The Offtopicgrad Soviet: A Place to Discuss All Things Red

[luiz]

I respect your position, Cheezy, but it is incorrect for Communists to criticize, in public, existing proletarian parties in power, especially in the face of the enemy. What good comes of it? Yours or my comments on an internet forum won't change the status of the DPRK. So, what's the purpose? Criticism that makes us stronger is face-to-face, not directed at third parties. You misunderstand the role of criticism in the struggle.

Maybe Cheezy thinks (correctly) that by refusing to criticize the North Korean regime in public, and even worse, by praising it, you're actually harming the cause. That's because the vast majority of people, even communist sympathizers and fellow-travelers, know for a fact that NK is hell on Earth. If you praise Kim and his ilk, they might realize (correctly) that maybe it is not such a good idea to side with people like you.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

It would be preferable if we could discuss this stuff without having to be remember who has the most experience as a labour organiser, as if that actually any bearing on this stuff one way or the other. North Korea's socialist credentials or lack thereof are a matter of fact, not a function of who happens to be debating them; we know this, so we should debate like we know it.

First of all, Cheezy's and my exchange was/ is about the criticism of a socialist state... Which is what my post was about. Criticism among the left must be face-to-face and constructive, or otherwise you are doing the enemy's work for them. That was the meat of my post. If you believe the DPRK to be a socialist state, and you wish to criticize them, do not do it in the face of the enemy, and do not use, as substantiating evidence, non-socialist criteria or sources.

If you arguing that they are not a socialist state, a DOP, then you are arguing that they are a DOB, in which case, no one has argued that this is the case, or given evidence to support that claim. Ergo, doesn't seem appropriate to argue non-Red issues in a Red forum.

And my position comes from years of struggle, active revolutionary struggle... You cannot separate my position from that any more than I can separate your head from your body. So, let's get THAT straight.
I.will continue to put up these IRL credentials because the weight they place on the arguement comes from material practice, not simply books.

In my view, if you learn anything that is not for the purposes of proletarian struggle, then you are putting your own self ahead of the lives of billions of toiling working people.

The proof of theory is in the practice.

Here endeth the lesson.

Maybe Cheezy thinks (correctly) that by refusing to criticize the North Korean regime in public, and even worse, by praising it, you're actually harming the cause. That's because the vast majority of people, even communist sympathizers and fellow-travelers, know for a fact that NK is hell on Earth. If you praise Kim and his ilk, they might realize (correctly) that maybe it is not such a good idea to side with people like you.

Dear Sir or Madame, you may be right.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Reindeer Thistle, this isn't internal party politics. There's no rule, no stigma against public discussion of disagreements (which doesn't even exist in most parties, FWIW). Don't try and paint me as some sort of traitor because I criticize you or something you defend within sight of someone who might agree with me. That doesn't make them my friend or ally, nor me theirs. And most of all, so what if they profit in this case by it? There's nothing to defend in DPRK! The only husk worth salvaging is that it resists American and Japanese attempts to control the country through its puppet ROK state, and thus should be defended as any country which resists imperialism is defended, but no more than that.

No, there is nothing wrong with public discussion, because we should always be honest about our mistakes and shortcomings, own our weaknesses, and act to resolve them. Simply hiding them does nothing. I have nothing to be ashamed of in the DPRK, because it does not represent what I believe, and I am not ashamed of what I believe. Strictly personal disagreements are perhaps another thing to be discussed aside, but that is not the case here. Indeed, it would be very productive for people to see how we feel about things, so that they can judge their support for us better, and perhaps have their understanding of our views and positions given better context, which may move them to agree where they did not previously. We are not a hive mind, and as I said, we are not a party, so we have no reason to behave like either.


We can't learn from our mistakes or from the situations others have found themselves in if we aren't honest about their nature. What worries me about the defense of North Korean "socialism" is that people who are unable to perceive its anti-socialist nature, most of all people like you who are apparently so un-picky as to take literally anyone who calls themselves communist at his word as an ally*, become fully capable of endorsing such a miserable farce of a regime at home as well. It isn't even bastardized socialism with the warts that we can smooth out later. It's just not socialism at all. It can't become socialism, that's why endorsing DPRK as a socialist regime is so incredibly dangerous.

*and yet practice Marxism-Leninism? Isn't Leninism all about being picky with your friends?

Maybe Cheezy thinks (correctly) that by refusing to criticize the North Korean regime in public, and even worse, by praising it, you're actually harming the cause. That's because the vast majority of people, even communist sympathizers and fellow-travelers, know for a fact that NK is hell on Earth. If you praise Kim and his ilk, they might realize (correctly) that maybe it is not such a good idea to side with people like you.

In one small part, this is the case. But it's a lot more complicated than that. I don't believe a lot of what the popular media says about North Korea, North Koreans, and their lives, because there are numerous sources which describe a much better (or at least different) situation than is broadcast as the image decided for the DPRK by its enemies. I am also well aware that many of their problems stem from global isolation as well as the misfortune to have been the victim of several traumatic and catastrophic natural disasters (you could do well to look up "The Arduous March" and why it began).

However, central to my point is that, regardless of what the North Korean regime has done for its workers, regardless of whether the propaganda spread about the DPRK is true or not, the relationship between the North Korean worker and the machine he works is not socialistic. North Korea is no more socialist for taking care of its population than Norway or Sweden are, because that's not what determines the nature of social relations! To pretend anything other than this is to ignore dialectical materialism, whether it's slanderers calling it communist or defenders calling it socialist.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Reindeer Thistle, this isn't internal party politics. There's no rule, no stigma against public discussion of disagreements (which doesn't even exist in most parties, FWIW). Don't try and paint me as some sort of traitor because I criticize you or something you defend within sight of someone who might agree with me. That doesn't make them my friend or ally, nor me theirs. And most of all, so what if they profit in this case by it? There's nothing to defend in DPRK! The only husk worth salvaging is that it resists American and Japanese attempts to control the country through its puppet ROK state, and thus should be defended as any country which resists imperialism is defended, but no more than that.

Au Contraire, I am not painting you a traitor at all and not asking you to observe MY criteria -- I am merely explaining mine. I have no secondary contradictions: only labor v. capital' proletariat v. bourgeoisie.

It is because this is not internal party politics that I take this position. Were we in an inner-Party discussion, I would hear any criticism of the DPRK and answer it. That is the job of a teacher, a cadre to the struggle. Solidarity does not mean "take the good workers with the bad," it means that for all we would have to criticize the DPRK, what constructive purpose does it serve? Answer me that.

The sole consideration for a Marxist-Leninist on any issue is that it helps or hinders the cause. I do not discuss DPRK with non-Party members outside of this forum, strictly for the same principle: it does not help my cause to even bring up a socialist republic thousands of miles away when I am dealing with a DOB sitting right on top of me. For real. What it does is what it has done here: either take apologists for capitalism and convince them that socialism is not for them, or take someone who likes what we do in the worker organization and force a communist perspective ON them. You cannot will people to be revolutionaries... it is a process they go through themselves. But it is not an issue of domestic import to the revolution of the United States and it serves NO purpose to the movement anywhere to bash an admitted socialist republic, even if you think there is something wrong with it. Part of being a Marxist-Leninist is also choosing your battles.

It is like when you are going through hard times in a marriage. What do you do?
1. if you want a divorce, you see a divorce lawyer.
2. If you want to save the marriage you see a marriage counselor.

Funny that this all started when I reposted something you put on your Facebook.

The issue, as in the clip I posted from Fall of Eagles, is that it is the primary purpose to fight all that hinders the revolution. Everything that stands in the way of proletarian victory. Does the DPRK stand in the way of proletarian victory? Too soon to tell, anyway. That is why I repeat that we need to seize state power and then deal from a position of power. That's all. I am only discussing my position in relation to the DPRK.... I am not assigning a position to all Reds. As I said. But likewise if you can't learn from a successful revolution, what's the point.

Think Muhammad Ali: the Viet Cong never called him a <expletive deleted>... what harm have the DPRK done the cause of the international proletarian movement? If you think they are not socialist, then prove it... burden of proof is on the prosecution. I cited the Constitution... mind you, this is not a Party constitution, this is the constitution of a STATE.

No, there is nothing wrong with public discussion, because we should always be honest about our mistakes and shortcomings, own our weaknesses, and act to resolve them. Simply hiding them does nothing. I have nothing to be ashamed of in the DPRK, because it does not represent what I believe, and I am not ashamed of what I believe. Strictly personal disagreements are perhaps another thing to be discussed aside, but that is not the case here. Indeed, it would be very productive for people to see how we feel about things, so that they can judge their support for us better, and perhaps have their understanding of our views and positions given better context, which may move them to agree where they did not previously. We are not a hive mind, and as I said, we are not a party, so we have no reason to behave like either.

I am not treating this as party discussion. Trust me. NO one gets away with this in a party meeting. We have very limited timeframes and we are under constant surveillance. We discuss international dealings, yes, but our primary goal is proletarian revolution in the United States, where to strike the next blow, where to gather the allies, etc. The next blow to strike is not the DPRK. Others may attack them, I explain.

I participate in these and other threads to get the wind of what's happening in non-revolutionary circles. My recruitment is through theory applied to practice. I do not hope to convince anyone of anything over the internet, simply because you must see for yourself what is at stake. Those 6 college students we took out with us on Saturday were MORE than convinced that the US government, who has the resources to so do, does nothing for the vast majority of Americans. That is a first start. Communism, socialism, etc as terms have been so sullied by the bourgeoisie that starting a discussion with them can be a deal-breaker. Explain your aims and view in non-rhetorical, non-hackneyed terms, speaking to the facts as recorded daily in the revolutionary news vehicles, explaining the desirability of the

That's my position.

We can't learn from our mistakes or from the situations others have found themselves in if we aren't honest about their nature. What worries me about the defense of North Korean "socialism" is that people who are unable to perceive its anti-socialist nature, most of all people like you who are apparently so un-picky as to take literally anyone who calls themselves communist at his word as an ally*, become fully capable of endorsing such a miserable farce of a regime at home as well. It isn't even bastardized socialism with the warts that we can smooth out later. It's just not socialism at all. It can't become socialism, that's why endorsing DPRK as a socialist regime is so incredibly dangerous.

Socialism ain't always what you think it looks like. Trust me, I practice it in the organizations I work with: if you work, you eat. That is, you guarantee the mechanisms will exists to feed you if you work to make them happen. For those who will NOT work, they will survive, of course, and we do not turn anyone away who needs help.

But, please tell me what in what you read in the DPRK constitution is NOT socialism or the qualities of a socialist state.

Most of all people like you who are apparently so un-picky as to take literally anyone who calls themselves communist at his word as an ally* and yet practice Marxism-Leninism? Isn't Leninism all about being picky with your friends?

In bold... we never assign motivation. That is behaviorism. What else do you have but your words and deeds? Besides, please re-read the position on the adversary. The arena of contention for a revolutionary is always where they are, the adversary in a fight can change, but the adversary of the communist is international monopoly capitalism.

Read what Cuba and Venezuela have to say... even China.

 

[Traitorfish]

Think Muhammad Ali: the Viet Cong never called him a <expletive deleted>... what harm have the DPRK done the cause of the international proletarian movement? If you think they are not socialist, then prove it... burden of proof is on the prosecution. I cited the Constitution... mind you, this is not a Party constitution, this is the constitution of a STATE.

"I'm right until proven otherwise"? Jesus Christ. This is how bloody cults get started...

 

[H4run]

@RT: Note I wrote this comment also after following pretty much of the discussion, so RT there is no way for you to admit the socialist government mistake in the open discussion? because it is against the ethics. So isn't it quite pointless also to have the discussion because from the beginning you already intent to win it no matter what? Unless if it is a close discussion between the red where you can open and honest regarding their mistake.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

@Haroon: I was only explaining my position.

@TF: tl;dr... Please keep your comments brief and don't mince words, tell us what you really think.

Cuba-DPRK solidarity

A meeting and film screening was held at the Taedonggang Diplomatic Club in Pyongyang on 13 August (Tuesday) to mark the month of DPRK-Cuban solidarity. Attending the event were Cuban Ambassador to the DPRKGermán Hermín FerrasÁlvarez, staff members of the Cuban Embassy in the DPRK, Vice Chairman of the Korean Committee for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries So Ho Won, and DPRK officials.

So Ho Won said in a speech at the meeting that “that the first gunfire made by the Cuban revolutionaries and patriots in Moncada under the leadership of Fidel Castro Ruz marked a historic occasion in encouraging the Cuban people in the struggle for freedom and liberation. The Cuban people have won victory by following the road of socialism despite the U.S. political and military pressure and moves for stifling Cuba economically and its subversive activities and sabotage.” So also remarked that “the Korean people will as ever stand in the same trench with the fraternal Cuban people in the just struggle to beat back the U.S. imperialists’ moves for aggression and intervention and defend socialism,” according to KCNA.

Germán Hermín FerrasÁlvarez said that “the international solidarity activities are of great significance now that the imperialists are becoming all the more pronounced in their counterrevolutionary offensive” that “the friendly relations between the two countries have grown strong in the protracted and rigorous struggle against the U.S. imperialists, the common enemy, and become a model for the world people” and he “expressed belief that Korean people would always win victory in the struggle to shatter the U.S. moves for stifling the DPRK, defend the sovereignty of the country and achieve national reunification.” At the end of the meeting, participants watched DPRK and Cuban films.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

That's because they 1. had Western support from trade and investment, and 2. they had already murdered around 200,000 of their own people.

So by default support from the capitalist west is much better than from lets say the Soviet Union or China (while it was "reder"). I wasn't talking about political murders or massacres, the number I put regarding North Korea was from starvation.

 

[Traitorfish]

@TF: tl;dr... Please keep your comments brief and don't mince words, tell us what you really think.

I think that your enthusiasm for "anti-imperialist" regimes has left you unable to distinguish fascism from socialism so far as it is practised in a faraway country that the United States doesn't like.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

I think that you're enthusiasm for "anti-imperialist" regimes has left you unable to distinguish fascism from socialism so far as it is practised in a faraway country that the United States doesn't like.

I disagree.

 

[ParkCungHee]

The only husk worth salvaging is that it resists American and Japanese attempts to control the country through its puppet ROK state, and thus should be defended as any country which resists imperialism is defended, but no more than that.

Even that's more optimistic than I'm willing to give the regime. If you watch them long term, the pattern of DPRK policy is navigating the narrow straights of integrating into the capitalist superstructure without rendering the existing regime superfluous.

They're smart enough to realize that attempting the Chinese model would quickly turn them into a very expensive middle man the South would want to get rid of at the first opportunity.


Hence the method to what people assume is madness about the constant provocations and military alerts. The DRPK wants to integrate into the capitalist superstructure, but wants the ROC, PRC and Japanese (and even Americans) to think of them as indispensable to the security of the region.

That's why they never actually shut down Kaesong etc. They're perfectly happy to exploit their worker population, even in collaboration with their neighbors. Their "resistance" is just a Tirpitzian policy of convincing their neighbor they're enough of a threat that they should always have control over those workers.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

"I'm right until proven otherwise"? Jesus Christ. This is how bloody cults get started...

This is sort of a McCarthyist position, actually, TF... You may want to reword that.

 

[Traitorfish]

The only husk worth salvaging is that it resists American and Japanese attempts to control the country through its puppet ROK state, and thus should be defended as any country which resists imperialism is defended, but no more than that.

Even that's more optimistic than I'm willing to give the regime. If you watch them long term, the pattern of DPRK policy is navigating the narrow straights of integrating into the capitalist superstructure without rendering the existing regime superfluous.

Even before Park's point (which I agree with), an "anti-imperialist" position on North Korea seems dubious . Where would such a logic put us, for example, in regards to the First World War- revolutionary defeatism in Austria, social patriotism in Serbia? Reindeer Thistle at least maintains some internal consistency through his baffling conviction that the DPRK is a genuine, bona fide, electrified, six-car socialist republic. But to recognise that the DPRK is both an unapologetic bourgeois dictatorship yet argue that the global working class has some interest in its continued existence? That I can't understand.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

I did not recognize that the DPRK is a bourgeois dictatorship, and I not an "anti-imperialist." All governments are class dictatorships! That's Marx 101.

I cited the DPRK constitution and defend it as a socialist state in the classic Marxist sense: but it is a workers' state. Where are DPRK's multinational investments? In what foreign nations do DPRK corporations extract surplus value from the workers, aided by compradors, for the benefit of the bourgeoisie?

People see guns and red stars on Asians in uniform and freak out. I assure you, the rising sun on a uniform is a far more deadly -- and less welcome sight.

 

[Traitorfish]

Red stars and Asians, I have no problems with. Guns, well, I have my British anxieties, but they don't drive me to tears. It's the uniforms that get me. I've never encountered anybody advocating for uniforms who I would consider to be on my side. Not once.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Oh, I see... Speaks volumes.

However, since I am unarmed, have ONLY worn an apron as uniform when I worked for Safeway, and never did military service, I accept your apology.

Oh, and the "anti-imperialist" thing was quite a fraud by 1914 when the 2nd international party heads all voted for war credits, while the left were left out in the cold. The left positions ranged from "wait 'til the war's over and then we'll get rid of our leadership," to "oppose the war" to "turn the bourgeoisie war into a civil war."

Kautsky's comment was that the Second International was an instrument of peace, not war. War was already on the bourgeoisie order of the day... A revolutionary grouping needs to deal with that.

 

[Hygro]

edit: blast, red diamond. disregard

 

[ReindeerThistle]

edit: blast, red diamond. disregard

Oooo... Hygro, PM me if it's about me... I would love to hear it.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Even before Park's point (which I agree with), an "anti-imperialist" position on North Korea seems dubious . Where would such a logic put us, for example, in regards to the First World War- revolutionary defeatism in Austria, social patriotism in Serbia? Reindeer Thistle at least maintains some internal consistency through his baffling conviction that the DPRK is a genuine, bona fide, electrified, six-car socialist republic. But to recognise that the DPRK is both an unapologetic bourgeois dictatorship yet argue that the global working class has some interest in its continued existence? That I can't understand.

I can't really comment on Park's point, I'm not sure I agree with such sweeping statements about North Korean motivation/goals from anyone, simply because of the secretive nature of the regime and the lack of information about their deliberations. I think in that area we can only speculate, given what we know about their concerns and behavior in the past.

However, I think you misunderstand what I, specifically, mean by "support" and "anti-imperialist." What I mean is opposition in a unilateral way. Allow me to illustrate with an example from a current situation, that of Crimea, Ukraine, and Russia. Despite the Crimean anxiety about the new Ukrainian regime, Russia's actions are undoubtedly imperialist in nature. Russia is an imperialist, capitalist state, different from the United States only in its ability to project power and influence. In a vacuum, it would be obvious that internationalists would oppose this imperial action. However, we don't live in a vacuum, we live in a political world where the United States of America behaves as a global hegemon and leader of world imperialism. It's the biggest dog. The US is also unquestionably on the side of the new Ukrainian regime, and very likely brought it to power with the funding it gave to the Maidanists at the beginning of the year. Either way, Ukraine is going firmly pro-EU and America now (see the IMF package deal, among other things like NATO and nuclear re-armament vis-a-vis Russia talks). Russia's imperialist actions weaken this proto-Fascist regime, and an American imperialist ally in the region; they are a blow at American attempts to mold politics inside other countries to its own benefit. Again, in a vacuum, internationalists in the US, Russia, and Ukraine would first adopt the policy of opposition at home to the actions of their own government, and call on the Ukrainian people to overthrow their proto-Fascist government. This would roughly mirror the policy of the Zimmerwaldists in 1915. But in the real world, the primary concern is blocking American power projection. America is the global predator, stealing, exploiting, and strong-arming other countries into fueling its own consumption; it is the lynchpin of global capitalism. Our duty, then, is to oppose this first and foremost. In this context, Russian imperialism becomes not merely an objective evil, but the lesser of two evils. If Russia loses out, then American hegemonic imperialism wins and is strengthened. But if Russian imperialism wins, then little for Russia changes, but America is dealt a blow - in the very least, the example is made that countries can stand up to American gunboat diplomacy and win. In addition, the Ukrainian regime is weakened, which makes the job of Ukrainian anti-fascists easier too. This never amounts to endorsement of the Russian regime, or glorification of its [non-existent] anti-imperialist nature, but it does amount to standing up for the little[r] guy being victimized by the bully. It's tactical.

Likewise, I think DPRK can play a useful role in opposing American influence, or at the very least, being a perpetual thorn in America's side. I oppose attempts by the United States, Japan, or other nations to meddle in the internal affairs of DPRK, because such actions would inevitably serve global their own imperialist ends and not help the North Korean people, but that never amounts to endorsement of the North Korean regime as such, nor defense of that regime from internal threats from genuine progressive forces (a key difference from the Popular Front era, which saw stability as the foremost concern). It is a respect for the North Koreans to have control over their own destiny, independent from manipulation by imperialist powers, and a desire to do my part to stop my government from engaging in such an action.

EDIT:

edit: blast, red diamond. disregard

The only reason I have marked this as Red Diamond is in expectation of the coming re-merger of the forums, so that it can maintain a bit more order than the average bar brawl. However, that being said, I wish to encourage both lively and critical debate, so long as it remains civil. Policing will be minimal, but I want it to be understood that this is no more an "I can't help myself but go yell at Reds where ever I see them" thread than Ask A Red was.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

That was well-said Cheezy. Like I said, I respect your position.