Okay, I'm a reformist

[Qwerty Dvorak]

I don't believe in workers' revolution. I haven't for a small while now.

I still agree with socialists in principle; I think capitalism has major flaws and the free market seriously limits the potential of any social policy. I would like to see a reform of public services to bring them more in line with the principles of universality and equality.

But I simply do not see a workers' revolution coming any time in the foreseeable future. I think that we should fight through the democratic system, through the capitalist system, to secure further gains for the working class. Accepting the existence of the capitalist system means accepting that the economy is an important part of any society, that maintaining the economy is an important priority for the state and thus that social policy may at times be restricted in scope and reach by economic policy. I now favour an approach based on pragmatism more than ideology. I am still very interested in politics and may join a more mainstream party in the future. If I do it will probably be Labour or, more probably, Fianna Fáil.

It's hard even for me to tell when this change occurred; I think it only really happened over the last couple of months. A large part of this change was the Lisbon Treaty, the latest EU treaty which Ireland rejected. The entire far left campaigned against the Treaty, but I disagreed, favouring a Yes vote because of the benefits brought by the Treaty and the EU in general. At first I tried to maintain, to myself as much as to everyone else, that this position was reconcilable with socialism. However, this position was based on a trust in institutions such as the EU, national government and the rule of law that socialists and communists do not, indeed, cannot, share. Furthermore, while volunteering with the Irish Alliance for Europe campaigning for a Yes vote, I found it strange that this issue, the sole issue (at the time) over which I disagreed with the far left, was the one to which I most readily devoted all my time and effort, and this volunteer work was the most enjoyable I had experienced so far. I think this was because I was a part of real mainstream politics, where issues are not so black and white and people are at least willing to listen to what you have to say. I enjoyed the freedom of politics without the burden of a fringe ideology; I came to realize how restricted I had been in debates in the past where it would have been hypocritical of me as a socialist to come into a debate on a contemporary issue, analyse both sides and put forward what I think is the best possible solution based on the situation. This is because, as a socialist, I only ever believed in one solution whatever the situation; communist revolution. It's hard, then, to partake in any kind of discussion on social or economic policy because you are tied by ideology to spouting this obligatory protest line and are prevented from putting forth or even condoning any practical medium- or long-term solution.

That's about it. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time at RevLeft, both posting my opinions and debating as a regular member and contributing to the management of the board as part of the CC. I would like to continue posting, though the regularity of my posts will depend really on what discussions are taking place at the time. So I'll probably be talking to many of you again, albeit from the other side of the fence. Let's agree now to try and keep it civil eh? ;)

So yeah, I presume I will be restricted now (well, as soon as an admin sees this). Until then I might post in Chit-Chat or something but I will refrain from posting in the more theory-based boards unless I really have something to contribute. Once I am removed from the CC, and after you do whatever you need to do with this thread in here (I'm not sure if you'd need to do anything, like have a poll?) could you please move it to the OI forum, so it can serve as an explanation of my position to others and perhaps so we can spark a discussion or two.

Good luck to you all! Keep up the CC drama! :wub:

[The Feral Underclass]

Get a fucking back bone!

[Dros]

Sorry to see you've gone the way of LSD but...

Time to restrict.:crying:

[Pawn Power]

I don't really know who you are (sorry)... did you formally go by a different name?

Anyway, bye.

[chimx]

Advocating a pragmatic line is not a restrictable offense. Plenty of socialists, such as Lenin and the Bolsheviks, practiced pragmatic reformism. It is just that they also maintained an underlying communist ideology. You should clarify your stance. Are you rejecting communism? If not, I don't see why it is necessary for you to be restricted at all.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

I don't really know who you are (sorry)... did you formally go by a different name?

Anyway, bye.
I was RedStar1916, then Ron Burgundy. I don't expect you to know who I am, I obviously wasn't nearly as prominent a member as, say, LSD. But I posted a good bit at times.

(Oh, and as well as Chit-Chat I will probably continue to respond in this thread for the time being if that's alright)

[Lector Malibu]

Redstar1916 I kind got this impression awhile ago actually.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Redstar1916 I kind got this impression awhile ago actually.
When?

[Lector Malibu]

When?

There was a time when I noticed you where not that active on the board. I'd just see you kinda show up in the revleft index but not really post. I actually said to myself that something was up. I did not realize it was to this extent though.

Anyways I don't support what you're doing but you are being honest and well I guess that counts for something.

Also I will say there is endless drama but at the same time I still wish you would reconsider . Don't let that influence you I guess is what I'm saying...

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Get a fucking back bone!
:laugh: This post originally said "Goodbye."

Tell you what TAT, if I'm ever in England I'll look you up, we can drink beer and fist fight.

[TC]

The difference between revolutionary and reformist politics isn't that those with revolutionary politics naively think that revolution is coming "in the foreseeable future"; anyone who claims to foresee workers revolution in the west in the near term is not likely to be taking a scientific socialist position but an idealist, utopian one. The difference is that the revolutionary left believes a radical change reconstructing society along different social organisation is necessary and desirable, whereas a reformist left-liberal position holds that this is not desirable and only changes within the current system are.

The choice to work within the current system and acknowledge its reality isn't reformism, its realism; reformism is to accept the limits of the current system rather than seeking to go beyond it.

Given this it sounds more that you simply reject ultra-leftism and utopianism rather than accept reformism. Drawing the false dichotomy between working for contemporary meaningful real political change within the current framework on the one hand and seeking revolutionary change on the other, creates a caricature of the left, Marxism, and revolution.



. This is because, as a socialist, I only ever believed in one solution whatever the situation; communist revolution.

Then you were a utopian socialist and not a Marxist because a scientific approach to politics dictates being able to evaluate the real material conditions and political dynamics in society; to simply say that 'revolution is the only solution' regardless of the situation being discussed is imposing a totally ahistorical essentially metaphysical dogma. Thats not Marxist, its essentially religious.

I certainly don't think the one solution to any political question is communist revolution, thats just dishonest and politically opportunist. Capitalism and bourgeois democracy is a highly adaptable economic form with many different social structures, ranges from the extreme of Nazi Germany to the other extreme of the contemporary Netherlands or Sweden; one can certainly conceive of more or less oppressive, more or less desirable, and more or less progressive, developments short of revolution that offer 'solutions' to many social political and environmental problems. The difference between Marxism and utopianism is that Marxists base their politics on reality and neither wishful thinking or blind dogmatic adherence to an ahistorical political demand. The difference between Marxists and reformists is that despite seeing how problems such as racism, sexism, environmental catastrophe, starvation, war, and so on could potentially be solved without moving beyond capitalism, Marxists still want to go beyond it despite it. In the mean time though the Marxist position is not one of indifference between better and worse forms of capitalism nor is it a refusal to recognize material gains short of revolution when they happen.

[Led Zeppelin]

Weak.

Now restrict.

Oh by the way, the reason he turned reformist is due to the fact that he was hardly ever active as a "rrrrrrevolutionary", same thing as with LSD.

I predict that a lot of members here will end up like that sooner or later, if they don't become active.

[Honggweilo]

When?
Your balant support for the Lisbon Treaty should have tipped everyone off...

ok thx bai!

[Die Neue Zeit]

The difference between revolutionary and reformist politics isn't that those with revolutionary politics naively think that revolution is coming "in the foreseeable future"; anyone who claims to foresee workers revolution in the west in the near term is not likely to be taking a scientific socialist position but an idealist, utopian one. The difference is that the revolutionary left believes a radical change reconstructing society along different social organisation is necessary and desirable, whereas a reformist left-liberal position holds that this is not desirable and only changes within the current system are.

For once, I agree with you - or, rather, you agree with Kautsky:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1909/power/ch01.htm


To be sure, actual evolution has taken the road foretold by Marx and Engels. And the triumphant progress of Socialism is due, next to the extension of capitalism and therewith of the proletarian class struggle, above all to the keen analysis of the conditions and problems of this struggle supplied by the work of Marx and Engels.

In ONE point they were in error. THEY EXPECTED THE REVOLUTION TOO SOON.

[Redmau5]

Ah that's a shame.

Well, good luck. If you do decide to join Labour then we still might see you around at some stage.

[Le Libérer]

Thread moved to OI by request of Ever Closer Union.

[Zurdito]

wow there´s a shock!

I have absolutely no problem with you ever closer union, but this was kind of obvious :p

[spartan]

I have never understood why some Socialists have a problem with advocating greater worker's rights and better welfare and public services in a Capitalist society (Especially now when the post-cold war free market obsessed Bourgeoisie is trying to privatise everything and dismantle our hard fought for welfare systems) as long as you dont lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day you still wish to replace it completely with a Socialist system (Like ever closer union appears to have done).

There are some Socialists who believe that worker's should fight for everything possible in our Capitalist society, whilst there are others who believe that we should just let them rot and let Capitalism get so bad that the workers will rise up against it.

They fail to see that winning hard fought for gains for workers in a Capitalist state will eventually weaken the Capitalist state so much that workers will already have a great head start to potentially implement Socialism.

Look at post-war pre-Thatcher Britain. Most major industries were nationalised (As part of Labour's post-war Keynesian policies) and they had universal free healthcare and education and yet class consciousness amongst the British working class was probably the highest it had been since the depression!

Workers were always on strike and demanding the government give them what they wanted (Which they largely did after a fight) but to be fair this was during the cold war when the Capitalist west (Minus America) was prepared to compromise and let the workers have there way a bit to limit potential Soviet influence (Hence why Germany and Scandinavia had social market economies and Britain had it's Keynesian influenced system with it's universal free healthcare and education and nationalised industries).

[Hiero]

The difference is that the revolutionary left believes a radical change reconstructing society along different social organisation is necessary and desirable, whereas a reformist left-liberal position holds that this is not desirable and only changes within the current system are.

Also the reformist don't believe that change is inevitable, or that things are actually changing.

In the first world it is quite easy to believe that very little is changing, and that things wont change. If we look at the 1st world there have been no qualitative changes in relations of production since the beginning of capitalism. Things do seems stangnet and it is easy to assume it will remain stagnant.

However in the periperhy, which is interdepedent with the centre, qualitative change occurs nearly every decade in various countries. Either in the form of socialist revolution, or bourgeoisie national revolution. Whatever changes occur that take the periphery away from interdependence with the imperialists, causes strain on the centre till eventually the whole imperialist system will collapse.

Samir Amin an Egpytian economist with a third worldist outlook, viewed correctly that the majority of the worlds proleteriat are found in the underdeveloped countries, not in the developed centres. This was concluded in the 1970's, it is even more true of today. We have in first world countries a majority of the workforce employed in service sectors, the parasitic sectors who contribute nothing to the production of commodity and whose wages are paid through expliotation of labour in the 3rd world.

When fake communist turn to complete reformist it is nothing more then oppurtunism. Since revolution in 1st world countries is not apparant, then working in the systemm appears to be a means to achieve goals. Their solutions for the third world is idealist too and can even be racist, they promote that development of productive forces and even better managment of productive forces will lead to improvements and they never mention changes in the relations of production, and that these changes are invietable. Working in the system only furthers the existance of the imperialist system and gives it legitimacy.

While my theory and Amin's in general appears close to the now defunct MIM it does not come to the same conclusion for communists. I think what Communist need to focus primary on support for third world proleteriat movements, support and fight to maintain workers gains (either economic or social) in the centre through participation and support for trade unions and other progressive organisation and finally the building of cadre in the centre that understand the imperialist system.

If you are waiting around or even organising "revolution" in the 1st world country you are going to be dissapointed. Some people falsely believe that building large parties, getting the propoganda right or the most ridicilous which Jacob has put forward that changing your name will make revolutionary politics popular and there for make the revolution.

This doesn't mean we wait around for the material conditions to change, for the imperialist structure to collapse. We should organise for it's collapse, this requires people looking at current party goals and structure and working out it they are applicable with the current goals of the majority proleteriat.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

A trot becoming a reformist, jumping bojangles Batman what a surprise! Can't say I'm caught off guard, the transitional program has a tendency to turn folks pink. And if "leftists and the law" wasn't a red flag, I don't know what is. Enjoy campaigning for bureaucracy and the rule of EU law. Your contribution to society will remain at 0.

[Led Zeppelin]

A trot becoming a reformist, jumping bojangles Batman what a surprise! Can't say I'm caught off guard, the transitional program has a tendency to turn folks pink.

Wow I didn't expect such sectarian crap from you, Joe Hill.

A while back an anarchist kid who went by the name Anarchist Freedom here became a liberal, does that mean that "it's not a surprise that a anarcho-kiddie became a reformist because anarchism is only a lifestyle choice involving what kind of clothes you wear"?

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

Wow I didn't expect such sectarian crap from you, Joe Hill.

A while back an anarchist kid who went by the name Anarchist Freedom here became a liberal, does that mean that "it's not a surprise that a anarcho-kiddie became a reformist because anarchism is only a lifestyle choice involving what kind of clothes you wear"?

*shrugs* There's also a tendency amongst certain anarchists to devolve into reformism. Trots have a similar situ. The anarchos attract silly civil libertarians, and the trots attract radical social democrats.

[Module]

That sucks :\
Despite me not having communicated with you on here, you were a good poster and I sincerely hope you stick around! :)

[Shekky Shabazz]

ecu,

You mentioned feeling 'restricted' within your former beliefs. Is it safe to assume now you do not?

Could you envision a series of events occuring that would lead you back to your former beliefs? What do you think those would be?

[Dros]

A trot becoming a reformist, jumping bojangles Batman what a surprise! Can't say I'm caught off guard, the transitional program has a tendency to turn folks pink.

My god!

The opportunist said something I can agree with!





PS: I don't mean to offend the Trotskyists. I just know a few Trots who went "pink"...

[Bilan]

The difference between revolutionary and reformist politics isn't that those with revolutionary politics naively think that revolution is coming "in the foreseeable future"; anyone who claims to foresee workers revolution in the west in the near term is not likely to be taking a scientific socialist position but an idealist, utopian one.

So...Your suggesting that the continued polarisation of wealth caused by the new economy, intensive privatisation, the current economic crises and the increasingly repressive nature of Western States is not likely to have any impact? That foot holds for revolutionary politics to grow and expand are not current being created because of this radically, and rapidly changing nature?

I'd be interested in reading your theory on why Paris 68 occurred.

[RedAnarchist]

Wow, I never expected to read this thread, thats for sure. Its a shame that you're a reformist ECU, but maybe we can reconvince you sometime back into revolutionary leftist politics. I hope you stick around - you'll be one of the better OI'ers.

[RHIZOMES]

Not surprising, I've never seen you make any posts that demonstrated you had a knowledge of Marxism at all.

And HOLY SHIT your username makes so much more sense now.

[apathy maybe]

Yeah, I have a confession to make too. I'm actually a feudalist, I support the whole idea of kings and nobles and stuff. I think it would be great if we went back to a system where there was a small layer of elites on top, and a large amount of toiling peasants on the bottom (of course, I would be on top).

I have actually always been this way, except that I got confused about the spelling and started reading federalist stuff, which lead me to where I am now. But I'm coming clean, I'm going back to my roots.

So yeah, sucks to be you, you got tricked by me for nearly six years.

Nah, just joking.

Seriously, I can see the attractiveness of believing that reformism is a good thing, that building up state power is good and all that (I used to think that way). But the only good reformism is the sort that moves towards abolishing state power, removing power from the elites.

And once you jump into the sticky mess of parliamentarianism, then you give up alternative means of change, and you have to accept the good with the bad. You get suckered into thinking that one step in the wrong direction is OK, because down the road it will lead to two or three steps in the correct direction. You start thinking that maybe it might be a good idea to restrict people's freedom for their own good. (You shall wear seat belts in cars, because it's for your own good. Oh, and we don't want to drive up medical costs.)

Fuck that shit. The only thing a parliament is good for is a nice bonfire, or alternatively a museum (after the revolution, about the bad times before the revolution).

[Killfacer]

fair enough mate, enjoy your life.

[The Feral Underclass]

I also have something to admit: I'm straight.

[Demogorgon]

There is a tendency for people on the left to feel disenchanted and move to plain reformism. This I think is a shame, but it is hardly surprising. The reality of modern politics is such that anyone outside of its mainstream can become disillusioned.

That being said, there is a tendency on this board to attempt to drive away anybody who so much as believes that change cannot come about in a matter of hours. I for instance believe two things that I suspect most people here agree with, but can sometimes be taboo to say. I believe that socialists have to make themselves as visible and credible as possible in a pre-revolutionary situation. That means simply marching around and throwing stones at the police ain't going to cut it. We have to try and work our way into the media (there are plenty of mainstream papers, especially in Europe, that do carry columns by Marxists), we need to establish a political presence, this means competing in elections and even, in some circumstances, taking seats in Parliament to gain further attention and to continuously bring political discourse back to working class issues. This will give us a much greater presence and indeed motivate more people towards revolution. Deliberately engaging in Parliamentary politics, despite the full knowledge that that will not achieve change is a good way to make people realise that more drastic change is needed.

Next, and the anarchists cannot agree with this, but others should. In a post revolutionary situation, the working class may seize power, but that is not enough. There is a hell of a lot of complicated change still required. Economic institutions to restructure or eliminate, residual private ownership of means of production to be dealt with, legal codes needing replaced, Government institutions needing rearranged, replaced or done away with and so on. In short, there is much to be done and doing this takes time. A post revolutionary society is going to have to carry out a lot of reforms itself and denying this or refusing to discuss how these reforms ought to take place is hardly productive.

The above two points of view are not reformist, Any Marxist with common sense will not raise an eyebrow at them. But there is a tendency on this board to dismiss people who discuss such issues as being reformist and people have a tendency to "live down" to expectations. Telling people that such views are reformist can turn people into real reformists.

I still like and respect Ever Closer Union of course, he still opposes Capitalism and marginalising radical Social Democrats is another stupid thing to do. Leftist movements will not turn into mass movements by allowing nobody except the purest hardcore to join.

Joining Fianna Fail is pushing it though.

[Panda Tse Tung]

I'm actually a libertarian green national socialist.

But in all seriousness, good luck ;). It's your choice, I'm not judging.

[RHIZOMES]

There is a tendency for people on the left to feel disenchanted and move to plain reformism. This I think is a shame, but it is hardly surprising. The reality of modern politics is such that anyone outside of its mainstream can become disillusioned.

That being said, there is a tendency on this board to attempt to drive away anybody who so much as believes that change cannot come about in a matter of hours. I for instance believe two things that I suspect most people here agree with, but can sometimes be taboo to say. I believe that socialists have to make themselves as visible and credible as possible in a pre-revolutionary situation. That means simply marching around and throwing stones at the police ain't going to cut it. We have to try and work our way into the media (there are plenty of mainstream papers, especially in Europe, that do carry columns by Marxists), we need to establish a political presence, this means competing in elections and even, in some circumstances, taking seats in Parliament to gain further attention and to continuously bring political discourse back to working class issues. This will give us a much greater presence and indeed motivate more people towards revolution. Deliberately engaging in Parliamentary politics, despite the full knowledge that that will not achieve change is a good way to make people realise that more drastic change is needed.

Next, and the anarchists cannot agree with this, but others should. In a post revolutionary situation, the working class may seize power, but that is not enough. There is a hell of a lot of complicated change still required. Economic institutions to restructure or eliminate, residual private ownership of means of production to be dealt with, legal codes needing replaced, Government institutions needing rearranged, replaced or done away with and so on. In short, there is much to be done and doing this takes time. A post revolutionary society is going to have to carry out a lot of reforms itself and denying this or refusing to discuss how these reforms ought to take place is hardly productive.

The above two points of view are not reformist, Any Marxist with common sense will not raise an eyebrow at them. But there is a tendency on this board to dismiss people who discuss such issues as being reformist and people have a tendency to "live down" to expectations. Telling people that such views are reformist can turn people into real reformists.

I still like and respect Ever Closer Union of course, he still opposes Capitalism and marginalising radical Social Democrats is another stupid thing to do. Leftist movements will not turn into mass movements by allowing nobody except the purest hardcore to join.

Joining Fianna Fail is pushing it though.

Agree with this.

[Malakangga]

Hey,what's wrong with you,ECU?
what the fuck have you done?

[RedAnarchist]

Hey,what's wrong with you,ECU?
what the fuck have you done?

I don't think he's done this rashly to be honest, malakangga. Persoanlly, its probably going to be better for him in the long term to be honest about his views rather than clinging onto more radical views.

[Bud Struggle]

I don't believe in workers' revolution. I haven't for a small while now.

I still agree with socialists in principle; I think capitalism has major flaws and the free market seriously limits the potential of any social policy. I would like to see a reform of public services to bring them more in line with the principles of universality and equality.

I must say that there was a time a while ago that I would have been jumping all over this with smart assed one liners--no so much now. I'm pretty saddened by this. Over the past couple of months I've come to know ECU by his very thoughtful and caring posts. He's a very decent guy who seems to live his beliefs. He's an honest guy in a very cynical age.

And while I'm no Commie--it heartens me a bit to see people like ECU fighting the good cause for people's rights and freedoms. But no matter, as a Communist or as a Socialist I think he's make his mark on this world to make it a better place.

Welcome to the OI, Brother. :)

[Robert]

Wow, if you weren't sure you didn't belong with the "in crowd" before, you know now. What a bunch of narrow-minded elitists you were hanging with!

Anyway, welcome to the gulag. It's more interesting over here anyway.

Now, let's get you on a nice road to riches, shall we?

[RedAnarchist]

I must say that there was a time a while ago that I would have been jumping all over this with smart assed one liners--no so much now. I'm pretty saddened by this. Over the past couple of months I've come to know ECU by his very thoughtful and caring posts. He's a very decent guy who seems to live his beliefs. He's an honest guy in a very cynical age.

And while I'm no Commie--it heartens me a bit to see people like ECU fighting the good cause for people's rights and freedoms. But no matter, as a Communist or as a Socialist I think he's make his mark on this world to make it a better place.

Welcome to the OI, Brother. :)

Is he going to be your prison *****?:lol:

[Lector Malibu]

I must say that there was a time a while ago that I would have been jumping all over this with smart assed one liners--no so much now. I'm pretty saddened by this. Over the past couple of months I've come to know ECU by his very thoughtful and caring posts. He's a very decent guy who seems to live his beliefs. He's an honest guy in a very cynical age.

And while I'm no Commie--it heartens me a bit to see people like ECU fighting the good cause for people's rights and freedoms. But no matter, as a Communist or as a Socialist I think he's make his mark on this world to make it a better place.

Welcome to the OI, Brother. :)

It's scary as hell when you guys call each other brother.

[RedAnarchist]

Wow, if you weren't sure you didn't belong with the "in crowd" before, you know now. What a bunch of narrow-minded elitists you were hanging with!

Anyway, welcome to the gulag. It's more interesting over here anyway.

Now, let's get you on a nice road to riches, shall we?

Don't listen to him, ECU -

http://www.esreality.com/files/inlineimages/2008/64414-its-a-trap.jpg

[Die Neue Zeit]

There is a tendency for people on the left to feel disenchanted and move to plain reformism. This I think is a shame, but it is hardly surprising. The reality of modern politics is such that anyone outside of its mainstream can become disillusioned.

If anything else, I was once a red-on-the-surface (swinging back and forth between Trotsky and Stalin) and pinko/orange once by voting for the social-democratic party in my country. Sufficed to say that my disillusionment with faux reformism only increased.


Telling people that such views are reformist can turn people into real reformists.

Sorry for not sharing your vocabulary, but I set a much higher standard for "reformism" and consider most "social-democrats" (ie, of the Keynesian or social-liberal type) to be pseudo-reformists or, at best, "progressive reformists." There is talk right now about "revolutionary reformism" and "radical reformism" just below it.

[Herman]

It was obvious from the moment that you supported the EU treaty.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I'm really surprised that anyone could take seriously the claim that bourgeouis electoral politics "really matter" or that capitalism can be somehow "transformed" through the above-mentioned mechanism into communism, considering that the very reforms that were fought for in the 30s-50s are now being dismantled.

[nuisance]

But I simply do not see a workers' revolution coming any time in the foreseeable future.
Well that's no surprise with revolutionaries dropping out.
Also to paraphrase Malatesta- Not whether we accomplish revolution today, tomorrow or within ten centuries but that we walk towards revolution today, tomorrow and always.

[Baconator]

So the score on revleft is :

Others to Communism = 0
Communism to other = 2 ( LSD and Ron)

Or am I missing some other significant conversions? Seems like OIers are doing a pretty fine job here. Ron , like LSD, is still not out of the woods yet. It appears they are in support of some sort of social democracy. Its a little better than the communist soup kitchen but still not all that great. Ron! Glad you started employing some logic but theres a lot more to grab on to so I wish you well.

[RedAnarchist]

Baconator, you sound like the unpopular loner who clings onto the new kid at school.:lol:

[BOZG]

Joining Fianna Fail is pushing it though.

Pushing it? Fianna Fáil is the chose party of Irish capitalism. Its entire programme is dedicated to capitalism. Joining FF would put you squarely out of even social-democracy, nevermind radical social-democracy.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

So the score on revleft is :

Others to Communism = 0
Communism to other = 2 ( LSD and Ron)

Or am I missing some other significant conversions? Seems like OIers are doing a pretty fine job here. Ron , like LSD, is still not out of the woods yet. It appears they are in support of some sort of social democracy. Its a little better than the communist soup kitchen but still not all that great. Ron! Glad you started employing some logic but theres a lot more to grab on to so I wish you well.


Anarcho capitalism rotting the brain?

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Then you were a utopian socialist and not a Marxist because a scientific approach to politics dictates being able to evaluate the real material conditions and political dynamics in society; to simply say that 'revolution is the only solution' regardless of the situation being discussed is imposing a totally ahistorical essentially metaphysical dogma. Thats not Marxist, its essentially religious.

I certainly don't think the one solution to any political question is communist revolution, thats just dishonest and politically opportunist. Capitalism and bourgeois democracy is a highly adaptable economic form with many different social structures, ranges from the extreme of Nazi Germany to the other extreme of the contemporary Netherlands or Sweden; one can certainly conceive of more or less oppressive, more or less desirable, and more or less progressive, developments short of revolution that offer 'solutions' to many social political and environmental problems. The difference between Marxism and utopianism is that Marxists base their politics on reality and neither wishful thinking or blind dogmatic adherence to an ahistorical political demand. The difference between Marxists and reformists is that despite seeing how problems such as racism, sexism, environmental catastrophe, starvation, war, and so on could potentially be solved without moving beyond capitalism, Marxists still want to go beyond it despite it. In the mean time though the Marxist position is not one of indifference between better and worse forms of capitalism nor is it a refusal to recognize material gains short of revolution when they happen.
It's funny how people make posts and then go back later to make them more hostile. Anyone who knew me or my politics would know that I was never, at least not in the recent past, a utopian socialist; I always supported reforms within the current system. I even set up a usergroup for that particular purpose.

But ultimately I would question whether or not a Marxist can support any solution other than revolution. Of course a Marxist may support pro-worker reforms within capitalism (though many don't), but these are always just going to be short-term, temporary fixes in the mind of the Marxist. The difference, I think, between a Marxist and a reformist is not that the former believes that revolution is coming soon. I was being hyperbolic earlier. It is that a reformist tries to find ways to work within the current system to solve problems in society, whereas a Marxist tries to find ways to ease them.


wow there´s a shock!

I have absolutely no problem with you ever closer union, but this was kind of obvious :p
Hehe, it's odd that some people are more surprised than others. I'm guessing it was the support for the Lisbon Treaty that gave it away for many. For what it's worth I still think that support for the Lisbon Treaty and support for the far-left are compatible.


A trot becoming a reformist, jumping bojangles Batman what a surprise! Can't say I'm caught off guard, the transitional program has a tendency to turn folks pink. And if "leftists and the law" wasn't a red flag, I don't know what is. Enjoy campaigning for bureaucracy and the rule of EU law. Your contribution to society will remain at 0.
Pray tell, what exactly is your contribution to society? In numerical and verbal terms please.


ecu,

You mentioned feeling 'restricted' within your former beliefs. Is it safe to assume now you do not?

Could you envision a series of events occuring that would lead you back to your former beliefs? What do you think those would be?
No, I don't feel as restricted. I feel more free to say what I feel, even if it may be "taboo" within the far left.

Regarding what could lead me back to the far left, I don't think any amount of deliberation on its own could bring me back. My family's financial situation seems to be rather uncertain at the moment a number of reasons. It could be that circumstances bring me back to the left, though I very highly doubt it.


I must say that there was a time a while ago that I would have been jumping all over this with smart assed one liners--no so much now. I'm pretty saddened by this. Over the past couple of months I've come to know ECU by his very thoughtful and caring posts. He's a very decent guy who seems to live his beliefs. He's an honest guy in a very cynical age.

And while I'm no Commie--it heartens me a bit to see people like ECU fighting the good cause for people's rights and freedoms. But no matter, as a Communist or as a Socialist I think he's make his mark on this world to make it a better place.

Welcome to the OI, Brother. :)
I doubt there was ever a time when you would have responded with smart-ass one-liners, you always seemed like a nice guy. Thanks for the post. I do of course still have the betterment of society at my heart. It's not that I've changed my mind regarding the kind of society I'd like to see, but rather how to achieve that society.


Wow, if you weren't sure you didn't belong with the "in crowd" before, you know now. What a bunch of narrow-minded elitists you were hanging with!

Anyway, welcome to the gulag. It's more interesting over here anyway.

Now, let's get you on a nice road to riches, shall we?
Funny, I've had a lot of accusations of associating with "elitists" lately, and most of them have come from leftists.


So the score on revleft is :

Others to Communism = 0
Communism to other = 2 ( LSD and Ron)

Or am I missing some other significant conversions? Seems like OIers are doing a pretty fine job here. Ron , like LSD, is still not out of the woods yet. It appears they are in support of some sort of social democracy. Its a little better than the communist soup kitchen but still not all that great. Ron! Glad you started employing some logic but theres a lot more to grab on to so I wish you well.
I assure you it wasn't anyone in the OI that changed my mind on communism. I explained my shift in politics in the first post. And I really can't see myself converting to anarcho-capitalism any time soon, sorry. You probably don't realize it, but you and your ilk are even more marginalized than the far left. The majority of peopley in society would support social democracy or at least a welfare state and, while they may disagree strongly with the far-left, they at least recognize it as a small but active political force. There are no active anarcho-capitalists in Ireland, and if there were they'd be laughed out of politics.


Pushing it? Fianna Fáil is the chose party of Irish capitalism. Its entire programme is dedicated to capitalism. Joining FF would put you squarely out of even social-democracy, nevermind radical social-democracy.
Well I'm not sure I want to join FF. I might not. But regarding your comment - Fianna Fáil is not the chose party of capitalism, it is the chose party of government, of politics. It is realistically the only relevant party in Ireland today, and the only one I could ever join. There are only three real political parties in Ireland, Labour, Fine Gael and FF. Labour is a joke of a party. No integrity, they pathetically throw tantrum after tantrum in an attempt to rectify their past political mistakes. The Lisbon Treaty is just the latest example, with Gilmore turning on the European Union after realizing he backed the wrong horse. That leaves only Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Fine Gael are the social conservative party, and I remain as socially progressive as ever. After spending a year with a fanatical FGer who believed in the death penalty and wanted a life sentence for drug addicts I could never join them. Fianna Fáil are the only party left to consider.

[Bud Struggle]

No, I don't feel as restricted. I feel more free to say what I feel, even if it may be "taboo" within the far left.

You may soon come to realize--it's the full fledged RevLeft Commies that are in the Gulag. It's we OIers that are really free. :)

[Killfacer]

no we aint, we cant post anywhere. its shit. Welcome to the gulag.

[Bud Struggle]

no we aint, we cant post anywhere. its shit. Welcome to the gulag.

No, no, no. Have you read the rest of RevLeft--it's as dull as all get out:
"How can I organize my middle school"
"Wittgenstein Brown book, is it as good as the Blue?"
"What kind of hair gel should I use to get my hair to look like Trotsky?"
"Should Communist women shave their armpits?"*

Much more fun here on OI--You can say things like: Abortions are bad, Marx sucks, Stalin's mustache had dinner crumbs enbedded in it. And nobody's going to kick you out of anything.

In OI you have delicious humor, charming repartee, and hot babes--what more could you ask of a Forum?

The rest of RevLeft: Capitalism, nyet; Communism, da. :)

*All actually topics on RevLeft.

[Killfacer]

not to mention rap battles. Maybe i misjudged the place. Welcome to free earth, the utopian society.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

No, no, no. Have you read the rest of RevLeft--it's as dull as all get out:
"How can I organize my middle school"
"Wittgenstein Brown book, is it as good as the Blue?"
"What kind of hair gel should I use to get my hair to look like Trotsky?"
"Should Communist women shave their armpits?"*

Much more fun here on OI--You can say things like: Abortions are bad, Marx sucks, Stalin's mustache had dinner crumbs enbedded in it. And nobody's going to kick you out of anything.

In OI you have delicious humor, charming repartee, and hot babes--what more could you ask of a Forum?

The rest of RevLeft: Capitalism, nyet; Communism, da. :)

*All actually topics on RevLeft.
I don't particularly want to say any of those things, but I get your point.

[Bud Struggle]

not to mention rap battles. Maybe i misjudged the place. Welcome to free earth, the utopian society.

Just think what it must be like to CONSTANTLY be looking over your sholder--did I say that correctly? I hope they didn't misunderstand me! You are always wondering if "the CC has started a thread on me?"

Look at all those poor bastards that think they are great Commies and wake up exiled to the OI. "Please let me back" "Please" "PLEASE" "What am I supposed to believe?" "Please tell me so I can believe it!"

You wanna live like that? Rather say what you believe and if there's some shit--take it. But be free. That ECU--he did it and he's one class act guy.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

Just think what it must be like to CONSTANTLY be looking over your sholder--did I say that correctly? I hope they didn't misunderstand me! You are always wondering if "the CC has started a thread on me?"

Look at all those poor bastards that think they are great Commies and wake up exiled to the OI. "Please let me back" "Please" "PLEASE" "What am I supposed to believe?" "Please tell me so I can believe it!"

You wanna live like that? Rather say what you believe and if there's some shit--take it. But be free. That ECU--he did it and he's one class act guy.

I'm going to enjoy living in your large house.

[Bud Struggle]

I don't particularly want to say any of those things, but I get your point.

I'm the Marketing Director for the OI. :)

[Kwisatz Haderach]

It saddens me to see you turn to reformism, ECU, but, more importantly, I really can't see the logic behind your change of heart. Social democracy is a dying ideology, and its sole concern today is to fight a hopeless defensive battle to protect its past successes for as long as it can. But the welfare state and all the past achievements of reformism are being pushed back, eroded everywhere.

If social democracy were surging forward and making progress, I could see the logic in your conversion: You could say that the revolutionary left is ineffective, and that reformism's successes prove it can deliver on its promises.

But that is not the case. Over the past three decades reformism has proved more than ever that it cannot deliver on its promises.

You said that you prefer reformist politics because you feel that it can do some real good in the short and medium term. I see no evidence of that. I see no reason to believe that reformism today can do anything but defend the achievements of the past, even as they are slowly being torn down. Neither reformism nor revolutionary leftism can deliver in the short term, really, but at least revolutionary leftism can deliver in the long term.

And there's another concern, too: How many of your goals and principles are you willing to compromise in order to achieve small victories? How much good can you really do from within a party like Fianna Fáil? You may find that while the revolutionary left has subjects it considers taboo, the capitalists will let you speak your mind all you want - and completely ignore you.

[BIG BROTHER]

not another one!:(

[Bud Struggle]

I'm going to enjoy living in your large house.
You always were an opportunist. :lol:

[Killfacer]

see our marketing director has got shit to work with; peace of mind, rap battles and much much more.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

It is that a reformist tries to find ways to work within the current system to solve problems in society...
I don't think it's possible to solve any major social problems within the current system - and even if it were possible, it's not going to happen, because most mainstream politicians don't want it.


It's not that I've changed my mind regarding the kind of society I'd like to see, but rather how to achieve that society.
Do you really believe that it is possible to achieve socialism by reform? But what about the fact that mainstream politics is currently headed in the opposite direction? How do you propose to reverse the trend?


Fianna Fáil is not the chose party of capitalism, it is the chose party of government, of politics.
But if their politics are not your politics, how does that matter? A powerful enemy is still an enemy. You cannot hope to enter FF and change the party by yourself.

[Bud Struggle]

I don't think it's possible to solve any major social problems within the current system - and even if it were possible, it's not going to happen, because most mainstream politicians don't want it.

If I may interject (seriously) that's my problem with the whole plan. So, there's to be this "Revolution" and then all of the politicians go away, all of leaders, all of the businessmen, and then people "arise" and put this whole complicated Marxist economic, political and social order into effect?

No government, everybody taking turns wiping poop from the asses of old people, people working without pay. Lots of stuff for free just because you and others make it or grow it. You work when and as you want.

Listen, I'm not in the least bit against it--but if you've done business in the cold hard real world like I have, maybe it seems a bit idealistic.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

You always were an opportunist. :lol:

I'm going to really enjoy your fancy cars and large TV.

[Bud Struggle]

I'm going to really enjoy your fancy cars and large TV.

How are you missing the point that I will be leader of the Revolution?

[Robert]

It's scary as hell when you guys call each other brother.If you'd like to actually become a brother, Flower, here's the procedure: A present brother must start a nomination poll giving a brief explanation why they think they should be a brother and adding a link to your posts so that those voting can determine whether they agree that you fit the condition for admittance. In accordance with the new rules, there will first be a mandatory 3 day discussion period after which the poll will be started.

I nominate Flower Eater as a brother. We consecrated brothers will now, in accordance with rules, have a secret 3-day discussion period and let you know whether you are worthy of admission to our exalted society. Speaking for myself, Flower, I'll be pulling for you!

As for this:


"What kind of hair gel should I use to get my hair to look like Trotsky?"

Take a bow, TomK! Thou art KING of all brothers! Outstanding.

on edit: Tom, you aren't seriously claiming that that was a real thread!?:laugh:

[Qwerty Dvorak]

I don't think it's possible to solve any major social problems within the current system - and even if it were possible, it's not going to happen, because most mainstream politicians don't want it.


Do you really believe that it is possible to achieve socialism by reform? But what about the fact that mainstream politics is currently headed in the opposite direction? How do you propose to reverse the trend?


But if their politics are not your politics, how does that matter? A powerful enemy is still an enemy. You cannot hope to enter FF and change the party by yourself.
I'm off to bed soon so I'll be brief. But in general I think politics, both in what it does and in what it can do, follows the economy. As I said in my original post, economic concerns can and do limit the potential for social reform. This is reality. Right now there is a global recession and every first world economy, including Ireland's, is feeling the pinch. There is, realistically, not enough money to go around. The government has a very limited amount of funds available to it, and while it could spend these funds on welfare and nationalization the more prudent thing to do would be to invest in the economy. Mass government spending means either higher taxes or higher borrowing, and both are bad for Ireland in the long term. Sure, we could start paying higher welfare to the unemployed but if in order to do that we have to tax business out of the country then they're never going to have the chance to improve on that welfare sum because they won't be able to get a job.

The history of capitalism is one of ups and downs, expansion and recession. The time to fight for reform and improvement is when the economy is in expansion, when we actually have the money to make it happen. That's exactly the problem - Labour and the social democrats chose to remain silent during the boom. The Celtic Tiger was a missed opportunity to secure real gains for the working class and society in general. Instead, mismanagement and general acting like a bunch of twats heavily impaired Labour's voice to fight for change, and no other party or organization presented itself as a real and viable alternative (that is, there was no other social democrat platform). Now the growth of the economy has ground to a halt, we are experiencing considerable tax shortfalls. Everyone is going to feel the pinch - yes, the working class are going to feel it more than anyone else and that's something I strongly disagree with. But if we ever want to change that, I don't think we are going to get there by selling papers on the street for some socialist party that can't even get elected. That is no way to influence public policy. Furthermore, we have to face the harsh reality that if we don't act prudently now, our economy may not experience as thorough or speedy a recovery as we would like. Conservative estimates predict expansion returning as soon as 2010, that is good news for the working class and for society in general and I do believe that FF's prudent economic policies are how to achieve that. This is how to secure Ireland's future economic prosperity, and it is in this prosperity that real advances can be made for everyone.

I would like to see Fianna Fáil turn to a left-of-centre stance once the economy gets back on track and I would like to see Labour getting active in the fight for better working and living conditions for the working class. the thing about Fianna Fáil is that its policies are dictated not by ideology but by its members and by the population of the country. I know that Fianna Fáil, moreso than Fine Gael though less so than Labour, has a strong centre-left wing that could pave the way for progressive public policy in more affluent times. I would like to see a FF-Lab coalition.

Ultimately, I still realize that there are great injustices in society today and that the working class are disproportionately afected by these injustices. I want nothing more than to see this change. And that is why I support FF's policy of prudent economic management in the short term as a downpayment on Ireland's future, so that we may fight for social change when we have a relaistic chance of winning.

Right, so that wasn't that brief at all.And now I'll be wrecked for work in the morning. I wonder how many enemies I've made with this post... :(

[Kwisatz Haderach]

If I may interject (seriously) that's my problem with the whole plan. So, there's to be this "Revolution" and then all of the politicians go away, all of leaders, all of the businessmen, and then people "arise" and put this whole complicated Marxist economic, political and social order into effect?
Actually, stuff like that happened before - lots of times - in the course of history. The new order was never Marxist, but other than that, yes, what you described is exactly what happened in all historical revolutions. All the former politicians, leaders and businessmen lost their positions - some died, some fled the country, some just gave up and turned to an average life - and then people arose and built a new and complicated economic, political and social order.

It's what happened in France in 1789-1795, and in Russia in 1917-1922, and in my own country in 1947-1949. It's not far-fetched at all. We've built new societies from the ground up before; we've just never built the specific kind of new society that Marxists want.


No government, everybody taking turns wiping poop from the asses of old people, people working without pay. Lots of stuff for free just because you and others make it or grow it. You work when and as you want.

Listen, I'm not in the least bit against it--but if you've done business in the cold hard real world like I have, maybe it seems a bit idealistic.
That's not what's supposed to happen after the revolution at all. You're talking about communism, the distant, post-scarcity future goal. What's supposed to happen after the revolution is socialism, which involves a radical democratic government, a planned economy, and people working to earn currency which they use to buy stuff. At first, socialism will only provide a few things for free - health care, education, housing, and probably also basic food and clothing. The goal is to gradually expand this list so that it eventually covers everything.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

ECU, if you are wondering what the Irish government can do to improve the situation of the working class or society in general, the answer is nothing. In the age of globalization, the government of a small country like Ireland is powerless before the might of the corporate world, as you and all other mainstream people implicitly admit when you point out that careful policy is needed to avoid scaring corporations away - that shows they have the economy by the balls, and the government is their servant, not their master.

Reformism is weak and failing because reformism is all about taking over existing capitalist governments, and existing capitalist governments are weak and failing. Within the capitalist system, power is shifting from governments to corporations, so reformist attempts to get into government are like trying to become the captain of a sinking ship.

[Bud Struggle]

Actually, stuff like that happened before - lots of times - in the course of history. The new order was never Marxist, but other than that, yes, what you described is exactly what happened in all historical revolutions. All the former politicians, leaders and businessmen lost their positions - some died, some fled the country, some just gave up and turned to an average life - and then people arose and built a new and complicated economic, political and social order.

It's what happened in France in 1789-1795, and in Russia in 1917-1922, and in my own country in 1947-1949. It's not far-fetched at all. We've built new societies from the ground up before; we've just never built the specific kind of new society that Marxists want.

I understand, really. But I don't believe. It's a faith thing at this point--and that's why (in my serious posts) I keep going off into the faith and philosophy tangent.

There's no "science" here. Just a bunch of people that "believe". Maybe that's enough. It worked with Christianity (Marx's Jewish older brother.)

I dunno.



That's not what's supposed to happen after the revolution at all. You're talking about communism, the distant, post-scarcity future goal. What's supposed to happen after the revolution is socialism, which involves a radical democratic government, a planned economy, and people working to earn currency which they use to buy stuff. At first, socialism will only provide a few things for free - health care, education, housing, and probably also basic food and clothing. The goal is to gradually expand this list so that it eventually covers everything.

THAT'S the problem with RevLeft. We can all get booted to OI for haveing the slightest problem with abortion--but the existance of Communism in practice after the Revolution-- sexual androids and ass wiping robots, group families and work when you want being a folk singer without talent--no problem, the industrious TomK will support you.

I think I have real issues with Communism.

Tom

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

How are you missing the point that I will be leader of the Revolution?

The Ron Paul Relovelution?

[Robert]

the existance of Communism in practice after the Revolution-- sexual androids and ass wiping robots, group families and work when you want being a folk singer without talent--no problem, the industrious TomK will support you.

He's on a roll! Get the hell out of his way! Go Tommy go!

[Bud Struggle]

The Ron Paul Relovelution?

I'm not a Communist--but I can be THE Communist. Not to get on your case, no need for your to understand--but there are forces and powers well within human grasp--yet beyond the ken of most that will come into play that will go into the comming Revolution.

I learn and I grow.

Let the Revolution come. :)

You can have my house. My dacha will be bigger. :thumbup1:

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

I'm not a Communist--but I can be THE Communist. Not to get on your case, no need for your to understand--but there are forces and powers well within human grasp--yet beyond the ken of most that will come into play that will go into the comming Revolution.

I learn and I grow.

Let the Revolution come. :)

You can have my house. My dacha will be bigger. :thumbup1:

I'm going to love living in your dacha

[Robert]

Yo, Joe. You're in over your head. Quit before you drown.

[Bud Struggle]

Yo, Joe. You're in over your head. Quit before you drown.

Joe, I see you as a Grand Leader of the Revolution--many medal and honors will be bestowed on you for your valient fight for the people.

And after the Revolution--and even if you survive, keep your will up to date. ;):lol:

[RHIZOMES]

So the score on revleft is :

Others to Communism = 0
Communism to other = 2 ( LSD and Ron)

Or am I missing some other significant conversions? Seems like OIers are doing a pretty fine job here. Ron , like LSD, is still not out of the woods yet. It appears they are in support of some sort of social democracy. Its a little better than the communist soup kitchen but still not all that great. Ron! Glad you started employing some logic but theres a lot more to grab on to so I wish you well.

I became a communist through Revleft. I was leaning in that direction before but before I found Revleft I had abandoned those ideas as being utopian (When it was really just my understanding of socialism that was utopian).

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I don't mean to spoil any orgies, but there was a mistake in this thread concerning people "leaving communism" in favor of capitalism moreso than the reverse. I'm not sure what OIers can see, but many threads are made in the Introduction and Learning zone by people whose interest towards communism has heightened because of RevLeft. I also distinctly recall a few OIers claiming to change over, but I'm not going to search through hundreds of threads just to appease some nonsensical teenage better-than-you complex.

Good day. And by the way, I'm still waiting on a tangible defense of private property.

[Hiero]

My family's financial situation seems to be rather uncertain at the moment a number of reasons. It could be that circumstances bring me back to the left, though I very highly doubt it.

That is really stupid.

[Demogorgon]

THAT'S the problem with RevLeft. We can all get booted to OI for haveing the slightest problem with abortion--but the existance of Communism in practice after the Revolution-- sexual androids and ass wiping robots, group families and work when you want being a folk singer without talent--no problem, the industrious TomK will support you.

I think I have real issues with Communism.

Tom

Yes, there are aspects of this board that are shit, and some people here who are nuts. I was recently thrown out of the CC for saying as much. But we are not all like that, and the Communist movement certainly isn't all like that.

[Bud Struggle]

Yes, there are aspects of this board that are shit, and some people here who are nuts. I was recently thrown out of the CC for saying as much. But we are not all like that, and the Communist movement certainly isn't all like that.

Congradulations on your exit from the CC!

You are now cordially invited to take the next stop and join LSD, and ECU and become a member of OI.

TomK
Director of Marketing for OI

[Demogorgon]

Congradulations on your exit from the CC!

You are now cordially invited to take the next stop and join LSD, and ECU and become a member of OI.

TomK
Director of Marketing for OI



Thanks for the offer, but it wasn't my political views that got me the boot ;)

[Bud Struggle]

Thanks for the offer, but it wasn't my political views that got me the boot ;)

I quite understand, but just remember the door is always open for you--as a matter of fact, we'll even leave the lights on. :)

[Robert]

WTF, demo? If you got the boot for whatever reeason, aren't you an OI'er by default?

And where are your prison bars? You special or something? We're very egalitarian here and don't like people putting on airs, or, as they say in the country:

Don't get above yore raisin'.

[Demogorgon]

WTF, demo? If you got the boot for whatever reeason, aren't you an OI'er by default?

And where are your prison bars? You special or something? We're very egalitarian here and don't like people putting on airs, or, as they say in the country:

Don't get above yore raisin'.

No, no, I am just an ordinary member now. Not quite raised to your plateau yet.

Besides, even if I was restricted, I wouldn't have bars. I have never gotten around to having an avatar.

[Robert]

Hey, you're right ... look at me. Free. Free at last. Great God almighty, I'm free at last!

[Labor Shall Rule]

Malcolm X once said, "if they give you something, they can easily take it away." The Avalon of the welfare state is simple mythology, a moment in false history like King Arthur's court that will not likely be repeated. Even if it could be repeated, it's existence would be as ephemeral and weak as it's earlier incarnation.

As an intelligent and literate person, you should know that in today's era the welfare state is being destroyed and the re-imposition of financial discipline upon the global south is the order of the day. Look beyond your borders - the 'end of welfare as we know it' and structural adjustment programs are wrecking working class communities everywhere - and this is because capitalism could not provide for everyone and maintain it's privilege.

You are only sticking to their game by degrading yourself to reformist politics. The fight for whatever crumbs the workers can get (i.e. through making 'democratic gains') is necessitated in a system where property and the means of production are outside of democratic control. But to mitigate that necessary variation of class struggle as the only 'realistic' tactic behind the strict facade of plurality is profoundly idealistic in itself, and it robs the historic possibility of qualitative leaps to be made with popular movements that pose a direct challenge to capitalist-rule.

[Lost In Translation]

Hey, you're right ... look at me. Free. Free at last. Great God almighty, I'm free at last!
Now if you could only rid yourself of those BOLD letters under your counterrevolutionary tag, you would be free.:D

[Robert]

Understandable point of view, globalcommie, but as TomK shrewdly observed, the only people who can freely express their opinion around here are the OI'ers. Of course, there are certain lines we cannot and don't want to cross, but neither can you.

I'll take my freedom over yours, thanks.

[Dean]

So yeah, I presume I will be restricted now (well, as soon as an admin sees this). Until then I might post in Chit-Chat or something but I will refrain from posting in the more theory-based boards unless I really have something to contribute. Once I am removed from the CC, and after you do whatever you need to do with this thread in here (I'm not sure if you'd need to do anything, like have a poll?) could you please move it to the OI forum, so it can serve as an explanation of my position to others and perhaps so we can spark a discussion or two.

Good luck to you all! Keep up the CC drama! :wub:

I'm sorry to see you kicked from the CC and restricted. I think your goals are still noble, and I am glad to see that you haven't done a 180, but just reevaluated your stances. If I could have done something I would have, but there was no vote: you were automatically kicked and restricted.

[Demogorgon]

Understandable point of view, globalcommie, but as TomK shrewdly observed, the only people who can freely express their opinion around here are the OI'ers. Of course, there are certain lines we cannot and don't want to cross, but neither can you.

I'll take my freedom over yours, thanks.

That is a real problem with this board, but then again, I have been able to say precisely what I want and do it on a daily basis. Granted that habit has a lot to do with my removal from the CC, but all the same I think I prove that most of the Commies here can say what they want, so long as they stray from the "a-word" anyway.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Understandable point of view, globalcommie, but as TomK shrewdly observed, the only people who can freely express their opinion around here are the OI'ers. Of course, there are certain lines we cannot and don't want to cross, but neither can you.

I'll take my freedom over yours, thanks.

Not really - if they are closet racists, I would think that they still can't express themselves... especially if they're closet anti-Semites.

[Robert]

Not really - if they are closet racists, I would think that they still can't express themselves... especially if they're closet anti-Semites.

Clever, Jacob. But neither can a closet racist who is not restricted. So we tie on that point.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Also, OI is just one repetitive forum ad nauseum, while we have multiple fora to talk about current events, undiscovered theories, etc.

[Bilan]

Well, that sucks.

[Bud Struggle]

^^^ Also, OI is just one repetitive forum ad nauseum, while we have multiple fora to talk about current events, undiscovered theories, etc.

I'd take issue there. There's a lot more talk of all kinds here on OI than on the entire rest of RevLeft. You guys get pretty pedantic and repetitive there, also. (e.g. "Stalin: Good or Bad.")

If you wasnt a free and open exchange of ideas, OI is the place.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ "Stalin: Good or Bad" is only an issue in the History forum, thankfully. Where else can we talk about Karadzic, the FARC, the SNP, Chavez, etc. except in Politics? :D

[Robert]

OI is just one repetitive forum ad nauseum, while we have multiple fora to talk about current events, undiscovered theories, etc.

Gee, Jacob, I wonder why you have more fora than we do?

[RedAnarchist]

Gee, Jacob, I wonder why you have more fora than we do?


Well, do you need more than one toilet in the bathroom?

[Robert]

Pretty disrespectful, Red. Not quite a flame, but remember, Big Brother is watching.

Besides, I note that you spend a fair bit of time walking these musty halls. Things getting a little dull in the Great Hall(s), are they?

[RedAnarchist]

Pretty disrespectful, Red. Not quite a flame, but remember, Big Brother is watching.

Besides, I note that you spend a fair bit of time walking these musty halls. Things getting a little dull in the Great Hall(s), are they?

No, its just entertaining to come in here.

[Robert]

From John Davis's The Post-Captain, or, The wooden walls well manned comprehending a view of naval society and manners, 1804:

"[Red] may tell that to the marines, but the sailors will not believe him."

[RedAnarchist]

From John Davis's The Post-Captain, or, The wooden walls well manned comprehending a view of naval society and manners, 1804:
"[Red] may tell that to the marines, but the sailors will not believe him."


I don't understand why you posted that.

[Robert]

Because I started to say "Tell it to the marines," American for "you're not fooling me," but then I remembered you were British, so I chose what I think is the English analog.

That's a long way of saying "I suspect you find OI more lively and interesting than the Great Hall of the People, not just 'more entertaining.' "

p.s. you're still in here.

[Bud Struggle]

No, its just entertaining to come in here.

You have to admit--OI is the must fun forum on RevLeft.

[RedAnarchist]

I'm in the CC, which probably contributes greatly to popcorn sales, and thats far more interesting.

[RedAnarchist]

You have to admit--OI is the must fun forum on RevLeft.

No, thats Chit Chat, which you should really post in mo...oh, I'm sorry, you can't!

[Bud Struggle]

I'm in the CC, which probably contributes greatly to popcorn sales, and thats far more interesting.

You got me there. :thumbup1:

Personally my favorite regular RevLeft Forum is the "Name Change" Forum--that's usually a hoot.

[RedAnarchist]

You got me there. :thumbup1:

Personally my favorite regular RevLeft Forum is the "Name Change" Forum--that's usually a hoot.

Do you mean the Members Forum? The Name Changes thread is in there.

[Robert]

oh, I'm sorry, you can't!This would be:

a. elitism

b. classism

c. bias

d. prejudice

e. censorship

f. croneyism

g. clubbishness

h. all of the above


Red, I'm happy that you're still in here and not hanging with those snooty types.

[RedAnarchist]

This would be:

a. elitism

b. classism

c. bias

d. prejudice

e. censorship

f. croneyism

g. clubbishness

h. all of the above


Red, I'm happy that you're still in here and not hanging with those snooty types.

a. Elitism? Most members of RevLeft are not OI'ers, and most new members don't get restricted.

b.Classism? Against who? I doubt that all the OI'ers are middle class, and I doubt that all non-restricted members are working-class.

c. Bias? This is a revolutionary leftist forum, of course it will be biased against those who don't hold revleftist politics.

d. Prejudice? Noone prejudged you on here, you were restricted because of your views.

e. Censorship? We aren't stopping you from expressing your views, we just have it so that you can only do that in one part of the forum. Is it censorship to keep the CC private?

f. Croneyism? May be partly accurate, but only because its rev leftists versus restricted members.

g. Clubbishness? Is that wong?

I post in most parts of this forum.

[Bud Struggle]

This would be:

h. all of the above


Quite unlike the solidarity and fraternity we have here in the OI, Brother Robert!

[RedAnarchist]

Quite unlike the solidarity and fraternity we have here in the OI, Brother Robert!

Yeah, LSD and ecu are just so close to you, aren't they?

[Robert]

Is it censorship to keep the CC private?No, it's just clubbish. I don't care. It's your club.

Don't worry about me. I'll just sit here, all alone in the cold (*sniff*), looking through the frosty window of the CC lodge as you accept a new member here. Purge one there. Then reinstate another.

Is there a Grand Poobah of the CC? Are you guys afraid of him? Not even a little?

I bet you're not allowed to tell. Like the Masonic Code or something.

I'm jealous.

[Robert]

Yeah, LSD and ecu are just so close to you, aren't they?

Yes.

And so are you, Red.

Brother Tom, I move for Red's admission to the Brotherhood of OI.

Lord knows he's earned it!

[RedAnarchist]

No, it's just clubbish. I don't care. It's your club.

Don't worry about me. I'll just sit here, all alone in the cold (*sniff*), looking through the frosty window of the CC lodge as you accept a new member here. Purge one there. Then reinstate another.

Is there a Grand Poobah of the CC? Are you guys afraid of him? Not even a little?

I bet you're not allowed to tell. Like the Masonic Code or something.

I'm jealous.

Er, no, there isn't. Its just an administrative forum, so you don't need your tinfoil hat on whilst being on RevLeft.

[RedAnarchist]

Yes.

And so are you, Red.

Brother Tom, I move for Red's admission to the Brotherhood of OI.

Lord knows he's earned it!

No thanks.

[Bud Struggle]

No, it's just clubbish. I don't care. It's your club.

Don't worry about me. I'll just sit here, all alone in the cold (*sniff*), looking through the frosty window of the CC lodge as you accept a new member here. Purge one there. Then reinstate another.

Is there a Grand Poobah of the CC? Are you guys afraid of him? Not even a little?

I bet you're not allowed to tell. Like the Masonic Code or something.

I'm jealous.

There's probably secret handshakes and all of that. It's well known that they have to wear their official Communist hats when they post. There's a couple of CCers right now:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/MercutioTomK/274638544_5500957553.jpg

(PM me and I'll tell you who these two Members of the Commie Club are--I rather not say on the open forum.)

The problem though is you just can't TRUST CCer's to be honest--no matter what they say, you don't know if like the the Soviet leaders that quickly became major Capitalists after the fall of the SU--they are true believers or just mouthing words to stay in the CC but will revert to Capitalists when a better offer is presented. ;)

[RedAnarchist]

There's probably secret handshakes and all of that. It's well known that they have to wear their official Communist hats when they post. There's a couple of CCers right now:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/MercutioTomK/274638544_5500957553.jpg

The problem though is you just can't TRUST CCer's to be honest--no matter what they say, you don't know if like the the Soviet leaders that quickly became major Capitalists after the fall of the SU--they are true believers or just mouthing words to stay in the CC but will revert to Capitalists when a better offer is presented. ;)

I've been in the CC since late 2003 (although I was out of for a while a couple of years ago) and theres been noone like that.

[Bud Struggle]

I've been in the CC since late 2003 (although I was out of for a while a couple of years ago) and theres been noone like that.

What the hats, or the trators to Communism? I assure you, both are real. I've been giving good solid Capitalist business advice to Communists here in E-mails and PMs since I arrived. Commie Cluber's included. :)

[RedAnarchist]

What the hats, or the trators to Communism? I assure you, both are real.

No, theres been noone whos decided to leave they thought capitalism was better. LSD and ecu don't think capitalism is better.

[Bud Struggle]

No, theres been noone whos decided to leave they thought capitalism was better. LSD and ecu don't think capitalism is better.

In their REAL lives, not in this place. Everybody's a good Communist on RevLeft--hell, I'm even a member of the Communist Party (USA) around here.

[JimmyJazz]

Ultimately, I still realize that there are great injustices in society today and that the working class are disproportionately afected by these injustices.

:blink:

If it's a helpless social victim you're after, surely the unemployed make a better candidate than the WC. What a weird bastard synthesis of Marxist social groupings and liberal political strategy social democracy is.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

:blink:

If it's a helpless social victim you're after, surely the unemployed make a better candidate than the WC. What a weird bastard synthesis of Marxist social groupings and liberal political strategy social democracy is.
Social democracy has helped more people than you ever will, helpless or otherwise.

[JimmyJazz]

Social democracy has helped more people than you ever will, helpless or otherwise.

You're making more sense now.

Also, no, social democracy has given the first world working classes a ticket to ride on the gravy train of their domestic capitalists, and by doing so has bought their support for an imperialism which holds most of the world in undeveloped, economically dependent squalor.

Your real problem is that you are not an internationalist.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

You're making more sense now.

Also, no, social democracy has given the first world working classes a ticket to ride on the gravy train of their domestic capitalists, and by doing so has bought their support for an imperialism which holds most of the world in undeveloped, economically dependent squalor.

Your real problem is that you are not an internationalist.
I'm probably more internationalist than anyone on this board. I want to see social democracy exported across the globe, by peaceful means of course. I'm not afraid to put my internationalism where my mouth is; I campaigned for a Yes vote to the Lisbon Treaty, which promoted greater international cooperation and further eroded national barriers to progress, while the far-left sided with the nationalists, US imperialists and Christian fundamentalists in opposing it.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Too bad you social-fascist liberals don't put really put that yellow "internationalism" where your mouth is in terms of political globalization, "democratization" of the EU, etc. That's the only way you parliamentarians will get back your precious social-welfarist crap. Even the unions UNITE and UAW have moved beyond you. :lol:


while the far-left sided with the nationalists, US imperialists and Christian fundamentalists in opposing it

You're tailing your yellow union buddies, not leading them.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

^^^ Too bad you social-fascist liberals don't put really put that yellow "internationalism" where your mouth is in terms of political globalization, "democratization" of the EU, etc. That's the only way you parliamentarians will get back your precious social-welfarist crap. Even the unions UNITE and UAW have moved beyond you. :lol:



You're tailing your yellow union buddies, not leading them.
What?

[Led Zeppelin]

Social democracy has helped more people than you ever will, helpless or otherwise.

It has also killed a lot more people than anyone ever will.

About 40.000 people a day.

[Coggeh]

Ya i hate to like be this way but I TOLD YOU SO , i started a thread about this ages ago and people just thought i was joking .

Thinking of joining Fianna fail ?!? were you ever a socialist ? ever ?

[Coggeh]

I'm probably more internationalist than anyone on this board. I want to see social democracy exported across the globe, by peaceful means of course. I'm not afraid to put my internationalism where my mouth is; I campaigned for a Yes vote to the Lisbon Treaty, which promoted greater international cooperation and further eroded national barriers to progress, while the far-left sided with the nationalists, US imperialists and Christian fundamentalists in opposing it.
Lisbon is over , you lost get over it . Im sorry to say Bunbureh but the fact your even contemplating joining FF is fucking sick and nothing short of it .

[Chapter 24]

It has also killed a lot more people than anyone ever will.

About 40.000 people a day.

:confused: I'm sorry, I'm just confused by this number. How did you come across this statistic? I'm jut curious.

[Bud Struggle]

:confused: I'm sorry, I'm just confused by this number. How did you come across this statistic? I'm jut curious.

Oh, Capitalism kills, 35,4938 people a day. Communism kills 44,7894 a day.

Nazism only 347 a day.:thumbup: Best to be a Nazi! ;)

I make up my numbers, just like LZ. Try it--it's fun! :lol:

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Social democracy has helped more people than you ever will, helpless or otherwise.
Yeah, that's true, social democracy helped a lot of people. A long time ago. For the last 28 years or so, however, it's done nothing but defend its past victories while slowly retreating further and further to the right.

What has social democracy achieved recently? Where has social democracy been on the offensive in the last 30 years?


I'm probably more internationalist than anyone on this board. I want to see social democracy exported across the globe, by peaceful means of course. I'm not afraid to put my internationalism where my mouth is; I campaigned for a Yes vote to the Lisbon Treaty, which promoted greater international cooperation and further eroded national barriers to progress, while the far-left sided with the nationalists, US imperialists and Christian fundamentalists in opposing it.
Umm, except that the Lisbon Treaty was neoliberal, not social democratic.

I think the idea of uniting all the countries of Europe in a socialist federation is brilliant. But only as long as we're talking about a socialist federation. The EU as it stands today serves only to destroy national-level welfare states (which is to say, it is slowly destroying precisely the social democracy which you claim to defend).

Internationalism doesn't mean supporting any and all international organizations under the sun.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Basically, the way I see it, the logic of compromising some of your principles in order to get concrete results - which is what social democracy is based on - only makes sense as long as you're actually getting the results.

Since the 1980s, social democracy hasn't been getting any results. I see no reason to expect that it will get any results in the future. So why compromise your principles, if you're not getting anything in return?

[politics student]

I'm probably more internationalist than anyone on this board. I want to see social democracy exported across the globe, by peaceful means of course. I'm not afraid to put my internationalism where my mouth is; I campaigned for a Yes vote to the Lisbon Treaty, which promoted greater international cooperation and further eroded national barriers to progress, while the far-left sided with the nationalists, US imperialists and Christian fundamentalists in opposing it.

It was a shame we lost the Lisbon Treaty. I want the EU to become the new body of revolution so we have the first steps to create a global communist government and safe guard the future for the human race for the short term and work on long term solutions. (colonization of mars)

I can see why the EU is hated so much it is a supranational based on capitalism but I can not see why we can not use it to create a united europe communist state through organized revolutions across the EU.

Saying that it would be a tough task to get the revolutionary parties to talk to each other when we have such a fractured situation in the UK alone.

[politics student]

Basically, the way I see it, the logic of compromising some of your principles in order to get concrete results - which is what social democracy is based on - only makes sense as long as you're actually getting the results.

Since the 1980s, social democracy hasn't been getting any results. I see no reason to expect that it will get any results in the future. So why compromise your principles, if you're not getting anything in return?

The UK never recovered from the raise of neo liberalism from the early 80's which spread to our ex socialist party. :crying:

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Here's an overdue reply to an old post:


But in general I think politics, both in what it does and in what it can do, follows the economy. As I said in my original post, economic concerns can and do limit the potential for social reform. This is reality.
It's not a one-way street. Social reform changes the economy. And need I remind you that the very first social democratic reforms in history were passed during the Great Depression?


Right now there is a global recession and every first world economy, including Ireland's, is feeling the pinch. There is, realistically, not enough money to go around.
Which makes it all the more important that the money shouldn't go mainly to the rich. Social reforms are needed most in times of recession, because that's when workers get poor and unemployed.


The government has a very limited amount of funds available to it, and while it could spend these funds on welfare and nationalization the more prudent thing to do would be to invest in the economy.
Welfare and nationalisation, if done properly, can bring a country out of a recession by increasing consumption and aggregate demand.


Sure, we could start paying higher welfare to the unemployed but if in order to do that we have to tax business out of the country then they're never going to have the chance to improve on that welfare sum because they won't be able to get a job.
Yeah. That's the thing - that's what makes social democracy impossible in this day and age. Not just in a recession, but all the time. If you do anything the capitalists don't like - if you try to pass any social reforms - they will just move to another country.

Capitalists don't have to put up with your social reforms any more. That's why social democracy is dying. Now we can either get rid of the capitalists completely, or surrender to them. There is no middle way left because they are just not interested in compromises any longer.

[Demogorgon]

I think Edric is right here, Social Democracy is pretty much a dead end these days because of the reality of modern society. There are a few places where it holds out of course, and even does rather well after a fashion, but I think it is proving to have been a historical anomaly. The interesting thing about it, is that between the end of the Second World War and the mid seventies, the wealth gap in the West decreased, the only time this has ever happened under capitalism. A lot of capitalist theorists concluded that after causing inequality as it emerged, capitalism would eventually bring about an egalitarian society and essentially thought that they had solved the problem. With the facts available at the time, it was a nice enough theory, I won't deny that, but given that increasing inequality is back with a vengeance (incidentally inequality is extraordinarily harmful, even if the poorest are increasing their absolute level of wealth) we can conclude that the answer does not lie in the Social Democratic policies of the fifties or sixties, however nice they may have seemed. I don't deny that that is a great pity, it gives me no pleasure to say that, what seems like an easy route, will not work. But it is the plain truth.

As for the EU, nobody wants to see nationalism thrown away and Europe and eventually the world united than I do, but the EU is not the way to do it. Hell, even if you support the EU, you should still oppose the Lisbon treaty, it would only have made the EU worse.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Too bad you social-fascist liberals don't put really put that yellow "internationalism" where your mouth is in terms of political globalization, "democratization" of the EU, etc. That's the only way you parliamentarians will get back your precious social-welfarist crap. Even the unions UNITE and UAW have moved beyond you. :lol:


while the far-left sided with the nationalists, US imperialists and Christian fundamentalists in opposing it

You're tailing your yellow union buddies, not leading them.What?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7484639.stm

I don't see any aggressive promotion of union globalization by yellow "social-democratic" soft-fascists like yourself. They're left to do this on their own.

[Pogue]

People move to social democracy because they want to fight for real life gains, rather than just spending hours talking about theory about a vague revolution happening at X point in the future.
I think most are not bothered by revolutionary theory, but by the fact that the 'revolutionary movement', especially in the UK, is small and fractured.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ But more people turn to extremist solutions after seeing the dismal failure of "social democracy." :) You should read my article submissions.

[Pogue]

What are these extremist solutions? Do you mean fascism?

[Die Neue Zeit]

"Anti-capitalist" politics and, yes, far-right politics (I prefer not to use "fascism" as a term except when referring to either the historic, expansionist fascism or the social fascism of yellow messieurs like ever closer union)

[Pogue]

What do you mean by sociaism fascism? Wasn't that just a mindless insult from the USSR to refer to social democrats?

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Considering the "surveillance society" that is the UK, the term "social fascism," while an insult back then, is a VERY accurate position of modern "social democrats." Gun control, surveillance, political correctness, welfarism, etc.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

This is all getting a bit ridiculous. One of the main reasons I abandoned my far-left stance was that I was tired of being tied to one strict ideology or set of beliefs. Yet all your criticisms involve tying me to some set party line or set of policies introduced by a party I am not a member of in a country I don't live in.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ You're just like the lifestyle-ist LSD, then. :)

[Led Zeppelin]

:confused: I'm sorry, I'm just confused by this number. How did you come across this statistic? I'm jut curious.

It was the amount of people who died each day of starvation.

I found the number of 40.000 for the year 1990, but I guess it has improved over the years:


According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAO) of the United Nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations), more than 25,000 people died of starvation every day in 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003)

Well lucky us!


I make up my numbers, just like LZ. Try it--it's fun!

If you weren't ignorant you would have a good point there, too bad that it is not the case.

Now you just made yourself look like a fool, congrats.

Though I guess since you do that so often here it is no longer something you should be congratulated for.

I do think it's funny though how some members are trying to refute the claim that social-democracy helped many people by using the "not anymore" argument...have you people been blind to the rest of the world? Does only Western-Europe and a few other wealthy nations exist to you?

While the people in these imperialist countries were "being helped" the rest of the world was being raped in order to "help them".

Think about that.

[534634634265]

can we somehow merge this thread into my thread on the role of reformists in the revolution?

[Harrycombs]

Oh, Capitalism kills, 35,4938 people a day. Communism kills 44,7894 a day.

Nazism only 347 a day.:thumbup: Best to be a Nazi! ;)

I make up my numbers, just like LZ. Try it--it's fun! :lol:


Around the world, some 26,500 children die every day.
That is equivalent to:


1 child dying every 3 seconds
18 children dying every minute
A 2004 Asian Tsunami occurring every week
An Iraq-scale death toll every 15–36 days
Almost 10 million children dying every year
Some 60 million children dying between 2000 and 2006

The silent killers are poverty, hunger, easily preventable diseases and illnesses, and other related causes.

[RedAnarchist]

Oh, Capitalism kills, 35,4938 people a day. Communism kills 44,7894 a day.

Nazism only 347 a day.:thumbup: Best to be a Nazi! ;)

I make up my numbers, just like LZ. Try it--it's fun! :lol:

Hows that Polish ancestry working out for you?

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

This is all getting a bit ridiculous. One of the main reasons I abandoned my far-left stance was that I was tired of being tied to one strict ideology or set of beliefs. Yet all your criticisms involve tying me to some set party line or set of policies introduced by a party I am not a member of in a country I don't live in.

Um anarchists are usually pretty flexible. Perhaps your choice of far left brand was just a poor one. Go to a WSM meeting.

[Killfacer]

joe has a point, its them bloody commies who make everyone do everything they want and are really unflexable.

[Lector Malibu]

This is all getting a bit ridiculous. One of the main reasons I abandoned my far-left stance was that I was tired of being tied to one strict ideology or set of beliefs. Yet all your criticisms involve tying me to some set party line or set of policies introduced by a party I am not a member of in a country I don't live in.


Well he thing I've found is that if a person was ever seriously left to venture over to the right is not really an option.

I'm not the communist poster child or captain anarchist by any means but seriously after being on this side I know this is where I want to be and belong.

There's no question in my mind that capitalism needs to be destroyed whatsoever.

[Bud Struggle]

Hows that Polish ancestry working out for you?

No complaints. You know, if the Polish decided to have stayed in England--they would have taken over the place.

They are leaving because of the sucky food. :(

[Bud Struggle]

Around the world, some 26,500 children die every day.
That is equivalent to:


1 child dying every 3 seconds
18 children dying every minute
A 2004 Asian Tsunami occurring every week
An Iraq-scale death toll every 15–36 days
Almost 10 million children dying every year
Some 60 million children dying between 2000 and 2006
The silent killers are poverty, hunger, easily preventable diseases and illnesses, and other related causes.

What's China doing? How 'bout Cuba? What about the USSR--what did they ever do? Pol Pot, OUCH on the other side! Same thing in North Korea.

How 'bout that multi-billionaire Communist Mugabe--feeding the people?

Yea, we need a better system--but most of the problem is being caused by idiotic third world factionalism.

[RedAnarchist]

No complaints. You know, if the Polish decided to have stayed in England--they would have taken over the place.

They are leaving because of the sucky food. :(

I was referring to the Nazi thing.

[Bud Struggle]

I was referring to the Nazi thing.

They going Nazi? (Freakin' idiots. Them, that is.)

Let me look that up a bit.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

What's China doing? How 'bout Cuba? What about the USSR--what did they ever do? Pol Pot, OUCH on the other side! Same thing in North Korea.

How 'bout that multi-billionaire Communist Mugabe--feeding the people?

Yea, we need a better system--but most of the problem is being caused by idiotic third world factionalism.

Which is caused by.....Capitalism! Its is a systemic problem of the poor distribution of wealth and an economic system driven by a zero sum economic system.

[Bud Struggle]

Which is caused by.....Capitalism! Its is a systemic problem of the poor distribution of wealth and an economic system driven by a zero sum economic system.

Nope, everybody sucks.

I's not about the system--it's about people not caring.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

Nope, everybody sucks.

I's not about the system--it's about people not caring.


This is pessimistic nonsense. If people didn't care we'd all live as industrial slaves hooked up to feeding tubes and catheters so we could work all our waking hours. Societies change for the better, mostly becuase people care enough to bring about real change.

[Bud Struggle]

This is pessimistic nonsense. If people didn't care we'd all live as industrial slaves hooked up to feeding tubes and catheters so we could work all our waking hours. Societies change for the better, mostly becuase people care enough to bring about real change.

Fine. I'm doing that. Mayby not in lock step with some 19th Century economist--but I DO stuff. And I say here what I do.

So, you ever actually SO anything? Or are you to shy to say. :)

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

Fine. I'm doing that. Mayby not in lock step with some 19th Century economist--but I DO stuff. And I say here what I do.

So, you ever actually SO anything? Or are you to shy to say. :)

In the past 6 months, I've helped over a 1000 people get a 40 percent pay raise, saved the jobs of 20 workers, and helped those workers fight off a corrupt union bureaucracy. I've converted 4 people to anarchism and radicalized another 15-20. I've done your fair share of general agitation and action. I'm also writing a book on moral philosophy and anarchism. Enough political action for ya? I would provide you a list of the past 3 years, but that would take very long.

[Bud Struggle]

In the past 6 months, I've helped over a 1000 people get a 40 percent pay raise, saved the jobs of 20 workers, and helped those workers fight off a corrupt union bureaucracy. I've converted 4 people to anarchism and radicalized another 15-20. I've done your fair share of general agitation and action. I'm also writing a book on moral philosophy and anarchism. Enough political action for ya? I would provide you a list of the past 3 years, but that would take very long.

You want to List all the names of the people you helped.

Otherwise Led Zep won't believe you.

I will, though. I admire the helping people get raises, the radicalizing--not so much--but it seems you do much more good than harm. :)

[Led Zeppelin]

You want to List all the names of the people you helped.

Otherwise Led Zep won't believe you.

Actually I do believe him.

I'm not sure what problem you have with proving your claims? I mean, you mentioned that you own a factory and that you help the socialist/communist cause with the shit you do with it, well, then prove it.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

Tom if you are worried about privacy. PM us the evidence.

[Bud Struggle]

Tom if you are worried about privacy. PM us the evidence.

A little, I guess! Please PM me with all your information--first so I have some insurance that you are telling the truth. Once I have you completely checked out--I'll PM you back. :rolleyes:

You don't have to believe me. I have no problem with that. I also don't believe you are anything more than a couple of out of work high school grads (if that). So maybe I find you or LZ hard to accept as anything more than mom's garage living leftist who can't find a job, well that's fine! I live in my mum's garage, too. Shit all.

You must admit I touched upon a nerve saying you RevLefters are a bunch of phonies. Well not realy--as a repository of Communist ideology and history, it's a first rate site. As a causal agent of the Communist Revolution--I think the New Your Yacht Club is doing a better job. I'd like to see that change a bit.

Good! Now let's see if we can get you (and me) out of mum's garage and see if we really can start a revolution.

It's a start. :)

[JimmyJazz]

I'm probably more internationalist than anyone on this board. I want to see social democracy exported across the globe, by peaceful means of course. I'm not afraid to put my internationalism where my mouth is; I campaigned for a Yes vote to the Lisbon Treaty, which promoted greater international cooperation and further eroded national barriers to progress, while the far-left sided with the nationalists, US imperialists and Christian fundamentalists in opposing it.

I don't know anything about the Lisbon treaty. But your idea that social-democracy can exist in the whole world is faulty unless the whole world can develop in a capitalist direction, which it can't due to current free trade policies. And support for these policies (or rather, tolerance of them) is achieved, in my opinion, primarily by an unrelenting nationalism in our media and from our politicians.

eta: I'm talking about the U.S. in that last bit, I don't know how applicable it may be to your country. I'm sure it is at least somewhat applicable even if it does not rise to quite the same level of constant "We are the greatest country in the world!" bullshit as it does here.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

This is all getting a bit ridiculous. One of the main reasons I abandoned my far-left stance was that I was tired of being tied to one strict ideology or set of beliefs. Yet all your criticisms involve tying me to some set party line or set of policies introduced by a party I am not a member of in a country I don't live in.
Umm, please read my posts at the end of page 7. My criticisms don't tie you to anything, they are simply based on the fact that social democracy doesn't work any more - it hasn't been working for almost 30 years.