tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-116356752024-03-13T04:28:10.418-07:00Porcupine blogA blog devoted to my interests which include anarchism and social movements, history, archeology, and anything else I choose to write about.Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.comBlogger559125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-35829103635335437442022-07-03T09:49:00.001-07:002022-07-03T09:59:22.496-07:00MORE RACISM AND HATE FROM CANADA's FAR RIGHT<p lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">An
article appearing in </span></span><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
The Star, June 27, </span></span><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">entitled
“</span></span><span lang="en">Indigenous conservation Canada’s
way of the future, Guilbeault says.” </span><span lang="en">In
reference to </span><span lang="en">Steven </span><span lang="en">Guilbault
</span><span lang="en">, Min</span><span lang="en">ister</span><span lang="en">
of Enviro</span><span lang="en">nment aroused a barrage of hate. This
involved demonization of the minister and the Liberals, the Big Lie
Technique, conspiracy fantasies and racism toward Indigenous people.
</span><span lang="en">Guilbault had the temerity to suggest that we
could learn something from Indigenous People and that they ought to
be given some say in environmental matters. The remarks below are highly
disturbing as they represent 4 aspects of Umberto Eco's 14 points of
Ur-fascism. (1) (Eco said that only one of these points was enough to
generate a fascist movement)</span></span></span>
</p><p lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: small;"><span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en">B</span><span lang="en">IG
LIE TECHNIQUE</span><span lang="en"> – non-violence as terrorism,
</span><span lang="en">Guilbault was a former environmental activist
with Greenpeace.</span></span>
</span><p style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">“<span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en">From
an orange suit to a cabinet position. From a terrorist to a level of
authority and we wonder what the hell went wrong with our country??
Canada is 155 years old today but only took two trudeau's to destroy
it.”</span> “<span lang="en">JT's eco-terrorist from the 1970s
and 1980s”</span> </span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en">D</span><span lang="en">EMONIZATION</span></span><span style="font-size: small;"> - “<span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en">Guilbeault:
one of Canada's destroyers” “The guy is a stunt clown with no
qualifications other than being a Quebecer who like his boss hates
the west.and Free Enterp</span><span lang="en">rise.” “</span><span lang="en">with
the help of dogmeat Singh”</span> “<span lang="en">USELESS
TAPEWORMS”</span></span></span>
</p><p style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en">ANTI-INDIGENOUS
BIGOTRY </span></span><span style="font-size: small;">“<span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en">How
come they pollute their own reserve”</span> <span lang="en">“but
they never practiced or currently practice animal conservation.
They're wiping out the walleye in Alberta, salmon in BC. And they
have no issues with wiping out entire WMU's of moose and elk.”</span></span> “<span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en">4.9%
of the population of canada should dictate how the other 95% live -
yeah, right.</span> “ <span lang="en">“never was their land they
were nomads who crossed the land bridge at Alaska 10s of thousands
years ago. Continued being nomads we have to make them self
sufficient and stop pumping endless money into reserves where it is
eatin up by chiefs and council. Harper made them accountable for the
money and Trudeau scrapped it</span> “ <span lang="en">“ the</span><span lang="en">r</span><span lang="en">e
never was any inter-tribal massacres or scalping, or slave trade or
stealing and raping of females by variouos tibes long before whitey
came here?</span> “ <span lang="en">“governments pass along
billions a year from our tax dollars, way more than come from
"resources" taken from OUR land, not exclusively their
land, but hey don't let facts get in your way.</span> “ <span lang="en">“The
amount of time, money and effort spent on 4.9% of the population is
ridiculous and hopefully the day of reckoning will come when they are
told STOP, ENOUGH, instead of being a liability be an asset.”</span>
<span lang="en">“Somebody said get rid of Reservations, and old
time, long forgotten treaties that have no relevance to the 21st
century. We forget that when Columbus arrived in North America that
some indigenous tribes were slaughtered by other tribes, and their
sacred sites, language and customs have deliberately been erased by
other tribes who wanted everything for themselves. Bring out the
past, investigate which lands were stolen or confiscated by other
tribes, and reverse these tragedies.</span> “ <span lang="en">“Why
all the fuss about aboriginal clean drinking water.” “Most
Canadians pay for their own filtration systems or pay waterboard
taxes for potable citywater. Why are the indigenous special?</span> “
<span lang="en">“I see the native lands quite often , Protect land
, animals ? really ? Puppies in landfill , stray animals , land ,
houses in shambles , wrecks and garbage about . Protect what land ?
Like Guilbealt ( jail bird ) all a fake all for Money !</span> “
“<span lang="en">lets burn the prairies to destroy an entire herd
of bison…..so environmentally friendly!</span> “</span></span>
</p><p style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: small;">CONSPIRACY
FANTASIES</span><span style="font-size: small;"> - “<span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en">U.N.D.R.I.P
is a Scam! you are using the Indian people as pawns in order to
fulfill your evil agenda of U.N Agenda 21/2030 AKA NEW WORLD ORDER!”</span>
“<span lang="en">Is he a member of the WEF?”</span> <span lang="en">“the
globalists are just using the natives sadly / when they get the power
they will destroy them! guilbeault is WEF bought and paid for!he butt
buds with turd.”</span> </span></span>
</p><p style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span face="Verdana, sans-serif"><span lang="en">1.
</span><span lang="en">The four points are disagreement as treason,
fear of difference, obcession with a plot and selective populism.</span></span></span>
</p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-51913340721451850202022-06-28T10:41:00.000-07:002022-06-28T10:41:00.808-07:00Anarchism in Bolivia<p>
</p><p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Review
of Huascar Rodriguez Garcia's <i>La Choledad Antistatal</i></span>
</p><p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Anarchism
doesn't really begin in Bolivia until 1923 when Luis Cuiscanqui, an
Aymara mechanic and Domitilia Pareja form <i>el Grupo de Propaganda
Libertario</i> and commence publishing <i>Antorcha</i>. The first
anarcho-syndicalist unions were formed shortly thereafter. In 1927
the <i>Federacion Obrera Local </i><span style="font-style: normal;">(FOL)
wa</span>s formed in La Paz uniting these new unions. The anarchists
put their efforts into the eight hour day struggle. At that time
people worked 10 hours a day and this was often increased to 24 hours
in the mines.</span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">The
FOL quickly became a powerful mass movement, not just emphasizing the
general strike, but also popular education and culture. They
supported the Aymara in their struggle against the state and the
landowners. Support for indigenous people became a central focus of
the federation. Luis Cuisicanqui published an anti-racist manifesto
"Voice of the Campesino" for which he was persecuted by the
state. From the beginning, FOL had an autonomous women's movement and
union – <i>Sindicato Feminino de Oficios Varios </i> led by three
of FOL's most important anarchist militants, Catalina Mendoza, Rosa
Rodriguez, and Petronilia Infantes. This became the <i>Federacion
Obrera Feminina</i> <span style="font-style: normal;">(FOF)</span><i>
</i>The workers knew them affectionately as Cata, Peta and Rosa. The
union became very influential among laundry women, culinary
workers, florists and market women. </span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Anarchism
quickly spread to other cities in Bolivia. During the Fourth National
Workers Congress of 1929 Marxists were in a minority and the
anarchist presence was overwhelming. The <i>Federacion Oruro de
Trabajadores</i> (FOT) was formed in Oruro. The growth of this
union, as well as their dynamite armed miners sowed panic among the
ruling classes. FOT also formed a women's union much like FOF. </span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Meanwhile,
the Bolivian Government was gearing up for a battle with Paraguay in
the ill fated Chaco War. The anarchists were naturally opposed. Many
were rounded up and placed in jungle concentration camps, and as
people of the Altiplano, many died of malaria and TB. Others were put
in front of firing squads and shot as "traitors," or placed
on the front lines. The police engaged in<i> false flag</i>
operations, setting off bombs in the <i>barrios</i>, hoping the
anarchists would get blamed. FOL and FOT were made illegal and the
movement went underground.</span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">FOL
regrouped in July 1935 and organized a massive general strike that
put La Paz in the hands of the workers. The army revolted and
overthrew the government. The military had become radicalized during
the Chaco War, attempted to introduce top-down statist "military
socialism" and tried to coopt the anarchists. This endeavor
failed.</span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">In spite
of all this violence and turmoil, the <i>Federacion Obra Feminina</i>
persisted. They did such a good job of organizing women cooks,
servants and restaurant workers that men sought to join. The women
feared a take-over and told the men to form their own union and join
FOL . As they said to the men "we organized it, we defended it,
we run it!" FOF were also aware of the racial aspect involved.
The women who laboured in the kitchens and houses of the rich white
<i>criollos</i> were Indigenous (<i>Cholas</i>) . FOF was proud to be
a <i>Chola</i> union and by 1940 had 5000 members.</span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Defend
their union they did. Market women were accused of being smugglers
for bringing in goods from the countryside. The resulting strikes and
mass demonstrations saw many arrests and beatings, but the FOF women
soaped the street causing the mounted cops and troops to slip and
fall. Things got so hot for the authorities that the law was
eventually rescinded.</span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">FOF
organized schools and libraries, teaching women to read. They also
fought for the right of divorce and equal treatment of children in
and out of wedlock. These demands scandalized the hypocritical upper
class women.</span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">The
radicalized soldiers formed the National Revolutionary Movement (MNR)
and organized a miners union in 1944. This union began to push the
anarcho-syndicalists to one side, but it took another eight years to
eliminate their influence. In the meantime FOL organized campesinos
in the <i>Federacion Agraria Departmental </i>(FAD) Shortly after,
early in 1947, the peasants rose up in one of the greatest
insurrections of indigenous people of the 20<sup>th</sup> century.
The whole Altiplano was ablaze with burning haciendas. The people
took back their land stolen centuries ago. FOL, FOF and FAD called a
general strike. The state responded with massive repression.
Thousands were arrested and sent to jungle concentration camps where
thirty died, including FAD leader Marcelino Quispe. The repression
was so extreme that the <i>Federacion Obra Feminina</i> remained
the largest intact anarcho-syndicalist group and became the vanguard
of the movement.</span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">The
MNR, now further radicalized by the Trotskyists, did little. The
anarcho-syndicalists took the blow for them and they reaped the
benefits by moving in and organizing their own unions. In 1952 the
MNR won the general election and the oligarchy refused to relinquish
power. A spontaneous revolt throughout the country, in which the
anarchists were deeply involved, overthrew the government. The nation
was in the hands of the workers and peasants, but the MNR
reintroduced the state and immediately sought to limit the direct
action socialization process going on. The Workers Confederation of
Bolivia (COB) was formed by the Trotskyists and the
anarcho-syndicalist unions were forced to join. FOL dissapeared soon
after. FAD lived on for another couple of years, but was eventually
forced to amalgamate with the MNR peasants union. </span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: -0.13in;">
<span style="color: black;"><strong><span style="font-variant: normal;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">FOF
joined the MNR union in 1955, but somehow maintained its existence as
an anarcho-syndicalist movement. Ten years later the </span></span></span></span></span></span></strong><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><strong><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Federacion
Obra Feminina</span></i></span></span></strong><strong><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
was finally crushed by the US-inspired Barrientos dictatorship which
overthrew the MNR government.</span></span></span></span></strong></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: -0.13in;">
<br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-48221412873983597292022-05-31T16:41:00.005-07:002022-07-03T09:50:49.906-07:00FASCISM IN CANADA<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">These
are the comments found in a fossil fuel propaganda site called
“Fairness Alberta” Note the racist attacks on Quebec, the
paranoia and conspiracy fantasies. And the endless demonization of
the innocuous Justin Trudeau. No doubt these were many of the same
people who supported the KKKonvoy</span>
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">We
have a PM focused on destroying the West and giving everything to
Quebec to make it grand</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">Maybe
it's time to throw QUEBEC out of Canada . They don't seem to like
anything about Canada except transfer payments</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">I</span></span><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">f
Canadians allow it to continue worse is yet to come with the complete
shut down of the energy sector in western Canada...</span></span><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">
A</span><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">nd that has
been the objective of Trudeau, Singhe and most Quebec leaders for
several years now, ...part of the wef plan they are following </span></span><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">[WEF
is the “World Economic Forum” bugbear of the loony right]</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">The
Liberal/NDP Government is the enemy to the oil and gas industry! It
is a Regressive government!</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">actually
he wants to give Canada to the UN & WEF …for those
organizations to run our country... They will take everything we have
(our houses, vehicles, boats, sleds, body autonomy, freedom), and we
will become their slaves.</span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">he
is deliberately destroying Canada setting it up for a communist(or
worse) govt to move in and take over </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">We
have the worst most corrupt prime minister and his cabinet along side
the highest corrupt province Quebec that are leaches and are draining
this country to the point of no return.Can any one tell me what
Quebec and the liberals do for Canada but use it like their own bank
and keep Canada bankrupt and leave the rest of Canadians
poorer.Quebec and Trudeau should be kicked out of Canada and maybe we
can final get this country back on tract without these leaches
thinking that Canada is their slaves.It makes me sick how Trudeau and
Quebec have destroyed Canada and divided this country in two .Trudeau
and the corrupt mafia in Quebec work well together and that’s why
this uneducated spoiled boy remains in power because he’s the
puppet to pass what ever Quebec wants and in return he gets kick
backs and votes.Quebec still has the highest corruption in Canada and
it is only getting worse with Trudeau in power because that’s the
only way Trudeau knows how to keep himself in government is through
bribery and corruption.</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">The
liberals are determined to support communist regimes and destroy our
energy industry. Unreal.</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">a
way to weaken the Canadians to be easier to control by the Global
entities. </span>
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">Anyone
who is against the use of Canada's natural resources of oil and gas
is an enemy of Canada !!!!</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">How
can Quebec tell other Canadians how to be? Quebec hasn't signed into
confederation! Quebec shouldn't have a say in any of Canadian
politics! As far as I'm concerned, GET OUT OR SIGN INTO
CONFEDERATION!</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">You
want different things in life, Just about everything you buy clothes,
cars, boats, toilet paper to list a few needs oil or gas to make it
or run it. So if everything is shut down in the gas and oil sector
you would not have things you need so stop harping on shutting
everything down</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en">The
liberals and NDP are ruining all of Canada now not just the west.
Traitors have to be dealt with.</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Liberals
propaganda has convinced the ignorant masses that Canadian oil and
gas is bad! They have done so because the Trudeau foundation and the
Liberal elite are making vast fortunes from imported oil!</span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">No
oil for Quebec from Alberta......................Period. And no Saudi
oil for Quebec. And no illegal immigrants through Quebec. </span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-1813446050147329022022-04-02T08:26:00.019-07:002022-04-02T08:35:19.101-07:00COVID 19 DISINFOMATION<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-size: medium;">Here is a list of articles on Covid 19
disinformation.</span><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Interesting that half of the 12 most important sources of disinformation in the Guardian article are entrepreneurs using Covid to make money. As well one is an Anti-Semite and another a religious fanatic trying to spread racist hatred.<br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/17/covid-misinformation-conspiracy-theories-ccdh-report">https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/17/covid-misinformation-conspiracy-theories-ccdh-report</a></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-campaigns/31590996.html">https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-campaigns/31590996.html</a></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation</a></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-debunk-misinformation-about-covid-vaccines-and-masks/">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-debunk-misinformation-about-covid-vaccines-and-masks/</a></span>
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-78557537908233869192022-03-10T10:11:00.000-08:002022-03-10T10:11:05.284-08:00 THE BACKGROUND TO RUSSIAN AND UKRAINIAN CULTURE <p><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id" dir="auto"><br /> <br /><span style="font-size: medium;">The
Ukraine is the site of one of the oldest civilizations in the world.
Cucuteni culture was from about 5500BCE – 3000BCE – Also known as the
“Trypillian Culture.” During middle phase there were settlements in the
form of concentric circles of up to 15,000 people. Climate change and
invasion of the Indo-European “Kurgan peoples” caused the collapse of
this society and a “dark age”. The Cucuteni culture shows no sign of a
power hierarchy and had a subsistence farming economy based upon
gifting. What we see is a fairly advanced civilization without the state
or class division. (*) This is also true of other neighboring cultures
such as the Vinca, located in what is now Rumania and Serbia. This
latter culture also had the beginnings of an alphabet, the symbols of
which reappear a thousand years later in the Minoan “Linear A” script.
The Kurgan peoples – who may have destroyed the Cucuteni-Trypillian
civilization, were definitely a hierarchical society. The kurgans are
mound tombs burying a king along with his sacrificed horses, wives and
slaves. <br /><br />In classical times this area was occupied by the
Scythians - warlike tribes of horsemen. (900-200 BCE) Some of the
horse-riding archers were women, giving rise to the Greek myth of the
Amazons. The Scythians came from central Asia and Siberia and their
lands stretched all the way from Mongolia to Germany.<br /><br />March ahead
several thousand years. The area of Russia, Belarus and the Ukraine was
settled by the Eastern Slavs. First mention of the Slavs is in the
second century AD by Roman chroniclers . It seems the Slavs lived in the
area roughly similar to the Cucuteni culture thousands of years before,
though their origins must lie in Eurasia further to the east. Russian
history begins with the establishment of the Rus state. (Hence Rus-land)
The Rus state was the result of the Varangians – a mix of Slav, Norse
and Finns who traded in the area. Novgorod became the chief city and in
862 AD Oleg of Novgorod seized Kiev and established the state of Kievan
Rus, which united the northern and southern East Slav lands. Under the
influence of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire Kievan Rus adopted
Christianity and other customs. (One of which was calling the king a
Tsar (Russian translation of Caesar or emperor.) Kiev became wealthy
with the trade on the Volga and the exchange of goods between Europe and
the Middle East. In 1237 Kievan Rus was destroyed by the Mongols –
with a great loss of life and the center of Rus-land shifted north to
Moscow. Finally after almost 250 years of struggle the Mongols were
defeated and the basis for the modern Tsarist state was created.<br /><br />A
contradiction lies at the heart of Russian society – a strange mix of
authoritarianism and anarchism. A society that gives you Ivan the
Terrible, Stalin, Putin and the Azof Battalion also gives you Bakunin,
Kropotkin, Maria Spiradanova and Nestor Makhno. The roots of this
contradiction may go all the way back to the Cucuteni culture with its
stateless, classless society, conquered by the brutal Kurgans. Add to
this the Byzantine despotism and its authoritarian religion and the
traumas that 250 years of struggle against the Mongol invader must have
engendered. In spite of the repression through the millenia, the
cooperative and libertarian communist practices survived among the
Ukrainian and Russian peasants. These took the form of the MIR – village
ownership of the farm lands and their egalitarian distribution and the
ARTELS – village production cooperatives. These libertarian communist
practices were such that both Karl Marx and the Socialist Revolutionary
Party thought that the Russian lands need not pass through capitalism,
but on the basis of these practices develop a socialist society.<br /><br />The
positive aspect of the Russian peoples – their “instinctual” anarchism,
means we should not give up on either the Russian or Ukrainian peoples,
no matter the nature of their leaders or the system that dominates and
exploits them. <br /><br />(*) Nestor Makhno would have liked to have heard this.</span></span></p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-12597406047257921262022-02-26T12:23:00.005-08:002022-02-26T12:23:32.963-08:00POLITICAL PARTIES Part 3 LIMITING THE EFFECTS OF THE IRON LAW<p>
</p><p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">One
of Michels observations is undoubtedly true. Only a minority is ever
involved. But this fact does not mean the “iron law” is
inevitable. Cooperatives or strata councils are run by a small group
and usually a minority attends the mass meetings. As long as these
groups are governed according to the wishes of the membership, this
minority situation holds sway. However, should the executive decide
to act contrary to the wishes of the membership, people come out of
the woodwork, vote down the proposal and elect a new executive. These
changes can occur as long as the structure of the organization allows
it. If there are clauses in the organizations constitution that
limit the powers of the membership, then the leadership will have its
way, and the iron law is functioning. </span></span></span></span>
</p><p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Here
are two examples, one positive, one negative. A Vancouver credit
union was taken over by individuals who used the institution for
speculation in real estate. Members rallied and eventually voted out
the speculators and returned the institution to its original mandate.
Mountain Equipment Coop was taken over by a group that grossly
overextended the business leading to bankrupsy. They decided to sell
the coop to an American corporation. The membership revolted and
tried to stop this. But unfortunately there was a clause that
allowed the leadership to ignore the the membership and so the coop
was sold, in spite of the membership's wishes. Hence structure
matters and the iron law can be offset.</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Michels
lumps syndicalism in with regular trade unions and political parties
as being subject to the iron law. We have to remember that when he
wrote POLITICAL PARTIES the syndicalist movement was only about
sixteen years old. Later syndicalists would learn from the mistakes
of the early movements. The French CGT soon developed a
self-perpetuating leadership. Leon Jouhaux led the union for 40 years
and other syndicalist leaders spent decades in office. </span></span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Later
syndicalist unions like the IWW introduced term limits to prevent the
formation of a permanent leadership clique. One's office was limited
to two terms of a year, and then you could not run again for five
years. Michels complaint might be that term limits would harm the
organization by eliminating skilled experienced leaders. But these
people did not disappear. They were always there for advice if
needed, and furthermore assumed other important, but non-executive
roles. These included traveling delegates,organizers, public
speakers, and writers. Like Indigenous Elders, they had input, but
no executive power.</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Michels
wrote of how the party or union, to be effective needed certain
skilled, educated individuals. These became the core of the
bureaucracy and eventually led to a more conservative outlook on the
part of the institution. The IWW simply contracted lawyers and
accountants, using them for their advice and skills, but not making
them part of the union structure. </span></span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Throughout
the history of the IWW various groups have tried to take over the
organization, and thus establish elite control, but have never
succeeded. The reason for this failure is the union structure. It is
first and foremost highly decentralized. Each branch is
semi-autonomous. The only way the IWW could pull a branch charter
(dissolving the branch) would be if the group acted totally contrary
to the constitution of the union. Each branch freely elects its
officers and delegates on an annual basis. Each year there is a
Convention of the union and each branch elects delegates to it, the
number dependent upon the size of the branch. The role of the
Convention delegate is to carry out the will of the branch they
represent. There are also term limits as to convention delegates. The
Convention does not decide the union policies. They merely discuss
the proposed amendments and policies – which have been sent in by
the membership – and develop them into a workable “package”
that the membership as a whole – by secret ballot – will then
vote on later that year at the same time they also vote in the new
General Executive Board. Hence the IWW, and similar syndicalist
unions, have avoided the rule of a clique, the formation of a
bureaucracy and the eventual rejection of its radical syndicalist
policies for conservative unionism. At the same time, it is not a
fossil from 1905, but has changed as is needed, without forgetting
its essential attributes.</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="background: transparent;">As
well as the IWW there is also the example of the </span></span></span>International
Typographical Union. Seymour Martin Lipset analyzed this union in
<i>UNION DEMOCRACY</i>. A number of factors counter-acted the iron
law. “The first and perhaps most important has to do with the way
the union was founded. Unlike many other unions... organized from the
top down, the ITU had a number of large, strong, local unions who
valued their autonomy, which existed long before the international
was formed. This local autonomy was strengthened by the economy of
the printing industry which operated in largely local and regional
markets... Large locals continued to jealously guard this autonomy
against encroachments by international officers. Second, the
existence of factions helped place a check on the oligarchic
tendencies that existed at the national headquarters. Leaders that
are unchecked tend to develop larger salaries and more sumptuous
lifestyles, making them unwilling to go back to their previous jobs.
But with a powerful out faction ready to expose profligacy, no
leaders dared take overly generous personal remuneration.” 1.</span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">The
social movements of the 21<sup>st</sup> Century practice both
“talking circles” and consensus. Of course, these tend to be ad
hoc rather than permanent organizations, but it is not difficult to
see how these procedures can counteract the iron law. By consensus, I
mean “modified consensus” - not full consensus where one
individual can block the proceedings, a situation untenable in large
gatherings. The talking circle entails everyone having input, no one
can hold down the floor as speaking time is limited, and no one may
speak again until all others have. With consensus, the only
policies adopted are those that have the overwhelming agreement of
the whole group. It is not hard to see how such methods when used in
permanent organizations would prevent the formation of dominant
cliques and the imposition of policies contrary to the wishes of the
membership. </span></span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Anarchists
did not need Michels to tell them about the problems of organization.
Indeed, they knew about the “iron law” well before it was coined
as a term. It is precisely methods of organization that separated the
Marxian socialists from the libertarian socialists. Socialist and
Marxist Leninist groups and parties have for some strange reason
ignored POLITICAL PARTIES. The result has been an on-going move
toward the right among mass-based parties, cultism and/or
factionalism among the smaller groups. None seem able to question the
structure or procedures of their organizations. They search for
excuses outside of their sect, but never themselves. Hence they are
doomed to be either capitalist reformists or generals without an
army.</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">The
German Green Party initially was aware of the problems of
organization, being influenced by anarchism. However, the rotation of
MPs, decentralization and consensus seemed incompatible with a
functioning parliamentary party. Thus, the Greens moved in the
direction of a more conventional form of internal politics. The Green
experience indicates that the parliamentary system is ultimately
incompatible with a more developed and inclusive form of democracy. </span></span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">1.
https://www.liquisearch.com/iron_law_of_oligarchy/examples_and_exceptions</span></span></span></span></p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-72937427869975883142022-02-20T15:24:00.000-08:002022-02-20T15:24:08.616-08:00Part 2 Robert Michels - POLITICAL PARTIES The Errors of “POLITICAL PARTIES”<p><br /></p><div><div class="" dir="auto"><div class="ecm0bbzt hv4rvrfc dati1w0a e5nlhep0" data-ad-comet-preview="message" data-ad-preview="message" id="jsc_c_hp"><div class="j83agx80 cbu4d94t ew0dbk1b irj2b8pg"><div class="qzhwtbm6 knvmm38d"><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto"><div class="kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">There are a number of assumptions made by Michels which are not based upon empirical evidence and are little better than elitist prejudices, or at best, may have been true at the time, but are no longer the case today. There is a “pathology of the crowd” and the “masses incapable of most necessary resolutions.” 25 In the “lower stages of civilization, tyranny dominant.” 32 As we know from anthropology, societies without the state tend toward consensus and are not tyrannies.</div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Millions cannot make decisions without intermediaries. Assemblies of thousands have the “gravest difficulties”. (Tell that to the Indignados) 26 Hence the need for delegates to represent the mass” 27(A confusion between representation and delegation) 25 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">“A strong organization needs a strong leadership.” 36 A “fighting party needs a hierarchical structure” as “liberty must yield to the need for prompt action.” and “democracy incompatible with strategic promptness.” 42 All are assumptions and are counter-acted by evidence, such as the anarchist militias in Spain, the Zapatistas, the Kurdish militias etc.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">For most people the relationship of the “good of the individual and the good of the collectivity... little developed.” which is why parties reject referenda as a means of safeguarding democracy.” 42 This was written two years before tens of millions of men went off to get themselves killed in a misguided, but nonetheless authentic desire to sacrifice themselves for the national collectivity. </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">The majority are indifferent, only a minority take part in party decisions. 50</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">(Are they really indifferent, or just happy with the way the organization functions? About 90% of the IWW members do not bother to vote in the annual elections – yet these same members are active in activities of their branches.)</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">There is a huge difference of educational level among members, giving rise for a need for leadership. 53 (This may have been true in the past, but part of today's lack of deference toward authority is rooted in the fact that many of us are better educated than our masters.) 53</div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">The masses have a need to “prostrate themselves” before their leaders, which is the remains of a “religious need.” 67. This may have been true to an extent in the past, but today – other than the far-right – witness the adulation of Trump – most people have a fairly cynical view of their wannabe leaders.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">The anarchists are “enemies of all organization.” 81 Not that old cliché again!</div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Bernstein is quoted as evidence. He denies the average person the knowledge and ability to make “unreconstructed popular sovereignty” possible and as the masses lack a sense of responsibility, “socialism is [not] everything BY the people, but everything FOR the people.” 88. For social democracy, democracy is an end, not a means. The mass must submit to the leaders, who know more than they do.” 95 Ominous! Here we have socialism stripped of its the self-managed essence. Right-wing social democracy begins to confuse state ownership with socialism.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Michels complains in a rather priggish way about the vast numbers of associations social democratic workers belonged to. Lacking the slightest notion of the pre-figurative – all the good stuff has to wait for the Party taking power – he sees this associationalism – today seen as one of the high points of German social democracy - as dangerously “petty-bourgeois.” This is from the guy who ten years later supports Mussolini! 289</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Michels refers to syndicalism's attempts to overcome the iron law by reducing the control of a minority over the union. He criticizes this attempt by confusing delegation and representation, asking how can the problems of organization be overcome by an antidote rooted in representation? 340 He sees the oligarchic nature of French syndicalism in the lack on initiative of the working classes. They don't move unless told to by the union. Only a handful of union members subscribe to the CGT press. 354 But activists are always a minority, everywhere. This is only a problem if this minority becomes a self-perpetuating elite, or tries to force itself boss-like upon the mass of workers.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">He assumes that social wealth could only be administered by a bureaucracy which leads to the impossibility of a society without classes, as the adminstrators end up with the power of a capitalist. These administrators would use their power and relative wealth compared to the workers to secure the same positions for their children. 383 Michels has seemingly no conception of self-management, and the use of decentralization and federalism to minimize the possibility of a centralized bureaucracy forming.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">He reiterates Marx's complaint about the position of the Federal Council anarchists on the need to send delegates to committees. According to Marx, these delegates would “be invested with an authoritative character.” 359 This is pure obfuscation, since delegates carry out the will of the assembly and can be recalled by the assembly. </div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">NEXT - Part 3 LIMITING THE EFFECTS OF THE IRON LAW</div></div></span></div></div></div></div></div>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-71930789089157062992022-02-17T13:33:00.008-08:002022-02-17T13:33:36.249-08:00THE FEMINIZATION OF THE WORKING CLASS AND ITS POLITICAL IMPACT<p>
</p><p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Based
on “Quelle coalition face au bloc bourgeois?” By Pierre Rimbert,
Monde Diplomatique, February 2022</span></span></span></span>
</p><p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Rimbert
points out that a major transformation of French society has been
largely ignored. Within the last 50 years the working classes have
become in the majority, women. In 1970 38% of women were workers and
the same percent were actively involved in the economy. (As workers,
owners, petty bourgeois etc)</span></span></span></span>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">By
2020 48.5% of these “actives” and 52% of the working classes were
women. In 1970 women aged 25-59 made up 50% of the actives compared
to 95% of the men. Today 82% of women are actives and 91.9 % of the
men. </span></span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">As
for the class structure of France, some 20% of the active population
are bourgeois, petty bourgeois and managerial class. Almost half of
the actives are blue collars of which 80% are male. Of the lower
wage, less educated white collars 75% are women. Of the 10% of the
actives who are educated white collar workers (teachers, nurses,
techs etc) these are in the majority women. </span></span></span></span>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Over
the last 25 or more years the French economy has undergone a
transformation. A loss of blue collar employment and many white
collar office workers, bank clerks etc. There has been a host of new
“care” jobs such as child care, aides in old age homes, hospital
and teaching auxiliaries, cleaners, etc. There is a second,
pre-existing group of government employees, nurses, teachers and
technicians. (the latter three professions have also expanded.) The
two groups make up 60% of white collar workers and are overwhelmingly
women. People have also commented on how the gilet jaune movement had
a large number of women from both groups of white collar workers.</span></span></span></span>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">The
“care” section is also where one finds a great number of
immigrant workers. It should be noted that the female workers
suffer from much greater precarity than men, have lower wages, are
shunted into part time without benefits, etc.</span></span></span></span>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">At
the same time the Covid lock downs have made everyone aware of how
important these care jobs and other essential services, are –
which are mainly staffed by women. </span></span></span></span>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Rimbert
believes that for the left to reconquer lost ground, it must focus on
these women workers, especially of the essential services. The French
left (and by extension elsewhere, since these developments are not
unique to France) should focus more on this growing sector of the
class and less upon its dying sector.</span></span></span></span>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">There
has been a fair amount of moaning among the Anglosphere left about
“where is the working class and why don't they like us anymore?”
(by which they seem to mean blue collars.) Well, Jacobin and Tribune,
put away your hankies – here is your working class!</span></span></span></span>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-10436069809826122412022-02-17T13:31:00.001-08:002022-02-17T13:31:23.849-08:00Robert Michels and the Social Democratic Parties.<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">The
social democratic parties started out in the late 19<sup>th</sup>
century as socialist, by which they meant public ownership and
democratic control of the major industries. In time their, actual
practice devolved into one of gradual social reform and the
socialist goal was restricted to an indefinite future. In the 1950s,
even this “Sunday sermon socialism” was dropped, as well as the
notion of class struggle, and the Marxist analysis of capitalism.
Social democracy was reduced to liberal reformism. In the 1990s
reformism was tossed aside, and most social democratic parties became
centrist parties with neoliberal economics combined with a touch of
social progressivism. (Sort of “We support feminism, but are
cutting funding to your Woman's Centre.”) The socialists who all
along the way resisted these developments, had a difficult time of
it, being marginalized, purged, or in the case of Rosa Luxemburg,
murdered.</span></span></span></span>
</p><p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Here
in Canada there was a similar trajectory. (Except for the part about
murder.) The CCF started out as a socialist party, but the right wing
soon isolated the socialists. In 1956 they dropped all reference to
socialism. Workers education and any concept of class had gone by the
board earlier. The CCF relaunched itself as the liberal reformist
NDP. Troublesome socialists were isolated or driven out, the most
infamous example being the purge of the Waffle Group. While the NDP
never took power federally, it had a number of provincial governments
and important reforms were enacted. During the 1990s these same NDP
governments went neoliberal and turned on their supporters, cutting
back social services, privatizing, and even stooping to mass arrests
of environmental protestors. </span></span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">How
do you explain this sad story? The inevitable corruption of leaders
or some innate tendency toward moderation are superficial
explanations. The problem must be structural. The social scientist
who closely examined the structure of the social democratic parties
and how this effected their political evolution is found in Robert
Michels and his ground breaking 1911 study, POLITICAL PARTIES.(Hearst
International Library, NYC, 1915) </span></span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">While
POLITICAL PARTIES was aimed at social democracy, it also applies to
trade unions and any other organization with similar internal
structures. What is most remarkable for me about his study is the
lack of effect upon the internal policies of these organizations.
They have continued to stumble on, blithely unaware it seems, of any
need to counter-act this “iron law of oligarchy.” And they wonder
why they have lost support...</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Michels
begins with the rather obvious observation that a workers movement
requires organization, since workers are defenseless in isolation.
But organization brings “dangers in its train.” p. 22 “Political
organization leads to power, and this power is always conservative.”
366 “Where delegated authority is of brief duration, representation
is possible. But permanent representation will always be the
exercise of dominion... over the represented.” 40</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">The
embourgeoisification of social democracy is not, as many claimed back
in 1910, the result of bourgeois joining the party, but rather the
changes that take place within the working class leadership, due to
the nature of the party structure. 270</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">As
the party grows, bureaucracy is needed and this involves become paid
positions. Such positions separate the working class militants who
take on these roles from the class itself. They are now secure party
functionaries and not “dirt-beneath-their nails” workers subject
to the whims of the capitalists. Bureaucracy leads to further
centralization and the formation of a conservative bureaucratic
grouping. 116</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">The
bigger the organization, the more specialization. The more
specialization, the less ability to see the “big picture” and the
less desire to study the underlying problems of society.
Specialization leads to philistinism, anti-intellectualism, and a
renunciation of the movement's final goals. 188 As bureaucracy
increases, the cultural and internationalist aspects of socialism
declines. As a result [the] “mechanism becomes an end in itself.”
187</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">This
need for technical experts, creates an elite. Party leaders begin to
make decisions on their own without consulting the rank and file
which is indicative of a decline in democracy. Pps. 32, 34 Leaders
tend to have oratorical ability. Educated people who do not possess
these skills are thus side-lined. 70. A mediocre intellect who is a
good speaker or has charm and charisma takes precedence in the party
and this adds to its intellectual decline. Such leaders tend to have
a low opinion of the masses. The masses supposed incompetence is
then used to justify further exclusion from party business. 151</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">MPs
soon become leaders of the party and this leads to further erosion of
rank and file control, as MPs are elected for long terms and by
electors and not party members. 136 Elected representatives often
become “lifelong incumbents” thus increasing their control. 43.
Party members and supporters tend to believe that the parliamentary
way the only way and thus do not wish to make life difficult for MPs
by challenging them to any extent. 138 <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">The
MPs think they are superior to the Party Congress and claim
increasing autonomy. They then restrict what can be voted on at the
Congress, out of fear for their own positions. </span>Threats of
resignation of office are also used as hammer to force one's position
upon the party. 43 <span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">The leadership
is in danger of becoming “a closed corporation cut off from the
party.” 140-141</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Development
of profession politicians and party leaders increases over time, and
“all sense of solidarity lost” toward the working class. 81. The
parliamentary experience in manipulative politics is used within the
party against dissidents. p. 84 Leaders become a major source of
power and make sure of this by making themselves indispensable. 86 A
very strong loyalty to leaders develops which is stronger than the
loyalty felt toward to government officials among the masses. Inertia
plays a role as well, since the leadership is “already
constituted.” Leadership comes less from election by the masses,
not to mention individuals rising from them, and more one of
cooptation from a narrow group acceptable to the party leaders.
98-104</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Radically
changing policies within a party is a difficult and disruptive
process, that almost always fails. Eliminating a leader unpopular
with the ranks is considered a crime by the party bosses, and if
forced to step down, this unpopular person is given a new post by the
leadership. 158 Wherever opposition arises within a party, it is
attacked as a result of intrigue, and slandered as an attempt to
destroy the party. The leaders claim to be under attack and demand
the confidence of the members. Criticism of leaders seen as an attack
on the party. This is similar to governments claiming that
demonstrators are attacking constituted authority, when all they seek
are reforms. 224 “Every autonomous movement... signifies a profound
discordance with the... leaders... Apart from such transient
interruptions the.. normal development... will impress... an
indelible stamp of conservatism.” 162</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Party
members do become aware of the oligarchical nature of their
organization. But “far from recognizing the real fount of
oligarchical evil in the centralization of power... they often
consider that the best means of counteracting [it] is to intensify
this very centralization.” 15 This is seen in Marxist Leninist
organizations especially.</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Michels
confuses “representation” with “delegation” throughout his
study, and the real problem lies with the former. The representative
is elected for a given term, cannot be easily removed and as a group
they are quite autonomous in their decision making. Such a situation
combined with the party bureaucracy can only give rise to a
self-perpetuating clique that can only be removed from power with a
great deal of effort which is usually highly damaging to the party.</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">Numbers
in the text refer to the page numbers of POLITICAL PARTIES</span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="LEFT" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: d%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: #00000a;"><span style="font-family: Verdana;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background: transparent;">PART
TWO will examine the flaws in Michel's analysis and discuss ways of
overcoming the “iron law of oligarchy.”</span></span></span></span></p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-20503273430704597842022-01-01T12:25:00.003-08:002022-01-01T12:25:33.457-08:00SOCIETY BEFORE DOMINATION<p> <span style="font-size: medium;"><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb d3f4x2em iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto"></span></span></p><div class="kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Warning – long read. This was written in 2018 and covers some of the territory of DAWN OF EVERYTHING. If written today would be nuanced by DAWN. It is part of a larger work called ETHICS, ANARCHISM and HUMAN CONDITION published in January of 2021</span></div></div><p></p><div><div class="" dir="auto"><div class="ecm0bbzt hv4rvrfc dati1w0a e5nlhep0" data-ad-comet-preview="message" data-ad-preview="message" id="jsc_c_qn"><div class="j83agx80 cbu4d94t ew0dbk1b irj2b8pg"><div class="qzhwtbm6 knvmm38d"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb d3f4x2em iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto"><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">"One of the best kept secrets is that practically all of the material and social technologies fundamental to civilization were developed before the imposition of dominator society." 1 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> At one time, there was a common world view; one that emphasized unity, the sacredness of nature and the common good. At a certain point in history this unity was sundered, the common good reduced to the needs of a parasitic minority and nature as wealth to plunder. How this came about is a very important question. To begin to answer this we have to look more closely at the social and economic lives of early humans and the historic peoples who still lived in relative harmony with nature and each other. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">We have already seen in a previous chapter how this world-view is based upon inter-relationship and unity. Rather than reiterate, I will leave you with three examples only. The motto of Clayquot Sound people of Vancouver Island, Hishuk ish Ts'awalk (everything is one) The Nuu Chach Nulth perspective is "Nothing is isolated from other aspects of life surrounding it and within it. This concept is the basis for the respect for nature that our people live with." 2 Further north, on Haida Gwaii, the Haida concepts yahquudanga (respect for everything) and gina'waadiuuxan gud ad kwasid (everything depends on everything else) reflect the same conception of existence. That such a world-view should deeply effect and reflect the social life of these peoples should seem obvious to the reader.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Land Tenure Social life was based on what was in essence a cooperative, communally-owned economy. This cooperation lay at the very root of what it means to be human. As Richard Leakey pointed out, food sharing is the essence of reciprocity, and is something only humans do. 3 Social life was what made us intelligent, and this was rooted in sharing. 4 . According to anthropologist Levi Strauss, "reciprocity as mutual exchange [is the] fundamental structural principle of societies." 5 A food-sharing society is, of course, one that is highly egalitarian, as compared with a system where the means of existence are appropriated and consumed by a minority.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> For cooperation to exist beyond a mere handful of people , sedentary living was necessary. While the remains of long houses and small villages can be found dating back to 20-30,000 years, the great move to sedentary existence came with the improved rainfall after 13,000 BCE. More rain meant more plants and no need for migration. 6. The drought of Younger Dryas period, circa 10,000 BCE, triggered agriculture. Sedentary living preceded plant domestication, and farming was “no great conceptual break” since semi-farming was done by hunter-gatherers. 7. When conditions were right – less ability to easily forage – the transition to crop growing was made.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> In spite of the development of agriculture, European forest clearing was "minimal" until 1000 BCE. Early farmers were also foragers, but the clearing that happened after 1000 BCE made the fall back on wild foods difficult for some populations. 8. Europe was mostly covered with heavy forest until Roman times and the ease or difficulty of survival for farmers depended upon proximity to fishing and hunting grounds . Virtually from the beginning of agriculture, if people became fully dependent upon crops produced in a climatically dry area, such as Jericho circa 6700 BCE, environmental degradation resulted. 9. Famine caused such systems to collapse and populations to disburse to other areas. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Hence, Archaic and Aboriginal egalitarian societies practiced foraging, horticulture and animal domestication. It is an error to fetishize the various economic developments amongst these peoples as rigid 'stages' of history. As hinted at in the preceding paragraph, when people started planting crops or keeping sheep, they did not stop fishing, hunting, gathering wild plants, fruit and nuts. Foraging complemented the agricultural. What was produced was a balanced economy and thus a balanced diet. All natural economies are thus mixed economies, and few, if any, free peasant communities were ever purely agricultural. Only with the advent of the state and class division, were peasants reduced to the role of purely agricultural producers – and that was for the masters, and even then, the Commons with its foraging rights continued to exist until the 19th Century.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> It has long been thought that women developed agriculture. Whether this is true or not, most Aboriginal cultures see women as the 'moving spirit' behind agriculture and the sedentary life. 10. It is not hard to see that a sedentary life would improve the lives of women and children, as compared to a nomadic existence.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Nor can agriculture be blamed for the resulting class division and state-building. Recent studies show "repeatedly" that inequality is "more than simply an epiphenomenon." [of agriculture] 11. One need only ask how it was that the peoples of New Guinea had a yam-based economy for 8000 years and never developed a state or classes. Or how the Hopi, Wendat, and Iroquois grew crops for 2000 years and rather than building a state, went in the opposite direction. Authoritarian relations are much more than an 'epiphenomenon' of agriculture, indeed, agriculture is only a necessary precondition. But a precondition is not a cause. The cause must be found elsewhere.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The development of agriculture did not necessarily mean conflict with the earlier forager populations, as they occupied different ecological niches. The earliest agriculturalists of Europe came from the Near East and settled "in exactly those areas avoided by hunters and gatherers", ie, river valleys and loess plains of Danube basin, circa 5600 BCE 12. Farming spread from the Ukraine to France in about 300 years. There was a uniformity of burial styles, architecture and artifacts, among these peoples, showing that foragers became farmers. There is "overwhelming evidence against population replacement in the spread of the Neolithic." 13 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Land tenure was on a usufruct basis. Forests, meadows and uncleared land were held in common.14. Communal lands not used for cultivation were open to all for hunting, fishing, plants and timber. Usufruct "ensured an equitable distribution of property... prevented land hoarding for wealth and status." 15. Generally, land was not bought or sold. It could be loaned but never permanently alienated, since the land did not belong only to the present people, but future generations as well. 16. According to the Jesuit chronicler, Charlevoix, writing in the 17th Century New France, Indigenous people "... hold that all things should be common to all men." 17 No First Nations people ever thought of property as a commodity or even an absolute right. . </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> This communal concept did not vanish with the arrival of the European invaders. In Indian Territory (Oklahoma) "not a pauper in that nation, and the nation did not owe a dollar... and it built its own schools and hospitals... Yet the defect of the system was apparent... they own their land in common. It is Henry George's system and under that there is no enterprise to make your home better than your neighbors. There is no selfishness, which is the bottom of civilization..."18. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Nor was this land tenure system limited to the Americas. Indeed, it was universal before the development of class division and the state. For example, the Celts had communal land ownership, which the Romans replaced with private ownership when they conquered them. 19 The Brehon Laws of Ireland had the land shared by kinship groups. This was destroyed and turned into private property by the English in the 17th Century. 20. In Highland Scotland the clans owned the land. The clan chief was a nominal owner only, like the Queen of England as nominal owner of the United Kingdom. 21</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">For the Germanic tribes, “The land which was not taken possession of by the village remained at the disposal of the hundred. [local regional government of several villages] What was not assigned to the latter remained for the shire...[ county] 22 In Switzerland the lands were allotted to each family to grow crops. Once the harvest was over, the land returned to the commons to be used as a communal pasture. 23</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">“Thus in Sweden we find all these different stages of common holding side by side. Each village had its village common land (bys almänningar), and beyond this was the hundred common land (härads), the shire common land (lands), and finally the people’s common land. In Caesar’s time, one of the largest tribes, the Suevi,... cultivated their fields in common... Tacitus (150 years after Caesar) only mentions the tilling of the soil by individual families. But the land to be tilled only belonged to them for a year. Every year it was divided up anew and redistributed.” 24. In Kievan Russia, the peasants were defacto owners of the land, though it was nominally owned by the prince. “The peasant held his land from the commune.” 25. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Political Structure According to social critic Jerry Mander, "Virtually all traditional tribal people share three primary political principles; 1. All land, water and forest community owned... 2. all tribal decisions by consensus, in which every member participates. 3. chiefs are not coercive, authoritarian rulers... more like teachers or facilitators. According to anthropologist Pierre Clastres "no relationship of command-obedience is in force." 27. Other scholars and commentators agree with Mander's observations: North West Coast chiefs had to seek advice from councils. "... they had little direct power over free individuals... little evidence they had power over the estate or fellow house members." 28.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> While villages and bands were autonomous, this did not mean there was no mutual aid or peaceful relations among these groups. Cooperation sometimes came about in reaction to outside forces. The Chumash in California faced a major drought circa 1150 AD and began to fight over scarce resources. They realized the danger of this and cooperated, shifting their resource extraction from plant food to seafood. The Chumash were "without rigid social ranks, warriors or slaves...[their society] arose as a brilliant solution to an unpredictable world of climatic extremes. 29.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The traditional reason for the formation of the Iroquois Confederacy was an attempt to overcome the violence among the various Iroquoian speaking groups. As relative newcomers to the north eastern part of North America, they were probably under pressure from the previous inhabitants. The 13h Century saw a cooling of the climate, which also would have made life more difficult for them and would also contribute to inter-group conflict. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Hul'qui'num Villages of Vancouver Island were in "loose alliances" with each other for food gathering and defense. There was "no formal organization, no village chief or council. Co-operation and ad hoc leadership [was] for specific purposes, exercised by virtue of specific skills." 30. In reference to the Montagnais people "... they have neither political organization... nor authority... therefore they never kill each other to acquire these honours... not one of them gives himself to the Devil to acquire wealth." Also the women held "great power". 31. " [They] ... cannot endure in the least those who seem desirous of assuming superiority over the others." 32. The Malecite (New Brunswick) met at an annual council to settle disputes and re-allocate hunting grounds. 33. The Ojibwa and Saulteaux, had a highly diffused, non-hierarchical form of governance. 34. . For the Athabaska, leadership was from anyone showing ability, including women. 35. The Coast Salish had house chiefs from both sexes, but their power was circumscribed. There was no central authority in spite of a very hierarchical status system. 36. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The early anthropologist W.H. Maine described the villages in India, "The council of village elders does not command anything... nor is there right or duty in an Indian village; a person aggrieved complains not of an individual wrong, but of the disturbance of the order of the entire society." 26 This latter is much like First Nations attitudes to wrongs committed, rather than punishment of , the main concern is restoring harmony to the group. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Nor was this egalitarianism restricted just to the Americas or to 'simple' foraging societies.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> "The principle characteristics of incipiently stratified societies in much of later prehistoric Europe is the relatively small scale of inequality." 37. According to Colin Renfrew, a "group oriented politics" prevailed in megalithic Europe and Malta with monumental architecture, but no individual displays of wealth. 38. The civilization of the Indus Valley was "the most egalitarian of all." 39. For ancient Ireland, it was "difficult in the court tombs context to point out any object... that screamed 'kingship' or even exalted states for any individual." 40. In Bronze Age Europe there were "no powerful kings or centralized bureaucracies... most people lived in small villages much the same as the first farmers 3000 years earlier.” 41. There was "No evidence in all Old Europe of patriarchal chieftanates." 42. At a much later date, the chiefs in Celtic and Germanic societies prior to feudalism '... were subjected to the authority of the councils... the powers... belonged to the community meeting in full assembly." 43.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The natural unit in Native American society was the self-governing village.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Each village owned its surrounding territory and the 'tribe' was a European invention. 44. The self-governing village would have been the common system with foragers and non-class divided agriculturalists, elsewhere in the world. Nor were these villages necessarily tiny hamlets of a few dozen people. Wendat villages had up to 2500 or more inhabitants. 45. Cowichan villages could have as many as 1700 inhabitants. 46. The Eastern Bororo of Matto Grosso has villages of 1500 people. 47 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> If you look at these villages in terms of contemporary mega-cities, you will not understand the significance of their population size. By way of comparison, we have population figures from late 17th Century England. In 1688 three quarters of England lived in villages. They averaged less than 200 inhabitants. 16% lived in towns or cities, the average size little more than 1000 people. 48. About one fifth of the villages were free, ie run by the peasants themselves. The gentry, who were only 5% of the population, controlled two thirds of the territory. 49. Note also, the difference in land tenure between the English peasants and Aboriginal farmers. Unlike their Native American contemporaries, 80% of them were dominated by a parasitic 'nobility.'</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> How did village-based societies relate to other groups? While conflict certainly existed, it was not necessarily dominant. The Cree had a word for the type of relations they sought. This word was witaskewin – and its meaning was, "How people not of same nation can live together... [by] continually re-negotiated peaceful co-existence." 50. The natural outcome of witaskewin was to form confederacies with other groups, and if not confederacies, informal, peaceful relations based upon trade or defense. The most famous confederacy was that of the Iroquois, but the concept was widespread. Other groups must have had their own witaskawin philosophy.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> In fourth millennium Western Mediterranean societies, it was "difficult to detect warlike activities." 51. The more violent Bell Beaker culture penetrated the Western Mediterranean from 2450-on. A mass burial of war victims at La Vacause occurred approximately 2000 BCE. 52. 2000 BCE, was, of course, more than 4000 years after agriculture developed in that area. There was little evidence of violence in Neolithic and early Bronze Age Ireland, but a "formidable arsenal of weapons" have been found from late Bronze Age. 53. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The following people formed confederacies; The four different Algonquin peoples in the Maine - New Brunswick area, 54. the Blackfoot Confederacy of Blood, Peigan, Blackfoot and Sub-arctic Algonquin and the Sioux had a confederacy of seven groups. 55. The Wendat were some 40,000 people in twenty five villages divided into five groups. 56. The Wendat confederacy was not just for peace but also for trade. Alliances were also made with Eries and Montagnais, as well as Mi'kmaq, Penobscots and Delawares on the Atlantic coast – a vast network of trade and friendship. 57. The Eastern Bororo showed little sign of inter-village violence. They had four different clans. Some fifty four villages were confederated and former enemies, the Kayapo, Karowa, Kurogi also joined up. "By the establishment of ritual names and reciprocity... internal peace became part of the new morality." 58. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Complex cooperative concepts of land usage also played a political role. Saltspring Island was jointly owned by the Cowichan, Snuneymuxw, Penelakut and Saanich nations. The Europeans could not understand this, "the difficulty arising from the Indian custom of descent from the female side..." Also "because of complex inter-village kinship, warfare among Hul'qui'num [was] practically non-existent." 59. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Why Did the Egalitarian Societies Change? </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> "No possibility that the [patriarchical] could have developed out of the Old European matrilineal... balanced society... a collision of two ideologies, not an evolution." p. 396 Marija Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, Harper, 1991</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Until 400 years ago, at least one third of the population lived in stateless societies. 1600 marks the beginning of the hegemony of the state. p. 14, James C. Scott, Against the Grain, Yale, 2017 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">“One True God, one true answer, and one right way... results in a social structure consisting of specialists... ranked in terms of prestige... results in [a] social class structure.” Leroy Little Bear , in John Ralston Saul, The Comeback, Viking, 2014, p. 228 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The classical Marxist view of the demise of what they called "primitive communism", i.e., the egalitarian societies of the prehistoric period, has been contradicted by anthropology and archeology. The Marxist concept is that early humans lived in such material scarcity they were forced to share out of necessity. Once agriculture arrived, there was now a storable surplus of wealth and eventually this was appropriated by the higher-status individuals like chiefs and shamans. This gave rise to class society – and the state which was needed to preserve with violence this class inequality. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> This Hobbsian view of foragers has been contradicted by paleontologists - one example being the height of hunter-gatherers. A people living in scarcity would have a lower protein diet and hence would be short in stature. But the decline in height comes after foraging was replaced by the agricultural states. Evidence shows there was plenty of food for foragers during the paleolithic. Agriculture is also not necessary for storable wealth. There were many rich non-agricultural societies like Kwakwakawak and Tsmishian, who engaged in the smoking and drying of fish, and the manufacture of other storable food items. Humans were storing parched grain 28,000 BCE, Salting, drying and smoking of meat began long before agriculture. Some paleontologists are of the view that the semi-domestication of reindeer was occurring 20,000 years ago. Nor were storable food items the only forms of wealth that could be accumulated. Trade in shells, and useful tool-making stone like flint, nephrite, and obsidian, long preceded agriculture. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> As for the origins of crop-growing, Scientists never thought to search for the origins of agriculture in the tropical regions and so reduced its origins to the Middle East. There is strong evidence that in the tropical areas humans were altering the landscape as far back as 45,000 years ago, and no clear cut division between foraging and growing.. “{Using techniques ranging from genetic sampling of forest ecosystems and isotope analysis of human teeth, to soil analysis and lidar, the researchers have found ample evidence that people at the equator were actively changing the natural world to make it more human-centric... people began burning down vegetation to make room for plant resources and homes. Over millennia, the simple practice of burning back forest evolved. People mixed specialized soils for growing plants; they drained swamps for agriculture; they domesticated animals like chickens; and they farmed yam, taro, sweet potato, chili pepper, black pepper, mango, and bananas. “</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> “[Scientists ]...realized they'd discovered a global pattern. Very similar evidence for ancient farming could be seen in equatorial Africa, South Asia, and Southeast Asia...They are challenging the idea of a "Neolithic revolution" ... In the tropics, there was no bright line between a nomadic existence and agricultural life...So rather than huge leaps, what we see is a continuation of this local knowledge and adaptation in these regions through time...Humans were clearly modifying environments and ...20,000 years ago in Melanesia, they were performing the extensive drainage of landscapes at Kuk Swamp to farm yams [and] bananas... There is also evidence that as soon as humans reached South America [and] took up residence in the Amazon [they] began farming.” 60. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> While the "scarcity of primitive communism" is an erroneous assumption, so too, is the idea that agriculture leads automatically to state and class formation. As before mentioned, the people of Papua have been growing yams for 8000 years, but only got a state when the Europeans imposed it upon them in the 20th Century. The Iroquoian people were agricultural for over a thousand years and rather than developing state and class division went in the opposite direction, one of stateless confederalism. Numerous other examples could be given. The reality is, all states have developed out of agricultural societies, but not all agricultural societies have developed states. Thus agriculture is a necessary pre-condition for state and class division, but cannot be the essential cause. This must be found elsewhere. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">According to John C. Scott, “All classical states based on grains, History records no cassava states, no sago, yam, plantain... states... only grains suited best to concentrated production.” “State formation becomes possible only when there are few alternatives to a diet dominated by domesticated grains.” 61. A broad subsistence web, foraging combined with crops and animals makes state formation difficult, 62. which is why Indigenous people of the Eastern USA, Old Europeans, Celtic, Teutonic and Slavic tribes – all grain growers, never produced a state. They were not dependent on grains. When the state arose in these areas it was imposed from without.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> For liberal anthropologists like Jared Diamond, states arise from chiefdoms through competition and conquest. 63. Here the problem is that chiefdoms have existed for thousands of years without becoming states and tribes have raided and feuded all this time without conquering territory and establishing a state. The best example of this is Papua with its thousands of tiny feuding chiefdoms and nary a state. Thus chiefdoms with their competition and feuding, though necessary preconditions, cannot be an essential cause. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The science of paleoclimatology provides a possible answer. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Climate Change As Major Factor The growing of crops in the tropics began about 30,000 years ago. At this point in our knowledge we can only speculate that refugees from the flooding of the coastal plains due to the melting of the glaciers might have influenced the development of farming in the Middle East. Whatever the origins, it commenced there about 11,000 BCE and was fairly well established 2000 years later. 64. According to the American Geographical Union, climate around the time the Middle Eastern agricultural societies developed was warm and damp. This climate persisted roughly 7000 to 3000 BCE, but there were many fluctuations. Around 6200 BCE agricultural development received a severe set-back due to the flooding of glacial waters into the Atlantic Ocean. This created an arid climate in Europe and the Middle East. Conflict erupted in central Anatolia and destruction of villages by fire resulted. 65.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Increasing humidity in Europe after 6000 BCE, encouraged farmers to follow the improving climate north and west. 66. A hot, dryer climate began to emerge about 4700 BCE, persisting to 3500 BCE. At this time the Sahara Lakes and the Ural Steppes begin to dry up. Agrarian societies also disappeared in Greece and Britain. 67. Around 2200 BCE a climate crisis severely effected much of the world. Old Kingdom Egypt went into crisis, the Akkadian Empire collapsed, the temple civilization of Malta disappeared, the Harrapian civilization of India was negatively effected. Dendrochronology and glacial ice core samples show evidence for severe climate change. Some scholars think it may have been the result of a super volcano, others a large meteorite. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> A second, even more severe wave of drying occurred between 2000 and 1600 BCE. (AGU Press release July 1999) The Sahara-Arabian area "played a crucial part in the history of man" and " in no other major belt was the interaction of man and milieu more oscillating in nature..." according to climate scientists. 68. Increasing aridity post 3500 BCE, led to population concentration and irrigation, preconditions for the state. 69.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Finally, there was the major crisis which effected all the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern cultures after 1200 BCE. Civilizations of Crete, Malta and Mycenae, were destroyed. Egypt and Assyria survived, but never recovered their former stature. About this time archeological evidence for an increase in violence appears in Western Europe. Many scientists think it was the result of a super volcano eruption in Iceland covering the sky with clouds of ash for several years. Other scholars, most especially Eric H. Cline, see the destruction as a combination of natural and human- made crises. 70. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The results of climate change appear in archeological remains. It appears that the change “[to] cattle keeping was probably a response to drying conditions” in the Western Desert of Egypt. “Six thousand years an overwhelming drought gripped the Western Sahara... Its effects are dramatically obvious in the archeological record... human beings virtually disappear...” 71. The Badarian culture were newcomers to the Nile Valley, having arrived from the Western Desert. The "severe fluctuations of the western pluvial 7000-2500 BCE", might have caused this influx. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> "Climate change a major factor" in the development of pre-dynastic culture. 72. The Nile delta was the site of an egalitarian farmer civilization circa 5000 BCE . 73. Upper Egypt conquered the delta peoples between 3300 and 3100 BCE and established an authoritarian system. 74. "No evidence of political centralization" in Lower Egypt, during 3500-3100, unlike in Upper Egypt. "The invention of the Egyptian state largely an Upper Egyptian Affair." 75. Falling Nile levels at the end of the pre-dynastic period [3100 BCE] triggered competition and conflict... eventually resulting in unification.” 76. Upper Egypt itself was probably a creation of the earlier invaders from the dried-up Sahara lakes .</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> The first invasions of the Old European Culture by steppe dwelling nomads occurred circa 4000 BCE., during the first period of dry climate. The next wave of invaders circa 3500 BCE completely destroyed the civilizations of Eastern Europe. 77. The descendents of these invaders, called the "Bell Beaker People" went into Western Europe and took over the megalithic societies about 2100 BCE 78. The egalitarian civilization of the Indus Valley disappeared circa 1800 BCE, which is well within the last drying period of 2000-1600 BCE </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Since the cooperative model disintegrated, is there some inherent weakness in it? Clearly not, as it was destroyed from outside. There was "no 'inner evolutionary transformation' and the state was "introduced by external factors." 79. There is, in fact, a “universal disinclination” to relinquish autonomy. The abolition of the free village could only come about through war. 80. In 1500 BCE there were an estimate 600,000 autonomous entities, by the year 2000, this had been reduced to one hundred ninety three. 81. “Force and not enlightened self-interest is the mechanism by which political evolution has led step by step from the autonomous village to the state.” 82. Societies choose subordination over extinction, thus war causes free societies to disappear. 83.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Climate change forced mass migration from the drying zones into the fertile and moist valleys. Previously, there had been the inter-group conflict that we are familiar with in observing band or village societies, which amounted to no more than raiding and feuding. We have also seen how migrants would chose different ecological niches and thus avoid conflict with the original inhabitants. With severe climate change there was seizure and permanent occupation of territory. The conquered valley populations would be more numerous than the invaders and this would lead to the need for a permanent repressive force to keep the vanquished in line. Thus the creation of the first states. The conquered would be made to work for, or at least pay taxes to their conquerors, giving rise to class division. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Slavery is a factor in class formation. Since slavery was practiced thousands of years before class division and in historically existing stateless societies, it is, like agriculture, a precondition for class and state, but not an ultimate cause. Culturally accepted enslavement meant that outsiders were game for exploitation, and it would make sense that with climate change based invasions, the conquered would be forced to work for the conquerors. The precedent had been set, perhaps thousands of years before. The difference was that in earlier times, and in existing stateless societies, slavery (or other forms of exploitation) was not the basis of the economy. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Uruk is believed to be the first state, forming 3200 BCE, but since it is not a Sumerian name, this would indicate conquest of the original population. 84. Peasants “will not automatically produce a surplus that elites might appropriate, but must be compelled to do it” In these early, but imperfect states, this would take the form of forced labour and taxation combined with slavery. 85. Only coercion prevents peasants from using alternative sources of food for subsistence, 86. as we have seen with the free peasant 'mixed economy.'</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Terror is never enough to make an unequal society function. 'Soft power' is needed, and thus domination was rationalized through changes in religious ideology and practices. Nature gods were gradually or quickly replaced by tyrannical sky gods, modeled on the conquering warrior kings. Shamans were replaced by a bureaucratic priesthood, who replaced knowledge of the divine through practice with belief in and fear of the gods. These religious developments were uneven and complex. Nature divinities, while playing secondary roles, were incorporated into pantheons along with tyrant gods. Egypt, India and China never really developed a tyrant sky god, and in certain ways remained true to the old partnership religious practices. [Some scholars are of the opinion that the transition from shaman to priest was already happening prior to state formation. See David Lewis-Williams, David Pearce, Inside the Neolithic Mind] The Aztecs and several American dominator societies incorporated shamanistic practices, such as use of psychedelics, in an otherwise violent religion. By about 3000 BCE the dominator triumvirate; class division, state and authoritarian religion was in place in the Middle East and ready to spread like a fatal cancer across the globe.</div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Notes</div></div><div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">1. p. 66 Riane Eisler, The Chalice and the Blade, Harper, 1995 . The list includes pottery, agriculture, towns, two story houses, building with bricks and stone, monumental architecture, weaving, spinning, use of metals, writing, art, music and musical instruments, dance, sail boats, long distance trade, jewelry, wine making and brewing, domestication of animals, use of herbal medicines and psychedelic plants. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">2. p. 231 Nancy J. Turner, The Earth's Blanket, Douglas and MacIntyre. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">3. p. 185, Richard Leakey, Origins Reconsidered, Doubleday, 1992 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">4. p. 285, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">5. p. 16, Harold Barclay People Without Government, London 1990</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">6. p. 88, David Lewis-Williams, David Pearce, Inside the Neolithic Mind, Thames and Hudson, 2009</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">7. p. 75, Robert Wright, Non Zero, Vintage 2000 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">8. pps. 122-125, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">9. p. 95, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">10. p. 63, Georges E. Sioui, Huron-Wendat – The History of the Circle, UBC Press, 1999 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">11. p. 259, D. Price, G.M. Feinman, Foundations of Social Inequality, Plenum, 1995</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">12. p.68, Ruth Tringham, Hunters, Fishers and Farmers of Eastern Europe, Hutchinson, 1971</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">13. p. 317, T. Douglas Price, Europe's First Farmers, Cambridge, 2000</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">14. p. 101. Georges E. Sioui, Huron-Wendat – The History of the Circle, UBC Press, 1999 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">15. p. 66, R. Douglas Hurt, Indian Agriculture in America, Univ. Of Kansas, 1987 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">16. p. 67, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">17. 35, Paul Lafargue, The Evolution of Property, Kerr, ND</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">18. Senator Henry Dawes 1883. pps 231, 232 Noam Chomsky, The Year 501, Black Rose 1993</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">19. p. 205, Brian Fagan, The Long Summer, Basic Books, 2004</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">20. p 51, D.M. Voskoboynik, “The Memory We Could Be”, New Society 2018 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">21. p. 110, Paul Lafargue, The Evolution of Property, Kerr, ND</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">22. Frederick Engels, The Mark, Labor News, NY, 1928. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">23. p. 54, Paul Lafargue, The Evolution of Property, Kerr, ND </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">24. Frederick Engels, The Mark, Labor News, NY, 1928. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">25. p. 132, Law in Medieval Russia. Ferdinand Feldbrugge, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 2009</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">26. p. 53, Paul Lafargue, The Evolution of Property, Kerr, ND </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">27. pps 227, 229, Jerry Mander, In the Absence of the Sacred, Sierra Club, 1992 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">28. p. 171 Foundations of Social Inequality, eds D. Price, G.M. Feinman, Plenum, 1995</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">29. p. 220 Brian Fagan, The Long Summer, Basic Books, 2004</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">30. p. 21 Chris Arnett, Terror of the Coast, Talonbooks, 1999</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">31. p. 35, Pere La Jeune, Jesuit Relations 1637, Eleanor Leacock, Myths of Male Dominance, MR, 1981</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">32. p. 48, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">33. p. 44 Paul Robert Megasci, ed, Aboriginal Peoples of Canada, Univ. of Toronto, 1999.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">34. p. 129, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">35. p. 226, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">36. p. 244, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">37. p. 249, Foundations of Social Inequality, eds D. Price, G.M. Feinman, Plenum, 1995</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">38. p. 266, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">39. p. 167. Christina Biaggi ed, The Rule of Mars, KIT, 2005.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">40. p. 154 Lawrence Flanigan, Ancient Ireland, St. Martins, 1998</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">41. p. 192, Brian Fagan, The Long Summer, Basic Books, 2004</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">42. p. 324, Marija Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, Harper, 1991 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">43. p. 84, Paul Lafargue, The Evolution of Property, Kerr, ND, </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">44. p. 65. R. Douglas Hurt, Indian Agriculture in America, Univ. Of Kansas, 1987. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">45. p. 83.Georges E. Sioui, Huron-Wendat – The History of the Circle, UBC Press, 1999 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">46. p. 46. Chris Arnett, Terror of the Coast, Talonbooks, 1999. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">47. p. 321, Anna Roosevelt, Amazonian Indians, Univ. Of Arizona, 1994</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">48. pps 56-57, Peter Lasett, The World We Lost, Methuen, London 1976</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">49. p. 64, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">50. p. 51 John R. Saul, A Fair Country, Viking 2008</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">51. p. 75, Patricia Phillips, Early Farmers of the Western Mediterranean, Hutchinson, 1975</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">52. p. 130, 145, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">53. pps 159-161 Lawrence Flanigan, Ancient Ireland, St. Martins, 1998 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">54. p. 39, Aboriginal Peoples of Canada, ed Paul Robert Megasci, Univ. of Toronto, 1999. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">55. p. 252, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">56. p. 87, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">57. pps. 166, 168. Georges E. Sioui, Huron-Wendat – The History of the Circle, UBC Press, 1999</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">58. pps 321, 323, 329. Anna Roosevelt, Amazonian Indians, Univ. Of Arizona, 1994</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">59. pps. 84, 86 Chris Arnett, Terror of the Coast, Talonbooks, 1999</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">60. <span><a class="oajrlxb2 g5ia77u1 qu0x051f esr5mh6w e9989ue4 r7d6kgcz rq0escxv nhd2j8a9 nc684nl6 p7hjln8o kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x jb3vyjys rz4wbd8a qt6c0cv9 a8nywdso i1ao9s8h esuyzwwr f1sip0of lzcic4wl gpro0wi8 py34i1dx" href="https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Farstechnica.com%2Fscience%2F2017%2F08%2Fevidence-that-humans-had-farms-30000-years-earlier-than-%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR1ZFB7ZBbPF4tISsLIQLICaACTDM1eHIl3C38ddW_PF8rZpaDRoAwDmS9I&h=AT3x6hDrnav4Vaape17h8zJFhRhZCMzFIG5UDKQH4eBdCAzFgxaZUhqJF2QWmq1IN40VEi0k4CRHufKqzFenATzSYsSweFEsUG4RLZersJBbq5uJssQQAc3JJhEqcMhiMnHhRBDJqCyoC14B&__tn__=-UK-R&c[0]=AT13jWLjSS3J6RwFMKxVRiZ2tRJeJheqRMPm6DJ9_VxvWhexNhhB14gH3p9IpBXVG45kdVt02wv_GE6DJtx7P8Gcc9ujWwoNnJNmjZRksg-7YhxAgDe7gujICLa49jCJqz3jptrsVc5osnpTmqar" rel="nofollow noopener" role="link" tabindex="0" target="_blank">https://arstechnica.com/.../evidence-that-humans-had...</a></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">61. pps. 21, 22, James C. Scott, Against the Grain, Yale, 2017 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">62. p. 49, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">63. p. 148, Jared Diamond, The World Until Yesterday, Viking 2012</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">64. p. 75, Jean Manco, Ancestral Journeys, Thames and Hudson, 2013 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">65. p. 82 ibid.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">66. p. 73, Ruth Tringham, Hunters, Fishers and Farmers of Eastern Europe.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">67. p. 104, Jean Manco, Ancestral Journeys, Thames and Hudson, 2013 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">68. p. 304, S. Huzayyin, Mans Role in Changing the Face of the Earth, Vol. 1, W.L. Thomas, ed. Univ. Chicago 1973</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">69. p. 121, James C. Scott, Against the Grain, Yale, 2017</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">70. See Eric H. Cline, 1177 BC, The Year Civilization Collapsed, Princeton, 2014. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">71. p. 106, 115, Harry Thurston, Island of the Blessed, Doubleday, 2003. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">72. pps 140, 141, Micheal A. Hoffman, Egypt Before the Pharaohs, Dorest Press, 1979 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">73. pps. 176 and 195, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">74. pps 213, 214, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">75. 131, Harry Thurston, Island of the Blessed, Doubleday, 2003.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">76. pps 299, 301, Micheal A. Hoffman, Egypt Before the Pharaohs, Dorest Press, 1979 </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">77. p. 205, Ruth Tringham, Hunters, Fishers and Farmers of Eastern Europe. See also pps 126 and 130, Jean Manco, Ancestral Journeys, Thames and Hudson, 2013</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">78. p. 389 Gimbutas, p. 168, Biaggi. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">79. p. 59, Robert Wright, Non Zero, Vintage 2000</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">80. p. 209, ibid </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">81. Robert Carniero quoted p. 62, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">82. p. 57 ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">83. p. 119, James C. Scott, Against the Grain, Yale, 2017</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">84. p. 152, ibid</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">85. p. 153, ibid</div></div></span></span></div></div></div></div></div>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-16200357244862016342021-12-20T15:20:00.004-08:002021-12-20T15:29:35.219-08:00THE DAWN OF EVERYTHING by David Graeber and David Wengrow<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"> <span face="Verdana, sans-serif">One of the few aspects which
differentiate humans from other animals is our unending desire to
know why things are the way they are. Where any knowledge, let
alone scientific knowledge, is missing, we construct narratives to
fill that void. These stories we tell ourselves to fill these voids
are myths and they come not only in the familiar religious form, but
also have secular manifestations. One such was the Hobbsian view of
early humanity having a short brutal existence as it wandered around
like bears and cougars looking for food. This myth still influences
us as shown in our until very recent depiction of Neanderthals as
knuckle-dragging, inarticulate brutes and of the wandering, grazing
Indigenous people.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">With the beginnings of paleontology
in the 19<sup>th</sup> Century, came a linear and narrowly
compartmentalized view of human development, based on the underlying
capitalist ideology of Progress. First the Paleolithic Age, made up
of foragers who stumbled about knocking over wooly mammoths and such.
Then a transition period called the Mesolithic, and finally the
Neolithic. With the Neolithic came the “invention” of
agriculture, sedentary life, the processing of food, pottery,
elaborate rituals and massive ceremonial sites like New Grange in
Ireland.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Sadly, with agriculture comes the
Fall of Man, as the surplus so generated – a surplus that could not
exist in the Hobbsian world of the Paleolithic – is seized by a
minority and so the state and class division are invented, and
everything sort of goes to the dogs from there on.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">This has been the story up until
now. Recent discoveries have been quickly relegating this narrative
to the realm of worn-out myth, even some years before the appearance
of THE DAWN OF EVERYTHING. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">The reality is that paleolithic
peoples, and foragers in general, had plenty of food and worked way
less than later cultures did to acquire it. They did not wander
around grazing like cattle, archaeological evidence points to the
formation of villages some 30,000 years ago. Nor did they lack forms
of “wealth” that could be accumulated. They were gathering and
parching grains 28,000 BCE (parching allows grains to be kept for
years) and there is evidence of wine residue, the drying and smoking
of meat. Valuable shells (for their beaded leather clothing) obsidian
and flint were also kept. Pottery was made but only for figurines and
no practical purpose. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Recent studies of existing foragers
shows there is no clear cut line between foraging and cultivation.
Indigenous peoples used controlled burning, replanting, pruning,
wapato and camas gardens in a kind of permaculture. Neolithic peoples
engaged in a certain amount of crop growing, but would then abandon
it for foraging again, in what the authors called “play farming.”
All free peasant societies mixed farming with foraging. It took
about 5000 years to go from the first development of maize to the
condition where it became the principle food source. Same was true
with other grains.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Papuans have been growing yams for
8000 years, but never developed a state. Indeed, no root crop based
societies ever autonomously developed a state. At the same, time the
ONLY societies to develop the state and class division have been
those where grains are the primary crop. Agriculture, at least grain
growing, is a necessary precondition for state formation, but is not
the only cause.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Archaeological evidence is now so
complex that the authors insist that we should cease asking, “How
was the state and inequality invented?” But before we examine that
question further, let's take one last look at the breakdown of the
paleolithic-neolithic dichotomy.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Supposedly Neolithic society was the
first to develop massive monumental structures and then Gobleki-Tepi
was discovered a few years ago and smashed that idea to bits. This
massive structure – and others like it, since found, were built
12,000 years ago. At least 2000 years before the first major attempts
at agriculture.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Urban environments were long seen as
part of our move from simple peasant villages to “civilization”
and of course our old enemies the state and class division. Something
as complex as a city needed hierarchy, bureaucracy and inequality to
function. Hence the archeological record ought to show a gross
inequality of dwelling size, vast palaces, huge tombs for the kings.
They should also be warlike with evidence of periodic destruction of
buildings, art works glorifying war, and massive fortifications.
Problem is, the early cities like those in the Ukraine,
Chatal-Hukuk in Turkey, Mohejo-Daro in India, and the beginnings of
urban life in Sumeria do not show any of this. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Even more astounding were Tiahuanaco
in Bolivia and the massive Teotihuacan in Mexico. The former shows no
palaces and no evidence of the use of warfare to spread the
Tiahuanacan culture. Teotihuacan grew from a simple village into a
ceremonial center with the vast Pyramids of the Sun and the Moon,
which show evidence of human sacrifice, but none of any rulers
dominating the populace. It seems there was, however, a growing
tendency toward authoritarianism and about 300 AD the temples were
burned and largely abandoned. Housing then became the prominent goal
of the city. About 100,000 people lived in houses of equal size and
there was no evidence of hierarchy. The people of Teotihuacan had a
revolution in 300 AD, it seems.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">The authors point out that while
foraging bands had small population, foraging societies were not.
Once a year foragers would gather by the thousands at various sites
for social interaction, ritual and gift giving. Certain temple sites
were “seasonal cities” replicating seasonal variation of
foragers.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Forager societies cannot be reduced
to one type. One example being the Calusa culture of Florida that
practiced “extreme forms of inequality.” Hunting culture may
have moved from feeding the group to dominating other humans. It
seems that some foragers who lived near urban areas may have created
cultures that were hierarchical and violent and through a process
called “shismogenesis” both cultures became less and less like
each other. This would lead to a kind of proto-state developing on
the margins of the non-statist cities, a proto-state that eventually
conquers the cities and imposes kings and class rule. But even then
for a very long time kings had limited power – limited to annual
tax gathering (the rest of the year the peasants were left alone to
live as they always had.) or as in the case of the Sumerian cities
constrained by urban and neighborhood councils. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">The real question according to the
authors is not the origin of inequality and the state, but how this
fluidity of social relations cease or “How did we get stuck”
with authoritarian relations. The puzzle being, not the appearance of
kings, but “why we didn't laugh them out of court?” </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">There are three elementary forms of
domination, 1. control of violence 2. control of knowledge 3.
charismatic power. The early proto-states had one or at most two of
these. Only a full-blown state has both. The state was not the long
evolution from some earlier mode of living but a “confluence of the
three political forms” previously mentioned. These elementary
aspects existed well prior to state formation, though they are not
some kind of eternal Platonic form, but had their own specific
origins.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Another aspect explored by the
authors is Indigenous political analysis and political choice as
exercised by these people. We have already seen how there must have
been a kind of revolution in Teotihuacan, which established an
egalitarian society. There was a similar situation (and most likely
situationS) in North America with the city of Cahokia near the
Missouri River circa 1300 AD. A highly inegalitarian society was
overthrown and for centuries after its ruins and surrounding area
became a “forbidden zone.” The ex-Cahokians returned to village
life many miles from the remains of the city. “Whatever happened at
Cahokia, the backlash against it was so severe that it set forth
repercussions we are still feeling today.”</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">The result was a return to the
communal, consensus-based councils. Since Indigenous peoples traveled
widely, most likely a critique of centralized, top-down authority
spread among the Atlantic Coast population. One possible result may
have been the Haudenosaunee Federal Council, which developed roughly
about the time of Cahokia's demise.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">As a result, by the time the
Europeans arrived, if not a long time before, Indigenous peoples had
a well developed political theory that involved democracy and
federalism. Later claims that such ideas stemmed from the Europeans
and that Indigenous leaders were merely repeating what they learned
from the white man or that European critics of authoritarianism were
guilty of romanticism or reading European ideas into the Indigenous
are simply untrue. European intellectuals of the 16th, 17<sup>th</sup>
and 18<sup>th</sup> Centuries – especially the Jesuits from whom
we get most of the reporting – saw democracy and equality as an
anathema. The European critique of authoritarianism owed a great deal
to the Indigenous critique of authority, and especially, its European
manifestations. Liberal and socialist thinking is thus rooted in a
good measure, in an earlier Indigenous political critique.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">I have little disagreement with
DAWN, most of it is congruent with the readings in anthropology,
paleontology and archeology, that I have done over the past forty
years. These minor disagreements are two in number. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">For one, I am surprised that the
question of climate change and its relation to state formation was
not raised, other than very briefly. Back in the late 1990s I noticed
that Europe and the Mediterranean areas went through a periods of
severe drought circa 3000-4000 BCE leading to population migration.
This coincided remarkably with the formation of proto-states and the
destruction of the Ukrainian cities aforementioned. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">The other aspect is their
characterization of the Pacific North West cultures. While there are
a lot of similarities among these cultures, they are not the same.
The Salish are not like the Haida, Nuu cha nulth, or Kwakwakawak.
Nor can the potlach be reduced to its most extravagant form as was
found in a culture already devastated by disease and overwhelmed by
capitalist consumer goods. Indeed, Indigenous people see the potlach
as their most important ceremony, one that involves sharing and
ceremonies of name-giving, “coming of age”, and marriage. Nor for
all of the immense and complex status hierarchies, did the chiefs
possess much coercive power. Any petty colonial official had more
ability to coerce.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">While DAWN has been welcomed by most
of the left, those of a sectarian or vulgar Marxist bent, feel they
must trash it using their quiver full of logical fallacies. “I
mean, really, we can't say anything good about a book written by
ANARCHISTS, can we?” It just cracks me up to read that the book is
“anti-materialist”, “conservative”, “opposes historical
materialism” ect. Sorry folks, but there is something called the
dialectic, which means that theories have to be changed as
limitations appear as new evidence arises. To cling to an old theory
that clashes with empirical reality is to indulge in philosophical
idealism, turning an ever-moving theory into a religious dogma that
must be defended at all cost.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">When Marx wrote briefly about the
prehistoric in the 1840s there was no anthropology, no paleontology
and archeology was in its tomb-plundering infancy. Marx's narrative
of a communism of poverty and a later development of an agricultural
surplus allowing a class and thus a state to form, was simply guess
work. Science has shown the limitations of such a schema, and while
all societies must have an economic base, which in the last instance
limits the abilities of that society, the actual situation is vastly
more complex and contradictory. (For the simple-minded, complexity
and nuance are an anathema.) Marx would be the first to change his
opinions, as indeed he began to in his later writings. Those of a
secular religious bent, however, do not follow in their masters
footsteps. Far from the absurd charge that this is anti-materialist,
I see DAWN as a fine example of materialist dialectics at work. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-30376085009688960942021-12-20T10:02:00.007-08:002021-12-20T15:31:02.440-08:00YES MARTHA, IT REALLY IS CLASS STRUGGLE – the Indigenous and Environmental Movements<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"> “<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">OK, what do you mean by 'class'
and what constitutes 'class struggle'?”, you may well ask. Classes
are based upon their relationship to the ownership and control over
the means of wealth production. (Wealth, refers to that which is
produced by labour acting upon the natural world.) In contemporary
society, people who have neither ownership nor control over wealth
production are called 'working class'. This is a relationship of
economics and power and has nothing to do with education level,
cultural preferences, the ownership, or the lack of ownership, of
automobiles or a dwelling. Attempts to reduce the concept of working
class to the poor or uneducated, or to 'blue collar' workers alone
are superficial and a form of disinformation. Those who do own and
control the means of wealth production are called 'capitalists.'
There is also a middle stratum of small capitalists, managers and
independent professionals. The latter two are called the 'managerial
class'. Roughly 75-80% of the population are workers and the
remaining 20-25% make up the other two classes.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Class division creates conflict over
who controls the system of wealth production. Workers seek to
maximize their income and improvements in their working conditions.
Capitalists seek to minimize worker's income and restrict any
improvements that might impinge upon their annual profit margin.
Thus the capitalist-worker relation is a bit like oil and water.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">The battle over wages and working
conditions is class struggle at its most limited and basic. It is
something relatively easy for capital to accommodate and indeed, by
creating a consumer economy though higher wages and shorter work
hours, workers have done capital a great favour. Mass consumption
enabled capital to rapidly expand into new areas or replace older
forms of economy like the “mom and pop” store and craft workers
with corporate production.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Socialists, syndicalists and
anarchists always tried to get workers to move beyond the 'bread and
butter” (wages and working conditions) issues and to directly
challenge capital. Hence, these radicals rejected the notion of “a
fair days pay” for the slogan, “abolish the wage system.” , the
corollary of which was the workers were to democratically control
the economy. If we look at working class history, we find the shop
stewards movements, workers councils, general strikes and factory
occupations which directly confronted the capitalists over who was to
be in control. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">In the 1930s, in order for the trade
unions to get the legal clout needed to force the capitalists to
recognize them as bargaining agents, the unions agreed to not
challenge management over the control of the workplace. Since then,
unions have been reduced to “bread and butter issues” and when
capital is challenged it usually comes from outside the official
union movement, (France 1968), or from a radical minority within the
union movement, (the Quebec General Strike of 1972.) </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">The eco-movement and the Indigenous
movement, even when moderate in form, directly challenge capital.
They do this by attempting to stop or limit what capital can do with
“its property”. (1) Like with the factory occupations, the
question is raised, “who owns/controls?” The Wet'suwet'en
struggle challenges the “right” of capital to build a pipeline
through Indigenous territory. The Fairy Creek land protectors
confront Teal Jones “right” to cut “its” old growth trees.
Virtually all the major Indigenous and ecological struggles are
about who controls/owns what. Capital seeks to exploit Indigenous
lands and to generally impose development and forms of resource
extraction that are in opposition to the needs of the human and
natural environment. (2)</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Since the Indigenous and Ecological
movements directly challenge capital over questions of ownership and
control, theirs is a much higher stage of class struggle than over
the wages and working conditions of the business unions. Not only do
the business unions refuse to go beyond this narrow frontier, they
are often in league with the capitalists in opposing the Indigenous
and ecological movements when they challenge developers or
ecologically unsound resource extraction. Their sectoral interests
are seen as more important than the needs of the people as a whole.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">While it is true that certain land
or tree protection, can after a lengthy struggle, be accepted by
capital, the areas so protected are usually removed from the
commodity system. As land trusts, parks, Indigenous territories, they
take on more the form of a commons defended from capitalist
exploitation. Thus, a small, but permanent encroachment on the
“rights” of capital. Mega projects, on the other hand are the
system's favorite way of plundering the land and public finance, and
are much more difficult to defeat. A few hectares of old growth might
mean several million dollars, but Site C involves billions.
Stopping, or limiting, a mega project is a major victory against
corporate state capitalism. And it does happen, though it is
difficult to achieve, as capital will use all its media, government
and political resources, including violence, against these
movements.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">So, with the exception of the
minority of class struggle unions and any spontaneous worker risings
that might occur in the future, the capital-challenging forms of
class struggle have shifted to the Indigenous and Ecological
movements. Essentially, they are, at this point, the “vanguard”
of the struggle in opposition to capital. As climate conditions
deteriorate, one can only conclude these movements will grow in the
level of support and militance.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Before I conclude, there is one
straw man I wish to beat down. That is the ridiculous claim that the
ecological militants are some how “middle class.” Of course, when
something is sneered at as “middle class” the implication is that
it is not worth supporting by “real” socialists. I doubt if
anyone making these claims has done a sociological study of
ecological protestors, nor has anything but a superficial
understanding of what constitutes a class. Somehow I doubt that the
Fairy Creek land defenders are made up of corporate managers and
small capitalists! I suspect what they are in the main are white
collar WORKERS, like teachers, nurses, technicians, and those in the
service industry. None of these forms of employment involve ownership
or control of the workplace, hence they are as working class as a
logger or heavy equipment operator. </span>
</p>
<ol><li><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Here on Vancouver Island in the
last decade, we have had the Shawnigan Lake waste dump fight,
Victoria's Blue Bridge battle, the attempted privatization of the
Nanaimo Harbour, the Colliery Dam, Linley Valley, Cable Bay, the
Union Bay coal struggles, and now Fairy Creek. All challenged
capital's “right” to do what it wants with “its” property.</span></p>
</li><li><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif">A consistent ecological approach is
in opposition to capitalism, even if many environmentalists are
unaware that they are so. Since the environmental movement realizes
there is a limit to growth and capital exists to perpetually augment
itself (perpetual growth) the two are incompatible.</span></p>
</li></ol>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-31151440754175476832021-09-19T12:16:00.001-07:002021-09-19T12:16:38.743-07:00THE FAIRY CREEK HOSTILES – Examining the Content of the Comments.<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> <span face="Verdana, sans-serif">Forty-four abusive comments, (below)
were taken from the CHEK News comments section, two others were added
from Face Book. In general, there was no attempt to form rational,
empirically based arguments against the defenders or in favour of
cutting old growth. It is all emotionalism, all abuse, as though they
could not come up with counter-arguments and in frustration, simply
raged on. </span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">The largest number of negative
comments by far were accusations that the defenders did not work and
were on welfare. Accusations of hypocrisy were the next most numerous
as “Do you not live in a wood structure.” Almost as numerous
were claims that the defenders were stupid, uneducated, and ignorant.
Conspiracy theories were a fairly common explanation for the blockade
as in “they were paid to cause a confrontation” and “someone is
getting rich.” Other accusations include being terrorists (3) were
spoiled brats (3) criminals,(2) racist comments (2) hippies (1) and
outside agitators. (1) There were also three threats of violence
against the defenders.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Anyone conversant with social
history will immediately recognize the long history of these
accusations. Virtually every progressive movement from the
Abolitionists on, has had similar, and worse charges hurled at them.
They are all part of the reactionary push-back and are the common
currency of what might be called a right-wing culture. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Immediately apparent was the fact
that there were only two racist remarks and no misogynist ones. This
is in spite of the important role played by women and Indigenous
people in this movement. (The Fairy Creek action was founded by women
and the majority of leadership comes from women according to
spokesperson Pamela Laila Rai.) Of course, the hostiles might not
wish to express such feelings in a public forum like CHEK News, and
who knows what they are saying in closed groups like “Loggers Up.”
which I have not been able to access.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">I will now examine the comments in
more detail. The two largest groups “Not working” and ”Stupid,
uneducated” can be taken together as the right has always used
this line of attack. The Wobblies were “the bummery”, and the
membership of mass movements were always dismissed as gullible and
ignorant, easily manipulated by their leaders for nefarious purposes.
You can see how such a line of thought leads inevitably to conspiracy
theories. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Social and political stances are
usually rooted in one's psychological state. One has to ask what is
behind the accusations of stupidity and laziness?</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Progressive movements are today made
up usually in the main of students and white collar/professional
workers. I suggest that the hostiles, being less educated and having
to do manual labour, unconsciously feel inferior to these educated
people and thus project accusations of laziness, ignorance and
stupidity upon them. As well, one of the core elements of right-wing
culture in regard to “radicals” is demonization. If you turn
your opponents into monsters you can project anything you like upon
them. (Think of the German Jews, totally assimilated and innocuous,
yet Nazi propaganda turned them into Christian
civilization-destroying parasites in the eyes of masses of Germans.) </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">That old right-wing standby,
anti-intellectualism, must play a part. Since the defenders are
articulate and well educated, they become the target of “I know
trees, not those scientific types.” Where prejudice begins, a
scientific understanding ends, and thus people well versed in
biology, climate science and ecology are dismissed as ignorant.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Another key element in right-wing
culture is envy. In the case of Fairy Creek, I suspect it is a matter
of jealousy that young people can take time off work or studies to
protect some trees, then go back to their nice clean jobs or
classrooms when it is over, “while I continue to slog.”
Accusations of being welfare bums shows a hostility toward the poor.
It may also indicate the anxiety of potentially losing their jobs and
ending up on welfare. While the protestors are plainly not on
welfare, THEY might end up on it, as logging jobs continue to
disappear due to mechanization.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Let's examine the accusation of
hypocrisy. This is based upon the straw man fallacy that
environmentalists want to ban logging. Five minutes of Internet
search shows this to be dead wrong. What they want is sustainable
forest practices like they have in Europe. Practices that would
actually increase the number of forestry jobs. The straw man fallacy
is a common trick of right-wing ideologues. (and left-wing extremists
as well) It was used earlier in the TMX protests and as an attack
upon the Green New Deal. The gradual phasing out of petroleum usage
was straw-manned as immediately turning the taps off, and thus
enviros who used petroleum products were deemed hypocrites.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Terrorism and Conspiracy. Far right
media like Fox News and Rebel Media have been pushing the irrational
notion that people who take the violence of the state upon themselves
and do not reply in kind are terrorists. That words have meaning
seems lost on them, but this is, of course, part of the demonization
process. Trump supporters and alt-right neofascists have done the
same with Black Lives Matter and the movements against fascism. (The
much demonized “Antifa.”) The Alberta Government and Rebel Media
have pushed the idea that anti-pipeline protests are the result of a
conspiracy of some nefarious American group, possibly funded by
George Soros. The idea has been floated that the environmental
movement and the Green Party are gaining financially from the Fairy
Creek struggle and thus, they are behind the scenes pulling the
strings. The problem with that is the defenders have their own fund
raising and if anything this is diverting funds away from those
organizations. Furthermore any direct or indirect aid that the NGOs
like the Sierra Club, Greenpeace and the Suzuki Foundation give,
COSTS them money. </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Spoiled. Students and white
collar/professional workers can appear as privileged, and in some
cases are, even though most will probably earn less than a logger. As
with the other abusive terms, this is pure emotionalism, devoid of
real content. Spoiled people do not have the internal where with all
to get a university degree and work as a nurse, a teacher or a
technician. Spoiled people do not risk health, safety and career for
a principle. Spoiled people do not freely endure endless abuse and
do not have the self-discipline to neither flee nor fight back when
faced with police violence. How many of the hostiles would go
through this ordeal for a principle? Many might do so if it involved
self-interest like protecting their property, but risking their lives
for a bunch of trees? Closer to reality – though still unfair –
were two comments that came to my attention recently. The protestors
must be “insane” for risking their lives up on those tripods and
that they are “zealots.” Both commentators seem unaware that
every movement for change has been accused of being full of zealots
and crazies.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Anything outside of conventional
politics is deemed criminal, crazy or dangerous. The hostiles
seemingly have no knowledge of how we got what few freedoms and
reforms we still have. They came from a long struggle. Sometimes it
was non-violent like the Chartists or the Wobblies, other times it
involved workers mano a mano with the cops, riots, window smashing,
insurrections, dynamite, Winchesters and Colts. They ought to give
thanks that we don't have the latter. Some claim they believe in the
right to protest – but as long as they don't block the roads. This
more liberal view actually boils down to “I am in favour of protest
as long as it is not effective.” </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">The accusations hurled at the
defenders indicate that the hostiles have no understanding of the
practice of non-violent civil disobedience, nor the history of that
movement. Perhaps they think non-violence is all hearts and flowers.
It isn't. It is a form of warfare without violence. Non violence is
people standing for a principle like independence for India, civil
rights or protecting the environment and enduring arrest, beatings,
prison, lynch mobs and death, yet never retaliating with violence
themselves. Yes, they are crazy. Crazy like Gandhi, crazy like Martin
Luther King, crazy like Goodwin, Schwerner and Chainey, crazy like
Greenpeace in the atomic test zone, crazy like the man in front of
the tank at Tienamin Square, crazy like Paul Watson defending the
whales.</span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Verdana, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">We are facing a growing climate
crisis, that if not dealt with will be devastating for humanity and
the biosphere. Governments, enthralled to the corporations are
dragging their feet. A fire must be lit under them. We need more, far
more, of the spirit of the land defenders to fan those flames. To
paraphrase a great revolutionary “One, two, three, many Fairy
Creeks!” </span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><b>LIST
OF HOSTILE COMMENTS</b></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><b>Hypocrites</b></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">well
I'm glad you woke up in you modern heated house to hop on you
computer or cellphone all of with has a mass of carbon footprint to
show your a strong land Defender contributor my advice to you if fuck
off as hard as you can pal these guys can protest all they want but
get the fuck off the road, </span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Do
you not live in wood structures do you wipe your ass with toilet
paper do you not sit on furniture the list is endless get real you
tree huggers ,</span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Do
you live in a house made from trees </span></i></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">?,
</span></span></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Let's
protest about the forest. Yet they are burning wood sitting on wood,
Where did you get the nice chunks of firewood??You cut down a tree.
Total hypocrisy. </span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Lmao!
SAVE THE FOREST…theirs a lot going on in this picture that wouldn’t
be happening if it wasn’t for logging…for example, that nice
folding WOODEN stool/table, that lovely processed lumber they are
using as a bench</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">how
many of these " loose nuts" have furniture in there house's
...and for a better question....what's the furniture made of....?</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><b>Not
working </b></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Maybe
if Cerb ends one day, these lovely folk would consider getting a job.
</span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">People
that dont work and dont contribute to society, people who leech off
other people, and people that have nothing to offer and dont care </span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Take
away their food stamps </span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Must
be nice not to have to work</span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Nice
to see welfare dollars at work, </span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Must
be nice to protest and not work. I guess when the welfare runs out
they will go home. </span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Imagine
if all these people just got jobs and put money back into the economy</span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">I
feel so badly for the RCMP having to deal with these dead beats who
don’t go to work and the poor loggers trying to do their jobs. I
hope we have a cold snowy winter maybe that will get these law
breakers to go home </span></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Lock
these parasites up till winter hits. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Our
welfare system at work. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Collection
of losers and culls who won't work but mooch taxpayer money </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Shouldn't
these young people be working,oh ya they're parasites that live off
other peoples hard earned pay.throw the book at em and make an
example of disobeying the rule of law. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Parasites
burning old growth trees. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Protesters
on wefare Get a job!!!!</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Arial, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">and
take your welfare and stuff it up your smelly ass real people work.
I've never taken a payment from any government payday fucktard...as I
said </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Arial, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span><i><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span style="font-weight: normal;">Ya
u scum bag mud licker disgusting excuses of worthless shit are the
real criminals get a fucking job and for that matter a life.un
informed hippie pieces of garbage leaving shit pigs </span></span></span></span></tt></i></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><b>Terrorists</b></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype, serif;"><span><tt><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i>The
eco-terrorist blockades at Fairy Creek will continue for a very
simple reason. The coffers of the terrorists, the Wilderness
committee and the Green Party would suffer a major decrease if they
don’t have this conflict! It’s all about the $. </i></span></span></tt><tt><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span style="font-style: normal;">(From
a personal FB page) </span></span></span></tt></span></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Throw
the book at those hypocrites maybe they’ll go out and get real jobs
to find a use for their spare time instead of whining about the
environment they know nothing about and committing eco terrorism</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Hope
the rcmp leave us alone pretty sure we can deal with these terrorists
they better hope they lose in court </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Arial, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span><i><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span style="font-weight: normal;">they
are criminals and wont follow any court order </span></span></span></span></tt></i></span></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, serif; font-size: medium;"><span><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><i><b>Threats</b></i></span></span></span></tt></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Referring
to man on tripod - “</span></span></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Just
light the fire</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
“ </span></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Video
of a toy bulldozer running over a doll - “</span></span></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Give
those turds what they deserve</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">”</span></span></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Something
many protesters need - a good slap in the head </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">go
fuck your hat hope to see u one day </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><b>Conspiracy
Theories</b></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">They
get paid to cause a confrontation, They are paid shit disturbers and
they are there to trigger everyone they can. Fairy Creek is not the
first time paid protesters try to instigate forestry workers then try
to play the victim. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">All
a bunch of zombies following a group begging for money...Someone is
getting rich.”</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><span style="font-style: normal;"><b>Ignorant,
uneducated</b></span></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">These
people are so ignorant they're the reason why California is burning
to the ground people like them has nothing to do with global warming
has everything to do with not harvesting</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">So
protestors go home. We are tired of your stupidity. Cut down the
trees and replant and in 60 years we can cut them down again. Its one
of the few sustainable resources</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Don’t
call them old growth defenders like their uneducated and short
sighted stance has some sort of nobility </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Most
don't even Know what old growth is. The places I logged back in the
60's - 70's - 80's that were replanted - most PROtesters - if any -
would be able to tell they were even logged</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;">“<span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Bunch
of loosers. the bunch of u. under educated granola eating arm chair
quarterbacks. beat it ...go fuck yourself we grow trees as a
profession and you fucktards just cock off about bullshit</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><b>Anti-Indigenous
Racism</b></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">About
Indigenous support</span></span></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">
- “I would like to see the government break away from giving giving
& more giving... We pay to every village in Canada, millions of
dollars, who pays us white people millions, nobody. What was done way
back when is over, let it go, not my fault or yours, has to be put to
rest I had to pay for my land, they don’t, so who’s land is it?
So tiring to see on media, they want more & more.”</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">In
reference to Indigenous dancers</span></span></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">
- “Thats nice, the blockaders are providing entertainment for
security. Maybe get a beer truck out there and make a party of it.”
</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><b>Outside
Agitators</b></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">I
was told most of them don’t live in BC </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Where
do the protestors receive their money ? No one seems to want to
mention that do they ? </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Somebody
is paying these folks don’t kid yourself!! </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><b>Spoiled
</b></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">So
now they are acting like spoiled children throwing a temper tantrum. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span face="Arial, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><span><i><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span style="font-weight: normal;">It
is a disgusting display of self righteous spoiled brats.</span></span></span></span></tt></i></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Said
by a white guy – of course Gosh what attention seeking posers these
middle class white brats are.</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-61278814120459648432021-09-08T17:30:00.009-07:002021-09-08T17:53:51.786-07:00<div><div dir="auto"><div class="ecm0bbzt hv4rvrfc e5nlhep0 dati1w0a" data-ad-comet-preview="message" data-ad-preview="message" id="jsc_c_2da"><div class="j83agx80 cbu4d94t ew0dbk1b irj2b8pg"><div class="qzhwtbm6 knvmm38d"><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v b1v8xokw oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto"><div class="kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">T<span style="font-size: medium;">HE FAIRY CREEK HOSTILES - PART ONE</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Most of these quotes were taken from the Fairy Creek Flying Squad FB page and CHEK News comments section. I am collecting these quotes for anyone in the future who wants to write a book or article about the struggle. In time, such struggles become legendary and the true conditions that the struggle took place in become forgotten. Today everyone but out and out neo-Nazis loves Martin Luther King. But back in the day, most white Americans thought he was a trouble maker or some kind of Communist. I don't want the hostility to be forgotten. To do so is to have a false impression of the history of progressive movements and what a hard slog it can be to make positive change within society.</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">It is hard to say which is more prevalent – the visceral level of hatred expressed here or the deliberate ignorance. I will follow at a later date with a social psychological analysis of the quotes.</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The Quotes</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">“Bunch of loosers. the bunch of u. under educated granola eating arm chair quarterbacks. beat it ...go fuck yourself we grow trees as a profession and you fucktards just cock off about bullshit and take your welfare and stuff it up your smelly ass real people work. I've never taken a payment from any government payday fucktard...as I said go fuck your hat hope to see u one day </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Ya u scum bag mud licker disgusting excuses of worthless shit are the real criminals get a fucking job and for that matter a life.un informed hippie pieces of garbage leaving shit pigs </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The eco-terrorist blockades at Fairy Creek will continue for a very simple reason. The coffers of the terrorists, the Wilderness committee and the Green Party would suffer a major decrease if they don’t have this conflict! It’s all about the $. (From a personal FB page) </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">well I'm glad you woke up in you modern heated house to hop on you computer or cellphone all of with has a mass of carbon footprint to show your a strong land Defender contributor my advice to you if fuck off as hard as you can pal these guys can protest all they want but get the fuck off the road </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Maybe if Cerb ends one day, these lovely folk would consider getting a job. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Do you not live in wood structures do you wipe your ass with toilet paper do you not sit on furniture the list is endless get real you tree huggers </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Referring to man on tripod - “Just light the fire “ </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">People that dont work and dont contribute to society, people who leech off other people, and people that have nothing to offer and dont care </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Video of a toy bulldozer running over a doll - “Give those turds what they deserve”</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Take away their food stamps </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">They get paid to cause a confrontation, They are paid shit disturbers and they are there to trigger everyone they can. Fairy Creek is not the first time paid protesters try to instigate forestry workers then try to play the victim. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">do you live in a house made from trees ?</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">These people are so ignorant they're the reason why California is burning to the ground people like them has nothing to do with global warming has everything to do with not harvesting and not having controlled Burns because the groups like this </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Must be nice not to have to work</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">About Indigenous support - “I would like to see the government break away from giving giving & more giving... We pay to every village in Canada, millions of dollars, who pays us white people millions, nobody. What was done way back when is over, let it go, not my fault or yours, has to be put to rest I had to pay for my land, they don’t, so who’s land is it? So tiring to see on media, they want more & more.”</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">In reference to Indigenous dancers - “Thats nice, the blockaders are providing entertainment for security. Maybe get a beer truck out there and make a party of it.” </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">nice to see welfare dollars at work</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Let's protest about the forest. Yet they are burning wood sitting on wood </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">So protestors go home. We are tired of your stupidity. Cut down the trees and replant and in 60 years we can cut them down again. Its one of the few sustainable resources . By the way where did you get the nice chunks of firewood??You cut down a tree. Total hypocrisy. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Must be nice to protest and not work. I guess when the welfare runs out they will go home. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I was told most of them don’t live in BC </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Lmao! SAVE THE FOREST…theirs a lot going on in this picture that wouldn’t be happening if it wasn’t for logging…for example, that nice folding WOODEN stool/table, that lovely processed lumber they are using as a bench</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Imagine if all these people just got jobs and put money back into the economy </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I feel so badly for the RCMP having to deal with these dead beats who don’t go to work and the poor loggers trying to do their jobs. I hope we have a cold snowy winter maybe that will get these law breakers to go home </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Don’t call them old growth defenders like their uneducated and short sighted stance has some sort of nobility </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">here's a fair question to ask....how many of these " loose nuts" have furniture in there house's ...and for a better question....what's the furniture made of....?</span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Where do the protestors receive their money ? No one seems to want to mention that do they ? </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Somebody is paying these folks don’t kid yourself!! </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Lock these parasites up till winter hits. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Our welfare system at work. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Throw the book at those hypocrites maybe they’ll go out and get real jobs to find a use for their spare time instead of whining about the environment they know nothing about and committing eco terrorism </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">So now they are acting like spoiled children throwing a temper tantrum. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">collection of losers and culls who won't work but mooch taxpayer money </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">shouldn't these young people be working,oh ya they're parasites that live off other peoples hard earned pay.throw the book at em and make an example of disobeying the rule of law. </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">something many protesters need - a good slap in the head Most don't even Know what old growth is. The places I logged back in the 60's - 70's - 80's that were replanted - most PROtesters - if any - would be able to tell they were even logged </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">they are criminals and wont follow any court order </span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">It is a disgusting display of self righteous spoiled brats. All a bunch of zombies following a group begging for money...Someone is getting rich.</span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">hope
the rcmp leave us alone pretty sure we can deal with these terrorists
they better hope they lose in court </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Said
by a white guy – of cour</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">se
</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt><tt><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">"Gosh
what attention seeking posers these middle class white brats are."</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Parasites
burning old growth trees. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Hopefully
the injunction gets extended and they can do more to stop these
career protestors and anarchists. </span></i></span></span></span></span></tt>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><tt><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Protesters
on wefare Get a job!!!!"</span></i></span></span></span></span></tt></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><br />
</p> <span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></div></span></div></div></div></div></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-87188830157213729962021-08-22T15:36:00.007-07:002021-08-22T15:36:48.034-07:00<p>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">STRUCTURE
VS. MORALISM</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">In North
America and much of the Anglosphere, when the left does not live up
to its desires there is a great deal of hand wringing and mea culpas.
“Why can't we convert the NDP (Canadian social democrats) to
socialism? Why are some workers voting for Trump? Why is the labor
movement so weak? It must be our fault and what did we do wrong? It
must be the result of “identity politics”. ” </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">To an
extent, such questions ARE necessary, but their over-emphasis and the
total ignorance of an 800 pound gorilla in the room, shows an
underlying and unacknowledged world view which is causing a
distortion of reality. The emphasis on moralism and ideas comes
straight from liberalism. A socialist and anarchist analysis
emphasizes the STRUCTURAL aspects of the system, without ignoring
ideas, but relegating them to a secondary level. </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Liberalism
in various forms is hegemonic in North American society. The
“official” left, right and center are all variations of
liberalism, no matter the labels they might give themselves. Whether
self-styled social democrats or conservatives they are united by
their neoliberalism. We should not be surprised then, that the “far
left” is influenced by liberalism.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now
about the 800 pound gorilla that is being ignored. It is composed of the political-legal structure and trade union legislation. </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Political
structure – Both the First-Past-The-Post electoral system and the
US Congressional system severely limit democratic input. The first
puts enormous hurdles in the way of dissident parties such as
socialists and Greens gaining seats in parliament and keeps them
almost permanently reduced to a tiny minority if they should get in.
The US political system with its duopoly is deliberately designed to
exclude radical parties. (It is the only alleged democracy in which
“third party” is a term of contempt and in which no Green or
social democratic party has a seat at the national level.) Parties
become “catch all” centrists and the radicals within them are
marginalized.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Trade
Union legislation. Given the weakness of the left, it is no wonder
that a a host of unnatural hurdles are put in the way of organizing a
union shop. Be that as it may, the existing system is “winner take
all”, if after a union runs the obstacle course and wins a
certification. The minority who do not want the union become members
anyway. The only way you can change the union is during a legal
“raiding period” . There is a dues check-off, which means the
company automatically deducts the fees for the union. At first sight,
this seems like a good system, but it has some deep flaws which serve
to undermine trade union and general working class militance.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Due
check off means that a union can become wealthy relative to unions
which did not possess this privilege. Wealth means a highly paid,
and increasingly professional (and self-serving) leadership. Having a
large minority of members who are wishy-washy or even hostile to the
union is a dead weight and a permanent orientation away from
militance. Like political parties under FPTP, such unions are
“catch-all” organizations and the permanent tendency is toward
moderation. The union bureaucracy takes a dim view of radicals and
does everything to isolate them and minimize their influence.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now
let's contrast the North American political and trade union system
with a structure found elsewhere. </span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">In most
of continental Europe you have a parliamentary system combined with a
proportional ballot. This means that any group getting more that four
or five percent of the vote gets a seat. Thus it is relatively easy
for new parties to get established, and hence socialist and Green
parties in most European parliaments. Since the issues these parties
raise are real issues, they soon grow in influence. They can then
become part of a coalition government and the price for doing so,
will be the enacting of certain of their positions. Thus parties to
the left of the social democratic center can have an influence that
they do not have in less democratic political systems.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
existence of functioning and influential radical parties, also means
there will be media promoting these ideas, if not party journals and
web sites, a milieu that is sympathetic to them and promotes many of
their concepts. Thus, radicalism is kept alive among the population
and is not completely smothered by corporate media.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">In most
of Europe, the trade union system is more democratic than in North
America. Each workplace over a certain size is entitled to form a
“works council.” In order to be represented they do not have to
jump through a lot of hoops, to have a council is their right. The
workers vote on who represents them on the council, and it can be
from any trade union central that has members in the shop. Hence one
tendency does not take over the membership and the various socialist,
communist and syndicalist union representatives have to work together
in some manner, without losing their independence. Class struggle and
syndicalist unions thus have a chance at gaining influence. As such,
in France we have the Solidarity unions, (the fourth largest union
center), in Spain, the syndicalist CGT, (third largest union) the
CNT and the base unions and in Italy the COBAs. (base unions). In the
North American context these unions would be tiny and ineffective,
whereas they have hundreds of thousands of members.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Note
that “base unions” refers to the highly democratic, class
struggle unions which developed in the 1980s in opposition to the
more conservative bureaucratic unions. It also should be noted that
in France, Italy and Spain, the “social union” tends to
predominate rather than the US-style business union or right-wing
social democratic unions. Social unions seek more than just the
protection of their membership, but seek a “democratic socialist”
reform of capitalism. One example of a social union is the French
CGT, the largest of the union federations in that country.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> </span>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">What the
labour structure means in practice is that unions are “poor” and
the people in leadership positions are more likely to be there
because they believe in trade unions than for a high paid position
and cocktails with the bosses. Since there is no dues check-off, the
shop stewards have to collect the dues, which means the rank and file
have the leaders on a short leash compared to the American situation.
There is no dead wood membership and those who belong to the union
tend to be militants, this is further pressure to keep the union
honest.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
existence of social, class struggle and syndicalist unions along with
viable socialist parties, though a minority movement with the
exception of the social unions, means that class consciousness is
kept alive. These groups are the “keepers of the flame” for class
consciousness is based upon memory, of keeping alive the traditions
of struggle. If this knowledge and practice is suppressed and
forgotten, workers who are better paid merge into a fake middle
class, or if they are marginal workers, become lumpenized. The
existence of viable Green Parties (and even better, Red-Green
Parties) means that eco-awareness and the possibility of reform is
much greater than where such parties are minuscule. Class
consciousness helps explain the “French paradox” - France has a
small union membership (about 10% of the workforce) but when strikes
are called millions come out and the country is shut down. Class
consciousness is much more developed here and the political and
labour structures play a highly significant role in its maintenance.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">This
does not mean the unions, socialist and Green parties are above
criticism. Just check the revolutionary media in those countries!
Where these organizations are of some impact, there are also groups
to the left of them. The social unions have revolutionary
syndicalists nipping at their heels. The socialist parties are faced
with strong anarchist and horizontalist movements. The Greens are
faced with eco-anarchism and de-growth militants. It would be very
unlikely that these revolutionary movements would have a fraction of
the support they do without the prior existence of the more moderate
groups, keeping alive some of the basic class and ecological
concepts. Nothing exists in isolation.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Where
does that leave North American syndicalists, anarchists and
socialists? I don't think we have enough time to go through the
laborious process of democratizing our politics and labour relations.
I would certainly welcome any changes for the better, but the
problems facing us are so extreme and so pressing that they do not
allow us this luxury. It would be better to stop the blaming and
hand-wringing and to face reality – the cards are well and truly
stacked against us. With that realization, we can attempt to find new
methods that suit the adverse conditions we face.</span></span></span>
</p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-43868556115611567692021-08-22T15:32:00.003-07:002021-08-22T15:32:17.887-07:00<p>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">STRUCTURE
VS MORALISM – THE EXAMPLE OF “THIRD WORLD REVOLUTIONARIES”</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">We
cannot say this enough – when examining a phenomenon you must look
at the material conditions which underlie it and not simply reduce
this to ideas and moralism. This is especially true when assessing
the role of revolutionaries in the colonized and imperialized
world in the post-War period.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">In
countries that were nominally independent – such as those of Latin
America – it was soon evident that “regular” capitalism would
not allow for development, or at best a distorted development in the
interests of imperial capital. It was also evident that those
countries that had developed, did so by ignoring the pleas of the
political economists for laissez faire and minimum governmental
action. The model that evolved, largely based upon the Mexican
experience, could be called the nationalist, populist or social
democratic model. The essential aspects of this model were
infrastructural spending by government, national ownership of
resources, land reform, tariffs to protect budding industry, import
substitution, education and social reform. </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Such
policies were adopted in Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Costa
Rica and Mexico at various times from the late-1930s until the 1960s.
The result was a great improvement in the living standards of the
population. With decolonization, attempts were made to introduce
similar policies into Asia, the Middle East and Africa.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
nationalist model of development had a vicious adversary in imperial
capital, chiefly US imperialism and its junior partners, the UK,
Canada and France. Not only was there constant pressure to abandon
the model and open one's country to imperial capital, but violence
was commonly used to crush governments that seemed too independent.
Thus the social democratic Arbenz government was overthrown as was
the nationalist Mossedegh in Iran, Peron in Argentina, the populists
in Bolivia, etc.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">There
was however, one country that had succeeded in the national form of
development and had been successful in opposing the attacks by US
imperialism . This was the USSR. You can understand why
revolutionaries in the imperialized world, after seeking the brutal
overthrow of social democratic or liberal governments by the US,
might start to look closely at that model for national development.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Imperialism
was able to take advantage of the looseness and complexity of a
democratic system, by funding subversion and creating division within
the state, leading to right-wing coups d'etats. The answer seemed to
be to create an enforced unity through a one-party state, which would
then organize the country to accomplish the necessary tasks of
economic and social development. In the enthusiasm of the moment, the
now-obvious drawbacks to such a model – corruption, sclerosis,
paranoia and a population still powerless and therefore cynical, were
not evident.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Thus, by
the 1960s the Marxist Leninist model had become THE model of
development. It had initially been a response to imperialism, but
now this set of ideas had become a material force in its own right.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">We now
must examine the history of ideology in the imperialized countries,
most especially – since they formed the vanguard – those of Latin
America.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">For
the first 30 plus years of the 20</span></span></span></span></span><span style="color: black;"><sup><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">th</span></span></span></span></sup></span><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
Century the revolutionary movement in Latin America was
anarcho-syndicalism. The movement remained strong in Bolivia until
the 1940s, Cuba and Uruguay well into the 1950s, but in most
countries it was a spent force by the 1930s, crushed out of existence
by state violence. Had Che and Fidel been born 25 years earlier they
would have been anarchists, since this ideology had hegemony at that
time.</span></span></span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the
1930s a new revolutionary force emerged and replaced syndicalism -
populism. The model for the populists was the Mexican revolutionary
process at its most radical. This was a form of national development
with the nationalization of resources, state created infrastructure,
land and social reform. All within a state which was at least
nominally democratic. </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
populist model had some successes, Venezuela, Costa Rica, for a brief
period in Brazil under Vargas, Peron's Argentina, and Paz Essensaro's
Bolivia. But the movement was defeated in Guatemala and Cuba. Fidel
and Che, up till then had been populists. The former as a member of
the Orthodoxo Party, the latter as a left-Peronist. With the crushing
of populism, like the crushing of nationalism elsewhere in the 1950s,
the way was cleared for the ascent of Marxist Leninist ideas.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Thus not
a situation of “bad people” with “bad ideas” but one of a
situation posed and limited by material conditions.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">But
the dialectic did not stop with the ML model. As before mentioned,
the failings of that system also became evident. (And I suspect no
one was more aware of that than Fidel Castro) From the 1970s-on there
was a continual attempt to combine anti-imperialism and development
with a pluralist state. The top-down, one party state model was
abandoned. Successes were few at first. Unidad Popular was brutally
crushed in Chile, The Sandinistas held out for a decade, but were
voted out of power. Cuba chose mass involvement combined with an
ever-increasing openness of discussion and I suspectthat this is one
reason for the strength of that government. The 21</span></span></span></span></span><span style="color: black;"><sup><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">st</span></span></span></span></sup></span><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
century saw the “pink wave”. In spite of imperialism's successes
in eliminating relatively progressive governments in Argentina,
Brazil and Ecuador, the recent (and overturned) coup in Bolivia, and
the on-going attack on Venezuela, this movement is far from being
defeated.</span></span></span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Other
revolutionary, anti-imperialist, but pluralist systems can be found
with the Zapatistas and the Rojava Confederalists.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I think
they key is mass involvement in autonomous organizations. This allows
both pluralism and is a strong force against subversion.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-34517250669753631642021-08-22T15:27:00.000-07:002021-08-22T15:27:12.158-07:00<p>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span lang="en"><span style="font-weight: normal;">WHAT
IS EXTREMISM?</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Just
because you have some ideal or goal which is – or seems -
completely at odds with the world as it is, does not mean you are an
extremist. Extremism is an attitude, not just a set of ideas or
concepts. You can thus take any desire and tackle it in an extremist
fashion or in a non-extreme way. Being, say an anarchist or a
socialist, an atheist or a Christian does not make one an extremist,
but there are plainly extremist versions of these world-views. So
what is the extremist attitude?</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
extremist is, first and foremost, a bully and an authoritarian. It is
always “my way or the highway.” There is no respect for any
slight deviation from what the extremist thinks – agreeing with
half of what that person thinks is seen as wrong as complete
disagreement. There is no respect for other views and no attempt to
find a common ground. Tolerance and nuance are seen as weakness and
decadence. People who hold somewhat different views are abused,
called “sell-outs”, “revisionists”, “renegades” ,
“liberals”, “turn-coats” “wishy-washy” etc. When
extremists hold state power, they will use that power to persecute,
criminalize and punish those with different viewpoints. Extremists
at the head of movements without state power will call upon their
members to attack and even kill people whose viewpoints offend them. </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Extremism
is, of course, more than just an attitude. There are extreme
doctrines. These doctrines are completely at odds with several
hundred years of social progress and they are based not upon
empirically varifiable data but conspiracy theories, “revealed.”
religion and pseudo-science. Furthermore, the forseeable
implementation of these docrines is part and parcel of those
doctrines. Examples include religious extremists that are homophobes
and misogyists, political economists who seek to abolish a century of
social reform and go back to a Dickensian capitalism, neoStalinists
who would round up and shoot anarchists and socialists, and fascists,
Nazis, “alt-rightists”, and white supremists of every possible
description.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Extreme
doctrines are a magnet for extremist personalities, and of course,
such doctrines have been constructed by such personalities to begin
with. But this leads us to ask “where does the extremist
personality come from?” The same place all bullies come from –
emotional trauma. Is it any wonder then that extremism tends to
develop in societies with a great deal of violence, or among groups
that have been brutally oppressed within a violent society? There
are, of course, relatively priviledged groups, who see the coming of
equality as a threat. Much of white racism is rooted here.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Finally,
it needs pointing out that imperialism has aided and abetted
extremism in its war against national liberation movements and
general social progress. Beginning in the 1930s the American
Manufacturers Assn. bankrolled, “Christian fundamentalist” groups
as a way of combatting the “social gospel” of mainstream
Protestants. Fundamentalism has been promoted in Latin America to
offset Catholic social teaching and especialy Liberation Theology. At
home fascists are given kid gloves treatment – if the left was
anywhere near as violent as these groups they would be swiftly
suppressed. The fascists are capitalism's “useful idiots.”</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the
Middle East no effort was spared by imperialism to destroy the
secular nationalist modernizer regimes. It seems to have been
forgotten that back in the 1950s and 60s there was a strong
modernizing, secularist movement in the Middle East which included
Communist and Socialist Parties. Islamic extremism has two roots, one
is the destruction of the secular nationalist Mossedegh government in
Iran and its replacement by the brutal Shah, the other is the
US-engendered defeat of the leftist Afghan government. Britain
encouraged the Muslim Brotherhood in opposition to the secular Nassar
government and both the USA and the UK backed the reactionary Saudis
with their Wahhabi extremist version of Islam which they have
exported throughout the Muslim world. The US has added more fuel to
the fire by giving Israel a complete carte blanche to do anything
they want against the Palestinians.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">And
people wonder why there are extremist groups?</span></span></span>
</p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-65945875880034137962021-07-16T14:19:00.006-07:002021-07-16T14:19:53.922-07:00UNDERSTANDING THE HOSTILES – the minority opposed to the Fairy Creek Action<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"> <span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
small demonstrations against protecting the old growth forests were
marked by placards proclaiming the supposed need to “Defend
Logging”. Not one of those involved would have taken a few minutes
to go on line and find out exactly what the environmental movement's
plans are for the forest industry. I have, and within five munites
found the programs of all the major organizations as well as the BC
Green Party. Not one of these groups opposed logging, only cutting
old growth, and promoted sustainable practices which would create
permanent jobs in forestry.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">That
the hostiles never bothered to find this easily available
information, indicates their minds were made up before hand.
Misinformation from right-wing anti-environmental sources played a
factor, but I think the problem lies deeper than that. Like all
reactionary sentiments, its roots are an underlying prejudice, which
in turn grows out of fear. If you are prejudiced against some group,
your hostility will be projected out in the form of thinking the very
worst about them. The “eco-warrior” is a stock hate figure on the
right along with the “feminist” and BLM activist.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">There
is a division within the working population between the older and
declining industrial work force and the new working class of educated
white collar workers. This creates a cultural/political divide. The
land protectors are well educated, well read and culturally
sophisticated. The hostiles no doubt feel inferior and this
inferiority is hidden behind a mask of inverse snobbery. “Buncha
hippies on welfare. What do they know, they don't work in the woods”
sort of sentiments. (Of course it is more complex than that – there
are industrial workers who are eco-activists and white collars who
are hostiles.) </span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">All
environmentalists are critical of rampant consumerism and boldly
proclaim the need for a simpler life without giant pick -up trucks
and suburban McMansions. When status-linked consumer goods are one of
the few ways you can proclaim your self-worth, a group which
threatens this possibility is something to fear.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Any
familiarity with the land protectors will show the prominent role
played by Indigenous people and women. Resentment against Indigenous
people runs high among certain sectors of the Euro-Canadian
population. Of course, every bigot has “his “Indian”' to back
them up in any conflict with the “militants” and
enviromentalists, and this card is played to the max. Given the
racial slurs directed at Indigenous land protectors and the
underlying sub-stratum of prejudice present in the populace, racism
must be considered as a factor in understanding the hostiles.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Other
than sexist language directed at some of the women leaders, misogyny
seems more undercover than overt. Given the level of toxic
masculinity that exists in a significant number of males, it must be
very disturbing to see all those women in leadership roles. Strong
women frighten men who are still mired in traditional concepts of
what it means to be male. Indeed, the very idea of saving the trees
may come off as somehow “unmanly.” Among those suffering from
toxic masculinity, empathy is considered “feminine” and therefore
weak. Concern for the trees is empathy extended to all living things.
Thus the male land protectors also become a source of anxiety. After
all they are “letting” the women lead, and are full of empathy
for the forests., something no “real man” would do. These are the
“sensitive men” they loath/fear, whose very existence is a threat
to the character armour they have spent decades constructing. </span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">That
said, I do not blame the hostiles. They are victims along with the
trees. The Plunderbund and the governments that front for it, has and
will sacrifice them at a moment's notice. They will sacrifice these
people, until like on Easter Island, the last tree has been hacked
down. Nor do I blame the Plunderbund, for like the wolf killing the
lamb they are acting out their essential nature. In this case the
pillage of humanity and nature for an ever-expanding pile of capital.
Crime is their very essence.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">You
could point a finger at right-wing social democracy and
resource-based business unionism. The old autodidact socialists
would not let workers wallow in ignorance and prejudice. Their
newspapers and educationals constantly tried to lift workers up and
to expand their horizons. When right-wing social democracy took over
they eliminated both the newspapers and the education, leaving
workers even more vulnerable to corporate propaganda. The Communist
and socialist-led IWA promoted sustainable logging way back in 1940.
The right-wing purged the left in the IWA and these concerns flew out
the door. </span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">But
go easy on the finger pointing. They are acting according to their
nature too. Business unionism and right-social democracy are
predicated on the continued existence of the corporate capitalist
system. Their role is to mediate between the populace and the
corporate elite. They are also dependent on a strong corporate
economy. Take away that system and they are without a role. Hence
these forces are deeply hostile to any group that is radical or in
any way challenges the economic and political power structure.
Radicals have to be either tamed or destroyed. In the past, the
radical threat included the Wobblies, the Communists, the old time
Socialists and later the New Left. Today the threat is the
environmental movement, and most especially its direct action wing.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
problem for the corporate system is that even a moderate
environmental approach means the gradual termination of the
plundering, growth forever model. If corporate capitalism cannot
grow, which means continued destruction of the natural world, it goes
into crisis. Whether enviros know it or not, they are a dagger at the
throat of the system. This explains the deep hostility of much of the
corporate world and the hostile attitudes of both the business unions
and the right-social democrats. Of course, other than the hard right
climate crisis deniers, they cannot come out with a full bore attack
on the environmental movement. Instead they offer tepid half measures
and green-wash. What you can nail them for is their hypocrisy. </span></span></span>
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"> <span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Here
in BC the right-wing social democrat dominated NDP is split on the
issue of Fairy Creek. Many members ignore the party on this issue and
are in support. At the same time, there is a minority of
members/supporters who are among the bitterest hostiles.They
reiterate the right-wing anti-activist bigotry, but without the
racism and misogyny. Some of their accusations are pure Trumpite
lunacy. - that the action is due to “rich” environmental NGOs
trying to raise money, or that the non-violent activists are
eco-terrorists. Where does this craziness come from, other than fear?
What is the fear that drives them to such hatred? I suspect they
believe in “My party right or wrong” and that any opposition to
the NDP – even coming from the left, is the enemy. Such True
Believerism will not help the NDP and the party leaders would be wise
to put a lid on it. What ever the NDP brass do, right-wing social
democracy is a major obstacle in saving the old growth forests, let
alone developing a green economy. Our only hope is ever greater
non-violent resistance pushing change from below.</span></span></span></p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-77453286631781748782021-07-16T14:17:00.011-07:002021-07-16T14:17:47.017-07:00On The Cusp of Change – Or Disaster? <p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"> “Will we make it?”
- the question arises in this unprecedented 40 degree heat. Sad that
the question has arisen, for never in human history have we gotten so
close to creating the situation that would overcome our many
problems. There were very good reasons why these were not resolved a
hundred years ago. One major reason being the fact we were still
beset with the overwhelming legacy of a brutal and oppressive system
of domination. This legacy kept people from working together to make
change, and made many question the need for change in the first
place.
</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">We know what those
divisive legacies were. In the 1950s most people were racist – in
the full sense of the term. Misogyny and homophobia were universal.
Only an enlightened minority did not beat or terrorize their
children. Authoritarian, repressive religions held sway. The vast
majority believed what ever the government, media or other
authorities said. As for ecology - “What's that?”
</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There was the left of
course, and it was more advanced than most on these issues. But the
left's emphasis was on the economy, which essentially meant the
“White” male worker. Thus, the Old Left was an inch deep and a
mile wide. It had a lot of support in the working class, but its
challenge to the domination system did not go to any great depth.
(Women were ideally to be housewives, homosexuality was taboo and the
whole mega-project, eternal growth paradigm went unchallenged.)
</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in;">The New Left arose in
large measure as a response to these and other failures of the Old
Left. We tackled that list with gusto – taking racism, misogyny,
homophobia and environmental destruction head on. Initially, 90% of
the population hated us for all of this, so you might say we were a
mile deep and an inch wide.</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in;">Fast forward forty to
fifty years and what you find is that most people, at least
intellectually, are in favor of overcoming the issues the New Left
raised. You might well say that the average person today has much of
the consciousness of a 1960s New Leftist. People have also become
more tolerant, caring and aware of issues than ever before. This is
in spite of concerted and well-funded efforts to turn the clock back
to the 1950s.
</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>While consciousness has
changed, it has yet to give rise to the economic and ecological
changes that this consciousness implies. We still have the same old
top-down highly undemocratic political and economic systems and the
economy is still based upon plundering the natural environment.
However, it is only a matter of time when, like water droplets
wearing away a stone, this consciousness would force those changes
upon the system. (No, I am not saying consciousness determines
existence – the relationship is dialectical – the real existing
world gives rise to consciousness, which in turn reacts upon that
world.)
<p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There is now a race
between the impending climate disaster and the ability of that
advanced consciousness to change the system to one that is
sustainable. The one force that truly encapsulates that consciousness
and unifies humanity in a most basic way (for our survival) is the
global eco-movement. This is not small potatoes – combine the
eco-movement with its natural allies and you have the greatest mass
movement in history.
</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Just to begin with, the
world's Green Parties and the new leftist parties which reject the
neoliberal model have some twenty million supporters. There are the
NGOs – the biggest of which is Green Peace with branches in 50
countries. But the movement – and this is a very important point –
cannot be reduced to either parties or NGOs.These two groups are only
the tip of the eco-ice berg (now melting) There are tens of thousands
of small local or regional, grass roots groups. Combine the support
for all these groups, and I think they outnumber parties or NGOs.
</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">To this list you must
add those groups which the eco-movement is friendly with – such as
the world-wide Indigenous movement. There are millions of Indigenous
people, Maori, Australian Aboriginals, Polynesians, Sami, as well as
the Indigenous of the Americas. Then there are the groups who
naturally gravitate toward an ecological consciousness. There are the
radical and syndicalist unions which embrace the ecological approach.
There is Via Campesina, the peasant movement with one hundred million
members. You have spiritual communities like Buddhists, Catholic
Workers, Quakers and others. Where else could you place organic
gardeners, fair-trade advocates, animal rights people, and those who
favour “simple living.” ? Certainly not with the plunderers. We
have the “Greta Generation” - people not yet adults who know they
will be the ones to suffer from run-away climate change. These youth
are aware, like none other in history.
</p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">We are now both a mile
deep and a mile wide. Will we have enough time to avert disaster? The
time for change is NOW. If you refuse to change, at least get the
hell out of our way!</p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-54776173751648699812021-07-16T14:16:00.003-07:002021-07-16T14:16:27.493-07:00On Thought-less-ness and Hate<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"> <span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
population can be divided between those people who think and those
who do not. (*) The thought-less should not be blamed, for our
education system and mass media do not teach people how to think. At
its most basic, thinking consists of logical argument and empirical
evidence. Logical thought kicks in about age 7 to 9, yet we do not
teach basic principles of logic to children. </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The
thought-less person simply EMOTES. Now there is nothing wrong with
emotion, in many senses it is our driving force, but the problem
comes when emotion is ALL you have, logic and evidence be damned. In
the case of the harsh disagreements in the social, economic and
political realms, that emotion is usually hatred. This hate is based
upon fear. Hatred leads to a situation of non-thought – the hater
spews invective, grasps at any straw to denigrate the supposed
opponant. A vicious circle of non-thought ensues, hatred leading to
ever greater irrationalism. The more irrational, the greater the fear
and the greater the hate. The non-thinker uses a broad range of
logical fallacies to “defeat” the person or group they hate.
These include the straw man, the red herring, the false syllogism,
out and out denial, as well as innuendo taken as fact.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Hate
closes all doors. It is an all-consuming fire. The person hated is
written off, no dialogue is possible. The hater will never take the
olive branch offered. The opponant is a threat that must be
destroyed. But we must not confuse hate with anger. We have all been
angry with someone we love, but we get over it. We can be angry with
politicians and corporation bosses, but we know they are merely parts
of a system. Hate is something else. It precludes forgiveness and
understanding.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Hatreds,
and the fears that underly them, are often handed down through
families and friends, while others are the products of mass media
propaganda. Not being able to think, the person swallows these
stories whole. But hate gives meaning to an otherwise purposeless
existence. “Them (fill in the blank) are the cause of my
unhappiness.” You become trapped in a circle of mutual
reaffirmation, if one is in a group which shares common hatreds.
Hatred of certain groups gives meaning and interconnection with other
people of similar mind. There is a feeling of great superiority over
the target group, and so the ego comes into the mix. The insecure
individual gets an ego boost from the collective hatred of a group
which is usually superior to them in education, culture and ability.
There is truly a power in inverse snobbery.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">These
social aspects of non-thought also make it extremely difficult to
grow emotionally and intellectually. If you were to start thinking
and reject those hatreds and fears, you would lose the emotional
support of your familiy and friends whose views you so fervently
shared.</span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Dialogue
with a thought-less person becomes impossible in these circumstances.
You must try to reach them, but if rebuffed too often, it is better
to draw back. Some day thay might break out of their irrational
prison, but for now, all your logic, evidence and patience account
for nothing. There are some people you can never reach, and you have
to accept that fact. Your only hope is that you have planted some
seeds of awareness that may sprout later on. </span></span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Arial, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">(*) Of
course it is more complex than this. I have created a dichotomy to
clarify a point. Scratch many a well read, logical, person in the
right place and out pops a demon. Indeed, I would say we all have our
shadow, our hidden irrationalites we protect with unreason and
project upon others.</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p><br /><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-36235140261177570932021-07-16T14:06:00.003-07:002021-07-16T14:06:41.105-07:00GENUINE DECOLONIZATION <p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><span style="font-size: small;"> Changing names and
removing statues is fine, but only scratches the surface of
decolonization To authentically decolonize we must go much deeper,
right to the structures that imposed and perpetuated colonization.
What are these colonial structures imposed on the land? The two most
important are the system of government, politics and political
parties and the system of courts, laws and policing.
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The System of
Governance
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The state is a colonial
imposition. Prior to the European invasion, no states existed north
of MesoAmerica. The Canadian governmental system is rooted in the
British state. In the 18th Century, Britain was ruled by a land
owning/trading oligarchy (less that 5% had the vote) divided into two
parties, the Whigs and the Tories. Governments were formed through
the competition of these two groups, the party getting the most
seats, given power. This power was manifested through the state's
repressive apparatus (courts, police and army) which were used to
force compliance from the population. Winning the competition to
direct the state was all important, since it opened the country to
all forms of pillage by the victors.
</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Canadian state
formed in the mid-19th Century, was over time, forced through popular
pressure to enfranchise all adults. Nevertheless, the essential
elements of competition, winner take all and the potential to oppress
the populace remained. Due to the emphasis on competition and
winning, it is very ineffective as a form of governance. There is
little if any long term view, other than the next election and the
system divides people rather than brings them together. True
leadership, which entails both obedience to the desires of the
populace and the ability to tell unpleasant truths, is not possible.
“Leadership” takes the form of bossism (Do as I say, or else) and
as such is not representative of the common will. Therefore they are
not trusted.
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The internal party
structure is modeled on the state. You have competition for
leadership and the winner expects obedience from the losers. Failure
to comply means loss of position in the party or purging. The party
leader is a boss. Naturally, there is conflict within every party.
“Top-down” breeds a situation where the “iron law of oligarchy”
runs rampant. This causes the party to become sterile, lack
imagination, have no long term goals but power for its own sake. The
entire political system becomes incapable of dealing with the
problems of the day, leading to stagnation and increasing crises.
(The present inability of the government to deal with the climate
crisis being a prime example of this.)
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Of course, society is
class divided between the owners of the means of production and the
great mass who work for them. Class conflict is inevitable. Due to
the structure of govenment and internal party governance, inter-group
conflict is much greater than what one would expect from class
struggle alone. Progressive parties compete with each other and
internal party organization tends to authoritarianism, just like the
bourgeois parties. The progressive forces are thus divided and this
makes social change more difficult than it ought to be.
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Courts
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The colonial system of
courts, law and policing is based upon similar principles as that of
government. Like the state, the courts are rooted in a past forms of
minority domination. The court served as a tool in keeping the
majority of the population in line, and still largely serves that
purpose. In a trial, lawyers compete and the one who has the best
argument (or most convincing lies) wins the case. Winning is what
matters and justice takes second place. (Just as “solving a case”
is more important to the police than justice) Court procedures, and
the language used, are totally foreign to everyone except lawyers and
magistrates. Not all evidence is allowed to be examined and weighed.
The reasons behind a defendant's actions are usually deemed
irrelevant. The court's essential authoritarianism is revealed by the
notion of punishment. Slaves and serfs were dominated through fear –
and the punishments were horrific for that reason. While less brutal,
the court system continues the practice of using fear. Justice is
seen as the guilty party receiving a sufficiently harsh sentence. As
in the past, the court system and its laws are essentially based upon
suppression and revenge.</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The law is bizarre.
While there is a Natural Law that all societies share -one does not
rob, assault, rape or kill one's fellows, the colonial system is
based on statute law. If the dominant group has the power, it can,
and has always, made anything it wishes illegal. (Such as
millennial-old hunting rights obliterated) Or it can legalize crimes
committed by the dominant group. (Invader land theft) Behind this
lies the idea that the dominator minority knows better what is good
for the people than the people themselves. Such a legal system can
only be corrupt, as wealthy minority interests are promoted and
protected and any actions deemed even mildly threatening to the
dominators are criminalized. (Examples include the “corporation as
fictitious person” fraud, giving corporations the same rights as
human beings, and the moves to criminalize protest. A good example of
the latter being the Quebec Student movement's 2012 success in
mobilizing public support caused the Quebec Govt to make it illegal
for more than three people to be together in the streets.)
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Decolonizing Governance
and the Courts
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">So what might a
decolonized system look like? It would need to look at and borrow
from alternatives, and these are to be found with Indigenous Peoples
and ancient European (the Deep Past) customs. (*)</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Governance
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">First off, we need a
system that emphasizes cooperation rather than competition and a more
consensual attitude. Competition must be left where it really matters
– class struggle – and not be imported into the popular
movements, and barring this caveat, into the system of governance.
There needs to be a good amount of decentralization, but with
attendant financing. Decisions ought to be made and executed at the
level to which they are best suited. (The ancient subsidiary
concept.) As an example, municipalities and Indigenous nations would
have complete control over development, forests and resources. (**)
As much as possible, there would be mass participation in decision
making and democracy would be an on-going process, not something that
you did for five minutes every four years. While political
organizations ought to have coherence, party discipline would have to
go, along with the authoritarian internal governance. Leaders would
become like chiefs (coordinators and spokespeople) not petty
dictators.</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Courts.
</span></p><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The goal must be to
eliminate “winning”, competition and vengeance as justice. The
goal should be the truth, and all evidence examined. No more
punishment, but restitution, reconciliation, and where that is not
possible, the anti-social person must be removed from society, not as
punishment, but as protection for the populace. (***) The core of the
law ought to be Natural Law and any statute laws imposed must be done
by a social consensus to avoid the use of this power for the purposes
of corruption, persecuting a minority, or imposing ones personal
morality on the population.
</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">(*)The Deep Past refers
to the European peoples prior to their conquest by the Roman Empire
and the cultural genocide of the Roman Church.</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">(**) There would have
to be general environmental and human rights regulations that a
community could not breach.</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">(***) Both Indigenous
peoples and the pre-Christian Iceland Vikings had such concepts.</span></p><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;"><span style="font-size: small;">
</span><br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-90139344152499693962020-11-11T15:43:00.005-08:002020-11-11T15:43:32.101-08:00<p>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">VENEZUELA
– THE PROPAGANDA AND THE REALITY</span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">A
friend of mine just got back from Venezuela. He was trapped there by
Covid 19, spending EIGHT MONTHS there before he could get back to
Canada. During that time he traveled all over the country on his
bicycle – from Amazonia to the Caribbean and then to the Colombian
border. He either camped beside the road or was invited to stay at
peoples houses or farms. What he saw in that lengthy grass roots
tour is most informative;</span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">1.
No one was starving and there was plenty of food</span></span>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">2.
He saw no violent outbreaks or even regular criminal violence</span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">3.
Gasoline was rationed, yet the buses continued to run. And there
were plenty of cars on the road.</span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">4.
There were no hoards of people trying to cross into Colombia, in
fact, he discovered that many Colombians live in Venezuela, having to
escape the repression there.</span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">5.
Opposition to the Madero Government seemed to come from white people
alone. They often told him "how great the country was 20 years
ago." (when half the population lived in abject poverty and the
state was in their hands.)</span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" lang="zxx" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">This
on-the ground report totally contradicts what has appeared in the
mass media. Mind you, he did not visit Caracas, but if they lie about
the entire country, might they also not be lying about conditions
there too?</span></span>
</p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-54073534320720220302020-10-22T12:39:00.005-07:002020-10-22T12:39:24.687-07:00<p>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">THE NATURE OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There is unhappiness among many Green
Party of Canada supporters that the “establishment” candidate won
the leadership. This after the GPC “establishment” weighed in
against the eco-socialist candidates. There is also the
generations-long failed attempts to drag the NDP to the left, an act
of masochism, if there ever was. Usually people blame the party
leadership for selling out or being undemocratic. This is only a
superficial way of looking at the problem.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Parliamentary parties of the left
always start out militant and radical. Over time they move
increasingly to the right. It happens so often, it is almost like a
law of nature. All contemporary social democratic parties started out
as socialist parties whose goal was to replace capitalism with
socialism the moment they achieved power. Within two decades these
parties became purely reformist and socialism was for “Sunday
sermons.” By the 1990s they had abandoned even the goal of
significant reforms within capitalism and embraced neoliberal
ideology. These parties – including the NDP – are now center
parties. Many of the Green Parties have had a somewhat similar
trajectory, starting in the 1980s as very anarchistic and New Left
and then evolving more toward typical parliamentary parties. (The
difference with the social democratic parties is the Greens become
moderate without abandoning the core of their platform – ecological
sanity)
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">When something happens constantly like
this you have to look for systemic and structural causes. The cause
for the slide to centrism by radical parties can be found in two
areas. 1. The nature of parliamentary politics and the effect it has
on parties who are serious about engaging in the such politics. 2.
The internal structure of the political party.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">A tiny, irrelevant sect can remain
pure, but once you are serious about getting elected you are bound to
make compromises. First off, your platform has to be broad and
inclusive enough to draw in voters. Once elected, you have to get
results otherwise you won't get re-elected. This means compromise and
trade-offs with groups to your right. Compromise can quickly become a
habit. The longer one is reelected the more one begins to think like
a parliamentarian and less like the ordinary Janes and Joes who elect
you.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">You want to run candidates who are
electable – this means people who are photogenic, say the right
things and become “personalities.” They may not, however, be the
most radical or ideological of party members. As the party gains
influence the ideological become increasingly seen as a threat to
getting MP's elected. When a party gets politically established, the
MPs take on an ever greater leadership role. They, and their
handlers, begin to take the party away from the ideologues and grass
roots militants. The party ends up a “vote-catching machine” and
policies are designed to gain votes rather than pursue a coherent
social or economic goal.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The internal structure of political
parties leads to a dimming of radicalism. This is Robert Michels'
“iron law of oligarchy” which he developed from studying the
Social Democratic Party of Germany early in the 20th Century. Parties
are based around representation, not delegation. Thus, one elects
party officials for a set term and it becomes difficult to dislodge
them. The party leadership is a hierarchy and the longer one is a
member of that group, the more one has the time to develop a loyal
band of supporters. Parties typically use simple majority democracy
and it is thus easy to stack meetings with one's supporters. Once
established, a party hierarchy can control credentialing (who is
acceptable as party reps or MPs) and the party media. The party
hierarchy can send in organizers to take undermine and takeover
recalcitrant party branches. Since party radicals are also the party
ultra-democrats, their isolation or purging means there is even less
restraining the authoritarianism of the party hierarchy. Bureaucracy
tends to grow and the party develops a whole stratum of paid
staffers, who quite naturally know who pays their wages.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The “iron law” does not work in
every organization. Anarcho-syndicalist unions have largely avoided
it. They have done this through radically decentralizing power to the
branches, by a bare minimum of paid officials, recallable delegates
rather than representatives, and term limits for elected officials.
Any member and any branch can propose modifications to union policies
and these are voted on by the membership on an annual basis.
Delegates to convention are selected by the branches and the number
of delegates per branch is dependent upon the number of branch
members.</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The Green Parties in their original
form adopted some of these anarchist concepts and added the modified
consensus democracy which grew out of the direct action environmental
movements. Radical democracy was soon found in some ways to be
incompatible with being a parliamentary party. (says a lot about
parliamentary democracy) The Greens, while still keeping a much
higher level of internal democracy than other parties, modified and
became more like regular parties. As they gained in votes and MPs,
the pressure has been ever greater in that direction.
</p><p> </p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-56904628160505818252020-10-22T12:37:00.005-07:002020-10-22T12:37:51.453-07:00<p>
</p><p align="JUSTIFY" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span style="font-size: small;">WILL
HORGAN'S RE-ELECTION BE A PYRRHIC VICTORY?</span></span></span></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span style="font-size: small;">According
to the polls John Horgan's BC NDP will experience a crushing victory
over its opponents. This victory may, in the end, prove a disaster
for that party. As the climate crisis becomes ever more evident, ever
more people will become angry at the failure to take serious measures
against it. An ever-growing number will be frustrated by four more
years of ignoring the most important problem of all as the time clock
ticks down. Keep in mind that the Covid crisis has pushed the climate
crisis to the back burner for many. Once the Covid crisis is behind
us, the climate crisis will once more be important to these people.
There can only be negative repercussions for the NDP. This
situation will be exacerbated as direct action movements against the
climate crisis grow in number and intensity and are repressed by the
NDP government. (think Clayoquot 1992.) If, by some miracle, the
Horganite-right wing is replaced by a pro-environment left, it will
be an up-hill battle winning the trust of the population again, since
the Horganites initially opposed Site C, LNG and log exports.</span></span></span>
<p align="JUSTIFY" lang="en" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-right: 0.39in;">
<br />
</p><span style="color: black;"><span face="Arial, sans-serif"><span style="font-size: small;">Of
course, the NDP could reverse course and get serious about the climate crisis – shut down Site C and LNG as untenable. But I
will not hold my breath in anticipation..</span></span></span>
<p> </p>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11635675.post-28843441365716618882020-10-20T10:54:00.003-07:002020-10-20T10:54:30.596-07:00<p> </p><div data-contents="true"><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="aetin-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="aetin-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="aetin-0-0"><span data-text="true">WHY ARE WOMEN SMARTER THAN MEN?</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="3v4r9-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3v4r9-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="3v4r9-0-0"><span data-text="true">Polls in Canada – and usually elsewhere - show a significant gender gap when it comes to politics. The latest 338. poll sees the Conservatives getting only 24% of women's vote, but 33% of men's. The NDP gets 17% male support, 24% female. According to MacLeans June 2020, men supported the Greens at 6.2% and women at 7.9%. Thus, women are 37% less likely to vote right wing, 30 % more likely to vote NDP and 22% more likely to vote Green than their male counterparts. This indicates that women are considerably more intelligent than males, by an average of 30% according to the polls. This is a significant difference and if you don't think so consider your reaction to having your income cut by that amount. It would hurt, right?</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="13d5-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="13d5-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="13d5-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="cjvg3-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cjvg3-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="cjvg3-0-0"><span data-text="true">Now it may seem brutally unjust to claim that men are less intelligent than women because they have a greater propensity to vote for the right than the centre or left. Let us first examine stupidity. Key elements of stupidity are an inability to consider the future, treating all phenomena as if they existed in isolation, a rejection of science, (evidence-based observations), and responding to difficulties with belligerence. Put simply, you cannot make a rational, evidence based case for most right-wing policies.</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="dt5og-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="dt5og-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="dt5og-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="5e9kf-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5e9kf-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="5e9kf-0-0"><span data-text="true">These aspects of stupidity are either rejected or are manifested in the different political parties. The Liberals, NDP and Greens all claim to be concerned with the climate crisis, i.e. concerned with the long term. (Whether they do anything about it is another issue.) Both the NDP and Greens tend toward an antiwar stance. Both the Greens and the NDP understand that social problems cannot be treated in isolation, nor can they be fixed with repression. Empirical evidence shows that neoliberal austerity does not work to make a better society, indeed makes matters worse. Greens, NDP and Liberals reject austerity. No matter their obvious failings, no matter their hypocrisy, no matter their betrayals, intellectually at least, these parties take a more rational stance on issues than the right wing. Women are more likely than men to support parties which are rational about key issues.</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="7crri-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7crri-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="7crri-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="2vu86-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2vu86-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="2vu86-0-0"><span data-text="true">This is not to say that women cannot be attracted by right-wing forces if certain historically justified fears are manipulated. (The re-establishment of misogynist practices being the most important of these fears.) In France there is no gender gap in the support for the Front National. The leaders of this party have been able to whip up fears of Islamic extremism and the sharia law, which seems to have scared a significant number of women. No doubt some of Trump's massive white female support (now largely lost) came from his anti-Muslim fear-mongering in the 2016 campaign. Other than these examples, however, a political gender gap persists in most countries with women tending to prefer the progressive side over the reactionary.</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="6jl75-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6jl75-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="6jl75-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="68cpp-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="68cpp-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="68cpp-0-0"><span data-text="true">What are the roots of this male stupidity that propels so many of them toward the self-defeating policies of right wing parties? One posibility lies in a false concept of masculinity that effects a large enough proportion of the male population to make a major political impact. For lack of a better term, I call this “Mannism”. For the Mannist anything classifiable somehow as “feminine” is second rate, weak, cowardly, irrational, and overly-emotional. Also classified as feminine are empathy, a consensual rather than a competitive attitude, a desire for peace and an abiding interest in “intellectual” and cultural pursuits.</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="1b15d-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1b15d-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="1b15d-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="f2ua6-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="f2ua6-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="f2ua6-0-0"><span data-text="true">Social and environmental activists are seen to embody these “feminine” traits and this explains the rage that many males feel toward such movements. Neoliberalism is seen as correct, not because of empirical evidence, but simply because it rejects empathy, and is not an ideology of goody-goody wimps pandering to societies inferior members. The Mannist also uses an irrational form of reason – one that looks at the world with intellectual abstractions and formulas and avoids or denies the empirical. Hence, the persistent belief, contrary to evidence, that “free trade” and privatization work, simply because they function well in theory. So too, climate crisis foot dragging policies, and the continued ignoring or repression of social problems, no matter what the scientific evidence to the contrary. Anything that gets in the way of “natural competition” is to be avoided and should be encouraged to enable “the best” to climb to the top. An authoritarian hierarchy is “natural” and therefore desirable. That science shows the limits of competition as a factor of social development and that authoritarian hierarchies are of comparatively recent origins among humans is ignored.</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="fupn7-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fupn7-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="fupn7-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="b5uur-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="b5uur-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="b5uur-0-0"><span data-text="true">Mannism lies at the base of much of what is considered masculinity in much of Europe and North America. It is seen by many as “What it means to be a man” and thus puts the Mannist True Believer into conflict with any progressive movement. Women, on the other hand, while not innately so, are at least allowed by the social system to show empathy and to be cooperative and non-violent. Indeed, these traits are expected of them.</span></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="2cece-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2cece-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="2cece-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3vtfh" data-offset-key="dcp4d-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="dcp4d-0-0"><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-offset-key="dcp4d-0-0"><span data-text="true">Part of the struggle to create a better world must be to encourage men to be intelligent. This means the need to redefine what masculinity means in the contemporary world, if not ultimately eliminate such restricting self-definitions.</span></span></span></div></div></div>Larry Gambonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com0