Communities should open their own medical facilities and take care of basic allignments themself, survival pending revolution.
Results 41 to 60 of 111
The "bottom line" (so to speak) is that if you want a socialist medical system DON'T rely on a bunch of capitalist flunkeys to implement it! If they did implement it the way we want, we wouldn't be seen as so radical! This is what this dysfunctional US capitalist politics can produce. Call it the piece of shit that it is but hope it will do some working people some good. And keep the revolutionary ideas coming so that some time soon we won't have to beggar capitalist politicians for a small modicum of justice. We can only expect true socialism from true socialists.
Last edited by h9socialist; 22nd March 2010 at 14:29. Reason: Typo
¡Patria o muerte!
Communities should open their own medical facilities and take care of basic allignments themself, survival pending revolution.
That is what I'm angry about too. This reform was more of an attempt to sustain the private insurance industry. It's a lost opportunity.
The unions should realize by now the Democrats aren't serving their interests. But I'm afraid that their members might just go and vote Republican rather than come back to where working men truely have power...
Good luck finding doctors who won't settle for making under $100,000. This is one of the reasons why we actually have a shortage of doctors in the country. Almost everyone doctor that comes out of medical school wants to go to an urban hospital, preferably a suburban one, where they are guaranteed to make a smooth six figure salary. Few of them go out into rural areas because there is not that guarantee they'll be rolling in the big bucks.
A public option would have at least guaranteed a doctor get a decent salary in rural areas and help deliver services there, but the aura of "PRIVATE COMPANIES ARE EFFICIENT AND PROVIDE COMPETITION FOR LOWER PRICES" sales pitch won out again...
force them to at gunpoint
Look I'm mad that Congress won't take up a REAL public takeover of healthcare, like in Great Britain. The "public option" was a way of throwing the liberals a bone. I would have liked to have seen it too -- but it's only one loss in many. The only way we'll get medical socialism is through a socialist revolution of some sort. In the meantime, take some heart in watching an asshole like that idiot Boehner make a complete fool of himself on national TV. When conservatives sound so desperate, it at least is an indicator to me that something is going well. But, like I say, the inadequacy of this bill illustrates the need for radical change on the most fundamental level I US government.
¡Patria o muerte!
It's pretty much as restricted user RGacky3 says: if you want far-reaching social-democratic reform nowadays (in health care as with other things), you gotta threaten the bourgeois with revolution. And in several respects, I think he's right. The dynamics of power are such that the only thing that could at the very least put the U.S. in line with the rest of the "developed" world is a mass, organized movement of workers (and their allies) the likes of which has not been seen since the 30's.
Of course, I'm only talking about the threat of revolution here, not the actual waging of revolution. Obviously we'd like to go further still. But I think a decent case could be made for the attainment of meaningful social-democratic reform through mass mobilization as laying the groundwork for further victories and organizing experience and ever-increasing militancy that would eventually culminate into actual revolution.
YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS
Again, we are never, ever going to get socialized medicine with class consciousness this low in the country. We need to organize and spread propaganda, first among petty bourgeoisie intellectuals- particularly young ones (since those are more open minded) and then among the workers when we have sufficient numbers. We begin with the petty bourgeoisie because they have the resources and time to learn the evidence for Marxism.
We must craft our propaganda efforts based on long-term neuroscientific principles: http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/...=5&fldAuto=125
And until then, we must acknowledge that we are very much on the defensive and need to keep the means of organizing and campaigning open. We need to keep liberal-political freedoms as open as possible so we can organize.
The Democrats will not curtail our freedoms as wholesale as the Republicans. The Christian Right wishes to completely negate all free speech and assembly and outlaw leftist political thought. The Corporatists will do the same de facto if they are able to end Net Neutrality.
For this reason the Health Care Reformist Bill must be promoted as a tool by which to put the GOP down. While doing this, you should point to its flaws, and educate people about socialized medicine and Marxism. You can also note how Workers States like China and Cuba have extremely progressive health care systems despite having minuscule GDP per capita.
So there's STILL no public option?
Well fuck, I guess my mum got all hyped up about the bill for nothing.
'i would punch u in the jawside so hard it would lean more left than the ICC' - bailey_187 to AK
"Now the states in the business of casually arresting successful protest groups at the end of fully automatics we really are going to have to be very clever about how we go about things if the far left movement grows. ("First they came for the half witted tossers")"
- Comrade Joe on the arrest of EDL members
After thinking over the situation, I consider this result to hurt all parties involved. The passage will give a short-term defeat to the Teabaggers (whose rhetoric has turned downright fascistic over the past few weeks) and the Republicans. Moreover, I think the right-wing of the Republicans are fast isolating themselves from the rest of the political spectrum, while gaining more clout in the Republican party. This should reduce the appeal of the Republicans in the eyes of many.
At the same time, Obama and the Democrats are in danger of exposing their hand, as this "reform" makes things worse for workers in many ways (mandating the purchase of the same worthless insurance that doesn't equal care, weak price controls, etc.). Many Americans have been frustrated with what Obama hasn't done, but more powerful is anger at what has been done. Workers aren't going to look fondly upon terrible, pro-corporate legislation just because the Democrats are throwing confetti and popping the champagne. In fact, capitalist hypocrisy and arrogance will be further underlined by the whole charade.
Both sides of reaction, in my opinion, screwed themselves here. Their loss, as always, is our gain.
You give the far-right too much credit.
You sound a lot like Carl Davidson, the Leninist former webmaster of Progressives for Obama (now known as Progressive America Rising), who argued much the same points you do about how we need a "popular front" with liberals to stop the arch-reactionary right from taking power.
As for your proposition that we make it a priority to appeal to the petty-bourgeois before workers: good luck selling that here of all places.
YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS
Well I am not surprised. The difference between Democrats and Republicans from an economic viewpoint is whether or not we get better quality scraps. Though I suppose for actual proletariat who might be saved by this bill or if it expands that can mean the difference between life and death.
If you are starving better scraps means a lot, but it is ridiculous we are even in that position. Like I said, the main benefit is political i.e. we do not have all our civil rights completely negated and all our social programs completely removed i.e. social security privatized, complete economic collapse, etc.
Also I worry at times whether or not the GOP would start an actual war with China. If China continues to grow, and they go right enough, and believe they have sufficiently strong counter-nukes or can win a Proxy War, they might do it. These fundamentalist nuts literally believe they will go to heaven if they nuke China.
In the final analysis, all this thread points to is that there's still a lot of struggle left in front of us, Comrades. No doubt about it. But let's be objective in both directions. The healthcare legislation is woefully inadequate due to its bourgeois limitations. On the other hand, the US right wing suffered a pretty painful defeat last night. How this all plays out in history is anybody's guess. But I suspect that it was better for the bill to pass than to be defeated. Otherwise, the "powers that be" would have scared the politicians from touching this issue for another 25 years. At least this way the possibilities of successful struggles on this issue seem to be improved. This has some virtue because there's so much about the bill that needs to be corrected, and will require more struggle to correct.
¡Patria o muerte!
h9socialist, no offense intended or anything, but are you politically drunk or something? Why are you to the right of many capitalist Democrats on this issue? Why are you pretending this was anything but a deal brokered by corporatist politicians and the corporate heads they protect? Answer those questions first, I have some others.
Edit: I just saw that your organization is the Democratic Socialists of America, while explains why you're supporting Obama, and why you'd be to the right of many capitalist Democrats. That basically answers my questions on its own.
I wish I was like you. My response to reactionary disinformation and fear-mongering is, variously, either red-faced anger or red-faced tears. I can't seem to find pleasure it it, which puzzles me, since I am very much inclined to schadenfreude. I guess it's because I see their ignorance as my loss, rather than theirs.
Free your mind, and your ass will follow. --George Clinton
Free your ass, and your mind will follow. --Karl Marx
According to anti-socialists, yes. (I don't mean to accuse you of such.)
Programs that emulate the results of socialism, without actually stemming from socialism, are arguably detrimental to the cause of socialism, because they don't actually change social relations, but instead placate the exploited masses a while longer.
Having said that, I can't bring myself to take such a cynical position as to advocate the denial of programs that will immediately benefit the working class (which does not describe this bill, incidentally). I just want to point out that there is nothing socialist about it. Take two societies, one socialist, one capitalist, have the capitalist one outwardly emulate the socialist one, and you will not have arrived at two socialist societies. You'll have one socialist society, and one society of placated wage-slaves.
Free your mind, and your ass will follow. --George Clinton
Free your ass, and your mind will follow. --Karl Marx
I was just informed that, through the passed bill, medicare coverage is now dropping its age limit down to around 20 - 25. If this is true, then FUCK YEAH! lol I'll be getting my coverage quite soon haha!
Well, glad to know that I've lived long enough to be attacked from the Left again -- it's been a while. However, I have said nothing other than I think the law passed last night was woefully inadequate, and that it will take socialists to put forward a socialist program. I guess that makes me pretty right wing!
Yes, I come from that part of the Left that includes DSA, CPUSA, SPUSA, Solidarity and CCDS. I make no apologies for that.
¡Patria o muerte!
Term limits is actually very much related to this sad fact. But I'm not calling for an end to term limits, so that we might get another FDR for several terms. No, no: I'm calling for a limit of one term, so that we no longer have this situation where the first term is spent placating the ruling class, with the working class holding their breath for a re-election (if it's a Democrat) so that they might finally get the scraps they were promised four years earlier, once the president is feeling footloose and fancy-free on the way out. Better to give them only one term, so they can be free to immediately push for some of the things they promised, and try make as big a splash as possible in their single term, in ways that will make them popular with the people and perhaps go down in history. (Wishful thinking, I know.)
Free your mind, and your ass will follow. --George Clinton
Free your ass, and your mind will follow. --Karl Marx
h9socialist, don't play it that way. The questions I asked were pertinent (OK, so maybe the first one wasn't, but still)
http://www.democraticunderground.com...esg_id=7931084
Forgive me if that's not you. But on edit, it's your position and thus yours to justify, so it's not something I'll pursue too much.
Giving real healthcare reform would have put a chip in the United States' shrine to the free market and rabid individualism. Even one they have in the European Capitalist states would have required a total reworking of America's very foundation.
Of course, now you see why we advocate for revolution. We can't place the entirety of our bets in a liberal democratic system, or one will end up like the third way social democrats.
Looking at this, it gives us room for people to realize that the Democrats truly don't stand for progressive things and merely are cop outs. but will these disillusioned voters listen and join the struggle, or simply decide to vote Republican and get played by hegemony? I don't know.
It still amuses me to see some Obama supporters thinking he truly did something amazing. Their delusion knows no bounds.
As for collaborating with Democrats- when the 50s and 60s rolled on Max Shachtman advocated for the socialist movement to collaborate with Democrats, thinking it might pull them to the social democrat system, and eventually they would get somewhere... it's been well over 50 years after this, and it's all but worked very much against the movement, as history as shown time and time again.
