Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

June 3, 2011

Reflections on the World Socialist Web Site

Filed under: media,socialism — louisproyect @ 3:46 pm

Although I mostly go to the World Socialist Web Site for their movie reviews, I often find other issues covered there worth reading.

For example, they have an informative piece on the tornado that killed 3 people in Massachusetts. It is obviously drawn from the bourgeois press, but it includes enough analysis to let the reader know what side of the barricades they are on:

The small town of Monson, with a population of about 8,000, took a direct hit. Like many towns in the area, Monson was once a thriving mill town but has now fallen on hard times. Remarkably, no one in the town was killed, but homes and businesses sustained severe damage. The steeple was ripped off the church and was lying in the front yard.

So out of curiosity, I checked their Alexa rating to get a handle on how much traffic they are getting:

Site Information for wsws.org

Alexa Traffic Rank: 38,549

United States Flag Traffic Rank in US: 23,233

Sites Linking In: 4,146

This is simply fucking amazing.

For comparison’s sake:

Site Information for counterpunch.org

Alexa Traffic Rank: 33,853

United States Flag Traffic Rank in US: 11,038

Sites Linking In: 6,052

Given the high profile of Alexander Cockburn and the people whose articles appear there on a regular basis such as his brother Patrick et al, it is amazing that the two websites have comparable ratings.

Perhaps I should have realized this since my wife, who teaches at 2 NYC colleges, once told me that her students are always citing wsws.org in their term papers.

I am sure that the key to their success rests on the fact that they are a daily newspaper, except for Sunday. I gather that they discontinued their print version some time back. Also, despite their ultra-sectarian politics, they tend to offer straightforward radical journalism of the sort that you might have seen in the Guardian newsweekly, a radical U.S. publication that folded in the 1980s.

By another standard of comparison, Socialist Worker, the newspaper of the leading socialist group in the U.S.—the ISO—ranks much lower than the Socialist Equality Party, the sect responsible for wsws.org:

Site Information for socialistworker.org

Alexa Traffic Rank: 153,945

United States Flag Traffic Rank in US: 45,178

Sites Linking In: 922

To some extent this might be comparing apples and oranges, since the ISO’s newspaper is primarily designed to be sold as a print publication to students, trade unionists, and participants in the mass movement. It is also a weekly newspaper embodying the traditions of the “vanguard” press going back to Iskra, at least as understood by those following such a tradition. Perhaps given the Internet revolution that is to the 20th century what the Gutenberg press was to the 17th century, it is a time to rethink these paradigms.

A few years after the Guardian ceased publication (it was probably 1992 or so, just around the time I was discovering the Internet), I approached Barry Cohen of the Committees of Correspondence (a group I belonged to for five minutes until I realized how embedded in the Democratic Party they were) with a proposal to start something like the Guardian again. Barry had been the editor of the People’s World, the CPUSA newspaper, and knew the business inside and out.

Barry was adamant that economics was making print publishing a thing of the past. The costs were prohibitive, from office space to the printing press itself. He thought that a newspaper was probably needed, but that it should be based on the Internet. With the Internet, you no longer had the problem of laying out a newspaper that had to fit into an even number of pages, etc. Of course, the C of C never went anywhere with this, choosing instead to focus on Portside, a daily aggregation of articles that many people subscribe to (excluding me).

Speaking for myself (who else, obviously), I am leaning strongly in the direction of launching an online daily newspaper after retiring from Columbia University. I think there is a crying need for a publication that has no ideological agenda other than to promote the kind of broad-based socialism that the Guardian newsweekly once stood for. I would hope that such a web-based publication would welcome open debate among Marxists. Our political culture has tended to encourage newspapers, either print or web based, to see themselves as disseminating a “party line” to the exclusion of opposing viewpoints, even in the form of letters. This not only robs the left of having the exchange of clashing viewpoints that are so necessary to drive the dialectic forward.

At this stage of the game, I don’t anticipate that such a newspaper would have any connections to an organization. Frankly, I am too old and too weary for that sort of thing. But given the absence of a newspaper or website that has no ” revolutionary program” to sell, like toothpaste or cereal, I think that most potential readers would find that a refreshing change.

Peter Camejo once told me that a program for the American revolution does not exist and that it can only take shape through the living class struggle where objective conditions and the relationship of class forces will help to clarify what goals should be advanced and what strategy and tactics would be best suited to achieve such goals.

As my retirement draws near, I will try to put flesh on these bones.

33 Comments »

  1. I’ve been thinking for years that the web needs a paper like the one you describe.

    Comment by will shetterly — June 3, 2011 @ 4:07 pm

  2. Two problems with any web paper. First, good journalists can’t work for free. I believe that Counterpunch pays the writers who do investigations that are published in its newsletter. I don’t know about WSWS. Of course, anyone could write that report on Monson. But what Patrick Cockburn did in Iraq, well that is another
    kettle of fish. Second, materials on the web seem not to be edited very often. So, anything goes, and everyone is a writer. If you start a paper and don’t edit it, it won’t be worth reading.

    These may not be insurmountable problems, but I think that they are important ones.

    Comment by michael yates — June 3, 2011 @ 4:10 pm

  3. it’s worth nothing that socialistworker.org is in fact a daily; the print edition is now bi-weekly. alexa also provides other important statistics– including bounce rates, page views per user, and percentage of traffic coming from search engines; looking at these is important in drawing conclusions about the reach and efficacy of online publications.

    Comment by jon — June 3, 2011 @ 4:22 pm

  4. It would be very timely, Louis. I think many would be interested in helping. Socialists never die, they just go on to set up a newspaper, huh?

    Comment by Manuel Barrera, PhD — June 3, 2011 @ 4:45 pm

  5. The “International Workers Bulletin” went away about 10 years ago, actually, in favor of wsws.org

    The reason I think it’s successful is primarily do to the consistency in it’s presentation of analysis and news; that it’s not obviously tied to the “SEP”and they have a shit load of money where, unlike the very small staffed ISO, have a “large” full time staff of writers. The latter adds to the consistency one “expects” from the wsws.org

    I might add, too, that the SEP has actually grown because of the web site, having run into now dozens of ex-members who went through the sect and out again.

    I think a “daily newspaper” propagating what you want to see Louis, is basically a daily version of this blog, of which there are probably hundreds of them, if you are going to make this a one person operation, it will be exactly that. To make a project, analogous to the Guardian in it’s best days, you too will have to make it more than one man band. That’s the key.

    Comment by David Walters — June 3, 2011 @ 5:58 pm

  6. Yep…count me in!
    If Huff Post can get people to write for free so can we.

    Comment by Andy Bain — June 3, 2011 @ 6:04 pm

  7. Andy, you are definitely on my list. With all due respect to Michael Yates, I think it is possible to put out a web publication using volunteer labor. When I was involved with Tecnica in the 1980s, we sent over 500 volunteers to work in Nicaragua and southern Africa. People want to be part of a *movement*. That means more than money. Patrick Cockburn writes for the Independent, a newspaper that is sadly far more like the NY Times than the Guardian newsweekly of yore.

    Comment by louisproyect — June 3, 2011 @ 6:17 pm

  8. I think the difference between WSWS and SW reflects the fact that the SEP’s main priority in terms of political practice is keeping up the website whereas the ISO’s is not. That is why they can produce lengthy, analytical, well-researched, and informative content on such a daily and sometimes hourly basis that can compete with the best of the bourgeois papers (hence why kids are citing them in their papers; there’s a Maoist on YouTube who was caught plagiarizing their stuff — entire paragraphs!!).

    I’ve seen them put out 1,000-2,000 word pieces on a story as it is unfolding while SW put out its statement on OBL’s assassination on the Tuesday after the Obama’s announcement which was on Sunday evening.

    Priorities and resources have a lot to do with those respective traffic numbers you put out. If the ISO grows into a substantially bigger organization, I’m sure that’d be reflected in the online publication which will end up looking more like WSWS, except it will be more connected with and take a “line” on/in struggles a la Iskra, whereas WSWS generally just denounces other socialist groups involved in a fight as having middle-class protest politics that will lead to the victory of the counter-revolution and the collapse of the 7th international someday…

    A daily socialist/Marxist online publication is something I would support and contribute to if you start one up. The only thing I’d say is try to make it as professional looking and easy to navigate as possible; WSWS is a pretty good model, while Counterpunch and International Viewpoint are not.

    Comment by Binh — June 3, 2011 @ 6:39 pm

  9. It seems to me that Michael Yates is too pessimistic in this particular case. Swans is a fair example of showing that one does not have to pay “good journalists.” What one needs to do is to gather “good minds,” give them a forum for their ideas and thoughts — yes, certainly edit them well — and, above all, value their contributions.

    In the past 15 years, I’ve been able to keep loyal contributors (including Lou) without paying any one of them. People have a lot to give and want to give, especially those who journey on the path less traveled.

    This is not a new phenomenon. I am reminded of one of the greatest 20th century French writer, Julien Gracq (“Rivage des Syrtes”). When his first manuscript was refused by Gallimard (NRL), he turned to an obscure editor/publisher, José Corti. Corti, who was short on cash, asked whether Gracq could help him financially to publish his novel (“Au château d’Argol”). Gracq sent him a check by return. And when Gracq became famous and the NRL wanted him, he stayed with Corti for his entire life…

    Again, writers will give a lot for the opportunity to be published and share a space with like-minded authors, as their work is shunned by the mainstream press.

    Finally, regarding editing, take a look at CounterPunch: It’s one of the worst edited news aggregators (and I won’t talk about MRzine in deference to Michael…) on the Web, and, yet, it has a huge following. What a small press can do (e.g., Swans, a bi-weekly) cannot be reciprocated on a daily basis. Check the NYT!

    I welcome Lou’s project. A daily, bringing a socialist perspective with cultural emphasis and non-sectarian views and opinions, is direly needed.

    Note to Michael: For great editing, please consider contributing to Swans from time to time. We don’t pay, but Jan and I are great editors! :-)

    Best,
    Gilles

    Comment by Gilles d'Aymery — June 3, 2011 @ 6:53 pm

  10. I see that Gilles put a smiley face next to his description of himself and Jan as “great editors”. There was really no need for that. One of the reasons I have been contributing to Swans all these years is that they are great. Both as copy editors and as people.

    Comment by louisproyect — June 3, 2011 @ 6:58 pm

  11. I subscribe to Workers World, TheMilitant, The Workers Vanguard, The Party Of Liberation And Socialism, Socialist Action (when they print).

    I find that The Militant is good but it has articles like their sub sales drive, to be horribly irrelevant. Workers World is good but doesn’t have theoretical articles of substance. The Party Of Liberation is good but too slender. The WV is actually the paper with little internal stuff and lots of theory with topical news. Unfortunately the paper is written by extra terrestrials.

    I enjoy reading all these papers. I liked Workers World when Marcy had analysis. But he’s dead.
    Maybe they can hold a seance for Sam.

    I wont read anything from ISO. They don’t like any country that actually had a revolution. Not Cuba, not the former SU, not the former CCP-China. If you don’t know where a revolution was, you’ll never know how to build one.

    Comment by Hugh B. — June 3, 2011 @ 7:49 pm

  12. A few points:

    1) My understanding is that Socialist Worker is now a monthly newspaper, with the ISO shifting resources, correctly, toward their website, SocialistWorker.org, which tends to be pretty good, although it cannot keep up with wsws.org.

    2) On money/volunteer labor – I think it’s absolutely possible to get most material for free. The key issue for a lot of writers is they want their material to reach people. There are dozens and dozens of capable writers in various socialist groups who could actually develop as better writers if they were writing for a larger audience, or for a format beyond their own group’s newspaper.
    But Mike is right – the web tends to contain a lot of sloppiness. However, this can be overcome with a commitment to good editorial practices, and I assume Louis recognizes that.
    I also assume Louis doesn’t intend for this to be a one-man show.
    On wsws.org – I thought at first that it was produced by some sort of socialist super-geniuses, since they put out so much material so rapidly. Then I found out that they have a number of full-time staff whose sole job seems to be to produce the website. So *resources are key.* But I think they can be found. To give one example: Truthout, for example, raises $50,000 a month from its readers. At the end of every month they send out 1-2 e-mails a day asking for money. And somehow they pull it off. Much of their material, by the way, is reprints. I think that you could get socialist groups to agree to allow you to reprint their material, if like you say the newspaper was an open space for comradely discussion and debate. But you could also raise money and use it to pay writers or editors or organizers, as necessary.

    3) The newspaper could also include a links section, with links to news stories, like the ones Louis posts on Marxmail. A lot of young activists find these types of links useful and it would be a way of drawing people to the site/paper as well as allowing the site to have material on a lot of issues without requiring original writing on everything. The ISO has a section of their website titled “Critical Reading” (and also a Twitter account) which is useful though it has a minimal amount of material. At the other end of the links spectrum is BuzzFlash (http://www.buzzflash.com/), which posts about 100 headlines with links to stories on other sites each day. It’s excessive, but food for thought.

    4) I think that such a newspaper also needs to be linked to action. It doesn’t necessarily have to be an organizing vehicle but it has to promote important actions, another drawback of the World Socialist Website and a product of the SEP’s extreme sectarian politics.

    Anyway, I think such a project is just what is needed and I would be happy to contribute if that would be helpful.

    Comment by Dan DiMaggio — June 3, 2011 @ 7:52 pm

  13. One thing that is so appealing about the WSWS is the quality and quantity of their cultural reviews. I think those pieces attract readers the most, many of whom will read other articles and may become regular visitors. I’d single out in particular David Walsh as a very incisive and articulate film critic. I don’t always agree with him, but I enjoy reading his pieces.

    Comment by soz — June 3, 2011 @ 8:47 pm

  14. Sounds right to me also.

    Comment by Michael Hureaux — June 3, 2011 @ 8:54 pm

  15. David Walsh is great, but the other reviewers are very good as well. Plus, they have an ability to engage with some first-rate intellectuals like James McPherson, the civil war historian who they have interviewed multiple times. It is truly unfortunate that they are so boneheaded when it comes to the tasks of the class struggle.

    Comment by louisproyect — June 3, 2011 @ 8:55 pm

  16. WSWS covers things from an economically Marxist perspective that is hard to find elsewhere, from Obama’s austerity poliicies to the EU/IMF strangulation of Greece, in articles that are concise and to the point. I don’t read it on a daily basis, but I am impressed with some of the articles of this nature that I run across from time to time.

    As for your endeavor, I can be done, and I hope that you go forward with it.

    Comment by Richard Estes — June 3, 2011 @ 9:41 pm

  17. I had the privilege to meet David Walsh as he visited SF some years ago. He is a very talented man and I was glad that he contributed to Swans once. His downside, IMHO, is that he is a doctrinaire. As I kept telling him that I was not fond of big political theories and acknowledged my lack of understanding of Marxism, he kept answering that it was never too late to learn. But, to him, learning only meant joining the Fourth International, the guardian of revolutionary truth. I recall he sent me a couple of books, including “The Heritage We Defend,” by David North. I could not pass over the first chapter…

    “Vanguard” people can be highly educated, smart, and talented, but they end up being members of cults or sects, and also end up ignoring, discounting, and rejecting those who do not espouse their positions to a T, even though they are on the same wavelength.

    It’s very unfortunate and disheartening. You cannot build a movement through sectarianism. We need each and everyone of us, with one’s strengths and weaknesses, to come together, work together, struggle together, and envision the future together.

    I do hope that Lou, in his later years, will become the unifier we all need. I know he has the heart and the intellectual ability to make it happen.

    Please unite!

    Gilles

    Comment by Gilles d'Aymery — June 3, 2011 @ 10:19 pm

  18. I agree with all that. Do It! The far left has been obsessed with print media since Iskra…so very long ago. It was a 20th century obsession.I think the bare bones of any formulation is update daily/often; quality journalism; relevant reportage…and, what WSWS does not do, a lot of multimedia. I think WSWS misses that aspect and is far too textual in the context of the YouTube moment. The other aspect I think is missed is that any site needs to update its layout frequently to keep up with changing preferences and surfing habits.

    Akin to that is making sure you offer a range of delivery means — that is feeds and email updates for different topics; mobile apps; and a strong presence on Facebook. I think there is also space to build what the WSWS does not manage to do and that is a ‘web community’ in a way that no far left site has managed. I think rabble. ca is a useful example of this esp as it is very Canadian in geo slant.

    Comment by Denis Olsen — June 3, 2011 @ 11:26 pm

  19. I would like to echo others in saying I think this project is a great idea and in this time of growing worker fight back world wide could provide an important resource to the US left.I agree that a proposed leftist daily could combine elements of Counterpunch, WSWS, and Socialist Worker as well as reflect the heritage of The Masses and perhaps the early Partisan Review. Jacobin, a recent journal oriented towards university students, combines high theoretical content as well as easy to read accessibility and may provide something of a “role model”.

    Film and pop cultures reviews can be important in generating interest. The old MIM site, despite their loopy politics got much traffic I suspect based largely on their reviews, now archived.

    A daily leftist paper would be highly labor intensive.While it would be possible to have some contributors wrote for free, a paid dedicated staff would be necessary.For obvious reasons the Pew Charitable Trust or the Carnegie Endowment cannot be relied on. This won’t be NPR. I could mention an organization called Resist which was located in Somerville, Massachusetts. They specialize in fundraising for left causes, Noam Chomsky is or was on their board of directors.

    I hope this idea can be further pursued.

    Comment by Lenina Rosenweg — June 4, 2011 @ 12:38 am

  20. These people from England have an interesting site which is updated quite frequently:

    http://www.counterfire.org/

    Comment by meltr — June 4, 2011 @ 12:46 am

  21. I second Denis Olsen says about YouTube. Tens of thousands of young activists and socialists use the site to debate politics, and the majority of the socialists there are Stalinists/Maoists (I kid you not). You have no idea how many pro-Stalin or anti-Trotsky videos are there and how they are taken as gospel by people who were too young to even see the fall of the Berlin Wall much less know anything about the 60s.

    Comment by Binh — June 4, 2011 @ 1:05 am

  22. That’s an excellent idea. Just speaking as a ‘consumer’ of this stuff I think it helps if it’s not too overshadowed by a personality or party (like Cockburn or the SWP), because that can make readers skeptical about personal/party agendas. Especially if you build strong international links. I think leftists of all stripes are crying out for that more and more.

    I doubt you’d have problems with voluntary contributions of a high standard, either. Including design and maintenance to some extent (always a crucial factor – if it’s too messy or overloaded with daily info, I end up switching off). Especially if you have a broad enough ‘peer review’ team for moderation/editing.

    Comment by W.Kasper — June 4, 2011 @ 1:53 am

  23. That sounds like a great idea. One of the things lacking on the left is timely response to current affairs. Also I think the little events like a strike or a school closure or whatever in smalltown places etc – often the left press is the only place you can read about these things, and it deserves to be built up more.

    I think that kind of community-oriented revolutionary journalism does more than provide a compass on the big issues, it builds up healthy community activism. If it’s done without a heavy-handed Correct Line editorialised into it, anyway.

    There’s a lot of opinion based left websites. Many of them are very interesting. You could do OK reprinting a lot of stuff off of Counterfire, Links, socialistworker.org, etc etc etc but I don’t think that a lack of opinionated analysis is what the left lacks. All that stuff is available to us already. Getting the basic news of the day out there is where the gap seems to be.

    Comment by Ben Courtice — June 4, 2011 @ 3:49 am

  24. While I’d support an endeavour like Louis describes, I think people are misunderstanding what Michael was saying. It’s one thing to re-write news from the bourgeois press from a marxist perspective. It’s very much something different to gather your own news. The latter is really a full time job.

    As for web vs. print, I do think it bears mentioning that there are still a lot of people out there, especially in the working class, that have no regular access to the internet; and that the paper selling has a social function that goes way beyond selling the paper. That’s not to deny that paper selling has become a fetish for many marxist organisations, to some extent a way to discipline members. Still there is something to getting into actual face to face discussions with people in a public space that is missing from an online debate.

    Comment by christian h. — June 4, 2011 @ 3:59 am

  25. A first step is achieve a afr greater degree of collaboration and rescource sharing and cross-promotion between existing far-left journals and newspapers. But even with writers prepared to offer their writing for free, it still cost money to run and operate a regularly updated online journal, which means they will either need to generate income somehow or be backed by a left organisation. Non-sectatianism is essential. I don’t know what Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal’s (http://www.links.org.au) Alexis rating is, but it run at a respectable 1400 a day average visits

    Comment by Terry Townsend — June 4, 2011 @ 4:27 am

  26. I work in IT and have found that applications which have too much information, too many routes, tend to be much less popular. People simply become confused.

    wsws gives off the appearance of tightness – of “requiring” fewer articles for the daily read, while socialist worker appears cluttered – it tries to appear as if it has more articles than in reality. This is probably the web version of claiming more members than actually exist.

    Comment by Sam — June 4, 2011 @ 7:58 am

  27. The things I personally would be interested in are: original reportage rather than a simply re-framing mainstream media news; an academia-focused section (like a socialist version of the Chronicle of Higher Education); strong film/arts/book reviews that combine lively, accessible Marxist lit crit theory (i.e. Terry Eagleton style) with magazine-style reviewing; guest columnists from authoritative sources who propel ideas/information/perspectives into public debates and don’t simply trot out the “default” hard left line.

    I think the key is not necessarily having a lot of paid, full-time staff, although I’m not downplaying that at all. But we do know that people who have full-time jobs are prepared to go on and spend hours of their free-time working on things that they’re passionate about and creating projects of a magnificent scale in the process (i.e. Linux, Wikipedia). I think the key to getting people to do this is to a) give them the promise of an audience and an impact and b) give them enough freedom to develop their writing as much on their own terms as possible. No one, except already-committed left sectarians, wants to feel like they’re just unpaid lemmings shilling the company (party) line.

    Comment by K.C. — June 5, 2011 @ 4:34 am

  28. Interesting comment Louis, and important discussion. I hope you will find occasion for more “reflections” on the World Socialist Web Site. Given their readership and the growing number of disillusioned young people who have either quit or been rejected by the SEP for imagined ideological sins and other supposed deficiencies, I think there is a desperate need for continued discussion on this topic without getting sucked into the vortex of sectarian bullshit that those guys love to splash around in. The Socialist Equality Party is correct when they assert that working people must make a clean break from the capitalist parties and form an independent political force to fight for socialism, but they are obviously not an organization that can or will play an effective role in that fight beyond its current journalistic exercise.

    Comment by Sanford — June 5, 2011 @ 1:27 pm

  29. One of the best things about the wsws is its bare bones layout, a lot of people don’t have expensive computers or T1 hook ups that can handle flash etc.

    Comment by purple — June 5, 2011 @ 3:59 pm

  30. Broadly supportive of the idea. One wee caveat about WSWS though (apart from their screaming sectarianism, that is): What they do is news aggregation rather than original reporting. I say this as a paid journalist based in Brussels whose news articles on the EU/Greece/Portugal/Ireland clusterfuck are regularly ripped off by them without attribution. It doesn’t bother me terribly, as they certainly do a better job of it than UPI (which really is nothing but a copy-paste machine these days), weaving in some good analysis, and of course it is A Good Thing that such information reach as wide an audience as possible. Still, journalism doesn’t come for free, and nor should it.

    And WSWS dudes, BTW, if you’re reading this, I know what you’re up to. All you have to do is cite the original source and all will be forgiven…

    Comment by Leigh Phillips — June 14, 2011 @ 9:11 pm

  31. I have to disagree that all they do is news aggregation without original reporting. It’s true that aggregation supplemented by their own analysis is a very important part of the WSWS project. That is bound to be the case with any sort of Left-wing outlet. Rupert Murdoch has more resources for funding an investigation, when he wants to use them. The Left is always lagging behind in this respect and an important attraction of any Leftist outlet is simply the analysis which they may add to some of the generally reported facts.

    But the WSWS does have a pattern of doing periodic interviews with workers in various places such as this:

    http://wsws.org/articles/2011/jun2011/vide-j15.shtml

    After reading the WSWS since 2000 I’d say that they’ve done a reasonable job of some first-hand reporting coming from workers on strike or in related situations. That’s the main area which stands out in my memory as their contribution to on-the-spot reporting. The rest is mostly just a usually intelligent summary and/or analysis of events for which other news sources have already reported. But they have made some interesting additions to the news reporting about the labor struggles.

    Comment by PatrickSMcNally — June 16, 2011 @ 1:39 am

  32. Leigh, unless you can back your claim up with some evidence, you condemn yourself as a lying slanderer.

    Comment by Matt — June 24, 2011 @ 12:32 pm

  33. What’s with your hostility towards the ISO Louis? Unlike the PSL and the Socialist Workers Party, they aren’t running around being apologists for the Tianamen Square Massacre (PSL) or being the left cover for an unreconstructed political dictatorship (SWP’s constant masturbation over Cuba). At least the ISO know when something passes from a revolutionary democracy to a petty dictatorship and cult of personality. And thus change their position accordingly, and promote forms of social organisation that favour popular self determination and the most extensive liberty, democracy, and the emancipation of the working class being the act of the working class itself. It we don’t take that seriously, then we’re no better than the narrow minded,stereotyped conservative characterisation of political radicals.

    Comment by the red star twinkles mischievously — October 13, 2011 @ 2:46 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 157 other followers