that sort of manipulative bullshit is pretty irritating and reveals, ultimately, that you don't even believe your own bullshit. apparently, anarchists are not at all capable of learning through political practice!
i mean, if you all actually DID believe in the materialist force of political practice and if you all actually reject the vanguardism you claim to reject, you would believe that, rather than relying on a majority to overwhelm and marginalize the bad actors into silence and minority status, you'd believe that political practice would transform consciousness. but noooooooooooooooo.
and in the end, those who don't believe, as you do, that political practice is crucial, the one who argue, vociferously, that hearts and minds are changed through discourse and argument? heh. apparently, they don't believe in their own bullshit either. because discourse isn't enough. you need force, violence on one account or just the masses to rise up, finally, and put them down with the sheer force of the numbers.
it's really funny because, in the end, none of you really believe your own bullshit.
Oh wait! I know what it is: you really *do* think anarchists are some special breed impervious to transformation through political practice or impervious to reasoned argument. which means that, in the end, again, you don't take them seriously. they are the caricatures you paint of them which are, in the end, just as bad as calling them a cancer. it doesn't matter if it's teenaged girl or testosterone fueled males to which you reduce them.
At 11:57 AM 2/11/2012, Carrol Cox wrote:
>Eric's points are persuasive. I would only like to add that lessening of
>"relative weight' is hardly a purge, soft or hard. I assume that a number of
>tendencies, some that I _really_ dislike, will remain active in the
>resistance movements (plural) indefinitely; that even a "big tent" Party
>would not be able to contain them all, nor would such containment be
>desirable.
>
>Carrol
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
>On Behalf Of Eric Beck
>Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 10:46 AM
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] More on BB antics and their defenders
>
>Random, hurried thoughts:
>
>1. Old habits die hard. Between Julio's hard force of discipline and
>uniformity of tactics and Bhaskar's and Carrol's soft force of
>expanding the movement so as to marginalize the anarchists, the urge
>to purge remains strong. It's almost comical. Just when I think
>anarchists are engaging in anachronistic taunting for invoking
>Stalinism, it rears its fetid head.
>
>2. How come opponents of BB and anarchism never take it seriously (or,
>in shag's terms, respect it)? None of them actually try to figure out
>why it appeals to people who do shit and why those people prefer it to
>other forms of radical practice. It's always a false consciousness or
>petit bourgeois dilettantism or, at best, a good impetus to action but
>not a sustainable politics.
>
>3. Robert's point about violence having historically been mostly
>carried out by labor is a good one, and one I hadn't thought of. If,
>today, violence were carried out primarily by unionists, would that be
>okay or should that also be subject to central committee approval? In
>other words, is the opposition here violence as such or is it
>anarchism?
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)