From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
New anti-capitalist political party - (PSL) Party for Socialism and Liberation
I went to an event the other night and picked up the magazine. Anything that is anti-capitalist and involves the people that have already helped bring a LOT of people together on the streets is something I want to be a part of. I'm sick of pretending its okay to support the parts of the sick system of this country that seem to be taboo to any political party saying no to.
Socialism and Liberation Magazine
September 2004
Volume 1, Number 2
ABOUT THE COVER
Haitians celebrate the 200th anniversary of their liberation from colonialism and slavery, Jan. 1, 2004, in Port-au-Prince.
Photo: Kim Ives/Haiti Progres
Contents
THE ANTIWAR STRUGGLE
# War and the struggle against opportunism
# "I am opposed to every war but one!"
NATIONAL OPPRESSION
# Is the United States one nation?
# Prisons and the high tech revolution
FEATURES
# Film Review: "The Corporation"
# What is capitalism?
INTERNATIONAL
# Palestine: Women and national liberation
# Sudan: New war threats
# Bolivia: Who will control the natural gas?
CUBA
# Breaking the travel ban
# Bush's anti-Cuba policies split U.S. Cubans
HAITI
# The IMF and Haiti
# A history of the Haitian Revolution 1791-1804
# The class dynamics of Haiti's freedom struggle
VENEZUELA
# Victory in the referendum
# Defending the gains of the Bolivarian Revolution
EN ESPAÑOL
# ¿Quién va a controlar el gas natural en Bolivia?
# El FMI y el caso de Haití
September 2004
Volume 1, Number 2
ABOUT THE COVER
Haitians celebrate the 200th anniversary of their liberation from colonialism and slavery, Jan. 1, 2004, in Port-au-Prince.
Photo: Kim Ives/Haiti Progres
Contents
THE ANTIWAR STRUGGLE
# War and the struggle against opportunism
# "I am opposed to every war but one!"
NATIONAL OPPRESSION
# Is the United States one nation?
# Prisons and the high tech revolution
FEATURES
# Film Review: "The Corporation"
# What is capitalism?
INTERNATIONAL
# Palestine: Women and national liberation
# Sudan: New war threats
# Bolivia: Who will control the natural gas?
CUBA
# Breaking the travel ban
# Bush's anti-Cuba policies split U.S. Cubans
HAITI
# The IMF and Haiti
# A history of the Haitian Revolution 1791-1804
# The class dynamics of Haiti's freedom struggle
VENEZUELA
# Victory in the referendum
# Defending the gains of the Bolivarian Revolution
EN ESPAÑOL
# ¿Quién va a controlar el gas natural en Bolivia?
# El FMI y el caso de Haití
For more information:
http://socialismandliberation.org/mag/inde...
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
This is exactly the same Stalinist drivel that the hard left has been putting out for decades...nothing changes, no matter how much the world moves on and leaves these people in the dust. Get a clue, please. Perhaps the people who write this turgid crap should get out of their little rented rooms and see that it really is no longer 1968.
To get such attention right away, and such astute attention!
"Oh, lovely! Just what we need... another pathetic front group. Another attempt to cover for the authoritarian "left" groups who recognize that very few people are interested in their underlying agenda."
Front group? Its a new party put out by people with experience. BFD.
Very few people? Got that wrong. Funny, seems about 80k are interested in stepping out of their houses and into the streets (in SF alone) for their overt agenda.
Authoritarian left. Maybe. Or maybe just a few people doing what they feel is meaningful, and a few more people agreeing enough to help them make it happen. Rather than trying to trash one group on the left, why not promote a group you see an meaningful?
The Democraps? The Greens? P&F?
I suppose you prefer like rags like Z Mag that go around publishing hacks like Chip Berlet just to try to discredit anyone who questions 9/11 (naturally without ever publishing the actual 'conspiracy theories' themselves). Or Mother Jones going around trashing Nader as hard as they can to install a war monger. Or the Green Party having a handful of members decide that they won't run a presidential candidate that threatens the Ds this year (because people might not *like* us!) and then orchestrating the ousting of Nader to complete their 'goal.'
I'll take PSL any day. Spine. Not centrist capitalists dressed up as left.
"Oh, lovely! Just what we need... another pathetic front group. Another attempt to cover for the authoritarian "left" groups who recognize that very few people are interested in their underlying agenda."
Front group? Its a new party put out by people with experience. BFD.
Very few people? Got that wrong. Funny, seems about 80k are interested in stepping out of their houses and into the streets (in SF alone) for their overt agenda.
Authoritarian left. Maybe. Or maybe just a few people doing what they feel is meaningful, and a few more people agreeing enough to help them make it happen. Rather than trying to trash one group on the left, why not promote a group you see an meaningful?
The Democraps? The Greens? P&F?
I suppose you prefer like rags like Z Mag that go around publishing hacks like Chip Berlet just to try to discredit anyone who questions 9/11 (naturally without ever publishing the actual 'conspiracy theories' themselves). Or Mother Jones going around trashing Nader as hard as they can to install a war monger. Or the Green Party having a handful of members decide that they won't run a presidential candidate that threatens the Ds this year (because people might not *like* us!) and then orchestrating the ousting of Nader to complete their 'goal.'
I'll take PSL any day. Spine. Not centrist capitalists dressed up as left.
this new gang is no front group. they are the rump of the local and not-so-local split in the worker's world party. all i had to do was spend about three minutes on their website to see the conspicuous names of gloria la riva and richard becker, long-time (ex) wwp leaders. the wwp split due to the problems they had dealing with non-stalinists in the ANSWER front. who cares about the intricacies and allegations going back and forth? the salient feature is that the wwp split and this new formation is continuing the same old song and dance but without any camouflage this time. the gloves are off. smash red fascism.
" Dogma is fatal. It doesn't matter if it's Capitalist dogma, Judeo-Christian-Muslim dogma, or Revolutionary Marxist dogma."
Nope, no dogma here. That's another thing anarchists don't have, like leaders and front groups.....
Just keep saying it over and over and over until people get too bored to notice anything you say. And then blame the Man, man.....
Nope, no dogma here. That's another thing anarchists don't have, like leaders and front groups.....
Just keep saying it over and over and over until people get too bored to notice anything you say. And then blame the Man, man.....
That's not dogma. That's analysis.
nessie: "That's not dogma. That's analysis."
Translation: "Nessie believes it, so it must be immutably undenyably true."
@%<
Translation: "Nessie believes it, so it must be immutably undenyably true."
@%<
as well as a dogma.
Dogmas always appear as observations of a natural law to their adherents. That's a problem with all dogmas, anarchism very much included.
At least the commies provide for debates on subjects of relevance to this problem... because they recognize the problem exists. Believers of many sorts do. Anarchists, on the other hand, tend to just assert an exemption based on their own inherent rightness-- making related problems virtually impossible to solve within the context of the ideology.
How very typical, then, of you, nessie. Defend what's broke rather than look at it square.
Now, why might that be? That's another question, having to do with leadership having its privileges, among them unquestionability.
But not to digress of the topic of why you feel so threatened by sharing the social space with people who have different beliefs than your own. Let's get back to that question. So, nessie, what up?
At least the commies provide for debates on subjects of relevance to this problem... because they recognize the problem exists. Believers of many sorts do. Anarchists, on the other hand, tend to just assert an exemption based on their own inherent rightness-- making related problems virtually impossible to solve within the context of the ideology.
How very typical, then, of you, nessie. Defend what's broke rather than look at it square.
Now, why might that be? That's another question, having to do with leadership having its privileges, among them unquestionability.
But not to digress of the topic of why you feel so threatened by sharing the social space with people who have different beliefs than your own. Let's get back to that question. So, nessie, what up?
as if the two were separable.
commies: don't think revolution is a matter of forcing people to their own beliefs, but rather, is a matter of "historical inevitability."
nessie: thinks he's not a leader, just a guy "with opinions." and, incidentally, a membership in an ancient cornerstone of the local anarchist establishment, with control over at least potentially important communications resources that other people in part built, a local bully pulpit in the form of a persona built up on the basis of expression of belief so as to persuade others, and who is a self-appointed censor and activist-advocate that others be compelled to do same, to opinions he personally doesn't like.
but that's not leadership..... goes the dogma. it jsut walks and quacks like it.
every belief system has its own forbidden realities, forbidden in the sense that they may not be recognized or challenged. Privilege, as our sisters have taught us, exists in a politically-important silence.
in this sense, there is zero difference between anarchists and commies, or anarchists and any other type of believers, any type at all. the difference is anarchist exceptionalism on the question.
and hey: what *is* with the goldman cult?
commies: don't think revolution is a matter of forcing people to their own beliefs, but rather, is a matter of "historical inevitability."
nessie: thinks he's not a leader, just a guy "with opinions." and, incidentally, a membership in an ancient cornerstone of the local anarchist establishment, with control over at least potentially important communications resources that other people in part built, a local bully pulpit in the form of a persona built up on the basis of expression of belief so as to persuade others, and who is a self-appointed censor and activist-advocate that others be compelled to do same, to opinions he personally doesn't like.
but that's not leadership..... goes the dogma. it jsut walks and quacks like it.
every belief system has its own forbidden realities, forbidden in the sense that they may not be recognized or challenged. Privilege, as our sisters have taught us, exists in a politically-important silence.
in this sense, there is zero difference between anarchists and commies, or anarchists and any other type of believers, any type at all. the difference is anarchist exceptionalism on the question.
and hey: what *is* with the goldman cult?
Say something new for a change. Maybe I'll respond.
i usually stay away from posting on this forum; most any time something substantial is being discussed, the conversation (if we can pretend that such a good word can be used to describe such a dismal phenomenon) gets derailed by a shouting match between nessie and gehrig. nessie almost always tries to maintain some kind of substance to his posts, relevant to the topic at hand. gehrig, on the other hand, can only muster a buch of totally irrelevant non-sequiturs and completely ignorant straw-men. how is it that a discussion of the bullshit of this new stalinist party can become yet another episode of anarchist-bashing from this idiot? nessie, please try to restrain yourself from responding to the moronic provocations of the dimwit. just let his posts remain unanswered in cyber-reality--apparently the only place this moron has "friends."
"Your silence will not protect you."
Actually... it probably will, because it already has. What it won't do is change the facts, including the radical marginalization of your strain of thought. Only the true believers think the flaws are invisible for their unspeakability.
But hey, do what ya need to do, and don't do it for my sake. I'm just a messenger.
Actually... it probably will, because it already has. What it won't do is change the facts, including the radical marginalization of your strain of thought. Only the true believers think the flaws are invisible for their unspeakability.
But hey, do what ya need to do, and don't do it for my sake. I'm just a messenger.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network