Who and What can defend the Working class

No oppressed subclass or indeed the entire Working class can be protected by anything but a revolutionary party and working class controlled institutions. And this includes protection from their own personal fetishes and reactionary ambitions.

The Socialist Equality Party, SEP has chosen to rally their defence of the working class by defending the right of due process for the likes of celebrity bourgeois performers like like Woody Allen, Kevin Spacey, Roman Polanski, Charlie Chaplin etc... What did these COMRADES have in common was a predilection to have sex with and or marry teenage girls , decades younger than themselves. Polanski was given due process and plead guilty, but the SEP is not satisfied the quality of the due process given to this millionaire. The rest did not receive "due process", mostly because they were to powerful to be subjected to due process. Again the SEP is upset that these COMRADES have been hounded out their glorious profession. Which unlike a worker who similar loss of profession results in homeless and even death on the streets. All of the heroes that the SEP is concerned with, have enough to take care of themselves. Even enough to seek professional sexual companionship.

Forgive me for being grossly pedantic. But I am trying to make a point that irrespective of the actual composition of the event deviant, criminal or what ever. A Marxist party is dedicated to approach all issues from the working class point of view. When there are divisions among the ruling class we should be cheering them on and not taking sides on the basis of some Idealistic concern for transclass rights.

What makes this episode particularly egregious is that there is plenty of evidence for Woody Allen having sex with his wife's adopted daughter while married with the mother. This is called adultery. She was 18 and he was in his fifties. Chapin made two 15 year old girls pregnant. Kevin Spacy rode the pedaphile express, (an passenger jet plane owned billionaire Epstein), with Bill Clinton and a billionaire. Kevin did not deny his sexual molestation. He claimed it was a part oF his being GAY.

Playing the devil's advocate, the SEP is concerned for a growing facism in society as well divisiness of identity politics. Both are noble causes that I believe in. However the SEP forgets like all other petty bourgeois dominated parties that it is about the "Working Class" stupid, to paraphrase that well known sexual deviant Bill Clinton. It was enough for the SEP to stick to progressive case like Assange, who in spite of not being a worker at least had sex with grown women who very likely were honeypotting him into life imprisonment in some American gulag. There is much evidence of now violation of their sexual rights. Why would ask your girlfriend to come and sex with a man you claim to have abused you. However most importantly Assange was directly benefiting the working class with his journalism. Thus this created an obligation for an Working class party to defend him. The SEP does defend him. But in order to curry favor with other petty bourgeois has expanded the range of who they defend far beyond what is progressive.

Returning to the "due process" theme exposing a lack of "due process" in the capitalist system is the duty of the party that wishes a Revolution. Correcting this flaw is what reformist parties do.

This #metoo movement is a dangerous diversion from the goals that all progressives would agree with. I am sad to say that SEP tactics in picking the wrong examples of this lack of due process, (which itself is a diversion into reformism), and using the wrong class victims is also contributing to the confusion of the masses.

The SEP should stick to defending WORKING CLASS victims of the Capitalist system. Leave the work of defending the petty bourgeois to the petty bourgeois themselves. The bourgeois can eat each other for all I care! Of course the petty bourgeois deserve protection. However the SEP simply does not have the resources to the job of protecting all social classes. Nor should it. A party can only honestly defend one class.

Lenin, for example, was opportunist to defend both workers and peasants. He and the Working class in the Soviet Union have paid dearly for this mistake. It is at the root of Stalinism ever since. The root of political confusion, opportunism and eclecticism. It opened the door of all revolutionary parties as well as unions to the manipulation of non-Working class misleadership. The goal is not revolution for revolution sake or revolution to benefit everybody, but strictly for the working class.

Any other class needs to jettison their capital, petty or huge and get a working class job in order to join the Working class and its institutions. I realize that this excludes the likes of a Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky. But I refer to this issue in the context of our era and not theirs. We know things that they could not have imagined. What is progressive in one era no longer remains so in another. Even the bourgeois had their respective day in the progressive sun. It is no insult to those founding fathers and mothers of the Marxist movement, to point out their historical limitations.