Armchair Revolutionaries

[guerillablack]

I never understood, why most of the people here yap yap yap about revolution this and revolution that day in and day out here, but aren't doing anything really to progress this movement in America or anywhere else.

What are you doing?


*ps, this can be moved to practice.

[lenin_fresh]

I think one of the big problems is that a lot of us are a little too young to be taken seriously. Who the hell is going to listen to a 21 year old? I emailed William Blum one time asking him the best way fight what's going on and he replied that there really isn't anything to do short of staying informed and debating. Armed insurrection is an option, but that would be suicidal. Can't say that I disagreed.

I do what I can on issues I feel strongly about. But what's a guy who lives in Indiana going to do for now? I don't even live in a big town, demonstrations don't happen here. So basically it's just boycotts and debating until everyone is blue in the face. Then again, Debs managed to make some serious waves from my area.

I don't entertain any delusions that some of us will get older and "make peace with the establishment", but I do think that our age group wont see serious change until we're old enough to take the positions of power. That may sound revisionist (I know some of you aren't too down with that) but I think it's one of our best options.

So in other words I don't do a whole hell of a lot.

[redstar2000]

The short answer is people do what they can.

And await more favorable conditions so that they can do more.

What else, after all, would you have people do?

Constructive and well-thought-out suggestions are always welcome.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[John Train]

REFORM REFORM REFORM the revolution isn't coming any time soon! Also, if your not flat broke I don't see why everyone on this board wouldn't be donating as much money as possible to organizations like Amnesty International. Demonstrations are good for the spirit but almost completely ineffective in the U.S.

It is a complete waste of time discussing revolution in the U.S. and debating politics outside of political issues that have real life application like charitable donations, soup kitchens or occasionally local elections are more or less just entertaining and unless your a republican very depressing.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Reform is a big waste of time. Try asking a hungry shark not to eat you. Especially when your blood is in the water.

[barret]

The United States is a country that is too large, filled with people of varrying ideas on the government. Any attempt at a revolution would be put down pretty quickly. Some of it is to blame on the fact that there are many people in the United States who are ignorant of the government and their place in society. The only thing that is possible at the moment is to attempt to educate people on the wrongs of our current government / economy.

[Decolonize The Left]

Reform will fail to bring about true communism, or anarchism. It has in the past, it will in the future. Revolution is the only option, but it is far from ready.

Until then, read up, think, debate, hone your intellect and prepare to tear the system down.

-- August

[John Train]

Reform is a big waste of time. Try asking a hungry shark not to eat you. Especially when your blood is in the water.-NoXion

So, it's all or nuthin huh? Ted Kaczynski is a clear case of why that kind extremism in the U.S. will only lead to misery and needless violence.

The only thing that is possible at the moment is to attempt to educate people on the wrongs of our current government / economy.-barret

Reform will fail to bring about true communism, or anarchism. It has in the past, it will in the future. Revolution is the only option, but it is far from ready.

Until then, read up, think, debate, hone your intellect and prepare to tear the system down.

-- August

Revolution isn't an option and it's unlikely to become one within our lifetime. We can't hide in the hills like they did in Cuba and people in the U.S. are generally pacified to such a degree that even if they know the truth about capitalism and communism they're unlikely to do much of anything about it.

Obviously, I think propaganda and debate are positive things but they aren't going to lead to our kind of revolution now or maybe ever. Be a pragmatic idealist and try to focus on what "you can really do with what you know" feeding the homeless and providing them with things like a warm blanket is in my opinion what communism/anarchism is all about. It's the belief that man is essentially good and needs to help others to achieve any real sense of fulfillment. "Action" however insignificant it may appear to be in the political arena is far more "revolutionary" than debate.

Capitalists are no more capable of self-sacrifice than a man is capable of lifting himself up by his own bootstraps.
Vladimir Lenin

[guerillablack]

Lenin Fresh , i disagree with you. As seen in the Civil Rights Movements and Black Power movements, the college students were an active and crucial element in those processes.

Redstar, i also disagree with you. You know for a fact people do not do what they can. I have alot of events and projects planned for my college campus, community, people that would/raise consciousness.

There's no such thing as can you do something productive. It's do you choose to.

[John Train]

[QUOTE] Lenin Fresh , i disagree with you. As seen in the Civil Rights Movements and Black Power movements, the college students were an active and crucial element in those processes.


What do you mean by "Lenin Fresh"? If you meant you’re tired of Lenin quotes on this message board I guess I understand.

The black power movement (which was generally blatantly racist poor African Americans who were blinded by hatred) is over, thank god.

Liberal college students these days tend to be in support of gun control laws which would make an already incredibly difficult revolution impossible. Colleges do have plenty of socialists but they tend to compromise their socialist values to get ahead in this rat race. I'm really not trying to insult you but I really think you should take a good objective look around you and accept that there is no revolution coming and laying ground work for this improbable revolution is a waste of time and moral vigor.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 02:13 PM
The short answer is people do what they can.
I wouldn't say that was always the case. I think allot of the time people do what they want, not what they can.

[lenin_fresh]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2005, 07:17 PM
Lenin Fresh , i disagree with you. As seen in the Civil Rights Movements and Black Power movements, the college students were an active and crucial element in those processes.
I agree with that argument but there's also the fact that everyone's ability to get involved is different. Some college students don't have the time.

For example, I work two jobs and go to class full time. I don't have the time to organize a demonstration around here. Even if I did, what good would it do in Richmond, Indiana? Not much.

The only demonstration that's gone on here is a pro gay marriage one in Indianapolis back in March I think it was. That was during the morning while everyone was at work. The one before that? An anti-Klan rally in 2003.

The times have changed as well. Most college aged protestors are looked upon as people who will eventually do most of their shopping at the Gap later in life. That or they're just looked upon as crazy or naive. At least that's how it is in the States.

Never the less, doing what you can is still very important (though I guess that's stating the obvious).

Oh, and lenin_fresh is a play on words. Linen fresh? Like the fabric softener ads? Yeah, lame I know. :P

[viva le revolution]

Why not start or join a student communist organization? They are great at raising awareness and have the option of striking as an organization, for example, in Cuba, what made the takeover of Havana possible?
As Che and Cienfuegos were advancing with their columns a student group launched an attack on Batista's presidential palace, Batista narrowly escaped with his life and fled Havana leaving control an inempt Junta.
That made it possible to overrun Havana.
Student groups are immensely useful in the revolution, and as a united force are formidable, to raise awareness and to take united action.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

So, it's all or nuthin huh? Ted Kaczynski is a clear case of why that kind extremism in the U.S. will only lead to misery and needless violence.

Red Herring. Mr Kaczynski is an anti-civilisation nutcase. In case you fail to realise, the only parties that have any hope of attaining power are both right wing, the degree merely varies.

So yes it is 'all or nothing'. I want a free and fair society, not a capitalist society with some reforms and handouts to mollify the workers. Red or dead, none of this pinko semi-socialist nonsense.

Compromise is for those who don't deserve it.


The black power movement (which was generally blatantly racist poor African Americans who were blinded by hatred) is over, thank god.

Fuck off, you racist turd. There were some white black panthers you know. (Guess how many black people are in the KKK?) White people have absolutely no reason to complain of oppression, especially in the US.


I'm really not trying to insult you but I really think you should take a good objective look around you and accept that there is no revolution coming and laying ground work for this improbable revolution is a waste of time and moral vigor.

And you think trying to reform a system already corrupt to the core is going to be a more useful expenditure of energy?

[Amusing Scrotum]

Read as much as you can about everything political. Be it the ills of Capitalism, the virtues of Communism or just your local newspaper. Think about everything you've read and formulate your opinions. So that when you become involved in political discussions, you are able to form a coherent, intelligent and informative debate. Instead of just ranting "Capitalism sucks, we must smash the state."
Making someone else think about their political opinions is aform of revolution in itself.

Attending demonstrations can be very productive, they can also be useless. However showing your support for a cause you believe in is ALWAYS a good thing. However fruitless it may seem.

Volunterary work is another important thing. Living your life as you want others to live theirs.

[John Train]

W not start or join a student communist organization? They are great at raising awareness and have the option of striking as an organization, for example, in Cuba, what made the takeover of Havana possible?-viva le revolution

This is clearly not Cuba as I pointed out earlier on this thread. Che even agreed armed insurrection in the U.S. would be a bad idea.

Red Herring. Mr Kaczynski is an anti-civilisation nutcase. In case you fail to realise, the only parties that have any hope of attaining power are both right wing, the degree merely varies.

So yes it is 'all or nothing'. I want a free and fair society, not a capitalist society with some reforms and handouts to mollify the workers. Red or dead, none of this pinko semi-socialist nonsense.-NoXion

My point is you’re delusional if you think debate is going to change the climate so drastically as to allow a communist revolution in the U.S. I was using Kaczynski as an example of where your level of extremism leads. I never made any ideological comparisons.

Well if it's all or nothing it's going to be a bitter pile of nothing for you. THERE IS NO POPULAR SUPPORT FOR COMMUNISM IN THE U.S. AND THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THERE WILL EVER BE AGAIN!



Fuck off, you racist turd. There were some white black panthers you know. (Guess how many black people are in the KKK?) White people have absolutely no reason to complain of oppression, especially in the US.-NoXion

There is no need to get so nasty! You seem to be a very intolerant individual I'm sure you'll do just fine converting right wingers with that attitude. You are right though I wrongfully assumed they were racist. I never said anything about them opressing anybody, especially in the U.S.

[KC]

Just wait for globalization to wind down. The whole world has to be capitalist before communism even has a chance.

Companies go overseas for cheaper wages. Once these countries are developed, the companies move on. So what happens when all countries are developed to the point where they can't find the cheap labour they want? They're screwed. That is when the workers of the world start to feel the tension when their wages are cut or their work hours are lengthened. This is when communism will have greatest support.

[Ele'ill]

Demonstrations are good for the spirit but almost completely ineffective in the U.S.

Except for when 40,000 demonstrators shut down the WTO meeting (and the city) in seattle back on the 30th of november 1999. I guess that was the 'almost' but there's no reason it couldn't happen many more times. It was the voice of many people at the time and the organization involved was immense. The people do have power even now, don't underestimate it.

[KC]

Except for when 40,000 demonstrators shut down the WTO meeting (and the city) in seattle back on the 30th of november 1999. I guess that was the 'almost' but there's no reason it couldn't happen many more times.

Stop talking about this damn demonstration. Yes, it was big, but it was the exception.

[Ele'ill]

Stop talking about this damn demonstration. Yes, it was big, but it was the exception.

It was glorious you should have been there it was just so fantastical i'm getting goose bumps right now. I have to stop this though as I can't handle all this memory induced excitment before bed time. And also it wasn't that it was big, a dog can shit a large pile but under normal circumstances the pile will infact just sit on the ground and do nothing. Big means very little it was the organizing that paid off in the end.

[KC]

Stop talking about this damn demonstration. Yes, it was somewhat effective, but it was the exception.

Better?

[Ele'ill]

Actually it was very effective as it reached it's goal which was to send a message to the wto that many people are not content and are angry and aware of what is going on. They did this by shutting down the meeting. Which was the plan from the begining.

;D

[slim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 10:08 AM
I never understood, why most of the people here yap yap yap about revolution this and revolution that day in and day out here, but aren't doing anything really to progress this movement in America or anywhere else.

What are you doing?


*ps, this can be moved to practice.
Ive set my date. Im building support.

I agree with you a lot though. Ive offered people the chance and some of them who "yap" as you say, just dont care. They put on a front about it being a paper revolution.

It will happen. mid 2007. Join us if you wish. Set up your own resistance to the state in simultaneous defiance of tyranny.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by John Train
THERE IS NO POPULAR SUPPORT FOR COMMUNISM IN THE U.S. AND THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THERE WILL EVER BE AGAIN!

Yeah...things look pretty grim.

And it's easy to conclude that the way things are is "the way they will always be".

But history teaches a rather different lesson...that the worst bet you can make about the future is that it will "be like now only more so".

Betting on communist revolution seems like a real "long-shot".

Later on, it may turn out to be a "sure bet".

If Marx was right, it will be a sure bet!

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[John Train]

Except for when 40,000 demonstrators shut down the WTO meeting (and the city) in Seattle back on the 30th of November 1999. I guess that was the 'almost' but there's no reason it couldn't happen many more times. It was the voice of many people at the time and the organization involved was immense. The people do have power even now, don't underestimate it.-Mari3L

You postponed a meeting and you sent them a message they clearly haven't heard. That protest specifically was encouraging to some degree but in the end nothing was changed, awareness alone can't overtake an organization like the W.T.O and in the end that was the protests greatest achievement.

The police right now have more power then a city full of people not because of their weapons or numbers but because people often subconsciously believe they do. I think propaganda could cure them of this delusional concept and could lead to more protests of that magnitude that would endure throughout the pesky police's attempts at dispersing the crowd with their tear gas and billy clubs. "Steal this Book" has a useful little section that deals specifically with preparation for a demonstration it's a little dated I suppose but if everyone at the W.T.O protest would have read it the outcome might have been different, I emphasize very strongly "might" have been different.

Being disenfranchised by corporations and the W.T.O isn't going to lead to a Communist revolution, I think it may inspire sympathy for the cause but in the end people are so hopelessly indoctrinated it won't be enough.

Yeah...things look pretty grim.

And it's easy to conclude that the way things are is "the way they will always be".

But history teaches a rather different lesson...that the worst bet you can make about the future is that it will "be like now only more so".

Betting on communist revolution seems like a real "long-shot".

Later on, it may turn out to be a "sure bet".

If Marx was right, it will be a sure bet! - RED STAR

Unfortunately to be a communist means being a materialist (with few exceptions) this then means being an atheist/agnostic. We must believe Marx was a man not Jesus or the Messiah capable of predicting the future with supernatural accuracy. His predictions have been wrong in the past and I only hope won't continue to be wrong in the future.

I agree only in this epoch of history does the revolution seem improbable and painfully distant. But because we live in it we should try to make it more bearable through reform or individual acts of uplifting our communities as I said earlier in this thread. If communists spent more time organizing soup kitchens or raising money for indigent people their image would be harder to demonize and their support would grow.

[KC]

Unfortunately to be a communist means being a materialist (with few exceptions) this then means being an atheist/agnostic. We must believe Marx was a man not Jesus or the Messiah capable of predicting the future with supernatural accuracy. His predictions have been wrong in the past and I only hope won't continue to be wrong in the future.


Marx's ability to "predict the future" isn't based on "supernatural powers", but rather on his knowledge of the laws of capitalist society. He can't predict dates, but he can predict how the system will evolve, and perhaps even how it will eventually die.

[John Train]

Marx's ability to "predict the future" isn't based on "supernatural powers", but rather on his knowledge of the laws of capitalist society. He can't predict dates, but he can predict how the system will evolve, and perhaps even how it will eventually die.- Lazar

Of course, I understand that. But his predictions have been wrong in the past and I simply meant to have so much faith in someone like Marx is comparable to religious faith. He was a man and everyman regardless of their brilliance is capable of being wrong. His predictions are speculative and unverifiable therefore to put so much stock into what he said in 1848 is hypocritical of communist ideology in my opinion.

Keep in mind I'm not saying he was wrong about the eventual evolution of capitalism.

[KC]

Use the quote function. It will help you a lot.



Of course, I understand that. But his predictions have been wrong in the past and I simply meant to have so much faith in someone like Marx is comparable to religious faith. He was a man and everyman regardless of their brilliance is capable of being wrong. His predictions are speculative and unverifiable therefore to put so much stock into what he said in 1848 is hypocritical of communist ideology in my opinion.

What predictions are still relevant? I just thought he predicted German revolution.

[John Train]

Use the quote function. It will help you a lot.- LAZAR

NO!

What predictions are still relevant? I just thought he predicted German revolution.-LAZAR

Have you ever read the Communist Manifesto?

[KC]

NO!

Why not?



Have you ever read the Communist Manifesto?

Of course. I haven't in a while, though, unfortunately. I should reread it. What predictions were made in it?

[guerillablack]

By indoctrinated, are you telling me that the massses need to know of Marx or theories and philosophies? I don't think so. The poor, the lumpenproletiat doesn't even need to crack open a book or hear a speech to know that the system is fucked up and needs some drastic changes.

[John Train]

Of course. I haven't in a while, though, unfortunately. I should reread it. What predictions were made in it?

Well, obviously, he believed the proletariat would overthrow the government and instate communism. Marx also expected that the proletarian revolution would occur in Germany or England and then take place worldwide.



By indoctrinated, are you telling me that the massses need to know of Marx or theories and philosophies? I don't think so. The poor, the lumpenproletiat doesn't even need to crack open a book or hear a speech to know that the system is fucked up and needs some drastic changes.


If they don't understand the alternatives and there implications it's insane to think an ignorant working class would form a better government or that they even would.

[KC]

Well, obviously, he believed the proletariat would overthrow the government and instate communism. Marx also expected that the proletarian revolution would occur in Germany or England and then take place worldwide.


Marx underestimated the duration of time for capitalism to fully develop. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean that a communist revolution won't happen. Quite the contrary. It just means that it hasn't happened yet.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by John Train
But because we live in it we should try to make it more bearable through reform or individual acts of uplifting our communities as I said earlier in this thread. If communists spent more time organizing soup kitchens or raising money for indigent people their image would be harder to demonize and their support would grow.

But, you see, communism is not a charity. It doesn't exist to "help people". That's not its purpose.

If you want to "help people", then there are plenty of existing charities that you can hook up with...try "Food not Bombs", for example.

Communism is about the abolition of wage-slavery and the transfer of all power into the hands of the working majority.

If you think that is "impossible"...fine. Go and live your life, charitable or otherwise, as you see fit.

But real communists are not reconcilable to the capitalist system. We do not "accept" the proposition that "our cause is lost".

If we are "fools", then so be it. It is better to fight for what you want and lose, than it is to surrender to what you despise.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[John Train]

But, you see, communism is not a charity. It doesn't exist to "help people". That's not its purpose.

Communists also believe everyone has the fundamental human right to basic necessities like food or medical treatment. If you believe communism isn't going to help people than why are you a communist? I’m curious, what exactly are you doing to advance your cause?


But real communists are not reconcilable to the capitalist system. We do not "accept" the proposition that "our cause is lost".



If you are that unwilling to compromise I really feel sorry for you. Your only going to make yourself and those around you miserable. Pick your battles! Communism is simply a lost cause at this point in time. In the future maybe it won't be and your time and commitment won't be in vain.

I know this debate is a lost cause as well.

[KC]

Communism is simply a lost cause at this point in time. In the future maybe it won't be and your time and commitment won't be in vain.

Good job! Almost successfully used the quote function as well. Are you a communist? If not, what are you?




(Restrict?)

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by John Train
If you believe communism isn't going to help people, then why are you a communist?

I didn't say that it wouldn't help people; I said that "helping people" is not its purpose.

The purpose of communism is not "a better welfare system", it's liberation from the chains of class society.


I’m curious, what exactly are you doing to advance your cause?

Right now, I'm explaining to people the difference between charity and communism...something that many people find remarkably difficult to grasp.

Beyond this, I do whatever I can to encourage resistance to the despotism of capital...and to try to convince people to deepen that resistance and make it more intransigent.


If you are that unwilling to compromise I really feel sorry for you. You're only going to make yourself and those around you miserable.

That is precisely my intent. The recognition of misery is the first step towards fighting the system that has created it.

If it is your wish to beg for favors from your masters, go right ahead. No matter how much you whine and cringe, they'll probably piss on you anyway.

Real communists reject the servile option...unconditionally!

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[John Train]

Good job! Almost successfully used the quote function as well. Are you a communist? If not, what are you?

What do you mean by almost?

I'm me and I haven't been around long enough to have an absolute opinion on communism or any political system for that matter. Right now if I was demanded to choose sides I would side with libertarian socialists.


(Restrict?)

Don't be a prick!


Right now, I'm explaining to people the difference between charity and communism...something that many people find remarkably difficult to grasp.

Of course, I understand the difference. The point I'm making is simple, if you’re going to live your life fighting for a cause why make it a lost cause. I'm amazed you’re finding this concept so difficult to grasp. Even if you disagree it's a lost cause my objective has been pretty obvious all along.


Beyond this, I do whatever I can to encourage resistance to the despotism of capital...and to try to convince people to deepen that resistance and make it more intransigent.

So, you go to your corporate job, eat your corporate food, feed the bellies of the oppressors and then talk to some people about communism. You are being ridiculously vague as to what you do. Is it that hard to be direct or would pointedly saying what you do reveal how meaningless and petty your actions are.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by John Train
You are being ridiculously vague as to what you do.

That's because the details of my activities are none of your fucking business.

This is an internet message board open to the public; even you should be able to grasp that it is not a place to speak of the details of one's activities "in the real world".

But I do not "go to my corporate job" -- I am retired from all that. :)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[John Train]

This is an internet message board open to the public; even you should be able to grasp that it is not a place to speak of the details of one's activities "in the real world".

So, you’re involved in something illegal I presume or at least that's the impression you’re trying to give, whether it's a way of ducking my question or the truth, I don't know. Whatever it is you are doing if it's only goal or purpose is to promote a communist revolution in the U.S. it is a waste of time.


But I do not "go to my corporate job" -- I am retired from all that.

So, your either an old man with a pension or possibly, though less likely, a poor young man whose chosen to call himself retired not unemployed. If you’re an old man you should know better! If you’re a young man you'll discover what I'm saying is true soon enough or you'll sink deeper into a state of insanity.

I've met your kind before you’re alienated and alienating. You might upset someone with your askew take on reality but you won't gain any allies.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by John Train
So, you’re involved in something illegal I presume...

Nope.


So, you're either an old man with a pension...

Yes!


If you’re an old man you should know better!

I already know better than you -- though admittedly that's not saying much.


I've met your kind before; you’re alienated and alienating.

And I have met your kind before as well -- the technical name is, I believe, fatuous idiot.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Ownthink]

(Restrict?)


Don't be a prick!

It's standard policy if you're NOT a Communist. You are restricted to Opposing Idealoligies, I believe. No one here is being a prick, with the exception of you. Just because someone doesn't want to disclose personal details on the net, you think they must be running in criminal circles? You're a fucking asshole, you know it?

[John Train]

Red Star, it is now apprent you are skirting the issue. If you were not disclosing a spicific means through which you spread communism and it was out of legal concerns, I could've led it slide. Describing a very basic description of how you spread communism legally is pretty harmless. So, you are clearly full of shit.


It's standard policy if you're NOT a Communist. You are restricted to Opposing Idealoligies, I believe.

You believe wrong. There are plenty of Anarchists, Communists and Socialists on this message board.


And I have met your kind before as well -- the technical name is, I believe, fatuous idiot.


ho ho he he, I'm rubber your glue.

[Insomniac]

Unfortunately to be a communist means being a materialist (with few exceptions) this then means being an atheist/agnostic. We must believe Marx was a man not Jesus or the Messiah capable of predicting the future with supernatural accuracy. His predictions have been wrong in the past and I only hope won't continue to be wrong in the future.


If you’re an old man you should know better! If you’re a young man you'll discover what I'm saying is true soon enough or you'll sink deeper into a state of insanity.

You cannot have it both ways!

True most REAL communist who have a open and questioning mind do NOT take EVERY word written by Marx, Engles etc... as literal truth. Marx was right on some things and wrong on others!

Marx was only human like everyone else.

Yet you seem to think we should take your 'opinions' as literal truth!

'Communist revolution is impossible' etc... then you strike down other people with insults if we disagree with your views, despite the fact that you have NOT backed ANY of your points with ANY FACTS OR HISTORICAL EXAMPLES.

I disagree with everything you have said because it is without any fact or substance.

Why should people who stick to their beliefs, rather than become spinless sell out reformists like yourself be called 'insane'???

Most people will dismiss your stupid remark about seeing the light with your 'views' or going down the path of insanity.


Communists also believe everyone has the fundamental human right to basic necessities like food or medical treatment.

Communists believe that ALL humans on this planet deserve that. Yet it is IMPOSSIBLE to have that WITHOUT revolution! Ever have a look at the thrid world, charity will NEVER solve ANY of the major problems in the world for two reasons:

1.) There are too MANY people in need for charity to ever keep up with.

2.) Under capitalism, EVERY new generation of people born, most will be born into poverty thus even if charity cured all of the worlds ills for ONE generation, what about the NEXT generation?

Charity for the worlds poor is like a sticky plaster for a severed finger, it WON'T cure the problem. BETTER INSTEAD TOO ROOT OUT THE SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM.


If you are that unwilling to compromise I really feel sorry for you. Your only going to make yourself and those around you miserable. Pick your battles! Communism is simply a lost cause at this point in time. In the future maybe it won't be and your time and commitment won't be in vain

Yet again you contradict yourself!

You insult people who make the correct decision of not compromising their beliefs yet you say that those who do not compromise their beliefs will contribute to the FUTURE success of the communist cause.

Yes, even if there is no revolution in our lifetime, if I go to my grave knowing that after I die, my efforts help a communist revolution, then Ill die happy.

People who compromise their beliefs are IMO the MAIN cause of why the left is in such a bad state at the moment. Too many people on the left come up with the FAILED mantra of reform and servitude to capitalism, hoping the ruling class is going to throw a few crumbs at their pleas.


I know this debate is a lost cause as well.

Then why the fuck are you on this forum??????

Save us and yourself time and go to a centerist forum or a social democratic forum, because that is clearly where you BELONG!


So, your either an old man with a pension or possibly, though less likely, a poor young man whose chosen to call himself retired not unemployed.

WTF has this got to do with ANYTHING???

What the fuck are you, while were at this one?

Judging by the poor spelling and the even poorer ideas of what communism is, your some teenager who has yet to see how the world works and yet to see how people the world over struggle day to day to make ends meat, most of them not even making that!


If you’re an old man you should know better!

He does know better.

Can the same be said for you?


I've met your kind before you’re alienated and alienating. You might upset someone with your askew take on reality but you won't gain any allies.

Well anyone who does NOT benefit from the capitalist system does to some degree or another suffer from alienation!

If you don't like that, destroy capitalism. But wait, thats impossible according to you.


Red Star, it is now apprent you are skirting the issue. If you were not disclosing a spicific means through which you spread communism and it was out of legal concerns, I could've led it slide. Describing a very basic description of how you spread communism legally is pretty harmless. So, you are clearly full of shit.

Well if RedStar 2000 is full of shit Ill have his shit anyday over your shit!

FYI, RedStar 2000 participated in the SDS in the 60s, was invloved in numerous causes up until the reformist sell outs like yourself destroyed the potential that the SDS and other groups besides posed for a real revolution taking place.

What have YOU done for the cause??? Nothing it seems but preach gloom and doom about how will never achieve liberation and thus we must bow down to the capitalist class and surrender ourselves on a silver plate.


You believe wrong. There are plenty of Anarchists, Communists and Socialists on this message board.

Yes, revolutionary socialists, leninists, marxists, communists and anarchists ALL make up the membership of this forum.

Yet you do NOT appear to be any of them. You say we should accpet capitalism. At most your a gloomy social democrat (in other owrds a capitalist) and thus your no different in reality to a conservative. The difference between social democrats and conservatives is that conservatives are at least honest and state that the majority should accpet injustice and inequality and social democrats pull the wool over the peoples eyes with empty promises of a better life under capitalism.


ho ho he he, I'm rubber your glue

No.

RedStar 2000 has priciples and makes for a good debater, even if people don't agree with him.

You on the other hand cannot put across one coherant point and are nothing but a sell out and an idiot!

[John Train]

'Communist revolution is impossible' etc... then you strike down other people with insults if we disagree with your views, despite the fact that you have NOT backed ANY of your points with ANY FACTS OR HISTORICAL EXAMPLES.

Show me some contradictory evidence or shut the fuck up!


Yet again you contradict yourself!
You insult people who make the correct decision of not compromising their beliefs yet you say that those who do not compromise their beliefs will contribute to the FUTURE success of the communist cause.

Where was my first contradiction again?

You might want to reread my SUPPOSED second contradiction as well?


Judging by the poor spelling and the even poorer ideas of what communism is, your some teenager who has yet to see how the world works and yet to see how people the world over struggle day to day to make ends meat, most of them not even making that!

I dare you to find any more than the occasional typo in any of my posts. Yeah, you seem to have an enormously valuable and enlightened perspective on communism. I'm a teenager who at least knows what the word contradiction means.


Yes, even if there is no revolution in our lifetime, if I go to my grave knowing that after I die, my efforts help a communist revolution, then Ill die happy.

You won't KNOW unless you’re still delusional.


RedStar 2000 has priciples and makes for a good debater, even if people don't agree with him.

He is a better debater than you, but that isn't saying much.

[Ownthink]

Originally posted by John [email protected] 23 2005, 02:20 PM
Red Star, it is now apprent you are skirting the issue. If you were not disclosing a spicific means through which you spread communism and it was out of legal concerns, I could've led it slide. Describing a very basic description of how you spread communism legally is pretty harmless. So, you are clearly full of shit.


It's standard policy if you're NOT a Communist. You are restricted to Opposing Idealoligies, I believe.

You believe wrong. There are plenty of Anarchists, Communists and Socialists on this message board.


And I have met your kind before as well -- the technical name is, I believe, fatuous idiot.


ho ho he he, I'm rubber your glue.
Standard Policy if you ARE a Capitalist. There, I rephrased it.



Restrict this asshole.

[Freedom Works]

1.) There are too MANY people in need for charity to ever keep up with.
Caused by lack of wealth from "governments" stealing it.
Solution: No "government"


2.) Under capitalism, EVERY new generation of people born, most will be born into poverty thus even if charity cured all of the worlds ills for ONE generation, what about the NEXT generation?
This is so ridiculous. One great thing about capitalism is that it is a class system and not a caste system, so poor people can become CEOs of multinational corporations!
Oh, sharing facts would hurt the communist propaganda, wouldn't it?

[John Train]

Standard Policy if you ARE a Capitalist.

So, because I don't believe there is enough support in the U.S. for a successful communist revolution and I don't believe someone should spend their entire life laying ground work for a very uncertain future revolution I'm a capitalist. What a stupid and simple little man you are.

[KC]

Did he say you're a capitalist?

[John Train]

Yes

[Severian]

Originally posted by John [email protected] 20 2005, 04:19 PM
It is a complete waste of time discussing revolution in the U.S. and debating politics outside of political issues that have real life application like charitable donations, soup kitchens or occasionally local elections are more or less just entertaining and unless your a republican very depressing.
Charitable donations and soup kitchens aren't politics.

They're not "fighting for a cause". Not even the cause of reform.

Reagan was a big fan of private and church charity. He preached it was the answer to poverty, and used this as an argument for gutting "big government" social services.

As Insomniac points out, though, charity can't, and never has, provided for the needs of the millions - no, billions - of people in the world who lack basic necessities of life. Voluntary contributions never provide anything like the funding to do that, for the simple reason that the people who have the money just don't care that much about the people who don't.

When rich people do give to charity, it's usually to endow the elite colleges they went to, or to buy specialized hospital equipment they might need. Charity for people like themselves.

What's more, it's degrading to have to beg for charity rather than received what you need as a human right. There's a reason why people who live on charity are generally despised while living on Social Security is respected. It's because Social Security is a universal entitlement, you don't have to prove your poverty and helplessness to get it.

Which is why people like Reagan prefer charity.

If someone wants to work on charity, fine. I won't stop you, or even try to talk you out of it.

But when someone brings up charity as an argument against fighting back....screw that.

Real, significant change isn't produced by saints or charitable individuals.

It happens when millions of people fight back against the bosses and their government. When we demand changes of their government and even more, when we get tired of that and take power to make the changes ourselves.

Charity does none of that. It lets the bosses and their government off the hook.

[John Train]

Charitable donations and soup kitchens aren't politics.

They're not "fighting for a cause". Not even the cause of reform.

Reagan was a big fan of private and church charity.

Of course, they are political. I don't know how you came to that conclusion. How in the hell is combating poverty individually not fighting for a cause?

Yeah, your right I'm just like Regan. Oh, wait I couldn’t be I'm not active in politics, right?

Look I'll break it down. To have the desire to deal with poverty you first must discuss the reasons for poverty which are political. Then you discuss what you want to do about it as far as joining someone else's "organization" or starting your own and when you’re given the opportunity you VOTE for S.S. So, your job will no longer be necessary but at the moment it is necessary.

I believe, as should any communist, that it is simply indoctrination not human nature that allows for us to overlook a homeless person. How many have you passed recently?


I'm not saying individual charity is the answer to poverty or that what I'm describing will alter the system drastically. But if you look at the history of political systems the idea that one will truly rise above the rest and not turn to despotism or something unjust seems unlikely as does a changing of political systems in the U.S. within our lifetime. I'm tired of repeating myself. If you’re going to post at least read all the previous ones beforehand.


What's more, it's degrading to have to beg for charity rather than received what you need as a human right. There's a reason why people who live on charity are generally despised while living on Social Security is respected. It's because Social Security is a universal entitlement, you don't have to prove your poverty and helplessness to get it.

I've heard this argument before and I agree with you.
But, there are exceptions. If you deal with the same homeless people often enough you develop friendships with them and there is no level of degradation involved.




Real, significant change isn't produced by saints or charitable individuals.

What are you doing to bring about SIGNIFICANT change?

There seems to be a lot of romanticism in this thread and not a lot of realism.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

What are you doing to bring about SIGNIFICANT change?

You keep asking this question, have you ever thought of answering it yourself?

[John Train]

Silly NOXION, I already have.

[Severian]

Originally posted by John [email protected] 25 2005, 10:56 AM
ook I'll break it down. To have the desire to deal with poverty you first must discuss the reasons for poverty which are political.
No, you don't. The world is full of people who do charity work without once questioning the reasons why poverty exists....or who simply assume that "the poor you will always have with you."

Some of the most famous charitable workers, like Mother Teresa, weren't even trying primarily to help anyone, but rather to save their own souls. Her hospitals didn't even provide medication to the leprosy patients...but they did give the nuns a chance to do penance by bathing sores.

But please, explain what you think the political causes and solutions of poverty are. A little later you seem to be denying that any political change will "turn to despotism" anyway.


Then you discuss what you want to do about it as far as joining someone else's "organization" or starting your own and when you’re given the opportunity you VOTE for S.S.

I see....vote for who? Tweedledee or Tweedledum? The party of George "privatization" Bush or William Jefferson "end welfare as we know it" Clinton? Who, I might point out, actually did abolish AFDC, one of the 4 components of the Social Security Act.

The creation of Social Security was a product of the massive labor and unemployed organizing, strikes and demonstrations of the 30s, not just or primarily elections....that's the kind of massive social movement that will be required to defend it also.


I'm not saying individual charity is the answer to poverty or that what I'm describing will alter the system drastically. But if you look at the history of political systems the idea that one will truly rise above the rest and not turn to despotism or something unjust seems unlikely as does a changing of political systems in the U.S. within our lifetime.

The logical conclusion from that would be, don't bother with politics, "the poor you will always have with you", just try to slap a few band-aids on the suffering or save your soul as best you can.

So after denying you hold this anti-political viewpoint, a couple paragraphs later you're coming out with arguments for it.


I'm tired of repeating myself.

Then don't.


But, there are exceptions. If you deal with the same homeless people often enough you develop friendships with them and there is no level of degradation involved.

Why not? You're still not relating as equals: you're the benefactor and they're the grateful dependent.


What are you doing to bring about SIGNIFICANT change?

Ad hominem.


There seems to be a lot of romanticism in this thread and not a lot of realism.

Yeah? You just admitted that realistically charity isn't going to solve the problem.

[John Train]

No, you don't. The world is full of people who do charity work without once questioning the reasons why poverty exists....or who simply assume that "the poor you will always have with you."

Some of the most famous charitable workers, like Mother Teresa, weren't even trying primarily to help anyone, but rather to save their own souls. Her hospitals didn't even provide medication to the leprosy patients...but they did give the nuns a chance to do penance by bathing sores.

Well, any reasonably intelligent individual (Christians or religious types would obviously be excluded) doesn't blindly help others without a logical purpose. If I truly believed in capitalism, I would treat the homeless as subhuman (as many do) and not worthy of my time. Because I would then view them as lazy and as failures. I would not be able to see that the system has failed them.

Democrats or Republicans who discuss charity as an alternative to social security or the welfare state do so only as a political tactic. They could clearly care less.



But please, explain what you think the political causes and solutions of poverty are. A little later you seem to be denying that any political change will "turn to despotism" anyway.

That’s a discussion for another thread. If you start one I will be more than happy to post.

I never said they would "absolutely" turn to despotism or would violate human rights. You must admit the track record isn't all that good.




I see....vote for who? Tweedledee or Tweedledum? The party of George "privatization" Bush or William Jefferson "end welfare as we know it" Clinton? Who, I might point out, actually did abolish AFDC, one of the 4 components of the Social Security Act.

My exact words were "when you’re given the opportunity you VOTE for S.S."
I didn't say anything about voting for Bush or Clinton. I'm saying support a third party that has a genuine concern for S.S. (I shoud have been more specific). It's much more reasonable to assume a third party will eventually surface with popular support than a violent insurrection.



Why not? You're still not relating as equals: you're the benefactor and they're the grateful dependent.

Yeah, generally we are relating as equals and no they aren't wholly dependent on me and yes, they are grateful just as they would be under communism.


I didn't start this wave of condescension, I took part, but I would rather just debate with civility.

[Severian]

Originally posted by John [email protected] 27 2005, 08:59 PM
Well, any reasonably intelligent individual (Christians or religious types would obviously be excluded) doesn't blindly help others without a logical purpose.
Many people seem to consider it an end in itself, which seems logical enough.


If I truly believed in capitalism, I would treat the homeless as subhuman (as many do) and not worthy of my time. Because I would then view them as lazy and as failures. I would not be able to see that the system has failed them.

The fact is that many people who believe in capitalism don't hold behave that way. In fact, charity work is the main way, traditionally, that ruling-class women filled their time. See any of G. William Domhoff's sociological studies of the U.S. ruling class.


Democrats or Republicans who discuss charity as an alternative to social security or the welfare state do so only as a political tactic. They could clearly care less.

Yes, exactly. And they do that because advocacy of charity is a useful political tactic for opposing progressive political change.


You must admit the track record isn't all that good.

No, I don't have to admit that.

The track record is that revolutions historically have greatly improved the situation of most of humanity. We wouldn't even be having this discussion without past revolutions; we'd be plowing a field for some baron or plantation owner.

They haven't created utopia....but only utopians would demand that they should.


My exact words were "when you’re given the opportunity you VOTE for S.S."
I didn't say anything about voting for Bush or Clinton. I'm saying support a third party that has a genuine concern for S.S. (I shoud have been more specific). It's much more reasonable to assume a third party will eventually surface with popular support than a violent insurrection.

Why are those counterposed? If a rising workers' (not just "third") party in fact threatened the interests of the ruling class, it's likely they'd use violence to try to stop it. (Of course, if it acted more like the British Labor Party, they'd have no need to....but that just emphasizes the limits of voting.)

[John Train]

Many people seem to consider it an end in itself, which seems logical enough.

O.K., regardless of what other peoples motives are for charity, mine developed through politics.


No, I don't have to admit that.

he track record is that revolutions historically have greatly improved the situation of most of humanity. We wouldn't even be having this discussion without past revolutions; we'd be plowing a field for some baron or plantation owner.

So, do you believe the American Revolution benefited us?

The Cuban revolution didn't greatly improve the situation of its citizens. It's widely assumed the Cuban government is on the verge of collapse and that began as one of the more popular communist revolutions. I'm not saying some of their problems don't stem from outside influences like the trade embargo. But communist revolutions have never been infamous for success. The Communist revolution in El Salvador that the U.S. helped put down is another example. The Khmer Rouge clearly didn't improve anyone’s situation in Cambodia and I just recently learned the U.S. was arming them even before they fully ceased power. I could go on if you really need me to.

This discussion isn't a result of any violent revolution. It is the result of the labor movement.



Why are those counterposed? If a rising workers' (not just "third") party in fact threatened the interests of the ruling class, it's likely they'd use violence to try to stop it.

I could repeat myself again but I'm sure you can figure out by my previous posts what my thoughts are on this.

[Severian]

Originally posted by John Tr[email protected] 28 2005, 10:04 PM

O.K., regardless of what other peoples motives are for charity, mine developed through politics.
And you know what's paved with good intentions.

What you have to prove is not the motive for charity, but that it has some politically progressive effect. The opposite seems to be the case, that it stabilizes the system, and that's why it's supported by defenders of the system.


So, do you believe the American Revolution benefited us?

Clearly.


The Cuban revolution didn't greatly improve the situation of its citizens.

Tens of thousands of children die of malnutrition and readily preventable diseases every day....none of them are Cuban.

I might point out as well that fear of more revolutions like the Cuban one has been a great producer of reforms in Latin America, the "Alliance for Progress" was openly sold on the basis of preventing more revolutions, etc. Reforms are a byproduct of the revolutionary struggle.


It's widely assumed the Cuban government is on the verge of collapse

And when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me. People have been assuming that for 40 years. Their problem.


The Khmer Rouge clearly didn't improve anyone’s situation in Cambodia and I just recently learned the U.S. was arming them even before they fully ceased power.

Not a proletarian revolution in any sense obviously. Not a revolution at all I'd argue.


This discussion isn't a result of any violent revolution. It is the result of the labor movement.

What makes you think that's counterposed? There wouldn't be a labor movement without the "violent" bourgeois-democratic revolutions. It wouldn't have won everything it has without the fear of anticapitalist revolution.

You seem to have some kind of reverse fetish about violence. There is nothing special about violence. It is not the central issue between reform and revolution. Not even a difference...violence is also used to try to advance reformist goals, and of course violence is needed every day to maintain the system.

Everybody uses violence. That is not what defines revolution. It's just something for hypocrites to go on about, who have other reasons for opposing revolution.

[John Train]

Tens of thousands of children die of malnutrition and readily preventable diseases every day....none of them are Cuban.

The obvious point of all those examples was to show that the blanket statement you made about how revolutions "greatly improved the situation of most of humanity" is demonstrably false.



What you have to prove is not the motive for charity, but that it has some politically progressive effect. The opposite seems to be the case, that it stabilizes the system, and that's why it's supported by defenders of the system.

I don't think I said it was politically progressive. However, I guess I did imply it unintentionally.


So, do you believe the American Revolution benefited us?


Clearly.

How so?

I would recommend A Peoples history of the United States if you’re interested in the reasons for that war. Regardless of the reasons, what were the long term benefits? Look at Canada they never got the Queen off their back and they seem to be doing better than us in many ways.



Not a revolution at all I'd argue.

I'll bite, how exactly was what happend in Cambodia "not" a revolution?



You seem to have some kind of reverse fetish about violence. There is nothing special about violence. It is not the central issue between reform and revolution. Not even a difference...violence is also used to try to advance reformist goals, and of course violence is needed every day to maintain the system.

The kind of violent revolution I keep referring to is a very specific one. If you reread some of the earlier posts on this thread you'd understand that all I'm saying is to dedicate your entire life to an uncertain future revolution is extreme in my opinion and even attempting a violent revolution any time in the near future would be in vain. I'm not saying don't spread propaganda or spend some of your time with revolutionary affairs. I've just met too many idealists that couldn't get a grip on reality and they made their lives unbearable as a result.

[EagleEyeNuñez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 11:46 AM
Armed insurrection is an option, but that would be suicidal.
Maybe you should try it anyway.

[EagleEyeNuñez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 05:33 PM


(Restrict?)


Don't be a prick!

It's standard policy if you're NOT a Communist. You are restricted to Opposing Idealoligies, I believe. No one here is being a prick, with the exception of you. Just because someone doesn't want to disclose personal details on the net, you think they must be running in criminal circles? You're a fucking asshole, you know it?
What a douchebag ^ ^ ^

Who wants to bet he's a little geek who can't get any? :lol:

[Commie Girl]

Originally posted by EagleEyeNuñez+Aug 29 2005, 04:02 PM--> (EagleEyeNuñez @ Aug 29 2005, 04:02 PM)
[email protected] 23 2005, 05:33 PM


(Restrict?)


Don't be a prick!

It's standard policy if you're NOT a Communist. You are restricted to Opposing Idealoligies, I believe. No one here is being a prick, with the exception of you. Just because someone doesn't want to disclose personal details on the net, you think they must be running in criminal circles? You're a fucking asshole, you know it?
What a douchebag ^ ^ ^

Who wants to bet he's a little geek who can't get any? :lol: [/b]
:angry: Quit equating "manhood" to your dick and learn to debate.