Click on the headline to link to Occupy Cal website for the latest from the vanguard Bay Area battleground in the struggle for social justice.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-loaded, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
******
Markin comment November 11, 2011:
The struggle in the Bay Are continues. No sooner do we have a great victory in Oakland with the shutdown of the Port Of Oakland and positive General Strike results than everybody on the other side and their brothers (and sisters, don’t' forget Mayor Quan) is trying to stop us again. Ditto the attempts to set up an encampment at Berkeley by Occupy Cal. No Mas- Support the student strike Tuesday , November 15, 2011.All Out To Defend Occupy Cal!
Sunday, November 13, 2011
From #Occupied Boston (#TomemonosBoston)-Day Forty-Five-An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers!–General Assembly-The Embryo Of An Alternate Government-Learn The Lessons Of History-The Max Daddy (Or Mama) Of Modern Revolutions-From The English Revolution-The Putney Debates of 1647-An Agreement Of The People
Click on the headline to link to updates from the Occupy Boston website. Occupy Boston started at 6:00 PM, September 30, 2011. I will post important updates as they appear on that site.
********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
#TomemonosBoston
Somos la Sociedad conformando el 99% -Dewey Square, Cercerde South Station
#Tomemonos Boston se reuniarin en el Dewey Square en Downtown Boston a discutir cambios que la ciudadania puede hacer en el gobierno que afecte un cambio social positivo.
******
Below I am posting, occasionally, comments on the Occupy movement as I see or hear things of interest, or that cause alarm bells to ring in my head. The first comment directly below from October 1, which represented my first impressions of Occupy Boston, is the lead for all further postings.
*******
Markin comment October 1, 2011:
There is a lot of naiveté expressed about the nature of capitalism, capitalists, and the way to win in the class struggle by various participants in this occupation. Many also have attempted to make a virtue out of that naiveté, particularly around the issues of effective democratic organization and relationships with the police (they are not our friends, no way, when the deal goes down). However, their spirit is refreshing, they are acting out of good subjective anti-capitalist motives and, most importantly, even those of us who call themselves "reds" (communists), including this writer, started out from liberal premises as naive, if not more so, than those encountered at the occupation site. We can all learn something but in the meantime we must defend the "occupation" and the occupiers. More later as the occupation continues.
**********
Markin comment October 22, 2011
As part of my comment, dated October 20, 2011, I noted the following:
“… The idea of the General Assembly with each individual attendee acting as a “tribune of the people” is interesting and important. And, of course, it represents, for today anyway, the embryo of what the “new world” we need to create might look like at the governmental level.”
A couple of the people that I have talked to were not quite sure what to make of that idea. The idea that what is going on in Occupy Boston at the governmental level could, should, would be a possible form of governing this society in the “new world aborning” with the rise of the Occupy movement. Part of the problem is that there was some confusion on the part of the listeners that one of the possible aims of this movement is to create an alternative government, or at least provide a model for such a government. I will argue here now, and in the future, that it should be one the goals. In short, we need to take power away from the Democrats and Republicans and their tired old congressional/executive/judicial form of governing and place it at the grassroots level and work upward from there rather than, as now, have power devolve from the top. (And stop well short of the bottom.)
I will leave aside the question (the problem really) of what it would take to create such a possibility. Of course a revolutionary solution would, of necessity, have be on the table since there is no way that the current powerful interests, Democratic, Republican or those having no politics, is going to give up power without a fight. What I want to pose now is the use of the General Assembly as a deliberative executive, legislative, and judicial body all rolled into one. In that sense previous historical models come to mind; the short-lived but heroic Paris Commune of 1871 that Karl Marx tirelessly defended against the reactionaries of Europe as the prototype of a workers government; the early heroic days of the Russian October Revolution of 1917 when the workers councils (soviets in Russian parlance) acted as a true workers' government; and the period in the Spanish Revolution of 1936-39 where the Central Committee of the Anti-Fascist Militias acted, de facto, as a workers government. All the just mentioned examples had their problems and flaws, no question. However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.
And as always-everybody, young or old, needs to stand by this slogan - An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers Everywhere! Hands Off Occupy Boston !
**********
Markin comment October 26, 2011:
Recently (see October 22, 2011 comment above) I noted the following while arguing for the General Assembly concept as a form of alternate government using historic examples like the Paris Commune (1871), the early Soviets in Russia (1905 and 1917), and early antifascist militias in the Spanish Civil War (1936-37:
“However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.”
In order to facilitate the investigation and study of those examples I will, occasionally, post works in this space that deal with these forbears from several leftist perspectives (rightist perspectives were clear- crush all the above examples ruthlessly, and with no mercy- so we need not look at them now). I started with Karl Marx’s classic defense and critique of the Paris Commune, The Civil War In France. Today I am posting the Putney Debates of 1647 From The English Revolution.
*********
THE PUTNEY DEBATES 1647
http://www.putneydebates.com/The%20Debates.html
The Grandees
The Grandees were senior officers in the parliamentary, New Model Army. They were typically from the landed gentry and opposed several of the Levellers demands, such as 'levelling' enclosures around their estates.
The most famous and influential were: Sir Thomas Fairfax, Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton,
Thomas Fairfax, 3rd Lord Fairfax of Cameron (1612 –1671) a general in the parliamentary army and commander-in-chief during the English Civil War.
Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658) a military and political leader, made England into a republican Commonwealth and later became Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland.
Henry Ireton (1611 - 1651), a general in the Parliamentary army.
**********
The Levellers
The Levellers were a group of civilians, mainly business men and skilled craftsmen, who formed the first political group based on a democratic basis. Their 'movement'' was based on a set of common ideas and demands on the ruling classes rather than an organised political party.
They met in small groups on regular basis in various London Inns, drawing up petitions against parliamentary actions and collecting subscriptions, amounts paid my members were according to income, to fund their propaganda. Petitions could have up to 30,000 signatures and in 1647, after a bad harvest and increasing starvation throughout the country, petitioned Parliament for poor relief.
They also inspired many of the demands of the more radical elements of Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army. These elements were typically from the Cavalry regiments who had 'elected' spokesmen (who become known as the Agitators) to represent them. At this point the Levellers became very influential and had to be listened too.
Even now, some 360 years later, some of our current politicians are said to have 'leveller' ideas and are still fighting for the same democratic changes originally proposed by Overton.
Levellers
The term Levellers was given to them by the King Charles as one of their aims was to level the enclosures land of the nobility.
The term is also known to derive from the Levellers themselves as they declared that "all degrees of men should be levelled, and an equality should be established".
Summer 1647:
The Army was now in effective control of the country and issued The Heads of the Proposals as an outline of a constitutional settlement.
The Levellers' plan, An Agreement of the People, was more radical. Representatives of both viewpoints tried to arrive at a joint scheme during The Putney Debates (October to November 1647).
Their manifesto for constitutional reform in Britain paved the way for many of the civil liberties we value today.
The most prominent Levellers were:
Edward Sexby (1616-1658) Served in Cromwell's regiment of horse from 1643. He helped lead the Leveller soldiers in 1647, but remained in Cromwell's confidence and was made governor of Portland. He fought for Cromwell in Scotland and was sent as an agent provocateur to France in 1652-53.
He grew disillusioned with Cromwell's government and in 1657 wrote Killing No Murder, an endorsement of tyrannicide. He came to England - apparently intending to act on his principles - but was arrested and died in the Tower, 13 January 1658.
Colonel Thomas Rainsborough
(1610 - 1648)
One of the leaders of the Leveller soldiers in 1647, and he opposed all attempts at compromise with Charles I. Yet as vice-admiral in 1648, his imperious conduct helped provoke his squadron into declaring for the King. In May 1648, while besieging Pontefract Castle, he was surprised by cavaliers and killed.
Richard Overton (1625-1664) Agreed with John Lilburne on political questions but, more radical in his religious beliefs, he rejected the notion of an immaterial soul, arguing that the Scripture only gave grounds for belief in the resurrection of the body. This view was seen at the time as virtually the equivalent of atheism. In 1655, he fled to Flanders with Edward Sexby, where he conspired with Charles II to overthrow Cromwell's regime.
John Wildman (1621-1693) Played an important part in the army disturbances of 1647 and was imprisoned in 1648. His career of political radicalism continued long beyond the English Civil War. He was imprisoned from 1661 to 1667 for plotting against Charles II. Soon after his release, he conspired with Algernon Sidney against the succession to the throne of the Catholic James II. Wildman finally found a government he approved in the reign of William and Mary, became postmaster general and was knighted.
William Walwyn (1600-1681) A prosperous silk merchant, his political views were close to those other Levellers but, his overriding concern was with religious freedom, insisting that persuasion was the only proper method of religious conversion. Walwyn was imprisoned with other Leveller leaders in 1649, although unlike them he played no part in encouraging mutiny against Cromwell and the other army Grandees.
John Lilburne (1614-1657) Became involved in radical opposition to the Bishops, he fought for Parliament, but refused to subscribe to the Solemn League and Covenant and its endorsement of religious uniformity. He attacked the powers of the House of Lords, and abandoned his early support of Oliver Cromwell. Left the New Model Army in 1645. In and out of prison, he was popular with the people and a thorn in the government's side. Late in life, he became a Quaker
********
An agreement of the people for a firm and present peace upon grounds of common right and freedom.
28 October 1647
An agreement of the people for a firm and present peace upon grounds of common right and freedom, as it was proposed by the agents of the five regiments of horse, and since by the general approbation of the army offered to the joint concurrence of all the free commons of England
The names of the regiments which have already appeared for the case of the Case of the army truly stated, and for this present Agreement,[1] viz.
(Of Horse)
1. The General's Regiment.
2. The Life Guard.
3. The Lieutenant-General's Regiment.
4. The Commissary-General's Regiment.
5. Colonel Whalley's Regiment.
6. Colonel Rich's Regiment.
7. Colonel Fleetwood's Regiment.
8. Colonel Harrison's Regiment.
9. Colonel Twistleton's Regiment.
(Of Foot)
1. The General's Regiment.
2. Colonel Sir Hardress Waller's Regiment.
3. Colonel Lambert's Regiment.
4. Colonel Rainsborough's Regiment.
5. Colonel Overton's Regiment.
6. Colonel Lilburne's Regiment.
7. Colonel Baxter's Regiment.
Anno Domini 1647[2]
________________________________________
An Agreement of the people for a firm and present peace upon grounds of common right
Having by our late labours and hazards made it appear to the world at how high a rate we value our just freedom, and God having so far owned our cause as to deliver the enemies thereof into our hands, we do now hold ourselves bound in mutual duty to each other to take the best care we can for the future to avoid both the danger of returning into a slavish condition and the chargeable remedy of another war. For as it cannot be imagined that so many of our countrymen would have opposed us in this quarrel if they had understood their own good, so may we safely promise to ourselves that when our common rights and liberties shall be cleared, their endeavours will be disappointed that seek to make themselves our masters. Since therefore our former oppressions and scarce-yet-ended troubles have been occasioned either by want of frequent national meetings in council or by rendering those meetings ineffectual, we are fully agreed and resolved to provide that hereafter our representatives be neither left to an uncertainty for the time, nor made useless to the ends for which they are intended. In order whereunto we declare:
1. That the people of England being at this day very unequally distributed by counties, cities and boroughs for the election of their deputies in parliament, ought to be more indifferently proportioned according to the number of the inhabitants: the circumstances whereof, for number, place, and manner, are to be set down before the end of this present parliament.
2. That to prevent the many inconveniences apparently arising from the long continuance of the same persons in authority, this present parliament be dissolved upon the last day of September, which shall be in the year of our Lord, 1648.
3. That the people do of course choose themselves a parliament once in two years, viz. upon the first Thursday in every second March, after the manner as shall be prescribed before the end of this parliament, to begin to sit upon the first Thursday in April following at Westminster or such other place as shall be appointed from time to time by the preceding representatives, and to continue till the last day of September then next ensuing, and no longer.
4. That the power of this and all future representatives of this nation is inferior only to theirs who choose them, and doth extend, without the consent or concurrence of any other person or persons, to the enacting, altering, and repealing of laws; to the erecting and abolishing of offices and courts; to the appointing, removing, and calling to account magistrates and officers of all degrees; to the making war and peace; to the treating with foreign states; and generally, to whatsoever is not expressly or impliedly reserved by the represented to themselves.
Which are as follows:
1. That matters of religion and the ways of God's worship are not at all entrusted by us to any human power, because therein we cannot remit or exceed a tittle of what our consciences dictate to be the mind of God, without wilful sin. Nevertheless the public way of instructing the nation — so it be not compulsive — is referred to their discretion.
2. That the matter of impressing and constraining any of us to serve in the wars is against our freedom; and therefore we do not allow it in our representatives; the rather, because money (the sinews of war) being always at their disposal, they can never want numbers of men apt enough to engage in any just cause.
3. That after the dissolution of this present parliament, no person be at any time questioned for anything said or done in reference to the late public differences, otherwise than in execution of the judgements of the present representatives (or House of Commons).
4. That in all laws made or to be made, every person may be bound alike; and that no tenure, estate, charter, degree, birth, or place do confer any exemption from the ordinary course of legal proceedings whereunto others are subjected.
5. That as the laws ought to be equal, so they must be good and not evidently destructive to the safety and well-being of the people.
These things we declare to be our native rights; and therefore are agreed and resolved to maintain them with our utmost possibilities against all opposition whatsoever: being compelled thereunto, not only by the examples of our ancestors — whose blood was often spent in vain for the recovery of their freedoms, suffering themselves through fraudulent accommodations to be still deluded of the fruit of their victories — but also by our own woeful experience, who having long expected and dearly earned the establishment of these certain rules of government, are yet made to depend for the settlement of our peace and freedom upon him[3] that intended our bondage and brought a cruel war upon us.
For the noble and highly honoured the freeborn people of England, in their respective counties and divisions, these:
Dear countrymen and fellow-commoners,
For your sakes, our friends, estates and lives have not been dear to us. For your safety and freedom we have cheerfully endured hard labours and run most desperate hazards. And in comparison to your peace and freedom we neither do nor ever shall value our dearest blood; and we profess our bowels are and have been troubled and our hearts pained within us in seeing and considering that you have been so long bereaved of these fruits and ends of all our labours and hazards. We cannot but sympathise with you in your miseries and oppressions. It's grief and vexation of heart to us to receive your meat or monies whilst you have no advantage, nor yet the foundations of your peace and freedom surely laid. And therefore, upon most serious considerations that your principal right most essential to your well-being is the clearness, certainty, sufficiency and freedom of your power in your representatives in parliament; and considering that the original of most of your oppressions and miseries have been either from the obscurity and doubtfulness of the power you have committed to your representatives in your elections, or from the want of courage in those whom you have betrusted to claim and exercise their power (which might probably proceed from their uncertainty of your assistance and maintenance of their power); and minding that for this right of yours and ours we engaged our lives (for the king raised the war against you and your parliament upon this ground: that he would not suffer your representatives to provide for your peace, safety and freedom that were then in danger, by disposing of the militia and otherwise, according to their trust); and for the maintenance and defence of that power and right of yours, we hazarded all that was dear to us. And God has borne witness to the justice of our cause.
And further minding that the only effectual means to settle a just and lasting peace, to obtain remedy for all your grievances, and to prevent future oppressions is the making clear and secure the power that you betrust to your representatives in parliament — that they may know their trust, in the faithful execution whereof you will assist them.
Upon all these grounds we propound your joining with us in the agreement herewith sent unto you, that by virtue thereof we may have parliaments certainly called and have the time of their sitting and ending certain and their power or trust clear and unquestionable; that hereafter they may remove your burdens and secure your rights without oppositions or obstructions and that the foundations of your peace may be so free from uncertainty that there may be no grounds for future quarrels or contentions to occasion war and bloodshed. And we desire you would consider that as these things wherein we offer to agree with you are the fruits and ends of the victories which God has given us, so the settlement of these are the most absolute means to preserve you and your posterity from slavery, oppression, distraction, and trouble. By this, those whom yourselves shall choose shall have power to restore you to, and secure you in, all your rights; and they shall be in a capacity to taste of subjection as well as rule, and so shall be equally concerned with yourselves in all they do. For they must equally suffer with you under any common burdens and partake with you in any freedoms. And by this they shall be disenabled to defraud or wrong you — when the laws shall bind all alike, without privilege or exemption. And by this your consciences shall be free from tyranny and oppression, and those occasions of endless strifes and bloody wars shall be perfectly removed. Without controversy, by your joining with us in this agreement all your particular and common grievances will be redressed forthwith without delay. The parliament must then make your relief and common good their only study.
Now because we are earnestly desirous of the peace and good of all our countrymen — even of those that have opposed us — and would to our utmost possibility provide for perfect peace and freedom and prevent all suits, debates, and contentions that may happen amongst you in relation to the late war, we have therefore inserted it into this agreement that no person shall be questionable for anything done in relation to the late public differences after the dissolution of this present parliament, further than in execution of their[4] judgement: that thereby all may be secure from all sufferings for what they have done, and not liable hereafter to be troubled or punished by the judgement of another parliament — which may be to their ruin unless this agreement be joined in, whereby any acts of indemnity or oblivion shall be made unalterable and you and your posterities be secure.
But if any shall inquire why we should desire to join in an agreement with the people to declare these to be our native rights — and not rather petition to the parliament for them — the reason is evident. No Act of parliament is or can be unalterable, and so cannot be sufficient security to save you or us harmless from what another parliament may determine if it should be corrupted. And besides, parliaments are to receive the extent of their power and trust from those that betrust them; and therefore the people are to declare what their power and trust is — which is the intent of this agreement. And it's to be observed that though there has formerly been many Acts of parliament for the calling of parliaments every year, yet you have been deprived of them and enslaved through want of them. And therefore, both necessity for your security in these freedoms that are essential to your well-being, and woeful experience of the manifold miseries and distractions that have been lengthened out since the war ended through want of such a settlement, require this agreement. And when you and we shall be joined together therein we shall readily join with you to petition the parliament — as they are our fellow-commoners equally concerned — to join with us.
And if any shall inquire why we undertake to offer this agreement, we must profess we are sensible that you have been so often deceived with declarations and remonstrances and fed with vain hopes that you have sufficient reason to abandon all confidence in any persons whatsoever from whom you have no other security of their intending your freedom than bare declaration. And therefore, as our consciences witness that in simplicity and integrity of heart we have proposed lately in the Case of the army stated your freedom and deliverance from slavery, oppression and all burdens, so we desire to give you satisfying assurance thereof by this agreement — whereby the foundations of your freedoms provided in the Case of the army shall be settled unalterably. And we shall as faithfully proceed to — and all other most vigorous actings for your good that God shall direct and enable us unto. And though the malice of our enemies and such as they delude would blast us by scandals, aspersing us with designs of 'anarchy' and 'community', yet we hope the righteous God will, not only by this our present desire of setting an equal just government but also by directing us unto all righteous undertakings simply for public good, make our uprightness and faithfulness to the interest of all our countrymen shine forth so clearly that malice itself shall be silenced and confounded.
We question not but the longing expectation of a firm peace will incite you to the most speedy joining in this agreement — in the prosecution whereof, or of anything that you shall desire for public good, you may be confident you shall never want the assistance of,
Your most faithful fellow-commoners now in arms for your service.
Edmund Bear
Robert Everard (Lieutenant-General's Regiment).
George Garret
Thomas Beverley (Commissary-General's Regiment).
William Pryor
William Bryan (Colonel Fleetwood's Regiment).
Matthew Weale
William Russell (Colonel Whalley's Regiment).
John Dover
William Hudson (Colonel Rich's Regiment).
Agents coming from other regiments unto us have subscribed the agreement to be proposed to their respective regiments and you.
For our much honoured and truly worthy fellow-commoners and soldiers, the officers and soldiers under command of his excellency Sir Thomas Fairfax
Gentlemen and fellow soldiers,
The deep sense of many dangers and mischiefs that may befall you in relation to the late war whensoever this parliament shall end — unless sufficient prevention be now provided — has constrained us to study the most absolute and certain means for your security. And upon most serious considerations we judge that no Act of Indemnity can sufficiently provide for your quiet, ease, and safety, because — as it has formerly been — a corrupt party, chosen into the next parliament by your enemies' means may possibly surprise the House and make any Act of Indemnity null,[5] seeing they cannot fail of the king's assistance and concurrence in any such actings against you that conquered him.
And by the same means, your freedom from impressing also may in a short time be taken from you though for the present it should be granted.[6] We apprehend no other security by which you shall be saved harmless for what you have done in the late war than a mutual agreement between the people and you that no person shall be questioned by any authority whatsoever for anything done in relation to the late public differences after the dissolution of the present House of Commons, further than in execution of their judgement; and that your native freedom from constraint to serve in war, whether domestic or foreign, shall never be subject to the power of parliaments — or any other. And for this end we propound the agreement that we herewith send to you to be forthwith subscribed.
And because we are confident that 'in judgement and conscience'[7] ye hazarded your lives for the settlement of such a just and equal government that you and your posterities and all the freeborn people of this nation might enjoy justice and freedom; and that you are really sensible that the distractions, oppressions and miseries of the nation, and your want of your arrears, do proceed from the want of the establishment both of such certain rules of just government and foundations of peace as are the price of blood and the expected fruits of all the people's cost; therefore in this agreement we have inserted the certain rules of equal government under which the nation may enjoy all its rights and freedoms securely. And as we doubt not but your love to the freedom and lasting peace of the yet-distracted country will cause you to join together in this agreement.
So we question not but every true Englishman that loves the peace and freedom of England will concur with us. And then your arrears and constant pay (while you continue in arms) will certainly be brought in, out of the abundant love of the people to you; and then shall the mouths of those be stopped that scandalise you and us as endeavouring anarchy or to rule by the sword; and then will so firm an union be made between the people and you that neither any homebred or foreign enemies will dare to disturb our happy peace.
We shall add no more but this; that the knowledge of your union in laying this foundation of peace, this agreement, is much longed for by,
Yours, and the people's most faithful servants.
Postscript
Gentlemen,
We desire you may understand the reason of our extracting some principles of common freedom out of those many things proposed to you in the Case of the army truly stated and drawing them up into the form of an agreement. It's chiefly because for these things we first engaged against the king. He would not permit the people's representatives to provide for the nation's safety — by disposing of the militia, and other ways, according to their trust — but raised a war against them; and we engaged for the defence of that power and right of the people in their representatives. Therefore these things in the agreement, the people are to claim as their native right and price of their blood, which you are obliged absolutely to procure for them.
And these being the foundations of freedom, it's necessary that they should be settled unalterably, which can be by no means but this agreement with the people.
And we cannot but mind[8] you that the ease of the people in all their grievances depends upon the setting those principles or rules of equal government for a free people; and, were but this agreement established, doubtless all the grievances of the Army and people would be redressed immediately and all things propounded in your Case of the army stated to be insisted on, would be forthwith granted.
Then should the House of Commons have power to help the oppressed people, which they are now bereaved of by the chief oppressors; and then they shall be equally concerned with you and all the people in the settlement of the most perfect freedom — for they shall equally suffer with you under any burdens or partake in any freedom.
We shall only add that the sum of all the agreement which we herewith offer to you is but in order to the fulfilling of our Declaration of 14 June wherein we promised to the people that we would with our lives vindicate and clear their right and power in their parliaments.
Edmond Bear
Robert Everard (Lieutenant-General's Regiment).
George Garret
Thomas Beverley (Commissary-General's Regiment).
William Pryor
William Bryan (Colonel Fleetwood's Regiment).
Matthew Wealey
William Russell (Colonel Whalley's Regiment).
John Dober
William Hudson (Colonel Rich's Regiment).
Agents coming from other regiments unto us have subscribed the agreement to be proposed to their respective regiments and you.
********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
#TomemonosBoston
Somos la Sociedad conformando el 99% -Dewey Square, Cercerde South Station
#Tomemonos Boston se reuniarin en el Dewey Square en Downtown Boston a discutir cambios que la ciudadania puede hacer en el gobierno que afecte un cambio social positivo.
******
Below I am posting, occasionally, comments on the Occupy movement as I see or hear things of interest, or that cause alarm bells to ring in my head. The first comment directly below from October 1, which represented my first impressions of Occupy Boston, is the lead for all further postings.
*******
Markin comment October 1, 2011:
There is a lot of naiveté expressed about the nature of capitalism, capitalists, and the way to win in the class struggle by various participants in this occupation. Many also have attempted to make a virtue out of that naiveté, particularly around the issues of effective democratic organization and relationships with the police (they are not our friends, no way, when the deal goes down). However, their spirit is refreshing, they are acting out of good subjective anti-capitalist motives and, most importantly, even those of us who call themselves "reds" (communists), including this writer, started out from liberal premises as naive, if not more so, than those encountered at the occupation site. We can all learn something but in the meantime we must defend the "occupation" and the occupiers. More later as the occupation continues.
**********
Markin comment October 22, 2011
As part of my comment, dated October 20, 2011, I noted the following:
“… The idea of the General Assembly with each individual attendee acting as a “tribune of the people” is interesting and important. And, of course, it represents, for today anyway, the embryo of what the “new world” we need to create might look like at the governmental level.”
A couple of the people that I have talked to were not quite sure what to make of that idea. The idea that what is going on in Occupy Boston at the governmental level could, should, would be a possible form of governing this society in the “new world aborning” with the rise of the Occupy movement. Part of the problem is that there was some confusion on the part of the listeners that one of the possible aims of this movement is to create an alternative government, or at least provide a model for such a government. I will argue here now, and in the future, that it should be one the goals. In short, we need to take power away from the Democrats and Republicans and their tired old congressional/executive/judicial form of governing and place it at the grassroots level and work upward from there rather than, as now, have power devolve from the top. (And stop well short of the bottom.)
I will leave aside the question (the problem really) of what it would take to create such a possibility. Of course a revolutionary solution would, of necessity, have be on the table since there is no way that the current powerful interests, Democratic, Republican or those having no politics, is going to give up power without a fight. What I want to pose now is the use of the General Assembly as a deliberative executive, legislative, and judicial body all rolled into one. In that sense previous historical models come to mind; the short-lived but heroic Paris Commune of 1871 that Karl Marx tirelessly defended against the reactionaries of Europe as the prototype of a workers government; the early heroic days of the Russian October Revolution of 1917 when the workers councils (soviets in Russian parlance) acted as a true workers' government; and the period in the Spanish Revolution of 1936-39 where the Central Committee of the Anti-Fascist Militias acted, de facto, as a workers government. All the just mentioned examples had their problems and flaws, no question. However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.
And as always-everybody, young or old, needs to stand by this slogan - An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers Everywhere! Hands Off Occupy Boston !
**********
Markin comment October 26, 2011:
Recently (see October 22, 2011 comment above) I noted the following while arguing for the General Assembly concept as a form of alternate government using historic examples like the Paris Commune (1871), the early Soviets in Russia (1905 and 1917), and early antifascist militias in the Spanish Civil War (1936-37:
“However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.”
In order to facilitate the investigation and study of those examples I will, occasionally, post works in this space that deal with these forbears from several leftist perspectives (rightist perspectives were clear- crush all the above examples ruthlessly, and with no mercy- so we need not look at them now). I started with Karl Marx’s classic defense and critique of the Paris Commune, The Civil War In France. Today I am posting the Putney Debates of 1647 From The English Revolution.
*********
THE PUTNEY DEBATES 1647
http://www.putneydebates.com/The%20Debates.html
The Grandees
The Grandees were senior officers in the parliamentary, New Model Army. They were typically from the landed gentry and opposed several of the Levellers demands, such as 'levelling' enclosures around their estates.
The most famous and influential were: Sir Thomas Fairfax, Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton,
Thomas Fairfax, 3rd Lord Fairfax of Cameron (1612 –1671) a general in the parliamentary army and commander-in-chief during the English Civil War.
Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658) a military and political leader, made England into a republican Commonwealth and later became Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland.
Henry Ireton (1611 - 1651), a general in the Parliamentary army.
**********
The Levellers
The Levellers were a group of civilians, mainly business men and skilled craftsmen, who formed the first political group based on a democratic basis. Their 'movement'' was based on a set of common ideas and demands on the ruling classes rather than an organised political party.
They met in small groups on regular basis in various London Inns, drawing up petitions against parliamentary actions and collecting subscriptions, amounts paid my members were according to income, to fund their propaganda. Petitions could have up to 30,000 signatures and in 1647, after a bad harvest and increasing starvation throughout the country, petitioned Parliament for poor relief.
They also inspired many of the demands of the more radical elements of Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army. These elements were typically from the Cavalry regiments who had 'elected' spokesmen (who become known as the Agitators) to represent them. At this point the Levellers became very influential and had to be listened too.
Even now, some 360 years later, some of our current politicians are said to have 'leveller' ideas and are still fighting for the same democratic changes originally proposed by Overton.
Levellers
The term Levellers was given to them by the King Charles as one of their aims was to level the enclosures land of the nobility.
The term is also known to derive from the Levellers themselves as they declared that "all degrees of men should be levelled, and an equality should be established".
Summer 1647:
The Army was now in effective control of the country and issued The Heads of the Proposals as an outline of a constitutional settlement.
The Levellers' plan, An Agreement of the People, was more radical. Representatives of both viewpoints tried to arrive at a joint scheme during The Putney Debates (October to November 1647).
Their manifesto for constitutional reform in Britain paved the way for many of the civil liberties we value today.
The most prominent Levellers were:
Edward Sexby (1616-1658) Served in Cromwell's regiment of horse from 1643. He helped lead the Leveller soldiers in 1647, but remained in Cromwell's confidence and was made governor of Portland. He fought for Cromwell in Scotland and was sent as an agent provocateur to France in 1652-53.
He grew disillusioned with Cromwell's government and in 1657 wrote Killing No Murder, an endorsement of tyrannicide. He came to England - apparently intending to act on his principles - but was arrested and died in the Tower, 13 January 1658.
Colonel Thomas Rainsborough
(1610 - 1648)
One of the leaders of the Leveller soldiers in 1647, and he opposed all attempts at compromise with Charles I. Yet as vice-admiral in 1648, his imperious conduct helped provoke his squadron into declaring for the King. In May 1648, while besieging Pontefract Castle, he was surprised by cavaliers and killed.
Richard Overton (1625-1664) Agreed with John Lilburne on political questions but, more radical in his religious beliefs, he rejected the notion of an immaterial soul, arguing that the Scripture only gave grounds for belief in the resurrection of the body. This view was seen at the time as virtually the equivalent of atheism. In 1655, he fled to Flanders with Edward Sexby, where he conspired with Charles II to overthrow Cromwell's regime.
John Wildman (1621-1693) Played an important part in the army disturbances of 1647 and was imprisoned in 1648. His career of political radicalism continued long beyond the English Civil War. He was imprisoned from 1661 to 1667 for plotting against Charles II. Soon after his release, he conspired with Algernon Sidney against the succession to the throne of the Catholic James II. Wildman finally found a government he approved in the reign of William and Mary, became postmaster general and was knighted.
William Walwyn (1600-1681) A prosperous silk merchant, his political views were close to those other Levellers but, his overriding concern was with religious freedom, insisting that persuasion was the only proper method of religious conversion. Walwyn was imprisoned with other Leveller leaders in 1649, although unlike them he played no part in encouraging mutiny against Cromwell and the other army Grandees.
John Lilburne (1614-1657) Became involved in radical opposition to the Bishops, he fought for Parliament, but refused to subscribe to the Solemn League and Covenant and its endorsement of religious uniformity. He attacked the powers of the House of Lords, and abandoned his early support of Oliver Cromwell. Left the New Model Army in 1645. In and out of prison, he was popular with the people and a thorn in the government's side. Late in life, he became a Quaker
********
An agreement of the people for a firm and present peace upon grounds of common right and freedom.
28 October 1647
An agreement of the people for a firm and present peace upon grounds of common right and freedom, as it was proposed by the agents of the five regiments of horse, and since by the general approbation of the army offered to the joint concurrence of all the free commons of England
The names of the regiments which have already appeared for the case of the Case of the army truly stated, and for this present Agreement,[1] viz.
(Of Horse)
1. The General's Regiment.
2. The Life Guard.
3. The Lieutenant-General's Regiment.
4. The Commissary-General's Regiment.
5. Colonel Whalley's Regiment.
6. Colonel Rich's Regiment.
7. Colonel Fleetwood's Regiment.
8. Colonel Harrison's Regiment.
9. Colonel Twistleton's Regiment.
(Of Foot)
1. The General's Regiment.
2. Colonel Sir Hardress Waller's Regiment.
3. Colonel Lambert's Regiment.
4. Colonel Rainsborough's Regiment.
5. Colonel Overton's Regiment.
6. Colonel Lilburne's Regiment.
7. Colonel Baxter's Regiment.
Anno Domini 1647[2]
________________________________________
An Agreement of the people for a firm and present peace upon grounds of common right
Having by our late labours and hazards made it appear to the world at how high a rate we value our just freedom, and God having so far owned our cause as to deliver the enemies thereof into our hands, we do now hold ourselves bound in mutual duty to each other to take the best care we can for the future to avoid both the danger of returning into a slavish condition and the chargeable remedy of another war. For as it cannot be imagined that so many of our countrymen would have opposed us in this quarrel if they had understood their own good, so may we safely promise to ourselves that when our common rights and liberties shall be cleared, their endeavours will be disappointed that seek to make themselves our masters. Since therefore our former oppressions and scarce-yet-ended troubles have been occasioned either by want of frequent national meetings in council or by rendering those meetings ineffectual, we are fully agreed and resolved to provide that hereafter our representatives be neither left to an uncertainty for the time, nor made useless to the ends for which they are intended. In order whereunto we declare:
1. That the people of England being at this day very unequally distributed by counties, cities and boroughs for the election of their deputies in parliament, ought to be more indifferently proportioned according to the number of the inhabitants: the circumstances whereof, for number, place, and manner, are to be set down before the end of this present parliament.
2. That to prevent the many inconveniences apparently arising from the long continuance of the same persons in authority, this present parliament be dissolved upon the last day of September, which shall be in the year of our Lord, 1648.
3. That the people do of course choose themselves a parliament once in two years, viz. upon the first Thursday in every second March, after the manner as shall be prescribed before the end of this parliament, to begin to sit upon the first Thursday in April following at Westminster or such other place as shall be appointed from time to time by the preceding representatives, and to continue till the last day of September then next ensuing, and no longer.
4. That the power of this and all future representatives of this nation is inferior only to theirs who choose them, and doth extend, without the consent or concurrence of any other person or persons, to the enacting, altering, and repealing of laws; to the erecting and abolishing of offices and courts; to the appointing, removing, and calling to account magistrates and officers of all degrees; to the making war and peace; to the treating with foreign states; and generally, to whatsoever is not expressly or impliedly reserved by the represented to themselves.
Which are as follows:
1. That matters of religion and the ways of God's worship are not at all entrusted by us to any human power, because therein we cannot remit or exceed a tittle of what our consciences dictate to be the mind of God, without wilful sin. Nevertheless the public way of instructing the nation — so it be not compulsive — is referred to their discretion.
2. That the matter of impressing and constraining any of us to serve in the wars is against our freedom; and therefore we do not allow it in our representatives; the rather, because money (the sinews of war) being always at their disposal, they can never want numbers of men apt enough to engage in any just cause.
3. That after the dissolution of this present parliament, no person be at any time questioned for anything said or done in reference to the late public differences, otherwise than in execution of the judgements of the present representatives (or House of Commons).
4. That in all laws made or to be made, every person may be bound alike; and that no tenure, estate, charter, degree, birth, or place do confer any exemption from the ordinary course of legal proceedings whereunto others are subjected.
5. That as the laws ought to be equal, so they must be good and not evidently destructive to the safety and well-being of the people.
These things we declare to be our native rights; and therefore are agreed and resolved to maintain them with our utmost possibilities against all opposition whatsoever: being compelled thereunto, not only by the examples of our ancestors — whose blood was often spent in vain for the recovery of their freedoms, suffering themselves through fraudulent accommodations to be still deluded of the fruit of their victories — but also by our own woeful experience, who having long expected and dearly earned the establishment of these certain rules of government, are yet made to depend for the settlement of our peace and freedom upon him[3] that intended our bondage and brought a cruel war upon us.
For the noble and highly honoured the freeborn people of England, in their respective counties and divisions, these:
Dear countrymen and fellow-commoners,
For your sakes, our friends, estates and lives have not been dear to us. For your safety and freedom we have cheerfully endured hard labours and run most desperate hazards. And in comparison to your peace and freedom we neither do nor ever shall value our dearest blood; and we profess our bowels are and have been troubled and our hearts pained within us in seeing and considering that you have been so long bereaved of these fruits and ends of all our labours and hazards. We cannot but sympathise with you in your miseries and oppressions. It's grief and vexation of heart to us to receive your meat or monies whilst you have no advantage, nor yet the foundations of your peace and freedom surely laid. And therefore, upon most serious considerations that your principal right most essential to your well-being is the clearness, certainty, sufficiency and freedom of your power in your representatives in parliament; and considering that the original of most of your oppressions and miseries have been either from the obscurity and doubtfulness of the power you have committed to your representatives in your elections, or from the want of courage in those whom you have betrusted to claim and exercise their power (which might probably proceed from their uncertainty of your assistance and maintenance of their power); and minding that for this right of yours and ours we engaged our lives (for the king raised the war against you and your parliament upon this ground: that he would not suffer your representatives to provide for your peace, safety and freedom that were then in danger, by disposing of the militia and otherwise, according to their trust); and for the maintenance and defence of that power and right of yours, we hazarded all that was dear to us. And God has borne witness to the justice of our cause.
And further minding that the only effectual means to settle a just and lasting peace, to obtain remedy for all your grievances, and to prevent future oppressions is the making clear and secure the power that you betrust to your representatives in parliament — that they may know their trust, in the faithful execution whereof you will assist them.
Upon all these grounds we propound your joining with us in the agreement herewith sent unto you, that by virtue thereof we may have parliaments certainly called and have the time of their sitting and ending certain and their power or trust clear and unquestionable; that hereafter they may remove your burdens and secure your rights without oppositions or obstructions and that the foundations of your peace may be so free from uncertainty that there may be no grounds for future quarrels or contentions to occasion war and bloodshed. And we desire you would consider that as these things wherein we offer to agree with you are the fruits and ends of the victories which God has given us, so the settlement of these are the most absolute means to preserve you and your posterity from slavery, oppression, distraction, and trouble. By this, those whom yourselves shall choose shall have power to restore you to, and secure you in, all your rights; and they shall be in a capacity to taste of subjection as well as rule, and so shall be equally concerned with yourselves in all they do. For they must equally suffer with you under any common burdens and partake with you in any freedoms. And by this they shall be disenabled to defraud or wrong you — when the laws shall bind all alike, without privilege or exemption. And by this your consciences shall be free from tyranny and oppression, and those occasions of endless strifes and bloody wars shall be perfectly removed. Without controversy, by your joining with us in this agreement all your particular and common grievances will be redressed forthwith without delay. The parliament must then make your relief and common good their only study.
Now because we are earnestly desirous of the peace and good of all our countrymen — even of those that have opposed us — and would to our utmost possibility provide for perfect peace and freedom and prevent all suits, debates, and contentions that may happen amongst you in relation to the late war, we have therefore inserted it into this agreement that no person shall be questionable for anything done in relation to the late public differences after the dissolution of this present parliament, further than in execution of their[4] judgement: that thereby all may be secure from all sufferings for what they have done, and not liable hereafter to be troubled or punished by the judgement of another parliament — which may be to their ruin unless this agreement be joined in, whereby any acts of indemnity or oblivion shall be made unalterable and you and your posterities be secure.
But if any shall inquire why we should desire to join in an agreement with the people to declare these to be our native rights — and not rather petition to the parliament for them — the reason is evident. No Act of parliament is or can be unalterable, and so cannot be sufficient security to save you or us harmless from what another parliament may determine if it should be corrupted. And besides, parliaments are to receive the extent of their power and trust from those that betrust them; and therefore the people are to declare what their power and trust is — which is the intent of this agreement. And it's to be observed that though there has formerly been many Acts of parliament for the calling of parliaments every year, yet you have been deprived of them and enslaved through want of them. And therefore, both necessity for your security in these freedoms that are essential to your well-being, and woeful experience of the manifold miseries and distractions that have been lengthened out since the war ended through want of such a settlement, require this agreement. And when you and we shall be joined together therein we shall readily join with you to petition the parliament — as they are our fellow-commoners equally concerned — to join with us.
And if any shall inquire why we undertake to offer this agreement, we must profess we are sensible that you have been so often deceived with declarations and remonstrances and fed with vain hopes that you have sufficient reason to abandon all confidence in any persons whatsoever from whom you have no other security of their intending your freedom than bare declaration. And therefore, as our consciences witness that in simplicity and integrity of heart we have proposed lately in the Case of the army stated your freedom and deliverance from slavery, oppression and all burdens, so we desire to give you satisfying assurance thereof by this agreement — whereby the foundations of your freedoms provided in the Case of the army shall be settled unalterably. And we shall as faithfully proceed to — and all other most vigorous actings for your good that God shall direct and enable us unto. And though the malice of our enemies and such as they delude would blast us by scandals, aspersing us with designs of 'anarchy' and 'community', yet we hope the righteous God will, not only by this our present desire of setting an equal just government but also by directing us unto all righteous undertakings simply for public good, make our uprightness and faithfulness to the interest of all our countrymen shine forth so clearly that malice itself shall be silenced and confounded.
We question not but the longing expectation of a firm peace will incite you to the most speedy joining in this agreement — in the prosecution whereof, or of anything that you shall desire for public good, you may be confident you shall never want the assistance of,
Your most faithful fellow-commoners now in arms for your service.
Edmund Bear
Robert Everard (Lieutenant-General's Regiment).
George Garret
Thomas Beverley (Commissary-General's Regiment).
William Pryor
William Bryan (Colonel Fleetwood's Regiment).
Matthew Weale
William Russell (Colonel Whalley's Regiment).
John Dover
William Hudson (Colonel Rich's Regiment).
Agents coming from other regiments unto us have subscribed the agreement to be proposed to their respective regiments and you.
For our much honoured and truly worthy fellow-commoners and soldiers, the officers and soldiers under command of his excellency Sir Thomas Fairfax
Gentlemen and fellow soldiers,
The deep sense of many dangers and mischiefs that may befall you in relation to the late war whensoever this parliament shall end — unless sufficient prevention be now provided — has constrained us to study the most absolute and certain means for your security. And upon most serious considerations we judge that no Act of Indemnity can sufficiently provide for your quiet, ease, and safety, because — as it has formerly been — a corrupt party, chosen into the next parliament by your enemies' means may possibly surprise the House and make any Act of Indemnity null,[5] seeing they cannot fail of the king's assistance and concurrence in any such actings against you that conquered him.
And by the same means, your freedom from impressing also may in a short time be taken from you though for the present it should be granted.[6] We apprehend no other security by which you shall be saved harmless for what you have done in the late war than a mutual agreement between the people and you that no person shall be questioned by any authority whatsoever for anything done in relation to the late public differences after the dissolution of the present House of Commons, further than in execution of their judgement; and that your native freedom from constraint to serve in war, whether domestic or foreign, shall never be subject to the power of parliaments — or any other. And for this end we propound the agreement that we herewith send to you to be forthwith subscribed.
And because we are confident that 'in judgement and conscience'[7] ye hazarded your lives for the settlement of such a just and equal government that you and your posterities and all the freeborn people of this nation might enjoy justice and freedom; and that you are really sensible that the distractions, oppressions and miseries of the nation, and your want of your arrears, do proceed from the want of the establishment both of such certain rules of just government and foundations of peace as are the price of blood and the expected fruits of all the people's cost; therefore in this agreement we have inserted the certain rules of equal government under which the nation may enjoy all its rights and freedoms securely. And as we doubt not but your love to the freedom and lasting peace of the yet-distracted country will cause you to join together in this agreement.
So we question not but every true Englishman that loves the peace and freedom of England will concur with us. And then your arrears and constant pay (while you continue in arms) will certainly be brought in, out of the abundant love of the people to you; and then shall the mouths of those be stopped that scandalise you and us as endeavouring anarchy or to rule by the sword; and then will so firm an union be made between the people and you that neither any homebred or foreign enemies will dare to disturb our happy peace.
We shall add no more but this; that the knowledge of your union in laying this foundation of peace, this agreement, is much longed for by,
Yours, and the people's most faithful servants.
Postscript
Gentlemen,
We desire you may understand the reason of our extracting some principles of common freedom out of those many things proposed to you in the Case of the army truly stated and drawing them up into the form of an agreement. It's chiefly because for these things we first engaged against the king. He would not permit the people's representatives to provide for the nation's safety — by disposing of the militia, and other ways, according to their trust — but raised a war against them; and we engaged for the defence of that power and right of the people in their representatives. Therefore these things in the agreement, the people are to claim as their native right and price of their blood, which you are obliged absolutely to procure for them.
And these being the foundations of freedom, it's necessary that they should be settled unalterably, which can be by no means but this agreement with the people.
And we cannot but mind[8] you that the ease of the people in all their grievances depends upon the setting those principles or rules of equal government for a free people; and, were but this agreement established, doubtless all the grievances of the Army and people would be redressed immediately and all things propounded in your Case of the army stated to be insisted on, would be forthwith granted.
Then should the House of Commons have power to help the oppressed people, which they are now bereaved of by the chief oppressors; and then they shall be equally concerned with you and all the people in the settlement of the most perfect freedom — for they shall equally suffer with you under any burdens or partake in any freedom.
We shall only add that the sum of all the agreement which we herewith offer to you is but in order to the fulfilling of our Declaration of 14 June wherein we promised to the people that we would with our lives vindicate and clear their right and power in their parliaments.
Edmond Bear
Robert Everard (Lieutenant-General's Regiment).
George Garret
Thomas Beverley (Commissary-General's Regiment).
William Pryor
William Bryan (Colonel Fleetwood's Regiment).
Matthew Wealey
William Russell (Colonel Whalley's Regiment).
John Dober
William Hudson (Colonel Rich's Regiment).
Agents coming from other regiments unto us have subscribed the agreement to be proposed to their respective regiments and you.
From The “Occupy Oakland” Website-The November 2, 2011 Oakland General Strike-We Take The Offensive- Defend The Oakland Commune-Hands Off Occupy Cal!
Click on the headline to link to Occupy Oakland website for the latest from the vanguard battleground in the struggle for social justice.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Looking For A Few Good Men…And Women For Peace- A Stroll In The Boston Common On Veterans Day, Circa 2011- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Afghanistan! Hands Off Iran!-Hands Off The World!
Click on the headline to link to the Smedley Butler Brigade Of Veterans For Peace website for the latest news.
Looking For A Few Good Men…And Women For Peace- A Stroll In The Boston Common On Veterans Day, Circa 2011- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Afghanistan! Hands Off Iran!-Hands Off The World!
Markin comment:
Last year when I wrote what amounted to a paean to the Veterans For Peace and their Boston Common anti-war activities on Veterans Day 2010 in the entry, A Stroll In The Park On Veterans Day, where I said the following:
“Listen, I have been to many marches and demonstrations for democratic, progressive, socialist and communist causes in my long political life. However, of all those events none, by far, has been more satisfying that to march alongside my fellow ex-soldiers who have “switched” over to the other side and are now part of the struggle against war, the hard, hard struggle against the permanent war machine that this imperial system has embarked upon. From as far back as in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) days I have always felt that ex-soldiers (hell, active soldiers too, if you can get them) have had just a little bit more “street cred” on the war issue than the professors, pacifists and little old ladies in tennis sneakers who have traditionally led the anti-war movements. Maybe those brothers (and in my generation it was mainly only brothers) and now sisters may not quite pose the questions of war and peace the way I do, or the way that I would like them to do, but they are kindred spirits.
Now normally in Boston, and in most places, a Veterans Day parade means a bunch of Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) or American Legion-types taking time off from drinking at their post bars (“the battle of the barstool”) and donning the old overstuffed uniform and heading out on to Main Street to be waved at, and cheered on, by like-minded, thankful citizens. And of course that happened this time as well. What also happened in Boston this year (and other years but I have not been involved in previous marches) was that the Veterans For Peace (VFP) organized an anti-war march as part of their “Veterans Day” program. Said march to be held at the same place and time as the official one.”
And this year I expected to say roughly the same thing, except now that I have worked with them in some actions here in Boston, down in Washington D.C. in front of the Winter Palace (oops, the White House) in some civil disobedience actions, and in front of the Quantico Marine Base in Virginia in defense of the heroic Army private, Bradley Manning, that copy-cat approach doesn’t seem adequate. And here is why.
For an anti-war war veteran there are two kinds of ways to call oneself a veteran. The obvious one is to have “gone into the service,” as my grandmother (and probably many, too many, other grandmothers as well) used to say. The other is to be a veteran of the kind of anti-war actions described above. And, in the old days (the VVAW days) we used to say that kind of veteran service with a certain knowing snicker. A snicker like it was good to know, know finally, that you were on the side of the angels. And so to put paid to this piece let me finish with a story, a story about how a few god men and women kept on the right side of those angels just recently here in Boston.
Everybody with a pulse knows that there is a populist movement that has swept part of America (and the world) this fall looking for a little social justice and an end to the 1% takes all system we have lived under all our lives, the Occupy movement. An attentive news reader also knows that part of the publicity generated around the movement centers on establishing encampments in cities, large and small, in order to dramatize the pressing needs of the great majority of people. Here in Boston that started on September 31, 2011 with successful occupation of a section of the Rose Kennedy Greenway at Dewey Square near South Station. On October 10th elements within the movement attempted to expand the encampment another block and pitched tents accordingly. This “affrontery” set Boston Mayor Thomas Menino into spasms and he ordered out his Cossacks (a. k. a. cops) to disband the rabble, forthwith. At a General Assembly (the decision-making body that drives the camp and the political perspectives) that evening the overwhelming majority of those present and voting voted to defend the second site. As result in the dead of night (about 2:00 AM) the Mayor’s horde descended on the campsite in full combat regalia to arrest the peaceful assembly waiting to defend the site. Some one hundred and forty people were arrested that early morning.
That is the back story, and is more or less widely known by now. What is less well known is that a contingent of veterans, almost all veterans of previous civil disobediences actions, had determined one more time to defend something. This time not the mythical home and country but “family,” a family of mainly younger people who were not as well- versed in cop madness, or the niceties of the nightstick as these veterans. And so as is called for when an encampment is set up in enemy territory that contingent set up a perimeter on the pathway in front of the camp in the direction from which the attack was expected. And it came. The veterans, some of who were arrested and others who were merely pushed aside, or to the ground, “defended” the camp, honorably . And you now know why anything I expected to say about this years Veterans Day anti-war gathering on November 11th pales in comparison. A few good women and men, indeed. And I say that without a snicker today.
Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Afghanistan! Hands Off Iran!-Hands Off The World!
Looking For A Few Good Men…And Women For Peace- A Stroll In The Boston Common On Veterans Day, Circa 2011- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Afghanistan! Hands Off Iran!-Hands Off The World!
Markin comment:
Last year when I wrote what amounted to a paean to the Veterans For Peace and their Boston Common anti-war activities on Veterans Day 2010 in the entry, A Stroll In The Park On Veterans Day, where I said the following:
“Listen, I have been to many marches and demonstrations for democratic, progressive, socialist and communist causes in my long political life. However, of all those events none, by far, has been more satisfying that to march alongside my fellow ex-soldiers who have “switched” over to the other side and are now part of the struggle against war, the hard, hard struggle against the permanent war machine that this imperial system has embarked upon. From as far back as in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) days I have always felt that ex-soldiers (hell, active soldiers too, if you can get them) have had just a little bit more “street cred” on the war issue than the professors, pacifists and little old ladies in tennis sneakers who have traditionally led the anti-war movements. Maybe those brothers (and in my generation it was mainly only brothers) and now sisters may not quite pose the questions of war and peace the way I do, or the way that I would like them to do, but they are kindred spirits.
Now normally in Boston, and in most places, a Veterans Day parade means a bunch of Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) or American Legion-types taking time off from drinking at their post bars (“the battle of the barstool”) and donning the old overstuffed uniform and heading out on to Main Street to be waved at, and cheered on, by like-minded, thankful citizens. And of course that happened this time as well. What also happened in Boston this year (and other years but I have not been involved in previous marches) was that the Veterans For Peace (VFP) organized an anti-war march as part of their “Veterans Day” program. Said march to be held at the same place and time as the official one.”
And this year I expected to say roughly the same thing, except now that I have worked with them in some actions here in Boston, down in Washington D.C. in front of the Winter Palace (oops, the White House) in some civil disobedience actions, and in front of the Quantico Marine Base in Virginia in defense of the heroic Army private, Bradley Manning, that copy-cat approach doesn’t seem adequate. And here is why.
For an anti-war war veteran there are two kinds of ways to call oneself a veteran. The obvious one is to have “gone into the service,” as my grandmother (and probably many, too many, other grandmothers as well) used to say. The other is to be a veteran of the kind of anti-war actions described above. And, in the old days (the VVAW days) we used to say that kind of veteran service with a certain knowing snicker. A snicker like it was good to know, know finally, that you were on the side of the angels. And so to put paid to this piece let me finish with a story, a story about how a few god men and women kept on the right side of those angels just recently here in Boston.
Everybody with a pulse knows that there is a populist movement that has swept part of America (and the world) this fall looking for a little social justice and an end to the 1% takes all system we have lived under all our lives, the Occupy movement. An attentive news reader also knows that part of the publicity generated around the movement centers on establishing encampments in cities, large and small, in order to dramatize the pressing needs of the great majority of people. Here in Boston that started on September 31, 2011 with successful occupation of a section of the Rose Kennedy Greenway at Dewey Square near South Station. On October 10th elements within the movement attempted to expand the encampment another block and pitched tents accordingly. This “affrontery” set Boston Mayor Thomas Menino into spasms and he ordered out his Cossacks (a. k. a. cops) to disband the rabble, forthwith. At a General Assembly (the decision-making body that drives the camp and the political perspectives) that evening the overwhelming majority of those present and voting voted to defend the second site. As result in the dead of night (about 2:00 AM) the Mayor’s horde descended on the campsite in full combat regalia to arrest the peaceful assembly waiting to defend the site. Some one hundred and forty people were arrested that early morning.
That is the back story, and is more or less widely known by now. What is less well known is that a contingent of veterans, almost all veterans of previous civil disobediences actions, had determined one more time to defend something. This time not the mythical home and country but “family,” a family of mainly younger people who were not as well- versed in cop madness, or the niceties of the nightstick as these veterans. And so as is called for when an encampment is set up in enemy territory that contingent set up a perimeter on the pathway in front of the camp in the direction from which the attack was expected. And it came. The veterans, some of who were arrested and others who were merely pushed aside, or to the ground, “defended” the camp, honorably . And you now know why anything I expected to say about this years Veterans Day anti-war gathering on November 11th pales in comparison. A few good women and men, indeed. And I say that without a snicker today.
Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Afghanistan! Hands Off Iran!-Hands Off The World!
The Latest From The "Jobs Not Cuts" Website-National Week Of Actions-November 16-23 -In Boston November 17th At The Boston Common
NATIONAL WEEK OF ACTIONS November 16-23
JOIN THE RALLY AND PROTEST:
JOBS NOT CUTS
Thursday Nov. 17th @ 4pm-6pm Bandstand, Boston Common Near Park St. T station and Then We'll March on Kerry's Office
WE DEMAND:
Hands off Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid! No cuts to education and social services!
We need jobs, not cuts! Fund a federal public works program to create millions of jobs for the millions unemployed.
Make Big Business Pay! For major tax hikes on the super-rich and corporations!
End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan! Slash Pentagon spending!
For the impressive growing list of endorsers check out
www.jobsnotcutsprotest.org
End the Dictatorship of Wall Street!
A Socialist Strategy to Build the Movement
All around the world attention has been drawn to the occupation of Wall Street. The protests have captured the imagina¬tion of thousands and inspired new occupations which are spreading across the U.S.
The police crackdown in New York, in¬tended to intimidate this movement, completely failed to break our spirit. Now we are more determined than ever to fight. Inspired by the revolutionary upheavals in Egypt and across North Africa, as well as the mass youth occupations in Spain and Greece, protesters have taken to the streets of New York and cities across the U.S. to stand up to the domination of Wall Street and Big Business over our lives.
Below the surface there is deep anger in U.S. society which only seemed to be getting a twisted expression in the right-wing lunacies of the Tea Party. But the mass movement in Wisconsin this spring, and now the occupation of Wall Street provide a glimpse of the enormous potential to turn that anger into a progressive social movement.
How can we take the struggle forward?
Many are occupying to "liberate space" in order to build a new, more equal and just community, hoping it will inspire others to follow. While the Wall Street occupation is an example of a community based on democracy, cooperation and solidarity, unfortunately the occupation alone will not be enough to build a mass movement capable of changing society.
Many have alluded to Egypt saying that a growing occupation with one basic de¬mand is how the dictator was overthrown. But in fact, the situation was more complicated than that. In the week before Egypt's dictator Mubarak was ousted, the working class entered the scene with decisive strike action paralyzing key parts of the economy.
The occupations in Spain and Greece have been much bigger than Wall Street, but they too need the more powerful forces of the working class to move into action in order to win. In Wisconsin, a huge occupation of the Capitol lasted for over 3 weeks and was at the center of mass demonstrations of the workers and youth. They could have won if that movement had moved toward a general strike of public sector workers to shut the state economy down.
Instead the Wisconsin battle was consciously derailed by the Democratic Party and the top union leadership by diverting the mass movement into a campaign to recall the Republicans from power in order to elect Democrats in their place. However, the Democrats, like the Republicans, are a party of Wall Street and Big Business, and they offer no solutions. We need an independent struggle which seeks to draw in the widest layers of workers and youth. United we have the power to withdraw our labor, stop "business as usual," and hit the banks, corporations and ruling elite where it counts.
We need to build up the confidence to take such bold measures. That's why Occupy Wall Street needs to call for mass demonstrations around key demands that address the burning issues that working people and youth face like jobs, education, healthcare and so on.
System Change
Not only the economy but society as a whole is in a deep crisis. Global capitalism is a failed system that cannot overcome the problems of growing inequality, poverty, mass unemployment, environmental destruction, and war which it creates. The movement has to challenge Wall Street and both parties of big business. We must stand up to their policies where they try to solve their economic crisis on our backs in order to maintain a system which only benefits the elite in the first place.
But we must also provide a clear alternative. We need to fundamentally trans¬form society to one not based on profit but instead on meeting everyone's basic human needs. The only real alternative to corporate greed and capitalism is democratic socialism where the economy, workplaces, and society as a whole are democratically run by and for the vast majority of people.
Join Socialist Alternative! We say:
Spread the occupations across the U.S. and into schools and communities. For systematic, mass campaigning to mobilize the widest layer of workers, young people and labor unions into struggle.
•Organize weekend mass demonstrations that call for: No cuts
to social services, A massive jobs creation program, Major tax
hikes on the super-rich and big business, End the wars, Slash
the military budget, and Defend union and democratic rights.
•Build up to the November 16-23 National Week of Action to combat the
Congressional Super Committee plan for $1.5 trillion in cuts to social
services. We demand jobs not cuts!
•Prepare to run independent anti-corporate, working-class candidates in
2012 to challenge the policies of the two parties of Wall Street as a first
step towards forming a new party of the 99%, a mass workers' party.
End the dictatorship of Wall Street! Bring the big banks that dominate the U.S. economy into public ownership and run them under the democratic management of elected representatives of their workers and the public. Compensation to be paid on the basis of proven need to small investors, not millionaires.
Build the movement to replace the rotten system of capitalism with democratic socialism and create a new society based on human need.
*****
Markin comment:
Some of the demands stated are supportable although the method of achieving them seems unclear since the march is on Congressional Committee of 12 member Senator John "War" (Iraq and Afghanistan support) Kerry's office. Do the sponsors really still expect that parliamentary action (nudging the Congress to do the right thing, or else) is the way forward after last summer's debacle? Christ, let's learn something right now. You only get what you fight for-and are ready to take. We created the wealth-let's take it back! Labor and the oppressed must rule!
JOIN THE RALLY AND PROTEST:
JOBS NOT CUTS
Thursday Nov. 17th @ 4pm-6pm Bandstand, Boston Common Near Park St. T station and Then We'll March on Kerry's Office
WE DEMAND:
Hands off Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid! No cuts to education and social services!
We need jobs, not cuts! Fund a federal public works program to create millions of jobs for the millions unemployed.
Make Big Business Pay! For major tax hikes on the super-rich and corporations!
End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan! Slash Pentagon spending!
For the impressive growing list of endorsers check out
www.jobsnotcutsprotest.org
End the Dictatorship of Wall Street!
A Socialist Strategy to Build the Movement
All around the world attention has been drawn to the occupation of Wall Street. The protests have captured the imagina¬tion of thousands and inspired new occupations which are spreading across the U.S.
The police crackdown in New York, in¬tended to intimidate this movement, completely failed to break our spirit. Now we are more determined than ever to fight. Inspired by the revolutionary upheavals in Egypt and across North Africa, as well as the mass youth occupations in Spain and Greece, protesters have taken to the streets of New York and cities across the U.S. to stand up to the domination of Wall Street and Big Business over our lives.
Below the surface there is deep anger in U.S. society which only seemed to be getting a twisted expression in the right-wing lunacies of the Tea Party. But the mass movement in Wisconsin this spring, and now the occupation of Wall Street provide a glimpse of the enormous potential to turn that anger into a progressive social movement.
How can we take the struggle forward?
Many are occupying to "liberate space" in order to build a new, more equal and just community, hoping it will inspire others to follow. While the Wall Street occupation is an example of a community based on democracy, cooperation and solidarity, unfortunately the occupation alone will not be enough to build a mass movement capable of changing society.
Many have alluded to Egypt saying that a growing occupation with one basic de¬mand is how the dictator was overthrown. But in fact, the situation was more complicated than that. In the week before Egypt's dictator Mubarak was ousted, the working class entered the scene with decisive strike action paralyzing key parts of the economy.
The occupations in Spain and Greece have been much bigger than Wall Street, but they too need the more powerful forces of the working class to move into action in order to win. In Wisconsin, a huge occupation of the Capitol lasted for over 3 weeks and was at the center of mass demonstrations of the workers and youth. They could have won if that movement had moved toward a general strike of public sector workers to shut the state economy down.
Instead the Wisconsin battle was consciously derailed by the Democratic Party and the top union leadership by diverting the mass movement into a campaign to recall the Republicans from power in order to elect Democrats in their place. However, the Democrats, like the Republicans, are a party of Wall Street and Big Business, and they offer no solutions. We need an independent struggle which seeks to draw in the widest layers of workers and youth. United we have the power to withdraw our labor, stop "business as usual," and hit the banks, corporations and ruling elite where it counts.
We need to build up the confidence to take such bold measures. That's why Occupy Wall Street needs to call for mass demonstrations around key demands that address the burning issues that working people and youth face like jobs, education, healthcare and so on.
System Change
Not only the economy but society as a whole is in a deep crisis. Global capitalism is a failed system that cannot overcome the problems of growing inequality, poverty, mass unemployment, environmental destruction, and war which it creates. The movement has to challenge Wall Street and both parties of big business. We must stand up to their policies where they try to solve their economic crisis on our backs in order to maintain a system which only benefits the elite in the first place.
But we must also provide a clear alternative. We need to fundamentally trans¬form society to one not based on profit but instead on meeting everyone's basic human needs. The only real alternative to corporate greed and capitalism is democratic socialism where the economy, workplaces, and society as a whole are democratically run by and for the vast majority of people.
Join Socialist Alternative! We say:
Spread the occupations across the U.S. and into schools and communities. For systematic, mass campaigning to mobilize the widest layer of workers, young people and labor unions into struggle.
•Organize weekend mass demonstrations that call for: No cuts
to social services, A massive jobs creation program, Major tax
hikes on the super-rich and big business, End the wars, Slash
the military budget, and Defend union and democratic rights.
•Build up to the November 16-23 National Week of Action to combat the
Congressional Super Committee plan for $1.5 trillion in cuts to social
services. We demand jobs not cuts!
•Prepare to run independent anti-corporate, working-class candidates in
2012 to challenge the policies of the two parties of Wall Street as a first
step towards forming a new party of the 99%, a mass workers' party.
End the dictatorship of Wall Street! Bring the big banks that dominate the U.S. economy into public ownership and run them under the democratic management of elected representatives of their workers and the public. Compensation to be paid on the basis of proven need to small investors, not millionaires.
Build the movement to replace the rotten system of capitalism with democratic socialism and create a new society based on human need.
*****
Markin comment:
Some of the demands stated are supportable although the method of achieving them seems unclear since the march is on Congressional Committee of 12 member Senator John "War" (Iraq and Afghanistan support) Kerry's office. Do the sponsors really still expect that parliamentary action (nudging the Congress to do the right thing, or else) is the way forward after last summer's debacle? Christ, let's learn something right now. You only get what you fight for-and are ready to take. We created the wealth-let's take it back! Labor and the oppressed must rule!
From The “Occupy Cal” Website-In Honor Of The November 2, 2011 Oakland General Strike-We Take The Offensive- Defend "Occupy Cal"!-Hands Off "Occupy Cal"!-Support The "Occupy Cal" Student Strike! All Out November 15, 2011 In The Bay Area!
Click on the headline to link to Occupy Cal website for the latest from the vanguard Bay Area battleground in the struggle for social justice.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-loaded, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
******
Markin comment November 11, 2011:
The struggle in the Bay Are continues. No sooner do we have a great victory in Oakland with the shutdown of the Port Of Oakland and positive General Strike results than everybody on the other side and their brothers (and sisters, don’t' forget Mayor Quan) is trying to stop us again. Ditto the attempts to set up an encampment at Berkeley by Occupy Cal. No Mas- Support the student strike Tuesday , November 15, 2011.All Out To Defend Occupy Cal!
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-loaded, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
******
Markin comment November 11, 2011:
The struggle in the Bay Are continues. No sooner do we have a great victory in Oakland with the shutdown of the Port Of Oakland and positive General Strike results than everybody on the other side and their brothers (and sisters, don’t' forget Mayor Quan) is trying to stop us again. Ditto the attempts to set up an encampment at Berkeley by Occupy Cal. No Mas- Support the student strike Tuesday , November 15, 2011.All Out To Defend Occupy Cal!
From #Occupied Boston (#TomemonosBoston)-Day Forty-Four-An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers!–General Assembly-The Embryo Of An Alternate Government-Learn The Lessons Of History-The Max Daddy (Or Mama) Of Modern Revolutions-From The English Revolution-The Putney Debates of 1647-The Head Of Proposals
Click on the headline to link to updates from the Occupy Boston website. Occupy Boston started at 6:00 PM, September 30, 2011. I will post important updates as they appear on that site.
********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
#TomemonosBoston
Somos la Sociedad conformando el 99% -Dewey Square, Cercerde South Station
#Tomemonos Boston se reuniarin en el Dewey Square en Downtown Boston a discutir cambios que la ciudadania puede hacer en el gobierno que afecte un cambio social positivo.
******
Below I am posting, occasionally, comments on the Occupy movement as I see or hear things of interest, or that cause alarm bells to ring in my head. The first comment directly below from October 1, which represented my first impressions of Occupy Boston, is the lead for all further postings.
*******
Markin comment October 1, 2011:
There is a lot of naiveté expressed about the nature of capitalism, capitalists, and the way to win in the class struggle by various participants in this occupation. Many also have attempted to make a virtue out of that naiveté, particularly around the issues of effective democratic organization and relationships with the police (they are not our friends, no way, when the deal goes down). However, their spirit is refreshing, they are acting out of good subjective anti-capitalist motives and, most importantly, even those of us who call themselves "reds" (communists), including this writer, started out from liberal premises as naive, if not more so, than those encountered at the occupation site. We can all learn something but in the meantime we must defend the "occupation" and the occupiers. More later as the occupation continues.
**********
Markin comment October 22, 2011
As part of my comment, dated October 20, 2011, I noted the following:
“… The idea of the General Assembly with each individual attendee acting as a “tribune of the people” is interesting and important. And, of course, it represents, for today anyway, the embryo of what the “new world” we need to create might look like at the governmental level.”
A couple of the people that I have talked to were not quite sure what to make of that idea. The idea that what is going on in Occupy Boston at the governmental level could, should, would be a possible form of governing this society in the “new world aborning” with the rise of the Occupy movement. Part of the problem is that there was some confusion on the part of the listeners that one of the possible aims of this movement is to create an alternative government, or at least provide a model for such a government. I will argue here now, and in the future, that it should be one the goals. In short, we need to take power away from the Democrats and Republicans and their tired old congressional/executive/judicial form of governing and place it at the grassroots level and work upward from there rather than, as now, have power devolve from the top. (And stop well short of the bottom.)
I will leave aside the question (the problem really) of what it would take to create such a possibility. Of course a revolutionary solution would, of necessity, have be on the table since there is no way that the current powerful interests, Democratic, Republican or those having no politics, is going to give up power without a fight. What I want to pose now is the use of the General Assembly as a deliberative executive, legislative, and judicial body all rolled into one. In that sense previous historical models come to mind; the short-lived but heroic Paris Commune of 1871 that Karl Marx tirelessly defended against the reactionaries of Europe as the prototype of a workers government; the early heroic days of the Russian October Revolution of 1917 when the workers councils (soviets in Russian parlance) acted as a true workers' government; and the period in the Spanish Revolution of 1936-39 where the Central Committee of the Anti-Fascist Militias acted, de facto, as a workers government. All the just mentioned examples had their problems and flaws, no question. However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.
And as always-everybody, young or old, needs to stand by this slogan - An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers Everywhere! Hands Off Occupy Boston !
**********
Markin comment October 26, 2011:
Recently (see October 22, 2011 comment above) I noted the following while arguing for the General Assembly concept as a form of alternate government using historic examples like the Paris Commune (1871), the early Soviets in Russia (1905 and 1917), and early antifascist militias in the Spanish Civil War (1936-37:
“However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.”
In order to facilitate the investigation and study of those examples I will, occasionally, post works in this space that deal with these forbears from several leftist perspectives (rightist perspectives were clear- crush all the above examples ruthlessly, and with no mercy- so we need not look at them now). I started with Karl Marx’s classic defense and critique of the Paris Commune, The Civil War In France. Today I am posting the Putney Debates of 1647 From The English Revolution.
*********
THE PUTNEY DEBATES 1647
http://www.putneydebates.com/The%20Debates.html
The Grandees
The Grandees were senior officers in the parliamentary, New Model Army. They were typically from the landed gentry and opposed several of the Levellers demands, such as 'levelling' enclosures around their estates.
The most famous and influential were: Sir Thomas Fairfax, Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton,
Thomas Fairfax, 3rd Lord Fairfax of Cameron (1612 –1671) a general in the parliamentary army and commander-in-chief during the English Civil War.
Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658) a military and political leader, made England into a republican Commonwealth and later became Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland.
Henry Ireton (1611 - 1651), a general in the Parliamentary army.
**********
The Levellers
The Levellers were a group of civilians, mainly business men and skilled craftsmen, who formed the first political group based on a democratic basis. Their 'movement'' was based on a set of common ideas and demands on the ruling classes rather than an organised political party.
They met in small groups on regular basis in various London Inns, drawing up petitions against parliamentary actions and collecting subscriptions, amounts paid my members were according to income, to fund their propaganda. Petitions could have up to 30,000 signatures and in 1647, after a bad harvest and increasing starvation throughout the country, petitioned Parliament for poor relief.
They also inspired many of the demands of the more radical elements of Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army. These elements were typically from the Cavalry regiments who had 'elected' spokesmen (who become known as the Agitators) to represent them. At this point the Levellers became very influential and had to be listened too.
Even now, some 360 years later, some of our current politicians are said to have 'leveller' ideas and are still fighting for the same democratic changes originally proposed by Overton.
Levellers
The term Levellers was given to them by the King Charles as one of their aims was to level the enclosures land of the nobility.
The term is also known to derive from the Levellers themselves as they declared that "all degrees of men should be levelled, and an equality should be established".
Summer 1647:
The Army was now in effective control of the country and issued The Heads of the Proposals as an outline of a constitutional settlement.
The Levellers' plan, An Agreement of the People, was more radical. Representatives of both viewpoints tried to arrive at a joint scheme during The Putney Debates (October to November 1647).
Their manifesto for constitutional reform in Britain paved the way for many of the civil liberties we value today.
The most prominent Levellers were:
Edward Sexby (1616-1658) Served in Cromwell's regiment of horse from 1643. He helped lead the Leveller soldiers in 1647, but remained in Cromwell's confidence and was made governor of Portland. He fought for Cromwell in Scotland and was sent as an agent provocateur to France in 1652-53.
He grew disillusioned with Cromwell's government and in 1657 wrote Killing No Murder, an endorsement of tyrannicide. He came to England - apparently intending to act on his principles - but was arrested and died in the Tower, 13 January 1658.
Colonel Thomas Rainsborough
(1610 - 1648)
One of the leaders of the Leveller soldiers in 1647, and he opposed all attempts at compromise with Charles I. Yet as vice-admiral in 1648, his imperious conduct helped provoke his squadron into declaring for the King. In May 1648, while besieging Pontefract Castle, he was surprised by cavaliers and killed.
Richard Overton (1625-1664) Agreed with John Lilburne on political questions but, more radical in his religious beliefs, he rejected the notion of an immaterial soul, arguing that the Scripture only gave grounds for belief in the resurrection of the body. This view was seen at the time as virtually the equivalent of atheism. In 1655, he fled to Flanders with Edward Sexby, where he conspired with Charles II to overthrow Cromwell's regime.
John Wildman (1621-1693) Played an important part in the army disturbances of 1647 and was imprisoned in 1648. His career of political radicalism continued long beyond the English Civil War. He was imprisoned from 1661 to 1667 for plotting against Charles II. Soon after his release, he conspired with Algernon Sidney against the succession to the throne of the Catholic James II. Wildman finally found a government he approved in the reign of William and Mary, became postmaster general and was knighted.
William Walwyn (1600-1681) A prosperous silk merchant, his political views were close to those other Levellers but, his overriding concern was with religious freedom, insisting that persuasion was the only proper method of religious conversion. Walwyn was imprisoned with other Leveller leaders in 1649, although unlike them he played no part in encouraging mutiny against Cromwell and the other army Grandees.
John Lilburne (1614-1657) Became involved in radical opposition to the Bishops, he fought for Parliament, but refused to subscribe to the Solemn League and Covenant and its endorsement of religious uniformity. He attacked the powers of the House of Lords, and abandoned his early support of Oliver Cromwell. Left the New Model Army in 1645. In and out of prison, he was popular with the people and a thorn in the government's side. Late in life, he became a Quaker
********
71. The Heads of the Proposals offered by the Army.
[August 1, 1647. Rushworth, vii. 731. See Great Civil War, iii. 329-333, 340-343.]
The Heads of the Proposals agreed upon by his Excellency Sir Thomas Fairfax and the Council of the Army, to be tendered to the Commissioners of Parliament residing with the Army, and with them to be treated on by the Commissioners of the Army: containing the particulars of their desires in pursuance of their former declarations and papers, in order to the clearing and securing of the rights and liberties of the kingdom, and the settling a just and lasting peace. To which are added some further particular desires (for the removing and redressing of divers pressing grievances), being also comprised in or necessary pursuance of their former representations and papers appointed to be treated upon.
I. That (things hereafter proposed, being provided for by this Parliament) a certain period may (by Act of Parliament) be set for the ending of this Parliament (such period to be put within a year at most), and in the same Act provision to be made for the succession and constitution of Parliaments in future, as followeth:
1. That Parliaments may biennially be called and meet at a certain day, with such provision for the certainty thereof, as in the late Act was made for triennial Parliaments; and what further or other provision shall be found needful by the Parliament to reduce it to more certainty; and upon the passing of this, the said Act for triennial Parliaments to be repealed.
2. Each biennial Parliament to sit 120 days certain (unless adjourned or dissolved sooner by their own consent), afterwards to be adjournable or dissolvable by the King, and no Parliament to sit past 240 days from their first meeting, or some other limited number of days now to be agreed on; upon the expiration whereof each Parliament to dissolve of course, if not otherwise dissolved sooner.
3. The King, upon advice of the Council of State, in the intervals between biennial Parliaments, to call a Parliament extraordinary, provided it meet above 70 days before the next biennial day, and be dissolved at least 60 days before the same; so as the course of biennial elections may never be interrupted.
4. That this Parliament and each succeeding biennial Parliament, at or before adjournment or dissolution thereof, may appoint Committees to continue during the interval for such purposes as are in any of these Proposals referred to such Committees.
5. That the elections of the Commons for succeeding Parliaments may be
distributed to all counties, or other parts or divisions of the kingdom, according to some rule of equality or proportion, so as all counties may have a number of Parliament members allowed to their choice, proportionable to the respective rates they bear in the common charges and burdens of the kingdom, according to some other rule of equality or proportion, to render the House of Commons (as near as may be) an equal representative of the whole; and in order thereunto, that a present consideration be had to take off the elections of burgesses for poor decayed or inconsiderable towns, and to give some present addition to the number of Parliament members for great counties that have now less than their due proportion, to bring all (at present), as near as may be, to such a rule of proportion as aforesaid.
6. That effectual provision be made for future freedom of elections, and certainty of due returns.
7. That the House of Commons alone have the power from time to time to set down further orders and rules for the ends expressed in the two last preceding articles, so as to reduce the elections of members for that House to more and more perfection of equality in the distribution, freedom in the election, order in the proceeding thereto, and certainty in the returns, with orders and rules (in that case) to be in laws.
8. That there be a liberty for entering dissents in the House of Commons, with provision that no member be censurable for ought said or voted in the House further than to exclusion from that trust; and that only by the judgment of the House itself.
9. That the judicial power, or power of final judgment in the Lords and Commons (and their power of exposition and application of law, without further appeal), may be cleared; and that no officer of justice, minister of state, or other person adjudged by them, may be capable of protection or pardon from the King without their advice or consent.
10. That the right and liberty of the Commons of England may be cleared and vindicated as to a due exemption from any judgment, trial or other proceeding against them by the House of Peers, without the concurring judgment of the House of Commons: as also from any other judgment, sentence or proceeding against them, other than by their equals, or according to the law of the land.
11. The same Act to provide that grand jurymen may be chosen by and for several parts or divisions of each county respectively, in some equal way (and not to remain as now, at the discretion of an Under-Sheriff to be put on or off), and that such grand jurymen for their respective counties, may at each Assize present the name of persons to be made Justices of the Peace from time to time, as the county hath need for any to be added to the Commission, and at the Summer Assize to present the names of three persons, out of whom the King may prick one to be Sheriff for the next year.
II. For the future security of Parliament and the militia in general, in order thereunto, that it be provided by Act of Parliament:
1. That the power of the militia by sea and land, during the space of ten years next ensuing, shall be ordered and disposed by the Lords and Commons assembled, and to be assembled in the Parliament or Parliaments of England, by such persons as they shall nominate and appoint for that purpose from time to time during the said space.
2. That the said power shall not be ordered, disposed or exercised by the King's Majesty that now is, or by any person or persons by any authority derived from him, during the said space, or at any time hereafter by His said Majesty, without the advice and consent of the said Lords and Commons, or of such Committees or Council in the intervals of Parliament as they shall appoint.
3. That during the same space of ten years the said Lords and Commons may by Bill or Ordinance raise and dispose of what moneys and for what forces they shall from time to time find necessary; as also for payment of the public debts and damages, and for all other the public uses of the kingdom.
4. And to the end the temporary security intended by the three particulars last precedent may be the better assured, it may therefore be provided,
That no subjects that have been in hostility against the Parliament in the late war, shall be capable of bearing any office of power or public trust in the Commonwealth during the space of five years, without the consent of Parliament or of the Council of State; or to sit as members or assistants of either House of Parliament, until the second biennial Parliament be passed.
III. For the present form of disposing the militia in order to the peace and safety of this kingdom and the service of Ireland:
1. That there be Commissioners for the Admiralty, with the Vice-Admiral and Rear-Admiral, now to be agreed on, with power for the forming, regulating, appointing of officers and providing for the Navy, and for ordering the same to, and in the ordinary service of the Kingdom; and that there be a sufficient provision and establishment for pay and maintenance thereof.
2. That there be a General for command of the laud forces that are to be in pay both in England, Ireland and Wales, both for field and garrison.
3. That there be Commissioners in the several counties for the standing militia of the respective counties (consisting of trained bands and auxiliaries not in pay), with power for the proportioning, forming, regulating, training and disciplining of them.
4. That there be a Council of State, with power to superintend and direct the several and particular powers of the militia last mentioned, for the peace and safety of this kingdom, and of Ireland.
5. That the same Council may have power as the King's Privy Council, for and in all foreign negotiations; provided that the making of war or peace with any other kingdom or state shall not be without the advice and consent of Parliament.
6. That the said power of the Council of State be put into the hands of trusty and able persons now to be agreed on, and the same persons to continue in that power (si bene se gesserint) for the certain term not exceeding seven years.
7. That there be a sufficient establishment now provided for the salary forces both in England and Ireland, the establishment to continue until two months after the meeting of the first biennial Parliament.
IV. That an Act be passed for disposing the great offices for ten years by the Lords and Commons in Parliament; or by such Committees as they shall appoint for that purpose in the intervals (with submission to the approbation of the next Parliament), and after ten years they to nominate three, and the King out of that number to appoint one for the succession upon any vacancy.
V. That an Act be passed for restraining of any Peers made since the 21st day of May, 1642, or to be hereafter made, from having any power to sit or vote in Parliament without consent of both Houses.
VI. That an Act be passed for recalling and making void all declarations and other proceedings against the Parliament, or against any that have acted by or under their authority in the late war, or in relation to it; and that the Ordinances for indemnity may be confirmed.
VII. That an Act be passed for making void all grants, &c. under the Great Seal, that was conveyed away from the Parliament, since the time that it was so conveyed away (except as in the Parliament's propositions), and for making those valid that have been or shall be passed under the Great Seal, made by the authority of both Houses of Parliament.
VIII. That an Act be passed for confirmation of the Treaties between the two kingdoms of England and Scotland, and for appointing conservators of the peace between them.
IX. That the Ordinance for taking away the Court of Wards and Liveries be confirmed by Act of Parliament; provided His Majesty's revenue be not damnified therein, nor those that last held offices in the same left without reparation some other way.
X. An Act to declare void the cessation of Ireland, &c., and to leave the prosecution of that war to the Lords and Commons in the Parliament of England.
XI. An Act to be passed to take away all coercive power, authority, and jurisdiction of Bishops and all other Ecclesiastical Officers whatsoever, extending to any civil penalties upon any: and to repeal all laws whereby the civil magistracy hath been, or is bound, upon any ecclesiastical censure to proceed (ex officio) unto any civil penalties against any persons so censured.
XII. That there be a repeal of all Acts or clauses in any Act enjoining the use of the Book of Common Prayer, and imposing any penalties for neglect thereof; as also of all Acts or clauses of any Act, imposing any penalty for not coming to church, or for meetings elsewhere for prayer or other religious duties, exercises or ordinances, and some other provision to be made for discovering of Papists and Popish recusants, and for disabling of them, and of all Jesuits or priests from disturbing the State.
XIII. That the taking of the Covenant be not enforced upon any, nor any penalties imposed on the refusers, whereby men might be restrained to take it against their judgments or consciences; but all Orders and Ordinances tending to that purpose to be repealed.
XIV. That (the things here before proposed being provided, for settling and securing the rights, liberties, peace and safety of the kingdom) His Majesty's person, his Queen, and royal issue, may be restored to a condition of safety, honour and freedom in this nation, without diminution to their personal rights, or further limitation to the exercise of the regal power than according to the particulars foregoing XV. For the matter of composition:
1. That a less number out of the persons excepted in the two first qualifications (not exceeding five for the English) being nominated particularly by the Parliament, who (together with the persons in the Irish Rebellion, included in the third qualification) may be reserved to the further judgment of the Parliament as they shall find cause, all other excepted persons may be remitted from the exception, and admitted to composition.
2. That the rates of all future compositions may be lessened and limited, not to exceed the several proportions hereafter expressed respectively. That is to say,
(1) For all persons formerly excepted, not above a third part.
(2) For the late members of Parliament under the first branch of the fourth
qualification in the Propositions, a fourth part.
(3) For other members of Parliament in the second and third branches of the same qualification, a sixth part.
(4) For the persons nominated in the said fourth qualification, and those included in the tenth qualification, an eighth part.
(5) For all others included in the sixth qualification, a tenth part: and that real debts either upon record, or proved by witnesses, be considered and abated in the valuation of their estates in all the cases aforesaid.
3. That those who shall hereafter come to compound, may not have the Covenant put upon them as a condition without which they may not compound, but in case they shall not willingly take it, they may pass their compositions without it.
4. That the persons and estates of all English not worth £200 in land or goods, be at liberty and discharged: and that the King's menial servants that never took up arms, but only attended his person according to their offices, may be freed from composition, or to pay (at most) but the proportion of one year's revenue, or a twentieth part.
5. That in order to the making and perfecting of compositions at the rates aforesaid, the rents, revenues, and other duties and profits of all sequestered estates whatsoever (except the estates of such persons who shall be continued under exception as before), be from henceforth suspended and detained in the hands of the respective tenants, occupants and others from whom they are due, for the space of six months following.
6. That the faith of the army, or other forces of the Parliament given in articles upon surrenders to any of the King's party, may be fully made good; and where any breach thereof shall appear to have been made, full reparation and satisfaction may be given to the parties injured, and the persons offending (being found out) may be compelled thereto.
XVI. That there may be a general Act of Oblivion to extend unto all (except the persons to be continued in exception as before), to absolve from all trespasses, misdemeanours, &c. done in prosecution of the war; and from all trouble or prejudice for or concerning the same (after their compositions past), and to restore them to all privileges, &c. belonging to other subjects, provided as in the fourth particular under the second general head aforegoing concerning security.
And whereas there have been of late strong endeavours and practices of a factious and desperate party to embroil this kingdom in a new war, and for that purpose to induce the King, the Queen, and the Prince to declare for the said party, and also to excite and stir up all those of the King's late party to appear and engage for the same, which attempts and designs, many of the King's party (out of their desires to avoid further misery to the kingdom) have contributed their endeavours to prevent (as for divers of them we have had particular assurance): we do therefore desire, that such of the King's party who shall appear to have expressed, and shall hereafter express, that way their good affections to the peace and welfare of the kingdom, and to hinder the embroiling of the same in a new war, may be freed and exempted from compositions, or to pay but one year's revenue, or a twentieth part.
These particulars aforegoing are the heads of such Proposals as we have agreed on to tender in order to the settling of the peace of this kingdom, leaving the terms of peace for the kingdom of Scotland to stand as in the late Propositions of both kingdoms, until that kingdom shall agree to any alteration.
Next to the Proposals aforesaid for the present settling of a peace, we shall desire that no time may be lost by the Parliament for despatch of other things tending to the welfare, ease and just satisfaction of the kingdom, and in special manner:
I. That the just and necessary liberty of the people to represent their grievances and desires by way of petition, may be cleared and vindicated, according to the fifth head in the late representation or Declaration of the army sent from St. Albans [l].
II. That (in pursuance of the same head in the said Declaration) the common grievances of this people may be speedily considered of, and effectually redressed, and in particular,
1. That the excise may be taken off from such commodities, whereon the poor people of the land do ordinarily live, and a certain time to be limited for taking off the whole.
2. That the oppressions and encroachments of forest laws may be prevented for the future.
3. All monopolies (old or new) and restraints to the freedom of trade to be taken off.
4. That a course may be taken, and Commissioners appointed to remedy and rectify the inequality of rates lying upon several counties, and several parts of each county in respect of others, and to settle the proportion of land rates to more equality throughout the kingdom; in order to which we shall offer some further particulars, which we hope may be useful.
5. The present unequal troublesome and contentious way of ministers' maintenance by tithes to be considered of, and some remedy applied.
6. That the rules and course of law, and the officers of it, may be so reduced and reformed, as that all suits and questions of right may be more clear and certain in the issues, and not so tedious nor chargeable in the proceedings as now; in order to which we shall offer some further particulars hereafter.
7. That prisoners for debt or other creditors (who have estates to discharge them) may not by embracing imprisonment, or any other ways, have advantage to defraud their creditors, but that the estates of all men may be some way made liable to their debts (as well as tradesmen are by commissions of bankrupt), whether they be imprisoned for it or not; and that such prisoners for debt, who have not wherewith to pay, or at least do yield up what they have to their creditors, may be freed from imprisonment or some way provided for, so as neither they nor their families may perish by imprisonment.
8. Some provision to be made, that none may be compelled by penalty or otherwise to answer unto questions tending to the accusing of themselves or their nearest relations in criminal causes; and no man's life to be taken away under two witnesses.
9. That consideration may be had of all Statutes, and the laws or customs of Corporations, imposing any oaths either to repeal, or else to qualify and provide against the same, so far as they may extend or be construed to the molestation or ensnaring of religious and peaceable people, merely for nonconformity in religion.
III. That according to the sixth head in the Declaration of the army, the large power given to Committees or Deputy-Lieutenants during the late times of war and distraction, may be speedily taken into consideration to be recalled and made void, and that such powers of that nature as shall appear necessary to be continued, may be put into a regulated way, and left to as little arbitrariness as the statute and necessity of the things (wherein they are conversant) will bear.
IV. That (according to the seventh head in the said Declaration) an effectual course may be taken that the kingdom may be righted, and satisfied in point of accompts for the vast sums that have been levied.
V. That provision may be made for payment of arrears to the army, and the rest of the soldiers of the kingdom who have concurred with the army in the late desires and proceedings thereof; and in the next place for payment of thepublic debts and damages of the kingdom; and that to be performed, first to such persons whose debt or damages (upon the public account) are great, and their estates small, so as they are thereby reduced to a difficulty of subsistence: in order to all which, and to the fourth particular last proceeding, we shall speedily offer some further particulars (in the nature of rules), which we hope will be of good use towards public satisfaction.
August 1, 1647.
Signed by the appointment of his Excellency Sir Thomas Fairfax and the Council of War.
J. Rushworth.
[1] Rushworth, vii. 569.
********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
#TomemonosBoston
Somos la Sociedad conformando el 99% -Dewey Square, Cercerde South Station
#Tomemonos Boston se reuniarin en el Dewey Square en Downtown Boston a discutir cambios que la ciudadania puede hacer en el gobierno que afecte un cambio social positivo.
******
Below I am posting, occasionally, comments on the Occupy movement as I see or hear things of interest, or that cause alarm bells to ring in my head. The first comment directly below from October 1, which represented my first impressions of Occupy Boston, is the lead for all further postings.
*******
Markin comment October 1, 2011:
There is a lot of naiveté expressed about the nature of capitalism, capitalists, and the way to win in the class struggle by various participants in this occupation. Many also have attempted to make a virtue out of that naiveté, particularly around the issues of effective democratic organization and relationships with the police (they are not our friends, no way, when the deal goes down). However, their spirit is refreshing, they are acting out of good subjective anti-capitalist motives and, most importantly, even those of us who call themselves "reds" (communists), including this writer, started out from liberal premises as naive, if not more so, than those encountered at the occupation site. We can all learn something but in the meantime we must defend the "occupation" and the occupiers. More later as the occupation continues.
**********
Markin comment October 22, 2011
As part of my comment, dated October 20, 2011, I noted the following:
“… The idea of the General Assembly with each individual attendee acting as a “tribune of the people” is interesting and important. And, of course, it represents, for today anyway, the embryo of what the “new world” we need to create might look like at the governmental level.”
A couple of the people that I have talked to were not quite sure what to make of that idea. The idea that what is going on in Occupy Boston at the governmental level could, should, would be a possible form of governing this society in the “new world aborning” with the rise of the Occupy movement. Part of the problem is that there was some confusion on the part of the listeners that one of the possible aims of this movement is to create an alternative government, or at least provide a model for such a government. I will argue here now, and in the future, that it should be one the goals. In short, we need to take power away from the Democrats and Republicans and their tired old congressional/executive/judicial form of governing and place it at the grassroots level and work upward from there rather than, as now, have power devolve from the top. (And stop well short of the bottom.)
I will leave aside the question (the problem really) of what it would take to create such a possibility. Of course a revolutionary solution would, of necessity, have be on the table since there is no way that the current powerful interests, Democratic, Republican or those having no politics, is going to give up power without a fight. What I want to pose now is the use of the General Assembly as a deliberative executive, legislative, and judicial body all rolled into one. In that sense previous historical models come to mind; the short-lived but heroic Paris Commune of 1871 that Karl Marx tirelessly defended against the reactionaries of Europe as the prototype of a workers government; the early heroic days of the Russian October Revolution of 1917 when the workers councils (soviets in Russian parlance) acted as a true workers' government; and the period in the Spanish Revolution of 1936-39 where the Central Committee of the Anti-Fascist Militias acted, de facto, as a workers government. All the just mentioned examples had their problems and flaws, no question. However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.
And as always-everybody, young or old, needs to stand by this slogan - An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers Everywhere! Hands Off Occupy Boston !
**********
Markin comment October 26, 2011:
Recently (see October 22, 2011 comment above) I noted the following while arguing for the General Assembly concept as a form of alternate government using historic examples like the Paris Commune (1871), the early Soviets in Russia (1905 and 1917), and early antifascist militias in the Spanish Civil War (1936-37:
“However, merely mentioning the General Assembly concept in the same paragraph as these great historic examples should signal that thoughtful leftists and other militants need to investigate and study these examples.”
In order to facilitate the investigation and study of those examples I will, occasionally, post works in this space that deal with these forbears from several leftist perspectives (rightist perspectives were clear- crush all the above examples ruthlessly, and with no mercy- so we need not look at them now). I started with Karl Marx’s classic defense and critique of the Paris Commune, The Civil War In France. Today I am posting the Putney Debates of 1647 From The English Revolution.
*********
THE PUTNEY DEBATES 1647
http://www.putneydebates.com/The%20Debates.html
The Grandees
The Grandees were senior officers in the parliamentary, New Model Army. They were typically from the landed gentry and opposed several of the Levellers demands, such as 'levelling' enclosures around their estates.
The most famous and influential were: Sir Thomas Fairfax, Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton,
Thomas Fairfax, 3rd Lord Fairfax of Cameron (1612 –1671) a general in the parliamentary army and commander-in-chief during the English Civil War.
Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658) a military and political leader, made England into a republican Commonwealth and later became Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland.
Henry Ireton (1611 - 1651), a general in the Parliamentary army.
**********
The Levellers
The Levellers were a group of civilians, mainly business men and skilled craftsmen, who formed the first political group based on a democratic basis. Their 'movement'' was based on a set of common ideas and demands on the ruling classes rather than an organised political party.
They met in small groups on regular basis in various London Inns, drawing up petitions against parliamentary actions and collecting subscriptions, amounts paid my members were according to income, to fund their propaganda. Petitions could have up to 30,000 signatures and in 1647, after a bad harvest and increasing starvation throughout the country, petitioned Parliament for poor relief.
They also inspired many of the demands of the more radical elements of Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army. These elements were typically from the Cavalry regiments who had 'elected' spokesmen (who become known as the Agitators) to represent them. At this point the Levellers became very influential and had to be listened too.
Even now, some 360 years later, some of our current politicians are said to have 'leveller' ideas and are still fighting for the same democratic changes originally proposed by Overton.
Levellers
The term Levellers was given to them by the King Charles as one of their aims was to level the enclosures land of the nobility.
The term is also known to derive from the Levellers themselves as they declared that "all degrees of men should be levelled, and an equality should be established".
Summer 1647:
The Army was now in effective control of the country and issued The Heads of the Proposals as an outline of a constitutional settlement.
The Levellers' plan, An Agreement of the People, was more radical. Representatives of both viewpoints tried to arrive at a joint scheme during The Putney Debates (October to November 1647).
Their manifesto for constitutional reform in Britain paved the way for many of the civil liberties we value today.
The most prominent Levellers were:
Edward Sexby (1616-1658) Served in Cromwell's regiment of horse from 1643. He helped lead the Leveller soldiers in 1647, but remained in Cromwell's confidence and was made governor of Portland. He fought for Cromwell in Scotland and was sent as an agent provocateur to France in 1652-53.
He grew disillusioned with Cromwell's government and in 1657 wrote Killing No Murder, an endorsement of tyrannicide. He came to England - apparently intending to act on his principles - but was arrested and died in the Tower, 13 January 1658.
Colonel Thomas Rainsborough
(1610 - 1648)
One of the leaders of the Leveller soldiers in 1647, and he opposed all attempts at compromise with Charles I. Yet as vice-admiral in 1648, his imperious conduct helped provoke his squadron into declaring for the King. In May 1648, while besieging Pontefract Castle, he was surprised by cavaliers and killed.
Richard Overton (1625-1664) Agreed with John Lilburne on political questions but, more radical in his religious beliefs, he rejected the notion of an immaterial soul, arguing that the Scripture only gave grounds for belief in the resurrection of the body. This view was seen at the time as virtually the equivalent of atheism. In 1655, he fled to Flanders with Edward Sexby, where he conspired with Charles II to overthrow Cromwell's regime.
John Wildman (1621-1693) Played an important part in the army disturbances of 1647 and was imprisoned in 1648. His career of political radicalism continued long beyond the English Civil War. He was imprisoned from 1661 to 1667 for plotting against Charles II. Soon after his release, he conspired with Algernon Sidney against the succession to the throne of the Catholic James II. Wildman finally found a government he approved in the reign of William and Mary, became postmaster general and was knighted.
William Walwyn (1600-1681) A prosperous silk merchant, his political views were close to those other Levellers but, his overriding concern was with religious freedom, insisting that persuasion was the only proper method of religious conversion. Walwyn was imprisoned with other Leveller leaders in 1649, although unlike them he played no part in encouraging mutiny against Cromwell and the other army Grandees.
John Lilburne (1614-1657) Became involved in radical opposition to the Bishops, he fought for Parliament, but refused to subscribe to the Solemn League and Covenant and its endorsement of religious uniformity. He attacked the powers of the House of Lords, and abandoned his early support of Oliver Cromwell. Left the New Model Army in 1645. In and out of prison, he was popular with the people and a thorn in the government's side. Late in life, he became a Quaker
********
71. The Heads of the Proposals offered by the Army.
[August 1, 1647. Rushworth, vii. 731. See Great Civil War, iii. 329-333, 340-343.]
The Heads of the Proposals agreed upon by his Excellency Sir Thomas Fairfax and the Council of the Army, to be tendered to the Commissioners of Parliament residing with the Army, and with them to be treated on by the Commissioners of the Army: containing the particulars of their desires in pursuance of their former declarations and papers, in order to the clearing and securing of the rights and liberties of the kingdom, and the settling a just and lasting peace. To which are added some further particular desires (for the removing and redressing of divers pressing grievances), being also comprised in or necessary pursuance of their former representations and papers appointed to be treated upon.
I. That (things hereafter proposed, being provided for by this Parliament) a certain period may (by Act of Parliament) be set for the ending of this Parliament (such period to be put within a year at most), and in the same Act provision to be made for the succession and constitution of Parliaments in future, as followeth:
1. That Parliaments may biennially be called and meet at a certain day, with such provision for the certainty thereof, as in the late Act was made for triennial Parliaments; and what further or other provision shall be found needful by the Parliament to reduce it to more certainty; and upon the passing of this, the said Act for triennial Parliaments to be repealed.
2. Each biennial Parliament to sit 120 days certain (unless adjourned or dissolved sooner by their own consent), afterwards to be adjournable or dissolvable by the King, and no Parliament to sit past 240 days from their first meeting, or some other limited number of days now to be agreed on; upon the expiration whereof each Parliament to dissolve of course, if not otherwise dissolved sooner.
3. The King, upon advice of the Council of State, in the intervals between biennial Parliaments, to call a Parliament extraordinary, provided it meet above 70 days before the next biennial day, and be dissolved at least 60 days before the same; so as the course of biennial elections may never be interrupted.
4. That this Parliament and each succeeding biennial Parliament, at or before adjournment or dissolution thereof, may appoint Committees to continue during the interval for such purposes as are in any of these Proposals referred to such Committees.
5. That the elections of the Commons for succeeding Parliaments may be
distributed to all counties, or other parts or divisions of the kingdom, according to some rule of equality or proportion, so as all counties may have a number of Parliament members allowed to their choice, proportionable to the respective rates they bear in the common charges and burdens of the kingdom, according to some other rule of equality or proportion, to render the House of Commons (as near as may be) an equal representative of the whole; and in order thereunto, that a present consideration be had to take off the elections of burgesses for poor decayed or inconsiderable towns, and to give some present addition to the number of Parliament members for great counties that have now less than their due proportion, to bring all (at present), as near as may be, to such a rule of proportion as aforesaid.
6. That effectual provision be made for future freedom of elections, and certainty of due returns.
7. That the House of Commons alone have the power from time to time to set down further orders and rules for the ends expressed in the two last preceding articles, so as to reduce the elections of members for that House to more and more perfection of equality in the distribution, freedom in the election, order in the proceeding thereto, and certainty in the returns, with orders and rules (in that case) to be in laws.
8. That there be a liberty for entering dissents in the House of Commons, with provision that no member be censurable for ought said or voted in the House further than to exclusion from that trust; and that only by the judgment of the House itself.
9. That the judicial power, or power of final judgment in the Lords and Commons (and their power of exposition and application of law, without further appeal), may be cleared; and that no officer of justice, minister of state, or other person adjudged by them, may be capable of protection or pardon from the King without their advice or consent.
10. That the right and liberty of the Commons of England may be cleared and vindicated as to a due exemption from any judgment, trial or other proceeding against them by the House of Peers, without the concurring judgment of the House of Commons: as also from any other judgment, sentence or proceeding against them, other than by their equals, or according to the law of the land.
11. The same Act to provide that grand jurymen may be chosen by and for several parts or divisions of each county respectively, in some equal way (and not to remain as now, at the discretion of an Under-Sheriff to be put on or off), and that such grand jurymen for their respective counties, may at each Assize present the name of persons to be made Justices of the Peace from time to time, as the county hath need for any to be added to the Commission, and at the Summer Assize to present the names of three persons, out of whom the King may prick one to be Sheriff for the next year.
II. For the future security of Parliament and the militia in general, in order thereunto, that it be provided by Act of Parliament:
1. That the power of the militia by sea and land, during the space of ten years next ensuing, shall be ordered and disposed by the Lords and Commons assembled, and to be assembled in the Parliament or Parliaments of England, by such persons as they shall nominate and appoint for that purpose from time to time during the said space.
2. That the said power shall not be ordered, disposed or exercised by the King's Majesty that now is, or by any person or persons by any authority derived from him, during the said space, or at any time hereafter by His said Majesty, without the advice and consent of the said Lords and Commons, or of such Committees or Council in the intervals of Parliament as they shall appoint.
3. That during the same space of ten years the said Lords and Commons may by Bill or Ordinance raise and dispose of what moneys and for what forces they shall from time to time find necessary; as also for payment of the public debts and damages, and for all other the public uses of the kingdom.
4. And to the end the temporary security intended by the three particulars last precedent may be the better assured, it may therefore be provided,
That no subjects that have been in hostility against the Parliament in the late war, shall be capable of bearing any office of power or public trust in the Commonwealth during the space of five years, without the consent of Parliament or of the Council of State; or to sit as members or assistants of either House of Parliament, until the second biennial Parliament be passed.
III. For the present form of disposing the militia in order to the peace and safety of this kingdom and the service of Ireland:
1. That there be Commissioners for the Admiralty, with the Vice-Admiral and Rear-Admiral, now to be agreed on, with power for the forming, regulating, appointing of officers and providing for the Navy, and for ordering the same to, and in the ordinary service of the Kingdom; and that there be a sufficient provision and establishment for pay and maintenance thereof.
2. That there be a General for command of the laud forces that are to be in pay both in England, Ireland and Wales, both for field and garrison.
3. That there be Commissioners in the several counties for the standing militia of the respective counties (consisting of trained bands and auxiliaries not in pay), with power for the proportioning, forming, regulating, training and disciplining of them.
4. That there be a Council of State, with power to superintend and direct the several and particular powers of the militia last mentioned, for the peace and safety of this kingdom, and of Ireland.
5. That the same Council may have power as the King's Privy Council, for and in all foreign negotiations; provided that the making of war or peace with any other kingdom or state shall not be without the advice and consent of Parliament.
6. That the said power of the Council of State be put into the hands of trusty and able persons now to be agreed on, and the same persons to continue in that power (si bene se gesserint) for the certain term not exceeding seven years.
7. That there be a sufficient establishment now provided for the salary forces both in England and Ireland, the establishment to continue until two months after the meeting of the first biennial Parliament.
IV. That an Act be passed for disposing the great offices for ten years by the Lords and Commons in Parliament; or by such Committees as they shall appoint for that purpose in the intervals (with submission to the approbation of the next Parliament), and after ten years they to nominate three, and the King out of that number to appoint one for the succession upon any vacancy.
V. That an Act be passed for restraining of any Peers made since the 21st day of May, 1642, or to be hereafter made, from having any power to sit or vote in Parliament without consent of both Houses.
VI. That an Act be passed for recalling and making void all declarations and other proceedings against the Parliament, or against any that have acted by or under their authority in the late war, or in relation to it; and that the Ordinances for indemnity may be confirmed.
VII. That an Act be passed for making void all grants, &c. under the Great Seal, that was conveyed away from the Parliament, since the time that it was so conveyed away (except as in the Parliament's propositions), and for making those valid that have been or shall be passed under the Great Seal, made by the authority of both Houses of Parliament.
VIII. That an Act be passed for confirmation of the Treaties between the two kingdoms of England and Scotland, and for appointing conservators of the peace between them.
IX. That the Ordinance for taking away the Court of Wards and Liveries be confirmed by Act of Parliament; provided His Majesty's revenue be not damnified therein, nor those that last held offices in the same left without reparation some other way.
X. An Act to declare void the cessation of Ireland, &c., and to leave the prosecution of that war to the Lords and Commons in the Parliament of England.
XI. An Act to be passed to take away all coercive power, authority, and jurisdiction of Bishops and all other Ecclesiastical Officers whatsoever, extending to any civil penalties upon any: and to repeal all laws whereby the civil magistracy hath been, or is bound, upon any ecclesiastical censure to proceed (ex officio) unto any civil penalties against any persons so censured.
XII. That there be a repeal of all Acts or clauses in any Act enjoining the use of the Book of Common Prayer, and imposing any penalties for neglect thereof; as also of all Acts or clauses of any Act, imposing any penalty for not coming to church, or for meetings elsewhere for prayer or other religious duties, exercises or ordinances, and some other provision to be made for discovering of Papists and Popish recusants, and for disabling of them, and of all Jesuits or priests from disturbing the State.
XIII. That the taking of the Covenant be not enforced upon any, nor any penalties imposed on the refusers, whereby men might be restrained to take it against their judgments or consciences; but all Orders and Ordinances tending to that purpose to be repealed.
XIV. That (the things here before proposed being provided, for settling and securing the rights, liberties, peace and safety of the kingdom) His Majesty's person, his Queen, and royal issue, may be restored to a condition of safety, honour and freedom in this nation, without diminution to their personal rights, or further limitation to the exercise of the regal power than according to the particulars foregoing XV. For the matter of composition:
1. That a less number out of the persons excepted in the two first qualifications (not exceeding five for the English) being nominated particularly by the Parliament, who (together with the persons in the Irish Rebellion, included in the third qualification) may be reserved to the further judgment of the Parliament as they shall find cause, all other excepted persons may be remitted from the exception, and admitted to composition.
2. That the rates of all future compositions may be lessened and limited, not to exceed the several proportions hereafter expressed respectively. That is to say,
(1) For all persons formerly excepted, not above a third part.
(2) For the late members of Parliament under the first branch of the fourth
qualification in the Propositions, a fourth part.
(3) For other members of Parliament in the second and third branches of the same qualification, a sixth part.
(4) For the persons nominated in the said fourth qualification, and those included in the tenth qualification, an eighth part.
(5) For all others included in the sixth qualification, a tenth part: and that real debts either upon record, or proved by witnesses, be considered and abated in the valuation of their estates in all the cases aforesaid.
3. That those who shall hereafter come to compound, may not have the Covenant put upon them as a condition without which they may not compound, but in case they shall not willingly take it, they may pass their compositions without it.
4. That the persons and estates of all English not worth £200 in land or goods, be at liberty and discharged: and that the King's menial servants that never took up arms, but only attended his person according to their offices, may be freed from composition, or to pay (at most) but the proportion of one year's revenue, or a twentieth part.
5. That in order to the making and perfecting of compositions at the rates aforesaid, the rents, revenues, and other duties and profits of all sequestered estates whatsoever (except the estates of such persons who shall be continued under exception as before), be from henceforth suspended and detained in the hands of the respective tenants, occupants and others from whom they are due, for the space of six months following.
6. That the faith of the army, or other forces of the Parliament given in articles upon surrenders to any of the King's party, may be fully made good; and where any breach thereof shall appear to have been made, full reparation and satisfaction may be given to the parties injured, and the persons offending (being found out) may be compelled thereto.
XVI. That there may be a general Act of Oblivion to extend unto all (except the persons to be continued in exception as before), to absolve from all trespasses, misdemeanours, &c. done in prosecution of the war; and from all trouble or prejudice for or concerning the same (after their compositions past), and to restore them to all privileges, &c. belonging to other subjects, provided as in the fourth particular under the second general head aforegoing concerning security.
And whereas there have been of late strong endeavours and practices of a factious and desperate party to embroil this kingdom in a new war, and for that purpose to induce the King, the Queen, and the Prince to declare for the said party, and also to excite and stir up all those of the King's late party to appear and engage for the same, which attempts and designs, many of the King's party (out of their desires to avoid further misery to the kingdom) have contributed their endeavours to prevent (as for divers of them we have had particular assurance): we do therefore desire, that such of the King's party who shall appear to have expressed, and shall hereafter express, that way their good affections to the peace and welfare of the kingdom, and to hinder the embroiling of the same in a new war, may be freed and exempted from compositions, or to pay but one year's revenue, or a twentieth part.
These particulars aforegoing are the heads of such Proposals as we have agreed on to tender in order to the settling of the peace of this kingdom, leaving the terms of peace for the kingdom of Scotland to stand as in the late Propositions of both kingdoms, until that kingdom shall agree to any alteration.
Next to the Proposals aforesaid for the present settling of a peace, we shall desire that no time may be lost by the Parliament for despatch of other things tending to the welfare, ease and just satisfaction of the kingdom, and in special manner:
I. That the just and necessary liberty of the people to represent their grievances and desires by way of petition, may be cleared and vindicated, according to the fifth head in the late representation or Declaration of the army sent from St. Albans [l].
II. That (in pursuance of the same head in the said Declaration) the common grievances of this people may be speedily considered of, and effectually redressed, and in particular,
1. That the excise may be taken off from such commodities, whereon the poor people of the land do ordinarily live, and a certain time to be limited for taking off the whole.
2. That the oppressions and encroachments of forest laws may be prevented for the future.
3. All monopolies (old or new) and restraints to the freedom of trade to be taken off.
4. That a course may be taken, and Commissioners appointed to remedy and rectify the inequality of rates lying upon several counties, and several parts of each county in respect of others, and to settle the proportion of land rates to more equality throughout the kingdom; in order to which we shall offer some further particulars, which we hope may be useful.
5. The present unequal troublesome and contentious way of ministers' maintenance by tithes to be considered of, and some remedy applied.
6. That the rules and course of law, and the officers of it, may be so reduced and reformed, as that all suits and questions of right may be more clear and certain in the issues, and not so tedious nor chargeable in the proceedings as now; in order to which we shall offer some further particulars hereafter.
7. That prisoners for debt or other creditors (who have estates to discharge them) may not by embracing imprisonment, or any other ways, have advantage to defraud their creditors, but that the estates of all men may be some way made liable to their debts (as well as tradesmen are by commissions of bankrupt), whether they be imprisoned for it or not; and that such prisoners for debt, who have not wherewith to pay, or at least do yield up what they have to their creditors, may be freed from imprisonment or some way provided for, so as neither they nor their families may perish by imprisonment.
8. Some provision to be made, that none may be compelled by penalty or otherwise to answer unto questions tending to the accusing of themselves or their nearest relations in criminal causes; and no man's life to be taken away under two witnesses.
9. That consideration may be had of all Statutes, and the laws or customs of Corporations, imposing any oaths either to repeal, or else to qualify and provide against the same, so far as they may extend or be construed to the molestation or ensnaring of religious and peaceable people, merely for nonconformity in religion.
III. That according to the sixth head in the Declaration of the army, the large power given to Committees or Deputy-Lieutenants during the late times of war and distraction, may be speedily taken into consideration to be recalled and made void, and that such powers of that nature as shall appear necessary to be continued, may be put into a regulated way, and left to as little arbitrariness as the statute and necessity of the things (wherein they are conversant) will bear.
IV. That (according to the seventh head in the said Declaration) an effectual course may be taken that the kingdom may be righted, and satisfied in point of accompts for the vast sums that have been levied.
V. That provision may be made for payment of arrears to the army, and the rest of the soldiers of the kingdom who have concurred with the army in the late desires and proceedings thereof; and in the next place for payment of thepublic debts and damages of the kingdom; and that to be performed, first to such persons whose debt or damages (upon the public account) are great, and their estates small, so as they are thereby reduced to a difficulty of subsistence: in order to all which, and to the fourth particular last proceeding, we shall speedily offer some further particulars (in the nature of rules), which we hope will be of good use towards public satisfaction.
August 1, 1647.
Signed by the appointment of his Excellency Sir Thomas Fairfax and the Council of War.
J. Rushworth.
[1] Rushworth, vii. 569.
From The “Occupy Oakland” Website-The November 2, 2011 Oakland General Strike-We Take The Offensive- Defend The Oakland Commune-Hands Off Occupy Cal!
Click on the headline to link to Occupy Oakland website for the latest from the vanguard battleground in the struggle for social justice.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
Out In the 1950s Crime Noir Night- A Grifter’s Farewell- “Dark City- A Film Review
Click on the headline to link to a Wikipedia entry for the crime noir, Dark City.
DVD Review
Dark City, starring Charleston Heston, Lizabeth Scott, Dean Jagger, Jack Webb, Harry Morgan, Paramount Pictures, 1950
No question after running through a seemingly endless run of crime noir films that not all the films in the genre are equal. The classics like The Big Sleep, Maltese Falcon, Gilda, and Out Of The Past speak for themselves with fine plot lines and slightly awry femme fatales to brighten things up. The film under review, although not in that category, could have been better had it not gotten caught up in some melodramatic flim-flam and stayed the hard-boiled, gritty classic grifter story that it set out to be. The outlines of the plot surely gave more promise that was delivered.
Down in those post-World War II means streets out West a lot of war-weary, war-tousled, war-scarred guys tried to do, well, the best they could. And the best they could usually was some grifter scheme to make a score off some bozo mark and hit the road, hit the road fast, and leave no forwarding address. That is the substance of the plot here. Ex-soldier (World War II just in case you might have forgotten, or were not sure what war I was talking about since there are many to choose from these days) Dan Healy (played in an understated, post-war alienated, existential man kind of way by Charleston Heston before he became Moses or Ben Hur or whatever big screen techno-color champ he became later) make his downwardly mobile way to grifter-dom in some seedy skid row town.
Dan's thing is gambling and, of course, for such an endeavor you need suckers with dough, easily parted with dough. And, as well, some confederates in on the scam. That is the case here as Dan and two fellow grifters (one played by Jack Webb before he got “religion” and became Sergeant Friday on the 1950s television show, Dragnet) rope in the sucker, a guy holding a five thousand dollar check (serious money, serious money down on mean street then) although the money is not actually his. Needless to say a fool and his dough are soon parted.
And that is where things start to go wrong with this film (as well as in the lives of our three gamblers). Filled with remorse the mark (played by Don DeFore) can’t face the horror of going back and confessing to his employers that he blew the dough on gambling, and instead hanged himself in his lonely room. Not for him the easy road of blowing town and changing his name, toughing it out, or even filing a court claim against the miscreant gamblers. In short, nobody, nobody this side of Hollywood takes the rope on the facts presented here. And then it gets worst. See the mark has an older dominating brother who watches out for him. Now this suicide business once he finds out the cause gets him a little exercised. See the brother is a stone-cold psycho and he is out to even the score-three dead, very dead gamblers.
Well, if you have been paying attention you know that Charleston Heston, the star and therefore kill-proof, is one of those marked for extinction so the other two get their just desserts and old Heston squeaks by after some close moments. The problem is when we see finally see who the killer-brother is there is no way that anyone could believe, or at least I could believe, that this gorilla was anybody’s brother. Come on.
The other place where the film goes wrong is on the inevitable love interest angle. Now Danny boy, who spends a good part of the film moodily cutting up old torches from back in the day, has a sort of girlfriend. A very fetching smoky-voiced chanteuse, Fran, (played by Lizabeth Scott) girlfriend who wears her heart on her sleeve for him, although he is mostly indifferent to her. No femme fatale here-just a what you see is what you get gal who can sing the blues, while having them over her man who done her wrong. The problem is that the chemistry between Danny and Fran is all wrong, all wrong alls ways. Fran is the girl next door and Danny, is well Danny, a grifter and the two don’t mix. And the plot gets further muddied when Dan, trying to get a lead of where the mark’s brother is, starts to play footsie with the dead mark's non-grieving widow. So you see now what I mean when I say that not all crime noirs are created equal.
DVD Review
Dark City, starring Charleston Heston, Lizabeth Scott, Dean Jagger, Jack Webb, Harry Morgan, Paramount Pictures, 1950
No question after running through a seemingly endless run of crime noir films that not all the films in the genre are equal. The classics like The Big Sleep, Maltese Falcon, Gilda, and Out Of The Past speak for themselves with fine plot lines and slightly awry femme fatales to brighten things up. The film under review, although not in that category, could have been better had it not gotten caught up in some melodramatic flim-flam and stayed the hard-boiled, gritty classic grifter story that it set out to be. The outlines of the plot surely gave more promise that was delivered.
Down in those post-World War II means streets out West a lot of war-weary, war-tousled, war-scarred guys tried to do, well, the best they could. And the best they could usually was some grifter scheme to make a score off some bozo mark and hit the road, hit the road fast, and leave no forwarding address. That is the substance of the plot here. Ex-soldier (World War II just in case you might have forgotten, or were not sure what war I was talking about since there are many to choose from these days) Dan Healy (played in an understated, post-war alienated, existential man kind of way by Charleston Heston before he became Moses or Ben Hur or whatever big screen techno-color champ he became later) make his downwardly mobile way to grifter-dom in some seedy skid row town.
Dan's thing is gambling and, of course, for such an endeavor you need suckers with dough, easily parted with dough. And, as well, some confederates in on the scam. That is the case here as Dan and two fellow grifters (one played by Jack Webb before he got “religion” and became Sergeant Friday on the 1950s television show, Dragnet) rope in the sucker, a guy holding a five thousand dollar check (serious money, serious money down on mean street then) although the money is not actually his. Needless to say a fool and his dough are soon parted.
And that is where things start to go wrong with this film (as well as in the lives of our three gamblers). Filled with remorse the mark (played by Don DeFore) can’t face the horror of going back and confessing to his employers that he blew the dough on gambling, and instead hanged himself in his lonely room. Not for him the easy road of blowing town and changing his name, toughing it out, or even filing a court claim against the miscreant gamblers. In short, nobody, nobody this side of Hollywood takes the rope on the facts presented here. And then it gets worst. See the mark has an older dominating brother who watches out for him. Now this suicide business once he finds out the cause gets him a little exercised. See the brother is a stone-cold psycho and he is out to even the score-three dead, very dead gamblers.
Well, if you have been paying attention you know that Charleston Heston, the star and therefore kill-proof, is one of those marked for extinction so the other two get their just desserts and old Heston squeaks by after some close moments. The problem is when we see finally see who the killer-brother is there is no way that anyone could believe, or at least I could believe, that this gorilla was anybody’s brother. Come on.
The other place where the film goes wrong is on the inevitable love interest angle. Now Danny boy, who spends a good part of the film moodily cutting up old torches from back in the day, has a sort of girlfriend. A very fetching smoky-voiced chanteuse, Fran, (played by Lizabeth Scott) girlfriend who wears her heart on her sleeve for him, although he is mostly indifferent to her. No femme fatale here-just a what you see is what you get gal who can sing the blues, while having them over her man who done her wrong. The problem is that the chemistry between Danny and Fran is all wrong, all wrong alls ways. Fran is the girl next door and Danny, is well Danny, a grifter and the two don’t mix. And the plot gets further muddied when Dan, trying to get a lead of where the mark’s brother is, starts to play footsie with the dead mark's non-grieving widow. So you see now what I mean when I say that not all crime noirs are created equal.
Friday, November 11, 2011
From The “Occupy Cal” Website- An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers!-In Honor Of The November 2, 2011 Oakland General Strike-We Take The Offensive- Defend "Occupy Cal"!-Hands Off "Occupy Cal"!-Support The "Occupy Cal" Student Strike! All Out November 15, 2011 In The Bay Area!
Click on the headline to link to Occupy Cal website for the latest from the vanguard Bay Area battleground in the struggle for social justice.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
******
Markin comment November 11, 2011:
The struggle in hte Bay Are continues. No sooner do we have a great victory in Oakland with the shutdown of the Port Of Oakland and positive General Strike results than everybody on the other side and their brothers (and sisters, dont' forget Mayor Quan) is trying to stop us again. Ditto the attempts to set up an encampment at Berkeley by Occupy Cal. No Mas- Support the student strike Tuesday , November 15, 2011.All Out To Defend Occupy Cal!
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
******
Markin comment November 11, 2011:
The struggle in hte Bay Are continues. No sooner do we have a great victory in Oakland with the shutdown of the Port Of Oakland and positive General Strike results than everybody on the other side and their brothers (and sisters, dont' forget Mayor Quan) is trying to stop us again. Ditto the attempts to set up an encampment at Berkeley by Occupy Cal. No Mas- Support the student strike Tuesday , November 15, 2011.All Out To Defend Occupy Cal!
The Latest From The “Veterans For Peace” Website-Gear Up For The 2011-12 Anti-War Season-Troops Out Now!
Click on the headline to link to the Veterans For Peace website for the latest news.
Re-posted From American Left History-Thursday, November 11, 2010
*A Stroll In The Park On Veterans Day- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Iraq and Afghanistan!
Markin comment:
Listen, I have been to many marches and demonstrations for democratic, progressive, socialist and communist causes in my long political life. However, of all those events none, by far, has been more satisfying that to march alongside my fellow ex-soldiers who have “switched” over to the other side and are now part of the struggle against war, the hard, hard struggle against the permanent war machine that this imperial system has embarked upon. From as far back as in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) days I have always felt that ex-soldiers (hell, active soldiers too, if you can get them) have had just a little bit more “street cred” on the war issue than the professors, pacifists and little old ladies in tennis sneakers who have traditionally led the anti-war movements. Maybe those brothers (and in my generation it was mainly only brothers) and now sisters may not quite pose the questions of war and peace the way I do, or the way that I would like them to do, but they are kindred spirits.
Now normally in Boston, and in most places, a Veterans Day parade means a bunch of Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) or American Legion-types taking time off from drinking at their post bars (“the battle of the barstool”) and donning the old overstuffed uniform and heading out on to Main Street to be waved at, and cheered on, by like-minded, thankful citizens. And of course that happened this time as well. What also happened in Boston this year (and other years but I have not been involved in previous marches) was that the Veterans For Peace (VFP) organized an anti-war march as part of their “Veterans Day” program. Said march to be held at the same place and time as the official one.
Previously there had been a certain amount of trouble, although I am not sure that it came to blows, between the two groups. (I have only heard third-hand reports on previous events.) You know the "super-patriots" vs. “commie symps” thing that has been going on as long as there have been ex-soldiers (and others) who have differed from the bourgeois party pro-war line. In any case the way this impasse had been resolved previously, and the way the parameters were set this year as well, was that the VFP took up the rear of the official parade, and took up the rear in an obvious way. Separated from the main body of the official parade by a medical emergency truck. Nice, right? Something of the old I’ll take my ball and bat and go home by the "officials" was in the air on that one.
But here is where there is a certain amount of rough plebeian justice, a small dose for those on the side of the angels, in the world. In order to form up, and this was done knowingly by VFP organizers, the official marchers, the bands and battalions that make up such a march, had to “run the gauntlet” of dove emblem-emblazoned VFP banners waving frantically directly in front of their faces as they passed by. Moreover, although we formed the caboose of this thing the crowds along the parade route actually waited as the official paraders marched by and waved and clapped at our procession. Be still my heart. But that response just provides another example of the ‘street cred” that ex-soldiers have on the anti-war question. Now, if there is to be any really serious justice in the world, if only these vets would go beyond the “bring the troops home” and embrace- immediate, unconditional withdrawal of all U.S./Allied Troops from Iraq and Afghanistan then we could maybe start to get somewhere out on those streets. But today I was very glad to be fighting for our communist future among those who know first-hand about the dark side of the American experience. No question.
Re-posted From American Left History-Thursday, November 11, 2010
*A Stroll In The Park On Veterans Day- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Iraq and Afghanistan!
Markin comment:
Listen, I have been to many marches and demonstrations for democratic, progressive, socialist and communist causes in my long political life. However, of all those events none, by far, has been more satisfying that to march alongside my fellow ex-soldiers who have “switched” over to the other side and are now part of the struggle against war, the hard, hard struggle against the permanent war machine that this imperial system has embarked upon. From as far back as in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) days I have always felt that ex-soldiers (hell, active soldiers too, if you can get them) have had just a little bit more “street cred” on the war issue than the professors, pacifists and little old ladies in tennis sneakers who have traditionally led the anti-war movements. Maybe those brothers (and in my generation it was mainly only brothers) and now sisters may not quite pose the questions of war and peace the way I do, or the way that I would like them to do, but they are kindred spirits.
Now normally in Boston, and in most places, a Veterans Day parade means a bunch of Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) or American Legion-types taking time off from drinking at their post bars (“the battle of the barstool”) and donning the old overstuffed uniform and heading out on to Main Street to be waved at, and cheered on, by like-minded, thankful citizens. And of course that happened this time as well. What also happened in Boston this year (and other years but I have not been involved in previous marches) was that the Veterans For Peace (VFP) organized an anti-war march as part of their “Veterans Day” program. Said march to be held at the same place and time as the official one.
Previously there had been a certain amount of trouble, although I am not sure that it came to blows, between the two groups. (I have only heard third-hand reports on previous events.) You know the "super-patriots" vs. “commie symps” thing that has been going on as long as there have been ex-soldiers (and others) who have differed from the bourgeois party pro-war line. In any case the way this impasse had been resolved previously, and the way the parameters were set this year as well, was that the VFP took up the rear of the official parade, and took up the rear in an obvious way. Separated from the main body of the official parade by a medical emergency truck. Nice, right? Something of the old I’ll take my ball and bat and go home by the "officials" was in the air on that one.
But here is where there is a certain amount of rough plebeian justice, a small dose for those on the side of the angels, in the world. In order to form up, and this was done knowingly by VFP organizers, the official marchers, the bands and battalions that make up such a march, had to “run the gauntlet” of dove emblem-emblazoned VFP banners waving frantically directly in front of their faces as they passed by. Moreover, although we formed the caboose of this thing the crowds along the parade route actually waited as the official paraders marched by and waved and clapped at our procession. Be still my heart. But that response just provides another example of the ‘street cred” that ex-soldiers have on the anti-war question. Now, if there is to be any really serious justice in the world, if only these vets would go beyond the “bring the troops home” and embrace- immediate, unconditional withdrawal of all U.S./Allied Troops from Iraq and Afghanistan then we could maybe start to get somewhere out on those streets. But today I was very glad to be fighting for our communist future among those who know first-hand about the dark side of the American experience. No question.
From The “Occupy Oakland” Website-The November 2, 2011 Oakland General Strike-We Take The Offensive- Defend The Oakland Commune
Click on the headline to link to Occupy Oakland website for the latest from the vanguard battleground in the struggle for social justice.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
Markin comment November 3, 2011:
We have won a tremendous victory in Oakland. No, no the big dent in the capitalist system that we are all looking for but the first step. And that first step is to put the words “general strike” in the political vocabulary in our fight for social justice. This is Liberation Day One. From now on we move from isolated tent encampments to the struggle in the streets against the monster, the streets where some of the battles will be decisively decided. Yes, our first day was messy, we took some casualties, we took some arrest, we made some mistakes but we now have a road forward, so forward. No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn- There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-We Take The Offensive-Liberation Day One-Defend The Oakland Commune-Drop All Charges Against The Oakland Protesters!
P.S. (November 4, 2011) I noted above some of the actions were messy in Oakland. This was so partly because it was seen as a celebration as much as demand-ladened, hard-nosed general strike started as a prelude to anything immediately bigger (like the question of taking state power and running things ourselves) but also because people are after all new at this way of expressing their latent power. 1946 in Oakland, and anywhere else, is a long political time to go without having a general strike in this country. Even the anti-war mass actions of the 1960s, which included school-centered general strikes, never got close to the notion of shutting down the capitalists where they live-places like the Port Of Oakland. There are some other more systematic problems that I, and others, are starting to note and I will address them as we go along. Things like bourgeois electoral politics rearing its ugly head, keeping the thing together, and becoming more organizationally cohesive without becoming bureaucratic. Later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)