Tensions mount over Puerto Ricans

[L_F_Miranda]

Eddier, although I somewhat agree with your socialist rantings, I also KNOW that conditions and the owners of capital have also changed their tactics. 19th century tactics don't work anymore with the new conditions that came about in November 1989.

No, Michael Lind is not a prophet, he is a conservtive historian, one who, I think, gives good interpretation as to why Socialism didn't take hold in the U.S. Socialist reforms yes, but not the Marxist model.

Strangely, it was the Jews who were at the forefront of the socialist reforms made in the U.S. in the early 20th century. Today a great majority have gone the other way, they have joined the bourgeosie, living it off in Las Vegas, Tel Aviv and Florida.

On another note, I'm surprised that you haven't revised your socialist ideas and put them to worK in the modern world. Take for instance immigration.

As you know Marx hated the Lumpen proletarians, not because they were poor, but because they didn't have a working class consciousness.

They were used by the owners of Capital to screw up the working class. They used them as as pool of available workers to keep wages down and as strike breakers to screw up the working poor. They played the game of the bourgeosie very well. However, when they were of no use they were thrown away like a dirty pamper, much like what will happen to Puerto Rican Statehooders, LOL

Todays immigrants are the NEW LUMPENS. They are the pool of workers to screw up the established poor working class. The owners of Capital use them much as the Lumpen were used in the 19th century. They are the ones who are, indirectly, screwing up YOUR PEOPLE. In Puerto Rico they are the Dominicans. In the U.S. they are The hordes of Mexicans crossing the borders. While the Gringos may sound "concerned" about the illegals, they know that they ARE NEEDED to continue expanding their profits.

They say Immigrants get the jobs our people and the poor blacks won't do. That stupid story is an invention of the capitalists to justify immigration and maximize their profits. why won't our people say something or rebel? Because there is welfare and music, the pacifiers to keep YOUR PEOPLE and te Blacks content and happy. By the way, aren't we the happiest people on this planet?

When the industries finally go to cheaper areas of production like China , we then will be left thousands of unskilled, uneducated workers who will fight tooth and nail with Puerto Ricans for diminishing resources.

However , you and many more, continue to live La La land, in the industrial world of the 19th century, when Marx wrote his Communist manifesto.

[Eddier1]

Miranda you are sick! Your entire post is a RANT that is totally irrelevant
to what I wrote in my penultimate post. You ignored the points I made
, and only payed a nodding acquaintance with the fact that
Lind is now laying fallow, and only you are still fanatically attracted
to his flawed book.

The Jews, you say?; what the hell has that to do with the American
Socialist Party that led the fight to have child labor done away with.
The Jews at that time in the early 20th century, (not the 19th century
like you fictionalize) were mostly peddlars with pushcarts on the lower
eastside of NYC. They didn't care a rat's behind about the child
labor that was rampant in industrial America. It was the white anglo
communist Upton Sinclair who cared and helped mightly to bring
the issue to the attention of the American people and the world.

Straighten yourself out you anti-communist, conservative windbag, who
can't even get along with the other anti-communists on this forum,
because you are so obsessed with yourself and overclass-white
Americans like M.Lind.

[L_F_Miranda]

My, My, what a hostile response.

[Eddier1]

If you found it hostile and it hurt you that way, it is your fault. You made
me angry with the La-La land bit, and averring that I was in a time warp
living in the 19th century.

I don't deny that I am hostile to the conservatives on this forum,
who through imagery and word have slandered me time and
again as some sort of animal...a lizard mostly (I love animals and having
a lizard beautiful in markings as a pet would not bother me one bit).

Perhaps, I should not have said that you are sick, but now that you
you openly side with the conservatives, citing your favorite the
conservative historian, I cannot help but perceive that you are
duplicious in a very strange way. You accept Independence, because
in your views the Empire doesn't want statehood for Puerto Rico.
So I see now that it is not a choice of your own ideology, but
a bowing to the will and power of the Empire. It makes you a
'lacayo' by force. However, you are a conservative openly now
so you can drop the sham of masking yourself as an Independent.

That type of shambler is not an asset to the Independence
Movement, because what you are is a disrupter of the ideology
of Independence. Yes a disrupter, and I first saw it when you
got angry and bitter as hell when the Marina did evacuate Vieques.
Any real Independentist was overjoyed at the Marina leaving.
But you were strange to the point of showing the very first
signs that you might be a sicko at heart.

Now, that being said, I can't take back nor apologize to you
for calling you SICK. You opine it is hostile, but it is not based
on emotions but on the evidence of tracking your writings and
actions on this forum and others for many years. So it was
no rush to judgement on my part, and it is a valid one on my
part.

[L_F_Miranda]

Eddier do I sense some paranoia?

First of all this is the web, where everyone deals in a face less challenging manner. If you haven't learned it by now it's about time you got your act together. If I made you angry, GOOD! Why?

Because through anger one sometimes sharpens thoughts, realigns , and comes back sharper. However you just lowered yoursef to El Jibaro's level with your last post, not a good sign.

I've always rejected labels or to be put into intellectual boxes. Maybe that's why you make these strange generalizations about me. I don't seem to fit in one of your boxes.

So what do you do, label me conservative, which I think is your way of insulting. Once again you're too simplistic.

About Lind, he is NOT my ultimate guru. Yes, I agree with many of his ideas. Although he's not a Noam Chomsky, he nevertheless has some interesting insights on how the United States is ruled. It's interesting that conservatives and Liberals don't like him.

If you haven't read his book, then don't quote from secondary sources, go to the real thing and then make up your own ideas. No, Lind is not within the theoretical writings of Marx, he deals with the U.S. as a lay man with some common sense.

And Eddier continued saying:

"You accept Independence, because in your views the Empire doesn't want statehood for Puerto Rico. So I see now that it is not a choice of your own ideology, but a bowing to the will and power of the Empire. It makes you a
'lacayo' by force. However, you are a conservative openly now so you can drop the sham of masking yourself as an Independent."

Although you won't accept it, I've always believed in Independence. There was a time I thought it was a lost cause because the majority of us were against it, but then I began reading guys like Lind. What I learned was that it doesn't matter what the majority wants. Short of a massive revolution that will over throw the full system, it's the interests of the metropolis that dictate our lives. The most we can do is decipher what the Overclass wants at this stage of history and then apply it to the future of Puerto Rico.

I truely believe that Statehood is NOT the ultimate option. Even a rabid Statehooder like POV has begun to get strange feelings about it, however there is always a ray of hope with American citizenship. Nevertheless I think this can also be over looked if the powers that be want to send it down the toilet.

There was a time , in the late 70's , when statehood might have been an option, not for us, we don't decide anything, for the Navy! As the Cold war came to an end and 9-11 drove the U.S to affirm it's dormant nationalism, Puerto Ricans were sent in a downward spiral, specially those of the Statehood persuasion.

I find it folkloric everytime someone here comes up with a post asking, "what is the best status choice?" "I think it's statehood because we will become a Banana Republic if given Independence." Like if "the powers that be" care for our feelings.

And Eddier continued to ramble:

"I first saw it when you got angry and bitter as hell when the Marina did evacuate Vieques."

Angry or bitter? you read me wrong , as always, LOL, No Eddier, it only confirmed that Statehood was dead, no matter what 500% of Puerto Ricans thought. The Navy, the keepers of the colony in the Pentagon, abandoned us! LOL Our strategic value went down the drain the moment they left. LOL

And for Ruben's heroic gesture, he was smart enough to see what was coming down the pike and made good use of it. He knew that the Empire was changing its paradigams after 1989, he took a gamble on Vieques, he was right! More power to him!

And finally Eddier said:

Now, that being said, I can't take back nor apologize to you
for calling you SICK. You opine it is hostile, but it is not based
on emotions but on the evidence of tracking your writings and
actions on this forum and others for many years. So it was
no rush to judgement on my part, and it is a valid one on my
part.

First of all, you strike me as a guy who doesn't apologize. Its O.K on the web but it can make a shamble of your personal relationships.

Second, Am I that important to you that you've tracked my writings on this forum for years? Gee thanks.

By the way, if you come to NY let's have a cup cup of coffee and clear things up, POV did it, why not you? LOL

[Eddier1]

Eddier do I sense some paranoia?

Perhaps, you do, but the fact is that I am persecuted first as a
commie, who has been one for well over half a century. Do I have
a persecution complex about that?, NO!, because my scientific
socialism sustains me and prevents me from being paranoid.
Secondly, it is only natural that I am burdened with persecution
since I am a Puertorriqueno and sense the colonialized status
we Puertorriquenos have had for over 5 centuries.

First of all this is the web, where everyone deals in a face less challenging manner. If you haven't learned it by now it's about time you got your act together. If I made you angry, GOOD! Why?

I said always, (and others like Suki, et al, can attest to it) that on
the "internay", we are what we write! So prose and presentation
involving imagery is the matrix of our identity. I have no problems
with those parameters. If I want face to face stuff and nonsense,
I can go to a coffee house or some odd fellows scene like Starbucks.
Your act is to instigate, I have no act, only reality!

Because through anger one sometimes sharpens thoughts, realigns , and comes back sharper. However you just lowered yoursef to El Jibaro's level with your last post, not a good sign.

I unmasked you for what you are, and had to, as it was implied in
everything I have posted to you lately. It is a show-down that was
long in the making, and now that I am sure, I ascended by telling
the truth about you, and not lowering myself to being any hypocrite
like that Maitreya Liar and Slanderer is. You are simplicistic as an
instigator, and show that you can't even get along with other
conservatives. The seventh seal or sign is what the Maitreya is about,
and that is the bad sign you experience. No one has to take your or
his GUFF!

I've always rejected labels or to be put into intellectual boxes. Maybe that's why you make these strange generalizations about me. I don't seem to fit in one of your boxes.

Don't flatter yourself, you are obviously into cynicism and sadistic abuse
of boricuas, big time. You will fit in the intellectual box of a cynic, and
it will accept the last nail driven into that box whether you like it or
not.

So what do you do, label me conservative, which I think is your way of insulting. Once again you're too simplistic.

"Insulting", you have the nerve to say I insult you by telling you the
truth about what you are really? Oh yeah, 'the truth hurts' is the
classic adage and not simplistic at all.

About Lind, he is NOT my ultimate guru. Yes, I agree with many of his ideas. Although he's not a Noam Chomsky, he nevertheless has some interesting insights on how the United States is ruled. It's interesting that conservatives and Liberals don't like him.

You are being confusing in your writing. Who is the one that the
conservatives and liberals don't like; is it Lind or is it the anarchist
Chomsky? And Lind is not a Chomsky seems to imply that you think
more of the latter than the former; is Chomsky then your ultimate
guru? If he is, then you are definitely on the road to being a neo-con
who is an anarcho-fascist.

If you haven't read his book, then don't quote from secondary sources, go to the real thing and then make up your own ideas. No, Lind is not within the theoretical writings of Marx, he deals with the U.S. as a lay man with some common sense.

Now you are rambling, and again writing confusingly. If you mean Lind,
of course, I read his book quite a while ago. I am not using any
secondary sources to quote him. BTW, you haven't done any
exegesis of his book, quoting him and substantiating your views
about his "importance". He ain't a lay man, you contradict yourself
since you said that he is by profession a 'conservative historian'.

And Eddier continued saying:

"You accept Independence, because in your views the Empire doesn't want statehood for Puerto Rico. So I see now that it is not a choice of your own ideology, but a bowing to the will and power of the Empire. It makes you a
'lacayo' by force. However, you are a conservative openly now so you can drop the sham of masking yourself as an Independent."

What I said above is good; you ought to be advised by it

Although you won't accept it, I've always believed in Independence. There was a time I thought it was a lost cause because the majority of us were against it, but then I began reading guys like Lind. What I learned was that it doesn't matter what the majority wants. Short of a massive revolution that will over throw the full system, it's the interests of the metropolis that dictate our lives. The most we can do is decipher what the Overclass wants at this stage of history and then apply it to the future of Puerto Rico.

Yep, what the majority in P.R. wants in a colonial situation doesn't matter.
And you make political decisions a matter of the Overclass in the
'gigante del norte'. Well that overclass doesn't know what it wants
since only less than 18% of the voting eligibles in the U.S. ever vote,
and that ain't the hollowed majority opinion of the overclass. You
allow yourself to be led by the nose based on erroneous assumption.

I truely believe that Statehood is NOT the ultimate option. Even a rabid Statehooder like POV has begun to get strange feelings about it, however there is always a ray of hope with American citizenship. Nevertheless I think this can also be over looked if the powers that be want to send it down the toilet.

POV is professional military of the U.S.. And soldiers obey; if statehood is
down the tubes, POV will obey and change his tune for sure. Let's be
optimistic he isn't any Nacionalista that is a self acclaimed assassin, a
sniper and morter expert who will destroy from ambush cover.

There was a time , in the late 70's , when statehood might have been an option, not for us, we don't decide anything, for the Navy! As the Cold war came to an end and 9-11 drove the U.S to affirm it's dormant nationalism, Puerto Ricans were sent in a downward spiral, specially those of the Statehood persuasion.

Being nostalgic about statehood, eh...how cute even though I am not
sure what you want to convey due to the syntax by you. If you
are trying to write off the impact of the civil disobedience in Vieques
which proved effective on Bush (like he said "Puerto Ricans are our
friends) you are wrong!

I find it folkloric everytime someone here comes up with a post asking, "what is the best status choice?" "I think it's statehood because we will become a Banana Republic if given Independence." Like if "the powers that be" care for our feelings.

Those feelings expressed are not "folkloric", they have moral implications
based on the horrible history of banana republics of Latin America. You
are being cynical in the worst way. You are excluding the classic cynicism
that had virtue or ethics as part of its philosophy. Hence, you are a crass
cynic 'sin moral' which is what modern cynics usually are. Too bad for you that such is your point of view on these matters.

[RPR]

I've been reading PipePR's posts since his early days on the AOL boards.I wouldn't necessarily call Miranda an instigator.Although,its obvious to see that he likes to provoke a reaction.Its a good thing, as where else can most of us really go to talk about Puerto Rican politics?We need to start a frank dialogue on the island and in the dispora if we are to ever truly be the masters of our destiny.