rigorousintuition.ca

I haven't been checking in here lately, but I just came across the thread about my deleted post at DU sort of making fun of the implosion of PI.

But I think there is a bigger issue here: Why have the tactics of Leninist and Trotskyite cults returned to the left sphere?

By Leninist and Trotskyite, I don't mean people who actually follow the political economy of either of those thinkers. I am referring to certain tactics adopted by Leninst and Trotskyite parties in the US in the 1930s -- tactics that had little use for voting and democracy within parties, that prized effective propoganda over information, that emphasized cult-like obedience to "party lines -- and that were so revolting to the left, that they eventually gave rise to the "anti-communist left" including "anti-communist socialists."

From the spamming of DU with WorldSocialistWebSite nonsense to the demise of PI, it looks like a replay of the 70s when hundreds, if not thousands, of young progressives were recruited into political cults that differed little from Rev. Moon's Church or Scientology.

As I asked on DU recently, why are self-proclaimed "socialists" showing up who seem to subscribe to the WSWS cult, but few subscribe to America's largest socialist organization, Democratic Socialists of America?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... id=6653365

Why are people mindlessly repeating WSWS propoganda, even though it has been conclusively demonstrated that WSWS is owned by a wealth corporate CEO who's been running a cult for years that has never once had an internal election, or opened an office, and that sees its main goal as disrupting unions and strikes and attacking Democratic Socialists, Democrats, Greens, British Labour and other left of center parties?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... id=6561071

Well firstly, I've got to say I know little about the happenings at DU or PI, and also don't really know much about the specifics regarding the World Socialist Website, either, though I have read their stuff.

That said, I do think many of us are looking for a balance between order and chaos, i.e. we want to work with groups of people that are organized, but not authoritarian. It's hard to strike a balance- which would you choose: a humane group of people that gets little done, or the group that functions like a well-oiled machine but has little room for dissent and critical thinking?

Hopefully we don't really have to choose between these two extremes, there must be some kind of way to find the best of both...

I think this mindset has been escalating since 2000. HOW DARE YOU VOTE FOR ANYONE BUT...!!!!!!!
The latest real phonies are trying to put some cheesy spin on a behavior that is already old news, even though its not been a topic d'jour at websites that feature deceptive titles like "democratic" or "independant"

The lies come easier than the truth.

Well, one could ask the question in a different light:

Why are people perpetually whoring for the Democratic Party when is nothing more than a house organ for corporate America?

Why are people mindlessly repeating DLC/Democratic propaganda, even though it has been conclusively demonstrated that DLC/Democratic Party is owned by corporate America who's been running a cult for years that has never once had an honest election or opened honest dialogue, and that sees its main goal as lying to unions and attacking Democratic Socialists, "progressive" Democrats, Greens, and other left of center parties?

You see, PI has become a parody, but so has DU.

And, so have you.

HamdenRice wrote:I haven't been checking in here lately, but I just came across the thread about my deleted post at DU sort of making fun of the implosion of PI.

But I think there is a bigger issue here: Why have the tactics of Leninist and Trotskyite cults returned to the left sphere?

By Leninist and Trotskyite, I don't mean people who actually follow the political economy of either of those thinkers. I am referring to certain tactics adopted by Leninst and Trotskyite parties in the US in the 1930s -- tactics that had little use for voting and democracy within parties, that prized effective propoganda over information, that emphasized cult-like obedience to "party lines -- and that were so revolting to the left, that they eventually gave rise to the "anti-communist left" including "anti-communist socialists."

From the spamming of DU with WorldSocialistWebSite nonsense to the demise of PI, it looks like a replay of the 70s when hundreds, if not thousands, of young progressives were recruited into political cults that differed little from Rev. Moon's Church or Scientology.

As I asked on DU recently, why are self-proclaimed "socialists" showing up who seem to subscribe to the WSWS cult, but few subscribe to America's largest socialist organization, Democratic Socialists of America?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... id=6653365

Why are people mindlessly repeating WSWS propoganda, even though it has been conclusively demonstrated that WSWS is owned by a wealth corporate CEO who's been running a cult for years that has never once had an internal election, or opened an office, and that sees its main goal as disrupting unions and strikes and attacking Democratic Socialists, Democrats, Greens, British Labour and other left of center parties?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... id=6561071

DancingBear, you were making a decent argument before the ad hominem. Please don't go personal.

They haven't returned, they just never left. Disguised as progressives or liberals etc. they made friends, played nice nice. Then one day they when us pansy ass whatevers weren't looking bam bam you little lefties are not left enough you must be TROLLS, not just trolls but murderous prison trolls who are too stupid to see it their way to paradise. Thanks for stopping by HR. I don't know if we got along at DU but I appriecate your noticing the trap that was set. There are a lot of traps out there, lots of websites that aren't what they appear to be, maybe not progressive, maybe not independent, maybe not underground, maybe not even demorcatic. Free speech yea right free speech to the one that owns the website. Funny that bunch doesn't like folks to own stuff

NOW I WANT A DIVORCE I didn't know I swear I didn't know

HamdenRice wrote:I haven't been checking in here lately, but I just came across the thread about my deleted post at DU sort of making fun of the implosion of PI.

But I think there is a bigger issue here: Why have the tactics of Leninist and Trotskyite cults returned to the left sphere?

By Leninist and Trotskyite, I don't mean people who actually follow the political economy of either of those thinkers. I am referring to certain tactics adopted by Leninst and Trotskyite parties in the US in the 1930s -- tactics that had little use for voting and democracy within parties, that prized effective propoganda over information, that emphasized cult-like obedience to "party lines -- and that were so revolting to the left, that they eventually gave rise to the "anti-communist left" including "anti-communist socialists."

From the spamming of DU with WorldSocialistWebSite nonsense to the demise of PI, it looks like a replay of the 70s when hundreds, if not thousands, of young progressives were recruited into political cults that differed little from Rev. Moon's Church or Scientology.

As I asked on DU recently, why are self-proclaimed "socialists" showing up who seem to subscribe to the WSWS cult, but few subscribe to America's largest socialist organization, Democratic Socialists of America?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... id=6653365

Why are people mindlessly repeating WSWS propoganda, even though it has been conclusively demonstrated that WSWS is owned by a wealth corporate CEO who's been running a cult for years that has never once had an internal election, or opened an office, and that sees its main goal as disrupting unions and strikes and attacking Democratic Socialists, Democrats, Greens, British Labour and other left of center parties?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... id=6561071

HamdenRice wrote:By Leninist and Trotskyite, I don't mean people who actually follow the political economy of either of those thinkers. I am referring to certain tactics adopted by Leninst and Trotskyite parties in the US in the 1930s --

Thanks for making that important distinction. Though the tactics remind me most of a more recent example: LaRouche.

To the larger question, I think it's a co-option of the Left's latest disenchantment with a Democratic administration. Co-option by who, that's undetermined.

Jeff wrote:To the larger question, I think it's a co-option of the Left's latest disenchantment with a Democratic administration. Co-option by who, that's undetermined.

Regardless of whom is trying to co-opt (and i'm militantly agnostic on that--it's the same toxicity whatever the origin), one must admit the Obomb'em regime has created the disillusionment among the DP base that makes for the opportunity to do so. And as the DP has no one but themselves (and, of course, K-Street) to blame, they hardly deserve anyone's sympathies.

My apologies Jeff - as you can probably tell we've gotten together before.

It won't happen again.

Jeff wrote:DancingBear, you were making a decent argument before the ad hominem. Please don't go personal.

HamdenRice wrote:I haven't been checking in here lately, but I just came across the thread about my deleted post at DU sort of making fun of the implosion of PI.

But I think there is a bigger issue here: Why have the tactics of Leninist and Trotskyite cults returned to the left sphere?

Hi HamdenRice,

would you mind fixing the typo in your thread title?

i believe the proper spelling is:

Why the return of Trotskyite and Lennonist "Cults".?

thanks,
ie

Well Dancing Bear, thanks for proving my point.

I would like everyone to examine the kind of reasoning DB displays, because it pretty much demonstrates what has been happening.

What actually is the "Democratic Party"? Is it Rahm Emanuel and the DLC? Or is it the slightly progressive, slightly sleezy local district leader in my neighborhood? Or is it Dennis Kucinich? Is it Barak Obama? Is it my GF's union, the SEIU? Is it me because I reliably vote Democratic?

Any sane person who is grounded in reality would look at it and see it's an organization comprised of many parts at many levels -- presidential, congressional, federal, state and local. Whatever the DLC wants, it hardly controls what every single person who identifies as a Democrat believes. The main people who think the way you do are authoritarian leftists who have a bizarre Manichean view of the world.

I've written a lot about 9/11 in the 9/11 Forum of DU, so I'm not one to say that organizations or government organs can't be hijacked. But the idea that the Democratic Party is only a corporate tool, is frankly insane.

I learned politics mostly in South Africa in the late 1980s when the main political party was something called the United Democratic Front. It was to my friends maddeningly diverse because it wasn't actually a party, but a party of parties, or a party or organizations. I see the Democratic Party, or for that matter, the Democratic Socialists of America, as being similar. Sometimes the UDF was called not a party, but a "plane of struggle" -- a vehicle in which political alliances was made. It's where majorities are put together -- majorities that are comprised of progressive trade unionists, liberal minded corporate executives, disenchanged securocrats (think Gary Sick), hopeful next bubble entrepreneurs (think green energy), and lots of regular people who know the Repugs have nothing to offer them.

You, by contrast, have come to the lunatic belief that every single person who does not subscribe to exactly your point of view is some sort of corporate whore. That's why you will never amount to anything of importance in the political sphere, and will confine yourself to posting on crazy, increasingly narrow ideological websites like PI.

Jeff,

You're right. LaRouche is the model -- and I can think of some others. Why is it that DU for example is also swamped with "useful idiots" who believe Ron Paul has the answer to our economic problems?

Hey Hamden do you get paid by the Democratic party in some capacity?

Some people have speculated upon this and perhaps you can clear this matter up.

Ah Hamden,

Thanks for sticking to the script.

Yes, that good 'ol Democratic Party certainly is just a myriad of all kinds of views, isn't it? Of course, none of them matter once the vote is over, but the charade seems to work every two/four years, so why muck it up? Heck, I'll bet the next Presidential election will be another "us vs. them" special now, won't it?

It is a herculean effort, I know, to try and carry water for a party that spills it like, well, water, but you've managed to dust off all the talking points in one fell swoop (post?) so as not to have to repeat yourself. Let's review them, shall we?

"Any sane person who is grounded in reality would look at it and see it's an organization comprised of many parts at many levels -- presidential, congressional, federal, state and local. Whatever the DLC wants, it hardly controls what every single person who identifies as a Democrat believes. The main people who think the way you do are authoritarian leftists who have a bizarre Manichean view of the world."

Oh look! We're a melting pot! Good grief, THAT'S all you got? We've got two illegal wars, banks being handed welfare checks, healthcare "reform" that's laughable and you're actually going try and use the "authoritarian leftist" jive??? That's a knee-slapper there, as Andy would say. Please, make the case that the "true progressives" are going to hold Obama's feet to the fire, but let me get a towel first 'cause I'll probably wet myself from laughter.

"But the idea that the Democratic Party is only a corporate tool, is frankly insane".

Who is driving the health care debate? Ever check to see pharma donations? Does the name Geitner ring a bell? Emanuel? No, you're right Hamden, the Democratic Party is for "the people." Gosh, all of us long-time Dems who bolted the party are soooo wrong.

"It's where majorities are put together -- majorities that are comprised of progressive trade unionists, liberal minded corporate executives, disenchanged securocrats (think Gary Sick), hopeful next bubble entrepreneurs (think green energy), and lots of regular people who know the Repugs have nothing to offer them."

I'll let somebody else have fun with this one, although staking your "creds" with regard to experience is akin to Cheney saying he knows best because he'd been in government before.

Anytime you'd like to "enlighten" us as to what the dems have to offer, feel free. I'm always up for a chuckle or two, although I'm guessing we're talking guffaws if you actually try and make a case.

"You, by contrast, have come to the lunatic belief that every single person who does not subscribe to exactly your point of view is some sort of corporate whore.

Not all, just the majority. Get your facts straight.

"That's why you will never amount to anything of importance in the political sphere, and will confine yourself to posting on crazy, increasingly narrow ideological websites like PI"

Hee hee, if you ONLY knew what I was in a previous life, and isn't being important in politics kind of like being the loudest voice at an ASL convention?

Oh, and BTW I've been banned from PI (as have many others) for taking them to task over their dogmatic and intolerant viewpoints.

One last thing, then I'll let you run - if DU is not an increasingly narrow ideological websites could you tell me what it is? The damn place should have a cheerleader as a logo.

HamdenRice wrote:Well Dancing Bear, thanks for proving my point.

I would like everyone to examine the kind of reasoning DB displays, because it pretty much demonstrates what has been happening.

What actually is the "Democratic Party"? Is it Rahm Emanuel and the DLC? Or is it the slightly progressive, slightly sleezy local district leader in my neighborhood? Or is it Dennis Kucinich? Is it Barak Obama? Is it my GF's union, the SEIU? Is it me because I reliably vote Democratic?

Any sane person who is grounded in reality would look at it and see it's an organization comprised of many parts at many levels -- presidential, congressional, federal, state and local. Whatever the DLC wants, it hardly controls what every single person who identifies as a Democrat believes. The main people who think the way you do are authoritarian leftists who have a bizarre Manichean view of the world.

I've written a lot about 9/11 in the 9/11 Forum of DU, so I'm not one to say that organizations or government organs can't be hijacked. But the idea that the Democratic Party is only a corporate tool, is frankly insane.

I learned politics mostly in South Africa in the late 1980s when the main political party was something called the United Democratic Front. It was to my friends maddeningly diverse because it wasn't actually a party, but a party of parties, or a party or organizations. I see the Democratic Party, or for that matter, the Democratic Socialists of America, as being similar. Sometimes the UDF was called not a party, but a "plane of struggle" -- a vehicle in which political alliances was made. It's where majorities are put together -- majorities that are comprised of progressive trade unionists, liberal minded corporate executives, disenchanged securocrats (think Gary Sick), hopeful next bubble entrepreneurs (think green energy), and lots of regular people who know the Repugs have nothing to offer them.

You, by contrast, have come to the lunatic belief that every single person who does not subscribe to exactly your point of view is some sort of corporate whore. That's why you will never amount to anything of importance in the political sphere, and will confine yourself to posting on crazy, increasingly narrow ideological websites like PI.