Leftist Political Parties

[Taboo Tongue]

After listening to Bob Avakian excessivley and reading about him he comes off as cultish and almost like an athiest preacher of some sort. I also saw that he get's alot of flak about this on Rev Left so I was curious which leftist politcal parties does everyone (individually) support?

[Batman]

www.irsm.org

[John_worldrevolution.info]

www.fifthinternational.org

[More Fire for the People]

There is a thread like this here:
http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php...8108&hl=parties (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=38108&hl=parties)

I wouldn't say "support" but I favour the Democratic Party over the Republican Party. Not much difference, but the system is rigged so that only two parties can have influence. Voting for a third party would be wasteful even though voting for the Democratic Party is just as bad. I just cross my fingers and hope for free health care - don't expect much though.

[Clarksist]

I wouldn't say "support" but I favour the Democratic Party over the Republican Party. Not much difference, but the system is rigged so that only two parties can have influence. Voting for a third party would be wasteful even though voting for the Democratic Party is just as bad. I just cross my fingers and hope for free health care - don't expect much though.


That's horrible. The Democratic Party is getting all their money from the same fucken people as the Republican Party.

Free yourself from a rigged democracy. Its time to rise up and show that we have the power. Free yourself from parties, and get in part of the action.

American politics is an infantile preoccupation of time.

[More Fire for the People]

America is not ready for any sort of revolution, the only available option for class-conscious proletarians, peasants, and students is to educate their fellow workingmen.

By the way, I'm "supportive" only of part of the Democratic Party, typically the Progressive Caucus. As for the time being, a social democratic government will help open people's ears to left voices.

[STI]

America is not ready for any sort of revolution, the only available option for class-conscious proletarians, peasants, and students is to educate their fellow workingmen.


Indeed, communists and anarchists should spend their time educating fellow workers, but it should be about proletarian revolution. Any serious leftist who advocates voting/supporting Democrat is either seriously misguided or lying.


By the way, I'm "supportive" only of part of the Democratic Party, typically the Progressive Caucus. As for the time being, a social democratic government will help open people's ears to left voices

Probably not. Even if a real social democratic government were to be elected, not much would come of it. Take a look at when the NDP was elected in Ontario. What happened? They gave a big "fuck you" to the union membership and forced the (ironically-named) "collective agreement". The people who were members of/worked on the campaigns of the NDP became burned out and basically fed up with the left as a whole (if you can even consider the NDP to be "leftists"). No good came of it. Some militants "layed down their arms" when the NDP came to power, believing they'd do anything worthwhile. They didn't.

Are there any historical examples of the election of a social democrat "opening peoples' ears to [revolutionary] left voices"?

I'm willing to bet they're few and far between.

Supporting the Democraps only legitimizes their existence.

[Scars]

The RCP are a bloody joke and a pseudo-cult. If you look at everything they write, somewhere in it will have apiece about just how fucking brillant Avakin is. I'm just glad that they'll most likely collapse after Avakin carks it and maybe some of the comrades in the RCP can be recruited into worthwhile struggles.

Me? I support the Progressive Labour Party (PLP), their fancy site is here:
http://www.revolutionary-communism.tk/
Their ideology is covered here:
http://www.plp.org/pl_magazine/pl_index.html
(Road to Revolution IV is probably the 'key' document, though the rest are all important to understand what we believe)

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I support any revolutionary party actively enguaged in meaningful revolutionary activity, at least in the context of their involvement.
Critical support to build a united left!

Oh, and in Quebec, I was a PCQ member . . . though mainly for practical reasons.

[More Fire for the People]

Any proletarian revolution will be lead by the proletarian not a "wisened" political party. My "support" for the Democratic party is only my "support", I'm not encouraging others to vote for them but out of principle I need free health care now more than I need a pamphlet made by Marxist-Leninist idealist.

[STI]

And you think publicly supporting the democrats (and therefore implicitly encouraging others to do so), will make it happen? Not a chance. No Democrat presidential possible supports state medical care, and even if s/he did, it wouldn't carry over to anything real.

I think it's time we face the fact that things are shit and they'll continue to be shit until we overthrow this mess.

[John_worldrevolution.info]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 03:29 PM
Any proletarian revolution will be lead by the proletarian not a "wisened" political party. My "support" for the Democratic party is only my "support", I'm not encouraging others to vote for them but out of principle I need free health care now more than I need a pamphlet made by Marxist-Leninist idealist.
As a socialist you should be encouraging people to break from the democratic party and you should be at the forfront of such a struggle. I hear that some trade unions are already to start to break from them you should be encouraging them to do so! Supporting the DP is not the way to do that!

[More Fire for the People]

Then how do you propose a movement for free health care?
If you hadn't noticied politicians don't listen to protestors until they start a messy ruckus like WTO, 1999.

[spartafc]

Socialist Party of England and Wales (http://www.socialistparty.org.uk)
part of the CWI (http://www.socialistworld.net/)

[STI]

Then how do you propose a movement for free health care?

I don't! Things will only get worse from here on out. That's capitalism.

Take Canada as an example. We've had "free health care" for about 40 years, and it's starting to be dismantled. Even lousy social democrats are making note of that.

If we can only expect things to get worse in capitalism, how can you expect such a massive gain to be made using anything short of revolutionary upheaval?


If you hadn't noticied politicians don't listen to protestors until they start a messy ruckus like WTO, 1999.

If they won't listen to people protesting, what makes you think they'll listen to people passively asking for something?

I'm wondering if you actually expect universal health care to come from supporting the Democrats or even the Greens.

[John_worldrevolution.info]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 09:05 PM
Then how do you propose a movement for free health care?
If you hadn't noticied politicians don't listen to protestors until they start a messy ruckus like WTO, 1999.
Like I said before, a new workers party based on a grassroots workers movement and not Trade Union beaurocrats.

I work in the British National Health service and under Labour it has become more privatised and more dismantled than ever before. That's not because Labour are worse than the Tories but because bourgeois parties do what they can get away with be they repubs, democrats whatever. The democrats will not bring you a health service nor will they remove the troops from Iraq. They put on a liberal face to get elected by the working class but they are really an obstacle for workers and will sell you out and continue the destruction of what little welfare state the US has.

[More Fire for the People]

I am fully aware that the Democrats are not a proletarian party but to quote the Communist Manifesto:


The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future of that movement. In France, the Communists ally with the Social-Democrats(1) against the conservative and radical bourgeoisie, reserving, however, the right to take up a critical position in regard to phases and illusions traditionally handed down from the great Revolution.

In Switzerland, they support the Radicals, without losing sight of the fact that this party consists of antagonistic elements, partly of Democratic Socialists, in the French sense, partly of radical bourgeois.

In Poland, they support the party that insists on an agrarian revolution as the prime condition for national emancipation, that party which fomented the insurrection of Cracow in 1846.

In Germany, they fight with the bourgeoisie whenever it acts in a revolutionary way, against the absolute monarchy, the feudal squirearchy, and the petty bourgeoisie.

[STI]

Rot, that was written in the 1800s, while capitalism could still afford some reforms. The world is different now than it was. There's no more "monarchy" in Germany. Poland is no longer anticipating an "agrarian revolution".

And guess what, it's entirely possible that, oh my god, Marx was wrong!

So what are you going to believe, a hundred-and-some-year-old document, or the hundred-and-some years of history that followed it?

[More Fire for the People]

I think you completely neglected the most important part of that piece,

The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class;
Universal health care, social security, and public education are all in the momentary interest of the proletarian.

[STI]

Unfortunately, those things aren't possible anymore. Things are getting worse and worse for capitalism, and the capitalism is less and less able to afford reforms. Look at any advanced capitalist nation. Are reforms being implimented, or dismantled? Guess why.

[Led Zeppelin]

Fedaian (minority) (http://www.geocities.com/~fedaian/english/home.html)

[More Fire for the People]

There being dismantled by the capitalist of course because the working class has become complacent with social democracy, been lifted to a middle class income, and doesn't give a shit if they don't have free health insurance.

In no way am I advocating "reformist socialism" though, I am advocating momentary interest of the working class through reform.

[romanm]

If you think AmeriKKKan so called "workers" deserve even more imperial superprofits, then there are any number of crypto/trots, social dems, or social fascist parties for you.

If you want to liberate the vast majority of humynity, if you want to stand on the side of the exploited and oppressed, then there are places like IRTR and groups like MIM. Check my sig for links to IRTR.

[Le People]

I'm going to be pumbled for this one, but I support the Left wing of the Democrat party, because they can at least have some influnce. We should all recall Max Shactman and his infulnece on LBJ's Medicare.

[Scars]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2005, 12:53 AM
If you think AmeriKKKan so called "workers" deserve even more imperial superprofits, then there are any number of crypto/trots, social dems, or social fascist parties for you.

If you want to liberate the vast majority of humynity, if you want to stand on the side of the exploited and oppressed, then there are places like IRTR and groups like MIM. Check my sig for links to IRTR.
I love the way that MIM is easily the most secterian party out there, but they claim to not be at all secterian. It's truely laughable, made more so because they don't do anything! MIM is nothing more than a small circle of white, middle class Americans who write silly movie reviews and denounce parties on the other side of the world.

Answer me this Romanm, how many members does MIM actually have? Most people I know in the states have NEVER seen a MIMer, let alone multiples.

[More Fire for the People]

You know what I find funny about this "humyn" stuff is that "man" is a gender-neutral word in Middle English.

Also, American workers are poor as well, in fact my family makes $15,000 a year. If I had "superprofits" do you honestly think I would be posting here?

[Warren Peace]

CrimethInc rocks. It's anarchist, smart, revolutionary and totally decentralized. The link is in my sig. Also check out some of the other links.

Just don't think that because I have links to RAIL and IRTR that I support MIM. MIM is too authoritarian, dogmatic, and intoletant of other beliefs. MIM members never use their own names or even different aliases. For all we know, MIM could be run by one guy who hides in his basement and lives off beer and twinkies.

[Defyman]

I really do not agree with the organization of local parties that seek votes in every election. I think that right now we should make other people think and be doubtfull about capitalism. Maybe leftist parties could be used to measure the "popularity" of leftist ideas among people. But in general we should organize a big progressive communist movement, starting from the web...

GLOBALIZE THE RESISTANCE
:ph34r: :hammer: :ph34r:

[romanm]

I love the way that MIM is easily the most secterian party out there, but they claim to not be at all secterian. It's truely laughable, made more so because they don't do anything! MIM is nothing more than a small circle of white, middle class Americans who write silly movie reviews and denounce parties on the other side of the world.

Answer me this Romanm, how many members does MIM actually have? Most people I know in the states have NEVER seen a MIMer, let alone multiples.

Notice Scars's method in the above post. It is totally anti-communst and unscientific.

MIM doesn't answer pig questions about identity or organizational details.

In Scars's sloppy attempt at baiting for information, he contradicts himself. Scars says that MIM are all white college students, but a couple lines later he admits to knowing little about the identies of MIM - he even says nobody he knows has even met significant numbers of MIM.

It is public knowledge that MIM was founded with a majority of oppressed nation peoples and wimmin. But, this doesn't matter. What matters is science, not identity.

MIM is a vanguard organization. MIM is a party of leaders. And, if you can't hack the hard consequences of Lenin's "better fewer, but better" - then, there are any number of social democratic parties you can apply for.

As for MIM's work, you can check their web page and get a good sense of what struggles are important. MIM devotes alot of space to captive nation struggles, like keeping the borders open. They also devote alot of space for prison struggles. These are two areas among many others..


MIM members never use their own names or even different aliases.

Actually, MIM members do use different aliases. They use "MC" followed by a number designation. Also, there are HC designations and MSG designations and many others for those afiliated with MIM.


MIM is too authoritarian, dogmatic, and intoletant of other beliefs.

There is a general idea among liberals that requiring scientific discussion is dogmatic. MIM defends its positions scientifically, so it gets called dogmatic. The liberal view is totally backwards.

Dogma is when you hold a position without knowing much about it, or even when you have been shown that your idea is wrong or when you have no evidence. For example, saying that Stalin was bad when you really don't have much basis for that is being dogmatic. Yet, there are opportunists who hold all kinds of false, unjustified beliefs, without having investigated them scientifically - this is dogmatism.

If you want a party based on science, there is MIM. If you want a paty based on appeals to authority or emotional attatchment to a leader, there are any number of parties like that around.

[Scars]

<<Notice Scars&#39;s method in the above post. It is totally anti-communst and unscientific.>>

Oh yeah, they accuse anyone who doesn&#39;t mindlessly support them as being anti-Communist. If they put the amount of tiem and effort into productive things that they do into denouncing tiny parties in obscure countries then maybe, just maybe they could achive somthing.

<<MIM doesn&#39;t answer pig questions about identity or organizational details.>>

And why&#39;s that?

<<In Scars&#39;s sloppy attempt at baiting for information, he contradicts himself. Scars says that MIM are all white college students, but a couple lines later he admits to knowing little about the identies of MIM - he even says nobody he knows has even met significant numbers of MIM.>>

Actually I&#39;m saying there&#39;s not a significant number of MIMers TO meet. I suppose you could great each one using the multiple aliases that they no doubt use. And I never claimed they were collage students. And out of interest, how to do explain the fact that pretty much every Communist leader has been a part of the so-called &#39;labour aristocracy&#39;.

And your stupid spellings are irritating, childish, ignorant and hard on the eye. The &#39;wimmin&#39; thing is particularly stupid, &#39;man&#39; is derived from the anglo-saxon word for &#39;person&#39;, &#39;woman&#39; quite literally meant &#39;female person&#39;. It&#39;s no better than the RAF claimed to be striking a great blow against Imperialism by ignoring basic rules of German grammar.

The disgusting generalisation that there is no white working class is racist, shortsighted and ignorant. There are poor starving whites, just as there are poor starving blacks. There just happens to be more poor starving blacks, but this does not mean that there aren&#39;t poor whites. There isn&#39;t a white working class, just as there isn&#39;t a black working class. There only is THE working class, which is exploited no matter what skin pigment your DNA may give you.

[STI]

There being dismantled by the capitalist of course because the working class has become complacent with social democracy, been lifted to a middle class income, and doesn&#39;t give a shit if they don&#39;t have free health insurance.


Trust me, America doesn&#39;t have "social democracy". Canada doesn&#39;t, for heaven&#39;s sake&#33;

You&#39;d probably find that most people are in favour of free health insurance, but that&#39;s not hte issue. The issue is that it&#39;s impossible to do it by supporting/voting for the democrats.


In no way am I advocating "reformist socialism" though, I am advocating momentary interest of the working class through reform.

By doing that, you&#39;re legitimizing the existing structures. You&#39;re saying, through your actions, "electoralism really can work&#33;". When the working class thinks the existing structures can create change, they&#39;re a lot less likely to carry aout a revolution.

[CrazyModerate]

Yes, I remember the great day that a peoples revolution lead to a great socialist society, especially in the developed west and pacific rim... Oh wait...

Considering Mao was tyrant whose policies resulted in the death of millions of the poor, I don&#39;t see how his ideology could be so great for the proletariat.

Oh yeah and the NDP fucked up in Ontario for multiple reasons. You should consider the secret, yet massive, deficit the Liberals gave the NDP. Or the fact that Bob Rae is a douchebag and no longer aligned with the NDP. He in fact supports the so called "third way", just like Tony Blair and that bigoted asshole Kline.

Also, I&#39;m sure you just loved it when Mike Harris, and now Dalton McDouchebag, are in charge, right?

If the NDP stops settling for supporting the Liberals in return for miniscule social programs they could have some success and at the same time stay on track, on the left.

Name any revolutionary country and it would still not have better support for the poor than Canada or Denmark.

[red_orchestra]

Federally the NDP have never held office. But I&#39;m sure they would run the country better than those damn Liberals. Mainstream parties in general, suck. :0

[Paul R]

Scottish Socialist Party

www.scottishsocialistparty.org (http://www.scottishsocialistparty.org)