The Leftist AssemblyBoard

---

---

---

Comrade Quotes

"Capitalism attacks and destroys all the finer sentiments of the human heart; it ruthlessly sweeps away old traditions and ideas opposed to its progress, and it exploits and corrupts those things once held sacred." - Daniel DeLeon

---

---

I know it will sound absolutely pretentious, but I doubt this is actually a "farewell". I'm sure I will be re-elected, but in the case that you comrades do vote me out, I bid you farewell. I have enjoyed my time as editor of the Red Star, and though my editions will never parallel the uncomparable stuff put out by Comrade Fidels beard, I hope you see it fit to let me keep this position and continue to bring you articles on socialism and the Left.

---

---

“For myself, I want no advantage over my fellow man, and if he is weaker than I, all the more is it my duty to help him.” - Eugene Victor Debs

Those of you who know me well know of my fondness for Eugene Victor Debs. A quote of his was even used on the first edition of the Red Star I put out as the newspaper boy. Debs also holds the distinction of being the author of the first Socialist work I ever purchased, a collection of his essays and speeches, and as such led me down the path to becoming the lad you read today.

Eugene Debs was born in Terre Haute, Indiana, where he was first elected to the office of county clerk for the Democratic Party in 1879 at the age of 24 years old. He was very active in the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and was the Grand Secretary and Treasurer by 1888, and under him, the number of lodges grew from 98 to 384. He stepped down in 1893 and immediately went to work organizing the American Railway Union, one of the first industrial unions in the United States and among the largest of its time.

Debs began his transition from the Democratic Party, the party he would later describe as the party of the “small capitalist”, after the Pullman Strike of 1894 which the ARU participated in and which was put down by President Cleveland, whom Debs had supported in all his Presidential campaigns. Because a Federal injunction against the strike had been issued but Debs continued, he was sentenced to prison for six-months in Woodstock, Illinois.

Whilst serving his time there, Debs became familiar with the works of Karl Kautsky and was visited by Victor L. Berger, who gifted him a copy of Marx's Capital, which he cherished as “a token of priceless value”. It was this event, coupled with his experiences in the Pullman Strike and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen that Debs claimed propelled him towards the ideas of Socialism.

Debs was disgusted and distraught by the racism prevalent in the Southern United States, and which (by God take my word for it!) still lingers to this day. In his essay “Danger Ahead” for the International Socialist Review, he details his experiences in Texas of racism of whites towards black workers:

“The whole world is under obligation to the black, and that the white heel is still upon the black neck is simply proof that the world is not yet civilized. The history of the black in the United States is the history of crime without parallel.”

Debs first ran for the office of President of the United States under the Socialist Party ticket in 1904. In his speech after being nominated for the candidacy, Debs emphasized: “wage-labour is but a name; wage-slavery is the fact!” He stated the necessity of the class struggle being at the forefront of Socialist politics and attacked the Republican and Democratic parties as “twins” and charged that competition must be “broken down and co-operation [between workers] supplanted.”

Debs participated, along with Big Bill Haywood, James Connolly, Daniel DeLeon, Lucy Parsons, Mother Jones, William Trautmann, Ralph Chaplin, and scores of others, in founding the Industrial Workers of the World, the famed international industrial union that gave us the likes of Joe Hill, T-Bone Slim, and Utah Phillips.

Debs spread the word of the Wobblies wherever he went, writing in the Daily People, in an article titled “The Coming Union”: “The only national labor that recognizes the class struggle, the Industrial Workers of the World, is opposed, and the American Federation of Labor, whose leaders deny the class struggle, and is supported by men who call themselves socialists and class-conscious workers.

But in spite of all this, the Industrial Workers is the coming labor union in the United States and all the powers of Capitalism and all the resources of its emissaries cannot prevent it.”

Debs understood the cry that no human was illegal. After the Committee on Immigration supported the measures of the United States government to prevent the migration of Asians to the United States, and rally to their side in the International Socialist Review, writing: “It is utterly unsocialistic, reactionary, and in truth outrageous, and I hope you will oppose with all your power. The plea that certain races should be excluded...have no place in a proletarian gathering...that is calling on the oppressed and exploited workers of the world to unite for their emancipation.”

Debs vehemently and vigorously opposed the entrance of the United States into World War I. He dedicated his arguably most famous speech to opposing the war, the Canton, Ohio Speech of 1918. “Every solitary one of these aristocratic conspirators and would-be murderers claims to be an arch-patriot; every one of them insists that the war is being waged to make the world safe for democracy. What humbug! What rot! What false pretense! These autocrats, these tyrants, these red-handed robbers and murderers, the “patriots,” while the men who have the courage to stand face to face with them, speak the truth, and fight for their exploited victims—they are the disloyalists and traitors. If this be true, I want to take my place side by side with the traitors in this fight.”

It was this speech that got Debs jailed on 10 counts of sedition, and during his trial that he gave another arguably most-famous speech, his Statement to the Court. Because Debs' defense called no witnesses, he himself was called to address the court. In this statement, Debs stated his opposition to the current government and reaffirmed his support for the workers. He admitted his “guilt” and asked for no mercy nor immunity. He did, however, give this famous statement: “Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.”

Debs was sentenced to Prison because of his convictions against war. During his Prison term, Debs ran again for the office of president and gained the highest number of votes of any socialist candidate in the United States history. President Woodrow Wilson claimed Debs was a traitor and when advisers recommended clemency on basis of health, Wilson refused. However, in 1921, President Harding granted Debs his clemency.

In his last years, Debs was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and he continued his speeches in the name of Socialism, but he was mostly occupied with recovering his health that had severely deteriorated whilst in prison. Debs died of heart failure on October 20, 1926, at the age of 70. He was cremated and buried in his hometown of Terre Haute, Indiana.

Eugene V. Debs, in my opinion, was and is still the most important figure in American Socialist history. His charisma and demeanor, his simple way of speaking did and can still appeal to the ordinary American, and it even achieved turning a former Bernie-supporting Democrat-loving teenager from Western Kentucky into a proponent of socialism through writing and speaking. I'd ask you to take my word for it that if you are trying to speak to any of your friends or family about Socialism, even just opening them up to the idea, do not start with Marx or Lenin or anarchism as many are first to do. The names of Marx, Lenin, and anarchism have been soiled by decades of propaganda by the various governments of the world. But Debs has not been soiled or spoken against like the others have. Though he was criticized, he is not as well-known. Debs writings are written simply, do not use complicated concepts such as dialectics or Permanent Revolution. Debs was not a man of theory, Debs was a man of emotion and action.

---

---

---

---

---

Comrade Quotes

"Fascism is nothing but capitalist reaction; from the point of view of the proletariat the difference between the types of reaction is meaningless." Leon Trotsky

---

---

“It is to be desired that this could happen, and Communists certainly would be the last to resist it…But they also see that the development of the proletariat is in nearly every civilized country forcibly suppressed. Should the oppressed proletariat in the end be goaded into a revolution, we communists will then defend the cause of the proletarians by deed just as well as we do now by word.” - Engels, Principles of Communism

The question of a peaceful transition to a socialist society is usually the divide between Democratic Socialists and the rest of the Socialist tendencies. While I believe just about everyone who considers themselves a socialist would just love the idea of the bourgeoisie saying “So you voted this dude in and I'm and supposed to just let you take my stuff? OK, cool, here ya go.” For one, even if the bourgeoisie would accept such a proposition, the United States and the imperialist powers of the world would certainly not, one must merely look at Salvador Allende for evidence.

“The bourgeoisie has ways and means to manipulate the public, the constituencies, the electoral systems. It always has fascist ambushes and actions of civil war up its sleeve.” - J. Posadas, The Significance of the Electoral Victory of the Labour Party

But more likely still, the bourgeoisie, even if the government would support such seizure of their property, what would stop the bourgeoisie from hiring private military contractors to fight the government, especially if said government isn't one of the first world? Something like the Wonga Coup against a socialist government should not be dismissed as impossible, considering that PMCs like the Pinkerton Company have been hired to put down labour disputes in the past.

In a world absent of private military companies and a world absent of the CIA and the United States government in general, a peaceful transition to socialism could be possible. However, we as socialists should not focus on such fantasies and should instead focus on the real issues and possibilities to achieve our goals.

- Comrade Lib

---

---

I believe that there are two ways for the socialist movement in America to move forward. The first is for the various leftist groups such as the Party for Socialism and Liberation, the Workers' World Party, the SPUSA, the Peace and Freedom Party, Liberty Union, and so on to form a national united front of sorts and agitate. The second is through the One Big Union idea prevalent in the Industrial Workers of the World. A third option could be the DeLeonist synthesis of party and union as “sword and shield” of the workers.

For now, however, I will only touch upon the concept of One Big Union. In the United States of America, the labor movement has fallen from grace so hard, I can hardly regard it as a labor movement anymore. Only 6.3% percent of workers are organized into a union in the present day, compared to much higher rates in the past. Even today's unions, with the exception of the IWW and similar unions, can hardly be described as “unions” anymore. Unions today are not open in their membership like the radical unions, and most will only accept members if they work at a specific workplace, limiting their scope and impact.

“It has also upset and undermined the traditional labor relations approach of the unions. The attempt of the bosses to introduce a "new type of labor relations," a "nonconfrontational" kind of "friendly cooperation" between management and labor where decision-making power is supposedly granted to the workers, is nothing more than a new despotism of the bosses meant to accelerate profits, reduce costs and introduce an unprecedented era of permanent displacement and enlargement of the unemployed rolls. ” - Sam Marcy, Hi-Tech, Low Pay, Chapter 1: The Crisis in the Trade Union

This limit, in my view, is what restricts the American labor movement for bargaining for little more than wages and meaningless contracts in which the company refuses to barge an inch. The American labor movement needs to abandon these restrictive rules and open their membership to direct affiliation, and even better would be a merger of all unions into the One Big Union of all crafts, trades, and industries.

The Working Class should be united in its stand against the capitalist class through unions, in the short term improving their living conditions and working conditions, and in the long term building such a large confederation of workers and the working class that the capitalist class could be toppled and destroyed through a swift general strike across the world.

- Comrade Lib

---

---

---

---

---

Comrade Quotes
"Workers of my country, I have faith in Chile and its destiny. Other men will overcome this dark and bitter moment when treason seeks to prevail. Go forward knowing that, sooner rather than later, the great avenues will open again where free men will walk to build a better society. Long live Chile! Long live the people! Long live the workers! These are my last words, and I am certain that my sacrifice will not be in vain, I am certain that, at the very least, it will be a moral lesson that will punish felony, cowardice, and treason." Salvador Allende

---

---

An article published in the last edition of this venerable newspaper by Comrade Libertasnia drew my own attention. Unfortunately, the piece was full of the general farrago of nonsensical apologism for the detestable North Korean regime that frequently accompanies articles written on this subject from the Left. Though I acquit Comrade Libertasnia of deliberately attempting to apologise for the North Korean regime (unlike the ridiculous sort of Marxist-Leninist who tends to make this kind of argument), I thought it nonetheless important to write an article in response to clarify more sharply why the Left should cease wasting it’s time acting as defenders of this vile regime.
To first, clarify a potential objection, namely Libertasnia’s assertion that to not oppose US imperialism openly is to go along with it. This is true on the face of it, of course, but if we are to accept in this argument the general principle that silence equals equanimity, then by definition his own silence on North Korean atrocities equals condonement of them. This will not do at all!
For all the blustering rhetoric about ‘imperialism’ against the DPRK, one fundamental factor seems to have been missed by Comrade Lib, as it is regrettably missed by every other apologist who blunders into these sorts of equivocations, why should one be concerned about the fate of the DPRK? This regrettable tendency by some on the Left to be concerned about the fate of undemocratic and totalitarian regimes based on some mistaken belief they share some kinship against ‘imperialism’ is one of the modern Left’s more regrettable and foolish tendencies.
Let us clarify the situation more sharply. US war games in South Korea are conducted with the full approval and knowledge of the South Korean government, and US forces are on its soil with full permission to be there from the South Korean government. Comrade Libertasnia points out (correctly, in my view) that this threatening posture has the effect of isolating the DPRK and making its rhetoric consequently more extreme. Such is true, but as he points out (again, correctly) this is largely due to the ongoing war on the Korean Peninsula. Anybody who runs a country in a state of war with its nearest neighbour who expects said neighbour not to run war games on his border with its allies is a very stupid leader indeed.
From reading Comrade Lib’s piece, one could almost put the blame for the continued threatening posture of the US and its allies down to the fact of continued war. You could be forgiven for thinking that the US and its allies had deliberately prolonged the war in order to satisfy some ingrained imperial urge! This will not do at all! As Comrade Lib well knows, the only reason for the present war in question is open and deliberate North Korean aggression against its southern neighbour in 1950, without warning or provocation. To those who try to justify this atrocity, many attempt to point out that the South Korean government at the time was largely a construct imposed by Western powers in the wake of the Second World War. This was also true, as was the fact that the government of the North was a construct imposed by Stalinist totalitarianism. Only a very selective and deliberately misreading interpretation of the facts at the time could conclude the Korean War was due to anything other than North Korean aggression. Thus if the protest of the modern Left is that the Korean War should be ended (or preferably, should not have begun in the first place), we know exactly where they should direct their objection. Anybody who preens about American ‘imperialism’ in this case should recall where the problem started to begin with, and the DPRK has no other actor beyond itself to blame for its present wartime conundrum, it was not a passive state actor forced into self-defence, it was the deliberate and unprovoked aggressor. The Left should not put itself in the position of defending regimes such as this.
Wrong footing himself at every turn, the article by Comrade Libertasnia then proceeds to blame the United States for forcing North Korean acceptance of the armistice! Well, what was the alternative? After three years of war, in which millions were dead, not just on the North Korean side, and a conflict which had drawn in neighbouring China and still had a possibility of drawing in the Soviets and triggering a more general escalation, an armistice was the only possible resolution in the short term. This selective shifting between wishing that the Korean War had ended, and then criticising the US for forcing at the very least a ceasefire to the devastating conflict is again, selective, and indicative of a deeply disturbing tendency to shift the blame for the continuing crisis on the Korean Peninsula anywhere other than where it belongs, firmly on the shoulders of the DPRK and its leadership.
The final objection to this blistering farrago of nonsense is its final paragraphs, with Comrade Libertasnia accusing the United States of taking half the land on the Korean Peninsula and declaring the DPRK to be the ‘legal’ government, in what is perhaps the most reprehensible silliness of the entire article. He forgets (at least I hope it’s only forgetfulness) that the present borders of the DPRK and ROK were fixed by formal agreement signed between occupying US and Soviet forces in 1945, who, after destroying the forces of Japanese Fascism, agreed to establish separate (although only intended to be temporary), client states. The United States took no land from the North Korean state, and no territory presently belongs to the South Korean government that it did not already possess according to the initial terms of that particular agreement between occupying US and Soviet authorities. One party, namely the DPRK, took it upon itself to attempt to seize the southern half of the peninsula, no elections were held, and no attempts for negotiations were made. To compare this to the near-genocidal actions of US barbarism in Indochina (where the Vietnamese nationalists under Ho Chi Minh very explicitly attempted to both negotiate and participate in elections) is perverse. The circumstances are not at all similar to one another. The historical atrocities he points out performed by US troops are indeed true, and not as widely known as they should be. However, the fact is that South Korea today is a thriving multi-party democracy, which has a formal agreement with the United States permitting US troops in its territory. This agreement can be revoked by South Korea’s lawfully elected Parliament at any time. To blame US imperialism for retaining this posture given the ongoing war in the Korean Peninsula (a war, which, I again remind you, was entirely down to the DPRK’s provocations) is absurd and nonsensical. To defend the present North Korean state on the basis of atrocities committed almost half a century ago is absurd, given the extraordinary political liberalisation that has been undertaken in South Korea since then (not always with US support either). This is rank DPRK apologism at its most cynical and simultaneously silly, and Libertasnia’s apparent hand waving indicating it does not matter whether we like the DPRK’s government or not is unconvincing. If part of the argument against US Imperialism can be made on the grounds of atrocities conducted half a century ago, then, applying the exact same standards, the case against the very explicit imperialism of the DPRK can be made on the grounds of what it’s still doing in its own borders, every day, and on a far greater scale. Libertasnia’s ‘argument’ can only be made if one applies different standards to different parties, and selectively distorts and misrepresents the historical context (or ignores it entirely).
No one more than I wishes an end to the present state of war on the Korean Peninsula, nobody gets more irritated then I at the persistent state of media hysteria and absurdity that follows every North Korean provocation in the Western press. That still does not lead me to cease worrying at the detestable tendency of some on the Left to defend any regime, no matter how vile or deservedly overthrown, on the grounds of anti-imperialism. To read this apologist nonsense, one has to believe the DPRK is the innocent victim minding its own business and attempting to hurt nobody, while the US military presence is part of a detestable attempt to bully the hermit kingdom into submission. Only somebody very ignorant of the historicity of the Korean Peninsula and its present conflict, or very manipulative and loose with the facts, can possibly claim this to be the case. The DPRK is not an innocent victim of Imperialism, it is very explicitly an imperialist power attempting to conquer the territory of a now democratic government and people, who freely select their own leaders. Even with the oppressive context of the Cold War now over, the DPRK clings to this masturbatory fantasy. The Left should strive to do better than behaving as useful idiots for a vile totalitarian regime entirely run by the hereditary succession of one bloated crime family. Even if the domestic policies of the DPRK resembled anything remotely Leftist (which they do not), they would still have no grounds for being defended because of anti-imperialism.

- Comrade Cedoria

---

---

---

---

Comrade Quotes

"We are free, truly free, when we don't need to rent our arms to anybody in order to be able to lift a piece of bread to our mouths." Ricardo Flores Magon

---

---

I doubt this article will be very popular in our region, but I have decided to write it anyway. Over the last couple of days, I have scoured sites that in South Korea would be illegal, namely North Korean government websites. Unfortunately only one of these sites was in fully-translated English and sometimes Google translate came out with some pretty nonsensical translations. (Author's note: After writing this article and reviewing the sites for sources, I found out that my main source that gave WPK statements did in fact have an english button, don't mind my complaining. Honestly don't know I didn't pick out the ONE english word in a sea of language I don't know.) Despites these setbacks, I have to decided to move forward with my article on the situation with North Korea and American imperialism. Of course, this is something that divides the left (but doesn't everything?) along the lines of what I've found to usually LibSocs to Marxist-Leninists (Though there are many exceptions). Many LibSocs claim to support "neither North Korea nor American imperialism" but to not oppose America's imperialism is to go along with it.

But I suppose I'm getting ahead of myself. What exactly is the North Korean situation? To me, it's whether or not one allows themselves to swept up in western propaganda and begin to be silent against imperialism against the DPRK. Ever since America lost the Korean War, America has harassed the DPRK relentlessly with sanctions and military exercises on their border. Why is this done? Because America is demonstrating to the DPRK that one day Imperialism will come back, and it will strike harder than last time. If this was done on America's borders, people wouldn't just shrug it off as some kind of military training as most people in America do, but they would take it as a plan for invasion and reason for threatening said country, which is exactly what it is, especially considering the Korean War never legally ended. Instead, the DPRK was threatened with the bombs that had already killed off 30% of it's population to sign the armistice or be wiped off the face of the planet.

So if the war never ended and the US is constantly simulating an invasion on the DPRK's borders, what's stopping them? This is a simple answer: North Korea's own weapons. If the US did not fear the fact that North Korea might have nuclear weapons, they would have taken them out long ago, especially considering the policy of the Bush Administration's State Department on North Korea was, according to John Bolton, "no North Korea". Yet, if the US is simulating these invasions and the United State's threats to the DPRK increase in their viciousness every day, why, if the US media is to be believed about North Korea's constant threats to destroy America and its people, hasn't the DPRK gone and done it yet? Because they have no intention of doing so.

“The United States must be extremely cautious in the present situation and should specifically refrain from any military action that could lead to a conflict”
-Spokesperson of Strategic Army in the Korean People's Army - 2017.08.09

Sounds spooky, huh? What a threat from the "North Korean threat" as the US media calls it. When one researches the actual statements of the DPRK, you'll find that they have absolutely no intentions of a preemptive strike and instead have said time and time again that they will only use them in the case they are attacked first. The North Koreans are not the threat, the United States' Imperialism is. If the United States was constantly threatened and mock invaded, the US would have already gone to war and used its military's power, a power the DPRK does not have. The only thing the DPRK has that could ever deter a US invasion would be the very nuclear weapons they
don't want to use.

The DPRK has seen what the United States' imperialism tried to do the Vietnam, what they did to Chile, what they did to Libya, what they did to Iraq, what they tried to do to Syria, what they're currently planning to do to Venezuela, and, most importantly, what they did to the DPRK itself, that is murdering 30% of it's population in war the US caused by taking half of the legal Provisional Government's land and installing the dictatorship that killed thousands of Communists and even non-Communists in the Bodo League Massacres that was then blamed on the leftist Provisional Government.

One does not have to agree with North Korea's government or how the government runs things or what their ideology is, but to deny that the United States pushing and threatening and internationally bullying North Korea is Imperialism that needs to be stopped and a diplomatic solution without invasions acted out every single year found.
-Comrade Lib

---

After the ACLU decided it would back the "rights" of white nationalists and neo-nazis to protest the removal of a Confederate statue and promote their ideology, a counter-protest was set up by anti-racist protesters protesting the protest. Of course, despite claiming they wished to assemble peacefully in protest of the removal, the far-right cannot handle any criticism of its toxic ideas and a right-wing monster named James Fields decided to run into the counter-protestors, an action which took the life of Industrial Workers of the World member Heather Heyer and injured several others.

We should not waver in this time of great tragedy and instead we should see Heyer as what she was, someone who died fighting fascist, racist, and white nationalist ideas. This tragedy should only strengthen our resolve to stamp out and destroy such hateful and deadly movements with all of our energy. If the Alt-Right and Fascists are allowed to get away with this murder, they will know they can get away with anything anywhere, targeting any and all who dare to speak out against their disgusting ideas.
-Comrade Lib

---

---

---

---

Comrade Quotes

"Long live the liberation of the workers of all countries from the infernal chasm of war, exploitation and slavery!" - Karl Liebknecht

---

---

July has been a busy month for the 6th General Assembly, both within ministries and in the legislature. To begin, the legislative feats of this term have included the significant majority voting to pass my three bills, the Equal Vote Act, Legislature Reduction Act and Foreign Communication Act. These will all be positive changes to ensure we have a fairer and more effective government.

Minister of Archives Libertasnia has overseen the continuation of our regional newspaper, The Red Star, with the support of myself in making a magazine version and a regional website page to display it on.
Minister of Defence The Final Horseman has also overseen another project, the formal establishment of the Leftist Defence Force. As a team, we officially opened the military with a new dispatch and structure, created a formal Discord chat for operations, made a dedicated private regional website page and completed the training manual. Currently, the aim is to grow our numbers so that we can become a formidable force with the good foundations laid early in this term.
Minister of Foreign Affairs Sky Meople has completed a full evaluation of our embassy program, finalising the official embassy criteria earlier in the term and putting this into action with the closure of a number of embassies and the opening of one that still stands with The United Communist Republics.
Minister of Immigration and Customs South Miruva speedily updated our welcome telegram at the commencement of this term and has now completely taken hold of the auto-recruitment program. This has had amazing effects on our population numbers, climbing more than 30 nations in a very short time period. They are to be especially commended for these great results.
And that's my wrap on July 2017. I anticipate more success in the next two months of this term and if you have any ideas for practically anything, don't hesitate to contact me and I'll give you my thoughts. Protectors of the revolution, forevermore!

- Secretary Llorens

---

---

Comrade and Defense Minister The Final Horseman has given me a new set of posters to put in this week Red Star edition.

---

---

---

---

---

Comrade Quotes
"It is capitalism that constantly suppresses and crushes people, again and again, in order to live. The need of the Workers State, on the other hand, is to eliminate every form of oppression." J. Posadas

---

---

If you have visited the Discord lately, you would know I have been dabbling in the works of J. Posadas, a Trotskyite theorist known mostly for his views on Ufology and atomic war. However, when one looks past these beliefs, one finds that Posadas was probably more interested in space and technology. He wrote the essay “On the Socialist Future of Humanity”, in which he theorizes about what I can only describe as cybernetic implants that will allow the human voice to be “mightier than the mightiest thunderclap,” and that “the day will come when the human voice will have fulfilled a role comparable to that of Karl Marx.”

When I first read these words, I at first could not look past his outrageous theories about socialist space aliens and atomic war, but when one ignores such theories, you come to find in Posadas a hope for humanity's future and a certain kind of “Socialist Transhumanism”. Posadas suggests that, at some point in our technological socialist future, the human life span could be near eternal. And, should technology keep progressing at the rate it is today and we are able to throw off the shackles of capitalism, I believe it's entirely possible (probably not in my or your lifespan, or even our great-grandchildren's).

Posadas, in the very same essay, also speaks of a superior system to Marxism, socialism, and communism. The seventh stage of historical development, I believe it would be called in Marxist theory. According to Posadas, “The main drive of private property is to limit the scope, the development and the dynamic of intelligence. The interest of private property causes it to counteract and cripple anything that develops ideas.” However, under a socialist system or the future system, Posadas says will take its place, where property in held in common, humanity would be free of the profit and money influence into technological and everyone would benefit.

So, despite all of his flaws, Posadas makes a clear and reasonable argument for a technological and possibly transhumanist socialist future. I do not think the question is whether or not this vision will come true, but when. Technology is still progressing further than before under capitalism, even today. Think of the technology we could invent and utilize under a socialist vision.

“Socialism is all to the reverse. The elementary condition of socialism is to make every scrap of objective knowledge serve the common good, the good of humanity. Socialism does not serve the socialists and the communists, it serves humanity.” - J. Posadas
- Comrade Lib

---

---

“Another essential point to discuss is: ‘What are we going to do about the monarchy?’ The Labour left keeps silent about the monarchy and the constitutional position of the country. It realizes that challenges at this level can only precipitate historic change. No one in the Labour Party takes any position about monarchy or republic. The idea of a republic is rather moderate, but for Britain, it is quite a leap.” - J. Posadas, The Task for the Left in the Labour Party

To continue with topics inspired by Posadas, the British monarchy is a strange phenomenon. We here in America cannot fathom nor comprehend how people, including the Left, could prefer a monarchy over a Republic. Some say the monarchy keeps the United Kingdom (or Republics as it should be) united or something or another but look at the US. Sure, we've got fighting between the state and federal governments, no NHS, no nationalized industries, or really any progressive governmental institute like Britain, but at least we don't have some Queen.

Even Jeremy Corbyn, who has supported the idea of a British Republic, refuses to approach the idea, and in a 2017 TV Debate, said abolishing the monarchy is “not on anybody's agenda, it's certainly not on my agenda”. According to Posadas, if the British are to ever experience revolutionary change, or even hope to become a true socialist nation, it must happen through a republic. This view I am inclined to agree with.

Tony Benn, a prominent figure in Labour left during the rise of New Labour, even introduced a bill into Parliament in 1991 which called for the establishment of a secular presidential republic, which would've abolished the monarchy. Unfortunately, the bill never achieved a second reading. In my humble and Posadist opinion, if the Brits want any kind of progressive change towards actual socialism, they're gonna have to go Jacobin on the royal family.

"Britain did not lose its colonies. The masses of the world threw it out - Britain and its monarchy. Monarchy must be brought down and a Socialist Britain made." - J. Posadas, THE CRISIS OF BRITISH CAPITALISM, THE SOVIET UNION, AND THE LEFT IN THE LABOUR PARTY
- Comrade Lib

---

If you've read the rest of this edition of the Red Star, you may be wondering where in the world I'm going with these articles on Posadas. Well, here it is, a defense of the Posadist ideas and Posadas himself. But to start, who was Posadas?

J, or sometimes Juan, Posadas was a pseudonym for Homero Rómulo Cristalli Frasnelli, an Argentine trade union leader, and Trotskyite Marxist. “In 1947, he organized the Grupo IV Internacional (GCI) and created Voz Proletaria, an Argentine paper focused on the Peronist process in the early days of nationalism. Following this, he developed Trotskyist sections in several Latin American countries and created the BLA – the Latin American Bureau of the Fourth International.” At some point during Posadas' life, he was tortured by Argentinian authorities for his beliefs, and many believe this is one of the reasons he developed the stranger and more 'out there' (quite literally, eh?) ideas that he did.

Posadas did not limit himself to simply applying the Marxist analysis to the political situations of the time. He also wrote about technology, humanity's possible future in space, harmony with nature's animals, and what I can only describe as the prospect of cybernetic implants. So, when the Fourth International Posadist website lists the various fields that Posadas contributed to, they're not just glorifying him.

Now that you know about Posadas the man, move on to Posadism the idea. Many claim that Posadism shows a want for atomic war and contact with aliens. However, I believe this to be false. There is only one text I found in my research on Posadas indicating he believed in Aliens and this is the best passage where he lays it out:

“Beings that may have left their homes one million years ago might be coming to study the Earth, to see how life on Earth is like. It is possible. We say ‘one million years’, but for those beings, this may be a number without importance, a normal measure. They couldn’t have the same notion of time as we do. For us, time has been, and remains, a notion that we have learnt from a society divided into classes. It was to exploit nature that our society needed to measure time. This gave rise to a division of time that has no reason to exist.”

However, Posadas only says that the existence of other life forms in possible, and that, if they were more advanced than our society to achieve space travel, he goes on to say that they must have developed a form of socialism or an advanced society to get there. Posadas wrote, or said, a lot more on the subject of atomic war, however, I do not believe he 'advocated' for it as some would have us believe.

“In human relations, it is necessary to reason and persuade. Reasoning and persuasion do not exclude the use of force. We propose the preventative war, atomic even, against imperialism. But we do not advocate it with the mind of the assailant. It is the same as when some rock obstructs the way. What is the good begging it: ‘Rock, move and let me through’? The rock must be cast aside. What we advocate about the war, we do it in the same spirit, with no sentiment of violence or of arrogance. We pose it with the sentiment of doing something necessary in history: and not for the sake of one group or the other, but for humanity’s.” - J. Posadas, The World Revolutionary Process and the Course of the Partial Regeneration in the Worker's States

While some may interpret this as advocating for atomic war, I disagree. One must first look at the political situation of the time to truly understand what Posadas meant. This speech was given on July 20th, 1975. Politicians like Ronald Reagan were advocating for tougher action against the Soviet Union, the outcome of which would only be war in Posadas' mind, and that war would have been an atomic one. I do not believe Posadas advocated for nuclear war or annihilation more than you or I do. Instead, I believe that Posadas and the Posadists saw it as inevitable at the time and believed that it would happen no matter what. If one examines history, you will find they were almost right more than a couple times.

But if what is thought as the two main tenets of Posadism has just been defeated, what really is Posadism and what did Posadas want?

If one examines Posadas' writings closer, you will find they were much more than just some space aliens and atomic war. Instead, you'll find some Trotskyite ideas, along with other unique ideas from Posadas. Posadas rejected the idea of the USSR as a degenerated workers' state and the later Trotskyite idea of bureaucratic collectivism. Instead, he referred the Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, North Korea, and the rest as simply “worker's states” and other states in a period of political upheaval that could very well have ended up as socialist as “revolutionary states”.

Posadas believed that in “worker's states”, trade unions should be given control over production and distribution so the worker's states could avoid the corrupt bureaucracy that Trotskyites were known to heavily criticize. Posadas also wrote about cybernetic implants, as I demonstrated in my last article. In short, Posadas wrote about trade unions, teaching, Palestine, the EEC and later the European Parliament, Labour and the abolition of the British monarchy, and just about any political topic that could have been prominent at the time, the guy was everywhere.

His views on the European Parliament are something I think most leftists should adopt, regardless of whether or not you like Posadas. He believed it to be a capitalist institution set up to oppose the Warsaw Pact (which it was) and that leftist would be unable to gain any substantial change through it (which, unless there's something I don't know of, they have not). Instead, leftists who were elected to the EU Parliament should instead use it as a forum to promote their own ideas and support local change and self-determination.

In short, I think Posadas is unjustly ridiculed and made fun of throughout the leftist community undeservedly. He contributed heavily to the idea of space socialism and transhumanism, which I believe is a very interesting and ignored topic that should be further discussed by today's leftist circles.
-Comrade Lib

---

One of the more contentious issues the 6th General Assembly of our great region has been attending to these past couple of weeks has been the issue of political parties. For a bit of background on this issue, TLA began as a region with a multi-party system, and an electoral system that awarded ‘seats’ to political parties in the General Assembly per number of votes won. When this system degraded, due to both lack of activity and the fact that it was cumbersome, our current Secretary Llorens was among the first to support its abolition into the single-member electoral system we now use today.
Having some experience of political parties in DSU, I was initially opposed to their formation even then. I lost that battle, and the former Democratic Socialist Union did have a party system until its demise. When it was merged to form TLA, that system partially carried over into this new region. After a while, the unwieldiness and difficulty in generating activity hampered the operation of the party system effectively.

Having now experienced the party system’s ineffectiveness, I am more strongly opposed to its re-implementation than ever before. With all due respect to my long-standing friend and comrade Atealia, this has been a persistent point of disagreement between us.

Aside from the obvious issues pointed out above, I would like to elaborate further on some other reasons why I am opposed to the party system, in the hope the people of TLA consider my views and the reasoning behind them in their calculations about which side of this issue is in the right.

Firstly, a party system encourages members to group together around a common set of values and interests. On the surface, this is a good idea, however, in TLA we already group around a common set of REGIONAL ideas and values, namely the twin planks of democracy and socialism, or democratic leftism, as I sometimes call it. Political parties are unlikely to do much more than formulate minor points of distinction about what they mean by this, and it is completely unnecessary for members to have to chain themselves to a political party to get into a government position to articulate a view on something that should be changed. Why force people into parties to advocate change in government practice? Surely, we trust the good people of this region enough to present their ideas individually, and have them refined and discussed by other thinking individuals? The essence of the party system will strangle the base of our democracy, the ability of any member to have a say in potentially influencing our laws.

Secondly, I would submit a party based system is a more undemocratic electoral system. Individuals who wished to run for government in the past MUST belong to a political party, and most political parties were not considered eligible without at least five members. Again, if a particular person has a good idea for change in government, why should he be forced into membership of a party to run for election to implement that idea? Furthermore, what if an individual with a good idea is prevented from introducing the idea only by the fact that he can’t get a party with more than five, or three, or whatever other number of members we would hypothetically decide a party needed to have? Why should something as arbitrary as membership of a party dictate whether individuals can or cannot have a chance at election? At present, any member who demonstrates competence, or enthusiasm and runs for office has a good chance of winning, and they stand for election on their own merits, giving the electorate a clear view of their reasons and potential credentials. A party system obscures and blurs the credentials of members by giving people additional weight or credibility simply based on a party logo or name.

Third and final point. The party system encourages its members to submit themselves to the ideas of the party. An individual with a good idea that may not accord with party practice or policy will be constrained from suggesting or advocating this idea in the event of a party system being restored in this region. This region expects its government members to be loyal to this region alone. Introducing a party system adds a set of dual loyalties, to both party and to region. Party politics discourages its participants from thinking outside the box the party puts them in (or preferably, thinking at all), and works to arbitrarily prevent certain innovations or reforms that may benefit the region and its functioning simply because the party in question may not agree with its functioning. Again, our region has a right to expect its government ministers use their brains, and make use of their formidable cognitive capacities to endeavour to improve this region. There is no possibility that a party system would fulfil this purpose better than our current single-member electoral system, and considerable possibility for it to worsen it. Again, why force government members to chain themselves to a central party orthodoxy just to participate in politics? Is it not the case that this region should value ability and competence above all other factors such as tribalist partisan loyalties?

While my principal objections to the party system are its practical utility (which I have already made the case for on the RMB, I felt it was important to articulate the reasons of political principle and ideology that makes me not favour this proposition as well. I urge all government members and citizens of this region to reject the ideological group-think that the party system would impose upon the region and its members, and continue to allow an electoral system that encourages free exchange of ideas, innovation, creativity, and rewards members for positive and radical change that comes from outside the box and improves the region. Nothing that any of the advocates of a party system has yet said has given us any cause to believe a party system would serve these purposes as effectively as our present electoral system.
- Comrade Cedoria

---

---

---

---

---

---

Comrade Quotes

"The issue is Socialism versus Capitalism. I am for Socialism because I am for humanity. We have been cursed with the reign of gold long enough. Money constitutes no proper basis of civilization. The time has come to regenerate society — we are on the eve of universal change." - Eugene V. Debs

---

---

Author's Note: The title was Secretary Llorens request and I'll appease the little guy, no matter how bad the pun. - Lib
We here at the 6th General Assembly have just been elected! Llorens, who ran unopposed and faced a confidence vote, was elected 23-2. The Minister of Archives had two candidates, Libertasnia (Dat's me) and Sky Meople. Libertasnia (Dat's me) was elected 18-7.
South Miruva ran for Minister of Immigration and Customs unopposed and was elected 25-0. In Justice Election, Facemus was elected with 8 votes, Proletar was elected with 9 votes, and Rathfarnham was elected with 8 votes. Nottinhaps and Obiristan were eliminated in the first round but I hope they can find a future place in either TLA's government or military. In the Prime Minister election, Socialist National Kazakhstan ran unopposed and faced a confidence vote. His candidacy was opposed by former Secretaries Atealia and Cedoria and current Secretary Llorens. In the first ever instance, he lost the confidence vote 19-6. There will be a by-election held to determine the next Prime Minister. Sky Meople has been appointed by Secretary Llorens as Minister of Foreign Affairs and The Final Horseman was re-appointed as Minister of Defence. I hope our government can be more effective than the last and maybe NOT have a crisis or anything.

---

---

As we all know, the British elections have come to end, with May keeping her Prime Ministership and being forced to enter into a confidence and supply coalition with the Democratic Unionist Party, the main Conservative and Unionist party in Northern Ireland. This has sparked Gerry Adams, the leader of Sinn Fein, to say that May “was in breach of the Good Friday agreement”.

As the Tory-DUP coalition is quite fragile, the opposition totals 315 MPs to the Tory's 317 and their fragile friends the DUP's 10. The Tory-DUP alliance is one of confidence and supply, which means that the DUP is only obligated to support the government on motions of confidence and the state budget bill. On legislative bills, the DUP may favor their own policies or vote on conscience. This means that Sinn Fein's 7 seats could tip the balance of Parliament in favor of the opposition.

But for starters, why does Sinn Fein refuse to take their seats? Unfortunately, all MPs must swear an oath of allegiance to the reigning monarch. Sinn Fein, being a nationalist party in favor of a United Ireland, does not recognize the legitimacy of the Queen and will not swear the oath. Therefore, they cannot take their seats in Westminster. However, if Sinn Fein united in Westminster with the SNP, more people may be obligated to vote for them, considering they now had a voice in all of the UK.

So, should SF take their seats? My opinion: No. Should Sinn Fein take their seats, it would destroy the entire belief, Irish Nationalism, that the party stands on and would probably de-legitimize them in the eyes of their voters. While SF might be able to take their fight nationally through Westminster, I can say with certainty that they would have much more to lose.

- Comrade Lib

---

---

Seems like my dream of a French Parliament controlled by Melenchon has come to a sad but very expected end. President Macron's party, EN MARCHE!, gained an absolute smashing majority in the National Assembly, with 350 seats. Le Pen and her fascist friends, unfortunately, gained 6 more seats, with a scary 8 whole seats. However, the far-right has been beaten by the far-left, as the Communist Party gained 3 seats and Melenchon's “La France insoumise” gained 17 seats. The “Socialist” Party, which had 331 seats in National Assembly, lost 287 seats, for a grand total of 44 seats left.

In my opinion, it's only a matter of time before the Socialist Party simply disbands and their voters disperse to the other centre and left parties, probably going to En Marche, as they're both increasingly centre parties and the SP is increasingly irrelevant and disliked by the French population. This is only the first of many losses for the Socialists.

It was quite surprising to me that En Marche gained many seats at all as whilst the President IS a member of the party, it was still fairly new. But I suppose that's the cost of being American, it's strange to see new parties be successful. However, what will EM's domination of the French Parliament mean for France itself?

I think we'll be seeing France take a much more neoliberal turn. They may still accept refugees and Macron may pretend he's opposed to Trump but they're all capitalists and when it comes down to it they're all the same: opposed to the real interests of the working class. France may see the pushing through of the pro-capitalist economic reforms the Socialist Party attempted to push through when Macron was Economic Minister for François Hollande. Whether or not we'll see the same amount of protest that we did under Hollande or whether or not these reforms will be enacted remains to be seen.

Then again, I'm an American teenager observing a country that's literally an ocean away and probably have no idea about anything that's actually going on in the French political system. I suppose the world should simply be thankful that the French came to their senses and didn't elect Le Pen.

- Comrade Lib