So called socialist parties

[Lark]

I think that not only were there and are there so called socialist countries but so called socialist parties, I dont mean the reformists, I mean all the relics of the cold war and marxism, stupid lenin reinactment societies.

I hope they all catch cancer and stop setting working people back in the fight for their rights by years and years.

[Demogorgon]

Well whatever, but you won't fnd many parties existing outside of the internet who still hold to cold war ideology

[Severian]

The observation's obvious, and useless.

There's 5 million groups out there each saying all the others are fake.

So here you come, a group with one member, saying all the others are fake.

What makes you for real? What do you propose, and do, that's better?

[Lark]

I'm not a group of one, I'm just me.

Its simple, there isnt a capitalist party, capitalism doesnt need a party, it just is, if socialism doesnt grow up organically the same way on a personal, cultural and then structural basis it wont ever be.

The cold war ideology I'm talking about is democratic centralism or any other stupid leninist idea.

[Enragé]

newsflash: all mainstream parties are capitalist, them in power is what keeps capitalism going.

take away the state and what do you get? instantly a new state by companies protecting their interests. Those in power would be a "party" working for capitalsit interests, whether or not they call themselves such.

[Redmau5]

Those 'relics' are usually the ones at the forefront of class struggle. How are they setting working-people back when they are actively fighting for workers rights even when the working-class itself doesn't seem to give a damn?

You may disagree with their ideology but give credit where credit is due for the work that they do in trying to raise class-consciousness. And please don't make idiotic remarks about cancer.

[Aurora]

Oh Lads we have a smart one here lol

Lark most of what you say is bullshit and highlights your inability to learn,its amazing you havent been restricted yet.

there isnt a capitalist party
:lol: what NKOS said

The cold war ideology I'm talking about is democratic centralism or any other stupid leninist idea.
Dipshit,democratic centralism existed quite a long time before the cold war and btw dont talk shit about something you know nothing about historically or theoretically.

[Lark]

I give them no credit at all, class consciousness is party membership to a lot of them.

They dont deserve any credit because they are just self interested and self important rat bastards most of the time who set up fronts or infiltrate popular efforts or strip away democracy from unions like mine.

I think cancer isnt idiotic, it is a disease which kills healthy cells because something has gone wrong and the body identifies the cells as harmful, the relics of the cold war are the same thing, all they've ever done is get Thatcher and Regan elected by working people who hated them.

Maybe you can tell me how social security, pensions, a national health service or any of the other things that reform in the UK has brought about are in the interests of the ruling class or vested business interests? They are taxed to pay for it and it exists as a monopoly with which they cant compete, the banks would love to get a party into power that would abolish those things and if the conservatives had been in power for much longer or if they are elected again they will.

Reform is slow its not pointless and its not exactly the same as rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, although it will be if its not accompanied by culture wars or other sorts of popular struggle.

[Lark]

Oh Lads we have a smart one here lol


That just there is called "an appeal to the gallery", in debate terms is a pretty sure indication of authoritarian groupthink.


Lark most of what you say is bullshit and highlights your inability to learn,its amazing you havent been restricted yet.


I'll tell you what I have learned so far, around here agreement seems to go by a lot of names, "rational debate", "learning" etc. etc. but if you disagree you can expect a restriction sooner or later, is that how you conduct yourself in person? How do you ever expect to persuade anyone of anything with such sucky communication skills?


Dipshit,democratic centralism existed quite a long time before the cold war and btw dont talk shit about something you know nothing about historically or theoretically.


you dont have any friends in real life do you? I bet you're failing in most of your lessons at school too, speak to me when you've matured a little, dont need to react with the insecurity that prompts you to name calling

[Aurora]

Maybe you can tell me how social security, pensions, a national health service or any of the other things that reform in the UK has brought about are in the interests of the ruling class or vested business interests?
They arent,they exist because of preasure from the working class,some if not all of which are trying to be done away with by New Labour.

That just there is called "an appeal to the gallery"
Nah its called sarcasm

I'll tell you what I have learned so far, around here agreement seems to go by a lot of names, "rational debate", "learning" etc. etc. but if you disagree you can expect a restriction sooner or late
Right....you do know this is a site for revolutionary leftists to debate right?

is that how you conduct yourself in person?
No not really,but if someone is given facts and still churns out bullshit then ya.

you dont have any friends in real life do you? I bet you're failing in most of your lessons at school too, speak to me when you've matured a little, dont need to react with the insecurity that prompts you to name calling
:lol:


Could a mod close this thread it is obvious flamebait. ;)

[Lark]

OK let me get this right, you guys trade sarcasm with each other and membership card numbers while asking the mods to close threads and restrict members?

I can just imagine that the capitalist powers that be must be quaking in their boots as we speak.

Well done.

[Redmau5]

I give them no credit at all, class consciousness is party membership to a lot of them.

Well, being a member of a party which seeks to overthrow capitalism through proletarian revolution highlights some degree of class-consciousness.

And if you see a 'Leninist' group in your area or town campaigning on behalf of an important working-class issue, you wouldn't give them credit? I'm no fan of anarchism, yet I still applaud if anarchists win any victories on behalf of the working-class.


They dont deserve any credit because they are just self interested and self important rat bastards most of the time

Self-interested? Self-important? I spend my saturdays in the town centre trying to raise awareness about low-pay, young workers rights, the Iraq war, unjust water charges etc. all because I'm a selfish 'rat bastard'. When I'm not working or in college, I try to help as much as I can. But after all, we're only doing this because we're all evil dictators in-waiting, aren't we? We fight on behalf of working-class people in the hope that one day we'll seize power and brutally oppress the proletariat. :rolleyes:


strip away democracy from unions like mine.

I don't know what union you're in, but the unions in the UK are very reactionary. Most are controlled by right-wing bureaucrats.


all they've ever done is get Thatcher and Regan elected by working people who hated them.

That's called false consciousness. Read some Marx. Working class people aren't stupid. They vote for people like Thatcher and Reagan because they genuinely believe it's in their best interests. Revolutionary organisations are important because they help eradicate that false consciousness and instead create a genuine class consciousness.


Maybe you can tell me how social security, pensions, a national health service or any of the other things that reform in the UK has brought about are in the interests of the ruling class or vested business interests?

Bread and circus? Of course those aren't in the interests of bis business. Many of those benefits were won on the back of working-class struggle. If it is to survive, capitalism realises that it must provide a 'decent' standard of living for working-people, otherwise it would face mass revolt. It's like the Tiger analogy I remember reading about. The Tiger (the working-class) is locked in a cage (wage-slavery/capitalism). Every now and then the Tiger becomes angry, yet it's master (the ruling-classes) throws it the occasional piece of meat (reforms/economic growth) which keeps the Tiger satisfied. However, it is only a matter of time before the Tiger becomes hungry and angry again, and the master will not have food forever. I can't remember where I read that but it always stuck in my mind.


the banks would love to get a party into power that would abolish those things

Of course they would, but they can't. The people wouldn't allow it. As I said, the ruling-class must give the working-class some benefits, otherwise there would be widespread revolt.


conservatives had been in power for much longer or if they are elected again they will.

No they won't. They may allow increasing privatisation, but sure Labour already started us along that road.


Reform is slow

I know.


its not pointless

I agree, but only to a certain extent. Although reforms which benefit working people are to be welcomed, we must remember that what capitalism gives with one hand it takes away with the other. If more money is to be spent on the NHS then spending on education must be cut. As I said, reforms should be welcomed, but we should always be pushing for revolution.

[Whitten]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 06:03 pm
I give them no credit at all, class consciousness is party membership to a lot of them.
That statement is just plain laughable and if you knew the slightist thing about leninist theory, the concept of the vanguard party or the bolshevic-menshevic split you would know why. As you don't your just highlighting your ignorance.


They dont deserve any credit because they are just self interested and self important rat bastards most of the time who set up fronts or infiltrate popular efforts or strip away democracy from unions like mine.

Ignoring your childish accusations and slander, what is wrong with setting up fronts, the actually trying to get something done or the willingness to cooperate with others and be nonsectarian?


I think cancer isnt idiotic, it is a disease which kills healthy cells because something has gone wrong and the body identifies the cells as harmful, the relics of the cold war are the same thing, all they've ever done is get Thatcher and Regan elected by working people who hated them.

And improved the lives of millions of people, holding of capitalist imperialism for decades, defeating the Nazi's...


Maybe you can tell me how social security, pensions, a national health service or any of the other things that reform in the UK has brought about are in the interests of the ruling class or vested business interests? They are taxed to pay for it and it exists as a monopoly with which they cant compete, the banks would love to get a party into power that would abolish those things and if the conservatives had been in power for much longer or if they are elected again they will.

Because they are necessairy to prevent a shift towards more extreme and actually effective measures. What is going to benefit a capitalist more: a welfare state or an armed uprising against them?


Reform is slow its not pointless and its not exactly the same as rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, although it will be if its not accompanied by culture wars or other sorts of popular struggle.

I call for a restriction on the grounds this guy is a supporter of an opposing ideology. He's a reformist.

[The Grey Blur]

I spend my saturdays in the town centre
Where were you last Saturday then? :lol:

And Lark what group are you active in?

[Enragé]

i think he's some sort of very very cynical unionist

[Labor Shall Rule]

I don't trust political parties, they are enclaves of opportunism. I think it's more important to construct an independent working class organization that has a revolutionary programme and that implements tactics without seeking the consent of trade union bureaucrats, much like the IWW or CNT.

[Enragé]

the IWW and the CNT are/were in essence political parties, they just didnt call themselves that. Any group seeking to influence, destroy/replace, or take over the political system is a political party.

What you're referring to are just bureaucratic political parties, or parties influenced by bureaucrats/which have bureaucratic tendencies.

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 30, 2007 08:29 pm

I spend my saturdays in the town centre
Where were you last Saturday then? :lol:

And Lark what group are you active in?
Working. Some of us are members of the proletariat ya know. :lol:

[The Grey Blur]

Originally posted by Makaveli+May 30, 2007 10:48 pm--> (Makaveli @ May 30, 2007 10:48 pm)
Permanent [email protected] 30, 2007 08:29 pm

I spend my saturdays in the town centre
Where were you last Saturday then? :lol:

And Lark what group are you active in?
Working. Some of us are members of the proletariat ya know. :lol: [/b]
Counter-revolutionary scum.

[Janus]

Any group seeking to influence, destroy/replace, or take over the political system is a political party.
Pushing for change in the economic sphere does not necessarily make one a political party. Certain members of the IWW and various other trade unions may have a political agenda but the organization remains neutral politically and thus doesn't constitute a political party.

[Enragé]

separating economics from politics is impossible since they influence each other, for the large part decide how the other one looks like. For example you cannot have a communist economy with capitalist politics, or a capitalist economy with communist politics, its simple not possible.

People might want to seperate the two, they might convince themselves they are doing just that, but they're not.


the organization remains neutral politically

how can you do that if your end goal is by all intents and purposes a communist economy, i.e (amongst other things) an economy which is governed by the people who work in it themselves.
You cannot claim to remain neutral politically if you're looking to do this, since this means smashing the capitalist state apparatus (which protects the capitalist mode of production).

You cannot take a stance on the field of economics without also taking a stance on the field of politics. The whole divide between economics and politics is liberalist bullshit.

[Janus]

People might want to seperate the two, they might convince themselves they are doing just that, but they're not.
I'm not debating that nor is the IWW trying to separate the two; the basis behind pushing for economic change is that it will also affect the political structure.


how can you do that if your end goal is by all intents and purposes a communist economy, i.e (amongst other things) an economy which is governed by the people who work in it themselves.
You cannot claim to remain neutral politically if you're looking to do this, since this means smashing the capitalist state apparatus (which protects the capitalist mode of production).
Neutral politically as in it doesn't conform to a specific political ideology which is what is required in a political party. The whole concept of a political party is very specific and has a strict denotation and when you blur that then anyone can call just about any movement which seeks change a political party.

[luxemburg89]

such sucky communication skills?

HAHAHA I don't think you have any idea how bad that sounds do you? With rhetorical language like that being thrown at us we don't even really need to bother responding. Yet responding is fun so I think I will.



QUOTE
Dipshit,democratic centralism existed quite a long time before the cold war and btw dont talk shit about something you know nothing about historically or theoretically.




you dont have any friends in real life do you? I bet you're failing in most of your lessons at school too, speak to me when you've matured a little, dont need to react with the insecurity that prompts you to name calling

So this forum is not real life? Ah I see its a horrible dream you'll wake up from and we're all imagined characters wearing ballet costumes and singing the French National Anthem... Well supposing we are all actual people a lot of us probably would consider each other friends; and sooooo yeah, they do have friends in real life - us.