I was also reacting to the implication in your response to me that the distress
I was expressing about the world in that previous message was solely a function
of my particular situation because you did say
You've identified three very real conditions. I'd say this is whereWell no, I have no illusion that I should be doing more than I can do. Yes, I'd
we find the majority of our clients...> While you are probably physically
isolated more than many of us, you
do have the active interest in what is going on around you. If I had
some magic Fairy dust that would help you not to feel depressed over
world affairs, I'd send it by overnight mail. Maybe you still feel
that you should be physically involved in world affairs?
Carl,
Let's set my physical complaints aside and look objectively at the
world. I do really take what is happening, very personally. Every
article I read, every book, every news item I hear, all are about real
people and terrible things are happening to them. When you say that
you are curious about what will happen next, it is as if you are
talking about a film you're watching, not real life. A headline just
came into my inbox that tells me that we're one step closer to passing
the TPP. Obama and the Republicans will have their way and real people will
be hurt. Did you catch that bit in Hedgs'
article yesterday about how prison slave labor is working in the fast
food industry? Do you remember that there has been no rebuilding in
Gaza and it's been almost a year since Israel last attacked it? Is it
a good thing that most people are so busy that they don't have time to
think about these things?
And yes, New York has changed a great deal since 1973. Westbury has
changed, and not for the better. The city has changed in complex ways .
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 11:57 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Bernie Sanders & oppositional criticism
Miriam,
You've identified three very real conditions. I'd say this is where
we find the majority of our clients. Of course the third condition,
our personality, probably makes the greatest difference. Even folks
we meet who live with family, can be feeling isolated. Often they
live in a spare bed room with their own TV and a bath room just
outside their door. So they are with family, but actually alone.
In my experience, the people who seem to be the happiest are the ones
who have a network of activities and acquaintances, along with an
interest in what is going on around them. Not always world affairs,
nor even local affairs, but certainly an interest in what is going on
with family and friends.
While you are probably physically isolated more than many of us, you
do have the active interest in what is going on around you. If I had
some magic Fairy dust that would help you not to feel depressed over
world affairs, I'd send it by overnight mail. Maybe you still feel
that you should be physically involved in world affairs? Some of us
never adjust to the limitations of our bodies. I know that I sure
struggle with that aspect of aging. I was complaining to my doctor a
few months back, telling him how I haven't the strength in my lower
back to allow me to do the brush clearing I needed to do.
"Well," he said after a long pause, "You're not a young man anymore.
Have you considered slowing down and taking it easy?" But that made
me think of my great grandmother, sitting in her rocker waiting to go
to be with Jesus. She was barely 74 years old when she died.
I was more inclined to want to compare myself to the couple I knew
when I lived in Ballard, in the north end of Seattle. They had a
neat, orderly little two bedroom house just above the ship canal. She
baked her own bread, and never let me pass by without scooting out
with a bag of fresh cookies. He mowed the lawn with a hand mower and
trimmed the hedges and weeded the flower beds, on his hands and knees.
She did all the house work and kept the windows sparkling. They
clambered into their old Chevy and drove the three blocks to the big
Tradewell super market once a week, to stock up on supplies.
They were both 100 years old. They had been married 78 years when I
knew them. That was back in 1959. I married my first wife the next
June, and moved out of the area, so I do not know if they reached
their goal of 80 years of marriage. Think of being born before Abe
Lincoln was elected president!. Between 1859 and 1959 the entire
world had transformed. The Industrial Revolution was barely underway.
And at 100, they looked up to see huge jet planes trundling overhead.
They had an old black and white TV that one of their three children
had given them. They had central heat and electric lights and a
washer and dryer and a telephone. They had a car instead of a team of
horses. When I would stop by and ask them if I could be of any help,
the old man smiled, scratched his thinning white head and said, "I just can't
think of a thing.
We got all these modern gadgets doing most of the work." I wonder
what he would have thought of this computer...and the cell phone...or the
iPhone.
And now that I think of it, what a different world today, from that
moment back in 1935, in Spokane's Sacred Heart Hospital, when I came
screaming into the world on a blustery April 13th. Do you know, back
when I was a boy the iceman still drove his old horse and wagon around the
streets in Spokane.
Ah me! The changes we've seen. I'll bet even New York has undergone
some small changes in the past 70 or 80 years.
Which makes me chuckle. The last time I was in New York was in 1973.
My son learned to walk at my buddy's home out at Eaton's Neck, Long
Island, at the Coast Guard base. In fact, I still have a copy of the
tapes from the
1973 NFB convention, and in the background you can actually hear the
jingling of Jamie's shoe bells.
Anyway, a couple of years ago I was talking to a friend who had just
come back from New York. I wondered out loud if it had changed much
since I'd been there. When I told my friend that I'd not been there
since 1973, she burst out in hysterical laughter. "Could you imagine
coming back to Seattle after not being here since 1973?
My mind wandered around the city and surrounding areas. Funny, how
much really had changed, even though it seemed to still be the same.
Living among change helps the feeling of sameness, but I do remember
the lady in Port Angeles, who told us that she'd been born three doors
from where she now lived, 100 years ago, and she had grown up,
married, raised three children, worked, buried her parents and later,
her husband and one son, and today, "I don't know this town, and
everybody living here are strangers."
But she was happy. We'd first met this lady when she was a mere 95,
and was trying to figure out how she could thin her carrot seeds now
that she could not see to plant them properly. We showed her that she
could lay a strip of masking tape on the table, sticky side up,
sprinkle her seeds, shake off the excess, and lay the strip down in
the trench in her garden. She already had figured out that if she put
a stake at either end of the row and a string from one to the other,
she could draw a straight shallow trench and place her tape in it.
But I am rambling again. Time to head for Sequim and do some good in
the world.
Take care and know that I'm sending some powerful cheery thoughts out
your way.
Carl Jarvis
On 6/23/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl, You're a lucky man. I'm not feeling much excitement or wonder
lately..
This could be due to my physical condition, the state of the world,
my personality, or a combination of all three.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl
Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 12:29 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Bernie Sanders & oppositional
criticism
Miriam writes: "We talk about free elections, reaching out to the
public, organizing, working toward a better future for everyone. But
ultimately, we are at the mercy of the power elite."
But Miriam, isn't that the way it's supposed to be? I mean, if we
were riding high in the drivers seat, then this big mess would be our
fault, and some upstart little bunch of whipper snappers would be
trying to push us out.
Since the world is one big mess, I prefer to be where I am. Some
people see their lives as a hopeless blink of the eye. I see my life
as a cheery twinkle in an inquisitive eye.
And while neither eye will make a difference in the scheme of things,
at least I'm hopeful and having a good time, too.
I really hope each of us can grab the excitement and wonder that is
all around us. I know that this will not make the world better. But
being depressed or feeling down will not make things better, either.
Carl Jarvis
On 6/22/15, R. E. Driscoll Sr <llocsirdsr@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Since I am one of those who do not know Jill Stein the following is
the result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein
*Jill Ellen Stein* (born May 14, 1950) is an American physician
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physician> who was the nominee of the
Green Party
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_of_the_United_States> for
President of the United States
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States> in
the
2012 election
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_
2
0
12>.^[1]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-wins-1> ^[2]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-Boston.com-2>
^[3]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-Questionaire-3>
Stein was a candidate for Governor of Massachusetts
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_Massachusetts> in the
2002
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_gubernatorial_election,
_
2
002>
and the 2010 gubernatorial elections
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_gubernatorial_election,
_
2
010>.^[4]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-4> ^[5]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-5> ^[6]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-6> On June 22,
Stein announced that she would seek the Green Party's presidential
nomination during an appearance on Democracy Now!
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Now%21>.
Stein is a resident of Lexington, Massachusetts
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexington,_Massachusetts>. She is a
graduate of Harvard College
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_College> (1973) and the
Harvard Medical School
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Medical_School>
(1979).^[7] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-7>
^[8] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-8> ^[9]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-9>
Stein was endorsed for President in 2012 by Noam Chomsky
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky>, a linguist, author and
activist,^[10]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-Stein-10> and by
Chris Hedges <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Hedges>, a
Pulitzer Prize
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulitzer_Prize>-winning
journalist <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist> and war
correspondent
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_correspondent>,^[11]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-national_peace_l
e
a
ders-11>
among others. In February 2015, Stein announced the formation of an
exploratory committee to seek the Green Party's presidential
nomination in the 2016 U.S. election
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_
2
0
16>.^[12]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein#cite_note-considers-12>
^I Know a little more now.
On 6/22/2015 10:59 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
In 2012, no one with whom I spoke, knew who Jill Stein was and in
2016, they still won't know. We live in a mass, impersonal,
fragmented society, in a complex empire operated by financial and
military forces way beyond our control. We, on this list, and the
leftist organizations that we support, are dreamers. We talk about
free elections, reaching out to the public, organizing, working
toward a better future for everyone. But ultimately, we are at the
mercy of the power elite.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl
Jarvis
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 11:28 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: my blog carl jarvis
Subject: [blind-democracy] Bernie Sanders & oppositional criticism
Good article, Roger. And by the way, Jill Stein declared her
intent to run for the presidency this morning on Democracy Now,
with Amy Goodman.
So let me ramble a bit on the upcoming fiasco called the
Presidential Race. In boxing we call it, "The fix is in". There
is no race.
Unless you consider Tweedle Dee Dee and Tweedle Dee Dum sitting on
the fence, a race. Clinton verses Clone does not constitute a Race.
It is the left hand shaking the right hand. But both hands belong
to the same body. Both hands are controlled by the same brain.
Both hands appear to do different things, but both hands will
always do what the brain orders them to do.
That, in my humble opinion, is the American Political Monster.
So, if I am even close to being correct, we can't make this monster
do our bidding. We are under the spell of different brains than
the two hands of the Ruling Monster.
Then why even dabble in this fiasco? Why even campaign for Jill Stein?
Would we really want to place her in the pot of boiling water
called the White House? Ideally, we would better spend our time
planning how to remove the current Monster, with nonviolent means.
Remember, I strongly maintain that violent overthrow merely sets a
nation up for another violent encounter. Usually the takeover by a
Strongman.
We might better spend our time discussing what sort of world we
want for our children/grandchildren.
But the Progressive/Radical Parties are at each others throats,
eager to show the limitations of all others, and the "Rightness" of
their own.
Sort of like the vast array of Christian Denominations.
Maybe the day will come when all these organizations can talk
together without taking everything personally, but we have been so
conditioned to behave in that manner that it is going to be a long
time in coming.
Meanwhile, I am planning to support Bernie Sanders. Why? Because
he does have a fairly broad platform and audience. He will bring
up many domestic issues that the Right Hand would rather not
consider, and the Left
Hand(Clinton) will be forced to pay lip service to. At least this
will force the Monster Brain to work overtime in devising ways to
squelch Bernie Sanders. There is some value, or perhaps simply
some fun, in helping the Monster squirm.
As long as we keep firmly in mind that no matter what happens, the
Monster Brain is going to win.
And after the Primary, I plan to turn my measly support to Jill
Stein, and the Green Party. Still remembering that even if she
were to win, she would be swallowed up by the Monster Brain.
But again, her campaign will bring out issues that would never surface.
Perhaps of all the candidates, Jill Stein would have the greatest
impact on our nightmare called, Foreign Policy. None of the Left
Hand or Right Hand candidates will touch that sacred cow. None of
them, including Bernie Sanders, will dare to take on the mighty
military, the true power center today.
The Corporate Masters are behaving like the Greedy Fools down
through history. They will grab and grab and wake up one day to
discover that the very forces they set in motion to help them
maintain power, are turning on them and taking over. The Corporate
Rulers will become the servants of the New Ruling Class. The
Mighty Military.
But I digress. Bernie Sanders, and then Jill Stein. But it will
only be an exercise to fill in my idle moments.
Carl Jarvis
On 6/22/15, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In the past when I have been asked what I think of Bernard Sanders
I have said that at best he is a social democrat and a right-wing
social democrat at that. I think that Sanders is causing me to
revise that opinion himself. He does not seem to be a social
democrat at all and his claims of socialism have about as much
meaning as others' claims that Obama is a socialist. Sanders is
showing every sign of being nothing more than a bourgeois liberal
and not even a left-wing liberal either.
http://socialistaction.org/bernie-sanders-and-oppositional-critici
s
m
/
Bernie Sanders & oppositional criticism
Published June 21, 2015. | By Socialist Action.
July 2015 Sanders
By JOE AUCIELLO
“… the oppositional criticism is nothing more than a safety valve
for mass dissatisfaction, a condition of the stability of the
social structure.” — Leon Trotsky in his preface to “The History
of the Russian Revolution.”
In early June, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton
told a conference organized by Service Employees International
Union members that she backed the $15-an-hour national minimum
wage campaign. She praised the union activists and supporters “for
marching in the streets to get a living wage” and added, “I want
to be your champion. I want to fight with you every day.”
She didn’t really mean it, of course. Within 24 hours her campaign
issued a clarification explaining that in general Clinton favors
higher wages for low-income workers, but she does not specifically
endorse the demand for a $15 hourly minimum. So, union members and
activists heard their hoped-for message; big business and
Democratic Party officials heard the more honest message.
Clinton’s cautious centrism permits her only a flirtation with
leftist causes, thereby yielding the left-of-center space to
another candidate.
Thus, the stage is set for the entrance of Vermont Senator Bernie
Sanders, whose campaign website boldly asks: “Ready to Start a
Political Revolution?”
Sanders certainly intends to become the voice of “oppositional
criticism” in the 2016 election. Thus far, the efforts of this
sometime “socialist,” the independent in the Senate who typically
votes with the Democrats, have been more successful than those of
former Democratic governors Martin O’Malley of Maryland and
Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island.
Sanders has been drawing increasingly large crowds in the primary
states for his campaign events, and in those states his poll
levels are sharply rising. Clearly, Sanders is saying something
different—which energizes Democratic and independent voters. The
promise of radical change resonates with many whose lives have
seen little benefit during the tepid years of the Obama administration.
At this stage in the primaries, the Sanders platform gives a
public hearing to many progressive ideas. Most notably, the
Sanders campaign directs a spotlight on the obscene levels of
income inequality in America. Sanders speaks out for a national,
single-payer health care system and pledges to pursue efforts to
create sustainable energy to reduce global warming.
He would remove tuition fees from state colleges and universities.
He supports the $15 minimum wage, argues for breaking up the
mega-banks, and promotes a jobs package that would put people to
work by rebuilding the highways and bridges that are deteriorating
throughout America.
These are reforms that, if enacted, would benefit the lives of
millions.
No wonder Sanders’ poll numbers have risen dramatically.
Still, Bernie Sanders is hardly an unknown. Given his
“socialist-light”
political history and voting record, which is virtually
indistinguishable from that of a typical liberal Democrat and
includes support to funding Israel and the war in Afghanistan, it
is fair to ask:
Is Sanders really the voice of dissent? Is he really the figure
who can galvanize the poor, the working class, women, racial
minorities, and youth to lead the political fightback that is so
sorely needed?
Though audiences at rallies may be stirred by soaring speeches,
high-flown words accomplish little. What’s more, a geyser of
popular rhetoric tends to erupt every four years around election time.
A socialist writer has noted that while the Democrats proclaim
themselves “as champions of the poor, their ‘soak the rich’
rhetoric is largely a misrepresentation. They and their Republican
counterparts use such rhetoric only to appeal to voters. Both
parties, over the last decade in particular, have rushed to find
tax breaks for the rich and lower the real income of working people.
Today even two-income families are having a difficult time paying
for basic necessities.”
This observation was made 25 years ago. The article, written by
Hayden Perry, was entitled: “Congress approves new budget: Higher
taxes and fewer services,” which certainly has a present-day ring
to it. Though it was published in the November 1990 issue of
Socialist Action, it could be reprinted today with little change.
Bernie Sanders is this year’s model of the token “leftist” who
will make oppositional criticism as a safety valve for mass
dissatisfaction. His commitment to his causes appears real enough,
but it goes no further than the margins of the Democratic Party.
Those margins cannot and have never sustained a popular movement
that would give real meaning to democracy.
Some fifteen years ago, Ralph Nader launched his bid as the Green
Party candidate for the president of the United States. Although
Socialist Action gave no support to the Green Party’s electoral
campaigns, which only proposed reforms to capitalism, Nader at
least argued with a boldness and insight thoroughly lacking in
Bernie Sanders today. In his 2000 announcement speech, Nader said
that the foundation of his efforts would be “to focus on active
citizenship, to create fresh political movements that will
displace the control of the Democratic and Republican parties, two
apparently distinct political entities that feed at the same
corporate trough. They are in fact simply the two heads of one
political duopoly, the DemRep Party.”
How did Bernie Sanders, the socialist who asks if we are ready for
revolution, respond to the Nader campaign? In his political
memoir, Nader explains: “Bernie had told me that while he
sympathized and agreed with our pro-democracy agenda, he could not
come out officially for us.
The reason was that his modus vivendi with the House Democrats
would be ruptured and he would lose much of his influence,
including a possible subcommittee chair” (“Crashing the Party,” pp.
125-126).
Nader was discreet enough not to inquire about the actual results
of Sanders’
supposed influence.
Little has changed. The fix is still in. The Democratic National
Committee has essentially offered Sanders a simple deal in words
approximately like these: “We’ll let you speak out and give you a
place in the six Democratic primary debates if you affirm your
place as a Democrat. You get to say whatever you want in the state
primaries as long as you support whoever we want in the national
election.”
It is not a very good deal, but it is the only one on offer, and
though Sanders will haggle, pushing for more debates, he will
accept what he is given. It’s what Bernie does. In fact, Sanders
has built a career as the fighting socialist who takes a dive for
the Democrats.
Sanders does not lead and does not intend to. He follows. His
vision of the future is restricted to what has been made popular
in the recent past. The ideas Sanders offers, the program of his
campaign, go no further than the demands raised by the significant
social struggles of the last several years: the Occupy movement
and the environmental movement, especially.
The lesson for activists working for Sanders is quite clear: Do
better work and be more effective by building social protest
movements at the grassroots and national levels. The opportunities
are many and varied.
The Ferguson National Response Network is a good source of
information for protest actions taking place in cities all across
the United States.
The approximately 100 organizations that attended the United
National Antiwar Coalition conference would eagerly welcome new
supporters.
Whether it is 15 Now, Black Lives Matter, local campaigns against
nuclear power plants, struggles for environmental issues, women’s
rights, and more, important causes need the time, energy, and
money that is being poured into the Sanders for President Campaign.
The biggest flaw with Bernie Sanders is not his failure to condemn
capitalism as a system and call for its overturn. It may even be
asking too much to expect Sanders to fight for the structural
reform of capitalism, to demand the nationalization of basic
industries, as the British Labor Party did after World War II, in
a platform that won a national election. The Sanders team will say
the times are not right for such bold measures, that it is enough
if Bernie only wants to soften some of the system’s worst excesses.
But the time has come—in fact, the time is long overdue—to show a
new generation of activists just what the Democratic Party is and
why it is necessary to move past it. Bernie Sanders fails to take
that decisive step. His campaign by its very nature misleads
activists by asserting that the Democratic Party is a fit
instrument for the kind of social change that is needed to
transform America.
A socialist who truly merits the term “independent” once said,
“Capitalism rules and exploits the working people through its
control of the government. … And capitalism controls the
government through the medium of its class political parties. …
The unconditional break away from capitalist politics and
capitalist parties is the first act of socialist consciousness,
and the first test of socialist seriousness and sincerity” (James
P. Cannon, “Speeches for Socialism,”
pp. 339-340, emphasis added).
Sanders has been compared to a “sheep-dog” who herds people into
the Democratic Party. A better analogy might be drawn from the
world of sports. In the preparation for a championship bout,
boxers hire sparring partners to help them train and get into
shape for the real match. That opponent is there to fight but not
fight too much.
Though putting on a lively show before losing, the sparring
partner should not cause the real boxer any serious injury, much
less draw blood.
This type of dynamic is underway now in the Democratic Party
primaries.
Bernie Sanders is primarily a sparring partner for Hillary Clinton.
Share this:
Facebook4
Twitter1
Tumblr
Posted in Elections. | Tagged Democratic Party, Democrats, Sanders.
Get Involved
Join Socialist Action
Donate to help support our work
Get email updates
Events
Subscribe to Our Newspaper
JAN. 2014 p.1 jpegJAN. 2014 p. 12
Subscribe Today
Subscriptions to the monthly print edition of Socialist Action are
available for the following rates:
- 12 month subscription for $20
- 24 month subscription for $37
- 6 month subscription for $10
Learn More
Email Updates
Enter your email address to subscribe to our free e-mail Socialist
Action Newsletter. Also to receive notifcations of new web posts
by email.
Learn More
Newspaper Archives
Select Month June 2015 (6) May 2015 (10) April 2015 (12) March
2015
(9) February 2015 (11) January 2015 (10) December 2014 (12)
November
2014 (11) October 2014 (9) September 2014 (6) August 2014 (10)
July
2014 (11) June 2014 (10) May 2014 (11) April 2014 (10) March
2014
(9) February 2014 (11) January 2014 (11) December 2013 (10)
November
2013 (11) October 2013 (17) September 2013 (13) August 2013
(10) July 2013 (11) June 2013 (15) May 2013 (14) April 2013
(14) March
2013 (12) February 2013 (10) January 2013 (17) December 2012
(7) November 2012 (8) October 2012 (19) September 2012 (2)
August
2012
(27) July 2012 (18) June 2012 (3) May 2012 (19) April 2012
(14) March 2012 (17) February 2012 (19) January 2012 (17)
December
2011
(3) November 2011 (33) October 2011 (14) September 2011 (13)
August
2011 (34) July 2011 (24) June 2011 (19) May 2011 (19) April
2011
(15) March 2011 (15) February 2011 (16) January 2011 (15)
December 2010 (17) November 2010 (1) October 2010 (6) September
2010 (3) August 2010 (8) July 2010 (7) June 2010 (2) May 2010
(9) April 2010
(3) March 2010 (8) February 2010 (3) January 2010 (9) December
2009
(6) November 2009 (5) October 2009 (16) September 2009 (3)
August
2009 (2) July 2009 (5) June 2009 (2) May 2009 (7) April 2009
(6) March 2009 (16) February 2009 (9) January 2009 (10)
December
2008
(11) November 2008 (8) October 2008 (16) September 2008 (14)
August
2008 (18) July 2008 (12) June 2008 (3) May 2008 (2) April 2008
(3) March 2008 (14) February 2008 (11) January 2008 (11)
December
2007
(8) November 2007 (1) July 2007 (1) June 2007 (1) April 2007
(1) March 2007 (1) February 2007 (3) December 2006 (11)
November
2006
(11) October 2006 (13) September 2006 (15) August 2006 (11)
July
2006 (12) June 2006 (7) May 2006 (14) April 2006 (6) March 2006
(14) February 2006 (5) January 2006 (2) December 2005 (9)
November
2005
(8) October 2005 (13) September 2005 (12) August 2005 (9) July
2005
(16) June 2005 (16) May 2005 (16) April 2005 (12) March 2005
(14) February 2005 (19) January 2005 (15) December 2004 (14)
November
2002 (17) October 2002 (19) September 2002 (22) August 2002
(21) July 2002 (15) May 2002 (21) April 2002 (21) February 2002
(15) January 2002 (15) December 2001 (17) October 2001 (24)
September
2001 (18) July 2001 (19) June 2001 (18) October 2000 (17)
September 2000 (21) August 2000 (19) July 2000 (16) June 2000
(26) May 2000
(21) April 2000 (22) March 2000 (28) February 2000 (18) January
2000
(20) December 1999 (20) November 1999 (26) October 1999 (25)
September 1999 (18) August 1999 (40) July 1999 (38) June 1999
(24) May 1999 (27) April 1999 (25) March 1999 (26) February 1999
(29) January 1999 (24) July 1998 (12) 0 (2)
Learn More
Pamphlets/Books
Socialist Action publishes a wide variety of pamphlets on burning
issues of today such as global warming, women’s liberation, the
Middle East and other subjects.
Learn More
Socialist Action (U.S.): socialistaction@xxxxxxx | (510) 268-9429
Socialist Action / Ligue pour l’Action socialiste (Canada):
barryaw@xxxxxxxxxx
Copyright © 2015 Socialist Action. All Rights Reserved. Site
Design by Lucid Digital Designs | Site Utilities
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
