Wankers of the World (well Bulmental, Lowkey, Galloway and Williamson) Unite for No2NATO Conference, London 25 Feb. Urban75 are invited to attend.

[The39thStep]

maybe its me not seeing it right, maybe theres an antimlitarist message in the smiling dog with a bazooka meme thats passing me by

What you don’t understand is that it’s a massive wide mix of types

 

[spitfire]

maybe its me not seeing it right, maybe theres an antimlitarist message in the smiling dog with a bazooka meme thats passing me by

Probably not and do you know what I am going to backtrack a bit, yes there can be a tendency to get a bit gun happy amongst NAFO meme culture but I have a scale of what I am personally comfortable with and this is within my parameters. There are also memes I see that make me rather uncomfortable. And there is a fringe that takes too much pleasure in the deaths of Russian invaders for my liking.

However I think as a completely unstructured disorganisation (with a massive wide mix of types ) it will always attract a few loons. What I can say is that from what I have seen on the NAFO Discord any form of extremism, homophobia, racism, anti semitism* and Islamophobia (although it took longer than it should have done, they finally banned goat memes about Kadyrov), is treated with zero tolerance.

*Yes I know about Kama and his history of anti semitic tweets and they are inexcusable as I said at the time. Too many fellas making excuses for him as well.

 

[spitfire]

FTR I don't have a Fella.

This is my Twitter avatar. I made it myself about 6 years ago at a kids event in the IWM. I was with my daughter!

 

[LDC]

maybe its me not seeing it right, maybe theres an antimlitarist message in the smiling dog with a bazooka meme thats passing me by

There's some gap between it not glorifying war and neither it being an antimilitarist message though isn't there?

I don't think it's glorifying war fwiw, it's a joke meme that part of a disinfo cyber campaign against an aggressively imperialist (and arguably fascist) State. Pointing at NAFO and shouting, 'Oh look they're dodgy!' doesn't seem that relevant or important, or even significant news really.

 

[LDC]

What you don’t understand is that it’s a massive wide mix of types

To a question that just asks 'aren't NAFO dodgy as well' it's about an equally matched reply. What did you expect, 1,000 words on why they're a CIA sponsored pro-NATO cyber war unit in the pay of the capitalist running dogs?

 

[spitfire]

There is no CIA.

 

[LDC]

It's just a bit boring that every Ukraine thread seems to end up with ... but Azov... ...but NAFO... (or ...but the 1990s... if RD2003 isn't banned from it) or something. It's not even a decent or interesting criticism, just feels like a stuck record.

 

[The39thStep]

To a question that just asks 'aren't NAFO dodgy as well' it's about an equally matched reply. What did you expect, 1,000 words on why they're a CIA sponsored pro-NATO cyber war unit in the pay of the capitalist running dogs?

I never know what to expect from your posts tbh but whilst you are on can you just say a little more ( obviously not a 1000 words) on the political parameters of this massive wide mix of types?

 

[LDC]

I never know what to expect from your posts tbh but whilst you are on can you just say a little more ( obviously not a 1000 words) on the political parameters of this massive wide mix of types?

I mean I know nothing more than what's on the internet and chatting to one person that's vaguely involved. It's like all these meme things isn't it though; they take on a bit of a life of their own and drag all sorts of people in for all sorts of reasons, most of whom have never met, and many of whom won't have very clear or thought through political positions I'd bet. Trying to categorise the whole thing as politically dodgy vs. sound is just an impossible project, and what really happens is people just find the bits of it that already chime with their strongly held positions, and then point and shout at the other bits.

I don't think Azov or NAFO are significant on a wider political level fwiw, that's why it always seems odd to me that things often get dragged back to them. Maybe cos it's simpler than the messy much more complicated reality of it all.

Nice to know I'm unpredictable with my post contents though.... I think....

 

[The39thStep]

I mean I know nothing more than what's on the internet and chatting to one person that's vaguley involved. It's like all these meme things isn't it though; they take on a bit of a life of their own and drag all sorts of people in for all sorts of reasons, most of whom have never met, and many of whom won't have very clear or thought through political positions I'd bet. Trying to categorise the whole thing as politically dodgy vs. sound is just an impossible project, and what really happens is people just find the bits of it that already chime with their strongly held positions.

Nice to know I'm unpredicable with my post contents.... I think....

Cant beat a bit of unpredictability imv.

I'd agree with you about most NAFO supporters not having clear or thought through political positions btw however there are , as for example spitfire has outlined with regards to the anti Semitic posts by the NAFO badge/avatar maker (who is still employed at St.Javeline btw), some really unpleasant elements in that wide mix which shouldn't be tolerated or swept under the carpet.

 

[ska invita]

Probably not and do you know what I am going to backtrack a bit, yes there can be a tendency to get a bit gun happy amongst NAFO meme culture but I have a scale of what I am personally comfortable with and this is within my parameters.

I understand where you are coming from.....
Let me try and explain why it is well out of my parameters. I cant say it in a pithy post though, so this may ramble on a bit

Here's a parallel: for me there's only two positions you can have on racism: be supportive of racism or be anti-racist. Being anti-racist means actively challenging racism. Saying I'm not racist but not challenging it puts the person implicitly on the side of racism. Its a binary.

Martin Luther King Jr has some good lines on this: “I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the White moderate who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice.” <the going along with it, however reluctant, is the biggest hinderance to change.

IMO with militarism the parallel is you can either be a militarist or anti-militarist, you either challenge militarism or you support it, however tacitly or reluctantly. Whats happening with the Ukraine war is lots of people supporting militarism and an expansion of militarism.
To continue the parallel the "order" in the MLK quote in this case is a Western Military Order, one with a long and also very recent record of injustice (to put it mildly - mass scale slaughter more accurate).

Angela Davis has the quote "In a racist society, it is not enough to be non-racist, we must be anti-racist.” I'd say In a militarist society, it is not enough to be non-militarist, we must be anti-militarist.”

So that's the principles I believe in, and that's where I'm coming from.
But how to be anti-militarist in regards this travesty of an invasion?

I do recognise that within the logic of the moment, and within the logic of the existing political system and political order and existing politicians there is a good general case to arm Ukraine and to provide military support to other Eastern European countries and to expand NATO. I see the appeal of that,

But that's a very limited way of thinking about this all. The bigger picture is Fuck Putin but fuck all the western warmongers too, and fuck all their neo-imperialist games, and fuck the militarist politics of inter-national competition that underpins all of this. And of course NATO is part of that.

Dismantling militarised society should always be the goal at the forefront of what we actually want to happen. I reject the Peace Through War ideology. I reject that thinking that we need more weapons so there is less war.

All this NAFO crap doesn't actually help end the war or bring about the demise of Putin. What it does do is to normalise militarism, and even makes it seem fun and cute. It also in some underhand way creates sympathies for people with very dodgy politics. It adds more murk to what is an already murky pool. Long enough a post...

 

[LDC]

I understand where you are coming from.....
Let me try and explain why it is well out of my parameters. I cant say it in a pithy post though, so this may ramble on a bit

Here's a parallel: for me there's only two positions you can have on racism: be supportive of racism or be anti-racist. Being anti-racist means actively challenging racism. Saying I'm not racist but not challenging it puts the person implicitly on the side of racism. Its a binary.

Martin Luther King Jr has some good lines on this: “I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the White moderate who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice.” <the going along with it, however reluctant, is the biggest hinderance to change.

IMO with militarism the parallel is you can either be a militarist or anti-militarist, you either challenge militarism of you support it, however tacitly or reluctantly. Whats happening with the Ukraine war is lots of people supporting militarism and an expansion of militarism.
To continue the parallel the "order" in the MLK quote in this case is a Western Military Order, one with a long and also very recent record of injustice (to put it mildly - mass scale slaughter more accurate).

Angela Davis has the quote "In a racist society, it is not enough to be non-racist, we must be anti-racist.” I'd say In a militarist society, it is not enough to be non-militarist, we must be anti-militarist.”

So that's the principles I believe in, and that's where I'm coming from.
But how to be anti-militarist in regards this travesty of an invasion?

I do recognise that within the logic of the moment, and within the logic of the existing political system and political order and existing politicians there is a good general case to arm Ukraine and to provide military support to other Eastern European countries and to expand NATO. I see the appeal of that,

But that's a very limited way of thinking about this all. The bigger picture is Fuck Putin but fuck all the western warmongers too, and fuck all their neo-imperialist games, and fuck the militarist politics of inter-national competition that underpins all of this. And of course NATO is part of that.

Dismantling militarised society should always be the goal at the forefront of what we actually want to happen. I reject the Peace Through War ideology. I reject that thinking that we need more weapons so there is less war.

All this NAFO crap doesn't actually help end the war or bring about the demise of Putin. What it does do is to normalise militarism, and even makes it seem fun and cute. It also in some underhand way creates sympathies for people with very dodgy politics. It adds more murk to what is an already murky pool. Long enough a post...

Good and interesting post, cheers. I (like most people) have never considered myself a militarist or anti-militarist, so that's maybe why sometimes it feels like people are talking past each other. I also disagree about things like this being so clearly binary.

 

[existentialist]

hmmm.

Don't like this no-platform type activism. Let them speak. What's to be afraid of?

And when there's a meeting to discuss how to get rid of the monarchy, say, or how to redo democracy in the UK by getting rid of the Houses of Parliament, or whatever, will some other activists with different views get that meeting cancelled?

Default position should be 'let them speak' unless you have a very very good reason not to.

Nobody is stopping them from speaking.

 

[spitfire]

I understand where you are coming from.....
Let me try and explain why it is well out of my parameters. I cant say it in a pithy post though, so this may ramble on a bit

Here's a parallel: for me there's only two positions you can have on racism: be supportive of racism or be anti-racist. Being anti-racist means actively challenging racism. Saying I'm not racist but not challenging it puts the person implicitly on the side of racism. Its a binary.

Martin Luther King Jr has some good lines on this: “I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the White moderate who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice.” <the going along with it, however reluctant, is the biggest hinderance to change.

IMO with militarism the parallel is you can either be a militarist or anti-militarist, you either challenge militarism of you support it, however tacitly or reluctantly. Whats happening with the Ukraine war is lots of people supporting militarism and an expansion of militarism.
To continue the parallel the "order" in the MLK quote in this case is a Western Military Order, one with a long and also very recent record of injustice (to put it mildly - mass scale slaughter more accurate).

Angela Davis has the quote "In a racist society, it is not enough to be non-racist, we must be anti-racist.” I'd say In a militarist society, it is not enough to be non-militarist, we must be anti-militarist.”

So that's the principles I believe in, and that's where I'm coming from.
But how to be anti-militarist in regards this travesty of an invasion?

I do recognise that within the logic of the moment, and within the logic of the existing political system and political order and existing politicians there is a good general case to arm Ukraine and to provide military support to other Eastern European countries and to expand NATO. I see the appeal of that,

But that's a very limited way of thinking about this all. The bigger picture is Fuck Putin but fuck all the western warmongers too, and fuck all their neo-imperialist games, and fuck the militarist politics of inter-national competition that underpins all of this. And of course NATO is part of that.

Dismantling militarised society should always be the goal at the forefront of what we actually want to happen. I reject the Peace Through War ideology. I reject that thinking that we need more weapons so there is less war.

All this NAFO crap doesn't actually help end the war or bring about the demise of Putin. What it does do is to normalise militarism, and even makes it seem fun and cute. It also in some underhand way creates sympathies for people with very dodgy politics. It adds more murk to what is an already murky pool. Long enough a post...

That's a really interesting and thought provoking post. I completely get where you are coming from. Whilst I probably wouldn't consider myself a militarist (although by your definition I most definitely am as I am not an anti-militarist), I am definitely not a pacifist and feel that the Ukrainian resistance is justified and unfortunately at the moment that means more weapons to make the war shorter.

I think NAFO have done a great deal to counter Russian disinfo online which is probably their greatest contribution towards ending the war. The money raised is a drop in the ocean really

It also in some underhand way creates sympathies for people with very dodgy politics. It adds more murk to what is an already murky pool.

I have come to the conclusion that there are some very dodgy and murky people on both sides but only one side is doing the genociding and invading so for now that's where my sympathies lie. I don't forget or ignore the extremely unpleasant elements of the UAF and have no track record here of making excuses for them when they do show themselves. In fact up to late 2021/early 2022 I was pretty convinced that the whole of Eastern Ukraine was full of Nazis. I now believe it is not as black and white as that.

Thanks ska.

 

[spitfire]

George Galloway, what a joker eh?

 

[steeplejack]

to be honest I wasn't looking for a big bunfight, just some information.

I see NAFO as narcissistic, puerile and tasteless, but it takes all types. I had heard there were some dodgy types attached so was just asking for some views is all.

 

[RD2003]

I never know what to expect from your posts tbh

I do-liberalism masquerading as anarchism.

 

[tim]

hmmm.

Don't like this no-platform type activism. Let them speak. What's to be afraid of?

And when there's a meeting to discuss how to get rid of the monarchy, say, or how to redo democracy in the UK by getting rid of the Houses of Parliament, or whatever, will some other activists with different views get that meeting cancelled?

Default position should be 'let them speak' unless you have a very very good reason not to.

The fact that several of those on the platform are propagandists for Russian and Iranian state broadcasters seems like a good enough reason. Chris Williamson has no qualms about his employers killing protestors and claims the protestors are agents of Zionism fomenting a "Colour Revolution", so fuck him. Let him pontificate in the plaza outside Euston Station

 

[tim]

I do-liberalism masquerading as anarchism.

Which is probably more palatable than a huge dollop of Brown-Red sauce.

 

[kebabking]

George appears unhappy.

 

[RD2003]

Which is probably more palatable than a huge dollop of Brown-Red sauce.

Dunno, liberalism's responsible for more death and destruction historically. But I don't care for so-called red-brownism either.

 

[existentialist]

George appears unhappy.

O NOES!

Anyway...

 

[The39thStep]

to be honest I wasn't looking for a big bunfight, just some information.

I see NAFO as narcissistic, puerile and tasteless, but it takes all types. I had heard there were some dodgy types attached so was just asking for some views is all.

I think spitfire 's example of NAFO founder Kamil Dyszewski's posts which Kamil described in his apology as 'edgy' is a good example of dodgy types playing a leading role

Spoiler

 

[Supine]

Is there any need to post that shit?

 

[Ax^]

George appears unhappy.

just take it to speakers corner

 

[The39thStep]

Is there any need to post that shit?

Whats the best way to put a spoiler on it ?

 

[existentialist]

Is there any need to post that shit?

Only if you're trying to stir up (off-topic) shit, I'd have thought.

 

[hitmouse]

The infamous oat grinders are cultural appropriators with no actual link with the Society of Friends.

Think I paid 80p to see the Infamous Oat Grinders supporting Ruddy Yurts in the back room of the Dog & Hammer back in the 2000s.

its lickspittle lobby, ffs!

I mean I know nothing more than what's on the internet and chatting to one person that's vaguely involved. It's like all these meme things isn't it though; they take on a bit of a life of their own and drag all sorts of people in for all sorts of reasons, most of whom have never met, and many of whom won't have very clear or thought through political positions I'd bet. Trying to categorise the whole thing as politically dodgy vs. sound is just an impossible project, and what really happens is people just find the bits of it that already chime with their strongly held positions, and then point and shout at the other bits.

I don't think Azov or NAFO are significant on a wider political level fwiw, that's why it always seems odd to me that things often get dragged back to them.

I mean, I tend to broadly agree with you on a lot of this stuff, but, just to be difficult - do you reckon that Galloway, Blumenthal etc are more significant than Azov and NAFO? And if not, are they worth putting effort into discussing? Not trying to do a gotcha here, just genuinely trying to work out where I stand on all this.

I understand where you are coming from.....
Let me try and explain why it is well out of my parameters. I cant say it in a pithy post though, so this may ramble on a bit

Here's a parallel: for me there's only two positions you can have on racism: be supportive of racism or be anti-racist. Being anti-racist means actively challenging racism. Saying I'm not racist but not challenging it puts the person implicitly on the side of racism. Its a binary.

Long and interesting post, with a lot to think about, but fwiw I'd strongly disagree with this bit, I think things are rarely simple binaries in real life, and particularly when it comes to racism I think it's possible for people to be actively racist in some ways or in some situations and to be actively anti-racist in other ways and other situations, cos people are complicated. Which I think is ultimately something to feel hopeful about?

 

[TopCat]

Only if you're trying to stir up (off-topic) shit, I'd have thought.

The NAFO types lie down with dogs and so get fleas. It’s not off topic to mention their affiliations and backgrounds, just unhelpful to their warped narrative.

 

[Ax^]

and Galloway does not hang around or start party with dodgy member

or appear on platforms with fuckwits