The serious CPA thread (no spamming please)

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
bump ... trying to keep it in the top page...

so KX, how would your perfect state look?

Haven´t I made that clear? I basically want what you guys want, but a lot more non-polluting and equal in all respects.

[Az]

I think that as a party with a socio-econo-political agenda, we should first more or less agree on that . I am not quite sure that we agree since it's our first non-spam meeting that discusses this issue,IIRC.


And no splitters!

[Jon Miller]

hmmm

bump until I can post tonight

Jon Miller

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


please explain further (how have they become sidetracked by reality??P??

it seems to me that many 'communist' parties have basically shifted communism under the rug and took on different battles

when today, in the time of Globalisation, we need communism (the standard communism), more than ever

Jon Miller

When the Berlin wall fell it created havoc in large segments of the commie movement, those who could adapt did so. Those who couldn´t now spend their measly existence whining about how it was better in the old days.

It also affected the commie movement in the way that suddenly all of Trotskys theories on the degenerated workers states became obsolete. This left various trotskyist groupings aimlessly wandering about without any real purpose or tools to deal with the situation.

The long winter lasted 5 years, until new years day 1994. When the zapatistas marched into San Christóbal de las Casas. This sparked a new wawe of public awareness and radicalization among youth.

The anti-MAI campaign united enviromentalists like Friends of the Earth (FoE) with the commie movement, in Sweden FoE Sweden and Socialist Party, Sweden (USFI) among others campaigned ferociously against MAI. As was the case in several other european countries. The campaign was a success the treaty was never signed. The EU-summit also started to get regular protests as a follower. In Amsterdam in 1997 50 000+ people demonstrated against neo-liberalism. The demonstrations included greens, trade unions, communists, anarchists, etc.

Seattle´99 made this a global movement, "teamsters and turtles" on a global scale so to speak. This is a wawe we´re riding yet today. Global radicalization of youth and workers on a variety of subjects. To say that this is diverting the attention away from the struggle for the proletarian revolution is, to put it mildly, ostrich behaviour.

For example, in Brazil the Brazilian Communist Party (PCB) and all its fellow stalinist/maoist/hoxaist comrades was completely sidetracked by the surge of left radicalism that created the World Social Forum in 1998. The main left opposition lies instead in Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT) especially in the state of Rio Grande do Sul and Porto Alegre where the left current in PT Democracia Socialista rules. PT supports and cooperates with organizations like ATTAC-Brazil, FoE Brazil, Movement of Landless Rural Laborers (MST) where as the PCB and others don´t really take part in this new movement thus leaving them "sidetracked by reality". This tendency (sic!) can also be seen in a variety of countries in Europe. In Sweden it´s only Socialist Party(USFI) that really participates in the new movement with their connections to FoE Sweden and ATTAC.

I mentioned ATTAC, and I really believe that they will make a difference. They have gathered people around them who have, until now, been somewhat unaware of the threat that neo-liberalism poses to humanity and the earth. In Sweden we had a massive radicalization of the ATTAC cadre during the EU-summit in Gothenburg. They saw with their own eyes the fascist face of the bourgeouis state (to use some RAF-terminology) and was rudely awakened from their petty-bourgeouis conception of democracy.

I don´t say that ATTAC will lead the proletarian revolution, but it´s a fertile ground for open-minded communists.

Does this answer your question, JM?

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
I think that as a party with a socio-econo-political agenda, we should first more or less agree on that . I am not quite sure that we agree since it's our first non-spam meeting that discusses this issue,IIRC.

I agree to the socio-econo-political agenda, I just don´t think we shall limit us to that

And no splitters!

We are communists, therefore we split! Face it it´s harder to make communists work together than to make Dubya talk sense...

[Jon Miller]

standard communism is not trotskyist, Leninist, or even marxist

so I do not see how some theories that they have made being invalidated invalidates communism

and I see the 'new communism' as getting sidetracked and losing it's focus

Jon Miller

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
standard communism is not trotskyist, Leninist, or even marxist

so I do not see how some theories that they have made being invalidated invalidates communism

and I see the 'new communism' as getting sidetracked and losing it's focus

Jon Miller

Then what do YOU base your communism on? Marxism is the base for all modern communism, this is a fact.

Or is it just a side-stepping of the question? You´re wriggling like worm on a hook here, Jon

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Kamrat X


Then what do YOU base your communism on? Marxism is the base for all modern communism, this is a fact.

Or is it just a side-stepping of the question? You´re wriggling like worm on a hook here, Jon

read the works of the ealy communists and read about the early premarxist communist societies (that worked!!!!)

Marx had some good ideas, but I do not follow him

I combine good ideas from all over (and from as far back as Plato)

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

oh

and I am an original thinker

many of my ideas are new to myself

Jon Miller

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


read the works of the ealy communists and read about the early premarxist communist societies (that worked!!!!)

Like which societies excactly? Got any links?

Marx had some good ideas, but I do not follow him

I combine good ideas from all over (and from as far back as Plato)

Jon Miller

Then you´re not really a communist IMO. Sorry, JM

[chequita guevara]

Now, now, Komrat X, we don't law sole claim to communism. After all, there were communists before Marx. We just lay claim to communism based on scientifc theories, rather than morality.

We are not communists just because we think it would be nice to live in a better world. We are communists because we know communism is a superior system, and it has been proven to be so. Under similar condition, the degenerated workers states always out perform capitalist ones. Under ideal conditions, such ass the United States has, we would bury them.

We are communists because the internal logic of capitalism means that only one of two outcomes is possible, socialism or barbarism.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Now, now, Komrat X, we don't law sole claim to communism. After all, there were communists before Marx. We just lay claim to communism based on scientifc theories, rather than morality.

We are not communists just because we think it would be nice to live in a better world. We are communists because we know communism is a superior system, and it has been proven to be so. Under similar condition, the degenerated workers states always out perform capitalist ones. Under ideal conditions, such ass the United States has, we would bury them.

We are communists because the internal logic of capitalism means that only one of two outcomes is possible, socialism or barbarism.

Point taken. But you have to admit that the pre-marxist communists don´t really have much to offer in terms of understanding of modern society.

[chequita guevara]

Oh, I don't really think they have anything to offer us, other than an understanding of our own history and the development of our ideas.

But I'd honestly like to Comrade Miller try and argue otherwise. Rigorous intellectual debate is good for us, and at the very worst, it will be educational (as long as every stays nice).

[Zoid]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Oh, I don't really think they have anything to offer us, other than an understanding of our own history and the development of our ideas.

I agree with you there

[Az]

Let's say what we stand for.


for me it is:

-a Planned economical system in all aspects of economical life.
-an system that brings all people to similar working and living conditions.
-Equality between all people.
-Free education with acceptance to every faculty/department to fill up that workforce needed for future plans of development.
-Free Healthcare
-In the field of personal consumers , A number of products that would serve the same purpose , to let the consumer choose what they want to , and thus enjoy material freedom.
-Incentives in bonuses in payment for workers that work harder.
-Science promoted, Science honoured , Science tested. Because scholars are people too.
-Enviroment for the future of our children. If the enviroment goes against the interests of the Human race , ( and yes it could be , like those dams ) , I think the choice is clear.
-Everyone can have his own little private property. A book , Table, Chair , Car, and maybe even a small boat, when one gets older , and retires.
-Media owned by the government , run by itself. ( as the courts )
-Court system , a different branch of the government .

yes I think Jon is right here (again! ) Marx was correct on many points , but taking ideas from everywhere is the way.







neo-communism!