Crimethink

[xiainx]

I'm curious, how do the anarchist/anarchist communist on here feel about this? I, for one, am mostly against their tactics.

[#FF0000]

Generally, we don't like Crimethinc. I think they have some nice things to read once in awhile, but they're pretty useless.

[GPDP]

They make good pamphlets sometimes, but their politics are absolute shit. It's all lifestylist garbage that basically rejects class struggle in favor of hooliganism.

[The Douche]

I am a supporter for the most part.

[ex_next_worker]

They make a lot of organization-fetish anarchists angry because they enjoy life. Social anarchists then act out on their subconscious fantasies by making up stuff like "lifestylism".

[RedSabine]

I am torn with CrimethInc. I think their approach to alienation is nice, live free in your own chest, and some of their ideas are cool to think about... but not really practical and really only appeals to middle-class suburban kids who are already free from class... so then the next step in their freedom is a free lifestyle...

Not practical... but fun.

[ex_next_worker]

I am torn with CrimethInc. I think their approach to alienation is nice, live free in your own chest, and some of their ideas are cool to think about... but not really practical and really only appeals to middle-class suburban kids who are already free from class... so then the next step in their freedom is a free lifestyle...

Not practical... but fun.

Actually, a lot of CWC agents are broke. You can't abandon your life if you don't have the possibility, obviously. Neither can you sit on meetings and discuss Kropotkin while calling for mass-strikes on the internet.

[Prairie Fire]

Crimethink are a fucking joke. They avoid the proletariat like the plague, dispense with class struggle, and commit acts of petty vandalism.

The difference between them, and teen vandals that I went to high school with , is that the teen vandals I went to high school with didn't think they were shaking things up by comitting their juvenile acts.

Crimethink is an equally/slightly more ridiculous "organization" (I use the term loosley)
of petty-bourgeoisie children than the Animal Liberation Front and ELF.

[The Douche]

I think you guys take crimethinc to seriously. You should look at it as a critique of anarcho-leftism and social anarchism more than as an independent ideology.

I've known crimethincers who were unions organizers/salters, and some who were train kids.

OP, do you post on the B9?

[Rosa Provokateur]

Love 'em to death. Good people and great literature:)

[xiainx]

I think you guys take crimethinc to seriously. You should look at it as a critique of anarcho-leftism and social anarchism more than as an independent ideology.

I've known crimethincers who were unions organizers/salters, and some who were train kids.

OP, do you post on the B9?

Yeah, I post on B9.

[Oneironaut]

I've read a few of their pamphlets and know some anarchists who listen to them. I have yet to find an inkling of class analysis in their pamphlets. I don't see how they could effectively call for a revolution (if that is their goal?) without the proletariat at its center.

[GPDP]

That's because their idea of revolution boils down to "kill capitalism by opting out of it, and have a shitton of fun while you're at it!". While there's nothing wrong with having fun, there's a time and place for everything. Dumpster diving and making your own clothes isn't gonna destroy capitalism. Meanwhile, I know some class strugglist anarchists that manage to have fun while preparing for the next CIW campaign. No dumpster diving there.

Point is, lifestylist anarchists are little more than modern hedonists that somehow think they're being revolutionary.

[Pogue]

Interesting but useless. Fun but misinformed. Not really proper Anarchists, more "lets fuck around for a bit of fun because we're rich enough to do so." Their book had an article which praised fascism too.

[ex_next_worker]

The working class? Where have you been for the past seventy years?

[apathy maybe]

Your politics are boring as fuck.

Anyone who rejects all of CrimethInc probably doesn't know what they are talking about. (But then again, that has never stopped anyone, including those attacking all of RAAN for the activities of part of the network.)

I haven't read much by them, or about them, but what I have read tends to suggest to me that they do a fuck load more than most of the people who write shit about them. Of course, I've got no evidence beyond what is written, not everyone is going to write about their work on RevLeft.

They make a lot of good points about the state of the "left", as well as providing a needed alternative to the "worker" and "work" obsession that can be seen with many anarchists.

We should not be for work, we don't fight for the right for all to work, we fight so that none shall have to work. To therefore attack those who wish to stop work now, merely because they refuse to work now, is against the principle of being anti-work.

And isn't anti-work part of what defines us?

----

Also to the original poster (OP), what tactics, what are you talking about, can you please be a little more explicit. Single line posts, especially when they start a thread off, are annoying.


they're pretty useless.
Why?

It's all lifestylist garbage that basically rejects class struggle in favor of hooliganism.
Oh? And you have some links or even anecdotes to back this view up?


I am a supporter for the most part.
Why?
DEAR EVERYONE, STOP WITH THE NO EVIDENCE, NO THOUGHT, ONE LINE POSTS!



I don't see how they could effectively call for a revolution (if that is their goal?) without the proletariat at its center.
That's 'cause you're a Marxist. Other people can see that there exist other people in society. There have been various anarchist analysis's of the "lumpen-proletariat", students and others in society who have the least to lose and the most to gain from a revolution. And who also, due to not being tied down to work, jobs and responsibilities, have the free time to ferment revolt. Remember France 1968? It didn't start with the workers.

[Pogue]

They're useless because they lack a clear ideological goal, they lack a plan or an idea of social transformation outside of having parties and dumpster diving. They serve no use in the fight to abolish capitalism and the state.

[YSR]

Where have you been for the past seventy years?Uh, working.

Crimthinc are entertaining, fun to read, but while I don't think that they're politics are as bad as people around here say they are, I think they're dead wrong in rejecting class analysis.

They've come a long way from their early days. I've heard, like everyone else, the rumor that they have a wealthy benefactor that keeps them going. That seems pretty likely, based on how much free shit they can afford to give away. Not that I'm ripping on that, 'cause it's sweet, but it would be great if they could share the wealth around to the rest of us.

EDIT:

Oh? And you have some links or even anecdotes to back this view up?

In Fighting for Our Lives, they explicitly reject class struggle.

I think you're wrong about them criticizing the "anarchist obsession with workers." Anarchists actually aren't paying enough attention to the actual conditions of the working class. Instead, we fetishize the industrial proletariat of 1880s and think that that's what's going on outside our communities. If anarchists paid more attention to the actual class struggle, instead of vaguely including it in a list of oppressions that we're against, we might be making more headway.

[apathy maybe]

That's because their idea of revolution boils down to "kill capitalism by opting out of it, and have a shitton of fun while you're at it!". While there's nothing wrong with having fun, there's a time and place for everything. Dumpster diving and making your own clothes isn't gonna destroy capitalism. Meanwhile, I know some class strugglist anarchists that manage to have fun while preparing for the next CIW campaign. No dumpster diving there.

Point is, lifestylist anarchists are little more than modern hedonists that somehow think they're being revolutionary.
Does everyone in the network think that dropping out is a valid tactic? How isn't it more valid than proletarian revolution (which has also never been shown to work, and by work I mean bring about anarchism)?

Why can't you dumpster dive and organise?

Care to link to where CrimethInc says that they are being revolutionary?

What's wrong with being hedonistic anyway?


Interesting but useless. Fun but misinformed. Not really proper Anarchists, more "lets fuck around for a bit of fun because we're rich enough to do so." Their book had an article which praised fascism too.
More than one book has been written under the CrimethInc banner, these include Days of War, Nights of Love, Evasion and Recipes for Disaster: An Anarchist Cookbook.

Which book was it?

Also, isn't anarchism merely a rejection of hierarchy? If they reject hierarchy, capitalism and the state, how are they not anarchists?

Rich? I think you are probably misinformed here. Are these people lumpen-prols? Aren't they the scum? And you are saying they are rich? Maybe I'm misinformed.


In Fighting for Our Lives, they explicitly reject class struggle.
And does Fighting for Our Lives represent the entire group?

I think you're wrong about them criticizing the "anarchist obsession with workers." Anarchists actually aren't paying enough attention to the actual conditions of the working class. Instead, we fetishize the industrial proletariat of 1880s and think that that's what's going on outside our communities. If anarchists paid more attention to the actual class struggle, instead of vaguely including it in a list of oppressions that we're against, we might be making more headway.
Regarding the first sentence, I may well be wrong, my main purpose in this thread is to expose the flaws in others attacks, not to defend. As I said above, I don't know enough about the group.
As for the rest, I wouldn't have said that was the case for the people that I know, but then again, you and CrimethInc are from the USA, so I guess you have a better understanding of US Anarchism.

[YSR]

Their book had an article which praised fascism too.

Are you talking about the chapter in Recipes for Disaster? Because they clearly state there that anarchists and fascists compete for the same potential members. I think this analysis is partially incorrect, as it focuses on the lumpen-proletariat as the main targets of anarchist recruitment, but it's certainly not praising fascism.

Plenty of anarchists and Marxists have, in fact, praised certain aspects of fascist recruitment and appearance of their ideology. That doesn't mean they want to be fascists, just that they're analyzing and noticing the effectiveness of certain techniques.

[GPDP]

Does everyone in the network think that dropping out is a valid tactic? How isn't it more valid than proletarian revolution (which has also never been shown to work, and by work I mean bring about anarchism)?

Why can't you dumpster dive and organise?

Care to link to where CrimethInc says that they are being revolutionary?

What's wrong with being hedonistic anyway?

Maybe I was a bit wrong to overgeneralize, and I'll admit to that, but the pamphlets I've read (and I don't have them on hand, so I can't tell you which ones off the top of my head), while full of fancy and inspirational rhetoric about freedom and creating the future for ourselves instead of mindlessly following the line of a bunch of deceased bearded men from the 1800's, did say things like that. Very little about actually dealing with working people or organizing.

I know what their criticism is of leftist politics. That they are "boring as fuck". And maybe they have a point about the majority of them. But that doesn't mean one goes completely on the extreme side of the "fun-work" spectrum to remedy the situation. Like I said, I know plenty of anarchists/communists that have fun prior to and even during campaigns. Perhaps this is what they should be pointing to: that you can work and organize in the class struggle while still having fun. But I don't see that in their pamphlets.

As for dumpster diving, I don't really have a problem with it. I'm just saying I fail to see how that can be construed as anything more than what it is: free lunch.

And my jab about hedonism... well, how the hell would a society of hedonists work? Maybe in the far future, when everything is automated and we have all the time in the world to do whatever we want. But in today's society, well, if you wanna be a hedonist, go right ahead. You'll be irrelevant, is all.

[The Douche]

The walls in my house are decorated with crimethinc posters, I've got all their books, I've put up hundreds of their stickers. I guess you could say I'm a "crimethincer". I'm also in that dreaded and most hated (on this website, and not the real world, I might add) leftist (dis)organization, RAAN.

I also meet the criteria for most people on here as being "post-left" and some people probably think that I have rejected class struggle. And I would love to "drop out" if I could, but I can't.

Crimethinc doesn't tell anybody to drop out, they just say dropping out is fun, and it allows you to create your own world outside of capitalism. Crimethinc doesn't tell anybody anything really, they make propaganda, and thats about it. And really, its propaganda for people who are allready anarchists (they just don't know it yet).

I think the majority of this website needs to chill the fuck out with all the revolutionary posturing. There are some people on here who are legitimate working class revolutionaries of the traditional mold (NHIA comes to mind), the are some who are hardline early twentieth century anarcho-leftists (like Levellers Standard) and then there are working class kids who are angry at the state and capitalism and want to fucking smash it up (I feel like I fall in here) and then there are some pretentious dicks who are all up the inside of some bearded fuck's asshole. I've got news for you, all your fancy theory and your critiques and your three readings of das kapital don't mean anything to me or most people.

If I was walking down the street and somebody handed me a copy of a crimthinc pamphlet and a copy of any other sort of silly "leftist" prattle I know which one would stick with me.

[spice756]

I look at crimethinc web site and there some stuff there I'm confused.They are anti-capitalism ,hierarchy and authority.

They are oppose democracy.

They appose culture and rules but do not say what culture and rules .They appose society and the way things are but again do not say what society .

From their web site.

CrimethInc. began in the mid-1990's. I can't report on the original goals of all the participants, but I can trace my own initial intentions to a discussion among some friends about the revolutionary organization Winston joins in Orwell's 1984. The idea came up that it was actually a branch of the government . . . and from there, we began to consider what the opposite kind of organization would be (one that purported to be a part of the culture industry that rules today, while secretly undermining it), and how to form one. The irony, the margin-walking between contradictions, both were intrinsic to CrimethInc. from the beginning . . . and honestly, I can tell you no better now than I could have then whether we are just indulging reactionary desires by forming yet another "revolutionary organization," or heroically helping humanity to evolve past the despotism of such a thing by detourning/deconstructing the idea of the revolutionary organization

So they are anti-Communist


We are different from your average collective in that we do not vote democratically on things, nor do we seek consensus for its own sake. When consensus is sought, it is not to appease other participants, but rather to get their ideas and perspectives. The collective functions like an anarchist village in that individuals within it work on whatever projects they want, seeking help from others when they desire it (which is how responsibilities are chosen and shared, not assigned like they are in some Communist parties);




Crimethinc doesn't tell anybody to drop out, they just say dropping out is fun, and it allows you to create your own world outside of capitalism. Crimethinc doesn't tell anybody anything really, they make propaganda, and thats about it. And really, its propaganda for people who are allready anarchists (they just don't know it yet).

No where does it say to drop out or it is fun.From their web site.

If you aren't sure what you want to do with your life, there is nothing wrong with leaving college for a while to clear your head. In the 60's my father quit college one day in the middle of a quarter. He just decided that he'd had enough, packed up his shit, and left. Didn't tell his professors. Didn't tell the university, either. He worked for a year as a freelance draftsman before deciding that he'd had enough of that, too, and having gotten his mind right, went back to college and picked up where he left off. He finished and is now very successful in his line of work.

[The Douche]

I look at crimethinc web site and there some stuff there I'm confused.They are anti-capitalism ,hierarchy and authority.

Yes, we call that, anarchism.;)


They are oppose democracy.

In favor of more libertarian forms of decision making, as do many anarchist groups.


They appose culture and rules but do not say what culture and rules .They appose society and the way things are but again do not say what society .

Are you excited yet?:cool:


So they are anti-Communist

How did you deduce this from that quote? They are against "revolutionary organizations" as they have come to be defined, yes.


No where does it say to drop out or it is fun.From their web site.

There is ohhhhhhhh so much more to crimethinc than a website. You could not begin to scratch the surface of the organization by reading that wesbite.

But yes, that thing you quoted does in fact advocate dropping out in order to "clear your head".

[Annie K.]

how the hell would a society of hedonists work?It would be disappointing for people who never work, if their society didn't follow their example.


Perhaps this is what they should be pointing to: that you can work and organize in the class struggle while still having fun. But I don't see that in their pamphlets.I didn't read any of their pamphlets, I learned of their existence in this topic. But I'm not the least surprised that you don't see that. Because it goes without saying, and because the marxist militants and the crimethinc activists both want to organize a party.
And as both don't want to be confused with the other, one just say they want a party, and the other just say they want to organize.

But when bakunin said, more than a century ago, that the only task remaining was the organiszation of the proletariat, he thought, as everyone else, that the revolution would start within decades.
Organization is necessary. I know it. But if a century is not enough to complete it ? maybe a change in our tactics is to be thought of.

Remember also that the only revolutionnary event in a center of the capitalism since ww2 started without the working class, and without organization.

Dumpster diving is the individual pratice of a gift economy : it's just free lunch, yes. And it's just what revolution is about since 1848.

[bcbm]

Ugh, so many tired slanders, so little substance. I have my own critiques of Crimethinc, but none of them are the "critiques" being presented here... probably because I actually try to keep up with what they're putting out and what they're aiming at in putting it out. I'll do a longer response later when I have more time (maybe a week or two), but I'll just say that I think they're one of the most solid publishing outfits in the US right now and what they do is consistently well made and well written, even if I disagree with it. Beyond that, they've been taking a much harder line that borders on class struggle in recent publications and are actually putting out relevant stuff about the elections, economic crisis, etc while most groups have their thumbs up their ass. They've also been a major force in the recent resurgence in anarchist organizing and some of them who've been around for a long time have been showing a lot of newer organizers the ropes. Fuck the haters.

[The Douche]

Here is one of the newer things crimethinc has put out:

http://www.anonym.to/?http://thecloud.crimethinc.com/pdfs/democracy_reading.pdf

I challenge you to present something which is revolutionary and as easily accesible to the everyday person.

[spice756]

how the hell would a society of hedonists work?


It would be disappointing for people who never work, if their society didn't follow their example.

Where does it say on their web site they are promoting hedonism?




They are oppose democracy.
In favor of more libertarian forms of decision making, as do many anarchist groups.



What do you mean.



They appose culture and rules but do not say what culture and rules .They appose society and the way things are but again do not say what society .
Are you excited yet?


I don't know what culture or society they are talking about.That is a very broad topic.

[The Douche]

What do you mean.

They elaborate on it in the quote you posted. Non-binding forms of consensus for instance.


I don't know what culture or society they are talking about.That is a very broad topic.

Its not supposed to be specific its supposed to be prose.

Crimethinc is not the RCP, not everything they put out is "ground breaking analysis from the chairman". Some of it is just fun stuff to read thats supposed to make you thinks.

I think most cultures and societies should be turned on their heads, including the communist, anarchist, and activist cultures.

[spice756]

Dumpster diving is the individual pratice of a gift economy : it's just free lunch, yes. And it's just what revolution is about since 1848.


It sounds like they oppose the rich by droping out of the consumerism and never buy any thing but use old parts and go to free-markets.

Use old rag clothing and old stuff.

[black magick hustla]

They make a lot of organization-fetish anarchists angry because they enjoy life. Social anarchists then act out on their subconscious fantasies by making up stuff like "lifestylism".

I like how crimethinc children like the point out they "enjoy life" as if this was some sort of unique, wonderful statement. I think a lot of folks here get drunk, do drugs, w/e but the point is that we do not do it as a political statement. You can rant all you want about having an orgy with all your family, including your grandmother and your sisters, on the graveyard, my subvert the social order, but it wont.

[spice756]

What do you mean.
They elaborate on it in the quote you posted. Non-binding forms of consensus for instance.

I'm having hard time understanding it.They are saying some small group votes on it like in a small village?


Quote:

I don't know what culture or society they are talking about.That is a very broad topic.


Its not supposed to be specific its supposed to be prose.


You are joking ? culture and society is a way of life ,dress ,way of thinking ,behavior ,conduct,norms:scared:

[black magick hustla]

Opposition to democratic slogans is not something unique to them. I oppose democratic ideology too because it is generally a slogan used by the left or right of capitalism to send workers to die. However, it is not because of the childish idea of "tyranny of the majority"

[black magick hustla]

Remember also that the only revolutionnary event in a center of the capitalism since ww2 started without the working class, and without organization.

Dumpster diving is the individual pratice of a gift economy : it's just free lunch, yes. And it's just what revolution is about since 1848.

Lol, what about hungary '56, may '68, the polish general strikes in the 70s and 80s (before they were recuperated by reactionary nationalists), italy's hot autumn, the general strikes of 2006 in France? All of them were given momentum by the working class.

Dumpster diving is ok if you want free lunch. But saying is "revolutionary" is ridicolous.

[Annie K.]

what about hungary '56, may '68, the polish general strikes in the 70s and 80s (before they were recuperated by reactionary nationalists), italy's hot autumn, the general strikes of 2006 in France?I was talking about may 68. Hungary and poland are not a center of the capitalist economy, the italian movement was a revolutionnary struggle but it was never really close to a success, and for the french strikes of 2006, at first I was like "huh ? which working class is he talking about ?" but then I lol'd.

[black magick hustla]

I was talking about may 68. Hungary and poland are not a center of the capitalist economy, the italian movement was a revolutionnary struggle but it was never really close to a success, and for the french strikes of 2006, at first I was like "huh ? which working class is he talking about ?" but then I lol'd.

May 68 was one of the biggest general strikes in histiory. 10 millions workers striked in paris alone. You might wallow in your own bullshit all you want and believe the lie that the situationists were central, or whatever other ridiciculous pseudo-situationist creed you follow, but the bulk of the uprising was the working class.

If you do not believe there is a working class in the first world then fine. I think it says more about your status than anything else though. Also it says a lot about why you were the idiot who praised the murder of 6k americans in that osama thresad.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I hate Crimethinc, largely because of how pretentious they are.

They come off as extremely pretentious, to me anyway.

I will say, though, that most of the critiques that people level against them on this site are simply skull numbing. If I have to read the word "lifestylist" one more time, I'm going to fucking scream.

[Annie K.]

Calm down. I know that there was a general strike in mai 68, and I know that the situationnists didn't organize it. But I don't know what you misunderstood.
"Remember also that the only revolutionnary event in a center of the capitalism since ww2 started without the working class, and without organization." Could you tell me what is wrong in this sentence, without extrapolating ?


Also it says a lot about why you were the idiot who praised the murder of 6k americans in that osama thresadI don't know what you're talking about, and I don't know what it says. An explanation would be great.

[Mindtoaster]

Hmmm.... I don't know much about Crimethinc other then a quick look I have had through their website, the common critiques people here have of them, and this thread...'

But it appears to me some of you are taking them to seriously. It looks like a bunch of kids just trying to have fun outside of capitalism and maybe take a few jabs at "The Man". They really don't look like they imagine themselves as the heroic banner-carriers of the revolution, or like they're trying to do something other then fuck around a bit.

Yes rejection of class analysis is lame, yes opposing cultures seems a bit pointless... But really, they aren't trying to spark a revolution from the looks of it, just have fun. And it does look pretty fun.

But, once again, I do not know much around it, and I'm a bit dubious of some of the old recycled insults being thrown around.

[YSR]

Oh, but I did like the Purge of Traveler Kids (http://www.crimethinc.com/texts/pastfeatures/purged.php), which was long overdue.

[zimmerwald1915]

Calm down. I know that there was a general strike in mai 68, and I know that the situationnists didn't organize it. But I don't know what you misunderstood.
"Remember also that the only revolutionnary event in a center of the capitalism since ww2 started without the working class, and without organization." Could you tell me what is wrong in this sentence, without extrapolating ?

I don't know what you're talking about, and I don't know what it says. An explanation would be great.
I'm not entirely sure what point Marmot wanted to make, but it is true that in terms of pushing forward the demands made, in challenging the French state, and in signalling the reawakening of the working class after the post-1923 (approx.) counterrevolution, the actions of the French working class in May '68 was decisive. I think, and again I'm not sure, that he was making the point that the working class itself took the leadership in May '68.

[The Douche]

I'm having hard time understanding it.They are saying some small group votes on it like in a small village?

Take a look at the link I posted it will give an explanation of consensus I think. Are you a native english speaker?


You are joking ? culture and society is a way of life ,dress ,way of thinking ,behavior ,conduct,norms:scared:

No I'm not joking, I think a lot of those need to be "shook up".

[Oneironaut]

The working class? Where have you been for the past seventy years?

Well considering I've been alive for 20 years I can't answer your question. But for the past four years I have been a member of the working class. I think you seem to be saying that the working class has essentially disappeared from political movements over the past 70 years, and even if that is the case (which I would disagree with), it is an absurd notion to say the working class doesn't exist or whatever you are trying to say. Workers today still endure exploitation, are alienated from their products, and are the only class that possesses the "weapons" to overthrow capitalism in favor of socialism. So stop your reactionary chatter.

[Mindtoaster]

The working class is as large as it has always been.... And its still oppressed

Its just that in western nations (some) workers have moved from the factory floor to the cubicle because the worst of jobs have been automated or moved to foreign countries so the workers there can be exploited to support western capitalism.

Whether a worker is pulling levers in a factory or pushing pencils, he is still a wage slave, and still exploited for profit.

The average CEO made 45 times the amount of his workers in the early 1990s, would you like to imagine how large that number is now?

[RedSabine]

The working class is as large as it has always been.... And its still oppressed

Actually quite a bit larger...

[zimmerwald1915]

As a percentage of the world population, it may actually be declining. Sorry, no source; this is one of those fleeting ghosts of memories of articles half-read. Feel free to discount it if you like.

[spice756]

Take a look at the link I posted it will give an explanation of consensus I think. Are you a native english speaker?



No I'm not joking, I think a lot of those need to be "shook up".

My english is weak so some of the information on their web site and information I quoted I do not really understand it.

[ex_next_worker]

Enough with the working-class fetish already. The workers nowadays can work hard, earn enough and they have reasons not to revolt. The "working poor" don't think about revolution, they think about the right to work.

And obviously, the unorthodox Left isn't concerned anymore with obsessing about a central axis, i.e. a revolutionary subject like the working-class. So the basis of criticizing non-worker centred revolutionaries has no merit, since it is clearly a product of the old orthodoxies and is unjustified in a priori positioning of the proletariat as the basis of social change.

There is no Crimethinc ideology, because there is no Crimethinc.

[Pogue]

It was Days of War, Nights of Love, where they praise Fume and its leader, even though it was a proto-fascist society and the leader went on to join Mussolini.

They just have a completely ridiculous outlook, proposing useless ideas that will somehow change society and abolish capitalism, while cirticising us saying our politics are 'boring'. We're not playing a game, we're fighting class struggle. They're just impossible to take seriously and they make so much stuff up, oncemore like the Fume article. Its just poetic rubbish, fun but useless, as I said.

Lifestylism and having fun is fine but its not a substitute for class struggle. They seem to imply that we don't need organisation, strikes, etc, we just need to wash less and never drink and realise our dreams by jumping into a bin.

[Pogue]

Enough with the working-class fetish already. The workers nowadays can work hard, earn enough and they have reasons not to revolt. The "working poor" don't think about revolution, they think about the right to work.

And obviously, the unorthodox Left isn't concerned anymore with obsessing about a central axis, i.e. a revolutionary subject like the working-class. So the basis of criticizing non-worker centred revolutionaries has no merit, since it is clearly a product of the old orthodoxies and is unjustified in a priori positioning of the proletariat as the basis of social change.

There is no Crimethinc ideology, because there is no Crimethinc.

Then how come they have a website, publish books under their names and have 'members' and write literature setting out their beliefs about society and how to change it?

Its dumb sentences like your last one which 'post-left anarchists' spew out which make no sense and are pointless and hypocritical.

[apathy maybe]

So while this, too, has been said a million times, perhaps it will do some good to say it again in this context: the traveler kid lifestyle is not in itself at all revolutionary. It may surprise some to hear this from us—that shows how little they’ve been listening all along. Shoplifting, hitchhiking, scamming, unemployment—separated from a program of life- and world-transformation, all these are merely alternative tools for survival, a survival which makes do with and ultimately accepts the status quo. Oh dear, it looks like all you bastards are wrong about the promoting of lifestylism as "revolutionary". Whoops.
http://www.crimethinc.com/texts/pastfeatures/purged.php

So, can't you folk just accept that you don't know what you are talking about? (I certainly don't, it just pisses me off that certain types attack crimethinc for a crime they haven't committed, while at the same time, they attackers don't do anything themselves (as far as I know).)



Then how come they have a website, publish books under their names and have 'members' and write literature setting out their beliefs about society and how to change it?

Its dumb sentences like your last one which 'post-left anarchists' spew out which make no sense and are pointless and hypocritical.Do you also attack RAAN?

Have a long read of the Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrimethInc.) and then the links posted at the bottom of said article:


CrimethInc.com (http://www.crimethinc.com/) - maintained by the Crimethinc. Far East cell
CrimethInc. Great Lakes (http://www.freewebs.com/crimethinc)
CrimethInc.net/work (http://www.crimethinc.net/work)
CrimethInc. NorthStar (http://www.crimethinc.be/)
CrimethInc. West Coast (http://www1.freewebs.com/crimethincwestcoast/)
CrimethInc. International (http://www.myspace.com/CrimethInc)
IdeozloCin (http://www.myspace.com/ideozlocin) - based in Prague (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague), Czech Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_Republic)
Guerrilla Latina CrimethInc. (http://www.crimethinc.com/espanol/)

Have a look around. Don't think that they are awful, read and learn.

Once you have taken the time to understand the idea of "crimethink", and the fact that there is no organisation, then come back. But until then, what is it that some Leninists say? No thought without study or something?

[Plagueround]

But until then, what is it that some Leninists say? No thought without study or something?

It's a Mao saying. "No investigation, no right to speak."

As for Crimethinc, I've never read much of it other than one time when I was really drunk. I liked the pamplet I've read, but I have not made enough of an investigation to speak further.

[ex_next_worker]

We're not playing a game, we're fighting class struggle.

:thumbup::laugh:


Then how come they have a website, publish books under their names and have 'members' and write literature setting out their beliefs about society and how to change it?

What names? They state explicitly the names used in the book are pseudonyms used by various individuals (though not all of them). Anybody can be Crimethinc., so there are no members that would follow a code of dumpster diving, living in squatts or whatever. There is no platform, no programme, no "join our organization". It's just you. The fact that there is a website means a couple of people are posting under the name. A lot of people that do similar things do not use the name. Thus, the idea is not to reject someone because he doesn't use your set of ideals that you wrote down. The idea is not to spread a rigid ideology of how-to/when-to, but rather that the stuff of -isms is dinosaur stuff and it is the time toescape all definitions: all acts of Crimethinc. are the products of individuals and there is no way get around saying "this is Crimethinc. and this isn't".

The only belief the subversive agents have is a free world of joy and passionate living.

[Pogue]

I've read Days of War, Nights of Love apathy maybe, and their website, as well as some of their 'actions'. It pointless - too abstract, too wound up in being shocking or new or post-left to actualy contribute anything to abolishing capitalism. I have no problem with their ideas as such, i find it interesting and they have some good stuff, its jsu that they're hostile to traditional socialism and seem to propose lifestylism as an alternative to genuine organisation and class struggle - thats what I oppose.

[The Douche]

I've read Days of War, Nights of Love apathy maybe, and their website, as well as some of their 'actions'. It pointless - too abstract, too wound up in being shocking or new or post-left to actualy contribute anything to abolishing capitalism. I have no problem with their ideas as such, i find it interesting and they have some good stuff, its jsu that they're hostile to traditional socialism and seem to propose lifestylism as an alternative to genuine organisation and class struggle - thats what I oppose.

I've got some news for you man, most people in the world today are hostile to "traditional socialism" so maybe you ought to get over yourself.


Do you also attack RAAN?

Yes, most people on here did attack RAAN when we were at our peak.

The majority of this wesbite just cannot understand any sort of revolutionary thought that ocurred out of the context of the original thinkers of their theory. Pretty much if it came out after WW2, or it wasn't directly in line with the ideas that were developed before WW2, then it is "lifestylism" or "post-leftism" or "post-moderninsm" or whatever, and it is most positively wrong.



But then people have the nerve to ask why the left isn't going anywhere.

[Annie K.]

Lifestylism was not in the first place the term used by traditionnal socialists to oppose the concrete refusal of capitalism ?

[ex_next_worker]

I have no problem with their ideas as such, i find it interesting and they have some good stuff, its jsu that they're hostile to traditional socialism and seem to propose lifestylism as an alternative to genuine organisation and class struggle - thats what I oppose.

Again, I wouldn't say they are proposing, it's a criticism per se. Marx criticised (to say the least) anarchism. And he makes good points with, for example, On Authority concerning the latent effects of authority. I haven't come across CWC criticism of traditional socialism, I have read the critique of anarcho-communism as it is originally meant, i.e. organization precedes everything, and I think alienation with this same old stuff from decades ago has dried out. Remember Love and Rage? Whatever happened.. :rolleyes:

[Pogue]

But they do propose it because in that pivotal essay "Your politics are as boring as fuck" they outline as much. They reject our theories and organisation in favour of whateevr it is they propose.

Don't try saying that the essay isn't representative of their views, because if its not so why is it on their website and book?

[ZeroNowhere]

Marx criticised (to say the least) anarchism.
No, Marx criticized anarchists. Bakunin also criticized anarchists, and presumably most social anarchists would have a criticism of anarcho-individualism, and vice versa. So?


he makes good points with, for example, On Authority concerning the latent effects of authority
Wait, wasn't that Engels' work on how anti-authoritarians can't be revolutionary because revolution was necessarily an authoritarian act? Yeah, that was just being cheeky.

[ex_next_worker]

Don't try saying that the essay isn't representative of their views, because if its not so why is it on their website and book?

Crimethinc. sometimes write as a collective and sometimes as individuals. I think the author of the pertinent text is Nadia (or maybe several Nadias?) If you read their texts, they explicitly state the tendency of remaking your "politics".

It's possible to presume some CWC people are people involved in unions, etc. - as someone earlier pointed out.

Most of people, the people that wrote these books and pamphlets would laugh at this thread and its irrelevant content. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't care about definitions and certainly wouldn't be losing time over definitions on a board.


Wait, wasn't that Engels' work on how anti-authoritarians can't be revolutionary because revolution was necessarily an authoritarian act? Yeah, that was just being cheeky.

True, my bad. To turn this around, I meant Engels with the mentioned text. In this respect, it was a critique of anarchism as anti-authoritarianism.


No, Marx criticized anarchists. Bakunin also criticized anarchists, and presumably most social anarchists would have a criticism of anarcho-individualism, and vice versa. So?

Re-read, repeat.

[black magick hustla]

Actually, I will give that some of their readings are interesting and entertaining. I used to be big on crimethinc when I was a sophmore in high school. It did help me break with puritanism so I will give them that.

What bothers me about crimethinc is that in their publications, they think organization and militancy is all about fun, trying to pathetically create a moral framework out of hedonism. They claim to be against ideology but their ideology is some washed down version of stirnerism. Morality is something of the heart and trying to rationalize it with whatever standard, especially hedonism, is falling on the pits of ideology.

I will concede the fact that I do not know crimethincers, although I do know people with similar ideas. I am basing my opinions on their publications.

[Rosa Provokateur]

I've read a few of their pamphlets and know some anarchists who listen to them. I have yet to find an inkling of class analysis in their pamphlets. I don't see how they could effectively call for a revolution (if that is their goal?) without the proletariat at its center.

Not everyone goes by classical leftism. Not to say that class struggle isnt important but its not the only thing.

[Mindtoaster]

Enough with the working-class fetish already. The workers nowadays can work hard, earn enough and they have reasons not to revolt. The "working poor" don't think about revolution, they think about the right to work.



I think a lot of non-class struggle anarchists have a problem with this because they don't understand what we mean when we talk about the working class.

All a worker is is someone who works for a wage. Thats it. Doesn't matter how you make your living. Its the vast majority of the people on the planet. The people who are ruled over instead of ruling

[The Douche]

I think a lot of non-class struggle anarchists have a problem with this because they don't understand what we mean when we talk about the working class.

All a worker is is someone who works for a wage. Thats it. Doesn't matter how you make your living. Its the vast majority of the people on the planet. The people who are ruled over instead of ruling

Actually most of us "non-class struggle" anarchists (whatever that means), know exactly what you mean when you say "working class" because have the same definition, and many of us have been "class struggle" anarchist or involved in leftist organizations.

Most people say if you don't accept that class struggle is the number one revolutionary issue then you have rejected class struggle.

Do you think people who identify with crimethinc don't see workers as revolutionary? Of course they do, just not as the end all be all of revolution.

[Mindtoaster]

Actually most of us "non-class struggle" anarchists (whatever that means), know exactly what you mean when you say "working class" because have the same definition, and many of us have been "class struggle" anarchist or involved in leftist organizations.

Most people say if you don't accept that class struggle is the number one revolutionary issue then you have rejected class struggle.

Do you think people who identify with crimethinc don't see workers as revolutionary? Of course they do, just not as the end all be all of revolution.

When I say non-class struggle anarchists I mean the ones that *do* reject class-struggle.

We "fetishize" the working class because, if one understand the definition one understands that we are the ones that stand to benefit most from an Anarchist or Marxist revolution (along with parts of the middle-class).

Its ridiculous to reject that notion. Why would someone who makes over 200,000 a year, besides good-hearted idealists, have any interest in a revolution?

I thought you believed in class struggle anyway?

I was responding to ex_next_worker's post anyway, it was not a criticism of CrimeThink, which does not have a collective opinion on class struggle. I posted my thoughts on them earlier.

I don't think theres anything wrong with CrimeThink. Its just a way to have fun outside of capitalism, its not a fucking collective opinion on what a revolution should be like, as some of the people in this thread seem to think.

[The Douche]

Why would someone who makes over 200,000 a year, besides good-hearted idealists, have any interest in a revolution?

Because they are gay? Because they are a racial minority? Because they are a woman? Because they are in some way oppressed...


I thought you believed in class struggle anyway?

Do I believe that some people gain a revolutionary consciousness through class awareness? Yes, I did. Do I believe it is the only way to become a revolutionary? (or in other words, do I hold a class struggle outlook) No.

[Mindtoaster]

Because they are gay? Because they are a racial minority? Because they are a woman? Because they are in some way oppressed...



Do I believe that some people gain a revolutionary consciousness through class awareness? Yes, I did. Do I believe it is the only way to become a revolutionary? (or in other words, do I hold a class struggle outlook) No.

People who make several hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars a year are not oppressed. Theres been enough threads about how people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are part of the oppressing class.

I agree with you though, class awareness is not the only way people will become revolutionary. As I said above, there will always be genuinely committed idealists. But it is the reason the vast majority of revolutionaries will become such, which is why we put so much focus on the working class.

[The Douche]

People who make several hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars a year are not oppressed. Theres been enough threads about how people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are part of the oppressing class.

So everybody who does not sell the labor power to survive (in other words, is not working class) makes "hundreds of thousands" or "millions" of dollars a year? Its not so clear cut, my boss, who is a woman, is bourgeois, but she still stands to gain by marxist or anarchist revolution.

There is more to gain than physical wealth in socialist revolution. And you don't have to be an "idealist" to support that.

[Mindtoaster]

So everybody who does not sell the labor power to survive (in other words, is not working class) makes "hundreds of thousands" or "millions" of dollars a year? Its not so clear cut, my boss, who is a woman, is bourgeois, but she still stands to gain by marxist or anarchist revolution.

There is more to gain than physical wealth in socialist revolution. And you don't have to be an "idealist" to support that.

As I said above parts of the middle-class still stand to benefit from the revolution, and the lumpen whom I accidentally omitted (I suppose they are technically just a subsection of the working class)

My last sentence still stands though. The workers will make up the vast core of any communist revolution, as more then any other class they will benefit the most from ownership and management of the means of production. Not to mention they are vastly larger then all the other classes.

[zimmerwald1915]

My last sentence still stands though. The workers will make up the vast core of any communist revolution, as more then any other class they will benefit the most from ownership and management of the means of production. Not to mention they are vastly larger then all the other classes.
Not only will they make up the "vast core of any communist revolution"; they make up the group that originates its practical demands, which generates its forms of organization, and which is the motor-force of the revolution. "Oppressed" people of other sorts might latch on to the communist revolution, but they cannot originate it.

[Annie K.]

they make up the group that originates its practical demands, which generates its forms of organization. "Oppressed" people of other sorts might latch on to the communist revolution, but they cannot originate it.It doesn't look like it : the main organizations of the working class efficiently oppose the revolutionnary ambitions and attemps from the working class as from the others groups. And when this opposition becomes evident, the conscious workers don't turn massively to the preexisting minoritary and revolutionnary working-class organizations, and do not create their own.

Why couldn't another group start the revolution ?

[zimmerwald1915]

It doesn't look like it : the main organizations of the working class efficiently oppose the revolutionnary ambitions and attemps from the working class as from the others groups. And when this opposition becomes evident, the conscious workers don't turn massively to the preexisting minoritary and revolutionnary working-class organizations, and do not create their own.

Why couldn't another group start the revolution ?
Way to substitute an organization for a class. You have failed to get the point I was trying to make, have argued against a completely different one, and committed a classic and funny error in the process. It's 3:30 and my day has already been made. Thank you.

[ex_next_worker]

Why couldn't another group start the revolution ?

Because then the stuff of his beliefs falls apart ;)

There is no rejection of class struggle per se. However, there is the rejection of class oppression as the sole axis, leading revolutionary change.

[Annie K.]

Thank you.My pleasure, but I'd still like it if you explained your point. After all, you post in learning, and when I read again what I wrote, I don't see this substitution you're talking about.

[The Douche]

Revolutionary awareness in the world today for the majority of people has nothing to do with class.

Most people who become revolutionaries/will become revolutionaries will not do so because of a class issue, but because of some other oppression they are subjected to.

Will the majority of the revolutionary movement be working class? Yes, because that is the majority of the world.

I also don't think the revolution will have anything to do with Marx, or Kropotkin, or Rocker, or Malatesta. But I think the revolutionary masses will implement their ideas on their own. The revolution won't be syndcialist, but the way workers end up organizing their workplace will probably look a lot like syndicalism, etc...

[Rosa Provokateur]

Do you think people who identify with crimethinc don't see workers as revolutionary? Of course they do, just not as the end all be all of revolution.
Thankyou:thumbup:

[ex_next_worker]

I also don't think the revolution will have anything to do with Marx, or Kropotkin, or Rocker, or Malatesta. But I think the revolutionary masses will implement their ideas on their own. The revolution won't be syndcialist, but the way workers end up organizing their workplace will probably look a lot like syndicalism, etc...

Well said!

[StalinFanboy]

It seems that almost everyone here does not understand CrimethInc.

CrimethInc. is NOT theory, nor is it meant to be. And, like RAAN (of which I am a part), it is not one entity with a group making all of the decisions. It is a network of various "cells" and collectives doing things they think are worthwhile. Like Cmoney has said countless times, CrimethInc. is the critique of Left politics, and of life itself. Personally, I love the books and pamphlets and shit they put out. They are clever and witty, and quite epic in some cases (Expect Resistence). In many ways, CrimethInc. is the first step in a long process of getting into Anarchism. It's how I, and a lot of my friends, got interested in radical ideas. Besides, without a little fun lifestylism, we just turn into a group of boring assholes.

[spice756]

No where does it say lifestylism or hedonism.It does say rejecting society ,culture ,norms and way of life but does not elaborate.

They are hardcore anarchist and do not believe in democracy.There is some collectivism of law with hardcore anarchy.But no democracy or vote.

Has for drooping out of school it more if you are stress out , not the hippie school of thought drop out and get stoned.

No idea who will run or control things .I see them has chaos society no law and order.

Like a Mad Max !!

[ex_next_worker]

weak in reading,writting and spellinghttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies/sad.gif

true that

[The Douche]

No where does it say lifestylism or hedonism.It does say rejecting society ,culture ,norms and way of life but does not elaborate.

They are hardcore anarchist and do not believe in democracy.There is some collectivism of law with hardcore anarchy.But no democracy or vote.

Has for drooping out of school it more if you are stress out , not the hippie school of thought drop out and get stoned.

No idea who will run or control things .I see them has chaos society no law and order.

Like a Mad Max !!

Lifestyleism is a term that is made up by other leftists to describe anarchists they don't like. It has no real meaning, its just a vague insult usually thrown at people who don't support formal organizations and traditional politics. It means nothing.

Most anarchists do not believe in democracy, they believe in consensus, you can look up consensus on wiki in whatever your native language is to get a better idea.

Dropping out is not in reference to dropping out of school, its dropping out of capitalist society, usually to hop trains, hitch hike, squat, etc.

You don't have anywhere near enough information on them to go saying that they support a "chaos society" of "now law and order". (but either way, I wouldn't consider myself a big supporter of "law and order")

[ZeroNowhere]

Has for drooping out of school it more if you are stress out , not the hippie school of thought drop out and get stoned.
I am for dropping out of school to get a real life.
Of course, the Singapore government, other than making its public schools the equivalent of US public schools x100, also manages to make sure that unschooling is illegal. Somebody once complained about Singaporeans being robotic, and not thinking for themselves. It's obviously not genetic.
"The masses are stupid! I know, let's make schooling compulsory!"
"Hey, that's a great idea! Let's make compulsory schooling a human right!"
And they did, in the UDHR. Heh.
It's one of the human rights that the bourgeoisie likes. Unlike, say, the right to work, a good life, etc. Of course, the right to property did get included in there.
It's like the Austrian hacks, they take what they want (see the rise of neoliberalism), they ignore what they don't (getting rid of corporate welfare).
Also, getting stoned is, in fact, more educational than schooling. If you learn all of what the schools teach, you're just going to become another obediant robot brainwashed into supporting the system that exploits you (especially if you took high school history, and presumably Economics), while stoned people investigate the organic composition of walls.


Lifestyleism is a term that is made up by other leftists to describe anarchists they don't like. It has no real meaning, its just a vague insult usually thrown at people who don't support formal organizations and traditional politics. It means nothing.
Well, of course. It's like the label 'ivory tower' socialist, it doesn't mean anything anymore.
Certainly, it could be used to refer to stuff such as the common message sent out about global warming (it's all your faults, it has nothing to do with the profit motive), etc. However, now it's just a term used like 'hippy' to describe lifestyles such as freeganism, unschooling, free skooling (I've even seen an anarchist do this), etc. That is, it's an attempt to make an argument without making an argument at all, I believe that an author looking into the subject (not the term 'lifestylist', just the trend of 'pro-life', etc) called it 'unspeak'.


Most anarchists do not believe in democracy, they believe in consensus, you can look up consensus on wiki in whatever your native language is to get a better idea.
That's an assertion, that is, that most anarchists prefer consensual democracy. Do they?

[ex_next_worker]

Well I certainly wouldn't say anarchists don't believe in democracy. .They do, just that they believe in direct democracy.

When in reality I find the following assertion more appropriate


Once we shift our understanding…we are able to shift the mistake that most clouds our thinking over process – the continued couching of the debate in the language of democracy… Democratic discourse assumes without exception that the political process results, at some point, in collectively binding decisions… Binding means enforceable and enforceability is a background assumption of democracy. But the outcomes of anarchist process are inherently impossible to enforce. That is why the process is not ‘democratic’ at all, since in democracy the point of equal participation in determining decisions is that this is what legitimates these decisions’ subsequent enforcement – or simply sweetens the pill. Anarchism, then, represents not the most radical form of democracy, but an altogether different paradigm of collective action. (p. 69-70, Uri Gordon, Anarchy Alive!, Pluto Press 2008)

[spice756]

Lifestyleism is a term that is made up by other leftists to describe anarchists they don't like. It has no real meaning, its just a vague insult usually thrown at people who don't support formal organizations and traditional politics. It means nothing.


I thought Lifestyleism was a way of life?



Most anarchists do not believe in democracy, they believe in consensus, you can look up consensus on wiki in whatever your native language is to get a better idea.

I know what the word consensus is , but there still has to be majority abong the consensus and this is democracy .

[The Douche]

I thought Lifestyleism was a way of life?

Not in this context. We have people calling crimethinc and the people who support crimethinc "lifestyleists".


I know what the word consensus is , but there still has to be majority abong the consensus and this is democracy .

I'm not referring to the word consensus, I'm talking about the process of descision making known as consensus. It is different from democracy as we traditionally understand it.


Well I certainly wouldn't say anarchists don't believe in democracy. .They do, just that they believe in direct democracy.

When in reality I find the following assertion more appropriate


As I said above, anarchist oppose "democracy" as it is usually defined now (i.e. simple majority or 3/4 majority). And the quote you use is also an explanation of my statement. Though there are plenty of anarchists who would vehemently disagree with that quote. All the platformists would, thats for damn sure.

[Annie K.]

Ex, your quote of uri gordon seems to contradict your own assertion.

Democracy is a social organisation based on a particular repartition of coercive power, direct democracy too. Anarchy is a social organisation based on the absence of coercive power.

Some anarchists believe in direct democracy (some believe even in the necessity of the police...), but i hope that most don't believe.

[spice756]

I think you are confused :confused: there is strong consensus amonng the people to vote Bush out .This is democracy by a consensus majority.

Or a strong consensus to ban guns .



Some anarchists believe in direct democracy


What do you mean direct democracy.

All democracy is a majority rule over the minoraty .If there was no laws ,police .court you got no democracy :lol: People can do what ever they want.How is a consensus among people that want guns ban going get want they want.

[Incendiarism]

I'm anti-work, but I'm not anti-worker.

[Annie K.]

.If there was no laws ,police .court you got no democracyThat is one of the reasons why anarchy is not a synonym of democracy.

[ex_next_worker]

Ex, your quote of uri gordon seems to contradict your own assertion.

Democracy is a social organisation based on a particular repartition of coercive power, direct democracy too.

I support Gordon's assertion, meaning that I don't support stuff like direct democracy. I don't believe in coercive agreements. It doesn't matter with which adjective democracy appears. However, this doesn't mean anarchists that support direct democracy even support coercion, it's more of a semantical matter. Irrelevant.

How exactly is this contradictory?


All democracy is a majority rule over the minoraty .If there was no laws ,police .court you got no democracy
Police? Now, this is some poor deductive reasoning!


People can do what ever they want.Oh and we certainly don't want that, do we :bored:

[Annie K.]

I don't believe in coercive agreements. It doesn't matter with which adjective democracy appears.Hm. I thought you meant that all anarchists believe in direct democracy.

[spice756]

.


How exactly is this contradictory?


Police? Now, this is some poor deductive reasoning!

[/QUOTE]

With out police there can be no law or rule.


Oh and we certainly don't want that, do we :bored:

People can do what ever they like :lol: but cannot be 100 free will.You cannot allow free will.There has to be rules on the road ,people must be certffied to be a bus driver or air pilot ,people cannot kill or get into fights with other people.

[cenv]

It seems like CrimethInc appeals to people because they make politics personal. They talk about how capitalism effects people's everyday lives, and they connect politics to the way people feel. Unfortunately, they do this within a framework that doesn't seem to allow for an organized political movement. But if anyone ever manages to combine the personal appeal of CrimethInc with a cohesive political organization, watch out...

[DirectAction]

I first came across them when I came across the Anarchist Youth Network in the UK. This one activist swore by them so I had a look at what they wrote and I discussed politics with him from time to time and I have to say its a joke. His 'revolutionary stratergy' was basically to drop-out and take lots of government grants to run some bike repair shop, he also was completely opposed to any form of organisation even when it was clear this was to the detriment of any campaigns he was involved in. He was happy to live off the cultural baggage of past anarchist struggles, but would completely oppose analysing the events in detail. I think Chaz Buffe and Bookchin have exposed this trash much better than can be expected but as for specifics.
Your politics are bourgeois as fuck (http://www.anarkismo.net/article/3664)
Ken Knabb comments on CrimethInc (http://libcom.org/library/crimethinc-comments-ken-knabb)

[Chicano Shamrock]

I like how crimethinc children like the point out they "enjoy life" as if this was some sort of unique, wonderful statement. I think a lot of folks here get drunk, do drugs, w/e but the point is that we do not do it as a political statement. You can rant all you want about having an orgy with all your family, including your grandmother and your sisters, on the graveyard, my subvert the social order, but it wont.

.... We call it "The Aristocrats"! LOL

Anyways I like reading Crimethinc's stuff. I agree with some of it and disagree with other parts. I have never liked the punk lifestyle or dumpster diving unless you are completely broke. Punks intentionally make themselves look like shit. Claiming anarchism at the same time gives people the idea that anarchists are just little dirty kids. I don't agree with dropping out and I find all of that childish. Have a kid and see what dropping out does to them.

I do agree with or at least accept most of the stuff I have read from them. I agree with some of the others in this thread about the "working class"... where has everyone been for the last hundred years. What does this class even have in common with each other anymore? What is the point of organizing on the basis of class as opposed to a dozen other common grounds? Wouldn't it be easier to organize on a basis that society is more self aware of.

I would also be capable of discussing alternatives to direct democracy.

[DirectAction]

I agree with some of the others in this thread about the "working class"... where has everyone been for the last hundred years.

In what sense? Are you trying to say that nothing was achieved in the last century of class struggle?


What does this class even have in common with each other anymore?

Fragmentation and isolation towards each other are a by product of the supremacy of capital, which severes any semblance of solidarity towards each other. Your telling me that the class doesnt have needs like work, production of basic essentials and the running of something resembling an economy? We have a collective experience that capital can never take from us, and only a middle class theorists would try and argue otherwise.



What is the point of organizing on the basis of class as opposed to a dozen other common grounds?
Because economic oppression is one of the cornerstones to all oppressions within our society.

As Marx says
"All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority. The proletariat, the lowest stratum of our present society, cannot stir, cannot raise itself up, without the whole superincumbent strata of official society being sprung into the air. "




I would also be capable of discussing alternatives to direct democracy.
What the fuck for, your clearly opposed to taking democratic ideas into production and distrubution.

[Invincible Summer]

Crimethinc is like Adbusters - they are petit-bourgeois organizations that advance essentially useless actions such as detournements and minor social deviances in attempts for the participants to feel as if they are throwing a wrench into the works.

[griffjam]

They're useless because they lack a clear ideological goal, they lack a plan or an idea of social transformation outside of having parties and dumpster diving. They serve no use in the fight to abolish capitalism and the state.

Anarchism is a socio-economic and political theory, but not an ideology. The difference is very important. Basically, theory means you have ideas; an ideology means ideas have you. Anarchism is a body of ideas, but they are flexible, in a constant state of evolution and flux, and open to modification in light of new data. As society changes and develops, so does anarchism. An ideology, in contrast, is a set of "fixed" ideas which people believe dogmatically, usually ignoring reality or "changing" it so as to fit with the ideology, which is (by definition) correct. All such "fixed" ideas are the source of tyranny and contradiction, leading to attempts to make everyone fit onto a Procrustean Bed. This will be true regardless of the ideology in question -- Leninism, Objectivism, "Libertarianism," or whatever -- all will all have the same effect: the destruction of real individuals in the name of a doctrine, a doctrine that usually serves the interest of some ruling elite.

[StalinFanboy]

This is the English version of an interview appearing in the new issue of Brand, a quarterly Swedish anarchist paper founded in 1898. It explores the complexities of challenging capitalism from outside the economy, clearing up much of the confusion around the infamous anti-work stance associated with CrimethInc. To order a copy of Brand, contact [email protected]
The theme of this issue of Brand is work. CrimethInc. calls itself an “Ex-Workers’ Collective.” What does “work” mean for you and why have you left it behind?
It’s not so much that everyone involved with CrimethInc. has permanently left work behind, but that we focus on what we can do outside our role as workers in the capitalist economy. Identifying as ex-workers is a way to emphasize that we want our lives to revolve around what we do freely outside wage labor and capitalist competition.

We feel that capitalist competition rewards the most ruthless and selfish people with the most power, and that participating in such an economy drains us of all our potential as human beings, turning our creativity and labor power into monsters (such as global warming and patriarchal propaganda) that destroy and subjugate us. The less any person can contribute to this, the better—and the more we can realize our potential outside of the economy, the better we can fight it.
In the realm of capitalist ideology, there are some who identify with their role as workers—they measure their value according to what they produce and earn, the same way the economy does. Today there are probably more workers who don’t identify with their role as workers at all—for them, it is obvious that they’re only working because they’re forced to earn money to pay bills. Their “real lives” are elsewhere—in leisure consumption, for example. So identifying with the non-work aspects of life doesn’t necessarily make a worker into a revolutionary. All the same, we feel the tensions in this aspect of modern society can easily give rise to revolutionary desires, if we make demands that the capitalist economy cannot fulfill. One example of this is demanding that we should be free to live life to the fullest at all times; obviously, as long as capitalism exists, this will be impossible for most of us, so this desire can inspire people to revolt and resistance.
In the realm of anti-capitalist ideology, there are also some who identify with their role as workers. For them, the primary way they see to contest capitalism is by organizing with other workers to strike for higher wages and so on. In the best case scenario, aspiring revolutionary workers can hope to seize their workplaces and use them to produce goods to be shared by all, as Marx and various anarcho-syndicalists have described. But a lot has changed since 1848. In the era of climate change and alienating technology, it is becoming very difficult to believe that anything worthwhile can be produced in some of those workplaces. Because of this, we feel it is especially important for aspiring revolutionaries to be experimenting outside the workplace as well, where our activities and our sense of self are not dictated by the necessities of production and competition. In organizing a squatted social center or a Really Really Free Market, we discover more hints of the world we want to live in than we ever could under the bosses’ whip. Marx and Lenin might call this bourgeois; we would counter that we want revolution as much as they did, but unlike them we can imagine a society without authoritarian structures or destructive mass production.
So calling ourselves ex-workers is also a challenge to ourselves and to others to make the most of our potential outside the exchange economy right now, in order to fight that economy. Of course, different individuals, classes, genders, and nationalities have different relationships to that potential, according to how dispossessed they are by hierarchical social structures and repression. Some workers outside Europe and the US—say, in Korea—have almost no free time and resources outside the workplace; their primary weapon against capitalism is their ability to refuse to work. Elsewhere in the world—say, in India and Africa—there are millions of people who are already unemployed. Some dogmatic Marxists say they cannot be part of the “revolutionary subject” because they are not positioned to seize the means of production; we would counter that they too can participate in revolutionary struggle by interrupting the channels of distribution and control (think of Argentina’s piqueteros, or the street urchins who raided the World Social Forum in Africa).
But let’s be honest, young Swedish workers: in Sweden and the US, many of us have a great deal of unused potential to act outside the exchange economy to fight capitalism. In our countries, there is some degree of social mobility and social security, and many luxuries are available on credit; these can seduce workers so they conflate their interests with those of the middle class, rather than desiring freedom via the abolition of capitalism. So one of the primary challenges in our context is to spread a value system that counters middle class values in workers. Middle class values mean that, since the worker might one day be able to afford to own his own house, he identifies with the laws of the wealthy that protect those with big houses—even if these laws are used against other poor people like him. An example of counter-values would be valuing togetherness over property, so workers (or ex-workers!) could find fulfillment in living cheaply in collective spaces without a lot of status-oriented consumerism. The less we need to buy to feel good about ourselves, the less we are at the mercy of our enemies. This holds true for workplace organizing as well—the less workers feel they need the luxuries produced by capitalism and the more their necessities come from outside the capitalist economy, the longer and harder they can strike.
Incidentally, really beautiful things sometimes happen when workers go on strike: they write plays about their workplace conditions, they get to know each other outside the constraints of the shop floor, they help each other, they get to stand in the sunlight and raise their voices—sometimes they even utilize corporate equipment to make things according to their own desires. Perhaps you could say “ex-workers” are attempting to stage a permanent strike, to seize the means of production in the form of our own time and energy, as a step towards provoking a general strike.
CrimethInc. organizes an impressive number of projects and publishes an impressive number of books and journals. Is this not work?
Let’s not waste too much time on semantics—let’s just say we consider there to be a fundamental difference between voluntary labor and wage work. Obviously, we are not against labor—we put a tremendous amount of effort into our projects. Some of it is not “fun” at all—for example, supporting our friends through trials and lengthy prison sentences, or washing all the dishes after three hundred people eat at a Really Really Free Market. But the important matter is that it’s all activity we have chosen for ourselves, rather than activity the economy coerced us into.
Okay, what about praxis then: How can we imagine the effort of a CrimethInc. collective to, say, bring out a book or organize a convergence? There are CrimethInc. texts rejecting mandatory meetings, consensus decision-making, even individual commitment to collective processes. So what happens when you get together in order to plan a project?
You know, there is no “CrimethInc. party line” about anything, so you can find CrimethInc. texts rejecting things that other CrimethInc. texts (and agents!) embrace. Different structures are appropriate for different situations. In some cases, you need a structure that works for a lot of people who don’t know each other, that guarantees that all of them will have an equal voice. But really strict formal structures tend to be more exhausting, so they sometimes break down over time. We make use of such forms when needed, but we are also trying to stage a long-term struggle that will go on for the rest of our lives if need be, so we try not to use them unnecessarily. Because we are not trying to make decisions for whole neighborhoods, but only to collaborate on specific creative projects, we can afford to be more fluid. Most of our projects function on a basis of informal or semi-formal consensus among groups of comrades who share affinity and have been working together a long time. It seems that this structure has proved to be the most efficient and long-lasting for us. It means that the people cooperating on a project share long-term investment in it and know what to expect from each other, so we don’t have to start over from scratch again and again.
If we follow what you’ve said so far, it sounds like your understanding of work is strongly tied to the wage labor system. Obviously, many folks are dependent on this system, otherwise they can’t pay their bills, feed themselves and their families, etc. How do you think these folks should deal with their situation?
I hope it’s clear from the answer above that we see the refusal of work as a strategic approach for those who can make use of it, not as a litmus test to determine who is really radical. The point is simply that to the extent to which people can realize their potential outside the exchange economy, this can be a point of departure for anti-capitalist resistance. It’s not the only point of departure, and it’s not available to everyone, or to the same degree.
You are familiar with the critique that the CrimethInc. ex/non-working stance might function for young, healthy individuals with few responsibilities, maybe in particular for white middle class kids who have their color and class privileges to fall back onto in a bind. What do you make of this?
The refusal of work is a strategy that takes different tactical forms in different situations; obviously, specific tactics are better suited for people in some situations than for others. We’re not saying that working single mothers who slave all day cleaning floors to feed their children should quit their jobs and live on the street; but we are saying that anarchists who make comfortable incomes from wage labor should consider cutting down on their hours to start free childcare programs. We’re not saying African American men in the US who are always watched by racist security guards should steal (though many of them already have to do so); we’re saying that white radicals who have an easier time stealing should steal resources for collective projects that help everyone who needs food. We’re not saying that “freedom” means middle class punk kids dropping out of school to hitchhike around the world for a couple years before getting high-paying jobs at NGOs; we’re saying nobody is really free until all of us can make decisions based on desire rather than economic need, and the first step towards real freedom is for us to commit our lives to lifelong resistance… whether or not it comes with a salary.
Working class and middle class anarchists in the US and Sweden should be honest about acknowledging our privileges: we have access to resources and opportunities others around the globe do not, and we owe it to them and to ourselves to use those for everyone’s benefit. That means spending less time at work earning money for our own personal advancement in capitalist society, and more time fighting capitalism tooth and nail. Most full-time participants in CrimethInc. projects and related anti-capitalist activities have no bank accounts, no insurance, no retirement funds, no fancy wardrobe, and often have to steal and scam from one meal to the next; some of our harshest critics are probably much better off, financially speaking.
What about ex-working ethics in the context of communities where unemployment is rampant: many communities of color in the US, whole regions of Eastern Europe, vast areas of the so-called “Third World”? Usually, the lack of available (wage labor) work is seen as a serious problem within these communities. Some political activists have accused CrimethInc. of “cynicism” with regard to this situation, also in the context of the infamous blurb on the Evasion back cover.
Free-market intellectuals always defend corporate exploitation of “third world” nations (including US ghettos) by saying the exploiters are “creating jobs” that are desperately needed. Of course, once upon a time, long before European colonialism, the ancestors of these potential employees had access to the resources around them without having to trade their lives for them as wage slaves. People in rural Mexico and Brazil don’t need corporate exploitation so much as they need land reform. Lack of wage labor is only a problem when it is coupled with capitalist domination; to campaign for jobs for all, rather than for the abolition of capitalism, is cynical if anything is.
But this whole question is somewhat beside the point. Just because someone needs a job to get an income in Belgrade doesn’t mean a radical in Malmö is doing them a favor by working a lot instead of developing local anarchist projects and international solidarity efforts. Likewise, there are people who deliberately refuse and avoid wage work all around the world, even in the poorest regions. In some cases, these are people whose non-capitalist traditions are still alive, who are resisting assimilation into the culture of production, competition, and violence.
Evasion has to be seen specifically in the context of our efforts to promote a “counter-values” in the US, where middle class values have infected so much of the working class. In presenting an adventure story in which the protagonist makes the most of a life without financial means or stability, we were countering the pervasive message in the capitalist media that there is no pleasure or freedom without money. Many young people who start from an uncritical fascination with Evasion subsequently move on to more serious anti-capitalist ideas and efforts. The book is certainly not representative of most of what we do, but it has been surprisingly effective at accomplishing its specific purpose. It would be more sensible for political activists who feel it is not relevant to their lives to simply ignore it, rather than obsessing over it.
Incidentally, all the criticism of Evasion I’ve ever heard has come from middle class or working poor people. When the book was first published, the middle-aged African American and white homeless men with whom I shared tasks at Food Not Bombs said they thought it was right on, including the quote on the back cover. That quote was removed after the first printing, all the same, out of respect for the frustration some had expressed with it.
Can there be any place for trade unions? What about syndicalism? Class analysis? Is this all outdated leftist baggage, or can it still be a worthwhile pursuit, at least under certain circumstances?
Oh, syndicalism is still relevant, absolutely! I think most people involved in CrimethInc. projects see it as a complimentary strategy, not a competing ideology. Some people simultaneously participate in syndicalist organizing and anti-work organizing; others try to find connections between the two, such as providing dumpstered or stolen food to day laborers and those on picket lines. As for class analysis, we’re simply saying that it’s not radical enough to frame our interests as workers in this society—we have to start developing new conceptions of what our interests might be outside capitalist structures, or else our solutions will always be based in capitalist assumptions.
In light of this, what are your prospects for the ex-workers’ movement?
As the economy becomes more and more based on “precarious” work, it will be more important than ever to experiment with forms of resistance that are based outside the workplace. Likewise, in the US, where most trade unions have been totally absorbed into the machinery that perpetuates capitalist domination, we desperately need other starting points for class war. Effective anti-work struggles can only complement workplace organizing—that is, so long as we don’t misunderstand them as conflicting approaches.
Could you end with some examples of what “ex-workers” do besides publishing books and organizing protests and convergences?
In the community where I live, a town of less than 15,000 people, we maintain a number of community-oriented programs that we could never do if we had full-time jobs. We operate a free grocery distribution in the two low-income neighborhoods, and we sometimes do a free breakfast program for migrant laborers as well. We get the food for these from dumpstering, and also from sneaky employees—another reason to cultivate connections between workers and ex-workers, and to popularize anti-corporate theft. Every month, we help with a Really Really Free Market, at which hundreds of local people from all walks of life come together to give and receive resources without any capitalist exchange. We maintain a program sending free books to prisoners, since US prison conditions are terrible and prisoners otherwise have no access to reading material. We run a free zine distribution of perhaps 6000 zines, which we produce by means of theft and scams, for tabling at public events. There are underground networks to provide health care to people who cannot afford it, especially women. And of course we have gardens, bands, reading groups, postering and graffiti, and great parties.
These are just a few examples of what we focus on in the spare time we get from living outside the economy. In the US, unlike in Sweden, there is no government funding for any social programs or cultural projects, so we have to do these things on our own. Perhaps this is healthy, because it means we are never seduced to do things because they pay more. Sometimes one of us gets arrested for shoplifting, but we support each other and so far it has not been a serious problem—at least not compared to the long prison sentences some comrades are serving for ecological direct action.
Thanks very much for the opportunity to talk about this subject. If anyone has more questions, email us at [email protected] Good luck in everything you are doing there!

[Delirium]

I've seen alot more "lifestylists" actually organizing, feeding, clothing, and generally helping people than anyone in the established left. I'm sick of hearing all these armchair socialists bash people that are trying to do something in the real world. Capitalism has you so brainwashed that your attacking people who are trying to break out of the stale model of traditional leftism.

[manic expression]

I've seen alot more "lifestylists" actually organizing, feeding, clothing, and generally helping people than anyone in the established left. I'm sick of hearing all these armchair socialists bash people that are trying to do something in the real world. Capitalism has you so brainwashed that your attacking people who are trying to break out of the stale model of traditional leftism.

You should get out more.