The RAAN

[The Man]

Do Anarcho-Communists like the RAAN at all? Because I think I've seen a few that really don't like it.

[TC]

RAAN is an internet based anti-Communist petty vandalism group that disbanded some years ago, right?

I'd think Anarcho-Communists would hate them since part of how RAAN works its divisive anti-Communist line is to make itself into a bad parody of Anarcho-Communists. Of course, real Anarcho-Communists participate in struggle against ruling class ideology and politics instead of focusing on dividing the left and perpetrating petty hate crimes against Communists - so part of RAAN's anti-communism is an effort to make Anarcho-Communists look bad and ridiculous, but fortunately the parody is pretty transparent.

Hope that clears it up :).

[Rusty Shackleford]

yay a RAAN thread

they brick democratic party office windows. they are a sick communist street gang.

[StalinFanboy]

opinions are fairly mixed on RAAN.

I think your best course of action is to read about them on their website, and/or join their boards and ask them questions directly. Otherwise you're going to have to wade through bullshit such as TC's post.

I personally think RAAN is a pretty interesting idea. Although I disagree with a lot of the types of actions that have been claimed under their banner (I only disagree with them because as cool as I think it is to break windows and light cop cars on fire, I think it's problematic to over politicize these things), I think a contributing factor to this is that those involved in RAAN are interested in "doing things," but generally lack the numbers to organize more legit things.

Anyway, like I said, I think the best thing to do is interact with them and make up your mind, regardless of what the rest of the "scene" thinks.

[black magick hustla]

personally the rcp is small as insignificant as all the american left and everybody including the communists so while breaking the rcp window is funny who cares they are irrelevant. also tc is wrong because real communists dont care about the "problems of the left" and its "dividedness" cuz the left is insignificant and who cares if a bunch of cadre and assorted bureacrats who have no significance in the us in most peoples lives are divided. communists care about the self activity of the working class, and i dont mean this in the most abstract and theoretical way. i mean that communists do not care about having a "leftist glenn beck" but we care when there are strikes or when working class students fight against austerity like this http://en.internationalism.org/icconline/2010/11/daily-mail rather than polemicizing with activists and lobbying campaigns

[Widerstand]

RAAN is an internet based anti-Communist petty vandalism group that disbanded some years ago, right?

Not "internet based."
Not "anti-communist."
Not disbanded either.


I think a contributing factor to this is that those involved in RAAN are interested in "doing things," but generally lack the numbers to organize more legit things.

What's a "legit thing" then?

[StalinFanboy]

What's a "legit thing" then?
Something that contributes to subverting capitalist social relationships. Something that has to do with or furthering widespread, collective working class struggle against the state and capitalism.

Generally more than just vandalism.

[Widerstand]

Something that contributes to subverting capitalist social relationships. Something that has to do with or furthering widespread, collective working class struggle against the state and capitalism.

Generally more than just vandalism.

How does attacking (thereby disrespecting) property not subvert capitalist social relations? Is property not a form of social relation?

And that second part strikes me as both vague and simplistic - "having to do with working class struggle" could mean almost everything or nothing.

[StalinFanboy]

How does attacking (thereby disrespecting) property not subvert capitalist social relations? Is property not a form of social relation?

Property damage is too easily swept under the rug. Unless you like, burn down a ski resort, mostly everyone (including other pro-revs) will have forgotten about it. If you break a window, insurance pays for it. Hell, you can burn down a ski resort, and they'll cash in on insurance and build it up even bigger (true story).

If no one remembers it happening, or even cares 6 months later, does it still count as subverted?



And that second part strikes me as both vague and simplistic - "having to do with working class struggle" could mean almost everything or nothing.

Ah yes, but you skipped my key words: "widespread" and "collective." And property damage in the form of night time smashy smashies isn't really collective is it, when the only people that actually engage in the temporary subversion of property are a small group of pro-revolutionaries, and it appears as a spectacular event for everyone else?

[Widerstand]

Property damage is too easily swept under the rug.

As is pretty much everything.



Unless you like, burn down a ski resort, mostly everyone (including other pro-revs) will have forgotten about it. If you break a window, insurance pays for it. Hell, you can burn down a ski resort, and they'll cash in on insurance and build it up even bigger (true story).

But the point of property damage often is not to actually cause damage (though of course when you burn down a slaughterhouse it probably is). It very often is a purely symbolic and creative act (especially vandalizing). When people see a burning police car they don't think "oh look, they are to have one less now! hah! what a strategic advantage we have!", they'll think "look who's in charge now pigs!"



If no one remembers it happening, or even cares 6 months later, does it still count as subverted?

And how do you propose we measure how many people care for how long? And what events do people really care about or remember? Very few.




Ah yes, but you skipped my key words: "widespread" and "collective." And property damage in the form of night time smashy smashies isn't really collective is it, when the only people that actually engage in the temporary subversion of property are a small group of pro-revolutionaries, and it appears as a spectacular event for everyone else?

I don't think an action gains or loses validity from the amount of people participating in it, unless of course that was part of the goal (in our example it most likely isn't).

[ComradeOm]

When people see a burning police car they don't think "oh look, they are to have one less now! hah! what a strategic advantage we have!", they'll think "look who's in charge now pigs!"I suggest that you get out more because very few people outside of the socialist/left milieu are likely to have either reaction. But then this creation of symbols - which is nothing more than an updated, yet strangely defanged, version of propaganda of the deed - is an inherently inexact science. Burning a cop car or smashing a window can, and will be, interpreted/spun in a dozen different ways. This is because it doesn't speak directly to peoples' class interests and it doesn't say anything meaningful about state relations. Its just a burning car or a broken window

But then I've long suspected that this 'symbolism' argument is simply intended to gloss over the hollow core at the heart of RAAN. Look past the ridiculously flowery rhetoric and there's little to RAANismo (:rolleyes:) except 'action for the sake of action'. In the past I've drawn comparisons with Mussolini's similar fetishisation of the deed, but its also worth comparing RAAN 'crews' to Brasillach's idealisation of the 'gang' and its accompanying camaraderie. I think RAAN is little more than an excuse to indulge in the latter, through petty vandalism, while playing at being revolutionaries

Besides, most, if not all, of the 'RAANistas' that I've come into contact with have been pricks. And very self-consciously so

[Widerstand]

I suggest that you get out more because very few people outside of the socialist/left milieu are likely to have either reaction.

And here you are just plain wrong. Most people (and this of course includes the right wing press) associate burning cop cars with a loss of control by the police (ironically to your claim, the ones who wouldn't would most likely be leftists suspecting provocateurs). Whether or not they approve of that and what they make of it is, of course, a different matter altogether.



But then this creation of symbols - which is nothing more than an updated, yet strangely defanged, version of propaganda of the deed - is an inherently inexact science.

As is selling newspapers, demos, writing petitions and having innerparty convents. Though of course the latter are considered far more "serious", for whatever reason.



Burning a cop car or smashing a window can, and will be, interpreted/spun in a dozen different ways.

As can be and is done with most leftist activity or statements, what's your point?



This is because it doesn't speak directly to peoples' class interests and it doesn't say anything meaningful about state relations. Its just a burning car or a broken window

What exactly does this mean: "speak directly to peoples' class interests"? And it may not say much about state relations, but it contests the state's monopoly on force.



But then I've long suspected that this 'symbolism' argument is simply intended to gloss over the hollow core at the heart of RAAN.

I'm not aware of there being such a thing as "the heart of RAAN" or any form "core", but maybe they turned Leninist recently?



Look past the ridiculously flowery rhetoric and there's little to RAANismo (:rolleyes:)

Right there that's just a claim without any substance.



except 'action for the sake of action'.

Which is of course not true, but supposed it were, if your alternative was selling newspapers and paying membership fees for a party, I'll gladly choose action, tyvm.



In the past I've drawn comparisons with Mussolini's similar fetishisation of the deed, but its also worth comparing RAAN 'crews' to Brasillach's idealisation of the 'gang' and its accompanying camaraderie. I think RAAN is little more than an excuse to indulge in the latter, through petty vandalism, while playing at being revolutionaries

And did you know that Hitler was a fan of direct action? Just look at the pogroms in '38!

Anarchists = Fascists! :rolleyes:



Besides, most, if not all, of the 'RAANistas' that I've come into contact with have been pricks. And very self-consciously so

Valid argument etc.

[ComradeOm]

And here you are just plain wrong. Most people (and this of course includes the right wing press) associate burning cop cars with a loss of control by the police (ironically to your claim, the ones who wouldn't would most likely be leftists suspecting provocateurs). Whether or not they approve of that and what they make of it is, of course, a different matter altogetherOkay, you're right. Clearly you have a far greater insight into the minds of everybody else in the world than I have :rolleyes:

A "loss of control" is what we saw in the French banlieues in 2005/07. Burning out a single patrol car is simply vandalism. To ascribe any more significance to this, or to claim that it suddenly focuses everyone's minds on revolutionary change or the weakening of state structures, is delusional


As is selling newspapers, demos, writing petitions and having innerparty convents. Though of course the latter are considered far more "serious", for whatever reason.Because they are devoted, at least nominally, to raising class conciousness and building support or structures in the working class. The specific parties/groups/newspapers may be completely cac, or at least struggling against the tide, but at least they are committed to mass agitation, in lieu of a tiny clique going around and breaking the odd window. Do we really need to rehash the arguments against propaganda of the deed, and this pale rediscovery of it?


What exactly does this mean: "speak directly to peoples' class interests"?It means engaging with peoples' actual problems, with the struggles that we face everyday under capitalism, and relating these to social change. This is something that vandalism is completely unrelated to


And it may not say much about state relations, but it contests the state's monopoly on force.Delusional. The only way to effectively challenge the state's authority is to present a viable alternative. RAAN is not that. Burning the occasional squad car is not making any real dent in the ability of the state to respond or to enforce its will. Its merely a chimera that hints - despite all evidence to the contrary - that this act might spark a wider conflagration


I'm not aware of there being such a thing as "the heart of RAAN" or any form "core", but maybe they turned Leninist recently?Ah, the 'Leninist' slurs. Inevitable in any RAAN discussion. Leaving that aside, I'm sure you'll be happy to return to it, it is nothing but a vain conceit to assume that a group can function without some sort of ideology or guiding principles. RAAN, "dis-organisation" or not, is no exception


Right there that's just a claim without any substanceNo, its an opinion. Anyone who's read anything by RAAN should know where I'm coming from. Its probably nothing more sinister than bad writing, a lack of coherence and a reliance of buzzwords (none particularly lacking on the left) but the results can be horrendous. I remember this particular communique (http://www.redanarchist.org/texts/autpub/emopov/emopov3.html) (from way back in the day) fondly. A highlight:

We are not “activists.” We are a street-level tendency of anti-political radicals who have chosen to fight for their lives and construct an offensive engine the creation of community power and infrastructure through our daily recreation of what has come to be called “RAANismo.”

Tell it brother!


Which is of course not true, but supposed it were, if your alternative was selling newspapers and paying membership fees for a party, I'll gladly choose action, tyvmWell this is entirely a false dichotomy and, again, supposes that I unreservedly support every other non-RAAN organisation going. Of course partly this is because RAAN is defined as much, if not more, by what it isn't than by what it is. Still, I consider the latter to be more useful when talking about RAAN itself

But yeah, I think that the 'action for the sake of action' message comes across pretty (http://www.redanarchist.org/texts/autpub/praxis/2/nobullshit.html) clear (http://www.redanarchist.org/texts/p&d.html)


And did you know that Hitler was a fan of direct action? Just look at the pogroms in '38!

Anarchists = Fascists! :rolleyes:Well done, a Nazi reference. Because any discussion of early fascism and its obsession with action or dynamism, to the detriment of theory or 'intellectualism', inevitably calls for mention of Hitler. Keep raising the quality! :rolleyes:

To be clear: I am not calling RAAN fascist. I am however condemning their near-exclusive emphasis on action and dismissing this as a cloak for getting kicks out of vandalism. This is nothing but the mystique of action, and a rejection of the old, that interested so many young fascists in the early decades of the 20th C. At least the Futurists produced some quality art in the process


Valid argument etc.Please learn to tell the difference between a personal opinion and a "valid argument". Or even to take the argument as a whole instead of dissecting it line by line. Seriously, you expect me to produce some sort of academic source that confirms my experiences of RAAN members being annoying pricks?

[Widerstand]

Okay, you're right. Clearly you have a far greater insight into the minds of everybody else in the world than I have :rolleyes:

Yes, and I can read newspapers :)



A "loss of control" is what we saw in the French banlieues in 2005/07. Burning out a single patrol car is simply vandalism. To ascribe any more significance to this, or to claim that it suddenly focuses everyone's minds on revolutionary change or the weakening of state structures, is delusional

Indeed that would be delusional, but why do you bring it up? No one claimed such. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but I think context matters a lot.

You have however yet to explain why people should be stopped from burning cars, breaking windows or spray painting.



Because they are devoted, at least nominally, to raising class conciousness and building support or structures in the working class.

Yes I'm sure if the working class can read the latest ideological jizz about how to consider China's economy they will be much more likely to revolt :rolleyes:



The specific parties/groups/newspapers may be completely cac, or at least struggling against the tide, but at least they are committed to mass agitation, in lieu of a tiny clique going around and breaking the odd window. Do we really need to rehash the arguments against propaganda of the deed, and this pale rediscovery of it?

Vandalism of course is not the same as propaganda of the deed, and it certainly isn't supposed to be "mass agitation" (though I'm not sure if this is RAAN's stance, and frankly I don't care either; besides, spray painting is very much an agitation tool), both of which you are happily ignoring. The French riots you mentioned did by all means consist of vandalism, as does the Greek uprising and similar riots. Hell, May 68 was full of vandalism. I guess it'd be better if all these people stayed at home and read a newspaper?



It means engaging with peoples' actual problems, with the struggles that we face everyday under capitalism, and relating these to social change. This is something that vandalism is completely unrelated to

Are cops not part of these problems? Are the stores and offices, which's windows get smashed, not part of these problems?



Delusional. The only way to effectively challenge the state's authority is to present a viable alternative. RAAN is not that. Burning the occasional squad car is not making any real dent in the ability of the state to respond or to enforce its will. Its merely a chimera that hints - despite all evidence to the contrary - that this act might spark a wider conflagration

Of course only a Leninist would think that we need an "alternative state." Also I'm talking about vandalism as a whole here, not confined to RAAN.



Ah, the 'Leninist' slurs. Inevitable in any RAAN discussion. Leaving that aside, I'm sure you'll be happy to return to it, it is nothing but a vain conceit to assume that a group can function without some sort of ideology or guiding principles. RAAN, "dis-organisation" or not, is no exception

RAAN has guiding principles. This is of course not the same as claiming there is a "heart of RAAN" somewhere which directs all of RAAN's activities and statements.



No, its an opinion. Anyone who's read anything by RAAN should know where I'm coming from. Its probably nothing more sinister than bad writing, a lack of coherence and a reliance of buzzwords (none particularly lacking on the left) but the results can be horrendous. I remember this particular communique (http://www.redanarchist.org/texts/autpub/emopov/emopov3.html) (from way back in the day) fondly. A highlight:

We are not “activists.” We are a street-level tendency of anti-political radicals who have chosen to fight for their lives and construct an offensive engine the creation of community power and infrastructure through our daily recreation of what has come to be called “RAANismo.”

I'm not sure what you think is wrong with that. I consider building leftist infrastructure and bringing the community together very important aspects of organizing.



Well this is entirely a false dichotomy and, again, supposes that I unreservedly support every other non-RAAN organisation going. Of course partly this is because RAAN is defined as much, if not more, by what it isn't than by what it is. Still, I consider the latter to be more useful when talking about RAAN itself

Well you very obviously oppose vandalism, which includes almost every action damaging property (I suppose you're also against squatting? what about sabotage?), so the dichotomy does present itself, and doesn't strike me as quite false. If you wish to operate within the spectrum of legality that's your choice, but then you might as well go vote.



But yeah, I think that the 'action for the sake of action' message comes across pretty (http://www.redanarchist.org/texts/autpub/praxis/2/nobullshit.html) clear (http://www.redanarchist.org/texts/p&d.html)

Where do any of these texts promote action for the sake of action?



Well done, a Nazi reference. Because any discussion of early fascism and its obsession with action or dynamism, to the detriment of theory or 'intellectualism', inevitably calls for mention of Hitler. Keep raising the quality! :rolleyes:

Well you where the one starting to compare stuff, not me. Besides, I'd love to hear your critique of action and dynamism. Dogmatic passivity is so much better :rolleyes:


To be clear: I am not calling RAAN fascist.

Oh my, and here I thought you just compared them to an Italian-fascist street gang. How stupid of me!



I am however condemning their near-exclusive emphasis on action and dismissing this as a cloak for getting kicks out of vandalism.

Whether or not they get kicks out of it, I very much contest your "analysis" that RAAN's politics are just a "cloak" for vandalism.



This is nothing but the mystique of action, and a rejection of the old, that interested so many young fascists in the early decades of the 20th C. At least the Futurists produced some quality art in the process

What's wrong wit rejecting the old? You're a communist aren't you? Communists very much reject the old (primmies aside). Are you saying that not being stuck in the past makes one a fascist? I wouldn't at all be surprised, to be honest.


Seriously, you expect me to produce some sort of academic source that confirms my experiences of RAAN members being annoying pricks?

Oh, so it wasn't an argument you were making against RAAN? Cool.

[4 Leaf Clover]

RAAN has anything to do with class struggle , as much as much as an air condition device has with triple layered toilet paper

[Magón]

Not "internet based."
Not "anti-communist."
Not disbanded either.



What's a "legit thing" then?

Well RAAN is anti-Communist in the sense that other Anarchists who call themselves, anti-Communist are. They're just opposed to the Lenin and Stalin, etc. ways of achieving Communism, but not Communism itself.

[ComradeOm]

Indeed that would be delusional, but why do you bring it up? No one claimed such. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but I think context matters a lotOf course context matters, that's the whole point. Burning cars as part of a mass protest or social outburst of rage is a powerful statement or weapon; one or two individuals burning cars outside of this context is simply petty vandalism. The 'context' in this case being the existence of a mass social movement. Now RAAN's "property damage", which you apparently condone, very obviously does not lie within such a movement and nor is it a symptom of such social unrest. Its just a few individuals breaking windows: this is not admirable, it does not further any mass movement and it does not indicate a "loss of control" by the state. It is, in a word, pointless


Yes I'm sure if the working class can read the latest ideological jizz about how to consider China's economy they will be much more likely to revolt :rolleyes:Pouring scorn on the contents of these papers is one thing (although that hardly an accurate picture of their contents) but rubbishing the very notion of agitation (or what RAAN calls 'activism') is quite another. These are genuinely attempts, successful or not, to build wide-ranging support from within the working class for revolutionary programmes. RAAN dismisses not just the means to do this but also the very idea of such class-based initiatives. Hence its emphasis on 'crews' and the acts of individuals; all much sexier than handing out leaflets but indicative of a outlook (despite a proclaimed debt to Marxism) almost entirely devoid of class analysis


The French riots you mentioned did by all means consist of vandalism, as does the Greek uprising and similar riots. Hell, May 68 was full of vandalism. I guess it'd be better if all these people stayed at home and read a newspaper?Context, remember? I don't particularly care if people want to smash windows during a revolution but nor do I accept that breaking windows is going to contribute to the emergence of a revolutionary movement. The "symbolism" of these acts, when divorced from the immediate revolutionary environment, is negligible


Are cops not part of these problems? Are the stores and offices, which's windows get smashed, not part of these problems?Not until you explain why cops are a problem and why businesses are a problem. Believe it or not, most people today are not chomping at the bit, just waiting for the signal to rush onto the streets with Molotovs. This is closely related to the below:


Of course only a Leninist would think that we need an "alternative state." Also I'm talking about vandalism as a whole here, not confined to RAAN.Leninist (2). Call it a state - although note [b]that I did not[/i] - call it what you will. The power of the bourgeois state will only be truly broken when there is an alternative social model capable of filling the void. Destruction of the old must be accompanied by creation of the new. This is what a true 'loss of control' is - the renunciation of capitalist structures for new ones of the workers' design. This is something that RAAN, which their emphasis on individual acts, are incapable of providing or even articulating


RAAN has guiding principles. This is of course not the same as claiming there is a "heart of RAAN" somewhere which directs all of RAAN's activities and statements.Why are you fucking me about on semantics? Does it matter if I call it the "heart of RAAN" or "guiding principles"? This isn't necessarily a party programme but the currents of thought that make RAAN unique and set it apart from other groups. If RAAN did not have this then it would not exist as a distinct identity


I'm not sure what you think is wrong with that. I consider building leftist infrastructure and bringing the community together very important aspects of organizingWhat was I referring to here with this particular extract? Was it the ideas expressed or the ways in which they were expressed? That sentence, and the whole article that it was drawn from, is a mess of buzzwords, cliches, contradictions and hyperbole. The whole thing could be condensed into half the size by trimming down the ridiculous language. The actual ideas are nothing special but actually getting to them is a pain


If you wish to operate within the spectrum of legality that's your choice, but then you might as well go vote.Whah? Yes, because not breaking shop windows is the exact same as embracing parliamentary politics (:rolleyes:). This is exactly what I'm talking about with your false dichotomy


Where do any of these texts promote action for the sake of action?Look at the 'NO BULLSHIT, JUST ACTION' and 'Action' sections. Obviously some reading between the lines is necessary but it should be very apparent as to the emphasis that the Red and Anarchist Action Network places on action relative to theory


Well you where the one starting to compare stuff, not me. Besides, I'd love to hear your critique of action and dynamism. Dogmatic passivity is so much better :rolleyes:You know what, I'm not going to bother. If all you can do is pick one or two words from a text and regurgitate them with an accusation attached then there is no point. Seriously, look at this original sentence with attached emphasis:

"...early fascism and its obsession with action or dynamism, to the detriment of theory or 'intellectualism'"

From this you produce an accusation of "dogmatic passivity". What? Is this some sort of joke? Are you simultaneously on the RAAN forums laughing away at the 'fun' to be had from deliberately misconstruing my posts? Or are you just not reading them?

And, for the record, its a stupid comparison. I'd have thought that someone with the screen name 'Widerstand' would have been able to appreciate the nuances between the emergence of early post-war fascism and the enshrinement of National Socialism. But no, I say 'Mussolini's fetishisation of the deed' [edit] and you pop up 'Hitler'. Smooth


What's wrong wit rejecting the old? You're a communist aren't you? Communists very much reject the old (primmies aside). Are you saying that not being stuck in the past makes one a fascist? I wouldn't at all be surprised, to be honestNo, I'm not surprised either that you'd completely miss my point. Do you even know who I'm referencing when I talk about the Futurists? Or did you stop reading as soon your eyes alit on one phrase?

[revolution inaction]

Do Anarcho-Communists like the RAAN at all? Because I think I've seen a few that really don't like it.

I like there anti leninism, but apart from that there politics look kind of shit.


How does attacking (thereby disrespecting) property not subvert capitalist social relations? Is property not a form of social relation?

And that second part strikes me as both vague and simplistic - "having to do with working class struggle" could mean almost everything or nothing.

If an action increases or has the potential to increases working class consciousness or self organisation then it is revolutionary, if it doesn't then its not. Property destruction is not usually revolutionary, although it may be entertaining.

[StalinFanboy]

As is pretty much everything.
Yup.



But the point of property damage often is not to actually cause damage (though of course when you burn down a slaughterhouse it probably is). It very often is a purely symbolic and creative act (especially vandalizing). When people see a burning police car they don't think "oh look, they are to have one less now! hah! what a strategic advantage we have!", they'll think "look who's in charge now pigs!" Some people. You're in Europe and you have a stronger and more vibrant tradition of open class struggle. Over here in America, if people see a burning cop car they either don't care or think it's cool for a sec.




And how do you propose we measure how many people care for how long? And what events do people really care about or remember? Very few. Totally





I don't think an action gains or loses validity from the amount of people participating in it, unless of course that was part of the goal (in our example it most likely isn't).

I mean if someones larger goal is communist revolution then it would make sense to do things that would help this (although there is very little pro-revs can actually do). It seems to me that a lot of the time vandalism outside of open class struggle is just vandalism regardless of who does it.

I'm not sure why this argument is still going. I said I thought vandalism was cool, I just don't see the point in politicizing it.

[Blackscare]

How does attacking (thereby disrespecting) property not subvert capitalist social relations? Is property not a form of social relation?

So when I pulled down a christmas tree last month I was subverting to world capitalist order? Neat-o.

Man, with all the teenagers in the world it's a surprise there hasn't been a world revolution yet!

[Os Cangaceiros]

Okay, you're right. Clearly you have a far greater insight into the minds of everybody else in the world than I have :rolleyes:

A "loss of control" is what we saw in the French banlieues in 2005/07. Burning out a single patrol car is simply vandalism. To ascribe any more significance to this, or to claim that it suddenly focuses everyone's minds on revolutionary change or the weakening of state structures, is delusional


Well, the model that most police departments use today (at least in the developed world) utilizes the kind of criminal psychology popularized by William Bratton. Before his stints in Boston and NYC, police there basically just rode around in their cars and waited for calls. His own opinion was that the hallmarks of disorder and decay (broken windows among them) created a general atmosphere in which individuals felt "empowered" to break the law w/ impunity. This led to a form of policing characterized by persecuting the homeless with COV charges, aggressively pursuing vandals and toll cheats, and making sure that certain undesirable elements don't loiter for too long. This is the mindset of most cops in the U.S. today, and I've read that it's been popularized in Europe as well.

Whether window breaking or similar acts represent "revolutionary progress" is an entirely different matter; it doesn't. Although I don't think that even RAANites believe it does. I think that the primary value of RAAN lies in their ability to troll self-important "revolutionaries".

[Le Libérer]

I think that the primary value of RAAN lies in their ability to troll self-important "revolutionaries".
Based on half truths with no research whether the information is correct or not.

[Aesop]

I like there anti leninism, but apart from that there politics look kind of shit.

I swear their anti-leninism consists of just spraying graffiti on the buildings of socialist meetings and giving the odd slap to a leninists.
So you agree with those actions? :confused:

[The Douche]

Based on half truths with no research whether the information is correct or not.

Good thing we can always erase the evidence and remove the platform of those trying to raise the issue.:thumbup:

[apawllo]

I've only browsed the forums on a few occasions, and read some of their material. I like a fair number of their ideas to be honest; anti-Leninism, as mentioned is key. Also, the concept that they're a group of people each with their own ideas rather than some type of collective mentality is definitely a plus. I find it interesting however, after browsing the forums, that there seem to be a fair number of RAAN members who are in the military, and that the main justification for this is the training received. I'm not sure if you could pin point this as a catalyst for the arguably senseless violence as easily as immaturity, but it turned me off to the organization in general. That coupled with some of their choices of targets I suppose. They seem to discuss these things prior to their occurrences; perhaps not very thoroughly though?

As others said, browse the site and forum, talk to people there and make your own decision though. They provide the resources for you to do so...

[The Douche]

Nobody in RAAN says the military is "ok because of the training you receive".

Also, the extent to which diverging opinions are accepted/a dialogue exists is vastly overstated. There is a prevailing current that informs the ideology of RAAN and if you deviate from it you will find little support and catch lots of grief.

[synthesis]

But then I've long suspected that this 'symbolism' argument is simply intended to gloss over the hollow core at the heart of RAAN. Look past the ridiculously flowery rhetoric and there's little to RAANismo (:rolleyes:) except 'action for the sake of action'. In the past I've drawn comparisons with Mussolini's similar fetishisation of the deed, but its also worth comparing RAAN 'crews' to Brasillach's idealisation of the 'gang' and its accompanying camaraderie. I think RAAN is little more than an excuse to indulge in the latter, through petty vandalism, while playing at being revolutionaries

An ounce of action may be worth a ton of theory, but a ton of action without an ounce of theory is worth nothing at all.

[synthesis]

I think that the primary value of RAAN lies in their ability to troll self-important "revolutionaries".

I would phrase it more accurately as their ability to troll "self-important 'revolutionaries'" for the amusement of other "self-important 'revolutionaries.'"

[apawllo]

Nobody in RAAN says the military is "ok because of the training you receive".

Also, the extent to which diverging opinions are accepted/a dialogue exists is vastly overstated. There is a prevailing current that informs the ideology of RAAN and if you deviate from it you will find little support and catch lots of grief.

Maybe not in those words, but that's basically the impression that I was left with. That, perhaps in addition to some other justifications in some instances. As a matter of fact, I recall one member saying that since he had been promoted within the military a couple times, he felt he was more qualified than someone who wasn't a leftist to deal with commanding soldiers and so forth, since he had their best interests at heart. Of course the fact that he's commanding these soldiers to kill other people, both sides of which are pawns of the bourgeoisie was left by the wayside in discussion.

At any rate, yeah, RAAN seems like a club more than any type of political organization.

[Amphictyonis]

An online police officers wet dream.

[synthesis]

The various (and worthwhile) criticisms of RAAN aside, I don't think its existence is as pointless as people portray it. I think it does serve a certain purpose that results from the time and place in which we live.

There are reasons why it has become relatively popular in a relatively short length of time. It is a place for impatient young people (with whom I can sympathize) to avoid what I believe is perceived as an overly intellectual/theoretical and therefore ineffective "revolutionary" milieu - not hard to see why. That milieu itself exists for a reason.

In any case, I think it's easy to see why its critics believe that it has swung too far in the opposite direction. They want "action" and they want it now - regardless of whether the action is well-informed by class analysis. RAAN strikes me as fundamentally reactive (not reactionary) in respect to the circumstances described above.

I agree with the argument that RAAN posits "action for the sake of action," but I'd expand upon that - RAAN posits RAAN for the sake of RAAN, yet is not entirely unjustified in doing so, for the reasons I've listed above.

That said, RAAN's primary purpose at this point, to me, is extrinsic. Until it really coalesces into something coherent to anyone on the outside looking in, it can only function as a negative role-model - that is, to show us what we shouldn't do, much as, say, the RCP has done, representing the flip side of the coin. RAAN demonstrates the necessity of a finely-tuned balance between action and theory so that the former can be adequately informed by the latter and vice versa.

Of course, I welcome disagreement to my hypothesis from both members and sympathizers of RAAN and from those who are stronger detractors of it than I.

[The Douche]

Maybe not in those words, but that's basically the impression that I was left with. That, perhaps in addition to some other justifications in some instances. As a matter of fact, I recall one member saying that since he had been promoted within the military a couple times, he felt he was more qualified than someone who wasn't a leftist to deal with commanding soldiers and so forth, since he had their best interests at heart. Of course the fact that he's commanding these soldiers to kill other people, both sides of which are pawns of the bourgeoisie was left by the wayside in discussion.

At any rate, yeah, RAAN seems like a club more than any type of political organization.

Listen bro, I was a RAANista for a decent length of time, and am a member of the military, you're misrepresenting things.

[apawllo]

Obviously I don't know how things work. As I said I haven't been involved with them at any higher level than browsing their website. Feel free to correct my misrepresentations, though. I'd be interested in your take on the matter...

[The Douche]

Obviously I don't know how things work. As I said I haven't been involved with them at any higher level than browsing their website. Feel free to correct my misrepresentations, though. I'd be interested in your take on the matter...

My take on the matter? Nobody ever encouraged anybody to join the military in RAAN, RAAN also physically attacked a recruiting station. I think their position on the military is pretty clear.

[apawllo]

My take on the matter? Nobody ever encouraged anybody to join the military in RAAN, RAAN also physically attacked a recruiting station. I think their position on the military is pretty clear.

Fair enough.

[Rusty Shackleford]

My take on the matter? Nobody ever encouraged anybody to join the military in RAAN, RAAN also physically attacked a recruiting station. I think their position on the military is pretty clear.
oh shit, you got any news articles on it?

[The Douche]

oh shit, you got any news articles on it?

Communique from it:

http://redanarchist.org/texts/communiques/maryland071007.html

[Os Cangaceiros]

I would phrase it more accurately as their ability to troll "self-important 'revolutionaries'" for the amusement of other "self-important 'revolutionaries.'"

I hope you're not talking about me, because I don't characterize myself as a revolutionary. Revolutionaries are people who make revolution...currently I just talk about it on the internet.

As for "self-important"...:lol:

[sabotage]

if it wasn't for RAAN i probably never would have joined NEFAC

i chill at their forums. i almost did a RAAN action once, but @news spam filter censored it...

[synthesis]

I hope you're not talking about me, because I don't characterize myself as a revolutionary. Revolutionaries are people who make revolution...currently I just talk about it on the internet.

As for "self-important"...:lol:

I don't know why you'd take it personally. I often find it amusing myself. You don't think that statement is accurate?

[Blackscare]

RAAN strikes me as sort of an anarchist he-man woman haters club where they all hang out in their sooper-secret fort with a big "NO LENINISTS" sign on the door, occasionally venturing out to moisten some pamphlets then scurrying back to circle-jerk about how awesome they are.


Also, from having joined their forum at Nachie's request in the past and reading through it, they have some really goofy pseudo-spiritual bullshit going on. I remember reading a thread Nachie started about holding in your semen when you wank, in order to become more powerful (wasn't sure if they meant sexually or if they were trying to become super saiyans, which I must concede would be a brilliant revolutionary strategy).

Other than that particularly hilarious thread, and the rest of their chi section (that's what I call it in my head, don't remember the subforum name, but its full of that vaguely eastern mystical bullshit white super heshers like because it's culturally and geographically removed enough to seem novel and deep, rather than fucking idiotic), I honestly didn't gather that they did much serious discussion at all.

Anything they do post of an ostensibly political nature is post-modern poetic gibberish that I assume is intended to justify their childish behavior IRL. They're really just a club of self-indulgent dickheads that get together to reassure each other that, rather than just being a bunch of moon eyed man children with no ability to cope with reality, they're actually super 1337 revolutionaries who "get it" and realize that the key to revolution is petty vandalism, "having fun" (this part is SUPER IMPORTANT, say anything concrete, technical, or that doesn't involve bong rips and it's BORING, and the key to revolution is avoiding everything that is BORING and having totally badass dreads brah), and of course spooge-preservation.

Just an impression from their forums, though.

[Blackscare]

I'd like to add that I love Explosive Situation more than the internet itself and I meant no offense to him, I doubt he's 1/8th as goofy as Nachie, at least :P

Again, this is only experience from their forums, nothing IRL.


Also, I'd like to emphasize just how hilarious Nachie's jizzum thread was:


Anyway, all was well and good I figured I knew what I was doing (many sources on semen retention do not tell you any more than what I just did) but then I ran across this essay, which talks about the dangers of semen retention. It's all a little over my head because I don't really know jack shit about chakras, energy, etc. but it seems to be saying that there is a very real danger of not processing the energy correctly, in which case it builds up in places you don't want it to be, where it stagnates and putrefies...

That's right, he was concerned about the dangers of semen retention, not because there may be some actual physiological pressure buildup or the like, but because his energy might "stagnate and putrefy". Seriously. I'm pretty sure mana doesn't go bad, btw.

[Blackscare]

Last consecutive post, but since I just revisited their goofy little forum, I thought I'd share this. This tells you everything you need to know about Nachie, at least.



Nachie
Zen Lunatic
Forum Admin
Once Stabbed A Leninist

Posts: 1083

[Luís Henrique]

I like there anti leninism,

I dislike their leninism. For, rhetorics apart, they are very much "leninist", in the worst sence of the word: divisive, conspirative, substitutionist, overly concerned with confrontating what other leninist organisation calls "ostensibly revolutionary" groups, etc.

They are funny, though. They throw bricks at a barracks, and call it "putting soldiers on the taking end of missiles". (And who, please remind me, is "self-important"?) Tell you, I just printed a picture of Barack Obama and spat on it, in the middle of his eye. Take that, Mr. Commander in Chief of the world's only superpower's military! Now I feel revolutionary.

Luís Henrique

[The Douche]

RAAN strikes me as sort of an anarchist he-man woman haters club where they all hang out in their sooper-secret fort with a big "NO LENINISTS" sign on the door, occasionally venturing out to moisten some pamphlets then scurrying back to circle-jerk about how awesome they are.


Also, from having joined their forum at Nachie's request in the past and reading through it, they have some really goofy pseudo-spiritual bullshit going on. I remember reading a thread Nachie started about holding in your semen when you wank, in order to become more powerful (wasn't sure if they meant sexually or if they were trying to become super saiyans, which I must concede would be a brilliant revolutionary strategy).

Other than that particularly hilarious thread, and the rest of their chi section (that's what I call it in my head, don't remember the subforum name, but its full of that vaguely eastern mystical bullshit white super heshers like because it's culturally and geographically removed enough to seem novel and deep, rather than fucking idiotic), I honestly didn't gather that they did much serious discussion at all.

Anything they do post of an ostensibly political nature is post-modern poetic gibberish that I assume is intended to justify their childish behavior IRL. They're really just a club of self-indulgent dickheads that get together to reassure each other that, rather than just being a bunch of moon eyed man children with no ability to cope with reality, they're actually super 1337 revolutionaries who "get it" and realize that the key to revolution is petty vandalism, "having fun" (this part is SUPER IMPORTANT, say anything concrete, technical, or that doesn't involve bong rips and it's BORING, and the key to revolution is avoiding everything that is BORING and having totally badass dreads brah), and of course spooge-preservation.

Just an impression from their forums, though.

You may in fact be a literal moron.

[The Douche]

I think RAAN kind of lost the revolutionary lottery. A lot of what they were saying (and you'll never hear about this on here because people want to pick out only the outrageous and hard to understand or very specific parts of RAAN, but more on that later), especially back in the 2nd generation (which is when I got involved) was what can now be found in texts like The Coming Insurrection, and advocated by groups like Tiqqun and the The Invisible Committee.

When I got involved in RAAN the purpose of it, and what I hoped to do in it, was build a "culture of resistance". We sought, not to build any specific organization or party, but to build a broad culture of resistance within the working class, the purpose of the network was to provide a method of communication, a clear stated set of goals for use in propaganda/organizing, and as a tool for discussion of tactics. Unfortunately, as RAAN enters this third generation it is no longer about that.

RAAN now seeks to build itself, there is, at times even a (unintentional perhaps) creepy implication that revolution cannot happen without RAAN. When RAAN first started, anti-leninism was just another point in its list of positions, but many on the anarchist left accused RAAN of being some sort of Leninist authoritarian secret society trying to sap the energy from the anarchist movement, and that led to the creation of some goofy propaganda which some people feign offense at, and a couple of propagandistic actions, which people now won't shut the fuck up about, even though they happend years ago, and its not even the target audience that cares. RAAN encouraged a culture of "go do something" because it needed to "establish itself", it needed to "get its name out there", so that more people would involve themselves and RAAN would keep expanding. This is pretty divorced from the line when I got involved which was "do something, build connections, build resistance", when I first got involved we would say "RAAN doesn't matter", we saw it as just a tool. Now it is promoted as something far beyond that.

This focus on action I think was understandable in the begining, and in general, because it was important to establish the network, and actions do go towards building that culture of resistance (which was what we used to use the term RAANismo for). But this constant focus on action (which ironically, was one of my concerns with RAAN, coming from the DAT, where there was a strong focus on actions, the DAT wanted us to report back once a week on what we were doing for the struggle, which of course led us to do all sort of actions which were a waste of time and energy) has created 1) the false image that RAAN has no theory and 2) a degree of specialization and isolation from the working class at large. The actions now are geared towards being grandioise so that people find out about them. My critique of this strategy is the same that is levelled at any urban guerrilla organization/tactic, it isolates the militants from the working class. And in this case they're not even doing real "cool shit" like robbing banks or anything, they're just doing graffitti and vandalism (which I supported for a long time, because I thought we were doing this in a broader movement of building general resistance, but in reality that wasn't happening).

There is a lot of talk about "the left" within RAAN, and how much that needs to be avoided, how much of a dead end the left is etc (just like there is in the post-anarchist community, the french communist community, the nihilist communist community, and the left communist community), and yet there has started to be a massive tendency within RAAN to try and recruit from other organizations, or at the very least to encourage certain friendly members of those organizations to "do RAAN actions" and contribute to RAAN. This has become a major goal of RAAN as it seeks to build its organization, because the goal has shifted, as I said, from building resistance within the working class, to building the organization itself.

The "No Bullshit Policy" was also one of the worst things to make its way into the RAAN lexicon. On its face it is a really awesome idea and I liked it a lot. In a nutshell, it says that if you disagree with an action or an idea or the direction of RAAN, then you have the power to lead it in a different direction, you can do so by planning and pulling off your own action, and since yours will be the more correct option, more people will be attracted to it, and it will pull the organization that way. Like I said, on the surface it seems to be a decent idea, but in reality the NBP was used as a tool to politely say "shut the fuck up I'll do what I want and I don't need to answer questions". If you tried to critique an action or a position by someone, somebody who agreed with them would inevitably raise the "NBP" flag, and the arguement was effectively ended "sorry bro, No Bullshit, if you don't like it, do something better".

Unfortunately it got to the point where to "do something better" I felt I had to walk away from RAAN. But who knows, maybe RAAN is the exact same group I got involved with a few years ago, and its me who changed.

[Magón]

Also, from having joined their forum at Nachie's request in the past and reading through it, they have some really goofy pseudo-spiritual bullshit going on. I remember reading a thread Nachie started about holding in your semen when you wank, in order to become more powerful (wasn't sure if they meant sexually or if they were trying to become super saiyans, which I must concede would be a brilliant revolutionary strategy).

Isn't that a tantric sort of thing?

[The Douche]

Most ancient cultures' shamen/mystics/storytellers etc, i.e. those who provided knowledge and leadership practiced semen retention. I have also seen some modern studies which say that semen retention aids in one's ability to process information and cognitive abilities.



But yeah, continue to discuss an issue which is ultimately totally irrelevant to understanding RAAN.

[ellipsis]

They're really just a club of self-indulgent dickheads that get together to reassure each other that, rather than just being a bunch of moon eyed man children with no ability to cope with reality, they're actually super 1337 revolutionaries who "get it" and realize that the key to revolution is petty vandalism, "having fun" (this part is SUPER IMPORTANT, say anything concrete, technical, or that doesn't involve bong rips and it's BORING, and the key to revolution is avoiding everything that is BORING and having totally badass dreads brah), and of course spooge-preservation.


How does this compare to the NWO-ZOG? In other words, what are you doing that is so special? If you won't answer that, how about making some engaging criques of RAAN?

Better retaining your semen than using it for weaponized raping, like some leninists i know, who seem more than happy to give it away.


Polish sources claim that there are cases of mass rapes in Polish cities taken by the Red Army. In Kraków (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krak%C3%B3w), Soviet entry into the city was accompanied by mass rapes of Polish women and girls,Its funny I am a RAANista, kinda and I am a paid sperm donor, so the opposite of semen retention.

And blackscare, I am sure you have some "wierd" sexual ideas, think of the most bizarre porn you have achieved orgasm to and then tell me semen rentetion is more wierd.

[Le Libérer]

RAAN strikes me as sort of an anarchist he-man woman haters club where they all hang out in their sooper-secret fort with a big "NO LENINISTS" sign on the door, occasionally venturing out to moisten some pamphlets then scurrying back to circle-jerk about how awesome they are.


Also, from having joined their forum at Nachie's request in the past and reading through it, they have some really goofy pseudo-spiritual bullshit going on. I remember reading a thread Nachie started about holding in your semen when you wank, in order to become more powerful (wasn't sure if they meant sexually or if they were trying to become super saiyans, which I must concede would be a brilliant revolutionary strategy).

Other than that particularly hilarious thread, and the rest of their chi section (that's what I call it in my head, don't remember the subforum name, but its full of that vaguely eastern mystical bullshit white super heshers like because it's culturally and geographically removed enough to seem novel and deep, rather than fucking idiotic), I honestly didn't gather that they did much serious discussion at all.

Anything they do post of an ostensibly political nature is post-modern poetic gibberish that I assume is intended to justify their childish behavior IRL. They're really just a club of self-indulgent dickheads that get together to reassure each other that, rather than just being a bunch of moon eyed man children with no ability to cope with reality, they're actually super 1337 revolutionaries who "get it" and realize that the key to revolution is petty vandalism, "having fun" (this part is SUPER IMPORTANT, say anything concrete, technical, or that doesn't involve bong rips and it's BORING, and the key to revolution is avoiding everything that is BORING and having totally badass dreads brah), and of course spooge-preservation.

Just an impression from their forums, though.


You may in fact be a literal moron.

This coming from one of the only women who has the fortitude to deal with you big bad leftist men, Blackscare, you nailed it sweetheart. FTW.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I don't know why you'd take it personally. I often find it amusing myself. You don't think that statement is accurate?

Oh, well, I haven't really seen many of the people they make fun of actually appreciate self-deprecating humor, but maybe some of them do. I think it's funny to watch people get worked up over RAAN's "anti-Leninism" and various statements/actions it does. RAAN is like RevLeft's Ashton Kutcher in Punk'd mode, if Ashton Kutcher was a dope-smoking, tree-worshipping hippy vandal.

[Le Libérer]

RS2k is in the ER but heavily medicated. I told him about this thread. He said, "Well if RAAN actually had something useful to do with their time, they may be worth a shit."/end of quote. Now thats real humor.

[black magick hustla]

i like raan. i mean i am not a raanista. i like raan because its a hub of teens who fuckin hate the left but want communism and whatever they do no matter how "useless" is ten times more valuable than winning .00000001% of the votes in nebraska for the simple fact its a break from the activist ghetto or seminars about the philosophy of karl marx imho because youth who hate this world and want to reconstruct it is the prelude for revolution always. i like the fact that they set up a space for people to find an alternative to the poverty of american left cadre culture or the rotten carcass of american anarchism

[synthesis]

i like raan. i mean i am not a raanista. i like raan because its a hub of teens who fuckin hate the left but want communism and whatever they do no matter how "useless" is ten times more valuable than winning .00000001% of the votes in nebraska for the simple fact its a break from the activist ghetto or seminars about the philosophy of karl marx imho because youth who hate this world and want to reconstruct it is the prelude for revolution always. i like the fact that they set up a space for people to find an alternative to the poverty of american left cadre culture or the rotten carcass of american anarchism

In that respect, however, it doesn't strike you as something of a placebo effect?

[synthesis]

Oh, well, I haven't really seen many of the people they make fun of actually appreciate self-deprecating humor, but maybe some of them do. I think it's funny to watch people get worked up over RAAN's "anti-Leninism" and various statements/actions it does. RAAN is like RevLeft's Ashton Kutcher in Punk'd mode, if Ashton Kutcher was a dope-smoking, tree-worshipping hippy vandal.

Well, my main (insignificant) point was that RAAN does troll "self-important 'revolutionaries'" yet the beneficiaries also fit that shoe, merely on the opposite foot.

[southernmissfan]

I like the idea of an organization that is focused on building direct action and a "culture of resistance" and is for the most part non-aligned. Certainly the revolutionary left often gets caught up in seminars (which often amount to preaching to the choir/circlejerks), selling newspapers, etc. But at the same time RAAN certainly has a lot of flaws, which others have done well to point out.

The best thing we can do is take some of the positive ideas they contributed and continue to work towards a more effective left movement.

[The Douche]

i like raan. i mean i am not a raanista. i like raan because its a hub of teens who fuckin hate the left but want communism and whatever they do no matter how "useless" is ten times more valuable than winning .00000001% of the votes in nebraska for the simple fact its a break from the activist ghetto or seminars about the philosophy of karl marx imho because youth who hate this world and want to reconstruct it is the prelude for revolution always. i like the fact that they set up a space for people to find an alternative to the poverty of american left cadre culture or the rotten carcass of american anarchism

What you're talking about is the idea of RAAN, not the reality.


This coming from one of the only women who has the fortitude to deal with you big bad leftist men, Blackscare, you nailed it sweetheart. FTW.

You don't know anything about RAAN, have probably never met a RAANista in real life, and the female exRAANista in the room next to me is laughing at you.



If we don't analyse the real problems of other organizations we will end up repeating them.

[Le Libérer]

You don't know anything about RAAN, have probably never met a RAANista in real life, and the female exRAANista in the room next to me is laughing at you.




Trust me, I was laughing first. As does most of the left.

[Iraultzaile Ezkerreko]

...Who actually cares about this ridiculous excuse to abuse other people via the internet? I swear, threads about other organizations a rarely, if ever, worth reading on here.

[StalinFanboy]

Trust me, I was laughing first. As does most of the left.

I guess it's a good thing that RAAN doesn't really care about the Left then.


Anyway, I think Maldoror and Cmoney are pretty right on in their understanding/critiques/analyses of RAAN from what I know of the organization. From browsing their forums over the last couple months though it seems that RAAN has become its own ghetto with most of the people that are attracted to it being stuck firmly in the worst aspects of anarcho-sceneism.

[Rusty Shackleford]

probably the most important thing about RAAN is its attempt to break away form the stagnation that is the anarchist left.

[southernmissfan]

...Who actually cares about this ridiculous excuse to abuse other people via the internet? I swear, threads about other organizations a rarely, if ever, worth reading on here.

Well it's important to understand past mistakes in various organizations in order to grow. Of course, it is very arguable that these threads accomplish it.

What might be more constructive are threads where people input what they want in an organization, what they want it to do, how it is to be run, etc.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I think RAAN is very interesting - I like a lot about the model of autonomous crews carrying out actions under a common banner . . . but, at the same time, I think the banners of "anarchy" and/or "communism" are more useful. Ultimately, despite policy to the contrary (ha!), there's too much bullshit in RAAN that I would never want to be accountable for. From the weird baggage of "dictatorship of the proletariat" to folk on their message board equating indigenous struggles for autonomy with "nationalism", I just don't think I could do a RAAN action with the knowledge that someone could be like, "Oh, what's RAAN?" and find RAAN. I think the localized model of Modesto Anarcho (some of whom are former RAANistas) has more to offer - at least yr crew only has to answer for itself.

[black magick hustla]

I think RAAN is very interesting - I like a lot about the model of autonomous crews carrying out actions under a common banner . . . but, at the same time, I think the banners of "anarchy" and/or "communism" are more useful. Ultimately, despite policy to the contrary (ha!), there's too much bullshit in RAAN that I would never want to be accountable for. From the weird baggage of "dictatorship of the proletariat" to folk on their message board equating indigenous struggles for autonomy with "nationalism", I just don't think I could do a RAAN action with the knowledge that someone could be like, "Oh, what's RAAN?" and find RAAN. I think the localized model of Modesto Anarcho (some of whom are former RAANistas) has more to offer - at least yr crew only has to answer for itself.

do you even know what the dictatorship of the proletariat means and of course "indigenous struggles for autonomy" today take the form of nationalism - its all about preserving some non-existent pre-capitalist caricature of culture, language, etc

[synthesis]

I think people often figure out reasons why they disagree with something after they disagree with it. That's how I feel right now, so apologies if this seems hastily conceived; feel free to shut me down.


When I got involved in RAAN the purpose of it, and what I hoped to do in it, was build a "culture of resistance". We sought, not to build any specific organization or party, but to build a broad culture of resistance within the working class

This whole idea of a "culture of resistance" sort of strikes me as a result of fundamentally bourgeois ideology; at the very least idealist. You can't seriously hope to accomplish anything meaningful on the basis of "culture" in general.

[TC]

This whole idea of a "culture of resistance" sort of strikes me as a result of fundamentally bourgeois ideology; at the very least idealist. You can't seriously hope to accomplish anything meaningful on the basis of "culture" in general.

You make the fundamental mistake of equating with culture what is in fact, radical direct :reda:ction. When RAANista commandos used an improvised glue device to seize control of parking meters :ninja:, the profit extracting machinery of state capitalism was expropriated for the working cl:blackA:ss. Thats personal liberation from autonomous action you can feel and nothing is more meaningful than that! :star:

[Ravachol]

You make the fundamental mistake of equating with culture what is in fact, radical direct :reda:ction. When RAANista commandos used an improvised glue device to seize control of parking meters :ninja:, the profit extracting machinery of state capitalism was expropriated for the working cl:blackA:ss. Thats personal liberation from autonomous action you can feel and nothing is more meaningful than that! :star:

You're making a caricature out of an, arguably silly, action instead of commenting on the nature of a 'culture of resistance'. What is meant by a 'culture of resistance' is the establishment of a broadening network of people who engage in acts of resistance. If you think something like that is impossible, I'd take a good hard look at the notion of spreading class consciousness because it's pretty fucking similar.

As for the parking meters, sure the whole action and communique thing where a bit silly but these kind of actions aren't necessarily bad. In Italy in the '70s, for example, autonomists refused to pay tickets for public transport en-masse, thus practicing self-reduction and FORCING free public transport through action instead of having this or that senseless petition or begging campaign. In Greece there are groups who regularly sabotage payment machines for public transport and leave a sticker saying 'out of order due to public denial of payment'. Sure, these actions aren't a substitute for mass-based class struggle but they sure as hell are small material gains won through direct, unmediated action.

But whatever, people here like to bang on more about some bullshit on the internet and feel good about themselves than anything else anyway it seems.

[synthesis]

What is meant by a 'culture of resistance' is the establishment of a broadening network of people who engage in acts of resistance.

Again, I would argue that the concept of a "culture of resistance" for its own sake - beyond the fact that I can't imagine how anyone would define it in a way that would actually satisfy me in terms of concreteness - is idealist. It sometimes comes across as though they don't know what exactly it is they're "resisting." I would further argue that "resistance" and "revolution," as Marx defined it, are mutually exclusive.

[Widerstand]

Again, I would argue that the concept of a "culture of resistance" for its own sake - beyond the fact that I can't imagine how anyone would define it in a way that would actually satisfy me in terms of concreteness - is idealist. It sometimes comes across as though they don't know what exactly it is they're "resisting." I would further argue that "resistance" and "revolution," as Marx defined it, are mutually exclusive.

It's no more idealist than "class consciousness" is - in fact I would say it is less idealist, because it involves cultural feats, ergo also changes in forms of living, often through changed ways of discourse, collectivity, sabotage, civil disobedience, refutation of capitalist/state control, decreased dependence on capitalist/state structures, etc., which are direct changes to the material reality of those involved.

Regardless, the concept at the core - to organize people and make them aware of their situation - is not really different from how class conscious is supposed to be build. I see your quarrel with the term "resisting", which you somehow see as opposed to "revolution" - it isn't. But as long as we are not in a revolutionary situation, resisting and broadening our rows is all we can do. It's what all communists and anarchists do to some extent, the difference being that here resistance becomes part of people's daily life (to an extent) and manifests in direct action, whereas other communists (and some anarchists I imagine) prefer to utilize all sorts of things like pamphlets, newspapers, and reduce their resistance to written words or larger scale campaigns (neither of both being opposed to or incompatible with "cultures of resistance" btw).

[The Douche]

You make the fundamental mistake of equating with culture what is in fact, radical direct :reda:ction. When RAANista commandos used an improvised glue device to seize control of parking meters :ninja:, the profit extracting machinery of state capitalism was expropriated for the working cl:blackA:ss. Thats personal liberation from autonomous action you can feel and nothing is more meaningful than that! :star:

And things like this, and RAAN threads in general on revleft do an excellent job of proving my point.

Years ago, when RAAN started people viewed it with cautious curiosity (like I said, anarchists thought it was a leninist attempt to leach off their movement) and there was also a lot of time spent trying to make trotskyists understand they weren't welcome. Redstar2000 even wrote about his hopefullness for RAAN in one of his papers, and was very fond of RAANs "Principles & Direction" because he thought it had the best parts of both anarchism and marxism, he also posted on the RAAN boards for a while.

But this focus on "action action action" "get the name out there" etc has destroyed RAAN. Because when you push people to take action for the sake of action, then you're going to end up with stuff like gluing parking meters. Which hey, is a cool thing, and I don't think anybody here actually dislikes it or whatever, but then it gets promoted so heavily, not because RAAN thinks its so important, but because they want to get their name out there. And it gets to the point where these actions, which are really minute and really divorced from the working class, begin to obscure the politics of RAAN. And then of course those actions become RAAN, and RAAN begins to attract, instead of people interested in really new and cool ideas, people interested in vandalism and generally dumb shit. (see this for reference http://www.redanarchist.org/forum/index.php?topic=560.0)

[TC]

Uh for what its worth, I think people who drive cars and pollute and endanger pedestrians and cyclists and drive up health care costs and road repair costs ought to be taxed for it as a way of slightly offsetting their externalities. I have not heard a good argument for why progressive local defacto taxes should be sabatoged. It wasn't just stupid, it was politically wrong.

[Le Libérer]

become[/I] RAAN, and RAAN begins to attract, instead of people interested in really new and cool ideas, people interested in vandalism and generally dumb shit. (see this for reference ************************************/index.php?topic=560.0)
Sorry, we dont allow links to websites that have instigated trolling techniques on revleft, ie, ED editing, personal attacks on members of this board.

[The Douche]

Sorry, we dont allow links to websites that have instigated trolling techniques on revleft, ie, ED editing, personal attacks on members of this board.

Why don't you lock this thread then? Make "discussing the organization known as RAAN" against board rules, since no linking to their positions or actions will be allowed how can their positions or actions be discussed?

[ComradeOm]

Sorry, we dont allow links to websites that have instigated trolling techniques on revleft, ie, ED editing, personal attacks on members of this board.I was under the impression that it was individual posters that were censured in the past. Is it now the case that RAAN as an organisation itself is verboten on RevLeft?

[Le Libérer]

Why don't you lock this thread then? Make "discussing the organization known as RAAN" against board rules, since no linking to their positions or actions will be allowed how can their positions or actions be discussed?

Why are you taking offense to a rule that was decided by the CC way before you? I'm just the messenger.

And in fact, out of fairness, I have started a thread in the admin forum to discuss the relevence of this rule.

Arent you an ex member anyway? I suppose being in the military kind of smashes ones involvement in petty criminal activity?

[The Douche]

Why are you taking offense to a rule that was decided by the CC way before you? I'm just the messenger.

You're saying that in the days of the CC a vote was taken to prevent linking to the RAAN website? Why is this the first time its being enforced?


And in fact, out of fairness, I have started a thread in the admin forum to discuss the relevence of this rule.

Cool.


Arent you an ex member anyway? I suppose being in the military kind of smashes ones involvement in petty criminal activity?

Yes I am a recent ex member, but my desire is for there to be a valid critique of the organization, not the sort of which is going on in this thread. I also resent your snide remark, but have no interest in bullshitting with you about because I really dislike you and would rather limit my interactions with you on this board.

[el_chavista]

I can't help it, but I love these guys:


December 8th, 2006 - Amor y Revolucion, a day-long event of speakers, poets, music, and films put on by the Latino Student Union at Reed College in Portland, Oregon is opened with a RAAN presentation on the developing situation in Venezuela. Portions of the film Nuestro Petróleo y Otros Cuentos are also shown, probably for the first time in that state.

September 7-10th, 2006 - RAANistas embark on a successful mini-tour of the San Francisco Bay Area, holding five events in four days at both the AK Press warehouse in Oakland and the Free Mind Media Collective in Santa Rosa. The dates included two workshops on the nature of RAAN as well as talks and film showings about the situation in Venezuela, resulting in over $100 being raised for sister groups in that country. There was also a small Parkour training held in Santa Rosa, again with much positive response.

April 14-15, 2006 - A Philadelphia, Pennsylvania group known as the Revolutionary Marxist Collective (RMC) - which had recently undergone a split within its ranks over the question of Leninism - hosts RAANfest, a series of discussions and three workshops on various topics presented by the network. RAAN organizers moderate a public forum on the Venezuelan revolution and the film Nuestro Petróleo y Otros Cuentos is shown for what is believed to be the first time in North America. The next day RAAN presents an extensive training session in the art of Parkour, followed by an open forum that was titled, "Defining the Red & Anarchist Action Network"; an exploration of the nature of RAAN and what forms it could conceivably take in Philadelphia. As a result of these events, the RMC disbands and comes back together as a non-organizationally descript Philly RAAN crew.

March 11, 2006 - A workshop in the art of Parkour is jointly hosted by RAAN and the CA3 (Autonomous Collective for an Anarchist Tomorrow) in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas. This event was a major success and further consolidated the use of PK as a tactic within the Venezuelan movement, as well as the network's contacts within it.

March 1, 2006 - A group of revolutionaries in the Venezuelan city of Valencia decide to organize themselves as a RAAN presence, marking the first ever instance of the network's physical expansion outside of the United States. The Venezuelan RAANistas focus on providing Parkour training to their communities, and in this respect quickly become one of the most active chapters.

January-March, 2006 - Network organizer Nachie travels to Venezuela in order to study the revolutionary situation unfolding in the country and develop proposals for RAAN's involvement on the issue. His report, The Civil War in Venezuela: Socialism to the Highest Bidder is potentially the most comprehensive anti-state analysis of the Venezuelan process in the English language. In it, he details his experiences with various revolutionary groups inside the country and describes some projects that the network has organized around the issue.

June 9, 2005 - Amid a certain amount of debate, network co-founder Nachie authors the Bolivanarchism :lol: essay calling for increased anti-authoritarian education, critique, and involvement in campaigns relating to the developing political situation in Venezuela under the government of Hugo Chávez. The text provokes a vivid discussion, including a comradely Spanish-language critique by Giuliano Roma of the Argentine journal La Anarquia. As a result of this essay RAAN also makes contacts with several Venezuelan anarchist projects for the first time, laying the groundwork for solidarity efforts in the future.

[Le Libérer]

but have no interest in bullshitting with you about because I really dislike you and would rather limit my interactions with you on this board.

Tell you what, I will do likewise, even defending rules whatever that may of interest to you. Good luck getting someone else to do it.

Edit: Nevermind. I wont stoop to such pettiness. I will do whats right, as I do in everything I do. :)

[TC]

Why are you taking offense to a rule that was decided by the CC way before you? I'm just the messenger.

And in fact, out of fairness, I have started a thread in the admin forum to discuss the relevence of this rule.


That's fair and responsible but I don't see why its necessary to link to them and thereby promote them potentially at our own expense (due to the renewed interest in revleft seeing this thread as an incoming link would no doubt spark) in order to be able to discuss them.

Why not just cut and paste short things off their website for people who want to explain their positions?

[TC]

I can't help it, but I love these guys:


One of the strangest things is that despite being obsessed with anti-"leninism" and to a lesser degree anti-liberalism (no time for anti-capitalism!) they had (have?) by far the most authoritarian organizational structure on the left: defacto one person unelected unchallangable rule.

They came together on a website hosted by Nachi (Kazm) where originally there was a diverse group of people including leninists...they discuss founding an 'action network' - but then, all by himself with no vote or consensus, Nachi writes and then declares adopted by decree, a "Principles and Direction" document based on a newly acquired (the guy was a Trotskyist) hatred of "leninism."

And he personally purges the "leninists" from the online community which despite the ELF-style no-members-just-action claims of RAAN, has always been its defacto membership base.

He also seems to have given himself the role of exclusively deciding what counts as a RAAN action and what doesn't. There is just nothing anti-authoritarian about them.

[Le Libérer]

That's fair and responsible but I don't see why its necessary to link to them and thereby promote them potentially at our own expense (due to the renewed interest in revleft seeing this thread as an incoming link would no doubt spark) in order to be able to discuss them.

Why not just cut and paste short things off their website for people who want to explain their positions?

Id rather the admin team as a whole make the decision. But for the life of me, I am not finding anything worthy if saving.

And its easier just to filter the link.

[graymouser]

A Philadelphia, Pennsylvania group known as the Revolutionary Marxist Collective (RMC) - which had recently undergone a split within its ranks over the question of Leninism - hosts RAANfest, a series of discussions and three workshops on various topics presented by the network
Yeah, I was one of the people around the RMC, on the Leninist side. I don't know if any of the ex-RMC RAANistas are still active. They several years younger than me, and at the time I wrote their shit off as childishness.

To be blunt, when someone suggests you go around breaking shit - not disciplined, organized action but vandalism and so on - they are either idiots, or cops. I'm willing to give RAAN the benefit of the doubt and consider them idiots.

[Le Libérer]

Do Anarcho-Communists like the RAAN at all? Because I think I've seen a few that really don't like it.

Just curious, has your question been answered yet? :lol:

[The Douche]

Yeah, I was one of the people around the RMC, on the Leninist side. I don't know if any of the ex-RMC RAANistas are still active. They several years younger than me, and at the time I wrote their shit off as childishness.

To be blunt, when someone suggests you go around breaking shit - not disciplined, organized action but vandalism and so on - they are either idiots, or cops. I'm willing to give RAAN the benefit of the doubt and consider them idiots.

And you used to be in the SP? Pretty sure we met back when the RMC was founded, and before it, or I was RAAN.

None of them claim RAAN anymore to my knowledge.


One of the strangest things is that despite being obsessed with anti-"leninism" and to a lesser degree anti-liberalism (no time for anti-capitalism!) they had (have?) by far the most authoritarian organizational structure on the left: defacto one person unelected unchallangable rule.

They came together on a website hosted by Nachi (Kazm) where originally there was a diverse group of people including leninists...they discuss founding an 'action network' - but then, all by himself with no vote or consensus, Nachi writes and then declares adopted by decree, a "Principles and Direction" document based on a newly acquired (the guy was a Trotskyist) hatred of "leninism."

And he personally purges the "leninists" from the online community which despite the ELF-style no-members-just-action claims of RAAN, has always been its defacto membership base.

He also seems to have given himself the role of exclusively deciding what counts as a RAAN action and what doesn't. There is just nothing anti-authoritarian about them.

This is really not accurate, but I think anybody reading it could see that it is motiviated by your personal distaste for an individual. (who I consider a friend, but can be a very tough person to deal with at times)

[graymouser]

And you used to be in the SP? Pretty sure we met back when the RMC was founded, and before it, or I was RAAN.
There's a good possibility, yeah.


None of them claim RAAN anymore to my knowledge.
Well, that's a plus. I never see any of them around any more, but my own activity is mostly anti-war activism - not exactly fertile ground for that politics.

[TC]

This is really not accurate, but I think anybody reading it could see that it is motiviated by your personal distaste for an individual. (who I consider a friend, but can be a very tough person to deal with at times)

I remember what happened at the time and it was as I described. Its not motivated by any personal distaste its just the facts.

Want to dispute them? Was there a secret raan congress that voted? No, there wasn't, Nachie just came up with it on his own and imposed it (perhaps he consulted with Chimx - who I have at times liked a lot and 'known' online and on facebook for many years - but in any case there was nothing open or democratic about it).

I have no personal animus towards nachie, the animus is political and as a public safety threat: he says often indicates he wants to kill "leninists" and has in practice supported harassment and physical intimidation against other leftists. He is a menace and its just fortunate that they aren't brave enough to represent a legitimate threat.

[The Douche]

Well, that's a plus. I never see any of them around any more, but my own activity is mostly anti-war activism - not exactly fertile ground for that politics.

The two guys that I was closest to both moved out of Philly, and I haven't talked to them in a long time, I never really knew anybody else involved, but I know one of them was working at wooden shoe books for a while.


I remember what happened at the time and it was as I described. Its not motivated by any personal distaste its just the facts.

Want to dispute them? Was there a secret raan congress that voted? No, there wasn't, Nachie just came up with it on his own and imposed it (perhaps he consulted with Chimx - who I have at times liked a lot and 'known' online and on facebook for many years - but in any case there was nothing open or democratic about it).

You can try and paint Nachie as this authoritarian boogeyman if you want to, but your story is weak, and even if it were true it wouldn't appear to be, it looks like the rant of a person with a problem with Nachie. I remember chimx, I don't really have an opinion on him, he was leaving RAAN while I was on my way in. Why was he banned from here?


Either way, I have no interest in "defending" RAAN, but I think the discussion of it should be a little more productive than "they don't have positions" (they do) or "Nachie is a dick" (so what?). I think people, especially anarchist should take an interest in how organizations, especially one which was so comitted to breaking out of the activist ghetto, end up reinforcing the shit they claim to fight against.

[Blackscare]

You can try and paint Nachie as this authoritarian boogeyman if you want to, but your story is weak, and even if it were true it wouldn't appear to be, it looks like the rant of a person with a problem with Nachie. I remember chimx, I don't really have an opinion on him, he was leaving RAAN while I was on my way in. Why was he banned from here?


He was involved with unsurprisingly low and childish behavior when TAT was banned, he helped leak/spread personal information about comrades from this site. Real great, coming from a supposed anarchist, leaking sensitive info for either the government or some crazy nutjobs like those guys at redwatch to snatch up and do what they will with.


Maybe people who stab and leak personal information of anti-capitalists are accepted in whatever circles you travel in, but they at least aren't acceptable here. Had he never involved himself with the TAT affair I would argue that he shouldn't be here just on the grounds that he is violent anti-leftist thug and possible/potential murderer. Again, not anyone who should be murdered, just Leninists. Because we all know, Leninists are a huge threat to anarchists here in the US! We could seize power and send them all to the gulags any day now! :rolleyes:


Nachie is no friend of the anti-capitalist movement, and I daresay a lot of the people in RAAN aren't as well. I hope young anti-authoritarians/capitalists thinking about getting involved with these people find a better alternative, there are much better organizations to deal with than these thugs. Unless you're just really into guerrilla gardening, gluing shit closed, or have a penchant for stabbing leftists, because then it's right up your ally.

[The Douche]

He was involved with unsurprisingly low and childish behavior when TAT was banned, he helped leak/spread personal information about comrades from this site. Real great, coming from a supposed anarchist, leaking sensitive info for either the government or some crazy nutjobs like those guys at redwatch to snatch up and do what they will with.


Maybe people who stab and leak personal information of anti-capitalists are accepted in whatever circles you travel in, but they at least aren't acceptable here. Had he never involved himself with the TAT affair I would argue that he shouldn't be here just on the grounds that he is violent anti-leftist thug and possible/potential murderer. Again, not anyone who should be murdered, just Leninists. Because we all know, Leninists are a huge threat to anarchists here in the US! We could seize power and send them all to the gulags any day now! :rolleyes:


Nachie is no friend of the anti-capitalist movement, and I daresay a lot of the people in RAAN aren't as well. I hope young anti-authoritarians/capitalists thinking about getting involved with these people find a better alternative, there are much better organizations to deal with than these thugs. Unless you're just really into guerrilla gardening, gluing shit closed, or have a penchant for stabbing leftists, because then it's right up your ally.

:laugh:

Was talking about chimx, dick.

So many lulz at the fact that you think nachie is a murderer.

[Le Libérer]

:laugh:
Was talking about chimx,
dick.

So many lulz at the fact that you think nachie is a murderer.
Infraction for sexist language and flaming.

[The Douche]

Infraction for sexist language and flaming.

:rolleyes:

Calling someone a "dick" warrants an infraction. (whatever)

But you can freely call someone a "possible murderer"? Oh revleft, how you make me laugh.

[#FF0000]

I am pretty sure that Blackscare said that it's a horrible idea to post personal information on a site like this.

Which it sort of is.

No one called Nachie a murderer.

Just a rat. v:mellow:v

[The Douche]

I am pretty sure that Blackscare said that it's a horrible idea to post personal information on a site like this.

Which it sort of is.

No one called Nachie a murderer.

Just a rat. v:mellow:v


I would argue that he shouldn't be here just on the grounds that he is violent anti-leftist thug and possible/potential murderer.

I'll just leave this here...

[Le Libérer]

Calling someone a "dick" warrants an infraction. (whatever)

Umm yep it sure will.


To protect certain members from themselves, its pretty obvious this thread is closed.