Autonomous Class War - a definition

[Nigel]

Attica Is God!!!

The only thing thats out of order is your assumptions.

I love you really mate!!!!!

 

[lights.out.london]

That's still gobbledegook though.

Have you tried babelfish.com for a translation?

I take your point, though. Worth persevering IMHO.

 

[The Black Hand]

"The Organisational Platform" of our times, perhaps?

I await "The Reply" with interest!

To be serious, my personal opinion is that one has to start from a very basic point and then build on it, that one can only do that from the grass roots, and that any hint of vanguardism should be stamped on. I also prefer to think that any intellectual analyses of how a "movement" operates are formulated after the birth of said "movement", not that the "movement" has been designed around a pre-existing analysis (give or take the odd "truth").

Yes, we do need a new platform. Relying on that nearly 100 years old one is nowhere near good enough. Its a shame but anarchism is under theorised and has therefore not been able to realise its potential.

I agree, but I also think that the movement has never died, and so we are not talking about a new movement being born, but rather theorising its' new foci in swarms of the multitudes praxis. The definition was written as a participant within these issues and movement(s), with the aim of acting a bit like a super bright glow fly to gather other clan glow flies and swarm afresh.

 

[The Black Hand]

I was perusing the website of a group I have time for and thought that this was relevant. The quote is from http://www.zabalaza.net/pdfs/sapams/zab6.pdf the journal of good south african anarcho communists. It's an opinion that is both theoretically relevant and challenging to uber 'anarchists' (those who fetisishise a utopian amorphous completely leaderless anarchist never existing/ed 'utopia');

"in practice, all South African Left revolutionaries would
employ a shifting combination of both programme and insurgency, recognising the constantly changing tensions between the masses and a revolutionary minority with a set programme.
The insurgent multitude position was perhaps best expressed by Dwyer (AIDC), who said the Alliance “needed to put to bed the fear that they [the social movements] are a mob lead like sheep by charismatic
leaders. The people are not against leaders, but against leaders who are not under their control..."

 

[butchersapron]

Funnily enough, the lead story on their website is about an exciting new translation of the Platform

 

[The Black Hand]

Cool thread, Attica.

Yeah

 

[The Black Hand]

Funnily enough, the lead story on their website is about an exciting new translation of the Platform

Yes you are right, though it has historical specialist interest that shouldn't be on the front page of a populist organisation.

 

[mk12]

Can you explain your first post in easier to understand terms please. And give me concrete examples based in real life to support your ideas.

 

[The Black Hand]

Can you explain your first post in easier to understand terms please. And give me concrete examples based in real life to support your ideas.

I hopefully will get time to translate the deinition for you, but here is a 'real life' example you speak of. The link below includes analysis not published before supports my position. A bit old admitedly, but there are other examples, such as stuff I have written on prisons, praxis (article forthcoming), Dave Douglass's publications, Ian Bone's... etc

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog&pop=1&ping=1

 

[mk12]

The thing is, you shouldn't have to translate anything to me. It should be written in a language that everyone can understand, not just academia.

 

[The Black Hand]

The thing is, you shouldn't have to translate anything to me. It should be written in a language that everyone can understand, not just academia.

You are a hopeless utopian, as if everybody is born with a gift for doing that. And that is if I want to write like that in the first place, which I don't/am not bothered about. There are many many different styles out there, so you had better get use to a very diverse world.... It's gonna be here for some time to come.

As it goes I do not have any interest in writing like a journalist, I leave that to people who are better at it. And the only one for me is Ian Bone


I have trained myself to both think and write, and what is more, want to think and write at a higher level than the everyday. This is not isolated, far from it, it is events on the ground which provoke thought. It gives you perspectives within the totality - U Wot?

 

[The Black Hand]

I love you really mate!!!!!

Ok Nige.

 

[mk12]

And that is if I want to write like that in the first place, which I don't/am not bothered about.

Good attitude.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Here's a provisional attempt at definition;

Autonomous Class War applies critical analysis to; working class politics as the multitude fights the state and capitalism, the study of struggles, and the administration of business and the state. It emphasises the co -contextualising relationships of structure and agency, locating the 'everyday', routine world within structural and institutional relations but also emphasising alternative informal institutions and self valourisation outside them. It locates events, issues, media ('crime', 'deviance') and social conflict within their co - determining contexts rather than being obsessed by appearance level debate, causation, moral panic, superficial unity, partial analysis and limited organisation.

It endeavours to broaden the scope of analysis to a consideration of the working class as whole rather than isolated or small sectors, of practice and struggle rather than moral discourse, of humanity and towards dual power rather than punishment and ideologies of division, of freedom and dignity rather than discipline and control.

The structural relations of production and distribution, reproduction and patriarchy, neo-colonialism, and age are identified as the co - determining contexts. Within which the inter-relationships and mutual dependencies of structural forms of oppression can be understood, where different attempts to transcend and enforce boundaries take place, and the working class opposition manifests itself through the ever growing spread of struggles and solidarity.

Working class struggles, although they appear to be subordinate to capital, are in fact primary. Traditional leftist and anarchist vocabulary which speaks about 'resistance' is mistaken and reactionary, and thus their historic task has been to mediate the class struggle. Rather the task is to encourage the ever widening and developing working class practices and autonomous zones into potentially revolutionary moments. Moving beyond the 'permanent revolution' into permanent transcendence of expedient compromise with those who try to control how we live. To live as we choose we must suppress not only those who choose how we live, but the modes of thought that are engendered in and upon all of us. Everybody is not only thinking something they shouldn't they are doing something they shouldn't too.

When marx talked about alienation he didnt mean we should alienate the working class with this kind of inpenetrable ego-fuelled drivel.

Try knocking on a door in Salford or Barking to pursuade them of this. FFS.

 

[teuchter]

I have trained myself to both think and write, and what is more, want to think and write at a higher level than the everyday.

Perhaps you need to "train yourself" just a little bit more.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Attica

I dont doubt that there is some validity in what you say. I read it and understood it. There is a place for theory but if you want to see the futherance of "working class" interests you need to consider where you are starting from - and it aint a working class that is going to digest your little piece on the whole.

In fact, most of the "working class" in this country are fully and willingly indoctrinated into fundementalist capitalism and the exploitation of the genuine global working class. wittering on about the pros and cons of class war is very marginal and wont change that central fact.

 

[The Black Hand]

I do not have any interest in writing like a journalist, I leave that to people who are better at it.

Good attitude.

 

[The Black Hand]

Attica

I dont doubt that there is some validity in what you say. I read it and understood it. There is a place for theory but if you want to see the futherance of "working class" interests you need to consider where you are starting from - and it aint a working class that is going to digest your little piece on the whole.

In fact, most of the "working class" in this country are fully and willingly indoctrinated into fundementalist capitalism and the exploitation of the genuine global working class. wittering on about the pros and cons of class war is very marginal and wont change that central fact.

That is true - but I do not see it like that. The world is not a simple place, and in the history of the working class movement there have always been some who were active at various degrees. The working class as it is now is not strategising from a working class point of view for the revolution - that does not mean that some working class people shouldn't try to do it....

 

[teuchter]

Would you consider translating your OP into plain English so that those of us who aren't in tune with your "higher level than the everyday" writings can discern what it is that you are thinking?

(Advice here if you need it: http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/guides.htm )

Is the convoluted language a result of the immense complexity of your thoughts or is it what some might refer to as "obfuscation"?

 

[Uncle Kenny]

Is there not a place for refreshing and innovative critical theory and academia in this day and age? Or are we to stop conceptualising praxis and go off into blind activism?

 

[teuchter]

refreshing and innovative critical theory and academia

if only.

 

[The Black Hand]

Would you consider translating your OP into plain English so that those of us who aren't in tune with your "higher level than the everyday" writings can discern what it is that you are thinking?

(Advice here if you need it: http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/guides.htm )

Is the convoluted language a result of the immense complexity of your thoughts or is it what some might refer to as "obfuscation"?

The complexities of practice have always been a focus of attention for serious revolutionaries. Only reductionists (normally old blind Leninist/Stalinist types) think there is no place for wide ranging revolutionary practice/theory - it also seems to have infected some other @'s/socialists today which is very wierd. THis is the age of diversity, get used to it - the web has helped to diversify class consciousness way beyond simple reductionism. For that is what it is - this call to 'speak as the working class does'. However! ONLY THOSE who have angst about NOT being working class think this is a problem... I do not, and certainly the future of the working class does not depend on the debates on U75... Get real you wanna be stupid 'working class language fools', you are excusing ignorance, which has NEVER been a position of the working class movement.

 

[teuchter]

That's a nice little speech but you're missing the point. I'm not asking you to "speak as the working class does". I'm asking you to write in a manner that makes the thoughts behind what you are writing clear to the reader. Otherwise you might as well be talking to yourself. If you don't write with the primary intention of communicating something to the reader (as any good writer does) then you will be suspected of using a fog of impenetrable language to hide an absence of any actual content.

 

[Uncle Kenny]

That's a nice little speech but you're missing the point. I'm not asking you to "speak as the working class does". I'm asking you to write in a manner that makes the thoughts behind what you are writing clear to the reader. Otherwise you might as well be talking to yourself. If you don't write with the primary intention of communicating something to the reader (as any good writer does) then you will be suspected of using a fog of impenetrable language to hide an absence of any actual content.

I think some of the problems here is that the o/p position assumes that people have read around this area and have a conceptual framework in which to reference some of the exploration.

Not saying that you are at all Teutcher but there is an aversion to critical theory and academia from a large sections of the anarchist movement as they bend the spoon towards spontaneity, activism and lifestyle politics.

 

[The Black Hand]

That's a nice little speech but you're missing the point. I'm not asking you to "speak as the working class does". I'm asking you to write in a manner that makes the thoughts behind what you are writing clear to the reader. Otherwise you might as well be talking to yourself. If you don't write with the primary intention of communicating something to the reader (as any good writer does) then you will be suspected of using a fog of impenetrable language to hide an absence of any actual content.

I write with the primary intention of developing political theory. I am not interested in simplistic b/w formulations (of which unfortunately our movement has in abundance) which in fact are a barrier to critical thinking/practice which is necessary for political progression.

This is because of the complicated nature of the 'real world' - to pretend things are simple and easy is simply mistaken. The crises are far more numerous and deeper than that. At the minute our movement (@/independent marxist/socialists) acts as if things are great, it doesn't meet seriously to discuss politics across group boundaries (no conferences etc), it doesn't develop political theory, the magazines produced are simplistic and inadequate... And you say more of the same is good enough. Bollocks. There - is that simple enough for you?

 

[ska invita]

Traditional leftist and anarchist vocabulary which speaks about 'resistance' is mistaken and reactionary, and thus their historic task has been to mediate the class struggle.

Anarchists have mediated class struggle? How so?

 

[teuchter]

I write with the primary intention of developing political theory. I am not interested in simplistic b/w formulations (of which unfortunately our movement has in abundance) which in fact are a barrier to critical thinking/practice which is necessary for political progression.

I'm not interested in simplistic b/w formulations either. I will agree they are a barrier to all sorts of things.

This is because of the complicated nature of the 'real world' - to pretend things are simple and easy is simply mistaken.

Again I will agree with you here. But you shouldn't confuse expressing things in a clear way with expressing them in a simple way.

At the minute our movement .... doesn't meet seriously to discuss politics across group boundaries (no conferences etc),

I'm not part of your "movement" and I don't fully understand quite what it is or thinks it is. Partly because an explanation seems to be lacking. Maybe you don't care but one would have thought that if you wanted it to succeed then you would want as many people to be engaged with it as possible.

You talk about discussing politics across group boundaries. How do you expect this to happen if you write your "definition" of your "movement" in a way that it is virtually inaccessible to anyone outside your narrow frame of reference?

To quote Uncle Kenny:

I think some of the problems here is that the o/p position assumes that people have read around this area and have a conceptual framework in which to reference some of the exploration.

This might be true. But I reckon I can recognise over-convoluted writing disguising a lack of real content even if it's referring to an area of discussion in which I am not well-versed. I might be wrong of course, and the way to prove me wrong would be to re-write it in a way that would encourage me to engage with your ideas. That's all.

 

[The Black Hand]

Anarchists have mediated class struggle? How so?

One eg. By writing about class struggle in their publications and then saying at the end of the article 'clearly what we need is their variant of class struggle anarchism'.

There are many others, where they have substituted their organisation for the class struggle, or have organised a meeting about an issue but have not actually participated in the particular class struggle, or instead organise meetings not relevant to the class struggle at all, such as 'What is anarchism'.

The list is endless really...

 

[butchersapron]

The dastards!

 

[nino_savatte]

One eg. By writing about class struggle in their publications and then saying at the end of the article 'clearly what we need is their variant of class struggle anarchism'.

There are many others, where they have substituted their organisation for the class struggle, or have organised a meeting about an issue but have not actually participated in the particular class struggle, or instead organise meetings not relevant to the class struggle at all, such as 'What is anarchism'.

The list is endless really...

Hmmmmm.