An Appeal to End My Ban

[Johnny Anarcho]

Since my ban to the Opposing Ideologies board I have done more study. After reading thouroughly on Marx's theory of Historical Dialecticalism and class structure I've come to relize that oppression is economic/political and not racial/political. Also, examination of Germanys conditions during Hitler's rise to power support my findings in that economic chaos pushed Germans into accepting Hitler's anti-Semetism. If allowed to be active on the other RevLeft boards, I promise to keep my religious views in the Religion board. Please take my appeal into consideration and thankyou for taking the time to read my request.

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 05, 2006 09:53 pm
Since my ban to the Opposing Ideologies board I have done more study. After reading thouroughly on Marx's theory of Historical Dialecticalism and class structure I've come to relize that oppression is economic/political and not racial/political. Also, examination of Germanys conditions during Hitler's rise to power support my findings in that economic chaos pushed Germans into accepting Hitler's anti-Semetism. If allowed to be active on the other RevLeft boards, I promise to keep my religious views in the Religion board. Please take my appeal into consideration and thankyou for taking the time to read my request.
Also, I'm willing to meet any requirements needed to prove myself.

[Zeruzo]

ok, so show us you're boobies!

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 05, 2006 09:53 pm
...Marx's theory of Historical Dialecticalism...

It's Historical Materialism and Dialectical Materialism... and they don't belong to Marx.

What Marx's texts did you actually read?

[Johnny Anarcho]

I read Marx for Begginers, Mao for Begginers, Introducing Trotsky and Marxism, the Communist Manifesto, and Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-tung. I also have a subscription to Dynamic Magazine(Young Communist League magazine) and until recently I had a subscription to the People's Weekly World(Communist Party USA paper).

[LoneRed]

I wouldnt worry about it, this place is full of useless armchair activists, get out in the real world and fight, leave these idiots to themselves

[YSR]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 07:32 pm
I wouldnt worry about it, this place is full of useless armchair activists, get out in the real world and fight, leave these idiots to themselves
Spoken like the bitter anti-semite himself.

[LoneRed]

YSR, your name fits you well, grow up, idiot

[Pawn Power]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 08:32 pm
I wouldnt worry about it, this place is full of useless armchair activists, get out in the real world and fight, leave these idiots to themselves
Then why are you still here?

I agree get out in the real world and fight!

And if you don't like our discussions here then leave.

[Zero]

Originally posted by "Johnny Anarcho"
examination of Germanys conditions during Hitler's rise to power support my findings in that economic chaos pushed Germans into accepting Hitler's anti-Semetism.

Uhh... so I take it you fell asleep in history class? :huh:

[LoneRed]

Because the most recent restrictions was pretty much the icing on the cake, if you must know, and it doesnt help to have the bandwagon jumpers like YSR piping in

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by Zero+November 06, 2006 03:33 am--> (Zero @ November 06, 2006 03:33 am)
"Johnny Anarcho"
examination of Germanys conditions during Hitler's rise to power support my findings in that economic chaos pushed Germans into accepting Hitler's anti-Semetism.

Uhh... so I take it you fell asleep in history class? :huh: [/b]
No, its just that I thought Germans were racists at the time. After reading Marx for Beginners I understand now that history is fueled entirely by economics and Dialect.

[Zero]

So uhh... Why did LoneRed get banned?

[Johnny Anarcho]

I dont know. I just posted this thread to try and make an appeal to the CC to consider ending my ban. LoneRed just jumped in.

[An archist]

Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 06, 2006 03:45 am
No, its just that I thought Germans were racists at the time. After reading Marx for Beginners I understand now that history is fueled entirely by economics and Dialect.
Well, a lot of them were anti-semites, hence why Hitler could make the jews into scapegoats so easily, the jews have been used as scapegoats for hundreds of years.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by An archist+November 06, 2006 09:46 pm--> (An archist @ November 06, 2006 09:46 pm)
Johnny [email protected] 06, 2006 03:45 am
No, its just that I thought Germans were racists at the time. After reading Marx for Beginners I understand now that history is fueled entirely by economics and Dialect.
Well, a lot of them were anti-semites, hence why Hitler could make the jews into scapegoats so easily, the jews have been used as scapegoats for hundreds of years. [/b]
Exactly, the german population weren't just 'fooled' by Hitler (you're basically absolving of everyone of responsibility except the 'evil' Hitler who 'manipulated' them), a very large proportion (majority?) already held anti-semitic views, these were not generated by hitler or the economic conditions of the 1930s but played on, such views were embedded in german society-culture and european society generally.

[ComradeR]

Originally posted by Black Dagger+November 06, 2006 11:59 am--> (Black Dagger @ November 06, 2006 11:59 am)
Originally posted by An [email protected] 06, 2006 09:46 pm

Johnny [email protected] 06, 2006 03:45 am
No, its just that I thought Germans were racists at the time. After reading Marx for Beginners I understand now that history is fueled entirely by economics and Dialect.
Well, a lot of them were anti-semites, hence why Hitler could make the jews into scapegoats so easily, the jews have been used as scapegoats for hundreds of years.
Exactly, the german population weren't just 'fooled' by Hitler (you're basically absolving of everyone of responsibility except the 'evil' Hitler who 'manipulated' them), a very large proportion (majority?) already held anti-semitic views, these were not generated by hitler or the economic conditions of the 1930s but played on, such views were embedded in german society-culture and european society generally.[/b]
While this may be true, the way you put it plays into that whole western idea that because evil thing were done in their name, the whole german population at that time was evil. Oh and by the way it's very easy for the party in power to turn a population against an ethnic minority, making them scapegoats and using fear and lack of understanding of them to further their agenda. It's even being done using the Arabs quite successively here in the US today (which from what i hear even several in the CC now share the anti-Muslim view that has been pushed by the bush regime).

[Black Dagger]

the way you put it plays into that whole western idea that because evil thing were done in their name, the whole german population at that time was evil.

No it doesn't, i never used the term 'evil' to describe the population (and when i used the term to describe hitler it was meant non-seriously, i.e. i placed it in commas), the way i put it acknowledges the social basis for nazi ideology that existed in germany, and which drew sympathy all over europe, socially-acceptable anti-semitism, 'zionist conspiracy', distrust and scape-goating of the jewish population etc, this is something that pre-dates the nazi party by centuries. The 'whole german population' wasnt 'evil' (that's a really silly word to use), but a large proportion of them were anti-semitic (as was a large proportion of europe), and this played a role in their support for nazi rhetoric and ideology.



Oh and by the way it's very easy for the party in power to turn a population against an ethnic minority, making them scapegoats and using fear and lack of understanding of them to further their agenda. It's even being done using the Arabs quite successively here in the US today (which from what i hear even several in the CC now share the anti-Muslim view that has been pushed by the bush regime).

Yes, but the way you put plays right into the hands of post-war germans and post-apartheid south africans who play the 'i was only following orders' line, 'i was manipulated', 'i didnt know what was REALLY happening' etc. - shifting any responsibility off the general population and laying it all at the feet of the government, authority figures or political leaders. That is not an effective way to engage with the past for societies that have to progress from things like apartheid, it's completely dishonest.

[t_wolves_fan]

Welcome to Siberia. I hope the irony is not lost on you.

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by An archist+November 06, 2006 11:46 am--> (An archist @ November 06, 2006 11:46 am)
Johnny [email protected] 06, 2006 03:45 am
No, its just that I thought Germans were racists at the time. After reading Marx for Beginners I understand now that history is fueled entirely by economics and Dialect.
Well, a lot of them were anti-semites, hence why Hitler could make the jews into scapegoats so easily, the jews have been used as scapegoats for hundreds of years. [/b]
This may be true but the economic chaos left by the Great Depression is truly what caused the German people to follow Hitler. Dialect explains the entire thing.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Johnny Anarcho+November 07, 2006 12:52 am--> (Johnny Anarcho @ November 07, 2006 12:52 am)
Originally posted by An [email protected] 06, 2006 11:46 am

Johnny [email protected] 06, 2006 03:45 am
No, its just that I thought Germans were racists at the time. After reading Marx for Beginners I understand now that history is fueled entirely by economics and Dialect.
Well, a lot of them were anti-semites, hence why Hitler could make the jews into scapegoats so easily, the jews have been used as scapegoats for hundreds of years.
This may be true but the economic chaos left by the Great Depression is truly what caused the German people to follow Hitler. Dialect explains the entire thing. [/b]
But why did the german population follow hitler and not support the SPD or KPD? How does the 'dialect' explain 'the entire thing'? That is an incredibly reductionist position, not all events are simply the product of fluctuations in the economy, that's patently absurd.

Also, can you please clarify your positions on abortion, so-called 'gay rights' and queers in general?

You previously expressed support for an organisation, the 'New Black Panther Party', which a part from housing anti-semites, is also explicitly heterosexist. Now that you have apparently distanced yourself from this organisation, can you please clarify your opinion on these matters?

When previously asked about 'gay rights' you responded: "I try to avoid that subject" and "I dont support or oppose gays."

[Zero]

Can someone answer my question? Why did LoneRed get banned? For espousing his opinion?

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by Black Dagger+November 06, 2006 04:04 pm--> (Black Dagger @ November 06, 2006 04:04 pm)
Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 07, 2006 12:52 am

Originally posted by An [email protected] 06, 2006 11:46 am

Johnny [email protected] 06, 2006 03:45 am
No, its just that I thought Germans were racists at the time. After reading Marx for Beginners I understand now that history is fueled entirely by economics and Dialect.
Well, a lot of them were anti-semites, hence why Hitler could make the jews into scapegoats so easily, the jews have been used as scapegoats for hundreds of years.
This may be true but the economic chaos left by the Great Depression is truly what caused the German people to follow Hitler. Dialect explains the entire thing.
But why did the german population follow hitler and not support the SPD or KPD? How does the 'dialect' explain 'the entire thing'? That is an incredibly reductionist position, not all events are simply the product of fluctuations in the economy, that's patently absurd.

Also, can you please clarify your positions on abortion, so-called 'gay rights' and queers in general?

You previously expressed support for an organisation, the 'New Black Panther Party', which a part from housing anti-semites, is also explicitly heterosexist. Now that you have apparently distanced yourself from this organisation, can you please clarify your opinion on these matters?

When previously asked about 'gay rights' you responded: "I try to avoid that subject" and "I dont support or oppose gays." [/b]
I support gay-rights, no one should be denied rights because they arent straight. I'm against abortion and all violence, I only support abortion if its to save the mothers life or health, or if shes a rape victim.

[Black Dagger]

LoneRed was a sockpuppet, he can still post under his previous account which was already restricted, but not banned.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

Economic chaos was certainly a major factor. As I understand it, Hitler promised to sort it out by not bothering with the Treaty of Versailles and by stopping the nasty jewish bankers. The german population were on their financial knees, and so, in desperation, swallowed his poison hook, line and sinker. Of course not the whole story, but a fair few chapters of it.

-Alex

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Johnny Anarcho+--> (Johnny Anarcho)I support gay-rights, no one should be denied rights because they arent straight.
[/b]

But what is your opinion of homo/bisexuality in general? Is it a 'choice'? Is it natural/unnatural? etc.


Johnny Anarcho

I'm against abortion and all violence, I only support abortion if its to save the mothers life or health, or if shes a rape victim.

How is abortion 'violence'?

Are you against revolutionary violence as well?

You support abortion if a womans' health is at risk, but not if she just doesnt want to be pregnant for whatever reason? Personal, economic etc.

[chimx]

from what i gather, he denied the holocaust in the CC, but i'm not certain.

i don't see why this kid needs to stay in OI and i would certainly like to see him unrestricted. If there is concern about the sincerity of it than keep an eye on him for a time after his unrestriction.


typing with tgloves on is hard.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

What's wrong with abortion? You're just getting rid of cells. You might aswell condemn chaemotherapy.

-Alex

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Burntheolivetree
The german population were on their financial knees, and so, in desperation, swallowed his poison hook, line and sinker.

Again, as ive said, this line of thinking essentially absolves the german population from any responsibility, painting them as naive dupes who just wanted things to 'get better', completely ignoring the fact that anti-semitism was widespread in germany and europe generally, and had been for centuries. The nazi party didnt invent the image of the 'jewish banker' etc., they tapped into already present sentiment within the german population.

The logic of this argument suggests essentially that was no widespread basis for anti-semitism, which is great if you're a post-war german,

'That whole holocaust thing was just coz we were in hard times, not coz we actually have any resentment or hatred towards jews! Some of my best friends were jewish! Now we can all just get on with our lives, we only supported the nazi regime coz of the depression, you know?'

[Lenin's Law]

Originally posted by chimx+November 06, 2006 04:19 pm--> (chimx @ November 06, 2006 04:19 pm) i don't see why this kid needs to stay in OI and i would certainly like to see him unrestricted. If there is concern about the sincerity of it than keep an eye on him for a time after his unrestriction.

[/b]
Well, it looks like from the RevLeft guidelines that:


RevLeft Guidelines
Who is restricted?

In general, anyone who is ideologically opposed to the revolutionary leftist vision of this board is restricted to OI.

Anyone who defends capitalism or otherwise opposes worker liberation is automatically restricted. Anyone who opposes the rights of any other oppressed group is similarly restricted. This includes so-called "pro-lifers" or anyone else who opposes the right to abortion on demand.

Johnny Anarcho is against "abortion on demand" and thus, according to the guidelines, his restriction will be upheld.

[The Grey Blur]

I didn't notice the title of this thread was 'Hitler's rise to Power'. Just unrestrict the guy but keep an eye on him.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

BlackDagger- Hence I said that it's a major factor, and not the whole story. As soon as that really successful chancellor, Stresseman I think, got Germany's economy and diplomatic relations going, the German population weren't particularly interested in the Nazi party, my history book refers to it as their "lean years". Of course, had the anti-semitism not already been entrenched in german society, the Nazis wouldn't have thrived. But the point is both the economic conditions and the prejudice that was already there were necessary for Hitler & Co. to get any power.

-Alex

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by Lenin's Law+November 06, 2006 04:29 pm--> (Lenin's Law @ November 06, 2006 04:29 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 06, 2006 04:19 pm
i don't see why this kid needs to stay in OI and i would certainly like to see him unrestricted. If there is concern about the sincerity of it than keep an eye on him for a time after his unrestriction.


Well, it looks like from the RevLeft guidelines that:


RevLeft Guidelines
Who is restricted?

In general, anyone who is ideologically opposed to the revolutionary leftist vision of this board is restricted to OI.

Anyone who defends capitalism or otherwise opposes worker liberation is automatically restricted. Anyone who opposes the rights of any other oppressed group is similarly restricted. This includes so-called "pro-lifers" or anyone else who opposes the right to abortion on demand.

Johnny Anarcho is against "abortion on demand" and thus, according to the guidelines, his restriction will be upheld. [/b]
I never said I'm against it on demand, I just dont believe in it. My view is that people should have that right but more work should be done to solve the problem that abortion is just putting a band-aid over.

[kaaos_af]

Everyone deserves a second chance.




Except... a few hundred thousand people I could mention.

But I reckon this guy deserves another.

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by Black Dagger+November 06, 2006 04:18 pm--> (Black Dagger @ November 06, 2006 04:18 pm)
Originally posted by Johnny [email protected]
I support gay-rights, no one should be denied rights because they arent straight.


But what is your opinion of homo/bisexuality in general? Is it a 'choice'? Is it natural/unnatural? etc.


Johnny Anarcho

I'm against abortion and all violence, I only support abortion if its to save the mothers life or health, or if shes a rape victim.

How is abortion 'violence'?

Are you against revolutionary violence as well?

You support abortion if a womans' health is at risk, but not if she just doesnt want to be pregnant for whatever reason? Personal, economic etc. [/b]
I dont know if homosexuality is natural or not, I figure that if two people love each other then thats all there is to it.

I support violence if its in self-defence. Otherwise I oppose execution of prisoners, kiling animals for sport or food, war, and all other kinds of violence that end the life of an individual/living being.

[kaaos_af]

Hm. Then again. Well his heart's in vaguely the right place.

[Lenin's Law]

Originally posted by Johnny Anarcho+November 06, 2006 05:56 pm--> (Johnny Anarcho @ November 06, 2006 05:56 pm)
I never said I'm against it on demand, I just dont believe in it. My view is that people should have that right but more work should be done to solve the problem that abortion is just putting a band-aid over.[/b]

:blink:



Johnny Anarcho
I'm against abortion and all violence, I only support abortion if its to save the mothers life or health, or if shes a rape victim.


You just said right here in this thread: "I'm against abortion" now you're saying "my view is that people should have that right.."

So which is it?

Your views appear to changing rapidly here....

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by Lenin's Law+November 06, 2006 06:06 pm--> (Lenin's Law @ November 06, 2006 06:06 pm)
Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 06, 2006 05:56 pm

I never said I'm against it on demand, I just dont believe in it. My view is that people should have that right but more work should be done to solve the problem that abortion is just putting a band-aid over.

:blink:



Johnny Anarcho
I'm against abortion and all violence, I only support abortion if its to save the mothers life or health, or if shes a rape victim.


You just said right here in this thread: "I'm against abortion" now you're saying "my view is that people should have that right.."

So which is it?

Your views appear to changing rapidly here.... [/b]
Let me clarify; I'm against it personally but I dont think its mine or anyone elses place to restrict that right from others.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by JA+--> (JA)I dont know if homosexuality is natural or not [/b]

What makes you doubt that it is natural? There is a mountain of evidence to prove this.


JA

I support violence if its in self-defence. Otherwise I oppose execution of prisoners, kiling animals for sport or food, war, and all other kinds of violence that end the life of an individual/living being.

So do you support revolutionary violence or not? Class war? Violence against counter-revolutionaries? For revolution?


What is your opinion of the 'New Black Panter Party', the Nation of Islam & Louis Farrakhan?

[Whitten]

Originally posted by Black Dagger+November 06, 2006 06:19 pm--> (Black Dagger @ November 06, 2006 06:19 pm)
JA
I dont know if homosexuality is natural or not

What makes you doubt that it is natural? There is a mountain of evidence to prove this. [/b]
I dont see that being important here. What matters is he doesnt believe in forcing his views upon others

[chimx]

there isn't any evidence to prove it. there is just data that would tend to support the fact that it is a biological thing.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by chimx+November 07, 2006 04:41 am--> (chimx @ November 07, 2006 04:41 am) there isn't any evidence to prove it. there is just data that would tend to support the fact that it is a biological thing. [/b]
Right... there is no more evidence to prove homosexuality is natural than there is to prove heterosexuality is natural... :unsure:



Whitten
I dont see that being important here. What matters is he doesnt believe in forcing his views upon others

Of course it matters! It's not acceptable for people to hold prejudiced points of view 'as long as they keep them to themselves'. We have to take an active stance AGAINST prejudice, to fight it, not ignore it.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 06, 2006 06:46 pm
It's not acceptable for people to hold prejudiced points of view 'as long as they keep them to themselves'.
Yeah, that's thoughtcrime.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

Okay, so the thoughtcrime thing was probably just a silly jibe.

In case it wasn't, this is not our plan for society as a whole, it's just rules for the CC, a private club. One can't very well welcome a white supremacist into a meeting of the Black Panthers, on the basis that not to do so would be persecuting based on thoughtcrime.

-Alex

[Publius]

"I'm sorry for upholding my own opinions Commie Cabal, please accept the fact that I now conform to your every standard."

How obsequious.

[Lenin's Law]

If said opinions are right-wing then no, apology not accepted.

Virtually every other site restricts and bans its members on a whim; without any reason or justfication, 'just cause they feel like it.' Whereas this site actually consults its left wing members (who have been here long enough) and they vote on their decisions in a democratic manner. In fact, this message board has to be one of the the most democratically-run places on the internet, if not the most democratically run out there.

[Whitten]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 06, 2006 06:46 pm
Of course it matters! It's not acceptable for people to hold prejudiced points of view 'as long as they keep them to themselves'. We have to take an active stance AGAINST prejudice, to fight it, not ignore it.
People can hold views so long as they dont force them on others! What next, will you be saying people cant be christian or muslim even if they have no intent to force their views on others? What someone privatly thinks is irrelivent so long as they recognise other peoples right to differ, I would expect an anarchist to understand that.

[Janus]

Since it's too late to close this thread, anyone who wishes to contest their restriction should post here rather than start a new thread.

http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=22496

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 06, 2006 08:39 pm
"I'm sorry for upholding my own opinions Commie Cabal, please accept the fact that I now conform to your every standard."

Come on! Like everyone here agrees with everyone else?!? lol! Do you actually read the forums?? There are plenty of HUGE disagreements we have here. :rolleyes:

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 06, 2006 01:32 am
I wouldnt worry about it, this place is full of useless armchair activists, get out in the real world and fight, leave these idiots to themselves
Says the guy who made over 1000 posts in less than a year.... :rolleyes:

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Whitten+--> (Whitten)People can hold views so long as they dont force them on others! [/b]

What non-sense!

If someone holds heterosexist/racist/sexist/transphobic/etc. views they should be CHALLENGED, not bloody ignored! That is part of what revolutionaries do, we challenge prejudiced ideas, these are things that divide working people and work against the possibility of a united prole struggle against capitalism.


Originally posted by Whitten+--> (Whitten)
What next, will you be saying people cant be christian or muslim even if they have no intent to force their views on others? [/b]

Don't be absurd, being a racist is in no way comparable to being a christian or a muslim, it is possible for the latter to be anti-racist, the same cannot obviously be said for the former.


Originally posted by Whitten

What someone privatly thinks is irrelivent so long as they recognise other peoples right to differ, I would expect an anarchist to understand that.

This is extremely naive.

There is no such thing as being 'privately' racist or heterosexist etc. When people hold prejudiced views this directly influences how they act in society, how they talk to and about people, how they respond to people, how they interact with others.

Being an anarchist has nothing to do with this discussion, but as an anarchist i am committed to taking an active stance AGAINST social prejudice as a necessary step to achieve prole unity and put up a united front AGAINST capitalism and the state.

It is liberals (and people who hold prejudiced views), not anarchists, who take passive stances on social prejudice, defending peoples 'right' to be 'private' reactionaries.

--------------------------------------------



Johnny Anarcho, can you please respond to this post?


Originally posted by BD


[email protected]
I dont know if homosexuality is natural or not

What makes you doubt that it is natural? There is a mountain of evidence to prove this.


JA

I support violence if its in self-defence. Otherwise I oppose execution of prisoners, kiling animals for sport or food, war, and all other kinds of violence that end the life of an individual/living being.

So do you support revolutionary violence or not? Class war? Violence against counter-revolutionaries? For revolution?


What is your opinion of the 'New Black Panter Party', the Nation of Islam & Louis Farrakhan?

[Zeruzo]

Originally posted by PeacefulAnarchist+November 07, 2006 03:25 am--> (PeacefulAnarchist @ November 07, 2006 03:25 am)
[email protected] 06, 2006 01:32 am
I wouldnt worry about it, this place is full of useless armchair activists, get out in the real world and fight, leave these idiots to themselves
Says the guy who made over 1000 posts in less than a year.... :rolleyes: [/b]
says the guy that made a 150 useless posts in a month time :rolleyes:.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by PeacefulAnarchist+November 07, 2006 03:19 am--> (PeacefulAnarchist @ November 07, 2006 03:19 am)
[email protected] 06, 2006 08:39 pm
"I'm sorry for upholding my own opinions Commie Cabal, please accept the fact that I now conform to your every standard."

Come on! Like everyone here agrees with everyone else?!? lol! Do you actually read the forums?? There are plenty of HUGE disagreements we have here. :rolleyes: [/b]
:lol:

Yeah, that disagreement is within about 5% of the total political spectrum. Any opinions outside of that are purged.

It's hilarious that communists claim the Soviet Union doesn't represent communism, yet they purge dissident opinion. The parallels are unmistakable.

:D

[Whitten]

Originally posted by Whitten+--> (Whitten)People can hold views so long as they dont force them on others!

What non-sense!

If someone holds heterosexist/racist/sexist/transphobic/etc. views they should be CHALLENGED, not bloody ignored! That is part of what revolutionaries do, we challenge prejudiced ideas, these are things that divide working people and work against the possibility of a united prole struggle against capitalism.[/b]

How somebody feels personally about something is irrelevant. Just because someone feels homosexuality isnt right, it doesnt make them any less of a revolutionary. What makes them a revolutionary is that they are able to keep these opinions to themselves and to fight to allow others equal right sto as they want, whether that personal agrees with it or not.

A better arguement is with abortion. If a woman respected other peoples rights to have abortions, yet personally believed it to be immoral, she could still be a revolutionary. We have a number of non-restricted people who hold such a view. It seems to me that your looking for reasons to exclude people and divide the prole struggle, not him.



Originally posted by [email protected]

What next, will you be saying people cant be christian or muslim even if they have no intent to force their views on others?

Don't be absurd, being a racist is in no way comparable to being a christian or a muslim, it is possible for the latter to be anti-racist, the same cannot obviously be said for the former.

You just caught yourself out. Islam (and many would claim christianity) states that homosexuality is immoral. But if they respect other peoples right to follow other (or no) religions, or to commit deeds that they would not be allowed to under their religion, how can they not be welcomed.



Whitten

What someone privatly thinks is irrelivent so long as they recognise other peoples right to differ, I would expect an anarchist to understand that.

This is extremely naive.

There is no such thing as being 'privately' racist or heterosexist etc. When people hold prejudiced views this directly influences how they act in society, how they talk to and about people, how they respond to people, how they interact with others.

You cant control how other people think. People have the right to their own opinions, just as you do. Its not the job of the revolutionary to draw up a list of what a revolutionary can and cant morally believe. We should choose our comrades based on how they would treat others, not what they think of them.


Being an anarchist has nothing to do with this discussion, but as an anarchist i am committed to taking an active stance AGAINST social prejudice as a necessary step to achieve prole unity and put up a united front AGAINST capitalism and the state.

And against slightly differing moral opinion, apparently.

[Black Dagger]

Fucking UGH, what a steaming pile of shit.

I haven't got time to post a full response, but seriously, that is one of the most moronic posts ive read in over two years at this board.

I'll edit my reply in later when i have time, i'll take time just for this crap.

[Whitten]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 07, 2006 03:59 pm
Fucking UGH, what a steaming pile of shit.

I haven't got time to post a full response, but seriously, that is one of the most moronic posts ive read in over two years at this board.

I'll edit my reply in later when i have time, i'll take time just for this crap.
The Local Mod as always contributing to the quality of discussion...

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan+November 07, 2006 03:28 pm--> (t_wolves_fan @ November 07, 2006 03:28 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2006 03:19 am

[email protected] 06, 2006 08:39 pm
"I'm sorry for upholding my own opinions Commie Cabal, please accept the fact that I now conform to your every standard."

Come on! Like everyone here agrees with everyone else?!? lol! Do you actually read the forums?? There are plenty of HUGE disagreements we have here. :rolleyes:
:lol:

Yeah, that disagreement is within about 5% of the total political spectrum. Any opinions outside of that are purged.

It's hilarious that communists claim the Soviet Union doesn't represent communism, yet they purge dissident opinion. The parallels are unmistakable.

:D [/b]
Oh for fuck's sake, grow the fuck up. This is a message board specifically for that "5%" (where did you get that statistic by the way?) of the political spectrum. The fact that we tolerate cappie bullshit with this subforum actually shows we're less intolerant than many other political messageboards. (Especially cappie ones, the number of times I recieved an outright ban for not sharing their views...). We have a fairly good system here, don't be a **** about it.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2006 04:10 pm
Oh for fuck's sake, grow the fuck up. This is a message board specifically for that "5%" (where did you get that statistic by the way?) of the political spectrum. The fact that we tolerate cappie bullshit with this subforum actually shows we're less intolerant than many other political messageboards. (Especially cappie ones, the number of times I recieved an outright ban for not sharing their views...). We have a fairly good system here, don't be a **** about it.
Good grief dude, grow up a little and ditch the profanity.

For every "Cappie" board that's banned you, some whacked-out leftist board has banned me, so give up the fantasy that only right-wing types are intolerant of dissenting thought.

But c'mon, you have to appreciate the delicious irony that a bunch of "communists" banish dissenters to a certain part of the board, just like the Soviets banished dissenters to Siberia.

Even better, communists claim they should get to do it because this board is private.

I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

It's not as if we'd model society on how this message board is ran... That said, for the literate and mildly thinking capitalists, I don't see that they should be banned from say, philosophy, or science and environment. Theory and politics might cause problems, but for others, I dunno.

-Alex

[ZeroPain]

I see no reason he should be excluded from the forum in general. People are aways politically maturing and as such he, even if his ideas are less developed, is at least entitled an opportunity to learn more. This nitpicking of his every thought is pointless since it is obvious that he, with his current views will not be a disturbance unless someone else makes them so.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2006 06:40 pm
It's not as if we'd model society on how this message board is ran... That said, for the literate and mildly thinking capitalists, I don't see that they should be banned from say, philosophy, or science and environment. Theory and politics might cause problems, but for others, I dunno.

-Alex
Oh I agree with you, the owners/moderators should run this board as they want. It's theirs.

It's just funny, that's all.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan+November 07, 2006 06:01 pm--> (t_wolves_fan @ November 07, 2006 06:01 pm)
[email protected] 07, 2006 04:10 pm
Oh for fuck's sake, grow the fuck up. This is a message board specifically for that "5%" (where did you get that statistic by the way?) of the political spectrum. The fact that we tolerate cappie bullshit with this subforum actually shows we're less intolerant than many other political messageboards. (Especially cappie ones, the number of times I recieved an outright ban for not sharing their views...). We have a fairly good system here, don't be a **** about it.
Good grief dude, grow up a little and ditch the profanity. [/b]
:rolleyes: OH NOES! TEH NAUGHTY WORDS OFFEND YOUR EYES!


For every "Cappie" board that's banned you, some whacked-out leftist board has banned me, so give up the fantasy that only right-wing types are intolerant of dissenting thought. See, that still goes to show how singular this kindness we extend to scum like you really is.


But c'mon, you have to appreciate the delicious irony that a bunch of "communists" banish dissenters to a certain part of the board, just like the Soviets banished dissenters to Siberia. Hmmm. I would, but a) This is the internet. b) IF we didn't we wouldn't be able to havea discussion amongst ourselves without some loser like you jumping in.


Even better, communists claim they should get to do it because this board is private. SHould we open up the CC to you scum as well?


I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. Quite why this is relevent is lost on me.

[t_wolves_fan]

:rolleyes: OH NOES! TEH NAUGHTY WORDS OFFEND YOUR EYES!

Very little offends me, it's just hard to take you seriously.



For every "Cappie" board that's banned you, some whacked-out leftist board has banned me, so give up the fantasy that only right-wing types are intolerant of dissenting thought. See, that still goes to show how singular this kindness we extend to scum like you really is.

How? There are plenty of capitalist boards that don't ban people for dissent.



But c'mon, you have to appreciate the delicious irony that a bunch of "communists" banish dissenters to a certain part of the board, just like the Soviets banished dissenters to Siberia. Hmmm. I would, but a) This is the internet. b) IF we didn't we wouldn't be able to havea discussion amongst ourselves without some loser like you jumping in.

Actually you could, given that on the internet you can only be interrupted if you choose to read posts from people like me. This isn't real life, I can't shout my way into your conversation.



Even better, communists claim they should get to do it because this board is private. SHould we open up the CC to you scum as well?

Scum? Why am I scum?



I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. Quite why this is relevent is lost on me.

I know, that's why it's so funny.

[Publius]

Come on! Like everyone here agrees with everyone else?!? lol! Do you actually read the forums?? There are plenty of HUGE disagreements we have here. :rolleyes:

Can one be a leftist and still hold certain prejudices?

I would say that's a pretty 'big' question, yet it's one almost totally ignored. You just restrict those who, generally as a result of pure ignorance, hold backwards views on things like sex or race.

There are disagreements, yes, but I would say they are almost trivial: "WHO DO YOU THINKZ HOTTER, KROPOTKIN OR PROUDHON, LOLZ!?"

[YSR]

Kropotkin, I'd wager.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

There are disagreements, yes, but I would say they are almost trivial:

Yeah things like whether or not bourgeois elections should be utilized, whether or not to vote, whether there needs to be a workers state after a revolution, what can bring about a revolution, and what we want a revolutionary society to look like are pretty trivial.

[Publius]

Yeah things like whether or not bourgeois elections should be utilized, whether or not to vote, whether there needs to be a workers state after a revolution, what can bring about a revolution, and what we want a revolutionary society to look like are pretty trivial.

I would say voting is clearly antithetical to 'revolutionary' leftism.

Workers state? I don't see how anyone could reasonably argue for or against this proposal; it's pure speculation.

What could bring about a revolution? Problems.

What's a society going to look like? Nothing like you can imagine now.

They seem to be 'issues' only in the sense that none could possibly have any answer other than "I don't know."

[BurnTheOliveTree]

Voting isn't antithetical to revolutionary leftism, Publius. For it to be antithetical, it would have to actually work against a revolution, and it doesn't, to be honest. There isn't going to be a communist revolution in Britain any time soon, so on the one hand we have to agitate for the revolution, but we ignore bourgeoisie democracy at our peril. We have to hold our noses and vote for the lesser evils, perhaps the greens, or (horror of horrors) the SWP.

-Alex

P.S. I can't help but compare the "hold our noses" thing to hitler's "hold our noses and enter the Reichstag". Damn it. Must stop drawing Nazi paralells(sp?) with everything.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2006 07:08 pm

:rolleyes: OH NOES! TEH NAUGHTY WORDS OFFEND YOUR EYES!

Very little offends me, it's just hard to take you seriously.
Yes, but you're a capitalist so whether or not somone as laughably backward as you finds me difficult to takes seriously is well...irrelevant.





For every "Cappie" board that's banned you, some whacked-out leftist board has banned me, so give up the fantasy that only right-wing types are intolerant of dissenting thought. See, that still goes to show how singular this kindness we extend to scum like you really is.

How? There are plenty of capitalist boards that don't ban people for dissent. Which ones? Go on, give me some urls.




But c'mon, you have to appreciate the delicious irony that a bunch of "communists" banish dissenters to a certain part of the board, just like the Soviets banished dissenters to Siberia. Hmmm. I would, but a) This is the internet. b) IF we didn't we wouldn't be able to havea discussion amongst ourselves without some loser like you jumping in.

Actually you could, given that on the internet you can only be interrupted if you choose to read posts from people like me. This isn't real life, I can't shout my way into your conversation. YOu still clutter up the damn board and you know very well it would get irritating for us if some wanker came on here went "LOLZ TEH COMMUNISTS R TEH SUCKS!" and then, after we ignored said wanker they said "HAHA NUBZ LOL U CAN'T EVN RGUE WIT ME!!!!!ONE111!!LOLZ!". WHich is precisly why we don't allow wankers to post on the main forums.




Even better, communists claim they should get to do it because this board is private. SHould we open up the CC to you scum as well?

Scum? Why am I scum? The capitalism thing.




I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. Quite why this is relevent is lost on me.

I know, that's why it's so funny. SO because I don't find it releveant whether or not you could make something up it's hilarious? You need to watch some Monty Python or something, get an idea of what actual humour is.

[kaaos_af]

ha ha ha sucked in

[Johnny Anarcho]

Originally posted by Black Dagger+November 06, 2006 06:19 pm--> (Black Dagger @ November 06, 2006 06:19 pm)


JA

I support violence if its in self-defence. Otherwise I oppose execution of prisoners, kiling animals for sport or food, war, and all other kinds of violence that end the life of an individual/living being.

So do you support revolutionary violence or not? Class war? Violence against counter-revolutionaries? For revolution?


What is your opinion of the 'New Black Panter Party', the Nation of Islam & Louis Farrakhan? [/b]
I support the democratic prosess to bring Socialism about but if Class War is the last resort then I support it. As I said, I only support violence if its in self-defense. The New Black Panther Party gives a bad name to the original Black Panther Party, I would prefer it not be as anti-white as it is and as long as it is racist I oppose it. The Nation of Islam is so-so, their work to rehabilitate prisoners and to get drugs and prostitution out of the community makes them great but their anti-white views will have to go before I can fully support them. Islam is a religion for all people and should never be used for racism or descrimination of any kind.

[t_wolves_fan]

Yes, but you're a capitalist so whether or not somone as laughably backward as you finds me difficult to takes seriously is well...irrelevant.

That's fine and it works the other way as well.


Which ones? Go on, give me some urls.

Well the last one I was at was Protest Warrior, but it's shut down for whatever reason. A third of the board was socialists and communists.


YOu still clutter up the damn board and you know very well it would get irritating for us if some wanker came on here went "LOLZ TEH COMMUNISTS R TEH SUCKS!" and then, after we ignored said wanker they said "HAHA NUBZ LOL U CAN'T EVN RGUE WIT ME!!!!!ONE111!!LOLZ!". WHich is precisly why we don't allow wankers to post on the main forums.

Is it difficult to scroll by those messages, or do you simply lack the willpower to not respond?

I see your point though and as I said before I have no problem with the rule.



Scum? Why am I scum? The capitalism thing.

It's a mistake to make politics personal, you miss out on getting to know a lot of good people that way.


SO because I don't find it releveant whether or not you could make something up it's hilarious? You need to watch some Monty Python or something, get an idea of what actual humour is.

Yes and I love Monty Python, though for me it's The Simpsons.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2006 02:57 pm


Scum? Why am I scum? The capitalism thing.

It's a mistake to make politics personal, you miss out on getting to know a lot of good people that way.
Wait? YOu think the only people I know and get on with are leftist?!