Find a Marxist group near you or on line and JOIN IT........

[socialist_n_TN]

This is NOT a call to not vote Democratic or to vote for a third party because Marxism is an ideology, NOT a party. And even Marxist political parties rarely if EVER run candidates for office in this country. In fact they usually endorse Democrats in elections. So this post breaks no rules.

But I see all of this outrage about economic issues and all these suicidal sounding posts about jumping off cliffs, yet I see only a few who understand that you have to ORGANIZE to fight this type of thing. And Marxists have had the most experience at organizing to fight against capitalism run amok. Even if you're not a Marxist, STILL join. Fellow travelers on the road are needed now more than ever. WE ARE ALL NEEDED! Just remember that Marxism is the ONLY ideology that is unashamedly, unabashedly, and has ALWAYS been on the side of the working class and poor.

If you're in dispair about how things are going, you can either give up or fight back. And if nothing else is working to stem the tide, then what have you got to lose?

[Shagbark Hickory]

1. Is there a marxist group near me or you?!

[socialist_n_TN]

4. Or on line.......

You can do SOMETHING that way at least. You're in GA. as I recall. I know Atlanta has some as does Athens I'm sure.

Believe it or not, I've run into 2 Trotskyists in the last few months just from attending the rallies here in Tennessee.

[Shagbark Hickory]

15. I disagree that joinging a group is a better idea than trying to get representation.

We need to get some people to run for office.

Joining a group like this online does little more the get you a spot on the no-fly terror watch list.

[socialist_n_TN]

19. Who says it's either/or..........

?

[Shagbark Hickory]

22. You did.

"This is NOT a call to not vote Democratic or to vote for a third party..."

Well I know you had to put that disclaimer in there due to the rules but someone needs to come up with a catchy name for the movement, get lots of people and a candidate, like the tea baggers did. The tea baggers have a couple of their own running for president now.

[socialist_n_TN]

27. Nope, I didn't put that disclaimer in there ONLY

to stay within the rules. I actually think that.

Trotsky said that in a bourgeoisie democracy, you participate. If for no other reason than to tell the people that BELIEVE in it that we tried it your way. When the capitalists throw out the pretense of "democracy" (as in Greece), then I don't want anybody saying to me that it wouldn't have gotten this bad if you would have tried. I want to say, I DID try.

[Shagbark Hickory]

46. So do you have any recommendations of groups to join in our area?

Essentially we are in the same general area, yes?

[socialist_n_TN]

59. Shag, that's why I put the "on line" part in the OP

Even an on line group could possibly put you in touch with people in your area that are sympatico. And in Republican state hells like we're in, it's at least a start.

[Shagbark Hickory]

155. We're online.

Does that count?

[socialist_n_TN]

156. Nope sorry. This ain't a Marxist group

Although there are a few Marxists on here. :)

[Shagbark Hickory]

166. There's more marxists here than anywhere else on the web I think.

Where else am I supposed to look?

[saras]

117. You mean you HAVEN'T been on the list for decades?

[socialist_n_TN]

126. Yeah, I figure the FBI has had a file on me since

probably around '69. :)

[brooklynite]

2. Thanks but no...

...given that there's been no working example of a well-functioning marxist government, I'll stick to work to fix what we have.

[socialist_n_TN]

8. Good luck with that.........

BTW, notice that my OP didn't say anything about NOT trying to "fix what we have". By all means, give it your best shot.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. What I want to know is what are you thinking of when you say marxist

the USSR was not... and I can mention a couple well run SOCIALIST states... who are more of a mixed economy than anything. In fact the US in the 1950s came very close to that...

I know marxism is a big bugaboo... I have my issues but not because of bad governments... part of the problem in the US is that people do not know the meaning of worlds.

Of course I'd have to ask the OP are marxists in the US mostly neo marxists, trotskytes (no thanks, I know what it means) or paelo marxists? Yes, like conservatives they come in many flavors.

And then there are the socialists... insert almost, flavor of the week here. Nothing funnier than seeing a SOCIALIST who fled Franco and the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party in Mexico almost come to blows. Yep, over how to do things and what is the role of the state in making the life of the people better. I could not ask for a better introduction to how divided the left can be as well, and to what REAL LEFT is... trust me, in the US coming across a Real Marxist will be hard. And that is for good reasons. But here is a hint, it was a lot of those old hand lefties who were at the forefront of the battles of labor... and willbe again.

Stop being afraid of a word by the way.

[socialist_n_TN]

68. "(no thanks, I know what it means)"

:rofl: Since you're one of the folks on here that actually pay attention to my posts nadin, I'm sure you DO "know what it means".

Hell, at this point (as I said in my OP) I'm OK with "fellow travelers" (how's that for some Trotsky?). If nothing else joining a "discussion group" would educate some folks on what Marxism is about, at least from the viewpoint of that particular group. If that group is uncomfortable, find another of a different flavor. They ALL ought to have SOME basics in common at least as far as what they SAY.

As I said below, I just get tired of people complaining about a rotting system, even to the point of (hyperbolic?) suicide and won't even LOOK at the oldest alternative to capitalism there is. FOR GOD'S (ENGEL'S?) SAKE, AT LEAST LOOK AT AN ALTERNATIVE!

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. People will end up organizing

but my advise, if you happen to be a hard core lefty. is not tell them, at least in the beginning. Yes, go into philosophy, intro people to the writings of some of the real hard core labor organizers... but don't tell people they are (insert scary word here)

The movement is already under way anyway.

And it will be organic... what is happening in the midwest is the beginnings of it.

What happened in Sacramento when the teachers occupied the Rotunda for two weeks... we are already at the going greek on them stage. It is just starting...

And SOME of the people here have gone to marches too. I hope more will join us.

[socialist_n_TN]

75. I see the wisdom behind what you say in a lot of cases

and quite frankly, when I'm with a bunch of bourgeoisie lefties or centrists, I usually DON'T use the "M" word. Unless I feel like I know them pretty well.

But most people on here know what I am. And instead of bitching every day and threatening to give up or worse, LOOK AT AN ALTERNATIVE! The oldest alternative.

[NeedleCast]

3. No thanks

[socialist_n_TN]

9. OK....

nm

[dionysus]

5. rofl....

:rofl:

[dmallind]

6. If I wanted to waste time I'd join a tie collectors club - as much chance of political relevance nt

[LynneSin]

106. Oooo you know where there is a local Tie Collector Club?

:rofl:

[dmallind]

137. Sure - hell I once was in the conference room next to the toothpick holder collectors club - no lie!

[LynneSin]

144. Have you checked out the Belt Buckle collectors organization - what a fun group of people

:rofl:

[dmallind]

208. Nope - but I was once a member of several fountain pen collectors' groups

...and yes we had more political relevance than the Marxists. A lot more money too!

[Davis_X_Machina]

7. Been a DSA/USA member....

...not Marxist, mind you, but good enough for Bernie Sanders, and Irving Howe and Michael Harrington before him -- and a paid-up Wobblie.

You'll feel better, and meet a lot of interesting folks... but don't expect much. If you're of the 'this must change, NOW! persuasion, it'll drive you nuts.

The left broadly defined has been in a long secular decline, with the active cooperation of left Socialists, right across the developed world since the early '80's. Why is an active topic for scholarly discussion.

[socialist_n_TN]

12. Good enough for now, Davis.........

But the more that join and TRY, the more good is done. And at some point, we'll need the organization that a group gives if nothing else.

Really at this point, nothing is going to work anyway and for those whose inclination is self defense, then at least it's something.

[t0dd]

13. Thanks for the book recommendation

Any others? I think studying why the left has declined is a good way for figuring out how we can reverse course.

[Davis_X_Machina]

17. Tony Judt's

...Ill Fares the Land is a great place to start.... He discusses it at length in this New York Review of Books piece. (He was dead a couple years later, from ALS... a tremendous loss.)

Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: Is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them.

[hifiguy]

242. Just ordered that book yesterday

Read the NYROB piece a few months ago and Judt impressed me deeply. There is also a fellow named Henry Giroux who mines much the same ground. Very interesting guy who writes beautifully, though he assumes a basic knowledge of Marx's dialectic and its terms, though I wouldn't call him a Marxist in any classical sense.

His writing can be found here:http://www.henryagiroux.com/online_articles.htm

edited to add link

[Scruffy1]

96. Thanks for the book recomendation.

I'll order on payday. I like long books, anyway as the short ones don't last very long lol. Solidarity forever.

[spooked911]

177. thanks- interesting

will definitely check this out

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. Marxism is an ideology?

Don't tell Louis Althusser.

:rofl:

[BOG PERSON]

48. is there a joke somewhere in your post or are you just name-dropping althusser?

because that ":rofl:" is lost on me.

[alcibiades_mystery]

50. Uh

I guess it's just a joke for people who read and understand Althusser...

:shrug:

[tammywammy]

11. No thanks. n/t

[ileus]

14. Thanks anyway...

[socialist_n_TN]

37. Come back to me when the fascists

finally take over. Oh wait. That will be too late.

[socialist_n_TN]

16. OK I expected a lot of negatives.........

and that's fine. Obviously a lot of people on here are satisfied, or at least not totally DISSATISFIED, with the way things are going. This post is not for you.

However, if you're in DESPAIR about how things are going, CONSIDER IT! To paraphase an old saw, what have you got to lose? The chains that are closing in tighter every day? It's one way of organizing.

[Shagbark Hickory]

18. Lots of people still drinking the Ronald Reagan cool aid.

[socialist_n_TN]

21. There sure are. But that's all right too

When it's all gone, they'll understand too. Or maybe not. Either way, those people can't be reached until it's too late.

I just see SO many posts on here talking, even if it's metaphorically, about jumping off cliffs and shoothing themselves and how we're all fucked, etc. And it's like "Give up much?" I'm just not built that way. If I'm bullied, I fight back. I don't give up.

And if you're in real despair about the situation, THEN DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

[Shagbark Hickory]

23. People feel helpless to do anything about it. Myself included.

[socialist_n_TN]

30. Well joining a Marxist discussion group

if nothing else will allow you some interaction with people who might agree with you more than a corporatist Democrat would.

[Shagbark Hickory]

45. And what will be accomplished by discussing ideas that will never occur?

I'm feeling so hopeless about the direction this country is heading.

[socialist_n_TN]

66. Well, as I've said it's a start........

The theory of revolutions and organization will help clarify thinking and give you signposts to watch for if nothing else. That's in my opinion of course. You can get a lot by reading on your own of course (I have a feeling that you already have), but a group, even if it's just on line or by phone, can help with the clarification of ideas, goals, and yes, even action.

Here's the deal as far as I'm concerned. IF the shit really hits the fan in the ole USA, then it might be nice to have a core of sympathetic people who are in touch with each other. People who at least HAVE a programme for changing this rotten system. Even if that programme isn't well known. It will be up to us to get that programme out to the masses. And I'm talking about SPECIFICS, not just generalities.

And for most people whose only experience with Marx is 160 years of capitalist propaganda, it could be a learning experience that will benefit them. We've got to start where we're at, not where we WISH we were. Where we're at is massive leftist dissatisfaction with the direction of this country and this system. Marx is an alternative. The oldest alternative historically.

[white_wolf]

174. I think I'd rather have the Jim Jones kool-aid.

At least it would a quick death. Regan's is long drawn out and suffering.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[socialist_n_TN]

26. Yep, I know. They don't bother me at all

They are either satisfied with what's going on or they're just a little bothered. When they bother to think about it at all.

My post was really directed at people who are either TOTALLY PISSED off about it or are in despair about it and ready to give up. Giving up is not in my list of responses. When I'm bullied, I fight back. Marxists, at least ideologically, fight back.

[hifiguy]

24. The Marxist paradigm is the only one

that explains what is happening in this country. One must be familiar with it in order to see clearly. One need not adopt the Communist Manifesto in order to understand the death spiral of large-scale capitalism, but one must have some familiarity with Marx's description of it to truly understand current events in context. Marx's analyses are being proven more true and accurate each day.

[socialist_n_TN]

28. Thank you hifiguy. THAT, if nothing eles.......

would be one really good reason to join a discussion group AT THE VERY LEAST. Another reason would be because of the potential for an organized resistance to the capitalist takeover.

[nc4bo]

32. So, do you have any personal suggestions?

Please feel free to pm me.

[socialist_n_TN]

34. Well, this group has published

a couple of articles of mine on line. www.workerspower.net under the byline of Marcus Otono. "My nom de plume", he sniffed pretentiously. :rofl:

[nc4bo]

53. Thanks -

Found a Red Republic that links to some forums and has some info on it but not very active.

Problem is finding info that's not some conspiracy theory/far RW crazy stuff disguised as trustworthy sources.

I think I remember talks on DU of having a Worker's Party as a possible 3rd party option, this was quite a while ago. Not sure if it ever took off so I'll assume it hasn't.

Thanks again and feel free to pass me whatever else you find. Very interesting topic!

:hi:

[socialist_n_TN]

84. The Worker's Power group is what I like to call

"fundamentalist" Trotsky. Which is why I like them. Anytime there's a question about theory or programme, they go back to LD and his writings and extrapolate from them. They don't even (usually) go to the groups that were founded in Trotsky's day because of the changes over the decades since 1940. They try to find guidance in the Old Man's writings.

[socialist_n_TN]

35. BTW, somebody on here came up with a GREAT

observation RE: Marxism and what's going on today. They said something along the lines of most people don't know about Marxism, but the capitalists sure do. They're following Marx right down the line. I thought that was SO true.

[leftstreet]

86. +1

:thumbsup:

[Starry Messenger]

25. Uh oh, you said the M-word.

:D

[socialist_n_TN]

29. Yeah, I did didn't I?

:rofl:

But seriously folks. :) I get on here every day and see people whining about how we're all fucked and nobody's doing anything against the "corporatist" takeover and blah, blah, blah. So, if you really feel that way, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

JOIN SOMETHING THAT REALLY DOES AT LEAST PAY LIP SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE AND THEIR NEEDS. God knows, the PM of Greece let us ALL know what the politicians think about capitalism vs the people (hint: the people lose).

I mean it won't put you in the rain forest of Oregon as a Che Brigade guerilla, but at least you might learn something rather than capitalist propaganda.

[Starry Messenger]

31. Well, it can be an difficult shift in thinking.

Electoral politics tend to highlight the "bad actor" theory. If you don't like the bums, vote the bums out. It's a harder leap to "It's the system that creates the bums". I know that took me a little while to wrestle with. It just seems easier to vote and hope. It doesn't help that people also think that socialism is just an item on the menu of a variety of economic systems. It's tough to explain how everything works together to create a financial ecology, as it were.

[socialist_n_TN]

33. "financial ecology" That's damn good starry, I like that a lot

And you're right, I'm sure it's hard for people to accept. But Geez you'd think that it would be better than being so despairing that they talk about suicide, either literally or politically. If you're THAT down in the dumps about it, TRY SOMETHING, ANYTHING, ELSE!

Sorry, I didn't mean to yell at the choir. :)

[RSillsbee]

36. Because Marxism worked so well in the USSR?

I'll pass

[socialist_n_TN]

38. GREAT. Find something else that

will even TRY to stop the corporatist/fascist takeover. Everything else has worked SO well up to now.

There are a LOT of versions of Marxism other than the Stalinist USSR.

[hack89]

65. I will look to Norway or Sweden

they seem to have figured it out.

[socialist_n_TN]

76. The USA had it pretty close to figured out too

back in the late 30s until 1980. Then look what happened.

That's the problem with "regulating" capitalism. It doesn't STAY regulated. Regulating capitalism is like riding a tiger. It's hard to do and you're always in danger of being eaten.

[hack89]

87. But Sweden has a strong free market economy

that seems to be serving it's people well. Do you think they would want to change?

[socialist_n_TN]

90. Let's see how it turns out over the long term

As I said, for 50 years we had it pretty close to being figured out too. All it takes is one generation and the capitalists can destroy everything.

And when they finally take over EVERYTHING here, whose to say they won't export their "pure" system to the rest of the world? History shows that the capitalists won't let any type of socialism exist without attacking it either economically or militarily.

[MessiahRp]

57. They didn't really use Marxism, except in name as a way to shield their authoritarianist regime

Marxism speaks to the people. It defends and fights for the working class. Lenin and Stalin knew this so they used this system as a form of propaganda to keep people in check and then rolled in their violent authoritarian regime which was not Marxist at all. Marxism and Communism are not one in the same. Karl Marx' ideas and names got thrown in with Lenin and Stalin because his ideas were revered by people whom had no voice and it kept those people quiet and in line when the Communist Government took over. Unfortunately for Americans, our history books are filled with lies, untruths and right wing propaganda so nobody knows the truth about Karl Marx... as I suspect in 20-30 years the next generation will not know the truth about Thomas Jefferson (whom they're already removing from textbooks) and other liberal thinkers.

It's all part of a conceptual plan to force right wing ideology which includes supply side unrestrained capitalism, down people's throats.

Rp

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. Since it wasn't marxism try again

And there are many technical reasons why it wasn't... and they have little do do with Karl Marx who probably did a few loops in his grave, but all to do with Russian history going back to the 12th century and the Mongol Invasion.

If you are curious I could even recommend a book or two on the subject... albeit one was written by a Russian Emigree who did have an axe to grind. As long as you are aware of that, his write ups on Peter the Great and connections to oh Joseph Stalin's style of leadership explain why truly Marx had nothing to do with it.

By the by, the five year plans were not even invented by Lenin or Stalin, but by the 1901 Duma.

[RSillsbee]

105. Seriously,

IMO you need better people before sociaism will ever work. As long as you have to put humans into the equation you're doomed to failure

[socialist_n_TN]

110. So you put people in a system that GUARANTEES

and actually ENCOURAGES them to be the WORST they can be and expect the best outcome? Like capitalism?

[RSillsbee]

149. I don't expect the best outcome ANYTIME people are involved NT

[socialist_n_TN]

153. OK. So you expect a BETTER outcome by putting

people into a system that ENCOURAGES the WORST aspects of human nature?

[RSillsbee]

163. The WORST in human nature doesn't NEED to be encouraged NT

[socialist_n_TN]

168. So you DON'T believe in capitalism then

Because that's a system that encourages the WORST in people.

[RSillsbee]

213. I preffer capitalism to marxism

But botom line they both suck

[socialist_n_TN]

223. Well to me, that doesn't make a lot of sense......

You have a negative view of human nature, but you support a system that reinforces those negative traits. That actually makes a VIRTUE of them. Wouldn't it make more sense to support a system that at least pays lip service to the better side of human nature?

I'll leave you with this. For 160 years or so the current economic/political system has demonized Marxism as evil incarnate because Marxism doesn't recognize their status as an elite. And no, I realize that Stalin and Mao didn't help matters with the way they ran the political side of the equation. Brutally and without concern for the people they claimed to be trying to help and represent. But as many on this thread have pointed out, they weren't Marxists or at least the states they ruled weren't Marxist. There ARE other models and even if there weren't, people CAN learn from other's mistakes.

In short, don't let centuries of propaganda turn you off from a system that just MIGHT be closer to your beliefs than what we have now.

[RSillsbee]

235. I've read the Communist Manifesto

and it all sounds very good on paper but the fact is that human beings are human beings. For every Snowball there is a Napoleon.

Until you change human nature it will never work

[socialist_n_TN]

237. Back to "And capitalism works SO well"

At least with Marx, I know whose side I'm on.

[hifiguy]

245. One must separate, when reading Marx,

the description of how capitalism works and how it devours itself - which was one of the most prescient things ever written - from the prescriptive Manifesto which is utopian and unrealizable for the reasons you suggest. The point is to learn from Marx, not follow him dogmatically, and apply those Marxian principles which can work in the real world. It is done in most European countries, which are social democracies. And you can't have social democracy without Marx, whether you admit it or not.

[hifiguy]

241. "Capitalism rests on the absurd belief

that the nastiest of men, with the nastiest of motivations, will somehow work towards the benefit of all." - attributed to John Maynard Keynes

[white_wolf]

175. I'd be interested in reading those books. n/t

[coalition_unwilling]

228. Your post offers all the proof necessary to demonstrate that you

don't have the faintest idea what Marxism is. The USSR was not 'Marxist'. Marxist-Leninist, arguably. Stalinist, definitely.

[locahungaria]

39. Why all the closed minds?

Pick up a book (OK, if Marx makes you nervous, try Fred Goldstein instead) read on line, join a group......but at least try and educate yourselves.

There's enough "knee-jerk" reaction around here to think that the "Red Scare" has come back....

K & R for the valiant effort, S-n-T!

[socialist_n_TN]

69. Thanks loca. I try.........

:) Welcome to DU BTW.

[BOG PERSON]

40. no thanks

marxism is cool and all, but self-styled marxists are annoying and maybe .001% of them have anything original or interesting to say

[damntexdem]

41. Marx was a great diagnostician but a lousy clinician.

Do you have any evidence that any Marxist party can claim a better record?

[dissidentboomer]

44. A record better than what?

The Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Finns, and a few others might be considered "socialist". Although, I don't think PURE socialism has ever existed, in practice, and, JUST LIKE PURE FREE MARKETS, is a utopian pipe dream. Thus, proper and timely mixtures of socialist and capitalist policies are what work best. BOTH pure ideologies are beasts that devour whole nations. Should you get too close to either beast, you will NOT attain the pure form in practice but some horrible, nightmarish parody of pure capitalism or pure socialism. All you will have are the symbols to wave around. WE, I fear, are FAR TOO CLOSE to the pure capitalist beast.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. I'll offer Sweeden

what you think the Socialists don't follow SOME of what Marx wrote?

Oh hell I'll offer the US during the 1950s when we had a MIXED economy... tell me how bad where those years?

[dissidentboomer]

42. Funny you should post this, as I

just sent the following reply to someone here at another "thread":

"I've become a radical nut. I really don't think I'm a nut but I feel as though circumstances have made my views "radical". The funny thing is that my views haven't changed much since 1990, or so, but comparatively, they are now radical.

During the last 10 years, I have realized that Marxists are right about a few things. I'm no Marxist but the very rich HAVE waged class war since about 1980. They have waged it in a quiet manner and have cleverly used distractions and the ignorance of much of the public. Those statements would have seemed crazy in 1975, or so, but there are now many very bright, learned, experienced intellectuals who agree with those statements. Check out Kevin Phillips, for example. The tables have now tilted SO far in favor of the very rich that they are brazenly buying power and turning the clock back to about 1900, whenever and wherever possible. They have everyone beneath them so confused that many are playing right into their hands by supporting the partial destruction of things that can save them from wage slavery -the tax code, government oversight, organized labor, and individual rights. They are extremely skilled at making others seem like villians and at making economic policies that are directly contrary to the interests of the nation and the great majority of people seem perfectly logical and reasonable. They are now attacking what is just about the last strong plank that maintains a democracy - higher education. They have supported policies that have ensured that it is financially out of reach for all but the wealthy and, in a few years, some of the wealthy might have a hard time financing higher education. In addition, major chairs and professorships at most colleges and universities are funded by.... you guessed it.... major corporations who ensure that those with very conservative Chicago school economic and social views fill the chairs and professorships. They are closing us out."

Marxism is MUCH more than an ideology. It is a theory of historical development and human nature. Many conservatives and capitalists have desparately attempted, through propaganda, to bury Marxism, mostly through linking "marxism" and "socialism" and the USSR. "Socialism" is the logical, practical extension of Marxist theory. The USSR, after about 1928, was NOT socialism. It was more like fascist state capitalism.... NOT socialism. The comments and reactions to your suggestion provide some evidence for what I wrote in the message above about "higher" education.

[socialist_n_TN]

71. We Trotskyists call the USSR after '28

a "deformed worker's state". I think that '28 was when Trotsky was kicked out of the Party and exiled by Stalin.

[dissidentboomer]

72. Deformed, it was.

That's about when Trotsky left.

[socialist_n_TN]

81. Well, it's good to know that some folks know history

:)

[Cleita]

43. Unfortunately, I don't agree with Marx on the solution

to the problem. However, I do believe we need to start organizing labor into a party regardless of whether they are Democrats or Republicans. I mean all labor whether they are unionized or not. Let's face it most of us have to work for a living and when we don't we become poor and often homeless. I think this should be the real tea party movement, not the fake one funded by the Koch Brothers and other corporations. We don't need to change parties, but work within our parties to push them to where they work for the ordinary American.

[socialist_n_TN]

74. "We don't need ot change parties,

but work within our parties to push them to where they work for the ordinary American"

Good luck with that. I think that's been tried for the last three decades or so and it isn't working. Although, as I've said all through this thread, keep trying and so will I. I CAN multitask after all.

The problem with trying to do it this way is that it won't work when the parties don't pay attention to the people at ALL. And they don't. Poll after poll has shown that the apathetic, beaten down AMERICAN people support leftish positions by OVERWHELMING majorities and IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN GOVERNMENT.

The Greek PM admitted that the system (capitalism) was stronger (more important) than the will of the people (democracy). I see NO reason to believe that ANY of our politicians in leadership positions feel any different than Papandreou. So if this is the case, where do you go from here? Do you give up? Do you suicide? Join the fascists? Or join a movement whose core beliefs are anticapitalist and pro people. Rather than pro profit.

[Cleita]

82. Yes, but we are doing it individually and it's not working. We do need

a labor party within the parties. We will then pull both parties back to the left, pretty much where they were in the fifties. The labor party will not run candidates or function like a political party but as a movement within the parties. Most likely, the ranks of the working class Democrats will swell. What the Democratic Party stands for now doesn't give much to the ordinary working class American. An association of working and middle class would change that. Also, we must convince the small business, main street entrepreneurs that they too are working class and voting for the agendas of global corporations, multi-millionaires and billionaires is voting against their best interests. An association of working class people can get the message out.

[socialist_n_TN]

103. Wasn't that what the bourgeoise trade unions were for?

The DLC put that to death when they changed the Democratic Party support structure from their normal "special interests". Do you think that the corporatists that own the Dems now will let that happen?

[Cleita]

148. Yes, that's what they were for, but we need a larger

coalition considering the trade unions have shrunk in scope and power. We need to pull everyone in both union and non-union. This is a war for America against global money power.

[socialist_n_TN]

161. "This is a war for America against global money power."

EXACTLY. That's why we need people who know something about fighting global money power (read: capitalist system). They're called Marxists. It's the longest established anticapitalist group around.

Look, I'd love for everybody to be Marxists, but that's not reasonable or expected. What I WOULD like though is for people to keep an open mind about it and LEARN something about it FROM SOME SOURCE GROUPS before they automatically discount it just because of 160 years of capitalist propaganda.

Another thing. I meant what I said about fellow travelers at this point. The only time the capitalists relent is when they're scared they will lose it all. Like in the 30s. FDR didn't get his "reforms" of capitalism out of the goodness of their nonexistent hearts. They "compromised" the system BECAUSE THEY WERE SCARED. Commies scare them, IF there's enough of us. And supporters.

[Cleita]

162. For the reasons you outline, this is why you have to

bring them together under the umbrella of labor, because commies does scare them.

[socialist_n_TN]

222. Well yeah I don't have any problem with a

united front on specific issues with trade union groups. But what you have to realize is that, to a Marxist, trade unions (or at least their leadership) are part of the current SYSTEM. The system that we need to smash and start over with more economic democracy. Trade union leadership is part of the "labor aristocracy" and, as such, will ALWAYS shy away from actualy trying to take power FROM the capitalists.

But on specific issues that benefit the working class, I'll form a united front with the Devil himself as Trotsky said.

[Cleita]

244. What you want ideally are cooperatives and frankly I

do too, where businesses are employee owned and where the profits are shared by those who do the work. However, we are a long way from that Utopia so we need to get together our people power first to make real change.

[socialist_n_TN]

246. Hence united front work........

Which as I said, I have no problem with. :)

Edited to add:

However this doesn't change the need for people to learn about Marx and, if you want a practical guideline for tactics to use in the class struggle, I would suggest also reading some Lenin and Trotsky both. They were the ones who put together an actual successful revolution. It was an almost bloodless revolution too. And yes, I KNOW that the Red/White civil war was FAR from bloodless. IOW, multitask by pulling together with trade unionism for the immediate term, but learn what can be done if necessary in the longer term too.

[FLPanhandle]

47. No thanks.

I may not be happy about uncontrolled capitalism, but I'd rather fight for the proper controls in a capitalist society than experience any Marxist solutions.

[dissidentboomer]

51. Good lord. There ARE marxist solutions to

uncontrolled market created problems. THAT DOES NOT MEAN that we will make you wear a beret, date a hairy female liberation fanatic, and give up grandma's trust fund. You will awake in the morning, the OJ will be fresh, big comapanies and banks will still exist, and some SMALL ones might actually survive and be created with a cooperative atmosphere! Imagine! STOP BUYING INTO the fear. Ok?

[FLPanhandle]

54. No fear.

I don't believe in any Marxist solution I've heard so far.

I could just as easily say "STOP BUYING INTO the fear" of non-Marxist solutions. Statements like that convince nobody.

[dissidentboomer]

56. You could have a twisted idea

about what are and what are not Marxist solutions. You also might have supported some things that are Marxist and you didn't know. Don't worry. We won't tell anyone.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dissidentboomer]

61. LOL.... Ok. What would you call

increasing corporate tax rates, tax rates on the top 1 percent in income, directing the "stimulus" to creating permenant New Deal jobs rather than temporary jobs, prohibiting private funding in campaigns? Are these socialist ideas or are they not socialist ideas? Your call.

[FLPanhandle]

85. We've had a progressive tax rate and controls on campaign funding before

Those things were dismantled over time starting with Reagan. However, we were not a Marxist society before Reagan, so, no, those are not unique to a Marxist society.

[dissidentboomer]

121. No one said they were unique to Marxism. LOL. However, those

ideas pre-date reagan by a long, long time and were favorites of many, many socialists. READ some history, please.

[FLPanhandle]

124. I know my history

Statements like "READ some history", make you look snotty and stupid.

[dissidentboomer]

131. Fair enough. Look, I'm no socialist but

they have had ideas that have been implemented HERE in the good ol' USA and elsewhere that have been appropriate and have worked. The best examples of eras when main stream US politicians borrowed socialist ideas and implemented them with success are the 1930's and the Teddy Roosevelt administration (Remember regulation of the food and other industries to ensure better health and safety? Many, if not most of those specific ideas came from Upton Sinclair and other US socialists). There were socialists in FDR's administration, some of whom were major player in developing and administering the new deal. They scare the hell out of most Americans but ONLY because they have been told that socialists eat children and ALWAYS murder rich people. :evilgrin: I've known some.... they DON'T! They CAN be useful and we, as a nation, need ALL the help we can get.

[dissidentboomer]

63. Have you read all of my posts? Please tell me, then,

where they lack substance.

[FLPanhandle]

73. Well..

"THAT DOES NOT MEAN that we will make you wear a beret, date a hairy female liberation fanatic,"
"STOP BUYING INTO THE FEAR"
"Don't worry. We won't tell anyone."

All emotional responses and hyperbole and without any substance. If you call those posts full of substance, well, I hate to see your flippant and emotional posts.

[dissidentboomer]

122. You've read 3 posts. I suspect that you are a "baiter",

probably partisan. You are not knowledgeable enough about economics opr history to merit another response at this board.

[socialist_n_TN]

79. Great. Let me know how you feel when the

fascists finally take over and you're a serf. They've already all but dropped the pretense that the will of the people means anything compared to the system. Remember to all bourgeoisie politicians today, capitalism is more important than democracy.

If it's going to be stopped at all, it will be stopped by Marxist solutions.

[FLPanhandle]

83. So, it's Marxism or Fascism huh?

I don't buy your false choice.

"If it's going to be stopped at all, it will be stopped by Marxist solutions." I don't buy this either.

Implementing proper controls on a market/capitalist system is required. We've done well with capitalism until the controls and laws and taxation began to be dumped starting with Reagan. I'd rather go back and restore those things than dump the entire system for another system.

[socialist_n_TN]

97. Hey as nadin said, even Marx thought a well regulated

capitalism was a step up from feudalism. But systems outlive their usefulness. Capitalism, well regulated or not, is based on expansion. How will you square expansion in a world of limited resources?

As to Marxism or fascism, which are we closer to now? Anyway, it really doesn't matter what either one of us think, what will happen will happen. I'm just trying to stop the slide into fascism. I'll even wish you good luck getting that well regulated version of capitalism back. How do you propose to return to the "good old days"? I have a feeling we won't ever see them again. The capitalists have no reason to return to that "well regulated" system now that they own the government.

[FLPanhandle]

120. How do you propose to return to the "good old days"?

Either scrapping Capitalism or re-establishing the controls will require Americans demanding it. Will that happen in the short term? I have my doubts, but no one saw the changes of the 1960's coming in the 1950's, so it's possible.

We may disagree on the solution, but both of us don't like where we are going. I'll be happy if your way works as well as you think it will.

[socialist_n_TN]

130. Well we're a lot closer to what Marx envisioned

as the model for a prerevolutionary socialist state than Russia was in 1917 that's for sure.

In nadin's post about well regulated capitalism I had this thought. It's probably going to take a revolution, hopefully as bloodless as possible, to take our government back from the capitalists who own it. I don't think that either of us think they're just going to give it back after going to all the expense to buy it in the first place. So after a (hopefully) successful and bloodless revolution, what do you do then? Give it back to the capitalists even under heavy regulation for our grandchildren to have to do it all over again in 50 years or so? Or do you go for something different? I know it's just a thought experiment now, but it WILL be a legitimate question in the future. Either that or fascism.

[Dreamer Tatum]

88. Marxist solutions are discussed over bongs and wine bottles

not serious public policy debates. There are Marxist regimes elsewhere in the world...take your '30s radicalism there if you're a real "Trotskyist"

[socialist_n_TN]

93. Oh so it's an "America, love it or leave it" post huh?

Thanks. I miss the 60s. :rofl: Are you going Joe McCarthy on me next? "Are you or have you EVER been a member of the Communist Party?"

[Dreamer Tatum]

116. No, it's a "REALLY? TROTSKY???" post. nt

[socialist_n_TN]

119. I don't know. It sure sounded like.......

"if you don't like it then go somewhere else." I heard a lot of that in the 60s down south, so I'm pretty familiar with the sentiment.

Yeah really, Trotsky. The Marxist road not taken. Know anything about him other than Capitalist (or Stalinist- that was worse) propaganda?

But as I said, at this point I don't really care what flavor of Marxism people try. Or even if they go all in with it or not. Just quit bitching about we're all fucked and DO SOMETHING. And Marx is the oldest alternative to capitalism there is.

[The Big Vetolski]

142. Bongs and wine bottles? No WAY, dude! It's bongs and BEER!

Wine bottles belong to latte' liberals who have a vested interest in preserving capitalism because capitalism funds their trust funds, don't you know? Bongs and Beer is what fuels the masses!

As for the thirties, did you cheer the death of Glass-Steagal? Did your stock portfolio rise?

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. You mean like Glass Steegal? I am serious

Glass Steegal had elements of it... why the Pugs fought against it for so long.

That said what we have these days is not even Capitalism... but monopoly economy and inverted totalitarianism

[FLPanhandle]

91. "what we have these days is not even Capitalism"

That's sort of my point. We did very well when we had the proper controls on our capitalist system and campaign funding controls.

Those controls were dismantled over time. I'd rather a solution that restored these controls than scrap the entire system altogether.

[nadinbrzezinski]

94. And my point is that Glass Steegal

was actually a marxist solution, or one from Smith. The solution, that is heavy regulation and breaking up monopolies is at the heart of BOTH the wealth of nations and Das Kapital. They are bookends to Classical Economics.

[FLPanhandle]

118. Call it a "Marxist solution" if you like.

I wouldn't, as it's really just a control on speculation, but whatever.

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. Have you ever read either the Wealth or Das Kapital?

It would make sense... for the record, start with Smith... easier to read.

[FLPanhandle]

125. Read them both in college.

So?

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. Then it should make sense to you that it is in both systems

and that in reality the difference between one and the other is bookends to a political theory. They both also had the same exact diagnosis to monopoly practices... exactly the same diagnosis.

[Odin2005]

49. The only radical LW group around here is a bunch of dumb college-age authoritarian Trotskyites.

Unfortunately. A bunch of angsty middle-class fools more concerned about giving The Man the middle finger rather than engage in real radical activism.

[dissidentboomer]

52. Look around. There are others. Some quite

practical and reasonable.

[socialist_n_TN]

89. I would question if they're really Trotskyists then

Now LD DID believe in democratic centralism, but as far as intraparty democracy goes, support of that (and internationalism) was what got him assassinated by Stalin. You hash it out in house openly and democratically, then present a united front to the world. Stalin was the one that made decisions at the top and then ordered everyone to obey those decisions. If the group has a leader that makes top down decisions, it's decidedly NOT Trotskyist, no matter what they call themselves.

[slackmaster]

55. I've been a devout Groucho Marxist since childhood.

Duck Soup changed my life forever.

[Throd]

92. I'm an authoritarian Richard Marxist

[Unvanguard]

60. Marxist groups are utterly useless, and have been in the US since the 1950s.

Socialism is all well and good, but thinking about it in Marxist terms is often unhelpful, and in any case we are so far from socialism that we really ought to concentrate on other battles.

[dissidentboomer]

64. What would those be? Protecting your own

ass during the retreat?

[socialist_n_TN]

100. Yep. That must be it...........

because those "other" battles sure are working out well aren't they? Those "other" battles for the last 30 years have consisted of "What are we going to lose and how fast?" I'd like to change that paradigm.

I didn't know that SO many people had such a hard time doing more than one thing at a time. I thought American business had taught us all to multitask. So we could keep our jobs and increase those profits.

[Unvanguard]

113. You're not going to change the paradigm by recycling Marxism.

Its days are over. It has terrible associations in the minds of most Americans and a substantial part of the world. If you want to build a radical alternative so as to alter the paradigm of the last thirty years, you should do it by building an alternative that is genuinely new.

[socialist_n_TN]

133. Why reinvent the wheel?

Especially since Marx is pretty much predicting the behavior of capitalism to a tee. And hopefully any future Marxist state can learn from the past.

Hell, Chavez in Venezuela seems to have set up an ELECTED Marxist government that is pretty damn popular with the mass of the people in that country. The people actually saved him in '03 from a CIA inspired coup. I doubt that they would have done that if he were that unpopular.

But even disregarding Chavez, there are models other than the USSR for a Marxist government.

[Starry Messenger]

182. The theory of evolution also has a bad association for lots of Americans.

No one is calling for us to abandon it, however. How sad to see such anti-intellectualism from the "enlightened" left.

[Unvanguard]

186. The theory of evolution has ample scientific support

and is the overwhelming consensus among biologists.

Marxism is not a consensus view among historians, sociologists, or economists. Not even remotely.

[Starry Messenger]

202. LOL.

In this country perhaps.

[Unvanguard]

203. Not anywhere in the world.

Except maybe where a distortion of it is by force of law.

[Starry Messenger]

204. You obviously have no idea what you are even talking about.

Marxist theory is highly regarded and used as a tool in many writings up to the present day in many countries. But you've got commies on the brain, so there is no reasoning with you. Ta.

[Unvanguard]

209. Indeed, certain aspects of Marxist theory can be useful.

Marxism as a whole ideology? No, that is not the consensus in any country with academic freedom.

Your notion that I am some kind of anti-communist crusader is amusing. If Marx were alive today, he would criticize his followers for abandoning a critical, pragmatic approach to politics, the world, and past theory in favor of continued dogmatic adherence to his works. I dislike Marxist political movements in that spirit, not because I support capitalism, or because I am frightened of radical left politics.

[Unvanguard]

109. Well, mine and the asses of others, if it comes to that.

Rather better than losing everything because we were too busy stuck in our fantasies, I think. :shrug:

[dissidentboomer]

67. Suggestion for a web site and

reading/listening material - Professor R.D. Wolff, www.rdwolff.com

[Baclava]

95. Bring back the Gulags?

You KGB? I bet you have a nice dacha out in the country.

A "Worker's Paradise"


One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich - Alexander Solzhenitsyn

It is winter at a Soviet labor camp called “HQ,” in Siberia. A worker sounds the wake-up call for the inmates by pounding a hammer on a rail outside, but it is so cold that he soon gives up.

Ivan Denisovich Shukhov, an inmate at the camp, usually wakes up quickly at the wake-up call, but today he is aware of severe aches all over his body and a high fever. He listens to the sounds of other zeks, or camp inmates, trudging off to work. He hears signs that his own team, Gang 104, is preparing for labor as well. Shukhov recalls that this will be the day when it is decided whether Gang 104 will stay in HQ or be sent to the freezing, barren plains to work on a building project. Shukhov reflects that in such cold, with no place to get warm even for a moment, the only hope for survival is to dig feverishly and never stop.

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/denisovich/section1.rhtml

[socialist_n_TN]

98. Yeah that Trotskyist version of Marxism sure was harsh

Oh wait...

[Baclava]

151. Well, Old Joe twisted the "workers revolution" into something completely different.

I'll grant you that.

See, I've actually read The Communist Manifesto, something I bet these punks bad-mouthing me here never have done.

[Starry Messenger]

99. Fun fact.

Most of Solzhenitsyn's writings were published while he was a guest of the Hoover Institution. The right wing Vatican of CA. Make of that what you will. Condy Rice is a prominent member.

[socialist_n_TN]

101. I knew that Solzhenitsyn had been sponsered by

some RW group back in the 80s.

[Starry Messenger]

102. I live about 10 minutes away from Stanford U., where the Hoover center is.

Lots of interesting history there. :D

[socialist_n_TN]

104. Callyfornia girl huh?

:) Even down south, I've heard good things about Stanford.

[RZM]

171. That's not a 'fun fact.' It's a straight up lie

He was briefly hosted at the Hoover after his exile in the mid-1970s but from 1976 on he lived in Cavendish, Vermont. Actually he lived on a secluded compound that he rarely left.

Here's his bibliography:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Solzhenitsyn_bibliography


As you can see, 'most' of these works did not come out during his brief stint at the Hoover.

Really, you should check your facts before posting such misleading bullshit.

[Baclava]

181. Hush now - let the lambs go to their slaughter with their heads high and proud

Anybody that believes there's a Trotsky revival on the horizon is smelling the crack salts.

I forgive them.

[locahungaria]

114. Hyperbole much?

:eyes:

[Baclava]

136. Everybody knows these Trotskyites are just trying to get Bolshevik girls liquored up with vodka

in their "meetings"

...or so I've heard

[socialist_n_TN]

138. Shh. Don't tell anyone. That's a state secret

Or it would be if we had EVER had a Trotskyist state. :)

[Baclava]

143. More power to you comrade, Nostrovia!

I'd tell you the walls have ears - but you already know that ;)

[socialist_n_TN]

146. Unfortunately the walls had ice axes too

:(

[nadinbrzezinski]

127. I know what? since we still have them... RESERVATIONS any one?

No we are not bringing them back... they are here.

So by your logic it is just as evil... and do you want me to go into the estimated number of people who died in the Americas? Trust me, given the population density it is equivalent.

[JoseGaspar]

129. Uh huh...

There are more people in prison in the U.S. today than were ever in "Gulags" at their greatest size, both relatively and absolutely.

But, of course, those were "political prisoners" while American prisoners are simple criminals lacking in moral fiber.

And, people in the "Gulags" had a higher life expectancy, relative to general life expectancy, than the people in the American prison "system" today.

Sometimes its hard to see the ground when you sit way up on that high horse.

[Baclava]

135. "Higher life expectancy"? OH now that's hilarious...hahahaha

Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls

Soviet Union, Stalin's regime (1924-53)

Adler, N., Victims of Soviet Terror, 1993 cites these:

Chistyakovoy, V. (Neva, no.10): 20 million killed during the 1930s.

Dyadkin, I.G. (Demograficheskaya statistika neyestestvennoy smertnosti v SSSR 1918-1956 ): 56 to 62 million "unnatural deaths" for the USSR overall, with 34 to 49 million under Stalin.

Gold, John.: 50-60 million.
Davies, Norman (Europe A History, 1998): c. 50 million killed 1924-53, excluding WW2 war losses. This would divide (more or less) into 33M pre-war and 17M after 1939.

Rummel, 1990: 61,911,000 democides in the USSR 1917-87, of which 51,755,000 occurred during the Stalin years.

This divides up into:
1923-29: 2,200,000 (plus 1M non-democidal famine deaths)
1929-39: 15,785,000 (plus 2M non-democidal famine)
1939-45: 18,157,000
1946-54: 15,613,000 (plus 333,000 non-democidal famine)

TOTAL: 51,755,000 democides and 3,333,000 non-demo. famine

http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm

[JoseGaspar]

212. If you climb any higher up that horse...

... you will get a nose bleed.

Laugh all you like about tens of millions... but do it after you prove me wrong. You changed the subject instead.

I will address your new subject once you have cleared up the old one.

Your new subject is straightforward. There is actually a science of demographics... and there is quite a broad if dry literature on this, particularly since the fall of the Soviet union and the release of the archives.

But, prove me wrong first. This isn't rocket science. It is easy. How many people were in the Gulags at their height and how many were incarcerated in them on average? How many died? What average death rate does that result in? What was the death rate in the Soviet Union during that same time period? What are your sources?

Now, calculate precisely the same numbers for the U.S.

Do a little actual research, Ace. What do you find?

This is not hard... and it is a subject which addresses the U.S. just as directly as it does the Soviet Union.

[blindpig]

217. crickets

Funny about that, not so hard an exercise, but repeating the lies of others(including Nazis) is so much easier and comforting.

[Baclava]

231. Trotsky! Trotsky! Trotsky!

(I don't do math - too bor-ing)

[blindpig]

234. You must have me mistaken for another commie....

I'm 'old school'.

[socialist_n_TN]

238. Damn Baclava, now you've gone and insulted pig

Not ALL of us commies are Trotskyists. :)

[Baclava]

230. If you think I'm going to bore people with a math debate you can forget it

This is a happy thread and I'm going to keep it that way.


Trotsky! Trotsky! Trotsky!

[blindpig]

233. The truth is sooo boring....

so you be happy with your Nazi inspired lies.

[JoseGaspar]

236. Alright, Ace...

If you don't like my math quiz, let's try one of yours.

According to your quoted "estimates", above, Stalin killed 34 million people between 1939 and 1954. This number is exclusive of the 20 to 25 million Soviets who died as a result of the Nazi invasion of 1941.

Now, try this:

According to the Census of 1939, there were 168 million people in the Soviet Union. Annexations of the Baltic States and other territories in 1939 added another 24 million for a total of 192 million. According to the Census of 1959, there were 209 million people of whom 75 million had been born since 1940.

The death rate in the Russian Empire was 3% on the eve of the first World War. It was 1.6% after the fall of the Soviet Union.

Explain to me how 55 to 60 million people (20 to 25 million in WW2 plus your 34 million) could have died of "unnatural causes" between 1939 and 1959? That would make the death rate due to natural causes nearly zero over those 20 years. In fact, the death rate falls to nearly 1% just to account for those who died in the World War.

Or do you mean that Stalin was "responsible" for everybody who was a victim of the Nazi invasion of 1941?

There are people who say that but they are not called "demographers".

[The Big Vetolski]

145. Ummm...Stalin was the Gulag king. And he ordered Trotsky's

assassination. With an axe. In Mexico City. Read your history before you post more on this subject and make yourself look even more like an ignoramus.

[Baclava]

150. So you're saying Stalin wasn't a Marxist.?..don't you know ANYTHING?

Old Joe would have you gutted like a carp for shooting off your mouth like that about him.

[The Big Vetolski]

154. Baclava. Are you sure you didn't mean your name to be Balaclava?

You know, where the Light Brigade charged into the cannons? Because you just did.

Stalin was a Marxist. Just like Caligula was a Caesar. So was Marcus Aurelius. No one in their right mind says that Marcus Aurelius was an evil, demented, bloodthirsty tyrant because he believed in the same system that Caligula did. For that matter, I'm sure few here at DU would say that Franklin Roosevelt was just as bad as Ronald Reagan because both believed in representative democracy.

Or that America is bad just because Ronald Reagan was an American with a real, gen-u-ine birth certificate to prove it. Or because Jeffrey Dahmer was American, therefore all Americans are cannibals.

This is your logic: Stalin was a Marxist, or said he was, therefore all Marxists are evil. Might as well say: Jeffrey Dahmer was an American. Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal. Therefore all Americans are cannibals.

Don't insult my intelligence.

[Baclava]

159. "Stalin was a Marxist, or said he was, therefore all Marxists are evil."

That's not what I said at all.

Marx and Engels wrote about the plight of Germans working in an industrial society in the early 1800's...and the loss of humanity they suffered as a result of the industrialization of the German economy.

Stalin turned that into death camps. He took care of the 'struggle between classes' alright.

By killing everyone who didn't agree with him.

So who do YOU trust to run your totalitarian country, comrade?



(as to the first part - I am baclava - nutty and sweet with honey on the inside)

[The Big Vetolski]

169. That is exactly what you implied. Stalin was a Marxist. Stalin was

evil. Therefore all Marxists are evil. Then you accuse me of wanting a totalitarian country because I dare to disagree with your pathetic sophomoric logic. In the old days, I would have been well within my rights to challenge you to a duel for insulting my honor. But those days are gone. Thanks for making me appreciate them. How old are you, anyway?

[Baclava]

176. "How old are you?" hahahahah - old people smak is funny

get a grip grampa - Show me where I said "All Marxists are evil".

I implied nothing, YOU are the one spouting off like a teakettle on spit cycle.

You fools and your dusty ideologies will get everyone killed.

[The Big Vetolski]

185. I said you IMPLIED all Marxists were evil, puppy. I know you are a

puppy because you're playing the "exact words" game just like the kids in "The Brady Bunch." You also refused to answer my question, punk. You think your generation is different? Special? So did all of us. None of us were, and neither are you.

"Dusty ideologies," you say. You know nothing. Have you ever actually READ Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations," Karl Marx' "Das Kapital" or "Communist Manifesto"? For that matter, have you read "Plain Speaking," the interview with Harry Truman by Merle Miller? Do you even know who America fought in World War II? Do you even know from which country America gained independence? Have you even heard of the Revolutions of 1848?

If anyone ever asked me those questions, I could say yes. BTW, I'm 52, and I've lived long enough to know that I don't know everything, but I do know enough to know that it is the young that get everyone killed, because they are naive enough to do what their elders tell them to do. There's a reason the Army won't take anyone over 35, prefers those 18 to 21, and it ain't just about physical ability.

It's about the ability to indoctrinate. Don't think you're immune. You've already been indoctrinated, and I bet you don't even know what you've been indoctrinated in. Next lesson: Figure out what you've been indoctrinated in. Of course, you won't, because you already know it all, don't you? Young fool.

I will waste no more of my increasingly valuable time on you until you say something that has some freakin' THOUGHT behind it. Dude.

[Baclava]

190. I imply nothing, but that hollow bell in your head is making you bitter towards life.

I've read everything -

'Karl Marx' "Das Kapital" "Communist Manifesto"

yes yes yes

Descartes, Kant and that fucking Spinoza, I almost went blind reading that shit.

Here's one for you...

"The great masses of the people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."
Adolf Hitler - Mein Kampf

[The Big Vetolski]

193. You don't know when to quit when you're behind.

You've read everything? Really? Even Bush knew better than to claim that. Palin, OTOH...

[Baclava]

199. I knew you'd like that - - see? I can relate to old people

Give them what they want to hear, let them chortle and spit a little, then they go take their nap.

Speaking of Trotsky...

I bet you're a drinking man

The Trotsky: one ounce of vodka in 6 ounces of prune juice

[The Big Vetolski]

201. Jeez! You're insufferable, dude! Obviously your parents didn't spank

you near enough! See what this time-out shit has done for us? I drink neither vodka nor prune juice. But I can drink you under the table on bourbon or beer, and have a far greater lung capacity for ganja smoke while listening to the sainted Bob Marley. :bounce: :toast: :beer: :headbang:

Peace, man. I can't stay mad at you. Unfortunately, it's past my bedtime. Got to change my Depends before I go to bed to get my 7 hours before I go to work in the morning to continue keeping the roof over the head of a frickin' teenager. It sucks, but somebody's gotta do it.

The Dude abides.

[Baclava]

205. I admit it....I was a bottle baby...you can tell?

Meanwhile, I'm off to mother Russia to find a nice circus acrobat lady to hook up with.

I can have dreams too.

[socialist_n_TN]

170. I've got to agree with Big on this one

Old Joe might have CLAIMED to be a Marxist, might have even thought he WAS a Marxist at one point in his life. But he sure didn't wind up a Marxist.

"Socialism in one country"??????? What utter bullshit. Neither Marx OR Lenin would have called that Marxist. A top down hierarchy without intraparty democracy? Once again NOT Marx and NOT Lenin.

By the time Lenin died, Stalin had lost all vestiges of what might be called Marxism. That's why Trotsky called it Stalinism. Because it WASN'T Marxism.

[Baclava]

179. What you say is true -- I am just enjoying your thread

...you know what they say - - - if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao, you ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow.

Fuck the system. Have a pitcher of margaritas on me.

[socialist_n_TN]

183. Come on, man. I wouldn't pour a pitcher of margaritas

on you! Why waste them! :rofl:

And BTW, NOT a maoist either. Trot remember? Trotskyist! The Marxist road not taken.:)

[Baclava]

196. Trotsky! Trotsky! Trotsky! - - OK , got it

carry on

[white_wolf]

198. Though I have disagreed with you a lot in this thread

I do have to give credit for the Beatles reference. I love Revolution.

[Baclava]

200. They call me the gadfly...but I have the entire Beatles collection in my cell phone

Ain't teckanology wonderful?

I do find it amazing that kids today don't even recognize those songs.

No wonder everything is so fucked up.

[LeftPole]

107. Nothing to lose but our chains.

The current economic and political situation is like something right out of the old book.

[socialist_n_TN]

108. Yep. Most citizens of this country don't know what

Marxism is, but the capitalists sure do. They're following his path just like a road map. For themselves. Welcome to DU.

[hifiguy]

111. They are following the roadmap

but they did not, apparently, read the end of the story. Doesn't turn out well for them.

:hi:

[socialist_n_TN]

112. Word. As always, the hubris of the "Masters of the Universe"

will be their downfall. Unfortunately, it's going to take a lot of us with them.

[hifiguy]

115. That is what's so sad.

The countless victims of their greed and sociopathy will never get to see them swing from their well-deserved gibbets.

[amborin]

132. exactly! straight from the handbook itself!

[geardaddy]

134. K and R

just for learning about Marxism and other solutions.

[socialist_n_TN]

139. Well thank you gd. That was really what my OP was

about in the first place. If you actually learn something about Marxism and STILL don't like it, fine. But don't go by capitalist or even Stalinist propaganda.

[geardaddy]

141. I think we can learn a lot from Marx

I studied a little in college. Knowledge is power.

[Taverner]

140. Or just plain Socialist. K&R

I am a "student" of Eugene Debs myself

[Odin2005]

210. Me, too!

I don't consider myself a Marxist, though I do think many of Marx's sociological and economic analyses are good. I just reject Marx's historical analysis, which I consider simplistically linear and Eurocentric.

[Raine]

147. NO, Thanks but absolutely NO. nt

:thumbsdown:

[socialist_n_TN]

152. Kick for the night shift........

Anybody else want to chime in?

[OmahaBlueDog]

157. Cuba awaits with open arms

You need only to fly to Mexico City and catch a connecting flight for Havana.

We wish you well!

[socialist_n_TN]

167. Sorry too old to emigrate

You'll just have to put up with me. My family's only been in this country for 300 years.

BTW, thanks for the "love it or leave it" post. It brought back memories from my youth.

[OmahaBlueDog]

191. Stay. Go. Be happy - that's all I'm saying

If I had the money and I was 10 years younger, I'd probably go to Scandanavia.

That said, Marxism-Leninism was an epic fail. China may have a Communist Party, but the Chinese system resembles Nazi Germany more than it resembles anything Mao envisioned.

[white_wolf]

192. You don't think Scandinavia incorporates some elements of Marxism?

Secondly I've never understood this view that because an idea was tried once and implemented poorly by power hungry man it should be tossed out completely. The idea of representative government didn't work out too well when it was first tried. The Roman Republic was more of an oligarchy than an actual republic. The wealthy landowners controlled pretty much everything. The First Republic of French gave us Robespierre and Napoleon.

[socialist_n_TN]

197. As I've said ad nauaeaum

Trotskyism, the Marxist road not taken.

[Harry Callahan]

158. I think you may have the wrong country...

Have you ever considered emigrating to Cuba or Venezuela?

[socialist_n_TN]

165. OOOOH! Two more "Love it or leave it" posts

IN A ROW! :rofl: The 60s have returned with a VENGENCE!

[white_wolf]

184. the 60s are back?! Awesome!

Should I go to a Beatles concert first or woodstock? Decisions decisions.

[socialist_n_TN]

187. Well sure wolf. I know they're back because just in this

thread I've basically been told, "America, love it or leave it!" THREE times.

I figure if I give it a little while, the 50s will return with Joe McCarthy asking me, "Are you now or have you EVER been a member of the Communist Party?" I can't wait. I prepared with my comeback, "Senator, have you no shame?!?"

[white_wolf]

188. My comeback would be the fact that I have the right to freedom of association so

I can join any group I want. Oh, wait I forgot this is America where we only seem to pay lip service to people's freedoms when they don't agree with the powers that be.

[Harry Callahan]

214. I just want you to be happy, my friend...

Surely, a marxist cannot be happy living in the #1 Capitalist nation in the world. :hi:

[socialist_n_TN]

215. He can if he's trying to change that system.........

Anyway, as a Trotskyist, it wouldn't matter where I lived because I would need to be working for a WORLDWIDE system change. Since I was born here, I might as well try here.

[Harry Callahan]

249. Ah, a one world government of elitist central planners endeavoring to

create the Utopia that we all deserve.

But alas, you face the same problem as all others before you have. Utopia only exists in heaven.

[socialist_n_TN]

250. Not going to get into this too deep because it's WAY too

complicated for an internet post AND there's a lot of ways to go with it that doesn't involved a totally centrally planned economy. But yes, "general welfare" industries and interstate businesses would be nationalized and run for the benefit of the new owners. That would be the PEOPLE.

And yes, it is somewhat utopian. Kind of like the "We're all going to be rich" legend that fuels capitalistic dreams. Except it's less utopian than that.

[JackRiddler]

252. I will, soon as you choose Chile in the 1970s or El Salvador in the 1980s as better alternatives.

Wait, the real answer is:

Yeah. So?

[eridani]

160. Are there any that do things besides talk fo other Marxists? n/t

[socialist_n_TN]

164. Maybe. That probably depends on the group........

It's a start anyway. All you can do is check it out.

[snot]

172. Could we please distinguish betw. Socialist tyrannies and Socialist democracies??

[socialist_n_TN]

178. Hell, I was just asking folks to check out a Marxist

group in their area. :) All I've been reading on here over the last few days (months) is about how fucked we all are and suicidal sounding posts, etc., so I figured I'd give folks a way to put their money where their mouth is. If you want a group that's NEVER been anything, but on the side of the working class, try Marxism. If you want a group that believes in fighting back rather than giving up, try Marxism.

I wasn't even going to the point of tyranny or democracy.

[snot]

211. I think someone needs to start posting some of Marx's writings around here --

judging from this thread, I think a lot of DU'er's might be shocked at how insightful he was -- and at how much of his thought they agree with.

[socialist_n_TN]

216. EXACTLY snot. white_wolf posted some basic

Marxist stuff (Marx, Engels, Lenin) for a while, but I don't know how much people paid attention to it, but it was good, basic, bite size articles and passages.

160 years worth of capitalist propaganda causes some folks to cinch up at the very name when they probably have more in common with the writings and precepts than they do with basic capitalism.

[snot]

247. +1!

[Youth Uprising]

173. Screw the unreccers.

Anybody who is not seriously considering alternatives to Capitalism by now has their heads buried in the sand.

[socialist_n_TN]

180. Why thank you Youth, I think so too

But try getting some of these folks to check out something new. Or something old. Whew. Some folks would rather let the capitalists take over one big chunk at a time rather than fight back.

[Youth Uprising]

253. Those people have been conditioned to think that Capitalism is the be-all end-all and that

Socialism is evil. Anybody proposing another way is seen as a heretic. It's narrow-minded and stupid. I'm guessing the folks who targeted your thread where just our friendly neighborhood neo-liberals.

[joshcryer]

189. I recced it to 5 even though I think it's pretty silly, no offense OP.

Don't understand why it'd be unrecc'd so heavily whilst an Obama bashing article gets hundreds of recs. You'd think this would have hundreds of recs also.

[socialist_n_TN]

194. You know I hardly ever pay attention to recs

I've watched this one a little bit because it's kind of odd to me to have this much discussion and have so few recs. That's all right though. I've always said that this is a discussion board and the point is to discuss.

And I'm sure there'll be another unrec to counter your rec.

[socialist_n_TN]

195. Yep. I just checked and it's back down to 4

:rofl:

[jefferson_dem]

206. Swell group of folks that must be...

Good Lord. What has this place become?

[socialist_n_TN]

207. A preview of what the country will be

IF the wealthy and the capitalists and the politicians keep on screwing the rest of us. When the pols believe that capitalism is more important than democracy, you get this type of reaction from the rest of us.

[Marrah_G]

218. Don't let some of the snarky remarks get you down

I love your posts and I'm looking around at alternatives too.

[socialist_n_TN]

221. Don't worry. I am a Marxist. If I let snark

or even outright hostility get me down, I'd be down all the time. :) And I'm not. To be a revolutionary Marxist in this country at this time is the very EPITOME of being an optimist.

I'm just trying to get some folks out of the depressive funk that a lot of them seem to be in. Giving up is NOT an option and all the bourgeoisie political parties believe that the system is more important than democracy, so there's no help there. Marxism is NOT a "giving up" system, it's a "fighting back" system and I'd LOVE for more people to take a closer look at it.

And another thing. Have I mentioned that I'm a Trotskyist? :) Maybe a time or two, but you know right now, I don't really care WHAT form of Marxism you check out as long as you check out this general alternative. Maoist, Venuzuela, hell even Stalinist. We can argue about all that AFTER we've stopped the capitalist takeover and smashed this unfair and destructive system.

And many thanks for the kind words about my posts. I'm passionate about my beliefs and I try to inform too. Hopefully, I succeed more times than not.

[blindpig]

225. After a while....

it's like a tasty snack. If they ever offered a rational, historical argument it would be a different story. Long repeated lies don't cut it.

[socialist_n_TN]

226. "Long repeated lies don't cut it"

Ain't that the truth. It's pretty easy to shut down most of the arguments against the socialist system from people who CLAIM to be "left". And you just realize no amount of argument will change the minds of the right. The experience of unfettered capitalism will be the only thing that might change those minds.

[blindpig]

219. kick

Sorry I didn't see this yesterday.

[locahungaria]

220. I'll see your kick....

and raise ya one for the lunchtime crew.

[socialist_n_TN]

227. And thank you loca......

:)

[locahungaria]

229. You're very welcome.

Frankly, I enjoy your posts and POV; this challenge to broaden our horizons is quite refreshing!



:)

[socialist_n_TN]

240. Thanks again.......

When things are so totally fucked up that you're thinking about giving up or suiciding, it's TIME to look for out of the box alternatives.

[socialist_n_TN]

224. Thanks pig........

It's been a pretty interesting discussion comrade! :)

[and-justice-for-all]

232. SP-USA right here..nt

[socialist_n_TN]

239. Close enough!......

Thanks comrade! :)

[Book Lover]

243. Hell, I'd be happy if folks just included some literature in their summer reading

http://marxists.org/

[rdking647]

248. marxism is a failed ideology

unless you can show me one country where its been successful

[MellowDem]

251. Nah...

Marxism is rather... blech.

I just want what Sweden has. A nice mixed system of free market capitalism and socialism. I mean, we have that as well, it's just that our balance is out of whack.

Give me a Socialist-Capitalist Party. Marxists would be wasting my time.