you know, you are the only anarchist on here, who can actually talk about what you think. Every single one I have come across, define them self, by what they are against, rather than what they are for.
I don't actually see anything intrinsically wrong with any ideologically-motivated person defining themselves by what they're against (in fact it's what most politicians seem to do!), but it doesn't present a "holistic" picture, does it?
I think you are presuming too much about what I think. I totally understand what you're saying there. the funny thing is, the swp eulogise about this also.
But from a slightly different perspective. From what I remember of what I heard and read, the swp have always maintained an emphasis on what I'd call "ultimate control", in that they lionise revolutionary activity on the one hand, but want to harness it to their own ends on the other, whereas the empowerment of communities and the individuals in their communities is more usually the end for anarchism, unless you have (as some anarchists do) a programme and a platform for further and or wider political action.
So getting back to the topic, when you say "give up anti-fascism", you would also rule out the above? For some reason like it's no longer possible?
I haven't said "give up anti-fascism", so much as I've said "seek effective measures, not symbolic ones".
If we leave in place the causes of hard-right resurgence (i.e. by voting for the existing neo-liberal political parties), then while we may temporarily roll the hard-right itself back, we leave in place the structural factors that have militated towards that resurgence.
To put it simply: By adopting a strategy that displaces the BNP rather than seeking to eliminate the causes of their rise, we grant permission to them to come back and have another go, and by doing so, a message gets sent to people who otherwise might have fucked the BNP off that "nobody gives a shit, or they'd have got rid of this shower ages ago".
I don't like seeing the BNP given leeway to legitimate their shit-house brand of politics, but that seems to be the way things are going unless decisions are made to challenge them on the basis of their politics, rather than on the basis of the personal histories of their candidates, with a little bit of politics thrown in.
ps, I don't mind you correcting my wording, it often helps to clarify what you're saying, but if you stop trying to second guess me, and realise my interest is purely non partisan, academic, it will be more interesting.
But, but..it's so much fun to tease swappies and second guess them!!
You wouldn't deprive me of my fun, would you?
I did explain when I first came on 7 years ago, my interest in the rest of the left, was a bit like watching the discovery channel. Sure I am sw, and probably always will be (regardless of whether SW remains SW), but that doesn't mean that the rest of the left cannot pique my genuine interest. That it has taken seven years to get an answer on contradictory levels of consciousness, comes from his inability to chill imo. It is not as if an Internet forum is of any consequence.
It's as good a forum as anywhere to exchange views, and for people like us with difficulty getting around, more accessible than some physical venues.
).
Rubbish, get off, etc.
