Behind The Circled A?

[MilitantAnarchist]

Right, another sort of wierd one here, but no offence but can some ANARCHISTS answer this, cos all i get from commies is bullshit and insults(yea yea i no, stop freaking out, your fault for being snotty not mine)....... BUT, the circled a comes from Anarchy is Order (the 'O' being the circle).... but, i dont FULLY 100% understand what it means, i no the rest of it is 'government is chaos' but the way i feel is order is somthing that is bad, order means rules, and rules meen oppression, thats how i feel...... but the way i see it is that there is order in self governing, because it is order for yourself.... but with government, the oppression creates division which causes personal chaos......
Thats how i read into it, but what is your oppinion on it?

(also, please dont fucking ***** and moan because i dont want commies here, because you are pretty much making a rod for your own backs, whatever ive said on here, all the stalinist, trotskyist, commie lot have just disagreed and moaned, and i actually want to do somthing productive here)

[Blackscare]

You do know that most anarchists are also communists, right?

[Sean]

Moved from Philosophy.

[MilitantAnarchist]

You do know that most anarchists are also communists, right?


No, you see i fell for that but it is what you commies want us to think... i dispise commies as much as nazis, especially because i nearly bought into that marxist con.
Communism is a load of socialist shite! Stalin? Pol Pot? Yea right, shove it mate...

[Forward Union]

the way i feel is order is somthing that is bad, order means rules, and rules meen oppression, thats how i feel...... )

There will be rules in an Anarchist society. Enforced by a police/army. Though many Anarchists prefer to call this organ a "workers militia" to distinguish it from the current institutions. The sort of Anarchist society you seem to envisage has never really been proposed or supported by anyone in history.

And yes. Most anarchist are communists.

[MilitantAnarchist]

There will be rules in an Anarchist society. Enforced by a police/army. Though many Anarchists prefer to call this organ a "workers militia" to distinguish it from the current institutions. The sort of Anarchist society you seem to envisage has never really been proposed or supported by anyone in history.

And yes. Most anarchist are communists.

What are you on mate, Who the hell are you to talk about that? That is the complete opposite of what anarchy means, ANARCHY IS AGAINST ALL THAT SHIT!
And i am an anarchist, and i am not a commie. Commuist ideas are good on paper, and i partially believe in its ideals, but im not interested in it.
Your mistaken i think.....
And whats that got to do with my question? Is that your answer...
Will you be at the Anarchist Conference in June? Cos i'd love to hear you call the anarchist communites commies.

[Cynical Observer]

There will be rules in an Anarchist society. Enforced by a police/army. Though many Anarchists prefer to call this organ a "workers militia" to distinguish it from the current institutions. The sort of Anarchist society you seem to envisage has never really been proposed or supported by anyone in history.

And yes. Most anarchist are communists.

actually it has been proposed by some immature teenagers and anarcho-capitalists:D

but seriously, Militant Anarchist, anarchy is really just true communism, the key difference between marxist thought and anarchist thought is that marxists think we need a state to ease our way into communism where anarchists believe we are capable of ruling ourselves immediately and that creating a new state would be counter-revolutionary. Study more then u can bash the commies :p

[gorillafuck]

Will you be at the Anarchist Conference in June? Cos i'd love to hear you call the anarchist communites commies.
Then what would you call the way they run their economics?

[Mindtoaster]

Cos i'd love to hear you call the anarchist communites commies.

Making glaringly obvious statements tends to warrant pretty uninteresting reactions.

[Blackscare]

You seem to have no clue what the hell Anarchism is. If you don't support communism (or any of that "socialist shite"), then what are you? Capitalist? Anarchism isn't an economic system.

You don't seem to be the least bit "left", or even comprehend what "left" means, actually. You're just for smashing the state and any form of social order.

In fact, you sound pretty damn reactionary to me.


Making glaringly obvious statements tends to warrant pretty uninteresting reactions.

QFT

[#FF0000]

What are you on mate, Who the hell are you to talk about that? That is the complete opposite of what anarchy means, ANARCHY IS AGAINST ALL THAT SHIT!

Anarchy is not against order. Think about it. Would you fight to overthrow the staff at a soup kitchen just because they're organized? Anarchy is not against order. Order's great. I love order. We just don't think involuntary, irrational hierarchy and statism are necessary to have order. Horizontally organized communities are a better way to go, I think. Probably a more effective means of getting everyone's needs met as well.


And i am an anarchist, and i am not a commie. Commuist ideas are good on paper, and i partially believe in its ideals, but im not interested in it.
Your mistaken i think.....

No. You're the one that's mistaken. But it's alright. Happens to everyone.

In any case, which communist ideas do you not believe in? What do you believe in instead? I'm really curious.


And whats that got to do with my question? Is that your answer...
Will you be at the Anarchist Conference in June? Cos i'd love to hear you call the anarchist communites commies.

Anarchists are communists. They aren't state socialists like Marxist-Leninists and Trotskyists are, but they are communists, because they believe in a stateless, classless society, in which the means of production are controlled by the workers.

[MilitantAnarchist]

Commies Under Nazi Thought
****S
Shove it right up your arse, i am who i am. I believe what i believe. I dont want you to respect it, or even understand it... But i aint no commie, and no one i no classes themselves as commies, we're anarchists, and what no part of the system...
Suck eachother off all you want, your middle class ****s, and i declare you all my enemy... and the ones calling yourselves anarchists, your traitors, infact your just fucking thick... see you in the street one day hopefully commies

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)

[Cynical Observer]

Commies Under Nazi Thought
****S
Shove it right up your arse, i am who i am. I believe what i believe. I dont want you to respect it, or even understand it... But i aint no commie, and no one i no classes themselves as commies, we're anarchists, and what no part of the system...
Suck eachother off all you want, your middle class ****s, and i declare you all my enemy... and the ones calling yourselves anarchists, your traitors, infact your just fucking thick... see you in the street one day hopefully commies

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)
dude why are u so fucking hostile?! we're trying to tell u what communism and anarchy really are and figure out how to debate with u civilly and ur just gonna blow up? u came on here insulting people and refused to let anyone try to speak to u, instead of embracing actual anarchists u insulted us, i'd say that makes u the traitor.

[#FF0000]

Commies Under Nazi Thought
****S
Shove it right up your arse, i am who i am. I believe what i believe. I dont want you to respect it, or even understand it... But i aint no commie, and no one i no classes themselves as commies, we're anarchists, and what no part of the system...
Suck eachother off all you want, your middle class ****s, and i declare you all my enemy... and the ones calling yourselves anarchists, your traitors, infact your just fucking thick... see you in the street one day hopefully commies

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)

I think there are people here who've been anarchists before you were even born.

[mykittyhasaboner]

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)

We equally don't care cos we are all commies who want to oppress you on the internet. Seriously, fuck off. You are the one of the most antagonizing people I've ever seen on this site.

[Decolonize The Left]

Commies Under Nazi Thought
****S
Shove it right up your arse, i am who i am. I believe what i believe. I dont want you to respect it, or even understand it... But i aint no commie, and no one i no classes themselves as commies, we're anarchists, and what no part of the system...
Suck eachother off all you want, your middle class ****s, and i declare you all my enemy... and the ones calling yourselves anarchists, your traitors, infact your just fucking thick... see you in the street one day hopefully commies

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)

Alright buddy, you need to calm down and listen for a minute. Like you, I'm an anarchist. I am opposed to the state, to hierarchy, and to unjustified authority. I believe in a classless, stateless, egalitarian, society.

We, as anarchists, need to work to foster such a society. We need to ask the question: how ought such a society to be organized? Well, if it's classless, what we currently call the 'working class' (i.e. the vast majority of the world's population) will be in control of the means of production. This destruction of the capitalist system will eliminate the existence of classes.
If it's stateless, this group of people will need to organize in a de-centralized manner.
If it's egalitarian, this group of people will need some sort of identity over-and-beyond that of identity politics (race, gender, sexual orientation, etc...).

What does this look like?

It looks like a communist economy, that is, an economy whereby the working class controls the means of production and resources are distributed according to need and ability.

Anarchism is a political ideology.
Communism is an economic theory.

- August

[Idealism]

Right, another sort of wierd one here, but no offence but can some ANARCHISTS answer this, cos all i get from commies is bullshit and insults(yea yea i no, stop freaking out, your fault for being snotty not mine)....... BUT, the circled a comes from Anarchy is Order (the 'O' being the circle).... but, i dont FULLY 100% understand what it means, i no the rest of it is 'government is chaos' but the way i feel is order is somthing that is bad, order means rules, and rules meen oppression, thats how i feel...... but the way i see it is that there is order in self governing, because it is order for yourself.... but with government, the oppression creates division which causes personal chaos......
Thats how i read into it, but what is your oppinion on it?

(also, please dont fucking ***** and moan because i dont want commies here, because you are pretty much making a rod for your own backs, whatever ive said on here, all the stalinist, trotskyist, commie lot have just disagreed and moaned, and i actually want to do somthing productive here)

Id tend to think you are an individualist, in which case you belong in the OI. Or youre not, and are just horribly confused as to what either communism or anarchism is. Or both.

[Chalk]

Why are you guys even bothering with this one? :p You could forcefeed him any form of theory and he'd probably just puke it up and blame it for smelling bad.

[Post-Something]

Right, another sort of wierd one here, but no offence but can some ANARCHISTS answer this, cos all i get from commies is bullshit and insults(yea yea i no, stop freaking out, your fault for being snotty not mine)....... BUT, the circled a comes from Anarchy is Order (the 'O' being the circle).... but, i dont FULLY 100% understand what it means, i no the rest of it is 'government is chaos' but the way i feel is order is somthing that is bad, order means rules, and rules meen oppression, thats how i feel...... but the way i see it is that there is order in self governing, because it is order for yourself.... but with government, the oppression creates division which causes personal chaos......
Thats how i read into it, but what is your oppinion on it?

(also, please dont fucking ***** and moan because i dont want commies here, because you are pretty much making a rod for your own backs, whatever ive said on here, all the stalinist, trotskyist, commie lot have just disagreed and moaned, and i actually want to do somthing productive here)

Is it oppression for society to have a rule against murder?
What about against rape?
You have to have rules in place to stop oppression, surely?

No Anarchist seems to advocate what you do...you just sound like Marquis de Sade on cocaine to be honest.

[Sprocket Hole]

For fuck's sake man, you dont need to explode when most of the people posting are just explaining or asking questions. Don't you even fucking call people here "middle class", when you know nothing about anyone posting here. Honestly, I think your politics are "middle class".

I can understand why you would not want to be dubbed a "commie", but shit, if you would listen to what people are trying to explain to you, communism doesnt simply mean "brutal dictatorship commanding the economy". It is an economic system based on community. Assuming most of your anarchy buddies arn't individualists, or capitalists (even though you sound like an individualist), how do you think they propose to run their society?

If anarchy is order, and your an anarchist, why do you oppose anything organized? Do you think an anarchist society people will be allowed to, say, rape each other? You think that is guarunteed under your "freedom of the individual" thing? What about the freedom to not be raped?

That may be an extreme example, but from what I understand freedom under anarchy is pretty much anything that doesnt take from the freedom of someone else.

Didn't this start with you complaing about rules that have been voted on to ensure illegal info isnt posted? Or so people can't make misogynist or racist remarks? If you where free to do such things on this board you would be taking from the freedom of other members. Understand?

FYI, you shouldn't be suprised if people are ticked off at you. You came off hurling insults at a large community of the board.

[Rjevan]

Communism is a load of socialist shite! Stalin? Pol Pot? Yea right, shove it mate...
Socialist shite? Hell, what do you think the left is all about? Racism and capitalism? And while you could argue with "Stalinists" like me about Stalin being great or not - Pol Pot? :confused:
Seriously, I have never ever heard of anyone on this planet who admires Pol Pot or even claims that he was a communist/socialist/left-winger (besides of some Khmer Rouge who are facing trial at the moment). Pol Pot is nothing but a totally mad mass murderer, his policies were as much communist as Hitler's were. Just because somebody labels left-wing and waves a red flag this doesn't automatically mean that he is a true revolutionary, fighting for communism.

And what do you mean with "We Anarchists are not part of the system"? We Communists are neither. Do you think we're working together with the government and the burgeoisie because we're out for winning the next election and then lowering wages and heighten taxes and starting a few wars to strengthen weapon industry? Then I have to disappoint you.

But even I, as a Marxist-Leninist, have to say that I'm flabbergasted about your view on Anarchism. You seem to think Anarchism is about throwing Molotov cocktails, burning cars and enjoying total chaos without anyone to stop you? I don't believe in Anarchist ideas but at least I have a clue what they are about. You seriously should read some basic works and get clear what "Socialism", "Anarchism" and "Communism" means, just being a left-winger because someone is in his/her pubertal phase and wants to annoy his/her teachers and parents but without having a clue what he/she talks about is nothing but embarrassing.

[ZeroNowhere]

Guys, calm down, there's enough responses to that post already. Insulting somebody adds nothing to the discussion, and 22 wrongs don't make a left.


Anarchism is a political ideology.
Communism is an economic theory.
Technically, all anarchists are socialists, so anarchism would necessarily also be an 'economic theory'.

[Sean]

Guys, calm down, there's enough responses to that post already. Insulting somebody adds nothing to the discussion, and 22 wrongs don't make a left.
Agreed, but I'd like to keep it open in case he comes back with some sign of improvement or at least tells me what he's been smoking.

[Forward Union]

Originally Posted by MilitantAnarchist http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../showthread.php?p=1437955#post1437955)
Commies Under Nazi Thought
****S
Shove it right up your arse, i am who i am. I believe what i believe. I dont want you to respect it, or even understand it... But i aint no commie, and no one i no classes themselves as commies, we're anarchists, and what no part of the system...
Suck eachother off all you want, your middle class ****s, and i declare you all my enemy... and the ones calling yourselves anarchists, your traitors, infact your just fucking thick... see you in the street one day hopefully commies

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/3880/makhno1eu9.jpg

[Bilan]

Trashed stupid, obnoxious and abusive posts by people who fit into the previously mentioned categories.

[apathy maybe]

Right, another sort of wierd one here, but no offence but can some ANARCHISTS answer this, cos all i get from commies is bullshit and insults(yea yea i no, stop freaking out, your fault for being snotty not mine)....... BUT, the circled a comes from Anarchy is Order (the 'O' being the circle).... but, i dont FULLY 100% understand what it means, i no the rest of it is 'government is chaos' but the way i feel is order is somthing that is bad, order means rules, and rules meen oppression, thats how i feel...... but the way i see it is that there is order in self governing, because it is order for yourself.... but with government, the oppression creates division which causes personal chaos......
Thats how i read into it, but what is your oppinion on it?

(also, please dont fucking ***** and moan because i dont want commies here, because you are pretty much making a rod for your own backs, whatever ive said on here, all the stalinist, trotskyist, commie lot have just disagreed and moaned, and i actually want to do somthing productive here)
One of the problems on RevLeft we have is with people coming here thinking that "communism" is what happened/is happening in the Soviet Union, China, North Korea and Cuba (etc.).

This is despite no leader in any of those countries every claiming that those countries were organised along communist lines (as opposed to striving for or trying to get to that ideal).

I blame the media, history text books, ignorant teachers, ignorant school curriculum, and deliberate misinformation on the part of governments and the media.

Generally the people who explain this are gentle in their approach to newbies.

As for socialist, socialism should be thought of as something like: "one who advocated an organization of society that allowed laborers to receive the full product of their labor" 1 (http://www.wendymcelroy.com/print.php?news.1813). I have written on the distinction between "state", "narrow" or "Marxist" socialism on the one hand and "broad" socialism on the other before. Basically, we are all socialists, it's just that the narrow definition is used far more often, and I'm not a narrow socialist. I don't believe in states, I just think that workers should get what is owed to them.

I hope you forgive the ignorant bastards who attacked you, but please also recognise that you came here being ignorant and aggressive yourself.


There will be rules in an Anarchist society. Enforced by a police/army. Though many Anarchists prefer to call this organ a "workers militia" to distinguish it from the current institutions. The sort of Anarchist society you seem to envisage has never really been proposed or supported by anyone in history.
Dude, the trouble is, your "police/army" is not the same as a militia. A police force is a hierarchical, permanent, professional, non-rotating organisation. An anarchist militia is hierarchical only to a limited extent (if at all), non-permanent (only raised when needed), and is comprised of everyone (who wants to be involved), with rotas.

In other words, police are fundamentally objectionable to an anarchist because they are a force of power in a society which is not meant to have any. If you want a police force (and you have stated in another thread that you don't see a problem with permanent, professional and non-rotating), then I don't think you are an anarchist. Please just keep calling yourself "libertarian communist" rather than "anarchist communist", because you don't quite want the same thing.


And yes. Most anarchist are communists.
Most anarchists are anarchists first. Those that are also communists are communists because they think it is the best way to bring about communism.


He doesn't just sound reactionary, he is.
God, some people like throwing the term "reactionary" around don't they. What does it mean to you anyway? Does MA want to bring back feudalism or keep capitalism around? Bah humbug.


Technically, all anarchists are socialists, so anarchism would necessarily also be an 'economic theory'.
Actually, as pointed out (next post), this isn't true. I think where you went wrong is your definition of socialism. Socialism can be quite broad in meaning.



----


Socialist: Human nature does not exist how this person imagines that it does. Socialism is a broad term (or narrow in some situations) that includes a variety of ideologies. Socialism is about equality and giving control of the labour (and what is produced by that labour) of a person back to that person.

Anarchist: A person who subscribes to anarchism. Anarchism is a set of ideologies that have basic principles of opposition to hierarchy and coercion at the core. Includes opposition to state and capitalism.

Communist: A person who subscribes to communism. Communism is a classless stateless society where goods are shared in common (see also anarchism). Different people have different ideas about how to get there (see Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Kropotkin and others).
http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=678548&postcount=2


Nice post of mine: http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=862696&postcount=25

[Bilan]

Technically, all anarchists are socialists, so anarchism would necessarily also be an 'economic theory'.

Technically, that may be true, but that doesn't mean anarchism in itself is an economic theory. Anarchism, more than anything, is a movement with a set of loosely defined principles (Liberty, blah blah). It doesn't necessitate this or that form of economic system. Hence mutualists, communists, etc.

[cleef]

You seem to be promoting nihilism rather than Anarchism... it does not mean without rules, it means without rulers.
If you dont agree with leftist ideals then i am intrigued to know what your reasoning is for wanting to be an anarchist? Do you just want an excuse to blow shit up???

[Pogue]

Commies Under Nazi Thought
****S
Shove it right up your arse, i am who i am. I believe what i believe. I dont want you to respect it, or even understand it... But i aint no commie, and no one i no classes themselves as commies, we're anarchists, and what no part of the system...
Suck eachother off all you want, your middle class ****s, and i declare you all my enemy... and the ones calling yourselves anarchists, your traitors, infact your just fucking thick... see you in the street one day hopefully commies

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)

I don't understand why you have jumped to such an angry conclusion. Why are we 'sucking each other off'?

You just seem like you permanently want to rage agaisnt us even though we're not giving you any reason to do. No one here is 'under nazi thought', what do you base that claim on?

What does middle class mean? Why are we middle class? Why would 'middle class ****s' be advocating for working class rule and freedom?

Do you not find it slightly odd you'd be calling us 'fucking thick' whilst making a post full of unsubstantiated claims with alot if inciredibly insulting terms being directed at the tons of members we have here?

If we are all your enemy, who are your allies? And what have we 'betrayed'?

And why do you hope to see us in the street?

[destr0000000000yer]

anarchism is not just economical system or idealist politics.

ill repeat one thing that are a lot of anarchist repeating all the time and that is that anarchism is statement, a state of mind.

it should be indiependent from political programs like communism and all that garbage wrote on paper that says "you must do that", "you must grow wheat and show respect to working class". its bullshit, same shit like fascism, just masked in solidarity and equality.

communism is just fraud, history approves it. anarchists should be against commies and similar obtrusive ignorants, and be indiependent from all projects made by ruling caste.

i hate when someon calls me "lef-winger" cos im anarchist. put that political term in yer ass. saying im anarchist, means im zero

no gods no masters

[Revy]

Right, another sort of wierd one here, but no offence but can some ANARCHISTS answer this, cos all i get from commies is bullshit and insults(yea yea i no, stop freaking out, your fault for being snotty not mine)....... BUT, the circled a comes from Anarchy is Order (the 'O' being the circle).... but, i dont FULLY 100% understand what it means, i no the rest of it is 'government is chaos' but the way i feel is order is somthing that is bad, order means rules, and rules meen oppression, thats how i feel...... but the way i see it is that there is order in self governing, because it is order for yourself.... but with government, the oppression creates division which causes personal chaos......
Thats how i read into it, but what is your oppinion on it?

(also, please dont fucking ***** and moan because i dont want commies here, because you are pretty much making a rod for your own backs, whatever ive said on here, all the stalinist, trotskyist, commie lot have just disagreed and moaned, and i actually want to do somthing productive here)

"Rules" are not oppression. There are oppressive rules, but rules are not oppressive inherently.

I would say the meaning behind Anarchy is Order is that there is peace, and stability, and mutual respect between people without domination.

[Sasha]

if i come to your house and piss in the corner, is that o.k. ? is it o.k. if i set fire to your cat (or your mom)? i dont think so... if you then complain, are you an oppresive fascist? i dont think so....
rules under anarchism should be understood as just that.

the fact there will be no speedcamera's wont mean you will be allowed to drive as an maniak and flatten some kids.

[Black Sheep]

also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_symbolism

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Militant Anarchist. I believe you may be just a little confused mate. Anarchism IS order, this does not necessarily mean authority, hierarchy, and illegitimate power. All the things we are against.

I think you are defining communism wrong aswell. I used to be like you aswell mate. I would say I hated communism, but in the end when I read some Kropotkin I realised Communism wasn't the USSR or China. It was freedom.

[Dóchas]

this is fucking priceless!!! :laugh:

you come on, all guns blazing already shooting down most of the members here with a slight mistake and then you take it extremely personally when we actually try and make it clear to you that you are in fact a communist. i dont think you have much of an idea what anarchism really is so why dont you let us help you understand. just because some of the people here are not anarchists doesnt mean they dont know a bit about anarchism.

just on a side note, not that it really matters but you have a 100 posts most of the people that have given you advice and answers have well over a 1000 posts do you really think they dont know what they are talking about?

[Jack]

Radical dude! Fuck grammar too! It's a system of statist control!

[DIzzIE]

Fuck grammar too! It's a system of statist control!

on décapitalisme (http://granadacollective.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/on-decapitalisme/)




I. gravity is the first law of force that is inscribed into our bodies. grammar is the second. social war is the third and self management is the fourth.

II. how do we decapitate capitalism? by cutting off its head. a rhizomatic internet devoid of its tags, a sentence with a lower-case beginning. an always emergent discourse without a title. decentralised institutions that become constellations of extitutions. deindividuated bodies in acéphalous collectives.

III. an “I” that is always decapitalised. we own no proper nouns just as i do not want to own you and you do not want to own me. only the Structures that we imagine to still be standing retain their brand names and ownership capital. structures that must be decapitalised and torn down. time and space too must be pierced.

IV. no longer anarchists or socialists or communists or marxists or situationists or nihilists or new hegelians or nietzscheans or surrealists. no longer any ‘ists’ or ‘-ans’ or ‘ishes’ or ‘ics’ and no longer any national identities. no more hyphens hugging our fragmented sense of self identification, only outstretched arms.


V. in english, we become we. en français, nous devenons on. en espagnol, nos convertimos en [email protected], [email protected] «في العربي، نصبح نحن» and so on, in the manner of polylingual subway advertisements that implore you to ¡speak english like a native! we are not born into language but Institution inseminates it into us.

VI. we are many multiplicitous voices and we are one schizophrenic voice. when we listen, we can’t hear ourselves. we are deterritorialised mouths on hysterically anxious ribcages. we suspect an uncapitalism would resemble the uncommunism of totalitarian regimes. we escape the binary of blank and unblank; we decapitalise through de, not re, for what must come has not happened before. we destroy our discourse, we de-negate, we de-claim time and space.

VII. cycles of seven. when writing first came about it was magical – a telepathic spectacle of ideas and desires for whose who could not read. now many of us read but can no longer hear each other but pull at loose threads in the weaving of solidarity. writing’s secret fifth wall has been been breached; we must now rip a hole in its fabric to fold it in on itself.

[Chicano Shamrock]

I think all you guys just got trolled hardcore. Stop feeding the troll.

[communard resolution]

He isn't trolling. The problem with him is that he refuses to learn despite being given the opportunity. I think he's afraid of knowledge because it might shake the foundations of his individualistic little punk world.

He seems to take his ideas of anarchism from this song:


I believe in anarchy
Let's see you pogo!

I'm not ashamed of being a Punk
And I don't care, I don't give a damn
And I don't care what you say
Cause I believe in anarchy

[Chorus:]
I I I I I'm not afraid
And I I I I I'm not ashamed
Cause I still believe in anarchy

I'm not afraid of having a Fight
And I'm not ashamed about getting drunk
And I don't care what you say cause
I believe in AnarchyMilitantAnarchist, do stick around and learn. We're all permanent learners here, and none of us know all the answers. But there is really no point in violently holding on to your little preconceptions, refusing to engage with ideas, and choosing to be an idiot.

I know that you've got your heart in the right place: you mentioned campaigning for homeless shelters in another thread, which is a step in the right direction because it demonstrates social thinking. Much better than sitting around and pondering about your petty "right to be a punk".

But what socialists want is the emancipation of the entire proletariat rather than just ourselves, the homeless in one British town, or some tiny hippie-punk commune in Essex. This is what the words socialism, anarchism, and communism stand for - it's all or nothing.

And we definitely do not claim the right to run roughshood over everybody else's rights, which is why there need to be certain regulations which are not enforced upon us from above.

It would be a tragic waste and a shame if you ended up a commie-hating fool just because you were afraid of learning. I know you can do better than that.

[Jack]

I went to see The Casualties last night (I know they suck, but the shows are fun) and there were tons of his kind there. Teh Anarkeyzz

[Old Man Diogenes]

Commies Under Nazi Thought
****S
Shove it right up your arse, i am who i am. I believe what i believe. I dont want you to respect it, or even understand it... But i aint no commie, and no one i no classes themselves as commies, we're anarchists, and what no part of the system...
Suck eachother off all you want, your middle class ****s, and i declare you all my enemy... and the ones calling yourselves anarchists, your traitors, infact your just fucking thick... see you in the street one day hopefully commies

(if i get banned for not just agreeing with you, i couldnt give a fuck, cos im sick of you hypocrites)

Cool the fuck down, what are you on? "I declare you all my enemy" who the fuck do you think you are? They're right, a lot of anarchists (but not all) are communists, because they're similar ideologies, both anarchism and communism (the anti-authoritarian, true communism at least) work towards a stateless society. So don't come here calling people thick, because they way your acting your making yourself look pretty thick.

[counterblast]

Right, another sort of wierd one here, but no offence but can some ANARCHISTS answer this, cos all i get from commies is bullshit and insults(yea yea i no, stop freaking out, your fault for being snotty not mine)....... BUT, the circled a comes from Anarchy is Order (the 'O' being the circle).... but, i dont FULLY 100% understand what it means, i no the rest of it is 'government is chaos' but the way i feel is order is somthing that is bad, order means rules, and rules meen oppression, thats how i feel...... but the way i see it is that there is order in self governing, because it is order for yourself.... but with government, the oppression creates division which causes personal chaos......
Thats how i read into it, but what is your oppinion on it?

(also, please dont fucking ***** and moan because i dont want commies here, because you are pretty much making a rod for your own backs, whatever ive said on here, all the stalinist, trotskyist, commie lot have just disagreed and moaned, and i actually want to do somthing productive here)

The actual translation is "Anarchy is order, government is civil disorder"; it was meant to point out that governments diminish the same ideals they exist to preserve (freedom, independence, ect).

[revolution inaction]

This is false. Many anarchists, such as myself, reject the term "socialist" and don't identify with it in any way.

I've also read many in this thread equate being an individualist anarchist with believing in nihilism, no order, anarcho-capitalism, etc., and suggest that individualist anarchists be quarantined to the "opposing ideologies" forum for being insufficiently communist. Do any research into the history of European anarchism and you'll discover that individualist anarchists such as myself have always drawn upon Marx, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Makhno, etc. as influences, have always advocated a totally communist society, the communisation of wealth, entitlement to the fruit of one's own labor, and so on. (In fact, less "individualistic" anarchists such as Kropotkin were mostly reacting against Nachaev, the protege of Bakunin, who is usually accredited as the founding father of "anarcho-communism")

then you are socialist whether you identify with the term or not



The same might not be able to be said of American individualists such as followers of Tucker and Spooner, but if we're going to designate all bourgeois sects of anarchism to the opposing ideology section, it would be unfair to include the Tuckerites and Spoonerites but not the Kropotkinites and Tolstoyites....

What are you talking about there are no kropotkinites?

[Agrippa]

Socialists may advocate "collectivization" of society, but they're not communists.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Socialists may advocate "collectivization" of society, but they're not communists.

Could you tell me the difference?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Between collectivization and communism?

So Socialism is collectivization. What is communism and what does collectivization consist of?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Any political regime can redistribute wealth. That's not the same as communism, which is a profoundly different way of not only organizing society, but viewing and interacting with the world.

Collectivization, the way I understand it refers to workers control of the means of production, colletivizing it.

[Agrippa]

Ehh......this is diverging into "sketchy semantic back-and-forth" territory.

What I'm trying to say is that, within the capitalist infrastructure, there are collectively-organized institutions, (for example, a worker-owned restaurant in my hometown) but are still part of the capitalist infrastructure. To me this is different than communism, which is not merely collective legal ownership of certain resources but an entirely different philosophical outlook and method of human interaction....

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

on décapitalisme (http://granadacollective.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/on-decapitalisme/)

Am I the only one who think the quoted text is a load of bollocks?

[communard resolution]

Am I the only one who think the quoted text is a load of bollocks?

No.

[revolution inaction]

Socialists may advocate "collectivization" of society, but they're not communists.

socialism means workers control of the means of production, so communism is a kind of socialism

[Lord Testicles]

Wow...

I think someone needs to stop listening to the sex pistols and needs to start reading some anarchist literature. (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/index.html) ;)

[ZeroNowhere]

I've also read many in this thread equate being an individualist anarchist with believing in nihilism, no order, anarcho-capitalism, etc., and suggest that individualist anarchists be quarantined to the "opposing ideologies" forum for being insufficiently communist. Do any research into the history of European anarchism and you'll discover that individualist anarchists such as myself have always drawn upon Marx, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Makhno, etc. as influences, have always advocated a totally communist society, the communisation of wealth, entitlement to the fruit of one's own labor, and so on. (In fact, less "individualistic" anarchists such as Kropotkin were mostly reacting against Nachaev, the protege of Bakunin, who is usually accredited as the founding father of "anarcho-communism")
And individualist anarchists are socialists. At least, last I remembered they wanted a classless, stateless society.


What are you talking about there are no kropotkinites?
Trokinkapists, then.

[revolution inaction]

Trokinkapists, then.

I mean anarchists don't follow individuals in that way

[Agrippa]

I mean anarchists don't follow individuals in that way

And Catholic priests don't have sex with anyone. :rolleyes:

[Agrippa]

socialism means workers control of the means of production, so communism is a kind of socialism

Under communism there are no "workers" (in the sense of wage or other forms of alienated labor)

[revolution inaction]

Under communism there are no "workers" (in the sense of wage or other forms of alienated labor)

Do you think that is what i meant by workers?


And Catholic priests don't have sex with anyone.

If you'd said virgins instead of catholic priests then your comparison would make sense, because as soon as the start having sex they stop being virgins, the same doesn't apply to catholic priests.
if some one follows an individual to the extent they can be meaningfully be called a kropotkinites then they are not an anarchist, even if they call themselves one.

[ZeroNowhere]

if some one follows an individual to the extent they can be meaningfully be called a kropotkinites then they are not an anarchist, even if they call themselves one.
I really do not see how the fuck that makes sense in any way whatsoever. Nor do I care about labels having or not having names in them, but still... How does that work? Kropotkin wasn't an anarchist?

[GPDP]

I really do not see how the fuck that makes sense in any way whatsoever. Nor do I care about labels having or not having names in them, but still... How does that work? Kropotkin wasn't an anarchist?

I think he's trying to say that anarchists are not known to follow another person's philosophy, even if that person is an anarchist.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

I really do not see how the fuck that makes sense in any way whatsoever. Nor do I care about labels having or not having names in them, but still... How does that work? Kropotkin wasn't an anarchist?

Kropotkin was an Anarchist, but we don't call ourselves after particular philosophers. We are Anarchists not Kropotkinists or Bakuninists.

[ZeroNowhere]

I think he's trying to say that anarchists are not known to follow another person's philosophy, even if that person is an anarchist.
No, he said that if somebody followed Kropotkin's ideas, they would not be an anarchist.


Kropotkin was an Anarchist, but we don't call ourselves after particular philosophers.
I shall allow the irony to speak for itself.

[Agrippa]

Anarchism means "no rulers", not "no followers".

I don't see what's wrong with following the ideas of a philosopher if the ideas have value. It doesn't mean you accept every word they wrote or spoke as gospel. It means in general your philosophy is heavily influenced by the philosophy of someone before you. That doesn't make you a "servant" or rob you of your individuality, but rather it affirms communist principles. None of us are fully socially isolated, and we're all dependent on people who came before us.

Now, when I say "Kropoktinists", I mean peoples whose philosophy was substantially influenced by Kropotkin. That means they believe that anyone should be entitled to the fruits of communal labor regardless of how much labor they personally contributed. (this principle is called "mutual aid" or "gift economy") That means that they the material foundations of social organization imposed by the bourgeoisie (factories, automobiles, etc.) are "neutral" rather than designed to fit the needs of capitalist valorization. That means they believe that technology will continue to progress until none of us have to toil. That means they believe in taking sides in inter-imperialist rivalries. etc.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

I shall allow the irony to speak for itself.

Yes I admire Kropotkin and Bakunin, that's why my name is what it is. That doesn't mean I unconditionally agree with everything they did. This is what calling yourself a Bakuninist or Kropotkinist suggests. Anarchism is an idelogy which has it's individual way of organisation respective of the environment surrounding us so to link this to one man theories would be stupid.

[revolution inaction]

Yes I admire Kropotkin and Bakunin, that's why my name is what it is. That doesn't mean I unconditionally agree with everything they did. This is what calling yourself a Bakuninist or Kropotkinist suggests. Anarchism is an idelogy which has it's individual way of organisation respective of the environment surrounding us so to link this to one man theories would be stupid.

Thats what I meant, if some one is influenced by Kropotkin thats good, but if some one is a kropotkinist then i would expect then to do things like defending Kropotkin taking sides in WW1 because thats the kind of thing other people who name there ideology after a person do.
If you compare with science we see the same situation, scientists aren't Darwinists, Newtonists or Einsteinists are they? and no one thinks this means they reject the contrbutions of these scientists. But what is important is the ideas, not who said them first, or who had the most good ideas.
In both cases we take the good stuff and reject the rest, and we don't make personality cults around our favourites, even if we really admire them.

[revolution inaction]

I think he's trying to say that anarchists are not known to follow another person's philosophy, even if that person is an anarchist.

I'm not sure.. I do think we shouldn't follow others philosophy but instead use it.