I think the main barrier to a classless society is human nature, not the
stae. But other than that, I suppose I could call myself an anarchist.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 10:48 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 'The truth will come out: Finicum was flat
murdered'
Anarchism and socialism are very similar. I have explained on this list
before that anarchists and communists have pretty much the same goal.
Anarchists just call that goal anarchy and communists call it communism.
Both tendencies are for the eventual abolition of the state. The main
difference is that the anarchists see the biggest obstacle to that eventual
goal to be the state itself. They have the idea that class society is caused
by the existence of the state and that if the state were abolished then
class society would go away. Lenin's book, State and Revolution, was mainly
a polemic against the anarchists. He argued that their stance that a
classless society could be attained by the abolition of the state would not
work because those who had an interest in the state's continued existence
would just reestablish it on the instant that it was abolished. I will
counterpose scientific socialism to anarchism now because even though I said
that socialism and anarchism are very similar it is more accurate to point
out that anarchists have always been considered to be socialists, just not
of the scientific variety. Scientific socialists hold that class society
causes the state, that the state is a way of regulating and administering
class relationships and that if class society is abolished then the
objective conditions for the continued existence of the state will have been
removed and the state will fade away. That is, it will gradually transform
from a means of administering people into a means of administering things.
By the way, it is important to remember that anarchists call themselves
libertarians. They were calling themselves libertarians a long time before
the right wing libertarians started calling themselves libertarians. That is
why I cringe whenever the word libertarian is used on this list as if
right-wing libertarian was the only kind of libertarian. Insofar as they
advocate the abolition of the state or its minimization, though, the
right-wing libertarians and the left-wing libertarians, the anarchists, have
something in common. The main difference between those two camps is that the
left-wing libertarians are in favor of the abolition of capitalism and class
society in general and the right-wing libertarians are for the elimination
of the state, but have no problem with capitalism and with class society in
general. Still, though, there are a whole lot of complete misconceptions at
large about what anarchism is and, unfortunately, that is true among a lot
of people who falsely call themselves anarchists. That is probably why Chuck
says that all the anarchists he knows seem so selfish. The point is that the
people he knows who call themselves anarchists probably do not know what
they are talking about and that Chuck does not know enough about it himself
to recognize that.
On 3/1/2016 9:57 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Emma Goldman was an anarchist. There's a book about her on BARD andvote for Bill Clinton.
one on Bookshare. I haven't gotten through much but she sounds very
close to being a socialist.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran ;
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 9:21 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] 'The truth will come out: Finicum was flat murdered'
My comment about bringing on the anarchy was intended as a sarcastic
response to your elevation of property over justice for human beings
and the then disparaging indication that otherwise you would have anarchy.
But, actually, I wonder if you have really ever known an anarchist.
Most of the people I have known who call themselves anarchists do not
know what they are talking about. I remember one who was a singer in a
punk band who called himself an anarchist and I asked him which
anarchist tradition he adhered to. He didn't seem to know what I meant
so I offered some suggestions, Kropotkin, Proudhon, Bakunin ... who?
He then said that he was not an old anarchist, he was a new anarchist.
Then he threw around some words like death and destruction. I just
shut up having satisfied myself that he did not have the slightest
idea what an anarchist was. Then there was the woman who claimed to be
an anarchist and when I tried to explain to her where I thought
anarchist politics went wrong she also seemed to not know what I was
talking about and then went on to tell me about how important it was to
The list goes on. There have been a few, though, who did adhere tofact, anarchist philosophy is completely incompatible with selfishness.
traditional anarchist collectivism. I worked with a man in the
anti-draft movement who was well grounded in anarchist politics and
history. At a later time I got peripherally involved in the defense of
a high school student who was expelled from school for being an anarchist.
I had some conversations with her and while I found her a bit naive
she was definitely learning about and following anarchist politics.
Later she sued the school board and even though I was not present in
the courtroom I caught a report on television and was surprised that
my old comrade in the anti-draft movement testified as a friend of the
court and as an expert on anarchism. He turned out to be a university
professor by then. Since you describe the anarchists you have known as
selfish people I suspect that they were of the variety who claim to be
anarchists but do not understand what anarchism is. And if you take
their claims of being anarchists as good coin I suspect that you don't
know much about it either. I do happen to have some very strong
reservations about anarchism, especially the position about abolishing
the state by decree and the theory that capitalism is a manifestation
of the state rather than the state being a manifestation of capitalism
or some other class system, but it is undeniable that many anarchists
have dedicated themselves to anarchist collectivism as both a
revolutionary goal and as a way of life. That is far from selfishness. In
On 3/1/2016 12:54 PM, Charles Krugman (Redacted sender ckrugman forfarmers.
DMARC) wrote:
what has anarchy ever done for people? The anarchists that I know ofcops.
are extremely self-serving and operate out of a very narrow
perspective, their own!
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 5:09 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy]
Re: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] 'The truth will come out:
Finicum was flat murdered'
Property before people? How capitalist. Bring on the anarchy.
On 2/23/2016 6:38 AM, Charles Krugman (Redacted sender ckrugman for
DMARC) wrote:
the real issue here is how one chooses to fight for injustice. When
one crosses certain boundaries such as property lines there are
potential consequences. We live in a society where anarchy does not
rule.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 8:31 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] Re:
[blind-democracy] 'The truth will come out: Finicum was flat murdered'
And what does one risk when one chooses to not fight back against
injustice?
On 2/19/2016 9:26 PM, Charles Krugman (Redacted sender ckrugman for
DMARC) wrote:
when one chooses to live as an outlaw and adopt the ways of the
wild west taking over property that doesn't belong to them they run
the risk of being killed or murderedd if one chooses to use the
melodramatic rflare.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted
sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 6:35 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] 'The truth will come out: Finicum was
flat murdered'
http://themilitant.com/2016/8007/800755.html
The Militant (logo)
Vol. 80/No. 7 February 22, 2016
'The truth will come out: Finicum was flat murdered'
BY SETH GALINSKY
Working people should denounce the cold-blooded Jan. 26 killing of
Robert "LaVoy" Finicum by Oregon State Police and the FBI; the
frame-up conspiracy charges against Ammon Bundy and others who took
part in the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge; and
the frame-up of Dwight and Steven Hammond, two Harney County,
Oregon, cattle ranchers, imprisoned for a second time on the same
bogus arson charges dating back to 2001 and 2006.
"The truth will come out. LaVoy was just flat murdered," Tad Houpt,
the owner of a small logging company, said by phone Feb. 7. Finicum
and Bundy were traveling to a Jan. 26 community meeting that Houpt
helped organize in John Day, Oregon, when they were intercepted by
the
Bundy initiated the refuge occupation Jan. 2 to draw attention both
to the frame-up of the Hammonds and to U.S. government land
policies that have been undermining the livelihood of ranchers and
up.ranch.
The persecution of the Hammonds outraged small ranchers and farmers
throughout the West - controlled burns are common to control
invasive plants and to prevent the spread of wildfires.
Despite serving the sentence imposed by the trial judge, the
Hammonds went back to jail Jan. 4, because of a U.S. Appeals Court
ruling that their sentences didn't meet federal minimum rules.
After the trial the U.S. Bureau of Land Management vindictively
revoked the Hammonds' grazing permits, threatening the survival of
their
Meanwhile, the Oregonian reported Feb. 6 that the scanty official
information and one grainy video released on the killing confirm
many aspects of the accounts by Shawna Cox and Victoria Sharp - who
were in the pickup truck driven by Finicum.
According to both of them, the cops first fired one shot at the
vehicle they were in after Finicum initially pulled over. Finicum
then shouted out to the cops, "I'm going to see the sheriff," a
reference to Sheriff Glenn Palmer of Grant County, who was also
scheduled to be at the John Day meeting and has been quoted in the
press as saying the Hammonds should be freed.
Finicum tried to drive away, but was soon forced off the road again.
The
Oregonian reports that the FBI admits lethal force was used when
the truck "approached the checkpoint," that is, even before the
vehicle crashed into the snow bank and Finicum gets out with his hands
discussion.
Much of the capitalist press justifies the killing and prosecutions
by labeling Finicum and Bundy as extremists and outside agitators.
"To his detractors," the New York Times said, "he was a doctrinaire
leader of an illegal protest that is deeply opposed by many who
live near the refuge." The paper conveniently leaves out that most
people in the area support the demand to free the Hammonds and are
sympathetic to their opposition to the government land policies.
Many local residents visited the refuge, met Finicum and Bundy or
donated food and supplies to the occupiers.
Some 1,000 people attended Finicum's funeral in Kanab, Utah, Feb . 5.
While pretending to be objective, the Times' description of the
scene plays on many of its readers' prejudices. After the service
there were "cowboys on horseback and members of so-called patriot
groups wearing camouflage and carrying small weapons," it reports.
The Times did quote one rancher from Nevada, Diana Clark, at the
funeral. "All of us ranchers feel like we're backed into a corner,"
she said. "And it's hard to get anyone to acknowledge our needs,
and so they gave us a platform."
At least 22 smaller protests against the killing of Finicum took
place Feb. 6, from Florida to Washington. One common placard was
"Hands Up, Don't Shoot," a slogan first popularized by protesters
against police brutality after the killing of Michael Brown in
Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014. At events in John Day and Prineville,
Oregon, dozens of local ranchers participated.
Meanwhile, federal prosecutors have now indicted 16 supporters of
the occupation with conspiracy to "prevent by force, intimidation
and threats, officers and employees of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service . from discharging the duties of their office" at
the wildlife refuge.
The list of what the indictment calls "overt acts" to further the
conspiracy is proof itself that the prosecution is a frame-up.
The first "act" it lists is an Oct. 5 meeting where Ammon Bundy
warned Harney County Sheriff David Ward that if the Hammonds went
to jail there could be "extreme civil unrest."
Although the occupiers are not accused of pointing their weapons at
anyone, the indictment claims that they "brandished and carried
firearms." Oregon law allows the open carrying of firearms.
Bundy released a statement from prison Feb. 6, noting that the
occupation was civil disobedience. He encouraged those "who
disagree with my speech" or dislike his ideas to engage in civil
"If you do not advocate for government to tolerate ideas that it
hates, then the First Amendment and free speech mean nothing," he
said. "Arm yourself with ideas. . Argue and disagree. Be free."
Supporters of the Hammonds continue to organize. A new online
petition calling on President Barack Obama to free the Hammonds had
3,341 signatures as of Feb. 9. The Oregon Cattlemen's Association
is asking that donations be sent to: The Hammond Family, c/o Sandra
Carlon at US Bank, 493 N. Broadway, Burns, Oregon 97720.
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home
