Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Can anyone answer me this?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Dogma264, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. Dogma264

    Dogma264Active Member Forum Member


    31

    0

    0

    Jun 29, 2010
     
    hmm i like the graph you showed me and i like to thank all these replies but they really helped my understand anarchy and things like this because ive been confused about the system and am realzing that i dont need to latest clothes and toys and i dont need meat and i dont want to be rich at the cost of someone else

    Its very hard finding the truth when most books vocabulary is too comples for me and the only person i argue with is my older brother who is a soon to be shipped out to the navy and says this always "poor people are poor because they want to be, if they really wanted to be rich they would try harder, and one person trying against the system wont do anything so dont even try" its funny really thinking we both live in the same house
     
  2. punkmar77

    punkmar77Experienced Member Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    5,722

    175

    716

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Solamente tu puedes decidir si vas a hacer una diferencia o no, tu hermano lla se vendio al estado y ahora es parte de la maquina arrolladora y terrorizante de el capitalismo. El mismo systema que ha hecho pedazos a Guatemala y su pueblo. Si deveras quieres hacer una diferencia sigue bien tus estudios en la escuela como en la literatura anarquista, desarolla tu mente. No te dejes sonsacar por los amantes al dinero ni dejes que te digan que el anarquismo es una imposibilidad que vas a dejar atras cuando 'madures'.
     
  3. ryan1980

    ryan1980Experienced Member Experienced member


    94

    1

    0

    Jul 9, 2010
     
    Nah. Direct action is direct action. Some of it may not be effective (which speaks to poor/non-existant pefigurative organization behind the scenes), or even wanted but you have to look at it as action against oppression nonetheless. The "commitment" I spoke of was to clarify an ongoing action rather than a singular one(not that you aren't 'commited' to a singular action...). I certainly can't speak for different FNB chapters, but the ones I've been involved with have always contended that class be irrelevent within the organization and they would serve anyone of any class. So it matters not what class any one came from, but that you won't recognize it from that point on. You can't say that you want to smash class division and then write off middle class kids in the next line who want to help. Ongoing direct actions generally serve to create mutual aid that is bennificial to all but that can only happen if the first time recipient comes and you have a chance to explain the concept of FNB (or any organization that interacts with the 'public') to them, and that they agree. Before that, they may very well think that they are going to a third party and they are right if they have no interest in breaking divisions along side you in solidarity. Some people just need food.
    This happens in most activist organizations. You promote your ideals through direct action/propaganda by deed in hopes that others will join you to try and affect change you all what to see.
     
  4. butcher

    butcherExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    0

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Except when it isn't. ;)
    Direct action is direct action when it is direct action, lol.
    What is your criterion for direct action? One can not claim something to be direct action if one does not have a way to evaluate such a claim, ie a clear definition and criterion of what direct action is. I have tried to outline mine above, and hence have outlined my position that FNB is sometimes direct action, sometimes not.

    What a stoopid contention. Class is always relevant.
    This does not mean you have to not let middle class kids get involved, but it does mean acknowledging that class does exist, and that class privilege also operates within radical organisations. It is not at all working towards a non-class society to just pretend class divisions don't exist. It is for similar reasons that anarchists allow for women, queer or people of colour only spaces and groups. Allowing for self-organisation for those oppressed by patriarchy, racism and heteronormativity within our class is a neccesity to challenging these oppressive social relationships.
     
  5. ryan1980

    ryan1980Experienced Member Experienced member


    94

    1

    0

    Jul 9, 2010
     
    My criterion for a direct action is simple: The action must be direct, meaning as efficient as possible; it must have a clear objective, and it must be outside nomal structural avenues (police/proprietor notification/permission, permits, etc.) It must be small enough in number and narrow in scope to ensure efficiency. "Grassroots" organizing isn't direct enough to be considered a direct action (although may be absolutely wanted or warrented depending on the subject at hand). It must acomplish, at least in part, its objective. If you have a rock and throw it at a Starbuck's window and your objective is to create an economic loss on Starbuck's side and your rock shatters the glass; objective met. Now that is a direct action. It was you creating a situation that meets your objective in an efficient manner without going though any structual demands by external forces. You can claim that it wasn't effective, as it will only take 1400 dollars to fix the window, and really, Starbucks spends more on food delivery for monthly meetings. But it doesn't stand to reason that you didn't commit a direct action against oppressors because of its ineffectiveness.


    I certainly never said that class didn't exist. Of course it exists and you should acknowledge the fact that your group may be diverse in that respect. But what relevence does it have when your overall goal is to break down class barriers? Why mantain that social order inside of your organization and then have it affect the interpersonal relations within that group, and ultimately outside of that group onto those you're trying to affect with classless mutual aid? There's a disconnect in your methodology .
     
  6. manvsmaritoni

    manvsmaritoniActive Member Forum Member


    37

    0

    0

    Mar 12, 2010
     
    this is not at all how i feel. what i meant is that it is comforting to know they cannot win. either we win or we all lose, in the long run at least.

    ...yeah i tend to repeat myself sometimes...i do remember the fellow with the whack statements, not my friend though, i had never met him before. i strongly disagree with his statements, but you know that.
     
  7. butcher

    butcherExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    0

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    I never said you did, rather its a stoopid contention on behalf of the FNB chapters that put forward this perspective.
    Moreover, I repeat:
    Class barriers can and do affect interpersonal relations, especially when they are not explicitly dealt with in the open. Pretending it doesn't exist maintains class barriers, the goal is to challenge them.
     
  8. butcher

    butcherExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    0

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    I look in the fridge, i've run out of milk, I decided to walk to the shops to buy some more (objective), I walk the quickest route there (efficient), I successfully purchase milk at the shops, thus accomplishing my objective and I failed to notify the State of my intentions. Have I just engaged in a direct action?
    Come on dude! What makes direct action an explicitly political action?
    And what sort of political action is it? Conversely, what political action is not?
     
  9. ryan1980

    ryan1980Experienced Member Experienced member


    94

    1

    0

    Jul 9, 2010
     
    I disagreed with, "not mediated by 'representational' groups or persons, and prefigurative.", implicitly stating that I agreed with, "direct action is any action undertaken by subjugated groups to lesser or abolish their oppression".

    So, I thought we had already established the context that surrounds any direct action was freeing oneself or group from oppression. When you asked for my criterion, I gave you my baselines within that context. You're missing the subjective nature of what constitutes a 'political action' in the first place. Is the milk-buying act considered direct action? No. The shops are traditional outlets of commerce that the state regulates. If you're buying milk from a capitalist shop, then you reinforcing capitalist ethic and the state through the tax (straight sales or GST tax) they collect from you and the state needs no notification. They'll come if you don't pay the tax.. The question of whether direct action is 'political' or isn't depends on initial position. Do you feel oppressed by being out of milk? Direct action isn't owned by radicals and activists, it's a tactic and it can be implemented by anyone of any political persuasion. So we'd have to gague it all by its effectiveness to abolish whatever 'oppression' the person believes they're being restricted by, shouldered with or violated.
    YOU make it an explicit political action. Direct action is not restrictive and as a tactic can used and bent to achieve a goal, so asking who, what, when, where and why is pointless. Its supposed to be flexible and aid with overall objectives and is the reason why anarchists and activists use it to great avail.
     
Loading...