From avtonom dot org
We have stated from the very start that the beginning of a full-scale war in Ukraine on February 24, 2022 is an imperialist aggression of the Russian state. That is still true.
Our position on the war in Ukraine
"Autonomous Action" is not on the side of the Ukrainian state - and not on the side of any other state. However, in the current circumstances, the victory of Russia is not beneficial to the peoples of neither Ukraine, nor Russia, nor Belarus. Fighting against Russian aggression is now beneficial to everyone except the Kremlin. It is easy to see why it is beneficial to the Ukrainian authorities. But why is it also beneficial to people (and, accordingly, anarchists)?
Because:
-
The Russian state is now the dominant imperialist predator in the post-Soviet political space and beyond. The political system of modern Russia is a fascist dictatorship. It wants to spread its influence further, including direct conquering of new territories. At the same time, the current war with Ukraine is a moment of truth for this political system. If it wins (occupying Ukraine or a substantial part of it), it will greatly strengthen Putin's dictatorship, because it will show that the Kremlin can achieve its aims by violence. If it loses (in any obvious way), it will inevitably trigger a political crisis within Russia. This political crisis does not guarantee the dismantling of the fascist political regime. But it will give us a chance. All other ways to change the state of affairs in modern Russia are not much realistic. Therefore, the defeat of the Kremlin in the war with Ukraine is beneficial to any supporters of progress and freedom, including anarchists. Ukraine (both its people and its state) is now forced to act as an icebreaker, which is at least potentially capable of creating cracks in the ice of Putin's regime. For us, regime change is obviously desirable, because in the current situation anarchists cannot be meaningfully present in the public political life of Russia (nor other sane points of view).
-
Russian occupation means russification of the occupied territories and their population, bringing them to the imposed standards of the Kremlin. Any empire homogenizes the occupied territories and reduces the space of freedom. Putin's empire is doing the same, and its spreading deprives independent regions of their independence. In this sense, Ukraine's resistance is anti-colonial struggle which anarchists should support.
In the current circumstances, we consider meaningless the stance like "both are equally repulsive", "no difference between Zelensky and Putin" and so on. It made sense to cry "against all!" during the First World War, when equally authoritarian imperialist predators fought each other directly. Now, in the conditions of radical inequality of forces and objectively freer political system of Ukraine, such a position only helps the Kremlin to win. And this victory will make it worse for everyone.
For the same reasons, it does not make sense to call "everyone to lay down their weapons." As has been said many times, if the Russian army lays down its weapons, the war will end. If the Ukrainian army lays down its weapons, Ukraine will be devoured by Putin's empire and the war will continue. The war is beneficial to the Kremlin (because it allows to preserve power), and successful annexations only fuel its appetites, as shown by the previous 20-30 years. Putin's popularity is based on the fact that the Russians have never before lived with such a level of well-being. And the war has not yet undermined that. On the contrary, right now high salaries of the mercenaries and increased spending on military production rather brought money to the poorest layers of Russian population.
It is important to say that other states (including the so-called "democratic" ones) have also waged wars in recent decades. But the vast majority of these wars were not aimed at territorial conquests. This does not justify them, but it distinguishes them from the wars of Putin's Russia.
We respect and support the anti-authoritarians who decided to take up arms and fight against Russian imperialism, even if they joined the state army of Ukraine (AFU). This is why:
-
The dominant point of view among Ukrainians now is the need to resist, and this resistance is now primarily associated with the AFU. Therefore, the presence of anarchists in the ranks of the AFU is useful in terms of acquiring respect of the people, not to mention practical combat experience. Anarchists joined the AFU, because there was no other opportunity of armed resistance against Putin's army in Ukraine.
-
In the same condition of radical power inequality, AFU is naturally forced to be more open to non-standard and creative solutions and the manner of combat (an obvious example is its use of drones). This opens up some opportunities for anarchists in the AFU to influence the general structure of the state army (which we do not idealize, and to which we have a much more skeptical attitude). We are not exaggerating the extent of this influence, but it is still a chance. In addition, a significant part of the supply of the AFU is now carried out through non-state channels, like volunteers, etc.
Authoritarian and repressive trends in Ukraine
The fact that we support the struggle of Ukrainians against the Kremlin aggression does not mean that we unconditionally support everything that the Ukrainian state or the Ukrainian president do. Of course, Ukrainians (as well as all other peoples) should decide for themselves what and how will be arranged in their country. But we can express our attitude to some important cases.
We do not support the coercive conscription (draft) and the ban on leaving the country for men. We stand for voluntary army or at least for a movement in this direction. The reasons for the introduction of these measures in the Ukraine are understandable, but anarchists cannot support sending people to the front lines against their will. Until 2022, Ukraine was a regular nation state, with strongly corrupted bureaucrats, social stratification, low income level, etc. It also has a rather unpleasant policy towards Russian language, which is the first language for a significant part of the Ukrainian population. All this cannot for a second justify Putin's invasion, but the Ukrainian state also does not have the slightest right to force anyone to serve in the army.
The interests of any state are not worth a single human life. Self-identification with states is a propaganda wiring that kills people on both sides of the front in Gaza, Ukraine and other conflict areas of our planet. Anarchism becomes even more relevant now, when self-identification with states can cost you life in a meaningless war for murky interests.
But we repeat once again that we are not going to tell the Ukrainian comrades what to do and how to react to certain actions of the Ukrainian state. Authoritarian, conservative and straight fascist tendencies in Russia are in any case more powerful, and Russian political regime poses an immediate threat to all surrounding societies (and because of nuclear weapons - to the whole world). One can fight against Russian aggression without self-identification with the Ukrainian state.
What to do?
We urge the Russians to continue to protest and counter the criminal war in all ways possible, and to use all means to avoid being drafted. If you were drafted, leave the army as soon as you can. Consultation can be obtained, for example, in the volunteer "Go with a forest" project.
We publish anti-war leaflets and stickers to print and distribute. Download and use it.
Do not forget that in the current conditions, the distribution of such stickers and leaflets in Russian cities can lead to criminal prosecution. Do this in such a way so as not be recorded by video surveillance. Use printing services which will not snitch to the cops.
Find more stickers and leaflets on the Russian version of this anti-war page!
Leaflets
Stickers



Say no to military intervention to Ukraine. Peace to people, fight the rulers!
Comments
"Peace to people, fight the
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 08:23
"Peace to people, fight the rulers!"
The fascist Pasechnik, who sent the MGB after striking miners of the Komsomolskaya mine back in 2020, kidnapping and torturing the Efanov brothers as well as others, is still alive and well. Meanwhile, many of those very same miners are resting in their graves from bullet or explosion wounds - and it's hardly a mystery where those bullets and shells came from.
Generally this text just seems a rehashing of the same old line of argumentation, which was already well addressed by the text by Dimitris Chatzivasileiadis: https://athens.indymedia.org/media/upload/2022/06/16/When_the_Makhnovit…
And just a minor point: "Anarchists joined the AFU, because there was no other opportunity of armed resistance against Putin's army in Ukraine." - the Azov Brigade, which the anarchists (or "anarchists") Roman Lehar and Ruslan Tereshchenko joined, is not part of the AFU but of the NGU.
Is it just me or does the
anon (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 09:18
Is it just me or does the line about triggering a crisis in Russia sound like what many Russian revolutionaries were saying during WW1 as well?
Anyway, there are some uncontroversial basic points reiterated here (Russia is an imperialist colonizer & the Ukrainian army is widely seen as the only means by which to fight them). There are many things unmentioned here, like fascist & right wing Ukrainian elements (including Azov but definitely not just them), the banning of left-wing political organizations immediately after the invasion, the role of Western Europe in the war, the widespread conscription resistance happening now, & more.
By opposing conscription & hoping to positively influence the Ukrainian state by joining the army, they take slightly better positions than Dima Petrov (who supported conscription & described working with the state as a necessity), but still reformist rather than revolutionary ones.
The end of the piece implies that Avtonom aren't Ukrainian. Are they all Russians, or just Russian speakers?
Also, the other commenter linked the (good!) commentary "When the Makhnovists Wiped out Grigoriev and Petliura", but here's a non-PDF version on case anyone prefers.
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/post/2022/06/18/anarchist-prisoner-d…
P.S. while Ukrainians are oppressed by Russians, we shouldn't forget that the government also sent troops to Iraq, Afghanistan, & recently the DRC, making them military imperialists as well as economic/social (re: the anti-Blackness against refugees & immigrants as well as grain exports to the "global south").
"Is it just me or does the
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 10:17
In reply to Is it just me or does the by anon (not verified)
"Is it just me or does the line about triggering a crisis in Russia sound like what many Russian revolutionaries were saying during WW1 as well?"
Not quite the same I think. They weren't asking people to volunteer for the German army, or hoping for the German army to win the war. It seems to me the difference between revolutionary defeatism - to want the defeat of one's own government by one's own working class - and just defeatism - to want the defeat of one's own government by the other government. I think the position of the independent miners union in Donbass (those people from that strike I mentioned in the other comment) expressed here is closer to revolutionary defeatism: https://t.me/Alexander_Vaskovsky/689
Adding to this, I think the
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 11:14
In reply to "Is it just me or does the by Tim Declercq (not verified)
Adding to this, I think the reasoning of the AD is based on a false dichotomy: If the Russian state wins against the Ukrainian state then they would consider that worse than the Ukrainian state winning against the Russian state, so they support the latter option. Whereas the point should be the defeat of *both* states, at the hands of the independent action of the working class on both sides of the frontline.
Anyway, that's why I'm personally more in agreement with the position of that miners union in Donbass. Though I wouldn't expect that to be popular since they're communists (they'll quote Stalin all day long at you) and not anarchists, even though I think that objectively they have the better position than much of what the anarchists give us, and they've at least put their words into action with the strikes at not just the Komsomolskaya but also the AMK and others.
This actually seems to touch
Rabbit (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 11:18
In reply to "Is it just me or does the by Tim Declercq (not verified)
This actually seems to touch on the difference between Malatesta's anarchist defeatism and Lenin's marxist defeatism, in that for Malatesta, it did not matter that the Boers were oppressors, just the the British Empire, under which he happened to them live, lost (and this mattered to him for a few reasons). It did not need to be the working class of another country that defeated the British. Malatesta wasn't a marxist (although he was mostly clueless about the Boers, and on the other hand didn't unconditionally support Candia against the Turks either).
Huh. Thanks, I didn't know
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 11:32
In reply to This actually seems to touch by Rabbit (not verified)
Huh. Thanks, I didn't know this. Well I suppose I'm in agreement with Lenin on this one then. Just one remark though: "It did not need to be the working class of another country that defeated the British." It's not that the working class of *another* country is to defeat any state, in this case it would be the working class of Ukraine defeating the Ukrainian state, the working class of the LDNR defeating the LDNR state, and the working class of Russia defeating the Russian state. It's just that they do it together, as a common struggle. And to defeat their governments in a revolutionary way - the overthrow of the capitalist socio-economic order - instead of just a military way.
Yes, of course Lenin and Karl
Rabbit (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 12:49
In reply to Huh. Thanks, I didn't know by Tim Declercq (not verified)
Yes, of course Lenin and Karl Liebknecht stressed that the working class of each country fight it's own state, and strictly speaking Malatesta wasn't against this either (though he pointed out that during war time some would see it as seditious and unpatriotic, we could say, a regular challenge at an elevated level). But Lenin also discussed defeat in terms of another state fighting the one we live under, and that the working class should use these moments to turn the war into a civil war, and that revolutionary action against one's own state would assist in its defeat by another state:
"A revolution in wartime means civil war; the conversion of a war between governments into a civil war is, on the one hand, facilitated by military reverses ("defeats") of governments; on the other hand, one cannot actually strive for such a conversion without thereby facilitating defeat."
Malatesta on the other hand was a consistent anti-militarist (maybe it was Emma Goldman who pointed out that only anarchists can be true anti-militarists, I don't remember exactly), as well as a consistent supporter of national liberation and opposer of imperialism. I like to think that if he knew more about the Boers he'd have understood they were also oppressors, but who's to say? Point being that, for anarchists, the working class is not the only or even always the main revolutionary subject, in contrast to many marxists (except for some maoists who take this influence from Kropotkin and anarchism more generally). For Malatesta it was also good for the British working class if the Boers defeated their state. It didn't depend on whether the Boers were working class or not. At the same time, he did not support anarchist collaboration with the militaries of our own states or the intervention of evil empires like the British (in the case of Candia versus the Turks). This is what Wayne Price gets absolutely wrong about Ukraine and Malatesta, intentionally as far as I can tell, since he tries to hide Malatesta's views.
It being seen as seditious
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 13:44
In reply to Yes, of course Lenin and Karl by Rabbit (not verified)
It being seen as seditious and unpatriotic by some is definitely true. For example when the Efanovs were kidnapped during the Komsomolskaya strike, the MGB wrote a message on Telegram in the name of one of them "admitting" that the whole thing was set up by the SBU (while the actual fighting was at a relatively low level at that time in 2020, the use of the war by the state for such accusations was anything but low level). Since the full-blown war erupted 2.5 years ago this repression has only increased, for example when the Sverdlovsk miners wanted to go on strike back in April they got an MGB visit informing them that if they go on strike (or "perform war time sabotage for the enemy" as they call it) they'll all just be thrown into the meat grinder.
But yes, those couple of Greek anarchists I've talked to who argue for the defeat of NATO also tend to be the ones who are more open to national liberation arguments (see for example https://www.politico.eu/article/anarchic-athens-finds-new-cause-ukraine…) and argue that the defeat of NATO by Russia would also be good for the working class in NATO.
Anyway, if you want to call my position marxist instead of anarchist then you're free to do so, it doesn't matter much to me - I didn't arrive at it to correspond to any particular other person's or group's views. I do have a question though, if not the working class then who do you consider the revolutionary subject here to be? I mean in this specific case of the war in Ukraine.
Strictly speaking, I didn't
Rabbit (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 14:12
In reply to It being seen as seditious by Tim Declercq (not verified)
Strictly speaking, I didn't call your position marxist and I'm not a huge fan of name-calling. I simply pointed to the difference between Malatesta and Lenin's views. In my experience, most current day anarchists have very little interest in anarchist history and wouldn't care to be aware of the nuances of Malatesta's position. They might even engage in anachronisms. But nonetheless, Malatesta existed at certain points in time. And Wayne Price has been trying to obscure Malatesta's position.
Oh yes, if someone appeals to
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 14:54
In reply to Strictly speaking, I didn't by Rabbit (not verified)
Oh yes, if someone appeals to Malatesta (or to anyone else for that matter) to support their position and then tries to obscure that person's actual positions, then that is certainly worthy of a rebuke. And thanks for the info, I didn't know of these positions of Malatesta - those Greek comrades I've talked to about this appeal to Kropotkin (supporting the lesser imperialism against the greater imperialism, as I understand it) to support their position.
I myself don't generally like appealing to anyone to support a position, Malatesta or Lenin or anyone else. I just happen to agree with some Leninist trade unionists on a specific position (common strike action on both sides of the front line) but I also quite disagree with a lot of other things. Although I do agree with them on some other things too, for example as I understand it they got kicked out of their party a few years ago for "undermining party discipline" (or something like that) because they wanted to put the soviets under direct control by the worker collectives instead of by party officials. No idea which historical figure may also have had that position, and it doesn't really matter to me, I just happen to myself have the position that the soviets should be under direct control by the worker collectives instead of by party officials.
I'm not familiar with the
Rabbit (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 15:11
In reply to Oh yes, if someone appeals to by Tim Declercq (not verified)
I'm not familiar with the Greeks appeal to Kropotkin. Personally, I think Kropotkin is the single most contradictory figure within anarchism, he made both invaluable contributions and perhaps the greatest betrayal of anarchist principles ever in terms of theory/propaganda during WW1. As to your question about the revolutionary subject, as with Kropotkin, for anarchists traditionally it was all the oppressed, not just workers. Even middle class traitors could be part of it under certain conditions.
"I'm not familiar with the
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 15:54
In reply to I'm not familiar with the by Rabbit (not verified)
"I'm not familiar with the Greeks appeal to Kropotkin."
As far as I know no anarchist group has this position as its official line, it's just from some personal conversations with a couple of individual comrades who hold this position.
"As to your question about the revolutionary subject, as with Kropotkin, for anarchists traditionally it was all the oppressed, not just workers. Even middle class traitors could be part of it under certain conditions."
The notion of working class I was using doesn't just include people who are literally currently doing wage labour, but also includes for example the unemployed and such. Quite a few people are currently in hiding from the military police (it's very difficult to get out of the LDNR when you're wanted by the authorities, so many people go into hiding locally) so they're technically not currently working but they'd sure also be included in the revolutionary subject. The same goes for, say, prisoners (of which there's also plenty, including of the political kind). As for middle class people, there was a discussion a while back with a guy who owns a small chicken farm with a handful of workers, and the resulting position was that if he wasn't willing to let his workers collectivize his business during/after the revolution then he couldn't be considered a comrade (or "part of the revolutionary subject" I suppose). I generally agreed with that.
Either way, I agree with the idea of common strike actions on both sides of the front line not because it defines a revolutionary subject, but because the biggest detriment to the development of class consciousness is the nationalism pumped out by the authorities on both sides of the front line. And common strike action breaks this logic.
There's a reason I said
Rabbit (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 16:45
In reply to "I'm not familiar with the by Tim Declercq (not verified)
There's a reason I said middle class traitors not just the middle class in general, and maybe I'm extra strict about this, but I don't think people who are currently landlords or bosses or whatever should be welcomed into the movement/scene with open arms or anything.
Then it certainly seems we
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 17:26
In reply to There's a reason I said by Rabbit (not verified)
Then it certainly seems we are not in disagreement on the question of the revolutionary subject. And the traitor thing also goes both ways after all, there are plenty of traitors in the working class too (for example fascists or snitches for the bosses etc) who I wouldn't place in the revolutionary subject.
I also may have to correct an earlier point I made about there being more than plenty prisoners and especially political ones. Although I don't have numbers on the prison population, thinking about it some more and based on the things I do know, there's actually a good chance that the prison population is paradoxically going down because so many of them get thrown into the meat grinder instead.
Past mistakes IMO of every
GEF (not verified) Mon, 09/02/2024 - 10:03
In reply to Then it certainly seems we by Tim Declercq (not verified)
Past mistakes IMO of every Kropotkins & Malatestas of past and present (and sadly future, on and on): the only worthy revolutionary subject to anarchists is the ego.
Not that all other subjects are worthless, much less their struggles in some cases. But where Marx was right despite all his bullshit, is in how this society keeps generating divisions and contradictions, not just between what they call classes, but *within*. Scabs vs unionized workers, specialized vs general workers, but also workers vs lumpen unemployed... it's batfuck insane the diverse plethora of caste conflicts you get, especially since the so-called Post-Modern age were the Separation went viral. Yet the inherent, most basic form of struggle lies in egoist self-interest.
Labor organizing is a form of self-interest, and that's why despite not solving the question of how to build a broad mass revolt against the state, it does what it's meant to. Nationalism, on the other hand, answers to an external interest of an object, not subject... or more precisely a subjectified object. An incarnation, an impersonality made into the person. The socio-political identity category is not only not a revolutionary subject, but not even a subject; it isn't defined by any lived experience which can be used as a point of unity with other subjectivities.
The Worker as subject can only be its own... not that of a revolution, where it would become then an objectified socio-political category, to be made existent. When a vehicle of specific power-accumulation up against or despite other caste interests it (as with the usual labor strikes for specific demands) it serves its subjective interests, then if it becomes a broad revolutionary struggle it'll become an object that the subjective interests of a managerial caste within (then above) them. So it is always about self-interest... 'til it's not. But then it becomes reactionary.
So I get the purpose of opposing the Workers as revolutionary subject against the nationalist objectification of people (in which the topic of "the People's liberation" as used often by UkWayyyne becomes a kind of oxymoron), but even that isn't a very consistently anarchist position. I appreciate the effort of dedifferentiating Workers with each other, in erasing the divides between lumpen and "working class", between nationals and non-nationals, between ethnic identities, etc. Tho in the real world... I am still being treated as an inferior and pariah if I ain't a productive worker that owns some property and conforms to social norms. If I live rent-free and eat from dumpsters I'm a filthy homeless lumoen, to the view of my "fellow workers"... even some of my "fellow anarchists", lol.
Is there really an end to this social maze, outside of becoming Mark Zuckerbot (who's likely still stuck in the maze despite his power and billions)? Or is the end just starting when you overthrow the subjectification altogether?
So how to defend yourself *as anarchist* in Ukraine may be the most key question. If Russian forces are attacking your town... well obviously the urgency of the context will funnel your courses of action down to a few simple options: keep ignoring, living your bolo among the ruins and corpses; flee/hide; or enroll. But will enrolling be really protecting you, the anarchist, and your comrades, or just turning you into better cannon fodder for Neonazi officers? Or maybe there's other ways to defend and maybe fight back than by joining the state's thugs? Wasn't that what Makhno was about?
Sounds a bit like the
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 11:56
In reply to This actually seems to touch by Rabbit (not verified)
Sounds a bit like the position of the Laiki Drasi group (https://laikidrasi.wordpress.com/) whose position is that because they live under the biggest empire on the planet (NATO) therefor they support the defeat of NATO even if this defeat is to be inflicted by the Russian state.
It's also the position of
Tim Declercq (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 12:32
In reply to Sounds a bit like the by Tim Declercq (not verified)
It's also the position of some individual anarchists in Greece I know, although they argue it by appealing to Kropotkin instead of to Malatesta. As far as I know it's not the position of any anarchist groups though.
(would be nice if there was an edit function, or I suppose for me to learn to wait to compose a reply instead of just immediately commenting what comes to mind and then 10 minutes later thinking of something else I would've liked to add lol)
Lenin also supported the
anon (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 17:39
In reply to This actually seems to touch by Rabbit (not verified)
Lenin also supported the Boers, FWIW.
I still don't quite see how
Tim Declercq (not verified) Fri, 08/30/2024 - 08:16
In reply to Lenin also supported the by anon (not verified)
I still don't quite see how any of this even matters in the first place. We're not talking about the Boers but about the current war in Ukraine. And the comrades who argue for the defeat of NATO in this war regardless of the fact that the LDNR & Russia are also oppressors do so by appealing to Kropotkin and not to Malatesta. And the ones arguing for turning the inter-imperialist war into a revolutionary class war do not do so by appealing to Lenin. Well, maybe the Leninists do so, but not the anarchists, at least as far as I know.
"The end of the piece implies
anon (not verified) Thu, 08/29/2024 - 20:45
In reply to Is it just me or does the by anon (not verified)
"The end of the piece implies that Avtonom aren't Ukrainian. Are they all Russians, or just Russian speakers?"
These are three people from Russia and one Finn exploiting the name of a defunct organization. In essence, it is simply the editorial staff of an insignificant website.
When will this statement be
anon (not verified) Sat, 08/31/2024 - 04:24
When will this statement be available to read on the Avtonom website in Russian?
This statement is available
A (not verified) Mon, 09/02/2024 - 01:31
In reply to When will this statement be by anon (not verified)
This statement is available in Russian right on the main page of the Avtonom website :)
https://avtonom.org/nowar
I am in agreement with this
Wayne Price (not verified) Sun, 09/01/2024 - 13:08
I am in agreement with this excellent statement by Russian anarchists. As usual, most of the comments confuse wars between imperialist states, as in World War I, and wars between imperialist states and oppressed peoples. This was Kropotkin's error also, which led him to support imperialist France and the other Allies against imperialist Germany and the Central Powers. Malatesta denounced this stance, while still supporting wars of national self-determination by oppressed people against empires. This included such wars when in alliance with US imperialists, such as the Cuban War of Independence (while warning that the US, while an ally once, would immediately seek to take over Cuba).
Rabbit writes, " Wayne Price gets [this] absolutely wrong about Ukraine and Malatesta, intentionally as far as I can tell, since he tries to hide Malatesta's views." They are claiming that I am not simply wrong, in their opinion (which I admit is always possible) but that I am deliberately lying about Malatesta's views. There is no point in further discussion then.
I notice, from scattered comments, that "UkWayne" has become sort of a boogyman on this list, which I find kinda weird. All this hostility is focused on my views on the Ukrainian-Russian war, with little or no discussion of my views on voting, Palestine, anarchism, or other topics I have written on in this site. While I use this list to try to reach a few more reasonable-minded anarchists who are open to serious discussion, there are a whole lot of peculiar folks here.
Except that the war in
Tim Declercq (not verified) Mon, 09/02/2024 - 07:39
In reply to I am in agreement with this by Wayne Price (not verified)
Except that the war in Ukraine isn't a war of independence or of national self-determination. Ukraine has been a NATO client state since 2014, it can't even independently decide on peace as was shown with the US & UK ultimately making the decision of calling off the peace talks in Turkey back in 2022. Pretending that Ukraine was ruled by Russia before this war (and hence the war would be one of independence or national self-determination like the Boers or the Cuban one) is bonkers, if anything it's been ruled by NATO (no FSB bases in Ukraine but plenty of CIA ones).
Basically, you're just *pretending* that the war in Ukraine is the same as, say, the Cuban War of Independence so you can support your position by appealing to the position of some anarchists on those other wars. Not only is such argument by analogy a generally weak form of argumentation, it doesn't even hold up to scrutiny in this case.
You claim to be using this
Tim Declercq (not verified) Fri, 09/06/2024 - 17:34
In reply to I am in agreement with this by Wayne Price (not verified)
You claim to be using this list to reach anarchists who are open to serious discussion, but you've yet to answer a single point I've made in response to you, over multiple such responses I've written already. Any reason for this? I wouldn't want to conclude it's because you can't counter my arguments, and instead of doing the intellectually honest thing to adapt your own position, you just decide to ignore it and repeat your position ad nauseam.
" this list"
anon (not verified) Fri, 09/06/2024 - 17:44
In reply to You claim to be using this by Tim Declercq (not verified)
" this list"
Wayne and Tim are both personas of the same brainworm infested UKWayne troll. Change my mind, I'll wait.
Should be easy enough once
Tim Declercq (not verified) Fri, 09/06/2024 - 18:54
In reply to " this list" by anon (not verified)
Should be easy enough once you realize both are real names (at least I assume Wayne's real name is indeed Wayne, that it's not a pseudonym). Also, of course, the reason the term "this list" appears in my comment is because I was quoting Wayne but then decided I didn't want the whole quote ("use this list to try to reach a few more reasonable-minded anarchists who are open to serious discussion") so I removed the quotation marks and shortened it a bit - in particular I removed the "few more reasonable-minded" bit. That's already 2 ways that would've been available to you to figure that one out.
15 flyers distributed from
anon (not verified) Wed, 09/11/2024 - 09:13
15 flyers distributed from this communique, "Выходите на улицы" in Salt Lake City on 1300 South
2 more flyers distributed
anon (not verified) Wed, 09/11/2024 - 13:45
2 more flyers distributed today
Add new comment