Hong Kong
- This topic has 637 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
TrueScotsman
Participant
“This forum was created in order to learn, discuss and study the socialist party case”That’s precisely what I’m doing right now. I’m trying to learn what is your strategy for combating the inevitable counter-revolutionary violence. Instead I hear there will be none, Lol, or I’m insulted. Why won’t anyone directly answer the question?
Here’s what I think. You won’t answer the question because you cannot deny you need leaders to organise military violence. You can’t run an army in which every decision is run through committees of soldiers. It just wouldn’t work. You’d be destroyed by the side that doesn’t do that. Instead of facing this reality you obfuscate. It’s as plain as the nose on your face.
———————————
You are not learning anything at all. Your message is the best evidence
When you were wearing diapers, the socialist party was already combating those wrongs ideas of yours, we had already debunked the concept of the vanguard party and the leadership ( The Prince Machivelli of Russia ) even more, Lenin said that it was only a temporary measure applicable to Russia. and he was not going to re edit What is to be done?
We already combated the concept of the revolutionary war, and the idea that a small amount of peoples can make a revolution, we had already cleaned the floor with Lenin wrong conceptions, even more, Karl Kaustky and Julis Martov cleaned the floor with Lenin blanquist conceptions
We were the first one who had the courage and had the balls to denounce the coup of the Bolsheviks.
We were the only socialist organization which did not support WWI and most of its members refused to be part of the war
You are reading old news and trying to give lectures to the teacher. Take a note book, a pencil, and chair and start to learn something new, you are repeating old days that have been proven to be wrong
“The Left has always assumed that there will be counter-revolution by the threatened ruling class.”
Erm, because that’s what has happened every time throughout history.
“We do not dismiss such a rear-guard action by the ruling class as impossible but in the key countries, we consider such a counter-revolution as unlikely because our strategy is based upon a majoritarian principles as the CM explains.”
Then you are ignoring history. Anyone who believes a counter-revolution “unlikely” is a fool ignorant of history. Such fools, having overthrown the ruling class will shortly be dead/imprisoned/tortured unless they prepare against the certainty of counter-revolutionary violence.
“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.”
What happened in Germany? Huge socialist/communist movement in a vicious war of annihilation against fascist reaction. Fascists 1- Socialists-nil.
“Our goal is a volutarist society which leads to the conclusion that the means cannot be coercive.”
Then you will fail. The fascists will sooner shoot you than give up their place in the hierarchy or allow you to deny them a return to their place in the hierarchy.
“That is a very difficult concept for you to accept, I know that.”
It is, because it is fantasy. I don’t deal in a world of fairy tales. I deal in the real world where socialism’s mortal enemy, fascism, actually exists. In your playschool cosplays your only enemies are rainbow fairies (and real socialists).
“The SPGB reject ALL forms of minority action to attempt to establish socialism, which can only be established by the working class when the majority have come to want and understand it.”
So never then?
“Without a socialist working class, there can be no socialism.”
Well, thankfully, just about every socialist on the planet disagrees with you. While you naval gaze they build socialism in the real, actually existing world.
“The establishment of socialism can only be the conscious majority, and therefore democratic, act of a socialist-minded working class. In many of the so-called revolutionary situations in the past that majority did not exist within the working class.”
So you’ll just wait forever? Great strategy. Have fun with that. Oblivion…how’s the view?
“Can we prove that achieving socialism requires little bloodshed? The SPGB has perhaps the most thought out argument for maintaining that there is all possibility that socialism can be achieved by little violence.”
Then you know nothing of history. What do they say? Doomed to repeat it and all…
“So far, it has been a matter of the Socialist Party unfortunately saying “we told you so”
Huh? You said they couldn’t win socialism but they have and you think you’re right? You gotta start taking your meds Alan, they will help, I promise.
“But we are a miserable lot of gloom and doom merchants”
Wow, something we can agree on. Finally, never thought the day would come.
“but again at same time, we are rosy eyed optimists too in our views that the workers are fully capable of eventually understanding socialism and organising for it with the minimum of social disruption and upheaval and chaos, normally associated with revolution.”
Because of counter-revolution. A threat you dismiss despite history showing it will emerge every single time.
“The SPGB position is that we deem it as very unlikely that the capitalist class would be capable of resisting socialism violently and have argued that in my posts.”
Tell Hitler that, tell Mussolini that, tell Suharto that, tell every American President since 1917 that, tell Pinochet that, tell the Colombian death squads that, and on and on. You are delusional.
“if the people effectively withhold their consent, even the strongest of regimes can collapse.”
Or, they can exterminate, imprison, drive out and terrify you into inaction. See examples above.
“Without the consent of the working class – either their active support or their passive acquiescence the ruling class would have little power and little basis for rule.”
The socialist governments you condemn all had the support of the majority of their working classes.
“The only place violence comes into the revolutionary process is to defend the new revolutionary system from attack by the ancien regime.”
The only violence in which we should engage is that which is reasonably necessary in self defence”
But you’ll need leaders to organise that defence. You don’t believe in leaders. You can not square the circle.
“Although we always have the right to use reasonable force in self defence, it is sometimes the wiser course not to exercise that right. Sometimes it’s better to take the hit and make our enemy pay by exposing them publicly.”
Right, I’m sure Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Pinochet et al were all wounded by the exposure. Lol
“This can be especially effective when the perpetrator has a reputation to uphold. And sometimes the best response to violence is not counter-violence.”
Well, you can frog march off to the soccer stadium for your date with the executioner’s bullet, I think I’ll take my chances shooting back.
“We take damage because the use of force encourages the authoritarian idea that might makes right.”
Expropriating the power and wealth of the ruling class is inherently authoritarian. They’re not going to give everything up voluntarily. They’ll use all the resources at their disposal to prevent it from happening; not least of all counter-revolutionary violence. You’re not cut out for the struggle Alan. You are ignorant of history, a defeatist and coward. A traitor to the cause. Friend of the CIA no less. Why don’t you just join the fascist team wholeheartedly? You’ve already got one foot in the door.
“It disorients people on our side and entrenches our opponents in their positions. The more force we have to use in the course of the Revolution to prevail, the more difficult will be our problems afterwards.”
Well, Alan, if winning power isn’t the goal then this sport isn’t for you. I suggest joining a mutual masturbation society. That way, everyone’s a winner!
“If we must use force in self defence, then let us do it without hesitation and with all vigour necessary to prevail in the concrete situation. But let us not use force to substitute for having insufficient numbers on our side, because that is a confession of political weakness.”
Who’s going to organise and lead that “force”? You don’t believe in leaders.
“What defeated the attempted Kapp Putsch in Germany 1920. The trade unions did. They downed tools. Folded arms rather than taking to arms is an option.”
And how many of them were rotting away in concentration camps 13 years later?
“We do not envisage a Red Army or Workers’ Militia but that by holding constitutional power we state clearly in our Declaration of Principles Clause 6”
Which is why you are fools and will never win power. Safe from the dirty work of actually exercising authority you can naval gaze, scold and castigate to your heart’s content. You will never make any mistakes because you will never do anything. How self-congratulatory the head that doesn’t wear the crown.
“including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of oppression into the agent of emancipation and the overthrow of privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic.”
But who will lead the military, Alan? You don’t believe in leaders.
“The working class in possession of the State holds the ability of force to ensure the capitalist class gives up its position of privilege.”
No shit Sherlock. But it also needs leaders. There are no historical precedents anywhere of large, complex societies existing without them. And you certainly can’t organise the defence of such a society without military leaders. That’s history. It can’t be ignored.
No shit Sherlock. But it also needs leaders. There
are no historical precedents anywhere of large,
complex societies existing without them. And you
certainly can’t organise the defence of such a
society without military leaders. That’s history.
It can’t be ignored.————————————————————————–
It looks that you have not read the ethnological notebooks of Karl Marx, they show a different point of viewIt sounds like the members of the Argentina military juntas who said that peoples need military leaders, they should become members of the central committee of a Leninist Party.
Most of the president of Latin America backed by military juntas have said that peace come from the barrel of a gun and it was the favorite expression of Ernesto Che Guevara too who believe in the so called revolutionary war of Leninism
“The SPGB position is that we deem it as very unlikely that the capitalist class would be capable of resisting socialism violently and have argued that in my posts.”
Tell Hitler that, tell Mussolini that, tell Suharto that, tell every American President since 1917 that, tell Pinochet that, tell the Colombian death squads that, and on and on. You are delusional.
Did you really read what he wrote ? He is about socialism, he is not talking about capitalist regime. I don’t think you know the history of the working class of those countries. In none of those places they have never had socialist consciousness within the working class, most of them embraced nationalism including Germany and Italy, in Colombia they have always supported reactionary government, Pinochet had a high support from the working class ( around 34% ) . The USA presidency started in 1776 and the workers have been totally brainwashed by the ruling class, there is not a majority of socialists conscious workers and most workers do not have a clue of what socialism is and you are one of them.
It looks that you have not read the biography of Lenin written by his wife who was the secretary of the party where she said that the Bolsheviks were a minority and the minutes of the Bolsheviks party show that they were only a 10% Where is the support of the 90% ? The first killing of workers perpetrated by Lenin and Trotsky took place because the workers went to the streets to protest against the bolsheviks and the red army was part of the killing
I think you don’t quite comprehend the Marxist conception of authority, TS.
Marx uses the analogy of a conductor of an orchestra. Engels refers to the captain of a ship.
We defer to the knowledge, skills and experience of others. We take doctors advice even if sometimes we seek a second opinion.
A teacher, a writer, an orator, is not a leader. The role of leadership is political one where we yield our power and control to others rather than retaining the final say and decision-making under a democratic process, which can be very varied and diverse.
I have already said that the biggest mistake has been having made the revolution, the masses permit the politicians and intellectuals to usurp and co-opt it for their own interests and agenda. It demonstrates that the level of consciousness has not been achieved.
Elitists like yourself, reinforce the bourgeois thinking that workers cannot liberate themselves and require a saviour from a-high for their salvation,
Blanqui said, “Revolutions must take place in the mind before they can be carried out on the streets.”
As Marx said, “The emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves. We cannot, therefore, co-operate with people who openly state that the workers are too uneducated to emancipate themselves and must be freed from above by philanthropic big bourgeois and petty bourgeois.”
“Historically, the errors committed by a truly revolutionary movement are infinitely more fruitful than the infallibility of the cleverest Central Committee.” explained Rosa Luxemburg.
As Gandhi once supposedly have said, “There goes my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader.”
Elitists like yourself, reinforce the bourgeois
thinking that workers cannot liberate themselves
and require a saviour from a-high for their
salvation,______________________________________
In reality Lenin and his followers are corroborating what the capitalist class says , that workers can not live without leaders, it is the expression of the owners of the slaves that black peoples always need leaders and that they can not live without leaders. They are doing a good job for the capitalist class.
In a socialist/communist society a workers party will not be needed because it is going to be the end of the proletarian class, political struggles and social division and the concepto of leadership is a political conception.
The conception of leadership thru history has been created by the working class itself because workers thru history have not had political consciousness of their own class, during the primitive communist society the concept of leadership did not exist.
The concept of leader emerged with the concept of property or after the property society, and property in capitalist law is defined as ownership from the top of the earth, to the infinite bottom of the earth, and up to the infinite possession of the sky, therefore, the leaders own us, the concept of leader is a typical class society conception, and it has not place in a society without private ownership
“I think you don’t quite comprehend the Marxist conception of authority”
And I don’t think you understand reality. I think I know which I’d prefer to understand.
“We defer to the knowledge, skills and experience of others. We take doctors advice even if sometimes we seek a second opinion.”
Yet you ignore history. So no, you don’t defer to knowledge.
“I have already said that the biggest mistake has been having made the revolution, the masses permit the politicians and intellectuals to usurp and co-opt it for their own interests and agenda. It demonstrates that the level of consciousness has not been achieved.”
You’d have preferred the tsars remained in power then, or the fascists? Thankfully you weren’t around to have any influence on events.
“Elitists like yourself”
Yeah, I’m the elite. Lol
“reinforce the bourgeois thinking that workers cannot liberate themselves and require a saviour from a-high for their salvation”
No, they do it together.
“Blanqui said, “Revolutions must take place in the mind before they can be carried out on the streets.””
Blah blah said blah blah, masturbation society blah blah! Ahhhh, I’ve cum!
“As Gandhi once supposedly have said, “There goes my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader.””
Gandhi was racist, a member of the petty bourgeoisie, supporter of British imperialism in WW1, friend of the capitalist class and a pedophile. You might want to distance yourself from him, Alan. Lol
“Elitists like yourself”
Yeah, I’m the elite. Lol
Look in a dictionary the meaning of elitism and elitists, and elitist is a person which supports the elite and leaders, the vanguard party to lead is the typical elitist conception. The elite is a vague term used by the leftist instead of using the concept of bourgeois, like oligarchy instead of bourgeois, in old days leftist in the third world called oligarch to the owners of lands, or latifundium which comes from the Roman society but they approved small holding or minifundios
You really have an ideological mess in your brain, you should do what Lenin said in What is to be done? To demarcate your political camps.
“As Gandhi once supposedly have said, “There goes my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader.””Gandhi was racist, a member of the petty bourgeoisie, supporter of British imperialism in WW1, friend of the capitalist class and a pedophile. You might want to distance yourself from him, Alan. Lol
You misunderstood him and you do not know any style of literature or political writing where people use citation to confirm what they are talking about, sometimes I cite Stalin, Lenin or Mao to confirm my ideas. There was a politician which was an ultra right winger who used to cite Lenin all the time to confirm some of his ideas, specially State and the revolution, and What is to be done ? . Alan is not taking side with Gandhi.
In legal documents ( Pleading ) written in legalese expression, lawyers use all kind of citations to prove their cases, and Alan is doing the same thing, he is trying to prove his case about leadership
I don’t ignore history.
The Tsar was deposed by the people, not the political parties in a popular uprising that the Tsarist regime could not contain in
February 1917. Not by the Bolsheviks. They just finished off the job with the Romanov executions.During the crucial period your leader, Lenin, was thousands of miles away in exile ineffective and without influence.
From February to October there existed a transition called “dual power” between the soviets and the provisional government.
Pravda that had an editorial policy of critical support for Kerensky that lasted until the eventual return of Lenin and Stalin was one of the editors who refused to publish Lenin’s letters from Switzerland.
The Bolsheviks ended the influence of the soviets in a series of actions against their independence. It was not the fascists who defeated the workers’ soviets and hence the revolution, it was the Bolshevik Party, once they had no further use of them to camouflage their power grab.
I know my history only too well.
“This website is devoted to taking a shit on world socialism.”
There, fixed it for you.
“We have no interest in nation-states or in their rivalries and squabbles. We are not nationalists nor patriots. In both world wars, members of this organisation were required to either go on the run to avoid compulsory military conscription or they were sent to labour camps – Yes, Britain had its form of gulags, too.”
So your cowardly comrades left it to the brave Soviets to kill 8 out of 10 Nazis. How honorable of them.
“Taiwan is a province of China…There is only one China…”
“What surprised me is your support for nationalism. What does it matter to you if the ROC remains separate or if it becomes part of the PRC?”
It doesn’t matter to me. It matters to the Chinese.
“Why are you so emotionally attached to the idea of unification?”
I have no emotional attachment to the idea. The Chinese do. Why are you so emotionally attached to the idea that the quisling marionettes ruling Taiwan should be allowed to declare independence?
“What concern is it of you if a region chooses self-determination?”
It doesn’t concern me. It concerns the Chinese. What concern is it of yours?
“But to return to your own national chauvinist beliefs.”
Lol. What are those, exactly?
“You don’t mention that the indigenous inhabitants of Taiwan have been dispossessed and oppressed for hundreds of years.”
Not by the communists.
“If any group has a claim to Taiwan it is those people, the original Taiwanese, ethnically very different from the Han.”
Right, and everyone in the USA, Australia, Canada and New Zealand should return to Britain. Lol
“These islanders have been subject to colonisation and invasion by the Dutch, the Mainland Han, the Japanese and then the Kuomintang army.”
Not by the communists. And how many people are we talking about? A few tens of thousands? A couple hundred thousand?
“As world socialists, our interest extends to every industry and every country. What happens to the workers anywhere is the business of us here.”
Yeah, right. Your only concern is that their socialist experiments fail. Because you are naval gazers. You do nothing but snipe from the side lines.You will never make any mistakes because you do nothing. As Homer Simpson says, “If you try and fail, why try?”. Sums up you mob perfectly.
“We are not at all worried about the accusation that we are “poking our noses” into matters that do not concern us.”
I count 6 of you. No one gives a toss about you. Your sense of self importance is pretty impressive though. If there was a prize for that, you’d be in the running.
“However, your position is very much different. You don’t take the side of your class but support particular governments.”
The governments that are representatives of my class. But I don’t expect you to understand the nuance.
TrueScotsman wrote:
“This website is devoted to taking a shit on world
socialism.”There, fixed it for you.
————————————-
I don’t think it is proper to change other people expression on this forum and to use it to make jokes
World Socialist Movement is a serious socialist organization who has a recognized history and prestige within the working class movement, it has been recognized by some left communists groups that I have been in contact with
““These islanders have been subject to colonisation and invasion by the Dutch, the Mainland Han, the Japanese and then the Kuomintang army.” Not by the communists. And how many people are we talking about? A few tens of thousands? A couple hundred thousand?.”
Hear yourself, for goodness sake.
And you have the audacity to throw about the word racism when you have just exposed yourself as utterly unconcerned by settler colonialism because they don’t count because they are no longer as numerous as the invaders.
Would you say such things to the First Peoples of America? To the Aborigines and Maoris? To the Hawaiians? The adivasi of India? To the Palestinians in Israel?
I never suggested the deportation of settlers. You made a claim for Taiwan being “rightfully” a province of Mainland China and
I showed that the Han, regardless of politics, hold no claim to Taiwan other than as conquerors and that it is bombastic jingoism for the PRC to assert sovereignty over Taiwan. Should the UK insist that the Irish Republic still be British?As for numbers, TS. I count only one of you. When asked to name any political party you would consider comrades, you came up with absolute zero. Zilch. Not one organisation could you name that you would join or attach yourself to.
Why else other than being a lonely outsider should you devote your time and energy to this forum? Perhaps it is if we accept you live in Japan and are unable to speak the language, you suffer from isolation and even this little contact compensates your alienation.
“Hear yourself, for goodness sake.
And you have the audacity to throw about the word
racism when you have just exposed yourself as
utterly unconcerned by settler colonialism because
they don’t count because they are no longer as
numerous as the invaders.”You are funny. You talk of Taiwan belonging to the tiny fraction of indigenous people as though everyone else should exit the island. You’d have them run an industrial society all on their own? You think there are enough of them with the expertise to run the power stations, airports, sewerage treatment plants, train network, ports, banks, etc? You’d allow all the empty houses, factories and all other infrastructure to crumble around them? Spare me your faux outrage. Communism brings uplift to marginalised groups. Your pathetic attempts to label me racist are just that, pathetic. Lol
“Would you say such things to the First Peoples of
America? To the Aborigines and Maoris? To the
Hawaiians? The adivasi of India? To the
Palestinians in Israel?”Palestine-Israel does not belong on your list. The Palestinians are the majority of the population and the colonisation happened within our lifetimes. But what are you saying, Alan? That everyone else should just pick up sticks and leave? And where would they all go? You want 350 million homeless Americans to descend on Britain? Listen to yourself. Lol
“I never suggested the deportation of settlers. You
made a claim for Taiwan being “rightfully” a
province of Mainland China and
I showed that the Han, regardless of politics,
hold no claim to Taiwan other than as conquerors”No claim? Really? They’ve had a claim there longer than many countries have existed, including my own.
“and that it is bombastic jingoism for the PRC to
assert sovereignty over Taiwan.”No, it is recognised under international law as part of China. I appreciate that you don’t care much for international law but most people in the world do.
“Should the UK insist that the Irish Republic still be British?”
That’s a matter for the Irish and British to resolve.
“As for numbers, TS. I count only one of you. When
asked to name any political party you would
consider comrades, you came up with absolute zero.
Zilch. Not one organisation could you name that
you would join or attach yourself to.”Sure, but I have allies in the hundreds of millions because I’m not busily alienating every socialist on earth. How many allies do you have? Only Trotskyists? Oh, that’s right, you hate them too. You got no one. How’s the view from oblivion? BTW Is it white or black there?
“Why else other than being a lonely outsider should
you devote your time and energy to this forum?”Because I can. Why else?
“Perhaps it is if we accept you live in Japan and
are unable to speak the language, you suffer from
isolation and even this little contact compensates
your alienation.”Not at all. I’m blessed with a family, friends and ample free time. It’s just that I enjoy playing with you like a cat does a mouse.
TS yet again airs his obnoxious nationalist views and nationalist assumptions for all his pathetic attempts to present himself as some sort of faux communist (“Communism brings uplift to marginalised groups” – the same sort of argument the British imperialists used to justify their own imperial conquests – that it was good for the natives)
You cannot be a communist and a nationalist. You can only be one of these by jettisoning the other.
Perhaps our resident bootlicker of the billionaire-friendly Chinese capitalist regime should consider changing his pseudonym. Anyone who considers themselves to be a “True Scotsman” is a world away from the kind of thinking that asserts “The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got” (Communist Manifesto)
Despite the disagreements, L Bird, I’m glad to hear you’re alive and kicking and haven’t succumbed to the virus.
I would have said affectionately “shine on you crazy diamond” but I didn’t, just in case you thought it was insulting (which it wouldn’t have been)
- The topic ‘Hong Kong’ is closed to new replies.