Beatroot is often misunderstood. He has been called neoconservative and liberal both, and I always knew he was neither. The debates that have fired up this blog, and the blogs of his friends, he dismisses as old fashioned, in a world without left/right having meaning in the new world. I invited Beatroot to explain his position unedited except for making the title bold. Renegade Eye
Chavez – it’s not about ideology…
…it’s all about The Man
Two Fridays ago in Minsk Hugo Chavez met up, yet again, with ‘the last dictator in Europe’ and his Belarusian counterpart, Aleksander Lukashenko.
Chavez’s visit to Belarus was part of a tour including Iran and Russia to build up an alternative alliance of countries that he sees as opposed to US hegemony.
After the meeting between the Belarusian and Venezuelan presidents the Charlie Chaplin-esque Lukashenko said that the two countries shared:
" …absolutely identical" views on international affairs, which "is a reliable basis for close cooperation and mutual support in the international arena…”
(Critics, of course, would also point out other policy initiatives in common between Belarus and Venezuela, and for that matter Iran and Russia – the regimes’ liking for closing down TV stations and harassing media freedoms.)
For many on the right in the West, Chavez is the head of a dangerous new movement against US influence and capitalism in general.
Ironically, that view is shared by many on the Left in the West – Chavez is the new anti-imperialist, riding a wave of popularity among the oppressed in South and Central America against the satanic Uncle Sam and his allies.
Both Left and Right seem to believe we are heading for some kind of new Cold War, a regrouping of the old ideological battles.
But both sides are living in the past.
Chavez and Lukashenko are undoubtedly popular with some parts of the populations in their respective countries: for Chavez his popularity resides in the barios; Lukashenko draws his support from the old, the rural poor, the unemployed.
Putin and the current Iranian president can rely on support from similar sections in their own countries, too, alongside some in the new ruling elites backed by domestic Big Oil.
But if you scrape away some tough anti-Western rhetoric you won’t find much in the way of ideology to back it up.
Oil and hot air
Apart from Lukashenko (who has no natural resources at all), all the main regimes in this ‘new alliance’, in Venezuela, in Russia, in Iran, are built not on ideology, but on oil and the power of the rising price of oil. All four regimes are actually quite pragmatic, policy wise. It’s capitalism-lite, with a bit of nationalist rhetoric thrown into the mix.
While Chavez screams and shouts about America, he has been careful not to alienate its oil barons, too much.
America has painted Chavez as the new Castro, but 12 percent of US oil still comes from Chavez’s oil fields. Bush etc would quite liken to get rid of him, but as long as he doesn’t really challenge the basis of capitalism itself he is not that much threat to them at home.
In Venezuela, too, the real power of Colonel Chavez does not come from deep ideological roots within ‘the people’, but from the Venezuelan army.
So why do both the Left and Right in the West make him out to be the great new anti-imperialist? Why spend so much time discussing Chavez when he, like Lukashenko, Putin, are actually populist, nationalist pragmatists?
Quite simply, because Politics has lost its ideological bearings in the West. The old struggles at home – between organized labour and capital – have all but gone completely. And both sides are desperate to find some cause to reconnect with their own de-politicized populations. The western Left, particularly, finds itself without any meaningful ideological connection or cause in their own countries. Enter Chavez, stage ‘left’, to comes to the rescue.
The deal between the old socialist mayor of London – someone I voted for a longtime ago in another guise, Ken Livingstone – and Chavez, to bring ‘cheap oil’ to the ‘poor’ of London in return for technical advice and help in Venezuela, is a pathetic case in point. The poor of London have a standard of living that many middle class Venezuelans would feel comfortable with. That deal is just craven populism, with little meaning at all. It is a politico PR stunt. It shows the UK Left desperate for some radical gloss, which it thinks it can gain, not through meaningful struggle at home, but by rubbing shoulders with a not particularly ideologically committed South American ‘firebrand’.
That’s really just about as good as it gets for the western Left, these days.
The Cold War ideologies are no more; the old socialism and communism that provided the counter-weight to capitalism have become museum pieces.
And even the capitalists, without the Soviet bogey man, are not quite sure how to justify themselves any more. Watch how the rhetoric of environmentalism is the new dominant world view, popular not just with tree hugging Greenpeacers but with the UN, the EU, and many in national government. Capitalism can’t even defend its reason to be anymore – high growth, profit at all costs. Capitalists are even queuing up these days to put limits on themselves under the banner of ‘save the planet’.
It almost makes me nostalgic for the old free marketeers, when capitalists acted like capitalists and there was a real alternative among social institutions like the trade unions and labour clubs trying to create a real alternative. Now each side bows down to the god of environmentalism, to Gaia.
That a meeting between cocky little Chavez and a buffoon like Aleksander Lukashenko could be seen as significant shows that there is something pretty hollow about the politics of the old left and right in the West.
In reality the conflict is not about left or right, but between pro and anti Chavez. It’s not about politics but about a personality.
When are both sides in the West going to wake up (and smell the South American fair trade coffee) and try and win hearts and minds over to a new politics that has some roots at home, in London or Washington, Manchester or New York, and not in oil rich South America, ruled by a man playing to the gallery in parts of Venezuela and to the badge wearing left in the West? The Beatroot
131 comments:
I don't think Beatroot really understands Latin American populism. This is not surprising as the media distorts this populism and you actually have to sit down and read a a dozen or so books on the subject to comprehend it. Chavez is not the cause of the movement, he is created and held aloft by the movement. At best Latin American populits leaders have been experts in pulling together previously existing, but separate movements, but did not create these movements in and of themselves. He also does not seem to comprehend the importance of defeating US imperialism, a priority step in liberating humanity from capitalism and the state.
Chavez is very much the South American populist. In fact, he reminds me more and more of Peron (without the iconic wife figure)!
An interesting piece and i apologise in advance if i've mistinterpreted you.
I do want to disagree with one of the main tenets of it though (not completely however). That is that there is no struggle between capital and labour (or has almost completely gone). Yes, struggle has certainly reduced, we are not in the early 70s in the UK, but it still exists, see the postal strike this week in the UK.
And when you say that the old socialism/communism is buried, you are again half-right. the collapse of communism has removed the idea for quite a few people that there is an alternative to capitalism, yet the fact that capitalism was overthrown in several parts of the world remains. likewise where workers were victorious or put up a strong fight in struggle remains and will radicalise people under the right conditions.
You are right when you say the 'Soviet bogeyman' has gone, but capitalists (or at least western capitalists) are justifying themselves by reference to the 'terrorist threat'.
Why should UK (and anywhere else) leftists be interested in Venezuela, becuase any anti-capitalist worth their salt will have noticed that despite whatever flaws hugo chavez has he has rekindled the idea of an alternative to capitalism, sure he isn't practising what he preaches, but the fact of the matter is that this has created a discussion within Venezuela and the rest of Latin America on these ideas.
Any decent socialist like myself will also be an internationalist and will want to support their venezuelan brothers and sisters. This however, does not mean taking one's eye off what is happening in one's one country. Perhaps middle class socialists may do this, but working class people come up against the hard facts of economic life.
Despite Beatroot's assertions about the standard of living in the uk, even if they were true (there is a huge polarisation of wealth in the uk), working class people have to endure long hours, low pay and crap conditions, not to mention the only somewhat decent jobs left (and that is only compared to the retail sector jobs) in the public service are under a stream of attacks at present (hence the recent industrial action).
Yes we shouldn't be totally glued to venezuela, but we also shouldn;t be ignorant.
Capitalism is bad for men's health
Communism may be oppressive, but it seems as though capitalism is bad for men's health, according to a recent study which found significant increases in mortality rates after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The life expectancy for men freed from the Iron Curtain dropped by six years between 1991 and 1994 amid social disruption, physical hardships and economic instability.
The degree to which men were affected depended upon how rough the transition to capitalism was and how much income inequality increased, the new study from the University of Michigan found.
And they were significantly more likely to be impacted by the transition than women, the study found.
...
Kruger compared the mortality rates of men and women in 14 post Soviet countries.
Male mortality from intentional causes - homicides and suicides - doubled in the region, although it varied significantly by country.
Poland, which had a relatively smooth transition, saw the rate increase just 15 percent while Estonia, which was much more unstable, saw violent deaths increase 238 percent.
More significantly, Kruger said, was that the gap between the male and female mortality rates grew an average of 9,3 percent which showed that "this economic changed was more damaging to men than to women."
"The impact was really for men who are in their economically prime years," Kruger said.
"If you were an adolescent or young adult they may have seen this as an opportunity but those who are say 45 and settled into a routine they might see this as a threat."
The countries most affected were Romania, Estonia, Latvia and Albania, which saw the gap widen by 14 to 30 percent in the first five years after the fall of communism.
http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=nw20070701133113899C792285
Capitalism is a modern day slavery threat, it does not empower people and it creates social diseases.
VIVA LA REVOLUCION
I think everyone has seen enough demonstrations this past century of where too much ideology can get you that we are, rightly imo, weary of it. (Khmer Rouge comes to mind, to name a particularly blatant example)
Interesting piece. Can't say I agree with everyone's conclusions but I've taken them in.
The Beatroot is a cynic and that is a refreshing change from the brain impaired hacks that are the norm around here. He makes a mistake when he thinks the problem is the Soviet rather than the whole project itself.
Communist hacks like Ren keep rationalizing failed repressive police states like Cuba and pretend the maladies there were caused by space aliens. Despite repeated failures the foot soldiers of class genocide, property theft and human misery keep blaming these disasters on people. It is Kim Jong Mentally Ill's fault, it is Stalins fault, it is Mao fault, it is the Red Brigade's fault.Yet despite failure after failure the deluded minions of Marx never rise to the level of lab rats, who learn from their mistakes unlike Communists.
Beatroot is also 100% wrong in his opinion that Chavez is a populist.
There is no malice or deception on his part as he is by nature a cynic prove to moral relativism. Ren and the rest know what Chavez is and their kind is littered with imaginary fabled third forces in Vietnam and Pol Pot wasn't a communist.
The game Communists have played is they hide their identities under other terms like Priogressive, Green, whatever type of anarchism is fashionable at the moment, liberals and yes Socialists. Ren tries the absurd bit that Trotskyism is somehow less odious than the other forms of this malady.
Chavez will fail and the people are running. The same people that make excuses for Castro and Mugabe
will make the same excuses for Chavez.
Typical of the Communist party line is the classic bit about people fleeing Hugo's disaster are Oligarchy. This lie goes back to the Cuban days where everyone who fled was a Batista crony. The Argentinian imbecile Che and his American convicted rapist assasin Herman Marks executed ordinary people who were almost to a man ordinary Cubans including teens and women. In this spirit G calls engineers, doctors, small store owners and ordinary Jews fleeing in droves Oligarchy.
Crime is out of control in the blunderland so lets blame it on vestigial Capitalism. If there were true Capitalism the store shelves wouldn't be empty. Oh let the true faithful blame the farmers, Kulaks anyone.
Lastly, one can depend on people like Troutsky and Che Bob to go on fact finding missions. These visits are in the spirit of the Theresienstadt visits of the Red Cross.
No doubt the incoherence of your "collective insanity" hasn't hit home. Of course you will also dismiss the testimony of people like Sonia and the Junglemom who lived under the messes you rationalize.
The Beatroot is a cynic and it is not a bad thing. A cynic by nature
is a refressing change from the true faithful who repeat the same idiocies.
REN aspires to be the new Jim Jones. Kool Aide anyone
Politiques USA,
Communism may be oppressive, but it seems as though capitalism is bad for men's health...The life expectancy for men freed from the Iron Curtain dropped by six years between 1991 and 1994
That's like saying that falling out the window is better than crashing on the pavement...
There was this old Soviet joke I heard in 1981: 'Why is there suddenly no food in stores ?' - 'Because the tsar only stored enough food for 65 years...'
6 years difference in mortality is hardly like "falling out the window as crashing on the pavement." You are talking about thousands of lives shortened. How heartless can you get? But I don't think the increased mortality after the collapse of Stalinism is a reflection of anything positive about that system. It is just that when you radically increase unemployment and cut social services the death rate rises.
Chavez IS a populist. Beat, you actually have to STUDY before you mouth off. Get down and flog the books, maybe you will learn something.
Sorry, Beat, I meant BEAK, not you
et the fact that capitalism was overthrown in several parts of the world remains. likewise where workers were victorious or put up a strong fight in struggle remains and will radicalise people under the right conditions.
Of course the potential to change – radically – is in every human being. The point I am making is that the type of radical change you are thinking of – socialist revolution – was based on the idea of an easily identified mass working class in a certain stage of capitalism and politics. Well, things have changed. The socialist consciousness, and the institutions that sustained it, have disappeared. And the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union has left us with no international, secular, alternative movement to oppose capitalism (which was no real threat anyway because it was shit). The only alternative now seems to be suicide bombers. No ideology, no politics. All that is left is nihilism…
Beak
Beatroot is also 100% wrong in his opinion that Chavez is a populist.
There is no malice or deception on his part as he is by nature a cynic prove to moral relativism.
You got me totally wrong, guy. I am no moral reletavist. When the Left went moral reletavist I left the Left.
And I am not a cynic. I keep the idealist bit from Mark, actually. I want to see – like Trotsky wrote, I think:
I want no human to be dominated by another, and I want nature not to dominate humanity.’
Say that to the current trendy lefties and they would accuse you of ‘anti environmentalism’ or some such gibberish.
beatroot: Doesn't the response to your post show that the world is still in a left/right frame? It might as well be 1957, by the way people response.
The jury is still out, if Chavez is a populist. Both of us use that word, differently than Larry. I've posted on that subject before. A populist usually is someone class conscious combined with racism and nationalism. The formation of the new socialist party in Venezuela is changing the game. Every single move Chavez has made, has been in the confines of capitalism. If you talk of nationalizing oil without compensation, look at 1976, not Chavez. What happens after the new party is established, will answer .
Even in what you have thought was the old left/right world, state to state relations were based on expediency. That is nothing new to politics. There is little that can be said about islamism in Iran, that can't be said about Saudi Arabia.
The alternative to capitalism and Islamism, is Trotsky's transitional program. Weren't you once a member of SWP (UK)? No group on the left compromised with Islamism more. There is not a government in the world, that doesn't fear Trotskyism.
Larry: I posted an essay on what populism means. It is not a compliment to be called a populist. Populists are characterized by unpredictability. See Ralph Nader.
politiques USA: I will post in the future about this, China is now a capitalist country, that headed in that direction for several years, with slower disruption.
Criminologist: I agree.
Sonia: Why argue? The transition from Stalinism was harsh.
Hydralink: Welcome to the blog. Your blog is interesting.
Pol Pot: was what happens when nationalism and ruralism run amok. That is why Marxism is cynical about peasantry.
Beak: Thank you for posting here again. Now blogging will be fun again.
I can't get myself to calling you a hack back. I'll take it as a compliment.
If identifying politically as a Trotskyist is a deception, somebody explain it to me. Minneapolis during the 1930s had more Trotskyists, than Communist Party members. I was able to meet leaders of the 1934 Teamster strike, led by Trotskyists, that shut down the whole city.
It is not easy being an anti-Castro Cuban in Miami against the blockade. There are bullets with that person's name on them.
Who says everyone leaving Cuba or Venezuela, are from the oligarchy?
Some countries have store shelves stocked with people starving. Venezuelans have $$ to buy groceries. Countries in Africa with starvation have stocked shelves and starving people.
Stalinism is a deformity of socialism. It comes from the ranks of conservatism.
Trotskyism rejects guerilla adventures. Che was doomed, because he didn't understand the role of urban workers.
I'll post more tonight. Have to leave.
I lived in the eastern countries when I was a kid a few years before the collapse of the iron curtain. Life was very very tough over there, sometimes we were running out of food, there was only fruits in the stores on Mondays and Tuesdays, each people had to run their own farm so they could be sure they don't lack of anything to accomplish their primary needs. Life was tough but we were happy people.
I surf sometimes on the ex eastern european blogs, and most of the time I hear the same thing on these blogs: "life was better back then". Their ideals is that life should not only be made of work. These people have to work twice harder nowadays to meet the ends and a lot of them still make $160 a month. My guess is they have to blame it on somebody because it is harder to blame it on their own existence. It is easy to understand their behavior: liberal measures within their countries change their social way of life and they blame it on capitalism.
You know Ren, I understand what he means. Somehow we're living in a comic book world with comic book villains and hare-brained politics. It's natural to expect the same paper-politicians to rise the banner of their paper ideology. (speaking of comic books)
Humans tend to become more and more radicalised, myself included. There isn't any center left, not left versus right, there's right versus right. Center and Left is off, by Center and Left I mean those with a realistic everyday life achievable ideology AND open to any comments and suggestions and debates. Not only on your blog, but on every place I go I see US and THEM, and a ongoing war between the two. There's more of US here, but who are US? Lefties? I'm a nationalist, my definition of co-nationals is everybody existing within Syria's boundary NOW. And I'm the Syria Magna utopist Marxist refers to. I loathed everything to do with communism, and my loathe was inherited from my mother who suffered under their sick utopia. I was in shock when I was invited to join a Left Agregator, as I thought I have become everything I hated. And I know I was asked to join mainly because I'm living in the Axis, I'm one of THEIR enemies. Thus OUR friend. My political ideology didn't count as long as I am the pre-defined enemy by birthplace, nationality and religion.
Well, I got off the track as usual, but what I mean is this Two Axis World is too childish and idiot for my intelect to accept, so better start changing minds instead of arguing which of these bouffons is a bigger populist. As long as ther is Bush, there will be clowns like Chavez and grotesques like Ahmedinejad. Like a comment posted on a forum: the neo-con ideology feeds on Chavez kind of arch-villains.
And vice versa.
Kool Aide Time Ren
Jim Jones was another good far leftist.
Trotsky ad his own series of crimes that speak for themselves. He lost a power struggle and is by no means absolved for Stalins crimes or his own.
Do you want to pretend the scores of cases from Venezuela that cross my desk do not exist. People are leaving Venezuela in droves because of space aliens, the price of habeneros or a Cocanut Commie Clown.
The executions will commence and no doubt you will feign ignorance.
The shelves on the stores are suddenly bare, it takes a genius to figure out why.
Build a workers paradise and the workers flee. Hand productive farm land over to hacks and the population starves, been there done that.
You may delude yourself with flowery rhetoric and ermpty words and brain impaired slogans. However, class genocide, treason and theft are not considered a harmless alternative lifestyle.
Renegade-good article. If one wants to measure Chavez as anyone's idea of a socialist please refer them back to the likes of Lenin or Trotsky. They were serious revolutionaries and Trostky knew a thing or two about the military. One thing that I have noticed is that the less one is active in the class struggle in one's own country the more likely one is to 'idolize' someone else's 'socialist' system. And without criticisms. Or for that matter, allow them from others.
Can you do me a favor now that I have a little time could you sent me the Alan Woods site you mentioned that you were part of a while back. Markin American Left History
To make you guys feel all good about yourselves, have you ever heard that intellectuals oppose capitalism? In other words it means the longer you stay in school and the more you feel like you have to be on the left.
Here is a very interesting link:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/cpr-20n1-1.html
Thu the article is kind of bogus though, because the guy tried to sociologize his opponents. It does not really work this way though. For the french case it has been proved that University professors are traditionally from the left because they esteem that they are not paid enough compared to other socio-professional categories, even compared to their other student colleagues who occupy better functions in the business fields. It means for the same length of universitary cursus, french teachers feel they deserve better in a meritocratic point of view, therefore they are from the left. It comes from our system, for sure. In France the university system is called "elitist" because they only want the best students, so they try everything to kick out the rest of the others, besides teaching places are very limited now in the french system. Also the french system censors creativity and anything that is different from the french tradition, basically I would say a priory that this system has not the same functions than the US one (besides teaching).
For socialism, well it is a very big ideal, there are many ways to envisage this word. I am socialist for many reasons, inegalities, healthcare, lack of education are the main reasons, but it does not mean that I am allergic to capitalism. I don't share also the bolshevik ideology, that the revolution of socialism should be communism.
Ren for the case of China, they are still an under-developed country, but it may be the best capitalist example. They are ranked #5 with their GDP, they outperferm France and the UK, but they are at the 108th place with a GDP per CAPITA.
The link did not work, here it is again
Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?
Can someone tell me why the US does not have a "welfare state"?
I found an explanation from a professor at Harvard University here
The guy tried to explain it from a cultural point of view, and there is also a historical point of view. The notion of "welfare state" is from anglosaxon origin though, more english I would say than american; in french we call it "l'Etat Providence". But I refuse to believe, since this author claimed it, that if people are poor it is because they are lazy, that does not make sense at all. In the US they are people working 3 jobs and they still can't make it. Positive discrimination might be the explanation, at first sight of course.
Interesting article. I believe Chavez is a part in a movement that is much bigger than he is. I also think he might not realize this and turn on the movement because there is no place for powerful showmen in it. Hopefully it will be too late by then.
As far as the US and a welfare state, I skimmed through your link and I agreed with a few points. Many in the US (mostly conservative) believe that we have reached a near Utopian society, where your situation in life is determined by your actions. It is crazy, I know, but people believe this shit. They believe that any welfare program would go to poor people of color that are stupid and lazy. many haven't gotten rid of that belief.
I don't know why Europeans tend to think differently about welfare. Racism surely exists there. Interesting link anyway.
Beak: Jim Jones believed and practiced, leaving your homeland to build a utopia. Considering his religious training, I'm sure he was inspired by the Zionist model.
There is starving in Venezuela? That's news. No social services? No medical help?
What else besides baiting do you have?
Trotsky is a monster? Don't just throw out accusations. Prove Trotsky is like Stalin.
I doubt you can do much else.
What's with this "typical communist party line" stuff? Trying to be Joe McCarthy? Again I'm a Trotskyist.
Do you blow up abortion clinics? Rightists do that you know?
Puppeteer: Very interesting.
Why did they invite you?
Markin: It's about time you commented here.
politiques USA: The US had a push/pull situation in the 1960-1970s toward a welfare state. Michael Harrington of the Socialist Party wrote about poverty in the US. Lyndon johnson's "War On Poverty" was a safety net for capitalism.
Now the welfare state is out of vogue, because the Democrats share goals with the Reagan revolution. Clinton/Gore probably cut more social programs than Bush.
Yes, did you read the link? It seems like the author completely denies the notion of "welfare state" in the US as if it never existed. In Europe, I remember it was an anglosaxon notion.
I find it interesting that people fail to recognize that the greatest imperialist movements in history have been the Muslims and the Communists. Aside from the Europeans of old. Where does the U.S. fit in, pray tell, in the true definition of imperialism?
And Chavez is treading down the same path as Castro. He started off as a Socialist and ended up a Communist, and look at what a mess that country is in. For all it's purported claims of equality, Communism has 2 classes: the impoversihed masses and the leaders who have all the power and wealth. I've been there. The Oligarchy someone claimed that left Cuba was replaced by the Party heads. Someone please explain the allure of Socialism/Communism in its practical form, not in theory.
The biggest imperialist of our not so distant "modern" times was the UK. The empire collapsed over centuries, with peaks around WWII all the way to the 70s. There has been so many countries whose "independence" day is marked as a day against english colonialism (Bahamas for example, India, Canada also but different from the english crown though compared to the US).
By contrast for the eastern countries, even after the collapse of the Soviet-Union, a few of them mark their independence day against the good ol Soviet-Union. Many eastern countries by tradition still see Germany and also Western Europe as fascists. It's the case for Belarus who celebrated its independence today (July 3rd) since the Nazis got kicked out from Minsk in 1944.
These is where all the differences are between Western and Eastern Europe.
For the Muslims (Islam) their empire got enlarged, it is the only civilization that conquered so many territories in less than 25 years, right after the 4th century AC. There is the Ottoman empire too, from the XIIIth to 20th century, but it was not as big as the english empire, it was only covering a part of south-east Europe, then the Middle-East (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria) and was going all the way through Russia's neighbors (Bulgaria for example, Serbia, Greece, Rumania). It is the West that later on inherited of the parts of the Ottoman empire like the British for Iraq, or the French for Lebanon and Syria.
Otherwise I don't see why socialism would lead to communism, I never shared this ideology, it just does not make sense.
Sorry I made a mistake: it was during the VIIth century for Islam.
For socialism, I offered my shortened vision which apply more in the capitalist framework, we could even call it "welfare state". There are many examples of socialist countries that never fell in the communist trap. France is an example, during the 80s, the socialists were in power, although their practical politics were more at the right than any other people who were at the centre right, but they introduced humanist measures to help reducing the poverty. The RMI for example (translated in english by minimum income of insertion) to give more human dignity to the poor.
The Revenu minimum d'insertion (RMI) is a French form of social welfare. It is aimed at people without any income who are of working age but don't have any other rights to unemployment benefit (e.g. contributions based unemployment benefit). It was created in 1988 by Jean-Michel Belorgey by the government of Michel Rocard (Socialist Party, PS) and aimed at helping the people who had the most problems with finding work.
In France, there is a paradox: lots of people with university levels can hardly find jobs, but the French rarely like expatriating themselves abroad. But at least in this country they reduced poverty. The figures are around 2.9% for France, while they are around 13% in the US and more than 17% in the UK.
These are measures that I called socialist. I don't look at the ideology itself, I look more at the humanist side. Now I'm pretty sure lots of people can disagree with me, but this is how i envisage it since I was born in Europe. People in Latin America or people in the eastern countries may have a different version of socialism, and so do the people in the US. Until this day most of Americans think that socialism is like communism. If you read Che Guevara or Trotsky, then for sure you are going to fall into the communist trap. Communism is the elimination of the whole private property system, socialism is only the control of some properties (basic utilities for me) for the own good of its population. I give you an example:
- The State can have the monopoly in electricity. Why? For the own good of its population so that they can pay a cheaper price. In the UK they privatize the electric sector 20 years ago and their prices went way up. So this is a good reason. Competition, unlike many people think, does not necessarly mean you are going to get cheaper prices. This is an example taken at a national level: the State can produce its own electricity (with nuclear reactors) therefore it can afford to sell it for a cheaper price.
Now many countries in the world, take advantage of socialism, for the benefits of their people (Hugo Chavez or Putin for example) but on the other hand they use the priviledge of the state as a weapon in the geopolitical world. As long as people from these countries are able to pay a cheap price then it's fine, because it is for their people first (national sovereignity). And today it's not the case of Saudi Arabia, that is controled by the US oil consortium, prices are not cheap anymore over there, it's 8 times more expensive than Venezuela.
...etc
I should have started with the book "Das Kapital" from Karl Marx to explain socialism. Yesterday capitalism was very appealing, but today, when I look at the world, capitalism has nothing to do with keynesian economics, it looks more like mafia capitalism instead.
Ren. the US statistic tool to calculate the poverty level has been created around 1967 I believe. This tool is completely outdated and it has been introduced to under-estimate the poverty level after the Great Depression: the poverty level per income for 1 person is the only good tool since the poverty level tools is not proportional per family.
I don't know why Europeans tend to think differently about welfare. Racism surely exists there. Interesting link anyway.
You are welcome. Martin Luther King said "I am colorblind" and all these political parties were eliminated little by little by the US government during the 60s all the way through the 80s. Today in the US the colorblind notion completely disappeared from the american society. It seems like people have built walls and walls around their society so they can still feel different from other people (is it the effect of individualism?). In France, we are still colorblind, although racist pigs exist over there, and proud to be colorblind. Most of us do not really care about race and even religion. Iranians marry with Jews in France, and French Christians date Muslims. In the US it still seems it is a big taboo, and their way of thinking, especially in geopolitics, is determined by what they call "values" and relationships to History. We don't live in the same times between the US and France, the US is more on a Heidegger side, in France we are still living our sartrian way of life.
Well maybe, and I said "maybe", one of the US cities would could make me think more of the european mentality would be NYC before 911.
For the case of Poland, here are some fast historical facts:
- Poland during WWII was going to be shared in 2 parts, one for the Nazis, and the other one for the Russians.
- At one point in History, Poland and Belarus were almost one country during the XVIIth century
- Belarus is more pro-russian than Poland.
...etc
The strategies of the right in the eastern countries is a "under the belly" strategy. They demonize Putin, Chavez, and Belarus and Iran from a capitalist point of view. Now, I can't blame them with Putin, from a human right perspective since around 150 journalists disappeared in Russia, but the polonium story was not operated by Russia for sure from what I've seen at the FSB (the russian oligarchs, most of them are financed by the West in this secret war, and Russia tries to buy them whenever they can).
On the market, they fight with their capitalist tools (natural resources) and they still play the capitalist game. Russia for example always accepted dollars from the US, I don't know how long it is going to last, because they could pay with the rubles since they have tons of natural resources.
Someone should have mentioned that communism for example was not taken into consideration by the worldbank for many reasons, so they were excluded from the capitalist game. In the communist ideology, inflation does not exist logically speaking. Well it does not exist although I can tell you there was inflation over there, it was just an excuse to isolate them from globalization.
I think we should recenter the debate in its current perspective. Why is the West ticked off about Chavez, Putin and Co?
Do you remember the anti-missile shield's offer in Poland from the US?
It's been badly analyzed by western media once again. Western media portrays the situation so that Europe can defend itself from Iran. It's more complicated than that. Centuries ago, there has been lots of b/s between Poland, Belarus and Lithuania, and historically there are some kind of rivalry conflicts between these countries. For the case of Poland, they want to use it because they are still afraid of the Russians, and it comes of western Belarus that belonged to Poland in the past. At some point Belarus might be integrated into Russia, one never knows.
Politiques USA,
I lived in the eastern countries... life was better back then
Life is always better WHILE you are still falling out the window, then when your body is splashed on the ground...
Ren Back It Up
Jones was a Communist and should be a perfect role model. He made some brain impaired comments about fighting Communism with Communalism.
As far as your imbecilic comments about Zionism. National movements be they Basque, Kurd or Jewish seek to form real states and are by no means Utopian.
Commie Clowns like yourself feel owners of the divine truth you are entitled to lord over the unwashed masses and steal in the name of your utopian creed. There is nothing new about statism and repression. You are merely neo-fuedalists with great PR.
Okay Comwads
How are the store shelves in Venezuela suddenly bare?
You clowns have any answers about bread and gas riots? Why are applications of Communism directly correlated with repeated mass starvation?
Renegade Eye now serving Kool Aide to the faithful. Check your logic and independent thought at the door.
Larry
Chavez is not a populist. He is a commie hack following an entirely predictable path just like Mugabe with oil.
I lived in the eastern countries... life was better back then
04 July, 2007 05:45
You need glasses :) Read again, I did not even say that, besides I'm anticommunist. I will elaborate more later, I need to catch some sleep.
Well, already it looks like the debate Has degenerated. What’s the matter with you people?
You are also missing my point. Uses of the word ‘commie’ are as meaningless as the over use of the world ‘fascist’. Truth is communism is dead as a do-do. Now, why?
It seems people just cannot except that the world has changed. Stop trotting out the labels of the past and get real to the new realities.
Beatroot
A person who claims to be a Trotskyite is indeed a Commie. The term is underused, but vain cries of McCarthyism are cliche. Moreover, those who were called Communist in the McCarty era were in fact Communists beyond a shadow of doubt.
You also ignore the lengthy history of Commies staying in the Bolshevik closet. In the case of Jews, Commies attempt to portray imbeciles like Koevel as Greens. Yes, a green who writes almost entirely on the subject of anti Communism when not promoting himself as an ordinary Joooo oposed to zionism. Koevel classic are anti-communism is a form of mental illness. Some of us do not like class genocide and needless death. Anticommunism is anti-semitism, but anti- zionism is not anti- semitism. Native Americans were the first victims of anti communism becaused they lived communally. Lets see talks like a Commie rationalizes communism, but swears to be a Green. Would you like to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
Is Ren so ignorant of Russian history that he thinks the deaths started with Stalin. Sorry, but Trotsky lost a power struggle and any attempt to seperate him from the disasters he created is as insane as absolving a Roehm version of Nazism for the Holocaust.
Ren does aspire to be Jim Jones. Lets see classic cult of personality figure, seems familiar.
Lets see Fidel, Stalin, see a patern yet.
Beat,
Fascism vs. Communism? Nah, just Them v. Us. Or the other way round.
Another ideological war.
Don't you hink, Ren?
Beak
those who were called Communist in the McCarty era were in fact Communists beyond a shadow of doubt.
Don’t be silly…anyone with a beard back then was a ‘commie’;
The bit about Commies attempt to portray imbeciles like Koevel as Greens. I don’t understand at all….
Is Ren so ignorant of Russian history that he thinks the deaths started with Stalin.
There is some truth in that. Bolsheviks, under Lenin and when Trotsky had influence, were brutal when peasants were concerned. Trotsky was from the ‘industrialize as quick as possible’ wing of the revolutionary government. That meant that the country was subservient to the town – it was there to supply the industrial revolution and so create a proletarian class in Russia.
And that meant he was advocating ruthless and shitty treatment of peasants.
Something Stalin took to its logical conclusion.
Beatroot
Any person accused in the McCarthy are of being a Communist were in fact Communist. The Venona intercepts prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the lies Communist perpetuated for years.
Communists go through great lengths to hide their identity. They also found bogus groups like Code Pinko organized by and led by known Communist.
Deception is part of what makes commies what they are. Ren will feign ignorance even until it becomes too obvious and then he will mourn yet another revolution gone wrong. He knows what will happen next as do the rest of the totalitarian apologists.
I seperate G from the rest as he is young enough to get some slack.
It is no great feat to discern a noble idealist like Jams or a cynic
like yourself from a caculating souless hack.
Who are these people fleeing the empty shelves in Venezuela and risking their lives to get away from Fidel? Who were the boat people who risked their lives to get away from Marxism? The theory doesn't work and those who continue to advocate it today do so for power and greed.
I think people in here are mixing up marxism, communism and socialism; and other refer to the beauty of the theory by dismissing the practice. For an updated definition please refer to the search engines.
Communism was a very very bad ideology. If some people in here back up communism, then help yourselves, but I can't do that for my part. Communist governments were people who hijacked socialism and turned everything upside down to get more power against its citizens. Of course the idea of Marxism was very good in practice but nobody really succeeded during the XXth century to give the real meaning of this idea. Worse we went from Marxism to anarchism (the french Joseph Proudhon) to Bolchevism to even libertarians in the US ... etc We can pretty much say what we want about that, but philosophy and ideologies are only words talking to people and we still use these ideologies nowadays to justify our goals.
Communism is pretty much dead it's true, and i don't think people want to go back to communist times. After the fall of the Soviet Union, people who were communist decided to switch to the green party, they were not even capable of acknowledging the socialist party and tell us they screwed up.
Hey Happy July 4th.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, people who were communist decided to switch to the green party I was talking for the french case and it was so obvious for me that I forgot to mention it, as if it was acquired naturally.
Renegade thanks for info on Woods group. Also Progressive Labor had a caucus with a pro-working class orientation in 1969. That might be the group you are thinking of.
markin
politiques USA: Nobody is mistaking communism, socialism and Marxism. It is simply that some here are unable to defend logocally their rightist agenda.
beatroot: I know this must be a nightmare. Instead of getting away from left/right, you have someone saying McCarthy attacked nobody innocent.
The commenters I know who agree with you the most, come from Eastern Europe. Puppeteer is half Romanian.
Beak: Do you think those who bomb abortion clinics are terrorists? What do abortion clinic bombers have to do with you? The same Jim Jones has to do with me. In your world McCarthy's victims were all guilty, there was no anti-Semitism against the Rosenbergs, and there is no evidence against Posada.
You are not serious that you believe mcCarthy didn't smear anyone innocent? I don't feel too sorry for the Stalinists in the McCarthy era, when the Trotskyists were attacked under the Smith Act, they testified for the prosecution.
Mugabe a socialist?
I've been going through great lengths to hide my Trotskyist identity. I guess I was outted.
Greens are political mish mash. Anyone can be a Green. From my experience with them, is they are just slightly to the left of Democrats. At times they don't run candidates against liberals.
Trotsky vs Stalin was only a power struggle? No philosophical differences?
Check this out:
Russia has raised the idea of moving new missile forces to Kaliningrad, close to Poland and Lithuania.
First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov linked the possible move to US plans for a missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic.
Russia has already threatened to hit back by targeting missiles at Europe.
Mr Ivanov said there would be no need to move extra forces to Kaliningrad if the US agreed to use Russian facilities instead of the Polish and Czech bases.
Russia says the US plans for a limited missile defence shield, including bases close to Russia's borders, represent a threat to its security.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6269408.stm
A new cold war is on. Europe is taking over all the satellite countries from the ex Soviet Union, even countries who are closer by tradition and history to Russian motherland.
The commenters I know who agree with you the most, come from Eastern Europe. Puppeteer is half Romanian.
Is he? Libertate y solidaritate in Romania :-)
politiques USA: I think you have a point about Putin and the USA.
When I was a kid, a socialist told me the capitalist world, wants to avenge the Bolshevik Revolution. That is something easier proven in the days of the Cold War.
Contrary to Beatroot, the cold war runs through the minds of Putin and Bush. Putin thinks he is Stalin, and Bush thinks he's Churchill.
It is Ms. Puppeteer.
Ren
Jim Jones is your role model and a good Communist Role Model. He is just another one of the freaks drawn to Communism.
Lets see a self described Rudy Republican would not have anything in common with an abortion clinic
bomber. However, you do share the same philosophy with Pol Pot, Stalin, Ayers and Jim Jones. The only difference amongst you is how to acheive your goals.
The Rosenbergs were guilty and deserved to die. It is a shame they could only die once for their crimes. Communists are not Jews or Americans and there was zero anti-semitism in the case. This charge was createrd to deflect attention from the Slansky show trial and the deaths of Jewish intellectuals
in the Soviet Union. Paul Robeson went to see his friend Feffer who made hand motions that he was going to die . Robeson as a good Commie lied about what he saw to protect the party and told only his son who published it in his memoir.
All the people named as Communists
in McCarthy era were guilty. The Venonna intercepts has established Elizabeth Bentley and whitaker Chambers told the truth. Communists
merely knowingly lied for decades.
This is also why Communists should never be employed in higher education. I can throw piles of books on Hiss, the Rosenbergs, Dexter White and a whole variety of other subjects that were knowingly produced as scholarship
despite their factual inaccuracy.
There is no evidence against Posada. Cuba prevented the Brittish Government from raising the plane in question.
Mugabe is a Communist and has been so for decades.
The repression and massacre of the Russian people does not start with Stalin. Trotsky's record of death and bloodshed speaks for itself.
Green is one of many labels Commies hide under to escape their stench. Joel Kovel and Norman Finkelstein call themselves Green but this is more Commuist deception. Chomsky calls himself an Anarchist but is also a Communist who attempts to cloak his identity.
Sonia and CB give you too much credit for stupidity. You know what Chavez is doing and what happens next. This is part of the game your kind plays all the time. Each new Communism will be the one to get it right. You merely feign disappointment when the inevitable disaster strikes. Then you repeat the cyle with thje next cancer.
Jim Jones must be a role model of yours because plenty of fools drink the Kool Aide.
It's more complicated than it is Ren.
Some people in Europe and Russia say that the US do not want Europe to get closer to Russia, this is why the idea of the antimissile shield has been offered to Europe (Poland and another country). As a European I'm against nuclear US weapons installed in Europe, it's against my ethics. At one point Russia might be part of the European Union within 20 years if they are able to improve their human rights record.
In Europe, we've always been taught that Europe was going from Brest (France) all the way to Vladivostok (Russia), this is how old Europe was before WWII.
The Americans do not want a huge Europe, because at one point they are going to compete in some parts of the world, and it is indeed very true since the war in Iraq. It was not like that before, many people wanted Russia and Europe on the side of the US, then everything got screwed since the war in Iraq. The Russians want to go with China (Eurasia: Europe means West and Asia means East), some Europeans also do not want anymore the military embargo on China.
PS: the first economic power in the world is Europe (by GDP).
Beak: I don't blame you for being jealous, that Sonia and CB are respected by all political tendencies. Sonia, Craig and myself go back years. No amount of your pandering to them will change that.
Zimbabwe is not a capitalist country? Mugabe didn't even erase the debt, owed by the previous regime. He even allowed the IMF to destroy his country.
Just saying Trotsky is guilty of crimes isn't anything. No difference between Stalinism and Trotskyism?
Do you think there are communists in the State Dept still? McCarthy didn't get them all.
I hope you are right about Chavez.
The State Dept and the CIA declassified their records on Posada. Yes there is evidence against him. Not counting his own bragging,
I find Greens to be part of a muddled political party, some members radical and others liberal. Locally they are most active election time. Secret communist agenda? I wish. I have no doubt that Chomsky believes in some kind of libertarian socialist agenda he calls anarchism. I know he hates Leninism.
The Rosenbergs were not guilty of what they were charged with. The Venona Papers show that the Rosenbergs were innocent of the charges. The Zionist groups were scared, and disassociated themselves from the Rosenbergs, and denounced them at the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities. They passed nothing important to the Soviet Union.
I hope you are correct about Chavez.
I think you wish you could connect my politics to various Stalinists and cult leaders, you can't go beyond name calling.
I'd like to see you show me how a Trotskyist could support or have similarity to a movement supporting peasantry leading society, as Pol Pot? How do you explain Pol Pot hating Trotskyism? What would Trotsky say about such a movement?
Do you think I personally have been politically deceptive?
Sorry Beatroot.
Ren
As Jim Jones your "collective" insanity is at an all time low. Sonia and CB both post at my site and many of my readers visit both sites.
Lets start this slowly as reading comprehension issues.
The Rosenberg's guilt, including Ethel's involvement was proved beyond a shadow of doubt. They were guilty of the crimes they were charged with and deserved to die. They were not Zionists and like yourself were not Americans or Jews. Communists played up their Jewishness to deflect the heat of the Slansky show trials. Commies like yourself remained silent as Jews were targeted for death on the basis of imaginary Zionist/Titoist conspiracies. Most commies like the Rosenberg traitors remained loyal even when Commies were allied with Nazis and actively killing Jews in the 50's.
Neither the Rosenbergs nor yourself are Jews in any definitions. Being members of a quasi religious death cult tends to eliminate such ties. You are also the proud cheer leader for the Stormfront Brigade so long as they couch their words properly.
Chomsky is and always has been a Communist. He is what some call a "Council Communist". He writes of phantom Nazi-American alliances
while ignoring real Soviet Nazi alliances. He was a great fan of Pol Pot. Somehow his incoherent bit about Corporate media never seems to get around to State controlled media. How his theory explains the inane musings of a person whose worthless writtings are sold by University fiat in every book store is a mystery.
Greens are communists who have attempted to hide their identity.
Pol Pot was a product of the Frech Communist party and his thinking is traced to the Chairman, not Sinatara. Commies form rivalries in genocide but agree on the ultimate goals class genocide, subversion, theft. The mere wording is different.
The deaths and mayhem started long before Stalin was in power. Shall we add Soviet history to the growing list of subjects you know nothing about.
You know the truth about Chavez, but will deny and obfuscate until it no longer becomes possible. You will find another hero and repeat the pattern. This is the Jim Jones Koolaide you serve every day.
Mugabe has been a Communist for decades.
BR wrote: "The only alternative now seems to be suicide bombers. No ideology, no politics. All that is left is nihilism."
Now you're scaring me, BR!
REN wrote: "The alternative to capitalism and Islamism, is Trotsky's transitional program. There is not a government in the world, that doesn't fear Trotskyism."
I'm trembling as I respond. And I ain't a gubmint!
puppeteer wrote: "There isn't any center left, not left versus right, there's right versus right. Center and Left is off, by Center and Left"
At this point, an American quarterback should say: HIKE!"
Beak wrote: "Jim Jones was another ... far leftist."
So is Guiliani. Just ask anyone on the Christian right. And anybody who supports him is a commie scumbag.
Last, I'd much prefer a new Astor Piazolla party than a Fourhundred forty forth International. Free Reed Bandeleon!
Geez
Rudy G like myself has always been a social liberal. Most of my audience are Christian Conservatives and they are far more coherent than the closeted Commie clowns.
Jim Jones was in fact a Communist who called his variant Communalism.
He is just another of the pantheon
of classic Commie abominations who share the same goals as Ren.
Ren will be glad to serve you Koolaide even if it kills you.
I think that Beak is a little confused if he thinks that greens are communists. They have nothing whatsoever in common.
Communists, like Trotsky, thought that there would never be communism in Russia or anywhere else if not for rapid industrialization. The old Left agreed that increasing productive forces was the way to a better society.
Greens believe the opposite. They want to slow down growth and reverse p[roductive forces and industrialization.
The greens are another product of the end of Politics and the old ideological battles. Where the left once had faith in the future and the possibility of human progress, the greens have given up on progress and even the ability for humans to take control of social change.
So greens communist? Don’t think so.
To Beak: Communalist, liberal, commie. All the same according to the Christian right. Your boy's in a heap of trouble and it's only going to get worse for him.
To Beat: Well, at least the Greens are an alternative then. Less threatening than nihilists of any kind -- though I don't see how you can call Islamic faithful nihilists.
Wow. I'm impressed with how low and rabid the straw man and ad hominem attacks get when you have nothing to substantial say. Marx = Jim Jones = Ren. Impeccable logic! How enlightening for the rest of us!
More importantly, I'd just like to take up one point in Beat's original post, when he says that it is about personalities, not politics. In asserting this, he reveals his total disconnect with the current world situation and with the way history unfolds (in Britain and in Poland as well). Of course, that is his point - to smarmily rehash Fukuyama's assertion that with the fall of the Soviet Bloc, capitalism has triumphed, that we have arrived at the "end of history" and ideology.
Unfortunately for him, billions of people around the planet who suffer from the contradictions of class society - the real motor force of history - have a different opinion and are acting on it, whether they are consciously "left" ideologists or not. On the other side of the equation, the "right" is most certainly conscious and aware of the danger this poses to their system, and are already unleashing a war of propaganda and outright terror against the poor of the world for daring to "step out of line". The stakes are high.
The Venezuelan revolution is actually about mass social forces, about millions of people coming into open conflict with the narrow limits of a global socio-economic system that puts profits before the interests of society as a whole. It's about millions of people who have been oppressed for centuries, who every few decades decide that enough is enough and fight back. It's the Spartacus uprising against the Roman slave Empire on a far higher socio-economic and political level. And this time around, Crassus and co. may not be so successful in putting it down.
There is nothing magical in the water of Venezuela that has led to this situation, it is merely at the forefront of a process that is sweeping the whole of Latin America, and which will - with ebbs and flows - continue to sweep that continent and indeed the whole of the planet in the coming years.
This is not at all about a single individual, although individuals do have an important role to play in the historical process. But individuals are the products of their times and environment, they do not philosophize and act in a vacuum. Chavez reflects the aspirations of the masses, and has even pushed the process forward at certain stages, but he is not the revolution itself. A revolution is a vast, complex, and contradictory process - not a single decree, nationalization, uprising, victory, or defeat.
As Trotsky has been raised here, I'll let him do the talking on this point:
"The most indubitable feature of a revolution is the direct interference of the masses in historical events. In ordinary times the state, be it monarchical or democratic, elevates itself above the nation, and history is made by specialists in that line of business - kings, ministers, bureaucrats, parliamentarians, journalists. But at those crucial moments when the old order becomes no longer endurable to the masses, they break over the barriers excluding them from the political arena, sweep aside their traditional representatives, and create by their own interference the initial groundwork for a new régime. Whether this is good or bad we leave to the judgement of moralists. We ourselves will take the facts as they are given by the objective course of development. The history of a revolution is for us first of all a history of the forcible entrance of the masses into the realm of rulership over their own destiny." (From the preface to his History of the Russian Revolution)
Anyone who can't see that very process taking place in Venezuela over the last few years must have blinders on.
So whether they are consciously "left" or "right", the people of Venezuela - both the millions of workers and poor and the millionaire oligarchy backed by the U.S. government - are engaged in a life and death struggle far greater than the ideology of any individual. The repercussions are already international.
But collectively organized and politically conscious, the masses of Venezuela are far stronger than the oligarchy, despite its wealth and powerful allies. This is the battle that is being waged, and which in my very partisan opinion, must be won. If the oligarchy ever gets back in the saddle, we'll see how "democratically" they slaughter hundreds and thousands of "their own" people for giving them such a fright.
In short, "it ain't over 'til it's over".
Beatroot
Most Greens are in fact Communists
and the poster boy is Joel "Insane"
Koevel. A Green that writes almost entirely on anti-communism and repeats mindless anti-zionism is not Green. The worlds foremost anti-semite Norman Finkelstein also calls himself a Green. He merely trots out Old Soviet talking points and talks in classic Communist lingo such as.
"Israeli Jews are a parasitic class"
The above statement did not come out of thin air.
The Green bit is one of many deceptions Communist use. There is nothing Green about Koevel or Finky. As Politiques mentioned Commies just changed titles to escape the stench.
Peterson
Comparing Ren to Jim Jones is an actual insult to Jim Jones. Jones was a man of action who was prepared to live his destiny and create his Utopia. Ren merely practices revelutionary defeatism and deception and above all remains
in the USA.
Jim Jones was also a more effective Organizer than Ren. What better example of class genocide is there than killing yourself and all of your followers?
Ren is a poor mans Jim Jones with no charisma or organizational skills.
politiques USA: I thought that was interesting, looking at Russia, in terms of being allied with China, in the inevitable scramble for resources.
geez: You must have your own blog.
I'm sure you are aware that Trotsky wanted Argentine tango to be the dance of Russia, only because of Stalinism it never happened.
John: Atleast the discussion is back on track. I expect Beatroot to reply.
Of course, that is his point - to smarmily rehash Fukuyama's assertion that with the fall of the Soviet Bloc, capitalism has triumphed, that we have arrived at the "end of history" and ideology.
That was not my point and I was not ‘smarmily’ writing anything.
The ‘end of ideology’ was not my title but Ren’s. I do think we have come to the end of something, but something else will replace it.
Nor was a rehashing Fukuyama's pseudo-Hegelian point. For that to be so then what we have now would have to be the highest we can achieve. I think that this is patently not so. What we have lost is the idea that humans are the subject not the object of history. Until we rediscover that then we will be left not with political alternatives, but with religious ones, or apocalyptic ones, such as the green loathing of humanity and worship of ‘nature’.
What you can’t accept is that things have changed. If you went back to 1974, or 1904 you would see that I am correct. Fact is the working class may be a class in itself but not a class for itself any longer. That kind of consciousness has gone and so have the institutions that sustained it.
John,
the people of Venezuela (...) are engaged in a life and death struggle far greater than the ideology of any individual. The repercussions are already international.
Tell that to Beatroot. To him, what happens in Venezuela is completely unimportant.
It is indeed a 'life and death' struggle. And if Chavez wins, Venezuela will be dead.
Ren,
Zimbabwe is not a capitalist country?
No, it is not. And neither is Venezuela. If there is no respect for property rights, there is no capitalism. Zimbabwe is a Bolshevik country. Pure shotgun Communism.
john peterson wrote about socialist revolution or some derivative thereof sweeping the "whole of the planet in the coming years".
Doesn't seem to be the case in Europe. And without Bush, there'd be no revivication of socialism in Latin America. One of those temporary aberations, either way, I reckon.
And Beak, I doubt that Trotsky ever tangoed although maybe Emma Goldman did.
Both John and Sonia are showing the tendency of seeing things that aren’t there that I was writing abort in the post. And that’s because they feel they have no cause worth fighting for at home.
John thinks that if you count up all the strike actions etc in the world then you would come to a ‘political movement’ quantitatively. But I would advise him to read some history books and compare the 1970s to now. A complexly different world, at the fag end of the international socialist movement. What we have today is qualitatively different, comrade.
And Sonia! To suggest Venezuela is in mortal danger is laughable. What’s happening there is very important to Venezuelans but it won’t reignite a cold war.
Calm down and stop looking for the next Castro – both of you.
Beat - glad to hear that you accept that "something" will replace what currently exists. Any ideas as to what that might be?
As they say, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Nothing fundamental has changed since 1904 or 1974. The experience of just a few decades doesn't invalidate the entire structure of Marx's analysis of history and of capitalist society, which you are obviously familiar with. As you well know, history knows all kinds of aberrations, it is not a nice, clean linear process.
I agree that in most countries, the working class is not yet a class for itself - but class consciousness is not a static thing - it can fall as well as rise, and in much of the world it has been thrown far backwards in the recent period. But a pendulum can only swing so far in one direction before it swings back. We can see that process starting in Venezuela, and it won't stop at its borders - this is the real fear of the world ruling class.
Revolutionary Marxism, proletarian revolution, and world socialism are not "dead" - if they were, we wouldn't be here discussing this. I know a few lines in a blog won't suffice to convince you, but let's give it a few more years - I'm confident I'll be proven right. History marches on...
Is marxism dead? I don't know, I am not sure. In the eastern countries, Marxism never lied down on the ideology of Karl Marx but on the State that had annexed this ideology.
Have you guys heard about the word "teleology"? Teleology (not theology) is the theory that everything knows an end, and that offers in consequence the project of accomplishing everything. This idea - so simple - is in fact a critic of the world that integrated entirely the infinite as a reality and abdicated the mastering of totality.
Here is another definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleology
Teleology traditionally is contrasted with philosophical naturalism, which views nature as lacking design or purpose. For example, naturalism would say that a person has sight simply because he has eyes. In other words, function follows form (eyesight follows from having eyes). Teleology is the reverse of this position: a person has eyes because he has the need of eyesight (although a naturalist could just as easily use this argument from the perspective of evolutionary pressure). In this case, form follows function (eyes follow from having the need for eyesight). Organisms with eyes may be more successful at interacting with the world, so organisms with eyes survive long enough to produce offspring whereas organisms without eyes die without offspring.
I think this is what we are missing in this debate, and capitalism by nurturing its blind ego on other ideologies cannot criticize itself anymore.
John Peterson wrote: " let's give it a few more years..."
When I was a teen at the begining of the 1970s, I was sure the revolution was right around the corner. Good thing I didn't hold my breath.
An older convert once known as Saul of Taurus thought the Second Coming was right around the corner, too.
My guess is that all told there are more Christian fundamentalists who are enthralled by "left behind" ideological presumptions than class conscious revolutionaries today.
BTW, is the Telos journal run by Paul Piccone still around or did that come to an end, too? Hmmn, it is still around. Running articles like: "Soccer Violence and the Culture of Illegality"
by Danilo Breschi. Cool. But it looks like it's now somewhat critical of the left. Inuresin. So things don't necesarily end; they change. Even telos.
Sonia: I'll talk about Zimbabwe another time. I want to stay on topic.
Geez: I found Telos Journal online. I was less than impressed.
It is of no meaning comparing the numbers of fundamentalists to the numbers of revolutionaries. You know the power of a disciplined cadre, with good leadership skills.
You have no blog of your own?
Tomorrow if I have some time off, I will translate an article from my friend who was writing for the newspaper Le Monde. Most of his essays are very very hard to translate, and most of the time I can't even find the words in English. Example: simioanthropology. There is no such definition in english. We all know what anthropology means, but "simio" is utter non-sense. The term simio though in portuguese designs in 1 word the order of primates (gorillas, chimpanzees, humans ... etc), and these words need to be known to understand the philo-anthropology of marxism.
You can find a definition of "simio" in spanish here
I think that Marxism may be condemned to walk in the mists of time. The humanist side is perfect though, a more egalitarian society, even if one cannot be perfectly equal in practice, less injustice, ... etc
The mechanism on the other hand can be out of control. Proletarian class never existed at the beginning of the Soviet Union, so marxism had to create it, then marxism was dependent afterwards on the proletarian class to feed its ideology.
In capitalism we could even say we have the other side of marxism: for example more crimes are committed by rich people than poor people, but capitalism always refused to talk about it, and prefer to punish the poor instead. I think any ideology combines something good in theory and we can find deviances in the practice. I found many examples in the capitalist system, most of the examples are in the FDA fields. The 1st example is about the painkiller called "oxycontin" developed and commercialized to maintain the ultimate goal of addictive behaviors, another example is with a british firm that developed an anti-cancer treatment to maximize life's expectation for a few months to their patients but this company refuses to sell this medication in its own country because it is too costly, and they prefer instead the patients to die. These are a few examples going towards the deviances of the system. It is more perceptible in the american society, knowing that justice has not always been just in this country (SCOTUS for example) because they obey blindly to their ideologies of developing their beliefs around the world.
This is exactly why there are people like Hugo Chavez or the President from Iran, who are in a position of challenging our own deviances.
Well I'm going to bed ZzZZ, it's late here, 4 AM.
Beatroot,
Really interesting post, kinda reminded me of some of the analysis on spiked-online, which i also think is a lot closer to the bone than most stuff out there. you're right that a lot of people here really have missed the point - it is about us rather than about chavez; can we come up with a politics that will convince anyone in the west anymore, that is relevant to peoples real lives? i think we can, but all these arguments about soviet history or various types of third-worldism are distractions from the real issue.
Rob, exactly.
REN: You know the power of a disciplined cadre, with good leadership skills.
You have no blog of your own?
<><
The power of a disciplined cadre with good leadership skills ain't nuthin without a critical mass.
No blog, no life, no followers, can't and don't care to tango. Suits me fine just bustin' chops here and there.
Rob: Thank you for your comment.
Beatroot: When I did a post some time ago on Sudan, I was influenced by your stand. With the Spiked Online reference, I understand what influences more.
I adapted your position about "humanitarian intervention".
Spiked grew out of the Trotskyist movement. They still acknowledge Trotsky as one of their influences. Looking at that website, who'd ever know it grew out of "Living Marxism" and the Revolutionary Communist Party (UK) not the Maoist RCP from the US.
Now everything fits.
When it comes down to it, I'm glad Russia stumbled across this oil in the North Pole and has righful ownership. Although it makes the U.S. dependent to new foreign policy, it may makes us less dependent on old policies. I recommend this report about Russia's big oil boom and all the countries and companies involved....I found it very informative and interesting...
Russian Oil Production
Cheers!
Daniel,
I recommend this report about Russia's big oil boom and all the countries and companies involved
Excellent report indeed. One conclusion: Russia is indeed a capitalist country now, but it's the kind of capitalism that flourished in United States in the late 19th century, at the time of cattle barons, lumber barons and railway magnates. Even state companies are run like private ones... (i.e. competently)...
Was the RCP-UK connected with the RCP-USA?
A Bob Avakian connection?
The RCP (UK) wasn't Maoist, it was Trotskyist.
Renegade- as I posted on my site with a little updating Trotsky's Transitional Program reads like it could have been written today. It is a very valuable tool in the class struggle to get us from where were are to where we need to be. Things like 30 for 40 , labor party (for U.S.), workers and xyz government, etc. We have no disagreement on that point.
Spiked grew out of the Trotskyist movement. They still acknowledge Trotsky as one of their influences. Looking at that website, who'd ever know it grew out of "Living Marxism" and the Revolutionary Communist Party (UK) not the Maoist RCP from the US.
My reading of Spiked Online, is that on one level, it attempts to be controversial for no other ends than stimulating those who are bored with politics. On another level, it punches above its weight in an attempt to lobby on behalf of its main corporate sponsors. Spiked Online seizes upon the worst excesses of media hysteria regarding mobile phone masts etc. and assumes to the conclusion that all public concerns are simply worthy of dismissal as "political correctness" or "scaremongering".
I recall a Spiked review of Richard Dawkins' programme The Root of All Evil, in which the reviewer made a hackjob. If you remember that interview with Ted Haggard... well, the Spiked reviewer stated that "the pastor laughed the suggestion off and proceeded to demolish Dawkins" and "Dawkins came across as a sore loser". Haggard was absolutely terrible in that interview, yet the Spiked review was clearly an attempt to sound "different" and "gadfly" for no other reason than "standing out from the crowd".
Like many other Spiked articles, this review was hardly original - the same old platitudes about atheism and communism, and that atheists are "arrogant" for criticising religion.
i was asked to join this discussion but i really dont have time to read through 80 comments so i have read some of them.
there seems to be a lot of vitriol going on. there doesnt seem to be a great deal of discussion at all.
i also recognise some of the blogger names here.
i was asked about the Living Marxism (LM), former RCP people in britain.
they are not marxists, they are not leftists they are not trotskists.
they are in fact fairly rabid right-wingers who use the names they operate under to promote a pro-gm, pro-corporate agenda.
i am neither pro-gm nor pro-corporate but if someone else is then fine.
its the dishonesty that gets me
the evidence is voluminous
http://tinyurl.com/2l6ewv
http://tinyurl.com/2nrwly
http://tinyurl.com/33tc3o
if someone wants to take me up on these points then read what i posted. i will not respond to knee-jerk abuse.
for the record, i am neither a communist nor a socialist. if i could be defined it would anarcho-syndicalist but please just read either my blog or better, read 'island' by aldous huxley and you'll get it.
In our world when something dies, there is something else that takes place. In political ideologies, communism died and capitalism is trying to take over. There is a problem with that though in the sense that american sacralization of its politics and its metamorphosis in a repentant messianism blocks any kind of introspection. This is why I have always been a partisan of "know yourself first" before blaspheming the others. In the meantime human beings have to find something else, a new alternative based on true feelings to keep away (neo)capitalism from invading countries and destroying people's life since almost nobody is able to do any introspection in this thread.
Daniel: Welcome to this blog. I'll read that document this weekend.
Sonia: The end of Stalinism meant some type of capitalism, considering all the followers of Trotsky, Bukharen, and Zinoviev were dead.
Alan: Welcome to this blog. funny how Spiked is so concerned about science, than runs from Atheism.
Michael Greenwell: Welcome to this blog. Several people who comment here come from anarchism.
Most if not all the vitriol comes from one or two rightist trolls.
I think Spiked plays the game Hitchens does, of trying to be both left and right. Hitchens gets $$ from both sides, as I bet Spiked does. With turncoats follow the $$.
spiked is not concerned about science about science at all.
they spend all their time trying to debunk genuine science and replace with dogma
Communism as a world movement is dead. Slogans like "Death To The Kulaks As A Class" are laughable in todays world. No one takes such drivel seriously, outside of places like Darfur. These places are rightly seen as engaged in Dark Ages style barbarism.
The most successful "communist" countries today are places like China and Vietnam, countries that are ruled by totalitarian capitalists. Their relation to communism is in name only.
And the more capitalist innovations they adopt, such as limited private property rights, the less likely they are to take those two steps backwards. They can only stand still or go forward. And if they stand still,they will eventually collapse by the force of gravity working against their own inertia.
The next big movement is capitalistic fuedalism. Not the kind of Middle Ages feudalism where property rights were granted at the pleasure of the monarch, to earls and knights, but a more modern style capitalism.
I mean here the kind that is controlled by multi-national corporations who wield their influence not to an entitled aristocratic nobility, but
by political parties and their operatives who do their dirty work quite well, and are well paid for doing so.
Just like those knights of old,they are willing and eager to send our sons and daughters to serve as cannon fodder, to give life and limb and sanity in order to make the world safe for Coca-Cola General Electric.
Any viable "workers revolution" that aims to put an end to this will have to be nationalistic in nature, and even to a point isolationist-not internationalist.
Geez
No connection at all. UK RCP actually came out of the International Socialists (which turned into the SWP later). It was a faction of a faction. Wasn’t as popular as SWP in the 1970s. It was only when they published Living Marxism – a very glossary and un-Lefty magazine in the late 1980s early 1990s that it really started to get noticed. The party was wound up in 1996. Since then loads of these guys have become regulars in the UK media. Mick Hume is now a columnist for the Times…..Clare Fox (ex girlfriend of mine) is regular on BBC….Brendan ONiell you can find on the Guardian’s Comment is Free pages and Frank Furedi (the main ‘theory guy) is in all sorts of things etc etc etc…..
Posted by The Pagan Temple | 07 July, 2007 00:51
Michael Moore showed this link between the White House and the lobbyists in his latest documentary "sicko". In the american society there has been a shift from the medical body to the profit of financial corporations instead of taking care of their own patience without pre-approval. What happened to the oath of hypocratus? During the greek times, any sick people, living in wealth or in poverty, had the right to be correctly treated. This credo existed in the USA, but it disappeared during the 70s, and we can find it anywhere all over the world (Cuba, France, India, Russia ... etc).
The US spends 16% of its GDP in healthcare. As a comparison, France spends just 9.6% and is ranked 1st by the World Health Organization for the performance of its health care system. In spite of what it spends, the US is ranked 37th. Pre-emptive medicine does not exist in the US, although this adjective is certainly true when this country has to go to war: there is no money for the poor, but there is plenty of money if you want to kick the ass of oil nations. Oh by the way I think we found the weapons of mass destruction: hamburgers kill more people than a war.
There is also this word "socialized system" that is being criticized in the US. In the US they think that if the system becomes socialized, then there won't be the same quality of treatment, and that is completely false (NHS in England is an example). I always thought that Health Care should be a universal right.
These are the kind of stuffs that I think, for my part, deserve more public attention. We can't be indifferent, we do not have the right to be indifferent, and we have to do something about it. The first time when I put my feet on US soil, I was struck by poverty. How can that be possible, in a cutting-edge technology country, that we can find so many poors? That does not make sense to me.
Tonite I was supposed to translate a french article into english, and to be honest, i did not have the required time, besides my translation skills are not that great. But I'll take a rain check and hopefully i will translate this article as soon as possible from this not so famous french author.
This french philosopher had met Heidegger the Nazi in Berlin during his youth, most of his work has been written exclusively in french. This guy has no international notoriety whatsoever, although he received the iranian embassy delegation at his house a few months ago, he is read by millions of internet users all over the world, and I always found his articles mindblowing, very powerful, with a huge sense of humanism and a quality of thinking and analysis beyond my expectations. This guy taught me alot (he's next to his 90s now) and he wrote around 80 philosophical essays in his life. Some of his essays have also been censured by the french publishers, especially in the fields of theology.
Let's be responsible.
hamburgers kill more people than a war.
That's a very dumb comment...almost as dumb as that film Super-Size Me...
Obviously you don't have a sense of humor (юмористика).
Cze;
Dobry humor in Polish.
Do Widzenia
Oh...was it 'irony'...sorry...
Bwah s'oki :)
Ren we are doing a poll on my site as to who is the greatest apologist for authoritarian repression on the web. Would you like to campaign to win the nomination.
If I were as authoritarian as you I would just award you the prize and have the secret police intimidate anyone who disagreed.
By tradition western leftists are very critical from authoritarian regimes. In the french society, the socialists always blasted the regimes from the Soviet-Union after WWII. On the other hand, the rightists from France never said a word even under Putin's Russia.
I don't think any country even in the West has clean hands when it comes to human rights records. France for example actively took part in the genocides of Rwanda, and they became even the accomplices of the CIA in the most recent deportation cases in renditions flights in Europe (Poland too). So we can't win for losing.
western leftists are very critical from authoritarian regimes
They might have been 'critical from' (whatever that means), but Western leftists were certainly never critical OF totalitarian regimes. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro and even Pol Pot were widely admired by leftist Western intellectuals from Louis Aragon (one of whose poems was 'Vive le GPU'), Sartre (an admirer of both Stalin and Mao), Chomsky (who claimed that there was no genocide under Pol Pot) and many, many others...
Sonia: Do you still think that history will judge Bush 43 as a great president?
I don't understand your point. I know this blog has had criticisms of everybody you mentioned.
Beakerken: Ren we are doing a poll on my site as to who is the greatest apologist for authoritarian repression on the web. Would you like to campaign to win the nomination.
If I were as authoritarian as you I would just award you the prize and have the secret police intimidate anyone who disagreed.
Sonia, in the past yes, but these people are not here anymore to contest, they passed away, or they were born before WWII. For Sartre, it is normal, he always refuted german philosophy, because he was french and against the Nazis' occupation. Sartres was for the french resistance. People have to resist if they want to pursue their own happiness.
Ren
You are leading the voting so far.
It seems that people have a hard time voting for candidates that are in need of strait jackets.
The people have spoken and you seem
to be leading the vote.
Will you be serving the Koolaide to your followers after your victory?
Pagan: You keep saying that you don't have a side. Unfortunately on the blogs, you get ignored because of that. You don't beg for attention like beak.
Nationalism isn't a solution for the future. Multinationals have no national loyalty, therefore the workers shouldn't have national loyalty. It works better for both. Venezuela didn't have to lead in setting up Banco del Sur, as an alternative to the World Bank and IMF, but he chose to not only think in terms of nation.
You need to write a book, if you make up words like capitalist feudalism.
Beak:
Ren: You are leading the voting so far.
It seems that people have a hard time voting for candidates that are in need of strait jackets.
The people have spoken and you seem
to be leading the vote.
Will you be serving the Koolaide to your followers after your victory?
Ren-I just have to call them like I see them. Internationalism will never work, because it inevitably aims for one vast nation state.
Look at the mess the EU is in. It was originally conceived to be nothing but an economic arrangement-a trade agreement, for Christ's sake. It morphed from that-an economic trading bloc-into an entity where any country that was a signatory would be obliged to take in a minimum amount of Muslim immigrants? What the fuck is that all about? They are expected to agree to what are women's rights, gay rights, and even where the fuck their citizens can smoke tobacco products in public. That's one hell of a trade policy. No wonder the European voters rejected it in droves. Even the French hated it. When France rejects something because it is too "progressive" that is mind boggling.
If such an internationalist system ever was adopted, it would inevitably lead to collapse within individual areas, and eventually into outright chaos everywhere. It might be propped up for a time by sheer force, but that couldn't last long.
It would take decades to recover, and when it did, it would be in the form of city states and natiion states, many of which would be as isolationist as Albania under Hoxha,for example.
In other words, states are just a natural progression and extension of families, and tribes. Internationalism in any form would be like knocking down every house in your home town and building one giant building and telling everybody to live there and expecting them to get along.
As for comparing me to Beakerkin, there's no comparison that I know of, other than maybe agreement on some conservative ideals.
Beakerkin is like Zeus with a headache, with the exception that if you split his head open with an axe, instead of Athene- Hugo Chavex, Castro, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot,and every other communist that ever lived would come piling out. You would probably come out first with a pitcher of Kool-Aid.
Pagan: I hope you don't think I was comparing you to beak.
I was saying that on blogs, the most extreme and loudest, get the most attention. I think it hurts you at times.
I'll answer your post tonight.
Pagan
That is some image and if Ren came out of my head with Koolaide he would be serving the masses instead of being a vampire. That is the best laugh I had in a while.
Ren
Now you want to be my toady. This would be a bad thing for most people, but as you are a herd animal this might be the best you can aspire to.
However, since I am a greedy Capatalist I will find a way to make a buck off your idiocy. How about a reality TV show called Revolting America. Che Bob, Troutsky, LWB and yourself can go in a van ride across Ameica. You could preach Marxist idiocy in Walmart parking lots. Maybe you can let LWB speak in front of an actual KKK cross burning. It might be a good idea to buy life insurance before we get to Union City. It seems the locals do not care for your kind there. Although watching the Cuban American community delivering their brand of "social justice" might get good ratings.
Ren,
Do you still think that history will judge Bush 43 as a great president?
It depends. If Islamofascism fizzles and disappears after US withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush will be judged harshly for overreacting. But if Sears Tower and Golden Gate are destroyed by Muslim terrorists during Barack Obama's presidency, people will recall that while US was on the offensive, nobody dared to attack it directly.
Viet Cong didn't follow US troops to California to extract revenge - so those who called for US withdrawal from Vietnam were ultimately proven right.
If Al-Qaeda is as smart (and as moderate) as Viet Cong, the Iraq War might yet be seen as a mistake.
But if Al-Qaeda is what Hitchens claims it is - then Bush will indeed be seen as a great president for fighting them in Baghdad instead of in Peoria...
I don't understand your point. I know this blog has had criticisms of everybody you mentioned.
My point was that IN THE PAST leftists supported Stalins, Maos etc. IN THE PRESENT, they support Chavezes, Castros, etc. Nothing has changed. Chavez's ideology, his hatred, his extremism - they ARE EXACTLY THE SAME as Mao's and Lenin's...
IN THE FUTURE, leftists will support other dictators, while claiming that Chavez was a right-winger and a tool of Yankee capitalists...
Politiques,
in the past yes, but these people are not here anymore to contest, they passed away
Others have taken their place. Every leftist tyrant has a fun club of clueless Western cheerleaders. Stalin had Sartre. Chavez has Renegade Eye.
Oh for Christ sake, would someone please put a collar and dog leash on Beakerkahane. I'm tired of stepping in his inane racist dog crap.
Ah yes Ren's KKK partner in crime appears when we need him with another anti-semitic slur. "Beakerkahane" how original, you must now pay the Duck for stealing his material. No doubt LWB's next intelligent thought will
be his first.
How an avowed secularist is now an advocate of theocracy remains a mystery. Moreover, any simple reading of my blog shows several knock down brawls with real Kahanists. Additionally Kahanists do not hide their identities, unlike Commies. Being an actual Kahanist in the case of Ren and company would be a self improvement as the idiocy espoused by Kahane doesn't seek global hegemony, theft of property and is much less deadly.
Ren has asked where the Anti-Semitism is on his site exhibit 1 LWB. Every post everywhere turns into a post on a global Jewish conspiracy. Sonia writes a post about the Libby pardon and doesn't even know Libby is a Joooo. LWB explains the Libby pardon is part of a Jewish plot to manipulate Bush and rule the world. " All of you non-Jews will end up as Palestinians".
Classic themes by LWB also said by David Duke and the Neo-Nazis at Stormfront.
1 A secret cabal of Jews manipulated President Bush into invading Iraq.
2 Israel knew about 9-11 in advance and let fellow Jews (including me) and Americans risk their lives so America would serve their intersts.
3 AIPAC runs the US government
4 Jews control all the media
5 Jewish Americans who support Israel are traitors.
6 Askenazi Jews are Khazars and have no claim to any relation to the Jews in the Bible.
We will start with these six classic Neo-nazi themes. Ren has seen these themes and said nothing.
He has seen them many times and has said nothing. He would like to
lecture Rush Limbaugh and Don Imus about bad satire. However, when his good friend posts material that
could be found on Neonazi web sites he remains silent.
The truth is that Ren approves of this. This is a modern version of the Nazi-Soviet alliance that Ren has defended.
Lastly, it should not fall on me to point out the acceptance of the most blatant bigotry. Those of you
with a backbone should not have remained silent. LWB proves my points quite well, he is just too ignorant to comprehend it.
Ren you do not have to repeat this one. Either grow a backbone or break out the Koolaide.
Beak, and quite a few others.
Sorry, but what the fuck has your comments all through this thread got to do with my post? Is it not possible to keep to one subject? What you are doing is trolling….meaning a waste of effort, time, and space. Is it too much to ask for a DEBATE? Calling Ren a ‘toady’ and the like is not a debating point, it is like the small gibberish of a parrot with tourettes syndrome… and about as informative….
Beak
Now you want to be my toady. This would be a bad thing for most people, but as you are a herd animal this might be the best you can aspire to.
However, since I am a greedy Capatalist I will find a way to make a buck off your idiocy. How about a reality TV show called Revolting America. Che Bob, Troutsky, LWB and yourself can go in a van ride across Ameica. You could preach Marxist idiocy in Walmart parking lots. Maybe you can let LWB speak in front of an actual KKK cross burning. It might be a good idea to buy life insurance before we get to Union City. It seems the locals do not care for your kind there. Although watching the Cuban American community delivering their brand of "social justice" might get good ratings.
Ah yes Ren's KKK partner in crime appears when we need him with another anti-semitic slur. "Beakerkahane" how original, you must now pay the Duck for stealing his material. No doubt LWB's next intelligent thought will
be his first.
How an avowed secularist is now an advocate of theocracy remains a mystery. Moreover, any simple reading of my blog shows several knock down brawls with real Kahanists. Additionally Kahanists do not hide their identities, unlike Commies. Being an actual Kahanist in the case of Ren and company would be a self improvement as the idiocy espoused by Kahane doesn't seek global hegemony, theft of property and is much less deadly.
Ren has asked where the Anti-Semitism is on his site exhibit 1 LWB. Every post everywhere turns into a post on a global Jewish conspiracy. Sonia writes a post about the Libby pardon and doesn't even know Libby is a Joooo. LWB explains the Libby pardon is part of a Jewish plot to manipulate Bush and rule the world. " All of you non-Jews will end up as Palestinians".
Classic themes by LWB also said by David Duke and the Neo-Nazis at Stormfront.
1 A secret cabal of Jews manipulated President Bush into invading Iraq.
2 Israel knew about 9-11 in advance and let fellow Jews (including me) and Americans risk their lives so America would serve their intersts.
3 AIPAC runs the US government
4 Jews control all the media
5 Jewish Americans who support Israel are traitors.
6 Askenazi Jews are Khazars and have no claim to any relation to the Jews in the Bible.
We will start with these six classic Neo-nazi themes. Ren has seen these themes and said nothing.
He has seen them many times and has said nothing. He would like to
lecture Rush Limbaugh and Don Imus about bad satire. However, when his good friend posts material that
could be found on Neonazi web sites he remains silent.
The truth is that Ren approves of this. This is a modern version of the Nazi-Soviet alliance that Ren has defended.
Lastly, it should not fall on me to point out the acceptance of the most blatant bigotry. Those of you
with a backbone should not have remained silent. LWB proves my points quite well, he is just too ignorant to comprehend it.
Ren you do not have to repeat this one. Either grow a backbone or break out the Koolaide.
08 July, 2007 15:28
Beatroot
Your point is well taken but Ren is typical of the far left. The far left hasn't devolved it never was anything more than an apologist for totalitarian repression and the worst of mankind.
Ren is a toady and he is true to his nature. The far left has become a jumble of mindless anti-Americanism, anti-semitism, conspiracy nuts and historical idiocy.
The comments above have summed up the posts of LWB. Had I made similar comments about any other ethnic group Ren would be screaming at the top of his lungs. However, when a freak espouses the most blatant type of Nazi anti-semitism lefties get "collectively"
silent.
Ren's silence tells us that catering to anti-semites is part of the program. I only feel sorry that you are so blinded with self righteousness that you can not see the obvious.
My apologies beatroot. I was invited to participate at this blog by renegade. It’s just that every time I get here or many other places I find that I am being maligned by beakinspammer. His many split blogging personalities make it difficult to know who we are even talking to anymore. (tula 49 his newest creation today.)A few weeks ago it was liberal black sambo. This jackal is crazy.
I do not post under any other names than the one I post under now.
I stand by the accuracy of the comments. Moreover, everyone has seen the comments in question.
The silence of the self righteous is deafening. The comments of LWB are considered rabidly anti-semitic by Sonia, CB and even Eric who told LWB to knock it off. The comments speak for themselves as does the silence of Ren. The spirit of the Nazi- Soviet alliance is alive and well.
Kool Aid anyone.
Beatroot-
"That’s really just about as good as it gets for the western Left, these days.
The Cold War ideologies are no more; the old socialism and communism that provided the counter-weight to capitalism have become museum pieces.
And even the capitalists, without the Soviet bogey man, are not quite sure how to justify themselves any more. Watch how the rhetoric of environmentalism is the new dominant world view, popular not just with tree hugging Greenpeacers but with the UN, the EU, and many in national government. Capitalism can’t even defend its reason to be anymore – high growth, profit at all costs. Capitalists are even queuing up these days to put limits on themselves under the banner of ‘save the planet’.
It almost makes me nostalgic for the old free marketeers, when capitalists acted like capitalists and there was a real alternative among social institutions like the trade unions and labour clubs trying to create a real alternative. Now each side bows down to the god of environmentalism, to Gaia."
There was a point where the "Cold War" was good for capitalism and democracy, because it provided a competitor against which to strive for improvement of the system.
But the line was crossed and people started to forget that it was, after all, a struggle for world domination-not a struggle to "make the world safe for democracy" and all that bullshit drivel, but a struggle for supremacy on the world stage, pure and simple as that.
Now that the battle was "won", well, to the victors go the spoils. Because the world at large has now been "won" by the side of "democracy" and "freedom" and "free market forces", you see the dark side of those forces manifested in the form of rampant consumerism and "globalism".
Nobody wants fair trade, but "free" trade. It's just like the era of the Robber Barons, only now they are international in scope. In order to compete, America has to lower it's standards, and eventually this will lead to the end of Anti-Trust laws. Taken to it's logical conclusion, more and more companies, not just in America but worldwide, will be swallowed up by a relative handful of multi-national corporate beasts who will then dictate prices, wages, terms, and laws.
Regulations? Why, that's those evil "communists" at work, of course. The only people who should be regulated are-well, people.
So we have to cower them with global warming and doomsday scenarios, that way we can raise oil prices to record highs, and make even bigger profits. In the meantime, many of the third world developing nations can be cut some slack, until we build their economies up-i.e. so we can form an upper strata of uber-wealthy top one percenters to enslave the remaining ninety nine percent of the people, ravage their resources, and funnel even more money to the cause of "free market capitalism".
And if anybody disrupts the "righteous" cause of "freedom" and "democracy" (the right to be filthy rich off the backs of the working poor)-people like for example Hugo Chavez in Venezuala, or Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia-well, we'll just have to do something about that.
Stock tip for capitalist, freedom loving people everywhere-buy mercury futures.
Hey Blustein,
Still censoring your blog like a good Stalinist, I see.
Why don't you go interview MISS BEAMISH the CENSORBOY.
Hey Brown
I am returning to NYC. Please identify yourself in Union Square Park. I will be reading your idiocy in every forum.
Moreover, the process servers will be waiting for you. It seems that knowingly calling someone a pedophile without any proof is libel. The papers have allready been drawn and it will be either pay up or jail time.
I hope you enjoy prison you will be spending alot of time there unless you come up with the cash.
Maybe Ren will donate some beer cans.
This article was translated on June 2003; and it is still up-to-date:
Imaginary letter from the President of the French Republic to the American writers
While the war for the Iraqi oil treasure prepares, the American government asks to all the writers of the country to write praises of the American culture which will be circulated by the American embassies in the whole world. This step constrained the "Élysée" ( The French White house) to specify how the defence and illustration of French literature is integrated in the deterrent force of our foreign policies.
I imagined that the head of the State explains himself on this point in a letter to the American writers in which he exposes his philosophy of literary creation to them, his vision of history, his comprehension of relationships between literature and politics, literature and the idea of justice. This text will be widely diffused in United States.
1 - An unprecedent step
2 - My political duty
3 - American civilization and concept of preventive war
4 - The spirit of our literature
5 - Your literature and the critic of political power
6 - Will you become the instruments of a creeping priesthood ?
7 - The writer is not a servant of culture
8 - Observers and judges of the world politics
9 - The Attestors of universality
10 - Your Vanguard's duty
11 - Your anxious patriotism
12 - Apostles of lucidity
13 - The definition of justice
14 - The Security Council of UN
15 - Appeal to other judges
1 - An unprecedent step
For a President of a State to address the foremost writers of a foreign power, there is no precedent. Such an initiative may enter the prerogatives attached to my function if a political duty imposes it to me, and if my message meets the vocation of universality that belongs to literary genius. However, extremely singular political circumstances compel me to clarify the relationships that your great writers entertained with the spirit of their nation and, through it, with the grandeur of humanity being civilized at school of literature.
2 - My political duty
The political obligation that constrains me to write in the way that is yours, that of fights through writing, arises in the following way : my Foreign Affairs Minister informed me that because of the disastrous portrait of your country which your President in the exercise of his mandate enhances and spreads in the whole world, your State Department has decided to ask each and everyone of you to try to cure by some talented pages the cataclysm which strikes the effigy of your nation on the scale of the whole planet and, for that, you are called upon to write a panegyric of the American culture which would be diffused through the diplomatic channels of your country throughout the five continents, including by the care of your ambassador in Paris. You are called to praise the greatness of your civilization, and to write in the manner of psalms patriotic hymns to the glory that your continent acquired when it was winning fame for its defence of freedom and democracy on the entire planet.
I do not know if you will obey or if you will freely respond to these pressing calls from your State Department to its inspired children; but while your fatherland sustains its intention to destroy the grounds of public Law that several centuries of reflection from most famous lawyers and most well-known for their wisdom government men tried to conceive and write with precision in the words and with clear thinking inspired by their reason, you will understand that it falls under my responsibilities, not to suggest their answers to great writers, therefore to disobedient intelligences, but to explain to you what I see as the nature of French literature, and its relation to thoughts.
3 - American civilization and concept of preventive war
Your people wanted to be a guide of mankind, and the torch of a democracy moving towards a world of justice and truth. Secured by these principles, your State created an alliance between republican virtue and the sovereignty of your God. And now the white House requires of you to legitimate the concept of preventive war against the Demon. From now on, your enemy is called the " axis of evil ", and you fight it in the name of " immutable justice " which you embody. We, who have fought tyranny for more than two centuries, and who have made the fight against despotism, the banner of our foreign policy, we also condemn the Iraqi regime; but we notice that the Iraqi government does not threaten at all the American people, and that he does not bear any responsibility in the misfortune which struck you on September 11, 2001.
Will you crush an innocent population under a carpet of bombs? Will you massacre thousands of men, women and children only for the purpose of laying hands on the black gold which you covet the treasure ? Will you put American literature at the service of such an ambition or will you move back from the profanation of the heart of your nation which is asked to you ?
4 - The spirit of our literature
It is in order to help you to answer this question in your heart and conscience that I obey to my duty of President of the Republic of the rights of reason to speak to you also in my heart and conscience about the spirit of our literature. You know that literature was born only five centuries ago, at the time when we concluded a new alliance between writing and thoughts. It is by leaving the darkness of the Middle Ages that our writers' pen found anew its legitimacy in defending and illustrating the rights of human intelligence. Since then, our nation is unfalteringly attached to the prerogatives of our cerebrum, and to the prerogatives of the critical mind.
All our great authors found themselves philosophers of history and politics; and it is what connects them to the genius of your nation since you entered the arena of thoughts at the end of our century of Enlightment. But remember our common origins : in the XVI th century, the Renaissance was born from an intellectual impulse within Christian religion.
This rediscovery of Socratic introspection was based on criticism of Roman orthodoxy, engaged in assuring an unquestioned reign of its severely hierarchical Church: Marot, du Bellay, Rabelais, Montaigne, all our great writers were at the same time observers without compliancy of society ,and defenders of Protestant's freedom of thoughts. Our XVII th century also obeyed to the intellectual vocation that inspires us since Erasmus, but with a tenacity hidden under the same features of Catholicism and Protestantism : Descartes got into trouble with Rome, Pascal illustrated a Protestant form of Catholicism, which we call Jansénism, Molière attacked the devout, La Fontaine left us, in the funny or wild form of its fables, a treaty of politics more detailed and more ferocious than Le Prince written by Machiavel, Racine the pietous turned out to be an observer of human heart that his knowledge of the Court's life placed to a thousand miles from devotions and from his century, and the genius of Corneille is that of a witness of tragedy in History and politics. Then, our XVIII th century took over criticism of the narrow control papal authority exerted over the rights of thoughts : Voltaire, Diderot, and the encyclopedists began again, with a renewed fervour, the war of reason which began during the Renaissance in philology, and that Renan will continue during the XIX th century in his Histoire du Christianisme (History of Christianity) and his famous Vie de Jésus (Life of Jesus) .
5 - Your literature and the critic of political power
Your nation was only ten years old in 1789 when we created modernity by forging at all points the rational States still alive today. This ended definitively the wars of religion that devastated our continent for three centuries. This is why your literature is deeply bound to ours. Your genius has its deepest roots in the critic of the power of the States. You too are wary of politics and temptations of tyranny which it nurturs in its bosom.
But perhaps is it also dangerous to be born in the cradle of the Reformation because there isn't any religion safe from a relapse into orthodoxy. For five centuries, our fight for the conquest of the rights of thoughts has to start over and over. Our adversaries are obstinate and are armed to the teeth ; but they also rise from their ashes in our own walls, where our administrative democracies replaced Roman bureaucracy. Since Kant, the different Protestantisms yielded everywhere to the temptation of making sacred the bodies of the State, as if it were a substitute of ecclesiastical hierarchy, and Prussian Protestantism collaborated with Stasi by natural respect of authority. *
Our kings were always catholic, even under the Édit de Nantes (Edict of Nantes)*, and monarchy had to abolish this Edict, because our Protestants were delivering our strongholds to Anglican England. Since 1905, we understood that nations taking seriously their theology cannot allow themselves to divide the mind of their people between rival confessions while they each claim to offer the single truth. If religious truth did exist, there wouldn't be two of them. This radical contradiction made our democracy unviable during one whole century. Three monarchies and two empires succeeded our Revolution of 1789. Its last avatar was the reign of a catholic State on defeated France from 1940 to 1944.
6 - Will you become the instruments of a creeping priesthood ?
The turbulences of our bicephalous history bring us to observe, informed by a long experience, the interested offer made by your Government to sing its glory and its war feats just when its sceptre is strengthened in the Gulf. Every religion oscillates between evaporation and stiffness. When religions are powerful, they line up on the side of States which support them. The centuries of Roman priesthood were those of Inquisition. Are you sure that an America of psalms does not emerge from the canticles to culture ? Who convinces you that your President does not want transform you into instruments of an insidious priesthood ? Since when is literature at the service of an alliance of war with piety? In France, the authors whose pen delivered the orders of our victorious kings carried the title of historiographers of the Court. In our democracies, patriotic wars gave birth only to painters of death. Les Croix de bois, Le Feu, Le Voyage au bout de la nuit, these are the titles of the works of our painters of war that made a mausoleum from glory of weapons.
7 - The writer is not a servant of culture
In this spirit I would like to say to you what we understand, in France, by the term literature, and how our writers are, if not all philosophers by vocation, at least born to weigh and measure the power of the State, and to meditate on History - this being, in our eyes, the Socratic grounds of the introspective vocation of philosophy. And initially, I feel that the steps taken by your State towards you is an offence to your writer's vocation. How does the State dare presenting you as servants and employees at the defence of culture ?
Literary genius is not a mercenary of culture, because culture is only a small flowered garden, and your mission is to fly over it with great flaps of wings. Literature overlooks History's relations with life and with death. What would your great composers, your great painters, your great poets say if your government asked them to wear the garments of the defenders of what you call culture which is only the cluster of customs and habits of various people of the world ? You are the grave's interlocutors because you were born with tragedy. It was twenty-five centuries ago at the battle of Salamine.
8 - Observers and judges of the world politics
I hold you for advisers and guides for the heads of State, because you are observers and judges of world politics. Our great novelists of the XIX th century were visionaries of History. They pursued the conquests of political lucidity of the three previous centuries : Stendhal observes from afar the social machine of his time. He sees the bourgeoisie substituting the rights of industry to those of the altar. Zola paints the French people with the colours of L'Assommoir and of Germinal. Balzac brought a whole society to a dramaturgy of ambition and money. With Les Misérables, Victor Hugo boosts poverty to an epic of injustice. But didn't you have your painter of mediocrity and of boredom with the author of Babbitt , which symbolizes, in France, Mr. Homais in Mme Bovary ? With Faulkner and Hemingway, didn't you have your visionaries of the throes of death? What would they say if the American government had asked them to leave for a moment their grave so as to defend, at your sides, the day to day way of life which it pompously calls the " American culture ", and that in the name of a State from now on determined to trample the international Law to avenge an insect's sting ?
9 - The Attestors of universality
You are not only the witnesses of the genius of your nation : you are the attestors of universality in the New World; and it is for this reason that you have to cast the same critical glance over your nation that our writers didn't cease to cast over France for more than five centuries. All great literature is at school of anger. Where are your "Grapes of wrath " ? From Faulkner to Henry Miller, from Dos Passos to Sinclair Lewis, they are everywhere, the fires of your creators' rage. It is Paris that carried them to the light, in translation, because you were not yet ready to recognize the genius to its pace and to the metal of its voice. But since your literature is a child that our century of the Enlightment saw arising beyond the seas, and since we entered together the era of democracies of reason, you share duties with us - and initially the duty to light up the people when their leaders abuse of their ignorance, of their naivety and of their credulity.
10 - Your Vanguard's duty
I hear that, on your soil, many citizens of goodwill have the feeling that Iraq threatens America in a mysterious way , and that your President cannot explain his reasons to the people; and that, consequently, your fellow-citizens must trust your President, who is obeying secret reasons : great dangers are threatening the safety of your nation.
Ignorance, credulity and naivety of the people, we have known this for three thousand years. We know that these only change of clothes according to the times and places. But it was even more difficult to fight stupidity when it adorned with the prestige of the heavens or the furies of hell. It was even more difficult when recently it would propose a concrete proletarian paradise. Our great writers grappled with the folly of ignorance since we left the darkness of the Middle Ages.
In your turn, will you learn how to fight ignorance, credulity and naivety at the school of the great literature of all times and all nations? Will you explain to the American people that, among a large number of nations, alas, having frightening weapons, but not your bomb of Hiroshima, Iraq is the only one which seems to be a honeycomb ? Why does this country attract troubadours of virtue, knights of the Golden Fleece, crusaders of Holy Sepulchre, the ones thirsting for the well of truth, and the lovers of the beautiful Dulcinée of Toboso, all who sits in your Government ? It is that the Golden Fleece, the Holy Sepulchre, the wells of truth, and tutti quanti of moderns is called oil. Isn't that easier to explain to American people than the evil spells of witches, the danger of heresies, the eternal tortures of the damned and the nuclear lightning which used to appear as a mean of major excommunication ?
Yet, your anthropologists know so little of the human cerebrum's secrets that they did not succeed in refuting Marxist's redemption. Thus your images ridiculed your senator Mccarthy, and this suffice to refute the belief in the world's salvation through the advent of Soviet paradise on heart. From Cervantes to Rabelais, from Swift to Kafka, writers are visionaries of the insanity of nations. The literary genius has the eyes of Ezechiel : they are wide open to the Hercules of madness.
11 - Your anxious patriotism
I have been told that your compatriots are all at once anxious and devoted patriots. We tried this terrible mixture ; like today's Americans, our ancestors felt at the same time pious and anguished to see their Church juggling with the Gospels and the States. At that time, our writers purified Arethuse's fountain water, that of the word of Christ. For the faithfulls, they remembered the anguish of a god nailed to the gallows. You too are self-murderers of spirit. Don't you think that our former theologians, now converted to the lights of reason, still have lessons from the gallows to give to your Protestant writers ? For we all are at once sons of Voltaire, and connaisseurs of the torment when anguish marries fidelity. Your martyrdom is to drink the hemlock of reason on the Way of the cross of the unjust war dreamt by your Picrochole . Will you submissively climb the steps of this scaffold ? Will you let the blade of your State cut your neck, you who are, like all the writers of the world, the sons of Tolstoï's Guerre et paix (War and peace) and Dostoïevski's L'Idiot (The Idiot) ? You are the anxious ones and the faithful ones among the nations - but it is on Ixion's wheel of History that you are nailed.
Today, it is on your soil that you have a rendez-vous with the law of the World : for the first time, your turn has come to fight the eternal alliance of States with injustice. By the new ecclesiocraty of thoughtlessness and superficiality which your quarrelsome press represents, tell your nation: " Think by yourselves, open your ears, speak freely". One of our writers, Boetius, wrote four centuries ago a Traité de la servitude volontaire (Treaty of the voluntary servitude). Remember that the worst kind of servitude is involuntary, and that it arises with political naivety of people.
12 - Apostles of lucidity
You are apostles and missionaries of political lucidity, not since the Renaissance, but since Thucydide and Tacite. All my life, I made oracles out of you, because in my modest place, I am only a navigator to which the helm of History is unceasingly torn off from his hands. Confronted with the violent madness which seized your nation, do you believe that it is with my consent that the principle of preventive war was introduced to the UN? The ancients used to say that gods turn mad those they want to ruin. I tried to constrain by all means possible your unbridled Ajax. Help me to tie him with a strait jacket until the day that your nation will have rekindled its spirits, and will give us again lessons of courage, wisdom and freedom.
13 - The definition of justice
Today, I need you for the essential, and the essential relates to the definition of justice. Know that politics is so much the hostage of force that it unceasingly proclaims that justice is on the side of power. Thus, your State called upon all the resources of your theology of power ; and, in this spirit, you maintained that it does not belong to the omniscient God who you are to yourselves to reveal the sins to the creature, but to the creature to confess them until the last one, in order to try, by a meticulous and complete penance, to possibly become worthy of being spared by your wrath.
I managed to disarm for a time your theology of war. I said to your President that his role of head of the American skies is badly perceived in Europe , and that if you refuse to say to the UN's inspectors where the sins of Iraq are hiding, we would judge that you only are sly casuists, and that you refuse to peace its chances, in order to start a deluge of fire. Our European remarks were heard, and you had to give up the political pitfalls of your God.
But we are trapped by forces specific to politics, forces that enables it to baptize power in the baptism water of justice; for the UN admitted that it was fair to condemn only one nation to destroy its weapons for only one end : to allow your army to seize its oil. And now, if the Security Council decided, by a majority of its members, that your enemy did not entirely disarm itself, the expression of justice would supposedly come from the lips of this built majority.
14 - The Security Council of UN
The UN Security Council which is supposed to decide between peace or war, and which France will chair from the 1st January onwards, counts a majority of microscopic States over whom your government made itself complete Master, and that your government bound to his power by treaties which forbid these Lilliputians to oppose your foreign policies. It is a great paradox to make Justice reign by the voice of your servants when their dependence toward you deprives them of their sovereignty. What a parody to have puppets pronounce oracles of international ethics while you pull these puppets' strings. What a masquerade to witness History being subjected under our eyes to such force. France, Russia and China, permanent members of the Council, gave up in advance their right of veto. A certain sum of money from you was sufficient to buy Colombia, Romania, Singapore or Mauritius.
It has been a long time since History ceased offering to the whole planet the scene of such a caricature of justice ; it had been a long time since force had not presented, in the play of its madness, a more burlesque law-court than the court for which your government is asking you to change the verdicts of absurdity into decrees of international law. Will France be an accomplice of the God who will speak by the voice of your servants ? Will we back the States that you will have bribed ? Pygmies to your account, and that you will have disguised into secondary actors in the background of democracy, will they drive Europe to kneel in front of their aureole?
15 - Appeal to other judges
France appeals to other judges. Since five centuries, our writers are judges of the idea of justice. The greatest among you had the justice of God himself appear before their court of justice. From Eschyle to Shakespeare, from Sophocle to Cervantès, they lent their pen to the Isaiah dormant within them. Are there greater sovereigns than those who look at nations with the eyes of prophets, and who tell you that the God of America nails you on the gallows to make you pay the tribute of your salvation ? They know that the God of America is still the idol who furnished the necessary winds for the Greek fleet to depart for Troy. Your Iphigénie is called literature. It is literature that your State asks you to sacrifice to your idol in order to ensure a profitable crossing to your ships.
Here is what I would like to hear from your lips as great writers of a free America. Your God will give you all the gold of Priam if you sacrifice justice on the altar of war. But see how the heads of State are of little weight at your side. Only you have the power to give a voice to the literary genius, of which you are the guardians, but on the condition that you be its heroic victims. You are beckoned to drink the hemlock of sacrifice to the spirit that makes resuscitative the heart of literature. Tomorrow, the tocsin will ring the hour of carnages. Before the charge, it is to you that I appeal. You are the visionaries of the madness of nations. For centuries, your failures are those of thoughts. You are patriots, but your fatherland is a vessel, that of intelligence in storms of History. Help your literature to hold the rudder of reason before your civilization and ours sink in the shipwreck of international law.
As President of the Republic, I will not betray the ideals of my country. The world awaits France's response to the question of knowing if force dictates the law, failing that justice has force for itself.
1 - The Stasi : is an abbreviation of Staatssicherheitdienst; i.e the political Police of RDA from 1950 to 1989 .
2 - The Edict of Nantes is a treaty signed by Henri IV in Nantes on April 13 th 1598 that had established the rights of Protestants in France , ending the War of Religion between Catholics and Protestants.
Here is a pro Chavez blog:
http://www.venezuelaenrevolucion.blogspot.com/
I believe the person who runs the blog is from Cuba and lives actually in Portugal.
That's cute and nice, Blustein, but you didn't answer whether you still censor your blog.
Brown
You are going to jail. Do you understand that calling a person a pedophile and a Klansman is libel.
Moreover, if you have done this from your employers computer they will be paying me big time.
The papers are drawn and it will not be very long until you are served. You could be looking at several years in jail.
Then there is threatening Elmer's kids with molestation. That is going to place you in jail for a very long time.
Brown that is a nice picture of you. How long have you had Down's Syndrome? Those are some interesting photos you posted.
Ren
Answer the question. Do you stand by the Neonazi statements of LWB?
This is not going away until you respond.
JB
If calling someone a Klansman or libel were a crime Beakerkahane may soon be in a prison cell. Also I saw that another homeland security employee was picked up in "To Catch a Predator" this weekend. Someone may be on to something.
LWB,
You'd better shut your yap or you're going to the ovens just like John Brown.
Ima Nazi and Youra Nazi, but I'm the good Nazi who loves flowers and kites and DHS (even though DHS fired my alter-ego, MULLAH BEAK the DHS PEDOPHILE).
Anyway, you're a Nazi who hates Nazis, so I hate you.
Hey Blustein,
What the hell did LWB ever do to you that you wish him dead? He seems like a top-notch guy to me.
Anyway, you never answered whether you censor your blog like Goebbels.
So do you?
MUMIA in 2008
Brown
You are going to jail. Do you understand that calling a person a pedophile and a Klansman is libel.
Moreover, if you have done this from your employers computer they will be paying me big time.
The papers are drawn and it will not be very long until you are served. You could be looking at several years in jail.
Then there is threatening Elmer's kids with molestation. That is going to place you in jail for a very long time.
Brown that is a nice picture of you. How long have you had Down's Syndrome? Those are some interesting photos you posted.
Beak
Answer the question. Do you stand by the Neonazi statements of LWB?
This is not going away until you respond.
This started out as a decent discussion, then wound up in the sewer thanks to Beak, a total tweak.
Thanks BR for your explanation of the deevolution of the Trot left in the UK.
But I find the Spiked stuff on global warming to be rather absurd (but then again Alexander Cockburn's Counterpoint seems to be taking the same tailspin).
As Alan Mackenzie also pointed out in his blog: "Bate has also contributed to Spiked-Online, writing on issues such as DDT, GM[1] and depleted Uranium. The latter article by Bate is co-written with Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski,[2] who writes for 21st Century Science and Technology - the magazine of anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist Lyndon LaRouche, a scientist who believes that ‘The Ice Age is Coming.
I just don't get what this "new politics" is that Spiked and you keep going on about. Where is it?
Who is it?
It seems that the normally glib Ren has refused to comment on the blatant bogotry of LWB. It would seem Ren is either not manly enough to tell a friend with Neonazi like statements he is an embarassment or he agrees.
My guess is that Ren agrees with the Neonazi statements of LWB and is not man enough to admit it.
The longer he remains silent on the Neonazi like behavior of LWB the worse it gets. Moreover, he is well aware that John Brown has threatened children with molestation, libeled people with criminal accusation and has harassed an entire community.
Ren has proven to be a hypocrite and a Neonazi sympathizer.
Beat: This Claire Fox woman was your former squeeze? Fiona's sis?
And Fiona was somehow hooked into a Catholic news agency?
This really is starting to read like something akin to Lynn Marcus, et. al.
Scarey.
It seems that the normally glib Ren has refused to comment on the blatant bogotry of LWB. It would seem Ren is either not manly enough to tell a friend with Neonazi like statements he is an embarassment or he agrees.
My guess is that Ren agrees with the Neonazi statements of LWB and is not man enough to admit it.
The longer he remains silent on the Neonazi like behavior of LWB the worse it gets. Moreover, he is well aware that John Brown has threatened children with molestation, libeled people with criminal accusation and has harassed an entire community.
Ren has proven to be a hypocrite and a Neonazi sympathizer.
HAHAAH ? LWB: see what I did there.
I said I ar4 U. Haha!
"
Your dumer than JONG BROWN, hwo I hate!
So I wroted like me but righted your name instead of my name.!
See, these are the kids of things I learnded at DHS while working on the kiddie porn division there.
Until they fired me. They fired my friend Brial Doyle, too.
I hate DHS but also love it. I hate commies more though.
Commies staeled my avatar and threatneed my kids and call my friend Warren the Injun a SAMBO.
REN: Just say NO to LWB and no to yourself you commie dupe and NO JOHN BROWN! Then we'll be cool.
Until then, I will spam you.
H ? LWB: see what I did there.
I said I ar4 U. Haha!
"
Your dumer than JONG BROWN, hwo I hate!
So I wroted like me but righted your name instead of my name.!
See, these are the kids of things I learnded at DHS while working on the kiddie porn division there.
Until they fired me. They fired my friend Brial Doyle, too.
I hate DHS but also love it. I hate commies more though.
Commies staeled my avatar and threatneed my kids and call my friend Warren the Injun a SAMBO.
Mullah Beak: Just say NO to LWB and no to yourself you commie dupe and NO JOHN BROWN! Then we'll be cool.
Until then, I will spam you.
What is this obsession with Spiked? I like Reason too, so what?
I knew Clare for about four months in 1988, I think. Have not seen here since. I used to share a house with someone who was very close to her and was ‘in’ the party. I also went on maybe three marches (Ireland, and two other issues) with RCP people. I also went to a summers school where I saw Frank Furedi talk on ideology. He was good.
But that is about it. At the time I was in an Anti-Poll Tax union and that is not at all the RCP style – they stopped ‘united front’ activities sometime before that. And then I left the Labour Party in 1992 and that was the end of politics for me.
As far as a new politics is concerned – it doesn’t exist. But what is important is going back to some basic principles. These are as much defined by JS Mill as they are Karl Marx. And if anyone supports genuine free speech, secularism, enlightenment and all that I will support that argument. That goes for Spiked, Reason in America etc….
As far as Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski is concerned, never heard of the geezer. As far as GM goes, it is just a technology and nothing to get excited about.
As far as Global warming is concerned…well, that is another argument. But from a perspective of someone living in Poland, they are not going to accept less economic growth and neither should they nor be held to ransom by richer countries.
I agree about the level of discussion here...not at the beatroot level that is for sure....
After wading through Beaks idiocies here, and seeing how much space and time he took up, in what otherwise was going to be an interesting discussion, I would ask Ren to ban Beak henceforth. He is a troll and ought to go.
What's annoying is off-topic remarks on comment threads. I delete these on my blog these days if they get to numerous, so I would support that. Banning people from blogs is bad and I can;t support that...
Beaker-whatever is illogical, and too racist to the extent of calling our dead people during the second Qana Massacre (a horrific day over here) as pulling out rubber bodies and I do not know what... anything to defend Zionism...the mothers still weep
Renegade, if there is a way to ban that illogical person, I would be grateful.
Post a Comment