US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
Commentary :: Organizing
We're All Black Now!
09 Jan 2005
Now that Electronic Jim-Crow has officially stolen the 2004 presidential and congressional elections it can be officially declared that the South has finally won the civil war. It took a 150 years for the proslavery, segregationist, white supremacist movement in America to accomplish the task but they finally did it.
We're All Black Now!

By Lloyd & Namiko Hart

Now that Electronic Jim-Crow has officially stolen the 2004 presidential and congressional elections it can be officially declared that the South has finally won the civil war. It took a 150 years for the proslavery, segregationist, white supremacist movement in America to accomplish the task but they finally did it.

With the entrenchment of the Right wing sponsored unverifiable touchscreen electronic voting system as well as with the Trident, Diebold and E&SS controlled optical scanner and punch card electronic counting systems primarily in the southern states, but not exluding Ohio, the Dixiecrats' that split from the Democratic Party when the Democratic Party went pro civil rights and that took over the Republican Party can finally claim victory in the civil war that really began in the American Revolution when rich propertied slave owning white men chose not to include the freeing of the black slave and not granting the vote to women in that so-called revolution.

Yes, we're all black now. Disenfranchised from the electoral process in America and soon to be purged from public life altogether. The great irony is that rich propertied white men in the U.S. Senate got to vote on January 6, 2005 to not only hand the South and it's white supremacist leadership the victory in the civil war but also provide them with a well organized fascist dictatorship as the crowning achievement of the complete and total subversion of American democracy.

America has come full circle from resisting to finally accepting the madness of King George. When the war criminal George Walker Bush is sworn in on January 20th. 2005 American democracy will be replaced by lineage despotism.

In the coming years we will see the slow but sure process, a kind of final solution purge of our entire society of any enlightened thinking whatsoever. And of course the first target the right wing has chosen is Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and her fund-raising apparatus. Not that I'm a great Senator Clinton fan but it is an important object lesson that the right wing view centrists like Clinton as a threat to preventing them from for instance, raiding the Social Security Trust Fund to bailout the drunken cocaine snorting capitalists on Wall Street and in conglomerate banking that have squandered away a perfectly healthy technological revolution in the stock market in exchange for total petroleum supremacy worldwide. In other words Congress by indictment.

I do have hand it to those Democrats (Even though it was Democrats lack of resistance to the right wing that put us where we are today) who did stand up and object to the electoral votes from Ohio in the congress for the simple fact that they provided very useful videotape to uncensored media outlets outside the United States that now get to back up all of their U.S. election theft investigative reporting with actual elected leaders in the Senate and House documenting how the election was stolen by George W. Bush and the criminal regime of which he is the titular though lead poisoned head. The international community are important to our struggle here in the U.S. for they provide important needed resistance to the "Crazy Nuclear Armed American" image the right wing love to put out there.

"How can America promote democracy abroad when it has none on it's own shores!"

The way forward.

When you have no electoral option left to you the only way forward for enlightened thinking Americans is massive non-violent civil disobedience in absolute noncooperation with the destruction of the social and environmental contract that was under construction by the American public however meager it was.

The American public must go out into the public streets, sit down, block traffic and chant "No elections? No Peace!"

The American public must also join the Peace Movement in America and around the world in non-violent civil disobedience demanding an end to the very reason the elections were stolen in the first place, WAR.

In doing so the American public can repair the damage that 200 years of Yankee imperialism has caused to the world and begin the process of bringing the social and environmental ideals of the American middle-class to the rest of the world through negotiation, discussion, compassion and the universal love that binds all of humanity to all life on this planet.

Yes we're all black now!
See also:

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Re: We're All Black Now!
09 Jan 2005
This article is revoltingly moronic. This kind of mindless liberal hyperbole is totally lacking in relevance and political content. When you go around saying bullshit about a "fascist dictatorship" it A. dilutes the power of condemnation of ACTUAL fascism and B. distracts from the fact that the problem with the US system is that it's CAPITALIST, which has been the problem the whole damn time and which the reelection of George Bush has done nothing to alter.

On top of that the writer has the startling lack of vision to call for "massive non-violent civil disobedience," as if this was some sort of visionary proclamation. If the liberals don't give up on that tired nonsense soon, some of us just might lose our minds. (Not to say that non-violent civil disobedience is always entirely useless, but to imply that it is the great answer to the problems of the American people is painfully lacking in imagination, to say the least.)

But, predictably, the final paragraph reveals the most important intentions of this seemingly misguided author: "bringing the social and environmental ideals of the AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS to the rest of the world."

I rest my case.
Re: We're All Black Now!
09 Jan 2005
As far as I can tell the American middle class believe in clean air, clean water,clean soil, organic food, affirmative action and equality in voting rights by majority.

The problem with America is that the corporate bosses do not respect the very laws that regulate them. Do not respect human rights and now have joined in on directly undermining the very elections that would riegn in their corruption.

The only possible means of riegning in lawless capitalism is democracy against the back drop of a human and environmental rights constitution.

The rule of democratically produced law is the only way to create equality, social and environmental justice.

Now thats revolutionary.

If your not for an open democracy then your a counter revolutionary.
Re: We're All Black Now!
09 Jan 2005
"As far as I can tell the American middle class believe in clean air, clean water,clean soil, organic food, affirmative action and equality in voting rights by majority."

You have some serious tunnel-vision issues. Last time I checked, the American middle class, like any middle class, believes in supporting the exploitation of the working class and of the earth so as to maintain their comfortable economic position.

"The problem with America is that the corporate bosses do not respect the very laws that regulate them."

No, the problem is that in a capitalist 'democracy', the only people with the power to make laws that would regulate corporations are the same people that profit off of the exploitation perpetrated by those corporations.

"Do not respect human rights and now have joined in on directly undermining the very elections that would reign in their corruption."

What on earth makes you think that any President, given that being President by its very nature means being a member of the ruling class, would want to reign the very profitable corruption of the ruling class?

"The only possible means of riegning in lawless capitalism is democracy against the back drop of a human and environmental rights constitution."

No, the only possible means of reigning in "lawless" capitalism is overthrowing it. You can't "reign in" capitalism by participating in the system that keeps it in place.

"The rule of democratically produced law is the only way to create equality, social and environmental justice."

Laws have never had and will never have the ability to create equality or justice of any kind. The only way to create equality and justice is by destroying the system that creates inequality (capitalism) along with the "democratic" State that will always use repression and injustice to hold it in place, and replacing it with a system whose fundamental driving power is not profit but mutual aid.

Now that's revolutionary.
Re: We're All Black Now!
09 Jan 2005
The word democracy means power to the people. If the people do not exercise their democratic rights on a daily basis they will continue to lose those rights.

Small groups of men who maintain power by subverting the democratic rights of the citizens of this planet will indeed lose their power but only through the public exercising their democracy.

And if I'm hearing you write Max the need to go back and read some more marx. You will find out that he too believed in democracy as the only solution for the proper and equal distribution of the limited wealth this planet offers us.

A few of questions Max. if you're advocating overthrow of the government of the United States and its capitalist institutions have you got critical mass within the American public for such a revolution?

Are you advocating state capitalism where the government controls the means of production such as a Stalinist Russia had going for it or maybe like Cuba has going on for it now allowing state sanctioned privately owned small business?

What would be the means of the distribution of wealth through the society you envision? How would you meet the needs of the people and the environment of this planet?

Why does democracy have to be capitalist?

Isn't the reason capitalists subvert democracy to their will is because they think it threatens the unbridled capitalism they believed in?
Re: We're All Black Now!
10 Jan 2005
"the fact that the problem with the US system is that it's CAPITALIST"

That's garbage. The soviet union wasn't capitalist Max, are you a stalinist? The "problem" with the United States, and all representative democracy, is that it is authoritarian. That's the problem with capitalism as well. In fact, any government/system that exerts control or self-perpetuates through the authority principle is authoritarian.

If you seriously think the only fascist are stupid bonehead punks....
Re: We're All Black Now!
10 Jan 2005
MarK: No, I'm not a Stalinist, I'm an anarchist, and I agree that the problem with capitalism is that it's authoritarian, and the same with representative democracy. (So by extension that's also the problem with the US.) All I was trying to do was point out that the problem is much more broad then George Bush, which I'm sure you would agree with. As far as the "bonehead punk" comment, I'm just tired of seeing liberals throw around the word fascist rather than use more precise language like capitalism, authoritarianism, representative democracy etc. It takes away from a person's critique when they use imprecise language. It's much more powerful to say, "the US is a capitalist representative democracy and therefore authoritarian'" than it is to say "the US is a fascist dictatorship."

Floyd: First of all, I'm not against democracy, I'm against representative democracy, which, as MarK pointed out, is by its very nature authoritarian and which only serves to uphold capitalism by concentrating political power in the hands of the ruling class. I am also against state capitalism/state communism in all its forms, and no I don't need to "go back and read some more marx." I am, however in favor of direct democracy, which is unrelated to our current system and cannot be acheived through participation in the current system. And no, capitalists at this point don't really have much interest in "subverting your democratic rights" because representative democracy has and wil most likely continue to uphold capitalism quite well.

As far as having a critical mass to overthrow the US government... no, not for tomorrow. But, not surprisingly, working for a fundamental change takes a little longer than working for useless changes like have one presidential candidate rather than the other. And finally, as I already stated, the society I "envision" is driven by mutual aid rather than profit or authority, and power and wealth are distributed equitably without. Period. It's a simple concept really.
Re: We're All Black Now!
10 Jan 2005
Max, I am also an anarchist, not a liberal and have been all my life regardless of the work I have done in democratic party in the U.S. and the New Democratic Party in Canada.

And I disagree with you that the present situation does not call for the use of the word "Fascism" to describe what the wealthy elites are doing.

They are consolidating their power by destroying even the pretense of democracy in America by directly subverting the vote.

The very same American and foreign money that funded Hitler and Musolini into power is the same money that is pushing aside reasonable American thought and replacing it with direct despotic rule through the same theft of elections process that was used to bring Hitler and Musolini to power.

The core philosophy of the base of this fascist movement which comes from the "Left Behind" series of books that have sold 65 million copies calls for a second and more complete holocaust against the Jews which also means you and me Max as we are anarchists which the fascists view as a Jewish idea. The Left Behind Books declare the Jews must convert to Christianity or die.

Once you research all the present day players in modern fascism in America and abroad in context to the invasion and occupation of Iraq to control the strategic oil supply you must come to the conclusion that you can not go to war in violation of the very international law that was created to prevent future wars of choice as a result of Hitlers war of choice. A war that has now murdered one hundred thousand innocent Iraqi civilians. You must now come to the conclusion that the use the word "fascism" is completely appropriate.

The language that you think is appropriate for right now is for describing what your alternative would be.
Re: We're All Black Now!
10 Jan 2005
I agree completely with Lloyd. Any comprehensive defenition of fascism (other than just totalitarian rule) has multiple elements. Some examples are incorporation of the state and extreme nationalism. Both of these are present here.

So why would someone think that say, the US or Israel aren't fascist? Most likely it has to do with groups like the ARA and Antifa who use the word fascist to justify beating up dumb boneheads and conservatives. By simply equating Nazi with fascism (which is dumb since the word technically refers to mussolini who wasn't even racialist) your playing into the mindset of liberal groups like the ARA, ADL, and SPLC and are inadvertantly attacking your fellow anarchists as well as furthering a distorted, zionist, context of the word.
Re: We're All Black Now!
10 Jan 2005
Oh well, given that I've had this argument dozens of times with various folks, I'm well aware that it never ends. Hopefully we can agree to disagree on the specific definition of fascism and agree on the fact that the US government is authoritarian and needs to be opposed.

My main objection to the article, however, stil stands: that it's a fundamentally liberal analysis rooted in a degree of comfort with representative democracy and capitalism. I maintain that the problem is not George Bush. The problem is the system as a whole, and it's not a problem that can be solved without revolutionary change.
Re: We're All Black Now!
11 Jan 2005
To bizarro-MarK:

(1) the Soviet Union *was* capitalist, especially by the Marxist definition of capital.

(2) the clear majority of white supremacist groups in the US (national alliance; white revolution; national socialist movement; aryan knights of the kkk; creativity movement; volksfront; etc) ARE fascist, through and through, and no amount of zionism-baiting is going to change that.

(3) Q. "So why would someone think that say, the US or Israel aren't fascist?" A. Because we understand that bourgeois democracy is completely capable of the atrocities that both of those states have committed, and don't need to rely on inaccurate vitriol to reconcile this in our minds.

(4) How is it attacking our fellow anarchists by calling Nazi boneheads, and suit-and-tie white supremacists, (especially those in groups like the abovementioned) "fascist"? Are you saying that you don't want to alienate racist anti-statists? Are you calling racist anti-statists (like groups affiliated with the Third Position line) "fellow anarchists"? I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt, but that's sure how you're coming across.
Re: We're All Black Now!
11 Jan 2005
You always seem to insist in this recurring argument MJ (since someone brings it up once a month whenever NEAntifa announces its movie) that there is a difference between bourgiese capitalism and fascism. This is odd since most defenitions of fascism have it as a form of bourgiese capitalism. It is a form that not all capitalist states manifest, but all have tendencies of fascism.

The error of differentiating too sharply between capitalism and fascism was a point well understood in the spanish civil war. Those (anarchists) who attacked the fascists as an atrocity, or a seperate entity from the capitalists, were the first to ally with the capitalists and ultimately sell out the revolution, since the interest of capitalists and their fascist "opponents" were one and the same. I qoute Durruti:

"No government fights fascism to destroy it. When the bourgeoisie sees that power is slipping out of its hands, it brings up fascism to hold onto their privileges."

As far as attacking your fellow anarchists, that was defenitely unclear. I meant to imply that by furthering definitions of fascism that serve only the ADL and Capitalists (who can then deny that they have anything to do with fascism) you only hurt other anarchists (even most anarchists) who are fighting the root of fascism, capitalism.
Re: We're All Black Now!
11 Jan 2005
Eh, I would largely agree with you. I do think it's ridiculous that people start the same argument every time NE Antifa announces its monthly movie night, and I and others in the group (and not in it) give the same tired response.

Of course I think that capitalism and fascism are related, and that ultimately to stop fascism from sprouting again and again we're gonna have to take the whole beast down. It's funny, personally I like to keep my understandings of fascism and capitalism precise BECAUSE I value the struggle against capitalism so dearly, and hold it in mind at every point when strategizing about how to block fascist movements. It's a different way of taking the same lesson from the same history.

I think it's funny that people imply, over and over again, that NE Antifa members put antifascism over all other struggles. It's a side project for ALL of us! But we're all people who think fascist movements have their own logic, which must be taken into account as a special case within the broader struggle.

The reason we call ourselves "antifa" is that we identify with the "antifa autonome" tradition in radical antifascist circles in Europe, who learned from the mistakes made during the mid-20th-century wave of classical Continental fascism, in which revolutionaries entered popular fronts and set aside the anticapitalist struggle to focus on fighting fascism as a separate entity. Autonomous antifa groups seek to remain antagonistic to capital and the state in the process of their defensive campaigns against fascism.

This is something we talk about all the time, so don't condescend to us like you're explaining it anew. Yeah. Durruti. Exactly. In this vein, we had a nice long discussion a couple months ago on Gilles Dauve's "Fascism/Antifascism," which makes the case, better than anything I've read, about the potential counterrevolutionary effects of antifascism. And our understanding of fascism is definitely multivariate, which means that not only can we recognize fascism (or latent fascism) in movements that aren't explicitly racist (or don't use racism as an organizing principle), we also recognize that some fascists consider themselves "anti-statist" and even anticapitalist.

Ultimately I think of antifascist organizing as a defensive struggle that's directly analagous to union organizing. Under capitalism, unions (and especially those that are well incorporated into the system) are themselves capitalist organizations that buy and sell the commodity labor-power in a market-determined environment. But this doesn't mean that the reforms won by workplace organizing necessarily block the path to building anticapitalist revolutionary movements. Just as it's easier to spend the time to build mutual aid (or depending on your definition "dual power") organizations, circulate struggle, etc. when you have more free time, better healthcare, and are able to afford a marginally better standard of living for yourself and your loved ones thanks to wins from a union contract, it's also easier to do those things when you don't fear random racial or gender violence in the street at night.

Neither unionism nor antifascism are in any way revolutionary by themselves, and both are a sword that can cut both ways, but the possibility of revolutionary unionism (as a set of defensive tools) exists just as the possibility fo revolutionary antifascism exists.

Anyway, I hope that makes things clearer. I'm not speaking for everyone in NE Antifa, just myself. But maybe you're one less person that'll start flogging the same dead horse every time we ask if people wanna come over and watch movies with us?