But you absolutely are choosing sides and in your post, to which I'm
responding, you categorized Roger and me as part of the problem, the bad guys
and you are on the good side, the center, the uncritical bipartisan,
nonjudgmental person who wants to be friendly with everyone. Roger and I are
extremists, people who are critical of others, who are part of the left that
is, as you put it, "tearing the country apart". So if I state facts that are
true, i.e., that the tax bill which was passed favors the very wealthy and
hurts the rest of us, or that ever since the 60's, the changes in our tax code
have been made to favor big business rather than small business or the middle
and working classes, or that our politicians pass legislation which will
benefit their big donors more often than legislation that will benefit the
poor, or that the California fires are being fought not only by well paid fire
fighters, but prisoners, doing precisely the same work for $1 an hour during
the time their actually in danger, or that the only beneficiaries of our
eternal wars are military contractors and the corporations whose businesses
our country represents in those wars, if I say those things, then I'm
irrationally identifying enemies and helping to tear our country apart. The
fact is that I'm not a neutral bystander. I am concerned with social justice. I
come from an urban,working class Jewish background and and I've always known,
from the time that I was a child, that there were people who were opposed to my
existence and to the existence of other groups identified as marginal. I also
know that if this government chose to identify me as dangerous or dispensible
and chose to put me in the contemporary American version of a prison camp, the
majority of good, law abiding, bipartisan, centrist Americans would feel sad,
but would do nothing about it, especially if that government were run by the
corporate wing of the Democratic party.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Evan Reese
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 3:51 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Midterm elections: Democrats’ ‘blue wave’ falls
short
I'm taking your messages out of order.
Firstly, with respect to Chris Hedges, he may well be frightened. His prose
tends to be pretty intense anyway, so I can't really tell if he's amped it up a
notch from its usually high level.
There is a window here though for Trump to act if he decides to. So I can see
how Hedges might be more worried than usual.
Secondly, and more importantly, I get the impression that you think I should
jump on board the us versus them bandwagon that is rolling across the country.
I'm not going to do that.
I can see how seductive it can be for various reasons, but that kind of
thinking has been at the heart of humanity's worst conflicts:
Catholics versus Protestants
Hindus versus Muslims
Nazis versus Jews
Communists versus Capitalists
Whites versus Blacks
And a whole lot more. That kind of thinking is what's tearing this country
apart right now.
I've seen what us versus them thinking does to people. I've observed it all my
life, and I will not take part in it. It's pernicious. It has resulted in
inconceivable amounts of suffering throughout history.
If I were to be attacked physically, I would certainly defend myself. And I
have had no compunction in criticizing the actions of individuals, or even
whole groups, particularly if their actions are part of the historical record.
(Hitler is always the example par excellence in these cases, but Mao and Stalin
will do as well.) But that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about
the demonization of whole classes of people carried out by conservatives, and
people on the left as well. It doesn't sound any better coming from you and
Roger than it does coming from Sean Hanity and Rush Limbaugh. "But we're right,
and they're wrong.", you will say. Sure sure, and they'll say the same thing,
and on and on it goes. The result is acrimony at best, and often a lot worse.
If that is the only way we can solve our problems, then we may very well be
doomed, and deservedly so.
Evan
-----Original Message-----
From: Miriam Vieni
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 7:06 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] RE: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] RE:
[blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] Midterm elections: Democrats’ ‘blue wave’ falls short
Yes, but we're not speculating about the tax cut. We're not speculating about
how in 2008, the big banks were bailed out but not the home owners, or about
how the laws have been changed to favor the wealthy, starting in the 1970's.
When Reagan was elected, social security was changed. Before his election,
children up to 21 years of age, if they were attending college, continued to
get an additional portion of a parent's social security disability benefits.
After his election, that extra money stopped when the child reached 18,
regardless of college attendance, one small example. We have seen deep cuts in
services for the blind here in New York over the past 30 years, specifically,
services to the elderly, which I'm sure, reflect federal cuts. This isn't
accidental. Clinton cut Aid To Families With Dependent Children, and he, with
his financial advisers' encouragement, passed legislation which deregulated the
banks. All of these measures, and more, have been taken to benefit the ultra
wealthy, not to benefit the rest of us, however, one wants to define us. But
when you listen to TV or radio , or read about how our country is doing
economically, you are told about the country's economic health from the point
of view of Wall Street or Business.
Ordinary people are mentioned only in terms of statistics, and often, the
statistics are misleading. So the fact is that bad things have been happening
to ordinary people, financially, for years and years, and now, as the country
moves even more to the right politically and the Republican Party has moved to
the edge, and throughout the world, there is a rise in far right Fascist
movements which appear to be coordinated by people like Steve Bannon, we,
ordinary non rich people, do have enemies. Recognizing that fact doesn't mean
that I advocate war because I don't. But I see that in today's column, even
Chris Hedges, who usually writes about how this is the normal death of empire,
is sounding frightened.
Miriam,
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Evan Reese
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 6:19 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] RE: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Midterm
elections: Democrats’ ‘blue wave’ falls short
Well perhaps, but I notice your language has a lot of qualifiers in it, like
"possibly", and "maybe", so you're really just speculating.
And Trump, who may have a lot of failings, but he knows his base, isn't going
to touch Social Security and Medicare. And just this once, I believe him when
he says so because, as I said, he knows his base and he doesn't want to lose
it, which he would if he touched those programs.
Evan
-----Original Message-----
From: Miriam Vieni
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 4:27 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] RE: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Midterm elections: Democrats’ ‘blue
wave’ falls short
Maybe your conversation might be more productive if you both stopped using the
Marxist jargon? If you accept that the very wealthy have different
socio-economic interests than the rest of us, then their goals are probably not
in your best interest. For example, they want their taxes lowered and fewer
government services. They'd like to privatize social security and medicare and
do away with a number of opublic services. Possibly, they'd like to do away
with the NLS for blind and disabled people and the government subsidy that goes
to Bookshare. Maybe they'd like to cut rehab programs. Maybe they'll cut the
program that you mentioned yesterday, from which your mother benefits. The rich
don't benefit from any of these programs and they don't want to pay for them.
That's why the great big tax cut was passed. I think that's what Roger meant by
the term, your class enemies".
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Evan Reese
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 3:18 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] Midterm elections: Democrats’ ‘blue wave’ falls short
Nope, not a billionaire, I simply don't use the word "enemies" to describe
people who have more money than I do.
The word "enemies" is used for people one wants to go to war with, i.e.
kill. If you're into that, then count me out.
Evan
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 3:09 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Midterm
elections: Democrats’ ‘blue wave’ falls short
Oh? You are a billionaire?
_________________________________________________________________
Isaac Asimov
“Don't you believe in flying saucers, they ask me? Don't you believe in
telepathy? — in ancient astronauts? — in the Bermuda triangle? — in life after
death?
No, I reply. No, no, no, no, and again no.
One person recently, goaded into desperation by the litany of unrelieved
negation, burst out "Don't you believe in anything?"
Yes", I said. "I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement,
and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I'll believe anything, no
matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and
more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence
will have to be.”
― Isaac Asimov
On 11/14/2018 8:46 PM, Evan Reese wrote:
Your class enemies perhaps, not mine.
Evan
-----Original Message----- From: Roger Loran Bailey
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 8:12 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ; Evan Reese
Subject: Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Midterm elections:
Democrats’ ‘blue wave’ falls short
If you know anything about Socialist Action you will realize that the
author of this article is not advocating that the Democrat party be
run in any way. That is the business of the Democrats. Rather, the
author is pointing out that the Democrat party is just generally not
in the interests of the large majority of the population at all. That
is, the Democrat party is a party of our class enemies.
_________________________________________________________________
Isaac Asimov
“Don't you believe in flying saucers, they ask me? Don't you believe
in telepathy? — in ancient astronauts? — in the Bermuda triangle? — in
life after death?
No, I reply. No, no, no, no, and again no.
One person recently, goaded into desperation by the litany of
unrelieved negation, burst out "Don't you believe in anything?"
Yes", I said. "I believe in evidence. I believe in observation,
measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I'll
believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is
evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however,
the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be.”
― Isaac Asimov
On 11/9/2018 2:32 PM, Evan Reese wrote:
Quoting the article in part:
"But the candidates within the Democratic Party “big tent” ranged
widely in their views—from Democratic Socialists of America members
to conservatives like party hack Joe Manchin in West Virginia—who
shamefully voted for Brett Kavanaugh to join the Supreme Court...."
Now I don't like Kavanaugh at all, but I hope the author doesn't
think that only people with a narrow range of views should be
elected, as beginning the sentence with the word, "But", implies.
That doesn't sound like a very intelligent way to run a party or a
government. That's what's happening to the Republican party. I do not
want the Democratic party to become a mirror image of that. We are
talking about the House of Representatives after all. And whatever I
think of many other peoples'
views, there are a wide range of views out there. The House is
supposed to represent those views, not be a forum for a narrow set of
them.
Again, quoting the article in part:
"Evidence that the “blue wave” did not flow significantly to the left
can be seen in the fact that a quarter of the Democratic Party
candidates in the Nov. 6 election have a background in the CIA, the
military, the State Department, or national security...."
The fact that a quarter of them had such backgrounds is a problem?
Does the author mean to say that only people ignorant of such matters
should be elected? If the fact that only a quarter of them had such
backgrounds is a problem for him, that would seem to be what he's
saying. Again, that doesn't sound like a very intelligent way to make
decisions. Whatever one's positions on matters of the military, the
CIA, the State Department, or national security might be, it seems
hard to justify ignorance as a good approach to making decisions
about matters involving them. Ignorance is Donald Trump's approach to
running things. I hope this author isn't advocating a similar
approach for Democrats.
Evan
-----Original Message----- From: Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2018 11:24 AM
To: blind-democracy
Subject: [blind-democracy] Midterm elections: Democrats’ ‘blue wave’
falls short
https://socialistaction.org/2018/11/07/midterm-elections-democrats-bl
ue-wave-falls-short/
Midterm elections: Democrats’ ‘blue wave’ falls short
/ 2 days ago
Nov. 2018 Ocasio Cortez (AP)
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the Democratic Socialists of
America, was elected to Congress on the Democratic Party ticket. (AP)
By MICHAEL SCHREIBER
“This is the most important midterm election in the modern history of
this country,” said Senator Bernie Sanders, and many politicians and
pundits agreed. President Trump spoke similarly during his week-long
campaign tour, aimed mainly at shoring up Republican candidates in
so-called Red States. “Everything we have achieved is at stake,”
Trump declared to his cheering admirers.
After the election, however, the mood quickly subsided; there was no
evidence that substantial changes had come onto the political landscape.
For one thing, the hoopla that Democrats had drummed up to create a
mighty “blue wave” produced merely a ripple of elected candidates. In
a Nov. 7 news conference, in fact, Trump boasted that his campaign
rallies had “stopped the blue wave.”
The Democrats’ lackluster finish came despite the fact that they had
received the bulk of Wall Street donations. The securities and
finance industry backed Democratic congressional candidates 63
percent to 37 percent for the Republicans, according to the Center
for Responsive Politics.
Of course, the Democrats did succeed in winning a majority in the
House for the first time since 2011, and made gains in many
relatively affluent suburban districts that had leaned Republican in
years past.
And here and there, a few rookie Congress members were elected who
consider themselves to be “progressives” or even “democratic
socialists.” More women, LGBTQ people, and people of color than ever
before were elected on the Democratic ticket.
But the candidates within the Democratic Party “big tent” ranged
widely in their views—from Democratic Socialists of America members
to conservatives like party hack Joe Manchin in West Virginia—who
shamefully voted for Brett Kavanaugh to join the Supreme Court. The
crook Bob Menendez was also reelected as a Democratic U.S. Senator
from New Jersey, despite having been censured by the Senate Ethics
Committee for accepting bribes from a wealthy businessman.
Evidence that the “blue wave” did not flow significantly to the left
can be seen in the fact that a quarter of the Democratic Party
candidates in the Nov. 6 election have a background in the CIA, the
military, the State Department, or national security. They included,
for example, Elissa Slotkin, who won a congressional seat from
Michigan’s Eighth District. Slotkin is a former CIA operative in
Iraq, who also served as Obama’s Iraq director on the National
Security Council. Later, she worked at the Pentagon, looking into
drone warfare, “homeland defense,”
and cyber warfare.
All in all, despite the addition of a few “progressive” Democrats to
Congress, the complexion of U.S. politics has changed very little
since the election. The policies of the capitalist Democratic Party
have not been altered one iota from the pro-corporate, pro-war,
anti-environmental ones of the past.
The social issues that the Democratic Party candidates addressed in
their campaigns were exceedingly narrow. “Medicare for All” was a
central plank of the Democrats this year, though we can expect that
the proposal will be watered down; as under Obama, the needs of the
insurance industry will have to be catered to before the proposal
ever reaches a vote in Congress. The Democrats also spoke about
repairing the country’s roads and bridges—always a safe bet at
election time—but ignoring the need for efficient mass transportation
and the use of renewable fuels.
Major issues of an international scope were ignored, such as climate
change and out-of-control environmental pollution, and pouring more
money into the military (most Democrats in Congress supported this
year’s $716 billion military budget). Likewise, questions such as the
sanctions against Iran, trade wars with China and other countries,
and the endless U.S. wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East were
virtually absent from the platforms of Democratic candidates for
Congress.
Moreover, important domestic issues such as raising the minimum wage
to be enough to live on; the right to low-cost housing; securing the
rights of women, immigrants, and LGBTQ people; and stopping police
violence against people of color generally received no more than a
nod by the Democrats.
A referendum on Trump
The main issue that the Democrats ran on was simply “stop Trump.” CNN
and AP VoteCast polls on the eve of the election both showed that
close to 70% of voters hoped to send a message to Trump with their
vote; about 26% to 28% of the respondents were for Trump, and 38% to
40% were against. Trump readily agreed that the election was a
referendum on his administration. He told potential voters in
Mississippi, “Pretend I’m on the ballot.”
The Republicans held onto their “strongholds” in rural districts and
in areas of discontented white workers who had voted for Trump in 2016.
Accordingly, the Republicans increased their edge in the Senate and
won several key governor races. In general, right-wing and
Trump-supporting politicians were elected, while more mainstream
Republicans did not do as well. In a Nov. 7 tweet, Trump acknowledged
the fact, saying, “Those that worked with me in this incredible
Midterm Election, embracing certain policies and principles, did very
well. Those that did not, say goodbye!”
One loyal Trump supporter who followed the formula, Marsha Blackburn,
was elected to the Senate from Tennessee. “I’m going to work with
President Trump all of the way to build that wall,” she affirmed to
voters. A Blackburn commercial started with a shot of the immigrant
caravan crossing Mexico. “I’m going to stop the criminals who are
going toward our border,” Blackburn stated in a voice-over.
In order to rally his supporters in the weeks leading up to the
election, Trump relied almost exclusively on scare tactics, using
racist descriptions that are commonly employed by the ultra-right.
Trump described the Central American migrants traveling through
Mexico as “invaders” and “terrorists,” and he endorsed a campaign ad
that likened them to Luis Bracamontes, an immigrant who had been
convicted for killing two police officers.
Polls showed that the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme
Court was a key issue for Trump supporters in the election. Only a
month before the election, Trump spread the conspiracy theory that
people protesting Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination (“elevator screamers”)
were being paid for by billionaire George Soros—a figure who is
frequently denounced in anti-Semitic literature.
In the South, with its long history of injustices against Black
people, racism was merged with anti-immigrant prejudices in
Republican messages against the Democrats. In Georgia, Trump said
that Democrat Stacey Abrams, a Black “progressive” running for
governor, was “unqualified”
for the office, and that she “would turn Georgia into a giant
sanctuary city for criminal aliens, putting innocent Georgia families
at the mercy of hardened criminals and predators.” The National Rifle
Association in Georgia put out a message, “Defend yourself. Defeat
Abrams.” And ABC News reported that a robocall on behalf of her
Republican opponent, Brian Kemp, called Abrams a “negress.”
Should socialists work within the Democratic Party?
The elections reflected the broader polarization that has taken place
in the United States during the last few years, brought on in part by
the dissatisfaction and alienation that working people feel toward
the status quo in capitalist society. Some workers and middle-class
people, often in “rust-belt” districts that have seen better times,
have been hoodwinked by the anti-immigrant and racist messages of the
right wing.
But likewise, there is no doubt that the reactionary pronouncements
by Trump and the right have had an electric effect in mobilizing
people in opposition. The last two years have seen massive rallies in
the streets against Trump’s policies.
Unfortunately, at the present time, working people have no authentic
voice in the political arena except in the streets. Some socialists
mistakenly adhere to the idea that it might be possible to change the
pro-big business nature of the Democratic Party by working within it,
or that it might be possible to break a “left wing” (such as Bernie
Sanders
supporters) out of the party. But both scenarios are merely wishful
thinking.
Similarly, it is a deadly illusion to think that revolutionary
socialists can be elected to public office and work for significant
social change when using the ballot line of the capitalist Democratic
Party—always a “lesser-evil” trap for the unwary. History has
repeatedly demonstrated that the former party of the Klan, White
Citizens Councils, and Southern slavocracy serves the ruling class
elite unfailingly.
That this “graveyard of all fighting social movements” can be
considered a vehicle for advancing working-class interests is
preposterous. In general, when “progressive” or “left” candidates run
as Democrats, the party hierarchy forces them to align their
positions with those of the mainstream, not the opposite.
Consider Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the member of the Democratic
Socialists of America (DSA) from the Bronx, who was just elected to
the House as a Democrat. At first, the party leadership viewed her
with suspicion, but after winning the primary vote, she became a
celebrity, the subject of talk shows—and even Barak Obama endorsed her.
Accordingly, the DSA enlisted Ocasio-Cortez to travel to California
to raise money and support for other “left” candidates running in the
Democratic Party. We can expect, too, that the Democratic Party
leadership will use her services in selected and “safe” locales as an
opportunity to refurbish the party’s image when it suits their needs.
They understand that Ocasio-Cortez and other DSAers are fresh faces
who can attract young people and activists with new energy into the
party—and thus channel dissident voices into the double-talking
capitalist mainstream. Sanders played a similar role in 2016,
shepherding the unwary first into his campaign and then into Hillary
Clinton’s.
At her acceptance speech on Nov. 6, Ocasio-Cortez told supporters,
“We can make change … We are here, and we are going to rock the world
in the next two years … This is not the end. This is the beginning.”
But real change will never be achieved from within the Democratic Party.
The beginning of a new day for working people in the United States
will arrive when they construct their own party, one that operates
not only at the ballot box but in workplaces and in the streets, and
with a revolutionary program to enable the working class to take
political power in its own name and abolish the rule of the capitalists.
Share this:
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) 46Click to share on
Facebook (Opens in new window)46 Click to share on Google+ (Opens in
new window)
November 7, 2018 in Elections, Trump / U.S. Government.
Related posts
The rise of right-wing violence in Trump’s America
The caravan that defies borders
Michael Moore flays Trump in ‘Farenheight 11/9’
Post navigation
← ‘We won’t be erased,’ say Connecticut protesters for trans rights
Get Involved!
Donate to help support our work
Get email updates
Join Socialist Action
Newspaper Archives
Newspaper Archives Select Month November 2018 (5) October 2018 (10)
September 2018 (8) August 2018 (12) July 2018 (13) June 2018 (11)
May 2018 (19) April 2018 (15) March 2018 (17) February 2018 (14)
January 2018 (13) December 2017 (13) November 2017 (13) October
2017
(16) September 2017 (15) August 2017 (16) July 2017 (17) June 2017
(16) May 2017 (17) April 2017 (14) March 2017 (13) February 2017
(19) January 2017 (13) December 2016 (12) November 2016 (19)
October
2016 (12) September 2016 (10) August 2016 (10) July 2016 (14) June
2016 (14) May 2016 (9) April 2016 (12) March 2016 (14) February
2016
(8) January 2016 (11) December 2015 (11) November 2015 (9) October
2015 (8) September 2015 (10) August 2015 (7) July 2015 (13) June
2015 (9) 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 (15) 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 (18) 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)
Search
View socialistactionusa’s profile on Facebook View SocialistActUS’s
profile on Twitter View SocialistActionCT’s profile on YouTube
Subscribe to Our Newspaper
Upcoming Events
No upcoming events
Category Cloud
Actions & Protest Africa Anti-War Arts & Culture Black Liberation
Canada Caribbean Civil Liberties Cuba East Asia Economy Education &
Schools Elections Environment Europe Immigration Indigenous Rights
International Labor Latin America Latino Civil Liberties Marxist
Theory & History Middle East Police & FBI Prisons South Asia Trump /
U.S. Government Uncategorized Vote Socialist Action Women's
Liberation
View Calendar
Blog at WordPress.com.
Follow
