Mongolian Election

[RedStarOverChina]

Yay!

What change of policy (especially foreign policy) do u think they are going to have?

[BOZG]

Not very much about it online. What I could find says that they're not actually communist and have rebranded themselves since the fall of the Soviet Union. I don't expect them to do very much in all honesty. Possibly minor reforms, but nothing exceptional.

[comrade_mufasa]

Some links would be nice.

[BOZG]

News report (http://www.google.ie/url?sa=X&oi=news&start=0&num=1&q=http://tvnz.co.nz/view/news_world_story_skin/562840%3Fformat%3Dhtml)

[bolshevik butcher]

Now the question remains, have they done a new labour? OR are they real soicalists?

[More Fire for the People]

There party platform is here:
http://www.mprp.mn/english/info.php?p=goals

They sound rather social democratic to me.

[codyvo]

They seem like a great party to have in a country, I wish the US could come up with something half as good as this.

[RedStarOverChina]

Lets wait and see how they do. Social democrats is better than cappies, no? I think they deserve our support.

For now, I'm very interested in their foreign policy---whatever decision they make now is going to have profound effect in the future. Right now Mongolia is under the heavy influence of Russia, China, US and Japan.(the former government is rather pro-America) Which side to lean towards is Mongolian leadership's major concern. It will be interesting to see what comes up next.

[More Fire for the People]

Social democrats are capitalist.

[RedStarOverChina]

From what I see, many of them were union leaders. They do not approve free market economy and thus arent as bad as capitalists. If u consider EVERYONE ur prime enemy I hope u r gonna have a heck of good time beating up everyone <_<

[viva le revolution]

Their victory in Mongolia shows that socialism is gaining ground in the third-world which primarily should be the target for a world revolution.

[Severian]

&#39;&#39;All the candidates sounded the same to me, so I just voted for my old party,&#39;&#39; said 62-year-old Batsukh Tseveenchimed of the MPRP.

From this Associated Press article (http://www.sltrib.com/nationworld/ci_2751411)

I think this guy just summed up all these elections and all these parties in the ex-Soviet bloc.

nothing has happened here.....

[RedStarOverChina]

All the OTHER candidates sounded the same to me---thats what he meant. In that interview he also complained about the current situation in mongolia.

With a voter-turnout rate of over 80% i dont think most of the people voted like he did.

What about the other interviews they conducted? How the herders felt discontent about the inequality and poverty and stuff...Dont just give us bits and pieces of the story...


Severian, if u dont mind me asking: whats with u recently? why do u insist on condemning everybody and everything without knowing the whole story?

[Fidelbrand]

Hope there won&#39;t be another imperialist warrior like Genghis Khan. hehe...

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 10:46 PM
All the OTHER candidates sounded the same to me---thats what he meant.
Your psychic powers astound me.


In that interview he also complained about the current situation in mongolia.

Huh? That&#39;s the only thing that guy&#39;s quoted as saying in that article.


With a voter-turnout rate of over 80% i dont think most of the people voted like he did.

On the contrary, the article says, "Government radio said turnout was more than 70 percent - low by Mongolian standards. It wasn&#39;t clear if the number reflected voter apathy following repeated changes of government and protests over claims of official corruption."


What about the other interviews they conducted? How the herders felt discontent about the inequality and poverty and stuff...Dont just give us bits and pieces of the story...

I see...people reelected the party in power because they were discontented with the situation under its rule. That makes sense.


Severian, if u dont mind me asking: whats with u recently? why do u insist on condemning everybody and everything without knowing the whole story?

Why do you insist on thinking I haven&#39;t heard something, just because I fail to uncritically accept it? Why do you see (and read) what you hope for, rather than what&#39;s actually there?

There is no "recently". I am a communist. I believe the emancipation of the working class can only be the act of the workers ourselves. I place no confidence in petty-bourgeois misleaders, never mind outright enemies of working people.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 09:32 PM
Social democrats are capitalist.
Not nescerally, Hugo Chavez isn&#39;t.

[RedAnarchist]

I read somewhere (i think it was a BBC article) that the Mongolian Premier admires Blair, so dont expect much from this guy, unfortunately.

[h&s]

Originally posted by Clenched Fist+May 24 2005, 11:01 AM--> (Clenched Fist @ May 24 2005, 11:01 AM)
[email protected] 23 2005, 09:32 PM
Social democrats are capitalist.
Not nescerally, Hugo Chavez isn&#39;t. [/b]
No, Chavez just maintains the capitalist system and opposes workers revoluiton...

[codyvo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 09:32 PM
Social democrats are capitalist.
How, they have the same beliefs as many of the people on here they just don&#39;t want a revolution, they are just passive socialist.

[BOZG]

No, social democrats call for a humane capitalism, a &#39;social&#39; capitalism and a &#39;social&#39; world as opposed to a socialist world. Democratic socialists (in the American sense), on the other hand claim to call for socialism but through parliamentary reformism. Ultimately, the two ideologies lead down the same path.

[BOZG]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2005, 11:19 AM
I read somewhere (i think it was a BBC article) that the Mongolian Premier admires Blair, so dont expect much from this guy, unfortunately.
They were recently made full members of the Socialist International, the International that the Labour Party and most of the social-democratic parties are affiliated to.

[OleMarxco]

I hope they abolish money :D

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by h&s+May 25 2005, 12:43 PM--> (h&s @ May 25 2005, 12:43 PM)
Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 24 2005, 11:01 AM

[email protected] 23 2005, 09:32 PM
Social democrats are capitalist.
Not nescerally, Hugo Chavez isn&#39;t.
No, Chavez just maintains the capitalist system and opposes workers revoluiton... [/b]
He recently said that capitalism must be transceneded and socialism was the way forward. Don&#39;t amke wide sweeping topics on subejets that you are clearly ignorant on.

[BOZG]

But Chavez is a populist, not a revolutionary socialist himself. That isn&#39;t to say that he hasn&#39;t implemented policies that have brought massive gains to the working class but he just isn&#39;t do enough. If he&#39;s so ardent about socialism being the way forward, then start smashing the capitalist class and for fucks sake, take some lessons from Allende and arm the workers to the teeth. There&#39;s much to be heeded from that quote by van Goethe, "Knowing is not enough, we must apply. Willing is not enough, we must do".

[bolshevik butcher]

AS marxists our duty is to the working class, chavez is the best option available in venuzuela, VENAPAL has been nationalised, several factories are being placed under workers&#39; control, great things are happening in venuzuela.

[BOZG]

I don&#39;t doubt that great things are happening but this period of semi-dual power, for lack of a better term cannot exist forever. Either Chavez moves to the left or the masses get rid of him and seize control or a period of reaction will inevitably set in. Taped phonecalls between opposition members have revealed them discussing the NECESSITY of a dictatorship in order to supress the masses in Venezuela if they attempt to seize power. Socialism now or another Pinochet? They are the two options.

[bolshevik butcher]

I agree, bt i feel that chavez is certainly becoming more left wing, the opposition is digusting in venuzuela, the media is a propoganda tool of the enemy and the enemy is trying to create disoreder to provoke a military coup, but i feel that we have the makings of socialism their.

[fernando]

The masses are like sheep...for some reason they dont seem to massively rise up themselves before a charismatic leader arrises...

Wow...that sounded very uncommunist huh :lol:

[comrade_mufasa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 02:37 PM
The masses are like sheep...for some reason they dont seem to massively rise up themselves before a charismatic leader arrises...

Wow...that sounded very uncommunist huh :lol:
This shows that the masses are not ready for revolution. When the matrial conditions are ripe for revolution then the masses will come to arms on thier own.

[bolshevik butcher]

I think that&#39;s a bit unfair, the venuzuelans rose up in 1989, and actually even if Chavez were to go the basic infustructure, the bolivarian circles would still be in place.

[h&s]

Originally posted by Clenched Fist+May 25 2005, 05:37 PM--> (Clenched Fist &#064; May 25 2005, 05:37 PM)
Originally posted by h&s+May 25 2005, 12:43 PM--> (h&s &#064; May 25 2005, 12:43 PM)
Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 24 2005, 11:01 AM

[email protected] 23 2005, 09:32 PM
Social democrats are capitalist.
Not nescerally, Hugo Chavez isn&#39;t.
No, Chavez just maintains the capitalist system and opposes workers revoluiton... [/b]
He recently said that capitalism must be transceneded and socialism was the way forward. Don&#39;t amke wide sweeping topics on subjets that you are clearly ignorant on.[/b]
That doesn&#39;t matter. If what he did what he said and replace capitalism with socialism than that would be alright, but the point is he hasn&#39;t.
He may still do this, but personally I think its unlikely (though I would welcome it of course&#33;)
He may have nationalised important industries and talk about the evils of capitalism and imperialism, but at the moment this is just rhetoric.
There have been so many governments in the past that have talked about replacing the system with socialism, but almost none of them have actually done naything about it. Until the 80&#39;s it was standard practice for labour leaders to denounce capitalism, but not do anything about it.
I don&#39;t know how Chavez will respond to revolutionary pressure from below - we&#39;ll see when that happens, but as he is not a Marxist, if he leads it he will fail.


fernando
The masses are like sheep...for some reason they dont seem to massively rise up themselves before a charismatic leader arrises...
No, it is the masses rising up by themselves that leads to them following a &#39;charismatic leader&#39; - the revolution always starts from below.

[Brennus]

Originally posted by BOZG
But Chavez is a populist, not a revolutionary socialist himself. That isn&#39;t to say that he hasn&#39;t implemented policies that have brought massive gains to the working class but he just isn&#39;t do enough. If he&#39;s so ardent about socialism being the way forward, then start smashing the capitalist class and for fucks sake, take some lessons from Allende and arm the workers to the teeth. There&#39;s much to be heeded from that quote by van Goethe, "Knowing is not enough, we must apply. Willing is not enough, we must do".

To be fair, Chavez has been smashing the power of the capitalist class, especially in the oil industry. Also there are many armed civillians ready to fight for Venezuelan freedom and the social reform of Chavez. But yes, you are correct that Chavez has not organized the immediate destruction of Venezuelan capitalism.

[BOZG]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 11:26 PM
To be fair, Chavez has been smashing the power of the capitalist class, especially in the oil industry. Also there are many armed civillians ready to fight for Venezuelan freedom and the social reform of Chavez. But yes, you are correct that Chavez has not organized the immediate destruction of Venezuelan capitalism.
The main problem is that he&#39;s doing enough, quick enough. This drawn out process only gives the reaction more time to organise.

[Hiero]

The thing Chavez has been doing with the lower class is giving them some social security from the oil industry. If he stops this his support will just disappear and if he continues it without dealing with the power and ideological needs of the working class he will lose his support.

Untill he presents the working class with the idea of Class Conflict the working class will continue with supporting systems where they jsut have to put there hands out of money.

This is what Mongolian party needs to do. Rather then just try and improve the living standards of the working class, they need to fullfill the ideological and power needs of the working class.

Untill these countries present the class conflict idea to the working class they will be nothing but social security states untill the lose there support base and economic reforms are brought in.

[Lefty]

Man, you KNOW the world&#39;s gone to shit when fucking MONGOLIA, land of barren wastelands and rampant bestiality, is more forward-thinking than the U.S.

[RedStarOverChina]

hey--Mongolia happened to have a much longer history than the US does. What the hell does rampant bestiality mean?&#33; :angry:

[encephalon]

Here&#39;s the problem: Chavez can&#39;t create a socialist state. It&#39;d be foolish to even try without much of the rest of the world getting ready to do the same. He&#39;s working in the interest of the working class. If he tried to set up socialism, he&#39;d be quickly deposed, and the working class would lose.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 09:43 AM
Here&#39;s the problem: Chavez can&#39;t create a socialist state. It&#39;d be foolish to even try without much of the rest of the world getting ready to do the same. He&#39;s working in the interest of the working class. If he tried to set up socialism, he&#39;d be quickly deposed, and the working class would lose.
Latin america is in revlt just now, it is likely we will soon see a progressive government in bolivia, and i don&#39;t know how much longer luma will last either.

[h&s]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 09:43 AM
Here&#39;s the problem: Chavez can&#39;t create a socialist state. It&#39;d be foolish to even try without much of the rest of the world getting ready to do the same. He&#39;s working in the interest of the working class. If he tried to set up socialism, he&#39;d be quickly deposed, and the working class would lose.
I&#39;m not so sure about that. He may be able to set up an undemocratic authorotiarian &#39;socialist&#39; state through force, though that wouldn&#39;t be good wopuld it? But yeah, if he tried to hand over power to the working class without the situation being revolutionary it would not last long.

Latin america is in revlt just now, it is likely we will soon see a progressive government in bolivia, and i don&#39;t know how much longer luma will last either.
Thats a very importnant point. The working class in South America seems to be the most active in the world at the moment, though without the right direction they will have to settle for their progressive governments, not socialism.