Comments for what's left

Comment on Thugs of the Near and Middle East by beetleypete

beetleypete — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:05:11 +0000

Turkey makes a very convenient airstrip for NATO of course, so intervention is doubtful, even with a more reactionary religious group in power. Great article, and an interesting Canadian perspective on events. Regards, Pete.

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by Jill

Jill — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:50:59 +0000

Great piece and thank you for the insights. The lack of class based analysis found around the Internet on the Snowden revelations is not surprising but it’s still depressing. When I read remarks like “I feel like I’m in the USSR or North Korea!” I want to reply, “You should be so lucky.”

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by Prole Center

Prole Center — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 01:46:50 +0000

While I sympathize, to a degree, with the romantic idea that we can achieve a classless society overnight, history and logic shows quite plainly that it just ain’t gonna happen. Get the arguments from both sides. Read Marx, and especially Lenin, to get the other side’s argument. Years ago I largely considered myself an anarchist, but I could never quite make myself believe that Marxist-Leninists (like Che, for example), who risked everything for the cause somehow had an insidious secret agenda to become the “new ruling class.” It just didn’t make sense. Please read all sides of the debate and try to keep an open mind.

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by Prole Center

Prole Center — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 01:30:04 +0000

Pete, I understand that “A Very British Coup” as a TV show was redone recently. Any comments? I imagine the original adaptation done in the 80′s is the better one. Although, I am certain it doesn’t quite do justice to the novel. Sounds like a very interesting read. I’ll have to get a copy to read before I watch the show.

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by beetleypete

beetleypete — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:26:47 +0000

You have definitely got it right with these observations. Other views are, quite frankly, naive. Regards, Pete.

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by what's left

what's left — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 17:52:19 +0000

Sorry, not interested in rehashing the anarchist vs. Marxist debate.

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by Steven Frans

Steven Frans — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 16:29:39 +0000

“It was, instead, a consideration of class societies, of which I include societies which have overthrown an exploiting class, but which remain vulnerable to counter-revolution and must guard against the return of the previous exploiters to a position of dominance.” A socialist revolution, a radical transformation of society instigated by the working class cannot produce anything else than a classless society because abolishing alienated surplus value production (which is the only way in which subordinate labour, the working class as class can cease to exist) will make an end to all class antagonisms. Capital, the exploiting class of capitalists but also the guiding principle of capital accumulation as such, has to disappear for the socialist revolution to succeed. From this follows that no state will have a purpose in such process because there won’t be any class left to police. The former exploiters will disappear as an antagonistic force because the other side of the coin, labour / the working class, will have transcended itself. If this doesn’t happen, the state will stay in place as a police force for a ‘new’ exploting class (exactly what happened in the former ‘socialist’ people’s republics.) So yes, I deliberately misread your statements because I don’t agree with the premise that the working class will have to take control of the process of policing exploitation (the purpose a / the state serves) for socialism to become reality. In contrary, every such step will, in my opinion, produce an absolute mockery of the emancipatory drive that socialism stands for (read for example one of Kropotkin’s letters to Lenin: http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/kropotkin/kropotlenindec20.html ).

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by what's left

what's left — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 13:17:18 +0000

Had I argued that a classless society has a need for the repressive apparatus of the state you might have had a reason to disagree. But I didn’t, and your objection is therefore misplaced. You may recall that I wrote: “So long as societies are divided by class, there will be states, and so long as there are states, there will be political police.” The corollary is that societies that are not divided by class, i.e., classless societies, will not need a state (that is, the repressive apparatus of the state), and therefore will not need a political police. But my discussion in no way addressed classless societies. It was, instead, a consideration of class societies, of which I include societies which have overthrown an exploiting class, but which remain vulnerable to counter-revolution and must guard against the return of the previous exploiters to a position of dominance. Granting the previous exploiters political freedom to organize their return would be to elevate abstract ideas about political freedom above freedom from exploitation, oppression, hunger, and insecurity; to make the freedom to politically organize for the creation of conditions of exploitation senior to freedom from exploitation. It would, moreover, guarantee that the creation of a classless society would remain an unachievable dream, for the determined opposition of the expropriated capitalist class and it allies would be allowed to flourish rather than overcome. Allow me, then, to add to my previous observation. “So long as societies are divided by class, there will be states, and so long as there are states, there will be political police.” Without a political police in a socialist society to repress class opposition to a classless society, a classless society will never come about.

Comment on Al Qaeda’s Arms Supplier by Angie

Angie — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 03:18:52 +0000

For more on Assad winning, see

“Syrian Opposition to Sit Out Any Talks Unless Arms Are Sent, General Says”

Address :

-some quotes from it below:

““If we don’t receive ammunition and weapons to change the position on the ground, to change the balance on the ground, very frankly I can say we will not go to Geneva,” Gen. Salim Idris [top rebel military commander] said in a telephone interview from his headquarters in northern Syria. “There will be no Geneva.” . . .
“Mr. Assad’s military position has been strengthened by flights of arms from Iran and the involvement of thousands of fighters from Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group. The change of fortunes on the battlefield was illustrated last week when the Syrian military and Hezbollah fighters captured the town of Qusayr.

The proposal to hold talks in Geneva at a point when the Syrian opposition has suffered a bitter reversal has led many in the opposition to question the West’s strategy. In effect, they say, Mr. Kerry is insisting that the Syrian opposition sit down with representatives of a Syrian president who appears as determined as ever to hang on to power and at a time when the opposition’s leverage has been diminished.”

Angie@WhatNewsShouldBe.org

Comment on Police States, Theirs and Ours by Steven Frans

Steven Frans — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 22:10:41 +0000

The working class’ revolution will be protected by its own revolutionary dynamic: abolishing labour as a power relation, as a subordinating principle, and radically democratizing society, starting with production / consumption by adopting quality / human need as the orienting principle of the economy. Such a classless society doesn’t need a state. I think every emancipatory movement should stay true to its principles and can be held accountable on that basis. So no, I don’t agree: the /a socialist project can’t encompass a police state if its to succeed and be an active force for the better of humankind !