Anarcho-leftism & the politics of libcom

178 posts / 0 new
Last post
GerryK's picture
GerryK
Offline
Joined: 14-04-10
Jan 24 2013 13:56

There was no hint of sarcasm in RRs post that I quoted (not at all randomly).

Quote:
North London SF said it wasn't going to judge people who looted but was against people who burned down workers' houses

Firstly it is evasive to not support looting. It is a critique in acts of the commodity economy. Merely "not judging" is typical liberalism. The real Clifford Stott in Mad Mobs and Englishmen took exactly the same neutral stance. It is neutral in a situation which demands one takes sides. Even if this taking sides means being a bit more nuanced than merely "upping" or "downing" something like in the absurd tick boxes libcom provides.
As for burning workers houses; as far as I know nobody burned workers houses because they were workers houses. Certainly shops were burned and as a consequence people living above them got burned out. This is without a doubt terrible. But it requires something more nuanced than simplistically being "against people who burned down workers houses". The paradox is that the article published in Aufheben itself ( though apparently not by anybody in Aufheben) was more nuanced about such things than the populist Solfed.

RR: my apologies for the lateness of this sandwich. You cant get the staff nowadays...But here it is; and one suitable for your refined taste:

Arbeiten's picture
Arbeiten
Offline
Joined: 28-01-11
Jan 24 2013 14:37
GerryK wrote:
The real Clifford Stott in Mad Mobs and Englishmen took exactly the same neutral stance. It is neutral in a situation which demands one takes sides.

Hey, look mama, when I throw shit against a wall sometimes I can discern vague pictures!

There has been some pathetic posturing on this thread and it all feels a bit like a load of bitter old blokes getting their two cents/boot in. Particularly on this England riot issue. Absolutely unrelated, but hell, lets do it a year and a half down the line anyway (fwiw I think the line on burning down homes could have been left out, especially in hindsight [something the Aufheben article had on it's side] ).

Let's be clear about this, the whole of the british libertarian and anarchist 'movement' were fucking shit during the riots. I don't remember any GerryK's manning the barricades. In fact, what I remember quite distinctly was something akin to what is happening here. People posting about it on social media i,e. engaging in spectacle (whether writing 'radical communiques' or thorough denunciations).

Keep those axes grinding comrades!

no1
Offline
Joined: 3-12-07
Jan 24 2013 14:56
GerryK wrote:
Firstly it is evasive to not support looting. It is a critique in acts of the commodity economy. Merely "not judging" is typical liberalism. The real Clifford Stott in Mad Mobs and Englishmen took exactly the same neutral stance. It is neutral in a situation which demands one takes sides. Even if this taking sides means being a bit more nuanced than merely "upping" or "downing" something like in the absurd tick boxes libcom provides.

Too right!

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Jan 24 2013 16:03
Quote:
hell, lets do it a year and a half down the line anyway

Nah sod that, if GerryK wants he can just read the original thread.

http://libcom.org/forums/general/anarchists-respond-london-riots-solfed-...

Tim Finnegan's picture
Tim Finnegan
Offline
Joined: 16-05-12
Jan 24 2013 16:57
GerryK wrote:
Greek friends have assured me that in Greece such a scab as JD would not only never be allowed at an anarchist bookfair but would also have problems remaining in the country assuming he wanted to walk again. I have heard that this would also be the case in other countries.

Well they sound like twats, don't they?

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Jan 24 2013 20:33
GerryK wrote:
There was no hint of sarcasm in RRs post

Really?

Quote:
a giant conspiracy to ruin the anarkies11!1

Are you suggesting there actually is a giant conspiracy to ruin the anarkies?

Or--wait for it--was RR paraphrasing your argument in a facetious and exagerated way as to illustrate the absurdity of your claim? In other words, sarcasm.

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Jan 24 2013 20:34

Also, this shit should have been moved to libcommunity ages ago. Flaming is the appropriate response to such batshit crazy claims.

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Jan 24 2013 20:38
GerryK wrote:
the populist Solfed.

roll eyes roll eyes roll eyes

Quote:
RR: my apologies for the lateness of this sandwich. You cant get the staff nowadays...But here it is; and one suitable for your refined taste:

As, such wit.

Oscar Wilde's got nothing on you. GerryK, Shakespeare for the naughtie's generation.

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Jan 24 2013 21:38
Quote:
Are you suggesting there actually is a giant conspiracy to ruin the anarkies?

Well there had better be, otherwise the half-dozen or so people who appear to be dedicating their lives to making sure we know they're on to us (!!11!) rather than y'know, actually putting their money where their mouth is by trying to build a new movement where they live are gonna have wasted an awful lot of time...

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Jan 25 2013 08:07

Libcommunity! Score!

Clifford Stott
Offline
Joined: 19-01-13
Jan 25 2013 11:28
GerryK wrote:
The real Clifford Stott in Mad Mobs and Englishmen took exactly the same neutral stance.

O RLY?

Mad mobs and Englishmen extract wrote:
In sum, Tottenham demonstrated all the features of a classic anti-police riot. It was rooted in longstanding grievances and the failure of peaceful protest. It arose out of an incident that exemplified police illegitimacy and that empowered people to respond. Its patterns and forms expressed a selective antagonism towards the police and authority. Its passion reflected not only outrage but also the exultation of those who could finally assert their power over those who normally held power over them.

This may not have been a political event in the conventional sense of using power to secure specific gains. But it was profoundly political in the sense of arising out of and seeking to overturn everyday power relations in society.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/nov/18/mad-mobs-englishmen-2011-r...

I am not a communist, this is true. But neither am I neutral between oppressed and oppressor.

Steve Reicher & I wrote:
In the words of Martin Luther King, riots are the voice of the powerless.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/19/riots-psychology-cro...

Entdinglichung's picture
Entdinglichung
Offline
Joined: 2-07-08
Jan 25 2013 13:20

deleted

Entdinglichung's picture
Entdinglichung
Offline
Joined: 2-07-08
Jan 25 2013 13:20
Tim Finnegan wrote:
Can someone explain to me what all the Paul Mason references are about? (I mean, I didn't even know being "pro-Paul Mason" was a thing, but apparently...)

Anti-Masonic Party

BorisJobson
Offline
Joined: 6-02-13
Feb 6 2013 06:48

Somewhere in this long-winded text "Anarcho-leftism & the politics of libcom" the author says that SolFed is hypocritical or some such moralistic phrase. Why did it say this? Because it had pictures of burning cars on a poster celebrating those horrible riots of May 1968 in Paris at the anarchist bookfair when it had condemned the August rioters for doing the same thing. I have to concur. It is hypocritical. But not in the sense of the author of this pointless article. SolFed, if it seriously wants to negotiate for improved conditions, must clearly also condemn the destruction of cars whenever it has taken place. Just because it happened a long time ago and in another country known for being full of Latin hotheads does not mean it was not utterly appalling.

There is a rumour going round that it was Rob Ray who sent the press statement from SolFed during the August riots that condemned the rioters for burning cars. The reason for condemning them for this was, amongst other things, it stopped workers going to work. I want to commend Rob Ray (if indeed it was him) for this excellent criticism. He must be congratulated. Us rulers do the same when workers go on strike and stop other workers working. This applies particularly to transport workers. "The right to work" should be enshrined in law, and put up over the gates to workplaces, perhaps next to a catchy slogan like "Work Makes You Free".

Boris Jobson

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 6 2013 09:14
Quote:
a catchy slogan like "Work Makes You Free".

Ah, again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Lumpen's picture
Lumpen
Offline
Joined: 11-02-08
Feb 8 2013 14:12

Who are the real Nazis, eh? The Nazis? Or are the real Nazis not the Nazis but those opposing them with Nazi-like arguments just like Nazis would?

Makes you think.

Curious Wednesday
Offline
Joined: 11-01-12
Feb 9 2013 09:42

I do not know if Lumpen (above) intended to be ironic or self-contradictory but clearly his own comparison of Boris Jobsons post with "Nazi-like arguments" could itself be applicable to Godwins law. I think this resort to Godwins law every time somebody makes a a comparison with some aspect of Nazi policy should itself be applicable to a new law I just made up - which goes like this:
"As an online discussion in which Nazis are referred to grows longer , the probability of a comparison involving Godwins Law approaches".

It seems strangely self-contradictory to me that Libcom people who seem to like Dauve - one of the worst theoreticians when it comes to making simplistic equivalents of modern capitalism with the Nazis - often resort to my law when convenient. But then thats poolitics for you! The fact that Godwin is a libertarian anti-communist doesnt seem to alter this compulsion to constantly refer to him. Godwin is an American attorney and has served as a contributing editor of Reason magazine since 1994, a magazine that believes in "free minds and free markets". Dauve was right to the extent that free markets massacre about as many (perhaps more) people through economic force as the Nazis did through gas and bombs and bullets etc. He was wrong to the extent of implying that all forms of capitaism are equivalent. The Nazis were undoubtedly sadistic and not entirely "rational" in market terms. But the market massacres coldly and abstractly and destroys even more than the Nazis did with an insane irrational ideology (ie not entirely commodity-related rationality) . But is Godwins right-wing libertarianism seriously any better - or simply different?

The resort to Godwins law made by Chilli Sauce functioned as a way of allowing Rob Ray to avoid what Boris Jobson was (in satirical form ) attacking him for: complaining about how workers could not get to work as a result of the riots (if indeeed it was Rob Ray who sent off this press statement). This is the function of the resort to Godwins law - to distract from the essential.

Tarwater's picture
Tarwater
Offline
Joined: 29-12-08
Feb 9 2013 20:54

Boris' post was far from essential. Why not spend your time developing worthwhile arguments instead of this drek? I think it's beneath you.

Arbeiten's picture
Arbeiten
Offline
Joined: 28-01-11
Feb 9 2013 22:53

a left communist critique of Godwin's Law.... eek

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 9 2013 23:12
Quote:
It seems strangely self-contradictory to me that Libcom people who seem to like Dauve - one of the worst theoreticians when it comes to making simplistic equivalents of modern capitalism with the Nazis - often resort to my law when convenient.

"libcom people"

Juan Conatz's picture
Juan Conatz
Offline
Joined: 29-04-08
Feb 11 2013 01:27

Did I miss anything?

Lumpen's picture
Lumpen
Offline
Joined: 11-02-08
Feb 11 2013 07:53

The only law I recognise is THE OUTLAW.

Entdinglichung's picture
Entdinglichung
Offline
Joined: 2-07-08
Feb 11 2013 11:24
Lumpen wrote:
The only law I recognise is THE OUTLAW.

Quote:
Kill the king, when love is the law

(Sisters of Mercy: This Corrosion)

Entdinglichung's picture
Entdinglichung
Offline
Joined: 2-07-08
Feb 11 2013 11:30
Juan Conatz wrote:
Did I miss anything?

don't think so, ... if you aren't into trolling and weird banter

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 12 2013 08:51

If libcom ever brings back taglines...

Quote:
This is the function of the resort to Godwins law - to distract from the essential.

(Which I think they should, btw.)

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 13 2013 10:27
Quote:
Because it had pictures of burning cars on a poster celebrating those horrible riots of May 1968 in Paris at the anarchist bookfair when it had condemned the August rioters for doing the same thing.

Care to point that bit out in the article Boris? Oh... doesn't seem to be there... well never mind eh, I'm sure the rest of your "rumour mill" will continue to be invaluable in its ability to uncover things I'm either completely open about (eg. being co-author of the a linked piece) or are completely off the wall (the "posher than Eton" thing on indymedia was particularly amusing - also you realise your key researcher Samtonaf comes from a well-off background right?).

Seriously I'd love to see some of that stuff, it sounds like a really tiny 9/11 conspiracy club and an insurrectionist stepped into the machine from The Fly.

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Feb 14 2013 10:31

Best thread ever.

You might find this inspirational:

(http://youtu.be/_c6HsiixFS8)

You will also find this useful:

(http://youtu.be/OkxjnnBL7V8)

happychaos

Topic locked