Carlos,

I don't know how really 'anarchist' the events are in Argentina. What I do see however, is people taking matters into their own hands and acting for themselves (which is exactly what anarchists approve of). Yes, the threat of fascism is ever present when people try and take control, as it is used as the last card of the bourgeoisie. So, anyone who thinks the boss class will surrender its privileges without a fight, is dreaming.

But one thing you say is a bit odd, "there's no organisation, just anarchy." You seem to have a misunderstanding about what anarchism is all about Carlos, as anarchy is clearly all about organisation, more so than many other policical standpoints. It's what type of organisation that is the question.

I've wondered about the glorification of the Argentinian situation too. I know anarchists like to talk about people 'running things themselves' but what does that actually mean socially? The state, the organised ruling class, can be attacked but if you don't overthrow and - sacrilege - replace it with a mechanism for defending social gains and organising society then they will gradually win back power and destroy all the gains made.

The left historically has not lost by being too extreme, but by not being decisive enough. Can we maybe get away from the adolescent name calling at anyone who questions that getting rid of the police and army just involves everyone doing their own thing? As someone once said, revolution is the most authoritarian act there is. Lets not shirk from that.

I've wondered about the glorification of the Argentinian situation too. I know anarchists like to talk about people 'running things themselves' but what does that actually mean socially? The state, the organised ruling class, can be attacked but if you don't overthrow and - sacrilege - replace it with a mechanism for defending social gains and organising society then they will gradually win back power and destroy all the gains made.

The left historically has not lost by being too extreme, but by not being decisive enough. Can we maybe get away from the adolescent name calling at anyone who questions that getting rid of the police and army just involves everyone doing their own thing? As someone once said, revolution is the most authoritarian act there is. Lets not shirk from that.

This shows just how wrong anarchists are about the working class not needing leadership and guidance from political experts. Anarchists claim that a new free society will be brought about by the independent action of the working class and the people themselves and strongly reject any group whcih tries to give leadership to the workers and point to the atrocities committed in the Soviet Union as proof that leadership only leads to tyranny!

Firstly the Soviet Union faced enormous difficulties on a mamouth scale after the 1917 revolution including a civil war against the White Army and which devastated the economy so much that it led to a famine in which 6 million Russians starved to death. Under those extreme circumstances it is not surprising at all that the Russian revolution failed but it does not invalidate the ideas and teaching of Marx and Lenin who insisted that for a revoltuion to be successful there must be a revolutionary party which will sieze power on behalf and act as the tool for change of the working class.

The chaos and despair that is happening in Argentina now is what happens when the workers enter a revutionary situation without any leadership or a revultionary party to fight for them and to be their voice and tool for change and the establishment of a workers state! Therefore I would urge all revolutionaries to join a revolutionary socialist party to fight for an end to capitalism. It is futile fighting capitalism without having a revolutionary vanguard party to give clear political leadership to the workers!