A question for y'all, especially the anarchist contingent.......

[socialist_n_TN]

I've noticed a new meme in the MSM recently. It's all about "anarchists" now. Off the top of my head and in no particular order:

A) The cops raid homes in the NW and confiscate "anarchist" literature for the Grand Jury.
B) The guys that killed the two deputies in Louisiania were called "anarchists" in the headline. (I saw this personally in the Mobile paper).
C) Tampa empties the jail over the threat of "anarchists" from out of town (outside agitators coming to town to do...(?) whatever it is that anarchists do in the imagination of the supporters of the PTBs.
D) They called the guys in the Army that they arrested for plotting to kill Obama "anarchists".

My main question would be, do you guys here think any of these folks are really anarchists? Maybe "A" and POSSIBLY "C", but "B" and "D"? They remind me more of violent libertarians than anarchists, but I don't consider myself an expert on anarchist theory. What do you guys think?

It seems to me the MSM are trying to conflate any violent or semi-violent group they come accross as "anarchists". I smell another red scare brewing.

[limpyhobbler]

1. It's weird how much "anarchism" has been in the news lately.

A) Yes these are anarchists, based on their own statements. The government might be using the vandalism case as a pretense to map out a wider social network, intimidate them, and disrupt their protest activities.

B) The killers in Louisiana were "Sovereign Citizen" right-wingers. Definitely NOT anarchists. They are anti government right wingers whose ideology grew out of the Christian Identity movement. The media incorrectly refered to them as anarchists.

C) who can say?

D) The news reported the group had tattoos that "resembled the anarchy symbol". I assume the government is lying about that until I see a picture of the tattoos and hear what is the justification for calling them anarchists. Did they self-identify like that or what?

I think we're witnessing a smear campaign. Not a conspiracy but just somehow it is working out that way as the media has taken to calling every group of anti-government shitheads anarchists.

[socialist_n_TN]

4. RE: your last paragraph, that's what I'm thinking too limp ........

And as to the conspiracy aspect, remember how Faux does things. They'll plant an idea in a blog somewhere and then talk about it because it was "being talked about". Not exactly a conspiracy, but quite an effective way to get a meme out there.

As to Freedom Road, I've always heard them called socialists, but who knows?

[limpyhobbler]

8. I find the whole thing kind of depressing.

Anarchism is a valuable part of our intellectual heritage on the left. Many socialists are influenced to a certain extent by anarchist ideas. I don't think either CNN or the cops are going to make distinctions about who is an anarchist compared to who is an anarcho-syndicalist.

Even pure black flag anarchists are mostly peaceful and make valuable contributions to protest movements and in the community.

Were you talking about the folks currently being investigated related to the May Day vandalism in Seattle? The six raids in Portland, Seattle and Olympia? I think that is a very loose network of red/black/red-black tendency groups.

The folks being subpoenaed have received support from all over the place. Lot's of groups have denounced the raids and the use of the Grand Jury as an instrument of political repression. Here's a support site. People including Michael Parenti and Noam Chomsky have made statements on the political repression that are posted here -
http://nopoliticalrepression.wordpress.com/

At least some of them in Portland call themselves anarchists. She's got a tumblr blog -

In a follow-up interview with The Stranger, Plante said she wasn’t even in Seattle on May 1 and is neither a witness to nor a perpetrator of any related crimes. She is, however, a self-declared anarchist and thinks the FBI singled her out because of her political beliefs and social affiliations.

http://leahxvx.tumblr.com/post/29022444629/art-by-robert-ullman-political

Some of the involved people also made a statement here.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/08/03/18718805.php

This is just a cute picture of some anarchists that people have posted around DU a few times.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

31. "All anarchists are socialists, though not every socialist is an anarchist." - Benjamin Tucker

[IrishAyes]

51. The picture...

... makes me think of Mother Earth News. Sweet!

[HiPointDem]

2. 'communist' just doesn't play as well as it used to, what with the soviets gone & china communist

in name only.

"the international communist conspiracy" = cuba? not so scary.

but anarchists = 23-year-old vegans. also not so scary. maybe it plays well to the over-75 crowd that watches fox.

[socialist_n_TN]

7. Yep, so they conflate the RWers with a scary old word.........

denoting bomb throwers in most people's minds. Never mind the politics aren't anywhere near the same. However it does allow them a convenient catch-all for any resistence fighters.

[IrishAyes]

54. And I NEVER appreciated the blacklisting of Sinn Fein

Michael Collins was so right when he tried to convince people that the time had come to turn to political methods, but clearly that wasn't possible with the British boot heel planted so firmly on the entire island. Today I believe Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness to be in much the same situation.

Forgive me one note on Collins in passing: He was vehemently against the 1916 Easter Rising as premature and doomed to failure although he participated in solidarity. I believe if it had been possible, he would've freed all Ireland w/o bloodshed. To casual passersby who might be unaware, let me note that worldwide history and current events heavily impact every human on Planet Earth whether they realize it or not. It's no exercise in futility for me to keep an eye on events in Ireland past and present, and I'm glued to it by Gerry Adams' general (not personal to me) invitation.

Of course I rather expect this group's membership to have a more alert eye than the public in general, so I'm not presuming to preach to the choir. Just sayin'.

[BOG PERSON]

13. the avg person doesn't know what anarchists want to do

thats why ppl who seem to be radical-without-an-angle get labeled "anarchists"

[joshcryer]

15. Anarchists don't know what anarchists want anarchists to do.

[limpyhobbler]

17. LOL we should put that in the wikipedia article on anarchism.

[TBF]

3. The dreaded "anarchists" killed Occupy as well -

I have been watching ... and yes I think you are spot on. The raids in the NW were of course on Freedom Road (http://freedomroad.org/2012/07/fight-the-seattle-pds-attack-on-the-movement/) - they were raided in Chicago and Minneapolis as well. This democratic administration has labeled them a "terrorist organization" (http://www.solidarity-us.org/site/node/3046). If anyone is confused about who is running this country they only need to note how conservative the democratic party has become and the clown side-show from the other "side". There is no real resistance other than folks like Freedom Road, and so of course that is where the administration is focusing it's efforts. I don't think that is accidental in any way, shape or form.

[socialist_n_TN]

5. Yeah, I didn't think that it was accidental either.........

All of a sudden, every group of dirtbags on the RW that kills or threatens to kill is being conflated with true anarchist and/or resistance groups. It become a pretty familar pattern once you see it done a few dozen times.

[joshcryer]

16. When the bloc was being slandered here I knew...

...that it was only a matter of time before the large scale civil disobedience that the anarchists motivated other Occupiers in to last year would dissipate.

Divide and conquer tactics. First make the "far left radicals" out to be the bad guys, then chop up the Occupy camps, etc.

I still think Occupy has had a lasting effect, though, and is evolving into something else.

[TBF]

19. Interestingly

the vernacular has really made it into the mainstream. References to 1% vs. 99% in the press, cartooning, general usage. That is a huge thing - that folks are again talking about class. If Occupy does nothing else it gets points for that.

[socialist_n_TN]

6. And right on cue, one of the usual suspects........

a Conservadem on GD, mentioned the Army plotters as being "anarchists". Yeah, I do believe we have a budding meme.

[limpyhobbler]

9. Depressingly,

even many liberals and progressives are engaging in it too.

[socialist_n_TN]

10. Well I'm not so sure I'd call the ones on DU........

Engaging in it as being either "liberal" or "progressive". They actually seem to be the same group of posters who show up every time to trash left leaning views.

[TBF]

11. I think this sums it up really well. nt

[IrishAyes]

53. Well,

the education needs to continue, doesn't it? You're already making me a little smarter! I've had my share of misconceptions. I can't be the only person who wants to understand better.

[socialist_n_TN]

12. I'd still like to hear from our anarchist comrades........

It's not a trick question, I promise! I don't have enough of a comfortable foundation in anarchist theory to know whether these Sovereign Citizens RW groups are based in any branch of anarchism or if it's just ignorance of the MSM or deliberate obfuscation.

PLEASE, what say ye?

[joshcryer]

14. I think limpyhobbler answered the main questions.

As far as the general idea that the term is being used in the media more often lately, I don't think so. I think the term "anarchist" has been for decades misused or at least conflated. There was a time in the early 2000s where nazi skinheads were being labeled anarchists. It was very frustrating, particularly when the German nazi skinheads do self-identify as nationalist anarchists (an oxymoron to be sure; arguably more so than "anarcho"-capitalism).

Anarchy can mean "chaos" or "against authority."

Anarchism or anarchist refers to those "against authority."

The media conflates anarchy with anarchism or anarchist.

People who believe in "chaotic anarchy" are discordians or nihilists or more realistically, hooligans.

[BOG PERSON]

18. national anarchism kind of makes sense

if you define a nation as a "race" or a distinct culture (distinct customs, language, religious beliefs etc). so maybe national anarchism could be understood as a sort of racial syndicalism?

[joshcryer]

21. The "nation" would be an authority that actual anarchists reject.

As well as "race."

Crazy I know.

[BOG PERSON]

23. there is not just one nation though

there's hundreds of them. if you intend to abolish nations then surely you aim to abolish the cultures that nations arise from as well. is this the anarchist project? anthropological genocide??

[joshcryer]

24. You can have cultural diversity and identity without national borders.

Autonomous zones are a pivotal aspect of anarchy.

These are not nations because they are not maintained by a state and by arbitrary borders.

Hell, you look at Africa where cultural homogeneity was enforced by colonialism when they chopped up states.

Anarchism would propose to eradicate certain types of anti-egalitarian behavior such as making women wear veils and such. Only the most egregious type of "moral relativists" would find that "wrong." But anarchists would not do this through occupying, force, or violence. They would do so through propaganda and it would take decades if not centuries to rid the worst places of those behaviors.

[BOG PERSON]

25. "Anarchism would propose to eradicate certain types of anti-egalitarian behavior

such as making women wear veils and such. Only the most egregious type of 'moral relativists' would find that 'wrong.'"

how do you reconcile this w/ your support for islamist insurgencies in secular arab states

[joshcryer]

27. I support a peoples self-determination and revolutionary zeal.

I also support things like state social welfare and redistribution which has also got me in "trouble" for the "contradiction." "How can you support social welfare when it's paid for by taxes and enforced by the state?"

You'll note that while many people slandered the Libyan revolutionaries as islamists (as you do even now) the elections in Libya showed that the Muslim Brotherhood and islamists were marginalized. It is because they had a revolution from top to bottom, not just political, but social, economic, and even religious. There are still a lot of problems for Libya to work out, but now at least they have a chance without total authoritarianism.

If you want a total view on what some anarchists feel about the Libyan revolution you can read Andrew Flood's piece here: http://anarchism.pageabode.com/andrewnflood/gaddafi-libya-anti-imperialism-democratic-revolution

I agree with him 100% on this issue and throughout my support for their revolution I had always shared his view. For instance, I knew that it wasn't a "humanitarian intervention" and not once did I say that it was. I knew it was opportunistic. Yet for that entire year I got slandered here by people who can't grasp the gray areas where one can support a peoples but not support those who also 'support' them for opportunistic reasons.

Andrew writes:

How are we to solve this particular contradiction between the formally correct political position of opposing all intervention and the military reality of a democratic revolution that would have been snuffed out, with perhaps considerable loss of life without such intervention?

It's a tough one. And for those who see the world as black and white there is no ethical answer.

[tama]

33. Anarchic tribes

are often called "nations" as in "Indian nations".

Localism and neotribalism a lá ecovillages etc. intentional communities tend to be very anarchic ideas and practices, though they seldom self-identify as 'anarchists'. But I've seen also Kropotkin books on ecovill coffee table.

[socialist_n_TN]

20. Clarify for me Josh........

Do the Sovereign Citizens groups or the Army FEAR group (to your knowledge and from what you've read and seen) have any basis in traditional anarchist theory?

I must confess, I don't think so. But as I stated, anarchist theory isn't this Trotskyist's strongest subject, so I might be missing something.

As to the conflation and misuse of the name, I understand that it's gone on for a long time, BUT it just seems like there's suddenly a LOT more of it in a short period of time lately. And the PTBs do like to bring up a scary boogeyman as often as they can. The simpler the better. What they can do then is lump every resistance group together and blame, for example, Freedom Road for the violent transgressions of FEAR or the other RW and fascist groups all under the label of, in this case, anarchist. I was just wondering if this was a tactic that they were starting to use more often now.

[joshcryer]

22. I don't think so, anarchism is socialist, and "sovereign citizens" tend to be capitalists.

That is not to say that all "sovereign citizens" are capitalists or that none are anarchists but generally speaking I think it's true that most are capitalists. They just don't want to pay taxes or care about the public good.

[IrishAyes]

52. I can certainly...

... buy into your last statement.

After all, one of my main heroines Dorothy Day was a self-described anarchist, which always puzzled me because I lacked the knowledge to understand it. But she was certainly dedicated to serving the least of the poor, and that I revered. It's becoming more clear to me now.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

32. If they are rightwing, they are not anarchists.

Though some of the the Rothbardian types try to claim their "market anarchism" based on a very tenuous interpretation of Proudhon's mutualism - which fits squarely within the leftwing camp.

[IrishAyes]

55. NewSpeak in other words

"Market Anarchism" I mean.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

57. Yes, that's what the Rothbardian types call it ...

... but it's nothing to do with Proudhon's mutualism, which is based on collective ownership of the means of production. Since it's not owned by any "state", mutualism is interchangeable with free-market socialism or free-market anti-capitalism. But again, it's not to be confused with "market anarchism" as the so called "anarco-capitalists" try foist on us (essentially the Hayek version of capitalism).

I'd also like to say that a true free market has nothing to do with capitalism. A free-market can exist within socialism. In fact, without a capitalist to steal the surplus value, the market is truly free and belongs to the worker, so that he/she may exchange their labor/product of labor freely within a collective factory, or even industry and on up in economies of scale.

Free and federated worker societies.

[IrishAyes]

59. I feel smarter already, thanks!

Unfortunately the only self-described anarchist of any sort that I was aware of knowing personally turned out to be rather mean and hateful, interested only in himself, not others - they simply didn't matter to him at all. Destruction of everything did. I allowed that acquaintance to blind me to what you folks are describing as constructive anarchy. That I can support.

Though times are different and hopefully we've learned a little from the past, please keep in mind the experiments of pure democracy in ancient Greece which failed the test of time. In larger settings society needs more freely agreed-upon structure for the sake of efficiency.

A bit like the difference between micro economics and macro economics. Can you believe I was fool enough to try to explain that to someone in RedneckLand one day not long after arriving? Learned my lesson there, I did! The whole bus stayed in an uproar all day (long away trip) while I sat there shell shocked, wondering what hell I'd retired to.

And I swear I kept a straight face when one middle aged guy bragged to me earlier about his girlfriend having almost reached the 11th grade in high school. That seems to have made her the unassailable authority on everything. Anything much beyond Dr. Suess and you've lost them; they'll turn on you for it too.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

61. Your friend sounds like a nihilist ...

Destruction for sake of destruction with no other goal other than to just destroy, is nihilism. There are destructive anarchists, but it's supposed to be, in theory at least, to make way for construction (constructive destruction, if you will).

As to the rest of your post, welcome to most of America!

11th Grade? Whoa!

(Not to denigrate anyone who is in 11th grade, but I understood the point to your story).

Welcome, IrishAyes.

P.S. The best place I've learned about anarchy is from anarchist historian, Daniel Guerin's Anarchism: From Theory to Practice. It describes the various currents within "socialism in the anarchist tradition" and is well-sourced (so that you can further learn).

I consider myself somewhere between a mutualist, collectivist/syndicalist.

Exploring the economics of anarchy within a modern interpretation of mutualism is Kevin Carson's Mutualist webpage.

Happy reading!

[Witan00]

65. I agree. Anarchism is a left wing socialist philosophy by definition, period. n/t

[Deep13]

26. Anarchists? The 1920s called. They want their fear-mongering propoganda back....

We had better execute Sacco and Vanzetti immediately.

[joshcryer]

28. Innocent men?

Sarcasm?

[Deep13]

29. Well, they're already dead, so guess so. nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

30. It's their framing of violence and anarchism ...

I personally have no use for their framing, although, the Army anarchists narrative did irritate me a bit.

Anarchism is so misdiagnosed in today's society, it's almost laughable.

[socialist_n_TN]

36. I agree FA. And as I said above........

I don't think that framing is an accident. I think it's deliberate in order to lump all resistance as violent "anarchist", even though most of the truely violent ones (at least as far as indiscrimate violence goes) seem to be on the right rather than the left.

BTW, thanks for weighing in. I had hoped that you and Josh both would add in your input.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

37. Sure thing, comrade.

I haven't posted as much as I would like. I've been extremely busy at work.

And yes, I agree with you. I've heard a lot more about this "anarchism" thing a lot more ... always associated with violence. No mention of Leo Tolstoy who influenced Ghandi or MLK, Jr., or of the likes of Thoreau, Hemmingway, or Zinn. Terrorists, all!

[tama]

34. As expected

FBI etc. are not so dumb that they would not recognize Occupy and General Assemblies as essentially anarchic movement that does not recognize authority of Government, and as the greatest challenge against neoliberal status quo in US. What makes the situation in US especially interesting is that the author of the revolutionary document "Declaration of Independence" is considered "philosophical anarchist", which is very influential document also among "Jeffersonian" right wing militant dissidents.

[socialist_n_TN]

35. So tama, does this mean you think that..........

SOME of the RW groups portrayed as "anarchist" indeed ARE anarchist? Or are they just misreading Jefferson?

[tama]

39. Just my anarchism

but as far as I'm concerned anyone is free to use that word as they please, it's not a copyrighted trademark and anyways *FUCK COPYRIGHT* is essential part of my anarchism. That cleared and from activist point of view, I'm not into divisive sectarian definitions but support what Chomsky and others say about talking with also right wingers to find issues that unite us instead of dividing. And in US Jeffersonian "proto-anarchism" offers lot of opportunities to talk with and cooperate together with much larger number of people and create larger and stronger grass roots social networks of mutual aid and support. I'm with Orwell when he says that the real divide is not between left and right but between authoritarians and libertarians.

[Taverner]

42. Anarchy vs Anarchism

Big difference. Anarchy is "no law, no order." Many theorists (Mikhail Bakunin being one) suggest that this is the first state of Anarchy. Alan Moore called this "the land of take-what-you-want" and it is assumed that the rioting and looting eventually stop. The second state is where humans, on their own, form collectives. Bakunin believed this and Alan Moore would call this "the land of do-as-we-please."

Having witnessed the breakdown of society, I am not sure this prediction would ring true.

Anarchism as a philosophy, is different. Just as the one thing uniting all Socialist movements and theories is the "ownership of the means of production by the workers" the one thing uniting all Anarchists is "No masters, No leaders."

Anarchism is the ultimate in anti-authoritarianism; it even rejects the false democracy of the republic, and favors direct democracy.

As for me, I think attainable anarchism has to work backwards. Don't overthrow the state - overthrow the corporations! The corporations are our real "masters." This could be accomplished a myriad of ways, anything from staged takeovers, to businesses run as anarchist collectives, owned by the workers eventually having proxy over the means of production.

[IrishAyes]

49. That...

... makes a lot of sense, at least to me. Thank you.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

38. I've brought that up many times.

A lot of our former "leaders" were either outright anarchists or philosophically oriented as such. Voltairine de Cleyre brings this up in a wonderful essay about American traditions ... sadly, I can't recall the name of the essay at this moment. At a bar right now having a few Jamisons ...maybe it will come to me.

[tama]

40. Thoreau another big anarchist name there

and Jameson is also my favorite bulk whisky... Slainte!

[IrishAyes]

50. When the Jameson's gone...

... take a sip of any famous Irish brew. They're all delicious.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

64. Hemingway, Whitman, Wilde, Tolstoy ...

The list is long and varied!

[IrishAyes]

56. When it does come to you...

Please drop me a line. Sounds very interesting.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

58. Ironically, it's called Anarchism and American Traditions.

I couldn't remember the title about traditions or something, but the title is Anarchism and American Traditions!

I must have been pretty zonked.

[IrishAyes]

60. Might take me awhile to get to it

... but I will. Most of my summer reading happens of an early evening on the porch with my hot cocoa. I've landscaped so I can relax in private but still see what I want to see and hear everything. Some of the loud (to me) conversations of passersby who have no idea I'm in earshot can be very amusing, even illuminating in ways. I hear more town gossip there than anywhere else! I don't intend to eavesdrop, but I can't wear earphones to avoid it either.

[Taverner]

41. Anarchists have been the boogeymen for a while

Goes back to the turn of LAST century

Of course, doesn't help that those Anarchists bombed Wall Street and killed a President

[IrishAyes]

43. Sounds like it

However, the main reason I might hesitate to ask to join this group is because I abhor anarchism as I understand it. I'm personally a pretty good socialist, at least standing to the left of Kucinich if that's enough. And I've rubbed friendly shoulders with some fine communists in my day regardless of where we disagree. I'm not a communist myself, partly because as Ed Asner said, I've never seen it work. (At least not to my satisfaction.) But if I refused dialog except with people who agree with me, I'd be whistling alone in the dark on a desert island.

Capitalism is pure anathema to me - I abhor anarchy - I'm not a communist even though I've read a lot of the works and enjoyed them, including Trotsky. I'm just a dedicated socialist who supports President Obama because I believe he's nudging this country as far/fast leftward as seems possible. While that's not fast enough to suit me, I've also never believed in letting perfection become the enemy of excellence.

So I'll have to rely on your informed guidance as to whether this might be the right group for me and vice verse. You might find me too contrarian and regret a potential provisional welcome. It IS my personal belief after 68 years that communists are not born, they're made, mostly by the excesses of capitalism. What say you?

[IrishAyes]

44. (I don't like too many edits because people wonder why)

PS: Maybe it would help clarify things if I mentioned that I belong to OFA, MoveOn.org and Van Jones' Rebuild the Dream, plus intend to join the Occupy group, which I will soon put in my profile.

I ask ahead of time not only because I don't want to offend unnecessarily, but also because I don't advocate starting useless fights that are doomed from the start.

You'll notice I couldn't get through this post w/o edits! They usually have to do with style, not wishy-washy notions. I nitpick my own work, because it matters to me.

[socialist_n_TN]

45. As a "card carrying Trotskyist" those groups mentioned.....

I consider to be reformist or left reformist, BUT this group is pretty broad based, so I don't see any problem with you chiming in when and where you want. The biggest thing we try to avoid here is the name-calling involved in a lot of the far left debates you've heard in the last century.

I look at it like this. Debate about matters like party organization or even whether there should be a party at all are all OK. Just don't call somebody a "filthy Trotskyist" or a "bloodthirsty Stalinist". There could be vigorous debate about whether there should be a party structure at all. Just debate the issues and leave the name calling out of it.

[IrishAyes]

46. Thank You

Also please rest assured that I'd never dream of using the descriptions you mention. Not to anyone on the left, anyway, though I admit I can boil over a bit at the right. That's my pitfall. I was actually somewhat fond of Trotsky, too. As I might've said, regardless of where I might disagree with him or most other lefties. I disagree with all the rightwingers.

Probably I'd do more reading than responding in here, as I might well have more to learn than to share. But I look forward to visiting. Thank you.

If you don't mind, I'll add a fond farewell to Hugo Chavez in closing. President Obama's man enough to handle whatever he threw at him, and I wish he'd thrown a shoe at GWB that landed, ha ha!

[Fantastic Anarchist]

62. I'll say, when I've been in this forum, the various Left currents ...

... have gotten along swimmingly.

Not to say there's no conflict, but I haven't seen it. I'm very busy in my personal life, so I don't get to peruse this fine forum as much as I like, but where else can one find a Trotskyist and an anarchist, who are not only civil, but are pretty cool with each other?

[socialist_n_TN]

63. I agree FA..........

Believe it or not, there are some confluence of beliefs between Trots and anarchists. The main one is that both believe in "bottom up" decision making rather than "top down". Of course there's a difference over the need for an official vanguard grouping, much less a democratic centralist one, but those are the organizational things that we can debate if we want to.

There's so much shit going on now that there's a LOT of common struggles to fight for on the same side. The differences pale when it comes to the immediate.

[Starry Messenger]

47. Socialist Progressives is kind of a socialist "ecumenical council", imo

Our Statement of Purpose is here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1024881

Considering that the rest of DU can be hostile to any mention of socialism, and scoff at any critic of capitalism, we really try to keep the DU anti-capitalists from foundering on points of dogma into circular debates that don't resolve anything. Most anyone who is a DUer is probably involved in working with electoral politics and left-wing activism.

Many of us have different ideas of how to get to socialism, but I've always thought of this forum as a place to think about possibilities.

[IrishAyes]

48. Thank You

I read the Statement of Purpose before posting, of course; but your reply fills it out more clearly. Without vision the people perish.

Being relatively new to DU, I haven't as yet run into any avid capitalists, but you can be sure that when I do, I'll rap their knuckles with what little restraint I possess.

With temperate weather approaching, I won't be able to be online as much as I'd like because that's my outdoor season. It's only in the worst of summer and the dead of winter that I hide indoors, and then a lot of online activity helps keep me at least halfway sane. So I'm something of a twice-yearly snowbird. Anytime life in RedNeckLand grows too wearing, though, it will be nice to know you folks are here. So leave the light on and the door ajar for me! Thanks again.