Brazilian Communist Movement Iceberg (historical and nowadays)
I made this Iceberg meme in the beginning of the last year (2023), back when these kinds of images were still fashionable hahah but I never knew where to post it. I guess here would be kind of ok
I even thought about translating it to English, but was too lazy to do so. Might still do it if someone asks to
(Real pictures from the place where this story took place, but I took them in later trips, years later)
One time, long ago, when I was about 7 years old, me and my family went on a trip to the village where my grandma lives, deep in the state of Bahia countryside.
Some days in, in the middle of the trip, my parents decided to go on an early morning jog. After waiting for some time, which felt like forever for my child brain at the time (but was probably actually just some minutes, as the sun hadn’t even properly risen at this point), I took my younger brother by the hand (about 5 years old at the time) and went searching for my parents, still on our pajamas.
We followed the trail they said they were going to, hoping to catch up with them, seeing the first sunlight of the day as we went through the trail going off to the woods, the air still cold and foggy from the last night.
We walked for some time, I can’t remember for how long, or how far we went, getting deeper and deeper into the woods and far from the houses in the village, getting surrounded by the crooked tree branches and spike covered plants and flowers from this region, part of the transition from the Caatinga to the Cerrado biomes.
Even at the time, I could tell I was feeling some kind of deep emotion in this trek. In retrospect, I guess I could say I felt that moment was very surreal, even though I did not know that specific word at the time.
But then I stopped, even my child mind at the time could understand that was not a very good idea, I feared we could get lost. I turned to my brother and said “We should go back.” We turned around and started to return the same way we came.
My brother silently agreed and we went back, still holding hands, now that I think of it, he didn’t say a single word during the entire walk.
We luckily made it back safely to my grandma’s house, and after some time, my parents came back from their jogging, never even knowing we went looking for them.
Besides the serene and surreal moment we had in the woods, I also wonder how odd the scene might have looked for someone from the village, seeing two kids who are not from the place, in strange clothes (southeast Brazil pajamas), walking without supervision in the middle of the woods, at the first lights of dawn. We might even have looked like ghosts or something like that for them.
Anyways, that might not have been the most interesting childhood memory or adventure, but it surely is one that I found interesting and stayed in my mind since then.
Humans naturally seek out to work and to transform the environment around them. The product of this work, initially, greatly pleased us, as we saw in it part of ourselves.
For example, early humans would create their Venus Figurines, and literally see themselves in the product of their work, as it was representing a human being, but made from the natural materials from the environment around them.
With the development of the private property of the means of production, we became alienated from our work, and no longer can do it for ourselves, but for some other person, far away (the boss, the bourgeois). Now we have to work on their terms, and can't decide when, where, or how we will work.
So that is why everyone will be an artist if given the choice: free and non alienated work will always be fulfilling and pleasant, while alienated work is always gruelling and unpleasant.
This text was written by me back in college. It is about Democracy, Capitalism, Socialism, and the DPRK. Modesty aside, I thought it turned out pretty good, so I’m translating it and posting it here.
In this course we studied some important theoretical productions about Democracy. And after the construction of the group Seminar, which debated the question: “What is Democracy?”, this work seeks to deepen the reflection on this same topic a little more.
As is natural, due to the influence of the so-called “Western world” on our country, many of these authors studied discuss this issue based on contemporary bourgeois liberal democracy. As an example of political scientists of bourgeois democracy, it is possible to cite Joseph Schumpeter, when he addresses democracy in capitalism and socialism, and Robert Dahl, when he presents the concept of Polyarchy.
Schumpeter was a liberal political scientist who presented his “Method of Democracy” in his work Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. As a method, the author works with a concept of democracy based on well-defined norms, exercised by an efficient Bureaucracy (in the Weberian sense of a professional and impersonal administrative framework).
For the author, political equality is not a possible objective, so the democratic method focuses on trying to guarantee an institutional arrangement that leads to the common good. This arrangement should enable a political environment of high electoral competitiveness, with several parties as organizations representing different political tendencies, which compete in a free market logic on exclusively electoral routes. It is also necessary for this party organization to respect institutional norms.
Furthermore, it is also necessary to limit the possibility of decision-making, with systems of checks and balances that can prevent a politician, be they president, prime minister, deputy, etc. to make radical or extreme decisions that could generate political instability (such as calling into question the legitimacy of private ownership of the means of production or engaging in politics beyond electoral channels – a position strongly rejected by Schumpeter).
For this, the action of the aforementioned cold, impersonal, professional and efficient Weberian Bureaucracy is necessary.
On the other hand, Robert Dahl presents the concept of Polyarchy as a type of advanced democracy, analyzing other types of political organization during his work.
Dahl observes some factors, such as liberalization and popularization, present in political regimes. In this case, liberalization is characterized by the degree of public contestation and opposition to the current government, while popularization is characterized by the degree of popular participation in political decision-making.
Regarding the relationship between an active government and the opposition, the author highlights some possibilities: the first is that the lower the risk of losing the government for tolerating the opposition, the lower the probability of repression of the opposition. The second is that the greater the costs (political and economic) of repressing the opposition, the less likely repression will be. The third is that the more the costs of repression exceed the costs of peaceful tolerance, the greater the likelihood of the existence of a competitive political regime.
Based on these technical definitions, the author presents Cartesian graphs where it is possible to visualize and monitor the mentioned trends, characterizing certain behavior patterns of political regimes. In this case, a regime with low popularization and low liberalization is called a Closed Hegemony, a regime with low liberalization and high popularization is called an Inclusive Hegemony, a regime with high liberalization and low popularization is called a Competitive Oligarchy, and finally a regime with high liberalization and high popularization is called a Polyarchy.
Schumpeter and Dahl, despite presenting very different characterizations of the functioning of contemporary democracy, converge in the fact that their theoretical constructions start from the assumption that a truly open and democratic political regime necessarily involves maintaining private ownership of the means of production and of the bourgeoisie as ruling class. In this way, any form of divergent political organization automatically becomes a “dictatorship”, or ceases to be a full democracy in some capacity.
Schumpeter demonstrates his vision of socialist political organization in the following excerpt:
Firstly, we have the large socialist community, which is led by a minority party and offers no opportunities to others. The representatives of this party, gathered at the organization's XVIII Convention, heard reports and unanimously approved resolutions, where nothing was heard that resembled what we call debates. They ended by voting (as the official sources say) that "the Russian people (?), in unconditional devotion to the party of Lenin and Stalin, and to the great leader, accept the program of great works outlined in the most sublime of documents of our time (. ..)” (Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, p. 286)
Here, the author characterizes the functioning of the Soviet Union's politics as a closed and dictatorial regime, with a slight institutional simulacrum.
Dahl, on the other hand, recognizes that sometimes organizations that escape capitalist hegemony may not be so closed:
The extraordinary attempt to allow a great deal of self-management in subnational units in Yugoslavia means that the opportunities for participation and contestation are greater in that country, despite the one-party regime, than in, say, Argentina or Brazil. (Dahl, Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, p. 34)
Although the author recognizes the immense mobilization of the population in the self-management of Yugoslav society, through mechanisms of direct democracy, he also characterizes this political system as being “single party”, and therefore, according to his own theory, less democratic than others with many different parties.
The so-called elitist theories of (Bourgeois) Democracy, although important for understanding the relationship between the people and state institutions in Western liberal democracies, does not have the necessary tools to understand state organizations that deviate from these models.
Such alternatives are then mechanically labeled “regimes” and “dictatorships”. By “coincidence”, chance meant that the democracies were mostly in Western Europe and North America, while the rest of the American continent, the African continent and Asia as a whole were mostly full of dictatorships.
It is necessary to note, however, that during the height of the Cold War, a significant number of States around the world (mostly on the Asian and African continents) adopted a political organization contrary to capitalist hegemony, if not openly socialist. These states, many of which lasted a long time (some surviving to this day), would not be able to maintain themselves and achieve political stability solely through force and repression. The longevity (and even popular approval in current opinion polls) of these political models expresses an element of popular support and sense of democratic participation that cannot be ignored.
So, as a counterpoint to elitist theories, it is possible to mention the functioning of democracy in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), commonly known as “North Korea”.
As it is a socialist country (where there is no private ownership of the means of production) and has a vanguard revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party in power, the Workers' Party of Korea (WPK), the State is organized through People's Councils.
People's Councils are Direct Democracy organizations that arise from the basic levels of workplace, study (schools and universities), and places of residence, passing through neighborhood levels, municipal and state levels, until reaching the Supreme People's Assembly, the highest level of deliberation.
In these Councils, all interested parties can participate: present their political views, vote and be voted for. Furthermore, participation is not mandatory. A specific party affiliation is also not mandatory, and members of the WPK, the Korean Social Democratic Party, the Chondoist Chongu Party, independents not affiliated to any party, etc. can participate.
In these meetings, the political lines to be followed and the delegates of the higher authorities are decided by majority vote: If a deliberate policy cannot be immediately applied, a delegate is voted to present it to the higher authority. These delegates can also be instantly removed through a vote by their Popular Council, if they present serious misconduct in their role.
This functioning of direct democracy mechanisms in the DPRK, although it constitutes only one aspect of this complex system of government, is important to study, since modern democracy theorists are unable to explain it using their traditional academic constructs.
Added to this is the fact that the DPRK (as it is a socialist country that resists imperialist pressure to this day, even after the end of the former Eastern bloc) is one of the most harassed, caricatured and ridiculed societies on the planet. This caricature, in addition to its political bias, is constructed by the media and Western academics about Korea and its people from an extremely orientalist and racist perspective.
This is also why this study and demystification of the DPRK must be carried out, since it is impossible to assume a position favorable to the self-determination of the people while denying the Korean people the right to exist.
Bibliographic References
DAHL, Robert. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition.
SCHUMPETER, Joseph. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy.
VISENTINI, Paulo G. Fagundes. The Korean Revolution: The Unknown Juche Socialism. São Paulo. Unesp Publishing. 2015
Very brief post-completion thoughts on Zelda Link's Awakening
Recently finished Link’s Awakening and was positively surprised. I didn’t have any high hopes for the game, as I had never played it beforehand, and considering it is a spin off Game Boy title from 1993 (I played the DX version in the Switch virtual console).
But I liked it; it establishes some foundations of the “Zelda formula” that would be later expanded upon by OoT, MM, etc. Like playing different songs on the Ocarina, for example. Besides that, the music and pixel art in the game are really beautiful.
I guess everyone already knows that, but the ending is kind of sad for a Zelda game. The entire game is also kind of strange, with characters from Mario games, like Goombas and Chain Chomps as a regular part of the “fauna”; the Animal Village, with talking animals; the weird owl statues with vague messages; the plot twist, etc. etc.
Before the plot twist, I began to hypothesize that maybe Koholint Island was closer to the wherever the Mario games take place (If I recall correctly, devs usually joked that the two series take place in the same planet, but in lands far away from each other, but I may be completely wrong though), so that “species” that occur there (like Goombas) might also occur naturally in the island. But, after the plot twist, it all seems like some kind of fever dream.
I thought this when I was about the mid game, and now that I finished it I still stick to this thought: Link’s Awakening is the new Majora’s Mask, but nobody understands it yet.
Anyways, the game also has a nice message about making the most of the time you have and to have fun and appreciate the happy times. But also about knowing that these happy times are not eternal. Eventually, everything changes. This is part of life.
What I wish more people understood is that art is like cooking. Not everyone needs to be a great chef but everyone should cook to some extent. It is required to put fuel into our bodies, and we have to prepare that fuel. Same with exercise. A lot of people understand that regular exercise is part of a healthy life, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are athletes.
But it feels like most people don’t apply this perspective to art. Just because you are not an “artist” doesn’t mean that you should not be creating something that feeds your soul. It can be paper clip crafts, or doodles in your notebook, or knitting or LITERALLY WHATEVER THE HELL YOU WANT but please for the love of God do SOMETHING.
I think it starts with our art teachers exclaiming confidently that everyone is an artist. While I understand the intention behind it, I feel like it alienates people who don’t feel artistic, or aren’t particularly skilled and they end up frustrated. Not everyone is an artist in the sense that they have the mindset and technical skills to make meaningful pieces, but everyone should be a creator of some sort. It feeds that need in your soul, and just like food and exercise are part of a healthy body, so is art.
Human nature is to make crappy art and embroider crappy designs onto your clothes and finger paint and make a mess. All prehistoric cultures have instances of art dating as far back as tools and cooking, and it is just as vital to civilization as the things that keep us breathing. What’s the point of living without feeling alive.
Text in pink says: "Confusion Mountain was named that way because, depending on the sunlight, the Mountains might show colours that oscillate between white and red, which may cause confusion in visitors"
Brief Comments on the Revolutionary Process in China and the Military Question
Now that I have more time to carry out a higher quality study on the Revolutionary Process in China (at first primarily based on the works Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong and On the Protracted People's War), I come to make these brief comments.
Some aspects that immediately stand out to me include, for example, the treatment of the Military Question:
After the founding of the People's Liberation Army, the armed wing of the Communist Party of China, a profound modernization of the armed forces was carried out, not only placing the Army on a level of comparison with modern Western armies, nor only by combining Regular War with the Irregular Guerrilla War, but also, for example, by the prohibition of the feudal practices of physical punishment and insults, which in the old State and in the old culture commonly came from army officers and fell on low-ranking soldiers and the population.
This aspect of the modernization is highlighted by Chairman Mao Zedong in his quotes:
"The political work of the Eighth Route Army is guided by three basic principles. First, the principle of unity between officers and men, which means eradicating feudal practices in the army, prohibiting beating and abuse, building up a conscious discipline, and sharing weal and woe - as a result of which the entire army is closely united. Second, the principle of unity between the army and the people, which means maintaining a discipline that forbids the slightest violation of the people's interests, conducting propaganda among the masses, organizing and arming them, lightening their economic burdens and suppressing the traitors and collaborators who do harm to the army and the people - as a result of which the army is closely united with the people and welcomed everywhere. Third, the principle of disintegrating the enemy troops and giving lenient treatment to prisoners of war. Our victory depends not only upon our military operations but also upon the disintegration of the enemy troops." (Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong. Chapter 12. Political Work)
In this quote, it is also possible to note how this political work contributed to the unity between the Masses and the Army, as will be discussed later.
The modernization process can also be seen in the treatment of prisoners of war, who should now be treated with dignity and respect, and, when possible, released again.
This stance may even be surprising for Communist cadres with greater tendencies towards confrontation and Militarism (“Left-Wing” Militarism, in this case, means the prioritization of armed struggle over other spheres of political struggle).
Regarding prisoners of war, Chairman Mao Zedong says:
"Our policy towards prisoners captured from the Japanese, puppet or anti-Communist troops is to set them all free, except for those who have incurred the bitter hatred of the masses and must receive capital punishment and whose death sentence has been approved by the higher authorities. Among the prisoners, those who were coerced into joining the reactionary forces but who are more or less inclined towards the revolution should be won over in large numbers to work for our army. The rest should be released and, if they fight us and are captured again, should again be set free. We should not insult them, take away their personal effects or try to exact recant taxation from them, but without exception should treat them sincerely and kindly. This should be our policy, however reactionary they may be. It is a very effective way of isolating the camp of reaction." (Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong. Chapter 12. Political Work)
In this excerpt, it is also evident that the good treatment of prisoners of war makes it possible to insert them into the revolutionary forces, creating a split in the repressive forces of the reaction.
Another aspect that greatly differentiates the People's Liberation Army from the Reactionary Capitalist Armies is the fact that the Working Class Army is inserted in material production. In this way, troops who are not actively involved in combat can dedicate themselves to activities such as food production, planting and harvesting; production and maintenance of uniforms and other military equipment, etc.
Regarding the Army as part of production, Chairman Mao Zedong says:
"Production by the army for its own support has not only improved the army's living conditions and lightened the burden on the people, thereby making it possible further to expand the army. In addition, it has had many immediate side effects. They are as follows: (1) Improved relations between officers and men. Officers and men work together in production and become like brothers. (2) Better attitude to labour.... since the army began to produce for its own support, the attitude to labour has improved and loafer ways have been overcome. (3) Strengthened discipline. Far from weakening discipline in battle and in army life, labour discipline in production actually strengthens it. (4) Improved relations between the army and the people. Once an armed force begins to "keep house" for itself, encroachments upon the property of the people seldom or never occur. As the army and the people exchange labour and help each other in production, the friendship between them is strengthened. (5) Less grumbling in the army about the government and improved relations between the two. (6) An impetus to the great production campaign of the people. Once the army engages in production, the need for government and other organizations to do likewise becomes more obvious, and they do so more energetically; also, the need for a universal campaign of the whole people to increase production naturally becomes more obvious, and this too is carried on more energetically." (Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong. Chapter 20. Building Our Country Through Diligence and Frugality)
Here it is also possible to note how this insertion of the Army in the production process, as well as the other modernizations together, contribute to bringing the Masses and the Army closer together. In this case, a self-sufficient Army inhibits, for example, the contradiction between the Masses and the Army on the issue of requisitioning supplies (food, medicine, clothing, etc.), something that has historically always had the potential to generate hostilities and sharpen contradictions between the two groups.
To conclude these comments, it is worth making a brief comparison between the origins of the People's Liberation Army and the origins of the Reactionary Capitalist Armies in the third world.
In addition to the socialist modernizations mentioned above, the Working Class Army arises from the genuine need of this class to defend itself and advance towards Socialist Revolution. Therefore, this army was not only composed of workers and peasants who, in clandestine work, rebelled against the old State and joined the revolutionary ranks (at that time, still in the Guerrilla War phase), but also of from those leaving the ranks of the Reactionary Capitalist Army itself, who deserted and joined the Communists, also fed up with the terrible living and working conditions they experienced, as well as fed up with the situation of widespread poverty that was plaguing the entire country.
These revolutionary forces, in turn, actually entered into long and difficult battles against the reactionary forces, won, and became the armed wing of the Socialist Revolutionary Government that was subsequently established.
The Reactionary Capitalist Armies, mainly in the Capitalist countries in the third world, in turn, has very different origins.
In the case of former colonies on the American continent, mainly in Latin America, for example, the origins of the Army and security forces in general are almost always linked to one factor: colonial racial slavery.
These Reactionary Armies emerge to locate, pursue, and capture fleeing enslaved individuals, as well as to guarantee the integrity of the private property of the means of production (in this case, in their majority, large monoculture, unproductive rural lands, owned by local landlords).
This structure of combating the “internal subversive enemy”, heavily charged with racism, permeates these military structures to this day.
Finally, the example of dealing with the Military Question during the Chinese Revolution can offer valuable lessons for the development of creative Military Theories and for the treatment of the Military Question by Communists from all countries.
blakekathryn
kianamaiart
dailybridgerton
prguitarman
discoholicmusic
romaincrisis
