New to "the movement"

[Crash]

I have been doing some work with World Can't Wait over the past few months and have recently been hanging out with a few RCP people. I started listening to what people were saying and started doing some reading of the Revolution newspaper. Decided I wanted to learn more, so I got on google and found this place.

Pretty much, I'm looking for a good starting point after the Communist Manifesto. Are there other parties here in the U.S.A. other then the RCP? Also, I've been hearing alot of anti-Bob Avakian sentiment around here, can you guys explain a little of that too?

Thanks alot,


-Crash

[Martin Blank]

Hello, Crash. My name is Miles and I am in the Communist League. We've also been participating in the WCW campaign from the beginning. In case you're interested, our website is http://www.communistleague.org/. We don't call ourselves a party, but you can judge for yourself by the content of our work.

I would suggest some Marx and Engels as a good starting point after the Manifesto. The Marxists Internet Archive has a good collection on their website -- http://www.marxists.org/

* Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League (March 1850)
* 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
* The Civil War in France

After these, I would suggest two books by Lenin as worthwhile. These are also available on the MIA.

* Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution
* The State and Revolution

When you're ready to delve into economics, here are a few books I'd suggest, which are also on the MIA.

* Wage-Labour and Capital, by Marx
* Value, Price and Profit, by Marx
* Imperialism, by Lenin

These eight books will get you started. When you're done, if you'd like more selections, PM me. Or, better yet, some of these are available as downloadable booklets on our website, courtesy of the Albert Currlin Institute, under the "Workers Library Series" link.

In terms of Bob Avakian, the negative views on him are in two main categories: 1) comrades oppose the cult of personality around Avakian, and 2) comrades disagree with him politically.

Personally, I am not very impressed with what he's written. More to the point, I take issue with how Avakian's views are presented as both new and enlightening. Most of what he's written, in terms of political viewpoint, is not some kind of great revelation. In fact, quite the opposite. On questions of democracy, the Bush regime and corporatism, etc., for example, I know people who were making many of the same points years before Avakian.

Thus, it becomes rather frustrating to see RCP comrades present these views, and their author, as something that could only come from him. It comes off as if the RCPers turn off their brains and let Avakian think for them.

Hope this helps.

Miles

[Crash]

Would you say that WCW is a front? I have been wondering that myself, and have been asked that quite a few times.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 11:44 PM
Would you say that WCW is a front? I have been wondering that myself, and have been asked that quite a few times.
Some say yes, some say no. The only thing that makes me say that it is not a front is that the RCP is being overshadowed now by the Progressive Democrats of America, which is trying to take over the campaign for their own ends.

Miles

[Crash]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague+Apr 13 2006, 04:49 AM--> (CommunistLeague @ Apr 13 2006, 04:49 AM)
[email protected] 12 2006, 11:44 PM
Would you say that WCW is a front? I have been wondering that myself, and have been asked that quite a few times.
Some say yes, some say no. The only thing that makes me say that it is not a front is that the RCP is being overshadowed now by the Progressive Democrats of America, which is trying to take over the campaign for their own ends.

Miles [/b]
Yeah, I just got back home from the national meeting actually.

[Gryphon]

Would you say that WCW is a front? I have been wondering that myself, and have been asked that quite a few times.


I'm not really aware of WCW. Where can we get more info on WCW?

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2006, 12:37 AM

Would you say that WCW is a front? I have been wondering that myself, and have been asked that quite a few times.


I'm not really aware of WCW. Where can we get more info on WCW?
http://www.worldcantwait.org/

[redstar2000]

You may find this of interest...

St. Avakian's First Church of Mao (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1083550128&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Gryphon]

From The RedStar2000 Papers:


thought I made myself pretty clear, but let me spell it out: I am opposed to leader-worship as a matter of communist principle! No fucking exceptions!

Correct, 'idol' worshipping is a capitalist initiative aimed to promote the flow of capital based on the prestige of a leader or person who is sometimes regarded (sometimes ignorantly) to belong to the upper class. Thus, not only leader-worshipping is against communist principles, it is a tool used by economic forces to implement capitalist values within the socialist consciousness.

[barista.marxista]

Leader worship is a reactionary method, and it is something inherent in any authoritarian thought, and very particularly Leninism (and Maoism, Trotskyism, etc.)

If you're looking for good books, I second those recommend above (though not so much emphasis on Lenin. While you should by all means read him because it's important, HE IS NOT THE ONLY KIND OF MARXISM, and, in fact, many Communists, including myself and RedStar above, don't regard him as a real Marxist). However, if you want something as an introduction, I very seriously recommend Lenny Flank Jr.'s book Non-Leninist Marxism. It is written from a libertarian communist view, but includes a neutral summarization of Marxist politics and economics that is very accessible. It's available for free here (http://www.phillyrmc.net/nonlenin.html). It's short, easy, and very informative.

You need to read everything you can, and you need to experience all you want to. But, a warning: the RCP is not a revolutionary organization. They say they are, but they are liberal bourgeois trash. All Leninism is. Should you read the Flank book, or even just part of it, and want to pursue a real revolutionary methodology, PM me, and I will be more than willing to help you out.

[LoneRed]

even though my opinion is biased, as i am working with the CL, i find it a great organization, that throws away all the sectarian and dogmatic bullshit

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

Crash, be careful with groups like the RCP and WCW. They are not the type group to get involved in.

Communist League is deff on point and is worth looking into.

Also if I may you should also take a look at the Free People's Movement. www.fpm-mgl.org (http://www.fpm-mgl.org)

Unlike wasting money on promoting events such as the WCW did with there February protest in DC we are using it to actually help people.

Let me also recommend that you read Support the fight for the liberation of humanity! (http://www.fpm-mgl.org/ct/headlines/feb_06/08_h1.html)


--Paz

[barista.marxista]

I'm going to plug the Red & Anarchist Action Network (RAAN) (http://www.redanarchist.org/) here. If you're checking out groups to be involved with, this is one. It's all about a networked organization being brought alive by what YOU can do -- not what you're told to do, or what you wish you could do. Autonomism in action!

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2006, 11:06 PM
I'm going to plug the Red & Anarchist Action Network (RAAN) (http://www.redanarchist.org/) here. If you're checking out groups to be involved with, this is one. It's all about a networked organization being brought alive by what YOU can do -- not what you're told to do, or what you wish you could do. Autonomism in action!
Are you trying to imply something here, b.m?

Miles

[Nachie]

(S)he seems to be implying that it's all about a networked organization being brought alive by what YOU can do -- not what you're told to do, or what you wish you could do. (S)he seems to be implying that it is autonomism in action(!)

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 08:56 AM
(S)he seems to be implying that it's all about a networked organization being brought alive by what YOU can do -- not what you're told to do, or what you wish you could do. (S)he seems to be implying that it is autonomism in action(!)
Given the context of the thread so far, I'm not so sure of that. But anyway....

Miles

[Nachie]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 02:54 PM
Given the context of the thread so far, I'm not so sure of that. But anyway....
Are you trying to imply something here, c.l?

Nachie

[Brownfist]

I am not going to plug or diss any organization, group or party. As someone who has seen a revolution betrayed and has been involved in different movements over the years I just recommend you do two things 1) always be critical of yourself, your surroundings and the groups, organizations and individuals around you 2) read, and re-read.

I think CL recommended a pretty decent list of books, but I would also include Marx's Capital Vol.1,2 and 3. Frantz Fanon's Wretched of the Earth. Trotsky would also be really good to read, especially The Revolution Betrayed. Also, at the risk of have people attack me I would also suggest reading some Mao. Also, I dont think reading these books alone is useful, rather try to set up reading circles with different people, it can be RCP people that your are currently heanging out with, whoever it doesnt matter. Through discussion groups you can educate yourself, your "comrades", see how people think and/or decide whether these people you want to be around.

I dont think joining a group right now would be beneficial. I just think you should read and participate in different mass organizations, learn about what is going on around the world and in North America. So, also look into the history of the different groups people are looking into. Look at their programme's. Take a long hard critical look at these different groups.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by Nachie+Apr 15 2006, 10:24 AM--> (Nachie @ Apr 15 2006, 10:24 AM)
[email protected] 15 2006, 02:54 PM
Given the context of the thread so far, I'm not so sure of that. But anyway....
Are you trying to imply something here, c.l?

Nachie [/b]
Actually, yeah. I am (well, was) implying something.

I think that if barista.marxista has a criticism about the League -- perceived or otherwise -- I think s/he should be open and state it, not be coy about it and make little inferences that smack of whisper campaigns. I think s/he has a responsibility to be up-front about perceived differences, ask questions to clarify and/or confirm and/or dispell those differences, and then continue on.

Given the context of the thread, I read his/her comments as implying something about the League that is not the case. I would rather that s/he be open about such a perceived criticism than not. That way, the criticism can be answered.

Miles

[barista.marxista]

Given the context of the thread, I read his/her comments as implying something about the League that is not the case.

You recommended Lenin as introductory reading. I think my implication is obvious there.


That way, the criticism can be answered.

My criticism? FUCK YOU, Lennie.

RAANismo o muerte, siempre

[Nachie]

SHAZAM!

[FalceMartello]

Oh he gone fucked you up. Faccia di cazzo!!!

[RedCeltic]

I myself am a Marxist who is not a big fan of Mr. Lenin. However one of the books by him that were included in that list "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism" by IV Lenin, is in my opinion probably more relevant to today's world than many other Marxist writings. It is very helpful in understanding Globalization.

My advice to anyone interested in studying Marxism, or any other leftist ideology is to not fall into the hero worshiping trap so many seem to fall into. It makes you blind and ignorant. Keep in mind that you are not required by anyone to agree 100% with everything anyone tells you.

What the movement really needs are people who can think for themselves and not people who take what’s already been said and recite it like Holy Scripture. I’m also a firm believer in reading stuff you don’t agree with… in that way you know why they are wrong, and aren’t just saying so because someone told you they are.

[Nachie]

Ok but wait, for real:

barista suggests that this person check out a book, meanwhile it's no problem when the CL and FPM plug their organizations to him/her.

So then b.m. suggests RAAN and Miles takes it personally as if it was some big attack on the League. Why? He didn't say that about the FPM plug...

Plus, Miles insists that the League is "not Leninist", just "Lenin-friendly". Then he puts up a bunch of total Lennie nonsense like S&R for this newblood to read. Haughty nonsense.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 04:57 AM
You recommended Lenin as introductory reading. I think my implication is obvious there.
Doesn't make us "Leninist".
Lenin did have some good ideas, and some terrible ones.

Quite like how Anarchists acknowledge that Prodhun had good ideas, yet he respected privaye property.

[barista.marxista]

I myself am a Marxist who is not a big fan of Mr. Lenin. However one of the books by him that were included in that list "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism" by IV Lenin, is in my opinion probably more relevant to today's world than many other Marxist writings. It is very helpful in understanding Globalization.

Most relevant? Please: Lenin was a propagandist, which is why the imperialism of 1900 was not the last stage of capitalism. He was right on analyzing the way that stage was organized, but it hardly was the last. How has capitalism evolved? Read David Harvey's The Condition of Postmodernity. THAT is "more relevant to today's world than many other Marxist writings" to understand the workings of capitalism. Except for possibly Erik Olin Wright, or Toni Negri.


Quite like how Anarchists acknowledge that Prodhun had good ideas, yet he respected privaye property.

Yeah. That's why they don't recommend Proudhon as an introduction. But I'm not an anarchist.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 05:54 AM
Yeah. That's why they don't recommend Proudhon as an introduction.
It doesn't matter if its used for introduction or not, the point is that its used.
It would be hard not to include Lenin in Communist theory, afterall he lead the Russian Revolution, and its important to know how it all hapened.

And don't think of accusing me of being a Leninist.

All these Leninist witch hunts are counterproductive, and divert attention from the real issue.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by barista.marxista+Apr 15 2006, 11:57 PM--> (barista.marxista @ Apr 15 2006, 11:57 PM)You recommended Lenin as introductory reading. I think my implication is obvious there.[/b]

Oh, heavens to Betsy! I recommended The Eeee-Vil Lenin! Thought crime! Thought crime! You must be an awful authoritarian! Lenin must not be read! Lenin turned me into a newt! Burn the books! Burn them, I say!

If I say that I recommend reading Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations to anyone wanting to understand economics, does that make me a capitalist too? Schmuck!


Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 11:57 PM
My criticism? FUCK YOU, Lennie.

Necrophiliac.


[email protected] 15 2006, 11:57 PM
RAANismo o muerte, siempre

¡Comunismo o muerte! ¡Abajo a sectarianismo!

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 12:19 AM
Oh he gone fucked you up. Faccia di cazzo!!!
I feel like Ali fighting Joe Frasier: "Is that all you got?! My grandmama can hit harder than you!"

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 12:54 AM
Most relevant? Please: Lenin was a propagandist, which is why the imperialism of 1900 was not the last stage of capitalism. He was right on analyzing the way that stage was organized, but it hardly was the last. How has capitalism evolved? Read David Harvey's The Condition of Postmodernity. THAT is "more relevant to today's world than many other Marxist writings" to understand the workings of capitalism. Except for possibly Erik Olin Wright, or Toni Negri.
Now I get it. You're one of Heidegger's grandchildren. That explains everything. Now I know where you'll be when the revolution happens (hint: it won't be on the side of working people).

Miles

[Brownfist]

I think that this discussion has gotten quite silly. Despite what some people on this board think Lenin is an important theorist of global capitalism. One does not have to agree with him as many of you dont, however, telling people to not read him is just breeding ignorance. I think it would be irresponsible for anyone to assume that this new activist does not have enough brains to make his/her own critiques of Lenin and decide whether to accept Leninism or not. I think it would be far more responsible to recommend other texts which refute Lenin and offer other models of social organization than just state dont read Lenin. The same goes for any theorist whether they be Kautsky, Goldman, Proudhon, Bakunin, Plekhanov, Mao, Sison, Bhattarai etc. These kinds of silly debates are what make the Left as a whole marginal and ineffective.

[rebelworker]

Oy, this is turning into a dissapointing road to insult over nothing.

Before reppin y own org I suggest you check out this list its a pretty conclusive list of every left group in the US. I wouldnt recomend the vast majority of them but just so you know they are out there.

* African People's Socialist Party (APSP) auxiliary organization
* All-African People's Revolutionary Party (A-APRP)
* Alliance for Democracy added February 05
* Alliance Marxist-Leninist (North America)
* American Indian Movement - Grand Governing Council (AIM-GGC)
* American Indian Movement - International Federation of Autonomous Chapters (AIM-IFAC)
* Anarchist Communitarian Network
* Anarchist People of Color
* Arissa
* Atlantic Anarchist Circle, other page
* Barrio Union (Unión del Barrio)
* Black Autonomy Network of Community Organizers (BANCO) added February 05
* Black Radical Congress (BRC)
* Bring the Ruckus
* Committee for a Unified Independent Party (CUIP) / International Workers Party (IWP) unofficial
* Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS)
* Communist League added February 05
* Communist Party USA (CPUSA)
* Communist Voice Organization
* Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)
* Federation of Revolutionary Anarchist Collectives (FRAC)
* Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Fight Back] (FRSO)
* Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Freedom Road] (FRSO)
* Freedom Socialist Party (FSP)
* Great Plains Anarchist Network
* Green Party of the United States, other page
* Independent Progressive Politics Network (IPPN)
* Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)
* International Socialist Organization (ISO)
* International Communist Current periodical Internationalism
* Internationalist Group
* Internationalist Perspective
* Internationalist Workers' Group, other page
* Labor Party (LP)
* Labor Standard, mirror page
* Labor's Militant Voice, mirror page
* League for the Revolutionary Party (LRP)
* League of Revolutionaries for a New America (LRNA)
* Left Green Network
* Left Party
* Left Turn
* Liberty Union Party (LUP) added February 05
* Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM)
* Marxist-Leninist Organizer unofficial, added February 05
* National Black United Front (NBUF)
* New Democracy
* New Party
* News & Letters Committees
* Northeastern Federation of Anarchist Communists (NEFAC)
* Organizing Committee to form the Communist Party USA (Marxist-Leninist) unofficial, added February 05
* Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL)
* Peace and Freedom Party (PFP), periodical Partisan
* Progressive Labor Party (PLP), other page
* Progressive ProAction Party
* Ray O. Light unofficial added February 05
* Red and Anarchist Action Network
* Revolutionary Anti-authoritarians of Color (RACE)
* Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) updated December 05
* Revolutionary Workers League (RWL) added February 05
* Social Democrats USA (SDUSA)
* Socialist Action
* Socialist Alternative
* Socialist Equality Party (SEP), other page
* Socialist Labor Party (SLP)
* Socialist Organizer
* Socialist Party USA (SPUSA)
o Debs Tendency
o Direct Action Tendency added February 05
* Socialist Workers Organization (SWO) periodical Socialist Viewpoint
* Socialist Workers' Party (SWP) periodical Militant
* Solidarity
* South East Anarchist Network
* The Greens/Green Party USA
* The Spark
* Trotskyist Labor League (TLL)
* Truth
* United People's Party (La Raza Unida Party)
* United States Pacifist Party (USPP)
* Unity Organizing Committee (UOC) unofficial page
* US Marxist-Leninist Organization (USMLO) periodical Voice of Revolution
* Vermont Progressive Party
* Workers Action
* Workers Democracy Network
* Workers International League (WIL), youth organization
* Workers Party U.S.A.
* Worker's Socialist Party of the United States (WSP-US)
* Workers Solidarity Alliance (WSA)
* Workers World Party (WWP)
* Working Families Party (WFP)
* World Socialist Party of the United States (WSPUS)

Its from a web page calledbroadleft.org (http://www.broadleft.org/), defenitly a must check out for anyone serrious about left politics.

Having said that, depending on where you are located, I recomend checking out The Northeastern Federation of Anarchist Communists (NEFAC) (http://www.nefac.net).

We are just located in the northeast right now but are allied with a few other collectives and federations wth the hopes of an eventual continental fed. (Canada, US & Mexico).

We are close politically to both RAAN and CL, but, and this is coming from a memebr so take it with a grain of salt, bigger and more influential than both of them.

More anti lennenist than CL and more organized than RAAN.

We represent a branch of anti authoritarian communism that has been more alighned with anarchism than marxism(although we borrow heavily from bth).

For intro readings I recomend checking out the online materials at these two sites:
Zabalaza Anarchist Communist Federation (South Africa) (http://www.zabalaza.net/theory.htm)
Workers Solidarity Movement (Ireland) (http://struggle.ws/wsm/pdf.html)

Also Prole.info (http://www.prole.info/) is a very informative non sectraian antiauthoritarian communist site.

Have any more questions you can send me a personal message or Ill try and follow this discuaaion.

In Solidarity,
Dave

[violencia.Proletariat]

Anarchist-communists and platformists

http://nefac.net/

About the North Eastern Federation of Anarchist Communists (NEFAC)

http://nefac.net/node/83

[barista.marxista]

Lenin must not be read! Lenin turned me into a newt! Burn the books! Burn them, I say!

If I say that I recommend reading Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations to anyone wanting to understand economics, does that make me a capitalist too? Schmuck!

Actually, I believe my exact words were "He was right on analyzing the way that stage was organized, but it hardly was the last." I admitted Lenin was dead-on with describing the systemmatic workings of early-twentieth century imperialism, so obviously I'm not advocating burning his books. Infact, my criticism, I believe, was "Lenin was a propagandist, which is why the imperialism of 1900 was not the last stage of capitalism." Anyone who does not acknowledge that capitalism today is far more developed and works in entirely different ways than in 1915 blatantly rejects Marxist materialism. :P

I don't care if you read Lenin. I thought it was amusing that you spend so much time denying that the Communist League is Leninist, and then recommend three works by Lenin as introductory reading. :rolleyes: Be honest, or have you Lennies outright given up with that?

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 05:14 PM
I don't care if you read Lenin. I thought it was amusing that you spend so much time denying that the Communist League is Leninist, and then recommend three works by Lenin as introductory reading. :rolleyes: Be honest, or have you Lennies outright given up with that?
Silly little postmodernist, you understand nothing.

Let's look at the three books I put in there:

* Imperialism: The Latest Stage of Capitalism -- This is a book you see as useful. So, no strawman is applicable here.

* The State and Revolution -- This is the book that got Lenin accused of being an "anarchist". It advocates the "commune state" as an ad hoc body. It is also the book Lenin practically rejected a year after reading it.

* Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution -- This book is a personal choice, not one recommended by the League.

So, there you have it sports fans. This is what makes us "Lennies" -- a book that he himself sees as valuable and a book that was seen as "anarchist" by other Bolsheviks. Go figure.

BTW, about "Lennies": This is obviously inspired by the derogatory term for communists, "commies", used by reactionary bourgeois. Your class line is showing, barista. Not surprised, though. The postmodernist apple never falls far from the bourgeois tree.

Miles

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Brownfist
Despite what some people on this board think, Lenin is an important theorist of global capitalism.

I disagree with that evaluation. There was a time when his theory of imperialism was considered very important...but I think that time has passed.

The only reason to read Lenin now is from a historical standpoint...to understand the foundations of last century's movement.


One does not have to agree with him as many of you don't, however, telling people to not read him is just breeding ignorance.

Life is short and books are many; no one can "read everything". I wouldn't advise anyone to spend their time reading Lenin when there are many contemporary works that might be much more worthwhile in understanding modern capitalism "in the process of decay".

Of course that's a subjective opinion...and the recipient of such advice is always entitled to decide "who to listen to". :lol:

If they go ahead and read some Lenin, only to discover that it sounds like "another world", then my advice will be justified.


I think it would be far more responsible to recommend other texts which refute Lenin and offer other models of social organization then just state don't read Lenin.

You have a point, to be sure. But some things become so obsolete that refutation becomes kind of pointless in a way...except as an intellectual exercise.

Nothing wrong with that...but when recommending stuff to read, one usually hopes for more than that.

Put it another way, is it necessary for a each new revolutionary to recapitulate the whole history of revolutionary thought? After reading Marx, one "must" then read Kautsky, and Plekhanov, and Luxemburg, and Lenin, and Stalin, and Trotsky, and Mao, etc., etc., etc.??? And then all the critiques of the famous by the less famous?

If one wants to earn a "Ph.D." in "20th Century Revolutionary Thought", I suppose all that would be unavoidable.

But do we need to do that? :o


These kinds of silly debates are what makes the Left as a whole marginal and ineffective.

I disagree once more. What makes the "Left as a whole" marginal and ineffective is that we live in a period of reaction. When that changes, and it always does, we will still have "silly debates"...only there will be millions of people taking part in them.

And, I promise you, we won't look the least bit "marginal and ineffective". :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Brownfist]

Well I guess as someone who is pursuing my PhD in political theory and continental philosophy I guess I do have more time than most to read these texts. However, I do think that it is necessary to read these texts because they do give us insights into how the world works. Many individuals who current write contemporary works on global capitalism have either been influenced or have in response to Lenin's characterization of imperialism as the highest state of imperialim, thus I do believe that any educated activist must read Lenin.

I think it is important to read contemporary theoretical works, however, it is also important to read their predecessors. It results in a more meaningful debate. This is something that currently is lacked in the Left. For some reason, we activists, have fallen into the bourgeois lifestyle of anti-intellectualism. I think we do need to read these works, because they help us think through political action. Does one have to find limits and parameters of what to read and not read, of course. However, I do not think that the parameter can exclude fundamental texts. Should one read the complete collected works of Lenin, Marx or Engles probably not. But, specific theoretical texts are touchstones from which we can understand contemporary phenomenon.

[barista.marxista]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 06:19 PM
Silly little postmodernist, you understand nothing.
Just like your last presumptuive message claims I advocate burning Lenin's books, now you say I'm a postmodernist. I needn't even respond to these delusory accusations.


This is what makes us "Lennies" -- a book that he himself sees as valuable and a book that was seen as "anarchist" by other Bolsheviks.

Who the hell cares what other Bolsheviks called "State and Revolution"? It's inconsequential, because it was obvious that no real power was going to the Soviets. What Lenin wrote and what he did were two entirely different things, and only one of them counts in history. I can write that I think we should all be free -- it doesn't mean shit if I don't do something about it.


BTW, about "Lennies": This is obviously inspired by the derogatory term for communists, "commies", used by reactionary bourgeois. Your class line is showing, barista. Not surprised, though. The postmodernist apple never falls far from the bourgeois tree.

Yes, "Lennie" is a derogatory term for Leninists. And yes, in my class line is quite simply: fuck Leninists. If we don't take a militant stance against organized authoritarianism, the Left is never going to move past the shit we've been stuck in for the last century. Leninism is anachronistic, antiquated, and, in today's context, dangerous -- and that's why we fight it just as we fight fascism: tolerating none of its bullshit.


I think it would be far more responsible to recommend other texts which refute Lenin and offer other models of social organization then just state don't read Lenin.

Yes, and you've conveniently ignored my recommendations. I'll present some again:

Non-Leninist Marxism: A Philosophy of Revolution by Lenny Flank Jr. (available here (http://www.phillyrmc.net/nonlenin.html) for free)
The Condition of Postmodernity: An Inquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change by David Harvey
Reading 'Capital' Politically by Harry Cleaver (available here (http://libcom.org/library/reading-capital-politically-cleaver) for free)
Books for Burning by Toni Negri

I'd say of particular relevance from the above recommendations (respectively):

- "SIX: Critique of Leninism" from Flank (particularly focused on Lenin's interpretation of materialism)
- "Part II: The political-economic transformation of late twentieth-century capitalism" from Harvey (explaining exactly how capitalism has evolved beyond Lenin's definition of imperialism)
- "Chapter One: Introduction" from Cleaver (which gives an overview of the evolution of Marxism, and pinpoints the methodological failures of the various schools)
- "Domination and Sabotage: On the Marxist Method of Social Transformation" from Negri (the roots of the Autonomist critique)

That covers the critique of Leninism both economically and socially, as well as explaining what comes next. Seeing as I've read Lenin and understand the Leninist paradigm, you've got some serious reading ahead of you! Especially if you're calling me and autonomism "postmodern"! :lol:

EDIT: I mistakenly attributed that last quote to Miles. I apologize for its hostile nature, though I still think C.L needs to read all those things before he opens his mouth again.

[Brownfist]

barista.marxista I dont know why your attacking me. I am agreeing with you! I am not ignoring or arguing that you have or havent provided critiques of Lenin. I am arguing with others that suggest that Lenin not be included in a reading list for new members of the movement.

As for people calling one another "postmodernist", what is this the 90's? No one on this board has said anything remotely postmodern. Dont throw around terms if you dont know what they mean!

[barista.marxista]

Sorry man, meant that list toward Miles, not you. Mixed up the quotes. No hostilities.

[LoneRed]

We are close politically to both RAAN and CL, but, and this is coming from a memebr so take it with a grain of salt, bigger and more influential than both of them.

More anti lennenist than CL and more organized than RAAN.



what the fuck is this hogwash, oh an organization of anarchists and communists, ahah what a joke, bigger? this is the first time ive heard of this petty-bourg idealist movement. more influential? what are you running the govt, running candidates? what is so influential about a bunch of anarchists running around spouting anti-lenin propaganda, most of the time not having read a lick of lenin, nor correclty understanding his actions, seems awfully similar to those morons over at RAAN.


ps. its "leninist" not "lennenist"

[LoneRed]

by the way, if you say lenin should not be on the reading is, it will suffice to say that bakunin or proudhon should be nowhere near the reading list, nothing like a bunch of aristocratic artistic fools, eh

[Nachie]

Has anyone noticed that amidst all these shenanigans, the person who actually originated the thread has probably been scared away? Not that I blame them - I'd do the same if I modestly asked for some introductory reading and you threw the 18th Brumaire at me!

It's such a shame, too... because the Communist League had some great .pdf files for them to distribute :rolleyes:

[More Fire for the People]

Yes, because CommunistLeague maintained a rational debating point as long as he could while be attacked by petty-bourgeois — possibly crypto-fascist, most likely useless — self-rigtheous teenagers? CL and others tried to contribute to this topic while Nachie and barista."marxista" maintained a line of arrogance and terroristic writing.

Now if the original poster is still around, I have two suggestions for him:
The Civil War in France by Karl Marx
The History of the Russian Revolution by Leon Trotsky

[Nachie]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 01:43 AM
by the way, if you say lenin should not be on the reading is, it will suffice to say that bakunin or proudhon should be nowhere near the reading list, nothing like a bunch of aristocratic artistic fools, eh

by the way, if you say lenin should not be on the reading is, it will suffice to say that bakunin or proudhon should be nowhere near the reading list, nothing like a bunch of aristocratic artistic fools, eh
not a single anti-leninist on this thread recommended either of those. in fact b.m. explicitly said that recommending proudhon as intro reading is just as bad as recommending lenin.

NEFAC has been incredibly influential to the anarchist and lib marxist movement on the east coast, though i believe them to be past their prime except for in canada.

speaking of canada, rebelworker's native language is not english and it's a sign of how riled up you are that you've resorted to criticizing him on it.

NEFAC is anarcho-communist, not an "organization of anarchists and communists". they also do not focus any particular amount of attention on specifically anti-Leninist campaigns. we maintain good individual relations but technically they're very very different from RAAN, especially in structure.

But thank you, LoneRed, for totally exposing the outright Leninism of the League.

[Nachie]

Exactly what was the rational debating point kept up by Miles (communist league)?

"barista".marxista came in and suggested a book and RAAN, and then Miles decided to take personal offense and create an enemy of the league out of thin air just so he didn't have to put off debating us any longer.

and why are you trying to use "teenager" like it's some sort of insult?

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 01:44 AM
It's such a shame, too... because the Communist League had some great .pdf files for them to distribute :rolleyes:
Wow you guys are sectarian jerks.
Well, you brought this on yourselves, I was gonna keep quiet to keep my vision of working together. Oh well.

I'd rather distribute pdf files, than be a vegan and pelt EGGS at Ralph Nader :lol: :D ! Did you make that useless enviro-yuppie cry?
Great way to introduce potential Communists to the network; why explain anything, just throw eggs. Quite like how you guys debate.

Yes we distribute the pdfs on our own because we aren't based off a record label, and don't have a distribution network. You caitor to the anarchists because they're in your consumer base, how quaint.

[barista.marxista]

Originally posted by EL KABLAMO+Apr 16 2006, 09:04 PM--> (EL KABLAMO @ Apr 16 2006, 09:04 PM)
[email protected] 17 2006, 01:44 AM
It's such a shame, too... because the Communist League had some great .pdf files for them to distribute :rolleyes:
Wow you guys are sectarian jerks.
Well, you brought this on yourselves, I was gonna keep quiet to keep my vision of working together. Oh well.

I'd rather distribute pdf files, than be a vegan and pelt EGGS at Ralph Nader :lol: :D ! Did you make that useless enviro-yuppie cry?
Great way to introduce potential Communists to the network; why explain anything, just throw eggs. Quite like how you guys debate.[/b]
So wait, if you guys call us "just anarchists," you're being Marxist? And if we refuse to work with Leninists (who for the last 100 years have time and time again crushed working-class self-organization), we're sectarian. HAH! :lol:

And, shit, I'd rather pelt Ralph Nader with eggs to show our communities do not tolerate bourgeois politicians and their shit, than focus on selling our newspaper. :redstar2000:

[Nachie]

Bla bla bla more "vegan-scare" tactics.

You obviously have no idea what happened with Ralph Nader, the several-years long involvement of RAAN with the space he had come into, OR the communique released that explained very clearly why the action was taken. And at what point has anybody suggested that as a way to "introduce new communists to the movement"?

And how are we "based on a record label" when Poisoned Candy records only affiliated with RAAN late last year? Please note the network has been around since 2002, so I guess for three years we were "based off" Poisoned Candy without them knowing it?

You don't have a distribution network because you're a myth of the WWW.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 02:10 AM
So wait, if you guys call us "just anarchists," you're being Marxist?

I didn't say you were "just anarchists", I said you cater to them because of your record label thing. Theres nothing wrong with being an anarchist. But theres everything wrong with being a sectarian shit head.


And, shit, I'd rather pelt Ralph Nader with eggs to show our communities do not tolerate bourgeois politicians and their shit, than focus on selling our newspaper. :redstar2000:

We don't sell our newspaper.

People need to get the message clearly, throwing eggs doesn't demonstrate that message. If that note that was left wasn't found, then people may thing your were republicans, or anything for that matter.

Doesn't throwing eggs contradict your vegan message?

[LoneRed]

I responded to the baseless claims that the NEFAC was more influential and bigger than the RAAN and CL. I dont know about the RAAN, but as you can see my dislike of that organization, i can at least speak about the CL. As ive seen more done in the years its been a party, then i have seen in many other parties whole lifetimes, as well as the SP, which ive been in for 5 years, or so.. I know you said dont read proudhon at first, I was merely stating that if people shouldnt read one persons work (Lenin), then what should they read, its a slippery slope,does that mean no trotsky, no mao, no gramsci, etc... even if i dont agree with what some of these figures said reading them wont hurt ya. Also if they are discounting Lenin, on his "absurd" theories or what they believe, than they shouldnt have people read such people as bakunin or any capitalist "intellectual" or anyone for that matter, it all just leads down the wrong road.

[barista.marxista]

RAAN has no official line on veganism, or punk-rock distributions. Because each action under the RAAN acronym is autonomous, we do not have a "line." In fact, if you actually read the Principles & Direction, you'd come across a section saying just that about veganism. The distro in Montana is part of a punk-rock label, because the people who organized that distro were part of that particular label -- not because every RAANista is a punk. You obviously cannot even conceive of any kind of organization that is not dictated by some central committee.

[Nachie]

LoneRed seems to imply that any tactic of confrontation other than mass-pamphletting with a carefully-manicured "official position" paper is invalid because it might leave some room for ideological doubt? that action wasn't about changing the minds of the green party militants who had come to see their hero speak in his dreadful monotone, it was about kicking that asshole politician the fuck out of that neighborhood. and the RAANistas won.

plus it is my impression that there was precious little chance of "nobody finding" the Nader communique.

and for the last time, everybody in RAAN is not vegan!

[rebelworker]

For the record though I speak french english is my native language, i just dont spell very well, school was never my thing and I didnt read alot till later in life.

As for the hostility lonered, i think i said that I was politically close to the CL, I have had personal corespondance with miles and would like to meet some of you guys to talk at some point.

As for the Size and influence of nefac, mabey I am in a bubble here in quebec where the organisation is much more influencial than in other areas of the continent but to say that it is larger and more influencial than the CL and RAAN is not a snub to you guys I just think honestly in the Northeast were we exist, and in the rest of the world were we have contacts(mostly Europe and latin America) this is most defenitly the truth.

Our international news page gets 3000 hits a day, not alot but Im sure more than RAAN and CL combined.

As for nefac being over the hill, I think thats a bit of an overstatement.
NEFAC is not growing interms of membership numbers right now, we are growing in influence in a layer of militants not in the revolutionary "scene". There are two very important reasons for this. First, we blew up around the peaks of the antiglobalisation and anti facist movemnts, neither of which are very active right now. Secondly we work primerily in labour and community anti poverty organising right now, these are much longer term projects than anti glob or anti war protests, they take alot longer to do, are much more taxing and the people invloved have alot more to loose.

I just lost my job, my livelyhood, defending my rights and the rights of my fellow workers. Revolutionary politics is not something you can just talk about freely in a factory.

In the US our membership has stagnated in most regions, this has alot to do with the fact that many of our core organisers are doing 14 hour a day 7 day a week labour organising and have no time right now for too much nefac work.

The political landscape as it stands right now is not such that there are lots of people in the labour movement turning towards revolutionary politics, we are focused on building the workers movement right now, one of my friends and comrades was deported to Egypt two weeks ago, mobilizing for this cuts into my nefac work.

I would argue that you may not have heard of us cause your not in the same millue as us. And I would also argue that when the mainstream labour movemnt becomes more radicalised we will see who as been doing the shitwork at the expense of our organisation and who is respected among militants in the trenches.

Again I never said anything against either RAAN or the CL, I just stated what I still beleive to be the truth, we are more organised than RAAN( a fact that the members I have spoken too would not disagree with) and that we are less influenced by leninist politicds than the CL and from the posts of some of your members on this board I also think that noone would refute this.

I also think that even in our meager numbers right now, if you include the other regional groupings and collectives that are affiliated with us in North Amercia(nevrmind the world) we are larger in both membership and influence than either of these two other groups(who i hope to work with in the future).

Dave

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 02:11 AM
You obviously have no idea what happened with Ralph Nader, the several-years long involvement of RAAN with the space he had come into, OR the communique released that explained very clearly why the action was taken. And at what point has anybody suggested that as a way to "introduce new communists to the movement"?
You are oh so proud that you egged Nader, and spray painted an RCP bookstore, that really got proletarians to rise up didn't it?

So no one has gotten everyone to rise-up, but I don't think action should be focused on eggs and spraypaint.


And how are we "based on a record label" when Poisoned Candy records only affiliated with RAAN late last year? Please note the network has been around since 2002, so I guess for three years we were "based off" Poisoned Candy without them knowing it?

Just because I was wrong here, it still doesn't excuse your for being an immature sectarian.


And how are we "based on a record label" when Poisoned
You don't have a distribution network because you're a myth of the WWW.
Actually we are a distribution network, we just dont have it quaintly cutout for us with help from pette-bourgoeis friends at the record company.

If you can say were a myth of the WWW, well you're just a name since ANYONE can join. If anyone can join how are you to know your memberships descisions, how can your founders be held accountable?

[Nachie]

rebelworker is definitely right, particularly in saying that to the larger international anarchist movement, (Europe and Latin America) NEFAC is seen as the best point of reference for north america.

rebelworker, when you say the NEFAC "international news" site gets 3,000 hits a day, are you refering to anarkismo, or something on nefac.net itself?

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by barista.marxista
I'm going to plug the Red & Anarchist Action Network (RAAN) here. If you're checking out groups to be involved with, this is one. It's all about a networked organization being brought alive by what YOU can do -- not what you're told to do, or what you wish you could do. Autonomism in action

No Miles didnt take offense to BMs misgvings about a book, as you can see in the bold font s/he seems to imply that everyother organization is undemocratic.

I think offense can be taken to that.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 17 2006, 02:34 AM


So no one has gotten everyone to rise-up, but I don't think action should be focused on eggs and spraypaint.
Neither do I... it's actually only people like you who can't seem to take the attention off these one-shot "propaganda of the deed" type activities.


Just because I was wrong here, it still doesn't excuse your for being an immature sectarian.
No but it does expose your complete lack of knowledge regarding the network (even though you would have avoided the mistakes just by looking over our public history!) and these desperate attempts to find things wrong with us.


Actually we are a distribution network, we just dont have it quaintly cutout for us with help from pette-bourgoeis friends at the record company.
Actually it's neither a "company" nor "pette-bourgeois". It's a totally-DIY operation that does not turn a profit. The majority of our distribution network is in the form of other autonomous collectives with copy scam hookups and things of that nature. You're trying to make it look like we own SONY, but the reality is it's people silkscreening stuff in the basement on their own time because of their own dedication. You're just sad because you can't fuck with that.


If you can say were a myth of the WWW, well you're just a name since ANYONE can join.
Yeah? Well you're not coming to my birthday party!


If anyone can join how are you to know your memberships descisions, how can your founders be held accountable?
The founders aren't the "leaders" of this process or even its main contributors at this point. Many aren't even in the network anymore. Why would anybody other than a verticalist or hero-worshipper want to hold them accountable for anything?

The inability of any Leninist to even come close to grasping the way RAAN functions is really the best part about it...

[rebelworker]

Sorry Anarchismo, which is turning into a coalition of platformist groups, kind of the beginings of our own international tendancy.

The nefac site get alot less than this, in quebec I think we get about 1000 seperate users a month. This is a rough estimate based on articles read. We distribute 3000 newspapers in the province per issue(bi monthly right now).

In montreal at a well oraganised event we can get out a couple hundred people.

On one speaking tour we did three nights , three neignborhoods, with about a total of 400 people.

Again no offence but I would be surprised if the CL or RAAN could pull this off.

At mayday last year the anarchist contingant(co organised by nefac and another group) pulled out 4-500 people. The faction of the Workers Communist party of Iran present marched with us. Again although numerically small we still have considerable influence in some areas.

In Solidarity,
Dave

[LoneRed]

nowhere have i said anything about actions that might lead to ideological doubt, I was merely stating, that if one is to tell people not to read a particular persons work where does that end. its a slippery slope of a mess, It had nothing to do with certain "ideologically dogmatic" actions, you once again fail to know what i was talking about. Rebelworker, I do know that your claims, as well as other claims can be true in certain areas, the problem was, is that you didnt differentiate, you just said, on a whole it is more influential, ya it might be more influential in your area, where the league doesnt currently have a local, but that doesnt mean its more influential, on the grand scheme of things, I for no second doubt your activism or what you accomplish, but i can speak about the League, and ive seen, and embarked on and accomplished much more in this group than i have anywhere else, or seen anywhere else.

I nor i doubt miles, would mind talking with you or other members at some point, as long as their is common ground. this could be a large misunderstanding or lack of communication as it seems to be right now, but some of your claims included blanket statements.


the CL is not more influenced by leninist politics. in fact many members dont subscribe to the marxism-leninism that is rampant, if members have a liking for lenin, they arent taken abast and believe everything he said as dead on, I personally am not a leninist but some of his views are right on point. one cant deny that, even though redstar will. Just because some members or members you see on this message board hold a liking for leninist ideas does not mean the organization is more influenced by leninist politics, as reading our principles and position papers would clearly show.

[anomaly]

Originally posted by LoneRed
one cant deny that, even though redstar will.
What an odd thing to say.

Anyway, about CL, my understanding is that CL is 'Lenin-friendly', and, by extension, 'Leninist friendly'.

That is, are there Leninists in CL? You bet your ass there are. But is it a Leninist organization? No. Well, not yet. The League is really open to anyone who supports the idea of a so-called "workers' republic".

So it does have some Leninist influence, that much is sure. But it has, thus far, resisted any major change, so calling the League 'Leninist' seems incorrect to me. It may become Leninist, and I'm sure some of the members would like to see this, but right now, CL is best defined by the 'principles' listed on the site.

Essentially, CL just fights for a workers' republic, and anyone who wants that can join.

I generally support NEFAC and RAAN and I think the aims of these groups are rather similar (they're both anarchist, after all). The organization of the two is, however, quite different.

Which of the two listed above is 'bigger'? Well, I don't think we have any way of knowing. See, RAAN doesn't have any 'official membership'--it's a network. All members are autonomous.

Some anarchists like an RAAN-like organization; some like NEFAC. Either way, I think anyone in RAAN looks at NEFAC members as comrades, and vis-versa. It's just differences in preferences. To steal from an anarchist banner, "some of us like olives, some do not." :P

Anyway, as far as what's good to read, I reccomend RS2K's site (easy reading...it's refreshing after reading the Victorian style of Marx), this message board (amidst all the arguments, there's a lot of info), and I personally liked Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme. That has a lot of basic info on Marxism.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 02:46 AM
Neither do I... it's actually only people like you who can't seem to take the attention off these one-shot "propaganda of the deed" type activities.


No I just think they're stupid. Don't kid yourself Captain Hero.



No but it does expose your complete lack of knowledge regarding the network (even though you would have avoided the mistakes just by looking over our public history!) and these desperate attempts to find things wrong with us.

I did read through your history, how do you think I found out about your stunt with Nader.I just swimmed through it, because all I saw were these stupid spaypaint and eggs type deal, oh and the occasional gig in someones living room. Maybe you should add more theorectically, and intellectually stimulating things.


Actually it's neither a "company" nor "pette-bourgeois".

Its a means of production, a small one, and they sell the commodities; therefore they who run it and OWN it are pette-bourgoeis.


Yeah? Well you're not coming to my birthday party!

Wow, how clever. What an amazing response! My goose is COOKED!


The founders aren't the "leaders" of this process or even its main contributors at this point. Many aren't even in the network anymore. Why would anybody other than a verticalist or hero-worshipper want to hold them accountable for anything?

They who are knowst to you most make up the policy. they who are farthest away are harder to hear.

Actually verticalists didn't want anyone to be held accountable, much Stalins Russia.

[Nachie]

ya it might be more influential in your area, where the league doesnt currently have a local, but that doesnt mean its more influential, on the grand scheme of things
nice implication (my emphasis)

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 03:11 AM
That is, are there Leninists in CL? You bet your ass there are. But is it a Leninist organization? No. Well, not yet. The League is really open to anyone who supports the idea of a so-called "workers' republic".
I can't claim that Leninists will degenerate the organization due to the fact that objective circumstances will be different, but degeneration is a risk in any organization.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 03:17 AM
nice implication (my emphasis)
To deny that there are more influences of organizations in particular areas is totally wrong.

[Nachie]

anomaly: I am 100% sure that NEFAC has more "participants" than RAAN at this time.

EL KABLAMO: Yeah, I guess we're pretty petit-bourgeois. You win. Whatever.

As if we owned the machines pressing the vinyl, or something?

[barista.marxista]

Yeah, the DIY kids silk-screening in a basement are petty-bourgeois. But the Communist League's printers running off their copies of "Working People's Advocate" are democratically controlled by the workers! :rolleyes:

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 03:37 AM
Yeah, the DIY kids silk-screening in a basement are petty-bourgeois. But the Communist League's printers running off their copies of "Working People's Advocate" are democratically controlled by the workers! :rolleyes:
By that logic you should be able to have access to the RAAN site and rewrite everything if you wanted, and further more anyone who wishes to contribute to WPA can do so. Further more we copy the WPA off the site, print a copy, then take it to a xerox machine, and make more copies.

Does the small shop owner at point in trime not rent his shop?
Hes still Petty-bourgeois.

What did you hope to accomplish through this rediculous little flame war?

Can someone close this thread?

[barista.marxista]

The only stuff on the RAAN site is the bare-bones, what-you-agree-with-to-be-part-of-RAAN jazz. And anyone in RAAN can publish any writings on the site in the Text Library. So, yeah, RAANistas can control what goes up on the site.

And, um, we weren't the ones calling you petty-bourgeoisie. So what were you hoping to accomplish with your flamewar?

No need to close the thread. I'm out, yall. ;)

[вор в законе]

We made some impression to our newbie. No wonder he didn't post again. :lol:

One step forward, two steps back. Keep up the good work comrades !! :D

[anomaly]

Originally posted by Red Brigade
No wonder he didn't post again.
I think he left because he got fed up with the way things were going. If I were him, I might have done the same thing.

If you want to consider that a 'victory', well, whatever.

[YSR]

(Irrelevent post)

Sorry comrades, I forgot there was a 2nd and 3rd page before posting.

[anomaly]

I believe it was "Property Is Theft" to be exact.

But yea. Proudhon asked "What is Property?" The answer?--"Property is Theft."

EDIT: This was an answer to a deleted question from the post above^^^

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by barista.marxista+Apr 16 2006, 08:10 PM--> (barista.marxista @ Apr 16 2006, 08:10 PM)Just like your last presumptuive message claims I advocate burning Lenin's books, now you say I'm a postmodernist. I needn't even respond to these delusory accusations.[/b]

Let's see, you wrote this not too far above:


barista.marxista
I mistakenly attributed that last quote to Miles. I apologize for its hostile nature, though I still think C.L needs to read all those things before he opens his mouth again.

Fuck you, too.

Miles

[YSR]

Righto. Then I realized what a foolish flamewar of a thread I'd walked into and backed out before I lit my pants on fire.

I think you guys have moved far beyond debating your organizations' usefulness to class struggle and are mostly just flaming at each other. Just an observation.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 09:03 PM
"barista".marxista came in and suggested a book and RAAN, and then Miles decided to take personal offense and create an enemy of the league out of thin air just so he didn't have to put off debating us any longer.
I never took "personal offense", Nachie. Not at all. Just because some people can't discern between personal and political does not mean we all do. I responded to barista by asking if he was implying something. He answered yes, and launched into a strawman argument. The rest, as they say, is history.

But I will also say that EL KABLAMO is right, you really have shown yourselves to be a bunch of sectarian pricks. I should have figured it was going to happen; all the signs were there. I just want people here to remember who approached whom in a comradely way, and who responded like a bunch of spoiled brats.

Someday, if you children grow up and get real jobs, you'll learn the value of organization in the face of capitalism's attacks. Until then:... Party on, Wayne! Party on, Garth!

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 09:17 PM
You don't have a distribution network because you're a myth of the WWW.
Tell that to the Delphi workers, Nachie. Tell that to the people of the Lower Ninth Ward in New Orleans. Tell that to the immigrant workers we're working with organizing for May 1.

Do you only open your mouth to change feet now, Nachie?

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by Nachie+Apr 16 2006, 09:34 PM--> (Nachie @ Apr 16 2006, 09:34 PM)LoneRed seems to imply that any tactic of confrontation other than mass-pamphletting with a carefully-manicured "official position" paper is invalid because it might leave some room for ideological doubt? that action wasn't about changing the minds of the green party militants who had come to see their hero speak in his dreadful monotone, it was about kicking that asshole politician the fuck out of that neighborhood. and the RAANistas won.[/b]

So, it was all about you boys thumping your ... chests ... and feeling good about yourselves. Ugh!


[email protected] 16 2006, 09:34 PM
and for the last time, everybody in RAAN is not vegan!

And not everyone in the League is a Leninst. But that doesn't stop you from calling us "Lennies", does it?

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 09:52 PM
it's actually only people like you who can't seem to take the attention off these one-shot "propaganda of the deed" type activities.
"People like you" ... workers. Go figure.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 16 2006, 11:22 PM
We made some impression to our newbie. No wonder he didn't post again. :lol:
Hopefully, the comrade read the first few posts before our "propagandists of the deed" came in did another of their deeds ... on the floor.

Miles

[anomaly]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague
But I will also say that EL KABLAMO is right, you really have shown yourselves to be a bunch of sectarian pricks.
Oh come on Miles. Just because one RAANista was giving you a hard time, all RAANistas are sectarian pricks? Isn't this extreme generalization sextarian in and of itself?

I think Nachie and BM are very anti-Leninist. And for good reason. So they react strongly against any organization they perceive to be Leninist. And for good reason. Maybe they're wrong about CL, but calling them sectarian pricks won't convince them. :angry:


So, it was all about you boys thumping your ... chests ... and feeling good about yourselves. Ugh!
Actually, I think the reason was to 'kick that politician fuck' out of the neighborhood. And why not? These 'professional politicians' should be openly opposed everywhere.


"People like you" ... workers. Go figure.
That's not what was meant. Calm down Miles. You think this shit is going to make them like CL any more?

[Nachie]

BEST THREAD EVAR

[LoneRed]

i find it quite funny how your organization is so very anti-leninist, but from what ive read and seen, your approach is completely naive,childish, and immature, using such a strong political photograph and turning it to fit your own means, its a disgrace, if you particular members dont agree with it, kudos, but that is just bogus, i havent encountered any RAANers who have have actually read what lenin had to say, or know what his actions were, apart from listening to what the bourgeois had to say on the matter, the arguments are sounding very western capitalistic to say the least.

and it is quite doubtful that the CL would turn into a "leninist" organization, a lot of members respect lenin, or are marxist-leninist, but none that i know of want the CL to become another run of the mill leninist organization. That was why the CL was created to fight the sectarianism that exists in many other parties, and you all are just falling down that line with excluding leninists. As for your organization or group or network or what have you, the process of joining is quite ambiguous, so say if you have those from the petty-bourgeois class come in, thats fine i guess? let them foul up your organization even more, we in the CL are staying well clear of that nonsense

[Nachie]

sweet.

[вор в законе]

Originally posted by anomaly+Apr 17 2006, 04:29 AM--> (anomaly @ Apr 17 2006, 04:29 AM)
Red Brigade
No wonder he didn't post again.
I think he left because he got fed up with the way things were going. If I were him, I might have done the same thing.

If you want to consider that a 'victory', well, whatever.[/b]
Your ideological myopia doesn't let you see that that is exactly what I implied in that post with that sarcastic comment.

Thank you for validating it comrade. :D

[rebelworker]

Im still trying to figue out how it all happened...

Serriously guys for two groups who are so politically close in the grand scheme of things this got really out of hand, probably scared off a newbie, lates try and keep things a bit more comradely.

Mabey its telling on the sad state of the left that this decended into insults over nothing so quikly...

If i came off as arrogant Im sorry,i think I tried to have a honest debate about the state of the three orgs involved, I dont like to brag about nefac but I am proud of the work we have done.

Both the CL and RAAN sounds like they could use some more honest self criticism and be more open to the critiques of others.

[barista.marxista]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague+Apr 16 2006, 11:45 PM--> (CommunistLeague @ Apr 16 2006, 11:45 PM) Now, if I can be a "Lennie" for recommending a couple of books by Lenin, you can be a postmodernist for recommending postmodernist authors in such a way. [/b]
And if you had done your homework (by even looking up the description of the book on Amazon!), you'd see the book is not written by a postmodernist at all. It is a Marxist critique of postmodernism, focusing on how the cultural trend is the expression of the compression of space and time as a result the evolution of capitalism through the Fordist and Post-fordist eras. As I just fucking said, the second part of the book is what is vital to the Marxist understanding of Twentieth Century capitalism, as it explicitly explains how capitalism has averted crisis through new dispersions of overaccumulation, in ways contradictory to Lenin's theory of imperialism. So, again, you're making delusory accusations by blatantly showing you're even too fucking lazy to find out what the book is about, let alone read it and expand outside of your narrow little box.

So go fuck yourself.


LoneRed
from what ive read and seen, your approach is completely naive,childish, and immature

If you think RAAN's approach is focused on RevLeft, then you're delusional. It's absurd that if you argue something here, people say you're full of shit because it's a forum, but if you don't bother, they say you're not willing to defend your ideas.

I'd much rather choose the latter. See you in the streets, comrades.

[Led Zeppelin]

This is ridiculous, "barista.marxista" is comparing Leninists with fascists, a typical petty-bourgeois accusation, not even anarchists dare cross that line!

Oh, and in the case of State and Revolution, it seems to me that most people forgot this important passage:

"All officials, without exception, elected and subject to recall at any time, their salaries reduced to the level of ordinary "workmen's wages" — these simple and "self-evident" democratic measures, while completely uniting the interests of the workers and the majority of the peasants, at the same time serve as a bridge leading from capitalism to socialism. These measures concern the reorganization of the state, the purely political reorganization of society; but, of course, they acquire their full meaning and significance only in connection with the "expropriation of the expropriators" either bring accomplished or in preparation, i.e., with the transformation of capitalist private ownership of the means of production into social ownership."
Italics added.

As you can see, in the last passage Lenin was referring to the "purely political reorganization of society" only "in connection with the expropriation of the expropriators", or as he later clarifies; "with the transformation of capitalist private ownership of the means of production into social ownership".

Which serious person here can claim that the capitalist private means of production in the Soviet Union were completely transformed into social ownership? Have we forgotten the NEP? Have we forgotten the leasing of mines and such to foreign capitalist corporations? Have we forgotten the "tax in kind"?

Lenin was no fool, he understood perfectly that without the material conditions for socialism his State and Revolution type of state could not last for more than a month.

[sapho]

Cmon people. We are all revolutionaries with different opinions about who said what. Lets compromise and save our energy to fight the real enemy out there: Capitalism. :ph34r:

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 12:53 PM
If you think RAAN's approach is focused on RevLeft, then you're delusional. It's absurd that if you argue something here, people say you're full of shit because it's a forum, but if you don't bother, they say you're not willing to defend your ideas.

I'd much rather choose the latter. See you in the streets, comrades.
Well you're the one implying that your approach is based of rev-left.

All we saw is that you plugged RAAN, then added a RAAN link to your signature, shortly after that you tried to act like you were a badass.
Its seems like thats your mentallity of your movement as a whole.

Gee with RAAN I could plug, sign, and join all in one day, like you did!

But I wouldn't waste my time, because it's pathetic.

[KC]

EDIT: Fuck you guys.




:wub:

[Nachie]

haha awesome

EL KABLAMO: Actually, b.m. (what silly initials hehe) "joined" RAAN after a major organizing drive revolving around a weekend of workshops that included the first north american screening of a blacklisted documentary from venezuela, a parkour workshop that lasted several hours, and an open forum on the nature of the network in which a local member of NEFAC and some other groups all participated openly and with wonderful results.

We don't take revleft too seriously because we don't have to. It sure is easy to have a bit of fun on it, though!

[LoneRed]

i was referring to your groups attempts at making communism mere childplay by intertwining it with your group. If this is how anti-capitalists on the left are going to appear i will have no part in it. granted if you get things done, your method of showing your group to others is as i said before quite immature. there could also be fine members of RAAN <_< but as of yet, it seems most are too involved in the sectarianism of the movement Also referring to that propaganda poster RAAN has on their site...


Good Day

[Nachie]

i was referring to your groups attempts at making communism mere childplay by intertwining it with communism.
I assume you meant "by intertwining it with anarchism". What chauvinism&#33; And then we&#39;re called sectarians even though you so obviously have no respect for at least 50% of the network - why would there have been a reason for us to work together in the first place?

Based on nothing you&#39;ve also accused us of never having read Lenin&#39;s works and only parroting what the bourgeoisie has to say about him. meh. If somebody doesn&#39;t agree with Lenin, they OBVIOUSLY didn&#39;t really understand what the genius meant, I guess.

A majority of the Marxists in RAAN are ex-Lennies themselves, (myself included) and we have every reason to fight like hell so that silly ideology never sees the light of day again.


Also referring to that propaganda poster RAAN has on their site...
You mean the one that cracks me up every time?

EDIT ADD TO REFLECT LONERED&#39;S EDITS:


granted if you get things done, your method of showing your group to others is as i said before quite immature.
Only on revleft. And even here we&#39;ve happily engaged in all sorts of more "mature" discussion on those threads that weren&#39;t swarming with Lennie-lubbers. Sadly even those rarely last long before some vanguardist runs in crying that they feel excluded.

We insist on having fun with RAAN, using it as a vehicle for humor, because we insist on doing the same with the revolution.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by anomaly+Apr 17 2006, 12:44 AM--> (anomaly &#064; Apr 17 2006, 12:44 AM)Oh come on Miles. Just because one RAANista was giving you a hard time, all RAANistas are sectarian pricks? Isn&#39;t this extreme generalization sextarian in and of itself?[/b]

Well, it&#39;s not just one, it&#39;s two -- and the other one, Nachie, is the one that other RAANers seem to defer to when someone asks about their network. They can hide behind the line, "Oh, we&#39;re all just a bunch of individuals", for so long. After a while, when you hear virtually the same misrepresentation and slander from every member of that group, you can conclude that this is their viewpoint.

If there are other RAANers on RL that don&#39;t agree with Nachie and barista, then they should speak up.


Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 12:44 AM
I think Nachie and BM are very anti-Leninist. And for good reason. So they react strongly against any organization they perceive to be Leninist. And for good reason. Maybe they&#39;re wrong about CL, but calling them sectarian pricks won&#39;t convince them. :angry:

Honestly, anomaly, I don&#39;t think anything would convince them. It seems they made up their minds the second they read that letter I wrote to you about the differences between the League and RAAN. Because we don&#39;t symbolically put a gun to Lenin&#39;s head makes us "Lennies" in their eyes.

All of the letters, comments and such that are meant to clarify our stance mean little to them, from what I can see.


Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 12:44 AM
Actually, I think the reason was to &#39;kick that politician fuck&#39; out of the neighborhood. And why not? These &#39;professional politicians&#39; should be openly opposed everywhere.

I agree that people like Nader should be opposed everywhere, but tossing food doesn&#39;t do that. If you want to oppose a "professional politician", do what a couple of IWPA comrades of ours did in 2000: They cornered Nader and his "Labor for Nader" supporters at the Labor Day march in Detroit and turned him out, politically speaking, causing those working people who were supporting him to throw down their signs and walk away, and leaving him standing only with his "staff".

But then, as Nachie made clear, this was not about stripping Nader of his support, isolating him or exposing him. This was a feel-good exercise -- masturbation "of the deed".


[email protected] 17 2006, 12:44 AM
That&#39;s not what was meant. Calm down Miles. You think this shit is going to make them like CL any more?

As I said above, I don&#39;t think that there&#39;s anything I could say or do change their minds about us. They had already made them up, based on their own subjective views, which are built on foundations of quicksand.

Could I have been less incendiary in my responses yesterday? Yeah. I could have done that. I could have been nicer in my comments. And maybe I should have. What bothers me about doing that, though, is that I honestly don&#39;t think it would have mattered. I think it would have met with the same response the more venomous responses received.

Nachie and barista seem rather narrow-minded, and I cannot change that fact. Nachie may have once been in a "Lennie" group; if so, it&#39;s obvious that the only thing he changed was his label; the method that "Lennie" groups in the U.S. use -- seeing everyone as an "opponent" or "enemy", using "angular" arguments to drive wedges between them and their "opponents", engaging in the art of provocation to innoculate other members, etc. -- seems to still be used by him and other RAANers.

Miles

[Nachie]

After a while, when you hear virtually the same misrepresentation and slander from every member of that group, you can conclude that this is their viewpoint.
Or you could have just read the anti-Leninism section of our founding document and saved yourself the surprise...


Because we don&#39;t symbolically put a gun to Lenin&#39;s head makes us "Lennies" in their eyes.
Actually I think it has more to do with the whole "central committee" thing.


They cornered Nader and his "Labor for Nader" supporters at the Labor Day march in Detroit and turned him out, politically speaking, causing those working people who were supporting him to throw down their signs and walk away, and leaving him standing only with his "staff".
Could you be more specific as to "turning him out"? Either way you make it sound like it was a successful tactic, so my hat&#39;s off to those IWPA people. The egging of Nader is one of the actions we&#39;ve been criticized the most for, so all those criticisms have definitely been absorbed into the network&#39;s ongoing dialogue. Either way, that dude got egged and when I heard about it I know I laughed my ass off and so did plenty of other people. Not every action has to be about "reaching out" to liberals and reformists.


seeing everyone as an "opponent" or "enemy"
Not "everyone", just you&#33;

PS. I was never in a Leninist org

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by Nachie+Apr 17 2006, 01:25 PM--> (Nachie &#064; Apr 17 2006, 01:25 PM)Or you could have just read the anti-Leninism section of our founding document and saved yourself the surprise...[/b]

I didn&#39;t say I was surprised, Nachie. In fact, I said the opposite. I expected it.


Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 01:25 PM
Actually I think it has more to do with the whole "central committee" thing.

Quelle Horreur&#33; We have an elected working group to coordinate activity on a national level&#33; As I said, someday, if you grow up and get real jobs, you may see the value of organization. Until then:...


Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 01:25 PM
Could you be more specific as to "turning him out"?

As I recall, it was confronting him about his unionbusting tactics, his racism and his support for Congressional Democrats.


Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 01:25 PM
Not every action has to be about "reaching out" to liberals and reformists.

It wasn&#39;t. It was about "reaching out" to workers who were being duped because he presented himself as an "alternative" to the bourgeois parties and candidates.


Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 01:25 PM
Not "everyone", just you&#33;

Well, anomaly, there&#39;s your answer about if I had been nicer in my comments would have made a difference.


[email protected] 17 2006, 01:25 PM
PS. I was never in a Leninist org

No, but you were a self-described Leninist.

Now then, to deal with another point that, at this stage, seems to be necessary to address. Since the League has been deemed "Leninist" by RAAN, it seems clear that this little tidbit from their statements is applicable to us:


We will hunt you at your conferences, burn your newspapers, and beat you in the streets. We will never submit to the authoritarian schemes that you put together in all of your attempts to organize us into a silent "mass movement" of Bolshevik-saluters. The coming revolution has nothing to do with the supposed correctness of your party&#39;s line or its PC slogans - it is the organic supersession of all the injustice and contradiction embedded within this world, and the existence of Leninism is at this time the single greatest obstacle to the evolution of the REAL revolutionary communist tendency.

This, of course, is little more than gangsterism at its finest. I&#39;d call it terrorism, but that&#39;s too much of a loaded term at this point. Nevertheless, I will issue this response to our self-appointed anti-"Lennie" Gestapo: If you even think about approaching a League member to fulfill this aspect of your program, you better be wearing kevlar. We will defend ourselves by any means necessary. Period.

Miles

[Edelweiss]

Wow, great, the American Left is mauling each other in a public forum, and the real enemie is sitting back and laughing up their sleeve. Go on, buddies... :angry:

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 07:12 PM
Wow, great, the American Left is mauling each other in a public forum, and the real enemie is sitting back and laughing up their sleeve. Go on, buddies... :angry:
Word.


You sectarian anti-Maoists devote more time attacking Maoism than you do the common enemy. I suspect many of you have never even actually done any sort of actual political activity outside this forum.

[Crash]

I appreciate the response I have recieved. I post on a punkrock/hardcore message board and no one there gives a shit about current events. It is really unfortunate that people of a real punkrock background have bought into the system and just throw away politics. I thought politics and punkrock went together hand in hand.....

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 07:12 PM
Wow, great, the American Left is mauling each other in a public forum, and the real enemie is sitting back and laughing up their sleeve. Go on, buddies... :angry:
Well, I asked nicely for this thread to be closed.

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by EL KABLAMO+Apr 17 2006, 08:51 PM--> (EL KABLAMO @ Apr 17 2006, 08:51 PM)
[email protected] 17 2006, 07:12 PM
Wow, great, the American Left is mauling each other in a public forum, and the real enemie is sitting back and laughing up their sleeve. Go on, buddies... :angry:
Well, I asked nicely for this thread to be closed. [/b]
good idea indeed.