Earth Liberation Front

[Osman Ghazi]

I was reading about the ELF in school today and boy do they have an impressive resume. According to the FBI, since their split from Earth First! they have caused over $100 million in damage in various incidents of 'eco-terrorism'. They range from torching SUV's, animal labs and luxury homes to an arson at an unfinished, $50 million 206-unit condominium.

So, my question to all of you is: What do you think of these guys?

http://www.animalrights.net/archives/relat...tion_front.html (http://www.animalrights.net/archives/related_topics/organizations/pro_ar/earth_liberation_front.html)

Are they actually doing serious damage that may lead somewhere someday, or are they just misled wankers who don't realize the futility of their acts?

[T_SP]

In a word Assholes!! They do not call for Socialism making them just one trek ponies and the saying 'any publicity is good publicity' does not apply here!

The kinda changes they are attempting to make really need to be approached in a different manner for anyone to take them seriously. I imagine most would see these people as I do, mindless thugs with no agenda!

[Militant]

Wankers.

They have no real plan or support base to build on their "sucesses". You burn a dozen SUVs or condos. Great, but how do you build on it? They have no ability to project any real influence on the political scene, which makes their actions a futile gesture.

The most important step for any direct-action group is to setup some overt support group (ideal with no direct ties) that can act as a mouthpiece for the organization, and possible recruitment base! Lasting influence is the end goal of any political movement, militant or not.

On a final note, the damage they did, in the long and short term is pointless. All the targets they have struck would have insurance, so the only companies that would lose 100 million dollars are the insurance companies!

Edit: As SP mentioned, they have no socialist agenda, so I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole.

[Osman Ghazi]

The most important step for any direct-action group is to setup some overt support group (ideal with no direct ties) that can act as a mouthpiece for the organization, and possible recruitment base!

They have many affiliated organizations which act as both spokespersons and recruiters.


You burn a dozen SUVs

The FBI recently arrested a California man affiliated with the ELF who had scorched a dealership full of them. So it's bigger than that.

All I am saying about the ELF is that they are more militant, radicalized and active than most anarchist/communist groups, so they must be doing something right.

[commiecrusader]

I would say that they arent militant in a good way though. Whilst I applaud the effort they seem to be making, they arent going to achieve anything doing what they are. They will simply be disregarded as terrorists or yobbish thugs if they keep doing what they are. And I agree with Trotskyist in that the best way to achieve animal rights etc if that is what they are protesting about, or even just ecological stuff in general, is through improving the protection offered by the law at the moment. Animal abusers won't care about some burnt out SUVs or whatever, and neither will people who pollute or whatever.

[Osman Ghazi]

Whilst I applaud the effort they seem to be making, they arent going to achieve anything doing what they are.

I don't think anyone is going to achieve anything anytime soon. However, at least their doing something, and what's more, it is counter-productive for the capitalist class. I mean, 100 million bones ain't no joke.

The point is though, that when people finally become fed up with the capitalist system, they will turn to people who they feel are making a difference. And to me, that's the guys with the Molotovs in their hands, toasting the rich with their choice of cocktail.

[redstar2000]

I think the "general rule" for communists applies here: we applaud resistance to the capitalist system, regardless of its source.

Does that mean that we should "encourage" people to join the"Earth Liberation Front"?

Not in my opinion; as others have noted, they completely lack any kind of revolutionary perspective. They are indeed "one-trick ponies".

But who is the bigger fool? The person who destroys an SUV or the person who buys one?

Their direct actions may be trivial in the long run -- most direct actions are. But I have no problem with the fact that they've chosen to actively resist the prevailing social order to whatever extent their limited understanding makes possible.

It's always better to resist, even foolishly, than to submit.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[T_SP]

I think occupying the SUV dealership for a day or so would have been a better tact and it would have been better publicity, at least it would have stopped a days sale, like Millitant said those SUV's would have been covered by insurance so there was no real loss was there?!?! But stopping people from entering the dealership would have lost them a days money!

[Osman Ghazi]

I'm sure the firebombing of the dealership lost them at least a days revenue, if not more. Plus, it is rare that you would get all the money back from insurance.

[Guest1]

They may be misled wankers, but at least they're our misled wankers :lol:

[Valkyrie]

I have no problem with the ELF. I think they should take out some more of those gigantic two-headed spawned vegetable factories. Somebody's got to do it. Don't even want to see what the people are gonna be lookin like in 50 years. :blink:

[Xvall]

I like them. The only problem is that they're not a real orginization. They're just random people who have proclaimed themselves to be 'elves'. This causes problems, because I can murder schoolgirls, say that I did it in the name of the ELF, and no spokesperson would be there to condemn my actions and declare that the ELF isn't responsible for the acts committed. It's like belonging to 'The Left'. It's not really a solid organization, so much as it is a group of people who have associated themselves with 'The Left'.

[Osman Ghazi]

I like them. The only problem is that they're not a real orginization. They're just random people who have proclaimed themselves to be 'elves'. This causes problems, because I can murder schoolgirls, say that I did it in the name of the ELF, and no spokesperson would be there to condemn my actions and declare that the ELF isn't responsible for the acts committed. It's like belonging to 'The Left'. It's not really a solid organization, so much as it is a group of people who have associated themselves with 'The Left'.

That's true, essentially, you can get together a group of people, and if you decide that you are an ELF cell, then, you are. I mean, they actually do have organizational spokesmen of their own, but even they are unnofficial. They do use other environmentalist organizations as mouthpeices though, keeping in touch with the internet, mostly.

[Osman Ghazi]

I like them. The only problem is that they're not a real orginization. They're just random people who have proclaimed themselves to be 'elves'. This causes problems, because I can murder schoolgirls, say that I did it in the name of the ELF, and no spokesperson would be there to condemn my actions and declare that the ELF isn't responsible for the acts committed. It's like belonging to 'The Left'. It's not really a solid organization, so much as it is a group of people who have associated themselves with 'The Left'.

That's true, essentially, you can get together a group of people, and if you decide that you are an ELF cell, then, you are. I mean, they actually do have organizational spokesmen of their own, but even they are unnofficial. They do use other environmentalist organizations as mouthpeices though, keeping in touch with the internet, mostly.

[Osman Ghazi]

I like them. The only problem is that they're not a real orginization. They're just random people who have proclaimed themselves to be 'elves'. This causes problems, because I can murder schoolgirls, say that I did it in the name of the ELF, and no spokesperson would be there to condemn my actions and declare that the ELF isn't responsible for the acts committed. It's like belonging to 'The Left'. It's not really a solid organization, so much as it is a group of people who have associated themselves with 'The Left'.

That's true, essentially, you can get together a group of people, and if you decide that you are an ELF cell, then, you are. I mean, they actually do have organizational spokesmen of their own, but even they are unnofficial. They do use other environmentalist organizations as mouthpeices though, keeping in touch with the internet, mostly.

[Militant]

I think the "general rule" for communists applies here: we applaud resistance to the capitalist system, regardless of its source.

Does that mean that we should "encourage" people to join the"Earth Liberation Front"?

Why "applaud" useless resistance? It does not move our beliefs forward in any way. In fact, I believe it moves leftist backwards. It makes the left look like a group of half-literate counter-culture tree huggers with no support. Any single yahoo with a bic lighter and a gallon of petrol can destroy a dealership of SUV's, but as SP said occupying the dealership would have be more effective, but not for the reason he stated. It would have lost them a bit of cash, but more importantly it would have shown that left can get a group(!) of people to act in concert against a capitalist target. Not only that, it would have been more symbolic, they would have been showing that they are not afraid to be reveled if the cops came and dragged them out, but were secure enough in their beliefs to have their faces plastered all over television and newspapers around the world.

By being a thief in the night, they lose any ability to show in a concert manner that they are not afraid to be seen for what they believe in. (And yes, I'm aware that there was a chance that they would get caught in the act and arrested, but lets be honest, the chance was remote.)


It's always better to resist, even foolishly, than to submit.

As stated above, I have to digress. Resisting stupidly is a surefire way to limit yourself to resist well in the future. To extrapolate to the extreme, lets look at the Chechans killing all those kids. That's resisting stupidly, because they have basically destroyed any credibility that their cause had. They went, in my eyes, from a legitimate freedom movement to a group of mindless terrorist over the course of three days. I'm not sure if I will ever be able to bring myself to vocally support their movement ever again! While I'm not saying such a petty act such as burning SUV''s would destroy my belief in a movement, it ends up marginalizing it in the eyes of more moderate people, the group we need to win over to our side.

[Militant]

I think the "general rule" for communists applies here: we applaud resistance to the capitalist system, regardless of its source.

Does that mean that we should "encourage" people to join the"Earth Liberation Front"?

Why "applaud" useless resistance? It does not move our beliefs forward in any way. In fact, I believe it moves leftist backwards. It makes the left look like a group of half-literate counter-culture tree huggers with no support. Any single yahoo with a bic lighter and a gallon of petrol can destroy a dealership of SUV's, but as SP said occupying the dealership would have be more effective, but not for the reason he stated. It would have lost them a bit of cash, but more importantly it would have shown that left can get a group(!) of people to act in concert against a capitalist target. Not only that, it would have been more symbolic, they would have been showing that they are not afraid to be reveled if the cops came and dragged them out, but were secure enough in their beliefs to have their faces plastered all over television and newspapers around the world.

By being a thief in the night, they lose any ability to show in a concert manner that they are not afraid to be seen for what they believe in. (And yes, I'm aware that there was a chance that they would get caught in the act and arrested, but lets be honest, the chance was remote.)


It's always better to resist, even foolishly, than to submit.

As stated above, I have to digress. Resisting stupidly is a surefire way to limit yourself to resist well in the future. To extrapolate to the extreme, lets look at the Chechans killing all those kids. That's resisting stupidly, because they have basically destroyed any credibility that their cause had. They went, in my eyes, from a legitimate freedom movement to a group of mindless terrorist over the course of three days. I'm not sure if I will ever be able to bring myself to vocally support their movement ever again! While I'm not saying such a petty act such as burning SUV''s would destroy my belief in a movement, it ends up marginalizing it in the eyes of more moderate people, the group we need to win over to our side.

[Militant]

I think the "general rule" for communists applies here: we applaud resistance to the capitalist system, regardless of its source.

Does that mean that we should "encourage" people to join the"Earth Liberation Front"?

Why "applaud" useless resistance? It does not move our beliefs forward in any way. In fact, I believe it moves leftist backwards. It makes the left look like a group of half-literate counter-culture tree huggers with no support. Any single yahoo with a bic lighter and a gallon of petrol can destroy a dealership of SUV's, but as SP said occupying the dealership would have be more effective, but not for the reason he stated. It would have lost them a bit of cash, but more importantly it would have shown that left can get a group(!) of people to act in concert against a capitalist target. Not only that, it would have been more symbolic, they would have been showing that they are not afraid to be reveled if the cops came and dragged them out, but were secure enough in their beliefs to have their faces plastered all over television and newspapers around the world.

By being a thief in the night, they lose any ability to show in a concert manner that they are not afraid to be seen for what they believe in. (And yes, I'm aware that there was a chance that they would get caught in the act and arrested, but lets be honest, the chance was remote.)


It's always better to resist, even foolishly, than to submit.

As stated above, I have to digress. Resisting stupidly is a surefire way to limit yourself to resist well in the future. To extrapolate to the extreme, lets look at the Chechans killing all those kids. That's resisting stupidly, because they have basically destroyed any credibility that their cause had. They went, in my eyes, from a legitimate freedom movement to a group of mindless terrorist over the course of three days. I'm not sure if I will ever be able to bring myself to vocally support their movement ever again! While I'm not saying such a petty act such as burning SUV''s would destroy my belief in a movement, it ends up marginalizing it in the eyes of more moderate people, the group we need to win over to our side.

[Raisa]

It is stupid to think that people will care about animal rights when we have such poor excuses of human rights in the world right now.
I am sorry.

[Raisa]

It is stupid to think that people will care about animal rights when we have such poor excuses of human rights in the world right now.
I am sorry.

[Raisa]

It is stupid to think that people will care about animal rights when we have such poor excuses of human rights in the world right now.
I am sorry.

[T_SP]

but as SP said occupying the dealership would have be more effective, but not for the reason he stated. It would have lost them a bit of cash, but more importantly it would have shown that left can get a group(!) of people to act in concert against a capitalist target. Not only that, it would have been more symbolic, they would have been showing that they are not afraid to be reveled if the cops came and dragged them out, but were secure enough in their beliefs to have their faces plastered all over television and newspapers around the world.(millitant)

I agree, but for the reason I stated and yours also. It just wasn't something I thought of at the time.
I must admit Militant makes a good point(s) and I'd say with that name he'd have to be one of ours!!
So come on Militant who are you? Your profile gives nothing away :P

This kinda of action does not give credibilty to a group that claim they are the alternative.

And really, you kidding me!! Of course the insurance would pay out for all losses on such a big company as this! With a couple of SUV's thrown there way to say thanx!!

[T_SP]

but as SP said occupying the dealership would have be more effective, but not for the reason he stated. It would have lost them a bit of cash, but more importantly it would have shown that left can get a group(!) of people to act in concert against a capitalist target. Not only that, it would have been more symbolic, they would have been showing that they are not afraid to be reveled if the cops came and dragged them out, but were secure enough in their beliefs to have their faces plastered all over television and newspapers around the world.(millitant)

I agree, but for the reason I stated and yours also. It just wasn't something I thought of at the time.
I must admit Militant makes a good point(s) and I'd say with that name he'd have to be one of ours!!
So come on Militant who are you? Your profile gives nothing away :P

This kinda of action does not give credibilty to a group that claim they are the alternative.

And really, you kidding me!! Of course the insurance would pay out for all losses on such a big company as this! With a couple of SUV's thrown there way to say thanx!!

[T_SP]

but as SP said occupying the dealership would have be more effective, but not for the reason he stated. It would have lost them a bit of cash, but more importantly it would have shown that left can get a group(!) of people to act in concert against a capitalist target. Not only that, it would have been more symbolic, they would have been showing that they are not afraid to be reveled if the cops came and dragged them out, but were secure enough in their beliefs to have their faces plastered all over television and newspapers around the world.(millitant)

I agree, but for the reason I stated and yours also. It just wasn't something I thought of at the time.
I must admit Militant makes a good point(s) and I'd say with that name he'd have to be one of ours!!
So come on Militant who are you? Your profile gives nothing away :P

This kinda of action does not give credibilty to a group that claim they are the alternative.

And really, you kidding me!! Of course the insurance would pay out for all losses on such a big company as this! With a couple of SUV's thrown there way to say thanx!!

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

They're not helping the socialist cause, because that's not even what they're interested in. They're interested in animals rights and saving the environment. That's it. "One-trick ponies", like someone said.

They're not really hurting the cause either, though. There's no reason to speak out against these folks. They're not the enemy, by any means. The enemy is the ruling class. These guys are just hung up on the environment. Little do they know that as long as the capitalists are in power, nothing's gonna be done for their cause.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

They're not helping the socialist cause, because that's not even what they're interested in. They're interested in animals rights and saving the environment. That's it. "One-trick ponies", like someone said.

They're not really hurting the cause either, though. There's no reason to speak out against these folks. They're not the enemy, by any means. The enemy is the ruling class. These guys are just hung up on the environment. Little do they know that as long as the capitalists are in power, nothing's gonna be done for their cause.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

They're not helping the socialist cause, because that's not even what they're interested in. They're interested in animals rights and saving the environment. That's it. "One-trick ponies", like someone said.

They're not really hurting the cause either, though. There's no reason to speak out against these folks. They're not the enemy, by any means. The enemy is the ruling class. These guys are just hung up on the environment. Little do they know that as long as the capitalists are in power, nothing's gonna be done for their cause.

[Xvall]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 06:28 PM
It is stupid to think that people will care about animal rights when we have such poor excuses of human rights in the world right now.
I am sorry.
Elf is actually based around the environment. ALF is the organization based around animal liberation.

[Xvall]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 06:28 PM
It is stupid to think that people will care about animal rights when we have such poor excuses of human rights in the world right now.
I am sorry.
Elf is actually based around the environment. ALF is the organization based around animal liberation.

[Xvall]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 06:28 PM
It is stupid to think that people will care about animal rights when we have such poor excuses of human rights in the world right now.
I am sorry.
Elf is actually based around the environment. ALF is the organization based around animal liberation.

[Osman Ghazi]

(And yes, I'm aware that there was a chance that they would get caught in the act and arrested, but lets be honest, the chance was remote.)

Funny you should say that. The guy actually was arrested. When they arrested the wrong person for the crime, he made an anonymous call to the police saying that the guy was innocent. He made the call from his work, which they eventually traced back to him. Also, there was one guy, Michael Scarpitti, who was actually on the FBI's Most Wanted Domestic Terroists list. He was actually arrested in Canada, and apparently the Canadian government are letting him apply for refugee status, but who knows how that will turn out.

In short, I think that the opposite of what you said is true. ELF members are quite regularly arrested and, in some places, the trials are given big coverage. However, it is true that they will never really 'accomplish anything', because their methods are not geared toward seizing political power. However, they can and will inspire others to violence towards the ruling class and their property. And that's always a good thing. :D

[Osman Ghazi]

(And yes, I'm aware that there was a chance that they would get caught in the act and arrested, but lets be honest, the chance was remote.)

Funny you should say that. The guy actually was arrested. When they arrested the wrong person for the crime, he made an anonymous call to the police saying that the guy was innocent. He made the call from his work, which they eventually traced back to him. Also, there was one guy, Michael Scarpitti, who was actually on the FBI's Most Wanted Domestic Terroists list. He was actually arrested in Canada, and apparently the Canadian government are letting him apply for refugee status, but who knows how that will turn out.

In short, I think that the opposite of what you said is true. ELF members are quite regularly arrested and, in some places, the trials are given big coverage. However, it is true that they will never really 'accomplish anything', because their methods are not geared toward seizing political power. However, they can and will inspire others to violence towards the ruling class and their property. And that's always a good thing. :D

[Osman Ghazi]

(And yes, I'm aware that there was a chance that they would get caught in the act and arrested, but lets be honest, the chance was remote.)

Funny you should say that. The guy actually was arrested. When they arrested the wrong person for the crime, he made an anonymous call to the police saying that the guy was innocent. He made the call from his work, which they eventually traced back to him. Also, there was one guy, Michael Scarpitti, who was actually on the FBI's Most Wanted Domestic Terroists list. He was actually arrested in Canada, and apparently the Canadian government are letting him apply for refugee status, but who knows how that will turn out.

In short, I think that the opposite of what you said is true. ELF members are quite regularly arrested and, in some places, the trials are given big coverage. However, it is true that they will never really 'accomplish anything', because their methods are not geared toward seizing political power. However, they can and will inspire others to violence towards the ruling class and their property. And that's always a good thing. :D

[redstar2000]

Why "applaud" useless resistance?

Who says it's "useless"?

The fact is that we don't know what will inspire additional resistance.

Even "masters of the dialectic" don't know. :lol:

What we do know is that resistance tends to be contageous.

The more people resist the existing system, even in the smallest ways and even in foolish ways, the more likely it is that resistance will grow.


It makes the left look like a group of half-literate counter-culture tree huggers with no support.

I see criticisms like this all the time...and I think they are really misplaced.

We are not "image-builders" worried about what kind of "impression" we're making...as if our problem is that people don't see us "in a correct light".

If I were sitting down with some ELF kids, certainly I'd tell them that there are better ways to resist than the tactics they've chosen.

But they did not ask for my advice...or yours.

They decided to do something about over-priced unsafe gas hogs, suburban sprawl, etc.

The chances are that what they do will have little effect...but if even a small number of people resolve to engage in some form of resistance by virtue of their example then progress has been made.

I think it is an all-too-common fault of many parts of the left that they are quick to "roast" someone else's direct actions while taking none of their own. (Selling tiny tabloids "with the correct line" doesn't count.)

The politically principled way to develop a critique of someone else's model of direct action is to do a better one yourself.


To extrapolate to the extreme, let's look at the Chechans killing all those kids. That's resisting stupidly, because they have basically destroyed any credibility that their cause had. They went, in my eyes, from a legitimate freedom movement to a group of mindless terrorists over the course of three days.

Note that phrase that you correctly inserted: "in my eyes". Realize that unless you're Chechan or Russian yourself, they don't give a shit what you think!

What they want is to terrify the Russians into leaving Chechnya, period. Their brutal tactics might or might not work...that remains to be determined. Your "support" or "opposition" makes no difference at all.


While I'm not saying such a petty act as burning SUV's would destroy my belief in a movement, it ends up marginalizing it in the eyes of more moderate people, the group we need to win over to our side.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. No one knows these things nor is there any reliable way to find out.

But I don't think it is ever sensible for us to "paint ourselves into a corner" on the issue of "what will the moderates think?".

The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

And there's nothing we can do about that...except explain over and over again why resistance is always justified.

The system itself will show them why what we're saying is true.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

Why "applaud" useless resistance?

Who says it's "useless"?

The fact is that we don't know what will inspire additional resistance.

Even "masters of the dialectic" don't know. :lol:

What we do know is that resistance tends to be contageous.

The more people resist the existing system, even in the smallest ways and even in foolish ways, the more likely it is that resistance will grow.


It makes the left look like a group of half-literate counter-culture tree huggers with no support.

I see criticisms like this all the time...and I think they are really misplaced.

We are not "image-builders" worried about what kind of "impression" we're making...as if our problem is that people don't see us "in a correct light".

If I were sitting down with some ELF kids, certainly I'd tell them that there are better ways to resist than the tactics they've chosen.

But they did not ask for my advice...or yours.

They decided to do something about over-priced unsafe gas hogs, suburban sprawl, etc.

The chances are that what they do will have little effect...but if even a small number of people resolve to engage in some form of resistance by virtue of their example then progress has been made.

I think it is an all-too-common fault of many parts of the left that they are quick to "roast" someone else's direct actions while taking none of their own. (Selling tiny tabloids "with the correct line" doesn't count.)

The politically principled way to develop a critique of someone else's model of direct action is to do a better one yourself.


To extrapolate to the extreme, let's look at the Chechans killing all those kids. That's resisting stupidly, because they have basically destroyed any credibility that their cause had. They went, in my eyes, from a legitimate freedom movement to a group of mindless terrorists over the course of three days.

Note that phrase that you correctly inserted: "in my eyes". Realize that unless you're Chechan or Russian yourself, they don't give a shit what you think!

What they want is to terrify the Russians into leaving Chechnya, period. Their brutal tactics might or might not work...that remains to be determined. Your "support" or "opposition" makes no difference at all.


While I'm not saying such a petty act as burning SUV's would destroy my belief in a movement, it ends up marginalizing it in the eyes of more moderate people, the group we need to win over to our side.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. No one knows these things nor is there any reliable way to find out.

But I don't think it is ever sensible for us to "paint ourselves into a corner" on the issue of "what will the moderates think?".

The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

And there's nothing we can do about that...except explain over and over again why resistance is always justified.

The system itself will show them why what we're saying is true.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

Why "applaud" useless resistance?

Who says it's "useless"?

The fact is that we don't know what will inspire additional resistance.

Even "masters of the dialectic" don't know. :lol:

What we do know is that resistance tends to be contageous.

The more people resist the existing system, even in the smallest ways and even in foolish ways, the more likely it is that resistance will grow.


It makes the left look like a group of half-literate counter-culture tree huggers with no support.

I see criticisms like this all the time...and I think they are really misplaced.

We are not "image-builders" worried about what kind of "impression" we're making...as if our problem is that people don't see us "in a correct light".

If I were sitting down with some ELF kids, certainly I'd tell them that there are better ways to resist than the tactics they've chosen.

But they did not ask for my advice...or yours.

They decided to do something about over-priced unsafe gas hogs, suburban sprawl, etc.

The chances are that what they do will have little effect...but if even a small number of people resolve to engage in some form of resistance by virtue of their example then progress has been made.

I think it is an all-too-common fault of many parts of the left that they are quick to "roast" someone else's direct actions while taking none of their own. (Selling tiny tabloids "with the correct line" doesn't count.)

The politically principled way to develop a critique of someone else's model of direct action is to do a better one yourself.


To extrapolate to the extreme, let's look at the Chechans killing all those kids. That's resisting stupidly, because they have basically destroyed any credibility that their cause had. They went, in my eyes, from a legitimate freedom movement to a group of mindless terrorists over the course of three days.

Note that phrase that you correctly inserted: "in my eyes". Realize that unless you're Chechan or Russian yourself, they don't give a shit what you think!

What they want is to terrify the Russians into leaving Chechnya, period. Their brutal tactics might or might not work...that remains to be determined. Your "support" or "opposition" makes no difference at all.


While I'm not saying such a petty act as burning SUV's would destroy my belief in a movement, it ends up marginalizing it in the eyes of more moderate people, the group we need to win over to our side.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. No one knows these things nor is there any reliable way to find out.

But I don't think it is ever sensible for us to "paint ourselves into a corner" on the issue of "what will the moderates think?".

The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

And there's nothing we can do about that...except explain over and over again why resistance is always justified.

The system itself will show them why what we're saying is true.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[NovelGentry]

I just have one question... when this organization firebombs an SUV dealership, burns up some factory, or does anything destructive.... how many working class people lose their jobs because the company now has to "make up for the loss." You know a single useless executive who makes the equivalent of 6-10 of the other employees salleries isn't going to fire himself. It just seems like the group is giving capitalists another excuse to screw some workers over.

[NovelGentry]

I just have one question... when this organization firebombs an SUV dealership, burns up some factory, or does anything destructive.... how many working class people lose their jobs because the company now has to "make up for the loss." You know a single useless executive who makes the equivalent of 6-10 of the other employees salleries isn't going to fire himself. It just seems like the group is giving capitalists another excuse to screw some workers over.

[NovelGentry]

I just have one question... when this organization firebombs an SUV dealership, burns up some factory, or does anything destructive.... how many working class people lose their jobs because the company now has to "make up for the loss." You know a single useless executive who makes the equivalent of 6-10 of the other employees salleries isn't going to fire himself. It just seems like the group is giving capitalists another excuse to screw some workers over.

[redstar2000]

I just have one question... when this organization firebombs an SUV dealership, burns up some factory, or does anything destructive.... how many working class people lose their jobs because the company now has to "make up for the loss."?

Or how many construction workers get new jobs to rebuild the destroyed property?

This argument pops up both among leftists and even in class society as a whole (capitalists: "the minimum wage is a terrible idea because employers will hire fewer workers and thus it hurts the very people it was intended to help").

The thing is, capitalists don't need "excuses" to screw workers...they do it automatically as part of their normal procedures.

Their goal is to maximize profit...and "any excuse" will serve, including ones that are entirely fictional.

The honest corporate executive (:lol:) would always say "we are doing X because we think it will make us more money".

Everything else they say is just bullshit.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

I just have one question... when this organization firebombs an SUV dealership, burns up some factory, or does anything destructive.... how many working class people lose their jobs because the company now has to "make up for the loss."?

Or how many construction workers get new jobs to rebuild the destroyed property?

This argument pops up both among leftists and even in class society as a whole (capitalists: "the minimum wage is a terrible idea because employers will hire fewer workers and thus it hurts the very people it was intended to help").

The thing is, capitalists don't need "excuses" to screw workers...they do it automatically as part of their normal procedures.

Their goal is to maximize profit...and "any excuse" will serve, including ones that are entirely fictional.

The honest corporate executive (:lol:) would always say "we are doing X because we think it will make us more money".

Everything else they say is just bullshit.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

I just have one question... when this organization firebombs an SUV dealership, burns up some factory, or does anything destructive.... how many working class people lose their jobs because the company now has to "make up for the loss."?

Or how many construction workers get new jobs to rebuild the destroyed property?

This argument pops up both among leftists and even in class society as a whole (capitalists: "the minimum wage is a terrible idea because employers will hire fewer workers and thus it hurts the very people it was intended to help").

The thing is, capitalists don't need "excuses" to screw workers...they do it automatically as part of their normal procedures.

Their goal is to maximize profit...and "any excuse" will serve, including ones that are entirely fictional.

The honest corporate executive (:lol:) would always say "we are doing X because we think it will make us more money".

Everything else they say is just bullshit.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[DaCuBaN]

The more people resist the existing system, even in the smallest ways and even in foolish ways, the more likely it is that resistance will grow.

So you say; yet you also say there is a trend amongst the left to criticise such actions. It seems it does not always work this way. It seems that many on the 'left' are ostracised by such actions - they do not support them, but feel the need to defend them.

I wonder why?


The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

For a man of your years, you certainly show your naivity here: It is not a matter of holding a crucifix up toward self-styled 'revolutionaries' and chanting your hail-mary's until they are banished back to hell - it's about refusing to put your own goals above the wellbeing and livelihoods of people.

For many, this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain their either.

[DaCuBaN]

The more people resist the existing system, even in the smallest ways and even in foolish ways, the more likely it is that resistance will grow.

So you say; yet you also say there is a trend amongst the left to criticise such actions. It seems it does not always work this way. It seems that many on the 'left' are ostracised by such actions - they do not support them, but feel the need to defend them.

I wonder why?


The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

For a man of your years, you certainly show your naivity here: It is not a matter of holding a crucifix up toward self-styled 'revolutionaries' and chanting your hail-mary's until they are banished back to hell - it's about refusing to put your own goals above the wellbeing and livelihoods of people.

For many, this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain their either.

[DaCuBaN]

The more people resist the existing system, even in the smallest ways and even in foolish ways, the more likely it is that resistance will grow.

So you say; yet you also say there is a trend amongst the left to criticise such actions. It seems it does not always work this way. It seems that many on the 'left' are ostracised by such actions - they do not support them, but feel the need to defend them.

I wonder why?


The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

For a man of your years, you certainly show your naivity here: It is not a matter of holding a crucifix up toward self-styled 'revolutionaries' and chanting your hail-mary's until they are banished back to hell - it's about refusing to put your own goals above the wellbeing and livelihoods of people.

For many, this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain their either.

[redstar2000]

So you say; yet you also say there is a trend amongst the left to criticise such actions. It seems it does not always work this way. It seems that many on the 'left' are ostracised by such actions - they do not support them, but feel the need to defend them.

I wonder why?

Very murky -- I don't really understand your point here.

What I was referring to was...

1. The tendency of Leninist cargo-cults to "criticize" (in the loftiest terms) any form of resistance that doesn't happen to "fit" their "correct line".

2. And, perhaps even more common, the tendency of others to criticize some form of genuine resistance (however ill-conceived) because of the "impression it makes".

ELF is a real resistance group...however short-sighted they might be politically. If they wrote a political statement and someone wished to criticize it politically, I would have no problem with that in principle.

But it...irritates me that people who mostly sell newspapers or perhaps not even that much get all "huffy" when a bunch of kids act against the system.


For a man of your years, you certainly show your naivite here: It is not a matter of holding a crucifix up toward self-styled 'revolutionaries' and chanting your hail-mary's until they are banished back to hell - it's about refusing to put your own goals above the wellbeing and livelihoods of people.

For many, this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain there either.

This is pretty murky too. But you seem to be saying that "being on the left" is "an act of charity".

It's not.

It's about liberation from wage-slavery...not velcro chains or shaded auction blocks.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

So you say; yet you also say there is a trend amongst the left to criticise such actions. It seems it does not always work this way. It seems that many on the 'left' are ostracised by such actions - they do not support them, but feel the need to defend them.

I wonder why?

Very murky -- I don't really understand your point here.

What I was referring to was...

1. The tendency of Leninist cargo-cults to "criticize" (in the loftiest terms) any form of resistance that doesn't happen to "fit" their "correct line".

2. And, perhaps even more common, the tendency of others to criticize some form of genuine resistance (however ill-conceived) because of the "impression it makes".

ELF is a real resistance group...however short-sighted they might be politically. If they wrote a political statement and someone wished to criticize it politically, I would have no problem with that in principle.

But it...irritates me that people who mostly sell newspapers or perhaps not even that much get all "huffy" when a bunch of kids act against the system.


For a man of your years, you certainly show your naivite here: It is not a matter of holding a crucifix up toward self-styled 'revolutionaries' and chanting your hail-mary's until they are banished back to hell - it's about refusing to put your own goals above the wellbeing and livelihoods of people.

For many, this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain there either.

This is pretty murky too. But you seem to be saying that "being on the left" is "an act of charity".

It's not.

It's about liberation from wage-slavery...not velcro chains or shaded auction blocks.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

So you say; yet you also say there is a trend amongst the left to criticise such actions. It seems it does not always work this way. It seems that many on the 'left' are ostracised by such actions - they do not support them, but feel the need to defend them.

I wonder why?

Very murky -- I don't really understand your point here.

What I was referring to was...

1. The tendency of Leninist cargo-cults to "criticize" (in the loftiest terms) any form of resistance that doesn't happen to "fit" their "correct line".

2. And, perhaps even more common, the tendency of others to criticize some form of genuine resistance (however ill-conceived) because of the "impression it makes".

ELF is a real resistance group...however short-sighted they might be politically. If they wrote a political statement and someone wished to criticize it politically, I would have no problem with that in principle.

But it...irritates me that people who mostly sell newspapers or perhaps not even that much get all "huffy" when a bunch of kids act against the system.


For a man of your years, you certainly show your naivite here: It is not a matter of holding a crucifix up toward self-styled 'revolutionaries' and chanting your hail-mary's until they are banished back to hell - it's about refusing to put your own goals above the wellbeing and livelihoods of people.

For many, this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain there either.

This is pretty murky too. But you seem to be saying that "being on the left" is "an act of charity".

It's not.

It's about liberation from wage-slavery...not velcro chains or shaded auction blocks.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[DaCuBaN]

I don't really understand your point here.

There wasn't one; I was querying why so many on the left feel the need to defend the actions of those who are placed alongside them on the political spectrum, despite the fact that they don't necessarily share any political leanings - John Kerry (and here, the ELF) being a prime example.

For me, it's a source of perplexion.


it...irritates me that people who mostly sell newspapers or perhaps not even that much get all "huffy" when a bunch of kids act against the system.

Understandably; I'm no activist, but perhaps the answer is simple: They can't think of anything better. In short, jelousy - although it's more than likely that I'm oversimplifying matters.


you seem to be saying that "being on the left" is "an act of charity".

We've been down this line before, and you resolutely refused to 'get' my point there too ;)

If we take the example of someone born into the upper eschalons of price-system society, their declaration of being 'communist' cannot be perceived as much else but charity: They do not suffer (or at least not as much) as a result of the price-system.

This was not my point, however.

We as human beings are judgemental creatures: We are attracted by some people, yet repulsed by others; we condemn certain actions, yet applaud others; whilst I find myself mildly amused by the SUV incident, there are many who do not take it so lightly - and it is here I wished to apply focus:


this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain there

My point was not an 'attack', but merely my own thoughts on the matter. The 'hard-line' left has a nasty habit of attacking 'marginal' leftism, which actions like these (however radical) could be classified as, rather than nurturing it.

In short, I was in tenuous agreement - and thank you for correcting my spelling 'there' as well :)

[DaCuBaN]

I don't really understand your point here.

There wasn't one; I was querying why so many on the left feel the need to defend the actions of those who are placed alongside them on the political spectrum, despite the fact that they don't necessarily share any political leanings - John Kerry (and here, the ELF) being a prime example.

For me, it's a source of perplexion.


it...irritates me that people who mostly sell newspapers or perhaps not even that much get all "huffy" when a bunch of kids act against the system.

Understandably; I'm no activist, but perhaps the answer is simple: They can't think of anything better. In short, jelousy - although it's more than likely that I'm oversimplifying matters.


you seem to be saying that "being on the left" is "an act of charity".

We've been down this line before, and you resolutely refused to 'get' my point there too ;)

If we take the example of someone born into the upper eschalons of price-system society, their declaration of being 'communist' cannot be perceived as much else but charity: They do not suffer (or at least not as much) as a result of the price-system.

This was not my point, however.

We as human beings are judgemental creatures: We are attracted by some people, yet repulsed by others; we condemn certain actions, yet applaud others; whilst I find myself mildly amused by the SUV incident, there are many who do not take it so lightly - and it is here I wished to apply focus:


this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain there

My point was not an 'attack', but merely my own thoughts on the matter. The 'hard-line' left has a nasty habit of attacking 'marginal' leftism, which actions like these (however radical) could be classified as, rather than nurturing it.

In short, I was in tenuous agreement - and thank you for correcting my spelling 'there' as well :)

[DaCuBaN]

I don't really understand your point here.

There wasn't one; I was querying why so many on the left feel the need to defend the actions of those who are placed alongside them on the political spectrum, despite the fact that they don't necessarily share any political leanings - John Kerry (and here, the ELF) being a prime example.

For me, it's a source of perplexion.


it...irritates me that people who mostly sell newspapers or perhaps not even that much get all "huffy" when a bunch of kids act against the system.

Understandably; I'm no activist, but perhaps the answer is simple: They can't think of anything better. In short, jelousy - although it's more than likely that I'm oversimplifying matters.


you seem to be saying that "being on the left" is "an act of charity".

We've been down this line before, and you resolutely refused to 'get' my point there too ;)

If we take the example of someone born into the upper eschalons of price-system society, their declaration of being 'communist' cannot be perceived as much else but charity: They do not suffer (or at least not as much) as a result of the price-system.

This was not my point, however.

We as human beings are judgemental creatures: We are attracted by some people, yet repulsed by others; we condemn certain actions, yet applaud others; whilst I find myself mildly amused by the SUV incident, there are many who do not take it so lightly - and it is here I wished to apply focus:


this is one reason they find themselves on the 'left'; It is one reason why they do not remain there

My point was not an 'attack', but merely my own thoughts on the matter. The 'hard-line' left has a nasty habit of attacking 'marginal' leftism, which actions like these (however radical) could be classified as, rather than nurturing it.

In short, I was in tenuous agreement - and thank you for correcting my spelling 'there' as well :)

[PRC-UTE]

What I was referring to was...

1. The tendency of Leninist cargo-cults to "criticize" (in the loftiest terms) any form of resistance that doesn't happen to "fit" their "correct line".

2. And, perhaps even more common, the tendency of others to criticize some form of genuine resistance (however ill-conceived) because of the "impression it makes".

sounds familiar, same type of criticisms I hear every time we talk about Irish liberation. We should unite the proletariat before attempting anything else. Right, tell the loyalist with the kalashnikov that he shouldn't shoot "taigs" because it's not in his class interest.

That will work really well! like Sean MacStafain said, that's when you'll wish you had more than a placard and a slogan!

And I like calling them cargo cults. :lol: good description.


Militant,

are you a member of the British group "Militant" ?

I seem to remember them openly condemning past actions of resistance such as the Poll Tax rioters.

[PRC-UTE]

What I was referring to was...

1. The tendency of Leninist cargo-cults to "criticize" (in the loftiest terms) any form of resistance that doesn't happen to "fit" their "correct line".

2. And, perhaps even more common, the tendency of others to criticize some form of genuine resistance (however ill-conceived) because of the "impression it makes".

sounds familiar, same type of criticisms I hear every time we talk about Irish liberation. We should unite the proletariat before attempting anything else. Right, tell the loyalist with the kalashnikov that he shouldn't shoot "taigs" because it's not in his class interest.

That will work really well! like Sean MacStafain said, that's when you'll wish you had more than a placard and a slogan!

And I like calling them cargo cults. :lol: good description.


Militant,

are you a member of the British group "Militant" ?

I seem to remember them openly condemning past actions of resistance such as the Poll Tax rioters.

[PRC-UTE]

What I was referring to was...

1. The tendency of Leninist cargo-cults to "criticize" (in the loftiest terms) any form of resistance that doesn't happen to "fit" their "correct line".

2. And, perhaps even more common, the tendency of others to criticize some form of genuine resistance (however ill-conceived) because of the "impression it makes".

sounds familiar, same type of criticisms I hear every time we talk about Irish liberation. We should unite the proletariat before attempting anything else. Right, tell the loyalist with the kalashnikov that he shouldn't shoot "taigs" because it's not in his class interest.

That will work really well! like Sean MacStafain said, that's when you'll wish you had more than a placard and a slogan!

And I like calling them cargo cults. :lol: good description.


Militant,

are you a member of the British group "Militant" ?

I seem to remember them openly condemning past actions of resistance such as the Poll Tax rioters.

[Militant]

Who says it's "useless"?

The fact is that we don't know what will inspire additional resistance.

Even "masters of the dialectic" don't know. :lol:

I just I saw it as "useless" for the socialist cause for various reasons.

1. It's not socialist. It seems to me to be some yuppie movement with no real coherent political message. There is no plan to build upon or raise the stakes in this movement. For that reason, it is at best a fad, whose only long term effect will to be a footnote in a history book(!).

2. You called it foolish yourself. Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing. Obviously I'm asking us to try and make baseless inferences, but if they continue to burn things up (or down) there is a good chance someone will die. Is it still foolish, or does it cross the line and become worse then useless, a hindrance? Because if that unspeakable event were to occur it could cripple the American far-left, as they are generally seen as leftists by the establishment. I would rather they not take that chance, especially since I see no way that they could further the left.

An Redstar, I like how you imply I'm a Leninist, I'm not. And I also think its funny how you use that handle as an insult. Let's at least pretend to all be on the same team.


What we do know is that resistance tends to be contageous.

Foolish resistance is never contagious, resistance based on strong ideological grounds, with a definitive goal is. Red Army Faction comes to mind, with many "generations" as the older members were arrested and imprisoned. Iraq Resistance is the same, for each one killed, ten raise up, as the Americans are learning to their chagrin. But "foolish" resistance dies out quickly, the Weathermen come to mind. No plan, shaky ideological grounds, no future.


We are not "image-builders" worried about what kind of "impression" we're making...as if our problem is that people don't see us "in a correct light".

If I were sitting down with some ELF kids, certainly I'd tell them that there are better ways to resist than the tactics they've chosen.

But they did not ask for my advice...or yours.

They decided to do something about over-priced unsafe gas hogs, suburban sprawl, etc.

The chances are that what they do will have little effect...but if even a small number of people resolve to engage in some form of resistance by virtue of their example then progress has been made.

I think it is an all-too-common fault of many parts of the left that they are quick to "roast" someone else's direct actions while taking none of their own. (Selling tiny tabloids "with the correct line" doesn't count.)

The politically principled way to develop a critique of someone else's model of direct action is to do a better one yourself.

Again, I'm going to have to digress. Right now we are the vanguard of the left whether or not we want to admit that. If we want communism to come to fruition, someone (my generation!) has to setup the groundworks of a coherent leftist movement, and a group of yuppies arousal associated with us does not help towards that end. Your generation(!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

And don't worry Redstar, I'm working towards a "working model for direct action" with a group of like minded people.


Note that phrase that you correctly inserted: "in my eyes". Realize that unless you're Chechan or Russian yourself, they don't give a shit what you think!

What they want is to terrify the Russians into leaving Chechnya, period. Their brutal tactics might or might not work...that remains to be determined. Your "support" or "opposition" makes no difference at all.

Look at the sentence before I said "my eyes" I was trying to show how that action had damaged the Chechan movement in the eyes of moderate politicians, and only fed the power of hardliners like Putin. My fault for not expressing my point fully.


The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

And there's nothing we can do about that...except explain over and over again why resistance is always justified.

The system itself will show them why what we're saying is true.

We see the same thing, but draw different conclusions. I just choose to not poison the moderates against us before we have already begun. I believe we need to "grease the skids" a bit before we choose to take drastic action. The moderates will never truly be ready for direct action against the state, but I think we can slowly wean them over to such a viewpoint by a diet of talk, and when the time comes many will find themselves sympathizing with us. Again, all inferences, but at the moment that's all we got(!).

[Militant]

Who says it's "useless"?

The fact is that we don't know what will inspire additional resistance.

Even "masters of the dialectic" don't know. :lol:

I just I saw it as "useless" for the socialist cause for various reasons.

1. It's not socialist. It seems to me to be some yuppie movement with no real coherent political message. There is no plan to build upon or raise the stakes in this movement. For that reason, it is at best a fad, whose only long term effect will to be a footnote in a history book(!).

2. You called it foolish yourself. Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing. Obviously I'm asking us to try and make baseless inferences, but if they continue to burn things up (or down) there is a good chance someone will die. Is it still foolish, or does it cross the line and become worse then useless, a hindrance? Because if that unspeakable event were to occur it could cripple the American far-left, as they are generally seen as leftists by the establishment. I would rather they not take that chance, especially since I see no way that they could further the left.

An Redstar, I like how you imply I'm a Leninist, I'm not. And I also think its funny how you use that handle as an insult. Let's at least pretend to all be on the same team.


What we do know is that resistance tends to be contageous.

Foolish resistance is never contagious, resistance based on strong ideological grounds, with a definitive goal is. Red Army Faction comes to mind, with many "generations" as the older members were arrested and imprisoned. Iraq Resistance is the same, for each one killed, ten raise up, as the Americans are learning to their chagrin. But "foolish" resistance dies out quickly, the Weathermen come to mind. No plan, shaky ideological grounds, no future.


We are not "image-builders" worried about what kind of "impression" we're making...as if our problem is that people don't see us "in a correct light".

If I were sitting down with some ELF kids, certainly I'd tell them that there are better ways to resist than the tactics they've chosen.

But they did not ask for my advice...or yours.

They decided to do something about over-priced unsafe gas hogs, suburban sprawl, etc.

The chances are that what they do will have little effect...but if even a small number of people resolve to engage in some form of resistance by virtue of their example then progress has been made.

I think it is an all-too-common fault of many parts of the left that they are quick to "roast" someone else's direct actions while taking none of their own. (Selling tiny tabloids "with the correct line" doesn't count.)

The politically principled way to develop a critique of someone else's model of direct action is to do a better one yourself.

Again, I'm going to have to digress. Right now we are the vanguard of the left whether or not we want to admit that. If we want communism to come to fruition, someone (my generation!) has to setup the groundworks of a coherent leftist movement, and a group of yuppies arousal associated with us does not help towards that end. Your generation(!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

And don't worry Redstar, I'm working towards a "working model for direct action" with a group of like minded people.


Note that phrase that you correctly inserted: "in my eyes". Realize that unless you're Chechan or Russian yourself, they don't give a shit what you think!

What they want is to terrify the Russians into leaving Chechnya, period. Their brutal tactics might or might not work...that remains to be determined. Your "support" or "opposition" makes no difference at all.

Look at the sentence before I said "my eyes" I was trying to show how that action had damaged the Chechan movement in the eyes of moderate politicians, and only fed the power of hardliners like Putin. My fault for not expressing my point fully.


The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

And there's nothing we can do about that...except explain over and over again why resistance is always justified.

The system itself will show them why what we're saying is true.

We see the same thing, but draw different conclusions. I just choose to not poison the moderates against us before we have already begun. I believe we need to "grease the skids" a bit before we choose to take drastic action. The moderates will never truly be ready for direct action against the state, but I think we can slowly wean them over to such a viewpoint by a diet of talk, and when the time comes many will find themselves sympathizing with us. Again, all inferences, but at the moment that's all we got(!).

[Militant]

Who says it's "useless"?

The fact is that we don't know what will inspire additional resistance.

Even "masters of the dialectic" don't know. :lol:

I just I saw it as "useless" for the socialist cause for various reasons.

1. It's not socialist. It seems to me to be some yuppie movement with no real coherent political message. There is no plan to build upon or raise the stakes in this movement. For that reason, it is at best a fad, whose only long term effect will to be a footnote in a history book(!).

2. You called it foolish yourself. Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing. Obviously I'm asking us to try and make baseless inferences, but if they continue to burn things up (or down) there is a good chance someone will die. Is it still foolish, or does it cross the line and become worse then useless, a hindrance? Because if that unspeakable event were to occur it could cripple the American far-left, as they are generally seen as leftists by the establishment. I would rather they not take that chance, especially since I see no way that they could further the left.

An Redstar, I like how you imply I'm a Leninist, I'm not. And I also think its funny how you use that handle as an insult. Let's at least pretend to all be on the same team.


What we do know is that resistance tends to be contageous.

Foolish resistance is never contagious, resistance based on strong ideological grounds, with a definitive goal is. Red Army Faction comes to mind, with many "generations" as the older members were arrested and imprisoned. Iraq Resistance is the same, for each one killed, ten raise up, as the Americans are learning to their chagrin. But "foolish" resistance dies out quickly, the Weathermen come to mind. No plan, shaky ideological grounds, no future.


We are not "image-builders" worried about what kind of "impression" we're making...as if our problem is that people don't see us "in a correct light".

If I were sitting down with some ELF kids, certainly I'd tell them that there are better ways to resist than the tactics they've chosen.

But they did not ask for my advice...or yours.

They decided to do something about over-priced unsafe gas hogs, suburban sprawl, etc.

The chances are that what they do will have little effect...but if even a small number of people resolve to engage in some form of resistance by virtue of their example then progress has been made.

I think it is an all-too-common fault of many parts of the left that they are quick to "roast" someone else's direct actions while taking none of their own. (Selling tiny tabloids "with the correct line" doesn't count.)

The politically principled way to develop a critique of someone else's model of direct action is to do a better one yourself.

Again, I'm going to have to digress. Right now we are the vanguard of the left whether or not we want to admit that. If we want communism to come to fruition, someone (my generation!) has to setup the groundworks of a coherent leftist movement, and a group of yuppies arousal associated with us does not help towards that end. Your generation(!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

And don't worry Redstar, I'm working towards a "working model for direct action" with a group of like minded people.


Note that phrase that you correctly inserted: "in my eyes". Realize that unless you're Chechan or Russian yourself, they don't give a shit what you think!

What they want is to terrify the Russians into leaving Chechnya, period. Their brutal tactics might or might not work...that remains to be determined. Your "support" or "opposition" makes no difference at all.

Look at the sentence before I said "my eyes" I was trying to show how that action had damaged the Chechan movement in the eyes of moderate politicians, and only fed the power of hardliners like Putin. My fault for not expressing my point fully.


The "moderates" are not yet ready to resist capitalism by definition. They may or may not be reformists...but resistance in any form "scares" them at this point.

And there's nothing we can do about that...except explain over and over again why resistance is always justified.

The system itself will show them why what we're saying is true.

We see the same thing, but draw different conclusions. I just choose to not poison the moderates against us before we have already begun. I believe we need to "grease the skids" a bit before we choose to take drastic action. The moderates will never truly be ready for direct action against the state, but I think we can slowly wean them over to such a viewpoint by a diet of talk, and when the time comes many will find themselves sympathizing with us. Again, all inferences, but at the moment that's all we got(!).

[NovelGentry]

Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing.

Imagine they never did it and that SUV killed someone!!! Yeah, nothing would happen. This is the thinking that needs to be changed. You're completely willing to let corporations kill people with unsafe products, starvation, exploitation, but unwilling to let a rebellion against that kill people. I'm not saying innocent people deserve to die -- but why is one so acceptable and not the other?


Your generation(!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

I hate to break it to you, but the "current generation" as if there is such a thing ever without intermingled bits of other generations, is not much more than this. I think you fail to see that the majority of the people today (particularly 15-25 year olds) are in just the same position of "sex, drugs, and rock n' roll" the only differences is they're shallow about it. It has little to do with freedom and all to do with their self indulgence.


And don't worry Redstar, I'm working towards a "working model for direct action"

What a coincidence... so am I. But what will your direct action make of the severely numbed consciousness of anyone who's not on the same level of the left as you?


with a group of like minded people.

Smells like a vanguard party.... Looks likes a vanguard party...

I think the argument most other people are making here is that such action as that by the ELF may inspire all those willing to be inspired by such acts, where there is no formal method that can be said to inspire the entire proletariat to revolution. Furthermore, it's beyond a matter of inspiration. It's first and foremost a matter of education.

[NovelGentry]

Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing.

Imagine they never did it and that SUV killed someone!!! Yeah, nothing would happen. This is the thinking that needs to be changed. You're completely willing to let corporations kill people with unsafe products, starvation, exploitation, but unwilling to let a rebellion against that kill people. I'm not saying innocent people deserve to die -- but why is one so acceptable and not the other?


Your generation(!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

I hate to break it to you, but the "current generation" as if there is such a thing ever without intermingled bits of other generations, is not much more than this. I think you fail to see that the majority of the people today (particularly 15-25 year olds) are in just the same position of "sex, drugs, and rock n' roll" the only differences is they're shallow about it. It has little to do with freedom and all to do with their self indulgence.


And don't worry Redstar, I'm working towards a "working model for direct action"

What a coincidence... so am I. But what will your direct action make of the severely numbed consciousness of anyone who's not on the same level of the left as you?


with a group of like minded people.

Smells like a vanguard party.... Looks likes a vanguard party...

I think the argument most other people are making here is that such action as that by the ELF may inspire all those willing to be inspired by such acts, where there is no formal method that can be said to inspire the entire proletariat to revolution. Furthermore, it's beyond a matter of inspiration. It's first and foremost a matter of education.

[NovelGentry]

Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing.

Imagine they never did it and that SUV killed someone!!! Yeah, nothing would happen. This is the thinking that needs to be changed. You're completely willing to let corporations kill people with unsafe products, starvation, exploitation, but unwilling to let a rebellion against that kill people. I'm not saying innocent people deserve to die -- but why is one so acceptable and not the other?


Your generation(!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

I hate to break it to you, but the "current generation" as if there is such a thing ever without intermingled bits of other generations, is not much more than this. I think you fail to see that the majority of the people today (particularly 15-25 year olds) are in just the same position of "sex, drugs, and rock n' roll" the only differences is they're shallow about it. It has little to do with freedom and all to do with their self indulgence.


And don't worry Redstar, I'm working towards a "working model for direct action"

What a coincidence... so am I. But what will your direct action make of the severely numbed consciousness of anyone who's not on the same level of the left as you?


with a group of like minded people.

Smells like a vanguard party.... Looks likes a vanguard party...

I think the argument most other people are making here is that such action as that by the ELF may inspire all those willing to be inspired by such acts, where there is no formal method that can be said to inspire the entire proletariat to revolution. Furthermore, it's beyond a matter of inspiration. It's first and foremost a matter of education.

[commiecrusader]

It seems to me though that many ELF acts seem to have no motive to propogate change, simply to destroy things. Whilst these may be bad things, the ELF boil down to little more than vandals. There is nothing revolutionary in their acts, and I think for such apparently motiveless vandals to be associated with the left can only do us harm. If you want to act, make motives clear and actions relevant and purposeful.

[commiecrusader]

It seems to me though that many ELF acts seem to have no motive to propogate change, simply to destroy things. Whilst these may be bad things, the ELF boil down to little more than vandals. There is nothing revolutionary in their acts, and I think for such apparently motiveless vandals to be associated with the left can only do us harm. If you want to act, make motives clear and actions relevant and purposeful.

[commiecrusader]

It seems to me though that many ELF acts seem to have no motive to propogate change, simply to destroy things. Whilst these may be bad things, the ELF boil down to little more than vandals. There is nothing revolutionary in their acts, and I think for such apparently motiveless vandals to be associated with the left can only do us harm. If you want to act, make motives clear and actions relevant and purposeful.

[redstar2000]

[ELF] seems to me to be some yuppie movement with no real coherent political message.

Unfair...and wrong. Yuppies -- "Young Upwardly-mobile Professionals" -- buy SUVs, they don't burn them.


There is no plan to build upon or raise the stakes in this movement.

Their "plan" appears to be that people should "follow their example" by taking their own initiatives.

It is a "leaderless" form of resistance...and actually quite appropriate for anyone contemplating seriously illegal activities. Even if one "cell" or "affinity group" gets busted, all the others can continue to function normally.

The obvious drawback is that people in different "cells" never get to talk with one another and thus rarely develop politically beyond their present stage.

I think that's a serious shortcoming...which is why I don't recommend their strategy. In and of itself, it doesn't "go anywhere".

But I cannot, in good conscience, condemn people who actually resist the capitalist system.


For that reason, it is at best a fad, whose only long term effect will to be a footnote in a history book(!).

That's probably true. But it's better to be a "good footnote" in the history books than a bad "chapter title". :)


Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing...Is it still foolish, or does it cross the line and become worse than useless, a hindrance?...Because if that unspeakable event were to occur it could cripple the American far-left, as they [ELF] are generally seen as leftists by the establishment.

Well, that would certainly be an unfortunate development...I hope that ELF groups are careful enough to avoid that.

But it could happen...what then?

I personally would recommend a discreet silence on our part; we should simply not bring it up.

However, should someone insist that we discuss it, then we should criticize in terms of incompetence and not resistance.

And we can emphasize that this was the act of one ELF cell, not the whole "organization" (since ELF doesn't have that).

In other words, an accidental death in the course of an ELF action would certainly not do our "cause" any good and might even be marginally harmful...but it's "not the end of the world".

(By the way, I'm assuming we're discussing an "innocent" death here -- a janitor or night watchman, etc. Should ELF start a campaign of deliberately targeting the owners of SUV dealerships for assassination...that's rather a different matter. As the anarchists discovered in the late 19th century, assassination doesn't work as a strategy for revolution...but when rich bastards get killed, it does seem to have a morale-enhancing effect on the oppressed.)


And Redstar, I like how you imply I'm a Leninist, I'm not. And I also think it's funny how you use that handle as an insult. Let's at least pretend to all be on the same team.

If my remarks gave anyone the impression that you are a Leninist, then I apologize. :P I was speaking in more general terms.

However, when speaking of "crippling the American far-left", it would be difficult to find anyone who's been better at that than the various Leninist groups.

For some purposes, I'm prepared to treat them as "team-mates"...but I have no illusions about what would happen if any of them ever managed to get their buttocks into seats of power.

Bob Avakian in the White House? :o :o :o


But "foolish" resistance dies out quickly, the Weathermen come to mind. No plan, shaky ideological grounds, no future.

Well, there are other serious criticisms of the Weather Underground that might be made.

For one thing, in spite of all their rhetoric, their goal was essentially reformist...forcing an end to the U.S. war against Vietnam. "Bringing the war home" was the heart of their ideology.

When the U.S. withdrew in 1973 and the American puppet regime was defeated in 1975, the Weather Underground "had nothing left to do" except wait to be arrested.

For another thing, it was an extremely centralized organization -- all decisions were made by the "Weather Bureau" (central committee).

But it would be a mistake to think that everybody ran around saying "oh, those terrible Weathermen...they just prove the left is totally fucked".

I had occasion once to talk to some office workers in San Francisco who were there in the era of "bomb threats"...and they were actually quite tolerant of the Weather Underground. A "bomb threat" meant they got a two-hour paid break while the building was searched.

The Weather Underground was very careful not to kill anyone...except themselves through incompetent handling of explosive materials.


Again, I'm going to have to digress. Right now we are the vanguard of the left whether or not we want to admit that. If we want communism to come to fruition, someone (my generation!) has to set up the groundworks of a coherent leftist movement, and a group of yuppies arousal associated with us does not help towards that end. Your generation (!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

Harsh criticism...though not without truth. My generation was indeed far more effective on "the cultural front" than on "the political front".

Looking back, I think the reason for that is that our "cultural" innovations spoke to the needs and desires of a very large number of Americans...while our political evolution landed us in the dead-end of Leninist sectarianism (mostly Maoist) -- which Americans regarded correctly as wacko.

When SDS's ideology was summed up as "participatory democracy"...we did very well. The more "Leninist" we got, the worse we did...the more disconnected from material reality we became.

I certainly expect your generation and the ones that follow to do a lot better than we did.

But ELF is, I would imagine, part of your generation, not mine. Criticize them in a principled way...not just by tossing around the (inaccurate) word "yuppie".


I was trying to show how that action had damaged the Chechan movement in the eyes of moderate politicians, and only fed the power of hardliners like Putin.

That's a very slippery slope you're standing on. In the 60s and 70s, we were criticized for our "militant tactics" and intransigent opposition on the grounds that we were "weakening the moderates" (like Hubert Humphrey) and "playing into the hands of the reactionaries" (like Richard Nixon).

When it comes to power, those who have it in a class society are all "hardliners".

Only "loyal opposition" is acceptable to them; anything that they perceive as a serious threat (accurately or inaccurately) brings out "their inner fascist".

It is very foolish to plan one's political strategy with an eye towards "influencing" the ruling class's general response. It's far better to proceed on the assumption that they will be as repressive and reactionary as they think they can get away with.


I just choose to not poison the moderates against us before we have already begun.

Well, that's your choice...though I think you'll find that most of them are pretty unsympathetic to any serious change in "the order of things". If you publicly "crucify ELF", that's not going to make them think "better" of you.


It seems to me though that many ELF acts seem to have no motive to propagate change, simply to destroy things.

They think (evidently) that destruction "is a creative act".


There is nothing revolutionary in their acts, and I think for such apparently motiveless vandals to be associated with the left can only do us harm.

Well, they seem to have made their non-revolutionary motives clear enough: they hate SUVs and suburban sprawl.

The bourgeois media will, if they think it useful, label all of us "eco-terrorists" regardless of our actual words and deeds.

Accordingly, I don't think that we should "panic" and start saying "not us! not us! That's those other guys & they really suck!".


If you want to act, make motives clear and actions relevant and purposeful.

No question about it!

But the "devil" is "in the details".

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

[ELF] seems to me to be some yuppie movement with no real coherent political message.

Unfair...and wrong. Yuppies -- "Young Upwardly-mobile Professionals" -- buy SUVs, they don't burn them.


There is no plan to build upon or raise the stakes in this movement.

Their "plan" appears to be that people should "follow their example" by taking their own initiatives.

It is a "leaderless" form of resistance...and actually quite appropriate for anyone contemplating seriously illegal activities. Even if one "cell" or "affinity group" gets busted, all the others can continue to function normally.

The obvious drawback is that people in different "cells" never get to talk with one another and thus rarely develop politically beyond their present stage.

I think that's a serious shortcoming...which is why I don't recommend their strategy. In and of itself, it doesn't "go anywhere".

But I cannot, in good conscience, condemn people who actually resist the capitalist system.


For that reason, it is at best a fad, whose only long term effect will to be a footnote in a history book(!).

That's probably true. But it's better to be a "good footnote" in the history books than a bad "chapter title". :)


Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing...Is it still foolish, or does it cross the line and become worse than useless, a hindrance?...Because if that unspeakable event were to occur it could cripple the American far-left, as they [ELF] are generally seen as leftists by the establishment.

Well, that would certainly be an unfortunate development...I hope that ELF groups are careful enough to avoid that.

But it could happen...what then?

I personally would recommend a discreet silence on our part; we should simply not bring it up.

However, should someone insist that we discuss it, then we should criticize in terms of incompetence and not resistance.

And we can emphasize that this was the act of one ELF cell, not the whole "organization" (since ELF doesn't have that).

In other words, an accidental death in the course of an ELF action would certainly not do our "cause" any good and might even be marginally harmful...but it's "not the end of the world".

(By the way, I'm assuming we're discussing an "innocent" death here -- a janitor or night watchman, etc. Should ELF start a campaign of deliberately targeting the owners of SUV dealerships for assassination...that's rather a different matter. As the anarchists discovered in the late 19th century, assassination doesn't work as a strategy for revolution...but when rich bastards get killed, it does seem to have a morale-enhancing effect on the oppressed.)


And Redstar, I like how you imply I'm a Leninist, I'm not. And I also think it's funny how you use that handle as an insult. Let's at least pretend to all be on the same team.

If my remarks gave anyone the impression that you are a Leninist, then I apologize. :P I was speaking in more general terms.

However, when speaking of "crippling the American far-left", it would be difficult to find anyone who's been better at that than the various Leninist groups.

For some purposes, I'm prepared to treat them as "team-mates"...but I have no illusions about what would happen if any of them ever managed to get their buttocks into seats of power.

Bob Avakian in the White House? :o :o :o


But "foolish" resistance dies out quickly, the Weathermen come to mind. No plan, shaky ideological grounds, no future.

Well, there are other serious criticisms of the Weather Underground that might be made.

For one thing, in spite of all their rhetoric, their goal was essentially reformist...forcing an end to the U.S. war against Vietnam. "Bringing the war home" was the heart of their ideology.

When the U.S. withdrew in 1973 and the American puppet regime was defeated in 1975, the Weather Underground "had nothing left to do" except wait to be arrested.

For another thing, it was an extremely centralized organization -- all decisions were made by the "Weather Bureau" (central committee).

But it would be a mistake to think that everybody ran around saying "oh, those terrible Weathermen...they just prove the left is totally fucked".

I had occasion once to talk to some office workers in San Francisco who were there in the era of "bomb threats"...and they were actually quite tolerant of the Weather Underground. A "bomb threat" meant they got a two-hour paid break while the building was searched.

The Weather Underground was very careful not to kill anyone...except themselves through incompetent handling of explosive materials.


Again, I'm going to have to digress. Right now we are the vanguard of the left whether or not we want to admit that. If we want communism to come to fruition, someone (my generation!) has to set up the groundworks of a coherent leftist movement, and a group of yuppies arousal associated with us does not help towards that end. Your generation (!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

Harsh criticism...though not without truth. My generation was indeed far more effective on "the cultural front" than on "the political front".

Looking back, I think the reason for that is that our "cultural" innovations spoke to the needs and desires of a very large number of Americans...while our political evolution landed us in the dead-end of Leninist sectarianism (mostly Maoist) -- which Americans regarded correctly as wacko.

When SDS's ideology was summed up as "participatory democracy"...we did very well. The more "Leninist" we got, the worse we did...the more disconnected from material reality we became.

I certainly expect your generation and the ones that follow to do a lot better than we did.

But ELF is, I would imagine, part of your generation, not mine. Criticize them in a principled way...not just by tossing around the (inaccurate) word "yuppie".


I was trying to show how that action had damaged the Chechan movement in the eyes of moderate politicians, and only fed the power of hardliners like Putin.

That's a very slippery slope you're standing on. In the 60s and 70s, we were criticized for our "militant tactics" and intransigent opposition on the grounds that we were "weakening the moderates" (like Hubert Humphrey) and "playing into the hands of the reactionaries" (like Richard Nixon).

When it comes to power, those who have it in a class society are all "hardliners".

Only "loyal opposition" is acceptable to them; anything that they perceive as a serious threat (accurately or inaccurately) brings out "their inner fascist".

It is very foolish to plan one's political strategy with an eye towards "influencing" the ruling class's general response. It's far better to proceed on the assumption that they will be as repressive and reactionary as they think they can get away with.


I just choose to not poison the moderates against us before we have already begun.

Well, that's your choice...though I think you'll find that most of them are pretty unsympathetic to any serious change in "the order of things". If you publicly "crucify ELF", that's not going to make them think "better" of you.


It seems to me though that many ELF acts seem to have no motive to propagate change, simply to destroy things.

They think (evidently) that destruction "is a creative act".


There is nothing revolutionary in their acts, and I think for such apparently motiveless vandals to be associated with the left can only do us harm.

Well, they seem to have made their non-revolutionary motives clear enough: they hate SUVs and suburban sprawl.

The bourgeois media will, if they think it useful, label all of us "eco-terrorists" regardless of our actual words and deeds.

Accordingly, I don't think that we should "panic" and start saying "not us! not us! That's those other guys & they really suck!".


If you want to act, make motives clear and actions relevant and purposeful.

No question about it!

But the "devil" is "in the details".

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

[ELF] seems to me to be some yuppie movement with no real coherent political message.

Unfair...and wrong. Yuppies -- "Young Upwardly-mobile Professionals" -- buy SUVs, they don't burn them.


There is no plan to build upon or raise the stakes in this movement.

Their "plan" appears to be that people should "follow their example" by taking their own initiatives.

It is a "leaderless" form of resistance...and actually quite appropriate for anyone contemplating seriously illegal activities. Even if one "cell" or "affinity group" gets busted, all the others can continue to function normally.

The obvious drawback is that people in different "cells" never get to talk with one another and thus rarely develop politically beyond their present stage.

I think that's a serious shortcoming...which is why I don't recommend their strategy. In and of itself, it doesn't "go anywhere".

But I cannot, in good conscience, condemn people who actually resist the capitalist system.


For that reason, it is at best a fad, whose only long term effect will to be a footnote in a history book(!).

That's probably true. But it's better to be a "good footnote" in the history books than a bad "chapter title". :)


Now imagine they killed someone in that firebombing...Is it still foolish, or does it cross the line and become worse than useless, a hindrance?...Because if that unspeakable event were to occur it could cripple the American far-left, as they [ELF] are generally seen as leftists by the establishment.

Well, that would certainly be an unfortunate development...I hope that ELF groups are careful enough to avoid that.

But it could happen...what then?

I personally would recommend a discreet silence on our part; we should simply not bring it up.

However, should someone insist that we discuss it, then we should criticize in terms of incompetence and not resistance.

And we can emphasize that this was the act of one ELF cell, not the whole "organization" (since ELF doesn't have that).

In other words, an accidental death in the course of an ELF action would certainly not do our "cause" any good and might even be marginally harmful...but it's "not the end of the world".

(By the way, I'm assuming we're discussing an "innocent" death here -- a janitor or night watchman, etc. Should ELF start a campaign of deliberately targeting the owners of SUV dealerships for assassination...that's rather a different matter. As the anarchists discovered in the late 19th century, assassination doesn't work as a strategy for revolution...but when rich bastards get killed, it does seem to have a morale-enhancing effect on the oppressed.)


And Redstar, I like how you imply I'm a Leninist, I'm not. And I also think it's funny how you use that handle as an insult. Let's at least pretend to all be on the same team.

If my remarks gave anyone the impression that you are a Leninist, then I apologize. :P I was speaking in more general terms.

However, when speaking of "crippling the American far-left", it would be difficult to find anyone who's been better at that than the various Leninist groups.

For some purposes, I'm prepared to treat them as "team-mates"...but I have no illusions about what would happen if any of them ever managed to get their buttocks into seats of power.

Bob Avakian in the White House? :o :o :o


But "foolish" resistance dies out quickly, the Weathermen come to mind. No plan, shaky ideological grounds, no future.

Well, there are other serious criticisms of the Weather Underground that might be made.

For one thing, in spite of all their rhetoric, their goal was essentially reformist...forcing an end to the U.S. war against Vietnam. "Bringing the war home" was the heart of their ideology.

When the U.S. withdrew in 1973 and the American puppet regime was defeated in 1975, the Weather Underground "had nothing left to do" except wait to be arrested.

For another thing, it was an extremely centralized organization -- all decisions were made by the "Weather Bureau" (central committee).

But it would be a mistake to think that everybody ran around saying "oh, those terrible Weathermen...they just prove the left is totally fucked".

I had occasion once to talk to some office workers in San Francisco who were there in the era of "bomb threats"...and they were actually quite tolerant of the Weather Underground. A "bomb threat" meant they got a two-hour paid break while the building was searched.

The Weather Underground was very careful not to kill anyone...except themselves through incompetent handling of explosive materials.


Again, I'm going to have to digress. Right now we are the vanguard of the left whether or not we want to admit that. If we want communism to come to fruition, someone (my generation!) has to set up the groundworks of a coherent leftist movement, and a group of yuppies arousal associated with us does not help towards that end. Your generation (!) failed to do that, as leftism was associated, correctly or not, with "drugs, sex and rocknroll". Sorry for not wanting that for my generation.

Harsh criticism...though not without truth. My generation was indeed far more effective on "the cultural front" than on "the political front".

Looking back, I think the reason for that is that our "cultural" innovations spoke to the needs and desires of a very large number of Americans...while our political evolution landed us in the dead-end of Leninist sectarianism (mostly Maoist) -- which Americans regarded correctly as wacko.

When SDS's ideology was summed up as "participatory democracy"...we did very well. The more "Leninist" we got, the worse we did...the more disconnected from material reality we became.

I certainly expect your generation and the ones that follow to do a lot better than we did.

But ELF is, I would imagine, part of your generation, not mine. Criticize them in a principled way...not just by tossing around the (inaccurate) word "yuppie".


I was trying to show how that action had damaged the Chechan movement in the eyes of moderate politicians, and only fed the power of hardliners like Putin.

That's a very slippery slope you're standing on. In the 60s and 70s, we were criticized for our "militant tactics" and intransigent opposition on the grounds that we were "weakening the moderates" (like Hubert Humphrey) and "playing into the hands of the reactionaries" (like Richard Nixon).

When it comes to power, those who have it in a class society are all "hardliners".

Only "loyal opposition" is acceptable to them; anything that they perceive as a serious threat (accurately or inaccurately) brings out "their inner fascist".

It is very foolish to plan one's political strategy with an eye towards "influencing" the ruling class's general response. It's far better to proceed on the assumption that they will be as repressive and reactionary as they think they can get away with.


I just choose to not poison the moderates against us before we have already begun.

Well, that's your choice...though I think you'll find that most of them are pretty unsympathetic to any serious change in "the order of things". If you publicly "crucify ELF", that's not going to make them think "better" of you.


It seems to me though that many ELF acts seem to have no motive to propagate change, simply to destroy things.

They think (evidently) that destruction "is a creative act".


There is nothing revolutionary in their acts, and I think for such apparently motiveless vandals to be associated with the left can only do us harm.

Well, they seem to have made their non-revolutionary motives clear enough: they hate SUVs and suburban sprawl.

The bourgeois media will, if they think it useful, label all of us "eco-terrorists" regardless of our actual words and deeds.

Accordingly, I don't think that we should "panic" and start saying "not us! not us! That's those other guys & they really suck!".


If you want to act, make motives clear and actions relevant and purposeful.

No question about it!

But the "devil" is "in the details".

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[PRC-UTE]

Unfair...and wrong. Yuppies -- "Young Upwardly-mobile Professionals" -- buy SUVs, they don't burn them.

that's true, they're not yuppies. But they are usually middle class. I've taken part in a few earth first demos and usually without fail they are middle class. There were a few in the ecology movements who are socially aware, that Bari person for one.

[PRC-UTE]

Unfair...and wrong. Yuppies -- "Young Upwardly-mobile Professionals" -- buy SUVs, they don't burn them.

that's true, they're not yuppies. But they are usually middle class. I've taken part in a few earth first demos and usually without fail they are middle class. There were a few in the ecology movements who are socially aware, that Bari person for one.

[PRC-UTE]

Unfair...and wrong. Yuppies -- "Young Upwardly-mobile Professionals" -- buy SUVs, they don't burn them.

that's true, they're not yuppies. But they are usually middle class. I've taken part in a few earth first demos and usually without fail they are middle class. There were a few in the ecology movements who are socially aware, that Bari person for one.

[redstar2000]

That's true, they're not yuppies. But they are usually middle class. I've taken part in a few Earth First demos and usually without fail they are middle class.

I also have that impression.

But remember there are a lot of kids these days being raised to think they're "middle class" on the basis of credit card debt and 2nd mortgages. If mom and dad both get laid off...they're about six months away from living on the street.

Which may come as quite a shock to their "middle class" sensibilities. :lol:

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

That's true, they're not yuppies. But they are usually middle class. I've taken part in a few Earth First demos and usually without fail they are middle class.

I also have that impression.

But remember there are a lot of kids these days being raised to think they're "middle class" on the basis of credit card debt and 2nd mortgages. If mom and dad both get laid off...they're about six months away from living on the street.

Which may come as quite a shock to their "middle class" sensibilities. :lol:

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[redstar2000]

That's true, they're not yuppies. But they are usually middle class. I've taken part in a few Earth First demos and usually without fail they are middle class.

I also have that impression.

But remember there are a lot of kids these days being raised to think they're "middle class" on the basis of credit card debt and 2nd mortgages. If mom and dad both get laid off...they're about six months away from living on the street.

Which may come as quite a shock to their "middle class" sensibilities. :lol:

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[VukBZ2005]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 03:59 PM

I also have that impression.

But remember there are a lot of kids these days being raised to think they're "middle class" on the basis of credit card debt and 2nd mortgages. If mom and dad both get laid off...they're about six months away from living on the street.

Which may come as quite a shock to their "middle class" sensibilities. :lol:

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas
I Agree totally.

[VukBZ2005]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 03:59 PM

I also have that impression.

But remember there are a lot of kids these days being raised to think they're "middle class" on the basis of credit card debt and 2nd mortgages. If mom and dad both get laid off...they're about six months away from living on the street.

Which may come as quite a shock to their "middle class" sensibilities. :lol:

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas
I Agree totally.

[VukBZ2005]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 03:59 PM

I also have that impression.

But remember there are a lot of kids these days being raised to think they're "middle class" on the basis of credit card debt and 2nd mortgages. If mom and dad both get laid off...they're about six months away from living on the street.

Which may come as quite a shock to their "middle class" sensibilities. :lol:

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas
I Agree totally.

[commiecrusader]

Accordingly, I don't think that we should "panic" and start saying "not us! not us! That's those other guys & they really suck!".
I agree entirely. To do that would only increase suspicion from the public. To deny without being accused always has that effect. On the other hand, if people do start to claim they are left-wing, everything should be done to show them otherwise.


But they are usually middle class. I've taken part in a few earth first demos and usually without fail they are middle class.
Is it me or are eco-protestors usually middle class? I don't mean this in an insulting way to anyone, but normally, eco-protests seem to be a very middle class driven idea. The working class are too busy trying to get by to be overly concerned about pollution, and the upper classes are too concerned with making profits off their polluting factories. Just an observation.

[PRC-UTE]

The working class are too busy trying to get by to be overly concerned about pollution, and the upper classes are too concerned with making profits off their polluting factories. Just an observation.

that was my point as well. Not that I don't support their activities; I do. It's just most check-to-check manual labourers don't think about that much. although to be fair I know many workers who care deeply about the environment.

but ol red made a fair point. . . the middle class are shrinking, swallowed by debt and 5 million mortgages! :blink:

[commiecrusader]

yeah true dat. On my dad's wage, my family should be comfortably in the lower echelons of middle class, but him and my mum are so bad with money that we have massive debts and a massive mortgage. If he got sacked we would be royally fucked.

And I also care about the environment, but it does just seem to be a hobby of the middle classes. I think most people care but only the middle classes don't have more pressing concerns.

[comrade_mufasa]

The only good ELF is the ones they have on animes. They all ways try to free the earth from alien control or form large corpreit control of the planets.

The real ELf is only interested in there ideas that all animals should live, but get mad when you say that a lion kills animals.

[captain anarchy]

earth liberation is not really possibal parts of earth need to be destroyed for resources in every day life where do you think toilet paper comes from. now i think exsesive destroying of the earth is unnessasery. i think with all the damage that the earth reseives each day through polution and such i think its beyond the help of all organizations and i think people who destroy the earth are to powerful at this point so if you really love the earth hug a tree while you still can cause a asshole will soon kill it as sad as it is.

[Xvall]

Just another reminder to people, as they seem to be unaware of this in some of their posts: Elf is not based around the liberation of animals - Alf is.