A_Lane

Reply to comment by A_Lane in Nihilism by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote (edited )

I guess I would only consider for Nietzsche to be, in part, a Nihilist. I like the transvaluation of values, btw.

To my understanding, the philosophy of negation is just Sartrean Existentialism. To Nihilists, is the philosophy just more focused on Nietzsche?

I kind of like the revolutionary pessimism, but, don't think that I would fully agree with it. It's the sort of thing that I would just like the sentiment of.

Out of curiosity, what is the Nihilist take on Schopenhauer? Does Nihilism stem from some sort of existential relativism?

1

Reply to comment by A_Lane in Critiques of Revolution by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote

Perhaps, but, I feel like libertarian Communism doesn't adequately describe my political philosophy. I'm not a Marxist. I generally regard Communism as proceeding from Marx. I am a libertarian Socialist which I consider to be Anarchist.

I don't see how control is implied with an emergent alternative community. It is the case that there are power relations that exist within communities now. Anarchism seeks to abolish power relations. To me, this seems to imply that an alternative community should emerge.

1

Reply to comment by A_Lane in Critiques of Revolution by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote

Why be an Anarchist, then? If you don't intend for an alternative community to emerge, then, what's the point?

I guess I'm not quite so pessimist. I am curious as to what your critique is, though.

1

Reply to comment by A_Lane in Critiques of Revolution by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote

This is pretty good. I would agree with the critique that anything can be justified in the name of revolution, but, not necessarily with the critique of utopia, but, I see the concept of utopia quite strangely. It's just good in my opinion.

I also don't know that I would slander all insurrectionary Anarchists as being Stirnerites.

1

Reply to comment by A_Lane in Critiques of Revolution by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote

It's not necessarily not what I'm looking for. All that I requested was Anarchist critiques of revolution which this is. I've read Zerzan, but, never got heavily into Anti-Civ or Primitivism. I really like Jacques Camatte. I haven't read this yet, and, may or may not let you know what I think when I get around to doing so.

1

Reply to comment by A_Lane in The World Outside of "the West" by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote

That's pretty good, but, you have to learn about world-systems theory then, though. Besides, don't you think that that makes it seem like Greenland is the center of the world?

I jest. That could be the way to go. You probably should learn about what it is that you're talking about if you are going to use the terms, anyways.

I was just going to use the "non-Western world", but, I kind of don't think that that makes sense. Does that include Russia?

That seems to be the most sensible way to go, but, World-systems theory seems to carry its own set of baggage. Idrk.

I'll probably still just use the "West" and "outside of the West" unless I decide to learn more about World-systems theory which I may or may not do.

Thanks for the reply, btw.

2

Reply to comment by A_Lane in No Further Left by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote

Oh, I got the reference. As that text by Lenin is a partial bane of my existence as I am of a far-Left mileau, I just meant that I wouldn't criticize the far-Left so harshly.

1

Reply to comment by A_Lane in No Further Left by A_Lane

A_Lane OP wrote

There's just, like, a relentless drive to some further out there that may exist but probably doesn't which is good, but, being associated with the ultra-Left has just been getting to me lately. I don't know anyone, really. It's just something that I glean.

1

A_Lane OP wrote

Yeah, Marxism-Leninism is really strange. I later got into a Soviet death toll argument with that guy. He caimed that Soviet Union had only systemically eliminated "less than one million" people.

1

A_Lane OP wrote

Yeah, Marxism-Leninism is really strange. I later got into a Soviet death toll argument with that guy. He caimed that Soviet Union had only systemically eliminated "less than one million" people.

1

A_Lane wrote

I agree with some Pacifist concessions to the Second World War, but, don't think that I'd suggest that every Fascist death was justifiable. The war was catastrophic. The Fascists never should have been let in power, but, once they had secured it, they provided a significant enough threat to warrant that war was necessary. I don't think that a similar situation is any longer possible, and, have yet to parcel what this means for my political praxis and the so-called "third world".

The total disregard for human life should not be replicated in those who contend against such conduct. The slogan, "The only good Fascist is a dead one.", may be a good rallying cry, but, it is just that. Such maxims do not need to be believed too directly. Everyone is human. It's easy to malign every German citizen and soldier because they were constituents of the Third Reich, but, they really couldn't have all been abominable. I'm sure that there's a strange difficult logic that would let people see that the Nazis, too, had qualities that were admirable, but, I have yet to discover it, myself. It's much easier to write off the horrors of the Third Reich as being evident of the existence of evil than it is to attempt to cope with that such actions were carried out by people who, to their own body politic, were ultimately quite ordinary. That the human condition allows for such extreme degredation is too traumatic of a revelation to be adequately addressed within most of the West. The difficult, but, necessary task is to awknowledge that the Nazis were human, and, to come to terms with what that means for humanity.

Acts like the firebombing of Dresden, or, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki vitiated many of the noble causes of the Second World War. One should really be careful not to become the enemy by fighting them.

I am, of course, not suggesting that you are really in any danger of becoming like the Fascists, and, more or less have just gone off on a tangent.

Fascist ideology is an extreme form of mental degredation. It's sad that people are Fascists. To be human and feel that it is sad is what it will take to liberate humanity from Fascist ideology. It's fine to engage in the banter as we do, ultimately, vie against Fascists, but, what undoes their ideology is that people pity them.

That's what I was trying to discover. My ruth kills Fascists. You learn something new every day.

1

A_Lane OP wrote (edited )

To further clarify my position as you seem to be suggesting that it is motivated by that I, for all intensive purposes, pass as white, I don't think that it is my place to speculate upon what organizations like the Black Panther Party should or should not do, but, I am willing to put forth an opinion upon such matters in so far that they relate to my own political praxis. For instance, were you to ask me, "Do you support the Black Panther Party's Ten Point Program?", I would be willing to state, "While I mostly agree with it, I don't necessarily agree with their stance on self-defence." Were you to ask me, "Should the Black Panther Party adopt the Ten Point Program?", I would not be able to give a definite answer either way as that is not for me to decide.

I don't think that white Anarchists have a need for or will benefit from armament. Georg von Rauch may be a martyr, but, I don't think that the lesson to learn from the 2 June Movement is that such actions should be emulated. To me, they were just sort of tragic.

Since you brought this up, here's Fred Hampton on The Weather Underground: https://vimeo.com/1365887

1

A_Lane OP wrote

How does an insurgency hold no territory? People exist within space. A person will be at a location at a point in time. You are correct in your assumption that I do not understand how an insurgency exists somehow outside of space. There will be areas where insurgents are. Those places can be targeted.

Let's say that a spontaneous revolution comes from everywhere simultaneously. Why wage violent revolution at all given such favorable circumstances?

0

A_Lane OP wrote

As much as a person may find themselves to be stifled by the hoi polloi, any revolutionary strategy necessarily makes an appeal to commoners. Such tactics do harbor the danger of being Populist, and, I would find for a critique of them to be quite welcome.

0

A_Lane OP wrote

Okay, so, given an insurrection, what is there to prevent the State from just coming into liberated zones with SWAT teams? In so far that revolutionaries are armed, the State will be percieved as being justified in doing so. A few fringe groups may condemn such actions, but, I doubt that a majority of the population would.

I guess I don't think that the revolutionary strategy similar to the one used during the Algerian War of Independence is any longer likely to be effective. Precise strikes can be made without the overt forms of suppression that would necessarily galvanize a civillian populace. I'm not necessarily convinced that the cell structure is infrangible.

Say a spontaneous global revolution does occur and there are enough liberated zones to wage a civil war. Such a war would necessitate military equipment which again runs us back into the problem of who has it.

Any feasible revolutionary strategy seems to necessarily involve an appeal to that the military defects to a civillian populace. In so far that acts of violence are carried out, whether or not a person believes them to be, they will be regarded as acts of terrorism. The only terrorist attack that I can think of that may have effected positive change was the ETA bombing of Luis Carrero Blanco which, in part, forced the Spanish transition to democracy, but, did nothing to advance their cause.

Left-wing terrorism in the 1970s and 80s was tragic, but, it was just that. I don't see how such actions have at all effected positive change. If anything, they provided for the justification for the further militarization of the police and the diffusion of the military into civillian society. Such circumstances are an aporia and not a long tradition of defiance that ought to be celebrated.

0