[lbo-talk] what's left

[shag carpet bomb]

At 12:35 PM 4/29/2010, c b wrote:
> > this is voiced also by the leaders of reformist parties. This leads to
> > the necessity of uniting with them on any possible basis compatible
> > with advancing the interests of workers, at the same time as keeping
> > organisationally and politically independent of reformist leaderships
>
>
>I wonder how many American communists would be willing to speak of
>"the necessity of uniting with [the liberal wing of the Democratic
>Party, let's say] on any possible basis compatible with advancing the
>interests of workers."
>
>SA
>
>^^^^^^^
>
>CB: SMILE Funny u should ask this. The  American Ultra-lefts
>incessantly complain that the Communist Party USA does this.

heh. yeah. i was gonna say that the CPusa'ers I'm hanging with now are 
talking about how it's really unusual to see criticism of Obama on the web 
site. It's just not heard of!

I also think it's backward. I can remember when liberals, democrats, etc 
freaked out about the antiwar movement being tied to the commies - ufpj and 
the other one, can't think of it now. not on this list, but just in 
general. people didn't want to be associated with the commie freaks.

i also don't get it because, in my experience, most commies participating 
in things like antiwar groups, etc. generally keep their mouths shut about 
their leanings. they're all about accomodation. e.g., the May Day thingaroo 
here is all about bringing u.s. flags ONLY and placards with "Yes we can!" 
all over them.

I think, SA, you're mistaking discussions here, which are spaces for 
voicing frustration at placards with "Yes we can!" on them and american 
flags only rules, with the fact that, in the end, we go to the rally, 
participate in the meeting, whatever.... at least that's been my experience 
of any pinko-red I've ever known in f2f life.

--
http://cleandraws.com
Wear Clean Draws
('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)