World Can't Wait [Archive]

flyby

14th October 2005, 23:08

we need mass walkouts.

How many students are involved? Well there are different answers, but the main one is "not enough yet"! This movement needs to grow -- so that every student in your city knows what to do!

This is not a time to worry mainly aobut your personal safety, but to step out, boldly, with a sense that the time is ripening, and the bold actions of a few can bring forward the movement of the many.

the idea for November 2 is not just "individuals stay home" -- you need to go and organize the strike... have banners and groups gathering in front of the school.
call for a walk out.

in some places, students should "swap schools" to make it harder to idenfity and punish: so "you leafelt and pull out our school and we leaflet and pull out yours."

people need creative tactics.

But you have to start preparing people NOW, so more and more know its coming.

Postering, leafletting, getting stickers up all over the school and hangouts.

etc.

the stickers and leaflets are here (http://worldcantwait.com/getStuff/downloads/)

as for 1968: the big highschool strike of 1968 in NYC was walkouts (not building takeovers.) In colleges there were building takeovers.

novemba

15th October 2005, 04:26

i think the RCP is planning to pull some shit on november 2nd. i mean, all the buildings are gonna be empty (ideally) and maybe theyre gonna try a revolution...

Erythromycin-diazepam

15th October 2005, 04:37

Good luck i only know 2 people leftists at my school. so i cant do much.

JKP

15th October 2005, 07:16

Does the material reality mean that a strike is impossible? No matter, we'll just WILL them into existance.

Nothing is going to happen just because you want it to. Get over it.

Bolshevist

15th October 2005, 09:11

Why so much focus on Bush? He is just a product of imperialism, if he is ousted another one will come. It is similar to working against "imperialist policies".

Wanted Man

15th October 2005, 11:32

It's the Bob Avakian cult, they don't require any such thing as "logics".

Gura

15th October 2005, 13:36

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 04:07 AM
i think the RCP is planning to pull some shit on november 2nd. i mean, all the buildings are gonna be empty (ideally) and maybe theyre gonna try a revolution...
Even if many schools and office buildings were emptied, the police stations wouldn't be. They could try, but unless they have a weapons cache it wouldn't get very far.

15th October 2005, 14:06

lol i'm sure a few dozen properly organized and diciplined RCPers armed with just about anything could overrun a local suburban police station...you're talking about less then half a dozen cops in most cases...

But of course RCPers are neither properly organized nor do they have the militant dicipline needed to something like that.

People like a show they don't like doing things that take real risks and real guts...they correctly assume they wouldn't be successful if they did.

But thats mainly because they aren't organized for anything beyond selling newspapers and having meetings and occassional peaceful rallys.

Which is what makes the rhetoric so silly. "Resist or die?"..no ones gonna die and no ones going to *really* resist anything. Resistance actually means something in Iraq and Palestine and for that matter in Nepal and Peru, but they make a joke out of it.

Not that i don't think being inflamintory is a good thing just that its dumb to take yourselves too seriously when you're clearly not.

Gura

15th October 2005, 14:25

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 01:47 PM
lol i'm sure a few dozen properly organized and diciplined RCPers armed with just about anything could overrun a local suburban police station...you're talking about less then half a dozen cops in most cases...
True. I was thinking more along the lines of them not being able to resist riot police and the occasional army helicopter.

If the RCP were really dangerous enough or organised enough to take over buildings and occupy and defend them, then the FBI would have doen a great deal of intellgience gathering and would have wind of anything of this sort long before it happened.

Sabocat

15th October 2005, 14:25

Even though I am not an RCP member, I will be attending the local group for this protest.

It's a chance to see people, talk to people and show them that there are alternatives to the current structure.

The more people that we get to talk to and discuss what communism really means, the better chance we'll have at awakening class consciousness. The working class has been led to believe that there are no alternatives other than the two party bourgeois democracy.

But of course RCPers are neither properly organized nor do they have the militant dicipline needed to something like that.

People like a show they don't like doing things that take real risks and real guts...they correctly assume they wouldn't be successful if they did.

But thats mainly because they aren't organized for anything beyond selling newspapers and having meetings and occassional peaceful rallys.

I have personally been at a local anti-fascist protest where a very large contingent of RCP'ers were present. Not only did they physically attack the Nazi's marching, but the riot cops protecting them. One of the RCP'ers was beaten and arrested by the riot cops. I should also mention, that the local black bloc did nothing but smoke cigarettes and stand by and watch during it. So that statement that the RCP does nothing but sell papers and peacefully protest is completely unfounded.

If anyone is selling newspapers it is the ISO, and Workers World Party people.

15th October 2005, 15:45

If the RCP were really dangerous enough or organised enough to take over buildings and occupy and defend them, then the FBI would have doen a great deal of intellgience gathering and would have wind of anything of this sort long before it happened.

Only a small part of law enforcement is actual force, most of it is fear, and they establish fear by convincing people that they're way more competent then they actually are. The reality is that only a tiny percentile of criminal investigations go through the type of high tech forensic analysis that take place in Discovery Channel shows about how sophisticated cops are, the FBI and CIA only successfully intercept and have the time to interpret a tiny percentile of electronic communications that revolutionary groups make and have virtaully no in person intellegence.

Cops and soldiers and federal agents are only human, and most of the time not that smart or competent humans. For all the talk about SHOCK AND AWE and OVERWHELMING FORCE and SUPERIOR TRAINING and the MOST ADVACED ARMY IN THE WORLD that should cause opposition to simply MELT AWAY OR SURRENDER!!!...the Iraq war didn't actually go that way did it? Turns out that poorly fed poorly equiped low tech Iraqi guerrillas with no nightvision goggles or sophisticated heat seaking weapons or whatever the US Army is using to impress people at home, are actually pretty good at killing American marines...and american marines are pretty bad about figuring out when and where they're going to be attacked. Turns out that they're not invincible after all.

And likewise in the limited experiance the United States has had with revolutionary groups, far from "always getting their man" the FBI was actually quiet incompetent. Forget about protecting every tiny little local police station, the FBI couldn't even stop the WUO from attacking the New York City Police Department headquarters...nor could they catch the people responsible for it.

So that statement that the RCP does nothing but sell papers and peacefully protest is completely unfounded.

If thats true then i take it back...its just that thats all i've seen. That and running Revolution Books.

Red Flag

15th October 2005, 16:19

People are quiting their jobs

Really? How are they feeding themselves?

Non-Sectarian Bastard!

15th October 2005, 16:51

Why isnt this in Propaganda Booth? And btw Disgust congrats with your adminship, hadn't noticed.

flyby

15th October 2005, 17:00

first of all, what is envisioned on November 2 is a mass outpouring of the masses -- with a clear cut political purpose..... to set in motion a movement that can defeat and drive out the Buish regime (beat back its agenda, remove its key cliques from power etc.)

This is not planned as the small actions of a few hard cores.

To put this movement on the map, people need to walk out of school and take to the streets. Peple need to come out of the housing projects, barrios and ghettos (and put the gang colors aside). Artists need to put on exhibits, radio DJS need to call on their audiences to act.

There are literally millions of people who see the danger of what is happening (often more than some so-called "leftists" who are stuck in a rut of business as usual, and are acting on some illusory do-nothing "long term plan" of painfully small increments).

When WCW teams go out with the bush wanted poster -- it is common for people to literally break into tears of anger and frustration over what Bush and co. did in New Orleans, or the War, or the torture of Abu Ghraib.

People want to fight this, and they NEED TO FIGHT THIS.

And it is a moment when a (relatively small) core of active revolutoinary forces can build new influence broadly -- among many people who have not previously been awakened to radical politifs.

The comrade above who said "there are only two other leftists in my school, so we can't do anything" -- that person misses the essense of this moment, and of what is called for. This is the moment when three leftists can become a walkout of hundreds. Where you can bring what you know and understand to people (who are receptive in a new way, because of real events).

We don't wait to act untill the masses are already convinced!! That would be to ignore OUR responsibilities! No, we need to act (politically) to reach,, and win over people, to STRUGGLE with people over the necessity and possibility of influencing history (NOW!)

And if you do, your group of three will become dozens of activists influencing many hundreds of people -- and more important, all of you together will be influencing history (right here in the belly of the beast)!

Look at what is happening: they are undermining the teaching of evolutoin in schools! They are fighting to create voucherbased fundamentalist school systems (which they fully and literally intend to use to REPLACE public schools). They are waging war on the whole planet, wherever they choose. They have occupied and brutalized Iraq. They have unleashed a worldwide system of torture camps -- and openly defend and demand their right to torture.

These things are intolerable -- and they only give a SENSE of where these motherfuckers will take the society and the world if they succeed in their plans.

15th October 2005, 17:09

flyby

15th October 2005, 17:40

i think there is some truth that the independent core needs to ACT NOW so there can be an outpouring on November 2.

That is what i'm arguing for -- and that is what world can't wait (http://worldcantwait.org) is organizing for.

Act now. Step out. Be bold. Have confidence that you can reach, move and rally much broader forces.

It is like stage diving -- an act of courage and vision, that relies on broad masses, and helps bring them into motion.

novemba

15th October 2005, 21:38

i don't support this cause:

1) its the fuckin Avakian Cult, 2) seemingly no one else does, so it wont be a succesful campaign and even if it is then 3) the RCPers might to something stupid like try and oust the government resulting in a revolutionary situation and possibly the RCP gaining a strong foothold

ill kill an RCPer as well as a Capitalist bastard amidst the revolution

flyby

16th October 2005, 00:46

I'm not sure about all the rules of this forum, but clearly talking about killing other members of this forum and revolutoinary leaders is (or should be) not acceptable.

i suggest we ignore the troll-bait about killing communists and pretty-obviously-reactionary insistance that the struggle will never get any where.

There is an important and historic movement getting off the ground -- and I suggest we brush aside the rightwing assholes who drag the discussoin down, and dig deeper into what is needed and possible.

these are the days that will define this whole generatoin... these are the moments and decisions you will be asked about your whole life. Where were you? What did you do, when it all started to take shape? What did you risk? What did you dare? What did you understand and see?

Gura

16th October 2005, 15:31

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 12:27 AM
I'm not sure about all the rules of this forum, but clearly talking about killing other members of this forum and revolutoinary leaders is (or should be) not acceptable.
It's also illegal to advocate murder.

BOZG

16th October 2005, 15:39

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 03:12 PM
It's also illegal to advocate murder.
The law in a lot of countries is very hazy on this. It's illegal to advocated the murder of a specific, named individual but to call for the mass murder of a race or organisation is perfectly legal.

anonn

16th October 2005, 16:43

look the moment IS NOW to Drive Out the Bush Regime!

Milliuons are disgusted by what is going on, millions want to act. What we need is to launch an ongoing resistance movement to drive out the bush regime!
November 2nd will be the opening day...

And to be clear, this is about responding to the real dangers that are facing humanity, for all those that can't see this cuz they are in some sort of competition with other organizations, get over it.. The time to act is now before we find that it is too late!

BOZG

16th October 2005, 16:53

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 04:24 PM
look the moment IS NOW to Drive Out the Bush Regime!

Milliuons are disgusted by what is going on, millions want to act. What we need is to launch an ongoing resistance movement to drive out the bush regime!
November 2nd will be the opening day...

And to be clear, this is about responding to the real dangers that are facing humanity, for all those that can't see this cuz they are in some sort of competition with other organizations, get over it.. The time to act is now before we find that it is too late!
But millions aren't willing to declare a general strike to oust him, nor are millions willing to wage a revolutionary war against him.

flyby

16th October 2005, 22:14

instead of listing what people are NOT willing to do, lets look at what millions are (potentially) willing to do!

Millions are ready to act (in various ways) to create a movement.

And we should be the catalyst for having that happen.

And then, we can see the ways and openings to go farther.

Besides i think there are possibilities for some walk outs in factories (like in the LA garment center) etc. -- so I would not rule out strikes completely.

This is the start, it is the beginning of what follows.

encephalon

16th October 2005, 22:57

I attended a World can't wait meeting at my campus about a month ago, and frankly I was sincerely disappointed with Sunsara's presentation(and I had a friend who, after a few too many drinks after the meeting, managed to find her on the street and let her know.. very drunkenly). My biggest problem with it was that it was entirely too tame; it sounded more like a liberal democrat peace rally than something of true significance and of mass proportions.

I agree: a massive strike--economic and educational--that spans across the US would be relatively effective. However, the RCP didn't plan enough nor nurture the Charisma necessary to urge large masses to partake in such a strike. Tame displays of discontent simply don't rally people; however, history has proven that fiery speeches and precisely coordinated expressions do. If you want to lead the masses into a protest, find another lenin or mao or che. Meek protest = failed protest.

I've a feeling it will be more of a massive failure than a massive strike, although I wish otherwise.

flyby

16th October 2005, 23:24

I can't judge the event you attended (obviously) -- and I judge movements by their line, goals, vision (not by anecdotes).

But i will share with everyone the following mp3 of one of Sunsara's talks (http://worldcantwait.org/media/sunsara_conference.mp3) so everyone can judge for themselves.

On your other point: I agree that a movement is in a whole different place if it has a Lenin or a Mao -- so that the currents of discontent can be channeled and diverted into a common powerful revoltonary stream. I think we have such a leader (http://bobavakian.net), and I think the ambitious plans of November 2 can have a rather profound impact in preparing for the much larger and more fundamental conflicts that are needed.

Nothing Human Is Alien

17th October 2005, 20:30

I notice that you left out Che there. For all the talk in this thread about not falling into petty competition, that was a pretty hypocritical move.

Che was more than Bob Avakian could ever be in his wildest dreams.

That being said, if I was in the US I'd participate in this. I try to get involved in everything, no matter who calls for it, if only for its potential.

flyby

17th October 2005, 21:58

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2005, 08:14 PM
I notice that you left out Che there. For all the talk in this thread about not falling into petty competition, that was a pretty hypocritical move.

Che was more than Bob Avakian could ever be in his wildest dreams.

That being said, if I was in the US I'd participate in this. I try to get involved in everything, no matter who calls for it, if only for its potential.
since you bring up che, let me make some points:

1) Think of how Che is promoted on this site -- and then notice how whenever anyone discusses a great Maoist leader suddenly there are angry shouts of "cult of personality" -- I even see people with che avatars shouting that it is wrong to mention the contributions of a special leader. Go figger.

2) Che was a complex figure who fought U.S. imperialism, but did not oppose other forms of imperialism (specifically Soviet imperialism). His approach opposed building revolutionary parties and armed forces deeply rooted among the people -- and advocated a form of focoism by small groups of elite fighters to shake up the country and percipitate a crisis that could bring them to power. It is a strategy that leaves the masses (and agrarian revolution in particular) out of the picture -- and it cannot lead to genuine socialism.

3) By comparison, Avakian has illuminated a road to communist revolution -- based on a deep and sweeping summation of the last century of revolutionary movements and socialist experiences.

finally: I want to take note about your openness to this important movement to drive out the Bush regime. I think it is real, positive and important that you support such innitiatives even when you have political and ideological differences with some of the organizers (including me, obviously). I think that is a good thing, and a principled approach to struggle.

Severian

17th October 2005, 22:41

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 03:58 PM
Millions are ready to act (in various ways) to create a movement.
I'm sorry, but there's no reason to think that millions of people are inclined to actively participate in an anti-Bush movement.

None of the anti-Bush slogans or groups has struck any kind of chord with most working people. For good reason, I think. For one thing...

Flyby, what do you think is most likely going to replace the Bush administration when it leaves office?

flyby

17th October 2005, 23:46

on the inclination point: you must live on another planet from therest of us if you think millions are not fuming -- over countless outrages from katrina to abu ghraib.

As for what should replace Bush -- you know what i think, we need to replace this government and regime with a revolutionary state. We need socialist revolution.

Other people are opposing the bush regime from a range of other views of course, and they are grappling with "what it will take."

It is remarkable to me that a slice of "leftists" (a small slice admittedly! and very faintly left too!) are more passive and clueless than many rank-and-file democrats on all this -- and the danger and intensity of what the Bush pigs are fighting for.

Ask black people what they think of bush and co. after Katrina!

For all those with working synapses and a basic revolutionary spark, i urge you to study this analysis in some detail for a nuanced sense of the dynamics and stakes here:

Preaching from a Pulpit of Bones (http://rwor.org/a/019/avakian-preaching-pulpit-bones.htm)

AND

Bush, Hitler.....And You (http://rwor.org/a/019/PDF/019p03_e.pdf)

Severian

18th October 2005, 00:19

I asked:
"Flyby, what do you think is most likely going to replace the Bush administration when it leaves office?"

Not what "should".

As usual you've given a prerecorded standard answer rather than actually responding to a post.

Oh, and it's not "remarkable" at all that you're closer to Democrats on this.

deak

18th October 2005, 07:42

this kind of shit really pisses me of in the so called radical left. they are always the first to tear down any plan of action that isn't their mythical revolution that they will actually never start because they whine and ***** about things that people are actually doing and divide themselves to feel superior. Do I think this will have a huge impact in itsself? Probably not. But it is better to do something than to sit around and complain that we aren't doing enough. If you all have better ideas then share them to us all because we'd love to hear. As far as I can see the poster that is helping organize this is doing a hell of a lot more than those who sit around and post shit on the internet at night and then get up and keep doing the same bullshit that everyone else in this country are doing. Talk is cheap my friends. I guarentee you that the revolution when it comes won't be a product of some kids whining on the internet. It will be because of STRONG people who aren't afraid to get the ball rolling. That's the problem with the internet. It is wonderful for connecting revolutionaries, but generally it just makes it so people can ***** and then feel like they're doing something. So please, give me a break and don't go around attacking people that are trying to do some rabble rousing. MAYBE, step in and give those people a hand. Maybe the movement could grow into something more of your liking but it sure as hell won't if you're not there to help direct it.

now, before you start telling me how much you guys are all doing, notice that this is a general critique of what I see everytime someone makes a an attempt to do something, not a personal attack towards any of you.

Severian

18th October 2005, 08:13

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2005, 01:26 AM
I guarentee you that the revolution when it comes won't be a product of some kids whining on the internet.
I agree. As it happens, it's the RCP which thinks the internet is politically important.

I can't agree with the whole "just do it" approach, though. Not every action is automatically good - it depends on the political and class content of that action.

Nothing Human Is Alien

18th October 2005, 08:26

since you bring up che, let me make some points:

I didn't bring him up, another poster before you did.

1) Think of how Che is promoted on this site -- and then notice how whenever anyone discusses a great Maoist leader suddenly there are angry shouts of "cult of personality" -- I even see people with che avatars shouting that it is wrong to mention the contributions of a special leader. Go figger.

Che is upheld as a hero of the oppressed, and rightly so.

2) Che was a complex figure who fought U.S. imperialism, but did not oppose other forms of imperialism (specifically Soviet imperialism). His approach opposed building revolutionary parties and armed forces deeply rooted among the people -- and advocated a form of focoism by small groups of elite fighters to shake up the country and percipitate a crisis that could bring them to power. It is a strategy that leaves the masses (and agrarian revolution in particular) out of the picture -- and it cannot lead to genuine socialism.

3) By comparison, Avakian has illuminated a road to communist revolution -- based on a deep and sweeping summation of the last century of revolutionary movements and socialist experiences.

I'm very aware of the Maoist "critique" of Che, and usually would have just let this all pass, but the vulgarization you made of Che's theories is just wholely incorrect. I would suggest you actually study some of his works rather than regurgitating party line.

finally: I want to take note about your openness to this important movement to drive out the Bush regime. I think it is real, positive and important that you support such innitiatives even when you have political and ideological differences with some of the organizers (including me, obviously). I think that is a good thing, and a principled approach to struggle.

Right. Would you do the same?

coda

18th October 2005, 09:47

<<Flyby, what do you think is most likely going to replace the Bush administration when it leaves office?>>

well, technically, in accordance with the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, in the unlikely event that both President and VP cannot serve, or are run out of office -- then next in line of the chain of command is the Speaker of the House, -- that would be Dennis Hastert, Republican, IL.

I'm sure that's not what Bob Avakian has in mind, though.

http://library.thinkquest.org/11492/conven...succession.html (http://library.thinkquest.org/11492/convention/succession.html)

A little quote I came across today, brought to me by Pete Seeger in his out-of- print book "The Incompleat Folksinger." A book about the history of folk and political songs.

"Don't start vast projects with half vast plans"

(that's half-assed, for the people who don't get it)

ComradeOm

18th October 2005, 10:54

Listen, there will be no revolution until the material conditions are ready for one. That's very straightforward and its equally clear that those conditions do not even remotely exist in the US today. If this movement was taking place in Europe or developing nations then I'd be cheering them on. But, and I am sorry to say this, right now you're wasting your time. Far better to build consciousness within the working classes themselves then try and stage some pointless protest against a mere figurehead.

Maybe I'm just too cynical to buy into the Bob Avakian dream.

Wanted Man

18th October 2005, 11:13

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 09:22 PM
i don't support this cause:

1) its the fuckin Avakian Cult, 2) seemingly no one else does, so it wont be a succesful campaign and even if it is then 3) the RCPers might to something stupid like try and oust the government resulting in a revolutionary situation and possibly the RCP gaining a strong foothold

ill kill an RCPer as well as a Capitalist bastard amidst the revolution
As much as I disagree with the RCP, I can't accept this. Should the RCP somehow accomplish a true worker's revolution, which I doubt, then they deserve support. To unite against a revolutionary force is reactionary, and acting like the PCF did in May '68 would be treacherous to the proletariat.

Anyway, my main beef with the WCW organisation is that they only aim at Bush. This isn't about the "Bush regime". Bush isn't Mr Big, Bush isn't Hitler. America is not "Christian Fascist". All of these things are merely symptoms of the problem, which is capitalism. The revolutionary movement should take every crime of the bourgeoisie, from any president that is ruling America at the time. This shouldn't just be about driving out the Bush regime, but also driving out the following Cheney regime, the Rice regime, perhaps the Clinton regime, in short, the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. When this objective is clear, then revolution can be accomplished.

The RCP's confusion regarding fascism is quite clear. http://rwor.org/home-e.htm In the bottm right: "CONSERVATIVES MY ASS! THESE PEOPLE ARE NAZIS!" Or maybe it's not confusion, making one's opponents look like Nazis or fascists is still very strong today.

novemba

18th October 2005, 13:05

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2005, 05:57 AM
As much as I disagree with the RCP, I can't accept this. Should the RCP somehow accomplish a true worker's revolution, which I doubt, then they deserve support. To unite against a revolutionary force is reactionary
You want reactionary, thats the RCP. I'm not gonna stand around and watch them create their party in order to just make the working class their *****es just like ya boy in ya avatar...the RCP would be just as bad as the conditions we have now...it's the lesser of two evils, just a regime change....i don't support them and never will...

Non-Sectarian Bastard!

18th October 2005, 14:34

Who wanna bet that nothing will happen on 2 nov?

novemba

18th October 2005, 15:57

ill see that bet

Bad Grrrl Agro

18th October 2005, 16:44

hi milwaukee world cant wait here
our rally is on november 2nd of course
5pm
@the blue federal building in downtown milwaukee

BOZG

18th October 2005, 17:25

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2005, 07:26 AM
Do I think this will have a huge impact in itsself? Probably not. But it is better to do something than to sit around and complain that we aren't doing enough. If you all have better ideas then share them to us all because we'd love to hear. As far as I can see the poster that is helping organize this is doing a hell of a lot more than those who sit around and post shit on the internet at night and then get up and keep doing the same bullshit that everyone else in this country are doing. Talk is cheap my friends. I guarentee you that the revolution when it comes won't be a product of some kids whining on the internet. It will be because of STRONG people who aren't afraid to get the ball rolling. That's the problem with the internet. It is wonderful for connecting revolutionaries, but generally it just makes it so people can ***** and then feel like they're doing something. So please, give me a break and don't go around attacking people that are trying to do some rabble rousing. MAYBE, step in and give those people a hand. Maybe the movement could grow into something more of your liking but it sure as hell won't if you're not there to help direct it.

now, before you start telling me how much you guys are all doing, notice that this is a general critique of what I see everytime someone makes a an attempt to do something, not a personal attack towards any of you.
Well if it's better to do something that sit around, why did Lenin constantly argue to "Patiently explain" during 1917, rather than seizing power immediately? Because he recognised that the working class was not conscious or strong enough to firstly seize power and then to hold onto it. Our actions must always take into consideration, the class consciousness of the working class, where they stand and what they're willing to do. And this is a period where we must "Patiently explain". Action for the sake of action can often just acheive disillusionment and burnout. What is the likelihood of calling the working class to a general strike on November 2nd? The likelihood is that it will not be answered and if it is, more than likely by a minute number of workers. Why? Because the class consciousness of the American working class is not at a level where it recognises Bush as a class enemy or it does recognise the general strike as its historic weapon. In itself, even if the call goes unheard, it may appear that it does no harm but what does it mean in the minds of those activists, who are actively and vigorously campaigning for this to go ahead? They will see all their hardwork fail, they will see that the working class isn't listening to them yet and this no doubt will have an effect on their own attitudes. Maybe for the most conscious activists or the longtime activists, it will hit them too hard but for new, younger activists, this can be a huge blow to their confidence. It's a case of biting off more than you can chew.

The labour movement is littered with these cases, particularly in relation to the trade unions, where small groups of activists have broken away from their unions to form "revolutionary" unions without assessing whether other workers are willing to break from the traditional unions. And in the huge amount of cases, where the workers were not willing to make that break, it only served to have militant activists burn themselves out and become disillusioned when the working class doesn't hear them.

We cannot base our actions on activity itself. Class consciousness must always be the yard stick with which we measure our activities.

deak

19th October 2005, 02:01

Action for the sake of action can often just acheive disillusionment and burnout. What is the likelihood of calling the working class to a general strike on November 2nd? The likelihood is that it will not be answered and if it is, more than likely by a minute number of workers. Why? Because the class consciousness of the American working class is not at a level where it recognises Bush as a class enemy or it does recognise the general strike as its historic weapon. In itself, even if the call goes unheard, it may appear that it does no harm but what does it mean in the minds of those activists, who are actively and vigorously campaigning for this to go ahead? They will see all their hardwork fail, they will see that the working class isn't listening to them yet and this no doubt will have an effect on their own attitudes. Maybe for the most conscious activists or the longtime activists, it will hit them too hard but for new, younger activists, this can be a huge blow to their confidence. It's a case of biting off more than you can chew.

A few things:

Of course most of the working class aren't going to join the efforts, well BECAUSE we're too damn busy working trying to pay rent and if we have them our families. Most of the working class doesn't want to put forth the effort to find out what is really going on and I'll tell you why. Most of the time when I come home from a 10 hour day of construction the only thing I want to do is sit down and drink some beers, eat dinner, relax and go to bed. Most people who don't have a great life want to be proud of something. Since they aren't usually proud of their lives since American society views construction works, painters, garbage men et all as low class people. So instead they (I don't include myself in this) gravitate to abstract ideas such as god and Country. It's a hell of a lot easier to be proAmerican then be pissed of and sad and upset about how shitty the reality really is. It's always been like this. Everytime there's a war the people who start draping flags over their trucks and sing God Bless America have mostly been blue collar workers. It's mostly been upper middle class kids who gre long hair and protested wars. Why is that? Because they can afford to. They can afford to travel around and go to universities and meet like minded individuals and live off mommy and daddy's money while they do it. You can't go to a protest on Monday if you're boss won't let you off. And trust me in the construction business where there are 10 people waiting to take your job, your ass is canned if you pull some stupid shit like calling off for no reason. Anyways, the point I'm trying to get across is that it's super swell to talk about the working class and all that shit but it's another thing to become one. How do you start unions if you don't work with the people. How do you challenge their ideas and show how they are actively voting against their better intrests if you aren't there to talk to them? While I was a dock worker, I convinced 3 out of the 5 coworkers that Bush was a joke. Now who knows who they voted for whwn the time came but I honestly think the answer was no one.
Anyways the point is that you can't start unions from the outside. And you can't get people's support unless you are willing to be at their level. The reason why the workers movement was so strong in the 20's and 30's was because it was started by the workers themselves (not that there weren't outside agitators and leaders and such), AND of course because things were so horrible for them that they had no choice. But even if you look at those glorious Union forming days, they weren't exactly revolutionary for the betterment and equality of all people as a class. In fact they went around killing lots of blacks and Irish and Catholics and others.

Finally, like I said before, I don't think the Nov. 2nd thing will have any tangible effects on the Administration, BUT I'm freaking tired of these wanna-be elite revolutionaries attacking everyone that is trying to do what they even refuse to attempt. Instead of retarded assanine personal attacks and shit, maybe this forum should be a place where we can throw out ideas and discuss them in a respectful manner. Maybe if we didn't think we were each so godamned superior, we'd actually be able to start forming REAL collectives and thus, REAL results instead of a bunch of individuals working by themselves and acomplishing nothing.

Severian

19th October 2005, 07:41

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Oct 18 2005, 08:18 AM
Who wanna bet that nothing will happen on 2 nov?
Sounds like a good way to test who's living on another planet, as Flyby puts it.

Something will happen...some small rallies, maybe even some high-school walkouts. The composition will be mostly middle-class and white.

flyby

19th October 2005, 17:04

Originally posted by Severian+Oct 19 2005, 07:25 AM--> (Severian @ Oct 19 2005, 07:25 AM)
Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Oct 18 2005, 08:18 AM
Who wanna bet that nothing will happen on 2 nov?
Sounds like a good way to test who's living on another planet, as Flyby puts it.

Something will happen...some small rallies, maybe even some high-school walkouts. The composition will be mostly middle-class and white. [/b]
This seems like exactly the wrong method -- soaked in pessimism and passivity.

I don't know what WILL happen on November 2, but I know what NEEDS to happen.

So i'm not sitting around, sourly and negatively, announcing that nothing is possible, or that the situation in the world is not urgently fucked up. I'm trying everything i can, to help MAKE something happen.

What will happen on November 2? Will we actually initiate the movement that can change history in the U.S. (with all that this would mean for the world)?

All I can do is direct that question to everyone reading this: What are you doing? How much have you grasped what is at stake? Will actions be taken where YOU are?

Someone talked (negatively in a dissing tone) about high school walkouts and about radical students likely being middle class and white.

Everything about this (in tone and substance) is wrong too:

First of all, high school walkouts would be a great thing, the more the better.

Including in white middle class high schools! What is wrong with suburban kids fighting the government? when did that become something to piss on and look down on?

Look at how the antiwar movement started! And how ideas and radical actions often spread -- from the ghetto to the middle class, but also from middle class students to the ghetto. Is that kind of back-and-forth wrong?

Look at how white middle class students went South during the days of the early civil rights movement -- and how their actions helped trigger new courage and action among the Black masses.

When your kids ask you, in forty years, what you did when the U.S. launched war on the world, and when they were preparing to criminalize abortion and birth control, and when evolution was under attack in the schools and when gay people were being demonized (and plans were made to write that demonization into the bourgeois constitution).... what will you be able to say?

Will you say, "I didn't do anythng." or "I did everything I could to bring them down."

think about it.

Then watch this video again: What to do on your campus (http://www.worldcantwait.org/media/TheLeashx.wmv)

Severian

19th October 2005, 22:50

Originally posted by flyby+Oct 19 2005, 10:48 AM--> (flyby @ Oct 19 2005, 10:48 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2005, 07:25 AM

Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Oct 18 2005, 08:18 AM
Who wanna bet that nothing will happen on 2 nov?
Sounds like a good way to test who's living on another planet, as Flyby puts it.

Something will happen...some small rallies, maybe even some high-school walkouts. The composition will be mostly middle-class and white.
This seems like exactly the wrong method -- soaked in pessimism and passivity.

I don't know what WILL happen on November 2, but I know what NEEDS to happen. [/b]
It's called the scientific method. Our differing assessments of the situation imply different predictions about the likely response to the RCP's call. You said I was living on another planet. Let's see which of us that really applies to.

And of course you're not doing "everything you could to bring them down" if you mean the ruling class responsible for all those atrocities. You're tacitly backing the Democratic Party, by pretending it's the "Bush regime" responsible.

And in a way that's likely to backfire, for that matter. If you engage in reformism without being consciously aware of it, you won't accomplish anything even as a reformist!

There's a reason Fox News is willing to have Sunsara Taylor on their channel.

It's like the Chicago '68 convention demonstrations all over again....pro-Eugene McCarthy intent, pro-Nixon effect. And heck, at least they had a dove Democrat back then!

The "Bush regime" will most likely be "ousted" when the Democrats win an election. To answer the question you still haven't.

And that will happen when the Democrats convince a majority of the ruling class that they are better servants than the Republicans.

If you really think it matters which party is in power - I sure as heck don't - then logically you oughta be helping the Democrats do that, as the CPUSA is. But that wouldn't help you maintain your self-deluded self-image as a "Revolutionary Communist."

Give me a straight-up reformist over a pseudo-revolutionary centrist, masking reformist content with radical-sounding ultraleft rhetoric, any day! As Lessing wrote:
"But this much I know, that it is our duty, if we desire to teach truth, to teach it wholly or not at all, to teach it clearly and bluntly, unenigmatically, unreservedly, inspired with full confidence in its powers. . . . For the cruder the error, the shorter and more direct is the path leading to truth, whereas a highly refined error is likely to keep us eternally estranged from truth, and the more readily so in proportion as we find it difficult to realize that it is an error."

flyby

20th October 2005, 00:21

it is silly to say that targetting the government is "tacitly supporting the bourgeois opposition out of power."

In fact, the Bush regime is IN POWER, is waging war, is changing many key elements in U.S. politics, and has clear (predominent) initiative over the Democrats. And building a movement to drive bush out of power -- both represents a major challenge to the bush regime, and also (if done correctly) can and should undermine the influence of the Democratic party hierarchy over their social base.

The whole call for WCW/November 2 is (explicitly and openly) a call for independent historical action that breaks with the electoral framework and "does not wait" in an illusory was for Democrats to solve any of these problems.

(Think through for a sec, what is the point of saying "World Can't Wait"? It is an argument for indepedent political action -- not tied to elections or electoral politics or the logic of electoral politics. And it is, in addition, an internationalist statement -- that what is happening TO THE WORLD must be our spur to action.)

And if you take a moment to check out what the RCP actually says about the democrats, you will see that they expose them -- both for being representatives of this system, and also for the fact that they will not (and cannot, must not) be relied on to confront or defeat the direction of politics and war.

If you want to argue that Germans saying during world war 2 "Fuck Hitler!" were "tacitly promoting the other bourgeois parties" then go ahead.

But in fact Hitler was then a conentratoin and representation of the capitalist system -- and of the german imperialist ruling class -- He (and his government) was its main leaqdership -- and mobilizing people to overthrow hitler was (objectively and urgently) a challenge to German imperialism, its plans and designs.

And the Bush regime (its program, agenda, actions, plans, initiative) now concentrates and represents the plans of the system (without being the totality of the system.)

This rigid dogmatic thinking (which claims we can't say "Drive out this government"!! or unite with the millions who want to do this) is sterile.

In another post, the question is raised of "what replaces Bush regime?" And the answer (of course) is -- that is not known yet. Obviously some people (including people in this thread) think the very idea of revolution is impossible and ridiculous -- so they can't imagine that "drving out bush" could mean ANYTHING other than "put the democrats in." But that is your limitation.

In fact, it will not be easy to drive out the Bush regime -- and such a struggle would deeply disrupt very basic allignments in the U.S. political system.

You may think it is i mpossible for a revolutionary situation to emerge -- but what does that say about YOUR politics and analysis?

I suggest you dig deeper.

flyby

20th October 2005, 00:51

thinking about severian's charge (that this is just tacitly pro-democrat) i just went and looked at the world cant wait website (http://worldcantwait.org) to see how they described these issues.

They created an FAQ (http://www.worldcantwait.org/faq/) that deals with these very questions (what next? what about the democrats?)

Go read it.

Do your homework before making charges that aren't true, and before dissing a movement that is very much needed.

Severian

20th October 2005, 01:50

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2005, 06:05 PM
The whole call for WCW/November 2 is (explicitly and openly) a call for independent historical action that breaks with the electoral framework
"Breaking with the electoral framework" is not inherently progressive. Which you oughta know, since you say Bush has broken with the electoral framework of bourgeois democracy!

Breaking with all the parties of the bosses in the direction of independent working-class political action (for example (http://www.themilitant.com/2005/6941/694150.html))is progressive....but clearly that's not going on here.

Not only is the RCP joining most of the left in the orbit of the Democratic Party; but it has not had anything to do with the working class for a long time.

They created an FAQ that deals with these very questions (what next? what about the democrats?)

You can put whatever disclaimers you want in the fine print; that doesn't change the overall dynamic of your action, as reflected in its main slogan among other things.

When you blame all kinds of disasters, which in reality are caused by the capitalist system, on the Bush administration specifically....that can only breed illusions in the Democrats.

Hurricane Katrina is a good example. The Democratic governor of Lousiana and mayor of New Orleans are as guilty as Bush....yet you mention it as an example of what's supposedly new and worse about the Bush regime. In fact, the mayor of New Orleans was especially guilty of slandering the population of the city as descending into savagery. This helped cover the ruling class for its failure to respond effectively to human needs, and assisted in its repressive response.

flyby

20th October 2005, 03:48

Update: Cindy Sheehan endorsed Call for November 2.
And: Howard Zinn mp3 on World Can't Wait (http://www.worldcantwait.org/media/howardzinnstudents.mp3)

deak

20th October 2005, 04:07

When you blame all kinds of disasters, which in reality are caused by the capitalist system, on the Bush administration specifically....that can only breed illusions in the Democrats.

Ok, well this is getting rediculous. YOU are just ignorant if you believe that the Bush administration isn't the worst we've had since maybe Andrew Jackson. To say that attacking the Bush administration means you are pro democrats is just retarded. The Bush Aministration my friends, IS what we are facing right now. They are the governing power along with the neocons in congress. If it were Clinton in the office right now doing this shit, we'd be opposed to him (I was opposed to him while he was in power and not because of the BJ). The point is, if we all agree that no one is ready for the "REVOLUTION" right now, as it was concluded earlier on this thread and many others) than why the hell shouldn't we attack the elephant in the room of the present. NO, this won't overthrow capitalism and shit, but for god's sake the Bush administration needs to be removed. If you dissagree you have serious problems. You are so worried about your ultimate "HIGHER" ideas (which in fact is also wrapped up in you and others HIGHER egos) that you refuse to partake in the events of the day. We aren't talking about the future. We are talking about the present. We can't predict if capatalism will ever be overthrown or if it will be replaced with something completely new not related to communism, BUT we do know that the most important issue on the table that needs to be dealt with IS the current administration. So while we work on our ultimate goals, let us not forget that we have to work for the present as well.

flyby

20th October 2005, 04:17

look, here is the core of it:

The bourgeois political parties, trends, leaders and movements all (ultimately and fundamentally) serve and represent the capitalist system.

But they are not all the same -- some are more powerful, some have specific plans and programs that are especially damaging and threatening at various times.

If you think Allende is the same as Pinochet -- then go take another look.

If you think it didn't matter to the german masses that hitler was able to consolidate power, then you have no dialectics in your thinking. Pre-Nazi Weimar Germany was oppressive capitalism, and so was Nazi Germany -- but it WAS a bad thing that Hitler was able to consolidate and carry out his specific plans (which were ultimatley and fundamentally a concentration of the strategic interets of german imperialism.)

Just repeating dogmatically over and over again "they are all the same, and that's all i have to say on the matter" kinda misses the point. Here is one way they are not all the same: One group is in power, the other is not. Here is another way they are not all the same: One group has the initiative and is pressing to make major changes in the U.S. society (religiousity, educaiton, privatization, police power etc.)

Check it out. Open your eyes. Even while the overall capitalist system underlying the political aparatus hasn't changed, there are changes happening (as the ruling class modifies its plans and forms of rule to suit its interests and necessities.)

If you can't see such things dynamically -- you can never make a revolution.

Severian

20th October 2005, 08:00

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2005, 09:51 PM
Ok, well this is getting rediculous. YOU are just ignorant if you believe that the Bush administration isn't the worst we've had since maybe Andrew Jackson.
Hmmm....Did the Bush administration withdraw federal troops from the South in order to clear the way for night-riding terror, the smashing of Radical Reconstruction, and the imposition of Jim Crow segregation? Has it used nuclear weapons? Is it carpet-bombing cities and napalming villages to turn back a workers' and peasants' revolution? Has it sent troops directly against a workers' struggle or ghetto uprising in this country? Heck, for all its police-state probes, has it successfully returned things to the old COINTELPRO level?

Previous administrations did do all of those things...and the left didn't label any of them fascist or near-fascist. (Except, for part of the left, Nixon's, and of course he was a Republican. And except for the CPUSA for a brief time in the early 30s, when they called everything fascist.)

So why the change with Bush? The only reasonable explanation is that the middle-class left is following along with the growing harshness of the conflicts within bourgeois politics...just as it's always followed along with whatever bourgeois liberals did.

If it were Clinton in the office right now doing this shit, we'd be opposed to him (I was opposed to him while he was in power and not because of the BJ).

I don't doubt that you opposed him. Did you compare him to Hitler and demand his "regime"be "ousted"? I doubt it.

It's a documented fact that the RCP didn't. And I'm quite confident that when the Democrats eventually return to office - and go right on doing the same basic thing - the RCP will not take the same line towards the Democrats they're taking towards Bush.

Heck, Flyby just said so. Apparently the Democrats are Allende and the Republicans are Pinochet. What a load of crap. There are minor policy differences between the twin parties of the rich, but they don't rise to anything like that level.

And of course we can see right now that the middle-class left doesn't take the same attitude towards the Democratic administrations in Lousiana and New Orleans as to the Republican administration in Washington, even though they are all equally guilty of criminal negligence, at best, in their response to Hurricane Katrina!

Nothing Human Is Alien

20th October 2005, 10:45

Did she just compare the democrats to the popular union of Allende?

:huh:

flyby

20th October 2005, 16:59

i compared chile before the coup (capitalist, oppressive, non-revolutionary) with chile after the coup -- including in the essential point of which is preferable for the preparation of revolutoinary forces.

The point is that while bourgeois forces are (fundamentally and essentially) bourgeois -- that does not mean that it makes no difference to the masses of people what they do, or whether particular plans or changes succeed.

flyby

20th October 2005, 17:25

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 07:44 AM

[long list of oppressive actions under capitalism...]
Previous administrations did do all of those things...and the left didn't label any of them fascist or near-fascist. (Except, for part of the left, Nixon's, and of course he was a Republican.
So why the change with Bush? The only reasonable explanation is that the middle-class left is following along with the growing harshness of the conflicts within bourgeois politics...just as it's always followed along with whatever bourgeois liberals did.

[QUOTE]If it were Clinton in the office right now doing this shit, we'd be opposed to him (I was opposed to him while he was in power and not because of the BJ).

I don't doubt that you opposed him. Did you compare him to Hitler and demand his "regime"be "ousted"? I doubt it.

It's a documented fact that the RCP didn't. And I'm quite confident that when the Democrats eventually return to office - and go right on doing the same basic thing - the RCP will not take the same line towards the Democrats they're taking towards Bush.

Heck, Flyby just said so.
Well, lets break that down:

First of all, the RCP opposed clinton and his actions, exposed his reactionary nature (and does so now.) They called for a revolutionary movement against the capitalist system -- and worked to build one.

Second: You can't simply "call for the regime to be ousted" at any time -- unless you are simply into rhetorical flourishes. The point is that for real, material reasons there is a basis (now) to build such a movement (that breaks out of the embrace of bourgeois politics in important ways, and creates a new polarization).... and it is possible in a way that is rarely possible. (There were times under Nixon and Johnson when such sharp polarization and mass discontent were there. And it is a sign of THESE times that there is a material basis again.)

One of reasons for this material basis is the changes wrought and pushed for by this government.

Clearly (and this is important) all capitalist governments do intense and reactionary things (as pointed out in severian's post). But there are times when (due to the contradictions of the system) the ruling class MOVES TO CHANGE THE SOCIAL CONCENSUS -- the assumed and operating norms of politics and society.

This is very dangerous and risky for them (and dangerous for the masses, in another sense). And it creates conditions for new things to emerge politically.

The point is not that bush did x, y, and z more r eactionary things than Clinton (who accomplished reactioanry things Reagan only dreamed of!)

The point is that there is a move t oward a whole different form of rule -- including all out theocracy (with all that such a move implies -- both the negative impact it would have, and the potential for uprising to prevent it.)

Severian

20th October 2005, 20:38

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 04:29 AM
Did she just compare the democrats to the popular union of Allende?

:huh:
Hm. Now that I think about it a little more, might be she compared the Republicans to Allende. Y'know, seeing as how the Unidad Popular was just a puppet of Soviet social imperialism, and Maoists internationally were allied with the U.S. and all kinds of rightist regimes against the USSR, and Mao's government was one of the first to recognize the Pinochet regime, and the Chinese embassy in Chile was one of only three to turn away people seeking refuge after the coup.

Severian

20th October 2005, 20:42

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 10:43 AM
i compared chile before the coup (capitalist, oppressive, non-revolutionary) with chile after the coup -- including in the essential point of which is preferable for the preparation of revolutoinary forces.

The point is that while bourgeois forces are (fundamentally and essentially) bourgeois -- that does not mean that it makes no difference to the masses of people what they do, or whether particular plans or changes succeed.
But this comparison makes no sense in relation to the rest of your argument.

The only difference you've been able to point to between the Republicans and Democrats is: one is "in power" right now.

But communists' attitude towards Allende vs Pinochet, or to the Weimar Republic vs the Nazi regime, didn't depend on which one was in power! On the contrary, communists defended the bourgeois-democratic regimes - in power - against military or fascist overthrow.

(Stalinists' attitude, in contrast, depended on all kinds of accidental factors and the transitory diplomatic interests of Moscow or Beijing. See my last post.)

Severian

20th October 2005, 20:49

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 11:09 AM
Second: You can't simply "call for the regime to be ousted" at any time -- unless you are simply into rhetorical flourishes. The point is that for real, material reasons there is a basis (now) to build such a movement (that breaks out of the embrace of bourgeois politics in important ways, and creates a new polarization).... and it is possible in a way that is rarely possible.
Well, we're back to one of us living on another planet again. So again, we'll see in a little while which one of us that is.

(There were times under Nixon and Johnson when such sharp polarization and mass discontent were there. And it is a sign of THESE times that there is a material basis again.)

I'm sorry, are you comparing the present political period to the height of the anti-Vietnam War movement? Delusional.

What's more, that type of middle-class left radicalization is unlikely to be repeated under current conditions of economic crisis and class polarization.

And even under those conditions, calls for "ousting" the Johnson or Nixon "regimes" did not amount to anything. Calls for Nixon's impeachment did...they were taken up by the ruling class as a way of getting themselves out of a political crisis.

It's not the task of communists to help the ruling class solve its problems. The demand which intensified those problems - under the conditions of the time - was "Bring the Troops Home Now", not "dump Nixon."

flyby

20th October 2005, 22:41

I appreciate the back and forth, but have to focus on some other things. I may not be able to post here substantively for a couple of days.

A word on comparison:

Every comparison in history has complications. And obviously, any comparison is open to someone else responding "That's ridiculous, here are five or six differences."

Because in making comparisons, no one is saying "this is the same as that" (like it is reasonable to compare Bush to Hitler, and identify similarities, that does not mean that things are identical, obviously).

Severian thinks there is little chance of anything -- that politics is defined by business as usual, and what the germans call "kleinarbeit" (tiny incremental educational work.) I haven't paid much attention to the Militant lately -- but my impression is that it is years (decades actually) since they did anything more than sell books, reprint castro and promote this or that local organizing (like coal miners in Utah).

If you think about it, this gets to a deep issue about how things spring on the agenda. How radical movements emerge.

They will not grow from "each one reach one."

They will emerge from raw cracks and fissures breaking open in society (often from the actions of the ruling class itself) and conscious forces (i.e. the communists) acting upon that... in leaps.

So when someone launches a movement against the government, severian says "won't go anywhere." If you say, there is a mood against Bush not seen since Johnson and Nixon, Severian says "how can you compare this to the 60s?"

Well, once again, there are many differences now, between this time and the 60s. But the specific comparison i was making (aobut the depth of polarization, the dividing of the country into two, the deep deep hatred of millions against the actions of this government and their frustration with the lack of a BOURGEOIS center to support against these actions) does have similarities.

In other ways, things are more difficult now -- the powerful movement of Black people i nthe 60s does not have a prominent equivalent now (for example)...

But things can jump out (and Katrina has given the masses of black people a profound jolt of outrage! and even a sense of being the target of genocide.)

Severian

20th October 2005, 23:42

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 04:25 PM
Severian thinks there is little chance of anything -- that politics is defined by business as usual, and what the germans call "kleinarbeit" (tiny incremental educational work.)
Sorry, no.

I haven't paid much attention to the Militant lately -- but my impression is that it is years (decades actually) since they did anything more than sell books, reprint castro and promote this or that local organizing (like coal miners in Utah).

And participate in this or that national strike, or the Black farmers struggle, or campaign against police brutality. But I understand that to the RCP, the actions of workers and working farmers are unimportant. I've certainly never seen any RCPers at any of those. (Nor other middle-class leftists, at most of 'em.)

I did see some RCPers show up at some clinic defense actions which the SWP helped organize...as part of an actual coalition, and not through a front group...it was nice to have a few more bodies on the line, but to the degree the RCP played any distinctive political role, it wasn't the kind which strengthened the action.

That was the opinion of everyone involved in organizing the clinic defense, too. There was even a certain sentiment which emerged, of why are we letting these people participate...a sentiment the SWPers involved had to answer and oppose.

The RCPers didn't favor the most effective tactic - rather the one that let them stand out as more militant-sounding than everyone else.

And the jibe that all the SWP does is sell books and papers is certainly not new! I used to have an old pamphlet from 1968 which responded to that old faithful, and I wouldn't be surprised if it went all the way back to the 20s or 30s.

For a communist organization which operates openly and honestly in relation to working people, propaganda work is important. And becomes more, not less important, as class battles expand. Pop quiz: in the October 1917 insurrection, what was the first specific order to an individual army unit from the Military Revolutionary Committee? To retake and reopen a Bolshevik newspaper office!

If you prefer to operate behind front groups and avoid too much mention of that word "Communist", or worse, lip service to communist ideas that might scare off liberals.....then not so much.

What's more, the peace and anti-Bush rallies taking place today are symbolic propaganda actions. Just as merely propaganda as going out and selling the Militant and Pathfinder Books.

They will emerge from raw cracks and fissures breaking open in society (often from the actions of the ruling class itself) and conscious forces (i.e. the communists) acting upon that... in leaps.

Not the issue in dispute. The difference between us is: which class forces will "emerge", perhaps suddenly, to challenge the ruling class? IMO it's the working class, and its the actions of workers, however small at the moment, which are the seeds preparing a potential massive upsurge. Those are the most important actions taking place today - all the actions in which the working class fights for its own interests in defiance of the calls for wartime "national unity" and class peace.

Heck, the West Coast longshore strike a couple years back, though brief, did more to disrupt the war effort than all the middle-class peace demos put together!

The movement against the Vietnam War was an anomaly. It is rare in history for peace movements to amount to much...in most cases, they've been phony and fraudulent and regarded by communists as such.

The communist perspective is to answer the imperialist war with the class war, in all its forms.

That's my perspective. The RCP's very different class perspective is symbolized by its recent decision to remove the word "Worker" from the name of its newspaper. Which was a long overdue move towards truth in advertising, to be sure.

Severian

3rd November 2005, 13:28

Originally posted by Severian+Oct 19 2005, 12:41 AM--> (Severian @ Oct 19 2005, 12:41 AM)
Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Oct 18 2005, 08:18 AM
Who wanna bet that nothing will happen on 2 nov?
Sounds like a good way to test who's living on another planet, as Flyby puts it.

Something will happen...some small rallies, maybe even some high-school walkouts. The composition will be mostly middle-class and white. [/b]
In contrast, here's how Flyby assessed the situation:

instead of listing what people are NOT willing to do, lets look at what millions are (potentially) willing to do!

Millions are ready to act (in various ways) to create a movement.

And we should be the catalyst for having that happen.

And then, we can see the ways and openings to go farther.

Besides i think there are possibilities for some walk outs in factories (like in the LA garment center) etc. -- so I would not rule out strikes completely.
And when I disputed that:

on the inclination point: you must live on another planet from therest of us if you think millions are not fuming -- over countless outrages from katrina to abu ghraib.

Pity we didn't put money on it.

Google News Search - article about "World Can't Wait" rallies (http://news.google.com/news?as_q=&svnum=10&as_scoring=d&hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=world+can%27t+wait&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nsrc=&as_nloc=&as_occt=any&as_qdr=&as_drrb=b&as_mind=2&as_minm=11&as_maxd=3&as_maxm=11)

Looks reasonably successful as RCP front-group actions go; some rallies were reportedly in the hundreds or even low thousands; and apparently there were some high-school walkouts.

But nothing like Flyby's hyperbolic statements.

I probably am living on a different planet than Flyby, as she said; but apparently mine is the one called Earth.