# Would you support revolutionary "criminals"



## FifthFromFront (Nov 20, 2005)

I was going to use a couple of obvious examples from the past but figured that might lead down the path of whether that particular group was right/wrong rather than whether the overall idea was.

So if a new group set up proclaiming revolutionary ideals (if you anarchist then anarchist, if you are trot then trotskyist etc) would you support them?

Lets say they go round knocking off leading business men/Generals/police chiefs/politicians. Would you support that?

What if they started knocking off banks where working class people could potentially be injured/killed?

Would you support it or consider it too elite and vanguard? 

If support what support would you give - just verbal? Safe houes?

FFF


----------



## nick1181 (Nov 20, 2005)

I don't think I'd support violence full stop. Violence is generally only good for one thing - and that's creating more violence.

Civil disobedience is another matter. Ghandi was civilly disobedient.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Nov 20, 2005)

*Well*

this is a tactical question, depending on how the group relates to their 'base'.  For example the Red Brigades at one point had a degree of legitimacy, but ultimately were taken over by the state (Mark 2).

World of difference between armed resistance a la freedom fighters & elitist substitutionism.

If the question is though, can it ever be right for revolutionaries to support illegal actions, of course it can--for although now the revolution may well be televised (contrary to the great song) it will not be entirely legal.

Apropos the thread title, when capitalism is the law, revolution is order?? (surely?)


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 20, 2005)

nick1181 said:
			
		

> I don't think I'd support violence full stop. Violence is generally only good for one thing - and that's creating more violence.
> 
> Civil disobedience is another matter. Ghandi was civilly disobedient.


Who was Ghandi then? I thought he was really violent


----------



## rednblack (Nov 21, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> Lets say they go round knocking off leading business men/Generals/police chiefs/politicians. Would you support that?



yes 100% at anytime, possibly not more than verbal depending on the level of general struggle in society at the time



> What if they started knocking off banks where working class people could potentially be injured/killed?



it would have to be a high level of general struggle, and they'd have to have built good roots among the class before i'd support that


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 21, 2005)

Okay, nationalism, but if you take Kosovo and it's highly admirable civil and peaceful resistance movement among the Albanians during the 1980's, against the Yugoslav state. The state repression against the Albanians helped to create the kind of brutalised young men who had been in and out of prisons, who with their families suffererd from police brutality and corruption, their families prevented from taking their places in institutions of decent education and prevented from gaining decent employment.  This situation no doubt helps explain in part why a lot of rightly angry young men decided to help form and join the militant KLA and eschew peaceful protest and resistance.


----------



## pilchardman (Nov 21, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> Lets say they go round knocking off leading business men/Generals/police chiefs/politicians. Would you support that?


Killing those responsible, rather than - as is usual - killing those commanded by the truly responsible?  Of course I would.


----------



## General Ludd (Nov 21, 2005)

> Lets say they go round knocking off leading business men/Generals/police chiefs/politicians. Would you support that?


Ain't got no problem with that.


> What if they started knocking off banks where working class people could potentially be injured/killed?


Only in a very different political climate.


> I don't think I'd support violence full stop. Violence is generally only good for one thing - and that's creating more violence.


Violence worked for Nelson Mandela, don't you liberals normally love him?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 21, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> I was going to use a couple of obvious examples from the past but figured that might lead down the path of whether that particular group was right/wrong rather than whether the overall idea was.
> 
> So if a new group set up proclaiming revolutionary ideals (if you anarchist then anarchist, if you are trot then trotskyist etc) would you support them?
> 
> ...




Shades of Italy when the strategy was to provoke and expose the state as a repressive machine and bring the working class into closer conflict? A tactic used by both the 'left' and the right.

Or the impatient substitutionalism of the BMG in Germany who thought the working class had been bought off?

Thanks but no thanks, graduates with guns are  not a real alternative to  a genuine working class organisation.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Nov 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> graduates with guns are  not a real alternative to  a genuine working class organisation.



So that's 98% of the Last Century Left ruled out then.


----------



## fanta (Nov 21, 2005)

Ahh, the optimism of youth!    Bless!


----------



## Ratan (Nov 21, 2005)

Thanks but no thanks, graduates with guns are not a real alternative to a genuine working class organisation.


That's true,that sort of chic revolutionary bonecrunching just seems to me a rite of passage for disgruntled sprogs of the middle class.


----------



## knopf (Nov 21, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Who was Ghandi then? I thought he was really violent



Towards his wife, certainly.


----------



## JHE (Nov 21, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> Would you support revolutionary "criminals"[?]


You put the scare quotes around the wrong word there!  Your question should be:





> Would you support 'revolutionary' criminals?



Anyway, are assassination and bank robbery justified?  There are circumstances in which those activities are justified, IMO - but those circumstances are clearly not here and now.


----------



## bluestreak (Nov 21, 2005)

it would depend.  i'd support an angry brigade style campaign aimed at property and reflecting public opinion.  i'd be incredibly wary of non-self defence violence against people though.  it's just not my way, though sadly it is the way of many of those we'd be against.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 21, 2005)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> So that's 98% of the Last Century Left ruled out then.



In the last century, about 1976 ,  the local left used to meet up in a pub on a Friday in Wembley after the paper sales. There had been a bit of anti fash activity in the area and  three or four blokes who drank in the pub started to engage with the group we were with. After about three weeks one of them asked if we wanted weapons as he had a contact, we laughed him off but  some of the students got very excited about it. We were doing a building job on Kilburn Police station about a fortnight later when to our surprise the same three blokes walk out of the cop shop and into an unmarked car.


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Thanks but no thanks, graduates with guns are  not a real alternative to  a genuine working class organisation.



Aye


----------



## sihhi (Nov 21, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Who was Ghandi then? I thought he was really violent



He was- he called on Indians to enlist for the First World War.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 21, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> Lets say they go round knocking off leading business men/Generals/police chiefs/politicians. Would you support that?


Absolutely.



> What if they started knocking off banks where working class people could potentially be injured/killed?


This I'm a bit more ambivalent about, I don't know if I could support something like that.


----------



## fanta (Nov 21, 2005)

Shouldn't some of you ask the working class what they think?

Just a thought.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> Thanks but no thanks, graduates with guns are not a real alternative to a genuine working class organisation.


Whos' said they are?
I basically agree with RNB and General Ludd, and I wouldn't  shead any tears over some general's assassination but I recognise that that action for what it is.


----------



## Ratan (Nov 21, 2005)

redsquirrel said:
			
		

> Whos' said they are?
> I basically agree with RNB and General Ludd, and I wouldn't  shead any tears over some
> general's assassination but I recognise that that action for what it is.




Chuck norris said that not me,i was just agreeing with him.

Whatever the merits of blowing out some sinew and brain matter from a general. I just get the feeling that it comes from a idol worship of "rough trade". It reminds me of when i knew some middle class girls from the suburbs who delabate slept with black rastas cos they wanted to feel more " street" and be a part of a rough subculture. Which besides being patronizing and bonkers  its a embarrassment.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> Whatever the merits of blowing out some sinew and brain matter from a general. I just get the feeling that it comes from a idol worship of "rough trade". It reminds me of when i knew some middle class girls from the suburbs who delabate slept with black rastas cos they wanted to feel more " street" and be a part of a rough subculture. Which besides being patronizing and bonkers  its a embarrassment.


Well that's a concern definatley I'm not going to pretend it isn't, but I think to condem all such actions because of that is a mistake.


----------



## maomao (Nov 21, 2005)

The Bonnot gang were . So yes, definitely.


----------



## Ratan (Nov 21, 2005)

I never said i would condemn violent violence against those lot. But you dont what another s.l.a on yer hands. Whats that saying about revolution that its the working class who need it not middle class academics who play it.Or something like that.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

maomao said:
			
		

> The Bonnot gang were . So yes, definitely.


no the bonnot gang were not cool.

A popular misconception i'll grant you, but mistaken nonetheless.


What a stupid discussion to have on a board regularly read by the press and the police? If you want to know what ppl think do a  private poll.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> Chuck norris said that not me,i was just agreeing with him.
> 
> Whatever the merits of blowing out some sinew and brain matter from a general. I just get the feeling that it comes from a idol worship of "rough trade". It reminds me of when i knew some middle class girls from the suburbs who delabate slept with black rastas cos they wanted to feel more " street" and be a part of a rough subculture. Which besides being patronizing and bonkers  its a embarrassment.



Easily pursuaded or just going with the flow Ratan?


----------



## maomao (Nov 21, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> no the bonnot gang were not cool.
> 
> A popular misconception i'll grant you, but mistaken nonetheless.



They were cooler than you.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

thats not exactly decisive though, all things considered


----------



## sam/phallocrat (Nov 21, 2005)

maomao said:
			
		

> They were cooler than you.



Yes, I agree, that doesn't take much . . .


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> Whatever the merits of blowing out some sinew and brain matter from a general. I just get the feeling that it comes from a idol worship of "rough trade". It reminds me of when i knew some middle class girls from the suburbs who delabate slept with black rastas cos they wanted to feel more "street" and be a part of a rough subculture. Which besides being patronizing and bonkers  its a embarrassment.


You are ryazan and i claim my £5 in butter tokens.

I don't believe for a second ur m/c girls story its so fucking made up its totally bollocks. 
''Tara i really want to shag a rasta, specifically a black one''
''Why's that samantha?'' 
''I want to feel more street and be part of a rough subculture you see'' 
''Jolly D!''

These utterly damning condemnations of the m/c - keep em coming. Its so true you see, we all hang around trying our hardest to ape people we think are edgy; i desperately to shag someone who looks exactly like vicky pollard personally.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

sam/phallocrat said:
			
		

> Doesn't take much . . .


yes mate, i've already done that joke, directly above your post in fact. 
Well done you wit.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

sam/phallocrat said:
			
		

> i desperately want to shag a the kind of person who sells used travelcards for a living


really?

I stand corrected!


----------



## Ratan (Nov 21, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> You are ryazan and i claim my £5 in butter tokens.
> 
> I don't believe for a second ur m/c girls story its so fucking made up its totally bollocks.
> ''Tara i really want to shag a rasta, specifically a black one''
> ...




I could not give a annekissed withered bedsheet if you believe me or not. It was common knowledge in manningham in the early 80s, and if your middle class guilt stops you from thinking its true  who gives a frigg.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> I could not give a annekissed withered bedsheet if you believe me or not. It was common knowledge in manningham in the early 80s, and if your middle class guilt stops you from thinking its true  who gives a frigg.




my m/c guilt stops me from believing that m/c girls want shag people out of m/c guilt? Of course!

Genius!

This calls for a tagline change.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> It was common knowledge in manningham in the early 80s


Big in japan?


----------



## Ratan (Nov 21, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> my m/c guilt stops me from believing that m/c girls want shag people out of m/c guilt? Of course!
> 
> Genius!
> 
> This calls for a tagline change.



I know you've been bummed to death by head pater at your Minor public school,but get this through your matted dreads. Pretty white girls m/c deliberately sought out so called dangerous rastas cos it gave them a taste of the "forbidden fruit".It to them was a political action against there upbringing. Its m/c guilt because it stops you from thinking that out in the big bad world your m c sisters do do nutty things like that.


----------



## FifthFromFront (Nov 21, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> What a stupid discussion to have on a board regularly read by the press and the police? If you want to know what ppl think do a  private poll.



The whole point of it NOT being a poll is because it's not a yes/no answer. I was hoping people would give their reasons behind what they were thinking  and those that have have given the thoughts behind tended to reach the same conclusion - to target Leaders would be supportable, targetting areas where others may get injured is not supportable or would only be supportable in a very different climate.  

The reason I asked was because I've been reading again about Makhno and the group he was in before the revolution basically did  rob the industrialists in the area and punish local police chiefs etc. From what I can tell though they didn't do over  banks. I was comparing this to Sabate who did seem to rob banks as well

I know that the circumstances was different for Sabate, Makhno and present UK.

I'd hardly put say Makhno in the same league as some  students excited about weapons in a pub. 

FFF


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> I know you've been bummed to death by head pater at your Minor public school,but get this through your matted dreads. Pretty white girls m/c deliberately sought out so called dangerous rastas cos it gave them a taste of the "forbidden fruit".It to them was a political action against there upbringing. Its m/c guilt because it stops you from thinking that out in the big bad world your m c sisters do do nutty things like that.


You just get better and better 

edited to add: pater is latin for father, i have no idea what a head father is...? I wish i could speak latin its great.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> I know you've been bummed to death by head pater at your Minor public school,but get this through your matted dreads. Pretty white girls m/c deliberately sought out so called dangerous rastas cos it gave them a taste of the "forbidden fruit".It to them was a political action against there upbringing. Its m/c guilt because it stops you from thinking that out in the big bad world your m c sisters do do nutty things like that.


where was the edit?


----------



## Pilgrim (Nov 21, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> I'd hardly put say Makhno in the same league as some  students excited about weapons in a pub. FFF



To be fair, the situation in which Makhno was active is hardly the same as ours today.

Although I can't help thinking that Makhno would probably either laugh or cry, looking at the shenanigans going on amid the British Left these days.

I'm not sure which to do myself sometimes.


----------



## mk12 (Nov 21, 2005)

Cry with laughter, it works for me.


----------



## Ratan (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> You just get better and better
> 
> edited to add: pater is latin for father, i have no idea what a head father is...? I wish i could speak latin its great.



Yes the head pater or the blond floppy fringed brute of the boarding school who sodomized delicate young sprogs of the middle class like you.


----------



## Ratan (Nov 22, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> where was the edit?



To add girls ,sir.


----------



## Fong (Nov 22, 2005)

JHE said:
			
		

> You put the scare quotes around the wrong word there!  Your question should be:
> 
> Anyway, are assassination and bank robbery justified?  There are circumstances in which those activities are justified, IMO - but those circumstances are clearly not here and now.



I dunno, I think you could make a strong case for bumping off a few CEOs and a few politicians right now.


----------



## Ratan (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> You just get better and better
> 
> edited to add: pater is latin for father, i have no idea what a head father is...? I wish i could speak latin its great.



Delving in to Tex's long buried memories.


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> You are ryazan and i claim my £5 in butter tokens.
> 
> I don't believe for a second ur m/c girls story its so fucking made up its totally bollocks.
> ''Tara i really want to shag a rasta, specifically a black one''
> ...




I did have a 39 year old upper middle class woman coming onto me when I was 20. She scared the shit out of me.  But she was quite tidy. Wish I had taken her up on her offer.      Oh well.

*I am not a black rasta*


----------



## editor (Nov 22, 2005)

Ratan said:
			
		

> I know you've been bummed to death by head pater at your


Unacceptable personal abuse.

Bit _familiar _for a new poster, aintcha?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 22, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Unacceptable personal abuse.
> 
> Bit _familiar _for a new poster, aintcha?



It is and I believe that Childline would normally be the agency that would deal with this sort of issue.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 22, 2005)

fanta said:
			
		

> Shouldn't some of you ask the working class what they think?


I wasn't aware we'd appointed a spokeman.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

unacceptable abuse? Bring it on - i'd be hurt if it was in any way true.

Back to revolutionary criminals:

Wasn't the moral of RAF and Brigatte(sp?) Rosse that they misjudged the political climate (which was far more confrontational then) and didn't really have much of an effect on wider social movements/were not held in acclaim by the w/c of those countries? Same with the weathermen. The issue of their class background is to me (what a surprise) not that relevant, as all the 1970's leftist militant groups did more or less the same thing, some more deadly than others and they had different class composition in each. The issue is how effective they were and whether the risks they took with their own lives (i care nothing for those they killed) were worth it.

In a related point the longstanding greek militants have finally been caught i heard. Good innings tho.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> I wasn't aware we'd appointed a spokeman.


*applauds*


----------



## Ratan (Nov 22, 2005)

Whats more insulting being called a lier or a few throw away insults.?.


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Nov 22, 2005)

nick1181 said:
			
		

> I don't think I'd support violence full stop. Violence is generally only good for one thing - and that's creating more violence.
> 
> Civil disobedience is another matter. Ghandi was civilly disobedient.



Violence only creates more laws.


----------



## FifthFromFront (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> The issue is how effective they were and whether the risks they took with their own lives (i care nothing for those they killed) were worth it.
> .




So your support would be dependant on how effective they are? OK thats fair enough but how do you judge effectiveness the only way I can see is with hindsight which would then prevent you supporting them till either afterwards or very late on - wouldn't it? Maybe not. I dunno.

But for instance Leon Czolgosz (if I've spealt that right I'll be happy!) assassinated President  McKinley in the 1900's. He said he did it for  working people and was not sorry for his "crime". But it wasn't at all effective really was it? I mean he did kill the president but it didn't achieve much. Personally I think he did quite well and would be supportive of that sort of thing but in the end he was tried and executed for it which would mean that you aren't supportive of it(??)

I can see your point and it's an interesting take on things but at the same time I'm trying to work out what it would and wouldn't support.

FFF


----------



## FifthFromFront (Nov 22, 2005)

nick1181 said:
			
		

> I don't think I'd support violence full stop. Violence is generally only good for one thing - and that's creating more violence.
> .



what about self defence? couldn't topping the leaders be considered self defence?

FFF


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

CUMBRIANDRAGON said:
			
		

> Violence only creates more laws.


Indeed; it depends how long your gameplan is, and whether the violence will _definitely_ create new laws. If the perpetrator believes a revolution is coming or that their actions may precipitate a revolution, repressive legal measures aren't a factor.

I also wonder if outright assassination really would create new laws; say a leading general was carbombed, no leads and nobody claiming it. What would the new law be? Don't blow people up? I think thats already been covered somewhere...


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> unacceptable abuse? Bring it on - i'd be hurt if it was in any way true.
> 
> Back to revolutionary criminals:
> 
> ...



The Red Brigades and the RAF were very very different things, they shouldn't really be presented as generic examples of left-wing terrorism. The Red Brigades arose from factory workers initiatives against immediate local bosses and formen and developed their own practical logic from that point on. The RAF developed out of their own pathological disatisfation, arrogance and elitism and had fuck all connection with any wider class based movement - the contexts in which their violence developed was also very different. Italy was in a state of near insurrection from the mid-late 60s onwards, Germany never appraoched being in the same siutation and this was one of the reasons for the RAFs embrace of armed substitutionism - their frustration and contempt at the stupid german proles.


What Greeks? The N11th? They were caught a few years back. The leader being the son of a very famous trot leader.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Nov 22, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> The leader being the son of a very famous trot leader.



Raptis/Pablo was by far the most famous Greek Trotskyist, I suppose. Are you talking about his son by any chance?

On the more general point of the thread - individual terrorism doesn't fucking work. In fact it's counterproductive. How often do some people need to be told?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 22, 2005)

Nah it was Witte (real name Demitris Giotopoulos) strong man of the Archeiomarxists. (Ok not _that_ well known).

http://www.revolutionary-history.co.uk/backiss/Vol3/No3/ECCI.html
http://www.revolutionary-history.co.uk/backiss/Vol3/No3/Archeio.html


----------



## Pilgrim (Nov 22, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> So your support would be dependant on how effective they are? OK thats fair enough but how do you judge effectiveness the only way I can see is with hindsight which would then prevent you supporting them till either afterwards or very late on - wouldn't it? Maybe not. I dunno.
> 
> But for instance Leon Czolgosz (if I've spealt that right I'll be happy!) assassinated President  McKinley in the 1900's. He said he did it for  working people and was not sorry for his "crime". But it wasn't at all effective really was it? I mean he did kill the president but it didn't achieve much. Personally I think he did quite well and would be supportive of that sort of thing but in the end he was tried and executed for it which would mean that you aren't supportive of it(??)
> 
> ...



I'm sure I recall having read somewhere that Leon Czolgosz made overtures to various Anarchist groups and individuals in the USA, and was rebuffed none too subtly for his trouble.

So I wouldn't call him an example of a 'revolutionary' criminal, more of a lone maniac with a gun to be honest.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 22, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> In the last century, about 1976 ,  the local left used to meet up in a pub on a Friday in Wembley after the paper sales. There had been a bit of anti fash activity in the area and  three or four blokes who drank in the pub started to engage with the group we were with. After about three weeks one of them asked if we wanted weapons as he had a contact, we laughed him off but  some of the students got very excited about it. We were doing a building job on Kilburn Police station about a fortnight later when to our surprise the same three blokes walk out of the cop shop and into an unmarked car.



So? Guns are not a problem, if you want a shotgun that is... 

Pistols ain't that hard to get hold of either, and so are other weapons. I've been reading to many copies of "Shooting Times", Shooting Gazette" and "The Countrymans weekly"    

The poor don't need idle chatter, they NEED guns      'to reap the crop so widely sown'... But, I guess you don't want rhetoric, somebody does have to fire the first bullet however. Agreed, now is not the time in the UK, but that doesn't mean it will always be like that.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> The Red Brigades and the RAF were very very different things, they shouldn't really be presented as generic examples of left-wing terrorism. The Red Brigades arose from factory workers initiatives against immediate local bosses and formen and developed their own practical logic from that point on. The RAF developed out of their own pathological disatisfation, arrogance and elitism and had fuck all connection with any wider class based movement - the contexts in which their violence developed was also very different. Italy was in a state of near insurrection from the mid-late 60s onwards, Germany never appraoched being in the same siutation and this was one of the reasons for the RAFs embrace of armed substitutionism - their frustration and contempt at the stupid german proles.



i knew all of that; my point was their modus operandi and the effect they had were pretty much the same, and they can be looked at simultaneously as examples of left wing terrorism. 

I'd leave out the Angry Brigade and the Weathermen because they never killed anyone (apart from themselves, yes). 

yes the greeks were caught a few years back, i only found out about it recently


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> i knew all of that; my point was their modus operandi and the effect they had were pretty much the same, and they can be looked at simultaneously as examples of left wing terrorism.
> 
> I'd leave out the Angry Brigade and the Weathermen because they never killed anyone (apart from themselves, yes).
> 
> yes the greeks were caught a few years back, i only found out about it recently



And my point is they were _not_ the same, not in birth, developement, organisation, context, activty or result. The RB's effectively took part in an attempt to deliberately sabotage a social movement that was begining to put the functioning of the state in question  - thereby doing the states work directly and indirectly (they were riddles with state agents throughout much of their active existence). The policy of aggressive militarisation and going head to head with the state, theorised on a very limited basis and without sufficient public support sidelined the far more interesting and useful activity going on in wider society at that time and startd a process that led to there being at least 2000 political prisoners by the early 80s and many forced into exile.

All the Germans managed was to allow the state to either use old Nazi laws or introduce new ones in order to deal with them  -_exactly_ as the RAF had planned, and which today still act as the basis for legal represiin of oppositional movements.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> All the Germans managed was to allow the state to either use old Nazi laws or introduce new ones in order to deal with them  -_exactly_ as the RAF had planned


sorry, they _wanted_ the laws?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 22, 2005)

Yep, they wanted to expose the unchanging nazi like authoritarian nature of the FRG in order to wake up those stupid proles i mentioned. Hence their attacks were deliberate provocations designed to elict strong measures or over-reactions in turn from the state. (Notice the lack of an active w/c in pursuing its own needs and organising its own activty in this little scenario).


----------



## FifthFromFront (Nov 22, 2005)

Pilgrim said:
			
		

> I'm sure I recall having read somewhere that Leon Czolgosz made overtures to various Anarchist groups and individuals in the USA, and was rebuffed none too subtly for his trouble.
> 
> So I wouldn't call him an example of a 'revolutionary' criminal, more of a lone maniac with a gun to be honest.



Wasn't he rebuffed because the editor of an anarchist paper was convinced he was in fact an agent provocateur (well that one was proven a bit wrong!!   ) and so put out a warning. 

 Emma Goldman later said that her sympathies were with him because he didn't do it for personal reasons but for the good of the people didn't she?

To dismiss him as a lone maniac with a gun is a bit harsh I think. He might not have been the most sensible of people but I guess he did it for the right reasons

FFF


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

(@ BA)
I see.

Fuck when it comes to being all machiavellian like that, its just becomes ridiculous.

So in summary: 
BR start off as armed wing of workers movement, drift and eventually have very little contact with original base, are heavily infiltrated, end up doing the govt's job for them.

RAF start off as brainchild of intellectual revolutionaries, have no contact with workers movement, end up doing gvt's job for them.

Is that ok?


----------



## Pilgrim (Nov 22, 2005)

FifthFromFront said:
			
		

> Wasn't he rebuffed because the editor of an anarchist paper was convinced he was in fact an agent provocateur (well that one was proven a bit wrong!!   ) and so put out a warning.
> 
> Emma Goldman later said that her sympathies were with him because he didn't do it for personal reasons but for the good of the people didn't she?
> 
> ...



To be fair to Czolgosz, I'm not aware of the agent provocateur part, so I may have been a tad harsh on him. I certainly wasn't aware of Emma Goldman's support for his action, and, TBH, I'd like to see Bush and Blair killed tomorrow if possible.

This particular act of 'Propaganda of the deed' was certainly not the only one that occurred during the period. IIRC, Alexander Berkman was later to serve a sentence for attempting to kill an industrialist named Henry Frick. And we all know what happened to Sacco and Vanzetti simply because they were Anarchists.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 22, 2005)

Not really!  

But i'm not going to get into Italy or Germany in the 70s, i'm trying to watch the football! I can agree on the conclusion that both ended up doing gvt's job for them though in very diff ways that were a result of their differing conditions.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

*Guns and bandanas*




			
				Attica said:
			
		

> So? Guns are not a problem, if you want a shotgun that is...
> 
> Pistols ain't that hard to get hold of either, and so are other weapons. I've been reading to many copies of "Shooting Times", Shooting Gazette" and "The Countrymans weekly"
> 
> The poor don't need idle chatter, they NEED guns      'to reap the crop so widely sown'... But, I guess you don't want rhetoric, somebody does have to fire the first bullet however. Agreed, now is not the time in the UK, but that doesn't mean it will always be like that.





Attie and the Enema Squad go out 'among the poor' again, listening to 'what they want.'

Indeed, why bother with idle chatter when keyboard posturing will do?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Indeed, why bother with idle chatter when keyboard posturing will do?


i had thought you'd be able to answer that very question.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i had thought you'd be able to answer that very question.





So says the man with twenty-five thousand posts, half of them indulging his Galloway fetish.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> So says the man with twenty-five thousand posts, half of them indulging his Galloway fetish.


i take it you've counted them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2005)

if it's half my posts on galloway, that should be 18,000 posts on that grubby little man.

have you really counted every single one?


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Fuck's sake Pickmans, get a life.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Fuck's sake Pickmans, get a life.


which would presumably mean doing more of what you do? no thanks! 

i'm not that crazy.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

*Still crazy after all these years*




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> which would presumably mean doing more of what you do? no thanks!
> 
> i'm not that crazy.





Doing what?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2005)

i don't know what it is you do - though that's not for want of asking - but i'd sooner top myself than find myself as joyless as you.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i don't know what it is you do - though that's not for want of asking - but i'd sooner top myself than find myself as joyless as you.





How does rejection of comical pseudo-revolutionary posturing equate with joylessness?

You and some of your mates on here bring me lots of joy, in actual fact.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> How does rejection of comical pseudo-revolutionary posturing equate with joylessness?


have you ever put forward a positive suggestion in all your posts here? have you ever suggested a way forwards? i very much doubt it.

all your posts that i've encountered have been depressing put-downs, reasons to do nothing, rejections of any positive proposals and so on and so forth.

perhaps i'm wrong - perhaps there's a side to your posts i've missed. but i doubt it. stop pretending your portentous put-downs indicate you've anything to offer anyone. it just makes you look like some johnny no-mates wanker trying to piss on everyone else to obscure the fact he's nothing to offer by way of an alternative.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

He's IWCA so he has already proposed his way forward.

It could be argued that all he does is troll most of the time, but its clever trolling.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> perhaps there's a side to your posts i've missed. but i doubt it.





Unlike some who post on here I'm under no illusions about anything.  This is a forum for debate, nothing more.  However, if anybody wants to search my posts they'll find that there can be a 'positive side'.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> all your posts that i've encountered have been depressing put-downs, reasons to do nothing, rejections of any positive proposals and so on and so forth.





No they haven't.  The trouble with you and certain others on here is that you can't take criticism of your chosen religion.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> He's IWCA so he has already proposed his way forward.
> 
> It could be argued that all he does is troll most of the time, but its clever trolling.





Trolls get banned, don't they?  I've never even come close to being banned.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> it just makes you look like some johnny no-mates wanker trying to piss on everyone else to obscure the fact he's nothing to offer by way of an alternative.





I repeat: those with tens of thousands of posts to their names have no right to call people they don't know 'Johnny no-mates wankers.'


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2005)

not what i meant - you participate in discussions simply to laugh at other opinions, and even start piss-take threads about them; this is trolling, but of a funny, almost constructive sort.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 22, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> not what i meant - you participate in discussions simply to laugh at other opinions, and even start piss-take threads about them; this is trolling, but of a funny, almost constructive sort.





There's a constructive side to everything I do.

For instance I'm off to take a constructive crap now.  Then I'm going for the last hour in my local.  Wish I had some mates to talk to though.  Even Pickman's would do.


----------



## Fedayn (Nov 22, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> There's a constructive side to everything I do.
> 
> For instance I'm off to take a constructive crap now.  Then I'm going for the last hour in my local.  Wish I had some mates to talk to though.  Even Pickman's would do.



You mean you're gonna go to the pub and talk to some real mates/people? How dare you ignore U75 posters... what an outrage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> I repeat: those with tens of thousands of posts to their names have no right to call people they don't know 'Johnny no-mates wankers.'


what, and people you spend a piddling hour with in a pub really know you?


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 23, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what, and people you spend a piddling hour with in a pub really know you?





One or two yes.  Most no, although I've been on what's known as nodding terms with a handful of others for some time now.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 23, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> not what i meant - you participate in discussions simply to laugh at other opinions, and even start piss-take threads about them; this is trolling, but of a funny, almost constructive sort.



No that's me !


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 23, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> He's IWCA so he has already proposed his way forward.





As I've pointed out before, anything I post is entirely my own opinion.  That I agree wholeheartedly with most of what the IWCA do and say is purely co-incidental.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> As I've pointed out before, anything I post is entirely my own opinion.  That I agree wholeheartedly with most of what the IWCA do and say is purely co-incidental.


semantics mate, surely; you agree with the IWCA, and you agree with what you say i assume; therefore...


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 23, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> No that's me !


oh yeah... so who is this LLETSA guy


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 23, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> oh yeah... so who is this LLETSA guy





Me!


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 23, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> semantics mate, surely; you agree with the IWCA, and you agree with what you say i assume; therefore...





Not necessarily.  I'm sure I've said plenty of things on these boards that many IWCA members might not agree with.


----------



## snadge (Nov 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Me!



comedy moment extrordinaire


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 23, 2005)

he is good isn't he.


----------



## j.w. Gilmore (Nov 23, 2005)

*Ghandi*




			
				Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Who was Ghandi then? I thought he was really violent


Ghandi was one of the first people to apply the principles of Non-violence in modern times.  He simply organized people to overthrow a colonialist country by not doing what they said.  Very interesting, I think.  I dont know if that would work today, but it actually worked with England back then.  So he wasnt violent, he was very non violent.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 23, 2005)

Yeah he got other w/c saps to die so he could get a foot in with the brits. (see Roger Casement)


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 23, 2005)

j.w. Gilmore said:
			
		

> Ghandi was one of the first people to apply the principles of Non-violence in modern times.  He simply organized people to overthrow a colonialist country by not doing what they said.  Very interesting, I think.  I dont know if that would work today, but it actually worked with England back then.  So he wasnt violent, he was very non violent.


So the violent resistance by the Indian population had absolutely nothing to do with it?


----------



## JHE (Nov 23, 2005)

Fong said:
			
		

> I dunno, I think you could make a strong case for bumping off a few CEOs and a few politicians right now.


Really?  Go on then.  Make the case.  Explain how (and who) it would help.


----------



## dylanredefined (Nov 23, 2005)

Ghandi the one who made the history books .The red army faction aim to provoke the state into showing how violent and oppresive it was .Unfortunatly 
for them the population seemed quite happy for the state to oppress and destroy the r.a. f.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 24, 2005)

j.w. Gilmore said:
			
		

> Ghandi was one of the first people to apply the principles of Non-violence in modern times.  He simply organized people to overthrow a colonialist country by not doing what they said.  Very interesting, I think.  I dont know if that would work today, but it actually worked with England back then.  So he wasnt violent, he was very non violent.


really? I heard he was heavily armed and caused hundreds of british casualties. There 2 sides to every story surely.


----------



## fishfingerer (Nov 24, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> really? I heard he was heavily armed and caused hundreds of british casualties. There 2 sides to every story surely.


Let's just say that the truth as always, lies somewhere in the middle and leave it at that.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 24, 2005)

Ryazan said:
			
		

> he is good isn't he.





It's the way I tell 'em.


----------



## Herbert Read (Nov 24, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> As I've pointed out before, anything I post is entirely my own opinion.  That I agree wholeheartedly with most of what the IWCA do and say is purely co-incidental.



Really i cant believe i found my self in the same position, i knew i would some day see the light.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 24, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Really i cant believe i found my self in the same position, i knew i would some day see the light.





                                                     ?


----------



## Herbert Read (Nov 24, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> ?



I think your brillint, witty and your political analysis is shit hot your the sweeny.


----------



## hibee (Nov 24, 2005)

I take it this is Sir Herbert trying to be funny.


----------



## Herbert Read (Nov 24, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I take it this is Sir Herbert trying to be funny.



im deadly serious about my respect for LLETSA and the IWCA


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 24, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> im deadly serious about my respect for LLETSA and the IWCA





Time I got thinking seriously about an ASBO maybe.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 24, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> I think your brillint, witty and your political analysis is shit hot your the sweeny.



Herbie, glad you are back cos I wanted to ask you about the reason why the ani fash benefit was called off that you advertised. On Indy media someone had claimed that it was because the organisers had been harrassed by the Police and then there was a very complicated link to an example where the Police had arrested someone for having some drugs on them.

What happended? and why was the mysterious idependent anrchist monty attending?


----------



## Idris2002 (Nov 24, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Yeah he got other w/c saps to die so he could get a foot in with the brits. (see Roger Casement)



Sorry you've lost me. Gandhi and Roger Casement? 

Casement paid with his life for his ideological mistake, didn't he? And by the standards of that era his work on the Congo and the Putumayo horrors was a point in his favour. . .


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 24, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> How does rejection of comical pseudo-revolutionary posturing equate with joylessness?
> 
> You and some of your mates on here bring me lots of joy, in actual fact.



With a smile on my face and a laugh in my heart I have not given up on revolution - unlike you. There was no posturing in my post, just a description of some of the main magazines in Britain which have lots of guns in them and help to sell loads of them. You can't tell the difference between orthodox lefty shite (that you believe in), and something that might, just might, happen. 

But I make no apologies for it whereas you try to hide in the traditional Leninist mode, and I describe social reality as I experience it - you just don't get around much either cos you are happy with your dinky little world (and my, isn't it just sooooo small).

And I know that the tradition I come from is richer (not in the money sense )than your pathetic one too   fuk U.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 24, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> With a smile on my face and a laugh in my heart I have not given up on revolution - unlike you. There was no posturing in my post, just a description of some of the main magazines in Britain which have lots of guns in them and help to sell loads of them. You can't tell the difference between orthodox lefty shite (that you believe in), and something that might, just might, happen.
> 
> But I make no apologies for it whereas you try to hide in the traditional Leninist mode, and I describe social reality as I experience it - you just don't get around much either cos you are happy with your dinky little world (and my, isn't it just sooooo small).
> 
> And I know that the tradition I come from is richer (not in the money sense )than your pathetic one too   fuk U.



I am a bit confused here Attica , exactly what tradition is this? I always had you down as a bit of a maverick. sort of Scarlet Pimpernel type.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 25, 2005)

*Who was that masked man?*




			
				Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> I am a bit confused here Attica , exactly what tradition is this? I always had you down as a bit of a maverick. sort of Scarlet Pimpernel type.





It's the tradition of the Doo Doo Chasers.  Otherwise known as the Enema Squad. 

I think dear old Attie likes to think of himself as a kind of Lone Ranger of the revolution, in actual fact.  (Herbie Read can be Tonto.) However, when I try to picture him, I can't help getting some kind of cross between Popeye and Syd Barrett in his darkest days.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 25, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> With a smile on my face and a laugh in my heart I have not given up on revolution - unlike you. There was no posturing in my post, just a description of some of the main magazines in Britain which have lots of guns in them and help to sell loads of them. You can't tell the difference between orthodox lefty shite (that you believe in), and something that might, just might, happen.
> 
> But I make no apologies for it whereas you try to hide in the traditional Leninist mode, and I describe social reality as I experience it - you just don't get around much either cos you are happy with your dinky little world (and my, isn't it just sooooo small).
> 
> And I know that the tradition I come from is richer (not in the money sense )than your pathetic one too   fuk U.





When the poor take up arms, Attie will be right behind them.  Four thousand miles behind them, somewhere out in southern California doing a book signing with Naomi Klein.

'His professor' (bless his little cotton socks) will be, by then, chief bag carrier for this superstar of anti-capitalism.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 25, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> It's the tradition of the Doo Doo Chasers.  Otherwise known as the Enema Squad.
> 
> I think dear old Attie likes to think of himself as a kind of Lone Ranger of the revolution, in actual fact.  (Herbie Read can be Tonto.) However, when I try to picture him, I can't help getting some kind of cross between Popeye and Syd Barrett in his darkest days.



I always have an image of Monty as Zorro.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 25, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> I always have an image of Monty as Zorro.





For some reason I always get a picture of that evil interloper in 'Lost in Space.'


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 25, 2005)

*What are you thinking of?*




			
				Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Herbie, glad you are back cos I wanted to ask you about the reason why the ani fash benefit was called off that you advertised. On Indy media someone had claimed that it was because the organisers had been harrassed by the Police and then there was a very complicated link to an example where the Police had arrested someone for having some drugs on them.
> 
> What happended? and why was the mysterious idependent anrchist monty attending?





He can't tell you about things like this!!!!


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 25, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> He can't tell you about things like this!!!!




I assumed he was at the centre of things .


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 25, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> I assumed he was at the centre of things .





Why do you think he has to wear that bandana?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 26, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> It's the tradition of the Doo Doo Chasers.  Otherwise known as the Enema Squad.
> 
> I think dear old Attie likes to think of himself as a kind of Lone Ranger of the revolution, in actual fact.  (Herbie Read can be Tonto.) However, when I try to picture him, I can't help getting some kind of cross between Popeye and Syd Barrett in his darkest days.



Chuck said 'I am a bit confused here Attica , exactly what tradition is this?' 

Crikey, are you that dense or is it just the memory loss troubling you in your old age? I genuinely am mystified by your lack of ideas. How many times do I have to say EP Thompson and the people/issues he wrote about b4 you twig?  

And I'm far far from being alone letawank, I mix it between groups, across issues, and in different arenas. Whereas you appear to be happy with your small town wank, i notice that you can't mix it anywhere other than in your self referential clique too. I know whose realistic strategy is best


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 26, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> When the poor take up arms, Attie will be right behind them.  Four thousand miles behind them, somewhere out in southern California doing a book signing with Naomi Klein.
> 
> 'His professor' (bless his little cotton socks) will be, by then, chief bag carrier for this superstar of anti-capitalism.



   Yawn, you are just soooo boring letawank, but perhaps worse, so misleading and wilfully ignorant. The poor have already taken up guns, but then you don't care about anywhere else other than your pathetic small town parochialism. 

If I get a freebie to the USA I will let you know though, and 'my' professors (several of them) are already famous in their own right so there's no way they'd promote a minnow like me.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 26, 2005)

*Madazza Attica: in the tradition of Enid Blyton?*




			
				Attica said:
			
		

> Chuck said 'I am a bit confused here Attica , exactly what tradition is this?'
> 
> Crikey, are you that dense or is it just the memory loss troubling you in your old age? I genuinely am mystified by your lack of ideas. How many times do I have to say EP Thompson and the people/issues he wrote about b4 you twig?
> 
> And I'm far far from being alone letawank, I mix it between groups, across issues, and in different arenas. Whereas you appear to be happy with your small town wank, i notice that you can't mix it anywhere other than in your self referential clique too. I know whose realistic strategy is best





So there we have it: he's read one of his books, so he's 'in the tradition' of EPT.  I suppose that also puts him in the tradition of Ladybird Reader Books 1-4, or whatever they used to teach reading at his school.  (Back there in da ghetto; tribulation dats all he know.....)

What's all this 'small town' blather all of a sudden, Madazza?   I live in one of the biggest cities in the country.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 26, 2005)

*'He's a Kingston Twelve tuffie....'*




			
				Attica said:
			
		

> Yawn, you are just soooo boring letawank, but perhaps worse, so misleading and wilfully ignorant. The poor have already taken up guns,





Yes, against each other.  I'd have thought you'd have noticed this out there on the frontline.  

Ain't leading to revolution matie.


----------



## Goodbye lesley (Nov 26, 2005)

The poor have already taken up guns, but then you don't care about anywhere else other than your pathetic small town parochialism. 



Where are these poor with there pop guns atticbedroom,and dont bombard me with south americans or ep Thompson quotes.


----------



## poet (Nov 26, 2005)

Godalmighty, what a bunch of armchair thugs. If things get much worse then I'd be willing and able to take up arms to defend persecuted minority groups in Britain but the idea of murdering people for the 'crime' of being a businessman is indescribably repulsive. If your idea of an anarchist state means murdering anyone you don't like then you can stuff it.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 26, 2005)

poet said:
			
		

> Godalmighty, what a bunch of armchair thugs. If things get much worse then I'd be willing and able to take up arms to defend persecuted minority groups in Britain but the idea of murdering people for the 'crime' of being a businessman is indescribably repulsive. If your idea of an anarchist state means murdering anyone you don't like then you can stuff it.


consider it stuffed!

hello goodbye lesley: as attica alread specified he wasn't talking about the uk, so why are you saying he was?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> consider it stuffed!
> 
> hello goodbye lesley: as attica alread specified he wasn't talking about the uk, so why are you saying he was?


it's goodbye goodbye lesley - he's been banned.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2005)

poet said:
			
		

> Godalmighty, what a bunch of armchair thugs. If things get much worse then I'd be willing and able to take up arms to defend persecuted minority groups in Britain but the idea of murdering people for the 'crime' of being a businessman is indescribably repulsive. If your idea of an anarchist state means murdering anyone you don't like then you can stuff it.


you've already indicated your inability to fathom the depths of anarchism through your use of the phrase "anarchist state". including such an obvious oxymoron in your post doesn't give me much confidence in your ability to delve meaningfully into the intricacies of anarchism as we know and love it.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 26, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Chuck said 'I am a bit confused here Attica , exactly what tradition is this?'
> 
> Crikey, are you that dense or is it just the memory loss troubling you in your old age? I genuinely am mystified by your lack of ideas. How many times do I have to say EP Thompson and the people/issues he wrote about b4 you twig?
> 
> And I'm far far from being alone letawank, I mix it between groups, across issues, and in different arenas. Whereas you appear to be happy with your small town wank, i notice that you can't mix it anywhere other than in your self referential clique too. I know whose realistic strategy is best



Thompson was a member of the CP untill Hungary wasn't he?


----------



## rednblack (Nov 26, 2005)

poet said:
			
		

> Godalmighty, what a bunch of armchair thugs. If things get much worse then I'd be willing and able to take up arms to defend persecuted minority groups in Britain but the idea of murdering people for the 'crime' of being a businessman is indescribably repulsive. If your idea of an anarchist state means murdering anyone you don't like then you can stuff it.



i thought you stuffed it ages ago when you joined the loons at the cato institute


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2005)

the cato institute?

somewhere, perhaps, for hapless oriental manservants to learn a smattering of martial arts before working for the french _surete_?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Yes, against each other.  I'd have thought you'd have noticed this out there on the frontline.
> 
> Ain't leading to revolution matie.



Wasn't talking about this country dickhead.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> So there we have it: he's read one of his books, so he's 'in the tradition' of EPT.  I suppose that also puts him in the tradition of Ladybird Reader Books 1-4, or whatever they used to teach reading at his school.  (Back there in da ghetto; tribulation dats all he know.....)
> 
> What's all this 'small town' blather all of a sudden, Madazza?   I live in one of the biggest cities in the country.



Have you had a look at your own gibberrish? Before you throw comments about mental health around... No content, nil point. 

(and your theory of class consciousness is a small town paraochial one, that's why you are 'small town')


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 27, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Have you had a look at your own gibberrish? Before you throw comments about mental health around... No content, nil point.
> 
> (and your theory of class consciousness is a small town paraochial one, that's why you are 'small town')





Who mentioned mental health? 

Gimme an outline of my own 'theory of class consciousness,' will you, 'cos I don't believe I've ever posted anything about it on here?  

I choose to leave that to the heavyweights like you and Herbie Read.  When the Enema Squad gets going, you just get out of the waY, especially if you don't want a brown polka dot pattern on your clobber.  

I do admit to failing to see the wider significance of some pushing and shoving with a few coppers after somebody or other pissed everyone off and got ejected from a pub.  But there you go.  As long as the class has learned from the experience.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 27, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Wasn't talking about this country dickhead.





As you made clear with your little throwaway statement.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 27, 2005)

AtticaIf I get a freebie to the USA I will let you know though said:


> A dangerous militant like you wouldn't get into the US of A, Atters.
> 
> Your 'several professors' are already famous?  This makes me think of Ferguson, Wenger and Mourhino putting a lot of time into a player who's destined to spend his career with Forest Green Rovers.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> A dangerous militant like you wouldn't get into the US of A, Atters.
> 
> Your 'several professors' are already famous?  This makes me think of Ferguson, Wenger and Mourhino putting a lot of time into a player who's destined to spend his career with Forest Green Rovers.



Thanks for your touching concern re. my travel plans - though I already have been to the USA, not so long ago too. As for my career, your assesment is, shall I shall, a) stupid or  b) innaccurate. I can't decide, i'll let the 'readers' do that.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> A) Who mentioned mental health?
> 
> B) Gimme an outline of my own 'theory of class consciousness,' will you, 'cos I don't believe I've ever posted anything about it on here?
> 
> ...



A) you. Its not progressive in anyway so you should know better.

B) Your theory of class consciousness you have presented in many different ways, it is a small town 'realistic' parochial one.

C) Little battles help to spread bigger ones, it's a lesson some of us drew from the civil rights struggles....


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 28, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Thompson was a member of the CP untill Hungary wasn't he?



Yeah, and your point?.... Thousands left the party due to that '56 moment didn't they...


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> As you made clear with your little throwaway statement.



So you admit I am right then?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 28, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Yeah, and your point?.... Thousands left the party due to that '56 moment didn't they...



They did indeed, Thompson still claimed he was a Marxist . Are you a Marxist?


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 28, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> A) you. Its not progressive in anyway so you should know better.
> 
> B) Your theory of class consciousness you have presented in many different ways, it is a small town 'realistic' parochial one.
> 
> C) Little battles help to spread bigger ones, it's a lesson some of us drew from the civil rights struggles....





A) No I haven't

B) Posts on an internet message board making remarks about a variety of loosely associated topics do not, in my book, amount to a 'theory of class consciousness'. I'm surprised that a towering intellectual and guru-in-the-making like you should make that mistake.

C) Madazza Attica equates a bit of pushing and shoving in a pub one Saturday afternoon with the civil rights struggle.  (Sigh.)


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 28, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> So you admit I am right then?





What, that 'the poor have already taken up arms,' or however you worded it, is hardly what could be termed an insight when your talking on a world scale.  

'Your professors' are flattering you too much perhaps.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 28, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Thanks for your touching concern re. my travel plans - though I already have been to the USA, not so long ago too. As for my career, your assesment is, shall I shall, a) stupid or  b) innaccurate. I can't decide, i'll let the 'readers' do that.





What?  They let you in?  With all those guns about?

They obviously didn't know what you and the Enema Squad are capable of, matie.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> A) No I haven't
> 
> B) Posts on an internet message board making remarks about a variety of loosely associated topics do not, in my book, amount to a 'theory of class consciousness'. I'm surprised that a towering intellectual and guru-in-the-making like you should make that mistake.
> 
> C) Madazza Attica equates a bit of pushing and shoving in a pub one Saturday afternoon with the civil rights struggle.  (Sigh.)



A) Yes you have you liar, several times you stupid jerk (see your first word in reply C) above for the latest example) I find it offensive (yes, really).

B) Bollocks - you cannot get out of it that easily. Are you in denial then? I like it that you think I think I'm gonna be a guru, I though have a realistic estimation of my capabilities   

C) No No No (your attempts at point scoring always fail so easily), the civil rights struggles were built on many things, one of which was the dramaturgical qualities of individual resistence which encouraged others to join in the fray.... from small acorns, slightly bigger acorns etc. based on a developing class consciousness... Don't take my word for it though, try "Race Rebels: Culture, Politics and the black working class" by R. Kelley, New York: The Free Press, 1994.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 28, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> They did indeed, Thompson still claimed he was a Marxist . Are you a Marxist?



Definately maybe. Alternatively you could try; left-anarchist,  autonomist, or anarcho-Marxist, I though try to steer clear of labels. The class struggle is way too important to let labels/preconceptions get in the way.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 28, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> A) Yes you have you liar, several times you stupid jerk (see your first word in reply C) above for the latest example) I find it offensive (yes, really).
> 
> B) Bollocks - you cannot get out of it that easily. Are you in denial then? I like it that you think I think I'm gonna be a guru, I though have a realistic estimation of my capabilities
> 
> C) No No No (your attempts at point scoring always fail so easily), the civil rights struggles were built on many things, one of which was the dramaturgical qualities of individual resistence which encouraged others to join in the fray.... from small acorns, slightly bigger acorns etc. based on a developing class consciousness... Don't take my word for it though, try "Race Rebels: Culture, Politics and the black working class" by R. Kelley, New York: The Free Press, 1994.





A) You've tried whipping up sympathy from bleeding hearts before, Madazza; calling those who espouse crap all the time, especially if they do it in an amusingly idiosyncratic manner, nutters, is equated with poking fun at the genuinly mentally ill only in the eyes of the most tiresome kind of politically correct liberal.  

B)  I have made plenty of points on these boards with regard to what I see as a possible way forward for working class politics.  I maintain, however, that they don't amount to a theory of class consciousness.  If you want a theory, though, here's one: the political consciousness of working class people is lower than it has been for a century.  So low, in fact, that few would find it possible to see the wider significance of the legendary 'Coronet incident'.  We must, therefore, turn to 'advanced elements' like your good self. Don't take my word for it though, try 'Making a Nuisance of Yourself Then Fucking Off Before the Law Arrives: Dramaturgical Qualities of Middle Class Crusty Toerags,' by Josh Nomark (London, October 2005.)


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2005)

> attica

if you try so hard to steer clear of labels, why have you previously described yrself as "neo-thompsonian"? and wtf does neo-thompsonian mean?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> B)  I have made plenty of points on these boards with regard to what I see as a possible way forward for wortkin class politics.


like? links!


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 28, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> like? links!





You know what I'm talking about: just adding my two pennorth to various discussions on the benefits and pitfalls of IWCA-type politics and so on.  I'm not the one making grandiose claims for myself-Madazza's the one doing that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> You know what I'm talking about: just adding my two pennorth to various discussions on the benefits and pitfalls of IWCA-type politics and so on.  I'm not the one making grandiose claims for myself-Madazza's the one doing that.


oh. 

i thought that you'd shared some original ideas, all yr own work, with us.

obviously not.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 28, 2005)

*Obviously thinking of himself.....*




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> oh.
> 
> i thought that you'd shared some original ideas, all yr own work, with us.
> 
> obviously not.





I think there are some posters on here who often make well-argued points.  But who on these boards posts up 'original ideas' then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> I think there are some posters on here who often make well-argued points.  But who on these boards posts up 'original ideas' then?


well...

there's attica, for a start...


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 28, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> well...
> 
> there's attica, for a start...





True.  And Herbie Read's a complete one-off.  Or a complete one.  Not sure which.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 29, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> A) You've tried whipping up sympathy from bleeding hearts before, Madazza; calling those who espouse crap all the time, especially if they do it in an amusingly idiosyncratic manner, nutters, is equated with poking fun at the genuinly mentally ill only in the eyes of the most tiresome kind of politically correct liberal.
> 
> B)  I have made plenty of points on these boards with regard to what I see as a possible way forward for working class politics.  I maintain, however, that they don't amount to a theory of class consciousness.  If you want a theory, though, here's one: the political consciousness of working class people is lower than it has been for a century.  So low, in fact, that few would find it possible to see the wider significance of the legendary 'Coronet incident'.  We must, therefore, turn to 'advanced elements' like your good self. Don't take my word for it though, try 'Making a Nuisance of Yourself Then Fucking Off Before the Law Arrives: Dramaturgical Qualities of Middle Class Crusty Toerags,' by Josh Nomark (London, October 2005.)



A) Bollocks Letawank - you post more of the 'everybody else is wrong I am right crap', crikey, no hint of self criticism. here's something for you to consider - I find it offensive because I have more direct experience of this than you care to imagine, and I repeat, i find your sloppy attitude to mental health issues reactionary and offensive. True.

B) Dear me, no content again Letawank, just bullshit and crass ignorance. 'Consciousness is low therefore we cannot try to build consciousness' - your shocking intellectual nothingness continues to impress me. 

You write off everything that you disapprove of, a position that cannot possibly be true... You need some humility, badly... 

But because you've shown absolutely no sign of opening up your mind I'll continue to 'satisfy myself' at least by 'abusing you' in my own way (oh er missus) FOAD


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 29, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> A) You've tried whipping up sympathy from bleeding hearts before, Madazza; calling those who espouse crap all the time, especially if they do it in an amusingly idiosyncratic manner, nutters, is equated with poking fun at the genuinly mentally ill only in the eyes of the most tiresome kind of politically correct liberal.
> 
> B)  I have made plenty of points on these boards with regard to what I see as a possible way forward for working class politics.  I maintain, however, that they don't amount to a theory of class consciousness.  If you want a theory, though, here's one: the political consciousness of working class people is lower than it has been for a century.  So low, in fact, that few would find it possible to see the wider significance of the legendary 'Coronet incident'.  We must, therefore, turn to 'advanced elements' like your good self. Don't take my word for it though, try 'Making a Nuisance of Yourself Then Fucking Off Before the Law Arrives: Dramaturgical Qualities of Middle Class Crusty Toerags,' by Josh Nomark (London, October 2005.)


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 29, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> A) Bollocks Letawank - you post more of the 'everybody else is wrong I am right crap', crikey, no hint of self criticism. here's something for you to consider - *I find it offensive because I have more direct experience of this than you care to imagine, and I repeat, i find your sloppy attitude to mental health issues reactionary and offensive. True.*
> 
> B) Dear me, no content again Letawank, just bullshit and crass ignorance. 'Consciousness is low therefore we cannot try to build consciousness' - your shocking intellectual nothingness continues to impress me.
> 
> ...



As an ex-mental patient with experience of being placed at different times into psychiatric care under sections 2 and 3 of the Mental Health Act I find your defense of the mentally ill misguidedly patronising and unessescary.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 29, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> A) Bollocks Letawank - you post more of the 'everybody else is wrong I am right crap', crikey, no hint of self criticism. here's something for you to consider - I find it offensive because I have more direct experience of this than you care to imagine, and I repeat, i find your sloppy attitude to mental health issues reactionary and offensive. True.





Oh behave will you?  I don't know what you're like in real life, but put it this way: if you went on in public in the style you usually do on here, it wouldn't be long before somebody said 'Oh for Christ's sake, shut the fuck up, you nutter.'  It wouldn't be much longer before somebody said something a lot stronger. They wouldn't be thinking of the genuinely mentally ill; they'd be thinking of you, Attie. 

Try it next time you're out there 'building consciousness' among the working class.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 29, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> A) B) Dear me, no content again Letawank, just bullshit and crass ignorance. 'Consciousness is low therefore we cannot try to build consciousness' - your shocking intellectual nothingness continues to impress me.
> 
> You write off everything that you disapprove of, a position that cannot possibly be true... You need some humility, badly...





Nay laddie.  I never said that nothing can be done because working class political consciousness is low.  What I have said is that being apparently serious about such things as 'the Coronet incident' being a part of this process is a mark of serious derangement. (Oops, there I go again....)

And you actually sing the praises of 'everything you disapprove of,' do you?  Hadn't noticed this feature of your customary approach.  (Makes note to consult the collected works of Chairman Attica when gets time.)


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 29, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> > attica
> 
> if you try so hard to steer clear of labels, why have you previously described yrself as "neo-thompsonian"? and wtf does neo-thompsonian mean?



Hunter S Thompson in Matrix 4 -The dramaturgical qualities of individual resistence.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 29, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Oh behave will you?  I don't know what you're like in real life, but put it this way: if you went on in public in the style you usually do on here, it wouldn't be long before somebody said 'Oh for Christ's sake, shut the fuck up, you nutter.'  It wouldn't be much longer before somebody said something a lot stronger. They wouldn't be thinking of the genuinely mentally ill; they'd be thinking of you, Attie.
> 
> Try it next time you're out there 'building consciousness' among the working class.



Some people piss me off - and you are one of them as I don't take fools gladly. 

You reactionary wanker, Still no reflection, still nothing as per...


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 29, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Nay laddie.  I never said that nothing can be done because working class political consciousness is low.  What I have said is that being apparently serious about such things as 'the Coronet incident' being a part of this process is a mark of serious derangement. (Oops, there I go again....)
> 
> And you actually sing the praises of 'everything you disapprove of,' do you?  Hadn't noticed this feature of your customary approach.  (Makes note to consult the collected works of Chairman Attica when gets time.)



Your technique is pure bollocks, straw man, denial... 

Nothingness, no critique, just misrepresentation and lies.

I have always defended many class consciousnesses, so you will be looking a long time letawank...


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 29, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> > attica
> 
> if you try so hard to steer clear of labels, why have you previously described yrself as "neo-thompsonian"? and wtf does neo-thompsonian mean?



A neo-Thompsonian is somebody who follows in the tradition of EP Thompsons insights into class consciousness as a 'process of becoming' rather than a given/a thing. I am not the only one to use such a term.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 29, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Some people piss me off - and you are one of them as I don't take fools gladly.
> 
> You reactionary wanker, Still no reflection, still nothing as per...






'I don't take fools gladly.' says Madazza Attica.   Oh the irony, says LLETSA.

Here's some reflection for you Madazza: you're a top comedy act but you're on too long.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 29, 2005)

*Short, snappy, a rhythm to it-I like it!*




			
				Attica said:
			
		

> Your technique is pure bollocks, straw man, denial...
> 
> Nothingness, no critique, just misrepresentation and lies.
> 
> I have always defended many class consciousnesses, so you will be looking a long time letawank...





Have you taken up rapping?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> A neo-Thompsonian is somebody who follows in the tradition of EP Thompsons insights into class consciousness as a 'process of becoming' rather than a given/a thing. I am not the only one to use such a term.


i know of no other person who uses it - a quick google for "neo-thompsonian" turns up rather more about hunter s than e p.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2005)

Ryazan said:
			
		

> As an ex-mental patient with experience of being placed at different times into psychiatric care under sections 2 and 3 of the Mental Health Act I find your defense of the mentally ill misguidedly patronising and unessescary.


i find that difficult to believe.


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 29, 2005)

*That explains it!*




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i know of no other person who uses it - a quick google for "neo-thompsonian" turns up rather more about hunter s than e p.





He's been confusing the two all along!


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i find that difficult to believe.



Why?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i know of no other person who uses it - a quick google for "neo-thompsonian" turns up rather more about hunter s than e p.



So you don't know everything.... And? 

Here's something that may suggest you looking wider (I will provide exact references later if you request them);

 "In the British criminological field the influence of E.P. Thompson and other British Marxist historians was palpable (Jock Young 1998a). This ‘history from below’ perspective was interpreted by criminologists as subcultural theory; people were seen as acting and reacting to social conditions. Not only would the structural explanation be provided, the minutae of the actual generation of rule breaking and movement through time would be presented; 
“subcultures of imagination and creativity rather than of flatness and determinism, resistance rather than negativism and retreatism, of a world of leisure as well as school and work, of meaning rather than malfunction” (Jock Young, 1998a, 20)".


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> 'I don't take fools gladly.' says Madazza Attica.   Oh the irony, says LLETSA.
> 
> Here's some reflection for you Madazza: you're a top comedy act but you're on too long.



One of the lessons of Feminism was listening to how people feel, and I feel that you are grossly offensive on this one. Fool. (but worse you are a lying manipulating old lefty hack whose trying to present themselves as something else - but more of this later)...


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Nov 30, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> So you don't know everything.... And?
> 
> Here's something that may suggest you looking wider (I will provide exact references later if you request them);
> 
> ...



Note Attica the interpretation of the  Marxist Thompson's  historical approach  'the voice in the crowd'  by Young et al into some form of subculturism. Young et al may be interesting, provocative and wity but not Marxist. Thompson saw  class ( and a live version of class at that) as the key issue in making history,.


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 30, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> One of the lessons of Feminism was listening to how people feel, and I feel that you are grossly offensive on this one. Fool. (but worse you are a lying manipulating old lefty hack whose trying to present themselves as something else - but more of this later)...



Like yourself then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2005)

Ryazan said:
			
		

> Why?


i didn't know you were an 'ex'.


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 30, 2005)

That wasn't funny.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2005)

it wasn't meant as a joke.


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 30, 2005)

I didn't say it was.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2005)

you certainly implied it.

but i can't linger to bandy words with you. some of us have things to do.

evil plots don't just make themselves, y'know.


----------



## Ryazan (Nov 30, 2005)

Once victim, always victim- that's the law!


----------



## The Black Hand (Dec 2, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Note Attica the interpretation of the  Marxist Thompson's  historical approach  'the voice in the crowd'  by Young et al into some form of subculturism. Young et al may be interesting, provocative and wity but not Marxist. Thompson saw  class ( and a live version of class at that) as the key issue in making history,.



I think you are wrong  A dialectical view MUST be one that has a totalising perspective, and thus the concentration on subcultures/cultures is entirely correct. Otherwise you are left with an unMarxist pov which sees people as solely the victim of capital and the state. Rather, there IS room for manoeuvre, and capital and the state DOES react to the practices of the working class as it forces its needs and wants into history. My example here would be tobacco smuggling; the practice of the multitude has destablised the tobacco industry, and since the European 'free market' was established in 1992 has altered the practices of capital and the state as the masses have engaged in both the smuggling and consumption of smuggled tobacco.


----------



## Ryazan (Dec 3, 2005)

The "multitude".   

You sound like a Leninist.  Or Charles Dickens.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2005)

Ryazan said:
			
		

> The "multitude".
> 
> You sound like a Leninist.  Or Charles Dickens.


whereas you sound like a wanker. or a wanker's wanker.


----------



## Ryazan (Dec 3, 2005)

I can't be.  I'm not a member of Class War.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Dec 3, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> I think you are wrong  A dialectical view MUST be one that has a totalising perspective, and thus the concentration on subcultures/cultures is entirely correct. Otherwise you are left with an unMarxist pov which sees people as solely the victim of capital and the state. Rather, there IS room for manoeuvre, and capital and the state DOES react to the practices of the working class as it forces its needs and wants into history. My example here would be tobacco smuggling; the practice of the multitude has destablised the tobacco industry, and since the European 'free market' was established in 1992 has altered the practices of capital and the state as the masses have engaged in both the smuggling and consumption of smuggled tobacco.



I hate to point this out but before sociology students discovered subcultural theory Thompson, Hill and others had already published works that were anything but portraying the working class as a just a victim of capital and the state. Marx himself  did not just write about the working class a some static sub strata but saw the working class as the force that could end capitalism.

Btw fag smuggling beats the tax man not the tobacco company and can hardly be considered to be the pinnacle of working clalss struggle.


----------



## The Black Hand (Dec 4, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> I hate to point this out but before sociology students discovered subcultural theory Thompson, Hill and others had already published works that were anything but portraying the working class as a just a victim of capital and the state. Marx himself  did not just write about the working class a some static sub strata but saw the working class as the force that could end capitalism.
> 
> Btw fag smuggling beats the tax man not the tobacco company and can hardly be considered to be the pinnacle of working clalss struggle.



Are we arguing at cross purposes here? I have already stated I like THompson Hill etc, are you agreeing with them? You are an autonomist after all


----------



## The Black Hand (Dec 4, 2005)

Ryazan said:
			
		

> The "multitude".
> 
> You sound like a Leninist.  Or Charles Dickens.


   doh! The multitude is an anti Leninist concept...


----------



## Ryazan (Dec 4, 2005)

Explain this to me.


----------



## The Black Hand (Sep 15, 2006)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Btw fag smuggling beats the tax man not the tobacco company and can hardly be considered to be the pinnacle of working clalss struggle.



I never replied to this before so;

True, but you cannot seperate capitalism _from_ the state - it is a capitalist state. This is a Gramscian interpretation, and it is the multitude who are up against the capitalist states legal enforcers when they smuggle which is definately class struggle. I am not saying that smugglers seek out battles with Customs as they did in the 'good old days' - but there have been examples of attacks on Customs officers and premises....


----------

