Team :) umm.. actually I should re-phrase the question.

But first...yes Belly old mate..I agree.. the ideals of socialism are noble. Ok..that said.

The question should have been as follows:

"Are the statements found in the Socialist Alternative Web site under the heading 'Socialist Propoganda Unit'....seditious?"

Can you share some thought out opinions on this single issue please?

I've read that before but lost track of where.. until I found it by accident in connection with another 'quest' :)

So..when a political group speaks of 'revolution' and preparing people for it.. and when it openly admits that it cannot persuade enough people to take over democratically.. does it not mean that they are contemplating ultimately 'violent revolution' ?

lets try to focus on this one issue please. It's not about "Is socialism a good idea" but "How does this particular group plan to achieve it"?

If the answer is in the affirmative..then it begs the question about those who are involved in, and support the 'Socialist Alternative' movement.. by financial and ideological contributions..and by their physical presense at meetings where they voice support for the cause.

Well dears, It looks like we three witches have been joined (in the fourth post) by the local succubus.

Maybe we should turn her out (in a professional sense, of course).

Now Belly / Polycarp “the ideals of socialism are noble.”

Don Quixote was considered, likewise, “noble”,

However, his antics were considered less than socially productive.

As an aside: like terrorism, sedition is in the eye of the beholder. In a socialist state the revolutionaries may be Conservative groups.

Revolution also means change. Change can come about by means other than physical force - such as cohesive power, good marketing and political influence. I think polycarp is making too much of this and is nitpicking to suit his own agenda.

Rudd has used the term 'Education Revolution' and the Howard government referred to their dismal Workchoices as an industrial relations revolution. I hardly think either of them are in danger of being arrested under our terrorism laws.

A bit of socialism in the mix would do this country a world of good to offset the 'revolution' of a more dangerous kind - the governing of our nations purely in the interests of big business without duty of care to the very citizens that drive these economies with their labour.

I am not advocating for a Socialist State of the Lenin/Marx variety just some acknowledgment that sometimes collective interests outweigh the interests of individuals by providing safety nets, a sense of community and caring for each other and the infrastructure that supports those communities.

Sure, socialists are seditious. They have the right to be seditious if we have a society which allows free speech.

From the Declaration of Independence of the United States:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That
to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving
their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any
Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of
the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in
such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and
Happiness."

If one would ban the socialist website one would also have to ban the Declaration of Independence.

Without Socialists there would never be any 'rights' for those except for landowners.
Call me a socialist, accuse me of sedition, but without the social conscience we would still be living in feudal times.
Wthout a socialist agenda of some kind we would still have slavery, and the poor would be as in USA, castigated, blamed, living on the streets without hope and turning to drugs to dull the pain of their existence...
oh..
ooops ..
Well, argument explained.

Polly

Answer to your questions:

a) They are allowed to publish this rubbish.

Australia is still a democracy where we have freedom of speech.

You have freedom to 'whack-a-mozzie'.

I have freedom to call you out on your hate-speech.

b) Why they aren't all in jail under our anti terrorism laws

Because they are not terrorists. DUH!

c) Why, when such goals are stated that their efforts to support other seditious groups are not also taken into account?

Which seditious groups? Also you have judged this particular group 'seditious' no-one else. For reasons, please return to my answer to your question a).

However,

The question you should be asking yourself is this:

Would Jesus be a Socialist or a Capitalist? Explain reasons for your choice.