Thursday, July 07, 2005

Too much blogging; Friends of Durruti Group

My brother convinced me that I would get more traffic on my blog if I started keeping a diary on "The Daily Kos." He's right, but the problem w/ writing on Kos is that I actually have to approach the whole thing differently than I do here. After all, you're my friends, family and occasional indymedia either know me well enough, or are familiar enough w/the far-left-end of the political spectrum to know what I'm talking about when I casually talk about "abolishing the white race" or "sticking it to the man" or whatever. It's a lot of homework to shift audiences, man!
I know it's good practice.
So, after an exhausting post explaining the whole theory of "race traitor," in my dkos diary, which will no doubt need a fire-extinguisher by 9am tomorrow, I'm a bit tapped out.
On other matters, I have this reflection. I spent a good portion of my afternoon reading Friends of Durruti, and I have come to the conclusion that it played a significant role in the collapse of Love and Rage Revolutionary Anarchist Federation. How so? The principle argument of the book (reviewed by Chris Day in 1997) is that the Friends of Durruti were the most advanced section of the Spanish anarchist movement because they realized that anarchism was itself inadequate for proletarian revolution. The argument is pretty convincing, but it rejects anarchism directly, saying "the Spanish revolution was the tomb of anarchism." It's funny, the book makes a clear case for the collaboration of the CNT with the bourgeois state, but it didn't warm my heart to the FOD. Jose Peirats, whose writings about the Spanish revolution are highly recommended by Noam Chomsky, said that whenever he went to the FOD meetings they were very authoritarian and seemed always to be talking about shooting people.
Meanwhile, in the presentcoverage of the G8 conference is utterly predictable, unless of course, you follow the indymedia pages in Scotland.


sf_gary said...

I left an unfortunate comment to your 2nd Dkos diary... You're right, in your response, that I've written about the abstract myself. Perhaps even worse, considering my main criticism was that the idea of "abolishing whiteness" would be misperceived, some of what I've written myself could be equally misperceived. So I'm an idiot, all the way around. I must have felt like being snarky and condescending, and your diary, by virute of being the most compelling one on the board at the time, bore the brunt.

But I have a feeling you can take it.

That said... I admire your thought process and I'll be reading your blog (bookmarked). But I'll keep the doofus snarkiness to myself.

reb said...

aw thanks! Glad you reconsidered.