ILA80 (International Labor Aid ‘80)
LightNews LightNews
banner
broomflowrs.bsky.social
ILA80 (International Labor Aid ‘80)
@broomflowrs.bsky.social
190 followers 170 following 5K posts
“There is no rational doctrine in opposition to communism but for the absence of one.”

Remember Day of Heroism:
El Fronton, Lurigancho, Callao..
Posts Replies Media Videos
broomflowrs.bsky.social
I also found that the island Clipperton in french polynesia has an EEZ of 200 nautical miles as does acapulco.

The strike probably took place in the international waters between Clipperton and Acapulco, but on the side closer to Mexico
November 2, 2025 at 6:07 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Maritime chart
November 2, 2025 at 5:47 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Location of a recent US strike 400 miles southwest off the coast of Acapulco.

The arc of the bottom left quadrant delimits the strike’s potential locations.
November 2, 2025 at 5:27 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
In epochs of wars and revolutions, the consciousness of the broad masses grows with tremendous speed. The correlation of forces is far from accurately reflected in parliamentary groupings. The influence of the Left, even from the fragmentary information available to us, is strengthening within the proletariat at the expense of the Centre and the Right. The masses of the proletariat had already begun to implement the tactics of the Left before the war. Recall the demonstrations against the high cost of living, the Moabit disturbances, the popularity of the mass strike in the struggle for suffrage in the Prussian Landtag, etc. With the further course of the war, their influence can only increase, because they most fully reflect the interests of the proletariat in the epoch of imperialism, which is pushing the working class towards the tactics indicated by the Left. As for the Right, their break with socialism is becoming ever more complete, and they, I think, will soon turn — without reservations— into a party of social and democratic reforms, into a democratic party of the petty bourgeoisie, at whose tail a negligible stratum of the proletariat, more firmly hitched to the chariot of imperialism, will still plod along. There is no future for the Centre in the socialist movement either. Part of the proletariat adhering to it has already gone either to the Right or to the Left. The majority has gone and will continue to go to the Left. But the intermediate layers will not disappear so quickly. The leaders of the Centre will still play a reactionary role, holding the proletariat back from the correct path. 1916. Y. SVERDLOV FROM TURUKHANSK EXILE. PROLETARIANS OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
individual strata of the proletariat may coincide with "national tasks." But the interests common to the entire proletariat, the interests of the entire proletarian movement, are reducible to social revolution, which is possible only on an international scale. Hence the internationalism of the Left. Let us summarise. The Right reflected in their theory and practice Germany's dominance on the world market and linked the interests of the proletariat and the popular masses in general with its further strengthening and expansion. They were the ideological representatives of those strata of the proletariat whose temporary interests coincided with the development of German imperialism and who had not yet advanced to a consciousness of their common proletarian tasks. Simultaneously, they represented within the party those democratic strata of the German people who sought a change in the domestic policy of the ruling classes while supporting their imperialism, and who followed Social-Democracy as a democratic party, ignoring its socialist name. If the Right wing reflected the *positive* influence of imperialism on the proletarian movement, the Left reflected its *negative* influence. It represented within the party the general interests of the proletariat as a whole and was recruited from those of its elements for whom the imaginary benefits of the moment did not obscure class consciousness. The Centre occupied an intermediate position. It lacked the integrity and consistency characteristic of the Right and Left wings, which proceeded in their strivings from the new conditions of struggle. It stood, in the era of the dominance of finance capital and imperialism, on the preceding stage of capitalist development.
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
strengthening of militarism is its consequence, it is still possible to bring about its weakening through the struggle for the gradual disarmament of modern states. The Lefts, on the contrary, regarded finance capital as the highest stage in the development of the capitalist mode of production. They considered imperialism the inevitable policy of dominant finance capital, against which it was only possible to fight by enhancing the activity of the broad proletarian masses, educated in the spirit of social revolution. Only such a revolution could put an end to imperialism and the militarism, increased tax burden, rising cost of living, and constant possibility of military clashes that accompany it, the weight of which would fall on the popular masses. The Lefts also took into account the changes that finance capital had introduced into the mutual relations of various classes. They were far from being carried away by parliamentary struggle and vote-getting in elections. They ceased to view socialism as a "final goal" merely indicating the direction of struggle within the framework of the existing system. For them, socialism became the fundamental element in the entire daily proletarian struggle. Finance capital, in their opinion, had already prepared the objective conditions for a socialist system. The matter rested only on the subjective prerequisites for the revolution. To the policy of finance capital, the proletariat must counterpose socialism —this is the only answer of the proletariat to imperialism. And only by educating the proletarian masses in the spirit of activity can the socialist policy of the proletariat defeat the policy of finance capital. The old forms of struggle, the simple accumulation of forces around parliamentary work and in trade unions, did too little to develop the activity of the masses themselves. The conditions of struggle created by the dominance of finance capital brought extra-parliamentary struggle to the fore —
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Again on the Course of Events A section of the orthodox, taking account of all the changes that had occurred and the international experience of the proletariat, put forward the idea of developing even greater activity among the broad masses. They gave a correct assessment of imperialism and called for a ruthless struggle against it and the militarism that accompanies it. It was on the basis of the attitude towards imperialism and the new tactics that the division among the orthodox occurred. The Centre, headed by Kautsky, was entirely under the sway of old traditions. The activity of Social-Democracy, as it had developed over the preceding period of historical development, seemed to him something given once and for all. It reflected the period of the proletariat's accumulation of forces. That period when capitalism had not yet reached the highest phase of its development-the phase of financial capital. For decades, German Social-Democracy had carried out its work by "peaceful," "legal" means. It set itself the task of educating and organising the masses. All this work did not go beyond the bounds of bourgeois society. If the Right put the dot on the "i," adapting the party's theory to this practice, the Centre always had a discrepancy between the two. It did not push the socialist revolution as far into the future as the Right did, but, like them, it did not link its practice to it. The resolutions passed by party congresses, mostly orthodox, did not change the essentially opportunist practice. In full agreement with the Right, the Centre fought within the party against all "innovations." If the old tactics had allowed Social-Democracy to gather a million members under its banner, if the social-democratic trade unions showed rapid growth, approaching three million, catching up with and surpassing the old English trade unions in membership numbers and funds, then there was no need whatsoever to change these tactics. ..
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
As already indicated, in the initial period of opportunism's development, the orthodox Marxists opposed it unanimously. The revisionists' demand that the party defend the interests of all democratic strata of the population, and not narrow its tasks to representing only the proletariat, was met with a united rebuff. The orthodox also unanimously proved the incorrectness of assertions about the victory of small-scale production over large-scale, about the mitigation of class contradictions, etc. The orthodox unanimously defended the basic tenets of revolutionary Marxism from the attacks of the revisionists. To the revisionists' gradual "growing into the state of the future"*, the orthodox counterposed the catastrophic path of development. *[Author's Note:] As one of the left Social-Democrats quite correctly noted, "growth" was indeed happening, but "into the modern class state" But this was only in theory. In practice, the orthodox differed little from the revisionists. The thoughts and strivings of both were directed towards the interests of the given moment; for both, the struggle for partial improvements, for reforms, constituted their entire practice. The only difference was that the orthodox simultaneously propagandised the inevitability of a fundamental upheaval in the future. Without linking their day-to-day work with socialism, without adapting their entire tactics to the coming social revolution, the orthodox educated the masses in the spirit of passive radicalism. tremely tense international situation was created, changed. Financial capital is inherently anti-democratic. Having seized state power, subordinating it to itself in Germany (and not only in Germany), it could take the masses of the population even less into account. The significance of parliament, already not particularly great in Germany, declined. The working class was faced with the question of extra-parliamentan gressure on the ruling classes.
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
military adventures — all this was laid down long before the war in the party's practice. Repeatedly, in response to accusations of unpatriotism from the bourgeoisie and Junkers, concrete representatives of Social-Democracy declared: "Wir sind gute Deutsche" ("We are good Germans"). And never was it declared that "wir sind gute Internationalisten" ("We are good internationalists"). August Winnig*, chairman of the Construction Workers' Union, quite correctly indicated the causes of nationalism when he wrote: "Every working class is very strongly interested in the prosperity of the national economy of its country... Here we have the ultimate reason for the phenomenon that workers decisively take the side of their state."** *Winnig, August (b. 1878) - German right-wing Social-Democrat, defender of German imperialism, supporter of fascism. **"Sozialistische Monatshefte", 1915, No. 1. Cited from Ensis's article in "Sovremenny Mir" (The Contemporary World), 1915, No. 6. [Author's Note] The conduct of the opportunists, their tactics, were logically consistent throughout. If the working class is "interested in the prosperity of the national economy of its country," then it must support everything that contributes to such prosperity. The expansion of markets, a dominant position on the world market, is in the interests of the prosperity of German industry. The German bourgeoisie is also interested in this. The proposition about the intensification of the opposition of interests between the working class and the ruling class seems absurd given the presence of such important common, "national" tasks shared by them. Colonial Policy, Reformism and Yellow Unions The prosperity of one's country's industry facilitates the implementation of workers' reforms. urn, contribute to the success of trade union struggle. But it is merely an appendage to the national movement.
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
which can intervene everywhere in the world in order to turn the entire world into a sphere of investment for its finance capital. "*** Financial capital, representing the unity of previously fragmented capital, completely subjugates state power to itself. The old antagonism between the industrial bourgeoisie and the landowners disappears. They are brought together by their now normal participation in all the parts into which surplus value is divided. In Germany, they were also brought together by a common protectionist policy. Both financial capital and large landed property desire protective tariffs. The struggle for agricultural tariffs, in turn, united large, medium, and small landownership. Simultaneously, a process of economic, and subsequently ideological, subordination of medium and small production to financial capital took place. If economically this subordination was characterised by indirect dependence, ideologically it was complete. Medium and small production was also strongly interested in the further development of a successful imperialist policy. The expansion of the sphere for capital application helped prolong the era of prosperity and postponed the crisis. ***Hilferding, pp. 511-512. [Author's Note] Thus, as financial capital achieved dominance, a unified bourgeois mass was created. And it often confronted the working class as a reactionary mass. The imperialist aspirations common to this bourgeois mass provoked opposition from certain strata of the proletariat. The expansion of colonial policy, the associated increase in the army and navy, and hence the increased tax burden and the strengthening of state power— all this was against the interests of the proletariat. But to certain strata it seemed that it was precisely thanks to the dominant position of German industry on the world market that they enjoyed relative prosperity. It seemed to them that their interests in foreign policy coincided with the interests of..
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
The foreign policy of the ruling classes is wholly determined by their country's position on the world market. And their domestic policy is heavily dependent on their foreign policy. The character of the workers' movement, the character of the proletariat's class struggle, is closely connected with the policy of the ruling classes. The policy of the proletariat is inherently antagonistic to that of the bourgeoisie. But at a certain period in a country's capitalist development, this antagonism can be concealed from the broad masses. Such obscuring of the antagonism is possible to a greater extent the more closely the country's industrial development is linked to the world market and the more dominant a position its industry occupies there. The century-long history of the English workers' movement is the best illustration of these propositions. All historians of the English labour movement concur in explaining its trade-unionist character by the influence of England's dominance on the world market. But the same influence was at work in Germany. Viewed from the angle of this influence, the entire process of demarcation that occurred within German Social-Democracy becomes understandable. By the end of the 1890s, German industry already represented a significant force on the world market. Even then, the bourgeoisie of the old capitalist countries— England and France —was crying out about German competition. And in the last decade before the war, the cry about Germany's industrial hegemony became universal. And this cry reflected not an imaginary danger, but the most genuine reality. German goods were displacing English and French goods from their own possessions, from the metropoles as well as from the colonies. As already indicated, Germany managed to achieve its dominant position thanks to its more perfect industrial organisation, thanks to the higher stage in its capitalist development —the stage of financial capital.
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
genealogy included several generations of pure proletarians were growing. However significant the influence of petty-bourgeois elements may have been, it alone, in my opinion, cannot explain the triumph of opportunist practice. This is all the more true since it is necessary to explain the shift specifically towards *right-wing* opportunism. The petty bourgeoisie itself can provide fertile ground for the development of *left-wing* opportunism, expressed in anarchism in its various forms, as can be seen by looking at the workers movement in, for example, France or Italy. Germany's industrial development over the last two to three decades proceeded with tremendous speed. No other country could compare with it in this regard. The following figures give some idea of this development: **Coal Production (million tons)** | Country | 1887 | 1912 | Increase (%) | :---------|:--- | :---|:-----------| Germany England 176 |226 |+193.3% 1162 | 264 | +62.9% France 21 | 41 | +95.2% **Pig Iron Production (million tons)** Country | 1887 | 1912 | Increase (%) | Germany 4 | 18 | +350.0% England 8 10% France 12 |5 |+150.0% Simultaneously, there was rapid growth in the textile industry. **Cotton Processing (million English pounds)** Country | 1887 | 1912 | Increase (%) | Germany England France 281 1578 | +461.5% |1339 | 2171 | +61.5% |233 | 614 | +163.5% *(Author's Note:]* Figures taken from Mukoseev's article "The Economic Causes of the War" in the collection "Questions of the World War", "Pravo", Petrograd, 1915. Capitalism in Germany
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
genealogy included several generations of pure proletarians were growing. However significant the influence of petty-bourgeois elements may have been, it alone, in my opinion, cannot explain the triumph of opportunist practice. This is all the more true since it is necessary to explain the shift specifically towards *right-wing* opportunism. The petty bourgeoisie itself can provide fertile ground for the development of *left-wing* opportunism, expressed in anarchism in its various forms, as can be seen by looking at the workers movement in, for example, France or Italy. Germany's industrial development over the last two to three decades proceeded with tremendous speed. No other country could compare with it in this regard. The following figures give some idea of this development: **Coal Production (million tons)** | Country | 1887 | 1912 | Increase (%) | :---------|:--- | :---|:-----------| Germany England 176 |226 |+193.3% 1162 | 264 | +62.9% France 21 | 41 | +95.2% **Pig Iron Production (million tons)** Country | 1887 | 1912 | Increase (%) | Germany 4 | 18 | +350.0% England 8 10% France 12 |5 |+150.0% Simultaneously, there was rapid growth in the textile industry. **Cotton Processing (million English pounds)** Country | 1887 | 1912 | Increase (%) | Germany England France 281 1578 | +461.5% |1339 | 2171 | +61.5% |233 | 614 | +163.5% *(Author's Note:]* Figures taken from Mukoseev's article "The Economic Causes of the War" in the collection "Questions of the World War", "Pravo", Petrograd, 1915. Capitalism in Germany It is especially important to note the *forms* in which this powerful growth of the entire industry took place. The capitalist mode of production began to develop in Germany during a period when capitalism in some other countries, especially England, had already reached a high leve f maturity. To compete more rapidly and successfully on the world market, to act as an equa capitalist power,
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
the bourgeoisie was not widening, but narrowing; that the class struggle was not intensifying, but weakening. To prove the truth and immutability of these propositions, a fundamental revision of the theoretical foundations of Marxism and the tactics derived from them was necessary. The standard-bearer in this effort was Eduard Bernstein*, who immediately became the foremost apostle of revisionism, not only in Germany but internationally. *Bernstein, Eduard (1850-1932) - leader of the extreme opportunist wing of German Social-Democracy and the Second International, renegade, theoretician of revisionism. The struggle against Marxism raised by the revisionists did not go unanswered by its adherents. A fierce polemic ensued, as a result of which not a single stone was left standing in the entire theoretical structure of opportunism. Moreover, reality itself very soon cruelly mocked the revisionists' aspirations. In the early 1900s, the boom phase ended, a crisis broke out, followed by a long depression. Theoretically, revisionism was dead. During this critical period, the orthodox Marxists, led by Kautsky, did work of enormous importance, defending proletarian theory and practice. In the process of struggle against revisionism, they widely popularised the ideas of revolutionary Marxism among the masses. However, by inflicting a crushing defeat on the theoretical constructs of revisionism, Kautsky and others, without realising it themselves, weakened the force and significance of this struggle. They did not draw practical conclusions from their blows; they did not carry their assessment of revisionism to its logical conclusion. While pointing out the bourgeois character of all revisionist pronouncements, they did not mention the necessity of a complete break with them. On the contrary, they constantly reiterated the need to preserve party unity.
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Therefore, by elucidating the reasons for the demarcation within the ranks of German Social-Democracy, we thereby obtain an explanation for such, and not some other, development of the socialist movement in other countries. As already indicated, the period of struggle against revisionism was 1898-1905, while the process of separating the extreme Left from the ranks of the orthodox Marxists began in 1905 and was completed in 1910-1912. The emergence and development of the revisionist movement in Germany was usually explained by two causes: first, the reflection of petty-bourgeois influence on the proletariat, and second, the industrial boom of the 1890s. The capitalist mode of production, in its progressive motion, destroys the vital nerve of the petty bourgeoisie - small-scale production. The ranks of the petty bourgeoisie are continually thinning. A significant section of it sinks to a lower social level, becoming proletarians. Another section retains a semblance of independence, falling into complete dependence on the big bourgeoisie. A similar process, with some variations, occurs in agriculture. The ranks of the proletariat are continuously replenished by yesterday's "independent" petty bourgeois from town and country. This is the general law of capitalist development. It manifested itself in Germany no weaker, but rather stronger, than in other countries. The growth of the proletariat in Germany occurred faster than that of other classes; it grew at their expense. It is quite natural that a significant number of those from petty-bourgeois backgrounds, finding themselves in the ranks of the proletariat, also ended up in its trade unions and in the socialist party. Germany's social development had thrust the proletariat forward as the sole fighter for the democratisation of the political system. Social-Democracy was the only democratic party.
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
The Period of Struggle During the period of struggle against revisionism (1898-1905), German Social-Democracy was divided into two parts: the orthodox Marxists and the Bernsteinian revisionists. Starting in 1905, a process of separation of the so-called Lefts from the orthodox camp began. Thus, the following grouping emerged: the Right (revisionists), the Centre (a section of the former orthodox), and the Left (the remaining orthodox). From the moment the Lefts appeared, their recent comrades in the struggle against revisionism began to oppose them more zealously than they had their former opponents, the revisionists. From 1910 onwards, they directed almost all their blows against the Lefts. To crush the latter, the Centre usually united with the Right. Disagreements among the orthodox first manifested themselves at the Jena Party Congress (1905) during the discussion on the mass strike. Here we already have, in embryo, the future three tendencies. While the revisionists considered the very discussion of the issue to be untimely, the Centre found it necessary to place it on the agenda, to outline possible cases for Lefts, unsatisfied with this, proposed conducting widespread propaganda among the masses for the idea of the strike. Similar disagreements emerged at the subsequent Mannheim Party Congress (1906) on the same issue*. But these were merely, so to speak, outpost skirmishes. A lively polemic between the Centre and the Lefts began in 1910-1911, gradually taking on increasingly acute forms until it led to a complete demarcation. *[Author's Note:] For characterising the conciliatory policy towards the revisionists, the following fact is interesting. Almost simultaneously with the Jena Party Congress, a congress of social-democratic trade unions was held in Cologne. There, the question of the mass strike was also discussed, and a resolution was passed ..
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Sverdlov 1916
The Split in German Social-Democracy Outset of the War From the very outset of the war, there was no unity within the ranks of German Social-emocracy. Even before the first Reichstag vote on war credits, two tendencies had emerge ithin the parliamentary faction: one for and one against approving the credit Puring the infial son, the intent to the old disay disciplit in tet bro got a unification between the Eisenachers and the Lassalleans, the party had always presented a united front against the bourgeoisie and the Junkers. Even during the most acute periods of internal struggle between the orthodox Marxists and the revisionists, a unity of public action had been maintained. It was precisely this unity under which German Social-Democracy had grown and strengthened, transforming into a powerful party with over a million members, dozens of newspapers and journals, and so on. It is therefore understandable that many associated the successes of the socialist movement with this unity, and nothing else. Repeatedly, during stormy sessions at various party congresses, when polemics between representatives of different tendencies flared up with particular intensity and threatened a split, the leaders would remind everyone of the necessity of unity. The main argument of the late August Bebel* and others was that they must not grant the bourgeoisie a triumph— a bourgeoisie that, before almost every party congress, predicted the party's inevitable split. *Bebel, August (1840-1913) - a prominent figure in the German and international workers' movement, one of the leaders and founders of German Social-Democracy and the Second International. However, maintaining an external unity did not prevent the maturation of deep, principled disagreements within the party. The modern war merely brought long-debated points of party tactics into sharp relief, forcing the various tendencies to draw the logical conclusions from their views and, in its further development, leading to a
August 25, 2025 at 5:22 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Some good books
Years of war by grossman Wall of bronze by qing Crab cannery ship by takiji Iron flood by serafimovich
August 20, 2025 at 8:18 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
What a pointless correction. Gao Gang was not around in 1968.
August 3, 2025 at 12:58 PM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
this cover is so cool
August 2, 2025 at 5:07 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
This is a chart laying out some notes and documents i collected regarding marxism
August 2, 2025 at 4:00 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Some of the landscape in this region:
July 29, 2025 at 2:28 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
Welcome to Ayaviri 1990
July 29, 2025 at 2:26 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
The brave combatants.
July 29, 2025 at 2:18 AM
broomflowrs.bsky.social
July 29, 2025 at 2:11 AM