suggestion - a thread stickie on marches you are going on

8 posts / 0 new
Last post
suggestion - a thread stickie on marches you are going on
Printer-friendly version

some of us are pretty much unemployed.

i would like to march with the users of this site, some day. or is it all discussion??

i imagine that with the world how it is, as farcical as it sounds maybe there will be less emphasis on work place activism in the future.




yeah, it's certainly a good

yeah, it's certainly a good idea to have a thread of what demos people go on and where, and some of the discussions that took place at the demo. Not "how many papers did you sell" or whatever though :D

how many left wingers did you

how many left wingers did you stare down :D !

tangent alert - does anyone [else] think that the great risk now is the progressive erosion of civil liberties, from left wing parliamentary propoganda [funded by the bourgeoise]? if anyone agrees - will the leftist party program in the more powerful countries be forged as a solution to international issues, or will they have to campaign for a dissolution of national civil liberties?


"not with a bang but a winper" tell this to possum. heh.

the question for me is simply - what civil liberties will the worker's councils oppose, in order to bring about communism? are there any we can do without?? IMHO, both pro parliament and civil violence should be opposed. seriously - what do you think??

'Stickie' response

A relevant tangent lem_ : and perhaps not entirely tangential : here's an attempt at a small 'colour supplement' to it.

The erosion of civil liberties : some thinking out loud:: your thoughts most welcome

1)The erosion of civil liberties is surely the direct experience in life of tens of millions of people in the UK

2)The abrupt withdrawal (i.e. faster than 'erosion') of civil liberties is already the direct experience of hundreds more millions of people on the International Level

3)The more or less complete absence of civil liberties is the direct daily experience of yet more hundreds of millions of people  on the International level.

Examples :

1) Law against supporting your mates on strike if you are in a different industry: 'secondary picketing' (Thatcher) right to remain silent if arrested - linked to 'innocent until proven guilty':(Blair) stop, question, search and generally hassle without good cause -just because you are strolling along The Embankment past the Ministry of Defence.(Brown and now permanent)

2) Curfews, restriction on travel, marshall law and all that that allows : (quicker to list the states where this hasn't or isn't happening?)

3) Burma : " there ! in the van ! " but I haven't done anything wrong " " Ah troublemaker eh?' In the cell' China : evicting families in Bejing ,bulldozing 300/400 homes to build Olympic stadium 2004.


Does this already existing direct experience not re-orient your first question?

On the State Capitalism thread (I think) Demagorgon solidly and clearly describes (for me at any rate) that The State is the enemy whether this 'wing' or that 'wing', whether 'allegedly' democratic or obscenely 'pretending to be 'Communist'

Sorry if I have missed the point entirely: rephrase and I'll think again :@}

If I have understood your first point even vaguely correctly, I would offer that

This or that Parliamentary party or State or  'Alliance of States' already has forged and put in place ruthless 'solutions' to keep them on top: but these 'solutions' are not solving even Capital's 'problems'  

The 'violence' point is also relevant : I'll come back

(for once trying to engage my brain before opening my mouth)





heh, me too. but i didn't

heh, me too. but i didn't understand what you were getting to mate.


i feel that the workers councils must have a monopoly on [literal] coercion [- sorry i forgot the word for watered down tyranny].

more-over, i feel that communists should oppose violence in all its forms - bar those based on the WORKER'S councils - which should be limited, and not violate civil property rights.


not so much because of simplicity, or even hypocricy. and certainly NOT a sacrifice to bourgeois / existing ethics, or curtailing of inserruectionism / anarchism.

i think it is a solution, of sorts, to say that even-though it is unclear when communism materializes, communists still know what to oppose and promote. that is IMHO, the elimination of violence from the civil sphere, and all violence from the "home".

:) ?


Thanks for clarifying

Sometimes I find a disconcerting gap where certain cortical synapses should be 

Yes: as you say (with the IMHO caveat) apart from the things-we-cannot-by-definition-predict : how long is 'terminal' etc  ...communists know what to oppose and promote:

1) Pre-revolution : precisely these kinds of threads have/will/must produce clear positions and definitions of 'what is rooted in Capitalist terrain' - oppose. 'What is rooted in Proletariat terrain : promote'

2)Period of Revolution to Transition : similar :easier and yet no easier : The Workers have struck that huge historic blow and -say- 'gained the higher ground' but Capital is still marshalling a counterattack in the valleys. 

Oversimplified sketch follows:

Violence: I agree with and stand by this precept :

The level,extent and depth of violence required to make The Revolution itself, is dictated byThe Bourgeoisie i.e.The call for World Revolution is not per se a 'call to arms'  but it would be fatally unrealistic and fatally negligent to 'dream' that the enemy will surrender. 

I don't venture further into speculative future :which doesn't mean you haven't every right to :@} so..

As self-organised workers groups/councils 'acclimatize' to the new conditons: their new 'social supremacy' if you like, then Marx's keen perception - not 'prescription' - is I'd argue persuasive: if the process is defended to a new dawn , then 'Class' is meaningless : who's left to oppress already with any form of violence ? 

Apart from a (possibly long) period of defence during which which armed workers within their 'councils' will be equipped should that be the worker's will : they this time will literally 'call the shots'.


Just to be clear: as you realise the Worker's to free themselves- nay all of us- must take back Private  Property i.e. The Means Of Production : after all every Factory , Corporate building : every Qantas aeroplane every railway in the world belongs to them anyway ''cos they made it.

MY jeans and sneakers ? your kettle? that's not Private Property in The Means of Production sense. 



A squatmate of mine in 1980 fell into the kitchen one day laughing his head off: he couldn't stop

"'What's up Greg? " I said

"..Someone's stolen my 'All Property Is Theft' T-shirt .." }






Thank you so much for this

Thank you so much for this absolutely delicious remark, A. Simpleton.  I so understand your feeling. 

A. Simpleton wrote:
Sometimes I find a disconcerting gap where certain cortical synapses should be #€£¥

Unfortunately the SMILEY got lost in translation, or did somebody, some Internet snooper, steal it?  I also find the disconcerting GAP increases rapidly with age after a certain melt down point is reached.  

Synaptic greetings  from Fred. 


"all of us- must take back

"all of us- must take back Private  Property i.e. The Means Of Production : after all every Factory , Corporate building : every Qantas aeroplane every railway in the world belongs to them anyway"


:-) cooool. i am sorry i can't quote.