Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Stalinist Spanish Civil War Artwork Vandalized on San Francisco's Embarcadero
Direct Action to commemorate the beginning of the Spanish Civil War the right way...
July 19th is the anniversary of the beginning of the Spanish Civil War in 1936 -- the beginning of the last significant attempt at an anti-capitalist revolution in the period of revolutions that began in Mexico in 1915 and accelerated after the Russian Revolution of 1917. The revolutionary movement in Spain was defeated by a counter-revolution spearheaded by the Stalinist Soviet Union and it's global puppets and public relations hacks. (See George Orwells's 'Homage to Catalonia' for the best brief introduction to the events surrounding the revolution and counter-revolution in Spain.)
A public art work celebrating the role played by the Abraham Lincoln Battalion, the US dupes of and cannon fodder for the Stalinist counter-revolution in Spain from 1936 to 1939, was dedicated this past May on San Francisco's Embarcadero, behind the fountain on Justin Herman Plaza at the foot of Market Street. Sometime this past week, some person or persons unknown gave this monument to the one of the big lies of 20th century history an appropriate makeover. The Stalinist art work was grafittied with the message, "Viva Durruti Y Orwell," in what appears to be red and black spray paint.
Workers Memory Project
A public art work celebrating the role played by the Abraham Lincoln Battalion, the US dupes of and cannon fodder for the Stalinist counter-revolution in Spain from 1936 to 1939, was dedicated this past May on San Francisco's Embarcadero, behind the fountain on Justin Herman Plaza at the foot of Market Street. Sometime this past week, some person or persons unknown gave this monument to the one of the big lies of 20th century history an appropriate makeover. The Stalinist art work was grafittied with the message, "Viva Durruti Y Orwell," in what appears to be red and black spray paint.
Workers Memory Project
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
really, really fucked.
Why IS Orwell the privileged voice in English on the SCW? After all, Orwell was biased enough to name names to the British government's secret police:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/oct/26/artsnews.booksnews
Then, of course, there was the proud legacy of Jay Lovestone, an anticommunist who ought to have known, right? Maybe that's why he ended up working for the CIA, helping them identify leftists in Central America (and...? well, the bloody record speaks for itself):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Lovestone#Union_and_anti-communist_activities
So... what about you? How far will your embittered anticommunism drive you?
Why IS Orwell the privileged voice in English on the SCW? After all, Orwell was biased enough to name names to the British government's secret police:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/oct/26/artsnews.booksnews
Then, of course, there was the proud legacy of Jay Lovestone, an anticommunist who ought to have known, right? Maybe that's why he ended up working for the CIA, helping them identify leftists in Central America (and...? well, the bloody record speaks for itself):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Lovestone#Union_and_anti-communist_activities
So... what about you? How far will your embittered anticommunism drive you?
just saying...
Stalinism and Stalinists were the most effective force for counter-revolution in the 20th century. In Spain as in many other places they saved the day for capitalism. The authentically revolutionary anarchists should have hunted down and killed every last member of the PCE and the PSUC. It wouldn't have solved all their problems but it would have been a step in the right direction.
Orwell may not have had the most stellar record when it came to his post-Spain activities (even some of his pre-Spain activities...), but he had the intestinal fortitude to tell the truth about Stalinist mendacity, brutality, and counter-revolutionary policy and behavior in Spain and elsewhere at the real risk to his own skin. Let's not forget that he fled Barcelona only a few days before his would-be assassins discovered his whereabouts. To claim that any criticism or struggle against Stalinism, the most hideous perversion of working class idealism, is the same as working for the CIA or the British Empire is a bald-faced lie (typical of Leninists, who cannot imagine that anyone could possibly attack them from the left). The CIA and other ruling class scumbags would never be in favor of the sorts of self-organized experiments in working class autonomy and power (you know, that whole Revolution thing) that occurred in Spain before and during the Civil War, and in other places since. So fuck you and your Stalinist apologetics. Humanity will never be free until the last capitalist is strung up with the guts of the last Stalinist.
shouldn't have reprinted the lies of the show trials in Moscow, without comment, in their press, and even more importantly, shouldn't have endorsed the Republican Government by joining it. Only a minority of Anarchists, including Durrutti along with a handful of Trotskyists, politically opposed the government.
For more information, read Revolution and Counterrevolution in Spain by Felix Morrow.
What "Land and Freedom" directed by Ken Loach.
For more information, read Revolution and Counterrevolution in Spain by Felix Morrow.
What "Land and Freedom" directed by Ken Loach.
While all of the criticisms of Stalin are justified, desecrating art is despicable. And, contrary to one statemen above, the latest euphemism for communist is terrorist (actually, it dates back at least to Nazi Germany) and the US remains staunchly anti-communist and opposed to any advances by any socialist organization or any socialists in the political sphere or anywhere else. The spying being perpetrated by the Democrat-Republicans with our tax dollars, reading all our Emails, listening to all our telephone calls, ad nauseum, and the so-called "terror watch lists" at the airports with now 1 million names are all the usual anti-communist witchhunt. But, I digress, just a little. Back to the desecration of art by alleged anarchists.
I read all of the inscriptions on this very informative and expensive tribute to the anti-fascist resistance in Spain, 1936-1939, and realized that while for me it is just a reminder, for most Americans, it would be the elementary education they never received and should know. And above and beyond that, the record of fighting for anything, BY AMERICAN ALLEGED REVOLUTIONARIES much less socialism, in these fascist times is minimal, at best. We have a society where 25% of the high school students drop out of school in California (with some high schools having a 50% drop out rate), where the adult functional illiteracy rate is about 40% (they can just read and write their name, but not much else), where millions are homeless while millions of homes and apartments sit empty, where millions more rely on food handouts to keep from starving to death while billions are given by Democrats & Republicans to the capitalist class' war machine to maximize their profits (See SF Chronicle, 7/20/08); where there is no national healthcare system as exists in the rest of the industrialized world, resulting in the US being 42nd in life expectancy according to a new study published by Columbia University Press entitled "The Measure of America," where the death penalty continues to exist unlike most of the world including all of Europe, most of Latin America including Mexico, as well as South Africa and Ivory Coast, and we have a government that is openly dedicated to fascism which can hardly wait to use the fascist laws to imprison, torture and murder all socialists, communists, anarchists, peaceniks, labor organizers, civil libertarians and anyone else who has a decent through in their head, demonstrated with every court ruling. YET ALL WE GET IS DESCREATION OF ART BY ALLEGED REVOLUTIONARIES!
Where is the labor organizing to make the workingclass strong enough to carry out a general strike to put an end to the capitalist system and its profit motive in this country, THE ONLY WAY ANYTHING WILL CHANGE?
We know that it is the capitalist class that has the greatest contempt for culture and education as both empower the workingclass to fight for itself to end the horrors of capitalism, the wars caused by its profit motive, and the open fascism that now exists when the democratic facade of capitalism's parliamentary democracy is removed. It is always the arts that are removed from the school system first, especially the workingclass schools, while promotion of the military is escalated.
I am horrified that any art was desecrated. Clearly, this little gang of hoodlums who did this are not interested in organizing labor to put an end to capitalism right here in the USA, the belly of the beast, where we all live, our only hope.
I read all of the inscriptions on this very informative and expensive tribute to the anti-fascist resistance in Spain, 1936-1939, and realized that while for me it is just a reminder, for most Americans, it would be the elementary education they never received and should know. And above and beyond that, the record of fighting for anything, BY AMERICAN ALLEGED REVOLUTIONARIES much less socialism, in these fascist times is minimal, at best. We have a society where 25% of the high school students drop out of school in California (with some high schools having a 50% drop out rate), where the adult functional illiteracy rate is about 40% (they can just read and write their name, but not much else), where millions are homeless while millions of homes and apartments sit empty, where millions more rely on food handouts to keep from starving to death while billions are given by Democrats & Republicans to the capitalist class' war machine to maximize their profits (See SF Chronicle, 7/20/08); where there is no national healthcare system as exists in the rest of the industrialized world, resulting in the US being 42nd in life expectancy according to a new study published by Columbia University Press entitled "The Measure of America," where the death penalty continues to exist unlike most of the world including all of Europe, most of Latin America including Mexico, as well as South Africa and Ivory Coast, and we have a government that is openly dedicated to fascism which can hardly wait to use the fascist laws to imprison, torture and murder all socialists, communists, anarchists, peaceniks, labor organizers, civil libertarians and anyone else who has a decent through in their head, demonstrated with every court ruling. YET ALL WE GET IS DESCREATION OF ART BY ALLEGED REVOLUTIONARIES!
Where is the labor organizing to make the workingclass strong enough to carry out a general strike to put an end to the capitalist system and its profit motive in this country, THE ONLY WAY ANYTHING WILL CHANGE?
We know that it is the capitalist class that has the greatest contempt for culture and education as both empower the workingclass to fight for itself to end the horrors of capitalism, the wars caused by its profit motive, and the open fascism that now exists when the democratic facade of capitalism's parliamentary democracy is removed. It is always the arts that are removed from the school system first, especially the workingclass schools, while promotion of the military is escalated.
I am horrified that any art was desecrated. Clearly, this little gang of hoodlums who did this are not interested in organizing labor to put an end to capitalism right here in the USA, the belly of the beast, where we all live, our only hope.
Destroying art of the Stalinists can't defeat Stalinism.... besides nearly all of those folks are in their graves already.
Handing a well researched, well written leaflet out in front of the exhibit would have been far more effective.
Handing a well researched, well written leaflet out in front of the exhibit would have been far more effective.
as someone deeply committed to preserving the history and memory of workers movements, i would like to learn more about the Workers Memory Project. I am currently involved in a museum project in Spain that, among others, will honor the memory of Durutti in the Spanish Civil War. Is there someone I could discuss the WMP with? thanks.
Well, it's nice to know the American school system can still achieve anything at all, even if that's only the instillation of a fierce anticommunism in the average American. (Often, 'ironically,' by use of Orwell texts.) Almost everywhere else in the world, the so-called "Stalinist" legacy (language most respondents here have accepted uncritically) is treated in an appropriately complex manner. Only here in the USA do "masses" of revolutionaries take the Manichean approach, reducing "Stalinism" to pure evil, against which their own sliver of leftist ideology becomes Pure Good. The other major configuration in American politics that operates that way is that of fundamentalist Christianity. Perhaps that says something about the culture. Consider, someone in the thread above tries to pass off "Land and Freedom" as anything other than Orwell's "Homage" on film. Nothing more nor less. So I repeat: why is Orwell's the privileged voice in English? Particularly when his political behavior calls his political objectivity (to say nothing of morality) into question. Or does political morality not matter? Or do you just ignore inconvenient contradictions? Foam at mouth, rinse, repeat. And you got the nerve to call other people names. (Anonymously.)
As for hunting down and killing every communist they could find, there was a faction of anarchists in Spain that did just that-- Franco's Falangists did so for some 40 years in fact. Funny-- they didn't believe in the elected government either! You got what somebody used to call "common ground." I suppose the "real" anarchists were too busy stopping Nazi Germany to notice, and then defending 3rd world movements against CIA death squads after that, eh? But on the other hand, if we want to play reductionism to its logical limit, what is this silencing of others' free speech and desecration of public memory, other than a particularly weak and cowardly will to power? What, you didn't have the guts to stand there when the crowd was dedicating it, and hand out leaflets with your thoughts on it, or something? And so I repeat the question: where is the logical limit of your willfully-vicious anticommunism? It hardly matters that the CIA no longer hunts commies (no, it's Muslims now, we all know we've always been at war with Eastasia)-- the point was the Lovestone metaphor. All the gonzo reaction to initial questioning of this tantrum-in-paint conveniently ignores the question as well. Naturally-- it can't be answered both honestly, and ethically. It says too much, and some in this conversation obviously feel that their silence will protect them.
Indeed, this whole little defacement thing lacks a certain courage of conviction, unlike those who died in Spain, whatever side they were on. I guess we're on the "then as farce" cycle. For reals-- the Sparts are better-behaved than this.
You want a reduction? Here's one: Shame on you.
As for hunting down and killing every communist they could find, there was a faction of anarchists in Spain that did just that-- Franco's Falangists did so for some 40 years in fact. Funny-- they didn't believe in the elected government either! You got what somebody used to call "common ground." I suppose the "real" anarchists were too busy stopping Nazi Germany to notice, and then defending 3rd world movements against CIA death squads after that, eh? But on the other hand, if we want to play reductionism to its logical limit, what is this silencing of others' free speech and desecration of public memory, other than a particularly weak and cowardly will to power? What, you didn't have the guts to stand there when the crowd was dedicating it, and hand out leaflets with your thoughts on it, or something? And so I repeat the question: where is the logical limit of your willfully-vicious anticommunism? It hardly matters that the CIA no longer hunts commies (no, it's Muslims now, we all know we've always been at war with Eastasia)-- the point was the Lovestone metaphor. All the gonzo reaction to initial questioning of this tantrum-in-paint conveniently ignores the question as well. Naturally-- it can't be answered both honestly, and ethically. It says too much, and some in this conversation obviously feel that their silence will protect them.
Indeed, this whole little defacement thing lacks a certain courage of conviction, unlike those who died in Spain, whatever side they were on. I guess we're on the "then as farce" cycle. For reals-- the Sparts are better-behaved than this.
You want a reduction? Here's one: Shame on you.
Of course, this whole thing could be a lie. Can anyone post a photo please? This would be evidence.
How dare you..equate the falangist fascists with anarchists they killed and mutilated over the years. Thsi is not some abstract point. These were real people who attempted to liberate there part of the world. No matter what we think of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade and the actions around this statue (i'm personally for the actions that try to correct history), your statements are disgusting. Talk abotu your fuckin' impolite people.
Regardless of subjective intentions, and many of them were hard-core Stalinist stooges, the members of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade were utterly exploited by their Stalinist commisars. They sustained a high casualty rate because their commaders were incompetent -- and let's not forget that some number of them were murdered by their commanders as well, in many cases for political deveation fromt he counter-revolutonary Stalinist line. Any non-Stalinist study of the Spanish Civil war shows that the Lincolns were organized and run by the Moscow franchise CPUSA, as were the other national sections of the misnamed Inrenational "Brigades;" most of the national sections were more like battalion strength.
The role of the Stalinist counter-revolution in Spain was to save capitalism, the bourgeois state and the class power of the bourgeosie. This was successful, and was done through police terror and large-scale murder against vast numbers of working class revolutionaries and accompanied by lies afterwards and ever since.
The authentically revolutionary elements in the anarchist movement should have butchered the Stalinists wholesale; that would only have meant killing a few thousand of these counter-revolutionaries at the very beginning of the war, and it might have precluded a million deaths and the defeat of the revolutionary movement during the subsequent war.
The role of the Stalinist counter-revolution in Spain was to save capitalism, the bourgeois state and the class power of the bourgeosie. This was successful, and was done through police terror and large-scale murder against vast numbers of working class revolutionaries and accompanied by lies afterwards and ever since.
The authentically revolutionary elements in the anarchist movement should have butchered the Stalinists wholesale; that would only have meant killing a few thousand of these counter-revolutionaries at the very beginning of the war, and it might have precluded a million deaths and the defeat of the revolutionary movement during the subsequent war.
Is Peter Carroll Peter N. Carroll?
maybe its Peter J. Carroll ;)
No anarchist group or individual has claimed credit for this attack or supported it in any way.
Conclusion: this is cointelpro tricks meant to provoke sectarian fighting instead of resistance to the state.
Don't buy it.
Conclusion: this is cointelpro tricks meant to provoke sectarian fighting instead of resistance to the state.
Don't buy it.
Chuck0 of Infoshop and Lawrence Jarasch of Anarchy magazine have supporting this.
Remember that when they roll into town.
Remember that when they roll into town.
The rest of the anarchists seem pretty non-plussed at the vandalism, even if they seem to accept the standard issue insult term "Stalinist."
Hey, who's refighting the Spanish Civil War? So far it looks like about three people.
Nobody is taking the bait.
Hey, who's refighting the Spanish Civil War? So far it looks like about three people.
Nobody is taking the bait.
Who's refighting the conflicts that took place in--and more importantly, destroyed--the First International? Oh, I know, anarchists and marxists, that's who! The fight over the legacy of what authentic revolution is (or could be) was begun during the First International (especially in the immediate aftermath of the Paris Commune), continued during the Spanish Revolution, and continues to this day. The central questions that have yet to be resolved are: legal vs illegal, centralization vs decentralization, development of the "productive forces" (through capitalist development) vs dismantling them (this is part of the decentralization argument), nationalism vs internationalism, industrial/urban workers vs agricultural workers, and perhaps even more contentiously, the question of the state. If you American exceptionalists think you're fighting some new and/or unique fight, you're bigger fools than you've already shown.
The correct spelling of my name is JARACH, not "Jarasch." I'm not Germanic. My name is a matter of public record and easy to find, so why is it that people can't get it right? It's like spelling Durruti "Durutti" or "Durrutti," as if he were Italian. It's like calling the Wobblies the "International Workers of the World" or spelling Malatesta's first name "Enrico." There's plenty of ignorance masquerading as political discourse already without adding such easily corrected mistakes to the mix.
And for the record, I do not necessarily support the act of vandalism in question; what I support is honest historical inquiry concerning the counter-revolutionary practice of Leninism (of which Stalinism is a subset). What I have been protesting is the fake unity between Stalinists and anarchists that many stupid anarchists insist existed in 1936 and today.
And for the record, I do not necessarily support the act of vandalism in question; what I support is honest historical inquiry concerning the counter-revolutionary practice of Leninism (of which Stalinism is a subset). What I have been protesting is the fake unity between Stalinists and anarchists that many stupid anarchists insist existed in 1936 and today.
Oh yeah, you don't have to wait until I "roll into town"; I live in Berkeley. If you want to start something, you can find me.
The graffiti originally said, "Viva Durruti y Orwell." Some Stalinophile asshole apparently tried to take off the spray paint, then either got high on the brain-damaging fumes in order to keep believing in all the ideological garbage of the Stalinist counter-revolution, or they were overcome by the historical exhaustion of their state capitalist dogma.
Three cheers for the revolutionary vandals! Stalinists -- the Golden Gate Bridge is that way! They say that most people jump facing the city. Hit the water head first and you'll just bounce back up to the observation deck anyway...
Three cheers for the revolutionary vandals! Stalinists -- the Golden Gate Bridge is that way! They say that most people jump facing the city. Hit the water head first and you'll just bounce back up to the observation deck anyway...
the FBI took out two birds with one stone. Not sure hwy getting Bay Area leftists to start fighting is that important to them right now.... maybe a war in Iran brewing or something... seems a bit strange....
Not sure why you think
1. I am somehow connected to the FBI (having been under their surveillance previously certainly isn't the connection you're implying), and
2. I am some kind of leftist. I advise you to do a quick google of my full name to check on the two or three essays I've written concerning the troubled relationship of anarchists to leftists.
Anarchists and anti-Stalinists (and even non-Leninist communists) have always fought Stalinism and bureaucratism within the Left; the monumental ignorance of history and myopia concerning contemporary tensions among and between people who declare themselves to be some kind of opponents to the status quo is no less annoying for its ubiquity. Attempts to paper over the real divisions that exist between anti-statists and everyone who thinks that some repressive apparatus is necessary for revolution are self-defeating.
Not clear on the timing of the vandalism? If you'd read the communique of the art enhancement, you'd have seen that July 19 was chosen because that was the date of the beginning of the Spanish Revolution.
1. I am somehow connected to the FBI (having been under their surveillance previously certainly isn't the connection you're implying), and
2. I am some kind of leftist. I advise you to do a quick google of my full name to check on the two or three essays I've written concerning the troubled relationship of anarchists to leftists.
Anarchists and anti-Stalinists (and even non-Leninist communists) have always fought Stalinism and bureaucratism within the Left; the monumental ignorance of history and myopia concerning contemporary tensions among and between people who declare themselves to be some kind of opponents to the status quo is no less annoying for its ubiquity. Attempts to paper over the real divisions that exist between anti-statists and everyone who thinks that some repressive apparatus is necessary for revolution are self-defeating.
Not clear on the timing of the vandalism? If you'd read the communique of the art enhancement, you'd have seen that July 19 was chosen because that was the date of the beginning of the Spanish Revolution.
What is really important is re-fighting the Spanisg Civil War or if that seems too recent the Russian Revolution or if you are really serious about your beliefs perhaps the French Revolution or German Civil War. Why stop there... the genocide in Serbia was partly about the Invasion by the Turks hundreds of years ago and part of the conflict in Palestine is based of a belief in long claims and making up for wrongs comitted by the Roman Empire. If we could just dig back a little farther we could probably come up with a good argument against humanists for a genocide against Neanderthals
History must be remembered so we can learn from the past but more often than naught evoking history is used to evoke mistakes of the past by blaming broadly defined groups in the present for actions of groups with similar classifications in the past. Are all Muslims in Bosnia guilt for the actions of the Turks when they defeated the Serbs? Are all Christians guilty for the Crusades? Are all Communists guilts for the actions of the USSR? In the US Communists and Anarchists are afterall more of a religious movement than a political one. Yes the fights in the early 1900s were real but the fights that lead to the Sunni Shia split were also political even though the rememberance of the grievance is now almost wholely religious. Stalin wasnt fighting for Communism, and most of those the USSR supported in Spain were not fighting for Stalin (just as Sandanistas were not personally fighting for the Russians and the Afghan Mujahadin wasnt fighting for the US). In the memory of modern day followers of the new ideologies that were born from exciting stories of war and valour, identity and meaning can be gained by seeing onself as part of a mythical struggle with good and evil, heros and villans and epic struggles that will inevitably be played out in the end of days. Its easy to ignore petty concerns of everday people (or perhaps do good works to help build support but with a motivation based more on the long term struggle than human concerns) when one is a soldier in a larger struggle fighting for good in a world of evil.
Vandalism is not that bad in the overall scheme of things but vandalisn of public art put up by a religious group to remember its history doesn't seem like something any movement should back. How would you feel is some other sect destroyed a work of art you put up to remember the history of your religion? All self-decribed religions have done horrible things in the past but then again but many of the horrible things done in the name of religion were done out of a belief that all other religions were evil or at least wrong-minded (and the same can be extended to religions like Communism, Anarchism, Neoliberalism etc...)
History must be remembered so we can learn from the past but more often than naught evoking history is used to evoke mistakes of the past by blaming broadly defined groups in the present for actions of groups with similar classifications in the past. Are all Muslims in Bosnia guilt for the actions of the Turks when they defeated the Serbs? Are all Christians guilty for the Crusades? Are all Communists guilts for the actions of the USSR? In the US Communists and Anarchists are afterall more of a religious movement than a political one. Yes the fights in the early 1900s were real but the fights that lead to the Sunni Shia split were also political even though the rememberance of the grievance is now almost wholely religious. Stalin wasnt fighting for Communism, and most of those the USSR supported in Spain were not fighting for Stalin (just as Sandanistas were not personally fighting for the Russians and the Afghan Mujahadin wasnt fighting for the US). In the memory of modern day followers of the new ideologies that were born from exciting stories of war and valour, identity and meaning can be gained by seeing onself as part of a mythical struggle with good and evil, heros and villans and epic struggles that will inevitably be played out in the end of days. Its easy to ignore petty concerns of everday people (or perhaps do good works to help build support but with a motivation based more on the long term struggle than human concerns) when one is a soldier in a larger struggle fighting for good in a world of evil.
Vandalism is not that bad in the overall scheme of things but vandalisn of public art put up by a religious group to remember its history doesn't seem like something any movement should back. How would you feel is some other sect destroyed a work of art you put up to remember the history of your religion? All self-decribed religions have done horrible things in the past but then again but many of the horrible things done in the name of religion were done out of a belief that all other religions were evil or at least wrong-minded (and the same can be extended to religions like Communism, Anarchism, Neoliberalism etc...)
What the fuck are you talking about? Your incoherent meanderings are just a bunch of postmodernist bullshit: identity this, religious that, blah blah blah.
Anarchists and other anti-state revolutionaries don't have public art you dimwit; we aren't funded by non-profits and NGOs and we don't have grant writers who can get donations from foundations. We wouldn't have to cry when someone who is against our ideas vandalized our monuments, because A. we don't build monuments and B. we already know that most people are against our ideas.
And yes, anyone who calls him/herself a Christian had better come up with some pretty decent explanations for the witchcraze, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the decimation of Native Americans. Saying that those who perpetrated these horrors weren't "real" Christians is not an explanation. And yes, anyone who calls him/herself a communist had better come up with some pretty decent explanations for the suppression of Kronstadt, the Makhnovists, the Shanghai Commune, Spain, post-1945 Eastern Europe, the East Berlin workers in '53, the invasion of Hungary in '56, Czechoslovakia in '68, the sell-out of the French workers in '68, ad nauseum. Saying that those who perpetrated these counter-revolutionary acts weren't "real" communists is not an explanation. And yes, anyone who calls him/herself an anarchist had better come up with some pretty decent explanations for "influential militants" of the CNT-FAI joining the Catalan semi-autonomous government and the Spanish Republic in '36. Saying that those who perpetrated the most serious betrayal of anarchist principles weren't "real" anarchists is not an explanation.
History means something. It's not just people in the past acting in the past. Some of us are trying to apply the lessons of past mistakes to our lives to avoid making the same ones. The mistakes were specific, unlike the vagueness of your inane post. We aren't refighting the same fights--we're trying to update them so the issues will be relevant to contemporary politics. Some of our fake comrades on the Left are still fighting the same fights because they have learned nothing from their own failures--they don't even think of them as failures, but merely the result of the temporary dominance of their enemies on the Right. They are the ones who keep plugging away with their delusional dogmatism, unable and unwilling to learn anything from the past 140 years of struggle. The rest of us, who've abandoned the stupid millstone of authoritarian Leftism (if we ever wore it in the first place), are the ones who are applying the lessons to our lives and struggles.
Anarchists and other anti-state revolutionaries don't have public art you dimwit; we aren't funded by non-profits and NGOs and we don't have grant writers who can get donations from foundations. We wouldn't have to cry when someone who is against our ideas vandalized our monuments, because A. we don't build monuments and B. we already know that most people are against our ideas.
And yes, anyone who calls him/herself a Christian had better come up with some pretty decent explanations for the witchcraze, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the decimation of Native Americans. Saying that those who perpetrated these horrors weren't "real" Christians is not an explanation. And yes, anyone who calls him/herself a communist had better come up with some pretty decent explanations for the suppression of Kronstadt, the Makhnovists, the Shanghai Commune, Spain, post-1945 Eastern Europe, the East Berlin workers in '53, the invasion of Hungary in '56, Czechoslovakia in '68, the sell-out of the French workers in '68, ad nauseum. Saying that those who perpetrated these counter-revolutionary acts weren't "real" communists is not an explanation. And yes, anyone who calls him/herself an anarchist had better come up with some pretty decent explanations for "influential militants" of the CNT-FAI joining the Catalan semi-autonomous government and the Spanish Republic in '36. Saying that those who perpetrated the most serious betrayal of anarchist principles weren't "real" anarchists is not an explanation.
History means something. It's not just people in the past acting in the past. Some of us are trying to apply the lessons of past mistakes to our lives to avoid making the same ones. The mistakes were specific, unlike the vagueness of your inane post. We aren't refighting the same fights--we're trying to update them so the issues will be relevant to contemporary politics. Some of our fake comrades on the Left are still fighting the same fights because they have learned nothing from their own failures--they don't even think of them as failures, but merely the result of the temporary dominance of their enemies on the Right. They are the ones who keep plugging away with their delusional dogmatism, unable and unwilling to learn anything from the past 140 years of struggle. The rest of us, who've abandoned the stupid millstone of authoritarian Leftism (if we ever wore it in the first place), are the ones who are applying the lessons to our lives and struggles.
sounds about right
vandal & anarcho-identity morons = hater
self-righteous critics who dignify this nonsense = idiots
vandal & anarcho-identity morons = hater
self-righteous critics who dignify this nonsense = idiots
Sorry I'm not an educated elitist like you. Guess I'm just fodder in your war to save the world. I know when Im beaten so I'll just slink off and let you make decissions for the rest of us peons.
Like my moma told me, dont argue over what episode of Star Trek is best with a Treky who speaks Klingon.
Like my moma told me, dont argue over what episode of Star Trek is best with a Treky who speaks Klingon.
It said "this machine kills fascists." If that's authoritarian leftism, and apparently you think it is, they that's what I am. I am not really an authoritarian, nor are the socialists I've had the pleasure to work with and know. They were the rebels. Not your experience? I'd like to hear about how socialists, who you call stalinists, have oppressed you. Or hurt you in some way. I suspect they haven't and you are play-acting your uterly dogmatic take on the Spanish Civil War. You act as if the anarchist FAQ is the historical record. It's not. The cutting edge doesn't always get to choose for everyone, and acting in the name of everyone doesn't mean you really do.
This act isn't making anyone a better person, or pushing any struggle forward. It's bad news, I don't trust it. Pick better targets, like those with power and save your arguments for real people who can respond in kind. Pretend you're speaking to people instead of at them. Or be content to reproduce anarcho versions of the most whacked out trotskyist scholasticism. Whatever.
This was fucked up. The Abraham Lincoln Brigades were organized by the Communist Party to put thousands of Americans in the field against Franco, Hitler and them guys. A lot of these people paid with their lives and they weren't fighting to oppress anyone. Nor has that been their effect in the world, a desire to oppress others. They spread brotherhood and commitment. Your debates about angels on the head of a pin and refusal to personify an ideological position is dehumanized and grotesque. I am for socialism and against the anti-social, the politics of fear and fascists. If you think I'm the same thing as Franco because I think the state is a fact of social life (at least as far as my time on the earth), then you stupid and there's no point even trying to talk.
Sectarians come bearing different flags, but they all look the same in the sun. You're all about your flag. I hope you'll see that, but I doubt it.
People make change. Don't get lost in your ideology and lash out because you don't know how to get from here to the better place. Don't pull people down. Make them stronger, more able and open to possibility not weighed down by the past.
I'm a Communist, active for many years. This is how I think, and how the comrades I've known have thought and acted. I think the Communists in Spain had a wrong position. I don't feel governed by the past. People learn different lessons. Looking at Spain, which I have, I didn't think the anarchists were capable. They were deeply confused, even on the question of Revolution. Spain did not, in fact, have a revolution. It could have, and if the Communists hadn't subordinated revolution to the anti-fascist front... who knows. I do know communism in all varieties died for Europe after Spain. And nobody celebrates that.
But you wouldn't even know or care that people aren't caught in the ideological pigeon holes you're trying to force on this. I think you protest a little too much, if you get my drift. Those obsessed with authority and autonomy often have a funny relationship with power. "Power" or authority are not the only ways of understanding social life... really.
That's all I have to say. Carry on with the hi-fidelity, super authentic histrionics.
If I saw someone doing that, painting that over the memorial I mean, I'd punch them in the face. It's a surprising reaction, it's not like I think about this on the regular, but that then makes me totally distrust the situation and the anonymous vitriol I see in these discussions. People disagree. If you've got it worked out, go make your non-authoritarian transformation happen. If it works, I'm with you. I don't think it will so I'm doing something else. Most people are like this.
This act isn't making anyone a better person, or pushing any struggle forward. It's bad news, I don't trust it. Pick better targets, like those with power and save your arguments for real people who can respond in kind. Pretend you're speaking to people instead of at them. Or be content to reproduce anarcho versions of the most whacked out trotskyist scholasticism. Whatever.
This was fucked up. The Abraham Lincoln Brigades were organized by the Communist Party to put thousands of Americans in the field against Franco, Hitler and them guys. A lot of these people paid with their lives and they weren't fighting to oppress anyone. Nor has that been their effect in the world, a desire to oppress others. They spread brotherhood and commitment. Your debates about angels on the head of a pin and refusal to personify an ideological position is dehumanized and grotesque. I am for socialism and against the anti-social, the politics of fear and fascists. If you think I'm the same thing as Franco because I think the state is a fact of social life (at least as far as my time on the earth), then you stupid and there's no point even trying to talk.
Sectarians come bearing different flags, but they all look the same in the sun. You're all about your flag. I hope you'll see that, but I doubt it.
People make change. Don't get lost in your ideology and lash out because you don't know how to get from here to the better place. Don't pull people down. Make them stronger, more able and open to possibility not weighed down by the past.
I'm a Communist, active for many years. This is how I think, and how the comrades I've known have thought and acted. I think the Communists in Spain had a wrong position. I don't feel governed by the past. People learn different lessons. Looking at Spain, which I have, I didn't think the anarchists were capable. They were deeply confused, even on the question of Revolution. Spain did not, in fact, have a revolution. It could have, and if the Communists hadn't subordinated revolution to the anti-fascist front... who knows. I do know communism in all varieties died for Europe after Spain. And nobody celebrates that.
But you wouldn't even know or care that people aren't caught in the ideological pigeon holes you're trying to force on this. I think you protest a little too much, if you get my drift. Those obsessed with authority and autonomy often have a funny relationship with power. "Power" or authority are not the only ways of understanding social life... really.
That's all I have to say. Carry on with the hi-fidelity, super authentic histrionics.
If I saw someone doing that, painting that over the memorial I mean, I'd punch them in the face. It's a surprising reaction, it's not like I think about this on the regular, but that then makes me totally distrust the situation and the anonymous vitriol I see in these discussions. People disagree. If you've got it worked out, go make your non-authoritarian transformation happen. If it works, I'm with you. I don't think it will so I'm doing something else. Most people are like this.
There is no problems with an ideology based purely off of fighting authoritarianism but such ideologies usually produce either single person movements or contradictions where informal hierarchies within Anarchist groups surpass more formal power structures in groups that dont define themselves as anti-auhoritarian.
Ive known many anarchists who had nonanarchist day jobs and managed other people and they were amongst the most authoritarian bosses Ive seen. Ive also known many anarchist movements where people were either subsurviant to string personalities or group think in a way where they would be much less likely to bring up differences than in systems with more formal power structures. Anarchist power structures seem to either take the form of social clique hierarchies where only the cool kids are in the inner circle or academic hierarchies based off esoteric knowledge usuaully unrelated to the modern/real world. Both reward those from rich backgrounds who can afford to network rather than work or study.
Ive known many anarchists who had nonanarchist day jobs and managed other people and they were amongst the most authoritarian bosses Ive seen. Ive also known many anarchist movements where people were either subsurviant to string personalities or group think in a way where they would be much less likely to bring up differences than in systems with more formal power structures. Anarchist power structures seem to either take the form of social clique hierarchies where only the cool kids are in the inner circle or academic hierarchies based off esoteric knowledge usuaully unrelated to the modern/real world. Both reward those from rich backgrounds who can afford to network rather than work or study.
Quote:
haters and idiots
by miles
Thursday Jul 24th, 2008 7:19 PM
What the fuck are you talking about? Your incoherent meanderings are just a bunch of postmodernist bullshit: identity this, religious that, blah blah blah.
Anarchists and other anti-state revolutionaries don't have public art you dimwit; we aren't funded by non-profits and NGOs and we don't have grant writers who can get donations from foundations. We wouldn't have to cry when someone who is against our ideas vandalized our monuments, because A. we don't build monuments and B. we already know that most people are against our ideas.
**** End quote.
Something about people living in glass houses, and all that.
Here's an extremely recent photo of the mural on the side of Bound Together Anarchist Bookstore, in the Haight District of San Francisco. Sure looks like it's doing an awful lot of memorializing; else why would it be covered with busts of fallen comrades? Oh, and that chain-link fence in the right margin of the photo? That's because the courtyard the mural faces is fenced in by the City College of San Francisco, whose property it is.
An anarchist memorial-- secured by the mechanisms private property and a governmental entity! We're just waiting for the shrieks of denunciation from the anarcho-purity "crowd." Most anarchists, apparently, get it-- and have been denouncing the cowardly and public-masturbatory defacing of the memorial to the Abe Lincoln Brigade vets. Just like their red comrades would be livid with rage at the defacing of the anarcho-memorial. We would see it as an attack on the workers and on people's culture, and we would rally to your defense-- just like we did for the working class martyrs Sacco and Vanzetti (who should have a public memorial, if indeed they don't). The truth is that we are all one movement, and the rest is just tactical disagreement. Well, most of us. But every community has its anti-social types to bear.
As far as all-that goes, the City and County of San Francisco very likely get it, as well. They've secured the mural for the anarchists, because politicians (like the Greens who have represented the district at the Board of Supes since they went back to the district system) recognize that the anarchists are a constituency whose votes are worth earning.
Oh, yeah: the evidence. Hint: evidence does not equal a diarrhea of theoretical jargon from your anarchy book. That is screed, polemic, propaganda. But not evidence. Evidence demonstrates the fact in an objective manner. When it's independently replicable, it becomes proof. Therefore, I offer proof of the core contention: a public anarchist memorial, secured by the City and County of San Francisco, California, in late July 2008.
"miles", you're wrong.
haters and idiots
by miles
Thursday Jul 24th, 2008 7:19 PM
What the fuck are you talking about? Your incoherent meanderings are just a bunch of postmodernist bullshit: identity this, religious that, blah blah blah.
Anarchists and other anti-state revolutionaries don't have public art you dimwit; we aren't funded by non-profits and NGOs and we don't have grant writers who can get donations from foundations. We wouldn't have to cry when someone who is against our ideas vandalized our monuments, because A. we don't build monuments and B. we already know that most people are against our ideas.
**** End quote.
Something about people living in glass houses, and all that.
Here's an extremely recent photo of the mural on the side of Bound Together Anarchist Bookstore, in the Haight District of San Francisco. Sure looks like it's doing an awful lot of memorializing; else why would it be covered with busts of fallen comrades? Oh, and that chain-link fence in the right margin of the photo? That's because the courtyard the mural faces is fenced in by the City College of San Francisco, whose property it is.
An anarchist memorial-- secured by the mechanisms private property and a governmental entity! We're just waiting for the shrieks of denunciation from the anarcho-purity "crowd." Most anarchists, apparently, get it-- and have been denouncing the cowardly and public-masturbatory defacing of the memorial to the Abe Lincoln Brigade vets. Just like their red comrades would be livid with rage at the defacing of the anarcho-memorial. We would see it as an attack on the workers and on people's culture, and we would rally to your defense-- just like we did for the working class martyrs Sacco and Vanzetti (who should have a public memorial, if indeed they don't). The truth is that we are all one movement, and the rest is just tactical disagreement. Well, most of us. But every community has its anti-social types to bear.
As far as all-that goes, the City and County of San Francisco very likely get it, as well. They've secured the mural for the anarchists, because politicians (like the Greens who have represented the district at the Board of Supes since they went back to the district system) recognize that the anarchists are a constituency whose votes are worth earning.
Oh, yeah: the evidence. Hint: evidence does not equal a diarrhea of theoretical jargon from your anarchy book. That is screed, polemic, propaganda. But not evidence. Evidence demonstrates the fact in an objective manner. When it's independently replicable, it becomes proof. Therefore, I offer proof of the core contention: a public anarchist memorial, secured by the City and County of San Francisco, California, in late July 2008.
"miles", you're wrong.
Most people on the "left" oppose inequality, poverty, pollution, sexism, racism, war, police violence etc...
Most organizing draws in new activists around things like anti-war protest, protest against polluting factories, protest against bad employers etc...
Words like Progressive, Green, Liberal, etc... get corrupted as people like Clinton or Obama get elected and mainstream ideologies fall apart in compromise over actions like Kosovo, welfare reform, funding for war and the police, Occupation in Palestine etc...
Anarchism and Communism are trustworthy brands you know wont betray you when push comes to shove. Associating with such groups and labels is much less about some utopian future that may never come but about making a strong statement about what one opposes today across issues.
Starting with the revelations of Stalin horrors many realized that the label Communist had high negatives but since the CPUSA at the time was still actually tied to the USSR the break was gradual and consisted of people becoming less involved in politics or becoming Trotskyists (since by associating with someone Stalin killed one is making a strong statement that Stalin is not what one is fighting for)
The generation gap created by the baby boom after WWII also created a problem in existing Communist structures in the US since hierarchical organizations required many years of advancement and what angry teenager or college student is going to want to join an organization where one is just a gopher for the higher-ups. Thus were born New Left groups that ranged from the Communist to the Anarchist with much less labor focus and more focus on the immediate problems of the late 60s and 70s.
With the fall of the USSR and more importantly a larger population from post Communist countries enrolling in US Universities, the Communist label faced new problems. Arguing that the USSR was great up to so and so a year is purely academic in an isolated US context but with Chinese and Russian students having direct memories of realities definitely complicated things.
Seattle gave a 2nd boost to Anarchism but it was mainly one of tactics and message (arther than long term goals or differences in historical analysis).
But, anarchism started to implode in 2005 or so. Sectarianism was one reason; older anarchists didn't like all the youngsters calling themselves Anarchists without knowing the history and ideologies. Anti-ANSWER and anti-ISO organizing by Anarchist also imploded since the argument hung on the idea that movements were being co-opted (which was probably true) but when ANSWER and ISO became less active the Anarchist organizers who were denouncing ANSWER didn't step in to do the organizing around the issues that such groups had been focusing on. In the few cases where Anarchist did try organizing they went in the opposite direction of the complaints; with even vaguer messages and less specific focus on the war in Iraq, domestic spying...
When movements start to retreat is when you expect extremism to emerge. The Revolution was supposed to come but all the people in the streets really were there for the specific issue of the day not over some longer term common goal. At such times those who have committed (even just psychologically) too much of themselves to the inevitability of end-times strike out with blame at others since it must be the fault of someone or some group that a Revolution didn't take place rather than a misunderstanding on why there was short-term popular appeal. I think a paint attack on a Communist memorial should be seen in this context.
One could say that the world needs some new ideologies since both Anarchism and Communism are too tainted, but that misses the point. There are plenty of new labels activists take on (progressive, anti-globalization...) but the problem is that without the history (and mainstream disdain for the labels) new labels usually get corrupted by business and government. Communism and Anarchism have a base of loyal followers (and books that can survive even without followers) that can withstand changes in the political psychology of the public much better than other new groupings. If the US goes to war with Australia in 2100, there will likely be Anarchists and Communists helping organize protests and working through front-groups to change public opinion to end such a war. Other new ideologies will come along and some may even collapse governments, change borders and the like. Communism and Anarchism are unlikely to impact the world in that way ever again. But Communism and Anarchism are a grouping of ideas in terms of immediate organizing that will likely continue much longer than other newer ideologies. Part of the reason they will survive and be useful in terms of resisting tyrany is because like the Protestant religious movements in Europe in the 1400s-1500s (Anabaptists,Thomas Müntzer, Münster Rebellion, etc..) that gave birth to them, the ideals and utopian goals have a deeply humanistic appeal and ideals that can likely never be achieved. Seeing such movements as religious may seem derogatory but Engels' "The Peasant War in Germany" aknowledges suchroots, and ideas and ideologies do afterall have to come from somewhere. Communism and Anarchism are useful but both are useful as a long term means and since they mainly differ on ends that makes them hard to tell apart by those outside of their group of religious followers.
Most organizing draws in new activists around things like anti-war protest, protest against polluting factories, protest against bad employers etc...
Words like Progressive, Green, Liberal, etc... get corrupted as people like Clinton or Obama get elected and mainstream ideologies fall apart in compromise over actions like Kosovo, welfare reform, funding for war and the police, Occupation in Palestine etc...
Anarchism and Communism are trustworthy brands you know wont betray you when push comes to shove. Associating with such groups and labels is much less about some utopian future that may never come but about making a strong statement about what one opposes today across issues.
Starting with the revelations of Stalin horrors many realized that the label Communist had high negatives but since the CPUSA at the time was still actually tied to the USSR the break was gradual and consisted of people becoming less involved in politics or becoming Trotskyists (since by associating with someone Stalin killed one is making a strong statement that Stalin is not what one is fighting for)
The generation gap created by the baby boom after WWII also created a problem in existing Communist structures in the US since hierarchical organizations required many years of advancement and what angry teenager or college student is going to want to join an organization where one is just a gopher for the higher-ups. Thus were born New Left groups that ranged from the Communist to the Anarchist with much less labor focus and more focus on the immediate problems of the late 60s and 70s.
With the fall of the USSR and more importantly a larger population from post Communist countries enrolling in US Universities, the Communist label faced new problems. Arguing that the USSR was great up to so and so a year is purely academic in an isolated US context but with Chinese and Russian students having direct memories of realities definitely complicated things.
Seattle gave a 2nd boost to Anarchism but it was mainly one of tactics and message (arther than long term goals or differences in historical analysis).
But, anarchism started to implode in 2005 or so. Sectarianism was one reason; older anarchists didn't like all the youngsters calling themselves Anarchists without knowing the history and ideologies. Anti-ANSWER and anti-ISO organizing by Anarchist also imploded since the argument hung on the idea that movements were being co-opted (which was probably true) but when ANSWER and ISO became less active the Anarchist organizers who were denouncing ANSWER didn't step in to do the organizing around the issues that such groups had been focusing on. In the few cases where Anarchist did try organizing they went in the opposite direction of the complaints; with even vaguer messages and less specific focus on the war in Iraq, domestic spying...
When movements start to retreat is when you expect extremism to emerge. The Revolution was supposed to come but all the people in the streets really were there for the specific issue of the day not over some longer term common goal. At such times those who have committed (even just psychologically) too much of themselves to the inevitability of end-times strike out with blame at others since it must be the fault of someone or some group that a Revolution didn't take place rather than a misunderstanding on why there was short-term popular appeal. I think a paint attack on a Communist memorial should be seen in this context.
One could say that the world needs some new ideologies since both Anarchism and Communism are too tainted, but that misses the point. There are plenty of new labels activists take on (progressive, anti-globalization...) but the problem is that without the history (and mainstream disdain for the labels) new labels usually get corrupted by business and government. Communism and Anarchism have a base of loyal followers (and books that can survive even without followers) that can withstand changes in the political psychology of the public much better than other new groupings. If the US goes to war with Australia in 2100, there will likely be Anarchists and Communists helping organize protests and working through front-groups to change public opinion to end such a war. Other new ideologies will come along and some may even collapse governments, change borders and the like. Communism and Anarchism are unlikely to impact the world in that way ever again. But Communism and Anarchism are a grouping of ideas in terms of immediate organizing that will likely continue much longer than other newer ideologies. Part of the reason they will survive and be useful in terms of resisting tyrany is because like the Protestant religious movements in Europe in the 1400s-1500s (Anabaptists,Thomas Müntzer, Münster Rebellion, etc..) that gave birth to them, the ideals and utopian goals have a deeply humanistic appeal and ideals that can likely never be achieved. Seeing such movements as religious may seem derogatory but Engels' "The Peasant War in Germany" aknowledges suchroots, and ideas and ideologies do afterall have to come from somewhere. Communism and Anarchism are useful but both are useful as a long term means and since they mainly differ on ends that makes them hard to tell apart by those outside of their group of religious followers.
Since not all anarchists agree on strategies, tactics, or even goals, it makes less than no sense to use the mural on the side of Bound Together as exemplary of "anarchists"--except those anarchists who are members of the Bound Together collective who were responsible for organizing the painting of the mural in the first place. A mural on the side of a building that's been rented for over 15 years is qualitatively different from a piece of public art, installed with the help of the SF Arts Commission. And while I'm being pedantic, let me point out that the building next to Bound Together was not owned or operated by CCSF at the time the mural was originally painted, so your attempt to create some kind of analogy between the ALB monument as public and the BT mural as city-sponsored/protected/secured is absurd. The mural has been enhanced by non-political graffiti plenty of times over the years, and the fence didn't go up as the result of that, but of the various protocols and policies of CCSF once they acquired the property. Your attempt to somehow disqualify the mural therefore falls flat.
Your assertion that you and your kind came to the defense of Sacco and Vanzetti flies in the face of what non-Leninist historians and contemporary eyewitnesses have to say about the International Labor Defense--a CP front group. They weren't interested at all in Sacco and Vanzetti as anarchists, as activists working outside (and against in some cases) unionists and other reformists. The ILD and Stalinists were interested in them as soon-to-be-martyrs. As one ILD activist said to Katherine Anne Porter: "What good would they be to us alive?" So don't pull that "we're all in this together" bullshit on someone who knows the actual history better than you.
The very late acknowledgment of the value of the mural as a piece of art has nothing to do with the people depicted on it or its site. Check out the actual reasons for the City to be involved and you'll find that it has nothing to do with courting votes (no matter how many vocal and visible stupid anarchists vote, the larger portion of them in SF will not).
No need to use the ironic quotation marks around my moniker; I am authentically known as Miles by many people. Didn't anyone ever teach you that the use of quotation marks to indicate irony is authoritarian, an attempt to show other people how superior you are, and to provide them with the correct analysis? Fuck off.
Your assertion that you and your kind came to the defense of Sacco and Vanzetti flies in the face of what non-Leninist historians and contemporary eyewitnesses have to say about the International Labor Defense--a CP front group. They weren't interested at all in Sacco and Vanzetti as anarchists, as activists working outside (and against in some cases) unionists and other reformists. The ILD and Stalinists were interested in them as soon-to-be-martyrs. As one ILD activist said to Katherine Anne Porter: "What good would they be to us alive?" So don't pull that "we're all in this together" bullshit on someone who knows the actual history better than you.
The very late acknowledgment of the value of the mural as a piece of art has nothing to do with the people depicted on it or its site. Check out the actual reasons for the City to be involved and you'll find that it has nothing to do with courting votes (no matter how many vocal and visible stupid anarchists vote, the larger portion of them in SF will not).
No need to use the ironic quotation marks around my moniker; I am authentically known as Miles by many people. Didn't anyone ever teach you that the use of quotation marks to indicate irony is authoritarian, an attempt to show other people how superior you are, and to provide them with the correct analysis? Fuck off.
Most people on "the Left" are ditsy, incoherent, and want the government to alleviate inequality (as defined by who?). This is the one main area where anarchists differ from Leftists: anarchists don't want the government to do anything but disappear. Sure war, pollution, sexism, racism, bad employers (there are good ones? Whatever happened to class war? Even the wobblies are hip to that) make people sad, but so what? The various strategies and actual goals of various groups and individuals are what separate us from others interested in "social justice"; one set of folks wants the government to fix things, and another set of folks knows that government can only fix things accidentally, and even then, never permanently.
Words like "progressive" "green" "liberal" etc, are completely vague. None of them are descriptive of anything beyond a particular set of self-referential postures. They make it easy to pretend that everyone else who uses such undefined terms already agrees with everything you stand for, which of course is ludicrous. In order for something to be corrupt (whether an institution, a word, an ideology, or a strategy, etc) it had to have had some pure form that was originally uncorrupted. How delightfully Platonic--and when dealing with politics, how delightfully absurd. Politics is impure by its very nature: ruling other people is not a pure practice; compromise is always necessary unless one exists in a pure dicatorship. Another difference between Leftists and anarchists: Leftists believe that there are people who are both wise and moral enough to rule wisely and morally, while anarchists know that to be put in the position of ruling others is inherently unwise and immoral.
Starting with the revelations of Boshevik horrors, many realized that the label Communist was politics by a different brand name. The earliest exposes of Bolshevik betrayals of revolutionary principles came from anarchists who'd been among the earliest supporters of Lenin and company: Alexander Berkman and Emma Goldman were eyewitnesses to the earliest suppressions of anarchists, Left SRs, independent (non-Party) communists, and others. To say that Stalins horrors were some aberration is untenable historically.
Anarchism's popularity goes in waves (or cycles); that's nothing new. Blaming it on "sectarianism" (which you conveniently skip describing or defining) is an evasion of the content of what made post-Seattle anarchism attractive to a new generation of activists, and an evasion of what internal tensions that attraction held. Knowing history isn't enough to create splits--it's what people do with (or in most cases without) that knowledge that creates splits.
Most of the new generation, ignorant of history, fell into alliances with Stalinists, Maoists, and Left Nationalists. To self-conscious anarchists, who have some inkling of how best to organize anarchistically, these alliances contained too much internal stress; Stalinists and other authoritarians don't particularly like or support or promote the decentralized decision-making processes that most anarchists use. Sooner or later--that is, without any prompting from us old farts who have actually experienced this sort of thing before--the alliances are bound to implode. That's because the goals and strategies of anarchists tend to be pre-figurative, while authoritarians use whatever strategies further their particular agendas.
How is the spraypainting enhancement of public art an example of impatience, extremism, supposedly the sign of a general retreat of revolutionary zeal? This makes no sense, but it does psychologize the actions of others, which has always been a particularly nasty authoritarian trick. You obviously know and understand the motivations and goals of others. Well done professor--we all await your doctoral dissertation with baited breath!
Communism certainly is tainted--with the mass murders of workers, peasants (those in whose name the Communists seized power wherever they could manage it), and their ideological enemies and rivals among anarchists and non-Party revolutionaries. Anarchism has no analogous taints--unless you consider the vandalism of public art on a par with the Moscow Show Trials (for example).
If you really think that the only significant differences between Leninists and anarchists is their respective methodologies, you haven't been paying attention. Leninists, like all other Leftists, want to use government to alleviate what they consider social problems. Anarchists, on the other hand, want to abolish government completely. This is not only a difference of goals, but in the pre-figurative methodology of most anarchists, it means that the strategies and tactics of Leftists and anarchists are light years apart. Leftists in general, and Leninists in particular, are clear that anarchists are only useful as the shock troops of their movements: the most zealous for the Cause, and therefore the most reckless, fearless, and most likely to die or burn themselves out. This saves the Leftists the trouble of lining anarchists up against the proverbial wall after the revolution, as they've always done.
You can keep your precious fake non-sectarianism. Some of us know our enemies when we see and hear them, and read what they write.
Words like "progressive" "green" "liberal" etc, are completely vague. None of them are descriptive of anything beyond a particular set of self-referential postures. They make it easy to pretend that everyone else who uses such undefined terms already agrees with everything you stand for, which of course is ludicrous. In order for something to be corrupt (whether an institution, a word, an ideology, or a strategy, etc) it had to have had some pure form that was originally uncorrupted. How delightfully Platonic--and when dealing with politics, how delightfully absurd. Politics is impure by its very nature: ruling other people is not a pure practice; compromise is always necessary unless one exists in a pure dicatorship. Another difference between Leftists and anarchists: Leftists believe that there are people who are both wise and moral enough to rule wisely and morally, while anarchists know that to be put in the position of ruling others is inherently unwise and immoral.
Starting with the revelations of Boshevik horrors, many realized that the label Communist was politics by a different brand name. The earliest exposes of Bolshevik betrayals of revolutionary principles came from anarchists who'd been among the earliest supporters of Lenin and company: Alexander Berkman and Emma Goldman were eyewitnesses to the earliest suppressions of anarchists, Left SRs, independent (non-Party) communists, and others. To say that Stalins horrors were some aberration is untenable historically.
Anarchism's popularity goes in waves (or cycles); that's nothing new. Blaming it on "sectarianism" (which you conveniently skip describing or defining) is an evasion of the content of what made post-Seattle anarchism attractive to a new generation of activists, and an evasion of what internal tensions that attraction held. Knowing history isn't enough to create splits--it's what people do with (or in most cases without) that knowledge that creates splits.
Most of the new generation, ignorant of history, fell into alliances with Stalinists, Maoists, and Left Nationalists. To self-conscious anarchists, who have some inkling of how best to organize anarchistically, these alliances contained too much internal stress; Stalinists and other authoritarians don't particularly like or support or promote the decentralized decision-making processes that most anarchists use. Sooner or later--that is, without any prompting from us old farts who have actually experienced this sort of thing before--the alliances are bound to implode. That's because the goals and strategies of anarchists tend to be pre-figurative, while authoritarians use whatever strategies further their particular agendas.
How is the spraypainting enhancement of public art an example of impatience, extremism, supposedly the sign of a general retreat of revolutionary zeal? This makes no sense, but it does psychologize the actions of others, which has always been a particularly nasty authoritarian trick. You obviously know and understand the motivations and goals of others. Well done professor--we all await your doctoral dissertation with baited breath!
Communism certainly is tainted--with the mass murders of workers, peasants (those in whose name the Communists seized power wherever they could manage it), and their ideological enemies and rivals among anarchists and non-Party revolutionaries. Anarchism has no analogous taints--unless you consider the vandalism of public art on a par with the Moscow Show Trials (for example).
If you really think that the only significant differences between Leninists and anarchists is their respective methodologies, you haven't been paying attention. Leninists, like all other Leftists, want to use government to alleviate what they consider social problems. Anarchists, on the other hand, want to abolish government completely. This is not only a difference of goals, but in the pre-figurative methodology of most anarchists, it means that the strategies and tactics of Leftists and anarchists are light years apart. Leftists in general, and Leninists in particular, are clear that anarchists are only useful as the shock troops of their movements: the most zealous for the Cause, and therefore the most reckless, fearless, and most likely to die or burn themselves out. This saves the Leftists the trouble of lining anarchists up against the proverbial wall after the revolution, as they've always done.
You can keep your precious fake non-sectarianism. Some of us know our enemies when we see and hear them, and read what they write.
How fragmented do we wish to be as a movement. The teamsters didn't rip the turtles heads off. They identified a common enemy. That being the WTO is a bit more difficult than fascism in Spain. I hope this was only perpetrated by middle class kids. Otherwise, lets just give up on fighting neo-liberalism and slit our wrists.
Sad as fuck indeed. If you're going to off yourself, one, I'd think it over in much greater depth than you've given to the larger issue at hand here.
And if you finally do opt for the wrong choice, I wish you could take your Popular Front ideology with you...
And if you finally do opt for the wrong choice, I wish you could take your Popular Front ideology with you...
This guy is a hostile crank who hides behind an ultra-left mask. He's a troll, a real jerk. This attack on anti-fascism confuses the basic fact that the Spanish Civil War was an anti-fascist struggle – that's where MOST anarchists, communists, socialists and others were at in Spain. Some people like to imagine other ways it could have gone, but blaming those who fought when hiding behind anonymity and avoiding real struggles among real people is a perfect example of why moralistic cretinism is for suckers.
Kevin Keating is the man who vandalized this mural.
Nobody will take the bait to return that kind of treatment in kind.
Kevin Keating is the man who vandalized this mural.
Nobody will take the bait to return that kind of treatment in kind.
Reducing the discussion of the action to your fantasy about the unknown person or persons who might or might not be responsible for the vandalism is a transparent attempt to derail the conversation you are incapable of participating in.
I am not Kevin Keating, and I'm pretty sure that at least two or three other people who've voiced their principled revolutionary anti-Stalinism aren't him either. You seem to have some kind of obsession with Kevin and his alleged personal failings. Get a grip.
From 1935 the term "anti-fascism" meant organizing in Popular Fronts, as dictated by the Comintern. It was also the accepted euphemism for members of various CPs. You can try to avoid the true meaning of the term and hide your adherence to this cross-class anti-revolutionary tactic and set of strategies, but you won't fool those of us who know better. The issue behind the vandalism is the refusal of Popular Frontism and the memorializing of those who believed in it, fought for it, and thereby contributed to the counter-revolutionary actions of Stalinism in Spain.
Smear the alleged messenger if you feel like that discredits the message, but don't be surprised that others don't fall for that bait and switch, that red (and I do mean red) herring.
I am not Kevin Keating, and I'm pretty sure that at least two or three other people who've voiced their principled revolutionary anti-Stalinism aren't him either. You seem to have some kind of obsession with Kevin and his alleged personal failings. Get a grip.
From 1935 the term "anti-fascism" meant organizing in Popular Fronts, as dictated by the Comintern. It was also the accepted euphemism for members of various CPs. You can try to avoid the true meaning of the term and hide your adherence to this cross-class anti-revolutionary tactic and set of strategies, but you won't fool those of us who know better. The issue behind the vandalism is the refusal of Popular Frontism and the memorializing of those who believed in it, fought for it, and thereby contributed to the counter-revolutionary actions of Stalinism in Spain.
Smear the alleged messenger if you feel like that discredits the message, but don't be surprised that others don't fall for that bait and switch, that red (and I do mean red) herring.
Actaully, most people were at a place of popular rebellion and a social revolution. It is funny how marxist-leninists talks about the workingclass as the revolutionary subject, but thats not true at all, is it? Rather, it is the political mediatiors (i.e their own organisation, i.e. the cadre of that organisation, i.e themselves) who are. So they forget about the people and can only think in terms of mediators working together, the political power they can gain, the best way to control the masses and give benefits to themselves. And the people? They are just pawns in their hands to be used as these future stalins see fit - all in the name of creating a state that accumulates capital under their control (and for their benefit!), instead of the capitalist class that exists today.
The pictorial evidence of a public anarchist memorial in San Francisco, full of faces of the fallen and protected by a fence enclosing the 'private' property of the state, is exactly the situation anyone who cares to go look will find-- and exactly the thing you denied existed, upthread. Right scroll bar will demonstrate. Tally ho.
Your long stream of rationalizations as to why others doing it is bad, but your 'side' doing it is alright, all serve to obscure the fact that you've been proven at least unreliable in discourse, and maybe downright dishonest. Because if you know so bleeding much about the circumstances of that mural, then how could you simultaneously deny that any such memorial existed, while remaining in the realm of what is generally understood as 'honest'?
That's your problem-- and I'm sure you have lots of blame for 'others' for it.... eeeeeeeeee-vil "Stalinist" others, likely. Mind they don't end up under your bed and in your cornflakes, while they're at it, mate. Personally, I suspect whoever pulled this little stunt might in fact have several personalities, and you just might be one of 'em. No evidence, though-- that's just a feeling.
Your long stream of rationalizations as to why others doing it is bad, but your 'side' doing it is alright, all serve to obscure the fact that you've been proven at least unreliable in discourse, and maybe downright dishonest. Because if you know so bleeding much about the circumstances of that mural, then how could you simultaneously deny that any such memorial existed, while remaining in the realm of what is generally understood as 'honest'?
That's your problem-- and I'm sure you have lots of blame for 'others' for it.... eeeeeeeeee-vil "Stalinist" others, likely. Mind they don't end up under your bed and in your cornflakes, while they're at it, mate. Personally, I suspect whoever pulled this little stunt might in fact have several personalities, and you just might be one of 'em. No evidence, though-- that's just a feeling.
Okay, enough of the use of quotation marks to indicate that you don't believe I am called Miles. It is the name by which I am known by many, so wallow in your anonymity all you like, but at least have the respect to call me by what I call myself.
The mural on the side of the building in which Bound Together operates is not the same thing as public art, installed with the co-sponsorship of the San Francisco Arts Commission. The mural was a project undertaken voluntarily by members of the Bound Together collective with no sponsorship by anyone other than those donating their time and talent (such as it is). It existed for more than 15 years before anyone from the city noticed it officially. As such it does not qualify as a project similar to the memorial for the ALB. Really your attempt to equate the two things is stunningly stupid. As I mentioned before, the fence was put up many years after the mural was initiated, before the building next door was brought under the control of City College, and the fence they put up has nothing to do with the existence of the mural. "Exactly" no similarity, in fact, to the manner in which the ALB memorial was put up. Tally no.
I never mentioned anything about the good or bad of enhancing art. You are imputing ideas and opinions to me that I have not expressed here or anywhere else. I mentioned that the mural at Bound Together had been tagged many times over the years by non-political graffiti. I never said that was "bad" or that it made me unhappy or that those who engaged in such activities are miscreants. Whatever you have decided is my unreliability is based entirely on your fantasies about the mural on the side of Bound Together as somehow representative of all anarchists (at least in the Bay Area), regardless of many of us not being part of the Bound Together collective or supportive of murals in general, and murals of supposed anarchist heroes in particular. You sir are the one being dishonest if you believe that the mural was sponsored by the city and that it is a memorial that represents all anarchists. But it really seems you believe your projected fantasies, so it's hard to call you dishonest. Delusional perhaps is a more apt description.
I never denied that the mural existed--I just never considered it a public memorial in the same league as the one erected for the ALB.
Of course you have no evidence that the persons who enhanced the ALB memorial and I are the same multiple personality. At least on this particular subject you freely admit you live in a fantasy world. Best of luck with your imaginary friends too.
The mural on the side of the building in which Bound Together operates is not the same thing as public art, installed with the co-sponsorship of the San Francisco Arts Commission. The mural was a project undertaken voluntarily by members of the Bound Together collective with no sponsorship by anyone other than those donating their time and talent (such as it is). It existed for more than 15 years before anyone from the city noticed it officially. As such it does not qualify as a project similar to the memorial for the ALB. Really your attempt to equate the two things is stunningly stupid. As I mentioned before, the fence was put up many years after the mural was initiated, before the building next door was brought under the control of City College, and the fence they put up has nothing to do with the existence of the mural. "Exactly" no similarity, in fact, to the manner in which the ALB memorial was put up. Tally no.
I never mentioned anything about the good or bad of enhancing art. You are imputing ideas and opinions to me that I have not expressed here or anywhere else. I mentioned that the mural at Bound Together had been tagged many times over the years by non-political graffiti. I never said that was "bad" or that it made me unhappy or that those who engaged in such activities are miscreants. Whatever you have decided is my unreliability is based entirely on your fantasies about the mural on the side of Bound Together as somehow representative of all anarchists (at least in the Bay Area), regardless of many of us not being part of the Bound Together collective or supportive of murals in general, and murals of supposed anarchist heroes in particular. You sir are the one being dishonest if you believe that the mural was sponsored by the city and that it is a memorial that represents all anarchists. But it really seems you believe your projected fantasies, so it's hard to call you dishonest. Delusional perhaps is a more apt description.
I never denied that the mural existed--I just never considered it a public memorial in the same league as the one erected for the ALB.
Of course you have no evidence that the persons who enhanced the ALB memorial and I are the same multiple personality. At least on this particular subject you freely admit you live in a fantasy world. Best of luck with your imaginary friends too.
No wonder these cowards hide behind a political label. Nobody would claim credit for this gross attack on the men and women who volunteered their lives to fight for democracy and against fascism.
How fucked can you be? I thought the commie sects were supposed to be the sectarian dumb asses, but I've never seen them do anything this off target.
Scumbags.
How fucked can you be? I thought the commie sects were supposed to be the sectarian dumb asses, but I've never seen them do anything this off target.
Scumbags.
There's an expression called agent/provocateur. It means the person is an agent, or – if there is no proof – they might as well be. Cointelpro behavior is meant to heighten tension between and amongst forces in oppostion to the government. It can be done along racial lines, or simply by poking the touchy spots we all have.
Don't fall for the bait. I am a communist, but I think of the anarchist institutions in the Bay, and all I really see are friends whether they all know it or not. I'm not letting someone pit me against people who I've mostly seen on the same side over and over again.
Fight those with power, serve the people. Help the people rule.
Don't fall for the bait. I am a communist, but I think of the anarchist institutions in the Bay, and all I really see are friends whether they all know it or not. I'm not letting someone pit me against people who I've mostly seen on the same side over and over again.
Fight those with power, serve the people. Help the people rule.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$70.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network