Original PI owner gives up, gives to whack jobs

[seemslikeadream]

The site is now under the administration of the remaining membership. They have access to the website files and they have rearranged, deleted and edited many of the posts and threads on the forum. They also have access to everyone's account info.

This is a breach of trust and the agreement we signed when we joined the forum.

You mean everyone left now has administrative privilege?

I'm sorry to see what's happened over there, and shocked that it has. It looks now like a bullying parody of a Leninist death cult.

Jeff, after reading this post all I'd like to know is how to end my membership here. Thanks.

Why did you even become a member? I haven't even used my big red letters yet, why are you leaving?

[lightningBugout]

Close readings of Capital are so 1974.....

[Jeff]

Maybe I should make sure that I'm left enough for this board. Am I?

This is an anti-fascist board.

About this only, I'm very doctrinaire.

[stillrobertpaulsen]

If the term "left" has any meaning other than a purely relative one, it is as that group of political ideas, parties, movements, and organizations which believes that politics is driven less by ideas than by interests and that those interests are based on economic class. Radical republicans (Civil War variety), revolutionary democrats, social democrats (including even a sizable chunk of the British Labor Party and the German SDs of today), socialists, utopian socialists, agrarian socialists, communists, anarchists, anarco-syndicalists, and nihilists - if these do not agree on anything else, they agree on the centrality of social classes even before they divide on what to do about them.

In contrast, "Liberals" explicitly reject the centrality of social classes. If such exist at all, they are assumed to be trumped by a common interest (national or otherwise) and any division is based only on transitory political opinion or policy. They are united with "Conservatives" in their agreement on the fundamental norms of society and on their long-term objectives (most importantly in the defense of private property and the projection of "national interest"). Indeed, for them, the current organization of society is the only one conceivable.

Two questions:

1. I noticed you did not include the Green Party on your list of the "left". Where exactly do they fit on the political spectrum as you define it? Are Greens progressive? Liberal? Leftist?

2. Is it possible to be a Leftist and still be in favor of private property?

[DoYouEverWonder]

I won't say I understand what's happening at PI, and though what I think I see happening there saddens and disturbs me, it remains Tinoire's board to reposition as she chooses. If, in fact, that's what she's doing.

What that means for the discussion here - it's complicated. There are some shared members, and ex-members, with conflicting grievances, and if this can be a forum for their discussion, then terrific. But the more thought I give to this, the less thrilled I am at the prospect of a board vs board pissing match. So, while I can appreciate the passions invested, for the health of this board I'm not going to allow this to become a protracted flame war.

Jeff,

I am very sorry, that a dispute from another forum has to be played out in yours. You have always been a gentleman and you are very gracious. I don't think this is something that has to go on for too long, or to bleed over into the rest of RI. But we have no where else to go at this point.

We would love to do this on PI where it belongs but the new admins have banned almost everybody who is not in their group. Therefore it is impossible for to defend ourselves against their arguments and attacks.

However, what has happened to PI needs to be brought out into the open because that is the only way to stop it from continuing to happen over and over again. That is the only way to stop the ugly rumors and confusion.

For peace and understanding,
DYEW

[DawnB]

That was a very gracious post, DYEW, and I agree.

And, Jeff, thanks - I'm o.k., then, because I'm very anti-totalitarian and anti-authoritarian, and, hence, very anti-fascist.

The basic points came across.

Robert, I repeatedly asked the same questions, and never got a straight answer. At times, it was indicated that, yes, Greens were welcome. If one dared to do anything but completely reject capitalism and private property totally, one was quickly treated with absolute contempt by members of the group at PI now. I think that they need to be honest and make it clear what their version of an acceptable leftist is ... on the front page. I can guarantee that one will not want to be participating over there for long - if one doesn't reference the "centrality of the class struggle." And Spirit help the poor person that wants to talk about anything else, particularly about any spiritual beliefs or about 9-11 truth.

They just need to make it abundantly clear on the first page - and not something vague like, "It's the right board for you if you're for the working class." It needs to be specific like, "You must believe that capitalism needs to be eliminated in all forms, want to talk about class struggle ad nauseum, and reject anyone owning property but the state." If Tin had just made that clear in mid-June, things would have gone a whole lot better.

There, I've said what I wanted to say. Thanks for letting us discuss this.

[23]

Jeff said, " It looks now like a bullying parody of a Leninist death cult."

Poignant observation, and one that should not be a surprise to anyone.

Authoritarianism is authoritarianism. Whether it wears a capitalist mask or a socialist one.

And bullies will be bullies, no matter which ideology they evangelize.

In the end, it's not your words that reveal who you really are.

It's your actions.

Particular the ones that involve the treatment of others who disagree with you.

23

[stillrobertpaulsen]

Robert, I repeatedly asked the same questions, and never got a straight answer. At times, it was indicated that, yes, Greens were welcome. If one dared to do anything but completely reject capitalism and private property totally, one was quickly treated with absolute contempt by members of the group at PI now. I think that they need to be honest and make it clear what their version of an acceptable leftist is ... on the front page. I can guarantee that one will not want to be participating over there for long - if one doesn't reference the "centrality of the class struggle." And Spirit help the poor person that wants to talk about anything else, particularly about any spiritual beliefs or about 9-11 truth.

They just need to make it abundantly clear on the first page - and not something vague like, "It's the right board for you if you're for the working class." It needs to be specific like, "You must believe that capitalism needs to be eliminated in all forms, want to talk about class struggle ad nauseum, and reject anyone owning property but the state." If Tin had just made that clear in mid-June, things would have gone a whole lot better.

DawnB, thanks for noticing my questions. I'm hoping chlamor will too, but after reading what your experience has been, I won't hold my breath. I don't have any problem with people wanting to define and delineate the political spectrum as far as the left is concerned. What scares me is when people do so for the express purpose of doing so to weed out "the enemy". Not that I'm implying that chlamor has intimated that Greens would fall in the enemy camp. But since chlamor seemed eager to expostulate on the subject of the difference between liberal and leftist, I am hoping for an answer to my questions.

The irony is that while I consider myself to be a Progressive, there are many aspects of socialism that I think can work in my country, the USA. My most recent post at PI was a column by Joe Bageant, who really doesn't strike me as a liberal at all. But at the same time, I have no problem with people owning private property. So while I wrote my first question with your experience in my mind, DawnB, I wrote the second question thinking of myself and how my particular view of that subject might weigh in for someone who is focused on defining what is Left and what isn't.

As far as Tinoire is concerned, I would like to know what she thinks of that statement: "You must believe that capitalism needs to be eliminated in all forms, want to talk about class struggle ad nauseum, and reject anyone owning property but the state." I'm still a registered member at PI, so maybe I'll ask her when I have the time. Bottom line: if Progressive are not Leftist enough, and ProgressiveIndependent is now a Leftist site, she needs to change the name for of the site for the sake of clarity.

[23]

Bottom line: if Progressive are not Leftist enough, and ProgressiveIndependent is now a Leftist site, she needs to change the name for of the site for the sake of clarity.

Is there a difference between someone who is asserting that Progressives are not leftist enough and someone who is asserting that you are not patriotic enough?

The subject of the litmus tests may differ, certainly.

But the arrogance is similar, is it not?

As for...

"you must believe that capitalism needs to be eliminated in all forms, want to talk about class struggle ad nauseum, and reject anyone owning property but the state"...

just like Marx rejected Bakunin, of course.

Standard dictatorship-of-the-proletariat-speak.

Which, by the way, can be an appropriate question for their (PI's) plate:

are they supporters of a dictatorship of the proletariat?

23

[marshwren]

[
Which, by the way, can be an appropriate question for their (PI's) plate:

are they supporters of a dictatorship of the proletariat?

23

Why, of course they are. As long as THEY are the dictators...now, why does that remind me of certain former president...????

[JackRiddler]

Close readings of Capital are so 1974.....

But I like 1974! Relatively speaking. 1966 would be even better. Both happened in my lifetime, but I didn't get to participate in the social or political action, having been just nine in 1974.

[DawnB]

I always say that I admire the social democracies in Europe. Some may be swinging right on the political spectrum, and that's not what I agree with. I believe that the government should provide certain services.

For example, the government should open up Medicare to all. I believe that people should be able to supplement that with private insurance (that's strictly regulated, should they want insurance for a private hospital room, or elective surgery, or whatever).

Having worked for government for many years as a social worker, this is a very important issue for me. Government should provide complete services, but should be as least dictatorial as possible. We, as a people, should only interfere with fundamental rights when there's a compelling interest (the highest legal standard), and healthcare, for example, should be considered a fundamental right.

[lightningBugout]

Close readings of Capital are so 1974.....

But I like 1974! Relatively speaking. 1966 would be even better. Both happened in my lifetime, but I didn't get to participate in the social or political action, having been just nine in 1974.

And I like close readings of Capital. I'm just calling out a period when Marx reading groups were very hot in certain academic disciplines.

[marshwren]

Close readings of Capital are so 1974.....

But I like 1974! Relatively speaking. 1966 would be even better. Both happened in my lifetime, but I didn't get to participate in the social or political action, having been just nine in 1974.

And I like close readings of Capital. I'm just calling out a period when Marx reading groups were very hot in certain academic disciplines.

With all due respect, Kapital is just one of many, many reasons economics is called 'the dismal science'. The Chicago School is another.

[DoYouEverWonder]

One thing I don't understand is why do people, who apparently hate Progressives, want a site named Progressive Independent so badly?