Fuck vanguardism?

[Wretched Of The Earth]

I was researching a revolutionary named Subcommondante Marcos, he is quoted as saying "fuck the vanguards of the world, and denouncing leaders, saying that the workers should lead the revolution.

But he, a Mexican of european decent, is playing a leading role in the EZLN/Zaptista movement, even telling campesenos what crops to grow.

Isn't he just posturing, acting like he does not accept vanguardism, yet at the same time, playing the fair skinned articulate subcommandante of the movement, saving the indigenous folks :(

Vuanguards are not created for the fun of it, they are an essential part of building and spreading the revolutionary movement, revolutions do not just happen, the people become angry at material conditions, but they need to be given the class outlook and marxist guide to carry out an upheaval and revolutionise the modes of production, and in turn, thier lives.

[Os Cangaceiros]

As I said in another thread:

Marcos is not a leader of the EZLN, hence the "subcommandante" title. He's merely the group's spokesperson and "poster boy".

[Homo Songun]

As I said in another thread:

Marcos is not a leader of the EZLN, hence the "subcommandante" title. He's merely the group's spokesperson and "poster boy".

Whatever lets you sleep at night, man.

At least the Leninists are honest about it.

[Enragé]

leninists, anarchists, whatever - they/we are all vanguards, as in those making the step to go do something about the shit in the world however marginally before most do. All we must ensure is we don't start running too far ahead thus getting disconnected with the majority of people, or lagging behind.

The fight between leninists is much more essentially the structure of the vanguard. Should it a top down pyramid [with whatever democratic safeguards, 'democratic centralism'] or more like 'waves in the sea' like bakunin said?*

*some will come up, but all will fall back down again.

Besides, isnt marcos a maoist? (i know for sure he used to be).

/
even telling campesenos what crops to grow.

is he doing that? got sources?


Isn't he just posturing, acting like he does not accept vanguardism, yet at the same time, playing the fair skinned articulate subcommandante of the movement, saving the indigenous folks

sort of. Couldnt find people to fight with in the cities, so he went to the countryside.

But i dont know if he's actually running things. The position of the EZLN etc. is that he's just a spokesperson, hence SUBcommandante.


the people become angry at material conditions, but they need to be given the class outlook

people already have 'the class outlook', the positions people are in frame their outlook. Instead of 'giving' them a class outlook (i.e indoctrinating someone), you should simply point out that the outlook they have is tied to their class position.


and marxist guide to carry out an upheaval and revolutionise the modes of production

A very good non-marxist guide to carry out an 'upheaval' and 'revolutionise the means of production' was formulated in theory and put into practice by the CNT-FAI in the run-up to the spanish revolution.

People create their own guide in and through struggle, it cannot be imposed from without. Together we can give it coherence, in the dogmatist's isolation lies defeat.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Whatever lets you sleep at night, man.

At least the Leninists are honest about it.

The EZLN is pretty explicit about his role within their organization.

[Wretched Of The Earth]

No, most workers have no idea what the state is, that police are organs of the state, that capitalists are giving their jobs away, it is not the polish stealing them.

Until i stumbled across some marxist stuff, i had no idea that class was anything other than a way to describe poshness.

Most people do not understand that the rich control the means of production.

As a working class person, it makes me laugh when people say that the workers are already concioss and do not need a vanguard, it is false.

Class conciousness is at an all time low.

People argue with me that they are not exploited, that their boss is good for employing them, that capitalists are good because "they worked for what they have"

As much as we love to think of our class, the working class that is, as being so very enlightened and masters of our own universe, we dont half side with our oppressors.

[Robocommie]

Leadership is essential for a revolution, but so too is democracy. The two should not be seen as mutually exclusive, some people who extol the vanguardist theory overlook that secondary element, others condemn it, overlooking the role it has played in actually carrying revolutions from furious mobs of the oppressed into cogent movements.

[Os Cangaceiros]

As a working class person, it makes me laugh when people say that the workers are already concioss and do not need a vanguard, it is false.

Who ever said that?

A "vanguard" can mean different things. If all a vanguard is simply an "enlightened" section of a population or class that takes it upon themselves to create a mass movement, then one could argue that the "ultraleft" and insurrectionary anarchists are "vanguardists". The debate between the insurrectionists and the "mass anarchists" in the 1880's revolved around how to bring about a mass revolt within society. But of course "vanguardists" have been understood as those who favor a "revolutionary party".

I don't think that anyone has ever argued that workers are already conscious.

[Wretched Of The Earth]

well a party is just a vehicle for socialism, and hey, why does anyone care how we get there?

[Proletarian Ultra]

Since when have the EZLN done anything? Like the early 90s or some junk?

Lead a revolution by holing up in some jungle shithole and hold fundraisers with Bianca Jagger. Fuck subcomandantism!

[bricolage]

Lead a revolution by holing up in some jungle shithole and hold fundraisers with Bianca Jagger. Fuck subcomandantism!

Solidarity at its finest.

[Proletarian Ultra]

Solidarity at its finest.

Maybe, but really, what is EZLN doing?

[Invincible Summer]

I was researching a revolutionary named Subcommondante Marcos, he is quoted as saying "fuck the vanguards of the world, and denouncing leaders, saying that the workers should lead the revolution.

But he, a Mexican of european decent, is playing a leading role in the EZLN/Zaptista movement, even telling campesenos what crops to grow.

Isn't he just posturing, acting like he does not accept vanguardism, yet at the same time, playing the fair skinned articulate subcommandante of the movement, saving the indigenous folks :(

He is one of the few people in the EZLN that can speak Spanish and English; most of the indigenous people can hardly manage in Spanish. His role is not that of a leader, but more like a PR guy. Watch "A Place Called Chiapas," it makes it very clear how much of a "leadership" role Marcos has.

I also doubt Marcos said "fuck vanguards," as he is almost always very eloquently spoken.




Besides, isnt marcos a maoist? (i know for sure he used to be).


Yeah I'm pretty sure he used to be in the Maoist National Liberation Front in Mexico.


Maybe, but really, what is EZLN doing?
Trying not to be overcome whilst being surrounded by Mexican forces.

[Robocommie]

Maybe, but really, what is EZLN doing?

Surviving in opposition to a capitalist state, while participating in political agitation for a socialist alternative and organizing the territories under their control into autonomous municipalities. In other words, slowly building socialism with what limited resources they have.

[Wanted Man]

I also doubt Marcos said "fuck vanguards," as he is almost always very eloquently spoken.

He wrote "I shit on all the revolutionary vanguards of this planet" (http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/2003/marcos/etaJAN.html) as the title of a letter to ETA.

[robbo203]

There are two senses in which we can use the term "vanguard"

The first refers to a minority of workers who might called "politically advanced" in their thinking. An avant garde. This is simply a descriptive term. It tells us about the extent of class consciousness and is certainly not incompatible with Marx's dictum that the "emancipation of the working class must be the act of the working class itself". What that means, simply, is that in order for this emancipation to happen (i.e. a socialist revolution), the minority can no longer remain the minority but must become a majority. Thus the vanguard in this sense must complete disappear for socialism to happen

The second refers to a minority that purports to act on behalf of the majority by capturing power in their name. It is this kind of vanguardism that socialists oppose -not simply because it is only the working class as a whole that can emancipate itself - not some minority elite - but also because this is simply a recipe for reinstating or reinforcing class society. The vanguard in this sense will rapidly metapmorphise into a new ruling class and, having started out claiming to act in the interests of the "unenlightened" majority will inevitably end up opposing those interests

[Wretched Of The Earth]

so what would the Black Panther Party come under, it was refered to as the vanguard by huey, and huey was very much iconised as was Stalin, Mao etc.

In my view, vanguardism as in the Weather Underground, ie a bunch of political people acting on behalf of the masses, is not vanguardism, but petty adventurism.

Realk Vanguards, are a party, or group of people, who build socialism, through programs like the panthers,or through land seziure and education like the FARC.

A vanguard is only a vanguard if it acts for the people, builds socialismand participates in struggle, not takes on the state for the people, instead of with the people

[automattick]

Fuck vanguardism? Yes. And what about Marcos? Yes, fuck him as well.

While I don't generally agree with all of this views, in the documentary Zizek! the subject Slavoj Zizek discusses the topic of utopia and its Marxist definition. Rather than describing what utopia is, he in fact delivers a very straight-forward definition of consciousness:

"The true utopia is when the situation is so without issue, without a way to resolve it within the coordinates the possible that out of the pure urge of survival you have to invent a new space. Utopia is not a kind of 'free imagination' utopia is a matter of innermost urgency--you are forced to imagine it as the only way out [...]"

Anybody who has ever worked, working or will eventually work a job will understand that when your manager or employer begins to cut paychecks because some outside consultant thought they were too bloated, or cut your benefits, that first inkling where, even for people who were never interested in politics or economics formally speaking, will start to flare into feel anger. This only begins to grow more and more, until you have those rare instances where workers conduct sit-ins, strikes, even take over the means of production themselves. Communists come into play because we are part of the working class which realizes that "another world beyond our own is scientifically possible" and helps to make this clear to other workers who are on strike. We should help them to realize this, not by leading them, but through encouragement.

Vanguardism assumes that consciousness, in a Kautskyian sense, comes from the middle class to the working class. No; Marx's ideas may have evolved from middle class origins, but he realized that the only material force to change conditions comes from the minds of the working class. We can sit and theorize and try to give less-jargonistic lectures about the theory of value, etc., but in the end every work him or herself must on their own, through organizing on their own terms, come to realize this.

[Invincible Summer]

He wrote "I shit on all the revolutionary vanguards of this planet" (http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/2003/marcos/etaJAN.html) as the title of a letter to ETA.

See? Much better than "Fuck vanguards"

[black magick hustla]

i think the concept of the vanguard party has been incredibly misused to the point that anarchists attack a strawman and there are tiny stalinist/trotsyist grouplets claiming to be the vanguard while their membership consists of two old men and their pet ferret. a vanguard party where the bolsheviks, the german KPD, the italian communist party, the cpusa in its non stalinist days in the days of reed, to a certain extent the mexican partido liberal mexicano (in its anarchist days), etcewtera. a vanguard is not self appointed, a vanguard party is made by the class itself in periods of heightened resistance.

[Proletarian Ultra]

i think the concept of the vanguard party has been incredibly misused to the point that anarchists attack a strawman and there are tiny stalinist/trotsyist grouplets claiming to be the vanguard while their membership consists of two old men and their pet ferret. a vanguard party where the bolsheviks, the german KPD, the italian communist party, the cpusa in its non stalinist days in the days of reed, to a certain extent the mexican partido liberal mexicano (in its anarchist days), etcewtera. a vanguard is not self appointed, a vanguard party is made by the class itself in periods of heightened resistance.

Yeah. A vanguard is the class conscious proletariat and allied declasse intellectuals. It is not just declasse intellectuals.

And speaking of declasse intellectuals, WTF is Marcos?

[black magick hustla]

my dad dislikes subcomandante marcos a lot because he says he acts like a clown. tbh i can see why he says that. here is a man wearing a retarded ski mask with a pipe and riding his horse around and publicizing his headless pet chicken. i think the man likes the spotlight

[black magick hustla]

Yeah. A vanguard is the class conscious proletariat and allied declasse intellectuals. It is not just declasse intellectuals.

And speaking of declasse intellectuals, WTF is Marcos?

i think the term "declasse intellectual" was made up by petit bourgeois intellectuals. i dont think there is such thing as that. the man has to eat somehow. ricardo flores magon was piss poor and took all sorts of odd shitty jobs to mantain himself yet he was a famous "intellectual". most intellectuals either make enough money by selling their stuff and therefore constitute petit bourgeois, or work shit odd jobs.

[it_ain't_me]

Since when have the EZLN done anything? Like the early 90s or some junk?

since when have you, idiot?
Fuck vanguardism? Yes. And what about Marcos? Yes, fuck him as well. no, fuck you. both of them have done more than you ever will.

and then you go on to approvingly quote zizek and kautsky, lol. you can always tell a reactionary in leftist's clothing based on what his attitude is toward actual revolutionaries vs. what his attitude is toward ''theorists'' who haven't done shit in real life.

[Weezer]

Vanguardism is essential to anarchism, as with communism.

Who do you think led the anarchist militants in Spain? That would be the CNT-FAI. You don't have to be Leninist to have a vanguard.

[AK]

Vanguardism is essential to anarchism, as with communism.

Who do you think led the anarchist militants in Spain? That would be the CNT-FAI. You don't have to be Leninist to have a vanguard.
I think many anarchists denounce their concept of a vanguard because a lot of the Leninist vanguards plan to seize power post-revolution.

[graymouser]

i think the concept of the vanguard party has been incredibly misused to the point that anarchists attack a strawman and there are tiny stalinist/trotsyist grouplets claiming to be the vanguard while their membership consists of two old men and their pet ferret. a vanguard party where the bolsheviks, the german KPD, the italian communist party, the cpusa in its non stalinist days in the days of reed, to a certain extent the mexican partido liberal mexicano (in its anarchist days), etcewtera. a vanguard is not self appointed, a vanguard party is made by the class itself in periods of heightened resistance.
As a Trotskyist with a ferret, I have to take exception to that. Ferrets make very bad party members, they just hide your papers and that's no good.

On a more serious note, there are no Trotskyist organizations that think of themselves as being a vanguard party in the United States. The Socialist Workers Party probably was closest to this self-conception but it never really made it there. For the most part Trotskyist groups view themselves as small "fighting propaganda groups" attempting to create the nucleus of a future vanguard party by gathering together and training cadres. In a downturn of the class struggle you can only pick up the "ones and twos"; as things heat up there will be a process of splits and fusions whereby an actual party will be forged. The point of the Trotskyist group today is to build theoretically aware leaders so that the energy of an upswing doesn't become dissipated or wander down an opportunist or ultra-left road.

The problem is, this perspective is hard to live with for a long time and people get demoralized and either take on very opportunist stances (like making a hero out of a Stalinist like Castro or a bourgeois populist like Chavez) or go off on ultra-left, voluntaristic jags which wear out their relatively few cadres and don't deliver the hoped for results.

None of this is related to the vanguard party. Trotskyists look at it as, a vanguard is going to exist in any revolution - but history has shown us that leaving the questions of program, strategy and tactics up to "spontaneity" leads to disaster, and that training cadres like the Bolsheviks did means a party can go from being small to genuinely mass-based in a short period during a revolutionary crisis. This has yet to be proven wrong.

[Tablo]

I feel like we need a solid idea of everyone's definition of what a vanguard is.

[automattick]

no, fuck you. both of them have done more than you ever will.

and then you go on to approvingly quote zizek and kautsky, lol. you can always tell a reactionary in leftist's clothing based on what his attitude is toward actual revolutionaries vs. what his attitude is toward ''theorists'' who haven't done shit in real life.

Sorry, vanguardism is a failure. You're arrogant enough to think you can lead workers? To tell them what to do in a revolutionary situation?

You're just a degenerate that doesn't know what you're talking about.

[Proletarian Ultra]

Originally Posted by Proletarian Ultra
Since when have the EZLN done anything? Like the early 90s or some junk?

since when have you, idiot? no, fuck you. both of them have done more than you ever will.

I'll gladly cop to being a do-nothing idiot, but it's a fair question.

Mexico is on fire and the EZLN just holding their base areas. Now, I'm sure that means a lot in terms of quality of life and dignity for the peasants involved and proud we are of all of them. Good for Marcos if he helps them out with what have you.

But since he's not moving the ball down the field - under the most favorable conditions in decades - I don't see why his position on vanguards or anything else should be of interest to anyone at all. In short, "shit on all the subcomandantes of this planet."

[RedSonRising]

I think he is using the term "vanguards" to differentiate himself and the Zapatista movement from what he perceives to be failures of authentic community control over the decision-making process due to bureaucratic hierarchy. It's a biased blanketing for sure, but I think he opposes a strong conscious emphasis on the leadership while at the same time maintaining an effective system of leadership that many could interpret as being a vanguard itself. It's not something I agree with in principle, but the Zapatista movement is a respectable model for social change taking place within Chiapas and other impoverished communities in Mexico, so I suppose it's not that big a deal that his philosophy is contemptuous of the theory. He isn't advocating a war with Leninists or anything.

[Adi Shankara]

Whatever lets you sleep at night, man.

At least the Leninists are honest about it.

He isn't their leader. hence why he wears the mask: it symbolizes "the faceless and leaderless element of the peasant struggle amongst the Indigenous Mayan people".

[Homo Songun]

Dude, I'm well aware of what they say is the case. Him being a touchy feely "intergalactic" postmodernist doesn't make him any less of el líder maximo. I'm really quite shocked at peoples naivete here.

[this is an invasion]

He wrote "I shit on all the revolutionary vanguards of this planet" (http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/2003/marcos/etaJAN.html) as the title of a letter to ETA.

Which is totally fuckin' awesome.

[Adi Shankara]

Dude, I'm well aware of what they say is the case. Him being a touchy feely "intergalactic" postmodernist doesn't make him any less of el líder maximo. I'm really quite shocked at peoples naivete here.

It's kind've hard to be an "el lider maximo" when no one really knows who you are. besides, he can't help how the media propogates him into some romantic icon--would you have him cease doing the good work in Chiapas he's doing, simply because he gets some American and European girls wet between their legs?

[it_ain't_me]

Sorry, vanguardism is a failure. You're arrogant enough to think you can lead workers? To tell them what to do in a revolutionary situation?

You're just a degenerate that doesn't know what you're talking about.

and you're an armchair reactionary who likes kautsky the class traitor and zizek the coke-sniffing intellectual over lenin or subcomondante marcos. you can of course pretend now that the issue is you simply don't like vanguards, but in your previous post you also said fuck marcos. you just don't like leftists who try and achieve anything in the real world. there are plenty of fake leftists like you, so don't worry, you have plenty of company.

[this is an invasion]

and you're an armchair reactionary who likes kautsky the class traitor and zizek the coke-sniffing intellectual over lenin or subcomondante marcos. you can of course pretend now that the issue is you simply don't like vanguards, but in your previous post you also said fuck marcos. you just don't like leftists who try and achieve anything in the real world. there are plenty of fake leftists like you, so don't worry, you have plenty of company.

You're silly

[automattick]

and you're an armchair reactionary who likes kautsky the class traitor and zizek the coke-sniffing intellectual over lenin or subcomondante marcos. you can of course pretend now that the issue is you simply don't like vanguards, but in your previous post you also said fuck marcos. you just don't like leftists who try and achieve anything in the real world. there are plenty of fake leftists like you, so don't worry, you have plenty of company.

:laugh: Hahahahahaha.........excellent! This thread just keeps getting better; the more people like you who are too afraid to rationally critique my argument, the more I realize that you can't. Let me know when you post something intelligent and not nearly as humorous!

[it_ain't_me]

You're silly

nope, silly would be to say ''fuck [revolutionaries from across the entire spectrum of revolutionary practice]''.

[this is an invasion]

nope, silly would be to say ''fuck [revolutionaries from across the entire spectrum of revolutionary practice]''.

Nah. There are plenty of historical and theoretical reasons to say such things.

[it_ain't_me]

Nah. There are plenty of historical and theoretical reasons to say such things.

there are plenty of historical and theoretical reasons to say fuck your mother :)

[bcbm]

very eloquent:thumbup1:

[it_ain't_me]

stay out of this bcbm, this is between me and cmoney

[this is an invasion]

The silliness factor of this thread is rising.

[this is an invasion]

cmoney isn't here bro. I'll tell him you said hi though.

[bcbm]

stay out of this bcbm, this is between me and cmoney

certainly sir, forgive me for the breach of your engagement

[AK]

and you're an armchair reactionary who likes kautsky the class traitor and zizek the coke-sniffing intellectual over lenin or subcomondante marcos. you can of course pretend now that the issue is you simply don't like vanguards, but in your previous post you also said fuck marcos. you just don't like leftists who try and achieve anything in the real world. there are plenty of fake leftists like you, so don't worry, you have plenty of company.


You call them an armchair revolutionary whilst in the comfort of your own armchair.
KAUTSKY TEH CLASS TRAITOOOOOORRRRRRRR!!!1!one!1!

[it_ain't_me]

cmoney isn't here bro. I'll tell him you said hi though.

that shouldn't be hard :)

tell him i hope he's having fun driving his jeep in between his military job and his spusa meetings
You call them an armchair revolutionary whilst in the comfort of your own armchair.


:owned

[robbo203]

ahem ...this is getting a bit like Monty Pythons "silly" sketch. Go back to post 16 for a clear definition of vanguardism. To talk of a vanguard in one sense is perfectly OK but in another sense it is emphatically not. The key to it all is does the vanguard propose to capture power in advance of the workers becoming socialist and to (allegedly) act on behalf of them. If so then we must reject this kind of vanguard completely and without reservation. It can only ever entrench class society

[Tifosi]

my dad dislikes subcomandante marcos a lot because he says he acts like a clown. tbh i can see why he says that. here is a man wearing a retarded ski mask with a pipe and riding his horse around and publicizing his headless pet chicken. i think the man likes the spotlight

Of course he want's to be in the spotlight, the EZLN need him to be in spotlight so that they can stay in the news. If he didn't like the camera's he would be a crap spokesperson. It wouldn't look to good for the EZLN having this guy so nervous that he can't speak up in front of the world representing them.

[REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL]

We need to first define vanguardism before we can debate about it.

I think anarchists have their strawmen of leninist vanguards (That is, that they want a small group of people do "Command" workers, and then take over the running of things after the revolution "for their own good") (Although tbh, while not leninist principle..that is what actually happened in Russia.)

And calling a book "I shit on the vanguards of the world" is the most awesome thing ever

[Sasha]

OK enough this is an verbal warning to all of you, anyone still flaming, trowing personal insults around, etc etc wil face the dire consequenses (of recieving an PM warning and having this thread closed and trashed :lol:)

[Wanted Man]

Which is totally fuckin' awesome.

I didn't really follow what the text was about, but as far as titles go, I'd easily rate it a 7.


It's kind've hard to be an "el lider maximo" when no one really knows who you are. besides, he can't help how the media propogates him into some romantic icon--would you have him cease doing the good work in Chiapas he's doing, simply because he gets some American and European girls wet between their legs?

A bit of casual sexism is what makes a thread fun! :thumbup1: That, and any political statements beginning with the word "fuck". Thanks to all of you for another great Revleft thread.

[Honggweilo]

is tat sum tendency warz i sees? can i haz sum?

[Lulznet]

Marcos is a spokesperson not a leader of the movement.

He simply speaks for the worker. :thumbup1:

[Slavoj Zizzle]

Why do people support the EZLN? They are basically the liberals wet dream, they coexist with the capitalist state, live off the land/share resources/other hippie crap, and are a non-violent alternative to communist revolution. I understand they are better than the Mexican state, but Shining Path/FARC are much more deserving of our support, and if the EZLN is the best anarchism can do :laugh:

[this is an invasion]

and if the EZLN is the best anarchism can do :laugh:

EZLN aren't anarchist.




NICE TRY THOUGH:thumbup1:

[Slavoj Zizzle]

EZLN aren't anarchist.




NICE TRY THOUGH:thumbup1:

I've always wondered, what do anarchists consider as a successful anarchist society. Ukraine? Catalonia? Some hippies in Seattle?

I used to be an anarchist because I admire Chomsky and I bought into western propaganda about Communism, but the day I realized Communism is basically Anarchism with a plan and a history of success I switched over and never looked back.

[RedSonRising]

Why do people support the EZLN? They are basically the liberals wet dream, they coexist with the capitalist state, live off the land/share resources/other hippie crap, and are a non-violent alternative to communist revolution. I understand they are better than the Mexican state, but Shining Path/FARC are much more deserving of our support, and if the EZLN is the best anarchism can do :laugh:

The Shining Path and FARC are perfect examples of what you don't want a guerrilla organization degenerating into, while the Zapatistas have actually transformed social relations and created a model of worker autonomy within their controlled territory. They're creating socialism where they can and not provoking the state unnecessarily. The left should support a territorially limited success of revolutionary society rather than flamboyant autocratic thugs bombing police stations and civilians. The EZLN should spread, but don't discredit their ability to establish a truly democratic decision-making process just because they aren't popping the heads off of Mexican statesmen left and right.

[Adi Shankara]

Why do people support the EZLN? They are basically the liberals wet dream, they coexist with the capitalist state, live off the land/share resources/other hippie crap, and are a non-violent alternative to communist revolution. I understand they are better than the Mexican state, but Shining Path/FARC are much more deserving of our support, and if the EZLN is the best anarchism can do :laugh:


People support the EZLN because they actually get something done down in Central America; when Marcos (almost certainly not his real name, no one except those close to the EZLN know who he is) said "fuck Vanguardism" he didn't mean it in a sense that Vanguardism is outdated; he was most likely referring to the "Vanguard movements" in China, Laos, etc. places where they have failed and become the new bourgeoisie.

Sub Commadante Marcos isn't in it for the fame. if he was, he'd take off his mask and parade his name all over--but truth is, no one knows who he is, and thus, it's not like there is a big gain for him when there is no profits to be made, no book deals, etc. because anyone can claim to be subcommadante marcos, since no one knows who he is.

FARC is rightfully categorized as a terrorist organization--they are communist in name only. Shining Path, I'd agree, is worthy of support, but come on...FARC? they kill Indigenous people who want nothing to do with the war, which in my opinion, is the most deplorably possible thing you can do; the Indigenous people don't deserve subjugation by their supposed liberators, which is exactly what FARC has done.

that, and doesn't FARC have ties to the Medellin cartel?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Wow. What happened to this thread in my absence? :blink:


They are basically the liberals wet dream, they coexist with the capitalist state

Can't wait to see another version of the Acteal massacre, only on a larger scale! I'm sure that a paltry number of impoverished indigenous guerillas will do great against a Mexican state that receives massive stereoid injections every single year in the form of payments from Estados Unidos!

Oh, and as already pointed out, the EZLN is not an anarchist organization. Or maybe you're not aware that Che Guevara's face is a common insignia in San Cristobal. :rolleyes:


but Shining Path/FARC are much more deserving of our support

When did FARC storm Bogota? I must have missed that...last time I checked, they were isolated in certain areas of Colombia, stagnating since the collapse of the USSR, removed from Colombia's industrial/developed sectors and surviving from revenue netted by kidnapping gringos and the coke trade.

Sendero Luminoso is a pack of scumbags, by the way. I have a little bit of respect for FARC/ELN; I have absolutely none for the butchers that SP produced.


I've always wondered, what do anarchists consider as a successful anarchist society. Ukraine? Catalonia? Some hippies in Seattle?

Somalia, hurf durf.


but the day I realized Communism is basically Anarchism with a plan and a history of success I switched over and never looked back.

Yeah, real history of success: a collapsed USSR, a Chinese state that combines the worst aspects of oligarchic rule with crony capitalism, a couple of "Third World" nations that have varying degrees of capitalist market intervention into their internal affairs (Vietnam, Cuba) and a state in North Korea that can only be defended by saying "It's not THAT bad, guys".

The failed orthodoxies of the past will be burned when and if a real revolutionary movement developes...of that I have no doubt.

[bcbm]

Marcos (almost certainly not his real name, no one except those close to the EZLN know who he is)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_w1IyLXo1QA4/SzzpCHx-WhI/AAAAAAAACLM/wSyJ-vbnuVw/s1600/mexicocuandomarcoserarafael.jpg

[Adi Shankara]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_w1IyLXo1QA4/SzzpCHx-WhI/AAAAAAAACLM/wSyJ-vbnuVw/s1600/mexicocuandomarcoserarafael.jpg

and we know this is Marcos...how? I could post a picture of Mel Gibson and claim to have it be Marcos as well...

[Adi Shankara]

Yeah, real history of success: a collapsed USSR, a Chinese state that combines the worst aspects of oligarchic rule with crony capitalism, a couple of "Third World" nations that have varying degrees of capitalist market intervention into their internal affairs (Vietnam, Cuba) and a state in North Korea that can only be defended by saying "It's not THAT bad, guys".

The failed orthodoxies of the past will be burned when and if a real revolutionary movement developes...of that I have no doubt.

You should read into Thomas Sankara, who led a very successful transitional state on the path to Socialism in the aim of developing into communism, where many great accomplishments were completed, until his assassination at the hands of his former comrades.

[bcbm]

and we know this is Marcos...how? I could post a picture of Mel Gibson and claim to have it be Marcos as well...

you could, but mel gibson isn't a missing leftist professor who bears a striking resemblance to marcos.

[9]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_w1IyLXo1QA4/SzzpCHx-WhI/AAAAAAAACLM/wSyJ-vbnuVw/s1600/mexicocuandomarcoserarafael.jpg

It's obviously him, the eyes = unmistakable. Unless it was photoshopped or whatev. I don't particularly care, just an observation.

[cb9's_unity]

you could, but mel gibson isn't a missing leftist professor who bears a striking resemblance to marcos.

Are you absolutely positive its him? The point is that he isn't trying to glamorize himself or make profit off of the revolutionary movement. That is supported by the fact that only a few people are absolutely sure who he is.

Its not the guys fault for having a history. He didn't just materialize out of nowhere wearing a ski mask and smoking a pipe.

[black magick hustla]

Sub Commadante Marcos isn't in it for the fame. if he was, he'd take off his mask and parade his name all over--but truth is, no one knows who he is, and thus, it's not like there is a big gain for him when there is no profits to be made, no book deals, etc. because anyone can claim to be subcommadante marcos, since no one knows who he is.



Everybody knows who he is. He is an ex professor from Mexico City. I think people pander to much to the mystique of the ski mask and the pipe. I think his image is very interesting, but I think sometimes people are wooed to much by his appearance than his content. After all his face makes very good graffitti.

[Adi Shankara]

Everybody knows who he is. He is an ex professor from Mexico City. I think people pander to much to the mystique of the ski mask and the pipe. I think his image is very interesting, but I think sometimes people are wooed to much by his appearance than his content. After all his face makes very good graffitti.

I still don't think that's him--some accounts have him with blonde hair, for example. And there will always be those attracted to the image--we can't help it Anarcho-communism is "cool", but it's easy to tell the true believers from the riff-raff--If I was to ask someone "what is your opinion on the Bourgeoisie's relation to the proletariat's misery" and they didn't have an opinion, I'd call them a poser.

[praxis1966]

Admittedly, I didn't read the entirety of this thread, but to return to the point and address the OP...


Vuanguards are not created for the fun of it, they are an essential part of building and spreading the revolutionary movement, revolutions do not just happen, the people become angry at material conditions, but they need to be given the class outlook and marxist guide to carry out an upheaval and revolutionise the modes of production, and in turn, thier lives.

I don't know about anybody else, and I wouldn't claim to speak for them even if I did, but I find this extraordinarily condescending. First of all, I don't need to be lead anyplace. I have this big gray wad between my ears called a brain that allows me to lead myself. Don't take this the wrong way because it's not a personal attack, but a criticism of vanguardism in general, but I personally don't trust anyone who thinks they know what's best for the people.

And speaking of the people, I'm getting a little sick of folks talking about "them" like some amorphous mass that can just be molded and shaped into whatever particular tendency the vanguard wants "them" to be. Let me just be clear about one thing: I am one of the people, and I'll do my own liberating thanks very much.

[Adi Shankara]

And speaking of the people, I'm getting a little sick of folks talking about "them" like some amorphous mass that can just be molded and shaped into whatever particular tendency the vanguard wants "them" to be. Let me just be clear about one thing: I am one of the people, and I'll do my own liberating thanks very much.

Very good point, which is why I always liked Thomas Sankara and Leon Trotsky--they didn't devolve into this "us and them" mentality, where they thought they were intellectually superior than others. Thomas Sankara supposedly began every speech (in French of course) at Internationals and forums with "I am Thomas Sankara, and I am one of 7 million Burkinabe men, women, and children".

[ComradeOm]

Admittedly, I didn't read the entirety of this threadI haven't read any of this thread, and I really don't think I'm missing much, but its important to state that the reality of 'vanguard party' rarely corresponds to the myth. Certainly it has nothing in common with the strawman presented by the OP

Far from being some small sect destined to "guide" the revolution, the vanguard is a mass party (http://www.revleft.com/vb/russian-revolution-bolshevik-t105275/index.html) that contains the most militant and revolutionary elements of the working class. That's all