[Marxism] Interesting discussion on issues of US democracy

Lil Joe joe_radical at earthlink.net
Sun Apr 17 12:04:44 MDT 2005


This is a great discussion -- but it should be placed in context of a
struggle for
workers struggle to build its class party! Discussing the need to build the 
working class movement, politically, by a move to the House of
Representatives, 
thus ultimately abolishing the Senate to make the House the Government, 
in a parliamentary system in which the 'Speaker of the House' becomes the 
"Prime Minister", thus abolishing the Presidency and Electoral College. 

The struggle to bring about these reforms is the laborpartypraxis, the fight
for a Labor Party with the political objective being to 'win the battle of
democracy', by
becoming the absolute majority in the House, legislating a working class
agenda that
would place the House in irreconcilable opposition to the Senate, Presidency
and the
Courts, revealing to workers a need for a new Constitutional Convention.
Just as the
capitalists and slave-owners excluded slaves, Blacks, women and property
less
workers, and poor yeoman farmers, so our Constitutional Convention will
exclude
capitalists and their political representatives: Democrats and Republicans.
This
Constitution -- attended by delegations of trade union, women and oppressed 
minority community, religious and other organizations based in the working
class 
and farmers representatives will be open to the public scrutiny on
television, not
written in hiding as was the capitalist's and slave-owners Constitutional
Convention,
which was really a coup against the radical principles in the Declaration of
Independence.   

Lil Joe

Message: 18
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 10:02:18 -0400
From: Brian Shannon <Brian_Shannon at verizon.net>
Subject: [Marxism] Should socialists call for democratic structural
	change?	Was Wassup?
To: Marxmail <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <e6335ecdb939d3060eba9d0624ca8c9b at verizon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=WINDOWS-1252;	format=flowed

First -- thanks for replying and not ignoring.

 >This is what the struggle is about in the 21st century?  Establishing 
a democratic republic?  That wasnt the issue in Russian in 1905, so 
how can it be an issue in the US in 2005?

The demand for a democratic republic was a major demand in both 1905 
and 1917. In fact, that was what was involved in dissolving the 
National Assembly, which the Bolsheviks and others had called for. When 
the workers came to power in the soviets, they went beyond the 
democratic demands. That is precisely what main structural demands were 
for the Russian Revolution, the Chinese Revolution, the Spanish 
Revolution and more undeveloped countries.

Our developed and dominant imperialist nation still has an undeveloped 
political structure that serves the capitalists very well indeed, but 
does not serve the rest of us.

 >Issue 1:  The Senate functions exactly as the founders intended, 
insulating property from the anticipated and dreaded increase in the 
unwashed masses of the cities, i.e. workers.  Issue still exists.

It works as the founders intended over 200 years ago, but many 
constitutions have been created since then. Probably none in the world 
is as regressive and powerful an upper chamber ours. Yes the issue 
still exists. Shouldnt the Senate be abolished?

 >Issue 2: The Electoral College functions exactly as intended.  See 1 
above.

The Electoral College does not work at all as intended. Recall that 
independent leaders were to sit down and among themselves choose the 
best person. That never happened from the beginning.

The 3/5 credit for the non-citizen slaves no longer exists, so that is 
also not as intended.

All our Electoral College does is ratify the winner take all result of 
the state elections (except for a couple of states that try to amend 
this stupidity).

 >Issues 3-5: Runoff voting, proportional representation exist in many 
other countries and so what?  Anything better about those countries?

It is not about the those countries but about creating a voice for 
the minority parties, whose program can be distributed to all. (Most of 
these countries have democratic guarantees of radio, TV time and even 
wall space for posters.)

 >And bringing this to the major parties?  Go right ahead. Seek yet 
another set of alliances with progressive Democrats and Republicans. 
Seek yet another alternative to a class program. Big fat waste of time 
and worse-- try cooptation

Bringing this is a way of saying make a demand. To the major 
parties, we say that you claim to be representatives of a democracy, 
but you arent.

It is basically asking for the same thing that progressives have asked 
for when they demanded the right to vote for women and 
African-Americans. We now ask for one-person, one-vote for everyone.

Brian Shannon





More information about the Marxism mailing list