************************************************************************

HOME PAGE OF THE DEMOCRATIC POWER FACTION

The RandomPoster33 Press Page

From @RandomPoster33, an independent and censored contributor to WSWS.ORG comments section and advocating for a Fourth International Government

Three Blocked Comments- Does the SEP Deserve to be on the Ballot While it Blocks Participation for Democratic Power?

Discussion on World Socialist Web Site 1 comments The WSWS and the fight for revolutionary leadership in Latin America Random Poster 6 hours agoRemoved Two extra factors must weigh in to the construction of the ICFI in Latin America: 1. Fascism and military rule left a legacy on politics. [Latin American] Fascism derived…

+

+

+

+

+

+

Discussion on World Socialist Web Site 1 comments

The WSWS and the fight for revolutionary leadership in Latin America

Random Poster 6 hours agoRemoved

Two extra factors must weigh in to the construction of the ICFI in Latin America:

1. Fascism and military rule left a legacy on politics. [Latin American] Fascism derived partly from Spanish fascism, which survived WWII into the 70s, and partly from American imperialism with its repeated invasions to prevent the growth of socialism. A patient sensitization must occur towards and among the people with regard to the events that occurred under military governments and continue to occur as with the military shooting of protesters in Bogota as a response to the national strike movement.

2. The ICFI split in 1971. This broke it from most of the Trotskyists in South America. The two factions, the OCI and SLL both bore responsibility. The OCI had abandoned an insistence on Marxist leadership for the revolution while the SLL abandoned the demands of Lenin and Trotsky with regard to Democratic Centralism and the Left Opposition. Without Democratic discussion or a defense of factional democracy within the international, the insistence on teaching the Marxist dialectic took on authoritarian properties associated with the Stalinist bureaucracy. In order to establish Marxism in South America, the ICFI will have to defend the rights of its members and respect them as fellow Marxists. A syndicalist appeal to the faceless masses, without the work of building support for the party among advanced workers, will remain purely theoretical, producing tragedy through inaction. As a result of the abstention from participation of the ICFI, the fake
socialism of nationalist bourgeois parties hold sway without any open challenge.

I have discussed these ideas before in my new book, which you can download here:

https://randomposter33.file…Discussion on World Socialist Web Site 1 comments

The role of the World Socialist Web Site in educating a new generation of revolutionaries

Random Poster 7 hours agoRemoved

I would like to add that some Millennials graduated from high school or began college when the 9/11 strike hit New York, Washington D.C. and Pennsylvania. The 2008 financial crisis ended careers and forced them into low-wage jobs.

For these reasons, Millennials only own 3% of the national wealth. When Baby Boomers were the same age, in 1989, they controlled 21% of the national wealth. While the WSWS and SEP must not hold this against Baby Boomers or (perversely) Millennials, as representatives of the working class, they must demand a redistribution of wealth along generational lines in order to uphold the principles of equality.

I had argued about this topic in my new book, which you can download here:

https://randomposter33.word…Discussion on World Socialist Web Site 3 comments

The approach of the World Socialist Web Site to science

Random Poster 7 hours agoRemoved

The article quotes Trotsky:
“The ruling class, the possessing class, controls technique and through it controls nature.”

Despite the clear position that Trotsky takes, the WSWS refuses to represent the scientific arguments that prove that the Covid-19 virus had laboratory origins. Transfer of viruses between animals, including genetically modified animals, those modified to share DNA and protein profiles with human beings, occurs in labs. Laboratories actually enhance this process to produce greater concentrations of the virus with more effective contagious and virulent properties.

Above any particular scientific discovery, Marxism values the scientific method. To ignore the evidence with regard to genetic manipulation to produce viral weapons disarms the workers in the fight against the counter-revolution. If the virus does come from a laboratory, the cure could also exist as a product of the same program. Scientific reports actually prove that the techniques and samples existed with which to produce Covid-19 in a laboratory. Why not at least give these scientists a chance to argue and allow the readers to decide?

I have presented these arguments in my new book, which you can download here:

https://randomposter33.file…

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

6 responses to “Three Blocked Comments- Does the SEP Deserve to be on the Ballot While it Blocks Participation for Democratic Power?”

  1. TJM Avatar
    TJM

    How did you settle on the conspiracy theory that Covid-19 has artificial origins? The vast majority of world scientists have pointed out that human to animal transmission in a natural environment is the clear cause (which occurs every year since time immemorial creating new strains of the flu and the common cold). Why would every nation in the world collaborate in such a conspiracy? Why would the leading scientific bodies and the vast majority of mainstream scientists collaborate on such a conspiracy? Even if your conspiracy was correct, how would this alter the approach of the WSWS toward the pandemic? Should other scientific prescriptions like masks and lockdowns and vaccinations be ignored? The task of the WSWS would not change if the coronavirus had artificial origins, but embracing such conspiracy theorizing (and discounting science) would have stark implications. Like your stances on #metoo, identity politics, generational struggle (?), there seems to be a general disrespect for the Marxist materialist approach.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. randomposter33 Avatar
      randomposter33

      If you look at their statements on the subject, they never say they actually disproved the existence of laboratory origins. They don’t even argue that it is unlikely, only that it is possible, but that supposedly no proof exists or that they haven’t seen any.
      You seem to have read back and agreed completely with the arguments used to justify the war in Iraq but this time in support of a war on science. Why would so many countries join the “Coalition of the Willing” if they had no proof that Iraq had weapons of Mass Destruction? Now the same argument gets recycled, and they need no proof to back their assertions that all laboratory science is a conspiracy. This looks like a Luddite argument or something violent and cruel out of the dark ages. Please provide some reference or scientific proof for your theory about the virus’s evident laboratory origins.
      The WSWS approach to the pandemic promises an end to the violence of the pandemic through an acceptance of the WHO’s authority. The WHO is an agency of the UN, the same UN that approved the science behind the Iraq War claims about WMDs. Why do you suddenly trust their science above the science of Hong Kong University Virologist Li-Meng Yan? The acceptance of the laboratory origins of the virus would protect the working class from future attacks perpetrated by the reaction, since it would advocate for a complete unraveling of terrorist networks to end the capitalist class’s rule by terror.
      The masks and lockdowns and vaccines have actually faced opposition such as yours the entire way. The resistance to vaccines will lead to more deaths, just as the resistance to lockdowns and masks and to research into the real origins of the virus. All resistance to scientific positions on principle, as if science were the real enemy, must accept an absolute rejection from Marxism, but you would rather defend this “resistance” than confront it as part of a revolutionary movement. Your acceptance of the anti-mask, anti-lockdown, and anti-origin-research “resistance” should lead you towards a thorough introspection. You can gain a light for that introspection from my website’s articles on the Yan Report.

      Like

      Reply
      1. TJM Avatar
        TJM

        For the record I an FOR masks, vaccinations and lockdowns without equivocation… I think you misread that part

        Like

        Reply
        1. TJM Avatar
          TJM

          *am

          Like

          Reply
        2. randomposter33 Avatar
          randomposter33

          Then you should also support research into the origins of the virus and allow for a scientific discussion if this seems contraversial. Genetic engineering has made many advances, allowing laboratories to manipulate the genetic structure of viruses in order to produce certain effects within the hosts or to take a virus that does not infect through a human-to-human mechanism and manipulate it into a contagious disease. Since this technology exists and the reports on successful manipulation and production of viruses exists, then you cannot rule out the possibility of a laboratory origin for the virus. This means you must hear the evidence without slandering it as a conspiracy theory. To call this position “unscientific” appears no different from a Stalinist tyrannical argument to suppress information and discussion. That’s why I included a description of the conflict over science between early Soviet scientist and geneticist Vavilov and his Stalinist rival Lysenko in this review of the pseudo-science that’s used to combat the Yan Report:

          https://randomposter33.wordpress.com/2020/09/29/a-hoax-of-a-peer-review-of-li-meng-yans-scientific-report-by-johns-hopkins-university-staff/

          Like

          Reply
        3. randomposter33 Avatar
          randomposter33

          Also, if you are for masks, vaccinations, and lockdowns, you should also ask, “why are these safety measures facing opposition?” The idea that the far right and the oligarchy want to defend democratic rights has no validity or rationality. The only explanation is that the counter-revolution’s virus weapon needs public gatherings without safety measures in order to make its way into enough hosts. The vaccinations will prevent a large part of the infection, but as long as certain parts of the population can still contract the virus, they can act as vectors to hit vulnerable sections of the population or threaten mass gatherings.

          Like

          Reply

Leave a comment