Democracy Is Direct

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:28 pm

jakell » 13 Feb 2016 01:17 wrote:I say 'surprisingly' because a lot the Left/Right dynamic (in the 'anti-fascism' context) amounts to useless hot air and often seems about denying the other side a foothold, that they do not have a 'thing', and what they do have is merely a (substandard) naysaying of their own position.


in Australia its more than hot air.

Look at the Bendigo Mosque issue.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/stop-the ... 2012662221

These fuckwits are actively trying to stop other Australians from being free to practice their religion in their home town.

Nothing wrong with denying those cunts a foothold imo.

Or coming out in public to make a stand against their attempts to deny our fellow Aussies the right to be themselves.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-10/p ... go/6842862
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:39 pm

Luther Blissett » 13 Feb 2016 02:08 wrote:
Joe Hillshoist » Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:22 am wrote:
The truth is what "did us in" was probably a few things that happened in 2007, but I like that RI doesn't lay down and die even if it frustrates the fuck out of me more often these days.


Theresa and Jeremy?

I agree with your characterization of the last 7 years of politics. I am of the mind that any social progress and advancement we have made has been almost completely people-powered.


Yeah there was that, there was what happened to DE, and a whole lot of real far right inflitration attempts. As well as what seemed to me to be attempts by abusers to intimidate people. A lot of trust got destroyed around that time. After Theresa and Jeremy died there were people, probably crypto scientologists, who posted here worked their way into the communities trust then seemed to go about piosoning relationships between community members.

I miss heaps of those old voices because so many were so good at pulling stuff apart and tracing links that were kind of full on. There was a real attempt to examine the link between RA and mind control techniques and how those techniques were translated into methods of overall social control.

You're right - the only responses have come from grass roots action. people power and the like. Even bernie sanders seems to be in that mold. (But so did Obama to many of the same people I reckon.)
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby Luther Blissett » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:50 pm

jakell » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:54 pm wrote:On my last forum we had a discussion about online activism, trying to achieve certain goals and forming specific communities. We sort of concluded that the internet is in too much flux to make these sorts of direct analogues with real life activities, of course they are still possible in a reduced fashion. A lot of people seem to overlook the fact that the internet is pretty young, and the existence of useful forums and communities is younger still, also, that 'golden age' of forums seems to be fading in the face of social media and casual internet usage, ie that 'flux' again.

I don't think there's much chance of any 'unsavoury types' landing here, so the question is rather academic, attracting regular folks seems to be hard enough.


The online activities of real-life activist groups in which I am involved are somewhat useful, somewhat frustrating. I'm sure the internet makes planning and development much more efficient than in the past, eliminating the need for constant meetings. Though I do have an all-day meeting tomorrow (on a Saturday).

You raise an interesting point which I've been thinking about a lot lately. What will resistance and activism look like in augmented reality? Though I see it as a stopgap on the path to transhumanism, I also see it as external enough to the body and as inevitable as web 2.0 that I am sure I will give in. I think that the change is coming much faster than we think and could massively disrupt modern life. I would prefer to stay ahead of the curve and determine ways to use this new platform as a tool for resistance.

I don't think that the 2D internet is long for this world. But I would prefer it that this community somehow exist beyond the demise of the 2D internet.

I believe that you and I both have had some success with infiltrating far-right spaces online and attempting to steer conversations — in my case towards pacifism, race and gender equity, class consciousness — and as I've never been discovered, it is not too insane to imagine the same being done by people who want to steer towards far-right "values."
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:54 pm

.

Joe Hillshoist » Fri Feb 12, 2016 8:15 pm wrote:

if you feel he is casting aspersion at you specifically perhaps you need to ask yourself why.


That's just a stupid statement. I could care less what AD or anyone here may conjure up in their minds about "me". No one here knows "me", only a representation of a fragment of some of my thoughts that I may share on this board. To imply that I should dedicate any time towards "asking myself" anything related to what others may 'think' Re: my activities here is a useless exercise.
In any event, I am NOT referring to MYSELF when I reference the casting of aspersions. AD has made unsubstantiated (and at times passive/aggressive) claims a number of times towards individual and/or group forum members here. It's dishonest at best.

I'm disappointed in myself: I've previously indicated I'd avoid this topic a page ago, and here I am, typing again.

Note to self: cease and desist.
Last edited by Belligerent Savant on Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5214
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:58 pm

jakell » 13 Feb 2016 02:48 wrote:
Whether we like it or not, these people are a part of society.

I know the use of the word 'nazi' here does rather narrow the field, but I'm assuming that the category you have in mind is wider than that. They are a part of society.
I think you're right about their increased solidity though, but I put this down to the Left's smug-self absorption, plus the fact that the conditions they favour are becoming more prevalent.


Yes there are neo nazis and they are a part of society.

If they become influential in the discussions we have as a society then our society devotes some of its time and energy into making people suffer for the horrific crime of being who they are. This process becomes a feedback loop. Moar power to the arseholes and more suffering for people who shouldn't have to.

Best that they crawl back under their rocks.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:09 pm

Belligerent Savant » 13 Feb 2016 11:54 wrote:.

Joe Hillshoist » Fri Feb 12, 2016 8:15 pm wrote:

if you feel he is casting aspersion at you specifically perhaps you need to ask yourself why.


That's just a stupid statement. I could care less what AD or anyone here may conjure up in their minds about "me". No one here knows "me", only a representation of a fragment of some of my thoughts that I may share on this board. To imply that I should dedicate any time towards "asking myself" anything related to what others may 'think' Re: my activities here is a useless exercise.
In any event, I am NOT referring to MYSELF when I reference the casting of aspersions. AD has made unsubstantiated (and at times passive/aggressive) claims a number of times towards individual or group forum members here. It's dishonest at best.

I'm disappointed in myself: I've previously indicated I'd avoid this topic a page ago, and here I am, typing again.

Note to self: cease and desist.


Ok maybe it is a stupid statement, and the fact that you are prepared to stick up for people being unfairly accused is something that is worthy of respect.

AD has made unsubstantiated (and at times passive/aggressive) claims a number of times towards individual or group forum members here. It's dishonest at best.

Plenty of times I've read stuff here by people and thought "WTF is your agenda? Why are you saying that shit mate?" maybe AD feels the same way and is a bit more "vocal" (in his/her cp way) about it. if (s)he's wrong the people "accused' should be able to defend themselves if they're on the level. Ok maybe they shouldn't have to ... but this used to be a robust forum where people stood their ground. Has that changed?

When AD posted that thread about new age woo and the far right it challenged so many people's comfortable assumptions about their world views. Mine included.

Lots of people took it personally instead of in what I assume was the intended spirit - which was :"This is where these ideas come from. Are you comfortable with that and at what point do these ideas import attitudes you might otherwise reject as bullshit."

I've never seen AD as casting aspersions on me but sometimes as challenging ideas I might have uncritically accepted. it doesn't mean (s)he's right.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby jakell » Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:34 pm

Luther Blissett » Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:50 am wrote:
jakell » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:54 pm wrote:On my last forum we had a discussion about online activism, trying to achieve certain goals and forming specific communities. We sort of concluded that the internet is in too much flux to make these sorts of direct analogues with real life activities, of course they are still possible in a reduced fashion. A lot of people seem to overlook the fact that the internet is pretty young, and the existence of useful forums and communities is younger still, also, that 'golden age' of forums seems to be fading in the face of social media and casual internet usage, ie that 'flux' again.

I don't think there's much chance of any 'unsavoury types' landing here, so the question is rather academic, attracting regular folks seems to be hard enough.


The online activities of real-life activist groups in which I am involved are somewhat useful, somewhat frustrating. I'm sure the internet makes planning and development much more efficient than in the past, eliminating the need for constant meetings. Though I do have an all-day meeting tomorrow (on a Saturday).

You raise an interesting point which I've been thinking about a lot lately. What will resistance and activism look like in augmented reality? Though I see it as a stopgap on the path to transhumanism, I also see it as external enough to the body and as inevitable as web 2.0 that I am sure I will give in. I think that the change is coming much faster than we think and could massively disrupt modern life. I would prefer to stay ahead of the curve and determine ways to use this new platform as a tool for resistance.

I don't think that the 2D internet is long for this world. But I would prefer it that this community somehow exist beyond the demise of the 2D internet.


As far as I can see (granted, I haven't given it much thought), anti-fascism will not be such an issue in the case of transhumanism. The majority of far-right thought seems to be directed towards biological determinism and traditionalism, something that will not sit well with transhumanism. Although they've learned to use cyberspace as well as others, this seems to be used as a specific tool for their political ends rather than an open-ended aid to human progress.

The one nod I've seen towards this was via a rather kooky religion called Cosmotheism, which claimed to promote human evolution via artificial selection and eugenics rather than any technological means (although that wasn't proscribed). It was highly race-orientated though.

I believe that you and I both have had some success with infiltrating far-right spaces online and attempting to steer conversations — in my case towards pacifism, race and gender equity, class consciousness — and as I've never been discovered, it is not too insane to imagine the same being done by people who want to steer towards far-right "values."


I don't think I ever tried to steer towards any particular values, but mostly simply waited for the right conditions to emerge so that questionable beliefs could be challenged successfully. My situation was possibly different though as it was a pretty mixed forum (it wasn't really a 'far-right' forum) so there were plenty there who already had decent values and weren't too shy about expressing them, if anything it was this I tried to facilitate rather than introduce anything of my own.
" Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism"
User avatar
jakell
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: North England
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:05 pm

American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:35 pm

http://www.crimethinc.com/index.html

From Democracy to Freedom



Image

Billions around the world have watched the familiar pageantry of the US Presidential race: Trump, the champion of the new extreme right, laying the groundwork for the despotism to come; Sanders, the partisan of an impossible dream, who nonetheless succeeded in luring disaffected millions back into electoral politics; Clinton, the despised representative of the status quo—around whom the hapless majority are forced to rally, since the future is sure to be even worse. Contemplating this bleak spectacle, some people object that this isn’t real democracy.

This talk about real democracy will be familiar to anyone who lived through the Occupy movement or one of its overseas equivalents. In 2011, from Tunis to Madrid and New York, movements triggered by the economic crisis turned into experiments with new forms of governance. By 2014, the luster of real democracy had begun to wear off: the Ukrainian revolution confirmed the right-wing appropriation of the discourse, while the movement that spread from Ferguson began with a riot, not an assembly. But next time revolution is on the agenda, we’ll surely hear more calls for “real” democracy. As long as democracy is the only paradigm we have for change, even anarchists will demand it.

Reflecting on the revolts of the preceding decade, we decided it was high time to get to the bottom of what democracy really is—and whether it’s what we want, after all. After years of research, discussion, and experimentation, we are excited present our conclusions in a massive new feature: From Democracy to Freedom.

In this text, we examine the common threads that connect different forms of democracy, trace the development of democracy from its classical origins to its contemporary representative, direct, and consensus-based variants, and evaluate how democratic discourse and procedures serve the social movements that adopt them. Along the way, we outline what it could mean to seek freedom directly rather than through democratic rule.

This is the flagship text in a series we will be publishing over the next several weeks, including testimony and critical analysis from participants in directly democratic movements around the world.


Read the feature >
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 19, 2016 1:43 pm

No Borders Part 2

From subMedia.tv

The folks from Sur Negro release their much awaited second episode of “No Borders, Social Struggles across the world” with a look at the New York City Anarchist Bookfair and the fight for $15 minimum wage, plus a music intervention by Rebel Diaz.



https://vimeo.com/179842017
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Fri Oct 21, 2016 12:41 pm

Feminism … Anarchism … Anarchafeminism, by Cindy Crabb

This three part piece by Cindy Crabb appears in the current issue of Perspectives on Anarchist Theory (N.29), and is available from AK Press.


Image


READ MORE
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Mon Oct 24, 2016 2:59 pm

http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/2016/10/ ... -reaction/

And After the Election, the Reaction

Image

Could there be any better illustration of the shortcomings of representative democracy than this year’s Presidential campaign? For months upon tiresome months, the whole world has cringed as US voters struggled to identify the second worst of all possible evils. As anarchists who believe in bona fide self-determination, we have critiqued and mobilized against the reduction of freedom to electoral politics in every Presidential racesince 1996. This time, it just seemed redundant.

But the 2016 election is practically over. What’s coming next is worse.


Read the analysis.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:20 am

Dancing in the Ruins of Empire

Image
Ghost-Angels to commemorate Pulse nightclub massacre, Gay Pride Orlando 2016

Things are rough in the United States, yeah? We’re in terrifying, fearful times, and it doesn’t seem like there’s much we can do about it. There is…but I’ll get to that stuff in a minute. First though, I think we should be hopeful, and maybe even a little excited.

That sounds awful, I’m sure. And before I continue, let me say I understand why we should be panicked. The right and far-right of American politics is about to take the reins of the largest and most violent empire the world has ever seen. They’ll have control of the military, the congress, the courts. They’ve already said they intend to dismantle most of the civil rights protections, benefits, and social programs that not only keep many of us safe, but keep the most vulnerable amongst us alive.

That’s terrifying, yes. We should be very worried, and I’m not going to tell you otherwise. Anyone who tells you not to worry probably hasn’t taken the time to see how bad things are going to get, and maybe even stands to benefit from the new regime.

I don’t mean you shouldn’t worry. You should. But you shouldn’t be terrified, because terror will cripple you. ‘Terror’ is what was used to bring in most of the government surveillance that’s about to be used against us. “Terror” is why many environmentalists in the last decade were imprisoned. “Terror” is also why most of the police forces in the United States are now as armed as military units overseas.

Terrified people make mistakes. They run towards the nearest person offering them protection, or hide in silence as those around them suffer violence. Terrified people are easily controlled, easily abused, easily conquered.

We must not be terrified.

Instead, we should be excited. Not for the rise of the far-right, for nationalism and white supremacists and fascists and Christian fundamentalists. Not for the suffering of our friends, nor for ours, nor for the coming violence against everyone who doesn’t fit into the plans of our new masters.

We should be excited because we suddenly have a chance we didn’t have before. This is a crisis, absolutely, but it isn’t just ours. During the summer, I wrote of the impending death of Liberal Democracy. That time is upon us.

Environmental destruction, climate change, and extinction are all the effects of capitalism. Racism, patriarchal violence, and the oppression of the poor and disabled are requirements of capitalism. And the government, the ‘State,’ is how capitalism survives.

This is why no real change has ever happened regarding climate change. Why no government has ever truly stopped racist oppression of minorities in any country, why life has never been fully livable by the poorest and most vulnerable. The State serves capitalism, and fascism arises whenever they are under threat. If capitalism and the state are under threat, though, who is threatening them?

We are.

Anti-government and anti-capitalist protests around the world have only increased in the last 20 years. Entire countries in Europe have become ungovernable because of the people’s unwillingness to play along with elected leaders who promise them only austerity, more war, and the hope of eventual reform. Entire towns and regions in Spain and Greece, for instance, are de-facto autonomous zones. In smaller regions of France it is the same.

That is, empire is crumbling, people are finding a new way to live, and governments and the rich everywhere are on the defensive.

That’s why we shouldn’t be terrified. That’s why we should be excited. It’s time to press our advantage. It’s time to dance in the ruins of empire.

Here’s some stuff that might help.


Read at: https://godsandradicals.org/2016/11/20/ ... of-empire/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Tue Nov 22, 2016 2:15 pm

Delegation of authority and centralization have their place but this sort of thing should be an integral part of a truly participatory society:


“First we began learning something together, it was a sort of waking up to a knowledge that was collective, and this has to do with a collective self-awareness of what was taking place within all of us. First we began by asking one another, and ourselves questions, and from there we began to resolve things together. Each day we continue discovering and constructing while walking. It is like each day is a horizon that opens before us, and this horizon does not have any recipe or program, we begin here, without what was in the past. What we had was life, our life each day, our difficulties, problems, crisis, and what we had in our hands at the time was what we used to go looking for solutions. The beginning of the practice of horizontalidad can be seen in this process. It is the walk, the process of questioning as we walk that enriched our growth, and helped us discover that strength is different when we are side by side, when there is no one to tell you what you have to do, but rather when we decide who we are. I do not believe there is a definition for what we are doing, we know how it is done, but we are not going to come across any definition, in this way it is similar to horizontalidad. More than an answer to a practice, it is an everyday practice.”

– Neka, Quoted in Horizontalism, Marina Sitrin, 2006
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Democracy Is Direct

Postby American Dream » Wed Dec 21, 2016 1:38 pm

http://ideasandaction.info/2016/12/nati ... perialism/

Nationalism and Imperialism
December 21, 2016

By Jake Tompkins


This article will be aimed at laying out a general Anarcho-syndicalist position on the “national question”, colonialism and imperialism, and national liberation. This will not be an original theoretical contribution, but will be a loose tying together of the general Anarchist praxis and theory on these subjects into one coherent position. Anarcho-syndicalists are revolutionary unionists and anti-authoritarian socialists and as such the Anarcho-syndicalist approach to this question will be an approach that comes out of these traditions.

Imperialism and Colonialism

We will start with definitions of both these terms. Imperialism as Lenin defines it is the international order of nation states that forms the international capitalist system. This baseline definition offered in the first pages of “Imperialism: The highest Stage of Capitalism” is essentially correct, though much of Lenin’s specific ideas on how imperialism forms and the state of imperialism at the time he was writing his pamphlet are incorrect. Imperialism is essentially the hierarchy of nation states that form the international capitalist system in which nation states are used as tools for national capitals and thus national bourgeoisies to compete with each other. Imperialism in essence is the competition between capitalists on a world scale and thus capitalism is intimately connected to imperialism.

Colonialism is much harder to give a short, concrete definition for as it doesn’t refer to one specific thing, or facet, but a historical phenomena. Here we must deal with two concepts; settler colonialism and neocolonialism. Colonialism as a project and historical phenomena started with settler colonialism where capitalism, in it’s need to expand out of Europe and feed the cities in Europe who at that time did not have enough resources to sustain their own local capitalist economies sent large fleets of sailors, settlers, and soldiers to take over land already occupied by indigenous peoples and turn in into a space for capital to operate. In this process native populations were brutally exterminated, in some cases completely wiped out and subject to genocide in ways that prefigured the holocaust concentration camps. As such colonial regimes were established that produced commodities locally and then exported them back the country that owned the colony. Leading up the second world war there was a process of “decolonisation” where the former colonies gained political independence, however WW2 established a global power relation that retained the same basic aspects of western domination as outright colonialism. While colonies no longer existed the west still controlled the world through intra economic and world power means.

It should be noted that “settler colonialism” isn’t over. We have just passed into a neo-colonial stage of it. Settler colonialism still exists in that in the former colonies (such as the United States) in the form of the marginalization of indigenous groups and the separation of them from their sacred lands.

Anarcho-syndicalists are against capitalism and have no horse in the race of the capitalist class to the bottom. We are against the capitalist system and its exploitation of the working class and as such are against the international capitalist system. As we are Anarchists, we are against the state. The state is an institution which dominates society in the interests of the minority that controls it. The imperialist system is the competition between the capitalist class and their states and as such we oppose the whole thing, along with colonialism that is one manifestation of the imperialist system. We are for the struggle of indigenous people against neo-colonialism and on the side of the working class people that are killed and dominated by imperialism.We want to destroy these systems and replace them with a world Anarchist federation, or syndicate, that allows for the free-organization of human activity, by all of humanity collectively, across the world.
The National Question and National Liberation

For second international Marxism the “national question” was one of the most important questions of the day as a result of huge national conflicts that were unfolding in the places that the second international was present in. As such the Second International Marxists had to theorise about “nations”, what they were, and what was to be social democracy’s (second international Marxism) policy toward them. This is where the debate between Rosa Luxemburg and Vladimir Lenin manifested. Luxemburg for her part argued that the nation was a construction of capitalism and a cultural institution through which the capitalist class ruled. Lenin argued that the nation was a grouping of people with common heritage, economic situations, and geographic placement. Lenin’s definition of what a nation is came from the common social democratic understanding of it. Generally Second International Marxism argued that the nation was based on some sense of community and commonality. The historic problem with this is that nations were largely constructed by destroying organic communities, dividing them up, and fracturing them. Luxemburg, was essentially correct in stating that nations constituted a cultural form through which the bourgeoisie ruled the working class.

Nations are a carved out slice of territory where the native capitalist class exploits the native working class. Nation states are the organs of power that allow the bourgeoisies of each nation to rule in said nations and compete with other national bourgeoisies. Nationalism is the ideology of these national bourgeoisies and their interests. This means that as Anarchists are opposed every bourgeoisie and every state, we are opposed to nationalism. Many sects of Stalinism insist that there is something called “the nationalism of the oppressed”. To them this refers to nationalism which can empower people dominated by the structures of imperialism and neo-colonialism. As Anarchists we contend that there is no such nationalism. Nationalism is the ideology of a native capitalist class which by its nature seeks to dominate and exploit the native working class and build its own global power in the international system of imperialism.

Since we are against nationalism we also oppose Stalinist Socialism in One Country theory.This theory was developed by Stalin who up until 1935 agreed with the Bolshevik view that socialism would have to be achieved by an international movement of the working class. Stalin declared in 1935 that as a result of the complete nationalisation of industry, Russia under his control had achieved socialism. While this may be socialism by the Stalinist definition, Anarchism comes out of a completely different tradition of “socialism”. Our socialism is our desire for a world wide society without oppression and collective administration of production rather than control of it by a state ruling class.

National liberation can be viewed in two different ways. One is the liberating of people from oppression by the international system of imperialism and the other is anti-imperialist nationalism which sees the development of a new nation state with it’s own bourgeoisie as an alternative to imperialism. There is no anti-imperialist nationalism. This can only amount to anti-imperialist imperialism. Nations are what form the international system of imperialism and nation states are what enforce it. As opponents of the imperialist system, capitalism, and the state, we oppose any kind of nationalism and opt for national liberation on the basis of the destruction of all nation states and the whole imperialist system.

Strategy of Anarcho-Syndicalists

Anarcho-syndicalists want to see the abolition of imperialism, capitalism, neo-colonialism, and nationalism. We aim to do this by carrying out a general social revolution where the oppressed of all sectors of global society construct power and begin to re-organize society to eliminate oppressive systems of power with it. This will involve completely disarming the ruling class and reactionary forces and being on the side, concretely, in all situations, of the oppressed majority of society, rather than on the side of the capitalist class and states of the world. We oppose both the US, Qatari, and Saudi imperialist campaign in the middle east and the counter imperialism of Iran, Hezbollah, Assad, and Russia. For a world without classes, nations, states, and capitalism.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests