Also, it’s worth pointing out that the movie is based on a book of the same name by former (and I emphasize former) leftwing journalist Stefan Aust who has promoted the whole RAF-suicide garbage and over the years has become more and more rightwing.

If anyone’s interested, the folks at PM Press have an edited volume of the RAF’s writing.
http://www.pmpress.org/content/article.php?story=RAFBookLegion

First Worldists will mock and sneer. Did they not mock the foolish old man who removed the mountains? Since when have revolutionaries not be attacked? Mao said to be attacked is a good thing. What is so funny is that the actions of First Worldists betray them. Why aren’t they out organizing their precious Amerikkkan working class? No, they would rather troll us. Why are they bothering with us if we are so insignificant? The truth is simple. They know we are right, at least at some level. They just aren’t honest enough to deal with it. They just can’t stand it that the world doesn’t correspond to their conception of it. So they stomp their feet around and engage in infantile whining, trolling. They direct their anger at us because we put a mirror up to their face. They don’t like what they see. We burst their bubble. They are like those people who reenact historical periods, like the people who dress like pirates or knights. However, these First Worldists make believe that the First World today is 1917 Russia. So, they go out an play Bolshevik or anarchist. I’ve even seen some of them who dress up like lumberjacks or train engineers. I’ve even seen some that mimic Trotsky, down to the hair and beard. Of most Amerikkkans laugh at all the ridiculous First Worldist “revolutionaries”: “why is that guy standing on a soap box dressed in overalls? And why does Colonel Sanders have a megaphone?” They want to go on with their renaissance fair, their First Worldism. We show them that the real proletarian struggle is not a game. People are dying all over the world due to lack of water, lack of sanitation, lack of food, etc.– the vast majority, billions. Billions. Think about it for a minute. They are so self centered. I wish it were unbelievable, but it isn’t. It is unfortunately so typical. It really pains me that they can’t see, that they can’t feel the pain and suffering that is out there. No, it’s all about me, me, me. We try to wake people, to shake them: look at what is fucking going on in this world! I wish we could reach more. In their little world we are the bad guy. They attack us because we challenge their fantasy with reality. The real proletarian struggle isn’t some game. It’s life or death for billions. They hate us because we are the real deal. Our hearts are pure. And we are way smarter than they are. We’re the leading lights. And that is no joke.

Breathtakingly Racist Anti-Chinese Political Ad
http://www.reappropriate.com/2010/10/22/breathtakingly-racist-anti-chinese-political-ad/

This will be your last troll post that we allow through, seeing as you can’t come out with a substantive critique and are instead applying the ‘throw everything and see what sticks’ method.

In any case, here are a few recent documents which roughly deal with the topic of your last post.

http://raimd.wordpress.com/our-program-faq-contact-more-info/#comment-3248

http://raimd.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/dear-raim-you-rock-amerika-sucks-what-can-i-do/

http://raimd.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/dear-raim-denver-open-thread/#comment-3141

Give it up. If you ‘line’ had any credibility, you’d be up to more than just trolling us.

The criticism contains within it three logical fallacies. First is a ‘guilt by association’ fallacy. Even if the Tea Party did agree with one of RAIM’s conclusions for entirely reactionary reasons, this does not mean the conclusion is false, incorrect or reactionary itself. Bringing up the Tea Party is a red herring, i.e. it distracts from the substantive basis of our conclusions rather itself forming a logical criticism.

The next two fallacies are both straw-men, i.e. the mischaracterization of both our and the Tea Party’s politics. “[Amerika's] poor don’t know how good they got it,” is hardly a satisfactory summarization of either RAIM’s or the Tea Party’s political line. Hence, the criticism itself is false. But, it does offer an interesting jump-off point to discuss RAIM’s revolutionary politics juxtaposed to both the reactionary Tea Party and various First Worldists.

For the record, our politics state that people aren’t stupid: that they are generally pretty aware of how good or bad they have it. That even the ‘poorest’ Amerikans have it better off than most of the Third World masses is a fact. We can discern this reality from multiple sources, and people do every day. It is only the chauvinist, fake ‘left’ which vigorously and actively denies this simple fact.

The Tea Party, for its part, presents itself as being the representative of the every-Amerikan, and includes the notion that they are being cheated by elites, particularly by the imperialist-state. This idea, the Amerikan so-called ‘masses’ are victims of the powerful, is lightyears from RAIM’s politics. However, its nearly identical the First Worldists, people who adopt nominally ‘left wing’ politics to advocate primarily for the minority, First World ‘masses.’

Simply put, RAIM’s politics do not correspond to the Tea Party. More accurately, the idea that the average Amerikan is fundamentally oppressed by ‘elites’ is one that runs both through the Tea Party and the First Worldist ‘left.’

RAIM is about revolutionary politics for the exploited masses of the world. That even our so-called critic implies Amerika’s so-called ‘poor’ are a distinct minority says a lot in the way of affirming our position.

It must be asked: what progressive action can be organized around this lower strata of the First World? A more egalitarian distribution of stolen wealth, perhaps; not the revolutionary overthrow of imperialism. Thus, a focus on Amerika’s so-called ‘poor’ is chauvinist. Its message is this: every Amerikan deserves to be ‘middle class,’ eat fresh fruit year-round, drive nice cars and have comfortable houses; and raising Amerika’s so-called ‘poor’ up to this decadent standard of living is more important than preventing the 35,000 daily deaths from starvation that occur globally.

So in short, we think Amerika’s so-called poor have it good because they do and because we are not chauvinists: our world-view, understanding and goals extend beyond imperialist borders. Insofar as there is a poorer strata within the First World, we work to unite it with the much larger, revolutionary struggle of the world’s exploited majority. We do this without spreading illusions about its immediate strategic feasibility. Unlike the chauvinists, we are not singularly focused on this or that group within the First World. Ultimately, revolution will come from the Third World, and it is these convergent struggles which today hold primary importance. Saying Amerika’s so-called ‘poor’ deserve more is pure First World chauvinism which only serves to justify the existence of the larger group of better-off parasites. RAIM is for a revolutionary global equality, one which necessitates the lowering of material living standards for the vast majority of Amerikans.

The Tea Party sounds exactly like all the First Worldist “far left” groups. They sound like all the First Worldist anarchist/socialist/communist groups. This is because all of these groups represent the same interests. They represent the middle and lower economic strata running to protect their privilege. The Tea Party is fascist. The First Worldist “far left” is social fascist: socialist in word, fascist in reality. All these groups, be they far left or far right, represent the same Amerikkkan class interests. Only RAIM stands against Amerikkka. Even working class Amerikkkans are the enemy. Amerikkkans as a whole benefit from imperialism, from the genocide of the Indigenous, the plunder of the Third World, etc.

How do we make revolution without a social base? We have a social base! Our social base is the vast majority of humanity. Like Lin Biao wrote, we need a global people’s war against the First World.

Also, you premise the question as though a proletarian revolution must somehow take place within the imperialist drawn borders of a country. The Soviet Red Army had to dispense with the notion of an “impending uprising of German workers against Hitler” and simply finish the job themselves in 1945.

To cap off, a “revolution” within Amerikkka is not a “socialist” revolution at all, but a social-imperialist one. Real revolutionaries don’t support a revolution within Amerikkka, but a revolution AGAINST Amerikkka!

Support the the oppressed masses in their billions, not the privileged asses in their millions.

First Worldists use this rhetorical canard, thinking that we’ll be “shamed” into fawning over Amerikkka’s “poor.” What this sort of line actually reveals is their own chauvinism towards the WORLD’S poor. They put the concerns of the Third World proletariat on back burner, in favor of a social-imperialist “revolution” based on an intellectually dishonest definition of “poor.”