Ungdomshuset Evicted (1 Viewer)

[W.]

hadnt read that actually, your views have changed so much

I'd hope they would in 6 years. Realising that running around being an activist-ist is a dead end or that you can't boycott your way out of capitalism and developing your politics in a way which reflects this is hardly a crime. It seems your only gripe is that I didn't stay punk for life, something I'd expect from Janer maybe but that you ought to be above.

didnt realise you were against riots which didnt have "mass community support" now - no more masked up basta marches then

I said some people substitute violence for militancy and that while that makes for good tv a million years of it won't get us any closer to a revolutionary sitution. I support rioting as a tactic in struggle, not as a recreational hobby for greeks.

time moves on for people i suppose, next thing you'll be back on the meat!

Time moves on for everyone - you're not squatting in brixton anymore, things change. Maybe I am back on the meat already..

 

[rape the drummer]

Maybe I am back on the meat already..

Welllllllllllll......

 

[W.]

 

[Janer]

It seems your only gripe is that I didn't stay punk for life, something I'd expect from Janer maybe but that you ought to be above.

You used to be a Punk?

 

[W.]

I think I'll subscribe to the revisionist school of "if you're not now - you never were"

 

[bohs punks]

is that the official wsm party line or are you speaking in a personal capacity - i'd say that tactical and theoretical unity is a fucker to get used to!

 

[rape the drummer]

why do people have such a problem with other people not liking the same music and dressing the same as them anymore. grow up.

 

[bohs punks]

i thought this thread was about politics not music or fashion. anyway.

 

[ci]

is that the official wsm party line or are you speaking in a personal capacity - i'd say that tactical and theoretical unity is a fucker to get used to!

Aye. a right pain in the arse. Being a member of WSM can be difficult at times. You have to be so careful about what you say in public, be it on mesage boards or otherwise, lest it be taken as , as you put it, "the party line." Better not admit my unfashionable attraction to some of Lilly Allen's stuff, or BohsPunx next argument criticising the WSM might be based along the lines that they, like Weeler, aren't punx enough.

As RTD said, cop on. Tunnel vision is acceptable until you hit say, 17. After that it's called ignorance.

Ps. In keeping with the topic of the thread, Solidarity with those arrested.

 

[Janer]

But Boh's Punk didn't say what you've just said Ci and people are not complaining about Weeler and RTD's new found music choices, but I and others do and will comment when "former followers" of it do have sly digs at it and wash their hands with extra disnfectant.

I would also like to ask Weeler why does he compare the Punk lifeshelf to the football transfer window or has Logans Run warped his thinking?

 

[ci]

But Boh's Punk didn't say what you've just said Ci and people are not complaining about Weeler and RTD's new found music choices, but I and others do and will comment when "former followers" of it do have sly digs at it and wash their hands with extra disnfectant.

I wasn't getting at his comment's about Weelers music choices- Weelers a big boy now and can fight that corner himself. I was getting at his constant sly digs at the WSM.

 

[bohs punks]

the nature of a platformist organisation is that members of the organisation will stick to argueing an agreed line in public - ie the agreed party position. thats not some sly dig on my behalf but the nature of platformism and what is deemed neccesary to build an effective anarchist organisation capable of assuming the leadership of ideas among the class.

the wsm claims to be a platformist organisation.

this by its neccesity entails members keeping any disagreements they have internal to the organisation and not going off on a tangent in public as to do so is to leave the potential for creation of confusion among the class as to what anarchists actually believe in.

to me messageboards are public but whatever- im not in the party so who cares what mmy views are.

whatever as to the merits of theoeretical unity or indeed of building the organisation and who such an organisation actually attracts as members what i was stating was my belief that sticking to a patrty line must be difficult, especially i suppose for those who come form a punk background where the views on what constitutes anarchism are varied. ( eg situationism, direct action, class struggle, belief in the reveloutionary nature of what others deem as vandalism / anti social behaviour by working class youth).

thus the comment of this must be hard - it must be!


i didnt realise the wsm were so sensitive about discussion. so i will stop and go read your position papers when i am interested in what any of you think on given topics.

building the reveloutionary organisation mus be more important than reading my comments anyway.

 

[W.]

the nature of a platformist organisation is that members of the organisation will stick to argueing an agreed line in public - ie the agreed party position. thats not some sly dig on my behalf but the nature of platformism and what is deemed neccesary to build an effective anarchist organisation capable of assuming the leadership of ideas among the class.

This is all true, but you seem to think it extends to the personal lives of members, if I publish an article or even debate on here about things it's not the WSM debating. We have positions on key things like how to organise, what constitutes class struggle, womens freedom and so on.. These positions are classic anarchist communist positions and would be quite similar to the politics of our platformist comrades in Chile, South Africa, Canada etc. It's a specific tendency within anarchism. The WSM's paper, our 3 local papers and our magazine are our official moutpieces aswell we occasionaly may issue press releases or statements.

the wsm claims to be a platformist organisation.

It is. And one of the most influential ones around.

this by its neccesity entails members keeping any disagreements they have internal to the organisation and not going off on a tangent in public as to do so is to leave the potential for creation of confusion among the class as to what anarchists actually believe in.

If you honestly think this extends to discussing things on a punk board you have the completely wrong idea. Essentially this amounts to theoretical unity between branches on points we have position papers on, not the mental policing of every member.

to me messageboards are public but whatever- im not in the party so who cares what mmy views are.

It's not a party. Messageboards are public but that doesn't mean everything me, ci, wageslave or any number of other people on here say is a position of the WSM. To be a position it would have to be put to delegate council.

building the reveloutionary organisation mus be more important than reading my comments anyway.

Quite intersting statement because every time I multiple quote your messages and reply to your points you seem to ignore me and just go on with your inuendo about platformism and who may or may not be punk anymore.

Seeing as you either don't understand or are deliberately misinterpreting the Platform, here it is in a nutshell;

• Theoretical Unity, that there is a commitment to come to agreement on theory. By theory they don't mean abstract musings on the meaning of life. By theory they mean the knowledge we have about how the world operates. Theory answers the question 'why?', for example 'why is there poverty?' 'why haven't Labour Parties provided a fairer society?' and so on and so on. By theoretical unity they mean that members of the organisation must agree on a certain number of basics. There isn't much an organisation can do if half their members believe in class struggle and the other half in making polite appeals to politicians, or one in which some people believe union struggles are important and others think they are a waste of time. Of course, not everybody is going to agree with everybody else on every single point. If there was total agreement there would be no debate, and our politics would grow stale and sterile. Accepting this however, there is a common recognition that it is important to reach as much agreement as possible, and to translate this agreement into action, to work together, which brings us to ...

• Tactical Unity, that the members of the organisation agree to struggle together as an organisation, rather than struggle as individuals in opposition to each other. So for example in Ireland, the WSM identified the Anti-Water Charges campaign as an issue of great importance. Once it was prioritised, all of our members committed themselves to work for the campaign, where possible. The tactics and potential of the campaign were discussed at length at our meetings. It became the major focus of our activity.

• Collective Responsibility, by this they mean that each member will support the decisions made by the collective, and each member will be part of the collective decision making process. Without this, any decisions made will be paper decisions only. Through this the strength of all the individuals that make up the group is magnified and collectively applied. The Platform doesn't go into detail about how collective responsibility works in practice. There are issues it leaves untouched such as the question of people who oppose the majority view. We would argue that obviously people who oppose the view of the majority have a right to express their own views, however in doing so they must make clear that they don't represent the view of the organisation. If a group of people within the organisation oppose the majority decision they have the right to organise and distribute information so that their arguments can be heard within the organisation as a whole. Part of our anarchism is the belief that debate and disagreement, freedom and openness strengthens both the individual and the group to which she or he belongs.

• Federalism, which they define as "the free agreement of individuals and organisations to work collectively towards common objectives".

 

[ci]

A quick post before I go back to work. These words are taken from a fellow WSM head in a similar discussion a while back- "The whole point about being platfomist, rather than vague anarchists who encompass an extremely broad definition of what’s a libertarian, is that there is a high level of agreement on core principles. I doubt any of us subscribe wholesale to everything. "

FFS Bohspunks, do you mean to say that a member of a platformist organisation is not allowed to have a personal opinion or to display said personal opinion in public? I mean, an organisation (not party..!) where everyones views are completely hemogenous is hardly healthy is it? Organisations like the WSM thrive on discussion and the odd friendly argument. Weelers posts on a public message board, especially one like Eirecore, cannot be taken as the view of the entire organisation.

 

[nooleen]

moutpieces

heh

 

[W.]

FFS Bohspunks, do you mean to say that a member of a platformist organisation is not allowed to have a personal opinion or to display said personal opinion in public? I mean, an organisation (not party..!) where everyones views are completely hemogenous is hardly healthy is it? Organisations like the WSM thrive on discussion and the odd friendly argument. Weelers posts on a public message board, especially one like Eirecore, cannot be taken as the view of the entire organisation.

I agree (not surpising) It shows a massive misinterpretation of the Platform to think that. The platformist organisation in contrast with the syndicalist or synthesist one is a coming together of like-minded anarchists (in the tradition of bakunin, makhno, friends of durruti) for the purpose of holding providing a strong ideological line in order to give coherence to the anarchist movement. It comes from the lessons of Russia and the Ukraine after 1917 and the failure of the CNT in 1936 (entering & breathing life into the government).

The platformist organisation is not a mass organisation and doesn't intend to be, through co-ordinated involvement in social struggles and trade unions platformists seek to increase the influence of their ideas build democratic structures as well as pushing for direct action. Platformist groups do not exist in opposition to other anarchist (or even left-revolutionary) groups but as the organised tendency within anarchism.

 

[pete]

 

[nooleen]

(cartoon)

i don't get it........

 

[pete]

it's called "a joke"

 

[nooleen]

i get the concept of jokes - but i don't get this particular joke, you see.