“When Lenin came back from exile to Russia that was in its revolutionary crisis, he urged the Bolsheviks to stop calling themselves Socialists and Social Democrats because he didn’t want them to be confused with the sellout parties of the Second International. The parties that had supported World War I and sold out the revolution. So the Bolsheviks started calling themselves Communists to distinguish themselves from the parties of the Second International.” — Caleb Maupin
with Chris Hedges
RT America on Feb 9, 2019
More than 6 million United States citizens are currently denied the right to vote due to state laws that disenfranchise citizens who have been convicted of a felony. More than 75 percent of these disenfranchised citizens are not in prison, and more than half have completed all terms of parole and probation.
In Defence of Jeremy Corbyn
First off, let me get the ‘defending Corbyn’ bit out of the way. I do defend Corbyn’s defence of the downtrodden and the dispossessed, a rare quality in Britain’s despicable, dishonest and hypocritical political class. The attacks on him accusing him of anti-semitism are reprehensible and fundamentally originate with the Zionist entity, Israel, launched by Israel’s supporters inside the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) and reinforced by that other supporter of Israel, the BBC (with the able assistance from the rest of the corporate media).
Why should it be that in a climate that’s shifted so far to the right, that out of the morass that is contemporary Britain, there should emerge a politician who was shaped by and effectively still lives, in a world that no longer exists? It’s bizarre to say the least but how to explain it?
by Tyler James
March 2, 2017
WHAT DOES it mean to be a revolutionary? Ultimately, it means you believe that capitalism can’t be fixed, and that we need a qualitatively different kind of system that prioritizes freedom, democracy and human need rather than profit and power for the few.
“Those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.”
George Bernard Shaw
Change is a word that both intellectuals and the intelligentsia of America are discussing in these times. However, one is justified to wonder what kind of change they mean. As a rule when intellectuals/liberals speak of change, they mean reform (and not enough of it, at that: that is, the leisurely conforming of the lives of the collective with their own. The radical, politically-socially committed intelligentsia means something else and their thought and conclusions take another avenue of meaning: their aim is transformation or, if you prefer, radical change. However, it is an unfortunate paradox that no more than liberals, the intelligentsia does not always know what to do with its convictions.
The battle between Sanders and Clinton over the term “progressive” presented an opportunity to discuss some history. Now that Sanders is supporting the very person who misappropriated the term it is even more important to define what does progressive mean, if it is more than a euphemism for the vague term “liberal.” This article argues on the contrary that “progressive” has a very precise meaning conferred by its history.
Luxemburg Saw Reform as a Means and Revolution as the Goal
strugglevideomedia on May 26, 2016
“Rosa Luxemburg: Reform or Revolution?” Luxemburg scholar Sandra Rein is the first speaker at the Left Forum 2016 panel. She is introduced by panel moderator Laura Flanders. Rein is associate professor of Political Studies at the University of Alberta (Canada) and holds a Social Sciences and Humanities Research grant to investigate the ideas of Rosa Luxemburg, Emma Goldman and Raya Dunayevskaya. She is also a member of the Editorial Board for the Complete Works of Rosa Luxemburg.
Please see revised version: “Progressive”: Does its Meaning Depend on Whatever the Clintons Think is “Progress”? by Rob Hager
The battle between Sanders and Clinton over the term “progressive” presents an opportunity to discuss some history relevant to the campaign. The meaning of the term gains importance from new thinking that “people of color and progressive whites add up to a new majority” comprising 23% and 28% of the electorate respectively. See Steve Phillips, Brown is the New White: How the Demographic Revolution Has Created a New American Majority (2016). These Americans are those most strongly committed to America’s republican traditions. Today’s progressives represent the same fraction who fought to establish the republic envisaged by the two Toms, Paine and Jefferson.
I ended my last piece with this:
But assuming JC [Jeremy Corbyn] makes all the right calls, could it, a reborn Labour Party lead to a new call for an end to the madness of capitalism and exactly 130 years after Morris made his plea?
‘The road to hell is paved with good intentions.’
I’m really torn writing this, for on the one hand, Jeremy Corbyn’s (JC) sudden materialisation in the midst of a rampant, Victorian-style imperialist England, like Doctor Who landing in the Tardis, it’s difficult not to join in the euphoria currently sweeping through what’s left of the left in England (the current Media Lens has an excellent description of this) and bow down before JC, an almost Christ-like apparition right in the middle of the gangster capitalists in Armani suits who rule us.
Here is the talk by Prof. Chomsky: Noam Chomsky On The NDAA: The U.S. Constitution Is Being Scrapped.
with Noam Chomsky
Nov 12, 2012 by LeighaCohen
(CFPA) http://peacecoalition.org/ 33rd Annual Conference & Interfaith Service for Peace on Sunday, November 11 in Princeton featuring Noam Chomsky, Amy Goodman & Juan Cole.
[tweetmeme source= “DandelionSalads” only_single=false]
As Emma Goldman put it, “Ignorance is the most violent element in society.” But when you conjoin ignorance with a population willing to go to war at a pin drop, you’ve got violence to the nth degree squared. Combine a massively overinflated military budget, with a salesman in a flight jacket, and you’ve got a more than successful war making machine.
The uninformed and dis-informed American public, equals a weapon of mass destruction. If the United States didn’t have these virulent munitions; the U.S. government could still pursue all manner of sordid acts and deeds. It’s the ‘brilliance’ of keeping so many millions of people, so hunkered down, and so deeply in the dark. You don’t need thought police, when you’ve essentially got a moribund, and asleep at the wheel press.