portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

political theory

What color are the flags in South America where resistance is the greatest?

Red, red, red.
The color of the flag is redder than red. The talk is of socialism.

Leave your black flag from 3 years ago in the closet. Anarchism is dead.

Join us...you are welcome.
Agreed 05.Nov.2005 08:52

Student of Marxism

I was glad to see such a high socialist turnout down there.

It aint hard to fool people. 05.Nov.2005 09:28

Against State Capitalism

Yeah, lots of people believe the socialist myth despite it's failures to ever make people free or equal. Does the average person in Cuba live like Fidel? Hell no. Does the average person in China live like a member of the CP? Hell no. Will the people in South America ever be free of state sponsored terror and economic manipulation under a socialist government? Hell no!

Read the Bolshevic Myth and other essays written by those who fought to overthrow the czar only to be crushed by the communists and you will understand why some of us will always fly the black flag no matter who is trying to fool the people into being followers.

Wonderful! 05.Nov.2005 09:47

not a lackey

It's good to see that the authoritarians are still telling us what to do, and spreading lies. It would be strange any other way.

reply 05.Nov.2005 10:02

Jason

Socialism is necessary. Not a particular brand of State control which has used that name, but socialism - People working together in common causes to create a sane society. Your post is so knee-jerk based on a label. Look at the deeds, not just react to a word. Judge each case on its own merit, not lump everything into one category. If what you call anarchism were to ever succeed, it would requore many individuals to develop these skills. So, no offense, I would say that right now, you would not be capable of living what you aspire to.

have you learned nothing? 05.Nov.2005 10:23

rico

It is true that many carrying the banner of socialism have been authoritarian. However the same can be said of anarchists. Baukunin was anti-semetic for example. What really distinguishes socialists and anarchists at this juncture however is that socialists are in solidarity with a radically democratic and egalitarian movement in South America. Are you really prepared to rally against the multitudes of people in Argentina, Venezuela, Brazil, Cuba, Bolivia, etc... who desperatly want and need socialism? Who carry red flags and pictures of Che? Are you intellectually superior to these people because you are a middle-class white American?

Besides, who are Bush and the neo-liberals afraid of more; a massive socialist movement capable of winning power through elections or insurrection? Or a handfull of "anarchists" in black hoodies more concerned about looking good on a demo than with actually confronting capitalism and their state?

All this aside I believe the kids in black are well intentioned. However as long as you stubbornly cling to the black flag you will be outside the groundswell of anti-capitalism taking place in South America right now. Go ahead and condemn Castro, Chavez, Lula and Evo Morales because they are socialist. Denounce their "authoritarian" ways. But look just to your right and you will see neo-liberal militarists, right-wing christians and the like right there with you.

Viva Chavez!

Huh? 05.Nov.2005 11:23

Against State Capitalism

Who said I was white, middle class, or american? Of the three I am closest to being "american," but my parents were not born here.

I have nothing against the multitudes of people rallying in South america right now, and I never claimed to be superior to them in any way. I don't believe they will find what they are looking for with a socialist government however because history has shown that time and time again those in power abuse people regardless of what economic policies they espouse. Under a socialist government there is even greater room for abuse of power because instead of several large corporations there is only one corporation- the government. And that corporation controls every aspect of life, from education to food production to distribution to labor. The power is not in the peoples hands at all. Democratic socialism hasn't faired much better because it still relies on having people thousands of miles away making decisions for those of us who are just as capable of making decisions here at home.

So yes, Chavez sent alot of people who will never enjoy his power or wealth to Argentina with some red flags. Good for him. Good for the people who recognize that he is smarter than Bush and his policies are more sane. But somewhere out there people still want real freedom and that is something socialism hasn't brought anyone, ever.

We are all Rothschilds children 05.Nov.2005 12:07

Frehley

We all know now that Soviet communism was instilled by the Rockefellers via the Rothschilds, as a Ying to our Yang. Hegelian dialect. Puppet dictators are a specialty of the CIA.

"The shareholders of these banks which own the stock of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York are the people who have controlled our political and economic destinies since 1914. They are the Rothschilds, Lazard Freres (Eugene Mayer), Israel Sieff, Kuhn Loeb Company, Warburg Company, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, the Rockefeller family, and the J.P. Morgan interests."
- Eustace Mullins

"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and communism under the same tent, all under their control...Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."
- Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 (flight KAL007) that was shot down by the Soviets

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who
makes her laws"- Mayer Amschel Rothschild

The Red game 05.Nov.2005 12:21

Petey

The Saint-Simonians, the occult religious millenialist forerunners of communism, praising Baron de Rothschild in their magazine Le Globe, "There is no one today who better represents the triumph of equality and work in the nineteenth century than M. le Baron de Rothschild... .Was this Jew born a millionaire? No, he was born poor, and if only you knew what genius, patience, and hard work were required to construct that European edifice called the House of Rothschild, you would admire rather than insult it."

well 05.Nov.2005 12:48

.

It's good to see that the privileged americans know what's best for the people of south america yet again. Maybe you should go there and tell them how to live since you know what's best.

We are the leaders we are looking for and ... 05.Nov.2005 14:05

B

The future is Green!

fuck all yer isms 05.Nov.2005 15:48

me

cant we just see resistence for what it is. ..

i may have anarchic twists. . . but who the fuck cares if the huge protests have red flags, purple flags, black flags,

the original poster sounds like he or she is having a pissing contest.

i dont care why people get involved to take down the present power system of greed war intolerence and death

solidarity with the demonstrations in argentina and everywhere

when we take down the whitehouse, ill do it side by side with black flags, red flags, and rainbow flags, and even those blue flags that have a picture of the earth (who was that not in our name. . .?)

fuck your divisions, fuck your infighting,

Can you read? 05.Nov.2005 15:54

Against State Capitalism

For the record, my mother is Thai and my father is half Korean, half Java. I don't claim to know what is best for South america. I was replying to a snipe at my politics and saying that many of those who fought for communism in Russia later regretted their decision, at least those who were left alive. I was also saying that economic disparity does exist in EVERY communist and socialist country, period. When you are ready to confront that lets talk. Until then stop trying to tell me how white I am.

islam isn't an ism because it has got an 'l' and an 'a' in it... 05.Nov.2005 16:21

Lynette Trellis

"Words are our servants and not our masters" - 'Tony Blair', socialist, allegedly, one upon a time...

How funny. People care about such things.


There is only one cool colour scheme on the party 'n' protest scene. Think Pink and Silver - a lighter shade of red (pink) and a lighter version of black (silver). Easy.

What happened to the "Red and Black"? 05.Nov.2005 18:18

me also

Seriously, these people are rising up under the banner of socialism because their oppressors and their neo-liberal trade policies are committed in the name of capitalism. Anarchism and Socialism may seem strange bedfellows to some but they have almost always been bedfellows. "Anarchism is dead?" What kind of of brain rotted crap is this? Why do we have to turn factional divisions and political differences into battlefronts? Both the anarchists and socialists need to be looking at the actual process of whats happening instead of the ideological labels if they want to engange in anything more than a pissing contest. Also, don't be jealous my socialist comrades, you too will eventually come up with snazzy uniform to wear at protests.

against sectarianism 06.Nov.2005 01:02

Edward

To Rico: Marxism is correct because it corresponds to reality, not because a bunch of people support it.

Furthermore, regarding the flags: it really depends which pictures you look at. There are just about as many red-black flags in the photos I've seen.

Overall, I'd have to say your original post was pretty unscientific and more a sectarian caricature of "socialism" than anything else. Just as I don't really give much weight to the loud-mouthed sectarian anarchists, I hope people realize that most communists and socialists really are committed to principled struggle with people who disagree with us. Believe it or not, we have just about as many disagreements amongst ourselves--not entirely unlike the various strands of anarchism.


a ridiculous argument 06.Nov.2005 07:42

nobody

Socialists and Anarchists are are opposite sides of the political spectrum. Anarchists are usually against authoritarian control which is exactly what Socialist regimes are about. So why are you even thinking that the goals of both are anywhere similar? Socialsts are the enemies Anarchists just as much as Capitalists are. In that they both despise Capitalism they have a common goal but not for the same reasons. Socialsts want to trade rich capitalist control over our economic life with government control, it it really that simple minded. Anarchists want NO CONTROL BY AUTHORITY FIGUREHEADS. These cannot be further apart. So f-off socialist pigs, I'd rather have a Capitalist crook in charge than a Governmental one.

why people in South America are Socialists.......and not anarchists 06.Nov.2005 07:59

steve

Socialism offers a hope and a roadmap that anarchsim lacks. Under socialism (Venenzuela for example) you can nationalize large companies, give giant tracks of land back to the peasants, and work for the lower classes against the rich- for starters. All anarchism offers is empty slogans such as "fuck authority" that have little effect on actual social processes.

against ideology 06.Nov.2005 15:52

agnostic fundamentalist

not that i know the answers or anything, but here's my 2 cents. as an agnostic, i think that there are good and bad forms of almost anything. as pertains to this particular debate, i think there can be good and bad forms of anarchy and socialism, and that both are probably only going to be as good as the people who practice them. you can oppress someone under any banner, slogan, or ideology under the sun, people.

apologies 06.Nov.2005 16:54

rico

I sincerely apologize to "against state capitalism" for class and race baiting, it's a shitty thing to do to someone who you are on the same side of the barricades with.

I think a lot of good points were made here and I actually agree with a lot of the criticisms, sectarianism is poisonious to the broader anti-capitalist movement and must be fought against.

I think my original post was poorly articulated and was coming from some frustration and dissappointment I was feeling about the left in this country. Of couse I believe that people should be able to express themselves however they want politically, I guess I just find it surprising that so many choose an anarchist indentity. I see Latin America as an emerging bulwark against rampant neo-liberalism and imagine if we on the left were to use some of the language and imagery from them it would send a message to our own rulers "shit, we have them here too"!

Red, Black and Green Unity prevents neo-Nazi victory 07.Nov.2005 14:19

luna moth

The phrase "Can't we all just get along?" may be played out by now yet the truth of this simple statement speaks volumes. If people continuously fracture themselves with their various "isms" (similar to schisms?) then the Bush regime may enjoy their position of power for a few more years with no direct or substantial challenge. Ironically infighting between the German leftist parties (Kommunist vs. Socialist) also made Hitler's victory that much easier, the Nazi Party already had the financial support of the wealthy industrialists (Rockefeller, JP Morgan, Prescott Bush. Thyssen, Krupp, etc..). The infighting between the various leftist faction schisms was icing on the cake for the National Socialists in Germany. Following the Reichstag fire and the blame fingered on the Kommunists (KPD), the remaining Socialists (SPD) either joined up with the Nazis or fled the country. Let's not have a repeat performance of the Fourth Reich taking over North America under the Bush regime..

"KPD vs SPD
At the 12th party congress of the KPD from 9th to 15 June 1929 in Berlin-Wedding, Thälmann steered a clear course of confrontation with the SPD after the events of "Bloody May", in which 32 people were killed by the police in an attempt to suppress demonstrations which had been banned by the Interior Minister, Carl Severing, a Social Democrat.

During that time Thälmann and the KPD fought the SPD as their main political enemy, acting according to the Comintern guidelines which declared Social Democrats and Socialists "social fascist". These guidelines remained in force until 1935 when the Comintern officially switched to endorsing a "popular front" of all socialists against the Nazi threat.

On 13 March 1932 Thälmann was once again candidate for the German Presidency, against a incumbent Paul von Hindenburg and Adolf Hitler. The KPD's slogan was "A vote for Hindenburg is a vote for Hitler; a vote for Hitler is a vote for war.". Shortly after this Thälmann proposed to the SPD the formation of an antifascist coalition as a united front against the Nazis.

After the Nazis (NSDAP) gained power on 30 January 1933, Thälmann proposed that SPD and KPD should organise a general strike to topple Hitler, but this was not achieved. On 7 February a Central Committee meeting of the already banned KPD took place in Königs Wusterhausen, near Berlin, where Thälmann emphasised the necessity of a violent overthrow of Hitler's government. On 3 March 1933 he was arrested in Berlin by the Gestapo."

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Th%C3%A4lmann

Argentina's protesters probably don't all think the same either, though the "common enemy" strategy may override any petty differences. Not that the differences between a free state anarchy and a worker state communism are petty, though when compared to a corporate police state under neo-Nazi Fourth Reich fascism of Bush regime, well, do u get the point?