An issue that divides much of the far left is whether or not the current system can be saved. The revolutionarys look down on the the reformists for wanting to change a corrupt system by using that corrupt system, and the reformists look at the revolutinarys as unrealistic ideologues for thinking that the system can ever be overthrown and that if it was they would be able to replace it with something better. In my opinion the solution lies somewhere in between. I think advocating a violent revolution is alienating and in many ways counter-productive, but on the other hand simply running candidates and waiting for them to lose is useless. What do you think? Links to revolutionary groups: http://www.rwor.org/ -Revolutionary Communist Organization: Maoist group affiliated with Mumia Abu Jamal and Rage Against the Machine http://www.internationalsocialist.org/ -International Socialist Organization:Neo-Trotskyists who follow the writings of Tony Cliff, One of the largest socialist groups around. largely based on college campuses. http://www.internationalist.org/ -Internationalist Group, Orthodox Trotskyists http://www.plp.org/ -The extreme of the extremists, Stalinists http://www.iww.org/-Industrial Workers of the World, anarcho-syndicalist Links to reformist groups http://www.sp-usa.org-The Socialist Party USA, perrenially runs candidates, never gets any attention(at least not since Debs) http://www.greenpartyus.org-TheGreen Party, Nader's party http://www.dsausa.org-The Democratic Socialists of America, includeds Rep. Bernie Sanders of VT and some other politicians with socialist leanings
Revolution or reform does nothing in the long run. There will always be three classes, an upper, middle, and lower. The persons within each class will be competing with the others for money, wealth, and power. Any political system that does not allow this human competition cannot function over humans for long. That said, then what is the solution? Revolutions are bloody and radical and dangerous, now, to the world as a whole instead of just a single country. Almost every nation is tangled up in a web with every other. If one of them falls, the strands break and the web collapses. So, if we were to have a succesful socialist revolution in the US, then socialism would, over the course of a few decades, sweep the globe. I think that reform is the way to go. As of now, I am tired of the republicans and democrats. They've been in power for far too long and distinction between them is growing harder to find by the day. Neither are liberal, neither are conservative, both are working for their friendly associates in the corporate world and not the people as a whole. Yet we elect them anyway. We need a fresh start. As a liberal, I'd have to say that we need a good majority of liberals in the senate and the house, but not an overwhelming one--more like 70-30. If the liberals are left to themselves then we'd wind up without an army, without defense and with all of our money spent on the environment. These things are too liberal. There needs to be some sort of a balance. As of now, we have politics being too conservative.
Pollux I disagree with you that its human nature to divide into classes(see my post in the communism forum) this is rooted in culture and not in biology. We have had periods when "liberals" have been in control of all branches of the US government the problem is our "liberal" pary in the US is fairly right wing so nothing much happend. I'm also curious as to what people think of the groups I postes links to. Did anyone have the time/interest to look at them? what did you think?
Pollux, I don't follow your reasoning about the necessity of 3 classes. I do share your fatigue with the nearly indistinguishable Democrats and Republicans (indistiguishable when you compare their actions not campaign platforms). I'm looking forward to a future when huge military structures and centralized planning of basic living are discarded everywhere. I'm looking forward to a future when people look for their own solutions to problems cooperatively as the situations demand, and do not look to some faceless central authority, party, or corporation, as if some superior knowledge, or some concern for our individual aspirations, is contained there. How do we get there? I believe that the common interests of all people (let's say life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) will be increasingly satisfied when increasing numbers of people are better equipped to more readily reject the fabrications and manipulations of self-serving governments and corporations. This is revolutionary, but lacks a violent aspect, so probably appears more like reform. I believe that inevitably, as more and more people are individually empowered with increasing knowledge and technology, their independence will come naturally. As technology brings an end to centralized production, an end to centralized collection of energy and resources, as centralized distribution that causes so much hunger and disease is discarded, there will be no thought or need for Great Fathers to pay fealty to. We'll clearly see every Naked Emporer, and we'll realize we always were free, but allowed ourselves to be tricked like little children. I can see the beginnings of this revolution everywhere, even "on the right" every day. There is a healthy disrespect for government growing worldwide, and I think it will change everything for the better. Not overnight, probably not in my lifetime. But it's encouraging and fun to participate in.
Real democracy? In my opinion we need to make a dramatic return to our democratic roots. In the current technological environment, true democracy is made impossible by the visualization of our culture and the lack of emphasis on debate. We can't be a real democracy if the constituents choose candidates based on emotional and visual appeal. The dramatic evolution of information technology has the potential to recreate an Athenian "democracy on the hill." Because ideas can now be linked across the nation, and voter input can be recieved instantaneously, the gross corruption of our current government is unnecessary. A system where the constituents directly participate in the decision-making process is actually becoming feasible Some people bring up the point that because people are easily led, such a system would be nothing but a media war. But the reason why our populace is so apathetic is because they aren't educated in a way that values government. People stood and listened to the Lincoln-Douglas debates for hours at a time and voted with logical consideration. It's only because of the visual aspect of our current society that people seem to stupid. I think if we reform our education system to place emphasis on debate, independent thought, and evaluation of arguments, this kind of government may be feasible in the future. Any thoughts?
Oh, yes, I had looked at those, and they're interesting, but I sort of said my 2 cents already: For me the key to change is to speak up (even when you pay a personal price) when something is wrong or stupid, and avoid the more militant approaches, because that invariably becomes what it opposes. How can an effectively large group be motivated to resist violently, or extremely confrontationally, without flirting with a new flavor of fascism? Happily, fascism can be stillborn, when most everyone says "No thanks, that's wrong and stupid". I believe more and more people are getting smart enough to do that, more readily, and more often. The old herd/mob instinct keeps trying to assert itself among us, but we're learning to rise above it, as more intelligent and empathetic individuals.
hypewaders, yeah, i agree. I think that the systems problems are so great that it can't be fixed by a little tweaking with things like campaign-finance reform and whatnot. However violent "socialist" revolutions have historically led to dictatorships. A better solution would be to oppose whats going on militantly(but not violently) through demonstrations, direct action, civil disobediance, whatever it takes. Eventually the message will get across and enough people will be fed up with the government that they will seize control of it via elections. It is possible that the government will try to invalidate the elections if all of the old demopublicans are voted out, but this too can be dealt with non-violently. If 2/3 of the country refuses to recognize a government than it won't exist.
I really, really don't want a socialist United States. Which country are you talking about, jps? I voted everything is fine as it is, but there are a few changes I'd like to see: reform War on Drugs, pay off the national debt, maybe reform the electoral vote. Simple things, really. I'd like to see the Libertarians get into power. That'd be a refreshing change of pace. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I was talking about the United States because thats where I live, but I think it applies to everyone. There isn't a single government that exists today that really serves the interests of its people. Yeah, the Libertarians are certainly a lot better than anything we have now.
Along these lines, the only necessary ideology is for billions of ordinary people to become informed and brave enough to begin speaking out and practising non-cooperation with government- and corporate-interest bullshit, each in his/her own creative way. A nearly apolitical or multilateral movement would be far more revolutionary than divisive surges of _____ists or ______ians. People who simply do not tolerate bad government will be more effective, the more ubiquitous they can remain.
Historically two class societies have failed. It appears that unless we overcome the current trend, America will end up that way. Our current government has asumed an "let them eat cake attitude" towards the people. A Poor education system will lead us down that path rapidly. We are exporting high paying jobs now, as well as menial mass production labor. What will be left is a two class society much like that of the Roman empire. I see a great parallel between the USA and the Roman empire even now. Troops spread widely in foriegn countries, A faltering economy at home, a careless and a care less government. masses of people gathering in arenas to be entertained. As far as a government of preference goes, the common people must always be represented. This necessitates a two or three party system. If we look back over the past 100 years, all of our wars have been waged against countries that had only one political point of view.
I agree with everyone who said that our educational system needs be be drastically changed. Our current education system was designed to create complient citizens and obediant consumers. We need to push an "enlightenment" curriculum, that makes people aware of the world, and resistant to propaganda. While we're at it we could push the envelope in science/technology, history, sociology/psychology etc. And give hope to the lower income kids about a bright future of higher education(which slum culture and simple economics deny them). I would never send any kids of mine into the current public education system. Eventually, in the future, I hope that the worst and most menial jobs will be automated, and the creative or mentally intensive positions will be for humans.
blankc, absolutely, more important than our political system is our cultural system. We need a cultural revolution more than a political one.
