How is Japan going to become communist? [Archive]

ahhh_money_is_comfort

5th June 2005, 02:32

Hey I'm serious.

How come I'm the only one here who get's nailed for spamming? Why don't you equally dish it out?

I didn't know Japan was in political and ecnomic strife. Ok 1000 years? So what. I'm not going to wait.

I don't see any viable footholds for communism anywhere. All the industrial and ecnomic countries are just becomming more stronger and more stable. It is in the poor and backward places that still fly hammer and sickle flags. These are the WRONG candidates for communism. That is the whole point of the question. Something is wrong here, the good candidates for communism just keep humming along.

Publius

5th June 2005, 02:59

They turned from a traditionalist, isolationist, xenophobic fuedalist state to a capitalist powerhouse in less than a hundred years.

I don't think it's likely that they'll turn communist. At all. But this isn't really a teneble position.

LSD

5th June 2005, 03:04

How come I'm the only one here who get's nailed for spamming?

um... because you keep spamming?

I didn't know Japan was in political and ecnomic strife. Ok 1000 years? So what. I'm not going to wait.

:huh:

Who said "1000 years"?

Did you just make that number up ...and then disagree with it?

That's kind of ...wierd... :unsure:

I don't see any viable footholds for communism anywhere. All the industrial and ecnomic countries are just becomming more stronger and more stable.

Hardly. The world economy right now is more precarious than it has been in a long time.

We're about a hair away from a major depression.

Now, I'm not saying that the economy will collapse tomorrow, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a big crisis in the next few decades.

In fact, I'd bet on it.

It is in the poor and backward places that still fly hammer and sickle flags.

Yes, because it is those countries that bear the greatest burdon of capitalism such that the first world bourgeois can keep their local workers relatively satisfied. It's a rather briliiant tactic that ensures that revolutionary fervor only happens "elsewhere".

But what happens when the third world isn't available for exploitation any more? Then what happens to all those first world workers?

Non-Sectarian Bastard!

5th June 2005, 03:28

How come I'm the only one here who get's nailed for spamming? Why don't you equally dish it out?

If you would be willing to point out the spammers, I'd glad to give them warning points too. But you are one of the more obvious spammers. I mean starting a thread: "How is Japan going to be Communist?". I nor you can predict the future of Japanese society. This thread is bound to a shouting yes/no. As LSD pointed out, things can drasticly change in a short time. Just in 1917 Lenin declared not to expect a revolution in his lifetime.

All the industrial and ecnomic countries are just becomming more stronger and more stable.

I don't know the exact situation of other places, but people around me and Holland in general are getting poorer.

It is in the poor and backward places that still fly hammer and sickle flags. These are the WRONG candidates for communism. That is the whole point of the question. Something is wrong here, the good candidates for communism just keep humming along.

Who knows, things can change.

ahhh_money_is_comfort

6th June 2005, 00:42

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Jun 5 2005, 03:28 AM

How come I'm the only one here who get's nailed for spamming? Why don't you equally dish it out?

If you would be willing to point out the spammers, I'd glad to give them warning points too. But you are one of the more obvious spammers. I mean starting a thread: "How is Japan going to be Communist?". I nor you can predict the future of Japanese society. This thread is bound to a shouting yes/no. As LSD pointed out, things can drasticly change in a short time. Just in 1917 Lenin declared not to expect a revolution in his lifetime.

All the industrial and ecnomic countries are just becomming more stronger and more stable.

I don't know the exact situation of other places, but people around me and Holland in general are getting poorer.

It is in the poor and backward places that still fly hammer and sickle flags. These are the WRONG candidates for communism. That is the whole point of the question. Something is wrong here, the good candidates for communism just keep humming along.

Who knows, things can change.
Holland? Ok that is a good candidate? Do they like communist there?

Non-Sectarian Bastard!

6th June 2005, 01:27

No. I don't care whetever the workingclass struggle is under the banner of Communism or whatever, my greatest concern is to achieve our goal. It does seem we do have a grow of the radical left here. It's not really kicking off now, because people are still busy with the current rightwing swing and pathetic social-democratic parties. But a good chance that we will go further in the direction of the radical left, after the rightwing swing and neo-liberal government policies. Although admittedly, Holland probaly isn't going to be fore-runner of revolution.

ahhh_money_is_comfort

6th June 2005, 06:25

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Jun 6 2005, 01:27 AM
No. I don't care whetever the workingclass struggle is under the banner of Communism or whatever, my greatest concern is to achieve our goal. It does seem we do have a grow of the radical left here. It's not really kicking off now, because people are still busy with the current rightwing swing and pathetic social-democratic parties. But a good chance that we will go further in the direction of the radical left, after the rightwing swing and neo-liberal government policies. Although admittedly, Holland probaly isn't going to be fore-runner of revolution.
What if the working class tell you to buzz off and jump into a lake? Isn't that what is basically happening in all the good candidates for a revolution?

Not Holland? Any place else? Holland doesn't like commies? Even though they are getting more poor?

Professor Moneybags

6th June 2005, 16:48

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 5 2005, 12:38 AM
Hey, I've got a fun idea, let's all jump back to the year 1700.

ahhh_the_king_is_comfort:

"How is France going to become democratic.

That country is such a strong fortress of monarchism I don't ever see it becomming democratic."

Things change.
One day, the whole world will be speaking esperanto. Esperanto is the future !

LSD

6th June 2005, 16:55

What if the working class tell you to buzz off and jump into a lake? Isn't that what is basically happening in all the good candidates for a revolution?

I don't know if anyone has been advocate mass "lake jumping" based on political ideolgoy, but you're correct in that the revolutionary left does not have a very strong position among first world workers.

That's largely because capitalism has become quite good over the past 100 years ot so at making social compromises that keep the workers generally satisfied. Now, many of those compromises are being reversed an workers are inscreasingly and increasingly faced with just how powerless they are.

Therefore, I predict that the role of the revolutionary left will greatly increase. But, of course, none of us know what will happen.

Certainly we all hope that that will happen and will push and advocate for it, much as how, I'm sure you will push for whatever it is you believe in (is it libertarianism or mixed-economy with you, I can't keep up).

One day, the whole world will be speaking esperanto. Esperanto is the future !

Stop spamming.

Professor Moneybags

6th June 2005, 17:12

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 6 2005, 03:55 PM

One day, the whole world will be speaking esperanto. Esperanto is the future !

Stop spamming.
I wasn't spamming, I was pointing out the absurdity of your Nostradamus-like prophecies about communism being the future.

LSD

6th June 2005, 17:45

:lol:

I wasn't predicting the future, I was critisizing AMIC for doing so.

I don't know if Japan will becoome communist. I certainly hope so, for the sake of the Japanese people, but I have no way of saying what will happen. AMIC claims that Japan "can't" ever become communist merely because it is fiercly capitalist today.

I, therefore, demonstraed (quite wittily I might add!) that current conditions are no guarantee of future conditions.

I said Japan could become communist.
AMIC said Japan can never become communist.

I said something can happen, but I don't know. AMIC says that he knows what will happen, period.

So ...which one of us is making "prophecies"?

KptnKrill

6th June 2005, 19:30

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 6 2005, 03:48 PM
One day, the whole world will be speaking esperanto. Esperanto is the future !
lol :D That was funny as hell :)

ahhh_money_is_comfort

7th June 2005, 15:08

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 6 2005, 05:45 PM
:lol:

I wasn't predicting the future, I was critisizing AMIC for doing so.

I don't know if Japan will becoome communist. I certainly hope so, for the sake of the Japanese people, but I have no way of saying what will happen. AMIC claims that Japan "can't" ever become communist merely because it is fiercly capitalist today.

I, therefore, demonstraed (quite wittily I might add!) that current conditions are no guarantee of future conditions.

I said Japan could become communist.
AMIC said Japan can never become communist.

I said something can happen, but I don't know. AMIC says that he knows what will happen, period.

So ...which one of us is making "prophecies"?
Hey "AMIC said Japan can never become communist." That is what you THINK I said. I fully accept the possibility of that happening. Nothing lasts for ever. I consider that happening in 20 years about the same chance as a snow cones chance in a Phoenix summer without shade in a car with the windows rolled up.

Isn't the way a revolution is supposed to happen a bit of a catch 22?

Need a developed country, but all the developed countries are just getting protelariat fat, dumb, and happy.

ahhh_money_is_comfort

7th June 2005, 15:11

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Jun 6 2005, 01:27 AM
No. I don't care whetever the workingclass struggle is under the banner of Communism or whatever, my greatest concern is to achieve our goal. It does seem we do have a grow of the radical left here. It's not really kicking off now, because people are still busy with the current rightwing swing and pathetic social-democratic parties. But a good chance that we will go further in the direction of the radical left, after the rightwing swing and neo-liberal government policies. Although admittedly, Holland probaly isn't going to be fore-runner of revolution.
Ok Holland not communist friendly. Any where else you can think of that is a good candidate for revolution?

RedAnarchist

7th June 2005, 15:12

If the workers were kept happy by concessions from the capitalists, why are the capitalists revoking them? Is it some sort of political suicide or do they think they are too strong?

ahhh_money_is_comfort

7th June 2005, 21:34

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 03:12 PM
If the workers were kept happy by concessions from the capitalists, why are the capitalists revoking them? Is it some sort of political suicide or do they think they are too strong?
Where? Who is this boogey man capitialist doing so and so to the workers?

Clarksist

7th June 2005, 21:53

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 02:08 PM
Isn't the way a revolution is supposed to happen a bit of a catch 22?

Need a developed country, but all the developed countries are just getting protelariat fat, dumb, and happy.
It is also in developed countries where out-sourcing begins to happen and no money is being made from the proletariat, and thus they can't support the major corporations. So once depression hits, then the proletariat want to liberate themselves and helm the industrialized nation.

Catch 22 how?

Sa'd al-Bari

8th June 2005, 01:24

Where? Who is this boogey man capitialist doing so and so to the workers?
Europe is a good example. Many of these countries have practiced a so-called “welfare state” which makes various concessions to placate the masses. However, in order to compete globally with the U.S., Japanese and other capitalists for the division and re-division of the world’s profits many have attempted at taking down this “welfare” system. This has generally coincided with the growing of the EU (which is currently being staggered by anti-EU movements) into a large economic and military block, to further the ability to compete with U.S. imperialism.

Professor Moneybags

8th June 2005, 16:30

Europe is a good example. Many of these countries have practiced a so-called “welfare state”

Many, as in "all of them".

which makes various concessions to placate the masses.

The welfare state was introduced by progressive socialists, presumably in an attempt to bring in communism "lite" peacefully.

Andy Bowden

8th June 2005, 17:59

The welfare state was an idea of John Maynard Keynes who described his ideas as "trying to save the world from communism". It was implemented because the ruling govts of western Europe believed, rightly or wrongly, that unless concessions were made to the workers of these countries communism would take control.

OleMarxco

8th June 2005, 18:31

You said that more countries are becoming stronger and more stable (North Eastern/Western ones) and it's only poor and backwards countries (South/South-Eastern) wavin' Hammer & Sickle-flags. Did it ever occur to you that it MIGHT be poor and backward countries that have the most reason too do so, because they have all of been led under Capitalist-hegemony, and suppression from western Imperialism, enslaving them to their economy with multionational companies and sweat-shops backed up with a military "task-force" in the back, lurking somewhere? Of course the USSR is somewhat to blame too, but they never were sumthin' other than isioalistic.

STI

8th June 2005, 19:18

The welfare state was introduced by progressive socialists, presumably in an attempt to bring in communism "lite" peacefully.

Errr, no. It was introduced by social democrats. Nice try, though.

Professor Moneybags

8th June 2005, 21:58

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 06:18 PM
Errr, no. It was introduced by social democrats. Nice try, though.
You mean there's a difference ?

ahhh_money_is_comfort

11th June 2005, 04:13

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 06:31 PM
You said that more countries are becoming stronger and more stable (North Eastern/Western ones) and it's only poor and backwards countries (South/South-Eastern) wavin' Hammer & Sickle-flags. Did it ever occur to you that it MIGHT be poor and backward countries that have the most reason too do so, because they have all of been led under Capitalist-hegemony, and suppression from western Imperialism, enslaving them to their economy with multionational companies and sweat-shops backed up with a military "task-force" in the back, lurking somewhere? Of course the USSR is somewhat to blame too, but they never were sumthin' other than isioalistic.
Sorry, but that is not Marxism. Please refer to the theory. Marxism is very clear on this. The revolution will be in an industrial and technological place. I think you need to be re-educated.

Non-Sectarian Bastard!

11th June 2005, 06:16

Moneybags are you admitting that you know nothing, nor are interested in knowing about communism? That you don't even know the difference between social democracy and communism?

Professor Moneybags

11th June 2005, 07:44

Moneybags are you admitting that you know nothing, nor are interested in knowing about communism?

Let's just say that if I didn't know anything, the quotes I've collected would tell me all I needed to know.

That you don't even know the difference between social democracy and communism?

The one half-enslaves you, the other totally enslaves you. Big deal.

Non-Sectarian Bastard!

11th June 2005, 08:43

So putting some quotes together, describes all alternatives to capitalism? If so, does this count the other way too?

Please, back your statements up. How is communism and social-democracy slavery? And what is slavery?

Now, that you admit not to even have the slightest interest in debate, then what is the use of you even coming here?

MarxItUpSome

11th June 2005, 17:29

Communism appears in many of the less-developed countries because, quite frankly, this is where most of the workers are being oppressed! People there are only able to find work in sweatshops or on farms while they get paid peanuts for their efforts by the more economically-developed countries. The welfare state may help those who live in the MEDCs but it is those workers in the third-world who are oppressed and it is very much for them that communism would work - do you care nothing about them?

ahhh_money_is_comfort

12th June 2005, 01:02

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 05:29 PM
Communism appears in many of the less-developed countries because, quite frankly, this is where most of the workers are being oppressed! People there are only able to find work in sweatshops or on farms while they get paid peanuts for their efforts by the more economically-developed countries. The welfare state may help those who live in the MEDCs but it is those workers in the third-world who are oppressed and it is very much for them that communism would work - do you care nothing about them?
Sure I care about them, what a dumb question. I have lots of family in 3rd world countries working in those sweat shops.

Marxism is very clear on this. It is not debatable. Revolutions must happen in a developed country. A communist revolution by definition is in a developed country. In your countries of interest, a revolution violates communist theory.

That is the catch-22.

JC1

12th June 2005, 01:52

Sure I care about them, what a dumb question. I have lots of family in 3rd world countries working in those sweat shops.

Marxism is very clear on this. It is not debatable. Revolutions must happen in a developed country. A communist revolution by definition is in a developed country. In your countries of interest, a revolution violates communist theory.

Actualy there have been quite a few Working Class inserections in " First " World counrys. Germany 1919, Warsaw 1943, France 1968, ect ect.

Where in Marxism does it say a reveloution has too take place in the developed woreld first ? Marxism States that in the current epoch , Imperialist Capital has invested in the third world and smothered the local bourgoises and made them impotent. It also re-inforced backwards , fuedal conditions so that Surplus Value could be gained easier. This has caused the Working Class to be the only revelouttionary Class in those situations.

There is no Catch 22 here.

STI

12th June 2005, 02:39

You mean there's a difference ?

Yes. Social democrats want to implement some reforms to capitalism (to varying degrees, depending on which social democratic party you're talking about). Social democrats want anything but to do away with capitalism, just make it "nice and fuzzy".

Socialists, at least in word, want to replace capitalism with socialism. Nationalize the means of production, put "the party" in charge of the show, and, over time, become the new ruling class.

MarxItUpSome

12th June 2005, 17:49

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 12:02 AM
Marxism is very clear on this. It is not debatable. Revolutions must happen in a developed country. A communist revolution by definition is in a developed country.
Wrong. Get your facts straight before posting shit. Communism is an international movement in pursuit of a classless, stateless society. If the proletariat is to be found in developing countries, that's where you'll find the revolution.

ahhh_money_is_comfort

13th June 2005, 05:30

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 01:52 AM

Sure I care about them, what a dumb question. I have lots of family in 3rd world countries working in those sweat shops.

Marxism is very clear on this. It is not debatable. Revolutions must happen in a developed country. A communist revolution by definition is in a developed country. In your countries of interest, a revolution violates communist theory.

Actualy there have been quite a few Working Class inserections in " First " World counrys. Germany 1919, Warsaw 1943, France 1968, ect ect.

Where in Marxism does it say a reveloution has too take place in the developed woreld first ? Marxism States that in the current epoch , Imperialist Capital has invested in the third world and smothered the local bourgoises and made them impotent. It also re-inforced backwards , fuedal conditions so that Surplus Value could be gained easier. This has caused the Working Class to be the only revelouttionary Class in those situations.

There is no Catch 22 here.
Workers seizing production = developed country.

Simple.

Peasants are not workers.

Peasants are in a feudal system.

Revolultions in these places violates Marxism.

ahhh_money_is_comfort

13th June 2005, 05:32

Originally posted by MarxItUpSome+Jun 12 2005, 05:49 PM--> (MarxItUpSome @ Jun 12 2005, 05:49 PM)
[email protected] 12 2005, 12:02 AM
Marxism is very clear on this. It is not debatable. Revolutions must happen in a developed country. A communist revolution by definition is in a developed country.
Wrong. Get your facts straight before posting shit. Communism is an international movement in pursuit of a classless, stateless society. If the proletariat is to be found in developing countries, that's where you'll find the revolution. [/b]
There are no protelariat in farm based societies. Workers work in factories that produce goods. There are no factories to seize in a farm based society.

MarxItUpSome

13th June 2005, 17:10

pro·le·tar·i·at (proli-târi-aht)
n.

1.
-1. The class of wage earners who, possessing neither capital nor production means, must earn their living by selling their labor.
-2. The poorest class of working people.
2. The propertyless class of ancient Rome, constituting the lowest class of citizens.

and whether or not the original lowest class in society was, as you say, the industrial worker, the message of Marx and Engels must be interpreted - it was conceived during the industrial revolution which ended a long time ago.

STI

14th June 2005, 18:06

Wrong. Get your facts straight before posting shit. Communism is an international movement in pursuit of a classless, stateless society. If the proletariat is to be found in developing countries, that's where you'll find the revolution.

True, communism is (should be) a borderless struggle, but that doesn't mean that the entire world can just go to capitalism right away. Communism has to come first from advanced capitalist societies, not necessarily (or at all, IMO) to the end of creating new states, but that doesn't mean, say, Rwanda will be ready for communism at the same time as a place like France, Germany, or even the USA.

-1. The class of wage earners who, possessing neither capital nor production means, must earn their living by selling their labor.
-2. The poorest class of working people.
2. The propertyless class of ancient Rome, constituting the lowest class of citizens.

When Marx talked of "the proletariat", he was talking about the first group in your list.

ahhh_money_is_comfort

16th June 2005, 00:25

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 05:10 PM
pro·le·tar·i·at (proli-târi-aht)
n.

1.
-1. The class of wage earners who, possessing neither capital nor production means, must earn their living by selling their labor.
-2. The poorest class of working people.
2. The propertyless class of ancient Rome, constituting the lowest class of citizens.

and whether or not the original lowest class in society was, as you say, the industrial worker, the message of Marx and Engels must be interpreted - it was conceived during the industrial revolution which ended a long time ago.
That is not a peasant.

Revolutions typically happen in places with peasants and not protelariat.

ahhh_money_is_comfort

16th June 2005, 00:27

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 06:06 PM

Wrong. Get your facts straight before posting shit. Communism is an international movement in pursuit of a classless, stateless society. If the proletariat is to be found in developing countries, that's where you'll find the revolution.

True, communism is (should be) a borderless struggle, but that doesn't mean that the entire world can just go to capitalism right away. Communism has to come first from advanced capitalist societies, not necessarily (or at all, IMO) to the end of creating new states, but that doesn't mean, say, Rwanda will be ready for communism at the same time as a place like France, Germany, or even the USA.

-1. The class of wage earners who, possessing neither capital nor production means, must earn their living by selling their labor.
-2. The poorest class of working people.
2. The propertyless class of ancient Rome, constituting the lowest class of citizens.

When Marx talked of "the proletariat", he was talking about the first group in your list.
See. I was right and you(MarxItUpSome) were wrong.

People working in fields are not protelariat. That is where revolutions happen eg: Russia, China, Cuba, and Africa. I think someone needs to be re-educated.

romanm

16th June 2005, 01:31

Japan, like the United $nakes of Amerikkka, has no proletariat.

Xvall

16th June 2005, 03:00

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 10:37 PM
That country is such a strong fortress of capitalism I don't ever see it becomming communist.
Nazi Germany was a really strong fortress of bigotry, corporatism, and militarism. It got the shit kicked out of it in a matter of years, and now it's one of the most tolerant nations on the globe.

Just goes to show.

Lamanov

16th June 2005, 15:39

Ummmm ^_^ "somebody" might want it to happen... ;)

Japan:

Communist Association - Future (Kyôsanshugi Kyôgikai - Mirai, COM-Future / Komu-Mirai)
Communist League (Spark) (Kyôsanshugi Dômei (Hibana))
Communist Network (Kyosanshugi Netsuto Waku)
Democratic Party of Japan (Minshûto)
Democratic Unity League (Minshû Tôitsu Dômei, Mintôitsudô)
Ecolo
Fourth International Central Secretariat (Dayon Intânashonaru Chûô Shokikyoku)
Fourth International Japan Section Reconstruction Preparation Group (Dayon Intânashonaru Nihon Shibu Saiken Jumbi Gurûpu)
Greens Network Japan added February 05
ing Network (Ingu Netsutowaku) added February 05
Internationalism (Kokusaishugi)
Japan Communist Party (Action Faction) (Nihon Kyôsantô (Kôdô-ha))
Japan Independence Association (Jishu Nihon no kai)
Japan Labor Party (Nihon Rôdôtô)
Japan Revolutionary Communist League (Nihon Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei, JRCL)
Japan Revolutionary Communist League, National Committee/Middle Core Faction (Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei, Zenkoku Iinkai/Chûkakû-ha, Chûkakû-ha)
Japan Revolutionary Communist League - Revolutionary Marxist Faction (Nihon Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei - Kakumeiteki Marukusushugi-ha, Kakumaru-ha)
Japan Struggle League for the Liberation of the Working Class (People's Power) (Nihon Rôdôsha Kaikyû Kaihô Tôsô Dômei (Jinmin no Chikara))
Japanese Communist Party (Nihon Kyôsantô, Nikkyô)
Japanese Red Army (Nihon Sekigun) unofficial
Marxist Comrades Group (Marukusushugi Dôshikai)
Movement for Democratic Socialism (Minshûshugiteki Shaikaishugi Undô)
National Council of Internationalist Workers (Kokusaishugi Rôdôsha Zenkoku Kyôgikai) updated February 05
National Conference of the Liberation Faction for the Establishment of the Revolutionary Workers' Party - Workers' Opposition Faction (Kakumeiteki Rôdôshatô Kensetsu Omezasu Kaihô-ha Zenkoku Kyôgikai - Rôtai-ha, Kakurôkyô Rôtai-ha) updated February 05
National Congress Aiming at the New Worker's Party (Atarashii Rôdôshatô Omezazu Zenkoku Kyôgikai, Wakazu) updated February 05
New Socialist Party (Shin Shakaitô)
Okinawa Social Masses Party (Okinawa Shakai Taishûtô, Shataitô)
People - Group aiming at Self-Government, Solidarity, Ecology (Jichi, Rentai, Ekoroji Omezazu Gurûpu - Sôsei) updated February 05
Rainbow and Greens (Niji to Midori)
Social Democratic Party (Shakai Minshutô, Shamintô)
Progressive Reform Research Group (Shinpoto Kaikakuken Kyûkai)
Socialist Association (Shakaishugi Kyôkai, Kyôkai-ha)
The League (Bunto / BUND)
Workers Communist Party (Rôdôsha Kyôsantô)
Workers Network (Wakazu Netsuto Waku)
Workers Socialist League (Rôdôsha Shakaishugi Dômei, Rôshadô)
Workers' Solidarity Movement (Rôdôsho Rentai Undô)

:hammer: :cool: :ph34r:

ahhh_money_is_comfort

19th June 2005, 07:24

Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 16 2005, 03:39 PM
Ummmm ^_^ "somebody" might want it to happen... ;)

Japan:

Communist Association - Future (Kyôsanshugi Kyôgikai - Mirai, COM-Future / Komu-Mirai)
Communist League (Spark) (Kyôsanshugi Dômei (Hibana))
Communist Network (Kyosanshugi Netsuto Waku)
Democratic Party of Japan (Minshûto)
Democratic Unity League (Minshû Tôitsu Dômei, Mintôitsudô)
Ecolo
Fourth International Central Secretariat (Dayon Intânashonaru Chûô Shokikyoku)
Fourth International Japan Section Reconstruction Preparation Group (Dayon Intânashonaru Nihon Shibu Saiken Jumbi Gurûpu)
Greens Network Japan added February 05
ing Network (Ingu Netsutowaku) added February 05
Internationalism (Kokusaishugi)
Japan Communist Party (Action Faction) (Nihon Kyôsantô (Kôdô-ha))
Japan Independence Association (Jishu Nihon no kai)
Japan Labor Party (Nihon Rôdôtô)
Japan Revolutionary Communist League (Nihon Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei, JRCL)
Japan Revolutionary Communist League, National Committee/Middle Core Faction (Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei, Zenkoku Iinkai/Chûkakû-ha, Chûkakû-ha)
Japan Revolutionary Communist League - Revolutionary Marxist Faction (Nihon Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei - Kakumeiteki Marukusushugi-ha, Kakumaru-ha)
Japan Struggle League for the Liberation of the Working Class (People's Power) (Nihon Rôdôsha Kaikyû Kaihô Tôsô Dômei (Jinmin no Chikara))
Japanese Communist Party (Nihon Kyôsantô, Nikkyô)
Japanese Red Army (Nihon Sekigun) unofficial
Marxist Comrades Group (Marukusushugi Dôshikai)
Movement for Democratic Socialism (Minshûshugiteki Shaikaishugi Undô)
National Council of Internationalist Workers (Kokusaishugi Rôdôsha Zenkoku Kyôgikai) updated February 05
National Conference of the Liberation Faction for the Establishment of the Revolutionary Workers' Party - Workers' Opposition Faction (Kakumeiteki Rôdôshatô Kensetsu Omezasu Kaihô-ha Zenkoku Kyôgikai - Rôtai-ha, Kakurôkyô Rôtai-ha) updated February 05
National Congress Aiming at the New Worker's Party (Atarashii Rôdôshatô Omezazu Zenkoku Kyôgikai, Wakazu) updated February 05
New Socialist Party (Shin Shakaitô)
Okinawa Social Masses Party (Okinawa Shakai Taishûtô, Shataitô)
People - Group aiming at Self-Government, Solidarity, Ecology (Jichi, Rentai, Ekoroji Omezazu Gurûpu - Sôsei) updated February 05
Rainbow and Greens (Niji to Midori)
Social Democratic Party (Shakai Minshutô, Shamintô)
Progressive Reform Research Group (Shinpoto Kaikakuken Kyûkai)
Socialist Association (Shakaishugi Kyôkai, Kyôkai-ha)
The League (Bunto / BUND)
Workers Communist Party (Rôdôsha Kyôsantô)
Workers Network (Wakazu Netsuto Waku)
Workers Socialist League (Rôdôsha Shakaishugi Dômei, Rôshadô)
Workers' Solidarity Movement (Rôdôsho Rentai Undô)

:hammer: :cool: :ph34r:
Can you explain this too me? I have a short attention span.