Is Urban PPnCA a place for people to ... ?

[JoePolitix]

As I remember it, it was you who left, explaining that you were going off to make the revolution. Later, you came back, but have been very shy. You still haven't told us how the revolution went.

If I remember correctly I said I was leaving because "the revolution will not happen on line" - an appreciation of irony and subtilty on your behalf wouldn't go amiss. I was alluding to the fact that I was dissapointed with the direction of political discussion on the board which often amounted to cheap point scoring over serious political discussion, a trap I think I've started to fall into sometimes (call it institutionalisation possibly?).

Anyway, thanks for reminding me . I genuinely intended to stop posting but the temptations of Urban were too great. I thought you could close your own account down but I couldn't find such an option when I looked. I'm going to throw in the towel by the end of next week for good though - and you can quote me on that, I'm going to request the mods close down my account this time.

Don't get me wrong - I think its a good site but its proved more addictive than I had anticipated and I have a lot of work on at the moment that I need to focus on.

Anyway, as you were.

 

[JHE]

...and you can quote me on that...

Cor, thanks, Minister.

You'll fuck off or not, as you prefer. You'll come back or not, as you prefer. No need for a song and dance. No need for justifications. But it's best to drop the pompous shit for the mo. You're not Secretary of State for Dishing Out the Mozziegeld yet.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

In a manner of speaking, yes, though it functions at a different level. Once you get started on depth psychology (or the microphysics of power to use the wanky poststructuralist term) you lose the capacity to actually engage meaningfully with other people. It's a useful perspective to adopt sometimes but if everything is about power (which in a manner of speaking it is) the possibility of rational conversation goes out of the window.

do you not see that deadlock as being the crunch point ofr all political debate particularlly when discussing the same side of the same coin but from different angels which essentially marks down any rational debate due to competing power struggles as the different viewpoints struggle for promenance.

Accomidation of these points leads to comprimise which neither is happy with or the 'natral' selection of the path of least resistance where the most dominant ideas florish and the remainder fall by the wayside.

 

[In Bloom]

the Mozziegeld

The fucking what?

 

[audiotech]

Someone once described me as "a proper fucking tool... [a] humourless version of MC5". I was one of the reasons he left U75 apparently. Sorry 'bout that

Interesting?

I don't think you're "a proper fucking tool" btw

 

[dash_two]

Where's the 'fringe political grouse lek with no females watching' option?

 

[nosos]

do you not see that deadlock as being the crunch point ofr all political debate particularlly when discussing the same side of the same coin but from different angels which essentially marks down any rational debate due to competing power struggles as the different viewpoints struggle for promenance.

Accomidation of these points leads to comprimise which neither is happy with or the 'natral' selection of the path of least resistance where the most dominant ideas florish and the remainder fall by the wayside.

I think you're massively underestimating the possibility for rational debate. These are all real issues for sustaining rational debate (not in the sense of some metaphysical notion of rationality but simply in the sense of reason giving) but they're limits. They define the boundries. Rational debate is something that depends on a certain convergence of social and psychological conditions. When people are atuned to what the other's saying, when they're not being driven by the need to dominate or humiliate the other, when they're roughly open to the fallability of their own views, when they understand the way the other is communicating, rational debate is possible. It's only when these conditions fall apart that it begins to be all about power*.

*Apart from in the true but trivial sense that person 1 convincing person 2 of anything through "reason" is actually an exercise of power. Reason and rhetoric are not, on the final analysis, different things.

 

[durruti02]

True.

Also I think Steve Booths comment on t'other thread about relaxed drinks across boundaries, as sort of regional get togethers mulling over the big issues of the day and for the movement could be a good way to go as a start. Something not too informal though, not organised in typical slack anarchist way, but NOT over efficient like wannabe Leninists are prone to do either.

In Newcastle (apart from many working mens clubs throughout the region) I can name the Star and Shadow as a potential good venue for this sort of thing... It's got good clean toilets, bar and does food, there's a chippy down the rd and you can bring your own drinks and relax... A big problem with squatted venues is the state of the toilets which can be way below par. Seriously, I would never take my kids to some squats because of that. I also prefer the Italian squats I have seen, which do not have adolescent grafiti on the walls, and are organised in a tidy way, and have art work and nice bars and stuff...

a bizarre thing is that people can debate online who would NEVER go to the pub together .. not entirely sure why .. i have tried a number of times to get meetings of U75 politicos and between me and them they have not happenned ..