# Bash the Rich!



## bristol_citizen (Sep 4, 2007)

Now all your Bash the Rich needs catered for on one convenient site:
http://bashtherich.wordpress.com/


----------



## treelover (Sep 5, 2007)

its coming closer!


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 6, 2007)

wow an actual retard convention. 

what fun


----------



## The Black Hand (Sep 6, 2007)

That's U that is


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 6, 2007)

bristol_citizen said:
			
		

> http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/2f64a95f3b.jpg


If anybody wants me, I'll be over here, weeping.


----------



## Stig (Sep 6, 2007)

oi, leave my boyfriend alone.


----------



## rich! (Sep 6, 2007)

do you think the subtle typographic difference will save me, or should I avoid Notting Hill?

mind you, avoiding Notting Hill has always been a winning strategy for me


----------



## Kanda (Sep 6, 2007)

treelover said:
			
		

> its coming closer!



What is??


----------



## joer90 (Sep 14, 2007)

toffs out!


----------



## tommers (Sep 15, 2007)

fucking hell.  that's astounding.


----------



## revol68 (Sep 15, 2007)

live the dream like the eighties never happened.....


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 15, 2007)

I think the Rich may be away at their Cotswold second home that day. Or perhaps they'll be up in the Highlands with Sebastian and Annabella and the Estonian nanny and the ponies at their third home. Cornwall however, is very pleasant at this time....


----------



## The Black Hand (Sep 16, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> live the dream like the eighties never happened.....



That does not make any sense.


----------



## The Black Hand (Sep 16, 2007)

lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> I think the Rich may be away at their Cotswold second home that day. Or perhaps they'll be up in the Highlands with Sebastian and Annabella and the Estonian nanny and the ponies at their third home. Cornwall however, is very pleasant at this time....



They are not an homogeneous group, i think it is more accurate to talk of ruling classes because there are subdivisions in the rich. EG. Billionaires such as Bernie Ecclestone and Branson are of a different class to people like Cameron, or the petit bourgeoisie....


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 16, 2007)

Right.


----------



## joer90 (Sep 17, 2007)

fuck it there all a bunch of cunts!


----------



## joer90 (Sep 17, 2007)

fuck it there all a bunch of cunts!


----------



## TopCat (Sep 27, 2007)

I'm getting plenty of feedback that loads are coming out of the woodwork for this one. 

evil plans aplenty!


----------



## bluestreak (Sep 27, 2007)

glad i'm not rich then.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 27, 2007)

Dave cameron has got three properties that we know of with two in london..... Which will get the real attack and which will have the diversion?


----------



## The Black Hand (Sep 27, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> I'm getting plenty of feedback that loads are coming out of the woodwork for this one.
> 
> evil plans aplenty!



Sounds good.


----------



## joer90 (Oct 1, 2007)

Only two days before bonfire night wonder if there will be fireworks?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 7, 2007)

Look here - a big article about it in the Guardian;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,2184954,00.html


----------



## joer90 (Oct 9, 2007)

things seem to be going well for this have you seen the pictures on the class war news wire? theres a good one of tony ben with a bash the rich poster held up behind him


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 10, 2007)




----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 11, 2007)

So - is this campaign seeking to organise an anti gentrification campaign; through networking and targetted direct action to focus the cases eg. Kilmartin, on a more general target which is a logical associated symptom of gentrification issues. 

OR - am i mistaken?


----------



## chico enrico (Oct 11, 2007)




----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 11, 2007)

chico enrico said:
			
		

>


So you are neutral on the question of whether I am mistaken.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 15, 2007)

Of course, bashing the rich, in terms of changing the social system that causes social and economic divide, is about as effective as bashing the poor.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 15, 2007)

You have totally failed to understand or appreciate what was written.


----------



## october_lost (Oct 16, 2007)

It reminds me of the early SDS days....


----------



## TopCat (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> So you are neutral on the question of whether I am mistaken.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> You have totally failed to understand or appreciate what was written.



I certainly have not.  Like most anarchist stunts, this one is as puerile as it is pointless.  You do not effect social change by attacking symptoms, but rather by attacking causes, and if you can't see that then you've failed to understand the nature of capitalism.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I certainly have not.  Like most anarchist stunts, this one is as puerile as it is pointless.  You do not effect social change by attacking symptoms, but rather by attacking causes, and if you can't see that then you've failed to understand the nature of capitalism.



   Doh! Are you seriously saying rich Toff class people are not involved in the reproduction of capitalism?

And while we're on this subject please could you describe some 'causes' (as you put it) of capitalism.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

>



Don't worry about it - a small bit of fun.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Doh! Are you seriously saying rich Toff class people are not involved in the reproduction of capitalism?
> 
> And while we're on this subject please could you describe some 'causes' (as you put it) of capitalism.



First off, I don't think that's doing your eyes any good at all.  So stop it.

Look.  Capitalism reproduces itself, just as it produces rich people and poor people.  Everybody's a functionary, and that's all.  There are no 'evil' capitalists in control.  In fact, there's no-one in control. You're advocating bashing people who were born a particular way.  Neat thinking.  Let's get the disabled, too, eh?  It's that foolish. If you'd been born rich you'd not be spouting your anarchist hogwash here, now, would you?

Causes of capitalism?  I don't understand the question, although I suspect that that's because you haven't understood my position.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> First off, I don't think that's doing your eyes any good at all.  So stop it.
> 
> Look.  Capitalism reproduces itself, just as it produces rich people and poor people.  Everybody's a functionary, and that's all.  There are no 'evil' capitalists in control.  In fact, there's no-one in control. You're advocating bashing people who were born a particular way.  Neat thinking.  Let's get the disabled, too, eh?  It's that foolish. If you'd been born rich you'd not be spouting your anarchist hogwash here, now, would you?
> 
> Causes of capitalism?  I don't understand the question, although I suspect that that's because you haven't understood my position.



I do understand it and disagree with it. It is you who have failed to understand capitalism. What's that bullshite about 'my eyes' to - you were completely incomprehensible there. 

Putting everybody on the same level in terms of power/opportunities/ simply is not possible. Yours appears to me to be a very niave analysis.


----------



## untethered (Oct 16, 2007)

All Things Bright and Beautiful said:
			
		

> The rich man in his castle,
> The poor man at his gate,
> God made them, high or lowly,
> And order'd their estate.



.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> I do understand it and disagree with it. It is you who have failed to understand capitalism. What's that bullshite about 'my eyes' to - you were completely incomprehensible there.
> 
> Putting everybody on the same level in terms of power/opportunities/ simply is not possible. Yours appears to me to be a very niave analysis.



I never advocated such a thing.  Which lends weight to my argument that you've failed to grasp what I'm saying.  Shall we begin again?

Economic disparity is a function of capitalism.  We have rich and poor because we have class-divided society.  To attempt to ameliorate that situation without addressing the cause of that situation is doomed to failure.  You can't reform capitalism in the interest of the working-class, any more than you can run an abbatoir in the interests of the animals slaughtered in it.


----------



## joer90 (Oct 16, 2007)

If the rich are "just the same as us" why don't they stop making us work every day and night for them? start paying us a "living wage".give up there 2nd 3rd and 4th houses? hundreds of acres of land ect ? and we could all live in peace and harmony? you really are a muppet! the only way were guna get what is ours is by forcing the bastards to give us it asking nicely or moraliseing unfortunately dosent work..........................


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I never advocated such a thing.  Which lends weight to my argument that you've failed to grasp what I'm saying.  Shall we begin again?
> 
> Economic disparity is a function of capitalism.  We have rich and poor because we have class-divided society.  To attempt to ameliorate that situation without addressing the cause of that situation is doomed to failure.  You can't reform capitalism in the interest of the working-class, any more than you can run an abbatoir in the interests of the animals slaughtered in it.



  DOh! I am not interested in reform - I am interested in  revolution 

You gave so little substance so I drew the above point out of what you had said. It seemed to me to be a logical derivative of your idealistic position. What theoretical heritage are you drawing on? Which authors? Or as it looks - have you just made it up?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2007)

What's wrong with thinking for yourself? Or as you call it making stuff up.


----------



## Brainaddict (Oct 16, 2007)

joer90 said:
			
		

> If the rich are "just the same as us" why don't they stop making us work every day and night for them? start paying us a "living wage".give up there 2nd 3rd and 4th houses? hundreds of acres of land ect ? and we could all live in peace and harmony? you really are a muppet! the only way were guna get what is ours is by forcing the bastards to give us it asking nicely or moraliseing unfortunately dosent work..........................


That's not really a political tactic though, so much as a teenage rant about how bad all those bad people are. So much of this class war rhetoric is lacking in, well, actual politics.

For instance some people think that the kind of revolution you have has a lot to do with the post-revolutionary landscape. So using terms like 'forcing the bastards' is quite telling. 

A properly political look at the problem of class divisions and exploitation would start from asking where we want to get to, not who we want to hate.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pacifist. But I'm also not an idiot. And I can see that saying 'Those people have got what I want so I'm going to take it' is the politics (or lack thereof) of wannabe bullies pissed off that other people are better at being bullies than them.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> A properly political look at the problem of class divisions and exploitation would start from asking where we want to get to, not who we want to hate.




Would it? Why? Why not look at contemporary class composition and movement instead? Why should it be about where 'we' want to go? Why is your approach any more 'political'? What do you mean by 'political'?


----------



## Brainaddict (Oct 16, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Would it? Why? Why not look at contemporary class composition and movement instead? Why should it be about where 'we' want to go? Why is your approach any more 'political'? What do you mean by 'political'?


Because it's difficult to move forward if you don't know where you're going. I mean 'political' as opposed to vacuous sloganeering - that is, actually thinking about the relations between people now, what they might look like in a more just society, and how to get from here to there. 
And by 'we' I mean anyone who cares.

But I know you read sinister liberal motives into everything I write, so *actually* what I meant by 'political' is anyone who agrees with me, 'we' means 'everybody had better get in line or else' and my vision of a future society is important because otherwise how will I know what to impose on people?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> Because it's difficult to move forward if you don't know where you're going. I mean 'political' as opposed to vacuous sloganeering - that is, actually thinking about the relations between people now, what they might look like in a more just society, and how to get from here to there.
> And by 'we' I mean anyone who cares.
> 
> But I know you read sinister liberal motives into everything I write, so *actually* what I meant by 'political' is anyone who agrees with me, 'we' means 'everybody had better get in line or else' and my vision of a future society is important because otherwise how will I know what to impose on people?



A remarkably a-political reply  Well, given that you reject class analysis what are you doing offering advice to people who recognise the centrality of class to politics as to how to proceed? I don't think you actually _really_ answered any of those questions btw...


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

joer90 said:
			
		

> If the rich are "just the same as us" why don't they stop making us work every day and night for them? start paying us a "living wage".give up there 2nd 3rd and 4th houses? hundreds of acres of land ect ? and we could all live in peace and harmony? you really are a muppet! the only way were guna get what is ours is by forcing the bastards to give us it asking nicely or moraliseing unfortunately dosent work..........................



Damn, man!  What is it with you guys and your extrapolation?  Where did I say the rich were the same as us?  I didn't.  Where did I suggest asking nicely?  Oh.  Look.  I didn't.  Where did I moralise?  Surprisingly enough, I didn't.  What I pointed out was that demanding this and that whilst accepting the continuation of capitalism was doomed as a tactic.
There can be no fairness within capitalism: it's a social system that's based on the exploitation of the majority by the minority, and the only way of changing is by having a conscious, democratic social revolution that transforms society into a classless, stateless, moneyless society based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production.

Who's a muppet?  Certainly not me, although I wonder who's got their fist up your bum.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> DOh! I am not interested in reform - I am interested in  revolution
> 
> You gave so little substance so I drew the above point out of what you had said. It seemed to me to be a logical derivative of your idealistic position. What theoretical heritage are you drawing on? Which authors? Or as it looks - have you just made it up?



You're still doing that rolling eyes thing.

If you're not interested in reform why aren't you advocating revolution?


----------



## admirablenelson (Oct 16, 2007)

All you need to know about this campaign is to be found in the following quote from that blog.

about John Cruddas ...

"Being based permanently in Dagenham isn’t good enough for him, so he claims assistance on a second ‘London’ home - in swanky Notting Hill. This also means his spoilt children can get into a nice Catholic school, and don’t have to go one in nasty old Dagenham."

Firstly, the Cruddas kids can hardly defend themselves against the charge of being "spoilt".

Then the familiar charge that any one who doesn't send his kids to the shittiest school imginaginable is somehow an enemy of the people.

Yawn. More sixth form politics, bin.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You're still doing that rolling eyes thing.
> 
> If you're not interested in reform why aren't you advocating revolution?


 

I am. 

Funnily enough I am saying these things as somebody who is not promoting the event cos I live in a different part of the country a long long way away from where it is taking place...

Your critique is not so much critique - more jumbled mess - you said "We have rich and poor because we have class-divided society. To attempt to ameliorate that situation without addressing the cause of that situation is doomed to failure." But you could quite easily say that 'we have class divided society because we have rich and poor' which to me makes more sense cos I am looking up from below at the class structure around and above me. 

You are not at all clear, and you are full of wishful thinking...


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> What's wrong with thinking for yourself? Or as you call it making stuff up.



Thinking for yourself is great - but you do not get very far unless you blend it and go beyond/with previously existing theories. I am all for free thought, it is not practices enough. Too many people are stuck in cults with preexisting leaders (and here I am including organisations in the anarchist movement as well as the communist one).


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2007)

Yet:



> What theoretical heritage are you drawing on? Which authors? Or as it looks - have you just made it up?



Come on.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

I LOVE FREETHINKING 

Does that make it easier for you to understand?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2007)

Which authors are you drawing on to argue this?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Which authors are you drawing on to argue this?



Do you really want  a full list?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2007)

Yes please.


----------



## october_lost (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Look.  Capitalism reproduces itself, just as it produces rich people and poor people.  Everybody's a functionary, and that's all.  There are no 'evil' capitalists in control.  In fact, there's no-one in control. You're advocating bashing people who were born a particular way.  Neat thinking.  Let's get the disabled, too, eh?  It's that foolish. If you'd been born rich you'd not be spouting your anarchist hogwash here, now, would you?


Good post


----------



## TopCat (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Damn, man!  What is it with you guys and your extrapolation?  Where did I say the rich were the same as us?  I didn't.  Where did I suggest asking nicely?  Oh.  Look.  I didn't.  Where did I moralise?  Surprisingly enough, I didn't.  What I pointed out was that demanding this and that whilst accepting the continuation of capitalism was doomed as a tactic.
> There can be no fairness within capitalism: it's a social system that's based on the exploitation of the majority by the minority, and the only way of changing is by having a conscious, democratic social revolution that transforms society into a classless, stateless, moneyless society based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production.
> 
> Who's a muppet?  Certainly not me, although I wonder who's got their fist up your bum.




Historically, with the last batch of "Bash The Rich Marches" we demanded nothing...

That was the whole point. There was nothing they could ever offer to appease us. Our banner at the front read only "Behold! Your future Executioners!"


----------



## Geri (Oct 16, 2007)

Oh dear, some muppet has gone and booked his coach for the wrong day!  

This is why you should never let men do anything without checking it for them first.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 16, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Yes please.




Butchers!


----------



## lights.out.london (Oct 16, 2007)

Were any rich actually bashed?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

Geri said:
			
		

> Oh dear, some muppet has gone and booked his coach for the wrong day!
> 
> This is why you should never let men do anything without checking it for them first.



I agree


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

october_lost said:
			
		

> Good post



No its not - its shite


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> I am.
> 
> Funnily enough I am saying these things as somebody who is not promoting the event cos I live in a different part of the country a long long way away from where it is taking place...
> 
> ...



Over the years, on boards like these, I have met many people like you.  Sophists.  Some clever.  Some not so clever.  Some very stupid.  Some even more stupid than you.  But what I've learned is that you can never win an argument with a truly stupid person.  All you can do is offer them a cure.  In your case I prescribe a cursory study of human history with specific reference to the origins of private property not as a fact of society, but rather as the basis of society.  Should you grasp that then you will no longer place the cart before the horse.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Over the years, on boards like these, I have met many people like you.  Sophists.  Some clever.  Some not so clever.  Some very stupid.  Some even more stupid than you.  But what I've learned is that you can never win an argument with a truly stupid person.  All you can do is offer them a cure.  In your case I prescribe a cursory study of human history with specific reference to the origins of private property not as a fact of society, but rather as the basis of society.  Should you grasp that then you will no longer place the cart before the horse.



Ahh. The man with all the answers. 

Please, Educate us all.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Ahh. The man with all the answers.
> 
> Please, Educate us all.



I only have 73% of the answers, I'm afraid.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I only have 73% of the answers, I'm afraid.



Thats not a high enough percentage for you to pass judgment, proscribe cures and pretend like you actually have a claim to know everything.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Thats not a high enough percentage for you to pass judgment, proscribe cures and pretend like you actually have a claim to know everything.


None of which I've done.  Don't blame me if YOU feel inadequate.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

What is it with some of you?  Had a sense of humour bypass, huh?  Jeez.  It's only a bit of SWP-bashing.  It's not like they're ever going to even be a footnote in history.


----------



## joer90 (Oct 16, 2007)

your right we need to get rid of capitalism thanks for stateing the odvious you twat! who runs capitalism? who makes the laws? owns the factorys? locks us up?................. the rich thats who thats why were having a pop at them whats your answer to capitalism? what you guna do about it? fuck all i suspect.....................


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Thats not a high enough percentage for you to pass judgment, proscribe cures and pretend like you actually have a claim to know everything.



Except for the fact that in this case he is actually right


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Actually, before anyone else points it out, it's not this thread I'm bashing the SWP in.  This thread is where I'm bashing anarchists.  I do get confused about who I'm bashing, sometimes.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 16, 2007)

joer90 said:
			
		

> your right we need to get rid of capitalism thanks for stateing the odvious you twat! who runs capitalism? who makes the laws? owns the factorys? locks us up?................. the rich thats who thats why were having a pop at them whats your answer to capitalism? what you guna do about it? fuck all i suspect.....................



Rather the rich than the mob.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

joer90 said:
			
		

> your right we need to get rid of capitalism thanks for stateing the odvious you twat! who runs capitalism? who makes the laws? owns the factorys? locks us up?................. the rich thats who thats why were having a pop at them whats your answer to capitalism? what you guna do about it? fuck all i suspect.....................



Hey!  Who's an aggressive chappie?  I'll tell you what, kid.  A bunch of so-called anarchists staging a risible theatrical performance is no threat whatsoever to the ruling class.  In fact, if people like that didn't exist the ruling class would employ people to stage such displays, just to sidetrack those who are actually concerned about effecting meaningful change.

You see, you need to understand how flexible, adaptable and capable of absorbing dissent capitalism is.  Anarchists rioting outside the World Trade Centre?  No threat.  Aeroplanes aimed at buildings?  Not a problem.  The only possible threat to the status quo is the working-class understanding why capitalism can never work in their interests, and why they must overthrow it and replace it with a classless, stateless, moneyless society based on common ownership and democratic control of the means of production.  When the working-class have that understanding, and rise up to end capitalism, not reform it with some ludicrous leftist state-capitalist dictatorship, then, and only then, will the ruling class have something to worry about.  That's what I work for.  And you're in the way.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

It seems that I have jumped in without really reading any of the thread. 

I only posted because GY comes across as an arrogant moron.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> It seems that I have jumped in without really reading any of the thread.
> 
> I only posted because GY comes across as an arrogant moron.



Well, if you bother to read what I've written I'm sure that you'll retract the 'moron' bit.  As for being arrogant, thanks very much.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Well, if you bother to read what I've written I'm sure that you'll retract the 'moron' bit.  As for being arrogant, thanks very much.



Nah. The more I read, the more it seems like you have nothing to say. Oh and it wasn't a compliment, you don't seem to have much to be arrogant about.


----------



## lights.out.london (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> A bunch of so-called anarchists staging a risible theatrical performance is no threat whatsoever to the ruling class.
> 
> You see, you need to understand how flexible, adaptable and capable of absorbing dissent capitalism is.  Anarchists rioting outside the World Trade Centre?  No threat.  Aeroplanes aimed at buildings?  Not a problem.  The only possible threat to the status quo is the working-class understanding why capitalism can never work in their interests, and why they must overthrow it and replace it with a classless, stateless, moneyless society based on common ownership and democratic control of the means of production.
> 
> When the working-class have that understanding, and rise up to end capitalism, not reform it with some ludicrous leftist state-capitalist dictatorship, then, and only then, will the ruling class have something to worry about.



My edits.

I'm inclined to agree with you.

joer90 is a lovely guy, IRL. No need to talk down to him. He can cope with the arguments. No need to name call.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Hey!  Who's an aggressive chappie?  I'll tell you what, kid.  A bunch of so-called anarchists staging a risible theatrical performance is no threat whatsoever to the ruling class.  In fact, if people like that didn't exist the ruling class would employ people to stage such displays, just to sidetrack those who are actually concerned about effecting meaningful change.


That's not anarchism, that's a sinister situationist vanguard, innit


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Nah. The more I read, the more it seems like you have nothing to say. Oh and it wasn't a compliment, you don't seem to have much to be arrogant about.



So.  Anything to contribute, aside from nastiness?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

Only to second this:




			
				lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> <snip>
> No need to talk down to him. He can cope with the arguments. No need to name call.



*leaves thread*


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Only to second this:
> 
> 
> 
> *leaves thread*



Well, you know, I think I've been extremely gentle considering some of the things I've been called today.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Over the years, on boards like these, I have met many people like you.  Sophists.  Some clever.  Some not so clever.  Some very stupid.  Some even more stupid than you.  But what I've learned is that you can never win an argument with a truly stupid person.  All you can do is offer them a cure.  In your case I prescribe a cursory study of human history with specific reference to the origins of private property not as a fact of society, but rather as the basis of society.  Should you grasp that then you will no longer place the cart before the horse.



     

You stupid twat.

'Property is theft' is the famous slogan from the 19th century and we aim to abolish commodities my friend (but not things or the ability to make them). Serious revolution. A complete change in perception as well in the way capitalist society is run.

I have learned that you are a truly arrogant and stupid person and no, you will never win the argument cos you do not know it all, and you have only a one sided argument. Grow up. 

How old are you? Have you got your degree yet?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Hey!  Who's an aggressive chappie?  I'll tell you what, kid.  A bunch of so-called anarchists staging a risible theatrical performance is no threat whatsoever to the ruling class.  In fact, if people like that didn't exist the ruling class would employ people to stage such displays, just to sidetrack those who are actually concerned about effecting meaningful change.
> 
> You see, you need to understand how flexible, adaptable and capable of absorbing dissent capitalism is.  Anarchists rioting outside the World Trade Centre?  No threat.  Aeroplanes aimed at buildings?  Not a problem.  The only possible threat to the status quo is the working-class understanding why capitalism can never work in their interests, and why they must overthrow it and replace it with a classless, stateless, moneyless society based on common ownership and democratic control of the means of production.  When the working-class have that understanding, and rise up to end capitalism, not reform it with some ludicrous leftist state-capitalist dictatorship, then, and only then, will the ruling class have something to worry about.  That's what I work for.  And you're in the way.



So your 'work' is not effective at all then is it? You do nothing, achieve nothing, attack nothing. Well done - it sounds like the same social democratic crap you pathetically and weakly critisise.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

*briefly returns*

Sounds like sophism to me

*leaves again*


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> You stupid twat.
> 
> *'Property is theft'* is the famous slogan from the 19th century and we aim to abolish commodities my friend (but not things or the ability to make them).


Why should today's anarchists listen to anything that the antisemitic, grotesquely chauvinist, 19th Century bigotted twat called Pierre-Joseph Proudhon had to say?


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> You stupid twat.
> 
> 'Property is theft' is the famous slogan from the 19th century and we aim to abolish commodities my friend (but not things or the ability to make them). Serious revolution. A complete change in perception as well in the way capitalist society is run.
> 
> ...



I'm quite probably old enough to be your father, although if I was I'd have drowned you at birth, most likely.  You're spouting nonsense.  You plan to bring about a revolution that's going to change the way capitalist society is run?  And you're going to do it by killing people.  That's not a revolution, it's reform.  You are utterly confused.  You're going to abolish commodities.  But they'll still be able to be made.  Yeah!  

You might think that I am arrogant and stupid, and I can see why you might think that.  It's because that is precisely what you are.  I've seen some very sloppy thinking over the years, but you could win prizes.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Why should today's anarchists listen to anything that the antisemitic, grotesquely chauvinist, 19th Century bigot known as Proudhon had to say?



I wasn't asking them to - i just mentioned it as a famous slogan.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I'm quite probably old enough to be your father, although if I was I'd have drowned you at birth, most likely.  You're spouting nonsense.  You plan to bring about a revolution that's going to change the way capitalist society is run?  And you're going to do it by killing people.  That's not a revolution, it's reform.  You are utterly confused.  You're going to abolish commodities.  But they'll still be able to be made.  Yeah!
> 
> You might think that I am arrogant and stupid, and I can see why you might think that.  It's because that is precisely what you are.  I've seen some very sloppy thinking over the years, but you could win prizes.



Which cult do you hang around with daddy or have you left them all?

That means which organisation (SPGB/ICC etc) and/or union are you in and have you left the 'left'?


----------



## JoePolitix (Oct 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Why should today's anarchists listen to anything that the antisemitic, grotesquely chauvinist, 19th Century bigotted twat called Pierre-Joseph Proudhon had to say?



"Property is theft" is fine though because Marx nicked it and him da man


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I'm quite probably old enough to be your father, although if I was I'd have drowned you at birth, most likely.  You're spouting nonsense.  You plan to bring about a revolution that's going to change the way capitalist society is run?  And you're going to do it by killing people.  That's not a revolution, it's reform.  You are utterly confused.  You're going to abolish commodities.  But they'll still be able to be made.  Yeah!
> 
> You might think that I am arrogant and stupid, and I can see why you might think that.  It's because that is precisely what you are.  I've seen some very sloppy thinking over the years, but you could win prizes.



You have understood nothing my friend. You know little of the origins and history of 'bash the rich' and would rather bore us all with your perfect but achieve nothing view of radical change. AS it goes there will be no deaths that day (unfortunately I hear you all scream), I hope there will be some rich bashing but I think the filth will stop it all. SO! Now we've established your critique is not worth anything so far - and it is your stupidity too that assumes workers will destroy the ability to make things. Have you not noticed we will need things? Like hospitals/surgical equipment, houses, beds, cookers. Well they will in my communist future - in yours you say they will appear as if by magic.

Butchers! Quick - the cult has been spotted! I sensed it earlier but you gave him too much benefit of the doubt


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Which cult do you hang around with daddy or have you left them all?
> 
> That means which organisation (SPGB/ICC etc) and/or union are you in and have you left the 'left'?



I don't hang around with any cults.  And why've you stopped calling me unpleasant names?  I was beginning to enjoy it.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Why should today's anarchists listen to anything that the antisemitic, grotesquely chauvinist, 19th Century bigotted twat called Pierre-Joseph Proudhon had to say?



Because his ideas about federalism and decentralisation as responses to societies complexity are still relevant to the modern world and can stand on their own merits aside from his eccentriticities?

I did give him the benefit attica, but not now - not after that arrogant nonsense he posted above.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I don't hang around with any cults.  And why've you stopped calling me unpleasant names?  I was beginning to enjoy it.



You still haven't said whether you hang around with any organisation or not. Do you?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Why should today's anarchists listen to anything that the antisemitic, grotesquely chauvinist, 19th Century bigotted twat called Pierre-Joseph Proudhon had to say?



I believe that is known as an 'ad hominem' argument. Saves you having to engage with actual ideas. Might be a bit taxing that.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> You still haven't said whether you hang around with any organisation or not. Do you?



Say something nasty and I might answer that question-not that it's relevant.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I'm quite probably old enough to be your father, although if I was I'd have drowned you at birth, most likely.  You're spouting nonsense.  You plan to bring about a revolution that's going to change the way capitalist society is run?  And you're going to do it by killing people.  That's not a revolution, it's reform.  You are utterly confused.  You're going to abolish commodities.  But they'll still be able to be made.  Yeah!
> 
> You might think that I am arrogant and stupid, and I can see why you might think that.  It's because that is precisely what you are.  I've seen some very sloppy thinking over the years, but you could win prizes.



You are proper unpleasant.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I believe that is known as an 'ad hominem' argument. Saves you having to engage with actual ideas. Might be a bit taxing that.


Am I wrong, Dillinger4? 

Imagine Proudhon here today, relating his ideas to us. 
We'd think he was a chauvinist, a bigot, and intolerant of other cultures, wouldn't we?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 16, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Say something nasty and I might answer that question-not that it's relevant.



I know you hang around a cult - are you happy leaving it like that for any other readers? There IS a very small chance I could be wrong, but I do not think so at present.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Am I wrong, Dillinger4?
> 
> Imagine Proudhon here today, relating his ideas to us.
> We'd think he was a chauvinist, a bigot, and intolerant of other cultures, wouldn't we?



Not only is that not a realistic proposition, it again does not actually engage with any ideas he suggests.

I am not saying you are wrong. I am saying your argument is flawed.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 16, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Because his ideas about federalism and decentralisation as responses to societies complexity are still relevant to the modern world and can stand on their own merits aside from his eccentriticities?


But I find him offensive to the extreme on so many counts. He said that Jews had placed themselves "beyond the conscience of the human race" in their "stubborn rejection of Jesus". I mean, that's a bit much to accept from an anarchist. How am I supposed to accept this type of authoritarian bigotry and chauvinism today? 

Isn't there someone, anyone, any other anarchist philosopher or social scientist who's written about decentralism and federalism that I won't find philosophically repulsive or ethically wanting? And what is so important about Proudhon's theories on decentralism and federalism to anarchism?

e2a: Proudhon's theories on


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> But I find him offensive to the extreme on so many counts. He said that Jews had placed themselves "beyond the conscience of the human race" in their "stubborn rejection of Jesus". I mean, that's a bit much to accept from an anarchist. How am I supposed to accept this type of authoritarian bigotry and chauvinism today?
> 
> Isn't there someone, anyone, any other anarchist philosopher or social scientist who's written about decentralism and federalism that I won't find philosophically repulsive or ethically wanting?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem



> An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 16, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Not only is that not a realistic proposition, it again does not actually engage with any ideas he suggests.
> 
> I am not saying you are wrong. I am saying your argument is flawed.



Proudhon conceived of a final solution one hundred years before the Hitler's National Socialists. And you say _my_ argument is flawed? Why should todays anarchists give this right-wing racist's work the time of day?



			
				Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's Diaries said:
			
		

> _Jews_
> - make a provision against this race which poisons everything by meddling everywhere without ever merging with any other people
> - Demand its expulsion from France, except for individuals married to Frenchwomen.
> - Abolish the synagogues; don't allow them to enter any kind of employment; finally proceed with the abolition of this religion.
> ...


He was an authoritarian right-wing chauvinist bigotted prejudiced twat of the highest order. There's nothing leftist about Proudhon, and he doesn't measure up to modern anarchist ideology. Proudhon is full of fail.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> And what is so important about decentralism and federalism to anarchism?


Are you fucking serious?

Proudhon held a lot of views that were, by todays standards, fucking vile, but the fact is that he was a product of his time.  The ideas put forward by Proudhon are pretty important, in terms of the history of anarchism, regardless of what a nasty individual he may have been.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 16, 2007)

Sorry, IB, I should have said 'And what is so important _about Proudhon's theories on decentralism and federalism_ to anarchism?' 

In fact, I'm going to add that, because that is what BA mentioned, and I asked for other theorists who wouldn't be repulsive by todays standards.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 16, 2007)

Well, things have moved on a great deal since Proudhon's time, but the point is that you can't just ignore the very real impact he had on the development of anarchist ideas.

Personally, I think that what little I've read of Proudhon is poorly written, idealistic nonsense, but it's important nonsense, nonetheless


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

DapperDonDamaja said:
			
		

> Rather the rich than the mob.



Behold etc...


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Hey!  Who's an aggressive chappie?  I'll tell you what, kid.  A bunch of so-called anarchists staging a risible theatrical performance is no threat whatsoever to the ruling class.  In fact, if people like that didn't exist the ruling class would employ people to stage such displays, just to sidetrack those who are actually concerned about effecting meaningful change.
> 
> You see, you need to understand how flexible, adaptable and capable of absorbing dissent capitalism is.  Anarchists rioting outside the World Trade Centre?  No threat.  Aeroplanes aimed at buildings?  Not a problem.  The only possible threat to the status quo is the working-class understanding why capitalism can never work in their interests, and why they must overthrow it and replace it with a classless, stateless, moneyless society based on common ownership and democratic control of the means of production.  When the working-class have that understanding, and rise up to end capitalism, not reform it with some ludicrous leftist state-capitalist dictatorship, then, and only then, will the ruling class have something to worry about.  That's what I work for.  And you're in the way.




So the only "answer" is developing the perfect dialcetic..

What a toss.

"Action is the lifeblood, without action your nothing".....


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Well, if you bother to read what I've written I'm sure that you'll retract the 'moron' bit.  As for being arrogant, thanks very much.




Tosser...


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

Well the anti-activist moaners can moan.

The lib com students can bleat,

Who cares?

We know most don't agree with us now. Are we surprised? 

Were coming.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 17, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Personally, I think that what little I've read of Proudhon is poorly written, idealistic nonsense, but it's important nonsense, nonetheless


I often wonder how many of his ideas were truly original. (Very few, probably) I wonder how much he took from Godwin, esp. in terms of decentralism/federalism. 

Others before Proudhon had asserted that ownership/property is theft - he wasn't the first. What about the Diggers? There's obviously a Christian undertone to Proudhon's writing, so perhaps he took this from Aquinas who postulated that all property belongs to G0D, therfore Man can only use things, not own them, and to claim ownership is in effect, stealing from G0D. Before Aquinas, Aristotle said much the same, only he substituted Nature for G0D. 

None of Proudhon's ideas were original - his ideas on mutualism, microloans etc were already in existance in cooperatives and independent religious communities, his ideas of decentralism and federalism had already been discussed and developed in the 17th and 18th centuries. 

Proudhon later said that 'Property is freedom' (no-one ever really mentions that). Proudhon later renounced anarchism (splitter!), so if he's considered by some as the father of modern anarchism, then he's the father who sired his child to an woman he later abandoned after publicly humiliating her, beating her up, then failing to pay maintenance for the rest of that child's childhood.

Anarchism doesn't need "great" men of history - it needs sound theories and direct action, plus continuous adaptation and application to the times we find ourselves living in.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 17, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Anarchism doesn't need "great" men of history - it needs sound theories and direct action, plus continuous adaptation and application to the times we find ourselves living in.



Really?  As if you would have a clue, you pro-state apologist


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 17, 2007)

THE SHOCK OF VICTORY, by David Graeber
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/message/10219


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 17, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Behold etc...


As fantastic a slogan as "Behold your future executioners" was, do you not think it's pretty telling that the police managed to force you to march away from the areas rich people lived in with it?  Not so much a crack anarcho-hit squad as situationists on crack, really.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> As fantastic a slogan as "Behold your future executioners" was, do you not think it's pretty telling that the police managed to force you to march away from the areas rich people lived in with it?  Not so much a crack anarcho-hit squad as situationists on crack, really.




So don't come along and definately don't come along to all the other stuff were planning. I'm sure you have a long book to read now so run along eh?


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 17, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> So don't come along and definately don't come along to all the other stuff were planning. I'm sure you have a long book to read now so run along eh?



I just love the way that supporters of Class War embrace rational discussion!  I truly had forgotten just how much fun they can be!


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 17, 2007)

Well, no one can blame me if this thread goes tits up.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 17, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I just love the way that supporters of Class War embrace rational discussion!  I truly had forgotten just how much fun they can be!



Get off your high horse, you content free bullshitter.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 17, 2007)

Considering that I have written several thousand words in this thread, and have raised a good many important points, not one of which has been addressed by my opponents, and given that I have been subjected to a good deal of unnecessary abuse, not least from yourself, who has contributed precisely nothing of value, I feel completely justified in inviting you to go and have intercourse with spiders, or some other socially-useful act.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 17, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> So don't come along and definately don't come along to all the other stuff were planning. I'm sure you have a long book to read now so run along eh?



reading Viz whilst taking a shit is more revolutionary that this toy town bash the shit march.


----------



## Zhelezniakov (Oct 17, 2007)

No one in class war, to my memory, ever said that organising things such as bash the rich marches was the be all and end all, or that this act in it's self would bring capitalist class society crashing down. Neither did they say that by doing this you should neglect a million other ways of challenging the status quo. They did say that politics should be a bit of a laugh, and imaginative, not some tedious burden. I would have thought, that something like this, would have been welcomed, after all it's not as if there's much else going on, neither is it detracting from the politics others are engaged in ? being that every variety of left politics, means jack shit to the lives of most working class people.
It's true, that the last time class war did this it was a disaster, doesn't mean this one will be, maybe it will, maybe it wont, we'll find out on the day wont we.
Anyways, 105 years of the spgb urging the working class to elect it's delegates to parliament and legislate to abolish capitalism, hasn't got you very far has it Mr Guruyogourts  


(Actually I have a soft spot for that lot from Clapham high street)


----------



## Spion (Oct 17, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> Really?  As if you would have a clue, you pro-state apologist


That kind of statement deserves some evidence. To do otherwise just looks cowardly. So, come on, Lazzer!


----------



## october_lost (Oct 17, 2007)

joer90 said:
			
		

> your right we need to get rid of capitalism thanks for stateing the odvious you twat! who runs capitalism? who makes the laws? owns the factorys? locks us up?................. the rich thats who thats why were having a pop at them whats your answer to capitalism? what you guna do about it? fuck all i suspect.....................


I suspect he/she was arguing we should resist capital at the point of production


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

Zhelezniakov said:
			
		

> (Actually I have a soft spot for that lot from Clapham high street)




The WRP?


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 17, 2007)

No, that's the SPGB (aka The Impossiblists)


----------



## Zhelezniakov (Oct 17, 2007)

Yeah, it's much more productive to spend all your life on the internet being an obnoxious prick, than organising toytown shit


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

nino_savatte said:
			
		

> No, that's the SPGB (aka The Impossiblists)



I know nino, i was just making a crap sectariania joke.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 17, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> reading Viz whilst taking a shit is more revolutionary that this toy town bash the shit march.


you know jack shit you student tosser


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 17, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Considering that I have written several thousand words in this thread, and have raised a good many important points, not one of which has been addressed by my opponents, and given that I have been subjected to a good deal of unnecessary abuse, not least from yourself, who has contributed precisely nothing of value, I feel completely justified in inviting you to go and have intercourse with spiders, or some other socially-useful act.



You have written nothing challenging or of any importance. 1/10 You failed to provide any evidence of research behind your rubbish, just a lot of misplaced moralism. Your politics are apolitical and without foundation in the very class you claim to have at heart. And if you are in the SPGB you are in a non Marxist cult.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 17, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> you know jack shit you student tosser



i'm not the one who spends their days in universities.


----------



## Spion (Oct 17, 2007)

So, what will this event achieve?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 17, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Considering that I have written several thousand words in this thread, and have raised a good many important points, not one of which has been addressed by my opponents, and given that I have been subjected to a good deal of unnecessary abuse, not least from yourself, who has contributed precisely nothing of value, I feel completely justified in inviting you to go and have intercourse with spiders, or some other socially-useful act.



You have raised very little in the way of 'points'. Except for scoring points, in your own mind.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 17, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> That kind of statement deserves some evidence. To do otherwise just looks cowardly. So, come on, Lazzer!



read his previous posts when he invariably joins the rat-pack every time I am involved in a debate


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 17, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> You have written nothing challenging or of any importance. 1/10 You failed to provide any evidence of research behind your rubbish, just a lot of misplaced moralism. Your politics are apolitical and without foundation in the very class you claim to have at heart. And if you are in the SPGB you are in a non Marxist cult.



Not that I particually agree with you elsewhere on this thread, but I agree with this.


----------



## Spion (Oct 17, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> read his previous posts when he invariably joins the rat-pack every time I am involved in a debate


So, you have no evidence. Thanks for clearing that up


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 17, 2007)

We could use this thread to define what politics is all about.

  

"YOUR WRONG"

"NO YOU ARE WRONG AND I AM RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING"


----------



## joer90 (Oct 17, 2007)

it sounds to me like you are some sort of wanker calling me a "kid"? talking about "so called anarchists" going on about crashing planes into buildings? what planet are you on? bash the rich is highlighting the very things your suposed to be against the privaliged few lording it over the rest off us if you want to stay at home wanking off fine the rest off us will get on with the job at hand(no pun intended) class war! any time any place..........  nottinghill


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 17, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> i'm not the one who spends their days in universities.



Not me pal - you student tosser. 

I was at Red Hill today - go find out what that is


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 17, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> So don't come along and definately don't come along to all the other stuff were planning. I'm sure you have a long book to read now so run along eh?


Do you ever get tired of making the same old incoherent, provably untrue personal attacks again and again?  Because you're boring the shit out of me.


----------



## JoePolitix (Oct 17, 2007)

*Three quickies*

1. Proudhon - a stain on humanity. More:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1966/twosouls/4-anarch.htm

2. Larry O'Hara - also a stain on humanity, though thankfully a less significant one. "If you're against me then you're objectively a state apologist" - 'kin' 'ell. And Invisibleplanet's actually a she not a he - you can't even get the basics right can ya?

3. Guru Yoghourtface - if you can't take the heat don't run into the kitchen in a fucking sweat suit.

As you were comrades


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> reading Viz whilst taking a shit is more revolutionary that this toy town bash the shit march.




Have you not got some growth hormones to munch you midget son of a scumbag screw?


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 17, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Do you ever get tired of making the same old incoherent, provably untrue personal attacks again and again?  Because you're boring the shit out of me.


Heh.


----------



## joer90 (Oct 17, 2007)

There's also guna be a radical history tour on the big day with stuff such as the clash the angry brigade class war stuff race riots police bashing the lot!!!  theres guna be a booklet with all this stuff and more available at the @st bookfair for a mere £1 get em while you can cos there going like hot cakes!!!!


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 17, 2007)

Will you be paying schooldisco.com to organise an after party?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

In Bloom, what is it that so upsets you about people actually doing stuff as opposed to just wittering away on the internet?


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 17, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> In Bloom, what is it that so upsets you about people actually doing stuff as opposed to just wittering away on the internet?


I'm not upset, I find this fucking hillarious 

Maybe you could try to get Wham to reform and play at the end of the march?


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 17, 2007)

JoePolitix said:
			
		

> 1. Proudhon - a stain on humanity. More:
> 
> http://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1966/twosouls/4-anarch.htm
> 
> ...



The gender of Invisible Planet is irrelevant--and as the coward has repeatedly attacked my research without providing one example of their supposed superior offerings in this area, an understandable mistake. 

Joe Politix: with a bit more evolution, he might aspire to be a stain on a diaper.

As you were, little turd.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 17, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> So, you have no evidence. Thanks for clearing that up



no, you have no research capacities--glad to clarify.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

inbloom. So you have no class politics, no passion, no nothing. 

Just a reading list of dead people...


----------



## editor (Oct 17, 2007)

Well, this thread's going well.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 17, 2007)

JoePolitix said:
			
		

> 1. Proudhon - a stain on humanity. More:
> 
> http://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1966/twosouls/4-anarch.htm



Draper's suggestion that one cannot have democracy with out "authority" -- (which I am glad to see that he has italicized for those of us to stupid to find the word otherwise )-- is wrong, but he's right about Proudhon and Bakunin -- they're not 'Fathers' of anarchism. 

These 'historical fathers' belong to a type of creation myth making - simply, they're of historical interest, however, anarchism doesn't need 'fathers' or "great" men of history - it needs sound theories and direct action, plus continuous adaptation and application to the times we find ourselves living in..


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

Blimey - is there anyone who is pure enough for you to take seriously? Apart from Khomeni of course. What a fucking tools game.

Good luck with your new career.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 17, 2007)

editor said:
			
		

> Well, this thread's going well.



It is the usual highly theoretical and philosophical debate between those who think they know it all but theorise themselves into inactivity, against those who think that class is a relationship and they are participants in the general struggle, but the class needs to feel/bring alive the 'class for itself' (class consciousness) too.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

And draper wasn't ever a neo-con you shit hot researcher you. He was an independent trotskyist influenced marxist.


----------



## Spion (Oct 17, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> no, you have no research capacities--glad to clarify.


This is stage 3 in a 'debate' with Larry.

Stage 1: Larry makes an outrageous assertion
Stage 2: Larry gets called to produce evidence to back it up
Stage 3: Larry fails to, and attempts to shift blame to his accuser for his own inability to back his ludicrous claims

at this point the 'debate' can take a number of directions

1. It continues in circles as Larry is called to produce evidence and continually refuses, or
2. Larry says 'Buy my vanity-published magazine, "Notes from my sordid grief hole" - it's all in there', or
3. Larry's accuser realises he's dealing with one hell of a vain, empty-headed cock, and moves on

See ya, Lazzer


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 17, 2007)

Draper wrote some good shit before 66 
e.g. 'Why the Working Class'.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

Invisible planet *is* a state/authority lover turned anarchist researcher overnight though. She's fond of calling people racists too and tying to smear people via PM.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 17, 2007)

Zhelezniako
Anyways said:


> It's actually only 103 years, but let's not split hairs.  I'm not a member, as I've already said.  I have a few theoretical differences, largely related to activism as it happens, that led me to leave some 15 years ago


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> It is the usual highly theoretical and philosophical debate between those who think they know it all but theorise themselves into inactivity, against those who think that class is a relationship and they are participants in the general struggle, but the class needs to feel/bring alive the 'class for itself' (class consciousness) too.




Fucking hell you make sense for once.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> It's actually only 103 years, but let's not split hairs.  I'm not a member, as I've already said.  I have a few theoretical differences, largely related to activism as it happens, that led me to leave some 15 years ago




Your the spods spod and of no practical use to any fucker. I bet you thought their turgid debates were substituting themselves for the working class........


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 17, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Invisible planet *is* a state/authority lover turned anarchist researcher overnight though. She's fond of calling people racists too and tying to smear people via PM.


Please provide evidence to back up your assertions.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Please provide evidence to back up your assertions.



Which one? That you support state authority? That you have called me and others islamophobes on here? That you tried to involve me in a smear game against another poster via pm last night without knowing that i knew the poster in real life? Bit of a fuck up that last one.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 17, 2007)

Yes, prove all of those, including your claim that I tried to involve you in a *smear game against another poster via pm last night* - you made those claims in public, so prove them, in public.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

1) It's in your posting record. 

2) As admitted to me via pm only last week 

<snip - FM>

3) As pmed to me last night. Looking remarkably similiar to another Pm sent to me and other posters behind the same posters back by luther blisset a few weeks back. And both with a recommendation to go to Loughborough. Odd that.

<snip - FM>


----------



## TopCat (Oct 17, 2007)

So anyway it's all going ahead.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 17, 2007)

Uh, okay, in no particular order:

1. Being a "state/authority lover" is a matter of opinion and the accusation of such is not against any rules, unless it is used to harass someone or disrupt threads or other not-allowed things.

2. If someone is using the PM function to harass people that is not on, but if it is not used for that nothing will be done.

3. Posting PMs is not on either but then again, if somebody actually suggests that PM-related proof is provided and it is, the "offence" is hardly going to be taken seriously.

4. This whole thing isn't anything at all relevant to this thread, that I'm pretty sure of. Please keep further discussions to PMs or whatever avenue is preferred.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 17, 2007)

Fair dos FM. Just wanted to make clear for anyone else getting these Pms that they're not alone. Zipped from here.


----------



## bluestreak (Oct 17, 2007)

aw, it's almost like the old days around here on this thread


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 17, 2007)

I love these kind of threads.


----------



## jayeola (Oct 17, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Hey!  Who's an aggressive chappie?  I'll tell you what, kid.  A bunch of so-called anarchists staging a risible theatrical performance is no threat whatsoever to the ruling class.  In fact, if people like that didn't exist the ruling class would employ people to stage such displays, just to sidetrack those who are actually concerned about effecting meaningful change.
> 
> You see, you need to understand how flexible, adaptable and capable of absorbing dissent capitalism is.  Anarchists rioting outside the World Trade Centre?  No threat.  Aeroplanes aimed at buildings?  Not a problem.  The only possible threat to the status quo is the working-class understanding why capitalism can never work in their interests, and why they must overthrow it and replace it with a classless, stateless, moneyless society based on common ownership and democratic control of the means of production.  When the working-class have that understanding, and rise up to end capitalism, not reform it with some ludicrous leftist state-capitalist dictatorship, then, and only then, will the ruling class have something to worry about.  That's what I work for.  And you're in the way.



Amen.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 18, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Have you not got some growth hormones to munch you midget son of a scumbag screw?



yes, yes dear.... have fun bashing the rich...


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 18, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Which one? That you support state authority?


242 mentions of state, not one supporting state authority.



			
				butchersapron said:
			
		

> That you have called me and others islamophobes on here?


PM clearly says that you're referring to something that happened a long time ago (2 years ago - a long time in board-years). I asked you to provide proof,  then  I would make amends (implicit in this is your providing of proof, you still haven't provided proof that it was unwarranted at the time. My offer still stands - provide proof, and if I was wrong, I'll make amends. 



			
				butchersapron said:
			
		

> That you tried to involve me in a smear game against another poster via pm last night without knowing that i knew the poster in real life? Bit of a fuck up that last one.


In a PM to you, I called Attica a twonker. He already knew I didn't trust him anyway (but the details of that will remain private). There is no indication that I tried to recruit you into a smear game - no sign of that at all, and that's because I didn't try to recruit you into a smear game. It's simply not the way I go about things. That PM looks quite out of context since Attica had just bemoaned on the forum somewhere, for the bizillionth time, his perception that there was a lack of anarchist theory/practice. I was getting fed up of this continual misrepresentation of contemporary anarchist theory and practice, and then you seemed to go along with that too. I'd already argued with Attica that this wasn't the case, but was obviously floggin a dead horse since he still insisted in repeating the same old same old, and so I showed you privately by PM, that wasn't the case. Anyway. I'm not the only person here who thinks Attica is a twonker and he's been called far worse by people not half as easy-going as me. I'm quite sure he's not bothered what I think of him. 

As for sending the same conference to you as someone else - I'm sure I'm not the only person in the whole wide world who's signed up to the Research Anarchism/Rise Up lists. 

Disappointingly, it seems that I was mistaken when thought you were supportive of the whole anarchist movement, but my original thought was that perhaps you were, and that's why sent you a link to the RA-list notice on next years conference.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 18, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> yes, yes dear.... have fun bashing the rich...


How is 'rich' being defined again?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 18, 2007)

**you see the dangers of playing this game now IP?**


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 18, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> inbloom. So you have no class politics, no passion, no nothing.
> 
> Just a reading list of dead people...


I know you find reality quite upsetting, but at least make an effort to think before you post a load of bollocks, eh?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 18, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> It seems that I was mistaken when thought you were supportive of the whole anarchist movement and that's why I a) disagreed with Attica that nothing new was happening and b) sent you a link to the RA-list.




Am i expelled?

(((whole anarchist movement type thing)))


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 18, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Am i expelled?


Don't be a silly sausage 



> (((whole anarchist movement type thing)))


Have you got a proper hanky on you? (not one of those foul disposable things)


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 18, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> How is 'rich' being defined again?


Usual Oxford English dictionary definition.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 18, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> In a PM to you, I called Attica a twonker. He already knew I didn't trust him anyway (but the details of that will remain private). There is no indication that I tried to recruit you into a smear game - no sign of that at all, and that's because I didn't try to recruit you into a smear game. It's simply not the way I go about things. That PM looks quite out of context since Attica had just bemoaned on the forum somewhere, for the bizillionth time, his perception that there was a lack of anarchist theory/practice. I was getting fed up of this continual misrepresentation of contemporary anarchist theory and practice, and then you seemed to go along with that too. I'd already argued with Attica that this wasn't the case, but was obviously floggin a dead horse since he still insisted in repeating the same old same old, and so I showed you privately by PM, that wasn't the case. Anyway. I'm not the only person here who thinks Attica is a twonker and he's been called far worse by people not half as easy-going as me. I'm quite sure he's not bothered what I think of him.
> 
> Disappointingly, it seems that I was mistaken when thought you were supportive of the whole anarchist movement, but my original thought was that perhaps you were, and that's why sent you a link to the RA-list notice on next years conference.



My critique is not that there is no theory and practice as I have already indicated to you, but that it is chaotic, suffers from tyrannies of structurelessness, is undemocratic, fails to involve localised working classes, cannot operate beyond one off events, that its' not so much anarchist as social democratic practice, and that's just an off the cuff list. There is more. 

There are others I critique to such as Left Communists and those whose practice never goes beyond simplistic one party social democratic political behaviour. I really cannot understand those anarchists who set their political ambitions so low, or those individualists who are content to operate without a large political movement. It is not good enough to have ideas with no practical chance of implementation, to have strategy that means your tactics are limited, or to pretend that your politics are sufficient even though there is no alliance building or operating outside the comfort zone amongst different people who will disagree. Anyway, there will be more of this sort of thing in MAYDAY magazine, you all should come to the launch at Housmans, the stall and meeting at the anarchist bookfair  

IP - i used to be like you somewhat with an exagerated view of anarchisms importance, but its palpable failings are so obvious. I try to lift and synthesise the best parts from all progressive traditions, the exact political mix is yet to be decided through praxis.

I am not bothered what people who do not know me think of me, or what my political adversaries think. I AM NOT best pleased with the latest shenanigans.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 18, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> a vain, empty-headed cock



the above being a self-definition of Spion.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 18, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> I AM NOT best pleased with the latest shenanigans.


Sorry about the following, often twonky, but nevertheless civil when sparring person-even-though-we-disagree, but I've been given no choice - I must challenge this:



			
				Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> the above being...


Where is your proof that I'm a pro-state apologist, Larry O'Hara?

245 mentions of state, and not one of them an apology. Feel free to provide proof to the contrary if you can find it.

.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 18, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Where is your proof that I'm a pro-state apologist, Larry O'Hara?
> 
> 245 mentions of state, and not one of them an apology. Feel free to provide proof to the contrary if you can find it.
> 
> .



other people might feign ignorance of your posting history--you know perfectly well the history of your trolling interventions in threads I have crossed swords with you on.  In which you have defended Searchlight and their disinformation consistently.  So, your strategy here is to 

*1) *either cause me to waste my time going back through all those threads & copy/pasting your contributions,

or 

*2) * to rely on other posters not being bothered to do so, and thus like your Kopite friend allowing your past record to be excused by default.

I have better things to do than *1), *more constructive (non-internet) matters to spend my time doing.  If casual observers want to take it that you/the Kopite have 'won' the argument, let them do so.  You, and I, know otherwise.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 18, 2007)

Ignorance of my posting history? History of my trolling interventions in threads where YOU have crossed swords with I? Consistent defence of Searchlight and their 'disinformation'? STRATEGY?


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 18, 2007)

Zizek would have a field day with this one. 
*imagines what a Perverts Guide to Urban75 would look like*


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 18, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> I know you find reality quite upsetting, but at least make an effort to think before you post a load of bollocks, eh?


Oh rly, IB? No-one else does, why should TC be subject to that?   *joke*
((((load of bollocks))))


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 18, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Zizek would have a field day with this one.
> **imagines what a Perverts Guide to Urban75 would look like**


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> the above being a self-definition of Spion.


Translation: "That's you, that is"


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> other people might feign ignorance of your posting history--you know perfectly well the history of your trolling interventions in threads I have crossed swords with you on.  In which you have defended Searchlight and their disinformation consistently.  So, your strategy here is to
> 
> *1) *either cause me to waste my time going back through all those threads & copy/pasting your contributions,
> 
> ...



If an accusation is worth making, then the evidence has to be presented. Otherwise you just look like you're trying to intimidate someone.

Imagine times of greater repression someone saying, "Oh, s/he's a state agent." That kind of thing gets people killed right now in other places. Present the evidence or withdraw, Larry. Otherwise you just look like a provocateur.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 18, 2007)

Tell you what, why don't the various people who want to argue about their research abilities, connections to special branch etc piss off to another thread and take the gormless idiots like inbloom and revol with them?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 18, 2007)

Oi. Apparently more happened here after I went to bed. Let's be clear - _don't post PMs_ plz - I was a bit soft on that last night but it shouldn't happen. (Asking people to prove stuff that was said over PM isn't a good idea either.)


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Tell you what, why don't the various people who want to argue about their research abilities, connections to special branch etc piss off to another thread and take the gormless idiots like inbloom and revol with them?


 What were you expecting? How many ways can you discuss how you're going to "bash" "the rich"? Well, there's, "Urg, yes, bash em!" or "You stupid arseholes, what do you think that will achieve?"

Then there's advertising the intent to do violence to people on a public message board. If that wasn't stupid enough to begin with, no-one with half a brain will discuss it. Hence the reason the thread turned into a implicit/explicit smear-fest


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 18, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Which one? That you support state authority? That you have called me and others islamophobes on here? That you tried to involve me in a smear game against another poster via pm last night without knowing that i knew the poster in real life? Bit of a fuck up that last one.



You've never been involved in "smear games" have you, butchers?  

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 18, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> What were you expecting? How many ways can you discuss how you're going to "bash" "the rich"? Well, there's, "Urg, yes, bash em!" or "You stupid arseholes, what do you think that will achieve?"
> 
> Then there's advertising the intent to do violence to people on a public message board. If that wasn't stupid enough to begin with, no-one with half a brain will discuss it. Hence the reason the thread turned into a implicit/explicit smear-fest




Nah, too many people feel that this type of action shows them up to be empty idiots who achieve nothing. If as has happened in the past, these type of actions raise the profile of Bash the Rich type events and organisation (Class war sold a lot of papers in the past and had an influence out of all proportion to their tiny size) then it makes a mockery of the pseudo intellectuals and their complete lack of action. Hence the agression and abuse.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Nah, too many people feel that this type of action shows them up to be empty idiots who achieve nothing. If as has happened in the past, these type of actions raise the profile of Bash the Rich type events and organisation (Class war sold a lot of papers in the past and had an influence out of all proportion to their tiny size) then it makes a mockery of the pseudo intellectuals and their complete lack of action. Hence the agression and abuse.


You clearly have a lot of faith in the potency of events like this and their ability to 'expose' 'pseudo intellectuals'. I guess we'll have to wait and see if that particular cause and effect works out.

Meanwhile, what do events like this hope to achieve? What could be its lasting outcomes? I can't help feeling it'll just be on the one hand a colourful spectacle for shoppers and on the other a sort of party rally for whoever's organising it.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 18, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> You clearly have a lot of faith in the potency of events like this and their ability to 'expose' 'pseudo intellectuals'. I guess we'll have to wait and see if that particular cause and effect works out.
> 
> Meanwhile, what do events like this hope to achieve? What could be its lasting outcomes? I can't help feeling it'll just be on the one hand a colourful spectacle for shoppers and on the other a sort of party rally for whoever's organising it.




What is hoped to be achieved? Well....

An escalating series of similar events for starters...


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 18, 2007)

Suck it and see. Might just be a good laugh, might prove to help a re-groupment of people and help in some minor way to put the public expression of class anger back on the agenda, gods knows the time is ripe enough for that to happen given the super-rich flaunting their privilige in our faces with very little comeback. It's not supposed to be the storming of the winter palace.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> An escalating series of similar events for starters...


Well, if that's the case let's hope they start to gain some political content that can address the problems the bulk of people face, rather than just catering for the Saturday afternoon sport of some nostalgic muggers


----------



## TopCat (Oct 18, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> Well, if that's the case let's hope they start to gain some political content that can address the problems the bulk of people face, rather than just catering for the Saturday afternoon sport of some nostalgic muggers




Your perception of what political content is appropriate is probably different to mine.


----------



## treelover (Oct 18, 2007)

Perhaps they should also pass by where the Russian oligarchs live.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 18, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> Translation: "That's me that is"


.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 18, 2007)

Spion said:
			
		

> Present the evidence or withdraw, Larry. Otherwise you just look like a provocateur.



the evidence is on U75 past threads, you tefious troll--if you aren't interested in looking for it, then go and play with yourself.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 18, 2007)

JoePolitix said:
			
		

> 1. Proudhon - a stain on humanity. More:
> 
> http://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1966/twosouls/4-anarch.htm
> 
> ...



What heat?  There's nothing here I haven't heard countless times.


----------



## JoePolitix (Oct 18, 2007)

I mean the way you've been storming about saying "all you anarchists and Leninists are thick" etc and then whinging that people are being nasty to you when they answer back.

What else did you expect?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 18, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> What heat?  There's nothing here I haven't heard countless times.



I can imagine you get called a fucking prick quite a lot.

Every time you open your mouth, I bet.


----------



## october_lost (Oct 19, 2007)

So....Bash the Rich, what do people think


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 19, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I can imagine you get called a fucking prick quite a lot.
> 
> Every time you open your mouth, I bet.



I only get called such things by defensive emptyheads like you.  I mean, you've done nothing but attack me.  Apart from calling me stupid names, you've said nothing.  Which is to be expected, of course.  You have nothing to say.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I only get called such things by defensive emptyheads like you.  I mean, you've done nothing but attack me.  Apart from calling me stupid names, you've said nothing.  Which is to be expected, of course.  You have nothing to say.




Lots of posters have said much about you guruyoughurt. That you are a knee jerk SPGB type, who has insulted many if not most of the posters on this thread who unsurprisingly do not agree with you.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 19, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> the evidence is on U75 past threads, you tefious troll--if you aren't interested in looking for it, then go and play with yourself.



Tut tut.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2007)

october_lost said:
			
		

> So....Bash the Rich, what do people think




The question is more; Will you come? If not why not? If not this then what etc etc...


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> the evidence is on U75 past threads, you tefious troll--if you aren't interested in looking for it, then go and play with yourself.


You're not rid of me so easily, you perfidious buffoon. 

The material evidence isn't there - if it were, you'd readily provide it instead of making unsubstantiated inferences to past threads. 

Most people here haven't got a clue about what you're talking about since you don't provide evidence. What you referring to is unconnected to anything mentioned in this particular thread making you 'the troll'. 

One might assume that your sudden appearance in this troll-like fashion to vent your 'rage' at me points to an annoyance that I discussed the more unsavoury characteristics of Proudhon and his work, but since you just popped by to call me a 'pro-state apologist', I'll just say this: since the rise of the nation-state/industry/capitalism, borders have become the bane of the majority of ordinary people's lives - from the Baja to the Bedouin, from Sapmi to Jew and from migrant to asylum seeker, immigrant to refugee - state borders restrict human movement in a way hithertoo unexperienced in the history of mankind. Whilst they might work in administrative ways - they also work against the natural movement of peoples.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> You're not rid of me so easily, you perfidious buffoon.
> 
> The material evidence isn't there - if it were, you'd readily provide it instead of making unsubstantiated inferences to past threads.
> 
> ...




Can I ask that you and larry and guru all fuck off to another thread to discuss your tedious disagreements?


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 19, 2007)

And people have the brass neck to accuse me of personal spats and derailing threads?


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Can I ask that you and larry and guru all fuck off to another thread to discuss your tedious disagreements?


You can, but I'd rather have had a chance to respond to such an accusation as 'pro-state apologist'. I have done so now, so please accept my apologies for for continuing a derail which I did not initiate. 

Back to the thread. 
Are you richer than me, TC?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 19, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I only get called such things by defensive emptyheads like you.  I mean, you've done nothing but attack me.  Apart from calling me stupid names, you've said nothing.  Which is to be expected, of course.  You have nothing to say.



Isn't it funny that almost everyone thinks your a prick?

If you were as smart you think you are, you would get the hint.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 19, 2007)

nino_savatte said:
			
		

> And people have the brass neck to accuse me of personal spats and derailing threads?



You are being outshone here nino.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> The question is more; Will you come? If not why not? If not this then what etc etc...


The 'rule' here is 'Bash the Rich'.

If you're richer than me, that means I've to bash you.
If I'm richer than you, that means you've to bash me. 

Since 'rich' is largely perceptive, then if you've got a car and house and I haven't, you're richer than me, and this 'rule' means I can bash you.

I can't afford to get to London and anyone who can afford to get there is richer than me, so according to this rule, they're deserving of a bashing from me, but this is largely impossible, since I can't reach them to bash them. 

I chose to bash Proudhon, since he was richer than me, is dead, so can't complain and what I wrote about him is verifiable fact, and I commit no physical harm against another person by doing so. Those whose pride was dented by my doing so have no right to bash me, since I'm poorer than they, therefore they aren't entering into the spirit of the very event they pupport to support


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> The 'rule' here is 'Bash the Rich'.
> 
> If you're richer than me, that means I've to bash you.
> If I'm richer than you, that means you've to bash me.
> ...




Well your lack of perception can in my opinion only really be explained by a total lack of class analysis. As for the pedantic questions, this demo is principally about having a go at an etonite coke head who wants to rule the country. We oppose that hence the demo. If you agree come along, if not don't. Simple innit.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

I don't think it's got anything to with with a lack of class analysis, TC.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 19, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> You are being outshone here nino.



Innit? I shall remind all of the participants of this the next time anyone tries to lay into me about "personal spats".


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Well your lack of perception can in my opinion only really be explained by a total lack of class analysis. As for the pedantic questions, this demo is principally about having a go at an etonite coke head who wants to rule the country. We oppose that hence the demo. If you agree come along, if not don't. Simple innit.



Why would anarchists single out Cameron and not Brown? Why would anarchists single out figureheads, and not the protest against the entire nature of this hierarchical and unrepresentative system of government? 

This demo looks pro-Government, but anti-Tory-leader - it works for Labour/Leftists who believe in a hierarchical top-down system but has sweet FA to do with anarchism. 

Why aren't your efforts focused on the 'eradicate Islam' Vlaams co-ordinated demo across USA/UK/Belgium happening the weekend before? 
I'd like to think that you'd have been with _us_ at the Battle of Cable Street. Whatever happened to No Pasarán! 

Tell me, what's anarchist about this demo?


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 19, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> You're not rid of me so easily, you perfidious buffoon.
> 
> The material evidence isn't there - if it were, you'd readily provide it instead of making unsubstantiated inferences to past threads.
> 
> ...



To call you a buffoon might be an insult to buffoons--so I won't.

You presume, by introducing irrelvancies, that this passes as an answer to my comment about your posting history--you and I both know it doesn't.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> To call you a buffoon might be an insult to buffoons--so I won't.
> 
> You presume, by introducing irrelvancies, that this passes as an answer to my comment about your posting history--you and I both know it doesn't.



Obfuscation. Prove or stfu.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2007)

I give up. Can't you meet for a straightner and be done with it?


----------



## dash_two (Oct 19, 2007)

Maybe invisibleplanet is upset cos his parents live along the route.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

<gets naked in protest>


----------



## ChrisFilter (Oct 19, 2007)

Bash the Rich? What a pile of wank.. what does it hope to achieve? Seems to me like one bitter bloke has attracted cohorts thanks to excessive foaming at the mouth. 

If the point is that the rich get easy access to further wealth and positions of power, well duh, no shit, but smashing things up and alienating yourself from society through bitter meaningless protests isn't going to achieve a fucking thing.

Or have I missed the point?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2007)

ChrisFilter said:
			
		

> Bash the Rich? What a pile of wank.. what does it hope to achieve? Seems to me like one bitter bloke has attracted cohorts thanks to excessive foaming at the mouth.
> 
> If the point is that the rich get easy access to further wealth and positions of power, well duh, no shit, but smashing things up and alienating yourself from society through bitter meaningless protests isn't going to achieve a fucking thing.
> 
> *Or have I missed the point*?



By miles.


----------



## ChrisFilter (Oct 19, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> By miles.



 At least I'm consistent. This is why I never bother with the politics forums


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 19, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> <gets naked in protest>


pity it isn't you...


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I only get called such things by defensive emptyheads like you.  I mean, you've done nothing but attack me.  Apart from calling me stupid names, you've said nothing.  Which is to be expected, of course.  You have nothing to say.



afaik, Dillinger4 doesn't usually insult people. He's normally playful and good natured. You must have really annoyed him.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 19, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> pity it isn't you...





click image for Greenham Common Peace Camp Archive Slideshow​
Perhaps one of these lovely Revolutionary Knitting Circle Ladies could be me?


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> pity it isn't you...


Larry's research skills are quite something. The secret state ain't gonna get away with anything with our Lazzer alert to their shennanigans


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> By miles.


And of course, no-one is going to tell anyone what the point is, are they? You fellahs really are some shit hot agitators


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 20, 2007)

Bash the rich protests started in Chicago in America when Lucy Parsons cogently argued that the poor who were starving and dying, some by throwing themselves into Lake Michigan, should go the the areas of the rich and outside their posh restuarants where they fed their fat guts - take a knife or gun and shoot and stab the rich as they come out. Better to die standing with a gun in your hand than on your knees. Similar to how Zapata thought too, and a lot of other class struggle anarchists, and communists. Even EP Thompson critisised the moral high ground position of Ghandi and others that lead thousands to starve, while the rich had vast stores of grain and full shops.


----------



## october_lost (Oct 20, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Bash the rich protests started in Chicago in America when Lucy Parsons cogently argued that the poor who were starving and dying, some by throwing themselves into Lake Michigan, should go the the areas of the rich and outside their posh restuarants where they fed their fat guts - take a knife or gun and shoot and stab the rich as they come out. Better to die standing with a gun in your hand than on your knees. Similar to how Zapata thought too, and a lot of other class struggle anarchists, and communists. Even EP Thompson critisised the moral high ground position of Ghandi and others that lead thousands to starve, while the rich had vast stores of grain and full shops.


And thats a comparison for our times?


----------



## durruti02 (Oct 20, 2007)

nino_savatte said:
			
		

> And people have the brass neck to accuse me of personal spats and derailing threads?



nino .. i formally and humbley and with brass neck apologise ..  

( till you do it to me again!  )

not sure i will come .. police tactics have changed a lot since the 8ts .. suspect i will be in the area as it were  

to the knockers .. politics is surely multi layered .. we all must do what we do best .. i find it hard to believe this event does NOT have a place in the process even though it might seem a waste of time to many 

tbh it is amazing in these divided times that more of the left are not picking up on class division .. london is a cesspit of the rich these days and bar occassional attacks on city bonuses ( and no more than  from the daily mail LOL) we hear nowt from our leftist wannabe leaders


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 20, 2007)

october_lost said:
			
		

> And thats a comparison for our times?


No, I am talking about the historical pedigree of the idea and its real development so far. You will have to ask Ian Bone for the current theoretical positioning of this Bash the Rich.

I will have a brief stab though - this campaign seeks to organise an anti gentrification campaign; through networking and targetted direct action to focus the cases eg. Kilmartin, on a more general target which is a logical associated symptom of gentrification issues. As such, it is a propaganda event designed to shout to the masses the slogans of their own struggle, to operate outside of the social democratic political framework, to try to engage those who are pissed off with the status quo. The particular event on November 3rd should be seen as a moment of the class struggle and class struggle movement, not the end.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 21, 2007)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> nino .. i formally and humbley and with brass neck apologise ..
> 
> ( till you do it to me again!  )
> 
> ...



Well, this is a turn up for the books. You see, there are a lot of posters who do the same thing as me and some spend their entire time here  derailing threads. However I do object to the use of that accusation as a means of escape - and many people use it because they lack honesty.


----------



## bristol_citizen (Oct 21, 2007)

editor said:
			
		

> Well, this thread's going well.



Isn't it just? It's amazing. You set up a thread, nobody contributes for weeks on end, then 12 contributors all show up at once. 

Anyway, what I actually wanted to do was say that the _Bash the Rich Radical History Tour of Notting Hill_ pamphlet is now available on the Bash the Rich blog.

Alternatively you can purchase a limited edition (of just 500) hard copy version from the Anarchist Book Fair next week for just £1.00.

It's actually a surprisingly good read too.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 21, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> No, I am talking about the historical pedigree of the idea and its real development so far. You will have to ask Ian Bone for the current theoretical positioning of this Bash the Rich.
> 
> I will have a brief stab though - this campaign seeks to organise an anti gentrification campaign; through networking and targetted direct action to focus the cases eg. Kilmartin, on a more general target which is a logical associated symptom of gentrification issues. As such, it is a propaganda event designed to shout to the masses the slogans of their own struggle, to operate outside of the social democratic political framework, to try to engage those who are pissed off with the status quo. The particular event on November 3rd should be seen as a moment of the class struggle and class struggle movement, not the end.


The reality is that it's nothing of the kind.  This march has SFA to do with class struggle, it's completely disconnected from the everyday struggles of working class people.  You lot are all mouth, no trousers.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 21, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> The reality is that it's nothing of the kind.  This march has SFA to do with class struggle, it's completely disconnected from the everyday struggles of working class people.  You lot are all mouth, no trousers.



That is a totally piss poor not theoretical reply. 

If I was to apply your judgement upon you it would say that you are no mouth, no trousers, no balls, nothing. You do jack shit


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 21, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> That is a totally piss poor not theoretical reply.
> 
> If I was to apply your judgement upon you it would say that you are no mouth, no trousers, no balls, nothing. You do jack shit


Except that that's bollocks and you know it.  You can rage and scream and accuse everybody who disagrees with you of doing nothing all you like, but it won't make it true.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 21, 2007)

When it comes down to it, Class War and the milleu surrounding them are all about spectacle.  It's all big, flashy stunts and nostalgia over riots long past.

Maybe it's me, but personally, I'm just not interested in wasting my time chasing after feeble attempts at recreating a past moment that never even occurred.


----------



## october_lost (Oct 21, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> I will have a brief stab though - this campaign seeks to organise an anti gentrification campaign; through networking and targetted direct action to focus the cases eg. Kilmartin, on a more general target which is a logical associated symptom of gentrification issues. As such, it is a propaganda event designed to shout to the masses the slogans of their own struggle, to operate outside of the social democratic political framework, to try to engage those who are pissed off with the status quo. The particular event on November 3rd should be seen as a moment of the class struggle and class struggle movement, not the end.


Surely we should contribute to peoples struggle at the point they arise. I mean is this a propaganda exercise, a network, direct action or what?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 21, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> When it comes down to it, Class War and the milleu surrounding them are all about spectacle.  It's all big, flashy stunts and nostalgia over riots long past.
> 
> Maybe it's me, but personally, I'm just not interested in wasting my time chasing after feeble attempts at recreating a past moment that never even occurred.



You're doomed to repeating the past cos you say it so many times nobodies listens.

In Bloom - your social democratic activity does not count as anarchist action. In the article about 'what the af did last year' there was nothing to distinguish you from the social democrats you say you are against. Anyway, I do not want to argue with you, but you started it and drew my fire. I would rather have a drink at the bookfair as I previously indicated.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 21, 2007)

october_lost said:
			
		

> Surely we should contribute to peoples struggle at the point they arise. I mean is this a propaganda exercise, a network, direct action or what?



Peoples struggles manifest in different ways - how do we contribute to peoples struggles when they phone in sick en masse for example. In short - we do not need to, it is patronising to think working people need help. That attitude is very similar to the British philanthropic tradition which never goes beyond mediating class struggles.  

Actions do not have to be 'this' or 'that' or the 'other'. They can be all three, especially when the gentrification issue is such a large one with so very many cases. How do we encourage those to stand up against the bosses/toffs? With Kilmartin for example - he is very happy to join in on a wider agenda. This is the stuff of the class struggle, spreading the struggles that arise and shouting to the multitude the slogans of their own struggles. 

And I say this as someone NOT involved in the event at all - who has their own event up North to do that day. But I can recognise the possibilities inherent in imaginative direct action, involving different working class people, against widely recognised class targets. This is the working class organising for itself, it is just that critics are too blinkered to see and would rather criticise rather than do anything innovative themselves.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 22, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> When it comes down to it, Class War and the milleu surrounding them are all about spectacle.  It's all big, flashy stunts and nostalgia over riots long past.
> 
> Maybe it's me, but personally, I'm just not interested in wasting my time chasing after feeble attempts at recreating a past moment that never even occurred.




But why waste you time argung about it here? Have you not got some doorstepping to do? Or workmates to bore?


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 22, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> But why waste you time argung about it here? Have you not got some doorstepping to do? Or workmates to bore?


It's half term


----------



## TopCat (Oct 22, 2007)

Well go patch your corderoy trousers and elbow patches then.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 22, 2007)

Patch my elbow patches?  Why on earth would I do that? 

Anyway, the central point here is that workplace organisation is really, really boring.  Let's all just drop out, grow some dreadlocks and join a CrimeThinc collective.  That'll show the capitalist bastards.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 22, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Patch my elbow patches?  Why on earth would I do that?
> 
> Anyway, the central point here is that workplace organisation is really, really boring.  Let's all just drop out, grow some dreadlocks and join a CrimeThinc collective.  That'll show the capitalist bastards.



Dreadlocks? They might suit you and your lifestyle but I can't see any of my political mates going for it. 

What progress has "your approach" achieved to date?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 22, 2007)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Patch my elbow patches?  Why on earth would I do that?



Just to clarify - top cat was saying that your old man jacket with elbow patches on needs those patches patching. Ugedit?


----------



## Yelkcub (Oct 22, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> The question is more; Will you come? If not why not? If not this then what etc etc...



Define 'the rich' so people can decided if they'll be bashing or being bashed.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 22, 2007)

Yelkcub said:
			
		

> Define 'the rich' so people can decided if they'll be bashing or being bashed.



Did you go to Eton?


----------



## Yelkcub (Oct 22, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Did you go to Eton?



No.


----------



## nino_savatte (Oct 22, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> Did you go to Eton?



No, Uppingham  this one.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 22, 2007)

Yelkcub said:
			
		

> Define 'the rich' so people can decided if they'll be bashing or being bashed.



You are being very stupid. As if people are really that bothered? If you know you hate the rich you know it - if you know you are rich you know it. 

It is only those who are too pathetic, stupid, or are wilfully seeking problems, who want these sorts of silly questions answered. Given that a top tory toff is the named target, you know whether you come close to being like him or not. Get real.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 22, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Just to clarify - top cat was saying that your old man jacket with elbow patches on needs those patches patching. Ugedit?


There was something to get? 

In any case, I'm not that sort.  I have a leather jacket and a ponytail.  Sometimes I tell the pupils that Mr. Bloom was my dad's name and they should come down to the SENCO and 'rap' with me any time they feel like it.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Oct 22, 2007)

I hate the Romans as much as anybody


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 23, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> You are being very stupid. As if people are really that bothered? If you know you hate the rich you know it - if you know you are rich you know it.
> 
> It is only those who are too pathetic, stupid, or are wilfully seeking problems, who want these sorts of silly questions answered. Given that a top tory toff is the named target, you know whether you come close to being like him or not. Get real.



I've been watching this thread with some amusement, and have deliberately not written anything for few days so the resident anarchists might expose their shortcomings.  They have...

Attica, I'd like you to tell me what your position on the rich would be if you had been born rich.  I'm not taking puerile insults as an answer this time, which is all I've seen you write so far.

Now, do you accept that your political position is a product of your class position, or do you fancy being smacked about the head by a bit of historical materialism?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2007)

Dialectical materialism more like. Stalinist dia-mat. The crudest of economic determinism. 

You actually think he's arguing against the idea that you mention in your last line? 

And what an absurd question? What an absurd _thrust_ -  'I'd like you to tell me what your position on the rich would be if you had been born rich'.  

Is this the rapier like mind of a pure marxist at work? Or some soppy liberal. Are you a pacifist too?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I've been watching this thread with some amusement, and have deliberately not written anything for few days so the resident anarchists might expose their shortcomings.  They have...
> 
> Attica, I'd like you to tell me what your position on the rich would be if you had been born rich.  I'm not taking puerile insults as an answer this time, which is all I've seen you write so far.
> 
> Now, do you accept that your political position is a product of your class position, or do you fancy being smacked about the head by a bit of historical materialism?



You fools. You have all fallen into the trap so cunningly set up by Guruyoghourt. Now you have to face his condescension all over again. 

Its all for his amusement.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Dialectical materialism more like. Stalinist dia-mat. The crudest of economic determinism.
> 
> You actually think he's arguing against the idea that you mention in your last line?
> 
> ...



Nah. He is just a fucking prick.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Attica, I'd like you to tell me what your position on the rich would be if you had been born rich.  I'm not taking puerile insults as an answer this time, which is all I've seen you write so far.



Were you born poor or rich Mr yogurt?


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 23, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Dialectical materialism more like. Stalinist dia-mat. The crudest of economic determinism.
> 
> You actually think he's arguing against the idea that you mention in your last line?
> 
> ...


 I'm certain that he wouldn't want to argue against it.  He must be very well aware that his position collapses in a puff of logic if he even acknowledges the false step in his thinking that I exposed dozens of postings ago.

As for your apparently unrelated questions, one, I'm not a pacifist.  Actually, I'm a highly-trained and honed warrior.  Two, I accept historical materialism as a useful tool for analysing things that happen, and the labour theory of value is the most accurate analysis of capitalism to date.  If that makes me a 'pure' Marxist then yeah, guilty as charged.

You might think my question absurd.  History shows us that ideas are a social construct.  Attica would not hate the rich if he didn't feel so impoverished.  What he needs to do is to let go of his rage and develop ways of really changing the world.  Filling it with more hate and violence isn't a way forward.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2007)

So you set him a false question. Declare yourself a pure marxist and then offer us some gcse teenage marxist guff about the social construction of ideas (ideologies even!). What on earth do you think that you're bringing to the pot?

I'm not even going to get onto the 'pure marxism' of 'Attica would not hate the rich if he didn't feel so impoverished. What he needs to do is to let go of his rage and develop ways of really changing the world'. Because, it's a joke right?


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 23, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> You fools. You have all fallen into the trap so cunningly set up by Guruyoghourt. Now you have to face his condescension all over again.
> 
> Its all for his amusement.



No, Dillinger, you buffoon, it's about your education.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 23, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> So you set him a false question. Declare yourself a pure marxist and then offer us some gcse teenage marxist guff about the social construction of ideas (ideologies even!). What on earth do you think that you're bringing to the pot?
> 
> I'm not even going to get onto the 'pure marxism' of 'Attica would not hate the rich if he didn't feel so impoverished. What he needs to do is to let go of his rage and develop ways of really changing the world'. Because, it's a joke right?



How foolish can you be?  Having fun finding out?  Good.  Show me where I ever declared anything of the sort?  Don't bother.  You can't do it.  The 'pure marxist' shite is just another name I've been called by people who can't, or refuse to think about what I've written.  Problem with people like you is that all you can do is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to those who challenge you.  

I'm not joking here.  I happen to know that you don't get rid of the problems of capitalism without abolishing capitalism.  You might not want to take on the thankless task of educating people that way, and no doubt there are reasons for that, but you need to stop kidding yourself that token protest is going to change a thing.  History shows that it doesn't.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2007)

mr yogurt said:
			
		

> Attica, I'd like you to tell me what your position on the rich would be if you had been born rich. I'm not taking puerile insults as an answer this time, which is all I've seen you write so far.



Were you born poor or rich Mr yogurt?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> How foolish can you be?  Having fun finding out?  Good.  Show me where I ever declared anything of the sort?  Don't bother.  You can't do it.  The 'pure marxist' shite is just another name I've been called by people who can't, or refuse to think about what I've written.  Problem with people like you is that all you can do is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to those who challenge you.
> 
> I'm not joking here.  I happen to know that you don't get rid of the problems of capitalism without abolishing capitalism.  You might not want to take on the thankless task of educating people that way, and no doubt there are reasons for that, but you need to stop kidding yourself that token protest is going to change a thing.  History shows that it doesn't.



Is this your best tuesday rhetoric young man? Really? Can't you do a little better?

The problem is not that posters here don't recognise the necessity of abolishing capitalism, just that they reject the necessity of being bored into it by your 'education' instead of it being an active developement of their own self activity centred around their own self-identified needs and met by their own self-organisation - not by you, and not by your beard.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2007)

Do you think that you're a good educator Dr yogurt?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> No, Dillinger, you buffoon, it's about your education.



Please educate us all GY. You are ever so smart. Smarter than everybody else, ever.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Do you think that you're a good educator Dr yogurt?



Of course he is. We are all learning so much, and not even thinking he is a pompous prick in the slightest.


----------



## JoePolitix (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I'm not joking here.  I happen to know that you don't get rid of the problems of capitalism without abolishing capitalism.  You might not want to take on the thankless task of educating people that way, and no doubt there are reasons for that, but you need to stop kidding yourself that token protest is going to change a thing.  History shows that it doesn't.



So the task of abolishing capitalism and replacing it with socialism is down to educating people on how to do it then? Who are the educators? The SPGB? The Yogart Guru? The keepers of Holy Grail, the holders of that secret ingredient that'll sort everything out?

Bollox! There's no dialectical process there. Your entire stance is philosophical idealism pure and simple, not Marxism, not historical materialism.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

edit - nm


----------



## muckypup (Oct 23, 2007)

I want to be rich


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

muckypup said:
			
		

> I want to be rich



*bashes you*


----------



## muckypup (Oct 23, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> *bashes you*



I'll still be ethical and compassionate  

poverty, ignorance and ideology; its a terrible mix. causes some people to spout a load of ideological rubbish. whilst, ironically, 99% of the poor working class just want to get rich  I love humanity. the stupid baffoons that they are.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

muckypup said:
			
		

> I'll still be ethical and compassionate
> 
> poverty, ignorance and ideology; its a terrible mix. causes some people to spout a load of ideological rubbish. whilst, ironically, 99% of the poor working class just want to get rich  I love humanity. the stupid baffoons that they are.



Just you wait for somebody far more ideologically inclined to come along and educate you on how wrong you are.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 23, 2007)

JoePolitix said:
			
		

> So the task of abolishing capitalism and replacing it with socialism is down to educating people on how to do it then? Who are the educators? The SPGB? The Yogart Guru? The keepers of Holy Grail, the holders of that secret ingredient that'll sort everything out?
> 
> Bollox! There's no dialectical process there. Your entire stance is philosophical idealism pure and simple, not Marxism, not historical materialism.



Well said that man  This is the Marx of Marx


----------



## TopCat (Oct 23, 2007)

A thankless task of educating people indeed. 

He did not grow up with an outside loo.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I'm certain that he wouldn't want to argue against it.  He must be very well aware that his position collapses in a puff of logic if he even acknowledges the false step in his thinking that I exposed dozens of postings ago.
> 
> As for your apparently unrelated questions, one, I'm not a pacifist.  Actually, I'm a highly-trained and honed warrior.  Two, I accept historical materialism as a useful tool for analysing things that happen, and the labour theory of value is the most accurate analysis of capitalism to date.  If that makes me a 'pure' Marxist then yeah, guilty as charged.
> 
> You might think my question absurd.  History shows us that ideas are a social construct.  Attica would not hate the rich if he didn't feel so impoverished.  What he needs to do is to let go of his rage and develop ways of really changing the world.  Filling it with more hate and violence isn't a way forward.



As it goes while i woz away Butchers did a very good reply to you - there's nothing to add other than to say that love and hate are part of the totality. Without one the other is meaningless, anyway they exist more on a continuum rather than isolated and uninteracting. I have love/ i have hate - so what? At the minute I hate you and love Butchers   IF love and peace changed the world the peaceniks, pacifists and Buddhists would have already done it but they have not. What changes the world is class struggle, but I forget - you not only have forgotten what it is like you never understood it in the first place


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 23, 2007)

You're absolutely right, children  I've seen the light.  Now I'm off to decapitate my employer with a hatchet.  That'll make a revolution alright, won't it?  Cocks.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 23, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> A thankless task of educating people indeed.
> 
> He did not grow up with an outside loo.



Goes to start an 'Outside loo' thread - more commonly know as the 'outside bog'.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You're absolutely right, children  I've seen the light.  Now I'm off to decapitate my employer with a hatchet.  That'll make a revolution alright, won't it?  Cocks.



Oh poor diddums - taking your ball home and running off to mummys mansion


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You're absolutely right, children  I've seen the light.  Now I'm off to decapitate my employer with a hatchet.  That'll make a revolution alright, won't it?  Cocks.



Cocks! Marx's cock! Kautsky's cock!


----------



## muckypup (Oct 23, 2007)

actually i agree. the rich are evil. money is evil. give it all to me and I shall save you from the perils of wealth. I take cheques, cash, credit cards and material goods. 

Free home collection service can be arranged.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 23, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You're absolutely right, children  I've seen the light.  Now I'm off to decapitate my employer with a hatchet.  That'll make a revolution alright, won't it?  Cocks.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 23, 2007)

muckypup said:
			
		

> actually i agree. the rich are evil. money is evil. give it all to me and I shall save you from the perils of wealth. I take cheques, cash, credit cards and material goods.
> 
> Free home collection service can be arranged.



Indeed, we are often told that money can make you unhappy. Can I have a go though?


----------



## muckypup (Oct 23, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Indeed, we are often told that money can make you unhappy. *Can I have a go though*?



LAMO  

bloody ideological left wing idiots. everything's black and white to them. how about a campaign to 'bash the dogmatic moron'. I'm pretty sure the working class will be happy to lend a helping hand. they want their bling and pity the socialist who tries to tells them otherwise


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 23, 2007)

muckypup said:
			
		

> LAMO
> 
> bloody ideological left wing idiots. everything's black and white to them. how about a campaign to 'bash the dogmatic moron'. I'm pretty sure the working class will be happy to lend a helping hand. they want their bling and pity the socialist who tries to tells them otherwise



I am afraid you are raging against an imaginary foe. Again. Have a spliff and relax - it may do you good.


----------



## muckypup (Oct 23, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> I am afraid you are raging against an imaginary foe. Again. Have a spliff and relax - it may do you good.



yes imaginary as in no one pays them any attention, they might as well not exist  and i'm very relaxed my dear boy. but thank you


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 25, 2007)

muckypup said:
			
		

> yes imaginary as in no one pays them any attention, they might as well not exist  and i'm very relaxed my dear boy. but thank you



A pleasure my dear sir, I do aim to please. Verily, it was only yesterday, a harsh stormy Northern day, that I took my cape off and laid it before the feet of a fair damsel as she got out of her horse powered chariot.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Indeed, we are often told that money can make you unhappy. Can I have a go though?



You fucking wankstain.  You just lost the argument.  There.  You've dragged me down to your own pathetic level, which is what you and your hideously didactic and hypocritical chums always try to do.  [Actually, rather than running off with my ball, as you asserted earlier, I'm going to start another thread entitled 'Freedom for me to be a complete tosser and freedom for you to think the way I do: The problems of anarchism as a half-baked idea' ]Personal freedom?  Fuck off, you dictatorial fascist poseur.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You fucking wankstain.  You just lost the argument.  There.  You've dragged me down to your own pathetic level, which is what you and your hideously didactic and hypocritical chums always try to do.  [Actually, rather than running off with my ball, as you asserted earlier, I'm going to start another thread entitled 'Freedom for me to be a complete tosser and freedom for you to think the way I do: The problems of anarchism as a half-baked idea' ]Personal freedom?  Fuck off, you dictatorial fascist poseur.



Haha.

This is called throwing the rattle out of the pram.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I repeat:
> 
> What.
> 
> ...



Keep going.  You'll fool the dupes.  Some people make a living out of it.  Just got to fool enough people.  You''l make a great politician.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Keep going.  You'll fool the dupes.  Some people make a living out of it.  Just got to fool enough people.  You''l make a great politician.



Just can't help sounding like a prick with every word you type.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Throwing the rattle out of the pram is what you call it.  Anyone with a brain in this thread thinks that you've been crushed.  Which you have.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Throwing the rattle out of the pram is what you call it.  Anyone with a brain in this thread thinks that you've been crushed.  Which you have.



See above.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Throwing the rattle out of the pram is what you call it.  Anyone with a brain in this thread thinks that you've been crushed.  Which you have.



Its nice you win little victories in your own mind. But what a shame it doesn't match what actually happens outside of your fevered imagination.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Throwing the rattle out of the pram is what you call it.  Anyone with a brain in this thread thinks that you've been crushed.  Which you have.



I have a brain, and very little time for Attica. However, you are making are spectacular fool of yourself...carry on.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> I have a brain, and very little time for Attica. However, you are making are spectacular fool of yourself...carry on.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



I can only think that you haven't been following the thread.  Oh.  Didn't you die in the year I was born?  Or are you not the real Louis MacNeice?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

Have a gold star doktor yogurt.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Have a gold star doktor yogurt.


No, thanks all the same.  There's no point in trying to make amends for your shocking behaviour.  It won't work.  Incidentally, do you ever wish that you were clever enough to have got a Ph.D?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

Not really.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

I am starting to wonder if he can say anything that _won't_ make him come across as a prick.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I am starting to wonder if he can say anything that _won't_ make him come across as a prick.



I can understand why you might think that, my little anarchist friend.  Maybe it's because your perceptions are not just totally warped but rather, that they are utterly fucked in the ass.  I don't know.  What I do know is that I never encountered anyone of so limited means who was quite as arrogant and vacuous as you.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I can understand why you might think that, my little anarchist friend.  Maybe it's because your perceptions are not just totally warped but rather, that they are utterly fucked in the ass.  I don't know.  What I do know is that I never encountered anyone of so limited means who was quite as arrogant and vacuous as you.



Who are you calling an Anarchist?

 

I think you are just venting your insecurities, myself.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Who are you calling an Anarchist?
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are just venting your insecurities, myself.



You see, herein lies the problem.  You are siding with anarchists.  In order to attack me.  What should I think?  I know nothing of what you think, or where you stand.  Why?  Because all you've done since we met is attack me with preposterous insults.

And I have no insecurities.  Especially when I'm confronted with ineffectual abusers.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

Don't i get a crap comeback from you Herr Docktor?


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Don't i get a crap comeback from you Herr Docktor?



You want crap comebacks?  Write it yourself.  It's perhaps the only thing that you'll ever excel me at.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You want crap comebacks?  Write it yourself.  It's perhaps the only thing that you'll ever excel me at.



And even with that post you prove yourself wrong. Bravo! More!


----------



## JoePolitix (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You want crap comebacks?  Write it yourself.  It's perhaps the only thing that you'll ever excel me at.



Your head's so far up your own arse the space has probably formed a quantum singularity of head-up-arseness.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You see, herein lies the problem.  You are siding with anarchists.  In order to attack me.  What should I think?  I know nothing of what you think, or where you stand.  Why?  Because all you've done since we met is attack me with preposterous insults.
> 
> And I have no insecurities.  Especially when I'm confronted with ineffectual abusers.



I am not really siding with anybody. That you think everybody should have 'sides' is just ignorance, really. 

I am only posting here because I don't like you, or your pompous prick attitude. 

I don't know why you are think you are so right, because all you are doing is grandstanding a load of NOTHING, nothing except your own vainglorious pomposity. 

Nothing you have said has any intellectual content.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> And even with that post you prove yourself wrong. Bravo! More!



You know?  You think you're winning here?  No-one is fooled by this puerile nonsense.  A beast that wants discourse of reason would have thought longer before posting.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You want crap comebacks?  Write it yourself.  It's perhaps the only thing that you'll ever excel me at.



Man. You are so kewl.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You know?  You think you're winning here?  No-one is fooled by this puerile nonsense.  A beast that wants discourse of reason would have thought longer before posting.



There is only one really really bad loser here.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I am not really siding with anybody. That you think everybody should have 'sides' is just ignorance, really.
> 
> I am only posting here because I don't like you, or your pompous prick attitude.
> 
> ...


 
Which is precisely the kind of thing that people like you call argument.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Which is precisely the kind of thing that people like you call argument.



What are we supposed to argue against?

All I am hearing is how you think you know everything and are better than everyone.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You know?  You think you're winning here?  No-one is fooled by this puerile nonsense.  A beast that wants discourse of reason would have thought longer before posting.



Winning? Winning what? I'm just having a bit of fun and laughing at the nakedly leninist principles that underly your anti-leninism.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Winning? Winning what? I'm just having a bit of fun and laughing at the nakedly leninist principles that underly your anti-leninism.



Don't ruin GY's big moment butchers. He might never have a victory as glorious as this ever again.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> There is only one really really bad loser here.



Do you know how risible this is?  Let me tell you.  I began putting the case for socialism here several days ago.  It's nothing new to me.  I've been doing it since I was twelve.  That's thirty-two years ago.  I've heard all of this shit before.  Not one person on here has attempted to argue the case for socialism with me.  All anyone has done is call me names.  Which is all very amusing, of course.  And I'm sure it makes you all feel better about your pathetic little lives that led you into thinking that one man's action can make a difference.  Which is fine.  Why not start another bash-the-rich type of movement.  Bash those who know more than we do.  Peasants.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Do you know how risible this is?  Let me tell you.  I began putting the case for socialism here several days ago.  It's nothing new to me.  I've been doing it since I was twelve.  That's thirty-two years ago.  I've heard all of this shit before.  Not one person on here has attempted to argue the case for socialism with me.  All anyone has done is call me names.  Which is all very amusing, of course.  And I'm sure it makes you all feel better about your pathetic little lives that led you into thinking that one man's action can make a difference.  Which is fine.  Why not start another bash-the-rich type of movement.  Bash those who know more than we do.  Peasants.



And here is the reinforcement of everything I have said so far.

Its funny, but its also kind of sad.

I am starting to feel sorry for you GY. I didn't before, but I am starting to feel that way.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Do you know how risible this is?  Let me tell you.  I began putting the case for socialism here several days ago.  It's nothing new to me.  I've been doing it since I was twelve.  That's thirty-two years ago.  I've heard all of this shit before.  Not one person on here has attempted to argue the case for socialism with me.  All anyone has done is call me names.  Which is all very amusing, of course.  And I'm sure it makes you all feel better about your pathetic little lives that led you into thinking that one man's action can make a difference.  Which is fine.  Why not start another bash-the-rich type of movement.  Bash those who know more than we do.  Peasants.



What on earth makes you think that anyone here would wish to engage with you whilst you make 'the case for socialism'? And what gives you the right to badger and hector them into being 'interested' if they don't. The real debaters of the WSM would be laughing in their graves at your stale kautsky piss lectures. I don't think you've quite grasped the case yourself priest.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Do you know how risible this is?  Let me tell you.  I began putting the case for socialism here several days ago.  It's nothing new to me.  I've been doing it since I was twelve.



*resists urge*


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> *resists urge*



Allow me. 

What are you now GY? 13?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 25, 2007)

The yog is funny. What do you all think she/he looks like fashion wise?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 25, 2007)

If we give you a trophy engraved with your name and the words 'U75 P&P champion october 2007' will you promise to behave Dr yogurt?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

TopCat said:
			
		

> The yog is funny. What do you all think she/he looks like fashion wise?









The one on the left, I reckon.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

You guys crease me.  What you lack in rationality you make up for in sheer audacity.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You guys crease me.  What you lack in rationality you make up for in sheer audacity.



Its a shame for you.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> If we give you a trophy engraved with your name and the words 'U75 P&P champion october 2007' will you promise to behave Dr yogurt?



Only if you let me help you with your all-too-apparent lack of ability to express yourself in ways that are meaningful.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 25, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Its a shame for you.



Maybe so.  But for you it's shameful.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Maybe so.  But for you it's shameful.



 

*goes to pray to baby jesus*


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 25, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Only if you let me help you with your all-too-apparent lack of ability to express yourself in ways that are meaningful.



I have always been told, and it seems true with experience, that when people spout off as you have here, they are really only voicing their own insecurities.

Much of the things you have said in reply could really only be directed at yourself.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 27, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I have always been told, and it seems true with experience, that when people spout off as you have here, they are really only voicing their own insecurities.
> 
> Much of the things you have said in reply could really only be directed at yourself.



See what I mean?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 27, 2007)

Damn.

You really got me with that one.

 

I obviously need a GuruYoghourt education. Where do I sign up?


----------



## jonH (Oct 27, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Damn.
> 
> You really got me with that one.
> 
> ...




Here


.....................................


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 27, 2007)

jonH said:
			
		

> Here
> 
> 
> .....................................



*signs screen*


----------



## LX365 (Oct 28, 2007)

*FIT Watch at Bash the Rich*

Bash the Rich: Fight the FIT

Meet 11:30, Bar area of Royal Festival Hall to discuss tactics and actions.

Forward Intelligence Teams (FIT) will be out in force for this one and we
will be there to greet them.

Whilst we allow the FIT teams to film and follow; stop and search; control
and coral, we will not have successful public actions.  When we start
refusing and resisting, we will start to win.

This is a call from FIT Watch activists to join us on 3rd and show the FIT
Teams we will oppose their intimidatory tactics.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 29, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> You fucking wankstain.  You just lost the argument.  There.  You've dragged me down to your own pathetic level, which is what you and your hideously didactic and hypocritical chums always try to do.  [Actually, rather than running off with my ball, as you asserted earlier, I'm going to start another thread entitled 'Freedom for me to be a complete tosser and freedom for you to think the way I do: The problems of anarchism as a half-baked idea' ]Personal freedom?  Fuck off, you dictatorial fascist poseur.




FFS  this actually is the nutshell of the difference between stupid orthodox politicos and the new wave of class struggle. Your old boring party line is way dead, why? COs you cannot tell somebody who is having a bit of a giggle from a political position, and yes, it IS your fault. You are stupid, and no, I haven't lost the argument. In fact, I am winning very well


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 29, 2007)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> I have a brain, and very little time for Attica. However, you are making are spectacular fool of yourself...carry on.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



Oh FFS. And you are making a tit of yourself too. Who gives a flying fek what U think. Nobody. Keep your stupid ad hominem crap comments to yourself and try some politics for a change. It would do you some good.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> FFS  this actually is the nutshell of the difference between stupid orthodox politicos and the new wave of class struggle. Your old boring party line is way dead, why? COs you cannot tell somebody who is having a bit of a giggle from a political position, and yes, it IS your fault. You are stupid, and no, I haven't lost the argument. In fact, I am winning very well



Would that be the new wave of class struggle that began with the last bash the rich street-party?

Fact of the matter is that the case for peaceful, democratic social revolution is just as valid today as it was when the spgb was formed in 1904, and that your ridiculous notion of changing society by violently taking on the state is utterly discredited.  Now, look, I know what these boards are, and I know that they have very limited value when it comes to propagating revolutionary ideas.  And there's only one reason I'm writing here: it's because I enjoy winding people like you up in my spare time.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 30, 2007)

Dr yorgurt. Your surgery is a disgrace. And why have you got all those photos of beards Up?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Would that be the new wave of class struggle that began with the last bash the rich street-party?
> 
> Fact of the matter is that the case for peaceful, democratic social revolution is just as valid today as it was when the spgb was formed in 1904, and that your ridiculous notion of changing society by violently taking on the state is utterly discredited.  Now, look, I know what these boards are, and I know that they have very limited value when it comes to propagating revolutionary ideas.  And there's only one reason I'm writing here: it's because I enjoy winding people like you up in my spare time.



If you opened your mind  and actually did some thinking before your conservative politics spewed forth - before you opened your stupid mouth - you may have something interesting to say. Look here - http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=6316&type=otherlibertarianpress&language=en

and here;

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=215736

You will find that;

A) I live up North and I am not going to bash the Rich.
B) I am participating in another event that day which may be more suited to your type of politics  
C) You know nothing of what my politics actually are. 
D) Just because you are a Doctor does not mean you know everything or have anything interesting things to say.
E) Party line politics as you seem to be spouting died with the end of teleology - I am a revolutionary pluralist, although that does not extend to social democrats  BTW I do think democracy is essential, and that mass activity is the way forward...


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 30, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Who gives a flying fek what U think.



You do...that's why you replied.

Louis (I'm bored at work...again) MacNeice

p.s. points D and E from the post above are both really funny.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> <snip> And there's only one reason I'm writing here: it's because I enjoy winding people like you up in my spare time.



You are such a complete and well rounded human being.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 30, 2007)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> You do...that's why you replied.
> 
> Louis (I'm bored at work...again) MacNeice
> 
> p.s. points D and E from the post above are both really funny.



You have no politics and no practice, and no, I really think you are pathetic. 

K*eep your stupid ad hominem crap comments to yourself* and try some politics for a change. It would do you some good.

Add some politics and engage me like that then my current view of you may change. As it is you follow me around like a sexual pest.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Dr yorgurt. Your surgery is a disgrace. And why have you got all those photos of beards Up?



Dear oh dear.  Been at mother's medicine cabinet again, have we?  Tut tut.

For the record, beards disgust me.  I mean, what are we?  Apes?  For my part, I'm too high up the evolutionary ladder to have enough facial hair to grow one.  If I don't shave for a few days I look like some wispy-goateed teenage freak.  Not attractive at all.  And Mrs. Yoghourt nags no end about it.  No, beards are not in favour here.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> You are such a complete and well rounded human being.


You're quite right, Dillinger, my little friend.  Quite right.  Of course, I never used to be so evolved.  I started off just like you.  But years of hard work has made life very easy.  Give it a go.  Don't be an oik all your life.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 30, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> You have no politics and no practice, and no, I really think you are pathetic.
> 
> K*eep your stupid ad hominem crap comments to yourself* and try some politics for a change. It would do you some good.
> 
> Add some politics and engage me like that then my current view of you may change. As it is you follow me around like a sexual pest.



As I can't be held responsible for the contents of your fantasies, I think I'll keep posting just when and how I want to.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> You do...that's why you replied.
> 
> Louis (I'm bored at work...again) MacNeice
> 
> p.s. points D and E from the post above are both really funny.



Points D and E are funny?  This must be some new teenage definition of 'funny', right?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 30, 2007)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> As I can't be held responsible for the contents of your fantasies, I think I'll keep posting just when and how I want to.
> 
> Louis MacNeice



More ad hominem rubbish without politics boy. Do grow up.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> If you opened your mind  and actually did some thinking before your conservative politics spewed forth - before you opened your stupid mouth - you may have something interesting to say. Look here - http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=6316&type=otherlibertarianpress&language=en
> 
> and here;
> 
> ...



This from the 'man' who has just been upbraiding a poetical imposter for ad hominem attacks.  Amusing stuff.

I just followed your links.  What of it?

Point A: People who live down south aren't going to bash the rich, either.  They're going to get their heads kicked in by the filth, and feed the red-tops with sensational shite that will alienate workers even more from this glorious new wave of class struggle.

Point B: You know nothing of my 'style' of politics at all, do you?  Perhaps you've been to a stuffy spgb meeting or two, and you can be forgiven for imaging me to be of that ilk.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  I do politics as stand-up comedy, and politics is also expressed in my music.

Point C:  And why's that?  All I know is that since I've been attacking Class War you've been attacking me.  Ad hominem most of the time, I might mention.

Point D: I never claimed to know everything.  And I'm well aware of how boring some with a Ph.D are.  Fuck me.  I've dealt with enough of them!  But rest assured that I am, in fact, possibly the most interesting person on the planet.  Certainly on these boards!

Point E:  Please enlighten me.  What on earth is a revolutionary pluralist?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 30, 2007)

Yawn. Go figure.   Try this;

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Understandi...611034?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1193752097&sr=1-18


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Yawn. Go figure.   Try this;
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Understandi...611034?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1193752097&sr=1-18


Why?  Can't you tell me?


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Why?  Can't you tell me?


No.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> No.



Fine state of affairs, that is.  Very well.  I don't want to know, anyway.  Revolutionary pluralist, my elbow.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Fine state of affairs, that is.  Very well.  I don't want to know, anyway.  Revolutionary pluralist, my elbow.



your arse You elbow do not know your from.

Put the above into a sentance pls.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Points D and E are funny?  This must be some new teenage definition of 'funny', right?



Funny as in Attica has a PhD and at other times is not averse to using it for effect. And funny as in 'the end of teleology' is simply an amusing phrase.

Louis (46 next birthday) MacNeice


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 30, 2007)

A 'revolutionary pluralist' is someone attempting to occupy the 'liberal moral high ground' (all for difference and inclusion) while simultaneously wanting to talk/look tough. At least that is how Attica is using it.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 30, 2007)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> A 'revolutionary pluralist' is someone attempting to occupy the 'liberal moral high ground' (all for difference and inclusion) while simultaneously wanting to talk/look tough. At least that is how Attica is using it.
> 
> Louis MacNeice



No, that is not accurate. I believe we have to get together beyond boundaries (connections are always more interesting than separation), and I and the Mayday magazine are trying to open up new perspectives and space for those interested in serious progression. 

'One party' views are history, the problems are simply too great for anybody who thinks their group is it or can go it alone. So 'revolutionary pluralist' believes in an open approach, but also one which is not blinkered or clings to redundant conceptions from a time long since past. A many sided approach rather than a one sided one which characterises the vast bulk of the Left/@ movement and i include Ra/iwca in that (but this is basic Marxism Louis). Louis you had better buy our magazine to find out really.   FYI RA get a mention in the magazine (that's upped our sales by one)...


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> <snip>
> 
> But rest assured that I am, in fact, possibly the most interesting person on the planet.  Certainly on these boards!





Yeh. You sure are.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Yeh. You sure are.



I know.  Don't you feel privileged?


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I am, in fact, possibly the most interesting person on the planet.  Certainly on these boards!



your self-awareness is only exceeded by your modesty...

Am I right in thinking you're an SPGB propagandist?  Do tell me if its true--I need a good laugh.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 30, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> I know.  Don't you feel privileged?



Jesus fucking Christ. 

I would like to think you are joking.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Jesus fucking Christ.
> 
> I would like to think you are joking.



Then I'd advise you to think that way.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 30, 2007)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> your self-awareness is only exceeded by your modesty...
> 
> Am I right in thinking you're an SPGB propagandist?  Do tell me if its true--I need a good laugh.



Can't help you there.  I left the SPGB over several key theoretical differences, such as the inadequacy of sitting on your fat arse pontificating about why the working-class hadn't grasped socialism yet as a means of changing the world some decade and a half ago.  I probably laugh at the SPGB more than you do, but I suspect that it's for very different reasons.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 30, 2007)

> This message is hidden because GuruYoghourt is on your ignore list.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 31, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

>


Very mature.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 31, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Very mature.



But you haven't said anything interesting and have an attiutude which is far removed from what the social relations of communism actually are.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Can't help you there.  I left the SPGB over several key theoretical differences, such as the inadequacy of sitting on your fat arse pontificating about why the working-class hadn't grasped socialism yet as a means of changing the world some decade and a half ago.  I probably laugh at the SPGB more than you do, but I suspect that it's for very different reasons.



Crucial to who?


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 31, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> But you haven't said anything interesting and have an attiutude which is far removed from what the social relations of communism actually are.



Which is nothing more than your opinion.


----------



## GuruYoghourt (Oct 31, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Crucial to who?


  I never used the word 'crucial'.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Oct 31, 2007)

> This message is hidden because GuruYoghourt is on your ignore list.



I didn't read it, but let me guess: You said something that makes you look like a fucking prick?

I can't be anything but right


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 31, 2007)

GuruYoghourt said:
			
		

> Which is nothing more than your opinion.



No. Your arrogance is certainly not part of the social relations of communism.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 1, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I didn't read it, but let me guess: You said something that makes you look like a fucking prick?
> 
> I can't be anything but right




yup.

This yoghurt has managed to sour the whole thread.


----------



## Boogie Boy (Nov 2, 2007)

See you all tmrw.

BB


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 2, 2007)

Boogie Boy said:
			
		

> See you all tmrw.
> 
> BB




Top man.


----------



## Boogie Boy (Nov 2, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Top man.



Got to be done mate, really enjoyed the meet at the ABF. 

BB


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 4, 2007)

This threads gone quiet - is anybody going to say how it went?


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2007)

There's a write-up on the Class War website, Attica.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2007)

short write up and a few pics here


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 4, 2007)

*Ian Bone says on his blog*

"This was a toe in the water, the first step in building again a combative anarchist street presence and direct action movement. We now know which comrades are up for it and which aren’t.We now know we can build an alternative to the world of virtual anarchy of the ‘anarchism on my parents computer’ variety. We aim now to keep the momentum going so that we escape the inaction of  only annual events and bookfairs. We see the key area as affordable housing and need to see the return of the mass squatting movement of 1946-47 - already starting to happen in the USA. Ocupations of high profile yuppie/rich developments like the Centrepoint one in the 1970’s could spread from London across the country. We’ll also be taking an interest in Boris Johnson’s election campaign and be orgnising events on the Mayoral election day on May 1st……and much more. A group of us are meeting regularly in London and we welcome contacts throughout Britain who want to work with us. Comments welcome.

Putting insuurectionary anarchism back on the streets where it belongs. Class War.

Cheers to everyone who turned up."


----------



## Boogie Boy (Nov 5, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> This threads gone quiet - is anybody going to say how it went?



The cops were all over us, lots of FIT and plenty of TSG too. Lots of them and not enough of us perhaps. 

BB


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 5, 2007)

Boogie Boy said:
			
		

> The cops were all over us, lots of FIT and plenty of TSG too. Lots of them and not enough of us perhaps.
> 
> BB



There's always another time, often things build up. EG. the first RTS was actually quite small in Camden my memory is telling me...


----------



## bristol_citizen (Nov 5, 2007)

Funny you should mention Camden:

http://johnnyvoid.blogspot.com/2007/11/bliss-to-hit-camden-town.html


----------



## TopCat (Nov 5, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> There's always another time, often things build up. EG. the first RTS was actually quite small in Camden my memory is telling me...




Your right, there were about 30 bods involved in Camden and thousands later on the M41.


----------



## punkrockfaggot (Nov 5, 2007)

Right, from my perspective this is what happened...

I went to Bash The rich for a few lessons in the history of Class struggle in London, a bit of argy-bargy with the cops and a march.

What I saw were no real signs of knowing what was going to happen, no history lessons, and if the 200-odd people turned up, they turned up after me and my ten-strong squad bolted and had a nice run-around notting hill.

Come five o clock we did a nice No War but the Class war banner drop outside buckingham palace for the tourists, some chants and a scarper.

To be honest I wish I went to the Anarchist bookfair instead...


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 5, 2007)

punkrockfaggot said:
			
		

> Right, from my perspective this is what happened...
> 
> I went to Bash The rich for a few lessons in the history of Class struggle in London, a bit of argy-bargy with the cops and a march.
> 
> ...



This is interesting stuff. THe key is to get the many 'groups of 10' there all in one go!! Seriously, it is good to here accoutns from different people/groups... The secret is moving all politics forward...


----------



## punkrockfaggot (Nov 5, 2007)

Cheers,
but I really did feel the day coming apart at the seems, with no real history-making actions and no public interest.

And the group of ten appeared to be the lucky lot since a lot of us were kettled and couldn't even take a piss without the cops stopping us.

One of our lot managed to accidentally shatter a dead carcas merchants shop window and knock a cop to the floor, but she suffered a minor concussion and had loads of black-outs and missing minutes from that day and had to drink lots of whiskey and smoke a big spliff to feel better.


----------



## chico enrico (Nov 5, 2007)

I had a great day out. Notting Hill is well nice, lots of good bars and Portobello Rd was _JUMPING_ with rides.

_What_ march?


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 5, 2007)

punkrockfaggot, how many people would you estimate were there?


----------



## revol68 (Nov 5, 2007)

> One of our lot managed to accidentally shatter a dead carcas merchants shop window and knock a cop to the floor.



Hero of the revolution.







p.s.  I normally call them a butchers.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 5, 2007)

has anyone watched this video yet?

fucking best laugh i've had in days.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2007/11//385160.mov

We Carn't Afford the Rich: Toffs Out!

Christ almighty what a farce.


----------



## punkrockfaggot (Nov 5, 2007)

Ive not a clue how many there were, there were defo less than 30 people when my squad legged it, and from that point we weren't going near the Kettled protesters. Class War Fed says 300.


----------



## imposs1904 (Nov 5, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> has anyone watched this video yet?
> 
> fucking best laugh i've had in days.
> 
> ...



_"Even worse . . . maybe even in Dagenham."_


----------



## TopCat (Nov 5, 2007)

chico enrico said:
			
		

> I had a great day out. Notting Hill is well nice, lots of good bars and Portobello Rd was _JUMPING_ with rides.
> 
> _What_ march?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 7, 2007)

*Bone again*

Well, they said it couldn’t happen … and they were nearly right, but the Class War Bash the Rich march was held in Notting Hil yesterday and has been cautiously considered a success.

Around 2/250 people gathered on Portobello Road whilst confused cops bimbled around trying to spot the evil anarchists. At around 3pm the march left in the direction of Cameron’s house and the scale of the police presence became evident. Undeterred the demonstration continued, despite being flanked on all sides by hyped up, jumpy cops who were quick to resort to violence.

Reaching a stones throw from Cameron’s house, where the chinless one was reportedly hiding under his bed, the demonstration remained in good spirits with occasional chants of ‘we gotta get rid of the rich’, and a rousing ode to good old Harry Roberts.

Fitwatch made a fine job of winding up the FIT team, although there were a handful of arrests, including someone for sitting in the road after the police penned the demonstration in at Ladbroke Grove. Several folk managed to avoid the kettle, some dispersing into the streets (pubs) of Notting Hill with others tailgating the march.

Finally the demonstration arrived at Meanwhile Gardens where the old bill retreated to spend the rest of the evening driving round Notting Hill snarling at people.

One toff passed on the route was Oxbridge twat Rik Mayall, who showed his true colours by giving a nazi salute as the march passed by.

And whilst the Notting Hill bourgeois were hardly choking on their lattes it was all in all a good day out, and very much a new beginning as opposed to a stand alone event.

As one person said at the end of the march, as anarchists, if we aren’t on the street then we aren’t anywhere and was was good to see so many old faces and some new ones.

All in all we counted 5 arrests, at least two of the arrestees were released without charge on Saturday evening.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 7, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Reaching a stones throw from Cameron’s house, where the chinless one was reportedly hiding under his bed


except there are reports that wasn't even his house any more.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 7, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> As one person said at the end of the march, as anarchists, if we aren’t on the street then we aren’t anywhere and was was good to see so many old faces and some new ones.


that one person was Ian Bone. 

So Ian Bone is quoting Ian Bone here.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 7, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> Well, they said it couldn’t happen …


Actually no one said it couldn't happen. Lots of people said it would be massively overpoliced and marched around in a cordon.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 7, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> has anyone watched this video yet?
> 
> fucking best laugh i've had in days.
> 
> ...


Oh yeah?  Well you're fascism


----------



## JonnyT (Nov 12, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> has anyone watched this video yet?
> 
> fucking best laugh i've had in days.
> 
> ...


"This is fascism!"

"Okay, sir, this is fascism, get a move on please."


----------



## chico enrico (Nov 13, 2007)

"this is fascism" 

 

What a cock.

They should have stewards to tell dorks like that guy to shut up or fuck off out the march. Foolishness like that dogs radicalism in Britain like a bit of used toilet-paper stuck on the sole of your show. 

Still, nice speach from Paul at the end. Think Bone's being a bit optimistic if he thinks we'll see a return to the housing occupations of 1947 tho. 

Half the folk there look like they couldn't organise the occupation of a sleeping-bag.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 15, 2007)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Actually no one said it couldn't happen. Lots of people said it would be massively overpoliced and marched around in a cordon.



   That's every demo though. For historical interest, actually the first walking kettle was the 5 or 6 deep police cordon that escorted the Class War contingent into Hyde park during the large Miners march into Hyde Park in 1992.

Also, if you took time to see, you would have noticed that I quoted Ian Bone. Those were Ians words...

Finally, aimed at all, according to Autonomous Class War;

*The Philosophy of Praxis*

If you think you are beaten you are. If you think you dare not, you don't. If you like to win but think you can't, it's almost certain you won't.

If you think you'll lose, you're lost. For out in the world we find, success begins with a fellow's and collective will - it's all in the state of mind.

If you think you are outclassed, you are. You've got to think high to rise. You've got to be sure of yourself before you can ever win a struggle.

Life's battles don't always go to the stronger or faster, but sooner or later the people who win are the people who think they can.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 15, 2007)

Mate, i know - you were quoting ian, and ian says 'someon on the march said that...'

That someone, was ian himself. So your quote, shows ian quoting ian.

Its a bit confusing. For some reason i can't edit my post to clear it up.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Nov 16, 2007)

Praxis schmaxis. I just call it action. Why complicate matters?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 16, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Praxis schmaxis. I just call it action. Why complicate matters?



I have already said it means MORE than action. I appreciate the desire for simplicity, but the world is not simple. If it was we would have had change by now...  I do appreciate the benefits of great easy to understand propaganda, and I always will. However, I also appreciate that this has be hand in hand with the historical generations (this does not mean pensioners, though it does include them), the keepers of the working class memory, who learned their class struggle in practice. 

It is the 'organic intellectuals' who I have interest in these days, the potential backbone of a revived working class movement, who have knowledge, passion and commitment, but who use their efforts sparingly. Who are unlikely to be impressed with simplistic and well meaning propaganda, no matter how good it is. And I know we (collective 'we') have produced great propaganda over the years, the Moon Against the Monarchy poster was the best of the last 15 years, or at least amongst the best... The key could be in the connections between the 2 separate groups I have tried to identify...


----------



## chico enrico (Nov 16, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> *The Philosophy of Praxis*
> 
> If you think you are beaten you are. If you think you dare not, you don't. If you like to win but think you can't, it's almost certain you won't.
> 
> ...



alternatively;

*Anyone can fall in love *

Anyone can fall in love 
That's the easy part you must keep it going 
Anyone can fall in love 
Over the years it has to keep growing 
Sun and rain 
Joy and pain 
There's highs - there's lows 
We've no way of knowing. 

Anyone can fall in love 
That's not hard to do it isn't so clever 
Anyone can fall in love 
But you must make the love last forever... 
Who can say 
Love will stay? 
It's up to you 
Don't hide what needs showing. 


Anyone can fall in love 
That's the easy part you must keep it going 
Everyone can fall in love 
But you must make the love last forever more 


How do you keep the music from dying? 
Love falls asleep unless you keep trying 


Anyone can fall in love 
Life's more than that, it's pulling together 
Everyone can share the love 
Where we come from friends never say never 
side by side 
satisfied 
To stay right here in one square forever. 


Anyone can fall in love 
That's not hard to do it isn't so clever 
Anyone can fall in love 
But you must make the love last forever more. 


(Lyrics by Don Black. Sung by Anita Dobson)


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 16, 2007)

But the philosophy of praxis is relevant and don black is not.


----------



## durruti02 (Nov 17, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> I have already said it means MORE than action. I appreciate the desire for simplicity, but the world is not simple. If it was we would have had change by now...  I do appreciate the benefits of great easy to understand propaganda, and I always will. However, I also appreciate that this has be hand in hand with the historical generations (this does not mean pensioners, though it does include them), the keepers of the working class memory, who learned their class struggle in practice.
> 
> It is the 'organic intellectuals' who I have interest in these days, the potential backbone of a revived working class movement, who have knowledge, passion and commitment, but who use their efforts sparingly. Who are unlikely to be impressed with simplistic and well meaning propaganda, no matter how good it is. And I know we (collective 'we') have produced great propaganda over the years, the Moon Against the Monarchy poster was the best of the last 15 years, or at least amongst the best... The key could be in the connections between the 2 separate groups I have tried to identify...



but attica you seem only ever invloved in alienated activist 'praxis' .. do you really think you can subsitute that for the real w/c world??


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 18, 2007)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> but attica you seem only ever invloved in alienated activist 'praxis' .. do you really think you can subsitute that for the real w/c world??



I think you are mistaken. I was very involved with the labour movement circa 1992-93 and I also am today. I also have deep problems with the fetishising of a so called/romanticised 'real working class world'... The working class cannot be forced into 'realistic' categories simply because it is way too big and too varied. An homogonised working class consciousness is simply not possible today in the age of the technological revolution and diversity.

I live in a 'traditional' working class community and the working class is not creating _any_ political forms here. I think this is a problem with your almost hierarchical pov - 'localism' is the way forward, when clearly in the vast majority of cases it is just not happening. 

I think you have apriori written off other political forms which are still valid - campaign groups, trades councils, unions etc. UCATT is growing nationally and with large building projects on the horizen this will only improve its' situation, around my way too UCATT is useful.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 18, 2007)

Attica and Durruti02 lock horns, a real battle of the intellectual heavyweights.

lol.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 18, 2007)

revol68 said:
			
		

> Attica and Durruti02 lock horns, a real battle of the intellectual heavyweights.
> 
> lol.



Fek off or i'll punch you.  Seriously, you need to get a life cos you say nor do anything interesting.


----------



## durruti02 (Nov 19, 2007)

Attica said:
			
		

> I think you are mistaken. I was very involved with the labour movement circa 1992-93 and I also am today. I also have deep problems with the fetishising of a so called/romanticised 'real working class world'... The working class cannot be forced into 'realistic' categories simply because it is way too big and too varied. An homogonised working class consciousness is simply not possible today in the age of the technological revolution and diversity.
> 
> I live in a 'traditional' working class community and the working class is not creating _any_ political forms here. I think this is a problem with your almost hierarchical pov - 'localism' is the way forward, when clearly in the vast majority of cases it is just not happening.
> 
> I think you have apriori written off other political forms which are still valid - campaign groups, trades councils, unions etc. UCATT is growing nationally and with large building projects on the horizen this will only improve its' situation, around my way too UCATT is useful.



whoever said i was against unions? or trades councils? or campaigns? i just said that to do this praxis you talk of hs to be based in these .. not on an intelectual level .. just does not work ..


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 20, 2007)

Heaven forfend that any of us should become intellectuals -eh, durutti? I mean learning, erudition, all to be despised - non?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 21, 2007)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> i just said that to do this praxis you talk of hs to be based in these .. not on an intelectual level .. just does not work ..



Of course, and I am doing.


----------



## dublx (Nov 22, 2007)

I'm well lost.


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 22, 2007)

You're not the only one.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2007)

nino_savatte said:
			
		

> You're not the only one.


some may call me a dreamer....


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 22, 2007)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> some may call me a dreamer....



Liberal.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 22, 2007)

nino_savatte said:
			
		

> Liberal.


...others call me a thug...


----------



## nino_savatte (Nov 23, 2007)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> ...others call me a thug...



Charmant, mais il me n'étonne pas.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 23, 2007)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Mate, i know - you were quoting ian, and ian says 'someon on the march said that...'
> 
> That someone, was ian himself. So your quote, shows ian quoting ian.
> 
> Its a bit confusing. For some reason i can't edit my post to clear it up.



just seen this, Ian didn't write that piece


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 28, 2007)

but posted it on his blog without signing it?


----------



## winjer (Nov 28, 2007)

At the top: riotact | 04.11.2007 18:21 | London
At the bottom: pics at http://johnnyvoid.blogspot.com From Indymedia UK

Granted the middle has enough we've-already-won hyperbole to be Bone's.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 28, 2007)

how does jonnyvoid choose what to support and what to slag off?

Its just so random!


----------



## sam/phallocrat (Nov 28, 2007)

ask him


----------



## The Black Hand (Jan 4, 2008)

Just thought I would bump this thread cos I can


----------



## mk12 (Jan 5, 2008)

thankyou ever so much.


----------



## chico enrico (Jan 7, 2008)

winjer said:
			
		

> At the top: riotact | 04.11.2007 18:21 | London
> At the bottom: pics at http://johnnyvoid.blogspot.com From Indymedia UK



that El-Banna character looks like Trigger off Only Fools & horses in a fancy dress santa beard+wig.


----------



## Paul Marsh (Jan 8, 2008)

chico enrico said:
			
		

> that El-Banna character looks like Trigger off Only Fools & horses in a fancy dress santa beard+wig.



Naah - the bodies of Uncle Albert and Trigger have been combined in some weird Islamist experiment. 

Only the CIA can save us from such dastardly behaviour!


----------



## gutlessuk (Feb 4, 2008)

The "Rich" are a problem in the UK,but the REAL problem lies with the so-called "Middle Classes";20-30 Years old Age Group,who allow all the injustices that go on without lifting a finger to change anything.They can't/WON'T Protest,either because they are the Generation that had it "cushy" and never needed to Protest,because they had enough money in their pockets,OR,they are Gutless,Spineless and Stupid Arseholes who are more Obsessed with getting to their Shit Office job at 6 o'clock in the morning to impress their Fucking Boss.They also have 2 Wages coming in so they don't have to worry when the Greedy Fucking Utilities companies keep increasing their prices!!And they don't Vote either,but they'll ring up fucking X-Factor,or I'm a Celebrity to vote someone out!!!And who do THEY believe is responsible for the Countries "Decline"??People on JSA or Incapacity Benefit.Not the Mega Rich who Steal Millions in Tax-Fiddling.Corporate businesses,Banks etc know this,and will keep hiking the Prices up till the Cows come Home.They also won't protest because they don't want to be thought of as a Trouble-maker!The Boss might not like it...Just look at an Office Car Park.What do you see?Anonymous Grey/Silver Cars...Don't want their employer to think they have a shred of Individuality,or an Artistic attitude,if their Car is Brightly Coloured.That's Dangerous,and it would upset the Team ethos. Like Nazi Germany in the early 1930's,ALL Our rights are being eroded every day,little by little,and if it isn't stopped NOW,then it will not be long before we are ALL SLAVES to Big business(which we are now anyway to a lesser extent)THEY need to Control us with Mortgages,Standing Orders and the like,and THEY are not only controlling us but they are also ROBBING US every day.STOP THEM soon.REfuse to Pay high bills.Look at the Customers on that Rail line down South,They can 2 or 3 people who Protest,but they can't Crush 500 or 1,000 of us.


----------



## gutlessuk (Feb 4, 2008)

*We must PROTEST NOW!!*

The "Rich" are a problem in the UK,but the REAL problem lies with the so-called "Middle Classes";20-30 Years old Age Group,who allow all the injustices that go on without lifting a finger to change anything.They can't/WON'T Protest,either because they are the Generation that had it "cushy" and never needed to Protest,because they had enough money in their pockets,OR,they are Gutless,Spineless and Stupid Arseholes who are more Obsessed with getting to their Shit Office job at 6 o'clock in the morning to impress their Fucking Boss.They also have 2 Wages coming in so they don't have to worry when the Greedy Fucking Utilities companies keep increasing their prices!!And they don't Vote either,but they'll ring up fucking X-Factor,or I'm a Celebrity to vote someone out!!!And who do THEY believe is responsible for the Countries "Decline"??People on JSA or Incapacity Benefit.Not the Mega Rich who Steal Millions in Tax-Fiddling.Corporate businesses,Banks etc know this,and will keep hiking the Prices up till the Cows come Home.They also won't protest because they don't want to be thought of as a Trouble-maker!The Boss might not like it...Just look at an Office Car Park.What do you see?Anonymous Grey/Silver Cars...Don't want their employer to think they have a shred of Individuality,or an Artistic attitude,if their Car is Brightly Coloured.That's Dangerous,and it would upset the Team ethos. Like Nazi Germany in the early 1930's,ALL Our rights are being eroded every day,little by little,and if it isn't stopped NOW,then it will not be long before we are ALL SLAVES to Big business(which we are now anyway to a lesser extent)THEY need to Control us with Mortgages,Standing Orders and the like,and THEY are not only controlling us but they are also ROBBING US every day.STOP THEM soon.REfuse to Pay high bills.Look at the Customers on that Rail line down South,They can crush 2 or 3 people who Protest,but they can't Crush 500 or 1,000 of us.


----------



## chico enrico (Feb 4, 2008)

alternatively, maybe most people are totally alienated from any form of protest cos sadly it tends to attract folk coming out with ill-conceived twaddle like the above. 

liked the bit about living in the UK being like nazi germany in the '30s, though. reminds me of something I wrote in a social studies essay at school once, before being taken aside for a friendly word by my teacher whose parents were killed in a concentration camp.


----------



## brasicritique (Feb 6, 2008)

Bash the rich collective group thearpy for sons and daughthers of the rich but open to all 

highlights include;

Gathering in a crowd
Chanting ' camerons a toff'
Living up to media stereotypes
Conforming to set patterns of previous demo behavior
Speaking to the police
Being totally unoriginal

All participants will have a free photographic portrait and the chance to appear in a film ( Paid for by Dept of justice in assoc with the criminal justice bill )  

we also have our special gold memebership which allows you to have a brief stint in custody and shared Urban75 bragging rites!

Book now to avoid disappointment


----------



## Spion (Feb 6, 2008)

You're a lot more talkative these days, Brassic. And a lot more humourous


----------



## TopCat (Feb 8, 2008)

brasicattack said:


> Bash the rich collective group thearpy for sons and daughthers of the rich but open to all
> 
> highlights include;
> 
> ...



Oh how my sides ache with laughing. 

So original, especially the bit about the protesters being rich kids, more like projection on your part boy.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Feb 8, 2008)

aye, but with that one bit left out, its pretty funny i reckon.

well played there by brassic.


----------



## brasicritique (Feb 8, 2008)

TopCat said:


> Oh how my sides ache with laughing.



Have you tried sellotape?



TopCat said:


> So original, especially the bit about the protesters being rich kids, more like projection on your part boy.



Its not meant to be original my child  and i would dearly love to conduct a survey on the social status of both those involved and there parents bless em

I Don't know about TC i think you need some _TCP_ for that raw nerve there my little cherub


----------

