If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
you are only realy concerned with being superior ...a sure sign of insecurity.
Although MR, it would have to be clear to all those who subscribed to this option that the PTB would not hesitate to kill, maim or otherwise violently intimidate those involved to force them back to work.
It would require a seriously high percentage of the general public across several key sectors to usher in change. The problems being systemic in nature, they require reordering of the powers and principles of governance themselves. Otherwise all you achieve is a change of actors with the same script remaining intact.
No different from what Ghandi faced then...
Errrr...what?
1) Is the rule of law. Quite why the same people who know that the law is made up by self interested motherfuckers in westminster to please certain political ends also believe that the law is a set of neutral precepts that hold "society" together is a mystery.
Have a link
http://mason.gmu.edu/~jhasnas/MythWeb.htm
2) Myth number two is my favourite. That forced commonality called "being a citizen" in a "nation" it's akin to thinking that there really is a santa claus and like small children waiting to hear the tinkling of tiny bells no one wants to hear that Mummy and Daddy lied to them.
Neither one bears even the slightest scrutiny and they are both the major devices that the PTB maintain sway. As Clandestine says you only change the actors and not the play if you organise politically. Your biggest problem is having people like me who know there is no nation or states or towns or whathaveyou in charge, because they will do anything they want and go to sleep laughing at your idiocy.
And no matter which group you set up they will be in charge of it because they have more options behaviourally to get to the top. This is why the world is run by sociopaths.
Sorry, don't need some old dude to tell me what the situation is. I know and so does the rest of the working class know what the situation is and our eyes certainly aint closed. What I said is that there aint nothing we can do, even if we organise politically.
I'm not laughing at it either mate.
There are things that can be done. Employment rights, better wages and workign conditions weren't magicked out of the air. They were fought for. They can still be fought for.
And this has exactly what to do with Marxism?
Class.
Well this isn't true is it?
The anti-war movement for example had afew hardcore supporters, but as soon as the media got bored, so did most of the people. They stopped marching, protesting or doing anything except occasionally saying how they were on the one big march.
In New Orleans, a lot of people went to help and offer aid, then after a week got bored and gave up. People are interested so long as celebrities and the media are interested, because people are fickle!
It is there to see!
There's a difference between liberalism and Marxism, the two aren't juxtaposed.
Bizzarely Born Slippy is right about the whole left/right thing. It's been hijacked by statists to further their aims.
The underlying assumption is always that you must have some government, and that you can either have left wing government or right wing government. Funnily enough these are structurally the same, but benefit different groups of people.
Governments that use violence and threats to benefit those from the "lower class" are left wing. Governments that use violence and threats to benefit a small elite are right wing. They are both totalitarian. Even liberal ideology can be totalitarian if it's imposed on people using force.
The content changes but the process remains the same- it's one man violently imposing his will on another. It's this process that's the problem.
Of course, being in favour of "legitimised" violence on behalf of fiction yourself, it's going to be hard for you to get your head round. In other words, you are a statist.
No facts in this sentence. Are you gonna provide any or what?
Btw, I can't "fail to understand". When someone is attempting to communicate with me, they either get through to me (success) or don't (failure) either way, the onus is on the person doing the communication to get their point over.
To say that someone else doesn't understand what you mean is to just to be a lazy, incompetent communicator.
Anyway, fuck that, let's have some facts.
It could be said the middle class is the new working class...we're all slaves to the system, regardless of blue collar/white collar divisions.
This is a pivotal notion i'd like to see socialist organisations addressing, but unfortunately i don't. All i can see is the same old bores backed up by the new-wave of pathetic, conscience-driven, loathed-by-all-others-but-lefty-students wanking themselves silly over pictures of John Mclean and Leon Trotsky.
Depends on what class defintions you use. In strict Marxist terms, there are only 2 classes and most middle class people would be working class.
That'll be the SWP. No one takes 'em seriously.
The SSP too. Colin Fox dressing up as Robin Hood and parading about glasgow city centre just about destroyed any veigh sense of credibility socialists had up here.
I don't think the ideals between left wing and right wing groups are the same... There's a difference between libertarianism and authoritarianism. A difference between neo-comservatism and neo-marxism.
So you think that employment rights, better wages and working conditions were a direct result from the working class or just the ruling class giving them to the working class to keep them at bay?