Tacoma SDS

I appreciate your civil response. Internet discussion often tends to get out of hand...

While I can say with certainty that I am not a socialist, I have to quibble with what you suggest as socialism being contrary to democracy. Participation in the state, or participatory democracy, where individuals are actually involved in the decisions that effect their lives, does not necessarily stand in opposition to a state whose primary concern is providing for the people.

From Wikipedia's "Socialism" article, we can begin to work towards a common understanding of socialism:

Socialism refers to a broad array of ideologies and political movements with the goal of a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community.[1] This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state.

From my position, I think it would not be particularly democratic for the state to be in charge. Rather, I would prefer individuals, for example "worker's councils", to be in charge of their own livelyhoods, etc.

You also mention Che Guevara, a most polarizing figure. He represents more than a socialist revolution, however. I admit I've read quite abit more on him that most have (especially the hordes of ridiculous people who sport his shirt everyday). His primary legacy is the idea of "Foco Theory", which suggests that a small band of armed revolutionaries, given the right situation, and a populace that is being significantly oppressed by the state, can spark a revolution. I have seen a "Che" flag a only a handful of the events I have attended in my life. Far more often, however, I see persons who refuse to be politically engaged wearing his likeness on their shirts. This is puzzling and leads to a skewed interpretation of who supports what.

Guevara also fills a more important role in South and Central America where he lived and fought most of his life. For many there, he represents the last great effort to throw off the yoke of corrupt government. He is a radical figure who can be rallied around, whether is politics are palatable or not. I personally thing he is fascinating, but not without his flaws, being human after all. (I appologize if you were aware of all this, but I thought it would important for comment-lurkers as well.)

There is one more part of your comment I feel moved to respond to. That military recruiters have somehow "paid their dues" and are more American than others. This supposes that soldiers pick their wars, never do wrong, and that the military is part of, or is itself a democratic institution. I can say with confidence that none of these things are true, no more than the local Department of Motor Vehicles is an extension of democracy or a democratic institution.

It is true that soldiers often risk their lives, and some have jobs (like helicopter control-system repair) that do not involve having guns pointed at them. It is true that many believe that joining the military, and possibly going to war on the behalf of the United States is equivalent to protecting the country they love. None of these things are relevant, however, when discussing democracy, or war. And just because someone believes that we should not be involved in one war or another, or even come to that realization after they have been in the military and served half their contract, does not mean they are un-American, anti-American, or any of the other silly pejoratives that are used to describe them.

Finally, I cannot speak for the organizers of the Tacoma Mall action (which is not a "Tacoma SDS event" despite us allowing anyone and everyone to post events here, including non-political ones).