# worst anarchist magazine?



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2009)

which is the shittest anarcho mag you've seen in recent years?

i've gone for mayday, the only magazine which freedom stocks that sees people hand in the copies they've been unfortunate enough to buy.


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Jul 10, 2009)

I'm not sure Mayday is anarchist, plus the editor gave me a free copy.

Anarchy a Journal of Desire Armed is utterly awful, utter trash. Rolling Thunder (Crimethinc) is exempt from being shit because the design is generally brilliant, it's almost worth buying on the strength of that alone sometimes.

Green Anarchist was always crap as well, alienating and bonkers, though I quite like Steve Booth as a person.

The three main federation ones are normally quite good (though DA can be hit and miss), and Black Flag has been good for at least the last two issues. I also like RAG an anarcha feminist mag from Ireland, and Northeastern Anarchist from the US.

The only mag I read every article with great interest is Notes From the Borderland, which is not anarchist (it's antifascist) but has anarchist contributors and is very interesting imo, and actually written journalistically.

Now or Never from Norwich is always funny, and entertaining.


----------



## durruti02 (Jul 10, 2009)

i can't believe you didn't enable multiple picks .. i'dve gone for a few more than black flag which i hate


----------



## bluestreak (Jul 10, 2009)

Is notes from the Borderline that nutjob who used to post here?  The one who believed all social workers were state agents of class and race oppression?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

They're all great

Not that i read any of them.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

bluestreak said:


> Is notes from the Borderline that nutjob who used to post here?  The one who believed all social workers were state agents of class and race oppression?



Larry's not a nutjob. I have no idea of your/his argument.


----------



## maomao (Jul 10, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Green Anarchist was always crap as well, alienating and bonkers, though I quite like Steve Booth as a person.



I had a Green Anarchist 'Only Guns Give Us Rights' poster on my wall on my wall throughout my teenage years which rather upset my trot mother. 

Where can I find the magazines listed above?


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Jul 10, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> They're all great
> 
> Not that i read any of them.



Instead you read Aufheben??

Yeah Larry of NFTB is not a nutjob though sometimes his confrontational online style when married to the conspiratorial nature of some of the stuff he deals with can make it hard to see to the casual observer.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

Not recently.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

I'm on a different level now.


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Jul 10, 2009)

IWCA internal bulletin?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

I read Local news for local men. I like the focus.


----------



## audiotech (Jul 10, 2009)

Green Anarchist who in one edition attacked printers because they helped produce The Sun.

I met one of the writers in a marquee at Glastonbury who repeated this shit to me.


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Jul 10, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> I read Local news for local men. I like the focus.



Libdem newsheet?

I'm forbidden from criticising any fed's publications or Black Flag, party line and all that.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

MC5 said:


> Green Anarchist who in one edition attacked printers because they helped produce The Sun.
> 
> I met one of the writers in a marquee at Glastonbury who repeated this shit to me.



It's that your experience is of 25 years ago (And fillited with an uncheckable lie)


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Libdem newsheet?
> 
> I'm forbidden from criticising any fed's publications or Black Flag, party line and all that.


 
Tacks cracking the whip eh. Show him whose boss.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> i can't believe you didn't enable multiple picks .. i'dve gone for a few more than black flag which i hate



er - this is the WORST anarchist magazine thread, not the mildly shit anarchist magazine thread


----------



## audiotech (Jul 10, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> It's that your experience is of 25 years ago (And fillited with an uncheckable lie)


 
I have a vast experience over a long period of time and like I've said before what I write here is all true. You might not like some of it, but there you go.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 10, 2009)

Nah, you make shit up.


----------



## audiotech (Jul 10, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Nah, you make shit up.


 
Only in your head.


----------



## Mr Smin (Jul 11, 2009)

Seems elitist to miss off Class War just because it's a newspaper rather than a magazine


----------



## tar1984 (Jul 11, 2009)

So are there any good ones then?

Thats not saracastic btw, im curious.


----------



## JimW (Jul 11, 2009)

All gone downhill since they suppressed _Arbeter Fraynd_  Used to love their spot-the-ball; now it's all head-the-balls instead


----------



## Belushi (Jul 11, 2009)

bluestreak said:


> Is notes from the Borderline that nutjob who used to post here?  The one who believed all social workers were state agents of class and race oppression?



IIRC he's the fella who accused me of being part of the conspiracy to kidnap working class kids and give them to childless middle class couples after I'd pointed out that his allegations about a childrens charity I used to temp for was paranoid conspiraloonery.


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 11, 2009)

I voted for _Anarchy: A journal of paedos and beardos_, but only because they OP was slack and missed out _Green Anarchist_ 

As far as good ones go, RAG (the Irish anarchafeminist mag) is good, if a little liberal at times, Direct Action is okay.  Don't think I've ever read any of the others in the poll (except for Organise, of course).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I voted for _Anarchy: A journal of paedos and beardos_, but only because they OP was slack and missed out _Green Anarchist_


and because you couldn't read the final option


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 11, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> and because you couldn't read the final option


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 11, 2009)

is anarchy: paedos and beardos (lol) the one that published hakim bey's stuff? I hope not because i once cited it in an essay on anarchism  

oh and green anarchist is SHIT!


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 11, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> is anarchy: paedos and beardos (lol) the one that published hakim bey's stuff? I hope not because i once cited it in an essay on anarchism


I may be misremembering, but I'm pretty sure they did.  There are quite a few paedo apologists around the lifestylist end of anarchism, not a majority by any means, but more than you'd find anywhere else.  I find it more than a little disturbing.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 11, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I may be misremembering, but I'm pretty sure they did.  There are quite a few paedo apologists around the lifestylist end of anarchism, not a majority by any means, but more than you'd find anywhere else.  I find it more than a little disturbing.



bein a bit ignorant on these matters how do you mean the "lifestylist" end of anarchism mate? 

what's the "justification" they use for it? surely noncery is incompatible with anarchism cos it involves hierarchy/power over another person?


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Jul 11, 2009)

Belushi said:


> IIRC he's the fella who accused me of being part of the conspiracy to kidnap working class kids and give them to childless middle class couples after I'd pointed out that his allegations about a childrens charity I used to temp for was paranoid conspiraloonery.



Feel free to lie about what I said--this will help you in social work circles.


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 12, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> bein a bit ignorant on these matters how do you mean the "lifestylist" end of anarchism mate?


Lifestylist is a term used to mean politicos (mostly anarchists, sadly) who regard certain lifestyle choices, such as veganism or wearing certain clothes, as a radical or revolutionary act in and of itself.  Not uncoincidentally, folks who tend to hold this sort of view often have Godawful politics in other areas as well.



> what's the "justification" they use for it? surely noncery is incompatible with anarchism cos it involves hierarchy/power over another person?


They tend to argue that opposition to noncing is basically the same as homophobia, like I said earlier it's a minority view but unfortunately, some anarchists are willing to tolerate this shit.  There's an article on libcom about Hakim Bey that goes into it a bit more.


----------



## rioted (Jul 12, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Lifestylist


Lifestylist is a term of abuse used by marxists (some of whom pretend to be anarchists) to defame those who approach politics from a political perspective rather than an economic one.


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 12, 2009)

"Marxist" is used as a term of abuse used by idiots who don't posess the wit to understand Marx


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> "Marxist" is used as a term of abuse used by idiots who don't posess the wit to understand Marx


example?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2009)

rioted said:


> Lifestylist is a term of abuse used by marxists (some of whom pretend to be anarchists) to defame those who approach politics from a political perspective rather than an economic one.


marxists who pretend to be anarchists = pointyhead wankers

lifestylists = people who would like the revolution, as long as they can retain their indolent & self-indulgent ways after the overthrow of capitalism


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 12, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> example?


See both the post above the one you quoted and anything CrimeThink has produced, ever.


----------



## rioted (Jul 12, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> "Marxist" is used as a term of abuse used by idiots who don't posess the wit to understand Marx


You don't think Bakunin understood Marx? You don't think Marx understood Marx?


----------



## Belushi (Jul 12, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> lifestylists = people who would like the revolution, as long as they can retain their indolent & self-indulgent ways after the overthrow of capitalism



Neckshot fodder.


----------



## rioted (Jul 12, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> lifestylists = people who would like the revolution, as long as they can retain their indolent & self-indulgent ways after the overthrow of capitalism


As opposed those who would model us on ants or bees. Who see no value in individual difference, natural variation? Who see no value in the individual save as a unit of economics?


----------



## rioted (Jul 12, 2009)

Belushi said:


> Neckshot fodder.


"Just another set of bigots with their rifle-sights on me"


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 12, 2009)

rioted said:


> You don't think Bakunin understood Marx? You don't think Marx understood Marx?


I don't think that using Marxist as an insult speaks to a particularly great understanding of Marx.  Especially when it's aimed at people who are not Marxists in the first place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2009)

rioted said:


> As opposed those who would model us on ants or bees. Who see no value in individual difference, natural variation? Who see no value in the individual save as a unit of economics?


the lifestylist is ime characterised by what i said, an indolent and self-indulgent lifestyle which contributes little or nothing to progressing any form of revolutionary project. i have nothing against people choosing how to run their lives. but lifestylist lifestyles seem to me almost without exception to rely on the continued existence of capitalism for their own continued existence. and ime lifestylists are pretty much invariably among the worst adverts for anarchism. 

in any post-revolutionary society i'd like to see, work would be destroyed. as far as i'm concerned, we don't struggle for the continued existence of the working class, but to destroy it as part of the wider reformation of society: no capitalist society > no forced sale of labour > no class of people who can only survive by the sale of their labour. work, the labour required to maintain societal infrastructure, to feed and clothe and so on, would no longer take much of people's days, but perhaps a couple of hours a day. the abolition of the great deal of useless toil currently the core activity of so many people's lives would free people from being a unit of economics and leave them able to pursue more congenial areas of interest. but lifestylists seem rather averse to any form of organisation, and also from any sort of responsibility beyond the purely personal - which itself is beyond many of them.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 12, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Green Anarchist was always crap as well, alienating and bonkers,
> 
> .



I found it thought provoking and amusing.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 12, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Lifestylist is a term used to mean politicos (mostly anarchists, sadly) who regard certain lifestyle choices, such as veganism or wearing certain clothes, as a radical or revolutionary act in and of itself.  Not uncoincidentally, folks who tend to hold this sort of view often have Godawful politics in other areas as well.



Oh ok. There's so much wrong with that pov i dont know where to start!! and i think i've come across afew of those ........ 



> They tend to argue that opposition to noncing is basically the same as homophobia, like I said earlier it's a minority view but unfortunately, some anarchists are willing to tolerate this shit.  There's an article on libcom about Hakim Bey that goes into it a bit more.



thanks for that mate. i think i've read it before - it's pretty fucking depressing how many people were willing to let this shit go unchallenged!  why do you think they're willing to tolerate bey and his ilk?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 12, 2009)

Drinking the last of the milk is a revolutionary act. Refusing to go out and buy more cos you don't want to encourage the capitalist system makes you twice as revolutionary.


----------



## Steve Booth (Jul 12, 2009)

It's easy to criticise other peoples' stuff, but what would make a *good* Anarchist magazine? - a lot of what is produced only appeals to a limited group of people, broadly the people who share the same politics as the producers / writers / editors. Very few publications can break out of the "Anarchist Ghetto" - Colin Ward's _Anarchy_ magazine from the 1960s is often well thought of, I can't just off the top of my head think of another, but I'm sure there will be some. I think if anarchism as a political philosophy is to make a difference in society, it needs to make that leap.

Without doing this, that sort of politics remains introspective, esoteric and can often blunder off down blind alleyways and wrong paths. This is as much a criticism of myself or of GA, as it might be about any other mag. Maybe what is needed is some sort of sense of art, something broader than just the politics, and a sense of fun as well. To sort of misquote or paraphrase Emma Goldsmith, "If I can't laugh it isn't my revolution". We often take ourselves too seriously. Among the current publications, TCA (The Cunningham Amendment) is sometimes quite good at the jokes. Somebody like Banksy isn't a magazine but has got through to quite a lot of people.

To my mind, a good magazine would, through its practice, answer questions like: How can we break out of the ghetto, and get through to people? How is what we advocate better than they way things are today? Have we expressed ourselves clearly enough? - Say it with pictures, say it with cartoons, say it with placards or posters or music or stickers or beer mats.


----------



## TopCat (Jul 13, 2009)

The only really good one was Crowbar back in the day. All the rest are turgid shite.


----------



## TopCat (Jul 13, 2009)

Steve Booth said:


> It's easy to criticise other peoples' stuff, but what would make a *good* Anarchist magazine? - a lot of what is produced only appeals to a limited group of people, broadly the people who share the same politics as the producers / writers / editors. Very few publications can break out of the "Anarchist Ghetto" - Colin Ward's _Anarchy_ magazine from the 1960s is often well thought of, I can't just off the top of my head think of another, but I'm sure there will be some. I think if anarchism as a political philosophy is to make a difference in society, it needs to make that leap.
> 
> Without doing this, that sort of politics remains introspective, esoteric and can often blunder off down blind alleyways and wrong paths. This is as much a criticism of myself or of GA, as it might be about any other mag. Maybe what is needed is some sort of sense of art, something broader than just the politics, and a sense of fun as well. To sort of misquote or paraphrase Emma Goldsmith, "If I can't laugh it isn't my revolution". We often take ourselves too seriously. Among the current publications, TCA (The Cunningham Amendment) is sometimes quite good at the jokes. Somebody like Banksy isn't a magazine but has got through to quite a lot of people.
> 
> To my mind, a good magazine would, through its practice, answer questions like: How can we break out of the ghetto, and get through to people? How is what we advocate better than they way things are today? Have we expressed ourselves clearly enough? - Say it with pictures, say it with cartoons, say it with placards or posters or music or stickers or beer mats.



This blokes magazine Green Anarchist is strange, weird, offensive and scary plus badly written.


----------



## The39thStep (Jul 13, 2009)

Steve Booth said:


> It's easy to criticise other peoples' stuff, but what would make a *good* Anarchist magazine? - a lot of what is produced only appeals to a limited group of people, broadly the people who share the same politics as the producers / writers / editors. Very few publications can break out of the "*Anarchist Ghetto*" - Colin Ward's _Anarchy_ magazine from the 1960s is often well thought of, I can't just off the top of my head think of another, but I'm sure there will be some. I think if anarchism as a political philosophy is to make a difference in society, it needs to make that leap.
> 
> Without doing this, that sort of politics remains introspective, esoteric and can often blunder off down blind alleyways and wrong paths. This is as much a criticism of myself or of GA, as it might be about any other mag. Maybe what is needed is some sort of sense of art, something broader than just the politics, and a sense of fun as well. To sort of misquote or paraphrase Emma Goldsmith, "If I can't laugh it isn't my revolution". We often take ourselves too seriously. Among the current publications, TCA (The Cunningham Amendment) is sometimes quite good at the jokes. Somebody like Banksy isn't a magazine but has got through to quite a lot of people.
> 
> To my mind, a good magazine would, through its practice, answer questions like: How can we break out of the ghetto, and get through to people? How is what we advocate better than they way things are today? Have we expressed ourselves clearly enough? - Say it with pictures, say it with cartoons, say it with placards or posters or music or stickers or beer mats.



one of the features of the *anarchist scene *is its inability to put anything out that doesn't resemble a childs comic, a dreary and prententious 2.2 degree assignment on autonmous life styles/post capitalism/imaginary inner cities or a a liberal party version of Dave Spart.

The worst one I have ever come across is Occupied London ,at least Mayday is funny albeit unintentionally


----------



## Nigel (Jul 13, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I may be misremembering, but I'm pretty sure they did.  There are quite a few paedo apologists around the lifestylist end of anarchism, not a majority by any means, but more than you'd find anywhere else.  I find it more than a little disturbing.



Its this allignment that many 'liberals' in America have with NAMBLA, apparentely Paglia's a member. Never really got to the bottom of why, even if you don't agree with them, relatively intelligent people allign themselves with this organisation?


----------



## Nigel (Jul 13, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Instead you read Aufheben??
> 
> Yeah Larry of NFTB is not a nutjob though sometimes his confrontational online style when married to the conspiratorial nature of some of the stuff he deals with can make it hard to see to the casual observer.



Think Aufheben is really good, but wouldn't call it Anarchist, neither would its original panel of writers I should imagine.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 13, 2009)

Mr Smin said:


> Seems elitist to miss off Class War just because it's a newspaper rather than a magazine



In my opinion CW went down hill after it stopped being 'Britain's Most Unruly Tabloid', however compared to a lot of stuff on the Anarchist Left still relatively good.

Would have been Heavy Stuff that was their magazine.
Had some gems in it such as an article about class and how the middle class all hate themselves!

The corny horny handed (possibly false) lumpeness of it was entertainment value in itself


----------



## PeterTCA (Jul 14, 2009)

Gwacious. What a sour thread this is. Is this really the readeship Anarchist papers deserve? I think I'm right in recalling that when Green Anarchist was being raided and arrested (and subsequently imprisoned) by the police there were other comrades dismissing its editors as being fascists.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Think Aufheben is really good, but wouldn't call it Anarchist, neither would its original panel of writers I should imagine.


i wouldn't call it really good or even mildly worth reading. its on a par with mayday for pointyhead shitfer wankstain politics


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Jul 14, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Think Aufheben is really good, but wouldn't call it Anarchist, neither would its original panel of writers I should imagine.



Neither would I you plum.

Which political organisation are you hanging around now btw?


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Neither would I you plum.
> 
> Which political organisation are you hanging around now btw?



For your special branch records; Socialist Party, but i'm moving and growing keener on the ideas of the Na t+onal Anarchists

Only political campaign really involved in KONP.

Reading quite a lot of Mao & Ho Chi Minh at the moment.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> i wouldn't call it really good or even mildly worth reading. its on a par with mayday for pointyhead shitfer wankstain politics



I dunno, was quite impressed with articles such as one on China, In Search Of Red October etc. for originality if nothing else

From what I remember of the collective they were based around on the south east coast, very active politically in real life terms, around issues such as casual labour, environmentalism, anti fascism, hunt sabbing etc.

Remember, I think it was the main guy who initiated it truancing SWP in a debate at a well known University, and another prophetically (more to the point quite accurately) talking about the role China would play after the fall of the Soviet Union at a Tony Cliff meeting, only to be accused by his cult of racism, victimising the 'yellow menace'.

You cannot just put Aufheben down to a theoretical quasi-autonomist journal waffling on.

But to be fair to MAYDAY never really paid much attention to it.
Whatever you want to say about Attica, he was very actively motivited around politics at one time


----------



## Quest (Jul 14, 2009)

All anarchist mags are shite. Written by fuckwits for fuckwits. I wouldn't use an anarchist mag for shit house paper.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 14, 2009)

Quest said:


> All anarchist mags are shite. Written by fuckwits for fuckwits. I wouldn't use an anarchist mag for shit house paper.



That's cool, most anarchists wouldn't use *you* for shit-house paper either, being a bit fussy about what goes near their arses.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

The good thing about many of the cut and paste style magazines coming out from the eighties onwards was the people expressed opinions based on how they felt rather than trying to base them around political or ideological structure, perfect grammar; punctuation etc.

This gave people a voice and a way to express themselves that they usually wouldn't have.
*PUNK ROCK*


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 14, 2009)

Anyone mentioned Total Liberty yet?

In fairness, though, what is the judgement "worst" based on?  Bad writing?  Most have that from time to time.  A perspective you don't share?  All have that from time to time.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

One of the best was XTRA: the paper for armchair terrorists,
later became LOGO.
Excellent cartoons and graphics on the back.
Depiction of the State was classic


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Anyone mentioned Total Liberty yet?
> 
> In fairness, though, what is the judgement "worst" based on?  Bad writing?  Most have that from time to time.  A perspective you don't share?  All have that from time to time.



Cannot recall that one, where was it based?


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

Poison Pen in Hastings was good, apart from the paedo stuff.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

PeterTCA said:


> Gwacious. What a sour thread this is. Is this really the readeship Anarchist papers deserve? I think I'm right in recalling that when Green Anarchist was being raided and arrested (and subsequently imprisoned) by the police there were other comrades dismissing its editors as being fascists.



They did allow articles about the 'Politic Real'(sic) and others by a few dodgy characters, including one of the editors that would give suspicions along those lines


----------



## In Bloom (Jul 14, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> i wouldn't call it really good or even mildly worth reading. its on a par with mayday for pointyhead shitfer wankstain politics


Yeah, thinking is bad, let's go throw a brick at a cop for no reason


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

Anyone write for, do any of these.\
Was involved in one caled Nyet Pravda, around poll tax Criminal Extremist(only one issue, mainly round feelings experiences of Poll Tax Riot), wrote for poems for something called Doctors Dileama.

Its a shame these mags died out, would be good for young people today. I know you have Blogs etc. but actually doing something in Hard Copy that you can sell, distribute, give to friends adds a sense of doing something and reality to the process


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Jul 14, 2009)

Nigel said:


> They did allow articles about the 'Politic Real'(sic) and others by a few dodgy characters, including one of the editors that would give suspicions along those lines



Aren't you mates with one of the contributors to Rose Noir?


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Aren't you mates with one of the contributors to Rose Noir?



I have known Wayne Sturgeon John, or whatever he likes to call himself these days since I was twelve, when we both were in YCND together. 

He wrote some stuff for Nyet Pravda when we were both involved with LCDG/ACF, who printed it for us.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

Aren't Housemans going to do a display of these sometime in the Basement.

Be interesting to see which ones have survived


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 14, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Cannot recall that one, where was it based?


Derby, I think.


----------



## Fruitloop (Jul 14, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Its this allignment that many 'liberals' in America have with NAMBLA, apparentely Paglia's a member.



Ooh good, yet another reason to ignore her completely.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

The point wasn't whether you like Paglia or not: it is the almost respectabilty in belonging to such an organisation.

Apart from SWP's minor flirtation with PIE, a few nutty libertarians both left & right and a break off from USEC: Campaign Against Fascism In Europe's take on 'inter-generational' sex; rightly,no-one in this country would take such a line and if they did they would be run out of town.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 14, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Apart from SWP's minor flirtation with PIE,



WTF?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 14, 2009)

Seriously idris, just ignore what this informed poster says.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jul 14, 2009)

Idris2002 said:


> WTF?


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 14, 2009)

Nigel said:


> The point wasn't whether you like Paglia or not: it is the almost respectabilty in belonging to such an organisation.
> 
> Apart from SWP's minor flirtation with PIE, a few nutty libertarians both left & right and a break off from USEC: Campaign Against Fascism In Europe's take on 'inter-generational' sex; rightly,no-one in this country would take such a line and if they did they would be run out of town.



Huh?? 

In what world is Nambla "almost respectable" for american liberals to belong to?

 

And by PIE you men the paedophile info exchange yeh? what the fuck? Im sorry I know it's the swappies we're talking about, but I dont believe one word of whats written in this post !

Surely this is potentially libellous?


----------



## Nigel (Jul 14, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> Huh??
> 
> In what world is Nambla "almost respectable" for american liberals to belong to?
> 
> ...


They were caught up with it temporarily around idiots in Gay Liberation Front.
They lost a libel action when false accusations were made in Lifting The Lid On The ANL; N F publication.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 14, 2009)

Erm...riiiiight  

Any links?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 14, 2009)

Just bullshit


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 14, 2009)

Surely there are enough real things to be slagging off the Swappies about rather than making some bullshit up that they're paedophiles or were involved in NAMBLA and PIE. Besides if I'm not misaken many gay rights/vaguely left wing organisations were infected by paedos in the 1970s and 80s but kicked them out pretty sharpish in most cases.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> Besides if I'm not misaken many gay rights/vaguely left wing organisations were infected by paedos in the 1970s and 80s but kicked them out pretty sharpish in most cases.


is there any evidence of that?


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 14, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> is there any evidence of that?



could have worded that better tbh - apologies 

See here on Wikipedias entry on Nambla: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambla#The_founding_of_NAMBLA




			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Opposition to NAMBLA from the larger gay rights movement was evident months after NAMBLA was founded: in the conference that organized the first gay march on Washington in 1979. In addition to forming several working committees, the conference was responsible for drafting the basic organizing principles of the march ("the five demands" Flyer for March on Washington [see p. 23]). Originally, the Gay Youth Caucus had won approval for its proposal demanding "Full Rights for Gay Youth, including revision of the age of consent laws." However at the first meeting of the National Coordinating Committee, a contingent of lesbians threatened not to participate in the march unless a substitute was adopted. The substitute, authored by an adult lesbian and approved in a mail poll by a majority of delegates, stated: "Protect Lesbian and Gay Youth from any laws which are used to discriminate against, oppress, and/or harass them in their homes, schools, job and social environments."[12]
> In 1980 a group called the "Lesbian Caucus – Lesbian & Gay Pride March Committee" distributed a hand-out urging women to split from the annual New York City Gay Pride March because the organizing committee had supposedly been dominated by NAMBLA and its supporters.[12] The next year, after some lesbians threatened to picket, the Cornell University gay group Gay PAC (Gay People at Cornell) rescinded its invitation to NAMBLA founder David Thorstad to be the keynote speaker at the annual May Gay Festival.[12] In the following years, gay rights groups attempted to block NAMBLA’s participation in gay pride parades, prompting leading gay rights figure Harry Hay to wear a sign proclaiming "NAMBLA walks with me" as he participated in a 1986 gay pride march in Los Angeles.
> Thus by the mid-1980s, NAMBLA was virtually alone in its positions and found itself politically isolated. Gay rights organizations, burdened by accusations of child recruitment and child abuse, had abandoned the radicalism of their early years and had "retreat[ed] from the idea of a more inclusive politics,"[13] opting instead to appeal more to the mainstream. Support for "groups perceived as being on the fringe of the gay community," such as NAMBLA, vanished in the process.[13] Today, almost all gay rights groups disavow any ties to NAMBLA, voice disapproval of its objectives, and attempt to prevent NAMBLA from having a role in gay and lesbian rights events.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 15, 2009)

i'm sorry, from your previous post it sounded like nambla had been active in the uk. that doesn't appear to be the case.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

I didn't say they were. Sorry if it seemed like that.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm sorry, from your previous post it sounded like nambla had been active in the uk. that doesn't appear to be the case.



The sex case

edit: sorry - hard day


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> I didn't say they were. Sorry if it seemed like that.



it was the mention of the swappies what done it.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

Nigel started it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> Nigel started it



it's always the other fellow in't it


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> it's always the other fellow in't it



fraid so


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> The sex case
> 
> edit: sorry - hard day



What sex case?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2009)

nambla = sex case


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

oh, ok  sorry i thought you meant like an actual case in the uk involving them and well ,sex. never mind ...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 15, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> it was the mention of the swappies what done it.



At least it was never a shibboleth


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 15, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> At least it was never a shibboleth



and it's lucky it wasn't a shuggoth, altho' some view the swp as one might a shuggoth.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> Surely there are enough real things to be slagging off the Swappies about rather than making some bullshit up that they're paedophiles or were involved in NAMBLA and PIE. Besides if I'm not misaken many gay rights/vaguely left wing organisations were infected by paedos in the 1970s and 80s but kicked them out pretty sharpish in most cases.



Sorry apart from Right Wing Stuff & other loonies can only find interview with Gary Bushell at the moment. (Which isn't much better)

"When did he go off socialism? While at the Socialist Worker, he says. "There was this organisation, the paedophile information exchange, and the socialists were preventing them from being attacked. I didn't think paedophiles should be allowed to organise."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/garry-bushell-for-garry-england-and-st-george-675384.html


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

This could have something to do with it

"Inevitably lesbians and gay men have been pin-pointed as a threat to the family. Early warnings in Britain of the systematic gay-baiting that was to follow, came when Mary Whitehouse successfully prosecuted Gay News for blasphemy and when the Callaghan Labour Government – as part of its attempt to portray Labour as the party of the family – carried out a vicious, hysterical witch-hunt of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE). To broaden the onslaught paedophilia and homosexuality were lumped together by the popular press and gay men were portrayed as would-be child molesters. The fact that PIE, which included both heterosexuals and homosexuals in its ranks, stood four-square for consensual relations only and against molestation was characteristically ignored by the rabid press."

http://www.fifthinternational.org/content/action-programme-gay-liberation


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

To be perfectly fair an organisation calling its self "The Paedophile Information Exchange" shouldn't really expect anything else other than "hysterical witch-hunts" tbh. It's their own fault for choosing that name and being about paedophilia.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

I'm a lesbian btw.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> I'm a lesbian btw.



Good for you.

The article by 5th International hasn't convinced you to join Workers Power then


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> To be perfectly fair an organisation calling its self "The Paedophile Information Exchange" shouldn't really expect anything else other than "hysterical witch-hunts" tbh. It's their own fault for choosing that name and being about paedophilia.



Can you think of a more user friendly name for such an organisation?


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

calling yourself "the paedophile information exchange" and then complaining when there are hysterical witch hunts against you is like swallowing a whole bottle of weedkiller and then complaining when you die.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

What is your position on the age of consent then?
Or shall we go back to discussing Anarchists publications.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Can you think of a more user friendly name for such an organisation?



"nonces r' us"


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

Nigel said:


> What is your position on the age of consent then?
> Or shall we go back to discussing Anarchists publications.



I think its fine at 16, thanks for asking 

whats YOUR position?


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> I think its fine at 16, thanks for asking
> 
> whats YOUR position?



Probably the same, however make some exceptions for young people under 16 to have sexual relations with people around their age group.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 15, 2009)

you dont need the "paedophile information exchange" to state that position for you tho.


----------



## albionism (Jul 15, 2009)

Total Liberty was often quite a good read.
Some fine articles by the late Peter Neville.


----------



## barney_pig (Jul 15, 2009)

the spartacist league, and their various spin offs still rather vociferously support the Nambla pedos
http://www.picosearch.com/cgi-bin/ts.pl
(various links)
an example:
_



			But Arnold Friedman committed no crime! The “crime” for which the state had substantiated proof was possession of child pornography. So what? Child pornography is, as is any kind of pornography, images and words intended for entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less. There’s nothing wrong with getting off with visual aids, whether they portray naked women, young boys or monkeys going at it. One person’s turn-on is another person’s turn-off—who is going to decide what is “obscene”?
		
Click to expand...

_
 next time you see these clowns at a demo remember this


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 15, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> At least it was never a shibboleth


That's easy for you to say...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 15, 2009)

albionism said:


> Total Liberty was often quite a good read.
> Some fine articles by the late Peter Neville.


I've not picked it up for ages, but it was often well-written.  Which is the point I was alluding to earlier: what do we mean when we say "worst"?

I often disagreed with _Total Liberty_'s editorial standpoint, but liked the writing.  On the other side, I mostly like the (modern era) basic house ideology of _Freedom_, but find the writing style/standard grates.


----------



## Random (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> you dont need the "paedophile information exchange" to state that position for you tho.



and relations between under 16s is not paedophilia any more than people in India have a fetish for Asians.


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Jul 15, 2009)

Random said:


> and relations between under 16s is not paedophilia any more than people in India have a fetish for Asians.



So if two 15 year olds have sex in front of me it's ok? 


ETA: joking!!


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

albionism said:


> Total Liberty was often quite a good read.
> Some fine articles by the late Peter Neville.



Shame I never got to have a look at this, sounds good.

Another one that had pretty good theoretical stuff in it was Workers Playtime, from what I remember had a really good article analysing Miners Strike. Recentely staff at Housemans sold us WP around Wapping/Printers, mainly short articles but pretty sound.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

barney_pig said:


> the spartacist league, and their various spin offs still rather vociferously support the Nambla pedos
> http://www.picosearch.com/cgi-bin/ts.pl
> (various links)
> an example:
> ...



I'm sure the sparts do have some dodgy position on this, however if you had, say books/illustrations by Sade, Henry Miller, Bukowski, TOPY stuff, etc., you could possibly fall into this catagory as well, by that quote.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Jul 15, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Libdem newsheet?
> 
> I'm forbidden from criticising any fed's publications or Black Flag, party line and all that.



he winks, but this is actually true. 

All the feds are excellent, from their membership and activities to their exciting magasines and papers, and we look forward to ever increasing joint-work in the cause of libertarian struggle... 

loving the name btw


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2009)

I've just got that focus joke


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

First copy of Virus wasn't the best publication by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Jul 15, 2009)

Nigel said:


> This could have something to do with it
> 
> "Inevitably lesbians and gay men have been pin-pointed as a threat to the family. Early warnings in Britain of the systematic gay-baiting that was to follow, came when Mary Whitehouse successfully prosecuted Gay News for blasphemy and when the Callaghan Labour Government – as part of its attempt to portray Labour as the party of the family – carried out a vicious, hysterical witch-hunt of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE). To broaden the onslaught paedophilia and homosexuality were lumped together by the popular press and gay men were portrayed as would-be child molesters. The fact that PIE, which included both heterosexuals and homosexuals in its ranks, stood four-square for consensual relations only and against molestation was characteristically ignored by the rabid press."
> 
> http://www.fifthinternational.org/content/action-programme-gay-liberation



mwa ha ha ha top stuff


----------



## chico enrico (Jul 15, 2009)

TopCat said:


> The only really good one was Crowbar back in the day. All the rest are turgid shite.



nah. crawbar was more a brixton squatters paper surely?

class war up until it became a federation (1984 or 85 if i remember right)

Xtra

practical anarchy/clydeside anarchist 

there _must_ be more...i'll have a think. 

only two in the OP i've even SEEN are black flag & direct action.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

Taxamo Welf said:


> mwa ha ha ha top stuff



Would you trust Workers Power international section to baby sit for your children


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

I know this is slightly off topic, but as far as Anarcho Punk stuff goes The Apostles, album covers were pretyy interesting stuff.

Was working with some guys in Oxford who said they were around that scene.
Talked about the guy who did the illustrations/art work/graphics.

Said he was half Egyptian or something, had some hastle with gangster types who drove him away and beat him up tortured him etc. Never did any artwork again

Don't know if this was true, apart from Andy Martin, anyone know what happened to The Apostles?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 15, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> "nonces r' us"



Diddler's


sounds almost like a resteraunt


----------



## chico enrico (Jul 15, 2009)

Nigel said:


> I know this is slightly off topic, but as far as Anarcho Punk stuff goes The Apostles, album covers were pretyy interesting stuff.
> 
> Was working with some guys in Oxford who said they were around that scene.
> Talked about the guy who did the illustrations/art work/graphics.
> ...



Yes. i drummed on their first few 7" singles and am still in touch. 

dunno how those folk in oxford could have ever got those bizarre idea but not an iota of truth in any of them. and it was andy who did the cartoon sleeves and dave fanning who did the hawkwind type hippy artwork. 

both as london as jellied eels, both still living in hackney, both still doing well, doing artwork, making music and both black belts in about every martial art known to man, having practiced them for the past 30 years, so it'd be a pretty stupid and suicidal 'gangster' who ever messed with either of them!


----------



## chico enrico (Jul 15, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Its this allignment that many 'liberals' in America have with NAMBLA, apparentely Paglia's a member. Never really got to the bottom of why, even if you don't agree with them, relatively intelligent people allign themselves with this organisation?



allen ginsberg is a member, but had never heard that about paglia 

why on earth would she be? doesn't make sense. maybe 'for a laugh' ?


----------



## chico enrico (Jul 15, 2009)

Idris2002 said:


> WTF?



it was more GLF elements within SWP in seventies.

there's a chapter on it in a book i've got called 'anti-climax'


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

chico enrico said:


> Yes. i drummed on their first few 7" singles and am still in touch.
> 
> dunno how those folk in oxford could have ever got those bizarre idea but not an iota of truth in any of them. and it was andy who did the cartoon sleeves and dave fanning who did the hawkwind type hippy artwork.
> 
> both as london as jellied eels, both still living in hackney, both still doing well, doing artwork, making music and both black belts in about every martial art known to man, having practiced them for the past 30 years, so it'd be a pretty stupid and suicidal 'gangster' who ever messed with either of them!



Good to hear.
Claimed they were ex-Hackney squatters?
By the sound of it Bullshitters

Andy Martin did Shotokan didn't he?

Have you still got punk obituary, wouldn't mind getting a tape of it some time?


----------



## chico enrico (Jul 15, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Good to hear.
> Claimed they were ex-Hackney squatters?
> By the sound of it Bullshitters
> 
> ...




if you go to www.killyourpetpuppy.co.uk you can download it there. don't have any of the LPs myself. 

(but really, you're best off downloading their early tapes, before they started releasing records. that's by far their best stuff.)

a lot of the hackney squatter types who were part of that scene post on the KYPP forum as well. 

yes, they both did shotokan and about everything else that enables you to karate chop paving stones in half and kick holes in doors. dave now teaches some sword fighting martial art. 

think there's a couple of other ex-apostles members who post on here too!


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

chico enrico said:


> if you go to www.killyourpetpuppy.co.uk you can download it there. don't have any of the LPs myself.
> 
> (but really, you're best off downloading their early tapes, before they started releasing records. that's by far their best stuff.)
> 
> ...



Thanks!


----------



## Nigel (Jul 15, 2009)

Really good site!
Liked the Fall stuff.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Jul 16, 2009)

Nigel said:


> Would you trust Workers Power international section to baby sit for your children?



One word.

REVO.


----------



## chico enrico (Jul 17, 2009)

chico enrico said:


> nah. crawbar was more a brixton squatters paper surely?
> 
> class war up until it became a federation (1984 or 85 if i remember right)
> 
> ...



actually, ive just noticed that i _totally_ got the OP of this thread wrong. the above are what i reckon are the *BEST* @ papers ever.

(apart from BF and freedom which are just shite)


----------



## Ungrateful (Jul 20, 2009)

At the risk of severe understatement, the current _Mayday_ really isn't great, however parts of the earlier editions weren't too bad.  One of _Mayday_'s main problem with it was that it was never going to live up to some of the more excessive hype.... It's good to be enthusiastic about your 'zine, its another thing to be almost delusional about it. 

Having said that, I wonder how many critics of anarchist zines have tried putting one out? And did so successfully? 

It's not easy producing a good-looking, accessible, cheap, interesting, worthwhile magazine (hell multinational specialists find it difficult) and then to distribute it so that it has a chance of finding a readership. There are few lefty bookshops and alternative record shops which used to pepper our town centres. There are few big demos and marches which used to provide a meeting point. Even social space is privatised. You can't sell papers outside supermarkets anymore, because the massive car parks that surround them are 'privately owned', and councils either crack down on street sellers. So credit to all of them, including the TBH, for at least trying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

which parts of the earlier editions 'weren't too bad'? cos no parts of any of them have looked too top to me.


----------



## Ungrateful (Jul 20, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> which parts of the earlier editions 'weren't too bad'? cos no parts of any of them have looked too top to me.



I'm not saying they were 'top' (just 'not bad') an important distinction, and the reason, perhaps Mayday tanked so badly because it was claiming to be oh so much more  ....  anyway in answer to your question, whilst I'm not a massive fan of Dave Douglas in general, his diagnosis in issue 1 was passionate, articulate and pertinent (though my disagreement with it, would take longer than the article).


----------



## durruti02 (Jul 20, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> er - this is the WORST anarchist magazine thread, not the mildly shit anarchist magazine thread


 but its just not possible to have just one 'worst' @ mag 

.. it's like saying your favourite track/record .. there are multiple answers!!


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 21, 2009)

Ungrateful said:


> I'm not saying they were 'top' (just 'not bad') an important distinction, and the reason, perhaps Mayday tanked so badly because it was claiming to be oh so much more  ....  anyway in answer to your question, whilst I'm not a massive fan of Dave Douglas in general, his diagnosis in issue 1 was passionate, articulate and pertinent (though my disagreement with it, would take longer than the article).



You know, given the effort/personnel involved (or not)/ money etc then I am happy with what we did/are doing. Things could have been done differently to be sure, but the pressures enabled expedient decisions to be made. I would rather have done what we did than not to have done so, and I like this tbh. Its different, doing things in a way that is trying to carve out something new. Mayday is not the finished item 2bs (to be sure) but it certainly has something, and is quite clear about the political space which it is trying to encourage.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 21, 2009)

Just a point, the anarchist magazines are uniformally poor, not worth reading. Like this thread really. The silly boys spout off in a very predictable manner, which ironically is like the content of the other magazines.


----------



## trevhagl (Oct 21, 2009)

Mr Smin said:


> Seems elitist to miss off Class War just because it's a newspaper rather than a magazine



it's the only READABLE and interesting one i can remember seeing, apart from parts of Now Or never


----------



## trevhagl (Oct 21, 2009)

most anarchist mags are humourless and concentrate on minor issues / foreign issues that the average geezer in the street isn't interested in.


----------



## fogbat (Oct 21, 2009)

Anarchist magazines would be much improved if they had tv listings. And possibly a roundup of the week's soap stories.


----------



## chico enrico (Oct 21, 2009)

trevhagl said:


> most anarchist mags are humourless and concentrate on minor issues / foreign issues that the average geezer in the street isn't interested in.



got it in one mate.

WAG is good though. you should try and get hold of that.


----------



## ewok (Nov 3, 2009)

Nigel said:


> I know this is slightly off topic, but as far as Anarcho Punk stuff goes The Apostles, album covers were pretyy interesting stuff.
> 
> Was working with some guys in Oxford who said they were around that scene.
> Talked about the guy who did the illustrations/art work/graphics.
> ...



Remember the covers.  they used to send me a lot of stuff when I was doing fanzines


----------



## Nigel (Nov 6, 2009)

ewok said:


> Remember the covers.  they used to send me a lot of stuff when I was doing fanzines


Have you still got any?
If you've got old copies of XTRA would be interested in getting illustrastions on the back!


----------



## Nigel (Nov 6, 2009)

Some of the corniest and bizzare libertairian politico writings around were in Skin Two(fetish mag, glossy)
There was a classic line,"....somehow wearing black and living in squats capitalism still managed to survive"


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Nov 6, 2009)

chico enrico said:


> .
> 
> WAG is good though. you should try and get hold of that.



WAG would be good if they used a readable font, and put it on a plainish background so that people could actually read it!


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 6, 2009)

trevhagl said:


> most anarchist mags are humourless and concentrate on minor issues / foreign issues that the average geezer in the street isn't interested in.


Yeah, but on the other hand, you just used the word "geezer" as if it's something that anybody has ever said in normal conversation, so forgive me if I'm reluctant to listen to what you have to say about communication.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 6, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Yeah, but on the other hand, you just used the word "geezer" as if it's something that anybody has ever said in normal conversation, so forgive me if I'm reluctant to listen to what you have to say about communication.



You could do with forgetting the form and understanding the content, (the former doesn't negate the latter) you're refusing to listen just like the old left.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 6, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> You could do with forgetting the form and understanding the content, (the former doesn't negate the latter) you're refusing to listen just like the old left.


I'm refusing to listen to trevhagl because he's a nutter who doesn't actually know what he's talking about.  If I wanted to appeal to people like him I'd give up on politics altogether and try to get a job on the next Guy Ritchie abortion.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 6, 2009)

Incidentally, Class War is patronising, juvenile bullshit written by university graduates who think that they'll look prolier if they write like they've just drank a four pack of spesh.

Also, the politics are piss poor and it's not even that funny.


----------



## Zhelezniakov (Nov 7, 2009)

When class war was started it had maybe 20 odd people in it, 17 of whom had never been any where near a university, myself included. In fact if anything its class composition was lumpen and it attracted people wouldn't have dreamed of going anywhere near a political organisation. I have known just about about everybody who was responsible for putting the class war paper out, and with a few exceptions, they were not university graduates. That was a myth put about by people with an axe to grind, like yourself.
If the politics were piss poor that's a matter of opinion isn't it, but then it has managed to get across more ideas about basic class solidarity, than the rest of grown up, sleep inducing, and underwhelming anarchist scene put together many times over. Good to see that it still has the ability to wind the likes of you up  When is your revolution due 3011 ?


----------



## durruti02 (Nov 7, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Yeah, but on the other hand, you just used the word "geezer" as if it's something that anybody has ever said in normal conversation, so forgive me if I'm reluctant to listen to what you have to say about communication.


 you've never lived in w/c  london then?


----------



## durruti02 (Nov 7, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Incidentally, Class War is patronising, juvenile bullshit written by university graduates who think that they'll look prolier if they write like they've just drank a four pack of spesh.
> 
> Also, the politics are piss poor and it's not even that funny.



yeah piss poor politics lol

http://libcom.org/library/unfinished-business-politics-of-class-war 

( btw that  libcom intro is idiotic????)


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 8, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> you've never lived in w/c  london then?


I've never lived in any part of London, I have better taste than that.

And yes, Unfinished Business is piss-poor, reading Class War try to explain why soldiers are working class but the police are middle class is like watching a quadriplegic attempt summersaults.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 8, 2009)

re:Zhelezniakov, I don't know about Class War (the paper) when it first started, because I wasn't around then, and I don't really give a shit.  I've read recent issues of Class War and it's weak as fuck, whatever you may have been in the late 80s and early 90s, what's left is the shambling corpse of the rump of an organisation that dissolved itself over ten years ago.


----------



## PeterTCA (Nov 8, 2009)

Zhelezniakov said:


> When class war was started it had maybe 20 odd people in it, 17 of whom had never been any where near a university, myself included. In fact if anything its class composition was lumpen and it attracted people wouldn't have dreamed of going anywhere near a political organisation. I have known just about about everybody who was responsible for putting the class war paper out, and with a few exceptions, they were not university graduates. That was a myth put about by people with an axe to grind, like yourself.
> If the politics were piss poor that's a matter of opinion isn't it, but then it has managed to get across more ideas about basic class solidarity, than the rest of grown up, sleep inducing, and underwhelming anarchist scene put together many times over. Good to see that it still has the ability to wind the likes of you up  When is your revolution due 3011 ?




Good post.

If fellow comrades are to be vilified then it's only reasonable that the matter is backed up with evidence.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 8, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I'm refusing to listen to trevhagl because he's a nutter who doesn't actually know what he's talking about.  If I wanted to appeal to people like him I'd give up on politics altogether and try to get a job on the next Guy Ritchie abortion.



Funnily enough I know Trev, he's been around longer than you and done more than you. Infact, I am not sure you have actually done anything, but that was not my point in posting this.

I am offended by the prejeudicial and judgemental approach you are taking.

The thing is he is your authentic working class, part of the opposition to the fash in the land of the Prince bishops. He may not have the academic education you have, but if politics is to be anything meaningful it has to involve our Trev. 

Your version of leftism is currently just mediated anarchism, trying to insert itself into the historical process but never being part of it. You and others such as limpcok promote a dry perfectly formed ultra left linear narrative of politics which is not human (it is mistaken as to the human condition and irrelevant to the popular multitude).


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 8, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> re:Zhelezniakov, I don't know about Class War (the paper) when it first started, because I wasn't around then, and I don't really give a shit.  I've read recent issues of Class War and it's weak as fuck, whatever you may have been in the late 80s and early 90s, what's left is the shambling corpse of the rump of an organisation that dissolved itself over ten years ago.



I agree the paper has been poor for a long time since and before the split. Since the split it has been variable in content, some essential reading, a lot of pap. I am not a fan of the knee jerk 'fuck this hang them' approach to recent issues, it has not been authentic to me. It is impotent leftism when it is not tied to any struggle.

I made an effort to take over editorship, i suggested that myself and Ian should edit it (and a graphic designer) to do a 21st century version (what it still needs imho), but I got shown the door for suggesting that

The thing is Class War DID influence a lot of people, hence the sudden and recent new growth of groups reforming around Britain. Whereas the *anarchists and limpcok have never done or been anything*, have had no impact on class consciousness at all and that is the only place that matters.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 8, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> Funnily enough I know Trev, he's been around longer than you and done more than you. Infact, I am not sure you have actually done anything, but that was not my point in posting this.
> 
> I am offended by the prejeudicial and judgemental approach you are taking.
> 
> ...


To be fair, all you little people look so tiny from this comfy ivory tower of mine that it's hard not to look down on you.  I could explain further, but I'm off to sodomise the house boy and beat the maid.

P.s. You actually know fuck all about me, try not to make silly assumptions, eh?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 8, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> To be fair, all you little people look so tiny from this comfy ivory tower of mine that it's hard not to look down on you.  I could explain further, but I'm off to sodomise the house boy and beat the maid.
> 
> P.s. You actually know fuck all about me, try not to make silly assumptions, eh?



I didn't make silly assumptions tithead in the ivory tower. I said (go read it again, or are you too busy doing fuckall?)_ I wasn't sure whether you had actually done anything_. That is a cue for you to say what you HAVE done. 

I notice you didn't answer the more Political questions too.


----------



## Mallard (Nov 8, 2009)

Mayday for me. It's all over the shop.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 8, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> the labour required to maintain societal infrastructure, to feed and clothe and so on, would no longer take much of people's days, but perhaps a couple of hours a day.



This is fanciful. True that capitalism squanders huge amounts of energy in wasteless productivity, true that its a cruel and barbaric way of production and distribution.

Its nonsense though to think that a society putting aside capitalist industrial growth, for example, isn't going to be one of heavy toil and divided labour. Think of the effort required in agriculture or medicine alone. A post revolutionary society is still going to need tools, tractors, power, lorries etc, unless you wish to work every daylight hour toiling the land.

Medicine, for all its ills, requires very specialised labour. How many will be nursing our increasingly elderly population if they only do 2-3 hours a day?

You need a different approach to industrialisation. Somehow a revolution in work and social stratification. The world is not going to throw away its healthcare, mobile phones, or even internet message boards. If we want them we are going to carry on working and the situation is even more acute if the world is split between the post revolutionary societies and those that aren't. The struggle for a share of resources is going to mean producing a surplus in something. 2-3 hours working with the rest spent producing art and expressing our true selves won't get the washing up done.


----------



## Shevek (Nov 9, 2009)

Mr Moose said:


> 2-3 hours working with the rest spent producing art and expressing our true selves won't get the washing up done.



lolol


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> I didn't make silly assumptions tithead in the ivory tower. I said (go read it again, or are you too busy doing fuckall?)_ I wasn't sure whether you had actually done anything_. That is a cue for you to say what you HAVE done.


I was actually referring to your factually innacurate (and somewhat hypocritical) sideswipe at my supposed level of "academic education"



> I notice you didn't answer the more Political questions too.


There weren't any "political questions" in your post, or any questions, come to think of it.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> A) I was actually referring to your factually innacurate (and somewhat hypocritical) sideswipe at my supposed level of "academic education"
> 
> 
> B)There weren't any "political questions" in your post, or any questions, come to think of it.



A) Give it a break. Are you denying your level of education?

B) You missed this then? "Your version of leftism is currently just mediated anarchism, trying to insert itself into the historical process but never being part of it. You and others such as limpcok promote a dry perfectly formed ultra left linear narrative of politics which is not human (it is mistaken as to the human condition and irrelevant to the popular multitude)."


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 9, 2009)

Mallard said:


> Mayday for me. It's all over the shop.



Wtf does that mean? It looks like a meaningless opinion.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> A) Give it a break. Are you denying your level of education?


Go on then doctor, tell me about my level of education, since you supposedly know so much about me.



> You missed this then? "Your version of leftism is currently just mediated anarchism, trying to insert itself into the historical process but never being part of it. You and others such as limpcok promote a dry perfectly formed ultra left linear narrative of politics which is not human (it is mistaken as to the human condition and irrelevant to the popular multitude)."


I didn't miss it, it's just not a question, it's a load of pointless jargon and insults devoid of any real political content.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> A) Go on then doctor, tell me about my level of education, since you supposedly know so much about me.
> 
> 
> I didn't miss it, it's just not a question, it's a load of pointless jargon and insults devoid of any real political content.



A) I asked you the question, you are the one who knows? Or have you been out of it way too much?

B)  _"Your version of leftism is currently just mediated anarchism, trying to insert itself into the historical process but never being part of it. You and others such as limpcok promote a dry perfectly formed ultra left linear narrative of politics which is not human (it is mistaken as to the human condition and irrelevant to the popular multitude)". _

Au contraire, you are just opting out of a political answer. It is quite clear what I said, that you are an ultra leftist, of the anarchist type. If you are unwilling to face facts there is nothing else that can be done, and other people can see that you are ducking the issue.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> A) I asked you the question, you are the one who knows? Or have you been out of it way too much?


I'm not denying anything, it's just that my level of education (A level, if you really care) is irrelevant.  What I know about politics I picked up from reading in my spare time and listening to what other, more experienced people have to say about what they've done and where they've been.

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier, by the way.  You assume that because I'm able to express myself in writing and I know a bit of political theory, I must have had an unusually high level of formal education that somehow relates directly to politics.  Class War commit the same basic error and then compound it by assuming that the best way to appeal to people who don't have degrees or high paying jobs is to communicate crassly stupid ideas in a glib fashion.



> Au contraire, you are just opting out of a political answer. It is quite clear what I said, that you are an ultra leftist, of the anarchist type. If you are unwilling to face facts there is nothing else that can be done, and other people can see that you are ducking the issue.


Oh really, and what is it about my politics that is "ultra leftist", specifically, and why does it matter?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Class War commit the same basic error and then compound it by assuming that the best way to appeal to people who don't have degrees or high paying jobs is to communicate crassly stupid ideas in a glib fashion.


when was the last time you read class war?


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> when was the last time you read class war?


It's about two years since I actually read an issue cover to cover.  I only need to sniff bullshit once to know what it smells like.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I only need to sniff bullshit once to know what it smells like.


you should change your homepage then.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> you should change your homepage then.


Is "I know you are but what am I?" really the best you can do?

I suppose it's about the level of "wit" found in your paper.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I suppose it's about the level of "wit" found in your paper.


wag's been one of the anarchist publishing successes of the past year, i think you'll find. which issue of wag were you particularly unhappy with?


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> wag's been one of the anarchist publishing successes of the past year, i think you'll find. which issue of wag were you particularly unhappy with?


I meant Class War.  As it happens, I've never read (or even heard of) wag, is it that Irish anarchafeminist magazine written with a comedy speech impediment?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I meant Class War.  As it happens, I've never read (or even heard of) wag, is it that Irish anarchafeminist magazine written with a comedy speech impediment?


you may have meant what you like - i'm not in class war. wag is the paper of the whitechapel anarchist group, as seen in (inter alia) the evening standard and daily mail.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> you may have meant what you like - i'm not in class war.


But you were in the past, no?



> wag is the paper of the whitechapel anarchist group, as seen in (inter alia) the evening standard and daily mail.


Hadn't read that, providing the Daily Mail with the sort of quotes they want from anarchists about the G20 isn't exactly difficult.  Chris Knight was already doing that effectively enough.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> But you were in the past, no?


so?




> Hadn't read that, providing the Daily Mail with the sort of quotes they want from anarchists about the G20 isn't exactly difficult.  Chris Knight was already doing that effectively enough.


so you're speaking from a position of ignorance throughout.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 9, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> so?


So it's not unreasonable to assume that you still are, given that I'm not given to following who finally faced facts and left Class War from one week to the next.



> so you're speaking from a position of ignorance throughout.


Why would you expect otherwise on the subject of a paper I've never read by a group I'm only periphally aware of?


----------



## audiotech (Nov 9, 2009)

chico enrico said:


> if you go to www.killyourpetpuppy.co.uk you can download it there. don't have any of the LPs myself.



Some early Crisis stuff on there to download, so thanks.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 9, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> A) I'm not denying anything, it's just that my level of education (A level, if you really care) is irrelevant.  What I know about politics I picked up from reading in my spare time and listening to what other, more experienced people have to say about what they've done and where they've been.
> 
> This is exactly what I was talking about earlier, by the way.  You assume that because I'm able to express myself in writing and I know a bit of political theory, I must have had an unusually high level of formal education that somehow relates directly to politics.  Class War commit the same basic error and then compound it by assuming that the best way to appeal to people who don't have degrees or high paying jobs is to communicate crassly stupid ideas in a glib fashion.
> 
> B) Oh really, and what is it about my politics that is "ultra leftist", specifically, and why does it matter?



A) I may have been confusing you with somebody else, but the annoying pedant line you do so well. I agree with a lot of what you say about the recent Class Wars btw. However, done properly, in the midst of mass class struggle then the Class War brand was undoutedly the most popular thing the British anarchist movement has produced. The 'Fuck the POll Tax' stickers for example would be grabbed out of your hand in the city centre boozers (i remember this very well) - it made the 'anarchist' label irrelevant because it was popular consciousness.  Something the Afed has never and I cannot see ever doing.

B) If you are Afed its ultra leftist, if you do not know what that means, or why, look it up. I am against anarchism being just another variety of ultra leftism, which unfortunately poisons too much of the class struggle anarchists in the UK to make them useful.


----------



## In Bloom (Nov 12, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> A) I may have been confusing you with somebody else, but the annoying pedant line you do so well. I agree with a lot of what you say about the recent Class Wars btw. However, done properly, in the midst of mass class struggle then the Class War brand was undoutedly the most popular thing the British anarchist movement has produced. The 'Fuck the POll Tax' stickers for example would be grabbed out of your hand in the city centre boozers (i remember this very well) - it made the 'anarchist' label irrelevant because it was popular consciousness.  Something the Afed has never and I cannot see ever doing.


Frankly, I'm deeply sceptical of Class War's claims to have made such a massive impact in the past, given that virtually nobody outside of the activist milleu has ever heard of them.



> If you are Afed its ultra leftist, if you do not know what that means, or why, look it up. I am against anarchism being just another variety of ultra leftism, which unfortunately poisons too much of the class struggle anarchists in the UK to make them useful.


I know what I mean by ultra-left, I want to know what you mean by it and why you think that the AF is "ultra-left".  Not a lot to ask for, really.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 12, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Frankly, I'm deeply sceptical of Class War's claims to have made such a massive impact in the past, given that virtually nobody outside of the activist milleu has ever heard of them.



TBH is making a fool of himself here, but this simply isn't true.


----------



## Rod Sleeves (Nov 12, 2009)

Classwar is the only anarchist group most people I know over thirty have ever heard of, except maybe the Wombles. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is another matter.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 12, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> TBH is making a fool of himself here, but this simply isn't true.



You are the fool Butchers, I stand by what I write. There is a big ultra left streak in anarchism, and imho it is THE problem holding movement(S) back.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> You are the fool Butchers, I stand by what I write.


Someone has to, and no-one else will volunteer!


> There is a big ultra left streak in anarchism, and imho it is THE problem holding movement(S) back.


Big? Do you mean in anarchist terms (i.e. there are 5 "ultra left" anarchists in the UK) or in real terms (i.e. a majority of anarchists in the UK are "ultra left"?
And why, if you've given the subject as much thought as you imply, would it be "THE problem holding movement(s) back"? Surely you're not saying that anarchism is such a "narrow church" that the same issue would impinge on the entire "congregation"?
Or perhaps you are.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 13, 2009)

Rod Sleeves said:


> Classwar is the only anarchist group most people I know over thirty have ever heard of, except maybe the Wombles. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is another matter.



"Class War" gave good slogan, and even better (for the media, anyway), they made a good story.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 14, 2009)

ViolentPanda said:


> Someone has to, and no-one else will volunteer!
> 
> Big? Do you mean in anarchist terms (i.e. there are 5 "ultra left" anarchists in the UK) or in real terms (i.e. a majority of anarchists in the UK are "ultra left"?
> And why, if you've given the subject as much thought as you imply, would it be "THE problem holding movement(s) back"? Surely you're not saying that anarchism is such a "narrow church" that the same issue would impinge on the entire "congregation"?
> Or perhaps you are.



Anarchism in its 57 varieties is a massive church. The problem imho is that some want to write the tablets of stone and create an artificial and pure 'anarchist communism' with no basis in the multitude/class consciousness. It affects those like Butchers, Limpcok, and others whose 'Marxism' is abstracted out of the class struggle and then imposed back upon it. They do not genuinely experiment and open politics up to participation by the multitude. 

These ultra leftists think, like the old left and the bourgeoisie, that there is a linear narrative, they have no praxis and just self referentially contruct 'we are right we are' when they are totally isolated from the multitude. Their 'poitics' is never opened up to difference and movement. They are totally useless and it is really sad. They do nothing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 14, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> Anarchism in its 57 varieties is a massive church. The problem imho is that some want to write the tablets of stone and create an artificial and pure 'anarchist communism' with no basis in the multitude/class consciousness.


The only "anarchists" I've ever spoken with who want to fossilise their credo are the primmies, and that's only because they're more at home with stone tablets than printing presses.


> It affects those like Butchers, Limpcok, and others whose 'Marxism' is abstracted out of the class struggle and then imposed back upon it.


And yours isn't?
Attending the Durham Miner's Gala and shaking Dave Douglass's cock for him after he's had a piss doesn't make you at one with the class struggle, wack. It just means that you're attempting to impose *your* Marxism more subtly than others you perceive to be doing so. 


> They do not genuinely experiment...


We'll only find out what works by doing, not taking part in "experiments" or writing articles to fill the mind-numbing theoretical journals.


> and open politics up to participation by the multitude.


Participation is about people *wanting* to take part and doing so, not about offering them a host of choices, for them to ignore at leisure.


> These ultra leftists think, like the old left and the bourgeoisie, that there is a linear narrative...


There is. It runs alongside (but separate from) the non-linear narrative. 


> ...they have no praxis...


Well, that depends on how you're defining the word. After all, what is "praxis" but "practice" with a spin, a word deployed by academics to gloss their wafflings? 


> ...and just self referentially contruct 'we are right we are' when they are totally isolated from the multitude. Their 'poitics' is never opened up to difference and movement. They are totally useless and it is really sad. They do nothing.


See, I'd have more respect for you ranting on like this if you had the self-awareness to realise your own guilt in such matters, but you appear to have clung to the perception that you are the only true arbiter of what is or isn't right, of who is or isn't "anarchist".


----------



## Red Cat (Nov 14, 2009)

ViolentPanda said:


> Well, that depends on how you're defining the word. After all, what is "praxis" but "practice" with a spin, a word deployed by academics to gloss their wafflings?



I don't agree with that. Its meaning is practice informed by theory which is informed by practice. The theory is modified by what is learned in practice, which in turn changes practice, which again produces a different outcome, which then changes the theory etc. Its a cyclical relationship. Or experimental as BH said. Or in your own words:



ViolentPanda said:


> We'll only find out what works by doing



Praxis.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2009)

ViolentPanda said:


> Attending the Durham Miner's Gala and shaking Dave Douglass's cock for him after he's had a piss doesn't make you at one with the class struggle,


----------



## Mallard (Nov 14, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> Wtf does that mean? It looks like a meaningless opinion.



A polite way of saying the issue I read was rambling and pretty incoherent at times and I gave up after a bit. The bits I read seemed more mechanistic  marxist than anarchist to me. But what the fuck do I know? I am entitled to an opinion though.  No offence I hope it does well.


----------



## Ralph Masters (Nov 14, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I voted for _Anarchy: A journal of paedos and beardos_, but only because they OP was slack and missed out _Green Anarchist_
> 
> As far as good ones go, RAG (the Irish anarchafeminist mag) is good, if a little liberal at times, Direct Action is okay.  Don't think I've ever read any of the others in the poll (except for Organise, of course).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 15, 2009)

Red Cat said:


> I don't agree with that. Its meaning is practice informed by theory which is informed by practice. The theory is modified by what is learned in practice, which in turn changes practice, which again produces a different outcome, which then changes the theory etc. Its a cyclical relationship. Or experimental as BH said. Or in your own words:
> 
> 
> 
> Praxis.



In other words, a word that academics use in _lieu_ of saying "learning through experience".
My bugbear with TBH is his fondness for letting his use of Academese stray into his "public" writings, when it'd be far better to use forms of words that people don't have to scratch their heads about, however much using Academese turns him on.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 15, 2009)

ViolentPanda said:


> A) The only "anarchists" I've ever spoken with who want to fossilise their credo are the primmies, and that's only because they're more at home with stone tablets than printing presses.
> 
> B)And yours isn't?
> Attending the Durham Miner's Gala and shaking Dave Douglass's cock for him after he's had a piss doesn't make you at one with the class struggle, wack. It just means that you're attempting to impose *your* Marxism more subtly than others you perceive to be doing so.
> ...



A) THat doesn't mean that they are not fossilising it, it is a de facto fossilisation - i am quite aware they think otherwise.

B) Au contraire, I have always said that there is no imposition, it is about spreading the struggles. Look at the recent stuff during the postal dispute, Mayday covered the dispute in process and had the best agitational propaganda. BTW your straw man, Dave Douglass and the miners, is a laughable provocation, that is a small part of what I do.

C) Experiments are DOING, it is time to realise that all participation IS experiment, and a chance to reflect.

D) Participation is encouraged or not, imho the anarchists separate themselves off from ordinary people by setting up too many political obstacles to engage.

E) THe Linear narrative may exist, but it is a totally false construction imposed on the real world.

F) Praxis indicates a level of theory qualitatively different from what existed orginally, normally better and an improvement upon what existed before.

G) FFS of course I know my limitations, you lot spend so much time telling me... But I also know what efforts there are are not only not enough, they are poor, partial, and barely existing, and those who could do something about it choose not to, and remain enclosed within their self referential little world. 

Look, I say things as a participant, my narrative is my own, I know there are more truths out there too, I know that they think they are right. THey have not got beyond the illusion that 'they are right though'. I have got past that particular barrier and that is why I concentrate upon praxis and promote struggles. There is plenty of evidence that others toss off about everything under the sun, my focus is clear as can be seen in the history of my posts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> Look, I say things as a participant, my narrative is my own,


is it a linear or non-linear one?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 16, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> is it a linear or non-linear one?



It is a non linear one, however the dialectician within me also pays attention to the evidence used to support the linear one(s). It would be silly not to.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 16, 2009)

Mallard said:


> A)A polite way of saying the issue I read was rambling and pretty incoherent at times and I gave up after a bit.
> B)The bits I read seemed more mechanistic  marxist than anarchist to me. But what the fuck do I know? I am entitled to an opinion though.  No offence I hope it does well.



A) Which issue, cover? Articles?

B) Which bits?

No offence taken btw. I do like independent opinion.


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 16, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> Anarchism in its 57 varieties is a massive church. The problem imho is that some want to write the tablets of stone and create an artificial and pure 'anarchist communism' with no basis in the multitude/class consciousness. It affects those like Butchers, Limpcok, and others whose 'Marxism' is abstracted out of the class struggle and then imposed back upon it. They do not genuinely experiment and open politics up to participation by the multitude.
> 
> These ultra leftists think, like the old left and the bourgeoisie, that there is a linear narrative, they have no praxis and just self referentially contruct 'we are right we are' when they are totally isolated from the multitude. Their 'poitics' is never opened up to difference and movement. They are totally useless and it is really sad. They do nothing.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 16, 2009)

The39thStep said:


>



It is a shame it passes you by.


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 16, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> It is a non linear one, however the dialectician within me also pays attention to the evidence used to support the linear one(s). It would be silly not to.




Is its non-linearity the reason why no-one can follow what you say?


----------



## rioted (Nov 16, 2009)

kropotkin said:


> Is its non-linearity the reason why no-one can follow what you say?


You can only follow linear logic? Marxist?


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 16, 2009)

kropotkin said:


> Is its non-linearity the reason why no-one can follow what you say?



You've come to the table late.


----------



## The Black Hand (Nov 16, 2009)

rioted said:


> You can only follow linear logic? Marxist?


Anarchist?

I agree, they haven't got a clue as to the pedigree of ideas.


----------



## Mallard (Nov 17, 2009)

The Black Hand said:


> A) Which issue, cover? Articles?
> 
> B) Which bits?
> 
> No offence taken btw. I do like independent opinion.



a) Issue 2? read it about 3/4 months ago.

b) Article on state of nation/left and one on 'theory' if I remember correctly. I borrowed it along with North Eastern Anarchist (from US) from local club as it looked interesting. I did return it after reading!

I'll look out for the next one.


----------

