Internet harrasment
Aug 1 2007
I hope this is the right forum to put this in.
The poster MJ has been carrying out a campaign (for lack of a better word) against me, digging up everything I've ever written anywhere to discredit me. I believe this stems from MJ's desire to get his own back against me for criticizing NEFAC/Wayne Price vis a vis national liberation. I'm sure nobody has forgotten that thread. Reading it over, you will find I was very polite to the members of NEFAC, altho I insulted "Smash Rich Bastards," something I regret.
When I commented on a thread about feminists knifing a man who made a cat-call or something, in a slighty exaggerated way, MJ launched an "ad homin" attack on me by obsessively going thru everything I'd ever written on libcom to discredit me (in fact, he seems somewhat "obessive-compulsive"!). He even slandered me by accusing me of saying Black welfare mothers were "pretending to be victims" when I obviously was not, merely commenting upon the image of the world conveyed by the media and feminist-liberal establishment. Oky, annoying and weird (who goes thru everything somebody has ever said?), but alright.
then MJ starts a thread about some off the cuff remark I made about "Banking families". I defend my ideas (successfully in my opinion). But now on every other thread I post on, MJ will launch an ad homin attack on me to discredit anything I have to say. That's harassment.
do the admins find this kind of behaviour acceptable? we're not talking about intelectual disagreement here. I'm fine with that. The poster Joseph K showed himself to be an honest poster on the "banking families" thread. MJ however is totally intelectually dishonest. No where has he engaged with the ideas I have put forward, merely slandering and trying to discredit me.
Sorry this is so long, I just value libcom and wouldn't like to be driven off because every time I wrote anything I'd be attacked in this intelectually dishonest way.
Yours respectfully
Aug 1 2007
#1
Aug 1 2007
#2
guydebordisdead wrote:
I didn't know western europes premier platformist group had their own hats now.
Aug 2 2007
#3
Oh come on, you can do better than that.
Aug 2 2007
#4
GDID beat me to it, but what the hell...
Aug 2 2007
#5
I'd say anarchists calling for nationalisation is pretty mickey mouse.
Aug 2 2007
#6
revol68 wrote:
I'd say anarchists calling for nationalisation is pretty mickey mouse.
Then don't join the WSM. Don't row across threads.
Aug 2 2007
#7
guydebordisdead wrote:
revol68 wrote:
I'd say anarchists calling for nationalisation is pretty mickey mouse.Then don't join the WSM. Don't row across threads.
yeah and you can tell your leadership in exile to stop trying to get organise! to join, deal?
Aug 2 2007
#8
revol68 wrote:
yeah and you can tell your leadership in exile to stop trying to get organise! to join, deal?
Are you speaking on behalf of Organise! again?
Aug 2 2007
#9
guydebordisdead wrote:
revol68 wrote:
yeah and you can tell your leadership in exile to stop trying to get organise! to join, deal?Are you speaking on behalf of Organise! again?
Eh no i'm speaking as a member of Organise!, y'know the organisation Joe seems to think should be in the WSM, and beleive me there is more chance of Patrick pearse rising from the grave and bumming kids as there is of Organise! joining the WSM. I might have little time for the 'platformist tradition' but i atleast have nough respect to recognise youse exist and have differences with us, rather than patronisingly telling youse that youse are being silly and really youse should be in Organise!, i'd appreciate it if certain members of your organisation could do the same, it would certainly make it easier to actually work together on certain issues.
Aug 2 2007
#10
No idea why you're telling me this revol, it's Joe you have the problem with. I thought it was condescending and paternal but at the end of the day he wasn't asking in any official capacity or assuming to speaking on behalf of the wsm, he is not even an active member of the wsm. In terms of making things easier for us to work together I find that you are the main barrier to that.
Aug 2 2007
#11
Wow!
I might have been 'condescending and paternal' but actually I was invited to be. Boul was obviously disappointed that the new Organise! A+Ps had attracted no comment so in reponse I made what I thought was the most obvious comment about them. Obviously people would have been happier if I picked some minor detail and went on about that for every slightly relevent thread for the next year? Nigel Irritable obviously didn't find my statement of the obvious that odd.
Anyway I'm lookling forward to become the WSM version of John Throne in the years ahead.
Aug 2 2007
#12
This is fucking ridiculous, my concern is with your shit politics. I can pinpoint the moment I became concerned and decided to look through your posting history to try to figure out wtf you were on about:
MJ wrote:
daniel wrote:
It seems like quite an important trend in modern day America, certainly more important than the anarchist so-called movement as it now stands (slumps).The "militia movement" peaked in the 90s, as did anarchist interest in it (of good and bad sorts).
daniel wrote:
I believe not. Apparently its been picking up in recent years ever since the PATRIOT Act.
No, it hasn't. I don't think it would be that good or bad particularly if it were true but... it's not.
That was June 12. Then I realized you were the jackass who made [this thread and my interest was piqued. Shining a little light on you takes very little effort -- the site is structured to make it easy to find a given user's posts, and I really didn't have to dig deep to find a whooooole lot of BS. And all I really had to do was cut and paste.
And no, this has nothing to do with the Wayne Price thread. I disagree with the way Wayne describes national liberation in general and I disagree with his assessment of Hezbollah in particular, and I think it's perfectly reasonable for people to ask if he speaks for NEFAC on those things. If you reread that thread, I actually suggest that a concerned organization write a formal letter to NEFAC asking about those issues. I don't think the climate and structure of a public internet forum encourages productive and reflective debate about that, given that jackals with chips on their shoulder are allowed to say anything they want here. So it doesn't make any sense that I would be seeking some kind of revenge for your starting that thread! 
I'm sure your politics on one level are decent enough, or were, but I think you're experimenting with right-opportunism stylistically, and nobody seems to be calling you out for talking out of your ass so much and trying to gain attention with provocative statements. It's really funny that given this behavior, and given the fact that you want to be "the first anarcho radio shock jock," when someone actually pays attention and calls you out on your shit you go crying to the admins about "harassment"! 
If you want me to stop paying attention to you, because I'm hurting your feelings, just ask me to. I'll give you some space to work these things out yourself. Here's some hints that might head you in the right direction. If you don't want us to read your blog and notice your links to "9/11 Truth" sites, don't link to it in your profile. If you don't want people to notice your shit politics maybe you should rethink making "slighty exaggerated" statements like that feminists are the "real enemy" and that "banking families" run the world.
So here's an offer. I will refrain from commenting on or to you for the month of August if you ask me to. I'll be happy to check back in with you on the first of September to see if you want to extend it another month. Does that sound good to you?
Aug 2 2007
#13
MJ wrote:
So here's an offer. I will refrain from commenting on or to you for the month of August if you ask me to. I'll be happy to check back in with you on the first of September to see if you want to extend it another month. Does that sound good to you?
Might I suggest you extend that till September 11th.
Aug 2 2007
#14
Quote:
Might I suggest you extend that till September 11th.
lol
Aug 2 2007
#15
MJ is consistant with his pwnage.
Aug 2 2007
#16
daniel,
Going through posters comments and quoting them isn't harrassment, it's pretty standard practice on here. When it's taken from different web forums or websites (excluding articles obviously) then we'd be concerned if it could lead to people being identified, but otherwise no argument, sorry. If there's particular posts you're concerned about, then if you link directly to them we'll try to check them out. Hopefully the one-month hiatus will fix this though.
Aug 2 2007
#17
For the record, I made references to things he wrote on his blog, which he linked to in his profile, and which when I told him I was reading it he told me to enjoy reading. I didn't leave any comments on it.
catch wrote:
Hopefully the one-month hiatus will fix this though.
Daniel, just let me know if you want to accept this offer.
Aug 3 2007
#18
Forget it. I don't think I've anything else to contribute so adios and thanks for the sensible reply "catch."
Aug 3 2007
#19
Aug 3 2007
#20
MJ wrote:
I'd like to point out that MJ wrote this and thus clearly has shit politics.
Aug 3 2007
#21
JoeBlack2 wrote:
Nigel Irritable obviously didn't find my statement of the obvious that odd.
It was, in my view, something of a statement of the obvious. If there was another group in Ireland with politics as close to those of the Socialist Party as the politics of Organise! are to those of the WSM, I'd certainly advocate a merger.
I'm not a fan of the kind of half-witted unity mongering which the left is full of. You unite with people you can work with towards set goals. I see no evidence that either group is impossible to work with (at least both have worked reasonably productively with us at some point). You both share a goal, in the creation of a national anarchist organisation. The question is if your politics are compatible. And given that you don't seem to greatly differ in either your class struggle anarchism or your approach to individual issues, I really don't see the problems. I mean what are the big issues separating the two groups precisely:
1) The WSM advocated a vote for a candidate in a union officer election. Some years ago. Once. And it specifically isn't something they advocate as part of their union strategy.
2) The WSM used to have a republican tinged position on the North. But they don't anymore. Is this even an area of disagreement anymore?
3) The WSM are platformists. Organise! on the other hand believe in a politically coherent and disciplined organisation with... oh, wait.
The above all seem like minor issues really and nothing which couldn't coexist in one organisation. The one area where they might actually be a significant disagreement is over the role of a revolutionary organisation. The WSM, to its credit, has spelled out in some detail its views on the question. I get the impression that Organise! may disagree with this in part, but I'm not clear on the detail. If you have significantly different conceptions of the basic role of an organisation that could be a real problem.
JoeBlack2 wrote:
Anyway I'm lookling forward to become the WSM version of John Throne in the years ahead.
You are going to bore them to death?
Aug 3 2007
#22
IrrationallyAngry wrote:
[JoeBlack2 wrote:
Anyway I'm lookling forward to become the WSM version of John Throne in the years ahead.You are going to bore them to death?
Possibly but I think hes also a useful example of how time and distance means your ability to understand events fades. It was really a warning to myself.
BTW the conversation on unity has jumped to the Organise positions thread - I'm going to take the liberty of reposting your comments there.
Aug 3 2007
#23
JoeBlack2 wrote:
Possibly but I think hes also a useful example of how time and distance means your ability to understand events fades. It was really a warning to myself.
I know what you mean. I used to read his endless stuff on Indymedia and the twenty page long leaflets he would hand out on the odd occasion when he showed up at an SP event. I do so less often now, not just because of the longwindedness and the repetition but more because it just seems so utterly disconnected from the way in which Irish society actually works at the moment. Yet if you ask any older SP member about him, who knew him twenty or thirty years ago they'll tell you he was a ruthlessly realistic organiser. It's very hard to reconcile the two and yes, I'd say much of it is down to time and distance. It must be hard for someone who was active in the Labour movement in 1982 to get to grips with just how different the country is a quarter of a century later.
Still, I'll look forward to your long essays on Indymedia instructing the WSM to set up local "fight to win" united front committees with most militant layers of the working class in each Dublin suburb. I see you have already started the lectures on "left sectarianism".
JoeBlack2 wrote:
BTW the conversation on unity has jumped to the Organise positions thread - I'm going to take the liberty of reposting your comments there.
No problem. I don't know why you'd think that reposting a Trotskyist agreeing with you is going to do you any favours though!