Support the French Rioters!
- Thread starter ClassWar
- Start date
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
there was no need to prove my point so quickly.revol68 said:
montevideo
New Member
revol68 said:
what i think is needed is someone to tell the workers what working class struggles to support, otherwise how on earth are they going to know? You up for the job revol?
This 'we' you talk of, you mean communists like us?
revol68
what, fucking what?
montevideo said:
yes well i would argue my case, as a working class person surely i have the right to comment on struggles that effect me?
From your argument you either think working class people have no right to criticise the tactics and actions of other working class people, or you see me and yourself as some how distinct from the rest of the class.
thats the problem with relativism it is based on the relativist abstracting themselves above everyone else, like some sort of wanky liberal deity above the petty squabbles of mere mortals.
revol68
what, fucking what?
in this age the style is the substance, and i think you'll find i can be nice, but not to arseholes like monty and rednblack who couldn't argue their collective way out of a wet paper bag yet see fit to lay out binary choices.
Of course once the logic of their argument is taken to it's conclusion your left with nothing more than an irrational allegiance to the working class, not as the negation of itself but rather as an end in itself.
Of course once the logic of their argument is taken to it's conclusion your left with nothing more than an irrational allegiance to the working class, not as the negation of itself but rather as an end in itself.
montevideo
New Member
is that a pulp song?
my two cents.
Of course there strikes can be reactionary (as Revol mentioned, strikes in defence of a loyalist state, anti-semitic strikes, anti-immigration strikes, strikes aimed at excluding women workers from the workplace). The question is, what do you do. What end do you want and what means to you use to obtain it? fFor instance, in the case of the anti-woman strike, do you want the employer to break the strike (so he can hire women workers at lower wages) or do you want to win male workers over to the idea that they should protect their own working conditions by acting in solidarity with women workers? For me it is the latter, which is why you stay on the picket lines, making arguments, and trying to change the field of struggle.
So as to the french rioters, as Raw Sllac pointed out, riots are chaotic events, made up of very different elements, good, bad, ugly, neither. But whose interests are served if the army go in and declare military law?Whose interests are served if there is massive repression. Not the interests of the community, but the interests of the state that has for so long abandoned the community. That is why you act in solidarity with the rioters (and not align your self with the state).
I don't think the bad should be ignored - the means do not justify the end - but we have to be mindful that a) the powers that be always present the half of the story that protects their interests - we do not know what is happening in the suburbs and speculation in a vaccum is particularily useless and b) the commiting of anti-social acts by rioters does not remove responsiblity from the french state.
The death of Jean-Jacques Le Chenadec was a tragedy in my view, I don't think we should ever belittle the loss of human life. But his widow said two things, the first addresses the men who killed her husband, the second the man who created the conditions which caused the riot
a) I want these people punished, I want people to react - that French people be conscious of all this. That a man died for nothing.
b) [Sarkozy] "lit the fuse with his provocative remarks, It is because of him that Jean-Jacques is dead."
Of course there strikes can be reactionary (as Revol mentioned, strikes in defence of a loyalist state, anti-semitic strikes, anti-immigration strikes, strikes aimed at excluding women workers from the workplace). The question is, what do you do. What end do you want and what means to you use to obtain it? fFor instance, in the case of the anti-woman strike, do you want the employer to break the strike (so he can hire women workers at lower wages) or do you want to win male workers over to the idea that they should protect their own working conditions by acting in solidarity with women workers? For me it is the latter, which is why you stay on the picket lines, making arguments, and trying to change the field of struggle.
So as to the french rioters, as Raw Sllac pointed out, riots are chaotic events, made up of very different elements, good, bad, ugly, neither. But whose interests are served if the army go in and declare military law?Whose interests are served if there is massive repression. Not the interests of the community, but the interests of the state that has for so long abandoned the community. That is why you act in solidarity with the rioters (and not align your self with the state).
I don't think the bad should be ignored - the means do not justify the end - but we have to be mindful that a) the powers that be always present the half of the story that protects their interests - we do not know what is happening in the suburbs and speculation in a vaccum is particularily useless and b) the commiting of anti-social acts by rioters does not remove responsiblity from the french state.
The death of Jean-Jacques Le Chenadec was a tragedy in my view, I don't think we should ever belittle the loss of human life. But his widow said two things, the first addresses the men who killed her husband, the second the man who created the conditions which caused the riot
a) I want these people punished, I want people to react - that French people be conscious of all this. That a man died for nothing.
b) [Sarkozy] "lit the fuse with his provocative remarks, It is because of him that Jean-Jacques is dead."
revol68
what, fucking what?
sovietpop said:
but this just rehashes a false opposition, no one has said they support the army going in, everyones support lies with youth, but some of us wish to understand some of the more unsavoury actions, what they mean, what it does for the recomposition of the class, and whose interests are served by them.
Montevideo has constantly claimed that people people who refuse unconditional support are somehow playing into the hands of the state.
Oh so this boils down to the old argument about what is meant by 'support', support vs unconditional support. Personally I found that 'defend' is a much more useful word to use - but isn't this a bit of semantic argument (much better left to late at night when the pub is about to close?)
montevideo
New Member
revol68 said:
no he hasn't nor has he expressed any support for the rioters, unconditional or otherwise, nor has he laid out any binary choices.
Are you now saying this is a genuine expression of working class anger?
montevideo
New Member
revol68 said:
so you freely admit that i have not expressed support for the rioters, unconditional or otherwise.
What then have you been arguing about in your shrill & demented way for the past 3 pages?
I'm sure you treat political messageboards like you do grand theft auto.
I know i do.
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
I get the feeling dear sweet little Revol will be bottled as he walks down the street after the pub closes
revol68
what, fucking what?
Random said:
nothing inadequate about it.
I think it's actually a great way of dealing with all the stupid things that piss me off.
anyway you know me online well enough to know that the hyperbolic rhetorical violence is just a post modern critique of the unified sovereign self.
Paul Marsh
NeitherWashingtonNorMecca
Time for a report from someone who was on the picket of the embassy?
montevideo
New Member
news just in from the frontline: about 8 people turned up, no banner, loadsa tsg, 2 people got nicked (in harrods!!!) for assaulting police. Fuck knows how/what circumstances, would've thought the class war mob would've been out in force?
montevideo said:
Is getting nicked compulsory in anarcho circles?
We await Attica's pronouncement on the significance of these arrests to working class history.
By the way, was one of those arrested in Harrods Thora by any chance? Maybe she went beserk when an assistant suggested those rainbow DMs didn't suit?
Similar threads
