Why anarchism as a method of action doesn't work.

[Pickman's model]

So you are trolling a man from the North of Ireland by writing 'wittily' in a Dublin accent? How ingenious. And you even got in the the empathetic vowel thing. Hilarious. Oh you are juxtaposing his generalisations with yours. How my sides ache.

i don't know what gave you the idea 'fillum' is peculiar to dublin.

although the 'jaysus' bit's certainly somewhere in the midlands.

 

[LiamO]

i don't know what gave you the idea 'fillum' is peculiar to dublin.

although the 'jaysus' bit's certainly somewhere in the midlands.

Hello Mr Pedantic.

No the 'fillum' bit is covered in the empathetic vowel sub-section (part 1). Ironically the mocking of the use of empathetic vowels is in common amongst people from the north-east of our Sceptic Isle... to take the piss out of their fellow countrymen from the south and west.

Midlands? How do Dubs say 'Jaysus' and 'batin' then Picky? Maybe every writer from O'Casey to Roddy Doyle has it all wrong and you are right? Probably.

 

[Pickman's model]

Hello Mr Pedantic.

No the 'fillum' bit is covered in the empathetic vowel sub-section (part 1). Ironically the mocking of the use of empathetic vowels is in common amongst people from the north-east of our Sceptic Isle... to take the piss out of their fellow countrymen from the south and west.

Midlands? How do Dubs say 'Jaysus' and 'batin' then Picky? Maybe every writer from O'Casey to Roddy Doyle has it all wrong and you are right? Probably.

i've heard 'fillum' from someone from newcastle, quite a way off from baile atha cliath. and given dublin's halfway up the coast, it's in my view of things in the midlands. not athlone, i'll grant you.

by the way, how's pointing out you're (in this case) talking a bit of shit pedantic?

 

[LiamO]

yawn. night night.

 

[mk12]

In response to the title of the thread:

Which left-wing ideology has worked? What does "worked" even mean? Achieving a classless society?

SWP-style Leninism has hardly achieved anything, has it? (apart from totalitarianism of course).

 

[Blagsta]

They say "fillum" in Belfast too, as well as the north east of England.

 

[ViolentPanda]

How my sides ache.

That's punishment beatings for you.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Fuck me, you'd think that if anything, a dogmatist could keep their bullshit straight!

Still havn't said what you whining about in post 110

because of what happened earlier, I thought I would explain why I like your post.


Your post in my experience of most people I have spoke to on here do seem to reflect the majority of anarchist position to progressive left. ' modern left and right wing thinking is nothing more than sides of the same coin.'

it's a bit like the link I gave to the anarchist talking about the occupying movement, and his position about 'Marxism' just wanting to take over the state and wield it on behalf of the working class, even though the SWP have said many times "the state is not like a car you cant get in and drive in any direction you want' and 'the emancipation of the working class has to be the act of the working class'. It just amazes me how often anarchists completely must understand, and misrepresent what is actually said, and then jump to the conclusion that the the SWP, and in this case the whole socialist revolutionary left, are just as bad as the ruling class.

 

[TremulousTetra]

this being the case why did you say not three hours ago that 'neither anarchists or socialists can substitute themselves for working class self activity'? either they are able to do this, as you claim to have argued previously, or they can't as you argued earlier today. which is it?

 

[TremulousTetra]

The way it seems to me is that there are two or three options, and that's all.

1) That the SWP, through the "democratic centralism" of the CC, deliberately fuck up the "workers movement" (whatever the fuck that is).

2) That the constant screw-ups are not the product of malice, but of ineptness,
or
3) That there's some kind of agenda at work beyond being a fringe political organisation, whether that's providing a living for the CC, or sucking a tramp's armpit.

The usual structural determinism. So, no room for agency. OK.

Someone who's been indoctrinated doesn't see the stuff they spout as lies, but as a "revealed truth". It's why you're so similar to bible-thumpers.

Maybe so. Never claimed to be anything other than giving my honest veiwpoint.

I account for your inability to think outside your mindset or even discuss the topic of a thread in a similar fashion. ttfn

 

[ViolentPanda]

Still havn't said what you whining about in post 110

There was me convinced I'd made it abundantly clear.

Perhaps you really are as stupid as some posters claim.

You say that the SWP says "the emancipation of the working class has to be the act of the working class".
Yes?

You say this not very long after coming out with (w/r/t your perception of anarchists, and how "socialists", which of course is your code for the SWP, are so much more, well, socialist than anarchists) "Whether anarchists like it or not, there is a democratic will of the majority. Those who concentrate on the actions of the collective,those who see the emancipation of the working class being the act of the working class, seek to work with the working-class, even when the will majority goes against what they believe would be best for the movement as a whole [ie the real world me]"
See those bolded words? "With the working-class"? You've already shown, by talking of "working with", showed yourself/your organisation to be outside of "the working-class", and yet there you are, trying to influence the working class as to how/when/why they emancipate themselves.

The SWP are not, for the most part, of the working classes. Who the fuck are they to interpose themselves between the working classes and their emancipation?
I'll tell you what they are: Another bunch of leeches looking to gain power through stepping on the working classes. No more and no less.

 

[TremulousTetra]

I think that the Socialist Workers Party is full of very learned and interesting members; Owen Jones for example. However, they always seem to be at the core of divisions in working-class movements. The SSP split in Scotland, Respect in England. Maybe it is unfair. I just do not understand why they have not merged with other small organisations, accept that socialism needs a united voice, and they seem happy to control one small party even when it loses ground to the BNP. The anarchists seem far more united.

Tried to unite in SA & RESPECT. My honest opinion. Think they may have been too hasty, didn''t spend enough time winning people to common cause ie the SP in the SA. Having said that, not sure the SP were winnable, as the SP and the SWP had different agendas for the Socialist Alliance. In the crudest terms, the SWP saw the Socialist Alliance as some kind of alliance of revolutionaries and reformists seeking to build a mass alliance occupying the ground of old Labour where the revolutionaries would have been in a minority, but at least in the organisation, whereas I think the Socialist party, I emphasise I think, the SP saw Socialist Alliance as being in alliance of revolutionaries, or at least those to the left of the Labour Party. This left everybody suspicious of why the Socialist workers party was bending over backwards to accommodate reformist style views. Some involved the Socialist Alliance and respect accused the SWP of wanting to control the organisations, but this is in contradiction to its clearly stated, and often stated position, of wanting revolutionaries to be a minority in a mass [well at least big] working-class alliance.

there is so much distrust going in all directions, I am not picking on anyone in particular, that I don't think United left is possible. I am quite glad Socialist worker seems to have moved away from this line with the expulsion of John Reese Lindsey German, etc. [though very sorry to loose such fine comrades.]

If Anarchist's seem more united wherever you are, good. Get involved with them, and do stuff.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The usual structural determinism. So, no room for agency. OK.

A Trot talking about agency. That's a new one!
It's not determinism,, it's a simple set of choices based on fairly common experience of the SWP held alike by former members, members and non-members. You may not like that so many people (a majority, even) hold such views, and are so deeply suspicious of the SWP's motives, but their suspicions are based on experience.

Maybe so. Never claimed to be anything other than giving my honest veiwpoint.

What, even when you repeatedly told fibs by claiming butchersapron had said something that he hadn't? Oh no, that was a "mistake", although you only admitted the error after you'd repreated the lie...well...repeatedly.

I account for your inability to think outside your mindset or even discuss the topic of a thread in a similar fashion. ttfn

Ah, the irony of you, who's left hostages-to-fortune of your own adherence to dogma all over Urban, implying that other people are narrow-minded!

 

[ViolentPanda]

Tried to unite in SA & RESPECT. My honest opinion. Think they may have been too hasty, didn''t spend enough time winning people to common cause ie the SP in the SA. Having said that, not sure the SP were winnable, as the SP and the SWP had different agendas for the Socialist Alliance. In the crudest terms, the SWP saw the Socialist Alliance as some kind of alliance of revolutionaries and reformists seeking to build a mass alliance occupying the ground of old Labour where the revolutionaries would have been in a minority, but at least in the organisation, whereas I think the Socialist party, I emphasise I think, the SP saw Socialist Alliance as being in alliance of revolutionaries, or at least those to the left of the Labour Party. This left everybody suspicious of why the Socialist workers party was bending over backwards to accommodate reformist style views. Some involved the Socialist Alliance and respect accused the SWP of wanting to control the organisations, but this is in contradiction to its clearly stated, and often stated position, of wanting revolutionaries to be a minority in a mass [well at least big] working-class alliance.

there is so much distrust going in all directions, I am not picking on anyone in particular, that I don't think United left is possible. I am quite glad Socialist worker seems to have moved away from this line with the expulsion of John Reese Lindsey German, etc. [though very sorry to loose such fine comrades.]

If Anarchist's seem more united wherever you are, good. Get involved with them, and do stuff.

Ah, so the Swappies didn't pack meetings in order to manipulate votes on policy, then? We just imagined all of that, I suppose?

 

[TremulousTetra]

There was me convinced I'd made it abundantly clear.

Perhaps you really are as stupid as some posters claim.

You say that the SWP says "the emancipation of the working class has to be the act of the working class".
Yes?

I say it, or the SWP do in FACT say it? you were a member, and know members. Am I lying again?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I say it, or the SWP do in FACT say it? you were a member, and know members. Am I lying again?

Are you stupid? You say, as in "you have said in a previous post", not as in "you're saying that, but you're lying", you goat-witted fuckstick.

 

[Random]

Which left-wing ideology has worked? What does "worked" even mean? Achieving a classless society?

Both liberalism and social democracy have worked, across large parts of the globe. Where they're now less successful/in retreat it's as victims of their own success, rather than due to being crushed, as is the case with anarchism and old school bolshevism.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Ah, so the Swappies didn't pack meetings in order to manipulate votes on policy, then? We just imagined all of that, I suppose?

"Pack meetings"?

 

[TremulousTetra]

Are you stupid? You say, as in "you have said in a previous post", not as in "you're saying that, but you're lying", you goat-witted fuckstick.

I will put the question a different way. Do the SWP say "the emancipation of the working class has to be the act of the working class."?

ETA, you must know, after all you are the expert.

 

[TremulousTetra]

A Trot talking about agency. That's a new one!

interesting.I thought after reading the anarchist article linked in the first page you might respond better to sociological talk.

It's not determinism,, it's a simple set of choices based on fairly common experience of the SWP held alike by former members, members and non-members. You may not like that so many people (a majority, even) hold such views, and are so deeply suspicious of the SWP's motives, but their suspicions are based on experience.

2+2=5. At the end of the day comrade, they are and I am, motivated by achieving the same aims as you, a classless society.

What, even when you repeatedly told fibs by claiming butchersapron had said something that he hadn't? Oh no, that was a "mistake", although you only admitted the error after you'd repreated the lie...well...repeatedly.

yes I apologised for misquoting him from a conversation several years earlier. I was sure he said that, and I was wrong. However, in my opinion, his position and yours still remains similar to what I stated, yours and his position on fascism is a stopped clock analysis, similar to that of the KPD.

Remember what I actually said now. Do you have a link?

Ah, the irony of you, who's left hostages-to-fortune of your own adherence to dogma all over Urban, implying that other people are narrow-minded!

I've also acknowledge my fallibility in this respect. I think most peoples perception of things can be distorted by their respective, except you of course. You are infallible. Oh yes, and the other guy.


Do you not like discussing politics?

 

[TremulousTetra]

You say this not very long after coming out with (w/r/t your perception of anarchists, and how "socialists", which of course is your code for the SWP, are so much more, well, socialist than anarchists) "Whether anarchists like it or not, there is a democratic will of the majority. Those who concentrate on the actions of the collective,those who see the emancipation of the working class being the act of the working class, seek to work with the working-class, even when the will majority goes against what they believe would be best for the movement as a whole [ie the real world me]"
See those bolded words? "With the working-class"? You've already shown, by talking of "working with", showed yourself/your organisation to be outside of "the working-class", and yet there you are, trying to influence the working class as to how/when/why they emancipate themselves.

I also talked about anarchist not working with the working class on the March organised by workers, and fucking off and doing their own thing. So what? by your twisted logic, this must mean they are working class???
so let me make this absolutely clear, socialist worked/marched with the working class in Seattle, anarchists didn't. That's it.

btw Socialist is socialist, and the Socialist workers party is the Socialist workers party. you cannot just insert your own words. And you cannot tell me my words had a meaning they didn't.

 

[TremulousTetra]

The SWP are not, for the most part, of the working classes. Who the fuck are they to interpose themselves between the working classes and their emancipation?

And middle class anarchists I presume?

I'll tell you what they are: Another bunch of leeches looking to gain power through stepping on the working classes. No more and no less.

idiot.

 

[butchersapron]

ResistanceMP3
John cooper
gmart

 

[manny-p]

ResistanceMP3
John cooper
gmart

To the gulags the lot of them- the counter revolutionary cunts!

 

[Pickman's model]

/\ says all I need to know about your political nous

 

[Pickman's model]

To the gulags the lot of them- the counter revolutionary cunts!

The GULAG's too good for them

 

[ViolentPanda]

"Pack meetings"?

Fuck me, you've understood the meaning of the expression well enough to object to it before, and all of a sudden you don;t know what it means?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I will put the question a different way. Do the SWP say "the emancipation of the working class has to be the act of the working class."?

Yes, and according to you they also talk about "working with the working class" - to what end if not to facilitate their emancipation?

ETA, you must know, after all you are the expert.

Have I ever claimed to be an expert?
Nah, you're just building your straw men again.

 

[ViolentPanda]

interesting.I thought after reading the anarchist article linked in the first page you might respond better to sociological talk.

That's not "sociological talk", it's a strand of sociological theory alongside thousands of others, and not really something to be expected from someone whose ideology puts them firmly in the Marxian camp.

2+2=5.

Ah, we've all got it wrong, and you true believers are right. Where have I heard that schtick before?

At the end of the day comrade, they are and I am, motivated by achieving the same aims as you, a classless society.

I keep reading you saying this, and then I read you putting forward the ideas of a political party who practice a form of "democracy" that effectively constitutes an in-group and out-group (that's sociological and psychological theory, by the way, with a bit of social anthropology thrown in), just like the democrats of the Labour party etc do.

yes I apologised for misquoting him from a conversation several years earlier. I was sure he said that, and I was wrong. However, in my opinion, his position and yours still remains similar to what I stated, yours and his position on fascism is a stopped clock analysis, similar to that of the KPD.

Remember what I actually said now. Do you have a link?

I've also acknowledge my fallibility in this respect. I think most peoples perception of things can be distorted by their respective, except you of course. You are infallible. Oh yes, and the other guy.

Hmm, I've never claimed to be infallible, so you've just wasted time building another straw man.

Do you not like discussing politics?

I do.
You, however, like others, don't discuss "politics", you discuss your own positions. Your OP is an exemplar of this. Politics isn't just about applying your analysis to a situation and judging whether the situation is "right" or "wrong" according to your own ideological predicates. That's not politics, it's religious dogmatism.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And middle class anarchists I presume?

I wouldn't know. I don't currently know any, and those I did know usually turned out to be people going through a rebellious phase before wholeheartedly embracing capitalism.

idiot.

Perhaps.