HUMOUR:

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL LENINISTS:

HUMOUR:

THE GENERAL AND THE COLONEL:

Or you might say, "it's icepick licking good".

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS:

THE FALL OF THE WALL-20 YEARS ON:

Today marks the 20th anniversary of the end of the Berlin Wall as an effective barrier between East and West Germany. This sudden collapse of one of East Germany's main controls on its citizens was certainly not the first, the last or even the most important event in the relatively fast crumbling of the Soviet Empire and the Marxist Leninist system of rule that underpinned the Empire.

The end of the Empire wasn't necessarily an unalloyed good, and many elderly people in the successor states long for the stability and security that dictatorship provided. Many are also offended by the conspicuous nature of inequality that has grown up. Not that the old communist ruling class wasn't just that- a ruling class with all the perks of same. It's just that they tended to flaunt it far less than the nouveau riche in eastern Europe today. On balance the end of central planning probably has improved the economic situation of the average person, but it certainly hasn't improved it as much as some might have thought it would at the beginning of the transitions.

The end of the Soviet Empire was also either the beginning of the end or the hastening of disintegration for a vast sea of communist parties that existed in countries where they didn't have state control. Most of these are pale shadows of their former selves. Some are certifiably dead. Others have successfully jettisoned their Marxist Leninist ideology to become ordinary social democratic parties. This implosion wasn't confined to the 'Moscow Line' Leninists. While the Maoists were already in a state of decline before the late 80s the fall of their supposed enemy led to a much more rapid decline. People (rightfully) saw that there was little difference between these two forms of Stalinism, except that the Maoists had a far greater potential for brutality in power. Even the Trotskyists saw their decline accelerated. Even though they were not Stalinists their Leninism tarred them with the same brush.

Today Leninist parties are pretty much a dead issue except for some very isolated situations. None, outside of Nepal, have even the remotest chance of becoming the new ruling class. Even being junior partners in coalition with other parties is becoming less and less common. Only North Korea stands as an horrible example of what Stalinism was in its full "glory". Many states (China, Vietnam, Laos and, to a large extent Cuba) maintain a Leninist concept of dictatorship while abandoning more and more of the economic fantasies that underlaid Marxism in power. These states may still be Leninist, but they can hardly be called Marxist anymore.

Not that the corporate managerialism of 'the West' is without its own problems, as citizens of the ex-communist states soon found out. This type of society also generates its own opposition, but the end of the Marxist dreamworld has left others to take up the fight. There have been many different beneficiaries of the disillusionment with Marxism. Anarchism (which was already growing) became even more attractive to radicals and potential radicals as the anarchists definitely had the best "I told you so" record in regards to the communist states. Green/ecology parties also experienced a boost as, for at least awhile, it seemed that their main competitors on the left were totally discredited. After an initial period of confusion and a certain anxiety left social democracy has also made a comeback, especially in South America. It often does this by borrowing/stealing mightily from the rhetoric and rarely the actual programmatic content of the anarchists and the ecologists.

Of course there are illusions and then there are illusions. Right wing commentators who were breaking their arms patting themselves on their backs about their 'great triumph' or 'the end of history' were given only a few years grace before history came back to bite, both politically and economically.

The fall of the Soviet Empire, and all the changes it set in motion, was, on balance, beneficial. Nobody can tell what new forms of class rule and opposition to class rule the future will hold. What is certain is that no grand political theorist or movement even foggily predicted the timing and manner of the end of the Empire. This should give anyone pause when confronted with those who, like the commies of old, claim to have a hidden key to the course of history in some sacred text. Beware of too much certitude.

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS-CUBA:

SELF MANAGEMENT IN CUBA ?????????????:

Over at the Porkupine Blog our good comrade Larry Gambone has brought forward a debate that is presently going on amongst the ruling class of Cuba. The present nominal dictator of that island seems to be following the course of death laid out by Generalissimo Franco, who he so much resembles. One piece at a time. Meanwhile the apparatchiks are jockeying for power and influence before the inevitable. What is not in doubt is that the economic, political and social system of Cuba will change with the death of the dictator. The question is "how will it change ?". Gambone argues that there is a faction of the ruling class that is willing to move towards a libertarian form of socialism, self management. Molly thinks that this portion of the Communist ruling class is inevitably small and doomed to lose. First of all it must only profit minimally from the present situation or it would advocate "no change". Second of all it has to see little opportunity to loot the public treasury after the end of Leninism, as was done in eastern Europe. This restricts and diminishes it even further.No doubt there are legitimate "idealists" in the apparat (despite the inevitable corrupting influence of power and privilege, especially communist power and privilege ), but they will be voices crying in the wilderness unless there is a mass base for their proposals. In any case, despite my expectations, see the Porkupine Blog for the details of the debate.

INTERNATIONAL ANARCHIST MOVEMENT-GREECE:

ATHENS INDYMEDIA UNDER THREAT:

Following the recent riots in Greece various political from fascist to communist, with many in between, have conceived the idea that shutting down the Indymedia centres in Greece would be a laudable goal. The following, from the English section of Athens Indymedia is the defiant response.

............................

The distribution of ideas ... Can't be strangled! Can't be repressed! Can't be repressed!:
During the revolt in December, pressure and attacks against the 2 existing Indymedia sites (Athens and Patras) reached a peak.

With ridiculous questions during the Greek Parliament sessions from members of parliament belonging to a fascist political party, slanderous rumours and sneaky publications even from the Greek Communists Party official newspaper(Molly hardly finds this surprising. Leninism was reactionary from its birth, and it has become even more so in the bizarre "life after death" in which it exists today), as well as other daily newspapers, the State has a cultivated its plans of shutting down Indymedia , a website of direct information used by socio-political movements and internet meeting point for thousands of people sharing their thoughts and actions, creating and organising a site of free expression and resistance against Capitalism and State agendas epitomized in the motto “profits above people”.

Let them all know that Indymedia is outside their sphere of authority and control, it belongs to those voices suppressed and gagged by their system, it's far away from their logic and morality. It is ours and will stay alive for as long as we need it to change this world.

Don't you dare attack free speech and its Indy-media!

Don't even think about it!

[ Indymedia's archive for functioning and dynamics of Indymedia ]

NEPAL:

THE NEW RULING CLASS- JUST LIKE THE OLD RULING CLASS- ONLY WORSE:

The following has been translated from the Voix De Faits blog, in Québec City. Voix De Faits is a blog of the Québec section of NEFAC, the North Eastern Federation of Anarchist Communists, a platformist organization. I may disagree with labelling the new ruling class that the Nepalese Maoists want to shove down the throats of their people as "capitalist". My own term is "managerial". In the rest of the world, with the defeat of fascism and the collapse of other Leninist regimes a more benign form of this ruling class has come to power. In Molly's view the pathetic Leninist aspiration to power is primitive in that a better form of the class rule that they propose already holds sway in the commanding heights of the economy through most of the world. This managerial ruling class "uses" sometimes more or less "capitalist" forms of political economy, but at other times uses political manipulation of the economy to achieve their goals. They are superior to the failed Leninist experiments of the last century (and the soon-to-fail Cuban experiment) simply because they are more flexible and less hidebound by ideology(religious belief ?). All that being said I cannot express the degree of loathing that I have for the cultists of the greatest mass-murderers that human history has ever seen. The following article expresses the essence of Maoism (the lowest of the low in a field filled with scum), only using a different name for the evil.

....................................

The vast Maoist revolution in Nepal is ... a capitalist revolution!

In Nepal, the ex-Maoist rebels are currently on the verge of becoming the first party of the constituent assembly, elected Thursday, which will allow the transformation of the monarchy in the Republic and will force the king to abdicate. The Maoists have won or are leading in 98 districts now. They are also about to get a simple majority, beating the same old political formations such as the Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal Unified Marxist-Leninist (center-left).

It will be recalled that the people's war in Nepal, led by the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist adherents "(...) is regarded as a bright hope not only for the Nepalese masses, but also for the entire international proletariat and the oppressed peoples (...)"!( PCR (Co) - Arsenal no.2).

The newspaper Le Monde, published this week, an interview with the general Nepali Maoist ideologue, Baburam Bhattarai, the right arm of the Party, the no.1 in the Party. According to this interview, one of the highlights of their revolutionary program, "(...) would be to initiate a political transition dominated by the capitalist revolution (...)"! Oh yes! The famous transition period, which after years of propaganda will eventually become the famous revolution desired ...

After the peace accord in 2006, which ended the conflict which has claimed more than 13,000 deaths in 10 years, the Nepali Maoists now proclaim that their aim in the short and medium term is neither socialism nor even Social Democracy, but to erect a triumphant capitalism! For a revolution acclaimed by the Maoist Parties , as the embryo of the new wave of world revolution, which rises with increasing strength, and that was afford to build a new world finally free from all forms of exploitation, we can say that it's rather tipsy.

After revolution, the only solution is that the Nepali Maoists modus operandi becomes this only solution? After Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc .. how many disastrous examples of genocide are necessary to demonstrate that Maoism militants are not a hope for the oppressed masses, but rather a dictatorship established and maintained by force? ------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------

Here is the article in the newspaper Le Monde

... Baburam Bhattarai is in a three-story villa with red tiles, located in a suburb of Kathmandu where modest brick houses rise on the side of the ravine. A look at the portrait gallery of red saints red adorning his living room, tells us that this man then, number two in the Communist Party adherents of the Nepali Maoist (CPN-M), must have a sacred dogma. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao: the display of references is clear. Eyes half closed, a thin mustache covering severe lips, Baburam Bhattarai affects of the dryness of a former guerrilla shaped by life in the resistance.

And yet, the man is a master of the brilliantly contortions of the dialectic. It is probably not a coincidence that this former architecture student, holds a PhD at the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in New Delhi, is a great lover of chess, and passes for the ideologue of Nepalese Maoism.(See Déclassé Intellectuals in the works of Max Nomad-Mollymew) At age 53, he became a key person, alongside the leader of the party, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, alias "Prachenda" (the Terrible),around the reconstitution of the political life of Nepal around a republican calendar that they were able to impose on the traditional parties at gunpoint.

Mr. Bhattarai exudes confidence. He is sure of his case: the abolition of the monarchy and to gain power. He is confident even though the lucky red star CPN-M, can afford the luxury of polishing revolutionary jargon. Since power, he believes, is close and it will still take some useful steps to be achieve it, it is important to reach out, to be accommodating. Thus, if "the abolition of the monarchy" and "the elimination of feudalism" return as leitmotifs in his speech, he spoke ,strangely enough little about, "socialism".

"POLITICAL TRANSITION"

Certainly, the goal remains as "long term", but in the meantime, priority will be to initiate a "political transition" dominated by the "capitalist revolution".The supreme Irony, the Maoists have a mission, if you understand Mr. Bhattarai correctly, to implement capitalism in Nepal!

"We will not nationalise big industry and we will respect free enterprise", he said . The charm offensive against the bosses had already begun: the leaders of the CPN-M have come to meet with the office of the Federation of Industry and Commerce.

He says, we have reassured them, and they are willing to work with us."

Is not such openness is not in flagrant contradiction with the orthodox Marxism-Leninism professed by the CPN-M? "Absolutely not," Mr. Bhattarai protests."Marx, Engels and Lenin had already written on the subject," he says. Between feudalism and socialism, there is capitalism.. However there is still no capitalism in Nepal. It must be developed.

" Indeed, the ideologue of the CPN-M now is wary of models. While he still reveres Mao - a porcelain bust of the Great Helmsman is on a throne on a table in the living room - he wants to "go beyond Mao." "We must develop our own style", he says. "Marxism is not a religion, it is a science. We want to develop Marxism."(Booolsheet amigo-Molly) And that "Marxism to develop" must accommodate itself to democracy?

Mr. Bhattarai said, accepting the "competitive multi-party system". Of course, the Maoists are critical of a parliamentary system on the "Westminster model, "a source of instability". They want institutional reform to establish a "presidential system similar to the French." But Mr. Bhattarai assures us that he has nothing against democracy. Intoxication? Conversion sincere? History will judge fairly fairly soon

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------

Also, if you are interested, you can read the message of solidarity from PCR (co) on the occasion of the 8th anniversary of the war in Nepal, published in the journal Arsenal(Maoist scumbags-Molly) ... Are they talking about the same revolution?

Dear comrades,

We extend our warmest greetings on the occasion of the 8th anniversary of the outbreak of the People's War. Starting from almost nothing, but armed with what is most important - a Party, an ideological line and a correct political line, as well as a deep bond with and supported by the broad masses - the combatants of what would become the mighty and glorious People's Liberation Army began with great courage a long and arduous struggle, which is now a bright hope not only for the Nepalese masses, but also for the entire international proletariat and the oppressed peoples.(or at least the inferior members of the managerial ruling class who can't get directing jobs otherwise-Molly)

By constantly advancing in the fight against the reactionary classes and the imperialist powers that support them, and building, step by step, a new popular power, the oppressed masses in Nepal run by your Party have established a solid base of support for the global revolution.

The considerable success that you have already won prove once again, in the words of Mao, a just cause still enjoys considerable support, and that ,when it is conducted properly, it is possible to combat and win even against the enemies of the most despotic and in the most difficult conditions that exist.

The people's war you lead past eight years is a vivid demonstration of the great power of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, ie The ideology of the proletariat internationally reinforced by the experience of more than 150 years of struggle for socialism and communism. (Maoist language is so weird. all that I can say is that my asshole is not just chewing bubblegum, if this is true,but it is blowing multicolour bubbles. The comrades of Voix De Faits added this bit for the sake of irony. as they say...)

A little ironic or not?

INDYMEDIA REDUX:

SLANDERS ON ANARCHISM:

Regular readers of this blog will be fully aware on my opinion about the disgraceful state of Winnipeg Indymedia and the Indymedia network in general (see our archives for Dec. 20, 2007, Dec 14, 2007, Feb 24, 2007, Jan 15, 2007 and Dec. 22, 2006). In a time when anarchism has basically become the radical left, at least in North America and most of Europe, various flotsam from the shipwrecks of history inevitably try their hand at dipping into this pool in hopes of recruiting. This includes not just the old laundry list of Marxist-Leninist parties, desperate to get a recruit, any recruit, for their failed dreams of becoming a new ruling class. Even more repulsively it includes various neo-Nazi outfits and individuals who have exploited the vague leftism that too many anarchists hold to to try and turn opposition to Israeli state policies into outright anti-semitism. One of the major playpens of these reptiles is the Indymedia network, and they have been instrumental in not just corrupting the original ideal of Indymedia- an alternative news source for thoise who make news locally but are not reported by the mainstream media- but have also been the cause of the shutdown of many Indymedia sites. Unfortunately the "moderators" of most Indymedia sites, while they may claim "sympathy" for anarchism, simply don't have the ideological (and personal moral) "backbone" to reject this infiltration outright. Not surprising given the fact that far too much of what they see as "anarchism" is barely-thought-out leftist fashion (Israel Bad-Palestinian organizations Good).

Molly has been fighting this since before she started this blog in 2006, and she intends to keep on going in her own uniquely nasty way. For a statement about "leftist anti-semitism" and just how repulsive it is see 'Making Resistance to Anti-Semitism Part of All Our Movements' in the TEXTS section of our links. What is "new" in this is that some have come to take the example of what happens with Indymedia to slander anarchism, as if it was responsible for this mess rather than vague leftism. My comrade Larry Gambone of the Porkupine Blog has sent a circular about one instance of this on the Socialist Unity site. Larry has responded as has Molly. If you are an anarchist reader of this blog think about popping over and adding your own two cents worth. The basis of the accusation is that "anarchism doesn't believe in organization", that the Indymedia types are "anarchists of a sort" (yeah, "a sort" but not part of the historical tradition of anarchism), and that , therefore, anarchism is implicated in anti-semitism. As Molly has said above, the anti-semitism that such sites allow (and the very allowing of it) comes much more from mindless leftist crowd following than from anything that could be described as "anarchism". Anyways, have a look.

Why I hate the word "activist".
I hate this word first and foremost because it has a meaning in the popular press that says, basically, "someone who makes their living by advocating certain social causes" ie a "professional leftist". There may indeed be "professional rightists" as well, but they are far outnumbered by their left wing brethren. The right generally has an easier time of rounding up volunteer labour than the left does. Right wing causes may often be controlled by the same set of personal manipulators that left wing ones are, but they rarely achieve the degree of "hollowness" that some leftist " government grant machines" achieve. It's the old "too many chiefs..." story.
In the popular press, left or right, the term "activist" that they assign either neutrally or in praise, means, in 19 cases out of 20, somebody who makes their money by petty politics. Now, I'm of the opinion that Canada would have a much more vibrant and realistic left if the government ceased to spend one single cent in support of these "activists". What activity there was left would be far more in touch with reality and far more independant. Today it is neither.
I also hate the term "activist" because it still carries a "connotation" of self sacrifice from past decades when one's activism in various political opposition groups demanded self sacrifice rather than being a path to financial benefit -pretty well the "denotation" today. This "taking up the cross" is a sure pathway for the activist to sacrifice others in the same way as he or she sacrifices themselves if they ever gain power. Saints easily become inquisitors.
So, whether it refers to the self-deluded or simply cynical present day opportunist or to the old style puritanical fanatic the word makes me more than slightly queasy. Not that the old style "activist" has entirely disappeared. One may still find them acting out petty fantasies of two bit terrorism or blathering on about "anti-oppression", or lurking in the moldy caverns of failed Leninist sects. But they are much rarer than the "new style" activist. Somebody who gains tenure in an university by churning out "leftism 101" is flogging others, not themselves. They actually profit handsomely from it.

Other Losers of 9/11
To continue this thread, another of the losers who lost via 9/11 was the 'American Left'. By this I mean not the "liberal left" of neo-conservative "horror dreams" but rather the left in the USA extending from what would be called "social-democrats" in civilized countries, through more dogmatic socialists and into the eerie netherworld of Leninist sects and "left-over new leftists" ensconced in various parts of academia. I deliberately leave the anarchists for later, even though the rise of the modern American anarchist movement is intimately connected to the lost opportunity that the American left was a victim of.
Remember the time. It was a time when the events of Seattle 1999 were fresh in memory. Intelligent leftists such as Barbara Ehrenreich and many others were reaching out to this new generation of radicalism. Meanwhile the Stalinist and Trotskyist sects were pretty well moribund. Their potential for lasting another decade was remote.
Here's the astonishing fact. The American left "lost" by winning. The fact that what they had been saying to a diminishing audience for decades was getting further and further from reality was gradually dawning on them. many "protestants" had arisen to proclaim that the left should recover its connection with ordinary people. The birthing pains of American anarchism were only !! a part of this. The left stood poised to recover the commitment to such things as participatory democracy and a genuine populism that decades of identity politics had obscured. The Leninist left looked poised to finally fall into the trash-bin of history, a fall very much predestined with the fall of the Soviet Empire in 1989.
This didn't mean that the American left would likely become "anarchists", though it did mean that they would be more than willing to "steal from the anarchist kit of ideas", often giving a version more sensible than that of the originators. It meant that they could have reformed and abandoned so many of their practices that made them a running joke amongst those who had the misfortune of coming in contact with them.
What happened ? An out-of-control imperial crusade on the part of the American government suddenly breathed new life into the terminal patient of American leftism. The Leninists began to recruit again. The academics found a cause to escape the growing knowledge of their futility. The inevitable reckoning was put off- perhaps for decades.
The gift that the Bush presidency gave to a tiny minority of their opponents was a gift of inestimable value. "War" tends to focus the mind just as almost dying does. This focus,however, pushes other matters way into the periphery. The left will now coat-tail the more "loyal" liberal opposition and imagine that it is gaining success after success. The success will be entirely illusionary.
The left would have had a very important role to play in "remaking America". Now they have put all their eggs in the one basket and continued on with business as usual in other matters that are more important in the long term. They will ignore pressing matters just as much as the conservatives that they hate do.
The left has failed because it has missed an opportunity for reformation, for abandoning a lot of its very bad habits. The opportunity will come again, but at a less opportune time. Perhaps when the American public is mindlessly casting around for villains to blame for its defeat, a defeat for which hubris is far more responsible than so-called traitors.
Next installment: We finally go overseas in examination of the losers.
Molly