As the curtain comes down on 2022, the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) wishes you a Happy New Year! We look forward to a new year of struggle, and victories, that raise us to new heights. Conditions show we are in an exciting period for revolutionaries who are connecting with workers and the oppressed – making practical plans with a long-term vision. 2023 promises many opportunities to organize, build the united front against imperialism, and advance towards an American revolution. Freedom Road Socialist Organization is determined to play a part in that process. You should consider joining us today!

The United States is an empire in decline, struggling to maintain its dominance of other countries and their markets. The Biden White House is desperate, ramping up wars, threatening other countries, and makes enemies of people around the world from Palestine to the Philippines, China and Venezuela. Billions upon billions of dollars are being spent on the military while housing, healthcare and education face cutbacks.

Here at home this crisis of U.S. imperialism is deepening divisions everywhere, from political rallies to family holiday dinners. Bigots are louder than ever and free to express it on television and in social media. People don’t just feel threatened, they are being shot and killed by racist reactionaries in grocery stores and churches, on the street and at work, and in schools and night clubs. The crisis is here, and it is ugly, but it also means people are more and more ready to act, and to be bold. People are in motion, and they want solutions. Conditions for revolutionaries to organize and fight back are good.

2022 was a year of continuing the George Floyd rebellion. Remember, more than 27 million people took part in the 2020 uprising against police murders. People across the country in cities like Dallas, Milwaukee, Minneapolis and Jacksonville continue organizing and building the Black Liberation movement. The National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression (NAARPR) continues to protest police killings and abuses in more than two dozen cities and the list is growing.

Local chapters of NAARPR lead campaigns that put police on trial, convict them and sentence them to prison. This is a first for many cities. It is a result of the rebellion, but also due to the campaign work by groups of determined activists. NAARPR will host a conference in 2023 that promises to be a big event.

Chicago stands out because the demand for community control of the police is advancing and about to be implemented. This reform originates with Fred Hampton of the Black Panther Party. The campaign for community control attracts the families of loved ones murdered or mistreated by police, as well as droves of new activists. This is getting real as Chicago activists canvass for district council elections taking place in February. These councils can implement new reforms that take control over local police policies and spending.

As we all know, 2022 wasn’t all bread and roses. After the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned abortion rights, the FRSO put a lot of time and energy into fightbacks across the country to restore abortion and demand reproductive justice for all. We helped build the movement for reproductive rights in many states during the November elections, and now there is momentum towards International Women’s Day. FRSO will lead and participate in protests and events around March 8, 2023. Even if your state won, the fight is not over. You should consider joining or starting an International Women’s Day event.

Then on May 1 we commemorate International Workers Day, remembering the great sacrifice of the Haymarket Martyrs of Chicago, and the struggle for the eight-hour day and unions. Where the FRSO is organized, we will participate in mass marches and rallies, as well as FRSO-hosted forums to advance the revolutionary demands of the workers of the world.

This year promises to be historic for unions and the working class. The new leadership of the Teamsters Union, O’Brien and Zuckerman, promise a showdown with the shipping giant UPS. Rank-and-file workers’ organization and militancy on the shop floor in the UPS can build power, raise standards across the shipping industry, and fire up the entire working class. It will require a Teamster strike and a victory against UPS. With this, we will see a surge in union organizing drives, like the ones at Amazon, Starbucks, restaurant chains, and even banks.

The FRSO is already calling for the March on the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on July 15, 2024. It is only 2023 now, but we are preparing a broad united front for a national march and protest in the streets that goes right up to the front doors of the RNC. We will let the Republicans know exactly why we oppose them with our every breath. Keep a lookout for an organizing conference.

FRSO is working to build a new revolutionary communist party. We are building a party capable of uniting all who can be united to wage a decisive struggle against monopoly capitalism, and to build socialism. That is why It is important to join the FRSO now!

A new year is upon us! Our future is bright!

#UnitedStates #Editorials #FreedomRoadSocialistOrganizationFRSO

The past has shown that the stance we take on elections can either prepare us for future struggles or leave us on the sidelines of history. There are four major questions we can ask about elections. Is there a special danger present? Is the election a referendum of sort on a key issue – such as a war or economic crisis? Is the election important to the oppressed nationality movements and the struggle against national oppression? Is there a significant political option besides the two parties of the ruling class, the Republicans or Democrats?

Different forces may have different answers to those questions. Freedom Road Socialist Organization believes that this November, it is important to defeat the most reactionary and backwards candidates whether they are running for the House or Senate, for governor or for local office.

There are several criteria we can use during the upcoming elections to determine who the most backwards candidates are. Politicians running for office have different stances on democratic struggles like reproductive rights, voting rights, the police and the crimes they commit in oppressed communities, policies on immigration and other important issues.

We must defeat any politicians running for office this November who hold a favorable view of Trump. It is likely that the Republican candidate for president in 2024 will be someone like or very similar to Trump and his terrible politics. Defeating reactionary politicians at the ballot box is also important because we want to see the most favorable conditions for organizing in the streets and in our workplaces after the elections.

We want the people’s movements to focus on winning demands and advancing struggles to new heights. We want to avoid a situation where people are led astray into thinking that the solution to our problems is replacing one ruling class politician for another. We can promote a real people’s agenda as we prepare to protest the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee in the summer of 2024. We will also demonstrate at the Democrat National Convention.

Our approach regarding the elections will take different forms in different places. Often, this will mean that those who are working in swing states must work to defeat Republican candidates. In places where the Republicans are very unlikely to win, organizers should vote against right-wing or centrist Democrats in favor of candidates with more progressive stances. Elections do matter and it would be a mistake to ignore them, even when both of the major parties represent the interests of the ruling class. Ultimately, Freedom Road Socialist Organization believes that our hope belongs with the people’s struggles and real change will be won on the streets.

The United States has seen a high level of political struggle this past decade. Many have been drawn into the streets for the first time, and that is wonderful. It is our duty to continue fighting for peace, justice and equality. In the final analysis, both the Republican and Democrat parties serve the 1%. Neither of those parties represent the interests of working and oppressed people. This November, let’s defeat the worst enemies on the ballot and continue our work among the people.

Struggles and organizations are blossoming, and we have a world to win. We are building revolutionary organization and understand that only a revolution and socialism can bring about a new world.

#UnitedStates #Elections #Editorials #FreedomRoadSocialistOrganizationFRSO #DonaldTrump #midtermElections2022

On Saturday, May 14, Masao Suzuki, chair of the Joint Nationalities Commission of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) expressed outrage at another white supremacist mass murder. “Three years ago, white supremacist Patrick Crusius drove hundreds of miles to kill Chicanos and Mexicanos in El Paso, Texas,” said Suzuki. “Then today another young white supremacist, Payton Gendron, also drove into Buffalo, New York to attack the African American community.” Eleven of the 13 people Gendron shot were African American, and ten died.

Both Crusius and Gendron had posted manifestos repeating the lies of “replacement theory,” a neo-Nazi idea that white Americans and Europeans were being displaced. This theory is a call for ethnic cleansing and mass murder of people of African, Asian, and Latino descent. Gendron livestreamed his killing spree to further spread hate and violence.

“These events are just the modern-day versions of mass lynchings historically aimed at African Americans, Asian Americans, Chicanos and Latinos, and indigenous people,” said Suzuki. “This country was founded on the genocide and seizure of land from Native Americans, and enriched by the chattel slavery of millions of Africans kidnapped from their homelands.” Suzuki added, “These white supremacists are trying to start a race war, and our communities need to prepare to defend themselves.”

“Today the white supremacist movement is funded by parts of the monopoly capitalists, and their poison spread by Fox News and anchor Tucker Carlson. These same capitalists are the ones jacking up prices,” referring to the record profits being reported by big businesses such as Shell Oil and Tyson Foods. “Wages can’t keep up, more and more people are turning up at food banks, and the numbers of homeless keep rising,” said Suzuki, “Our organization sees the need to replace this racist and exploitative system with socialism.”

#UnitedStates #Editorials #WhiteSupremacy #massShooting

Just last year, the halls of power in Minnesota shook when people answered the murder of George Floyd by rising up. We marched on the State Capitol, the county attorney, the state attorney general, the police federation and the interstate highways. Day and night, for weeks on end, we faced riot police, tear gas, National Guard troops and white supremacists. The Third Precinct police station was burned, as were hundreds of other buildings. And fires here sparked protests across the world and transformed the political landscape.

Today, when Minneapolis is in the midst of its first local elections since the uprising, voters will consider dozens of candidates for local office, as well as a few ballot measures.

At the top of the ballot will be the mayor’s race. As of this writing, no candidate has a clear path to beat incumbent Mayor Jacob Frey, but it’s important that he not be handed an easy victory. We can vote to send a message that he does not have support for his failures to address policing, housing, the pandemic and more. Whether you write in someone else, or if you choose a candidate who stands for things you can support, we urge people of conscience to use ranked choice voting to cast three votes against Jacob Frey.

There’s another chance to vote against Frey, in the form of a ballot question. Question 1 asks to take most city council powers and turn them over to mayoral control. Consolidating power into fewer hands would weaken the fight for working class and oppressed peoples. We can’t just leave Question 1 blank. To be counted against expanded mayoral power, voters need to mark No on their ballots.

There is also a ballot question, Question 3, related to rent control; we support rent control.

While those are easy choices. All of Minneapolis is waiting for the final tally on a measure that aims to replace the Minneapolis Police Department with a new Department of Public Safety. The new department would be under the joint control of the mayor and city council, and could still include police. The measure would also end the minimum police staffing requirement currently in the city charter.

Many good people have come out to support this amendment – Question 2 – and it’s been held up as an accomplishment of our movement. We see it as something that came from outside our movement, and which threatens to hinder the fight for real change. We’ll be voting No.

Proponents argue that Question 2 is a pathway to abolition, but also say it’s not that. A campaign website FAQ asks, “Does…it mean abolish or defund the police?” Then answers in bold type, “No. It does not.” Question 2 was born on a stage in Powderhorn Park, adorned with words “Defund police,” but it neither cuts the police budget nor requires the transfer of police funding to other projects or programs. We support investment in mental health resources, addiction services and youth programs, but Question 2 doesn’t mandate any of those.

And while we support ending the staffing requirement in the city charter, that alone does not get us the change our communities need.

First, ending the requirement does not cut the budget or the size of the police force – doing that is still a political decision. This amendment leaves that decision in the hands of the city council. The same city council that declared their “veto-proof majority” on that stage in Powderhorn Park last June and has voted at least twice since then for more money for the Minneapolis Police Department.

Second, to cut the number of cops without addressing accountability is meaningless. Take the example of Derek Chauvin, before he murdered George Floyd. He was a 19-year veteran of MPD with a display case full of commendations and medals. He would not be the first cut from a downsized police force. The only way to get rid of the Derek Chauvins is to demand accountability for someone like him, who has 26 complaints on his record and has killed five people before George Floyd. The killers of Terrence Franklin, Jamar Clark, Travis Jordan and others, are all still working for MPD, and as long-term employees, would be protected from any cuts in the force. The most direct way to ensure accountability is to end the practice of police being allowed to police themselves.

Currently, the Office of Police Conduct Review (OPCR) is responsible for reviewing civilian complaints, but no complaint gets sustained by the OPCR unless a police panel agrees. The group Communities United Against Police Brutality found that only 0.36% of complaints result in discipline (compared to a national average of 7-8% for civilian review boards). Question 2 does nothing to end this practice, nor does it open past complaints or police murders for review.

So long as police control the complaint process, there can be no accountability. So long as no one reviews past harms, there can be no justice. If there is no change in police conduct, cutting the size of the police force doesn’t protect us from police abuses.

Currently, the mayor is the only civilian authority over Minneapolis police. Question 2 would change that, so that the mayor would share power with the city council. While the mayor has proven himself unwilling to rein in police, the city council has also showed us time and again that they are willing to pass the buck even on the things they can do. They have the power to address the complaint process, and have not done so. It is the city council that approves the contract with the Police Officers Federation, but they never press for changes that will protect community members. The city council has the power to eliminate the camping ordinances that invite police to criminalize our unhoused neighbors and carry out merciless evictions, despite the overwhelming housing crisis in our city, yet they have done nothing. These are just a few things that could change on a dime, if the city council were willing to take action. Yes, we need to take power over policing out of the hands of the mayor, but it gets us nowhere to put it into the hands of a body that has shown itself unwilling to make change.

Proponents of Question 2 have invited us to reimagine public safety, but ask us to vote for a proposition that will do nothing to make concrete changes that will protect us from police violence in our communities, or address the harms already done by a violent, racist institution. Some worry that the defeat of Question 2 would be a blow against the movement to end police accountability and win Black liberation. In our view, the defeat of Question 2 will be an opportunity to get the focus back on concrete changes to address the needs our communities have right now.

We will be voting No on Question 2, and throwing our weight behind the fight for community control of the police by establishing an all-elected Civilian Police Accountability Commission. Look for it in your ballot in 2022, and join the Black-led grassroots effort to get us there.

#MinneapolisMN #InJusticeSystem #OppressedNationalities #Editorials #Opinion #PeoplesStruggles #AfricanAmerican #PoliceBrutality #Antiracism #Elections #MinneapolisUprising #MinneapolisElections

Freedom Road Socialist Organization stands with working people on the West Coast who are threatened by the massive wildfires that have taken scores of lives. Dozens more are missing and feared dead and thousands of homes were destroyed. We encourage FRSO members in California, Oregon and Washington to assist in whatever way possible in efforts that ensure the safety of your neighbors and contribute to pro-people recovery efforts. It is important to combat the fear mongering around the fires that is happening in the service of a cynical right-wing political agenda.

There is nothing natural about the disaster that is engulfing the West Coast, it is the product of climate change, which in turn has been created by capitalism. A decade of hotter and drier summers, lower levels of winter precipitation and rapid spring melt outs has created fuel for the fires. Large, extremely hot fires are in turn reshaping the ecosystems that they ravage. In some areas even jack pine seeds, which normally thrive on fire, are being killed by the intensity of the infernos. In some places, what was once a forest is being replaced by grassland. That means that the trees that are so necessary to clean carbon dioxide from the air will not be coming back, leaving more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to fuel warming.

Big business, in particular the fossil fuel industry, have economic interest in blunting measures that would slow or roll back climate change. Capitalism rewards a greedy few and encourages short-term thinking in order to maximize profits today. The result is a world that is growing hotter, has more extreme weather events, and is posing an existential threat to life as we know it and possibly even to humanity.

In the White House, the main political representative of monopoly capitalism is steadfast in his opposition to science, and blabbers about “raking the forest.” That kind of ridiculous commentary and denial of science is not funny when whole towns are being burned to the ground.

Every progressive person should support government assistance to help the people of the West Coast battle this disaster and rebuild their lives. The wealthy that run this country have plenty of money; they can be taxed and made to pay for this crisis.

Our movements need to insist that the government needs to get serious about addressing climate change. Trump has no intention of doing that and that is one of the many reasons he needs to go. That said, we will need to stay in the streets no matter who is elected to force a serious battle against climate change.

Capitalism is a failed system. It is destroying our planet for the profits of a few. There is no hope to stop climate change in the context of the chaotic market-driven forces of capitalism. The sooner the powerful and privileged are overthrown, and socialism – a system where everything is done to improve people’s lives – replaces it, the better it will be.

#WestCoast #Editorials #PeoplesStruggles #Capitalism #EnvironmentalJustice #Washington #California #Oregon #WildFires

But what the people need is more testing done for free, and health care for all. What workers need are unemployment benefits and income support for the self-employed. Working people need protection from eviction and relief from debts. What nurses and other medical workers need is more masks and other protective equipment.

With more than 1500 confirmed infections in the United States, the novel coronavirus is not a foreign threat from Europe, as Trump seems to believe, it is spreading here. Inaction and incompetence by the Trump administration have squandered away the time for preparation.

#UnitedStates #Editorials #PeoplesStruggles #stockMarket

New York, NY – For working New Yorkers, taking the subway is an essential part of their day-to-day life. Having a car in New York is incredibly difficult and expensive, which means unless you are rich enough to take a cab to work every day, the subway is basically the only viable option. So for the many New Yorkers with working-class jobs that do not allow them to show up late without risk of getting fired, it is very important that the subway runs smoothly and remains affordable.

However, the reality is that New York’s Metro Transit Authority (MTA) struggles to maintain a dilapidated subway system that faces constant delays. Only about 25% of stations are fully accessible, and the MTA estimates it will be $426 billion in debt by 2023. How does the MTA propose to solve these problems? Their ‘solution’ is to ruthlessly police the poor and the homeless in a new crackdown on fare evasion, and to further exploit transit workers, putting more money into the pockets of MTA officials and higher ups.

The MTA announced in late 2019 that they will hire 500 new cops to patrol the subway stations and stop people from evading the subway fare. This comes as part of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s push for so-called ‘quality of life policing.’ In other words, Cuomo and the MTA want to police the poor and the homeless out of the subways, which will in their minds improve the ‘quality of life’ for those who can afford the subway fare.

Since the MTA announcement of crackdown, New Yorkers have released videos of officers using excessive force against people for evading the fare, or even just for selling churros in the subway station. The MTA claims the new policing effort against fare evasion will save them $200 million over the next four years. This is a ridiculous claim on multiple fronts. For one thing, people aren’t all of a sudden going to roll over and pay if they literally cannot afford the subway fare. Secondly, the expansion of police forces will cost $249 million over the next four years – much more than the MTA plans to save.

All of this shows how out of touch with reality the MTA leadership and Governor Cuomo are. Rather than pushing for, say, increased taxes on the rich to help fund the transit system, their logic says, let’s squeeze more money out of poor and working people, despite the fact that New York is one of the richest cities in the world. Clearly, Cuomo and the MTA do not value the lives of the poor, and are only motivated by ways to save and make more money.

The MTA is also attempting to save money off the backs of working people through the exploitation of transit workers. In May 2019, when the transit workers’ contract was up for renewal, the MTA made an insulting first offer that would have resulted in major concessions on the part of transit workers. The MTA’s stubbornness in pushing their agenda forced the Transport Workers Union (TWU) Local 100 to go through six months of contract negotiations to fight for workers’ rights. While the TWU Local 100 was able to secure wage increases and other wins for workers in the new contract that got approved in January 2020, the MTA forced through increases in workers’ healthcare costs, adding higher charges for emergency room visits and brand-name prescription drugs.

The MTA is also now pushing for workers to act as a kind of secondary police force in helping to stop fare evasion – something that is not in transit workers’ job training, and that puts them at risk of potentially dangerous and violent situations. The MTA boasts that it will save millions of dollars as a result of their new contract and budget plan. If the employer is saving so much money, this means that they plan to find whatever ways they can to further undermine the rights and wellbeing of transit workers.

Most resistance to the MTA’s new attacks on poor and working people has come in the form of demonstrations against the crackdown on fare evasion and the hiring of 500 new cops. Forces on the ground have mobilized around these issues, and two well-attended actions were held in late 2019, with a third held at the end of January.

In spite of this mass pushback and disapproval, Governor Cuomo and the MTA have chosen to spend the city’s money on hiring more cops rather than actually paying transit workers living wages and fixing the broken down subway system. This decision is an attack on poor and working people on many levels. First, the cops are literally attacking poor people who cannot afford the subway fare by brutally harassing them with excessive force. Second, the neglect to actually fix the broken down subway system is an attack on poor and working people who need to get to work on time to avoid facing unemployment, which could of course, for some, lead to homelessness. Third, the MTA’s incompetence is also an attack on transit workers.

When transit workers are forced to fix urgent problems with the subways that happen on a daily basis, their lives and health are put directly in danger as they work in the subway tunnels while subway service continues to operate. So by not setting aside greater resources to actually pay transit workers a living wage, give them sufficient healthcare benefits, and fix problems more proactively, the MTA is directly attacking the health and wellbeing of transit workers, which of course, in turn, results in a less functional subway system that continues to put poor and working people at risk of losing their jobs.

Bearing all of this in mind, when Cuomo and the MTA decide not to invest the resources (resources which they clearly have if they can afford to hire so many cops) in fixing a broken subway system, they are not just causing an inconvenience for people – they are actually putting poor and working people’s lives directly in danger.

The situation with New York’s subway system is yet another example of how capitalism time and again fails working people. The problem is, Cuomo and the MTA only see the subway system through the eyes of the bosses and the rich. If New York’s leaders and those in charge of the MTA acted from a working-class perspective, they would understand why the transit system is broken; they would understand that the system will remain broken until it actually pays transit workers living wages, and puts resources into ensuring that poor and working people can get to their jobs on time, rather than attacking them over a $2.75 subway fare. But such sensible thinking will never come out of a capitalist system because capitalism is all about more profit for the employers, no matter how much that means exploiting workers and neglecting the needs of the working class and poor.

Only under socialism can we imagine a system where transit workers get a living wage along with the healthcare and other benefits they need; where the transit authorities prioritize fixing broken subway equipment and infrastructure because they actually value the lives of working people who rely on the subway to get to work; and where there is no need for cops in the subway stations because there is no need for a constantly increasing subway fare in the first place. Only under socialism can we have a transit system that truly works for all and reflects the needs of poor and working people.

#NYCNY #CapitalismAndEconomy #Editorials #PeoplesStruggles #PoliceBrutality #NewYork #NYPD #Antiracism #MTA #Subway #FTP

While the occurrence of wildfires is fairly common in Australia, the intensity of the fires occurring is really without precedent. The flames are so massive that, in some instances, they are creating their own weather, with lightning and ‘ember attacks.’ As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, due to Australia’s changing climate there will be more fires to come.

Poor land management has contributed to the worsening conditions. The scale and ferocity of the current bush fires are products of an unprecedented lengthy drought season. But it is the greed of energy corporations and the complicity of officials from both political parties that has produced these unusually long droughts and, in turn, this disaster.

It is not a secret that Australia is inextricably tied to the fossil fuel industry. Illustrative of this is the fact that today coal accounts for 15% of the country’s export revenues, and six of the top 30 largest Australian corporations are mining or fossil fuel companies. Australia’s continued investment in dirty energy has cost the nation thousands of metric tons of CO2 emissions, according to the Australian Department of Agriculture. The ineptitude of Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison towards downsizing the role of coal is a prime example of denial of an issue to the point of propagating it.

Morrison vowed near the onset of the fires back in October 2019 to outlaw the boycott campaigns utilized by climate activists, citing the alleged damage it would do to the country’s mining industry. Activists have been successful in impacting targeted businesses, affecting their ability to access banking, insurance and consulting services. None of this should come as a surprise, given Morrison is a vocal supporter of President Donald Trump and the class interests that he represents.

In addition to their disastrous domestic energy policies, the Australian government has contributed further to the deterioration of the climate through its commitment to U.S. imperialism. Mobilizing to participate in the wars of U.S. empire has emitted untold amounts of harmful waste into the environment. In order to pay for these actions and the equipment for their armed forces, the government has cut funding from vital fire management programs that were underfunded to begin with. Government-sponsored disaster relief efforts and civilian relocation services have similarly been gutted, only exacerbating the problems, particularly for the most vulnerable communities.

In a parallel to the political situation in the U.S., this issue is not partisan. While one wing of the political elite is outright dismissive of the existence of climate change, the other plays lip-service to the scientists and their warnings while doing the bidding of the corporations who get them elected. The reality, both in Australia and in the U.S., is that most of the leaders of mainstream political parties ultimately play on the same side, working in the interests of the ruling class against the interests of the working class.

Issues pertaining to climate change are the product of fundamental components of the prevailing global economic system of capitalism. Capitalism gives economic interests the platform to make decisions in society. It will never work in the best interests of the people being impacted by those decisions. A system that incentivizes economic gains to the detriment of people and planet is problematic and prone toward causing environmental catastrophe. Capitalism holds that obtaining the maximum profit is the driving force of an economy. It is by getting rid of the private ownership of means to produce good and services for the benefit of the 1 percent, that we will be able to avert and resolve the issues of the climate crisis.

The solution to the problem of climate change is not to place the future in the hands of political hacks who have never had the interests of the working class and other oppressed people in their minds. Elected officials will be compelled to adhere to the demands of the masses if we are organized and militant enough. The creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during the Nixon administration – a reform, yes, but a big concession won from the ruling class as a result of ceaseless mass struggle – is proof enough of this. When the movement against climate change is organized and fully recognizes capitalism as the main threat, it will be able to turn the tide and begin to prevent the kind of cataclysm unfolding in Australia.

#MilwaukeeWI #CapitalismAndEconomy #Editorials #EnvironmentalJustice #Australia #Fire

Jacksonville, FL – I'm not sure how we'll look back at film in the 2010s. Much of it already seems like a blur, leaving me asking questions like, “Was that the Batman movie with Ben Affleck or Christian Bale?” or “Which of the five Spider-Man and five Star Wars movies did you like the best?”

To put it another way, how are we supposed to really evaluate the 21 Marvel Cinematic Universe movies theatrically released in this decade? Even Marvel movies represent only about half of the total comic book-related films produced in the 2010s. It’s just disorienting.

It's mostly the product of monopoly capitalism. Fewer giant corporations own most of the franchises and intellectual properties today than even ten years ago. In pursuit of profit, studios fall back on less risky, tried-and-true bankable stories and franchises. To that end, we’ve seen an explosion of sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, spinoffs and more in the last ten years.

We end up in absurd situations where Sony remakes Spider-Man every couple of years for no other reason than to stop their franchise rights from lapsing back to Marvel (owned by Disney). Now 20th Century Fox's Alien Queen is technically a Disney princess. Even movies that completely bombed in theaters but developed a cult following on home video, like Blade Runner, get treated like major franchises.

The other factor driving all of this is the Great Recession. For most of us, the economy never recovered from the 2008 crisis. All capitalism can offer us anymore – especially my generation – is this fake, totally banal nostalgia for a past that supposedly didn't suck so much (it did; we were just kids). In Capitalist America, you might not have the money to see a doctor, but you can watch Gargoyles, or Lizzy Maguire, or a brand new Star Wars TV show on Disney+ for $6.99 per month.

It’s appropriate that the 1980s weighed so heavy on pop culture this decade. We continue to live in the hangover of Reaganomics, and the billionaire reality-TV psychopath who came to encompass the greediest excesses of that era now sits in the White House. Rest assured, a similarly exhausting wave of 90s cultural nostalgia is on the horizon for the 2020s. Let’s hope that it’s limited to movies and music and not politics or economics.

As less of us went to the movies in the aftermath of the recession, Hollywood increasingly came to rely on overseas audiences for ticket sales. This lends itself to studios producing bigger blockbusters, which are heavy on special effects and colorful characters but lighter on dialogue and story – since the latter, of course, has to get translated.

But it wasn't just blockbusters. Even the supposedly 'high-brow' cinema adored by the rich and famous mostly sucked. Take a look at this decade’s Oscar winners and nominees: The King's Speech - a sendup to the British crown? The Artist - a silent film no one saw? Argo - thinly disguised propaganda for war with Iran? Birdman - an eye-rolling 'love letter' to rich yuppies in New York? All of these movies won Oscars for ‘Best Picture.’ Even on the off-chance that you saw them, does anybody really think these movies had anything important or lasting to say about the world?

All that said, the 2010s wasn't all cynical garbage. There were plenty of outstanding movies, including many not on my list. But in the interests of cutting through the haze, I've highlighted 20 movies from the last ten years that stood out:

1. Free State of Jones (2016) - This isn't just the best Civil War movie ever – it's a revolutionary manifesto for organizing in the South. I wrote a full review back in 2016 for Fight Back!, which you can read here. 2. Sorry to Bother You (2018) - It’s the most pro-union, anti-capitalist movie made in the U.S. in several decades, delivering an original story and a legendary sci-fi plot twist worthy. Sorry to Bother You isn’t just great political art. It perfectly speaks to the struggles facing the working-class youth of today in an age dominated by monopoly corporations like Amazon and flooded with social media, low wages, high rent and soul-crushing jobs.

3. It Follows (2014) - Solidly one of the five best horror films I've seen, ever. Perfectly captures the dreadful inevitability of a nightmare.

4. Arrival (2016) - The most aspirational sci-fi film of the decade, and one that lays out Nietzsche's problem of the eternal recurrence in a hopeful way. Arrival left me believing that humanity has a chance to stop our impending climate and war-driven apocalypse and live better than we ever have.

5. Lincoln (2012) - Staggering and important portrayal of the political fight to abolish slavery in the United States. All the better because it's not an insipid biopic like the title might suggest.

6. The First Purge (2018) - The apex for the best original franchise to emerge from the 2010s. Every couple of years, The Purge series offered the most biting and timely political commentary at the movies or on television. With its Black working-class protagonists battling for survival against rich neo-Nazis, The First Purge, technically the fourth installment, represented the series at its most class-conscious.

7. Inception (2010) - I cooled on all of Christopher Nolan's movies over the last decade except for this one. Truly an exceptional mind-thriller that stunningly represents the way we perceive and construct ideas.

8. First Reformed (2018) - What does it mean to accept that the capitalist system we live under will lead to certain doom for humanity and the earth, but also to set aside that terrible realization enough to do something about it? How do you stave off nihilistic despair and embrace a positive vision worth fighting for? Those questions asked in First Reformed bring to mind Huey Newton’s writing about ‘reactionary suicide’ and ‘revolutionary suicide’ – something the film explores beautifully.

9. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) - Without a doubt the best comic book movie of the decade. It's hard to even remember it's animated and not live-action.

10. Get Out (2017) - Jordan Peele was the source of some of the best comedy in the 2010s, but he also penned the perfect horror movie about racism and wealthy liberals – one that I suspect will go down as an all-time great in the genre. Get Out has forever raised the bar for socially conscious horror films.

11. Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) - A rare sequel/reboot I didn't think we needed, but we did. Visually unparalleled, electrifying and revolutionary.

12. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) - Just a cut above practically every film in the Star Wars series. This is a movie that grapples seriously with guerrilla warfare and gives desperately needed texture to the Rebel Alliance

13. Django Unchained (2012) - Tarantino's first and last great film of the decade, set in the antebellum U.S. South.

14. El Libertador (2014) - Ignore that Netflix series. This staggering film about South American revolutionary Simon Bolivar’s life is unparalleled. You can see the mark of the late great Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, who helped finance the movie, all over it.

15. 3 ½ Minutes, Ten Bullets (2015) - Having organized in 2014 to win justice for Jordan Davis, the 17-year-old African American murdered in his car for playing rap music, I'm still floored by Marc Silver’s documentary on racist vigilante murder in Jacksonville, Florida. You can read my full review on Fight Back! News here. 16. Carlos (2010) - The Godfather trilogy of 1970s Marxist guerrillas.

17. Vox Lux (2018)- An underrated neoliberal dystopia about the fascist impulses of our popular culture, rooted right here in modern-day USA.

18. Ex Machina (2014) - Truly insidious sci-fi horror that will only become more terrifying as we progress further down the automation and robotics rabbit hole.

19. Inside Out (2015) - Delightful, insightful and soul-enriching for both young and old. It left an unforgettable mark on me like no Pixar movie has since I was a kid.

20. Nightcrawler (2014) - Diabolical look at the twisted capitalist ethos that pervades television media in this country. Go to your local news Facebook comments section if you think Nightcrawler is just fiction.

#JacksonvilleFL #Editorials #Opinion #PeoplesStruggles #Movies #2019 #MarvelCinematicUniverse

Dear Comrades:

We convey our warmest revolutionary greetings on the occasion of the 51st anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of the Philippines. Your achievements are many and we stand with you in your struggle to liberate the Philippines from the yoke of U.S. imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism. We are sure you will win many more victories in the coming period.

The Communist Party of the Philippines is in the leadership of a great people’s war that is inspiration to working and oppressed people everywhere. The people's democratic revolution, with socialist orientation, will triumph over reactionaries of all types.

We condemn the murderous regime of President Duterte and brutal wave repression that he has unleashed against the trade unions, mass organizations and all democratic and revolutionary forces. This repression is a sign of desperation. Like President Trump in the U.S., Duterte is a political representative of moribund system that is facing extinction.

We demand that the U.S. government end all aid to the reactionary and repressive government of the Philippines.

The people of the U.S. share a common enemy with the people of the Philippines: the U.S. monopoly capitalists. Every advance of the revolutionary movement in Philippines, like every advance of the revolutionary movement in U.S., brings closer the day of our common liberation.

Marx spoke long ago of working and oppressed people having nothing to lose but our chains. We place great value on the militant friendship between our organizations and our shared view that proletarian internationalism is a vital weapon in our common effort break the chains of monopoly capitalism that bind the peoples of our counties.

Long live the Communist Party of the Philippines! Long live the unity between the people of the U.S. and the people of the Philippines! Together we will win!

With communist greetings,

Freedom Road Socialist Organization

#USA #Philippines #Socialism #Editorials #PeoplesStruggles #frso #NPA #NewPeoplesArmy #Asia

This paper prepared collectively by the central leadership of Freedom Road Socialist Organization, and was presented by leading member of FRSO, Frank Chapman, at the Centennial Commemoration of the October Revolution, held in New York City, July 2017. The event was sponsored by People’s Response for International Solidarity and Mass Mobilization (PRISM) in cooperation with the U.S. member organizations of the International League of People’s Struggle (ILPS-US).

Introduction

As communists and revolutionaries, we welcome this opportunity to mark the 100th anniversary of Russia’s 1917 October Revolution, and to discuss its ongoing relevancy to the struggle today. The October Revolution was a world-changing event. At one stroke, it settled the question of whether another world was possible. Releasing one-sixth of the world from the chains of wage slavery, it smashed the myth that rule by the few was a sort of permanent condition, and, by successfully establishing proletarian political power, the October Revolution succeeded in opening the road to socialist construction. For the years that followed, the great achievements of the Soviet Union created a new and better way of life and would exercise a powerful effect on working and oppressed people around the globe. Not only did the October Revolution change the lives of the millions who lived in what would become the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), it changed the world revolutionary movement in a big way. Mao was later to say, that the October Revolution sent the “salvos of Marxism to China” where it was to become a powerful force in the movement for national liberation and socialism. In the U.S., the October Revolution came to exercise a magnetic pull on the revolutionaries in the socialist, labor and other people’s movements, contributing to the creation of a single, revolutionary Communist Party in the early 1920s, which became an important factor in the country’s political life.

How we can learn for the October Revolution in the U.S.

The Bolsheviks, under the leadership of Lenin, Stalin and others, creatively applied Marxism to the concrete conditions of Russia. In doing so they waged a consistent struggle against opportunism in the socialist and labor movements – internationally and in Russia itself. It was this struggle against opportunism that prepared the Bolsheviks to lead the working class in the seizure of power. The October Revolution was a qualitative leap, from one historical epoch to another – a period in which moribund capitalism is heading for extinction and where socialism is on the agenda. This process in turn gave rise to Leninism; Leninism being Marxism in the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution.Marxism-Leninism is a science, the science of revolution. It allows us to understand the laws that govern the processes at work in the world, and by understanding those laws, including those of how history develops, we can grasp the necessity and understand our freedom to change the world. Because Marxism-Leninism is a science, a science that is by necessity and fact, universal in character, we can take the lessons of the October Revolution and learn from the experience in a materialist way that helps us to advance our work in the U.S. Lenin made the point that the soul of Marxism was a concrete analysis of concrete conditions, so we cannot say that it something that is fixed, static, or immutable. Rather, Marxism-Leninism is and will be constantly enriched through cycles of practice, and the summation of that practice.We learn from the past, to guide our work in the present and to serve the future, which includes our revolutionary goals. We have no desire to be a historical reenactment society, and it should be obvious to all serious people that we cannot rely on analogies from Russian history to understand current conditions.

Conditions in the U.S. today

The U.S. today is empire in decline, beset by contradictions internal and external. Lenin stated imperialism was capitalism in its moribund stage, and it is arguable that the irrational bigot Donald Trump is a fitting political representative of a sick and dying system.Internationally, the U.S. faces a growing challenge for the national liberation movements and the national democratic governments, the socialist countries, and other imperialist rivals. Thus, the U.S. is increasing military spending, taking hostile actions against socialist Korea and Cuba, and is stepping up the U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq and other places. Within the U.S., the monopoly capitalists are perusing an agenda of austerity and reaction, which means an intensification of racist discrimination and national oppression, directed at African Americans, Chicanos and Latinos, Arab and Asian Americans, and indigenous peoples including Pacific Islanders. There is an attack on the standard of living of working people (including wages, health care, pensions, and perhaps most importantly – the right to have trade unions), attacks on the rights of women, and organized bigotry against Muslims. The point here is not do draw up a comprehensive list of the crimes being committed by the monopoly capitalist class, nor is it to chart the restructuring of the economy and political polarization that has unfolded since the great economic crisis of 2007, rather it is to provide a general picture of a wide-ranging war that the bourgeoisie is waging on the people of the U.S. and by extension, the peoples of the world.Fortunately, the war that the rulers of the U.S. are waging on working and oppressed people is not a one-sided one, and we are now in the midst of one of the greatest upsurges of struggle since the 1960s. In cities across the country, massive and militant protests have taken place against police crimes and there is a growing movement for community control of the police. There is a growing tide of anger over the anti-immigrant polices of the Trump administration. Trump’s attempted ‘Muslim ban’ drew hundreds of thousands of people into the streets and airports. It is estimated that about 20% of the people of the U.S have taken part in protests and demonstrations since Trump took office.Finally, there another point concerning objective conditions that bears mentioning: the communist movement in the U.S. is small. This does not negate the fact that the existing Marxist-Leninist organizations have not made big contributions to the people’s struggle. We have. Rather it is recognition of the reality that the U.S. is a large country with big working class, and for those of us who are revolutionaries, the task of building a new communist party remains on our agenda. At any given time, communists have three general tasks: to win all that can be one in the struggle while landing the strongest possible blows on the enemy; to raise the general level of consciousness and organization among the people; and to build communist organization win the advanced to Marxism-Leninism. As we carry out these tasks there is an incredible amount that we can learn from the October Revolution and the work by Russian communists to make it a reality.

The October Revolution and the need for a communist party

Given that no ruling class, be it the capitalists and landlords who ruled Russia in 1917, or the monopoly capitalists who rule the U.S. today, have ever left the stage of history voluntarily, working and oppressed people need to be organized to take political power by whatever means necessary. This is basic lesson of the October Revolution that is universally valid. Lenin made the following points about what is needed for revolution:

It is only when the “lower classes” do not want to live in the old way and the “upper classes” cannot carry on in the old way that the revolution can triumph. This truth can be expressed in other words: revolution is impossible without a nation-wide crisis (affecting both the exploited and the exploiters). It follows that, for a revolution to take place, it is essential, first, that a majority of the workers (or at least a majority of the class-conscious, thinking, and politically active workers) should fully realize that revolution is necessary, and that they should be prepared to die for it; second, that the ruling classes should be going through a governmental crisis, which draws even the most backward masses into politics… weakens the government, and makes it possible for the revolutionaries to rapidly overthrow it. (LCW Vol 31, p. 85)

To this we can add another precondition – the need for a Communist Party. The outstanding revolutionary leader, Mao Zedong put it like this:

If there is to be a revolution, there must be a revolutionary party. Without a revolutionary party, without a party built on the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary theory and in the Marxist-Leninist style, it is impossible to lead the working class and the broad masses of people in defeating imperialism and its running dogs. (MSW Vol 4, p. 284).

Our organization, Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), does not claim to be the party of the working class. We are a communist organization that is working to build a new communist party. The reason we do not claim to be the party is that we do not in any real way, to use Stalin’s formulation, encompass the advanced detachment of the working class. The problem is this: most advanced workers – the activists, organizers and leaders – are not revolutionaries or communists. The active of our class are in one place politically and the communists are in another. There is a gap. A separation. So, we need to fuse Marxism and the workers’ movement.

One of the great strengths of the communist movement in Russia is that it dealt with the problem of fusing Marxism and the workers’ movement in a practical and meaningful way. In 1899 Lenin posed the issue like this:

The separation of the working-class movement and socialism gave rise to weakness and underdevelopment in each: the theories of the socialists, unfused with the workers’ struggle, remained nothing more than utopias, good wishes that had no effect on real life; the working-class movement remained petty, fragmented, and did not acquire political significance, was not enlightened by the advanced science of its time. For this reason we see in all European countries a constantly growing urge to fuse socialism with the working-class movement in a single Social-Democratic movement. When this fusion takes place the class struggle of the workers becomes the conscious struggle of the proletariat to emancipate itself from exploitation by the propertied classes, it is evolved into a higher form of the socialist workers’ movement—the independent working-class Social-Democratic party. (LCW, Vol 4, p. 255)

In addition, Lenin and the Bolsheviks also developed measures to consolidate the party – organizationally, politically and ideologically – all of which we can learn from today.

Taken as a whole, conditions in the U.S. today are favorable for building communist organization. The large number people who self-identify as “socialists” in the wake of the Sanders presidential campaign is an indicator of this, as is the upsurge of struggle against police crimes, the large-scale protests against Trump, and the openness in the labor movement to class-struggle unionism. Also, coming off the economic crisis of 2007, and the restructuring of the economy that has taken place since then, there is a sense among many, especially among young people, that capitalism is a failed system.In all of the people’s struggles, the issue of “Who will lead?” is a basic one. Communist leadership is not preordained. It is earned, though our clarity of political line, organizational capacity and hard work. Communists need to be good at learning at the same time as we teach others. We cannot afford to criticize from the sidelines. We need to step up, and if we do not do so, opportunists of various stripes will be glad to do it for us.For example, objectively speaking, there is a movement against Trump. It began while he was on the campaign trial, and many of us marched against him and his agenda in the streets of Cleveland during the Republican National Convention. There was a huge outpouring of struggle, which was largely spontaneous, following his election, and we are now in a period where large-scale fightbacks can be organized against his more egregious attacks – such as the Muslim ban.In building the movement against Trump, we need to contend with reformists and other class forces, including those tied with the leadership of the Democratic Party, over the issue of who should lead. The fact is the only way we can lead this movement is by being the ranks of those who are the practical organizers of it – which means that we are among those calling the demonstrations, organizing the big protests, and are among the speakers putting out a clear line on the issues of day. To the extent that we can, we want the movement to target not only Trump, but also the monopoly capitalists who stand behind him.In this struggle, like every other popular movement, is critical for communists do more than work to raise the general level of consciousness among the masses of people, and we can’t be content with being the among the best of the activists either. In every battle that we engage in it is critical we are summing things up with the activists and leaders, helping them understand the laws the govern monopoly capitalism, and explaining the need for socialism. By doing this we grow the communist movement in this country, and lay the basis for creating a new communist party. It should also be noted that this work of building communist organization in the crucible of the day-to-day struggle helps to create the material basis for Marxist-Leninist organizations, to engage in joint practice, to engage in summation, and, where possible, to the achievement of principled organizational unity. Strategy for revolution in the U.S. and the national question

All revolutionary strategy is based on answering the question, “Who are our friends and who are our enemies?” This is impossible without understanding the specific features of U.S. society.

Our strategy for socialist revolution is constructing a united front against the monopoly capitalist class, under the leadership of the working class and its political party, with a strategic alliance between the multinational working class and the oppressed nationalities at the core of this united front.It is vital to understand the special needs and demands of entire nationalities within the borders of the U.S – African Americans, Chicanos and Latinos, Asian Americans, Native peoples including native Hawaiians, Arab Americans and others, are bound by the chains of national oppression. Racism in the U.S. carries the stench of the slave market. It maintains that Black people are inferior and that racial antagonisms are ahistorical and independent of the development class societies. We totally reject this notion.Lenin referred to pre-1917 Russia as a “prison house of nations,” and that is exactly what the U.S. is today, where racist discrimination and systematic inequality in all spheres of life – economic, political, and cultural – is the order of the day. One of the main reasons that Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik) was successful in October 1917 was that it championed the fight against national oppression, and it consistently stood for the national liberation and self-determination. There is a lot we can learn from this experience. Likewise, by waging a struggle against the opportunism and social chauvinism that characterized the Second International, Marxism-Leninism became the revolutionary theory, where the national question takes it rightful place, where is understood where it is in reality – as vital to the revolutionary process internationally and vital to understanding the core dynamics of change in a multi-national state like the U.S. We make the following point in our Statement on National Oppression, National Liberation and Socialist Revolution, which crystalizes our understanding of the importance of the fight against national oppression:

The struggle against imperialism and national oppression is a revolutionary struggle, for just as the people of Asia, Africa and Latin America require revolutionary struggles to overthrow colonialism and liberate their countries, so will it take a revolutionary struggle in the United States to gain full equality for oppressed nationalities. Since it is the system of imperialism that profits from and causes national oppression, only the overthrow of this system can end national oppression.

Two things are needed to develop the strategic alliance. First, we need to build the African American, Chicano, and other oppressed nationality movements, and to promote working class leadership with in those movements. Workers from oppressed nations in the trade union movement bring with them the special demands of their national liberation movements. We fight for the trade union movement to stand in unconditional solidarity with the oppressed.

Second, as we build the multinational working class movement, we need to ensure that the fight against racist discrimination, and for consistent democracy, and full equality for the oppressed is at the core of our agenda. For example, in recent years the struggle against police crimes has exploded in Black community. In a number of places this struggle has expanded to encompass the fight for community control of police. In addition to building these fights, everything possible should be done to get the labor movement to support them. Or to take another example, we have worked hard to build the immigrant rights movement, to resist deportations and to build the fight for legalization for all. In the cities where we do this, we have worked hard to draw in the labor movement. The work to build this strategic alliance also requires carrying out a set of interrelated and at times difficult tasks. White workers, especially those who are active and forward-looking, have the responsibility to fight white chauvinism or racism among whites and play an active role in building the fight against all manifestations of national oppression. Racial prejudice is not the primary cause of national oppression. It is the consequence, the rationalization and justification of national oppression.

Revolutionary-minded oppressed nationality workers have the responsibly to oppose narrow nationalism among workers of their own nationality.

Building a united front against monopoly capitalism, building communist organization with the aim of constructing a Leninist party of a new type, or building a strategic alliance are all tasks that can be carried out now. All the basic contradictions of imperialism are sharpening and there is a real urgency to do what must be done.

Proletarian Internationalism

The monopoly capitalists who rule the U.S. also rule an empire that extends around the world. They are parasites and exploiters who rob vast swaths of the globe – hundreds of millions of people – of their labor, land and natural resources. They have built a military machine of an unprecedented scale in world history and the U.S. is waging continuous wars, from the Philippines to Iraq. They have placed Puerto Rico under colonial rule and block its path to independence. And they make the Zionist occupation of Palestine possible. The people of the U.S. and peoples of world have something in common, a common enemy. Every blow that the people of the U.S. land on our rulers is good for people everywhere, and vice versa, and this is the material basis for proletarian internationalism, for the unity of the working class and for oppressed nations on a world scale.Living in the center of an imperialist empire, revolutionaries have a special responsibility to oppose the wars of our ‘own’ rulers and extend support to the oppressed. As we do so there is a great deal that we can learn from the determined fight that the Russian communists waged against the social chauvinists, i.e. those who were socialist in words, but “great nation chauvinists” in deed. As we build the anti-war movement we constantly encounter those who what to join the in demonization of the national liberation movements. We cannot let these forces set the terms of the movement.Along a similar vein, we can never accept the imperialists’ attempts to criminalize the national liberation movements with their slanders of terrorism or narco-terrorism, and we oppose their laws that seek to outlaw international solidary.The future is brightThe October Revolution opened the road to a new stage in human history that shows what our class can do – that we can “lose our chains.” Revolutionaries in the U.S. have a big job and we are well served by using the science of Marxism-Leninism and learning from advanced experience. Monopoly capitalism is a failed, criminal system that had a beginning and that will surely have an end. Its gravediggers are already on the scene. And while we do not know the year or month – we are certain the U.S. will have its October.

#SovietUnion #Socialism #Editorials #OctoberRevolution

The cause of peace and justice suffered a blow in 2016 with the election of Donald Trump. Trade unions, Black community groups, immigrant right organizations, student activists and others joined a surge of protest designed to make sure that ‘business as usual’ would be impossible for Republican bigots taking office, while criticizing disappointing corporate Democratic Party politicians for their shortcomings. With the 2018 midterm elections quickly approaching, it is important for everyone to have a good analysis and plan of action.

There are four important questions to answer about elections. Is there a special danger? Is there a major war or economic crisis to consider? Is the election important to the oppressed nationality movements combating racism? Is there a political option independent from the Republican or Democratic Parties (which both represent different interests of the 1%)? Answering these questions can help guide groups of people looking for the best outcome from the elections, although the real change our world needs will come from the people's movements and not the ballot box. The rich and powerful will never let us simply vote their whole rotten system out, but we can strike blows against them, win important fights and build our righteous causes.

Activists in every part of the country should analyze their own conditions and determine the best course of action. Elections are often about finding contradictions in the political system of the rich and powerful and highlighting them in order to win battles, raise political consciousness, or build involvement. Progressive people will have opportunities this November to weaken Trump's power by turning over Congress (getting a non-Republican majority). The fewer friends Trump has in the House and Senate, the better. Often this will mean voting against Republicans. The amount of time and effort movements should spend getting people to vote will vary depending on the particular electoral contest. A few races throughout the country will see progressive candidates mount strong campaigns.

Some states, like Minnesota, Illinois and Wisconsin, will have the opportunity to defeat major anti-labor politicians at the ballot. It's very important for the labor movement to stop politicians who are looking to further damage trade unions by spreading ‘right to work’ legislation and other backward policies, like ending the right of public employees to collectively bargain. In some of these battlegrounds, it might be necessary to spend time and effort making sure that the worst enemy of the working class loses.

Some areas will have the chance to push back against the war being waged by bigoted politicians on immigrants, oppressed nationalities, women and LGBTQ people. This is especially true for states facing attempts to criminalize Muslims and other immigrants, or states where politicians are trying to roll back reproductive rights while bashing women or LGBTQ folks. Some areas can fight cuts to social programs and even stop the empowerment of far-right leaders and organizations, for example, in the South.

At the end of November, no matter the outcome, there will still be a world a world to win for those willing to fight for it. Organizers should work to win the important battles at the ballot box while remembering that real hope is in the people's struggle and change is won in the streets, neighborhoods and workplaces – whenever we fight greedy bosses, organize to stop police crimes, protest on campus, and elevate the political understanding of everyone around us. We teach best with our actions (and people learn best by doing) so organizers must fight all the harder through November and beyond for a society that values people over profits.

#UnitedStates #Elections #Editorials #Socialism #DonaldTrump

Eight years ago, on Sept. 24, 2010, more than 70 FBI agents took part in a series of coordinated raids that were aimed at activists of the anti-war and international solidarity movements, and also members of Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO). In a bogus investigation of “material support of terrorism” charges, seven houses and an office in Minneapolis and Chicago were raided. While the raids were underway, FBI agents approached and attempted to intimidate activists in Michigan, California, North Carolina and Wisconsin.

Also on that day, the FBI delivered grand jury subpoenas to many of the raided activists. More activists were served with subpoenas in the following weeks; a total of 23 people were commanded to appear before a Chicago grand jury – and the government threatened jail for those who refused. The charge of material support of terrorism carries 15 years in prison per count, and federal prosecutors repeatedly stated that they intended to indict “multiple people on multiple charges.”

After these raids, the attacks kept on coming. On May 17, 2011, the home of a longtime leader of the Chicano liberation movement, Carlos Montes, was hit with a no-knock raid in Los Angeles. Montes was jailed, hit with trumped up weapons charges, and faced 22 years in prison. Then on Oct. 22, 2013, Homeland Security arrested the well-respected Chicago Palestinian American leader Rasmea Odeh, who stared down a decade in prison as well as deportation.

Court documents show that all these attacks by the federal government were linked and that they stemmed for a common ‘investigation’ that involved the same cast of FBI agents, police and sheriffs working with the FBI, Joint Terrorism Task Forces, and federal prosecutors. Taken as a whole, this repression ranks as one of the largest attacks launched against progressive and left movement since the 1970s.

In the end it was the wall of resistance and an outpouring of popular support that defeated and blunted these assaults on the right to speak out and organize. Not one of those called to testify in front of the grand jury did so. In that refusal, the grand jury resisters put principal and doing the right thing above their freedom. Prosecutors said they were looking for someone “inside” FRSO to testify in a trial. Their threats yielded them no one. Carlos Montes and Rasmea Odeh waged heroic courtroom battles against the false charges leveled against them. The case of Carlos ended with a victory. In court, Rasmea put the Israeli occupation on trial for its crimes and beat the jail time – but sadly was deported to Jordan, where she continues her activism.

Unions representing millions of workers, countless progressive organizations and individuals, and even politicians stood up to this campaign of repression. Rallies took place in more than 100 cities across the world. Those actions, hard work, and a sound legal strategy, explains why this resistance was met with success.

Sometimes victories can be assessed by what does not happen. FBI documents, including the Justice Department’s “interrogation questions for FRSO members,” affidavits for search warrants, and defense lawyer conversations with federal prosecutors, indicate that the government planned, at least in part, to hold an anti-communist trial for FRSO leaders and supporters. In so doing they aimed to criminalize the very idea of international solidarity. Yet here we are, eight years later, and FRSO and other subpoenaed activists are still building the movements against Trump, for justice and are making contributions to the people’s struggle.

The U.S. is not the free country it claims to be. For decades the U.S. government has been trying to criminalize organizations in other countries that fight for national and social liberation – like the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Communist Party of the Philippines, or the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). It is wrong to call those who fight for freedom ‘terrorists,’ and it is unacceptable for the government to make it a crime for people to point this out.

In the years ahead, it is vital that we resist each and every attack on our democratic rights and that we stand with those facing repression.

The powers that be are not going to transform themselves. Exploiters and oppressors are true to their nature, and repression is what they do. We are activists and we are certain that change will come. And we are revolutionaries and socialists – we are certain this system cannot last.

#UnitedStates #AntiwarMovement #InJusticeSystem #Editorials #PeoplesStruggles #FreedomRoadSocialistOrganization #September24FBIRaids #AntiWar23 #FBIRepression #GrandJuries #PoliticalRepression

Less than 12 hours after winning the Florida Republican nomination for governor, right-wing congressman Ron DeSantis went on Fox News and launched a racist attack on his opponent, Andrew Gillum.

Speaking to Fox News host Sandra Smith about Gillum on the morning of August 29, DeSantis said, “The last thing we need to do is to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist agenda with huge tax increases and bankrupting the state.”

Gillum, the mayor of Tallahassee, is the first African American to run for governor of Florida. He clinched the Democratic nomination in a major upset victory over party establishment favorites, all of whom were either millionaires or billionaires. Endorsed by self-described ‘democratic socialist’ senator Bernie Sanders, Gillum won out with a platform calling for Medicare for All, a $15 per hour minimum wage, higher taxes on corporations, and reforming the state’s criminal injustice system.

DeSantis’ racist smear came on the heels of President Donald Trump’s own attacks on Gillum via Twitter, calling him a “failed socialist mayor.” Trump endorsed DeSantis, a frequent Fox News contributor, early in the primary, which allowed the rabidly right-wing congressman to easily defeat Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam for the GOP nomination.

Racists have a long history in the U.S. of comparing African Americans to ‘monkeys’ or ‘apes’ dating back to the beginning of the slave trade. Even after the civil war, propaganda produced by white chauvinists and the Ku Klux Klan often portrayed Black people as primates to dehumanize them. Most recently, TV personality Roseanne Barr saw her re-launched show cancelled after comparing Valerie Jarrett, an African American woman who advised former president Barack Obama, to ‘apes’.

DeSantis’ smear drew widespread outrage across the country. Even Sandra Smith went on the defensive and claimed Fox News didn’t condone DeSantis’ comments – laughable for anyone familiar with the network’s regular programming.

Gillum accurately clocked both Trump and DeSantis’ attacks on him, saying on CNN that they were “scraping from the bottom of the barrel” and doing “the bidding of big business and big lobbyists.”

“Frankly, it doesn’t matter if you’re in the rural panhandle of Florida, or in the I-4 corridor, or the very populous and very diverse south Florida – if you’re working multiple jobs to make ends meet, you’re not happy,” continued Gillum. “If you’re worried about your next illness driving you into bankruptcy, you’re uncertain about that and uneasy. If you see the toxic algae blooms that are flowing out the eastside and westside of this state, killing off sea life and also impacting our quality of life, you’re also pretty upset about that. What my candidacy offered was basically a foil for all those issues, to say we can talk about those things and give our voters something to vote for, and not just against.”

Gillum pulled together a coalition of grassroots activists and organizers across the state to win the Democratic primary. Activists in Jacksonville, Tampa Bay, Tallahassee, Gainesville, Orlando, Miami and elsewhere ran an insurgent campaign on a fraction of the money possessed by his wealthy opponents. They won by taking Gillum’s platform, which speaks to the real needs of Florida’s working class, to the people. Like the GOP, the Democratic Party is also a party of big business with a long history of running bankers and 1% politicians for governor in Florida. But Gillum’s upset victory – and especially the mass movement behind it – has made DeSantis and the particular class interests he serves very nervous.

It’s worth quoting DeSantis’ remarks at some length because they reveal something important about racist discrimination in the U.S. and whose interest it promotes. DeSantis called Gillum “an articulate spokesman for these far left views,” and “a charismatic candidate.” But he continued, “I watched those Democrat debates and none of that is my cup of tea, but he performed better than the other people there, so we’ve got to work hard so that we continue Florida going in a good direction. Let’s build off the success we’ve had with Governor Scott. The last thing we need to do is to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist agenda with huge tax increases and bankrupting the state. That is not going to work. That’s not going to be good for Florida.”

With remarkable candor, DeSantis acknowledges the unique challenge that Gillum and his message poses to the right-wing business interests in Florida. Unlike the centrist, pro-business millionaires and billionaires who ran against him in the Democratic primary, Gillum’s message spoke to the real issues faced by Florida’s working class – low wages, lack of health care, unaffordable education, and mass incarceration. It’s a message that can unite the state’s working-class majority of all nationalities in November and defeat the Republican nominee, which hasn’t happened since 1994.

When DeSantis refers to “the success we’ve had with Governor Scott,” the ‘we’ he’s talking about are the rich, big business, and corporations. Florida’s ruling capitalist class has done quite well under Governor Rick Scott, who has delivered massive profits, deep tax cuts, weakened unions, fewer protections for workers and the environment, and crumbling infrastructure. Our state’s working class, on the other hand, has seen their lives get worse in Scott’s eight-year term. Looking to Trump for inspiration, DeSantis wants to deepen Scott’s attacks on African Americans, Latinos, public education and the entire working class on behalf of the ruling class.

Since corporate shills like DeSantis can’t attract much mass support to their big business agenda, they fall back on racism and bigotry to divide working people and hold down the oppressed. Historically, the ruling class in the U.S. drums up racist sentiments to re-direct the anger of many white workers away from their destructive policies and towards oppressed people. Trump and DeSantis have continued this tried-and-true divide-and-conquer tactic, especially by targeting immigrants and Muslims.

Solidarity between workers of all nationalities and genders is the strongest weapon our class has to fight for our interests and win. Racist discrimination is a feature of U.S. society and it is a tool of the bosses, big business and the ruling class that is used to exploit and oppress entire nations. It creates real inequalities between whites and other nationalities in terms of income, housing, and more. With this injustice as its base, racism erodes solidarity. It’s used to break white workers away from their natural allies – African Americans, Latinos and workers of other nationalities – and weaken the entire working class in the process.

Here we saw DeSantis using blatant racism to attack a candidate whose message has broad appeal to Florida’s working class. He knows the Florida GOP’s 1% policies cannot compete with Gillum’s platform to raise wages, provide health care to everyone, stop mass incarceration, and more. So he falls back on racist attacks on Gillum aimed at breaking off white supporters.

Even DeSantis’ redbaiting of Gillum, who is not and has not called himself a socialist, echoes Klan-era propaganda, which targeted both socialists and African Americans alike. Many of the authors of the Taft-Hartley Act, and the Right to Work laws which significantly weakened unions, supported the Klan and couched their assault on unions in terms of fighting ‘socialism.’ DeSantis follows in this long, disgraceful line of Southern right-wing attack dogs.

Florida’s working class has every reason to oppose DeSantis’ racist attacks on Gillum and fight for a better way of life. Eight years of Scott’s policies have ravaged our schools, our unions, our communities and our lives. To confront these challenges, the community organizers and activists whose work in Florida paved the way for Gillum’s remarkable victory must continue building fighting unions and mass people’s movements – and that means rejecting DeSantis and Trump’s racist agenda.

#JacksonvilleFL #InJusticeSystem #Labor #OppressedNationalities #US #Editorials #AfricanAmerican #Antiracism #Elections #AndrewGillum #RonDeSantis #2018FloridaGovernorElection #ElectoralPolitics

Chelsea Manning is a hero of mine. Not because she’s Trans but because she sacrificed her freedom and exposed the uglier sides of the war on terror. She was deeply in the closet but very aware of her transness and despite this she exposed the crimes of the U.S. war machine knowing she could be arrested and imprisoned for the rest of her life in a men’s prison.

And when we talk about Chelsea Manning and her struggles I have to reflect on the wider dynamics of mental health issues in the LGBT communities and in the Trans community in gender non-conforming communities in particular.

In my own life, I've known four women who killed themselves three of them were Trans. Two years ago, when a prominent Trans activist, friend and former coworker took her own life I felt myself going into a deep depression. I was drinking to numb myself. I was eating to forget.

Nearing 50 years old I realized I had no higher education. I'm a climbing guide and part-time day laborer on a construction site. Being a climbing guide is cool but I'm hardly an exceptional one. I started climbing when I was 38 years old. Far past any kind of peak that your average climbers going to have. And the lack of testosterone in my body means I often find myself taking a long time to recover from injuries. I often times have a lower level of energy than I think I should at my age.

I now work two, sometimes three jobs, often six or seven days a week. I work three jobs to keep myself busy, keep myself distracted but also because I almost lost my apartment due to failure to pay taxes. The state threatened to seize my apartment and start foreclosure procedures unless I signed a contract that requires me to work day after day in heat and cold, through injury and exhaustion to pay my bills. I am not alone.

The threat of foreclosure. Suicides in my community. My taste for self-destructive behaviors nearly dragged me down to a place with no return. I thought, no one’s really going to miss me. I’ve tried my best; I’ve been out for nearly 30 years and I am bone tired. Maybe I can be done and just rest now. And I feel such shame that I struggle to hold my shit together. That I can’t take care of my basic needs. That because of past abuse, transphobia, violence trauma and PTSD I am still a fucking hot mess.

I came out in 1989. My coming out was layered. I came out as dyke. I came out as a woman of Trans experience and I came out as leftist. These identities were and are intertwined within me. The AIDS crisis. Attacks on abortion clinics. Homophobia and transphobia in my home and community. The racist murder of Black men like Yusef Hawkins in Bensonhurst Brooklyn. These weren’t abstract struggles that I latched onto as I adopted the identity of a Trans social justice warrior. I felt this was a vision of a new me as I expressed my corner gender identity.

It was hard. It was so scary and I felt so alone. I had lost my community. The blue collar south Brooklyn Irish Italian stoops and street corners family-owned bars and broken down parks I grew up in were gone for me. I was effectively homeless at times – without job skills, without an education.

I remember being at Brooklyn College's library in early 1990s trying to learn about the French Revolution, feminism and Trans stuff for the first time ever, and honestly, this was also the first time I was trying to read – like really read (which says some stuff about my class education background).

And that’s when I learned about transphobia in feminism and it was this new pain and sadness. Another weight dragging me down. Then coming out and meeting a young stone butch who'd already been to some regional East Coast lesbian folk events that barred Trans women. Then trying to find out if it was okay for me to go to Lesbian Avengers meetings or WHAM (Women's Health Action Mobilization) meetings or bookstores and parties and social events. In sum I didn’t know if I was allowed to go anywhere in a community I desperately wanted to be a part of.

So when we talk about TERFs [trans-exclusionary radical feminists] today we need understand how transphobia was and is woven into our legacies. We need to understand the role of transphobia in Second Wave feminism, in much of the new left, in much of the lesbian and gay community.

But it was also such an important time in our community’s struggles. In particular AIDS. And in 1991 there was an AIDS forum held in New York where there were doctors, intellectuals, political operatives, and members of the gay community who would come together to discuss the state of the AIDS crisis. We were ten years into the crisis and 150,000 gay men – well side note here, they weren't all gay men, many of them, tens of thousands of them were Trans women – died. This is undocumented, this is not in the history books, but this is a fact 150,000 had died, and hundreds of thousands more were affected.

And the president of the U.S. refused to utter the word AIDS in public. We were year 12 into the third presidential term of right-wing Christian fascist Republicans running the government. And we were deep in the AIDS crisis.

At this meeting people spoke with absolute seriousness about fundraising strategies, medical developments and voting the Republicans out of office. For sure. But despite the urgency that everyone in the room felt it wasn't until Larry Kramer, the founder of the Gay Men's Health Crisis and the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP), spoke that I think it was clarified what was truly happening in America. Larry Kramer was the last speaker. After they announced his name he took a long pause, perhaps thinking of the 18 of his closest friends who had already died of AIDS.

And then he said, “Plague. We are in the middle of a fucking plague, 40 million infected people is a fucking plague, and nobody acts as if it is. Nobody in this hospital, nobody in this city, nobody in this world. 40 million people is a fucking plague. Nobody knows what to do next. Nobody knows what to do next.”

It's without a doubt that if it wasn't for the sacrifices of a generation of gay men who died of the AIDS crisis that we wouldn't be all sitting in this room today. It is without a doubt that if it wasn’t for the Trans women, cis women and men and Trans men who shut down Saint Patrick’s cathedral, broke into the FDA building and stole vital incriminating files, got arrested, protested, and staged die-ins that I would be here today.

All of the political activism that emerged in the 1990s and in the 2000s are rooted in the second wave of our modern Civil Rights Movement and that movement is fundamentally linked to our sexual liberation or need for healthcare and our willingness to put our bodies on the line and do whatever it takes direct up and to fight AIDS.

Today, in the first six months of 2018, more than ten Trans women have been murdered. Each year we mourn our dead in November on the Trans Day Of Remembrance. And it feels insufficient. Nobody knows what to do except mourn the dead.

It feels like we are still under siege and we are one Craig’s List date away from being dead. We are one Tinder date away from being dead. One paycheck away from being homeless. We are one more heartbreak away from breaking. Each year we lose so many to suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, depression and feeling lost and without love. I know these feelingss they often nip at me at night after I turn off the lights before I fall asleep.

After Chelsea Manning announced on Twitter that she was thinking of taking her own life, the Maryland police went to her home to do an alleged ‘wellness check.’ Four cops broke into her apartment, with their guns unholstered, in Bethesda, Maryland. Four cops. Guns drawn. Three of them were female officers. It’s on video. You can watch it. It is without a doubt that they were looking to kill her. Her freedom is a spit in the eye to imperialism and you can draw your own conclusions about the motivations of four Maryland police officers who are called to do a wellness check. What their values and morality are. Likely, it’s the same values as ICE separating families and disappearing immigrants. It’s the same ICE that killed Roxana Hernández, a Honduran Trans woman who died after five days in U.S. custody in facilities notorious for their freezing temperatures. Like the morality of the Supreme Court who side with the bigoted baker in Colorado. Let’s be clear – even Caitlyn Jenner now understands the stakes. But what do we do next?

And there is a through line of transphobia in our communities that needs to be understood. It leaves Trans women particularly, Trans women of color vulnerable to violence, unemployment, depression and drug addiction. And suicide. The LGBTQ communities are stratified by race and class. It’s not simply that cops and corporations march at Pride. It’s that across the U.S., in small towns and cities, our Trans communities are being left to fend for ourselves without any support save charity. Without any struggle except lighting a candle at a Trans Day of Remembreace event in November and without any love but a “you look fabulous” when we pass each other on the street. We need more. We need material support and survival institutions. We desperately need access to mental health care that is gender affirming. We need jobs and job training. And we need fighting organizations.

Our responses are going to be varied. There needs to be some trial and error. We need to stand together and we need to ready ourselves for what may be coming but we cannot throw out empathy and love for the entire LGBTQ community. We’ve been through so much. We have to take care of each other. Some of us are going to go all in on the midterm elections. Some may want to consider building the next ACT UP. I'm long past the point of suggesting that I know the answers to any of this but I really want to argue the fact that we need a multi-tactical approach to dealing with the crisis that we are facing today. And having a multi-tactical approach means not having all our eggs in one basket.

I don’t want to lose any more of my community. Thank you.

This article is a modified version of a speech given at the “State of Trans 2018” Kingston LGBTQ Center in Kingston, NY in early June.

#NewYork #NewYorkNY #LGBTQ #Editorials #queerLiberation #LGBTQRights #transgender #workingPoor

To mark the April 22, 1870 birthday of Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, Fight Back News Service is circulating the following excerpt from his 1918 book, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky.

Can There Be Equality Between the Exploited and the Exploiter?

Kautsky argues as follows:

(1) “The exploiters have always formed only a small minority of the population” (p. 14 of Kautsky’s pamphlet).

This is indisputably true. Taking this as the starting point, what should be the argument? One may argue in a Marxist, a socialist way. In which case one would proceed from the relation between the exploited and the exploiters. Or one may argue in a liberal, a bourgeois-democratic way. And in that case one would proceed from the relation between the majority and the minority.

If we argue in a Marxist way, we must say: the exploiters inevitably transform the state (and we are speaking of democracy, i.e., one of the forms of the state) into an instrument of the rule of their class, the exploiters, over the exploited. Hence, as long as there are exploiters who rule the majority, the exploited, the democratic state must inevitably be a democracy for the exploiters. A state of the exploited must fundamentally differ from such a state; it must be a democracy for the exploited, “and a means of suppressing the exploiters; and the suppression of a class means inequality for that class, its exclusion from “democracy”.

If we argue in a liberal way, we must say: the majority decides, the minority submits. Those who do not submit are punished. That is all. Nothing need be said about the class character of the state in general, or of “pure democracy” in particular, because it is irrelevant; for a majority is a majority and a minority is a minority. A pound of flesh is a pound of flesh, and that is all there is to it.

And this is exactly how Kautsky argues.

(2) “Why should the rule of the proletariat assume, and necessarily assume, a form which is incompatible with democracy?” (P. 21). Then follows a very detailed and a very verbose explanation, backed by a quotation from Marx and the election figures of the Paris Commune, to the effect that the proletariat is in the majority. The conclusion is: “A regime which is so strongly rooted in the people has not the slightest reason for encroaching upon democracy. It cannot always dispense with violence in cases when violence is employed to suppress democracy. Violence can only be met with violence. But a regime which knows that it has popular backing will employ violence only to protect democracy and not to destroy it. It would be simply suicidal if it attempted to do away with its most reliable basis—universal suffrage, that deep source of mighty moral authority” (p. 22).

As you see, the relation between the exploited and the exploiters has vanished in Kautsky’s argument. All that remains is majority in general, minority in general, democracy in general, the “pure democracy” with which we are already familiar.

And all this, mark you, is said apropos of the Paris Commune! To make things clearer I shall quote Marx and Engels to show what they said on the subject of dictatorship apropos of the Paris Commune:

Marx: “. . . When the workers replace the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie by their revolutionary dictatorship . . . to break down the resistance of the bourgeoisie . . . the workers invest the state with a revolutionary and transitional form . . .”

Engels: “. . . And the victorious party” (in a revolution) “must maintain its rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionaries. Would the Paris Commune have lasted more than a day if it had not used the authority of the armed people against the bourgeoisie? Cannot we, on the contrary, blame it for having made too little use of that authority? . . .”]

Engels: “As, therefore, the state is only a transitional institution which is used in the struggle, in the revolution, to hold down one’s adversaries by force, it is sheer nonsense to talk of a ‘free people’s state’; so long as the proletariat still needs the state, it does not need it in the interests of freedom but in order to hold down its adversaries, and as soon as it becomes possible to speak of freedom the state as such ceases to exist. . . .”

Kautsky is as far removed from Marx and Engels as heaven is from earth, as a liberal from a proletarian revolutionary. The pure democracy and simple “democracy” that Kautsky talks about is merely a paraphrase of the “free people’s state”, i.e., sheer nonsense. Kautsky, with the learned air of a most learned armchair fool, or with the innocent air of a ten-year-old schoolgirl, asks: Why do we need a dictatorship when we have a majority? And Marx and Engels explain:

—to break down the resistance of the bourgeoisie;

—to inspire the reactionaries with fear;

—to maintain the authority of the armed people against the bourgeoisie;

—that the proletariat may forcibly hold down its adversaries.

Kautsky does not understand these explanations. Infatuated with the “purity” of democracy, blind to its bourgeois character, he “consistently” urges that the majority, since it is the majority, need not “break down the resistance” of the minority, nor “forcibly hold it down”—it is sufficient to suppress cases of infringement of democracy. Infatuated with the “purity” of democracy, Kautsky inadvertently commits the same little error that all bourgeois democrats always commit, namely, he takes formal equality (which is nothing but a fraud and hypocrisy under capitalism) for actual equality! Quite a trifle!

The exploiter and the exploited cannot be equal.

This truth, however unpleasant it may be to Kautsky, nevertheless forms the essence of socialism.

Another truth: there can be no real, actual equality until all possibility of the exploitation of one class by another has been totally destroyed.

The exploiters can be defeated at one stroke in the event of a successful uprising at the centre, or of a revolt in the army. But except in very rare and special cases, the exploiters cannot be destroyed at one stroke. It is impossible to expropriate all the landowners and capitalists of any big country at one stroke. Furthermore, expropriation alone, as a legal or political act, does not settle the matter by a long chalk, because it is necessary to depose the landowners and capitalists in actual fact, to replace their management of the factories and estates by a different management, workers’ management, in actual fact. There can be no equality between the exploiters—who for many generations have been better off because of their education, conditions of wealthy life, and habits—and the exploited, the majority of whom even in the most advanced and most democratic bourgeois republics are downtrodden, backward, ignorant, intimidated and disunited. For a long time after the revolution the exploiters inevitably continue to retain a number of great practical advantages: they still have money (since it is impossible to abolish money all at once); some movable property—often fairly considerable; they still have various connections, habits of organisation and management; knowledge of all the “secrets” (customs, methods, means and possibilities) of management; superior education; close connections with the higher technical personnel (who live and think like the bourgeoisie); incomparably greater experience in the art of war (this is very important), and so on and so forth.

If the exploiters are defeated in one country only—and this, of course, is typical, since a simultaneous revolution in a number of countries is a rare exception—they still remain stronger than the exploited, for the international connections of the exploiters are enormous. That a section of the exploited from the least advanced middle-peasant, artisan and similar groups of the population may, and indeed does, follow the exploiters has been proved by all revolutions, including the Commune (for there were also proletarians among the Versailles troops, which the most learned Kautsky has “forgotten”).

In these circumstances, to assume that in a revolution which is at all profound and serious the issue is decided simply by the relation between the majority and the minority is the acme of stupidity, the silliest prejudice of a common liberal, an attempt to deceive the people by concealing from them a well-established historical truth. This historical truth is that in every profound revolution, the prolonged, stubborn and desperate resistance of the exploiters, who for a number of years retain important practical advantages over the exploited, is the rule. Never—except in the sentimental fantasies of the sentimental fool Kautsky—will the exploiters submit to the decision of the exploited majority without trying to make use of their advantages in a last desperate battle, or series of battles.

The transition from capitalism to communism takes an entire historical epoch. Until this epoch is over, the exploiters inevitably cherish the hope of restoration, and this hope turns into attempts at restoration. After their first serious defeat, the overthrown exploiters—who had not expected their overthrow, never believed it possible, never conceded the thought of it—throw themselves with energy grown tenfold, with furious passion and hatred grown a hundredfold, into the battle for the recovery of the “paradise”, of which they were deprived, on behalf of their families, who had been leading such a sweet and easy life and whom now the “common herd” is condemning to ruin and destitution (or to “common” labour . . .). In the train of the capitalist exploiters follow the wide sections of the petty bourgeoisie, with regard to whom decades of historical experience of all countries testify that they vacillate and hesitate, one day marching behind the proletariat and the next day taking fright at the difficulties of the revolution; that they become panic-stricken at the first defeat or semi defeat of the workers, grow nervous, run about aimlessly, snivel, and rush from one camp into the other—just like our Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries.

In these circumstances, in an epoch of desperately acute war, when history presents the question of whether age-old and thousand-year-old privileges are to be or not to be–at such a time to talk about majority and minority, about pure democracy, about dictatorship being unnecessary and about equality between the exploiter and the exploited! What infinite stupidity and abysmal philistinism are needed for this!

However, during the decades of comparatively “peaceful” capitalism between 1871 and 1914, the Augean stables of philistinism, imbecility, and apostasy accumulated in the socialist parties which were adapting themselves to opportunism. . . .

\* *

*

The reader will probably have noticed that Kautsky, in the passage from his pamphlet quoted above, speaks of an attempt to encroach upon universal suffrage (calling it, by the way, a deep source of mighty moral authority, whereas Engels, apropos of the same Paris Commune and the same question of dictatorship, spoke of the authority of the armed people against the bourgeoisie—a very characteristic difference between the philistine’s and the revolutionary’s views on “authority” . . .).

It should be observed that the question of depriving the exploiters of the franchise is a purely Russian question, and not a question of the dictatorship of the proletariat in general. Had Kautsky, casting aside hypocrisy, entitled his pamphlet Against the Bolsheviks, the title would have corresponded to the contents of the pamphlet, and Kautsky would have been justified in speaking bluntly about the franchise. But Kautsky wanted to come out primarily as a “theoretician”. He called his pamphlet The Dictatorship of the Proletariat—in general. He speaks about the Soviets and about Russia specifically only in the second part of the pamphlet, beginning with the sixth paragraph. The subject dealt with in the first part (from which I took the quotation) is democracy and dictatorship in general. In speaking about the franchise, Kautsky betrayed himself as an opponent of the Bolsheviks, who does not care a brass farthing for theory. For theory, i.e., the reasoning about the general (and not the nationally specific) class foundations of democracy and dictatorship, ought to deal not with a special question, such as the franchise, but with the general question of whether democracy can be preserved for the rich, for the exploiters in the historical period of the overthrow of the exploiters and the replacement of their state by the state of the exploited.

That is the way, the only way, a theoretician can present the question.

We know the example of the Paris Commune, we know all that was said by the founders of Marxism in connection with it and in reference to it. On the basis of this material I examined, for instance, the question of democracy and dictatorship in my pamphlet, The State and Revolution, written before the October Revolution. I did not say anything at all about restricting the franchise. And it must be said now that the question of restricting the franchise is a nationally specific and not a general question of the dictatorship. One must approach the question of restricting the franchise by studying the specific conditions of the Russian revolution and the specific path of its development. This will be done later on in this pamphlet. It would be a mistake, however, to guarantee in advance that the impending proletarian revolutions in Europe will all, or the majority of them, be necessarily accompanied by restriction of the franchise for the bourgeoisie. It may be so. After the war and the experience of the Russian revolution it probably will be so; but it is not absolutely necessary for the exercise of the dictatorship, it is not an indispensable characteristic of the logical concept “dictatorship”, it does not enter as an indispensable condition in the historical and class concept “dictatorship”.

The indispensable characteristic, the necessary condition of dictatorship is the forcible suppression of the exploiters as a class, and, consequently, the infringement of “pure democracy”, i.e., of equality and freedom, in regard to that class.

This is the way, the only way, the question can be put theoretically. And by failing to put the question thus, Kautsky has shown that he opposes the Bolsheviks not as a theoretician, but as a sycophant of the opportunists and the bourgeoisie.

In which countries, and given what national features of capitalism, democracy for the exploiters will be in one or another form restricted (wholly or in part), infringed upon, is a question of the specific national features of this or that capitalism, of this or that revolution. The theoretical question is different: Is the dictatorship of the proletariat possible without infringing democracy in relation to the exploiting class?

It is precisely this question, the only theoretically important and essential one, that Kautsky has evaded. He has quoted all sorts of passages from Marx and Engels, except those which bear on this question, and which I quoted above.

Kautsky talks about anything you like, about everything that is acceptable to liberals and bourgeois democrats and does not go beyond their circle of ideas, but he does not talk about the main thing, namely, the fact that the proletariat cannot achieve victory without breaking the resistance of the bourgeoisie, without forcibly suppressing its adversaries, and that, where there is “forcible suppression”, where there is no “freedom”, there is, of course, no democracy.

This Kautsky has not understood.

#UnitedStates #Culture #Editorials #PeoplesStruggles #Lenin #Socialism #Birthday #Kautsky

Freedom Road Socialist Organizations condemns in the strongest possible terms, the cowardly attack on Syria carried out by the Trump administration, and accomplices in Britain and France. We demand that the missile and air strikes stop now!

While the scope of this attack is unknown at this time – except to the those carrying it out and the Syrian people who are experiencing it – we can say with certainty that this aggression deserves the opposition of all who are against war and injustice.

The Trump administration is claiming alleged chemical weapons use by Syrian government is the reason for this attack. This is not credible. At all. The U.S. lies to justify its wars. It was not so long ago that we were told that “weapons of mass destruction” were in Iraq, and Iraq was destroyed in the aftermath of this fiction. There is no evidence and no good reason to believe the talk about use of chemical weapons.

Syria is winning its war against reactionaries and foreign mercenaries, and a few weeks ago Trump claimed that he was thinking of withdrawing U.S. troops from the country. There is no underlying logic that makes the alleged chemical weapon usage by the Syrian government a believable story.

The U.S. is trying to maintain its domination of the Middle East, and that is the real reason it is attacking Syria. Syria is charting a path that is independent of imperialism, and as such, it is a thorn in the side to U.S plans for the region.

We urge all progressives to demand an end to the attack on Syria, and to support Syria in its efforts to resist those who would destroy it.

Stop the war on Syria! End the missile attacks! U.S. troops out now!

#UnitedStates #Editorials #Syria #FreedomRoadSocialistOrganization #MiddleEast

To mark the anniversary of the publication of The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Frederich Engels, on Feb. 21, 1848, Fight Back! is reprinting the book’s first chapter. This anniversary comes in the context of a growing rejection of capitalism and a renewed interest in the science of revolution, Marxism-Leninism. Enjoy. Chapter I. Bourgeois and Proletarians

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.

In the earlier epochs of history, we find almost everywhere a complicated arrangement of society into various orders, a manifold gradation of social rank. In ancient Rome we have patricians, knights, plebeians, slaves; in the Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; in almost all of these classes, again, subordinate gradations.

The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.

Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other — Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.

From the serfs of the Middle Ages sprang the chartered burghers of the earliest towns. From these burgesses the first elements of the bourgeoisie were developed.

The discovery of America, the rounding of the Cape, opened up fresh ground for the rising bourgeoisie. The East-Indian and Chinese markets, the colonization of America, trade with the colonies, the increase in the means of exchange and in commodities generally, gave to commerce, to navigation, to industry, an impulse never before known, and thereby, to the revolutionary element in the tottering feudal society, a rapid development.

The feudal system of industry, in which industrial production was monopolized by closed guilds, now no longer sufficed for the growing wants of the new markets. The manufacturing system took its place. The guild-masters were pushed on one side by the manufacturing middle class; division of labor between the different corporate guilds vanished in the face of division of labor in each single workshop.

Meantime the markets kept ever growing, the demand ever rising. Even manufacturer no longer sufficed. Thereupon, steam and machinery revolutionized industrial production. The place of manufacture was taken by the giant, Modern Industry; the place of the industrial middle class by industrial millionaires, the leaders of the whole industrial armies, the modern bourgeois.

Modern industry has established the world market, for which the discovery of America paved the way. This market has given an immense development to commerce, to navigation, to communication by land. This development has, in its turn, reacted on the extension of industry; and in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in the same proportion the bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, and pushed into the background every class handed down from the Middle Ages.

We see, therefore, how the modern bourgeoisie is itself the product of a long course of development, of a series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange.

Each step in the development of the bourgeoisie was accompanied by a corresponding political advance of that class. An oppressed class under the sway of the feudal nobility, an armed and self-governing association in the medieval commune: here independent urban republic (as in Italy and Germany); there taxable “third estate” of the monarchy (as in France); afterwards, in the period of manufacturing proper, serving either the semi-feudal or the absolute monarchy as a counterpoise against the nobility, and, in fact, cornerstone of the great monarchies in general, the bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representative State, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.

The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.

The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his “natural superiors”, and has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous “cash payment”. It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom — Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.

The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage laborer’s.

The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation.

The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal display of vigour in the Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire, found its fitting complement in the most slothful indolence. It has been the first to show what man’s activity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions that put in the shade all former Exoduses of nations and crusades.

The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.

The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexons everywhere.

The bourgeoisie has through its exploitation of the world market given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country. To the great chagrin of reactionaries, it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants, satisfied by the production of the country, we find new wants, requiring for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence of nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual production. The intellectual creations of individual nations become common property. National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and from the numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature.

The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices of commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians’ intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image.

The bourgeoisie has subjected the country to the rule of the towns. It has created enormous cities, has greatly increased the urban population as compared with the rural, and has thus rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life. Just as it has made the country dependent on the towns, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilised ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.

The bourgeoisie keeps more and more doing away with the scattered state of the population, of the means of production, and of property. It has agglomerated population, centralized the means of production, and has concentrated property in a few hands. The necessary consequence of this was political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, with separate interests, laws, governments, and systems of taxation, became lumped together into one nation, with one government, one code of laws, one national class-interest, one frontier, and one customs-tariff.

The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of Nature’s forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground — what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor?

We see then: the means of production and of exchange, on whose foundation the bourgeoisie built itself up, were generated in feudal society. At a certain stage in the development of these means of production and of exchange, the conditions under which feudal society produced and exchanged, the feudal organization of agriculture and manufacturing industry, in one word, the feudal relations of property became no longer compatible with the already developed productive forces; they became so many fetters. They had to be burst asunder; they were burst asunder.

Into their place stepped free competition, accompanied by a social and political constitution adapted in it, and the economic and political sway of the bourgeois class.

A similar movement is going on before our own eyes. Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many a decade past the history of industry and commerce is but the history of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of production, against the property relations that are the conditions for the existence of the bourgeois and of its rule. It is enough to mention the commercial crises that by their periodical return put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly. In these crises, a great part not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, are periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity — the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed; and why? Because there is too much civilization, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary, they have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring disorder into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property. The conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them. And how does the bourgeoisie get over these crises? On the one hand by enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces; on the other, by the conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough exploitation of the old ones. That is to say, by paving the way for more extensive and more destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented.

The weapons with which the bourgeoisie felled feudalism to the ground are now turned against the bourgeoisie itself.

But not only has the bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons — the modern working class — the proletarians.

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed — a class of laborer’s, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labor increases capital. These laborer’s, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce, and are consequently exposed to all the vicissitudes of competition, to all the fluctuations of the market.

Owing to the extensive use of machinery, and to the division of labor, the work of the proletarians has lost all individual character, and, consequently, all charm for the workman. He becomes an appendage of the machine, and it is only the most simple, most monotonous, and most easily acquired knack, that is required of him. Hence, the cost of production of a workman is restricted, almost entirely, to the means of subsistence that he requires for maintenance, and for the propagation of his race. But the price of a commodity, and therefore also of labor, is equal to its cost of production. In proportion, therefore, as the repulsiveness of the work increases, the wage decreases. Nay more, in proportion as the use of machinery and division of labor increases, in the same proportion the burden of toil also increases, whether by prolongation of the working hours, by the increase of the work exacted in a given time or by increased speed of machinery, etc.

Modern Industry has converted the little workshop of the patriarchal master into the great factory of the industrial capitalist. Masses of laborer’s, crowded into the factory, are organized like soldiers. As privates of the industrial army they are placed under the command of a perfect hierarchy of officers and sergeants. Not only are they slaves of the bourgeois class, and of the bourgeois State; they are daily and hourly enslaved by the machine, by the overlooked, and, above all, by the individual bourgeois manufacturer himself. The more openly this despotism proclaims gain to be its end and aim, the more petty, the more hateful and the more embittering it is.

The less the skill and exertion of strength implied in manual labor, in other words, the more modern industry becomes developed, the more is the labor of men superseded by that of women. Differences of age and sex have no longer any distinctive social validity for the working class. All are instruments of labor, more or less expensive to use, according to their age and sex.

No sooner is the exploitation of the laborer by the manufacturer, so far, at an end, that he receives his wages in cash, than he is set upon by the other portions of the bourgeoisie, the landlord, the shopkeeper, the pawnbroker, etc.

The lower strata of the middle class — the small tradespeople, shopkeepers, and retired tradesmen generally, the handicraftsmen and peasants — all these sink gradually into the proletariat, partly because their diminutive capital does not suffice for the scale on which Modern Industry is carried on, and is swamped in the competition with the large capitalists, partly because their specialised skill is rendered worthless by new methods of production. Thus the proletariat is recruited from all classes of the population.

The proletariat goes through various stages of development. With its birth begins its struggle with the bourgeoisie. At first the contest is carried on by individual laborers, then by the workpeople of a factory, then by the operative of one trade, in one locality, against the individual bourgeois who directly exploits them. They direct their attacks not against the bourgeois conditions of production, but against the instruments of production themselves; they destroy imported wares that compete with their labor, they smash to pieces machinery, they set factories ablaze, they seek to restore by force the vanished status of the workman of the Middle Ages.

At this stage, the laborers still form an incoherent mass scattered over the whole country, and broken up by their mutual competition. If anywhere they unite to form more compact bodies, this is not yet the consequence of their own active union, but of the union of the bourgeoisie, which class, in order to attain its own political ends, is compelled to set the whole proletariat in motion, and is moreover yet, for a time, able to do so. At this stage, therefore, the proletarians do not fight their enemies, but the enemies of their enemies, the remnants of absolute monarchy, the landowners, the non-industrial bourgeois, the petty bourgeois. Thus, the whole historical movement is concentrated in the hands of the bourgeoisie; every victory so obtained is a victory for the bourgeoisie.

But with the development of industry, the proletariat not only increases in number; it becomes concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows, and it feels that strength more. The various interests and conditions of life within the ranks of the proletariat are more and more equalized, in proportion as machinery obliterates all distinctions of labor, and nearly everywhere reduces wages to the same low level. The growing competition among the bourgeois, and the resulting commercial crises, make the wages of the workers ever more fluctuating. The increasing improvement of machinery, ever more rapidly developing, makes their livelihood more and more precarious; the collisions between individual workmen and individual bourgeois take more and more the character of collisions between two classes. Thereupon, the workers begin to form combinations (Trades’ Unions) against the bourgeois; they club together in order to keep up the rate of wages; they found permanent associations in order to make provision beforehand for these occasional revolts. Here and there, the contest breaks out into riots.

Now and then the workers are victorious, but only for a time. The real fruit of their battles lies, not in the immediate result, but in the ever-expanding union of the workers. This union is helped on by the improved means of communication that are created by modern industry, and that place the workers of different localities in contact with one another. It was just this contact that was needed to centralize the numerous local struggles, all of the same character, into one national struggle between classes. But every class struggle is a political struggle. And that union, to attain which the burghers of the Middle Ages, with their miserable highways, required centuries, the modern proletarian, thanks to railways, achieve in a few years.

This organization of the proletarians into a class, and, consequently into a political party, is continually being upset again by the competition between the workers themselves. But it ever rises up again, stronger, firmer, mightier. It compels legislative recognition of particular interests of the workers, by taking advantage of the divisions among the bourgeoisie itself. Thus, the ten-hours’ bill in England was carried.

Altogether collisions between the classes of the old society further, in many ways, the course of development of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie finds itself involved in a constant battle. At first with the aristocracy; later on, with those portions of the bourgeoisie itself, whose interests have become antagonistic to the progress of industry; at all time with the bourgeoisie of foreign countries. In all these battles, it sees itself compelled to appeal to the proletariat, to ask for help, and thus, to drag it into the political arena. The bourgeoisie itself, therefore, supplies the proletariat with its own elements of political and general education, in other words, it furnishes the proletariat with weapons for fighting the bourgeoisie.

Further, as we have already seen, entire sections of the ruling class are, by the advance of industry, precipitated into the proletariat, or are at least threatened in their conditions of existence. These also supply the proletariat with fresh elements of enlightenment and progress.

Finally, in times when the class struggle nears the decisive hour, the progress of dissolution going on within the ruling class, in fact within the whole range of old society, assumes such a violent, glaring character, that a small section of the ruling class cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class, the class that holds the future in its hands. Just as, therefore, at an earlier period, a section of the nobility went over to the bourgeoisie, so now a portion of the bourgeoisie goes over to the proletariat, and in particular, a portion of the bourgeois ideologists, who have raised themselves to the level of comprehending theoretically the historical movement as a whole.

Of all the classes that stand face to face with the bourgeoisie today, the proletariat alone is a revolutionary class. The other classes decay and finally disappear in the face of Modern Industry; the proletariat is its special and essential product.

The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history. If by chance, they are revolutionary, they are only so in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat; they thus defend not their present, but their future interests, they desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat.

The “dangerous class”, [lumpenproletariat] the social scum, that passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society, may, here and there, be swept into the movement by a proletarian revolution; its conditions of life, however, prepare it far more for the part of a bribed tool of reactionary intrigue.

In the condition of the proletariat, those of old society at large are already virtually swamped. The proletarian is without property; his relation to his wife and children has no longer anything in common with the bourgeois family relations; modern industry labor, modern subjection to capital, the same in England as in France, in America as in Germany, has stripped him of every trace of national character. Law, morality, religion, are to him so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests.

All the preceding classes that got the upper hand sought to fortify their already acquired status by subjecting society at large to their conditions of appropriation. The proletarians cannot become masters of the productive forces of society, except by abolishing their own previous mode of appropriation, and thereby also every other previous mode of appropriation. They have nothing of their own to secure and to fortify; their mission is to destroy all previous securities for, and insurances of, individual property.

All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority. The proletariat, the lowest stratum of our present society, cannot stir, cannot raise itself up, without the whole superincumbent strata of official society being sprung into the air.

Though not in substance, yet in form, the struggle of the proletariat with the bourgeoisie is at first a national struggle. The proletariat of each country must, of course, first of all settle matters with its own bourgeoisie.

In depicting the most general phases of the development of the proletariat, we traced the more or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up to the point where that war breaks out into open revolution, and where the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation for the sway of the proletariat.

Hitherto, every form of society has been based, as we have already seen, on the antagonism of oppressing and oppressed classes. But in order to oppress a class, certain conditions must be assured to it under which it can, at least, continue its slavish existence. The serf, in the period of serfdom, raised himself to membership in the commune, just as the petty bourgeois, under the yoke of the feudal absolutism, managed to develop into a bourgeois. The modern laborer, on the contrary, instead of rising with the process of industry, sinks deeper and deeper below the conditions of existence of his own class. He becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth. And here it becomes evident, that the bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society, and to impose its conditions of existence upon society as an over-riding law. It is unfit to rule because it is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery, because it cannot help letting him sink into such a state, that it has to feed him, instead of being fed by him. Society can no longer live under this bourgeoisie, in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society.

The essential conditions for the existence and for the sway of the bourgeois class is the formation and augmentation of capital; the condition for capital is wage-labor. Wage-labor rests exclusively on competition between the laborers. The advance of industry, whose involuntary promoter is the bourgeoisie, replaces the isolation of the laborers, due to competition, by the revolutionary combination, due to association. The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable.

#Germany #CapitalismAndEconomy #Culture #Editorials #PeoplesStruggles #Socialism #KarlMarx #FriedrichEngels #TheCommunistManifesto

The Coalition to March on the RNC, with an impressive list of endorsers demanding, “Good jobs, affordable education, health care, equality and peace,” led the largest of several events protesting the Republicans and their right-wing agenda of hate and war. The Freedom Road Socialist Organization played an active role in the Coalition to March on the RNC in 2012, just as it did in 2008 when protesters marched on the RNC in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

We are well aware that police intelligence operations began soon after we announced our plans to march on the Republicans the year before the RNC.

We also know the dedicated and hard-working activists who led the meetings, press conferences, planning sessions and the big march itself. While we are open and democratic with many people participating, the leadership of the Coalition to March on the RNC consisted of a close-knit group of young friends. They went to college together and knew each other since before they were even interested in politics. While many activists came forward and played important roles in organizing against the Republicans, we are confident in our leadership and clear about the empty boasting by the police.

The leaders of the Coalition to March on the RNC made plans that were both politically and tactically sound, and successfully carried them out even when the state tried to impose a ‘clean zone’ around the RNC itself. The march was a big success and saw virtually no deviation from the plan. We captured the political spotlight that day, despite hurricane rains that caused the Republicans to cancel their opening day. The media covered our march with its people’s demands instead of Mitt Romney’s right-wing agenda of the 1%.

However, this does not prove that the police or other law enforcement agencies did not send spies and provocateurs into organizations mobilizing against the RNC that year – in fact, we know that the enemy has infiltrated the movement before and certainly conducted surveillance of social justice organizers in 2012. No one who loves peace and justice is unaware of the heavy amount of surveillance and repression of activists and community organizers carried out on a daily basis by the state and its agents. What is important is to take a stand against disruption and repression, and for activists to look out for each other and show solidarity with those under attack.

The repression of those who fight for peace and justice is part of the long history of state repression that organizers and revolutionaries, often anarchists and communists, face. This account serves as a backdrop for important conclusions to be drawn about the nature of state repression today and the enemy's spying on the 2012 RNC protests in Tampa, Florida.

The police and law enforcement agencies hate activists and organizers who fight for a better world and will do anything to suppress them or stop them from achieving their goals. This fact was well known to those who organized in Tampa in 2012, and to other forces in movements like Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter.

It is certain that the police sent spies to meetings, marches and rallies – with the purpose to disrupt, divide and destroy an open, democratic and progressive march and other protest events against the Republicans. It is even likely that some of the police spies stuck around after the march was over in Tampa, as was the case with police spy “Karen Sullivan” in Minneapolis-Saint Paul in 2008. If so, then they have failed to meet their objectives and instead have witnessed a growing people's movement in Florida and the rest of the country that is resistant to provocateurs, sabotage, co-option and wrecking by the enemies of the people.

The Coalition to March on the RNC's event was a huge success despite Tropical Storm Isaac soaking Tampa on the day of the big march. That day, veteran activists along with new organizers dealt a blow to the 1%, the imperialist class in the U.S. Just as police spies and all the forces of nature could not impede the march on the RNC in Tampa, so too will the oppressed and the working class ultimately emerge victorious against capitalism.

#UnitedStates #Editorials #FreedomRoadSocialistOrganization #2012RepublicanNationalConvention #CoalitionToMarchOnTheRNC #RepublicanNationalConvention2012 #PoliticalRepression

On June 29, the governor of Puerto Rico, Alejandro García Padilla, said that Puerto Rico’s debt was “not payable.” The government of Puerto Rico has a debt that is 70% of the islands Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This is more than three and half times as great as the next most indebted states, Rhode Island and Massachusetts, whose debt-to-GDP ratios are less than 20%. In addition, Puerto Rico’s electric utility also has major debt problems.

Puerto Rico’s debt woes are rooted in the fact that it is a colony of the U.S. Its economy is limited by the high cost of imports as a U.S. law, known as the Jones Act, requires all of Puerto Rico’s imports to be carried on U.S.-made ships that are U.S.-owned and staffed by Americans. This contributes to the cost of living being almost 15% higher than in the U.S, even though incomes average less than half that of those in the U.S. Unemployment in Puerto Rico is 12%, more than twice the U.S rate. Another problem is that the U.S. government made it easier for Puerto Rico to borrow by making its bonds exempt from all U.S. taxes. Last but not least, Puerto Rico cannot take advantage of U.S. bankruptcy law like other U.S. cities, counties and states.

Wall Street immediately turned to its friends in Congress such as Republican Jeffrey D. Duncan of South Carolina. Duncan has proposed setting up a ‘Financial Control Board’ to take over the finances of the government of Puerto Rico, to insure the best results for the Wall Street hedge funds that own billions of dollars of Puerto Rican bonds.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is also proposing more of its austerity medicine that it imposed on Greece. They say that Puerto Rico should eliminate its minimum wage, or if not, cut it to one-third the federal minimum of $7.25 an hour, or $2.41 an hour. In addition, the IMF wants a welfare cut to force people to work for these slave wages.

The governor of Puerto Rico and his allies among the Democrats in Congress want to restructure the debt and extend bankruptcy laws to Puerto Rico. This would be better than Wall Street running the show through a Financial Control Board, but would still mean more austerity – more pension cuts, more wage and job cuts for public sector workers and higher taxes – for the people of Puerto Rico.

What would benefit the people the most would be a path of struggle against the Wall Street banksters who almost brought down the world economy during the financial crisis of 2008. The debt should be eliminated. The Jones Act must be repealed. Ultimately, what Puerto Rico needs is independence – so that the their country is in their hands, not the hands of Wall Street hedge funds and their politicians in Washington, D.C.

#PuertoRico #Editorials #austerity #AlejandroGarcíaPadilla