The Offtopicgrad Soviet: A Place to Discuss All Things Red

[Traitorfish]

@ Cheezy,

I see the argument you're making, and it seems consistent enough. But I still don't understand how it can be understood as a communist position. Geopolitics are the bosses' game, not the workers'. We have no stakes in this, no investment and no prospects, we simply have nothing to win. No socialist worth their salt thought it mattered if the King or Kaiser called the shots in Europe, and hat has so fundamentally changed that we should take an interest now, at a time when capital is more reactionary than ever?

I certainly agree that workers should resist the imperial machinations of their government. But that's about refusing to be part of the machinery of imperialism. It is not "tactical", it is a matter of principle, both ethical principles and principles of class. It's a refusal to play their game, not an attempt to participate in as a third player, which is how you seem to be framing it.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I suppose a lot of what I wrote is posturing, or an opinion. I guess I feel the need to justify counter-arguments to liberal defense of imperialist foreign policies in communist terms? It would be more worthwhile if there were an international of some sort which could coordinate such attitudes into meaningful actions...

 

[ReindeerThistle]

According to the 21 Conditions, Communists in parties NOT in power have a duty to oppose their nations' adventures in the colonies in any way they can. Parties IN power, of course, withdraw from (or, as in Russia, incorporate) their colonialized territories.

Geopolitics absolutely affects the worker... For good and bad. They can, as Lenin's crew did, use the war as a locomotive for revolution.

Shoot, it was, in no small part, English worker activity that contributing to England's neutrality during the American Civil War.

 

[Gary Childress]

Hi RT,

Do you think that if the US adopted a system of government similar to that of the DPRK that the working poor in our country would see better living conditions than they do now?

It seems to me that the leadership of the DPRK is in absolute control of the country. So long as they maintain the country as a "socialist" state, then perhaps they can maintain their power. Since they are apparently maintaining it as a "socialist" state does that therefore justify the absolute power of the leadership". Is democracy NOT a concern of true socialism or is the DPRK somehow a "democracy"?

And if socialism is of such high worth that any means necessary to achieve it are justified, what if Bill Gates for whatever reason suddenly agreed one day to take over the US and run it according to socialist doctrines in exchange for absolute power? So long as he fulfilled his promise and ran the US according to socialist doctrines, would it be justifiable to allow Bill Gates to take over? I'm sure there would be no end to the line of people who would volunteer for absolute power in exchange for giving a few perks to the working class.

 

[Agent327]

Shoot, it was, in no small part, English worker activity that contributing to England's neutrality during the American Civil War.

Really? How so?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

According to the 21 Conditions, Communists in parties NOT in power have a duty to oppose their nations' adventures in the colonies in any way they can. Parties IN power, of course, withdraw from (or, as in Russia, incorporate) their colonialized territories.

A document for an organization which ceased to exist in 1943...

Shoot, it was, in no small part, English worker activity that contributing to England's neutrality during the American Civil War.

Which British workers were they? Because the British textile industry was pretty hard-pressed during the Civil War, that's why places like India, Egypt, and Algeria (French) are able to be known for their cotton today: Europe tried to create domestic cotton resources they had control of. I would be surprised if the British worker didn't press for war to resolve his own unemployment.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Hi RT,

Do you think that if the US adopted a system of government similar to that of the DPRK that the working poor in our country would see better living conditions than they do now?

Excellent question, Gary.

Frankly, if the federal government followed our 1787 Constitution, conditions for workers would be better.

But, as I said, each nation comes to socialism in its own way. I do not know the shape of the final US structure -- that really is for the proletariat to construct. All I know is the structure that works in the mass organizations we build. Since workers get no other opportunities to be non-exploitative leadership, when we rise to leadership we often make mistakes... But our "mistakes" don't send 30,000 children a day to their deaths by starvation in a profit-driven world that throws away food.

It seems to me that the leadership of the DPRK is in absolute control of the country. So long as they maintain the country as a "socialist" state, then perhaps they can maintain their power. Since they are apparently maintaining it as a "socialist" state does that therefore justify the absolute power of the leadership". Is democracy NOT a concern of true socialism or is the DPRK somehow a "democracy"?

Democracy is absolutely a concern, and a requirement. C.f. My description of the Cuba system. Since I have never heard a DPRK spokesperson talk about their system and describe its mechanism, I can only cite what I read. It sounds a lot like how the Cubans work.

Since I have heard a Cuban speak about the Cuban system, I am confident the US system can work like that... But we have to build our own apparatus. That is part of our strategy.

And if socialism is of such high worth that any means necessary to achieve it are justified, what if Bill Gates for whatever reason suddenly agreed one day to take over the US and run it according to socialist doctrines in exchange for absolute power? So long as he fulfilled his promise and ran the US according to socialist doctrines, would it be justifiable to allow Bill Gates to take over? I'm sure there would be no end to the line of people who would volunteer for absolute power in exchange for giving a few perks to the working class.

The principle of a socialist government would be that the class in power would be the Proletariat. Norway, Sweden, Finland have "socialist" doctrines, but they are wealthy countries and can afford to be generous to workers, but that is still not socialism.

A document for an organization which ceased to exist in 1943...

Disbanded for cause, see Stalin's interview with a British journalist on the subject.

Besides, The Communist Manifesto was written to describe the aims and views of the Communist League, which disbanded in 1852... Do we not find theoretical value in that? "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back" was written about a 1903 RSDLP conference... Is there.no theoretical value in that?

Or, are you saying communist parties out of power should NOT oppose their nations' colonial exploits?

Please clarify.

Which British workers were they? Because the British textile industry was pretty hard-pressed during the Civil War, that's why places like India, Egypt, and Algeria (French) are able to be known for their cotton today: Europe tried to create domestic cotton resources they had control of. I would be surprised if the British worker didn't press for war to resolve his own unemployment.

Marxists.org does not have the documets available, but International Publishers had a great volume on Marx and Engels' correspondence on the US Civil War, which we have in our library. There are letters that describe demonstrations of workers in opposition to England entering the war on the CSA side.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Disbanded for cause, see Stalin's interview with a British journalist on the subject.

I know what the cause was.

Besides, The Communist Manifesto was written to describe the aims and views of the Communist League, which disbanded in 1852... Do we not find theoretical value in that? "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back" was written about a 1903 RSDLP conference... Is there.no theoretical value in that?

Or, are you saying communist parties out of power should NOT oppose their nations' colonial exploits?

Please clarify.

I'm saying that we are not beholden to the rules laid down for internal management by a defunct organization. It's nice that some of them remain relevant, but don't cite them at me as if I'm breaking some rule by not obeying them.

Marxists.org does not have the documets available, but International Publishers had a great volume on Marx and Engels' correspondence on the US Civil War, which we have in our library. There are letters that describe demonstrations of workers in opposition to England entering the war on the CSA side.

I have a collection of Marx's contributions to the New York Tribune, would I be able to find them in there?

 

[ReindeerThistle]

I know what the cause was.

Do you agree with the reasons?

I'm saying that we are not beholden to the rules laid down for internal management by a defunct organization. It's nice that some of them remain relevant, but don't cite them at me as if I'm breaking some rule by not obeying them.

Of course not.

But don't get on my case for citing them, or you will see gulag time; but, then, I will be Commissar of Entertainment, so I won't have much say in the matter. While you are in prison, though, I will ensure quality films and books for your re-education.

Cuba, Viet Nam parties go by these rules... Still standing. My organization does, as well. They are good guidelines, especially #1.

I have a collection of Marx's contributions to the New York Tribune, would I be able to find them in there?

I doubt it... Maybe.
Mostly, these were letters between Marx and Engels during that period.

 

[Traitorfish]

Do Marxist-Leninists actually have any idea how weird they sound to everybody else, bringing up things like the 21 Conditions as if these were contemporary documents and not historical artefacts? How difficult it is for most people to distinguish between their parties and historical re-enactment societies? I'm not sure that they do.

 

[Agent327]

I have a collection of Marx's contributions to the New York Tribune, would I be able to find them in there?

Possibly:

Shortages of cotton from the South eventually caused a major crisis in British industry. Thousands of workers were thrown out of employment, or put on reduced hours. Yet while the textile bosses angled for armed intervention on the side of the slave-owners, the British working class stood in solidarity with the Union struggle. Marx and Engels were part of a movement against British intervention in the American Civil War. Marx, for example, spoke at a meeting of 3,000 trade unionists against intervention. The movement helped stop the British government from recognizing and fighting for the Confederacy.

From http://isreview.org/issue/80/karl-marx-and-american-civil-war, where several demonstrations are mentioned.

The question of course is if these demonstrations were crucial, as Britain was also trading with both sides. At any rate, the claim made here is not supported by British government documents - of which there would be plenty. What is clear, however, is that there were various interests at play.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Must be tiring for people to oppose everything... Nihilism posing as "non-Party" communism must be exhausting.

The Bible was written however many centuries ago, and yet serves as a basis for Christian belief systems in the 21st century.

The Hippocratic Oath is even older, are those principles out of date? Outside of Holland, that is?

I recently retired a 100 year-old steam boiler whose most relevant repair manual was copyrighted in 1898 (first American edition)... The boiler had 100 years of active service until a crack appeared that I could not repair. It's replacement is warranteed for 5 years, and its life expectancy is 25 years.

Not everything old is incorrect. We still breathe the same oxygen Lavoisier discovered in the 18th century.

edit: typo... 18th, not 19th century.

 

[luiz]

Not everything old is incorrect. We still breathe the same oxygen Lavoisier discovered in the 19th century.

We certainly don't. Lavoisier was executed by revolutionaries in the late 18th Century (1794 to be precise). After his head was chopped off in the name of revolutionary justice he failed to make any further discoveries.
"The Revolution does not need scientists nor chemists..."

PS: Yes, I'm aware that citation is possibly apocryphal.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Luiz is still breathing phlogistan?

Well, most mammals still breathe the same oxygen that Lavoisier discovered in the 18th century.

Don't trust anyone under 30?

Don't forget the amazing medical research Cuban doctors are doing.

Cuba's health system, an essential element in the country's social development, has benefited from the gradual incorporation of up-to-the-minute technologies and treatments to counter the negative effects of several diseases.

Traditional medicine has developed at the same time as state-of-the-art technologies, in a combination aimed at achieving the sole goal of improving the people's quality of life.

Cuban experts also use natural toxins, including the so-called Escozul, which is obtained from the blue scorpion, whose scientific name is Rhopaluris junceus.
Research carried out so far has shown that Escozul has analgesic, anti-inflammatory and anti-tumoral properties, and has had a positive impact on more than 90 percent of patients.

The toxin is extracted under laboratory conditions and using complex techniques. The poison is processed to guarantee its purity and later mixed in appropriate doses.

Escozul has proved to be effective to treat several diseases, especially cancer in the lungs, colon, the digestive track and the prostrate gland, and has preventive effects in some other cases.

Research is underway to administer the drug to patients suffering from arthritis, diabetes, asthma, hepatitis, pelvic inflammation, hepatic cirrhosis and breast displasias.
Cuba's medical achievements place the island among the top countries in organ transplants, including more than 100 heart transplants.
Very complex surgeries are carried out by highly-trained experts who stand out for their high sense of ethics and humanity and who use state-of-the-art technologies.
Excellent programs and unique techniques attract visitors who stay at medical facilities where they receive treatment against ophthalmologic ailments, or a cure for skin diseases such as vitiligo.
Drug addicts and alcoholics, many of whom have been declared a lost case in their countries of origin, find a cure to their problems in Cuba, in a natural, pleasant and tranquil environment that greatly contributes to therapy.
Moreover, patients receive an excellent personalized treatment by Cuban professionals at the Island's medical institutions, where they can find a cure for several diseases.

In Cuba's health system, specialized institutions treat patients who suffer from Parkinson's disease, in addition to those suffering from ailments that affect the quality of movement or from degenerative diseases of the central nervous system.

In that regard, Cuba's neurologists have a vast experience and have successfully carried out surgical procedures to correct movement problems.

 

[Agent327]

Yet you can find people with bad teeth in paradisal Cuba with little difficulty. Must be a hole in the health system...

Have you ever actually been in Cuba, Comrade?

Must be tiring for people to oppose everything... Nihilism posing as "non-Party" communism must be exhausting.

The Bible was written however many centuries ago, and yet serves as a basis for Christian belief systems in the 21st century.

The Hippocratic Oath is even older, are those principles out of date? Outside of Holland, that is?

I recently retired a 100 year-old steam boiler whose most relevant repair manual was copyrighted in 1898 (first American edition)... The boiler had 100 years of active service until a crack appeared that I could not repair. It's replacement is warranteed for 5 years, and its life expectancy is 25 years.

Not everything old is incorrect. We still breathe the same oxygen Lavoisier discovered in the 18th century.

edit: typo... 18th, not 19th century.

Is this rant in reply to anything? (The so-called Hippocratic oath is basically a myth; it isn't practised nor known exactly. What it comes down to is: do no harm to the patient.) Again, this is something anyone can google...

By the way, did your 'research' on euthanasia throw up anything beyond rightwing propaganda or do you still not know what it is?

---

Anyway, discourse apart, there's no solid evidence that worker protests actually tipped the balance in Britain's non-intervention stance towards the US Civil War - which was the actual topic...

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Jeelen, your refering to me as comrade is tantamount to flaming.

Please stop.

 

[W|M]

We certainly don't. Lavoisier was executed by revolutionaries in the late 18th Century (1794 to be precise). After his head was chopped off in the name of revolutionary justice he failed to make any further discoveries.
"The Revolution does not need scientists nor chemists..."

PS: Yes, I'm aware that citation is possibly apocryphal.

Lavoisier was executed because he was an aristocrat, not because he was a chemist.

 

[Gary Childress]

The principle of a socialist government would be that the class in power would be the Proletariat. Norway, Sweden, Finland have "socialist" doctrines, but they are wealthy countries and can afford to be generous to workers, but that is still not socialism.

Hmmm. So I looked up a few quick references on the North Korean political process.

Since its founding, the most important position in the DPRK has been that of the leader of the Workers' Party of Korea (WPK) — titled as chairman from 1948 to 1966, general secretary from 1966 to 2011 and first secretary since 2011. For all intents and purposes, the WPK is the only legal party in the country (two minor parties exist, but are completely subservient to the WPK), and its leader exercises absolute control over the country. The government serves largely as a transmission belt for the party.

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

In reply to a question put forth by Michael Marshall, Li Chun Sik of North Korea stated at a meeting of the Association of Secretaries General of Parliaments (ASGP) of the Inter-Parliamentary Union:[5]

“ While candidates could be nominated by anyone, it was the practice for all candidates to be nominated by the parties. These nominations were examined by the [Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland] and then by the Central Electoral Committee, which allocated candidates to seats. The candidate in each seat was then considered by the electors in meetings at the workplace or similar, and on election day the electors could then indicate approval or disapproval of the candidate on the ballot paper. ”

Only one candidate appears on the ballot.[6][7] Elections are ostensibly conducted by secret ballot, and a voter may cross off the candidate's name to vote against him, but must do so in a special booth without any secrecy.[6]

Members of the Supreme People's Assembly are elected to five-year terms, and meet for SPA sessions up to ten days per year.[1] The Supreme People's Assembly elects a standing committee known as the Presidium, which exercises legislative functions when the Assembly is not in session. It also elects the Chairman of the National Defence Commission, the country's chief executive, and the Premier.

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

I suppose at face value this could more or less pass as a dictatorship of the proletariat or something.

I also looked over at Human Rights Watch, which I understand to have a bit more leftish leanings than Amnesty International which tries to be a bit more non-partisan and neutral. Here's a bit from HRW's 2014 World Report:

Although North Korea has ratified four key international human rights treaties and technically possesses a constitution with some rights protections, in reality the government represses all forms of freedom of expression and opinion and does not allow any organized political opposition, independent media, free trade unions, civil society organizations, or religious freedom. Those who attempt to assert rights, fail to demonstrate sufficient reverence for the party and its leadership, or otherwise act in ways deemed contrary to state interests face arbitrary arrest, detention, lack of due process, and torture and ill-treatment. The government also practices collective punishment for supposed anti-state offenses, effectively enslaving hundreds of thousands of citizens, including children, in prison camps and other detention facilities with deplorable conditions and forced labor.

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2014/country-chapters/north-korea

As there is apparently only one candidate to vote for on each ballot, it sort of sounds like I have the "freedom" to vote against a candidate but if I can't do it in secret there are no safeguards against possible repercussions.

It seems to me that there are a few ways of interpreting this. Perhaps we humans don't really thrive on freedom and democracy. That's certainly a possibility. Maybe there is a good reason why monarchy, autocracy or aristocracy have been rather common forms of government for many societies. Maybe we humans just don't thrive given choices and the opportunity to debate and disagree with each other. And if it is our nature to suffer in freedom and democracy, then perhaps a dictatorship of the proletariat is much better than a dictatorship of capitalists?

Or conversely, perhaps Marx is right (at least as I've seen him represented) and the dictatorship of the proletariat is not the end goal and will someday give way to a true communist society?

 

[Agent327]

Lavoisier was executed because he was an aristocrat, not because he was a chemist.

By which logic the proletariat should execute the likes of Friedrich Engels for being a capitalist. (Which RT - for all his profession of being in favour of peaceful revolution - would happily applaud, being a member of Stalin's cult).

Jeelen, your refering to me as comrade is tantamount to flaming.

Please stop.

Please stop posting nonsense.

Once again, no response to anything I posted. Keep up the good work, Comrade.

 

[W|M]

By which logic the proletariat should execute the likes of Friedrich Engels for being a capitalist. (Which RT - for all his profession of being in favour of peaceful revolution - would happily applaud, being a member of Stalin's cult).

I never said Lavoisier's execution was a good thing, and even if I did, that makes no sense because Engels wasn't a capitalist