Mediaboss Marketing

May 18 marked the 12th anniversary of the end of 26-year bloody communal war in Sri Lanka waged by successive Colombo governments against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and more broadly the islands Tamil minority.

Speaking in parliament on the day, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapakse glorified the armed forces for the liberation of the country from terrorism. He added: We ended the [war] era, displaced refugees were settled into their villages and public representatives from the North and East today are living with dignity, freedom and enjoys the democracy.

This turns history upside down, hiding the brutal truth of the end of the war. The relentlessly military offensives in the early months of 2009 drove the LTTE along with hundreds of thousands of Tamil civilians into a small pocket of land near Mullaitivu on the northwest coast of the island.

The Sri Lankan military mercilessly pounded the area with artillery shells, and from the air, deliberately targeting hospitals, aid centres and designated civilian areas. According to UN estimates, at least 40,000 civilians were slaughtered. When the LTTE defences finally collapsed, the military murdered surrendering LTTE leaders and herded some 300,000 civilians into army-controlled detention camps. Hundreds of young people were hauled off for re-education to unknown locations.

Mahinda Rajapakse, who was Sri Lankan president at the time, was directly responsible for these war crimes and gross abuses of democratic rights. His younger brother, Gotabhaya Rajapakse, who is now the countrys president, oversaw these criminal military operations as defence secretary. He is directly implicated in the murder of LTTE leaders, who giving themselves up and carrying white flags of surrender.

As for the situation facing Tamil people today, those incarcerated in camps were resettled and many still living in abject poverty in huts with elementary facilities. Around 90,000 war widows in the islands North and East are struggling to survive. The two war-torn provinces remain under heavy military occupation, with the Tamil population, particularly young people, constantly harassed and intimidated. Protests are taking place to demand information about the disappeared and the release of political prisoners.

While it was celebrating its victory over the LTTE in the South, the government unleashed a military-police crackdown in the North and East, arresting dozens for paying their respects to their loved ones who were killed in the massacre at Mullaitivu.

The government was forced to hold low-key victory celebrations this month because the COVID-19 pandemic is surging in the country. The Colombo regime is nervous about the developing mass opposition among workers and the poor who are facing wage and job cuts and rising prices for essential foods and other basic items.

The governments response to growing social unrest is to strengthen the armed forces in preparation for class war. As part of the victory celebrations, thousands of soldiers were promoted to higher ranks. In response to the defeat of the LTTE, the military has been expanded, not contracted, with its budget allocations increasing again this year to a massive 440 billion rupees ($US2.2 billion).

In opposition to the jubilation in ruling circles in 2009, the World Socialist Web Site wrote: The military defeat of the LTTE has done nothing to resolve the issues underlying the civil war. It has merely proved that the unity of the Sri Lankan state on a bourgeois basis could only be maintained through bloody repression and atrocities. (WSWS perspective on May 21, 2009).

Eruption of the war in 1983 was the result of the communal politics pursued by the Sri Lankan capitalist class and successive governments since the formal independence in 1948 from the British imperialism.

Unable address any of the democratic or social questions facing working people and the oppressed masses, Colombo governments resorted to Sinhala-Buddhist supremacism and anti-Tamil chauvinism in every political crisis to divide and weaken the working class.

Shortly after independence, the government of the day abolished the citizenship rights of around a million Tamil plantation workers brought from India as cheap labour by the British colonial rulers. In 1956, following a profound crisis of rule that led to an uprising by workers and the rural masses in 1953, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party won the election on the basis of a Sinhala-only policy that made Sinhala the only official language and relegated Tamils to second-class citizens.

The Lanka Sama Samaja Party, which claimed to be Trotskyist, had initially acted as a brake on communalism, promoting the unity of the working classSinhala and Tamil. But its degeneration and betrayal in 1964, when it entered the capitalist government of Sirima Bandaranaike and embraced Sinhala populism, led to the formation of petty bourgeois radical organisations based on the armed struggle and communal politicsin particular, the LTTE among Tamil youth in the North and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) among rural Sinhala youth in the South.

The right-wing United National Party (UNP) government of J. R. Jayawardene, which came to power in 1977, responded to the countrys economic crisis by implementing pro-market restructuring and encouraging foreign investors to take advantage of its cheap labour. As the working-class opposition erupted, Jayawardene rewrote the constitution to establish an autocratic executive presidency and engaged in one anti-Tamil provocation after another culminating in the devastating anti-Tamil pogroms in 1983 that led to outbreak of open warfare.

The Socialist Equality Party (SEP)and its forerunner Revolutionary Communist League (RCL)is the only party that consistently opposed the communal war on the basis of the fight to unite the working class. We demanded unconditional withdrawal of the military from the North and East and defended democratic rights of Tamil minority. At the same time, the RCL/SEP opposed LTTE separatism which promoted the communal division of the working class.

In 1987, the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) and the RCL advanced the perspective of Sri Lanka-Eelam Socialist Republic as part of fighting for a Union of Socialist States in South Asia. This program was based on the Trotskys theory of Permanent Revolution, which emphasised that only the working class can provide the leadership to the rural poor and oppressed masses in solving the democratic tasks as part of the struggle for socialism.

The protracted and devastating war demonstrated the inability of any section of the Sri Lankan bourgeoisie, all deeply mired in communal politics, to meet the democratic aspirations and social needs of working people. While Colombo governments sacrificed the lives of Sinhala youth to maintain the power and privileges of the majority Sinhala establishment, the bourgeois Tamil parties were seeking greater autonomy or a separate Tamil capitalist state to exploit the Tamil working class.

The SEP explained that the defeat of the LTTE in 2009 was not primarily a military question but was the result of its bourgeois-nationalist perspective. The LTTE was organically incapable to make class appeal to Tamil workers let alone in the working class elsewhere in Sri Lanka and internationally. As the devastating final army offensives were underway, it issued pathetic appeals to the international communitythat is, to the very powers including the US and India that were backing Colombos war and turning a blind eye to its atrocities.

The twelve years since the end of the war have only led to a deepening political crisis as Sri Lanka has been swept up in sharpening geo-political tensions, particularly the US confrontation with China, and worsening global economic situation, all of which has been compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. The military and its brutal methods used during the war are now being prepared for use against the working class as unrest grows over the worsening social conditions facing working people.

The end of the war coincided with the 200809 global financial crisis. The Sri Lankan economy already burdened with the heavy costs of the war and its devastation was hit hard. The government of President Mahinda Rajapakse turned to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for financial assistance, implemented its austerity dictates and resorted to military and police repression against opposition from workers and the poor.

At the same time, the US was deeply hostile to Rajapakses ties with China which had supplied arms and finance for the war. In a regime-change operation orchestrated from Washington, he was ignominiously defeated in the 2015 presidential election that brought Maithripala Sirisena to power with the support of the UNP, the bourgeois Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and also the pseudo-left groups.

The national unity government led by President Sirisena and UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe as prime minister rapidly jettisoned its promises of good governance and to improve living standards. Deeply implicated in war and its atrocities themselves, Sirisena and Wickremesinghe ensured there was no genuine investigation into the crimes of the Rajapakse regime. As the economic crisis deepened, the government again turned to the IMF, imposed new burdens on the working class and poor, and used police state methods to suppress social unrest.

The pseudo left groups and trade unions that had promoted and helped Sirisena and Wickremesinghe into power, defended the national unity government to the hilt and assisted in suppressing a growing wave of strikes and protests. The TNA, the chief representative of the Tamil bourgeoisie, was a de facto partner in the government.

The national unity government also led to a further fragmentation of the political establishmentwith the two major parties of the ruling class, the UNP and SLFP reduced to shells. In this highly unstable situation, Gotabhaya Rajapakse, backed by the military and significant sections of big business, exploited the mass disaffection to win the 2019 presidential election which was deeply divided along communal lines. While Tamils did not vote for Rajapaksethe man responsible for war crimes, Sinhala working people did not vote for the United National Front candidate Sajith Premadasa who has imposed new social burdens as part of the national unity government.

Rajapakse and the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) that backed him was also able to exploit the 2019 Easter Sunday terrorist attacks by a local Islamist extremist group that killed 270 people and injured many more to promise a strong and stable government that would be tough on national security.

The fact that Sri Lanka is now governed by the Rajapakse brothersthe two figures that bear the greatest responsibility for the militarys crimes and atrocities in the final months of the warmust serve as the sharpest warning to the working class. In the midst of a profound and social crisis, the bourgeoisie is relying on Gotabhaya Rajapakse and his promise of strong government to suppress mounting opposition from working class.

President Rajapakse has installed retired and in-service generals to key positions of the government, including retired Major General Kamal Gunaratne as defense secretary and Army Commander Major General Shavendra Silva as head off the national COVID-19 operation centre. At the same time, he rests heavily on Sinhala extremist groups and has helped whip up anti-Tamil and anti-Muslim chauvinism.

Workers need to draw the necessary political lessons from the disasters resulting from communal politics. Gotabhaya and Mahinda Rajapakse who presided over the slaughter of tens of thousands of Tamil civilians will not hesitate to use the same brutal methods against the working class and the urban and rural poor.

The working class cannot defend any of its democratic and social rights without rejecting all forms of nationalism and chauvinismboth Sinhala-Buddhist supremacism and Tamil separatismthat were responsible for the war. Only through a unified struggle against the capitalist classtheir joint oppressorsprofit system on which it rests can workers win to their side the rural toilers and fight for a workers and peasants government. Such a government would implement socialist policies to meet the pressing needs of the majority not the profit requirements of the wealthy few, as part of the fight for socialism throughout South Asia and internationally.

We urge the workers and youth to join the SEP which alone fights for this program.

Sign up for the WSWS email newsletter

Here is the original post:
Twelve years since the end of Sri Lanka's communal war - WSWS

Theory May 18, 2021 Hidayat Greenfield

Today I was asked to speak about reimagining socialism. I would like to do so by rephrasing the topic. Its not a matter of reimagining socialism, but rather, of reimagining ourselves as socialists. This makes the task simpler and more difficult.

Simpler because we do not need to construct a complete vision of a post-capitalist society or even how the capitalist system will be dismantled and replaced. We only need to focus on a socialist approach to explaining how capitalism creates the problems we face (exploitation, injustice, inequality, poverty, unemployment, violence, discrimination, pandemics, and the climate crisis), and why solutions cannot be found as long as the capitalist system prevails.

But it is also more difficult because we must reflect on our socialist commitment and our ability to communicate a socialist agenda through organizing, education, and agitation.

As socialists, how do we understand the problems created by the capitalist system? How do we locate the root cause(s) of a problem in capitalism as a system? We must ask this whether its brutal working conditions, poverty, jobs destruction, massive inequality, gender discrimination, violence against women, the lack of decent housing, or the failure to pay a living wage. Take any one of the thousands of problems that were trying to address in organizing workers for collective action and systemic change.

Both the causes and the solutions (in terms strategies for struggle and the demands and policies that are articulated in that struggle) must expose and challenge capitalism and the capitalist dynamic.

Blaming capitalism is easy. Explaining why a particular problem is integral to the capitalist system is more difficult. But if we do not locate the cause within capitalism, how do we arrive at a solution that is anti-, non-, post-capitalist?

The fact is that much of our response to the crises created by capitalism produces social democratic demands for state intervention and partial or temporary state control that just help to fix capitalism. Nationalizing banks, nationalizing industry, promoting food sovereignty, government subsidies and public spending, public sector job creation, minimum wages, etc. are presented as radical solutions. In the context of crisis, these are radical. But ultimately, they serve to promote the realignment of the capitalist system revitalizing, not replacing, capitalism. (Nationalization usually involves nationalizing private corporate debt and shifting the burden to workers. In the 2008 financial crisis, Newsweek magazine declared on its cover: We are all socialists now).

The incredible propensity of capitalism to absorb whatever you throw at it, to utilize it to restore itself, is something that we should not underestimate. Consider how the very real problem of gender discrimination and gender inequality has been reconstructed as advertising, branding, and reputation as something that now generates private profit. The problem of gender discrimination and gender inequality is tackled without exposing the convergence of patriarchy and capitalist authority, or subordination and capitalist property relations. In other words, gender discrimination and gender inequality are manageable problems within capitalism (and actually a source of profit accumulation) if de-linked from patriarchy, class, class relations, and class struggle.

The problem with class is that the predominant understanding of class today is liberal, not socialist. Class is understood as a hierarchy of wealth and inequality, of comparative incomes and living standards, and even occupations. This is a liberal notion of class that supports our moral outrage (unfair, unjust, outrageous inequality and extreme wealth). But it is not the socialist understanding of the class relations that are integral to capitalism and the class struggle essential to challenging it.

With a liberal understanding of class (occupation, income, wealth), any demand to rectify inequality and poverty is described as class struggle. This then gives the impression of a socialist agenda, while, in fact, accepting, if not revitalizing, the capitalist system. Using the terms class and capitalism does not make us socialists. We need a socialist understanding of class, capitalism, and the capitalist dynamic.

Im not suggesting we abandon our moral outrage and be dispassionate many socialist intellectuals appear dispassionate, often with a detached and smug, I told you so. We must retain our moral outrage and sense of urgency. But we must ensure that its not simply a moral judgment (good vs. evil). We must respond by tackling the fundamental capitalist logic thats causing these problems.

More than anything, this dilemma is reflected in political parties that claim a socialist platform. These parties tend to use moral outrage to demonstrate that they are speaking and acting on behalf of the people that they represent the oppressed, the exploited, and the mildly annoyed. This is a source of political legitimacy. This moral outrage at injustice tends to produce short-term responses in terms of new policies or legal reform. The problem is always blamed on the incumbent government and rarely blamed on the capitalist system itself.

Like the absence of any real class analysis (where class is understood as social relations and property, not wealth disparity and income), there is a lack of understanding of the capitalist state. The focus is on government, which is the institutional representation of only one aspect of state power. More often it is a narrow focus on the people who run the government bad people we dont like. Again, moral outrage.

I think, at its worst, this moral outrage is driven by a desire to seek popular approval through social media, rather than a desire to prevent the systemic causes of whatever outrage were responding to. The fact that due to the digital divide those who respond to social media are a tiny minority doesnt seem to matter. Those who Like, Heart, re-post and re-Tweet are the people. Our populist response is trending! For populist political leaders the task of reimagining themselves as socialists is much easier. They only need to be as socialist as social media needs them to be.

To reimagine ourselves as socialists we must restore our socialist analysis. The COVID pandemic, rising unemployment, poverty wages, wage theft insecurity, and all of the vulnerability that weve been discussing should be understood in terms of the capitalist dynamic. No doubt private property and the drive for profit is already well understood. (Although we need to understand profit not in terms of how much money is made, but in terms of exploitation and the extraction of surplus value.)

We probably need to pay more attention to commodification, which is essential to the capitalist system. Commodification is a social process that transforms every aspect of human life into a commodity that can be bought and sold for profit. We must understand the intersection of property relations (as a source of power) and the compulsion of capitalism through market forces that transforms everything into a commodity. We then need to understand the exploitation through which surplus value is extracted and the redistribution of that value.

Im sure it is well understood that the most fundamental aspect of capitalist social relations and the capitalist system is that labour power is a commodity. Workers sell their labour-power to capitalists (the owners of the means of production) and capitalists extract profit (surplus value), which constitutes exploitation.

Yet everything about labour organizing reinforces the politico-legal framework that regulates the commodification of labour-power and how workers sell their labour-power. Registration of trade unions and legal recognition and a collective agreement are necessary goals of a labour movement. But it is not a socialist movement because it does nothing to challenge the commodification of labour-power. It could be argued that the institutional fetishism of a legalistic approach to organizing diminishes workers capacity for class struggle.

Its worth considering that social movement unionism simply obscures this contradiction. Coming as it does from a social democratic tradition, the very purpose is to compromise.

To understand the distinction between a socialist understanding and a social democratic or libertarian understanding, consider that the founding declaration of the International Labour Organization (ILO) states that labour is not a commodity. What is the difference between labour-power as a commodity and labour as a commodity? Second, distinguish between the libertarian notion of worker rights in ILO conventions as individual human rights and our need for collective rights.

Understanding commodification is vital. Sexual exploitation involves commodification. Gender discrimination involves commodification. Indeed, the current solutions to gender discrimination without disrupting patriarchy or property relations is also a form of commodification. The current crisis and pandemic (and the next pandemic) are rooted in commodification. If we can understand the disease drivers that created this pandemic (through human-mediated action), we can see how commodification plays such a vital role. For example, the issue of vaccines and access is not just a government failure, but the failure of a system in which human health is commodified.

Commodification is not just about everything becoming a product (for sale). Its inextricably bound up in competitiveness and the relentless drive to increase productivity. Its the capitalist imperative or the compulsion of capitalism.

As I argued somewhat hopelessly in a recent debate over the need to restore public healthcare, a genuinely public service that serves society, such as free, universal healthcare for all, can fulfill neither its obligations nor guarantee the rights of people if it is subordinated to the imperative of capitalist productivity. The compulsion that drives productivity, efficiency, competitiveness regardless of the absence of an overt aim of generating profit turns a service to society, a public need, into a commodity. As a commodity, it is inherently unable to satisfy human needs because people as individuals competing for access must seek out that commodity in the market. More than anything, this prevents us from protecting public health in this and the next pandemic.

The other aspect of reimagining ourselves as socialists concerns the complex interaction of individual material interests and collective interests. Its complex because when were organizing, we have to consider how much time and energy we put into trying to convince workers that whatever were proposing is in their individual personal, material interests. If you join us and do this, you will benefit. If you dont do this, there will there will be terrible consequences! If we dont take action now, you could be next!

Fear of bad things happening to them as individuals drives much of what we do when we attempt to convince people to join our organizations or to join our struggle. But what kind of struggle is it if its just a collection of individual, personal, and material interests? Progress on a day-to-day basis will be measured against our ability to deliver on that promise: What do I get from this? Why havent I gained anything yet? Even if phrased as we (What do we get from this? Why havent we gained anything yet?), it still means me.

Very rarely do we suggest that workers join struggles simply on the basis that it is for the greater good, in the public interest, or social interests. (Notice we refer to social problems but no longer speak of social interests.) There is not much traction in arguing that there will be a collective benefit. When we talk about climate change and the struggle for climate justice, its still very much a libertarian approach to a capitalist problem. Its very clear to us that the capitalist system created this climate crisis. Its equally clear that capitalism cannot deliver or allow a solution to this crisis. That capitalism will destroy the planet is pretty much a foregone conclusion. But our collective ability to prevent that from happening is diminishing. Day by day.

Yet how much education, awareness, campaigning, and organizing for climate justice involves an appeal to individual material interests? The impact on individuals is the most predominant part of the discussion. Even if we refer to community, we do so because thats the collection of people around us, all the people we know or identify with, so its still about me. Look at the entire response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the way in which personal inconvenience (wearing masks, staying home, distancing) trumped our collective need to protect public health.

When we are organizing, the need to bring in the personal is seen as a very practical way to reach people and convince people in everything we do. Its practical. But from the outset, it undermines our socialist commitment because we avoid the very difficult task of building a collective set of values that gives real meaning to solidarity. We sidestep the need to build a collective set of values to drive collective action, and a genuine commitment to something greater than ourselves. Whether you want to say its societal or the public good, or the greater good, it doesnt matter at this stage. We can barely have a conversation about this thing that is beyond the individual. What we do is pretend were talking about social interests or societal interests, and the greater good, by talking about the collection of individual personal interests affected by this. Theres always that promise of what it means for me. All subsequent collective action around this is premised on that promise.

The final point Id like to make in reimagining ourselves as socialists is the dilemma of the imagination itself. Our collective imagination is fundamentally inhibited by how we communicate, educate, and agitate.

Its inhibited because we communicate within a system where human attention has been commodified. Our attention has been commodified and is bought and sold for profit.

The business of Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and other corporations that produce and control social media is the business of capturing and selling peoples attention. As critics of the attention economy have shown, the product is you.

The commodification of attention transforms our ability to communicate, perceive, learn, and ultimately, to think. One of the effects of the commodification of attention is distraction, and the level of distraction or inability to pay attention is massive. This perpetual distraction or continuous partial attention syndrome is the result of both new technologies and the commodification of attention.

So even if we develop our socialist analysis, what do we do with it? We have a socialist commitment based on genuine collective interests that rise above personal individual material interests, yet we cant communicate, educate, and agitate effectively because we dont have peoples attention. Their attention has already been captured or bought.

This is probably what leads me to be so pessimistic about our future. Whatever we try to communicate, people are listening for phrases and sound bytes to post or share. Already thinking of how it will look on Instagram, TickTock, Facebook, Twitter, etc. and what reaction it will get likes, comments, re-posts so we dont really have their attention, just their time. And all the while, they are thinking about getting other peoples attention.

This constant inattention preempts any deeper thought or analysis or reflection or internalization because its all completely externalized at that point. Its all for an imaginary audience. This is part of the commodification of attention its now what peoples brains are re-wired to do. This perpetual distraction or continuous partial attention syndrome also has significant consequences for mental health and well-being. It runs up against how our brains are hardwired and we may have to consider how this damages, inhibits, or redefines our ability to understand or imagine anything.

How do we reimagine ourselves as socialists if we are constantly competing for the attention (not understanding) of others? How can the reimagining of socialism take place if we are so distracted? Is it possible that the depth of understanding needed to fight capitalism and replace it with socialism no longer exists because understanding no longer has depth? In fact, I wonder whether weve lost our ability to imagine.

Recapturing that attention and rebuilding our collective imagination is a massive task. We must regain peoples attention sufficiently to understand the causes of the crisis and problems we face and the collective action thats needed for the collective good. If we believe we can still do that, then I think theres hope.

Hidayat Greenfield is currently the elected Regional Secretary for the Asia-Pacific section of the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF).

The rest is here:
Reimagining Socialism: A Conversation - The Bullet - Socialist Project

During the past week, numerous prominent leaders of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have posted tweets celebrating the 1940 assassination of Leon Trotsky and portraying the murderer, the Stalinist GPU agent Ramon Mercader, as a hero.

Many of the tweets by DSA leaders are illustrated with photos and memes of an alpenstock, the weapon used by Mercader to murder Trotsky. Nickan Fayyazi, a member of the National Coordinating Committee of the Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA), presents one such photo with the caption this might come in handy today.

Asheville, North Carolina DSA member Dan Pozzie proposes erecting a memorial to Trotskys assassin, reading, In memory of Ramon Mercader: He showed us the way. A tweet by a recent DSA East Bay, California Steering Committee member reads, Ice pick jokes will never not be funny, and we will all continue making ice pick jokes publicly + unapologetically.

The tweets are part of a coordinated response by a substantial section of DSA officials to the growing readership of the World Socialist Web Site, the online publication of the Trotskyist International Committee of the Fourth International, among rank-and-file members of the DSA.

In March and April, a World Socialist Web Site article exposing DSA member and Democratic Congressperson Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezs statement denouncing criticism of the Biden administration as bad faith recorded over 100,000 distinct readers, including thousands of DSA members. Anxiety over the impact of the WSWSs criticism of the Democratic Party and the trade union bureaucracy was exacerbated by the failure of the AFL-CIOs unionization drive at the Amazon facility in Bessemer, Alabama in April.

The DSA members celebrating Trotskys assassination include elected national office holders and leaders of its youth wing (YDSA), branch chairs, leaders of campus clubs and prominent DSA podcasters, as well as contributors to the Guardian and DSA-affiliated media outlets such as Jacobin magazine.

Those who are tweeting sick jokes about Trotskys murder are circulating the political equivalent of pornography. They are not only laughing about the murder of one of the towering figures in the history of twentieth century socialism, they are solidarizing themselves with the campaign of mass murder carried out by Stalins totalitarian regime.

The fact that such individuals hold leadership positions within the DSA should be taken as a serious warning by rank-and-file members and supporters of this organization. In politics, people are judged by what they do. Individuals who solidarize themselves with the crimes of Stalin have absolutely nothing to with genuine left-wing politics. The trajectory of their politics is not toward socialism, but toward supporting state repression against the socialist movement.

From the standpoint of the international class struggle and the fate of socialism, Trotsky's assassination on August 20, 1940 was the most consequential political crime of the twentieth century. His murder deprived the international working class of the last surviving leader of the 1917 October Revolution and the greatest strategist of world socialist revolution. Trotsky played a monumental role in the struggle for world socialism, as a theoretician, orator, writer, organizer of the seizure of power by the working class, leader of the Red Army, implacable opponent of Stalinism, founder of the Fourth International, and socialist visionary of a world liberated from all forms of oppression. The study and assimilation of Trotsky's vast legacy are essential for the preparation of the victory of socialism in the twenty-first century.

But Trotsky was not the only victim of Stalinism. His assassination was the culmination of a wave of Stalinist terror launched in 1936 with the first of three Moscow Trials. During the Great Terror of 1936-40, the Stalinist regime murdered an estimated one million revolutionary workers, intellectuals and artists. An entire generation of Marxists and socialists who had played a decisive role in the preparation, leadership and defense of the 1917 October Revolutionincluding virtually all of Lenins closest comradeswas murdered. The Great Terror, which precisely targeted those prominently identified as socialists for extermination, has been correctly described as politically directed genocide.

What follows is a small sample of the scores of tweets by DSA members celebrating Trotskys murder. Those retweeting or liking these posts comprise a Rolodex of the DSA leadership.

The aforementioned post by Nickan Fayyazi, a member of the YDSAs National Coordinating Committee leadership body and co-chair of the YDSAs UC Berkeley chapter, presents a photo of an ice pick with the caption this might come in handy today, alongside other vulgar language. This was retweeted by Dary Rezvani, a prominent member of the Los Angeles DSA.

The tweet about the ice pick was liked by over 100 people, including many DSA members, as well as the following DSA leaders and prominent members:

A separate post by Washington D.C. DSA member Ben Davis features a drawing of Mercader preparing to carry out his attack on Trotsky. It shows the assassin holding an ice pick above Trotskys head as the latter works at his desk. It bears the caption: Clear out the wreckers. Davis worked for Bernie Sanders campaign in 2020 as a data analyst and has written for the British Guardian newspaper, which describes Davis as someone who works in political data in Washington D.C.

This post was also liked by a number of DSA members.

The term wreckers, drawn from the vocabulary of Stalinism, has distinct political implications. Trotskyite wreckers was a term employed by Stalin to justify the mass murder of Trotskyists and opponents of the Stalinist regime, based on the lying claim that they engaged in terrorism and sabotage. It featured prominently in the three Moscow frame-up trials and was used to justify the slander that Trotsky and his supporters were agents of fascism. On March 29, 1937, in the lead-up to the second Moscow Trial, Stalin gave a speech titled Deficiencies in Party Work and Measures for Liquidating Trotskyites. In the course of the speech, Stalin employed the term Trotskyite wreckers 16 times.

Another tweet, by former DSA National Electoral Committee member Nate Knauf, includes the same drawing depicting Trotskys assassination, accompanied by the words, Thats right!!! This post was liked by Ben Davis, Knox College YDSAs Matt Milewski, New York DSAs Ganeev Chichagov, and YDSA Purdue Co-Chair Mason Wyss, among others.

An additional thread posted by a recent DSA East Bay Steering Committee member was liked by Guy Brown, a member of the DSA National Political Education Committee and co-chair of the Charlotte Metro DSA; Maura Quint, a DSA supporter and contributor at the New Yorker and the Hill; and an unidentified member of the Portland DSAs steering committee.

In a separate post, Southwest Florida DSA and Florida Gulf Coast University YDSA member Morgan Kirk tweeted a meme about Trotskys death.

The following DSA leaders liked this post:

Most of those posting, retweeting or liking these tweets are active members of the Democratic Party or officers of the AFL-CIO trade union bureaucracy. These include:

One DSA member who also liked such tweets is New York City DSA Organizing Committee member Honda Wang, a leading anti-Trotskyist within the DSA. Wang regularly posts attacks on the WSWS. The comments section of his TikTok videos attacking the WSWS are filled with commenters posting images of alpenstocks.

Wangs politics and his past as a political consultant for Schoen Consulting give a sense of the type of right-wing Democratic Party operatives directing the DSAs attacks on the WSWS.

On his LinkedIn profile, Wang explains that when working for Schoen, he consulted on strategy and communications for political clients in both domestic and international markets, and advised corporate clients in a wide range of sectors.

Wang does not list the governments, politicians, state agencies and corporations with which he has worked, but Schoen Consultings clients now include billionaire Michael Bloomberg and his Independence PAC, a private fund for buying political support, as well as Walmart.

A public report on Schoen Consulting explains that the clientele of its founder, Bill Clinton advisor Paul Schoen, includes:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY), New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine, and Indiana Governor Evan Bayh, and his corporate clients have included Walmart, AOL Time Warner, Procter & Gamble and AT&T. Internationally, he has worked for the heads of state of over 15 countries, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and three Israeli Prime Ministers. Schoen helped introduce Victor Pinchuk, Ukraine oligarch, financier, and former member of Parliament, to philanthropic and political groups that have made him an international figure who now serves on the boards of the Peterson Center for International Economics, the International Crisis Group and the Clinton Foundation.

Wangs career as a Democratic Party operative shows that the Democratic Party and AFL-CIO apparatchiks who comprise the DSA leadership identify in Trotsky a threat to their own material position and to the capitalist system. Undoubtedly, there are other provocateurs not named here who are also motivating these attacks behind the scenes from within the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party is an imperialist-capitalist party and is rabidly anti-socialist. Why, then, are its operatives within the DSAwhich claims to be a variety of anti-Stalinist socialismglorifying the crimes of Stalinism and recycling its slanders against Trotsky?

To understand the political logic that underlies this apparent contradiction, it is necessary to review the historical context of the Stalinist terror of the 1930s and its relationship to American politics during the era of Roosevelts New Deal. That period was the heyday of the political alliance between a substantial section of Democratic Party liberals and the Stalinist American Communist Party. This alliance was known as the Popular Front, which was devised by the Kremlinin the aftermath of Hitlers rise to power in Germanyto draw the democratic imperialist governments of Europe and the United States into an alliance with the Soviet Union. In return for more favorable diplomatic relations with these imperialist states, the Soviet regime and the national Communist parties under its control would support bourgeois governments and suppress working-class struggles against capitalism.

One of Stalins central aims in the Moscow Trials and the Terror was to convince the Western Democracies that the Soviet Union had broken decisively with Bolshevism and the Lenin-Trotsky perspective of world socialist revolution.

The class-collaborationist policies of the Popular Front led to the victory of the fascistic Franco dictatorship in 1939 in Spain, and, in 1940, the establishment of the Vichy regime in France.

In the United States, the American Communist Party enthusiastically promoted the Roosevelt administration. Democratic Party liberals increasingly viewed Stalin as a valuable ally and endorsed his extermination of the Old Bolsheviks.

As is well known, leading left-liberal publications such as the New Republic and the Nation endorsed the Moscow Trials, confirming Trotskys classification of the Popular Front as democracy in alliance with the GPU. Prominent artists, writers and intellectualssuch as Lillian Hellman, Louis Fischer, Freda Kirchwey and Malcolm Cowleydeclared their confidence in the integrity of the Moscow witch trials, although the only evidence presented against the defendants was their own dubious confessions. They bitterly attacked the American philosopher John Dewey for agreeing to serve as chairman of the Commission of Inquiry into the Moscow Trials. Subsequently, they denounced the Commissions findings that Trotsky was innocent of all charges against him and that the Moscow Trials were a frame-up.

The Democratic Party is once again threatened by a growing movement of the working class. It recognizes and fears that the radicalization of youth and the working class can lead, unless diverted, toward a break with capitalist politics and, therefore, a serious movement for socialism.

The Democratic Party employs the DSA to prevent this development.

In this context it is significant that the two issues which triggered the Democratic Party and DSA leaderships attacks on Trotsky were the WSWSs exposure of Ocasio-Cortez, which led significant numbers of DSA members to write to the WSWS expressing support for our criticisms, and the increasingly prominent role played by the WSWS and the Socialist Equality Party in strikes and social struggles taking place across the country. The DSA and the Democratic Party view the defeat of the AFL-CIOs unionization effort at Bessemer, Alabama and recent votes by workers rejecting sellout contracts as warning signs that efforts to create a state-controlled labor movement are coming into conflict with profound hostility within the working class to the pro-corporate AFL-CIO.

The Democratic Party defensively turns to the lies of the Moscow Trials, filtering them through the DSA to poison the political atmosphere against genuine socialism. They recognize that Trotskyism, represented today by the SEP and WSWS, is the political force giving conscious expression to growing socialist sentiment in the working class and among the youth.

No organization that calls itself progressive, let alone socialist, can tolerate the legitimatization of the crimes of Stalinism and the GPU. That these crimes are being hailed by a significant section of the DSAs leadership exposes the presence of a deeply reactionary and vile political culture within the organization.

At a time when right-wing violence is a growing threat against the left, it is the obligation of socialists to defend those threatened with political violence by far-right and fascistic forces. Despite our clear opposition to the politics of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the WSWS has consistently defended her and her staff from ongoing threats of violence by fascists, who attempted to kill her during the coup attempt of January 6, 2021.

The DSA now has a political obligation to make clear that the propagation of lies that legitimize and encourage violence against left-wing and socialist opponents of the Democratic Party will not be permitted within its organization. Local branches of the DSA should pass resolutions denouncing the anti-Trotskyist slanders. They should demand that the upcoming national convention issue an unequivocal denunciation of the neo-Stalinist campaign.

We urge all members of the DSA who are seriously interested in history, theory and the politics of socialism and Marxism to read the works of Leon Trotsky, who ranks alongside Lenin as the greatest fighter for socialist revolution in the twentieth century.

***

The World Socialist Web Site recommends that DSA members read In Defense of Leon Trotsky, by David North, the chairman of the International Editorial Board of the WSWS and the national chairman of the Socialist Equality Party (US). This book provides a comprehensive refutation of Stalinist lies directed against Leon Trotsky.

mehring books

In Defense of Leon Trotsky

David North defends Trotskys legacy against the campaign of historical falsification begun by Stalin and continuing to this day. Stalin assassinated Trotsky in 1940, but was unable to silence the Fourth International, founded to embody the revolutionary heritage of 1917.

Read the original here:
Praising the crimes of Stalinism: The DSA and the assassination of Leon Trotsky - WSWS

What does it mean to you, to say Im a Vet! I dont know about you, but Im damn proud of being an American Veteran!

Yes, I served 29 years in the U.S. Military, and I would do it again, if asked, and physically able! For me, it was a special, on-going, experience!

Today, I must, reminded you, that We U.S. VETERANS, swore a PLEDGE, to Protect and Defend, our Constitution! Does that PLEDGE ever concern you? It does me, because it may apply today!!

Who is defending the PLEDGE NOW, outside of our Military? Apparently, FEW if ANY, with our background, are concerned?

Remember, serving U.S. Military members cannot get involved -in National Politics! But Veterans CAN and should! Particularly, if they see the Nation shifting away from the tenants of OUR Constitution!

Do any of you, feel our Constitution is in DANGER today? I do! Why? Because, Socialism, is intended to be OUR new way of LIFE! I am TOLD! And, as a way of life, it is NOT noted, in any part of the Constitution!

Would you REALLY accept SOCIALISM, as a way of life, for YOU and your KIN? I wont No Way!! FREEDOM and FREE ENTERPRISE have been our MANTRA, from Day One of our Constitution!

President Biden has unilaterally, throw OPEN our Southern Border, without any National DEBATE, or CONSENT, by the US Congress, or National Mandate!

Is that action, not a THUMB in the EYE of OUR Constitution and YOU and ME?

Will Socialism provide Americans their personal independence? The INDEPENDENCE we ALL have today?

Ask the Venezuelans, who are currently racing across our Southern Border, to this their Sanctuary of Freedom? What a potential BUMMER running from Socialism into the arms of nuveau SOCIALISM!

Come ON Vets! Lets get involved in saving our Constitution and our FREEDOMS! While it still provides all Americans today!

Read the original:
Where are the veterans? | Editor's Inbox | stardem.com - The Star Democrat

In the past when the Soviet Union and the system of socialist countries still existed, there was nothing to discuss about socialism in Vietnam. However, since the model of socialism in the Soviet Union and many Eastern European countries collapsed, and the worlds revolution fell into decline, the issue regarding Vietnams path towards socialism was raised again.

We acknowledge that capitalism has never been as global as it is today and has also reaped great achievements. However, capitalism still has failed to overcome its inherent contradictions.

The social protest movements that broke out in many developed capitalist countries over the past time have revealed the nature of capitalist political institutions. In the developed capitalist countries, the so-called "free" and "democratic" elections cannot change dominant forces, although they can change the government.

We need a society in which development is truly for people. We need economic development in tandem with social progress and justice. We need a society of compassion, solidarity and mutual assistance, towards progressive and humanitarian values. We need sustainable development in harmony with the nature to ensure a healthy living environment for current and future generations. And we need a political system where power is really of the people, by the people and for the people.

National independence associated with socialism is the basic and cross-cutting guideline of the Vietnamese revolution and is also the key point in President Ho Chi Minh's ideological legacy.

During the years of Doi Moi (Reform), the CPV has been more and more aware of socialism and the transition period towards socialism.

So far, although there are still some issues that need further study, a general perception has been formed: The socialist society that the Vietnamese people are striving to build is a society of wealthy people, strong country, democracy, justice and civilisation; owned by the people; of a highly developed economy based on modern production forces and appropriate, progressive production relations; and advanced culture imbued with national identity. It is a society where people have a prosperous, free and happy life, and conditions for comprehensive development; ethnic groups are equal and united, and respect and help each other; there is a socialist rule-of-law state of the people, by the people and for the people, led by the Communist Party; and there are friendly and cooperative relations with countries around the world.

To that end, we must: accelerate industrialisation and modernisation in association with the development of the knowledge-based economy; develop a socialist-oriented market economy; build advanced culture imbued with national identity, improve people's living standards, ensure social progress and justice; firmly guarantee national defense and security, and social order and safety; implement the foreign policy of independence, self-reliance, multilateralisation, diversification, peace, friendship, cooperation and development, and proactive and active international integration; build a socialist democracy, carry forward the will and strength of the great national unity bloc, combined with the strength of the era; build a socialist rule-of-law state of the people, by the people and for the people; and build a comprehensively pure, strong Party and political system.

A basic, important feature of the socialist orientation in the market economy in Vietnam is to combine economy with society, economic policies with social policies, and economic growth with social progress and justice.

In the socialist political regime, the relationship between the Party, the State and the people is the relationship between the subjects who share the same goals and interests; all guidelines of the Party, policies, laws and activities of the State are to serve interests of the people. The political model and general operating mechanism are the Party's leadership, the State's governance and the people's ownership. Democracy is the nature of the socialist regime, and is the goal and the driving force of the socialism building. Building a socialist democracy and ensuring that power truly belongs to the people is an important and long-term task of the Vietnamese revolution.

Being deeply aware of the Communist Partys leadership is a decisive factor in the cause of the Doi Moi and would ensure the country's development in accordance with the socialist orientation. We have paid due attention to Party building and rectification, considering this a key task that is vital to the Party and the socialist regime. The CPV has persistently taken Marxism-Leninism and Ho Chi Minhs thought as the ideological foundation and the lodestar for revolutionary actions, and have taken democratic centralism as the basic organising principle. The Partys leadership has been based on platform, strategies, and orientations on policies and major guidelines. Aware of the risks of corruption, bureaucracy and degradation, especially in the context of the market economy, the CPV has ordered regular self-renewal and self-rectification, and the fight against opportunism, individualism, corruption, bureaucracy, wastefulness and degradation within the Party and in the entire political system.

The Doi Moi process, including the development of the socialist-oriented market economy, has really brought about great and positive changes to the country over the past 35 years.

Apart from these achievements, there still remain shortcomings and limitations, along with challenges in national development. The CPV has been aware of these challenges. It is a very tough and arduous struggle, which requires new vision, new mettle and new creativity.

Both theory and practice show that socialism building is creating a qualitatively new type of society, which is totally not easy. Therefore, apart from determining the right guidelines and ensuring the Partys leadership, it is a must to promote creativity, support and active participation of the people.

On the other hand, while determining political directions and making decisions, it is necessary for the Party to study experience of the world. We must proactively and actively integrate into the world and materialise the foreign policy of independence, self-reliance, peace, cooperation, development, and multilateralisation and diversification of international relations on the basis of respect for each others independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit.

It is very important to remain steadfast and firm on the ideological and theoretical foundation of Marxism - Leninism. Such scientific and revolutionary features of Marxism-Leninism and Ho Chi Minh's thought are sustainable values that have been pursued and realised by revolutionaries. They will further develop in the spheres of revolution and science. We need to selectively absorb and supplement them in the spirit of criticism and creativity.

Read the original here:
Some theoretical and practical issues on socialism and path towards socialism in Vietnam - Nhan Dan Online