The leninists

50 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Oct 25 2005 10:54
The leninists

I would rather work with those who continue to venerate the greatest single tragedy in human history as the high point of working class history, then with the hippies.

That is how bad it has got. Something needs to be done to reforge the working class movement.

ronan
Offline
Joined: 26-06-05
Oct 25 2005 15:49

confused hippies are rather a broad church, do you mean people with flowy clothes and problems with linear thought? or just generally people who frame their opposition to capitalism outside of class struggle politics?

i found a link to these people, they wouldnt really be hippies in the traditional sense but they still seem to have all the cop on of roadkill.

http://www.spacehijackers.org/

i tend to think of people like this as rather harmless, the problem isn't them, it's that there's not a whole lot else. but the web is probably the wrong place to look.

maybe your problem is with non-materialists.

actually i think you're wrong, hippies are generally harmless but leninists are generally dangerous, left unity me hole.

PaulMarsh's picture
PaulMarsh
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 25 2005 16:18

I think Nick is objecting to Neil in this picture:

I should also point out that Class War has had its own answer to Vyvian for years!

meanoldman
Offline
Joined: 15-01-04
Oct 25 2005 17:41

My response to Nick's post is: What the fuck? confused confused

lucy82
Offline
Joined: 31-05-04
Oct 25 2005 18:01

well we did this

http://indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/08/296212.html

and we did this:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/manchester/2005/01/304541.html

and we did this:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/manchester/2004/05/290430.html

so i suppose it makes me a hippie sad

but it was all fun with a serious point and people joined in. more impact than just handing out leaflets anyway. look, lets not pretend that people are particularly attracted to the more traditional way of communicating. does the aversion of people to megaphones, leaflets or often their cynicism about trade unions and workplace organising not say anything to you about the failure of the left? i'm not pretending anything that we did had any great impact but then what does?

and fun is necessary. spacehijackers may not have deep political analysis but they know that much. as for leninists, they are usually to busy disappearing up their rhetorical arses to communicate effectively with people. your welcome to them Nick. They can join the massed ranks of the facists, Oxfam and the CPGB. you have a very black and white view of these things. lets hope it doesn't lead to shooting people who disagree with you.

Volin's picture
Volin
Offline
Joined: 24-01-05
Oct 25 2005 18:14

Yeah 'cos working with Leninists is really gonnae further a

socialist

and

libertarian

movement. roll eyes

There was a few interesting splits shown at the Bookfair between social anarchists and your more individualist lot. But really, these kind of rash, overblown reactionary positions (ie. what you prescribe) would probably be far more counter-productive than what there is at present.

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Oct 25 2005 19:28
Nick Durie wrote:
I would rather work with those who continue to venerate the greatest single tragedy in human history as the high point of working class history, then with the hippies.

you would? you really would?

star green black

creepyoller
Offline
Joined: 1-05-05
Oct 25 2005 20:35

I'm quite upset at the attitude towards the Young Ones' Neil. 30 odd years ago I bore an uncanny resemblance to fellow, except I washed less often.

PaulMarsh's picture
PaulMarsh
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 25 2005 21:44
creepyoller wrote:
I'm quite upset at the attitude towards the Young Ones' Neil. 30 odd years ago I bore an uncanny resemblance to fellow, except I washed less often.

Well, this is how you should now look:

lucy82
Offline
Joined: 31-05-04
Oct 26 2005 06:06

neil was the one who did the shopping, worrying and cooked the lentil gruel.

every house should have its hippie wink

creepyoller
Offline
Joined: 1-05-05
Oct 26 2005 06:27

Yes the transformation has been completed, except I'm greyer (of the hair) and speccy.

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Oct 26 2005 08:28
Quote:
you have a very black and white view of these things.

That's maybe true.

Quote:
i suppose it makes me a hippie

I seriously doubt it - not in the sense I meant it anyway; as it happened I liked the ID stuff and I continue to think that kind of activity can have quite an impact on some levels. I wasn't really meaning 'hippies', what I meant was these modern narodniki. They're scum and they need to be dissociated from those who are actually interested in the historic mission of the proletariat. No serious progressive movement would ever tolerate some lunatics lining the pockets of a drug-dealing scumfucks to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds all so these modern nihilist can have their carry on. It's an unspeakable crime.

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Oct 26 2005 08:57
Quote:
There was a few interesting splits shown at the Bookfair between social anarchists and your more individualist lot. But really, these kind of rash, overblown reactionary positions (ie. what you prescribe) would probably be far more counter-productive than what there is at present.

Oh piss off Volin! What 'position' am I prescribing?

That we should distance ourselves from idiots? It's hardly a through-going strategy I've set out there is it? So I make some daft remark (albeit pompous and overblown - yes I'll admit that) about Leninists. Well shoot me down, but to say that I have articulated a 'position' which would be 'more counter-productive than what there is at present' is a little bit much, no?

As it happens I have articulated real positions before, and happen to have some ideas on that front (see: http://www.libcom.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6687 & http://www.libcom.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6628 for my more recent contributions to the discussion)

And as regards Leninists anyway, I know a few who are pretty sound and commited people, who if they were talking any sense and engaged on a proper level would be a real asset to a revolutionary movement.

Good people often end up in these groups by the way coz anarchists are usually such utter tossers. I've met more people who describe themselves as anarchists who I genuinely dislike and find offensive, distasteful and barking mad than I have people in the SSP or RCG for example. I know quite a few commited socialists particularly from the SSP whose politics is libertarian and anti-electoral, but for whom the anarchist movement in Scotland is too filled with people like Phil Jones or that tosser Andy from Printworks to ever consider getting involved with.

When you speak to these people and demonstrate you're not an individualist tosser then progress is usually made.

I know of one person who, for example, went to a dancin, came out drunk after it shut, and ventured into Albion street just to see. He found the doors open (3AM) and people partying outside in the street and indoors. They asked, 'Is this the pure mad anarchist place' and was welcomed into the party. They describe in great detail the wreckage of humanity that they found there.

That is one individual's description of why they didn't get involved in anarchisr politics, and it is the generalized perception created by what these idiots in Printworks, in the Solidarity centre, in the section 60 warehouse et-fucking-cetera. project for us.

If you want to work with them, fine - you're welcome to.

I would rather engage with the left whom you seem to dismiss in characteristically Cohn-Bendit style (and let's look where that nonce is now, eh? http://www.cohn-bendit.de/) in order to recruit the wheat and leave the chaff, because if you've got 2000 SSP members in Scotland for example and maybe 50 or so non-alligned left-militants in various Leninist groups, and _only about 50 active anarchists_ across the whole country then that to me says something.

'Anarchists' are tossers.

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Oct 26 2005 09:29
Quote:

fuck me, your a right cock.

i'm not one to lick the arse of the situationists but seriously you've got a fucking morgue in your mouth.

"People who talk about revolution and class struggle without referring explicitly to everyday life, without understanding what is subversive about love and what is positive in the refusal of constraints, such people have corpses in their mouths." -- Raoul Vaneigem, who got chucked out of the SI coz in May 68 he fled Paris in terror for Belgium. He was the worst and most individualist of them.

Have you actually read 'the revolution of everday life' (whence you paraphrase) Revol? It's utter shite. It's filled with meaningless attacks on individualists and collectivists and unexplained poncy references to historic luminaries like Rousseau or Voltaire as well as evocations of dead anarcho-terrorists and narodniki. It draws almost no conclusions - save that we shouldn't be militants coz that's not about everyday life, is it? The SI, (a group of wanky artists and intellectuals, living in their druggie commune in Paris where they nearly killed themselves on several occasions after days of binge drinking and barbituates by leaving the gas oven on to kill each other) really knew about the everyday life of the working class didn't they?

And to quote from Vaneigem... Wowee. You are a cock! That man reckoned that what was wrong with revolutionaries was that they were too concerted in their efforts and worked too hard, so that's why they were unsuccessful. What was needed was for people to become more like moronic bohemians and maybe do it like the SI and every year publish a pamphlet or something. That'll get the proletariat going, eh?

Fuck off back to your baudrillard with this anti-militant shite you moronic ultwa-weft, quasi-syndicalist tosser. the only way we are going to make any progress is if we have more, not less militants.

The trouble is people egoize too much, and 'get burnt out, man' and just don't get fucking on with it. I know more anarcho-lifestylists who are into having workshops on investigating the inner anus than I do solid class struggle types. To warp the criticism of lifestylism, as you do, and as Vaneigem does, is just a wanky intellectual justification for your own lifestylism.

To paraphrase what I wrote and to quote from SI high master Debord (who couched in wanky intellectual language actually rewrote so no bad stuff that Marx wrote before) did :-

"The self-emancipation of our time is an emancipation from the material bases of inverted truth. This “historic mission of establishing truth in the world” can be carried out neither by the isolated individual nor by atomized and manipulated masses, but only and always by the class that is able to dissolve all classes by reducing all power to the de-alienating form of realized democracy — to councils in which practical theory verifies itself and surveys its own actions. This is possible only when individuals are “directly linked to universal history” and dialogue arms itself to impose its own conditions" -- Thesis 221, The Society Of The Spectacle.

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Oct 26 2005 10:48
Quote:
oh you sad lil cunt, did i not make clear my reservations about the situationists in the post or numerous other posts.

You did to an extent, but it was a bit of a misusage of what Vaneigem was actually at. Especially given that Debord said that kind of stuff all the time and was a lot more pompous than I'll ever be.

Quote:
I get the distinct impression that your not from a particularly working class background

Well you don't need to get a 'distinct impression', I'm not. I've said this on numerous occasions. I'm not working class (except if you're using the word as a translation of 'proletarian', and even then I'm a sole trader and a gardner so I don't really, exactly fit into any Marxian class category). I was born into a middle class family

Quote:
you feel the need to overcompensate.

Perhaps, but I don't see how you can draw those conclusions from me making pompous statements regarding the 'historic mission', or otherwise, of 'the proletariat'. I also think it's a bit rich for you to pull me up on it given your "And i don't have to engage in very shakey anthropoligical studies to see the possibility of communism, i see it in a million little moments every day," which was equally, if not more, pretentious.

Quote:
your militancy is a lifestyle pursuit.

I don't really think that's a fair accusation actually - not that you're ever fair about anything. But seriously what do you actually know about my lifestlye? We've never met. I don't tend to post references to how I spend my day to day life - beyond the obvious that I must spend a bit of time on the internet to be discussing whatever it is we're discussing this morning. I think it's important to keep that level of personal off here and talk about business - ie the reason why we are posting to a libertarian communist website and not some asynine 'friends blah blah' discussion board.

Quote:
It's always a struggle for "the classes historical mission," never the classes desires let alone your fucking own, you are such a dour activist wanker that you have pushed me to defend the situationists

it's a straw man to say I'm not motivated by personal goals, or that because I made some pompous remarks about historical missions that I'm like some Nepalese Maoist ascetic guerrilla fantasizing about the day when everyone will wear blue jammies and red stars because it's their historic goal to do so - to fulfill some pseudo-Hegelian prophesy or satisfy some intellectual problematic. That's the kind of thing your pal Debord was intae. tongue

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Oct 26 2005 11:09

Sadly i think i would rather work with a hippie (whatever that means) than with someone like you Nick. Get off your keyboard and join the CPGB. Seriously Nick, calm down you sound like your having a hissy fit.

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Oct 26 2005 11:35
Quote:

Sadly i think i would rather work with a hippie (whatever that means) than with someone like you Nick. Get off your keyboard and join the CPGB. Seriously Nick, calm down you sound like your having a hissy fit.

oh ffs! What kind of a post is that? two lines in which you make no cogent criticisms, offer no rationale for your statement re me, and then offer up this suggestion:-

Quote:
Get off your keyboard and join the CPGB.

That's great that is. Fantastic. You might as well argue or so-and-so's posting style not being to your liking, coz that's essentially what you've said. You know damn well I have no intention of ever joining the CPGB. It's a nonsense, a straw man and it's totally lacking in coherent thought.

To bring it back to what we actually started out talking about what do you think oif someone who offers up over 20k (I don't know that actual figure - just that it was more than 20k) for a let of a condemned warehouse in Brigton to a gangster for use as a G8 convergence space? Or am I having a 'hissy fit' by objecting to this?

cantdocartwheels's picture
cantdocartwheels
Offline
Joined: 15-03-04
Oct 26 2005 12:10
revol68 wrote:
you search out universal truth and grand historic missions in order toget yourself through the grinding alienation of capitalism, but it is as revolutionary as Disney world.

So lets get this straight, you call nick out on a silly phrase when he was making a correct if somewhat overtread point, but you then come out with phrases a million times worse for no fucking reason, you complete and utter twat.

I think this thread should just be locked, since its just going to be another pointless slagging match involving wanky quotes, copiuos use of the word 'cock', some pretentious self pitying balls and some tedious historical references to the orange order. I just can't be asked to read another of these threads.

ronan
Offline
Joined: 26-06-05
Oct 26 2005 13:48
lucy82 wrote:
...

so i suppose it makes me a hippie sad

but it was all fun with a serious point and people joined in. more impact than just handing out leaflets anyway. look, lets not pretend that people are particularly attracted to the more traditional way of communicating. does the aversion of people to megaphones, leaflets or often their cynicism about trade unions and workplace organising not say anything to you about the failure of the left? i'm not pretending anything that we did had any great impact but then what does?

and fun is necessary. spacehijackers may not have deep political analysis but they know that much. as for leninists, they are usually to busy disappearing up their rhetorical arses to communicate effectively with people.

yeah, that was definitely an over simplification, embarrassed i think the thing about more effective ways to communicate is dead right. my bro sent me this link: http://www.appliedautonomy.com/projects.html which is kinda cool. i actually think the critique of the militant is still important, even if Vaneigem went a bit loopy after the SI went down the tubes. we don't want to create a society of endless duty and obligation. that only recreates hierarchy by posing the activist as someone who knows better than 'normal' people.

subversion should be fun and liberating but i don't think that fun is therefore by definition subversive, which is what i think is wrong with the space hijackers. there's definitely some cool things there but a lot of it is just pranks with weighty words thrown in.

so, to make it a second on this website, lucy i'm deeply sorry and ashamed. wink

RedCelt
Offline
Joined: 17-06-05
Oct 26 2005 15:57

Being a Leninist or involved in Leninist campaigns is just counter productive and a waste of time. I for one don't want to be involved with authoritarians.

red n black star

lucy82
Offline
Joined: 31-05-04
Oct 26 2005 16:45
ronan wrote:
lucy82 wrote:
...

so i suppose it makes me a hippie sad

but it was all fun with a serious point and people joined in. more impact than just handing out leaflets anyway. look, lets not pretend that people are particularly attracted to the more traditional way of communicating. does the aversion of people to megaphones, leaflets or often their cynicism about trade unions and workplace organising not say anything to you about the failure of the left? i'm not pretending anything that we did had any great impact but then what does?

and fun is necessary. spacehijackers may not have deep political analysis but they know that much. as for leninists, they are usually to busy disappearing up their rhetorical arses to communicate effectively with people.

subversion should be fun and liberating but i don't think that fun is therefore by definition subversive, which is what i think is wrong with the space hijackers. there's definitely some cool things there but a lot of it is just pranks with weighty words thrown in.

so, to make it a second on this website, lucy i'm deeply sorry and ashamed. :wink:

no worries. i agree that fun is not by definition subversive and some of the pranky stuff is downright irritating. also these things tend to become really cliquely sometimes but then again looking at various subgroups, what doesn't?

Volin's picture
Volin
Offline
Joined: 24-01-05
Oct 26 2005 18:17
Nick_Durie wrote:
Oh piss off Volin! What 'position' am I prescribing?

Oooh listen to you, you're really going to make many 'militant' friends by speaking to people like that. I dunno you tell me...that you'd rather work with Leninists? I'm sorry but I just find that a rather strange statement and at first glance anyway, a position born out of the reaction to the present situation. Now, I (and most people participating to any extent in the real world) already limitedly co-operate with other socialists but I'd never go quite so far as saying what you do. The nature of working with authoritarian socialists can only be seen as a temporary and contradictory relationship, and in the long-term we should be working against them. The anarchist movement is irrelevent, but this constant negation of those baddy activists, as though it's all their fault, actually isn't going to change that. If there was a real social anarchist movement with strong membership in specific organisations and perhaps a larger number of non-aligned people participating in community and working struggle, you'd soon find very little support for the pointless activities associated with our cause today. Like myself, a lot of people get involved in the more protest-based action because *that's all there is*, that's the first port of call for 'anarchists'. It's definetely not good enough and more than often results in a waste of time. And yet there are a lot of people involved in it who would easily participate in a more far-sighted, class struggle approach.

That libertarian communist approach will not be brought about by working with (for?) those who's very ideology is essentially contrary to ours. At the same time we shouldn't stick rigidly to an abstract purism that usually means we don't do anything. And yeah, a simpler, less domgatic communication of our ideals is the only way they'll be spread. Individually, we have to "co-operate" with anyone of like mind when it comes to local campaigns etc. but do so as libertarians with the furtherance of libertarianism in mind. I don't believe we're that for off each other's viewpoint but blank statements like "Lets work with Leninists" or "'Anarchists' are tossers." aren't really going to do you any favours.

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Oct 26 2005 18:46
Volin wrote:
The nature of working with authoritarian socialists can only be seen as a temporary and contradictory relationship, and in the long-term we should be working against them.

yup

creepyoller
Offline
Joined: 1-05-05
Oct 26 2005 19:22

cantdo says the thread's content has 'some pretentious self pitying balls', then goes on to say, 'I just can't be asked to read another of these threads.'

If you dont like it, why add melodrama to it.

sublimembject
Offline
Joined: 12-01-05
Oct 26 2005 22:57

I'm anti-Leninist and all that, but do we really think that the Bolshevik Revolution was, as the OP suggests, the 'greatest single tragedy in human history'? Even given the events of the 20th century alone, I'm not sure I'd want to put 1917 at the top of the tragedy charts.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Oct 26 2005 23:34

I see the possibilities of communism every day. On the smile of every child. On the face of every baby.

(* source - South Park, not Hakim Bey)

RedCelt
Offline
Joined: 17-06-05
Oct 27 2005 15:00
sublimeobject wrote:
I'm anti-Leninist and all that, but do we really think that the Bolshevik Revolution was, as the OP suggests, the 'greatest single tragedy in human history'? Even given the events of the 20th century alone, I'm not sure I'd want to put 1917 at the top of the tragedy charts.

Perhaps not the 'greatest single tragedy in human history', the First World War or the Holocaust are obviously more tragic. Ironically though, I think in retropspect the Bolshevik seizure of power was a great reversal for communism - we know what became of it.

From what I gather the Revolution was subverted by the Bolsheviks who at one point were trying to contain and slow down the Revolution which came from the people, not them. It wasn't the Revolution that was a tragedy but the authoritarians subsequent Counter-Revolution.

red n black star

Irp
Offline
Joined: 21-09-05
Oct 28 2005 02:24

Although really it's not just a choice between the hippies and Bolsheviks for anarchists. There's a large amount of communist marxist thought that isn't bolshie idealism.

check out www.communistleague.org

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Oct 28 2005 07:47
Irp wrote:
Although really it's not just a choice between the hippies and Bolsheviks for anarchists. There's a large amount of communist marxist thought that isn't bolshie idealism.

check out www.communistleague.org

Why the hell is their logo a hammer, sickle and tongs? eek

Is it supposed to be some kind of pun on going at it "hammer and tongs"?

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Oct 28 2005 08:11
Quote:
Perhaps not the 'greatest single tragedy in human history', the First World War or the Holocaust are obviously more tragic. Ironically though, I think in retropspect the Bolshevik seizure of power was a great reversal for communism - we know what became of it.

From what I gather the Revolution was subverted by the Bolsheviks who at one point were trying to contain and slow down the Revolution which came from the people, not them. It wasn't the Revolution that was a tragedy but the authoritarians subsequent Counter-Revolution.

I'm sorry but it was.

Chingiz Khan may have killed more people than Stalin, but at least he didn't do it in the name of socialism. The global left has never recovered from the crushing defeat wrought by Lenin and his minions.

Just look at what happened to the British communist movement after 1917. Previously they had been increasingly anti-parliamentary, syndicalist and democratic.

After the establishment of CPGB on Moscow's orders a lot of these people chucked in the towel and joined the CPGB, coz 'they'd done it in Russia' and so everyone should just listen to big Vlad.

Seriously the death of socialism is the greatest single tragedy in the history of mankind, to say nothing of the death camps and enforced mass starvation begotten in the name of 'communism'.

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Oct 28 2005 08:17
John. wrote:
Irp wrote:
Although really it's not just a choice between the hippies and Bolsheviks for anarchists. There's a large amount of communist marxist thought that isn't bolshie idealism.

check out www.communistleague.org

Why the hell is their logo a hammer, sickle and tongs? eek

Is it supposed to be some kind of pun on going at it "hammer and tongs"?

are they curling tongs, is there a hairdresser link in there?