Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

ACG On-line Public Meeting on February 15th

I'm not able to post on the thread about anarchists and organisations, but for the record -

I was not calling 'charlie mowbray' a paedophile (as he claims). I was saying that he bears an uncanny resemblance to the Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. And I didn't intend to get personal with people, but was soon on the recieving end of dishonest bile, with people getting personal about my friend and portraying them in a dishonest way.
Are you a) still pretending that you and AA are two entirely different people, and b) then complaining about lies and dishonesty from others?

Anyway, that's a helpful bump, because it looks like the recording of this meeting is now online for anyone interested:
 
Are you a) still pretending that you and AA are two entirely different people, and b) then complaining about lies and dishonesty from others?

Anyway, that's a helpful bump, because it looks like the recording of this meeting is now online for anyone interested:
Yep, he's still pretending not to be himself :rolleyes:
 
I'm not able to post on the thread about anarchists and organisations, but for the record -

I was not calling 'charlie mowbray' a paedophile (as he claims). I was saying that he bears an uncanny resemblance to the Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. And I didn't intend to get personal with people, but was soon on the recieving end of dishonest bile, with people getting personal about my friend and portraying them in a dishonest way.

In anycase, it's a shame that certain people take honest criticism of certain formal organisations as a personal attack on them, and then proceeded to initiate personal attacks, lies and ganged up. It's pathetic.

And yet I'm the one who gets banned. I very much doubt theres any point in me continuing to post on the political threads on here anymore, just as I suspected. And what I said about the ACG and the ACN was 100% true and it's a fact that the ACG has a problem with transphobia.

The two ACG members in question were blatantly anti-trans and were full of praise for both Helen Steel and her transphobic hate. Part of the ACG's 'nuanced' position was supposed to be that it disagreed with how Helen Steel was treated at the 2017 London Anarchist Bookfair, and the behaviour of some TRA's and the liberal/extreme IdPol types, but also didn't agree with or tolerate the transphobia of the likes of Helen Steel.

The ACG clearly went against this and clearly does allow transphobic bigotry amongst it's membership and clearly doesn't care about trans people, which resulted in people leaving.

I would say that the ACG is class reductionist in a sense. They hardly ever focus on oppressed groups, particularly LGBTQ+ people and ethnic minorities. Their mishandling of their transphobia problem is also typical of class reductionists.

Class identitarianism often goes hand in hand with class reductionism. By identitarianism I mean viewing the working class in a certain way, idealizing them and attaching certain characteristics to them. There are definitey those in the anarchist mileu who do this, including some people in the ACG. But to be fair, it is much more distinct and noticeable with someone like Lisa McKenzie ( and that anarcho-UKIP type politics).

Anyway, I doubt this post is going to be received in a serious or friendly way. I'm gonna log out now and focus my attention elsewhere. I also don't want to spend alot of time in an online space that signal boosts the likes of the ACG (and lets such people promote themselves) and clearly doesn't give a monkeys about transphobia, as has been proven time and time again. An online space where shit politics has always ruled the roost (and where general stupidity, mob hatred, groupthink and pompous masturbation is dominant).
One problem you have is people can actually read your contributions and it's very clear you're lying about what you said about charlie mowbray, which was
I'm saying that you're A. a pompous bellend who writes turgid, very boring and inaccurate books and is a shit and very dull public speaker, B. that you're a dogmatic individual who allows transphobia in your organisation and firmly believes and tells others that you have 'the one true way' of what you consider to be anarchism, and C. that you drive around the East End of London trying to catch children.
the sooner you're fucked off these boards the better
 
Are you a) still pretending that you and AA are two entirely different people, and b) then complaining about lies and dishonesty from others?

Anyway, that's a helpful bump, because it looks like the recording of this meeting is now online for anyone interested:
No doubt the British proletariat is all over this. Lapping it up they are. They can't get enough :thumbs:
 
Anyway, having now got around to listening to the recording, one question I was thinking about: I certainly don't agree with the ICC's position of basically writing off Palestine Action/Workers for a Free Palestine, but suppose they are right to point out that most people involved in those campaigns are not internationalists by the ACG's, or indeed the ICC's, definition. I would love it if those actions were being carried out by people with red/black flags instead of red/black/white/green ones and the slogans were a bit more NWBCW and less national liberation, but apart from slogans and symbols, would the actual practical activity of a NWBCW version of Palestine Action or Workers for... be any different?
A similar point could be made about Russia, I think, as I understand it most of the sabotage and war resistance has come from people with an anti-imperialist/free Ukraine position rather than a strict NWBCW one, but is there anything they'd actually be doing differently if they were?
 
Anyway, having now got around to listening to the recording, one question I was thinking about: I certainly don't agree with the ICC's position of basically writing off Palestine Action/Workers for a Free Palestine, but suppose they are right to point out that most people involved in those campaigns are not internationalists by the ACG's, or indeed the ICC's, definition. I would love it if those actions were being carried out by people with red/black flags instead of red/black/white/green ones and the slogans were a bit more NWBCW and less national liberation, but apart from slogans and symbols, would the actual practical activity of a NWBCW version of Palestine Action or Workers for... be any different?
A similar point could be made about Russia, I think, as I understand it most of the sabotage and war resistance has come from people with an anti-imperialist/free Ukraine position rather than a strict NWBCW one, but is there anything they'd actually be doing differently if they were?

Isn't the criticism a broader and more political one with the Palestine stuff, rather than just suggesting a different type of action for small groups of activists to do here?
 
Isn't the criticism a broader and more political one with the Palestine stuff, rather than just suggesting a different type of action for small groups of activists to do here?
I mean, I suppose what I'm trying to get at is that I'm interested in how the broader political stuff actually intersects with/informs practical day-to-day activity. Like, if the criticism's just something like "we should do a general strike against the war", then that's great and all but it's not very interesting unless it's attached to some kind of proposal of how we get from here to there.
Also, without wanting to be too much of a booster, I reckon one of the things that makes the arms factory blockades interesting, imo, is that they've pulled out numbers in the hundreds, which is still not massive overall but does at least feel like a partial break with the horrible old "big march around the city centre vs small groups of trained activists doing NVDA" dichotomy.
 
To have a class war, of course, you need an army, and an army is a form of state.
There is currently a class war being waged on us, and there has been throughout written history. Since the Industrial Revolution, the war has been one waged by capital against labour.

It is the “common sense” of the current hegemony to see only resistance to that as “class war”.
 
There is currently a class war being waged on us, and there has been throughout written history. Since the Industrial Revolution, the war has been one waged by capital against labour.

It is the “common sense” of the current hegemony to see only resistance to that as “class war”.
What you say is true. However, the slogan "No War But the Class War" is not a recognition of the existing state of affairs, but a call for the working class to wage a class war. As interstate wars (and wars for national liberation) are waged with guns, then the slogan implies the armed overthrow of the capitalist class. (To me, anyway).
 
What you say is true. However, the slogan "No War But the Class War" is not a recognition of the existing state of affairs, but a call for the working class to wage a class war. As interstate wars (and wars for national liberation) are wages with guns, then the slogan implies the armed overthrow of the capitalist class. (To me, anyway).
It’s one possibility, but quite a literal interpretation.
 
It’s one possibility, but quite a literal interpretation.
My interpretation is coloured by my (limited) knowledge of the left-wing slogans during the First World War such as "the main enemy is at home" and (I believe) "turn the guns around".
 
I mean, I suppose what I'm trying to get at is that I'm interested in how the broader political stuff actually intersects with/informs practical day-to-day activity. Like, if the criticism's just something like "we should do a general strike against the war", then that's great and all but it's not very interesting unless it's attached to some kind of proposal of how we get from here to there.
Also, without wanting to be too much of a booster, I reckon one of the things that makes the arms factory blockades interesting, imo, is that they've pulled out numbers in the hundreds, which is still not massive overall but does at least feel like a partial break with the horrible old "big march around the city centre vs small groups of trained activists doing NVDA" dichotomy.

TBH I feel like I'm on such a different page about what needs to be done politically (from both the 'general strike now' position and the actions by those activists) it's hard to feel those directions or types of activity has any connection to what I think needs to be done.

To respond to your comment of the 'partial break with...' comment, I feel like those form of politics (the march and the action) are just totally wrong headed when looked at in a wider context, and what's needed is a total break with both those types of activity and organisation.
 
TBH I feel like I'm on such a different page about what needs to be done politically (from both the 'general strike now' position and the actions by those activists) it's hard to feel those directions or types of activity has any connection to what I think needs to be done.
Could you expand on this a bit? Would be genuinely interested in what you do think is useful in this situation.
 
Yeah, or more specifically what people in the UK can/should do about it.

TBH, and I accept this isn't going to be a popular idea, but I think the reality is we can't really do anything about it, and that goes for plenty of other things as well, this isn't special. (Or at the very least the time we put in has next to no measureable impact in terms of improving outcomes, and I mean collective/movement time rather than as individuals.)

I think at this moment in time we need to be brutally strategic and unemotional about what we do with our political activity.
 
In their online statement on International Women's Day the ACG state that March 8th is a "celebration and commemoration of working class women's continued oppression and exploitation."

Bizarre. What are they on about?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom