El Che
24th May 2002, 01:01
I realise this is a futile exercise, but I think its importante say something against the "revolution". Here revolution is intended as a coup to take over and retain power in the name of the working class. You all know the political philosophy behind it, so I wont waste time by going into that. But I think its importante to realise whats wrong with this picture, because something is definatly wrong with the picture in question. Yet I still see many people that suport an unlegitimate from of goverment, born through violent means. Many have stated that the only reason they dont contribute to take power by force is because there is someone to stop them, no moral imperitive would stop them from doing so, infact its something they desire. That is where I get off, that is where I distance my self from that position and those who suport it.
In the same way I defend Socialism, I also defend Democracy, because both of these things are whats right to defend. Capitalists like to confuse Capitalism with Democracy, you people give them a helping hand with your revolutionary naivity. Either you believe that people should have power over the state or you believe the oposite, there is no middle ground there is no ambiguity. This is also a dividing line within the political spectrum, a line between the democratic and the non democratic left. You can not justify non democratic goverment exactly because non democratic goverment does not justify its self. Non democratic goverment subtracts its self from public escrutiny, and people who defend this are anti-human, they have no respect for human beings. Because if you have respect for human beings you will recognise them the right to rule them selves, if you do not you have as much consideration for them as you have for sheep. I urge you to think carefuly about this, you must be responsible in your positions if you wish to be taken seriously. How can you seriously defend the legitimacy of a minority to rule by force? Its very easy to be a romantic idealist but its also very shallow.
Some say that the Democracy that exists now, in europe and the US for example, is bourgeois Democracy. To this I would say two things.
Firstly this is a disputable claim, democracy is not bourgeois, but what you have is enterferance in democracy by economic powers that obviously try to defend their interests. Coupled with that you have political forces that act within democracy to defend the interests of economics powers, that is to say that you have politicians, that compete for popular suport (votes), with legitimacy and in full exercise of their democratic rights. We must get rid of this idea that political capitalists shouldn`t have a right to defend what they stand for, if you think that way then you have absolutly no idea what message behind the concept "democracy" is. And you must separate those democraticaly legitimate political positions, from unlegitimate enterferances by economic powers. To give you an example, I think that large contributions be corporations to political parties hurt democracy and should be fought.
Secondly lets admit, for argumentation`s sake, that democracy is completly subverted or "bourgeois" in a given contry. Why then my revolutionary friends would you defend a system that seeks to prepetuate this injustice? what if it doesn`t exist in the first place then that means its ok for us not to defend democracy as long as we are the ones in power? Do you realise how flawed that is? If there is no democracy in your contry then obviously, as person of conscience that you are, it should be one of your objectives, and if it is not then you are a fascist.
Other issues could be raised from a leftist point of view, from the point of view of what the Marxist left seeks to achive. But the above are the universal ones, and they are quite enough.
(Edited by El Che at 1:16 am on May 24, 2002)
In the same way I defend Socialism, I also defend Democracy, because both of these things are whats right to defend. Capitalists like to confuse Capitalism with Democracy, you people give them a helping hand with your revolutionary naivity. Either you believe that people should have power over the state or you believe the oposite, there is no middle ground there is no ambiguity. This is also a dividing line within the political spectrum, a line between the democratic and the non democratic left. You can not justify non democratic goverment exactly because non democratic goverment does not justify its self. Non democratic goverment subtracts its self from public escrutiny, and people who defend this are anti-human, they have no respect for human beings. Because if you have respect for human beings you will recognise them the right to rule them selves, if you do not you have as much consideration for them as you have for sheep. I urge you to think carefuly about this, you must be responsible in your positions if you wish to be taken seriously. How can you seriously defend the legitimacy of a minority to rule by force? Its very easy to be a romantic idealist but its also very shallow.
Some say that the Democracy that exists now, in europe and the US for example, is bourgeois Democracy. To this I would say two things.
Firstly this is a disputable claim, democracy is not bourgeois, but what you have is enterferance in democracy by economic powers that obviously try to defend their interests. Coupled with that you have political forces that act within democracy to defend the interests of economics powers, that is to say that you have politicians, that compete for popular suport (votes), with legitimacy and in full exercise of their democratic rights. We must get rid of this idea that political capitalists shouldn`t have a right to defend what they stand for, if you think that way then you have absolutly no idea what message behind the concept "democracy" is. And you must separate those democraticaly legitimate political positions, from unlegitimate enterferances by economic powers. To give you an example, I think that large contributions be corporations to political parties hurt democracy and should be fought.
Secondly lets admit, for argumentation`s sake, that democracy is completly subverted or "bourgeois" in a given contry. Why then my revolutionary friends would you defend a system that seeks to prepetuate this injustice? what if it doesn`t exist in the first place then that means its ok for us not to defend democracy as long as we are the ones in power? Do you realise how flawed that is? If there is no democracy in your contry then obviously, as person of conscience that you are, it should be one of your objectives, and if it is not then you are a fascist.
Other issues could be raised from a leftist point of view, from the point of view of what the Marxist left seeks to achive. But the above are the universal ones, and they are quite enough.
(Edited by El Che at 1:16 am on May 24, 2002)