A Three Stooges account of the failed effort to foment a transit system fare strike in San Francisco in 2005

115 posts / 0 new
Last post
thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
May 2 2007 04:06

Comrade Motopu's picture
Comrade Motopu
Offline
Joined: 27-04-07
May 2 2007 09:09

I have removed all full names, last names, and e-mail addresses, unless the names are of people who have included their full names on this site, like Kevin, people I know would not care, like Marc, or myself or close comrades. I hope this shows a good faith effort, and please don’t ban me.

KK:
“Esshan and Lamia had a heavy duty jam with Federal immigration pigs, and that was why they left; that's my understanding at least.”

CM: According to them, they were insulted by you calling them “anarcho-scenesters” and harassing them. Let me guess Mr. Reagan “can’t recall” ever doing such a thing.

KK: Norton is a former apparatchik of an outfit called 'Line of March.' He wrote their leaflets beacuse the other stumblebums have a long track record of being unable to do so; maybe they actually are all closet-primitivists applying the extraterrestrial critique of language articulated by John Zerzan in this.

CM: MN was in said group almost forty years ago and got kicked out. Is that really reason enough for us to refuse to even associate with him regarding the Fare Strike? You’re off your chum! You were a “teen-age marxist leninist” yourself (taken from the title of another one of your articles abut yourself), and more recently than Marc got kicked out of the Maoists. By your logic, no one should ever associate with you! Ha ha. Talk about painting yourself into an ideological corner. You’ve outdone yourself!

And how does the fact that Marc wrote to the Examiner make him our leader, a Leninist-Stalinist, or the person who wrote our flyers? I asked for proof of those things, you didn’t provide any, and you can’t, so stop obfuscating dude. Gifford was not interested in talking to the corporate press and Marc had always asked others if they wanted to talk to reporters. Jason, Josh, and others to were either too busy with school, too far away in the East Bay, or didn’t want to.
I found Dave Carr (that’s me, I can use my own full name) quoted on KPFA news the day the strike started, and two or three articles on the Fare Strike at the SF State paper (Xpress), as well as a Josh Wolf documentary on the strike, not to mention Aaron and others all over indymedia talking up the Fare Strike in their own terms, being openly anti-capitalist. None of these had any Marc Norton interviews. You like to imply things believing people outside the Bay Area will believe them, but what you never do is prove your assertions. Still waiting Kevin.

In this post, I really want to emphasize the sheer hypocrisy of Kevin’s opportunistic double standards.

Here is what Kevin said about working with anyone involved in a Stalinist group in 1995:

“We were and still are interested in talking to combatitive workers who hold what we feel are mistaken ideas about the validity of unions as organizations of working class struggle. But we also knew this particular effort was a project of MUNI workers who are politically allied with or members of the Progressive Labor Party.
...Pl was and is clear on the need for a proletarian revolution that would abolish wage labor, commodity production and national frontiers. However, their model for this allegedly having once existed was the Stalinist Soviet Union of the 1930s and Maoist China in the 1950s. While we are willing to talk to almost anyone under the right conditions, we do not engage in any form of joint action with Stalinist groups, and we are determined to fight for a communist perspective that will eclipse Stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism, etc.
From the Poor the Bad and the Angry, page 5.

Here he is in 2005 talking up the Drivers’ Action Committee, I’ll make the significance to Kevin’s supposed theoretical stance clear below:

Our leafletting of Muni drivers included a flyer inviting drivers to come to the first Town Hall meeting. Among those attending the first Town Hall meeting was Victor Grayson, a long-time Muni bus driver and key member of the Drivers Action Committee, a group of dissident Muni operators.
source:
http://libcom.org/library/muni-social-strikeout-the-failed-transit-fare-strike-in-san-francisco

What Kevin does not mention is that within the DAC, there is a large presence of Progressive Labor Party cadre, those folks he would “not engage in any form of joint action with.” But he merely describes them as “a group of dissident Muni operators.”

Here is a Chronicle article indicating two important people in the DAC, and noting their involvement with the Progressive Labor Party:

The Drivers Action Committee, the group of militant drivers who called for the slowdown, also urged drivers at AC Transit to join the no-overtime campaign.
There are political overtones to the organizing efforts by MURRAY AND HER HUSBAND, JOHN MURRAY, who is also a Muni driver. JOHN MURRAY IS ON THE EXECUTIVE BOARD OF THE PROGRESSIVE LABOR PARTY, a group that describes itself as ``revolutionary communist.'' The Murrays have played a major role in the organizing campaign, and some Muni officials say their activities were crucial to the two contract rejections.
(From a 2000 article on Muni drivers)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/09/02/MN109072.DTL

Here is a nice note from the same couple mentioned above. Note that Kevin Keating is a recipient.
-----Forwarded Message-----
From: E & J MURRAY <ej********@*****.net>
Sent: Jun 20, 2005 10:13 PM
To: Vic ****** <*******@*****.net>
Cc: Lamia ******* <l*******@*****.edu>, Kevin Keating <*****@****.com>,
Ehssan *****<*****@*****.net>, Farhan***** <*****@***.com>,
***** <******@*****.com>,
Liam ******* <*****@***.com>, *****l@***.net,
****@ix.****com

Subject: meeting, Examiner artilce, resolution

To all drivers and friends:
Drivers Action Committee at MUNI is having a meeting
on This Thur 6\23 at 7pm at the Starbucks (corner of
Bryant & Mariposa in SF, across from Potero Bus Barn)
to discuss building a movement of passengers and
drivers to fight the attacks on transit.

CM: Kevin was working with the Murrays and the Drivers Action Committee, in other words, working with Stalinists. While I am not making a judgment of someone working with militant Muni drivers who are involved in and supportive of the ideas of a Fare Strike, I just wanted to post this to make clear that it is beyond hypocritical for Kevin to paint us all as Leninists for working with a union guy who was a Maoist forty years ago, while he works with people who are currently open Stalinists.

I welcome any comments on this. How do people view Kevin’s rhetoric on this topic? Is he a hypocrite?

Here is what Marc Norton had to say in an e-mail, indicating that Kevin had been positioning himself as a choke point between riders and drivers (remember he then turned around and criticized us for “ignoring” the drivers!), and importantly that this open Stalinist had been one of Kevin’s coveted contacts/partners:

From: Marc Norton <******.com>
Date: June 21, 2005 2:48:22 AM HST
To: FareStrike@yahoogroups.com
Cc: ***@**.com, **@**.com, ***@igc.org
Subject: [FareStrike] Fw: meeting, Examiner artilce, resolution
Reply-To: FareStrike@yahoogroups.com

Some of you know that I had a talk with Ellen on the phone on Sunday morning. Now she has put me on her e-mail list, as you can see below. SO KEVIN IS NO LONGER THE BOTTLENECK FOR COMMUNICATION WITH HER FOLKS.

This sure looks like an open invitation. I'm planning on going. Who else can go?

In struggle,
Marc Norton

CM: Need more proof? Here is an e-mail from Kevin Keating telling folks that only he and a hand picked group can meet with drivers (and then instructing them to put up his posters around town!).
From:
"kevin keating" <*****@*****.com>
To:
baac@*****.org
Subject:
[BAAC] tonight's rank and rile MUNI meeting...
Date:
Wed, 4 May 2005 14:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Hi everyone,

Victor, the MUNI operator who spoke at the town hall
meeting Sun. night, invited 2 or 3 of us to attend the
rank and file meeting tonight. Those of us already
involved in Refuse to Pay/Social Strike have already
figured out who those three are. The meeting is not
open to more people than
that.

People who haven't been involved in the Social Strike
effort so far should plan on getting involved during
the next, very demanding phase of activity; we are
going to cover the main areas of SF with 11" by 17"
wallpaper-pasted posters drawing attention to the
drive for a social strike. It's very demanding,
energy and time-wise, so the more people who can get
involved at that point, the better.

Kevin Keating

CM: Well, of course people found out he'd been lying about drivers not wanting to meet with them, and even that Kevin had sent them to the wrong sites for meetings on more than one occassion.

Kevin Keating
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
May 2 2007 14:06

responding to "Sam Diego:"

1. It looks like eight people were interviewed for the prolix-leftist-airbrushed history version of the events, interviewd by the first person in the list. My source for this is one of the interviewed. A "discussion list" doesn't count as a person.

I know from long harsh experience how difficult it is to collectively get together even something as brief as a leaflet; to claim all nine people inetrviewed here "wrote the document" strains believability -- but that's a consistent problem with the Comrade Mobuto and GH set.

One of the people interviewed told me last Sunday, and I quote: "(GH, author of this doc) is a bullshit artist." This guy doesn't agree with my perpective, but ther's no unananimity of agreement among people who disagree with me, either.

2. If people have a problem with me and never communicate it to me, then I can't pick up the news via ESP -- or from poison-rumor-spreading; Comrade Mobuto, have you been taking lessons now from GH? He has a black belt in this sort of thing. Why, he could even teach classes in this, the kind of classes they offer on the inside of a pack of matches. I'll believe someone when i hear from them myself, not from a zero-credibility source like Comrade Mobuto.

I'd simply love love love to continue to respond to every little fixation of Comrade Mobuto, but I've got better things to do right now. I'm gonna go watch some paint dry.

OliverTwister's picture
OliverTwister
Offline
Joined: 10-10-05
May 2 2007 16:22

Surely its obvious by now that Kevin Keating is spreading lies about comrades, with no evidence.

Ban?

Kevin Keating
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
May 2 2007 16:54

See, this "Oliverttwist" character is typical of this social set in this benighted part of the globe; they can't address the substance of what I have to say, so they try to censor me.

What am I supposedly lying about, Olie? Is it that I am I not sufficiently loyal to the Lenin-Stalin guy who wrote your leaflets for you? Try to be specific -- and honest, if that's really within your reach.

And why are you cowering behind a fake name? Nothing you have posted could be of any interst to the cops, any more than the rest of your actions would be.

janky
Offline
Joined: 26-12-05
May 2 2007 16:55
Quote:
they can't address the substance of what I have to say, so they try to censor me

there is no real substance.

daniel's picture
daniel
Offline
Joined: 8-04-06
May 2 2007 17:41
Kevin Keating wrote:
The new, improved version of my article about this, with some of the leaflets, stickers, etc, can be found at:

http://www.infoshop.org/myep/muni_social_strikeout.html

I owe a debt of thanks to an excellent anarchist comrade, ChuckO of the Mid-Atlantic Anarchist Infoshop for helping to get this together.

Chuck0 - anti-sectarian extraordinaire!

Kevin Keating
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
May 2 2007 17:42

'Line of March' existed in the 1980's, not 40 years ago. This is the very least of the numerous inaccuaracies of Comrade Mobuto. 'Line of March' were ex-Maoists who re-discovered the "socialist" virtues of the USSR and regimes allied to it after the downfall of the Gang of Four. 'L of M' set themselves up in a critically supportive relationship to the Moscow-franchise C.P.U.S.A.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, and took most of the C.P. U.S.A. with it, 'Line of March' folded as well.

I demanded several times in a thread like this on anti-politics.net that Mobuto 'fess up as to the Leninist-Stalinist pedigree of Marc Norton. He dodged the question, again and again and again. And now, like with his spreading the lie that I harassed a woman who was in fact victimized by the author of the "FARE STRIKE! 2005..."prolix-leftist doc, he tries to weasle out of an honest, striaghtforawrd examination of what he was involved in.

There is a huge difference between having a political relationship with the only oppositional group among the mass transit system employees in an Italian style 'self-reduction' effort, and having a Leninist-Stalinist give political direction to your own effort. The first implies no concession to an organization like PL or to its politics -- and as a matter of fact, the drivers who were members of PL, a woman and her husband had both at that point either retired or were about to retire. The second one implies that you don't really know what you are doing.

Marc Norton made it clear at one of the Muni Social Strike meetings that he had written the content-poor leaflet that the conventional leftist culture of failure group 'Muni Fare Strike' distributed. Norton refused demands that he re-do the leaflet and include some sort of appeal to the drivers. At first he gave a dog-ate-my-homework excuse, claiming that their wasn't a big enough margin at the bottom of the leaflet to include anything about the employees of the transit system. Apparently he's a grown man who allows his word processing program to make his political judgement calls for him. And he can't remember the old days before desktop publishing, when you would have had to improvise with glue-stick and a scissors at the photocopy machine.

After that Norton got all petulant about his rights of authorship, as if his crappy leaflet was 'Guernica' or a Vermeer or something.

Go take a look at the crappy leaflet; its at the bottom of my artcile on the 'Love and Treason' page. It can also be found on display in the prolix-leftist doc. Compare it with the leaflet to the drivers, displayed at the opening of the doc on the 'Love and Treason' web page. Judge for yourself.

daniel's picture
daniel
Offline
Joined: 8-04-06
May 2 2007 19:35

I'd never heard the word 'prolix' before...

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
May 2 2007 20:12
daniel wrote:
I'd never heard the word 'prolix' before...

Comrade Motopu's picture
Comrade Motopu
Offline
Joined: 27-04-07
May 2 2007 21:35

KK:

1. It looks like eight people were interviewed for the prolix-leftist-airbrushed history version of the events, interviewd by the first person in the list. My source for this is one of the interviewed. A "discussion list" doesn't count as a person.

CM: Wrong. We didn't conduct a single interview for this. Each person wrote his or her own essay. They were posted at a chat site type thing. People then passed them around through email. Some were asked to reduce the length. General editing was done by three or four people regarding grammar, spelling etc. Some suggestions were thrown back and forth by all. The first page of principles were done together by the group, but of course they only restated what we had all been organizing around from the start: class struggle, anti-capitalist action through self organization. The last item, self organization, explains a dominating figure like KK was not part of our effort. GH's account was put first, because he wanted to provide a sort of introduction and background within his account, which we agreed to after finding our initial intro was getting in the way of jumping into the first hand accounts. To repeat, these are accounts, not interviews. The post from the discussion list Kevin mentions of course does not represent that discussion list, but the person who wrote it, making that, bizzarre rationalizations aside, the tenth person whose account is in our pamphlet. Many people took what they had been writing and posting during the strike and fashioned those into their actual essays. In one case, a Chinese person had posted her comments to one of us, and I myself went back and put her essay into more "standard" english, being careful to leave effective phrasing even if it was not "correct" and to not change the intent or meaning of anything. The historical precedents section at the end was done by GH, and everyone wanted it in. GH is very good on labor history, and on Bay Area radical history and political history. He's also been involved in working class struggle in the Bay Area for some time. We all liked his essay, so it was in, and it does give needed context to the issue of the Fare Strike/Social Strike.

KK:
I know from long harsh experience how difficult it is to collectively get together even something as brief as a leaflet; to claim all nine people inetrviewed here "wrote the document" strains believability -- but that's a consistent problem with the Comrade Mobuto and GH set.

CM: That's nice that you acknowledge the difficulty of this process, and yes, it explains why we took a while to get this thing together. Again, there were no interviews done for the pamphlet. I don't know what your source told you, but it sounds like you have distorted his or her's information, because you are simply 100% incorrect on your assertion.

KK:
One of the people interviewed told me last Sunday, and I quote: "(GH, author of this doc) is a bullshit artist." This guy doesn't agree with my perpective, but ther's no unananimity of agreement among people who disagree with me, either.

CM: Fine. But since your entire premise is wrong, why should anyone listen to any of this nonsense?

http://farestrike.org/

gatorojinegro's picture
gatorojinegro
Offline
Joined: 21-01-07
May 3 2007 00:20

Actually, I'm the person who Kevin is referring to who made the off-the-cuff comment about Gifford. Gifford and I discussed this today on the phone. Gifford and I agree we had a misunderstanding as to how the various accounts were to be used in the pamphlet. As i told Dave (Comrade M) and J. (main editor of the pamphlet), it was fine with me if they wanted to extract pieces from my own account (which is here on libcom).

I attended the first organizing meeting of the Muni Social Strike group, about six months before the actual fare strike. Kevin and I were the only middle-aged folks there. The group was mainly made up of 20something anarchists. I argued that, as this was a mass struggle, and it was necessary to draw ordinary folks into participation, they should create a mass organization, a riders' union, and start recruiting people to join, by doing things like tabling at major bus stops during busy periods. Both Kevin and the young anarcho-communists rejected this on the grounds that they wanted to use the fare struggle as an opportunity to put out their anti-capitalist, anti-market ideology, and they suggested that a mass organization, presumably because it would be politically diluted by ordinary folks, would end up being "reformist".

It is my view that to get mass participation it was necessary to start early developing a network of riders who could spread the struggle. Not doing that meant the strike itself was too dependent on the active intervention of the 50 activists who were involved. I didn't say so at that meeting, because I didn't want to insult them, but it is my view that the "we want our anti-capitalist politics in command" approach was vanguardist, because then it ensures control of the decisions and the struggle by a radical activist vanguard. Kevin's criticism of Marc's fare strike leaflet is also part of the problem here, as it reflects on his failure to appreciate that this has to be treated as a mass struggle, reaching large numbers of riders where they are at, politically.

My proposal for using this struggle to build a mass riders organization, and a rider/driver alliance, is how i would apply syndicalist politics to this struggle. Around 50 to 60 activists put a great deal of energy into the fare stike organizing but now there is nothing to show for it. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, that is why i think building a mass rider union should have been a central focus.

It was my perception that a number of the young anarchists seemed to look up to Kevin, as an older, more experienced comrade. But I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually tired of Kevin's relentless unwillingness to listen, and his constant patter of insults at those who don't agree with him. In letting Kevin get away with this for months, they were too liberal, in my opinion. They were unable to develop a practice of group discipline. Kevin now denounces the anarchists but that was not his opinion at the outset, because, I guess, at that point they were willing to give him some credibility.

Some of the young anarchists also had what I would regard as a naive spontaneist conception of how such a fare strike movement would occur. Some said that groups of riders would simply "self-organize" their bus stops. But why would someone do that if they didn't see a larger, organized movement they could plug into?

Doing outreach to community groups was another way to spread the word and get more people committed to support the struggle. An relevant group in this context was the Coalition for Transit Justice. CTJ had been endorsed by 35 communty groups. CTJ had done some lobbying against the fare hike and service cuts, and the Muni bureaucrats made some concessions, but it is very likely that this was simply part of the Muni bureaucrats' strategy: make ridiculous suggestions for draconian cuts so that you can then look reasonable when you back off.

Sarah, a tenant organizer who participated in CTJ, was at the first Muni Social Strike meeting as a liaison to CTJ. But Kevin insulted her, and throughout the struggle insulted CTJ at every opportunity. Some people in CTJ did not support the fare strike, especially the staffers for Tenderloin Housing Clinic (a housing NGO), and CTJ as a whole never endorsed it. That's why Marc Norton dropped out of CTJ. But there were some people in CTJ and some of the groups who did support the fare strike, or could be persuaded to aid it. It therefore made no sense to alienate or attack them. For example, the most important extension of the strike among the riders was the organizing by the day laborers organization. That organization was an endorser of CTJ. Because Kevin was liable to insult anyone whose political views didn't come up to his ideological test, it was not a venue that would be comfortable for ordinary folks to participate in.

Kevin's own account of the fare strike gives a positive assessment of the "town hall meetings" that Muni Social Strike invoked. But the first of these meetings, with about 50 people, was overwhelmingly people from the anarchist ghetto, with a small handful of Leninists and drivers from the Drivers Action Committee. It was a symptom of their isolation.

At the time it seemed to me that Kevin's fixation on the use of wall posters was too mechanical an approach to the organizing of the riders. I think you need to talk to people one on one and recruit more people, to be active, to spread the struggle. To their credit, the Muni Fare Strike group focused on this.

To his credit, Kevin did spend a great deal of effort on the outreach to the drivers, which included not only the DAC but also leafletting at bus turnarounds. This was one of the more positive actions of the Muni Social Strike group.

In my perception, the Muni Fare Strike group was a loose assortment of radical activists who came together to work on this organizing collectively. The Muni Fare Strike group had a variety of viewpoints in it. One person told me he agreed with Kevin's (left-communist) politics, but couldn't stand Kevin personally. I didn't see Marc dominating it. Marc's Leninist politics seems to me to be a red herring here. Besides, Leninists also came to the town hall meetings that Kevin describes approvingly. I think that in any mass struggle there are going to be people with a broad variety of viewpoints. So what if there are Leninists or Greens or whatever involved?

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
May 3 2007 00:25

Don't bother being reasonable Tom, it doesn't fit within the framework of this dialogue.

Sam Diego
Offline
Joined: 28-04-07
May 3 2007 02:28

Thanks for another viewpoint, gatorojinegro.

But this still begs the question: Kevin, there are 5 accounts of the 2005 SF fare strike on libcom, have you ever even looked at them? Or really even read them?

Your pseudo-critique that began this thread cites absolutely nothing from the Fare Strike text. You simply make unsubstantiated claims that have been repeatedly refuted by comrade motopu and now by gaterojinegro.

If you really read the Fare Strike text, it's plain that they are what they say they are: "First-Hand Accounts."

If you're claiming that one person did interviews or ghost wrote all 10, where's your proof? In form, they're clearly not interviews, as they even include excerpts of e-mails, and they're all in different prose styles. If one person wrote all 30-odd pages with all that variety in perspectives, it's a literary masterpiece.

But if, as I gathered from reading them, they're the accounts of 10 of the 50 to 60 organizers that gatorojinegro mentions, it's simply the participants trying to document what they did. Kevin, what's so wrong with that?

You're implying that all 10 people "air-brushed history." You obviously took Composition 101: where are the supporting details? The answers to the "wh-" questions? You know, the "who, what, where, why, when and how." We can't even begin to believe you until you make a persuasive argument. But you haven't even tried. You make all these broadly general claims, then people refute them and make counterclaims. You just answer these counterclaims with irrelevant facts about people that have nothing to do with the fare strike or even what's being discussed. If I was your teacher, you'd get a D-.

Frankly, Kevin, I doubt you ever read the Fare Strike pamphlet or any of Tom Wetzel's accounts. It's pretty clear that this whole smear campaign is nothing more than a vendetta against the many people you hate. I'll repeat what someone else picked up on: where the substance? Certainly 6 months of organizing for something can be summed up in something more impressive than a "prolix" string of insults?

If this is the best you got Keating, you're a pretty lousy writer.

Comrade Motopu's picture
Comrade Motopu
Offline
Joined: 27-04-07
May 3 2007 04:44

I found these cool lyrics online and although they're a bit prolixy, I thought it was uncanny how relevant they seem to our current debate:

Don't Fear the Keating
By Muni Rider Cult

All our busses have come
Here but now they're gone
Riders don't fear the keating
Nor do the wind the sun or the rain (we can be like they are)
Get on Muni (don't fear the keating)
Baby take my hand (don't fear the keating)
We'll be able to strike (don't fear the keating)
Baby I'm your pass
La-la-la-la-la-la-la la-la-la

The Self reduction's done
For now the fare strike's gone
Kevin Keating and Lenin Are together in eternity (Kevin Keating and
Lenin)
40,000 Muni Riders everyday (like the italian reducers)
40,000 men and women everyday (redefine Muni)
Another 40,000 coming everyday (we can be like they are)
Get on Muni (don't fear the Keating)

Baby write your pamphlet (don't fear the keating)
We'll be hegemonic (don't fear the keating)
Baby I'm your driver
La-la-la-la-la-la-la la-la-la

Love of riding free as one
Here but now fare is gone
Came the last night of sadness
When it was clear that she couldn't get on
Then the bus door opened and the wind appeared
The "Train in Vain" pamphlet disappeared
The electric wires flew and then Keating appeared (saying be afraid)
Come on baby (and she had no fear)
And she ran from him (then we boarded the 43)
She looked backwards and said goodbye (she had become a striker)
She had ridden for free (she had become like we are)
Get on Muni (don't fear the Keating)

Kevin Keating
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
May 3 2007 16:57

Looking over the posts on this list, at this point it's clear that i've dealt with the extremely small number of substantive points that have been raised. So, unless anyone has anything intelligent to say in the next day or so, and unless some worthwhile, intelligent and honest contributions start showing up on this thread, I'll make a few points in summation and then call it a day.

I've already wasted time in dialog or attempts with dialog with the off-the-rack-on-40%-off-sales-day-at-Macy's leftist boobs posting here. I don't need to waste further keystrokes on people whose politics are no good, who have never initiated any working class-oriented subversive action, contributed nothing positive to any such action, who have never sucessfully communicated anything to anybody, and who probably never will.

Kevin Keating
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
May 3 2007 17:00

Oh yeah, and by the way; contrary to what "Sam Diego" bleats, I don't "hate" anybody posting here. Why would I bother to work up such strong feelings over you? No one on earth pays that much attention to you. Why should I?

Smash Rich Bastards
Offline
Joined: 24-03-06
May 3 2007 17:11

...and with that, Kevin is outta here.

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
May 3 2007 17:16

Thank god. If that's how he acts in the Bay Area on a regular basis, my sympathies go to anyone who has to deal with him.

janky
Offline
Joined: 26-12-05
May 3 2007 18:27
MJ wrote:
Thank god. If that's how he acts in the Bay Area on a regular basis, my sympathies go to anyone who has to deal with him.

It is actually a lot worse. I made my decision never to work with him after getting out of an initial social strike meeting where he had a 40 minute monologue about how an auto-reductionist movement would magically bring about an anti-capitalist consciousness in the working class. People on the periphery were leaving left and right after he consistently attacked people attending the meeting for having different opinions or ideas on how to organize. I have nothing in common with groups who allow pompous egomaniacs such as Kevin to claim that they are doing working class people a service by being as obnoxious as he is.

Fundamentally, these "critiques" that he has made of the social strike have no merit or substance and are not based in reality. In fact, it was his participation which led to a split, and later a re-alignment, of those involved in organizing the social strike. Notice, that not even one person has come forward to defend Kevin Keating's actions except Chuck 0 who was separated from the situation by 1,000 miles.

Kevin Keating
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
May 3 2007 18:42

Those that can, do -- and those that can't stage protracted anonymous e-mail harassment campaigns, eh "Sam"...

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
May 3 2007 18:53
Kevin Keating wrote:
Those that can, do -- and those that can't stage protracted anonymous e-mail harassment campaigns, eh "Sam"...

Yay! He's back.

daniel's picture
daniel
Offline
Joined: 8-04-06
May 3 2007 21:04

if what'd been said is true, how in hell did you let this guy get away with (apparently) single-handedly destroying a campaign? black bloc I don't know anything except what I've read on this thread, but holy shit...

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
May 3 2007 21:07
daniel wrote:
if what'd been said is true, how in hell did you let this guy get away with (apparently) single-handedly destroying a campaign? black bloc I don't know anything except what I've read on this thread, but holy shit...

Everyone is insane in fringe-politics. If you begin from that premise, then convieniently suppress the knowledge - you can begin to understand.

janky
Offline
Joined: 26-12-05
May 3 2007 23:04
thugarchist wrote:
[
Everyone is insane in fringe-politics. If you begin from that premise, then convieniently suppress the knowledge - you can begin to understand.

ditto... throw in some youngins to boot. Watch them get eaten.

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
May 4 2007 14:21

"Hey cool, there's even an old guy in our group -- he says he was part of the Situationists or something..."

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
May 4 2007 20:35
MJ wrote:
"Hey cool, there's even an old guy in our group -- he says he was part of the Situationists or something..."

Dude. Len Bracken was a NEFAC supporter in the Roundhouse collective...

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
May 4 2007 21:09

hahaha

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
May 4 2007 21:10

Flint made me read his horrible book Stasi Slut too.

Kevin Keating
Offline
Joined: 8-10-06
May 4 2007 23:29

Are there any intelligent, articulate, thoughtful people out there who are still reading this thread and simply not posting on it? Or has it now de-evolved into being the plaything of drooling loser morons from NEFAC; the doltish and inarticulate "thugarchist," MJ, and 'Smash Rich Bastards'? 'Smash Rich Bastards,' boy, a handle like that clearly required a lot of thought. Which of his grandparents is he trying to scare with it?

I will say that it was nice of this spud 'Smash' etc, to post all those binky pictures of the members of the NEFAC Central Committee. If I'm ever in Montreal and find myself sitting next to one of them on a bus, I'll be sure to relenquish my seat to an elderly person.

If there are no sentient beings paying attention anymore, then we can just call this a wash. Comrade Mobuto, where did you go -- I miss you!

Kevin Keating