The FARC-EP: Red-headed stepchild of 1st world revolutionaries. Good, bad or just keepin it real?

205 posts / 0 new
Last post
Felix Frost's picture
Felix Frost
Offline
Joined: 30-12-05
Jan 18 2007 21:43
jonnyflash wrote:
wow, the loincloth jungle paradise scene will make the primmies pro-FARC.

Yeah, and they even practice free love (as long as you get the permission of your Commander first, of course):

Love beneath the intimacy of the mosquito netting

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 24 2007 03:10

Knightrose wrote:
...whose critical faculties become diluted in direct proportion to the distance the issue he is considering is from home.

I believe it's important to understand all of the strong revolutionary currents internationally, and see the FARC one such current. Not only myself, but along with every principled organization worldwide that has given a position on the Columbian civil war. But hey, those brown folk haven't heard....if you don't tell them, who will!?

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 24 2007 05:59

Seriously tho, like any rev organization (including your strain of lib-com examples, though none spring to mind....wait a sec, why doesn't one of you give me an example of a rev organization that follows your strain of lib-com?) FARC does exist in a rather inhospitable situation. When vulernable parts of the FARC are seen, they are attacked by the state. Informants are the eyes of imperialism. Without them, the imperialist knows little about the insurgency. Like the Black Panther Party before, Iraqis today, and every insurgent group in history, blinding the enemy by silencing informants can only be a main priority.

When informants are silenced, those informants generally die. This is a fact of war. Those people had families who will miss them. In these cases, we must continue to extend our international solidarity to the only organization that puts the run on the assassins of the union leaders.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jan 24 2007 07:31
Quote:
give me an example of a rev organization that follows your strain of lib-com?

Personally I'm not that interested in actual "revolutionary organizations", they often tend to be leninist and (as posters have said before) anti-working class. What is more interesting is actual working class movements. Oaxaca is an example of that, worker managed factories in Argentina and e.g. the recent wildcat strikes in Egypt.

Tojiah's picture
Tojiah
Offline
Joined: 2-10-06
Jan 24 2007 07:42
jonnyflash wrote:
When informants are silenced, those informants generally die. This is a fact of war. Those people had families who will miss them. In these cases, we must continue to extend our international solidarity to the only organization that puts the run on the assassins of the union leaders.

Well, folks, there you have it! Mobster apologetics rebranded as working-class solidarity, a tradition going back almost 90 years!

"Fact of war" indeed. You callous piece of dung.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jan 24 2007 07:59

While I totally disagree with jonnyflash, there's really not that much wrong with killing informers when lives are at stake. Assuming that's actually what's going on...

Tojiah's picture
Tojiah
Offline
Joined: 2-10-06
Jan 24 2007 08:16
888 wrote:
While I totally disagree with jonnyflash, there's really not that much wrong with killing informers when lives are at stake. Assuming that's actually what's going on...

Right.. Except that if you know there's an informer, there's no point in killing him, you just keep him off the loop. The only reason to kill informers is to keep others from informing by out-terrorizing the state. Excuse me if I find that reprehensible.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jan 24 2007 08:27

or for revenge.

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Jan 24 2007 08:46
jonnyflash wrote:
Knightrose wrote:
...whose critical faculties become diluted in direct proportion to the distance the issue he is considering is from home.

I believe it's important to understand all of the strong revolutionary currents internationally, and see the FARC one such current. Not only myself, but along with every principled organization worldwide that has given a position on the Columbian civil war. But hey, those brown folk haven't heard....if you don't tell them, who will!?

Quote:
Not only myself, but along with every principled organization worldwide that has given a position on the Columbian civil war.

This line is almost a tautology. I presume that jonnyflash defines a 'principled organisation' as one that supports the FARC, so it is automatically true. Conversly, if I define a 'principled organisation' as one that opposes the FARC, it is eually true say that no principled organisation supports the FARC. The line is just meaningless rhetoric.

Devrim

Bubbles's picture
Bubbles
Offline
Joined: 4-12-06
Jan 24 2007 08:48
atlemk wrote:
Quote:
give me an example of a rev organization that follows your strain of lib-com?

Personally I'm not that interested in actual "revolutionary organizations", they often tend to be leninist and (as posters have said before) anti-working class. What is more interesting is actual working class movements. Oaxaca is an example of that, worker managed factories in Argentina and e.g. the recent wildcat strikes in Egypt.

APPO was/is(?) a revolutionary organization that had lennies in it.

Bubbles's picture
Bubbles
Offline
Joined: 4-12-06
Jan 24 2007 08:52
jonnyflash wrote:
Seriously tho, like any rev organization (including your strain of lib-com examples, though none spring to mind....wait a sec, why doesn't one of you give me an example of a rev organization that follows your strain of lib-com?)

Go read a fucking book. You really ought to know who and what is around before you start supporting folks.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jan 24 2007 09:10
Quote:
APPO was/is(?) a revolutionary organization that had lennies in it.

Which is why I wrote Oaxaca and not APPO.

rasputin
Offline
Joined: 30-01-05
Jan 24 2007 14:24
x357997 wrote:
atlemk wrote:
Quote:
give me an example of a rev organization that follows your strain of lib-com?

Personally I'm not that interested in actual "revolutionary organizations", they often tend to be leninist and (as posters have said before) anti-working class. What is more interesting is actual working class movements. Oaxaca is an example of that, worker managed factories in Argentina and e.g. the recent wildcat strikes in Egypt.

APPO was/is(?) a revolutionary organization that had lennies in it.

"Includes Leninists" and "is Leninist" are two very different things.

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 00:57
Quote:
Personally I'm not that interested in actual "revolutionary organizations", they often tend to be leninist and (as posters have said before) anti-working class. What is more interesting is actual working class movements. Oaxaca is an example of that, worker managed factories in Argentina and e.g. the recent wildcat strikes in Egypt. - atlemk

Well, that clarifies your politics to me. A movement, such as the struggle in Oaxaca (perhaps also the Zaps? ) is acceptable, as are worker-managed factories in Argentina and, I hope, those in Venezuela as well. You like smaller-scale, regional struggles and dislike projects of national scale. Why is that? Do you think those examples you gave would become unacceptable if the organizers had similar plans of national, rather than regional scope?

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 01:14
Quote:
Well, folks, there you have it! Mobster apologetics rebranded as working-class solidarity, a tradition going back almost 90 years!

"Fact of war" indeed. You callous piece of dung. - treeofjudas

IMHO, Amilcar Cabral was right on when he said " mask no difficulties, mistakes, failures". Like Cabral, the FARC-EP has a policy of honesty. Within the COINTELPRO schemes that brought down what was arguably my continents' strongest rev movement (BPP) some decades ago, informants and moles played a crucial role in that destruction of some of the best and brightest working-class militants we had. If a movement resisting attempts by the state to destroy it via infiltration suddenly becomes a mob organization, then Durruti and Ascaso were right up there with Scarface and the Vatican. Judas Iscariot, indeed.

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 01:21
Quote:
Treeofjudas: Right.. Except that if you know there's an informer, there's no point in killing him, you just keep him off the loop. The only reason to kill informers is to keep others from informing by out-terrorizing the state. Excuse me if I find that reprehensible.

The informant that gave the map of Fred Hampton's apartment to the cops, then slipped a sleep drug into Fred's drink wasn't "in the loop", he was simply there doing some party business. If it was demonstrably difficult to keep informants from doing harm in the BPP, how would you suggest a jungle-based geurilla organization do so? The point is not to terrorize the informant, but to stop the activity permanently, as it endangers the struggle and exposed the best elements of the movement to the worst of the state.

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 01:26
Quote:
X357997 - Go read a fucking book. You really ought to know who and what is around before you start supporting folks.

I return the charge with slight alteration: You really ought to know what's going on before you start repeating the anti-FARC lines required by your sub-culture.

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 01:29

and X357997, wash that mouth out with soap, then let us know which movements you support.

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 01:33

revol68, every time you call someone a cunt, and nobody calls u on it, about 100 women stop thinking libcom.org is worth their time. Think about that.

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 01:42
Quote:
Felix Frost - Yeah, and they even practice free love (as long as you get the permission of your Commander first, of course):

Love beneath the intimacy of the mosquito netting

There are female, as well as male commanders. A project such as the FARC-EP's brings new forms of social organization, referred to in the link as purely consentual relationships with maternity provisions etc. It's not easy for one of us in the metropoles to imagine the love lives of those struggling on the empire's edge. I won't judge the FARC regarding areas I don't understand, but I will commend the FARC for treating women as equal human beings with agency. and respecting maternity. A lot more than my government can seem to manage, even in peacetime!

violencia.prole...
Offline
Joined: 12-07-06
Jan 25 2007 02:33

Since this is a libertarian communist board I'm not suprised most oppose FARC. However, I've yet to see an actual arguement against them in this thread. I've read a couple repeats of "mobsters" without any evidence and a critique of their politics (nothing wrong with that). Do you all think that FARC is more progressive the Colombian state or not?

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jan 25 2007 02:51
jonnyflash wrote:
revol68, every time you call someone a cunt, and nobody calls u on it, about 100 women stop thinking libcom.org is worth their time. Think about that.

Every time you speak everyone thinks you are a naive oaf with no critical faculties, eager to repeat the Stalinist mistakes of the past.

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 07:22

I wonder why I only hear about theory-impoverished anarchist groups in Columbia and Venezuela when there is a massive mainstream media slander campain against their much larger, more theoretically sound cousins. It's trippy how that works. Maybe nobody in the imperial cores wants to hear them until a movement becomes strong enough that it needs attacking from the left as well as the right? They do provide a thin sheen of cred to the anti-Chavez forces (but don't scratch that surface). Just a vague thought.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jan 25 2007 08:08
Quote:
Well, that clarifies your politics to me. A movement, such as the struggle in Oaxaca (perhaps also the Zaps? ) is acceptable, as are worker-managed factories in Argentina and, I hope, those in Venezuela as well. You like smaller-scale, regional struggles and dislike projects of national scale. Why is that? Do you think those examples you gave would become unacceptable if the organizers had similar plans of national, rather than regional scope?

Nothing in my post saying I dislike struggles on a national scale. You asked for some examples and I gave you a few. You read too much into my post. Nothing would of course be better if there were more factories in Argentina self-managing, or uprisings like Oaxaca everywhere in Mexico and beyond. But I do not see the class struggle as being a nationalist project.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Jan 25 2007 08:33
jonnyflash wrote:
the anti-Chavez forces

there you go with your binaries again, "you're either with Chavez, or you're with the imperialists." you're in the US yeah? - did you vote for Kerry and call it class struggle?

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Jan 25 2007 09:47
violencia.proletariat wrote:
Since this is a libertarian communist board I'm not suprised most oppose FARC. However, I've yet to see an actual arguement against them in this thread. I've read a couple repeats of "mobsters" without any evidence and a critique of their politics (nothing wrong with that). Do you all think that FARC is more progressive the Colombian state or not?

I think that part of the discussion that has been going on between the Platformists, and those opposed to national liberation movements across various threads on this board comes down to this word ‘progressive’. I think that those arguing against NLM are in general agreement that there are no progressive factions of capital, and that communism can only be created by the working class. Therefor it doesn’t matter if one faction talks left, or is progressive. They may be able to cheat the working class, but they can’t cheat the law of value. All of these leftist groups if they come to power will be forced to attack the working class.

Also, as a point of interest the argument seems to be between Europeans, and Americans (the WSM being an exception). I think that it reflects on the dominance of leftist and third worldist ideology in the American anarchist movement.

One of the interesting points that was brought up during the discussion about Venezuela was about attacks on the oil workers:

ICC wrote:
The biggest and most significant attack has been the one directed against the oil workers. Through the coordinated action of the Chavist and oppositional factions, the Chavist government has succeeded not only in reducing the number of workers, but also in passing a law that has long been wanted by the Venezuelan bourgeoisie, namely the elimination of the staff co-operative which, since the time of the multinational oil companies, had allowed workers and their families to obtain foodstuffs at reduced prices. This was done with the argument that “the situation is very hard for everyone” and that the oil workers are privileged, a “workers’ aristocracy”.

Nobody has replied to this apart from to assert that the oil workers are ‘lackeys of US imperialism’. To me though it is very clear that this is an attack on working class living standards.

I don’t know much about events in South America, so I don’t feel able to present a well informed argument against the FARC. However, I am familiar with leftist guerrilla groups in the Middle East, and I am sure that they work in a similar way. The fact that these groups end up acting like gangsters is unsurprising. As someone wrote on another thread:

Lurch wrote:
Luxembourg famously said:

Quote:
Imperialism is not the creation of any one or any group of states. It is the product of a particular stage of ripeness in the world development of capital, an innately international condition, an indivisible whole, that is recognisable only in all its relations, and from which no nation can hold aloof at will.”

(Junius Pamphlet)

In other words, in the period of “wars and revolutions” announced by WW1 and the revolutions in Russia, if all states don’t have the same means, all have the same policy. If effectively the ambitions for world domination could only be realised by the most powerful states, the smallest powers still shared the same imperialist appetites.

As in the Mafia, only the Godfather can dominate the entire town, while the neighbourhood pimps can dominate only a single street, but nothing distinguishes them at the level of the aspirations and methods of gangsters. Thus the smallest states devote as much energy as the others to becoming a greater nation at the expense of their neighbours.

Again, I think that the fascination of the left in America with leftists (or nationalists, or even Islamicists) with guns, and a lack of a class analysis.

Devrim

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 09:51
Quote:
here you go with your binaries again, "you're either with Chavez, or you're with the imperialists." you're in the US yeah? - did you vote for Kerry and call it class struggle? - Joseph K

Let me clear up the confusion over the definition of anti-Chavez.

Anti Chavez forces call lock-outs strikes, and take part or sympathize with anti-Chavez marches. They call Chavez a dictator, a caudillo, anti-democratic, oppressive. umm, let's see...that would be lots of our posters here. Is Joseph K pro-imperialism? I'm sure not explicitly, though you seem keen to grasp at the lines of the most advanced anti-Chavez forces; the ones with the big bucks. A few million NED dollars buys alot in a country where 50% of the people live in squats. Make no mistake, our NGO's aren't certain where their cash comes from either..foundation to foundation to endowment to grant to activism on the ground. Whereas if the cash came directly from Rockefeller, Pew, Bromfman foundations etc, there would be a clear line of activity for us to "follow the money".

Kerry?... You haven't heard? they don't really let us Canadians take part in US elections. They seem pretty cheesy and pre-determined anyways. Not that ours are much better mind you. Our right is the US left, and our center-left is the US ultra-left(electorally speaking).

jonnyflash
Offline
Joined: 14-01-07
Jan 25 2007 10:01

To any women reading this thread, let me apologize so as not to be seen as condoning. Revol68's harsh misogynistic language is not indicative of anything larger than the bizarre subculture on this blog.

From now on, every time Rev68 uses his favorite "c" word, let's just read it as "can't". As in, Rev68 can't understand how 51% of the population (plus all the feminist men) find his word choice to be repellent and indicative of his general lack of good will, parenting and sense.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Jan 25 2007 10:14
jonnyflash wrote:
they don't really let us Canadians take part in US elections.

imperialist pig dogs! yeah that's why i first asked if you were in the US, but never mind, nice dodge.

jonnyflash wrote:
Is Joseph K pro-imperialism? I'm sure not explicitly, though you seem keen to grasp at the lines of the most advanced anti-Chavez forces; the ones with the big bucks.

Let me be explicit. I am a libertarian communist. I am opposed to the rule of capital, whether 'foreign' or 'domestic', militarised or tolerant & liberal, neoliberal or social democratic. I do not collapse all these modes into one, but i recognise the only force capable of opposing capital per se rather than replacing one set of bosses with another is the self-organisation of the working class - there being no guarantee that the new bosses will even be any better than the old ones except for the level of autonomous working class power. Therefore i am anti-Chavez insofar as i am anti-capitalist and anti-state, and i am anti-US imperialism (military or IMF/WB) insofar as i am anti-capitalist and anti-state. You'll note this has approximately nothing in common with 'post-leftism'. Does that clarify matters?

And since i'm bieng nice and patient, would you care to answer the very first comment on this thread?

John. wrote:
Before we start, do you consider yourself an anarchist, a Leninist, or what?

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Jan 25 2007 10:18
jonnyflash wrote:
To any women reading this thread, let me apologize so as not to be seen as condoning. Revol68's harsh misogynistic language is not indicative of anything larger than the bizarre subculture on this blog.

we also call each other cocks as an insult, is that permissible or will all men everywhere take offence?