Alexander Eichler
The Huffington Post
December 29, 2011
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/29/young-people-socialism_n_1175218.html
Young people — the collegiate and post-college crowd, who have served as
the most visible face of the Occupy Wall Street movement — might be getting
more comfortable with socialism. That’s the surprising result from a Pew
Research Center poll that aims to measure American sentiments toward
different political labels.

The poll, published Wednesday, found that while Americans overall tend to
oppose socialism by a strong margin — 60 percent say they have a negative
view of it, versus just 31 percent who say they have a positive view —
socialism has more fans than opponents among the
18-29 crowd. Forty-nine percent of people in that age bracket say they have
a positive view of socialism; only
43 percent say they have a negative view.

And while those numbers aren’t very far apart, it’s noteworthy that they
were reversed just 20 months ago, when Pew conducted a similar poll. In that
survey, published May 2010, 43 percent of people age 18-29 said they had a
positive view of socialism, and 49 percent said their opinion was negative.

It’s not clear why young people have evidently begun to change their
thinking on socialism. In the past several years, the poor economy has had
any number of effects on young adults — keeping them at home with their
parents, making it difficult for them to get jobs, and likely depressing
their earning potential for years to come — that might have dampened
enthusiasm for the free market among this crowd.

Indeed, the Pew poll also found that just 46 percent of people age 18-29
have positive views of capitalism, and
47 percent have negative views — making this the only age group where
support for socialism outweighs support for capitalism.

Young people have also been among the most involved in the nationwide Occupy
movement, whose members have leveled pointed criticism at the capitalist
ethos and often called for a more equal distribution of American wealth.

In general, income inequality — which a Congressional Budget Office report
recently pointed out is at historic levels — has received more and more
attention in politics and the media since the Occupy movement launched in
mid-September. Usage of the term rose dramatically in news coverage
following the start of the protests, and politicians from Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid to President Barack Obama have used the movement’s
language to describe divisions in the American public.

Still, the nationwide Occupy demonstrations notwithstanding, socialism
doesn’t score very well in other age groups in the Pew poll, or across other
demographic categories.

Pew broke down its results by age, race, income and political affiliation,
as well as support for the Occupy Wall Street and Tea Party movements. There
were only two other groups among whom socialism’s positives outweighed its
negatives — blacks, who say they favor socialism 55 to 36 percent, and
liberal Democrats, who say they favor socialism 59 to 39 percent. These were
also the only two groups to show net favor for socialism in the 2010 poll.

(2)
Little Change in Public’s Response to ‘Capitalism,’
‘Socialism’
A Political Rhetoric Test
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press December 28, 2011
http://www.people-press.org/2011/12/28/little-change-in-publics-response-to-capitalism-socialism
Overview

The recent Occupy Wall Street protests have focused public attention on what
organizers see as the excesses of America’s free market system, but
perceptions of capitalism – and even of socialism – have changed little
since early 2010 despite the recent tumult.

The American public’s take on capitalism remains mixed, with just slightly
more saying they have a positive
(50%) than a negative (40%) reaction to the term. That’s largely unchanged
from a 52% to 37% balance of opinion in April 2010.

Socialism is a negative for most Americans, but certainly not all.
Six-in-ten (60%) say they have a negative reaction to the word; 31% have a
positive reaction. Those numbers are little changed from when the question
was last asked in April 2010.

Of these terms, socialism is the more politically polarizing – the reaction
is almost universally negative among conservatives, while generally positive
among liberals. While there are substantial differences in how liberals and
conservatives think of capitalism, the gaps are far narrower. Most notably,
liberal Democrats and Occupy Wall Street supporters are as likely to view
capitalism positively as negatively. And even among conservative Republicans
and Tea Party supporters there is a significant minority who react
negatively to capitalism.

These are among the findings of the latest national survey by the Pew
Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Dec. 7-11, 2011 among
1,521 adults that tests reactions to words frequently used in current
political discourse. Another term in the news, libertarian, continues to
receive a mixed public
reaction: 38% have a positive view, 37% negative, and nearly a quarter (24%)
have no opinion either way.
Interestingly, some of the most positive views of libertarianism come from
groups on both the left and the right of the political spectrum. People who
agree with the Tea Party movement see libertarianism positively by a 51% to
36% margin, as do liberal Democrats by a 47% to 32% margin. And while the
word libertarian receives a very positive reaction from younger Americans,
older people tend to view it negatively.

Both of the ideological descriptions used most frequently in American
politics – conservative and liberal – receive more positive than negative
reactions from the American public. But the positives for conservative (62%)
are higher than for liberal (50%).

This gap mainly reflects the balance of what people call themselves; more
people consistently call themselves conservative than liberal in public
opinion polling.
Those who think of themselves as politically “moderate”
give similarly positive assessments to both words.

As many Democratic strategists have argued, the term progressive receives a
far more positive reaction from the American public than the term liberal
(67% vs 50%), though the difference is primarily among Republicans.

`Socialism’ and `Capitalism’

The term capitalism elicits more positive (50%) than negative (40%)
reactions from the American public, but not by much. And while Americans of
different incomes and ideological perspectives offer different opinions on
capitalism, the divides are not as wide as on other terms measured.

More affluent Americans, as well as conservative Republicans, are more
likely to offer positive than negative reactions to capitalism by
two-to-one. And among people who agree with the Tea Party movement, 71% view
capitalism positively. Yet within each of these groups, a quarter or more
say they have a negative reaction to capitalism.

Notably, liberal Democrats and supporters of the Occupy Wall Street movement
are not overtly critical of capitalism. In fact, as many offer positive as
negative reactions in each of these groups.

By contrast, socialism is a far more divisive word, with wide differences of
opinion along racial, generational, socioeconomic and political lines. Fully
nine-in-ten conservative Republicans (90%) view socialism negatively, while
nearly six-in-ten liberal Democrats
(59%) react positively. Low-income Americans are twice as likely as
higher-income Americans to offer a positive assessment of socialism (43%
among those with incomes under $30,000, 22% among those earning $75,000 or
more).

People under age 30 are divided in their views of both capitalism and
socialism. But to Americans age 65 and older, socialism is clearly a
negative (72%), not a positive (13%), term.

Mixed Views of `Libertarian’

The American public remains divided over the word libertarian, with 38%
offering a positive reaction, 37% a negative reaction, and 24% offering that
they don’t have a reaction either way.

The steepest divide in reactions to the term libertarian are not political
but generational. By a 50% to 28% margin, people under age 30 have more
positive than negative feelings toward the term libertarian. Views are more
split among those age 30-64, while those age 65 and older offer more
negative (43%) than positive (25%) reactions.

Overall, there is only a small partisan divide when it comes to views of
libertarianism – Republicans offer slightly more negative reactions than do
Democrats or independents (45% vs. 35% and 37%, respectively).
Independents have more positive reactions (44%) than either Republicans
(34%) or Democrats (36%).

Liberal Democrats offer relatively positive assessments of libertarianism –
47% have a positive reaction and just 32% have a negative reaction. This is
matched by the positive ratings among people who agree with the Tea Party
movement – by a 51% to 36% margin they react positively to the word
libertarian.

`Conservative’ and `Liberal’

Republicans see the terms conservative and liberal in particularly stark
terms. By an 89% to 8% margin they view the former positively, and by a 70%
to 20% margin they view the latter negatively. Democrats are not as
universal in their views. By a 68% to 22% margin they have a positive
reaction to the word liberal, and at the same time they are equally likely
to have a positive as a negative reaction to the word conservative (47% vs.
44%).

There is a sharp difference by age when it comes to the word liberal – while
61% of people under age 30 react positively, just 34% of those age 65 and
older say the same. By contrast, reactions to the word conservative are
almost identical across all age groups.

Public reactions to the word progressive are far more favorable than to the
word liberal; two-thirds have a positive reaction to the former compared
with just half for the latter. There is very little difference among
Democrats – who view both terms favorably. The largest difference is among
Republicans most (55%) of whom have a positive reaction to the word
progressive, and a negative (70%) reaction to the word liberal.

About the Survey

The analysis in this report is based on telephone interviews conducted
December 7-11, 2011 among a national sample of 1,521 adults, 18 years of age
or older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia (914
respondents were interviewed on a landline telephone, and 607 were
interviewed on a cell phone, including 284 who had no landline telephone).
The survey was conducted by interviewers at Princeton Data Source under the
direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International. A
combination of landline and cell phone random digit dial samples were used;
both samples were provided by Survey Sampling International.
Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish.

Respondents in the landline sample were selected by randomly asking for the
youngest adult male or female who is now at home. Interviews in the cell
sample were conducted with the person who answered the phone, if that person
was an adult 18 years of age or older. For detailed information about our
survey methodology, see http://people-press.org/methodology/

The combined landline and cell phone sample are weighted using an iterative
technique that matches gender, age, education, race, Hispanic origin,
region, and population density to parameters from the March 2010 Census
Bureau’s Current Population Survey. The sample also is weighted to match
current patterns of telephone status and relative usage of landline and cell
phones (for those with both), based on extrapolations from the 2010 National
Health Interview Survey. The weighting procedure also accounts for the fact
that respondents with both landline and cell phones have a greater
probability of being included in the combined sample and adjusts for
household size within the landline sample.

Sampling errors and statistical tests of significance take into account the
effect of weighting. The following table shows the sample sizes and the
error attributable to sampling that would be expected at the 95% level of
confidence for different groups in the survey:

Sample sizes and sampling errors for other subgroups are available upon
request.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording
and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias
into the findings of opinion polls.

___________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that
will help them to interpret the world and to change it.

Submit via email: portside@portside.org

Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3

Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq

Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe

Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive

Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate

By Max Chavez

In the 20th year after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, I know that the issue of Gorbachev is of great contention amongst our comrades. The folks at The Nation, however, have clearly been making the case that the fall of the Soviet Union was decisively not an event for the betterment of the world. I’d like to submit this article from The Nation entitled “The Soviet Union’s Afterlife”

http://www.thenation.com/article/165316/soviet-unions-afterlife?page=0,1

for posting, consideration and discussion amongst our comrades on the website since Stephen F. Cohen (husband of The Nation editor Katrina van den Heuvel) makes good, strong points about the negative effects of the fall of the Soviet Union.

Here is a video of Stephen Cohen on Democracy Now! from just this past Friday on this very issue.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/165379/stephen-cohen-russian-protests-and-soviet-unions-afterlife

Here is the first paragraph:

The Soviet Union’s Afterlife

By Stephen F. Cohen

Asked to evaluate the French Revolution nearly 200 years later, the Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai was famously reported to have replied, “Too early to say.” Though apocryphal, the long perspective attributed to Zhou is better informed than the certitudes of American commentators about the causes and consequences of the end of the Soviet Union only twenty years ago.

Please post your comments. All points of view are welcome.

12/17/11 Statement from Leonard Peltier: From Behind
the Iron DoorHau Kola

Greetings my friends, relatives, relations, supporters

I wrote a statement the other day sitting here in my cell and I know that
no one really cares to read something that is 6 pages long.
So this is my effort to shorten it a little bit.

The first subject I want to touch on is being in prison for 36 years is
hell. There are some folks who are planning to walk across America
starting in California going to Washington D.C. to bring attention to the
injustice that faces Indian people in the judicial system of America and
of which I am some of the evidence of that. But first of all what I
really want to say is I really appreciate and love the people that do
things like this for those of us who are imprisoned. And if walking
across America sounds like a lot try standing in an 8 by 6 cell for 36
years. But I want you to know as terrible and painful as this is in
a strange way I am honored that the most powerful government has
considered me a challenge that they would violate all their own laws to
keep me imprisoned. In my standing I have stood for what’s right. I
have stood for the right of a people invaded by emissaries of the
corporations they ultimately represent; the right of a people to defend
themselves in whatever way necessary to defend their women and children
and elders and life itself when attacked with deadly force by this
government.

For some of you who may recently come in contact with my case, my case is
one where an Indian community that had been continually terrorized by FBI
and a goon squad funded by them on the reservation, had opposed the sale
of 1/8th of the tribe’s mineral resources and land. On June the
26th 1975, they attacked the village of Oglala on the Pine Ridge
Reservation. It started with two FBI agents in unmarked cars and
unmarked clothing, firing into an enclave of dwellings. The two
agents numbers soon swelled to 250. In the ensuing battle the two
initial agents were killed and one young Indian man, Joe Stuntz, was
murdered by the FBI, shot between the eyes. Ultimately some 30 of
us escaped. Two men, Bob Robideau and Dino Butler that were
captured before I was, were put on trial and all the evidence of that day
was allowed to be presented in their defense. And they were acquitted by
reason of self-defense; the jury said they had the right to defend
themselves with deadly force. I had escaped to Canada and was later
apprehended there, the government perjured testimony, and they got
someone to lie to bring me back from there. I was put on trial and
all the evidence used to convict me was later proven false in court, as
well as the lie to extradite me. And the same evidence used by the
defense in the first trial was not allowed. They ultimately got a
conviction saying I was guilty of murder which was later amended to
aiding and abetting.

Then later an individual whom some called Mr. X, on tape admitted he was
the shooter. Bob Robideau one of the original two men acquitted by
reason of self-defense later told retired FBI Agent Ed Wood he was Mr. X
and that he had shot the agents. Bob feared for his life. Bob
didn’t make his statement for many years. Bob did all that he could
do to help me over the years and later started living in Spain. And
then he made a statement to a few people that he was going to come back
and speak more about being the shooter and being acquitted of the
offense. And within about a month’s time he was found dead in his
apartment in Spain. He supposedly fell out of bed and hit his head
and died. Having said that, my main point is that where all the evidence
was allowed to be presented Indian people were found not guilty
rightfully defended themselves by reason of self-defense.

There has not been a violation of human rights by America that wasn’t
first practiced on Native Americans. America’s first biological
warfare was against Indian people with small pox and measles infected
blankets, the first concentration camps were against Indian people where
they took their land and rounded them up. And Lincoln known for being
against slavery, had 38 Indian men hung in unison in Mankato Minnesota
for rebelling in the starving concentration camp they were confined to
and there were camps all across this nation for American Indian
people.

The first atomic bomb was dropped on Indian land polluting it and
destroying the water tables. To this day the result of their
digging for uranium still pollutes parts of the Navajo reservation.
They practiced sterilization of our women up until the late 1950s and
even into the 60’s. Up in Alaska they experimented with various
forms of hepatitis on the native people there. The list goes on and
on. Our people to this day suffer generational trauma as a result
of the concentration camps and invasions and starvation and boarding
schools that tried to destroy our culture. The death rate in the
boarding schools was 50%.

To this day the unemployment rate for American Indians is 35%. What
America calls “depression” has become a way of life for us.
Bureaucrats scream and jump up and down about the Israelis right to claim
their homeland, yet at the same time America still takes our land against
our will, our homeland. The black hills of South Dakota was leased for 99
years the lease has been up for some 20 something years, but they will
not return it. They have offered to pay some 3 billion dollars for
the Black Hills. Why don’t they take that money and relocate the
non-Indians from there? There have been people complaining of a
mosque in the proximity of the former World Trade Towers yet our sacred
hills have Abraham Lincoln’s face carved in the side of our sacred area,
and George Washington who practiced a scorched earth campaign against our
people in the East is there along with others.

I’m sorry if I’m getting carried away, I want America to be a great
nation, but I want it to be fair to all people. We don’t ask for
anything that wasn’t agreed to by this government,. There’s three hundred
and seventy something treaties that cover most of our concerns. I
apologize if in reading this in some way it hurts your celebration of the
holidays. Its very difficult to not be negative when you are
unjustly imprisoned for this long and every day you look through an iron
door when the true enemies and terrorists are free to terrorize the poor
and the oppressed of America. When the resources of America and the
labor of its people is used to enhance the lavish lifestyle of some 2 to
3 % of the population that owns 96% of America’s wealth or I should say
owns and controls 96% of America’s wealth then people like you and the
people occupying Wall Street and walking across America are needed more
than you would ever know.

I said I wouldn’t make this too long and it seems I have gone back on my
work. However in closing I would like to thank the National
Congress of American Indians for passing a resolution supporting me in my
bid for freedom. And I would especially like to thank Lenny Foster
who has served as a spiritual leader in prisons throughout America who
presented the resolution to the National Congress of American
Indians. I would also like to thank all the others, too numerous to
mention, who has supported me for so many years. I guess in some
off handed way I have learned to live and exist by my contact with them
over the years. This struggle has been long and difficult and I
know at times I have offended people and hurt their feelings and for that
I am deeply regretful. But rest assured I appreciate all of you in
the deepest sense of the word. And I pray that this Holiday season
brings joy to you and your families. And there is no greater gift
that we can give our children and our children’s children than freedom
and a healthy earth.

I will close for now but unless they shut me up like they did Bob, you
will hear from me again rest assured.

In the Spirit of Crazy Horse and all the others that have died for their
people,

Sincerely,

Leonard Peltier

Freedom Archives

522 Valencia Street

San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org

by Dutch Hillstrom

Today, 12/18/11, I went to a march for immigrant rights in the City of Bellaire. The Bellaire Police Department has decided to adopt a new law which legalizes racial profiling by allowing the cops to ask anyone for identification who might appear to be an immigrant. There are many immigrant workers in Bellaire who already struggle each day just to provide enough food for their family and pay the monthly rent. This new law will create another burden for the immigrant community, for it will make them more afraid of cops and less likely to call the police when there is a real emergency. If, for example, there is a robbery in an immigrant household, it is unlikely that the family will report it given the dangers of doing so. For a cop only has to ask for papers and he can immediately deport anyone who does not have legal identification.

The working people in the immigrant community of Bellaire will not have it! Today, Occupy Houston and Houston United organized a large demonstration in Bellaire. There were about 200 people, all who were very upset about this new law. The march assembled at Bellaire and Chimney Rock; from there we marched to Bellaire Police Department. The march was very visible, as we had a loudspeaker and a PA system. Then we assembled at the Bellaire Police Department and rallied for about an hour; there were many speeches as well as labor songs.

The Houston Communist Party stands in solidarity with the immigrant workers of the City of Bellaire who are struggling against this new Draconian legislation. There will be many more protests and marches in the near future, as the local Houston government is also trying to pass this law. Protests and demonstrations are very important; however, we must also wage class war at the electoral level. The only way that these new laws will really be defeated is if progressives get elected to office who have the power to vote against such legislation. Protesting in the streets is good, but it will not change the minds of those in power; therefore, progressives themselves must get into power, for it is there that the struggle can truly be won. If progressive candidates rally around such protests movements, they are likely to win an election and reject every new racist law that the reactionary conservatives propose. Hence, the Progressive Left in Houston must unite with protests like those today and try to get into public office to smash racism at the legislative level.

by James Connolly

With U.S. Labor for Friendship with Cuba as a program consultant, Marazul Charters, Inc. is organizing a research delegation to Cuba for full-time trade unionists: April 25-May 2, 2012.

The research goals of the delegation are to (1) learn how the Central de Trabajadores de Cuba (CTC), Workers’ Central Union of Cuba, the country’s national trade union federation, is working with the new economic policies within the context of socialism; (2) learn first-hand from Cuban workers about the accomplishments and new challenges of a different economic system than our own; (3) be apprised by the CTC about the effects of the 50-year old U.S. economic blockade against the Cuban people, and; (4) learn how full economic and trade relations between the U.S. and Cuba could help workers from both countries by providing economic opportunities.

The U.S. government continues to impose restrictions on travel to Cuba. But under a General License already issued by the U.S. Treasury Department, full-time professionals are permitted to travel to Cuba to conduct research in their fields. To qualify under the General License for professional research for this particular delegation, you must work full time as an appointed or elected official of a labor union or be an academic in this field.

The cost of the program is approximately $1,600 for double occupancy and $1,700 for single occupancy, which includes round trip air fare from Miami to Havana, a Cuban visa, hotel accommodations, breakfast daily, several additional meals, a bi-lingual guide, and a full research program. Delegates are responsible for their own air fare to and from Miami. The research program will include exchanges with CTC leaders and rank and file Cuban union members, visits to hospitals, labor unions, the Lazaro Pena School of the Cuban Workers, work sites, and the observance of Cuba’s May Day celebration on May 1st.
The deadline for all applications will be Friday, April 13, 2012.

If you are interested, or know someone who is interested, that meets the above qualifications – Interested persons should contact Marazul Charters at info@marazul.com. Marazul Charters will send you details on the arrangements, the qualifications, as well as the application form.

If you have specific questions about the program itself – Please contact Carl Gentile, Chairperson of U.S. Labor for Friendship with Cuba, at 1187@comcast.net and/or call 240-285-6519. U.S. Labor for Friendship with Cuba seeks to educate working people about Cuba’s accomplishments in eliminating hunger, joblessness, illiteracy, and making free quality health care and education available to its entire population; creating a society where the 99 percent are in control of their own destiny. We are also supportive of efforts to free the Cuban Five, who are unjustly imprisoned in the U.S. for fighting right-wing terrorism and for preventing attacks from Miami against Cuba by right-wing Cuban-Americans.

after they passed the new nuremburg laws

after the long
years of accomodation
comes the occupy
to say no to everything
to say yes to everything
to tell a majority
we don’t have to
live in the old way
and then like
the rat in the
corner comes
the occupation
to say no to us
to say yes
to constantly
resurrecting
pharaoh and
priest-guardians
of the wealth
created by all but
enjoyed by few
to confirm that
franklin of fed reserve
benjamins fame
was right when
way back when
he warned that
a country trading
liberty for security
would have neither
and some of us
look at these new
children of the
alien and sedition
fugitive slave
dred scott
jim crow
criminal anarchy
anticommunist
laws and we know
from past times
these laws are just
itching to be
broken and the
standards and
flags once again
strewn at the
feet of a newly
triumphant
red army having
captured
that city having
the effrontery
to be the
new berlin of
a fourth reich
about which
even now people
the world over
are placing their
wagers on how
long this monster
will last. so
thank you whoever
you are for
creating yet more
environment
to get it on
until all this gets
historical scrap
heap upon the
already existing
junk of past
empires whose
experience
was ignored
by gangsters
with drones and
other toys
who thought
they could get
away with
criminality
this time and
once again
like the boxer
said we don’t
get along
so we’ll just
have to
get it on.

december 16, 2011
berkeley ca

gary hicks

This New Year’s Eve/ Day will mark 53 years since the Cuban people, led by their liberation movement today expressed in their Communist Party, the trade unions, the Joven Rebelde, the women’s organizations, the cultural organizations, and others……freed their country from the clutches of US imperialism. They have built a socialist society that has survived eleven US presidents whose aim of destroying that society has ranked near the top of their foreign policy objectives. They have been a force of example in the less-developed countries. The very existence of socialist Cuba is a powerful message: people do not have to live in poverty, miseducation, bad health and other conditions of inhumanity. The peoples of the world do not have to live this way!

In celebration of all this…below,
the link to the movie “The Buena Vista Social Club”. Enjoy, and pass the link on to others. And a Happy New Year of victorious struggle against capitalist barbarism.

Gary Hicks
Berkeley CA

http://www.hulu.com/watch/62618/buena-vista-social-club