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

[GarfieldLeChat]

I don't think the SWP is just as bad as the ruling class.

I think it's worse!

The. Really don't engage with them or their kind.

It's a waste of breath.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think most on these boards with professed left Wong ideals are nothin more than armchair generals with fuck all intention of doing anything like what the occupy movement have attempted because they are only interested in being right on the Internet.

This thread as with EVERY other bullshit thread on here on the subject really is about further entrenching those battlelines so pinkos and anarkids can say I'm considerably more radical than you...

TBF, as far as I'm concerned, it's nothing to do with whose radicalism is stronger, it's about certain elements of the left not wishing to accept that left-thought isn't a homogeneous slab of opinion that can and should be brought to bear against any target that those certain elements of the left wish to direct it against. RMP3's arguments are riddled with his assumptions and presumptions about what people of the left should do (under the aegis of his favoured organisation, preferably), and with his misrepresentation of the position of anyone who doesn't fall in with his opinions.

 

[Athos]

You're still having problems with the reality that because one anarchist offers an interpretation doesn't mean that all anarchists find that interpretation tenable.

He can't quite get his head around a grouping of the revolutionary left in which all 'members' aren't required to adhere strictly to a centrally dictated orthodoxy.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oh right, the usual, 'he aint a real anarchist' arguement. OK

Isn't what Garf said.

I mean, we know how you like to construct these straw men, but at least have a little bit more fucking finesse, eh?

 

[ViolentPanda]

He can't quite get his head around a grouping of the revolutionary left in which all 'members' aren't required to adhere strictly to a centrally dictated orthodoxy.

Not just that, but the fact that they don't offends him.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm not interested in that strawman arguement. Never have been. Anarchism's obsession with the individual, which is constantly leading you into this kind of martyrdom.

You're not interested in any but your own straw men, anyway, because that's what your reply contains.

 

[Athos]

Not just that, but the fact that they don't offends him.

And, judging from his obsession with anarchism, enthralls and excites him at the same time. He's a sectarian fetishist.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Sorry, I forgot that we'd elected him Grand master of all the Anarchists.

We did? I didn't get a vote. The tyranny of the majority!!

 

[ViolentPanda]

If only the Irish Citizens' Army had had the benefit of your strategic leadership.

They'd have all been dead before 1916.

 

[Athos]

We did? I didn't get a vote. The tyranny of the majority!!

I think you'll find it's the democratically decided will of the majority. Why do you need a vote? It's that sort of individualism which undermines 'the movement' or should that be 'The Wave'?

 

[JHE]

Where's that pic of the skinny middle class anarcho that ernestolynch loves so much? That needs an airing on this thread.

Be fair. Not all Anarcho-Wotsits are masked teenagers.

You forgot 'sly quips about cannabis and/or cider'

Why be sly about it?

 

[Athos]

Be fair. Not all Anarcho-Wotsits are masked teenagers.

What the fuck is with his ball-bag?!

I had enlarged the image and zoomed in, just in time for the Mrs to walk in. Have some explaining to do.

 

[DotCommunist]

That has to be a gut, nobody has balls like that except that Viz character

 

[Riklet]

50 pages....

 

[SpineyNorman]

 

[TremulousTetra]

Seriously fuck off son.

It's the they are representative of the group they are critiquing but fine place it into your own terms so you can dismiss actual action being taken from your keyboard warrior bullshit.

WHAT? What is your point?

You and all like you attempting to ascribe ideals to other groups from the outside are scum.

Plain and simple.

One day, and I pray its soon you'll be beaten to death by mobs.

LOL And you haven't ascribed ideals to other groups from the outside? such as Leninists, the SWP, and myself? [what's worse is you and vp ascribe ideals to me I don't even hold. lol]

 

[ViolentPanda]

And, judging from his obsession with anarchism, enthralls and excites him at the same time. He's a sectarian fetishist.

You've made my stomach turn. And just before grub, too.

 

[ViolentPanda]

What the fuck is with his ball-bag?!

I had enlarged the image and zoomed in, just in time for the Mrs to walk in. Have some explaining to do.

Looks like a pretty nasty hernia.

 

[TremulousTetra]

What a fucking joke. You don't even see the contradiction in seeing "the emancipation of the working class being an act of the working class" and then following with that with crap about "working with the working class" (my emphasis).

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]. SOME Anarchist's obsession with individual conscience and individual initiative leads them more often than not to spit their dummies when the vote goes against them,, fuckoff and do their own thing, instead of trying to work with people. This leaves them exposed as individuals, easy meat for the state to pick off and throw in jail, something I regret as I consider you comrades.in the case of Seattle, the actions of the anarchists gave this day an excuse to bash the movement as a whole. The movement as a whole paid the price for your ''freedom' imo.​

I ripped apart the sentence from Athos to make a point, that the will of the majority in a working class movement is not always the same as anarchists or socialists. At that point you have to come to a decision, do you carry on working with the majority, or fuckoff? @ists tend to fuckoff and do their own thing imo.

You have ripped apart my paragraph and it's meaning. The real contradiction in my paragraph is between the anarchists who are more likely to do their own thing, and socialists who are more likely to submit to the will of the majority to remain part of the/a mass movement [whatever movement that is, anti-war movement, antifascist movement etc.) I suggest anarchists are more likely to do this, because of the emphasis upon the individual that you yourself are highlighted, and socialists are less likely to do this because of their emphasis on collectivist, mass action.

to deal with your spurious point. I see myself as part of the WC. the SWP see themselves as part of the working class. as a x-member of the SWP you know this, I don't know why you keep pretending it is otherwise.

 

[Athos]

"Ripped apart"

 

[JimW]

"Ripped apart"

The force of dialectic can do that sometimes, comrade. Handle with care.

 

[eoin_k]

So Resistance,

How do you feel about this line of argument:

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


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Organization_17_November

When you look at these comrades, you can have nothing but admiration for the selfless and frankly heroic acts of these individuals. For their bravery and commitment to the cause you can do nothing but salute them.

In my opinion this kind of activity is fine, if it is part of a mass movement who can make the state think twice about taking such actions against individuals [eg those trade unionists the 1970s who were released from prison on spurious grounds when it became evident there would be mass strikes if they remained in prison.] But in the real world nobody can sustain this kind of activity. Who can afford to be constantly on the run, arrested, and imprisoned?

So while I salute these people, I also find this methodology a profligate waste of fine activists.

 

[TremulousTetra]

There is nothing 'democratic' about a position which tramples over the legitimate freedoms of comrades.

you see I honestly believe you completely misunderstand the socialist argument. Nobody is arguing you should NOT have the right to do exactly as you want. that we argue for mass unity, and against you forking off and doing your own thing, does not mean we do not accept your right to do so. Placing the arguments to convince you not to do so, does not mean we are denying you that right.

Can you give me examples of where socialist have trampled on your legitimate freedoms in reality? Where they had stopped you from doing what you want to do?

I don't seek to work with the working class; I am working class. And the feedom in which I believe isn't the individulism to do exactly as I please, in my own interests; instead, it is simply the freedom to act according to my own conscience and judgement (informed but not dictated by comrades), to act in the way which I believe will further our shared aims.

I am working class. The SWP is working class. 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 MOVEMENTS, even when the will majority goes against what they believe would be best for the movement as a whole [ie the real world me]. SOME Anarchist's obsession with individual conscience and individual initiative leads them more often than not to spit their dummies when the vote goes against them,, fuckoff and do their own thing, instead of trying to work with people. This leaves them exposed as individuals, easy meat for the state to pick off and throw in jail, something I regret as I consider you comrades.in the case of Seattle, the actions of the anarchists gave this day an excuse to bash the movement as a whole. The movement as a whole paid the price for your ''freedom' imo.

for me it is self-evident that I and the SWP are part of the working class, and so negates the inference that you and VP have made. However I have inserted the word movements to add extra clarity.I don't think there was only a lack of clarity, I think you are VP are projecting onto myself and the SWP views we don't hold.

Perhaps this would be more believable if it wasn't for the constant sniping.

you're not being serious, you are pulling my leg comrade?

 

[TremulousTetra]

So Resistance,

How do you feel about this line of argument:

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Organization_17_November

When you look at these comrades, you can have nothing but admiration for the selfless and frankly heroic acts of these individuals. For their bravery and commitment to the cause you can do nothing but salute them.

In my opinion this kind of activity is fine, if it is part of a mass movement who can make the state think twice about taking such actions against individuals [eg those trade unionists the 1970s who were released from prison on spurious grounds when it became evident there would be mass strikes if they remained in prison.] But in the real world nobody can sustain this kind of activity. Who can afford to be constantly on the run, arrested, and imprisoned?

So while I salute these people, I also find this methodology a profligate waste of fine activists.

go on, summarise your point.

 

[Athos]

you see I honestly believe you completely misunderstand the socialist argument. Nobody is arguing you should NOT have the right to do exactly as you want. that we argue for mass unity, and against you forking off and doing your own thing, does not mean we do not accept your right to do so. Placing the arguments to convince you not to do so, does not mean we are denying you that right.

Can you give me examples of where socialist have trampled on your legitimate freedoms in reality? Where they had stopped you from doing what you want to do?

I am working class. The SWP is working class. 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 MOVEMENTS, even when the will majority goes against what they believe would be best for the movement as a whole [ie the real world me]. SOME Anarchist's obsession with individual conscience and individual initiative leads them more often than not to spit their dummies when the vote goes against them,, fuckoff and do their own thing, instead of trying to work with people. This leaves them exposed as individuals, easy meat for the state to pick off and throw in jail, something I regret as I consider you comrades.in the case of Seattle, the actions of the anarchists gave this day an excuse to bash the movement as a whole. The movement as a whole paid the price for your ''freedom' imo.

for me it is self-evident that I and the SWP are part of the working class, and so negates the inference that you and VP have made. However I have inserted the word movements to add extra clarity.I don't think there was only a lack of clarity, I think you are VP are projecting onto myself and the SWP views we don't hold.

you're not being serious, you are pulling my leg comrade?

Mass unity under the direction of that working class organisation, the SWP.

The idea that anyone who doesn't tow the SWP line is necessity acting in his own interests rather than that of his whole class is ridiculous.

I can't be bothered with this.

 

[eoin_k]

go on, summarise your point.

analogy

 

[The39thStep]

No cos he might say the Makhnovischina were anti semites and that the Kronstadt sailors were traitor counter revolutionaries that 'regretably' had to be crushed in order for the revolution to stay on course!

some sympathy for the latter actually.

 

[Captain Hurrah]

I could be wrong, but wasn't Makhnovshchina coined and used mockingly by the Bolsheviks ('look at the annakisseds, lol')? A bit like the Whites, when they called the fluctuating territory of the new Soviet state Sovdepia during the civil war.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I ripped apart the sentence from Athos to make a point...

You did what? You didn't "rip it apart".

...that the will of the majority in a working class movement is not always the same as anarchists or socialists.

He didn't claim that it was.

At that point you have to come to a decision, do you carry on working with the majority, or fuckoff? @ists tend to fuckoff and do their own thing imo.

That's not what you said. You mentioned nowt about making a decision, you spouted some pious bollocks about how "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".
Stop making your excuses up as you go along, eh?

You have ripped apart my paragraph and it's meaning. The real contradiction in my paragraph is between the anarchists who are more likely to do their own thing, and socialists who are more likely to submit to the will of the majority to remain part of the/a mass movement [whatever movement that is, anti-war movement, antifascist movement etc.) I suggest anarchists are more likely to do this, because of the emphasis upon the individual that you yourself are highlighted, and socialists are less likely to do this because of their emphasis on collectivist, mass action.

I didn't highlight an emphasis on the individual, I pointed out that your perspective pays no regard to the individual, preferring to see activists merely as possible cogs in the Swappie machinery.
Oh, and read your history. Socialism wasn't born of mass action, but of the struggles of individuals and small communities against exploitation. Mass action and involvement only came about after examples had been set of how people could achieve some measure of control over their workplaces.

to deal with your spurious point. I see myself as part of the WC. the SWP see themselves as part of the working class. as a x-member of the SWP you know this, I don't know why you keep pretending it is otherwise.

You're chatting shit again.
If the SWP are "part of the working class", then why all the flannel about "working with the working class", hmm? How do you work with something you're a part of? You don't. We both know that "work with" means "guide the proles, because they can't manage to guide themselves".

 

[ViolentPanda]

Mass unity under the direction of that working class organisation, the SWP.

I haven't been a member for about 30 years, but I 've got friends and acquaintances who stayed in, and I've never heard this bollocks argument that the SWP are a working class organisation before. Nearest I've heard is how they're an organisation for the working class, which is a mile different from what RMP3 is claiming.

The idea that anyone who doesn't tow the SWP line is necessity acting in his own interests rather than that of his whole class is ridiculous.

I can't be bothered with this.

And yet we always bite when he posts this crap. Mostly because he misrepresents anarchist positions so egregiously.