anarchist notes (may 18, 2010)

A few things.

t r u t h o u t has an interview with Simon Critchley here. Note that Critchley has been inspired by the Australian pamphlet series cum book How To Make Trouble and Influence People and titled his next book How to Stop Living and Start Worrying: Conversations With SC.

Speaking of Critchley, a recent issue of Critical Horizons (Volume 10, Number 2, 2009) is dedicated to him. (And his worries.)

Speaking of crackademics, Benjamin Kunkel helped me to understand (whichever drugs) Frederic Jameson (is imbibing when he writes) in his review of Uncle Fred’s latest smash hit Valences of the Dialectic. Choice quote:

In Late Marxism (1990), his book on Adorno, Jameson wrote of Dialectic of Enlightenment that ‘the question about poetry after Auschwitz has been replaced with that of whether you could bear to read Adorno and Horkheimer next to the pool.’ With Jameson the question has been whether you could avoid reading him on a university campus, or continue reading him outside one. In Jonathan Franzen’s The Corrections (2001), Chip Lambert, a former associate professor of literature in his thirties, decides to purge his library of Marxist cultural critics in order to raise some funds with which to indulge the yuppie tastes of his new girlfriend, Julia. Each of these books, Chip recalls, had once ‘called out’ to him ‘with a promise of a radical critique of late capitalist society’. And yet: ‘Theodor Adorno didn’t have Julia’s grapy smell of lecherous pliability, Fred Jameson didn’t have Julia’s artful tongue.’ Unburdened of his Marxist texts and their ‘reproachful spines’, Chip proceeds to buy Julia a fillet of ‘wild Norwegian salmon, line caught’ for $78.40 at an upmarket grocery store Franzen calls the Nightmare of Consumption, a name to suggest that faced with the brazenness of yuppiedom (as by the 1990s it was no longer even called; it was just the way that almost anyone who could afford to be, was) all satire or cultural criticism met defeat. Jameson’s Postmodernism had concluded with a call to ‘name the system.’ Ten years later, the system seemed to reply cheerfully to any ugly name you might call it. Hi, I’m the Nightmare of Consumption. Nice to meet you!

Doing Modernity is a blog in which A Sociologist Looks at Everyday Life in Contemporary Society. On it, Wayne(?) — who is A Sociologist — writes about Anarchism: A Radical Critique of Modernity (among other things). Speaking of blogs, Aragorn! has one here.

Punk Not Profit is a blog dedicated to honest anarchy and obscure punk “with the hope to expose the masses to the power of honest sound”.

Crazy and impossible.

The next link in my crazy chain is Anti-German Translation, which should probably be read alongside of Entdinglichung and Poumista. A hot piece of gossip on the Anti-Germans is the alleged assault by some from their camp on ‘anti-revisionist’ communists in Hamburg; see : Antideutscher Angriff auf die B5. Those responsible may or may not be linked to the Bündnis gegen Hamburger Unzumutbarkeiten (Alliance Against Hamburg Unacceptabilities). The incident may or may not, in turn, be linked to ongoing debates within the German left inre anti-Semitism, Israel, and related matters — especially some earlier incidents revolving around films (and boycotts).

In Australia, Michael Brull has written a letter to Mutiny zine (which celebrates its 50th issue this Friday, May 22 @ Black Rose) concerning an earlier article on ‘Free Speech and Fascism’. Those responsible for this earlier article reply to Michael in the same issue: the debate will presumably continue. Of relevance in this context is the announcement by fascists in Sydney of the attendance of Canadian neo-Nazi Paul Fromm at this year’s Sydney Forum. (Last year’s foreign guest speaker was Andrew Yeoman, a BANANA from San Francisco. On May Day 2010, two people were arrested and charged by police with allegedly assaulting Yeoman following an anti-immigrant protest he attended with a handful of other BANANAs and a small group of other racists.) Australia First, the party chiefly responsible for organising the Forum, has also completed the penultimate step towards registering with the AEC (alongside of, it should be noted, Secular Party of Australia, Building Australia Party and The Climate Sceptics).

Anyway, Michael has a blog here. He’s recently come under fire for his authorship of an article in local literary journal Overland, an article which has resulted in Overland being branded ‘biased’ by Jewish academics. On May 14, Antony Loewenstein had a crack at their line of argument in Crikey.

In other news, Noam Chomsky has been told, “for various reasons”, to piss off by Israeli authorities (Noam Chomsky barred by Israelis from lecturing in Palestinian West Bank, Ed Pilkington, guardian.co.uk, May 16, 2010; Barring of Chomsky stirs up a political storm in Israel, Peter Schworm, The Boston Globe, May 18, 2010). Inside Israel, meanwhile, 40 Kiwi anarchists have been busy stirring up the locals, who continue to be against the wall/s, and the state/s which build them.

Bonus!

About @ndy

I live in Melbourne, Australia. I like anarchy. I don't like nazis. I enjoy eating pizza and drinking beer. I barrack for the greatest football team on Earth: Collingwood Magpies. The 2021 premiership's a cakewalk for the good old Collingwood.
This entry was posted in Anarchism, Anti-fascism, Broken Windows, History, Media, State / Politics, War on Terror and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to anarchist notes (may 18, 2010)

  1. Michael Brull says:

    Hi. I found your blog on Rihab ages ago important/useful (my view is that she actually is anti-Semitic, but that’s another story).

    I was pretty disappointed by the Mutiny article I responded to (and the response to what I wrote), because they seem to me quite plainly authoritarian. But I think it’s a credit to Mutiny that I could criticise people who wrote in it so harshly, and be responded to so civilly, and both Mutiny and the “Revo Ratbags” could respond by stressing the value of discussion of the issues. I don’t think one would expect this in the rest of the radical left media. Even if I have other criticisms of Mutiny.

    You might be interested – I can provide links or you can just google – it’s not the first time a media outlet has been lobbied behind the scenes not to print the terrible things I say about Israel. Last year it was newmatilda, who fielded private complaints by the anti-defamation commission, and then public complaints by it and Labor MP Michael Danby, for printing such terrible things (singling out of course me and Loewenstein).

  2. @ndy says:

    Hi Michael,

    I’m prolly gonna write something, at some point, about yr exchange w the ratbags (and attendant issues), but I really oughta work my way through a backlog of other posts first. So ’til then, I’ll refrain from commenting. As for newmatilda — I’m not surprised. (But, y’know — long story I guess.) In general, the higher the circulation/readership, the moar pressures… which is one of the advantages of things like blogs and zines I suppose, and some, minor compensation for their relative obscurity. Or within an Australian context — and with regards anarchism — near-complete invisibility. That said, my own blog recently passed the 500,000 visits mark, which is something, I guess.

    Later.

  3. antihero says:

    Dear Slackbastard and other blog readers,

    I hereby present

    THE NEW DEVIL’S DICTIONARY
    Or An Idiot’s Guide to Becoming a Commissar

    The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words.
    – Philip K. Dick

    A

    Adult, n.,
    1. What you become when you finally give up any hope of seeing your dreams come to fruition, of developing your creative potential or of even living in a basically sane society and submit to the powers that control and bore us.
    John made a very adult decision to give up on childish dreams of workers’ self-management and having any control over the course of his own destiny.

    Australia, n.,
    1. The only reason you need.
    Asking questions is very un-Australian.

    Anarchy, n.,
    1. A useful scareword for frightening people into accepting authoritarian incursions into their freedoms that they would otherwise consider completely intolerable.
    Look, this brain implant that allows us to monitor your brainwaves for signs of independent thought is the only thing standing between us and total anarchy.
    2. A good scapegoat for the violence and brutality of every power structure that ever existed.
    Anarchy is chaos, okay. That’s pretty fucking rich considering the fact that wars and other instances of man’s inhumanity to man committed in the name of coercive power structures and the vested interests behind them is THE defining characteristic of human history.

    B

    Balanced, n.,
    1. Any point of view that correlates with that of the owner of a daily newspaper.
    When John suggested that it was not in the best interests of everyone to lick the shoes of newspaper owners, he was being very unbalanced.

    Blasphemer, n.,
    1. Anyone with such uncultivated manners as to infer one way or the other that the function of orthodox Christianity was to control through fear in the name of love.
    That blasphemer says orthodox religious doctrine functions to habituate workers to a hierarchical social order in which they play the part of passive tools. He is clearly the devil’s pawn.

    Bleeding Heart, n.,
    1. Anyone who demonstrates basic empathy for the poor and downtrodden.
    The bleeding heart was not able to fully repress his ability to feel.

    Bin Laden, Osama, p.n.,
    1. A godsend.
    We had to dismantle civil liberties in the name of defending them from Osama Bin Laden.

    C

    Choice, n.,
    1. When used in political terms, the ability of the people to determine for themselves which leader will tell them how to think and act instead of having one simply imposed on them from above.
    Choosing your masters makes you free.
    2. When used in economic terms, the ability to determine for yourself which commodities you throw into the bottomless pit of your alienation.
    Take the Pepsi challenge!
    3. That which must be avoided at all costs under pains of having to assume responsibility for the consequences of one’s actions.
    John made a choice between the contenders for the leadership, thereby deferring having to make any more choices for another four years.

    Civilisation, n.,
    1. The barbarity and savagery we perpetuate.
    We had to destroy the village in order to save it.

    Civilising, n.,
    1. The work of beating the independence, self-reliance, autonomy and self-respect out of foreign peoples in order to make them passive, submissive human resources for multinational corporations.
    The civilising mission brought the heathen savages Jesus, Coca-Cola and Justin Bieber.

    Common Good, n.,
    1. The self-interest of elites.
    We had to use taxpayer money to subsidise the diamond-studded ivory backscratcher industry in the interests of the common good.

    Communist, n.,
    1. Anyone who doesn’t agree with the right of laissez-faire capitalists to do whatever they feel like in the name of making money, regardless of the consequences for anyone else.
    2. Anyone who doesn’t submit enthusiastically to your capitalistic orthodoxy or dogma of choice.
    I think that guy who yawned while I was outlining the reasons why Ayn Rand was a genius is a goddamn commie.

    Counter-terrorism, n.,
    1. The violence of the strong, by definition a response to the violence of the weak and never instigated without provocation as in the case of, uh…terrorism.
    The government carried out a programme of counter-terrorism against the evildoers.
    See also: Terrorism.

    Cynic, n.,
    1. One who doesn’t believe everything they’re told.
    Dude, you are so cynical. Don’t you know the corporations are our friends?

    D

    Developing World, n.,
    1. Poor countries held in chronic poverty and social stagnation so that you can wear Nike high-tops while hanging out at the mall.
    If I developed that slowly people would think I was dead.

    Drive, n.,
    1. Greed.
    The main reason Barry likes to rent slaves to pay less in wages than the value of the product of their labour is because he’s so driven.

    E

    Economy, n.,
    1. The power and privileges of those who dominate the economy.
    The government requests that you work very hard and not ask questions in the interests of maintaining a healthy and vibrant economy.

    Equal Opportunity, n.,
    1. The right and ability of each to acquire wealth and power and to lie, cheat and steal in the name of truth, justice and equality.
    2. The right and ability of each to become a perpetrator instead of a victim.
    It was thanks to the Equal Opportunity laws that Jane was able to break through the glass ceiling and exploit workers as ruthlessly as her male colleagues.

    Evil, n.,
    1. That which is opposed to power.
    I think that outbreak of independent thought over there smacks of evil. Terrorist! Communist! Blasphemer!

    Extremism, n.,
    1. That which challenges the status quo.
    That critique of the totalitarian hierarchy that characterises the average corporation smacks of extremism.

    Extremist, n.,
    1. Anyone to the left of, say, Tony Blair.
    You must be one of those liberal extremists.

    F

    Faith, n.,
    1. Blind, unquestioning obedience.
    I must beat all traces of independent thought out of my brain as a demonstration of my devotion to the faith.

    Faithful, n.,
    1. The herd.
    The faithful walked silently in line and did not ask any questions.

    Fear, n.,
    1. A vital tool in the maintenance of power, without which the plebs would start getting funny ideas about taking control of their own lives and instituting regimes of workers control and self-management.
    We are beset by evil; anyone who does not submit to our orthodoxy completely is an agent of the devil.

    Flexible, n.,
    1. Broken.
    The workers went on strike but we broke the union and then we broke their spirits, and afterwards we found them to be much more flexible and accommodating.
    See also: Human resource.

    Freedom, n.,
    1. The ability and right of the rich and powerful to do whatever they feel like regardless of the consequences for anyone else.
    Any attempt to infringe on my ability to monopolise social resources and rent slaves is a threat to the freedoms that made this nation great.
    See also: Representative democracy.

    Free Market, n.,
    1. The economic system by which the military industrial complex provides massive state subsidies to private industry and the state rewards incompetence and irresponsibility by bailing out failing companies while imposing austerity on the poor.
    The subprime lender handed out bad loans as fast as he could because he knew that when the bubble burst the government would bail him out.
    2. The principle that the ownership of private property is the basis of human freedom, and thus that only those who possess private property are human.
    We had to defend the free market from the unpeople who claimed we were unable to tell the difference between freedom and license.

    Free World, The, n.,
    1. The Empire. The global order in which the rich, powerful countries of the North dominate and exploit the poor, weak countries of the South.
    We of the Free World must intervene in the affairs of this nation and overthrow their government in order to protect freedom and prevent the evildoers from extending their influence.
    See also: Freedom, Free Market, Representative Democracy.

    G

    God, p.n.,
    1. Object of irrational idol worship upon whom all the creative potentialities of the alienated individual are subconsciously projected as a means of avoiding having to learn to take responsibility for the consequences of one’s actions.
    You might think it was the collective industry of billions of workers over hundreds of generations that made the world, but actually it was all done by God in seven days.
    2. A schizophrenic tyrant and jealous Big Brother-type figure who rules through fear in the name of love. Most useful for keeping the lower orders under control.
    If God didn’t exist, it would be necessary to invent him, for the people need a religion.

    Good, n.,
    1. That which serves power.
    We must crush those who do not think the same way we do in the name of all that is righteous and good.
    See also: Evil.

    Growth, n.,
    1. That article of free-market ideology that stipulates that the Earth is an infinite resource and infinite garbage dump.
    The right-wing newspaper columnist argued that the nation’s national parks should be turned over to mining companies in the interests of growth.

    H

    Human Resources, n.,
    1. Objects that are exploited like any other resource until their value is used up, at which point they are thrown away. Have the unfortunate tendency to sometimes challenge your authoritah.
    The human resource was getting very uppity with its questions and its refusal to obey.
    See also: Flexibility.

    I

    Ignorance, n.,
    1. Possession or awareness of such facts, ideas, truths or principles that promote social change or challenges your favourite ideology or dogma.
    That lefty scumbag is very ignorant of the moral superiority of laissez-faire ideology.
    See also: Poofter.

    J

    Jobs, n.,
    1. What every politician invokes every time they want to defend the system of private accumulation, which is based not on the jobs motive but on the profit motive.
    The government is very concerned about protecting jobs.
    See also: Representative Democracy.

    L

    Lie, n.,
    1. A necessary part of looking after the best interests of those who are too stupid to define their best interests themselves yet intelligent enough to vote for you.
    One must lie in order to protect the labouring classes from themselves.

    M

    Moderate, n.,
    1. Any dictator who does what he’s told.
    Mahmoud Ahmandinejad is a violent extremist, whereas Pervez Musharraf is like a fluffy bunny with a big hat.

    Money, n.,
    1. A prehistoric fetish that makes fat, pompous bores attractive.
    I hate everyone who disagrees with you too. What a remarkable coincidence.

    N

    National Security, n.,
    1. The security of the power and privileges of those who own and control the nation.
    We had to outlaw independent thought in the interests of national security.

    Negative, n.,
    1. The tendency to try to develop a critical awareness and think for yourself instead of just allowing yourself to be told what to think by those who claim to have your best interests at heart.
    Dude, why do you have to be so negative about organised religion?

    Normal, n.,
    1. Whatever brand of madness you’ve internalised.
    Johnny found the world where some people had more stuff than they needed and other people didn’t have enough quite normal.

    O

    Order, n.,
    1. Any form of chaos and disorder perpetuated by the rich and powerful. Usually has something to do with the maintenance of the institution of private property despite the profoundly chaotic and anti-social nature of the for-profit economic system.
    Soldiers patrolled the streets to maintain order while the government threw billions of dollars into the economy to prevent it from collapsing.

    P

    Patriotism, n.,
    1. The last refuge of the scoundrel and also the first.
    2. The notion that the greatness of the nation derives from the ability of the average citizen to worship a flag, ignore history where history conflicts with the national mythology and allow themselves to be strung along by the nose.
    If you want to maintain power just tell the people you’re being attacked and denounce pacifists for lack of patriotism.

    Poofter, n.,
    1. One who provides an argument against something you believe based on empirical logic derived from evidence rather than emotive conjecture derived from preconceived prejudice.
    That poofter thinks he’s so clever with all that book-learning and all those big words and all those fancy-pants facts.

    Pre-Emption, n.,
    1. The notion that you are a victim, and that your victimhood entitles you to act exactly like what you claim to be reacting against.
    That other kid in the sandpit was going to hit me and take the spade so that was why I had to hit him and take the spade first. What are you punishing me for? I’m the victim here! WAAAAAA.

    Public, n.,
    1. The vested interests.
    The President resisted calls for a public option as part of healthcare reform, claiming there was no public support for such a proposal.

    Public Good, n.,
    1. That which any capable politician will immediate invoke when attempting to carry out unpopular measures that will only benefit the ultra-rich and disadvantage everyone else.
    We are abolishing all taxes on the richest 5% of the population and making up the shortfall by conscripting your first-born child into state-run labour camps in the interests of the public good.

    R

    Realism, n.,
    1. The practise of defining reality as whatever delusion or hallucination legitimises institutionalised power and privilege.
    We all found the article arguing that free market ideology was the direct word of God and that anyone who thought otherwise was a sexual pervert to be very realistic.

    Reform, n.,
    1. Any draconian legislation that rolls back what few rights you have and gives more wealth and power to people who already have too much of both.
    The legislation to reintroduce chattel slavery was heralded by the corporate media as an important reform that would spur growth.

    Representative Democracy, n.,
    1. The illusion of choice and the reality of a novel and unprecedented form of social control in which centre-right and far-right factions of a single-party state representing society’s dominant moneyed interests masquerade as a two-party state and take turns fleecing the public, who are in turn granted the privilege of choosing the method of their fleecing—the carrot or the stick.
    I voted for the millionaire from the left.
    2. The process by which the people facilitate the flowering of their deepest, innermost creative potential as individuals by choosing their political masters instead of having them imposed on them from above.
    I voted and yet strangely I still feel alienated.
    See also: Anarchy.

    S

    Saviour Complex, n.,
    1. The apparent malfunction of anyone who feels that living in a basically sane world would be sort of, well, a nice break with tradition.
    People who are critical of the fact that the US committed the supreme international crime of aggression by invading Iraq, and that they did it using the pre-emptive principle that Hitler used to start WW2 in the name of spreading democracy, are all the same. They all want to save the world.

    Security Forces, n.,
    1. The forces of state reaction.
    Security forces cracked down on the troublemakers demanding a basically sane society.

    Sensible, n.,
    1. Servile.
    The speech denouncing dissent as aiding terrorists was very sensible.

    Security, n.,
    1. That which politicians dangling evil bogeymen in our faces promise us in exchange for our freedom.
    Those who exchange liberty for security deserve neither.
    2. A state in which everyone is very nervous, anxious and afraid and feels compelled to cling to authoritarian strongmen who they hope will save them from evil.
    I was feeling very nervous so I voted for the guy who said he would protect me from the bogeyman de jure.

    Stability, n.,
    1. What we say goes.
    Dissent was shut out of the mainstream in the interests of stability.

    State, n.,
    1. To some, God on Earth. To others, a glorified protection racket that facilitates the oppression and exploitation of the working classes by the propertied classes, usually in the name of defending it from some sort of evildoer or ‘the inherent evil in human nature’ or some shit.
    If the state protects human beings who are inherently evil from themselves, who protects us from those who protect us?

    T

    Terrorism, n.,
    1. The violence of the weak.
    On September 11 the evildoers carried out an act of terrorism.
    See also: Counter-terrorism.

    V

    Victim, n.,
    1. The mentality best suited to rationalising the sense of entitlement that allows you to do whatever the hell you feel like regardless of the consequences for anyone else.
    We’re allowed to commit the supreme international crime of aggressively invading another country because they are evil and our country is a victim.

    W

    Work, n.,
    1. An institution, referred to by certain ne’er-do-wells as wage-slavery, loved most by enthusiastic pawns and those who never have to do any themselves by virtue of being the ones who order other people around instead.
    I went to work and obeyed all orders without question.

    X

    Xenophobia, n.,
    1. A useful way of distracting attention away from the fact that capitalism doesn’t really work very well.
    It’s the fault of all the dark-skinned people who speak funny and don’t know much about AFL and not a fundamentally unjust system that our lives suck.

  4. Michael says:

    500 000 hits? Wow! How long has this site been up for? How much do you get in a day/week?

  5. @ndy says:

    500,000 visits — not hits. According to Site Meter:

      VISITS

      Total 502,955
      Average Per Day 700
      Average Visit Length 1:49
      Last Hour 31
      Today 696
      This Week 4,900

      PAGE VIEWS

      Total 835,991
      Average Per Day 1,058
      Average Per Visit 1.5
      Last Hour 54
      Today 1,014
      This Week 7,403

    My account is free, which means I don’t get access to many moar deets, and it (ie, statistical infos) only extends over the last 12 months.

    I started blogging as ‘slackbastard’ at the beginning of May, 2004, but only began blogging regularly at the end of 2005. That was on Blogger. I started blogging at anarchobase at the start of May 2008.

  6. Thanks for the link. I have seen no other reference yet to the alleged attack on the B5 elsewhere on the net. The grouplet/blog which posts about it, the KAH, is an organisation solely created, as far as I can tell (and as it looks like you’ve worked out), in backlash against the BgHU, which in turn was created in response to a group from the social centre B5 stopped the showing of a Claude Lanzmann film about Israel.

    Any further info gratefully received!

  7. Duncan says:

    This is a translation of the B5 statement that appeared on the Leftist Trainspotters list:

    In the night before Monday (13.5.10) so-called anti-Germans of the “Alliance against Hamburg unacceptabilities” smashed a B5 window with a bottle after a movie showing by a women’s group. Several persons from B5 saw the anti-German who is known to us run away towards “Kleine Pause” [transl.: a diner on the corner near B5]. At another corner, two more anti-Germans were waiting and standing guard. The comrades of B5 caught up with the bottle-thrower at “Kleine Pause”, but were awaited there by more anti-Germans of the “Alliance against Hamburg unacceptabilities”. Then minor skirmishes took place. The anti-Germans insulted the comrades of B5 in a homophobic and sexist way. Among other things the bottle-thrower said “Cunt, I’m gonna fuck you in the ass”. Another comrade was “greeted” by him with “Sieg Heil!”.

    People from B5 were called “Sons of bitches”, “Retards” and “Worse than nazis”.

    After the anti-Germans became more aggressive and the situation more confusing, several St. Pauli fans interfered. They quickly grasped the situation and pushed several anti-Germans away. Later, those fans of St. Pauli apologised for the anti-Germans’ behavior because they knew some of that persons. An anti-German woman stood out by bodily attacking a [female] B5 comrade. After several of her attempts were thwarted, she retreated to the other anti-Germans.

    When the police arrived, the comrades went back to B5. After some time the bottle-thrower came to B5 again and said he wanted to discuss, but then started to use coarse language against several B5 comrades again. In the meantime several of them [anti-Germans] stayed around and attempted to hide. The comrades went back into B5 and left the bottle-thrower standing, seeing no need to talk to these people.

    The direct anti-German attack against left free spaces is a new form of conflict. They outed themselves as anti-leftists once again and increasingly show their true face. Even if some anti-Germans move around in the “scene”, they are not part of a progressive left. They have thrown overboard fundamental positions of an emancipatory left and turned their backs on antiracism, anticapitalism and internationalism. They also increasingly work against the anti-militarist movement. They position themselves on the rulers’ side and want to be a “tearing-down operation of the left” [transl.: self-description of “Bahamas”, a hardcore-antigerman magazine]. Recently Hamburg anti-Germans cooperate with the police more often. They give comrades’ names and addresses to the state’s repression apparatus. For us as leftists cooperation with organs of repression is not a possibility. Therefore we must and will defend our free spaces ourselves.

    Internationalist Centre B5
    May 2010

    I have no idea of the politics of the B5 Centre but it’s pretty obvious that regardless of how quaint and interesting some of their ideas are Anti-Germans are absolutely mental.

  8. sensible leftists in hamburg (still the majority on the left there) avoid to cooperate with both the B5 & the surrounding groups like SoL, KAH & TAN (animal right weirdos who were “anti-germans” 12 years ago) and with the majority of the anti-german groups, both scenes desperately need each other for justifying their crap and to strengthen their identity

    the best text on the recent conflicts in Hamburg so far is in my opinion Szeneperistaltik: Gegen linken Konservatismus – zum ständigen Gezänk zwischen Antideutschen und Antiimps by the comrades of the Anarchistische Gruppe/Rätekommunisten (AG/R) … but this text is only available in German so far

  9. @ndy says:

    machinecraptranslation:

    Szeneperistaltik against left conservatism – to the constant squabbling between anti-German and Antiimps of anarchistic group / council communist (AG/R), January, 2010

    the discussions in the suite of the prevention of the film „ Pourqoi Israel? “ from Claude Lanzmann in October, ’09 in the Hamburg stage cinema B-Movie, the no more countable papers and statements for it or against it, above all of course against it, the anti-German demo with 350 participants and the almost worldwide sensation which has released the angry shouting around this brainless action the not at all foreseeable results for the Hamburg left are triggers to write down the following.

    Before the B-Movie and subsequently a conflict smoldering for many years escalated, that is marked by the mutual attempt to silence of two currents each other. Verbally and now and then also physically with primitive means delivered squabbling from anti-Germans and Antiimps dominates sometimes more, sometimes less discussions and practise of the radical lefts – and hinders them with it terrifically. Time more, sometimes less succeeds to one of the wings in clamping other political currents for itself. We could calm down with the fact that here enter spiritual need with intellectual misery a self-destructive symbiosis. At last both sides denounce themselves with her cracked positions themselves, could make no difference to us, if, if her discussion would not far become in the left hineinwirken – as the broadly carried call has pointed to the anti-German demo on 13.12.

    It should be at this point not about the concrete discussion, but we will criticize behaviour patterns and mental patterns which are widespread in the local lefts. In this we see the real causes for the fact that the denunciation of the objective discussion is preferred that one at best ignores himself and, if the worst comes to the worst, the fists fly. In a time in which it seems as if we could never reach our purposes, the interest shifts to Nebenschauplätze in which then all strength is put. After the motto if we cannot already change the bad of this society we want to push through at least in own scene our moral images. The comrade-in-arms of a different way of thinking suddenly finds himself in the role of the primary political opponent.

    Dogmatism and Verächtlichmachung of other positions

    left conservatism expresses themselves in the axiom, only own point of view is the only right and all the other positions are real no more on the left (as a rule anti-semitic or proimperialistic). One reads in addition once anti-German texts. The authors there stylize themselves voluble to know-alls and intellectual Alles-Zermalmern who have recognized the anti-Semitism supposedly being rife in the lefts as only ones and have criticized. Where a criticism in one-sided and thick-skinned (because under Außerachtlassen of own location, Palestine solidarity is urgent since to the land of the Shoah) they turn around their argumentation pattern and require an uncritical solidarity with Israel as the shelter site for the victims of the anti-Semitism. They fade out with the fact that Israel is just not only a refuge for Jews and Jews, but also a quite normal nation state and desweiteren a state which has an interest in it (however, by no means only for it is to be held responsible) that he does not live yet in peace with his neighbors. Israel is a historical necessity, nevertheless, there is no cause Israel to glorify.

    The anti-German informers of every left opponent use the anti-Semitism reproach so inflationarily that he has lost every dividing sharpness and analytic quality in her argumentation, without they would notice that. Exactly looked anti-Germans play down in this manner the really existing anti-Semitism.

    But also her self-selected Contrepart (selfchosen by both sides), the so-called. Antiimps (after the present use of this concept for followers of a very traditional and mostly uncritical solidarity with the most different anti-imperialistic movements worldwide), is a little more than the other side of this medallion: The analyses which arise from her murky world of thought are a tepid infusion of comparable views of the 1980s. They are the Antiimps virtually forever valid truth. New aspects and criticism are not merely rejected by them, rather it has the appearance as if was not only thought about them at all. To the critical – even if certainly right – discourse about sense and nonsense of “people’s freeing” or “anti-zionism” they have not always strictly refused to go along and deliver in her publications, hence, an always stale, overcome impression. Criticism of tradierten views in the lefts is taken only to the knowledge to win ammunition for own explanations against the critics. Therefore, discussion papers from these circles not only enormously angestaubt, but look just also ignorant. And a visit in the B5 has somewhat of a time trip in the past.

    This spectrum faces to more modern forms of the anti-Semitism helplessly: The comparison cited over and over again here of single facets of the Israeli occupation politcy with the crimes of the German fascism encourages letzendlich all those which would like to play down the German crimes with the “knowledge” where, nevertheless, differently it goes likewise rather horribly to the thing. It was never taken in these circles to the knowledge, how much the NS-Vergleicherei serves in the German population of a debt defense.

    Moral Rigorismus

    both sides are marked in her statements and her action very morally and far less than they themselves to itself with pleasure explain from a critical society analysis. Behind her siding with a side in each case of the Israel Palestine conflict discussions disappear in our society, indeed, not completely, however, become the secondary phenomenon. The morally sound siding either for the Palestinians or the Israelis leads to a decision of an acting Middle East conflict in the FRG how he could not be more absurdly. Both sides hide behind nation states resp. Nation state foundation organizations and are caught in derem middle-class thinking. On one side glorification of the imperialistic states as a “civilization”, on the other side an absolutely got run down half Marxism which runs out at best to the support of state-capitalistic miserable management. The impression suggests itself that, the more action-incapable and socially marginalisierter the German left is, the lauthalser the anti-German Antiimp quarrel is able to crowd in the center.

    Search for identity

    the middle-class society generates constantly anew Konformität – only who takes part and consent is stated her accepted member – all the others expose themselves to the danger to be pushed away in a fringe existence. On the other side exclusively „ gray mass “ is dull (and with it also damaging to business), so that constantly the call becomes after the special, only kinds according to which the singles or the singles (she) have to show. Thus the called individuality becomes the manner, the Distinktion for the purpose social participating. The possibilities of the affiliation too all kinds of scenes, the offer of various fashions to select under an immense number of hobbies or the Anhängens in traditions, help outwardly to show a personality (just also where none exists).

    Beside many other variations, to get an image as a pseudo-individual sign, does – what sounds at first absurd – also left policy unspoken offers of an Identitätsfindung beyond the social mainstream. Which youngster oriented on the left does not admire the lawless militant whom neither norms nor their state executors seem to interest.

    Antiimps and anti-Germans have to do here quite unique offers to be able to feel accompanying to an In-Group and to differentiate itself from the “mass” also of the remaining lefts. This continual demarcation of the ” other “ is a konstitutives moment of both currents as they present themselves nowadays; if possible there would not be both without this demarcation policy at all. While the theoretical Rüstzeug one too level, her outside representation (in these circles is still too old-fashioned quite classically as an agitation and propaganda called) to unfold attraction, the construct of ideas of the others is too absurd to get by without identitäre motivations of the Mitmachens.

    Both currents have developed own, unmistakeable appearance. While the anti-Germans to themselves moulder with pleasure very much, manage the time ahead, and claim the image of the entschiedensten critics, the Antiimps hemdsärmlig present itself as entschlossensten Fighter against the imperialism. Exemplarily the name one of these troops may stand for the first ones: „ sous la torments “ is called translated „ under the beach “ and rekurriert on the ‘ 70th slogan „ under the plaster the beach “ lies: They just still prospect more deeply and look what would be still to be found then under the beach. For zweitere is typical with pleasure ´ sometimes – apparently, only besides – eingesträute remark if they are criticized because of her readiness for violence within the lefts, nevertheless, this is not so serious at all, mensch has, in the end, also former guerillas in own rows (and unspoken: these real guys are used quite different). From this whole affected behaviour more vanity than seriousness speaks in the political discussion. But: Both need it to hold together her stores, hence, her Unbedingheit and Kompromißlosigkeit.

    Perspektivlosigkeit

    Both sides of the medallion are also an outflow of the present Perspektivlosigkeit of left radical policy. The anti-Germans have moved from it the end that if it already has no purpose with the (welt) revolutionary change mensch should at least prevent that the worst human crime of the modern age – the Holocaust – recurs. This honorable concern became from some actresses in the course of the time in a lobby work for the Israeli government policy would cross and with it of the absurdity revealed. In this country a serious analysis and fight of the really existing anti-Semitism takes place in these circles for a long time no more. They let the serious reproach of the anti-Semitism to the catchword in internal-left power and Einflußgerangel neglect. But also the Antiimps have found her compensation of the local joyless states by the projection of her romantically transfigured armed fight on everything what bangs somewhere in the world and shoots. Besides, they disregard allzugern what there for actresses stand on the place. Nevertheless, it should be natural, actually that if one refers anyhow to Palestine must be shown initiative that the main involved parties there of the “opposition” are just the fascistic islamists of the Hamas. Who suppresses this or defends even with the slogan, these are objectively anti-imperialistic „ “ because they just fought against Israel and the USA, the purpose of a relieved society has lost out of sight.

    Their kind of theory is to both sides not a part of her struggle around a better world, but a hold clutch not to get in the complex tatgtäglichen discussions in the rolling. One estimate it to throw into anxiously academic language with her theory set pieces around himself. Nachwuchsantideutsche have often gone as youngsters to the autonomous scene and had to find out later with her first intellectual walking attempts at the university that her own scene unterfeeds theoretically is barely. In this situation the anti-Germans with her linguistic fustian offer almost to the acquisition of the identity new now as critical intellectuals. Who reads anti-German texts, will find out that mostly with an elaborated linguistic treasure and formulation treasure becomes handled that, however, the contents stand in addition in no relation. Language is trimmed here on Distinktion and is reduced.

    Their Antiimp counterpart comes along there quite differently and however, thus immediately. Also here it does not come particularly on the correctness of that what says mensch (or sells on a tick), but on how it is reported. Where the image of the toughened, his self-foolproof fighter should be presented, the theory must correspond to him. Their contents have not changed for soon 100 years, apart from an update in the ‘ 70th, her truth are always resemble, eternal ones. The Leninism beloved there or Maoism becomes on useful formulae ´ runtergebrochen. If, however, a theory building was not changed since several decades, this signifies either, the world has not changed, or the theory is overtaken for a long time. But also the case should be latter, in Antiimp circles würd’s disturb anyhow nobody!

    Political theory serves both currents only of the mutual identity assurance and wants far less to a discussion about the world in which we live, and how it would be to be changed, contribute. The moral cleanness of own scene, her ideas and publications is both far important as the attempt, to be convincing, to win people for the images of another world. Neither anti-Germans nor Antiimps contribute to the social emancipation. Here not – and also not in Israel and Palestine.

    The thought is foreign to both sides that a radical left change not only requires, but that it is almost her movement principle. As the inhabitants of a middle-class state who aim at another, free society freely from exploitation and suppression, for it self-determined and collectively organizes, we stand daily between him what forces this society upon us, between the middle-class behaviour patterns which we have practised jahrzahntelang, and where we want. Thus seen mistakes are completely inevitable. They also are generally nothing bad, as long as we are ready to learn from them. The will to change, to change also, to revise calm points of view, the political practise over and over again is to be checked and to be left well-worn ways a konstitutives element of every left radical, revolutionary movement!

    Editorial remarks

    We received the article we received from the authors for the publication in this issue.

  10. Michael says:

    Wow. That’s pretty impressive. I kinda just assumed this was an obscure blog that some anarchists knew about and that was it.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.