http://www.peoplesworld.org/home/ http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3184 The danger of John's commentary is not only that it ties the to the "Communist perspective" the Keynesian approach and definition of public goods, embracing by the same stroke the fallacies strategies of the lesser evil, but more importantly that it makes a biassed analytic leap by, as he put it, viewing the problem "in strictly economical terms". There is no strictly anything in the Materialist Dialectic analytical approach, that is not to deny the fundamental role which economy plays in John's response to David's "fair question". It is more than a "fair question" it is an important one that members of the CPUSA should address without paternalistic hats and innuendoes of Trotskyist taints that only intimidate and push aside the genuine look in the mirror. I didn't see any "raising the ante" approach in his question. But rather a criticism for lack of identity from the part of those that are running the Party. Obviously John has leap frogged all the existing data on the existing reality of this economy and its context within this world. Salary loss, jobs loss, bankruptcies, public social cuts, concentration of capital with the explicit facilitator's role of all past and present presidencies, home foreclosures, increased levels of homelessness, fascistic approach to national security - and both Parties (Republicrats) have their hands covered with red paint in this. -, increase in imperialist interventions - Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Honduras, Colombia, Serbia - perpetual harassment and provocations in countries like Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Iran, Russia, China, North Korea, and on and on -, the previous administrations de-industrialization trend has not been reversed unlike the empty promises of the actual representative of capital would have us believe. Do you still remember the "changes that we can believe in" hypocritical slogan? What do you make of the actual increase in corporations profitability, would you say that it is a result of expanded policies that address the urgent elementary necessities of the overall population? That as a result of salary increases we are seeing an increase in commodity purchase? Efficiency in production has its correlation in profit making and guess at who's expenses? And what is more this is not a strict US problem, in the so called Social-Democratic countries of Europe, but not only, we see similar patterns. When times are tough guess who pay's the bill? That's right the "small people!" And whom should be there in the first trenches of the social-political-economical fight? That's right, the Communist Party! There has to be a much more direct understanding of what "Social-Democracy" really means. In times of the fat cows, it means reducing class struggle and class consciousness by hypnotizing with meager carrots the working populations at home when simultaneously skinning to the bone those abroad, while doing the never ending duties of supervising capital expansion. In times of arid pastures, there goes your "public goods" and to hell with the mask, repression for dissent and public money for the banks. There are less masochistic ways to terminate than to tie your destiny to the under belly of an elephant. There are other forces other parties, other movements that can be created without compromising your class character and integrity. As crucial as is the role of the vanguard in the class struggle and regardless of the CPUSA position in it, the reality is, according to Forbes, so far his class is winning it! Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:59:17 -0400 Miguel Ervedosa http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3184 http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3183 An alliance implies a two-way agreement resulting in working together. Even if we are willing to ally with Democrats, I'm sure they would never in a million years agree to be our ally. How many times have Democrats looked down their nose at socialists, derided them as lunatics, called them a stain on their party, tried to dissociate from them, etc. How can we have an alliance with such people? We can try to support them while hiding our political identity. But that's a one-way street and cannot be called an alliance. What's more why would we want to "ally" with these people in this way? It's one thing to argue that health care should pass and to support it - see the blog entry I wrote for our Party club at http://www.starsandgears.blogspot.com/ - its another thing to call anonymous support of the center-left bourgeoisie "alliance". Lets be precise in our terms. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:40:24 -0400 D. Bester http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3183 http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3182 The whole notion that we have no alliances with the Democratic party under any circumstances is ridculous in the extreme and has nothing to do with marxism. That prescription would have us sitting out the 2008 elections and sitting on our hands this fall - not to mention the struggle for reforms the past year. Don't be fooled by the revolutionary phrase. As for dave's question about our role, I do think we have spelled it out, but the problem is that he doesn't agree. I am going to submit something soon to preconvetion discussion addressing this. Dave's problem is that he reduces our unique contribution to the ideological sphere alone, and narrowly so at that - not so my friend. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 11:00:37 -0400 sam webb http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3182 http://www.peoplesworld.org/krugman-s-attack-on-china/#PageComment_3181 The relationship w/China is one area where the policies of the more progressive US unions, including/especially the USW, continue to be backward. While unions have developed exchange programs that include even Cubs and Vietnam, China is still a poria (I know tha is misspelled). It seems to me that one thing that trade unionist can do is work toward bettering the (non-exististent) relationship between US & Chinese unions. The proposal from the administration, around the jobs question, to create an export commission, actually centering their drive toward jobs create around exports, must be centered on China. It cannot succeed, from what we're seeing, since China has shifted its economy away from imports in this period, toward production for their home market. A divisive import tax could only worsen this relationship with the ONLY nation on earth that could actually increase imports from our nation, and it would certainly invite retaliation from a much stronger economy. Ultimately the "export commission" proposal seems code language for moving in direction of more free trade pacts, a clearly failed policy. John deserves credit for writing on this issue, which is a real mystery to most. I, for one, certainly do not really understand what "China's market based socialism" means. What we see is that, while China has raised millions from poverty, their policies in relationship to the world socialist movement has clearly been a negative one. As well, we see China exporting capital, having huge problems with not paying workers, has created more billionaires than our nation, have a large sector of their economy than is capitalist and highly exploitive foreign corporations and a labor movement that is more a tool of mngt. I was recently dumbfounded to learn that China is "moving to create a ntl. health care program." While that is great----60 yrs AFTER their revolution they still haven't addressed that need? Saying this, I understand that China is still a developing nation, etc. However, I think we really need to discuss what is "socialist" in China, if there is some part of that economy that is actually socialist. We certainly need much more understanding of that situation. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 10:11:25 -0400 bruce bostick http://www.peoplesworld.org/krugman-s-attack-on-china/#PageComment_3181 http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3180 Davids question about the specific contribution of communists, or for that matter, socialists as well, is a fair one, although I do not agree with his earlier recipe of simply "raising the ante" in slogans. That's the classic Trotsky - like approach that more often than not plays a splitting role. In strictly economic terms, from the communist perspective, the role of the social-democratic struggle (especially its offensive, income raising, reform features) is to compel a reproduction of society in which public goods expand relative to private commodities. Public goods (since Paul Samuelson's classic study gave them a very precise definition) form a very broad and indeed expanding part of our economy. They have grown qualitatively with every major technological/financial restructuring of the world capitalist economies since. They include all government infrastructure and services which span security, health, transportation, education, environmental protection, anti-discrimination, economic bargaining rights and institutions. But they also include a host of new products classified as intangible which, although still captured legally as commodities in fact are very poor ones, and businesses that make them are increasingly becoming quasi-public (drug enterprises for example). Entertainment, software, art, all the "knowledge" industries are included. So a key part of the communist and socialist angle is a vision of where the democratic struggle is HEADING. In the first place toward a society in which the rule of socialism, from each according to their ability, to each according to their work, is ever more directly embraced in law and culture. To the extent that the public and private investment in "our abilities" leads to expanded public goods, the more rewards for work are shared broadly, and the less are commodities' values divided according to the division of labor, including the division of labor and capital. In the second place, toward the time when public goods are indeed bigger than commodities in consumption (and employment) and the communist principles of from each according to their ability to each according to their needs becomes both practical and appropriate to such an advanced economy. We need to find ways to celebrate these principles. They can inspire a new generation of fighters. We also add, where liberalism does not, a keen focus on the working class component in the democratic struggle, and the special challenges to democracy that bourgeois and monopoly forces repeatedly pose. The democratic struggle is, as we can see everywhere around us, a CLASS struggle. The same solutions that the objective features of the great crisis compel us to address, are also those that move in a more socialist direction. We should draw attention to this at every opportunity, and note -- to the alarm of those that, after 1991, claimed a 'new world order' -- the transition from capitalism is still underway, and on schedule! jcase Sun, 21 Mar 2010 09:46:47 -0400 John Case http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3180 http://www.peoplesworld.org/resetting-u-s-cuba-relations-and-the-cuban/#PageComment_3179 You need a workers army which serves the majority. The fascists will always side with the Imperial rich as the way forward, and that is why the top five percent in America own and control the base 95%. Obama wants to change some things, but is told he cannot change the oppressive rulers who make wars of aggression to maintain their profits so he goes along. Wrong way and leads nowhere. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 02:17:14 -0400 john http://www.peoplesworld.org/resetting-u-s-cuba-relations-and-the-cuban/#PageComment_3179 http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3178 Bruce, your comments generalizing those of us who are critical as not speaking about the crisis is unfortunate and only has the effect of shutting down debate. I refuse to justify my criticisms by first giving my credentials and by having to regurgitate the obvious. I have stated in as many ways as I can create that our involvement in the mass arena as the best soldiers is axiomatic. What I have been begging for is the answer to a straight forward question, "What is the Specific role of Communists in this period when we say that the time could not be riper for building the Party? How will we recruit?" Simply saying we should be involved is not giving leadership to those of us in the trenches. Neither you, nor Sam Webb, nor John Case, nor Dan Margolis have been anything but general. There are many of us who understand unity, understand the relationship between the immediate and the advanced, but do not have the material and ideological tools to carry on the struggle as Communists Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:30:16 -0400 David Bell http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3178 http://www.peoplesworld.org/obama-school-plan-has-pluses-but-big-minuses-teachers-and-others-warn/#PageComment_3177 The problem of poor schools is never dealt with except by tinkering and gimmicks like charter schools and privatization, which often make the system worse. The issue is how to get enough high quality teachers and backup resources into the schools, mostly in inner city and minority communities, with highest need. Although no doubt there are some pretty awful teachers, attacking teachers as a group to get them to perform better is worse than useless, especially when there is no magical way to create new teachers with better skills. Meanwhile, creating the impression that teaching in inner city schools is a career killer because you will be expected to work miracles on the test scores and will be fired if you don't, is just another way to motivate good teachers to avoid those inner city postings. In 3 1/2 decades of undergraduate college teaching I often suggested careers in elementary and secondary education to my students, but with each passing year there was less responsiveness to the idea. When asked, students would tell me they did not want to be schoolteachers because the job seemed to be impossible and not one respected by society. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:59:44 -0400 Emile Schepers http://www.peoplesworld.org/obama-school-plan-has-pluses-but-big-minuses-teachers-and-others-warn/#PageComment_3177 http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3176 Well, Bostick! Of course, I wasn't pretending to claim that building alliances and aspiring for a broader movement is foolish or even opportunistic, although requiring a certain degree of compromise. What is on the other hand foolish and opportunistic is to establish alliances with the same system that you say fight against. How do you think that the Communist Party in Greece mobilized such a broad mass of demonstrators? And do you think that they were all Communist? The banner of unity in this case is the banner of opportunism, it is the banner of confusion because it pretends to fight the system while advocating for its defense. All this of course in the sequence of a painful economical crises which has been washed out, in most analyses that I read from the CPUSA, by carefully balancing the subtle critic with an over optimistic look at the Obama administration policies. If you think you are going to "win the hearts/minds of the" United States people with this action path, you are in for a big surprise! You have to break the mold of critical thinking. You should understand that people do not take the time to read these sad and often uninspiring, pretending to be casual journalistic commentaries, articles and then answer to them just for the fun of pocking someone's else ego. We are talking about the emancipation of the world, about the urgent necessity of a vanguard who assumes itself as such and doesn't feel the uncontrollable need to almost say sorry at every written line for defending and representing the fights and aspiration of the working class and yes, of course its allies and all oppressed citizen of this country. It is important to not hide the truth, and the truth at present is not pretending to be positive and self indulge in "new age communistic" compliments. The truth is that the CPUSA is in the critical stage of becoming irrelevant by tying up its "destiny" to that of the Democrats. Real unity is the art of engaging on a broader front without losing its intrinsic identity. There are alliances you do not want to seek for the simple reason of loosing your ethical reliability and integrity. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:29:03 -0400 Miguel Ervedosa http://www.peoplesworld.org/no-pat-hands-in-politics/#PageComment_3176 http://www.peoplesworld.org/israel-faces-moment-of-truth-over-east-jerusalem/#PageComment_3175 Great article, Sue! You're doing a tremendous job here. You're getting the word to folks that no one else is doing. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:33:27 -0400 bruce bostick http://www.peoplesworld.org/israel-faces-moment-of-truth-over-east-jerusalem/#PageComment_3175