you forgot about celtic and rangers too
yeah they are for the backward peasants.
anyway Man Utd and Liverpool shirts are still far more common and they also allow a temporal breaching of the sectarian divide.
Thats exactly it. I actually respect the opinions of real people, real (working) people. Not some academics or professional revolutionaries who treated "humanity" and "the proletariat" as some kinds of as you put it "fucking object." I respect that people value their countries and cultures, it seems a perfectly natural thing and something that is not opposed to peace or progress. So hey.
what is a fucking "culture"? It's a bullshit vague term reserved for retards to hide their parochial reactionary mindsets behind. Oh i'm not a racist, bigot, cunt or whatever I just want to protect my identity, culture, tradition etc.
Why is it when dickheads talk about an irish cyulture they mean some stupid celtic myths and wank, why is it they don't include going for an indian, drinking italian coffees, watching the Wire or Soprano's, going to the pub to cheer on an English football team? And what about the flipside, what about the proud culture of killing people cos they don't identify with your nation? What happens when you have competing identities on the same territory that they both claim is essential to their 'culture' and identity? You know what fucking happens, hatred division and bloodshed.
Whatever. We're talking on pretty existential terms here. You know why Thatcher called both the English miners and football fans "the enemy within"? Because they had a shared, tight-knit culture.
To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.
The cultural homogenization and destruction we have seen in recent years is class war pure an simple. Isolated, nihilistic individuals are easy pickings. Proud communities... not so easy.
If there is anything worth celebrating in capitalism it is how it has torn up parochial identities, how it rips through the simple minded cohesion and peace of communities and made obvious the rank hypocrisy, repression and power relations they mask..
Beautiful. Once again, lefties score a touchdown for capitalist ideology...
Whatever. We're talking on pretty existential terms here. You know why Thatcher called both the English miners and football fans "the enemy within"? Because they had a shared, tight-knit culture.Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote:
To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.The cultural homogenization and destruction we have seen in recent years is class war pure an simple. Isolated, nihilistic individuals are easy pickings. Proud communities... not so easy.
Thatcher called the miners the enemy within because they were in the vanguard of a militant working class.
As for football fans, it was actually in reference to football hooligans and I'm afraid for all the romanticisation of the Firms and their close knittedness they were essentially gangs of working class men kicking the shit out of each other around an allegiance to a football team, the fact that these firms were also often tied into organised crime and bred brutal internal hierarchies should also tell us alot.
What exatly is to be celebrated in gangs of working class men kicking the shit out of each other? And this close knitted community was always rooted in an oppositon and hatred of the 'other', they were as united by hatred of other fans as they were by some an idenitification with their team.
Beautiful. Once again, lefties score a touchdown for capitalist ideology...
So facing reality and rejecting reactionary identities and communities is a touch down for capitalist ideology?
Lets embrace mythical communal golden ages as a response to the atomisation of capitalism. Wasn't it you that brought up slave morality?
And why were the miners the vanguard of the militant working class? Industrial union organization and...
Have you ever read Class War's "Unfinished Business"? An interesting, if crude, book. Celebrates English culture and working class community.
zarathustra wrote:
Whatever. We're talking on pretty existential terms here. You know why Thatcher called both the English miners and football fans "the enemy within"? Because they had a shared, tight-knit culture.Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote:
To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.The cultural homogenization and destruction we have seen in recent years is class war pure an simple. Isolated, nihilistic individuals are easy pickings. Proud communities... not so easy.
Thatcher called the miners the enemy within because they were in the vanguard of a militant working class.
As for football fans, it was actually in reference to football hooligans and I'm afraid for all the romanticisation of the Firms and their close knittedness they were essentially gangs of working class men kicking the shit out of each other around an allegiance to a football team, the fact that these firms were also often tied into organised crime and bred brutal internal hierarchies should also tell us alot.
What exatly is to be celebrated in gangs of working class men kicking the shit out of each other? And this close knitted community was always rooted in an oppositon and hatred of the 'other', they were as united by hatred of other fans as they were by some an idenitification with their team.
Isn't there like a social surplus of violence or something a la Freud? It either goes into character armoring (Reich) or is expressed in one way or another. Clastre's "function of primitive warfare" etc. I don't know, but its an interesting thought. Is ritualized violence a necessary part of a healthy society? As somebody with (alleged) anger management problems, I can attest to the fact that violence either comes out one way or another and is wost when it gets choked-up inside.
And why were the miners the vanguard of the militant working class? Industrial union organization and...Have you ever read Class War's "Unfinished Business"? An interesting, if crude, book. Celebrates English culture and working class community.
You are an idiot! What english culture does it celebrate? Oh you mean it celebrates a history of refusal and insurrection from the working class in the UK?
And yes it is a very rude book.
As for the miners and the mining communities, they are gone, they don't represent the position of the contemporary working class, you can keep harking back to such days but i'm afraid the working class is much more oikely to commute across a city to get to work and work with people who don't drink in the same bars as them, who don't share the same hobbies etc. That's reality, deal with it and learnt o see the libertory potential in that contradiction.
revol68 wrote:
zarathustra wrote:
Whatever. We're talking on pretty existential terms here. You know why Thatcher called both the English miners and football fans "the enemy within"? Because they had a shared, tight-knit culture.Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote:
To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.The cultural homogenization and destruction we have seen in recent years is class war pure an simple. Isolated, nihilistic individuals are easy pickings. Proud communities... not so easy.
Thatcher called the miners the enemy within because they were in the vanguard of a militant working class.
As for football fans, it was actually in reference to football hooligans and I'm afraid for all the romanticisation of the Firms and their close knittedness they were essentially gangs of working class men kicking the shit out of each other around an allegiance to a football team, the fact that these firms were also often tied into organised crime and bred brutal internal hierarchies should also tell us alot.
What exatly is to be celebrated in gangs of working class men kicking the shit out of each other? And this close knitted community was always rooted in an oppositon and hatred of the 'other', they were as united by hatred of other fans as they were by some an idenitification with their team.
Isn't there like a social surplus of violence or something a la Freud? It either goes into character armoring (Reich) or is expressed in one way or another. Clastre's "function of primitive warfare" etc. I don't know, but its an interesting thought. Is ritualized violence a necessary part of a healthy society? As somebody with (alleged) anger management problems, I can attest to the fact that violence either comes out one way or another and is wost when it gets choked-up inside.
christ now you are suggesting some primordial root to violence.
And regardless, why would anarchists celebrate the working class directing such violence against each other centring around identitification with football firms, nationalism, parochial localism?
I'm not celebrating anything. I'm just thinking aloud. Not being a lefty, I don't take a party position on everything...
Isolated, nihilistic individuals are easy pickings. Proud communities... not so easy.
I'm not celebrating anything. I'm just thinking aloud. Not being a lefty, I don't take a party position on everything...
In my culture we call it "talking shite".
Let me amend. The position I espouse (see party position paper Sports & Culture subsection Violence paragraph 3A) is that maybe a bit of sports violence for a few laughs between consenting adults is really ok, as opposed to say beating your girlfriend or going postal.
Quote:
Isolated, nihilistic individuals are easy pickings. Proud communities... not so easy.
Gee whiz. And the Teamsters knee-cap people. Theres this whacky distinction between good and bad.
Let me amend. The position I espouse (see party position paper Sports & Culture subsection Violence paragraph 3A) is that maybe a bit of sports violence for a few laughs between consenting adults is really ok, as opposed to say beating your girlfriend or going postal.
no fuckwit the positin you were expousing was that football hooligan firms were feared by the government because they were closely knitted communities of working class men, overlooking of course that they were organised around working class men kicking the shit out of each other, a celebration of violence, machismo and retarded tribalism, that their sense of identity was as much (if not more) bound up in a hatred of the 'other', a feature that runs through nationalism as well.
Let me use an analogy. The reason you can swim thru water and not thru space is because there is water around you offers resistance. You can make your body move through the water. In space, you just hang there. Right? Rough analogy. Now if you're all alone in a world of supermarkets, McDonald's, internet forums, cubicles and so on, you hang by yourself in a void. Anyway, something like that.
Everybody forms tribal identies. Except, heck, beasts and saints, or something. Maybe yours is libcom, but you have one.
Everybody needs roots. A tree without roots blows over.
Much better analogy.
Let me use an analogy. The reason you can swim thru water and not thru space is because there is water around you offers resistance. You can make your body move through the water. In space, you just hang there. Right? Rough analogy. Now if you're all alone in a world of supermarkets, McDonald's, internet forums, cubicles and so on, you hang by yourself in a void. Anyway, something like that.Everybody forms tribal identies. Except, heck, beasts and saints, or something. Maybe yours is libcom, but you have one.
yes, that's why we have mates, why we listent o music, have aesthetic tastes, follow football teams, whatever. Why these things should be rooted in some stupid parochialism, love of the land or anyother reactionary bullshit that attempts to tie working class people to a nation or whatever is beyond me.
Then again there is always the possibility of a working class identity based on negation of destroying capitalism, infact i would go so far to say that any working class identity not centred on such a refusal is reactionary wank.
Everybody needs roots. A tree without roots blows over.Much better analogy.
maybe if your a fucking tree, thankfully we are social creatures and so our roots are social relations not blood or soil!
Of cours you can go around dreaming of ficticious roots if you want but that is simply a pathetic attempt to deny reality.
I commented on "negative identities" before. Pathetic. If the working class defines itself by capital and not the other way around, all is lost.
zarathustra wrote:
Everybody needs roots. A tree without roots blows over.Much better analogy.
maybe if your a fucking tree, thankfully we are social creatures and so our roots are social relations not blood or soil!
Of cours you can go around dreaming of ficticious roots if you want but that is simply a pathetic attempt to deny reality.
Ironically of course, the red and black flag (or flags) stand just for those two things. Black for the soil of the land. Red for the blood of the people.
I say this as a note of historical interest.
I commented on "negative identities" before. Pathetic. If the working class defines itself by capital and not the other way around, all is lost.
defines itself in opposition to capital, a working class that doesn't do so is simply a working class celebrating wallowing in it's own shite, the working class condition is nothing to celebrate or take pride in, it is something to loathe, to hate, to fight, and resist. The only thing to take pride in is working class resistance to it's condition, it's history of refusal.
The working class kid who loathes their situation is far more revolutionary than the leftist who dons their prolier than thou mask.
revol68 wrote:
zarathustra wrote:
Everybody needs roots. A tree without roots blows over.Much better analogy.
maybe if your a fucking tree, thankfully we are social creatures and so our roots are social relations not blood or soil!
Of cours you can go around dreaming of ficticious roots if you want but that is simply a pathetic attempt to deny reality.
Ironically of course, the red and black flag (or flags) stand just for those two things. Black for the soil of the land. Red for the blood of the people.
you silly cunt, the black stands for negation, a position of loss and mourning and the red is symbolic of the workers struggle.
No, I believe the black stands for the soil (it was the flag carried by the peasants).
No, I believe the black stands for the soil (it was the flag carried by the peasants).
Soil is brown you silly cunt.
And the black stands for mourning and negation.
Where did you get the idea that the black was for soil?
Could this discussion please continue sans personal insults?
zarathustra wrote:
I commented on "negative identities" before. Pathetic. If the working class defines itself by capital and not the other way around, all is lost.defines itself in opposition to capital, a working class that doesn't do so is simply a working class celebrating wallowing in it's own shite, the working class condition is nothing to celebrate or take pride in, it is something to loathe, to hate, to fight, and resist.
I'm going to have to pull Nietzsche on you again buddy. I'm sorry, "negatives" don't produce "positives." As I've said in previous posts, the truly radical nature of the working class lies in its positive nature, its constructive nature. To quote a previous post by myself:
Look at the Spanish syndicalist builders, say, who took such pride in their work that they were the most sought-out builders. Or the brewery workers who took part in founding the IWW who took pride in beer-making and, according to Fred Thompson, wished to provide the cooperative commonwealth with the best beer going. Look at the founders of the anarchist movement, men who loved their work - Jura watchmakers, French artisans, Spanish peasants.Call me workerist - I'm proud of it. Because I see a real dignity in work. Good honest work, where at the end of the day you can sit back and be proud of your achievements.
In less than two weeks time hundreds of neo-Nazis and racists will descend on the coastal town of Dover calling for Britain to “close the border”. It is vital that anti-fascists and anti-racists...
A short biography of Séraphine Pajaud, French anarchist and champion of atheism, anti-militarism and women's liberation
An article by Staughton Lynd reinterprets the concept of union democracy to include workers of all kinds (unionized workers, nonunion workers, and farmers); protection of the rights to strike,...
Please read the posting guidelines before posting. If you see anything which falls outside them please use the down' button on the offending post to flag it for the moderators' attention, or in the case of spam, click the 'spam' button. Site admins are listed here, and feedback can be posted in the feedback forum.
Click here to register now. Logged in users:
Can comment on articles and discussions
Get 'recent posts' refreshed more regularly
Bookmark articles to your own reading list
Use the site private messaging system
Start forum discussions, submit articles, and more...
Thats exactly it. I actually respect the opinions of real people, real (working) people. Not some academics or professional revolutionaries who treated "humanity" and "the proletariat" as some kinds of as you put it "fucking object." I respect that people value their countries and cultures, it seems a perfectly natural thing and something that is not opposed to peace or progress. So hey.