WOMBLES and CAG

159 posts / 0 new
Last post
raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 15 2005 11:54
Saii wrote:
This is the BIG problem with your kind of politics from what I can see, it's entirely based on these constantly moving travellers, rather than on people who are going to stick to a community for years or decades. London is not a community of 11 million people, it is an urban bloc of thousands of different communities. CAG may or may not be planning to stay where they are permanently, but the point is they have nailed the idea that you don't just stay ten months here, twelve months there all over the shop chasing after an ever-moving circus of floating activists. it shouldn't matter where they live, it should matter where you live.

We're hardly "constantly moving travellers", and people move because they're forced to move. And your right london has 1,000 of communities some geographically based others not. I wasn't arguing that we should stay "10 months there and 12 months here", I was saying that in regards to social centres, as convergence of political action in a certain locality.

Where I live is in London, there is nothing within the borough I live in that have the slightest connection to, there is no community under capitalism (remember that old chestnut!).

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 15 2005 12:02
Quote:
Where I live is in London, there is nothing within the borough I live in that have the slightest connection to, there is no community under capitalism (remember that old chestnut!).

Yeah I know that quote, it's fucking rubbish and it flies in the face of hundreds of years of community organisation and resistance. If you have no links within the borough that is a failing of yours, and a deep one. Without links to your community how can you ever expect to strongly influence them on any issue?

Try going to a community meeting if you aren't from that area, or even a pub for the locals, and see how far you get telling them how to defend themselves against phone masts, bus stations, council house sell-offs or anything else.

I know people don't move by choice, my point is that the very concept of squatted social centres negates the possibility of staying in almost every case, and the sort of people you are using to keep it going are not the sort of people who are going to stay in the same area almost by default (you made much of the foreign contingent for example, nice people but also people on their way to somewhere else in most cases). I thought that went without saying.

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 15 2005 12:21
raw wrote:
Where I live is in London, there is nothing within the borough I live in that have the slightest connection to, there is no community under capitalism (remember that old chestnut!).
saii wrote:
Yeah I know that quote, it's fucking rubbish and it flies in the face of hundreds of years of community organisation and resistance. If you have no links within the borough that is a failing of yours, and a deep one. Without links to your community how can you ever expect to strongly influence them on any issue?

Try going to a community meeting if you aren't from that area, or even a pub for the locals, and see how far you get telling them how to defend themselves against phone masts, bus stations, council house sell-offs or anything else.

No I think that quote is spot on. And I don't think having an opinion on every issue is what is needed, I find your words really patronising.

"try and go to a pub for locals" he..he..he..Oh please!

saii wrote:
I know people don't move by choice, my point is that the very concept of squatted social centres negates the possibility of staying in almost every case, and the sort of people you are using to keep it going are not the sort of people who are going to stay in the same area almost by default (you made much of the foreign contingent for example, nice people but also people on their way to somewhere else in most cases). I thought that went without saying.

Look, social centres isn't all we concentrate on, we do alot of other things. I thought I say that because again people have chosen to ignore in what context we have/are doing stuff. Especially "Revol", I have made my point clear and you keep repeating the same crap.

As for the "foreign contingent", we don't so them as that at all...remember No Borders....some of the most up for it, passionate and theoritically clear people were not born in the UK.

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 15 2005 12:48
Quote:
I find your words really patronising.

As a normal guy living in a run-down estate and paying rent to keep me and my family alive in London I would find it patronising if unemployed squatters who have no clue about my life, circumstances or yes, community told me I was wasting my life and should care more about a bunch of Greeks I've never met, but each to their own. You don't think there's a reason why people shout 'get a job' at activists in the street or talk about kicking the druggie fuckers out of that empty building next door?

Quote:
Look, social centres isn't all we concentrate on, we do alot of other things. I thought I say that because again people have chosen to ignore in what context we have/are doing stuff.

Edit:: And as i said, I quite like the foreign contingent, they're good people. What they aren't is a constant presence in a local community.

I was citing it as an example of where your tactics seem to be weak, simply from what I've read on this thread. You wanted me to argue on your grounds, I am doing so.

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 15 2005 13:33
Saii wrote:
As a normal guy living in a run-down estate and paying rent to keep me and my family alive in London I would find it patronising if unemployed squatters who have no clue about my life, circumstances or yes, community told me I was wasting my life and should care more about a bunch of Greeks I've never met, but each to their own. You don't think there's a reason why people shout 'get a job' at activists in the street or talk about kicking the druggie fuckers out of that empty building next door?

You know thats not what I said, so why attribute things to me that I didn't say? As for the reason why people shout "get a job" (to whom? just your defined view of activists), well there's alot of reason, there is a big mentality amongst people that deviancy is bad and conformity is good. Anything which is slightly out of the ordering is frowned upon, like cultues from other parts of the world, different ways of living, different ways of looking at the world...It is not enough to take the comments of someone and see them as the bible truth, it's also important to look at the reasoning.

I really find you postings very weak, and I'm tired in replying to you if all you do is purposely misquote me

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 15 2005 14:33

The quote was that you found me patronising. I was arguing that someone with your attitude shouldn't cast stones. If you think it's patronising for someone to point out a failing, then perhaps you are in the wrong business.

Quote:
to whom? just your defined view of activists

I have had 'get a job' shouted at me, I doubt there is anyone on these boards who hasn't at some point. Don't demean both of us by pretending otherwise.

Quote:
There is a big mentality amongst people that deviancy is bad and conformity is good

That's possibly the most unconsidered, thoughtless and counterproductive analysis I've ever seen of the phenomenon.

The sort of reasoning that usually characterises these things in my experience is what I've stated above, that a bunch of idiots living off the charity of the state (this being the major perception of activists) are pretending we can all afford to live ethical, not work, send money to a thousand different causes/people etc in a society where that's quite obviously a fucking ridiculous idea at the moment. The perception is that activists leech off everyone else and then start talking about how wonderfully ethical they are. Hence the general dislike. It's got very little to do with deviancy from the norm, or every pub conversation I have would quickly turn into a fight.

Yes I know in theory we can all live in a wonderful world of mutual aid, but we are living in a world where the revolution HAS NOT HAPPENED. People still need to live, and they can't do that without earning money. There is a very limited number of people who can pick up the cast-offs of this society, but that is not production, it's recycling and it can't sustain a large population.

Quote:
I really find you postings very weak, and I'm tired in replying to you if all you do is purposely misquote me

Don't fling accusations about which you can't back up, isn't that what you said to Jack?

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 15 2005 16:02

thats perhaps true in some respect, I am the biggest critique of that sort posturing within my own collective. But what I've described, about wombles, has been the dominant political attitude expressed by people, in years of meetings and discussions and working with people.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Feb 15 2005 16:19

The level of debate has sky-rocketed in the last few pages... 8)

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Feb 15 2005 16:23

Bloody hell, it has n all.

It's the departure of CAG I tells ya.

It's as if we've entered some eye of the storm, a strangly eerie plateau where the way forward seems just within our grasp.

But who will b the first to say "suck my balls"?

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Feb 15 2005 16:34

grin grin

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 15 2005 16:45

You know, some would say this sort of thing is why enrager has a bit of a reputation you pair of fucking fucktard ball-suckers.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Feb 15 2005 18:51

Well seeing as certain people - raw in this case - have decided to start attacking me for no apparent reason:

raw wrote:
(see the above comments from alan about ketamine and alchohol abuse <--no doubt this has come from that bispectacle prick at freedom!).

...I will comment on this.

Firstly I broke my glasses moving stuff into my girlfriend's flat over a year ago and haven't replaced them, so I'm just a plain old prick at the moment. Although it is always nice to try to insult someone based on some kind of disability I know.

If you do want to try to slag me off for personal rather than political reasons, actual physical attributes you could use are as follows:

* I have long hair

* I am very skinny

Also various Wombles have tried to spread a myriad of quite pathetic lies and rumours about me over the past year[1], so I don't feel particularly that I should omit uncomfortable truths from this discussion...

So to start

Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
Reading over raw's earlier post I do also have to agree with barry that it comes across as unneccessarily threatening.

Well to be honest this doesn't surprise me - one member of the Wombles did threaten CAG members. This same Womble has also tried to threaten me, as well as an Israeli-American anarchist and anti-fascist street medic girl (by standing over her in her sleep + waking her up before threatening her), and a Black Flag contributor and EF! activist as well as others I won't mention. This appears to be accepted behaviour with this group, who cannot with a straight face call anyone else sectarian as a result.

raw wrote:
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.

Re: the original communique, one Womble (montevideo) stated on urban75[2] about the Wombles that he

montevideo wrote:
worked in an anarchist group for 4 years. Never voted, never elected, never held positions/roles. We got on alright.

And later said that since they have no organisational structure (since all organisation is 'oppressive'), no membership and no voting or delegation anyone is entitled to check their email, have access to their website passwords and produce propaganda in their name. So although silly it's fair enough (and Jack's post was very funny, although I'm sure you don't get the Britney Spears' reference due to your self-imposed exile from mainstream society, and so probably won't "get" it), and as Saii pointed out is considerably better than some real stuff, like the infamous "fences" poster.[3]

BTW the comments about the ketamine and alcohol abuse of Wombles did not come from this unspectacled prick - they're practically legendary within the "scene" as I'm sure raw is well aware. He will also be aware of the problems caused by these things - as I know cos I've been in meetings where he and everyone else has discussed alcohol use within the group, etc..

And this:

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

So is it "friendly" to have one of your group utter threats to people as they leave then? I'm glad I'm not friends with you!

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

I just thought I'd re-post this, cos it's pretty hilarious!

But of course these are points about the behavioural culture of the Wombles, not the politics (which revol has criticised [and can we stop saying critique all the time! Even to the point of saying "the critiquer". One who makes a "critique" is a "critic" ffs!] constructively and intelligently). But then this whole thing is about your criticisms of the behaviour of CAG. Which is fair enough, but you should be prepared to have the spotlight put on you too.

I have omitted a whole bunch of stuff about utterly disgusting anti-social and highly un-anarchist behaviour (not to mention very dodgy politics) by Wombles that I could have brought up, but for some reason do still have some sense of inter-anarchist solidarity. Something which you seem to be lacking.

Steven

Footnotes ;)

1. Some extremely insidious, such as this one here:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2394375#post2394375

Others are more ridiculous, such as accusations of racism:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2390550#post2390550

Others still are so ridiculous they're not even worth mentioning.

2. http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101682&page=1&pp=25

3. Wombles poster, c. 2004: "For struggling for a better world all of us are fenced in, threatened with death. The fence is reproduced globally. In every continent, every city. every countryside, every house. Power's fence of war closes in on the rebels, for whom humanity is always grateful. But fences are broken. The rebels, whom history repeatedly has given the length of it's long trajectory, struggle and the fence is broken. The rebels search each other out. They walk toward one another. They find each other, and together break other fences - RESISTANCE IS EXISTENCE."

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Feb 15 2005 19:49
Saii wrote:
As a normal guy living in a run-down estate and paying rent to keep me and my family alive in London I would find it patronising if unemployed squatters who have no clue about my life, circumstances or yes, community told me I was wasting my life and should care more about a bunch of Greeks I've never met, but each to their own. You don't think there's a reason why people shout 'get a job' at activists in the street or talk about kicking the druggie fuckers out of that empty building next door?

You articulated excellently what I was trying to say in response to the outrage over my "ketamine" comment.

I love it when Ipswich kids talk sense. Almost makes me wanna go to the next EASF. tongue

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Feb 15 2005 19:52
raw wrote:
alan_is_fucking_dead wrote:
True, but it seems to me that this thread has shaped out quite well, in that Raw is getting huge bodies of criticism from several different angles, which was what he always called for.

Very wishful thinking, that in no part lets any of you lot of for doing the states work, spreading rumours about my friends personal habits and calling us cops.

Absolutely laughable bullshit. Give this point up mate.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Feb 15 2005 20:01
raw wrote:
As for the reason why people shout "get a job" (to whom? just your defined view of activists), well there's alot of reason, there is a big mentality amongst people that deviancy is bad and conformity is good. Anything which is slightly out of the ordering is frowned upon, like cultues from other parts of the world, different ways of living, different ways of looking at the world...

Or maybe (and this would seem to be more likely) it's cos you're all voluntarily unemployed and have chosen this Crimethinc-esque lifestyle. Which is fine if you're just out for yourself, but you're claiming to be revolutionary anarchists. And the question people will find themselves asking (fuck, the question I ask and I'm not at all adverse to squatting) is: what the fuck does this have to do with me?? How exactly are you relating to the vast majority of society who "conform" to the generally accept lifestyle??

People accuse me (and CAG) of creating and "us" and "them" deal within the so-called movement, yet I think the flipside to us (WOMBLES etc) are very much responsible for there being an "us" and "them" in general society between activists/revolutionaries/anti-capitalists and everyone else. So why the fuck should we try and relate to a school of thought which is dragging libertarianism (and therefore communism/socialism and probably the entire left wing) further and further out of the public spotlight and making it appear more and more ridiculous?? What good does it do us, when we are fully agreed on the obvious shortcomings of groups like the WOMBLES and how counter-revolutionary their existence actually is, to somehow pay lipservice to what is (in this case at least) a twisted and completely unworkable abstract like solidarity??

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 15 2005 22:22
raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 15 2005 22:53

"wine importing business" ....you make me laugh and cough up blood

I really encourage Revol and the rest to join the ICC and leave the anarchist movement well alone

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 15 2005 23:00

Class A apparently,

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Feb 15 2005 23:03

Typical. I ask like 10 semi-rhetorical questions and Raw gets distracted by the more fashionable and eloquent Revol questioning him on how many baked beans he got for dinner aged 6.

That's glamourous activism in action right there!!

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Feb 15 2005 23:03
raw wrote:
Class A apparently,

Hahaha that was quite funny actually. Mr. T

Joe Hill
Offline
Joined: 2-12-04
Feb 16 2005 00:43

Revol drums fingers....

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 16 2005 08:51
Quote:
"saii" (thats what I've been told)

I don't do 'folds', and I've been trying very hard to be fair and balanced to both sides. I'll be honest, I have problems with the outlooks of both CAG and the WOMBLES, but I haven't at any point said they need to be dissolved or that I wont work with them, I've simply analysed what I've heard and asked for a response. I've said CAG shouldn't spread rumors, and I don't do so myself, so keep me out of your little rants about shit-spreading in future because that stinks of hypocrisy.

You've repeatedly ignored large tracts of the argument here, which is beginning to irritate me. Either you wish to engage, as you earlier stated, in a meaningful debate or you don't. You say Revol should become more like you but you have not yet presented anything like an adequate defence of the WOMBLES tactics, let alone presented any strong counter-argument for why it's a good thing, why libertarian communism along the lines of CAG wouldn't work...

Quote:
these liitle rumours spread about peoples behaviour, and there were willing idiots who finally found a role for themselves in spreading them...Therefore all your info is secondary information

It seems to me that not only did John provide several examples, plus a plethora of thread background, he does have personal experience, which makes your accusations of lying largely invalid. A much better argument would be that one member doesn't make the group, as John's accusations seem to relate primarily to one of you.

Quote:
when the only british anarchist hunger striker only got 20 people out on a support demo

Are we talking about Simon Chapman here btw? Because there was more than one demo, plus leaflettings, awareness raising campaigns etc all over the country. There was even mainstream media coverage in East Anglia. Mentioning one demo as evidence of the lack of support is a fucking ridiculous argument.

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Feb 16 2005 09:59
raw wrote:
Thanks for your wise words john, maybe I can stay at your villa in ancona and ponder my next political move (I'm sure you understand having a nice villa in italy is widespread knowledge).

irrelevent to his criticisms on the whole, except that he was drawing distinctions between the stated politics of the Wombles and the apparently accepted behaviours of some of it's members.

He cannot be held responsible for the behaviour of his parents- the only people who can be held responsible for the Wombles' behaviour are the Wombles.

Quote:

As for your bullshit accusations towards a comrade of mine, well I remember before enrager was formed (maybe the basis before enrager was formed) were the AYN types (majority middle class skater punks, who for better or worst became "class struggle" and told the rest of the anarchist movement that they had it all wrong). these liitle rumours spread about peoples behaviour, and there were willing idiots who finally found a role for themselves in spreading them...now the new generation "saii" (thats what I've been told), "jack" (a friend of friend said) and "alan" (I agree with jack) are in the fold.

I really don't have the time to answer all your perceptions apart from the fact that at all those situations you were told of, you infact were not there. Therefore all your info is secondary information.

That section of your reply just avoids each and every point raised without denying anything or seeking to explain it. Are these accusations true? It is important to be honest with each other here, and simply counter-attacking with pretty crap aspersions ("on the whole middle-class skater punks") doesn't do this. Secondary information can be still be accurate, raw, as you well know.

I have been very fair throughout this little spat, and I have heard some of these accusations from several different sources over the last couple of years- is everyone lying in order to smear you?

Quote:

And you say we should be prepared to have the spot light on us? when has the spot light been turned fucking off! And we have every right to be angry, when the only british anarchist hunger striker only got 20 people out on a support demo...where were all the fucking class struggle anarchist showing their solidarity, ffs! And you wonder why we hate this petty bullshit.

Raw

More distractions, and as Saii pointed out, the last thing is palpably not true- even it was it has no bearing on the discussion.

Very poor response on the whole, raw.

certainly not up to your usual standard.

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 16 2005 10:54

Sorry forgot to reply to Alan there.

Quote:
People accuse me (and CAG) of creating and "us" and "them" deal within the so-called movement, yet I think the flipside to us (WOMBLES etc) are very much responsible for there being an "us" and "them" in general society between activists/revolutionaries/anti-capitalists and everyone else.

There is no point in internicine bitching about how much damage the WOMBLES do to our reputation because they aren't going to disappear, at least for the moment, and personally I don't think they do as much damage as you'd like to think, that divide will be there for as long as the media hold more sway over people's minds than we do.

I'll be honest, I'm very much in favour of having a diverse series of groups who can appeal to different sectors of society - there are people I would recommend to Class War, others I'd push towards SolFed and yes, some I'd tell to go join the WOMBLES (or at least not stop them from doing so). I've been talking about their limitations here, of which there are many, but I repeat, if they are going to be here and they are going to hold similar views to us on a range of subjects I'm not going to denounce them and refuse to co-operate with them, because I have no interest in making more enemies than I have to.

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Feb 16 2005 12:32

Ok apologies for that last post, I really think I have spent too much time on these bulletin boards already.

I have nothing against no one personally, really. It's all just a big distraction.

C ya!

Raw

gangster
Offline
Joined: 14-11-03
Feb 16 2005 12:39
revol68 wrote:

At least those people who are middle class and develop a good class analysis are aware of their relationship to other people struggling to negate capitalism, the wombles prefer to pretend it isn't important, and what really matters is some idealist conmmitment to a better world, free of hierarchy, yet youse offer no fucking strategy as to how to get there.

That's a laugh, you have repeatedly been asked for a real world and practical strategy and have not come up with anything concrete in a single particular struggle... Your (collective) behaviour on these boards is contradictory to the consciousness and attitude the working class movement needs if we are to progress our struggles against capitalism too.

CAg Angst Revol - I is sure there's a sentance that could be constructed with these words in...

gangster
Offline
Joined: 14-11-03
Feb 16 2005 13:25
revol68 wrote:
oh gangster get a life you sad middle aged man, one day your going to wake up and realise that all that kicking and the only thing that broke was your sanity.

as for strategy well i don't believe I can play arm chair general, but I do think we should have a strategy, in that we seek to intervene in struggles that can break out of the activist politico ghetto. I have also given examples of the kind of things we have done and can do, water tax resistance, anti fascism, organising in our workplaces, strike solidarity (always aware of the dangers of subsitutionism), environmental campaigns that have a basis in communities. Essentially the strategy is to look for what struggles that currently exist and build from there, not to contionously form more and more anarcho activist groups like toff busters or to engage in the stuntism of protesting the royal wedding.

And why won't raw answer my question?

I would really like to know cos im not comfortable thinking that i've been suckered in by a baseless lie, I thought it was common knowledge his da owned a wine import company. confused

You would know everything being a professional saddo... You are in the Labour party too, your list of 'involvement' is just soo reformist... there's no hope in your beliefs and attitudes that gets us anywhere, and that in youngster I find totally crap... When i was a yoof i can remember people who wanted to be respectable too, so that oldies would listen to them... It seems the discipline of neo-liberalism has infected people work discipline so very well, and its only us oldies who are against work. BTW given the amount of time you spend posting crap on here, it seems to me that you must be out of work... Is that true? And your questioning of Raw's class pedigree stinks of an inquisition too...

3rdseason
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Feb 16 2005 19:39

Im not even sure why it was a point of debate whether WOMBLEs like ket or not. Why would it matter if they choose to do that? As if that would make their activities less valid. By all means criticise their politics but bringing personal habits into it is a bit desperate.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Feb 17 2005 01:56
raw wrote:
Thanks for your wise words john, maybe I can stay at your villa in ancona and ponder my next political move .

Ha ha yes I can well understand how having 5 grand is well beyond the means of any decent proletarian, and is purely the domain of the big bourgeoisie! Why, there must be a veritable army of horny-handed toilers my parents have exploited grin

Quote:
(I'm sure you understand having a nice villa in italy is widespread knowledge)

Seeing as I've told people, yes I do understand. I also wear shoes and have good personal hygiene. Sorry if this doesn't make a proper anarchist sad

Quote:
As for your bullshit accusations towards a comrade of mine ... I really don't have the time to answer all your perceptions apart from the fact that at all those situations you were told of, you infact were not there. Therefore all your info is secondary information.

Riiiight, so it's all untrue you're saying? You've posted a bunch of information you only know 2nd or 3rd hand. Like pingtiao said it doesn't make it untrue. I was there when I was threatened - are you calling me a liar? And Jack when he was? Would you like me to quote your comrade verbatim - since I remember it very well?

And also that girl just started crying in the night for no reason?

Raw I don't know if you're deliberatly trying to cover it up or if you really don't know about this stuff. Her boyfriend at the time used to post here and was there at the time, d'you want him to tell you personally or something, if you only believe first hand info? I only spoke to her the next morning but she was pretty shaken up - and this is someone who has been a medic on american ARA actions.

Quote:
And you wonder why we hate this petty bullshit.

If you lot really hate it so much, how come over 50%* of one key womble's posts on urban75 are dedicated purely to slagging me off?

Seriously though I was thinking about what you said above about people mixing private and political life. Because you have had a go (on here) at people for having jobs, and not being able to attend Wombles events as a result. I think the biggest difference here is between those who see (anti-)politics as being a part of their life, which should relate to it as closely as possible and try to improve it, and those who see those politics as something they dedicate their whole lives to, which leads to the separation between "normal" person and "activist", with acrimony going both ways ("Get a job, hippy!" , "Why don't you *do* something you brainwashed consumer drone?" etc.). I think this is also why you take things waaaay too seriously.

* When I did a quick "find all posts" a couple of months ago, 13 out of 25 of montevideo's posts were eek

cantdocartwheels's picture
cantdocartwheels
Offline
Joined: 15-03-04
Feb 17 2005 02:53
3rdseason wrote:
Im not even sure why it was a point of debate whether WOMBLEs like ket or not. Why would it matter if they choose to do that? As if that would make their activities less valid. By all means criticise their politics but bringing personal habits into it is a bit desperate.

So basically you're going to live in hippy fantasy land and ignore decades of experience while pretending that hard drug habits can't have a negative effect on a political movement.

Topic locked