G8 Summit or Lord of the Rings?

So it seems that the Great-8 have changed tactics and no longer want to show off their awesomeness in the glory of their metropolitian city's filled skyscrappers, shopping districts, and streetlights decorated to welcome the G8, NOPE those days are gone! A new era has blessed us, Today we met them in the fields to duke it out like the old days! From the streets of Genoa to the fields of Scotland and Germany, Resistance is global!





G8 pics

Indymedia1

G8 pics

Indymedia2

BEWARE of Your Perspective.

All jobs I have ever had I have been told by management to NOT discuss my hourly worth with fellow workers to "avoid problems". Bullshit, they dont want YOU to discuss what you are making in comparision to they girl next to you on the sandwich line. Because,"It can cause ill will and feelings of inequity among employees."


"I might be an engineer and my salary could be different from yours for a variety of reasons," says T. Ray Bennett, vice president of human resources at the 2,600-employee American Bureau of Shipping in Houston. "They could include time with the company, industry time, performance, specialties, additional training -- there are a lot of reasons why guys in the same job could have different salaries," its called division of labor, and divided workers cant fight the boss.

Read the disturbing article yourself.


Beware of Sharing Salary Details

Black Panthers in the Triad.



Yes Weekly!(Jordan Green)

The Strange History of the Black Panthers in the Triad


Newspaper clips on traid Panther activity!

The Black Panther, Black Community News Service


It's About Time, The Black Panther Party:

The Black Panther Party (most comprehensive and official website by the Panthers)


Libcom.org:

Black Panther Party for Self-Defense

Marxists.org:

Black Panther Party for Self-Defense

Wiki source:

Black Panther Party for Self-Defense

FBI DE-CLASSIFIED:

Winston Salem(NC) BLack Panthers DE-CLASSIFIED

But I too want to live in the future.

I have often asked myself this question over and over, yet I lack a good enough answer. What do I want? Better said, what would I like my community to look like? The obvious answer always seems to be a question or a statement on how I do not want society to look and operate. Also, with this very important question comes one more, how the hell do we get there? Capitalism seems to be able to adapt itself to any thing we throw at it and that is both good and bad, the never ending duality. Our lives are almost at the mercy of an economy run mad, almost. Our reforms and campaigns under the last few hundred years has always, sadly, allowed a smooth return to business as usual, with percentages here or there. Have we not gained anything genuine under our struggles, riots, activism, organizing, and strikes? Sure we have! Do I think we want more? Yes! In fact, I know we want more because the system is still breathing.

Capitalism is as fascinating as it is horrible. I am always amazed at how it can recuperate after all blows we have given it. No matter how much we level the economic playing field, get more money or benefits, profit and reinvestment still goes on. It continues because we allow it to continue, our labor and creativity is the life blood and brain of capitalism. So no matter how good our hours, conditions, or pay we still produce a great amount of surplus-value for capital. The cycle continues. This tells us that no matter what we want to do or how he would like to live our lives there will always be a price as long as capitalism remains. The price, our work that benefits someone else and spending the little amount of money we have in comparison to the wealth collected off our labor.



Anyway, I am drifting for my original thought, what do I want and how do I want to get there (how can we get there)? I would like to see communities standing up and organizing movements, campaigns, etc… that concentrates on the economic aspect of our lives and begins to redistribute the wealth horded by capitalism. I am not very interested in trying to coordinate some social experiment or alternative within the economy because that just takes to much time and becomes to ritualistic. Rather, I would like to see a community tackle the economic needs of human beings according to needs and equity, not equality or rations. Face it we all want different things on a material basis. I am not very interested in Cuban ration cards, though food being a right is an interesting thought (I still want more than rice and beans). In Lenin’s, What is to be Done, he argues against the trade union mentality of only dealing with economic questions (pay and the miniscule “% wage increase”) and the trade unions not being political enough. But I am beginning to see the economic aspect of our lives as the very core of our own captivity.



Mr. Marx what would you say? “…It ought to have been said that with the abolition of class distinctions all social and political inequality arising from them would disappear of itself” (Critique of the Gotha Program, Part II. Marx, K). Yes, well how important is the economic aspect of our lives in comparison to the political? What was true for the Paris Commune is true for society today, “its true secret was this. It was essentially a working-class government, the produce of the struggle of the producing against the expropriating class, the political form at last discovered under which to work out the economic emancipation of labor. Except on this last condition, the Communal Constitution would have been an impossibility and a delusion. The political rule of the producer cannot coexist with the perpetuation of his social slavery. The Commune was therefore to serve as a lever for uprooting the economical foundations upon which rests the existence of classes, and therefore class-rule. With labor emancipated, every man becomes a working man, and productive labor ceases to be a class attribute” (The Civil War in France, Part III. Marx, K).

So then, “What is to be Done”? As I said before, I would like to see a great deal of agitation on the issue of our material existence and how we spend our time. Why stop at a campaign for an increase in the cities minimum wage? Is it not also possible to demand more than our 1968 standard of living? How about taking up the Wobblies old struggle for the 4hr. work day (20 hour work week), is it not time that we got more “free-time”? The liberal/conservative twin joined at the hip seems very worried about putting people to work, well put your money where your mouth is! You want higher employment or even 100% employment, decapitate the 8 hour/1 person monster of drudgery, and let’s replace it with 4 hour /2 people monster drudgery. But don’t you dare try to counter with lower wages.

A citizens, though not the absolute correct term, wage or global citizens guaranteed income could produce a security net and workers who are more eager to be productive and creative not only for the community but for themselves. More free time and money can only spark people’s interest in new and better things! The Situationist inside me tells me this is not radical enough, this is not good enough. But hell we have to start somewhere. Do we really want the responsibility, no burden, of taking care of it all? This is the withering away, the transition from the old to the new. No seizure of state power. Rather, the impending destruction of an out-of-date economic system. Our freedom will rise from the corpse of the working day; let’s do the everyday to make the revolutionary possible!

Radicalizing the Everyday

In response to a comment posted on the minimum wage article/debate regarding GRAF’s stance on wage-labor, it seems prudent to write an official statement. Our stance and debate with Doug Clark of the News & Record concerning a minimum wage hike to $9.36, the economics in a “globalized” economy and ways of organizing workers stands on its own. It is not always necessary to constantly remind ourselves or our readers that we are anarchist-communists who are for a social revolution to rid human interaction of capitalism, wage-labor, private property, etc.... We are quite tired of constantly reading texts that are packed with radical rhetoric (abolish, smash, revolution, etc…) which just gives us another great pamphlet how the “extreme-left” dresses the part of awesome radicals. I want more, we want more, a social movement against capitalism, real action! A system that is highly organized and kept in place largely by a state monopoly on violence and liberal/conservative (twins joined at the hip) moral hegemony which quickly marginalizes any opponents with the feeling that, “there is no need to argue…” is our everyday life.

With that said, I now realize that we should have been more forthcoming or radical in our suggestion on what we as workers should be thinking about and how we should organize in for the minimum wage campaign. Organizing within the community and allowing ourselves to realize we have power in numbers should be the main method of organizing this campaign. Sure the minimum wage hike is reformist but our everyday lives are riddled with compromises. We must make sure the way we organize ourselves and communities is not reformist but takes on a social character. It is not about taking power or giving away power to city councilmen because that is not the issue. Nor is it a matter of getting a 3 dollar raise on our labor. Rather, the most important component during this campaign and the future is how we organize.

The problem with our movement or the “anarchist movement” is that we are against so much and almost pride ourselves on always pointing out the negative rather than doing something worth while with our time, ourselves included. We are not about hijacking movements or events. We should base ourselves in our communities as part of that community and no longer live up to the stereotype of wanting to be so different, allowing ourselves and our politics to become incoherent and abstract. When a campaign, event, or idea that will end up benefiting our communities pops up lets contribute with our politics, organizing methods, social outlook, and creativity. We know how to organize ourselves in for “anti-globalization” protests in relation to the state and other groups, now its time to do the same in our communities. We know we have something to offer so lets do it! It is about building networks and communities that will have the ability to leap into a new era free of capitalism.

GRAF draws inspiration from the old bearded men, the old school IWW (Industrial Workers of the World), left-wing communists, Black Panther Party for Self-Defense,1960’s-70’s strands of communism/Marxism which lead to contemporary autonomist-Marxism, the Zapatistas, ourselves, the dramatization of the Spanish Civil War in “Land and Freedom”, etc…but through all this history, theory, and practice we realize that we cannot resurrect ghosts. Inspiration is just that, inspiration and now we must move forward if we wish to remain relevant. As the theorists and activists of the 70’s in Italy leafleted their way to insurrection, GRAF would like to see communities come together for just that.

Abolishing wage-labor, of course! Seeing the dismantling of the state and ridding ourselves of capitalism, of course! And we see an important step in doing just that by changing our everyday lives on the way to a classless society. Being realistic no longer means compromise. Rather, realizing that we can struggle in the everyday for the future is realistic and militant. A campaign for a minimum wage hike is not won by voting or petitioning but by making it no longer profitable to NOT hike up minimum wage. Organizing and networking our communities to come together is our only strength.

Min.Wage $9.39 or $5.15?

Is Greensboro coming together to make minimum wage $9.36!?


From the Greensboro Minimun Wage Campaign,"We are working to increase the Greensboro minimum wage to $9.36/hour. This amount equals the purchasing power of the minimum wage in 1968. In the richest country in the world people who work should not live in poverty. Santa Fe, San Francisco, Washington, DC, and Albuquerque have already raised their citywide minimum wage. Register. Sign the petition. Vote. Volunteer."

PART I. The News & Record tries to get political?!

Doug your argument against a wage increase is about as relevent as the good old southern democrats argument against "free-labor", silly. first and last, your argument stinks of free-market fetishism and you assume that change can only happen when it is granted and sacrificed from above.

Hell, working for 6 dollars per hour as restuarant dish washers, car washes, chain stores, or package centers all around greensboro hardly making ends meet without skimming off the top or having to stir things up abit in the triad to gain a decent wage??? we will take our chances with the ladder. Doug your opinion is offensive and written from a place of privilege that continues to justify "free-market" vulgarity. the cost, of our dignity and everyday life is at stake and your business minded opinion is not appreciated.

Maybe the problem with the south is lack of labor laws, labor unions, the low wage, the right to work laws, and all other laws and repression of southern workers that continues to put profit over workers rights and high wages. Maybe the continuing problem with North Carolina and Greensboro/triad area is regional goverments favoring businesses while pretending to be all charitable like saying, "look we have brought you jobs after the textiles took off." ah, what a favor...low wage jobs and part-time jobs in place of industrial jobs...having two generations racing for the same job...

No, your arguements and the entire stack of these "well reasoned" arguments against a wage increase are anti-worker and yet another attempt to justify low wages and bad working conditions.

Doug stated,

"Higher restaurant prices might not drive many families out of town for a cheaper meal, but some might eat at home more often. With less business, restaurants likely would lay off staff."

You are automatically assuming that workers will have to pay up for that difference...why not make someone else take that hit....say shareholders and store owners....

After all this is class warfare and your arguments have been used since the 1800's to continue paying workers less than they deserve. Just like back in the day, your form of media has been used to spread misinformation and reactionary ideas throught nations and cities to scare people of change for the better. It is the business world, owners, and goverments fault that we have low wages, dont put that blame on us! Why dont you do something usefull with your time and blog and side with humanity.

"Ain't ten cents[$9.36] worth as much to us as it is to Pulitzer and Hearst[Food Lion, Harris Teeter, etc...] who are millionaires? Well, I guess it is. If they can't spare it, how can we?"
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Newsboys_Strike)

PART II: What is capitalism and how does it work?

I call that bluff. Restaurants would not raise prices because that would cut into profit on top of the raised wages for workers (hypothetically). higher costs equals less business. Rather if a Restaurant wants to remain competative and in operation it will keep the old prices and take the $4.21 x A as an added cost in production. So ya, no worries Greensboro will not become a ghost town.

If a business is already taking a dip in the profit margin from the $4.21 x A("A" being the number of employees) wage increase and you claim that this is such a huge increase in price that a business would have to raise prices to make a profit, then I do not think that $4.21 wage increase is that businesses main concern. If a business has come to such a stand still economically that it can not afford to pay its workers I think the "free-market" shark will eat that establishment for lunch. Plain and simple they can afford it, it is just that "they" dont want to pay it, its called greed.

The age old arguments against wage increases and reduced work hours come from one perspective, the business perspective. First off, higher wages = more consumerism. The money isnt disappearing its being relocated into the pockets of workers who will then spend that money...a nice little economic reform that helps everyone because at the end of the day someone gets paid $9.36 a hour and the company this person works at is still producing products to be consumed, thus the system continues.

Higher wages will make thousands of people in greensboro very happy!

PART III: Enough is Eough...

Doug states, "Look at the auto industry if you want a model of unionism in the 21st century economy: Union automakers are laying off workers up north; non-union (Asian) automakers are hiring for new plants in the South. They're still paying good wages and benefits, just not noncompetitive wages and benefits.

I'm just not following your magical formula for how businesses can absorb higher wages (other than they should be less "greedy"). I'm sure business owners struggling to keep prices down and make payroll in a competitive market don't think of themselves as greedy."

Doug once again your argument is laced with standard run of the mill "neoliberal" ideas based on romatic notions of generous businessmen running around like chickens with there heads cut off to stay afloat in a the "free-market" gone mad!

I am going to save the both of us a whole lot of writing and just say that we are on two different sides of the arugement. You are for low consumer prices at the cost of a decent living for workers and you claim, through neo-liberal romanticism, that this somehow benefits the workers. No matter how i read or look at your article it states that workers should not attempt to gain higher wages because that will end in corporate bankrupcy.

In essence your arguments and article are anti-worker and pro-business. Not only that, your arguments say more about your perspective than your heartfelt sympathy.

My "magical formula for how businesses can absorb higher wages (other than they should be less "greedy")," is quite simple. If you look all over the globe and throughout history we can see how this "magical formula" was put into practice. Historical materialism shows the history of capitalism as in phases of conflict between workers wanting more and owners of capital wanting more...

Making things simple, currently we are in a period of economic and government reorganization or restructuring on a global scale and both sides are scambling to get a bigger "piece of the pie".

As for unionism, I have a better example of functioning unionism, look at South Korea's labor movement. As for historical unions with something positive to offer the future we have the IWW (industrial workers of the world, wobblies). Neo-liberal anti-unionism is a reactionary and very anti-worker perspective that attempts to get workers to see themselves as their job. We must never forget that people work out of the necessity of survival nothing more. we are not our jobs, we are not wal-mart, gas stations, or computer stores, etc...in a service economy addicted to low-wage labor across the borders and seas it is a race to the bottom and in order to survive campaigns such as these in coordination with campaigns and activism across the globe must happen to improve our lives. we are thinking globally and acting locally.

As for blaming auto-workers and auto-unions for factories closing down and moving out of state is just ridiculous. I understand the point about lower wages and people "willing" to work for less in mexico or asia but I dont buy it. Nor does this argument justify workers to do nothing. To do nothing is an impossibility anyways.

Business owners do not think of themselves as greedy just was kings did not think of themselves as despots. Either way we can never ignore what despotic rule or "competitive business owners" regardless of their justification force the rest of us to scrape by.

My arugment or "magical formula" still stands and i have history on my side. If you are still skeptical you can just ask these questions.

1.In all of human history, especially post-industrial revolution, workers have struggled to improve their lot(8 hour day from 12 hour day, payed holiday, benefits, less work same pay, more workers on the lot same pay, etc...) by various means of action(some peaceful, some not) and through all these changes and raising the cost of labor have businesses still not obtained their profits?

2.Also, during these events in history when workers won union contracts, better working conditions, or higher pay has there not always been present arguments of economic collapse or higher unemployment due to the coming changes to scare people of change?

TO BE CONTINUED???

Fight For Köpenhamn

So much can be said about the historical, current, pratical, and cultural importance regarding The Ungdomshuset (Youth House) in Copenhagen, Denmark for Norreboro, the youth, the left, and city culture but it all seems to be slipping away as if it is something from the past already in memory lane. After taking part in an 8,000 person strong demostration filled with all types of people young and old in defense of Ungdomshuset I can only say that I am sad for never giving myself the time to actually enjoy enough of what Copenhagen had to offer and sad because we are losing a place that allowed "us" to communicate and entertain in the open. The state is attempting to both marginalize, criminalize, and neutralize the Dannish autonomous-left by first demolizing the Blue House Squat, now evicting Ungdomshuset and selling the property off to some right-wing evangilical christians, and making it harder for people to openly and inclusively organize and congregrate. The state sees the autonomous-left as a threat and are hoping by destroying "our" places and kicking us to the curb we will fall apart and disappear. But if the last few days are anything to indicate what the Dannish state has brought upon itself, the UNGDOMSHUSET LIVES ON!

Ungdomshuset








Ungdomshuset FOR SALE: house including 500 stonethrowing autonomists from hell!



8,000 supporting Ungdomshuset. March 3rd. Copenhagen.

DING DONG THE BUSH IS DEAD

The Death of the President.

“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”

-George Orwell.

George Orwell once wrote…that, "It's not a matter of whether the war is not real or if it is. Victory is not possible. The war is not meant to be won. It is meant to be continuous. A hierarchical society is only possible…on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new version is the past...and no different past can ever have existed. In principle, the war effort is always planned...to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects. And its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia...... but to keep the very structure of society intact. "

-George Orwell, Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 9/11).

Gabriel Range's film, Death of a President which won the International Critics Prize at the Toronto 2006 Film Festival is a pseudo-documentary about the assassination of the 43rd President of the United States of America, George Walker Bush (Dubya). The White House did not even comment on the movie and oppositional party member Senator Hillary Clinton thought that Range’s film was, “despicable” and “absolutely outrageous” but Marx-Trek must say the film was compelling, ultra-realistic...to realistic…, and a very cleaver critique of the American psyche, paranoia, ultra-nationalism, despotism, and the complete disconnect between the state and America’s citizenry.

It was something of comedy to see such an accurate glimpse into a possible future out come. The film was set in 2008 where President Dubya is successfully assassinated and the following fake interviews from a jolly god-filled presidential speech writer who just seemed be one step away from seeing beyond our realm who reminds me of the ever so clueless mother in the Adam Sandler movie, Water Boy, a self-righteous lying scumbag police chief who refers to peaceful demonstrations with the crack of his baton, and finally a entire population held hostage and ignored by the state. A spectacle so gripping it cannot be ignored, no matter how fake it is.

The sad reality of this pseudo-documentary is that the US government did not have to wait until the assassination of a president to implement measures that track, spy, and kidnap human-beings. Nor did the US government have to wait for some terror attack such as 9/11 to occur before introducing Big Brother. No, the US government did not have to wait for such dramatic events because legally or “illegally” most of these outrageous practices are already in place. During the feature all I could think about is how such spectacles can either be down played or turned up in high gear so that Empire can achieve its objective. The film played on the all too familiar gut wrenching reality or possible reality, it does not really matter how fake or real, where I was left with a satisfied thought. President Bush does not need to be assassinated to achieve some political goal nor does he need to be killed so that people around him understand that he truly is a war-monger and demon for capitalism not a drunkard born-again saint. This film pretty much lets Bush and Co. know that there is an immense amount of hatred for them all and that plenty of people around world will actually get satisfaction from watching President Bush go down from a semi-automatic carbine sniper rifle from 300 yards away. For satisfied customers the bonus is that they can watch his assassination over, over, and over again.

Knowing that Death of a President is a fake documentary and that the people in the film are in no way connected or based on reality I still feel that the film itself could pass-off as reality. Point being, reality passes us all by with little or no thought and the horrors of reality themselves go unnoticed. Actually, it is not that the far off third world tragedies go unnoticed it is more accurate to say that our own horrors and alienation from our everyday lives keep us all in a constant state of disconnect. So the film itself is as much a real documentary as it is fake. In the early 1900’s it was anarchists, from the 50’s to the 70’s it was communists, the 80’s drugs, and the 2000’s terrorists of all sorts lurking around every corner ready to take your freedom. No matter what decade the threat remains, a faceless problem, a ghost, a spectre! Its not that the US is at war with terrorism or Iraq, they are at war with us all.

Churchill, Why Are You So Skeptical?

Churchill, Why Are You So Skeptical?

“It is clear that, up to now, the forces of production have never been developed to the point where enough could be developed for all, and that private property has become a fetter and a barrier in relation to the further development of the forces of production.”

~Karl Marx, “The Principals of Communism.

“At first glance good reason to rejoice; but no sooner does the slightest suspicion enter one’s mind that it becomes obvious that all these forces have simply redeployed, and are now waging the same war under different colors. Green, lest not forget, is also the color of the dollar bill. The new and improved consumerism may be democratic, it maybe ironic, but always presents its bill, and the bill must always be paid. A life governed by a sanctioned greed is by no means freed thereby from the old tyranny of having to forfeit one’s life simply to pay for it…”

~Raul Vaneigem, The Revolution of Everyday Life.

I must say that I like Ward Churchill but this article is the most randomly pieced together interpretation of Marxism I have ever read. I believe there is a great many different kinds of Marx within Marx’s own writings and it is completely unfair and out of context to pretty much just mix it all together to make a good point in a very bad way. We can see Marx the historian of ideas, Marx the historian of the evolution of political-economy, Marx the communist, Marx the critic of capitalism, Marx the interpreter and translator of capitalism where we gain so much knowledge concerning capitals relation to both the Earth and Humanity (all humans even non-European hold outs, the few that are left). Churchill’s article did contain some positive critiques concerning Marx’s non-PC/insensitive/Eurocentric language but Churchill’s theoretical understanding of Marx and Marxism, Communism (anarchist-communism, libertarian-Marxism, etc..), a classless society (not Stalinism, Marxist-Leninism, China, Cuba, Soviet Union, etc…) seems to be confused or even slanted to fit his own agenda, which is fine. I totally respect and admire what AIM fights for! I just feel that Churchill is trying to debate an issue that is a non-issue.

Churchill states, “Marx was very straightforward in acknowledging that the sold cultural model upon which he was basing theses on history and value was his own, that is to say European (or, more accurately, northwestern European) context. He even committed a paper several provisos stipulating that it would be inappropriate and misleading to attempt to apply the principles deriving form his examination or the dominate matrix in Europe to other, non-Europe3an contexts, each of which he (correctly) pointed out would have to be understood in its own terms before it could be properly understood vis a vis Europe. With this said, however, Marx promptly violated his own posited methodology in this regard, offering a number of non-European examples - of which he admittedly know little or nothing - as illustration of various points he wished to make in his elaboration on the historical development of Europe. Chinese society, to name a prominent example of this, was cast (really miscast) as "Oriental feudalism," thus supposedly shedding a certain light on this stage of European history. "Red Indians," about whom Marx knew even less about than he did of the Chinese, became examples of "primitive society," illustrating what he wanted to say about Europe's Stone Age…Insofar as all cultures were made to conform with the material correspondences of one or another moment in European history, and given that only Europe exhibited a "capitalist mode of production" and social organization - which Marx held to be the "highest form of social advancement" as of the point he was writing - it follows that all non-European cultures could be seen as objectively lagging behind Europe.”

And,

“In plainest terms, Marxism holds as "an immutable law of history" that all non-European culture must be subsumed in what is now called "Europeanization." It is their inevitable destiny, a mater to be accomplished in the mane of progress and "for their own good." Again, we may detect echoes of the Jesuits within the "anti-spiritualist" Marxian construct.”

Concerning Marx’s choice of word I must say, yes his interpretation of the world is Eurocentric and I could see why people would be turned off or even offended reading words that refer to one’s own cultural and economic system as “primitive” in relation to Europe. Then again it is within the context of a historical analysis that sees capitalism as a more advanced economic system then feudalism, hunter-gatherer, and all the pre-capitalist economic systems and I agree. His meaning of “advanced” does not automatically mean superior. Rather, a more “advanced” economic system means, in comparison to other forms of production, that under capitalism workers have a better material existence than under feudalism, etc… With the development of capitalism came the people’s liberation from peasantry, serfdom, and extreme poverty but that liberation is not synonymous with utopia, peace, or Marxism. As capitalism was organized and workers began filling places of labor capitalism created its own time bomb, the negation of capitalism is the working class. Marx understands history and human existence as contradictions that are both exploited and destroyed which he refers to as dialectic materialism. A communist’s, a Marxist’s, and an anarchist’s main political goal is to understand and exploit these contradictions within capitalism and other economic conditions to better their condition. As in the autonomous zones of Chiapas where the Zapatistas try to remain outside of capitalism but find themselves in constant war with capitalism to defend the scraps they have.

Churchill’s main argument or most reasonable argument seems to be more about linguistics or semantics concerning revolutionary theory. I agree, there can be some tasteless language from the old 1800’s bearded men on both the anarchist and communist/Marxist camp. If you want to see some real “Eurocentrism” in action read some Proudon or Stirner. But the beauty of political theory is its evolution through time and the ability to go back to older texts and create a new political tradition that is relevant today. It is ridiculous to jumble together Lenin and Marx and then assume that it’s the same thing, as did Mr. Churchill, because that is a very linear way of looking at Marxism, anarchism, communism, etc… There exists many different political traditions that have their roots in Marx’s writings and to critique Marx through the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and all the horrible dictators throughout the world who once called themselves communists is not a critique of Marx. It is a cheap shot, a punch below the belt.

Most importantly, anarchist-communism is not something in the far off distant future to be attained. Rather anarchist-communism is a current through history that has been around as long as one class of humans exploited the labor of another class and this anarchist-communist current is what forces human societies to reorganize itself and restructure its production process (primitive-communism millions of years old and 21^st century leftism). An anarchist-communist’s mission is to use this social, political, and economic current in a revolutionary period and hopefully partake in an insurrection, but what happens usually is barbarism, capitalism regains control, fascism, etc… But to be more specific this current is more powerful or more relevant now than say in France during the French Revolution, the capitalist revolution against feudalism. So in response to Churchill’s point that Leftist are in some way religious because they believe in a better future is not accurate, communism is a social current.

As stated by Riff-Raff, “Communism is not an ideal that will be created. It is already in existence, not as a society but a current, a task to prepare one self for. Communism is a movement which is attempting to abolish the human-condition that is determined by wage-labor, communism will abolish it through revolution. The discussion of communism is not an academic one, it is not a debate about what is going to happen tomorrow, communism is an integrated aspect of an entire series of immediate and distant tasks, where discussion is only an aspect in reaching theoretical understanding. On the other hand, such a task could easily and more effectively be carried out if we could answer the question: where are we going?”

Churchill is right in saying that Marxism has Eurocentric qualities and that it flows from a history rooted in Western Judeo-Christian culture but no more than the !Kung are “!Kungucentric” and have their beliefs grounded in a !Kung culture. Are political theories worse or bad for the Earth and all of humanity simply because they come from Europe or is this another one of Churchill’s punches below the midsection? Just because Judeo-Christian culture and all that comes from it seems to be destructive we must recognize that left-wing radicalism grew naturally out of this material condition as a vicious and very real opposition. When left-wing politics refers to all of humanity it is simply responding to the simple yet horrifying material reality that capitalism has pretty much integrated the entire biosphere and all its inhabitants into its cogs and therefore all of humanity must struggle against capitalism, regardless if you are an “indigenist,” peasant, campesino, or “working-class” (all are working-class). Capitalism is not at your door step, the phone call is coming from inside the house! Look at all the benefits that Marxism, anti-capitalism, Lenin, anarchism, etc…has done for the EZLN. I think the anarcho-primitivists, libertarian-Marxists, anarchists, or “techno-anarchists”/anti-anti-civilizationists can find some common ground and solidarity within the Zapatista resistance. The autonomous zones of Chiapas are a great example of a social current but I am sure that the Zapatistas and campesinos say, we still have a long way to go.

If the indigenous populations around the world are not going to ally themselves with the left who have traditionally been very active in their right to “self determination” or freedom to remain “outside” capitalism’s cogs, then who are they going to ally themselves with? The way I see it, an anarchist-communist revolution that puts the power back into the hands of the working class is the indigenous population’s only hope. How long can a few thousand people spread across the world with different ways of living, different ways of sustaining themselves, and different traditions going to act out independently, unified, and win against a system that has engulfed the entire world and its population without allying itself with the left? The numbers do not add up. Churchill is right in saying that a Marxist’s interest and an “Indigenist’s” interest are not the same but that does not mean that they have nothing in common, quite the opposite. Left-wing radical politics does not want to integrate the indigenous lands into capitalism, capitalism wants that. Left-wing radicalism is not interested in the subsumption of indigenous lands or peoples into their “communist utopia”. To be blunt, they can do all the peasant farming or hunting and gathering they want more consumption for me and my fellow techno folk.

Value, what is value? Churchill seems to have a romantic, idealistic, and maybe even a mystic view of nature and places value on some kind of spiritual essence within nature as opposed to the supposed nature hating materialist’s view of nature. Then again Churchill’s critique of the left-wing materialists might be ignoring other forms of value besides raw material, maybe immaterial or abstract value?

Churchill states, “A mountain is worth nothing as a mountain; it only accrues value by being "developed" into its raw productive materials such as ores, or even gravel. It can hold a certain speculative value, and thus be bough and sold, but only wish such developmental ends in view. Similarly, a forest holds value only in the sense that it can be converted into a product known as lumber; otherwise, it is mere an obstacle to valuable, productive use of land through agriculture or stock-raising, etc. (an interesting commentary on the Marxian view of the land itself). Again, other species hold value only in terms their utility to productive processes (e.g.: meat, fur, leather, various body oils, eggs, milk, transportation in some instances, even fertilizer); otherwise they may, indeed must be preempted and supplanted by the more productive use of the habitat by humans.”

Though immaterial value might not be the exact right term, maybe immaterial surplus-value in the context of capitalism, it will have to do until I find a better suiting term to explain sightseeing, an emotional interaction with nature, or the need or feeling to preserve woodland, water systems, oceans, ancient cultures attached to the land, bio diversity etc… Just because left-wing politics and theory might not be centered on the welfare of nature does not mean that non primitivist radicals are not worried about the environmental state of our planet. Hell, in order for humanity to survive we must create sustainable societies even capitalism and capitalists are starting to understand that they cannot extract surplus-value and profit from both raw material and the working-class if either are around. If the Earth is to polluted to extract usable capital, harass ancient cultures that stand in the way of trade routes, exploit humanities emotional attachment to nature, and the working-class is to sick and poor to produce surplus-value and profit for capital then the entire free-trade system will collapse. Industrial collapse is something that seems to be glorified within the green-anarchist movements and if I may punch below the belt, is this not some future event when all becomes well again and humanity is finally reintegrated back into nature, harmony? So it seems that Eurocentric Judeo-Christian culture has even infiltrated the green-anarchist/primitivist movements. What will happen to the green-anarchist/primitivists when capitalism goes green to sustain itself?

Because,“…At first glance good reason to rejoice; but no sooner does the slightest suspicion enter one’s mind that it becomes obvious that all these forces have simply redeployed, and are now waging the same war under different colors. Green, lest not forget, is also the color of the dollar bill. The new and improved consumerism may be democratic, it maybe ironic, but always presents its bill, and the bill must always be paid. A life governed by a sanctioned greed is by no means freed thereby from the old tyranny of having to forfeit one’s life simply to pay for it…” (Raul Vaneigem, The Revolution of Everyday Life, preface to the 1^st French paperback edition.)

Well back to the issue of value, value can be put on anything that can create surplus value within capitalism regardless if that products end result is material or immaterial. Churchill is wrong when he states,

“A mountain is worth nothing as a mountain; it only accrues value by being "developed" into its raw productive materials such as ores, or even gravel. It can hold a certain speculative value, and thus be bough and sold, but only wish such developmental ends in view. Similarly, a forest holds value only in the sense that it can be converted into a product known as lumber; otherwise, it is mere an obstacle to valuable, productive use of land through agriculture or stock-raising, etc. (an interesting commentary on the Marxian view of the land itself). Again, other species hold value only in terms their utility to productive processes (e.g.: meat, fur, leather, various body oils, eggs, milk, transportation in some instances, even fertilizer); otherwise they may, indeed must be preempted and supplanted by the more productive use of the habitat by humans.”

Though he is correct in stating that a mountain, a forest, an animal, and a human’s labor power can be reproduced as something valuable to capital, Churchill ignores the fact that a mountain, a forest, an animal, and a human can also embody an immaterial and abstract surplus-value/exchange-value and a use-value. The left glorifies the use-value, death to exchange-value. Also what Churchill seems to confuse is how a leftist views value and how capitalism views value. But Churchill is absolutely correct when he observes this interesting Marxian view on value itself but his observation is not all that interesting or profound. Just as a capitalist sees value in extracting ore, skinning animals for fur, or logging forests for consumption an anarchist-communist sees value in socially extracting raw material from nature for social use a “Native America” sees value in cutting down trees to make canoes, killing animals for meat and fur , and using nature to ease her life. All three have something in common yet vast differences.

Native Americans and other indigenous cultures around the world are little in size, their existence is ecologically sustainable, and they see the same kind of “western” value in nature, something to be used, as western capitalist and Marxists. Capitalists are in control of a society that is not ecologically sustainable but do not ever underestimate a capitalists drive to continue extracting surplus-value, if he has to create an ecologically sustainable free-market economy and reduce pollution levels to sustainable levels to insure his profit he will definitely do it. This is where a “Marxist-environmentalist” theory comes into play. Marxism does not view this on going transformation within capitalism to a more environmentally friendly capitalism as something that capital does out of its own good will. Rather, the working-class, indigenous peoples, and the natural fact that nature is collapsing are all active subjects forcing capitalism to restructure itself because we refuse to live this way! The only pisser is this, the social current for revolution seems to be too weak at this moment to abolish capitalism and of therefore our struggle and energy for change will be integrated into the cogs of capitalism. But the dialectic remains! So, the continued world grasp continues but at least it will soon be an environmentally sustainable capitalist grasp that we must struggle against to continue our fight to develop environmentally decentralized communist societies or we underestimate capitalist ignorance and arrogance and we do face industrial collapse and then I am afraid that barbarism and decentralized clan type fascism will come to the defense of the ruins of capitalism. At least in this Mad Max or Kevin Costner’s, “The Postman” future society power will be decentralized and the left can federate itself to create more autonomous zones but I would long for the day that we could fully feed, cloth, and entertain humanity. Either way, Marxism and anarchist-communism remains.

Notes:

-Churchill, W. http://www.cwis.org/fwj/22/falsep.htm

-Marx, K. The Principals of Communism.

-Vaneigem,R. The Revolution of Everyday Life.

Star Trek-Marx Trek, are Trek?

coming soon!

Human or Commodity?

To survive in the market place as workers who produce value/surplus value/commodities means to give up the most important quality we as human beings have: our time, our selves, our control over our lives, and our fundamental understanding of what it means to be human (freedom) in exchange for a forced existence in alienation to ourselves and what we produce. Our struggle must only have one objective, take control over our own lives. By realizing that our labor power socially produces value/commodities in a society that privately controls the distribution of wealth, we must rise above the trash heap that is capitalism and socially consume, oh glory to use-value! The adventure is how and when we get there!

Why GRAF "cant stop, wont stop" living in 1992.

coming soon!

International Cycle of Struggles!

We need not demand the right to work, but the right to a decent life!

“Extensively, the common is mobilized in communication from one local struggle to another… the geographical expansion of movements takes the form of an international cycle of struggles in which revolts spread from one local context to another like a contagious disease through the communication of common practices and desires.”

-Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt, Multitude

We need not demand the right to work, but the right to a decent life! Capital chooses when it needs one’s labor, when the opposite should transpire out of our struggle, we must gain control over our labor and lives. The government and businesses are in business with one another, nation-states and supernational organizations are the collective think tanks and enforcer for capitalism. Two consequences: the illusion of business not wanting illegal labor, in turn for cheaper wage labor and successfully eliminating workers being able to dissent and demand their rights, out of fear of deportation and prison. The opening of borders for corporations to freely move across the globe but walls, borders, and death await those who want to move freely. Throughout the world a contradiction keeps money and profit circulating without static but detains the very element that makes this profit possible, the worlds working population.

Attempting to create a chasm between the struggling people of different geographical regions, neutralizing the threat of an already existing true international class war where workers with common desires for freedom from poverty, boredom, wage slavery, border laws, and from work itself will fail because of our unity and creativity. Taking it upon one self to move, freely, without abstract interpretation, we stand in solidarity with the idea that no matter what the reason, the freedom to move without consequence should undoubtedly exist. Not only to describe the notions and paths of the multitude (the North American housewife, the student, part-time worker, Mexican free-trade zone laborer, migrant worker, Palestinian refugee, Indios, illegal immigrant, peasant, teacher, nurse, cubical wage-slave, homeless, youth, elderly, material and immaterial laborer, etc…), but to support human liberation from restraint in all its forms. Neutralizing the “multitude” is impossible, thus our presence nation wide today.

No matter the tactics of capitalism: from racist minutemen, nationalist politicians, reactionaries, propaganda machines, spectacle driven news corporations, to neo liberal free-trade capitalists, people continuously resist border laws and capitalism, thus a dis-rhythm is presented. Reorganizing society to benefit business and not people is not in our interest, we must struggle against capitalism to obtain true global human liberation.

A paradox exists in the encroachment of mobility and human freedom. It will never be tolerated. Proof of this exists in a migrant and non migrant proletarian gathering, in the streets, in solidarity, in revolt. Resistors, workers, and neighbors must unite, are uniting, in common desires, to demand freedom from the market, not a free market.

Contact GRAF: grafbeyondgraf@yahoo.com or www.myspace.com/grafbeyondgraf

GRAF: Non-Party Program

GRAF

Global (Greensboro’s) Revolutionary Autonomous Front

Non-Party Program

(SECOND DRAFT)

“…At first glance good reason to rejoice; but no sooner does the slightest suspicion enter one’s mind that it becomes obvious that all these forces have simply redeployed, and are now waging the same war under different colors. Green, lest not forget, is also the color of the dollar bill. The new and improved consumerism may be democratic, it maybe ironic, but always presents its bill, and the bill must always be paid. A life governed by a sanctioned greed is by no means freed thereby from the old tyranny of having to forfeit one’s life simply to pay for it…”

~Raul Vaneigem, The Revolution of Everyday Life, preface to the 1^st French paperback edition.

1. We are for a society that is free of monetary exchange, socio-economic hierarchies, and societies that glorify the use-value of commodities vs. exchange-value. Therefore we are anti-capitalists and consider ourselves left-communists, anarchist-communists, anarchists, and autonomous-leftists.

2. We recognize that the free-market organizes itself through a state-apparatus in order to collectively conduct repressive and expansive measures that erect a society of control which constructs economic regions of domination kept in place by police and military forces who inhibit freedom of movement. By creating a society with no outside existence, the multitude is forced to take part in the capitalist’s cogs. We support the social call for no-nations/no-borders and will partake in constructing a society free of a state-apparatus, while enthusiastically empowering communities of people to create community participation based on more non-hierarchical decision making processes, a multitude of international-worker class democracies.

3. We recognize that classism and racism exists on two plains: social and institutional. Understanding that capitalism effectively uses both racial prejudices and tolerance to manipulate that working class to extract cheap labor and socially divide local and global communities on the basis of fear, fear will be replaced with respect and alliances (GRAF will also work on internal racism).

4. Capitalism maintains a class society for its very survival. The owning class projects a certain class perspective through education, media, and supposed leisure activity, this is not our class therefore not our perspective. We hope to make visible the class contradictions/hypocrisies integrated into our current social situation to better re-create a society riddled with class-division and privilege into a vibrant classless society.

5. We are for a society that respects each individual’s sexuality that is nurturing and compassionate. We recognize that hetero-sexism has socially integrated sexist and homophobic perspectives and behavior into the collective populous; therefore we will be active in the struggle for women’s liberation and homosexual freedom.

6. We are for a society free of sexism and male domination. We understand that patriarchal-capitalism has instilled a false male-superiority complex in social relations that emotionally and physically drain women. Patriarchal-capitalism has also made personal relationships and social interactions based on the commodity economy, making love financial. Understanding this, the movement of movements must destroy sexism and patriarchy once and for all (GRAF will also work on internal sexism).

7. During the existence of capitalism the physical world has become more and more integrated to better serve the free-market, with little regard to various bio-regions, ecological sustainability, animal and plant life, and indigenous cultures bound to traditional lands. We recognize ecological sustainability insures healthy specie survival and bio-diversity; therefore we support animal liberation from capitalism, eco-defense, and indigenous resistance to corporate-globalization and privatization of traditional communal lands.

8. We recognize there exists a healthy multitude of movements against the same enemies and we embrace this multitude. Understanding what works for us may not for fighting people in Asia, Europe, South America, Africa, Central America, the Middle East, or city to city. Communication is key! There exists an interconnectedness between these multitudes as with the North American housewife, the student, part-time worker, Mexican free-trade zone laborer, migrant worker, Palestinian refugee, Indios, illegal immigrant, peasant, teacher, nurse, cubical wage-slave, homeless, youth, elderly, material and immaterial laborer, etc…

9. We understand that work is something that is determined and dictated to the multitude by capitalism, therefore we support the idea of zero work for capital while undertaking socially conscious productive labor (necessary labor) for the local and global community, subverting the capitalist work place and “open” social spaces to create.

10. We support various tactics and methods of action to overcome this sexist-racist-class dictatorship to create a free, vibrant, and fun global classless societies.

MISSION STATEMENT

Without a doubt, capitalist created technologies, innovations, and development have allowed for faster communication, faster means of production, more agricultural production, and medical breakthroughs that could potentially benefit a classless society. These commodities currently have a price and are subject to classism. Now more than ever, Capitalism has entered into our everyday life and is visible in all aspects of social interactions. Our personal relationships with lovers and friends are beginning to embody behavior dictated by capital. As capitalism integrates huge portions of living life into a society that resembles theatrics, our lives and social relations are viewed rather than action. Capitalism or spectacular society is attempting to make its own negation internalize capitalistic ideology in hopes of safe guarding its own existence. GRAF wants to project a radical and true working class perspective into the cogs of capitalism to bring about its demise.

EDUCATION & THEORITICAL RADICALISM

Working will never be demonized by capitalism because human labor binds all capital together. In this fact rests both capitalism’s negation and the class war. Due to compromise of some past labor movements and current trade-union perspectives (AFL-CIO) the battle for no work has been lost and converted to empty labor slogans such as, “equal work opportunities for all,” and “jobs for all who want to work”. We must find the radical, spontaneous, and true labor perspective once again, the resurrection of autonomous class warfare.

Though, the working class can benefit from the state-apparatus, welfare and other government assistance, we want to expose the fraternal police orders for what they really are, city-to-city thugs who carry out day-to-day repressive measures to maintain order within the spectacle, the streets are the trenches before private property. In order to understand our own wishes we must fully understand the inner-workings of this spectacular-capitalist society in order to overcome! No matter how progressive either liberal labor union demands become or how socially progressive global governing bodies become we recognize: 1. the working class’s own struggle for freedom demanded capitalists and bureaucrats to reform current conditions, 2. these reforms will be revoked as quickly as they were created if the situation presents itself, and 3. we demand freedom from the market, not a free-market!