Archive for the ‘Communism’ Category

Letters to the Editor, Nov. 13 – Marco News

Marco Eagle Published 5:02 a.m. ET Nov. 13, 2020 | Updated 7:47 a.m. ET Nov. 13, 2020

Editorial cartoon(Photo: Universal)

How ironic. The same people who were denied the right to vote for centuries white women and black and brown U.S. citizens are now the saviors of our precious democracy.

It is even more amazing since Trump and the Republican Party tried every dirty trick in the book to keep these same people from voting in the 2020 presidential election. They all deserve a badge of honor and our eternal gratitude. Our young citizens should also be thanked.

Nevertheless, I will never understand how so many educated Americans could be so brainwashed by one man. Trump, maybe the greatest conman in the history of the United States, was able to do it.

Hopefully, when Biden is sworn in, they will get to see how a real American president should act and perform.

E. L. Bud Ruff, Marco Island

My parents took me to see the great leader who had come to campaign in our hometown to make Germany great again. The people cheered him on. Flags were everywhere. No one feared the loss of democracy in the process. The enemy was cloaked under the word communism.

Fascism was the opposite of communism, but both systems advocated rule over many by a handful of insiders.

Fast forward to the cult of Trump. When I see the signs, the flags, the radicals and thugs who defend the great leader under some skewed concept of patriotism and nationalism, I see images of the past repeating.

I dont know whether it is lack of education or plain stupidity that causes these folks to side with dictators in advocating the demise of democracy in our country. About 75 million (voters) said no in order to save democracy.

In my native country it went the other way. Right after Hitler took power, government agents went door to door, looking for his enemies. They arrested socialists, communists, trade union leaders and others who had spoken out against the party. Democracy was dead and concentration camps were built to house socialists. The con had worked, as it almost did here.

Fred Rump, Golden Gate Estates

More: Guest Commentary: Safe Navigation in area waters

More: Letters to the Editor, Nov. 10

And: Letters to the Editor, Nov. 6

Read or Share this story: https://www.marconews.com/story/opinion/2020/11/13/letters-editor-nov-13/6248670002/

Go here to see the original:
Letters to the Editor, Nov. 13 - Marco News

How Olivia de Havilland defied the male studio heads and charmed the audience. – The Washington Newsday

The actress Olivia de Havilland, who died on Saturday at the age of 104 in her home in Paris, turned Hollywood upside down in two ways

The two-time Oscar-winner was a pivotal figure in Hollywoods golden era and has appeared in nearly 50 films since the beginning of her film career in 1935.

De Havilland, perhaps best known for her role as Melanie Hamilton in Gone with the Wind and for her twists in Robin Hood and Captain Blood, was less known for her efforts to end Communist influence in Hollywood. In 1946, De Havilland gave a speech to the Hollywood Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions in which she was asked to condemn the Truman administrations policies toward the Soviet Union.

Instead of delivering the pro-Soviet speech, she urged the Hollywood liberals to distance themselves from Moscow and the American Communists.

We believe in democracy, not communism, she said, according to the book Dupes: How Americas Adversaries Have Manipulated Progresses for a Century by Paul Kengor.

She warned liberals that communists would often join liberal organizations to exploit them.

When Hollywoods Bolsheviks saw what de Havilland had done, they were furious, Kengor wrote, citing the speech as a serious awakening for Ronald Reagan, who was also a member of the Independent Citizens Committee of Arts, Sciences and Professions in Hollywood.

Reagan and de Havilland were already working together on the Santa Fe Trail in 1940.

They also fought to end the Hollywood system, according to which actors had to work exclusively for the studio they had signed on for up to seven years, unless they were lent to competitors. Under this system, actors could be suspended without pay if they refused roles, and the period of suspension was recorded in their contracts.

De Havilland also thought Warner Bros. would give her inferior roles.

She expected that her home studios, Warner Bros. would cast her in her own leading roles. That didnt really happen. She still felt that her best roles were in other studios, said Emily Carman, a professor at Chapman University.

De Havilland sued her employer, Warner Bros. in 1943 when they tried to renew her contract. The lawsuit ended the system of long-term contracts and changed the way Hollywood worked. The court decision in de Havillands favor became known as the De Havilland Act.

She could have just been the simpleton of Errol Flynn, said Carman, referring to de Havillands co-star in a number of films. We wouldnt remember her if thats what she just did. Its really remarkable that in the prime of her career, she fought offstage against Warner Bros. for almost two years.

She went beyond the form that Hollywood had given her for a more multi-faceted acting career, Carman said.

De Havilland won her first Oscar in 1947 for Best Actress in the 1946 film To Each His Own and her second Oscar in 1949 for her performance in The Heiress.

She was the great Hollywood star of the Golden Age, said Jonathan Kuntz, film historian at UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television.

She lived so long, lived into the 21st century, Kuntz added, and allowed people in the modern era to still get a first-hand look at a person with that experience in the classical era.

This story was made available to Tekk.tv by Zenger News.

See the article here:
How Olivia de Havilland defied the male studio heads and charmed the audience. - The Washington Newsday

How Florida Democrats Lost Latino Voters And What They Should Learn From It – WUWF

President Trump won Florida by 4 percentage points thats a landslide by the states standards. Political analysts attribute that success, in part, to Joe Bidens inability to secure enough votes in already solidly blue regions like South Florida.

Although Florida didnt decide the election, after all, its still a heavyweight in the Electoral College and Latino voters here play a critical part in deciding who receives those electoral votes.

WLRN is committed to providing South Florida with trusted news and information. In these uncertain times, our mission is more vital than ever. Your support makes it possible. Please donate today. Thank you.

WLRNs Luis Hernandez spoke with a panel of reporters and a political strategist to understand more about this diverse set of voters. Tim Padgett is WLRNs Americas editor; Lourdes Ubieta is a television, radio host and journalist; Fernand Amandi is a Democratic strategist, pollster and lecturer at the University of Miami.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

WLRN: Tell us one story about one Latino voter that you spoke with before the election that really illustrates what happened in Florida.

TIM PADGETT: We were at a voting polling site, and she was probably the only person and perhaps the only Cuban-American voter there who was voting for Biden. She told me that she was probably the only person in her Cuban-American family there in Hialeah who voted for Biden. And because she's a teacher, she's very worried about President Trump's performance with the COVID crisis and how that was affecting her. She was sort of out of step with everyone else in the Cuban-American community there in Hialeah who was voting mostly on this idea that Trump was had a much tougher stance against communist Cuba and that therefore Biden and the Democrats were all socialists radical socialists because they didn't agree with that hard line on Cuba.

LOURDES UBIETA: With the Venezuelan voters, mostly on the Democratic side, I was shocked to see quite a few families voting for Trump just for Trump, not for the rest of the candidates on the ballot, just because of his policies towards Venezuela. So there was kind of an emotional vote for Trump in the Venezuelan community for his hard line stance.

FERNAND AMANDI: As a pollster, I had the pleasure to speak to thousands of people about it through some of the polls that we did. And that was certainly a sign for us of what was to come. But I think more personally, I would say just looking across the Thanksgiving dinner table a couple of years ago at members of my own family, several of whom had voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, that all of a sudden sounded like they were guests on Fox News, repeating back some of these absurd talking points that the Democratic Party has become infiltrated by Marxists and communists and socialists. That was certainly a warning sign.

Do you think that the messaging from Republicans was stronger than what the Democrats were doing?

UBIETA: In Florida, these people from Latinos for Trump, they did great work here. Im talking about the outreach of the party. First, about this socialism message it worked. Why? Because a big part of the community here in Florida comes from countries that have suffered a direct impact of communist or socialism, like Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba.

Then, they use influencers like [Alex] Otaola, who made younger Cuban voters, who we suspect that they want to vote for the Democratic Party, vote for Trump. Their Trojan horse was the registration they did of thousands of new voters. They went door to door calling for people to register to vote and I think thats part of the story.

AMANDI: They always do this after every losing election. They talk about how much they invested in dollars and how many staffers they hired. But its all a function of when those dollars are spent. It's much more efficient to spend a fraction of the money earlier in the cycle than just trying to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at the wall in commercials that may or may not be generating the message.

The fundamental problem here, that I saw, is that the Democratic Party was allowed to be branded here in Florida with Hispanic voters as a party of socialism and communism. It's an absolutely absurd characterization, the only thing more absurd than that is to fail to confront that and contextualize that refute it, because then otherwise it doesn't matter who the Democratic candidate is someone as moderate as Joe Biden will then be seen through that lens. And that's where, unfortunately, the Biden campaign just got outfoxed here in Florida.

PADGETT: Part of it has to do with the COVID problem, the Biden campaign obviously wanted to be responsible about how direct its outreach was to voters in a health context. But ironically, the Republicans realized that they're starting at a disadvantage with Latinos, for example, you've got a president who's known for his racist rhetoric with Latinos as well as his fierce anti-immigration policies. And because of that, they do tend to work harder at this idea of micro-engaging Latinos, meaning don't look at Latinos as a monolith, but go at them more personally and individually.

Despite the fact that the Democrats were coming up with individual groups like Cubanos con Biden, Venezuelanos con Biden. But still, the Republicans did a much better job of making each individual Latino group in Florida and especially South Florida feel as special as the Republicans have always made the Cuban voters feel.

Help me understand how Latinos in general view the word socialist compared to how Americans view the word vastly differently.

PADGETT: Given the socialist regimes that have destroyed countries like Venezuela and South America and across Latin America, that word then takes on the connotation of destructive, radical Marxist communism like Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua right now. That is what the word summons in that context, whereas in the North American context here, socialism, we tend to see more of Denmark as an example. We tend to think of the social safety net combined with capitalism is what makes us such a great society, for example.

But the Trump campaign was very savvy about realizing that that's a nuance that most Latin American voters, particularly in South Florida and so many of whom have fled regimes where radical socialist Marxist style political philosophy is applied, that's a nuance that they're just not really going to pick up on. And if you call Biden and the Democrats socialist, that Latin American context of the words will take over. It was a brilliant psychological insight on their part. And it worked.

UBIETA: Latin voters have the idea that the Democratic Party is kidnapped by the more leftists in the party. I believe that the Biden campaign made a mistake when they didn't react to the support of people like Gustavo Petro in Colombia, a former guerrilla [member] and related to terrorists in Colombia or Nicolas Maduro or Miguel Daz-Canel in Cuba. So all these elements together give you that perception that the party is kidnapped [by the far left]. And these big people that made us run out of our countries in Latin America are supporting Biden and Biden is not saying thank you, I don't want your support. So they bought it, they believe it. There is an emotional vote "No, no, no, no, I don't want to have in the United States what I had in Colombia, Venezuela, Cuba."

AMANDI: That's the problem. Democrats are now defined as [socialists and communists] and in politics, the name of the game is defining yourself and your opponent before your opponent defines themselves or defines you. And again, you know, everybody wants to focus on the 2020 cycle. But this is a phenomenon that happened in 2018, the road testing or the pilot program, if you will, of the socialism campaign happened in 2018 here in Florida when Andrew Gillum was called a socialist, when even Bill Nelson, one of the greatest moderates in the Senate to come out in many years, also tagged with the label. But what did the Democratic Party do? Nothing.

They chose not to counter it. They thought that they were going to litigate the word and redefine the word when in reality thats a trigger word. It's a word that traumatizes a lot of people. There were actually many people, some of them from this community, that said the Democrats should not even touch that issue of socialism.

See the article here:
How Florida Democrats Lost Latino Voters And What They Should Learn From It - WUWF

Chardon-hey! Poland becoming a nation of wine drinkers as country listed 5th most attractive market in the world – The First News

Poland is now among the top five most attractive wine markets in the world, according to the Global Compass 2020 report published by Wine Intelligence. Kelsey Chance on Unsplash

Poland is now the fifth-most attractive wine market in the world, a major increase since last year, according to a new report.

Wine is not normally the first alcoholic drink people think of when it comes to Poland. The country tends to be associated with beer and vodka, which both have a long tradition of being produced in Poland unlike wine, which is usually imported from other countries.

The jump in ranking can be attributed to an increasing wine drinking population and a flux of disposable income, both of which are taken into account when calculating wine market attractiveness, along with other economic and specific wine market metrics.Wine Intelligence

Yet the Polish market has big potential: Poland is now among the top five most attractive wine markets in the world, according to the Global Compass 2020 report published by Wine Intelligence.

It is in fifth place, after the United States, South Korea, Germany and China, up from 14th place last year. Fifty markets around the world were analysed for the report.

Wine Intelligence had already noticed Polands potential earlier. Back in 2017, it had predicted an exciting period of growth ahead for Poland not just economically, but also in terms of wine consumption.

The report said: Wine consumers in Poland are [] typically younger and more eager to discover more about wine than in other places, and as the economy keeps expanding relatively fast, so does the purchasing power.IAN LANGSDON/PAP/EPA

This years ranking compared two attractiveness models: one with the impact of COVID-19 and the other without it. In the former, Poland ranked fifth, compared to tenth place in the latter, without the effect of the pandemic.

Poland was categorised as a growth market for wine, one where it is a mainstream product and/or experiencing growth, between an established and an emerging market. Other countries in this category include South Korea, Russia and Singapore.

In a piece published in 2017, James Wainscott of Wine Intelligence linked Polands promising wine market to the changes in the country over the past three decades.

Although the total number of wine drinkers has remained relatively stable over the past few years, within this population, consumers are drinking wine more frequently.Wine Intelligence

The fall of Communism in 1989, the advent of cheap air travel and membership of the European Union has infused the country with wealth and shaped the perspectives of a huge swathe of Poles born after 1980, he wrote.

Wine from France, easily available in Poland at hypermarkets such as Auchan and Carrefour, was found to be the top country of origin, but consumers have been introduced to wine from Portugal by the Portuguese-owned Biedronka shops.

This years report said: Poland brings a lot of opportunities for global wine brands. This is one of the few markets in Europe where European origins such as France, Italy or Spain dont dominate.

Poland was categorised as a growth market for wine, one where it is a mainstream product and/or experiencing growth, between an established and an emerging market.Zachariah Hagy on Unsplash

Instead, the US and Chile are the main countries of origin supplying the Polish market. Wine consumers in Poland are also typically younger and more eager to discover more about wine than in other places, and as the economy keeps expanding relatively fast, so does the purchasing power.

It added: This leads to Poland being a strong opportunity market, particularly as the market develops and drinkers start looking for core and recognisable brands.

Read the original post:
Chardon-hey! Poland becoming a nation of wine drinkers as country listed 5th most attractive market in the world - The First News

J. Posadas, the Trotskyist Who Believed in Intergalactic Communism – The Wire Science

J. Posadas. Photo: Russian Wikipedia CC BY SA 4.0

Posadas (19121981) is one of the most famous and ridiculed of Trotskyists, notorious both for the cults he named after himself and his claim that UFOs were evidence of communist societies in other galaxies. Together with his belief that nuclear war might hasten the advent of communism (and his hopes that dolphins could be integrated into the new society), Posadass xenophilia has in recent years fed his legendarisation by countless meme pages, or even outright LARPing in the form of the Posadist Caucus in the Democratic Socialists of America.

For A.M. Gittlitz, author of a new book on J. Posadas, this ironic veneration of the Argentinian Trotskyist also has something to say about our political moment. In times in which its hard to believe in the future, Posadass wild optimism appears as a caricature of an earnestness and sheer sense of belief now almost lost to us. In his richly researchedI Want to Believe: Posadism, UFOs and Apocalypse Communism, Gittlitz documents the more serious side of Posadass activism in postwar Latin American Trotskyism, while suggesting that even his strangest claims were not so detached from the UFOlogy of the time.

David Broder is the translator of J. PosadassFlying saucers, the process of matter and energy, science, the revolutionary and working-class struggle and the socialist future of mankind. He spoke to Gittlitz about Posadass interest in the extraterrestrial, his comrades involvement in the Cuban Revolution, and how he became an online legend.

First, lets talk about Posadas the man. Some of the comments cited in the book notably, his prediction that jokes would be unnecessary under communism cast him as an intensely ascetic figure, yet this also seems linked to his projection of militant commitment and seriousness. What kind of formative experiences took Posadas toward his vision of organisation and revolutionary morality?

His asceticism came from a certain interpretation of Lenin and Leon Trotskys conception of a disciplined vanguard party, widespread in the Latin American Bureau of the Fourth International. But a lot of the more cultish aspects and bizarre utopian visions came from his own idiosyncrasies.

Posadas, born Homero Cristalli, grew up in intense poverty with (at least) nine siblings in working-class Buenos Aires in the 1910s and 1920s. After the premature death of their mother, they had to beg neighbours for eggs, work odd jobs for pennies, and sometimes subsisted on green bananas for days on end. The malnutrition left him with both permanent health problems and a belief that we need to consume much less than what is normal under capitalism.

In his twenties, his tireless work distributing newspapers for the Socialist Youth drew the attention of Buenos Airess small proto-Trotskyist milieu, and he was recruited as a union organiser. Although he was not an intellectual, his diligent attention to the tasks assigned to him made him a valuable asset among the fractured field of anti-Stalinist communists. It was only in the 1950s, when he had risen to the position of Secretary of the Latin American Bureau (BLA), when some in the movement reported Posadas was manic. He demanded that his militants conform to his own lifestyle of lite sleep and the endless production, translation, and distribution of texts.

When he was denied leadership of the Fourth International in 1961, and the BLA broke into its own International, he made revolutionary morality central to the movement. Non-procreative sex, especially between militants who werent married, was prohibited. Posadas hoped sexual desire would fade away under communism, and perhaps technology would replace sex altogether. This, too, reflects Posadass own sexless marriage.

By the early 1970s, Posadass harsh authoritarian monolithism, his increasingly strange texts, and the major repression of his movement in Latin America led most of the youth and working-class base to leave the International. Then came the expulsions of the remaining intellectual core of the movement serious Marxists like Guillermo Almeyra and Adolfo Gilly. The only ones left were young militants who entered socialism through the texts of Posadas alone and had barely even read Marx or Trotsky.

He believed his movements small size and inexperience was a virtue for these militants could be perfectly harmonised as transmitters of his ideas to the leaders of the workers states that would, he thought, build communist society after the expected World War III. The communal living, submission to a charismatic leader, doomsday predictions, abusive self-criticism sessions, escalating spirals of commitment, separation of militants from their partners and families, and taking young militants as sex partners, make it fair to qualify Posadism as a cult. But compared to dozens of other postwar Leninist organisations of various sizes, these features were by no means unique.

Posadas played an important role in Latin American Trotskyism and particularly in the period of the Cuban Revolution. Yet his followers entered into open conflict with Che Guevara and Fidel Castro. Can you tell us about the role they played, the place the guerrilla struggle had in Posadass thinking, and why that relationship fell apart?

Trotskyists internationally were skeptical of Castros revolution throughout the 1950s, but the small circle of Cuban Trotskyists were enthusiastic supporters. Some fought in the sierras of Guantanamo, and one was a close comrade of Castro, sailing with him on theGranma in 1956. After the revolution, they quickly formed the Partido Obrero Revolucionario (Trotskista) (POR(T)) under Posadass BLA, and were allowed to use state radio to organise their first congress. They began to organise a strong network throughout the Cuban working class, pushing for the formation of Soviets, the nationalisation of industry, and expulsion of the Guantanamo military base.

The Soviet-aligned Partido Socialista Popular (PSP) quickly identified the POR(T) as a threat to the revolution. The USSR hoped that Cuba would follow its policy of peaceful coexistence with the US. But on many issues Castro and Guevara tended closer to the POR(T)s own radicalism, defying the US by nationalising dozens of industries and utilities in 1960.

Early attempts to suppress the Trotskyists by PSP agents were thwarted by Guevara. But after the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 and the missile crisis of 1962, the POR(T) continued pushing bellicose rhetoric, against the Soviet Unions policy of dtente. Castro thus gave the PSP a free hand to clamp down on the Trotskyists until nearly every member was arrested.

Even then, the Posadists internationally supported Castro but above all, they supported Guevara. Adolfo Gilly wrote in the Monthly Review that Guevaras policies as minister of industry were properly anticapitalist, relying on a disciplined workforce motivated by revolutionary enthusiasm instead of the capitalistic workers self-management initiatives pushed by the PSP-run Ministry of Agriculture. When it came to confrontation, the Posadists were impressed that Guevara often stated that nuclear war might be a necessary evil to defeat imperialism and saw his conception of thefocoguerrilla cell as a third-world variant of the Soviet workers council. Posadas experimented with this idea in Guatemala, where he became the ideological figurehead of the MR-13 rebels, pushing them to form armed revolutionary peasant councils wherever they went.

When Guevara resigned from the government and disappeared, the Posadists wrote that Castro, under pressure from the Soviets, had killed him. This, along with the guerrilla war in Guatemala devolving into a genocidal counterinsurgency, infuriated Castro enough that he denounced Posadas and Trotskyism in general at the 1966 Tricontinental Congress. When Guevara was finally killed by the Bolivian army the following year, Posadas called the photo of his corpse a forgery.

Posadas is probably most famous for his comments on UFOs as harbingers of a more developed and thus postcapitalist society. You quote his son Lon Cristalli playing down this focus, remarking When Carl Sagan says it its fine, but when Posadas said it he was a planetary madman. The interesting thing here is the suggestion that what Posadas wrote about was drawn from a wider cultural phenomenon, the UFOlogy of the 1950s-60s and also Bolshevik cosmism. What precisely was new about Posadass intervention on this theme?

Cristalli is correct to defend this aspect of his fathers work in this way. Sagan was a pioneer of the astrobiological, and, in my opinion, political science of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI). Along with Soviet astrophysicist Iosif Shklovsky, Sagan represented the most optimistic pole within SETI, initiating projects like the Allen Telescope Array and the Voyager Gold Record on premises very similar to the main logic behind Posadass UFO essay. That is, if contemporaneous communicable alien civilisations do exist, they will have had to sustain themselves for thousands of millennia. They must, then, have overcome or avoided entirely our own imperialist and self-destructive impulses and so if we have the ability to contact them, we should do so without fear. Shklovsky even wrote that it was Marxism that would deliver humanity to this higher-level longevity. Sagan kept his leftist sympathies close to his chest, but he didnt exactly disagree.

But Posadass 1968 essay on UFOs was not so much a matter of committing his movement to UFOlogy, or restoring the cosmist tradition to communism, as of settling an internal debate within the movements intellectual core over the reality and significance of UFOs. Yes, the phenomenon is real, he said, and if we can contact them, we should. But he added that his comrades shouldnt focus too much on trying to do that or speculating what UFOs are doing here or what their society is like for we have everything we need to create a sustainable utopia on Earth right now. He remained a believer, but never publicly wrote on the subject again.

A key figure here is Dante Minazzoli. Can you tell us about his interest in UFOlogy and what his comrades thought of this? Was there a certain point at which Posadism became mainly famous among other Trotskyist groups precisely because of this focus?

Dante Minazzoli and Homero Cristalli founded theGrupo Cuarta Internacional(GCI) in the mid-1940s as a small circle of proletarian militants committed to Trotskys vision of establishing the Fourth International as a world revolutionary vanguard. At that point,Posadaswas just a collective pen name, and since Cristalli was not much of a writer, Minazzoli likely wrote a lot of what was published under the name J. Posadas. In some ways, Minazzoli was as much Posadas as Posadas himself; although it was a speech by Posadas that became the famous UFO essay, its content was based on Minazzolis long-held extraterrestrial hypotheses.

In 1947, after Kenneth Arnolds story of flying saucers and news of the Roswell incident spread through tabloids worldwide, there was a flap of UFO sightings around Argentina. Influenced at a young age by science fiction and the cosmist literature of Camille Flammarion, Minazzoli believed humans are just one species among many in the universe, and our destiny is to meet and fraternise with them. He urged his comrades in the GCI to analyse the phenomenon, but they prohibited him from talking about it.

Two decades later, when the Posadist Internationals leadership believed themselves to be the legitimate successors to Trotsky and Lenin, and thus the intellectual vanguard of world revolution, Minazzoli brought up his thesis again in the context of a reading group on Friedrich EngelssAnti-Dhringand LeninsMaterialism and Empirio-Criticism.He made a dialectical materialist argument for the existence of extraterrestrial life, and a political argument that the UFOs were here to observe us as we achieved socialism so we could be welcomed into the galactic community. He was probably not alone in this belief, but other International leaders, like Guillermo Almeyra, urged him to cut it out.

But Minazzolis insistence on the topic moved Posadas to comment. The transcribed speech was published in a few of the Posadist newspapers worldwide. Militants from other Trotskyist groups already read the Posadist press for its bizarre conspiracy theories, predictions, and screeds on revolutionary morality. The UFO essay became a cult classic among them. Rumours of it spread through the fractured Trotskyist movement as evidence that their rivals were truly mad and that they had chosen sects correctly.

You tell us that Posadas returned to attention or perhaps, neo-Posadism emerged in an unprecedented way in the 2010s thanks to meme pages like the Intergalactic Workers League Posadist, focusing on both his catastrophist hopes in nuclear war and his unreal vision of a new society where man would commune with dolphin. In your account, this isnt just because Posadas is funny, but because ironic veneration of his extreme revolutionary optimism somehow fits the mood of our time. Could you explain this a bit more?

Although a handful of Posadists continued, and still continue, their militancy, the movement largely faded from even its small relevance within Trotskyism after Posadass death in 1981. But the UFO essay and his enthusiasm for nuclear war remained legendary among Trotskyists and train-spotters of small revolutionary left sects. Among these wasMatthew Salusbury, an intern for a magazine of the paranormal, theFortean Times. He pitched an article that the British Posadists of the Revolutionary Workers Party were a Trotskyist UFO cult.

Although it hyperbolically leaned into the UFO angle, and unearthed, for the first time, Posadass late-life obsession with dolphins, it became the main referent for Posadass Wikipedia page, piquing many imaginative discussions on leftist message boards. In 2012, you translated the UFO essay into English for Marxists.org, which showed his interest in aliens was more than just a legend. Then, in 2016, as the insanity of the US and UK elections radicalised bizarre corners of the internet, Aaron Bastanis concept of Fully Automated Luxury Communism took off as a leftist meme.

Space was added to the schema, and a cartoonish Posadas alongside mushroom clouds, whizzing flying saucers, and dolphins leaping into space naturally followed. The Intergalactic Workers League Posadist was probably the most successful spin-off meme page. To date, its produced hundreds of memes, earned tens of thousands of followers, and its administrators occasionally venture out to a May Day parade or leftist event in character.

As a result of the memes, Posadas has become (in the Anglosphere, at least) one of the most notorious names in the pantheon in the history of revolutionary socialism outpacing his rivals and, at times, even overtaking Trotsky himself in terms of Google searches. Some have criticised the enthusiasm as cruel, citing a false rumor that Posadas was driven mad through torture, or that the Posadas memes do not take seriously the history of a movement that made heroic contributions to the South American labor movement and saw dozens of its militants killed and tortured.

Its a fair point, and thats part of why the bulk of my book offers a sober history of the Posadist Internationals origins and politics. But I also see a side of that is more positive. Young leftists today find themselves in between a century of counterrevolution and a future that seems destined to continue slowly sinking into dystopia. Posadas, who came to prominence in the 1950s as the spread of colonial revolution made it common for revolutionaries to believe a nuclear third world war was imminent, was the most extreme catastrophist thinker believing the war was both necessary and desirable, and that utopia was on the other side.

So, one way to read the Posadist memes, in absence of a potential world war between communism and capitalism, is that were fucked, drop the nukes, get it over with already. But theres also openness to another possibility that something strange and unexpected could happen, the emergence of a new Lenin, a mass, religious-like awakening of the working class, or a disaster that devastates the dominant order leaving the working class to rebuild the world on our own terms. Essentially, anyone who believes communist revolution is possible thinks something like this, even though to most people thats as ridiculous as waiting for the aliens.

It also seems that the veneration of Posadism has coincided with the collapse of other self-styled revolutionary organisations in recent years indeed, in Britain this was also expressed by meme pages like Proletarian Democracy, which called for a Seventh International and asked readers to crowdfund a workers bomb. Is mocking Posadas a way of dealing with our disappointment in Leninism? Or just an easy scapegoat?

For decades, Posadas was like a funhouse mirror at which sectarian leftists would laugh at their own distorted image. The humor around Posadas today is totally different. The people who are into the memes (a few ex-Trots among them, but by and large the demographic is young people who have never engaged in militancy) arent mocking a strange sect of Trotskyism, or Trotskyism in general, or Leninism in general, but the entirety of the failed revolutionary socialist tradition.

Ironically though, its not a critical mocking. Its more ironic and absurd. I think at the bottom of it is a curiosity about those who once believed inanythingso strongly that they would fight and die for it. Theres a respect for it. It comes from a place of wanting to be a part of something like that, but not really being able to believe in it.

As well as exploring Posadisms stranger ideas, this is a richly textured biography of the man himself. Can you tell us a bit about why you wanted to write this book and how you went about piecing the story together?

I wanted to write a science fiction story, something like a communistIlluminatus! Trilogy, with Posadism as a main part. But as I researched, I became far more interested in the actual history little of which has been written about in English.

I visited the major archives of the movements internal documents in Amsterdam and London, and found additional materials in Paris, Stanford University, Mexico City, Montevideo, and Argentina. While in Buenos Aires I knocked on the door of Len Cristalli, now secretary of the small International, but he refused to talk to me. Later I heard he bragged about rebuffing an imperialist agent from theNew York Times. The secretary of the Uruguayan section was also reluctant to talk to me, but was so friendly he couldnt help himself, and we ended up chatting off the record for a couple hours. I was also fortunate to meet an original Cuban Posadist at the Trotsky conference last May in Havana. Although most veteran Trotskyists I met described Posadas with little more than nasty jokes, they all had a lot of respect for the original militants of the BLA.

Through Sebastian Budgen I talked to an ex-militant of the Italian section, Luciano Dondero, who alluded to particularly intriguing untold parts of the story, like the sex scandal that served as a pretext to the expulsion of the intellectual core, and the daughter that Posadas had late in life, groomed to be his messianic heir. Other personal details of Posadass life, from his earliest memory witnessing the near-revolutionarySemana Trgica of 1919 unfold from his window in Buenos Aires, to his direct support for guerrilla insurrections in Algeria, Cuba, and Guatemala, his failure to recognise the importance of the 68 uprisings, the movements repression in the Operation Condor dictatorships, and the sad demise as a marginal authoritarian cult, served as a poignant story an example corresponding to the arc of revolutionary socialisms failure in the twentieth century.

At the same time, I became fascinated with Trotskyism which I had never really taken seriously before. Their conception of militancy was far different from what I was used to growing up in the anti-authoritarian anti-globalisation milieu. I found that commitment to program a really admirable tradition my generation lacks. It also seems obvious that the dozens of global uprisings weve seen in the past years would be stronger with some level of international coordination, and a guiding conception of what it means to be anticapitalist, how the working class can take power, and what to do afterward.

This is not to say a resurgent Fourth International or FORA (the anarcho-communist union of which the parents of Posadas and Minazzoli were part), or any new attempt at an old model, would work. But it is important to understand what they were trying to achieve, why they were established, and why they failed. In the18th Brumaire,Marx wrote about how revolutionaries who find themselves in hopeless situations look to conjure figures from the past in hopes of coming up with new ways to move forward. It is ironic enough to resurrect Lenin, Stalin, or Mao for this purpose, and Trotskyism always had this strange tone of self-defeatism. With Posadas, at least, there is no mistaking the irony inherent in the necessary task of creating something radically new from the ruins of history.

A.M. Gittlitz is author ofI Want to Believe: Posadism, UFOs and Apocalypse Communism.

This article was first published on Jacobin.

View post:
J. Posadas, the Trotskyist Who Believed in Intergalactic Communism - The Wire Science