a particular anarchist's breakdown and explanation of theory and thought.

Monday, February 1, 2010

'Petty-Bourgeois, Praise the Coming of the Organic Reformation!'

The Organic Reformation. This post will possess a background of a Marxist belief that industrialization of a country is dependent on the bourgeois form of society, e.i. capitalist production/exploitation. [On this note I am tempted to speak of the industrialization of other previous third world countries like India, Brazil, and Venezuela being semi-non-dependent on fossil fuels and that the old capitalist/imperialist superpowers are a dieing breed to be extinct by the horizon of the new world, however beautiful the idea, it is not completely so.] Today the profit motive has touched the values of Organic manufacture. Organic production demand has risen over the past few years. Of course, supply follows demand. Organic producers and retailers have monopolized on the opportunities of Organic production.
Yet, the Organic movement has turned into some kind of pompous status to use in the power complex. Our culture assigns some kind of dignity to purchasing Organic foods (that may not be produced with harmful chemical additives, but most assuredly with the more successful, are produced with the labor of classical capitalist exploitation) that the poor are not as able to purchase. The Organic Reformation has turned into the hypocritical social strata despotism that it was started to defeat. The petty bourgeoisie are the only ones that can afford the organic food prices, thus giving them the delusion that they are better than the true proletarians who are too desperate to bother buying the high prices necessitated by the bourgeois system.
The Organic Reformation is growing though. Demand keeps growing as the supply becomes more available, spurred on by the opportunities provided by the growing demand of the organic produce markets, increasing the supply, lowering the prices brought on by the competition essential to bourgeois production, increasing demand, increasing supply, lowering prices, increasing demand, etc. until the organic produce markets begin to be equal to the artificial produce markets and is accessible by the proletariat. This is bourgeois development. Once the Organic Reformation completes, the organic produce markets have spread to numerous industries and the market has become large enough to trump the artificial markets, the Social Revolution would place organic production under the worker's control, networked by industry associations, creating the anarchist economy.
I see this as very possible and good. I also see the Organic Reformation possible under Anarchist production. It just amounts to a question of which method would be best. In my opinion I think the Organic Reformation would happen faster under Anarchist production. Someone else may see Anarchist production as too unstable or hectic to allow such a progress in as fast a time as bourgeois production. Nobody really knows because the problem with theory is that it is based off of fact ascended into speculation.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Albany

Going to Albany has changed my aspect on a few things. For one, the Shaleshock movement is incredibly important and any sort of action is crucial to the defense of NYS. The movement must be a politically secular movement, where political ideologies are kept out of the way so that a resident of NYS doesn't feel obligated to be an x to join. That doesn't mean that a political culture won't be evolved with the movement. The oil bourgeoisie unregulated by the state rampaging and destroying the environment and livelihood is bound to clear up a few superstitions about capitalism. It's like the International of the 19th century, or the IWW of early 20th century and today. Workers are accepted regardless of backgrounds/identity and shown the sources of their disparity and some solutions to the problem, reformist to revolutionary.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Communists

ever since... perhaps 1793 to around 1840... workers and peasants alike, all who labour, have gathered under the socialist banner, and have repeated the maxim "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need," wishing to implement it into society. But that is about where it got to. It then started branching off into authoritarian, libertarian, Utopian, and all sorts of crazy names. By the late 19th century, the lines were clearly drawn... The Marxist Communists and the Anarchists. After vigorous competition for control of the international, it all degraded and finally disappeared into the slumber of the 1880's-90's to the early 1900's.
Then, with the result of massive militarization of states, World War broke out. This awakened many citizens to the bullshit of Capitalism, and the State, or the State in the hands of the Bourgeoisie. Then, 1916, Russia breaks, a democratic institution is put in as a provisional government. 1917, Bolsheviks take over with a coup d'etat. Lenin's dictatorship of the proletariat (Lenin's dictatorship of the proletariat being a state of the vanguard to fulfill the interest of the workers) was put in place. A few years later, Lenin's dictatorship of the proletariat is still in place. Rosa Luxembourg tries to make revolution against the Germans... Boom! nothing happens.
After the smoke from the coup is cleared, the Communists try to make another International. While all of this Commie shit was happening, the anarcho-syndicalists had been creating national syndicalist unions which delegated with other national syndicalist trade unions. The Anarchists watched and waited while the Communists formed their Soviet Union. Nestor Makhno, fought both the White and Red armies to defend what collectives he had. Sadly, in the end he fails and writes with his Russian comrades, the Platform.
The Syndicalists are invited to go to the International, and quickly turn away at the way the Soviets handle their matters. It becomes clear in the Syndicalists' eyes that the Soviet Union is a failure. The Syndicalists then try to strengthen their front against, now, both Communism and Capitalism.
People ask, 'could Communists and Anarchists work together in a revolution'. Seeing as they differ completely (aside from believing that capitalism is bad, although you could argue this since Communists try to enlist from the middle classes), I believe not. Anarchists are anarchists for they believe that the proletariat should go from be oppressed by the State and the Bourgeoisie, to oppression under the yoke of the dictatorship of the proletariat (or the dictatorship of the Communist Party). Where Communists do not trust the Working Class to handle matters themselves, the Anarchists do not trust the Party to handle matters of the Working Class for them.
I think the question could be answered in the Spanish Civil War. The Socialists (they are the moderates, the liberals of the Socialist rainbow, not Communists, alike Anarchists in many respects)[POUM], the Communists [PSUC], and the Anarchists [FAI-CNT] had been organizing trade unions for decades (UGT being the trade unions belonging to the PSUC, the CNT trade unions, being syndicalist, the political organ, the FAI belonged to them).
Then, Franco wanted to take power under a Fascist, Feudal banner. He organized an uprising with the aid of the other Fascist countries, Nazi Germany and Mussolini's Italy, and the UGT, the CNT, and the POUM quickly responded with and uprising of their own. So we have the Communists, the Socialists (Left Communists), the Anarchists, and the Fascists, basically the four alternative tendencies to Parliamentary Democracy battling it out. The Government, the FAI, POUM, PSUC, and the liberals united as Anti-Fascists to combat Franco. In the rear of the front line, what appeared to be Worker's States, Anarchists and Communists capitulating and working together to achieve Socialism was created. It was inspiring and magnificent. But in 1937, the Communist PSUC, began to replace the worker patrols and trade union militias, who bravely held the line, with Guards of their own to take power away from the Anarchists and give it to the PSUC, which was controlled by the Communists. This amounted to brawls and street fighting with the Anarchists and Communists, ending with the detaining of the POUM. The jailing of the POUM then continued to the other members of the political parties, ending with the failure of the the Government, and the victory of Franco.
The Communists could have saved the war by agreeing with the POUM and the FAI-CNT that the revolution and the war are inseperable, which would have made support for the Government from the working people of other countries. And if they had won, counting on the malevolent Communists, Spain would be Communist.
If there is a revolution in America, or England, or anywhere, Communists and Anarchist would fight side by side, but after the State and the Bourgeoisie are invisible, they would turn their weapons on each other. It could be possible, with Left Communists and Anarchists to live in a form of harmony, but the Communist urge to dictate and warp destroys the notion that Anarchists and full fledged Communists can get along. The Communists State, in such a revolution where Anarchists and Communists cooperate, would have to be not involved. With the loss of the Soviet Union, it is more plausible that they can cooperate more harmoniously.
Personally, I disdain Communism as nearly as much as Fascism. Communism has failed more then once. The logic that Communism has never been realized and that the multiple times that Communism has come into existence is bullshit. So I am surprised that there are still Communists around. I would do my best to not allow Communism to come about in my area, as it is dictatorship, plain and simple. My revolution is anarchist above all.
Critique of Communism

Thursday, December 10, 2009

Whispers to myself on the "facts" of social uprising

Certainly everyday I think of the supposedly inevitable revolution. I have abandoned the idea that the Social Revolution is inevitable. The Social Revolution needs mass propaganda, mass awakening, and perhaps most importantly, practical stimulation.
This is happening in Greece, the revolution is in Greece. That is the model for all peoples. Commemorating the anniversary of Alexandros Grigoropoulos' murder by the police, riots have broken out to combat the police. It's not just about anarchists. workers and students on all fronts are stepping up against the police. Every occupied building guarantees the freedom of detained demonstrators.
I think that the expanse of the revolutionary spirit says something about the situations of the world movements. In one instance we have the United States. The IWW (Industrial Workers of the World) has under 2000 members. We have a growing anarchist movement, albeit a bit uncomfortably slow (compared to European movements), successful organizing skills when we look at the RNC and DNC (08), and confrontation with the police in some locales. The Shaleshock Coalition is beginning to rise awareness to the incompetence of the state and the insatiable greed of the capitalist (being a human being in an undesirable position of power). This is appreciable but sadly, as said, a bit unprecedented to the European movements.
Next, we have the Netherlands. They are personally one my favorite countries when in comes to anarchism. They and Iceland have a successful squatting movement. They also usually have a successful Food Not Bombs movement (not to say that the US doesn't, Silent City Distro is putting out free food, and Boston FNB is highly successful). The European movement surges of citizen movements (citizen movements is something that the US largely has nothing of), facilitated by anarchists, having the most experience with the tasks. What the northern European anarchists have that the US anarchists don't have is in my humble opinion, a bolder movement, particularly in squatting. what's different about organizing successful events and a squatting movement is that, although important and incredibly helpful, the organizing of events is temporary. The squatters movement creates a stability for the anarchists ensuring a determination to keep and defend the squat and the mode of life, and confrontation with the police. The Netherlands, in Amsterdam, has had a few events to express solidarity towards the anarchists in Greece, something I may be missing in the US.
The situation in Greece gives credence to networks and collectives. Before the tragedy of Alexis' murder, Greece had a network of collectives all in communication with each other. When the murder made news, the word passed through the entire network reaching all the collectives reaching all the anarchists. Thus, when all the anarchists were given the news they immediately organized demonstrations which turned into riots, and the rest is history. Now, on the anniversery of the tragedy, the anarchists, and most of the organizations of Greece are demonstrating and occupying to gain political and economic rights and advantages. It has learned of the mistakes made in last December's insurrection, and has become much more efficient than last time.The state of the country uprising is inspiring to those who wish for the social revolution or people's rights. It is inspiring to all anarchists and all people that we should form an organization and temperament like those of the Greeks.
The question of Greece now is sustainability, and progress. How long with the offensive last, and how far will they have gone?

for info on Greece '09: Riots and Police Brutality on first day, libcom
second day, libcom
consistent in anarchist events on Greek struggle, witness to last December uprising
some revleft threads: one, two

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Silent City Distro and Anarchist Economics

Silent City Distro is pretty amazing. I talked to a guy on the phone who was busy organizing the North East Anarchist Network General Assembly in Ithaca. It makes me feel all fuzzy and prideful to see the anarchist movement actually moving. Happy to have a collective in the city. If we could get one in every city and establish a free economy then we would have basically realized Anarchy.
I want to start a free agricultural economy in Ithaca at least. The production of vegetables would consist in numerous gardens throughout the countryside. I should hope to produce a surplus, and that should be possible with the ways these freegans get their shit. And the distribution would be through Food Not Bombs. They'd have to have more workers though for it to be realized. They'd distribute every day at most, and thrice a week at least. This could be at the squat, a rented or bought place, or at a park. I think that this would bring a lot of people into the practice and politics of anarchism, especially with the economy today. I also want to start a FREE STORE which I might describe later.
To all the people who say that no one will want to start a garden to feed people, I say to that, FUCK YOU!
A FREE STORE will have to be monitored frequently to minimize shoplifting. It would get it's crap from whatever freegans get and don't need, "shoplifting" "maybe", :), and a drop off box for stuff people would like to sell to the FREE STORE. It's gonna have to have a place so it can exist, and I think that in with a squat, a place rented or bought, it would do perfect. A squat qould go great with the Food Not Bombs, but a rented space might be too small. Though we'd need so much more, it's still a good start.

Thursday, May 14, 2009

OM: In frustration of Hindu Terminology

Tonight I have realized that I am connected with everything, whether through the air I breathe, the water I drink, the stars I look at, the energies I feel, part of the collective unconscious and the psyche we all experience together. We are and we always shall be brothers and sisters, eternally connected, immortal and temporarily in existence with eachother. Spiritually connected with the Allfather, Atman, the spirits, ancestors, and the rocks and algae. Undeniably consistent with eachother, the love dwells under our skin, under the skin of the predator and the prey, the killer, the victim, the monk and the junkie.
Silently, slowly, gracefully moving.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Earth First Meeting

Today after school I went down to Dewitt park to see the Earth First! folk. The meeting actually began at one, and while lunch I was trying to think whether I should skip the afternoon for it. I got to the meeting at around 4 and they were discussing civil disobedience and direct action. After, they did some weird introduction, where they all said their names and did some weird action, and everyone copied. Must be some weird cult thing... after that I was invited to sit down. On the ground inside the circle I could see food scraps of grape fruit and a melon and an empty box of what I think was doughnuts.I listened to a discussion about direct action and civil disobedience and what they were good for and then it moved into what workshops they wanted to do. I don't really remember what exactly they said because I was eating clover leaves while it all was going on. They decided on building an example tripod for making successful and able road blocks (civil disobedience).

While the team went out to their van and grabbed giant poles and other equipment there was a sort of intermission. Juggling with improvised music of Madeline and banging a spoon on a can. A little after a woman had two boxes full of papers. She told everyone that there were zines, booklets, and leaflets for free and charged with donations (as mysterious as that can sound) I grabbed a bunch of them and I am going to scan them and post PDFs of them on the blog. While I was doing this the woman started explain on how to tie the very special ropes in the tripod and other important things. After I got all the booklets I wanted, I left being strained for time.

Out of what I saw I was pretty interested. And I wanna go to whatever one might be next, if there's one that's next.