DKP-MV Feed11/08/2010 (Uncategorized)
It will take some time because we have much to do. Please take a look at the period tables in the download area (purple) – maybe you can find one in your language.
German source: http://dkp-greifswald.de/de/
Our Problem: We’ve not enough time to translate to englisch. We’re working on 80 Articles current political, contemporary or complete timeless.
Comments Off
11/08/2010 (What is ..., What is the difference ...)
When I started twenty years ago with the study, the GDR was liquidated. This experience was fundamental to my understanding of capitalism. The understanding that the cold war – led one sided – is ongoing and that constant is class war from above, was ultimately the beginning of my class-consciousness. In order to develop that one must already be a leftist.
In these terrible for the East, but for me hopeful days of my first semester, I was shocked by the testimony of a fellow student (- Another Eastman (Ostler (West German: Ossi))), the discussion with the words: “Oh, right-wing-left-wing – all the same!” wanted to escape. “Right and left – that’s all bunkum!” he said.
This view, I have met many times so should be explained here, why left-wing and right-wing can not be mistaken, and why the distinction is fundamentally important in politics.
Capitalism is characterized by class conflicts. So this is not – but that class contradictions are obscured by the ruling class. It must therefore be explained what’s driving all the real thinking political organizations – that dimension must be illuminated which spans the political spectrum. The political spectrum ranges from left to right.
So what is left and what right?
A leftist to be does mean to be egalitarian, a rightist to be – elitist.
A leftist to be means to be for equal rights of all to be, a rightist to be – fight for particular interests.
A leftist to be means to be in solidary, a rightist to be – corrupt and unsolidary.
A leftist to be means to fight for the human right, a rightist to be – to combat it.
A leftist to be means to combat the exploitative and oppressive government, a rightist to be – obeying the government.
A leftist to be means to love people, a rightist to be – the state.
A leftist to be means that the state belongs to the people (contributors) and serves them, a rightist to be – that people belong to the state and serve.
Implications
Therefore means to be a leftist to stand up against discrimination against minorities, against racism and fascism, against exploitation and degradation of rights, to be a rightist – to be the opposite.
And again to be a leftist means to be against conscription and against forced services, to be to be a rightist – to demand sacrifices from the people and to make people into murderers.
Therefore means to be a leftist – to fight for democracy, to be a rightist – to fight against it.
Therefore means to be a leftist – to combat privileges, to be a rightist – to enforce them by violence.
Therefore means a leftist to be – to be altruistic and to strengthen the common good, to be a rightist – to be selfish and fight it.
Therefore means a leftist to be ecologically to be, a rightist to be – without regard to consume.
Therefore means a leftist to be – International Friendship, to be a rightist – war.
Therefore means to be a leftist in capitalism that we may imprisoned or murdered for our convictions.
Therefore means a rightist to be in capitalism left opposition to spy out and to track and to kill trade unionists.
Therefore means a leftist to be – to split the class compromise, be a rightist – to drive with the D-Mark to Mallorca and to vote for CDU (the entrepreneurs party in FRG).
Therefore means a leftist to be, in capitalism’s own safety to put the workplace, the livelihood, health or even life for my conviction on the line.
Because Leftists exploitation as the cause (reason) of the oppression and exploitation (→ »Left and Property«(unready)) as the cause of private property of the means of production have identified, are leftists against the private ownership of productive assets and rightists are in favor of that anyone can accumulate any amount of property.
In every country there is a spectrum of different mixtures of these two very different positions. From left-right scheme divergent positions, we call apolitical. They play no role for social progress. Extreme-right positions are logically inhuman and public danger. They impede the progress.
Therefore means a rightist to be, in socialism – to be locked up as long as one is a rightist because fascists are not allowed to run loose!
Implications for the spectrum
The described left-right model is important for understanding the political landscape.
Exploiters to continue to exploit someone, have to be able to suppress. In order to suppress and in order to move other people to help them and thus to convince especially the volunteers who are not exploiters, of the meaning of their activities, they need a right attitude. The conservatism (in Germany) is one such attitude mixed with religious ornaments and family romance.
The left-right diagram shows why the “Greens” are no longer green. They are no longer left-wing. Left know that both social and environmental demands can always be enforced only against corporate interests – not with them! They know that the capitalist state can not be democratic. “The Greens” do not know it longer and aren’t able to push through anything.
The left-right model shows that the CDU (Christ-democratic Union – the conservative party) is far on the right of the middle and the warring SPD (so-called social-democratic party) with its low wage slavery and the pension reform is today also far to the right of center.
The Left Party, which sometimes takes part in provincial governments must follow in a bourgeois coalition government, a mixture of capitalist policy (ie suppression) and left objectives. It is clear that a mixture of repression and emancipation, a mix of private capitalist appropriation and the common good, a mixture of accumulation and redistribution to bottom, a mixture of war and peace not can work. It is therefore far from to be the leftmost force in the political spectrum.
[Evariste]
German source: »Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Links und Rechts?«
Comments Off
09/19/2010 (Uncategorized, What is ..., What is the difference ...)
In a TV Broadcast (Markus Lanz) concerning the xenophobic statements of Mr. Sarrazin in which also present were Michel Friedman and Rudolf Dressler all really leftists was evident that the two latter could not explain properly the concepts of integration and assimilation. This is not surprising, since they are no (proper) leftists. Nevertheless, the failure must be remedied, the educational setback be ironed out – this is the place for it.
Integration is a fundamental concept of the left political dictionary. In the fight against the domination of capital, in the fight against discrimination and lack of solidarity in the fight against desolidarization integration is one of the key conditions and therefore first to be taken.
In the integration it is about (re)inclusion into society of social groups that are excluded by resentment,. This requires not only to take measures to create a compensation for the disparity in legal practice,the legal practice itself – especially the resentment must be addressed with priority.
In the integration of foreigners (- in short: “Integration”), exists prominent misunderstandings. The German public – which by the way, a racist immigration law enjoys – believes that the respective foreign – non-Christian religious groups or ethnic groups would have to integrate themselves and would not be willing. We have to put this idea right out of their heads here.
The integration performance – and that is the main message of the text – is to be provided entirely by the society in which shall be brought outlawed or proscribed. They can not integrate themselves!
Integration of foreigners requires acceptance and adoption, renunciation of discrimination, fight against prejudice, language learning opportunities and equal treatment in everyday use. If these conditions are not met, there is a defence of the society, which closes itself. This then creates counterreaction among foreigners, who in order to preserve their dignity, must construct a different self, which by the closed society, due to party consideration, is interpreting this as “unwillingness to integrate”.
Who wants to be integrated into a society, depends on good will.
The fact is that the much talked about “willingness to learn language” for the foreigners does not matter, because affordable language learning offerings have been slashed in recent years so that not everyone has the opportunity to do so. Only in April 2010, the federal government has limited language learning. The xenophobia of the Federal Government shows (similar to the handling of unemployment), in its cynical behavior, to shift blame and to demand something, what not everyone is possible. Further to say “integration”, but to actually think “assimilation”. The willingness of the German population to integrate foreigners is therefore quite small. This is also underlined by the racist immigration law and a all in all deterrent dealing with foreigners.
Looking at the actual characteristics of specific groups of foreigners, it is noticeable that some of them such as the Turkish minority have developed a widespread cult of rejection who uses a stringent moralism. The reason is that the rejection that exists in the population the foreigners were exceedingly aware1. The negative population uses to argue against foreigners also true facts, such as the lower equality of women in Turkish society. Even foreigners enemies (xenophobists), who are never as feminists, or at least “women understanders” noticed forfeited this argument in a magical way. By these and other allegations, the minority is under pressure. The minority has no chance of the pressure exerted by their hostile parts of populations to mitigate by arguments or to rebut because no one listens. But since they must keep their dignity, it is necessary to develop a different version of the apparently prevailing view. This follows technically the scheme of resentment and can only look like that the enemy corrupt and bad – bad because of its strange socialization – is. The alien was made by resentment for foreigners. Resentment induces an opposite in the opponent. The discriminators feel vindicated and “recognize” to “parallel society”. 2
Arnulf Baring funnyly also present in the aforementioned TV Broadcast notified “that they will someday Germans” as the objectives of integration. This is a classic case of confusing integration with assimilation.
Assimilation means inclusion in the community through cultural raze.
If an alien is assimilated, it means that he adopts the way of life of local people and their culture. If forced assimilation, this is contrary – according to the size of the group and given – against human rights or the Self-determination of nations.
A multicultural society is inclusive. If you want to integrate disabled persons, we require them not to make everything as non-disabled. If women are to be equal (integrating into working life), in addition to the economical conditions (daycare centers, children’s holiday, and remaining warranty) only requires acceptance, and not that women (as in the U.S.) have to mutate to men. Integration granted rights, assimilation, they sells them for adjustment. Those who demand assimilation, for the fundamental rights are sellable.
Unfortunately, many that say “integration”, in reality want “assimilation”.
The real absurdity and almost had to keep secret – is that assimilation is actually happening by itself. Simple fact is if people are integrated, they will be assimilated within a generation. They assimilate themselves.
Here are a few basics:
From a theoretical point of view, culture is exchangeble.3 One might think that cultural identity is important. But this is a mistake! actually only culture is important. And culture is not arbitrary. The culture, people develops, depends on the productive forces. This and the way of earning a living, the relations of production shape the culture more than all the specifications. today young Germans are closer to computer games than to Goethe, even to the most special modern pop-music closer than to Beethoven. Today one can observe that slow due to the globalization creates a global mixed culture. These are mixed according to the theory, all cultures, which are on the same level of productive forces or in other words – all the have consumed by the magnitude and duration, a similar amount of energy4.
If the integrating culture receptive to the newcomer, he will be equally receptive. Arises even a spirit of optimism (as before in America emigrants), the assimilation sometimes even take place in the zeroth generation (instantly). Selfassimilation expanded the horizons. The advantages of the new company will be adopted.
There is a so-called identity, only as a defensive reaction – if and when a culture is imposed or even more important – the integration is denied by foreign enemies. The come under pressure or rejected are in a situation where they must assert themself. The equality of the situation with the other welds in their group together.
Forced assimilation and rejection can prevent integration. The assmimilation enforcement it is thus created that the foreigner negative calls Assimilation. We recognize the foreigners hater because he apparently wants to the alien’s impose his own identity, even though he hates them. The alien enemy calls assimilation, because he hates. He can absolutly imagine to be for integration. The fact that he wants to change the foreigners, shows us clearly that he do not accept him. The foreigner who refuses the exerted pressure falls automatically in the position to reject the new culture and is reflected back to its origin. This scheme is not only foreigners, but all minorities.
Example, Turkey, in Turkey there is a vast minority among others – the Kurds. They should be assimilated as “mountain Turks”. This forbids them the use of its language5 and celebrating their festivals. The result is repulsion. Had the Kurds have had autonomy from the beginning, they were now really “mountain Turks”. The resistance of the Kurds has been sought to dispel the fact that you have thousands of villages dissolved and dispersed the Kurdish population (distributed) has to take the Kurdistan Workers Party PKK – the most consistent representation of the Kurdish minority rights – the hinterland. The result is that today 90% identify themselves to the Turkish Kurds in Kurdistan with the PKK. Permanent memory of these events are the daily discrimination of Kurds before the law and the profession. Integration is not granted. Even Kurds who go to the Turkish army to rise, there is not in proportion as Nonkurds.
The claims of alien enemies(xenophobists) shall not be taken seriously! Foreign enemies are ill-mannered!6
[Evariste]
1The from foreign enemies like discussed question of why it is the Turks, and “the Muslims” does not belong here. The answer is related to Turkish Nationalism and the narcissism of nationalists. The German foreign enemies Turks see as particularly Muslims and projecting an attempt to assert itself against discrimination, which they perceive as recalcitrance on all Muslims.
2 The here made clear rejection of German culture techniques, of course, has disastrous consequences for anyone who has to live here anyway.
3 In the specific cases but not!
4 Here must be noted correctively that the rich cultures have the opportunity to make use of poor cultures. Whether canoeing, hang-gliding or boomerang, the rich culture can choose the best and most pleasing. In the poor-culture, it looks different. After making the contact their way of life will change dramatically. By changing the methods of production – hence the relations of production – is one’s own culture in parts of irrelevant and must change. As a new culture because of exploitation and impoverishment is not forming quick enough, the original culture forfeited without substitute. The exploited necessarily accept the rich cultural elements for which their energy status is not appropriate. They can not easily distinguish between good and bad habits of the rich, which this distinction precisely because of their available energy does not need to. So there is definitely a mix, but this is not necessarily practical. In addition, forfeit valuable cultural techniques which would be important for a non-decadent future.
5 Meanwhile, the policy of European integration (integration of states) has demanded the sacrifice of Turkey, to recognize minorities as such according to the practices of international law. This demand, which means a surrender of Turkish nationalism in a tough ideological in-fighting the Turkey is met very slowly and reluctantly.
6 Note for english readers: after the terrible Sarrazin Publication much Germans with longing for racism came out their holes and said: “This had yet to be said.” Sarrazins book now is in the third Edition.
German source: Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Integration und Assimilation?
Comments Off