Disturbing comments on Facebook

88 posts / 0 new
Last post
Panait's picture
Panait
Offline
Joined: 20-01-12
Jan 20 2012 09:30

Please, don't inflame the discussion here with irrelevant topics about what should we understand through the term "movement". I also make apeal to your decency and common sense, when you ask for a more concrete proof. The fact that I was having acces to IASR email (see my previous comment # 60) is a proof that I was a member of this group and I can confirm that AS Info Romania statement reflects the reality.

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Jan 20 2012 12:07

Panait are you ASIR or do you know them?

Panait's picture
Panait
Offline
Joined: 20-01-12
Jan 20 2012 12:30

I don't know them all. I collaborate with ASIR occasionally very well but I can't say I am from their close group.

Harrison
Offline
Joined: 16-11-10
Jan 20 2012 12:30
Panait wrote:
This is going too far!
I am an ex member of IASR. I quit this group for the reasons that are reported by AS Info Romania in comment # 29.

In order to be credible I would like to ask comrade Harrison (his comment # 7) to confirm if the person who replied him at his first email at iasr@riseup.net is signing with a name that start with the letter 'M'. Well, that person is me.

I would like to say very clear that:
1. IASR members don't see in those comments posted on facebook any problem;
2.IASR is lying the larger community;
3. IASR does not represent the movement in Romania. There are other groups that are more active, more dedicated and clear on their libertarian path and also more numerous than IASR is;
4. IASR members not only that are lying and accept sexist views but they also have no honor when they published the name of a comrade;
4. Regarding 1, 2 and 4 it is clear for me that IASR can not be a tool for emancipation and the remaining members are irresponsible.

Hi Panait, it was indeed signed by someone whose name started with the letter M, but i'm afraid i can't take that as proof that you are that person.

Sorry! I just don't want to take sides on something happening in a far away country where I have no way of verifying who is telling the truth or not...

Since with all these claims and counter claims it is now impossible to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth, the most important thing to me now is that all Romanian comrades denounce those comments, and that those who don't are removed from any anarchist group they may be in.

Panait's picture
Panait
Offline
Joined: 20-01-12
Jan 20 2012 12:46

I understand your position.
I can reveal also the content of that email. It was a short reply, approximately like this:

Dear (Name),

I am also shock and sad about this comments.
I will inform you about what have been done about.

Sign

(I remember that I used this formulation "about what have been done about" and also that I used the appellative "Dear" followed by a name).

Harrison
Offline
Joined: 16-11-10
Jan 20 2012 15:03

yeah, that is roughly what what was emailed to me

volkmarW's picture
volkmarW
Offline
Joined: 6-07-11
Jan 20 2012 15:09

I can't stand idle anymore, i am a member of IASR and I'm sick of these insults. We did our job, good or bad we did, unlike others that don't because they are afraid it will cause a rift. If the admins want, they can check the IP adresses of these two individuals and see for themselves who is who.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jan 20 2012 15:31

Just a word to IASR. This is something I mentioned on before and on other occasions. If there is an official email or FB or anything from your organization, please be careful how it is used and that each person using it has authorization to do so and that the membership knows what is being written.

From what it written, it looks as if somebody here wrote to the IASR email and Panait, who now says s/he is not in the organization somehow answered that mail. Why are you replying to email sent to iasr if you are not in that organization?

Well, I will take all said into account.

About the topic of the movement, which is called irrelevant here, it was introduced by Panait who is claiming that ASIR does not represent "the" movement and making other claims about the "libertiarian movement". Since it was brought up, it is also fair to ask about it since I have been trying to follow things in that country for many years and know many activists and some other groups. I am wondering which groups the author of that comments consider to be "clear". Just one comment from me is that I don't consider those that are taking grants from liberals or focused on single issues and lifestyle issues to be very clear nor necessarily social. That maybe needs to be on another thread but if somebody started with such claims in order to denounce another group, I guess it is fair to ask what s/he considers to be positive.

Little Prince's picture
Little Prince
Offline
Joined: 24-08-11
Jan 20 2012 16:04

@ akai: "From what it written, it looks as if somebody here wrote to the IASR email and Panait, who now says s/he is not in the organization somehow answered that mail. Why are you replying to email sent to iasr if you are not in that organization?"
Maybe it will help to read comment 29 - it seems there is an answer. And again - I have more patience for IASR, ASIR or comrades who leave the IASR for some reasons - then for people, who bring more problems to such kind of very bad conflicts - by "spying" and looking from outside.
And a note to IASR - guys, it's much more better to be honest, doing your job - good, or bad. If you are honest, you can have a position, which is bad - but it will be much easier to handle such problems.

volkmarW's picture
volkmarW
Offline
Joined: 6-07-11
Jan 20 2012 17:17

What individuals think is not the businesses of IASR, we collectively did our job because this incident involved official channels, we already had a position. On the other hand, what individuals think its their own position, not necessarily mine or other people's. As for the accusations, of course they are untrue, and the holes in the statements are huge. Its clear in the statements, they want IASR to cease its existence. And my personal guess, taking in consideration the history this guy has with other organizations and especially the IWA, is because we intended to join. Nobody goes to such lengths without some profound previous dislike of us, and this was the perfect occasion.

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
Jan 20 2012 17:24
volkmarW wrote:
What individuals think is not the businesses of IASR, we collectively did our job because this incident involved official channels, we already had a position. On the other hand, what individuals think its their own position, not necessarily mine or other people's. As for the accusations, of course they are untrue, and the holes in the statements are huge. Its clear in the statements, they want IASR to cease its existence. And my personal guess, taking in consideration the history this guy has with other organizations and especially the IWA, is because we intended to join. Nobody goes to such lengths without some profound previous dislike of us, and this was the perfect occasion.

so your saying you might think rape is an legitimate anti fascist activity? that you don't care if your members promote rape as an anti fascist activity?

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jan 20 2012 19:23

I thought that the statement of the group was meant to indicate that the group as a whole condemns these statements.

I think right now they should clarify this since the use of the word necessarily indicates something else. My guess would be that this use of that word and the difference it makes may not be clear, since it is a subtlety of English, so let us spell it out.

If somebody writes, ¨what individuals think its their own position, not necessarily mine or other people's´´, instead of ¨this was an individual´s position, not mine or other people´s¨, there is a difference. The first option implies that you might agree or that each member has the right to agree actually with that individual. The second means that you do not agree.

I hope that explanation was clear.

If indeed you mean the first, that would mean that the group as a whole does not really completely distance itself from the statement, but just is basically saying that it was an individual opinion... and maybe some people in your organization are for, maybe against.

Please clarify which one it is because the way it was formulated does leave doubt.

Well, again maybe this is off-topic, but this is not an isolated incident since some comrades pointed out that they have heard similar types of remarks here in Poland. And always there are discussions with antifascists about what fascists ¨deserve¨ or not. Like this year some people who went on the nationalist march in Warsaw were brutalized by police and some people really thought that was fine that police abuse their powers like that since in general both police and fascists are our enemies. The liberals actually thanked the police for their actions and interventions, which included brutal beatings of people who were detained or standing calmly. So I really think this is the context in which the whole thing came up and this needs to be thoroughly discussed in Romania and surely elsewhere. The antifascist subculture also breeds a certain macho sensibility and an analysis of how it manifests itself in different situations in needed.

IASR's picture
IASR
Offline
Joined: 11-01-12
Jan 20 2012 19:40

Individuals are responsible for their own acts. If they condone it, they should deal with the fallout. I don't have time nor patience to deal with other peoples craziness, if it doesn't involve IASR why should i care about it. Even so, if IASR becomes like a political party regulating my life, i myself will leave.

And as i already stated, the intent of the word was already explained, more than that becomes nitpicking and interpretation, which can be done infinitely, in the worst case becoming some sort of trolling.

And akai is quite right regarding the scene here in Eastern Europe, people here are brutal on both sides. While on western boards its considered a scandal, in the eastern climate its considered a dumb statement or even a sycophantic joke. Dealing with totalitarianism in the past and even present, made many people here as brutal as the fascists themselves.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Jan 21 2012 09:03

IASR, really, this is what i understand:

an organization makes a statement = all the individuals (or majority in the decision making process, depends on your methods) says a position which is agreed collectively.

the statement says that in the organization MAY be individuals who agree with raping fascists = the individual members of the organization during the process of making the statement indeed agree to say that some of them MAY agree with the raping.

and then you say, you don't care what your individual have in their heads.

sorry, but i am lost here - you collectively agreed that IASR is against raping, but somehow you at the same time agreed that th people who come to this conclusion MAY agree individually with raping? I somehow lose connection between the individual and the organization and it feels like there is some artificial connection between the two subjects, not a "real" one.

i just try to imagine what would your position mean in my organization and really cannot understand it. the point of political party may be valid, as IASR mentions, but this is something pretty crucial to leave it just with the argument of "party-line politics".

I wish I could write it more clearly if English was my native language, but I hope if this is not clear it will be discussed better in the process of discussion here.

Panait's picture
Panait
Offline
Joined: 20-01-12
Jan 21 2012 09:53
akai wrote:
From what it written, it looks as if somebody here wrote to the IASR email and Panait, who now says s/he is not in the organization somehow answered that mail. Why are you replying to email sent to iasr if you are not in that organization?

@akai
At that moment I was a member. After leaving IASR I had no longer access to the email.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jan 21 2012 13:09

Well, I have to agree with Revol and MT here that things are looking more unclear. Please understand that I mentioned a cultural context only to explain that this is a common problem, not as some excuse. What IASR user says (and I say "IASR user", not "IASR" since I assume this is a personal statement or explanation) about the climate and how this is often perceived in many parts of Eastern Europe, is simply a fact.

I think MT is right about this and I think that you are digging yourself into a little hole (and the organization, since you are using the organization name as your user name). The question of individual vs. collective responsibility is valid but in this situation, it does involve IASR since it was done using an IASR account. Therefore, people would expect that the organization at a whole clarify if it is reflective of their position.

I originally thought that this was handled OK, with an apology going out on behalf of the organization. However, some of the subsequent things have raised other questions and I don't think it is nitpicking - really I think they just raise other issues.

Back at the top of this thread, I explained my concern about people registering on forums such as this with their organization names. I honestly think that you should discuss and review this issue in IASR since what you are saying and what you are doing seem to present a contradiction. If you say that people are responsible for their own words, then it should be clearer in all public communication which words are personal ones, that an individual is responsible for and which ones reflect an opinion which was consulted and agreed in your organization.

Inside our organization, there are certainly differences of opinion on different subjects and individual members are free to argue their positions... to a certain point. For example, if we are against capitalism and somebody from our organization was arguing for it, it would be that this person is not in accord with some basic principles. The amount of ideas and principles one could have is endless, so ultimately, we find ourselves even publically debating each other. It would be quite another thing if a member of our group was publically spouting things that the majority of us would condemn. At this point we would have to clarify that it is not our position, knowing that the public words of our members do reflect on the group. And although there may be some discussion of where the limits are in terms of group invigilation, I think that it would be common in many organizations that people would not want to have somebody whose views were so problematic. Of course in our experience, we do realize that people can say really stupid things, without thinking things through, including things they don't really mean, but I would like to think that in such cases, the situation is addressed and this would include a discussion of the individual responsibility towards the group when making statements using their accounts or the possible impact on the group as a whole.

Please think about it.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Jan 21 2012 13:34

another issue:

Quote:
And akai is quite right regarding the scene here in Eastern Europe, people here are brutal on both sides. While on western boards its considered a scandal, in the eastern climate its considered a dumb statement or even a sycophantic joke. Dealing with totalitarianism in the past and even present, made many people here as brutal as the fascists themselves.

I very well know this fact and it is widespread. BUT it should be fought against. From your comment it is not clear if you consider it OK or not, so I somehow don't know what exactly you mean by the comment and why you open this issue at all. I can imagine people who would indicate that "oh, those pussy western feminists, they know shit about our situation and how bad fascists are over here and how we need them to pay for their sick ideology, like the good old partisans made fascist women pay". my very first post in this topic indeed operates with this logic. and i am afraid you operate with it as well, although your personal or AISR's position is totally unclear on this issue and, again, I really don't know what is the reason that motivated you to come up with the paragraph in this discussion. it is your reaction to akai, but her post is pretty clearly saying she opposes such behavior/attitudes.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jan 21 2012 14:19

Sorry, I brought up this problem in the discussion so I do not think that their comment is unrelated. I agree though that the reaction / comment was not clear.

I wonder if what is missing here is sort of a clearer treatment of the issue of such remarks and of collective responses to individual behaviour and attitudes.

The reason I say that is because I personally lived through a couple of international scandals where the lack of any clear collective response became a major issue. Completely different expectations about how to deal with things. In two cases, the situation was that groups in Eastern Europe (Russia and Poland) did not feel any necessity to do so and groups from abroad were outraged by this. In one case I was told that it was "crazy" to expect people to discuss it like in therapy, but that people should just give the person a good reprimand (or beat him up) privately.
So it was quite a long discussion with those who thought that way of dealing things was the "normal" way. Especially when faced with the sad reality that in this case, the person involved probably would have understood that his behaviour was not acceptable to his peers a lot more easily if he had been brutally yelled at by them.

I was sort of in a go-between situation, explaining it and found also there were rather deep cultural tendencies and common practices that did not make this all obvious to those groups. This gets more complicated in situations which are deemed to be "private" and in many places in E. Europe there are historic taboos against encroaching in what is considered to be the "private" area. In one case this literally led to years of discussion. That is how not obvious this issue was for people. In one situation, it sort of got understood rather quickly but in the other, it NEVER was acknowledged as inappropriate. Not surprisingly, this became a repeated problem and my conclusion is that the people involved are just defensive assholes and allow individuals too much in terms of making decisions.

Sorry for the tangent. In the situation with the FB comments, I think that it is very clear that this cannot be considered in any way to be a private or individual matter, but it looks like some here are not thoroughly convinced or haven't thought it through too much.

Maybe in the situation where there are a lot of questions on the internet, those people do not have a chance to collectively reflect as they should. Or maybe they don't want to give it much thought. I certainly hope that isn't the case. Personally I think that the fact that they tried to respond, albeit it not necessarily in the clearest way, is a sign that they considered this problem seriously, if perhaps not too deeply from different aspects. When I compare this to the situation of the Bulgarians who never said anything, even when one of their members was threatening our comrades here on the internet, I at least see some effort here. But I hope that they will see the point about why people are still asking questions and understand why subsequent statements of the IASR user raised more doubts.

AS Info Romania's picture
AS Info Romania
Offline
Joined: 12-01-12
Jan 23 2012 20:00

In the follow-up of our warning posted on Libcom against the group with the name IASR, we realised that Akai received with gratitude a name denunciation made by IASR against one of our collaborators and comrades. (Here we must express our respect for the admins of Libcom who don’t allow themselves to become part in a witch-hunt and immediately took away the name from the post of IASR).

The defamation of one of our comrades has served Akai as the pretext to speak against our statement and, more than that, to warn against ASIR. Already before that, she showed the will to get names from comrades (in her comment #46) and, already after the first statement posted by ASIR, she claimed that ASIR would be „known, to hang with some shady-types” (comment #32). In order to gather information, she, Akai, would „try to do some spying” to find out more (comment #32). Just so, as if there would not exist a known email-address of ASIR, where anyone could simply ask.

IASR and Akai have found a common interest to speak against ASIR.

Akai´s reason for doing so lies in the critical view about IWA of our denounced comrade, while the reasons of the remaining IASR members for joining her are their knowledge about his “ostrascism”, created by influential and leading members of IWA, to whom Akai also belongs.

Both are driven by political calculations and not by the solving and clearing of problems. Both try to create an infamous climate. We question that Akai is truly interested in a real clearing of the situation with IASR. She searches for excuses for IASR´s sexist comments by claiming a different perception about it in the east, what we do not deny. But she ignores with this, maybe because of a lack of knowledge, that especially inside the anarchist movement in Romania there is a noticeable and present feminist orientation, which leads an ongoing debate with patriarchy and sexism since many years. It is hard to believe that IASR doesn’t know about it and seeks refuge under the excuse of harsh social reality.

At this point we also have to mention, that we read with interest the comment #74 of IASR, where they say: “Dealing with totalitarianism in the past and even present, made many people here as brutal as the fascists themselves”. We hope that this is not a hidden announcement of violence against comrades opposed to the IASR, a group, which already has denounced the name of a comrade so far.

Finally, it seems that it is more important to discredit a person whose political opinion is not liked, than to realise the real circumstances. Because of that, the focus was taken away from the content of the warning against IASR and instead of that, IASR and Akai switched to defamation and lies.

Anarcho-Syndicalist Infoservice Romania (ASIR)
22.01.2012

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Jan 23 2012 20:56

omg, how pathetic can this get? roll eyes

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Jan 23 2012 21:57

I wonder if ASIR has any 'members' other than the guy whose name was removed?

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jan 24 2012 07:40

Give me a fucking break. I already know damn well who and what is ASIR.
I also know a little about discussions in Romania, I know the discussions on feminism (we even have Romanian comrades here visiting now, outside of this, and we try to get a round perspective).

There is absolutely no attempt from my side to avoid this issue, sweep it under the carpet, etc., which is why I said something on this forum in the first place. I was initially happy that people seemed to distance themselves from it but I found the further comments to be unclear. That's all.

As for finding a solution to it, it seems clear to me that the problem still is that some people have not thought this through from all angles and I said they need to do it.

There were two main issues and several connected: the comments themselves and then the remarks which led to a discussion of individual and collective responsibility. I presume that the people writing from IASR understood what was wrong with the original remarks - whether or not it was only later, that is a secondary issue. About the other, well, I said my view and can only hope that they think about it.

As for the problem of sexism in general, I don't think I need anybody with a dick telling me that there are problems about that or that they need to be treated seriously. I intend to follow up on this whole situation, That's all.

As for the rest of ASIR's stuff, I think you're giving yourself too much importance.

adi pogo
Offline
Joined: 5-11-12
Nov 5 2012 18:18

Dear users of this site, i am an anarchist from Romania from a long time ago and i had a lot of problems with the people from this fake syndicate ,no any other anarchists are recognizing them, they are self called IASR or ASIR ,they are pretty bourgeois who have no connection and no sustain from any proletariat ,in fact they are suspected that they are under cover from police trying to make a data base with all anarchists from my country,since i entered in contact with them ,my blogs and my social accounts have been periodically under flood ,i am sorry that your trust is so easy to be tricked by some people who have been rejected by the anarchists from my country.
I want to say that the person who made these awful comments hasn't been removed by this organisation and it still in charge in this undercover organisation.
Best greetings and be carefully who are according your trust!!!!
Anarchy and freedom!!! thanks for your attention.

Stan Milgram
Offline
Joined: 30-10-12
Nov 7 2012 05:57
Transcona Slim wrote:

There's another 'anarchist' on the youtubes, mr1001nights, who engages in this sort of misogyny - of course, his is based on a pop reading of evolutionary psychology mixed with anti-civ garbage and Noam Chomsky. If this is a 'trend' then it needs to be combated as much as the BNP and other fascists.

Calling him a fascist and comparing his videos to a person openly calling for the rape of women is hyperbolic. To be fair the muse for his misinformed take on feminism comes from a person named nuclearnights who's putting some equally idiotic material out on youtube. I don't think your comment holds any weight. That people like mr1001nights should be "combated as much as the BNP and other fascists". To label any criticism of certain feminist theory 'fascist' is assuming feminism as a whole is a holy grail unworthy of critical analysis and anyone who attempts such is a fascist.

I'm of the opinion both he and nuclearnights should go away or at least make videos about archery or something. We'd all be better off.

Panait's picture
Panait
Offline
Joined: 20-01-12
Nov 25 2012 20:13

LOL Ady you hypocrite - You found a scandal to get in - your favorite activity! How about talk about this with the other Adi - your friend - that is making denunciations and make racist and sexist comments.
IASR is sectarian and dead but they are not "under cover from police".

Panait's picture
Panait
Offline
Joined: 20-01-12
Nov 26 2012 05:54

and they are not "pretty bourgeois"
they are poor students and workers.