{"article":{"id":124146,"heading":"Intellectual Ferment in the Party","author":"duko","created":"2005-03-23 18:48:34","modified":"2005-06-02 15:33:30","last_modified":"Thu, 02 Jun 2005 22:33:30","article":"

Editor's Note: The following is an excerpt from the question and answer \r\nsession following a recent talk by Bob Avakian, Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party. \r\nThis talk was given to a group of supporters of the RCP who are studying the historical experience \r\nof socialism and the dictatorship of the proletariat, and preparing to take up the challenge of \r\npopularizing this experience and engaging in discussion and debate with others about it, particularly \r\non campuses but also more broadly.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

This excerpt has been slightly edited for publication in the RW<\/i>. The \r\n complete text of Bob Avakian's talk \"DICTATORSHIP \r\n AND DEMOCRACY, AND THE SOCIALIST TRANSITION TO COMMUNISM\" and the \r\n complete Question \r\n and Answer session is online at rwor.org.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n

QUESTION <\/b>: I was just wondering if you could speak a little bit to how--while \r\nnot throwing out democratic centralism or something like that--how do you have the party in the mix \r\nof all of these ideas? You went to China and you talked to these people around how China was \r\nopening up to the West and saying Marcos was a great leader and this, that and the other, and you \r\nwere asking these people in the Chinese party and they didn't have the answers. And part of it is: \r\ndid those people not have the answers, or did they have some questions on it, but they were more \r\ndebating it internally and they couldn't talk to you about it? How can you have the mix of people \r\nbeing able to be in the midst of all the questions that are going on, intellectually--political questions, \r\nbut also in the ideological realm--without breaking democratic centralism? How do you have people \r\nin the mix of that, being able to engage it and even in some ways go off in the wrong direction in \r\norder to eventually get to the right direction, but then not have that cause a splintering effect. You \r\nknow?<\/p>\r\n\r\n

BA:<\/b> Yes, I do. As far as the specifics about China, I think it was some of both. I think \r\nthat the people we were talking to were not in a position to just respond, because they would have \r\nbeen violating the principles of the party, the principles of democratic centralism; but they could \r\nhave taken it up higher and come back and at least given us an answer, even if it were a restatement \r\nof official policy. They did give us a sort of general rap, but it was very general and frankly \r\nmeaningless in that context. There was a question of democratic centralism inside the party, which \r\nwe did recognize. But somewhere, on some level, somebody should have been able to engage the \r\nthings we were raising and to give a reply to them. And that didn't happen.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

But the more general point is--look, this is one of the big problems of socialism. You're living in this \r\nfucking world of imperialists, and everything you do is used by the enemy. They pour over everything you say to look \r\nfor vulnerabilities. And this makes it difficult to openly discuss a lot of things, in socialist society. To be honest, the \r\ndecision to do the \"opening to the West\" was probably made by a tiny handful of people. It was not made \r\nthrough the process of having discussion among the masses broadly. And the reason for that is not because Mao, for \r\nexample, didn't believe in that process. But this involves a lot of \"state secrets.\" If you are worried about \r\nthe Soviets attacking--let's get down on the ground here--if you're worried about the Soviets attacking you at any \r\nmoment, and you let it be known that you're starting to negotiate with the U.S. to try to counterbalance that, maybe you \r\nwould precipitate a Soviet attack quicker, before you can get anywhere with that, with those discussions and \r\nnegotiations.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

You're operating under a lot of constraints there. This was a very real threat, and to precipitate an attack before \r\nthey felt they were as prepared as they could be, would be a bad idea. On the other hand, the result of that is that this is \r\na very restricted group of people that's discussing and debating and struggling over this--and falling out over it, frankly. \r\nThe split in the Chinese leadership with Lin Biao had a lot to do with this. And his line wasn't any good either--it was \r\nsort of a pro-Soviet line in that context. Not that he thought the Soviet Union was so great, but that the way to deal with \r\nthe Soviet Union was more to move in its direction rather than to \"provoke\" it. So this is the problem: Here \r\nyou have a society that you want to be run by the masses of people, and yet one of the biggest decisions that's made is \r\nnot made by the masses of people, it's made by a tiny handful--because of the reasons that I've talked about, and not \r\nbecause you had leaders who didn't want the masses involved in this discussion. If they had had the freedom to do so, I \r\ncan guarantee you that, given his overall approach to things, Mao would have had massive discussions for a few years \r\nbefore they resolved the question. But, in the real world, they might have been attacked in the meantime.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

So that's the problem you're dealing with, that's one level of what you're raising, one level of contradiction. It's a \r\nreally knotty problem. It's a really vexing problem, and you could stay up late at night--I myself have agonized over \r\nthis for 30 years, without exaggeration. [ laughter <\/i>] And I still am not at ease with it. It's easy to see some \r\nmistakes were made, that's not what I mean. But I'm not at ease about how you correctly handle this, because there's \r\nnot an easy answer to it. I literally have been thinking about this and agonizing over it for 30 years, and I still don't feel \r\nthat I'm that much closer to knowing the answer to it. To the degree they could, over every question and issue they \r\ncould, under Mao's leadership they would involve the masses very broadly in these things. But there were some \r\nspheres where they did not, where they had not yet wrenched the freedom to do this. When we get down to the point \r\nwhere it's a question of how to finish off the few remaining enclaves of the imperialists in the world, we can probably \r\nafford a lot of debate about it. But we're a long way from that point, and it's very difficult at this stage, when you're \r\nfighting uphill all the time. And it's remarkable the things that were achieved under those circumstances, but we still \r\nhave to do better. And you can't just say: \"Well, what do you expect? That was the necessity, so that's all that \r\ncould happen.\"<\/p>\r\n\r\n

But it's not an easy answer. Not only have I agonized over this for 30 years, but other people have agonized over \r\nit, and we don't have an answer, a satisfactory answer yet. So we have to keep working on this problem. But it's a \r\nreflection of the fact that you are still where you are in the process. And, as I said, the masses being the masters of \r\nsocialist society is relative and not absolute. This is one of the sharpest expressions of it. This is a case where \r\nrepresentatives who hopefully act in the interests of the masses are, in their very small circles, debating and deciding \r\nthis--and then taking it down through the ranks of the party and the army, and in some form among the broader masses. \r\nSo that's one point.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

The other point has to do with this orientation about \"a solid core with \r\n a lot of elasticity\" and about being able to determine and distinguish \r\n those things around which you do really have to be very firm and pay very close \r\n attention, and those things around which you don't have to and shouldn't do \r\n that. Even within the life of the party, this is something that needs to be \r\n applied--even in the political and ideological life of the party (I mean, there's \r\n life of the party in another sense, but we're not talking about that right now). \r\n [ laughter <\/i>] But in the ideological and political life of the party, \r\n you have to be able to make those distinctions. If you want ferment among those \r\n you are leading and influencing, or in the society as a whole if you're leading \r\n it, you can't have no ferment inside your leading core, your vanguard. So what \r\n can you have it over, and what can't you? In the midst of trying to deal with \r\n all the contradictions of socialist society, are we going to have the party \r\n undecided about whether we should have socialism and the dictatorship of the \r\n proletariat? I don't think so! If that were the case, we wouldn't be able to \r\n do anything.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

On the other hand, what does it mean to apply these principles in the sphere of art, or of health service, or the \r\nscientific sphere? We might be able to have a lot of ferment and debate--including in the party--over things like \r\nthat.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

But this will put tremendous strains on things, and particularly on the leading core, at times. In feudal society one \r\nof the ways they executed people was by drawing and quartering them, with horses pulling people in different \r\ndirections and their bodies just flying apart. Well, you know, if you're in a position of trying to lead a process of the \r\nkind I'm talking about, you can feel sometimes like you might be drawn and quartered. Maintaining that solid core, \r\nwhile allowing and encouraging and fostering a lot of ferment, and wrangling and struggle--a lot of the elasticity--\r\nmeans that it's extremely difficult to keep that core together while you're doing that. But if you don't do that, if you're \r\nnot willing to risk that, then you won't really involve the masses the way you need to--the \"you\" who is \r\nengaging and deciding these things doesn't expand, even inside the party, let alone more broadly, and you don't get the \r\nrichness and diversity out of which much more can be learned.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

But this takes work. That's why Mao said that dogmatists are lazybones, because all you have to do is just repeat a \r\nfew rote formulas and chant a few slogans, and treat the science like--pervert it into a religion, essentially--and for \r\nawhile you can go along like that, until reality overwhelms you. But to do it the way I'm talking about, and \r\nemphasizing, requires a lot of work and it requires continually grappling with \"what is this outlook and \r\nmethodology and how do you apply it correctly under now this circumstance and now that circumstance--with three or \r\nfour things going on at once.\" I remember there was this ad with Martina Navratilova a number of years ago--I \r\ndon't remember what the product was but I remember the ad--she was sitting there with all these tennis balls flying by \r\nher (or at least they were simulating that), and then at one point she reached up and grabbed one. The point was that \r\nyou have to maintain your concentration in that kind of a circumstance--keep your eye on the prize, so to speak--while \r\nyou let some things go. And that's what we have to do. A lot of things are flying by you, and you've got a lot of things \r\ngoing on that are intensely percolating in society--and how do you keep ahold of the core but let a lot of this stuff fly all \r\naround you? That takes a lot of work and struggle and going back and forth between practice and theory and really \r\nknowing the masses of people more and more deeply and bringing them forward more so that you have the basis, when \r\nyou go to apply this outlook and methodology, to really do it well. And then you have to learn quickly and well from \r\nyour mistakes. And maybe once in a while a ball flies and hits you in the face, and then you have to deal with that.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

But if you don't conceive of socialism, and even the life of a vanguard party, in that kind of way, then I don't think \r\nyou're really going to be capable of rising to the challenges we're going to confront, and you won't be really involving \r\nthe masses, both in the party and more broadly, in coming up with the answers to these questions.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

There are elements of what I'm saying here that are drawing from historical experience; and there are elements that \r\nare new, in the sense of trying to take that experience and look at it in a new light and try to figure out what aspects, or \r\ndifferent angles of coming at this, would be correct or should be attempted. And, although we don't have socialist \r\nsocieties and the dictatorship of the proletariat right now, we do have a party and there are parties in other countries--\r\nwe do have a movement, an international movement--and a lot of the same questions, methodologically, pose \r\nthemselves now. And the experience we accumulate in handling these things well and the way in which the masses \r\nlearn to do this in growing numbers--as Lenin said masses means different things under different circumstances. When \r\nyou don't have a revolutionary situation, masses might refer to a few hundred people or a few thousand people in a \r\ngiven area. When you get a real mass upsurge in society, masses becomes tens, hundreds of thousands, even millions. \r\nWhen you get a revolutionary situation, it becomes a great part of society that is called into political life. So, when we \r\ntalk about \"masses\" now, we're not talking about millions and millions of people at this point; we're \r\ntalking about relatively small numbers, we're talking about thousands of people who can be drawn into these processes. \r\nBut that's very important preparation for when millions are called into motion.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

So we have some things to learn about this, but I think the principle that it's never good when there's not ferment \r\nalso applies to parties. Intellectual ferment, ideological ferment, is part of what we need to keep a party vigorous and \r\nkeep it able to really deepen its ties with and bring forward masses without losing its bearings, and without losing its \r\nessential core.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n

RL<\/strong>: We wish to end on this note.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

<\/p>

This article is posted in English and Spanish on Revolutionary Worker \r\nOnline
http:\/\/rwor.org
\r\nWrite: Box 3486, Merchandise Mart, Chicago, IL 60654
\r\nPhone: 773-227-4066 Fax: 773-227-4497
\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\n","contact":"darbycrash1965@yahoo.com","link":"","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/html","summary":"\r\n\r\n

QUESTION <\/b>: I was just wondering if you could speak a little bit to how--while \r\nnot throwing out democratic centralism or something like that--how do you have the party in the mix \r\nof all of these ideas? You went to China and you talked to these people around how China was \r\nopening up to the West and saying Marcos was a great leader and this, that and the other, and you \r\nwere asking these people in the Chinese party and they didn't have the answers. And part of it is: \r\ndid those people not have the answers, or did they have some questions on it, but they were more \r\ndebating it internally and they couldn't talk to you about it? How can you have the mix of people \r\nbeing able to be in the midst of all the questions that are going on, intellectually--political questions, \r\nbut also in the ideological realm--without breaking democratic centralism? How do you have people \r\nin the mix of that, being able to engage it and even in some ways go off in the wrong direction in \r\norder to eventually get to the right direction, but then not have that cause a splintering effect. You \r\nknow?<\/p>\r\n\r\n","numcomment":36,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2005\/03\/124146.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[{"id":124153,"heading":"deepen the party's ties to the masses","article":"What ties?","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-23 20:40:59","modified":"2005-03-23 20:40:59","fileurl":""},{"id":124155,"heading":"strengthen the relevance of george orwell and pogroms","article":"Given the fact that it is becoming obvious to many people that International Socialism is the living current response to the Germanic statement "today Germany, tomoroow the world,' i belive that we, as International Socialists, should make sure that we remind people of our ties to real stupidity by emphasizing that we, Die Partei, must control all beings, property people and life.\r\nAfter al, our secret operative, george herbert walker bush is in place and ready to rule forever. and he has toprtect the legacy of his father's betrayal of the gullible Amerikanjischers (impure mongrel nation of savages and trash form the refuse of genetic superiority) Americans. We have to emphasize the reality of our existance: if we as International Socialists do not control america, then DEATH TO EVERYONE EVERYWHERE. Aadter all, we aere Nihilists.Dowe care? Nowe don't care. we simply must dominate everyone. they'll get used to it...it's like marrying a rapist, or a demon. You know, us...the International Socialists.)\r\nthere's not enough of a sense of dread or fear when we appear. We have to mobilize our street operative,the nazi skinheads and the satanic crust punks. Chomsky is a liar but he's a broadbased facile and determined liar.\r\n\r\nWait -- what am I saying? that's GREAT for our causes! we have to remeber that after all, we as Bolsheviks, represent dystentery, malaria and fear, being interrogated to death and also Hitler. We should stop pretending that we are anything but a bunch of internazis.\r\n\r\n(Naional Socialists were called nazis in the good old days when we terrorized those stupid plocks and those ugly Deist hebrews. Superstitious poo poo god-Heads! we have to up the intensity on our evil and menacing presence so that people realise that with our emphasis on class division and ongoing -- even permanent revolution, that We're Aryans and we won't stop til everyone.licks our boots and does as we say. After all -- we are the Party. We ave this internet now: its; a perfect time to reveal that we are the internazis and our sortm teh internatoional socialists shal wipe everyone out with thesheer force of our lack of a clue, or failing that, our stench and our collective sttupidity!)\r\n\r\n\r\ncause when you get right down to it since we all basically follow the Communist manifesto, the opiate of teh intellectual bogger flicking assholerie -- ","author":"doctor_jones","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-23 23:46:18","modified":"2005-03-23 23:46:18","fileurl":""},{"id":124156,"heading":"Socialism...","article":"... would be perfect if the public treasury entrusted to the task of financing services were determined by referendum. Not the parasitic hands of greedy wealth accumulation by the super rich, like it is now.\r\nI call it neosocialism.","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 00:00:25","modified":"2005-03-24 00:00:25","fileurl":""},{"id":124169,"heading":" Preparing to take up the challenge of popularizing this experience","article":"There isn't going to be any popularizing of Socialism or Communism. These failed systems have been in the trash bin of history for about 50 years now. They have zero successes and have been tried in quite a few countries.\r\n\r\nThe best they can do is point to Fidel Castro and Che Guevara - two of the biggest losers in memory.","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 03:27:31","modified":"2005-03-24 03:27:31","fileurl":""},{"id":124170,"heading":"Fidel Castro and Che Guevara","article":"Let's see... Cuba under a hostile embargo for over40 years and has a lower rate of infant mortality than the US.\r\nOh, and Che had to be cut in half by machine gun fire with the aid of the CIA.\r\nYup, all failures. With a bit of help.","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 03:33:26","modified":"2005-03-24 03:33:26","fileurl":""},{"id":124171,"heading":"The big Cuban heist","article":"The only thing they (Fidel and Che) ever accomplished was the big heist. They stole properties from their rightful owners and they got away with it. From that point on it's been all down hill. They're still driving 1957 Chevy's over there. Fidel has one of the most oppressive dictatorships in memory (well, since Saddam).","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 03:36:50","modified":"2005-03-24 03:36:50","fileurl":""},{"id":124172,"heading":"Nationalized Whore houses","article":"Yeah, I bet the loss of the mafia's take from Havanaa got some people pissed off.\r\nWhaaaaa!","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 03:42:58","modified":"2005-03-24 03:42:58","fileurl":""},{"id":124177,"heading":"57 chevys in cuba","article":"It's not like they can get newer cars, can they?","author":"more rational","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 07:59:13","modified":"2005-03-24 07:59:13","fileurl":""},{"id":124179,"heading":"fidel?","article":"Cuba's not that oppressive compared, say, to the Duvalier regime in Haiti. Our allies.\r\n\r\nWhat about Noriega in Panama, or the death squads of El Salvador, or Milosevic, or Idi Amin. These guys were a a whole different level.\r\n\r\nThe basis of democracy rests on the freedom of speech and thought, and on that count, these folks fail. Even *we* fail, somewhat, directly, and completely, in our foriegn policy.","author":"more rational","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 08:06:29","modified":"2005-03-24 08:06:29","fileurl":""},{"id":124185,"heading":"OneEyedMan","article":"filcher: "They stole properties from their rightful owners and they got away with it."\r\n\r\n...yeah, Myer Lansky and Charlie Luciano....","author":"KPC","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 16:30:01","modified":"2005-03-24 16:30:01","fileurl":""},{"id":124186,"heading":"stealing properties from their rightful owners","article":" This was the argument made against Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, the graduated income tax, and the legalization of labor unions.","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 17:01:53","modified":"2005-03-24 17:01:53","fileurl":""},{"id":124189,"heading":"The RCP and the Cult of Chairman Bob","article":"\r\nAs humorous as the RCP\u2019s adoration of their megalomaniacal leader is, it is not just some quirk, but proof of their rejection of a Marxist program and methods of organization. It flows from the RCP\u2019s rejection of the Marxist understanding that the working class, through whose labor wealth is created, is the only class that has the objective interest and social power to overthrow the capitalist order. Instead, they prattle endlessly about \u201cresistance\u201d by the \u201cpeople.\u201d For them the main issue is promoting Avakian\u2019s \u201cvision\u201d for the people versus Bush\u2019s. \r\n\r\n\r\nhttp:\/\/www.icl-fi.org\/ENGLISH\/2005\/RCP-844.htm","author":"Workers Vanguard","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-24 20:01:07","modified":"2013-11-11 00:32:55","fileurl":""},{"id":124194,"heading":"vision","article":"Avakian thinks that Stalin is a hero - a pretty good indication of what his "vision" would turn out to be like if by some miracle he actually attained state power somewhere.","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-25 00:43:38","modified":"2005-03-25 00:43:38","fileurl":""},{"id":124196,"heading":"Meyer's blind eye","article":"When commenting on Castro's stealing properties from their rightful owners, Meyer says:\r\n\r\n"This was the argument made against Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, the graduated income tax, and the legalization of labor unions."\r\n\r\nVery good Meyer - you scored 66.6% on this one. You are correct when you say the graduated income tax and legalization of labor unions are a heist.","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-25 00:56:43","modified":"2005-03-25 00:56:43","fileurl":""},{"id":124197,"heading":"almost right","article":"There shouldn't be any tax on earned income.\r\nOnly unearned income.","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-25 01:02:34","modified":"2005-03-25 01:02:34","fileurl":""},{"id":124198,"heading":"and unearned income ...","article":"Should be progressivly taxed to cap the power of the super rich which I'm CERTAIN BA is not in the catagory of.","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-25 01:05:29","modified":"2005-03-25 01:05:29","fileurl":""},{"id":124201,"heading":"Shaq's salary","article":"How about Shaq's salary Sheepdog? Is that earned or unearned in your view?","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-25 01:51:20","modified":"2005-03-25 01:51:20","fileurl":""},{"id":124202,"heading":"not a sports fan","article":"Well, if he made the money doing something besides sitting on his ass, I'd say it was earned income for the duration of his short productive career.\r\nAlso I'd say he'd better invest it into something solid and intrinsicly valuable for the years of living in a worn, stressed body.","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-25 02:15:34","modified":"2005-03-25 02:15:34","fileurl":""},{"id":124222,"heading":"scandal","article":"The real scandal is not that athletes like Shaq, Roger Clemens, or Brett Favre make millions of dollars a year for entertaining people, but that billionaire owners actually have enough money to pay them these ridiculous salaries. A country where some people sleep in the streets and others can pay entertainers salaries like this and still successfully demand that cities build them stadiums\/sports palaces at taxpayers' expense is a very sick one.","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-25 16:59:17","modified":"2005-03-25 16:59:17","fileurl":""},{"id":124263,"heading":"The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly","article":"The Good: What's good is that those people have the opportunity (in America) to become wealthy (whether a talented sports hero like Roger Clemens or a successful team owner like Drayton McLane\r\n\r\nThe Bad: What's bad is that the government sucks off a disproportionate share of their earnings. They can't keep their own money.\r\n\r\nThe Ugly: There are people like Meyer who want the government bloodsuckers to confiscate even more. These people really believe in this income redistribution crap (that's at the heart of failed systems like Socialism and Communism). It's a variation on Robin Hood: "Steal from the rich and make them poor too like us."","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-26 12:09:23","modified":"2005-03-26 12:09:23","fileurl":""},{"id":124269,"heading":"Adult ADD is a tradedy","article":"Still autolocked in circles. Bush Admirer, you really should keep a journal to know when you're in the place you started when you got lost. We don't enjoy making fun of you so much as it's getting redundant. Try going back to where you started this silly notion and re-read the train of comments until you are back here. That will be fun.","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-26 15:55:31","modified":"2005-03-26 15:55:31","fileurl":""},{"id":124271,"heading":"chuckle","article":"here, this will help.\r\n\r\nSocialism...\r\n\r\n... would be perfect if the public treasury entrusted to the task of financing services were determined by referendum. Not the parasitic hands of greedy wealth accumulation by the super rich, like it is now.\r\nI call it neosocialism.\r\n","author":"Sheepdog","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-26 16:04:40","modified":"2005-03-26 16:04:40","fileurl":""},{"id":124275,"heading":"hard working owner","article":"Ah yes, George W. Bush, former owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, bought for him by his daddy. Now we all know that Bush had a right to own this team, to exert powerful influence over the people of Arlington and Dallas (many of them black and poor), and to demand special priveleges for his sports franchise. He, er, earned these rights. Admittedly, how is earned them is a bit unclear, but the rights of private property must always take precedence over the rights of human beings. Righ, BA?","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-26 16:54:23","modified":"2005-03-26 16:54:23","fileurl":""},{"id":124375,"heading":"Think about it Meyer","article":"Think about it Meyer\r\n\r\nPerhaps most rich people deserve to be rich because they earned it.\r\n\r\nAnd perhaps most poor people deserve to be poor because they earned it.\r\n\r\nBeing lazy --> failure\r\n\r\nBeing industrious --> Success\r\n\r\nBeing a leftist --> Lazy --> failure--> blaming someone else for one's own lack of ability\/motivation\/achievement\r\n\r\nMoral of the story: A lazy bum deserves to fail, and he gets his just due","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 02:31:30","modified":"2005-03-29 02:31:30","fileurl":""},{"id":124377,"heading":"BA's right","article":"Al Capone is a great example of real wealth and how it is accumulated.","author":"Xek","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 02:38:03","modified":"2005-03-29 02:38:03","fileurl":""},{"id":124381,"heading":"No Xek","article":"Al Capone actually got his just due. That's what's happening now with Ken Lay and Andrew Fastow. Those folks didn't earn anything -- they stole it.\r\n\r\nThe guys who earned it have names like Steve Jobs and Yao Ming.\r\n\r\n","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 03:45:32","modified":"2005-03-29 03:45:32","fileurl":""},{"id":124389,"heading":"OneEyedMan","article":"...da filcher's idea of a hero is a criminal who steals big and doesn't get caught...","author":"KPC","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 16:29:54","modified":"2005-03-29 16:29:54","fileurl":""},{"id":124392,"heading":"honest thieves","article":"Bush Admirer's idea of a hero is an honest crook who finds enough legal loopholes to steal money legally or semi-legally, like the owners of Walmart or the owners of the energy companies that virtually bankrupted California a year or two ago. Or the owners of Haliburton and various other cronies of Bush and Cheney.The only time these clowns actually go to jail is when they steal money from other rich people; the poor and the general population are fair game. Ripping them off is euphamized as the operation of the free market.","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 17:04:19","modified":"2005-03-29 17:04:19","fileurl":""},{"id":124393,"heading":"honest thieves","article":"Bush Admirer's idea of a hero is an honest crook who finds enough legal loopholes to steal money legally or semi-legally, like the owners of Walmart or the owners of the energy companies that virtually bankrupted California a year or two ago. Or the owners of Haliburton and various other cronies of Bush and Cheney.The only time these clowns actually go to jail is when they steal money from other rich people; the poor and the general population are fair game. Ripping them off is euphamized as the operation of the free market.","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 17:04:51","modified":"2005-03-29 17:04:51","fileurl":""},{"id":124396,"heading":"fresca","article":"" owners of the energy companies that virtually bankrupted California a year or two ago."\r\n\r\nDidn't he just say that Ken Lay et al were a bunch of crooks?\r\n\r\nYou and the dolt need to read before typing you're usual nonsense. Especially when trying to criticize your betters.","author":"uh..","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 19:35:04","modified":"2005-03-29 19:35:04","fileurl":""},{"id":124397,"heading":""you're usual nonsense"","article":"But at least they know the difference between 'you're' and 'your'.\r\n","author":"English Inspector ( Your 'Better' )","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 20:09:14","modified":"2005-03-29 20:09:14","fileurl":""},{"id":124405,"heading":"Freemarket Fresca","article":"Kenny boy was only one of many involved, and he was tried because he ripped off his peers (the wealthy) as well as the general population. If he had only done the latter he would not only be walking the streets, but he would be having public libraries and parks named after him for donating a few thousand tax-deductable dollars to disintegrating cities he helped to make worse. This is called the free market system.","author":"Meyer London","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-29 23:40:45","modified":"2005-03-29 23:40:45","fileurl":""},{"id":124414,"heading":"Crooks in corporations","article":"There have been some crooks in corporate America. But corporations are by and large good citizens. \r\n\r\nIt's a shame that organized labor isn't as 'clean' as corporate America. In fact, it's hard to distinguish between the Mafia and the AFL\/CIO\r\n\r\nThe same could be said for Jesse Jackson and his type of shake down organization. They compare poorly to corporate America.\r\n\r\n","author":"BA","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-30 04:22:57","modified":"2005-03-30 04:22:57","fileurl":""},{"id":124423,"heading":"OneEyedMan","article":"filcher: "It's a shame that organized labor isn't as 'clean' as corporate America."\r\n\r\n...yeah, a shame....\r\n\r\n...maybe labor unions ought to employ some of corporate America's tried and true methods...\r\n\r\n\r\n**********************************\r\n\r\nThe date April 20, 1914 will forever be a day of infamy for American workers. On that day, 20 innocent men, women and children were killed in the Ludlow Massacre. The coal miners in Colorado and other western states had been trying to join the UMWA for many years. They were bitterly opposed by the coal operators, led by the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company. \r\n\r\nUpon striking, the miners and their families had been evicted from their company-owned houses and had set up a tent colony on public property. The massacre occurred in a carefully planned attack on the tent colony by Colorado militiamen, coal company guards, and thugs hired as private detectives and strike breakers. They shot and burned to death 20 people, including a dozen women and small children. Later investigations revealed that kerosine had intentionally been poured on the tents to set them ablaze. The miners had dug foxholes in the tents so the women and children could avoid the bullets that randomly were shot through the tent colony by company thugs. The women and children were found huddled together at the bottoms of their tents. \r\n\r\nThe Baldwin Felts Detective Agency had been brought in to suppress the Colorado miners. They brought with them an armored car mounted with a machine gun--the Death Special-- that roamed the area spraying bullets. The day of the massacre, the miners were celebrating Greek Easter. At 10:00 AM the militia ringed the camp and began firing into the tents upon a signal from the commander, Lt. Karl E. Lindenfelter. Not one of the perpetrators of the slaughter were ever punished, but scores of miners and their leaders were arrested and black-balled from the coal industry. \r\n","author":"KPC","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2005-03-30 21:42:04","modified":"2005-03-30 21:42:04","fileurl":""},{"id":125074,"heading":"Capitalists are doomed long live to the MSV","article":"the new socialist order will only be constructed over the ruins of the capitalist Sodomah. Our glorious Red troops will be like avenging angels bringing death to the oppressors.\r\nWe will meticulously demolish even the last trace of your rotten society. Over its ruins we will build the Socialist Paradise with millons of cubic meters of Concrete and Steel, the monoblocks and the Walls with radiactive wire will be erected, signalling the arrival of the claseless new society. \r\nDoubt is the weapon of our enemies. There is no place for doubt on our new society. All those who question the authority of our Leaders will be inmediatly liquidated. \r\n\r\nJoin our Movement.....or be liquidated.\r\n\r\nHASTA LA VICTORIA FINAL\r\nMSV \r\n\r\n-sorry for my english, i talk in spanish as i am argentinian, as the fag called Guevara. We post here as we are being SISTEMATICALLY CENSORED by the intolerant fascists who administrate INDYMEDIA ARGENTINA--\r\n\r\n:oP","author":"Comandante Ernesto Mendoza","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"image\/jpeg","created":"2005-04-13 20:38:04","modified":"2005-08-15 00:05:18","fileurl":"\/usr\/local\/www-domains\/la.indymedia.org\/public\/uploads\/2005\/04\/msv_banner_5.jpg","image":{"original":"\/usr\/local\/www-domains\/la.indymedia.org\/public\/uploads\/2005\/04\/msv_banner_5.jpg"}},{"id":127955,"heading":"One picture says it all!","article":"This lovely lady has it figured out!","author":"Impartial Observer","parent_id":124146,"mime_type":"image\/jpeg","created":"2005-06-02 15:33:30","modified":"2005-08-15 00:05:18","fileurl":"\/usr\/local\/www-domains\/la.indymedia.org\/public\/uploads\/2005\/06\/model-noche.jpg","image":{"original":"\/usr\/local\/www-domains\/la.indymedia.org\/public\/uploads\/2005\/06\/model-noche.jpg"}}]}