Debs On Social Democracy

For years I have said that what is needed in our elections is a firebrand like Eugene Debs….that would be Left politics for the Right has that moron Donny.

The following is a piece Debs wrote in 1898…..if you read the article it could be talking about today…..

‘Social Democracy’ by Eugene V. Debs from Social Democratic Herald. Vol. 1 No. 14. October 8, 1898.

In the outset, and to “clear the deck” for action, some attention should be paid to definitions. What is meant by the term, “Social Democracy?”

The term “social” as applied to “democracy” means, simply, a society of democrats, the members of which believe in the equal right of all to manage and control it. Reading this definition, men are likely to say, “There is nothing new in that,” and they speak understandingly. The men and women who are engaged in organizing the Social Democratic Party of America are not pluming themselves upon the novelty of their scheme for the improvement of social, industrial, and political conditions. They claim for their movement a commonsense basis, free from the taint of vagary and in all regards preeminently practical.

The wise man is credited with saying, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.” Crediting the declaration of Solomon as conclusive, there must have been a time before he lived when something like “social democracy” of which I write existed in the earth, the germ idea of which, though latent for centuries, has aroused men from their lethargy from time to time in the processes of evolution, to find its most potent expression in the present era of “progress and poverty,” civilization and savagery, wealth and war, charity and greed, aroused them to an interest in socialism, which, with the chivalric courage of crusaders and the revolutionizing zeal of iconoclasts, has appeared to do battle for the regeneration of society.

No one hesitates to admit that the task is herculean; no one underestimates the power of opposing forces. Their name is legion, and they are organized forces—close, compact, resourceful, and defiant. They do not propose to surrender, compromise, nor arbitrate. They have the masses in the dust, their claws upon their throats and their hooves upon their prostrate forms. In the face of all the verified facts that startle thinking men, there is no requirement for extravagant speech.

But conditions as they exist are artificial, not natural. They were created by men, and may be changed by men, since it is a truth “that where there is a will there is a way” to elevate humanity as certainly as where there is a will there is a way to degrade it, and social democracy has one central pivotal purpose, the amelioration of social conditions and the emancipation of the victims of a vast brood of wrongs, all of which converge and consolidate in one great and overmastering wrong of robbing them under the forms of law, of the fruits of their toil, and thereby reducing them to a condition where men dispose of their manhood and women of their chastity for the means of continuing lives that are a ceaseless horror.

No well-informed honest man either doubts or attempts to controvert the proposition. It is as self-evident as the law of gravitation. It is the crime of the ages, the one great curse resulting from “man’s inhumanity to man,” the ever-present and threatening calamity which wage-earners are required to face and provide against as best they may.

Capitalism is running riot throughout the land. The private ownership of the means of production, that is to say, the means of life, is doing its deadly work. The trusts, syndicates, and corporations, with more eyes and hands than any mythological monster ever possessed, concoct new schemes of spoliation and the masses sink to lower depths of poverty, want, woe, and degradation.

The picture is not overdrawn. A Hogarth’s hand would relax its hold upon its pencil in tracing the horrors of a sweatshop or the agonies of the lives of tramps. Dante would look in vain throughout the realms of the infernal for incidents more horrifying than are found in the deep, dark, mining hells where miners work and famish. Only a Milton would be equal to the task of depicting the wreck and ruin wrought by the capitalist system in a land which should be a paradise, but which has been transformed into an arena more horrible than those where Roman emperors delighted to torture the victims of their vengeance.

All over this fair land, in every center of population, in mine and factory and shop, and spreading out into the forest, field, and farm, where bird and bee and brook make merry music and the winds transform leaf and spray into harps, where the flowers vie with the stars in making the earth as beautiful as the sky above, iron-tongued and iron-handed monsters of greed and lust, conscienceless as a Moloch and as relentless as death, have inaugurated wretchedness and poverty until from ocean to ocean, from valley to mountaintop, rises one unceasing complaint, touching every note in the scale of discontent and anger, while statesmen and students, philosophers and philanthropists, amazed and aghast, contemplate environments and await developments.

The millions of wage-earners do not own themselves, they are wage-slaves, and their masters control their lives and subject them to conditions as degrading as those which existed in times of chattel slavery. True it is that the united forces of labor could make themselves masters of the situation and change conditions to their liking, but divided on lines of political partisanship, intimidated, bulldozed, and bribed, they have done the bidding of the capitalist class, have been misled and betrayed by ignorant and dishonest leaders until hope has all but perished.

At this supreme juncture socialism has come into view and advances to the arena. It offers a remedy for social ills which must be mitigated if peace and prosperity are to come to the land. It strikes at the very root of capitalism by proposing to transfer the means of production and distribution, i.e., the land, mines, factories, railroads, machinery, etc., from private capitalists to the whole people to be operated by them in their collective capacity for the good of all, and this it proposes to do by the ballot of a triumphant majority of awakened, class-conscious supporters. The revolution is to be complete, but it is to be achieved by the ballot.

From the date of the introduction of chattel slavery into the British colonies of America to the time when the shackles fell from the limbs of 4 million slaves by the proclamation of Abraham Lincoln, 243 years had elapsed. But it was amidst the smoke and carnage of war, when a thousand streams ran read to the sea, that chattel slavery with its blocks and whips and pens disappeared from the land.

Wage-slavery has now in the United States a firmer standing than was ever secured by chattel slavery. For two centuries and a half no gleam of hope flashed upon the darkness in which the chattel slave lived and wrought and died, but along all the years, forces were being evolved to secure his rescue, culminating in a war of calamities unparalleled in the history of the world.

Socialism would work out the redemption of the wage-slave without a sanguinary conflict. Its emancipating program includes no bloody ordeals. It unfurls to the winds no battle banners except those inscribed with peace and goodwill to man. Its first great proposition is to educate workingmen and by an act which requires an exercise of willpower, to stand forth, redeemed and disenthralled, from the domination of any other man or set of men under heaven. This can be done. It is the initial step to a higher plane of existence and a nobler life, where men grow and expand to their full stature. It is a step which evinces the beginning of wisdom. He who takes it plucks for his own behoof and those dependent upon him the richest fruit that has grown on the tree of knowledge of all the ages.

Thousands are doing their own thinking and are conscious of their class interests in the economic struggle. They are organizing everywhere.

The movement is international.

The following is from the declaration of principles of the Social Democratic Party of America:

The control of political power by the Social Democratic Party will be tantamount to the abolition of capitalism and of all class rule.

The solidarity of labor connecting us with millions of class-conscious fellow-workers throughout the civilized world will lead to international socialism, the brotherhood of man. Capitalism is to culminate in socialism. The scepter it has wielded so long and so mercilessly in the interest of its class is soon to fall from its nerveless grasp. It is destroying itself and from its ruins will rise the Cooperative Commonwealth.

The Social Democratic Herald began as the Social Democrat. The Social Democrat was the paper of Eugene Debs’ pioneering industrial union, the American Railway Union. Begun in 1894 as the Railway Times, in July of 1897 it was renamed The Social Democrat and served as the paper of the Chicago based Social Democratic Party. First published in Terre Haute and then Chicago, the paper was produced weekly. After a split with Utopians who retained the paper, Debs’ published The Social Democratic Herald. When they joined with the Springfield, Massachusetts based Social Democratic Party in 1901, the Socialist Party was born. Victor Berger took over the paper in 1901 and moved it Milwaukee where it ran until 1913.

Not much has changed in over a hundred years….in closing I quote Debs….”The only worker who has an excuse to keep out of the social democratic movement is the unfortunate fellow who is ignorant and does not know better. He does not know what socialism is. That is his misfortune.”

A little slice of American history…..we need leaders with cajones….we have had enough of the spineless corruptible twats we have now.

I like this man’s style…..he is needed again…..today.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“legop ergo scribo”

Closet Socialism?

Inkwell Institute

Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  Government/Socialism/Politics/Political Theory

Paper #27

“There are exactly 200 card carrying Communist in the State Department”

“How many Communists are there Senator?”

There are exactly 52 Communists”

(From the original “Manchurian Candidate”)

The point I am trying to make is that since 1917 there have been closet socialists trying to take over the government…at least, that is what the paranoid lame brain morons would have you believe……..it all boils down to YOUR definition of a socialist…..in the beginning almost all socialists were social democrats…that changed in 1917 with the rise of the Communists and the ideological battles fought between socialist and communist and somewhere along the way the social democrats became as liberal political movement not the radical movement of the communists/socialists…..

I have spent an inordinate amount of time trying to educate idiots that the use of the word socialist or Communist or Marxist is just plain lame and is nothing more than a boring tactic to incite fear…..

Would a socialist accept the concept that political change could be brought about peaceably and constitutionally?

Would a socialist accept capitalism as the ONLY reliable means  of generating wealth?

Would a socialist see the defects in capitalism and rectify them economics and social engineering?

Would a socialist view the nation state as a meaningful unit of political rule with a significant capacity to regulate economic and social life?

From what you know about socialism…answer the questions……

If you know anything then your answers would have to be NO!

There is a way of looking at social democracy, which above is…if you take a few of the “sociaslists ideals like redistribution of wealth, economic management and equality then we can make a case of Social Democracy being a sort of “socialist lite”……..but NOWHERE is this a radical form of socialism if anything it is a bit liberal in thought, modern definition not classical.

Personally, I do NOT consider social democracy as a form of socialism, but then I am not a pundit that wants to create hate and fear….to me this is what use to be called “neorevisionism”, a way to find a bridge between capitalism and socialism which to me looks a lot like what now is called neo-liberalism (a post for the future…watch for it).  Yes, there are too many “isms” in this post but I wanted to show just how complicated we can make political philosophy….

To me socialism is NOT about the ballot box and because social democracy depends on the ballot box I do NOT consider it as an indication of what is truly socialism….but then again I am not a traditional political philosopher by any stretch of the imagination….

2010 Election Watch: The UK

From the desk of the Scriptorium

Election series 2010:  The UK

I realize that most of the people in the US could care less about the elections in the UK…..I think they are mistaken…….

I have been asked why I subject myself to the agony of politics…..the answer is easy….my education made me a political addict….it is the most fascinating of subjects…..I meet a lot of good friends and a bunch of crazies….both are interesting in their own way….and the exchange of views is almost a good exercise…..I have also been asked why I would be interested in the politics of another country….that is easy also…they have a different type of government and it plays differently than the Federal system we have here……I also depend on my friend Quin from Quintessential Havoc (blogroll will get you there) to help me understand better and to fill in the gaps that I will no doubt have in my posts concerning the UK and the EU…….

The election for PM of Britain is under way…..they have Brown from Labor, Cameron from the Tories and Clegg from the Liberal Democrats….as best I can tell it is pretty much a draw right now, but the LibDem Clegg is making lots of noise and could be a spoiler for one of the dudes….

The voting system is a bit unique , at least I think it is……..Rather than marking an ‘X’ against their preferred candidate, each voter ranks candidates in order of preference. If a candidate receives a majority of first place votes, he or she is elected. However if no single candidate gets more than 50 percent of the vote, the second choices for the candidate at the bottom are redistributed. The process is repeated until one candidate gets an absolute majority.  (Quin maybe able to expand this a bit)

The UK currently operates a simple plurality, first-past-the-post system. In this voting system the single winner is the person with the most votes; there is no requirement that the winner gain an absolute majority of votes.

Uses multi-seat constituencies and transfers votes that would otherwise be wasted to other eligible candidates. STV initially allocates an elector’s vote to his or her most preferred candidate and then, after candidates have been either elected or eliminated, transfers surplus or unused votes according to the voters’ stated preferences.  (Thanx to Reuters reporters for some of the facts in this post)

With that said…there is a push for electoral reforms in the UK….the issue is popular as it is in the US?

Labor

– Referendum early in the next parliament on whether to move to the Alternative Vote* system for elections to the House of Commons

– Free vote in parliament on reducing voting age to 16

– Legislation to ensure parliaments sit for a fixed-term

– Commission to chart a course to a written constitution

– Statutory register of lobbyists

– Completion of reform of the House of Lords

– Full implementation of a new system of independent regulation of MPs pay, pensions and allowances.

CONSERVATIVES

– Oppose change to ‘first-past-the-post’ system**

– Reduce the number of MPs by 10 percent to 585 from 650 (The US only has 435 Reps)

– Work to ensure consensus for substantially elected House of Lords

– Give House of Commons more control over own timetable

– Reduce discrepancy between constituency electorate sizes

– Right to kick out MPs found guilty of wrongdoing

– Ensure that legislation on devolved issues that only affects England, or England and Wales, can only be passed with the consent of MPs from England, and where applicable Wales

– Introduce new rules on lobbying

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS

– Prefer Single Transferable Vote system***, which would allow them to cut MPs by 150

– Right to vote from age 16

– Fixed-term parliaments

– Replace House of Lords with fully elected second chamber with fewer members

– Introduce written constitution(Wait!  There is NO written constitution?)

– Right to sack MPs who have broken the rules

– Curb influence of lobbyists

Alternative vote

This will make the Brit system of electing a PM as clear as mud for most, but I think that what effects one country may ultimately show up in others and that includes the US……once again I apologize of my UK readers if I screwed up any of this…..I look forward to hearing from them….

What The Hell Is A Democrat Socialist?

We have Social Democrats and Socialists and Democratic Socialists, but what the hell is a Democrat Socialist?

As reported in the Politico:

A conservative faction of the Republican National Committee is urging the GOP to take a harder line against both Democrats and wayward Republicans, drafting a resolution to rename the opposition the “Democrat Socialist Party” and moving to rebuke the three Republican senators who supported the stimulus package.

In an e-mail sent Wednesday to the 168 voting members of the committee, RNC member James Bopp, Jr. accused President Obama of wanting “to restructure American society along socialist ideals.”
“The proposed resolution acknowledges that and calls upon the Democrats to be truthful and honest with the American people by renaming themselves the Democrat Socialist Party,” wrote Bopp, the Republican committeeman from Indiana. “Just as President Reagan’s identification of the Soviet Union as the ‘evil empire’ galvanized opposition to communism, we hope that the accurate depiction of the Democrats as a Socialist Party will galvanize opposition to their march to socialism.”

This is just an expansion of the babble put forth by Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) who  said recently that there were 17 socialists in Congress.  Alabama?  Is that not in the South? (that is sarcasm in case it was missed by anyone)

Jesus, do these morons realize just how pathetic they are looking?  This branding did NOT work in the election, but the GOP cannot let it go.  This type of hype is only playing to there base–old white guys in the South.  The only region in the country that fear works on anymore.  The rest of the country is NOT listening.