The political role of libcom.org - your views
Mar 16 2006 20:11
George Stapleton just posted this here in the Freedom thread:
georgestapleton wrote:
Libcom clearly sees it self as a means to an end. It sees itself as a tool to ensure the regroupment of class struggle anarchism in britain primarily but also increasingly outside of britain. Hence the not-to-uncommon jokes about libcom seeing it self as the precurser to the great british libertarian communist federation. The content of libcom reflects the collective's aims at both drawing people to class struggle anarchism and regrouping the existing class struggle anarchists, making them work together and discuss together.
This kinda struck me a bit. I spose I and most of the libcom people we don't really see other anarchists that much, so it's interesting to hear what people think we're up to.
Is that joke "about libcom seeing it self as the precurser to the great british libertarian communist federation" really common? Is that what people really think?
What do people think our aims are, or what do people think they should be? I for one am very curious.
Cheers for any input!
Mar 16 2006 20:15
#2
I'm apparently a "Libcom fellow traveller" (even though I didn't think most of the admin didn't like me that much), and the idea of a Libertarian Communist Federation frankly makes me feel ill.
Mar 16 2006 20:19
#3
georgestapleton wrote:
No not in that form it's not common but take what you said here: http://www.libcom.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=104855#104855I mean we are hardly going to invite Freedom or Black Flag so why would we invite libcom? I know you were joking but it's clear that there you don't see the libcom collective as a political collective.
I like conferences cos I'm a nerd. And cos there are often cool Europeans there. I spent nearly 2 days at work reading the 60-odd pages of minutes from a recent IWA gathering 
I was only joking there though, the WSM one doesn't sound like it'd be that fun. No offence like 
But what do you mean "don't see the libcom collective as a political collective"?
Mar 16 2006 20:20
#4
oops make that 'do see libcom as a political collective'
i.e. a political collective, more than a website collective.
Mar 16 2006 20:24
#5
and oh i said not-to-uncommon. I didn't say common. Errrr, I don't like people discussing what I said without much thought. 
Mar 16 2006 20:26
#6
dat might be your own preconceptions though. Personally, having spoken to Johnetc a bit, they seem to be doing it mostly for their own amusement, partly as a learning experience, and partly to provide a service. Lately, they seem to be trying to bring it a wee bit further than that and have it as the main online entry point for the entire world for libertarian viewpoints, but that's probly just the egomania kicking in .
Mar 16 2006 20:27
#7
Saii wrote:
Personally, having spoken to Johnetc a bit, they seem to be doing it mostly for their own amusement
Mar 16 2006 20:29
#8
Quote:
Is that joke "about libcom seeing it self as the precurser to the great british libertarian communist federation" really common? Is that what people really think?
No, the joke about libcom is more along the lines of it being a place of childish bickering and sniping. But this is becoming far less prevalent i think.
I suppose libcoms main purpose is simply to be a place of discussion and organisiation which allows news and views of the class struggle to be disseminated, circulated and disected with the aim of furthering the lucidity, solidarity, understanding and effectiveness of this class struggle.
Mar 16 2006 20:36
#9
Vaneigemappreciationclub wrote:
Quote:
Is that joke "about libcom seeing it self as the precurser to the great british libertarian communist federation" really common? Is that what people really think?No, the joke about libcom is more along the lines of it being a place of childish bickering and sniping.
The really sad thing is that's not even us, it's you lot, our forum users. Well and Jack. Having looked at many other internet forums I think that's more a property of the medium, although TBH I think those problems should hopefully be pretty much sorted now, we put a lot of effort in.
Mar 16 2006 20:38
#10
Yeah I noticed the smell of chloroform coming from revols keyboard.
sorry revol
Mar 16 2006 20:39
#11
yeah obviously its the users fault, well you can replace 'users' with 'jack's'. Its hardly the end of the world anyhow!
Mar 16 2006 20:52
#12
The political role of Libcom will evolve as its editors politics change - this has already happened enormously in just two years.
Mar 16 2006 20:54
#13
That was suspiciously con-commital Paul!
Could you expand a little? Where do you see us as having moved, and do you think this is a good thing or not?
Mar 16 2006 20:59
#14
pingtiao wrote:
That was suspiciously con-commital Paul!Could you expand a little? Where do you see us as having moved, and do you think this is a good thing or not?
From openly anarchist, towards what could be loosely termed libertarian communism, but with a harsher attitude towards anarchists than that usually held by libertarian socialists/communists.
In another year or two, who knows......
Mar 16 2006 21:05
#15
what do you mean by 'anarchist'?
We are all what we understand to be 'anarchist' but don't use the term because of what sneaks through under that label
Mar 16 2006 21:07
#16
i see many political roles for libcom, but the main one is to reverse the trend of anarchist politics among the younger section of the movement especially isolating itself from the working class.
It is also providing a non-sectarian space for all libertarians to get together, and i think the value of this shouldn't be underestimated.
It is also proving to be a good place to get something concrete organised and i believe we will get better at this with experience (collective writing processes, decision making, practical organising, networking etc). We have only touched the surface with this IMO.
Just dont go all mental and join Workers Power or some other tanky group within two years
Mar 16 2006 21:12
#17
JDMF wrote:
Just dont go all mental and join Workers Power or some other tanky group within two years
Been there, done that! (One of us is ex-YCL, ha ha)
Pingtiao, I'm happy to use the term anarchist... moreso than libertarian communist anyway probably. It's just a question of when it's useful, and when it's not.
But yeah the site has changed a lot - at the beginning enrager was just a picture of a burning car!
Mar 16 2006 21:14
#18
I know John, but I thought I'd put the 'party line' out there! I'm perfectly happy to call myself an anarchist- I'm in the AF after all.
Mar 16 2006 21:19
#19
John. wrote:
(One of us is ex-YCL, ha ha)
Really? Who? (it wasn't me)...
I can't believe people think we're trying setup something called the Libertarian Communist Federation, we'd blatantly call it the Libertarian Communist Organisation to go with the domain name...
Mar 16 2006 21:20
#20
JDMF wrote:
It is also providing a non-sectarian space for all libertarians to get together,
Not sure about that.
Mar 16 2006 21:22
#21
Nah your mixing up the people in the space with the space itself - the fact they're here arguing at all is progress only a non-sectarian space could allow for.
Mar 16 2006 21:25
#22
jimmer wrote:
John. wrote:
(One of us is ex-YCL, ha ha)Really? Who? (it wasn't me)...
Oh I thought you were. I take it back. An ex-YCL groupie then
pingtiao:
Quote:
I know John, but I thought I'd put the 'party line' out there! I'm perfectly happy to call myself an anarchist- I'm in the AF after all.
I don't think that's any kind of "party line".
Mar 16 2006 21:27
#23
Wel, it is what everyone in the group has said at some point or other, and is what Paul was allusing to, no?
Mar 16 2006 21:28
#24
pingtiao wrote:
Wel, it is what everyone in the group has said at some point or other, and is what Paul was allusing to, no?
That wasn't restricted to the term "anarchist" though, so I think the statement's a bit misleading, more generally I think it applies to all political jargon labels...
Mar 16 2006 21:28
#25
You have said in the past (esp Jack) that 'anarchist' referred to something you felt you had no alleigance to, which supports both Paul and your points.
Mar 16 2006 21:29
#26
Saii wrote:
You have said in the past (esp Jack) that 'anarchist' referred to something you felt you had no alleigance to
Not in itself, but nor does "communist", cos communists have done fucking disgusting things. Far worse then even the worst anarchists have ever done. But anyway back on topic...
Mar 16 2006 21:36
#27
i think libcom serves a dual purpose in that it is a really good entry point for people finding out about anarchism and a place for internal discussion and criticism.
a resource for anarchists new or old, with a library full of stuff and forum board where ideas can be thrashed out is pretty handy.
honestly, a space where people involved in the class struggle can be really self-critical is a good thing. since there are lots of anarchists (especially me) with shit politics, this sort of forum is really useful. Frequently people hold back from criticism because they don't want to cause offence, the internet allows for this inhibition to disappear a bit (tho maybe it sometimes goes too far).
i usually guess that libcom developed out of a frustration with the state of anarchism in england and that it was created to try and network between class struggle-based anarchists and to act as an alternate access into radical politics than the direct action movement and squatting.
Mar 16 2006 21:40
#28
dara wrote:
since there are lots of anarchists (especially me) with shit politics, this sort of forum is really useful
oh dara you don't have shit politics. You just need to shower more often. 
Mar 16 2006 21:42
#29
what a sweetheart
Mar 16 2006 22:03
#30
Re: the comments on doing libcom for our own amusement - i think this is a must, if you dont enjoy or have the ability to make fun of your own actions (esp. in this area) then there isnt much point in doing it.
Of course if you cant do that we all know what you end up like:
No not in that form it's not common but take what you said here: http://www.libcom.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=104855#104855
I mean we are hardly going to invite Freedom or Black Flag or Anarkismo so why would we invite libcom? I know you were joking but it's clear that there you don't see the libcom collective as a political collective.
Oh and you took my qoute out of context. I was contrasting libcom to Freedom so I was exagerating libcom's differences to Freedom.