From: "Dave Coull" <coull2-AT-btinternet.com>
Subject: RE: primitivism and anarchism
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:43:26 -0000



Chuck0 wrote


> You've obviously got some kind of irrational 
> dislike of me. 


Well, like Shawn said, "My primary objection is 
to the kind of triumphalist 'we're #1 - lose
the losers' mentality that seems to be driving 
all of this". I dislike that sort of attitude
from "post-leftists" like yourself. And disliking
that sort of attitude is perfectly rational.


> Dave, we're sending you a humor care package 
> from this side of the pond.
>
> You take this stuff waaayy too seriously.


No, I don't take it  "waaayy"  too seriously.
I take it a  _bit_  seriously. I like to think
that I take it just about seriously enough, although
I admit I may sometimes get the balance wrong.
But anyway, there's a difference between taking
things  _a bit_  seriously, and taking them
"waaayy" too seriously. I don't see discussion 
(or argument) as being merely some kind of contest 
in which some self-appointed judges decide who
can produce the best, most flippant, witticisms, 
regardless of the actual _content_ of what is being 
said, but neither do I take the stuff "waaayy" too serious.
I try to express how I see things, and I  KNOW  that 
I am getting across to some people. But of course I do 
sometimes take it a bit seriously when folk make racist 
or anti-working-class remarks. As for yourself.... 
"You claim that you are yourself working class.
Well even if true that doesn't disprove what
I wrote. There are plenty of folk in the working 
class who have anti-working-class attitudes. 
Some of them are folk who came originally from
a bit higher up the social scale, from a more
'middle class' background, and who have never
really fully adjusted to their loss of status,
and never really lost their middle-class attitudes.
But even some folk who have always been working 
class can hold anti-working-class attitudes,
because, quite simply, the dominant ideology
 IN  ALL  CLASSES  at any time in history,
or at least in most periods of history,
is the ideology of the ruling class.  
That is why they remain the ruling class.
In any period of history when the ideology
of the ruling class  _ceases_ , even temporarily,
to be the dominant ideology, you get revolutionary
upheavals. You attacked me as a building worker. In 
doing so, you revealed profoundly anti-working-class 
attitudes."


> Where is Tad Kepley when we need him now?


Dead of a drug overdose, with any luck. YOU may 
need him, but the anarchist movement and humanity 
as a whole could manage without him. He was a waste 
of perfectly good oxygen and planet space. He lived 
as a parasite, stealing from folk in the anarchist movement, 
biting the hand that fed him, and all the while spewing 
forth his heroin-crazed denunciations of everything worthwhile 
about anarchism. When he was on the anarchy-list he brought 
the tone way, way down, from the gutter to the sewer. 

Dave C