Interesting article thing I saw today;

[VonClausewitz]

(I saw this on some site today, I forget where, I'll nose through my history to find it for you, I have chosen to elaborate on the basic ideas here, for a little discussion.)

The far right and far left are as bad as each other, extremist violence is perpetually called for by both sides, and neither seems to have much grasp of the gravity of what they suggest. Both sides have their scapegoats, who by and large, get blamed for everything that is wrong with the world. (for example)

The Far Left = The Rich/Bush/Capitalists etc etc
The Far Right = The Jews/Blacks/Communists etc etc

Now, the problem with both of these extremes is so; they both fancy the extinction of one section of society to further their own means, their own political and social programs, both sides saying that it's 'For the good of the people'. Of course, it's always going to be bad for at least one section of 'the people'. These groups will tend to be bent to fit whichever badness is happening in the world, so that the extremes can carry on complaining about them, calling for their removal etc.

Ask a far right person about why say multi-racial families should not be allowed, and they will go off on one about the 'purity of the race'. Also probably a moan about how blacks and and other ethnics get preferential treatment (affirmitive action in America apparently). A highly illogical standpoint of course, and one that gets laughed at by rational people everywhere on a fairly regular basis.

On the flipside, as a far left person why the rich shouldn't be allowed, and you get a long winded rant about unfair wealth and oppression of workers and all that, which by and large, in most countries these people are from, is an obsolete view. It is notable that amongst much of the genuine working class - actual factory/etc workers - that I have lived with, drank with and generally been around, there is little time for politics.

(Untill I took up my place at university, I didn't find much call for 'revolution' or any kind of right-wing 'racial purity'. Perhaps ignorance is indeed bliss ?)

Extremism of the left and of the right really does tend to emerge most amongst comfortable people (champagne socialists anyone ?), people who have had the time to concern themselves with 'racial purity' and 'marxist economics', whereas the man working the lathe in the factory just wants to get on with life.

A final point, drawn verbatim (with my own thoughts) from the original text;

The Left hate the rich because of guilt; they all have nice lives, some others don't.
(Thought I've never heard a red shout 'I have a brand new PC, why can't African tribesmen ?!')

The Right hate the Jews becuase of jealousy; the jewish stereotype of the richman.
(The actual current prevailing theory amongst the far right is some bullcrap 'illuminati' style theory about Jewish world rulership)

---- End

Methinks that much of this article (bar the bits I elaborated upon), was infact written by a moderate type person, simply to show how every extremist hates their monetary/social betters under some pretense or another. Now, let's have some thoughts about this ?. I'll post my opinions as the topic goes on.

Reactionary ? Liberal type right/left ?

[Ownthink]

I hate people who ***** about "extremists". Nobody is going to the "extreme" on the Left. We are not killing anyone or professing hatred based on somebody's skin color or anything.

Violence is a good tool and is sometimes needed and useful. This article sounds like a rant from a moderate Republican.

It's shit.

[Amusing Scrotum]

It is an interesting article. People often moan that the far left is just as violent as the far right. Perhaps in places that is true. However I tend to answer that a Nazi will shoot a man because he is black, a Communist would shoot a man because he is a Nazi. That difference is incredibly important.


Originally posted by VonClausewitz+--> (VonClausewitz)It is notable that amongst much of the genuine working class - actual factory/etc workers - that I have lived with, drank with and generally been around, there is little time for politics.[/b]

There is of course a distinction we have to make here. Most people (rich or poor) have "little time" for politics. There are however, certain people (myself included) that enjoy commenting on politics. It is like a hobby, I can say for instance that I play football and comment on politics. These are my hobbies.

However even people who a mainly disinterested in politics will become incredibly interested if politics directly affect them. I know a former miner for instance, who had absolutely no interest in politics until the miners strike. When his livelihood was directly affected by politics, he took an active interest which has stayed ever since.

Workers, especially those in Unions, have always had some view on politics. Indeed working class communities still vote Labour, not because of what the Labour Party has become, but because of what it once was.

Most workers, especially physical workers, have a strong labour streak. The old Socialist principles still run through every working class area and in times of adversity they arise.

So I think only champagne Socialists and middle class pseudo intellectuals actually think that the working class is passive. The kind of people who think working class people (and they often invoke the factory man stereotype) are a-political, have indeed probably never met a working class person and they certainly have limited experience of the working class if they have ever met them.


Originally posted by [email protected]
Extremism of the left and of the right really does tend to emerge most amongst comfortable people (champagne socialists anyone ?), people who have had the time to concern themselves with 'racial purity' and 'marxist economics',

It is a pity in my opinion that some many middle class Marxists have made Marxism into an academic field. They tend to think that "mere workers" couldn't possibly understand.

Of course Marx's work isn't easy to understand, though my main barriers are with the language he uses, 19th century English. However it is not impossible to grasp the basics and I have seen some books which outline these basics in modern English.

The Marxists who write these books and indeed every Marxist who "de-mystifies" Marxism is doing an incredibly important thing. The workers are not foot soldiers for the party and if we want to change anything it is important that we realise that the working class cannot be "token" Marxists, they must be "proper" Marxists.


Ownthink
This article sounds like a rant from a moderate Republican.

I agree, the a-political "rabble" is the viewpoint of middle class pseudo academics and has no relation to what the working class is actually like.

[redstar2000]

I don't think the person who wrote this piece really understands very much of anything about either the "far left" or the "far right"...it sounds like something written by a high school "journalist".

My own "high school" writings are fortunately lost forever...I'm sure I cranked out some real crap.

But I don't think I ever wrote anything as bad as that. :lol:

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

[Zingu]

The Left hate the rich because of guilt; they all have nice lives, some others don't.
(Thought I've never heard a red shout 'I have a brand new PC, why can't African tribesmen ?!')


Its much more complicated than just "hating rich people". :lol: