"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."

Welcome to Infoshop News
Saturday, June 15 2013 @ 05:00 PM CDT

What's war good for? It's good for building the movement!

News ArchiveSubmitted by Chuck0:

What's war good for? It's good for building the movement!



And what is the Movement? The Movement being whatever issue
is salient at the time. It was Globalisation, it is now Peace. It is an
opportunity to reword those old chants, to change the labels on the
donation buckets, and change the header on those old petition
forms. It is a new and exciting time to build the Movement.

And what is the best way to build the Anti-…….. Movement? It
is to join the Party, pay up your membership fees, sell the paper
and vote for our candidates. There are lots of new people around
the Movement that offer excellent opportunities to recruit and
build. It is about coming to the next big rally (preferably organised
with police permission), and listening to our speakers. It is about
being busy creating symbolic and spectacular actions. It is about
building the Party, as the best vehicle for the Movement to grow
and become successful.

And any criticism or dissent must from those people whose only
politics is that of sectarianism. They talk a lot but do nothing
important, autonomous direct action has nothing to offer the
Movement. Or maybe you just don't understand because you are
‘Thinking Under Capitalism’. Don’t make your concerns public
because we need 'unity' and 'solidarity' now more then ever
before if the Movement/Party is to have any success.

It is also about forgetting that the Party was in full support of the
Soviet war in Afghanistan during the 1980's. That the Party
supported the murderous purges, the campaigns of
disappearances and terror conducted against the Afghan people
by the USSR and the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan
(PDPA). If you do remember, then remember that the Party was
doing good, progressive and revolutionary things (especially for
Party members).

In the light of reality, Party propaganda statements like “in the
April 1978 revolution … for the first time the history of the
country political power was transferred from the ruling class to
the working class” really are a little silly (A Brief Glimpse at
Afghanistan from 1978, Peace Courier, Sept/Oct 2001).
Especially in light of the fact the class privilege, private property
and a capitalist based wage economy was still operating after both
the 1973 and 1978 coups, carried out both times by the PDPA.

However, as long as a 'Socialist' imperial power was holding the
guns, it is all OK. Right?

In the end, it makes no difference who holds the guns when they
are aimed at you.

asger

@nti-copyright

(.... against Historical Revisionism. The Left is not always
beautiful)

********

****** The A-Infos News Service ******

News about and of interest to anarchists

******

COMMANDS: lists@ainfos.ca

REPLIES: a-infos-d@ainfos.ca

HELP: a-infos-org@ainfos.ca

WWW: http://www.ainfos.ca/

INFO: http://www.ainfos.ca/org

-To receive a-infos in one language only mail lists@ainfos.ca the message:

unsubscribe a-infos

subscribe a-infos-X

where X = en, ca, de, fr, etc. (i.e. the language code)

Share
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Ask
  • Kirtsy
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Twitter
  • SlashDot
  • Reddit
  • MySpace
  • Fark
  • Del.icio.us
  • Blogmarks
  • Yahoo Buzz
What's war good for? It's good for building the movement! | 4 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
comment by J.R.
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 11 2001 @ 12:23 PM CST
I am very glad that this has been addressed. If there is one thing that will hurt the anti-war movement, it is authoritarian leftists claiming that the pre-Taliban \"socialist\" government was some sort of worker-run paradise because of the attention devoted to education, health care, and housing during that time. It was not a pleasant place to be at all if one was Afghani -- it was an undemocratic party dictatorship along the lines of the USSR that ended up with a Pol Pot-like dictator (Amin) who viciously purged and murdered minorities and political opponents. Why did the Soviets invade? Mostly, because the PDPA was not fully under their thumb, and because Afghanistan was no longer under the control of the PDPA, thanks to both popular unrest and the equally undemocratic Pakistan-America-fundamentalist proxy army invading from the south.

If we are claiming to be champions of democracy in Afghanistan, let\'s actually back groups like RAWA and other democratic reform groups, not the PDPA or other Cold War relics of authoritarianism, as this is hardly better than claiming support for the religio-fascist Taliban. If we back the former \"workers\' state\" of the PDPA, it doesn\'t make us much better than Reagan, who claimed that the brutal fundamentalist mujahedeen were \"freedom fighters\", or W. Bush, who is currently claiming that the Northern Alliance (whose leadership is made up of vicious war criminals with records bloody enough for the RAWA to call them \"the second Taliban\") will bring popular democracy to the Afghani people.
comment by Adam
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 12 2001 @ 01:40 PM CST
I think that anarchists and anti-authoritarians have a responsibility in the movement to raise these issues and \"call out\" the sectarian political parties of the authoritarian left. When organizations are dominated by these folks and their in fighting we need to make it clear to the rest of the movement what these folks are about and how is a member of each group. We also need to be critical in a constructive manner by having a greater emphisis that these groups involvement is hurting the movement and that they are undemocratic than pointing out historical \"skeltons in the closet\" of these gorups (which are good, but many people may not understanf these).

But often, unfortunatley, I\'ve seen that anarchists have a tendancy to bail out on coaltions and groups that become dominated by authoritarians rather then stick to it nad fight them out.
comment by FromBelow
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, December 23 2001 @ 02:32 PM CST
Burningman has obviously come to these boards with the attempt to convert anarchists to authoritarian communism. Granted, some oif the communists goals are good. But, as long as there are leaders, there will be corruption. And the absolute worst leadersn have been communists, namely Stalin. As much as you would like to tout the good that authoritarian communists have done, it remains that they supported murderous tyrnats such as Stalin and Castro. It is time that anarchists learned when and when not to cooperate with the rest of the left.
comment by Ministry of vice
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 29 2002 @ 10:55 AM CDT
Thank you Voron!
People in many movements are so taken with \'communism good, capitalism bad\' that they don\'t realize the history of bloodshed and murnder and slaughter in the name of revolution.
History of course will repeat itself as soon as we forget it. We are forgetting it.
Go tell some of the Chinese people that cultural revolution was a great achievement. Some of the starved peasants in both China and Russia that communism brought progress to them. That when property was taken forcefully from many Jewish citizens in was in the name of the revolution and that they were the enemies of the people.
What I see in the movements all over this country is racist, ignorant, white (mostly), middle class and up(who are in poverty by choice though no one in poverty would CHOOSE to live that way) telling the ignorant masses how they should listen to their revolutionary ideas.
If they don\'t, well, then they are not \'conscious\' enough.
In the anti-war movement i have seen the left ally itself with the conservative Muslim community and Orthodox jews who oppose israel.
Probably for a photo-op more than for anything else, but its pretty disturbing that the left would give up its principles for a good picture.
They would proclaim their support in the numerous papers only to put in the corner \'and we oppose taliban and fundamentalists as well\'
So eager to please, so cute!

Unite all those who can be united- as long as they give up their culture, their religion, their way of life, their way of thinking, themselves... funny idea.

just wanted to say i don\'t favor any religous group or god. i am anti-authoritarian but think that every group of people deserves the right to self determination. Solving anything with violence will not do anything to help or further humanity as inocent people get killed and it becomes part of history. Not a very good history to have, in my opinion.
(p.s. I am not an FBI agent. I know this statement will make people think that i am but i am not. Anytime I post anything about criticizing the left in any way, i get accused of being and fbi agent. so i am just saving you the trouble. )