The most working-class anarchist group is...
- Thread starter ernestolynch
- Start date
General Ludd said:
Has it really been ten pages? Hey - they call me the catalyst! 'Respect brother!' (Looks in mirror and slaps self on open palm with other open palm.)
It isn't at all derogatory to state the obvious truth that anarchism isn't even on the radar of working class people. (Actually, I wasn't the first one to say this as, thinking back, I was replying to somebody who'd already done so when I first said it; I withdraw the above comment - it's all down to that man Ryazan again: now there is a true catalyst if ever there was one....) This is the truth of the situation, no matter how much hard work anarchists put into trying to make it otherwise. Christ, it's a simple enough idea to grasp.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
swarthy thug said:
I would to have your mind?
I want to have your mind?
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
Our Tommy, that cheeky chirpy cockney? I can't believe that!swarthy thug said:
Not a single anarchist on this thread has denied that, I completely agree with it*. That is very very different to say that that is the situation that anarchists want.
*As long as you add the provisio of 'almost all', there certainly are working class people who've heard of anarchism - all working class anarchists for starters.
redsquirrel said:
I would to have your mind?
I want to have your mind?
Its sounds a bit off key out of content
.No more film outs from now on.
charlie mowbray said:
Yeah but did you suss gary glitter out,or pee wee herman or arthur mullard.
public/private paradox
charlie mowbray said:
What I mean by defensive is the totally out-of-proportion response to the reasonable comment I made way back in the mists of Monday. I will point out once more, just for your benefit, that I did not attack anybody, nor 'push' the 'great alternative.' The indignation behind the responses - as well as their general apoliticism ('let's all give credit where it's due and be nice-by the way, the organisation you support is crap and you're a cunt!') is telling.
The only point I was making was that anarchism is totally unknown to and not understood by the working class and the public in general. Fair point? Ask around, why don't you?
If that had been all you were saying this thread would have disappeared a long time ago.
Thumper Browne
Big Wheel Up
icepick said:
Why yes it does.
Yes they are aren't they.
Yes I am, a bit, but I made the remark many pages ago that there should be a clear line where Anarchism begins and Anti-Capitalism ends. I'm not sure who's fault it is that the issue is so confused. This if anything needs to be addressed by the movement because when 'the working masses' do hear about anarchists through mainstream media its always in that shady light. But that doesn't mean the confrontations should be stopped because I honestly believe they shouldn't.
It's good to talk, like, have it out in the open.
Anyhoo I just thought this was hilarious:
Are you pretending to live on estate now?
Just brilliant!
That is a bit bad, but the point was well made, I thought.
Thumper Browne
Big Wheel Up
LLETSA said:
Are you even going engage in anything constuctive here or am I gonna put you on ignore like your mate swathy thug?
montevideo said:
Given the fact that there isn't a sign saying 'we are anarchists' no information, just the tell tale signs.
That anarchism is totally unknown to and not understood by the working class and the public in general and that is how anarchists want it to remain.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
So you get to decide who is and isn't an anarchist now? What are these tell tale signs.Chuck Wilson said:
Your argument is circular - anarchists are childish and violent becuase childish and violent people are anarchists.
charlie mowbray said:
Who is 'us' ? Can't work you out Charlie, on one hand you try and set out a clear political difference bewteen your politics and the rest of the anarchists and then come over all faint on behalf of all anarchists.
redsquirrel said:So you get to decide who is and isn't an anarchist now? What are these tell tale signs.
Your argument is circular - anarchists are childish and violent becuase childish and violent people are anarchists.
That arguement would be circular but its not mine. Some anarchists are childish, immature and juvenile but those descriptions apply equally to any form of politics. My problem is is that I still can't see much consensus amongst the anarchists as to what anarchism is or how to attain it. Hence attacking one strand of anarchism seems to be an invite for another strand to defend its version of anarchism.
Incidentially the website doesn't mention any violence at all does it?
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
But you've done precisely that, you claimed that anarchism was immature etc then when asked for some evidence gave that link. When people pointed out that there was no reason to consider those people anarchists you claimed they were anarchists because they fitted "tell tale signs" (whatever those are, you still haven't said).Chuck Wilson said:
redsquirrel said:
One of the best threads I've read on here.
I could be described as working class by any deffinition. I really hadn't heard much about anarchism at all until about a 18mths ago aside from the media violent brick throwing lunatic mayday stuff.
The absolutely depressing thing about it is how good an idea it is (in a generalised no hierarchy way) but to my mind at least there seems so little hope of it becoming a mainstream way of working/living. Which isn't to diminish it or the people actively involved in it, I guess it says something about the conditions in society.
I could be described as working class by any deffinition. I really hadn't heard much about anarchism at all until about a 18mths ago aside from the media violent brick throwing lunatic mayday stuff.
The absolutely depressing thing about it is how good an idea it is (in a generalised no hierarchy way) but to my mind at least there seems so little hope of it becoming a mainstream way of working/living. Which isn't to diminish it or the people actively involved in it, I guess it says something about the conditions in society.
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
And when did I , or anyone else say "the organisation you support is crap"etc. Putting the old words in the mouth again, aren't we?LLETSA said:
And no, you were saying more than that, weren't you (and yes, when did any anarchist disagree with that statement). Go on, be honest for once, why don't you. You'll feel much better for it. It'll be much better than the glib and smug way you handle things here.
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
So you won't get a job as a psychiatrist, then?Chuck Wilson said:
No, don't try to use the divide and rule crapola. As far as I can see, most (not all) of the anarchists on this thread have more or less the same politics. But we're talking about a website where there is no mention of anarchism, after a what appears like a naive belief in the Manchester Evening News objectivity- the old "It's in the paper, it must be true". Surely you realise this is not necessarily so.
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
Chuck Wilson said:
Thumper Browne said:
Thumper Browne
Big Wheel Up
swarthy thug said:
Sweet baby Jesus! I took you off ignore cos like I said in me PM, off on the wrong foot and all that, but now that I can read your drivel again. I see you can only attack me as some kind of sexual fetishist, which as it happens I am, what of it? Do you think that because I am sexually deviant that I am to be ridiculed? At least I've been honest enough to acknowledge the thrills of anti-capitalist action, tho that's not sexually exciting, not all excitment has to be sexual.
charlie mowbray said:
I was giving the overall gist of the comments made by anarchists regarding the IWCA - whom, I once again point out, I did not even mention. If you don't believe me go back and read it all again.
I believe you were the first to raise the subject of the IWCA, charlie. I just find it curious as to why- and why others were so quick to follow you.
Similar threads
