Monday, April 13, 2015

A Voice From The Left-The Latest From The Steve Lendman Blog





 A link below to link to the Steve Lendman Blog



From The Pen Of Frank Jackman

Over the years that I have been presenting political material in this space I have had occasion to re-post items from some sites which I find interesting, interesting for a host of political reasons, although I am not necessarily in agreement with what has been published. Two such sites have stood out, The Rag Blog, which I like to re-post items from because it has articles by many of my fellow Generation of ’68 residual radicals and ex-radicals who still care to put pen to paper and the blog cited here, the Steve Lendman Blog.  The reason for re-postings from this latter site is slightly different since the site represents a modern day left- liberal political slant. That is the element, the pool if you will, that we radicals have to draw from, have to move left, if we are to grow. So it is important to have the pulse of what issues motivate that milieu and I believe that this blog is a lightning rod for those political tendencies. 

I would also add that the blog is a fountain of rational, reasonable and unrepentant anti-Zionism which became apparent once again this summer of 2014 when defense of the Palestinian people in Gaza was the pressing political issue and we were being stonewalled and lied to by the bourgeois media in service of American and Israeli interests. This blog was like a breath of fresh air.

A Jackman disclaimer:

I place some material in this space which I believe may be of interest to the radical public that I do not necessarily agree with or support. One of the worst aspects of the old New Left back in the 1970s as many turned to Marxism after about fifty other theories did not work out (mainly centered on some student-based movements that were somehow to bring down the beast without a struggle for state power) was replicating the worst of the old Old Left and freezing out political debate with other opponents on the Left to try to clarify the pressing issues of the day. That freezing out , more times than I care to mention including my own behavior a few times, included physical exclusion and intimidation. I have since come to believe that the fight around programs and politics is what makes us different, and more interesting. The mix of ideas, personalities and programs, will sort themselves out in the furnace of the revolution as they have done in the past. 

Off-hand, as I have mentioned before, I think it would be easier, infinitely easier, to fight for the socialist revolution straight up than some of the “remedies” provided by the commentators in these various blogs and other networking media. But part of that struggle for the socialist revolution is to sort out the “real” stuff from the fluff as we struggle for that more just world that animates our efforts. So read on. 

An additional Jackman comment (Fall 2014):

The left-liberal/radical arena in American politics has been on a steep decline since I was a whole-hearted denizen of that milieu in my youth somewhere slightly to the left of Robert Kennedy back in 1968 say but still emerged in trying put band-aids on the capitalist system. That is the place where Steve Lendman with his helpful well informed blog finds himself. It is not an enviable place to be for anyone to have a solid critique of bourgeois politics, hard American imperial politics in the 21st century and have no ready source in that milieu to take on the issues and make a difference  (and as an important adjunct to that American critique a solid critique of the American government acting as front-man for every nefarious move the Israeli government makes toward increasing the oppression of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank). 

Of course  I had the luxury, if one could call it that, which a look at Mr. Lendman's bio information indicates that he did not have, was the pivotal experience in the late 1960s of being inducted, kicking and screaming but inducted, into the American army in its losing fight against the heroic Vietnamese resistance. That signal event disabused me, although it took a while to get "religion." on the question of the idea of depending on bourgeois society to reform itself. On specific issues like the fight against the death penalty, the fight for the $15 minimum wage, immigration reform and the like I have worked with that left-liberal/ radical milieu, and gladly, but as for continuing to believe against all evidence that the damn thing can be reformed that is where we part company. Still Brother Lendman keep up the good work and I hope you find a political home worthy of your important work.                  


Save the Date - UNAC National Conference, May 8 - 10, 2015


 


In Honor Of Russian Revolutionary Vladimir Lenin’s Birthday (April 1870-January 1924)-The Struggle Continues 



 

From The Pen Of Frank Jackman 

 

For a number of years I have been honoring various revolutionary forbears, including the subject of this birthday tribute, the Russian Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin architect (along with fellow revolutionary Leon Trotsky) of the October Revolution in Russia in 1917 in each January under the headline-Honor The Three L’s –Lenin, Luxemburg , Liebknecht. My purpose then was (and still is) to continue the traditions established by the Communist International in the early post-World War I period in honoring revolutionary forbears. That month has special significance since every January  

Leftists honor those three leading revolutionaries who died in that month, V.I. Lenin of Russia in his sleep after a long illness in 1924, and Karl Liebknecht of Germany and Rosa Luxemburg of Poland in 1919 murdered in separate incidents after leading the defeated Spartacist uprising in Berlin.

 

I have made my political points about the heroic Karl Liebknecht and his parliamentary fight against the German war budget in World War I in which he eventually wound up in prison only to be released when the Kaiser abdicated (correctly went to jail when it came down to it once the government pulled the hammer down on his opposition), on some previous occasions. The key point to be taken away today, still applicable today as in America we are in the age of endless war, endless war appropriations and seemingly endless desires to racket up another war out of whole cloth every change some ill-begotten administration decides it needs to “show the colors”, one hundred years later in that still lonely and frustrating struggle to get politicians to oppose war budgets, to risk prison to choke off the flow of war materials.  

 

I have also made some special point in previous years about the life of Rosa Luxemburg, the “rose of the revolution.” About her always opposing the tendencies in her adopted party, the German Social-Democracy, toward reform and accommodation, her struggle to make her Polish party ready for revolutionary opportunities, her important contributions to Marxist theory and her willing to face and go to jail when she opposed the first World War. This month, the month of his birth, it is appropriate, at a time when the young needs to find, and are in desperate need of a few good heroes, a few revolutionaries who contributed to both our theoretical understandings about the tasks of the international working class in the age of imperialism (the age, unfortunately, that we are still mired in) and to the importance of the organization question in the struggle for revolutionary power, to highlight the early struggles of Vladimir Lenin, the third L, in order to define himself politically. It is rather a truism that nobody is born a revolutionary and that was the case with Lenin as well although the hagiography surrounding his name by the Stalinists later would attempt to make one believe that was the case. But, Lenin, not unlike many of us who took part in the 1960s political upheavals and had gone pillar to post from one political perspective to another before understanding that Marxism held some promise about creating that “world turned upside down,” that search for the newer world” that animated many of us, also when through various strategies before coming to that same conclusion. Probably the best way to see that process is to look at Lenin’s experiences through the prism of his fellow revolutionary, early political opponent, and eventual co-leader of the Bolshevik Revolution Leon Trotsky. Although Trotsky was some ten years Lenin’s junior he had been just as caught up in the revolutionary times of pre-World War I Russia and he too had gone through some transitions before coming to his life-long adherence to the spirit of Marxist doctrine.    

 

A Look At The Young Lenin By A Fellow Revolutionary

The Young Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Doubleday and Co., New York, 1972

The now slightly receding figure of the 20th century Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, founder and leader of the Bolshevik Party and guiding light of the October 1917 Russian Revolution and the first attempt at creating a socialist society, has been the subject of many biographies (maybe more than slightly receding in some quarters in the West although still actively and vociferously anathema among the so-called liberal political intelligentsia as if the past twenty-five years after the demise of the Soviet Union had not buried the idea of that style of communism in the popular imagination). Some of those efforts undertaken during the time of the Soviet government which was dismantled in 1991-92, especially under the Stalin regime, bordered on or were merely the hagiographic. Others, reflecting the ups and downs of the post-World War II Cold War, painted an obscene diabolical picture, excluding only Lenin’s horns, and in some cases not even attempting to exclude those. In virtually all cases these effort centered on Lenin’s life from the period of the rise of the Bolshevik Social Democratic faction in 1903 until his early death in 1924. In short, the early formative period of his life in the backwaters of provincial Russia rate a gloss over. Lenin’s fellow revolutionary Leon Trotsky, although some ten years younger than him, tries to trace that earlier stage of his life in order to draw certain lessons. It is in that context that Trotsky’s work contains some important insights about the development of revolutionary figures and their common beginnings.


Although Trotsky’s little work, originally intended to be part of a full biography of Lenin, never served its purpose of educating the youth during his lifetime, a politically active anti-Stalinist life cut short by a Stalinist axe, and the story of its subsequent discovery is rather interesting one should note that this is neither a scholarly work in the traditional sense nor is it completely free from certain fawning over Lenin by Trotsky. Part of that fawning may have been a hang-over from certain past disputes before World War I in which generally Trotsky had been wrong.  Part also, as always, determined by the vicissitudes of the furious Trotsky-Stalin fights in the 1920s and 1930s for the soul of the Russian Revolution as Trotsky tried to uncover the layers of misinformation about Lenin’s early life. Part of it resulted from Trotsky’s status as junior partner to Lenin and also to his late coming over to Bolshevism. And part of it is, frankly, to indirectly contrast Lenin’s and his own road to Marxism.


That said, this partial biography stands up very well as an analysis of the times that the young Lenin lived in, the events that affected his political development, and the idiosyncrasies of his own personality that drove Lenin toward revolutionary conclusions. In short, Trotsky’s work is a case study in the proposition that revolutionaries are made not born.

To a greater extent than would be true today in a celebrity-conscious world with a media explosion ready to delve into every part of a person’s pre-celebrity life many parts of Lenin’s early life are just not verifiable. Partially that is due to the nature of record keeping in the Russia of the 19th century. Partially it is because of the necessity to rely on not always reliable Tsarist police records. Another part is that the average youth, and here Lenin was in some ways no exception, really have a limited noteworthy record to present for public inspection. That despite the best efforts of Stalinist hagiography to make it otherwise.

Nevertheless Trotsky does an admirable job of detailing the high and low lights of agrarian Russian society and the vagaries of the land question in the second half of the 19thcentury. One should note that Trotsky grew up on a Ukrainian farm (what would later be called derogatorily a “kulak” farm) and therefore was no stranger to many of the same kind of problems that Lenin had to work through concerning the solution to the agrarian crisis, the peasant question. Most notably, is that the fight for the Russian revolution that everyone knew was coming could only be worked out through the fight for influence over the small industrial working class and in the name of some socialist construct of the new society.

I note that for the modern young reader that two things Trotsky analyzes are relevant. The first is the relationship between Lenin and his older brother Alexander who, when he became politicized, joined a remnant of the populist People’s Will terrorist organization and attempted to assassinate the sitting Tsar in the late 1800s. For his efforts Alexander and his co-conspirators were hanged. I have always been intrigued by the effect that this event had on Lenin’s development.

On the one hand, as a budding young intellectual, would Lenin have attempted to avenge his brother’s fate with his same revolutionary intellectual political program? Or would Lenin go another way to intersect the coming revolutionary wave that everybody knew was coming (except maybe the person of the Czar himself as Trotsky famously told it in an early chapter in his seminal History of the Russian Revolution) either through its agrarian component or the budding Marxist Social Democratic element? We know the answer but Trotsky provides a nicely reasoned analysis of the various influences that were at work in the young Lenin. That alone is worth the price of admission here.

The other point I have already alluded to above. Revolutionaries are made not born, although particular life circumstances may create certain more favorable conditions. Soviet historians in their fawning heyday tried to make of Lenin a superhuman phenomenon- a fully formed Marxist intellectual from his early youth. Trotsky once again distills the essence of Lenin’s struggle to make sense of the world, the Russian world in the first instance, as he tries to find a way out the Russian political impasse. Trotsky’s work only goes up to 1892-93, the Samara period, the period before Lenin took off for Petersburg and greener pastures. He left Samara a fully committed Marxist but it would be many years, with many polemics and by using many political techniques before he himself became a Bolshevik, as we know it. And that, young friends, is a cautionary tale that can be taken into the 21st century. Read on.
A View From The Left-Syriza Tries to Appease EU Imperialists-Greece: European Union Turns Screws-Why Greek Trotskyists Said “No Vote to Syriza!”

Workers Vanguard No. 1065
3 April 2015
 
Syriza Tries to Appease EU Imperialists
Greece: European Union Turns Screws
Why Greek Trotskyists Said “No Vote to Syriza!”
 
On February 20, less than a month after being propelled to victory in the Greek elections on the basis of its anti-austerity rhetoric, the Syriza-led government of Alexis Tsipras caved in to the diktat of the imperialist European Union (EU) and accepted a four-month extension of the EU’s extortionate “bailout.” Syriza agreed to come up with a new package of austerity measures, but more than a month has passed without any new austerity agreement being reached. Instead there is a tense stand-off and Greece’s relationship with Germany in particular has grown increasingly venomous. The European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)—the rapacious Troika (now called “the institutions” as a face-saving concession to Syriza)—are increasingly frustrated with Athens, leading to renewed speculation about a Greek exit from the euro single currency.
In the January 25 elections, our comrades of the Trotskyist Group of Greece opposed on principle any vote for Syriza—which pledged from the outset to keep Greece within the EU—because it is a capitalist party. The “radical” Greek government’s conciliation of the Troika fully vindicates our characterization of this bourgeois, pro-EU party. In a January 15 statement for the elections, our comrades explained that “the EU’s purpose is to enable the imperialist powers of Europe, led by Germany, to subordinate weaker capitalist countries like Greece and impose savage austerity on working people throughout Europe, including in Germany” (see “Greece: European Union Austerity Elections,” WV No. 1060, 23 January).
We reprint below a presentation by a TGG spokesman at a February 21 forum in London held by the Spartacist League/Britain, which published it in Workers Hammer, No. 230, Spring 2015.
*   *   *
I will be speaking about the recent Greek elections and what the rise of Syriza means for the working class and oppressed in Greece and Europe. Despite what you might have heard, Syriza’s election does not represent any kind of step towards socialism. We in the TGG called for no vote to Syriza. As we explained in our statement for the Greek elections, our perspective is the fight for workers revolution in Greece and internationally. We opposed Syriza because it is committed to keeping Greece in the imperialist European Union (EU), which is a pledge for more hunger and joblessness; moreover Syriza is not a workers party and does not in any way represent the interests of the working class. Its programme is bourgeois and its base is among the petty-bourgeoisie—shopkeepers, farmers and professionals—a layer with no independent class interests that is generally drawn behind the bourgeoisie under capitalism. We called instead for a vote to the Communist Party (KKE), a party which is based in the working class but which has a reformist programme. The KKE opposed the imperialist EU and any support to Syriza.
In the 25 January election, Syriza achieved an overwhelming victory, winning 36 per cent of the vote. The key factor was that Syriza promised to ease up on the grinding austerity faced by Greek working people since the world economic crisis began in 2007-2008. This austerity has been imposed by the imperialists who dominate the EU. They have demanded savage attacks on the workers and poor in exchange for loans to bail out the bloodsucking banks. The pro-EU Syriza seeks merely to renegotiate the terms of imperialist oppression of Greece, by getting a break on the terms of repayment of the massive government debt.
Nonetheless, there are real illusions in Syriza among layers of the workers and the oppressed who are desperate for any form of relief. Furthermore, the fact that an election was won by a party other than the two main capitalist parties, PASOK (the Pan-Hellenic Socialist Movement) and New Democracy (ND), who have shared power for 40 years, is seen as a blow to the Greek oligarchs and their system of patronage and corruption. There is also a sense of national pride that a party the German government explicitly did not want in power won an election in Greece.
Since 2012, Syriza has been abandoning many of its more left-sounding demands and currying favour with industrialists and bankers. Before the election, Syriza jettisoned its opposition to NATO and dropped its call for a debt write-off. Since the election, it has promised not to renationalise any of the industries privatised by the previous government. Two years ago Syriza demanded the rejection of the austerity memorandum of the Troika. Now it is willing to accept 70 per cent of the austerity measures. While I was on my way to London to give this forum, the Syriza government capitulated to the EU’s demands. It has now agreed to extend the hated bailout in exchange for implementing even more austerity, the very thing it was elected to overturn.
In Greece the TGG is the only organisation outside of the Communist Party that describes itself as revolutionary Marxist and opposes the new capitalist Syriza government. The Socialist Workers Party of Greece (SEK), co-thinkers of the party of the same name here in Britain, argues that this government is a “big step forward” for the working class (socialistworker.co.uk, 6 January). The fake-Trotskyist Greek Workers Revolutionary Party (EEK) called before the election for a “powerful United Front” from the KKE to Syriza and including everyone in-between, in order to “smash...imperialist domination” and open the way to “universal human emancipation” (eek.gr, 28 December 2014). In other words, for them a Syriza government represents a transition to socialism. The Xekinima group, which is affiliated with Britain’s Socialist Party [and Socialist Alternative in the U.S.], said that Syriza “can open a new epoch for the working people” and begin the “counterattack of the workers movement” against Greek and international capital (xekinima.org, 26 January). These leftists are now salivating at the prospect of parties similar to Syriza coming to power elsewhere in Europe, especially Podemos in Spain.
I read in the paper last week that Kenneth Clarke, British former Tory chancellor, called Syriza “latter-day Trotskyites.” He intended this to be a derisive statement about Syriza’s extreme radicalism. But as a supporter of a genuine Trotskyist organisation, I really was insulted to be compared with these pro-EU liberals. You don’t need to know very much about the new Greek government to know that Syriza is not about to form workers defence militias, suppress the fascist-infested police, expropriate the key sectors of the Greek economy, and begin to rule through soviets. Syriza is very open about what it seeks to do: it wants to work within the bounds of the EU and Greek parliament. It wants to make Greek capitalism profitable again and it wants to protect the interests of the shipowners and banks. Syriza thinks the best way to do this is to put a more humanitarian facade on the imperialist EU and system of capitalist exploitation.
Most of the Greek left has jumped onto the Syriza bandwagon. Some are inside Syriza, including the Greek comrades of Socialist Appeal, which is part of the International Marxist Tendency founded by the late Ted Grant. Others, like the SEK, belong to Antarsya, a coalition that ran its own candidates in the election but seeks to be the pressure on the streets that will push Syriza to the left. In addition to the SEK, Antarsya is also home to other ex-Trotskyists, ex-Stalinists and Maoists. In the January elections, Antarsya ran in a bloc with Plan B, a small split from Syriza. Plan B is no more socialist than Syriza. What passes for radicalism in Plan B’s programme is a request that the parliament consider adopting direct democracy—to make Greece more like Switzerland. Of course, we know that Switzerland is a paradise—for the super-wealthy! While Antarsya and Plan B ran their own candidates, they were very careful not to oppose a vote to Syriza. That is why we said “no vote to Antarsya!”
One particular anecdote stands out to me. During the election campaign we were distributing our “Vote KKE” leaflet at a busy street corner in central Athens. Antarsya and the Communist Party also had leafleters. There was a Syriza office just a block away, and they were very hostile to our leaflet. I noticed, in contrast, that one of the Antarsya members was over with the Syriza guys chatting and laughing and being very comradely. So when she came back I made a snarky comment about their supposed “independence from Syriza” and she shoots back: “Well, just watch, we’ll be striking in the streets right after the election.”
Today Antarsya is indeed in the streets, but they aren’t striking against the government, they’re supporting it. They’ve mobilised for pro-government, national unity protests in the last couple of weeks, where thousands rallied under Greek flags. Under the guise of opposing the Troika, these protests line up Greek working people in “solidarity” with their class enemy at home—the Greek capitalists. When Syriza talks about seeking European solidarity it is talking about solidarity with the bourgeois regimes of Italy, France, and Spain—once Podemos is in power. It is not referring to international working class solidarity—which must be forged around Europe-wide opposition to the EU.
Down With the EU!
We of the International Communist League have opposed the EU since its formation. Dominated primarily by Germany, the EU exists centrally to advance the interests of these imperialist powers. Together with their junior partners, they use the EU to subordinate dependent states, such as Greece and many East European countries. Equally important to remember is that the EU is a means of increasing the rate of exploitation of the workers in imperialist European countries as well. Workers in Germany have seen their wages slashed and living conditions undercut in the name of profitability. Today the French working class is facing EU-mandated austerity carried out by the Socialist Party government of François Hollande. In Britain, which is in the EU but not the currency bloc, the government has launched massive cuts to healthcare, welfare and housing. In Greece the attacks have been extreme. The healthcare system is so inadequate that Doctors Without Borders is operating in major cities like Athens. In the capital, 25 per cent of school children go hungry, and the universities are so strapped that they lack the cash to pay even basic operating costs. Any Guardian or New York Times article will tell you: mass unemployment, mothers too poor to give birth in a hospital, children and pensioners rummaging through rubbish bins for food.
The unions have been a special target of the EU imperialists and of the Greek bourgeoisie. Collective bargaining was shredded under the EU/IMF memorandum, and key sectors of union power have been weakened, most famously the port of Piraeus, half of which was privatised and where there is no union. The years-long economic depression has decimated the already small Greek working class. When I first visited Greece in 2012, I visited a picket line of striking workers at a steel plant outside Athens. When we met with them they had already been on strike for over 200 days. We talked to the workers there about their strike and published solidarity statements in our international press [see WV No. 1005, 6 July 2012]. The strike was launched after the plant’s owner, a major Greek industrialist, threatened mass layoffs and wage cuts that were permitted under the EU-IMF memorandum. PAME, the KKE’s trade-union front, helped organise the strike and the workers had led a long, militant and popular strike. However, they were isolated and threatened with state repression. About a month after our visit riot cops launched a massive attack on the picket lines and broke the strike. Crucial in the strike’s defeat was that there were no sympathy strikes in other steel plants, nor was there an attempt to broaden their struggle to other layers of the working class. As of 2014 the plant was closed, and the remaining workers had been laid off. The attacks on workers in Greece should serve as a warning. The workers of Europe must recognise that the EU is using Greece as a test case for what it has in store for all of them.
One of the reasons we offered critical support to the KKE is that it opposes the EU. But the Greek Stalinists’ opposition to the EU comes from their nationalist perspective. Indeed, much of the left in Greece has some rhetoric about Greece being better off outside the eurozone and EU, even as their comrades in other parts of Europe explicitly promote the idea of a reformed, democratic EU—a “social Europe.” In contrast our opposition to the EU is internationalist—we are for revolutionary struggle by workers across Europe against this imperialist consortium.
Recognising that the euro would be an instrument of the EU imperialists, we opposed its introduction. We noted that a common European currency was not viable in the long-term. Ordinarily, each country has its own currency, and a debtor country can get some relief and regain competitiveness by devaluing its currency. But this is not possible in a currency union like the eurozone. The imperialists, centrally the German bourgeoisie, demand that debtor countries slash wages, pensions and welfare in return for aid to the banks. There is no way out for debtor countries under this setup. In the eurozone, Greece is akin to a patient on life support, and the machine keeping it breathing is the cash provided by the Troika. Mass unemployment and hunger were deliberate policies enacted by the Troika and local rulers to cow the working class and to attempt to make Greece “profitable” again, which means driving up the rate of exploitation. The EU imperialists, centrally Germany, have treated Greece like a colony, even getting rid of bourgeois politicians like former PM George Papandreou, who made the mistake of proposing to get a popular mandate for massive austerity. For years domestic political decisions have been vetoed by Berlin and Brussels.
The sharp cuts in public spending have had a predictable effect—the Greek economy has contracted by 25 per cent since the beginning of the crisis. A smaller economy means less tax revenue, thereby increasing the deficit and prompting demands for more austerity. As we pointed out in our election statement, a Greek exit from the EU as the result of workers struggles would be a step forward, but not a solution in itself. The economic crisis of the imperialist system cannot be resolved within the borders of one country, particularly in small, dependent Greece with its low level of industry and resources. International socialist revolution is the only solution to unemployment, wage cuts, imperialist war and the other depredations of decaying capitalism.
Nationalism: Poison for Workers Struggle
Don’t be fooled by Syriza’s name, which stands for Coalition of the Radical Left. It is anything but that, both in its current incarnation and in its origins. It originated, in part, from a right-wing split from the Communist Party by anti-Soviet elements. The forces that became Syriza spent the last decade immersed in the Social Forums, student struggles and populist “indignados” protests—the last of which were explicitly anti-working class. In 2004 Syriza was formed as a coalition including bourgeois and petit-bourgeois political forces like environmentalists and ex-PASOK members.
As for Syriza’s transformation into a party, its founding conference in 2013 adopted a resolution, which is a dead letter today, where one of the most radical demands was to nationalise the banks. It proclaims itself to be for the laos, the people, of which the working class is only one sector. It was not built by workers organisations, unions, but rather emerged as a voice for the petty bourgeoisie.
In our January statement we called Syriza a petty-bourgeois party because it had not yet gained ruling-class support. That is no longer the case. Before the elections the main bourgeois daily newspaper Kathimerini ran editorials about “dealing with the Syriza virus” (ekathimerini.com, 24 September 2014) and accused Syriza of gambling with the country’s economic development. But a few days after the elections, Kathimerini warned right-wing New Democracy, its former favourite, that it “must throw its support behind any government decisions that are for the overall good.” Syriza worked very hard to win the support of a wing of the bourgeoisie. In 2013 Tsipras promised to maintain the notorious tax scheme whereby the monumentally wealthy Greek shipowners pay little tax. He also met with leaders of Greek industry last year, promising them a better business climate with fewer obstacles to profit-making.
Much of the left in Greece and internationally expressed dismay at Syriza’s alliance with the right-wing nationalist Independent Greeks (ANEL). Such surprise has to be deeply cynical. Syriza and the Independent Greeks have been courting each other for some time. They had an ongoing parliamentary alliance stretching back to 2013. That year, Syriza sent a representative to the Independent Greeks congress, and they agreed to a common front to bail out little brother (Greek) Cyprus. This alliance is useful for Syriza and its boosters, as it allows them to blame their backtracking and lies on the coalition. But, actually, there is no conflict of class interest between the Independent Greeks and Syriza, because both parties share a desire to promote Greek nationalism and national interests. For the Independent Greeks this means expelling immigrants from the country, accusing the tiny Jewish population of Greece (descendants of survivors of the Holocaust) of not paying taxes, and otherwise promoting horrible nationalism and anti-gay bigotry.
Knowing that its promises are largely empty, Syriza uses nationalist populism as an ideological prop for its rule. For years, Greece has been swept by almost daily strikes and protests against the government and its policies. But today you have flag-waving, pro-government protests, a confirmation of Syriza’s usefulness to the Greek capitalists in deflecting anger away from them. One of our comrades noted that this is the first time in her life she has ever seen pro-government demonstrations.
Tsipras has denounced Turkey for infringing on Cyprus’ sovereignty, and the Greek military announced last week that it will be carrying out military exercises with Cyprus, Israel and Egypt. Fascist Golden Dawn announced that they will support Syriza measures against privatisations as well as anything Syriza does to oppose sanctions against Russia. While Greece’s subordination to the imperialists understandably whips up national sentiment against the Troika, the solution for working people is not nationalism, in which is expressed the lie that there is a common interest between Greek workers and their capitalist exploiters at home.
Rather than pointing out to the working class that the Syriza-Independent Greek nationalist alliance is simply an alliance of left and right bourgeois populists, the left has turned its fire against the Greek Communist party for refusing to ally with Syriza. We called for a vote to the KKE not least because it had refused in advance to rule with Syriza. The KKE correctly said: “Reject the blackmail and lies of ND-Syriza, the people have bled enough for the EU-plutocracy.” An electoral alliance between the KKE and Syriza would be a classic popular front, or alliance between a reformist workers party (the KKE) and a bourgeois party (Syriza). When the workers are tied to the capitalists by their misleaders, as in China in the 1920s, Spain and France in the 1930s and Chile in the early 1970s, the result is not socialism but the disillusionment and disarmament of socialist-minded workers, the defeat of revolutionary opportunities and, very often, the rise of extreme right-wing reaction.
The workers movement of Greece has its own bitter memories of such betrayals. In the Second World War the Communist Party’s military forces led a successful resistance struggle against the German occupation and controlled nearly the whole country by 1944. However, the KKE, following Stalin’s diktat, handed power back to the British-backed capitalist forces. The Greek bourgeoisie murdered thousands of Communists after winning the years-long civil war, and the KKE remained more or less underground until after the fall in 1974 of the military dictatorship. I urge you to read the current issue of the ICL’s theoretical journal Spartacist, which has an in-depth article explaining the origins of the KKE’s popular-frontism and Stalin’s nationalist programme of “socialism in one country.”
There is a mass reformist workers party in Greece with tens of thousands of working-class members and deep trade-union links. It is the Communist Party, not Syriza, that maintains the allegiance of militant Greek workers. The KKE is one of the few remaining mass Stalinist parties that has refused to dissociate itself from the Soviet Union. Today, the KKE claims to have turned its back on “coalitions” with the bourgeoisie and to have studied and corrected what it calls “mistakes” made when it did participate in bourgeois governments at various junctures. We called for critical support to the KKE, meaning that although we urged people to vote for it, we didn’t shy away from or disappear our differences with its Stalinist programme. We sought to use the tactic of critical support as a way to expose the reformist programme of the KKE. Our critical support allowed us to argue with KKE workers and youth against the party’s nationalism and populism. And we had lots to argue about.
The KKE views as sacrosanct the Greek borders, which were extended a hundred years ago in a series of fratricidal wars. Back in 2013 the Communist Party newspaper ran an article calling to strengthen the war industries in the name of national defence. In the last election the KKE ran NATO admiral Giannis Douniadakis as a candidate. This was an act of fealty to the capitalist state, and we said: “No Vote to Douniadakis!” The KKE denies that there is a Slav Macedonian minority in Greece, never mind that it should have the right to separate. But the democratic demand for the right of self-determination for national minorities is vital for a revolutionary party in Greece to uphold, and we raise it prominently. Because of the national conflicts in the Balkans and the imperialist subordination of the region, for the working class a Socialist Federation of the Balkans is the only way forward.
The KKE and the Capitalist State
The Communist Party’s pronouncements can sound like Marxism. In the latest issue of its theoretical journal Communist Review the KKE wrote, “The new power must smash the bourgeois state. No organ and its mechanism can be reformed and transferred to the conditions of socialist construction.” There was also a very interesting letter by the KKE in a recent issue of the Morning Star, newspaper of the British Communist Party. The letter was a rebuttal of the international fake left’s criticism of the KKE for not joining with Syriza in government. The KKE makes a number of correct arguments against Syriza and its left tails, including that Syriza “accepts the strategy of the EU and Capitalism” (morningstaronline.co.uk, 23 January).
The KKE’s current posture can only partially obscure what is at bottom a class-collaborationist Stalinist programme. In fact, despite its left rhetoric, in practice the KKE does administer the capitalist state on the local level. There is a KKE mayor of Patras, Greece’s third-largest city, for example. Our international views it as a communist principle not to run for or accept executive office—mayor, president, sheriff etc. These are offices where, if in power, a communist would be responsible for the day-to-day administration of the capitalist state, including the local police, of course.
We distributed thousands of copies of our critical support statement, including to rallies and marches of the KKE and its youth group. We had a range of reactions from KKEers, some thanked us while others found it almost unbelievable that a Trotskyist group would be voting for the KKE. The Douniadakis candidacy, which I mentioned earlier, was a hot topic of debate, as were the democratic rights of national minorities in Greece and the question of the police, who the KKE has argued can be won to the side of the working class. We discussed with KKE students who asked us to sit down with them and explain what we meant by our criticisms of the KKE’s populism and nationalism. These youth were impressed with our organisation’s principled defence of the USSR and East Germany during counterrevolution, and our call in 1979, “Hail Red Army in Afghanistan!”
You might think that every so-called socialist organisation in Greece has an orientation to the KKE, with its mass support in the working class, left-sounding Stalinist politics and mass demonstrations of tens of thousands. But they don’t. In fact, when our comrades distributed our critical support statement to an Antarsya election meeting, SEK leaders expressed disgust that we would call for a vote for Stalinists. That’s right, the Cliffites, who have voted for everyone from Greece’s bourgeois PASOK to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, were horrified by the idea of voting for the Communist Party. The left complains constantly of the KKE’s sectarianism. In fact, it is anti-Communism that holds Antarsya together, with its hodgepodge membership of ex-Stalinist, fake-Trotskyist and Maoist organisations. None of these groups defended the Soviet Union against capitalist counterrevolution in 1991-1992. We did! We fought on the ground there, and earlier in East Germany, for unconditional military defence against imperialism and internal counterrevolution and for workers political revolution to oust the Stalinist bureaucracy and install regimes of workers democracy.
For Workers Struggle Against Fascism!
I would like to conclude with some comments on the rise of the fascist Golden Dawn, and the strategy needed to stop them. Golden Dawn now holds the third most seats in parliament, behind only Syriza and New Democracy. As you may know, one of its supporters stabbed and killed the leftist rapper Pavlos Fyssas in September 2013, and fascists are also responsible for other brutal killings and assaults on immigrants and leftists. Golden Dawn, with its Nazi symbolism and extreme nationalism, is seen by many lumpen and petty bourgeois as the only “radical” alternative to the system that brought on the economic crisis. In many working-class areas once dominated by the KKE, such as the port area of Athens, Golden Dawn has fed off years of hunger and unemployment.
This situation urgently cries out for mass, united-front mobilisations centred on the power of the organised proletariat to stop the fascists. The capitalist state keeps the fascists in reserve in order to use them to crush the workers when bourgeois class rule is threatened. It is therefore suicidal for leftists and workers to have any illusions that the institutions of the capitalist state can be used to stop the fascists. While the left hailed the arrest of more than a dozen Golden Dawn leaders in 2013, we warned that the very laws used by the state to go after the fascists would eventually be used to suppress the working class and oppressed.
The struggle for a workers united front against fascism does not mean that revolutionaries should ditch their programme to lash up with reformists and bourgeois forces. We advocate a united front premised on full freedom of criticism and political independence for the various organisations involved. In this way, revolutionaries seek to expose the reformist misleaders and win workers to the revolutionary programme. This is how Trotsky advocated the use of the united-front tactic in the early 1930s in Germany. The German Communist Party’s refusal to demand that the reformist Social Democracy join them in a workers united front against the Nazis allowed Hitler to come to power without a shot being fired.
The KKE itself has been attacked by Golden Dawn, but its leaders have offered no sustained resistance to the fascist threat. Shortly after Fyssas’ murder there was a large demonstration organised by the KKE’s union front PAME that stopped Golden Dawn from rallying. But this was essentially a one-off event. The KKE’s programme against fascism is expressed in its newspaper Rizospastis, where it has appealed to “isolate” the fascists ideologically and to use the “weapon of the vote” against them. The demo after Fyssas’ murder hinted at the real strength of the working class, but this strength has been held in check by the KKE’s leadership. The KKE argues that only socialism can stop fascism. It is true that ultimately only the workers in power can end the conditions that give rise to fascism, but for the KKE this is just a cover for its refusal to mobilise against the fascists, and encourages passivity in the working class towards the deadly threat the fascists pose today.
In the fall of 2013, shortly before Fyssas’ murder, I witnessed the largest working-class demonstration I have ever seen. There were tens of thousands of workers, mobilised by the Communist Party and its trade-union front PAME. Many were waving red hammer-and-sickle flags, marching in close military formation through the streets of Athens to the U.S. Embassy to protest what seemed like the imminent bombing of Syria. Two months after Fyssas was killed, more than a thousand Hiter-loving scum marched right up to the Greek parliament in central Athens and rallied there unopposed. Had tens of thousands of workers been mobilised in the streets by the unions and the left, this fascist provocation could have been stopped. So our propaganda for a united front is not abstract in the least. One must only remember that this year is the 70th anniversary of the end of the Nazi Holocaust to be aware of what is at stake.
The SEK in Greece is a prominent organiser of KEERFA, an anti-fascist front group. We attended a KEERFA meeting during last year’s November 17th commemoration. This event is held annually to commemorate the students killed by the ruling military junta during a pro-democracy protest at the Athens Polytechnic in 1973. The commemoration draws thousands of Greeks from all walks of life, from schoolchildren with their teachers to aged veterans of the Civil War. Every left organisation in the country sets up literature tables inside the campus. We attended the event held by KEERFA to discuss the progress of their anti-fascist campaign. The main speaker, a public leader of KEERFA, spoke at length about the nature of fascism, the struggle for immigrant rights, etc. All of this led to a final, resounding crescendo: we must march in the streets—to pressure the government to throw the fascists in jail!
There can be no greater expression of illusions in the capitalist state than this demand. It is suicidal in any capitalist country to rely on the state to deal with the fascists, but in Greece it should be even more apparent because it is widely known that half of the cops support Golden Dawn. The last government’s health minister was known for using a homemade axe to hunt down leftist students when he was a leader of a right-wing youth group. A supporter of the TGG intervened in the meeting from the floor. She really shook the room up. She explained why we call for the united front and then exposed the illusions in the cops and courts pushed by the SEK and KEERFA. She went after the SEK for being anti-Communist, and for being so repelled by our call for a workers united front with the Communist Party. She got a fair bit of applause after her remarks.
Well, of course KEERFA and the SEK are absolutely thrilled that Syriza was elected, because now they really push illusions that the state will take care of the fascist threat. The SEK calls on Syriza to continue the trials of Golden Dawn, root out their supporters in the state apparatus, and “disarm the police.” A recent anti-Turkey provocation launched by the new government illustrates the depth of these reformist illusions. Days after the election Panos Kammenos, the new defence minister, staged a nationalist anti-Turkey provocation by lowering a wreath over the Imia islets, where three Greek soldiers died in a helicopter crash in 1996. These are pieces of rock whose ownership is disputed by Greece and Turkey, and every year the fascists hold an Imia rally on 31 January.
This year’s counter-demonstration in Athens against the fascist rally was a crystallisation of the toothless, liberal, anti-fascist “common front” against fascism hailed by Antarsya and KEERFA. This demo, the first since the election of Syriza, saw the left rally hours before and in a different location from the fascists, obviously with no intention of stopping Golden Dawn. Everyone from the Syriza youth to Antarsya to anarchists was represented. Much was made of the fact that there was a minimal police presence. Of course, had this been a serious mobilisation to stop the fascists, you can be sure that hundreds of riot cops would have been dispatched to protect Golden Dawn.
For a Leninist-Trotskyist Party
No capitalist government, including one led by Syriza, will be able to satisfy the desperate demands of the Greek masses for jobs, healthcare and pensions. In these conditions, the fascists will continue to grow. It is necessary for the Greek working class to come to the fore in militant struggle of all those facing ruin by the capitalist crisis. A class-struggle response to the populist demagogy of the fascists is needed. In a country where the unionised working class has been decimated by the economic crisis, a massive campaign to organise the unorganised is needed. In Greece, immigrants are murdered in the street, detained in squalid camps, or pushed into the sea to drown before even reaching Europe’s shores. Against deportations and state repression against undocumented migrants, we call for full citizenship rights for all immigrants. In response to massive, sustained unemployment in a society where a whole generation has never held a job, we demand jobs for all through a shorter workweek with no loss in pay! In a society where the pitiful minimum wage leaves the working poor to burn firewood to heat their apartments, have their electricity cut off, and send their children hungry to school, we demand a sliding scale of wages to keep up with the cost of living! In contrast to Syriza’s timid begging for scraps from the imperialists, we say: Repudiate the debt! Nationalise the banks!
This struggle would point to the need for the working class to completely expropriate the bourgeoisie and establish its own government through socialist revolution. It will be necessary to extend any revolution in a dependent European country like Greece to the imperialist centres of Berlin, Paris, and London. Our programme is for the Socialist United States of Europe. I would like to conclude by quoting from an article written by our German comrades. They wrote: “The Socialist United States of Europe, in conjunction with the conquest of proletarian power in the U.S., Japan and throughout the world, would lay the basis for a real international division of labour in a planned economy, thus enormously increasing the productivity of society. Establishing the genuine equality of the peoples of Europe, it would eradicate the source of the imperialist wars that have brought Europe so many times near extinction” [“Economic Crisis Rips Europe,” WV No. 992, 9 December 2011]. Central to our perspective as Trotskyists is the reforging of the Fourth International as the world party of proletarian revolution, the task the International Communist League has set for itself.
A View From The Left-Imperialists Stoke Religious Fires-U.S. Out of the Near East Now!-Down With Sanctions Against Iran!

Workers Vanguard No. 1065
3 April 2015
 
Imperialists Stoke Religious Fires-
U.S. Out of the Near East Now!
Down With Sanctions Against Iran!
 
MARCH 30—The blood of tens of thousands who have been slaughtered in communalist violence throughout the Near East is on the hands of the U.S. imperialist rulers, who continue to stoke religious and ethnic hatred throughout the region. To undermine the Iran-allied regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, the U.S. incited and armed sectarian Sunni forces, plunging that country into civil war. In Iraq, the U.S. is relying on militias controlled by longtime pariah, Shi’ite Iran, as ground troops against ISIS, which itself arose out of the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq and now controls a wide swath of the country. In Yemen, where for years the Obama administration has been launching drone strikes against the population in the name of targeting Sunni Al Qaeda forces, the U.S. is backing the Saudi-led attack against the Zaidi Shi’ite Houthis, who are viewed as an Iranian proxy.
At the same time, the White House has taken a spin at diplomacy with Iran, much to the alarm of Israel and the U.S.’s Sunni Muslim allies in the Persian Gulf. The Obama administration’s latest round of negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program—with the participation of Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China—has also worked leading Republicans into a frenzy. In January, without informing the White House, Republican House Speaker John Boehner invited Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to rail against Iran at a joint meeting of Congress. The head of the Near East’s only nuclear-armed state, Netanyahu was enthusiastically applauded throughout his March 3 speech in which he ominously declared that the terms the White House was offering Iran “will inevitably lead to nuclear war.”
A week later, 47 Republican members of Congress sent an open letter to the Iranian government declaring that any agreement it negotiated with the Obama administration could be revoked by the next president “with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.” Although the Israeli government has denied it, U.S. officials report that Israel has been spying on the nuclear negotiations and—what has really got the White House worked up—leaking the information to Congress. The Obama administration has tried to rein in the rabid Netanyahu as it continues its nuclear negotiations with Iran.
On March 25, the Sunni monarchy of Saudi Arabia began bombing Yemen. With the support of a coalition including other Gulf states and Egypt, the Saudis aim to restore the government of Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi, who resigned the presidency in January in the face of attack by the Houthi rebels. The air campaign, for which the U.S. says it is providing “logistical and intelligence support,” was announced in Washington by the Saudi ambassador. The Iranian government has denounced the U.S.-backed assault in Yemen.
Those who run U.S. imperialism add a twist to the expression that today’s ally is tomorrow’s enemy. For them, today’s ally is today’s enemy. The only constant is that imperialist domination breeds misery and war. Notwithstanding their bickering and conflicting policies, the Republicans and Democrats share a common class interest: maintaining U.S. supremacy in the oil-rich Near East. The imperialist system is based on war and plunder, and as the world’s “superpower,” U.S. imperialism is the greatest enemy of the world’s workers and oppressed.
Down With U.S. Imperialism!
It is the duty of class-conscious workers everywhere, particularly in the U.S., to oppose all wars and occupations carried out by the imperialists. When the U.S. began air strikes against ISIS last year, we explained that “any force, however unsavory, that attacks, repels or otherwise impedes U.S. forces strikes a blow in the interests of the exploited and the oppressed” (“U.S. Out of Iraq! No Intervention in Syria!” WV No. 1051, 5 September 2014). We take a military side with ISIS when it targets the imperialists and forces acting as their proxies, including the Baghdad government and the Shi’ite militias as well as the Kurdish pesh merga forces in Northern Iraq and the Syrian Kurdish nationalists. This does not mean we give the slightest political support to the reactionary ISIS butchers.
Since early March, a coalition dominated by Iranian-backed Shi’ite militias has been waging an offensive to recapture the Sunni city of Tikrit from ISIS control. Tehran has for some time used the sectarian bloodbath in Iraq to increase its influence in the region. When the U.S. began intensive bombing of Tikrit on March 25, several Shi’ite militias announced they would not collaborate with the U.S. and would pull out from the assault, a move the Pentagon claimed to “welcome.” In fact, the militias remain part of the offensive in Tikrit. And, according to the New York Times (27 March), American officials have acknowledged that Shi’ite militias would “play a crucial part in subduing Tikrit.”
For Marxists, what is decisive is the fact that in Tikrit the Shi’ite militias are acting as surrogates for U.S. imperialism, as they were even before the open involvement of U.S. forces. A victory for the Shi’ite militias and the Iraqi army would directly benefit the aims of U.S. imperialism, which is leading the regional war against ISIS. Likewise, if the militias were driven back by ISIS and other Sunni forces, this would be a blow against U.S. imperialism. The brutality of ISIS forces is widely broadcast in the Western media, but the Shi’ite militias and Iraqi government forces are cut of the same cloth. Whole Sunni villages have been wiped out after having been “liberated” from ISIS.
This is not the first time the clerical regime in Iran has served the interests of the U.S. The Iranian regime supported the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, engaging in extensive intelligence and military coordination and supporting the U.S.-installed government. Not that this collaboration did the Iranian government any good—in January 2002, Iran became part of George W. Bush’s “axis of evil” and subsequently the target of rounds of crippling sanctions under both the Bush and Obama administrations.
In the past, Israel attempted to bolster Persian-dominated Iran, even under the mullahs, as a bulwark against the regional Arab regimes. Israel played a key role in assisting the U.S. in the sale of weapons to Iran, as revealed when the Iran/contra scandal broke in 1986. At the time, U.S. military officials were shipping guns to the Iranian government in violation of Congressional bans, in order to fund right-wing contra death squads in Nicaragua. This was despite the U.S.’s strong tilt toward Iraq in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War.
Although today the U.S. and Iran are effectively cooperating on the ground in Iraq and nuclear talks are ongoing with a March 31 deadline, the U.S. has not let up on the punishing economic sanctions against Iran. The sanctions are an act of war, hitting Iran’s poor and working population the hardest. The White House’s professed purpose is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The Iranian government has always denied seeking to develop nuclear weapons, and even pro-imperialist analysts and U.S. intelligence agencies have admitted there is no evidence of such a program. The 20 percent uranium enrichment level cited by the imperialists as the level that can be quickly converted to weapons-grade is the same needed for medical isotopes for cancer treatment.
The possession of nukes is no guarantee of security from attack by U.S. imperialism, with its massive nuclear arsenal and overwhelming military power. Nevertheless, nuclear weapons are an important deterrent against military attack and can provide a measure of independence from imperialist diktat. This was demonstrated in the negative in Libya. In 2003, in addition to signing on to the imperialists’ war on terror, Muammar el-Qaddafi renounced Libya’s nuclear weapons program and welcomed imperialist inspectors. Eight years later, he was overthrown by the U.S. and allied imperialist powers, setting the stage for the current bloody chaos in Libya. Despite the fact that we give no political support to the reactionary mullah regime in Tehran, we Marxists recognize that Iran needs nuclear weapons as well as effective delivery systems to deter attack, not least from Israel.
For Proletarian Internationalism!
March marked the 12th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which toppled Saddam Hussein’s Sunni-dominated government and plunged the country into communalist slaughter. To buttress their occupation, the U.S. imperialists systematically played off sectors of the Iraqi population against each other, fueling the communalist bloodshed. The U.S. and allied powers committed and unleashed mass murder, indiscriminate terror and torture on a scale far exceeding that of the brutal Iraqi strongman they replaced. A recent report by Physicians for Social Responsibility found that some one million Iraqis died as a result of the U.S. invasion and occupation.
ISIS, an offshoot of Al Qaeda, is itself a product of U.S. interventions. The founding elements of Al Qaeda, including the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of its Iraqi affiliate, were trained and funded by the CIA as it assembled a reactionary horde to oppose the Soviet Union’s intervention in Afghanistan in the 1980s. In Iraq, ISIS was able to garner support among even some secular Sunni Arabs as a result of the repression they suffered at the hands of the overwhelmingly Shi’ite government installed by the U.S.
Iraq today is a shattered society, with its industry and infrastructure in ruins. To be an Iraqi is to live under the constant threat of sectarian murder: Sunni vs. Shi’ite, Arab vs. Kurd. And if you are from a small community—e.g., the Christians or Yazidis—with no militias to back you, you live or die at the sufferance of others. This is the “liberation” that U.S. imperialism brought to the peoples of Iraq.
The social emancipation of the Iraqi masses is dependent on working-class struggle in nearby countries where there are strategic concentrations of the industrial working class, centrally Iran, Turkey and Egypt. We have no illusions that it will be an easy task to break workers of the Near East, including in Zionist Israel, from nationalism and religious reaction and win them to the Marxist program of proletarian revolution. But there will be no end to ethnic and national oppression, no liberation of women, no end to the exploitation of working people short of shattering the capitalist order and laying the basis for a socialist federation of the Near East.
What is needed is the construction of Marxist workers parties, sections of a reforged Fourth International, to unite the working classes of the region around a program of revolutionary internationalism and class independence from the imperialists, the local bourgeoisies and forces of religious reaction. This perspective crucially hinges on linking up with the multiracial working class in the U.S. in a fight against capitalist rule here in the belly of the imperialist beast.
If our readers can make no sense of what is happening in Iraq, Yemen or anywhere else the U.S. is intervening, there is a reason: this ruling class is crazed. Jon Stewart gave it his twist on the Daily Show: “It took decades of destabilizing conflict, but we finally figured out how to wage a proxy war against ourselves.” Not only is Washington promising even more years of war in the Near East—whatever happened to pulling out from Iraq and Afghanistan?—it is also simultaneously provoking capitalist Russia, a major nuclear power, over Ukraine while constantly menacing the Chinese bureaucratically deformed workers state through spy flights and military encirclement.
The American ruling class flaunts its barbarity, openly debating the virtues of torture, riding roughshod over nations around the world and leading the planet in the incarceration of its own population while carrying out grisly executions at home. As the U.S. imperialists sow death and destruction across the Near East, working people in the U.S. have seen their wages driven down, social services gutted and legal rights whittled away. While U.S. drones blow away schoolchildren and wedding parties in Muslim countries, the cops gun down black and Latino men on American streets.
Since the destruction of the Soviet degenerated workers state in 1991-92, the arrogant, power-mad U.S. rulers have seen no significant obstacle to their global designs. Self-designated cops of the world, they believe they can do anything to anybody and get away with it. But the U.S. bourgeoisie’s status as supreme world power is beset by contradictions. They can direct killer drones to take out today’s “enemy” from thousands of miles away, but at home bridges are near collapsing, public education is starved of funds (except in wealthy suburbs) and much of industry is hollowed out. One bit of infrastructure they have built up is super-high-speed data networks for Wall Street, where “economic growth” spells only the latest speculative investment craze. Meanwhile in New York City’s East Village, people are killed and buildings leveled by an exploding gas line.
This decrepit, depraved profit system has got to go! The struggle of the working class in this country to liberate itself from exploitation is also the struggle that can liberate all those ground under the heel of the imperialist colossus. The American proletariat, currently demoralized by decades of defeats, must be imbued with the consciousness of its revolutionary potential to sweep away the capitalist system and create a new society organized to serve human need. In “Imperialist Rape of Iraq” (WV No. 800, 28 March 2003), written at the time of the U.S. invasion, we argued:
“Mass slaughter is the concentrated expression and ultimate logic of the ‘normal’ brutal workings of the capitalist system, which daily condemns countless numbers around the world to death by malnutrition, lack of medical care and industrial murder.
“If there is to be a choice for coming generations of working-class and minority youth other than one of grinding exploitation, joblessness, mass imprisonment or military servitude, if the impoverished masses of the world are to have a future other than starvation and slaughter, this whole system must be torn up by its roots through a socialist revolution and replaced by a rational, planned economy internationally.”
The Spartacist League is the U.S. section of the International Communist League, which is dedicated to building the parties that can bring this perspective to the working class in the U.S. and internationally.

Sunday, April 12, 2015


As The 100th Anniversary Of The First Year Of World War I (Remember The War To End All Wars) Continues ... Some Remembrances-Artists’ Corner- George Grosz
 



In say 1912, 1913, hell, even the beginning of 1914, the first few months anyway, before the war clouds got a full head of steam in the summer they all profusely professed their unmitigated horror at the thought of war, thought of the old way of doing business in the world. Yes the artists of every school the Cubist/Fauvists/Futurists/Constructivists, Surrealists or those who would come to speak for those movements (hell even the Academy spoke the pious words when there was sunny weather), those who saw the disjointedness of modern industrial society and put the pieces to paint, sculptors who put twisted pieces of metal juxtaposed to each other saw that building a mighty machine from which you had to run created many problems; writers of serious history books proving that, according to their Whiggish theory of progress,  humankind had moved beyond war as an instrument of policy and the diplomats and high and mighty would put the brakes on in time, not realizing that they were all squabbling cousins; writers of serious and not so serious novels drenched in platitudes and hidden gazebo love affairs put paid to that notion in their sweet nothing words that man and woman had too much to do, too much sex to harness to denigrate themselves by crying the warrior’s cry and by having half-virgin, neat trick, maidens strewing flowers on the bloodlust streets; musicians whose muse spoke of delicate tempos and sweet muted violin concertos, not the stress and strife of the tattoos of war marches with their tinny conceits; and poets, ah, those constricted poets who bleed the moon of its amber swearing, swearing on a stack of seven sealed bibles, that they would go to the hells before touching the hair of another man, putting another man to ground or lying their own heads down for some imperial mission. They all professed loudly (and those few who did not profess, could not profess because they were happily getting their blood rising, kept their own consul until the summer), that come the war drums they would resist the siren call, would stick to their Whiggish, Futurist, Constructionist, Cubist worlds and blast the war-makers to hell in quotes, words, chords, clanged metal, and pretty pastels. They would stay the course.  

And then the war drums intensified, the people, their clients, patrons and buyers, cried out their lusts and they, they made of ordinary human clay as it turned out, poets, beautiful poets like Wilfred Owens who would sicken of war before he passed leaving a beautiful damnation on war, its psychoses, and broken bones and dreams, and the idiots who brought humankind to such a fate, like e. e. cummings who drove through sheer hell in those rickety ambulances floors sprayed with blood, man blood, angers, anguishes and more sets of broken bones, and broken dreams, like Rupert Brooke all manly and old school give and go, as they marched in formation leaving the ports and then mowed down like freshly mown grass in their thousands as the charge call came and they rested, a lot of them, in those freshly mown grasses, like Robert Graves all grave all sputtering in his words confused about what had happened, suppressing, always suppressing that instinct to cry out against the hatred night, like old school, old Thomas Hardy writing beautiful old English pastoral sentiments before the war and then full-blown into imperium’s service, no questions asked old England right or wrong, like old stuffed shirt himself T.S. Eliot speaking of hollow loves, hollow men, wastelands, and such in the high club rooms on the home front, and like old brother Yeats speaking of terrible beauties born in the colonies and maybe at the home front too as long as Eliot does not miss his high tea. Jesus what a blasted night that Great War time was.   

And do not forget when the war drums intensified, and the people, their clients, patrons and buyers, cried out their lusts and they, they, other creative souls made of ordinary human clay as it turned out

And then the war drums intensified, the people, their clients, patrons and buyers, cried out their lusts and they, they made of ordinary human clay as it turned out, artists, beautiful artists like Fernand Leger who could no longer push the envelope of representative art because it had been twisted by the rubble of war, by the crashing big guns, by the hubris of commanders and commanded and he turned to new form, tubes, cubes, prisms, anything but battered humankind in its every rusts and lusts, all bright and intersecting once he got the mustard gas out of his system, once he had done his patria duty, like speaking of mustard gas old worn out John Singer Sargent of the three name WASPs forgetting Boston Brahmin society ladies in decollage, forgetting ancient world religious murals hanging atop Boston museum and spewing trench warfare and the blind leading the blind out of no man’s land, out of the devil’s claws, like Umberto Boccioni, all swirls, curves, dashes, and dangling guns as the endless charges endlessly charge, like Gustav Klimt and his gold dust opulent Asiatic dreams, like Joan Miro and his infernal eyes, dibs, dabs, vaginas, and blots, and like poor maddened George Groz.        

And do not forget when the war drums intensified, and the people, their clients, patrons and buyers, cried out their lusts and they, they, other creative souls made of ordinary human clay as it turned out sculptors, writers, serious and not, musicians went to the trenches to die deathless deaths in their thousands for, well, for humankind, of course, their always fate ….            

Channeling The Grateful Dead Minus…




From The Pen Of Sam Lowell

No I was never a “deadhead,” never would have accepted that designation in any case if somebody tried to lay that moniker on me although in the old days, the days of the 1960s mad dash to seek a newer world that got trashed about seven million ways before the deal went down and “the authorities,” as my mother used to say when speaking of the ruling class or its agents, pulled the hammer down and soured a whole generation, no, make that three generations now since they are still furiously trying to keep us in lock-down mode, I went out in San Francisco by the moniker Prince of Love. But that was strictly among the brethren, those who were, literally, my mates on the yellow brick road converted school bus which a group of us called home for a couple of years as we went up and down the coast looking for the heart of Saturday  night, looking for the great blue-pink American West night, hell, maybe just looking to turn the world upside down and see if that was any better than the gruel that was on tap, was being force-fed to us for no known reason.

No, as well, I never went to one of their sold-out stoned out concerts which was something of a ceremonial rite of passage for those who did consider themselves “Dead Heads” and insisted that each and every time out they eat so much acid, smoke so many reefers, swallow some many bennies just like the very first time they hear the Dead in order to get that same guitar rush. And taking something from sports figures and their superstitions wear the same outfit each time to be washed clean by the Dead magic (of course those who never gave up the tradition had pretty threadbare outfits before Jerry went over the top, went to see the “fixer” man to get well one more time, one time too many). So like I say despite the voodoo stuff I have any number of friends who were/are ardent fans and they seem to be, well, normal, normal except in those flashback moments where they see “colors, man, colors,” would have “far out” experiences when they would/will get ready for a Dead concert. (Remind me to tell you sometime about a friend of mine from back in Carver, a town about thirty miles south of Boston, who to give you an idea of the tenor of the times back then went from a foul-mouthed corner boy, actually using that moniker, he said it turned the girls on, to “Far-Out Phil” when he came West to join us.) So even the best of them would succumb until the wheels kind of fall off….for a while.  

But here is my take on the Dead just to keep things in perspective, just to keep things right. I, after a couple of years on the road out there, and maybe not directly in the inner circle of the hippie/drug/literary scene but close enough to get tangled up in the new dispensation I like to look at the connections, the West Coast connections, where a lot of the energy of the 1960s got its start or if started elsewhere got magnified there. Draw the lines, if you will, from the wild boy alienated, there is no other word that says it so well, bikers over in Oakland and the edges of other working-class towns, mostly white, mostly with some kind of Okie/Arkie background roaring up the streets of Squaresville in search of the village daughters and putting the fear in the average citizen who thought Attila the Hun’s kin had descended, but remember that alienated part that is the hook-in, hot rod after midnight “chicken run” runners out in the valleys, alienated too but with a little dough and some swag and a hell-bend desire to go fast, go very fast, if for no other reason than to breakout of  valley ennui (although they would punch somebody out, fag bait somebody if they ever used such a word in their presence if they knew what it meant) and surfer boys, coast boys and with a little more laid back approach in search of the perfect wave (read: Nirvana), maybe not quite so alienated because of that golden tan blonde dish sitting on the beach waiting to see if Sir Galahad finds the holy grail, to the “beat” guys Kerouac, Cassady, Ginsberg and friends running across America just to keep running, writing up a storm, wenching, whoring , pimping, white blue-eyed hipsters “speaking” be-bop to a jaded world, to sainted Ken Kesey and the Merry Pranksters (and our Captain Crunch, leader of our own merry prankster psychedelic bus), the Hell’s Angels (bad dudes, bad dudes , no question), Fillmore with strobe light beams creating dreams, et. al and you have the skeleton for what went on then, right or wrong. Wasn’t that a time, yes, wasn’t that a time. And the Dead were right in the mix.