Letters from a Young Radical

Hey Marie! Wow I had no idea this version of the b...

2010-08-06T11:26:08.090-07:00

Hey Marie!
Wow I had no idea this version of the blog was still here. Definitely an old post, and I can't claim to ever have figured out how to blog responsibly, critically and with awareness of all the issues (I think I've always made a lot of bold claims that could easily be riddled with holes) - so it's really awesome that you responded directly with your reactions and questions.

Yes I believe the socialist theory I've been "schooled" in is technically Trotskyism although the ISO makes clear that even Marx and Trotsky were wrong at times, in their opinion, so it's a loose -ism.

I like to specify Marxist because it tends to separate from the disturbing Stalinist and Maoist groups.

I'm not sure if I said so in the post, but I do appreciate loaded language at times - I think it can be important, but it's also not exactly unbiased in that way. It's good to hear about Anarchist publications, regardless of the lack of resources - it's important that people try their best, I feel. I'll have to check out "Freedom".

Regarding the warning label image I used, I don't think I was worried about copyright images at this point, but I should hope that a place like freepress.net doesn't mind haha (that's like a credit anyway, right?).

:)

I moved this blog to www.youngradical.com but haven't fixed the link since I moved hosts and haven't updated it in quite awhile. I'll probably leave this one up for a bit and then delete it and try to revive the other one, even if for archive's sake.

Feel free to email me if you want to chat about this stuff!

irischamberlain@gmail.com
Iris*

Surfed onto your page and found this entry from (w...

2010-08-06T09:51:28.774-07:00

Surfed onto your page and found this entry from (when?). I appreciate that you state your viewpoint ("Marxist"), but wonder whether others would label it specifically "Trotskyist"? I appreciate your comment on "Socialist Worker" that it "uses loaded language" - it mist be difficult to find any source which is truly objective.

"The Guardian, a british newspaper that isn't afraid to comment more bluntly on United States news (it may however, be not so great for British news)" - it is reasonable, and I do read it. I also read "Freedom", the anarchist newspaper; it is hampered by lack of resources, but has refreshing views. It is NOT a daily.

That "Warning" label - any idea of the copyright position?

Thanks for an interesting blog.

I think Annie Zirin's article is one of the best i...

2009-01-14T13:30:00.000-08:00

I think Annie Zirin's article is one of the best in terms of getting at the history of Zionism.

Not to engage in shameless self-promotion, but this book I read is really good -- check out my review: http://socialistworker.org/2008/07/10/jewish-and-against-zionism.

I think we have to draw a distinction between Zionism/Israel and Judaism. Many Jews (including myself) do not support Zionism/Israel (Zionism is the political ideology upon which Israel is based -- a Jewish-only state that inherently excludes everyone else). More importantly, Zionism was a tiny minority movement within Judaism prior to the Holocaust. Up until that point, most Jews were leftist radicals who wanted to fight anti-Semitism in the countries where they lived -- not give into anti-Semitism and retreat into their own state. We need to rebuild the tradition among the Jewish population -- opposition to all forms of oppression (including Islamophobia) and the fight for liberation everywhere (especially Palestine).

Hope to see you tonight, Iris!

Oh check me out, courtesy of the ISO:

Garet...

2009-01-13T19:15:00.000-08:00

Oh check me out, courtesy of the ISO:

Gareth Porter's piece is invaluable:
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45297

The siege of Gaza by Hadas Their
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 58/rep-gaza. shtml

Israel: The Watchdog State by Lance Selfa
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 04/Israel_ watchdog. shtml

Zionism: False Messiah by Lance Selfa
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 04/zionism_ false_messiah. shtml

The hidden history of Zionism by Annie Zirin
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 24/hidden_ history.shtml

Israel: Colonial settler state by Phil Gasper
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 15/israel_ colonial. shtml

The class character of Israel (reprint) by Moshe Machover
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 23/class_ character_ israel.shtml

Iraq, Palestine, and U.S. Imperialism by Toufic Haddad
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 36/toufic. shtml

Israel and the Nakba: Chronicle of dispossession by Paul D'Amato
http://www.isreview .org/issues/ 60/rep-nakba. shtml

Interesting point about the oppressed becoming the...

2009-01-13T19:07:00.001-08:00

Interesting point about the oppressed becoming the oppressor as well...

I worry about posting things like this since I'm f...

2009-01-13T19:07:00.000-08:00

I worry about posting things like this since I'm far from an expert on the topic, but I always come back to how important I think it is to document my progress and understanding of the world.

Having said that, I was wondering some things as well (in the Shministim video, they mention "Israeli" and "Jew" separately and I thought "oh crap, not mutually exclusive?"). Similarly, it's probably a very important distinguishment when you say you're anti-Israel. I really need to learn more about that, although I think I understand why the concept of Israel is very problematic (I guess I was just thinking of it as a country name and a culture of peoples)... I should probably be more careful with things like that.

In any case, I don't think many people read this blog, but feel free to continue posting ISO-related stuff whenever just in case! As for me, I know about the meeting and I REALLY want to come (although I might not be able to because we're releasing a new product tomorrow and you know, QA and such can be a bitch).

Do you have any articles you can recommend offhand? I plan on catching up with every Gaza-related article I can find on SW and something about the history of the conflict on ISR.

Thanks Sam!

Amen is right. Unfortunately for humanity, as far ...

2009-01-13T17:47:00.000-08:00

Amen is right. Unfortunately for humanity, as far as we've come as a species (I just got off my cell phone with a co-worker in Japan as I sit in a coffee shop in Seattle -- yay technology!), we still live under capitalism, which is based on extreme inequality, competition, and brutality. The few are disgustingly rich because the majority are heart-breakingly poor. Minority rule, as we have in every country of the world today, can only be based on extreme violence and repression. Otherwise, it would be untenable. We all know how many people we know who wish things were different but have been taught it's impossible or are afraid to take the risk of opposing such a powerful establishment. That's the message Israel is trying to send to the Palestinians -- give up, you have no hope, if you don't, you'll all be slaughtered. But the Palestinians have justice and survival on their side and they will never give up. The Israeli establishment would not be able to carry out these war crimes if it weren't for total US support. Literally, Israel wouldn't last a day if the US withdrew all the military, economic, and political aid. The US supports Israel full hilt because Israel is the US' only reliable ally in the Middle East -- the most important strategic region in the world. Israel supports the US' aims full hilt because it has an eerily similar project: expansion, power, and control of the region. Israel is a colonizing power that has consistently killed Palestinians and stolen their land. Israel wants the Palestinians (ie, human resistance to Israel) eliminated just as the early US wanted the Native Americans eliminated or crushed. As an anti-Zionist, I am anti-Israel -- Israel in the sense of a Jewish only state established on others' land. As a Jew, it horrifies me that a people who have experienced so much oppression can be such a brutal oppressor. I think Jews, Arabs, Muslims, Christians and anyone else should be able to live in a secular state with democratic rights everyone. Our ISO branch is actually having an educational discussion on exactly these issues tomorrow, Wednesday, night at 7pm at SCCC in room 4183. Join us to discuss and learn more!

thanks for this, iris :-) good to hear what you th...

2008-11-11T15:26:00.000-08:00

thanks for this, iris :-) good to hear what you thought. very amusing too.

for the record, shaun is irish, not scottish.

Haha. Yeah I thought some parts of it were actuall...

2008-10-03T13:38:00.000-07:00

Haha. Yeah I thought some parts of it were actually very funny, but 5 whole minutes of leading up to that with the whole insulting tone is a bit much, I agree.

That ad is also just really boring. We're too lazy...

2008-10-03T13:31:00.000-07:00

That ad is also just really boring. We're too lazy to vote but we'll spend five minutes listening to celebrities lecture us (using a technique that parents use with little kids)?

At least Jamie Foxx was wearing a kaffiyah -- that's pretty cool.

Yes! I really liked that article too, particularly...

2008-08-05T11:19:00.000-07:00

Yes! I really liked that article too, particularly the history of the banana.

Finney you are so awesome to respond to this!
Y...

2008-07-01T21:58:00.000-07:00

Finney you are so awesome to respond to this!
You said: "As long as there is competition, the consumers can find a better price/product and the producers (workers) can find better wages/jobs". I agree in theory, but how do we define "better"? Is minimum wage better than slavery? And its true that more competition means more options, but is the "best" detergent really the best we can do? Why is it that I still can't find tampons that don't have bleach in them? Largely the companies that succeed, even with a lot of competition, are not giving us any real choices. Do I want All, Tide, or Wisk? Who cares?

"However the problem with capitalism is that people are lazy and the problem with Socialism is that people are greedy. Then again capitalism deals with lazy people better than socialism deals with greedy people, at least so it seems to me."
I think I'd have to get your motivations behind these to respond but I'll try anyway. The problem with people who are lazy in Capitalism is that they can't survive. The laziness of people often comes up in this conversation, I'm not sure why. Lazy to me doesn't translate as the default human state of being so much as a reaction to boredom. The way society is set up now is lacking in stimulation or nurturing supports. It's HARD to live the way we do. Why would anyone want to do a thankless job? I think if everyone could do what they want in the world, they would be able to find fulfillment in something, and we wouldn't have an issue with people who don't "contribute to society".

While I agree there's a question in Socialism phrased basically, "what about people who want to accumulate more stuff even though they have everything they need to survive and be happy?". I don't think greed is an evolutionary human characteristic (if it is at all) that can't be overcome when surrounded by certain cultural narratives, such as being happy with what you have. And this isn't to say that in a socialist society we couldn't have things that we want. Perhaps people share yachts and use them when they want to. There certainly isn't a limitation saying I can only have what I need to survive and no fun like Playstations - there would be a lot of room for that if we wanted it.

Great thoughts Finney, thanks for the challenge.

When ever a corporation gets to the size that it c...

2008-07-01T21:11:00.000-07:00

When ever a corporation gets to the size that it can usurp competition, weather it be in the market of consumers or the market of producers, it looses the ability to be good. As long as there is competition, the consumers can find a better price/product and the producers (workers) can find better wages/jobs. However the problem with capitalism is that people are lazy and the problem with Socialism is that people are greedy. Then again capitalism deals with lazy people better than socialism deals with greedy people, at least so it seems to me. But awesome post, I hadn't thought about it from this perspective before :-).

Thought of you. There's no use trying to be re...

2008-06-19T08:06:00.000-07:00

Thought of you. There's no use trying to be responsible, we might as well pack it up and go home http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/18/opinion/18koeppel.html?em&ex=1214020800&en=acf4d20d4c12e559&ei=5087%0A

I AM THE AUTHOR OF THE BOOK YOU'RE CRITIQUING WITH...

2008-06-18T18:46:00.000-07:00

I AM THE AUTHOR OF THE BOOK YOU'RE CRITIQUING WITHOUT READING.

SALON LEFT A MISLEADING IMPRESSION. I CERTAINLY DO NOT BACK LITERACY OR CIVICS TESTS FOR VOTERS, FOR INSTANCE.

AND I DO NOT BLAME THE VOTERS FOR ANYTHING. I ASK THEM TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR BEHAVIOR. FOR EXAMPLE, AFTER THE 9-11 COMMISSION REPORTED THAT 50% OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE STILL INSISTED ON BELIEVING THAT SADDAM WAS BEHIND 9-11 I SEE NO REASON NOT TO HOLD THE PUBLIC RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS IDIOCY.

TH INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE FOR ANYBODY WHO CAN READ OR WATCH THE EVENING NEWS. THAT SO MNY FAILED TO ABSORB IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY ON OUR DEMOCRACY.

THIS IS A 10 ALARM FIRE THAT WE CAN'T AFFORD TO IGNORE ANY LONGER.

PLEASE GO TO MY BLOG TO FIND OUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE BOOK IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO READ IT. THE BLOG PROVIDES A VIDEO, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT LAYS OUT SOME OF MY ARGUMENTS.

HTTP://HOWSTUPIDBLOG.COM

RICK SHENKMAN

Re: Porter.
1. I think Fairey did those on his ...

2008-06-14T11:41:00.000-07:00

Re: Porter.
1. I think Fairey did those on his own? But I disagree, I think the design on Obama's campaign is very similar: http://divisionstreet.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/vfc_poster_e.jpg
(What's the difference between a headshot that says CHANGE by Fairey and one that says Vote for CHANGE by the campaign?).

2. Repeat above claim. I appreciate the whole "we" thing, but I'm starting to feel its just patronizing and well, obviously just to win.

3. Supa interesting, want to read more about that.

4. That's only interesting in the context of a recent conversation, where someone claimed to me that socialists basically only exist because of propaganda, invented it, mastered it, etc. I find it ironic that in actuality, an American did the job and his achievements are now ingrained in capitalist marketing.

5. Agreed, but Bush had a whole lot of people behind him (cause you know, they like money and power). Someone who is against the govt/business/media not having so much power is going to be the black sheep, no pun intended. O that was aweful.

Hehe, I didn't realize anyone was commenting on th...

2008-06-08T00:41:00.000-07:00

Hehe, I didn't realize anyone was commenting on this thing. Thanks for that! Yeah, this is one of those really hard arguments (I'm beginning to discover that most are). I would never personally use the word "fat acceptance" because it sounds like a loaded (haha get it?) term that "fat haters" use. What about "thin acceptance?". In truth, being either extremely thin or extremely overweight is simply not healthy. The hard part about the conversation is that there are two compelling anti-mainstream arguments that clash with eachother: 1) That our materialist culture, our advertising and media all push women to be something physically impossible for the majority of the species, and it causes serious emotional damage. And 2) that we really are a nation of fast food junkies, and we need to get back to the earth and back to ourselves to become healthy as a culture again. Both of those - the race to be thin and the epidemic of weight are caused by the profit machine. It's a perfect cycle. See fast food advertising, eat fast food, gain weight, see advertising/media/entertainment/diet advertising, buy products to become thinner, rinse and repeat.

Hey Leela - thanks for posting! Yeah, I totally ag...

2008-06-08T00:33:00.000-07:00

Hey Leela - thanks for posting! Yeah, I totally agree on the interesting contradictions (?) of how to save the world. The Dalai Lama's traditions likely influenced the movements of the 70's that focused on change through individualism (ie: if we all change ourselves for the better, the world will be a better place), rather than community. I don't think this is a bad philosophy at all, and in fact I think it's necessary, and does help, and can help if it continues to spread. However, I also agree that it may be naive to think that this is the only solution to changing the world, and also leads (sometimes intentionally) to things like blaming the victim, or demoralization and frustration, ie: "Why can't everyone just be compassionate like ME?! If everyone was just nice to eachother the world would be better". Individualism has its merits but I think it can also be dangerous, and has been used as a weapon in this century in advertising and does a great job at breaking up social movements.

What strikes me as so interesting and funny, and I...

2008-06-08T00:24:00.000-07:00

What strikes me as so interesting and funny, and I absolutely think this is wonderful:

You're one of the most feminine people I know.

From the Help Halt Terrorism! link uspace added, t...

2008-06-02T08:51:00.000-07:00

From the Help Halt Terrorism! link uspace added, this is interesting, and I think helpful.
http://citizenwarrior2.blogspot.com/2007/09/how-to-change-someones-opinion.html

Less fun at parties, tho.

Coupla thoughts:

1. The Obama posters by Fa...

2008-06-02T08:44:00.000-07:00

Coupla thoughts:

1. The Obama posters by Faiery, et al... were they commissioned by the Obama campaign? They aren't available on the site, and I think they're too smart to actively create such imagery. This is the campaign that traveled middle Pennsylvania in an unmarked bus b/c they knew the rock star image wouldn't work there.

2. They could go further in making this about people vs. THE ONE, but, the Obama site opens up with "the largest grassroots movement in the hsitory of presidential politics". Atop the site inside, it is his quote about believing not just in him, but in "our" ability to change. I don't think Obamamania is something the campaign fully embraces, because I think this campaign is too smart to try to actively set up Messianic expectations. (Also, just from what I hear and read of this guy personally, it's not his personality.)

3. Fully agree on rationality + emotion. Studies show you're right. Emotion plays an important role in decision-making: how we prioritize and weigh some criteria over others. Full rationality = analysis paralysis, from the (pop) psych books I've read.

4. "I find it interesting that the Marxists of the Russian Revolution of 1917 considered propaganda to mean simply telling people about your ideas, whereas American Eddie Bernays took it and ran..." What in particular strikes you here?

5. "I've come to believe that once in the system, even the president has only limited power, if he (can I say "or she" yet?) wants to retain ... their... position." Well, on one hand, yes. That's the structure of the US gov't. I think the Bush administration is a good example of the Prez being able to accomplish almost anything they want. Some of the "ruling class" wanted war; tax cuts; dismantling of environmental laws; etc. Others of the "ruling class" did not. But I agree that even though some power players will align with a somewhat populist message, that Obama's apparent agenda will meet greater resistance than Bush's. For sure.

Shit, time to work.

.
Marxist economics? Now that's an oxymoron. ...

2008-06-01T16:01:00.000-07:00

.
Marxist economics? Now that's an oxymoron. So many talented artists for Obama too. His 'Change', 'Hope' and 'Progress' mantras are actually somewhat self-mocking. Making your own Obama posters is totally addicting, I laughed so hard I almost had a breakdown. LOL!
:)
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
always hope for hope

push for change at all costs
change can never be bad

.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
only feel and hope

please make people change
change can only be good

.
Make Some Obama Posters NOW!
.
Appeasement Talk Bothers Appeasers
.
Help Halt Terrorism Now!
.
USpace

:)
.

I've wondered about this often myself, and I have ...

2008-05-29T08:46:00.000-07:00

I've wondered about this often myself, and I have a few thoughts I'd like to share back.

First, I don't think that it's fair to assume that this commenter was a 14-year old boy who strayed out of his comfort zone of MySpace and a crappy band's fansite, found himself confused and then posted a nasty comment. Crappy commenters are found in every type of media all over the internet - they're women and men and young kids copying older kids and college kids and make up just about every type of age demographic you can imagine.

I don't think the anonymity is quite why they do it. I think it's because the very nature of the Internet is to eliminate barriers between your subconscious and the "outside" world. You can indulge any fantasy you have on the internet - there's any kind of porn you could ever want to see, or anything you've ever wanted to know about anything is just a Google search away, and there are photos of places and people you'd never see in real life. Oh and don't forget all the gossipy pieces of information about your friends, family and peers on social networks. There are TONS of blogs out there (like Perez Hilton) whose entire premise is to indulge people's urge to make fun of celebrities (those more fortunate than themselves) - picking out their every little flaw and remarking snarkily about their inability to have to real relationships - they make the crappy comments FOR the people who would crappy comment on it on their own! Anything you want to do or see online is out there if you can find it.

My theory is that people are so used to just chasing their impulses through a search box or address bar that they've got no problem taking two seconds to write out what their most base reactions are to what they see. The commenter leaves his mark and moves on. I think there are very few who do it intentionally to wreak havoc (e.g. hurt someone's feelings or start a thread to get some attention). Anonymity gives the ability to behave this way without consequence, but it's not the direct reason why they do it.

Jezebel (the gawker media celebrity/fashion gossip blog with a feminist twist) has an interesting way of handling crappy commenters. Once a day they do a post that mentions a good comment and a bad comment. Good comments are usually witty remarks about the original post, bad comments are ones that detract from the discussion or are especially hateful toward the content or other commenters. Sure, it's just their commenter ID that suffers a public shaming, but it's still a way to take out the anonymity of it all. Every so often the blog will do a post where they ban the commenter IDs of repeat offenders, calling them out for their bad behavior and telling them why they're not allowed to comment anymore. Sure, nothing is stopping those people from signing up under a different id to start commenting again - but by now they will have heard the message that impulsive expressions of hatred aren't okay.

I'm obese with fat in the liver. Bad times as this...

2008-05-05T11:32:00.000-07:00

I'm obese with fat in the liver. Bad times as this will definitely lead to trouble in the future without improvement, but I think that shows something. We aren't meant to be overweight. We, as all animals tend to, eat more when an excess of food is available. And boy do we have lots of it in our great nation!

It takes training to overcome this genetic predisposition. And now 2/3 of Americans are overweight, and 1/3 obese [1]. Sorry, but I'm against fat acceptance. We're putting ourselves at risk as a nation and individually.

We also have to accept that we live in an "information economy" and are sedentary, so we have to take extra measure to get out and exercise. I'm definitely guilty of that cause of trouble.

I agree about the statement regarding all the good things thin contestants do while not mentioning anything Chloe has done, just pointing out her weight, was an outright attack and had no merit in the argument.

Let's all enjoy the nicer weather and get out walking, kayaking... and admittedly barbecuing :)

[1] http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/overwt.htm

hey Iris, just discovered your blog!!!

Int...

2008-04-18T17:24:00.000-07:00

hey Iris, just discovered your blog!!!

Interesting stuff on the nature vs. nurture debate. I absolutely agree that people's environment fundamentally shapes their experience, ideas, behavior. You only have to look at the huge variation in human societies across the world and throughout history to see how adaptable we are and how much the social situation affects the individual. Humans are by definition social, we simply can't survive on our own. Even capitalism, which pretends to value "individuals" is really a social system in which a small segment of society dominates the rest.

But I do have to take issue with the Dalai Lama's prescription for compassion. He seems to recognize that individual development is rooted in social factors, yet his solution is entirely focused on the individual. "Meditate on compassion", "teach your children" etc. (how are working class parents supposed to "nurture" their children while working full time and being forced to send them to substandard schools?) It's hard to see how any of this will say get rid of systematic inequality, or end an occupation (there's a reason people in Tibet are rioting, not meditating). We need to organize collectively if we want to solve the problems we face as a society. For instance like they did in 1968 (shameless plug :D)