MESSAGE TO ALL LEFTISTS [Archive]

mentalbunny

22nd February 2003, 15:43

Comrades, the recent events in this community have got me thinking; we need to show solidarity with each other, we need to unite and discuss and compromise so that we come to an agreement so we can really make a difference.

Those with access to the Commie Club will have no doubt seen the tension and division that has surfaced over the temporary closing of the non-political forums, this has caused well respected members to resort to exaggerated insults and petty behaviour, and this illustrates why we live in capitalist societies, why the Left has nearly no voice. We cannot agree among ourselves and this is putting the cause in jeopardy, more than that, it is putting the future in jeopardy.

We all know that Leftism is the best way forward, Leftism works for the future while the right wing only seem to consider the present. If we truly want to succeed we must be prepared to make sacrifices for the long term goal, we must sometimes be prepared to take a less radical view and follow the course that will be most effective, give power to those most likely to help us reach a more stable, left-wing community, rather than wasting it on people who share our dreams but have no chance in making it a reality.

You may consider me a “sell-out” for these ideas, but I believe that the revolution we need is one of the mind, and therefore it will be slow and gradual because people in this world cannot cope with sudden changes, they are too entrenched in the values with which they were brought up. We may think it is futile, that the world will never see communism, but my friends, this is only the beginning. I believe that we cannot run off, trying to save the world from the capitalists, because the world is predominantly capitalist. As horrible as it sounds, we must appease these people, the people with money are the people with power, they control what we see and what we do not see to a certain extent, the press give most people their opinions, who are we against the power of Murdoch? I hate to say it but we must be moderate to increase our power, we have no credibility if we scream our politics from the roof-tops, shouting out that private property should be abolished and the proletariat should rule the world. If we say these things the rest of society will ignore us, the Conservatives simply will not listen and Labour will just see us as a headache. If you believe that a violent revolution is the only way, what will happen after it? Do you propose to simply kill all those who disagree with you? If you believe in the left being voted into power, how do you expect to get people to listen to you?

Maybe my politics is too reactionary for you, but let me reassure you, I hold the same dreams of a truly civilised world, where there is no exploitation, no fat cats and no politicians, I just believe that it will be many generations until this can be successfully achieved and that my priority is for making the most difference in this world, which means compromising my ideals to a certain extent, it means not telling people the true depth of my feeling.

I am sorry if you believe that I do not belong here now that I have shared my feelings, but I ask you to consider this deeply, some of us take for granted that the workers will instantly follow us, some of us underestimate those in power. Knowledge is not all in books, what Marx and Lenin, among others, thought is useful to know but it is not necessarily right in today’s context. I do not know everything, I’m only a 16 year old bourgeoisie school girl, maybe I will grow up and join the capitalist ranks, but I doubt it, I just want the best way of reaching true socialism, with as little blood shed along the way as possible.

Pete

22nd February 2003, 15:57

Reactionary? Yes. But their is some validity in your post. We must be in solidarity with one another on the outside. This is kind of like Canadian Political Parties. I don't like that comparison because Canadian Politics has to be the shittiest invention in the world. If we work on actually pratical things, like united workers (ie Unionizing your work place) then we can show our solidarity. But I have yet to have a reply from someone other then my self in my thread asking for help on how to run a Union Drive. That ist hte kind of thing that shows our weakness. We are ideological more then practical. I think alot of the people here now I am Utopian. My political compass score is the most Left/Libertarian that it can be, but I am willing to look at the real world. Since the world is predominately capitalist we must spread word of it's internal lies and hypocrisies, allow the wieght of the system to crush it's self. We must stay away from the power structure of bourgeosis politics. Che said as much. We can use our own ways, spreading pamphlets to work places, twisting every converstaion left, stuff like that, to spread our message. Don't give up, have hope always, but don't resort to capitalistic methods. "Those who make peace revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable" JFK. Capitalisim leaves no room for popular dissent, it will coem in its own form
Hasta la victoria siempre

By the way I always thought you where older then me Metal Bunny :)

Blibblob

22nd February 2003, 18:01

MentalBunny, i fully agree with you...

It sucks that the capitalists dont have the same problem, you never see them arguing over ideals...just who gets the money.

Valkyrie

22nd February 2003, 18:15

Crazy Pete, I didn't see your unionizing post..

Here's some stuff from the IWW.

www.iww.org/organize/workplace/

And the IWW site for Canada.

http://www.iww.ca/

(Edited by Paris at 6:27 pm on Feb. 22, 2003)

Pete

22nd February 2003, 18:21

Thank you :) It is in the Pratice forum

Guardia Bolivariano

22nd February 2003, 21:06

You really have found THE problem on this site.You are as far from being a "sell- out" as humanly posible.

ComradeJunichi

22nd February 2003, 21:10

Thursday Night wanted me to post this:

This post is ridiculous. And I'm ashamed you post at a forum dedicated to Che Guevara. He would laugh at you. You're a silly little girl who probably shivers when looking at blood. Wake up, dear. A revolution isn't a pretty thing: people are going to get shot and nobody is going to like it, but it is the way of Marxism-Leninism. So get real.

Comrade Marcel

22nd February 2003, 21:21

I think Mao Zedong said it best:

'A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.'

"Report on an Investigation of the Peasant Movement in Hunan" (March 1927), Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 28.*

mentalbunny

22nd February 2003, 22:02

Yet again the community is divided. What would happen if one group split off from the other, who would be the most succesful?

I'm not saying that violence could nott work, but I think wee should see what happens when we go down other avenues.

People seem to talk about a violent revolution, but why has nothing happened yet?

Comrade Marcel

22nd February 2003, 22:05

Quote: from mentalbunny on 10:02 pm on Feb. 22, 2003
People seem to talk about a violent revolution, but why has nothing happened yet?

Material conditions and class conciousness.

redstar2000

22nd February 2003, 22:57

Mentalbunny, first let me say that I don't think you are a "silly school girl" or a "sell out".

Your posts are far more thoughtful than many who are chronologically older than you and (unless you're keeping something from us) no one has made you an offer. :cheesy:

Lefties have been heatedly debating the issues you raised for at least 150 years...without resolving them. To me, this suggests that academic discussion is insufficient to decide the issue...that we must turn to experience.

The weakness of the "moderate" position is that nowhere have "moderates" been able, even temporarily, to replace the rule of the capitalist class with the rule of the working class.

The strength of the "moderates" is best seen in countries like Sweden...where they have been able to enforce considerable restraint on the unlimited greed of the capitalist class.

The strength of the "radical" position is that radicals have been able to overthrow the capitalist class in some countries; the weakness is that working class power in those countries has been temporary...and the capitalists are back in power again.

The danger of the "moderate" position is that it rather easily evolves into outright acceptance of capitalism. The danger of the "radical" position is that it can leave the working class behind while leaping headlong into small group conspiracies and quasi-military adventurism.

And, of course, the "moderates" and the "radicals" do not tend to be the best of comrades; "social fascist" and "bloodthirsty Stalinist" are just some of the milder insults that have been exchanged.

Perhaps we could make an effort to put that kind of debate behind us; we could say to one another "choose the path you think is best and let history decide who is right." Realistically, I doubt if this is possible...but it could be done if we wanted to do it.

I can certainly understand that many people feel discouraged; I've already said that I don't expect the revolutionary left to become a real factor in world politics before the end of this century...that means that few or none of us will live to see our dreams come true.

Does that mean we give up? Or does it mean that we "do the right thing" regardless of the outcome?

Consider those 6th and 7th century Irish monks, spending hours copying books that many of them couldn't read and most of them couldn't understand. All they had going for them was the conviction that knowledge was preferable to the barbarian darkness that had conquered Europe.

We have a lot more than that going for us...we know that in the end, the barbarians always lose.

:cool:

mentalbunny

22nd February 2003, 23:30

Thanks for your post redstar, it was really interesting and useful, I will consider what you said carefully.

Eastside Revolt

23rd February 2003, 00:34

I agree with mentall bunny on the level that we leftist find the stupidest meanial reasons to dissagree and split. But I think the idea of taking-up arms should never be forgotten. And as for Thursdaynight, does he not realize that revolution is about love. If a revolution ever does happen, you can garantee that people like me and TN will be constantly trying to kill eachother, maybe because were too alike.

canikickit

23rd February 2003, 00:55

we need to unite and discuss and compromise so that we come to an agreement so we can really make a difference

No we do not. At least not on this site. Disagreement is the main reason that these forums prosper. Without agreement, there are still issues which concern us all, and the site is still useful for those reasons (e.g. notification of protests and links to articles).

As for agreement and compromise in the real world; it's never going to happen. People have different agendas, people have different beliefs.

I think that Redstar's end of the century prediction is ridiculous wishful thinking. If we're not blown up by then we'll probably be talking about 2/300 years down the line.

I think we just need to educate ourselves and the people around us we can reach. Sew the seeds as it were.

There's not going to be any kind of overthrow of capitalism in any of our lifetimes. I laugh out loud most times I read people's posts to the contrary. Ha, ha, ha.

Thursday Night strikes me as a silly kid. Read what he said again, he's a joker.

Alexander Pop

23rd February 2003, 01:14

No matter how hard anyone trys, many will find another paths to walk! Too many people... too many paths... but only one to lead out of the forest!
This planet holds all the keys to all questions us may have! To use the key means to find it, to find it means to know, to know means to understand! But very very very few people do understand... or should I say are not even 1inch closer to the key!
The forest will show you further when you get to understand!

Blibblob

23rd February 2003, 02:19

Agreement is just as bad as being a yes man.

If we all agreed, things would never get better. We are the good of the world, we disagree with what is going on, and try and change it. Even those who just disagree to dissagree.

redstar2000

23rd February 2003, 02:26

"I think that redstar's end of the century prediction is ridiculous wishful thinking."

You may be right, canikickit.

:cool:

Blibblob

23rd February 2003, 02:29

But... dont trash your dreams, put them away and never look at them again.

CheViveToday

23rd February 2003, 04:21

Disagreements and debates aren't necessarily bad, and something needed in order for this community to thrive [As Canikickit said]. However that is different from the squabbling, insulting, and whining going on between certain members. I'm new here, however I don't see that any of that is necessary. Oh and Canikickit, in the words of Darth Vader...."I find your lack of faith disturbing". ;-)

Pete

23rd February 2003, 04:31

Only agree when you truly do. Otherwise you are a yes man.
Umm ahh hell. I forget shit to easy!

pay feo 2003

23rd February 2003, 05:11

well sed, metal bunny. props to you for speaking your mind...and thinking too!

words like "sell out" dont mean shit to me. is it even a word with a valid definition? i think not.

im not ashamed to tell the world i hold no political beliefs, why should I? in fact, right now im looking into the "prestige" status of the original "humanists" - Aldous Huxley anyone?

i came into the world like everyone else, naked and innocent...will i leave? hell no! not until i've at least made an honest attempt to settle a score!

who ever said "money" was the big problem? tell me who?

dont we all want prestige for being people and not robots?

prestige implies the ascendancy given by conspicuous excellence or recognized superiority - websters definition

now, back to the subject of money. money is not the real problem. truthfully, we all want to sustain an abundant life for ourselves, our family, the world yet we must not try to predict the outcome only focus on the task at hand. division will occur on its own, naturally.

why dont i believe that money is the problem? for many reasons, only i will name one.

its about land ownership. now what? :angry:

Xvall

23rd February 2003, 05:15

Mental; I must say. (I don't know why I am saying this, maybe cause I'm a little drugged up right now.) You type really well. That whole little essay was just overtly pleasant to look at!

(Edited by Drake Dracoli at 5:20 am on Feb. 23, 2003)

Rebelde para Siempre

23rd February 2003, 06:59

This is something which has always troubled me, people can just never agree and never will.

I'd like everyone to think why we are leftists in the first place. Is it truly because you want the best for mankind? Is it truly because you love the human race enough to want all to live in peace? Or, is it because deep down you are a selfish fuck who wants everyone to share your views?

One thing I admire about the Zapatistas is that they really have no political agenda, they dont want to limit themselves to a certain doctrine. Limiting yourself to one set of beliefs is the cause of all conflict. I hate to say it but sometimes (actually maybe all the time) compromise is needed (between leftists anyway).

Healthy debate should be the road to compromise, where everybody may not nessacarily agree, but will serve the common good and goal.

Also, the idea of violent revolution is bullshit. If there is ever is a violent revolution it will be far into the future, but by then I hope people will have seen the error of their ways and evolved mentally (I really hope this will happen... but the future doesnt look bright)

Btw, I agree with Drake - Your post was very well written mentalbunny.

(Edited by Rebelde para Siempre at 7:29 am on Feb. 23, 2003)

Lefty

23rd February 2003, 07:55

I'm curious. You say that unity is the only way that true progress for the left can be achieved, right?(Unity=everyone advocating a peaceful revolution)
So...
do you expect the more militant leftists to just become pacifists?

Sorry.

Larissa

23rd February 2003, 12:28

Quote: from mentalbunny on 7:02 pm on Feb. 22, 2003
Yet again the community is divided. What would happen if one group split off from the other, who would be the most succesful?

I'm not saying that violence could nott work, but I think wee should see what happens when we go down other avenues.

People seem to talk about a violent revolution, but why has nothing happened yet?
What Mentalbunny is saying is just "Don't work hard, work smart".
Violence shall be the ultimate resource. We DO lose credibility when we shout out loud our leftist theories instead of explaining them and doing a deep thorough and most effective job.

(Edited by Larissa at 9:30 am on Feb. 23, 2003)

Rebelde para Siempre

23rd February 2003, 13:08

Larissa, I agree wholeheartedly.

One reason the left does not gain credible support is because people dont take you seriously if you are just preaching the same old shit without backing it up with evidence/fact or reason.

Violence is the effort of an untrained mind trying to express itself.

By violence I also mean expressing an incoherant argument.

(Edited by Rebelde para Siempre at 1:10 pm on Feb. 23, 2003)

canikickit

23rd February 2003, 14:26

You may be right, canikickit.

:cool:

Of course, it's all entirly speculative; who knows what situation we'll be in in twenty years time? The way things are going at the moment, I think it will get worse before it gets better. Much worse probably.

Oh and Canikickit, in the words of Darth Vader...."I find your lack of faith disturbing".

The human race is disturbing. How could I possibly have faith when people capitalise my name for no reason? But seriously, what do you want me to do? It's not that I don't have faith in my opinion and the opinions of a lot of people here being 100% correct, but we represent a tiny minority; it may be growing, but progress is slow and people are insane.

Blibblob

23rd February 2003, 14:46

Sanity is relative.

Pete

23rd February 2003, 15:35

"Also, the idea of violent revolution is bullshit. If there is ever is a violent revolution it will be far into the future, but by then I hope people will have seen the error of their ways and evolved mentally (I really hope this will happen... but the future doesnt look bright) "

A comprimise is not saying that Violent revolution is stupid. You have advocated comprimise, but refuse to accept the radical left's point on any grounds. As Larissa said, shouting will accomplish nothing, but pascifisim will eventually run dry as well. I propose a comprimise.

The left needs to be militant. No question there. Everyone who thinks we should be passive might as well be a righty trying to brain soil us. If we do not take anyaction our idealas will not spread. And remember it is possible to be militantly pascifists. Look at Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. They where both MILITANT while PACSIFIST. To militarize the Left while still being pacsifistic we must make our self known. We must unionize our work place (if big enough) or our local trade (if say you ahve people under your boss). If we can have all the workers unionized it will be harder for the management to oppress or subject us to unhealthy work conditions (including the mental condition).
EXAMPLE: I work at a Zellars, it is a retail store that sells everything from food to condoms to fine china to thongs to lego to photo development. Our bosses, each night I have 2-3 hanging around, tell us to do a job and then see them. How does this help the work get done? It just makes their job necassary (instead of giving us a list or just telling us everything we must go back and forth). In addition one of my coworkers got YELLED AT TWICE for helping out another coworker. She was out of her assigned area so she was pulled into the office TWICE (we have multiple bosses remeber) and yelled at for this. This does not create a healthy environment. If we where unionated this would not happen, or all the workers could show solidarty against this and do a slow down or strike if it persists (which it has among other workers). I am looking for a left-l;eaning union (I have been directed to one site already th IWW or something) so that leftist education will be part of the union book and periodicals. I am trying to MILITARIZE my work place to the LEFT while keeping PEACEFUL.

If all the workers of the world are unionized, then would it not be easier to UNITE them under an international solidartity movement? EXAMPLE: So if say (completely hypothetical) the iron miners in Austria are striking for better working conditions, the government can't try to cover the shortage by importing iron from say Canada because the Canadian workers will strike in solidarity with their Austrian comrades. If this happened world wide it would put pressure on the World to apply heavy pressure on Austria to settle the issue in that one mine. That may seem a bit far fetched but I can see it happening. International Solidarity. Militarized but pacifist. The workers could control their government by having mass General Strikes against all around bad conditions (EXAMPLE: privatization of Canadian Healthcare all Canadian workers strike in solidarity to forcet he Canadian government to reinstate healthcare and increase its budget to an all time high).

The power would be in the WORKERS HANDS as many unions pick their reps from the workers who are members. They could change the conditions of their nation and the world by acting in solidarity. Maybe this would be a good end of century prediction? A step towards global communism.

If the Government called out the government on the strikers, then we would have to fight back in SELFDEFENSE ONLY. If 1000 men with semi automatic rifles start firing at 1000 men with picket signs their is a serious problem. Most of the time, I'd think, their would be members of the military who would leak information to the strikers. Like relatives who don't want to shoot their dad or brother or sister. But if it comes to violence the workers must be expected to FIGHT BACK. They may occupy factories that have been shut down to increase the profit of some fat old man (like in Venuzuela [Idon't know about the profit thinkg but I am refering to the workers occupying factories]). They may swell to occupy all work places in a city or township or county, creating the illusion of a 'revoltionary army' who will fight for thier rights as workers and humans. End of the century predition as I said.

That is my comprimise. Not in whole because a break for breakfast cut off my thinking momentarily :) But I will clarify ANYTHING. Just ask and please don't be a bastard and flame :) It is the middle ground between militant Lefts and pacsifist Lefts. A true comprimise.

Azygous

23rd February 2003, 16:17

am i the only one who doesn't know what the fuck is going on?

all i know is that two forums were temporarily closed....i have no idea why....and now you guys are debating the option of armed revolution.

Pete

23rd February 2003, 16:21

"all i know is that two forums were temporarily closed....i have no idea why....and now you guys are debating the option of armed revolution. "

The two forums where closed so we would expend more energy on political debates. Armed Revolution is but one of them.

Blibblob

23rd February 2003, 19:08

Im not trusting azygous, he doesnt seem to be with us...

CheViveToday

23rd February 2003, 19:51

Oh and Canikickit, in the words of Darth Vader...."I find your lack of faith disturbing".

The human race is disturbing. How could I possibly have faith when people capitalise my name for no reason? But seriously, what do you want me to do? It's not that I don't have faith in my opinion and the opinions of a lot of people here being 100% correct, but we represent a tiny minority; it may be growing, but progress is slow and people are insane.

I fully understand your point, I guess I'd just like to think that we can bring upon a change sooner than later if all we put forth an effort. I truly believe this can happen.....but I guess it could be wishful thinking. I hope not.

Blibblob

23rd February 2003, 20:25

I hope it can happen. But i just talked to somebody who stands firmly against us. And he was never willing to back down. As such, neither will anybody else.

Pete

23rd February 2003, 20:33

That is when you bring out the pictures of murdered palestinian babies.

Blibblob

23rd February 2003, 20:41

i didnt have any :(

Pete

23rd February 2003, 21:10

They are in Commie Club

Blibblob

23rd February 2003, 21:12

i cant go in commie club

mentalbunny

24th February 2003, 14:14

Thanks for the wide response, guys.

I am advocating an approach similar to Ghandi's and Martin Luther King's, it seems to work best (sorry if I did not make this clearer, this has always been my intention).

I am not saying that we should all agree all the time, obviously then we would make no progress but we all seem to be far too dogmatic and stubborn. Violence, in any form, will not help our cause, nor will it help the future generations that will inhabit this world, and that is hopefully the real reason we are left-wing.

RpS and Larrisa, thank you for saying what Inwould have said if I'd thought about it better.

Rebelde para Siempre

24th February 2003, 14:18

A comprimise is not saying that Violent revolution is stupid. You have advocated comprimise, but refuse to accept the radical left's point on any grounds. As Larissa said, shouting will accomplish nothing, but pascifisim will eventually run dry as well. I propose a comprimise.

I wasn't saying that I am against a violent revolution, but the whole idea of violent revolution is not practical in today's society or even the forseeable future. Basically if you compare the old days of violent revolution even in the U.S, the conditions were right and the left had popular support.

These days i'm sorry to say, the "radical left" has limited support or influence. Going up against a capitalist war machine, intelligence and subversion is something the left is going to pay dearly for if it ever does.

And I'm never a fan of seeing people die, especially well-intentioned leftists and simply uninformed opposition.

(Edited by Rebelde para Siempre at 3:09 pm on Feb. 24, 2003)

SlimShady4538

24th February 2003, 14:22

I agree with Mentalbunny. Fighting solves no conflict. If King George the Second is ever to be taken down we must unify against him. A good place to start is to oppose the capitalist war for oil. I aint getting drafted or supporting a war so Joe Blow can keep his wasteful SUV. HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!!

Larissa

24th February 2003, 14:25

Quote: from SlimShady4538 on 11:22 am on Feb. 24, 2003
I agree with Mentalbunny. Fighting solves no conflict. If King George the Second is ever to be taken down we must unify against him. A good place to start is to oppose the capitalist war for oil. I aint getting drafted or supporting a war so Joe Blow can keep his wasteful SUV. HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!!"King George the second"!! LOL!! I liked that one :wink: never heard it before.

Pete

24th February 2003, 14:50

"King George the second"

That first made me think about the bloody British Monarchs but I get it HAHAHAH!

It is sad that the Canadian Environment Minister who is advocating the Kyoto Pact owns 4 suvs.

Show me the Money

24th February 2003, 15:07

Quote: from mentalbunny on 4:43 pm on Feb. 22, 2003
You may consider me a “sell-out” for these ideas, but I believe that the revolution we need is one of the mind, and therefore it will be slow and gradual because people in this world cannot cope with sudden changes, they are too entrenched in the values with which they were brought up.

Comrade, every revolution is about the mind(at first)..

..but could we use the Internet to create a common mind-set?? Could we educate the Internet Users our POVs??

CheViveToday

24th February 2003, 16:52

The intellectuals on this site have educated many people! I am one of the people who has gained much knowledge already, and I've only been here a few weeks! If there were a lot more leftist communities like this on the internet, it would be great.

Show me the Money

24th February 2003, 16:57

that's for sure!!

Show me the Money

24th February 2003, 17:06

also related:
http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...pic=616&start=0 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=13&topic=616&start=0)

(Edited by Show me the Money at 6:08 pm on Feb. 24, 2003)

Kez

24th February 2003, 20:00

decent post Mental :)

Right, first we discussing a "united left" yeah?
Hasnt this been proven to be wrong?
In Spain, in Germany in 30's?
I cannot unite with someone i disagree with (poltically not personally), this would be betraying my own beliefs, if that person could explain his/her views and i thought he/she was right then i would support them, but as i have my own views (which are based on the books i read) i cannot blindly support someone else, this is what happened in the labour party in the 80's when they were SO desperate to get into power they lost all their ideas for opportunism, now we have the most bankrupt fucked up piece of shit of a labour party.

On Violent Revolution,
This is the only way, the bourgeois are NEVER gonna give up power, that is why we have a parliament and a constitution to hold down pressure from below. The system has been set so even though the quantitive changes may occur, qualitative changes DONT occur, this is why we must completely destroy the system, we cannot reform it.
Violent doesnt mean guns and shit, if there was a general strike, and the capitalists gave up, then not a bullet would be shot, but the bourgeois WONT give up power even though the whole of the workign class is against them, that is why only violent revolution can succeed.

This should be a very interesting thread
Comade Kamo

CheViveToday

24th February 2003, 20:04

Yes, armed/violent revolution should never be ruled out by leftists. It has and can work. Just look at Cuba. I agree that armed/violent revolution isn't always the right choice, and should definately never be the first choice, but it's necessary in certain situations. It had been necessary in places in the past and will be necessary again in the future.

Eastside Revolt

24th February 2003, 20:32

Quote: from CrazyPete on 2:50 pm on Feb. 24, 2003
"King George the second"

Actually he's more like King George the 3rd. George Washington was the first.

mentalbunny

25th February 2003, 21:55

Kamo I suggest you trust the printed word less and your own judgement and reasoning more, try to think of things outside of books, that's far too dogmatic and stubborn, in my opinion at least.

Kez

25th February 2003, 22:39

"Kamo I suggest you trust the printed word less and your own judgement and reasoning more, try to think of things outside of books, that's far too dogmatic and stubborn, in my opinion at least."

please say you didnt mean that....

What do i base my ideas on except my books and my experiences?

So i dont read marx,lenin, trotsky and i call myself a communist?

I think what your suggesting is opportunism, please correct me. Dogma only comes in when someone talks in slogans, and doesnt use evidence to back up their points

ireallyhadablackout

26th February 2003, 04:16

Quote: from Rebelde para Siempre on 6:59 am on Feb. 23, 2003
This is something which has always troubled me, people can just never agree and never will.

Also, the idea of violent revolution is bullshit. If there is ever is a violent revolution it will be far into the future, but by then I hope people will have seen the error of their ways and evolved mentally (I really hope this will happen... but the future doesnt look bright)

ah, very well stated. a person after my own heart.
as i read your post i found myself complentating which idea to elaborate on first, for its clarity is bewildering to my thought process.

first, lets look into the true definition of "violent" if it can be done. i believe that it can.

second, we must identify the elements as well as define them, precisely so that there is no misunderstatements.

elements can include many things consisting of time, space and matter.

also, the people do not have to be violent themselves only self-destructive in a natural sense for as biological entities we possess the intrigue of what is known to be a "mind."

ireallyhadablackout

26th February 2003, 04:27

Quote: from TavareeshKamo on 10:39 pm on Feb. 25, 2003

please say you didnt mean that....

What do i base my ideas on except my books and my experiences?

So i dont read marx,lenin, trotsky and i call myself a communist?

I think what your suggesting is opportunism, please correct me. Dogma only comes in when someone talks in slogans, and doesnt use evidence to back up their points

ah, i see what you mean. would it be fair or wise to study civilizations that came before us?

how does one take the word "dogma" to mean if one were to put it down as in hieroglyphics.

are you to tell me that we have progressed to a point that language is an advantaged when we have seen with our own "evidence" the civilizations before us and how they progressed?

i can understand your statement in regards to how you became involved in "communism" whether in theory or you live it every day. i too experience learning in the same manner.

in my attempt to state a point, i fear i may have said nothing at all. lol. my apologies.

ireallyhadablackout

26th February 2003, 04:50

Quote: from SlimShady4538 on 2:22 pm on Feb. 24, 2003
I agree with Mentalbunny. Fighting solves no conflict. If King George the Second is ever to be taken down we must unify against him. A good place to start is to oppose the capitalist war for oil. I aint getting drafted or supporting a war so Joe Blow can keep his wasteful SUV. HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!!

im not saying i agree with metal bunny. its the method i am in agreement with not the leftism, for in my mind i have not yet proposed to study it so that it is concrete in my mind along with many other so called "terms".

what is the difference between having access to "resources" and "cash money"? are they one in the same? does anyone know?

also, can anyone summerize why is it when there is "rumor" of war, oil and gasoline prices go up? if there is such an abundance of the black oil, then why raise prices on an abundant resource? doesnt this cause economic imbalance in some way? dont tell me its because war is expensive. i dont believe that, not yet anyway.

(Edited by ireallyhadablackout at 4:54 am on Feb. 26, 2003)

mentalbunny

26th February 2003, 12:50

Kamo, what I meant was that you seem to do little thinking with your own brain, you rely on the theory, etc, that you read and you just accept this, you don't consider that it might not be quite as right as you think it is.

Eastside Revolt

26th February 2003, 21:54

MentalBunny,

What is the problem here, you don't agree with violent revolution? Or you don't agree with someone who thinks blind following is wrong?

Conghaileach

26th February 2003, 23:49

from CrazyPete:
EXAMPLE: So if say (completely hypothetical) the iron miners in Austria are striking for better working conditions, the government can't try to cover the shortage by importing iron from say Canada because the Canadian workers will strike in solidarity with their Austrian comrades. If this happened world wide it would put pressure on the World to apply heavy pressure on Austria to settle the issue in that one mine. That may seem a bit far fetched but I can see it happening. International Solidarity.

The kind of strike you're referring to, one of showing solidarity with workers who are on strike, is known as the sympathetic strike. If it interests you, I would suggest that you read up on Larkinism and the 1913 Dublin lock-out.

James Larkin was the fouder of the Irish Transport & General Workers Union (ITGWU). When a coalition of bosses made membership of this union illegal, because of Larkin's favoured tactic of the sympathetic strike, the workers walked out. For almost an entire year 20,000 workers were on strike. Dublin was brought to a standstill.

Here (http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws88_89/ws29_1913.html)'s a site on the ITGWU and the lock-out if you're interested.

(Edited by CiaranB at 11:57 pm on Feb. 26, 2003)

Rastafari

27th February 2003, 00:52

In the end, the Bolsheviks won over Russia, folks. Immediate action and violent action is the only solution in this violent and short-term world.

CompadreGuerrillera

27th February 2003, 00:52

wow i have really been away for a while!
i totally agree comrade!
i have been dormant for a while, so i am a little late in replying, about nonviolent revolution
it is possible if it is simeltaneous across the world, same with a violent one to be successful, we need organization in any event, way more than we have now, which i dont think we have
we need to establish a network across all the nations, to all the people, with lots of committed memebrs, with good leadership, and a good plan for the future,
seperation is a problem in all minoritie parties, be it communists, anarchists, what have you, they each have their own vision for the future, and dissagree, and dont want to compromise
so if anything we need organization and be flexible, and compromisable to other comrade's ideas
good original post comrade

later all
Compadre Guerillero

Pete

27th February 2003, 03:21

Compadre, welcome back.
In respect to your post I have another idea. Well I read it somewhere, I must have because I find that it is a good idea. After the capitalist powerstructure is removed and the dictatorship of the proletairait has created a new man that is not profit driven then it will be up to each community to be ruled as they wish. If some want to have an authoritative dictator over themselves let them, but only the people that choose that. If you want to be oppressed then go somewhere where an oppresser can opress you. Freedom of choice and direct democracy by commune may not seem effective, but it will smooth over the difficulties you foresee. I personaly believe taht after the dictatorship of the proletariat (which would be a anachro-syndacist type movement) the world will shift in to anachro-communsim. The method of this will be years, decades even, of de-conditioning and education.

mentalbunny

27th February 2003, 17:44

CompadreG, I love your sig, i recommend everyone here to read it and to digest what it means.

redcanada, I don't quite get what you're saying, I'm not asking people to go along with things, but I'm asking for a degree of unity so we can actually get something done.

Eastside Revolt

27th February 2003, 20:17

I just couldn't see what you and Kamo were arguing about.

Alexander Pop

27th February 2003, 23:16

Seriously you don't think that something can be done by peaceful actions.... like those pittyfull anti-war protests
With such actions you can't accomplish anything, unless you consider as accomplishment giving King George II a really big laugh and loads of fun and amusement...
I've been to shitload of peacuful protests and those helped nothing! Thankfully after many peaceful protest came one violent and that one helped! People got hurt and shit, but hey - no pain no gain!
I don't like seeing people get hurt and shit but sometimes you just gotta get over it.... it's life!

Kez

27th February 2003, 23:55

Im slighlty insulted over the fact im accuseed of not thinking for myself, just because i refer to books and texts doesnt mean i dont think for myself.

2nd, u think the capitalist government will collapse if u get a few hundred people to hold candle lights outside number 10?

CompadreGuerrillera

28th February 2003, 01:02

ty crazy pete its good to be back, and ty mentalbunny, that quote is very important, and should be known by all revolutionaries, we CANT allow ourselfs to become fascists or stalinists, etc. we cant go down to the level of those we fight, it would contradict our cause, and wind up in the failiure of the proletariat's government, like so many governments before us(CCCP after Lenin), China(who, keep in mind opresses thier workers the most out of all the countries, and still claim communism)(a grand example of hypocracy and becoming the monster)

(Edited by CompadreGuerrillera at 1:05 am on Feb. 28, 2003)

RedComrade

28th February 2003, 04:45

Quote: from canikickit on 2:26 pm on Feb. 23, 2003

You may be right, canikickit.

:cool:

Of course, it's all entirly speculative; who knows what situation we'll be in in twenty years time? The way things are going at the moment, I think it will get worse before it gets better. Much worse probably.

Oh and Canikickit, in the words of Darth Vader...."I find your lack of faith disturbing".

The human race is disturbing. How could I possibly have faith when people capitalise my name for no reason? But seriously, what do you want me to do? It's not that I don't have faith in my opinion and the opinions of a lot of people here being 100% correct, but we represent a tiny minority; it may be growing, but progress is slow and people are insane.

I have pondered the problem of the positions on this board being so unpopular and wander what people would think of getting a team of people on here together and spamming non political and non leftist boards with propaganda, perhaps this sounds intrusive but I know i probably would never be were i am today if it was not for a spam /leftist message on the bottom of an audiogalaxy page i just happened to read. What are your guyses thoughts on a propaganda/evangelist dept. to spread are beleifs?

Kez

28th February 2003, 23:21

I see what ur saying, but that really wont be effective being a secterian approach to the amount of work we'd put in, and is the approach taken by the numskulls of the SWP and the like.
What we need to do is to concentrate on the masses, the workers, the students, the oppressed.

Capitalism is in crisis now, we got 5 years before it gets out, this is the time to agitate, educate and organise.

NOW

Kez

2nd March 2003, 14:27

This is what Plekhanov the founder of Russian Marxism said:
“Before we can unite, and in order that we may unite, we must first of all draw firm and definite lines of demarcation. Otherwise, our unity will be purely fictitious, it will conceal the prevailing confusion, and hinder its radical elimination. It is understandable, therefore, that we do not intend to make our publication a mere storehouse of various views. On the contrary, we shall conduct it in the spirit of a strictly defined tendency. This tendency can be expressed by the word Marxism, and there is hardly need to add that we stand for the consistent development of the ideas of Marx and Engels and emphatically reject the equivocating, vague and opportunist ‘corrections’ for which Edward Bernstein, P. Struve and many others have set the fashion.”

Although Plekhanov later turned koo koo in c1916, he said this in 1900, and i believe this to be most true, and something we should all take into account

Apprentice of Marx

2nd March 2003, 15:22

Quote: from redstar2000 on 9:57 pm on Feb. 22, 2003

The strength of the "moderates" is best seen in countries like Sweden...where they have been able to enforce considerable restraint on the unlimited greed of the capitalist class.

i just wanted to say that sweden is a right wing capitalist country (I know because i live there!) and it is getting worse! there is no leftist parties that has a chance of being elected
sweden is getting less and less democratic!
all parties that you can vote on are just variations of eachother and there all right wing!

sweden is not a socialistic country!

Pete

2nd March 2003, 21:34

I am slightly disturbed by that Apprentice; I am disturbed because it is portrayed in Canada as a Far left socailist country. Well Canada is called socialist by many people although it isn't. All of our aspects of Socialism came from what Trudeau put into the Liberal's platform, transferred of course from the CCF, because the Liberal's never think of anything for themselves. The situation of parties being slight variations is the same in America and Canada, except atleast the NDP are beginning to turn far left again. Jean is a great man, but he has lost all sway in his party, and the Liberal's are looking towards the PC and thinking "That is something I would like to get into." Let us hope that Martin fails his leadership bid and Shelia Copps gets in. She will stand up to America while turning Canadian politics left again. That was a divergence from the issue at hand, but shows how a party can be split 3 ways and the meaning behind it can be lost. Under Trudeau the Liberals where untied and Left of Centre, close to the NDP, but now they are Right of Centre and divided and close to the PC....division creates reaction.

Iepilei

2nd March 2003, 22:36

I made it to about the 5th page on this topic, and got impatient. I feel as if I must contribute to this in some way, shape, form.

Every revolution must begin in the mind. Otherwise, you've noone to fight with. In our time right now, we're experiencing probably the height of military supremacy in the United States - a time in which armed revolution is unlikely to happen. Right now, is our time to express and to speak out against.

We cannot be too passive, and we cannot be overly aggressive. Pacifists are looked down upon as lacking direction, guidance. Aggressors are looked upon as being arrogant, dangerous, or terroristic. We must set in peoples minds that we are neither hippies nor fundamentalists. We must do this using socratic means.

Have people question their lives. Once the bulk of the population begins to realise the flaws inherant in their system they will begin to retaliate. However you cannot change everyone's minds. Many are set in stone and will fight with anything. Many refuse to accept.

So will the end revolution be violent? Many leftists wish it not. Che once said that every revolutionary mind is motivated by love. We share love for our fellow man, but we must realise that the feeling is not always mutual. There are racists. There are agressors. There are people who are so in tune to the way things are and their higher status that they will do anything to keep it.

We are constantly moving forward. As one progresses, they will face obstacles - this is life. No matter what happens, though, we must not let anyone stop us from advancing.