One march or any number of marches are not going to do the job by
themselves. We have to build some momentum. Also marches are not going
to convince the ruling class of anything. The greatest value of a march
is to get more people involved. The most effective way of getting rid of
the bourgeoisie is a general strike. Even then, though, there has to be
a disciplined revolutionary party available to steer the movement in the
right direction. Even though we have not managed to overthrow the ruling
class in that way yet it still is a move in the right direction. And a
very likely reason that mass mobilization has not yet overthrown the
bourgeoisie yet is that the democrat party and its liberal lapdogs have
always managed to diffuse any mass movement by cooptation and channeling
the participants into voting for democrats. Many, many promising
movements have been drowned in the democrat party and people like Bernie
Sanders have been some of the most enthusiastic drowners.
On 8/10/2017 6:36 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
So after you managed to organize the march on Washington, then what? I must point out
that it was a whole lot of people whom you would define as bourgeois or petit bourgeois,
who did the organizing for that one march after the inauguration. It took many
organizations and tons of money. Then there was a "march for science", not
quite as large, but again, involving a great deal of organizing effort. And then there
were the real popular resistance efforts, the folks who went to airports when that first
Muslim ban was announced. That seemed more spontaneous and it happened in a lot of
different places. Actually, the last time, and the only time that I experienced sustained
resistance was the marches against the Vietnam war, some local, and some mass marches on
Washington. That was something like 55 years ago. We marched and the war went on and when
it ended, the reasons were manifold and complicated. The thing is, this is a huge
country with a very diverse population and a totalitarian government that hides its power
behind democratic symbols. It allows many people to have the illusion of personal
freedom. Those people aren't going to be in the streets. But assuming that you did manage
to get masses of people into the streets to demonstrate. Then what? Why are you setting
up a choice between electoral politics and mass protests? And what solutions do you
propose if the Military, or the militarized police use violence to quell the mass
demonstrations?
I suppose my other issue is that in the model you set forth, everyone whom you define as "the
bourgeoisie" , is an enemy of "the working people" whom, you assume are not only
aware of what is in their own self- interest, but are concerned about each other. I certainly
understand that society is structured in such a way that there are people who have most of the
economic advantages and most of the power while other people can barely have enough to survive. I
know that the labor of the people with fewer advantages is used for the welfare of the most
advantaged. Also, I think the the larger the society or the institution, the more bureaucratic and
impersonal it is and the less it serves the needs of people. I would like people to have more
freedom to make choices about their lives, more privacy, more time. But because of my personality
and education and the work that I once did, I can't view the world through a Marxist prism. You can
assign a label to me that has a negative connotation to you and other followers of Marxist theory.
But because I think we both want the same things, for life for everyone to be better, for
everyone's work to be valued, for everyone's needs to be met, it's better to find the ideas that we
have in common than to reject some ideas because they don't fit into your concept of the socialist
model. You might look at thos discussions of theories of economic development that are on The Real
News network. It sounds as if there are a lot of people who do not consider themselves mainstream
economists, who see many different ways of dealing with economic development in society. I suspect
that I'd be as unhappy with State Socialism as I am with Corporate Capitalism. We have basic human
nature to deal with and human biology and personality development are not wholly dependent on the
economic and social system in which the individual lives. One can be willfull, or selfish, or
domineering, or warm, or loving, or kind, whether one grows up in Cuba or California. Well, that's
what I think.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] ;
On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 3:33 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: DSA votes for BDS, reparations, and out of the
Socialist International
Well, there are a lot of small goals that can be accomplished, but I am not
necessarily sure that they should be accomplished. Yes, we live in the real
world and what we try to accomplish must be realistic. If your goal is to
perpetuate the bourgeoisie in power it is realistic to collaborate with the
bourgeoisie to make sure that their electoral system continues to prop up their
rule. That is obviously realistic because bourgeois and petty bourgeois
leftists do it all the time.
However, if your goal is to remove the bourgeoisie from power then that
strategy is very unrealistic. A more realistic way to go about it is to
organize the people who would benefit the most from the removal of the
bourgeoisie from power to fight back. There are a lot of small goals that can
be accomplished in that direction too. When a new union local is established
that is a small and realistic goal that can be accomplished. When masses of
people can be mobilized to march on Washington that is a bigger realistic
accomplishment that is also realistic. Put a lot of those realistic
accomplishments together and you can eventually make something big. However,
working to get people elected who oppose the movement, as realistic as it may
be, only harms your movement. You may as well ask the masses to pick up a razor
and cut their own throats. It would probably be unrealistic to expect all of
them to do it, but a few probably would and so it is realistic to think that
you could convince some people to cut their own throats, but if your goal is
entirely something else you find yourself not moving a millimeter toward your
goal.
On 8/10/2017 11:39 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Given that fact, and given the fact that we live in the real world which
exists, and not in the one in our heads which we would prefer to exist,
wouldn't it be a good idea to focus on small goals that are actually capable of
being accomplished and that might help all of us, help make our lives more
secure, make people less vulnerable, rather than consistently focusing on the
big picture, the far off unreachable goals?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 10:57 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: DSA votes for BDS, reparations, and out
of the Socialist International
One major roadblock is that there is so much of the Ruling Classes thinking
interwoven with the different Progressive, Left Wing Organizations, that there
is little chance for a united front, as long as that Ruling Class sits in
control. The Empire's People are calling the shots. We, on the Left, are too
often dancing to their tune.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/9/17, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And as long as Sanders and people like him keep making sure that
alternative parties don't have a chance it is likely to continue that
way. But by independent political action I didn't mean that anyway.
Running candidates for office is not an attempt to change the
economic system by revolutionary socialists anyway. It is only a way
to get attention and to find opportunities to distribute propaganda.
For one thing, the bourgeoisie isn't going to let their system be
overthrown through the electoral process anyway. They will cancel the
elections before they will let that happen. Then there is the problem
of being faced with administering the bourgeois state even if you do get
elected.
What happens then? Look to Venezuela for a possible answer. Look to
European social democrats for another answer. They tried to
administer the bourgeois state and turned into administrators for the
benefit of the bourgeoisie itself and in a lot of cases actually
became the bourgeoisie. Independent political action means a lot of
things other than playing at bourgeois electoral politics. It
includes strikes and mass actions. If you think that overthrowing the
current economic system depends only on getting elected to the very
state that maintains that system then it doesn't matter a lot if you
get elected as a democrat or an alternative party.
On 8/9/2017 9:32 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Problem is that alternative parties don't have a chance in hell of
winning an election in this country. That's why Sanders did what he
did. People on the left are having this big debate about who should
run and which party is pure enough and socialist enough and while
they're debating, power and money are taking over. If a bourgeois
liberal can make things better, I wouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger
Loran Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 8:29 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bob Hachey <bhachey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: DSA votes for BDS, reparations, and
out of the Socialist International
It really doesn't matter much to me what Sanders runs as. He has
shown himself to be just a bourgeois liberal politician. His use of
the word socialist never meant more than just social democrat, but
he played it down so much that it ended up meaning nothing when
coming from him. The biggest harm that I see that he did, though,
was to herd would be independent political activists into the
democrat party. He did it in the first place by running as a
democrat and thereby dragging people to the democrat primaries and
then after he couldn't get past the primaries personally he urged all of his
followers to vote for Hillary Clinton.
That has always been exactly what the DSA has done and obviously
they haven't stopped. Nevertheless, this article does offer some
hope in that there is at least a major faction of the DSA that wants
to pull away from the democrats.
On 8/9/2017 2:59 PM, Bob Hachey wrote:
Hi Roger,
Do you believe that, let's say, 5 or ten years ago, the dSA would
not be supporting the DBS movement against Israel?
It was sure nice to learn that both the DSA and Bernie Sanders
support the dBS movement. By the way, some of my friends who have
been disillusioned with the Democratic party believe that Sanders
should have run as an independent in the 2016 election. I think it
was better that he ran as a Democrat. IF nothing else, his campaign
and the nasty way he was treated by Democratic leadership shone a
very bright light on a terribly corrupted party.
Bob Hachey
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger
Loran Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 2:51 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] DSA votes for BDS, reparations, and out
of the Socialist International
The article below does tell me that the DSA seems to have moved to
the left since I was working with them in the West Virginia
Citizen's Action Group, but they still have not broken from the
Democrat Party. The fact that a significant faction would even
propose it, though, shows some progress.
https://socialistaction.org/2017/08/07/dsa-votes-for-bds-reparation
s -a nd-out-of-the-socialist-international/
DSA votes for BDS, reparations, and out of the Socialist
International
/ 2 days ago
arton1711-18b26By JUAN CRUZ FERRE
This article is reprinted from leftvoice.org.
— AUG. 5 — The National Convention of the Democratic Socialists of
America is currently under way. An estimated 700 to 800 delegates
representing 25,000 members nationwide are participating in the
four-day event at the University of Illinois in Chicago. In the
weeks preceding the convention, numerous resolutions were put
forward by individual members and groups, some of which were
circulated throughout the organization to be presented for discussion and vote
at the convention.
On Saturday (Day 3), the discussion centered on amendments to the
DSA’s constitution as well as the organization’s national priorities.
The delegates voted to sever relations with the Socialist
International, a conglomeration of parties that have embraced and
in some cases implemented neoliberal policies around the world
(ie., the German SPD, Hollande’s Socialist Party in France, Peña
Nieto’s PRI in Mexico, the Indian Congress Party, and the Greek PASOK).
The resolution that passed stated, “Our affiliation with the
Socialist International hinders our ability to develop stronger
relationships with parties and social movements that share our
values and which, in many cases, are bitterly opposed to their
country’s SI affiliate(s),” and, “In many countries, they have
helped to lead the attack on the welfare state and on the rights of workers and
unions.”
The DSA has been affiliated with the Socialist International since
its founding in 1982. Saturday’s vote to leave the international
marks a historic shift, signaling the political leanings of the
exponentially growing new membership.
At the same time, some members are putting forward proposals for
building “stronger relationships with new left parties and movements”
outside of the SI, “from Podemos (Spain) to PSOL (Brasil) to
Momentum in Britain” (from DSA Momentum Platform).
On Saturday, the assembled delegates voted to support the Boycott,
Divestment, and Sanctions movement against Israel. The bulk of the
resolution is an indictment of Israel’s occupation of Palestine:
“Israel has engaged in a program of rapacious colonization
(‘settlements’) of the Occupied Palestinian Territories…Israeli
settlers in the West Bank are given the rights of Israeli
citizenship, subject to civilian law, and are permitted to drive on
roads barred to Palestinians…Palestinians in the West Bank are not
Israeli citizens, are subjected to military law, including being
tried in military courts with a 99% conviction rate, are forced to
drive on different roads…[T]here are today at least 50 laws that
discriminate against Palestinians with Israeli citizenship.
“…[A]ll of the aforementioned constitutes apartheid…”
With this vote, the DSA has taken a stance that leaves behind the
Democratic Party’s line and that of Bernie Sanders, who, when asked
whether he supported the BDS during an interview with Al Jazeera,
bluntly replied, “No, I’m not a supporter.”
The decision immediately rippled through social media and was
lauded by many inside and outside the organization.
Also on Saturday, delegates voted in favor of a resolution by
members of the NYC and North Jersey members of the Afro-Socialist
and Socialists of Color Caucus. The proposal included formal
recognition of the Caucus by the National organization. It included
a statement in support of reparations in the US to “communities
descended from slaves” and the Global South “nations who have
suffered hundreds of years of economic exploitation” by “imperialist nations.”
The statement pointed out,
“Reparations won’t erase the shamefully violent history of our
country, or the irreparable damage 400+ years of free labor has
caused the black community. It is, however, a means of
redistributing wealth to the communities descended from slaves,
which could ease the material burdens they face today.”
Of note, in an amendment that was eventually voted down, New York
City members proposed to replace the preamble of the “Priorities Resolution”
with language around the DSA’s relationship to the Democratic Party:
“We should recognize that the Democratic Party is not our party,
even if we sometimes run or support candidates within it. We have,
therefore, no interest in its internal battles, such as the fight
between Keith Ellison and Tom Perez. We should refrain from
endorsing or supporting Democrats engaged in political struggles within the
Democratic Party.
Taking part in such internal Democratic Party fights only
disorients our members, leading them to believe that the Democratic
Party can be a vehicle for the aspirations of working people.
“We believe it is important to emphasize this point because the
Democratic Party has historically been the biggest challenge to
progressive movements.”
The proposal did not advance a clear break with the Democratic
Party; it was milder in content, but was still struck down at the convention.
Although the DSA’s electoral strategy and the question of full
independence from the Democratic Party has proven difficult to
resolve, the events taking place at the DSA convention signal
auspicious changes brought on by the growing new members and influx of youth.
Share this:
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) 44Share on
Facebook (Opens in new window)44 Click to share on Google+ (Opens
in new
window)
August 7, 2017 in Marxist Politics and Philosophy.
Related posts
Socialist Action National Convention: Build the Party!
Socialist Action holds 14th National Convention
NDP convention: Mulcair is out, change is in
Post navigation
← Khadr deal exposes Ottawa’s hypocrisy
Syria: Did Trump really end CIA’s secret war? →
Get Involved!
Donate to help support our work
Get email updates
Join Socialist Action
Newspaper Archives
Newspaper Archives Select Month August 2017 (6) July 2017 (17)
June
2017 (16) May 2017 (17) April 2017 (14) March 2017 (13)
February
2017 (19) January 2017 (13) December 2016 (12) November 2016
(19) October 2016 (12) September 2016 (10) August 2016 (10) July
2016
(14) June 2016 (14) May 2016 (9) April 2016 (12) March 2016
(14) February 2016 (8) January 2016 (11) December 2015 (11)
November
2015
(9) October 2015 (8) September 2015 (10) August 2015 (7) July
2015
(13) June 2015 (9) May 2015 (10) April 2015 (12) March 2015 (9)
February 2015 (11) January 2015 (10) December 2014 (12) November
2014 (11) October 2014 (9) September 2014 (6) August 2014 (10)
July
2014 (11) June 2014 (10) May 2014 (11) April 2014 (10) March
2014
(9) February 2014 (11) January 2014 (11) December 2013 (10)
November
2013 (11) October 2013 (17) September 2013 (13) August 2013
(10) July 2013 (11) June 2013 (15) May 2013 (14) April 2013
(14) March
2013 (12) February 2013 (10) January 2013 (17) December 2012
(7) November 2012 (8) October 2012 (19) September 2012 (2)
August
2012
(27) July 2012 (18) June 2012 (3) May 2012 (19) April 2012 (14)
March 2012 (17) February 2012 (19) January 2012 (17) December
2011
(3) November 2011 (33) October 2011 (14) September 2011 (13)
August
2011 (34) July 2011 (24) June 2011 (19) May 2011 (19) April
2011
(15) March 2011 (15) February 2011 (16) January 2011 (15)
December
2010 (17) November 2010 (1) October 2010 (6) September 2010 (3)
August 2010 (8) July 2010 (7) June 2010 (2) May 2010 (9) April
2010
(3) March 2010 (8) February 2010 (3) January 2010 (9) December
2009
(6) November 2009 (5) October 2009 (16) September 2009 (3) August
2009 (2) July 2009 (5) June 2009 (2) May 2009 (7) April 2009
(6) March 2009 (16) February 2009 (9) January 2009 (10) December
2008
(11) November 2008 (8) October 2008 (16) September 2008 (14)
August
2008 (18) July 2008 (12) June 2008 (3) May 2008 (2) April 2008
(3) March 2008 (14) February 2008 (11) January 2008 (11) December
2007
(8) November 2007 (1) July 2007 (1) June 2007 (1) April 2007
(1) March 2007 (1) February 2007 (3) December 2006 (11) November
2006
(11) October 2006 (13) September 2006 (15) August 2006 (11) July
2006
(18) June 2006 (7) May 2006 (14) April 2006 (6) March 2006 (14)
February 2006 (5) January 2006 (2) December 2005 (9) November
2005
(8) October 2005 (13) September 2005 (12) August 2005 (9) July
2005
(16) June 2005 (16) May 2005 (16) April 2005 (12) March 2005
(14) February 2005 (19) January 2005 (15) December 2004 (14)
November
2002
(17) October 2002 (19) September 2002 (22) August 2002 (21) July
2002 (15) May 2002 (21) April 2002 (21) February 2002 (15)
January
2002 (15) December 2001 (17) October 2001 (24) September 2001
(18) July 2001 (19) June 2001 (18) October 2000 (17) September
2000
(21) August 2000 (19) July 2000 (16) June 2000 (26) May 2000
(21) April
2000 (22) March 2000 (28) February 2000 (18) January 2000 (20)
December 1999 (20) November 1999 (26) October 1999 (25) September
1999 (18) August 1999 (40) July 1999 (38) June 1999 (24) May
1999
(27) April 1999 (25) March 1999 (26) February 1999 (29) January
1999
(24) July 1998 (12)
Search
View socialistactionusa’s profile on Facebook View
SocialistActUS’s profile on Twitter View SocialistActionCT’s
profile on YouTube
Subscribe to Our Newspaper
Upcoming Events
No upcoming events
Category Cloud
Actions & Protest Africa Anti-War Arts & Culture Black Liberation
Canada Caribbean Civil Liberties Cuba East Asia Economy Education &
Schools Elections Environment Europe Immigration Indigenous Rights
International Labor Latin America Latino Civil Liberties Marxist
Theory & History Middle East Palestine Police & FBI Prisons South
Asia Uncategorized Vote Socialist Action Women's Liberation
View Calendar
Blog at WordPress.com.
Follow