FARC are left-fascists (Stalinists) [Archive]

View Full Version : FARC are left-fascists (Stalinists)

marxistsocialist

13th July 2008, 15:26

Hello all: I had to change my possition, i dont support FARC's taking of hostages, but i support FARC. My friends, USA is head toward a fascism, capitalism will evolve into fascism. I am not kidding, this is a serious situation. Read this prediction about a fascist America:

Juan Bosch: His Prophecy of a Fascist America

http://rsta.pucmm.edu.do/biblioteca/bosch/juanbosch.jpg

http://prisonplanet.com/122203fascistamerica.html (http://prisonplanet.com/122203fascistamerica.html)

William Hughes

A long time ago, I remember reading a disturbing magazine article that was written by Juan Bosch. He was the former president of the Dominican Republic, a small country in Central America.

Bosch, like any true son of a nation, stood with his people against the grasping Oligarchs. He favored modest land reform in his poverty-stricken country. That proved a little too much for the fat cat sugar plantation owners and the ambitious army generals. He was ousted after only seven months in office, in 1963, in a CIA-assisted military coup. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson sent in 20,000 Marines, on the pretext that the Dominican Republic might go communist. He feared it was another Cuba in the making. Sure, LBJ! Bosch died in 2001.

Anyway, getting back to Bosch's commentary. He had predicted that America would one day look like a U.S. occupied Dominican Republic! His point was, and I'm sorry I can't remember his exact words, that America would be corrupted by its underhanded role in replacing his and other governments around the globe. He saw a time when the U.S. would have its soldiers patrolling its own cities, airports, railroad stations, ports, public buildings and its capital. And, also that its citizens' liberties would be unduly restricted by the federal government that had lost its moral compass. Sadly, that time is coming fast!
When I was in NYC, on Feb. 15, 2003, I got my first glimpse of Bosch's view of this future, more sinister America. It was at an Anti-Iraq War rally. Instead of being allowed to march, as so many other groups are regularly permitted, (like the Irish on St. Patrick's Day), the Anti-war activists were enclosed for miles, along First Avenue, in serial cattle pen-like enclosures, (mini-police-created-protest zones), which were patrolled by a horde of mostly angry cops, many on foot, and some on horseback.

Next, observe any major U.S. airport and you will also see exactly how Bosch's words are ringing true today. The National Guard boy-ohs are out there in force, daily, carrying their loaded rifles. On any given day, too, your car may be stopped and searched going into an airport parking facility or on the approach road to any important public building. To get on a commercial airplane, you may be searched from head to toe.

Visitors to the U.S. Capitol in DC, state capitals, or to a local City Hall for that matter, must pass an obstacle course of security zones, metal detectors, surveillance cameras, i.d. check points, and, of course, the presence of the endemic police dogs. Local court houses resemble armed camps, where all visitors are subject to search by a deputy sheriff, or worse, some rent-a-cop with a third grade education and shiny toy badge.
Meanwhile, hundreds of immigrants are presently being warehoused by the Feds, under suspect legal authority, many without trial or charges. As for what is happening at Guantanamo, Cuba, where 660 Muslim prisoners are being detained at the sole "discretion of the Executive," it is an international disgrace and a "legal black hole." (See Human Rights Watch, Nov. 21, 2003, Kenneth Roth, hrw.org)

Bosch's vision of a fascist America is taking shape, slowly. Much of it, we still can't presently see or feel, since the Homeland Security Law and USA Patriot Act have yet to be fully implemented. There may be some who are now under wrongful police surveillance and don't even know it. Tom Ridge, the Homeland Security czar, "may" be a decent guy. However, what will that agency look like if there is a contrived or genuine terrorist incident or incidents in this country, and a Right Wing creep, like an Elliott Abrams of Contragate infamy, takes it over? Huh?

Then, there was my experience of an anti-Iraq War rally in Washington DC, on Jan. 19, 2003, at Lafayette Park. I thought some of the cops on that day went out of their way to be unduly combative towards the protesters. I captured some of that happening on film at: http://homepage.mac.com/bhughes2/iMovieTheater75.html (http://homepage.mac.com/bhughes2/iMovieTheater75.html).

Another even more unpleasant incident that made me think of Bosch's words was a rally for human rights, on Dec. 6, 2003, at York, PA. I had never seen so many armed, rough-looking policemen in my life, in one place and from so many different city, state and federal jurisdictions. Is this a sequel to the dark screenplay of William S. Burroughs' "Blade Runner?" I thought (Check out my video of the event at:

http://baltimore.indymedia.org/media/all/display/1979/index.php (http://baltimore.indymedia.org/media/all/display/1979/index.php)).

The protesters, when they reached the York Co. Prison, were all herded into a so-called, "free speech zone." Before entering it, they were searched and deprived of any personal property the cops had arbitrarily decided they shouldn't have. Once in the government-designated "zone," the media wasn't allowed to talk with any of the marchers. In fact, I saw a local female reporter almost bodily removed from the scene by a bully of a cop because she had dared to want to interview one of the protesters.

Also, when the activists were marching along the highway from the York Co. Prison to the Caterpillar plant, (the second site of the rally), the cops kept screaming at them, in a very hostile tone, to "get off the road." This forced the protesters to walk in snow and slush that had piled up on the roadside as the result of a recent heavy storm. Some of the police, in my opinion, had consciously chosen to manufacture a "them vs. us" scenario. To those cops, the demonstrators weren't citizens of our Republic exercising their right to protest the conduct of their government- - they were misguided individuals, who might be hiding Osama bin Laden.

Bosch's prophecy is unfolding. The situation will only get worse, unless the people wake up. And, if you think our mostly cowardly Congress will act to remedy this serious matter, you better think again. It was that spineless Congress that first created this disgraceful mess!

Hiero

13th July 2008, 15:31

Was there a question or point? Or are you just an agitator?

Led Zeppelin

13th July 2008, 15:35

"Left-fascist"? Did you just make that term up?

Tell me, how exactly does "right-fascism" vary from "left-fascism"?

marxistsocialist

13th July 2008, 15:39

Pirate turtle the 11th

13th July 2008, 16:13

hahaha i am not agitator, i am a truth-teller. Truth hurts. I am not lying, the article is in spanish, it says just that. That FARC are not *authentic* group looking for a better world, and the tactics of "Revolutionary highjacking" supposedly looking for a better world, can't give you a better world indeed, because who wants to be highjacked for 10 years in the jungle. in other words FARC are plain evil

http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=7277

marxistsocialist

Your critizezing them for taking hostatges.

If taking a goverment official ( you know from the goverment they a fighting) hostage allows them to fund operations which stop the right wing death sqauds from killing people then its time to get another hostage.

(Although hostage taking has disenfranchised farc with the urban proles which means farcs name is tarnished but to be honest the Columbian goverment will always find something to slander farc with).

Edit: just to point out the last person i saw who used the word left-facists was a bnp supporter just weeks after I heard a trendy lefty say it

neither are people to aspire to.

Also don't use fascist for everything it makes it hard to use when something that really is fascist appears

Red October

13th July 2008, 16:53

I'm an anarchist and no big fan of the FARC, but they are not fascists. Fascism is a specific ideology, not a blanket term for authoritarians. Stalinism may be authoritarian, but it is not a form of fascism. Legitimate criticism of FARC (and there are many) are welcome here, but spouting off this garbage about fascism is just stupid.

rednordman

13th July 2008, 17:52

lol this is a very daft post. Just because you do not approve of the behaviour of a particular 'leftist' military movement, you label them as something that they are really no where near. This sort of thing I am hearing more and more of in recent times. Its like people are trying to ‘apologise’ for mistakes that people within socialist movements have made by labelling then as ‘fascist’.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m pretty sure most people on this forum and of leftwing thought would totally condemn the behaviour of FARC within the last decade, even these 'Stalinists' that you talk so ill of. Just because they are proclaimed revolutionary communists and fighting for a cause that I do agree with (especially in Colombia) does not void them from making stupid decisions that nobody (including me) agrees with. In my opinion, kidnapping people reeks of desperatism, so this could well be a very bad sign for their movement in general.
I also seriously doubt the Pinochet or any other authoritarian militant leader would have a positive opinion on J Stalin. Sometimes it’s good to look at topics from different perspectives (such as Stalin) rather than just labelling them something that does not make sense (do you even know what fascism was?). Sure FARC are very bad for kidnapping people but there are (or where) probably some positive aspects to their movement as well. Not everything is straight forward as you think, theres two side to every story (apart from the Nazis).

marxistsocialist

13th July 2008, 18:02

But people don't be shy, and affraid. I mean are you guys in favor of FARC or not? It's like the leftists who hate FARC's tactics are too shy to label them as evil. For me FARC are plain evil, and i am not shy or affraid to be labeled as "agitator", "troller", etc. just because I label FARC as a left-fascist organization, using Nazi, stalinist, fascist tactics.

marxistsocialist

lol this is a very daft post. Just because you do not approve of the behaviour of a particular 'leftist' military movement, you label them as something that they are really no where near. This sort of thing I am hearing more and more of in recent times. Its like people are trying to ‘apologise’ for mistakes that people within socialist movements have made by labelling then as ‘fascist’.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m pretty sure most people on this forum and of leftwing thought would totally condemn the behaviour of FARC within the last decade, even these 'Stalinists' that you talk so ill of. Just because they are proclaimed revolutionary communists and fighting for a cause that I do agree with (especially in Colombia) does not void them from making stupid decisions that nobody (including me) agrees with. In my opinion, kidnapping people reeks of desperatism, so this could well be a very bad sign for their movement in general.
I also seriously doubt the Pinochet or any other authoritarian militant leader would have a positive opinion on J Stalin. Sometimes it’s good to look at topics from different perspectives (such as Stalin) rather than just labelling them something that does not make sense (do you even know what fascism was?). Sure FARC are very bad for kidnapping people but there are (or where) probably some positive aspects to their movement as well. Not everything is straight forward as you think, theres two side to every story (apart from the Nazis).

rednordman

13th July 2008, 18:10

I repeat what i said in the original post. Its safe to say that almost all (99.5%) of people are totally AGAINST the actions of kiddnapping by farc. But somethings that i agree with or admire will do something that is simply plain wrong, so im caught in the middle, if you know what i mean. There is many examples with the soviet union and maoist china, but i just look at the positive aspects and learn from their mistakes.

Pirate turtle the 11th

13th July 2008, 19:01

Ok your annoying me now.

But people don't be shy, and affraid.

Over an internet forum?
Who really gets shy on a internet fourm?

I mean are you guys in favor of FARC or not?

More complicated then that. I support them since they help keep the right wing death squads and bay but i do not fully support them since they are not anarchists.

It's like the leftists who hate FARC's tactics are too shy to label them as evil.

No because evil is a crappy way to describe something.

For me FARC are plain evil, and i am not shy or affraid to be labeled as "agitator", "troller", etc.

Well if you were over the internet I think there would be something wrong with you

just because I label FARC as a left-fascist organization, using Nazi, stalinist, fascist tactics.

How do they use Stalinist tactics?
Were do Farc use to use fascist tactics? ( really i aint noticed them stiring up racial tensions)

For the record taking hostages is known as wel erm taking hostages its not exclusive to a few ideologies.

Also your logic seems to be

fascism = i dont like
Stalinism = i dont like
Hostage taking = I dont like + Stalinist and fascist because I also do not like them

Edit: Last time I heard the phrase left wing fascists http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=iNEIprfXXqU

if your wondering its made my nazis in disguise

marxistsocialist

13th July 2008, 19:35

Hiero

14th July 2008, 04:22

FARC are workers and peasants.

subham

14th July 2008, 09:06

FARC is undoubtedly struggling for the liberation of Columbia from US hegemony working through the puppet government over there. Those who denounce FARC as Fascist, are either consciously or unconsciously echoing the version of US imperialists about FARC!!

Saorsa

14th July 2008, 09:24

I like FARC. I don't like US mercenaries (or "contractors" as the media has referred to the two hostages ransomed back along with Ms Betancourt), and I don't like reactionary politicians.

Marxsocialist, I hope you stay on Revleft, because you're one of the most hilarious people I've ever run into on this site. :laugh: I loved the first post saying "hello everyone, I just read an article that said FARC are left-fascist Stalinist nazis that eat babies. Liek OMG! That is all."

Anyway, to the tedious business of rebutting you...

So make up your mind, do u think FARC can overthrow capitalism? Yes.

or do u think that the right way to overthrow Colombia capitalism is like Marx, Lenin and Trotski said: by workers?Ahahahahahaha! Oh, this is too good... "Liek come on guyz, my boi Trotski sed dat takin h0stagez is liek 3vi1".

Or did he... http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/06/moral.htm

However, it is possible and even probable that our moralist will refuse to say candidly that which is and will attempt to beat about the bush: “To kill at the front is one thing, to shoot hostages is something else again!” This argument, as we shall shortly prove, is simply stupid. But let us stop for a moment on the ground chosen by our adversary. The system of hostages, you say, is immoral “in itself”? Good, that is what we want to know. But this system has been practised in all the civil wars of ancient and modern history. It obviously flows from the nature of civil war itself. From this it is possible to draw only one conclusion, namely, that the very nature of civil war is immoral. That is the standpoint of the newspaper La Croix, which holds that it is necessary to obey the powers-that-be, for power emanates from God. And Victor Serge? He has no considered point of view. To drop a little egg in a strange nest is one thing, to define one’s position on complex historical problems is something else again. I readily admit that people of such transcendent morality as Azaña, Caballero, Negrin and Co. were against taking hostages from the fascist camp: on both sides you have bourgeois, bound by family and material ties and convinced that even in case of defeat they would not only save themselves but would retain their beefsteaks. In their own fashion, they were right. But the fascists did take hostages among the proletarian revolutionists, and the proletarians, on their part, took hostages from among the fascist bourgeoisie, for they knew the menace that a defeat, even partial and temporary, implied for them and their class brothers.

Victor Serge himself cannot tell exactly what he wants: whether to purge the civil war of the practise of hostages, or to purge human history of civil war? The petty-bourgeois moralist thinks episodically, in fragments, in clumps, being incapable of approaching phenomena in their internal connection. Artificially set apart, the question of hostages is for him a particular moral problem, independent of those general conditions which engender armed conflicts between classes. Civil war is the supreme expression of the class struggle. To attempt to subordinate it to abstract “norms” means in fact to disarm the workers in the face of an enemy armed to the teeth. The petty-bourgeois moralist is the younger brother of the bourgeois pacifist who want to “humanize” warfare by prohibiting the use of poison gases, the bombardment of unfortified cities, etc. Politically, such programs serve only to deflect the thoughts of the people from revolution as the only method of putting an end to war.

People taken as hostages are at least bound by ties of class and family solidarity with one of the camps, or with the leaders of that camp. A conscious selection is possible in taking hostages. A projectile fired from a gun or dropped from a plane is let loose by hazard and may easily destroy not only foes but friends, or their parents and children. Why then do our moralists set apart the question of hostages and shut their eyes to the entire content of civil war? Because they are not too courageous. As “leftists” they fear to break openly with revolution. As petty bourgeois they dread destroying the bridges to official public opinion. In condemning the system of hostages they feel themselves in good company against the Bolsheviks. They maintain a cowardly silence about Spain. Against the fact that the Spanish workers, anarchists, and POUMists took hostages, V. Serge will protest ... in twenty years.LOL. You are a douchebag, and you are not a Trotskyist. You are instead a petty-bourgeois liberal. Go home and cry to mommy, and come back once you know two shits about revolutionary Marxism.

Decolonize The Left

14th July 2008, 09:30

Ok some guys here who hate FARC tactics but at the same time are like affraid to divorce themselves from the evil tactics used by FARC are like doubful wether or not to support FARC's "revolutionary hostage" tactics. Any taking of hostage is evil, even if it's after the best noble causes. Highjacking people for years is plain bad, evil, immoral, criminal.

FARC is a communist revolutionary organization committed to opposing the many right-wing paramilitary organizations employed by the Colombian government (as well as the capitalist government as a whole). You, I assume since you have access to a computer, are not sitting in the jungle with them. You have no in-depth knowledge of their position, undertakings, struggles, and experiences. Let this be known.

Secondly, you declare the taking of hostages as "evil, immoral, criminal." I ask for you to defend that statement. What do you mean "evil?" Where do you draw this sharp term from? Immoral? What is your moral outlook on life? Criminal? According to what laws?

So make up your mind, do u think FARC can overthrow capitalism? or do u think that the right way to overthrow Colombia capitalism is like Marx, Lenin and Trotski said: by workers?

It is foolish to believe FARC, alone, can overthrow "capitalism." I doubt the members of FARC even believe that. What I'm sure they do believe is that capitalism is a vile system of exploitation and they will do their best to fight it. I see no problem with this position what-so-ever. Furthermore, "the workers" will take their own paths in Colombia. They will decide what they wish to do as a class, if anything. At least FARC is providing an opposition viewpoint in relation to the government and right-wing propaganda.

- August

Decolonize The Left

14th July 2008, 09:32

LOL. You are a douchebag, and you are not a Trotskyist. You are instead a petty-bourgeois liberal. Go home and cry to mommy, and come back once you know two shits about revolutionary Marxism.

Shame on you. This person may be misinformed, misguided, and confused, but you have no right to degrade them and tell them to leave the site. This person is obviously in need of some form of education in radical theory, not of your childish remarks.

You want to support the cause of communism? Then stop alienating people because it makes you feel cool.

- August

Saorsa

14th July 2008, 09:36

Shame on you. This person may be misinformed, misguided, and confused, but you have no right to degrade them and tell them to leave the site. This person is obviously in need of some form of education in radical theory, not of your childish remarks.

You want to support the cause of communism? Then stop alienating people because it makes you feel cool.

- August

I blame it on my evil left-fascist Stalino-Hitlerite tendencies. I obviously have no tolerance for yet another Trotsky kid coming onto Revleft and feeling that he has the mana to denounce "Stalinism".

Decolonize The Left

14th July 2008, 09:43

I blame it on my evil left-fascist Stalino-Hitlerite tendencies. I obviously have no tolerance for yet another Trotsky kid coming onto Revleft and feeling that he has the mana to denounce "Stalinism".

I don't care what you blame it on. I'm talking about the fact that by belittling and insulting people who are new to the board, or to radical theory, you are hurting the cause!

Develop some tolerance. It will do you some good, for it will expose you to new ideas, and it will help the cause in general by getting rid of your childish rants about people's comments.

- August

chebol

14th July 2008, 11:04

I blame it on my evil left-fascist Stalino-Hitlerite tendencies. I obviously have no tolerance for yet another Trotsky kid coming onto Revleft and feeling that he has the mana to denounce "Stalinism".

Careful now kiddo. The fact is that the FARC are actually prety stalinist in their overall strategy (I prefer to use the term Stalinoid, for a number of reasons, which i won't go into here).

Criticising this from a Trotskyist perspective would be entirely valid. What our new friend is doing, on the other hand, is just throwing a series of terms that he doesn't understand in the direction of the FARC in the hope that someone will bite.

While we're on the topic, the taking of hostages is *sometimes* useful. That time is very much over for the FARC, and is nothing more than a political deadweight around their necks. Their (apparent) failure to understand this is a free kick to every real wannabe fascist (Uribe and Co.) and every person who feels a bit left, but is still too scared, inexperienced and naiive to stop regurgitating bourgeois vomit (see marxistsocialist's posts for examples of c.).

Just remember that for every one who posts, dozens more just skim over and read. They're the ones who we should be really targeting, not the ones who spout incomprehensible gibberish every now and then. And we do that by keeping it cool, and on topic (mostly :rolleyes: ).

Hiero

14th July 2008, 13:18

The fact is that the FARC are actually prety stalinist in their overall strategy (I prefer to use the term Stalinoid, for a number of reasons, which i won't go into here).

Now this is the furtherst stretch for the term Stalinist I have ever heard. I have heard the term used to describe 1st world parties and regimes who followed USSR's socialist planing. This is a new one, a Stalinist ideology for 3rd world, south American rural guerrilla group fighting against a US neo-colonial state. It is getting quite ridiculous.

Justin CF

14th July 2008, 15:34

Alright, a few quick points directed at marxistsocialist:

Most of the people on this forum seem to be atheists, so absolute moral terms (such as "evil") probably aren't going to gain much acceptance.

Taking hostages isn't bad because Hitler and Stalin did it. This is a logical fallacy.

Just because we abject to some actions of an organization doesn't mean we must reject the organization as a whole. You yourself seem to be voting for Obama, which should blow this argument right out of the water.

comrade stalin guevara

14th July 2008, 15:39

SUPPORT FARC BECAUSE THEY ARE LEFT THIS IS A WESTERN IDEA OF OUR COLOMBIAN COMRADES DIVIDE AND CONQUER AN OLD CAPITOLIST FAVORITE...:hammersickle:

marxistsocialist

14th July 2008, 15:43

We are not clones with same DNA. everybody has their own personal world view, only cultists, followers of Charles Manson and David Koresh type of cults have to be enslaved by the cult leader. If you like FARC, i am ok with that, if you don't like FARC i am ok with that. Don't try to control the thoughts of others

marxistsocialist

Alright, a few quick points directed at marxistsocialist:

Most of the people on this forum seem to be atheists, so absolute moral terms (such as "evil") probably aren't going to gain much acceptance.

Taking hostages isn't bad because Hitler and Stalin did it. This is a logical fallacy.

Just because we abject to some actions of an organization doesn't mean we must reject the organization as a whole. You yourself seem to be voting for Obama, which should blow this argument right out of the water.

Hiero

14th July 2008, 19:30

This thread is strange.

Decolonize The Left

14th July 2008, 19:59

This thread is strange.

Yes, very...

- August

BIG BROTHER

14th July 2008, 22:36

i think this thread should be deleted.

Justin CF

15th July 2008, 00:35

Hiero

15th July 2008, 05:57

Justin CF,

marxistsocialist is now banned. Forgot everything he said, infact forgot that anything really went on here.

Decolonize The Left

15th July 2008, 07:06

Justin CF,

marxistsocialist is now banned. Forgot everything he said, infact forgot that anything really went on here.

Why was he banned?

- August

RedAnarchist

15th July 2008, 07:13

Why was he banned?

- August

He was a sockpuppet for the banned member marxist_god.