>>4626>>completely divorced from our respective movements>What do you mean?What that user means is probably unions and to a lesser extent parties (inb4 getting banned for talking about unions and parties on a "radical" imageboard). Before you sperg out about Keir Starmer or whatever, please be aware that people from other places than the UK or USA are also posting here. From what I gathered I
guess Haz is a NEET with parents rich enough to finance his life. The political views people have are almost always fundamentally anchored by their position in life and only nudged somewhat by theorizing and reading. (Individuals who let themselves be thrown around by the books they read have a screwed intuition about the power of arguments in winning over somebody.) I don't need to know exactly which company people work at, but I want to be sure that the people I interact with are working class. We on the left could avoid a lot of wrecking behavior by narcissists if we simply had some standards of not allowing kids of landlords etc. into our groups.
>>4638>Well Haz said he's been a communist for over ten years, when Infrared started might have been later. >The thing is they aren't just bluffingYou either don't know this or you are talking about yourself in the third person.
>>4655>That last tweet is literally nonsense. What the fuck is an "idle guarantee of truth"?I guess wanting timeless facts when facts change all the time (note that this is not the same as saying everything is subjective opinion; e.g. what is the fastest available means of transportation depends on the time and place).
>>4657 is probably right.
>>4704Yeah. Haz is terrible at communicating common tropes of Marxism to people who are already familiar with them and agree with them.
Don't spend ten minutes with an article I wrote, watch ten hours of me being a sperg on stream (and install proprietary spyware to interact with me, but that's a given). This is atrocious. How is somebody with a full-time job supposed to engage with this?
>>4709>only fucking Sage is so dense to still claim that union work / strikes are direct actionNo, that is very common. Far more common than stating the opposite. English Wikipedia says: "Nonviolent direct action may include sit-ins, strikes, street blockades…" Both German and Spanish Wikipedia list the strike (Streik, huelga) as an example of direct action as well. Wikipedia saying it shouldn't matter much, so here's more.
Émile Pouget wrote in L’action directe that the general strike is the highest form of direct action:
<Et ce sera l’Action directe portée à son maximum : la Grève Générale !Direct Action by Voltairine De Cleyre:
<Every person who ever in his life had a difference with anyone to settle, and went straight to the other persons involved to settle it, either by a peaceable plan or otherwise, was a direct actionist. Examples of such action are strikes…http://www.spunk.org/library/writers/decleyre/sp001334.htmlRudolf Rocker also put strikes forward as an example of direct action.
This Haz guy is just Angry Muke.