Join the National Protests on the 16th Anniversary of the Afghanistan War

[ckaihatsu]

[unac] Join the National Protests on the 16th Anniversary of the Afghanistan War


Join the National Protests on the 16th Anniversary of the Afghanistan War

October 6th marks the 16th anniversary of the longest foreign war in U.S. history. Instead of ending it, Trump has announced an escalation of the war on Afganistan. Join us in protest during the week of October 2 - 8. See the call by leading U.S. antiwar activists: http://notowar.net/no-to-war-call-to-action/







Endorse the Week of Action: http://notowar.net/endorse-no-to-war-2017/

Add Your Action to the List of Actions:
http://notowar.net/post-your-action/

For more information and to see planned actions:
http://notowar.net/

No to endless war & Occupation!
No to white supremacy!
Hands off N. Korea and Iran!
Stop attacks on Immigrants and Muslims!
Bring all the troops home now and close the bases!


Keep Space for Peace Week
October 7 - 14, 2017
No 'Missile Defense' in Korea
No THAAD in Seongju

The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space will be holding its annual Keep Space of Peace Week. This will be during the week that follows the actions against the Afghanistan escalation with one day overlap. Organizations may want to integrate both actions or participate in both.

For more information: http://www.space4peace.org/


7 Arrested at Hancock Reaper Drone Base



Monday, 25 September 2017, 9 AM. Seven members of the grassroots group Upstate Drone Action once again were arrested as they delivered a citizen’s war crime indictment to the chain of command at Hancock Air Force Base. Upstate Drone Action also placed a huge dollar sign [$] dripping with “blood” in the main entrance way to the base. The six-foot high dollar sign dramatizes what the group believes determines the many overseas wars the Pentagon/CIA engages in: corporate greed. [read more]






​

Please contribute to UNAC: https://www.unacpeace.org/donate.html

If your organization would like to join the UNAC coalition, please click here: https://www.unacpeace.org/join.html

To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to: [email protected]


---
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]sts.riseup.net>
List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>

[BIXX]

Please contribute to UNAC: https://www.unacpeace.org/donate.html

If your organization would like to join the UNAC coalition, please click here: https://www.unacpeace.org/join.html

To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to: [email protected]


---
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>

This is not interesting revolutionary content

[ckaihatsu]

This is not interesting revolutionary content

No, *you're* not interesting revolutionary content.

[The Intransigent Faction]

This is not interesting revolutionary content

This is not constructive criticism.
It's also rather bizarre for any communist to dismiss organized condemnation of the war in Afghanistan as uninteresting.

[Homo Songun]

So what are people planning on doing in their respective areas?

[Ele'ill]

This is not constructive criticism.
It's also rather bizarre for any communist to dismiss organized condemnation of the war in Afghanistan as uninteresting.

Organized condemnation of wars isn't inherently revolutionary, or interesting.

[ckaihatsu]

Organized condemnation of wars isn't inherently revolutionary, or interesting.

Actually, they are -- the Russian Revolution would have spread to Europe if more people in Germany had been condemning the German government's rush into world war (WWI), and sided with the revolutionaries instead.

[Homo Songun]

New York City actions

New Yorkers Resist Wars on Oct. 7

By staff |
October 4, 2017
Read more articles in Antiwar Movement

Flyer for the event. (FightBack!News)

New York, NY - Over 47 groups have signed on to the Oct. 7 day of action against U.S. imperialism. People will converge at on Saturday October 7, in New York City’s Herald Square, 34th Street, at 1 p.m.
The day is important because it marks the 16th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Since then, the U.S. has continued a relentless campaign of war and genocide in every country it invades, from Iraq to Libya. The U.S. government claims it does this for humanitarian purposes, but the death toll says otherwise.
The organizers of the rally have agreed upon simple, yet straightforward demands for the day. These include U.S. out of everywhere; stop the attacks on migrants, refugees and Muslims; No war, no sanctions; and the right to self-determination.
Organizers ask all to come out and join them in resisting war and racism, at home and abroad this Saturday.
To find out more, go to the Facebook Event.

[BIXX]

This is not constructive criticism.
It's also rather bizarre for any communist to dismiss organized condemnation of the war in Afghanistan as uninteresting.

I'm not dismissing the condemnation of war but I also agree with ele'ill that condemnation of war is not inherently revolutionary.

Furthermore, I have given ckaihatsu (along with other users, admins, and mods) constructive criticism, and he consistently fails to heed any criticism, of any sort.

[Ele'ill]

Actually, they are --

I said it isn't inherently revolutionary, or interesting. Organized condemnation of wars can still be supporting a lot of other horrific shit, like the state generally, while condemning its actions on the other hand. Bodies of people mobilized against war can still not be in support of, or be a threat to, revolutionary action, despite the character of their own actions. In the same way that people demonstrating against the actions of the police can also be essentially pro-police, people who are 'pro-ecology' can still find capitalism favorable. I think that certain people feel that these positions are eroded from society towards a higher likelihood of revolt and I don't think that's necessarily true, although I definitely acknowledge that it's possible.

There have been waves of protest struggles in the past that proved to be everything from vampiric cooptation to photo shoots for various bodies of people despite the alleged context. In regards to being interesting I would have liked to see you post that this is happening without a news post or email because I value what you think far more than some news posts you are copying and pasting.

[ckaihatsu]

I'm not dismissing the condemnation of war but I also agree with ele'ill that condemnation of war is not inherently revolutionary.

Would you agree that condemnation of the U.S. war on Afghanistan is at least *anti-imperialist* -- ?

Furthermore, I have given ckaihatsu (along with other users, admins, and mods) constructive criticism, and he consistently fails to heed any criticism, of any sort.

Yeah, just because you put 'criticism' out there doesn't automatically make it correct or in any way worthwhile. Your ego consistently overshadows your politics.

I said it isn't inherently revolutionary, or interesting. Organized condemnation of wars can still be supporting a lot of other horrific shit, like the state generally, while condemning its actions on the other hand. Bodies of people mobilized against war can still not be in support of, or be a threat to, revolutionary action, despite the character of their own actions. In the same way that people demonstrating against the actions of the police can also be essentially pro-police, people who are 'pro-ecology' can still find capitalism favorable. I think that certain people feel that these positions are eroded from society towards a higher likelihood of revolt and I don't think that's necessarily true, although I definitely acknowledge that it's possible.

There have been waves of protest struggles in the past that proved to be everything from vampiric cooptation to photo shoots for various bodies of people despite the alleged context.

I agree with this critique / general-assessment, since you're making a distinction between tactical-type *actions*, and the varying range of less-than-solid politics that ungird support for a particular tactic.

In regards to being interesting I would have liked to see you post that this is happening without a news post or email because I value what you think far more than some news posts you are copying and pasting.

And, yet, despite your compliment, I'm just one person living in a much larger socio-political world, so I have to get my basic information ('news') from *somewhere*, which may be useful to others here at RevLeft as well.

I don't appreciate your legacy of hostility to my news posts, and to news developments in general.

[Ele'ill]

I agree with this critique / general-assessment, since you're making a distinction between tactical-type *actions*, and the varying range of less-than-solid politics that ungird support for a particular tactic.

Not quite. I'm describing progressive activism as an apparatus of control and juxtaposed with communist activity. I'm suggesting there's a gulf of difference. Instead of seeing instances of escalation within activist mobilizations as coming from the activist mobilizations, look at it as a break from activism towards revolutionary and communist activity.

And, yet, despite your compliment, I'm just one person living in a much larger socio-political world, so I have to get my basic information ('news') from *somewhere*, which may be useful to others here at RevLeft as well.

You should create a twitter feed that posts all of that news and then the revleft twitter can repost and you can link to it in your signature. And then you foster actual discussion here on the forum.

I don't appreciate your legacy of hostility to my news posts, and to news developments in general.

if i'm hostile towards news developments in general, how do you explain my handful of news threads that several users, including you, apparently liked

[BIXX]

I don't appreciate your legacy of hostility to my news posts, and to news developments in general.

I just want to point out that this isn't the place to be posting news.

[The Intransigent Faction]

I said it isn't inherently revolutionary, or interesting. Organized condemnation of wars can still be supporting a lot of other horrific shit, like the state generally, while condemning its actions on the other hand. Bodies of people mobilized against war can still not be in support of, or be a threat to, revolutionary action, despite the character of their own actions. In the same way that people demonstrating against the actions of the police can also be essentially pro-police, people who are 'pro-ecology' can still find capitalism favorable. I think that certain people feel that these positions are eroded from society towards a higher likelihood of revolt and I don't think that's necessarily true, although I definitely acknowledge that it's possible.

There have been waves of protest struggles in the past that proved to be everything from vampiric cooptation to photo shoots for various bodies of people despite the alleged context. In regards to being interesting I would have liked to see you post that this is happening without a news post or email because I value what you think far more than some news posts you are copying and pasting.

While I agree with this entirely, it doesn't erase the absolute necessity of opposing U.S. military intervention throughout the world. This is a necessary but not sufficient condition for socialism.

Yes, it's true there are plenty of anti-war marches driven by less-than-revolutionary politics, but we shouldn't just ignore them.

[Ele'ill]

While I agree with this entirely, it doesn't erase the absolute necessity of opposing U.S. military intervention throughout the world. This is a necessary but not sufficient condition for socialism.

Yes, it's true there are plenty of anti-war marches driven by less-than-revolutionary politics, but we shouldn't just ignore them.

That all hinges on what you mean by opposing and i think there's somewhere between ignoring and accepting the politics of, especially here on a revolutionary discussion forum

[ckaihatsu]

Not quite. I'm describing progressive activism as an apparatus of control and juxtaposed with communist activity. I'm suggesting there's a gulf of difference. Instead of seeing instances of escalation within activist mobilizations as coming from the activist mobilizations, look at it as a break from activism towards revolutionary and communist activity.

Certainly -- I'm no more for progressive-type activism leading into an apparatus of progressivist-type political control, than the next communist.

The problem is that the real world is far from ideal, and that the nation-state exercises a fair amount of influence on daily politics. This means that much 'progressive', and possibly overlapping *revolutionary* activity, necessarily becomes *defensive*, such as fighting to make sure that immigrants aren't shut out of the U.S. due to imminent threats from Trump.

So of course *communist* activity should be prioritized over 'progressive'-type activism, because progressivist / radical types of activism are usually facing issues coming out of the nationalist apparatus, like the threats to immigrants.

With any instances of nationalism-derived issues, like that of threats to immigrants, such resulting activism from the left and/or far-left *blends together* because of the dire nature of the immediate threat -- deportations. This is what I would call a *strategy* in common, with varying tactics -- that of addressing how to stop deportations, for example.

The *distinction* we can make, however, between revolutionary politics and progressivist-type politics, is that of overall *position*, over time: When nationalist-type politics aren't of an imminent-threat nature -- say with some kind of election season -- the *progressivist* position will be much closer to the nationalist 'center' by taking such bourgeois elections seriously, while the *revolutionary* position is much further left, knowing that the politicians are just employees of the state, whoever they may happen to be.

Revolutionaries will be looking to take 'proactive' measures that strengthen the solidarity of the international working class, rather than kowtowing to the latest nationalist dog-and-pony-show over electoral candidates.


[3] Ideologies & Operations -- Fundamentals [CORRECTED, 170602]

Ideologies & Operations -- Left Centrifugalism

And:


Leftism -- Want, Get

Also:


[18] Ideologies & Operations -- Dynamics 0 of 2

[19] Ideologies & Operations -- Dynamics 1 of 2

[20] Ideologies & Operations -- Dynamics 2 of 2

---

You should create a twitter feed that posts all of that news and then the revleft twitter can repost and you can link to it in your signature. And then you foster actual discussion here on the forum.

Thanks, but I'll pass on that.

if i'm hostile towards news developments in general, how do you explain my handful of news threads that several users, including you, apparently liked

Hey, yeah, sure, if you and others here can contribute to the inclusion of topical news items, that's all for the better -- I've been *particularly* sidelined from that myself, thanks to you and BIXX and your 'spam-defining' faction.

[Ele'ill]

Certainly -- I'm no more for progressive-type activism leading into an apparatus of progressivist-type political control, than the next communist.

okay, but..

The problem is that the real world is far from ideal,

but this means precisely that we cannot concede to vampiric institutions/organizations

and that the nation-state exercises a fair amount of influence on daily politics. This means that much 'progressive', and possibly overlapping *revolutionary* activity, necessarily becomes *defensive*, such as fighting to make sure that immigrants aren't shut out of the U.S. due to imminent threats from Trump.

Firstly i'm for agitation and escalation but since organizing has essentially been a failure up until the point where autonomous actions occur and there is a significant number like 2k in a bloc in berkeley after the big milo counter-action, and a surprisingly large showing in p-town that was able to stop a 2nd polizei charge, it seems that maybe there hasn't been enough engagement within the radical sphere itself and that affinities or other groupings have already formed on their own but are partially or fully isolated. It's from there that projects other than street oriented things are started as something that is or closer to communist activity or activity from non-communist identifying anarchists.

So of course *communist* activity should be prioritized over 'progressive'-type activism, because progressivist / radical types of activism are usually facing issues coming out of the nationalist apparatus, like the threats to immigrants.

With any instances of nationalism-derived issues, like that of threats to immigrants, such resulting activism from the left and/or far-left *blends together* because of the dire nature of the immediate threat -- deportations. This is what I would call a *strategy* in common, with varying tactics -- that of addressing how to stop deportations, for example.

I guess the problem i see with that is you are then bleeding progressive activism the other way and it becomes injected into revolutionary discussion spaces as being relevant as-is, it isn't.

The *distinction* we can make, however, between revolutionary politics and progressivist-type politics, is that of overall *position*, over time: When nationalist-type politics aren't of an imminent-threat nature -- say with some kind of election season -- the *progressivist* position will be much closer to the nationalist 'center' by taking such bourgeois elections seriously, while the *revolutionary* position is much further left, knowing that the politicians are just employees of the state, whoever they may happen to be.

Revolutionaries will be looking to take 'proactive' measures that strengthen the solidarity of the international working class, rather than kowtowing to the latest nationalist dog-and-pony-show over electoral candidates.

I don't understand what this means or how it relates.

Thanks, but I'll pass on that.

I think that it would be better for everyone. Also i've omitted your graphics that you posted to me because you haven't been able to explain how any of them work.

Hey, yeah, sure, if you and others here can contribute to the inclusion of topical news items, that's all for the better -- I've been *particularly* sidelined from that myself, thanks to you and BIXX and your 'spam-defining' faction.

The difference is that you spam liberal news whereas i post news that is appropriate for the forum.

[ckaihatsu]

okay, but..



but this means precisely that we cannot concede to vampiric institutions/organizations

Agreed, and I just said as much:

[T]he *progressivist* position will be much closer to the nationalist 'center' by taking such bourgeois elections seriously, while the *revolutionary* position is much further left, knowing that the politicians are just employees of the state, whoever they may happen to be.

---

Firstly i'm for agitation and escalation but since organizing has essentially been a failure up until the point where autonomous actions occur and there is a significant number like 2k in a bloc in berkeley after the big milo counter-action, and a surprisingly large showing in p-town that was able to stop a 2nd polizei charge, it seems that maybe there hasn't been enough engagement within the radical sphere itself and that affinities or other groupings have already formed on their own but are partially or fully isolated. It's from there that projects other than street oriented things are started as something that is or closer to communist activity or activity from non-communist identifying anarchists.

Your particular sectarianism aside, I basically agree that it's better to have organization and practice originate from further-left politics than from radical-left politics.


---

So of course *communist* activity should be prioritized over 'progressive'-type activism, because progressivist / radical types of activism are usually facing issues coming out of the nationalist apparatus, like the threats to immigrants.

With any instances of nationalism-derived issues, like that of threats to immigrants, such resulting activism from the left and/or far-left *blends together* because of the dire nature of the immediate threat -- deportations. This is what I would call a *strategy* in common, with varying tactics -- that of addressing how to stop deportations, for example.

I guess the problem i see with that is you are then bleeding progressive activism the other way

'Bleeding progressive activism the other way' -- ?

You're *objecting* to having a revolutionary-minded influence over progressivist-originating politics and activism -- ? -- !

and it becomes injected into revolutionary discussion spaces as being relevant as-is, it isn't.

You're not addressing the subject matter, though -- with the example of fighting anti-immigration policy, all originating leftist politics *do* *blend* together on common ground with repelling anti-immigration practice. (Ditto for anti-imperialism, etc.)


---

The *distinction* we can make, however, between revolutionary politics and progressivist-type politics, is that of overall *position*, over time: When nationalist-type politics aren't of an imminent-threat nature -- say with some kind of election season -- the *progressivist* position will be much closer to the nationalist 'center' by taking such bourgeois elections seriously, while the *revolutionary* position is much further left, knowing that the politicians are just employees of the state, whoever they may happen to be.

Revolutionaries will be looking to take 'proactive' measures that strengthen the solidarity of the international working class, rather than kowtowing to the latest nationalist dog-and-pony-show over electoral candidates.

I don't understand what this means or how it relates.

It means that not all different stripes of leftist-ground originating politics are the same -- for example, radical politics vs. revolutionary politics.

Radicals are inherently more oriented to the nation-state than revolutionaries are, so their politics will always be more-influenced-by, and oriented-towards, issues *derived* from the bourgeois nation-state, *in the interests* of the bourgeois nation-state, such as electoralism (elections).

I think that it would be better for everyone. Also i've omitted your graphics that you posted to me because you haven't been able to explain how any of them work.

No, it's not that I'm *incapable*, because I've explained several of them in past threads, at length (you can do searches for such). It's that I'm *unwilling* to cooperate with your requests of me because you have a shitty attitude -- don't expect *my* cooperation when you're not being cooperative yourself.


---

Hey, yeah, sure, if you and others here can contribute to the inclusion of topical news items, that's all for the better -- I've been *particularly* sidelined from that myself, thanks to you and BIXX and your 'spam-defining' faction.

The difference is that you spam liberal news whereas i post news that is appropriate for the forum.

Well, I have no control over this matter, since your faction has gotten board policy to change -- I happen to be able to derive valid and topical news content from liberal-originating news releases, while you prefer to be more-dogmatic over the source of any given news. (Would a revolutionary be able to read a *corporate*-sourced news story, as from the New York Times, and parse it appropriately for valid news content, or should revolutionaries avoid *all* non-revolutionary news sources in a dogmatic, sectarian way -- ?)

[Ele'ill]

Agreed, and I just said as much:

---

Okay well you opened with an apology being that the world isn't ideal so no you apparently don't understand and don't agree. Would you collude with the state?

Your particular sectarianism aside, I basically agree that it's better to have organization and practice originate from further-left politics than from radical-left politics.


---

It's not entirely clear what that means but I'm pretty sure it doesn't work as a reply to what I said.

'Bleeding progressive activism the other way' -- ?

You're *objecting* to having a revolutionary-minded influence over progressivist-originating politics and activism -- ? -- !

No, i'm rejecting you peddling progressive praxis in your news spam that often links to their organizing events.

You're not addressing the subject matter, though -- with the example of fighting anti-immigration policy, all originating leftist politics *do* *blend* together on common ground with repelling anti-immigration practice. (Ditto for anti-imperialism, etc.)


---

What do we mean by 'oppose' and 'fighting'? The majority of the organizations you spam news for would probably stand against or hide from communism/anarchy related activity.

It means that not all different stripes of leftist-ground originating politics are the same -- for example, radical politics vs. revolutionary politics.

Radicals are inherently more oriented to the nation-state than revolutionaries are, so their politics will always be more-influenced-by, and oriented-towards, issues *derived* from the bourgeois nation-state, *in the interests* of the bourgeois nation-state, such as electoralism (elections).

What does this have to do with anything?

No, it's not that I'm *incapable*, because I've explained several of them in past threads, at length (you can do searches for such). It's that I'm *unwilling* to cooperate with your requests of me because you have a shitty attitude -- don't expect *my* cooperation when you're not being cooperative yourself.


---

I and others have asked you to explain how your graphics work, i.e. imagine a video of your graphics coming together with a narration, that would be explaining how they work, and the only thing you've done is give a brief title or summary to things and then claim that you won't explain them because of hostility, after you've spammed several of them into a thread.

Well, I have no control over this matter, since your faction has gotten board policy to change -- I happen to be able to derive valid and topical news content from liberal-originating news releases, while you prefer to be more-dogmatic over the source of any given news. (Would a revolutionary be able to read a *corporate*-sourced news story, as from the New York Times, and parse it appropriately for valid news content, or should revolutionaries avoid *all* non-revolutionary news sources in a dogmatic, sectarian way -- ?)

I post from liberal news sources all the time, like in the st louis thread. The difference is that the content and my contribution is relevant to communism/anarchy, whereas the content that you post is not relevant to communism/anarchy and you offer no contribution of your own.

[Bea Arthur]

Okay well you opened with an apology being that the world isn't ideal so no you apparently don't understand and don't agree. Would you collude with the state?




It's not entirely clear what that means but I'm pretty sure it doesn't work as a reply to what I said.




No, i'm rejecting you peddling progressive praxis in your news spam that often links to their organizing events.





What do we mean by 'oppose' and 'fighting'? The majority of the organizations you spam news for would probably stand against or hide from communism/anarchy related activity.






What does this have to do with anything?







I and others have asked you to explain how your graphics work, i.e. imagine a video of your graphics coming together with a narration, that would be explaining how they work, and the only thing you've done is give a brief title or summary to things and then claim that you won't explain them because of hostility, after you've spammed several of them into a thread.










I post from liberal news sources all the time, like in the st louis thread. The difference is that the content and my contribution is relevant to communism/anarchy, whereas the content that you post is not relevant to communism/anarchy and you offer no contribution of your own.

This is what was decided about such posts as the OP in this thread: that they would not be allowed any longer.

shot.png