Archive for February, 2011

America does have a Proletariat Class

Monday, February 28th, 2011

Some people say that there is no American working class because even lower and middle class Americans out-earn people from the third world. I strongly disagree. Even inexpensive areas in America are more expensive to live in than India or Russia. Even Pittsburgh and Phoenix are going to have higher rents than a third world city. So while the American middle class makes more money, the American middle class has more expenses.

Therefore the argument that a proletariat does not exist in America, because even the middle class makes money, is a false argument. It does not consider the cost of living. When you consider the cost of living, there are class distinctions in America. Marx (as far as I know) did not write much about cost of living as compared to wages, but I would like to see what he has written if he did.

Someone who makes $40,000 in India is probably set for life. Someone who makes $40,000 in New York City is probably renting a room in an outer borough or living in Jersey because he/she cannot afford to live where he/she works.

Truth about events in Libya

Monday, February 28th, 2011

Contrary to disinformation from the international bourgeois media and the despotic Arab monarchs e.g. al-Jazeera, here is an honest report about events in Libya from Xinhua:

Tripoli, the capital of Libya with about three million population still remains peaceful under the control of Muammar Gaddafi, 12 days after the north African country plunged into turmoil.

Hundreds of Gaddafi’s supporters held demonstrations in the weekend in downtown’s Green square, backing the iron-handed leader. “People love Gaddafi,” they shouted. Meanwhile they also slammed some Arab media for “distorting the information.”

Local residents still enjoy water pipes, coffee and warm sunshine in the roadside coffee bars. “We’re in progress, but it needs time, step by step,” Makkhazoo, a retired Libyan diplomat told Xinhua.

“My life has been disturbed, they told me to stay at home in the evenings,” a German woman who teaches Germany in Tripoli said. Although the city is under heavy guard of the troops loyal to Gaddafi, gunfire can be heard from time to time at night.

Gaddafi’s son Seif al-Islam launched a media campaign on Thursday, inviting the international media to Tripoli to report about “the truth in the city.”

“You can go anywhere to see anything you want to see,” a media official said.

Gadafi also ordered to give each family 500 Libyan dinars ( about 400 U.S. dollars) to improve people’s life, the state radio said on Sunday.

The authority even allowed foreign reporters to visit the Zawiya city on Sunday, some 40 km west of Tripoli. The city reportedly has witnessed heavy clashes between Gaddafi’s troops and anti-government protestors.

The highway heading to Zawiya is strongly occupied with military forces, policemen and some armed men in plain clothes and with their faces masked. Vehicles have to pass at least five checkpoints to reach the restive city.

The central part of Zawiya has been controlled by anti- government protesters after clashes Thursday and Friday. When about 50 foreign reporters arrived in the area, some 300 protestors gathered in the street, waving weapons and chanting slogans as “Game over Gaddafi,” “Gaddafi get out,” and “Free Libya. ”

“We protested in peace before, we don’t want to fight with anybody, we just want peace,” Abulgasem, a lecturer in Zawiya university said.

However, the reporters saw a mass demonstration supporting Gaddafi in a nearby district al-Harsha, attended by hundreds of people including women and children. “We don’t want two Libyas, we want one,” a middle aged woman yelled, referring to the unrest that might split the country.

On the way back to Tripoli, nearly 1,000 pro-Gaddafi supporters, mostly young people, blocked the traffic and stopped the journalists, “All people support Gaddafi,” the young man chanted, waving Libya national flags and Gaddafi’s “Green Book.”

“I don’t like the things happened in Benghazi, we can’t live without Gaddafi,” a man holding his baby daughter told Xinhua.

Some Libyans did not want to involve themselves in any kind of struggle. “I just want to live my life in stability, with or without Gaddafi,” Salah, a driver told Xinhua reporters. (one U.S dollars equals to about 1.25 dinar)

And this is from the Russian web site rosbalt.ru via Mathaba.net

Part of the Belarussian citizens working in Libya before the riot, is not going to leave this country. According to them, the situation in Tripoli and Ghadames, where they live, is normal,  shops are open, as are kindergartens and schools, including mobile communications and the Internet, reports TUT.by.

TUT.by was able to talk on Skype with the Belarussian citizen Julia, who is now in Tripoli with her child. According to Julia, February 23, she could not go out of Libya to Moscow, after waiting for a plane with a baby in the afternoon until three in the morning.

“The aircraft they have did not pick us up, people were waiting in the street [due to the crowd in the small airport of Tripoli], in the end they just turned around and left” – says a friend of Julie. — “But they say the situation there (in Tripoli) is stabilized, they have [reconnected] mobile communications, the Internet, have opened even gardens.

Julia herself in correspondence with the editors on February 24 said that she no longer wants to leave, but a sleepless night in anticipation of an aircraft wasn’t a great memory. “All is calm. I can not hear shots. The Belarussian embassy phoned me last night. They, too, confirmed that all is quiet. And they should know even better because they are in the middle of the city.”

Julia does not want to leave and is not going. “Listening to the news, you would think Tripoli is in ruins. — There was a heated situation previously in the city center, but without air attacks on civilians (as was claimed by foreign media), and now everything is fine! Media have created particular confusion in this situation! Particularly the channel Al-Jazeera!”

The Belarusian portal was also able to connect via Skype with Ghadames. A citizen of the Republic of Belarus, who lives there, said that “if the situation does not deteriorate, the majority of Belarussians would like to stay here.” According to her, all is quiet in Ghadames: “Shops are open, no one shoots. In connection with such events we are watching for our safety in the dark trying not to go out in the dark just in case. The local population (who have to communicate) to us is normal.

On Libya

Thursday, February 24th, 2011

With the victory of the people’s uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia and the ongoing democratic movements in Yemen, Bahrain, and elsewhere, imperialist forces and their reactionary agents throughout the Middle East have been exploiting this revolutionary atmosphere in order to stir anti-democratic and counter-revolutionary revolts against progressive countries in the region. Reactionary forces such as Iran’s anti-government opposition have been trying to hijack the revolutionary movement for their own nefarious ends, with slogans like “Mubarak, Ben Ali, now it’s time for Sayed Ali,”

The counter-revolutionaries in Libya enjoy the support of all levels of the bourgeois political spectrum, as well as revisionist “socialists”, anarchists,  and other opportunistic sections of the Left. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page calls on the U.S. Government to “bomb their airfields”, while commentaries published by the ultra-liberal Guardian are seething with anti-Libyan and anti-Gaddafi hatred. One commentary published by the Guardian is written by an anti-revolutionary emigre, whose piece amounts to a vicious assault on the legacy of the Libyan Revolution, claiming that the Libyan people had  been reduced to “near beggars”, despite the concrete progress Libya has made in improving the standard of living. None of these forces can possibly support a genuine revolutionary movement. Indeed, the people they are cheering have been sporting the monarchist rag that symoblizes the horrible monarchy that ruled Libya at the behest of imperialism during the 1950s and 1960s, which was wiped out in September 1969 with virtually no struggle on behalf of the king. By contrast, the Libyan Government today commands mass popular support who are prepared to fight and die for the Al-Fateh Revolution. The Jamahiriya TV channel has demonstrated mass popular support for the Revolution Tripoli.

The class character of this revolt is fundamentally reactionary. It is not led by the working-class i.e. the most revolutionary of all social groups, but by the bourgeoisie. In the city of Benghazi, the rebels have formed a “people’s committee” that is composed of “judges, lawyers, and other professionals” , in stark contrast to how the working-class was the driving force of revolutionary events in Egypt. The imperialists and local bourgeoisie have enlisted terrorists, hooligans, and criminals to unleash a reign of terror in the country. In particular, the rebels captured and hanged two policemen, and also murdered the director of a hospital, whose corpse showed heavy signs of torture. Understandably, the Libyan revolutionary forces have fought back, and the resulting clashes have so far left 111 soldiers and 189 civilians killed, demonstrating that the security forces have acted in a proportionate and acceptable manner. Yet, the international bourgeois media has been irresponsible and unreliable with its dishonest reporting about a “bloodbath” in the country, quoting mouthpieces of the counter-revolution with slanderous claims about black African death squads and the use of war planes on civilians. Bourgeois journalists are not actually on the ground these absurd allegations. Those guilty of this outright propaganda warfare against Libya include the BBC, al-Jazeera, and other organs that are de facto controlled by imperialist and corrupt oligarchic regimes. The monstrous slanders about the Colonel leaving the country for Latin America like some Nazi fugitive are just the tip of the iceberg of the systematic campaign to misrepresent events in the country, similar to the bogus “Green Revolution” in Iran in 2009. As Venezuela’s ambassador to Tripoli has shown, the media is lying about events by projecting week-old images and pretending that they are occurring today. He states that there has been no loss of life in Tripoli for the past several days, a city that has been “totally calm”.

In addition to bourgeois elements, traitorous and opportunist sections of the Libyan regime have defected, and are assisting the rebellion in what basically amounts to an attempted coup d’etat. The fact that the rebels have taken control of some areas of Libya obviously shows military sophistication with the involvement of top-ranking figures in the security establishment who have defected. The rebels have claimed to form a so-called “interim government” in Benghazi that is led by traitors who formerly served the Revolutionary Government in Tripoli.

The media narrative about Libya with its outright lies and fabrications intends to demonize the Libyan Government and turn global public opinion against Libya, paving the way for regime change and possible military aggression. The “bloodbath” narrative follows similar fabrications from the past, such as the CIA-controlled media’s reproting about the imaginary Timisoara “massacre” Romania in 1989 that supposedly left thousands of people killed. There were also the the Iraqi incubators in the lead-up to the aggression against Iraq in the early 90s and the stories about the non-existent mass graves in Kosovo. With Fidel Castro’s warning about an impending invasion of the NATO countries for the purpose of looting Libya’s oil and effectively recolonizing the country, there must be firm criticism of the anti-Libyan propaganda campaign.

Colonel Gaddafi is the Leader of the Great al-Fateh Revolution, the country’s source for guidance.He serves the revolution and the people, who through the freely-elected popular committees, people’s congresses, and trade unions exercise democratic power in the country. In his capacity as Leader of the Revolution, he has been a staunch fighter for peace and social progress not only in Libya, but around the world.  His Revolution for forty years has actually been committed to realizing the people’s needs with its tasks of eliminating poverty and injustice in Libya. His Green Book is a guide for genuine democracy for peoples of the developing world. The September Uprising of 1969 in Libya goes down as one of the greatest liberating processes in the Arab lands, one that faithfully followed in the footsteps of the 1952 Revolution in Egypt. Similar to President Nasser, Colonel Gaddafi has long championed the unity of all Arabs. Unlike other countries throughout the world, Colonel Gaddafi and his country’s government stood up to and successfully resisted the flagrant U.S. aggression against Libya during the 1980s, thereby solidifying the country’s independence. Because Colonel Gaddafi and his government in the 1970s brought Libyan oil under the ownership of the Libyan people, the country has experienced a golden age, characterized by impressive progress in all spheres of life, including economic development, social welfare, and an increase in political participation. The predominantly desert country enjoys agricultural independence, no inflation, and a sophisticated infrastructure with its advanced roads, etc. There is no poverty in the country, as the people are protected by generous housing and food subsidies. Tens of billions of dinars have been spent for raising the people’s standard of living, as well as development fields, the reclamation of millions of acres of farmland, and so on. In particular, the country successfully completed the Great River project, which turned millions of acres of land into arable lands, providing the people with food and job opportunities. All of this unacceptable to the imperialism, who desire to convert Libya into another Iraq.

In such a circumstance, Col. Gaddafi and his comrades have no choice but to use all force necessary to destroy the rebellion. What must happen next is the conversion of Tripoli into an armed camp and mobilize all forces for victory. Guerrilla units should be formed in the enemy’s rear.

Leader Gaddafi demonstrated in a brilliant speech that the people are on the side of the Revolution and will deal a crushing blow to the enemies. He correctly stated, “I have not yet ordered the use of force, not yet ordered one bullet to be fired … when I do, everything will burn.” He concluded that the cowards and traitors who are leading the rebellion will fail, as those who control Libya will be “The Libyan people and the popular revolution”

By contrast, the Libyan Government today commands mass popular support who are prepared to fight and die for the Al-Fateh Revolution. I tuned into to the Jamahiriya TV channel, and Tripoli and other parts of Libya were shown to be in a state calm, with massive show of support for Colonel Gaddafi.

Why I hate Globalism

Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011

From a craigslist advertisement (I won’t link to it)

We are looking for a competent web designer who is creative and has a good work ethic. Prima Donnas’ need not apply. While we value the work that you do, we are in business to offer a competitive price to our clients and we are not willing to spend $100 per hour for domestic web designing. While we would very much like to keep this work within the USA, please remember that you are competing against very talented designers and programmers from India, China, Romania and Russia (and even South America). I only write this because for every job posting I get replies from local people stating their fees to be $80-$100 per hour while at the same time I get someone in India quoting $4 per hour. I have yet to hire anyone outside of the US but keep this in mind when listing your working price. I don’t have time to play a wage game of going back and forth to decide a price. Please give me a reasonable rate up front and I will be VERY happy to employ/contract domestically.


Capitalism is great.

Revisiting : ties between Marxism and Islam against Imperialsm

Monday, February 21st, 2011

The original Article
Two years ago, Besoshvilli wrote an article about the ties between Marxism-Leninism and Islam and I was not sure how to approach it as my understanding of Marxism was only soundbites. I had never seriously read Marx.

I have reflected.

I think I am now at the point where I am willing to support political collaboration (I must be careful what I say!) with “extreme” Muslims as a tactic, but not as an objective. My end objective unashamedly is tied to secularism as a matter of principle, now and forever. But I am not opposed to building coalitions against imperialism that include factions that otherwise have worldviews that I would not be happy with. The fact is that the Islamic world is strong enough to be a menace to the liberal imperialists, but not strong enough to defeat everything secular. It is because of that intermediate level of strength that an alliance is possible. If “hardcore” Muslims were actually capable of taking over the world and imposing Sharia Law (which they are not), then such an alliance would be foolish if one considers himself/herself to be tied to other systems of philosophy such as Marxism or Nationalism.

Criticism of Israel vs. Judeo-Obsessivism

Saturday, February 19th, 2011

Believe it or not, the issues about the Jewish people and Israel and how to properly approach them are something that I debate myself about a lot. With so many misguided people passionately attacking the issue of Israel coming from multiple angles, it is difficult to formulate a correct stance that is based on logic instead of emotion. I believe I am achieving something that is closer to the correct stance.

To criticize Israel, I think one should acknowledge a few things:
-Before American imperialism, British imperialists found Zionism useful.
-Before American imperialism, Josef Stalin for a while found Red Zionism to be useful (he later changed his mind).
-Nazi Germany played a major role in accelerating Zionism.
-Jewish activism is not the sole reason why America acts behind Israel. Another reason is Christian Zionism. Another reason is opposition to Islam. The most important reason is capitalism.
-Hardcore Islamic states are not capitalist friendly. For this reason, America wants to get rid of them. The philosophical reasoning for their opposition to American capitalism is completely different than a secular reasoning. Hardcore Muslims oppose American style capitalism because they view themselves as fighting against the modern world. Marxists oppose capitalism because they believe it exploits the working class. The logic of secular opposition and religious opposition to capitalism is different, but America does not like anyone who opposes liberal capitalism, whether feudalistic or socialistic.
-American imperialists are super-capitalists who launch wars both for immediate profit and for converting other countries to capitalism. Israel, at the end of a day, is a capitalist country. At the end of the day, Israel assimilates (some) Arab citizens if they are useful to capitalism.

After you realize this, I think you can, in a smaller way, attack Israel for being belligerent. But I still maintain that people who elevate the Jewish question as high as they do are wrong. I still maintain that many Zionists may have had good intentions, and many individual Jews go to Israel because they think they can find a job there and it is convenient.

Socialism and the Immigration Question

Friday, February 18th, 2011

When it comes to immigration, it’s hard to have an opinion that’s out of line with the thinking of liberal bourgeoisie WITHOUT being labeled A) racist, B) reactionary, C) xenophobe, or D) all of the above. Furthermore, it’s even harder to have the discussion while trying to remove it from the context of one’s own country, and look at immigration for what it really is – a question of sustainable economic and social policy.

At its very core, immigration can be best understood as population policy. As such, if stripped of all ideals, slogans and associated philosophies, it often times boils down to a matter of resources, though certainly not entirely to the exclusion of other matters. The use of publicly available resources, whether natural or synthetic, human or material, etc. is not without limitations, costs and consequences. An open-door immigration policy is thus population policy out of control.

The resource question in regards to immigration is further obfuscated in liberal capitalist countries like the United States, where resources are utilized and exploited by the private ownership classes. In such cases, immigration boils down to economics, but seen on an entirely different plane. For the capitalist, waves of immigrants are sources for both exploitable labor and consumers in the market.

Further complicating this matter still remains the issue of the State, and its role in society. In the United States, the Federal government assumes largely an administrative/executive role, one largely focused on maintaining the economic and social status quo for the benefit of the ownership class. Whereas in other countries, contemporary and historic, the State has assumed a more active, leading role in directing and shaping society.

But for post-capitalist societies, whereupon the complete socialization of the means of production and resources has occurred,  immigration will not be a matter of simply allowing for a broader consumer market or a source of cheap labor. Within such societies, the people become a completely socialized community– whereby individual members are educated to see themselves and dedicate their lives for the collective good. Out-of-control immigration policies once again revert back to the question of resource. In economies structured on the principal, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work,” society has a vested interest in maintaining  the use of public resources (including services and goods) for dedicated and committed members of the community.

While the possibility of immigrants becoming ideologically suitable and contributing members of the community is certainly  not excluded, as a general approach, immigration policy in a socialist society should be highly selective and exclusionary. Not only is this necessary for the required social, political, and cultural cohesion to drive society towards its inevitable and historical ends; but, it’s also a genuine matter of security.

For these very reasons, methods of domestic restrictions must also be implemented. Citizens who refuse to work and contribute must not receive the benefits of the collectivist society. Habitual criminals, asocial types, members of the former exploiting class and political enemies must be isolated from the community and removed in order to neutralize the myriad threats they pose.

By the numbers…

Tuesday, February 15th, 2011

A breakdown of casualties in occupied Afghanistan

2010 represented the deadliest year on record for US and NATO-led foreign occupation troops in war-torn Afghanistan.

Total Casualties: 711 – including (499 American), (103 British), (109 ‘other’). This represents a 36.46% increase over the total number of casualties among ALL NATO-led ISAF participants in 2009!

Deaths by improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were also up in 2010. In 2009, there were approximately 275 NATO casualties attributed to IEDs – 60.98% of all deaths. In 2010, this number rose to 368, even though they constituted slightly less of the overall cause of death (58.41%).

June was the deadliest month on record for 2010 – with 103 casualties recorded. This also made it the deadliest month at any time since the US-led invasion in 2001. June also saw the influx of an additional 30,000 US troops to occupied Afghanistan as part of US President Barack Obama’s plans to escalate the war.

In the nine years since the US invaded Afghanistan with the objective of “neutralizing ‘radical’ Islam,’ Afghanistan has suffered tremendously at the hands of NATO and the American-led foreign occupation force, with casualties conservatively estimated at several hundred thousand, not including those displaced, maimed, tortured or otherwise devastated at the hands of the foreign aggressor.

Those who don’t get the class question often over-state the jewish question

Monday, February 14th, 2011

People who do not get the fact that imperialism, immigration and warfare have ties to economics are likely to instead focus on conspiracy theories in which Jewish individuals who advocate these things are “named.” (of course, Jews are only 2% of the population).

Even with regards to colonialism in Israel, there is an economic motive. people are poor, but they are told they can get access to wealth if they go to Israel. When the interests of zionism and corporatism conflict, corporatism always wins. Kahane was banned for that exact reason. Non-Jewish citizens still exist in Israel, and part of the motive may be the importance of an individual to the economy. “Freedom” (or free markets) is encouraged in occupied American nations, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, for the exact same reason. Spreading freedom means spreading capitalism.

That being said, going from the nile to the euphrates, and sending every single Jew to Israel, is not a good idea in my opinion.

discuss on forum : The link

Facebook – Doing what Vbulletins Don’t

Monday, February 14th, 2011

Many of the posters associated with this website used to post on big vbulletin forums. These forums were supposed to allow people to speak controversial viewpoints (anonymously). They were advertised as free speech forums. However it seems that these forums became “free ego” forums where the moderators were free to backstab their own members. Where people would “troll” and bait people just to get a reaction. Where people would harass people in real life from the comfort of their anonymity (until I hacked them all and outed their identities) and staff members would give out high fives to these cowards.

Facebook used to censor people. It would frequently ban people for posting views that are too extreme. Facebook used to be limited to college students, but I was “down from the start” because I joined while I was in college. Actually, the real truth is that a few friends set up the account for me and impersonated me for a few days, but then they handed it over to me.

Now facebook has grown. But I also noticed that facebook really does not ban people for political opinions anymore. Facebook has made the vbulletins irrelevant. Why post with a bunch of anonymous cowards and egotistical moderators, when you can post in a giant network, control who your friends are and actually have real free speech? The free speech on facebook is much improved.

Our integration with facebook is a sound idea. It is more socially acceptable to use your real name on a forum which has a social networking theme then it is to use it on a forum that appears to not be social networking.

It used to sort of frustrate me that I had to go to forums that were run by a lot of hostile people to have free speech. But I really do not need these forums anymore. Now facebook does everything they used to do and it does it better.

I am not afraid to post under my real name. I dislike having my name “outted” in a social situation where everyone else is anonymous. You do not blog under your real name and you do not post on a forum where everyone else is anonymous under your real name. But it is okay to social network under your real name.

My comments are frequently “liked” (it is a way to say you agree with a post). I am received on facebook more as I am in real life then I am among two-faced vbulletin cowards. The cowards who stalk the vbulletin forums will be weeded out of facebook.

I am glad that facebook is allowing real free speech and real social networking, so that I do not have to go to shady places to express my views.

May the real defeat the fake.

Free media productions is about the real. Shady vbulletins are about the fake.

SEO Powered By SEOPressor