Kanda said:I reckon it's just internet posturing. Well done![]()
cesare said:Internet posturing leads to a well deserved slap in Attica world.
Children children. You do not aggravate me at all, your lame 'pisstaking' is sooooo lame it has no legs. It's not funny, its not new, its not clever. Attica said:Here's something I did t'other day.
06-11-2007, 12:35 PM
Attica
Autonomous class struggle Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 2,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by scumbalina
So thinking about doing something then doing it, that what it means?
Attica
"Most people and so called political groups have a Non Marxist/anarchist understanding of Praxis - they keep the 2 separate, or often do theory without practice, or practice without theory, or theory which they do not test in their social democratic practice.
It is false to see theory here, and practice over there.
It is the joining up of theory and practice in class struggle, which inevitably influences and changes political surroundings/ambiance/possibilities which necessitates the generation of new theory, which changes the quality of 'theory' and 'practice' on the move to create Praxis."
phildwyer said:Nonsense, rubbish, garbage and complete and utter trash in every respect. You have simply constructed a straw man when you say that there are those who seek to maintain an abstract differentiation between theory and practice. For is it not totally and unequivocally obvious that *all* theory has practical purport, while equally and by the same token *all* practice has theoretical implications? And thus we see clearly and without any ambiguity whatsoever that no-one, ever, under any circumstances is remotely capable of engaging in non-practical theory or, in the same regard, non-theoretical practice neither. "Praxis" therefore cannot in any sense be defined as the unity of theory and practice, since it is inherently and ontologically impossible to separate the two, and therefore by your foolish and simplistic definition *everything* done by anyone anywhere in the whole world would be "praxis." The term would be all-inclusive and therefore meaningless. And so it would seem that your grasp of "praxis" is hardly as firm as you would have the more naive among us believe would it not?
Attica said:![]()
Children children. You do not aggravate me at all, your lame 'pisstaking' is sooooo lame it has no legs. It's not funny, its not new, its not clever.
What it is, is lazy conservative posting with no politics. You have NOT even answered the politics in my first post, 'that is how lame you are'.
Kanda said:Do you not think this reaction is because people actually can't be arsed to engage you? Not people like you, you specifically...
Attica said:No. You have not understood what I have posted. It is clear that you are the confused one.
phildwyer said:Au contraire, I beg to differ, and I do believe that you are mistaken. It is clear that confusion sits upon you and you alone. Confusion has in fact made his masterpiece out of your person. Confusion thy name is Attica. Attica and confusion are widely and correctly regarded as all but synonymous in educated circles. Indeed so intimate is their liason that many have been tempted to posit a dialectical interpenetration between the poles of the binary "confusion" and "Attica" so that to all intents and porpoises they can be regarded as mutually definitive and thus in the final analysis ultimately inseparable as far as any kind of *real* political impact is concerned.
u tork cak cok.Attica said:I think it is a reflection of their lack of politics and their true essence coming out.


So, in Hegelian terms, Attica's like a dickhead version of the Beautiful Soul?phildwyer said:Indeed so intimate is their liason that many have been tempted to posit a dialectical interpenetration between the poles of the binary "confusion" and "Attica" so that to all intents and porpoises they can be regarded as mutually definitive and thus in the final analysis ultimately inseparable as far as any kind of *real* political impact is concerned.
Kanda said:I'm just pissed, skittish, no offence. You're the only fuckers posting
Phil is best to engage you, ignore me![]()
phildwyer said:Au contraire, I beg to differ, and I do believe that you are mistaken. It is clear that confusion sits upon you and you alone. Confusion has in fact made his masterpiece out of your person. Confusion thy name is Attica. Attica and confusion are widely and correctly regarded as all but synonymous in educated circles. Indeed so intimate is their liason that many have been tempted to posit a dialectical interpenetration between the poles of the binary "confusion" and "Attica" so that to all intents and porpoises they can be regarded as mutually definitive and thus in the final analysis ultimately inseparable as far as any kind of *real* political impact is concerned.

Attica said:u tork cak cok.
the button said:So, in Hegelian terms, Attica's like a dickhead version of the Beautiful Soul?
Kanda said:You degrade yourself with that response btw![]()
Who wot where when? Those who know may like to know it was at the Historical Materialism conference at SOAS.Attica said:Hey, I do what I like. Like selling a copy of the excellent new magazine MAYDAY to Ed Emry on SundayWho wot where when? Those who know may like to know it was at the Historical Materialism conference at SOAS.

-.-. --- -.-. -.-Attica said:Hey, I do what I like. Like selling a copy of the excellent new magazine MAYDAY to Ed Emry on SundayWho wot where when? Those who know may like to know it was at the Historical Materialism conference at SOAS.
phildwyer said:Those who advocate violence against their opponents forfeit the right to serious debate. They are quite understandably mocked as clowns instead.
Larry O'Hara said:funny, I just can't quite see Nelson Mandela in a clown's outfit...
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/11/385750.htmlTo mark the re-launch of Black Flag, a meeting is going to be held at Housmans bookshop (5 Caledonian Road, King's Cross, London) on Wednesday, 12th of December (6.30 for a 7pm start) .
The evening will include a brief introduction including the history of the Black Flag, the magazine and the anarchist symbol itself, followed by a discussion in which comments and suggestions for the new version.
The new Black Flag magazine, which was previewed and sold at this year's London Anarchist Bookfair, has seen generally positive feedback and is looking to become bi-annual for 2008 with its next edition slated for May 1st.
Ahead of the launch, the collective is offering a freebie for Indymedia readers, a PDF (attached) of the biography which ran in this issue on the life of John Taylor Cauldwell, a legendary anarchist organiser in Scotland who sadly died earlier this year, showcasing the sort of style (and partly content) the magazine is working towards.
[pdf Article: John Taylor Caldwell - application/pdf 853K
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2007/11//385751.pdf]
While this issue consists primarily of analysis, reviews, historical work and profiles, the magazine collective are also keen to bring in more people to work on contemporary investigative pieces, anaysis of current social struggles and
The Housman's meeting will see collective member Iain McKay available to talk about what people would like to see in the next issue, and will welcome new volunteers to contribute, for layout and design work, or help with distribution and marketing.
The new issue is £3 and copies can be found at Housmans, Freedom bookshop, by writing to:
BLACK FLAG
BM Hurricane
London
WC1N 3XX
United Kingdom
or by emailing Black_Flag AT lycos.co.uk
Attica said:The contradictions in Limpcok are laughable. First they say they are beyond anarchism, now they are promoting a stereotypical anarchist magazine as the best thing since sliced bread. The old stuff about/by Lucy Parsons and Durti (no matter how excellent in their time) is the stuff of a cult and not a movement relating to everyday life.
Seriously, the picture of Mikal bakunin on the back page was a VIZ LIKE pisstake out of itself that the editors didn't even notice...![]()
![]()
![]()
<editor: URL removed>


phildwyer said:Nonsense, rubbish, garbage and complete and utter trash in every respect. You have simply constructed a straw man when you say that there are those who seek to maintain an abstract differentiation between theory and practice. For is it not totally and unequivocally obvious that *all* theory has practical purport, while equally and by the same token *all* practice has theoretical implications? And thus we see clearly and without any ambiguity whatsoever that no-one, ever, under any circumstances is remotely capable of engaging in non-practical theory or, in the same regard, non-theoretical practice neither. "Praxis" therefore cannot in any sense be defined as the unity of theory and practice, since it is inherently and ontologically impossible to separate the two, and therefore by your foolish and simplistic definition *everything* done by anyone anywhere in the whole world would be "praxis." The term would be all-inclusive and therefore meaningless. And so it would seem that your grasp of "praxis" is hardly as firm as you would have the more naive among us believe would it not?