Jump to content


Protestors to Occupy Wall Street For 2 Months (Live Stream Inside)


174 replies to this topic

#41 Renan

Renan

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 623 posts
  • Location:São Paulo ,Brazil

Posted 30 September 2011 - 09:58 AM

View PostSteve, on 28 September 2011 - 09:17 PM, said:

Finally, I do not see police and soldiers as comparable. People who become cops, even those with the best of intentions ( who are usually weeded out anyway as they become aware of what the police actually do), do so because they think society needs policing. I think there are definitely people who join the military for the same reason, that the world needs some sort of police force. But there are a ton of people who join out of some sort desire to be a part of a community (whether this is a national community or just the community of their squad isn't too important - although obviously I am against nationalism of any sort), there are people who are forced into joining because they are poor and unskilled and come from areas that have already been forsaken by the rest of society and capital, there are people who join because it is a way of possibly getting into college or making sure their loved ones can be taken care of, etc etc. And there is an actual class divide within the military between the people who come from money who go into a military academy and become an officer, and those who are working class and join as rank-n-file. Not to mention that throughout history, military conscription was pretty rampant, and this creates a significant difference between soldiers and cops.

It´s much more likely that soldiers would join the side of the working class than cops.

Cops are the standard repressive forces directly used against the working class, their historical rivalry with the rest of the class would prevent such union.
The only situation where I think there could be a chance of cops joining on our side is if their salaries weren´t paid, and there would still be a  pretty fair chance of them do their jobs without being paid.

Only some few times soldiers were used to such situations (usually when shit is really getting out of control), and when this happened, in various historical moments a significant portion of them (the majority came from the working class, as you pointed out) joined to the other side, for example, like in Spain ´36.
For Honesty and Nihilism

#42 Renan

Renan

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 623 posts
  • Location:São Paulo ,Brazil

Posted 30 September 2011 - 10:39 AM

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 28 September 2011 - 11:43 PM, said:

Revolution is form of self defense.  Revolution is not authoritarian, any more so than a slave fighting to escape from bondage is authoritarian.  I would not be enforcing my will on anyone--I would only refusing to let anyone enforce their will on me.  There is a large difference.

What he meant is that the revolution will not be an event based purely on the free will of all in involved. And, as Steve pointed out, this has nothing to do with the version of the avant-garde elite commanding the proletariat or anything like that.

In a revolutionary situation, people will force their will of revolution on others who don´t want it (this may include some workers as well). For example, in Chile´s recent events, with a brief general strike and looting, there have been cases of working/medium class people attacking each other. The working class is composed of different individuals with different kinds of minds (where most don´t even now or think about a revolution) the only thing that can unite them is their social position that they occupy in society. If the situation in which they live is basically the same, if they are subject to even more increasing and diverse sacrifices, it´s likely that most of them start acting similarly to this same situation.

Do you think that millions (not to say billions) of people one day will just gonna think the same thing, at the same time and in the same place?
For Honesty and Nihilism

#43 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 30 September 2011 - 01:57 PM

View PostRenan, on 30 September 2011 - 10:39 AM, said:

What he meant is that the revolution will not be an event based purely on the free will of all in involved. And, as Steve pointed out, this has nothing to do with the version of the avant-garde elite commanding the proletariat or anything like that.

That's not what he meant, because that makes no sense.  "Free will" does not mean "Will without consequence", and it never has.  That is, it may be my will to never work (this included all forms of labor--no need to get technical) again, but that doesn't mean that I can do so without consequence.  And that doesn't mean I live in an authoritarian system.  It means that all choices we make in life have positive and negative consequences, as they should.

Now, if you meant to say that revolution will not give freedom to all individuals, then I fail to see how not.  Freedom is the equality of compromise.  Only under revolutionary and post-revolutionary circumstances can these conditions exist.

Quote

In a revolutionary situation, people will force their will of revolution on others who don´t want it (this may include some workers as well). For example, in Chile´s recent events, with a brief general strike and looting, there have been cases of working/medium class people attacking each other.

Which is authoritarian, definitely.  Those people had non-authoritarian ideals on a macro level, but treated others in an authoritarian way on a micro level.  You can't have one or the other.

Quote

The working class is composed of different individuals with different kinds of minds (where most don´t even now or think about a revolution) the only thing that can unite them is their social position that they occupy in society. If the situation in which they live is basically the same, if they are subject to even more increasing and diverse sacrifices, it´s likely that most of them start acting similarly to this same situation.

Do you think that millions (not to say billions) of people one day will just gonna think the same thing, at the same time and in the same place?

They don't need to think the same thing.  I'm the one who has been arguing this.  See the other topic on Wall Street.
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#44 EatShitAndCry

EatShitAndCry

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts

Posted 01 October 2011 - 02:28 PM

So the solidarity protest was goddamn awful. My friends and I were so disgusted by these liberals that we ditched out after a few minutes. NEXT TIME DONT SPEND 5 MINUTES TALKING ABOUT HOW WE SHOULDN'T CALL EACH OTHERS "COMRADES" BECAUSE ITS "NOT MAINSTREAM".

#45 EatShitAndCry

EatShitAndCry

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts

Posted 01 October 2011 - 02:33 PM

Oh, and this girl came up to us and asked us "are you black bloc?"
Everyone was drinking Starbucks while talking about how much they hate corporations.
They told us not to break the law. YOU DONT HAVE A PERMIT, WE ARE BREAKING THE LAW BY HAVING THIS MEETING DICKHEADS! (ps I thought liberals loved civil disobedience)
Some Quaker asshole "assumed" the leadership role of the group and spent like 30 minutes talking about his powers and position. Fuck you, ginger.
"Don't antagonize the police" was said over and over again. Apparently they're our friends!

So now I've been to 2 protests in my life. This one was a total circle jerk. The one before was slightly better because I got to hang with FDM.

#46 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 01 October 2011 - 03:52 PM

View PostEatShitAndCry, on 01 October 2011 - 02:33 PM, said:

Everyone was drinking Starbucks while talking about how much they hate corporations.

I'm pretty sure that you, and everyone else here, is guilty of that in some capacity.

Quote

They told us not to break the law. YOU DONT HAVE A PERMIT, WE ARE BREAKING THE LAW BY HAVING THIS MEETING DICKHEADS! (ps I thought liberals loved civil disobedience)

The left generally supports civil disobedience, but not everyone.  It depends on the group.

Quote

Some Quaker asshole "assumed" the leadership role of the group and spent like 30 minutes talking about his powers and position. Fuck you, ginger.

That's pretty lame, if true.  The Wall Street occupation in contrast has been quite democratic.

Quote

"Don't antagonize the police" was said over and over again. Apparently they're our friends!

I'm not sure why you would bring up friendship, as it has nothing to do with anything.  You didn't go into that protest prepared to fight off a bunch of police, and I imagine, neither did anyone else.  Pocket knives are no match against armored police with clubs and tear gas.  And I'm sure there were minors, and those with physical disabilities there in attendance.  So unless you want to see innocent people get beaten, it would be wise not to antagonize the police.  To bring up friendship shows me that you are unwilling to look at this critically, and that you have already made up your mind about the people there.

And you might be right, judging by your description of the leader above.  But I still get a sense that you are unwilling to approach this openly.
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#47 EatShitAndCry

EatShitAndCry

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts

Posted 01 October 2011 - 10:10 PM

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 01 October 2011 - 03:52 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure that you, and everyone else here, is guilty of that in some capacity.

Yeah it just seemed very ironic. It's not like I hate anyone for drinking it I just thought it was funny.


I'm not sure why you would bring up friendship, as it has nothing to do with anything.  You didn't go into that protest prepared to fight off a bunch of police, and I imagine, neither did anyone else.  Pocket knives are no match against armored police with clubs and tear gas.  And I'm sure there were minors, and those with physical disabilities there in attendance.  So unless you want to see innocent people get beaten, it would be wise not to antagonize the police.  To bring up friendship shows me that you are unwilling to look at this critically, and that you have already made up your mind about the people there.

And you might be right, judging by your description of the leader above.  But I still get a sense that you are unwilling to approach this openly.
Their meeting was just a big circle jerk and the only real thing it accomplished was setting the time for the next meeting.

#48 Steve

Steve

    come to cali and we'll beat your fucking ass

  • The One
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,149 posts
  • Location:California Love

Posted 03 October 2011 - 03:06 AM

Here are my thoughts on OccupyWhatever, free from the debate form that generally devolves into retardeness - on both sides.

The politics... are terrible. I think this much can be agreed upon (hopefully). This talk of the "99%" is absolute nonsense. Yes, obviously the majority of the wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of one percent of the population, but this is an inaccurate and useless analysis if one is going to attack capitalism (which is only best understood as a logic that dictates social relationships - and not the typical superficial understanding of rich v poor), which is the only thing I am interested in. Perceiving the problem is being that of a conflict between tax brackets only shows one thing: these people are mad with the way capitalism is being managed - something i have already said before. How many of this 99% are business owners that are exploiting and fucking over there workers? Anyone who has ever worked for a small business knows exactly how terrible they have to be to their workers because they are not pulling in the same amount of money as bigger businesses. I find it weird that workers and their exploiters see themselves, in this case, as on the same side.

And the implications of this position is that the rich pay for the crisis. Talking about giving the 99% their "fair share" would quite effectively reverse this crisis and put capitalism right back on track. I find this more detestable than the Right wing alternative. What the Left, with its talk of more jobs, and taxing the rich, and better social welfare programs and its moralism and obsession with democracy, never realizes is that it is just as important, maybe more-so, to the functioning of capital as the capitalists themselves. The Right wing, and the capitalists, due to the contradictions within the logic of capital itself, lead capitalism to crisis; meanwhile the Left and its organized labor and workers movements, lead capital right back out of it. I am absolutely against capitalism in all its forms, from the hyper-corpratized one we have right now, to the hypothetical democratically self-managed one of the Left.

One of the big things that I don't get is the simultaneous call for more democracy and non-violence. PRG has already acknowledged that this world is undemocratic. My question then is why do these people think they can make an undemocratic world more democratic democratically? This coupled with non-violence can only amount to symbolic gestures and appeals to a certain morality - the kind that the ruling class has already shown to not give two shits about. A radical shift in social relations can only come about through force, be it a military take over, or the blockage of the flows of commodities. Neither of these are democratic because there will always be a segment of the population which will oppose it, and there will a time when there will either be confrontation or the movement will implode in upon its own inability to move beyond dogmatism. It's cliche, but the rich will never allow anyone to simply vote away their power and wealth. Revolutions themselves are rarely bloody or violent, it is always the counter-revolution that sheds blood.  


On the issue of control that I brought up earlier. PRG replied saying that what I said, in his mind, actually justifies more policing rather than less, which I was advocating. I think this shows quite clearly the dividing line between us. My goal, my main desire that motivates my politics and all the intellectual schizophrenia that comes with diving into many, contradictory theories, has always been freedom, in the most absolute sense of the word. I want to be free from social constraints and norms and free from work and the alienation and loss of connection to my life that comes from it. If a post-capitalist world is one that is more policed, and life and all the beautiful chaos that it entails is more controlled, then count me out. I would rather live in a world that is chaotic, but totally free, than one that is totally equal but thoroughly controlled. I do not care about people as such. Therefore, I do not care about uniting them. I do not care about unity or harmony if those things require control and policing. All I care about is my friends, and how together we can escape from work as much as possible, as soon as possible. In this sense, both Leftist anti-capitalism and capitalism itself offer the same dead end drudgery and control.

And yes, I was wrong about the number of people there. But I was right when I said that its useless to sit there and camp out in a park like a bunch of hobos if there is no actual economic blockage happening. Although, hopefully, if this Brooklyn Bridge thing is any indication, this could change. I would love to be proven wrong with the issues that I have raised. My pride isn't that important, although I think the last thing I said about control will always be a relevant criticism.
The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.

#49 Steve

Steve

    come to cali and we'll beat your fucking ass

  • The One
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,149 posts
  • Location:California Love

Posted 03 October 2011 - 03:09 AM

I don't care that much about debating, especially right now while I am caught in the middle of agreeing with two irreconcilable positions. I don't ever think that I will be able to change anyones mind. And that is not my goal. the main reason why i end up making political posts here is that it is part of habit. I have been doing that here for years, so its easy to slip back into it.
The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.

#50 Renan

Renan

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 623 posts
  • Location:São Paulo ,Brazil

Posted 03 October 2011 - 12:07 PM

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 30 September 2011 - 01:57 PM, said:

That's not what he meant, because that makes no sense.  "Free will" does not mean "Will without consequence", and it never has.  That is, it may be my will to never work (this included all forms of labor--no need to get technical) again, but that doesn't mean that I can do so without consequence.  And that doesn't mean I live in an authoritarian system.  It means that all choices we make in life have positive and negative consequences, as they should.

What does this have to do with the part you quoted?
I said that workers can revolt against the revolution as well. Some workers still remain submissive and sacrificing themselves for the economy, even when the situation proves to be unsustainable.

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 30 September 2011 - 01:57 PM, said:

Now, if you meant to say that revolution will not give freedom to all individuals, then I fail to see how not.  Freedom is the equality of compromise.  Only under revolutionary and post-revolutionary circumstances can these conditions exist.

It really scares me that you read this sort of thing in my posts. Again, what does this have to do with what you quoted?

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 30 September 2011 - 01:57 PM, said:

Which is authoritarian, definitely.  Those people had non-authoritarian ideals on a macro level, but treated others in an authoritarian way on a micro level.  You can't have one or the other.

I'm not talking about leftists. Most of the people involved were only workers, who had no kind of ideals at all.

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 30 September 2011 - 01:57 PM, said:

They don't need to think the same thing.  I'm the one who has been arguing this.  See the other topic on Wall Street.

I haven´t seen you saying anything like this before, and this talk of "consciousness raising" on the thread you mentioned just proved exactly the contrary:

Quote

We call for protests to remain active in the cities. Those already there, to grow, to organize, to raise consciousnesses, for those cities where there are no protests, for protests to organize and disrupt the system.

For Honesty and Nihilism

#51 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 03 October 2011 - 01:08 PM

Steve, I appreciate these longer replies, as I get a better understanding of where you're coming from.

View PostSteve, on 03 October 2011 - 03:06 AM, said:

Here are my thoughts on OccupyWhatever, free from the debate form that generally devolves into retardeness - on both sides.

The politics... are terrible. I think this much can be agreed upon (hopefully). This talk of the "99%" is absolute nonsense. Yes, obviously the majority of the wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of one percent of the population, but this is an inaccurate and useless analysis if one is going to attack capitalism (which is only best understood as a logic that dictates social relationships - and not the typical superficial understanding of rich v poor), which is the only thing I am interested in. Perceiving the problem is being that of a conflict between tax brackets only shows one thing: these people are mad with the way capitalism is being managed - something i have already said before. How many of this 99% are business owners that are exploiting and fucking over there workers? Anyone who has ever worked for a small business knows exactly how terrible they have to be to their workers because they are not pulling in the same amount of money as bigger businesses. I find it weird that workers and their exploiters see themselves, in this case, as on the same side.

I work for Anti-Flag, and its the most positive working experience I've had in my life.  I get a say in my working conditions, and I'm actually treated like a human being rather than just a commodity.  Sure, it's still capitalism, and I still would prefer that we abolish the system altogether, but to say that they're my enemy would be ridiculous.  I recognize that not all business owners are so radical, but to discriminate when they too are victims of the capitalist system in my mind accomplishes nothing.  I don't see the 99% as being a tax bracket issue, but rather as an exploitation issue. We're all powerless to escape capitalism, so we fight each other to sustain our survival.  But we've been targeting the wrong people.  The business owners and police officers are not the ones pulling the strings--they're just merely the ones who got tangled up in them.

Quote

And the implications of this position is that the rich pay for the crisis. Talking about giving the 99% their "fair share" would quite effectively reverse this crisis and put capitalism right back on track. I find this more detestable than the Right wing alternative. What the Left, with its talk of more jobs, and taxing the rich, and better social welfare programs and its moralism and obsession with democracy, never realizes is that it is just as important, maybe more-so, to the functioning of capital as the capitalists themselves. The Right wing, and the capitalists, due to the contradictions within the logic of capital itself, lead capitalism to crisis; meanwhile the Left and its organized labor and workers movements, lead capital right back out of it. I am absolutely against capitalism in all its forms, from the hyper-corpratized one we have right now, to the hypothetical democratically self-managed one of the Left.

That's an oversimplification.  Right wing economists are not trying to "kill" the economy on purpose.  Many economists rather argue that reducing government spending will have the effect of both higher revenues for the government and putting welfare recipients back to work, etc.  And politicians, especially during crisis, tend to subscribe to these positions, because they work, to some degree.  The problem is that they tend to favor the rich first (IE:  Those in power), and only make the poor weaker.  And the farther right a countries "center" becomes, the easier it is to appease people with small reforms.  Reduce the expectations of the working class, essentially.  Reduced expectations and a wealthier corporate government is not my idea of progress.

Quote

One of the big things that I don't get is the simultaneous call for more democracy and non-violence. PRG has already acknowledged that this world is undemocratic. My question then is why do these people think they can make an undemocratic world more democratic democratically? This coupled with non-violence can only amount to symbolic gestures and appeals to a certain morality - the kind that the ruling class has already shown to not give two shits about. A radical shift in social relations can only come about through force, be it a military take over, or the blockage of the flows of commodities. Neither of these are democratic because there will always be a segment of the population which will oppose it, and there will a time when there will either be confrontation or the movement will implode in upon its own inability to move beyond dogmatism. It's cliche, but the rich will never allow anyone to simply vote away their power and wealth. Revolutions themselves are rarely bloody or violent, it is always the counter-revolution that sheds blood.  

That a segment of the population opposes it does not matter.  As I have said in the China topic, true democracy cannot exist in hierarchical structures, because the fact that one person has artificial power over another just makes voting an exercise in futility.  Voting with a proverbial gun to your head, as I put it.

I call for more democracy not so much for the results it produces (which will never be perfect in an undemocratic system), but more so for the attitudes it produces.  By giving people more decision-making power (and I mean real decision making--not pulling a lever ever 4 years), they begin to understand the undesirability of hierarchical power, and the potential of common human beings to organize a society for themselves.  Otherwise, there's always going to be an habitual need for authority, of familiarity, and control.  As far as I know, you have always ignored the mental aspects of anarchism, which is why it has been so hard for me to get behind your ideas.

Quote

On the issue of control that I brought up earlier. PRG replied saying that what I said, in his mind, actually justifies more policing rather than less, which I was advocating. I think this shows quite clearly the dividing line between us. My goal, my main desire that motivates my politics and all the intellectual schizophrenia that comes with diving into many, contradictory theories, has always been freedom, in the most absolute sense of the word. I want to be free from social constraints and norms and free from work and the alienation and loss of connection to my life that comes from it. If a post-capitalist world is one that is more policed, and life and all the beautiful chaos that it entails is more controlled, then count me out. I would rather live in a world that is chaotic, but totally free, than one that is totally equal but thoroughly controlled. I do not care about people as such. Therefore, I do not care about uniting them. I do not care about unity or harmony if those things require control and policing. All I care about is my friends, and how together we can escape from work as much as possible, as soon as possible. In this sense, both Leftist anti-capitalism and capitalism itself offer the same dead end drudgery and control.

How can you say leftist anti-capitalism (it is really anarchism that you are describing) is controlling, when you have in fact here an authoritarian position here?  The difference between anarchism, and between whatever it is that you are proposing, is that anarchism allows for the free associations of all people.  That is, if you want to live together with others in an unorganized and perhaps chaotic fashion and they together with you in the same way, you have every right to do so.  But if others want to live together with others in a more organized society, then they have every right to do so as well.  The position that you have taken here is that one is okay, and one is not.  It is completely against the idea of free associations.

Posted Image
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#52 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 03 October 2011 - 01:27 PM

View PostRenan, on 03 October 2011 - 12:07 PM, said:

What does this have to do with the part you quoted?
I said that workers can revolt against the revolution as well. Some workers still remain submissive and sacrificing themselves for the economy, even when the situation proves to be unsustainable.

I know they can.  I am saying that you used the words "free will" incorrectly.  When you said that the revolution "will not be an event based purely on the free will of all in involved", I could respond that no action we make is based "purely" on our free will.  We need to consider negative consequences, which ideally, would not exist.  Or at least, everyone would prefer to live in a world where they'll have the most say over what those consequences are.  Only a non-hierarchical living environment can provide for this, to the greatest number of people.

So while workers will revolt against other workers, it is not because they are enemies, but because they are slaves who have not yet found their potential to be emancipated.  They are the kids at the orphanage who rat out their friends as to avoid getting another whipping, so to speak.  It has nothing to do with free will.  They're in extremely coercive social relationships.

Quote

I haven´t seen you saying anything like this before, and this talk of "consciousness raising" on the thread you mentioned just proved exactly the contrary:

Consciousness raising, or making others aware of their bondage, does not imply a hive like mentality.  See my post here:

http://anti-flag.com...dpost__p__94362

Posted Image
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#53 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 03 October 2011 - 04:25 PM

http://nymag.com/dai...osing_pati.html


"Brookfield posted rules against a range of behaviors such as laying tarps, sleeping bags and personal property on the ground. Previously, the only rules posted in the park prohibited skateboarding, rollerblading and bicycling. Men in suits tried to pass out printed copies of the rules, but protesters refused and chanted "Don't take the papers". So they put stacks on benches and tables, prompting the protesters to accuse them of littering."

Posted Image
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#54 Renan

Renan

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 623 posts
  • Location:São Paulo ,Brazil

Posted 03 October 2011 - 05:55 PM

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 03 October 2011 - 01:27 PM, said:

I know they can.  I am saying that you used the words "free will" incorrectly.  When you said that the revolution "will not be an event based purely on the free will of all in involved", I could respond that no action we make is based "purely" on our free will.

Sorry, my choice of words was really bad. What I meant was that if there was a chance that I, and other comrades of mine, if we could seize the means of production or stop, in any way, the route of commodities circulation, I would do that without necessarily respecting any decision of a democratic organization (composed by the other workers), even more if they refused to act or being trapped in demands.

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 03 October 2011 - 01:27 PM, said:

So while workers will revolt against other workers, it is not because they are enemies, but because they are slaves who have not yet found their potential to be emancipated.  They are the kids at the orphanage who rat out their friends as to avoid getting another whipping, so to speak.  It has nothing to do with free will.  They're in extremely coercive social relationships.

One thing is to simply submit yourself to these social relationships, like you and me, another thing is to act like the ones who submited you to this. The example I cited above was one of exploited acting just like their police executioners, trying to maintain the social peace again.

Of course, this sort of thing is rare and is only made by a minority among the working class, but it's still a strange fact that goes directly against the determinism of class struggle.
For Honesty and Nihilism

#55 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 03 October 2011 - 06:20 PM

View PostRenan, on 03 October 2011 - 05:55 PM, said:

Sorry, my choice of words was really bad. What I meant was that if there was a chance that I, and other comrades of mine, if we could seize the means of production or stop, in any way, the route of commodities circulation, I would do that without necessarily respecting any decision of a democratic organization (composed by the other workers), even more if they refused to act or being trapped in demands.

This is going in circles.  I would again refer you to one of my posts in which I explain how true democracy cannot exist under hierarchy.

Quote

One thing is to simply submit yourself to these social relationships, like you and me, another thing is to act like the ones who submited you to this. The example I cited above was one of exploited acting just like their police executioners, trying to maintain the social peace again.

Of course, this sort of thing is rare and is only made by a minority among the working class, but it's still a strange fact that goes directly against the determinism of class struggle.

I don't see how in any way the example you gave is acting authoritarian.  Organization is not policing.  Organization is apparent in every aspect of our lives, in every human relationship (If you want to be my friend, treat me and my other friends with respect, for example. If you want to play in our band, please play the same song that everyone else is playing.  Etc).  It's the same thing here--if you choose to associate with us, please help us to raise awareness.

Posted Image
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#56 Renan

Renan

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 623 posts
  • Location:São Paulo ,Brazil

Posted 04 October 2011 - 09:52 AM

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 03 October 2011 - 06:20 PM, said:

This is going in circles.  I would again refer you to one of my posts in which I explain how true democracy cannot exist under hierarchy.

Okay, but what I am pointing out is that democracy works on the majority decision (and yes, without hierarchy, democracy would be more democratic or "truest") and the majority, until now, always has chosen the maintenance of class society. It was not given to them the chance of choice for a new society, but it doesn´t matter to them. As I said before, they would just choose this damn reality, likewise, the servants would probably choose to stay within a feudal system. In fact, I see the same thing in the projects of various other radicals in the  Left. They refuse to see the root of capitalist society (commodity production) and always remain within the project to change the mode of production. No matter what happens, the production can´t stop. If you don´t produce, you are not human. I don´t know who depresses me more, if the exploited majority or the Left. Well, the exploited, at least, seem to learn more from their mistakes.

The majority always had contrary interests to mine (either personally and politically). And it's even more frustrating to know that I depend on them for a effective radical change in my life.

I can´t rely on their ability to choose today´s society destruction. That's why I don´t believe in democracy (even in your idealized "true" democracy). I can´t be sure of anything but I don´t think revolution will come in a "conscious" way by the majority, by working class actions. They will be forced to do it, if something really happens, of course.

And I really have no interest in the construction of "true" democratic society, as an alternative to a post-capitalist society. This doesn´t mean I´m in favor of an autocracy / oligarchy/ whatever-archy (this "democracy" morality really piss me off). I didn´t knew exactly the word that defines what I favor. I think it´s acracy.
For Honesty and Nihilism

#57 Floyd

Floyd

    the new Emporor of TPU. Overthrow me, I dare you!

  • The One
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,695 posts
  • Location:Monroe, Georgia

Posted 04 October 2011 - 09:56 AM

So apparently they are having one of these "solidarity occupations" in Athens GA on Thursday. It's a private Facebook event, so only people with Facebook accounts can find out anything more than it's existence.
Yeah... that's super revolutionary.

View Posthorse_ebooks, on 13 September 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:

TO RELAX WITH FRIENDS HOW TO RELAX WITH FRIENDS HOW TO RELAX WITH FRIENDS HOW TO RELAX WITH FRIENDS Listen to good music from CDs, tapes

http://chorusofone.no-ip.org/ -strike anywhere forum. join it.

"Move to Atlanta!"


#58 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 04 October 2011 - 11:20 AM

View PostFloyd, on 04 October 2011 - 09:56 AM, said:

So apparently they are having one of these "solidarity occupations" in Athens GA on Thursday. It's a private Facebook event, so only people with Facebook accounts can find out anything more than it's existence.
Yeah... that's super revolutionary.
http://www.occupytog...theast/georgia/

Trying too hard Floyd.  It looks like it just went up.
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#59 Punk Rock Geek

Punk Rock Geek

    Challenge Conventional Thinking

  • Administrators
  • 3,893 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 04 October 2011 - 11:37 AM

View PostRenan, on 04 October 2011 - 09:52 AM, said:

Okay, but what I am pointing out is that democracy works on the majority decision (and yes, without hierarchy, democracy would be more democratic or "truest") and the majority, until now, always has chosen the maintenance of class society. It was not given to them the chance of choice for a new society, but it doesn´t matter to them. As I said before, they would just choose this damn reality, likewise, the servants would probably choose to stay within a feudal system. In fact, I see the same thing in the projects of various other radicals in the  Left. They refuse to see the root of capitalist society (commodity production) and always remain within the project to change the mode of production. No matter what happens, the production can´t stop. If you don´t produce, you are not human. I don´t know who depresses me more, if the exploited majority or the Left. Well, the exploited, at least, seem to learn more from their mistakes.

The majority always had contrary interests to mine (either personally and politically). And it's even more frustrating to know that I depend on them for a effective radical change in my life.

I can´t rely on their ability to choose today´s society destruction. That's why I don´t believe in democracy (even in your idealized "true" democracy). I can´t be sure of anything but I don´t think revolution will come in a "conscious" way by the majority, by working class actions. They will be forced to do it, if something really happens, of course.

And I really have no interest in the construction of "true" democratic society, as an alternative to a post-capitalist society. This doesn´t mean I´m in favor of an autocracy / oligarchy/ whatever-archy (this "democracy" morality really piss me off). I didn´t knew exactly the word that defines what I favor. I think it´s acracy.

I feel that you are ignoring my replies.  As I said "no action we make is based "purely" on our free will. We need to consider negative consequences, which ideally, would not exist. Or at least, EVERYONE would prefer to live in a world where they'll have the most say over what those consequences are. Only a non-hierarchical living environment can provide for this, to the greatest number of people."

I have bolded the word everyone.  I can't emphasize it enough.  Having a say in what the consequences to your actions are is the single most important thing to every person alive.  Those who already have real decision making power (the super rich) will not sympathize with our movement.  Everyone else will.  The only thing that will stop them is fear (of being ostracized by their employers, by their friends, by their government) and pessimism (the idea that has been fed to them since they were young that owners and other sources of authority are needed to keep the stupid population in line).  To organize on Wall Street is the first step to ridding one self of these chains of fear and pessimism.  To organize is to reclaim your own humanity.

Posted Image
I'm PRG/Poofah, and I ran http://peacepunk.net for nearly 5 years before being promoted to the official Anti-Flag website. It's nice to meet you all! I will be administering this forum alongside Anti-Flag and the A-F Records crew.

#60 Renan

Renan

    Anti-Violent

  • Anti-Violent
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 623 posts
  • Location:São Paulo ,Brazil

Posted 04 October 2011 - 01:10 PM

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 04 October 2011 - 11:37 AM, said:

I feel that you are ignoring my replies.  As I said "no action we make is based "purely" on our free will. We need to consider negative consequences, which ideally, would not exist. Or at least, EVERYONE would prefer to live in a world where they'll have the most say over what those consequences are. Only a non-hierarchical living environment can provide for this, to the greatest number of people."

I want to consider the negative consequences of my actions and I am also in favor of a non-hierarchical society, but I fail to see where democracy (which is the system of social organization that you stand for) fits necessarily in this situation. The point for me of a revolution, among other things, is to no longer be required to be part of a gregariousness of any kind. In your democracy I have to be part of this gregariousness and respect the outcome of their decisions. I don´t  want to respect decisions related to the maintenance, or reform, of capitalist and other class social relations (which is what I have seen in the projects and goals of the Left as a whole).

I have no interest on "having a say on the consequences" because we already have this right. We can have a say about capitalism consequences but things  change practically in nothing. I can say a lot of things in a democracy, both at the fake and at the "true" one, but doesn´t mean that what I say will be done. I don´t see a democracy project being part of a revolutionary process. Both because the economic/political authorities  will not respect these decisions and because people involved aren´t interested in choosing a revolutionary alternative.

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 04 October 2011 - 11:37 AM, said:

I have bolded the word everyone.  I can't emphasize it enough.  Having a say in what the consequences to your actions are is the single most important thing to every person alive.

I´m sure it's not the most important thing to me.

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 04 October 2011 - 11:37 AM, said:

Those who already have real decision making power (the super rich) will not sympathize with our movement. Everyone else will.

I'm "super poor" and doesn´t sympathize with your "movement".

View PostPunk Rock Geek, on 04 October 2011 - 11:37 AM, said:

The only thing that will stop them is fear (of being ostracized by their employers, by their friends, by their government) and pessimism (the idea that has been fed to them since they were young that owners and other sources of authority are needed to keep the stupid population in line).  To organize on Wall Street is the first step to ridding one self of these chains of fear and pessimism.  To organize is to reclaim your own humanity.

I agree with you about people´s fear but, in fact, I would say that everyone around me (and the ones participating in protests like Wall Street) are actually pretty optimistic with the society around them, as they always were in the past. Yes, at the end of the week they all get drunk, or do drugs, or go to the church,  or just vegetate in front of the TV or computer, or go to protests asking for demands and show how they are model citizens, or whatever other kind of lies they want to tell to  themselves, just to  wake up for a new long week of routine and tedious work, saying how they love their work and how they love their lives because there are people who don´t even have this.

I don´t see humanity in choosing between something horrible or bad. Nor in being arrested or having pepper spray in my face, or being beaten up with police batons in a peaceful protest that will have no influence at all in the current production and it´s current social relations.
For Honesty and Nihilism



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users