Disqus - Latest Comments for AnthonyParnell

Re: Reflections On Obama's Tour

Anthony — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:07:59 -0000

Kostas,

The situation here in America is very good. All that we need is an effective organization of the working class and, when the time is right, a vanguard to lead the way to authentic change (revolution.)

Unfortunately, organizations such as the CPUSA are more focused on playing within the Bourgeoisie game and election process than establishing an effective organization paving the way for Socialism. It is a shame that such a historical organization has given way under the Capitalist pressure and has become yet another cog in the wheel of the system.

How is the Communist Party in your country? Have they caved, or are they still authentically Communist?

Re: Reflections On Obama's Tour

Anthony — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:17:50 -0000

Humans aren't "designed," but conditioned to their environment and social conditions. This environment and social system is prone to change, and those who can't accept change or think that this capitalist system we find ourselves in is eternal and ever perpetuating are the ones who are "looking through rose colored glasses." A few hundred years ago, you would have been giving the same lecture regarding the status of feudalism and how capitalism would never work.

The issue of selfishness or egoism as you've postulated doesn't quite hold: no one has ever said that society will leap from capitalist, self-centered exploitation to a Communist utopia. As I have mentioned several times previously and as you've failed to comprehend (wilful ignorance), an intermediate Socialist phase is required to eliminate the factor of scarcity within society. No longer would industry produce for the purpose of private profit, but rather to meet the needs of society, and industry and the economic heights being held in common by the people, any "profit" that will accrue will be distributed among the workers and into society at large via social programs. Marx postulated that this Socialist phase will take hold in a highly industrialized nation with a strong history of capitalism, making the United States a perfect candidate for social change.

You may not agree with it, and you may not like it, but it is only a matter of time before Socialism takes hold here in the United States. The mechanism for its arrival is being built even as we speak, and it will eventually be the cure to the disease that the Bourgeoisie has become.

But I don't expect you to understand this; the best argument you can make is to call other people names, which only shows the limited nature of your comprehension.

Re: Reflections On Obama's Tour

Anthony — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:34:07 -0000

If you don't understand the social changes which have taken place in the past, and which also point toward the social changes to take place in the future, it is you who is "drinking the kool aid" of willful ignorance. Perhaps you should put a little more critical thought into your worldview and your opposition to this topic.

Re: People's Weekly World - Largest-ever workplace raid terrorizes 600 workers in Miss.

Anthony — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 22:51:52 -0000

I agree, and I always have: there must never be any "guest worker program" or any way in which illegal/non-citizens are brought in to work for the purpose of cheap labor in poor conditions. These individuals must become full citizens with all of the benefits and union support this implies; only then will there be "workers' rights" and a lesser degree of exploitation. The support of "guest worker programs," in my mind, is merely another way for these politicians to keep big-business on their side by ensuring a steady stream of legalized non-citizen labor for their own ends.

I also believe that these immigration laws are not being enforced because these same politicians are either fronts for or part of the wealthy, big-business elite that profit, whether directly or indirectly from their exploitation. It is a simple matter of self-interest on the part of the rich, and they just happen to be the ones in higher office in our warped little oligarchy we like to call a "democracy."

Re: People's Weekly World - Largest-ever workplace raid terrorizes 600 workers in Miss.

Anthony — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:42:57 -0000

This isn't about "workers rights." Simply put, these wealthy elite use "undocumented workers" (illegal aliens, in other words) for cheap labor. Since they have no civil rights in this country due to their being illegal, they have no recourse with regard to fair pay, decent working conditions or anything else. They are used in preference to both legal immigrants and native citizens because of these reasons. Thus, to support "undocumented workers" is simply to support their exploitation. It is only when these illegals become legal citizens that they have "workers rights," or at least legal representation.

Re: People's Weekly World - An August surprise: Russia-Georgia conflict explodes on world scene

Anthony — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:39:02 -0000

I'm glad to finally see FACTUAL reporting on this Georgian aggression and subsequent conflict. I'm ashamed and angered that the Western media has their collective heads so far up their backsides that they don't even understand that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are autonomous regions, and have been for some time.

I have created a petition to try to get the word out regarding Georgian aggression, and for those who would like to stand in solidarity with Russia in this conflict. Feel free to sign it and pass it around:

http://www.petitiononline.c...

Re: Reflections On Obama's Tour

Anthony — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:45:24 -0000

There has been no Communist society in any country, unless you count prehistoric primitive Communism. The reason that Communist efforts to create a Socialist society have failed is that most of these nations devolve into tyranny because there has been no strong democratic element previously. For a Communist society to exist, there must first be a strong industry created by a period of well-developed Capitalism. This gives way, in Marxist theory, to Socialism which tailors the goal of production to the needs of society instead of bourgeoisie profit. Unless there is a strong tradition of democracy, this Socialist transition can very well degenerate into a tyrannical dictatorship.

With the issue of scarcity thus eliminated by Socialism, society can develop and grow out of the flawed ingrained behaviors it has maintained to that point, the state government can wither away to mere administrative functions, and Communism will result. Thus far, experiments in Communism have never been able to evolve past the Socialist phase because of a lack of strong industry and little history of democracy.

Just as feudalism gave way to capitalism, so too capitalism must eventually give way to Socialism; and then, Communism. The period of transition and the effectiveness of the Proletariat revolution are the only determining factors of when such a change will take place. The matter of it taking place is almost certain.

Re: People's Weekly World - House passes apology for slavery and segregation bill

Anthony — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:20:27 -0000

I would disagree with the idea of reparations or payments, either directly or through social programs on the basis of race or nationality. We should completely extinguish the idea of racial separation and racial discrimination, and strive to help those in need based on class and income alone. Doing anything else is simply enforcing the same divisive, race-based social conditions that have kept the Proletariat fractured and ineffective for generations.

Re: Reflections On Obama's Tour

Anthony — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:04:39 -0000

Communism doesn't exist in any of the countries you mentioned; and indeed, a Communist society in modern times has never come to fruition. If you understand the Marxist theory of societal development, which you most likely don't, you'll notice that he theorized that before a Communist society can result, there must first be a strong Socialist state in which the Dictatorship of the Proletariat has placed the industry and economic centers firmly under the control of the public. This Socialism must be in place so that society can develop past the self-centered habits forced upon them by the problem of scarcity. When a society begins production to meet its own needs instead of capitalist profit and the inefficiencies this entails, this makes Communism as a later stage of development possible.

Before Socialism can be developed, however, the society's industry must be strong and developed through a previous capitalist phase. Marx believed that a Socialist and later Communist state would only be possible in a truly developed capitalist society. The countries you mentioned previously are still in a state of transition; they haven't even reached true socialism as of yet, much less Communism; but it is interesting to note that many states such as China are experimenting with a mixed economy, allowing limited capitalist actions in order to further develop their industry and economy so that future Socialism will be possible.

On the flip side of your snide remarks, one may also ask: how is Constitutional Democracy doing in the United States? With all of these fixed elections, useless imperialist wars of aggression, the fiat money system, and many other violations besides, I'm sure it's doing just fine. As you said, "if ignorance is bliss..."

Re: People's Weekly World - Obama trip spotlights new direction for U.S. foreign policy

Anthony — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:36:43 -0000

I agree with Burleson and Sean. I would have joined the CPUSA long ago if it weren't for their obvious support of Obama and his policies, many of which I find to be a contradiction in terms with Socialist revolution and Communism in general. Obama isn't a bridge toward Socialism or even a departure from the Capitalist norm. He IS one of the rich elite, and he does NOT support Socialist reform or revolution throughout the world. This much can be seen from his eagerness to export democracy to the Socialist Republic of Cuba via subversive means; his lack of support for overturning "quotas" in Affirmative Action in favor of helping the lower class of any ethnic background; his elitist and imperialist foreign policy with regard to Afghanistan and this "preemptive strike" attitude with regard to Pakistan and even Iran. Coupled with his gun control views and his total lack of understanding on most issues of foreign policy (research his mistakes, such as his not knowing what "Blackwater" is and the like), and it is rather obvious that this much support by the CPUSA leadership for the same political and social status-quo is counterproductive and, in fact, disturbing.

We need to draw major distinctions: you can be opposed to Capitalism and its ruling elite, in favor of Proletariat revolution/evolution and the creation of a Socialist society; or you can support the capitalist big-business oligarchy which rules both parties. You can't, by definition, do both. If McCain is as repugnant as we all think he is, then it is possible to undermine his campaign and "bring out the dirt," so to speak, so that the public will know who or what they're voting for, and the same should be done to Obama and any other political candidate in the mainstream; but it isn't necessary or desirable to support the current political establishment.

Re: Should the left celebrate the 4th of July?

Anthony — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 00:34:54 -0000

"No. It's a Democratic Party blog."

No my friend, this is a blog for, quote, "Marxist analysis of the '08 Elections from the Communist Party USA leadership." Marxist analysis hosted by the Communist Party itself. Though one could argue that the CPUSA is inherently democratic, there is no denying it is Communist and Marxist/Leninist. ;)

Take care!

Re: Should the left celebrate the 4th of July?

Anthony — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:46:13 -0000

I don't believe you are "standing back and gazing at the forest" simply because your views are much too simplistic and convenient. Your first mistake (as you're so fond of saying) is that you view America as an artificial whole, as an individual, whereas it is exceedingly obvious to most here that America is a State which is composed of a variety of different nations, each of which are composed of differing social classes. Thus it is impossible to point at America as a whole and say, "Every one of you is guilty of oppressing the international proletariat." Especially so when it is those owners of industry and economic forces that are the only ones capable of doing the oppressing. To say that the proletariat, working class or whatever phrase you'd rather use is agreeing to the capitalist oppression is ignoring the fact that most of the proletariat in this country is blisfully unaware of the negative aspects of capitalism, their role in society, and the role of the bourgeoisie in the devastation of the third world nations. Those who do know about it and still refrain from speaking out against it and trying to find solutions for it are indeed arrogant and despicable; but unless they are the owners of the majority of capital and are part of the elite who actually run the machinery of industry which profits from their exploitation, they can't be said to be responsible for it. It is a contradiction in terms. It's like advocating the idea that the slaves who belong to the richest master are actually part of the elite slaveowners simply because they live in better conditions than some of the other slaves. Regardless of their material condition, their social standing and economic role still applies.

As for me spewing Marxism and the like... excuse me. What was I thinking, advocating Marxist and at times Trotskyist ideas? What is this, a Communist blog or something? LOL

You have your views (which are actually hypocritical and a bit annoying since you're likewise American and, by your definition, an oppressor), and I have mine. Let's simply agree to disagree and go our separate ways in trying to doing our part to try to bring about a more just world in which wealth is more evenly and fairly distributed.

Re: Should the left celebrate the 4th of July?

Anthony — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:59:31 -0000

It is indeed true that America is the top exploiter of the impoverished workers and their nations the world-over; and it is also true that America is not a nation ruled by the majority, but rather the elite minority which holds its means of production and the heights of the economy. It is this elite minority that is subjugating the world, not the American worker which indirectly "benefits" by having their exploitation come at a higher price. If I am excessively viewing the world from "inside the American box," you are excessively viewing it from outside the American box and within another. You're missing the entire point that a Socialist system can only be instituted within a fully developed capitalist and democratic system; otherwise the result is toward either a new ruling class or a bureaucratic caste which holds power tyrannically, resulting in what Trotsky described as a "deformed workers' state" in such republics as Cuba, and a "degenerated workers' state" in the former USSR. Such changes toward Socialism and perhaps eventually Communism are impossible if one consistently points the finger at the higher-paid yet none-the-less proletariat upon which the capitalists make their profits and exploit the rest of the world mercilessly.

You're missing the forest for the trees, and you're not taking into account that within each class there may be many levels or sub-classes which, however you cut it, still compose that same class: the international proletariat. Regardless of how well the American worker is doing in relation to other nations, they are still not doing nearly as well as the bourgeoisie to which they sell their labor-power. Furthermore, to confuse the two classes on the basis of material benefits is missing the entire point, as the American proletariat is the proletariat by virtue (or ill luck?) of the fact that THEY DO NOT CONTROL THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION OR THE COMMANDING HEIGHTS OF THE ECONOMY, which is the very reality that makes the class what it is. The exploitation of others in foreign nations may be worse; but in such a system, exploitation by means of unpaid labor is still the reality.

Or am I just "spewing Marxist 101 texts" if I happen to disagree with your opinions?

Re: People's Weekly World - Reflections on Obama's world tour

Anthony — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:07:29 -0000

I said "near Messiah" in that he is overly hyped on the left, to the extent that even supposed Communists are pulling for his nomination. But it is no exaggeration that a few twisted souls actually do think of him as a Messiah-like figure. Just type "Obama" and "Messiah" in a search engine and you'd be surprised at the results.

So many people think of him as the "Great Black Hope" or their "Last Hope," but the only problem with trying to be all things to all people is that you end up being not much of anything. Perhaps I'm a bit disheartened to see so many on the left, even avowed Communists and Socialists pull for his nomination when so many of his policies are diametrically opposed to both strains of political thought.

Re: Should the left celebrate the 4th of July?

Anthony — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:57:14 -0000

There is indeed an American proletariat, regardless of how high their standard of living is in comparison with the proletariat in other countries. Any class that must sell their labor-power to the bourgeoisie in order to live is by definition proletarian; and also, by definition, they are being exploited in that the products of their labor are being sold for a higher value than what they receive in terms of their wages; that "profit" which goes into the pockets of an elite minority is unpaid labor and, despite being higher than in other countries, constitutes exploitation. The United States is currently one of the greatest centers for capitalist imperialism, the higher wages resulting from a higher gross national product is merely an opiate keeping the bourgeois' "commodities" (the worker) from achieving class consciousness and seeking a social revolution. What they failed to take into account is that the capitalist system is prone to crises such as recessions, depressions and other shocking events which is the stimulus for the workers to awaken to their condition, throw off the shackles of profiteering repression and establish a socialist "Dictatorship of the Proletariat."

Conditions are ripe for a revolution/evolution in the United States due to its advanced system of democracy, capitalism and its final stage, imperialism which is prerequisite for the socialist revolution to take place.

We may be the "elite proletariat," but to the bourgeoisie, we are all the same: commodities to be exploited when convenient, and we all will share a similar fate in their system.

Re: People's Weekly World - International law? Not in Texas

Anthony — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:50:00 -0000

I think it's the tone in which these articles are written that draws such responses. For instance, I was taken aback when I read, "The logical thing for Mexico to do if its citizens are denied review and are executed is to say that the U.S. has unilaterally abrogated the Vienna Convention, and that U.S. citizens arrested in Mexico no longer have rights under its terms." To me, an injustice against the proletariat in one country would not call for the same injustice to be perpetrated elsewhere. It should have been written in such a way as to signify that such a violation of workers' rights here in the US may cause a similar violation elsewhere, which is one of the reasons it is to be condemned. Thinking in terms of national distinction is counter-productive, in my view.

From reading many of these articles, I'd have to say that some of the writers tend to suffer from some semblance of nationalism; that is, instead of thinking of the proletariat in terms of a class collective, they are thinking of "American workers." For instance, those who support Obama's bid for election are also supporting his views on overturning the Socialist Republic of Cuba; such support can be seen as selling out on the idea of supporting Socialism and Communism worldwide. I think emphasis should be taken away from the current American election process, which is NOT "paving the way for Socialism" as any who read the platform of either candidate would know; and begin focusing more on the proletariat collective and the revolution/evolution of social order both in this country and worldwide.

Re: People's Weekly World - Killing of Mexican immigrant spurs fightback

Anthony — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:16:45 -0000

To be fair, most of those workers persecuted in the past were legal immigrants, while these have subverted the immigration laws. I don't oppose the workers themselves; what I do oppose is big business using undocumented/illegal labor for greater profits. This arises because such illegal immigrants have no rights or access to labor unions, and no way in which to redress the wrongs done to them. Essentially the capitalists want to use them as slave labor and, in their desperation, they consent to be exploited.

Certainly those who harm others because of racial/ethnic discrimination should be prosecuted; but to blame "hate speech" for the volitional actions of responsible individuals is ludacrous. If we begin prosecuting and censoring others because they are "inciting to hatred," what is to stop the government from once again prosecuting Communists and revolutionary Socialists for their "incitement to revolution" and of teaching "Marxism/Leninism?" We need to recognize that people are responsible for their actions, and we should blame them for their actions, not those we feel are "inciting" them. Just as *people* are responsible for gun-related deaths as opposed to firearms themselves, so too are people responsible for what they do.

Besides, there is likewise quite a bit of hatred and animosity on the side of such organizations as La Raza and others seeking Reconquista. I've personally heard them speak rather disparagingly about us "Gringos." Would implementing "hate crime" legislation or censorship apply to them as well?

Re: People's Weekly World - Reflections on Obama's world tour

Anthony — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:45:56 -0000

Obama's outlook is just as elitist and militaristic as the rest of them. To end the war in Iraq, to him, is simply to expand the fronts of world war in Afghanistan, Pakistan and possibly Iran. As far as his progressive social views, he doesn't even support amending Affirmative Action so that its focus is not on race, but class. Furthermore, he wants to maintain America and its bougeousie leadership as a preeminent military and economic superpower. Not only this, he has publically stated that it is his goal to undermine the Socialist Republic of Cuba by exporting democracy and interfering with Cuba's right of self-determination in the interests of the capitalist class. How any Communist or Socialist could support a man with such obvious and blatant right-wing views is beyond me.

He is being hailed as a near Messiah among the left, and I'm afraid that they're going to be in for one hell of a shock if he's elected. Politics and social inequality as usual. With a liberal amount of taxation and exploitation thrown in for good measure. After all, we as a working class are merely "bitter" and "clinging to religion and guns," unlike that civilized "elite ruling class" of which he is a part.

Re: CPUSA Online - Editorial: Eye on the Prize

Anthony — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:19:36 -0000

With each passing day, Obama appears to move farther and farther toward the right wing. Sure, he wants to end the Iraq war; but he also wants to bolster the war in Afghanistan and has his eye on invasion of Pakistan. His plans for a "civilian defense force" is nothing but round-about wording for reinstating the draft. His outrageous foreign aid spending for Africa will only further hamper and cripple African economy and hurt the working class. If the fact that he will be the first black president is the main reason for his support by the left, then I'm utterly and completely shocked: this would be tantamount to voting for a man not because of his positions, but his skin color, which is the polar opposite of eliminating class distinction and racial discrimination!

Personally, I would rather not vote for a "lesser of the two evils," because either way you go at this point, you will be supporting the same "politics as usual." He'll sound like a leftist progressive one day, and the next he'll be repeating the same ideas McCain has put forth. It all depends on his political audience and the possibility of his getting elected; the sooner we realize that, the better.

Re: Should the left celebrate the 4th of July?

Anthony — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:57:13 -0000

To me, the 4th of July is more about the destruction of tyranny through a popular revolution than it is about "slavery" or "imperialism." If this nation had stayed true to its principles, we wouldn't be engaged in Imperialism the worldover now. We wouldn't let the government erode our civil rights for which our ancestors fought and died. It is misguided to look to our current oligarchy and prostrate ourselves in thanksgiving before the rich ruling class whose main interests are the same now as in the days of slavery: capitalist profit! While some are pointing to foreign dictatorships and announcing, "See how long you last there!" they are entirely ignoring the fact that this country is becoming just as dictatorial, under our very noses. Resolving those issues that are taking this country away from the interests of the people and the rights of the proletariat is, in my view, patriotism; and tearing down the old class distinctions that allow for our common exploitation by the "elites" is a logical continuation of the struggle for independence.

Re: People's Weekly World - McCain flip flops on affirmative action

Anthony — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:36:55 -0000

I've noticed all too often that Obama, instead of trying to lead the vanguard against the right-wing Republicans and their upper-class, Imperialist ideas simply repeats the ideas and sentiments of those who came before him when it is politically advantageous to do so. Despite what we thought when this election began, we can't trust him to end foreign military occupation and invasions; he wants to continue that tradition. We can't trust him to focus on class as opposed to race because that is how he's getting much of his support. We also can't trust him to put in place the mechanism for future Socialism: he is exactly that "wealthy elite" that wants to cement their profits and class position for the future. From the looks of it, what we CAN trust him to do is to strengthen the government, tax the holy hell out of all of us, and use us as mere fodder for more useless foreign wars. Not to mention keeping the economies of the African continent in shambles from even more direct aid.

A vote for either one of these useless politicians is a vote for the same-old social constructs that continually exploit the proletariat.