Log in

View Full Version : LaRouche's "Operation Mop-Up"



Severian
24th April 2006, 01:22
The LaRouchites are known today as a fascist group. And for their crazy-sounding conspiracy theories.

But once they were a leftist organization, a splitoff from Students for a Democratic Society. How did this change? The most important step was a series of physical attacks on the Communist Party and other groups...for being an obstacle to revolution.

These attacks were justified with rhetoric like "The Class Struggle Is for Keeps,".... "We must dispose of this stinking corpse [the CP] to ensure that it cannot act as a host for maggots and other parasites preparing future scabby Nixonite attacks on the working class. If we were to vacillate . we would be guilty of betraying the human race. Our job is to pulverize the Communist Party."...."All those mighty 'Communists' can do is hide behind the nightsticks of the local police, while publishing tear-jerking accounts of their own casualties" and "[The SWP] has been saying, 'Smash the Communist Party' for almost forty years, yet when some left organization proceeds to actually smash the CP, the SWP leaders and members roll their glazed eyes heavenward, expecting the entire galaxy to fall upon them."

From "Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism" by Dennis King:

Operation Mop Up was preceded by months of squabbling between the NCLC and the Communist Party USA. NCLC members had frequently disrupted CP meetings with long harangues from the floor. The CP began tossing them out and published articles alleging that they were government agents. Matters escalated in early 1973 when the NCLC announced a conference in Philadelphia to build a national organization for welfare recipients and the unemployed. CP members and other local activists started a campaign to discredit the conference, calling its NCLC organizers racists as well as agents. The NCLC leadership was furious. A New Solidarity front-page editorial, entitled "Deadly Crisis for CPUSA," warned the CP that if it didn't back off it would face an all-out counterattack. The CP failed to take the threat seriously.

On the conference's opening day the anti-NCLC coalition sent a sound truck through the black community and staged a picket line with signs comparing the NCLC to the Ku Klux Klan. This failed to stop the event, which was attended by several hundred white middle-class activists and a handful of welfare mothers. The harassment did, however, give LaRouche the pretext he needed. He called an emergency meeting of the East Coast NCLC. "From here on in," he declared, "the CP cannot hold a meeting on the East Coast.. We'll mop them up in two months." The NCLC, he promised, would seize "hegemony" on the left--i.e., replace the CP as the dominant organization.

Many NCLC members were shocked and frightened by LaRouche's announcement, but he anticipated their reluctance: "I know you better than you know yourselves, and for the most part you're full of crap, "he said. "This isn't a debating society anymore."

A front-page New Solidarity editorial, "Operation Mop Up: The Class Struggle Is for Keeps," echoed LaRouche's call. "We must dispose of this stinking corpse [the CP]," the editorial said, "to ensure that it cannot act as a host for maggots and other parasites preparing future scabby Nixonite attacks on the working class.. If we were to vacillate . we would be guilty of betraying the human race. Our job is to pulverize the Communist Party."

Meanwhile, the NCLC leadership prepared an extraordinary psycho-theological document, "The CP Within Us," to bolster morale. The key to winning Mop Up, it argued, was to expunge the inner voice of cowardice and hesitation (i.e., the CP) within each NCLC member.

Months prior to Mop Up, LaRouche had ordered the most physically agile NCLC members to undergo training for street fighting. This training was now stepped up. Members were organized into flying squads armed with metal pipes, clubs, and numchukas (Korean martial arts devices consisting of two sticks attached by a chain). The idea was to go into action as mini-phalanxes with the numchuka wielders in the center.

Mop Up began in New York, [and] then spread to Philadelphia, Buffalo, Detroit, and other cities. Attackers were sometimes brought from out of town so their faces wouldn't be recognized. In several cities they broke up public meetings and invaded leftist bookstores, beating anyone who tried to bar their way. In New York they ambushed individual CP leaders on the street. In Detroit they administered a savage beating to a partially paralyzed left-wing activist on crutches. In Philadelphia, twenty-five to thirty NCLC members raided a meeting of the Public Workers Action Caucus. "The steps were a mass of blood," said a PWAC activist. "As soon as I walked out I was hit by a pole." Although no one was critically injured in any of the attacks, several were hospitalized with broken bones and many required medical treatment for cuts and bruises.

The NCLC rhetoric kept pace with the attacks. "The red Communist Party has turned into a den of yellow cowards," announced a LaRouche spokesman in Philadelphia. "CP Recruiting Pallbearers for Its Own Funeral," blared a headline in the April 30 New Solidarity.

When members of the Socialist Workers Party and other Trotskyist groups came forward to defend the CF despite past differences, the NCLC responded with an announcement that henceforth the Trotskyists would be fair game. Undeterred, dozens of SWP supporters showed up to guard the CP's New York mayoral candidate, Rasheed Storey, after the NCLC announced it would break up a speech he was scheduled to give at Columbia. Doug Jenness, a member of the defense squad, recalls that about forty LaRouchians "filtered into the hall, some wearing leather jackets. They had staves concealed under blankets. When Storey started speaking, they stood up and moved forward, putting on brass knuckles and displaying numchukas. "Storey and other speakers were whisked out the back. The battle then began in earnest. Although the NCLC was finally driven from the hall, six members of the defense squad required treatment.

An unsigned front-page New Solidarity article, "Their Morals and Ours" (named after an anti-Stalinist treatise by Trotsky), expressed anger at the attitude of LaRouche's former Trotskyist comrades. The SWP, the article complained, "has been saying, 'Smash the Communist Party' for almost forty years, yet when some left organization proceeds to actually smash the CP, the SWP leaders and members roll their glazed eyes heavenward, expecting the entire galaxy to fall upon them."

"Their Morals and Ours" revealed the tactical thinking behind Mop Up. It boasted that fifty NCLC members could "rout" three hundred CP members and that the CF would have to mobilize at least six times as many fighters to even become a "serious obstacle."

This bravado strongly resembled the passage in Mein Kampf in which Hitler, describing an altercation between Nazis and leftists in a Munich meeting hall 111 1921, crowed that "our enemies, who must have numbered seven and eight hundred men, [were] beaten out of the hall and chased down the stairs by my men numbering not even fifty."

"Their Morals and Ours" also said that destroying the CP meant showing that it was "a 'paper tiger,' rightfully an object of pitying contempt in the eyes of the working person." This idea was further developed in another New Solidarity article: "All those mighty 'Communists' can do is hide behind the nightsticks of the local police, while publishing tear-jerking accounts of their own casualties."

Again, there is a similar formulation in Mein Kampf: "Any meeting which is protected exclusively by the police discredits its organizers in the eyes of the broad masses.. [A] heroic movement will sooner win the heart of a people than a cowardly one which is kept alive only by police protection."

Such parallels did not go entirely unnoticed within the NCLC. Christine Berl, one of LaRouche's top disciples (who quit the following year), recalls that she was assigned to prepare a report for a 1973 NCLC conference on how Hitler built up the Nazi Party. "It scared me," she says. "I began to see it was the very tactics Lyn was using." Berl says that she presented her doubts in the form of a puzzle: How do we distinguish ourselves from the Nazis? The audience was unable to give a clear answer.

New York in 1973 was hardly comparable to Munich in 1921. There were no Freikorps veterans and ruined shopkeepers to flock to LaRouche's banner. And his street fighters were middle-class intellectuals, not desperate lumpen proletarians. Indeed the majority of them were not fighters at all. Most Mop Up attacks were carried out by just a few dozen persons. Even the most enthusiastic of these became nervous as the CP and SWP fought back, their defense squads often outnumbering the attackers. "I pissed blood for a month," recalls a female NCLC member who was injured while charging a Detroit SWP rally. The Chicago regional NCLC sent a memo to New York stating that it wasn't strong enough to "deal directly" with the CF. Would the leadership send "defense reinforcements?" Until such reinforcements arrived, the Chicago organization would keep most of its activities "low-key or underground," the memo said. By May, the NCLC leadership was finding it difficult to whip up enthusiasm for fresh attacks even in New York.

It is widely believed among leftists that the police in some cities encouraged Mop Up. This suspicion is understandable in light of well-documented police harassment of left-wing groups in the late 196os and early 197os. But former LaRouchians who participated in Mop Up say they don't recall any police encouragement. At the time, the NCLC regarded the police as the enemy, acting in cahoots with the CP and the SWP to repress the true forces of Revolution. This view was vehemently expressed in the pages of New Solidarity as the police cracked down on Mop Up in city after city. Several NCLC members were arrested in Philadelphia, including a top LaRouche aide. More were arrested in Boston. In Buffalo felony indictments brought the local Mop Up to a grinding halt. In New York City two NCLC members were charged with second-degree assault and possession of a deadly instrument after they attacked black CP leader Ron Tyson. One of Tyson's attackers was rearrested a week later for assaulting an SWP member.

The only evidence of a law enforcement role in Mop Up points not to local police but to the FBI. The findings of a federal judge in an SWP lawsuit against the FBI suggest that once Mop Up was under way, the bureau's New York office attempted to aggravate it as part of a campaign of anonymous mailings and other malicious pranks to keep leftist sects at each other's throats. Federal Judge Charles D. Breitel of the Southern District of New York reviewed classified FBI files in 1979 as a court-appointed Special Master acting for plaintiff SWP. His report noted that a letter had been sent to the NCLC during Mop Up listing the names, home telephone numbers, and addresses of SWP members. "Unless the Government is prepared to allow disclosure of all information" in the deleted part of the file, Breitel ruled, "it should be conclusively presumed that the letter was sent by the FBI."

LaRouche knew just how far he could push Mop Up. Before the stalemate with the CP could turn into a rout for his followers, he declared victory and called everything off. In fact, Mop Up did no real political harm to the CP. A few meetings were canceled in the first weeks, but thereafter the CP continued its normal activities behind a screen of defense squads. However, Mop Up was a great success for LaRouche. It induced his followers to believe that those they had attacked, and who had fought back, were permanently the enemy. No longer were non-NCLC leftists seen as rivals within a common Marxist tradition. They had become unredeemable devils, traitors to the working class, subhuman police agents; fascists. Mop Up thus marked a bizarre new stage in the NCLC's political evolution--the stage of anti-fascist fascism.
source (http://www.ex-iwp.org/docs/1992/Operation%20Mop-Up.htm)

Another account (http://www.publiceye.org/larouche/Mop-Up.html)

The lesson is clear: physical attacks on any tendency in the working-class movement have to be opposed by all. "An injury to one is an injury to all".

Whether the attacks come from fascists or a supposedly left group, they have to be treated the same. Heck, when somebody vandalizes or sets fire to a left bookstore, you may not know at first who did it: but the response is the same. And if it is a left group carrying out the attacks - they may well be on the road to fascism, like the LaRouchites or the Newman/Fulani group.

There have been other examples of thug violence within the working-class movement, most of them less spectacular. Not all of the perpetrators have become fascist groups - PL, the RCP, the CP itself among other examples. The latest example is RAAN - following in the footsteps of the Stalinist groups it denounces and attacks.

But all of the attacks had to be opposed and defeated; they were a threat to every part of the working-class movement, not just their immediate targets.

Working people have to decide for ourselves what strategy is best for our liberation. No gang of thugs can be allowed to silence any voice within the working-class movement. Only the ruling class benefits when someone tries to do so.

Nachie
24th April 2006, 01:36
The only lesson I see here is that if you organize as a top-down hierarchal party of any tendency, sooner or later some great leader is going to make you do something batshit insane :lol:

Severian
24th April 2006, 02:14
All human groups have one or more leaders, Nachie. By having no formal leader, you merely insure your leaders are unelected, unaccountable, and unremovable. The Redstar cult on this board is a good example: nobody ever officially proclaimed him its infallible leader...but he is.

Anyway, here's an example of recent LaRouche-like rhetoric:

The existence of Leninism as a force - albeit a discredited one - in today's political movement will no longer be tolerated, neither by our action network nor by the overwhelming force of the revolutionary mass, which by its very nature will destroy the ridiculous notion that the total suppression of bourgeois society can be achieved, much less led, by those who continue to worship the fascist doctrines of past state-capitalists.
We are a union of anarchists, autonomists, situationists, and Marxists who believe that Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, and all those who affiliate themselves with the statist movements and ideologies they represent are not our allies, never have been, and never will be. To them we say:
We will hunt you at your conferences, burn your newspapers, and beat you in the streets. We will never submit to the authoritarian schemes that you put together in all of your attempts to organize us into a silent "mass movement" of Bolshevik-saluters. The coming revolution has nothing to do with the supposed correctness of your party's line or its PC slogans - it is the organic supersession of all the injustice and contradiction embedded within this world, and the existence of Leninism is at this time the single greatest obstacle to the evolution of the REAL revolutionary communist tendency.
A friendly message from the Red & Anarchist Action Network (RAAN)
Source (http://redanarchist.org/propaganda/fucklenin.pdf)

Remarkably similar to:


We must dispose of this stinking corpse [the CP] to ensure that it cannot act as a host for maggots and other parasites preparing future scabby Nixonite attacks on the working class. If we were to vacillate . we would be guilty of betraying the human race. Our job is to pulverize the Communist Party.

Batshit insane? If you say so. Similar? You betcha.

The difference is that RAAN is mostly talk, while the LaRouchites were serious people who meant what they said; but this isn't a difference in RAAN's favor.

Nachie
24th April 2006, 02:21
There's a fundamental difference between one Leninist group attacking another so as to dominate the movement with the exact same centralized leadership structures on the one hand, and a tendency that rejects Leninism itself on the other.

You're still going with the assumption that attacking Leninists is some Official RAAN Policy being actively organized through the dictates of a central leadership (which we don't have) and party ideological newspaper (which we also don't have).

As for the "infallible cult of [whoever]"... anybody who's dumb enough to subscribe to something like that sounds like they weren't paying attention to begin with.

VermontLeft
24th April 2006, 03:29
Severian ,whats a "redstart cult"? isn't redstar an admin here? so dont people just listen to what he says cause if they dont theyd be banned? :lol:

but i mean if your saying that hes like a "cult leader" or wahtever, whos in the cult?

i mean I like some of what redstar says, but i dont think he right on everything and i havent seen anyone else here say that. i mean i know im still knew here but i think id notice if anyone was acting like a "cult" or whatever. :P

also, are there any other "cults" here? do you have one or are you part of another one? ...or what? :huh:

barista.marxista
24th April 2006, 03:33
Severian, has Jack Barnes authorized you to talk here? If not, you'd better watch out! BOOGA-BOO.

Jack Barnes is LaRouche, donned with a red cape.

Severian
24th April 2006, 07:23
Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 07:36 PM
There's a fundamental difference between one Leninist group attacking another so as to dominate the movement with the exact same centralized leadership structures on the one hand, and a tendency that rejects Leninism itself on the other.
In other words: we are good, so whatever we do is good.

They are bad, so whatever they do is bad.

"We" and "They" being defined by....self-applied ideological labels, the names groups choose to call themselves by. Which are pretty meaningless, "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" - and a skunk cabbage as rotten.

Heck, I'm not sure if LaRouche's NCLC described itself as "Leninist" or not. You'd have to be some kind of drooling idiot to think it mattered either way.

ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER!


You're still going with the assumption that attacking Leninists is some Official RAAN Policy being actively organized through the dictates of a central leadership (which we don't have) and party ideological newspaper (which we also don't have).

Nope, you're assuming I care. The actions are a contemptible attempt to silence opponents, regardless of how they're organized or by who.

In one post in another thread I spelled out "RAAN, or the thugs within it", but I haven't bothered with the long form every time. Esp. since I haven't seen any condemnation from anyone within RAAN, and that leaflet I linked is hosted on one RAAN site.

Really, this whole "RAAN takes no official position" business strikes me as a big ol' dodge-around worthy of a White House press secretary.

Nachie
24th April 2006, 07:54
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2006, 06:38 AM
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER!
Well shit, as long as we can agree on that...

Severian
24th April 2006, 08:34
But of course we don't agree on that or anything.

Everything you say is based on the assumption that names speak louder.

Me anarchist! You Leninist! We fight!

barista.marxista
24th April 2006, 11:39
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2006, 02:49 AM
Me anarchist! You Leninist! We fight!
Can you read that ittybitty title right underneith people's avatars?

rebelworker
24th April 2006, 17:22
What about when Socialists opose national socialists?

Thats ok right?

Its all in the name and structure my man.

In the seventies Anachists and trotskyists couldnt march in public in montreal for fear of being beaten down by a mob of maoists..

Why should we wait for that to be repeated?

Centralists organizations will by there very structure and ideology eliminate opponenets whwen they get big enough, history has shown this again and again.

I for one will not wait around fro this to happen.

I dont personally waste my time attacking maosists in montreal, I just out organize them.

But if I ever thought they could become a real threat again I would re think my tacktics.

PRC-UTE
24th April 2006, 19:56
In the seventies Anachists and trotskyists couldnt march in public in montreal for fear of being beaten down by a mob of maoists..

As has already been pointed out (and should be obvious) the Maoist cults are either disentegrating into liberals (RCP) or way too small to do anything like MIM.


The only lesson I see here is that if you organize as a top-down hierarchal party of any tendency, sooner or later some great leader is going to make you do something batshit insane

So you're better cos you're doing the same behaviour as the LaRouche group ... but without the hierarchy (or even face to face meetings)? ;)

Nachie
24th April 2006, 20:23
So you're better cos you're doing the same behaviour as the LaRouche group ... but without the hierarchy
Essentially, yes :D

But I do take issue with your saying that we're doing the same thing. Remember, LaRouchers actually engaged in pretty fucked-up physical violence against ordinary CP members, and RAAN is just all talk.


(or even face to face meetings)?
No, we got them shits too.

Martin Blank
25th April 2006, 00:31
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2006, 02:11 PM
So you're better cos you're doing the same behaviour as the LaRouche group ... but without the hierarchy
Yeah, kinda like how the KKK in the 1940s learned it was better to not have a single national organization if they were going to carry out their terrorist activities.

Miles

Nachie
25th April 2006, 00:37
Exactly!

LSD
25th April 2006, 01:32
Yeah, kinda like how the KKK in the 1940s learned it was better to not have a single national organization

The KKK didn't really "learn" that, they would have loved to have been able to go back to the unity and size of the 1920s; but by that point they were too fractured and divided.

Indeed, most experts in the field now consider the Klan to be "all but dead", not in small part because of its inability to keep itself unified.

Just a little historical interlude. ;)

barista.marxista
25th April 2006, 01:33
Originally posted by CommunistLeague+Apr 24 2006, 06:46 PM--> (CommunistLeague @ Apr 24 2006, 06:46 PM)
[email protected] 24 2006, 02:11 PM
So you're better cos you're doing the same behaviour as the LaRouche group ... but without the hierarchy
Yeah, kinda like how the KKK in the 1940s learned it was better to not have a single national organization if they were going to carry out their terrorist activities.

Miles [/b]
Like how the Nazis realized that with strict centralization in their party, they'd had more control?

Yeah, works both ways, dumbass.

JC1
25th April 2006, 06:09
Like how the Nazis realized that with strict centralization in their party, they'd had more control?

Yeah, works both ways, dumbass.


Except, the CL is not forcing anyone to join up, whereas, the "R"AAN want's to crack the head's of the class enemy (In RAAN's case, the working class).

My question is though, if you guy's think that Leninism is politicaly bankrupt, why do you need to beat leninist's up on the street ? I guess the only plausible ansewer is they don't realy take there own non-sense seriously ! After all why would they put there membership in physical and legal harm's way to combat a tendency witch, according to there line, is politicaly irrelevalnt ?

It dont realy matter tho'. I dont think these kid's got anyone scared. Not me or any other of my Workin' class soulja's like Miles.

Let me ask RAAN a question, that is a paraphrase from the late/great Eazy E.

Where did RAAN find these anorexic streetfighter's ? Youre entire network weigh's only 60 pounds, when there wet and wearin boot's ?

Nachie
25th April 2006, 06:24
Because Leninism is indeed politically bankrupt, but not yet politically irrelevant. However they're irrelevant to horizontal networks of mutual aid, to be sure.

And if you don't exclude them now, they'll stab you in the back later.


Where did RAAN find these anorexic streetfighter's ?
Who cares? Niggaz my height don't fight :P

Martin Blank
25th April 2006, 09:30
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2006, 07:47 PM

Yeah, kinda like how the KKK in the 1940s learned it was better to not have a single national organization

The KKK didn't really "learn" that, they would have loved to have been able to go back to the unity and size of the 1920s; but by that point they were too fractured and divided.

Indeed, most experts in the field now consider the Klan to be "all but dead", not in small part because of its inability to keep itself unified.

Just a little historical interlude. ;)
Actually, there had been a debate among the surviving Klans as to whether or not to unify as a single group or act as a coalition (the United Klans of America). The Georgia dentist who was the Grand Wizard (forget his name) advocated keeping it an autonomous coalition so that the federal Ku Klux Klan Act and state criminal laws could not once again bankrupt them.

In the end, though, it didn't really work out for them. The SPLC was able to push through a civil lawsuit naming the UKA.

Miles

Martin Blank
25th April 2006, 09:32
Originally posted by barista.marxista+Apr 24 2006, 07:48 PM--> (barista.marxista @ Apr 24 2006, 07:48 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2006, 06:46 PM

[email protected] 24 2006, 02:11 PM
So you're better cos you're doing the same behaviour as the LaRouche group ... but without the hierarchy
Yeah, kinda like how the KKK in the 1940s learned it was better to not have a single national organization if they were going to carry out their terrorist activities.

Miles
Like how the Nazis realized that with strict centralization in their party, they'd had more control?

Yeah, works both ways, dumbass. [/b]
The United Klans of America came after the Nazis -- the clue was where I mentioned the 1940s.

Crack a history book, asshat. You'll be better off for it.

Miles

Severian
25th April 2006, 10:02
Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2006, 10:37 AM

In the seventies Anachists and trotskyists couldnt march in public in montreal for fear of being beaten down by a mob of maoists..

Why should we wait for that to be repeated?
So would it be preferable to have anarchists and/or "autonomist Marxists" (if they exist in the real world) attacking Trotskyists and Maoists, as Nachie advocates? Sorry, no. Only the ruling class benefits.

If you have confidence in your ideas, and in working people's ability to decide for themselves which approach is best, you won't resort to that kind of goon-squad approach

And even when Stalinist violence was a real-world problem, retaliating in kind was dumb as dirt. Even against the LaRouchites, that woulda been a mistake!

It obscures who is responsible for the use of violence to settle an ideological dispute. But if one group is attacking and the other defending, that becomes clear.

Also, retaliation opens you up to potential police repression.

Note that was not part of the SWP's successful response to the LaRouchite thug attacks. Or, for that matter, the CPs, Progressive Labor's, the RCP's...there's a lot of experience in how to deal with violence within the workers' movement.

It involves:
1. Protest and condemnation; isolate them politically and get everyone in the workers' movement to take a stand against the thugs.

2. Physical self-defense; enlist everyone willing to take a stand for free speech regardless of whether you agree with the views of, say, the CPUSA. After they get the crap beat out of them a few times, the attackers will generally give up. The LaRouchites turned to waylaying individual opponents.

3. If necessary, don't be shy about demanding the arrest and prosecution of physical attackers. Just as the civil rights movement demanded the arrest and prosecution of racist terrorists. The subjective motivations of those carrying out anticommunist thuggery don't matter; respond to the actions. Arrests were an element in the successful combatting of LaRouchite attacks on individuals; as Dennis King mentions in his book quoted above.

Stalinist thuggery - back when it was a real problem - was successfully combatted by these means. Any thuggery within the workers' movement which becomes a problem in the future - can be combatted the same way.

(Progressive Labor once attempted to disrupt an antiwar conference in '71....the disrupters were thrown out, but other PLers were able to speak and justify themselves at the same conference! Making it clear who was on the side of free speech, and who against it. This approach was a success - PL concluded their disruptions were "not an effective tactic" against that antiwar coalition.)

****

Without the sponsorship of a Stalinist regime, Stalinism will not be as large a problem as in the past.

But with more and more of the middle-class left becoming alienated from any real connection to workers' organizations and struggles - "left" attacks on the workers' movement may well be a real problem in the future. More groups may follow LaRouche's path.

Their ideology will be irrelevant to that. Maoist, Trotskyist, anarchist, "autonomist Marxist", whatever meaningless label. (I can read those titles, Barista, but I rarely bother to, since two or three words can't say anything meaningful about someone's politics.)

It's their class composition which drives this political problem....and their actions which have to determine our response.

***

Nachie's just trolling now. Saying that his own group is just talk? Saying "exactly" to a comparison between RAAN and the KKK?

redstar2000
25th April 2006, 10:10
Originally posted by Severian+--> (Severian)The Redstar cult on this board is a good example: nobody ever officially proclaimed him its infallible leader...but he is.[/b]


VermontLeft
Severian, what's a "redstar cult"?

Well, you see, even though no one is aware of it, I "secretly control" all the brains at RevLeft...except for those, like Severian, who are careful to wear their tinfoil hats whenever they come here. :lol:


Also, are there any other "cults" here? Do you have one

No, there's no "Severian" cult here...not because I don't "permit it" but because no one is interested. :lol:

By the way, the "secret sign" that someone is a member of the "redstar cult" is when they bold words in their posts.

Just thought you'd want to know. :lol:

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

PS: In a more serious vein...

Parties and Movements (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1142664295&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

Ian
25th April 2006, 10:14
Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2006, 03:39 PM
Because Leninism is indeed politically bankrupt, but not yet politically irrelevant. However they're irrelevant to horizontal networks of mutual aid, to be sure.

And if you don't exclude them now, they'll stab you in the back later.


Where did RAAN find these anorexic streetfighter's ?
Who cares? Niggaz my height don't fight :P
what the fuck is this? Casual racism, fucking awesome.

Nachie
25th April 2006, 16:11
It's the name of an Eazy-E song.

PRC-UTE
25th April 2006, 18:51
Originally posted by Ian+Apr 25 2006, 09:29 AM--> (Ian @ Apr 25 2006, 09:29 AM)
[email protected] 25 2006, 03:39 PM
Because Leninism is indeed politically bankrupt, but not yet politically irrelevant. However they're irrelevant to horizontal networks of mutual aid, to be sure.

And if you don't exclude them now, they'll stab you in the back later.


Where did RAAN find these anorexic streetfighter's ?
Who cares? Niggaz my height don't fight :P
what the fuck is this? Casual racism, fucking awesome. [/b]
Good call, Ian. There's a racial undertone to this tendency, and we saw MurderInc going on quite a bit against reperations.

Martin Blank
25th April 2006, 19:27
Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2006, 01:06 PM
Good call, Ian. There's a racial undertone to this tendency, and we saw MurderInc going on quite a bit against reperations.
What else should we expect from a bunch of suburban white kids?

Miles

LoneRed
25th April 2006, 19:56
Like how the Nazis realized that with strict centralization in their party, they'd had more control?

quite the tautology eh :lol:

Ian
26th April 2006, 00:43
Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2006, 01:26 AM
It's the name of an Eazy-E song.
Whoa, it's ok to say bad shit if it's a song title now. Well, *****es Aint Shit.

Nachie
26th April 2006, 03:20
Thing is, JC1 dissed me with Eazy-E song lyrics and it only made sense that I reply in kind. I realize now that Miles and REPOMAN will do their best to sensationalize this by calling RAAN a bunch of suburban white kids (with collectives in Venezuela, of course) and hastily "building" associations between myself and the comments of other members who to my knowledge are not RAANistas at all (MurderInc). Yes, stunning case for "racialist undertones" you got there. I wish you the best of luck in turning it into a good CC poll!

Miles has of course recently stayed out of the anti-Leninist threads that keep popping up, but like a good opportunist wastes no time diving in here when he smells blood. What. EVEEERRRRRRRRRR. <_<

I sincerely apologize to Ian and any others who were personally offended, as this was never my intent.

Still, it remains an actual Eazy-E song title and I feel completely comfortable having used it in the context of JC1&#39;s comments towards RAAN.

Martin Blank
26th April 2006, 04:48
Originally posted by Nachie+Apr 25 2006, 09:35 PM--> (Nachie &#064; Apr 25 2006, 09:35 PM)I realize now that Miles and REPOMAN will do their best to sensationalize this by calling RAAN a bunch of suburban white kids (with collectives in Venezuela, of course)[/b]

There&#39;s no contradiction here. After all, Altamira is a part of Caracas.


[email protected] 25 2006, 09:35 PM
Miles has of course recently stayed out of the anti-Leninist threads that keep popping up, but like a good opportunist wastes no time diving in here when he smells blood. What. EVEEERRRRRRRRRR. <_<

Still clueless.

Miles

Nachie
26th April 2006, 05:00
Actually the RAAN affiliates are in Valencia, not Caracas (though of course we do maintain regular contact with other groups and individuals in the capital. Maybe you&#39;ve heard of the Tupamaros? I dunno, they&#39;re not exactly based out of Altamira...)

But why would you need to know that? You were just interested in a totally random accusation based on nothing at all...

Honestly we could have a nice field day with this but I&#39;m not going to tokenize our RAANista comrades in the South like that.

Martin Blank
26th April 2006, 05:13
Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2006, 11:15 PM
Actually the RAAN affiliates are in Valencia, not Caracas (though of course we do maintain regular contact with other groups and individuals in the capital. Maybe you&#39;ve heard of the Tupamaros? I dunno, they&#39;re not exactly based out of Altamira...)

But why would you need to know that? You were just interested in a totally random accusation based on nothing at all...

Honestly we could have a nice field day with this but I&#39;m not going to tokenize our RAANista comrades in the South like that.
No, you have other, more effective, ways to tokenize them, I imagine.

Miles

Nachie
26th April 2006, 05:14
No, you have other, more effective, ways to tokenize them, I imagine.

Well we&#39;ll just, have to wait, and see, in the future, I guess.

bayano
26th April 2006, 08:12
the tupamaros are allied with the chavistas. theyre some badass muthafuckas, but i would be a bit surprised to hear they associate with raan.

but frankly, any left tendency (whether self-proclaimed left or officially anti-left) that attacks other leftists has some serious mental problems. seriously, what the fuck is the fringe left&#39;s problem when it keeps acting like petty pseudo-gang thugs against other fringe left elements. as if u dont have a huge repressive state apparatus that u could be focusing ur rage at? or some project minutemen or protest warrior events u could be busting up? no, ud rather be delinquents and attack other largely irrelevant groups. but if u do so, know that it doesnt give u any points with the &#39;masses&#39;, and it serves for some great entertainment for the huge state apparatus that gets to sit back and watch some of the radical elements of the piss-poor so-called resistance movement in this country spend all their time writing diatribes against each other and sometimes even busting each others heads.

man, there aint never gonna be a revolution in this country. whats the old joke about the US left? if we were a shooting squad, we would form a circle.

Andy Bowden
26th April 2006, 11:43
The RCP is not the ruling party of the USA - it has virtually no effect on anyone. As misguided as its ideas (imo) are, its not oppressing anyone.

If RAAN want to oppose leninism, then why don&#39;t they actually use arguments instead of threatening people with violence?

Not every one who joins the RCP is a hardline maoist - Id be willing to bet thered be a shitload of activists who join the organisation, attracted by its stance, and public profile.

By attacking these recruits you are destroying any possible chance of anarchists winning over people.

And it&#39;s also a totally insane argument - were anarchist, your leninist, and us beating you up is ok because were right.

If your so right, then why dont you use actual arguments to win people over? Its not as if violence is the last resort against an aggressive RCP.

VermontLeft
26th April 2006, 11:48
By the way, the "secret sign" that someone is a member of the "redstar cult" is when they bold words in their posts.

Oh :o

Well, then im starting the CULT OF LSD cause hes my favorite poster here and if you get a cult, so should he :P

also, severian, maybe no ones starting a cult around you cause no one wants to?? :o and that might be cause your a bit of an ass and keep making fun of people and saying that their in "cults".

i mean honey and flies or whatever, right? :(

chebol
26th April 2006, 13:16
Nachie, what&#39;s your connection with the Tupamaros? More than, say, just a wee visit to Barrio 23?

For what it&#39;s worth, I&#39;m a Leninist and my organisation maintains close connections with the Tupamaros too. What does that mean?

Does it make any difference if I tell you I helped design their election material for last year? Probably not.

You see, the Tupamaros have their heads screwed on straight. They&#39;re supporting a revolutionary movement by leading by example. And what is that example? It&#39;s sure as hell not threating to blow up PCV headquarters. There are far bigger fish to fry. Get your priorities straight, comrade.

Btw. Last time I checked, Valencia was one of the (not the only, Merida gets a lot of traffic too) "tourism capitals" of Venezuela, so I&#39;m not surprised the RAAN has some following there.

Nachie
26th April 2006, 15:44
Actually I spent about a week meeting with Oswaldo Kanica, who is the preseident of the MRT. I also met Jose Pinto, the general secretary/NA candidate, but did not find him as personally engaging. These meetings encompassed two long interviews as well as several informal talks and outings. They have offered free housing and potentially assistance with food for any future "RAAN delegations" into the country. They are "Guevarist", which I personally see as having some interesting (though not always positive) differences from strict Leninism. We had ample discussions on ideology and Kanica knows full well how RAAN feels about Lenin.

I will be going much more in depth about my and RAAN&#39;s experiences in Venezuela in an upcoming essay titled "The Civil War in Venezuela". It will definitely be posted here when it is complete, and I&#39;m sorry if I shy away from this topic for the moment so as to save my analysis for that piece. I&#39;m sure you&#39;ll be satisfied.

But yes, the Tupas do for the most part have their heads screwed on straight. Or at least the veterans do.


It&#39;s sure as hell not threating to blow up PCV headquarters.
Oh, you&#39;d be surprised.


Btw. Last time I checked, Valencia was one of the (not the only, Merida gets a lot of traffic too) "tourism capitals" of Venezuela, so I&#39;m not surprised the RAAN has some following there.
Again, I&#39;m not going to tokenize my comrades for the sake of skeptics on this forum. But they&#39;re neither white, tourists, nor esqualidos.

chebol
27th April 2006, 13:57
Nachie, I know the MRT are up to a lot of things that are best not mentioned on a message board, but you miss my point. In fact, you reiterate my point in your post, although I&#39;m not sure you noticed it.

The MRT identify themselves as "Guevaristas", which you yourself recognise is a form of Leninism. Now, is the MRT Public Enemy #1 in Venezuela? Is the PCV? Even PPT?

The point is, work with anyone who is a decent revolutionary, that is engaging in the practical struggle. So, while the RCP probably ought to be brought down a notch or two, threatening to blow them up doesn&#39;t really help.
Neither does the tirade of anti-Leninism that&#39;s been spewing forth over the past few days.
People are convinced through actions, not vitriol. (I mean, vitriol helps, but only in context). If you want a bug-bear, feel free, but the more you rant against those on the left, the less people will think you are serious. There&#39;s more than enough sectarian bullshit as there is.

I wasn&#39;t suggesting that your comrades in Venezuela were white or escualidos, Nachie, I was suggesting that it&#39;s the kind of city where, due to the degree of contact with foreigners, particularly from the US, that Valencia is a logical place for your tendency to come about in venezuela. Relax- not everyones&#39; trying to have a go at you (not even all the Leninists).

Look forward to the essay. I&#39;m sure I&#39;ll have a lot to say about it.

Nachie
27th April 2006, 21:04
I will try to remember to PM you as we&#39;ll be doing a peer review/editing process on the RAAN forums as with every other text we publish, and that way any critiques you have could potentially make it into the finished product.