Log in

No account? Create an account
Voice of the Proleitariat

> recent entries
> calendar
> friends
> profile
> previous 20 entries

Saturday, October 6th, 2007
1:17 pm - Dems and the War

The American people put the Dems in office to get us out of war.
Do you think the war is ending? Are all your friends and family home safely?
A new solidarity pamphlet, giving a look over.
How should the anti-war movement (which I hope most of my friends count themselves as a part of) think of and interact with the Democrats?
We need to get out NOW, so that no more of our friends, family, soldiers are killed and hurt in a war for profit. Iraqis have the right to self determination, which they're obviously being denied under our occupation.

Phil Ochs I ain't marching any moreCollapse )

(comment on this)

Sunday, November 6th, 2005
10:10 pm - Stop Killer Coke

Hello everyone,
In the spirit of the School of the Americas (SOA) vigil and latin american solidarity, United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) is hosting a supplimental protest in Cokelanta on Friday, Nov. 18.
Coca Cola has been involved in many human rights abuses including the murder of nine labor leaders within the coca cola bottling factory, kidnap of children for intimidation, etc. More information can be found at: www.killercoke.org
Hundreds of us will converge at noon that Friday Nov. 18th at the Coca Cola head quarters to highlight the international crimes Coca Cola still refuses to address.
This will be along the way for many of us to the SOA vigil.
The vigil, hosted by SOA watch (www.soawatch.org), will draw thousands of participants to Colombus, GA, home of the infamous SOA/WHINSIC at Ft. Benning. This training school (often called the School of Assassins) has trained some of the most brutal Latin American dictators and human rights abusers that we know of.
Both marches are a great way to let Killer Coke and our military know that we're not letting up on them and that our solidarity with the people of the global south and the movements there is ongoing and growing.
For more information, contact:
or call Jessica at: 516.652.9772

If you are interested in going from/through Hattiesburg, MS, please let me know. Rides are currently being organized and we don't have much time!

Michael C. Ide

(comment on this)

Monday, September 6th, 2004
7:52 pm - marxist aesthetics part 1

in my search for some sort of look into the whole question of how culteral production works into marxist theory. ive came to realise that marx never actually sat down and wrote his ideas on the matter. (he does use art and literature as examples to illustrate some ideas in his more earlier writings)
i think a main reason that art is overlooked is becuase it cant be cateragrized materially. in looking at the world through dialectic and materialist perspective is pretty simple, but the the issue of aesthetics can be pretty grey. Marx's ideas were a philosphy and i think that when people look at things in such black and white ways it takes away from the entirety of the picture. i dont think it is possible to apprieciate marx's aethstetic ideas and graps its potential when his entire doctrine is reduced to mere economics and politics, that ignores its philosphical essence. when looking at the question of aesthetics this becomes clear. art is an exspression of the artist's inner world, and how they preseive the world around them. now when somebody agrees with a certain viewpoint, it will be reflected in their work. but alas it cant be imposed/forced onto them. now with materialsim, the world is exsplained through science. but since art reflects an individual's personal exsperiences of the world they are apart of it shows a peice of this person, despite possible leanings in viewpoints or idealologies. Marx's works have breifly talked about that, but were never clearly defined.
when the october revolution happened in russia, and the people wanted an art to reflect the new society that they have worked, and fought for this presented a problem in what is socialist art? lenin obviously had his personal taists but he thought it was exstremly important to allow artists freedom in choice of medium, theme, form and style. like how we can imfer from his writings in "materialsim and empirio-critism" (published in 1909) this freedom was essential becuase like all other things- its historically conditioned. this writing and this implication from this writing (which was dealing with science and not aesthetics but used as the model for defining what is marxists aesthetics) this notsion of art as reflection... which mainly looks as art as its cognitive function and not looking at it in any other way. the way one reflects scientifically is very differnt from artistically. before i discress, after the novemeber revolution's victory, the people wanted an art that reflected the birth of a new society. for probally the first time the issue of marxist aethstics was put to the forefront. lenin made his personal taists known, but he never alloud these taists to become the norm or allow certain artists with a particular style or theme become the dominiate norm. becuase the government didnt have a definate possition on art this left the door open to artist exsperimentation. lenin did acknolege that art does play a social and educational role, it does work in differnt ways politics. keeping in the sprirt of this view, after lenin's death the bolshevik party in its 1925 resolution on the relationship between the part and literature, stated "the class character of art in general and literature in particular is expressed in dorms indinitely more varied than. for example, in politics." in this way the party remained faithful to the marxist thesis that art is an ideological fom that exspresses class interest, with out ignoring that complex middlework, art is not a simple, direct means of exspressing those interests.
it is important to note that the gains made by marxist aaesthetics in both capitalist and commmunints countries throws out the nationalistic notions and dogmas of "what" art is and is encredibly valuable. despite so many fucking contradictions on what is marxist aesthetics in looking at the whole we can find in them the answer.
so yes, im gonna continue trying to answer this question myself. i hope this made some sort of sence..

current mood: geeky

(5 comments | comment on this)

Monday, August 9th, 2004
10:16 am - x posted alot
xmarx This maoism_leninism is a community for Marxist-Leninists and Marxist-Leninist-Maoists.

There wont be too much anarchsim or evolutionary marxism here. Thats not to say that membership is limited though.

Feel free, whatever your tendancy may be, to become a member of this community. Please feel free to engage in spirted debate.

Have fun, be nice.

(3 comments | comment on this)

Saturday, August 7th, 2004
5:27 pm - The Venezuelan Revolution at a Glance

By Julian Benson

        Latin America is a region of turmoil. Its history is defined by the oppression brought onto it by the Bourgeois powers that be, and the valiant struggle for freedom that the people have fought for over a century. From Bolivia to Columbia, to Argentina to Chile, the peoples of Latin America have suffered some of the harshest right wing dictatorships in history, and each time, the strength and resolve of the revolutionary masses have liberated themselves from the tyranny of Militarism. However, each time a dictator is felled, the revolution does not complete itself. The nation is restored to a bourgeois democracy, a democracy where the business elite and foreign powers hold the real power, where every political party stands for the same thing, Capitalism. In order for any nation to be a true democracy, to be truly free, the people must play an active role in the running of their own nation. With the people’s freedom, government and live hood controlled by an elite upper class, this is an impossibility. Therefore there is but one logical solution to ensure lasting peace and liberty, the dictatorship of the proletariat.
moreCollapse )

(1 comment | comment on this)

Thursday, August 5th, 2004
2:30 pm - For Torontonians

There ARE buses going from Toronto to NYC. Stop BUSH!
Get on the buses to New York!
Join the demonstration on August 29!

George Bush will be in New York City this August for the Republican National Convention. Hundreds of thousands of activists will be there too--from across the United States and around the world. In fact, New York City police are predicting at least half a million demonstrators. And over one thousand applications for rally permits have already been submitted to New York City Hall.

The Toronto Coalition to Stop the War will be sending buses to New York so that we can participate in these historic demonstrations in solidarity with the American anti-war movement.

Book your seat now!

The main demonstration will take place in Manhattan on Sunday, August 29 in the afternoon. Further actions and teach-ins will continue during the week.

Buses will leave Toronto from 720 Spadina Avenue on Saturday, August 28 at 7:00pm and will arrive in New York City on Sunday, August 29 at 7:00am (buses drive overnight).

There are currently two options to return to Toronto:

Bus 1 will leave New York on Sunday, August 29 at 7:00pm and will arrive in Toronto at 720 Spadina Avenue on Monday, August 30 at 7:00am (buses drive overnight).

Bus 2 will leave New York on Monday, August 30 at 7:00pm and will arrive in Toronto at 720 Spadina Avenue on Tuesday, August 31 at 7:00am (buses drive overnight).

Tickets cost $80.00 to $120.00 on a sliding scale. Pledge sheets are available at www.nowar.ca for those who'd like to self-fundraise.

Sunday night accommodations are available for an additional $5.00 for those passengers who take Bus 2.

PLEASE NOTE: All passengers crossing the U.S. border require a valid passport OR a valid photo I.D. and a birth certificate.

If you need to update your I.D., please do it as soon as possible as the wait may take months depending on your circumstances. It takes twenty weeks to get an Ontario birth certificate and only two weeks to get a Canadian passport. However, you may need a birth certificate to get a passport.

The passport office in Toronto is located at 74 Victoira Street, Suite 300 (east of Yonge Street, north of Adelaide Street West).  Hours of operation are 8:00am to 4:30pm.

For more information or to book a seat:
E-mail: bushbus2004@yahoo.ca
Phone: 416-795-5863
Website: www.nowar.ca

To get regular updates about Bush bus organising, join our listserve at bushbus2004@yahoogroups.ca.  To join, send an e-mail to

Other wesbites of interest:

Official website of the Republican National Convention: www.2004nycgop.org

City of New York Welcomes the RNC: www.nyc2004.org

Counter-convention activist website: www.counterconvention.org

RNC NOT welcome activist website: www.rncnotwelcome.org

United for Peace and Justice: www.unitedforpeace.org

International ANSWER: www.internationalanswer.org

Organised by the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War.
- www.nowar.ca - peace@nowar.ca - 416-760-6530 -

(3 comments | comment on this)

Tuesday, August 3rd, 2004
2:04 pm - Canadian Election Results

Disappointing NDP due to failure to use "S" word

By Alex Grant

As predicted, Canada now has a minority Liberal government. The results were: Liberals 135, Conservative 99, Bloc Québécois 54, and NDP 19. This puts the Liberals 20 seats short of a majority government. With the NDP unable to prop up the Liberals it is likely Canadians will head back to the polls within a year. Workers and youth who look to the NDP need answers so that the poor showing will not be repeated in the next election.

There were two big losers in this election campaign. Despite their apparent euphoria the Liberals have suffered a significant setback. Only six months ago they were riding high in the polls with their new leader Paul Martin the darling of the corporate press. Everything turned sour, however, when the sponsorship scandal broke and this acted as a lightning rod for years of accumulated discontent. Fortunately the Conservatives were unable to capitalize on the Liberals' crisis and were also rejected by the voters. Despite being pumped up by the right-wing press and increasingly partisan (and wildly inaccurate) polling firms, the new Conservative party could not attract significant support. This shows that Canadian workers are looking for change, but not change at any price.

The Liberals clung on to power by demonizing the Conservatives for their dramatic tax cuts, cuts to social programs, and support for the Iraq war. The Conservatives were of course guilty of these accusations, but the Liberals have done and will do little different. The Liberal tactics were not aimed so much at Conservative supporters but at the NDP. NDP voters were told, "Don't split the anti-Conservative vote. Voting for the NDP will let the Conservatives in and Liberal policies are not that different from the NDP's anyway." This tactic yielded significant results – the NDP went from polling 20% to a final result of 16% of the popular vote. Frequently these tactics served to actually elect the Conservatives as NDPers split their vote to the third place Liberal (voters were fooled by the press into thinking the NDP had no chance). In many seats the NDP only lost by 1 or 2 percent. If the NDP's vote was not eroded by vote splitting, (equal to about 4%), they could have doubled their seats and would be in a far better position for the next election. The question arises, how does the NDP combat the vote splitting tactic?

Jack Layton, the NDP leader, ran a fair campaign and was forceful in putting forward his reformist program. The main problem with this program is that it never explained the source of the problems workers face (Capitalism), or the solution (Socialism). When you compare the NDP and Liberal programs you see that the Liberals propose money for healthcare and the NDP proposes more money for healthcare. The Liberals propose childcare spaces and the NDP proposes more spaces. The Liberals propose phased-in money for cities and the NDP proposes money for cities now. Combine this with the inability of the NDP leadership to rule out a coalition with any of the capitalist parties and you can see how the Liberals' claim to have the same values as the NDP can be convincing. An average worker might think, "I like the NDP's reforms, but the Liberals are offering the same sort of thing and the NDP are going to work with them in a minority anyway, so I'd better be safe and vote Liberal to keep the Conservatives out."

Layton is proposing proportional representation as a solution to vote splitting. He correctly pointed out that the NDP's best result in 1988 yielded over 40 seats with 2.2 million votes while this time they won only 19 seats with 2.1 million votes. But is PR really a solution? While it can seem more democratic it is in fact merely a diversion. Pinning our hopes to a system that leads to coalitions means the NDP bureaucrats will always have an excuse to water down the party program. We do not need another method of shuffling the seats on the HMS Titanic of bourgeois democracy. We need policies that actually improve the lives of working people and win support both at the ballot box and on the streets.

So what is the real solution? The only way to avoid the vote splitting is to adopt a socialist program and explain that the capitalist Liberal and Conservative parties are incapable of solving the problems of Canadian workers. The NDP bureaucrats will answer that the workers will not support a "radical" socialist program – this only goes to show that the bureaucrats have no understanding of how their politics breed defeat. In the past workers did not support the NDP because it was not offering them anything and they could feel that the leaders had no confidence in their ideas.

As soon as the NDP actually started offering reforms (not enough, but still a start), their support jumped to 20%. The Liberals then proposed a left-sounding program (that they have no intention of implementing) and undercut the NDP's support. Do we need any more evidence that left policies win support? However, it is not enough to just put forward good promises. To avoid vote splitting it is necessary to explain how only by breaking with capitalism will the promises be achieved.

The most tragic example of how a reformist strategy leads to defeat was in the constituency of Vancouver South. Here Bev Meslo, former leadership candidate for the left-wing NDP Socialist Caucus, faced Liberal candidate Ujjal Dosanjh. Dosanjh was the former NDP premier of British Columbia who betrayed his party by defecting to the Liberals. This campaign was a fantastic opportunity to combat right-wing bureaucratic careerism with a working class socialist campaign that could enthuse this mostly working class and immigrant riding. Unfortunately Bev forgot all of her previous socialist verbiage and said, "We have to be careful not to scare away the middle class voters." This did not stop voters being scared by the prospect of the Conservatives and the NDP lost by a 2:1 margin. We hope Bev has learnt her lesson, as well as those on the left who believe that socialism is a great idea but it will never be popular. These middle-class radicals do not understand that socialism, and its scientific expression Marxism, are merely the culmination of 150 years of working class struggle. Socialist policies are popular when workers believe victory is possible and worth the risk fighting for. Socialist policies are popular because they have been formulated by the workers themselves when struggling to solve their problems.

The final story of this election is the historically low turnout. Only 60% of those eligible bothered to vote despite the wall-to-wall media coverage and the close race that led to an exciting campaign. This is the lowest turnout since Canada became an independent country. 40% of Canadians do not have any hope in political parties. These are predominantly young workers who are the most exploited and oppressed in society. The NDP can attract these disenfranchised workers with a radical campaign that links up with their experience and offers them hope for the future. A socialist campaign leads to victory, not just in parliament but in the lives of workers. In the words of the Pakistani Marxist MP Mansoor Ahmed, "Those who dare win!".

June 30, 2004

(comment on this)

Tuesday, July 13th, 2004
9:10 pm - New community!

Hey there! I'm just advertising for my semi new community ycl.

Its a community for those whom are interested in communism and is affiliated with the Young Communist League (Thus YCL).

Check it out, maybe join.


(comment on this)

Saturday, June 19th, 2004
12:00 pm - Venezulean Update

by Charley Allan


This article written by a HOV Campaign activist in London was published in today´s edition of the The Morning Star.Collapse )

(comment on this)

Wednesday, June 9th, 2004

I've argued with this so-called "evolutionary Marxist" and her views are just so screwed up that I stopped trying. Her comunity is real_marxism. She tried to argue that Marxism is a slow and gradual evolution of society, making reference to Darwin to prove it in a twisted Dialectal sense. The Dialectical principal of Quantity into Quality stands against slow and gradual change.
Darwin's theory, while being brilliant, did have flaws. Darwin believed that evolution was a constant process, i.e. physical adaptations slowly occurred over several generations. While fossils couldn't not prove this, he believed the gaps in the fossil record would eventually be filled through further excavation.
However this never occurred. hence the law of Quality in Quantity. While Evolution is a long process, there being a great span of time between evolutionary leaps, evolution itself it just that, a leap. After a period, evolution will make a rapid advance in a single generation. i.e. an ape will be born with apposable thumbs to parents that had not, Quantity into Quality.
As Marxists we apply this to society. Society will remain stagnant for a period, and then a great leap forward will occur. To say that, Social evolution is a slow and gradual process, Constantly moving forward at a steady rate, is a contradiction of Dialectics.

(7 comments | comment on this)

12:18 am - hey

hi, im new to this community and would like to announce my presence.
i am a member of the ycl and would love to discuss politics with other like minded people.

in solidarity,

(2 comments | comment on this)

Monday, June 7th, 2004
7:17 pm - Venezuela

A Revolutionary situation is currently raging in the Bolivarian nation of Venezuela. After winning the federal elections in 2000, Hugo Chavez (a socialist not a Marxist) brought many reforms to the country that gave the workers higher wages, universal heath care and access to better education.
However the oligarchy of business and some military leaders feverishly opposed Chavez's reign.
In 2002, a coup seized power away from Chavez and set up what they called a "Democratic Dictatorship".
The people, the workers of Venezuela, outraged at this turn of events rose up as one determined mass, for the first time, as a class conscious proletariat. They seized control of the government away from the coup leaders and re-established Chavez as the legitimate President of the nation.
From then on, Alan Woods (a noted Marxist writer and thinker) and those of his tendency have been actively educating Chavez about Marxism, and what's more, educating the people of Venezuela through public forums and speaking tours. Venezuela must be made to continue it's revolutionary march forward, and consolidate the nation as a true worker's state.
The counter-revolution was defeated in 2002 but it is regaining it's strength now with the aid of US imperialism. The right-wing government of Columbia has been massing it's military forces on the boarder of Venezuela, and extremist Para-military groups from Columbia have been crossing the boarder.
Our duty as Marxists is clear, to support the Venezuelan revolution, to push for Marxism and a worker's state.
To Demand the right to self-determination for Venezuela. To ensure no Imperialist intervention.
In Solidarity with the Revolution. Hands Off Venezuela!

Julian Benson

(comment on this)

Saturday, June 5th, 2004
12:37 pm

Venezuela: Bolivarian masses anger at referendum decision By Jorge MartinCollapse )

(comment on this)

Tuesday, June 1st, 2004
12:44 pm

does anyone know where walt brown stands in the polls thus far?

(2 comments | comment on this)

Tuesday, May 25th, 2004
11:52 pm

Lenin on War

The Philosophy towards war

Marxists naturally and constantly condemn all wars between states that are of an Imperialist nature. However, our attitude is fundamentally different from that of Bourgeois Pacifists, and Anarchists. While it is the philosophy of all pacifists to object to all conflicts and advocate peace under all circumstances, Marxists see the inevitable connection between war and class struggle. Thusly, we understand that war cannot be abolished unless classes are also abolished and Socialism is created. In keeping with this philosophy, our attitude toward Civil war (I.e. A war is a waged by the oppressed class against the oppressor) is entirely different than any pacifist. We view this type of conflict as legitimate, progressive and necessary. In addition, we differ from anarchists and pacifists in that we deem it necessary historically (in accordance with dialectic materialism) to study each war individually, in order to classify it as a progressive war (I.e. a war that benefited human development by destroying oppressive institutions (autocracy or serfdom for example)) or the opposite. Therefore it is necessary to examine the specific conditions of each war.

A Progressive War

The French revolution ushered in a new era of human history. From the time of revolution to the Paris Commune, one of the types wars was a war of a bourgeois-progressive, national-liberating character. In other words, the chief content and historical significance of these wars were the overthrow of absolutism and feudalism, the undermining these institutions and the overthrow of alien oppression. Therefore we can see the difference between a progressive war and an Imperialist war. Wars that liberate an oppressed people, including some bi-lateral wars (I.e. the Napoleonic wars) are progressive as they lead to the abolition of feudal and other oppressive institutions.

The Difference Between a Defensive and Aggressive War

The terms “defensive” and “aggressive” are used to describe wars. To a Marxist, a defensive war is one where the oppressed people wage war on their oppressors. Hence a “defensive war” is a just war. It is regardless who struck first as the deciding factor is the liberation of the oppressed people. If a colonial country were to declare war on it’s oppressor, this would be a defensive war as it is defending the people from oppression and conquest. Hence an aggressive war is one where an Imperialist power wages war to conquer and subjugate a people or peoples. We must always defend a people’s right to defend themselves against Imperialist aggressors.

Imperialist War

While a progressive war is a war fought between the oppressor and the oppressed, slave-owner and slave. An Imperialist war is one fought between two oppressive powers, two slave-owners. The purpose of an Imperialist war is to extend the power of national-bourgeoisie. Hence it is a war fought for the sole benefit of the owning class. Both sides use national-Proletariat as fodder to progress the ends of the bourgeois. Naturally, the people don’t benefit from either victory or defeat, as regardless of the outcome, they will remain oppressed by an imperialist power.

Civil War

During an Imperialist war it is the duty of all Marxists to bring about the defeat of “their” nation, that is to create dissension among the army and navy, to incite mutiny, to have the officer caste arrested and turn the guns of the army on the Imperialist government and start revolution. Thus the goal of Marxists during Imperialist war should be inciting a civil war. Exploitation and oppression of the working class in any country is ten fold in wartime. Proletariat are trained and armed for the purpose of fighting for an Imperialist power, but this power placed in the hands of the workers can easily be turned in favour of the people.

Social-Chauvinists and “Kautskyism”

The epidemic of opportunists and social-chauvinists becomes rapid during wartime. The opportunists inside of our own parties rally to support the war effort, and show the true extent of their spinelessness. Kautsky, a leading authority in the Second International is a prime example of just such a thing. At the beginning of world war one, he declared his support for the war and declared the International a “peacetime organization”. Or declare that the victory of “their” nation is favourable. To favour one’s own nation in an Imperialist war is a betrayal of the interests of the working class. It is the duty of true Marxists to break with these opportunists.


Pacifists and some socialists preach an active program of complete disarmament. This of course is a complete blunder with reference to Marxist theory, as it is tantamount to the complete abandonment of the class struggle and the unification of all through revolution. In order to defeat Capitalism, there must be a violent revolution. And the workers must be armed to defend against the inevitable violence that the bourgeois will bring upon the people in order to preserve their power. Disarmament will only come when the world is finally united and the concept of class and state are abolished. Only then will disarmament be viable.

The Marxist Program for War

In time of Imperialist war the need for a militant and revolutionary programme is at the utmost. Social-Chauvinists and opportunists but be stripped out from our organizations. War must not only be opposed, but also turned against the Imperialist rulers. Soldiers and the civil population alike must rise against being used as pawns for the expansion of Imperialism. In addition, we must be able to recognize a war that has a progressive nature, and if so, push it towards a revolutionary character. In wartime, although the traitors and opportunists will preach support for the national government, we must never deviate from the path of revolution. However, in times of war, persecution and attempted prevention of revolutionary actions will become much increased. Our groups may be outlawed, and our comrades arrested. Therefore, the importance of an underground organization must not be underestimated. Pamphlets, leaflets, newspapers and other revolutionary doctrine must be circulated to prevent the class conscious of the workers from being oppressed by nationalistic propaganda and opportunists in the so-called “social-democratic” parties. In short the revolution must never be deterred by wartime, Imperialist government, instead it must thrive under these conditions.

(comment on this)

Monday, May 24th, 2004
8:49 pm - The Revolutionary Situation in Venezuela

Part one
Part Two

(comment on this)

1:36 pm

My struggle is not a personal one, but rather, a universal concern. Capitalists keep their vice-grip on the American People by way of controlling big business. While software sadist Bill gates and Donald "Duche" Trump are major players, Big tobacco reigns as the most significant, and brutal machine in the capitalist system. It feeds off of America's children and other citizens like a parasite, and then kill its host with a slow painful death by cancer. While all this happen the executives sit back and watch with mirth as out children and teens are slowly drained of their essence.
Big tobacco is like a hydra, if you cut one head off, two more grow back. How do you kill such a monster? By attacking what they care about most: their money. Go for the coffer, and that will seal the wound before another head can grow back. How does one person undertake such a task? One person doesn't. I will take the masses, the people to stop this hydra. WE will stop it by putting out the butts and saying "lights out" to big tobacco.
In the United States, the hydra has fifty (50) heads. One for each state. If WE can get the citizens of each state, at least half of them to quit, that will cut off and seal HALF of the hydra's heads. Such a debilitating blow would certainly leave a mark. As a socialist, and a person, I put the well being of human beings over my own personal affairs. The hydra is a machine that operated on death and carcinogens. Please, join me and help destroy this capitalist monster. How many more mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, grand mothers, grandfathers will have to die at the hands of these dogs before WE finally say ENOUGH!! I hereby declare TOTAL WAR on big tobacco!


(comment on this)

Saturday, May 22nd, 2004
1:56 pm - Dance tonight!

Hello, I'm new to this community. My name is Krystina and I am a member of the YCL (Young Communist League) in the Lower Mainland.

Tonight there is going to be a FLMN and YCL hosted dance at the Dogwood center in Vancouver. It starts at 7:00, and all profits will go to the YCL.

Admission is by donation, as is snackies. There will also be liqour served, for those of whom are interested.

The dance is Latino music themed, and we're hoping that some of you come out.

Directions are as followed:
The adress is 706 Clark Drive, you can get there three ways.
1)Go to Commercial station, and take the #20 down to Venables, get off and then walk down Venables until you get to clark, and walk down until you see a red building.
2)Take any bus that takes you along Hastings, and get off on Clark. Walk up until you see the red building.

Hope to see you there!


(comment on this)

Friday, April 16th, 2004
1:51 am - Hands Off Venezuela

Add your name to this petition to oppose US intervetion in the soverign nation of Venezuela. E-mail handsoffvenezuela@yahoo.co.uk with your name, organizational affiliation (if any) and where your from.
For more information about the initiative read:

(comment on this)

Sunday, April 4th, 2004
6:31 pm

Call for Urgent ActionCollapse )

(comment on this)

> previous 20 entries
> top of page