Left vs Right Options

[communicat]

Your intellect is nowhere as well. Your ego is everywhere; not least of all at WR. By the way, since you like talking about yourself so much, how come you're so coy about revealing your true WP identity?

I am Jayjg (T-C-L-K-R-D) . And I will thank you to stay away from my Polish Judaica articles. Also, anything to do with Katyn massacre, which Volunteer Marek (T-C-L-K-R-D) , also here on WR (as you may guess from his Modigliani), has covered.

Oh, I see. "Polish Judaica articles". Now there's a convincing basis from which to distribute gems of wisdom about World War II, global politics, etc. Typical wikipedian. There's a lot of wikimedals headed your way.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Milton Roe may be pulling your leg. It has been known to happen.

[communicat]

The JOY:
As a political system, I would say Wikipedia follows Anarcho-syndicalism (T-H-L-K-D) which can combine a mixture of libertarianism and communism.

Hierarchy is anathema to Anarcho-syndicalism and indeed to all forms of political Anarchism; whereas, as everybody knows, hierarchy is absolutely intrinsic to the politics of WP -- despite the God-king's claims to the contrary in his oft-quoted Statement of "Principles". That's the real paradox/contradiction/claptrap.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Mod's note -- recent pissing match posts moved to this receptacle.

[communicat]

GlassBeadGame: " ... Chile a special place in our hearts [of the American Left]. I believe without reservation that Allende died and the democratic revolution in Chile was crushed because it was the worst thing possible in the eyes of the Imperialists ..."

Good thesis; I can't think of any convincing anti-thesis. Except to suggest maybe a final nail was driven into the coffin of the American Left in September 1976, when the violence came home to roost. That, as you will probably recall, was when exiled Chilean anti-Pinochet activist Orlando Letelier (who had served as foreign minister under Allende), was traveling to work at the Institute of Policy Studies in Washington, when Chilean DINA secret agents in tandem with Chilean CIA contract operatives detonated a bomb under his car. Letelier and Ronni Moffitt, a 25 year old American activist involved in the campaign to bring democracy to Chile, both died of their injuries. I suggest the consequent politics of fear contributed significantly to the final disintegration of the organised American Left. I could be wrong.

BTW, I didn't mean to imply or concur that the American Left is dead and buried. The organised, flag-waving Left of the 60s and 70s might be gone for a variety of reasons, including caution of bombs under cars; but at least the spirit of the Underground Press is still very much alive and well, even thought it might not enjoy the same top-of-the list search visibility as WP. Everything from the American CP, through the non-communist leftist Znet, to a host of well organised and presented leftist-academic and communist-anarchist and a range of other leftist sites, with virtually no mindless squabling in attendance. All the American Right has to offer, by contrast, is Conservapedia, large sections of WP, and regretable Radek/Roe-driven contributions at WR with which we are all too familiar.

[radek]

GlassBeadGame: " ... Chile a special place in our hearts [of the American Left]. I believe without reservation that Allende died and the democratic revolution in Chile was crushed because it was the worst thing possible in the eyes of the Imperialists ..."

Good thesis; I can't think of any convincing anti-thesis. Except to suggest maybe a final nail was driven into the coffin of the American Left in September 1976, when the violence came home to roost. That, as you will probably recall, was when exiled Chilean anti-Pinochet activist Orlando Letelier (who had served as foreign minister under Allende), was traveling to work at the Institute of Policy Studies in Washington, when Chilean DINA secret agents in tandem with Chilean CIA contract operatives detonated a bomb under his car. Letelier and Ronni Moffitt, a 25 year old American activist involved in the campaign to bring democracy to Chile, both died of their injuries. I suggest the consequent politics of fear contributed significantly to the final disintegration of the organised American Left. I could be wrong.

BTW, I didn't mean to imply or concur that the American Left is dead and buried. The organised, flag-waving Left of the 60s and 70s might be gone for a variety of reasons, including caution of bombs under cars; but at least the spirit of the Underground Press is still very much alive and well, even thought it might not enjoy the same top-of-the list search visibility as WP. Everything from the American CP, through the non-communist leftist Znet, to a host of well organised and presented leftist-academic and communist-anarchist and a range of other leftist sites, with virtually no mindless squabling in attendance. All the American Right has to offer, by contrast, is Conservapedia, large sections of WP, and regretable Radek/Roe-driven contributions at WR with which we are all too familiar.

Find a different internet forum to troll. Stop bringing my name up at every opportunity. Fuck off.

[communicat]

Milton Roe may be pulling your leg. It has been known to happen.

Nah, for once his posting has the ring of truth. He's the same guy alright. I know the type.

Radek: "Find a different internet forum to troll. Stop bringing my name up at every opportunity. Fuck off."

Yes sir, boss. Right away. Ooooo I'm pissing in my pants.

This post has been edited by communicat: Fri 14th October 2011, 12:26am

[timbo]

Milton Roe may be pulling your leg. It has been known to happen.

Nah, for once his posting has the ring of truth. He's the same guy alright. I know the type.

Radek: "Find a different internet forum to troll. Stop bringing my name up at every opportunity. Fuck off."

Yes sir, boss. Right away. Ooooo I'm pissing in my pants.

Y'know, Commie Cat, one thing I still don't understand -- why aren't you still at WP? So you got railroaded in an edit war... These things aren't terminal.

You lose one round in a 12 round contest -- and cry "No mas!" I just don't get that. Get off the fucking canvas and keep punching.

A little self-criticism and maybe a voluntary topic ban and you should be back in the door, one would think. You're not a far right wingnut Anti-Wikipedian...


tim

[communicat]

Milton Roe may be pulling your leg. It has been known to happen.

Nah, for once his posting has the ring of truth. He's the same guy alright. I know the type.

Radek: "Find a different internet forum to troll. Stop bringing my name up at every opportunity. Fuck off."

Yes sir, boss. Right away. Ooooo I'm pissing in my pants.

Y'know, Commie Cat, one thing I still don't understand -- why aren't you still at WP? So you got railroaded in an edit war... These things aren't terminal.

You lose one round in a 12 round contest -- and cry "No mas!" I just don't get that. Get off the fucking canvas and keep punching.

A little self-criticism and maybe a voluntary topic ban and you should be back in the door, one would think. You're not a far right wingnut Anti-Wikipedian...


tim

Thanks but no thanks. I'm not Prometheus. I'm not even a commie. Besides, I'm quite happy outside the tent pissing in -- (when Radek/Roe aren't actually making me piss myself with laughter).

This post has been edited by communicat: Fri 14th October 2011, 2:21pm

[communicat]

GBG: "The Tea Party is the same as Occupy Wall Street. Politics are an illusion."

Want to rethink that in the light of OWS-inspired events taking place today (Saturday) in Rome and around the world?

Besides, what's the correlation between Tea Party (funded by US big business) and OWS against big business? Beats me.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

GBG: "The Tea Party is the same as Occupy Wall Street. Politics are an illusion."

Want to rethink that in the light of OWS-inspired events taking place today (Saturday) in Rome and around the world?

Besides, what's the correlation between Tea Party (funded by US big business) and OWS against big business? Beats me.

I think that Bead may have been speaking facetiously, but since I believe that to be actually the case, I'll speak up. The Tea Party was not originally a Republican-own and -operated movement. It as an anti-bailout movement, both in the sense of opposing the bailout, and in the sense of opposing Obamacare, which is a specific form of the bailout directed to the insurance sector (which is part of the same Wall Street cephalopod.) It was a bunch of very naive and enraged people, who were soon co-opted by the Repubs and began shouting for austerity. But originally, they were angry about the same things the OWS people are angry about: not so much Big Business, as Big Finance.

Here's a tip, Communicat -- most Leftists are every bit as moronic as most Rightists. But I'll point you to an exception: a brilliant woman named Rosa Luxemburg. She not only had a competent theory of imperialism (i.e., that it is primarily a financial phenomenon, not military or some other kind of thing,) but she also put forward the theory of the Mass Strike, which happens when governing institutions have lost their legitimacy. From 2009 to the present, we have seen one continuous mass strike, with ebbs and flows, all around the world. The "Tea Party" phenomenon was co-opted on the national level, but there are plenty of grass-roots Tea Party types at the OWS demonstations right now. They don't know that they are supposed to be Right or Left. All they know is that their lives are being ruined, and that they are compelled to go out and find some way to express their anger and anxiety. The Mass Strike can be a very good or a very bad thing, because eventually leaders will emerge and provide it with a program, which will either save the nation or ruin it further.

[Milton Roe]

GBG: "The Tea Party is the same as Occupy Wall Street. Politics are an illusion."

Want to rethink that in the light of OWS-inspired events taking place today (Saturday) in Rome and around the world?

Besides, what's the correlation between Tea Party (funded by US big business) and OWS against big business? Beats me.

Gee, maybe if your answers and worldview come out in a contadiction, there might actually be something wrong with one of your premises. But no doubt you'll continued to be puzzled.

Here's a hint: Not only do many burgoisee have homes with substantial mortgages, but an even larger number of proles do, too. They are all very much pissed off.

[anthony]

GBG: "The Tea Party is the same as Occupy Wall Street. Politics are an illusion."

Want to rethink that in the light of OWS-inspired events taking place today (Saturday) in Rome and around the world?

Besides, what's the correlation between Tea Party (funded by US big business) and OWS against big business? Beats me.

I think that Bead may have been speaking facetiously, but since I believe that to be actually the case, I'll speak up. The Tea Party was not originally a Republican-own and -operated movement. It as an anti-bailout movement, both in the sense of opposing the bailout, and in the sense of opposing Obamacare, which is a specific form of the bailout directed to the insurance sector (which is part of the same Wall Street cephalopod.) It was a bunch of very naive and enraged people, who were soon co-opted by the Repubs and began shouting for austerity. But originally, they were angry about the same things the OWS people are angry about: not so much Big Business, as Big Finance.

This ignores the fact that OWS is about more than just the bailout. The Tea Party, which has always been an anti-tax movement, never would have many members who would support things like increased taxes on the rich, a maximum wage, an increased minimum wage, etc. And most would not support things like increased regulations, the return of Glass-Steagall, "too big to fail means too big to exist", etc.

[communicat]

GBG: "The Tea Party is the same as Occupy Wall Street. Politics are an illusion."

Want to rethink that in the light of OWS-inspired events taking place today (Saturday) in Rome and around the world?

Besides, what's the correlation between Tea Party (funded by US big business) and OWS against big business? Beats me.

I think that Bead may have been speaking facetiously, but since I believe that to be actually the case, I'll speak up. The Tea Party was not originally a Republican-own and -operated movement. It as an anti-bailout movement, both in the sense of opposing the bailout, and in the sense of opposing Obamacare, which is a specific form of the bailout directed to the insurance sector (which is part of the same Wall Street cephalopod.) It was a bunch of very naive and enraged people, who were soon co-opted by the Repubs and began shouting for austerity. But originally, they were angry about the same things the OWS people are angry about: not so much Big Business, as Big Finance.

Here's a tip, Communicat -- most Leftists are every bit as moronic as most Rightists. But I'll point you to an exception: a brilliant woman named Rosa Luxemburg. She not only had a competent theory of imperialism (i.e., that it is primarily a financial phenomenon, not military or some other kind of thing,) but she also put forward the theory of the Mass Strike, which happens when governing institutions have lost their legitimacy. From 2009 to the present, we have seen one continuous mass strike, with ebbs and flows, all around the world. The "Tea Party" phenomenon was co-opted on the national level, but there are plenty of grass-roots Tea Party types at the OWS demonstations right now. They don't know that they are supposed to be Right or Left. All they know is that their lives are being ruined, and that they are compelled to go out and find some way to express their anger and anxiety. The Mass Strike can be a very good or a very bad thing, because eventually leaders will emerge and provide it with a program, which will either save the nation or ruin it further.

As regards: "... most Leftists are every bit as moronic as most Rightists. But I'll point you to an exception: a brilliant woman named Rosa Luxemburg": Yeah, and look what happened to her. The Left does not exactly have a tradition of killing off brilliant intellectuals (with the possible exception of Trotsky, and nobody really knows for sure who exactly was behind that ...).

Meanwhile, GBG hasn't yet elucidated his (Buddhist?) position on politics as "illusion", (what isn't?).

[communicat]

GBG: "The Tea Party is the same as Occupy Wall Street. Politics are an illusion."

Want to rethink that in the light of OWS-inspired events taking place today (Saturday) in Rome and around the world?

Besides, what's the correlation between Tea Party (funded by US big business) and OWS against big business? Beats me.

I think that Bead may have been speaking facetiously, but since I believe that to be actually the case, I'll speak up. The Tea Party was not originally a Republican-own and -operated movement. It as an anti-bailout movement, both in the sense of opposing the bailout, and in the sense of opposing Obamacare, which is a specific form of the bailout directed to the insurance sector (which is part of the same Wall Street cephalopod.) It was a bunch of very naive and enraged people, who were soon co-opted by the Repubs and began shouting for austerity. But originally, they were angry about the same things the OWS people are angry about: not so much Big Business, as Big Finance.

This ignores the fact that OWS is about more than just the bailout. The Tea Party, which has always been an anti-tax movement, never would have many members who would support things like increased taxes on the rich, a maximum wage, an increased minimum wage, etc. And most would not support things like increased regulations, the return of Glass-Steagall, "too big to fail means too big to exist", etc.

Now we're getting somewhere. (And he's not even a commie ...)

[Milton Roe]

As regards: "... most Leftists are every bit as moronic as most Rightists. But I'll point you to an exception: a brilliant woman named Rosa Luxemburg": Yeah, and look what happened to her. The Left does not exactly have a tradition of killing off brilliant intellectuals (with the possible exception of Trotsky, and nobody really knows for sure who exactly was behind that ...).

I heard Stalin even sent flowers.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

This ignores the fact that OWS is about more than just the bailout. The Tea Party, which has always been an anti-tax movement, never would have many members who would support things like increased taxes on the rich, a maximum wage, an increased minimum wage, etc. And most would not support things like increased regulations, the return of Glass-Steagall, "too big to fail means too big to exist", etc.

That's a long list of policies which you are attributing to the OWS movement. The press coverage suggests that the OWS movement does not have a platform at all, that it is just raw protest at this point.

[Kelly Martin]

That's a long list of policies which you are attributing to the OWS movement. The press coverage suggests that the OWS movement does not have a platform at all, that it is just raw protest at this point.

The conversations I've had online with actual OWS protestors supports the "no platform" position. Individual protestors have individual positions, but there is no coherency to it. There is probably majority support amongst protestors, or would be if you could effectively poll them, for "something is wrong with the financial system and the way it interlocks with the political system" but there is, as yet, no choate expression of that, nor any sort of proposal on how to fix it.

Occupy Chicago produced a 12-point manifesto at a recent General Assembly. I haven't looked to see what's in it. No Occupy Wall Street General Assembly has been able to agree on any platform points, as far as I know, although they have been able to agree mainly on housekeeping issues.

[communicat]

This ignores the fact that OWS is about more than just the bailout. The Tea Party, which has always been an anti-tax movement, never would have many members who would support things like increased taxes on the rich, a maximum wage, an increased minimum wage, etc. And most would not support things like increased regulations, the return of Glass-Steagall, "too big to fail means too big to exist", etc.

That's a long list of policies which you are attributing to the OWS movement. The press coverage suggests that the OWS movement does not have a platform at all, that it is just raw protest at this point.

Your posting is just raw sewage at this point.

[communicat]

That's a long list of policies which you are attributing to the OWS movement. The press coverage suggests that the OWS movement does not have a platform at all, that it is just raw protest at this point.

The conversations I've had online with actual OWS protestors supports the "no platform" position. Individual protestors have individual positions, but there is no coherency to it. There is probably majority support amongst protestors, or would be if you could effectively poll them, for "something is wrong with the financial system and the way it interlocks with the political system" but there is, as yet, no choate expression of that, nor any sort of proposal on how to fix it.

Occupy Chicago produced a 12-point manifesto at a recent General Assembly. I haven't looked to see what's in it. No Occupy Wall Street General Assembly has been able to agree on any platform points, as far as I know, although they have been able to agree mainly on housekeeping issues.

The "choate expression" is that capitalism sucks. Never mind a few desultory online conversations. Watch Al Jazeera instead. (And no, Al Jazeera isn't run by commies either).

This post has been edited by communicat: Sun 16th October 2011, 2:09am