About
Editor:
Graham H. Cox
Contributors:
Dana R. Brown
Faiz Ahmed
Alex C
Chris Walker
Jim Stanley
Asaf Rashid
Michelle LeBlanc
J.A. Penn
Martin Wallace
Tracy Glynn
Geoffrey McCormack
YD Valle
Don Quijote
Beria
Ross J. Peterson
What is Leftnews?
Leftnews.org is designed to give the left-of-centre alternatives to the right-wing and right-(neo)-liberal media a place so that people can find them easily and, at the same time, provide a place for discussion. There should be something for everyone with left-leaning tendencies and (hopefully) some stuff that you do not agree with so that you can discuss it with those that do.
I also see Leftnews.org as a bit of an experiment in Communicative Action (though, I don’t see CA as an answer to many problems for the Left).
Political Leanings:
I try to keep posts on Leftnews.org coming from socialist and internationalist political perspectives.
I would say that there is nothing inherently anti-individualistic in socialism. I am vehemently opposed to any authoritarian state system be it capitalist or socialist (in the economic sense) as I believe that people should be free and inherently deserve to have a say over their own futures. However, this freedom should not be gained through the exploitation of others. This includes economic exploitation of the kind found in capitalism.
It is in the discussion I usually show my true political bias and argue from a materialist and socialist stand point. I do this for two reasons: It is more fun for me this way and allows me to be able to maintain discussions/arguments with anyone and still maintain my position on the left (else I would have to call it something like almost-all-left-except-the-far-left-news which I think would defeat the purpose) and I also think that one should always be consistent in the position that they argue from.
However, I include links on Leftnews.org from the centre and the far-left and everything in between.
Socialism:
Socialism is not the idea that people do not deserve the right to decide their own future (as I see it argued as in many right-wing blogs and publications). It is the view that the all the people should control the means of power and production and not just a select few who profit off others’ labour.
There is also nothing inherent in socialism that ensures that states become authoritarian. The same goes for capitalism, ‘centrists’, or liberals. Also, there is no economic system that is resistant to authoritarianism and that is why we can have a “social axis” or continuum that is separate from the economic (see The Political Compass).
The state’s economic system can be set-up with leaning towards two extremes: on the one side the state is set-up with the workers gaining all the profit from their labour, the other is with owners of the land/business getting all the profits. It can also be any value in between these two extremes. This has nothing to do with authoritarianism or individual rights (although some Marxists would argue that a worker’s rights are removed if you deny them the fruits of their labour and treat them like slaves… I would also agree with this).
Anything that describes workers not having the majority of control over their product or profit from their labour I (and political scientists from everywhere except some US universities) would call it right-wing or leaning towards capitalism. I do not think that it is evil (… though I have to admit I have trouble with the definition of “evil”) it is simply a different economic system where a ‘capitalist’ controls/owns the means of production and some form of ‘market’ controls the exchange price of those goods. It also means that the capitalist gets the profit which basically amounts to the capitalist taking money from the labours that produced the product.
Anarchists, present day ’social-libertarians’, radical-leftists, and non-authoritarian Marxists (mostly those known today as Trotskyists or 4th Internationalists) are at one end of the spectrum of the socialist ideology. None of these are inherently anti-industry or even anti-structure but all are profoundly anti-capitalist.
Socialism is best described as the political belief that workers should have a majority or complete control over production of goods and that society should be run for the benefit of all the people.
In any other system there is either a market, a capitalist, a ‘representative’ government (as in Canada’s case it is not democratic since the party system does not allow the total political spectrum and one has to play games is to win votes through lying and misrepresentation of what the parties stand for), or some other elite group telling the people what they want. In all these ideologies pure democracy is not the goal.
It may be true that pure democracy and socialism is not attainable but I would argue that this should not stop us from fighting for it. To do anything else, in my opinion, gives in too much to those that would manipulate the system for their own gain and thus is a loss of the rest of us. I do not think that a system where I cannot have a direct say is ideal and thus cannot and do not argue for it.
Graham H. Cox
Leftnews.org is part of The Citizens’ Press initiative to provide accurate and informed analysis and news from specific and specified political ideologies.
Leftnews and The Citizens’ Press are funded, designed, and maintained entirely by their members and readers.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:09 pm
I was curious why the agent orange comment on topic was closed? It is of great interest to
me as a surviving spouse of a veteran that exposure of agent orange caused such critical
illness for many years before the government took responsibility for compensation alone
only back to the time of supposed discovery of relation to illnesses was released. He died
last week and I will be homeless very soon due to great debt from his unemployability.
November 17th, 2005 at 9:41 pm
Patrice,
I am very sorry for your loss. I am pretty sure the comments section closses after a certain time of inactivity. I can assure you no one intentionally shut down the post.
What I will do, Patrice, is post another agent orange article and help stimulate some more conversation on the issue. We need to keep this one in the limelight and keep people informed.
November 17th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
Patrice,
I think I can speak on behalf of all of us at Leftnews.org and The Citizens’ Press when I repeat Dana’s condolences for your loss. If there is anything that we can do to put light on your struggles then do not hesitate to contact us.
Also, if you would like to write something more formal, yourself or with assistance, we can publish that on both The Citizens’ Press and Leftnews.
Any closure of comments is not intentional and all are free to comment about anything on any of the articles.
We will put some focus on the issue by posting articles regularly again (I see that Dana has already started this). I do apologize for not putting more focus on the issue. It is something that has fallen through the cracks in the major news media (and the independent press) but it is something that deserves to be and needs to be focused on. There is no excuse for the government’s inactions in this and they need to be held to account.
Again, please accept our sincere condolences and let us know if there is anything within our power that we can do to help.
Graham H. Cox
Leftnews.org Editor
April 22nd, 2006 at 8:25 pm
Just wanted to make one comment that seems mistaken in the above article, and that is describing Canada’s political system as ‘representative’. Canada is NOT a representative government and has never claimed to be. It is ‘responsible government’, with few fundamental changes from the late 19th century. We are a constitutional monarchy, and the system of responsible government is derived from a first past the post system with single member plurality ‘representation’ (much different from ‘representative’ systems like the US). All of these combined form the very antithesis of democracy.
Although it still is not called representative, since it derives its power from the federal and provincial governments and is subject to their whims, the only level which can arguably be called representative (since it lacks party machinery) is at the municipal level. However, the ‘first past the post’ system ensures that almost never is the ‘representative’ even representative of the majority, and the structure of councils means that even in such cases a single councillors vote is next to meaningless in a multiple ward system.
That’s nitpicking, but far too often people call Canada representative or democratic when it is neither. China has some bureaucrats elected at local levels, but we’d laugh if somebody called it democratic. Just because a state uses a democratic tool, doesn’t make it democracy. And just because a single member makes the decisions for everyone in a riding, doesn’t make it ‘representative’. At the very least these people represent parties, not constituents, which is far different than what most people brought up on american television think of when they hear ‘representative’. Other than that, excellent article.
October 16th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Patrice, my deepest condolences on your loss. I had a friend whose father was very ill from exposure to agent orange. Her family had been impoverished because he was unable to work and provide for them. It’s a scandal, yet I don’t think anyone in the government cared.
Agent orange is, from what I know about it, a real horror. It has affected millions of people in terrible ways, often deadly. The governments of the world have – either deliberately or through neglect – exposed people to it should really be held accountable.
I hope this thread continues, since the story is still relevant. We should make a renewed effort to collect stories related to this and post them. It is a humble contribution, but hopefully it will raise some awareness.