Dead radical dance party

<<How about Murray? (oh wait, he's not dead)>>

god, you 'post-left' anarkids are tacky. boring, too.

i've yet to see a substantive critique of bookchin's politics from a 'post-left' perspective that isn't full of this sort of gratuitous crap. bob black's one-liners are funny, but does anyone take that creep seriously?

Why do you hurt us so? Is it because you hurt too?

you mean substantive critiques like "tacky" and "boring"?

anarchy magazine's fixation with bookchin is tired.

i remember a few years ago, anarchy mag had a huge poster at the anarchist book-fair with bookchin's mug and under it "All Hail Big Murray!" It made you all look like sectarian asswipes. of all the people to target, you guys go after a 90 year old radical whose been fighting the system since the 1930s. this latest comment ("oh, he's not dead) is in itself no big deal, but it is similarly disrespectful and unnecessary.

sorry, i guess i missed your substantive critiques again. "tired" "disrespectful" and "unecessary" are all moral judgments based on your subjective values. they are not substantive, nor do they convince me that mercilessly criticizing a person who sets himself up as a gloriously original thinker (old man murray) should be stopped. but i'm perfectly happy to move on to you. you say that murray is a "radical who's been fighting the system since the 1930s" which is true after a fashion. in order to believe that statement, however, you first have to believe that stalinism and trotskyism are authetically radical movements. i don't. i believe that all forms of leninism are movements of authoritarian state-builders who rely on cops, taking hostages, and the wanton use of firing squads. that's no kind of radical social change i want to be a part of. murray became an anarchist in the '60s, and wrote many important things. but since he declared war on his (perceived) anarchist enemies with the scurrilous, sectarian, and paranoid "social anarchism or lifestyle anarchism" he's made himself unpopular among many anarchists (not all, certainly). in other words, he started it. some may not have the stomach for "infighting" but i'm happy to have at it. he has a pattern of attacking former allies as well. if he'd just shut up, nobody would feel the need to continue to defend themselves from his meandering and increasingly incoherent attacks. until that day, i say he's fair game--as are we all. any time any of us says or writes something stupid, we must expect at least a few people with brains to call us on it--as i have with you. if you can't come up with any substantive critiques (reverence for elders is not sufficient) about the contents of anarchy magazine, stop writing about it. (and if you can, you can always send them a letter--they'll publish it and comment on it if they so choose.) you were the one who brought up the need for substantive critiques--i'm just holding you to what i presume are your own standards.

I see what the problem is aaron.
Your looking for costume ideas for the party and are frustrated that Murray is not an option. That's fine, come as Emma, Nestor, or Johann. It doesn't matter to me. As long as you show up. As long as you dance.

As long as you dance.

Dancing is petit bourgeoisie as far as I am concerned. Real radicals glower and plan for the next black bloc.