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

Shady Bakunin

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by nclpw, Jul 27, 2013.

  1. nz61287n

    nz61287nMember Forum Member


    14

    0

    0

    Feb 14, 2012
     
    If you can find it post it (I would be interested in reading it).

    In terms of influencing the Nazis, I'm skeptical. As I have yet to read his stuff in depth it's possible that I'm missing something or interpreting some of his writings incorrectelly. Again I could be mistaken, but I don't really see the Nazis taking anything away from Bakunin's political philosophy with the exception of anti-semitism. If that's the case there would be a plethora of anti-semitic writers, philosophers, politicians...etc that the Nazis and Hitler would be much more comfortable with.


    As for this, your "friends on twitter" not withstanding, the examples of Israeli violence or incitements to violence (against Palestinians and Muslims) that you presented are not examples of Jewish hatred, rather they are expressions of nationalist/ethno-nationalist sentiment. In other words the state does not reveal secret or hidden racism and intolerance of a people, rather it instrumentalizes intolerance in pursuit of a particular set of ends.
     
  2. Kamil

    KamilNew Member New Member


    1

    0

    0

    Aug 31, 2013
     
    In the same way that we battle against white supremecy (ie Anglo hegemony)-there is no anti-european racism there its just railing against political "whiteness" so to speak- Bakunin is refering to zionism and bourgeois political "jewishness". It is undeniable that, just as there is a Eurocentric bias in the amerikkkan police state's legal institutions, so on the world stage there is an israeli-bias engineered by racist, capitalist interest groups. It is not anti-semitic to say that mainstream Jewish culture is inherintly racist anymore than it is prejudicial to say that mainstream amerikkkan culture of a few decades ago was inherintly racist, or that society in England has been inherintly classist for years. I used to date a girl who was half-chinese half-jewish, she was involved with a hasidic anti-zionist community (spiritually mystical and ultra-orthodox but socio-politically deeply opposed to the bandit state of Isreal), and even among them she described experiencing harsh and hurtfull prejudice for her different appearance. Furthermore, Bakunin consorted with many activists of Jewish descent as well as other ethnic groups that would be considered under par by a typical european gent of the time. In addition, Bakunin as a Slav himself never fit into the normative frame of what it means to be European as Russia has always been geographically and culturally more aligned with the East.
     
  3. hobolosophy

    hobolosophyActive Member Forum Member


    43

    0

    0

    Aug 5, 2013
     
    Bakunin died long before the state Israel was founded and much longer before some friends tweeted about Israel or ex-girlfriends joined whatever groups in Israel. So talking about the state Israel and what it is doing is pretty pointless and just off-topic. The things that happen now don't influence the past. History works the other way around. Everything else is corruption of historical facts. Bakunin was talking about the Jewish community. This community (and even the mainstream part of it) didn't have much to do with Zionism. Most Jewish people just wanted to be integrated in the countries where they lived. Many of them even converted to the Christian religion. Zionism became just a big thing after World War 2. As a reaction to the holocaust and what happened in the Third Reich and also during Stalin's epoch in Russia. It was supported by Britain who saw a chance to get rid of the Jewish people in Britain and by the USA who saw an Israeli state as a chance to gain more control and power in this region. And again: This state didn't exist in Bakunin's time and nobody would have expected in their wildest dreams that it could ever exist. Bakunin gave extremely negative characteristics to Jewish people. That is sick and in every definition antisemitic. Everyone should be able to see that. No matter what your point of view about the state Israel is. Which again doesn't have anything to do with Bakunin's time or the Jewish community back then. He blamed almost all negative things in the world (a world run by fucking right-wing loonies) on the Jewish community which were second-class citizens in every country they lived in. Bakunin lost the definition of an anarchist by blaming all those problems on an oppressed minority. You could even go so far and say that he worked into the hands of those in power. He hated an oppressed minority more than the people who actually ruled the world.
     
  4. Annie

    AnnieExperienced Member Experienced member


    74

    0

    0

    Jun 22, 2013
     
    good gosh! this thread is so bad...

    lacking the time i'll skip everything but the last post - including the petty geriatric wannabe-whatever:
    mymark, according to nazi standards you're just a cheap idiot spreading disinformation and distraction, not to mention your lie about being jewish - you don't even get the difference between "antisemite" and "anti-judaist" - FUCK YOU!
    bakunin - amongst almost everybody "then" talking about economic issues, including marx and engels - was talking about a - sadly - undefined group of "jewish" major capitalists, lets call them the first generation of the global banking and investment system. the "quote" the thread is about is out of his struggle against marxens' ideas about a world bank and the use of said global banking for a socialist world community - and his formulation wasn't very lucky and tinted with his personal fight with ol'karl m., later escalating right into the breaking of the first internationale.
    zionism didn't started with herzl and his comrades, like the emigration from europe to the americas there was always a small emigration of orthodox or simply persecuted jews to palestine - this was herzl's basis for his "zionism" and if one contemplates the enormous success of the "jewish" statebuilding between 1940 and 1948, the idea that zionism became virulent only after ww2 isn't that lucky - although i would agree that being "jewish" and staying in europe after 1945 wasn't an acceptable option anymore for most, at least for those who had a choice to immigrate into palestine - in the east, the stalinists forbade jewish emigration.
    thats very debateable - the struggle between the later israeli militants like the haganah and lots of other terrorist groups and the british occupation forces was long and bloody - no trace of an british agreement to the foundation of the israeli state. the british guarded the entrance to palestine very closely - resulting in hundreds of thousand deaths in the shoa of people unable to leave nazi-occupied europe and thousands of death in the eastern mediterranean seas of people refused to go on land in palestine. i don't think that counts for a british "agreement" and i tend to date the start of the us-interest on control of the area not sooner than the early sixties - just research the difficulties the IDF had to get arms and military equipment had untill 1962/63.
    i don't think that you got the definition of "antisemite" right:
    antisemites believe that the "jewish race" is b i o l o g i c a l l y inferior and destructive/corroding - just like the nazis claimed as a reason to...
    bakunin never said anything about the "jews" in general, his "unlucky" sentences about the polish jews in the polish independence/tsarist war or about marx the "jew" are about the jewish bourgeoisie involved in the capitalist development in europe and a kind of personal attack against ol'karl. the part where he wrote about the religious background of said group can be called "a n t i - j u d a i s t" which isn't "anti-semite", because it's just rejecting the "jewish" religion including their ever avenging god - pretty useless if you ask me.
    in person bakunin wasn't an ideal ideal for anarchists, all his life he had problems to slip out of his feudal background, distorting his views on the real world, further he suffered heavily from being unable to deal with money up to the point where people around him - including a number of jews - had to collect donations to support him after he had no income of his own and lost big sums on short-lived projects.
    but to call him an anti-semite is simply wrong and often with malicious idiot intent, the same goes to demonize the state of israel or the senile claim that the israeli-jews are the better nazis, not to mention keeping silence about the intent and background of the forces standing actually against the existence of a "jewish" state in palestine - remember, its just two days to the next anniversary of... and i hope noone is cynical or debased enough to justify the very reason for this anniversary.
     
  5. hobolosophy

    hobolosophyActive Member Forum Member


    43

    0

    0

    Aug 5, 2013
     
    To Annie:
    I think mymarkx post deserves a fuck you!, yes. But how can you know that he lied about being Jewish? Not that it matters. His argumentation doesn't lead anywhere.
    Today I lack a bit of time too so I just point out three things in your post.
    1.) 1940 - 1948 is during ww2 and after ww2. I think it's pretty obvious that Jewish people weren't very safe in Europe during the war, yes. What do you want to tell us with this marvelous historical fact?
    2.) Bakunin gives exactly those biologically inferior and destructive characteristics to the Jewish community. "This whole Jewish world, comprising a single exploiting sect, a kind of blood sucking people, a kind of organic destructive collective parasite..." speaks for itself. That was very unlucky.
    3.) How can he talk about just a small group when he says "this whole Jewish world.."? You just downplay what he said. I don't know if you fan him or if Bakunin and Marx are the only philosophers you've read so far. But I don't say that you are not allowed to read him anymore. Just get your facts straight when you talk about something or someone and don't downplay their negative sides. Emotional attached argumentation is useless in a discussion like this.
     
  6. Bakica

    BakicaExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    951

    0

    0

    Feb 21, 2010
     
    I wish not to open new threads so I will ask politely in this one since my question has to do with Bakunin and other capitalist critics. I find it hard to believe that they ( I will give Bakunin as an example, but I'm pretty sure I've read other anti-capitalist writers saying the same thing in other words ) are sexist but this part of the text gives me reason to think indeed, indirectly, are.

    Now, this text is saying that the worker is 'he' instead of 'he or she'. I'm aware of the time the text has been written and in which Bakunin lived, but still, isn't it a bit lame for an anarchist theorist to say something like this ? Also, this is not the only example, his whole text gives that strange sexist vibe that workers are only male. Also, when speaking about workers, he often says they do hard, often deadly, manual work which is again not correct. Not all workers are capable of doing hard manual work but are still being exploited, especially women ( not being stereotypical here ). I'm not calling Bakunin or Marx or any other theorist a sexist bastard, I just want to hear you opinion and do you often see what I've just said in texts you read ?
     
  7. NoGodsNoMasters38

    NoGodsNoMasters38Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    137

    0

    3

    Oct 17, 2013
     
    I think it was a different time. That's mostly the reason why I prefer other writers considering the evolution of man and the evolution of thought. Bakunin is (in my opinion) not the greatest Anarchist writer (I personally prefer Emma Goldman or Noam Chomsky), but I find the idea of him being truly Anti - Semitic to be a little dishonest. I am convinced that he just hates religion, period.
     
  8. Rebellious twit

    Rebellious twitExperienced Member Experienced member


    512

    0

    0

    Jul 21, 2012
     
    let me quote his critque on Karl Marx:
    if this doesn't sound anti semitic i don't know what does.
     
  9. NoGodsNoMasters38

    NoGodsNoMasters38Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    137

    0

    3

    Oct 17, 2013
     
    As I said, I don't read much Bakunin, but if that is a direct quote (he sounds like cartman :lmao: ) then yeah, that is pretty Anti - Semitic.
     
  10. Rebellious twit

    Rebellious twitExperienced Member Experienced member


    512

    0

    0

    Jul 21, 2012
     
    this quote is from one of his writings about marx i can't exactly remember which one, i have read in a book with bakunin and other anarchists selected works...one of his stupid arguments which fucking sucks...he has some smart ones though that doesn't use "jew" as an argument...anyhow i believe aswell that he is anti religious induvidual as you said and of my knowledge he used most of his time writing about religion and it's flaws..since he comes from a regime so powerful and authorthrian so i respect his writings and agree on most of it..besides the jewish comments...perhaps he became to extreme against religion he began targeting people and not the church and other religion institutions as a whole...
     
  11. Bakica

    BakicaExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    951

    0

    0

    Feb 21, 2010
     
    Emma and Noam are nothing compared to Bakunin in my opinion. I don't want to sound sexist but Emmas work is thrash and she is just famous for being anarho-feminist, nothing else.
     
  12. NoGodsNoMasters38

    NoGodsNoMasters38Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    137

    0

    3

    Oct 17, 2013
     
    Eh, Just my opinion but I feel Emma Goldman's writing is quite interesting. Also, about the feminism, At that time Women were far more oppressed than men, so it makes sense why that is well known only for that. As for Bakunin, I just never really liked his writing that much, guess it's a little over my head.
     
  13. BozzNugg

    BozzNuggMember New Member


    5

    0

    0

    Oct 10, 2012
     
    I feel like this thread would benefit from some historiography. People are who they are, not who we'd like them to be. I wish I could provide more but I haven't had the chance to read as much as I'd like on Bakunin. From what I understand though, or have noticed at least, from the writings of various radicals including Bakunin AND Marx, 'jews' and the now-infamous 'jewish-question' were highly promulgated in the 1800's. The reasons were more diverse than I can accurately represent, but my understanding is that, while most Euorpean nation-states had a christian state religion (thus tying the power of a state inextricably to the authority of god, which is sort of a holdover from earlier Papal dominion and before that, the first Roman Empire, divine right of kings, etc.), Jews were a necessarily marginal group, i.e. different laws applied to them. I think the biggest area where this tended to come out, apart from all the religious hate-mongering bullshit that's gone back and forth since the dawn of history and resulted in, among other things, a long and wide-spread persecution of Jews throughout European history, was in the different legal status of Jews in conducting finance/lending. I don't know the particulars and would be curious to hear from someone who did, but it is my understanding that, Jews were allowed to lend money with interest, something generally considered by the christian states of the time to be usury, a punishable offense for christians. This form of lending, which comprises one of the cornerstones of modern capitalism, was for one reason or another greatly associated with jews, thus, when the various thinkers of the time approached the so-called 'jewish question' i.e. what is to be done with/how christians were to treat them, this often became a large component of the argument.

    Marx goes on at some length about the Jews as does Bakunin and others in vociferously negative tones. In most socialist writings I've seen though, it seems that the primary objections are against religious authority (of which we know both Marx and Bakunin were vehemently opposed) and this method of money-lending (which similarly rankled both thinkers). If you go back and re-read the quote in this light, it makes a bit more sense I think. I'm not apologizing for Bakunin or Marx, but I think we should try to read their words in the context they came from before we start calling them anti-semitic and especially before we start wantonly throwing out all of their critiques of capitalism, society, etc. One might consider the fact that Marx himself was of Jewish ancestry yet wrote against 'jews.'

    Though I completely disagree with authoritarian socialism, I still think both men contributed quite a lot to the construction of socialism, libertarian or otherwise. That being said, I do find it regrettable that they were unable to separate out religion from government from money at the time or this ongoing confusion could perhaps have been avoided. But, there was likely a reason for it. Perhaps these institutions were so entwined back then that it was impossible to speak of them in isolation, perhaps that is still the case?

    Personally, given what we know of Bakunin, how fiery his speech was, how strongly he stated his position of disdain for religion, the state, authority, and capital, as well as the various forces he came up against from all sides, I find it understandable why he might have used the words he did, though I can't really condone them. Likewise, I don't think we can really speak of this as isolated from his other writing which is radically radically radically accepting of people of all kinds. I guess I'm just wary of reading his words entirely through the filter of our modern understanding.
     
Loading...