Anarchists attack banks, Bremerton, USA.

[Bilan]

BREMERTON

Chunks of concrete with the words "Social Youth Chaos" were thrown through the windows of four Bremerton banks early Thursday.

Notes taped to the blocks read, in capital letters,

"Here is your brick back, recognize it? You should. It is part of the wall that you, as one of the elite upper class, have helped to build between the minority ruling class, and the majority working class throughout history. By flaunting your decadence, you have made yourself a target."

At 4:01 a.m., Bremerton police responded to a call at US Bank at 2020 Sixth St. for a burglary in progress. Eleven minutes later they were called for the same reason to the Key Bank at 3570 Wheaton Way. Both had notes with the same writing thrown through the windows.

Officers searched other banks in the area and found two more that had been hit in the same manner — Bank of America at 1000 Sixth St. and Kitsap Bank at 3425 Wheaton Way.

Bremerton police contacted the FBI to see if similar crimes have occurred elsewhere.

Each of the notes contained written "directions" that said "attach to brick and throw through window." At the bottom, the notes said, "Get used to it," followed by the possible name of the group — "Social Youth Chaos-Fuck Shit Up."

Andy Oakley, community resource unit spokesman, said Bremerton police had never heard the name before and that there is no history of similar crimes here.

Link to mainstream news and image of notes (remove the spaces):

http://www. kirotv .com/news/15367749/detail.html?rss=sea&psp=southsoundnews

http://www. komotv .com/news/15842847.html

[jake williams]

Now it's well enough possible it's kids with some growing up to do, but it's hard nonetheless to get upset about attacking banks.

[F9]

smash the banks before the smash mankind!:star:

[Faux Real]

Seattle's got tons of anarchists I tell ya'.

[Cult of Reason]

Brilliant. This REALLY is going to help dispel the notion that Anarchism is all about chaos and throwing bombs. Bravo.

[Colonello Buendia]

totally, they're like V wannabe's or Black Blockers just giving Anarchism a very bad name

[apathy maybe]

Fuck Shit up.

Reminds me of a group in Melbourne... ;) (You know who you are.)

Anyway, This isn't obviously the work of "anarchists", it is obviously, however, the work of someone rather peeved by the whole capitalist system. And while it might not do much in the scheme of things, it is hardly something to condemn.

[Colonello Buendia]

It is however something we should distance ourselves from and not do, these sort of attacks are stupid and make for bad press

[bcbm]

Seattle's got tons of anarchists I tell ya'.

In my experience, not really. There's some punk DIY kids doing the typical punk DIY thing (yawn) and not much else. Very few people organizing or down for any sort of interesting shit at all.

----


Brilliant. This REALLY is going to help dispel the notion that Anarchism is all about chaos and throwing bombs. Bravo.

Oddly enough, you're the only one who seems to have that notion. I didn't notice any mention of anarchy, anarchism or anything of the sort in the news article. It only mentions pissed off youth. I guess you assume any pissed off youth who smash some windows are anarchists? So much for dispelling notions.

And even if they had claimed to be anarchists, the prevalent image of the anarchist "bomb thrower" died out sometime around 1930. The chaos thing still applies, and fucking shit up is to some measure attached, if the average person knows anything about anarchism at all. But who cares? The way to counter such images is to do lots of positive organizing and work within our class, not stop all direct action for fear of "giving the wrong image." This action doesn't convey the wrong image at all. We're anarchists and, yes, we want to tear down the fucking banks. If anything, we should be trying to explain why this action occurred, not separating ourselves from it. The working class is not afraid of violence, despite what the patronizing attitudes of many on the left will tell you.


It is however something we should distance ourselves from and not do, these sort of attacks are stupid and make for bad press

The enemies of the ruling class will always have bad press, so that's a pretty stupid reason to not do something.

[Black Dagger]

I wonder if these folks were inspired by the recent bank attacks in greece (though in greece it was smokebombs etc. not bricks) - coincidence?

[The Feral Underclass]

It is however something we should distance ourselves from and not do

Yeah, god forbid that anyone would smash a bank up.

[Forward Union]

Yeah, god forbid that anyone would smash a bank up.

http://www.acc.umu.se/~samhain/summerofhate/sid78snd.jpg

[Keyser]

It is always when events like this happen that you can see where the dividing line is between those on the Left who show their true pacifism and reformist nature by condemning such actions as these.

From the name of the group involved (Social Youth Chaos), they sound like a bunch of teenagers with not much political education and who think that social struggle and revolution revolve around a few teenagers throwing bricks at certain locations late at night and issuing political communiques three words long (Fuck shit up).:rolleyes:

Obviously these type of actions and the type of people invloved in such actions will never really build a mass movement nor would they ever be of much signigicance in the wider revolutionary struggle. They will ultimatley remain on the very margins of political space and only ever make an impact on other groups and individuals who share their approach to struggle (ie: the DIY anarchist scene), no doubt the average worker will not even notice this.

Despite my criticisms of these type of elitist and at the same time rather insignificant actions. I will not nor would I ever condemn it.

To condemn the actions of any revolutionary, no matter how insignificant or incorrect you may think their actions are, is to automatically support and side with the class enemy, the ruling class.

Criticise it, offer practical alternative political approaches and actions or withhold supporting them, any of these ways are open to other revolutionaries who may disagree with a certain action or political approach.

But condemning it outright in and by itself, often basing such a view on dubious bourgeois morality, is to de-facto support the class enemy and to betray your own side.

[Die Neue Zeit]

My advice for anarchists: cough up in unison the anarchist equivalent of Lenin's anti-terrorist The Autocracy and the Proletariat.

[Gitfiddle Jim]

Great, another reason for the violent anarchist stereotype to be upheld. Still, I won't condemn the attacks.

[bcbm]

Nowhere in the article did "anarchists" claim anything. The group claiming it was "Social Youth Chaos."

[Organic Revolution]

Great, another reason for the violent anarchist stereotype to be upheld. Still, I won't condemn the attacks.

Do you expect that resistance against global capital will come through peaceful means, or are we supposed to wait for some great leader to tell us that the time has come? No. There needs to be violence to overthrow the capitalism, and all acts against capitalism should be applauded by revolutionaries. Have we just discovered the wolf in sheep's clothing?


Nowhere in the article did "anarchists" claim anything. The group claiming it was "Social Youth Chaos."

Anarchists or not, there declaration seemed quite anti-capitalistic in nature.



It is however something we should distance ourselves from and not do, these sort of attacks are stupid and make for bad press

Read any Bonnano as of late? You are who he talks about in his introduction to Sabate. Why should we distance ourselves from any attack on capital? That is like an ice cream maker distancing himself from his product... it doesn't make any sense. You can always find who is really down to fight, and who is just talk when polemics against violence ring out... Very Mostian of you.


totally, they're like V wannabe's or Black Blockers just giving Anarchism a very bad name

What in Allah's name are you talking about?! Do you not know the history of the Attendat, or of Propaganda of the Deed? Political violence existed before V for Vendetta or the Black Bloc. Fucking hell, learn your history.

[renegadoe]

While I may not have acted as such myself, I nonetheless support the autonomy of the Bremerton anarchists, and I applaud any and all resistance to the dominion of capital - no matter how petty or seemingly trivial. Thus, I hope to see more bricks through bank windows in the future!

[KC]

This is about as lame as RAAN kicking in the door of a strip club for "exploiting women".:rolleyes:

[apathy maybe]

Not that your response is much better.

[F9]

why is is it bad to smash banks?do we want to "look" good on peoples eyes or we want to fight capitalism and fascism?actions against banks happene a lot in greece and i support it!

Fuserg9:star:

[Gitfiddle Jim]

Do you expect that resistance against global capital will come through peaceful means, or are we supposed to wait for some great leader to tell us that the time has come? No. There needs to be violence to overthrow the capitalism, and all acts against capitalism should be applauded by revolutionaries. Have we just discovered the wolf in sheep's clothing?


I did not condemn the attacks at all, any attack on capitalism in any form I am 100% fully behind.

I would like to retract my comment as my first thought was that the attack may be counterproductive, but I totally agree with your view that any attack on capitalism should be applauded by revolutionaries.

I too will resort to violence when it is necessary, but feel that the best way to reach out to more people is through peaceful methods.

And as for being the "wolf in sheep's clothing", you can rest assured I am totally and unequivocally behind the anarchist cause.

[An archist]

'Get used to it' so there porbably will be more of these actions.
Cool sentence attached to the brick too.

[KC]

why is is it bad to smash banks?

It's not "bad". It's just dumb.

Luddite - "Why is it bad to smash machines?"

[F9]

not for me.Dumb is staying at home and doing nothing and just wait peace to destroy the capitalists!

Fuserg9:star:

[Kropotesta]

It's not "bad". It's just dumb.

Luddite - "Why is it bad to smash machines?"
what a twattish thing to say.
you obviously think it's ok to accuse things of being destructive and oppressive. yet you don't condemn those who take action directly aimed at attacking that thing?

[Bright Banana Beard]

Will someone change the title from Anarchist to "Social Youth Chaos?"

[Cencus]

I chuckled when I read this, it's obviously some pissed off kids taking their frustration out on what they see as an evil. Kinda thing I mighta done 20 years back. No real harm done unless the kids get nicked, and what the heck made me laugh.

[bcbm]

It's not "bad". It's just dumb.

Luddite - "Why is it bad to smash machines?"

Yeah, those dumb Luddite workers, trying to protect their class interests.:rolleyes:

[Organic Revolution]

It's not "bad". It's just dumb.

Luddite - "Why is it bad to smash machines?"


Just an intelligent comment, the world is better for it. Asshat.

[rouchambeau]

Zampanò Quote:
why is is it bad to smash banks?
It's not "bad". It's just dumb.

Luddite - "Why is it bad to smash machines?"

Category error. Machines are not bad in themselves, banks are. It doesn't work to equate the sentiment against banks with that against machines.

[F9]

anarchy will always be the radical ideology who will first fight against capitalism and banks are members of capitalism so ENEMY!

Fuserg9:star:

[bayano]

well, put me squarely in the 'cheers' camp. im too old and known to do this sort of thing, but i wish it happened a hell of a lot more often. focused and nonviolent attacks like this can actually be quite popular with people. particularly if it is against something unpopular in a given community- a boss's office, a lender that has cheated people in the hood, a company in an immigrant community that calls ICE on undocumented workers, banks, police, etc etc. the only reasons not to is to not get caught.

my critique is of their phrasing.
firstly, i think the name 'social youth chaos' is far more damaging to anarchism (tho i agree, we dont know that this was done by anarchists) than concrete thru bank windows.

also, i question the use of second person phrasing in this context. not criticizing it, just questioning it. it is likely that whoever discovers the brick is a private security guard or bank teller or custodian, not the big banker. in other words, likely not 'one of the elite upper class'

hurrary for syc-fsu. good start. dont forget to organize bremerton's communities.

[chegitz guevara]

Throwing rocks at banks is not hurting capitalism one bit. If anything, it strengthens capitalism by making anticapitalist forces seem stoopid.

[bolshevik butcher]

It doesn't look very good for the people that work at the banks or the working class people that use them (yes in the imperialist world most people have bank accounts!). Would you say the same if it was a supermarket or a book shop or something? Becase it might as well have been. While an understandable action, probably by some angry kids as has already been said it's not a helpful or useful one at all and if anything just turns working class people away from socialist ideas by making the left look like vandelising kids with nothing better to do.

[Black Dagger]

I totally agree - leave the banks alone you stupid kids! They're just trying to make money ffs.

[Bilan]

I love these criticisms.
Hilarious.
It's pretty easy to summarize the crux of the problem here:

- One, they're inexperienced 'youths', or 'kids', and thus, due to their inexperience in the class struggle, result to petty vandalism.
- Two, this sort of action makes "us" look bad in the eyes of the press. (Whom, have you forgotten is the voice of the ruling class, and isn't going to support Workers movements anyway!)
- Three, that this wont change anything, and is detrimental to the struggle against Capital.

One is purely ageist nonsense, topped off with blatant arrogance, and sheer hypocracy on the parts - especially of - the younger people who here are criticising it, not to mention those only involved in reformist 'socialist' parties.
Kids, or not, actions against the institutions of capital are not something we should condemn.

Two, is bollocks, and more so, reeks of this "right and wrong" form of protest we often get here (especially after G20!).
Do you know what solidarity is? More over, do you understand the practice of solidarity?
Fact of the matter is, this is not something highly controversial at all. It's a threat to one of the institutions of capital (the banks) of resistance.
This is not alienating itself.
The condemnation of such an action, the lack of solidarity, and the social organizations (i.e. anarchist groups, u nions, etc operating in the area, and how they react) are what will make this action negative.
We don't need the fucking bourgeois media to speak for us.
And when in history has it?
Don't be fucking ridiculous.

Three, No, it wont change. Capitalism will almost certainly continue on, business as usual, in Bremerton tomorrow.
But it's not necessarily going to hinder the anti-capitalist movement.
The way we respond, the way we organize after (and before) this event will determine that.

[apathy maybe]

That is a fucking great post! Thanks (I tried to give rep, but I have to give it to other people first).

This action will not bring down capitalism, of course not. But it isn't meant to, I would suggest. I don't know who did this, but they are pissed off at capitalism, and so why shouldn't they take out their anger on a bank or two?

Any action again capitalism should not be condemned.

[Organic Revolution]

I find it interesting how mainly socialists are batting this one down.

[apathy maybe]

In my experience "socialists" (most of the time read "Marxist-Leninsts" or "Leninists") are the most vocal opponents of direct action and other direct attacks on the capitalist/state system. (Or other actions that don't achieve much over all, such as graffiti.)

Of course, not all "socialists" do this, it is just that of the people on the left who do condemn it, most of them are some variety of "Leninist" almost always.

The stupid thing is, is that they then go out do other things that achieve the exact same result! (Protesting in Sweden against the US invasion of Iraq for example :rolleyes:, or standing for election almost anywhere/anytime.)

[Guerrilla22]

This is about as lame as RAAN kicking in the door of a strip club for "exploiting women".:rolleyes:

RAAN seriously did that? LOL!

[BobKKKindle$]

Any action again capitalism should not be condemned.

Oh? National Liberation struggles are against Capitalism, because they create weaknesses in the imperialist system, although these struggles do not always result in the victory of the working class and the abolition of private property.

[Devrim]

The real question about this sort of action is whether it builds the power and the independence of the working class.

We would say that it doesn't.

Devrim

[Devrim]

Oh? National Liberation struggles are against Capitalism, because they create weaknesses in the imperialist system, although these struggles do not always result in the victory of the working class and the abolition of private property.

National liberation struggles on the another hand lead to thousands of workers getting massacred on behalf of their bosses, and directly maintain the imperialist system.

A whole lot worse than a bunch of kids throwing bricks at banks.

Devrim

[F9]

So your suggesting we sit at home and do nothing until a peaceful strike will come?
Capitalism and fascism needs violence.Either it hurts it 0.01% either 100%

Fuserg9:star:

[chegitz guevara]

In my experience "socialists" (most of the time read "Marxist-Leninsts" or "Leninists") are the most vocal opponents of direct action and other direct attacks on the capitalist/state system. (Or other actions that don't achieve much over all, such as graffiti.)

Maybe because this wasn't a direct attack on the capitalist system. It was public masturbation. It cost the bank a few hundred dollars at most to repair the damage. Way to stick it to the man. Surely capital will fall any day now.

So tell me, how many workers have been won over to your cause by this glorious victory?

[Organic Revolution]

Maybe because this wasn't a direct attack on the capitalist system. It was public masturbation. It cost the bank a few hundred dollars at most to repair the damage. Way to stick it to the man. Surely capital will fall any day now.

So tell me, how many workers have been won over to your cause by this glorious victory?

Tell me, oh-so-revolutionary paper seller, how many workers have joined because you gave them some socialist rag? It is necessary to attack capital by all means, even if it only inflicts a few hundred dollars in damage, it still had an affect. Could you say that selling a paper in front of this bank does the same as a smashed window?

[Lector Malibu]

Why is it every time somebody does something proactive it is put down or mocked as worthless? Really, I'm not saying that what they did was super sonic or amazing but I will say a group of youths where able to put a plan in action, pull it off and that I think speaks volumes for itself.

[Kropotesta]

Yeah I totally agree with yer. plus it's usually people who don't do anything active that moan, the irony.

[BanderaRoja]

In my experience "socialists" (most of the time read "Marxist-Leninsts" or "Leninists") are the most vocal opponents of direct action and other direct attacks on the capitalist/state system. (Or other actions that don't achieve much over all, such as graffiti.)

Of course, not all "socialists" do this, it is just that of the people on the left who do condemn it, most of them are some variety of "Leninist" almost always.

The stupid thing is, is that they then go out do other things that achieve the exact same result! (Protesting in Sweden against the US invasion of Iraq for example :rolleyes:, or standing for election almost anywhere/anytime.)

Your perspective is quite narrow. Marxist-Leninists are currently leading several mass armed struggles around the globe. It's bizarre and ironic for an anarchist to say that Marxist-Leninists are against "direct action". If you really think that a youth-group throwing a brick through a suburban bank window is more of a "direct action" than tens of thousands of peasants and workers forming a military and political cadre and contesting an imperialist backed army for land and power, then I would greatly question your judgement. Modern anarchism seems to be organized more along a age/cultural-struggle paradigm, placing youth culture as a sort of vanguard. Such a struggle might have a place in the future, but for now the class struggle supersedes it in the majority of the world.

Selling a newspaper might indeed have more of a revolutionary effect than this (not that I support selling newspaper, personally I find its only even worth it in a minority of situations). Newspapers can spread opinions and organize local events. A newspaper that organizes people to contest reactionary groups or policies (I'm thinking of something like the Minutemen or neo-conservative politicians) can have a relatively tangible positive outcome and provide momentum for those involved in revolutionary politics. I don't really see how a window-smashing can really have such an effect. A newspaper can lead to actual societal change, this brick-throwing will lead mostly to self-satisfaction by the perpetrators.

[chegitz guevara]

Tell me, oh-so-revolutionary paper seller, how many workers have joined because you gave them some socialist rag?

Gee, I wonder why I don't bother with paper sales. Because just like throwing rocks through windows, it's useless.


It is necessary to attack capital by all means,

You're becoming a suicide bomber when? After all, it is a means by which you can attack capital. Therefore it is necessary. You will be remember, oh martyr.


even if it only inflicts a few hundred dollars in damage, it still had an affect.

The only effect it had was to make leftists look like puerile hooligans. The bank is covered by insurance. The insurance company takes it as a write-off and charges its customers more, who in turn pass it long to their consumers, who also have to make up for the tax shortfall. Double whammy, the bank is fine, you look like an idiot, and some glazier is buying his wife a steak dinner.


Could you say that selling a paper in front of this bank does the same as a smashed window?

Selling a paper would turn less people against you, thus it is less harmful to the movement than throwing rocks.

[chegitz guevara]

Why is it every time somebody does something proactive it is put down or mocked as worthless?

Not every time, just when it's worthless. If you find you are constantly being mocked and put down as worthless, perhaps the problem is you.

[Comrade Rage]

Is this the most effective way to combat capitalism, no. But I'm stunned that anyone would condemn it. To the contrary, I applaud it. Sometimes you just have to DO something about the injustice in this world, and the amount of pain these banks are causing people.

If you must get pissed, get pissed at the bankers.

[STI]

Quote:
even if it only inflicts a few hundred dollars in damage, it still had an affect.
The only effect it had was to make leftists look like puerile hooligans. The bank is covered by insurance. The insurance company takes it as a write-off and charges its customers more, who in turn pass it long to their consumers, who also have to make up for the tax shortfall. Double whammy, the bank is fine, you look like an idiot, and some glazier is buying his wife a steak dinner.

What's important about an action like this one isn't the direct monetary damage inflicted upon the bank by a broken window, it's the meaning behind it: that private property is not sacred.

In the same way that punching Bill O'Reilly in the mouth wouldn't be an attack on capital because it made his mouth hurt but because it would take him off his pedestal, show that he doesn't have to be tolerated; this brick though the window demonstrates publicly that there are those who don't respect the rights of property and who are willing to undermine it.

And that's a step in the right direction.

[bcbm]

Throwing rocks v. "organizing the masses" (be moar vague) is a false dichotomy.


Selling a paper would turn less people against you, thus it is less harmful to the movement than throwing rocks.

Because I'm sure most workers have never had the desire to throw a rock through the window of a bank/their job/their boss' windshield, etc.

And if people are seriously turned off by a few busted windows, good luck convincing them of the necessity of armed struggle against the bourgeoisie.:rolleyes:

[Lector Malibu]

Not every time, just when it's worthless. If you find you are constantly being mocked and put down as worthless, perhaps the problem is you.

Actually people don't mock me but please continue....

[chegitz guevara]

Sometimes you just have to DO something about the injustice in this world, and the amount of pain these banks are causing people.

I don't disagree you have to do something. The disagreement is over what something means. Is that something effective or counter-productive? Vandalism is counter-productive. It is worse than useless. It helps the ruling class, as it increases the legitimacy of their call for increased law and order, which hurts everyone else. It is differentiated from terrorism only by degree.

[bcbm]

It helps the ruling class, as it increases the legitimacy of their call for increased law and order, which hurts everyone else.

We should moderate our means for attack out of fear of state reprisals? If we're doing anything of merit, the state will be on us and they have no shortage of reasons to legitimize their calls for "law and order." But who really falls for those? Again, I seriously doubt working people give a fuck about some bank windows getting fucked up. We shouldn't be worried about how the state responds to our actions- they will always respond with crack-downs, etc against revolutionaries, whether we break windows or organize strikes. The only way to avoid giving their claims "legitimacy" is to do nothing, because bourgeois law and order is our enemy.

[Comrade Rage]

I don't disagree you have to do something. The disagreement is over what something means. Is that something effective or counter-productive?It is minimally effective in that it costs something to replace the windows. Like I said before, sometimes people just need to fight back, and they strike where they can.

Vandalism is counter-productive. It is worse than useless. It helps the ruling class, as it increases the legitimacy of their call for increased law and order, which hurts everyone else.Uh, excuse me, it HELPS them? By providing an excuse to crack down on us? They've never needed an excuse, they've attacked activists for little to no reason before.

It is differentiated from terrorism only by degree.And your torturous 'logic' is followed to it's conclusion. Guess what, this is the same logic that the cops use to call the Joint Terrorism Task Force on protestors. This is a show of sabotage. No one gets hurt, very little damage is done.
It's strange though, that you decry this as nothing BS, but a couple of sentences later you say it's akin to TERRORISM:scared:. Which one is it?

(It seems like you and some other people have more sympathy for the windows than the people who broke them. *Tisk*)

[abbielives!]

And if people are seriously turned off by a few busted windows, good luck convincing them of the necessity of armed struggle against the bourgeoisie.:rolleyes:


Amen to that.

[MT5678]

And if people are seriously turned off by a few busted windows, good luck convincing them of the necessity of armed struggle against the bourgeoisie.


Yeah. Remember, the IWW was openly contemptuous of bourgeois "respectability". Are we to dishonor the names of our fallen comrades?

[mario_buda]

The "Conspiracy of Cells of Fire Thessaloniki-Athens" claimed responsibility for a series of arson attacks in Athens.

On Wednesday 5:20 in the afternoon, the first gas canister device exploded at former minister of justice, Papaligouras office. An unknown person phone called a TV station claiming the arson was in solidarity to the antiauthoritarian Giorgos Voutsis-Vogiatzis, in pre-trial imprisonment since the armed bank robbery at Gizi, and promised the attacks will continue.

The same night, from 2:00 to 2:10, in diverse areas in Athens 8 banks were set on fire, 4 luxurious cars and one insurance company. In particularly, Proton bank in central Athens, City Bank in Petroupoli, Millennium Bank in Gerakas, Millennium Bank in central Athens, City Bank in Pireaus, Open 24 (Eurobank) in Pireaus, Eurobank in Syggrou, Eurobank in Kallithea, Cyprus Bank in Patissia, and Ethniki Bank in Vyronas were set on fire. Also a Cyprus Bank vehicle in Argyroupolis, a sanitary department car in Glyfada, another car the press does n't clarify, and a Security group owned Mercedes in Kolonos, as well as the offices of Ethniki Insurance company in Kato Halandri.

Communique:

"The economic dictatorship establishes itself everyday on, either on the caterpillar tractors of the tanks, in order to complete the pillage (Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan), either on the conformism and obeisance of a compromised society that accepts with resignation the terms of captivity and reproduces them.

In these conditions, work is the welfare of economy being the machine's act of war in times of peace. The coercive 8hour work ties up all our time, our possibilities, our mood, our whole existence in exchange for the everyday commands of our bosses and a compensation payment.

This is why we consciously are in the opposite side. We don't beg for social concessions, nor are we interested in the syndicalists' argle-bargle on the pension system. We negate to our thankful exploration. We negate to negotiate for the matter-of-course of irrationality, because work may not be something to be ashamed of but it is something you are obliged to. Every day the same landscape, tired faces, eyes dejected, anxious time and our dignity checking its time-card in the bosses clock.

That's why we arm the old ways and invent new ones in order to escape the captivity of work. We propose a total attack against the existence and the morality of work. Looting of commodities and money from the temples of consumption and profit, torching economic targets, sabotaging the normal circulation of production, self-organised workplace ruptures and attacks...

Thats why we stand in solidarity to the revolutionary decision of the comrade Giorgos Voutsis-Vogiatzis who is kept detained for the armed robbery in ETE bank in Gizi, denying to accept the handcuffs of the constraint of work. As a minimum sign of disordering the smooth functioning of the economic dictatorship, we attacked last night banks, government targets and private insurance companies, and we also claim responsibility for the attack against the political office of the former justice minister Anastassis Papaligouras in Kolonaki. We also claim responsibility for last Wednesday attack at an Emporiki bank subsidiary on 124 Botsari street in Thessaloniki and the attack on Monday in the subsidiary of employment ministry on Antigonidon street, central Thessaloniki.

We do not forget any imprisoned comrade. We 'll be back soon...

Conspiracy of cells of fire Thessaloniki-Athens"

[KC]

Yeah, those dumb Luddite workers, trying to protect their class interests.

You're right. Poor analogy. The Luddites were just acting in their class interests. These are just a bunch of petty-bourgeois "alienated" youth. I shouldn't have compared them to something as serious and involved in the class struggle as the Luddites.


Category error. Machines are not bad in themselves, banks are.

Sorry I don't argue from a moral standpoint.


I totally agree - leave the banks alone you stupid kids! They're just trying to make money ffs.

I know right!


- One, they're inexperienced 'youths', or 'kids', and thus, due to their inexperience in the class struggle, result to petty vandalism.

No, it's due to their class position and their status as "alienated" petit-bourgeois.


I find it interesting how mainly socialists are batting this one down.

Really? You find it surprising that Marxists are against the individualist actions of such anarchists and their Narodnik tendencies?


RAAN seriously did that? LOL!

Word.

Strip clubs, like banks are "bad" and should be attacked.


Tell me, oh-so-revolutionary paper seller

Nice argument.


It is necessary to attack capital by all means

Sure. Go throw bricks through windows while we actually organize to end capitalism.


even if it only inflicts a few hundred dollars in damage, it still had an affect.

What effect is that, besides a broken window?


What's important about an action like this one isn't the direct monetary damage inflicted upon the bank by a broken window, it's the meaning behind it: that private property is not sacred.

I wonder how many people that heard about this that didn't think that before think that now because of this action.

Answer: 0.


We should moderate our means for attack out of fear of state reprisals? If we're doing anything of merit, the state will be on us and they have no shortage of reasons to legitimize their calls for "law and order."

The only time that violent or destructive action is appropriate is when it is already supported by the masses.


Again, I seriously doubt working people give a fuck about some bank windows getting fucked up.

Thank you for supporting my point.


We shouldn't be worried about how the state responds to our actions- they will always respond with crack-downs, etc against revolutionaries, whether we break windows or organize strikes.

There is, of course, a slight difference in the two. With one action you are being arrested for breaking a window; in the other you are being arrested for organizing against the state. In once instance you are a political prisoner; in the other you are a petty vandal.


And if people are seriously turned off by a few busted windows, good luck convincing them of the necessity of armed struggle against the bourgeoisie.

You don't win people over through throwing a brick through a window, just like you don't win them over by performing revolution.

[black magick hustla]

C'mon guys. I wouldnt particularly say this action was useful, but it was probably somewhat fun. The kind of fun of slashing the tires of your boss, or breaking the windows of his house.

I don't know why people get mad at this. The people who think this is a "direct assault" against capital or whatever are pretty damn insane tho.

[KC]

C'mon guys. I wouldnt particularly say this action was useful, but it was probably somewhat fun. The kind of fun of slashing the tires of your boss, or breaking the windows of his house.

Oh, cmon Marmot. I'm not mad. I just think it's dumb. Especially to claim that it was a "political action". I'd be all for it if it was just for shits and giggles.

Breaking shit is fun!

[to the bearricades]

Especially to claim that it was a "political action". I'd be all for it if it was just for shits and giggles.

Breaking shit is fun!

Your idea of politics are thus pretty boring.

[to the bearricades]

You're right. Poor analogy. The Luddites were just acting in their class interests. These are just a bunch of petty-bourgeois "alienated" youth. I shouldn't have compared them to something as serious and involved in the class struggle as the Luddites.

Luddites certainly defended their interests through destroying production. People who attack banks are also acting to damage that which enforces their servitude (production). Its in all of our interests do destroy banks. And destroying their windows is a good (though modest) start. Have you done anything lately to destroy capital; or at the very least to practice destroying capital? If you're like most Trots, you don't even need to respond.



Really? You find it surprising that Marxists are against the individualist actions of such anarchists and their Narodnik tendencies?I'm definitely not surprised that an authoritarian marxist would condemn those who actually take action against the institutions they despise (rather than reproducing their structure)



Strip clubs, like banks are "bad" and should be attacked.yeah.


Sure. Go throw bricks through windows while we actually organize to end capitalism.How has that organizing worked out so far?



What effect is that, besides a broken window?Nobody is claiming that a single broken window will end capitalism. But the real result is people who are more experienced and more prepared to enact more devastating damage to capital. Practice makes perfect. What have you done to get ready lately?



I wonder how many people that heard about this that didn't think that before think that now because of this action.

How many people have you converted to the wonderful world of Trotsky? Why hasn't your stale analysis really persuaded anybody of anything? Why haven't the masses fallen in line behind your revolutionary program? Its mind-boggling.


The only time that violent or destructive action is appropriate is when it is already supported by the masses.

Firstly, in references to "the masses" see above. With all your brave educating and agitating, why aren't the masses all in agreement with your piercing trot analysis? And whether or not "the masses" support something, is a ridiculous standard by which to judge the appropriateness of an action. The masses supported the destruction of millions in the holocaust. The masses also supported the invasion of Iraq. Attacking banks is always appropriate.


You don't win people over through throwing a brick through a window, just like you don't win them over by performing revolution.You also don't win them over with boring politics and alienating ideology. You certainly aren't winning anyone over. Have fun rallying the masses behind the brave vanguard; we'll be busy actually doing things.

[to the bearricades]

The "Conspiracy of Cells of Fire Thessaloniki-Athens" claimed responsibility for a series of arson attacks in Athens.

On Wednesday 5:20 in the afternoon, the first gas canister device exploded at former minister of justice, Papaligouras office. An unknown person phone called a TV station claiming the arson was in solidarity to the antiauthoritarian Giorgos Voutsis-Vogiatzis, in pre-trial imprisonment since the armed bank robbery at Gizi, and promised the attacks will continue.

The same night, from 2:00 to 2:10, in diverse areas in Athens 8 banks were set on fire, 4 luxurious cars and one insurance company. In particularly, Proton bank in central Athens, City Bank in Petroupoli, Millennium Bank in Gerakas, Millennium Bank in central Athens, City Bank in Pireaus, Open 24 (Eurobank) in Pireaus, Eurobank in Syggrou, Eurobank in Kallithea, Cyprus Bank in Patissia, and Ethniki Bank in Vyronas were set on fire. Also a Cyprus Bank vehicle in Argyroupolis, a sanitary department car in Glyfada, another car the press does n't clarify, and a Security group owned Mercedes in Kolonos, as well as the offices of Ethniki Insurance company in Kato Halandri.

Communique:

"The economic dictatorship establishes itself everyday on, either on the caterpillar tractors of the tanks, in order to complete the pillage (Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan), either on the conformism and obeisance of a compromised society that accepts with resignation the terms of captivity and reproduces them.

In these conditions, work is the welfare of economy being the machine's act of war in times of peace. The coercive 8hour work ties up all our time, our possibilities, our mood, our whole existence in exchange for the everyday commands of our bosses and a compensation payment.

This is why we consciously are in the opposite side. We don't beg for social concessions, nor are we interested in the syndicalists' argle-bargle on the pension system. We negate to our thankful exploration. We negate to negotiate for the matter-of-course of irrationality, because work may not be something to be ashamed of but it is something you are obliged to. Every day the same landscape, tired faces, eyes dejected, anxious time and our dignity checking its time-card in the bosses clock.

That's why we arm the old ways and invent new ones in order to escape the captivity of work. We propose a total attack against the existence and the morality of work. Looting of commodities and money from the temples of consumption and profit, torching economic targets, sabotaging the normal circulation of production, self-organised workplace ruptures and attacks...

Thats why we stand in solidarity to the revolutionary decision of the comrade Giorgos Voutsis-Vogiatzis who is kept detained for the armed robbery in ETE bank in Gizi, denying to accept the handcuffs of the constraint of work. As a minimum sign of disordering the smooth functioning of the economic dictatorship, we attacked last night banks, government targets and private insurance companies, and we also claim responsibility for the attack against the political office of the former justice minister Anastassis Papaligouras in Kolonaki. We also claim responsibility for last Wednesday attack at an Emporiki bank subsidiary on 124 Botsari street in Thessaloniki and the attack on Monday in the subsidiary of employment ministry on Antigonidon street, central Thessaloniki.

We do not forget any imprisoned comrade. We 'll be back soon...

Conspiracy of cells of fire Thessaloniki-Athens"

Greeks need to stop making us look bad.

[Bilan]

Gee, I wonder why I don't bother with paper sales. Because just like throwing rocks through windows, it's useless.


In the absence of both theory, propaganda, and action, you've already failed.

[bcbm]

These are just a bunch of petty-bourgeois "alienated" youth.

Odd that you know the class background of anonymous individuals. Petit-bourgeois (French FTW) as a Marxist pejorative is boring and overrused.


Sure. Go throw bricks through windows while we actually organize to end capitalism.

False dichotomy.


The only time that violent or destructive action is appropriate is when it is already supported by the masses.

So when the small, relatively unsupported Bolsheviks resorted to violent action in order to secure funds for themselves, that wasn't okay? It isn't violent action at any time that wins or loses the "support of the masses," so there is really no reason to not attack capital when given the opportunity. Furthermore, it isn't as though working people are afraid of violence- they use it often and vigorously in a wide variety of struggles.


Thank you for supporting my point.

Clever, but you know what I meant.:rolleyes:


There is, of course, a slight difference in the two.

Well no shit, way to completely miss the point again.

And what if you break a window while striking? Which category do you get lumped in then?


You don't win people over through throwing a brick through a window

Who ever suggested that you did? Quit creating strawman arguments.

[chegitz guevara]

C'mon guys. I wouldnt particularly say this action was useful, but it was probably somewhat fun.

Masturbationis also fun, but I don't do it in public.

[Bright Banana Beard]

Masturbationis also fun, but I don't do it in public.

I dare you to do it in public!

[F9]

we are dumb because we fight capitalism?I dont think so.Dumbs are those which dont doing nothing!Men we will continue to do it and we just dont pay attention in stupid arguments saying that this think is just dumb!And in greece where happens really often they always leave a message behind usually for prisoned comrades as the example above but they never forget the actual argument to do this to FIGHT CAPITALISM!

Fuserg9:star:

[Devrim]

How do supporters of this think that it builds the power and independence of the working class?
Devrim

[mario_buda]

People acting against their restraints, against institutions of domination (the state and capital, etc) in their daily lives, necessarily "builds the power and the independence of the working class."

If only every prole would go smash a bank rather than go to work (reproducing their own alienation).

[apathy maybe]

How do supporters of this think that it builds the power and independence of the working class?
Devrim

I don't. How does it reduce the power and independence of the working class? It doesn't.

What is there to complain about? Nothing.

[Devrim]

I don't. How does it reduce the power and independence of the working class? It doesn't.

What is there to complain about? Nothing.

I didn't condemn it. I also don't condemn people who spend their time playing football. This is about as revolutionary as drinking a cup of tea.

Devrim

[Devrim]

If only every prole would go smash a bank rather than go to work (reproducing their own alienation).

But they aren't doing, and this is voluntarism, and substitutionalism of the worst sort.

It is not revolutionary.

Devrim

[Colonello Buendia]

these acts though not to be condemned shouldn't be condoned purely because it gives the left a bad name. look at the Martin Luther King Jr quote in my signature to see why I disagree with these acts

[chegitz guevara]

I dare you to do it in public!

Nah, once was enough.

[mario_buda]

But they aren't doing, and this is voluntarism, and substitutionalism of the worst sort.

It is not revolutionary.

Devrim

They aren't doing? If workers would only "do nothing" and smash what makes them work, controls them and alienates them, this would be to the contrary very "revolutionary." Voluntary and willful attacks against capital is what inspires many to take courage and inspiration in their own struggles. I'm not familure with your uses of voluntarism or substutionalism or why these sorts are the worst. Re-educate me.

Your idea of revolution sounds boring. Where's the party at?


StateSUx said:


these acts though not to be condemned shouldn't be condoned purely because it gives the left a bad name. look at the Martin Luther King Jr quote in my signature to see why I disagree with these acts

Someone's sounding a little too much like a politician for an anarchist. Not condoning and finding inspiration in such acts is what "gives the left a bad name." What's the point of being against capital if you can't be AGAINST CAPITAL? Who will ever want to join your mass movements if you don't even ever do anything exciting?

[Bilan]

How do supporters of this think that it builds the power and independence of the working class?
Devrim

As a supporter, I say it doesn't.
But it is a willful action against the institutions of capital.

It's like when the anarchists in Greece fire bombed the riot police head quarters.
That wont abolish the police, but it's a willful act of destruction against the state.

[to the bearricades]

How do supporters of this think that it builds the power and independence of the working class?
Devrim

I hate when those who've never experienced a liberated moment in their lives talk about "power" and "independence", all while condemning those who've actually realize their agency. Don't preach about power to those who've actually begun to enact their rage against capital. Destroying what destroys you is more empowering than you can ever imagine from the comfort of your computer desk. If not put into action "power" and "independence" are little more than words.

[KC]

Your idea of revolution sounds boring. Where's the party at?

:laugh:

I'd say this pretty much sums up your position, and shows why nobody here takes you seriously.

Why don't you go dumpster diving?


I hate when those who've never experienced a liberated moment in their lives talk about "power" and "independence", all while condemning those who've actually realize their agency. Don't preach about power to those who've actually begun to enact their rage against capital. Destroying what destroys you is more empowering than you can ever imagine from the comfort of your computer desk. If not put into action "power" and "independence" are little more than words.

This is hilarious directed at Devrim.

[black magick hustla]

You kids havw been reading too much Crimethinc.

To be honest, I do think that doing whatever the fuck you want rather than being a good citizen is almost always a positive thing. Whether that is playing football or breaking a banks' windows.

[F9]

We (anarchists) like to be in action all the time.You cant have strikes everyday ,you cant find fascists and beat them every day, so a bomb to banks which symbolize capitalism it just makes us the day run better!We know that we did something against what we hate and we wont stay anarchists just from the name but from the actions!If people dont like our actions THEIR PROBLEM!They are free to act in the way they want but not against us!

Fuserg9:star:

[Devrim]

They aren't doing? If workers would only "do nothing" and smash what makes them work, controls them and alienates them, this would be to the contrary very "revolutionary." Voluntary and willful attacks against capital is what inspires many to take courage and inspiration in their own struggles. I'm not familure with your uses of voluntarism or substutionalism or why these sorts are the worst. Re-educate me.

It's funny isn't it. The anarchists whine about vanguardism, and then come out with stuff like this. It is worse than the worst sort of Leninism.

'They aren't doing' referred to 'If only every prole would go smash a bank rather than go to work'.

Devrim

[to the bearricades]

You kids havw been reading too much Crimethinc.


Valid. Nice job making a strawman argument in regards to what books you believe us to have read. And are you insinuating that because people do and support inspiring things and action they must be "kids"?


I'd say this pretty much sums up your position, and shows why nobody here takes you seriously.

So you don't take people seriously if they analyze something as boring? Thats fine, but then keep your boredom to yourself. In opposing capital we want to destroy drudgery and stagnation. That certainly won't happen by reproducing the same stagnation and toil in your 'movements'.

And its also funny that you use the word "here". As if your internet warrior analysis means anything to people who are more concerned with action than forums.

[Devrim]

I hate when those who've never experienced a liberated moment in their lives talk about "power" and "independence"

I nearly dislike people making assumptions about others as much as I dislike sub-situationist nonsense.

Devrim

[to the bearricades]

It's funny isn't it. The anarchists whine about vanguardism, and then come out with stuff like this. It is worse than the worst sort of Leninism.

Haha, did you seriously make that arguement?
Almost all the authoritarians on this thread are condemning the actions of enraged individuals because they don't fall in line with their party's idea of what proper revolutionary behavior is. Don't speak of vanguardism while condemning people for acting in ways unapproved of by the party elite. How is supporting everyones agency to strike back at capital vanguardist?

[black magick hustla]

Valid. Nice job making a strawman argument in regards to what books you believe us to have read. And are you insinuating that because people do and support inspiring things and action they must be "kids"?


I'd say this pretty much sums up your position, and shows why nobody here takes you seriously.

So you don't take people seriously if they analyze something as boring? Thats fine, but then keep your boredom to yourself. In opposing capital we want to destroy drudgery and stagnation. That certainly won't happen by reproducing the same stagnation and toil in your 'movements'.

And its also funny that you use the word "here". As if your internet warrior analysis means anything to people who are more concerned with action than forums.

First, I am not making "strawmen", I am really familiar with situationist theory. In fact, I could argue I am somewhat of a fan of them. I do acknowledge though, that the mayority of them were worthless dilettantes with trees up their asses.

We can talk of action all day. Next week I am going to go backpacking to Tenesse with a bunch of kids. Sure being 5 days perpetually drunk in the wilderness is no less revolutionary than smashing the windows of a bank? Sure if everybodfy went backpacking to tenesse capital would go down, woudln't it?

You are awfully boring.

[to the bearricades]

I nearly dislike people making assumptions about others as much as I dislike sub-situationist nonsense.

Devrim

Like making assumptions as to the class of the people who carried out this action, or their intentions? Nearly every criticism of this action has been a fallacy or a misunderstanding about the intentions or the class of the actors. Get serious.

[Devrim]

Like making assumptions as to the class of the people who carried out this action, or their intentions? Nearly every criticism of this action has been a fallacy or a misunderstanding about the intentions or the class of the actors. Get serious.

None of mine. Go back, and read them. It was you who was making assumptions about me.

devrim

[to the bearricades]

First, I am not making "strawmen", I am really familiar with situationist theory. In fact, I could argue I am somewhat of a fan of them. I do acknowledge though, that the mayority of them were worthless dilettantes with trees up their asses.

No you are, in fact, making strawman arguements. You tried entirely dismissing several peoples arguementation by making assumptions about what watered down book they may or may not ascribe to.


We can talk of action all day. Next week I am going to go backpacking to Tenesse with a bunch of kids. Sure being 5 days perpetually drunk and blown in the wilderness is no less revolutionary than smashing the windows of a bank? Sure if everybodfy went backpacking to tenesse capital would go down, woudln't it?

That does sound rather fun. But nobody ever made the assertion that everyone replicating an action would tear capital down. People did, however, say that any action (however inconsequential) is important to build and understanding of how to revolt and how to strike against power.


You are awfully boring.

cute :)

[KC]

In opposing capital we want to destroy drudgery and stagnation.

Which was my point exactly. You do it because you're bored.


Almost all the authoritarians on this thread are condemning the actions of enraged individuals because they don't fall in line with their party's idea of what proper revolutionary behavior is.

It has nothing to do with "behavior". It has to do entirely with an incredibly lame ideology that is based around "combatting boredom" and not capitalism. But keep doing what you're doing; we'll actually organize workers against capital and do something effective.

At least you're not bored, right?


Don't speak of vanguardism while condemning people for acting in ways unapproved of by the party elite.

Which party elite is this?

[Black Cross]

It's not on topic with any one of the current arguments in this thread, but I just wanna say, even though I don't consider myself one, I love anarchists (whether or not this bank attack [or whatever you'd call it] was by an anarchist group). Keep on kickin ass comrades.

[to the bearricades]

None of mine. Go back, and read them. It was you who was making assumptions about me.

devrim

Sorry, anything I said wasn't about you in particular.


It has nothing to do with "behavior". It has to do entirely with an incredibly lame ideology that is based around "combatting boredom" and not capitalism. But keep doing what you're doing; we'll actually organize workers against capital and do something effective.

At least you're not bored, right?

Its funny that a Trotskyist would call any ideology "lame". And no, my ideology isn't about "combatting boredom" in fact, I'm relatively unconcerned with 'ideology' in general. I'm way more interested in actually doing thing to bring down capitalism, not just talking about the way I'd like to bring it down. so go ahead "organize workers against capital". Way to be vague and stale. How has that worked out for you so far? The masses eating it up yet?


Which party elite is this?
Oh sorry, the Trotskyist intellectual forum elite. My mistake.

[mario_buda]

:laugh:

I'd say this pretty much sums up your position, and shows why nobody here takes you seriously.

Why don't you go dumpster diving?
.

I find it pathetic that authoritarians have such a hard time talking about desire and passion, as if anything else could inspire the destruction of what represses it. But really, could you be authoritarian with out self repression? No wonder you get so upset when anyone else talks about it. It seems so unfair doesn't it? You want to have fun too, but you can't allow yourself to, like a child stuck inside while everyone else is free to play.

The fact that you do not take this seriously sums up your position as well and it's exactly why I don't take you seriously (as well as hardly anyone outside of this stale milieu). Who wants to join something that's all about suffering and self repression necessarily? I'm sorry you've been duped into it. You can still come out and play.

[KC]

And no, my ideology isn't about "combatting boredom"

...

"organiz[ing] workers against capital" [is] vague and stale.

:rolleyes:


I'm way more interested in actually doing thing to bring down capitalismLike...


Oh sorry, the Trotskyist intellectual forum elite. My mistake.Funny you'd say such a thing about Trotskyists, when the prevailing joke is that they can't agree on anything. Make up your mind!

[BanderaRoja]

Throwing rocks v. "organizing the masses" (be moar vague) is a false dichotomy.

I didn't think I was being vague, but what I was referring to were armed insurrections by peasants and workers around the world. People's Wars are being currently fought in Nepal, Phillipines and India. Armed peasants and workers are currently also engaged in combat in Colombia, Peru (at a low intensity), etc. Obviously if one looks back at history the list is considerably longer. The vast majority of these struggles are led by Marxists-Leninists, primarily "Stalinists"/Maoists but also Trotskyists to some degree. I was attempting to point out that:

1. Apathy Maybe accused Marxists-Leninists of being averse to direct action. That view is absolutely loony in light of the facts. Marxists-Leninists have organized military and political wings of workers/peasants with tens of thousands of members and entire logistics operations that have been able to actually directly challenge states and the bourgeoisie. These are actual people laying their life and livelihood on the line as part of a struggle over power. The action being championed in this thread is someone throwing a brick through what is essentially a suburban store-front. There are high-school pranks that "challenge Capital" to a greater extent than that.

2. I suspect that part of the reason Apathy Maybe has this viewpoint is because anarchists are often myopic in relation to the Third World.


And if people are seriously turned off by a few busted windows, good luck convincing them of the necessity of armed struggle against the bourgeoisie.:rolleyes:

Sorry, I don't agree that this line of reasoning is correct at all. The two actions (armed struggle and this brick incident) are logically similar but carry extremely disproportionate weight in real life. Of course people desire to abolish work, however, by that same token most people in the world are intelligent enough to know that carrying something like that out will require an extremely large-scale complex mass operation. If your plan to abolish one of the fundamental and most pervasive institutions of industrial capitalism is to resort to disorganized, individualist actions most people will dismiss it offhand as doomed to fail. If you present an organized, articulated plan that is able to continually analyze social conditions and adjust strategy, and thereby has some chance of victory, people will take you much more seriously.

This is why in the past decade some number (likely in the hundreds of thousands) of individuals have taken up arms under a red flag, but very few have done so under a black one. Currently the bourgeoisie is most brutal and repressive in Third World nations where imperialist influence is large. The workers and peasants fighting there don't have the luxury of "following their desire" or enacting some relatively vague metaphysical concept of freedom. Political and economic victory is paramount and failure will cost people lives and livelihood. The scientific leadership that Marxism offers in that situation is why it is numerically much larger than Anarchism in most of the world and why in times of crisis people will likely turn to Marxist parties as opposed to Anarchist groups.


Your idea of revolution sounds boring. Where's the party at?

This reminds me of the anarchist quote "If I can't dance to it, it's not my revolution".

Who said revolution was in any way going to be fun? Revolution is an act of political and economic necessity. Most revolutions are about as far from fun as you can get. Take the example of Nicaragua. Having to take up arms, leave your home, experience economic hardship and watch your comrades get hacked to death by American-trained death squads is not my idea of "fun". However, if people had taken your example and decided to individually enact wanton violence rather than unifying into disciplined units that could work collectively then the result would have likely been much worse, more along the lines of immediate military defeat and mass retaliation enacted by the bourgeois. Its comporably to American football. If all else is relatively equal the side that will win is the one with the most detailed understanding of their own playbook as well as the ability to evaluate the rival's plays as the game progresses.

This is also why, in my experience, anarchists also continually have the label of "petty bourgeois" levelled at them or are accused of being immature. The notion that all of life should be fun, satisfy every individual's personal desire and simple in organization is characteristic of someone who is either naive and unfamiliar with ideas of necessity and self-sacrifice (as in someone who has grown up in relative luxury) or someone whose worldview is dominated by the suburban First World. In fact, despite the fact that anarchists see themselves as much deeper social critics than Marxists, their movement actually reproduces bourgeois social norms to a greater degree. We see it here:


I hate when those who've never experienced a liberated moment in their lives talk about "power" and "independence", all while condemning those who've actually realize their agency. Don't preach about power to those who've actually begun to enact their rage against capital. Destroying what destroys you is more empowering than you can ever imagine from the comfort of your computer desk. If not put into action "power" and "independence" are little more than words.

This perspective is a construction of First World consumer society, with its emphasis on immediate satisfaction and the individual being central to struggle. The principles that 1. There are times when the individual must sacrifice immediate desires for greater future success (discipline) and 2. The liberation of the whole of the class is primary above individual liberation. are alien to modern anarchism but central to the class struggle in the majority of the world.

[BanderaRoja]

I find it pathetic that authoritarians have such a hard time talking about desire and passion, as if anything else could inspire the destruction of what represses it. But really, could you be authoritarian with out self repression?

Who said Leninists lack desire and passion? First of all, self-repression is not a desire but a necessity in most class struggles. If breaking unity with your political grouping is going to setback the class struggle or bring repression on other revolutionaries, then yes personal desires might have to be repressed.

Secondly, how are self-repression and desire/passion mutually exclusive? Someone who has enough passion/desire to forego petty immediate concerns for ultimate victory or advancement seems to me to have much more passion than someone who can only muster enough will to commit small acts of vandalism.


It seems so unfair doesn't it? You want to have fun too, but you can't allow yourself to, like a child stuck inside while everyone else is free to play.

This is actually a perfect analogy. Most anarchists represent petty-bourgeois values, many are heavily tied into bourgeois academia. For them, they are relatively free on the outside, the pressures put on the proletariat are often non-existent with them. However, they are still dissatisfied with bourgeois society. Thus they are resentful against both the bourgeoisie and those who are still "trapped". The proletariat really *is* constrained in its physical conditions, which is why liberation is much more of a serious and important matter than simply reading "radical" critiques and espousing vague metaphysical notions about what really constitutes emotional freedom. The only thing you got wrong is that at the current moment there are more people trapped inside the house than there are outside playing freely.

[Devrim]

The whole thing about 'boredom' is a strange argument to be putting forward today. It is worth considering its roots though which are in some of those breaking from Trotskyism during and in the aftermath of the Second World War.

In the period of the post war reconstruction there were some, particular Castoriadis who claimed that capitalism had overcome its internal contradictions, and that the crisis was over. For those then, the main contradiction in society had to be different. Partially looking back to the young Marx, they decided that the new 'revolutionary motor' in society was 'alienation'. People would rebel because they were bored, and alienated*.

Guy Debord, the Situationist ideologue, was taken in by all this, and was actually a member of Castoriadis' group, 'Socialisme ou Barbarie'. All was going fine and dandy ideologically speaking until the 1960 came to an end, and the 1970s came along, the crisis returned along with mass unemployment, and kicked the whole theory repeatedly in the teeth.

To say that all the working class has to rebel against today is boredom is to walk blindly through the horror which is modern capital.

If we look merely at our country, we have gone through over twenty years of severe economic crisis and attacks on working class living conditions. We have also gone through over two and a half decades of war**.

These are familiar conditions for workers in many countries today. Added to this global phenomenon such as the massive looming environmental disaster, and the perspective is clear.

Today capital has nothing to offer the working class except war, impoverisation, and disaster. The choice is not between fun, or boredom, but the same as it was when Luxemborg posed the question nearly a century ago; Socialism or barbarism.

Devrim

*Interestingly enough they also decide that the main conflict was not between capital and Labour, but between order givers and order takers, which is where the bizarre theory of the co-ordinator class come from.
**Some may even go as far as to suggest that the two are somehow related.

[black magick hustla]

uh, I think alienation is a central question to the project of communism. Otherwise, you get a bunch of stalinists speaking about life expectancy rates without considering property relations.

[Devrim]

Yes, it is. However, it isn't the only thing. It is not as if capitalism is all rosy except for alienation.

Devrim

[mario_buda]

To say that all the working class has to rebel against today is boredom is to walk blindly through the horror which is modern capital.

Boredom is necessarily an integral part of capital, and is a product of a situation that is perpetually out of our control (state socialist/capitalist or otherwise). When we talk of our situation this is another way of talking about how it is undesirable, being alienated and full of a numbing dullness and fixed and limiting possibility.

It would be silly to merely be against boredom. I don't think anyone is suggesting this.

[KC]

I find it pathetic that authoritarians have such a hard time talking about desire and passion, as if anything else could inspire the destruction of what represses it.

You mean like class interests?

Oh, and I find you pathetic, too.


But really, could you be authoritarian with out self repression? No wonder you get so upset when anyone else talks about it. It seems so unfair doesn't it? You want to have fun too, but you can't allow yourself to, like a child stuck inside while everyone else is free to play.

No. I'm not concerned about "having fun" in terms of getting rid of capitalism. Why? Because it's not about having fun.


The fact that you do not take this seriously sums up your position as well and it's exactly why I don't take you seriously (as well as hardly anyone outside of this stale milieu).

Pretty many people take me, and my politics, seriously. The majority of people that I talk to, though, don't take yours seriously, and that says a lot coming from class conscious workers and union organizers.

Stop reading Crimethinc.

[mario_buda]

You mean like class interests?

Oh, and I find you pathetic, too.

No. I'm not concerned about "having fun" in terms of getting rid of capitalism. Why? Because it's not about having fun.

Pretty many people take me, and my politics, seriously. The majority of people that I talk to, though, don't take yours seriously, and that says a lot coming from class conscious workers and union organizers.

Stop reading Crimethinc.

I'm glad to know we finally know our terms. They are not friendly, and why should they be? You are as much my enemy as a fascist is my enemy. One thing that puzzles me is why you want a "revolution" at all if you don't care about individual agency, something you call having fun. I really don't expect you to understand, but it is quite obvious to me that you and people like you are the real enemies of any revolutionary struggle because you seek to control it, speak for it. Its playful chaotic character must make your skin crawl.

[KC]

I'm glad to know we finally know our terms. They are not friendly, and why should they be?

Well, duh. You're not even a smart anarchist. You're the kind of anarchist that makes anarchism look bad.


You are as much my enemy as a fascist is my enemy.

Not really. Fascists might actually take you seriously. I just think you're a joke.


One thing that puzzles me is why you want a "revolution" at all if you don't care about individual agency, something you call having fun. I really don't expect you to understand, but it is quite obvious to me that you and people like you are the real enemies of any revolutionary struggle because you seek to control it, speak for it. Its playful chaotic character must make your skin crawl.

Like I said, keep "having fun" and we'll keep doing real work.

[mario_buda]

Well, duh. You're not even a smart anarchist. You're the kind of anarchist that makes anarchism look bad.Luckily the kind of anarchist that looks bad to you is exactly the kind of anarchist I want to be. How nice of you to compliment me. An anarchist that would look good to you doesn't deserve to call themselves an anarchist.


Not really. Fascists might actually take you seriously. I just think you're a joke.Fascists take me seriously, how other than being opposed to me? This is a rather lazy trick, to say I have something in common with fascists by merely disagreeing with you. But there's no logic in this. I am opposed to all domination and hierarchy, fascists are not, therefore we differ greatly (in many other ways as well obviously). Anyone who isn't caught up in this dying melieu should be able to tell the difference.


Like I said, keep "having fun" and we'll keep doing real work.You make such petty arguments, zampano. Good luck with not having fun and organizing other people, doing the "real" work telling people how they should live their lives and being bored. I wish I was smart enough to know how to be an anarchist that a miserable trot would confuse me for one of his comrades.

[black magick hustla]

Listen. If you think planning activities, organizing, writing, financial work, etc, entails "fun" then you are a fucking idiot. I am sorry, but there is much more to do beyond organizing an informal collective of a bunch of anarchokids getting drunk.

The critique of boredom those have its place in revolutionary theory, as boredom itself is a central tenet of alienation. However, if you think the Paris Commune were just a bunch of bored out of their mind kids that suddenly decided to have a mass orgy, you are wrong.

[mario_buda]

Listen. If you think planning activities, organizing, writing, financial work, etc, entails "fun" then you are a fucking idiot. I am sorry, but there is much more to do beyond organizing an informal collective of a bunch of anarchokids getting drunk.

The critique of boredom those have its place in revolutionary theory, as boredom itself is a central tenet of alienation. However, if you think the Paris Commune were just a bunch of bored out of their mind kids that suddenly decided to have a mass orgy, you are wrong.

I don't disagree (for the most part), but joy not struggle should be an integral part of our struggles. Our critique of alienation should apply to our means to fight alienation as well. As an anarchist I believe that the means we use to change reflect the ends, they are inseparable. Either desire becomes important to revolutionaries or else those revolutionaries become unimportant, no longer revolutionaries but more of the same ideologues who encourage self repression for some far off heaven that never comes.

[KC]

Luckily the kind of anarchist that looks bad to you is exactly the kind of anarchist I want to be. How nice of you to compliment me. An anarchist that would look good to you doesn't deserve to call themselves an anarchist.

Well, not in the individualist sense, no, but platformist (class-struggle) anarchists fit the term and the theory much better than your petit-bourgeois individualist nonsense.


This is a rather lazy trick, to say I have something in common with fascists by merely disagreeing with you.

That's not what I was implying. Actually, that's exactly what you were trying to do with me.


You make such petty arguments, zampano.

I'm not making arguments. I don't need to. Your position is completely illegitimate in the eyes of everyone actually involved in the struggle.

[black magick hustla]

plataformism doesnt encompasses all class struggle oriented anarchist tradition. There are those who came from Malatesta's reaction to the platform, like TAT.

[Devrim]

And also anarchosyndicalists.

Devrim

[mario_buda]

I don't know why I keep responding. Maybe to show simply that there are other options available and to have my views represented rather than grossly misrepresented.


Well, not in the individualist sense, no, but platformist (class-struggle) anarchists fit the term and the theory much better than your petit-bourgeois individualist nonsense.

There have been very a small percentage of platformist anarchists since the anarchist platform first appeared. Most find it to contradict anarchism, which is least of all a fixed and solidified ideology and more a tendency toward criticism of the totality, for relationships without hierarchy and domination (anarchy or communism, or whatever you want to call it). Most class struggle anarchists reject the platform. I too come from a class struggle background, but do not find the individual to contradict this. This conception has nothing to do with what is called individualist anarchism in the US which is more market oriented, mutualist, etc. The usual petit-bourgeois insult would maybe make more sense if I was coming from this perspective (the great majority of anarchists do not), but I'm not and is therefore just silly because it can not be applied as a generalization of anarchists like it so often is. The term is used so wontonly and sloppily that it makes the arguments of those who use it lose credibility.


That's not what I was implying. Actually, that's exactly what you were trying to do with me.

Saying that I have as much in common with you as a fascist is not to say you are a fascist, but that we are very different. You should be able to tell the difference. I am not your comrade just because you claim you struggle, because you consider yourself left. This forum is a prime example of the meaninglessness of the distinction of left, when there can be very little qualitative difference between some on the left and those on the right.


I'm not making arguments. I don't need to. Your position is completely illegitimate in the eyes of everyone actually involved in the struggle.

You aren't making arguments. I agree. You're just creating straw men and acting as if by merely claiming superiority that people will take your ideas seriously. I know I'm illegitimate in the eyes of trotskyists "involved" in "the struggle". I obviously should be. I have nothing but contempt for your ideas. I'm will never be a part of your struggle and you'll never be a part of mine. I see that as something positive.

[Entrails Konfetti]

I'm dissapointed, they should have rigged a an ATM to spit cash at my local supermarket.

[Revolution4TheHellOfIt]

This may not be a substantial blow to the state but sometimes you may not be able to do that, sometimes the only thing you can do is spit in the face of capitalism. Also i believe that even individual acts against the state is better than no acts at all personally, I rather be with people who actually do things than join an organization that just theorizes and puts out great doctrines but does nothing.

[to the bearricades]

I don't really have a problem if "people here" (here being a forum), or those you attempt to represent "don't take me seriously". The degree to which you agree or don't means nothing so long as there aren't consequences to your forum jive.

[Lenin II]

I refuse to condemn these attacks. while i feel such spontaneous action of the masses - anarchist or just angry kids - is not especially productive, it is a force that can easily be turned into revolutionary spirit.

And I have no problem with people attacking banks, symbols of capital and conglomerate. These events show a growing fervor of the youth, the drops of water boiling over and sizzling from the steaming pot that is capitalism.

[Devrim]

Have the anarchists defending these actions noticed that the only people agreeing with them are Maoists and Hoxhaists. That would make me stop and think.

Devrim

[F9]

Have the anarchists defending these actions noticed that the only people agreeing with them are Maoists and Hoxhaists. That would make me stop and think.

Devrim

LOL nice!:D
We dont wait defending from noone, we act what we think the proper thing to do!

Fuserg9:star:

[Devrim]

But really Fuserg, what good does attacking a bank do? My point about who is defending you is that when the only people who are defending are completely openly anti-working class elements like Maoists, and Hoxhaists it would really make me think about what I was doing.

Devrim

[Leo]

I still can't see what's so extraordinary about breaking window glasses.

I have probably broken more windows than any anarchist on this website (that is while playing football in the streets). There is nothing interesting or political about it.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

I throw bricks at bricks, to encourage class conciousness

[Lenin II]

Have the anarchists defending these actions noticed that the only people agreeing with them are Maoists and Hoxhaists. That would make me stop and think.

Devrim
"The Nazis wore seat belts. We must stop wearing seat belts! We don't want to be like the Nazis, do we?"

Anyway, I never said I agreed with them. I said I refuse to condemn them because i endorse the thoughts behind these actions.

[F9]

In my point of view, i see banks as an organs of capitalism,so istead of sitting around a table and talking about theories and history,i prefer some action ,even with minimum result against capitalism!

Fuserg9:star:

[Herman]

"Those guys over there broke our windows!"

"Don't worry, we've got millions, so one window doesn't matter"

"Yeah, but anarchists did it! It was a mass movement!"

"Oh crap... I guess we should surrender to the almighty proletariat"

[lombas]

"Those guys over there broke our windows!"

"Don't worry, we've got millions,

...

so we can spend thousands on lawyers trying to get a compensation just to find out the poor sod ain't got no money!

[Ferryman 5]

Three Loud Leninist cheers for the 'Social Youth Chaos'. Hooray! hooray! hooray!

If you want any support developing your revolutionary theory just ask.

As for the condemners, if you don't get it by this point in history you probably never will.