knows it. They know it all to well. They just dont know why it is or if they can change it.

YEs all those people do, but some people&#39;s "shit" is trivial. Alot of people&#39;s "shit" isn&#39;t trivial, I&#39;m just saying that everyone is on the same page when it comes to what is and what isn&#39;t a bad life.


Because you can organize them into action. The fight is easiest with them and at the end of it you have built the movement and got more people to do the hard work. Logical.


Sorry I misread what your wrote, I thought you were speaking about people who were already part of the movement.


You said that we should set up business to make money.


What I"m more concerned with is building resources, resources aren&#39;t necassarily money. Money is a resource, but so is a place to hold demonstrations, or access to an office, etc.


And you don&#39;t think that a revolution is warrented right now. Look out of your window. The ruling class are fucking us over. We can not entertain bourgeois politics. We can not attain any significant power through getting elected into parliment. It&#39;s a pipe dream, it&#39;s idealism. It has never and will never work. Ever ever ever&#33;&#33;&#33;

Emitt the fourth and fifth sentences and the rest of paragraph sounds like what a cappie says about communism.

[OverthrowtheGovt16]

I think a lot of us should join the Communist Party of the United States of America (http://www.cpusa.org).

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 12:09 AM
Thats exactly what I"m saying "IF NECASSARY" if it&#39;s necassary then I have no problem with revolution
Which it will be is my point.


THere is a difference between getting a single legislator elected, and an entire population that is voting for substantial change in every walk of life.

You will never get an entire population to vote for a government. Who controls the electoral system? Who controls the life you are trying to change? And you are trying to change them with the false concepts of democracy they have created and control.


Entire nations that want change that are willing to vote out the old system.

Why do you think that the ruling class, the powerful, the rich, the George Bush&#39;s of the world are going to stand by and allow you to "vote them out"?


ALso how may I ask is your revolution any different than the Russian or Chinese revolutions?

The Russian and Chinese revolutions were fought in feudel societies where the majority of normal people couldn&#39;t read or write. In Russia, the working class numbered three million if that. A communist revolution has to come through the inevitablity of historical development. Which has thus far ben in stages. Communism is about liebrating the working class as the last oppressed class in human history. It can not be led by "intellectuals" over peasents and illiterate people. It dosn&#39;t work.


It seems to me that a scared government wouldn&#39;t do more to anger the militants. A scared government tries to subvert the movement, to make it look bad, to steal it&#39;s ideas. Much like the German government did int eh late 1800&#39;s and the American government did in the early 1900&#39;s.

They did do this.


So if it were a Communist election and a Capitalist ran would he be using a Communist method to gain communist power?

This is piss poor logic. A communist election would be in a communist society and capitalists wouldn&#39;t be allowed to gain positions of power. Nobody would want them too. Having just fought and changed society and taken it away from these people, why would we give it back. And a communist election would not be about power, but about administration.


What I"m more concerned with is building resources, resources aren&#39;t necassarily money. Money is a resource, but so is a place to hold demonstrations, or access to an office, etc.

I&#39;m sorry but I don&#39;t think these things are very important.


Emitt the fourth and fifth sentences and the rest of paragraph sounds like what a cappie says about communism.

Interesting?

[Lardlad95]

Which it will be is my point.

Then why the fuck are you telling me my ideas are ludicrous? If anything it will push the revolution forward and justify it even more. Why? Because if this is what the society wants and they don&#39;t let them do what they want then revolution is warranted.


You will never get an entire population to vote for a government. Who controls the electoral system? Who controls the life you are trying to change? And you are trying to change them with the false concepts of democracy they have created and control.

Getting the population to vote is different from the cappies twistingt he system to suite themselves. Also if these people aren&#39;t willing to fill out a ballot for it what makes you think they&#39;ll be willing to get shot for it?


Why do you think that the ruling class, the powerful, the rich, the George Bush&#39;s of the world are going to stand by and allow you to "vote them out"?

Either they&#39;ll step down or be exposed as the hypocrites they are and subsequently be shot


The Russian and Chinese revolutions were fought in feudel societies where the majority of normal people couldn&#39;t read or write. In Russia, the working class numbered three million if that. A communist revolution has to come through the inevitablity of historical development. Which has thus far ben in stages. Communism is about liebrating the working class as the last oppressed class in human history. It can not be led by "intellectuals" over peasents and illiterate people. It dosn&#39;t work

THe people liberating themselves of course. But I ask you this, will there be no leader of the revolution? Regardless of if the leader is an "intellectual" or not there will innevitably be a leader(s). Unless you were planning on every individual fighting as an individual.


They did do this.


I never said they didn&#39;t do those things, I said they weren&#39;t scared. And those actions don&#39;t appear to be the actions of a scared government. THose are the actions of a secure government.




This is piss poor logic. A communist election would be in a communist society and capitalists wouldn&#39;t be allowed to gain positions of power. Nobody would want them too. Having just fought and changed society and taken it away from these people, why would we give it back. And a communist election would not be about power, but about administration.

And that was a piss poor question dodge. I asked you a hypothetical. Regardless of how you&#39;d establish the society, answer the hypothetical.

THe question has to do with motive. A communist trying to get elected in a capitalist society is not trying to gain capitalist power, they aren&#39;t trying to be bourgeoise, they are trying to get elected so they can change things. Was Norman Thomas trying to be a capitalist?

Not to mention I find communist discrimination incredibly stupid. Banning someone from elections is like saying your scared that people would actualley elect them. If people didn&#39;t want capitalists in power it would dissappear naturally it wouldn&#39;t need your help.


I&#39;m sorry but I don&#39;t think these things are very important.

Having the resources to get your messeges out, to organize, to hold demonstrations isn&#39;t important?

[pandora]

The deepest action I have found that has worked with myself and others is re-affirming people&#39;s self-esteem by recognizing their experiences as being valued.

It seems one of Capitalism&#39;s greatest tricks is to disengage the masses from what they are experiencing as being real. Making people believe there lives are not history and therefore meaningless, causing them to not be able to believe they can create change in there lives.

This is the deepest misconception to be overcome.
This is what keeps people from community action, nihilism

If people feel there actions have affect they are more apt to act.
By speaking to people about their experiences or having them write them down and read them you can help people set goals, move forward,
or most importantly REWARD WHAT THEY HAVE ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED,
cheers

[Rasta Sapian]

I still think that we should totally re-market communism/socialism into a new package for the masses, words are the misconceptions of reality&#33;

All we are saying is give universalism a chance :o

people worldwide are ready for change, workers would unite for global unions and the ability to work toward Utopia&#33;

This neuveau uprising of ideas will be carried through both grassroots and politically organized ininciatives.

Our stuggle for the classlessness future and reorganization of nation states is just over the horizon, and yes, some force will be required where opposition stands&#33;
and yes democracy and literacy can be re-written for our benifit, with this the proletariot will awaken to a one world global villiage&#33; Power to the people, alllllllllllllllllllllll the people, equal in class and human rights. :o

peace yall

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 01:54 AM
Then why the fuck are you telling me my ideas are ludicrous?
You said if necessary, I say it will be necessary. But I think we both understand each others positions now.


Getting the population to vote is different from the cappies twistingt he system to suite themselves.

The system is already twisted to suit them. It exists to serve their interests.


Either they&#39;ll step down or be exposed as the hypocrites they are and subsequently be shot

Or they&#39;ll use the system they control to fight you.


But I ask you this, will there be no leader of the revolution? Regardless of if the leader is an "intellectual" or not there will innevitably be a leader(s).

I don&#39;t see any reason to assume it is inevitable. Leadership is a form or organisation which allows individuals to take positions of power and control. This is not desirable for a working class revolution. It is not about individuals taking power and control, it is about the mass of workers liberating themselves.


Unless you were planning on every individual fighting as an individual.

Working in co-operation with each other. Mutual aid, solidarity and equality.


THose are the actions of a secure government.

Secure governments don&#39;t protect themselves with missiles, 20,000 armed soldiers and police and 2 mile perimters with 50ft fences around them.

They do not condone the shooting of protestors, and they do not vilify a cause for their own purpose.


THe question has to do with motive. A communist trying to get elected in a capitalist society is not trying to gain capitalist power, they aren&#39;t trying to be bourgeoise, they are trying to get elected so they can change things. Was Norman Thomas trying to be a capitalist?

It is irrelevant whether they want it, they will get it nonetheless. Once they have it, they will realise that it is impossible to change anything for the better. I am talking about an end to exploitation, wage slavery, persecution and oppression. Not reforms, not tweeks of the system. I compeltely new world, without capitalism and without the state.

[Lardlad95]

You said if necessary, I say it will be necessary. But I think we both understand each others positions now.

OK everything is crystal clear


The system is already twisted to suit them. It exists to serve their interests.

No it&#39;s twisted to either keep the people having a defeatist attitude, or it keeps them from recognizing their potential. If the people become concious of thier power nothing is impossible for them to do, whether it be peaceful or violent. And like I said if the cappies prevent the democratic change then they&#39;ve screwed themselves. Because now they&#39;ll be shot.




Or they&#39;ll use the system they control to fight you.

They would have done that in either of our scenarios...


I don&#39;t see any reason to assume it is inevitable. Leadership is a form or organisation which allows individuals to take positions of power and control. This is not desirable for a working class revolution. It is not about individuals taking power and control, it is about the mass of workers liberating themselves.

So then how do they fight as an organized unit? How do they make sure that the revolution runs efficiently?


Working in co-operation with each other. Mutual aid, solidarity and equality.

PLease tell me how you organize massive amounts of people with no one at all organizing.


Secure governments don&#39;t protect themselves with missiles, 20,000 armed soldiers and police and 2 mile perimters with 50ft fences around them.

This is what smart governments do. This has nothing to do with being secure. IF you are a government it doesn&#39;t matter how secure you are if you can&#39;t defend yourself.


It is irrelevant whether they want it, they will get it nonetheless. Once they have it, they will realise that it is impossible to change anything for the better. I am talking about an end to exploitation, wage slavery, persecution and oppression. Not reforms, not tweeks of the system. I compeltely new world, without capitalism and without the state.


WHo said anything about tweeks. You are assuming that I was speaking about someone voting for universal health care or a higher minimum wage. No those are the tip of the iceburg, we are for sweeping change. Substantial change, only witht he ballot not the bullet.

[Guest1]

Ballot box revolution is not going to happen, there is not enough support to do that. Even if the majority of workers agree, the majority of politicians will not.

Even then, you would need a very high percentage to do anything like you speak of, constitutional changes and things like that that will be held up at every step of the way.

No, we will need to step around the system.

What makes your idea good is that it helps even if we don&#39;t want elections.

It could be a peaceful revolutiona t first nonetheless. Just creating the necessary conditions for revolution by setting up pockets of Communism in a sea of Capitalism. This will be reflected in the polls a bit, but the polls will never take us where we need to go.

We will only get there when the government inevitably starts to crack down, and the worker&#39;s, without leadership and of their own accord, fight back.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 01:39 AM
No it&#39;s twisted to either keep the people having a defeatist attitude, or it keeps them from recognizing their potential. If the people become concious of thier power nothing is impossible for them to do, whether it be peaceful or violent.


WHo said anything about tweeks. You are assuming that I was speaking about someone voting for universal health care or a higher minimum wage. No those are the tip of the iceburg, we are for sweeping change. Substantial change, only witht he ballot not the bullet.
So you&#39;re telling me the system isn&#39;t designed to serve the ruling class&#39; interests?


So then how do they fight as an organized unit? How do they make sure that the revolution runs efficiently?

Through organisation and co-ordination.


PLease tell me how you organize massive amounts of people with no one at all organizing.

Human consciousness is such a fascinating thing. Remove the word leader and you people remove the word organisation and replace it with chaos. Why? Leaders are one way of organising, but the most dangerous for the kind of change we want. Having no leaders does not negate organisation, and the anti-capitalist movement have organised thousands of people, co-ordinated them, without leaders.

Organisation comes from us, as individuals, working in co-operation, democratically.


Substantial change, only with the ballot not the bullet.

So you keep saying...

[redstar2000]

In my opinion, the central flaw in Lardlad95&#39;s perspective is that it doesn&#39;t take seriously the prospects for proletarian revolution.

It regards revolution as a "final option" to be invoked only when "all else fails".

The flaw is not one of "unorthodoxy" in the abstract; it is one of practical significance.

LL95&#39;s program was implemented in practice by German Social Democracy in the decades prior to World War I. They did have all the things that LL95 recommends -- community services (islands of socialism), members of parliament, their own mass media and considerable (if negative) attention in the bourgeois media, even a panoply of Herr Professors and economic "experts".

They even talked vaguely of revolution as a "final option"...but everyone (except for a few ultra-leftists) understood this to be a verbal formality. In fact, they fully expected to continue to succeed as they had done in the past...until they won a decisive majority in the Reichstag and began the transition to socialism.

But for all their efforts to "educate the working class" (and they were considerable), the real consequences of their perspective quite literally blew up in their faces at the beginning of World War I.

When faced with the prospect of imperialist war, both German workers (most of them) and German Social Democracy (most of them) immediately leaped into an orgy of patriotic bestiality.

Somehow (?), German Social Democracy not only failed to educate the German working class about the real nature of modern capitalism...but they even forgot the lessons themselves&#33;

The perspective that LL95 has "re-invented" was so "seductive" in its "successes" that when the real crunch arrived...it dissolved like mist on a summer&#39;s morn.

I can see no reason why that would not happen again.

The alternative perspective (what I think of as the communist perspective) is not to "preach revolution" in the way that the Salvation Army preaches "repentance".

Instead, at this time, I think our message to the working class should be one of resistance or as the anarchists say direct action.

I think our tone should be strongly negative...ruthless and relentless attacks on all aspects of capitalist society...and all illusions about how it "could" be "improved".

Even in those situations where our class actually takes direct action and actually wins a real improvement, we should congratulate the class on its victory and then point out what will happen next...the ruling class will take it back&#33; (We should never say anything positive about the capitalist system.)

But what of our positive vision of communism? I think that should be introduced gradually...as the working class resistance to capitalism becomes more wide-spread and genuinely bitter.

As the present grows grimmer, the future can be plausibly shown to be brighter...provided our class is willing to meet the challenge of revolution.

Most people do regard revolution, with good reason, as "the last resort"...they don&#39;t need us to tell them that.

What they need us for (if anything) is to remind them that revolution is the only option. When things get "hot", that won&#39;t sound anywheres near as wacko as it does now.

If things are going well, it will sound like plain common sense.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 19 2004, 12:03 AM
Ballot box revolution is not going to happen, there is not enough support to do that. Even if the majority of workers agree, the majority of politicians will not.

Even then, you would need a very high percentage to do anything like you speak of, constitutional changes and things like that that will be held up at every step of the way.

No, we will need to step around the system.

What makes your idea good is that it helps even if we don&#39;t want elections.

It could be a peaceful revolutiona t first nonetheless. Just creating the necessary conditions for revolution by setting up pockets of Communism in a sea of Capitalism. This will be reflected in the polls a bit, but the polls will never take us where we need to go.

We will only get there when the government inevitably starts to crack down, and the worker&#39;s, without leadership and of their own accord, fight back.
THe politicians wont agree... So are you telling me that if you were to be elected to an office you wouldn&#39;t carry out the will of the people? THere is a substantial difference between a marxist politician and a capitalist one.

Also I see the "ballot box revolution" as you put it as a stepping stone in the right direction to establishing a socialist society. I don&#39;t see it as the ends only as a means.

That isn&#39;t to say of course that outisde means shouldn&#39;t be utilized. Stepping around the government needs to be done also.

[Lardlad95]

So you&#39;re telling me the system isn&#39;t designed to serve the ruling class&#39; interests?

It is, but the way that it is designed isn&#39;t in such a blatant way. They designed it to serve their interests but not in a way where they are maintaining control through their own actions. It&#39;s designed to manipulate the people, it&#39;s designed in a more clever way.

THe thing is though that the people can become aware of their power. IF the people aren&#39;t manipulated then the cappies don&#39;t maintain power.


Human consciousness is such a fascinating thing. Remove the word leader and you people remove the word organisation and replace it with chaos. Why? Leaders are one way of organising, but the most dangerous for the kind of change we want. Having no leaders does not negate organisation, and the anti-capitalist movement have organised thousands of people, co-ordinated them, without leaders.

Organisation comes from us, as individuals, working in co-operation, democratically.

I&#39;d really like for you to elaborate on this. Though I&#39;m sure it would be easier to do so with an example.

Ok, there is a military strong hold in south carolina in the city of beaufort. This town contains four military bases. 1. Air Force Base, 2. Paris Island (the second largest training grounds for the US marines), 3. A Military Residence Base, 4. A Naval Hospital Base.

Now, please explain to me how the revolutionaries would take this town and it&#39;s four bases (that are filled to the brim with Marines and Naval/Air Force Personel) without having someone tell someone else what to do.

IF you need any more information on the bases I can give them to you as I used to live there,.

[DaCuBaN]

IF the people aren&#39;t manipulated then the cappies don&#39;t maintain power.


Spot on&#33; Well.. I think so anyway ;)

Personally I think the current system can work, but only once we outlaw all political organisations, and only allow individuals to run for parliament. Even then, you&#39;d need some kind of &#39;watchdog&#39; to make sure that informal alliances aren&#39;t cropping up.

I reckon it&#39;d work anyway :D :P

[Lardlad95]

The perspective that LL95 has "re-invented" was so "seductive" in its "successes" that when the real crunch arrived...it dissolved like mist on a summer&#39;s morn.

I can see no reason why that would not happen again

1. There have been countless times in history where people have had similar ideas, only to have the implementation done differenetly. There have been countless experiments in communism, none of them turned out the same.

2. The main problems that the Germans faced was 1) not truly "educating" the people, 2) Nationalism, and 3) WWI

I&#39;m wondering though, did the Germans tell the people that capitalism was wrong, or did they serve as a guide while the people came to that conclusion themselves? Because if it&#39;s the former than I can see why they failed.

As far as nationalism and war goes, Unless WWIII pops up i&#39;m not sure that it will be an issue. Of course there is still nationalist sentiment in America due to Bush&#39;s war on terror. But look at America 3 years after 9/11....the country is more split than it&#39;s been since the civil war. Patriotism is reserved for Republicans with starspangled bumper stickes and international sporting events.


The alternative perspective (what I think of as the communist perspective) is not to "preach revolution" in the way that the Salvation Army preaches "repentance".

Instead, at this time, I think our message to the working class should be one of resistance or as the anarchists say direct action.

I think our tone should be strongly negative...ruthless and relentless attacks on all aspects of capitalist society...and all illusions about how it "could" be "improved".

Even in those situations where our class actually takes direct action and actually wins a real improvement, we should congratulate the class on its victory and then point out what will happen next...the ruling class will take it back&#33; (We should never say anything positive about the capitalist system.)

But what of our positive vision of communism? I think that should be introduced gradually...as the working class resistance to capitalism becomes more wide-spread and genuinely bitter.

I don&#39;t disagree with any of that


What they need us for (if anything) is to remind them that revolution is the only option. When things get "hot", that won&#39;t sound anywheres near as wacko as it does now.

If things are going well, it will sound like plain common sense.

To do so of course you need things to get infinitely worse so they can start to get better. What i"m proposing is alliviating the suffering so things can get better without getting worse.

[cubist]

the proposition of allievating suffering before it gets worse is impossible in revolution,

revolution is a joke word it really means WAR, WAR is waht we don&#39;t want but must have, it kills what we wish to save it destroys what we rely on (human life) we can not stop sufferieng without revolution and we can not implement revolution with out cuasing mass suffereing and death.

Educating people will be impossible whilst capitalism is active,but who will trust people who have just flattened everything they had, maybe i am over emphasing but war draws ideals further apart and draws the followers closer together,

the blindness of ignoarnce has raped our nations we must free there minds from the system before we can educate them

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 06:46 PM
It is, but the way that it is designed isn&#39;t in such a blatant way.
Then I think you should come to Africa mate.


They designed it to serve their interests but not in a way where they are maintaining control through their own actions. It&#39;s designed to manipulate the people, it&#39;s designed in a more clever way.

Can you explain this please?


Ok, there is a military strong hold in south carolina in the city of beaufort. This town contains four military bases. 1. Air Force Base, 2. Paris Island (the second largest training grounds for the US marines), 3. A Military Residence Base, 4. A Naval Hospital Base.

Now, please explain to me how the revolutionaries would take this town and it&#39;s four bases (that are filled to the brim with Marines and Naval/Air Force Personel) without having someone tell someone else what to do.

Define what it means to tell someone what to do? Do you mean to have authority over them? Or do you mean to have authority about something?

There are going to be ex soldiers and police men in this revolution who are going to have much more knowledge about this than me and you. What do you do in a situation like this. You listen to what they have to say, and 99% of the time they&#39;re going to be right.

[DaCuBaN]

There are going to be ex soldiers and police men in this revolution who are going to have much more knowledge about this than me and you. What do you do in a situation like this. You listen to what they have to say, and 99% of the time they&#39;re going to be right.

It&#39;s about accepting that noone has the right to authority over anyone else. This doesn&#39;t mean you can&#39;t take good advice, or even submit to another&#39;s authority in a specific field voluntarily

After all, it&#39;s bloody foolish to let an ex mechanic run a revolt :lol:

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 06:51 PM
Spot on&#33; Well.. I think so anyway ;)
But you do realise that once that happens the people are going to have to do something about it. They can&#39;t just say "i&#39;m manipulated" and the capitalists stop being in power. They can and have, many times, realised this. Then what happens?


Personally I think the current system can work, but only once we outlaw all political organisations, and only allow individuals to run for parliament.

This is just a reaction, it isnt a solution. You can not wield the state to achieve workers liberation. As soon as you take control of the present state structure and start taking away peoples freedoms you have lost.


Even then, you&#39;d need some kind of &#39;watchdog&#39; to make sure that informal alliances aren&#39;t cropping up.

I reckon it&#39;d work anyway :D :P

So you mean a dictatorship?

[Lardlad95]

Then I think you should come to Africa mate.

Sorry your going to have to bear with me. Like most Americans my mind is stuck in America, I&#39;m trying to break the habit but they don&#39;t make a patch for this. Since I"m operating in America I&#39;m having a bit of a problem trying to work on other nations.

I"m sure your right about how it is in other nations.


Can you explain this please?

(speaking in america) the cappies give people "freedoms" the people think that they have choices and that they control their own destinies. And in one sense that is true, if I want to start a buisness I can. However the cappies manipulate people into using their "freedoms" to keep the cappies in power.

You give people the right to vote, but you make it so there are only two major parties, over time people start to think that the two major parties are the only parties. Thus you are either a democrat or a republican when you vote, but people don&#39;t question that, because they have the "freedom" to choose the president. When in fact they&#39;ve been led to believe that they have a choice between two.

Heres an analogy. Instead of holding your mother hostage unless you rob a bank for me, I simply convince you that you want to rob the bank for me.

Give the people "freedom" but screw with their heads so they use their freedom to keep you in power.


Define what it means to tell someone what to do? Do you mean to have authority over them? Or do you mean to have authority about something?

IF you have authority on something then you can suggest to someone what to do, in which case they don&#39;t have to do it. So how do things get done?


There are going to be ex soldiers and police men in this revolution who are going to have much more knowledge about this than me and you. What do you do in a situation like this. You listen to what they have to say, and 99% of the time they&#39;re going to be right.

Since they are right all the time, how do you stop them from taking authority?

[DaCuBaN]

This is just a reaction, it isnt a solution. You can not wield the state to achieve workers liberation. As soon as you take control of the present state structure and start taking away peoples freedoms you have lost

I wasn&#39;t meaning in a revolutionary sense - I was meaning that if we continue to use the system we currently have, the only way I believe it can be fair is to have all political alleigence outlawed, and only independant politicians (or even better, regular joe&#39;s&#33;) running for office

Combine that with mandatory voting, and this system might work. It&#39;s not perfect, but it&#39;s the best I can see that we can make from it at the present moment.

This isn&#39;t tied to my revolutionary tactics at all - it&#39;s a sideline.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 01:29 AM
IF you have authority on something then you can suggest to someone what to do, in which case they don&#39;t have to do it. So how do things get done?
Because human beings have the potential to be logical, rational and reasonable.


So how do things get done?

In a logical, rational and reasonable way.


Since they are right all the time, how do you stop them from taking authority?

They are not right all the time. They are right on one particular subject. In a battle situation it is logical, rational and reasonable to listen to the advice of someone who has experience of training in fighting a battle. The purpose of fighting in this battle is to destroy the ruling class, people want to create a communist society so why wouldn&#39;t they listen.

In order to take authority, there has to be authority there to take. Without hierarchy or command structures there can be no authority to take. Also, why would people allow him to take power. The point of a revolution would be to destroy these things, and as a revolution is made up of people who decided to have a revolution, allowing someone involved in that revolution do something which contradicts the very reason he and indeed everyone else is involved in the revolution is illogical. What would be the point in having a revolution to smash authority if you were going to allow someone to have authority?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 01:44 AM
Combine that with mandatory voting, and this system might work. It&#39;s not perfect, but it&#39;s the best I can see that we can make from it at the present moment.
What might work? Not the end of exploitation the destruction of the state and the smashing of the present day economic structure.


This isn&#39;t tied to my revolutionary tactics at all - it&#39;s a sideline.

It shouldn&#39;t be tied to anything. In order to see threw this goal you are going to have to betray your "revolutionary tactics." Unless of course they involve in state sponsered oppression.