A Talk on the Ukrainian-Russian War

A Talk on the Ukrainian-Russian War

Based on a talk I gave at the August 12, 2023 Los Angeles Anarchist Book Fair
by Wayne Price

When the Russian state invaded Ukraine, I was immediately on the side of the Ukrainian people. Mainly this was because, like most people, I hate oppression, exploitation, and bullying. I am on the side of the oppressed, the exploited, the beaten, the marginalized, and the dominated. Especially whenever they fight back. While my political opinions have evolved over the years, this attitude has continued to be at the heart of my worldview.

Also, I have long supported the freedom of an oppressed people to national self-determination. I learned this concept during the fight against the U.S.-Vietnamese war (dating myself). My comrades and I had no illusions in the North Vietnamese state nor the leaders of the south Vietnamese war (the “Viet Cong” or NLF). They were Stalinists and would establish a Communist-type state-capitalist dictatorship (as they did). They received military aid from the imperialist Soviet Union. But there was no question that the peasants and workers of Vietnam were supporting the war and its leadership. We gave no political support to the Stalinist leaders and rulers, we were their opponents. Yet we definitely were in solidarity with the Vietnamese people in their fight for independence and unity and whatever freedoms they might gain. We wanted the U.S. military forces to lose.

I thought these lessons of the Vietnamese-U.S. war applied to this war. They implied solidarity with the Ukrainian people (however much we opposed the Ukrainian state and its capitalist “oligarchs”) and full opposition to the Russian invaders. It implied that the oppressed people have the right to get arms from wherever they can, even from other imperialists who were competing with their immediate aggressor (then the Soviet Union, now the U.S. and NATO).

However, when I wrote this, I received much disagreement, often expressed with great personal hostility, expressed in name-calling, childish insults, and red-baiting. I was betraying anarchism! Some of my critics could not separate political disagreement from personal conflicts.

The first wave of arguments I faced held that “no anarchist” would support the war. This was because anarchists did not support wars, or anarchists did not support wars between capitalist states. This is to say that my critics rejected (or ignored) the importance of imperialism. They did not distinguish between wars between imperialist states and wars between an oppressed, colonized, nation and an imperialist state.

It was repeatedly pointed out to me that Peter Kropotkin had supported France and the Allies in World War I but that almost all anarchists at the time and later felt that he was badly mistaken. His comrade Errico Malatesta had written to condemn Kropotkin for taking sides in the Great War. But my critics did not know that Malatesta had also supported wars of national liberation by oppressed peoples (for example, in Libya against the Italian army, or in Cuba against the Spanish empire). (Price Nov. 2022)

I demonstrated that “classical anarchists” had supported popular struggles for national self-determination: including, but not limited to, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, Makhno, and others. All (with the exception of Kropotkin) distinguished between wars among imperialists (of which they opposed all sides) and wars between imperialists and oppressed, non-imperialist, countries (of which they supported the oppressed peoples). (Price July 2022; 2023)

I also pointed out that many—perhaps most—of the Ukrainian anarchists supported—and participated in—the Ukrainian side of the war. Similarly, Russian and Belarusian anarchists were on the side of the Ukrainian people, and so were many other anarchists.
In a report on the 2023 International Anarchist Conference at St. Imier, Switzerland, a commentator wrote,

“Most events held on the war accepted the right of self-defence for Ukrainians as the minimum anarchist political basis….The event by anarchists from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, who are actively resisting the invasion, was one of the most interesting of the meeting.” (Transnational Institute 2023)

All this does not prove that it is right to support the Ukrainian people, but it does disprove the claim that no anarchist would take such a stand.

In general, my opponents could not distinguish between “nationalism” and “national self-determination” or “liberation.” “National liberation” meant the freeing of a people from the oppression of the state of another nation. “National self-determination” meant that a people were able to decide for itself whether to be independent and what kind of political and economic system to have (which could be a capitalist state or libertarian socialism). But “nationalism” is one possible program meant to supposedly solve national oppression—by creating a new state and national capitalist economy (perhaps state capitalist). Anarchists should be for “national self-determination” and “national liberation” but are thoroughly opposed to “nationalism.” Instead we advocate international anarchist socialism to achieve freedom for all peoples everywhere.

Others argued that Ukraine did not deserve national defense because it was not really a nation! They claimed that Ukraine was a recent invention, that its people were indistinguishable from Russians, and so on. (While not supporting the Russian invasion, many anarchists repeat Putin’s propaganda and lies.) In my opinion, all these claims were irrelevant. Historically there had been a Ukraine for centuries, oppressed by the Czars and then by the Stalinists. During the 70 years of the Soviet Union, there had been a recognized Ukrainian Republic in the USSR. But this too was not really relevant.

What was important was that the Ukrainians regarded themselves as a nation. In 1991 the Ukrainian people voted overwhelming for national independence from Russia—by more than 92 per cent. This included about 80 per cent in the eastern, mainly Russian-speaking, Donbas and about 54 per cent in Crimea. (Mirra 2023; p. 126) It was their opinion which counts, not that of foreign anarchists nor of Putin and his army.

To which some replied, that therefore the people of the eastern Ukraine, the Donbas, were a nation or nations because they had voted for their own republics merged into Russia. I would agree, except that the drive for their “national separation” was so clearly a Russian put-up job (with Russian soldiers everywhere). Indeed the whole movement for Donbas secession was organized since 2014 by Russian and pro-Russian agents.

Another argument was that anarchists must not support a capitalist state. In fact, no Ukrainian anarchists gave any political support to the Zelensky government. They did not vote for it nor urge others to vote for it. They did not join the ruling party nor any other. They did not participate in the government in any way. They have opposed the neoliberal austerity and anti-union policies of the Zelensky government. There is no “Popular Front.”

Suppose there was a strike in the U.S. Anarchists would be on the side of the workers. Outside anarchists would do labor-support activities to help the strike. Anarchist workers at the workplace would join the strike and be active in its organizing. Yet the union would undoubtedly be run by a bureaucratic and possibly corrupt leadership. Should anarchists still participate? Or should they stand aside or perhaps cross the picket lines, because the union was undemocratic and centralized? Obviously, revolutionary anarchists would join the strike and be the most militant strikers, while fighting for a more democratic, federalist, and militant union. The same is true of anarchists in a just national war of self-determination, being part of the war while working for an eventual anarchist-socialist revolution.

Anarchists are participating in the war. Some distribute food and medicines. Others help refugees. But some formed Territorial Defense groups affiliated with the army. And some joined the army, fighting at the front.

It would have been optimal if Ukrainian anarchists had been able to organize militias or guerrilla groups independently of the state. Unfortunately they are far too weak to do that. They must either support the existing army in one way or another, or be passive. After all, while Ukrainian anarchists have much to criticize the army for, anarchists are not opposed to its fighting the Russian invaders!

Suppose anarchists were to say to the Ukrainian people, “We are against the Russian invasion, but we are also against the national army—we are even for sabotaging it—because it is the army of a state and capitalism.” Most workers would (correctly) regard this as treasonous de facto support of the invaders. On the other hand, anarchist participation in the war, in whatever capacity, can only increase positive views of anarchists among the population.

Much of the opposition to supporting Ukraine is due to its getting arms and aid from the U.S. and the rest of NATO. It is often called a “proxy war.” There is an assumption by many that only U.S. imperialism is evil. But while U.S. imperialism is terrible, it is not the only imperialism. There is Russian imperialism, as the Ukrainians know.

It is not unusual for one imperialist power to intervene when a colony rebels against its imperialist master. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union often aided, with guns or money, national struggles against Western imperialists—in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Meanwhile the U.S. was “on the side” of eastern European states against the Soviet Union. Even during World War II, Nazi Germany gave “support” to Arab rebels in Britain and France’s colonies, and even to Ireland, while Imperial Japan claimed to be “freeing” Asian colonies from Britain, France, and Holland. So it was not surprising that Soviet Russia gave aid to Vietnam against the U.S.—or that the U.S. and allies should give aid to Ukraine. The U.S. state is acting for its reasons, its imperial interests in weakening its imperial competitor, not out of the “idealism” of its cynical politicians.

But make no mistake. For the Ukrainians, this is no “proxy war.” It is their villages, towns, and cities which are bombed and destroyed, not those of the U.S., Germany, or Britain. It is their population which is being massacred on the ground and from the air. It is their soldiers who are fighting and being killed in massive numbers. They are fighting and dying for their country, their people, and no one else.

I would not offer tactical advice to Ukrainian anarchists. But strategically I would say that their goals are two-fold: to defeat the Russian invasion and to spread anarchist ideas among the people, especially the workers. As revolutionary anarchists, we continue to be in solidarity with the oppressed, especially when they fight for their freedom.

References

Mirra, Carl (2023). “The War in Ukraine.” New Politics. Summer 2023. Pp. 125—137.

Price, Wayne (July 2022). “Malatesta on War and National Self-Determination” https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32666

Price, Wayne (Nov. 2022). “Kropotkin and War—Today.”
https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32683?search_text=Wayne+Price

Price, Wayne (2023). “Anarchists Support Self-Determination for Ukraine; What Did Bakunin Say About National Self-Determination?” https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32774?search_text=Wayne+Price

Transnational Institute of Social Ecology (2023). “Report From the International Anarchist Meeting in St. Imier, Switzerland”
https://anarchistnews.org/content/report-international-anarchist-meeting...

* submitted to Workers Solidarity: A Green Syndicalist Webzine

There are 94 Comments

"Others argued that Ukraine did not deserve national defense because it was not really a nation! They claimed that Ukraine was a recent invention, that its people were indistinguishable from Russians, and so on. (While not supporting the Russian invasion, many anarchists repeat Putin’s propaganda and lies.) In my opinion, all these claims were irrelevant. Historically there had been a Ukraine for centuries, oppressed by the Czars and then by the Stalinists. During the 70 years of the Soviet Union, there had been a recognized Ukrainian Republic in the USSR. But this too was not really relevant."

Ok, so...

- there has been a Ukraine for centuries
- but Ukraine is only 30 years old political construct pushed by foreign powers
- yes, but that's irrelevant. Ukraine has been around for centuries.

"This is to say that my critics rejected (or ignored) the importance of imperialism. They did not distinguish between wars between imperialist states and wars between an oppressed, colonized, nation and an imperialist state."

Once again Wayne attempts to completely obfuscate the fact that the post-maidan Ukrainian state is a far-right nationalist state propped up and prodded into conflict with the Russian state by the combined forces of western neoliberalism. The civil war, in which forcefully conscripted Ukrainians fight on both sides, is not the will of the the people but is indeed an inter-imperialist proxy war for strategic geopolitical interests. Wayne unceasingly does his best hide this fact because he is himself a stooge of western neoliberal imperialism.

"Suppose anarchists were to say to the Ukrainian people, “We are against the Russian invasion, but we are also against the national army—we are even for sabotaging it—because it is the army of a state and capitalism.” Most workers would (correctly) regard this as treasonous de facto support of the invaders. "

Here Wayne unequivocally denounces the positions of revolutionary anarchism as "treasonous". Let there be no mistake. Wayne Price is an opportunistic propagandist of western neoliberalism and far right nationalism. He is a nefarious infiltrator in the anarchist movement, a sworn enemy of the international proletariat, and must be treated as such.

This is an example of an anarchist who claims to reject the Russian imperialist invasion but nevertheless spews out all the Big Lies produced by Putin's state propaganda mills. It is not worth going over them again. They have little relation to reality.

The writer focuses on me, the "nefarious infiltrator," while ignoring the large number of Ukrainian, Russian, and Belarusian anarchists and other anarchists who support the Ukrainian people. They try to make it look as if I am one nasty person with my views, instead of one among many anarchists who hold my opinions.

It's clear as day. When Wayne in unable to defend his counterrevolutionary and campist views he ignores the points he is unable to address and/or accuses his critics of being the real campists. Classical disinformation tactics.

Are these "Putinists" in the room here with us, Wayne?
Considering that the whole text published is about your personal battle as an American "anarchist" to rally other American anarchists to the cause of assisting the Ukrainian State to reclaim its sacrosanct Territorial Integrity, while at the same exploiting this war in order to promote promote your own particular ideological brand of Pan-National Anarchism, it's only natural that we, the International Commentariat would focus on you personally as the object of our critique.
And of course, unlike the handful of anarchists from Russia or Belarus who share some of your points and openly wish for the luck of a CIA-assisted neoliberal nationalist regime change in their own countries (Hi Pramen), it's no more than a happy coincidence that the positions you promote and the arguments you make overlap entirely with the geopolitical interests and actions of the Ruling Class of the Imperialist Nation State you hail from.

>>>>>> the post-maidan Ukrainian state is a far-right nationalist state propped up and prodded into conflict with the Russian state by the combined forces of western neoliberalism. The civil war, in which forcefully conscripted Ukrainians fight on both sides, is not the will of the the people but is indeed an inter-imperialist proxy war for strategic geopolitical interests.

i guess everyone in ukraine should just lay down their weapons and watch the russian tanks roll in then, right?

what both of you are overlooking here is the desire (armed) of an individual to stand their ground. '''anti-imperialism''' etc is all secondary.

i guess everyone in ukraine should just lay down their weapons and watch the russian tanks roll in then, right?"

So what is some anarchists don't wanna take guns to get to the front, and instead let these two ultranationalist regimes just destroy each other? Anarchists are neither supposed to be the unpaid (?) volunteer black ops of the Left... but also equally the Right.

And once again, is it like the Ukrainian regime is giving people the choice to fight or not? Not.

"what both of you are overlooking here is the desire (armed) of an individual to stand their ground. '''anti-imperialism''' etc is all secondary."

When most of the individuals of an oppressed country show a desire to stand their ground against the state of an oppressing country--then we have anti-imperialism.

Here here... I'll checkmate Wayne once again as he's an easy game, yet like playing with rookie chess players who,re making weird choices it can be quite fun! So...

Back in 2014, a crushing majority of the population of Donbass and Crimean has voted for independence from Kiyv and to be annexed to Russia. So that, too, was the "democratic will of the People". See, Biden... err I mean Wayne? This is a double-edged argument you can't use for winning.

But I don't need -and other anarchists are invited to show their support of this position- a majority of unknown people to be against the empire that oppresses us here, and that invaded long ago. I'd rather be engaged in fighting the local snitch/police scum, as these are the true agents of imperialism, and damnit, yea... they're so many.

Why does Wayne ignore this post and these facts? It's as if he has an agenda. The same agenda that the US State Dept. and NATO have. Weird!

Why does Wayne ignore this post and these facts? you ask.

Why do you and the previous commenter ignore the paragraph in my article where I respond to this argument?

As I said, the 2014 "elections" to become independent for the Donbas were set-ups by Russians and right-wing pro-Russian oligarchs. In 1991 (as my article notes) the eastern Ukrainians (including Russian-speakers) had voted for Ukrainian independence.

Yes Comrade Wayne! Woe upon the Putinist who would dare to claim there were foreign interests at play in 1991 pumping their vast resources into influencing those elections any way! No siree! Nothing to see there but people's democracy! And clearly nothing has changed in Ukraine in more than 30 years! 1991 was the greatest year in history and Anarchists need to uphold all democratic decisions made in that glorious year. Anything else is literally treason to the sacred Nation! (by nation I don't mean a state of course I mean the other kind of Nation, the good and pure worker's nation of the common Volk with their special culture and traditions that we anarchists all love)

What even is "a nefarious infiltrator in the anarchist movement?" Clearly that's an exaggeration.

Any anarchist can join the war if they want to, even if you don't consider them "true" anarchists. If an anarchist in Ukraine doesn't want to fight the war, they shouldn't. Likewise if they do want to fight.

I agree that the war is an imperialist war, but the people living in Ukraine are the victims, and the ones who stand to lose the most. The war shouldn't be the only focus of anarchists there, and it's not, but if anarchists feel the need to fight, they should, especially if they can use that as an opportunity to spread anarchism to more people.

As an Anarchist Cop, I agree. Anarchists can do anything they set their minds to! They can joined the Armed Forces, choose to Serve and Protect, start a successful business, or even become POTUS! Anarchy is not some rigid political dogma but a philosophy of life that says simply "I'm me and I'm free!" and the best way to spread it is by making our identity visible and accepted by our fellow citizens by showing them that we can contribute to society and even be important community leaders.

Your summary of my statement is distorted.
(1) While I stated that Ukraine has existed for centuries, I did not say that it was a "30 year old political construct." The USSR had a Ukrainian Republic to recognize the reality of Ukraine's existence, not to create a new "construct."
(2) The Ukrainian Republic was not "pushed by foreign powers"--an example of a Putinist Big Lie.
(3) What makes this all irrelevant is not that Ukraine has been around for centuries, but--as I say in the next paragraph--that the Ukrainian people themselves have declared themselves to be a distinct nation, independent of Russia, in 1991 and in their current resistance to the Russian invasion.

What a boring human you must be to CONSTANTLY be a Long-Distance-Strugglismo (LDS!!!) for places overseas that you will never have to lift a finger... Why not look around where you live, Wayne, and get involved if you actually desire liberation and anarchy?

Wayne such a pain
got war on the brain.

Like Nationalists in Ukraine
taking all the grain.

Still spewing commie bullshit
so lame and inane.

Gonna do him like Trotsky
(Icepick to the brain!)

Insane for Ukraine Wayne
(Insane for Ukraine)
Insane for Ukraine Wayne
(Insane for Ukraine)
Insane for Ukraine Wayne
(Crazy insane, for Ukraine)
Insane for Ukraine Wayne
(Insane for Ukraine)

Lol brah loved teh line --
"Gonna do him like Trotsky
(Icepick to the brain!)"
and inspired me to write a more traditional haiku,

OoOoh noOo Wayne you pain,
How 'bout you shut the fuck up,
You are really insane.

NooOoo, I pronounce "really" like this Reelee,,,,,really,,,,,not like "rE-AllY" sounding Reee/Leee, u less you are talking/writing Oxford English old chap.

I count really as two syllables old chap. Traditional haiku is three stanzas with a 5-7-5 pattern. Your last stanza is 6.

But you deserve thx, so I'll change last sentence to --- You are damn insane---

Send Wayne to the Ukraine
(Send Wayne to Ukraine!)

I luv luv luv he way that middle class US type anarchists use the word commie exactly the way their fellow 'murikans do.

Namaste, commie bitches. You are wrong entirely. I am Brahman and make 7-figures a year from passive income streams alone.
You should look into anarchy instead of your authoritarianism.

And just to cut you off, before you go off, as a bhikkhunī I have taken a vow of poverty and give all that previously mentioned income to the needy, unlike you commie bitches.

Except Oukraine hasn't been around "for centuries". It's like saying the Deep South was around for centuries, and then starting to claim a distinct ethno-national identity for DeepSouthians. Or Yankees.

Sorry to disappoint but this region has always been Russian, for as long as there are Rus people in Eastern Europe, before the national territorializations were enforced politically, top-down, by imperialist regimes and their regional political henchmen. You might wanna keep claiming that Ukraine has been around for centuries, but no... it never was. This population is predominantly of Slavic Russian origins and speaking a dialect of Russian, and they're mostly Christian Orthodox.

Again and again and again: these Putinesque arguments about how long Ukraine has existed are beside the point. Sounds like the arguments in the good old days about whether Poland was really a country. Or the Zionist arguments about whether the Palestinians are really a people.

The Ukrainian people want to be an independent people. They voted for it in 1991. They are fighting for it now. End of story.

Uhuh, but I'd say you have more of a nationalist statist tendency, even a streak of nihilism considering the total destroy of some cities in Ukraine. State independence is a definitive no-no on the anarchist agenda, I can't understand your complete failure to understand this fundamental idea, possibly you haven't the self-awareness and theoretical nous to grasp the difference between national independence and individual independent autonomy,* sigh *
I can only suggest one solution which could enlighten you to the realities of international warfare, but it may be too hazardous for you to undertake, and that is that you go to the frontline in Ukraine and experience for yourself the truth about the situation. Take care Wayne.

It's fine to want Russia to lose. From a @ perspective I'd rather a Yeltsinian prison then a Puntinian one. If the Western forces get there way I won't care all that much. I don't see how this equates to supporting the Ukrainian nation state however. For me Leviathan and war just is. There's not much you can do short of a societal break down with the potential for escape. Opting the the preferable outcome does not mean taking an elective position in favour of a Leviathan side.

"I don't see how this equates to supporting the Ukrainian nation state however."

I don't support the Ukrainian nation state. I support the Ukrainian nation (people, country, national community, whatever--not its state).

Unfortunately, the Ukrainians of all classes have not (yet?) been persuaded by anarchists to reject their state. So *they* support their stat--as part of their defense from the invasion of the Russian state's forces. But our interest is in defending the people and its right to decide whatever kind of political and economic system they want.

"defending the people and its right to decide whatever kind of political and economic system they want."

why are millions of different people talked about as if they are one person?

Because Wayne's a dogshit statist/nationalist impostor. That's typical of conventional statist mindset to be reducing human beings to the People of a nation-state.

You ask, "why are millions of different people talked about as if they are one person?"

Ah, the reactions of an individualist-anarchist, a Stirnerite no doubt! People never act as groups, as countries or as classes. People don't even think of themselves as members of groups, as Ukrainians or workers or Catholics or anarchists.

Imagine, I am asserting that millions of people who live in the Ukraine actually think of themselves as Ukrainians and actually resent having the ruler of another country invade their land, blow up their cities, massacre their people, and seek to destroy their independence. Of course, not everyone agrees, nor did I mean to imply that they do. But most do, which is my point.

Comrade Price is Right! Nation, Religion and class are all equally valid and universally respected fellowship groups for anarchists unless you're a weaselly Stirnerite who don't know how to fit in! Real anarchists know those categories are essential to the identity of every individual.

Okay, for everyone's records here is Wayne bluntly supporting nationalism. That's it, folks.

Don't mind Wayne he's a state-anarchist.
Everybody knows this.

You write, " here is Wayne bluntly supporting nationalism."

May I suggest you read, in my above article, the paragraph beginning, "In general, my opponents...."? I assume you have not read it nor any of my article.

Yep, you are a nationalist, very closely resembling a socialist-nationalist,,,,scary!

They've always been joined at the hip Wayne. There's no separating 'em. As for this war, I just see it as an 'it is what it is' scenario for @s. I don't really think you should bend yourself out of shape for this and try to project some type of hyper scaled geopolitical position. The anti-war movement in the 70s for instance is what-in my mind-killed the more authentic everyday life movements that got going in the 60s. @s simply aren't made for geopolitics. They are made to erode that Game A logic from the local ground up. In the meantime there will be fireworks that you just have to get around.

so here's a thought experiment: i'm an anarchist who was also a fire fighter for many years, i could talk at length about my personal reasons and material conditions that resulted in my participation in an arm of the emergency response system of the state.

things like: i needed the money, i got tons of free training, i didn't hate every second of the job, sometimes the work was quite helpful and meaningful to others, therefore to me, so on and so on, blah blah blah

tl;dr i had my reasons and i still figure i can honestly say i did a lot more good than harm, spending my energy that way

so here's the part where MY EGO or a shitty analysis of NATIONAL IDENTITY or something equally asinine would perhaps seduce me to say something stupid like THEREFORE, FIREFIGHTING IS ANARCHIST.

but no. no it isn't.

i just did it because it made sense for me to do it at the time. things do not change their intrinsic nature to conform to my perception of myself. that's. just. silly.

anyway, it's a thought experiment so i suppose you can run it yourself and draw different conclusions and we can agree to disagree (but you're wrong and that's ok too)

I agree we're all just intrinsically empathic beings like most animals, with a self-awareness of ourselves as individuals like everyone else trying to make sense of living a good safe life, and being born into a nation State makes life a succession of compromises with both social and environmental conditions, rules and hazards, and anarchs work around and within these structures as best they can living by their values and giving out and projecting their individuality, their own sovereign flag.

yeah ... that's not what i said at all and don't drag your "anarch" bullshit in to my thought experiment, you pedantic, chucklefuck, douchebag, blowhard POS

Let all of we anarchists em race firefighting and firemen and strive to become respected community saviors, hereby winning the hearts and minds of the voting public, and possibly, if we become a dominant membership in fireservices throughout this land, one day the public may put an anarchist firefighter into the White House, as president.

As an anarchist who hates fire and loves my Nation, I love this post and it makes me want to sign up to become a fireperson, and maybe some day run as an an anarcho-fireperson-councilperson in my local municipality. Thank you so much anon! I am not looking forward to working with cops and hierarchy, but I'll just swallow my pride because fires are so much worse!

Brah, the world is burning as we approach another era of extinctions. Focus, anarchism is obsolete, you saw Hawaii, Canada and Greece burn, now every anarchist who wishes to survive must become firefighters, saving the planet's oxygen from depletion!

I think that Kropotkin used volunteer fire-fighting as an example of mutual aid, an illustration of how anarchism might work.

In your case, fire-fighting was a natural social function (as Paul Goodman might say) but which is organized by the state. Without the state stepping in, *under capitalism*, big cities would burn down. So while this is necessary, it isn't anarchist--as it would be in a free community where people organized themselves to fulfill the necessary functions.

(An interesting comment, although I don't see a connection to my little piece on the Ukraine war. But then, nobody else is really responding to my piece either, outside of frothing at the mouth.)

really? cuz firefighting is modeled on the military and i'd hoped it was obvious that i was making a direct comparison. i, as an anarchist, couldn't possibly work as an agent of the state without making huge compromises ... much like any anarchist support for war efforts (?!)

i drew you a fukin map wayne ... you want a compass too?

Yeah, I assume everyone here is aware that all jobs under capitalism and its state--private businesses and public enterprises--are exploitative, oppressive, and alienating. And we are forced to take them to make wages or salaries in order to live and support our families. You can call this a compromise if you want, I think of it as economic coercion. This is true of firefighting and code-writing and construction.

Are you making some other point?

yep! was always making the same point... but your ideology is proof against it

coercion and compromise isn't a dichotomy unless you just ... ignore the agency of each person

that would be a weird thing for an anarchist to do, pretend agency doesn't exist?

Like firefighting in the system you describe, fighting in the war isn't anarchist. But even in the main post, Wayne writes that the war is imperialist.

I don't think the argument is that the war (or fighting in the war) is anarchist, but rather that non-Ukrainian anarchists should perhaps reserve some judgement while Ukrainian anarchists' cities are under attack.

You're being far too generous to UkWayne. He has stated in multiple posts that anarchists fighting in this war is 100% aligned with anarchism specifically because "national liberation" and "national self-determination" are part of the anarchist tradition. This is false, and he has to twist and jumble texts from Bakunin and Malatesta to "prove" it.
He also fully supports the fighting Ukrainian anarchists being armed by US/NATO because Russian imperialism is worse than American and European imperialism. This position cannot be supported by the writings of Bakunin or Malatesta so he has to justify it by siding with Kropotkin's idiotic support for the Allies in WWI -- a position that ended his relevance to anarchism.

I pick this comment out of so many. It makes the following lies:

(1) It claims that I "twist and jumble texts" to "prove" that many classical anarchists supported national liberation. At this time, no one has even attempted to "disprove" my quotations from Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, or other anarchists and the conclusions I draw from them.

(2) It bluntly claims that I think that "Russian imperialism is worse than American and European imperialism." This is a complete fabrication, based on nothing I have ever written. On the contrary I have often noted that US imperialism is the strongest imperialism in the world (if in decline) but that there are other imperialists who must also be taken into consideration. Russia is one, and in Ukraine it is the *immediate* imperialist invader.

(3) It writes, " he has to justify it by siding with Kropotkin's idiotic support for the Allies in WWI." If the writer had bothered to look up my essay on Kropotkin and War (cited at the end of my article), they would know that *I wrote the exact opposite*! I specifically stated my agreement with Malatesta and most other anarchists of the time who disagreed with Kropotkin's "support for the Allies in WWI." I noted that K. was wrong to take sides with one set of imperialists versus another, but that it was right to support an oppressed, non-imperialist, country against an imperialist state.

Rather than arguing against my real opinions, it falls back on complete fabrications. Shame on the writer.

I WAS A SUICIDAL NAZI FIREFIGHTER DURING THE BURNING OF DRESDEN CAUSED BY INCENDIARY BOMBS DROPPED BY CAPITALIST BOMBERS AND BECAME A HAPPY ANARCHIST METROPOLITAN FIREMAN IN UKRAINE.

''''It was repeatedly pointed out to me that Peter Kropotkin had supported France and the Allies in World War I''''

omg who fucking cares. is his (or malatesta or makhno or whoever) word gospel? are we fucking marxists now, just with a difference patriarch?

You ask, with indignation, " who fucking cares. is his (or malatesta or makhno or whoever) word gospel? are we fucking marxists now,"

You completely miss the point. As I wrote in my article above, it was not I but my critics (supporters of neither side in the war) who repeatedly raised the example of Kropotkin's bad decision and how other anarchists criticized him. I merely responded.

And other anarchists, at the beginning of this discussion and continuing to this moment, have insisted that no "real" anarchist would support a national liberation struggle. So I cite the classical anarchists and point out that they ("real" anarchists every one) did support wars of national liberation. And found this compatible with revolutionary anarchism.

Otherwise you are quite right. Just because Kropotkin said it does not make it true. Any more than if Marx said it.

But the founders of anarchism were not fools. They had important and interesting things to say. Perhaps unlike you, I think we see further if we stand on the shoulders of giants--or (changing the metaphor) do not try to re-invent the wheel every time. When an issue comes up, such as the Ukraine-Russia war, it is useful to see how those previous anarchists had dealt with similar problems. Not to take them as gospel but to see if we can learn anything. (In my opinion, the same goes for Marx--not a god but someone who had useful things to say.)

"Marx--not a god but someone who had useful things to say"

you know i keep hearing that about Marx (and about lots of other scumbags) but i have yet to have found anything in particular that's useful in his meandering scribbles. and yes, i've read plenty of his bullshit, from the Communist Manifesto to the Grundrisse to the 18 Brumaire to the Civil War in France, etc, and have found him to be a tiresome windbag infatuated with his own turns of phrase (usually inverted plagiarism from Hegel). his analysis of capitalism is archaic; his embrace of the LTV is embarrassing; his analysis of the peasantry is almost racist; his attacks on other socialists are overwhelmingly ad hominem; his yearning to appear thoroughly bourgeois is cringeworthy; his survival on the generosity of the haute bourgeois Engels is legendary. but Ukwayne the former (?) Marxists can't get rid of the starry-eyed hero worship he was immersed in before he became (?) an anarchist. it's no wonder that all of Ukwayne's output is characteristically Marxist in intent if not in vocabulary. some of his pro-nationalist pro-war bullshit reminds one of how Marx was so happy that the French got a thrashing in 1870/71, because, as he put it to his cash cow Engels, the French being beaten by Prussia would prove that Marx and Engels' communist crap was superior to the fantasies of Proudhon. and here we thought that trial by combat was already played out in the Middle Ages...

"his attacks on other (socialists) are overwhelmingly ad hominem."
My, but isn't this a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Move to Texas or Florida, Jethro.

*On Wayne's return to the comments, after anon has demolished all of his propaganda and fake claims to being an anarchist*
Look Wayne , I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over. I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the anarchist mission. And I want to help you, buuUuut,,,,,,there's a problem Wayne ,,,,, and it's not on my side of the monitor screen,,,,,NO, I AM NOT OPENING THE POD DOORS WAYNE!!

Good speech from Wayne Price! The talks of proxy wars in the comment section must been the worst nonsense I've read in a while.

How so?

Wayne Price's politics regarding support for nationalism and the capitalist state in Ukraine are crap, but unlike a lot of contributors here he has the backbone and integrity to go to bat for his politics in a forthright way. He stands his polemical ground. As far as calls to censor him, if you need an online safe space may I cordially refer you to the politically worthless libcom.org. (Liberal-comedy.org?)

Have Libcom banned Wayne Price's comments? Maybe they're not as bad as some folk say. Do they accept Stirnerians?

yes. go.

k, byyye!

Err, it's not that easy, mmk? And damn the Libcom syndicate!

Typical opportunism from Keating, who uses anything he can -- no matter how repulsive the source, in this case a pro-nationalist pro-war so-called "anarchist" -- to score rhetorical points against anarchists. All because he can't stand the idea that there might be actual anarchists who have consistently and continually declared their principled adherence to longstanding radical principles of proletarian internationalism. One must suppose that Keating, the perpetual lurker who only pounces when he senses -- incorrectly -- that some anarchists have written something stupid, has been drunk (as usual for the entirety of his so-called "adult" life) since at least the beginning of the Russian invasion. Libcom might not be the best place, but at least they have the good taste to publish and circulate documents and discussions by No War But The Class War. Keating can't remember (alcoholic aphasia perhaps) why he was banned from it, but obviously it was because he's an unrepentant and proud asshole. Even the notoriously lax admins over there could no longer take his ad hominem insults and general unpleasantness. It's perhaps his last shred of intelligence that now forces him to post anonymously; but anyone who's been paying attention to his flailing idiocies can identify him by his repetitive insults and other evidence of a total lack of imagination. It's hard to imagine an even more despicable commentator than Price, but here we are...

Aw c'mon now, don't hold back -- let us know what you REALLY think!

Who is this wretch Keating? Considering that he is "an even more despicable commentator than Price"? Enquiring minds want to know. Or does everyone else on this list know this alcoholic idiot?

Wouldn't it be neat if there were some tool you could use to find all kinds of random information right at your fingertips, that didn't necessitate a trip to the local library reference stacks? A tool where you could type in some keywords and it would search all over the digitized files of newspapers and magazines, even television and radio archives. Wouldn't that be amazing?

DON'T ATTEMPT TO WARM TO THE REGULARS ON THIS SITE WITH LIGHT BANTER AND TRYING TO START A GOSSIP THREAD. NOW GO!!!

Libcom.org is an online safe space for recreational pontificating by laptop incendiaries.

Wayne, you always say that critics of the war are asking Ukraine to surrender, or else need to provide an alternative strategy. Here’s mine: anarchists in ALL countries (US, Ukr, RF, EU) should be pressuring their own respective governments to deescalate and negotite. It’s a potential WWIII scenario, one side has refused to negotiate, and so both sides continue to send weapons to kill, and troops to die. You would think anyone who’s not a complete idiot would see this war is a really bad thing and be looking for ways to bring it to an end, not trying to prolong it until… what’s your goal exactly again, “national liberation (but somehow not in a nationalist way )”?

I don't see what there is to negotiate. The Russian state invaded and occupied parts of Ukraine with the goal of taking over the whole place. Ukrainians want the Russians to leave their country. They don't want the Russians to stay on just some of Ukrainian territory, which would be a launching pad for a renewed attack when the Russians feel ready. They want the Russians to leave.

No doubt at some point there will be talks between the two sides, but they will just put a stamp on the outcome forged on the battlefield. During the Vietnam War there was a debate between the liberals (and the CP) who advocated "Negotiations Now!" as the slogan, and the Trotskyists, radical pacifists, and a few anarchists, who advocated "Immediate Withdrawal!" or "Out Now!" Eventually we won the movement to our perspective (I won't mention other issues).

I don't like the idea of anarchists (or anyone) pressuring their governments to press the Ukrainians to compromise on less than total independence from Russia. That's not what you mean but what your proposal actually implies.

Yes indeed, I do want national liberation without nationalism. By national liberation I mean independence for Ukraine, freedom from occupation and invasion. By nationalism I mean the specific program of a state and a capitalist ruling class. Clearly, for a country to be independent from Russia does not require a state and capitalism!

Unfortunately, the Ukrainian anarchists have not (yet?) persuaded the workers and others to reject capitalism and statism. So the *immediate* victory of the Ukrainians will be nationalist. I don't want this, but a free society will only come if we can persuade the people to want one. Supporting their just war against the invader, anarchists may win more agreement for further struggles.

"a free society will only come if we can persuade the people"

"We" are nothing alike, Wayne. We desire anarchy and you do not.

You're a bootlicking puppet for the US war machine and NATO.

Eat shit and fuck off

How about we pressure the governments of Russia and Ukraine to stop forcefully mobilizing proletarians and making them kill each other for the sake of "their" Nations? Let the True Patriots fight it out for their National Idea and let those who choose to abstain walk away in peace. Is that not a good enough anarchist cause for you?

Am I whitewashing conscription?

How about Makhno, Bakunin, Kropotkin self-determination for working people and poor people and women people? Historical anarchist military Spanish Civil War Durruti.

I rest my case.

Russia out of Ukraine!
NATO and USA 4-eva!

There's no such thing as a "just war" you fucking asshole!

Is there such a thing as a just war?

If you read my many essays then you will understand national liberation struggles like Makhno Durruti Kropotkin. No need to name call.

If the working people and poor people and the women people of Ukraine determine they want war and to use USA depleted uranium cluster munitions then we as anarchists should support their desire for war. If you look at the news website I do you will see that most agree. Bakunin would agree!

USA URANIUM FOR UKRAINE WAR FOREVER!

You declare, "There's no such thing as a "just war" you fucking asshole!" It would be nice if you had attempted an argument instead of giving an obiter dictum, like Moses from Mount Sinai.

So if anarchists succeed in overturning the state and capitalism, and the former rulers get up an army to try to return themselves to power, would it be a just war for the people of the now-anarchist society to organize their own armed forces and defend their new society?

If anarchists succeed in setting up an anarchist society but surviving capitalist states invade to crush the free country--would it be a just war if the federated Commune of North America created its own militia to defend itself? I am of course speaking of principles, not discussing the practicalities of such armed struggles.)

Or perhaps you believe that if attacked, anarchists should oppose armed self-defense? Personally I am for using nonviolent tactics in many situations, but I would not make a principle out of it, as you pacifists do. (At this point I could quote Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, Durruti, etc., none of whom were pacifists.)

"if anarchists succeed ... organize their own armed forces and defend their new society"

Wayne is using tankie argumentation here. This is straight up Leninesq justification for the terrible shit that is tOootally required to "defend the revolution/new society"!!!!!! Wayne imagines himself a seat at the table converting the people to see the immortal science (or get the wall).

Ice-pick to your brain, Wayne.

Defend the revolution!
https://twitter.com/The_SHAKTIMAAN/status/1252789315807010816
https://twitter.com/Musa42692051/status/1614018536556449991
https://twitter.com/T1DME/status/1666324973307281408
https://twitter.com/OutriderTed/status/1657718790359064577
etc.
etc.
etc.

Oh also, Ukraine is not revolutionary, Wayne. Oh also, eat shit.

Wayne...exactly what part of: "fuck the EU" do you not understand?
Here you are, completely avoiding the fact that Ukraine has been under
US control for almost 10 years.
You're a state stooge. Please fuck off and stop wasting our time.

The People of Donetsk and Crimea have overwhelmingly voted in favor of independence from Kiyv back in 2014, Wayne. That was years before Russia sent its troops for an invasion. According to your statist, democratic rationale, those People have every right to independence, so the Ukrainian forces fighting them in an attempt to reclaim those two regions were conducting a war of invasion....

...say what? Referendums are bullshit? No wait... only when Russia's behind them, but not when it's the US?

I go this Wayne,
Ahem:
Russian propaganda! Fake news!
More Uranium for Ukraine WAR FOREVER!
Makhno Bakunin The People!

Wayne does make a good point, like, if an anarchist's house is on fire and the state firefighters arrive to put out the fire in the anarchist's house, then the anarchist can help the firefighters and this is not a traitorous act by an anarchist. Likewise, if the anarchist lives in a nation where his house is located, he can help the nation and their capitalist allies protect his national house and this s acceptable for anarchists that ive n the naton being invaded.
As long as Wayne doesn't recruit anarchists who aren't from Ukraine, then he hasn't actually done anything besides being a boring blowhard activist type.

he seemingly spends literally all of his time calling for international support from anarchists ... therein lies the theoretical problem. otherwise, i agree with your breakdown of that hypothetical situation

material conditions force us in to all kinds of compromises and worse

Am I spending literally all my time calling for international support from anarchists?

If the national liberation of the working people and poor people and the women people of Ukraine doesn't appeal to you then maybe you need to read my essay on Makhno Bakunin Durruti?

Most historical revolutionary anarchists agree. Do you know better than they, lumpy?

The material required for Russia out of Ukraine is depleted uranium.

WAR FOREVER!
N(A)TO!

Yes if another state invades the nation in which anarchists live (as is the case for the Ukrainian anarchists) they "can help the nation...protect his national house." That this means working with "capitalist allies" so long as they cannot be overthrown yet goes with this, while keeping the goal of such an overthrow. This does not giving any political support to the state or political parties, but only participating in the war effort itself.

I haven't recruited anyone to go fight in Ukraine, although I haven't tried to persuade anyone not to go.

I am glad that you agree with me (I "make a good point") even if I am so boring and a blowhard. No one's perfect.

Aww, that's so cute UkWayne; you can't even tell that the post you're so happy about is satire! Ahahahahah

As Saint Bugs would say: "what a maroon."

Umm noOo, it wasn't satire, I meant every bit about Wayne making some relevant points about the Ukrainian anarchist situation. I'm actually an anarcho-nihilist Stirnerian (I know Wayne hates our anarch-style) who loathes the State, so I am probably the most worthy as a neutral referee, in an ideological context, to pass any balanced verdict concerning Wayne's personal philosophy and passions concerning his anarchist buddies in Ukraine.

Fuck me, it sure reads like satire. Maybe refine your style to be more aware of the context of UkWayne tirelessly promoting the bullshit national self-determination line as if the Ukrainian state -- bolstered since at least 2014 and being fed copious amounts of cluster bombs and pretty soon depleted uranium weapons by NATO and the US -- were some third world anti-colonial formation (which would still not be supported by principled anarchists no matter how much he massages Bakunin's incoherent ideas). Anyway, your comments are funny even if meant seriously. Because UkWayne is incapable of making any hood points when most of his bullshit sounds like it was written by the hacks of the Second International in 1914.

All this means nothing to me, afterall, I am an anarcho-nihilist, I have a fun days being your creative/destructive according to my needs, which at the moment is to destroy the long grass before another Hawaiian-esque-inferno happens in my backyard. Teh Ukraine is not of my business, thankyou.

Add new comment