ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Is a war from the Baltic to the Black Sea impossible?
Lots of things are “possible”. For instance, it is not logically impossible that Russia hands back Crimea to the Ukraine. A more meaningful question is what is likely or probable.
If Russia attacked a NATO country that is what would happen but the likelihood of Russia doing that is as near to zero as you can get.
Biden reiterated that under no circumstances would he send US troops to Ukraine, even to rescue Americans in case of a Russian invasion. “That’s a world war. When Americans and Russians start shooting one another, we’re in a very different world,” he said.
I interpret that to mean that, in the event of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, the US would not react militarily and that Biden and his generals want to avoid a conventional war with Russia let alone a nuclear one.
So, once again, though a nuclear war is not logically impossible, the likelihood of one happening is virtually zero.
The most likely outcome is a diplomatic solution. So, if we want to speculate, we should speculate on what that might be.
Unlike the ICC and the CWO we are not committed to the view that there must be another, inevitably nuclear, world war. There is nothing in the nature of capitalism that says there has to be. That capitalism breeds local wars (often by proxies of the “great powers”) and obliges states to arm themselves with the most destructive weapons they can afford (so as to avoid going into the conference chamber naked) is sufficient condemnation of capitalism.
Here are the details of the meeting to be addressed by Corbyn that the Times editorial refers to.
It’s strange title for them since the only side to have threatened war is Russia, with the Western powers saying would not respond militarily to a Russian invasion. But, who knows, perhaps their message is aimed at Putin too.
A reminder that the Labour Party is right behind Boris Johnson in supporting NATO expansion into Ukraine. Today’s Times even calls Starmer a “NATO hawk” and supports him in this.
But this is what you have to do if you want to be considered fit to be the CEO of UK Capitalism plc.
Today’s Times says that the person who shouted about “what about the working man”.
“One man approaching Starmer was Eillism Coleshill, a former Tory councillor who is co-editor-in-chief of the anti-lockdown YouTube channel Resistance GB, which made a recording of the incident. Coleshill, who was suspended from the party making racist remarks, shouted at Starmer : ‘Why aren’t you standing up for our constitution? Why aren’t you standing up for Labour, for the working-class man?”
Doesn’t sound like a Corbynista, at least not a Jeremy one.
Sorry we can’t help. We are not “Marxist-Leninists”. In fact, as far as we are concerned, that’s a contradiction in terms as Marxism and Leninist are not the same. Leninist was the ideology of the ruling class in the old USSR which was state capitalist not socialist. It is still the ideology of various movements in parts of the world to establish a state capitalist regime. Marxism is quite different and stands for “the emancipation of all human beings irrespective without distinction of dec or race.”
This passage from that Washington Post article, referring to the Ukrainian President Zeletsky, was interesting, even revealing:
“He has projected an air of calm, denouncing what he and his advisers have characterized as a geopolitical fight between Russia and the West that has little to do with Ukraine itself.”
He seems to know what’s going on.
Thanks. There could be something in it as this is being spread by the Labour left and not just Johnson and the far-right.
According to this when the mob was shouting “traitor” they meant “traitor to the working class”.
Also:
“Traitor to the working calss
Men could be heard bellowing “traitor to the working class” before police stepped in to rescue Starmer and walked him to the safety of a police car.”And here’s Ken Loach on the subject.
Labour Heartlands seem to be a leftwing Corbynista blog? I think they are still in the Labour Party. Can anyone confirm this?
When Johnson smeared Starmer in the House of Commons he said that Starmer had prosecuted journalists but not Jimmy Saville. One newspaper report of the incident yesterday when a jeering mob surrounded Starmer said that there were shouts of “Assange”. Does anybody know if, when he was Director of Public Prosecutions, Starmer prosecuted Assange? Is that what Johnson was referring to?
You seem to be making as much fuss about the small loony wing of the Republicans as they make about the “ineffective” progressive wing of the Democrats. Both parties are employing scare tactics to corral voters.
I am not sure that the midterm elections will settle the matter of how effective the Republican extremists will be. These days, as has been noted, people “vote principally to keep people they dislike out of power”. So, in the US, many of the low percentage of people who do vote would be voting Democrat to keep the Republicans out and Republican to keep the Democrats out.
If the Democrats lose ground, the question will be why? I don’t think this could be interpreted as a vote for the extremists in the Republican Party but as a vote to punish the Democrats.
Is this true?
“Brighton and Hove City Council has begun to educate governors, heads, staff, parents and even pupils based on their race. White children will be taught that they are ‘privileged’ while non-white children will be taught that they are victims of their white classmates. This warped ideology is known as ‘Critical Race Theory’ (CRT).”
Or will there be a group with an ace to grind behind this petition?
It looks as if wiser counsels are beginning to prevail:
“French President Emmanuel Macron has said he thinks a deal to avoid full scale war in Ukraine is possible and that it is legitimate for Russia to raise its own security concerns.
Before talks in Moscow with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday, he called for a “new balance” to protect European states and appease Russia.”“However, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba appeared to play down the threat of an imminent invasion, tweeting on Sunday: “Do not believe the apocalyptic predictions. Different capitals have different scenarios, but Ukraine is ready for any development.”
The electoral system is the US has always been flawed, even corrupt, from a democratic standpoint, with gerrymandering, partisan election officials, problems with voter registration, siting of polling stations, etc. I don’t know if it is getting worse or if it is this applies across the whole country. Part of the problem is that the two main parties are electoral machines concerned with winning at all costs.
I don’t think the Republicans are out to destroy the electoral system, just to play it in their favour. That’s not democratic but it’s not the same thing as destroying political democracy.
Obviously socialists are concerned about political democracy. We want it to exist as a means for a socialist majority to win power and effect the revolution from capitalism to socialism more or less peacefully. We are also concerned that formal democratic procedures should be supported by a democratic culture.
If political democracy is under threat naturally we protest and always have done but what else can we do?
The policy of forming a “united front” with others who are not socialists but who favour political democracy doesn’t work and doesn’t advance our cause of socialism (which is why we exist). So we can’t do that, even less vote for them or tell others to, as Chomsky, Kliman and others advocate. The most we could do without compromising our socialist integrity would be to vote for or against some measure if it was put to a referendum.
The “united front with non-socialists” policy doesn’t work because it involves support for capitalism which creates the problems which lead some to blame democracy for them.
For instance at a lesser level, if the Republicans make gains in November this will be because some who voted for the Democrats two years ago either don’t vote or change to voting for the Republicans. Why would they do that? Because, I suggest, the Democrats have failed to solve the problems they face.
Ok I am not on the spot but I don’t think the admittedly flawed political democracy in the US is under threat of destruction. There is a fringe of raving rightists who want to destroy it but I don’t think that either the Republican leaders or the vast majority of those who vote for them want this. So we are talking hypotheticals here.
