To enforce its McCarthyite witch-hunt Labour’s “Governance and Legal Unit” declared that the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) “Investigation into antisemitism in the Labour Party” could not be criticised by any party member.
If you want to go through electoral channels in the US or the UK, you'd first have to completely overhaul their electoral systems to make a worker's party a viable option. I don't think entryism is possible in large, centre-left-ish parties like Labour or the Democrats. AFAIK, all evidence says that leftist electoral successes take place in multiparty systems, not in systems where you have to share your only platform with a majority of neolib ghouls.
Yea. I was thinking about how, if we had a decent sized communist party in the US, how it would relate to an event like a judicial coup and Trump staying in office. I don't think we can be expected to go out in the streets risking life and limb for either Joe Biden or to defend the American form of government.
I think the communist line would be taking to the streets and demanding a new form of government. Scrap the constitution. Start from scratch. Demand a "people's parliament" of sorts to lay out a new form of government. This won't necessarily lead to communism or anything. But it provides an opening for communists to organize and engage with the masses.
I think that's going similar to the path that UK comrades will have to follow.
Entryism into the current bourgeois government has been shown time and time again to fail. I don't see any reason to believe that anarchist insurrection would be more successful. Radical labor unions are basically dead in the west. Maoist guerilla warfare makes no sense in current situation.
I think the communist line would be taking to the streets and demanding a new form of government. Scrap the constitution. Start from scratch. Demand a “people’s parliament” of sorts to lay out a new form of government. This won’t necessarily lead to communism or anything. But it provides an opening for communists to organize and engage with the masses.
I agree, although scrapping the constitution would be an extremely hard sell in the US. To us, it's obvious that it was written to legitimize and secure the economic interests of slave-holding settler colonialists, and that it still produces outcomes along these lines, but the libs are convinced that things like the 2000 election or any shenanigans that could come out of this election are failings of the system. They do not see that bypassing the will of the people, that overriding the majority is an outcome entirely possible and even desired within the limits of the US constitution.
I'm not a fan of liberal democracy, but the US constitution doesn't even deliver on that. America is, foundationally and intentionally, set up to be an oligarchy, not a liberal democracy, and reliably works as an oligarchy in practice.
If you aggressively go with the "fuck the constitution, try something else" angle, it'll alienate a ton of people. But if you say that the system isn't working and needs a complete overhaul to be democratic in more than name only, you'd not only still be correct, you could also get libs on board who are devastated by yet another instance of Trump winning despite losing the popular vote, or by Republicans using the courts to override electoral results yet again.
I don't think we have much disagreement. I don't think the pitch is "fuck the constitution." I think it requires a period of propagandizing the failures of the constitution as a governing document, tons of street protest and labor unrest, likely violent confrontations with the state.
There would have to be so much instability that the bourgeoisie allow for a people's parliament, new constitutional convention, however you want to frame it, as a means of pacifying the masses.
It's wild how incapable they've become of stabilizing the system that guarantees their wealth. I guess it's inevitable when nations constantly compete for lower taxes, lower wages, less worker protections, but it's still so ridiculous that the bourgoisie views the moderate left as a threat to their interests and not as the only thing that could save them from getting a very short haircut :gui:
nice thread. You two make me think that we need to behave as the Indian people in their pursuit of independence in the 20th. Drive them out! Non-violently, of course. Looking for our Gandhi.
It's all so ghoulishly slow - way back in 2011 I was excited to vote on AV, only for the debate to be focused entirely around it being a Lib Dem ploy to usurp the government. 67% vote against. Never brought up again.
Australia introduced it when a second conservative party started to split the vote causing a left wing candidates to win with a minority vote. In 1918.
If you want to go through electoral channels in the US or the UK, you'd first have to completely overhaul their electoral systems to make a worker's party a viable option. I don't think entryism is possible in large, centre-left-ish parties like Labour or the Democrats. AFAIK, all evidence says that leftist electoral successes take place in multiparty systems, not in systems where you have to share your only platform with a majority of neolib ghouls.
Yea. I was thinking about how, if we had a decent sized communist party in the US, how it would relate to an event like a judicial coup and Trump staying in office. I don't think we can be expected to go out in the streets risking life and limb for either Joe Biden or to defend the American form of government.
I think the communist line would be taking to the streets and demanding a new form of government. Scrap the constitution. Start from scratch. Demand a "people's parliament" of sorts to lay out a new form of government. This won't necessarily lead to communism or anything. But it provides an opening for communists to organize and engage with the masses.
I think that's going similar to the path that UK comrades will have to follow.
Entryism into the current bourgeois government has been shown time and time again to fail. I don't see any reason to believe that anarchist insurrection would be more successful. Radical labor unions are basically dead in the west. Maoist guerilla warfare makes no sense in current situation.
I agree, although scrapping the constitution would be an extremely hard sell in the US. To us, it's obvious that it was written to legitimize and secure the economic interests of slave-holding settler colonialists, and that it still produces outcomes along these lines, but the libs are convinced that things like the 2000 election or any shenanigans that could come out of this election are failings of the system. They do not see that bypassing the will of the people, that overriding the majority is an outcome entirely possible and even desired within the limits of the US constitution.
I'm not a fan of liberal democracy, but the US constitution doesn't even deliver on that. America is, foundationally and intentionally, set up to be an oligarchy, not a liberal democracy, and reliably works as an oligarchy in practice.
If you aggressively go with the "fuck the constitution, try something else" angle, it'll alienate a ton of people. But if you say that the system isn't working and needs a complete overhaul to be democratic in more than name only, you'd not only still be correct, you could also get libs on board who are devastated by yet another instance of Trump winning despite losing the popular vote, or by Republicans using the courts to override electoral results yet again.
We got to frame it like "we need a new constitutional convention" because Americans worship that founding father shit
That's a good fucking idea.
I don't think we have much disagreement. I don't think the pitch is "fuck the constitution." I think it requires a period of propagandizing the failures of the constitution as a governing document, tons of street protest and labor unrest, likely violent confrontations with the state.
There would have to be so much instability that the bourgeoisie allow for a people's parliament, new constitutional convention, however you want to frame it, as a means of pacifying the masses.
It's wild how incapable they've become of stabilizing the system that guarantees their wealth. I guess it's inevitable when nations constantly compete for lower taxes, lower wages, less worker protections, but it's still so ridiculous that the bourgoisie views the moderate left as a threat to their interests and not as the only thing that could save them from getting a very short haircut :gui:
nice thread. You two make me think that we need to behave as the Indian people in their pursuit of independence in the 20th. Drive them out! Non-violently, of course. Looking for our Gandhi.
It's all so ghoulishly slow - way back in 2011 I was excited to vote on AV, only for the debate to be focused entirely around it being a Lib Dem ploy to usurp the government. 67% vote against. Never brought up again.
Yeah, it's extremely hard to pull off, the only successful case i know of is New Zealand in 1996.
Australia introduced it when a second conservative party started to split the vote causing a left wing candidates to win with a minority vote. In 1918.