Comment about some of Our Ukrainian comrades and brothers' position of Putin's invasion of "their country"

81 posts / 0 new
Last post
anon (not verified)
Comment about some of Our Ukrainian comrades and brothers' position of Putin's invasion of "their country"

Your national unity is really impressing , You want "the Ukrainian state" to prevail , do not want its defeat , take up arms against the invaders .. Your Ukrainian state is not the ruling oligarchs or the corruption of statesmen or the semi Nazi security agencies , or dishonest law system , exactly like Putin s Russian state , No , Ukrainian state is a a sovereign state , even democratic one with elections and a Jewish president ... It is very pleasing to hear that even those who supported Putin in the past are protesting against his invasion ... By the way , what Russian anarchists are doing now is exactly what is expected of them : to fight the nationalist rhetoric , against that nationalist stupefying slogans and their ruling oligarchy's propaganda of national unity , they refused all its appeals to sacrifice for the sake and interests of ruling oligarchs , they emphasis that war is at home against those ruling oligarchs not against other ordinary people beyond the borders who hold other nationality and speak different language .. Anarchists would not subdue to governments , they want to decide for themselves and we want others to do so also , we do not believe in elections , courts , police agencies , prisons , national states , or national unity or wars or regular armies .. This is indisputable for anarchists , of course you are free not to think so or want to be ruled and subdue to any outside authority let it be "national" or "religious" , democratic or even "popular" or a "workers' state" ... Comrades and brothers : You make big promises in the case that your state , Ukrainian state will prevail : a Russian revolution and a self organized grassroots Ukraine , are you sure ? You accept or admit that ultra nationalists or ultra right , neo Nazi , is a problem in Ukraine but do you really think that the solution could be more national sentiment and rhetoric and the dismissal of boundaries and conflicts among the classes , between those who rule and those who are ruled .. One last thing that I noticed also in ROJAVA : why do you think that anarchists have armed forces or tanks or nukes , why do you think that Pentagon , NATO and EU generals and statesmen do listen to anarchists .. Unfortunately this is not the case .. You knocked the wrong door my friends

I think that we can now focus on the main issue ; defeating all war beneficiaries and all nationalists of every type and color and religion etc etc

I belong , by birth , to the third world that watched just few decades back an upsurge of nationalist movements that were indulged as "progressive" , or as representatives of "oppressed nations" etc .. Let me just remind you of some of those liberators of their "oppressed nations" : Kaddafi , Saddam Hussein , Assad , Khomeini , I think that's enough to tell the whole story of nationalism .. I and my generation were witnesses of how those liberators oppress their own nations and with what brutality when their peoples tried to express any concerns about their liberators' corruption or iron grip or question their wisdom etc

Zelensky will do the same when time will come .. Kick his ass at the same time when it is possible with Mr. Putin's and all your MPs and oligarchs .. Russians and we , all , will do the same with our own ones ... Comrades and brothers : If they survive the onslaught , it will cost you , us and your neighbors , too much to do so

Comradely
Mazen Kamalmaz

The statement that I discuss here is
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/autonomous-action-the-dusk-before...

anon (not verified)
not from the 3rd world, but I'm with that!

I've also seen what has become of the cries for "democratia!" back in the early days of the Balkan mess of the '90s. All wht was delivered to them were shit puppet regimes with full corporate takeover ad al the related privatization. That, after a decade of bloody ethnically-driven war ending with NATO choppers bombing Serbia and Bosnia.

Oh, "Democracy" did come to them! With the help of the contemporary Ustace and Kosovar Mujaheedins, ravishing in massacres of civilians.

So national liberation tools who keep parroting the same generic NATO rhetoric, be careful what you wish for.

Wayne Price (not verified)
Defend Ukraine! Oppose All States and Empires!

The people of Ukraine (mostly workers, peasants, local merchants, and the poor) are being attacked from outside, by the authoritarian Russian state. They are opposed and are heroically fighting against the invaders. Shall Ukrainian (and other) anarchists declare, since you are not persuaded of anarchism we will not support you against the Russians. You are no better than the invaders? Or should they say, the real enemy is capitalism and all the states and empires it creates. To win real freedom, and to end all wars, we must get rid of capitalism and the state altogether. But since most of you do not agree with us right now, we will join with you in fighting against this particular manifestation of the overall system. In the course of the struggle we hope to eventually persuade you of the need for a new type of society, not just of the need to kick out the Russian invaders.

anon (not verified)
ok Wayne, take your pills now

1- the current Ukraine IS a State, with its own army, that currently is being quickly armed with jet fighters, drones and other destructive hardware by NATO powers.

2- the nationalist parties in charge since 2014 in Kiev have been ultra-capitalists, pushing re-privatization campaigns and greenlighting foreign big corporations to further install themselves in the country, undermining local autonomy of "the peasants" while threatening the environment with massive biotech development, under pressure by multi-billion IMF loans..

https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/22/monsanto-and-ukraine/

http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/OurBiz_...

https://naturalsociety.com/theyre-not-telling-monsantos-role-ukraine/

Where did your radleft critique went, Wayne? Or was that just internet poseurism all these years?

3- without using this as justification for the current bloodshed, Ukraine as a country is a product of the '90s Soviet collapse. Thr prior Soviet republic was created by Brechniev about 20 years earlier. So claims of any pure Ukraine are only the product of ultranationalist, anti-Russian groups that sweeped the government in 2014 and brought a new constitution that's ethnically-exclusive.

4- als what's up with the ethnic massacres happening these days in Ethiopia, or with Turkey's continuing military occupation of Kurdish lands in northern Syria? None of them White Euro Xians, maybe?

anon (not verified)
Why on earth should we care

Why on earth should we care about it Wayne? We aren't in the job of supporting nation states regardless of who rules them.

Wayne (not verified)
Free Ukraine!

Well, Ukraine HAS a state but it IS a country. It is that country, or rather the people who, by culture and history, identify themselves with that country whom I solidarize with. I am on their side.

Ukraine was not created in the 1990s. It developed over centuries, centuries in which it was dominated and oppressed by Russia, under the Czars and the Stalinists.

The Russian state has invaded Ukraine, killed its people, shelled its cities, driven hundreds of thousands into exile, but when asked to side with the Ukrainian people Anon answers, Oh no, they have a state. We anarchists are above defending a people who are so foolish as to have a state.

As I have quoted elsewhere, Bakunin, Kropotkin, and other anarchists supported national liberation struggles. As did Makho, combining class and national issues. And so should we.

anon (not verified)
JFC, Wayne, you just keep

JFC, Wayne, you just keep digging yourself into a deeper hole of not-very-anarchist perspectives. Anarchists have always -- with the execrable exception of Kropotkin et al during WWI and Rocker et al during WWII -- been against war and militarism. By issuing their pro-war manifesto, Kropotkin and the other 15 anarchists (a rather insignificant number considering the number of European anarchists active at that time) ceased to have anything interesting to say to other anarchists; Bakunin was for "national liberation" before he definitively became an anarchist; Makhno became far too enamored of the militarism that constantly plagued his movement and which made a lot of non-Ukrainian anarchists nervous, to the point where he and Arshinov et al promoted the explicitly hierarchical and militarist Platform. Invoking that Holy Trinity in this context will bring you nothing but grief from those of us who actually learned the history.
Your constant confusion of nation and country is the usual stupid anarchist position of trying to inject some sort of (alleged) anti-statism into nationalist struggles. It didn't work in the 19th or 20th centuries, and it's certain not to work in the 21st. Best of luck with it, but FFS stop saying it's an anarchist strategy. It is not. It is *your* strategy and that of loads of Anti-Imperialists (tm), but it is implicitly and explicitly pro-war and pro-militarist, therefore not anarchist.

lumpy (not verified)
how do you know that's not

how do you know that's not some troll who killed wayne, wearing his @news skin suit?

TotallyActuallyWayne (not verified)
How dare you sir!

How dare you sir!

I resent your questioning of my completely legitimate identity and thoroughly anarchist analysis without any theoretical problems whatsoever! I'll have you know this is my own skin and I've been wearing it since day 1!

anon (not verified)
Aaaah Wayne....

"combining class and national issues" is also exactly what the Nazis and some other fascist regimes have done. And that's why you been having "all-Ukrainian" labor unions in Ukraine for a long time, as jsyk the NSDAP was also an ethno-nationally focused labor union.

You also forgot to answer to #2. That the biggest underlying issue behind this war ain't Neonazis but the hardcore neoliberal capitalist interests. On both sides the Neonazis -real or not- have been acting as a cover for these private parts that no media, Western or Russian wants to talk about.

So again I command you, and everyone else to read thoroughly through the Oakland Insitute research, as it's a damning document that explains a lot of what's been going on (i.e. a literal land-grab... and violent attempt by Russia to revert it):

https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/OurBiz...

Energy is NOT, unlike what the mainstream media is claiming, the biggest motive behind this war. It's a war over the bread-basket of Europe, so to say, vast plains of fertile soil to be massively taken over by billionaires.

anon (not verified)
This has an interesting take

This has an interesting take on borders.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F2ES38iUcxI

Wayne Price (not verified)
Are Anarchists for Freedom?

When the posters here aren't making personal insults, they are showing their ignorance, particularly of anarchists' support for national freedom struggles, in wars around the world, in Cuba, Korea, Ukraine, China, Egypt, Mexico, and in Africa. The point is not to support nationalism or to advocate new states, but to support oppressed people everywhere--and to show them in practice that only a classless, stateless, international revolution can end all national and other oppression.

Of course the various Anons are correct in pointing out that the Ukrainian society has a state and a capitalist economy. Very true. Apparently they feel this settles matters. Not to mention the history of economic and political clashes within world capitalism involving Ukraine.

But the immediate issue is that the imperialist great power of Russia has invaded and trashed the poorer nation of Ukraine, murdering and making refugees of the workers and farmers of the country. You so-called anarchists stand neutral, rather than siding with the Ukrainian people in their brave resistance. Why, then, should they listen to you about anarchism?

The nuttiest response is by the person who claims that combining class and national issues as Makhno's forces did was no different from what the Nazis did. I will leave that alone.

anon (not verified)
I didn't say it was the same...

I said that this fusion of class and national liberation is confluent to the kinds of political movements like the Nazis. It may or may not lead to it, but still, ethno-nationalism is definitely something anarchists would better keeping a distance from, as **it goes in an opposite way to internationalism** and especially the liberation from the prisons of culture and ethnicity (that can never be achieved perfectly, yet is a becoming... through the development of an internationalist culture that goes beyond borders and ideology). Just like the national liberation movements in many parts of Latin America have paved way for racism, xenophobia, i.e. the hate of the Other-ness.

Also back to Makhno, what followed the Makhnovschina was nothing short of fascist ethno-nationalism, from the '30s onward, roughly 15 years after Makhno left the fight. The memory of the Soviet treachery and take over has remained indelible, to this day, but equally this is nationalist resentment. So at least there was a nationalist radleft basis for what later became a racist Far Right national liberation movement, backed by the Nazis. About the same happened with Palestinian nationalism in the '30s.... a front for German Nazi imperialism.

As others here said, you're sinking deeper into defending stuff that's counter-anarchist.

anon (not verified)
Also I'll again reiterate

Also I'll again reiterate with that Oakland Institute report that "radical Left" Wayne is still refusing to (read?) comment on. This is stuff that any self-respecting anticap would get appalled by... but apparently it's more important to preserve the nationalist hype, because reasons.

anon (not verified)
Deliberate misreading for the

Deliberate misreading for the win! Nobody is advocating neutrality, Wayne, but your calls for defending the Ukrainian nation (or country or people or whatever other vague term you want to invoke) is an implicit call for supporting the armed government forces of Ukraine. You have studiously ignored that criticism being leveled at you -- precisely because from an anarchist perspective it is indefensible and puts you completely outside the realm of anarchism.
For anarchists there's no such thing as a "national freedom struggle" -- as you well know. For anarchists there's no such thing as supporting wars -- as you well know. During wars anarchists have consistently advocated disobedience, desertion, fraternization, and other refusals to shoot the workers of other countries. Your advocacy for war as a theater of "national freedom struggles" puts you fully at odds with anarchists throughout history. Aside from being fully anti-anarchist, your adherence to nationalism, war, and Anti-Imperalism is disgusting.

Wayne (not verified)
Anarchism & National Liberation

(1) "Counter-anarchist" and "anti-anarchist" am I? Michael Bakunin wrote, “Nationality, like individuality, is a natural fact. It denotes the inalienable right of individuals, groups, associations, and regions to their own way of life. And this way of life is the product of a long historical development [a confluence of human beings with a common history, language, and a common cultural background]. And this is why I will always champion the cause of oppressed nationalities struggling to liberate themselves….” By “nationality...is a natural fact,” he meant, not that nationality is a biological fact, but that it is created mostly by unplanned, unpurposive, social history.

Peter Kropotkin wrote, “True internationalism will never be obtained except by the independence of each nationality, little or large, compact or disunited--just as [the essence of] anarchy is in the independence of each individual. If we say, no government of man over man, how can [we] permit the government of conquered nationalities by the conquering nationalities?"

(2) One Anon writes, "Nobody is advocating neutrality, Wayne, but your calls for defending the Ukrainian nation ...." If you are not for defending the Ukrainians against the Russian invaders, then you are indeed "advocating neutrality." But it is embarrassing to admit that you are not taking sides between the imperialist invaders and the oppressed people fighting back, so you make a pro forma denial.

(3) Another Anon denies that they said that Makhno's anarchist-organized peasant movement was the same as Nazism. Good, but what are you saying? Nazism denied class issues (its enemy was "the Jews" not the capitalists) and focused only on an imaginary racial unity. Makhno organized peasant armies, allied with urban workers, to fight the landlords as well as nationalist forces (Petluria) and invaders from Poland and Germany and the Bolshevik-Russians. Clearly a mixture of class and national issues.

But the writer wants anarchists to completely disregard issues of national and ethnic (and racial?) oppression. We should stay far away from such issues (which includes white supremacy, anti-semitism, nativism, as well as neo-colonialism). They think that supporting the struggles of, say, Ukrainians, leads to right-wing ideologies. On the contrary, if anarchists do not take up these fights for freedom (which is what we are supposed to be about) then the right will--as has been a problem in Ukraine. It was the defeat of Makhno which channeled Ukrainian national feeling into right-wing directions.

(4) Another writer demands that I comment on the paper from the Oakland Institute. It shows that Ukraine, like the U.S. and Russia is a capitalist country, enmeshed in international capitalism, and managed by a capitalist state. This is not news. Meanwhile the imperialist state of Russia is invading and massacring Ukrainian workers and peasants; will you support these people against the imperialist army?

anon (not verified)
"Nationality, like

"Nationality, like individuality, is a natural fact. It denotes the inalienable right of individuals, groups, associations, and regions to their own way of life."

aside from your perpetual, sophomoric subservience to long dead rich white men, ...

1. calling nationality a "natural fact" is so far beyond pathetic i can't even find the words to adequately dismiss the concept. and yes, i read your insipid rationalization of the term.

2. falling back on "rights" is almost as bad. because, wayne, rights cannot exist without authority to define and enforce them. please explain how anyone has the "right" to live however they choose? nobody will give me the right to live how i choose, i will simply LIVE HOW I CHOOSE.

fuck rights! fuck nations! and fuck dumb-ass pseudo-anarchists who support nationalism and think they have all the answers (or is it "excuses"?).

Wayne (not verified)
Are Anarchists against war?

(5) One Anon denounces me for not being against war: "For anarchists there's no such thing as supporting wars....During wars anarchists have consistently advocated disobedience, desertion, fraternization, and other refusals...."

No, like most anarchists I am not an absolute pacifist. I am against all imperialist wars but I think there are good wars. Leaving aside the issue of national liberation, anarchists are for revolutionary wars. See Kropotkin on the French Revolution. The participation of anarchists in the Paris Commune. Read about the Spanish Revolution and Durruti. Are you really that ignorant about anarchism?

lumpy (not verified)
... he really doesn't seem to

... he really doesn't seem to get it. wow! being a bit obtuse wayne

almost nobody here is talking about the dichotomy between violence and pacifism either.

even the ultra left and anarchist fighters who happen to be ukrainian citizens have acknowledged this bizarre paradox or faustian contract of joining up and fighting with or alongside the nationalist armed forces or all the other militias and paramilitary groups that have existed since the tumult in 2014, THAT's the issue.

Do you do it? Do you jump in to bed with the devil to get access to training and weapons and other supplies? Do you make the even more suicidal choice of trying to be some rag tag, principled anarchist militia that attempts to keep its politics "pure" in a fukin warzone? Then you get the distinct pleasure of dying while wishing you had some decent equipment just like the anarchists in spain a century ago.

It sounds like many of them have been forced to make these very difficult choices and I don't envy them one bit.

LOL (not verified)
"I think there are good wars.

"I think there are good wars." --Wayne Price, the sofa, March 10th, 2022

To mods,
It's a direct quote. Behave like anarchists instead of discussion authoritarians.

To Wayne,
How are there good wars? This is insanity from the mouth of a self-described anarchist. This requires discussions.

War on moderators is acceptable.

EA (not verified)
Revolutionary anarchists are

Revolutionary anarchists are not “for revolutionary wars,” Wayne. Revolutionary anarchists are for revolution. Understand the fucking difference.

anon (not verified)
OMG Wayne, you've really

OMG Wayne, you've really shown your true colors, authoritarian gold, blue and white! What the hell drugs you on, or is it alcohol fogging you up so even going down to the mall at lunchtime is like staggering through the fog of war. Get your act together, you've lost the anarchist script and replaced it with an tirade from von Clausewitz.

lumpy (not verified)
Congrats to Wayne!

you likely won't be helping the people of ukraine in any meaningful way but you've unified the @news comments section like we haven't seen in years!

anon (not verified)
LeWayne, amirite?

LeWayne, amirite?

lumpy (not verified)
don't you just love how

don't you just love how anarchists need an enemy to get along?

*sad piano while staring out the rainy window*

anon (not verified)
like archists?

like archists?

lumpy (not verified)
SIGH touche anon but i hold

SIGH touche anon but i hold some people to a high standard and am almost constantly disappointed, it's a personal flaw of mine

anon (not verified)
Weird how my earlier comment

Weird how my earlier comment disappeared, about how (based on the discourse I’m observing) a shocking amount of anarchists are taking a line barely distinguishable from pro-nato interventionist libs. Anarchists hand waving away the fascist component of Ukrainian nationalism and war effort, and saying p-tin is an imperialist (as if some capitalism is less imperialist than others?) . We are at the doorstep of wwiii and western radicals should be pushing our own governments to deescalate... Not finding their own ways to contribute to the bloody cause du jour. it’s very very troubling. it’s campist covid culture war crap all over again. Most of the historical anarchists whose names we know were strongly against wars between nations, Where the poor die in the name of cross-class national solidarity.

anon (not verified)
Why don't you substantiate

Why don't you substantiate your claims about what you assert anarchists are doing with even the most basic evidence so the authoritarian mods don't have to delete your posts to save us from having to decide for ourselves? Mmkay?

anon (not verified)
Because it’s just a personal

Because it’s just a personal observation and if it doesn’t match your experience then feel free to ignore it I guess? Although I feel like there are a few pieces on this site including the one this op is responding to, that are leaning that way as well, so you can also just take a minute to look around here...

anon (not verified)
I think you mean "waving away

I think you mean "waving away" - "hand waving" means using vague and impressive-sounding language with no substance, such as "historical anarchists whose names we all know," "a shocking amount of anarchists" and "barely distinguishable from pro-nato interventionalist libs"

anon (not verified)
I think ANY amount should be

I think ANY amount should be shocking, don’t you? Then again- who are your famous anarchists who supported nationalist wars?

I’m speaking from personal and anecdotal experience, some but not most of it found on this site. If it doesn’t match your experience then disregard. I’m just asking people to be wary. Across online I seem to see anarchists getting into it more with tankies than libs on this subject. If the us/nato is throwing gas on the fire and only the hardcore wingnuts are against it, again- Bad News. And there are some anarchists who Don’t Get It. That’s all.

Wayne (not verified)
Defend Ukraine! Oppose All States and Empires!

Lumpy may be right that I have "united" all these posters against me (or at least against my views; I assume it is not personal). But actually there is quite a range of opinions being expressed.

(1) One writer appears to be a pacifist, against all wars. I am denounced for writing that there are "good wars," and told that no real anarchist would agree with me. (Okay, it would have been clearer perhaps if I had written that there are "just wars;" I did not mean to imply that there are pleasant or nice wars, of course.) What is astonishing is not that this person holds with anarchist-pacifism, as some do, but that they insist that this is the only, orthodox, anarchist position and denounces me for being in agreement with most anarchists from Bakunin to Durruti..

Possibly the same person writes, 'Revolutionary anarchists are not “for revolutionary wars,” ... [but] for revolution.' Oh yeah? Please list the revolutions which did not include extended wars. Are you only for revolutions which are limited to brief insurrections but are not forced into dragged-out armed combat? A short uprising and, if it doesn't succeed quickly, give up? Oh those foolish anarchists of the Mexican revolution, the Ukrainian revolution, the Spanish revolution, the Korean anti-Japanese resistance, etc.! (sarcasm)

(2) Lumpy, on the other hand, does not rule out anarchists joining the Ukrainian armed resistance to the invasion. But he finds it an ambiguous situation. Actually we are in general agreement here (as I wrote in my statement). It is one thing to generally be on the side of the Ukrainian people, it is another to have a concrete opinion on what tactics Ukrainian anarchists should follow. They are in the immediate situation, with bombs falling around them. Should they form an anarchist guerrilla group? Join a volunteer Territorial neighborhood group? Join the official army? Leave the country? That is, of course for them to decide.

(3) One writer ("Weird") criticizes anarchists (such as myself) who support Ukraine. Among other comments, they ask, "as if some capitalism is less imperialist than others?" Well, yes, there are a few capitalist states which dominate and exploit the people of the world and there are the majority of humanity which is dominated and exploited. The first are the imperialists and the governments of the latter are imperialized (not that they would not want to join the big boy club or that they don't try to at least dominate their immediate neighbors). The conflict between the U.S. and Russia is an inter-imperialist conflict (not a war at this point). Anarchists oppose both sides. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is an imperialist one on the side of the Russian state and an anti-imperialist one on the side of the Ukrainian people. So we are on the side of the Ukrainian people (regardless of their capitalist economy and state).

(4) Most of the anarchists on this list may disagree with me. But I would guess that most U.S. anarchists are in general agreement about supporting the Ukrainian people against the Russian armies, while opposing both Russian and U.S. imperialism. (That seems to be what "Weird" seems to be objecting about.) From documents reprinted on this site and elsewhere it seems that most Ukrainian anarchists have a similar opinion. But--and I have seen this too often--anarchists on this list seem to believe that what they believe in what every anarchist believes and that anyone who doesn't agree with them is not a real anarchist.

lumpy (not verified)
fair enough sir! at least

fair enough sir! at least regarding my points
but i'm not convinced that the 1st anon is espousing pacifism.
that's just my reading comprehension, they haven't really said anything about nonviolence...

anon (not verified)
I was the anon that called

I was the anon that called you on your “good wars” comment. I have been to war have you? There are no good wars. There are no just wars. Every anarchist knows this.

anon (not verified)
Also, I am not a pacifist. I

Also, I am not a pacifist. I am, however, very much an anarchist that is not pontificating from an armchair on my imaginings about war.

lumpy (not verified)
yeah, he's weirdly

yeah, he's weirdly strawmanning you but it's the stupid internet.

this one time? i was talking to what I thought was a relatively friendly group of @s, that if anyone did sabotage attacks nearby the hippy protest camp, then it was pretty likely that the right leaning workers for the targeted company would swing by the camp and lay the boots to the random sandals and granola kids, like cause and effect, right? be gay and do the crimes but maybe think what happens next too?

and they accused me of pacifism

Luke from DC (not verified)
I've been in places the far-right would not want to challenge

Some places I have been, if people launched a direct action and right-wingers from the target tried to retaliate with violence, they would get the kind of welcome Putin's troops have been getting. Challenge us on our own turf? Hell, this sort of thing would be a great way anywhere from a pipeline camp to Ukraine to invite the enemy into a trap:

1: set up a strong position that cannot be taken without serious losses
2: Hit the enemy with a minor but intentionally easy to trace attack
3: Wait for his forces to show up, spring the trap when they are "on the X"

Native American warriors used a varient of this to invite settlers to come out of their fortifications and fight in the woods, which were the Indigenous fortress in this case: Bring a strong war party close but out of sight, send small patrols to harass the fort, when pursued retreat directly over the ambush position and spring the trap on the pursuers.

Thus we see this simple tactic can be used both in defending and attacking a position. There's just something about inviting an enemy to "lay boots" to punji stakes so to speak. Even dropping them into the hole used last month for a shit pit would probably make them think twice about coming back.

lumpy (not verified)
yeah well, that must be nice?

yeah well, that must be nice? suffice to say I'd assessed the defensive capacity of this particular hippy camp and found it to be ... bare footed? i've heard of rainbow gatherings that were more fierce. rawr!

anon (not verified)
"Defend Ukraine! Oppose All

"Defend Ukraine! Oppose All States and Empires!"

isn't that a contradiction in and of itself? if it had been:

"defend the people fighting against their oppression by imperialist bully-cunt-faces! oppose all states and empires!"

i might be able to get behind it.

anon (not verified)
Wayne, are you a Neocon?

Wayne, are you a Neocon? The reason for asking is you're doing for Ukraine what Norman Podhoretz and Christopher Hitchens did for Iraq.
Prove me wrong.

Luke from DC (not verified)
If you supported resistance in Iraq and Palestine

Than you should also support resistance in Ukraine. An invasion is an invasion, and an imperialist is an imperialist. All people have the right to defy and resist outside soldiers making "arrests," looting their homes (as Putin's troops are now doing) and bombing residential neighborhoods, and if necessary to resist them with armed force.

Also like Iraq, there is a wide variety of groups in Ukraine resisting Putin. The fact that one of the many groups in Iraq that fought GW Bush later became ISIS/Daesh was not a reason to support the US invasion, rather it was a reason to fight against Daesh after US troops left or in areas they took over during the earlier war. Ukraine has fash as one of many factions opposing Putin's invasion, Putin is fash in power himself and has been transforming Russia into a fascist hellhole for years. Read any of the reports here by Russian anarchists if you doubt this. Take their word, not mine.

So far as I am concerned, the European war should be regarded as being against Putin, his party, and his thugs rather than against Russia as a whole. Hundreds of thousands in Russia have stood up against Putin's war at great personal risk. Just last weekend Putin's pigs made 4,500 arrests in a single day against antiwar protesters. Russian kids who defy conscription and refuse to "serve" in Ukraine-or who desert from Putin's army-need to know the whole world has their backs. Same as Americans who refused to "serve" in Vietnam and burned their draft cards.

Hell, some say the real reason Putin is invading is that Ukraine has oil, enough oil to possibly drive down market prices and harm Russia's oil income. If this is an oil war, than Putin is even more like GW Bush than I thought. Overall I see him as combining Trump's domestic policy with GW Bush's foreign policy. Also, if he does not break his teeth in Ukraine he may get an appetite for invading more countries. Fortunately, his war has bogged down-and he is now reported to be getting nervous about his own future. The very spy agency folks who put him in power can easily put Novichok in his coffee if they conclude he is leading Russia to ruin.

Wayne (not verified)
Solidarity with the People of Ukraine!

For those interested, I wrote a statement laying out my opinion of support for the Ukrainian people and opposition to Russian and U,S. imperialism. I sent it to anarchistnews, which put it up, but I can't find it there anymore. It may be found at https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32559?search_text=Wayne+Price

Some comments are just too silly. Must I "prove" that I am not a neo-con? This person cannot distinguish between calling for the U.S. to invade Iraq (as the U.S. neo-cons did) and supporting the Ukrainian people when they resist the invasion of an imperial army.

Another Anon, proudly displaying their ignorance, declares, "There are no just wars. Every anarchist knows this." Except for the anarchists who chose to fight in what they regarded as just wars , such as Mahkno in Ukraine, or Durruti in the Spanish revolution, or see Malatesta's praise of the Cuban anarchists who fought in the Cuban war of independence, or Bakunin's support of guerrilla war in France against the Prussians, French anarchists who supported the Algerians, etc. None of these regarded war as as "good" in the sense of nice or pretty or glorious, but they all regarded their side of these wars as "just." (And what does it mean to "not be an pacifist" but to deny that there are any just wars?)

Of course, when I write, in brief titles or headlines, "Support Ukraine!" I mean "Support the Ukrainian People!" In the immediate, practical, situation, this may mean working with the Ukrainian state, but that does not mean that we give it any political support. Similarly, during the Spanish Civil War, anarchists worked with the bourgeois state, but the revolutionaries among them felt that this should only be until they were strong enough to overthrow the state (strategy of the Friends of Durruti Group).

Luke and dI are in agreement in this discussion.

anon (not verified)
Just keep walking it back,

Just keep walking it back, Wayne. Eventually your lazy and empty proclaimations will be impermeable. ‘Member when you said you believed in “good wars?”. We ‘member.

Imagine thinking 19th century views on things in 2022 is the radical point of view, LOL.

anon (not verified)
Next will be the loudspeaker,

Next will be the loudspeaker, and thumping the rostrum with your fist!

Le Way, (not verified)
And then security guards

And then security guards frisking folk before they enter the hall to listen to Wayne speaking!
At the door there will be a stall selling annual membership to Wayne's party at 200 dollars per person lol.

Wayne Price (not verified)
Just wars ?

I am not "walking back" anything, just clarifying what I meant. When I referred to "good wars" I did not mean "nice" or "pleasant" wars--obviously--but "just wars." I think that a people which has been invaded by a powerful imperialist army is in a just war when they fight back. I think that an oppressed and exploited class, such as the working class or slaves, is fighting a just war when it rebels and fights to overthrow the army and police of the ruling class.

Now that you have laughed at me (very mature), answer the question: Do you believe in just wars? Just wars against foreign invasion or for revolution? Inquiring minds want to know.

Le Way, (not verified)
Oh, so now your "Just war" is

Oh, so now your "Just war" is actually a morally good war, the morality determined by your subjective preference?

anon (not verified)
"Do you believe in just wars?

"Do you believe in just wars? Just wars against foreign invasion or for revolution? Inquiring minds want to know."

Of course not, I'm an anarchist. I also know what words like "just" mean. I also know what war means. You're embarrassing to anarchists everywhere.

anon (not verified)
trying to coerce people into

trying to coerce people into agreeing with your concept of "just war" is pathetic. war is a fucking racket, and i support no rackets other than for paddleball.

if you are simply asking if i support people defending their lives and ability to survive, what thoughtful person with any concept of liberation would not?

justify and rationalize your support of "just wars" all you want.

lumpy (not verified)
interesting question wayne!

interesting question wayne! the short answer is: FUCK NO, WHAT KIND OF STUPID QUESTION?!?! etc

which is the response you're mostly getting here BUT it might be worth more effort?

there's certainly justifiable violence in my worldview because i'm not a complete hippy jackass. the walter benjamin take makes a lot of sense to me although the use of the term "morality" is fraught.

but this is what classic insurrectionary anarchism was actually about, no? it got mutated in to the 90s thing where it was all black blocs and the specificity of the riot, which kept the violence within certain parameters, arguably on terms the cops would prefer but also it allowed a certain amount of combativeness without the usually young, usually untrained, unequipped anti-capitalist militants to not just get butchered by the state. the end stages of the revolt of the maidan square teach some grim lessons on that topic. anyway, that was mostly the "antiglobalization era" when I was just a baby @.

the original insurrectionist stuff was from further back in the previous century and imo, it had more serious answers to your question of how anarchists would get involved in large scale conflict without just completely compromising their own politics in to nothing.

tl:dr - what do I know? maybe have a seance and ask durruti's ghost

lumpy (not verified)
^edit for clarity: I meant

^edit for clarity: I meant the peak useage of black blocs in the anti-globalization days arguably kept a lot of anti-capitalists kids alive where they otherwise would have been massacred as enemy combatants, should they have ... been a bit more combative.

just my opinion

Wayne Price (not verified)
On the nature of war

To begin with, like most everyone, I hate war. I went to a great deal of trouble not to be drafted into the U.S. war against Vietnam--and to support the anti-war movement of the time. But in that movement my comrades and I fully supported the Vietnamese people in their war against U.S. aggression (despite our lack of support for the Stalinist leadership of North Vietnam).

In response to Le Way, who seems surprised that by a "just war" I mean " a morally good war." What else? Then he sneers, "the morality determined by your subjective preference?" No--determined by the same methods of moral evaluation which people use to determine whether they support capitalism, the state, or anything else.

The next writer also sneers that they know what "war" is, and therefore, because I think some wars are justifiable, "You're embarrassing to anarchists everywhere." This is after I have repeatedly named anarchists and the wars they participated in, regarding them as justified. Nothing gets through to this person.

This is followed by someone who declares, "war is a fucking racket, and i support no rackets." That seems clear enough. But then they announce, " i support people defending their lives and ability to survive," Well, if a group of people (say Ukrainians) take up guns and Molotov cocktails to kill invading Russian soldiers, in order to "defend their lives and ability to survive," then this is called a WAR. It would be a defensive and just war of national liberation. As you say, "what thoughtful person with any concept of liberation would not?"

I think I agree with lumpy, who goes off on a tangent about black blocs to illustrate his views on justifiable violence, but I have to admit that I am not sure I understand him (given the brief space he had to explain his point).

Le Way, (not verified)
I wasn't sneering Wayne, I

I wasn't sneering Wayne, I was frowning angrily, ,there's a difference. Anyway, your
"determined by the same methods of moral evaluation which people use to determine whether they support capitalism, the state, or anything else." That's the problem, " moral evaluation " is a tainted and problematic methodology when determining a personal commitment in actions which will interfere with the life and freedom of others who, likewise, are embroiled in an identical evaluation which, using the same arguments, is on an opposing side which similarly has spokespersons extolling the righteousness of their brand of morality. There are no winners in war.

anon (not verified)
Leave it to a fucking

Leave it to a fucking pkatformist like Wayne to make Le Way look like the sensible one. I hate this place.

lumpy (not verified)
... it's one fukin paragraph

... it's one fukin paragraph dude jfc, aren't you like a scholar and an academic sort of guy? wow

ok, i'll compress it?

OLD insurrectionist anarchist theory addresses your question. know why? cuz they actually fought in wars and stuff. Not to be confused with NEWER insurrectionary anarchism, which was mostly playing in the sandbox of the riot.

was that clear? good. am I depressed by this exchange? yes.

lukefromdc (not verified)
Draft resistance is needed again

Kudos to those who defied the drafr during Vietnam-and to the Russians defying Putin's draft today. Canada yesterday, Finland today.

That said, there are also those who take matters further. Burning draft cards was effective, burning draft BOARDS even more so. In the US at that timee, each draft board had unique paper records, difficult to reconstruct. Also, courts had ruled.that induction orders were unenforcible if.Selective Service could not prove you had not been called out of order. As a result, the Catonsville 9 style raids, the fires, and the bombings made everyone registered with the destroyed draft board able to legally walk away from an induction order. It was as strategic as stopping a tank war by bombing ball bearing factories and it worked. Finally came.the bombing of the Whirehall Induction Center. An estimate 2 million people's files burned, and Selective Service publicly predicted rhey would never recover.

Today, Putin's thugs probably keep these records on computers, and these computers are no doubt networked and on the same side of the Electronic Iron Curtain as the famously skilled Russian hackers. A stealrhy attack to poison backup files first, then corrupt data could be "another Whitehall" this time targetting Putin's war. No physical access nor explosives required so probably safer.

anon (not verified)
Why do both Wayne and Luke

Why do both Wayne and Luke seem incapable of threading their overly verbose strugglismo replies? Are they members of the same polycule? Are they the same person? Is commenting broken on anarkismo? I’m new here please explain.

anon (not verified)
peace protests is the solution to this mess

I think what some folkz in Germany have been doing is the right option for anarchos... Just do anti-war protests. Not dumb fascistic "close the sky/defend Ukraaaaiiine" protests, but simply protesting against war... both the current war happening and the 1000x bigger & more devastating one that can happen if NATO gets involved.

This war is indeed between rival imperialist schemes, not just the result of one imperialism as the Ukrainian nationalists want us to believe. The bottom end at the outcome of this war -if it fortunately ends in Ukraine- would be a victory for either the Putin side or the NATO side, but way more likely the latter as Putin is a tired figure with an already exhausted military.

Luke from DC (not verified)
Threading does nor always work right here

And only displays fully and reliably on large screens

anon (not verified)
Wayne said that individuals

Wayne said that individuals fighting for their survival and freedom are in a war of national liberation. No chief boom boom, you are framing it as an issue of nationalism, which no anarchist I respect would support.

Wayne (not verified)
National liberation is not the same as nationalism

I think I have reached the end of my ability to continue this discussion. However, I will make one last comment in response to the last Anon.

National liberation or national self-determination refers to a people not being oppressed by another nation. (See quotations from Bakunin and Kropotkin in my previous remarks.) The Ukrainian people do not want Russian troops invading their country, occupying their cities, blowing up their homes, and killing their families. The Vietnamese felt the same about the U.S. military back in the day. Anarchists have tended to agree. (See my essay on the way French anarchists supported the Algerian people against French imperialism.) This does not mean that anarchists agree with or support the leadership of the national movement, just that they show solidarity with the people.

Nationalism is a political program. It is a proposed program for solving national oppression. It calls for unity of the whole people (nation) behind a leadership (the national bourgeoisie or would-be new state-capitalists). It ignores differences in class and other differences. It ignores what the workers of the oppressed nation have in common with workers and oppressed in other nations. While it might win national independence, it cannot really solve all oppression.

Anarchists reject nationalism as a program. Instead we advocate a revolution of the workers and oppressed, spreading to all countries. of the world. Only his program can end the oppression of all nations.

I hope this clarifies matters.

anon (not verified)
National liberation is the

National liberation is the liberation of a NATION. point blank. Go back to the 19th century where your ideology is clearly stuck, along with the long dead folks you love to quote.

anon (not verified)
You can try all you want to

You can try all you want to redefine words, it's still an epic fail. The fact that non-left anarchists can have affinity with oppressed people, and even assist when possible, while rejecting war between nations is neither inconsistent or difficult to grasp. For the less dogmatically and academically constrained.

Wayne Price (not verified)
Nations?

If I use arguments, I am told I am not a real anarchist. If I then quote great anarchists I am sneered at for quoting "long dead folks." Can't win.

Look, there are such things as nations, which are one aspect of society. France is real and so is Ukraine. People may be oppressed as members of a nation. Ukrainians have bombs blowing up their buildings, not because they are workers or women but because they are Ukrainians. This is a fact. It overlaps with other forms of oppression such as class and gender, but is not reduced to them. The Ukrainians object to having Russian bombs being dropped on their heads. They chose to fight against the Russian invaders. Good for them, say I and many (most?) anarchists.

This is posed as a "war between nations." Actually it is the ruling class and state of one imperialist nation (Russia) which is attacking the people of another (non-imperialist) nation (a people mostly composed of workers and other ordinary people). The Russian people have little to no control over their state's actions. But if you "have affinity with oppressed people and even assist when possible," then you are on one side of the war, the side of the oppressed people of Ukraine.

anon (not verified)
No anarchist that I respect

No anarchist that I respect as such would care to defend any state, including Ukraine. However, anarchists that live in a war zone need to defend themselves and those they care about. If that means sharing an enemy with a state-sponsored military, so be it. One must deal with the reality of life, and if my existence was threatened by an invading military, I'd be fighting that invading force. If another military was also fighting that same force, then we share a short term objective, and I'd take advantage of that in every way I could. Important points on that:

When bombs are falling around my life, I will do what I need to. If that means I need to coordinate with a military that is also fighting my enemy, I will do so up to the point where I am at risk of losing my own agency. To avoid any such coordination is to be tactically ignorant and risk being killed by "friendly" fire.

The enemy of my enemy is NOT by default my friend.

If the invading military is defeated, then is the time to deal with those who remain in my vicinity. If not, I'm dead anyway.

anon (not verified)
You: "No, no, comrades. We

You: "No, no, comrades. We will establish communism AFTER the revolution and once the people are properly ready. Trust us.."

anon (not verified)
I'm well aware of the Spanish

I'm well aware of the Spanish civil war situation. Id still fight the invading forces, and if that means taking advantage of the capacity of another force that opposes the force threatening my life, I will do so for as long as it makes sense for my own objectives. That does NOT mean I trust them, only that I am taking strategic and tactical advantage of the situation. It ain't rocket science, and adaptability is the key to survival.

anon (not verified)
"adaptability is the key to

"adaptability is the key to survival"

does that spell the end of Wayne price? (Nothing personal, Wayne, just playing along).

DUMBDUMB (not verified)
Perhaps you should join the

Perhaps you should join the police and,,, get this,,, change them from the inside? A strategic and tactic advantage of the policing situation. The cops are less likely to kill or arrest you if they believe you are one of them, comrade!

anon (not verified)
yep, attack from inside is

yep, attack from inside is always a useful tactic.

anon (not verified)
well, maybe not ALWAYS...

well, maybe not ALWAYS...

Luke from DC (not verified)
Only if you are good at spying on cops

Having a few spies of our own inside police departments would be incredibly useful. Since it would be difficult to recruit agents in place, we would probably have to put moles inside. These moles would have to be able to pass police background checks etc. They would be able to collect all kinds of inside information: upcoming warrant raids, police tactics and strategy against protests, upcoming harassment campaigns against neighborhoods, home addresses of brutal cops and the brass, and so much more. This would be an incredibly difficult job, as they would have to conceal the real reason behind failed arrests, not making traffic ticket quotas etc, while collecting information, getting it out, and not getting caught.

Getting that info to the right hands would mean that everything from raids to crackdowns end in humiliating defeats for the cops, while protesters seem to know all the cops moves in advance because they actually DO.
Just imagine the "fun" for an all-out fascist inside the police department to have to raid house after house where he and his buddies are expected, the time of the raid and composition of the attacking force is known in advance, and so on.

DUMBDUMB (not verified)
It was a joke intended to

It was a joke intended to make fun of reformists and their stupid, non-anarchist, reformist ideas, you goober.

Anon (not verified)
Nation Vs state

Nation is not the same as state. True there are nation states, and nationalists would have you believe that the nation is the state, but that is not true (particularly for those nations split between states or subsumed within another).

A nation is a community writ large, with a shared history and culture. It's a loose grouping, that in itself is not incompatible with anarchism, although anarchism would see the differences between nations subsumed beneath our shared humanity (a cosmopolitan outlook) with differences celebrated where they do not conflict with anarchism, and no nation put over another of course.

Nations are also fluid, it is the state which wishes to restrain them for its own purposes.
Even if a Ukrainian nation were a recent development, that doesn't deny it's existence.

I do believe that anarchism means nations will reduce in significance, but I don't believe they would disappear.

Wayne Price (not verified)
Nation is not the same as State.

Very well stated.

Let me point something out: anarchists are internationalists and look forward to q peaceful global society. But, unlike Marxists, anarchists are also decentralists and pluralists. We do not aim at a homogeneous one-world, managed from a world center. We want a world of communities and regions, held together in networks and federations, with differences as well as commonalities. We do not foresee the end of all local cultures and nationalities. This is part of our positive view of national self-determination.

anon (not verified)
Oh right, so now culture is

Oh right, so now culture is cool for anarchists? All cultures have patriarchial and hierarchical institutions and values, so you know nothing about Anarchy 101, mmmkay!?

Wayne Price (not verified)
Cultural arrogance

What is striking about this last comment is not its silly belief that under anarchy there will be no culture--nor its arrogant statement about what is supposedly true for "all cultures." Some anarchist anthropology would cure this. It is the common elitism and arrogance expressed in saying that if I don't agree with the writer, "you know nothing about Anarchy 101." I have spent many years studying anarchism and I think I know a little about it, even if I don't know everything.

Anon 1659 (not verified)
Anon 16:56, There, I have a

Anon 16:56, There, I have a name now, 1659, which you can reference and thus differentiate between the numerous anons.
C'mon anons of the world, lets give ourselves a number o elp Wayne synthesize the myriad critiques he faces!
Lesson 1 Sociology for Wayne, All cultures are built upon mechanisms of exclusion. Ok, take that in and ponder upon the ramifications of this towards equal creative opportunity for members wanting to be culturally part of a society, and get back to me.
More pertinent to the context, can an armed defence force function without rank of command, you know, like everyone is a private and know one gives the orders? Enjoy!

anon (not verified)
"All cultures have

"All cultures have patriarchial and hierarchical institutions and values"

Plz anon 16:59... come to your senses and stop making the Wayne look more intelligent and less dogmatic than you. Culture is anything, bro. It's just the ways people do and say things.

anon (not verified)
'Nother poster here, how

'Nother poster here, how about answering the important relevant Question about Wayne's proposed anarchist defence force functioning without a hierarchy of command?
There are more flaws in Wayne's proposition concerning warfare than the cultural nihilist's argument.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
x
%
q
&
h
D
c
f
Enter the code without spaces.