Tuesday, May 23, 2006

History of the 4 Internationals

A lot have been asking me about the history of the Four Internationals, and about their experiences. This is one of my favourite topics, as each International has its own experiences and lessons that can assist us in the 21st century, from an activist, marxist, ideological, and empirical point view. This link includes a brief introduction on each International, plus the details, minutes, and its pioneer thinkers:




Demonstration on 25th May 2006

In the call of the European Social Forums, there will be a peaceful demonstration in the face of the Egyptian Demonstration this coming Thursday at 1:00. Hope you all be there. This demonstration is in solidarity with the arrested activists and judges, minimum we can do is to put a stand to that brutal regime in Egypt that is forged by U.S. Imperialism



Well not in size and political weight since the former are simply the coffee barriers within the 14th of March (whatever is left from it). Just previously plenty of left-wing activists thought how FPM and their 8th of March abused the demads of the teachers to do their own fiasco, now DLM does it again concerning the arrested activists in Syria.

The political statement "Declaration of Damascus - Beirut/Beirut - Damascus" was written by mutual left-wing scholars in Syria & Lebanon, I know for sure since I saw it being written by both sides. From the Lebanese side, the DLM business dealers despised the left-wing activists who wrote it from Lebanon and always mocked them as too immersed in their academics rather reading Ziad Majed's miserable articles. In the end, those academics did an event that shook our fellow Syrian activists, and suddenly the first to attempt to capitalize on the manner are the DLM in an FPM manner. They even refuted to wait the concerned lebanese left-wing on the manner who are organizing a bigger activity, just for the sake they gain personal points in the coming elections within their pethatic movement.

Conclusion: DLM have been guilty of re-writing the leftist ideologies to fit their Neo-Con principles, to justify their allegiance to the ultra-right wing master, the current Prime Minister, violating existing leftest groups, and plenty more: end result: they should be dismantled since they bring more harm to the leftists rather assist the workers.


Globalization & Gradual Dismantlement of the State

This is an article around 4 monthes ago that provides a brief introduction on how corporate globalization gradually dismantles a nation state. Keep in mind that topic is huge, and alot of articles, researches, studies, documentaries, and books tackle the topic.

Koehane and Nye introduced the concept of Complex Interdependence, whose focus is on the free markets among the various nation-states. As more and more states are inter-dependent through free markets, the role of the international institutions becomes more dominant as a means of securing free trade. Free trade is important to the nation states since all states benefit it as its individuals are maximizing their profit. This leads to replacing military goals (and the concept of self-concept state) with economic goals, and role of the government becomes smoother in practice, as the stress on autonomy decreases. International institutions such as the WTO, IMF, and WB become the dominant factors in the perspectives of the nation states since these institutions defend the free markets. This sounds as globalization is the saver of all nation states, yet what about the Nation-States practicing their own political rights in their own land, in the name of its people and sovereignty? There are many aspects and dimensions to analyze on the erosion of the role of nation-state.

The role of the government is on the decreasing level. With the existence of some Transnational Corporations whose budgets can outmatch any ten developing nations, things take a different turn for this Utopia and become a nightmare for the people of the host nations, which welcome with open arms the Transnational Corporations. The TNCs have grown so strong, that they interfere with local politics and tend to finance any elite who is willing to advocate free markets, tax incentives, cheaper labor, and less environmental constraints. Leslie Sklair says: “TNCs get involved in host country politics … Members of the transnational capitalist class often work directly for TNCs, and their lifestyles a major exemplar for the spread of consumerism.” The Transnational Corporations already dominate the ruling elites to their side, and can have all their activities legal via the executive/legislative powers of the nations.

Through consumerism, the TNCs are gradually abolishing domestic cultural values, and the ruling elites open way for the international media and consumerist advertising to enter their nations in order to submit their citizens to the single culture of consumerism. Hence, the elites do not only provide their countries to the TNCs as simply a place for cheap labor and production, but worse, as markets themselves. It is ironic to witness how a state sells off its welfares system just bring forth foreign investment The citizens in the eyes of the TNCs are simply cheap labor and markets to sell their own productions. The poor workers get poorer since they tend to have cheap wages no welfares to back them up. Advanced nations such as Great Britain and Sweden already cutting off their welfare system because they need to generate revenues due to the tax havens given to the TNCs. This means that the foreign corporation is favored more than the welfare of its citizens.

Till now, the gradual abolishment of the nation state from the perspective of elites’, and the people has been tackled. The next topic will be handled within the gradual annihilation of the nation state would be the fate of the economies. Sovereignty can be defined as the total control of the government on its entire land, and that includes the economic dimension. The Government has totally lost its sovereignty in that aspect since the WTO imposes the opening of the barriers of their nations to foreign investments. According to Suzan George, 1.6 trillion dollars float across the globe per day, and that leaves a nations’ economy at the mercy of the TNCs. After all, no governmental reform is sufficient to fix its national economy if the TNCs withdraw their investments. The Asian Crisis in 1998 gives a good example, while people should not wonder if sudden economic crashes occur in the ‘Southern Nations’, specially capital is free to float in the quest of maximizing power. This issue places an ambitious government in a sticky situation, how can they reform their nations if that includes imposing taxes on the TNCs? The fate of the nations’ economies depends on the greed of the TNCs, and the ones who suffer are the workers, since their elites will always manage a nice transaction with the WTO and its allies. Saskia Sassen says: “A basic proposition in discussions about the global economy concerns the decline sovereignty of states over their economies. Economic globalization does indeed extend the economy beyond the boundaries of the nation-state.”

The fourth dimension on analyzing the dismantlement of the nation state is the public institutions. The Public institutions exist for the welfare of the its people, and no one else cares for serving their own institutions except their own government [in theoretical] in this capitalist greedy world of the corporations. The concept of privatizations, another WTO glitch, was introduced to assist the burdened nations in managing their countries’ institutions and save costs in order to pay the debts accumulated on them. This WTO structuring, this is also labeled as ‘democratic’ by the advocates of corporate globalization, has dismantled the role of governmental institutions. The privatized institutions which are in the hands of the TNCs, who are profit oriented with cheapest costs, tend to promote the logic of solidarity with the burdens of the government by ‘saving a penny for a rainy day’. That excuse was followed to cut down on welfares in the financial/economic domains, while when it came to the natural resources management, the privatized institutions became hypocrites. Some companies aim to privatize oil, and what is worse a basic need for daily survival: water (Bolivia and Honduras). Even the basic natural resources became as commodities for the corporations which leaves the role of the nation state in a very doubtful position.

The nations’ role in protecting its people is also on the decline, as the governments start submitting to the demands of the corporations. In Nigeria, eight activists were executed for high treason due to the demands of Shell. In Latin America, the military always intervene to beat up the demonstrators who are demanding better wages and suitable work conditions. The role of the army is also to protect the citizens from any foreign aggression; it is so ironic that the army is protecting foreign corporations at the expense of the domestic corporations and aims the rifle towards the concerned civilians. It is important to note that nobody can raise a court case against a TNC, rather the court law suit should be raised at the international court which shows how the state has been dismantled down to its judicial level.

Now to move to the aspect of geography, globalization has transformed the industrial cities to “global cities”. The locations were it includes extensive international transactions cuts off the city from the rest of the nation, and becomes an international zone for the business dealers. The zone becomes rich with technologies, mass communications, and rich night life to suit this international bourgeoisie class. Capital has attained its own global rights, which is to be free, and the investment to the locations where it is free is heavily invested while the rest of the nation is left with minimal support from the government. Whatever the government can spare from its investments to its “downtown”, then and only then the rural areas are thought off. In a developing county, it would be surprising to see the capital city for example, and the extreme difference between the country’s social and economic situation in other than that global zone. The simplest example can be Beirut’s Down Town, and Lebanon’s south. Actually to sustain cheap labor in those global cities, foreign workers can be imported who would work for cheaper prices.

The last dimension to tackle is the dictatorship of the international communities over the state. Every state submits to the “structuring” of the international communities. This supports the Realist perspective in the international arena, on how developing states replicate the successful infrastructure and values of the successful super powers. A state can not exist unless it attains recognition from other states, and primarily the ones with great powers. That recognition of the state by others gives it the legitimacy to exist. In that perspective, John O. Meyer and other others in their article titled: “World Society and the Nation State” provide the readers with a humorous imaginary incident where a newly discovered populated island ends up in UN with the common structure of education, finance, economics, and gay rights demonstrations. As the authors say: “World-Cultural models of sovereign identity take concrete form in particular state structures, programs, and policies.” The world community takes part in rebuilding the identity of the states to fit those. As John Mearsheimer argues, the interests of the international communities are the interests of the great powers, and then the states identity is forged to suit the fast pace world of globalization and the interests of the corporate CEOs.

Corporate globalization has been gradually dismantling the role of the nation state, and its institutions. Most of the political elites are in alliance with the TNCs, the army follows the commands of the government against the local people, welfare of the citizen has been replaced for the welfare of the corporation, no state or citizen can persecute the TNC concerned at the domestic level, and all public institutions and even natural resources are undergoing persecution. Suzan George, in the book Anti-Capitalism, reveals a U.N. figure given in 2001 whereby of the top 100 richest entities: 51 entities are corporations and 49 are states. The main question is: at whose expense did the companies attain such wealth? The previous data leads us to ask the more important question: “Is there still any role for the nation state in relations with its citizens?”

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Permenant Revolution & Every Day Life

Permenant Revolution assumes that the revolution should not stop within a borders of state, but trespasses those borders and triggers a chain reaction through out the region, and as far as the world. The author of that theory was Leon Trotsky, and it came to him after pondering upon the 1905 insurrection with extensive analysis to its strengths, weaknesses, and what allowed it to take place. The importance of the 1905 revolution was that it established the first Soviet in the history.

The permenant revolution needs the workers to be successful. Only a workers' insurrection can trigger a wave of revolutions from the workers against their oppressors, any other form of a revolution would include the bourgeoisie as their leaders and end up installing a dictator/businessman on the throne. The Permenant Revolution assumes that the revolution proceeds till the Capitalist System is cancelled. It was Lenin who said that the Soviet Union is doomed to fail when the revolution was blocked in Warsaw and Germany, because the revolutionary wave got isolated.

The permenant revolution is not what the ignorant "lefties" or capitalists call bloody. It is as Trotsky said in the Post-1905 court, that it is the least bloody of all. Since the logic of the revolution is that the workers trash the government while barricading their strong holds. A demonstration of workers trigger class awareness of the society, and that triggers even the army soldiers joining their fellow demonstrators because the soldiers are after all workers (something Marx mis-calculated). In 1905, the soldiers rebelled against their officers (Potemkin cruisership). No army is crazy to shoot an entire nation's Proletariat. Instead, they prefer to join them, after all, the soldiers themselves got their relatives demanding the need for a better life.

The Clash in the Soviet Union came between Stalin's Block & Trotsky's Block. Stalin was focusing on building a singular undisputed nation, while Trotsky thought the revolution proceeds on wheels and triggers the revolutionary workers from one nation after the other. Sadly, Stalin's block won, and we recieved a double slap with the loss of Trotsky's block & hiding Russian Nationalism under the banner of the Communist Revolutionaries.

The Permenant Revolution assumes that for every revolution, there will be two counter revolutions. One comes from the reactionary capitalists/"leftists", and once that is surpassed since it is the easiest to spot, the second comes from within: Rise of the Bureaucrats: those who kill the revolution. While Lenin and Trotsky spent their free time on the street explaining to the Proletariat why they had to do an October revolution, Stalin was preparing his entrence to massacre the entire boleshevic revolutionaries in the name of Mother Russia.

The Permenant Revolution believes in Internationalism. Every worker is involved through out the world despite race, gender, class, sect, and color. The permenant revolution is a never ending revolution, for the only time the revolution stops is when the Capitalist System with all its supporting goons are eliminated or forever crippled.


Saturday, May 13, 2006

Religion In The Soviet Union

I just noticed that the Marxist.Com is releasing new set of articles under the name of Religion in the Soviet Union. It is a good introductory series again to reflect on what was the original stand of the Boleshevics on Religion and how Stalin messed things up, the site for it is as follows:


yet two good articles concerning Religion:

Marxism and Religion by Alan Woods:

Vodka, the Church, and the Cinema by Leon Trotsky

Keep in mind these are just introductory articles, for those interested with more details, I will post more details on the topic. I am sure I will tackle one of those days the topic in relation with Lebanon & Marxism & Religion

Mass-Oriented Socialists on the Return in Vienna

It is always a wonderful site to see solidarities such as Palestinian Rights and Hands off Venzuela rise on the shoulders of the shoulders of our comrades. It should be noticable that the left for the past 6 years is undergoing huge wars to win baby paces. Those baby paces are highly important if not protected, because these baby paces would lead to a multiplication factor and the rise of bigger steps. We have to be careful. Anyways, this is yet another piece by the www.marxist.com :


Bush's Greatest Thrill since 2001 is a fish

This what Bush said, but funny thing that in his entire years of power, he does not seem to remember one specific greatest moment; even though he admits that he gained a lot of experience on the top chair.

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4982338.stm

Quote of the Day

"Trotsky evidently surprised people abroad by his eloquence, by his education, which was remarkable for a young man, and by his aplomb. An anecdote was told about him which is probably not true, but which is nevertheless characteristic, according to which Vera Ivanovna Zasulich, with her usual expansiveness, having met Trotsky, exclaimed in the presence of Plekhanov: 'That young man is undoubtedly a genius'; the story goes that as Plekhanov left the meeting he said to someone: 'I shall never forgive this of Trotsky.' It is a fact that Plekhanov did not love Trotsky, although I believe that it was not because the good Zasulich called him a genius but because Trotsky had attacked him during the 2nd Congress with unusual heat and in fairly uncomplimentary terms."~~~Anatoly Lunacharsky


Concerning Teacher's Demonstrations

Sadly, the public school teachers recieve the blow first, and got no one to stand for them.

Firstly, cutting down retirement penions by 50% is an indicator which any country going to enter the WTO appears: cut down on welfarism. The government decided to "push" the cuts which they call "reform" (that fits IMF terminology) rather than forever cancel them.

Second: the "forces" of 8th of March including Free Patriotic Movement, decided to capitalize on the manner and use it as a political logo to wave a stick to the government. Hassan Nasrallah for sure could have made it a big event by sending down his loyalist camp, but sent few, while Orange flew. Sadly, by the end of the day, the teachers' demands became 8th of March demands because everything in this screwed up country is bi-polar media wise, hence what contradicts a block economically, fits the other politically.

Third: The participants were mostly the war lords of Harakit AMAL, Hizbullah, and the crazy Aoun who bombarded everything. Currently, crazy Aoun is close to lose his sanity and say: Michel Bonaparte. He things everything he did was gold, while he goes in Jazeera documentary on War of Lebanon saying proudly and happily: "I was there and I was the one who engineered it milatarily to make it successful (refering to Tal el Zaatar)". Later in the evening, he calls NBN debate show and says: "A lot of people are starving! If the Qawmi Souri (Syrian Nationalist) or Baathi is starving, they have no right to demonstrate?!" With that, he blew all chances for the workers to demand their rights to protect their retirement compensation. Actually, 14th of March would not mind to carry on with it for two reasons: to satisfy the demands of the IMF & WTO for free trade and "structuring", second to piss off Aoun himself. Sadly, it is the majority of the workers who suffer from that cheap fiasco.

Fourth: A variety of Democratic Leftist Movement members (Pro-Harriri politically and economically = 100% free trade) argue that Seniora should carry on with the 50 % cuts because it will save a lot for the government money. The interesting part is those arguements are placed by the IMF through the World Bank on Lebanon's conditions to enter. A second group argue that they will not tackle the topic because they would be called Syrian Agents rather work on the workers' problems. So if Hizbullah demand a workers demand, it is no longer. A third group would argue that WTO is going to intigrate Lebanon, they have no problem with that, as long as they can bargain with them their leftist tides. They seem to forget that the WTO enforces privatization every 5 years on of the 7 vital sectors of the government. A fourth group would go and argue not to fear the indicator and the World Bank are really socialists, since in Lebanon they know couple of left-wingers in it. The groups go on, and none of them would actually debate for the Workers (rather were to go to Monot), and preach the policy of Emancipation from Above.

Fifth: The Lebanese Communist Party entrapped itself with the 8th of March, again special thanks to the News Media, while the LCP gathered (according to LBC Channel) 15,000 demonstrator and doing a strong come back. Their leadership remainds non-ideological and Stalinist in nature. That means they focus on the figure head system and have a stalinist infrastructure which empowers the top of the pyramind. The LCP should resume its leadership to lead the workers as it did in the 1920s and 1930s (pre-Arab Nationalism striking the LCP), and one way is to return to the ideological extensive base and staying away from Stalinist Soviet Union framework.

Sixth: The Television Media is too biased to be reliable. First of all, al-Manar Television (pro-Hizbullah) was celebrating that all the demonstrators were carrying the Lebanese Flag rather their Party flags while the al-Manar Camera was displaying the different flags of different groups. LBC (Pro-Lebanese Forces) was zooming in on the few fight scenes that took place, and argued that the workers' demands are 8th of March rather than to open an investigation (as they traditionally do) on the situation of the teachers because again Hizbullah and their new best friends Free Patriotic Movement politized the manner.

Seventh: In the end, the victims are the Proletariat, and all of this is an escalating of class struggle were the Proletariat end up at the bottom of the boot as the bourgeoisie end up scavenging each other and lead their sectarian/regional followers as sheep against each other. The workers for now got no one to demand and lead their demands. The DLM made it publicly they are for the Emancipation From Above policy, while the LCP is still stuck with allying with anyone against U.S. Emperialism rather than to focus 100% on their base. Even though they grew, they are growing within a fixed frame work.

Eighth: There is no war but class war, the more money you have, the more you are politically and economically stronger. The bourgeoisie are fighting either to restore their previous access to wealth or to defend the newly attained wealth. The Rich are still getting richer in Lebanon while the Poor are getting poorer with all those crazy taxes, and the middle class is just almost eradicated.

Marxist From Lebanon

About My Absence

Well, it has been a while since I last posted, and plenty of events took place that needs to be analyzed (well at least I want to put a say in it), and I was busy between certain events, had a ix day heavy fever, and lastly my studies.