It is time to begin seriously discussing revolution. [Archive]

Sacrificed

9th September 2008, 07:34

As I look around this fine board here, I see a plethora of ideas, but no real action. And that's upsetting, because, frankly, the economic conditions today are ripe for a genuine leftist movement to form from below and swell the ground. When news of the recent government subsidization of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae reached me, it occurred to me just how unprepared the lot of you are.

Do you realized what just took place? The United States government took in over six trillion dollars worth of corporate debt - on the taxpayer dole. This, combined with the already staggering amount of national debt owed by the nation, means that our credit-based economy will almost certainly implode within the year under its own weight.

The American people are clamoring for relief from the whims of their corporate masters and the politicians they own, and only the revolutionary left can provide such a relief, by obliterating the class structures innate to the present system which give rise to them. So what do you do? You sit on here and whine about Trotsky shooting some anarchists eighty years ago, or defend Hoxha from Stalinist criticism. But I tell you this: the entire past history of the Soviet Union is now irrelevant to a discussion of the future of communism. I am a member of a generation that grew up without first-hand knowledge of the 'horrors' of the Soviet Union imputed to us by the capitalist media; our generational boogeyman instead is the bearded, unkempt Radical Muslim Terrorist threatening the American Way of Life - or so we're told by our elders.

Moreover, the American people grow more accepting of their situation with every passing day. Hardly a day goes by now that I don't hear a working individual discuss frankly the raw deal he's been given by his social 'superiors', and while he may not fully grasp the intricacies of the nature of capitalism, he has an instinctive feel for its errant practices. You needn't attempt to 'raise consciousness' any longer; it is well understood that the "happy times" won't be "here again" for a very long time. There isn't going to be another New Deal this time.

We are entering the twilight days of capitalism. The world economy has grown to the point that capitalism has fully ceased to be a productive force in the world; no new markets can be developed (how could they, when nations the entire world over have been ruthlessly exploited for their opportunities?) and no new social organizations can be birthed from it. The failure of previous efforts at communism are a result of this: in 1917 capitalism had hardly begun to emerge as the sole world economic arrangement; more than half the globe had yet to see electricity. Lenin was right in the respect that all capitalist societies exhaust their national markets before moving on to undeveloped nations to devour; but what he failed to see, and what is so integral to any form of workable socialism, was the fact that nations must be first developed by capitalism before the proper infrastructure is in place to support the change to a communist economy. Russia didn't have that infrastructure.

But we do.

This present crisis is not merely a 'market correction', but the beginning of a long decline in which communalistic modes of living will be foisted upon the Western world by environmental factors. I will say it again, in less vague terms: ours will be the generation that sees revolution. This is inevitable. I can almost give you the timeframe. It might require a decade, perhaps even two, for economic conditions to worsen to the point that capitalism is discarded even ideologically by the great masses; but I fully expect to be young when that day finally arrives. It began in earnest yesterday, when the petit-bourgeois was forced to confront the reality that its extended line of credit from the banks to the pockets of the large corporations was no longer as steady and sound as they might have imagined it.

This is 1916 - "for real" this time. How do we prepare?

freakazoid

9th September 2008, 07:47

spice756

9th September 2008, 08:13

As I look around this fine board here, I see a plethora of ideas, but no real action. And that's upsetting, because, frankly, the economic conditions today are ripe for a genuine leftist movement to form from below and swell the ground.

First there is lot of young people just learning.And becuse TV,radio and schools are anti-left and pro-conservative.It makes it hard to learn and understand communism and socialism.And the best way to learn is on the internet becuse for the most part it is not censored.But even this will not last long.

They are going to pump a coult neoconservative/fascism personality mass base to support the big corporations.The US will remove more liberty rights and freedom.And censoredship will grow along with a police state.

The US capitalism economy is crumbling.But most people are blind and cannot see the problems in the US.That is the reason for the lack of support there is for communism and socialism.

When news of the recent government subsidization of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae reached me, it occurred to me just how unprepared the lot of you are.

Who is Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae ?

Do you realized what just took place? The United States government took in over six trillion dollars worth of corporate debt - on the taxpayer dole. This, combined with the already staggering amount of national debt owed by the nation, means that our credit-based economy will almost certainly implode within the year under its own weight.

The government is not paying their debt off and this is very bad.They just keep getting more and more in debt .

:(

Sacrificed

9th September 2008, 08:15

I've been trying to make threads to get some talk about it. I believe that we are fast approaching a time where we will need to make a stand. Where this country will go to either an extreme authoritarian/fascist government or a communist/anarchist rout. WE need to be preparing for the coming revolution, and I am afraid that we will only be a small faction in the war. WE need to be making connections. WE need to be helping out in the community to create a positive example, think along the lines of the Black Panthers. WE need to be training for a time when things become less than peaceful. WE need to organize.

I absolutely agree. It is integral to the movement that leftists of all stripes begin to build bonds with their local communities. Are you (and that's a universal 'you') in a position where you can organize a local food drive? Can you liberate clothing from a store and provide them to the destitute of the region? These are the activities we must look towards to help secure a reliable group of core supporters.

Also, it is of the essence to begin thinking tactically. In the event of a revolution, are there any factories in your region that can be seized immediately? What local resistance might a left-wing organization encounter, and how could it effectively be neutralized? Certainly any method of public transportation would need to be taken over. I notice that there is rarely discussion of the precise means by which a revolution could be attained here, but this is probably the most necessary discussion of all.

Now I am not saying that there are not good people here doing that, but there needs to be more of us. Less arguing and sectarianism and more solidarity with our fellow comrades, not saying that a healthy debate is not a good thing but that we need to be able to look past our differences.

The people are starting to slowly wake up to what this country is becoming. Are we ready for it?

:ninja:

Absolutely. It won't be this month, or this year, or perhaps even this decade; but it will come, as surely as the rain. What seems long from an individual perspective is a drop in the historical ocean; we are on the threshold of revolution today. Prepare.

Sacrificed

9th September 2008, 08:22

Who is Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae ?

The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Mac) and the Federal National Mortgage Association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae), the two biggest 'government-sponsored enterprises' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_sponsored_enterprise) (read: government-backed private corporations) which were bailed out yesterday to the tune of six trillion dollars tacked onto the public debt. These were private corporations operating on government money, and - surprise! - they cooked the books. They'd been busted for it in 2003 and fined a paltry hundred million dollars; now they declare insolvency because of their practices and the American taxpayer has picked up the tab. It's an affronting example of government-sponsored class warfare against the American working man, corporate socialism in its most unadulterated form. The federal government is now backing hundreds of thousands of defaulted mortgages and loans which will never be collected.

If any right-wing libertarian ever tells you that it's a good idea for the government to get into the for-profit business, well, this ought to straighten him out right quick.

freakazoid

9th September 2008, 08:38

I absolutely agree. It is integral to the movement that leftists of all stripes begin to build bonds with their local communities. Are you (and that's a universal 'you') in a position where you can organize a local food drive? Can you liberate clothing from a store and provide them to the destitute of the region? These are the activities we must look towards to help secure a reliable group of core supporters.

I think a way to begin doing this is to start working with volunteer groups, don't even have to be leftists just a way to get your foot in the door with working with the community. By doing this you could find potential comrades that could be shown what leftism really is. You would also learn channels on how to distribute things like the food and clothing. There is a thread somewhere about some anarchist group in Germany and also Greece where they raid rich food and distribute it among the poor. I really believe in how the Black Panthers did things is the best model to emulate. Of course it would be nice to know how to even find volunteer groups. :(

Also, it is of the essence to begin thinking tactically. In the event of a revolution, are there any factories in your region that can be seized immediately? What local resistance might a left-wing organization encounter, and how could it effectively be neutralized? Certainly any method of public transportation would need to be taken over. I notice that there is rarely discussion of the precise means by which a revolution could be attained here, but this is probably the most necessary discussion of all.

Definitely need to find out and do reconnaissance work on places like the army, police, national guard, swat, there armories, banks, public transportation, grocery stores, communication places, water, gas, oil, etc, to find out where they are, how they operate, etc. That way when all this info is needed it will already be had. And they can either be raided, taken out, taken over, distributed, etc.

Sacrificed

9th September 2008, 08:50

I think a way to begin doing this is to start working with volunteer groups, don't even have to be leftists just a way to get your foot in the door with working with the community. By doing this you could find potential comrades that could be shown what leftism really is. You would also learn channels on how to distribute things like the food and clothing. There is a thread somewhere about some anarchist group in Germany and also Greece where they raid rich food and distribute it among the poor. I really believe in how the Black Panthers did things is the best model to emulate. Of course it would be nice to know how to even find volunteer groups. :(

Well, you're in Kansas, aren't you? If it ever becomes feasible and you find yourself part of something big, contact me. I live right next to St. Louis opposite the river, so it wouldn't be difficult to co-ordinate activities.

Also, I recommend just talking to people and keeping your finger on the proverbial pulse of the nation. You'd be shocked how freely I talk about class warfare and economic inequality today, and how many people readily agree with me. I found myself floored one day when an acquaintance of mine, not especially bright but well-intentioned, openly suggested armed revolution against what he termed 'the big companies'. I think a lot of communists and anarchists try to make it seem harder than it actually is to gain allies in the common man; of course you'd have to target your conversations to people who would seem receptive, but there are a lot of receptive people in these times.

Definitely need to find out and do reconnaissance work on places like the army, police, national guard, swat, there armories, banks, public transportation, grocery stores, communication places, water, gas, oil, etc, to find out where they are, how they operate, etc. That way when all this info is needed it will already be had. And they can either be raided, taken out, taken over, distributed, etc.

Absolutely. Don't do anything blatantly illegal without immediate gain - for instance, breaking into an armory for nothing more than to get a sense of its floor-plan, as a group of Chicago communists did a decade or so ago - but keeping in mind the layout of your geographical location and the personalities and organizations involved would go a long way towards aiding the cause. It also doesn't hurt to keep a legal weapon and ammunition handy; don't bring it to a protest, but don't shirk away owning it because some liberal-bourgeois politician subscribes to the notion that the lower classes are always safer unarmed.

As an an aside, it's probably counter-productive to describe yourself as a communist/anarchist right off the bat. I understand that communists 'make no secret' of their viewpoints, but the very term is negatively-laden. I prefer the term 'collectivist', which is as good as gold in certain quarters that might balk at my other self-description.

Robert

9th September 2008, 14:47

Sacrificed, your concerns are well founded, and I agree with some of what you say. But ...

Let's discuss this part first:

Do you realized what just took place? The United States government took in over six trillion dollars worth of corporate debt - on the taxpayer dole. This, combined with the already staggering amount of national debt owed by the nation, means that our credit-based economy will almost certainly implode within the year under its own weight.Serious as "what just took place" arguably is, I think you are overstating parts and understating others. The Treasury Department's takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac does not mean that taxpayers now have to cough up 6 trillion dollars. (A good thing, as you will answer, because we ain't got it.)

This 6 trillion is owed in the first instance, as you know, by John Average Homeowner. He owed it first to his local FDIC insured bank, and he now owes it to whomever bought the loan from John's bank, typically Fannie and Freddie, and now, indirectly, to those who bought an interest in mortgage backed securities issued by Freddie/Fannie. Those buyers are scattered all over the place, including China. Your black scenario (I don't deny that it's at best light grey) assumes that John will default on his loan and that fecal material will it the fan all the way up and down the line. Well, he may and he may not default. But the odds of him defaulting on an existing loan have not been made greater as a sole result of the takeover itself.

In a nutshell, then, it appears that what the Treasury Dept. has done is to have assumed credits, not debts.

As for those who do default, the ones left holding the bag will mostly be private individuals and investment funds who bought the paper, plus Freddie's and Fannie's stockholders, not the taxpayers. True, the Treasury Dept.'s current plan is to inject maybe 200-300 billion into Freddie/Fannie to keep liquidity in the banking system for administration of the corporations (Freddie/Fannie) and advances of new credits to banks for new, and hopefully more prudent, home loans. This will be public money, yes, but it's not an "assumption of 6 trillion in debt" as I think you are stating.

What I think one needs to factor in too is the cash-rich Chinese. They in my opinion are not going to stand by and watch the USA slide into anarchy for want of a few billion in cash. They're not our friends, but they need our, technology, soybean oil, machine tools, scrap metal, etc. far too much. They also need lots of solvent American Walmart customers to buy all their Christmas wreaths, spatulas, and screwdrivers. For the time being anyway.

We've been here before: the S&L crisis of the 80's and 90's cost taxpayers around $125 billion.

Sentinel

9th September 2008, 16:44

It's not that people aren't 'discussing revolution seriously', or that people aren't active, neither could you see how active people are from browsing RevLeft or some other internet forum.. There are several problems the radical left is facing, but lack of activity amongst those with revolutionary politics isn't the problem -- it's the power of the opposition. If there is inactivity, it's entirely due to this.

There is the weakening of worker's power on the labour market as it has been compromised away by corrupt social-democratic union officials. For instance here in Sweden the social democrats surrendered effective strike rights, in favor of collective agreements more binding than beneficial for the workers, already a hundred years ago.

We have the admittedly smart welfare state politics by the bourgeoisie and their lapdogs nominally belonging to the worker's movement. By granting the workers in the 'west' their basic needs to not starve or freeze and a limited amount of consumer goodies to play with while teaching from kindergarten that this is 'as good as it gets' and that all efforts to get any actual influence over our lives are futile and doomed to fail, the proletariat has been effectively rendered passive.

We have the powerful information-age media run by corporate interests trumpeting this message from every instance 24/7. Independent medias have so far failed to bring out the truth from the worker's perspective nearly as effectively.

However, 'hope is not lost', and I vehemently agree that change will come soon -- capitalism is not the 'end of history' it's advocates triumphantly like to claim. The change will start on many fronts and in many ways, although the road will be rocky and not easy in any way.

Technological progress with the automation of first industries and eventually also services is bound to create 'bread and circus' - society in the west, as the huge mass of workers will no longer be needed by the profiteers. Simultaneously class gaps will grow and climbing to the next class or 'making your fortune' will become harder or impossible, as economical power is centralised in the hand of corporation giants.

This will inevitably lead to a sense of alienation and more people asking themselves the question why the automatic industries and all the marvelous technologies The labour remains which is already, and will increasingly, be outsourced into the Third world, which will continue to be exploited due to this, and due to resources. Now, we already see powerful and ever growing resistance to this development in the Third world -- there is a strong left wing wave in South America, and the population of the Middle east is opposing capitalist efforts of controlling the resources there.

The forces of the imperialists are being stretched to their limits. While the US govt tries to gain power over middle east oil, their own 'backyard' South america is slipping from their hands.

Now, these developments will not lead to communism in the third world at least not in the near future, as the material conditions for that simply are lacking. In some countries the anti-imperialist revolutions and resistance movements will lead to development and betterment of living conditions, but in many others more likely not, as regressive nationalistic values and/or religious fundamentalism are dominant.

But what they will lead to is the failure of imperialism and global capitalism, as it can't survive without exploiting the peoples of these countries. This on the other hand is bound to lead to the ultimate crashing down of the welfare states and the increased poverty and thus radicalisation of the first world proletariat.

This will lead to a revolution in countries with the material requirements needed for communism.

I would say that this situation isn't far away at all. It won't be there one morning when we wake up though, but has rather already started to happen in a gradual fashion.

It is thus now the duty of progressives to keep telling the truth for the workers and keep organising them to guard their interests. Through class struggle, direct confrontation with the class enemy by direct-democratic organisations, they will not only learn to see that their interests are the same as those of their class as a whole, but also learn the fundamentals of self-organisation in a democratic fashion.

It is this worker's organisation and self-management which will lay the fundaments of the new society, which will be the pinnacle of human development so far.

Forward Union

9th September 2008, 17:38

As I look around this fine board here, I see a plethora of ideas, but no real action

That's because it's a forum, and "action" cannot happen on a forum, it can only happen in real life. Which it is, myself and many many other comrades on this board are incredibly active. You obviously have little or no connection to the aformentioned, vast array of activities that are happening, because you seem to be oblivious to the existance of such activities.

This is upsetting. I suggest you get active, and stop moaning about an internet forum.

Forward Union

9th September 2008, 17:39

I've been trying to make threads to get some talk about it. I believe that we are fast approaching a time where we will need to make a stand.

And so you're response to this imminent crisis is to "try to make threads"?

Join your union or residents association.

Dust Bunnies

9th September 2008, 19:38

The oppertune time is coming up, but we need to make up for a lot of lost time.

The masses think Communism is some evil system that eats babies. When the workers want "salvation" they just turn to those lying Capitalists with politician suits on. Barack Obama probably won't do much to help the worker. It will be difficult to rise up and fight, and if the government gets a wiff of our power they will have McCarthy 2: The Reds Strike back ;)

If the living condition continues to go down and the wars continues to drain our manpower and over extend us, that is 1917, we just need a strong base and an information machine to pump out info to the people. Didn't the Russians have themself overextended when Lenin attacked? It is the perfect way, and after we get some land and a HQ, if possible our next target should be air landing and docks, so that they can't ship the troops home. I plan on writing a story, set in 2012, where America lives in a Fascist America run by President George W. Bush. :D

Bud Struggle

9th September 2008, 20:46

I plan on writing a story, set in 2012, where America lives in a Fascist America run by President George W. Bush. :D

That would be the most serious thing on this thread (apart from Robert's excellent summary of the Treasury Department's takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.) :)

Sacrificed

9th September 2008, 22:36

Serious as "what just took place" arguably is, I think you are overstating parts and understating others. The Treasury Department's takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac does not mean that taxpayers now have to cough up 6 trillion dollars. (A good thing, as you will answer, because we ain't got it.)

It does indeed. The current plan under the so-called 'conservatorship' is to pay the debt to the tune of ten billion dollars a month for an indeterminate period of time. The taxpayer won't cough it up at once; instead he'll spit it out in pieces - you know, like bronchitis.

This 6 trillion is owed in the first instance, as you know, by John Average Homeowner. He owed it first to his local FDIC insured bank, and he now owes it to whomever bought the loan from John's bank, typically Fannie and Freddie, and now, indirectly, to those who bought an interest in mortgage backed securities issued by Freddie/Fannie. Those buyers are scattered all over the place, including China. Your black scenario (I don't deny that it's at best light grey) assumes that John will default on his loan and that fecal material will it the fan all the way up and down the line. Well, he may and he may not default. But the odds of him defaulting on an existing loan have not been made greater as a sole result of the takeover itself.That's not the problem. As you are aware, the FDIC guarantees all bank deposits up to a hundred thousand dollars. It is currently operating at close to its maximum legal capacity in a monetary sense; this year's spending bill only allotted to it three trillion dollars. Now, in addition to backing up virtually every bank account in the United States, it must also guarantee all of those bad home loans that the capitalists used like poker chips in a card game.

What happens if even a tenth of all those bad loans are defaulted on? The FDIC runs out of money. There's your problem, in black and white: the 'middle class' will quickly rejoin the ranks of the proletariat once its savings are no longer backed up with anything. Do you know what a 'bank run' is? Expect a lot more of them in the near future.

Incidentally, the Savings and Loan scandal wasn't nearly as dire as this situation, because that only effected a single bank, and vastly smaller sums of money were involved even adjusting for inflation. This time, any bank that invested in these mortgages are wide open and vulnerable.

But you don't have to take my (dirty, filthy, Commie) word for it. Here's (http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/573-Fraudie-and-Phoney-The-Aftermath.html) one of your kind to tell you the exact same thing.

Forward Union

9th September 2008, 22:36

This is 1916 - "for real" this time. How do we prepare?

opps

Ken

9th September 2008, 22:37

McCarthy 2: The Reds Strike back

:lol:

i am interested in seeing the opinions of the masses surveyed. i would do this myself but i happen to be super lazy.

you have to understand that a lot of people just arent interested in left politics and are just going about their daily lives oblivious to any 'revolution' that may be coming. unless ive missed (http://www.myspace.com/revleft)my guess, for every one commie there are fifty more capos.

i think you can divide the non-leftist population into these groups.

1. young people oblivious to leftism. mostly teenagers and adolescents under 20. growing up and experiencing socialization after the cold war, communism isnt a word in their lexicon. they might encounter it in history class learning about the vietnam war 50+ years ago. or they might learn about WWI(focusing more on the western fronts, the bolsheviks are breifly skipped through). 1917 was a century ago and of course, the idea of communism in the west is laughable.

2. the working class and the middle class(grouping together all working families). communism doesnt exist, is evil, or again, the idea of it here is laughable. mommy and daddy might have a commie son, but they know it is just a phase.

3. politicians, employers, high wage earners, some beaurocrats, and the immoderately rich. all know about the right and the left, and work to enforce the status quo. these are the people in power who destroy rainforests, make subvertive bubblegum music, oversee the production of biased newspapers etc, and are generally bad and evil. this is the minority. imo a lot of these especially the ones at the very top, should be killed. because they are only useful dead.

of course all this is very subjective. but all of the above posts have been as well. any thoughts are welcome.

freakazoid

9th September 2008, 22:52

You obviously have little or no connection to the aformentioned, vast array of activities that are happening, because you seem to be oblivious to the existance of such activities.

So why don't you list different things?

And so you're response to this imminent crisis is to "try to make threads"?

Is your solution to not talk about it? By making different threads it allows for discussion of ideas. I also had laid out ways to build community support, so my response isn't to just make different threads to get a discussion going.

Join your union or residents association.

Don't have a union, and I don't even know what that second thing is.

Forward Union

9th September 2008, 23:30

So why don't you list different things?

Because you should be getting involved in things local and relevent to you, your community, and your workplace. And I dont know anything about you and dont feel qualified to suggest things.

I could do if you told me more about where you live, but I dont have the time or will to go profile hunting.

Is your solution to not talk about it? By making different threads it allows for discussion of ideas. I also had laid out ways to build community support, so my response isn't to just make different threads to get a discussion going.

I want to discuss these things in my workplace, with my colleagues, in union meetings etc. Not on a tiny theoretical discussion board.

Don't have a union, and I don't even know what that second thing is.

Why don't you have a union? where do you work?

Zurdito

10th September 2008, 01:02

What I think one needs to factor in too is the cash-rich Chinese. They in my opinion are not going to stand by and watch the USA slide into anarchy for want of a few billion in cash. They're not our friends, but they need our, technology, soybean oil, machine tools, scrap metal, etc. far too much. They also need lots of solvent American Walmart customers to buy all their Christmas wreaths, spatulas, and screwdrivers. For the time being anyway.

This sounds a bit like the "decoupling" theory that China can continue to be the motor of the world economy independent of the US (I am not saying you necessarilly believe this). Two points: firstly, the Chinese are cash-rich primarily because the US consumer buys their goods, and secondly, the Chinese central bank over the last decade bought at least $1 trillion worth of US treasury bonds. So an economic collapse in the US would not spare China. Or India, Brazil or Russia.

Now I am not saying I think the US will slide into anarchy any time soon, the state will carry out a lot more nationalisations, controlled devalutation, expropriation of means of production etc., before the US gets anywhere near to "anarchy". But I do think there's a high possibility of a serious crisis and that China doesn't present any sort of relief from this. It is not just dependent on US (or German) technology, but on their economic growth and the strength of their currencies. "Cash-rich" is worth little if the cash is based on debts from people who can't afford to pay it, is denominated in a falling currency, and is backed by the profitibality of industries which have no market.

Robert

10th September 2008, 01:36

Sacrificed, I'll try once more to explain this and assuage your concern, if that's what it is (?). I really can't tell if you're worrying or gloating!

First, the only loans involved here are those which, necessarily, by definition, have already been sold by the bank to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and to the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae). They are privately owned companies, not government agencies. They issue stock. The main point here is that the original bank on a loan headed south already has its money and is out of the picture.

Second, you are apparently still confusing assets with liabilities. I know you know the difference and am not being insulting. But your confusion is causing you to assume that the government is going to be paying the current holders of the commercial paper. They aren't. Nor are they going ot be redeeming any stock. Securities issued by Fannie and Freddie, (securities now owned by investors from London to Singapore to Qatar) unlike deposits in your local FDIC insured bank, are not guaranteed by, and are not debts or obligations of, the United States. It's true that there is a small number (less than a 20, I think) who have bought now worthless stock in these private corporations, but that's a relatively minor and completely different problem.

Third, you must be referring to a different scandal than I when you say the Savings and Loan scandal only effected a single bank. The S&L crisis of the 80's and 90's resulted in over a thousand banks and at least 700 savings and loan closures. What is this single bank you are referring to?

Do I know what a bank run is? Please.

Zurdito, I agree with every word of your post. I hope that doesn't get you banned. :)

Sacrificed

10th September 2008, 02:05

Sacrificed, I'll try once more to explain this and assuage your concern, if that's what it is (?). I really can't tell if you're worrying or gloating!

I'm gloating.

First, the only loans involved here are those which, necessarily, by definition, have already been sold by the bank to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and to the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae). They are privately owned companies, not government agencies. They issue stock. The main point here is that the original bank on a loan headed south already has its money and is out of the picture.

That's exactly my point. The enormous number of bad loans sold off to the FHLMC and FNMA have now been ensured by the United States government through the FDIC. The FDIC, effective yesterday, has assumed responsibility for the six trillion dollars of debt accumulated by those GSEs. They weren't before, which meant that if those organizations took a hit on the market it wouldn't adversely effect the Treasury. Now that these losses have been socialized, however, and the FDIC has insured the rest of the mortgages, any future foreclosures, seizures, bankruptcies, etc. pertaining to these liabilities will negatively impact the public treasure itself.

Second, you are apparently still confusing assets with liabilities. I know you know the difference and am not being insulting. But your confusion is causing you to assume that the government is going to be paying the current holders of the commercial paper. They aren't. Nor are they going ot be redeeming any stock. Securities issued by Fannie and Freddie, (securities now owned by investors from London to Singapore to Qatar) unlike deposits in your local FDIC insured bank, are not guaranteed by, and are not debts or obligations of, the United States. It's true that there is a small number (less than a 20, I think) who have bought now worthless stock in these private corporations, but that's a relatively minor and completely different problem.

I hold in my hands a a prospectus from the FHLMC dated June 8th of this year. Towards the bottom of the fifth page, in tiny blackhead letters, it reads: "(I)n the event of insolvency, the federal government of the United States of America shall assume responsibility for any losses incurred by this corporation and possessorship of any remaining assets, including (but not limited to) futures, commodities, mortgages and loans, productive bonds, and all the subsidiaries thereof."

Now, unless I happened to have flunked out of my Economics class, and I didn't, this means that the Fed is presently backing all of the debt incurred by Freddie Mac (and, I presume, Fannie Mae as well). And this debt, being mostly mortgages and loans, is not likely going to be stable.

Third, you must be referring to a different scandal than I when you say the Savings and Loan scandal only effected a single bank. The S&L crisis of the 80's and 90's resulted in over a thousand banks and at least 700 savings and loan closures. What is this single bank you are referring to?I phrased that incorrectly: the S&Ls which were hit during that particular crisis had all invested in securities, which at the time were the 'next big thing' on the market, like 'no-risk investments' are today. When a few of the bigger banks began finding that the securities market had dried up, they began to bail, taking down the S&Ls with them.

Again, this, in itself, isn't going to cause the Second Great Depression. But it's certainly indicative that one is coming out way. As is probably clear, I'm by no means an expert in this field, but I have enough of a grasp on it to recognize when something bad has happened. Karl Derringer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCvWWqTtSDQ) is an expert, however, and he seems to have confirmed my initial instinct.

pusher robot

10th September 2008, 03:08

The FDIC, effective yesterday, has assumed responsibility for the six trillion dollars of debt accumulated by those GSEs.

It's NOT six trillions of debt. How are you not understanding this? They hold the mortgages. A mortgage is, for the lender, a credit, not a debt. The U.S. now is owed money by all those people who took out those mortgages. And most, roughly 90%, are perfectly good. They will be paid. The 10% or so subprime - which, I'm not shy to point out, were made at the behest of socialist do-gooders - will have a good number of defaults, and that will cost a number of billions. But it's a only a calamity, not a catastrophe.

freakazoid

10th September 2008, 03:31

Because you should be getting involved in things local and relevent to you, your community, and your workplace.

Not a whole lot going on there, I'm the only leftist that I know of.

I want to discuss these things in my workplace, with my colleagues, in union meetings etc. Not on a tiny theoretical discussion board.

We need to be discussing things here too. Why else are you on this board?

Why don't you have a union? where do you work?

I work at a grocery store, there is no union here.

Robert

10th September 2008, 03:52

I'm gloating.

Okay.

The enormous number of bad loans sold off to the FHLMC and FNMA have now been ensured by the United States government through the FDIC. The FDIC, effective yesterday, has assumed responsibility for the six trillion dollars of debt accumulated by those GSEs.

No. Now you are confusing the FDIC's recent closure of IndyMac and about 10 other banks with the Treasury Dept.'s conservatorship of Freddie and Fannie. They have commonalities, but they are not the same thing. The FDIC is not guaranteeing that $6 trillion be paid to anybody, as Pusher notes. In fact, the FDIC has nothing to do with Freddie or the new conservatorship. The only thing the FDIC insures is the deposits of these few failed banks -- not Freddie's stockholders or the repayments of the subprime loans -- and about 17 other banks that are on watch lists. If the banks fail because loans aren't paid, FDIC pays a max of $100k to each depositor. It's a lot of money, sure, but it's not 6 trillion, most of which will be repaid, and much of what is not repaid will be recouped through foreclosure sales on the properties underlying the loans.

I hold in my hands a a prospectus from the FHLMC dated June 8th of this year. Towards the bottom of the fifth page, in tiny blackhead letters, it reads: "(I)n the event of insolvency, the federal government of the United States of America shall assume responsibility for any losses incurred by this corporation and possessorship of any remaining assets

Dated June 8? My friend, please be reasonable: the Treasury's decision to place Freddie and Fannie in conservatorship, the subject of this your own thread, didn't even occur until the 7th of this month! Even if you're right about what that document says (I think you are looking at a bogus document; where did you get it?), it is wrong.

Now, unless I happened to have flunked out of my Economics class, and I didn't, this means that the Fed is presently backing all of the debt incurred by Freddie Mac (and, I presume, Fannie Mae as well).

I'm glad you did well in economics. Be that is it may, Freddie didn't "incur debt." It acquired assets.

Now please tell me where you got that "prospectus." I'd like to see it.

Zurdito

10th September 2008, 04:25

Zurdito, I agree with every word of your post. I hope that doesn't get you banned. :)

nah it probably just makes you a closet trotskyist. :p

RGacky3

11th September 2008, 00:00

When people think of revolution a lot of people think of thousands of workers and peasants overunning government buildings, taking over factories, dismanteling the state and so on. Thats not the revolution, thats the end, or the culmination of hundreds of revolutions. The Spanish revolution was not one revolution but many little revolutions that came together. The Russian revolution was also many little revolutions comming together (unfortunately all the little revolutions were centralized by force into being subordinate to the Bolsheviks).

When you think of revolution you should be thinking small, your workplace, your neighborhood, keeping things that are public, public, supporting good causes (rights for immigrants is a big one), supporting organizations that do good, helping others in their struggle with the Capitalist, THATS what revolution is about, class struggle, and class struggle starts at your workplace and neighborhood.

That being said, its much easier said than done, and seriously I don't blame people who arn't as active as they could be (I'm not as active as I could be), considering its hard enough staying afloat in this system, much less having the time and resources to try and fight it.

danyboy27

11th September 2008, 00:34

i am advocating free source software, helping peoples to make linux work on their pc.
am i active for that?

IcarusAngel

11th September 2008, 04:23

Advocating open-source software is lifestylism.

Besides, open-source software has already been claimed by libertarian-capitalists and the business community.

freakazoid

11th September 2008, 08:23

So what you are saying is that we should not use open-source software and should support people like Bill Gates? And since when do businesses use Linux?

Plagueround

11th September 2008, 09:10

So what you are saying is that we should not use open-source software and should support people like Bill Gates? And since when do businesses use Linux?

The entire back end of most businesses is built on linux/unix (as is most of the internet). Even Microsoft uses some linux in their back end servers, they just don't want you to know that. Using open source software isn't a bad idea at all, but it doesn't really "combat capitalism" either. I don't know if dismissing it as lifestylism is even applicable, unless of course you're responding to the ever skeptical and almost snide comments of spetnaz21.

IcarusAngel

11th September 2008, 09:19

First of all, even the term "open-source" software is a term derived to SUPPORT the business community, because they didn't like the concept of "free" in "free-software" (I don't know what "free-source software" even means).

That should tip you off as to what the Linux community is becoming; Linus Torvalds himself is staunchly "apolitical."

The remark was kind of satire against people who claim everything is lifestylism, but yes, using open-source software to "oppose" capitalism is really a form of lifestylism as it doesn't really help it and may hurt struggling programmers.

It's not going to change the "system" at all.

The amount of time it takes for the average person to make the switch to Linux could be better spent by learning politics.

Study the history of Unix, too. Try maybe the "Unix haters handbook," and see all the corporate shenanigans that went on into developing it.

Unix is not the OS of the revolutionary movement imo, and its "worse is better" philosophy is asinine.

I'm actually a linux buff myself, but it's just an OS, not a religion. Some fanatics in the community probably keep it from being as popular as it could e.

danyboy27

11th September 2008, 11:36

i dont care i am gonna give people kwnoledge and free linux cd to my buddies anyway.

if there is 1 thing i learned on revleft, is that often when the community say something is bad, its actually good, ill stick to the plan!

freakazoid

11th September 2008, 18:17

Even Microsoft uses some linux in their back end servers, they just don't want you to know that.

That's because they steal things for there stuff.

Using open source software isn't a bad idea at all, but it doesn't really "combat capitalism" either.

While it may not combat capitalism directly, it dosn't help it nor hurt us. Plus if done correctly it could start to cause some people to think about how capitalism is and that there is an alternative to it. It's better than nothing. You should do what you are good at.

Tungsten

11th September 2008, 19:57

As I look around this fine board here, I see a plethora of ideas, but no real action. And that's upsetting, because, frankly, the economic conditions today are ripe for a genuine leftist movement to form from below and swell the ground. When news of the recent government subsidization of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae reached me, it occurred to me just how unprepared the lot of you are.

Do you realized what just took place? The United States government took in over six trillion dollars worth of corporate debt - on the taxpayer dole. This, combined with the already staggering amount of national debt owed by the nation, means that our credit-based economy will almost certainly implode within the year under its own weight.

Criticising nationalisation? This sounds a bit odd coming from a left-winger.

This news is old hat anyway and 6 trillion is nothing: By 2040, the US will be 50 trillion in debt. This has been know since the days of Ross Perot- but nobody listened to him. Nobody listened to Ron Paul either, who gave the same warning.

A large amount of the debt is foreign, so revolution won't make it go away, either.

I am a member of a generation that grew up without first-hand knowledge of the 'horrors' of the Soviet Union imputed to us by the capitalist media;
And that presumably makes them a myth.

We are entering the twilight days of capitalism. The world economy has grown to the point that capitalism has fully ceased to be a productive force in the world;
Fiscal irresponsibility can be no more blamed on capitalism than can AIDS.

Russia didn't have that infrastructure.

But we do.
For how much longer?

This present crisis is not merely a 'market correction', but the beginning of a long decline in which communalistic modes of living will be foisted upon the Western world by environmental factors. I will say it again, in less vague terms: ours will be the generation that sees revolution. This is inevitable. I can almost give you the timeframe. It might require a decade, perhaps even two, for economic conditions to worsen to the point that capitalism is discarded even ideologically by the great masses; but I fully expect to be young when that day finally arrives.

There is also another possible, but unlikely outcome: People realise that what's bankrupting them is the state and it's institutions, it's quangos, it's welfare recipients (rich or poor, it makes no difference) and it's hangers on. The people decide to get rid of these programs. The end.

-------------

The US capitalism economy is crumbling.But most people are blind and cannot see the problems in the US.That is the reason for the lack of support there is for communism and socialism.

Capitalism economy? Not quite. I don't think you understand the nature of this problem. Debt is caused by spending more money than you have. You know what's forming the bulk of that debt, don't you? Medicare and Social Security payments (even the multi billion dollar war on terror only accounts for a small percentage of the total). Now you have someone running for president who wants universal healthcare too.

Over to you...

Also, it is of the essence to begin thinking tactically. In the event of a revolution, are there any factories in your region that can be seized immediately? What local resistance might a left-wing organization encounter, and how could it effectively be neutralized?

Yeah, seizing factories is really going to solve the national debt. I'm sure multinationals will be coming far and wide to invest in a country where their plants and assets will be seized.

If any right-wing libertarian ever tells you that it's a good idea for the government to get into the for-profit business, well, this ought to straighten him out right quick.

Well, it ought to. It's not a right wing libertarian idea.