WOMBLES and CAG
Feb 10 2005 18:49
The "WOMBLES communique" has nothing to do with WOMBLES. It is just the rantings of a sad boy trying save his local bus stop and convince the good working people of colchester to follow his wierd anarcho-trot/left communist idealogy.
Anyway it sounds like a bit of harmless fun, like spreading the rumour that WOMBLES is "heavily infiltrated by cops and journos" (another classic enrager thread!) and likewise we like turning up to freedom and explaining to them that they over stepped the mark (i.e. from a virtual world pranks to reality).
smash the state, destroy capitalism, save the bus stops
Raw
Feb 10 2005 19:19
#2
Well, you see shoes, in an effort to prove how well they will be capable of relating to the masses, and in defiance of such bourgeois values as "logic" and "coherency", the wombles as they protest against the anarchist movement ever becoming anything reactionary such as a mass movement, have formulated a blinding critique of CAG.
You see, bus stations - what are they used for? They are used so people can get to work. And so, because we want to save this valuable resource for local people, this shows that CAG lack a critique of work. Which is true, as we all wake up each day, utterly thrilled at the prospect of another jolly day of expropriation.
Luckily, we have the wombles to stop these stupid drones going to work, man! If they can't get the bus to work, then capitalism will presumably just collapse, and of course won't in any way mean no real damage to capital, but vast expense and inconvenience for ordinary local people. Guess they should just give up their jobs. 
Feb 10 2005 19:46
#3
raw wrote:
The "WOMBLES communique" has nothing to do with WOMBLES. It is just the rantings of a sad boy trying save his local bus stop and convince the good working people of colchester to follow his wierd anarcho-trot/left communist idealogy.Raw
WOMBLES are an voluntary, open and structureless collection of individuals with no membership basis. Therefore there should be no problem with Jack writing your communiques.
Feb 10 2005 20:45
#4
Ahhh I see now, saving bus stations=bad but of course 
Feb 10 2005 21:18
#5
wheresmyshoes wrote:
Ahhh I see now, saving bus stations=bad but of course
Saving bus stations is a perfectly valid thing to address....as long as it's not done in a CAG-handed fashion. 
Feb 10 2005 23:17
#6
raw wrote:
It is just the rantings of a sad boy trying save his local bus stop and convince the good working people of colchester to follow his wierd anarcho-trot/left communist idealogy.
Pope -- I find Catholicism attractive.
Bear -- sometimes I defecate near trees
Let's not take this too seriously, eh? The thead in question is mostly about Britney, anyway.
Feb 11 2005 16:23
#7
FFS.
The worker's movement has been smashed, the planet's being destroyed, many gains of second-wave feminism are being rolled back, etc etc...
We have slightly bigger problems than whether CAG or WOMBLES members have larger penises. Just get a fucking tapemeasure, settle the question, and get back to fighting our common enemy. And no the common enemy isn't the fucking Judean People's Front.
Feb 11 2005 16:23
#8
If and when the WOMBLES can take a dump that doesn't involve ketamines, Special Brew and more cops than an Ikea store opening, then they can start to entertain the very notion of considering the possibility of the unlikely idea that CAG may have ever done something somewhere near to the ballpark in which one may not completely discount the suggestion that the implication that we are single handedly destroying capitalism may not be 100% true.
Until then, crass comments about bus stops just smack of the following:
(i) attempted intimidation
(ii) frustration
(iii) feeling threatened
If the WOMBLES wanna learn a lesson in building links with communities and members of the working class on issues we agree on (or rather, issues we both disagree with the state on) with a view to continued cooperation against state and capital initiatives, then they should look to CAG.
If they wanna continue banging their heads against the state bureaucracy with a membership mostly maintained by activists, junkie burnouts and undercovers while maintaining some abstract bourgeios principle of "openness" to the point at which they are almost unworkable, while making no actual gains against state or capital at all, then they should carry on as they are, on the understanding that CAG feels no need to feel the urge to participate in "mutual aid or solidarity" with them as a group.
Until then, just you wait and see, kids.
Feb 11 2005 16:37
#9
FFS, both of you. Stop whining and squaring up to each other. Maybe you get on each other's tits, but that's not a political difference. I'm pessimistic to think that sometime maybe soon we're going toi need all the solidarity we can muster to deal with the casual repression that will become everyday.
Alan_is_Fucking_Dead wrote:
(i) attempted intimidation
(ii) frustration
(iii) feeling threatened
If the WOMBLES wanna learn a lesson in building links with communities and members of the working class on issues we agree on (or rather, issues we both disagree with the state on) with a view to continued cooperation against state and capital initiatives, then they should look to CAG.
Feb 11 2005 16:41
#10
I don't understand what purpose my quote fulfils in your post. Is it for emphasis, kinda like "yeah, everyone re-read what he put!! This guy should be your new revolutionary pin up!!" or was it more like a "man, this guy's so lame, we're all part of the same struggle, especially people who think our enemy is the Death Star and front doors...I'm a liberal, y'know??"
Feb 11 2005 21:43
#11
Because alan, its silly to say the Wombles should look to CAG, they shouldn't, i know what you mean but other people on the forum don't. CAG is just our local group, wombles are a larger organisation even if they are shite to judge them along the same lines does not offer a reasoned critique.
Basically your just falling into RAW's trap where he avoids criticism of his organisation by implying '''oooh look we're a well financed glamorous group in london, and you just live in some town in east anglia''.
We shuld be pointing out the failures and shortcomings of wombles activisty method, their complete lack of a class based position, the political approach they support generally in terms of their branch organising as demonstarted well in this thread, and the flaws in specific actions. And the fact that they're callled the wombles and are largely a bunch of ketamine addled hippies.
Feb 11 2005 22:21
#12
Nah shut up I'm right.
The WOMBLES don't have branches. That would be, like, organisation maaaan. That's so dogmatic.
And my post was largely in response to Raw's attack on us "saving a bus stop". CAG's WOMBLES critique has already been done by Jack (in his own inimitable way) on the post that was a catalyst for this thread. I'm just defending our bus stop.
Feb 12 2005 10:39
#13
I'm with lazlo on this one, grow up the lot of you. Life is too short and we are too few. If you don't like each other, fine. Just co-operate on the events/issues you have in common and leave the other side to whatever they want to do in the meantime. Stop bitching at each other like five year olds in the process though it's just fucking embarrassing.
Feb 12 2005 12:22
#14
Saii wrote:
I'm with lazlo on this one, grow up the lot of you. Life is too short and we are too few. If you don't like each other, fine. Just co-operate on the events/issues you have in common and leave the other side to whatever they want to do in the meantime. Stop bitching at each other like five year olds in the process though it's just fucking embarrassing.
Well thats the problem isn't it mate. Most of the bullshit comes from a small gobby clique 'elite' from a garrison town and a certain London bookshop. The people who share the view
Quote:
Well, that pretty much says it all. You're 'all anarchists together'. I'd rather push my communist beliefs, then end up working with people who aren't my comrades. If an 'anarchist' doesn't have a decent communist position, why the fuck should I want to work with them?
There is a reason why so many people who register here dont stay for long isn't there.
Feb 12 2005 12:26
#15
First point;
It is dangerous in my opinion for a group to post out communiques that act on behalf of another group, especially when those communiques promote violence for violence sake and tries to distort the group. IF PEOPLE DO NOT SEE THIS AS A PROBLEM THEN I'M PERSONALLY A STEP AWAY FROM DETACHING MYSELF FROM THIS MOVEMENT!
Second point;
There has been NO political critique of wombles from CAG, after repeatedly asking for any criticisms to be political and not personalised (see the above comments from alan about ketamine and alchohol abuse <--no doubt this has come from that bispectacle prick at freedom!).
Third point;
On a previous thread, members of CAG level of critiqiue was solely based on callings us "cunts" , " wankers" and "heavily infiltrated by cops and journos". The latter accusations was challenged when 5 of us went to speak to them at Freedom where they work on tuesdays. We went there diplomatically to introduce ourselves to them, and ask them NOT to agree with us or stop hating us BUT to stop posting malicious lies that WOMBLES is heavily infiltrated by cops.
Jack, on behalf of CAG refused to do this....anyway it all went quitely UNTIL now with this stupid "WOMBLES communique".
Just to stress, we in WOMBLES do not give two fucks on what other people think but we are open to political criticism and we have and will continue to engage with criticism on a political level.
Finally, we offered CAG support, we said to them that it was a shame that at our meeting (with CAG) they were not willing to open up a friendly dialogue and learn from each other. They instead have chosen to be antagonistical, they promote themselves as having the "right ideas" and that people should "look at CAG". They are infact everything they hate about us.
Raw
Feb 12 2005 12:38
#16
raw wrote:
Finally, we offered CAG support, we said to them that it was a shame that at our meeting (with CAG) they were not willing to open up a friendly dialogue and learn from each other. They instead have chosen to be antagonistical, they promote themselves as having the "right ideas" and that people should "look at CAG". They are infact everything they hate about us.
Raw
Well they've certainly got people looking at them, Im not sure for the correct reasons though.
Feb 12 2005 14:31
#17
Comrades,
Be you in the WOMBLES, CAG, or otherwise this thread should annoy you as much as it is really annoying me. The CAG group seem to have taken over this forum and having been using for internal jokes, for an intellectual wanking ground, which is very alienating for the likes of me, as opposed to using it as a vital internal organ of the broad class-struggle anarchist movement. This behaviour is not acceptable.
My partner is an ex-womble. She has criticisms to make of the organisation, just as many comrades within the WOMBLES themselves would also, but nonetheless I have met many committed communists who are members and former members, including my partner whose politics are very much based in socialism (altho they doesn't tend to use those kind of labels for herself).
I have criticisms of the WOMBLES, but so do that group's members. Undoubtedly there are liabilities within that organisation. The same however is true of just about any anarchist and communist grouping within the UK however. The WOMBLES are often singled out for criticism because of the incestuous nature of the London based movement, which often arrogates a role for itself as the national focus of the anarchist movement - hence people are often discussing the successes or failures of the WOMBLES et al, rather than, say, the Northern anarchist network, or the few comrades in Perth, or ASCA in Aberdeen, or the CAN in Cardiff.
The workers movement as my Glasgow comrade points out has been utterly smashed. We have incredible amounts of work to do right now to rebuild the armies of the revolutionary working class. Communism will not be brought about by saying that X group is just hippies who take horse tranquilisers. It will be built by comradely solidarity and a consistent revolutionary communist approach, a fact which seems have been entirely missed by CAG during their recent attacks and pranks levelled against the WOMBLES. I am no fan of the Earth First! network but it is not appropriate communist behaviour to say that they are hippies who live in trees, nor would I attack the AF because it's members are boring. None of these accusations are objectively true, and they serve only to put people's heckles up rather than promoting debate and discussion on tactics and political organisation in the spirit of solidarity and mutual aid.
This is what this forum should be used to promote. This is what we should be doing here and how we should approach criticism of other groups.
Raise The Red Flag!
:red: Nick Durie :red:
Feb 12 2005 17:15
#18
Quote:
It is dangerous in my opinion for a group to post out communiques that act on behalf of another group,
I've seen the WOMBLES write worse as a collective (something similar is up on the walls of Freedom in fact), but you're right he shouldn't have attatched your name to it without a disclaimer.
Quote:
There has been NO political critique of wombles from CAG
I've heard some perfectly valid critiques from members of CAG on the WOMBLES ethos before now, and I don't often speak to them. They are also not the only ones I've heard rumors about WOMBLES K and alcohol abuse from, it seems to be a 'common knowledge' rumor that they repeat rather than direct slander. It's something they shouldn't repeat without personal knowledge however if it is not in fact the case.
Quote:
Third point;
I don't care how this came about, you're probably both bending the truth. I'm just getting pissed off that it's cutting into what could be more productive time, hence the request for you both to back off and behave like the mutual aid icons you claim to be rather than the individualist egotists you are behaving like at the moment.
Quote:
just to stress, we in WOMBLES do not give two fucks on what other people think
The tone of this article suggests you are lying, if you didn't care you wouldn't react.
Feb 12 2005 19:00
#19
Saii wrote:
Life is too short and we are too few. If you don't like each other, fine. Just co-operate on the events/issues you have in common and leave the other side to whatever they want to do in the meantime.
You're contradicting yourself.
CAG generally feel they have nothing common with WOMBLES, which you seem to understand, yet you still revert to cliches like "we're too few". As far as I'm concerned, we are even fewer than you would think, since I wouldn't involve groups like the WOMBLES.
Feb 12 2005 19:06
#20
raw wrote:
(see the above comments from alan about ketamine and alchohol abuse <--no doubt this has come from that bispectacle prick at freedom!).
Firstly, it's bespectacled.
Secondly, quit with the glasses racism. 
Thirdly, I wish I wore glasses. Then I could be as cool as Revol.
As for your visit to Freedom, it was more actually productive than I expected. I hope you understand our viewpoint a bit better as a result.
Fourthly, like Saii(mon) says, you do give a fuck what people think, way too much of a fuck really if you ask me. The fact is you're setting out to be a really high profile group (for better or for worse) and that means you're gonna have detractors, who use all sorts of media and tones to, um, detract. Get used to it. At least I'm not writing for the Telegraph.
Feb 12 2005 22:20
#21
Alan_is_Fucking_Dead wrote:
Thirdly, I wish I wore glasses. Then I could be as cool as Revol.
But you're supposed to have glasses. That's not a dig at Revol is it?! Quit splitting the movement! 
Feb 12 2005 22:24
#22
Munster wrote:
Well thats the problem isn't it mate. Most of the bullshit comes from a small gobby clique 'elite' from a garrison town and a certain London bookshop. The people who share the view
You forget our Northern Irish contingent.
Raw, your post is totally invalidated by the fact that you 1. say how we need to keep the discourse 'political' and then rising to such unrivaled political denounciation of our Freedom-based comrade as 'prick'; 2. You claim we don't make political criticisms of the wombles, despite the fact we won't fucking shut up about that; 3. You think our campaign to save the bus station is a bad idea because it shows I don't have a "critique of work" and 4. You're in the WOMBLES.
If I can be arsed tho, I'll reply after I get back from Projektile. Which fucking rocks.
Put simply tho, what it comes down to is this. We're class struggle anarchists. We don't consider ourselves as part of the same 'movement' as non class-struggle types. Simple as. We have no desire to work with them and no desire to have any common ground.
Feb 12 2005 22:39
#23
raw wrote:
There has been NO political critique of wombles from CAG, after repeatedly asking for any criticisms to be political and not personalised (see the above comments from alan about ketamine and alchohol abuse <--no doubt this has come from that bispectacle prick at freedom!).Third point;
On a previous thread, members of CAG level of critiqiue was solely based on callings us "cunts" , " wankers" and "heavily infiltrated by cops and journos".
Dude it's not like anyone even has to work at "critiquing" this group.
Feb 13 2005 01:04
#24
Hi Nick, thanks for your comments..
The line you are taking is the same line we took regarding CAG, we were diplomatic, friendly and clear why we thought there behaviour was out of order. We did not go there to clarify who we were or to clear any misconceptions that they have about us. We said that at our meeting with them that it might be more productive if we were discussing political issues but we went to freedom only to talk about the shit they were putting up on these boards. In our opinion CAG types overstepped the mark, in turn we were very restrained in not hitting them..something which wouldn't be very progressive to do but sometime neccesary.
And I repeat again, the ONLY reason that I post is in response to destructive behaviour by other anarchists regarding the collective I;m involved. Thats why this thread is started with a reaction to Jacks false posting. So there!
Raw
Feb 13 2005 01:09
#25
raw wrote:
Hi Nick, thanks for your comments..The line you are taking is the same line we took regarding CAG, we were diplomatic, friendly and clear why we thought there behaviour was out of order. We did not go there to clarify who we were or to clear any misconceptions that they have about us. We said that at our meeting with them that it might be more productive if we were discussing political issues but we went to freedom only to talk about the shit they were putting up on these boards. In our opinion CAG types overstepped the mark, in turn we were very restrained in not hitting them..something which wouldn't be very progressive to do but sometime neccesary.
And I repeat again, the ONLY reason that I post is in response to destructive behaviour by other anarchists regarding the collective I;m involved. Thats why this thread is started with a reaction to Jacks false posting. So there!
Raw
Did I mention that without you, today's emotions would be the scurf of yesterdays?
Feb 13 2005 02:21
#26
Quote:
In our opinion CAG types overstepped the mark, in turn we were very restrained in not hitting them..something which wouldn't be very progressive to do but sometime neccesary
YOU WHAT?
Listen...I often disagree with these mischievous young anarchists in Colchester....
...but they are also very dear to me!
And when you talk of your little 5 strong 'visit' to them...and when you talk of your "restraint in not hitting them...I hear the language of the bully and the abuser.
For fucks sake!
This is really upsetting!
Its only a bunch of mischievous kids on a bulletin board!
I was with the wombles in the Carlini Stadium in Genoa.... at least then we were fighting the state, and not threatening some suburban kids anarchy group!
What the fuck?
Feb 13 2005 02:29
#27
Well I basically agree with Nick.
Does anyone want to comment on this quote?
Nick Durie wrote:
The CAG group seem to have taken over this forum and having been using for internal jokes, for an intellectual wanking ground, which is very alienating for the likes of me, as opposed to using it as a vital internal organ of the broad class-struggle anarchist movement. This behaviour is not acceptable.
In my opinion, endless abusive jokes about 'womble' behaviour are only justified if we do see this board as basically an internal 'jokes and wanking space.'
If, on the other hand, enrager is intended to be a libertarian/anti-authoritarian resource then clearly there does need to be more respect shown.
To Jack and others I'd also point out that the blurred line between the casual abuse and the accurate political criticism directed towards 'the WOMBLES' maks it easy to just ignore the whole lot, and I think the issues are too important to be ignored. It's easy to say you have 'nothing in common' with non-class struggle anarchists, but I'm afraid that's just wishful self-justifying thinking. The AYN, Freedom and enrager itself would not exist if it was not for the wider (class and non class struggle) anarchist movement -- the fact that people like Jack use all of these resources suggests that they are conncted to the widr movement.
Feb 13 2005 09:38
#28
Don't have time for fully developed responce, but, Lazlo -
1. re: the quote. You know that's total bollocks. Otherwise, it'd just be me, Jess, Alan, cantodo and redyred posting here, wouldn't it?
2. wombles jokes are awesome.
3. You sound like a Trot saying why we should all join RESPECT, because we just need to unite, man.
4. AYN was a tragic joke, as a result of it not having a class struggle ideology. I'd deeply love Freedom to become a class struggle only resource (It probably won't ever be, but I do think it's important that there are places people can get Left Communist literature - if we have to have so dire shit like Green Anarchist there too to cover the bills, then so be it). Enrager is in the process of being pushed more and more to class struggle ideology, and also somewhere I can amuse myself by laughing at lunatics who think the world would be lovely if we lived in trees, or didn't work and lived in squats. Not part of a 'wider movement'. Unless you mean like, we're in a wider movement with like, the Lib Dems, in that we 'do politics'.
Feb 13 2005 10:43
#29
Jack, I think he means we're using a wider infrastructure that depends on non-class struggle anarchists to operate, and that if you claim to be completely separate from "the movement" the claim is undermined by continued use of shared resources. The decision then is to admit that you're reluctantly tied into a wider movement with which you have little agreement due to the need for infrastructure, or to disassociate entirely with it.
Feb 13 2005 12:02
#30
yeah, what he said.
Reading over raw's earlier post I do also have to agree with barry that it comes across as unneccessarily threatening.
We have largely been thrown together by participating in waves of protest (eg stop the war, mayday, eco and other stuff). When these waves ebb, as they are doing now, the common causes that bind us are weaker and we start to focus on the differences. As movements decay, people turn on each other and abuse and threaten each other.
Let's not, eh?
But maybe we're all now too entrneched in our positions to back down?
Bloody patriarchy...
Who needs COINTELPRO when we can do it ourselves!
What's so wrong with saving a bus stop now?