Archive for the ‘U.S. politics’ Category

Generational divide: overreaction to the 1970s

April 16, 2010

We can now see that the whole political trajectory of the “RCP” and the left-wing of parasitism took shape under the stress of two types of events and a background of white nationalism. One type of event was the general FBI/COINTELPRO repression of the political movements. In this we can count a struggle such as Wounded Knee. Another event was the Iranian Revolution of 1979, which had a strong Maoist component but ended up going Islamic.

Prior to the Iranian Revolution’s solidifying as Islamic, the one thing the “RCP” did right was to agitate against the U.$. reaction to the “hostage crisis” in Iran that dogged Carter. At the time, the Amerikan public was in a war-mongering mood against Iran.

Following the decisive defeat of Maoist forces in Iran, the “RCP” overreacted and went in a permanent Trotskyist direction. Combined with the blows from the FBI, there was a deadly brew arising in the early 1980s.

Both the COINTELPRO and Iran struggles caused an overreaction favoring the CIA. MIM has pointed out that it is the CIA with the capabilities to rot out a revolution from within and in that sense it is more dangerous than any police organization. An arrest and railroad charge will be seen by the people, but some of what the CIA does in diplomacy and various covert operations is difficult for the people to see.

The FBI activities also made it “cool” to side with the mafia. The whole approach where every extortion, every threat, every violation of privacy is called “free speech” is mafia-inspired.

After the Maoist defeat including repression of Maoists in Iran, the Amerikan Maoists did not maintain united front with Iran against U.$. imperialism. Articles paid lip service to opposing war, while in action, the organization synchronized with the neo-conservatives. The “RCP” also built fraternal ties with an organization openly favoring U.$. invasion of Iran.

Trotskyism has always had a bigger emphasis on party-building than the united front and so it was in the direction of Trotskyism that “RCP” lip service articles turned, most notably in “Conquer the World.”

On the surface, it may seem to activists that the “RCP” did the right thing by leaning to the CIA and mafia side against the FBI. Yet it all depends on how far that tactical approach goes, and unfortunately, the “RCP” turned it into a strategy.

Not in lip service in its newspaper, but in deeds, the “RCP” was by the late 1990s in lockstep with imperialists preparing war in Iraq and Afghanistan, particularly the neo-conservatives who like the “RCP” now placed absolutist value on U.$. gender culture being superior to Islamic gender culture.

The mafia has an interest in selling weapons in war-created black markets and the CIA has an interest in penetrating everywhere. Yet the “RCP” had no difficulty joining in counter-terrorism operations against MIM, lynching to support the coming Afghan war.

Careful study of the Che-Libs will show the “RCP” attacking MIM for the benefit of cops. More importantly, activists have to open their minds to the differing interests of the mafia and CIA. If one puts all the focus on the FBI, it boils down to self-preservation of the left-wing of parasitism only.

Staying free of the FBI and its repression is not a victory if the cost is to help the CIA, mafia and neo-conservatives with their war preparations.


Eric Holder

April 16, 2010

Attorney General Eric Holder’s appearance April 14 2010 before the Senate Judiciary Committee has produced much discussion. Most assuredly off-base is the “Washington Post” coverage(1) which made it sound like Holder had a tough time of it.

The “Wall Street Journal” says the Obama administration has those who would like to put the Gitmo prisoners on civilian trial to show that there was torture of those prisoners.(2) At the same time, I have argued the Democrats fear the coverage of these trials also, because Obama took over Bush Jr.’s political debts in connection to Gitmo. If I were not correct, the Defense Intelligence Agency would have answered a certain FOIA two or three years ago.

Eric Holder was Deputy Attorney General from 1997 to 2001 in the Bill Clinton administration. Since it was in that period that I saw events leading up to 9/11, it can’t be said I have no conflict with him. Nor am I letting him off the hook for various attorneys who have no standards and have not done their jobs.


Tea Party demographics

April 15, 2010

Two polls on the Tea Party movement that flatly contradict each other have appeared in the liberal Democratic press. A Gallup poll(1) found no difference between the Tea Party movement and the general public in terms of education and age distribution, while the New York Times/CBS(2) paints a picture of the Tea Party movement as much older and much better educated than the general public.

If we take an average of the Gallup and New York Times/CBS polls, then the Tea Party movement is still above average in education level and age. The “New York Times” is claiming that the 18% of the public in the Tea Party movement is 75% from the over 45 category.

The older age reputed by the “New York Times” is a finding that cuts two ways. By virtue of being older, it becomes redundant to say that the Tea Party movement is more white, because older age groups have smaller minority proportions than younger generations. This becomes important to point out because the Gallup poll actually suggests the opposite of what the papers have emphasized on race.

Combined, the two polls suggest that if the Republican Party managed to field candidates that attracted demographics like the Tea Party, the Democrats would be thrashed handily in 2010 elections. Yes, 6% Black is under-representation of Blacks as Gallup says, but less so in older age groups and compared with past Republican vote getting efforts.

While past Republican efforts to attract Black votes have achieved single digit success, the 6% figure translates to approximately 30% of all Black votes if extended nationally in a close election as recent elections have been. The Democratic Party would not be able to afford that high a defection rate of Black votes, not to mention better educated whites.

The image of the Tea Party movement as southern Bubba is probably not correct. Quite the contrary, if the “New York Times” is correct, it could be the Democrats are disproportionately hillbilly.

Then too, we have to ask whether the Tea Party movement is disproportionately ’60s generation. Perhaps it is just that one generation produces all the social movements.

2. New York Times 15Apr2010, p. a19.

Inflection point: when the Right becomes Left and vice-versa

April 13, 2010

We’re seeing many signs of ferment in public political discussion. “Fox News” just published a piece which will tend to show Amerikkkans that they are in the top 10% of the world by class; even though, that’s not what “Fox News” says it is doing. “Fox News” endeavors to show that the U.S. government spends more than people think, even excluding military spending.

“Most of Europe is thought to have much larger governments than the United States.

Unfortunately, this isn’t true any more. Even after adjusting for differences in the cost of living and taking into account how many people live in the country, total U.S. government spending — at all levels of government — accounts for more real resources
per capita than 95 percent of the countries in the world. In fact, 166 out of 175 countries have governments that spend less money than the United States [click here for Table 1]. Our government spends 276 percent more than is spent by the average government of another country around the world. That comes out to about $17,400 per person living in the United States — almost $70,000 for a family of four.

Sweden’s famous ‘welfare state’ spends only about 8.6 percent more per capita than the United States.”(1)

John Lott is definitely barking up the right tree. He also says 93% of countries spend less per capita on non-defense expenditures.

Even if some details prove wrong, Lott is asking the right questions, so the left-wing of parasitism should check it out. The basic point is that cross-national variation in class is where class struggle really occurs. Everything within U.$. borders is really just intra-bourgeois variation.

People have said MIM is academic, but the people like Avakian and others saying MIM’s third cardinal does not matter deserve no trust. Now the Obama administration is considering cutting AIDS spending in Africa.(2) George W. Bush tripled African AIDS spending. Let’s say that again: George W. Bush tripled AIDS spending in Africa. Now it’s $7 billion a year.

True conservatives support charity over government spending abroad, but MIM says if we are going to be social-democratic it should be for the world’s true poor. We ask when it is that the social workers, hospital workers and teachers are going to realize that when they increase government spending here in the united $tates, that means less for money abroad and more deficit spending draining loans from abroad.

In other words, people opposing MIM do so for nationalist reasons: they are too loyal to Amerikans. There is a relative economic gap within the United $tates and any other country, but the relative economic gap within the United $tates is unimportant compared with the global gap. The left-wing of parasitism putting the focus on the internal relative question is not taking up corporatism by accident: it’s exactly where Democratic Party politics have been leading all these years of being in denial of the MIM thesis.

Lott has identified the culprits in resistance to MIM’s thought: all dependent on government funding–much of academia and of course political leaders on government salaries. They don’t want to admit that those with legal working rights in the united $tates are the plurality of the world’s bourgeoisie.

The underlying cause of the fermentation at the “Wall Street Journal” and “Fox News” is that people are starting to wake up and notice that the left-wing of parasitism was unable to rebut MIM in over 20 years on the question of white worker exploitation, which does not exist in the United $tates and the other Western imperialist countries.

Thank you to Ann Coulter for pointing to this Lott column. Most of the past 20 years, I skipped opinion writers of liberal or conservative variety, but I especially credit Ann Coulter and Maureen Dowd for pointing out more things than I used to give them credit for. They are prototypical corporate writers, but especially in their regard, I gave them too much blanket condemnation.

Now if we can go to the next step, and get Amerikans to see their global position and understand the class roots of why they always look down on Third World countries, always want to be social missionaries to those countries and don’t agree with them politically for their Islam or communism, we’d be making more headway. Along these lines, we need to see Republicans arise to oppose the Afghan, Pakistan and Iraq wars along with the occupations of Korea and Boricua and the military bases in all Third World countries. Yes to paying for AIDS medicine in Africa, no to counter-productive political, missionary and military activity rooted in class.


Andrew Stern

April 13, 2010

NPR is reporting today that Andrew Stern is resigning the presidency of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The reason is simple: the SEIU paid my lyncher number two to spy on me in my house. (An audible reference is made to this in a Harry Potter movie partly based on the Cheney vs. Ward Churchill phony struggle at the University of Colorado.)

On the day I purged her, the spy suddenly raised questions that Huey Newton already answered more definitively and transgressively before me. The reason she did so was to have blackmail scandal material against me when I answered as the Black Panthers before me did.
(It would only work in electoral politics, not with genuine Maoists.)

When Clinton and Obama were duking it out in the primaries, the SEIU was the first to endorse Obama. It’s not to say my lynchers would not have worked for Clinton had she won the primaries, but I just comment on the actual order things happened.


Supreme Court: Elena Kagan and foreshadowing

April 12, 2010

On the street I see foreshadowing of the Democrats’ desperate campaign struggle against me. The moving electronic banner in my town says approximately, “Hitler art mediocre but selling well.”

Others are discussing various aspects of my lyncher number one. People across the country are stepping into an imaginary zone. As explained before on this website, “bird” is a symbol of my arch-enemies. A local constructed a poster of a mutant rabbit chasing away all birds. The “Guardian” dredged up recall of a CIA bird similar to the kind of bird I’m in struggle with now. Also relevant is that Byrd is a Democratic Senator who is former KKK.

Before this struggle happens and the Democrats use the opportunity to release charges from the lynchers that I myself have not heard yet from the lynchers, I want to point out that that is exactly why the struggle is happening, to encourage lynching.

The Democrats had approximately five ways to put Kagan (or someone more “liberal” if she exists) on the court and they balked at all five.
1) Their media could have vetted out nonsense issues in my background to have me serve in office to monitor a Mideast peace agreement in 2008. I would have served in a Bush Jr., Obama and/or McCain administration. The media did not.
2) The Democrats in Congress in control since 2006 could have passed a resolution to instruct the Navy to lift the siege on Gaza. The Democrats did not: the peace talks got nowhere, so the cards from that are still in play.
3) The Democrats could have impeached Obama or his people could have started principled resignations to bring in Eric Holder or Jesse Jackson or ex-Gov. Wilder.
4) Obama could have traded with Senator Hatch scrapping the existing healthcare plan to get Kagan.
5) The Democrats could have granted me my first-stage rights as requested and I could have negotiated a deal for Kagan. By first-stage I mean the right to participate in politics without extortion and false accusations, the threshold I have failed to cross thanks to rumors.

Instead, as the “Guardian” correctly complained at the time of the December global warming conference, U.$. politics holds up the world. It’s not surprising, because Obama stepped repeatedly on Palestinian diplomatic cards of Annapolis during 2008. We should have known what was coming, that Obama did not bring any new cards to bear on the situation.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown told us back in the summer of 2009 “six more months” for the most significant issues of the world, blah, blah, blah. They were just buying time and in reality the Brits and Amerikans don’t care about diplomacy. I’m not going to list all the deals that the United $tates has turned down, but I have paid attention 5% this past three weeks, and if you did not see Obama-Clinton rebuked by Third World wimmin in at least three different countries, then you were paying even less attention than me.

The Democrats are going to use a vague sense of “women’s issues” to try to attack all their enemies. In reality, it’s about pornography quotas they have to meet.

In addition, they could run all their lynching that they have been salivating over the past five years in Aesopian language, rehearsing and still end up hoisted on just healthcare and abortion in November. As of now, the official story appears to be that the Senate will not likely filibuster. The mainstream Republican Party may just want a chance to run against a Kagan choice in November. On the other hand, Democrats are trying to intimidate those not in the Senate who might speak out anyway.


Healthcare fallout

April 12, 2010

There has been much fallout over the healthcare bill that Obama just passed.

  • Susan Estrich reported herself a more loyal Obamauton.
  • I presume the British have moved along with the Mexicans and Saudis. The “Guardian” was always pro-lynching, just less-so than other papers. Now it is pro-lynching, moreso.
  • Chomsky supported it.
  • Bart Stupak voted for it and then resigned from the House.
  • The “New York Times” is attacking the Pope with healthcare as the subtext.

    Obama basically made a number of domestic political promises to pass his healthcare bill, so the political situation changed somewhat.

    Once again, the Democrats sold some of their own “lesser evils” idea between two overwhelmingly bourgeois parties. MIM has argued there is no issue at the margin here. Our critics like Krugman at the “New York Times” would not be able to give meta-reasons for how one avoids choosing between tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum. MIM provides the answer of how to choose with class analysis.

    Which is better, Hitler as a leader or one of his military intelligence agents who favored including more nationalities as Aryan?

    Which is better, Hitler or Strasser? In fact, what the Democrats are ramming down our throat repeatedly is that Strasser is the lesser evil. That’s what Obama’s politics are and have been since before 9/11.

    Neither Strasser nor Hitler deserved support. Taking up principled, small-minority opposition was better.

    Contrary to reports on CBS, CNN and elsewhere, once factored correctly the healthcare plan may not be deficit neutral. With the Medicare break funded every year in practice the past 15 years, despite the overall Medicare law, the Obama plan runs in the red.

    What we should report for certain is that the threat we received just before the vote that someone would out Obama for the lynching was false. It was phrased in language insulting to us and did not happen. The point was likely to scare Congressional Democrats who have me under surveillance. Those afraid of losing their own power only want more lynching, because that’s how to win popularity here.

  • Peru

    April 12, 2010

    We received a recent attack from Obamauton number one on Peru. It’s again ad hominem, but in revealing ways. Obama is in better position now to put together what happened in Peru and his Obamauton perhaps makes a couple back-handed admissions.

    I did not apply for leadership of the “Revolutionary Communist Party” in 1983. I did apply for mere membership before founding the Maoist Internationalist Movement in 1984.

    However, had I been the leader of the “RCP” by at least the end of the 1980s, you can bet there would have been no labor aristocracy tourism to Peru: perhaps with an improved understanding of the true line, the revolution in Peru would have made it instead of being crushed by the Clinton-Kennedy machine.

    Had I been the leader of “RCP,” there would have been no crap about a bunch of “objectively revolutionary” white males up here just waiting for a chance to bust out for revolution. MIM consistently opposed “revolutionary” tourism with which secret services could provide the revolution bad company.

    The Avakianites were busy putting up posters “Revolution in the ’80s, Go for It!” It does no good that they made self-criticism on this point only to come back and spout ad hominem attacks on the same point now. The substance question is whether Peru’s revolution was sufficiently prepared for CIA infiltration efforts and would giving up on Amerikan “working class” revolution have improved Peruvian security. However, the Obamautons still have no position of substance on that.

    Ron Paul, the Tea Party and corporatism

    April 12, 2010

    The “Wall Street Journal”(1) reported that Tea Party founder Ron Paul has said Obama is not “socialist” but “corporatist.”

    We thank Ron Paul for making the change. We requested it here.

    The confusion arises because the fascist movement uses front-group infiltration tactics and U.$. ’60s radicals and ’80s post-modernists are too loopy to figure it out. In the 1930s, Hitler infiltrated the Social Democratic Party of Germany to take it over, as he steam-rolled the rest of society.

    Obama’s political mentors were 1960s radicals Bill Ayers, Michael Klonsky and Bob Avakian, who worked together as leaders in a minority faction for a little while in SDS. Although 1960s radical Huey Newton was rather clear-minded, the most popular white organizers like Klonsky, Avakian and PLP that led thousands of white youth always had things both ways on the white working class and set themselves up for the fascism we are in now. (Of these, PLP is more consistent. I don’t want to presume to have read them lately.)

    We hope the Tea Party movement continues to refer to the Obamautons as “corporatists” and “fascist,” not “socialists” or “communists.”


    Diversity within fascism: Don’t forget Norway and Italy

    March 28, 2010

    U.$. bombers are faster than Nazi Germany’s bombers were. The Predator drone above is an unmanned bomber better than what Hitler had.

    Nonetheless, there are important ways in which the United $tates is not Nazi Germany. The most important is that the United $tates does not face the same urgency in occupying other imperialist countries. In his last statements before death, Hitler said he wished he had invaded the Soviet Union sooner, because Stalin was not twiddling his thumbs.

    During World War II, most of the world was unaware of the extent of the genocides Hitler was carrying out. Today, most of the world does not realize the extent of U.$. exploitation and its devastating effects on Third World health. The United $tates is a far greater exploitation machine than Hitler Germany ever was.

    Hitler Germany had the youth and hunger to move quickly in ways that the United $tates does not today. Yet not all fascisms have the same pace of political and historical development. If we argue that Norway was not really fascist because it was not imperialist, that leaves Italy and Japan. Italy’s pace of war was if anything less than today’s U.$. pace. Today’s Amerikkkans are older and more high tech than Hitler’s Aryans, but in less hurry to occupy all the other imperialists.

    The O’Baconites are trying to prove that the Democrats and Republicans are separate and increasingly so, but they both favor the profit-system, and half the public could probably live without a Congress if the leadership wanted it. There are plenty of fascist features to observe in the U.$. case. Compared with Nazi Germany, the United $tates is already global imperialist top dog while Germany was an aspiring top dog imperialist. This accounts for differences on some questions of pace, but the fundamentals are the same.