Stupid question

[Tim Finnegan]

But that's ridiculous historically. Let's think of the last few democrats who were president. Hmm. There was... Woodrow Wilson (lol), FDR (who some leftists have a raging hard on for, because he fought nazis I guess), Truman (Nukes), JFK (Cold Warrior), LBJ (Cold Warrior), Clinton (lol bye welfare) and now Obama (sup libya)

And what was the likelihood, among all this, of a socialist presidency? Because if the alternative was the Republicans, who would have (perhaps with the exception of Wilson) been uniformly worse, then there really wasn't much alternative.

As I said, you do what you can with what you can.

[#FF0000]

and what was the likelihood, among all this, of a socialist presidency? Because if the alternative was the republicans, who would have (perhaps with the exception of wilson) been uniformly worse, then there really wasn't much alternative.

As i said, you do what you can with what you can.

quick, hitler or mussolini, which do you pick?

seriously, though, I don't care if someone decided "oh, well i better vote", but to say it's something we ought to encourage, I think, is ridiculous. There's really just nothing there for us.

[Tim Finnegan]

quick, hitler or mussolini, which do you pick?

seriously, though, I don't care if someone decided "oh, well i better vote", but to say it's something we ought to encourage, I think, is ridiculous. There's really just nothing there for us.

Then agitate for opposition to the political status quo, while simultaneously conceding the inevitability of contemporary bourgeois rule and thus the necessity of choosing the softer blow within those boundaries. It really isn't hard- British parties are quite used to it, only you lot across the Atlantic seem to find it a real burden. This kind of self-absorbed cynicism dressed in the garb of principled non-participation does the working class no favours.

And Mussolini, duh.

[Gorilla]

Lenin is irrelivant to modern socialism imo, the system he started was a failure, Noam Chomsky is many times more relevant to modern socialism than Lenin is.

Chomsky says the only social theory worth reading is Rocker's Anarcho-Syndicalism. Which isn't a terrible book, but is an utter bullshit statement even from an anarchist perspective.

[Tim Finnegan]

Chomsky says the only social theory worth reading is Rocker's Anarcho-Syndicalism. Which isn't a terrible book, but is an utter bullshit statement even from an anarchist perspective.

Are you sure about that? I have a copy of Pannekoek's Workers' Councils sitting right on my desk, and it has a recommendation from Chomsky on the back cover.

[Gorilla]

Are you sure about that? I have a copy of Pannekoek's Workers' Councils sitting right on my desk, and it has a recommendation from Chomsky on the back cover.

I dunno, he said it in some interview he gave once. TAKE MY WORD FOR IT BECAUSE GOOGLE IS NOT COOPERATING. :ducks:

[Viet Minh]

I gotta side with Tim on this one, not voting is akin to voting against democracy imo. If you will not vote for a bourgeous political party thats commendable, but use it to vote for a leftist party, and encourage others to do the same. They might not get many votes, but every one counts and will alert the more mainstream parties to their message, if nothing else. If nobody represents your views, then its time to either join a political party, or create a new one.

Its quite a popular opinion amongst anarchists to not vote, which is strange to me. Take it as a given that the capitlaist pigs and fascists will be voting, your vote will not go a long way but it will counteract one fascist, that makes it worth the trip, and even having your name on the voters roll.

[#FF0000]

I gotta side with Tim on this one, not voting is akin to voting against democracy imo. If you will not vote for a bourgeous political party thats commendable, but use it to vote for a leftist party, and encourage others to do the same. They might not get many votes, but every one counts and will alert the more mainstream parties to their message, if nothing else. If nobody represents your views, then its time to either join a political party, or create a new one.

Its quite a popular opinion amongst anarchists to not vote, which is strange to me. Take it as a given that the capitlaist pigs and fascists will be voting, your vote will not go a long way but it will counteract one fascist, that makes it worth the trip, and even having your name on the voters roll.

It's that who you vote for is kind of irrelevant. Even if a leftist party is on the ticket, there's nothing they can do. It's more worthwhile (and more important, whether you think voting is a good thing to do or not) to organize and do political work outside of voting.

[hatzel]

It's more worthwhile (and more important, whether you think voting is a good thing to do or not) to organize and do political work outside of voting.

...but also voting and organising aren't mutually exclusive activities, which I think is what...whoever it was who raised this point...was getting at

[#FF0000]

...but also voting and organising aren't mutually exclusive activities, which I think is what...whoever it was who raised this point...was getting at

I think voting is entirely inconsequential, though.

[JerryBiscoTrey]

How comes you guys know so much stuff?

http://www.marxists.org/

[hatzel]

I think voting is entirely inconsequential, though.

No need to specifically rally against doing it, though. Crazy utilitarian socialism going on here...

[#FF0000]

No need to specifically rally against doing it, though. Crazy utilitarian socialism going on here...

I think it's a tremendous misdirection to encourage voting.

[Jose Gracchus]

Are you sure about that? I have a copy of Pannekoek's Workers' Councils sitting right on my desk, and it has a recommendation from Chomsky on the back cover.

Yeah, he's endorsed everything pretty much to the left of Luxembourg. He particularly adores Pannekoekian council communism and CNT-brand anarcho-syndicalism. He wrote the preface to Anarchism by Daniel Guérin, which another anarchist bashed (both him and Guérin as really "left-Marxists"). So on that alone I don't think he can be said to support only Rocker (the preface is linked in my signature, BTW). He went to Hanoi and praised the efforts to build socialism during the 1960s, and wrote that it was admirable (though he did add that party-state control must be dismantled in favor of "direct popular control"). He also wrote admirably about some of the aspects of Maoist agricultural communes in a debate with William F. Buckley. He supports and has supported most national liberation movements.

RGacky just often gives Chomsky a bad name on this board by habitually starting shit with Leninists and using Chomsky's anti-Leninism as cover, and various quotes and clips as a substitute for having his own politics. And I say that as a huge Chomsky fan - he put me on my way to the revolutionary left.

[hatzel]

I think it's a tremendous misdirection to encourage voting.

On this we can agree. But I thought whoever it was who started talking about this whole voting thing was talking about people actively discouraging voting, which seems like a waste of energy. But maybe nobody said that and I'm making shit up again

[RGacky3]

The latest ads to discourage voting were republicans to stop latinos from voting in the south west.

[CynicalIdealist]

Yeah, he's endorsed everything pretty much to the left of Luxembourg. He particularly adores Pannekoekian council communism and CNT-brand anarcho-syndicalism. He wrote the preface to Anarchism by Daniel Guérin, which another anarchist bashed (both him and Guérin as really "left-Marxists"). So on that alone I don't think he can be said to support only Rocker (the preface is linked in my signature, BTW). He went to Hanoi and praised the efforts to build socialism during the 1960s, and wrote that it was admirable (though he did add that party-state control must be dismantled in favor of "direct popular control"). He also wrote admirably about some of the aspects of Maoist agricultural communes in a debate with William F. Buckley. He supports and has supported most national liberation movements.

RGacky just often gives Chomsky a bad name on this board by habitually starting shit with Leninists and using Chomsky's anti-Leninism as cover, and various quotes and clips as a substitute for having his own politics. And I say that as a huge Chomsky fan - he put me on my way to the revolutionary left.

On that note, why is he so pro-national liberation, in some ways pro-Mao and Castro and yet I've never heard him utter a good word about Lenin?

[eric922]

A lot of leftists love FDR, not for WWII, but for the New Deal which was a very progressives agenda for its time, and I will admit his second bill of rights would have been a good thing if passed.

[a rebel]

How comes you guys know so much stuff? Talking about liberal bourgeois keynesian economics and shit! Wut?! I'm not really a reader, and I wouldn't know where to start (Leftism for dumbfucks perhaps) I try to read up on stuff on wikipedia etc but I zone out quite quickly, particularly with macro economics or into the realms of philosophy or psychology..

Second part, more serious, without sounding patronising, how can 'we' as leftists, educate the masses about leftism, when there are (believe it or not) people thicker than me out there? No doubt they can grasp the basic principles (if I can, anyone can) ie money bad, equality good (right?)

Anyway if anyone knows what I'm talking about, tell me!

First off, stop bringing yourself down, knowledge comes in time and no questions are stupid.

Second the masses of the Earth are pretty dumb, and wouldn't try to understand the full scope of leftism. Why do you think some people become neo-nazis? they see guys in combat boots and suspenders, shouting "zeig heil!", and think "that's cool I want to join". That's how leftism would have to be marketed, Che Guevara shirts and red stars. That's how every revolution, ideology, or cultural movement is marketed, it has to be

[Ele'ill]

First off, stop bringing yourself down, knowledge comes in time and no questions are stupid.

Second the masses of the Earth are pretty dumb, and wouldn't try to understand the full scope of leftism. Why do you think some people become neo-nazis? they see guys in combat boots and suspenders, shouting "zeig heil!", and think "that's cool I want to join". That's how leftism would have to be marketed, Che Guevara shirts and red stars. That's how every revolution, ideology, or cultural movement is marketed, it has to be

Are you a revolutionary leftist?

The people of the world are extremely smart and extremely resourceful. I'd start out organizing around issues that effect the working class- the places where I work. Issues that effect me as a student- because I go to school. Issues within my community- because I live there. We take that and network, we teach and learn and share experiences with other people all over the world. We see the bigger picture too of course way way at the top and we don't like it- it's what we want changed but we can't get there quite yet. We will though.