Buckeye Socialist Network formed in aftermath of Socialist Dan La Botz’s run for Senate in Ohio

Read the full thing at Socialist Webzine:

Supporters of the Dan La Botz, Socialist for Senate campaign of 2010 met in Columbus, Ohio over the weekend to found a new organization and launch a campaign to fight for jobs and public services in Ohio— they also pledged to resist the policies of Republic Governor-elect John Kasich. Dan La Botz was the Socialist Party candidate for the U.S. Senate in Ohio in November 2010 and received 25,000 votes.

The 23 labor and movement activists from cities throughout Ohio created the Buckeye Socialist Network (there will soon be a BuckeyeSocialist.org website). The Network’s first campaign is called DEFEND OHIO and will focus on defending public employees’ jobs and public services.

“Governor Kasich has unleashed a class war in Ohio,” said Dan La Botz. “And we intend to fight back. Kasich’s inauguration is the ideal occasion for Ohio’s working people to protest in at the Capital in Columbus and to show the governor that he is going to face four years of fierce resistance by unions and social movements.”

20 thoughts on “Buckeye Socialist Network formed in aftermath of Socialist Dan La Botz’s run for Senate in Ohio

  1. LP Watcher

    Socialists got a few hundred votes in Ohio this past November. At the other end of the Freedom scale, the Libertarian Party got over a million votes.
    I recall that Stalin and Hitler were socialists.

  2. LP Watcher

    So what were Stalin and Hitler? I thought Hitler was part of the National Socialist Party? And Stalin had more people killed than Hitler, in the name of Communism or Socialism. Do two bad apples make the whole barrel bad?
    Big Government and out of control Big Corporations are equally bad.

  3. Phill

    National Socialism is German Fascism. Fascism is a right wing socio-political structure. Socialism is left wing. Secondly, big government is a misnomer and is nothing more then a media buzz term for keynesianism, which is not socialism in any capacity.

  4. LP Watcher

    All I know is BOTH facism and socialism is BIG GOvernment and a nanny state.
    A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is also big enough to take away everything you have.
    I want to keep my money.

  5. Ross

    “All I know…” – Why are you proud of your ignorance?

    Not to mention, is keeping your money really all you want out of your government? Even at the expense of others?

  6. Brian

    Don’t even respond to “LP Watcher.” He’s spouting Glenn Beck revisionist history. Every serious student of politics understands that there is a huge difference between fascism and socialism.

  7. Get real

    No difference when Government is in charge of your life. Or with Facism when you add in a twist of Big business. FREEDOM must be something you guys don’t care about. FREEDOM to live a life the way you want. And the GOP Tea Baggers don’t have a corner on that, because they want to throw a moral blanket over us.

  8. LP Watcher

    # 6 So you expect me to just turn over the fruits of my labor to the government, so they can hand off to someone else? Why should I bother to work then. Big Government and the mafia have a lot in common– shake downs to take money from the middle class.

  9. Sane LP Member

    Socialism is scary stuff, if left unchecked. When Ohio goes socialist, you will hear the giant “sucking sound” of people and small business owners moving out if the Buckeye State. Only people that might survive would be big business who pay-off the government officials.

  10. JT

    Phill: “Fascism is a right wing socio-political structure. Socialism is left wing.”

    Keep telling yourself that.

    Ross: “Not to mention, is keeping your money really all you want out of your government? Even at the expense of others?”

    I know this is pointless to even say, but it’s not an “expense of others” if you’ve earned it and they haven’t. Anyone who wants to make charitable donations can do that, and many people do (billions of dollars in such donations every single year in the United States). But those donors weren’t forced to do it, and nobody should be in a free society. Your life, your body, your money–your choice.

  11. Get Real

    There are socialist (nanny) parties already: It’s called the Democrats, with the GOP not far behind as they try to dictate personal behavior . I checked out voting results in Ohio and it appears the only alternative today is the Libertarian Party of Ohio– over one million votes says something in the past election. What it says is that people want “FREEDOM”. http://www.lpo.org

  12. FYI

    Sad to see terms misused in this discussion.

    Socialism is worker control of the means of production.

    State (monopoly government, regime) “socialism” presumes that the state is the proxy for worker control of the means of production. Numerous historical examples show us it is not.

    Workers do not control the means of production under state “socialism” – manager-bureaucrats do. State “socialism” is not socialism.

    State “socialism” is only left wing in theory, not in practice, as “left wing” is originally understood within the context of the divisions in the French parliament of the 18th century. Classical liberals, the ideological ancestors of the libertarians, were left wing.

    Fascism is a movement that grew out of this nominal “left” but was quickly adapted by manipulators from the right. It involves the open worship of state power, much as state “socialism” does.

    In practice, state “socialism” and fascism are similar, although under fascism control of the means of production is nominally private but heavily regulated and steered towards a small number of state-connected companies. Under state “socialism,” the same manager-bureaucrats that squash workers under fascism work directly for a monopoly state.

    The term socialist is also nowadays used for political parties/movements – many of which have led or shared power in governments – that theoretically seek to establish state “socialism” but actually govern or function within a mixed economy that is similar to fascism in economic practice, but in line with western pluralistic/democratic traditions on such matters as freedom of speech, civil liberties, and genuine multipartisan elections.

    As far as I know, no such parties ever actually established state “socialism” in economic terms. So, it’s impossible to say whether genuine state “socialism” in economic terms, such as existed in the Soviet Bloc, can coexist with liberal democracy, free speech, civil liberties and multipartisan elections in more than just theory.

    State “socialism”

  13. FYI

    …is not real socialism.

    And the ledership of the Democrats and Republicans are certainly not socialist in any real or even plausibly imagined sense.

  14. FYI

    @15 I think a good case can be made that it is a big step in that direction. Some of the other trends we are seeing on the homeland security/civil liberties/peace/police militarization/world policing fronts have disturbing elements of proto-fascism as well.

  15. JT

    FYI: “Socialism is worker control of the means of production.”

    Right. And how do those means of production come to exist in the first place? Do they just exist in nature, like rocks and water? Socialists look around them, see productive enterprises and wealth-creation, and say, “Why should some people own and not others? This is wrong.” In other words, they see the effect without considering the cause.

    Means of production are the result of the investment of savings. Socialism means control of the means of production by those who didn’t save and invest in it. In other words, some people are to sacrifice what they’ve earned, saved, and invested, without having an ownership claim to what they’ve invested in.

    That’s inconsistent with the view of American classical liberals I know of, who were defenders of privately owned capital. Moreover, if there are no prices leading to profit and loss, which socialists I know of eschew (production for use, not for profit), then rational economic calculation is impossible. See the Austrian economists.

  16. LP Watcher

    Only reason the Socialist are even on the ballot in Ohio is because the Libertarian Party of Ohio cleared the way for them. Law suits against Ohio by the LPO in 2006 and 2008 set the stage. The LP has done the “heavy-lifting” in Ohio for minor parties.

  17. IYF

    @17 you are assuming that workers did not collectively save and create an enterprise. That is not always a correct assumption. Many enterprises have been collectively created by workers, ranging from family businesses where everyone shares the workload to larger concerns which can have hundreds or even thousands of employee-owners.

  18. IYF

    “That’s inconsistent with the view of American classical liberals I know of, who were defenders of privately owned capital.”

    No it isn’t. Collectively owned capital is still privately owned. It’s no different from a business partnership, except in some cases with a larger number of partners, and no division between management and labor.

    “Moreover, if there are no prices leading to profit and loss, which socialists I know of eschew (production for use, not for profit), then rational economic calculation is impossible.”

    Not all socialists necessarily eschew prices. I think you may be thinking of communists, who take things a step further than socialists. Even so-called communist nations did not successfully do away with the existence of money and prices.

    Worker owned enterprises do away with the divisions between owners, management and labor, but otherwise they are regular for-profit businesses, and are entirely compatible with classical liberalism and Austrian Economics.

    Have you read much from the mutualists and voluntaryists?


    Has a pretty good online collection. A good place to start may be


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *