cockneyrebel
New Member
By that logic you could change your quote to:
Doesn't mean you'd write off socialist politics.
Doesn't mean you'd write off socialist politics.
What has anti-imperialism ever achieved?
- Thread starter durruti02
- Start date
cockneyrebel said:
he he .. how right you are .. and i do write them off !
as do your stalinist masses .. top down leftwing politics including nonsensical anti imperialism ( what is the point of actions that can have NO affect what so ever???) have failed and needs to be replaced
tbh there is some point in anti imp .. occassionally govts can be swayed .. though rarely .. and occassionally people come into politics thru them .. but overall all this 1 positive is lost in about a 100 negatives .. of failure to engage with people where they are at ( and worse condemning good people for being way they are at)
cockneyrebel
New Member
Well I'll re-phrase it again.
Indeed in terms of fundamentally changing society I can't think of a single exception. Does that mean you'd write it all off?
Indeed in terms of fundamentally changing society I can't think of a single exception. Does that mean you'd write it all off?
cockneyrebel said:
no not at all and clearly every day there are examples of simple 'radical pro working class politics' working .. on a mass scale we can look at spain 36 france 68 russia 1917 etc where people did for a least short periods of time fundamentally chnage society .. and we have millions of examples of where those politics have worked in the past over the globe .. and again there is a quite clear way that 'radical pro working class' politics can win .. this can not be said for antiimp politics in 'imperialist' nations ..
and still (apart maybe from the suggestion about what happenned in portugal in 74 and my suggestion of british strikes in 1919) no one has yet come up with any suggestion as to any successful antiimp politics .. nothing ..
there is a clear mechanism for radical pro working class politics suceeding .. there is none for anti imperialism
anti imperialism is NOT internationalism .. it is a distortion of internationalism that masquerades as internationalism but is a parasite on that and takes time and energy away from building the power that can offer REAL effective internationalism
sure your not supposed to edit peoples text but i forgive you! others wouldn't!
cockneyrebel
New Member
I'm only editing to show a point, not trying to quote you out of context!
But all the examples you gave - 36, 68, 1917, ultimately failed and didn't achieve a long term radical change in society. The only exception to this is 1917 and this eventually degenerated into stalinism. But that doens't mean I'd write off the chances of a fundamental shift in society so that it was run by the working class.
But all the examples you gave - 36, 68, 1917, ultimately failed and didn't achieve a long term radical change in society. The only exception to this is 1917 and this eventually degenerated into stalinism. But that doens't mean I'd write off the chances of a fundamental shift in society so that it was run by the working class.
urbanrevolt
New Member
durruti02 said:
I'm not quite sure what you mean though to be honest, durutti.
Sure if there are only a couple or so examples then it means that anti-imperialist solidarity struggles in the imperialist countries haven't been successful but what does it mean for what we should try to do?
saying real effective internationalism merely begs the question. I'm sure you're right we need to get away from top-down methods of politics but what are you actually arguing?
The next time there's an attack on another country surely as well as continuing to organise in the working class generally we should aim for e.g. walkouts, strikes, direct action.
And by the way saying there are a couple of examples of successful solidarity is not the same as
durruti02 said:
I'd add the Vietnam war protests as well- sure the Vietnamese fighting was a more essential and larger part but the mass mobilisations I'm sure had a material effect on the war mainly in terms of contributing to US soldiers refusing to fight in the field and it was a mass mobilisation which, along with other struggles such as for civil rights, contributed to a mass radicalisation that threatened for a time bourgeois hegemony. To say a lot of it was about dodging the draft partly misses the point- many went beyond this and in any case in any mass change immediate material needs are often a driving force- remember Peace, land, bread.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
durruti02 said:
The anti-Vietnam war demos were anti-imperialistic. How did you arrive at your 'conclusion'? Or is it the case that you have a problem with some of the people who were involved rather than the movement itself?
cockneyrebel said:
i know .. i do not mind at all! .. you made it clear what you were doing!
yes they did ultimately fail .. and we have various explanations for that which we will agree and disagree on .. but there is NO way no mechnaism for anti imp to suceed .. and as i said no one has given any examples of successfull anitimp work yet
urbanrevolt said:
no i am arguing entirely we should get away from that mentality that we can, with a defeated and fragmented class/movement, hope to have any influence whatsoever on events abroad, or our own 'imperialist' countries foreign policy
you talk of walk outs and strikes .. but we can not even win basics like london weighting and decent pay ..
we need a period here where we concentrate entirely on rebuilding from the base .. yes that will need commentary on global issues .. but this current infatuation .. no
on vietnam i stick to what i said ..
opposition in the USA to the vietnam wasr was NOT anti imperialism but down to earth materialist opposition to the draft and the deaths .. 50,00 GIs died http://www.archives.gov/research/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html the equivalent of 10,000 here ( the pop of teh USA at the time was c. 250 million as op to the 50 millon) and as a comaprison 450 non UDR/RIR soldiers died in NI from 1969 to 2003 http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/ni/security.htm#death IN Vietnam in 1968 alone 16,000 GIs were killed again equivalent of c3,000 squaddies here .. do you not think there would be riots here with the same rate of deaths in one year? so it was opposition to the deaths of GIs that put pressure on at home .. not the support of a timy minority for anti imperialism and ultimately though the US had to give up .. partially as they had done enough ( no one challenged western hegemony again till recent years and partly cos the cost outweighed the benefits)
at the moment the benefits in oil flowing are out of Iraq outweigh the costs of the US deployment .. so they will stay and particulalry now after the surge casulties have declined significantly .. same with Afghan .. if they can get the pipeline going the Wst will bear the casulties
i see the attraction of anti imp .. as i kid i had zapu or zanu posters on my wall!!
the 'other' is always deeply attractive ( especially to the young) and probably long should it remain so, on certain levels .. unfortunately in politics it is also part of how politics has become alienated fom reality ( MK qoute us some of Marxs E&PM! ).. we have a significant task in trying to break down alienation and mystification .. anti imp just makes it worse
that http://www.archives.gov/research/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html makes for tragic reading .. 226 native americans killed, 116 mongolians! and all the churches .. was god on their side?
urbanrevolt
New Member
durruti02 said:
You still haven't made this clear at all- and there are several examples of anti-colonial struggles which did indeed fail to get rid of oppression becuase they stopped short of socialism or the overthrow of capitalism but you seem to just either ignore these or the few examples pf mass movements in the industrialised countries in solidarity with anti-imperialist military struggles- Portugal, the anti US war in Vietnam movement in the US, for example.
If your point is that nowhere has socialism or wrking class rule syucceeded on any sustained basis- true. But you seem without making explicit why to say there is a special problem with anit-imperialism. I simply don't undertand your point!
urbanrevolt
New Member
funnily enough you did just reply to my previous post- which must have gone up a few seconds before my post 102
urbanrevolt
New Member
durruti02 said:no i am arguing entirely we should get away from that mentality that we can, with a defeated and fragmented class/movement, hope to have any influence what so ever on events abroad, or our own 'imperialist' countries foreign policy
you talk of walk outs and strikes .. but we can not even win basics like london weighting and decent pay ..
we need a period where we do concentrate entirely on rebuilding here from the base .. yes that will need commentary on global issues .. but this current infatuation .. no
on vietnam i stick to what i said .. opposition was NOT anti imp but down to earth materialist opposition to the draft and the deaths .. 50 k died the equivalent of 10k here ( as a ref 450 non UDR/RIR soldiers died in NI from 1969 to 2003 http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/ni/security.htm#death and http://www.archives.gov/research/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html .. in 1968 16k GIs were killed again equivalent of c3k squaddies .. do you not think there would be riots here with the same rate of deaths??? and .. it was opposition to the deaths of GIs that put pressure on at home .. ultimately though the US had to give up .. partially as they had done enough ( no one challneged western hegemony again till recent years partly cos the cost outweighed the benefits)
at teh moment the benefits in oil flowing are out weighing the costs of teh US deployment in iraq .. so they will stay and particulalry now after the surge casulties have declined significantly .. same with AFghan .. if they can get the pipeline going they west will bear the casulties
i see the attraction of anti imp .. as i kid i had zapu or zanu posters on my wall!!
that http://www.archives.gov/research/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html makes of rtragic reading .. 226 native americans killed 116 mongolians! and all the churches .. was god on their side they must have thought
Ok now I understand- still don't entirely agree e.g. think that the sight of mass demos blocking roads and railway tracks does make a difference and think it is absolutely essential to have an international dimension to our politics.
However, I at least understand your point and would agree if you said that at the least we should make sure that as well as anything else we rebuild the fundamentals of class struggle here- effective unions, community campaigns etc.
You may even say before and I'd sympathise though i think I'll stick with saying as well as- after all a workers' movement that can't even win on bread and butter issues isn't going to much good at building international solidarity
urbanrevolt said:
no i am not talking about anti imperialism in subjected countries .. ( i fucked up the OP .. i thought i clarified later) .. clearly that suceeded in many situations .. whether that was revolutionary is the other debate!
no my point remains that anti imperialism in 'imperialist' ( actually i do not even agree with the terminology .. i think we are in an era of globalised capital NOT empires) .. countries never does anything of any use for the w/c movment
ok sorry just noticed you replyed and as you say we must have crossed
so how though do we get blocked rail tracks? and what use is that in rebuilding the left? we had a million against the war in iraq for nothing
there is nothing in the mechanism of anti imperialism (and actually as well teh issue is the 'protest' strategy) that empowers people .. that leads to other levels .. that leads to people having power .. that leads to real change .. it is this politics of protest, over things we can NOT control, that has helped disillusion people in the possibilities of real change
hey you know about maslow's levels don't you?? how does that fit here! :-D
and i agree absolutely there should be an international dimension .. but not one that deflects and alienates and does nothing
Spion
I hear ya
It's true, there isn't, just as even trade unionism doesn't break the bounds of capitalist society unless worker/rank & file control is fought for politically. Solidarity with anti-imperialist struggles would ideally involve workers here blocking military logistics, striking against corporations involved in affected countries etc. Yeah, sure it's rather a long way off to say the least, but the working class is an international class and we should be aiming to realise that as well as fighting our nationally-based battles.durruti02 said:
Spion said:
ok thats interesting .. and i think many on the left have said similar and probably coming from lenins idea that working class can only achieve a trade union mentality .. it seems to me the emphasis is so on the political level it forgets that local community and solidairty is political too
and yes internationalism can help take understanding from one level to another
but the empowerment mechanism i do not see .. i do not see how anti imperialism either helps those it is designed to help OR helps ( apart from possibly ideologically but i think the negative grossly outweigh the positives) build collective power
as i say i think we have lost our roots SO fundamentally all our effort should be in that direction
on unions actually i think Dave Douglas has it right .. they are what we want them to be .. that they ARE revolutionary when they need to be .. i do not agree with this idea they inhibit revolutionary ideology ..
urbanrevolt
New Member
Just quickly on this as I gotta go out- it's actually an anecdote that may be useful, though of course it suffers all the usual caveats of being an anecdote.durruti02 said:
When I worked in Ethiopia my students and fellow teachers followed the news about protests against the Iraq war and something came up about protestors blocking rail tracks I think and certainly people I spoke to remembered seeing the anticapitalist protests in Genoa and other places and several said they really admired this kind of determination and direct action.
A year later some of these same students were organising blockades of Addis Ababa's streets in a massive strike and protest wave against the election corruption.
durruti02 said:
because no militant direct action was taken.
The Ethiopian activists I knew were prepared to take action because they were in an almost life and death fight and some of the key organisers of strikes and protests were extremly political and willing to look at historical and other situations to learn, be inspired, adapt and try different tactics.
durruti02 said:
Every struggle should be about empowering people- whether over immediate bread and butter issues, other more transitional issues or issues which are very political but seemingly remote from the day to day.
High school students who walked out of school over the Iraq war I am pretty sure did get a sense of empowerment out of it.
The pity is that we don't have a political movement based on self-emancipation that can connect everyday acts of defiance with a network of activists organising in communities, workplaces etc for people to take power in our own lives.
I know of course of Maslow's hierarchy. My personal experience of seing students organise on a campus because the sanitation was awful, health care dreadful leading to deaths, showed me though that in politics at least these hierarchies can overlap and interloop very quickly- many of the students defied imprisonment, beatings and a very real possibility of death by either truncheon, shot gun or prison toruture to organise because they saw it as a fundamental question of dignity and self-worth. We would rather die like lions than scurry like mice- my translation of Shelley's Mask of Anarchy rise like lions after slumber sile anbessa b'andinnet tenessa -literally rise in union like lions- went down quite well in some of the classes around this time! And I was very careful I hope to just discuss issues with the students - thye were th eones to ask about British history and the struggle for democracy, the anticapitalist movement etc.
urbanrevolt said:
wow you have some amazing meories there mate .. they should keep your fires burning for a long time!
"The pity is that we don't have a political movement based on self-emancipation that can connect everyday acts of defiance with a network of activists organising in communities, workplaces etc for people to take power in our own lives" .. you see i think it is this that i am interested in .. i think issues like anti imperialism or opposition to war actually do NOT empower people partially cos they never suceed .. an lets go back to educational theory again .. i'm terrible with names but who talked about the need to give people little successes little victories?? one of the humanists i guess?? i suspect opposition to teh iraq war and tyeh million strong march DIS empowered more people than it empowered .. neither did it give people any victory anything concrete to hold onto for the future .. i think going along with psychology we need to look at a much more micro level of politics were we can agther small victory to start to create critical masses .. we have been putting the cart before teh horse for too long
( p.s. this is why i get frustrated when CR thinks IWCA etc is simply about localism .. he does not realise there is deep theory behind it )
urbanrevolt
New Member
durruti02 said:"The pity is that we don't have a political movement based on self-emancipation that can connect everyday acts of defiance with a network of activists organising in communities, workplaces etc for people to take power in our own lives" .. you see i think it is this that i am interested in .. i think issues like anti imperialism or opposition to war actually do NOT empower people partially cos they never suceed .. an lets go back to educational theory again .. i'm terrible with names but who talked about the need to give people little successes little victories?? one of the humanists i guess?? i suspect opposition to teh iraq war and tyeh million strong march DIS empowered more people than it empowered .. neither did it give people any victory anything concrete to hold onto for the future .. i think going along with psychology we need to look at a much more micro level of politics were we can agther small victory to start to create critical masses .. we have been putting the cart before teh horse for too long
( p.s. this is why i get frustrated when CR thinks IWCA etc is simply about localism .. he does not realise there is deep theory behind it )
I agree with you to a large extent I think. We need to organise around issues -perhaps very small issues- where we can gain victories and people begin to discover a sense of their own power.
I think where we may disagree or at least have a different emphasis is on when to bring in wider politics.
You say we need local groups where people decide on the priorities for themselves- I agree but into those sort of groups I'd be for raising issues like the Iraq war, like globalisation etc. In some cases if the reaction was oh bloody hell not that lefty rubbish again well OK I'd accept that and take the more patient approach you're arguing- and I accpt that in some instances that may well be the result.
However, in some cases-I think it could work. So when a school organised a walk-out against the Iraq war did it succeed in having any effect on the war? Nothing tangible or definite. It probably did get reported on blogs or papers in Iraq and make a small psychological difference- important enough- but did it help stop the war? Clearly not. Does that necessarily mean though that the students involved were dempralised and disempowered? I don't think so necessarily- merely by pulling off an exemplary stunt, even one that only had a symbolic wider relevance, I think the students would have felt quite empowered.
I certainly agree we should organise round issues in the here and now to get victories and discover our own power and get organised and in that the immediate issues of course play an especial part. I just think we shouldn't be too schematic- organise about the here and now but also about the future and issues far away where it works in terms of sparking an interest.
urbanrevolt said:
ok look sure i/we must not be too dogmatic .. there will be situation in which taking action over globasl issues can empower .. tbh my ((((son bless his smelly teenage cotton socks )))) helped lead that big walkout back in 200? at his school .. in that situation school kids maybe feel they can NOT take action about school issues but maybe felt they could around the war .. i wonder what they feel now .. he is not interested in politics at all at the mo though every now and again he says something really deep about society!
i think you are wrong that you would though be raising global issues at local groups .. my point is yes be aware of, discuss and use global issues ( without a global overview of course we go nowhere) but we ned to dramatically shift emphasis in british politcal strategy to the mundane to teh ordinary to the every day .. and also to the social .. we of the key aims of thatcherism was to destroy communities .. we must do our best to counter that both as i said with teh mundane and the social ..
TopCat
Putin fanboy
durruti02 said:ok look sure i/we must not be too dogmatic .. there will be situation in which taking action over globasl issues can empower .. tbh my ((((son bless his smelly teenage cotton socks )))) helped lead that big walkout back in 200? at his school .. in that situation school kids maybe feel they can NOT take action about school issues but maybe felt they could around the war .. i wonder what they feel now .. he is not interested in politics at all at the mo though every now and again he says something really deep about society!
i think you are wrong that you would though be raising global issues at local groups .. my point is yes be aware of, discuss and use global issues ( without a global overview of course we go nowhere) but we ned to dramatically shift emphasis in british politcal strategy to the mundane to teh ordinary to the every day .. and also to the social .. we of the key aims of thatcherism was to destroy communities .. we must do our best to counter that both as i said with teh mundane and the social ..
Your approach is sooo boring though. Hence it only attracts a certain type.
TopCat said:
he he thats why, IF you had read my post ;D, you would have noticed this bit atthe end "and also .. the social " .. hey you think an ex cw/rts'er wants to just talk about dog shite?? .. you are right that approach alone would be pretty boring .. it needs to go along side other more interesting social stuff!
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
Your approach is also mostly unreadable. Am I the only person who has trouble reading durruti's posts?
Durruti - I find it near-impossible to understand your posts on the first, second, third, sometimes fourth read-through. When I put your post through a translator I get gobbledygook.
Durruti - I find it near-impossible to understand your posts on the first, second, third, sometimes fourth read-through. When I put your post through a translator I get gobbledygook.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
durruti02 said:he he thats why, IF you had read my post ;D, you would have noticed this bit atthe end "and also .. the social " .. hey you think an ex cw/rts'er wants to just talk about dog shite?? .. you are right that approach alone would be pretty boring .. it needs to go along side other more interesting social stuff!
So much so called political activity is dead boring though. It does attract a certain type and this puts off new entrants. All male groups, endless doorstepping, people droning on, it puts people off!
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
Spot on.TopCat said:
yes i agreed with you!! and i should fkn knowTopCat said:
.. er to repeat which is why i said the social stuff parties music other stuff is just as important .. which you ignored .. twice actually re doorstopping that depends on who it is and what they are on about .. as you know HI (and IWCA used to and maybe still does) do NOT drone on but offer people an opportunity to talk .. plenty do at length and say none has ever offerred them that chnace before ..
but look mate we have had this discussion for 20 years ateotd it has to be a combination of stuff ..
eta look cw ( and antimp) often inspired people .. but they offfer no empowerment .. my point is that is this which is missing from our politics .. stuntism i believe i called it then ;D
Similar threads
- Poll
