Jump to content

Lemur Isles

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Lemur Isles last won the day on February 14 2016

Lemur Isles had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

11 Good


About Lemur Isles

  • Rank
  • Birthday 08/25/1994

Personal Information

  • Location
  • Gender
  • Political Stance
    Hot Trot

NationStates Information

  • Military Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,236 profile views
  1. I'm not sure about that comrade
  2. There was a better political compass I did, that shows progressivism on social issues and authoritarian/libertarian on two different scales. As a result, I rightly appear less anarchist. http://www.sapplycompass.com/
  3. Lemur Isles

    Leftist regions unite to repudiate USSD

    Did the Communist Bloc make a statement about ending relations with USSD? I can't seem to find anything about it on their RMB. And weren't they also listed as part of the invading coalition, or was that a mistake?
  4. Lemur Isles

    Fascist NationStates is fucking crazy

    I know of a certain trade union bureaucrat who adds phrases like ¡Hasta la victoria siempre! or ¡Venceremos! at the end of his facebook posts, as if to maintain his 'revolutionary' credentials while he advocates conservative tactics.
  5. Now that the elections for WA delegate is through, I motion that this proposal be moved forward to the voting stage.
  6. It's not at voting stage yet comrade, I'll leave it open for feedback until Friday when I shall request that it be moved to vote
  7. Alright, here's the latest draft of the proposed amendment, retaining the ban on Anarcho-capitalists. I've also rephrased some of the wording in the Code of Conduct for more clarity. II. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 shall be reworded as:
  8. Lemur Isles

    New to the Internationale!

    Welcome comrade!
  9. My reasoning was that with the prohibition on red baiting would probably be enough when it comes to dealing with AnCaps, since their main problem is that they're just annoying. Also, known members of Libertatem should be prohibited too for being part of a hostile organisation. However, that was probably one of the things I was most unsure about, so I'll remove it from my proposal.
  10. II. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 shall be reworded as: Original Post: I propose an amendment to the Charter, along with a legislative bill, along the lines of: I think it would be good to actually codify these things.
  11. Lemur Isles

    Ejection of New Sloveniakia

    Veto. Like Misley alluded to, it was a little disappointing to see NS prioritise embassies with "anti-communist" regions over the Internationale. However, that is something that has since been rectified if I'm reading the RMB correctly. In any case I wouldn't think it appropriate to eject a longstanding comrade as New Sloveniaka. In politics it is best not to take it as a personal slight when someone criticises (or even mocks) your ideology or tendency. Defacing some of the acquired "Stalinist" regions was probably uncomradely, especially given that NK and others didn't do the same to Trotskyist and Anarchist regions. But that issue seems to have been resolved anyway, and even if it wasn't, the fact remains that New Sloveniaka has never been uncivil or directly hostile to any individual.
  12. I think that despite superficial similarities, there are huge differences between Sanders and Corbyn and - more crucially - their respective parties. Sanders vs Corbyn The candidates themselves are quite different. As others have alluded to, Sanders' foreign policy is nothing for socialists to get exited about (and in the American system, that's what the president has the most control over, Congress could easily vote against his progressive social policy). Even his social policy only seems radical in an American context - free healthcare and education are things a moderate European social democrat would support. I have a feeling his 'socialism' is the same as the governing French Parti Socialiste. Corbyn on the other hand has been associated with the Bennite left of the Labour party, left reformists who arguably stopped just short of being revolutionaries. He has consistently challenged imperialism in Palestine, the Iraq war, the bombing of Libya, etc. etc. He also was against repression in Northern Ireland, and supports a united Ireland. He also wanted to disarm Britain's nuclear weapons (though he unfortunately backed down on that since the parliamentary party and - disgracefully - certain unions opposed that policy), and leave NATO (another policy dropped for same reasons). Democratic Party vs the Labour Party The British Labour Party had historically been formed on the idea that the working class should have its own independent representation, a far cry from the Democratic Party's appeal as the party of the 'progressive' bourgeoisie (and before that, of slave owners...). Of course, they appear to have similar programmes nowadays, especially after the Blair's leadership. The Blairite 'New Labour' deliberately sought to emulate the Democrats in terms of having more moderate policies, as well as an attempt to abandon class politics and internal party democracy. However, many elements that defined Labour as a class-based party still remain. Unions are affiliated to the party, and members of said unions are automatically considered affiliate members, with voting rights. Unlike the Democrats, the Labour Party had active constituency branches where members could select their parliamentary candidates, and elect delegates to the national conference to set party policy (though the Parliamentary Party often contravened the decided policy, despite the best efforts of Tony Benn, and others in the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy in the 80s, which Corbyn was also involved in). However, these are a lot less active today, apart from where there's an influx of new members enthused by Corbyn (party membership doubled since May). Before the leadership election that saw Corbyn elected, the right of the party had actually changed the voting rules which ultimately favoured him, ironically. Before that, the leader was chosen by an electoral college composed of (1) the parliamentary party, (2) the unions, and (3) the constituency Labour Party organisations. However, the rules were changed to give every party member a vote, along with 'supporters' who could pay £3 to get a vote. The intention was to atomise the membership further, and create the sort of election 'primary' system that exists in America, where the best known candidate (establishment-backed, highly funded) is expected to win. However, Jeremy managed to scrape onto the ballot by getting the necessary nominations from labour MPs (many of whom later regretted this - they had merely wanted a 'broad' debate). A whole phenomenon arose with thousands joining or become 'registered supporters' to vote for the longtime socialist MP. Lenin had labelled the Labour Party a 'bourgeois-workers's party', with a working class membership, but a leadership prepared to responsibly manage capitalism. However, for the first time ever the Labour leader is a socialist from the left-wing of the party, making it have a left leader at the top, a right wing bureaucratic layer in the middle (made up of most of the parliamentary party, and Blairite apparatchiks), with a left-leaning membership (who are unfortunately a lot less organised than had been the case decades ago, especially with all the new younger inexperienced comrades). Now that there is a left leadership, there is an historic opportunity for the socialist left to organise itself, push for the deselection of right wing MP candidates, return of party democracy, and socialist policies. Without going into too much detail, the Democrats are a far looser party with no voted on policies, a membership of 43 million (according to Wikipedia) who are necessarily politically disengaged and passive voters. Sanders, at the end of the day, is only running for the party's nomination as presidential candidate. He'd probably have little to no chance of getting even his own party members to vote the right way in Congress, and there would be no chance of transforming the party into a socialist organisation. Conclusion All that said, I would actually support Bernie despite his limitations, were he not running as a Democrat. Independent political representation for the working class is the minimum prerequisite for receiving support from a revolutionary socialist/communist. In America it is absolutely necessary to create a Labor Party that is accountable to its membership, and Bernie could have been a high profile presidential candidate to inaugurate such a force (even if he faced certain defeat electorally). At least the groundwork would exist for the progressive growth of the left electorally, and on the ground, free from the influence of the corporate Democrats.
  13. Lemur Isles


    Cállate, mono!
  14. Leon Trotsky, "Their Morals and Ours".
  15. Lemur Isles


    Hola! Puedo entender un poco de Español, pero yo no puedo hablar o escribir mucho.