The direction of the AF

209 posts / 0 new
Last post
jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 7 2009 17:14

Since the baiting has been uncovered, twenty middle class people on to one underclass, and the expulsions are being uncovered, the reasoning has gone from humiliate him to bin it fast. I swear in all absolute honesty that these people were expelled and that it is a lie they resigned, before the AF use their influence over the blog site to have this thread banned, any one thinking of joining the AF or who has recently joined should consider what has really gone on here, not as what has been portrayed by a consensus of twenty people who do not represent the entire anarchist movement, consensus has a powerful effect on human nature, the effects of giving the idea consensus are largely responsible for the social position we are in. If you are thinking about joining this organisation you should consider the early posts, were they really incoherrent. You should also consider whether you want to control your own struggle or be alienated by a set ideology protected by a rule that says you need two thirds of the membership to make any change. Also be warry of the label I have not used myself, 'insurrectionalist' I am influence by this but I would say we are post left, there are serious problems with this form of anarchis, as there is with class struggle, one has lost its dialectic the other never had one, it also easy to use the label to portray such people as violent nutters, which is wrong. Please think carefully, when we have got to people first who wanted to join AF, they uderstood our criticsms and joined us the consensus against a looney is not what is happening here, it is a manufactured lie that I have been played right into because I was upset and my hard life has fucked me up.

BlackStarNorth
Offline
Joined: 15-11-07
Mar 7 2009 18:48

For the record, I was removed from the Afed list and ACOD after being informed that I had made criticisms of the AF in a private post to an AF member in Scotland. My description of the AF as being Leftist is correct. Tail-ending UAF and No Sweat (an AWL front) is not the way forward for Anarchy. By the way, my criticism of Sean Matgamna's politics - Socialist Organiser, now AWL - from first hand experience was actually removed from ACOD.

The fight against Fascism begins with the fight against Bolshevism - any authentic anarchist knows this as our comrades from past historic struggles had to pay the price of our lessons with their blood.

For Social Revolution and Communism,
BlackStarNorth

jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 7 2009 19:16

And the authentic position of real anarchists has thus been expressed, thus also an uncovering that disobey/preston co-operative people ldid not leave of their own accord. I have no doubt this will be removed from libcom asap, but there are real anarchists in AF who should contemplate what has been said, you will have your own criticisms of what your own people have said and done on here, I hold out a view that there is hope for an authentic anarchist movement, but anyway, I think you will be left behind by events in Greece, where an authentic anarchist movement is at the for front and if successful, will condemn your leftism to the rubbish bin of history.

rat's picture
rat
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Mar 7 2009 19:54

Don't delete, rename — Jon’s Rant Thread

BlackStarNorth
Offline
Joined: 15-11-07
Mar 7 2009 20:59

“The spirit of anarchy is the inspiring alternative to the failed forms of pseudo-opposition, i.e. Liberalism and Leftism. If we are serious about ending this society, then anarchy must move in a clear independent direction and break the stranglehold of capitalist politics over rebellion. Right and Left, both elements of capitalist control, must be abandoned along with the society they created.”

Wolfi Landstreicher

Landstreicher: http://325collective.com/library_from-politics.html

Malatesta: http://325collective.com/organ_em.pdf

In solidarity, BlackStarNorth

jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 7 2009 21:26

And another good point, These people called themselves my friends. Not just comrades. we drank together, we ate together, we thought together. As soon as they don't agree I'm consigned to being a mentalist. Is that the sort of organisation people want to be in? i don/t know who these people are under psudynims but i know we shared beers together many of which I bought and you have to wonder. If you join disobey you will be accepted in an autonomous way there is no conditions.It's pathetic these people, they don't recognise you as an automous human being you are a resource to be exploited, you are an ally so long as you agree with them, they are disgusting human waste. they won't even identify themselves, me, I know that if I get arrested it won't be for posting my real name on Libcom, so far this discussion 15 AF two Platformists, a reformist unionist who is an apologist for the biggest betrayal in all anarchist history and two anarchists. Solfed should be shot along with police men and Trots, the people they idolise betrayed anarchism for unionism, they submitted to fascists and held back the spanish revolution till it was taken over by liberals, bolsheviks then fascists, their view of one big union led to compromises and betrayal at the point of dealing with bosses and having to keep their position amongst a membership who were 2/3rds not anarchist, and the AF would really like to join with them. The LibSol view of community and localistion diguises an attitiude of betrayal to the workers by a doctrine of irelevant theory put forward and basteardised with ideolgy protectected by 'disciplined' organisation, purely for the benefit of theory put forward by an elite. I know for every one who posts on Libcom 7 more have read so take note, this is your British anarchism movement, Join 325, join EF! join Disobay but please don't join these tossers who are holding us back.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Mar 7 2009 21:38

Jonathan. I know nothing about the events you are referring to, your view might be right or it might be wrong. I have no clue. But, you have to realize that you do come off as a little bit, well, deranged.

E.g.

Quote:
Solfed should be shot along with police men and Trots, the people they idolise betrayed anarchism for unionism, they submitted to fascists and held back the spanish revolution till it was taken over by liberals, bolsheviks then fascists, their view of one big union led to compromises and betrayal at the point of dealing with bosses and having to keep their position amongst a membership who were 2/3rds not anarchist, and the AF would really like to join with them.

I am sure the people in AF, SolFed now etc. had nothing to do with the collapse of the Spanish revolution 80 years ago and that they have taken some lessons from what happened. I seriously doubt that the syndicalism of SolFed was preserved in vacuum since Spain.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Mar 7 2009 21:51
jonathan cottam wrote:
a reformist unionist who is an apologist for the biggest betrayal in all anarchist history

lol, is this aimed at me?

welshboy's picture
welshboy
Offline
Joined: 11-05-06
Mar 7 2009 22:32

Fucks sake, bin?

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Mar 7 2009 22:53

Why should it be binned? This is a record of a fairly important dispute, even if it is a rant.

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Mar 7 2009 23:12

bonkers bruno

martinh
Offline
Joined: 8-03-06
Mar 7 2009 23:27
jonathan cottam wrote:
SolFed should be shot

Well this does illustrate why our Preston comrades reported difficulties working with the local AF. roll eyes

jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 7 2009 23:40

some elements of the discussion are good, some elements are out there somewhere. on both sides. If at the end of the day it represents one persons breakdown more than a philosophical discussion that does not mean it was not worth having.

Solfed criticsms are justified, more than anyone else they represent the left and failed roots of anarchism, if we don't attack them we have learnt nothing. and they have learnt nothing, because you can't defend or reform a brand of anarchism that has failed at the very roots.Even AF know that anarcho syndicalism can not and will never work. yet they have made inroads to join with it, even though they were hardly much better when they were the Direct Action Movement and at least confronted fascism albeit it in their own geeky way.

you know this discussion has gone on a long time now, did any of you think to say to me "Jon whats wrong, we can work this out" instead of "Jon, you're a joke" your own comrade!

You attack post left anarchism as anti organisational but it does not occur to you to attack your syndicalist comrades as reformist or betrayers. This really show where AF stands.

Organisational anarchism is the closest to the left except anarcho syndicalism, you exist on the left,you prop up a left that no longer exists.you want the left you need the left and you don't know what to do with out it. Comrades, just do what they do in Greece where anarchists have been at the for front and the left has been all but irelevant and I swear, all will become clear.

Thrashing_chomsky
Offline
Joined: 3-06-07
Mar 7 2009 23:50

Hey, T_C here from Leeds AF.

john, I for one am willing to believe that some percentage of your ramblings have some serious ramifications for us that we should question of ourselves.. hell I'm open to reading a critique if you want to write one while not foaming at the mouth.

Whether it's 5% or 50% I can't tell, because I'm human and like most humans I stop listening to what someone is trying to tell me when they state categorically that you think SolFed- a federation of friends/comrades, and as far as I've experienced- fully decent human beings- should be shot.

If you can't learn some manners you can forget being taken seriously.

welshboy's picture
welshboy
Offline
Joined: 11-05-06
Mar 7 2009 23:56
888 wrote:
Why should it be binned? This is a record of a fairly important dispute, even if it is a rant.

It's not a dispute, it's delusional rubbish and not binning it is helping John make a tit of himself even further.
SolFed should be shot????
Fucking bin, I know I don't post here much anymore but for fucks sake that muppet who posted here as danny/messy got banned for coming out with crap like that.

Dumfries
Offline
Joined: 17-05-04
Mar 8 2009 00:13
BlackStarNorth wrote:
For the record, I was removed from the Afed list and ACOD after being informed that I had made criticisms of the AF in a private post to an AF member in Scotland. My description of the AF as being Leftist is correct. Tail-ending UAF and No Sweat (an AWL front) is not the way forward for Anarchy. By the way, my criticism of Sean Matgamna's politics - Socialist Organiser, now AWL - from first hand experience was actually removed from ACOD.

You're right, I can't see your post about Sean Matgamna, I don't know if it's just me being unable to find it or whether it was deleted, but even if it was deleted why do you think that was?

Your criticisms don't really make very much sense? Are you saying we're like the AWL or that we're worse than the AWL because we're not as radical as they are? Could you please clarify that...

On the issue of you being expelled for that reason it's the first I've ever heard of it and unless you are going to claim that the Scottish comrade who said you had resigned is lying then I think there's been a misunderstanding. As far as we understood you had contacted this Scottish comrade and said that not only were you uninterested in the AF but were taking a back seat with Disobey? Are you saying that's not what you said?

Dumfries
Offline
Joined: 17-05-04
Mar 8 2009 00:24
jonathan cottam wrote:
As soon as they don't agree I'm consigned to being a mentalist

[...]

Solfed should be shot along with police men and Trots

Hello?

jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 8 2009 00:35

Thrashing, i'm taking on board what you say and I do apreciate it, but as you can see it will take more than just me to be civil. why is SolFed accepted and post left not. You know post left or insurrectionalist anarchism is as classical a tradition as AF or SF yet we are nuttters and you have no job accepting, as Welshboy does, a tradition of betrayal from anarcho syndicalism, pre labourite anarchism had its faults but it never betrayed the workers.Maletesta was quite prone to walking into a village with a rifle and declaring anarchist- comunism, I think that insurrectionalist and post left anarchism are trying to move on from the roots in a progressive and good direction, SolFed just deny their problems and point out the CNT leaders were all FAI, as if being an anarchist-communist protects you in a high up union from betraying the workforce.

Dumfries
Offline
Joined: 17-05-04
Mar 8 2009 00:44

I know many insurrectionary anarchists who aren't nutters.

jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 8 2009 00:46

"delsional nutter" I'm supposed to be civil even with this rabid attack by welsh boy? I have a friend in SolFed who used to live in Preston, but believe me his ideas were soon side tracked, he left Preston for London because SF here were only interested in talks not action, before me in AF took over they nearly side tracked the entire movement in Preston with whingings like "You're wasting your energy, it will never go any where." Thats why I got five people to joined AF straight off.

would you call me a delusional nutter to my face? You have never met me but believe me you wouldn't. You think you can post anything you like on here but I'm a delusional nutter, I've been places you don't want to go mate and you don't want to call me that, try to be positive eh?

jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 8 2009 00:48

Joe Roe " i know many insurrectionary anarchists who are'nt nutters" Good on you mate.

jonathan cottam
Offline
Joined: 12-07-07
Mar 8 2009 01:33

Thrashing, I can't provide a thesis and tonight I am a little alcohol retardant, however I think it would be worth going over the main points i raised civily.

!. position papers/ pamphlets of postion cause alienation in the organisation and are static and theoretical, they don't represent peoples own autonomous srtuggle and they are rarely interventionist, meaning they don't come out of any struggle but are pure theory, further they represent an alienation between the group and the people they are trying to represent, meaning ordinary workers/people/excluded did not participate, neither experience and inovate on these ideolgies, ideologies themselves are static and can not be used as tools to intervene which depend on the situation and preferences of the workers/people/excluded.
2. These in turn should be flexible, as is a post left or insurrectionalist magazine which seeks to put together group or individual struggles according to the direct experience, not in a formulated position paper but on the groun or new from someones head it doesn't matter, what matters is there is a choice of real options, not some ones abstract theory taken from a biased history that is not relevant such as a position paper.
3.The point of formal organistion in a Bolshevik party is the siezue of power by an intelectual elite, in a platformist or federalist organisation it is the preservation of some ones ideolgy, rigid structures play absolutely no part in preparation for a revolution.
4.The AF has gone from a well meaning but mistaken belief that formal structure is the assurance of democracy to co-ercion and the maintanence of ideolgy against new comers, as with the 2/3 rule.
5.there is no paradigm for revolution in taking over industry through strike because it was always a flawed concept and now there is no industry, the insurrectionalists have never had a paradigm, we do not know how to bring about about anarchism either but we point out you are mistaken, the community remain a strong place for anarchism.
6.you expelled my comrades.
7.anarcho syndicalists are well meaning anarchists but it is the road to defeat because a union would have to negotiate with bosses and non anarchist workers, despite this and the 36 defeat AF wants a relationship with Solfed but will not enetertain a relationship with disobey,325 and Eaerth First. This is because you do not want any contact with groups that have proved that organistion is possible with anti-organisational principals.

Thrashing_chomsky
Offline
Joined: 3-06-07
Mar 8 2009 01:42

Right,

give me some texts on the post-left / insurrectionary anarchism and I'll give it a read, especially if you or the text can offer:

some insight into why your strand of Anarchism isn't taken seriously, and

whether its federalism itself, or AF/SolFeds version thereof that you think is standing in the way of the revolution.

yoshomon
Offline
Joined: 19-06-07
Mar 8 2009 03:10
Quote:
some insight into why your strand of Anarchism isn't taken seriously, and

Taken seriously by whom?

BlackStarNorth
Offline
Joined: 15-11-07
Mar 8 2009 07:34
Joe Roe wrote:
BlackStarNorth wrote:
For the record, I was removed from the Afed list and ACOD after being informed that I had made criticisms of the AF in a private post to an AF member in Scotland. My description of the AF as being Leftist is correct. Tail-ending UAF and No Sweat (an AWL front) is not the way forward for Anarchy. By the way, my criticism of Sean Matgamna's politics - Socialist Organiser, now AWL - from first hand experience was actually removed from ACOD.

You're right, I can't see your post about Sean Matgamna, I don't know if it's just me being unable to find it or whether it was deleted, but even if it was deleted why do you think that was?

Your criticisms don't really make very much sense? Are you saying we're like the AWL or that we're worse than the AWL because we're not as radical as they are? Could you please clarify that...

On the issue of you being expelled for that reason it's the first I've ever heard of it and unless you are going to claim that the Scottish comrade who said you had resigned is lying then I think there's been a misunderstanding. As far as we understood you had contacted this Scottish comrade and said that not only were you uninterested in the AF but were taking a back seat with Disobey? Are you saying that's not what you said?

My private post to Donnie in the Highlands was a response to his query as to how things were going in Lancashire. I made my point about the AF tail-ending Leftist initiatives - UAF, No Sweat, etc - and said that I would simply concentrate on supporting the Preston comrades. Donnie must have mentioned this to someone (I don't have a problem with that) because within a day or so I got a note from 'Membership' on the list basically saying goodbye. I was then shut out (on ACOD as well. I wasn't angry, just bemused.

The text of my missing contribution to ACOD (originally posted last year) is as follows:

In the dark and distant past, around twenty seven years ago in fact, AWL ‘founder’ Sean Matgamna once paid an unexpected visit to my home. Following the merger of his sadly misnamed International-Communist League with the Alan Thornett-led Workers Socialist League, of which I was then a member (i.e. dupe), he was on a charm offensive with many of the provincial foot soldiers that were unknown quantities to him.

I have little doubt that many contemporary Matgamnaites will have passed through the ‘John O'Mahony’ School of Trotskyist Blarney. But despite their eager-to-please smiles and, possibly, matey shouts of “Good luck!” they will no doubt be plotting yet another debilitating round of entryisms, fusions and splits. The focus will change, of course, depending on the political weather – the Fourth International (USec or USFI), the International Socialists, Workers Power, WSL, the Labour Party, NUS, etc, ad nauseum – now it’s increasingly likely to be on the future battle for a new ‘Workers’ Party’ (presumably so that the proletariat and the dispossessed can be doomed to suffer a re-run of the betrayals and crushing defeats of yesteryear.) This, however, would be par for the course for a tendency that in the early eighties, during its Socialist Organiser Alliance incarnation, sowed deeply damaging illusions in ‘old’ Labour reformism with its high profile campaign of “Make the Lefts Fight!”

Today, Matgamna, with his two state (rather than no state) ‘solution’ to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict - much in the same vein as his early 1970s perspective for Ireland - trundles on, in league with old cronies like Martin Thomas, from one opportunist turn to another. Needless to say, he will have an occasional achievement along the way; from say being a successful cheerleader for Boris Yeltsin to helping launch the career of one Kathryn Fletcher (arguably a new Sue Slipman in the making.) As a ‘professional revolutionary’ though, Matgamna, just like the proverbial leopard, will never change his spots. Check out the record for yourselves.

Joint action with Workers’ Liberty? It’d probably be safer meeting up with that nice Lucrezia Borgia for a glass of vintage wine. Still, if Sheffield comrades view some of the more recent (and thus not as yet zombified) AWL recruits as potential Anarchist Communists, then fine. Nevertheless it would be best to proceed with caution, lest in our zeal to corral more foals we rope a Trojan Horse instead.

BlackStarNorth
Offline
Joined: 15-11-07
Mar 8 2009 08:11
Thrashing_chomsky wrote:
Right,

give me some texts on the post-left / insurrectionary anarchism and I'll give it a read, especially if you or the text can offer:

some insight into why your strand of Anarchism isn't taken seriously, and

whether its federalism itself, or AF/SolFeds version thereof that you think is standing in the way of the revolution.

Thrashing_chomsky, it's probably the case that most of the active revolutionary anarchists around the world are insurrectionists operating with and from groups of affinity. No doubt they take themselves seriously in what they are committed to. Affinity groups are well organised but they tend to form, dissolve and then re-form again in response to ongoing struggles, therefore the chances of hierarchy and bureaucratisation setting in are very slim. The other main advantage of the Affinity group over the Fed structure is it is difficult to infiltrate and disrupt, whether by the State, the Bolshevists of Trotskyism et al, or Facists like the National 'Anarchist' charlatans. It is almost certain that the AF - along with many other bona fide anti-capitalist organisations - will contain one or two of these types of agent. IMO, Affinity groups offer greater effectiveness and security in the struggle.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Mar 8 2009 08:13

I think there is an answer to the disappearance of this post on ACOD. A load of stuff went missing when the system crashed. I recall it wasn't available for a week and when it came back posts for the week before had gone into internet heaven.

BlackStarNorth
Offline
Joined: 15-11-07
Mar 8 2009 08:33
Thrashing_chomsky wrote:
Right,

give me some texts on the post-left / insurrectionary anarchism and I'll give it a read, especially if you or the text can offer:

some insight into why your strand of Anarchism isn't taken seriously, and

whether its federalism itself, or AF/SolFeds version thereof that you think is standing in the way of the revolution.

Here are a few brief quotes and links for your interest:

"Post-left Anarchy is not something new and different. It's neither a political program nor an ideology. It's not meant in any way to constitute some sort of faction or sect within the more general anarchist milieu. It's in no way an opening to the political right; the right and left have always had much more in common with each other than either has in common with anarchism. And it's certainly not intended as a new commodity in the already crowded marketplace of pseudo-radical ideas. It is simply intended as a restatement of the most fundamental and important anarchist positions within the context of a disintegrating international political left." Jason McQuinn

“The spirit of anarchy is the inspiring alternative to the failed forms of pseudo-opposition, i.e. Liberalism and Leftism. If we are serious about ending this society, then anarchy must move in a clear independent direction and break the stranglehold of capitalist politics over rebellion. Right and Left, both elements of capitalist control, must be abandoned along with the society they created.” Wolfi Landstreicher

"In a totalitarian regime (whether it be political, like the Stalinist government of the former Soviet Union, or socio-economic, like the corporate capitalism of today,) in which the whole of human relations is regulated, fragmentary resistance to any one aspect of that regime - economic exploitation, environmental destruction, police brutality, child abuse, racism, sexism, social alienation - can only fail. The totality itself must be contested, the basic paradigms as well as their specific manifestations, not in order to impose another totalitarian order, but to open new horizons for everyone." Anarchist Society

http://325collective.com/library_what-are-anarc.html

http://325collective.com/library_informal-org.html

http://325collective.com/library_from-politics.html

The above website is a good resource, although I personally disagree with some of its outlook.

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Mar 8 2009 08:47
Quote:
Affinity groups are well organised but they tend to form, dissolve and then re-form again in response to ongoing struggles, therefore the chances of hierarchy and bureaucratisation setting in are very slim.

Bureaucratisation maybe (only maybe, I find consensus gatherings to be highly bureaucratic), but hierarchy? Seriously? Much as I like the Earth First! folks, there's clearly a strata of older heads who basically take charge whenever stuff is getting organised, even from within that group I've heard people talking about the 'alpha males'.

Quote:
The other main advantage of the Affinity group over the Fed structure is it is difficult to infiltrate and disrupt

Tell that to the Animal Rights movement. It doesn't matter how cliquey a group is, it always needs grunts to do the dirty work and that's always going to be a vulnerability, at least as much as would be the case in a more formal structure.

Dumfries
Offline
Joined: 17-05-04
Mar 8 2009 12:42
BlackStarNorth wrote:
[My private post to Donnie in the Highlands was a response to his query as to how things were going in Lancashire. I made my point about the AF tail-ending Leftist initiatives - UAF, No Sweat, etc - and said that I would simply concentrate on supporting the Preston comrades. Donnie must have mentioned this to someone (I don't have a problem with that) because within a day or so I got a note from 'Membership' on the list basically saying goodbye. I was then shut out (on ACOD as well. I wasn't angry, just bemused.

I had been trying to making contact with Preston comrades but that had proved completely impossible so I had brought this up with membership. At the time we were trying to ascertain whether people in Preston considered themselves members. The only two people we could get in touch with were Nightside in Preston and Sxe-Vegan in Blackpool. Nightside informed us that D & J no longer wanted to be members.

Then, when you sent this message it was obviously taken as an answer to our question and as an indication that you were no longer interested in being in the AF, if that wasn't the case then there was a big misunderstanding and I can only apologise for that. Nevertheless, it seems that you're not really interested in being in the AF anyway so it's not really a problem. Unless I'm wrong, in which case I am happy to sort it out.

Again, I'm sorry if you felt you'd be side-lined like that, I can truthfully say that was never out intention.

Quote:
Joint action with Workers’ Liberty? It’d probably be safer meeting up with that nice Lucrezia Borgia for a glass of vintage wine. Still, if Sheffield comrades view some of the more recent (and thus not as yet zombified) AWL recruits as potential Anarchist Communists, then fine. Nevertheless it would be best to proceed with caution, lest in our zeal to corral more foals we rope a Trojan Horse instead.

I see, so you're criticising the fact that some AFers worked alongside the AWL, is that right?

Fair enough, I can see your criticism but lets be clear on a few things. Firstly, the AWL comrades we have worked with have all been incredibly decent people and for what it's worth take the anarchist side on historical issues like the Ukraine and Kronstadt, so your previous reference to their historical role does not really relate to these particular AWL members. Secondly, we have been very selective in how we work with AWL and have actually been in a situation that led to some rather heated exchanges in regards to our involvement in one of their initiatives, which we formally withdrew from. Thirdly, Sheffield is void of an anarchist presence, or a presence of anarchists who are willing to actually do anything. The AWL in Sheffield are actually up for doing direct action stuff and we have worked along side them on issues like anti-militarism mostly with some success (Jon and other Preston group members actually came over from Preston to participate in an action with them). Our relationship with them is a marriage of convenience really and I can assure you we are only allies when it's necessary.

I think your comments about "tail-ending" UAF and No Sweat are totally and absolutely unfounded. No one has anything to do with UAF and individual AF members have every right to participate in campaigns (No Sweat) they choose to, or are you suggesting they're not? Which I think is only one AF member...

Does that clear things up?