DONATE NOW TO HELP UPGRADE LIBCOM.ORG

London Militant Atheists

164 posts / 0 new
Last post
Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Dec 20 2005 18:07

Shorty - if you are who i think you are then I know you're a sound guy. And while revol has been swearing a lot he does have a good point.

Can I ask, with this atheists thing:

1 - what is your ultimate aim with it?

2 - who is your target audience?

3 - what concretely are you trying to achieve with this audience?

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Dec 20 2005 18:42
revol68 wrote:
wouldn't go making smart arse remarks about typos so quickly.

To be fair he said syntax not spelling. And luckily this is over the net so he can't hear you mis-pronounce all those fancy names. Ha ha wink

shortygoldtooth
Offline
Joined: 16-11-05
Dec 30 2005 12:06
John. wrote:
Shorty - if you are who i think you are then I know you're a sound guy. And while revol has been swearing a lot he does have a good point.

Can I ask, with this atheists thing:

1 - what is your ultimate aim with it?

2 - who is your target audience?

3 - what concretely are you trying to achieve with this audience?

1 - The aim is that by having a series of sucessfull actions against suitable religous targets, a sense of achievment will be found, a growing level of inter person organisation established, and ultimately a cohesive group is established that can choose to take other actions against suitable hobby horses.

2 - everybody.

3- Make them wince/think/react/join us.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Dec 30 2005 14:56
shortygoldtooth wrote:
John. wrote:
Shorty - if you are who i think you are then I know you're a sound guy. And while revol has been swearing a lot he does have a good point.

Can I ask, with this atheists thing:

1 - what is your ultimate aim with it?

2 - who is your target audience?

3 - what concretely are you trying to achieve with this audience?

1 - The aim is that by having a series of sucessfull actions against suitable religous targets, a sense of achievment will be found, a growing level of inter person organisation established, and ultimately a cohesive group is established that can choose to take other actions against suitable hobby horses.

2 - everybody.

3- Make them wince/think/react/join us.

1: So your aim for setting up the group is you'll have a group?

That can't be your *ultimate* aim. What's your ultimate goal that you want the organisation to achieve?

And what do you mean by "actions" and "against religous targets"?

2: Everybody? You mean people who are already religious as well as atheists and everyone in between?

nosos
Offline
Joined: 24-12-03
Jan 2 2006 22:05
shortygoldtooth wrote:
3- Make them wince/think/react/join us.

Do you honestly think you're going to be able to show them that you're right? roll eyes

I honestly don't see how this is anything more than a self-righteous circle jerk. Which is not to say you guys shouldn't do it, just that attempts at politicisation might not particularly impress those who aren't quite as frustrated as you.

shortygoldtooth
Offline
Joined: 16-11-05
Jan 3 2006 14:53

Well three sets of roll eyes! Do tell though of any action that you involve yourselves in, apart from slagging people on message boards that is.

shortygoldtooth
Offline
Joined: 16-11-05
Jan 3 2006 15:40

No ones willy waving least of all me. I just get the impression that most people on here just moan away about all the big books that they have read and er thats it??? I have not been active for years and years but used to get up to plenty a "while back". It's just that I feel there is a gap in the market as it were, and I want to help fill it.

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 3 2006 15:48
revol68 wrote:

no offence but I'v probably done more actions than you'll ever have

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Jan 3 2006 16:06
shortygoldtooth wrote:
Well three sets of roll eyes! Do tell though of any action that you involve yourselves in, apart from slagging people on message boards that is.

I haven't slagged you off - I asked a couple of questions about what you hope to achieve

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 3 2006 17:15

where were you banned from and didn't know it?

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 3 2006 17:17

another short sharp shock treatment eh!

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Jan 3 2006 17:30

Ho ho ho...

*casts beady admin eye over thread to make sure everyone's being suitably behaved wink *

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jan 3 2006 17:32

Hi

Quote:
I just get the impression that most people on here just moan away about all the big books that they have read

This is a wicked thread. Is it OK if non-Londoners post on it? Who's the worst bookish offender? I reckon all of the Reading Group need sex really badly, that and a "A"-Level. Ha ha.

Love

LR

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 3 2006 17:33
revol68 wrote:
funny the sames been said about sex with you.

usual level of cutting wit

why didn't you post up a long whinging thread about your banning here on at least two other message boards like you did earier in the year when you were banned from elsewhere, or did the fact that your previous ones hardly even drew a wiff of a response or interest from anyone teach you that your irrelevant and it's no worth it

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Jan 3 2006 17:41

Why don't you stop falling for revol's fantastically juvenile provocations and keep the thread on topic? wink

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 3 2006 17:49

yes miss

nosos
Offline
Joined: 24-12-03
Jan 3 2006 22:58
shortygoldtooth wrote:
Well three sets of roll eyes! Do tell though of any action that you involve yourselves in, apart from slagging people on message boards that is.

Is that seriously the best you can do to justify this shit?

magnifico
Offline
Joined: 29-11-05
Jan 3 2006 23:36

We've got loads of religious nutters in my town. Recently heard someone on a bus in a nearby town saying they didn't want to come here because of all the 'god action'! They've got a loads of churches, the jesus army have got loads of houses and stupid vans and a great big cinema in the town centre and they're always leafleting etc. Religious people suck in the vulnerable (and worse, kids) and turn them into zombies.

Surely it's ok to do antireligious stuff, I thought class struggle anarchists always had, not only 'cos religion usually is part of or supportive of the establishment but also because it divides the working class and strengthens cross-class alliances based on faith. This is still true, even if the church is in general less powerful than it used to be. I'd have thought revol would be one of the people on these boards who could do anti-religious stuff most beneficially (though maybe not the most safely) since religious belief seems to me to be more of a barrier to united working class activity in Ireland than in most places. I'm not doing this kind of thing right now, but I wouldn't rule it out. Why is everyone so hostile? How is it any worse than, say, doing anti-racist stuff from a class struggle perspective? The only decent criticism I've seen on this thread is from revol saying that it isn't a fault line in capital at this time. But LMA people could argue that in light of the rise of islam in the UK and the political influence for christian nuts in the US (who like-minded people are trying to copy here) it actually is something important. i don't see why it's so obviously crap, that's all.

Quote:
Who will say with confidence that sexual abuse is more permanently damaging to children than threatening them with the eternal and unquenchable fires of hell?

Richard Dawkins

magnifico
Offline
Joined: 29-11-05
Jan 4 2006 00:25
revol68 wrote:
it's just that like all nationalist discourses it must find it markers in religion, race or anything else that can solidify and us and them.

Why does someone who advocates trying to remove one of these markers deserve such ridicule? Is an anarchist who does something to oppose racism equally idiotic?

ps i was editing my post while you were posting i think - don't think it really changes the meaning though

magnifico
Offline
Joined: 29-11-05
Jan 4 2006 00:42

I wasn't saying that religion is racist, I was saying that one of the main reasons the likes of us would oppose racism is that it creates false divisions among the working class as does religion. If religion is experiencing a boost within immigrant communities then it is becoming more influential in this country and is contributing towards further divisions between immigrant communities and the rest of us, which is bad from a class-struggle perspective and all the more reason to oppose it. I'm not suggesting that religion is part of the establishment in any meaningful way anymore, but that doesn't mean it's not harmful or that it's not worth attacking. Fascists aren't part of the establishment either, but that doesn't mean they're harmless.

I take your point that the working class divisions in northern ireland aren't primarily about religious belief, but are you really saying that it doesn't contribute to them in any way?

nosos
Offline
Joined: 24-12-03
Jan 4 2006 00:47
magnifico wrote:
And are you really saying that northern ireland wouldn't be better off with less religious belief?

Of course it would but of all the political action possible within northern ireland, I just doubt a militant atheists group is going to anything to help resolve the situation of which the religious belief is a symptom. Philosophically I'm hostile but mostly I'm just pragmatically cynical.

magnifico
Offline
Joined: 29-11-05
Jan 4 2006 00:54

If we are against nationalism because it divides the working class, and nationalism in northern ireland is bolstered by religion, I don't see how opposing religious ideologies there in a sensible way could fail to be a good thing, sepecially if it was accompanied by a class analysis of why religion is harmful.

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 4 2006 06:57
magnifico wrote:
If we are against nationalism because it divides the working class, and nationalism in northern ireland is bolstered by religion, I don't see how opposing religious ideologies there in a sensible way could fail to be a good thing, sepecially if it was accompanied by a class analysis of why religion is harmful.

this is a fair point, i think revol is wrong when he says that religion is just a symptom and not the problem, he even contradicts himself in the next sentence by correctly identifying the power that religion gives to nationalism, it gives nationalism a huge "letgitmasing" cross class power and contributes to this constructed sense of identity that feeds nationalism further

i don't see anything wrong in attacking a problem at one of its key sources

would the doubters here take the same line on catholic influences on nationalist poland, or the orthodox church's influence on nationalist serbia? symptoms? my arse

nosos
Offline
Joined: 24-12-03
Jan 4 2006 10:21

but, Tommy Ascaso, what will anything do to solve anything? don't you know that if every bit of activism is pointless then it means you shouldn't criticise whatever pointless bit of activist anyone else wants to do?

nosos
Offline
Joined: 24-12-03
Jan 4 2006 10:24
magnifico wrote:
I don't see how opposing religious ideologies there in a sensible way could fail to be a good thing, sepecially if it was accompanied by a class analysis of why religion is harmful.

How will a militant atheist group oppose religious ideologies in a sensible way? (genuine question)

magnifico
Offline
Joined: 29-11-05
Jan 4 2006 12:10

I'm not speaking for or against any particular activity that LMA may have done, I don't know anything about them apart from what's on this thread. I was assuming that they would be coming from a broadly libertarian communist perspective.

I agree that a lot of things that could be done by a militant athiest group would be substitutionist activism, which is a criticism a lot of people are making. But I wouldn't see spreading ideas that help raise class consciousness, or attacking ideas that tend to reduce class consciousness, as necessarily substitutionist. Religion is harmful to class consciousness as it creates false divisions in the working class. I keep mentioning racism and fascism, not because they are the same or 'as bad as' religion, but because if fascists are doing well in an area it is generally considered legitimate for anarchists to set up class-based anti-fascist groups to spread a message of class-based anti-fascism because fascism and racism divide the working class etc. This isn't even a purely defensive activity, as such groups can help raise class consciousness by pointing out where the real divisions in society lie. Would you tell antifa that "people get preached at enough by the fascists, they don't need you lot coming along and preaching at them not to be fascists"? Anarchists that do this aren't generally accused of substitutionism, so why should they be in the case of religion?

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 4 2006 12:24
Tommy Ascaso wrote:
I agree that it's part of the problem, but do you really think a militant atheist group will achieve anything oisleep?

it may do it may not, if i look on "the what have you done for class struggle in 2005" thread, i don't see much there either, a few people like revol & alan say that by having a better analysis seems to contribute in a way, so if people have a better analysis of how nationalism (through religion) divides class then why does this not achieve something, but people sitting in their bedrooms perfecting their anlaysis does?

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 4 2006 12:33
Tommy Ascaso wrote:
I don't think that setting up anti-religious or anti-fascist groups is an effective use of the anarchist movement's resources. Whilst I think both religion and fascism need to be tackled, I think political activity on a local level is far more important. It's exactly what the BNP have done, setting up anti-BNP groups in areas where they're active isn't enough to fight them, a viable political alternative is what's needed to draw people away from the BNP, and then we can give 'em a kicking...

:)

so if that's the case, why so much disdain for the IWCA here?

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 4 2006 12:46

a more militant one if you will?

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jan 4 2006 12:49
Tommy Ascaso wrote:
I just don't understand why they're going down the electoral route and would rather be involved in groups that have a more confrontational approach.

because they are sexier or because they achieve more? if so could you give some examples of these achievements? (serious question like) because 90% of people in a community will judge you on your achievements rather than your perfect analysis?