Canadian Left are new comrades of Taliban

[Emperor Ronald Reagan]

Originally posted by tecumseh
I support any and all attacks against American soldiers stationed abroad.

I'm with comrade tecumseh on that one.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Comrade Marcel@Sep 7 2006, 08:07 AM
Fucking imperialist country workers can do just fine with Walmart jobs, the Afghan people are actually suffering, so kiss my ass.

Did that comment catch anyone else's eye? It certainly caught mine. Though I suppose no one should be too surprised....after all, it's just another stench emitted from the proverbial leftist pond.

In this instance, this particular "comrade" has blatantly mocked the struggle of the million or so Wal-Mart workers ("[they] do just fine") whilst pledging his loyalty to "the Afghan people"....and not any particular class of "Afghan people". The struggle to survive on low wages, with little or no Healthcare, repeated attempts by Management to disrupt Union organising, including the removal of departments that Unionise and the shutting down of stores that Unionise*, is disregarded. And, in its place, we have a distinctly class collaborationist stance of loyal support of "the Afghan people"....namely the Taliban.

The idea of Independent working class politics, leading, obviously, to supporting the struggles of both the "Afghan" working class and those "just fine" Wal-Mart workers, is probably as alien to this "comrade" as a Terrace house is to Paris Hilton. But that, as they say, is leftism....and it's about as working class in orientation as the British Labour Party.
______

*For those that are interested: "When the meat-cutting department of a Texas Wal-Mart formed a union, the company announced a week later that it would phase out meat-cutting departments nationwide. When a Wal-Mart in Jonquiere, Quebec, received its union certification, the company shut the entire store down." [Source.]

[Tommie]

Originally posted by CADPAT@Sep 7 2006, 01:40 AM
As a Canadian I see the Canadian Armed Forces as being Peacekeepers and us Canadians have a great reputation for that. However with this conflict in Afghanistan in my opinion is no longer a peacekepping mission because in other peacekeeping missions in other countries we have not lost as many soldiers as we have lost in afghanistan, something like 33 now or something. The Soldiers in Afghanistan are no longer peacekeeping as they were earlier in the mission, they are now occupying afghanistan amd ruining canada's reputation as peacekeepers.

As a fellow Canadian I agree completely. Jack Layton and Bob Rae are right to call for a pullout from Afghanistan. We are not building a civil society or peacekeeping; we are involved in a hostile occupation.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Amusing Scrotum+Sep 8 2006, 03:14 AM--> (Amusing Scrotum @ Sep 8 2006, 03:14 AM)

Comrade Marcel

@Sep 7 2006, 08:07 AM
Fucking imperialist country workers can do just fine with Walmart jobs, the Afghan people are actually suffering, so kiss my ass.

Did that comment catch anyone else's eye? It certainly caught mine. Though I suppose no one should be too surprised....after all, it's just another stench emitted from the proverbial leftist pond.

In this instance, this particular "comrade" has blatantly mocked the struggle of the million or so Wal-Mart workers ("[they] do just fine") whilst pledging his loyalty to "the Afghan people"....and not any particular class of "Afghan people". The struggle to survive on low wages, with little or no Healthcare, repeated attempts by Management to disrupt Union organising, including the removal of departments that Unionise and the shutting down of stores that Unionise*, is disregarded. And, in its place, we have a distinctly class collaborationist stance of loyal support of "the Afghan people"....namely the Taliban.

The idea of Independent working class politics, leading, obviously, to supporting the struggles of both the "Afghan" working class and those "just fine" Wal-Mart workers, is probably as alien to this "comrade" as a Terrace house is to Paris Hilton. But that, as they say, is leftism....and it's about as working class in orientation as the British Labour Party.
______

*For those that are interested: "When the meat-cutting department of a Texas Wal-Mart formed a union, the company announced a week later that it would phase out meat-cutting departments nationwide. When a Wal-Mart in Jonquiere, Quebec, received its union certification, the company shut the entire store down." [Source.] [/b]

Well said.

The same applies, of course, to those who prefer the Iraqi "resistance" to the Iraqi working class......

[Comrade Marcel]

Are you suggesting the Iraqi working class are better off under imperialist rule? I guess Amusing Scrotum and Severian like imperialism better. Typical white western chauvinism that is so common on this board.

Also, it's interesting to note amusing scrotum is comparing the right to have a union taken away as being just as bad as the right to life, i.e. having to dodge bombs and bullets, wimmin getting raped, etc. which is what is happening to Afghani people.

The "Taliban" is simply brought up as an emotional word. It's the U$ that always says supporting resistance is supporting Taliban or al-queda or "terrorism" or whatever. I thought people on here were smarter than than.

It's about NATIONAL LIBERATION, THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION! The Taliban is secondary to that.

BTW rebelworker, a coworkers friend??? Like, honosetly, who cares. I might feel a bit sorry if you said "my girlfriends brother, my cousin, or etc." but why are we supposed to be sensitive to the feelings of your cooworkers friend. Makes me think of that part in Spaceballs when Darkhelmet tells Lonestar that he's his fathers brothers friends ex-roomate.

Now what if someone told you their wife is Afghani and their whole family was killed by KKKanadian $$$oldiers? Gee, wouldn't that be a little more significant?

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by Tommie+Sep 8 2006, 05:40 PM--> (Tommie @ Sep 8 2006, 05:40 PM)

CADPAT

@Sep 7 2006, 01:40 AM
As a Canadian I see the Canadian Armed Forces as being Peacekeepers and us Canadians have a great reputation for that. However with this conflict in Afghanistan in my opinion is no longer a peacekepping mission because in other peacekeeping missions in other countries we have not lost as many soldiers as we have lost in afghanistan, something like 33 now or something. The Soldiers in Afghanistan are no longer peacekeeping as they were earlier in the mission, they are now occupying afghanistan amd ruining canada's reputation as peacekeepers.

As a fellow Canadian I agree completely. Jack Layton and Bob Rae are right to call for a pullout from Afghanistan. We are not building a civil society or peacekeeping; we are involved in a hostile occupation. [/b]

What CADPAT said is complete bullshit. KKKanada's "reputation" as "peacekeepers" is simply a guise to justify imperialism. For such a small population, this country sure can push a lot of weight around and that weight comes from eating a lot of imperialist pie.

U$ has a "reputation" as being "free" and "democratic", right? Well anyone here would agree that's bullshit.

Being a Kanadian and then pointing the accusing finger south is just reactionary Kanadian nationalism.

Jack Layton and the NDP supported the invasion of Afghanistan in the first place. Where was he when the anti-war movement was protesting this? Not until the opposition to the Iraq war was popular did he show his face. A great way to scoop young people from the left a bit to the right to become card carrying supporters of his party, leadership and bourgeois politics.

Bob Rae, there's another piece of work. Some of the shit that guy did in Ontario not even conservatives would be able to get away with, it was so reactionary and racist. In fact, Ontario's most militant organization, OCAP, started under his government in response to his shit.

And please get rid of that PET avatar. Don't even get me started on him.

These people were, are not, and never will be; on our side.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Comrade Marcel+--> (Comrade Marcel)I guess Amusing Scrotum and Severian like imperialism better.[/b]

From my last post in this thread: The idea of Independent working class politics, leading, obviously, to supporting the struggles of both the "Afghan" working class and those "just fine" Wal-Mart workers, is probably as alien to this "comrade" as a Terrace house is to Paris Hilton. But that, as they say, is leftism....and it's about as working class in orientation as the British Labour Party.

That comment seem remarkably perceptive, given your reply. Or, maybe, it is so blatantly obvious that you would produce the banal response that you did, that a mentally challenged chimpanzee could have predicted it? The latter is probably more accurate; but my ego certainly favours the former.

Either way, you made my point for me....and you made it in a manner that is far better than any description I could offer. Independent working class politics, really is alien to you -- it generally is alien to the purveyors of bourgeois ideology. But, I suppose, if you want to use the framework provided by capitalist politicians, then that's your choice; personally, I just don't see why you don't have the honesty to call it what it is.

Maybe you don't call it what it is because you're deluding yourself? Seems likely to me. After all, you probably do think you are a partisan of the International working class. But ones self-perception, rarely depicts oneself in an accurate manner. So, in your case, whilst you perceive yourself as being a partisan of the working class, you're little more than a purveyor of bourgeois ideology and a scab -- with, it seems, an internet stutter; "KKK", "$$$", and so on.

Comrade Marcel

Also, it's interesting to note amusing scrotum is comparing the right to have a union taken away as being just as bad as the right to life....

I made no such comparison; I simply pointed out that you blatantly mocked the struggle of the million or so Wal-Mart workers. Though, to be honest, I doubt I needed to do even that. Most people will realise fairly easily what side of the barricades you're on....and given the record of your MIMite comrades during the Detroit newspaper strike in the mid-1990s, it isn't the side of the working class.

[Comrade Marcel]

Well, all that chatter might make you think you sound intelligent, you waisted your time spouting rhetoric that means fuck all. The reality still is that national liberation struggle requires killing imperialist soldiers, and that imperialist soldiers chose to take on killing oppressed people rather than work at Walmart (or whatever other lower-end 1st world job). That was my point in the first place, but obviously you are not really concerned about the real issue, but rather some abstract concept of "bourgeois" politics you say you are trying to expose me spouting. What bourgeois politics am I spouting, those of the bourgeois of the oppressed nations? If that's the case then I regress, it is a n ecessary step to mobilize even the bourgeois, the national bourgeosie against the imperialists. The was seen successful in China and is working in other places as well, such as the Philippines. This is a step in the direction of proletarian revolution.

On the other hand, the only bourgeois politics I see are the ones that seem to support Kanadian soldiers and oppressor nation workers. These are basically the politics of Layton, Council of Canadians, etc. all 1st world bourgeois politicians. That's certainly not my position but seems to be closer to yours. This is not a step forward for the international proletarian, but simply biting for more pie out of the mouths of the real proletarians by an already stuffed labour aristocracy.

BTW, I never "mocked" Walmart workers, who are just fine so long as they have their jobs, as compared with those under imperialist occupation and facing war. This should be, as you so-well put it, obvious to "a mentally challenged chimpanzee". Though I'm curious how you distinguish these from regular chimpanzees, are these your political allies?

As for the barricades, I'm the type of persyn always up front, so guess again. I'm not in MIM either, so guess yet again. Now please STFU and crawl back into whatever dark hole of individualist brand politics you poked out from.

[Tommie]

And please get rid of that PET avatar. Don't even get me started on him.

No. He was one of history's greatest leaders.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Originally posted by Tommie@Sep 14 2006, 12:11 AM

And please get rid of that PET avatar. Don't even get me started on him.

No. He was one of history's greatest leaders.

Oh, bullshit. Have you heard his FLQ speech? He was a reformist pig.

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by Tommie@Sep 14 2006, 12:11 AM

And please get rid of that PET avatar. Don't even get me started on him.

No. He was one of history's greatest leaders.

Yeah, if you like reactionary running dogs of the Anglo bourgeoisie and imperialist pig dogs...

[Dzerzhinsky]

Canada should bring all its troops home and place them on the borders.

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by Dzerzhinsky@Sep 14 2006, 02:57 AM
Canada should bring all its troops home and place them on the borders.

errrmm, nationalist much?

I think abolishing the borders all together and giving youth better things to do would be a more communist idea.

[Morag]

The reality is that Canadian soldiers are in Afghanistan. No amount of wishing and shouting, "We were right, nyah nyah nyah!" is going to change that. Either all the soldiers die at the hands of the Taliban (or more likely from American friendly fire), or we have a timetable to bring them back. So, I'd rather bring them back- I guess that makes me a KKKanadian, does it?

Wth new recruitment goals of almost 1/3 the existing forces, the Conservatives are not just increasing the size of the military, their beginning the largest military build-up since WWII. So, I'd like us all to join hands and get our troops the hell out of Afghanistan before the mission expands into neighbouring countries.

[Tommie]

Oh, bullshit. Have you heard his FLQ speech? He was a reformist pig.

A moving speech. The FLQ were anti-Canadian terrorists. The War Measures Act was justified because the unity of the country was at stake; nobody knew the extent of the FLQ's power and many believed that armed madmen would spill out onto the street.

Yes, I am a "nationalist." There is no shame in that. I'm proud to be Canadian and Canada has been and can become again an example for the world to follow. Our nationalized healthcare, multiculturalism and (at one point) dedication to peace and compromise around the world were all clear indications that Canada was a progressive country.

Canada's very existence has always been a source of irritation to the US Empire. From the War of 1812 to Manifest Destiny the Americans have tried to crush the Canadian nation and the Canadian identity. The signing of the Canada-US FTA (that eventually turned into NAFTA) was a crushing blow to Canada's sovereignty.

Despite our economic independence being handicapped by NAFTA and our foreign policy being reduced to the role of a lapdog to the US Empire, Canada still bothers our imperialist neighbours. California's legislature recently passed a bill calling for "Canadian style" healthcare. Canadians are granting amnesty to war resisters fleeing from duty in Iraq.

Canada is a nation and a concept worth fighting for. That is why I'm a "nationalist."

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

"It was in that context that I stated in the House of Commons a year ago that there was no need anywhere in Canada for misguided or misinformed zealots to resort to acts of violence in the belief that only in this fashion could they accomplish change. There may be some places in the world where the law is so inflexible and so insensitive as to prompt such beliefs. But Canada is not such a place. I said then, and I repeat now, that those who would defy the law and ignore the opportunities available to them to right their wrongs and satisfy their claims will receive no hearing from this government."

No only is he reformist - he is anti-revolution.

[Tommie]

He was against violence. Is that a problem?

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by Tommie@Sep 14 2006, 05:24 PM

Oh, bullshit. Have you heard his FLQ speech? He was a reformist pig.

A moving speech.

Sure, if you support the KKKanadian bourgeoisie.

The FLQ were anti-Canadian terrorists.

They certainly were anti-KKKanadian, and so am I. FUCK Kanada. Kanada is stolen native land. KKKanada is an oppressor state, denying sovereignty to the Quebecois people, who are an independent nation of people. Kanada is white bourgeosie making money on none white proletarians.

The FLQ were fighting for national liberation for the Quebecois people. Calling them terrorists is ridiculous. "Terrorists/terrorism" is a word brought out by demogogues whenever they simply want to cast a bad impression on their enemies.

The War Measures Act was justified because the unity of the country was at stake;

Jusitifiable to who? not the 1,000 plus leftists who were arrested, and some who lost jobs/housing because of it.

nobody knew the extent of the FLQ's power and many believed that armed madmen would spill out onto the street.

So instead the PET spilled his "armed madman" into the streets of Quebec.

Yes, I am a "nationalist." There is no shame in that.

Being a KKKanadian nationalist is supporting white supremacy, imperialism and colonialism. Yeah, you've got nothing to be ashamed of!

I'm proud to be Canadian

Well, I gathered that since you are a jingoist.

and Canada has been and can become again an example for the world to follow.

The world meaning what? The U$? Who exactly is going to follow the Kanadian example?

Our nationalized healthcare,

Crippled, crumbling, falling apart and half privatised. Doesn't even cover all circumstances. No Optical, Pharmaceudical or dental coverage either. So, in other words, just enough to keep you healthy enough to work with rotting teeth, poor eyesight and exspensive perscriptions. Great healthcare.

multiculturalism

Multicultralism is just a cheap, competitive and reserved labour market for the bourgeois. It's also complete bullshit when the original inhabintants of the land are treated like shit and you have a whole nation (Quebec) denied sovereignty.

and (at one point) dedication to peace and compromise around the world

Why? Because Kanada did not send soldiers to war, just big corporations to scoop out the goods?

were all clear indications that Canada was a progressive country.

Compared to what? Nazi Germany?

Canada's very existence has always been a source of irritation to the US Empire. From the War of 1812 to Manifest Destiny the Americans have tried to crush the Canadian nation and the Canadian identity.

Well, this is a nice conspiracy theory, but most early Kanadians were infact Americans. Most early Kanadians have a U$ background. In fact I think at the time of the ameriKKKan revolution, Kanadians of AmeriKKKan origin outnumbered those of Briti$h origin 4-1.

This is not to say that Kanada doesn't have a unique culture and identity. But to say this is under attack and that it is helpful to the international working class to defend Kanadian imperialism in the name of some white Kanadian culture is nothing but reactionary.

The signing of the Canada-US FTA (that eventually turned into NAFTA) was a crushing blow to Canada's sovereignty.

I'm sure the bourgeois whiped away all their tears with the money the made from it. But how exactly has this made us the next U$ state? I don't see any green money and no one has looked at me funny for asking for poutine yet. Wow, I'm so scared to lose that though, eh?

Despite our economic independence being handicapped by NAFTA

Kanada actually benefits quite a bit from NAFTA. Get this through your head: KANADA IS AN IMPERIALIST COUNTRY! Why not take a look around and see were all the goods you use were made. Start with the clothes you are wearing.

And you might want to see the book Conflicts of Interest: Canada and the Third World by Swift/Tomlinson (editors), 1991 Between The Lines - Toronto

and our foreign policy being reduced to the role of a lapdog to the US Empire,

That's bullshit. Kanada does what it wants when it wants and the states may not like some of it, but their are rarely detrimental consequences for the Kanadian bourgeoisie.

Canada still bothers our imperialist neighbours.

I'm sure Kanada bothers a lot of Iraqis, Afghanis, Haitians and others to as well.

California's legislature recently passed a bill calling for "Canadian style" healthcare.

You mean the healthcare Anglo-Kanadians copied from New France (Quebec)?

Canadians are granting amnesty to war resisters fleeing from duty in Iraq.

No they are not. There are some "conscious objectors" here but my understanding is whether or not they will be given refugee status is before the supreme courts.

Canada is a nation and a concept worth fighting for.

Against and for who?

That is why I'm a "nationalist."

You're a nationalist because you enjoy benefitting from cheap labour of the third world.

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by Tommie@Sep 14 2006, 07:56 PM
He was against violence. Is that a problem?

He was not against violence at all. He would use violence just fine when it suited within his regimes interests.

And yes, non-violence is an obstacle to communist revolution. This is a basic tenant of any revolutionary movement, anarchist, communist, Marxist.

Anyways, I think it's obvious you don't belong here. You are a Kanadian nationalist and pro-capitalist who is borderline racist and fascist.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Originally posted by Tommie@Sep 14 2006, 12:56 PM
He was against violence. Is that a problem?

Clearly the quote reveals that he is fundamentally against revolutionary activity. He says we have the means to achieve what we want through the state. It is anti-revolutionary and reformist. It's not just anti-violence.