: Having taken a refreshing few days off to paint my dining room (petit bourgeoisie that I am...Bourgeois---and petit bourgeois---refer to modes of production, NOT modes of consumption.
: To which I respond, there won't be any damned revolution, and from the rhetoric that flies around here concerning it, that's a good thing. Firing squads lining up the cancerous old guard...
Firing squads? The most 'authoritarian' thing I've EVER suggested was that those who refuse to work in the socialist future will go hungry (just like those who refuse to work do today in bourgeois culture). A rather significant distinction, don't you agree?
: I'm voting in November: first, because there are millions around the world who are dying for the opportunity to vote...
They only think that voting makes a difference (and, compared to semi-feudal conditions, it does---a bit).
:... second, because not voting is a cop-out...
I disagree. Refusing to play the rigged lottery is a statement of REJECTING it. All social change BEGINS with a rejection of present social relations.
: Having a Green like Nader in the White House will be far better for the future of this planet than an environmental enemy like Bush, or even a wishy-washing green like Gore or Bradley...
But Nader will NOT win because big business controls the 'democratic' election. Were you not paying attention to the less-than-extensive media coverage Nader received in 1996? Why be a dupe again?
: 3. All or nothing, now!
: That's the bullshit strategy of frigid ideologues. Small steps forward can mean big things for those at the bottom...
Tell that to African-Americans who earn one-third less than whites do (after having the 'vote' for over 100 years).
After almost every last reform of the 20th century (trust-busting, New Deal, Great Society, etc., etc.) has been tried and then rolled back, you STILL believe reforms can have a lasting impact?
: No one who tortures and murders others is worthy of your support.
Care to state exactly what that's supposed to mean?
