A question - NEFAC and national liberation

1182 posts / 0 new
Last post
Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Apr 25 2007 23:03
Revol68 wrote:
it's hilarious that the 'leadership of ideas' tendency is terrified of actually discussing them in any actual detail, instead we have various Joe Black and Smash Rich Bastards trying to downplay them as largely semantic differences.

To be fair they have tried to build a conspiricy theory, accuse people of slander, and tried to avoid political issues with mocking one liners too.

Please give credit where it is due.

Devrim

Flint
Offline
Joined: 17-12-05
Apr 25 2007 23:05
revol68 wrote:
From what I can tell youse are opposed to it, which is exactly my point. Wayne Prices shit doesn't add up, it's not consistent with internationalism and it's certainly not consistent with the views I've heard expressed by Quebec NEFACers. That is why I want to have this discussion about the actual issues instead of various people getting defensive and pulling down the shutters.

I think it's great that you talked to some Quebec NEFACers, once. I think you would be better off reading the actual position paper. The NEFACers in Quebec worked sometime on it, published it in their magazine, translated it into English, brought it up to the federation as a whole, where it was discussed, and overwhelmingly approved and adopted (I don't know if it was unanimous as I don't have the minutes in front of me, but it was either everyone or almost everyone in attendance). It is, to date, the best document NEFAC has collectively put out about any nationalist/national liberationist/separatist movement. Which isn't saying much; but it's what we've got.

Otherwise, maybe you want to argue with Wayne. Obviously, he's available in this forum to discuss with, or via private message, or probably the half-dozen ways you could contact him, like anarkismo.

NEFAC as a whole has made it's position clear in various official statements and position papers. Individual NEFACers have made it clear where they stand, and differences they perceive between their own individual positions, what they think the majority opinion is in NEFAC, and what they think is Wayne's position. You've already stated that you don't care what NEFAC does in regards to Wayne's membership.

If you want to argue with Wayne, go knock yourself out. He is always willing to engage completely irrelevant twits. The Spartacists, for example.

I'm sorry if you are upset that NEFAC largely doesn't care about Ulster. We might take a more active interest if the U.S. bombs you, or Canadian troops are used as peace keepers. Keep hope alive.

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Apr 25 2007 23:06
Quote:
leadership of ideas should be a verb

Unfortunately, it is actually a noun, and a prepositional phrase (consisting of a preposition, and an object noun)
Devrim

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:08
Devrim wrote:
Revol68 wrote:
it's hilarious that the 'leadership of ideas' tendency is terrified of actually discussing them in any actual detail, instead we have various Joe Black and Smash Rich Bastards trying to downplay them as largely semantic differences.

To be fair they have tried to build a conspiricy theory, accuse people of slander, and tried to avoid political issues with mocking one liners too.

Please give credit where it is due.

Devrim

Is it wrong to point out that you're little more than a total horrific stinking cunt? Can I get a Libcom moderator to rule on this? Please?

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:09
Devrim wrote:
Quote:
leadership of ideas should be a verb

Unfortunately, it is actually a noun, and a prepositional phrase (consisting of a preposition, and an object noun)
Devrim

You've been declawed by history kitty. Go lie down.

Flint
Offline
Joined: 17-12-05
Apr 25 2007 23:09

I'm thinking of proposing this for NEFAC's Aims and Principles:

Quote:
"War is God's Way of Teaching Geography to Americans"

Discussion, please?

Flint
Offline
Joined: 17-12-05
Apr 25 2007 23:14
revol68 wrote:
I would have thought those people in NEFAC who disagree with Wayne Price would be more willing to take him to task. Instead it seems like he's allowed to spout his shit unchallenged and when youse are asked about it youse just say it's not NEFAC's position, which wouldn't even be such a big deal if it wasn't for the fact Wayne Price never shuts the fuck up and has therefore made himself a defacto spokesperson for NEFAC. Surely those members of NEFAC with a basic commitment to Internationalism would be more pro active in distancing themselves from his bullshit? Cos as it is the loudest voice in NEFAC is a national liberationist muppet.

Wayne has a lot of time because he's retired. Anarkismo gets him to write a monthly column.

NEFAC is quite explicit when something is a shared position.

Once again, you'll notice that NEFAC doesn't post everything Wayne writes to our website.

He's actually one of the few people that doesn't get everything up.

He really should make it clear when he is writing something as his individual position (as in, personal capacity)--particularly when it differs or appears to differ from a NEFAC majority position.

There has been a lot of internal debate in NEFAC about Wayne's positions in regards to war, imperialism, nationalism and national liberation; and we often prefer other slogans to his. There has even been debate within Wayne's own collective, Open City.

I'm sorry that you can not distinguish between an individual and a collective. Have you considered creating a democratic centralist organization? It might provide a level of ideological control that you crave.

Flint
Offline
Joined: 17-12-05
Apr 25 2007 23:25
revol68 wrote:

no i can distinguish it's just abit strange that it's most promient member spouts shit that fly in the face of it's actual positions and comes in for very little in the way of criticism for it. That is that whilst I accept that NEFAC allows debate on such issues, it seems there is only one side to this one, with the others squirming in silence and then seeking to close down any discussion on the matter.

It could possibly be that most of us would rather not spout off about events elsewhere on the planet that we don't even have a tangential connection to, and also lack a lot of knowledge about what is going on there? In terms of the time it takes for us to come to collective positions, it's just not a good use of our limited resources. And, for whatever reason, most of us as individuals don't care enough about either the issue that Wayne is referencing, or lack the time to make a response.

Again, what about the East Timor article. Please Revol, tell NEFAC what to do? Thumbs up or thumbs down?

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:27
revol68 wrote:
Flint wrote:
revol68 wrote:
I would have thought those people in NEFAC who disagree with Wayne Price would be more willing to take him to task. Instead it seems like he's allowed to spout his shit unchallenged and when youse are asked about it youse just say it's not NEFAC's position, which wouldn't even be such a big deal if it wasn't for the fact Wayne Price never shuts the fuck up and has therefore made himself a defacto spokesperson for NEFAC. Surely those members of NEFAC with a basic commitment to Internationalism would be more pro active in distancing themselves from his bullshit? Cos as it is the loudest voice in NEFAC is a national liberationist muppet.

Wayne has a lot of time because he's retired. Anarkismo gets him to right a monthly column.

NEFAC is quite explicit when something is a shared position.

I'm sorry that you can not distinguish between an individual and a collective.

no i can distinguish it's just abit strange that it's most promient member spouts shit that fly in the face of it's actual positions and comes in for very little in the way of criticism for it. That is that whilst I accept that NEFAC allows debate on such issues, it seems there is only one side to this one, with the others squirming in silence and then seeking to close down any discussion on the matter.

How does "nobody gives a shit what you think" equate to "squirming in silence" and who exactly from NEFAC "tried to close down discussion" on any subject? It seems to me that more nefacers forced themselves onto the net to give their personal opinions than is usually the case. Individual internet activity is not a good way to judge how any real world organization functions I'd think. Maybe I'm just getting old.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:36
revol68 wrote:
But Waynes shit isn't just specific little takes on very specific areas or issues, it is sweeping statements like 'anarchists should support national self determination'. The kind of shit that should be straight away knocked into touch! How is it hard or irrelevant to challenge something as fundamentally incompatiable with internationalism as that?

So it wasn't true that you don't care what happens to The Hammer and you just want to have a discussion on anarchism and nationalism? You really are calling for NEFAC make sure The Hammer is "straight away knocked into touch!" Whatever that means.

throwhen
Offline
Joined: 19-12-06
Apr 25 2007 23:36
thugarchist wrote:
revol68 wrote:

let's be honest the Platform was mostly aimed at professional revolutionaries bringing their 'homogenous and finished programme' to the working class.

Of course the complaint here in this hilarious thread is that NEFAC isn't homgenous and finished enough...

i have been complaining for years about nefacs lack of discipline and ability to punish disenters. In america I'm usually considered a fucking bolshovik for this stance, but fuck, it sounds like i'd be accepted with open arms in england.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Apr 25 2007 23:38
Flint wrote:
Then with all due respect, since you can not be bothered to be involved in an organization or even make a minimum commitment like paying dues

That's funny, when I was paying dues in the AF, I paid well over minimum. Also I pay dues to libcom. There's currently not an organisation in the UK I can get excited about joining, I'm enthusiastic about libcom though, and put a lot of work into it.

Quote:
maybe you should shut the fuck up about differences of opinion within an organization and to what extent those differences should be allowed to be publicly expressed without being expelled.

Maybe you should try answering the fucking points instead of telling people to shut the fuck up.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:45
revol68 wrote:
Personally I don't see how his arguments don't breach the aims and principles but that's really not the issue, it's more the fact that other NEFACer's don't publiclly kick his retarded sub trot arguments into touch!

Why would anyone find it odd that most people don't spend a lot of time debating random people on the internet. I do but that just because I have no life.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:48
Mike Harman wrote:
Maybe you should try answering the fucking points instead of telling people to shut the fuck up.

Maybe a prominent NEFAC member (haha) like Flint should feel fine telling you to shut the fuck up.

Smash Rich Bastards
Offline
Joined: 24-03-06
Apr 25 2007 23:48
revol68 wrote:
Personally I don't see how his arguments don't breach the aims and principles but that's really not the issue, it's more the fact that other NEFACer's don't publiclly kick his retarded sub trot arguments into touch!

Also, I said Wayne "accepts" a stages theory, not that he necessarily "supports" it.

Sometimes I have a few too many drinks and accept the laws of gravity. Doesn't mean I support 'em.

When pressed he'll say he's an internationalist, class struggle anarchist and agree with our position on national liberation (which is against supporting the ideology -- as in aims and goals -- of national liberation movements).

throwhen
Offline
Joined: 19-12-06
Apr 25 2007 23:51
Flint wrote:
I'm thinking of proposing this for NEFAC's Aims and Principles:
Quote:
"War is God's Way of Teaching Geography to Americans"

Discussion, please?

this might be the funniest thing you've ever said.

i think herpes is gods way of telling people to stay away from duke

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Apr 25 2007 23:52
Flint wrote:
Tactics don't happen in a vacuum. A failure to retain and recruit, or grow recruitment... has an effect on whether demands for withdraw are even heard. Also, the folks often pushing hardest against recruitment are ALSO calling for immediate withdraw.

That doesn't mean they're both equally good ideas though.

Quote:
So, mass demonstrations are helpful then? What do you think mass demonstrations are doing besides calling for withdraw?

They're visible, that's it. In the case of the big UK demonstrations in 2003, the main ones happened before the war broke out, so they must have been doing something other than calling for withdrawal. They were also pretty fucking useless in themselves - the one thing that had a chance to develop was the school strikes (loads of kids high-school age kids just running out of school and blocking roads), they didn't last long though - probably at least partially because so much focus went into the demonstrations. I think I went to one in April or May, and it was like 300 swappies marching out of a university, fucked if I was marching with that bunch of cunts and no-one else. The diversion of any real struggle into endless "massive" protests is what really killed the fierce anti-war feeling, no matter how nice it was to be on the February 15th demo.

Mike Harman wrote:
Certainly. I'm all for a general strike against war. I wrote:
Quote:
When a state is determined to pursue war, and all forms of indirect symbolic protest actions have failed to sway politicians to halt their imperialist aggression, the only remaining option is direct action by the working class. One option is a general strike by workers that can effect the production and transportation of military capital, that is the materials essential for the war machine. The other is to deprive the military of the labor it needs to fight the war.

Others in NEFAC have pointed out that we need to strike against the war. NEFAC has pointed out that we need to object, desert, mutiny, strike and revolt.

Again - calls for a general strike (which Workers Power I think did, down a fucking megaphone on the marches), are as empty as calling for immediate withdrawal if there's nothing to back it up. I said "long term", not let's run around on demos with a megaphone calling for a general strike.

Quote:
But this stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum. You've got to have the mass demonstrations calling for immediate withdraw to provide the political space and public support for more militant tactics to be popularly supported. In the Vietnam war, deserting and objecting troops were explicit in saying the mass demonstrations gave them moral confidence to oppose the war.

That's all they do though, and like I said the hermetic insistence on more and more of them - it was like every fucking week for a while, by the STWC, burned out a lot of people.

Quote:
You just can't pick "general strike against war" as the only tactic you are going to use like it was an option on a menu.

And I said this where?

Quote:
As it is, going into the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq; it sounded like the only folks who had organized labor in a position to actually wage a general strike against the war was in the U.K.

Are you mad?

Quote:
It's conceivable that you folks could still organize a general strike to force the U.K. to withdraw.

and again. I think you need to read some of the threads on here about UK strikes somehow. Is your monitor rose-tinted or something?

Quote:
Anyway, yeah... mass demonstrations, calls for immediate withdraw and the like are weak actions, they are indirect actions, they are begging. It sucks. That's not the same thing as them having absolutely no effect. There is an effect. Sometimes the folks who are effected aren't even the ones the demonstrations are officially targeted at.

The point isn't that they're automatically bad, it's that the liberals, trots and stalinists (and in the UK Islamist groups like the MAB) will go run around like headless chickens organising them, so we don't have to.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:53
revol68 wrote:
thugarchist wrote:
revol68 wrote:
Personally I don't see how his arguments don't breach the aims and principles but that's really not the issue, it's more the fact that other NEFACer's don't publiclly kick his retarded sub trot arguments into touch!

Why would anyone find it odd that most people don't spend a lot of time debating random people on the internet. I do but that just because I have no life.

Well it wouldn't be if it wasn't for the fact there are alot of NEFAC people already on the internet debating all sorts of shit.

I think the reaction to this thread shows exactly how committed to real debate and discussion NEFAC are. But sure any old leftist shit will do for the platformists.

What reaction. NEFAC said they don't support nationalist ideology. Other than that 'ask the question get the answer' two post exchange the rest is just typical internet garbage.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:54
throwhen wrote:
Flint wrote:
I'm thinking of proposing this for NEFAC's Aims and Principles:
Quote:
"War is God's Way of Teaching Geography to Americans"

Discussion, please?

this might be the funniest thing you've ever said.

i think herpes is gods way of telling people to stay away from duke

Yer mum.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:57
thugarchist wrote:
revol68 wrote:
thugarchist wrote:
revol68 wrote:
Personally I don't see how his arguments don't breach the aims and principles but that's really not the issue, it's more the fact that other NEFACer's don't publiclly kick his retarded sub trot arguments into touch!

Why would anyone find it odd that most people don't spend a lot of time debating random people on the internet. I do but that just because I have no life.

Well it wouldn't be if it wasn't for the fact there are alot of NEFAC people already on the internet debating all sorts of shit.

I think the reaction to this thread shows exactly how committed to real debate and discussion NEFAC are. But sure any old leftist shit will do for the platformists.

What reaction. NEFAC said they don't support nationalist ideology. Other than that 'ask the question get the answer' two post exchange the rest is just typical internet garbage.

Edit--- I count 5 necac folks on this thread. Flint, MJ, Dave, SRB, and The Hammer. Thats a lot? Or is that just the ones that are bored at work or finished polishing their war staff?

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 25 2007 23:58
revol68 wrote:
Quote:
What reaction. NEFAC said they don't support nationalist ideology. Other than that 'ask the question get the answer' two post exchange the rest is just typical internet garbage.

well considering quite a few people of a platformist persuasion believe there is a difference between supporting national liberation and nationalism it would suggest the issue is somewhat more complicated (in their minds anyway!).

Who are these "quite a few" you're refering to?

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 26 2007 00:02
revol68 wrote:
Wayne Price, Joe Black, GeorgeStapleton and a few others as far as I can remember have all argued that their is a difference and that it is possible to support 'national liberation' without supporting 'nationalism'.

Well I don't pay attention to foreigners on the subject of nationalism.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Apr 26 2007 00:10
Flint wrote:
But for someone to lecture us about organizational discipline who 1) doesn't pay dues,

I pay dues, but not to the AF.

Quote:
2) doesn't go to meetings,

I went to a meeting last week. I even had to go to a massive shopping mall with my wife twice in two weeks to make up for it.

Quote:
3) doesn't even participate in an email list

I don't get it any more. Hopefully this is because they went through the people who hadn't paid dues for ages and chucked them off, can't remember now if I got an e-mail about it (sorry AF if I did, I was probably reading it with my daughter asleep on my shoulder), if I was still on it I'd be worried about the security of the organisation although it's not as if I don't have regular informal contact with AF members and get on well with them etc.

Quote:
(yet finds oodles of time to moderate a web forum)...

I think you'll find that's "do a large proportion of the tech and design work on the sexiest commie website in the world (apart from prole.info, they're sexier than us, but hopefully not tooo much)."

Quote:
in what meaningful sense do they participate in the organization and should they have any control of it?

In what way am I trying to "have control" over NEFAC? I'm asking some questions on a discussion forum. If I randomly turned up at one of your meetings and demanded Wayne's expulsion (which I've not even done on this thread, just said his views seem to be incompatible with those of the organisation), then that'd still be a weird thing to say.

Quote:
Catch, and presumably you... who are by no means alien to revolutionary politics, are dictating what level of ideological discipline should be enforced in political groups WHEN YOU AREN'T EVEN MEMBERS OF GROUPS.

Dictating? I think you should take some deep breaths and check your CAPS LOCK key.

Quote:
If you WERE members of organizations, you might understand how this sort of thing works and how spending all your time policing for ideological purity and rigidly control the expressions of members in a voluntary organization is counter to actually getting practical stuff done.

Actually one person who used to post on here, as Gentle Revolutionary, was in the AF at the same time as me, but used to slag it off on-line, and constantly go on about how the (trotskyist/luxemburgist) AWL were so much better, and loads of other stupid stuff. Let's say I was quite pleased when he quit and the As&Ps didn't get changed to be soft on religion, pacifist, vegan and some of the other rubbish he would go on about. Despite being single, not having a kid, not having a job, and not having black mould and windows falling out of his house before the kid arrived, I think he went to as few meetings as I did despite demanding that the AF (and the other nine organisations he was a member of) got involved in all kinds of nonsense. Being in an organisation doesn't make you a good revolutionary, that's down to the organisation and your behaviour in it, otherwise I expect to see you bowing to the superior size and discipline of the SWP.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Apr 26 2007 00:33
MJ wrote:
Wow, you think that by mentioning our "actual participation in the real world" I meant "we don't just put up boring documents about our position on the Internet, we actually print them out and hand them out on the street"? Ha ha ha. You must be real fun at parties.

No, I mean that if you try to pretend the internet isn't a part of the real world to excuse members mouthing off on it, then you're putting your head in the sand. It's much easier for me to read Wayne Price on anarkismo than it is for me to get a hard copy of North Eastern Anarchist - and I actually know where to go to get a hard copy of North Eastern Anarchist unlike 99.999% of the rest of the UK.

MJ wrote:
Oh no! "NGOs" "help indigenous populations" so clearly it would be counterrevolutionary for us to hook up with indigenous people in struggle! Fucking dumbass. Of course we're giving qualitatively different support and in specific situations where "NGOs" wouldn't.

All I asked was for an outline of how your support was qualitively different. Instead I get "fucking dumbass".

Quote:
I've made it clear that all these things are not central focuses of our work...

No but they're obviously important enough that you brought them up for discussion.

Quote:
Well, you'd probably get along pretty well with the mainstream anarchist movement in the US.

**shudders**

Quote:
Their line. Which as I read it is pretty much proletarian internationalism and NOT anti-imperialist nationalism.

Well "pretty much proletarian internationalism" is pretty much fundamental anarchist communism, so doesn't need to be taken from a front group like HOPOI by proletarian internationists right? But yet you went out of your way to say "based on HOPOI's line", not "a opposing the invasion of Iran on a class basis", which would be fine.

Quote:
At this point you have clearly crossed from participating in the discussion in good faith, because you're just frothing at the mouth and throwing whatever you can against anything we say about our group.

No, you're feeding me stuff that I can't resist, stop it.

Quote:
An anarchist in the US shouldn't pay any mind to US-Iran brinksmanship because it would inevitably just strengthen the position of the Ahmedinijads of that society, right?

Yeah, I obviously don't think anyone should give a shit about Iran. That's why I didn't post up any of these articles, at all. http://libcom.org/tags/iran

The rest of your post is just craziness, I post up the actual groups behind an innocent looking front group some of your members seem to think were alright, and you think I'm calling you crypto-Stalinists. I dunno.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Apr 26 2007 00:38
Devrim wrote:
This is more complex. We are against this as we feel that it is merely empty sloganering, ironically what we are often accused of. If we thought that it was more than an empty slogan we would raise it. For example when there were strikes against the first Iraq war by Turkish workers on the US base near Batman, it was a the right time to raise the slogan organise strikes against the war. It seemed to be a possibility even though that was the only action. Your slogan seems to me to be completly empty leftist rhetoric.

Of course I only speak for EKS in Turkey, and not for everyone else who disagrees with you.

Devrim

No that covers me as well. Although I'm not accused of empty sloganeering nearly half as much as you lot get it. Must be doing something wrong.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Apr 26 2007 00:54
revol68 wrote:
clearly it's cos you don't live in a country with significant national liberation movements!

That must be it. There was a joke in there about Plaid Cymru and HOPOI but bed is calling.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Apr 26 2007 01:01
revol68 wrote:
Mike Harman wrote:
Devrim wrote:
This is more complex. We are against this as we feel that it is merely empty sloganering, ironically what we are often accused of. If we thought that it was more than an empty slogan we would raise it. For example when there were strikes against the first Iraq war by Turkish workers on the US base near Batman, it was a the right time to raise the slogan organise strikes against the war. It seemed to be a possibility even though that was the only action. Your slogan seems to me to be completly empty leftist rhetoric.

Of course I only speak for EKS in Turkey, and not for everyone else who disagrees with you.

Devrim

No that covers me as well. Although I'm not accused of empty sloganeering nearly half as much as you lot get it. Must be doing something wrong.

clearly it's cos you don't live in a country with significant national liberation movements!

Yeah, 'cause thats remotely close to what anyone said.

throwhen
Offline
Joined: 19-12-06
Apr 26 2007 01:07

seriously i might be the only anarchists that actually supports nationalism.

who gives a fuck?

I'd waive a fucking flag, I did last may day at the immigration rally of close to a million folks in chicago.

throwhen
Offline
Joined: 19-12-06
Apr 26 2007 01:12

for what? disagreeing with the standard anarchists line?

Smash Rich Bastards
Offline
Joined: 24-03-06
Apr 26 2007 01:14
revol68 wrote:
Quote:
You're both apart of the European Union. Unless there is some serious envy about how they paint their mailboxes in the twenty-six counties its kind've a moot point by now, isn't it?

you'd think, anyway don't tell me that, tell it to the WSM and their rather confused position paper.

Dear WSM, its a moot point.

Besides, a united Ireland means there is a greater chance that you'd have to be apart of the same organization as Revol.

Think about it.

Topic locked