anarchist shame
Sep 5 2008 12:13
How many libcommunity users who are also members of anarchist groups (af, sf, o!, wsm, l&s, iwa, etc) wish they could keep most of the same politics and agree to never use the a - word again. Lets face it, its a fucking embarrassing word, which is hard to say to workmates and non-political friends. I would wager most people say libertarian socialist or something similar. It associates you with every mental thing done by mental anarchists and kinda puts you in the same big tent as primmos, post-leftists and crimethinc.
I would much rather we never had to use the word again.
Sep 5 2008 13:20
#2
Sep 5 2008 13:26
#3
Even while I was semi-organizing in retail, I never found it necessary to label myself. I presented an analysis of how things were, pointed out infuriating management practices, encouraged modes of action, etc..
The real question is why you find yourself having to label yourself as anything. Seems like a slippery slope to identity politics.
Sep 5 2008 13:32
#4
Weeler continues doing what others on libcom did months ago. Or in this case, everyone and years.
Sep 5 2008 13:35
#5
weeler is actually concerned that mentioning teh @nArKeee!!! will put off teh ladiezz.
Sep 5 2008 13:46
#6
notch is right
Sep 5 2008 13:46
#7
I do believe Jack is right and that this was discussed on here about 3yrs ago.
I don't have a problem with the A word. If people are twats about it fuck em.
Sep 5 2008 13:56
#8
conors, i started this thread because of a conversation we had. you know its total bollox, not just the word, most of what anarchism is about.
Sep 5 2008 13:58
#9
You misunderstood me, what i meant was politics in general is a load of balls and I wish I'd never had any.
But it is what it is, and the name is the least of my concern.
I mean, if i didn't have politics, I'd be a cop. A fuckin sweet cop. Bustin heads. Fuck, I'd be an amazing cop.
Sep 5 2008 14:02
#10
Exactly, we have nothing in common with most of reactionary stuff that comes from anarchists though. This is what they actually believe in;
Sep 5 2008 14:14
#11
We also have little in common with people who call themselves 'libertarian' in the US - it doesn't stop me prefacing 'communist/socialist' with 'libertarian' though
Sep 5 2008 15:48
#12
xConorx wrote:
We also have little in common with people who call themselves 'libertarian' in the US - it doesn't stop me prefacing 'communist/socialist' with 'libertarian' though
Not to mention all the fuckwits the call themselves socialists and communists...
Sep 5 2008 15:53
#13
exactly, so what do we do, invent new fuckin names for ourselves cos knobs use the names
I actualkly think the best thing you can do for the name of anarchism is to just be a sound person, not a mental, and not go on about it all the time.
Anywhere I work, people find out after a while, or it comes up, that I'm an anarchist.
Because I'm not completely mental and don't look like a squatter/punk/twat they usually are like 'oh right wow, I didn't expect that' and actually become kind of interested. If you have a sense of humour about it as well it helps. But denying what you are for the sake of it is just stupid.
If you a sound person, people won't really mind, and might even be inquisitive.
Like a woman in work, 'oh that bookfair you mentioned sounds interesting'.
Sep 5 2008 16:22
#14
Yeah, and it works better with the laydeez than " communist ". Bleh
Sep 5 2008 16:56
#15
name dropping the situationists will get you head in the right student bars, not that i would know
Sep 5 2008 17:49
#16
hey weeler fancy going to this?
Sep 5 2008 18:06
#17
Sep 5 2008 21:28
#18
If we change the label then we'll just get a new negative stereotype. No thanks, I like the word anarchism, it has a nice ring to it and it's not just something else with qualifiers.
Sep 5 2008 21:37
#19
Are anarchists THE most useless people in the world?
Sep 6 2008 19:37
#20
Probably Your Class Enemy wrote:
Are anarchists THE most useless people in the world?
No, Nazis are the most useless people in the world.
Sep 6 2008 20:57
#21
I disagree, it has to be................................... your mother
Sep 6 2008 23:01
#22
Zazaban wrote:
Probably Your Class Enemy wrote:
Are anarchists THE most useless people in the world?No, Nazis are the most useless people in the world.
National Socialism destroyed every single European Empire. Not a Bad tally.
They also did a good line in cars, motorways and rocket science
Sep 7 2008 00:31
#23
Probably Your Class Enemy wrote:
Zazaban wrote:
Probably Your Class Enemy wrote:
Are anarchists THE most useless people in the world?No, Nazis are the most useless people in the world.
National Socialism destroyed every single European Empire. Not a Bad tally.
They also did a good line in cars, motorways and rocket science
I was more talking about modern nazis.
Sep 7 2008 23:23
#24
Zazaban wrote:
Probably Your Class Enemy wrote:
Zazaban wrote:
Probably Your Class Enemy wrote:
Are anarchists THE most useless people in the world?No, Nazis are the most useless people in the world.
National Socialism destroyed every single European Empire. Not a Bad tally.
They also did a good line in cars, motorways and rocket science
I was more talking about modern nazis.
True.
I think its a post-industrial thing
Sep 8 2008 19:12
#25
A label is something you get on a tin. A name matters.
'If people are twats about it fuck em' - Those twats are workers - potential anarchists.
How we feel about our name is irrelevant. What's important is how the other millions of workers who aren't anarchists feel about it. Our name identifies us to those who don’t know us. Sure you can explain our name away to people in person, but exactly how many people will we reach that way?
Our name was always doomed by the dictionary, there was no need for any capitalist effort to misrepresent it. Every 'twat' knows it means chaos. Telling them that the dictionary says otherwise is not education, it's lecturing. Saying that changing the name would fail is just defeatist. We're not that helpless. If we really gave a damn what the rest of the world thinks of us we'd answer this with something stronger than - 'but I like it and anyway they'd never let us change it... Oh and we've been over this before, you lost, so shut up about it...'.
Sep 8 2008 19:33
#26
Did you actually read my post you condescending wanker? Given that you actually quoted me I'm assuming you're addressing my post.
I said the best thing you can do for anarchism is not to drop the name, but to positively identify with it with out being a boring mental twat.
then I gave an example of how, people I worked with have become curious about it precisely because I wasn't an earnest bore and was willing to chat about it on a level they saw as useful
I actually don't know who you are arguing against here.
what i actually said wrote:
I actualkly think the best thing you can do for the name of anarchism is to just be a sound person, not a mental, and not go on about it all the time.Anywhere I work, people find out after a while, or it comes up, that I'm an anarchist.
Because I'm not completely mental and don't look like a squatter/punk/twat they usually are like 'oh right wow, I didn't expect that' and actually become kind of interested. If you have a sense of humour about it as well it helps. But denying what you are for the sake of it is just stupid.
If you a sound person, people won't really mind, and might even be inquisitive.
Like a woman in work, 'oh that bookfair you mentioned sounds interesting'.
Sep 8 2008 19:45
#27
I wasn't just addressing your post so only part of what I said was in response to you. I didn't disagree that being a normal person and then telling people you're an anarchist works. What I said was that it's not a solution because it only works on a one to one basis and, given our numbers, that's too slow. I believe we should change our name.
What exactly is condescending in my post and why? I genuinely want to know because it wasn't intended to be condescending at all. And you could have called me condescending without calling me a wanker. We can all take offence and call each other wankers. Surely that just causes more offence and doesn't advance the debate at all?
Sep 8 2008 20:05
#28
I have absolutely no problem calling myself an anarchist. Everywhere I've worked people have known I was an anarchist, it sparks interest and discussion. Where I work right now my fellow workers want to know more about anarchism and are genuinely interested - as a result of the 2nd Belfast Anarchist Bookfair simply having taken place.
Even having people say "I didn't think anarchists believe in organisation", "how do anarchists organise a bookfair?" has allowed me to discuss anarchism sensibly with sensible people.
Sep 8 2008 20:24
#29
agree 100% with Boul
even guys I train and compete with ask about it
'what's that tshirt say?'
'oh, but you don't even have a mowhawk? so it's not just weirdoes'
Sep 8 2008 20:28
#30
I call myself an anarchist and discuss it with people where I work, my lovely maccyds, and they all seem to enjoy asking about it.
Yeah it's pretty embarrassing. But any movement that became in anyway successful will end up being tarred in the same way eventually. So I don't let bother me, the labels aren't what's important, I don't mind using the word in a setting where you can explain what it actually means, but if it's going to cloud the issues I don't mention it specifically.