Workers International League-http://www.socialistappeal.org
In Dfense of Marxism-http://www.marxist.com

No to Bush! No to the Democrats!
By the US Socialist Appeal Editorial Board

Making predictions in the complex world of electoral politics is difficult, but we can say without any doubt that regardless of who wins in 2004, the interests of the working class will not be served. The 2004 campaign will be a big business campaign and the winner will be a big-business candidate. Still, in the coming months, there will be a lot of pressure from those on the left who want to defeat Bush at all costs. The logic behind this sentiment is understandable - for millions of Americans, GW Bush represents all that is evil, decrepit, and dangerous in the world (a capitalist world).

But is this a real solution? Can voting for a "lesser evil" candidate lead to genuine, lasting improvement, peace, jobs, stability, universal health care and education? The answer is clearly "No!"

Most working people do not like Bush and the Republicans, but they don't like what the Democrats have to offer either. Millions do not really believe the old "worker friendly" lie any longer, and expressed their discontent by staying away from the polls in 2002. The only political alternative for the US working class and its trade unions is class independence. Signing over our fate to the representatives of the capitalists is a sure recipe for disaster.

Only a mass party of labor, based on the trade unions and armed with a program of socialist demands can fight back in the interests of the hundreds of millions of workers in the USA. Only with such a party can the process of falling wages, dropping living standards and shrinking rights be halted. The Democrats will never be capable of this.

The working class has to become aware of not only its economic power, but its political power as well. It has to be a class by itself and for itself. The only force the working class can trust is itself - its leaders must arise out of the struggle against the bosses, the government, and the labor bureaucracy itself.

The backing of the Democratic Party by the leading bureaucracy of the AFL-CIO is not only counter-productive, more importantly it is a complete betrayal of the rank and file. The energy and finances of the only mass working class organization in the United States are being sold out to the so-called "liberal" representatives of the capitalist class. This is a situation which is completely in contradiction with the class interests of the American workers. The members of the trade unions are expected to not only hand over most of their lifetime in work to the bosses, but through the actions of their own leadership must give up their political independence as well.

The Democrats have already proven in hundreds of incidents that they cannot be trusted to look out for the workers. They refuse to even fulfill one tenth of the meager promises they make. This leaves the labor movement only one alternative - a complete declaration of political independence. And what better opportunity exists for such a move than now? The Democratic Party has proved its utter worthlessness as far as the working class is concerned – it cannot oppose Bush on a class basis. Even AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, nominally their best supporter, has been forced to come out in mild criticism of them. Still, many people will ask, why don't we give critical support to someone "progressive" like Kucinich or Dean? The answer is clear - they are seeking the Presidency as the candidate of a capitalist party. There is no such thing as a "progressive bourgeoisie" in the age of imperialism - even less so in the world's most powerful capitalist country.

The progressive historical role of the capitalist class is long finished - they can bring nothing but instability, war, oppression and misery to the people of the world. The only reason they have held on to power so long is due to the crisis of leadership of the working class and the outright betrayal of their "socialist" and "communist" leadership.

Due to the absence of experienced and theoretically trained revolutionary parties with a clear class and Marxist perspective, all revolutions since October 1917 have failed. What is needed now is to break the masses and the labor movement from the degenerate Democratic Party - not to foment illusions in them, no matter how "progressive" a candidate may seem. Any support whatsoever for a candidate of the capitalist Democratic Party would blur the class interests involved, and would be the worst sort of class collaboration.

The interests of the capitalist class and the working class are 100 percent opposed, and our task is to increase class-consciousness and unity, not confuse the issue by allowing the possibility that "some" capitalists are "OK". While we would be more than happy if all the promises of universal health care, job creation, cuts in the military budget, repeal of anti-labor laws, and so on came to pass, we must explain that no matter how sincere these candidates are, they are acting only to save the capitalist system. The capitalists have had their chance; on the agenda in the coming period is the overthrow of the capitalist system once and for all. We must fight against all illusions in the system and its representatives.

In our discussions with the many honest supporters of the Democrats, who in our two-party system gravitate towards the "left", we must explain the need for class independence and a mass party of working people - there is no solution on a capitalist basis.

However, in the tumultuous years ahead, it is not ruled out that someone like Kucinich could break with the Democrats and run as an independent (perhaps along the lines of Nader's campaign as a Green in 2000). In this case, we would have to examine the situation concretely. If this candidate brought with him or her a significant layer of the radicalized youth, attracted the most militant labor activists and unions, and served as a point of reference in breaking the stranglehold of the two capitalist parties, we would have to consider very critical support. But even outside the Democratic Party, such a candidate would serve only to channel discontent along harmless lines. We would have to continually expose their weaknesses and call on them to break with their class interests, explaining to their supporters the need for class independence, the involvement of the unions, a socialist program, etc. But that is the music of the future - at the present time we must be extremely clear about the class issues involved: we can only trust our own class and our own power - no faith in the representatives and parties of the opposing class! The "left" Democrats will work to confuse the class issues. We must patiently explain to working people that it doesn't matter if the President is black, female, Latino, white, etc. What matters are the class interests defended by that candidate.

Only a system of workers' democracy - socialism – can genuinely improve the conditions of life for all workers. But to recognize this fact is not enough. We must develop a concrete plan of action to begin the fight back against the attacks of the capitalist class. The main point we must emphasize is the utter incapacity of the Democrats to defend the interests of working people - and this has always been the case. But this is not to say that they will not stage a comeback in the future - as we explained above, it is inevitable that they will. It is therefore imperative that we build a real alternative to the two capitalist parties - we can no longer allow a handful of rich people to control our destinies.

July 2003.

Also in this special July 4 edition of the US Socialist Appeal:

USA: No to the War on Workers at Home and Abroad!
Partners in Crime: American Big Business and the Nazis. By Yosef Mikhah.
See also:

Corporate corruption and the Bush administration By Mick Brooks (June 2003)
The cost of more Guantanamos By Michael Roberts (April 28, 2003).
The world economy after Iraq By Michael Roberts (April 27, 2003).
Class War Heats Up in the US. By John Peterson (April 10, 2003)


[Back to In Defence of Marxism][Back to US]

We're going for 2.000000000000..........000001% this time!!

Decide your own future.

The one Party the Republicans fear the most; it is formed from the best of both Liberal Social Policy i.e., Individual Liberty and Constitutionally Protected Rights, and the best of the Right - Free Market Economics.

...and no to the Libertarians as well! They will sell off all the public lands faster than you can say "The Grand Canyon Retail/Residential Development Corp". In the process, you can kiss goodbye legislation protecting the environment and the workforce.

...of so-called Government Regulatory Agencies and you will find very quickly that their policies are largely determined by the Industry they are supposed to regulate.

FDA Drug Approval is driven by the Pharmaceutical Industry. Witness the War on Alternatives to Toxic Pharmaceuticals and the high cost of bringing a new drug or treatment to market. Unless you have the backing of REALLY BIG MONEY you can forget it.
The FDA had to be told to back off on preventing Vitamin and Nutraceutical companies from advertising Scientifically proven benefits.

Railroad Administration: Same Story.

FDA and the Meat Packing industry take a look into and you will find very quickly that it is inadequate and that Tough Inspectors are gotten Rid of.

Border Patrol: Ditto.

Federal Law Enforcement: Did someone say Waco, COINTELPRO, MK ULTRA etc.,...

I could keep going but what is the point.

The biggest beneficiary of Big Government Regulation is Industry.

Unions?: Federal Troops were used to put down Strikes in the early 20th Century and on into the Teens. Stikers were executed for Striking and Picketing.

"Any Government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take it away." Eric Hoffer

There are effective alternatives to Big Brother and Big Sister.

Do you think Bush is providing good Governance? ROFL!!!!!!!!

Clinton?: Vomit!

CALIFORNIA

Living Wage plan will be bad for San Francisco

A so-called "living wage" law proposed for San Francisco would hurt the very people it is intended to help, warned LP mayoral candidate Michael Denny.

"When elected government officials ignore the laws of economics, citizens suffer, especially the poor," he said in an April 30 statement. "The proposed legislation targets the poorest and least-skilled workers among us, and will increase homelessness even more. It's the complete opposite of what's truly needed."

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is considering imposing a citywide minimum wage of $8.50 an hour, a 26% boost over the current $6.75 city minimum wage.

However, economists have repeatedly shown that a minimum wage makes less-skilled workers unemployable by pricing them out of the job market, noted Denny.

"[Low-skill workers] offer an employer less value than the law requires they be paid; as a result, they are denied the chance to learn new skills that would broaden their opportunities," he said. "Can San Francisco afford to unnecessarily cause thousands of workers to lose their jobs?

Geez, what a complete crock the article at the head of this thread is.

Socialism and Communism have completely failed whenever and wherever they've been tried because the concept is bogus. Marx was wrong. He didn't have any valid economic ideas. It didn't ever work because it couldn't ever work.

Adherence to Marx' beliefs in a more rigorous manner would only amplify and expedite it's failure as a system.

Capitalism, on the other hand, is probably mankind's greatest single invention. We owe our highly developed society and standard of living to Capitalism.

The best thing that could happen with labor unions would be for them to be outlawed. Failing that, we should reform the labor laws making the right to work a national law of the land. We should end the legality of the closed shop. Labor unions should be entirely optional both for employees and employers.

When the Republicans sweep both the House and the Senate elections next year, along with the White House, perhaps we can get to work on some serious and badly needed reform of our labor laws.

We should also shut down the EEOC and we need a major reorganization at the Department of Labor, including the firing of those administrators who are in the pocket of the AFL/CIO.

"Geez, what a complete crock the article at the head of this thread is."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

"Socialism and Communism have completely failed whenever and wherever they've been tried because the concept is bogus."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

"Marx was wrong."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

"He didn't have any valid economic ideas."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

"It didn't ever work because it couldn't ever work."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

"Adherence to Marx' beliefs in a more rigorous manner would only amplify and expedite it's failure as a system."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

"Capitalism, on the other hand, is probably mankind's greatest single invention."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

"We owe our highly developed society and standard of living to Capitalism."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

For more on logic at your level, try reading "Logic for Dummies."

Let's put this on a level that even debate coach can understand.

Socialism/Communism

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs"

"Mr(s). A" has a spouse and two (2) children, a total of four (4) people.
"Mr(s). B" has a spouse and four (4) children, a total of six (6) people.

"A" and "B" both work the same job, side by side, next to each other.

"A" produces 80 units of work per day.
"B" produces 60 units of work per day.
"A" produces 20 more units per day than "B".

"A" has four (4) mouths to feed.
"B" has six (6) mouths to feed.
"B" must feed two (2) more mouths per day than "A".

Back to our premise:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"

"A" produces more units, but "B" has more mouths to feed.

That means that even though "A" produces more, "B" (by virtue of more mouths to feed) receives more.

No, Thanx!! We conservatives don't want anything to do with that.

Next.

We conservatives don't need no stinking evidence for our allegations.

"We conservatives don't need no stinking evidence for our allegations."

This is an utter non sequitor.

What the hell are you refferring to?

"For more on logic at your level, try reading "Logic for Dummies."
Unsubstantiated Allegation

Well, at least you HAVE a debating technique. I'm just here to make an ass out of myself.

you are? fancy that. do you enjoy talking to yourself since you are debate coach.

Do you enjoy having conversations with yourself?

I wouldnt know. do you?

You wouldn't know? Let me refresh your memory. Idiot.

to scottie
by Scottie • Tuesday July 08, 2003 12:52 AM



you are? fancy that. do you enjoy talking to yourself since you are debate coach.

Do you enjoy having conversations with yourself, Ted? Idiot.

10 of the previous 11 posts in this thread are no more than board pollution. They serve no purpose other than to interfere with debate and pollute the board. They make no valid points, fail to refute previous posts, and are about like pissing in the swimming pool.

This only makes sense if the person making those ridiculous posts wants to stifle or cut off debate, most likely because his side is clearly losing.

Posts like these are nothing more than graffiti, and as we know, most graffiti is the work of younger teenagers.

circle
circle going nowhere
circle stuck in neutral

If la indymedia gets full of spam and no longer functions it is more of a pain to the lefties than it is to me.
I have a bit of fun coming and slaping them around a bit but if they want to criple their own propoganda system it would be typical leftie.

People who got wealthy through working hard, people who now give employment other people. They look at their own sad, sorry drug raddled lives and get JEALOUS.

So they join some crackpot fringe leftie group, start quoting outdated 19th century Marxist drivel and start trying to knock down all the good things that others have built up.

Pathetic losers, all.

....so you're josef now huh? How many is that now?

You are nothing but a joke. The likes of Helen Keller could dance circles around you intellectually. You are a great source of amusement.

MENSA disagrees with you

try to be relevant to the topic

Take your OWN advice, you hypocrite. Is a comment pertaining to spam, which YOU posted on Saturday @ 5.42PM, "relevant" to the topic of this thread? Idiot. It looks as though MENSA is getting pretty desperate these days.

"MENSA disagrees with you."

UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION
For more on logic at your level, try reading "Logic for Mental Defectives."

"....so you're josef now huh? How many is that now? "

Hey sheep, take your pills.

I've always been only fresca.

Face it. There are more of us than you.

What is keeping together the social conservatives, the economic conservatives, the libertarian fringe? Bush hammering away on tax cuts...

I didnt start these side tracks you did.
your point was that you thought that I was unintellegent you were mistaken. iI pointed it out.
now I am happy to return to discussing democrats bush and politics.

OK Bush is OK democrats are OK I would decide depending on who the democrats put forward as a candidate unfortunatly they will probably put forward a looser.

the greens are NOT OK.

How in the hell did we let in a moron like you? Did you perform some "oral favors?"

Who do you think will lead the democrats against bush TEd/debate coach/MENSA/analretentiveboy. ?
And how badly will he get thrashed?
And will the greens break the 3 vote mark?

Why in the hell didn't I abort you? I could have done humanity a huge favor!!!!!

what does that have to do with "no to bush and no to democrats"?