Glenn Beck reviews "The Coming Insurrection" on his show

[GPDP]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKyi2qNskJc

Yeah, I know, lol glenn beck, but this is really an interesting video. It's a review of sorts of a book written by French communists which calls for armed insurrection against capitalism.

The best part? He advises his audience not to ignore the book or call for its ban, but to pick it up and read it so as to "know the enemy within."

[IcarusAngel]

You can buy the version of the book he's holding from here: http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11879

MIT Press also sells a lot of Chomsky books and hosts some of his speeches as well.

At least he doesn't call for the banning of the book, like so many other conservatives.

[Robespierre2.0]

Bwahaha, I found it quite ironic how, at the end, he begins making comparisons to the American revolutionaries he so adores, then has to wrangle his way out of the hole he's dug, saying 'Be like Ghandi, be like Martin Luther King!' He's already made the point that both today's world and revolution-era United States were characterized by a disenfranchised majority forced to take up arms against a system that marginalizes them, and sort of shot himself in the foot.

Oh, mainstream media. Hilarious in it's stupidity, and yet, at the same time, so depressing to think of all the people that unquestioningly eat it up...

[IcarusAngel]

Yeah, I noticed that too. Beck isn't a good commentator so he often makes clumsy remarks like that. He obviously started getting lost in his own rhetoric.

He probably believes what he says, and he may even hate corporate governance, but his solutions are way off.

His books sell quite well and there are thousands of conservatives who believe in Mark Levin/Glenn beck ideology that all attempts to restrict capitalism are communist and socialist and we should have a pure free-market. So free-market ideology has a strong precense in the US.

Oh well. Here is another informative video from MIT press:
http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/182/

It seems that Universities are more open to free speech than most book publishers.

[IcarusAngel]

Glenn Beck thinks Adolf Hitler was a socialist.

That is all.


What's interesting about Conservatives like him is that they think "evil books" are not only books like the Communsit Manifesto, but also books like Ralph Nader's Unsafe at Any Speed (because it made people question the authority of corporate CEOs), Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, etc.

So, when true revolutionary books are discussed, they are almost at a loss for words, as they believe the calls for real communism have been drowned out.

[fabilius]

His book review made me more optimistic.:rolleyes:

[scarletghoul]

This guy is blatantly an undercover leftist troll trying to make conservative america look as ridiculous as possible

I also love how near the end he admits he hasnt read it yet

[n0thing]

I hadn't even heard of this book until now.

eh, fearmongering. Nothing to get excited about, I'm sure.

[the last donut of the night]

I love Glenn Beck! He protects me from the evils of those Reds!:laugh:

[RedScare]

Well, that made me hopeful. I'll have to see if I can get a copy of it.

[the last donut of the night]

Does anybody here know about a site or channel on Youtube where all of these absurd moments are stored. For example, a channel only with the most outrageous crap Fox anchors say. Because watching right-wing media is fun!:laugh:

[scarletghoul]

Edit - Don't do RickRoll videos outside of Chit Chat, please. Remember also that many people recognise the URL by now.
- RedAnarchist

[Stranger Than Paradise]

This Beck fella is always good for a laugh. No less so in that ridiculous video. Thought this was a good line: "the book comes from France of all places"

[obsolete discourse]

The Coming Insurrection is an amazing piece of theory and rhetoric. Its anonymous authors find an interesting connection between insurrectional anarchist theory ala Bonanno, post-structuralist theory ala Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari, and Agamben, a lot of the heretic marxists ala Walter Benjamin, and left-communist approaches. Its well worth a read, and worth examining the works of other anonymous texts related to the non-existant "anarcho-autonomous milieu". It has recently been translated to English and will be available to purchase or nick from most big American book stores. However, you could also download a printable pamphlet or read it online at tarnac9.wordpress.com

Fuck MIT and Chomsky--that's some preschool shit.
For real, the only reason The Coming Insurrection is something for the media to worry about is becuase it advocates a certain consistency between thought and desire.

[StalinFanboy]

Well, that made me hopeful. I'll have to see if I can get a copy of it.
It's been available in pdf and text format online for a while now.

[Agrippa]

I think it is wonderful that Glenn Beck is recommending that every American read this book. I am grateful for the free publicity Glenn Beck is giving to what may be possibly one of the most advanced, in terms of theory and praxis, manifestations of communist organization and resistance in the world today. I would thank Glenn Beck personally for helping to give L'Insurrection qui vient the anti-establishment mystique it deserves.

To everyone on this message board who has yet so far failed to take Glenn Beck's wise advise, read this book. It's available here (http://zinelibrary.info/files/pdf_Insurrection.pdf) in French and here (http://libcom.org/library/coming-insurrection-invisible-committee) in English.

Also, make sure to read its predecessor, L'Appel (http://fendersen.com/Call.htm), (which I unfortunately can't find in the original French) which is just as good, if not better, but inexplicably more obscure and less popular

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I have read the book and have found it to be the kind of out of touch with normal people crap that has held the movement back for fucklong amounts of time. That said it raised one or two good points.

[Agrippa]

I have read the book and have found it to be the kind of out of touch with normal people crap that has held the movement back for fucklong amounts of time. .

How so?

Keep in mind most of the English translations of Comité Invisible texts are written by pretentious, egotistical wannabe-academic Situationist assholes like Bill Brown.

But what about the actual texts themselves "are out of touch with normal people"? The French anarcho-autonomists have done more to rally "normal people" (whoever they are) around the cause of anarchism/communism - from soup kitchens to free health clinics - than any of the bureaucrats on the French left, be they Trotskyite or "anarchist".

[Saorsa]

"In Japan, they're beginning to UNIONIZE!!!!"

Arrrrrrgh!!!!

[which doctor]

I remember reading this a few years ago when it was still pretty obscure and thinking it was just poorly translated post-modernist claptrap. No way in hell would I ever expect it to end up on Fox News. Maybe it deserves a second reading.

Here's the thread I made on the text a while back: http://www.revleft.com/vb/insurrection-come-t61196/index.html?t=61196&highlight=invisible+committee

[Guerrilla22]

It's terrible because there ave never ever been any other books written that call for the overthrow of the capitalist system.

[Forward Union]

why get so worried about some mad insurrectionist pamphlet. It's probably boring and no one will read it.

[Agrippa]

why get so worried about some mad insurrectionist pamphlet. It's probably boring and no one will read it.

Please stop (quite literally) judging books by their cover, or more specifically, by the knee-jerk emotional response the words of the cover seem to provoke by colliding with your existing ideological prejudices.

Whether or not the book is "boring" is a debate I will not at this juncture plunge into, but it is very popular and many people have read it, in France, in the US, and around the globe, and thankfully, many more will read it now that Glenn Beck has ordered them to.

The pamphlet, or the milieu that produced the pamphlet, does not advocate "insurrectionism" in the American sense. In fact, it specifically criticizes those who seek the adrenaline rush of direct, reckless confrontation, without any regards for tactical subtlety, or the equally important but significantly less "sexy" task of building up a grass-roots infrastructure of economic support. "Insurrectionists" in the US think that Food Not Bombs and free clinics are "boring" and not at all relevant to the "social war". If their (wholly imagined) insurrection was ever escalated, they would all starve to death or die horrible, prolonged deaths from injury and illness. The French anarcho-autonomists are totally different, since their strategic philosophy emphasizes the importance of "community service" and "community organization" - as their highly successful political projects are all a testament to.

That they are somehow not allowed to use the word "insurrection", in your mind, sort of indicates you have a problem with anyone who directly confronts the state, or anyone who doesn't believe in subordinating direct confrontation with the state to endless labor-reform struggle.

Please read the book. It will take you an hour or less. Also, make sure to read its prequel, Call (http://fendersen.com/Call.htm), which is just as important, if not more

edit: and, witch doctor, that many online versions of the book are poorly translated is not the fault of the original authors. Sometimes when one whishes to study the progress of the class-struggle in other countries, one must take the initial investment of studying that country's language. French is a very easy written language for English-speakers to follow, especially with state-of-the-art Internet dictionaries and translators at your side. They're also only guilty of "post-modernism" in the sense of being influenced by Foucault and Debord, (among many other influences which wouldn't be considered post-modernist) what do you expect? They're fucking French. Rejecting them because they read and appreciated Debord and Foucault is just ideological bigotry.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Yeah, I noticed that too. Beck isn't a good commentator so he often makes clumsy remarks like that. He obviously started getting lost in his own rhetoric.

Yeah, he recently nodded approvingly while a guest said that the US needed another major attack by bin Laden to "save it".

I have read the book and have found it to be the kind of out of touch with normal people crap that has held the movement back for fucklong amounts of time.
That's the impression I'd always had of it as well.

How so?

Keep in mind most of the English translations of Comité Invisible texts are written by pretentious, egotistical wannabe-academic Situationist assholes like Bill Brown.

But what about the actual texts themselves "are out of touch with normal people"? The French anarcho-autonomists have done more to rally "normal people" (whoever they are) around the cause of anarchism/communism - from soup kitchens to free health clinics - than any of the bureaucrats on the French left, be they Trotskyite or "anarchist".
Interesting. Can you point us to any non-shit translations? I'll admit that I am totally guilty of judging it by the stuff I've read about it in English.

why get so worried about some mad insurrectionist pamphlet. It's probably boring and no one will read it.
That's the thing - none of us would be bothered about it, except that it's gaining attention on Fox News. They got bothered about it before we did. That could just be because it's a useful spectacle, or it could be because it's seen as representing a real challenge.


The pamphlet, or the milieu that produced the pamphlet, does not advocate "insurrectionism" in the American sense. In fact, it specifically criticizes those who seek the adrenaline rush of direct, reckless confrontation, without any regards for tactical subtlety, or the equally important but significantly less "sexy" task of building up a grass-roots infrastructure of economic support. "Insurrectionists" in the US think that Food Not Bombs and free clinics are "boring" and not at all relevant to the "social war". If their (wholly imagined) insurrection was ever escalated, they would all starve to death or die horrible, prolonged deaths from injury and illness. The French anarcho-autonomists are totally different, since their strategic philosophy emphasizes the importance of "community service" and "community organization" - as their highly successful political projects are all a testament to.

edit: and, witch doctor, that many online versions of the book are poorly translated is not the fault of the original authors. Sometimes when one whishes to study the progress of the class-struggle in other countries, one must take the initial investment of studying that country's language. French is a very easy written language for English-speakers to follow, especially with state-of-the-art Internet dictionaries and translators at your side. They're also only guilty of "post-modernism" in the sense of being influenced by Foucault and Debord, (among many other influences which wouldn't be considered post-modernist) what do you expect? They're fucking French. Rejecting them because they read and appreciated Debord and Foucault is just ideological bigotry.
Ah. So there's no well-written, accessible English translation of it, then? Shame.

[obsolete discourse]

The pamphlet, or the milieu that produced the pamphlet, does not advocate "insurrectionism" in the American sense. In fact, it specifically criticizes those who seek the adrenaline rush of direct, reckless confrontation, without any regards for tactical subtlety, or the equally important but significantly less "sexy" task of building up a grass-roots infrastructure of economic support. "Insurrectionists" in the US think that Food Not Bombs and free clinics are "boring" and not at all relevant to the "social war". If their (wholly imagined) insurrection was ever escalated, they would all starve to death or die horrible, prolonged deaths from injury and illness. The French anarcho-autonomists are totally different, since their strategic philosophy emphasizes the importance of "community service" and "community organization" - as their highly successful political projects are all a testament to.

It's cool you like The Coming Insurrection and Call, but I think you either have a fantasy of what insurrectional anarchist and communist practices are in the US or have a fantasy about the theoretical positions of TCI and Call. The reason anarchists and communists broadly critique Food Not Bombs or bicycle programs is because these projects are the main methods of a milieu that wants a dual power revolutionary strategy. This separates aboveground from underground, inside from outside, and creation from destruction, and can only effect to produce revolutionary organizations as a state-form. Only a method which reveals through practice the zones of indisitinction between these presumed antimonies can spread anarchy and live communism.

The insurrection of Call should be read alongside the insurrection of At Dagger Drawn--if not, read as an elaboration of that thought.

No one is foolish enough to say feeding ourselves can't be part of insurrection. However, I want the means of how we feed eachother to be faced as an important ethical question.

Ahem,
"perhaps, in the misery of the present, 'fucking it all up' will serve--not without reason--as the last collective seduction"
--TCI, get organized

[Misanthrope]

His book review made me more optimistic.:rolleyes:

I feel the same way!

[VILemon]

"From France of all places" "UNIONS!" I like how Glen Beck can worry out loud every show about the rule of elites and the corporate takeover of America interspersed with addresses to some imagined everyman who is being oppressed by "unions!"

He is truly the hand-wringing neurotic-Woody-Allen of fat cappie douche bags.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Only a method which reveals through practice the zones of indisitinction between these presumed antimonies can spread anarchy and live communism.

Could someone translate that sentence into English?

[NecroCommie]

Glenn Beck can review my ass!

[mykittyhasaboner]

"The left knows the history of America, more than most conservatives do."

Glenn Beck tells the truth for a change.

[Matty_UK]

Best bit of that review is at the end where he admits he hasn't read it, and then compares the authors of it to pamphleteers in pre-revolution America and says that Thomas Paine is the same sort of person as them.

Maybe he's secretly a communist trying to discredit the American talkshow right.

[Il Medico]

Glenn Beck= Fox's Stephen Colbert

The Funniest thing is, even though he sounds just as ridiculous as Colbert, he actually believes what he is saying. I find his show to be one of the funniest things on TV.

[Agrippa]

either have a fantasy of what insurrectional anarchist and communist practices

The fantasy is believing that, at this point, "insurrectionism" in the US means anything other than reckless macho hipster nihilism. This is starting to change, and for the better, but at the present time it's the sad, unfortunate truth.


The reason anarchists and communists broadly critique Food Not Bombs or bicycle programs is because these projects are the main methods of a milieu that wants a dual power revolutionary strategy. This separates aboveground from underground, inside from outside, and creation from destruction, and can only effect to produce revolutionary organizations as a state-form.

I have my own gripes with the "Food Not Bombs"/"Infoshop" strategy, and with the US anarchist community's bizarre and embarrassing obsession with bicycles, all of which I'd be happy to go into. I also agree with you in regards to the seperation of "aboveground from underground" and "creation from destruction", however, you are being maudlin when you say this inevitably leads to "revolutionary organizations as state-form". Do you have any practical evidence of this bombastic claim?


Only a method which reveals through practice the zones of indisitinction between these presumed antimonies can spread anarchy and live communism.

You're sabotaging my attempts to prove to these people that Call and The Coming Insurrection aren't just pretentious pseudo-intellectual bullshit.


The insurrection of Call should be read alongside the insurrection of At Dagger Drawn--if not, read as an elaboration of that thought.

I'll accept your book reccomendation and get back to you on that thought.

[bcbm]

The French anarcho-autonomists have done more to rally "normal people" (whoever they are) around the cause of anarchism/communism - from soup kitchens to free health clinics - than any of the bureaucrats on the French left, be they Trotskyite or "anarchist".Which probably has little to do with "normal people" reading their publications and more to do with how the authors live and interact within their respective communities and with each other as well. This is perhaps my problem with their texts... if you're familiar with their lifestyle or whatever you can see it within the writings but if not you're not left with much to work off in terms of building praxis.

[Agrippa]

Which probably has little to do with "normal people" reading their publications and more to do with how the authors live and interact within their respective communities and with each other as well. This is perhaps my problem with their texts... if you're familiar with their lifestyle or whatever you can see it within the writings but if not you're not left with much to work off in terms of building praxis.

Well, I myself am a fairly uneducated, lay person, and I understood both clearly. Again, this might be a translation problem.

Edit: Also, A Call was not written as propaganda for the masses but as commentary on strategy for those within "the movement". However, I believe The Coming Insurrection is very accessible.

[Marxist Madman]

Glenn Beck is and idiot, a Mormon, and a conservative. What more needs to be said?

[bcbm]

Well, I myself am a fairly uneducated, lay person, and I understood both clearly. Again, this might be a translation problem.

Depends on the person I guess. I didn't find it particularly engaging or meaningful until after I had seen first-hand what they were talking about and discussed it.

[Axle]

Much prop to Glenn Beck for putting the spotlight on that book. Thanks to him, it'll be the next book I read.

And watching him cram his foot in his mouth near the end of that video was just fantastic.

[Il Medico]

I just watched this again and either
1. Glenn Beck is far stupider than I first imagined (most likely)
or
2. He is an uncover leftist.

[RedRooskie]

Glenn Beck is a "recovering" alcoholic drug addict. As far as I'm concerned him, Rush Limbaugh, and people like them in the media are great for the left! I meen all they do is make their side look even more ridicules then normal.

[Trystan]

How many Western left-wing groups have actually been at all violent in the last, say, 20 years? (With the exception of the mostly harmless street skirmishes?)

The right have given us terrorist Tim McVeigh, and the risk posed by right-wing extremists is far higher now than it ever was in the '90s. I wonder what shows these imbeciles like to watch . . . :rolleyes:

And wasn't Glenn Beck actually supporting AQ in committing terrorist attacks on innocent people just last week?

[Agrippa]

The only things wrong with what Timothy McVeigh did were his motivations and his choice to murder innocent people, including children. (There was a daycare in or near the Oklahoma City building, if I recall) I'm certainly not calling for violence, but we should not brag about how we're less effective than the radical right.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

And wasn't Glenn Beck actually supporting AQ in committing terrorist attacks on innocent people just last week?
Yep, America needs Osama to carry out another major attack to save it from itself. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auQJVhNH99c)

The only things wrong with what Timothy McVeigh did were his motivations and his choice to murder innocent people, including children. (There was a daycare in or near the Oklahoma City building, if I recall) I'm certainly not calling for violence, but we should not brag about how we're less effective than the radical right.
First of all, that covers pretty much all of what Timothy McVeigh did, and secondly, even if he did it for good reasons and somehow managed not to kill innocent people, his tactics were still shit. Were any of McVeigh's aims achieved by what he did?

[Agrippa]

What I'm saying is that the most understandable thing about Timothy McVeigh is that he chose to lash out at the Oklahoma State government. How he went about doing it was wrong, and he did it for the wrong reasons, but the "radical right is more dangerous/violent than we are" argument completely misses the point, in my book.

[StalinFanboy]

It's probably boring and no one will read it.
Rofl. Apparently not.

[StalinFanboy]

The pamphlet, or the milieu that produced the pamphlet, does not advocate "insurrectionism" in the American sense. In fact, it specifically criticizes those who seek the adrenaline rush of direct, reckless confrontation, without any regards for tactical subtlety, or the equally important but significantly less "sexy" task of building up a grass-roots infrastructure of economic support. "Insurrectionists" in the US think that Food Not Bombs and free clinics are "boring" and not at all relevant to the "social war". If their (wholly imagined) insurrection was ever escalated, they would all starve to death or die horrible, prolonged deaths from injury and illness. The French anarcho-autonomists are totally different, since their strategic philosophy emphasizes the importance of "community service" and "community organization" - as their highly successful political projects are all a testament to.
We criticize Food Not Bombs, not because it's "boring," but because it's not infrastructure at all, and it consumes so much of peoples' time that could be spent on other projects.

But the rest of your post was spot on.