From the monthly archives: December 2011
“So the choice is not whether the proletariat will or will not struggle, but in whose interest it should struggle: its own or that of the bourgeoisie. The question history places before the proletariat is not to choose between war and peace, but between imperialist war and war against this war: civil war. [...]
“With the correct instinct of a habitual ruling class, conscious that the real social basis of its authority narrows as the extent of its rule grows and its power apparatus increases, the bourgeoisie makes the most energetic efforts both to broaden this basis (alignment of the middle class behind it, corruption of the labour aristocracy, etc.), and to defeat its chief enemies decisively before they have organised for real resistance. Thus, it is everywhere the bourgeoisie abolishes ‘peaceful’ means of conducting the class struggle, on the temporary, if highly problematic functioning of which the whole theory of Revisionism was based, and which prefers ‘more energetic’ weapons (one only needs to consider the situation in America). The bourgeoisie increasingly seizes control of the state apparatus, in identifying itself so completely with it that even demands of the working class which appear only to be economic are increasingly blocked by it. Thus, if only to prevent the deterioration of their economic condition, the workers are compelled to take up the struggle against state power (in other words, though unconsciously, the struggle for state power). This forces the proletariat into using the tactics of the mass strike, in the course of which, for fear of revolution, the opportunists are always intent on giving up positions already gained rather than on drawing the revolutionary conclusions from the situation. But the mass strike is by its very nature an objectively revolutionary weapon. Every mass strike creates a revolutionary situation in which the bourgeoisie, supported by its state apparatus, takes the necessary steps against it wherever possible. The proletariat is powerless against such measures. The weapon of the mass strike is also bound to fail against them if the proletariat, faced with the aims of the bourgeoisie, does not also take to arms. This means that it must try to equip itself, disorganise the army of the bourgeoisie – which of course consists mainly of workers and peasants – and turn the weapons of the bourgeoisie against the bourgeoisie. (The 1905 [Russian] Revolution offered many examples of correct class instinct, but only of instinct, in this respect.)
“Imperialist war means the sharpening of this situation to its utmost extremity. The bourgeoisie confronts the proletariat with the choice: either to kill its class comrades in other countries for the monopolistic interests of the bourgeoisie and die for these interests, or to overthrow the rule of the bourgeoisie by force. All other methods of struggle against this wholesale assault are powerless; all without exception would smash themselves against the military apparatus of the imperialist states. If the proletariat wants to escape this ultimate onslaught, it must therefore itself take up arms against this apparatus, undermine it from within, turn the weapons which the bourgeoisie was forced to give the people against the bourgeoisie itself, and use them to destroy imperialism.
“So here too there is nothing theoretically in the least unprecedented. On the contrary, the core of the situation lies in the class relationship between bourgeoisie and proletariat. War is, as Clausewitz defined it, only the continuation of politics; but it is so in all respects. In other words, it is not only in foreign affairs that war is merely the ultimate and most active culmination of a policy which a country has hitherto followed ‘peacefully’. For the internal class relations of a country as well (and of the whole world), it only only marks the intensification and ultimate climax of those tendencies which were already at work within society in ‘peacetime’. Therefore war by no means creates a totally new situation, either for the country or for the class within a nation. What is new about it is merely that the unprecedented quantitative intensification of all problems involves a qualitative change and for this – and only this – reason creates a new situation.” – György Lukács, “Imperialism: World War and Civil War” in Lenin: A Study on the Unity of His Thought.
“The assertion that religion is innate and natural to man, is false, if identified with Theism; but it is perfectly true, if religion is considered to be nothing but that feeling of dependence by which man is more or less conscious that he does not and cannot exist without another being, different from himself, and that his existence does not originate in himself. Religion, thus understood, is essential to man as light to the eye, as air to the lungs, as food to the stomach. Religion is the manifestation of man’s conception of himself. But above all man is a being who does not exist without light, without air, without water, without earth, without food, – he is, in short, a being dependent on Nature. This dependence in the animal, and in man as far as he moves within the sphere of the brute, is only an unconscious and unreflected one; but by its elevation into consciousness and imagination, by its consideration and profession, it becomes religion. Thus all life depends on the change of seasons; but man alone celebrates this change by dramatic representations and festival acts. But such festivals, which imply and represent nothing but the change of the seasons, or of the phases of the moon, are the oldest, the first, and the real confessions of human religion.” – Ludwig Feuerbach, §3, The Essence of Religion (emphasis added)
“A unionized public employee, a member of the Tea Party, and a CEO are sitting at a table. In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it. The CEO reaches across and takes 11 cookies looks at the tea partier and says, “look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie.” via by my friend A at A Better World Is Probable
“The Authority, God, the Creator, the Lord, Jehovah, Yahweh, El, Adonai, the King, the Father, the Almighty – those were all names he gave himself. He was never the creator. He was an angel like ourselves – the first angel, true, the most powerful, but he was formed of Dust as we are, and Dust is only a name for what happens when matter begins to understand itself. Matter loves matter. It seeks to know more about itself, and Dust is formed. The first angels condensed out of Dust, and the Authority was the first of them all. He told those who came after him that he had created them, but it was a lie.”
— Balthamos (from Phillip Pullman’s His Dark Materials triology, The Amber Spyglass, chapter two, pages 31–32)
When analysing a policy position we must ask the question: cui bono? – for whom does it serve? To begin to answer this question, it is vital to first determine who is proposing the policies and where their interests lie. Ron Paul, the 72-year-old doctor turned Republican Congressperson from Texas, is a member of what the Occupy Movement calls the 1%. In a 2008 article the Los Angeles Times reported that Paul has assets in $2-5.3 million dollar range, with investments in gold mining companies, a medical corporation (which he runs), and mutual funds. Even more, like most establishment politicians he controls vast sums of money donated to his campaigns. Currently his presidential campaign website reports that it has almost $4.5 million. The 2008 L.A. Times article noted that his 2008 presidential campaign raised over $34.5 million. When analysing the effects of Paul’s policy positions it would be foolish to ignore either Paul’s personal wealth or the wealth that he controls in his campaigns. It would be to ignore class and, correspondingly, to ignore the sort of class analysis which can arm working people with the tools to understand the fight ahead of them.
Paul might say he supports the Occupy movement – or parts of it. But even if he pays lip service to Occupy, why should working people believe Paul anymore than they’d believe Boehner, Bush, Obama, or Pelosi? Politicians both lie and present arguments whose substance materially defends the members of the 1%. This is indisputable.
Below are some examples of the anti-working class, environmentally destructive, racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-science policies that Ron Paul promotes. It is not a comprehensive examination of his positions, but it should be enough to convince any justice-minded person that Ron Paul deserves our contempt and condemnation, not our support.
No, the occupation of Iraq is not over. There are still thousands of private mercenaries, CIA agents, State Department thugs, corporations, etc., in Iraq. Once public utilities are now owned by corporations. There is an embassy in Baghdad that’s the size of Vatican City with nearly 20,000 people in it, including armed agents of the United States. Its good the U.S. couldn’t keep military soldiers in Iraq. But the occupation isn’t over, and won’t be until the mercenaries and armed thugs of imperialism leave Iraq too. That hasn’t happened yet, despite the (3rd? 4th? 5th?) attempt to convince the American public that the war is over.
Connor Kelly: Last night I talked with a young man from Egypt who took part in the recent demonstrations. He said he was brutally physically and sexually assaulted by security forces in Cairo. There are no channels in Egypt by which he can report the incident to the press or otherwise. It is imperative that the voices of the victims of injustice and oppression be heard.
– “In a dictatorship, independent journalism by default becomes a form of activism, and the spread of information is essentially an act of agitation.”
————————————————————————————————————————————————
As the Egyptian Revolution continues, the the sacrafice of ordinary men and women grows. The military dictatorship of the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) has wielded its iron rule on the people and has proved itself to be as bloody and repressive as the Mubarak regime. SCAF, supported by the West has murdered people on the streets of Alexandria, Cairo and countless other Egyptian cities, and are using torturous methods to do everthing in their power to curb the progress of the revolution.
But still, people gather in their thousands to fight for democracy – strikes and occupations are taking place across Egypt. Just yesterday, thousands of women marched in Cairo against the beating of female protesters. The revolution continues – the fight for freedom remains alive.
————————
Yesterday, I received a report from a young man aged 18 from Egypt. He had taken part in the demonstrations around Tahrir square over the last few days. He told me that two nights ago was arrested and brutally assaulted, both physically and sexually by state security forces. He was held for two hours, between 3am and 5am.
“I was arrested yesterday’s night by state security in an empty street near to tahrir and sexually assulated…… everything happened in the street……hard hitting and insults and they took all my money.”
He said the assault took place on Mohamed Mazloum Street in Bab el Louq and involved, “about 6 policmen from the state security and 5 or 6 from their men.”
This is just one of a multitude of similar incidents happening on the streets of Egypt daily. Over the last five days alone, dozens of people have been killed and hundreds injured by state security forces. The young man returned home to his family but despite his horrific ordeal he plans to go back and rejoin the demonstrations:
“I will go back to Cairo on thursday or friday”
When asked about the protests and the future of the revolution he said:
“SCAF would like to take the power for ever as a military dictatorship…..as what happened in 1952 in egypt. Also they are mubarak’s men and his followers…… they have the same ideology of dictatorship and fighting freedom… like what happened for Alaa Abdel Fatah and many other victims of mili-trials.”
The generals intend to rule Egypt the same way Mubarak did. SCAF represents an alliance of top officers, senior officials and businessmen who were the real power behind former dictator Hosni Mubarak’s regime.
I asked him what he thought of Western support for the military regime:
“Let’s say that the western governments are talking about freedom and social justice and those are their gods. How does that western government stand against any protesters who demand for freedom and social justice. If they are talking about real freedom and social justice….. they have to be against SCAF and with revolutionaries everywhere …but not ruling revolutionaries demands.”
The Egyptian military recieves billions of dollars from the United States every year. As we saw last month, the heavy tear gas being used against protesters was manufactured in the U.S. Despite the murder of countless civilians at the hands of the security forces the Western powers continue to back SCAF both militarily and finacially, as they did the Mubarak regime beforehand.
———————
“Our number is not great… we are losing victims everyday and the number of us is not too much at tahrir….it’s dangerous i know.”
The fight of the people of Egypt is the fight of ordinary people everywhere. It is the same fight for democracy, the same fight for freedom that is happening all over the world. Demostrations are taking place in major cities across the world. We must stand in solidarity with the people of Egypt and we must demonstrate alongside them. Their ongoing revolution and their sacrafice should be an inspiration to us all.
Solidarity with the People of Egypt!
- Connor Kelly
Ron Paul supports a wide array of horrendously reactionary policies. He is for eliminating birth-right citizenship – an extreme rightwing position which would make it so that children born in the United States to immigrant parents would be denied citizenship. He is for eliminating all social programs and government departments – like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, food stamps, and many other programs which protect working class people, especially racially oppressed groups, from the horrors of unrestrained market capitalism. He is for overturning Roe v. Wade, which would force women to get abortions in back alley chop shops, where many would die, bleed out, and suffer infections, permanent sterility, and extreme pain and agony. He is for deporting all immigrants, including expanding attacks on immigrant Muslims living in the United States. He’s against gay marriage and thinks its immoral. He says states should have the “right” to deny people in love the right to marry. He has had many Neo-Nazis donate to his campaign, and has refused to return donations when this has been exposed. His newsletter has had many white supremacist, racist, sexist, and homophobic comments. He is no friend of working and oppressed people. Ron Paul is a rightwing extremist.
The social function of ideologues like Ron Paul within the capitalist system is to divide working people. If people weren’t divided in United States by ideologues like Paul, Bush, Obama, and institutions like the media, schools, etc. – if we actually talked to each other, discussed, debated, weren’t segregated by race – then there would be no way that the imperialists could get us to support war and oppression. That’s why they divide us, segregate us, teach us to hate each other over petty reasons, instead of recognising our common humanity: because unity is dangerous to the rich who benefit from all of our suffering. There are so many of us and so few of them – and they are scared of that.
Ron Paul’s supposed “anti-imperialism” is just a distraction from his *material support* for imperialism and terror by his efforts to divide and confuse people. He will never be president. But as a Congressperson and rightwing ideologue he is able to promote and vote for all the other policies which divide working people, support imperialism, and further oppression and exploitation.
“And I, for one, will join in with anyone—I don’t care what color you are—as long as you want to change this miserable condition that exists on this earth.” – Malcolm X
“‘Educate yourselves because we’ll need all your intelligence. Agitate because we’ll need all your enthusiasm. Organize yourselves because we’ll need all your strength.” – slogan of the Italian communist newspaper L’Ordine Nuovo (The New Order), organised by Antonio Gramsci
For further reading check out:
Lenin’s “Where to Begin?” (May 1901) and “What Is To Be Done?: Burning Questions of Our Movement” (autumn 1901 to February 1902)
Everyone should be upset about the indefinite detention provision in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. But there are other provisions in the act – all of them in fact – that everyone who stands with the people of the world should also condemn. In particular the NDAA includes the sanctions against Iran, funding for the occupation of Afghanistan, and provisions on the United States’ nuclear posture in the world.
Iranians are under serious threat of military attack by the U.S. and Israel, and Afghans have been under attack by the U.S. during the current occupation for over a decade. We should oppose the NDAA not just now, but always, and on principle. Acts of Congress funding imperialist policies are reactionary not just when they affect U.S. citizens, but when they affect anyone. In this regard, you can go through the bill, and see the the whole of the Act is thoroughly rotten. It is something no person of good conscience could possibly support.
Please don’t forget our sisters and brothers around the world. An injury to one is an injury to all! Workers and oppressed people of the world unite!
Below is the text of just one section – Sec. 1245 which imposes further sanctions against Iran – as an example.
“The irrationality of the system now is fairly clear: You have masses of labour and masses of capital, unemployed, side-by-side, in a world of social need. How stupid is that?”
“The U.S. isn’t Iran, where say candidates are vetted by the clergy before you can vote for them and then you get a democratic vote. In the United States they’re vetted by concentrations of private capital, and then you get a vote. It’s a difference. But not a very substantial one.” – Noam Chomsky, SUNY New Paltz, Sunday 4 December 2011, at an event with Anthony Arnove, honoring the legacy and work of historian Howard Zinn
Here’s another quote from a leaked hydraulic fracturing talking points memo. Hydraulic fracking, more commonly known as hydrofracking, or simply fracking, is the process of drilling down into bedrock like shale, and then forcing pressurised liquids (containing many poisonous and cancer-causing substances) to cause the bedrock to fracture, releasing any natural gas contained therein. The process is highly destructive.
This happens in and around where people live, not some uninhabited place. So they need to get homeowners to sign leases for the companies to be able to drill. This document is a “talking points” document for corporate agents who go to people’s homes to convince them to sign the leases. It explains all the various ways they will try to try to distort things in order to maximise their profits.
This document reveals how corporations will do literally anything to expand their power and profits, including reproducing, expanding, and utilising the oppression of women. Women’s oppression is central to capitalism. We should work to overturn these sexist laws while we fight to rid the world of dirty energy.
Here’s the quote:
“Men are more likely to sign than women. Men don’t like to believe that you know more than they do, so they are also less likely to ask questions. In the state of Ohio the husband can sign the lease without spousal permission. Go that route if required. Tell them it is their decision. Write the lease agreement with only the husband’s name on the paperwork. This will make it more likely that they will sign alone. Men are also more conservative, and more likely to want oil and energy independence. Women will have more concern for the environment and will challenge you more often. Knowing who to approach can seal the sale.”
”I am not a capitalist soldier; I am a proletarian revolutionist. I am opposed to every war but one; I am for that war with heart and soul, and that is the world wide war of the social revolution. In that war, I am prepared to fight in any way the ruling class may make necessary, even to the barricades.” – Eugene V. Debs
Socialist Politics:
Recommended Readings
