The US and Israel have voided their right to exist: they deserve revolutionary change and judgment….

The reality of the US and Israel history since WWII belie all the false taken as expectation.
The seeded fascism of Trump and his fascist cult is a sick joke but hardly match the mainstream reality which
must be matched with a realization that the core
government is already a criminal faux democracy guilty of war crimes, global anti-democracy,
capitalist imperialism, genocide, etc, …
The liberal elites in government, media, are complete dummies with dog muzzles and cannot utter a beep here about the reality.

The US may be too far gone for revolutionary restoration, but we can at least stand back and consider that reformism would be
a lost cause as the last option, if it is that, is revolutionary change of government, a republic if you can keep…
I fear we have the Founding Fathers on our side here, n’est-ce pas?

 The irony: the right seeds revolution on the left

But did we/do we live in a democracy at all? If the right undermines voting rights we must proceed by other means. The onset of revolutionary futures on climate change move toward a democratic socialist inevitability in the fascist burn out of the alt-right self-destruct. A republic if you can keep it.

Without Manchin, is the For the People Act dead? Probably, unless Biden can convince one Republican senator to join him in supporting it.

Source: Opinion | The End of Democracy as We Know It | Robert Reich

The left must critique and recast its program…//A worldwide epoch of revolution is being prepared

The left must critique and recast its program…//A worldwide epoch of revolution is being prepared
Marxism has a false monopoly on the left and its format needs a ‘critical Marxism’ to be ready without jeopardizing the world’s last chances for postcapitalism: the Marxist-style left has failed every time it had an opportunity. We have suggested a lot of simple ways to recast the failed legacies here.

Some ideas: the term ‘marxism’ alienates the public now where in the second international it was massively attractive. Drop the ism and call it something else.
If you use the term ‘marxism’ it is not clear if you include or exclude Stalinism. An incompetent state of affairs. The left must disown its own past and reclaim terms like ‘socialism’. We have our own version here, not a simple slogan but a four-term system that stops oversimplification: ‘democratic market neo-communism’, DMNC: this system is designed to be a transitional construct to create a new kind of system that even socialists couldn’t imagine, what to say of capitalists.
The revolutionary transition is perilous. Could we somehow manage with capitalism? Thatcher exclaimed, there is no alternative. Bill Gates wants a Green capitalism. Consider the reality, this is the rough year the Amazon Basin bites the dust. Forty years ago the warning was clear, going, going. Now it is gone and we still hope reformist capitalism has the answer. We are dead by capitalism. But can the left do any better? Maybe, maybe not. But we don’t really have that choice anymore. So amend Thatcher, postcapitalism, there is no alternative. And we don’t have another forty years to waste. But both sides will get it wrong, most probably. We need new models: our ‘Tinkertoy’ DMNC, rapidly forces thinking into a more realistic problem and solution. Apparently, the Green New Deal will create windmills in the midst of industrial devastation.

Most of the public thinks revolution will lead to Stalinism, and they could be right. A new socialist revolution must examine its foundations. The problem is NOT easy and must balance democracy and authority, markets and planning, property and a Commons, economic rights, civil rights. Creating democracy under conditions of socialism is not so simple.

Further, the US intelligence/covert agencies are likely to inherit authority, as they did with Lenin and the old Tsarist curse turning into the Cheka. The left never discusses this.  What will you do? Pour laughing gas down the vents at Langley? The CIA has seventy years of experience in fascist counterrevolution, and a much bigger budget. Chanting slogans like ‘socialism’ is always oversimplified: the problem is at least a four-term system: socialism, democracy, economic markets as socialist markets, planning and its problems and new solutions, the nature of a Commons and the dead-end of state capitalism, the fake science of historical materialism and the need for new views of history and evolution. Time is short and the attempt to use the older legacy as-is will fail immediately. The Marxist left has done zero homework on any of this.
But it is easy to criticize Lenin, as the savage counterattack of the capitalists and the Whites turned everything into savagery.

The world is not what it was in the time of Marx. Thus US capitalist system is a labyrinth of complications. It has almost twenty million small businesses. How will a revolution deal with the order of magnitude increase in complexity? What will you do, day one, with twenty million irate small businessmen? Are you going to liquidate capitalists, as did the Chinese in the name of marxism, who liquidated a million capitalists, and then ended up in the same mess as before. There are endless problems like this. Will expropriation include fifty million house owners in suburbs? So where will twenty million instant counterrevolutionaries live?
Critical marxism must be severe, but it is not as such a compromise solution. There are real ways to leverage a real transition to postcapitalism. Our discussion is not about embracing reformism. At the same time, it is possible against the odds for a reformist transition to the expropriation of capital. Marxists, idiots or not, held to the issue of revolution, and they are probably right in that. Like the Christians in their catacombs, they are waiting for their moment. But the result failed.

We have suggested a much simpler approach than that of dinosaur Marxist cultists. There is a way out here. And one new factor is the demand of climate change that has made some transition almost inevitable, even as fascism, barbarism, dictatorship, Sweden bunkers for the rich, Putinism lurk vulture style. The left has one last hand to play: be wary of stale marxist cliches.  But Marxists, even the hopeless idiots, are closer to the future than most. We suggest they be shanghaied into our Red Fortyeight Group.  Thatcher kept saying there is no alternative. Now the slogan transitions, postcapitalism, there is no alternative.

World capitalism is lurching from one crisis to another, making life unbearable for billions of people.

Source: A worldwide epoch of revolution is being prepared

Capitalism and Fascism –

The revolutionary nature of capitalism goes far in explaining the political turmoil of recent years. Neoliberalism destroys social networks when it destroys economic relationships. Decades ago, autoworkers in Michigan and peasant farmers in Chiapas were faced with figuring out how to get by after their livelihoods were taken away. A fundamental question emerged: how was More

Source: Capitalism and Fascism –

 R48G: from ‘critical (post-)marxism to a new kind of (r)evolutionary left  

We have been critical of Marxism and there is a danger there in feeding opposition to the left, such as it is. In reality, the older Marxism doesn’t need much opposition from the bourgeoisie: it is its own worst enemy. The cadre of Marx true believers at this point could never mount a revolution against capitalism, while the reformist wing is almost impotent in its efforts.
I admire Marx and Engels but their legacy was very flawed and in any case is almost an antique at this point. But much of the core challenge to class society remains cogent. In the wake of the French Revolution which ended up empowering the haute bourgeoisie a challenge of the socialists and finally Marx was and remains a permanent challenge to the ‘pseudo-democracy plus capitalism’ that has remained in place. The Bolshevik revolution was apparently about something else and never really challenged that outcome of the modern revolutions. We have critiqued Marx’s attempt at a science but his class observations are very cogent. Marx swept the field where others from Proudhon to Lasalle were somehow forgotten. But Marxism itself is so flawed that a wider field of thought might have done better. We have critiqued Marx’s historical theory as junk science and unless the left can get past it they won’t have any second chances. The Marx cult is entrenched but almost defunct.
I am a socialist/communist at heart and don’t want to be cheated out of sane future by the ‘walking dead’ of Marxist religious zombies.
Marx’s theory suggests that the end of capitalism is predestined by laws of history and that just isn’t so. His theory may be wrong but it still stands as a hunch about history. Committed leftists with a better view of history have to construct socialism by their own efforts. The task is daunting and made more difficult by the inoperative ideologies of the left, what to say of the monumental propaganda and mind control of the capitalist order. But this is not ‘compromise’ thinking trying to negate the revolutionary option: the basis of a future socialism almost certainly requires the expropriation factor, revolutionary or reformist. But the Bolshevik fiasco shows how that component was botched as ‘state capitalilsm’. Something that really works is needed. We have our DMNC model: democratic market neo-communism, which points to the need to do what Marx so strangely always rejected: a model or blueprint of the intended system. Marx’s rejection of this as ‘Utopian’ compared to his ‘Scientific’ approach is just about the dumbest mistake a theorist can make. To be sure ‘utopian’ thinking plays on its own semantics and can lead to unusable abstractions, but we don’t need the term or play that game: A model is not utopian anymore than an economic model is utopian (hopefully). The question is one of social and economic function. We can’t use theory to construct socialism, we need recipes that can show feedback with the facts arising during realization. Our DMNC is very practical and passes a test: if a liberal system is said and seen to work in a functional sense, then our DMNC models will also work, with one caveat. It is not a utopian issue.
This approach therefore can result in a model that can put into action almost at once. There isn’t any morass of Marxist theory or new interpretations of Capital.
The American example, even, as is, mired in slavery, shows that ordinary men can found a new system and the first great modern democracy without ponderous theory. In many ways, Marx’s work critiqued that moment and the critique of a bourgeois revolution is his real contribution. But the correction process was hopelessly confused and fell into the hands of those who ended up destroying democracy in the name of socialism, a fatal and tragic outcome.

Source: A new/old definition of ‘working class’…Napoleon Between War and Revolution  – 1848+: The End(s) of History

An interesting thread at Marxmail: Re: [marxmail] GOP Still Wants to Pretend the Preservation of Slavery Wasn’t a Major Reason for the American Revolution – You mean the 1619 Project.

Re: [marxmail] GOP Still Wants to Pretend the Preservation of Slavery Wasn’t a Major Reason for the American Revolution –
You mean the 1619 Project.

I have no problem with any of it other than the bizarre understanding of the American Revolution. I’ll restate a few of the big points . . . .

1. The calendar makes its own demands. Britain did not abolish slavery until the 1830s, so it was not under any greater threat under the British Empirem in 1776 than it would be out of it. In fact, with this in mind, slavery would have remained legal for another half centuiry under the empire in states that actually got rid of it between the 1770s and the early 1800s after getting independence. Continue reading “An interesting thread at Marxmail: Re: [marxmail] GOP Still Wants to Pretend the Preservation of Slavery Wasn’t a Major Reason for the American Revolution – You mean the 1619 Project.”