DC last night:
- https://twitter.com/loran076/status/1323907767887867904?s=19
- https://twitter.com/FranceNews24/status/1323917050369245185?s=19
- https://hexbear.net/post/47055
it's more likely in the next few days that the fash will take the streets, especially as trump announces how he will contest the election. after all, chaos is his best bet for getting the powers that be to allow him to retain power without a fight. so don't fucking tell people to stay home. it's absolutely critical that everyone pays attention to what's happening in their own backyards and steps up to engage in appropriate community defense.
the election is just a stage. stop confusing it with the conditions that compel people to act.
not dyin' for biden. sorry but not really
Any Marxist going out in defense against fascism this month should make it crystal clear that they don't support Biden or Trump and should instead agitate by making demands in defense of democracy in a more abstract sense, and calling on voters to continue organizing for the shit they actually want (M4A, GND, accountability against police, etc.) after the election is decided.
I agree in principle but disagree on the specifics. this is a damn good time to agitate AGAINST the false democracy, to point out the ways in which it robs people of meaningful choice and agency in their own lives, and to advocate for a new system. this isn't the time for milquetoast socdemism.
My phrasing might have erred a bit too close to opportunism. Given that the US left is still extremely scattered and tiny relative to the working class as a whole (even if the left is growing more quickly now), we should strike a careful balance between crafting a message that will reach the DSA-adjacent progressive libs and anarchists and other newly radicalizing layers - who might still be terrified to death of Trump while only somewhat scared of business-as-usual neoliberals like Biden - while retaining a hard line against the two bourgie-funded parties, putting forth a clearly articulated alternative and a path to socialist revolution from existing conditions. This means condemning Trump's obvious contempt for democracy while reminding them of the Dem ratfuckery during the primaries, and arguing for the necessity to organize and build an independent workers' party - not just the smaller revolutionary party, but a mass party as well.
If that last part sounds like succdem shit, unfortunately it's still a necessary transitional step in between our current situation - one in which there's no real political representation for the working class at all - to one in which we eventually have a large enough revolutionary core within a larger grassroots independent left united front/mass movement to actually carry out the tasks of revolution. The tasks of the 1st and 2nd internationals were prerequisites for the tasks of the 3rd - and in terms of organization we're still arguably on square one here in the US.
yea, I mostly agree, I just want us to be careful about accidentally stumbling into tailism. the reformist platform will start to gain support over the next couple of years as covid accelerates the current crisis of capitalism and the ruling class begins to try and save itself. but that means our advocacy shouldn't stay limited to a fixed view of today but rather lay the seeds for tomorrow. we should be agitating people to ask why these overwhelmingly positive policies with bipartisan support haven't passed and use that as a launching pad to a line that analyzes the class war that has, up to this point, made such policies impossible. that way, when liberal politicians start to promise reform, we will be there and have credibility when we say no, transfer power to the masses.
I got you. The immediate tasks of coalition-building to build up the working-class forces capable of fighting for socialism carry with them the risks of going full opportunist like the 2nd international did, throwing the revolutionary baby out with the ultraleft bathwater. The most revolutionary elements and organizations of the coalition are necessarily going to have to attract as many higher-quality working-class and marginalized revolutionary fighters as they can from within the broader coalition, putting forth an unmistakably Marxist program which calls out the contradictions, including popular demands and phrasing them such that a) some version of the demand is theoretically immediately economically feasible, representing a winnable material gain for the workers but b) politically infeasible without sustained pressure from an organized mass movement at minimum, or in some cases without years of sustained organization for socialism.
For example, the demands for Medicare for All and to implement an NHS carry with them the implicit call to organize and work towards abolishing or at least greatly diminishing the private health insurance sector. The demand for an ecosocialist Green New Deal is an implicit call to place, at minimum, the energy, agriculture, manufacturing, and transportation sectors under the democratic control of the working class - it's a call for democratic central planning, a key feature of socialism (side note: Hawkins's version includes a budget which explicitly calls for funding the GND by slashing the military budget, making the program anti-imperialist). These implications are usually buried underneath the surface to more easily reach workers at a lower level of class consciousness, but anyone beginning to question reformism and to draw revolutionary conclusions, who begins talking with Marxist organizers, will through Marxist education and through the experience of organizing begin to uncover the contradictions.
Why is this popular policy that many of us want and need, theoretically winnable even under some form of capitalism, not policy? Because the ruling parties answer to the capitalists and the policy hurts the capitalists' profits. How do we achieve this policy? By fighting and organizing the masses for socialism, attracting the workers' attention though a campaign for the best feasible version of this policy as a transitional step.
Around the time of Occupy, the popular demand for the $15 minimum wage was eventually won in some parts of the country, in the process increasing the organizational capacity, confidence, and expectations of the workers and socialists who organized the Fight for 15 campaign, such that they were better prepared to fight for the next campaign and less willing to settle for scraps. Kshama and SAlt have consistently erred too close to opportunism since the 2016 Bernie campaign, but their partial victory from the minimum wage fight (especially in Seattle) is evidence that this sort of approach can work so long as the hard line against Dem-entryism and other forms of tailism and opportunism is maintained.
beyond the possibility of opportunism and tailism in our own ranks, as you've already addressed, I'm not sure we're doing ourselves favors by hewing too closely to the reformist branding. their M4A platform includes no NHS - though such has been the project of social democrats around the world a full century ago - their GND amounts, in an economic sense, to little more than an infrastructure and jobs program, with no transfer of power to the working class or democratic central planning, etc..
a "yes, and..." approach works better here: yes, M4A is a necessary first step but it only remedies one small aspect of the greater problem with private healthcare - privatized care means profiting on death and human misery; yes, the GND, especially paired with deep cuts to the military budget, is a good first step, but it's the bare minimum as climate change is intrinsically one of capitalism's externalities and the only way to truly head off the coming crisis is by transferring control of key industries to the democratic control of its workers and a return to true public ownership.
the public, by and large, already supports these policies. our focus should be on the faults of capitalism unveiled by the as-yet unsuccessful campaigns to reform its worst ills. in Gramscian terms, just because we haven't been overtly successful in the war of maneuver over the past few years doesn't mean we can't treat it like a victory in the war of position - after all, as you noted, our capacity has grown at least in part due to the organizing required to sustain these fights - and advance our demands to better reflect the new world of accelerating decay we find ourselves in.
(that is, with evictions up, food security down, and no support coming from the state for, at a minimum, months, in the midst of an explicitly abolitionist rebellion, perhaps we should adjust our immediate demands to speak directly to the crisis people find themselves in - I've got some ideas here and I'll share them in a separate post when I get a little time to breath, given the immediate situation on the ground that must be dealt with. there's a discussion I'd really like to have about the proletarianization of the petit-bourgeoisie and the weird potential for shared purposes we find ourselves with due to the stark and blatant nature of the crisis that disappearing class finds themselves in.)
Not sure there are any disagreements from me on this point. I previously mentioned fighting for the "best feasible version" of a given demand in my previous comment, which should certainly involve some form the "yes, and" approach to formulating demands.
Rather than simply calling for M4A, we should call for, at minimum, M4A and an NHS and to place hospitals and pharma companies under public and democratic working-class ownership. Rather than just calling for a GND with a just transition, we should call for an ecosocialist GND with a just transition and to fund it through taxing the rich, shifting money away from the military, and expropriating the GHG-emitting sectors and giving them to the workers to plan a serious climate response. Rather than simply calling for increasing testing/tracing and social distancing like some of the libs are doing, we cut through the false dilemma between public health and immediate economic needs by calling for socially-supported social distancing - not just stimulus checks/temporary UBI, but rent and mortgage freezes for nonessential workers, and dramatic increases in pay (hazard pay!) and increased workplace safety for the essential workers - nothing less than a living wage for those who have to work and a living income for those who can't, calling on the essential workers to use their collective leverage to strike to make the capitalists pay for it all.
We can reach people at their current level of consciousness by using the vulgar/popular/minimalist demands as a starting point, rephrasing them and fleshing them out in this fashion to point people away from reformism and toward the difficult but necessary work of organizing with the goal of socialist revolution in mind.
I'm all ears with respect to the ideas you had in mind, once you have a chance to post again.
agreed on all points and I like this approach. cheers!
if there are fascists trying to start shit in your town, you're going to stay home because someone might think you're dying for biden? what a bad fucking take.
Imma let libs take the lead on this one. I sure as shit ain't gettin my head blown off by a chud just for Biden to cave like every lib before him.
Right on! Too often have Communists been dying on the front lines to save the cowardly libs from their own folly. It's high time to fight smart, let the libs be the cannon fodder this time!
Yes! Let fascists run rampant over the communities we claim to care about! Callous short sightedness is how you build broad, working class movements and fight fascism!
Yeah, let's get communists killed for nothing all over again. Drowning the fash in our own blood, eh comrade?
Minorities being shit on by fascists rolling through is an acceptable compromise to own the libs who voted for Biden.
You can't save everyone. You're not superman. Fight for the ones who it's possible to bring into the fold. Fight in those communities you can protect not as a lone hero, but where it's possible to build towards socialist solidarity. Those libs who are unwilling to radicalise left can fend for themselves, they're grown ass adults and it's not up to us to change their nappies.
protecting your community has nothing to do with biden... god damn, there's more to politics than the fucking election.
I'm not trying to die in the first week of the next four years of our lives. Call me up when Trump pulls a threepeat.
deleted by creator
Minority being clubbed by fascists rolling through town after Trump delcares ballots illegitimate.
Chapos: Sorry sweaty, did you vote for Biden?
if they are democrats i don't want to protect them lol
😬
if blue fash and red fash want to fight it out on the streets then that's good for us. let them bleed
Roughly what percentage of the US population do you want dead?
100%
I have proposed, in the past, that the JDPON should disperse the Amerikkkans throughout the Third World instead of allowing them to remain in occupied North America. Here are some of my reasons:
A geographic concentration of Amerikkkans would facilitate counterrevolution. It would also be difficult to exercise proletarian dictatorship over hundreds of millions of enemies: we would need to import a huge unproductive sector of police and such from the Third World. As a practical matter, it would be better to thin the Amerikkkans out, making them minorities in the Third World, where they could easily be controlled and supervised by the international proletariat.
Amerikkkans will need to undergo re-education. It would be very difficult to re-educate them in their own kkkountry. They need to be in a proletarian environment where they can learn from the masses.
There are land claims to settle, mainly for the First Nations, but also for Aztlán [occupied Mexico -- MSH) and perhaps the Black nation. Conceivably some other nations could be moved to North America if they wished to be, such as Nauru or the small nations in Ghana whose land has been ruined by imperialist corporations. Amerikkkans are going to have to move out of much of North America and make room for other nations.
Amerikkkan kkkulture is almost totally reactionary. There is little worth saving in Amerikkkan kkkulture. It would be better to force Amerikkkans to assimilate to the more culturally and politically advanced peoples of the Third World. There is also historic justice in forcing Amerikkkans to assimilate, just as they destroyed so many other nations and cultures.
In the early stages of socialism, the Third World will require skilled workers and technicians of various kinds, including medical personnel. These persyns are disproportionately concentrated in the First World. Moving them to the Third World will be a practical way to address an urgent need.
The Third World is also owed big reparations. An excellent way to make those reparations is to put Amerikkkans to work building infrastructure in the Third World: roads, housing, water supplies, sewage, electricity, telecommunications, schools. Amerikkkans can also work in Third World factories and fields to expand production for the benefit of the Third World.
Part of the process of civilizing and proletarianizing Amerikkkans will be putting them to productive work--for a change. Amerikkka has so little productive capacity that there may not be many ways to put all those people to work in occupied North America. They may have to go to the factories and fields of the Third World.
Amerikkkans will need to be reduced to a Third World standard of living. If they stay in occupied North Amerikkka, they will benefit from the vastly better infrastructure and all the stolen wealth that they currently hold. It would be better to move them to the Third World as a way of accelerating the process of re-education.
There are historical precedents for relocating large numbers of enemies. Millions of Germans were forced to move after the Soviet victory over fascism in World War II. Even enemies like the united $nakes and the "united" KKKingdom agreed that it was necessary to move Germans off land that was needed for Poles, Czechs, and others. Again, this is related to the national question of the First Nations, Aztlán [occupied Mexico -- MSH], and the Black nation.
Is this a good idea? What are its advantages and disadvantages? How can we improve upon it?
deleted by creator
Instead you will get your head blown off to help trump consolidate power after the coup?
deleted by creator
Shitty life if you have nothing to fight for.