Video: Police beat Occupy protesters at Berkeley — RT
10 November — Police beat Occupy protesters at Berkeley (VIDEO) — RT
Demonstrators at the University of California Berkeley were assaulted by police on Wednesday night for failing to leave a peaceful encampment they attempted to establish in solidarity with the nationwide Occupy Wall Street movement.
In conjunction with the Occupy protests, demonstrators in Berkeley rallied yesterday against corporate greed and corrupt financial institutions on the historic campus, which was instrumental in the free speech movement of the 1960s. Amanda Armstrong, an organizer of yesterday’s protests, told the school’s Daily Cal paper that the occupation of the campus was also to oppose the increased privatization of the school.
Jerry+Spring 14:40 on November 26, 2011 Permalink |
Thanks for your most thought provoking article on the OWS.
We have had over a hundred years of Labour reformism, over three decades of Green reformism and now, we might possibly be in for a bit of Occupy reformism.
Although all three contain within their ranks some varying shades of revolutionary socialism, their shared ideology, which is also shared by Democrat reformism in the US, was perhaps best summed up earlier this year in the words of the neoliberal, Labour Party opposition leader of the UK, Ed Milliband;
“ People want an economy with fairness and social responsibility built-in. But we are only going to get that by thinking radically and building a better capitalism. ”
Neither radical Labour reformism or radical Green reformism or the latest contender for our support, radical Occupy reformism stand for the revolutionary concept of socialism beyond capitalism.
These radicals are of the historical tradition which begins with a few self-appointed leaders founding unity organisations that are selectively open to different ideological outlooks from the left to the right. They become incapable of doing anything other than seek reforms of the existing economic and political system and the different outlooks eventually merge into a particular brand of reformist ideology.
The historical conditions of today and the self-censoring avoidance of declaring that one stands for socialism beyond capitalism stem from;
Firstly, the historical persistence of reformist ideology among agricultural and industrial workers and its successful exploitation by imperialist leaders in both unions and government.
Secondly, but most importantly, by the collapse and disintegration of the communist socialist movement into a myriad of competing factions, both nationally and internationally, with each of the factions claiming or vying for the ideological and political leadership of the working classes.
In my view, the primary task of all revolutionary socialists at this historic juncture, particularly in each of the seven, imperialist countries of the US-NATO-EU, is to work for their own unity under the general slogan of revolutionary social democracy for socialism beyond capitalism.
Mark A. Goldman 16:47 on November 14, 2011 Permalink |
http://www.gpln.com/announcing_for_2012.htm
InI 16:53 on November 14, 2011 Permalink |
A somewhat reticent candidate for the US presidential race, Mark Goldman. The link takes you to his candidacy statement. WB
InI 13:29 on November 14, 2011 Permalink |
Claudia: What is ‘beyond socialism’? Communism? I agree that the ecological crisis adds urgency to the question but can it be tackled without getting rid of capitalism? Clearly, capitalism is the root cause of the ecological crisis and seems in no great hurry to deal with it perhaps because the rich think they can survive it. The starting point as you put it is surely capitalism?
Alexandre 11:58 on November 14, 2011 Permalink |
From occupier to revolutionary goes the distance between them and their Party. They are trying to escape to the political parties logic, but is there another way?
InI 12:18 on November 14, 2011 Permalink |
Hi Alex!
Good to hear from you. Is there another way? Other than being ‘led’ by a revolutionary party I assume you mean? That’s the $64 million question isn’t it. The problem as I see it, is that we have never been in this situation before. There are no road markers for us. In the past, at least in the so-called developed countries, it’s been the Communist Party and its flavours, that have claimed the right to lead a revolution. The problem is, they never had, either led a revolution, or even led for that matter. Is there another way? In countries like the UK, the ‘middle classes’, aside from being the ‘intellectual leaders’, suppliers of theories and so on, have been pretty much ignored by lefties as not being part of the ‘real’ working class. It’s a bizarre situation. Can the so-called middle classes identify with the rest of the working class, given as how they are now central to our economy? That’s what the UK government thinks and if true, it could lead to an entirely new kind of political formation that could take on the role of challenging capitalism.
claudia 09:11 on November 14, 2011 Permalink |
We have some ideas and we will like to start a real debate on “social common goods”. We are beyond socialism and our starting point is ecology in its deeper meaning