Results 1 to 20 of 112
militant anti-fascism discussion (split from murdered french anti-fascist thread)
And what makes you think he wasn't "conscious of what the enemy would do if they had the chance"? Is everyone who is the victim of violence just a clueless twit who was "asking for it"? Every member of an anti-fasc organization who is assaulted by fascists? If this kind of thing were posted about women and rape, or anti-rape organizations, you'd be restricted in a heartbeat. And deservedly so. I wonder why the logic in regards to this case is so different.
Between this thread and the Woolwich beheading one, I am beginning to think there's not a single act of violence wherein you can't find a way of subtly blaming the victim.
thats not what he said, in fact he he meant very much that he was "conscious of what the enemy would do if they had the chance", that was why he was an anti-fascist. he isnt excusing the death of our comrade, he is saying that he, as an militant anti-fascist made a conscious choice to engage the fash fully aware of the risk and possible outcomes it entailed. something we should embrace and celebrate, this is not some random victim of a hate crime, this is an fallen soldier, something we should mourn of course, not something to celebrate in a we gained a "martyr" kind of way but still something we should keep in mind and focuss on, he died for something he believed in, something he found worth fighting and potentially dying over, he is a hero and not just another victim.
The mind is its own place, and in itself Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven. What matter where, if I be still the same, And what I should be, all but less than he Whom thunder hath made greater?
Here at least We shall be free
He said an article critical of the victim made a valid point, then expanded on his "valid point" claim by saying that if you're involved in anti-fascist organizations, you need to know what you're getting involved in. How, exactly, is this implying that the individual was fully aware of what he was getting involved in?
And what's with this lame-ass comic book paramilitary language? This is the perfect example of anarchists not being able to distinguish stages in a class struggle. In case you haven't realized it yet, there aren't armed masses of workers taking to the streets to challenge the state. The "class war" continues, but hasn't come close to reaching the point of open armed conflict against the bourgeoisie. As such, this murder is a crime, not a fallen foot soldier in some armed conflict with the bourgeois state and its supporters, fascist or otherwise.
but there is, and always have been a physical conflict with the fash, in some places lower intesity than others, in some places armed and some not but there is just no way fascists and revolutionairies can co-exist, clashes happen, people get killed, mostly people like you dont notice it because you are either not their primary target (not black, not queer, not homeless, not handicapped, nor not female enough) or because there are militant anti-fascists who step up and take the heat. but yeah, there is war going on, it has always been going on and people are getting killed. there has been multiple attempts to seriously hurt or kill me and i live in a low intensity area, comrades in russia and poland are getting attacked weekly and killed at an alarming rate.
I hope all people who get into anti-fascist politics are conscious of it, it shouldn't discourage them, it should ENcourage them but yes, it happens and we better recognize it.
The mind is its own place, and in itself Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven. What matter where, if I be still the same, And what I should be, all but less than he Whom thunder hath made greater?
Here at least We shall be free
Apparently my point did not register. Allow me to restate it more pointedly. Saying there have always been and always will be low-level physical and violent confrontations between leftists and reactionaries does not warrant celebratory grandiose metaphors about fallen soldiers and wars. Much of it is defensive violence brought on by being targeted by reactionaries, and simply cannot be avoided. But that is different than celebrating it as some integral and desirable part of the current phase of struggle, something that should be honored and celebrated as if it were reasonable and normal. You might live for this kind of paramilitary shit (and I would be remiss if I didn't note that people who tend to be the loudest chest-thumpers about this shit are the ones farthest from engaging in it). But from my perspective, the young man's death is a waste of life, a waste of talent, and potentially the waste of a lifetime of good revolutionary activism. At this low level of class struggle, nothing is advanced by violent clashes with right-wing morons. To think it does serve a purpose shows how far removed a person's politics is from class struggle, and how wedded it is to idealist adventurism and lame Hollywood movies.
I said, to this audience here (revolutionaries supposedly) that they should check themselves into reality. The death of one of our comrades is an outrage, but it is not outrageous, in fact, it is to be expected that we (as militants of the class) will suffer casualties (injured, imprisoned, and yes, killed) at the hands of the state and para-military forces (like the fascists).
Furthermore, this language is not "paramilitary" it is also not "military" in nature, though it is martial. And you can deny the present condition of things if you like, but all that does is leave you ill-prepared. War is waging, we are in the thick of it, as a communist you have chosen sides in it. Violence is brought to you every day unless you live a really privileged existence (which I doubt), the presence of the police in our neighborhoods is the presence of an occupying army, the surveillance state turns our blocks into prison wards, and we constantly have the threat of unemployment held over our heads to ensure our compliance, all these things are violent, and we as communists fight against them (in one way or another, and if you don't, then I don't believe you're a communist).
War does not necessarily mean a contest of arms.
This article deals with the issue of rethinking what role we're actually playing in the unfolding struggle that is communism or whatever:
http://theanvilreview.org/print/aufhebengate/
This quote alludes to what I am discussing, and maybe will help you understand that you're misrepresenting my position:
Put capitalism in a bag of rice.
You know I am an actual combat veteran, right? (not that combat in that sense has anything to really do with what I'm talking about)
Put capitalism in a bag of rice.
Wait: don't you mean para-martial forces? (Fap fap fap) Seriously, give me a fucking break. It is not to be expected, unless you honestly think we are in the midst of a stage of armed class struggle. Which any objective observer can see is nonsense. It was a crime committed by a member of a fringe political community against a member of a different fringe (leftist) community. Even in the context of interactions between members of those fringe communities, it is not a common occurrence and shouldn't be "expected."
Yes, have fun waging war against the police and getting killed, when the vast majority of workers aren't even class conscious enough to be organized in unions or engage in mass workplace demonstrations. If you ask me, there are far more pressing tasks right now than dressing up and playing Rambo. I'll wait until my outrage against violent oppression is joined by a potentially revolutionary segment of the working class before I encourage fellow comrades to start engaging in acts of violence. To advise otherwise is, from a strategic perspective, idiotic. It potentially leads to a waste of human life for no benefit. Kinda like what we see in this case.
Last edited by Lucretia; 6th June 2013 at 20:22.
nobody is talking about waging war on the police
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
Really, so when somebody says "war is waging" and "violence is brought to you every day unless you live a really privileged existence (which I doubt)," then proceeds to use this logic to justify acts of violence against those forces of oppression, what do you think is being discussed? The latest Die Hard movie? (In fairness to you, the distinction might be hard to make.)
Where was I justifying acts of violence against forces of oppression?
I did specifically say this:
But it doesn't fit into your cute little narrative, so I can see how you missed it.
Put capitalism in a bag of rice.
i believe what is being discussed is social war and the stakes of adopting a partisan position within it
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
On the contrary, I have been clear that political/class struggle (or "warfare") has numerous phases, only one of which is open armed conflict. The fact that we haven't reached the stage of great warriors wielding their light sabers is why I don't find your grade-school martial metaphors to be particularly helpful in understanding the present situation, in explaining the pointless death of an eighteen-year-old leftist, and far better suited to an evening of Dungeons & Dragons.
As for your justification of violence against forces of oppression, I refer you to this remark of yours:
I suppose that we, who have chosen sides in this martial war against the evil forces of Skeletor, are not to engage in acts of violence? Hardly likely to be your view. So the only alternative is that it is justified for us to take action in this violent struggle, thrust upon us openly, against "forces of oppression." You stop short of saying, "Yeah, commit acts of violence, dude." But this is little more than a technicality, as your position can easily be deduced from the series of statements you've produced throughout this thread. You, of course, want to avoid saying it to spare the board any issues, and likely because such a statement would be against the board's policy. But the substance is unmistakable.
You're a very odd poster, swinging wildly from rhetoric that comes close to glorifying violence (whatever the context), to acting offended that anyone would deign to suggest that you might actually believe that some acts of violence are justified. Are you being serious?
Last edited by Lucretia; 6th June 2013 at 22:19.
Not worth my time. You can see what you like to see.
Put capitalism in a bag of rice.
What is being discussed in this thread is the violent death of an eighteen-year-old leftist in France, followed by statements that talked about how that violent death -- not some metaphorical use of armed conflict -- should be "expected" because violent "war is waging" and "violence is brought to you every day."
You can play The_Douche's public relations pointman and spin to your heart's content, but in the context of this thread and the statements therein, it's clear that -- at the very least -- there's a pretty audacious attempt to elide class struggle with episodes of physical violence like the one in this subject of this thread.
The irony is that after emphasizing the difference between "class war" and actual armed conflict (which is only the ultimate phase of a class war), and how stupid it is to keep using embellished and celebratory metaphors in the latter to make sense of the former, I am now being accused of not understanding the difference between the two, and that what everybody has been talking about all along is just "class war" or "social war" in a general sense.
in france recently there has been a huge upsurge in right-wing violence, especially against gays, surrounding the passage of the gay marriage bill so i think for anti-fascists in france this is a very, very real fight right now, even more so now with this murder.
'acts of violence' are certainly not off the table as a tactic but this war is not fought through force alone
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
no need to be an ass
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
Of course acts of violence are not off the table, in a context of low struggle in which you are compelled to deploy violence for purposes of self-defense. It is also in theory not off the table for some future date, in the even that class struggle heats up to the point of an open challenge to the bourgeoisie.
But I have been following events in France closely, and don't think that the recent spike in violence has come close to reaching a point to a state of generalized armed conflict -- which is what is required for me not to find such deaths like the eighteen-year-old's "expected." The attempt to conflate this upsurge in right-wing violence with the violence of class warfare generally is to make a mess of revolutionary strategy by abstracting violence from its context within the class struggle. To talk about either in highly elevated terms is to make a virtue of necessity. Class war is not a good thing, and shouldn't be celebrated. It should be undertaken as effectively as possible with the ultimate goal of winning, so that class struggle comes to an end.
the most violent periods of violence between the far right and left over past decades, at least in most places, have come nowhere near 'generalized armed conflict' but intense violence could certainly be expected during those times. i think this incident shows increasing confidence and audacity on the far right
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
No one was celebrating anything though, you just made that up.
Anyone who doesn't understand why disrupting the organising efforts and street presence of fascists isn't an integral part of class struggle is naive at best, and at worst an apologist for fascism.
