Severino Majkus

< srpanj, 2012 >
P U S Č P S N
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

Veljača 2013 (7)
Siječanj 2013 (30)
Prosinac 2012 (40)
Studeni 2012 (33)
Listopad 2012 (25)
Rujan 2012 (20)
Kolovoz 2012 (32)
Srpanj 2012 (32)
Lipanj 2012 (23)
Svibanj 2012 (23)
Travanj 2012 (16)
Ožujak 2012 (14)
Veljača 2012 (13)
Siječanj 2012 (19)
Prosinac 2011 (24)
Studeni 2011 (18)
Listopad 2011 (21)
Rujan 2011 (22)
Kolovoz 2011 (17)
Srpanj 2011 (14)
Lipanj 2011 (31)
Svibanj 2011 (27)
Travanj 2011 (28)
Ožujak 2011 (26)
Veljača 2011 (22)
Siječanj 2011 (26)
Prosinac 2010 (26)
Studeni 2010 (23)
Listopad 2010 (17)
Rujan 2010 (34)
Kolovoz 2010 (31)
Srpanj 2010 (30)
Lipanj 2010 (23)
Svibanj 2010 (28)
Travanj 2010 (20)
Ožujak 2010 (23)
Veljača 2010 (29)
Siječanj 2010 (31)
Prosinac 2009 (20)
Studeni 2009 (28)
Listopad 2009 (11)
Rujan 2009 (21)
Kolovoz 2009 (12)
Srpanj 2009 (19)
Lipanj 2009 (15)
Svibanj 2009 (20)
Travanj 2009 (33)
Ožujak 2009 (10)

Dnevnik.hr
Gol.hr
Zadovoljna.hr
OYO.hr
NovaTV.hr
DomaTV.hr
Mojamini.tv

. • Cestitka Garavom na tako sazetim, zrelim i promisljenim zapazanjima . Kangrga je jednom rekao u TV interviuvu: "Bit ce nesto od nas" Kad se davimo svakodnevno u ovom drustvenom blatu, ponekada nade i ponestaju. Ali, ako se ima na umu da smo generacije kojma su u cjelokupnoj istoriji zapale najvece zrtvenicko odricanje ali i naj veci izazovi, ako ne i privilegije,zatecenim u dosad nevidjenim orkanskim drustvenim krizama u kojima se civilizacijska epoha petmilenjsko klasnog nadmetanja, sada napokom raspada po svim svojim drustvenim savovima Gotovo da nema vise dana ni sata u kojima se ne dozivljava tektoska rasprnuca visokih detonacija, bljeskova sto zasljepljuju, vibracije koje lome sve nejake, gomilajuci psihijatrijske ustavnove, kazemate, vjesala, lomace, robije, popravne institucije, koje Nietzsche nazire kao "Popravljanje covjecanstva", upravo tamo gdje se ono nejvise lomi, iznakazuje, gdje mu se trga inskonski duh, vjeru u sebe ( Sapere aude). Samo jaci, koji se penju na vrske lutajucih santa, sad naziru sve oko sebe, taj bljestavi lom smetisnih nanosa, koji se u vlasitom dimu i odurnom zapahu tu raspadaju u zajednickoj gomili : Klasna bestijalnost, krscanske svinjarije, liberalni uljez, demokratski lopov, ideoloski demagog,,ekonomski tiranin. • Sav taj historijski nanos se napokom nasao na svojoj nagomilanoj hrpi! Navucimo maske, promatrahjuci taj trulez koji nestaje u svoj epohalni bezdan

 

Linkovi
Slikarstvo
www.pula-online.com
www.zutaminuta.com

31.07.2012., utorak


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
- 22:17 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

 


Korupcija u Hrvatskoj


Za ukinuce korupcije iz njenih  temelja nuzno je ukinuti postojeci sustav klasno nadmetanja jaceg nad slabijim ljudskim bicem. Time bi se ukinula ekonomska nejednakost, njen tutor politicka drzava, i njeni naj koruptivniji elementi: politicar, sudstvo, birokratska masinerija, policijska i vojna armada fizickih  prisila, vjerski i ideoloski parazitizam. I sve u tom smjeru dok god zemljom ne ovlada golo proizvodno civilizirano ljudsko bice kao apsolutni upravljac vlastitom sudbinom.


Drugim rijecima, nuzan je revolucionarni preokret kojim ce civilizirano drustvo uspostaviti socijalisticku republiku rada, u kojoj vise nema mjesta nekakvom tutorstvu, dusobrisnistvu, sizofrenom vodji nacije, i gdje je konacno uspostavljen tehnicka sluba u jedinu svrhu koordiniranja ekonomskim sustavom zemlje.


Time bi postali suvisli i oni vjeciti kukaoci i ronioci krokodilskih suza nad opcom nepravdom, pa bi tako i stekli svoje jednako pravo da se pridruze proizvodnim snagama.


- 15:58 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

29.07.2012., nedjelja

WHAT MEANS THIS STRIKE?


by
Daniel DeLeon


An address delivered at
the City Hall, New Bedford, Mass.,
February 11, 1898


W orkingmen and workingwomen of New Bedford:


Ye striking textile workers; and all of you others, who, though not now on strike, have been on strike before this, and will be on strike some other time:


It has been the habit in this country and in England that, when a strike is on, “stars” in the labor movement are invited to appear on the scene, and entertain the strikers; entertain them and keep them in good spirits with rosy promises and prophesies, funny anecdotes, bombastic recitations in prose and poetry; stuff them full of rhetoric and wind—very much in the style that some generals do, who, by means of bad whiskey, seek to keep up the courage of the soldiers whom they are otherwise unable to beguile.


Such has been the habit in the past; to a great extent it continues to be the habit in the present; it was so during the late miners’ strike; it has been so to some extent here in New Bedford; and it is so everywhere, to the extent that ignorance of the social question predominates.


To the extent, however, that Socialism gets a footing among the working class such false and puerile tactics are thrown aside.


The Socialist workingmen of New Bedford, on whose invitation I am here; all those of us who are members of that classconscious revolutionary international organization of the working class, that throughout the world stands out today as the leading and most promiseful feature of the age—all such would consider it a crime on the part of the men, whom our organization sends forth to preach the gospel of labor, if they were to spend their platform time in “tickling” the workers.


Our organization sends us out to teach the workers, to enlighten them on the great issue before them, and the great historic drama in which most of them are still unconscious actors.


Some of you, accustomed to a different diet, may find my speech dry. If there be any such here, let him leave. He has not yet graduated from that primary school reared by experience in which the question of wages is forced upon the workers as a serious question, and they are taught that it demands serious thought to grapple with, and solve it.


If, however, you have graduated from that primary department, and have come here with the requisite earnestness, then you will not leave this hall without having, so to speak, caught firm hold of the cable of the labor movement; then the last strike of this sort has been seen in New Bedford; then, the strikes that may follow will be as different from this as vigorous manhood is from toddling infancy; then you will have entered upon that safe and sure path along which eternal disaster will not, as heretofore, mark your tracks, but New Bedford, Massachusetts, and the nation herself, will successively fall into your hands, with freedom as the crowning fruit of your efforts.


Three years ago I was in your midst during another strike.


The superficial observer who looks back to your attitude during that strike, who looks back to your attitude during the strikes that preceded that one, who now turns his eyes to your attitude in the present strike, and who discovers substantially no difference between your attitude now and then, might say, “Why, it is a waste of time to speak to such men; they learn nothing from experience; they will eternally fight the same hopeless battle; the battle to establish `safe relations’ with the capitalist class, with the same hopeless weapon: the `pure and simple’ organization of labor!”


But the Socialist does not take that view. There is one thing about your conduct that enlists for and entitles you to the warm sympathy of the Socialist, and that is that, despite your persistent errors in fundamental principles, in aims and methods, despite the illusions that you are chasing after, despite the increasing poverty and cumulating failures that press upon you, despite all that, you preserve manhood enough not to submit to oppression, but rise in the rebellion that is implied in a strike.


The attitude of workingmen engaged in a bona fide strike is an inspiring one. It is an earnest that slavery will not prevail. The slave alone who will not rise against his master, who will meekly bend his back to the lash, and turn his cheek to him who plucks his beard - that slave alone is hopeless. But the slave, who, as you of New Bedford, persists, despite failures and poverty, in rebelling, there is always hope for.


This is the reason I have considered it worth my while to leave my home and interrupt my work in New York, and come here, and spend a few days with you. I bank my hopes wholly and build entirely upon this sentiment of rebellion within you.



WHENCE DO WAGES COME, AND WHENCE PROFITS?



What you now stand in need of, aye, more than of bread, is the knowledge of a few elemental principles of political economy and of sociology.


Be not frightened at the words. It is only the capitalist professors who try to make them so difficult of understanding that the very mentioning of them is expected to throw the workingman into a palpitation of the heart. The subjects are easy of understanding.


The first point that a workingman should be clear upon is this: What is the source of the wages he receives; what is the source of the profits his employer lives on? The following dialogue is not uncommon:


Workingman”“Do I understand you rightly, that you Socialists want to abolish the capitalist class?”


Socialist”“That is what we are after.”


Workingman”“you are!? Then I don’t want any of you. Why, even now my wages are small; even now I can barely get along. If you abolish the capitalist I’ll have nothing; there will be nobody to support me.”


Who knows how many workingmen in this hall are typified by the workingman in this dialogue!


When, on payday, you reach out your horny, “unwashed” hand it is empty. When you take it back again, your wages are on it. Hence the belief that the capitalist is the source of your living, that he is your bread-giver, your supporter. Now that is an error, an optic illusion.


If early in the morning you go on top of some house and look eastward, it will seem to you that the sun moves and that you are standing still. Indeed, that was at one time the general and accepted belief. But it was an error, based upon an optic illusion. So long as that error prevailed the sciences could hardly make any progress. Humanity virtually stood stock still. Not until the illusion was discovered, and the error overthrown, not until it was ascertained that things were just the other way, that the sun stood still, and that it was our planet that moved at a breakneck rate of speed, was any real progress possible.


So likewise with this illusion about the source of wages. You cannot budge, you cannot move one step forward unless you discover that, in this respect also, the fact is just the reverse of the appearance: that, not the capitalist, but the workingman, is the source of the worker’s living; that it is not the capitalist who supports the workingman, but the workingman who supports the capitalist; that it is not the capitalist who gives bread to the workingman, but the workingman who gives himself a dry crust, and sumptuously stocks the table of the capitalist.


This is a cardinal point in political economy; and this is the point I wish first of all to establish in your minds. Now, to the proof.


Say that I own $100,000. Don’t ask me where I got it. If you do, I would have to answer you in the language of all capitalists that such a question is un-American. You must not look into the source of this, my “original accumulation". It is un-American to pry into such secrets. Presently I shall take you into my confidence. For the present I shall draw down the blinds, and keep out your un-American curiosity. I have $100,000, and am a capitalist.


Now I may not know much; no capitalist does; but know a few things, and among them is a little plain arithmetic. I take a pencil and put down on a sheet of paper, “$100,000.” Having determined that I shall need at least $5,000 a year to live with comfort, I divide the $100,000 by $5,000; the quotient is 20. My hair then begins to stand on end. The 20 tells me that, if I pull $5,000 annually out of $100,000, these are exhausted during that term. At the beginning of the 21st year I shall have nothing left.


“Heaven and earth, I would then have to go to work if I wanted to live!”


No capitalist relishes that thought. He will tell you, and pay his politicians, professors and political parsons, to tell you, that “labor is honorable.” He is perfectly willing to let you have that undivided honor, and will do all he can that you may not be deprived of any part of it; but, as to himself, he has for work a constitutional aversion. The capitalist runs away from work like the man bitten by a mad dog runs away from water.


I want to live without work’ on my $100,000 and yet keep my capital untouched. If you ask any farmer, he will tell you that if he invests in a Durham cow she will yield him a supply of 16 quarts a day, but, after some years, the supply goes down; she will run dry; and then a new cow must be got. But I, the capitalist, aim at making my capital a sort of $ 100,000 cow, which I shall annually be able to milk $5,000 out of, without her ever running dry.


I want, in short, to perform the proverbially impossible feat of eating my cake, and yet having it. The capitalist system performs that feat for me. How?


I go to a broker. I say, Mr. Broker, I have $100,000. I want you to invest that for me. I don’t tell him that I have a special liking for New Bedford mills’ stock; I don’t tell him I have a special fancy for railroad stock; I leave the choosing with him. The only direction I give him is to get the stock in such a corporation as will pay the highest dividend. Mr. Broker has a list of all of these corporations, your New Bedford corporations among them, to the extent that they may be listed. He makes the choice, say, of one of your mills right here in this town.


I hire a vault in a safe deposit company, and I put my stock into it. I lock it up, put the key in my pocket, and I go and have a good time. If it is too cold in the north I go down to Florida. If it is too hot there I go to the Adirondack Mountains. Occasionally I take a spin across the Atlantic and run the gauntlet of all the gambling dens in Europe. I spend my time with fast horses and faster women. I never put my foot inside the factory that I hold stock in; I don’t even come to the town in which it is located, and yet, lo and behold, a miracle takes place!


Those of you versed in Bible lore surely have read or heard about the miracle that God performed when the Jews were in the desert and about to die of hunger. The Lord opened the skies and let manna come. But the Jews had to get up early in the morning, before the sun rose; if they overslept themselves the sun would melt the manna, and they would have nothing to eat. They had to get up early, and go out, and stoop down and pick up the manna and put it in baskets and take it to their tents and eat it.


With the appearance of the manna on earth the miracle ended. But the miracles that happen in this capitalist system of production are so wonderful that those recorded in the Bible don’t hold a candle to them. The Jews had to do some work, but I, stock-holding capitalist, need do no work at all. I can turn night into day, and day into night. I can lie flat on my back all day and all night; and every three months my manna comes down to me in the shape of dividends. Where does it come from? What does the dividend represent?


In the factory of which my broker bought stock, workmen, thousands of them, were at work; they have woven cloth that has been put upon the market to the value of $7,000; out of the $7,000 that the cloth is worth my wage workers receive $2,000 in wages, and I receive the $5,000 as profits or dividends. Did I, who never put my foot inside of the mill; did I, who never put my foot inside of New Bedford; did I, who don’t know how a loom looks;’ did I, who contributed nothing whatever toward the weaving of that cloth; did I do any work whatever toward producing those $5,000 that came to me? No man with brains in his head instead of sawdust can deny that those $7,000 are exclusively the product of the wage workers in that mill. Out of the wealth thus produced by them alone, they get $2,000 in wages, and I, who did nothing at all, I get the $5,000.


The wages these workers receive represent wealth that they have themselves produced; the profits that the capitalist pockets represent wealth that the wage workers produced, and that the capitalist, does what?—let us call things by their names—that the capitalist steals from them.


You may ask: But is that the rule, is not that illustration an exception? Yes, it is the rule; the exception is the other thing.


The leading industries of the United States are today stock concerns, and thither will all others worth mentioning move. An increasing volume of capital in money is held in stocks and shares. The individual capitalist holds stock in a score of concerns in different trades, located in different towns, too many and too varied for him even to attempt to run. By virtue of his stock, he draws his income from them; which is the same as saying that he lives on what the workingmen produce but are robbed of. Nor is the case at all essentially different with the concerns that have not yet developed into stock corporations.


Again, you may ask: The conclusion that what such stockholders live on is stolen wealth because they evidently perform no manner of work is irrefutable, but are all stockholders equally idle and superfluous? Are there not some who do perform some work? Are there not “directors"?


There are “directors,” but these gentlemen bear a title much like those “generals” and “majors” and “colonels” who now go about, and whose general ship, majorship and colonelship consisted in securing substitutes during the war.


These “directors” are simply the largest stockholders, which is the same as to say that they are the largest sponges; their directorship consists only in directing conspiracies against rival “directors,” in bribing legislatures, executives and judiciaries, in picking out and hiring men out of your midst to serve as bellwethers, that will lead you, like cattle, to the capitalist shambles, and tickle you into contentment and hopefulness while you are being fleeced. The court decisions removing responsibility from the “directors” are numerous and increasing; each such decision establishes, from the capitalist government’s own mouth, the idleness and superfluousness of the capitalist class.


These “directors,” and the capitalist class in general, may perform some “work,” they do perform some “work,” but that “work” is not of a sort that directly or indirectly aids production, any more than the intense mental strain and activity of the “work” done by the pickpocket is directly or indirectly productive.


Finally, you may ask: No doubt the stockholder does no work, and hence lives on the wealth we produce; no doubt these “directors” have a title that only emphasizes their idleness by a swindle, and, consequently, neither they are other than sponges on the working class; but did not your own illustration start with the supposition that the capitalist in question had $100,000, is not his original capital entitled to some returns?


This question opens an important one; and now I shall, as I promised you, take you into my confidence; I shall raise the curtain which I pulled down before the question, Where did I get it? I shall now let you pry into my secret.


Whence does this original capital, or “original accumulation,” come? Does it grow on the capitalist like hair on his face, or nails on his fingers and toes? Does he secrete it as he secretes sweat from his body? Let me take one illustration of many.


Before our present Governor, the Governor of New York was Levi Parsons Morton. The gentleman must be known to all of you. Besides having been Governor of the Empire State, he was once Vice President of the nation, and also at one time our Minister to France. Mr. Morton is a leading “gentleman"; he wears the best of broadcloth; his shirt bosom is of spotless white; his nails are trimmed by manicurists; he uses the elitest language; he has front pews in a number of churches; he is a pattern of morality, law and order; and he is a multimillionaire capitalist. How did he get his start millionaire-ward? Mr. Morton being a Republican, I shall refer you to a Republican journal, the New York Tribune, for the answer of this interesting question. The Tribune of the day after Mr. Morton’s nomination for Governor in 1894 gave his biography.


There we are informed that Mr. Morton was born in New Hampshire of poor parents; he was industrious, he was clever, he was pushing, and he settled, a poor young man, in New York City, where in 1860, mark the date, he started a clothing establishment; then, in rapid succession, we are informed that he failed, and started a bank!


A man may start almost any kind of a shop without a cent. If the landlord gave him credit for the rent, and the brewer, the shoe manufacturer, the cigar manufacturer, etc., etc., give him credit for the truck, he may start a saloon, a shoe shop, a cigar shop, etc., etc., without any cash, do business and pay off his debt with the proceeds of his sales. But there is one shop that he cannot start in that way. That shop is the banking shop. For that he must have cash on hand. He can no more shave notes without money than he can shave whiskers without razors.


Now, then, the man who just previously stood up before a notary public and swore “So help him, God,” he had no money to pay his creditors, immediately after, without having in the meantime married an heiress, has money enough to start a bank on! Where did he get it?


Read the biographies of any of our founders of capitalist concerns by the torchlight of this biography, and you will find them all to be essentially the same, or sestively silent upon the doings of our man during the period that he gathers his “original accumulation.” You will find that “original capital” to be the child of fraudulent failures and fires, of high-handed crime of some sort or other, or of the sneaking crime of appropriating trust funds, etc. With such “original capital" - gotten by dint of such “cleverness,” “push” and “industry” as a weapon, the “original” capitalist proceeds to fleece the working class that has been less “industrious,” “pushing” and “clever” than he. If he consumes all his fleecings, his capital remains of its original size in his hands, unless some other gentleman of the road, gifted with greater “industry,” “push” and “cleverness” than he, comes around and relieves him of it; if he consume not the whole of his fleecings, his capital moves upward, million-ward.


The case is proved. Labor alone produces all wealth. Wages are that part of labor’s own product that the workingman is allowed to keep. Profits are the present and running stealings perpetrated by the capitalist upon the workingman from day to day, from week to week, from month to month, from year to year. Capital is the accumulated past stealings of the capitalist, cornerstoned upon his “original accumulation.”


Who of you before me fails now to understand, or would still deny that, not the capitalist supports the workingman, but the workingman supports the capitalist; or still holds that the workingman could not exist without the capitalist? If any there be, let him raise his hand and speak up now. None? Then I may consider this point settled, and shall move on.



THE CLASS STRUGGLE



The second point, on which it is absolutely necessary that you be clear, is the nature of your relation, as working people, to the capitalist in this capitalist system of production. This point is an inevitable consequence of the first.


You have seen that the wages you live on and the profits the capitalist riots in are the two parts into which is divided the wealth that you produce. The workingman wants a larger and larger share. So does the capitalist. A thing cannot be divided into two shares so as to increase the share of each.


If the workingman produces, say, $4 worth of wealth a day, and the capitalist keeps 2, there are only 2 left for the workingman. If the capitalist keeps 3, there is only 1 left for the workingman. If the capitalist keeps 3 1/2, there is only 1/2 left for the workingman. Inversely, if the workingman pushes up his share from 1/2 to 1, there are only 3 left to the capitalist. If the workingman secures 2, the capitalist will be reduced to 2. If the workingman push still onward and keep 3, the capitalist will have to put up with 1.


And if the workingman makes up his mind to enjoy all that he produces, and keep all the 4, the capitalist will have to go to work.


These plain figures upset the theory about the workingman and the capitalist being brothers.


Capital—meaning the capitalist class—and labor have been portrayed by capitalist illustrated papers as Chang and Eng. This, I remember, was done notably by Harper’s Weekly, the property of one of the precious “Seeley Diners”—you remember that “dinner.” The Siamese Twins were held together by a piece of flesh. Wherever Chang went, Eng was sure to go. If Chang was happy, Eng’s pulse throbbed harder. If Chang caught cold, Eng sneezed in chorus with him. When Chang died, Eng followed suit within five minutes.


Do we find that to be the relation of the workingman and the capitalist? Do you find that the fatter the capitalist, the fatter also grows the workingmen? Is not your experience rather that the wealthier the capitalist, the poorer are the workingmen? That the more magnificent and prouder the residences of the capitalist, the dingier and humbler become those of the workingmen? That the happier the life of the capitalist’s wife, the greater the opportunities of his children for enjoyment and education, the heavier becomes the cross borne by the workingmen’s wives, while their children are crowded more and more from the schools and deprived of the pleasures of childhood? Is that your experience, or is it not?


The pregnant point that underlies these pregnant facts is that:


Between the working class and the capitalist class, there is an irrepressible conflict, a class strle for life. No glib-tongued politician can vault over it, no capitalist professor or official statistician can argue it away; no capitalist parson can veil it; no labor faker can straddle it; no “reform” architect can bridge it over. It crops up in all manner of ways, like in this strike, in ways that disconcert all the plans and all the schemes of those who would deny or ignore it. It is a strle that will not down, and must be ended, only by either the total subjugation of the working class, or the abolition of the capitalist class.


Thus you perceive that the theory on which your “pure and simple” trade organizations are grounded, and on which you went into this strike, is false. There being no “common interests,” but only hostile interests, between the capitalist class and the working class, the battle you are waging to establish “safe relations” between the two is a hopeless one.


Put to the touchstone of these undeniable principles the theory upon which your “pure and simple” trade organizations are built, and you will find it to be false; examined by the light of these undeniable principles the road that your false theory makes you travel and the failures that have marked your career must strike you as its inevitable result. How are we to organize and proceed? you may ask. Before answering the question, let me take up another branch of the subject. Its presentation will sweep aside another series of illusions that beset the mind of the working class, and will, with what has been said, give us a sufficient sweep over the ground to lead us to the right answer.



THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALIST SOCIETY



Let us take a condensed page of the country’s history. For the sake of plainness, and forced to it by the exigency of condensation, I shall assume small figures.


Place yourselves back a sufficient number of years with but 10 competing weaving concerns in the community. How the individual 10 owners came by the “original accumulations” that enabled them to start as capitalists you now know. Say that each of the 10 capitalists employs 10 men; that each man receives $2 a day, and that the product of each of the 10 sets of men in each of the 10 establishments is worth $40 a day. You know now also that it is out of these $40 worth of wealth, produced by the men, that each of the 10 competing capitalists takes the $20 that he pays the 10 men in wages, and that out of that same $40 worth of wealth he takes the $20 that he pockets as profits. Each of these 10 capitalists makes, accordingly, $120 a week.


This amount of profits, one should think, should satisfy our 10 capitalists. It is a goodly sum to pocket without work. Indeed, it may satisfy some, say most of them. But if for any of many reasons it does not satisfy any one of them, the whole string of them is set in commotion.


“Individuality” is a deity at whose shrine the capitalist worships, or affects to worship. In point of fact, capitalism robs of individuality, not only the working class, but capitalists themselves. The action of any one of the lot compels action by all; like a row of bricks, the dropping of one makes all the others drop successively.


Let us take No. 1. He is not satisfied with $120 a week. Of the many reasons he may have for that, let’s take this: He has a little daughter; eventually, she will be of marriageable age; whom is he planning to marry her to? Before the public, particularly before the workers, he will declaim on the “sovereignty” of our citizens, and declare the country is stocked with nothing but “peers.” In his heart, though, he feels otherwise. He looks even upon his fellow capitalists as plebeians; he aspires at a prince, a duke, or at least a count for a son-in-law; and in visions truly reflecting the vulgarity of his mind he beholds himself the grandfather of prince, duke or count grandbrats. To realize this dream he must have money; princes, etc., are expensive luxuries. His present income, $120 a week, will not buy the luxury. He must have some more.


To his employees he will recommend reliance on heaven; he himself knows that if he wants more money it will not come from heaven, but must come from the sweat of his employees’ brows.


As all the wealth produced in his shop is $40 a day, he knows that, if he increases his share of $20 to $30, there will be only $10 left for wages. He tries this. He announces a wage reduction of 50 per cent.


His men spontaneously draw themselves together and refuse to work; they go on strike.


What is the situation? In those days it needed skill, acquired by long training, to do the work; there may have been corner loafers out of work, but not weavers; possibly at some great distance there may have been weavers actually obtainable, but in those days there was neither telegraph nor railroad to communicate with them; finally, the nine competitors of No. 1, having no strike on hand, continued to produce, and thus threatened to crowd No. 1 out of the market. Thus circumstanced, No. 1 caves in. He withdraws his order of wage reduction.


“Come in,” he says to his striking workmen, “let’s make up; labor and capital are brothers; the most loving of brothers sometimes fall out; we have had such a falling out; it was a slip; you have organized yourselves in a union with a $2 a day wage scale; I shall never fight the union; l love it, come back to Work.” And the men did. Thus ended the first strike.


The victory won by the men made many of them feel bold. At their first next meeting they argued: “The employer wanted to reduce our wages and got left; why may not we take the hint and reduce his profits by demanding higher wages; why should we not lick him in an attempt to resist our demand for more pay?”


But the labor movement is democratic. No one man can run things. At that union meeting the motion to demand higher pay is made by one member, another must second it; amendments, and amendments to the amendments, are put with the requisite seconders; debate follows; points of order are raised, ruled on, appealed from and settled; in the meantime it grows late, the men must be at work early the next morning, the hour to adjourn arrives, and the whole matter is left pending. Thus much for the men.


Now for the employer. He locks himself up in his closet. With clenched fists and scowl on brow, he gnashes his teeth at the victory of his “brother” labor, its union and its union regulations. And he ponders. More money he must have and is determined to have. This resolution is arrived at with the swiftness and directness which capitalists are capable of.


Differently from his men, he is not many, but one. He makes the motion, seconds it himself, puts it, and carries it unanimously. More profits he shall have. But how? Aid comes to him through the mail. The letter carrier brings him a circular from a machine shop. Such circulars are frequent even today. It reads like this:


“Mr. No. 1, you are employing 10 men. I have in my machine shop a beautiful machine with which you can produce, with five men, twice as much as now with 10. This machine does not chew tobacco. it does not smoke. Some of these circulars are cruel and add: This machine has no wife who gets sick and keeps it home to attend to her. It has no children who die, and whom to bury it must stay away from work. It never goes on strike. It works and grumbles not. Come and see it.”



INVENTION



Right here let me lock a switch at which not a few people are apt to switch off and be banked. Some may think, “Well, at least that machine capitalist is entitled to his profits; he surely is an inventor.”


A grave error. Look into the history of our inventors, and you will see that those who really profited by their genius are so few that you can count them on the fingers of your hands, and have fingers to spare.


The capitalists either take advantage of the inventor’s stress and buy his invention for a song; the inventor believes he can make his haul with his next invention; but before that is perfected, he is as poor as before, and the same advantage is again taken of him; until finally, his brain power being exhausted, he sinks into a pauper’s grave, leaving the fruit of his genius for private capitalists to grow rich on; or the capitalist simply steals the invention and gets his courts to decide against the inventor.


From Eli Whitney down, that is the treatment the inventor, as a rule, receives from the capitalist class.


Such a case, illustrative of the whole situation, happened recently. The Bonsack Machine Co. discovered that its employees made numerous inventions, and it decided to appropriate them . To this end, it locked out its men, and demanded of all applicants for work that they sign a contract whereby, in “consideration of employment” they assign to the company all their rights in whatever invention they may make during the term of their employment.


One of these employees, who had signed such a contract, informed the company one day that he thought he could invent a machine by which cigarettes could be held closed by crimping at the ends, instead of pasting. This was a valuable idea; and he was told to go ahead. For six months he worked at this invention and perfected it; and, having during all that time received not a cent in wages or otherwise from the company, he patented his invention himself.


The company immediately brought suit against him in the federal courts, claiming that the invention was its property; and the federal court decided in favor of the company, thus robbing the inventor of his time, his money, of the fruit of his genius, and of his unquestionable rights.


“Shame?” Say not “Shame!” He who himself applies the torch to his own house has no cause to cry “Shame!” when the flames consume it. Say rather, “Natural!”, and smiting your own breasts, say, “Ours the fault!” Having elected into power the Democratic, Republican, Free Trade, Protection, Silver or Gold platforms of the capitalist class, the working class has none but itself to blame if the official lackeys of that class turn against the working class the public powers put into their hands.


The capitalist owner of the machine shop that sends the circular did not make the invention.



THE SCREWS BEGIN TO TURN



To return to No. 1. He goes and sees the machine; finds it to be as represented; buys it; puts it up in his shop; picks out of his 10 men the five least active in the late strike; sets them to work at $2 a day as before; and full of bows and smirks, addresses the other five thus: “I am sorry I have no places for you; I believe in union principles and am paying the union scale to the five men I need; I don’t need you now; good bye. I hope I’ll see you again.” And he means this last as you will presently perceive.


What is the situation now? No. 1 pays, as before, $2 a day, but to only five men; these, with the aid of the machine, now produce twice as much as the 10 did before; their product is now $80 worth of wealth; as only $10 of this goes in wages, the capitalist has a profit of $70 a day, or 250 per cent more. He is moving fast toward his prince, duke or count son-in-law.


Now watch the men whom his machine displaced; their career throws quite some light on the whole question. Are they not “American citizens"? Is not this a “Republic with a Constitution"? Is anything else wanted to get a living? Watch them!


They go to No. 2 for a job; before they quite reach the place, the doors open and five of that concern are likewise thrown out upon the street. What happened there? The “individuality” of No. 2 yielded to the pressure of capitalist development. The purchase of the machine by No. 1 enabled him to produce so much more plentifully and cheaply; if No. 2 did not do likewise, he would be crowded out of the market by No. 1. No. 2, accordingly, also invested in a machine, with the result that five of his men are also thrown out.


These 10 unemployed proceed to No. 3, hoping for better luck there. But what sight is that that meets their astonished eyes? Not five men, as walked out of Nos. 1 and 2, but all No. 3’s 10 have landed on the street; and, what is more surprising yet to them, No. 3 himself is on the street, now reduced to the condition of a workingman along with his former employees. What is it that happened there? In this instance the “individuality” of No. 3 was crushed by capitalist development. The same reason that drove No. 2 to procure the machine rendered the machine indispensable to No. 3. But having, differently from his competitors Nos. 1 and 2, spent all his stealings from the workingmen, instead of saving up some, he is now unable to make the purchase; is, consequently, unable to produce as cheaply as they; is, consequently, driven into bankruptcy, and lands in the class of the proletariat, whose ranks are thus increased.


The now 21 unemployed proceed in their hunt for work, and make the round of the other mills. The previous experiences are repeated. Not only are there no jobs to be had, but everywhere workers are thrown out, if the employer got the machine; and if he did not, workers with their former employers, now ruined, join the army of the unemployed.


What happened in that industry happened in all others. Thus the ranks of the capitalist class are thinned out, and the class is made more powerful, while the ranks of the working class are swelled, and the class is made weaker. This is the process that explains how, on the one hand, your New Bedford mills become the property of ever fewer men; how, according to the census, their aggregate capital runs up to over $14,000,000; how, despite “bad times,” their profits run up to upwards of $1,300,000; how, on the other hand, your position becomes steadily more precarious.


No. 1’s men return to where they started from. Scab they will not. Uninformed upon the mechanism of capitalism, they know not what struck them; and they expect “better times,” just as so many equally uninformed workingmen are expecting today; in the meantime, thinking thereby to hasten the advent of the good times, No. 1’s men turn out the Republican’ party and turn in the Democratic, turn out the Democratic and turn in the Republican, just as our misled workingmen are now doing, not understanding that, whether they put in or out Republicans, Democrats, Protectionists or Free Traders, Goldbugs or Silverbugs, they are every time putting in the capitalist platform, upholding the social principle that throws them out of work or reduces their wages.


But endurance has its limits. The superintendent of the Pennsylvania Railroad for the Indiana Division, speaking, of course, from the capitalist standpoint, recently said: “Many solutions are being offered for the labor question; but there is just one and no more. It is this: Lay a silver dollar on the shelf, and at the end of a year you have a silver dollar left; lay a workingman on the shelf, and at the end of a month you have a skeleton left.”


“This,” said he, “is the solution of the labor problem.” In short, starve out the workers.


No. 1’s men finally reach that point. Finally that happens that few if any can resist. A man may stand starvation and resist the sight of starving wife and children; but if he has nor wherewith to buy medicine to save the life of a sick wife or clild, he loses all control. On the heels of starvation, sickness follow, and No. 1’s men throw to the wind all union principles. They are now ready to do anything to save their dear ones. Cap in hand, they appear before No. 1, the starch taken clean out of them during the period they “lay on the shelf.” They ask for work. They themselves offer to work for $1 a day.


And No. 1, the brother of labor, who but recently expressed devotion to the union, what of him? His eyes sparkle at “seeing again” the men he had thrown out, at their offer to work for less than the men now employed. His chest expands, and, grabbing them by the hand in a delirium of patriotic ecstasy, he says: “Welcome, my noble American citizens. I am proud to see you ready to work and earn an honest penny for your dear wives and darling children. I am delighted to notice that you are not, like so many others, too lazy to work. Let the American eagle screech in honor of your emancipation from the slavery of a rascally union. Let the American eagle wag his tail an extra wag in honor of your freedom from a dictatorial walking delegate. You are my long lost brothers. Go in, my $1-a-day brothers!””and he throws his former $2-a-day brothers heels over head upon the sidewalk.


When the late $2-a-day men have recovered from their surprise, they determine on war. But what sort of war? Watch them closely, and you may detect many a feature of your own in that mirror. “Have we not struck,” argue they, “and beaten this employer once before? If we strike again, we shall again beat him.” But the conditions have wholly changed.


In the first place, there were no unemployed skilled workers during that first strike; now there are; plenty of them, dumped upon the country, not out of the steerage of vessels from Europe, but by the native-born machine.


In the second place, that very machine has to such an extent eliminated skill that, while formerly only the unemployed in a certain trade could endanger the jobs of those at work in that trade, now the unemployed of all trades, virtually the whole army of the unemployed, bear down upon the employed in each. We know of quondam shoemakers taking the jobs of hatters, quondam hatters tailing the jobs of weavers, quondam weavers taking the jobs of cigarmakers, quondam cigarmakers taking the jobs of machinists, quondam farmhands taking the jobs of factory hands, etc., etc., so easy has it become to learn what now needs to be known of a trade.


In the third place, telegraph and railroad have made all of the unemployed easily accessible to the employer.


Finally, different from former days, the competitors have to a great extent consolidated. Here in New Bedford, for instance, the false appearance of competition between the mill owners is punctured by the fact that to a great extent seemingly “independent” mills are owned by one family, as is the case with the Pierce family.


Not, as at the first strike, with their flanks protected, but now wholly exposed through the existence of a vast army of hungry unemployed; not, as before, facing a divided enemy, but now faced by a consolidated mass of capitalist concerns, how different is now the situation of the strikers! The changed conditions brought about changed results; instead of victory, there is defeat; and we have had a long series of them. Either hunger drove the men back to work; or the unemployed took their places; or, if the capitalist was in a hurry, he fetched in the help of the strong arm of the government, now his government.



PRINCIPLES OF SOUND ORGANIZATION



We now have a sufficient survey of the field to enable us to answer the question, How shall we organize so as not to fight the same old hopeless battle?


Proceeding from the knowledge that labor alone produces all wealth; that less and less of this, wealth comes to the working class. and more and more of it is plundered by the idle class or capitalist; that this is the result of the working class being stripped of the tool, machine, without which it cannot earn a living; and, finally, that the machine or tool has reached such a state of development that it can no longer be operated by the individual but needs the collective effort of many; proceeding from this knowledge, it is clear that the aim of all intelligent classconscious workingmen must be the overthrow of the system of private ownership in the tools of production because that system keeps them in wage slavery.


Proceeding from the further knowledge of the use made of the government by the capitalist class, and of the necessity that class is under to own the government, so as to enable it to uphold and prop up the capitalist system; proceeding from that knowledge, it is clear that the aim of all intelligent, classconscious workingmen must be to bring the government under the control of their own class, by joining and electing the American wing of the international Socialist party—the Socialist Labor Party of America, and thus establishing the Socialist Cooperative Republic.


But in the meantime, while moving toward that ideal, though necessary, goal, what to do? The thing cannot be accomplished in a day, nor does election come around every twenty-four hours. Is there nothing that we can do for ourselves between election and election? Yes”plenty.


When crowded, in argument, to the wall by us New Trade Unionists, by us of the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance, your present, or old and “pure and simple” organizations, yield the point of ultimate aims; they grant the ultimate necessity of establishing Socialism; but they claim “the times are not yet ripe” for that; and, not yet being ripe, they lay emphasis upon the claim that the “pure and simple” union does the workers some good NOW by getting something NOW from the employers and from the capitalist parties. We are not “practical” they tell us; they are.


Let us test this theory on the spot. Here in New Bedford there is not yet a single New Trade Unionist organization in existence. The “pure and simple” trade union has had the field all to itself. All of you, whose wages are now HIGHER than they were five years ago, kindly raise a hand. All of you whose wages are now LOWER than five years ago, please raise a hand. The proof of the pudding lies in the eating. Not only does “pure and simpledom” shut off your hope of emancipation by affecting to think such a state of things is unreachable now, but in the meantime and RIGHT NOW, the “good” it does to you, the “something" it secures for you “from the employers and from the politicians” is lower wages.


That is what their “practicalness” amounts to in point of fact. Presently I shall show you that they prove “practical” only to the labor fakers who run them, and whom they put up with. No, no; years ago, before capitalism had reached its present development, a trade organization of labor could and did afford protection to the workers, even if, as the “pure and simple” union, it was wholly in the dark on the issue. That time is no more.


The New Trade Unionist knows that no one or two, or even half a dozen elections will place in the hands of the working class the government of the land; and New Trade Unionism, not only wishes to do something now for the workers, but it knows that the thing can be done, and how to do it.


“Pure and simple” or British trade unionism has done a double mischief to the workers. Besides leaving them in their present pitiable plight, it has caused many to fly off the handle and lose all trust in the power of trade organization. The best of these, those who have not become pessimistic and have not been wholly demoralized, see nothing to be done but voting right on election day—casting their vote straight for the SLP. This is a serious error. By thus giving over all participation in the industrial movement, they wholly disconnect themselves from the class strle that is going on every day; and by putting off their whole activity to a single day in the year, election day, they become floaters in the air. I know several such. Without exception they are dreamy and flightly and unbalanced in their methods.


The utter impotence of “pure and simple” unionism today is born of causes that may be divided under two main heads.


One is the contempt in which the capitalist and ruling class holds the working people. In 1886, when instinct was, unconsciously to myself, leading me to look into the social problem, when as yet it was to me a confused and blurred interrogation mark, I associated wholly with capitalists. Expressions of contempt for the workers were common. One day I asked a set of then why they treated their men so hard, and had so poor an opinion of them. “They are ignorant, stupid and corrupt," was the answer, almost in chorus.


“What makes you think so?” I asked. “Have you met them all?”


“No,” was the reply, “we have not met them all individually, but we have had to deal with their leaders, and they are ignorant, stupid and corrupt. Surely these leaders must be the best among them, or they would not choose them.”


Now, let me illustrate. I understand that two days ago, in this city, Mr. Gompers went off at a tangent and shot off his mouth about me. What he said was too ridiculous for me to answer. You will have noticed that he simply gave what he wishes you to consider as his opinion; he furnished you no facts from which he drew it, so that you could judge for yourselves. He expected you to take him on faith. I shall not insult you by treating you likewise. Here are the facts on which my conclusion is based:


In the State of New York we have a labor law forbidding the working of railroad men more than 10 hours. The railroad companies disregarded the law. In Buffalo, the switchmen struck in 1892 to enforce the law; thereupon the Democratic governor, Mr. Flower, who had himself signed the law, sent the whole militia of the state into Buffalo to help the railroad capitalists break the law, incidentally to commit assault and battery with intent to kill, as they acflially did, upon the workingmen. Among our state Senators is one Jacob Cantor. This gentleman hastened to applaud Gov. Flower’s brutal violation of his oath of office to uphold the Constitution and the laws. Cantor applauded the act as a patriotic one in the defense of “law and order.”


At a subsequent campaign, this Cantor being a candidate for reelection, the New York Daily News, a capitalist paper of Cantor’s political complexion, published an autograph letter addressed to him and intended to be an endorsement of him by labor. This letter contained this passage among others: “If any one says you are not a friend of labor, he says what is not true.”


By whom was this letter written and by whom signed ?”by Mr. Samuel Gompers, “President of the American Federation of Labor.”


Whom are you hissing, Gompers or me?


Do you imagine that the consideration for that letter was merely the “love and affection” of Senator Cantor?


Again: The Republican party, likewise the Democratic, is a parry of the capitalist class; every mam who is posted knows that; the conduct of its presidents, governors, judges, congresses and legislatures can leave no doubt upon the subject. Likewise the free coinage of silver, or Populist party, was, while it lived, well known to be a party of capital; the conduct of its runners, the silver mine barons, who skin and then shoot down their miners, leaves no doubt upon that subject. But the two were deadly opposed: one wanted gold, the other silver. Notwithstanding these facts, a “labor leader” in New York City appeared at a recent campaign standing, not upon the Republican capitalist party platform only, not upon the Free-Silver capitalist party platform only, but on both; he performed the acrobatic feat of being simultaneously for gold and against silver, for silver against gold.


Who was that “labor leader” ? Mr. Samuel Gompers, “President of the American Federation of Labor.”


Again: In Washington there is a son of a certain labor leader with a government job. He is truly “non- partisan.”’ Democrats may go and Republicans may come, Republicans may go and Democrats may come, but he goeth not; the Democratic and the Republican capitalists may fight like cats and dogs, but on one thing they fraternize like cooing doves, to wit, to keep that son of a labor leader in office.


Who is the father of that son ? Mr. Samuel Gompers, “President of the A.F. of L.”


Again: You have here a “labor leader,” named Ross.


[Applause]


Unhappy men! Unhappy men! As well might you applaud the name of your executioner.


When I was here about three years ago I met him. He was all aglow with the project of a bill that he was going to see through your legislature, of which he was and is now a member. It was the anti-fines bill; that, thought he, was going to put an end to an infamous practice of the mill owners. I argued with him that it does not matter what the law is; the all important thing was, which is the class charged with enforcing it? So long as the capitalist class held the government, all such labor laws as he was straining for, were a snare and a delusion. What I said seemed to be Greek to him. He went ahead and the bill passed. And what happened? You continued to be fined after, as before; and when one of you sought to enforce the law, was he not arrested and imprisoned? And when another brought the lawbreaking mill owner, who continued to fine him, into court, did not the capitalist court decide in favor of the capitalist, and thus virtually annulled the law? And where was Mr. Ross all this time? In the Massachusetts Legislature. Do you imagine that his ignorance of what a capitalist government means, and of what its “labor laws” amount to, did not throw its shadow upon and color you in the capitalist’s estimation? Do you, furthermore, imagine that his sitting there in that legislature, a member of the majority party at that, and never once demanding the prompt impeachment of the court that rendered null that very law that he had worked to pass, do you imagine that while he plays such a complaisant role he is a credit to the working class?


No need of further illustrations. The ignorance, stupidity and corruption of the “pure and simple” labor leaders is such that the capitalist class despises you. The first prerequisite for success in a strle is the respect of the enemy.


The other main cause of the present impotence of “pure and simple" unionism is that, through its ignoring the existing class distinctions, and its ignoring the close connection there is between wages and politics, it splits up at the ballot box among the parties of capital, and thus unites in upholding the system of capitalist exploitation.


Look at the recent miners’ strike; the men were shot down and the strike was lost; this happened in the very midst of a political campaign; and these miners, who could at any election capture the government, or at least, by polling a big vote against capitalism, announce their advance toward freedom, are seen to turn right around and vote back into power the very class that had just trampled upon them.


What prospect is there, in sight of such conduct, of the capitalists becoming gentler? Or of the union gaining for the men anything NOW except more wage reductions, enforced by bullets? None! The prospect of the miners and other workers doing the same thing over again, a prospect that is made all the surer if they allow themselves to be further led by the labor fakers whom the capitalists keep in pay, renders sure that capitalist outrages will be repeated, and further capitalist encroachments will follow.


Otherwise were it if the union, identifying politics and wages, voted against capitalism; if it struck at the ballot box against the wage system with the same solidarity that it demands for the strike in the shop.


Protected once a year by the guns of an increasing classconscious party of labor, the union could be a valuable fortification behind which to conduct the daily class strle in the shops.


The increasing Socialist Labor Party vote alone would not quite give that temporary protection in the shop that such an increasing vote would afford if, in the shop also, the workers were intelligently organized, and honestly, because intelligently, led.


Without organization in the shop, the capitalist could outrage at least individuals.


Shop organization alone, unbacked by that political force that threatens the capitalist class with extinction, the working class, being the overwhelming majority, leaves the workers wholly unprotecteced.


But the shop organization that combines in its warfare the annually recurring cIassconscious ballot can stem capitalist encroachment from day to day.


The trade organization is impotent if built and conducted upon the impotent lines of ignorance and corruption. The trade organization is NOT impotent if built and conducted upon the lines of knowledge and honesty; if it understands the issue and steps into the arena fully equipped, not with the shield of the trade union only, but also with the sword of the Socialist ballot.


The essential principles of sound organization are, accordingly, these:


1st”A trade organization must be clear upon the fact that, not until it has overthrown the capitalist system of private ownership in the machinery of production, and made this the joint property of the people, thereby compelling everyone to work if he wants to live, is it at all possible for the workers to be safe.


2nd”A labor organization must be perfectly clear upon the fact that it cannot reach safety until it has wrenched the government from the clutches of the capitalist class; and that it cannot do that unless it votes, not for men but for principles, unless it votes into power its own class platform and program: the abolition of the wages system of slavery.


3rd”A labor organization must be perfectly clear upon the fact that politics are not, like religion, a private concern, any more than the wages and the hours of a workingman are his private concern. For the same reason that his wages and hours are the concern of his class, so is his politics. Politics is not separable from wages. For the same reason that the organization of labor dictates wages, hours, etc:, in the interest of the working class, for that same reason must it dictate politics also; and for the same reason that it execrates the scab in the shop, it must execrate the scab at the hustings.



THE SOCIALIST TRADE AND LABOR ALLIANCE



Long did the Socialist Labor Party and New Trade Unionists seek to deliver this important message to the broad masses of the American proletariat, the rank and file of our working class. But we could not reach, we could not get at them. Between us and them there stood a solid wall of ignorant, stupid and corrupt labor fakers. Like men groping in a dark room for an exit, we moved along the wall, bumping our heads, feeling ever onwards for a door; we made the circuit and no passage was found. The wall was solid. This discovery once made, there was no way other than to batter a breach through that wall. With the battering ram of the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance we effected a passage; the wall now crumbles; at last we stand face to face with the rank and file of the American proletariat; and we are delivering our message, as you may judge from the howl that goes up from that fakers’ wall that we have broken through.


I shall not consider my time well spent with you if I see no fruit of my labors; if I leave not behind me in New Bedford Local Alliances of your trades organized in the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance. That will be my best contribution toward your strike, as they will serve as centers of enlightenment to strengthen you in your conflict, to the extent that it may now be possible.


In conclusion, my best advice to you for immediate action, is to step out boldly upon the streets, as soon as you can; organize a monster parade of the strikers and of all the other working people in the town; and let the parade be headed by a banner bearing the announcement to your employers:


“We will fight you in this strike to the bitter end; your money bag may beat us now; but whether it does or not, that is not the end, it is only the beginning of the song; in November we will meet again at Philippi, and the strike shall not end until, with the falchion of the Socialist Labor Party ballot, we shall have laid you low for all time!”


This is the message that it has been my agreeable privilege to deliver to you in the name of the Socialist Labor Party, and of the New Trade Unionists or Alliance men of the land.






- 08:53 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

28.07.2012., subota

Nakon danasnjeg clanka Jutarnjeg Lista pod naslovom: "Vlada ne zeli vratiti na posao covjeka koji je zaztkrio aferu Fini-Medija !"


Zar u ovoj zemlji jos postoji i neko najmanje dijete, kojemu napokom nije jasno da je taj nas balkansi prostor vazda bio, jeste, i da ce po svojoj prilici ostati pod  ingerencijom drustvenog Lucifera najnize pasmine; gdje se sistematski nastavlja onaj sedmostoljetni palez svega sto je tu pronicalo ljudskog,Draskoceve lomace Matiji Gubcu, Jelacicevog Austro Ugarskog sluganstva na gusenju Madjarske revolucije, Kvaternikovo pospremanje terena Ustaskim zlocinima, Tito- Staljinisticki teror, HDZ-ova nacionalisticka pljacka stoljeca,i danasnji SDP-ov trojac Milanovic- Cacic- Linic, koji upravo prikuplja iz preostalog zgarista sve sto  im se jos nadje od neke koristi.

Ah Djeco nasa, koji cete nositi na vlastitoj grbaci sva ta nagomilana klasno-luciferska nedjela !
- 10:57 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

26.07.2012., četvrtak

Citateljima Socialist Landmarks, koji se ovdje pojavilo pred par dana  izvinjavam se sto je tehnickom greskom bio ispusten predgovor tom velikom epohalnom djelu od autora Daniela De Leona, pa ga se ovdje, zbog izuzetne vaznosti  naknadno donosi

Publisher's introduction to
_Socialist Landmarks : Four Addresses by Daniel De Leon_,
1977 edition, pages 7-20


Introduction


In "Reform or Revolution," Daniel De Leon says: "We know that movements make men, but men make movements. Movements cannot exist unless they are carried on by men; in the last analysis it is the human hand and the human brain that serve as the instruments of revolutions."


Attesting to the truth of this statement, De Leon himself stands as Exhibit A. The movement made De Leon. The movement shaped him into the foremost Marxist and social scientist of the twentieth century. Without the movement De Leon would undoubtedly have achieved distinction, possibly even a measure of fame, as an authority on international law, which was his field. But it was the movement of Socialism that awakened the fires of his genius.


And De Leon, in turn, played a stellar role in shaping the Socialist movement. To the immortal Karl Marx belongs the discovery of the role of the class strle in history, the materialist conception of history, and the formulation of the theory of value and surplus value, and its scientific application. But it was the American, Daniel De Leon, who discovered the actual structure of Socialist society and laid down the basic tactics for achieving proletarian victory in a highly developed industrial society.


Socialism rejects the "great man" theory of history. But Socialism does not fly to the opposite extreme of denying to great men their significant roles. Paraphrasing De Leon, Socialism says historical conditions make great men, but great men often help to determine the course of history and the timing of historical developments. The elements of the social concepts discovered by Daniel De Leon were present in the industrial structure of modern society. If De Leon had not been caught by "a cat's-paw of the labor movement," to use his own expression, sooner or later another great mind would have perceived in industrial production the outlines of the industrial government of the future. But decades might have elapsed first. Meanwhile the movement in America would almost certainly have paralleled the Social Democracy of Europe, which degenerated under the corrupting influence of reforms and compromise into a movement of "bourgeois Socialism."


Indeed, the section of the American movement that marched under the banner of the Socialist party did succumb to these degenerating influences. For half a century the reformist S.P. has peddled bogus Socialism, sown confusion and obscured the lines of the class strle. No candid historian would deny that it was due mainly to De Leon's profound respect for science, devotion to principle and tireless efforts that the Socialist Labor Party, instead of following the S.P. down the primrose path of opportunism and reform, followed without deviation the course charted by scientific Socialism. It is thanks to Daniel De Leon that we have in America today a nucleus for a sound, disciplined and clear-sighted Marxian organization of the working class.


De Leon came to the social question wonderfully equipped in spirit and intellect. He was born on an island off the coast of Venezuela on December 14, 1852. Sent to Europe as a youth for an education, he received a remarkably thorough and broad one. When he graduated from the famous old University of Leyden, in Holland, he had mastered seven languages and made a deep study of history, philosophy and mathematics.


De Leon was then a young man of twenty. Not wishing to live in the tropics where he was born, he came to New York where, in 1878, he graduated with high honors from Columbia University, having been awarded prizes in constitutional and international law. In presenting the award to Daniel De Leon, Professor Barnard said to him:


"Your successful labors afford ground for the just expectation that you may find your place among the distinguished publicists of the age and the country."


Five years later he was holding down the important academic post of lecturer on international law at Columbia University. Everything pointed to a brilliant career for De Leon as a university professor when, in 1886, an incident occurred that changed the whole direction of his life.


The Columbia Law School was then located on Madison Avenue, opposite St. Patrick's Cathedral. One day De Leon was chatting with a group of his colleagues on the faculty when suddenly there was a great noise in the street-bells ringing, horns tooting and men shouting. A line of street cars -- they were horse cars then -- was coming down the avenue accompanied by a parade of workers. There had been a strike -- a long, hard strike in which the strikers had been treated brutally by the police -- and the workers had won. The professors moved to the window to watch the procession, and the scorn and contempt that they expressed for the workers outraged De Leon's sense of justice. In a mood of anger and resentment over the class snobbery of his colleagues, he sat down and wrote a letter to Henry George, whom he had heard the workers were intending to nominate for mayor, and offered him his support.


It was this incident -- a stroke of fate -- and the subsequent petty persecution to which he was subjected at the university, that brought De Leon into the labor movement. He did not dabble in the labor movement. De Leon was no dilettante. He gave himself and his great talents wholly. Soon he was introduced to the works of Karl Marx and he readily absorbed their logic and principles. By 1889 Daniel De Leon was thoroughly convinced that the capitalist system had become outmoded and the safety and welfare of humanity demanded a new social organization, one that would function in the interests of all the people and not for the benefit of a small privileged capitalist class.


De Leon joined the Socialist Labor Party, the only party then in existence that claimed to be Socialist. With his vibrant personality and strong character, and his outstanding abilities as speaker, writer and logician, he made a deep impression on the membership of this workingmen's Party and in a year or two he was elected to the post of Editor of the Party's official newspaper, the WEEKLY PEOPLE.


So much for the bare facts of his early life. When De Leon entered the Socialist movement he found it vague as to its goal and confused and uncertain as to its methods. When he died a quarter of a century later he left behind him an indestructible movement with a clear understanding of where it was going and how it was going to get there. The story of how the movement was forged and hammered into a powerful working class weapon is largely the story of the development of De Leon's ideas. And De Leon's great speeches, particularly "Reform or Revolution," "What Means This Strike?" "The Burning Question of Trades Unionism," and "Socialist Reconstruction of Society," are pivotal chapters in that story.


De Leon's discoveries did not spring forth fullblown from his brow, as Minerva is said to have sprung from the brow of Jove. They were the product of years of experience and reflection, plus a profound understanding of Marxist science. Above all, they were the product of De Leon's genius for grasping, and accepting without equivocation, the logic of science.


"Reform or Revolution" (January 26, 1896) was the first of De Leon's epoch-making addresses and the first landmark of Marxian Socialism in this country. In it he laid down the fundamental principle that differentiates "revolution" from "reform." He demonstrated that a party of Socialism, which aims for a fundamental social change, tinkers with reforms at its peril. A party of Socialism must declare itself, he said. The workers must understand the need for a thoroughgoing social change and turn a deaf ear to promises of relief that leave the capitalists in the saddle. "Revolutions triumphed," De Leon declared, "whenever they did triumph, by asserting themselves and marching straight upon their goal. On the other hand, the fate of Wat Tyler [leader of a 14th century revolt of English peasants] ever is the fate of reform. The rebels, in this instance, were weak enough to allow themselves to be wheedled into placing their movement into the hands of Richard II, who promised 'relief -- and brought it by marching the men to the gallows."


When De Leon delivered "Reform or Revolution" he was still far from being an industrial unionist. But he was rapidly gathering the experience that would take him in that direction. Actual experience within the faker-controlled unions soon taught De Leon the futility of the policy of trying to convert these unions into Socialist unions via "boring from within." ' 'Boring from within,' " he said in 1900, "resolved itself ... into this: either you must bore to a purpose, and then you land quickly on the outside; or you don't land on the outside, but then you knuckle under, a silent supporter of the felonies committed by the labor lieutenants of capitalism. Such was the experience."


But experience also taught him that the union was a vital factor in waging the class strle. The union was born of the class strle. To yield it to the labor lieutenants of the capitalist class was to abandon all hope of emancipation. Without the organization of the workers into a classconscious revolutionary body on the industrial field, the goal of Socialism would remain an aspiration. Such, also, was the lesson of experience.


The Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance, the first trade union openly to challenge capitalist rule and acknowledge the Socialist goal, was an application of these lessons. Its purpose was to array the economic forces of labor alongside the revolutionary political party. "It was 'charged,' " wrote the author of "With De Leon Since "89," "that the idea of organizing the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance originated in De Leon's head. It did. That 'charge,' at least, was true. So much the better for De Leon."


De Leon's concept of the relative roles of the economic and political organizations reflected the stage of his thinking during the early S. T. & L. A. period. The S. T. & L. A. was to fight the capitalists and their labor lieutenants, and particularly the conservative politics of the American Federation of Labor and the Knights of Labor, in the Socialist spirit. "We call upon the Socialists of the land," read De Leon's resolution adopted by the Ninth National Convention of the Socialist Labor Party in 1896, "to carry the revolutionary spirit of the S. T. & L. A. into all the organizations of workers, and thus consolidate and concentrate the proletariat of America in one irresistible classconscious army, equipped with both the shield of the economic organization and the sword of the Socialist Labor Party ballot." (Emphasis added.)


The economic organization, therefore, was to act as a shield for the Party! By its own example, by standing "by the workingmen always" to organize and enlighten them, and by throwing itself into the fray "to sound the note of sense" whenever their brothers were being fooled, the union was to win converts to the Socialist cause, build the Party and its voting strength. But De Leon believed it was the Party that would consummate the revolutionary act by placing the public powers in the hands of the workers. In 1896 De Leon believed the Party, or rather, the Socialist ballot, was the "sword."


Two years of S. T. & L. A. experience convinced De Leon that the movement was on the proper course. His second epoch-making address, "What Means This Strike?" (February n, 1898), with its brilliant exposition of the class strle, was a devastating attack on the labor fakers and their "pure and simple" unionism, and a spirited plea addressed to the striking textile workers to adopt the principles embodied in the S. T. & L. A.


Summing up the burden of his message, De Leon said:


"The essential principles of sound organization are, accordingly, these:


"1st -- A trade [union] organization must be clear upon the fact that, not until it has overthrown the capitalist system of private ownership in the machinery of production, and made this the joint property of the people, thereby compelling everyone to work if he wants to live, is it at all possible for the workers to be safe.


"2nd -- A labor organization must be perfectly clear upon the fact that it cannot reach safety until it has wrenched the government from the clutches of the capitalist class; and that it cannot do this unless it votes, not for men but for principles, unless it votes into power its own class platform and program: The abolition of the wage system of slavery.


"3rd -- A labor organization must be perfectly clear 14 INTRODUCTION upon the fact that politics are not, like religion, a private concern, any more than the wages and hours of a workingman are his private concern. For the same reason that his wages and hours are the concern of his class, so is his politics. Politics is not separable from wages. For the same reason that the organization of labor dictates wages, hours, etc., in the interest of the working class, for that same reason must it dictate politics also; and for the same reason that it execrates the scab in the shop, it must execrate the scab at the hustings."


Ultimately De Leon was to assign to the union the function of enforcing the Socialist ballot by taking, holding and operating the industries, and of supplanting the political organs of class rule with its own administrative councils. Into this conception of the union, however, the S. T. & L. A. did not fit so well. Indeed, structurally, the S. T. & L. A., with its craft and mixed locals and district alliances, was ill-suited either to take possession of or to run the industries. In this respect it marked no advance over the old Knights of Labor. Its attacks on the K. of L. and the A. F. of L. were directed at the corruption and political conservatism of these organizations and not at their craft structure.


Nevertheless, by 1900 De Leon began to shift the emphasis upon the role of the union. While the workers were gathering their strength for a final assault on the robberburg of capitalism, he said in his debate with the Social Democrat, Job Harriman, that year, they would be embroiled in incessant strle. "We need an economic organization, accordingly, that moves under the protecting guns of a labor political party."


It was not until four more eventful years had passed that De Leon reached his full intellectual height. In the meantime, his editorials reflected a growing perception of the mission of revolutionary unionism. In 1896 he had seen the union as the "shield" and the Socialist Labor Party ballot as the "sword." But by 1904 these roles were completely reversed. Now it was the political party of labor that would be the shield, and the economic organization that would be the sword, of the proletarian revolution.


In "The Burning Question of Trades Unionism" (April 21, 1904) De Leon raised the third of his great Socialist landmarks. For more than half a century the Socialist movement had been strling to free itself of the historic habit of thought that projected the future Socialist Republic in the shape of a political society and in political terms. Marx had shown that the political State was, historically, an instrument of ruling classes, and that its primary function was to hold ruled and exploited classes in subjection. "Political power, properly so called," he wrote in the "Communist Manifesto" (1848), "is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another." But, while Marx fully grasped the class character of the State, and understood, as he himself expressed it, that Socialism would "cast away the political hull," he did not foresee the actual form and structure of Socialist Administration.


When the twentieth century dawned, the movement was still in this theoretical impasse. It concurred in Marx's dictum that "the existence of the State is inseparable from the existence of slavery." At the same time it looked upon the union movement merely as a weapon with which to wage the class strle, and on the political movement both as a means of contesting with the capitalists on the political field and as the instrument for administering Socialist society.


De Leon's epochal discovery of the industrial form of Socialist Administration, first presented in "The Burning Question of Trades Unionism," got the movement out of this impasse. "Civilized society," he said "will know no such ridiculous thing as geographic constituencies. The parliament of civilization in America will consist, not of Congressmen from geographic districts, but of representatives of trades throughout the land, and their legislative work will not be the complicated one which a society of conflicting interests, such as capitalism, requires but the easy one which can be summed up in the statistics of the wealth needed, the wealth producible, and the work required -- and that any average set of workingmen's representatives are fully able to ascertain, infinitely better than our modern rhetoricians in Congress."


Thus, at last, was the social form of labor's emancipation forecast! It gave the working class in full-orbed capitalist nations a clearly defined goal, a goal dictated by the nature and form of modern industry, and one that, in turn, reflected light back upon the methods of reaching it. Now, for the first time, the movement was set straight on the ultimate mission of the trade union, which was to organize and conduct Socialist administration. In summing up the point, De Leon said:


".... the trade union has a supreme mission. That mission is nothing short of organizing by uniting, and uniting by organizing, the whole working class industrially -- not merely those for whom there are jobs, accordingly, not only those who can pay dues. This unification or organization is essential in order to save the eventual and possible victory from bankruptcy, by enabling the working class to assume and conduct production the moment the guns of the public powers fall into its hands -- or before, if need be, if capitalist political chicane) y pollutes the ballot box. The mission is important also in that the industrial organization forecasts he future constituencies of the parliaments of the socialist Republic."


A little more than a year after De Leon revealed the historic mission of the trade union, he raised the fourth of his Socialist landmarks. The address known to tens of thousands of American workers as "Socialist Reconstruction of Society" (July 10, 1905) rounded out and climaxed fifteen years of theoretic labor. Here De Leon spelled out the respective and complementary roles of the political party of Socialism and the economic organization.


The political movement is vital because it renders the masses accessible to Socialist education and agitation. "It affords the labor movement the opportunity to ventilate its purposes, its aspirations and its methods, free, over and above board, in the noonday light of the sun, whereas otherwise, its agitation would be consigned to the circumscribed sphere of the rat-hole." By presenting the issue of Socialism on the political field "it places the movement in line with the spirit of the age, which ... denies the power of 'conspiracy' in matters that not only affect the masses, but in which the masses must themselves be intelligent actors. ..." "In short and in fine," said De Leon, "the political movement bows to the methods of civilized discussion: it gives a chance to the peaceful solution of the great question at issue."


But the political organization, vital though it is, is unfit to "take and hold" the industries. It is rendered unfit both by the "reason" for the political movement, which is to capture the "political robberburg" of capitalism (the political State) and dismantle it, and by its "structure," which must conform to the political demarcations of capitalist society. The function of the political movement is "purely destructive."


It is the mission of the union -- the Socialist Industrial Union -- first, to back up the Socialist ballot with an invincible might and to "take and hold" the means of social production; secondly, to assume "the conduct of the nation's production." The union, in short, has as its constructive mission that of assuming governmental functions. In De Leon's inspired words:


"As the slough shed by the serpent that immediately reappears in its new skin, the political State will have  been shed, and society will simultaneously appear in its new administrative garb. The mining, the railroad, the textile, the building industries, down or up the line, each of these, regardless of former political boundaries, will be the constituencies of that new central authority [i.e., the government of Socialism] .... Like the flimsy card-houses that children raise, the present political governments of counties, of states, aye, of the city on the Potomac herself, will tumble down, their places taken by the central and the subordinate administrative organs of the nation's industrial forces."


The rearing of this landmark identifies De Leon as an authentic genius, second only to Marx. Indeed, a little more than a decade after De Leon delivered "Socialist Reconstruction of Society," the Russian revolutionist, Nicolai Lenin, tacitly acknowledged this, saying that De Leon was "the only one who has added anything to Socialist thought since Marx." It follows, therefore, that De Leon's concept of Industrial Union Councils as the administrative organs of Socialism is now an integral part of Marxian science. Marxian science is no longer complete without it.


De Leon's landmarks point the way to a society of peace, affluence and social harmony, in which, at last, the producers will enjoy complete democratic mastery of their tools and products. Each of these addresses establishes a vital theoretical point and none may be ignored or treated lightly without dire peril to the cause of working class and human emancipation. It is, therefore, the duty of classconscious workers, and of all other citizens who are politically awake, and alive to the revolutionary implications of our age, to study and master De Leon's program as expounded with such consummate brilliance in these great addresses. Together, they compose a handbook on the tactics, principles and goal of the Socialist revolution in America.


- 19:17 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

Nagradna igra vlade : Cinkajte i zaradite do 500.- kuna.  (Dnevnik.hr)


 Od srednjevjekovnih Zbira, preko staljinisticke OZN-e, UDB-e i KOS-a , sve do danasnje nagradne Liniceve  igre  o Cinkanju, drustveni je sustav zastite Lopovskih Kasta od Iscrpljenih Masa, doista prevalio svoja dugacka  reformatorska putesenstva, da bi ih danas transformirao u kvazi Olimpijske Igre: „Budi Prvi, budi Bogat i budi okicen  vijencem  Slave.“   Ave Cezar


- 14:25 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #


TE Plomin na plin- izgubljena bitka?   (!)

Da bi neka bittka bila izgubljena ili dobivena, uslov je postojanja dvoje konfrontiranih suparnika. Ovdje , ne da ih nema, vec tu nema ni uslova njihovom postojanju. Tamo gdje je Drzava apsolutni suveren, volja jednog slogiranog naroda ravna je pickinom dimu. Cacic, koji je znao pridonijeti postojecoj drustvenoj farsi, harati ce ovim prostorima svojom sizofrenom paranojom dotle god mu se bude prohtjelo.

- 10:14 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

25.07.2012., srijeda

Ovdje se pojavljuju u  engleskom originalu cetiri najznacajnija oratorska djela u opce po pitanju Socijalizma, pod zajednickim naslovom SOCIALIST LANDMARKS, by DANIEL DE LEON


Prvi se predstavlja danas naslovljen:


 REFORM or REVOLUTION


U iducih par tjedana slijede :


What means this strike,


The burning question of trade unionism,


Socialist reconstruction of society.


Nadati se da ce nepoznavaoci Engleskog jezika znati da se koriste Googleovim prevodom na zeljeni jezik.


 


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/37/reformrev.pdf/


- 07:31 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

24.07.2012., utorak

Djecaku, koji je prelazio granicu kroz minsko polje da „KRADE“ drva kako bi svake  noci zaradio dvadeset kuna i time prehranjivao sebe i svoje sestero brace, bila je to njegova  posljenja noc.


Koja je zapravo cijena ljudskog zivota ? I hoce li neka Previsnja Baraba, jednom za svagda, i napokom  to da utvrdi?


Ili da se to pitanje uobicajeno uputi u vakumske praznine Balkana , koji danas nuzno potrebuje naknadnu kolicinu paklenih vozila od ciste koze sjedala,i grijacima za glomaznu dupad njegovih pomahnitalih Bogova.


- 10:58 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

23.07.2012., ponedjeljak

Dok Hrvatska gori, jel' se to narucuju novi Kanaderi ili jos savrseniji Migovci ?

Il' se pak jos nezna hoce li se jos paliti ili gasiti ?
- 17:46 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

21.07.2012., subota

SDP-ova SOA izjava od 4.lipnja (2012):


“Sigurnosno-obavjestajni sustav vrijednost je od osobite vaznosti za nacionalnu sigurnost i vitalne interese RH, a ostvarivanje svrhe zakonskih odredbi vaznije je od navodnog interesa javnosti.“ (J.L)


Staljinizam u svojoj  visoj razvojnoj fazi na djelu.


- 10:23 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

20.07.2012., petak

[URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/820/spainfinancialcr505943s.jpg/][/IMG][/URL


Kad ulicama Madrida stotina tisuca ljudi uzvikuje :"Zele unistiti zemlju. Moramo ih sprijeciti!", mozda bi i ovdje barem trebalo prekinuti sutnju o Sanaderovom godisnjem odmoru i Linicevoj namjeri da Dioki pokloni Jezicu i ruskoj oligarhiji.


- 12:38 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

19.07.2012., četvrtak

Citajuci gospon profesorov blog: Ribic drzavni neprijatelj br1, Rezultati mature, kao i blogerske komentare, " nekako mi dodje da tim tekstovima istrcim na ulicu i da ih podjelim sa prolaznicima, sa bilo kim, jer su predobri da ih zadrzim za sebe!" (izvod iz Sloderdjika ?) Kao i Uzvik dragog Kangrge:" Bit ce nesto od nas!"
Jer izdvojiti iz tog glomaznog stoga slame svega nekoliko zrnaca zita, kao da postaje jedini smisao danasnjeg ljudskog bitka.


- 22:47 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

17.07.2012., utorak

Brionska kultura sitih. Bas Carsija gdje raja bez kruha ne dopire. Sve je to vojsci placeno. Quo licet Cezar, non licet bovi.


Svakako LICET, Zahvaljujem !


- 13:56 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

16.07.2012., ponedjeljak

@Neverin
Drustvo koje nije jos steklo spoznaje o vlastitom minulom radu, jos se uvijek zatice na jednom nivou podredjenog bica, osudjenog na vegetativnu opstojnost iz onog dijela njegovog proizvoda, koji mu je prepusten u svrhu vlastitog reprodukovanja. Nista vise od toga ne sadrzi bitnost suvremenog civilizacijskog ustroja, sazdanog iskljucivo na stecevinama klasno podcinjenog rada. Drzanik se tu izjednacuje sa politicarom. Politicar sa lopovom. Lopov sa moralistom. Moralist sa nacionalistom. Nacionalist sa poboznikom. Poboznik sa okorjelim nasiljnikom, koji istjeruje svaki moguci trag ljudskom bicu sa ove divne planete Zemlje.
Severino

- 07:20 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

15.07.2012., nedjelja

Cacicev „Mini new deal“ Po strani sto se vec unaprijed raspada po  zamisljenim tehnickim i financiskim savovima jedne sumanute sizofrene nakane povracanja sjaja drzavnickoj infrastrukturi,u vremenima kad na nju nadire val globalno korporacijskog kapitala, a koja biva istovremeno naceta s jednog drugog aspekta kao anakroni mrtvac jedne prevazidjene drustvene epohe, gdje vec trune na muljevitim prostranstvima nevidjene pustosi polucene nad covjecanstvom, pretvorenog dobrim dijelom u sivi objekt nomadskog paupera.


 Kud ce Balkan dalje od svojih nepremostivih zidina.


- 13:19 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

14.07.2012., subota

Dva mala macica,
crna draga vrazicka,
traze sebi drustvo.
Po dva okajca,
dva dragulja,
da zabljesnu u vas dom.

- 21:04 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

12.07.2012., četvrtak

EKSKLUZIVNO: DRAMATIČNI SASTANAK NAKON PRESUDE
Milanović protiv vrha SDP-a: 'Želite da smijenim Čačića!? Onda možemo i na prijevremene izbore'
Da , gospodine Milanovicu. To bi vam bila i jedina politicka i moralna duznost. Ili pak vjerujete da nakon Cacic- Karamarkizma moze uslijediti i nesto gore od toga. I moze. Ali gdje je vasa muskaracka odlucnost,pored par jadnih zenskih sljedbenica, i Saborskih brbljavaca,koji, svi zajedno nemate nekakve vizije o jednom mogucem drugom ishodu za ovu jadnu zelju.

- 19:54 - Komentari (1) - Isprintaj - #
DRAMA U OGULINU: POLICIJA UHITILA MUŠKARCA (47)
VIDEO Vjerski fanatik dječacima naredio da se idu moliti Bogu, 15-godišnjaka porezao nožem!
Talibanstvo nije slucajno. Slucajna je ,mozda, samo njegova geografska izvornost.Talibanstvo je odraz globalne drustvene srzi jedne civilizacije u stadijumu svog totalnog dekomponovanja.. Perzijsko talibanstvo predstavlja samo njegovu globalnu elitnu prethodnicu. Njenu izvidnu petu kolonu korporacijskog kapitala, koji se u pozadini konsolidise za svoj konacni pakleni pohod na covjeka, koj je predhodno dotucen do iscrpljujuceg fizickog i mentalnog stanja i vec duboko transfomiran u obican uporabni objekt. Jedna moguca bitka izmedju suvremenog Goljata i Davida,tek treba dokazati jeli covjekova vrsta uopce zasluzila svoj daljnji planetarni opstanak. ili nije.
Naprosto, nista manje ni vise od toga nije izgledno.


- 11:26 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

11.07.2012., srijeda

Ne, moglo bi biti jos gore 2013., nego ce biti, gospodine Linicu.
Jer sto vama predstavlja taj sitnis od dvije milijarde kuna koje namjeravati dodatno oteti od proizvodnih snaga, koje ste, u produzenoj sprezi sa bivsom visestrukom zlocinackom vladom, i onako vec stjerali na vegetativnog mrtvaca , sve kako biste i dalje bili u stanju masno prehranjivati vasu sticenicku „domovinsku“ armadu i jednu od najbrojniji policiskih snaga u odnosu na broj stnovnistva citave Europe. Njihovih, odnosno sada vasih stotina generalskih stitnika proizislih iz tog pokolja kao ratni profiteri, heroji- obijaci svjetskih draguljarnica, pijandure, kockari i praznoglave siledze, koje jos dodatno nagradjujete otetim stecevinama proizvodjackih snaga, poklanjajajuci im za jednu kunu kompletno srozano nacionalno bogatsvo, a za koje vanjsko prioritetni kapital nema danje potraznje. Pojacanim podkosurivanjem i dalje surujete sa Vatikanskim spekulativnim vlasnikom glasacke pastve - stoke sitnog zuba. A da jos uvijek niste dirnuli niti jednu od nekoliko stotina novo kreiranih opcinskih birokratskih poslusnika, niti se odrekli i jednog potkupljenog unutrasnjeg niti dijasporinog glasackog parazita, besramno prihvacenih Gogoljevskih mrtvih dusa bivse vlade i ciji glasacki broj proistice gotovo za jedam milijun viska ukupnog stanovnistva zemlje. Dalje gradite svoj vladarski imidz na notornoj lazi, da nakon dizanja PDV na najvise europske razine, vise nece biti daljnjih poskupljenja, a koje vec sada svakodnevno rastu poput gliva poslije obiljne kise. Hepovcima priskacete na enormnom dizanju cijene elektricne energije, kojom se oni tek bahato razbacuju umnozavanjem jedne apsurdne javne rasvjete, kao jedine svrhe podeblanja vlastitog profita. Od basnoslovnih dvjesto pedeset tisuca parazithih drzavnih birirokrata, jos uvijek niste niti jednog od njih stjerali natrag u proizvodni sektor zemlje. U dizanju drzavne marze gorivnih derivata presli ste i svog predhodnog vladarskog nametnika, koji je navodno cvrsto stajao iza obecanja da ce, u slucaju kada cijena goriva dostigne deset kuna, drzava tada intervenirati vlastitim marznim snizenjem. Vi je, naprotiv , podizete. I nije vas zbog toga ni malo sram.
Bit ce, bit ce mnogo jos gore. Sto direkno treba da ide samo na ruku onom buduce novom siledji, koji se takvim hazardnim drustvenim stanjem puno lakse uspinje na novo upraznjeno prijestolje.

- 14:24 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

10.07.2012., utorak

Moju percepciju „normalnih ljudi“ definirao je Marksov predhodnik Heraklit, jos pred 2500 tisuce godina: „Put prema gore i prema dolje jedan je isti.“ Danas postaje mnogo teze definirati uzrok i posljedice ljudske transformacije u svoju neljudsku suprotnost, koja se, prema Nietzsche-u radja uporedo sa degresijom staro grcke kulture. Danas postoji mnogo vise dokaza da se ta degresija radjala puno ranije, to jest, da ona „uskrsta “, i izrasta upavo proporcionalno sa pojavom i razvojem privatnog vlasnistva na prostorima Mezapotanije i Male Azije, pred gotovo 4 tisuce godina, ako ne i vise. Na to upucuje i ne slucajna koincidencija istovremenog radjanja pisane povijesti. Prvi privatni pasnjak, sljedstveno i obradiva njiva, trebali su biti ne samo ogradjeni, vec i markirani, zabiljezeni. Dakle, treba da se uporedo time porodi i ona najveca hulja covjecanstva , sa sluzbenim cipom ugradjenim u vlastite mozdane praznine drzavnickog Biljeznika. Prve bi to bile konture jednog podcinjenog objekta u podrejenoj sluzbi novo nastalog posjednika.  Ta drzavnicka gnjida, koja ce se dalje granati, multplicirati i konsolidarizirati kao apsolutisticka guja nad cjelokunom civilizacijskom infratrukturom sve do danas, ne samo da biva u stanju usavrsiti suvremenu drzavnicku masineriju do njenh pomahnitalih razmjera, vec i daleko prerasta vlastite sluganske nadleznosti, kad se u kriznim ciklusima pojave socioloski vakumi klasnih suprotnosti i kada ona, tada, obogacuje svoje sluganske nadleznosti, u korist posjednickih kasta, i pretvara je u apsolutisticku vladavinu nad cjelokupnim drustvom, a koje,iz bilo kojih razloga ne uspjeva da se preporodi u skladu novonastalih zahtjeva na revolucionarni preustroj postojecih proizvodnih odnosa. Hitlerov nacifasizam i sovjetski staljinizam postaju tipican odraz slicnih kriznih razdoblja. Kao i u danasnjim SAD-ma gdje „ si ljudi ne mogu ni zamisliti u kojoj ih mjeri nadzire NSA, ( National Security Agency)“ Treci mileniji postaje znacajan po tome, sto se upravo u njemu zbiva jadan od najvecih drustvenih preporoda: pojave svijesti, za koju, suvremene teorije bivaju sklone da je tumace kao iskljucivi artefakt, a sto ce neko dogledno vrijeme ukazati na njegovu ispravnost ili ju posve opovrci. U svakom slucaju: svijest kao artefak ili evolucijska pojavnost, jednako bi, i svakako, cinila istinsku predhodnicu staro grckoj kulturi, koja se nebi vise mogla tumaciti kao uzrocna pojava, vec iskljucivo kao posljedicna reakcija upravo na pojavnost privatnog vlasnistva, i kada se ta kultura neslucajno zatice bas u punom cvatu robovlasnickog sustava. Dakle, staro grcaka kultura, kao jedna od prvih znacajnih posljedicnih niza jedne zajednicke uzrocnosti privatnog vlasnistva, koju slijedi rimsko carstvo, srednjevjekovna renesansa, prosvjetiteljstvo i napokom Njenacka klasicna filozofija, humanizam i Marks- Engelsov znanstveni socijalizam. Dok sam Daniel De Leon predstavlja, na margini dvaju proteklih stoljeca, prvi i najsjajniji socioloski prednacrt ikada stvoren, u obliku jednog sabirnog sizeja svih tih posljedicnih iskra, i cija ukupnost konacno inaugurira buduci covjekov ustroj na njegovom punom civilizacijskom jedinstvu, zajednicke suradnje na stvaranju i podjeli cjelokupnih stecevina tehnoloskog izobilja za sav normalni ljudski rod.
- 19:17 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #
Najgori rezultati mature iz matematike: Da nisu snizili prag,palo bi ih pola! (J.L.)

Obrazovni sustav ne treba mjenjati, treba ga iz temelja eliminisati. On unistava zdravi ljudski razum i podvrgava ga spekulativnom sustavu manjinskog profitabiljnog kretenizma ,i usmjerava prema proizvodnji bubalackih praznoglavaca koji ce upravljati drustvom zasnovanom na manjku analitickih upitnosti bolenog drustva.

- 12:51 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

07.07.2012., subota

Zoran Ostricev „sim pa tam“
Usmjerenost na unutrasnjost vazna je za razvoj misli vanjskog svijeta i razvoj sposobnosti moralnog razmisljanja i zakljucka, kaze Ostric. Onda ide dalje: Na strani sam Kautskog, a ne Lenjina. Ponosan sam medjutim na ono,sto su isti radili u borbi protiv fasizma. (!)
Ono sto su zapravo radili oboje tek su bili prvi segmenti radjanja upravo jedne dvostruke drustvene azdaje fasizma. Kautskove skretnice znanstvenog socijalizma u reakcionarnu pojavu reformatoske Druge internacionale, takozvane Socialdemokracije. Lenjinove izdaje tekovina Prve internacionale, sazdane na proleterskom internacionalizmu, preradjenje u sumanuti teoriju: sociajlizam kao prva faza komunizma, koja se i formalno aktivira Trecom internacionalom, zasnovanoj na nacionalnim parametrima njenih karakteristike svake zemlje posebice. Sto i nije nista drugo od stvaranja prvih segmenata staljnistickog barbarstva gradnje sociajalizma na ruskom zaostalom muzikovom feudu.
Kautskova Socialdemokracija gusi tako prve zacetke Njemacke socijalisticke revolucije. Lenjinova samovlast gusi Krondstadsku revoluciju, koja ustaje protiv novo stvorene birokratske kaste. Zajednickim naporima, Kautskog i Lenjina, svijesno ili ne, stvaraju tako prve direktne segmente Hitlerovog nacifasizma i staljinovokog opceg pokolja vlastite nacije,cija ce se uzrocnost i posljedice jos dugo odrazavati na maglovite tokove suvremene povijesti. Odnosno na njenu mogucu reverzibilnu smjernicu povratka covjecanstva prema njegovoj iskonskoj splji.
Malo tu preostaje ponosa, da bi se danas njime tako jeftino razbacivali.

- 11:33 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #
@neverin
Dok s jedne strane naglo slabe proizvodne snage, odgovorne za cjelokupni opstanak covjecanstva, proporcionalno tome sve vise jaca moc sv trojstva: Kapitala, Vatikanskog jezuitizma i konformnog intelektualnog agnosticizama, koji se lezerno ljuljucka u lozi liberalne demokracije. Dobro sagledavas opasnost koja covjecanstvu prijeti upravo od te samrtno ranjene zvjeri, i niposto ne znaci da ce se tim Goljatom znati suociti svojom prackom suvremeni David, koji istovremeno pokrece i cjelokupni kolos covjekovog ekonomskog sustava . Proslost je , nazalost, ukazala na cinjenicu, kad se u kriznim momentima zaticu upravo te snage na nivou njihove jos nerazvijene samosvjesti, tada one, kao nekim cudom transcendentiraju u puki masovni populizam okupljen pod zastavama „Hi Hitler!“ U danasnjem Hrvatskom okruziju: „ Zivo Cacic!“

- 00:59 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

06.07.2012., petak

Mocni ekonomisti pisu Angeli Merkel: „ Krenuli ste opasnim putem u spasavanju gresnih clanica eurozone.“ (J.L.)
Za sada se jedino znade da dugovi banaka, koji su tri puta veci od dugova europskih kriznih vlada, u svojoj konacnici dolaze na naplatu najiscrpljenijim proizvodjackim snagama svijeta.
Ta ce zastrasujuca cinjenica suvremenog drustva moci uroditi jedinim pozitivnim ishodom, tek pod predpostavkom da se ostvari onaj najveci "krik" iz suvremene povijesti Marksa i Engelsa:
„Proleteri svih zemalja ujedinite se!“

- 20:11 - Komentari (1) - Isprintaj - #

05.07.2012., četvrtak

Don Grubisic: Cacic mora dati ostavku, satrao je dvoje ljudi i nikome nista. (J.L)
Ma da je gotovo nepojmljivo za 20. stoljece da se jedno zdravorazumsko bice podvrgne Krscanskoj dogmi, don Grubisic svakako spada u onaj soj ljudi, koji, pored svih zabluda, a kojima gotovo svaki od nas obiluje u raznim varijantama, nedvojbeno spada medju rijetke, koji drze smjelo vlastitu glavu visoko nad povrsinskom barustinom sto tako nemilosrdno guta danasnje covjecanstvo, te ponosno u njoj pliva sa malobrojnom skupinom normalnih ljudi.


- 23:44 - Komentari (1) - Isprintaj - #
"Znas li ti tko sam ja? Ja sam prvi podpredsjednik Vlade, i tvoje nije da mislis nego da izvrsavas narebe!"
Ea, ea, alala
- 08:59 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

04.07.2012., srijeda

Tomicevi ispadi , koji su ovdje, kao nekim cudom upereni protiv samog sebe, kao da bi i nama, danas u Istri trebali posluziti kao mudra lekcija, koja upucuje da bi ovdje isto bilo pametno vratiti duh Mussolinijevog fasizma za zasluge, kojima se mi ovdje jos uvijek vozickamo njegovim asfaltom, i jos se uvijek koristimo njegovim infrastrukturnim vodovodnim objektima.
Mozda preostaje pronaci barem jednu olakotnu okolnost dragom Anti Tomicu, to sto je njegov tekst o Cacicu nastao pod utjecajem jednog izuzetnog toplotnog udara kojem je nas lijepi Split bio tako nesnosno izlozen ovih dana.

- 18:13 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #
Norlmalni ljudi
Milanovic: Trazit cu od ministara da odu 10 dana na odmor, jer zelite da vas vode normalni ljudi, zar ne?
Da, da, gospodine Milanovicu, jer to je sve sto ovoj zemlji treba. Ali to bi doista bili oni ljudi, koji prvenstveno nemaju s vama nista zajednickog. Koji se ne vozaju u blindiranom luksuzu po Hercegovini, jer bi ona trebala pripadati nekim drugim normalnim ljudima.Niti bi svrljali po Beckim balovima u bijelim frakovima dok im zemlja stenje od Atilovskih pohoda ratnih i poratnih profitera domovinskih hulja.
Deset dana, odmora od cega? Zar od besplatnog vozickanja sirom zemlje , kako bi izlagali svoje nadmene obraze svojoj raji na koljenima?
Ti vasi ministri, sa vama na celu, svi ostali parlamentarni brbljavci, stotine generala i njihovih adjutanata, stotine hiljada birokratskih prascica iz drzavne sluzbe, desetine kreiranih Holdinga gdje su posjedani u luksuznim lozama vasi odabrani uljeznici. Privatizacijski profiteri, koji su sebi kreirali domoviski pokolj zbog „restruktuiranja privrede“ za vlastite tajkunske pologe, i Kaptolski hokstapleraj, kojeg masno hranite krvlju i znojem nametnutog danka takozvanim vjernicima i onima koji s njima nemaju nikakve veze, a tek su roditelji one dijece srozane na pedofilnu zivincad, i koji nece nikada vise imati priliku da postanu normalni ljudi.
I onih tridest milijardi dolara,koje ste grabili sirom svjetske dijaspore u neizbrojane vrece , te koje su vecinski bile punjenje po nepisanim zakonima za podvrgnuto uplaseni kukavicluk emigracije.
( U tim danima pitao sam u cudu svog dragog znanca usred Melbourna: „Jeli istina da si i ti pridonio svoj prilog toj vreci bez dna?“ „ Pa jesam, jer mi je ta svota od 28.000 dolara odrezala nevidljiva ruka Jure i Bobana, sto je proisticala iz mog prihodovnog domacinstva. Zar ti nebi ucinio to isto na mom mjestu?“)
Gospodin Mesic se jos uvijek obilato hrani iz tih ugrabljenih rezerva. Vi gospodine Milanovicu bas i niste daleko od te drustvene nemani, koja danas dijeli taj plijen sa privilegovanim drzavnickim krdom, zajedno sa ovogodisnjom pojacanom dozom neoporezovanog kesha Kaptoskim salonjama. I sve ostalo da se jednog dana tu zbroji u jednoj debeloj knjizurini buducih normalnih ljudi; onog soja drustva, koji ce se zaticati na Markovom i Kaptolskom trgu kao nomalne proizvodjacke snage posve oslobodjene od vase klasne nakaradnosti sticanja vlastitih privilegija na racun tudjeg rada.
Normalni ljudi, kao aktivni partecipanti na svim ekonomskim sferama suvremen civilizacije, sposobne da proizvedu opce izobilje za sav ljudski rod, i koji ce se tek stidno prisjecati nase, odnosno vase besramne epohe podvrgnutog covjecastva cjelokupnog Globusa u obican slam; kao objekt za vasu neiscrpnu uporabu.
Normalni ljudi, koji ce diljem svjetskih muzeja tada iscitavati slavne rijeci nase Rijecanke : „Svinje, svinje, svinje!“

- 12:37 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

03.07.2012., utorak

Cijenjeni Help Deskovci i Blogeri.hr
Zatresla se brda i porodila Neverinov san o blogerskom shanku.
Posred Istre, izmedju Poreca i Pazina,Motovuna i Rovinja, izmedju Visnjanja i Dvigrada, daju se nazreti neke njegove konture.
Nije to neki geo centar HHHrrrvvvaaatttssskkkeee, al' jest stare dame Europske.
Vikend smjestaj pruza desetak lezaja po raznim kutovima seljacke trospratnice sa ljetnim paklenim ambjentalnim izborom od 26 pa sve do 40 stupnjeva. Plus neogranicen vrtni prostor za manijakalne kamperiste i rostiljere.
Blogeri sa svojim uzim drustvom samo nek kliknu na severina sa prilozenim spiskom vlastitih doprinosa.

- 09:09 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

02.07.2012., ponedjeljak

Samo, od nekud tu iza brijega…
Eh, stari moj druze. Pitas jesam li jos ziv i gdje sam. Odgovor ti ne znam na jedno ni na drugo,ali uvijek jos svracam na pasnjake svog djetinjstva, gdje sam obljezivao uciteljeve rane, one vazda uklete popadije, i one jos pridodane oceve i majke. Gdje sam preostale dane pricao sa svojom kravom Violom i promatrao kukca, koji nepogresljivo nailazi na njenu balegu. Mrvu za mrvom stvarao je od nje novu hrpu, mozda deseterostruko vecu od sebe. Obradjivao valjajuci je sve oko sebe, sve dok dobije oblik kugle, te gurao u njemu znanom smjeru, sve dok ne zapne za ovecu travcu. Tu je preskace, sada da ju vuce u istom smjeru natraske. Poznavao je zakone fizike kad ja nisam znao ni za sebe.
Sto da se tu jos doda u ovim zrelim danima. Moj pasnjak iz djetinjstva sada je prerastao u besplodini korov . Nit' o mom kukcu kojem tu vise nema traga.
Samo od nekud, tu iza brijega, eho dopire dreke Caciceve dijece .

- 13:02 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

01.07.2012., nedjelja

„RADIMO GLADNI ZA DEBELE SVINJE. CUVAMO TUDJU ZEMLJU.“
Da, dotle smo stigli. Kamo li se tek ide. Nova stravicna nasilja, jedina koja jos kucaju na vrata covjecanstva, ostavljajuci devetnajsto stoljece daleko iza sebe.

- 12:30 - Komentari (0) - Isprintaj - #

Blog.hr koristi kolačiće za pružanje boljeg korisničkog iskustva. Postavke kolačića mogu se kontrolirati i konfigurirati u vašem web pregledniku. Više o kolačićima možete pročitati ovdje. Nastavkom pregleda web stranice Blog.hr slažete se s korištenjem kolačića. Za nastavak pregleda i korištenja web stranice Blog.hr kliknite na gumb "Slažem se".Slažem se