Bedtime Theory Comments http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com yes, this is what I do for fun Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:29:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Nate http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-72 Wed, 07 May 2008 05:02:57 +0100 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-72 Todd, I'm about to suggest hte same thing to Adam - you should start an iww.org members only blog and repost stuff from this site there. At least some of it. Do I need to explain/try to convince? take care, Nate Todd,
I’m about to suggest hte same thing to Adam - you should start an iww.org members only blog and repost stuff from this site there. At least some of it. Do I need to explain/try to convince?
take care,
Nate

]]> by: todd http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2007/07/17/reply-to-nate-on-mass-and-political-organization/#comment-71 Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:53:12 +0100 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2007/07/17/reply-to-nate-on-mass-and-political-organization/#comment-71 duke, i sorta agree with some of that (minus the smack talking). i've never gone for malatesta's arguments though because: 1. ideology is less a product of will than of history. there are no apolitical unions, just unions with different positions in the class. likewise composition of the unions will vary with the context. 2. malatesta misses the role of struggle radicalizing workers consciousness. this makes growth without watering down principles possible, since workers in participating can be radicalized (not saying it will, just that it is possible, which destroys the fork in his argument). 3. i think the argument is true of unions. i also agree that unions are usually counterrevolutionary. i just don't think anarchists should build unions. we should build workers organizations that (a) build consciousness through struggle itself, (b) can initiate and widen struggle, and (c) create a framework for workers/community councils. this is different from unions, and a revision of anarchosyndicalism, but one that comes out of a wing of a-s (friends of durruti, fora, councilist inspired a-s). 4. malatesta didn't believe it interestingly. he helped build the USI a few years after making those arguments. duke, i sorta agree with some of that (minus the smack talking). i’ve never gone for malatesta’s arguments though because:
1. ideology is less a product of will than of history. there are no apolitical unions, just unions with different positions in the class. likewise composition of the unions will vary with the context.
2. malatesta misses the role of struggle radicalizing workers consciousness. this makes growth without watering down principles possible, since workers in participating can be radicalized (not saying it will, just that it is possible, which destroys the fork in his argument).
3. i think the argument is true of unions. i also agree that unions are usually counterrevolutionary. i just don’t think anarchists should build unions. we should build workers organizations that (a) build consciousness through struggle itself, (b) can initiate and widen struggle, and (c) create a framework for workers/community councils. this is different from unions, and a revision of anarchosyndicalism, but one that comes out of a wing of a-s (friends of durruti, fora, councilist inspired a-s).
4. malatesta didn’t believe it interestingly. he helped build the USI a few years after making those arguments.

]]> by: Nate http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2007/07/17/reply-to-nate-on-mass-and-political-organization/#comment-70 Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:39:33 +0100 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2007/07/17/reply-to-nate-on-mass-and-political-organization/#comment-70 wakka wakka Duke. Todd, let's talk about this stuff again some time. wakka wakka Duke.

Todd, let’s talk about this stuff again some time.

]]> by: Nate http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-69 Tue, 08 Apr 2008 03:17:49 +0100 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-69 I really like Adam's suggestion that you cut it way down for the IW (and/or the GOB?) then put the main thing online. The published version should have a link to the online version. mad love, n8 I really like Adam’s suggestion that you cut it way down for the IW (and/or the GOB?) then put the main thing online. The published version should have a link to the online version.

mad love,
n8

]]> by: Adam http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-68 Mon, 07 Apr 2008 19:18:23 +0100 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-68 Gave a quick skim. For the CNT reference you should include the years that they are saying it, at least I feel I its important for me to know and place it in conext. I think some of the early quotes can be cut down, as your central points are later in the article- provide more room to focus on those. Also to consider is chop, chop, chop and include a link to the full length article somewhere on the IWW website. Great overall, I'm curious to see what type of debate this might spark. Gave a quick skim. For the CNT reference you should include the years that they are saying it, at least I feel I its important for me to know and place it in conext. I think some of the early quotes can be cut down, as your central points are later in the article- provide more room to focus on those.

Also to consider is chop, chop, chop and include a link to the full length article somewhere on the IWW website. Great overall, I’m curious to see what type of debate this might spark.

]]> by: classic http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-67 Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:32:25 +0100 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-67 The writing is really good and I like the comparison in our situation to the CNT. However, you will lose people's interests with some of the language and the overall length of the peice. I essentially agree with what you have on paper here. Publish it! The writing is really good and I like the comparison in our situation to the CNT. However, you will lose people’s interests with some of the language and the overall length of the peice. I essentially agree with what you have on paper here. Publish it!

]]> by: nate http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-66 Sun, 06 Apr 2008 02:08:14 +0100 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/04/05/draft-dont-think-organize/#comment-66 long email from me on its way in a moment.... long email from me on its way in a moment….

]]> by: hoodia patch http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2006/11/26/sex-race-and-class/#comment-65 Sun, 23 Mar 2008 15:12:55 +0000 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2006/11/26/sex-race-and-class/#comment-65 I agree with you I agree with you

]]> by: mozilla foxfire http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2006/11/26/sex-race-and-class/#comment-64 Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:16:45 +0000 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2006/11/26/sex-race-and-class/#comment-64 In which country do you live? :) In which country do you live? :)

]]> by: Administrator http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/01/10/socialist-governments-and-cooptation/#comment-63 Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:14:38 +0000 http://anarchowhat.blogsome.com/2008/01/10/socialist-governments-and-cooptation/#comment-63 For some reason I didn't get the email saying I needed to moderate replies. I just saw yours which is useful. In the various re-edits I ended up doing exactly what you said in 1. With 2 I want to do that (and talk about the role anarchists can play in movements which are not clean from the perspective of the state). The third point is interesting, and something worth going into. I guess I was ignoring that to simplify, but I see now why it is incomplete. This is the problem I find with writing on these issues, it seems impossible to be brief. For some reason I didn’t get the email saying I needed to moderate replies. I just saw yours which is useful.

In the various re-edits I ended up doing exactly what you said in 1. With 2 I want to do that (and talk about the role anarchists can play in movements which are not clean from the perspective of the state). The third point is interesting, and something worth going into. I guess I was ignoring that to simplify, but I see now why it is incomplete. This is the problem I find with writing on these issues, it seems impossible to be brief.

]]>