Problems with libcom

[Larry O'Hara]

For what it's worth...

1) Have just read through some Wombles stuff I got at the bookfair--very interesting indeed, and refreshing in its iconoclasm

2) Look forward to the Wombles magazine.

3) Have just read through the latest Black Flag--interesting article on anti-fascism, but the revisionist interpretation of events in Leeds AFA hardly impresses.

4) The old Black Flag did have some fascinating stuff, much still worth reading today, on the secret state/far right. I would love it if this aspect of BF was revived.

 

[Raw SslaC]

So you don't think anarchists should disown themselves from fuckwits?

Are you going down the montevideo road of everything ever done by the working class (as a class in itself i might add) is beyond judgement, except like a proper activist you replace "working class" with Anarchist?

And do you accept that Libcom have the right to link or unlink to any group they wish?

You might not agree with it but you can't call it censorship.

I don't see a link from the WOMBLES to Organise! (thank fuck!) does that mean you are censoring my Belfast comrades?

And you have put forward various piss poor interpretations of Autonomism on the libcom boards, in particular your daft notions that autonomism is a geogrpaphical space eg squat instead of a a description of the working classes own dynamism within the process of capital.

if only the summer would come and then youse twats could spend your time penned in by the police being ogled at by the public as some sort of Damien Hirst piece gone astray.

(1)I called it censorship in the context of it where that link was place i.e. that section of the website describes groups/social centres/publications in certain areas. If someone is to take it as a comprehensive list (as it is NOT showing libertarian communist groups only) then WOMBLES in fact have been censored from it. End of story.

(2)In relation to autonomism, well that period of struggle and the theoritical debates which arose provides certain analytical tools to analyse capitalism and class struggle. When we talk of autonomy, we talk about in all contextes not restricted to work but other areas of production. (BTW I have NEVER said that "autonomism" is a "geographical space like a squat"!!! For fuck sake). If you want to here my ideas on why social centres have a POTENTIAL for reovlutionary autonomous working class resistance then I'll be happy to share them wit youse.

(3)If you think it's good that people are penned in by the police and attacked then atleast I know where you'll stand in a middle of such a thing - like your comrades from libcom did on mayday. Atleast our experience has taught us well to stand up for ourselves and people around us, even if it means getting beaten, arrested or sent to jail. I know who I'll rather had next to me if that happens. You seem to talk the talk and all that but it really doesn't get you nowhere, like I mentioned to jack and the CAG lot (what happened to them by the way, Ive had farts that lasted longer than their political manifestations!). There is a difference between comradely debate and just whinging youths saying how much a counter-revolutionaries we are for not following a certain idealogically pure thread of struggle.

(4)Revol is still a cock!

 

[revol68]

and i do know where i stand when it comes to fightig the police, i just don't see the point in being so fucking stupid as to continously walk into police pens, have a pathetic bit of argy bargy, some people get scooped and on we go again.

but hey keep on trying to ape the actions of reformed stalinists in Italy, i'm sure it will be really successful.

Libcom wished to disassociate themselves from the wombles because they have nothing to offer libertarian communism and think it stupid to provide roads to dead ends.

 

[soulman]

Libcom wished to disassociate themselves from the wombles because they have nothing to offer libertarian communism and think it stupid to provide roads to dead ends.

Is that what the Libcom collective as a whole have agreed upon?

 

[Raw SslaC]

and i do know where i stand when it comes to fightig the police, i just don't see the point in being so fucking stupid as to continously walk into police pens, have a pathetic bit of argy bargy, some people get scooped and on we go again.

but hey keep on trying to ape the actions of reformed stalinists in Italy, i'm sure it will be really successful.

Libcom wished to disassociate themselves from the wombles because they have nothing to offer libertarian communism and think it stupid to provide roads to dead ends.

Don't really give two fucks if we "have nothing to offer libertarian communism", I interested in how people resist the social reality and try to change it and are not afraid in sticking their necks out for something they care passionately about.

Plus I never mentioned fighting the police, though that has its place as it's usually these fuckers (especially in London) that you have to deal with, thats definetly a problem.

You keep throwing mud but your badly off target, mainly because your speaking from experiences mediated by internet discussion boards. You don't really know who we are, you haven't really discussed face to face with anyone actually involved. But hey don't let reality get in the way of a post.

sort it out!

raw

 

[cats hammers]

Is that what the Libcom collective as a whole have agreed upon?

The collective as a whole agreed upon the removal of the wombles from the contact lists. That is still our unified position.

 

[cats hammers]

like I mentioned to jack and the CAG lot (what happened to them by the way, Ive had farts that lasted longer than their political manifestations!)

Nothing, people either moved away, or decided to carry on doing the same work but realising trying to relate it to the pathetic mess that is the left/anarchist mileau is a fucking waste of time, and in fact counter productive.

 

[Rob Ray]

Regarding the links. Well if black flag will publish our contact details in the next issue (which it hasn't and doubt will ever do) then I'm sure we will publicise them.

Surely on those grounds though Libcom has no responsibility to link you, as you have never published theirs, and still don't (Freedom doesn't link either of you, mainly cos the website's crap/not updated/has no links at all, but at least we're fair-minded about it ). If you're going to talk about censorship, then perhaps that concept should not be a one way street.

I still think that if you are going to take a moral high ground on this subject then you've got to walk the walk (and yes I'm aware you very much do so in other instances, that's not the point). Libcom, Freedom and Black flag are all relatively well known media, have been for years, but you haven't linked any of them. Nor do you link various federations (solfed, AF, IWW), which have been in existence for longer than you and again, are well known in anarchist circles. That's not an oversight. No-one who would call themselves anarchists and have been around as long as you have would be ill-informed enough not to know about the above.

Jack et al, Raw's (still) got a point about the space hijackers, fair enough if you're going to start categorising as a an organised class struggle-specific site I guess, but at least be consistent.

 

[catch]

If someone is to take it as a comprehensive list

Where does it say comprehensive?

Rob Ray: There's a few links I'd like to cull from the listings myself, but that'll probably happen if there's a major update, not because people feel hard done by.

Space Hijackers seem harmless enough, but I don't think of them as a political group - more like sections of the Mark Thomas Comedy Product with a smaller budget.

 

[Emma Herself]

you haven't really discussed face to face with anyone actually involved.

Have you?

I was actually very keen to talk to you after that meeting at the bookfair, but unfortunately you'd scarpered pretty damn quick. Which was a shame. You wouldn't even make eye contact with any of the libcom team, so I hardly think it's fair that you have a go at revol for not having spoken to you or your comrades face to face, as he's in fucking Belfast, and has better things to do with the short amount of time he spends in London.

FWIW, the wombles have NEVER linked to libcom (or enrager),for personal reasons. Did we ever complain? We could hyave kicked up an equal amount of fuss at any point, but didn't feel the need to. And given what had just happened between your mates and my mates the night before the original site was launched, it's a wonder you were ever listed at all.

Besides, if libcom is such a load of self-referential activist bollocks, and we're such a bunch of "cocks", why do you give a shit if you're group isn't listed with us then? I know you want to be associated with any knobjockey who calls themselves anarchists out of solidarity, but we don't even call ourselves anarchists, so what's the problem?

 

[Emma Herself]

Good post Rob Ray - as for SH, I'm with catch on that one.

 

[Raw SslaC]

Surely on those grounds though Libcom has no responsibility to link you, as you have never published theirs, and still don't (Freedom doesn't link either of you, mainly cos the website's crap/not updated/has no links at all, but at least we're fair-minded about it ). If you're going to talk about censorship, then perhaps that concept should not be a one way street.

I still think that if you are going to take a moral high ground on this subject then you've got to walk the walk (and yes I'm aware you very much do so in other instances, that's not the point). Libcom, Freedom and Black flag are all relatively well known media, have been for years, but you haven't linked any of them. Nor do you link various federations (solfed, AF, IWW), which have been in existence for longer than you and again, are well known in anarchist circles. That's not an oversight. No-one who would call themselves anarchists and have been around as long as you have would be ill-informed enough not to know about the above.

Jack et al, Raw's (still) got a point about the space hijackers, fair enough if you're going to start categorising as a an organised class struggle-specific site I guess, but at least be consistent.

Yeah nice editing of my comments!! I also said that if someone where to email us to suggest a link then our webslave will stick it on up!!!

As for the nat fed links, well if those nat feds saw it as a problem then they'll email us. There is no sectarian reasons why we haven't done, surely if people feel so much about it they'll tell us, like black flag (and also wombles contact in black flag) if we really care that much to email youse about then we would have done it. Its different is a website which attempts to list all non-hierarchical groups from the "circle community squat" to "rhythms of resistance" to "space hijackers", that use to list wombles and then due to personal reasons its taken down.

 

[revol68]

yes well do you expect the Libcom collective to put up with your continous digs at them on their own site, not to mention physical threats and still link to youse?

I mean your not even banned from the forums, raw.

 

[Raw SslaC]

Have you?

I was actually very keen to talk to you after that meeting at the bookfair, but unfortunately you'd scarpered pretty damn quick. Which was a shame. You wouldn't even make eye contact with any of the libcom team, so I hardly think it's fair that you have a go at revol for not having spoken to you or your comrades face to face, as he's in fucking Belfast, and has better things to do with the short amount of time he spends in London.

FWIW, the wombles have NEVER linked to libcom (or enrager),for personal reasons. Did we ever complain? We could hyave kicked up an equal amount of fuss at any point, but didn't feel the need to. And given what had just happened between your mates and my mates the night before the original site was launched, it's a wonder you were ever listed at all.

Besides, if libcom is such a load of self-referential activist bollocks, and we're such a bunch of "cocks", why do you give a shit if you're group isn't listed with us then? I know you want to be associated with any knobjockey who calls themselves anarchists out of solidarity, but we don't even call ourselves anarchists, so what's the problem?

Yeah I "scarpered" to the anarchist assembly which we were hosting right after your meeting.

Again, if enrage email then it would have been put up on the site. Its open! remember that concept?

Look Zoe et al, I can prove it was for personal reasons that wombles was taken down from the listings. Also that some of the admins didn't know why
and for what reason we were taken down. Very libertarian! There were different reasons given each time it was asked on the boards why that happened. you should really get your stories straight before.

Anyway I really can't give two fucks whether wombles is listed (I think it gives your site/project to much kudos anyway ). I am merely highlighting a problem, and showing how infactual/revisionist your arguments are.

raw

 

[rednblack]

 

[Raw SslaC]

yes well do you expect the Libcom collective to put up with your continous digs at them on their own site, not to mention physical threats and still link to youse?

I mean your not even banned from the forums, raw.

Physical threats? when you and others were spreading rumours that we were a bunch of K hed & undercover cops. What do you think that someone new reading that would think? Would they believe it? To me thats political sabotage, for the reason of destroying and undermining a group - sounds very sinister that you lot were all a part of.

 

[revol68]

Physical threats? when you and others were spreading rumours that we were a bunch of K hed & undercover cops. What do you think that someone new reading that would think? Would they believe it? To me thats political sabotage, for the reason of destroying and undermining a group - sounds very sinister that you lot were all a part of.

no one accussed the wombles of being cops, I think they did point out that the nature of your organisation (or lack of) meant it was very easily infiltrated and infact had been in the past.

And don't try and tar me with that brush cos bar a few tongue in cheek jokes I actually tried to have some sort of debate with you on the libcom boards, until you turnt into a spoilt fuckwit who'd got pissed on his daddies wine and started having a go at Icepick over stuff completely irrelevant.

 

[Raw SslaC]

no one accussed the wombles of being cops, I think they did point out that the nature of your organisation (or lack of) meant it was very easily infiltrated and infact had been in the past.

And don't try and tar me with that brush cos bar a few tongue in cheek jokes I actually tried to have some sort of debate with you on the libcom boards, until you turnt into a spoilt fuckwit who'd got pissed on his daddies wine and started having a go at Icepick over stuff completely irrelevant.

Oooh a short fuse! "who'd got pissed on his daddies wine" ha ha
nuff said fuckwit

 

[Pickman's model]

no one accussed the wombles of being cops, I think they did point out that the nature of your organisation (or lack of) meant it was very easily infiltrated and infact had been in the past.

And don't try and tar me with that brush cos bar a few tongue in cheek jokes I actually tried to have some sort of debate with you on the libcom boards, until you turnt into a spoilt fuckwit who'd got pissed on his daddies wine and started having a go at Icepick over stuff completely irrelevant.

you don't sound entirely sober...

 

[revol68]

you don't sound entirely sober...

yes but by the mid afternoon i'll be sober and you'll still some fuckwit in Class War defending some cunts in the WOMBLES, as Churchill probably never said.

 

[cats hammers]

I am merely highlighting a problem, and showing how infactual/revisionist your arguments are.

So revisionist that the threads in question are still on our site and can be read by anyone.

 

[Rob Ray]

Yeah nice editing of my comments!! I also said that if someone where to email us to suggest a link then our webslave will stick it on up!!!

As for the nat fed links, well if those nat feds saw it as a problem then they'll email us. There is no sectarian reasons why we haven't done, surely if people feel so much about it they'll tell us, like black flag (and also wombles contact in black flag) if we really care that much to email youse about then we would have done it. Its different is a website which attempts to list all non-hierarchical groups from the "circle community squat" to "rhythms of resistance" to "space hijackers", that use to list wombles and then due to personal reasons its taken down.

I don't see the email offer as relevant to my point. The fact is you had/have a notable lack of organisation-based class struggle sites up, particularly ones which disagree with your political position. I'm sure when ppl were originally compiling the list that these names would have occurred, it's difficult to imagine how they wouldn't, they just didn't go up. I don't particularly care about that, nor does anyone else, hence not having a go about it before or indeed emailing, but it seems fairly relevant in a context when you are castigating other people for the same flaw.

You are complaining that Libcom took your link down for personal reasons. Fair enough, they may well have done (though I'll repeat it has been a year, I would have thought, given that it's one fucking link, that the subject would be unworthy of this much attention). But as I'm trying to show, they are not the only ones who have put up a list of links which happen not to include people they don't agree with/like, and they probably won't be the last.

They have not banned you from the forums, they have not banned your literature from the newswire. They do not try and influence other outlets not to support you. It is not then in any realistic sense censorship. That they have dropped your link is perhaps something that deserved criticism, but that was all said over a year ago now, I don't see why it is deemed necessary to labour the point further.

 

[Pickman's model]

yes but by the mid afternoon i'll be sober and you'll still some fuckwit in Class War defending some cunts in the WOMBLES, as Churchill probably never said.

no, by mid-afternoon you'll be passed out on a bench in the sun, surrounded by a pile of empty tommy cooper's.

it's interesting how no one here EVER defends you. you really are revol no-mates, aren't you?

 

[rednblack]

yes but by the mid afternoon i'll be sober and you'll still some fuckwit in Class War defending some cunts in the WOMBLES, as Churchill probably never said.

ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


raw is wrong to accuse libcom of censorship however, for the reasons rob ray pointed out.

 

[cats hammers]

it's interesting how no one here EVER defends you. you really are revol no-mates, aren't you?

Perhaps it's because he lacks the required hatred for users of the 73 bus to be accepted within the contemporary anarchist movement.

 

[revol68]

no, by mid-afternoon you'll be passed out on a bench in the sun, surrounded by a pile of empty tommy cooper's.

it's interesting how no one here EVER defends you. you really are revol no-mates, aren't you?

probably because i'm quite capable of dealing with the limescale of anarchism myself.

And would people please make up their minds, one minute im allowed away with murder thanks to my friendships the next im billy no mates.

And sorry that i don't require a retarded mob behind me to stand by my positions.

 

[Pickman's model]

And would people please make up their minds, one minute im allowed away with murder thanks to my friendships the next im billy no mates.

please direct me to any post of mine where i said you had mates.

And sorry that i don't require a retarded mob behind me to stand by my positions.

any mob that stood by your positions would have to have 'issues'.

 

[knopf]

i don't require a retarded mob behind me to stand by my positions.

Which is lucky.

 

[Raw SslaC]

To Rob Ray: I think I've said all I can say on it, so no need to say anymore.

To Revol: You seem to be the spoilt brat, you can't have your way and you stamp your feet and scream abuse

Go to your room! Ooops forgot you never leave it



raw

 

[Taxamo Welf]

To Revol: You seem to be the spoilt brat

a strange choice of words all things considered regarding respective backgrounds.

I wish people would refrain from the personal, but alas it seems an integral part of the caggist mentality.

I do hawever respect the fact that raw seems to have reached some kind of conclusion here: can we consider the issue closed?