Skip to content or view screen version

Cardiff Anarchist Bookfair this Saturday

South Wales Anarchists | 18.02.2015 16:10 | Culture | Free Spaces | Social Struggles | Wales

There will be three rooms of talks, workshop meetings (see below), and a main hall of stalls, plus creche, bar, cafe and more. In the evening there will be a benefit gig and social.



Also see:

South Wales Anarchists
- Homepage:


Hide the following 44 comments

are the swp welcome?

18.02.2015 22:49

am i welcome to the anarchist bookfair, to set up a stall, sell my newspapers, and try and recruit people to my party?


Re 'are the swp welcome'

19.02.2015 05:36

Be real, it's an Anarchist bookfair. The people welcome are members of the tiny clique that still think Anarchism is in any way relevent to the needs of the people of Europe. They want to come together and talk about how if only they were listened too everything would be wonderful in the world. A bit like the swp.


reply to the replier

19.02.2015 16:42

Anarchy is nothing like the SWP. The SWP are an authoritarian Marxist cult, and Anarchy is liberty and freedom.

Anarchy is relevant, and our movement is growing.
let me give some of my own take ( altho other anarchists may have different views, thats the beauty of anarchism)
in the face of the state we can:

1) set up TAZ or temporary autonomous zones, outside of the state, pirate utopias,
2) carry out direct action against the state and corporate power
3) work against borders, both real ones and those in our minds. kill the nazi in your head!
4) struggle against hierarchy in all its forms, sexist racist, straight privilege, white privilege classist, etc
5) encourage squatting.
6) supporting the culture, anarcho-punk gigs etc. beneath the gaze of the mainstream media, an anarcho punk underground has been growing. Oi! Oi! and the UK Subs are still going strong!
7) encourage crimethinc., or attacks against the state in subversive ways, such as Anonymous etc. ,shoplifting, squatting, taking over empty property etc. use your imagination!
8) get people to watch Russell Brand, and through him win them over to Anarchy. also watch the matrix, V for Vendetta to see the influence of anarchy in contemporary media.
9) promote veganism, both as a better way of life but also to stop violence against animals,against a hierarchal power relation between human and non human animals.
10) challenge the dictatorship of reason over the freedom of imagination, to dare to dream of a better utopian non facist, non hierarchal world without borders, nations, races, religions.
11) create network groups of like minded people.
12) take part in anti state no borders action, helping refugees from the so called third world from the fascist and racist border controls.
13) challenge societal authoritarian norms such as monogamy. promote free relations, polyamory etc.
14) encourage critical thinking, science, atheism as well as romantic imagination.
15) anarchism is actually the greatest challenge to the british state, and all states, they are afraid of us.

doubtlessly other anarchists would come up with a different list, but thats why you should get down to the Anarchist bookfair in Cardiff.
Be realistic, demand the impossible!

not the only dreamer

Leave well alone

19.02.2015 16:47

If you're really an SWP member contemplating turning up with a stall and not some silly troll, my advice is steer clear.

Why? Just take a look at how they treat their own:

If that doesn't convince you to stay away, have a word with Bristol about the likely reaction of certain visitors from that city.

Tedious D
mail e-mail:


19.02.2015 22:32

yes, i've seen what anarchists understand by free speech.
in reality, the anarchists are the real authoritarians.
in marxism, the swp's conference, anarchists are allowed to attend and there have even been anarchist speakers. why doesn't anarchist bookfair have some marxist speakers, so people can learn about Lenin and Trotsky?

to dreamer above;

good luck with your Temporary Autonomous Zones mate, i'm sure the state is running scared.


dear trot

19.02.2015 23:32

why dont you just TROT OFF!?


You're all nuts

20.02.2015 12:12

The idea of "recruiting members" means you are a cult. If it was so great, you wouldn't need to recruit

some people

Anarchist bookfair is recruitment

20.02.2015 16:51

look, as mentioned by a commentator above, the anarchists are a clique, the bookfair is their recruitment.

the best anarchists, such as Victor Serge, joined the Bolsheviks. Likewise, the best Anarchists after a few years, join the SWP.

the anarchists are more of a cult. the anarchists pretend they dont have a leader. but they do.

likewise the anarchist clique are in reality a party, but using another name. it is all pretty much the same.

furthermore, Russell Brand typifies typical anarchist politics. its not much more that; a well meaning rant, by hairy blokes.

check out this, which is an SWP criticism of Anarchism.


Oh look a divide and rule thread

20.02.2015 20:28

Trotsky, Lenin and the Bolshevicks were paid for by Western Monopolisitic Capitalists. First thing they did? Set up a Central Bank! ffs!

Marx sent his wife to a Paris Bankers to get cash! wtf?

Problem with 'vanguard' parties is they have no plan to get rid of the state - it's just supposed to happen! You know "wither away" - Oh aye pull the other one.

Marx took Hegel's dialectic and changed it saying sommat about humans being a species being whose characteristic was 'production'.

Is that IT Karl! - Human=Production Unit. Handy ideology for rapidly Industrialising a feudal state. Handy Ideology too for limiting the rising power of industrial capitalists, Create a dialectic (divide and conquer) Workers vs Factory bosses leaving Financial Capitalists (Bankers) untouched. Marxism a created ideology.

So why not talk about things anarchists and Marxists have in common? like working for social justice instead of bickering. Why bother with 19th Century invented ideologies?

Have a fab book fare!


dear zoltan

20.02.2015 22:25

I think you know very little about Marx and Marxism. much of what you're saying sounds like it comes from various anti semitic conspiracy about Marx being Jewish and linked to the Rothschild, and Lenin and Trotsky and 'Jewish' Bolshevism in league with 'Jewish' Bankers. please tell me that is not what you are saying. Proudhon and Bakunin were both anti semitic also.

anarchism gives easy answers which can never actually win, as the video link of John Molyneux's discussion on this topic demonstrates clearly.

anarchists and marxists do have a lot in common, which is why i wanted to set up a stall and invite attendees at the anarchist bookfair to come to SWP events such as this one;

How radical are the Greens?
Wed 25 Feb, 7.30pm
Cathays Community Centre, Cathays Terrace, CF24 4HX

next week at the same place as the bookfair! i hope all the bookfairers will attend this meeting, and find out more about Marxism and the SWP.

see you tomorrow!
you can also read Socialist Worker online, and join the party online


Dear Trot

21.02.2015 00:08

Dear Trot

20.02.2015 22:25
>>> I think you know very little about Marx and Marxism.

er hang on a minute I know enough about Marx and Marxism to know it ain't entirely right.

>>>much of what you're saying sounds like it comes from various anti
>>>semitic conspiracy about Marx being Jewish and linked to the

Well Marx was Jewish so what? Makes no difference to me. After what the Jewish people suffered in Europe I'm not surprised that a lot of radical thought was generated in the Diaspora and the Pale through the drive for Jewish emancipation you know basic human rights - It's also wrong to think of Jewish as some sort of monolithic thing like there are no divisions and splits in there. As for the Rothschilds well they were in it for the Oil and Minerals. Other Western Monopolistic Capitalists like Rockerfella, Ford later Koch and many more saw great opportunities in the Soviet Union PLC. Lenin wrote the Prospectus when in jail in the 1880s "The Spread of Capitalism in Russia". Capitalists were un doubtably involved and they chose the Bolsheviks as their 'Useful Idiots" Precisely because they were authoritarian Capitalists like authoritarian, hierarchic systems a lot. Lenin said something like I'm driving the car but it seems to have a mind of it's own.

>>> and Lenin and Trotsky and 'Jewish' Bolshevism in league with
>>> 'Jewish' Bankers.

Yeah "in league" would tend to suggest they were knowing and willing participants in a "conspiracy" to set up what after all John "control everything" Rockerfeller would see as the perfect State Capitalist System - Just the Central Bank sucking up the profits from all that surplus value generated by an idealistically motivated labour force.

Again I prefer just bankers or capitalists it makes no difference what religion they say they belive in generally bankers are slaves of mamon
Please don't tell me that the Bank of England didn't supply ready cash to the Bolsheviks - it's in Hansard ffs! Later they did the same thing for Hitler. Go figure

>>> please tell me that is not what you are saying.

That's not what I'm saying

>>> Proudhon and Bakunin were both anti semitic also.

Yes there was alot of it around at the time - I guess the Rothschilds had something to do with that - financing wars on both sides etc.

>>> anarchism gives easy answers which can never actually win,
Look for the revolution to be considered a success it has to be anarchistic if it ain't then the revolutions failed - you have to work out a way of getting from a monolithic authoritarian state the first probable result of your revolution to freedom - as Hegel meant it

>>> as the video link of John Molyneux's discussion on this topic
>>> demonstrates clearly.

Well of course I disagree. The problem with the Human = Production Unit view of the dialectic as John Molyneux shows in that vid is what dissatisfies me with Marxian Materialism. It's far too narrow a description of what a Human being is. Seems like a created ideology to limit humanity not free them. To make them into good workers - fuck that!

>>>anarchists and marxists do have a lot in common, which is why i
>>>wanted to set up a stall and invite attendees at the anarchist
>>>bookfair to come to SWP events such as this one;

Yep just concentrate on that and focus your energy on the ruling class

>>>How radical are the Greens?
>>>Wed 25 Feb, 7.30pm
>>>Cathays Community Centre, Cathays Terrace, CF24 4HX

The Greens aren't very radical are they, they don't seem to have a class analysis as far as I can see - and since the corporate elite have re launched the class war I think they should have one huh?

Any way Nice plug!
I think you could be called a Trot Troll ! For that :)

>>>next week at the same place as the bookfair! i hope all the
>>>bookfairers will attend this meeting, and find out more about
>>>Marxism and the SWP.

Well Marx was wrong about a lot of things and I don't think Marxists have developed his ideology at all in the last 170 years or whatever. People don't need an ideology to know they're being ripped off.
Machiavelli had a better understanding of how the ruling class operate especially - divide and rule.

>>>see you tomorrow!

probly not

>>>you can also read Socialist Worker online, and join the party online

Can I see your plan for the withering away of your good selves after you win the revolution in an authoritarian stylee? I don't think you'll find one. What will probably happen is that once in power you'll get all paranoid and start bumping off your comrades as "counter revolutionaries" or sommat

Have a good time at the Book Fair


zoltan please

21.02.2015 01:12

Ok, you are not using the anti semitic conspiracy slur.

however, you have misunderstood stalinism for marxism. Tony Cliff has criticised stalinism, and made clear the difference between the authentic socialist tradition from below, and stalinism.

it is impossible to get directly to anarchism, we need a state for a while after the revolution. but it is a state that, unlike all other states, will dissolve itself once it is no longer needed.

marx does not define man=production. this is your misreading, in favour for idealist fictions about the 'spirit'.
this is the real problem with anarchism, it is nothing but idealism.


Yer Yin and Yer Yan

21.02.2015 02:34

>>>zoltan please

21.02.2015 01:12
>>>Ok, you are not using the anti semitic conspiracy slur.

Nope I ain't

>>>however, you have misunderstood stalinism for marxism.

er I don't think so, and I don't want to get into the Left Opposition v Stalin thing, I mean Trotsky lived like a bourgeoise in exile in Turkey visited by rich French lawyers and bankers who financed the propaganda in Germany and France. I've not decided what Stalin was up to - probably working for western investors or building the Third Empire - don't know just know he was a massive fail.

>>>Tony Cliff has criticised stalinism, and made clear the difference
>>>between the authentic socialist tradition from below, and

Yeah Trots don't like Stalin. and Stalinists don't like Trots - I'm not keen on either. Problem is that Lenin was involved in the State Capitalist venture from the start too.

>>>it is impossible to get directly to anarchism, we need a state for
>>>a while after the revolution. but it is a state that, unlike all
>>>other states, will dissolve itself once it is no longer needed.

Puff just like magic! the SWP state withers away - unfortunately by the very act of setting up your authoritarian state you lose sight of where you intended to get to i.e. "to anarchism".

>>>marx does not define man=production.

That's not what I said - what I said is that to Marx the characteristic of the Human species-being was to produce - that's how the dialectic manifests itself - how "I" becomes universal through production.

>>>this is your misreading, in favour for idealist fictions about the

That's an assumption you are making - there is such a thing as subjective knowledge gleaned by looking inside - it's how the Chinese discovered acupuncture for example. So we have a dialectic - looking in - subjective knowledge - and looking outside to the object. You need to synthesise this dialectic somehow otherwise you just end up setting up authoritarian states and killing a lot of people because they don't agree with you.

>>>this is the real problem with anarchism, it is nothing but

Dude you've just admitted the same "idealism" the idea you seem to be proposing is that the ultimate goal of the SWP's state is and I quote

"to get ... to anarchism"

which you say is not immediately possible - we apparently have to wait until you lot have "withered away". While you're in the process of withering away the rest of us have to obey or die?

It is possible to make the synthesis of subjective and objective - when we've all done that then there's the revolution.

You see I don't believe as you do in authoritarian hierarchic states - just magically withering away - it's an act of faith on your part that it will it's abasically a con. You intimate that the great withering will be a natural bottom up process, but natural processes are actually observable and measurable in nature, They can be modelled, Marx has no answers here because he mistakenly dismisses subjective knowledge that produces things like eastern Martial Arts, Meditation and the like. Marx cannot explain how these phenomena have come about. They 'materialised' through subjective knowledge practises, that are necessary steps for an anarchist revolution

Take a Buddhist idea like "esho funi" it means (e) the environment (sho) the self and (funi) seperate but not separate. i.e. we are connected to the environment and to each other - though superficially it appears that we are not. This insight was gained through meditation leading to subjective knowledge. Not by doing western rationalist Science. This idea forms the core of what I think about the damage "production" and its collorary "consumption" is doing to our environment. If human=production unit (short hand for what I said above) then this seems to preclude not producing in order to sustain the environment because it is not part what Marx describes in his dialectic.

You will say production for need, but who decides who needs what - I get a crust and you get a limo for the great leader. Do you have a single observation of a state, special or otherwise that just withers away?

Do your stuff dude just don't ask me to ignore what I know about being a human being.


the tooth fairy anarchist

21.02.2015 23:50


i'm not asking you to ignore what you think you know about human beings, but having a 'spiritual' side doesn't mean anything practically. it is important to think scientifically, and not with woo woo fuzzy feelgood new age or buddhist 'wisdom'.

i mean, some people believe in santa claus, the tooth fairy, the teapot round mars, leprachauns or whatever, you believe in some buddhist ideas of this sort. no problem with me, and if you think anarchism gives you the space to believe in the flying spaghetti monster, thats cool.

however, marxists believe in facing reality.


why dont you trot off?

22.02.2015 02:10

the swp has collapsed almost everywhere else apart from Cardiff. the swp has acted violently towards students who protested against their patriarchal rape apologism, and are now trying to sponge off the anarchist did this thread turn into another anarchist vs trot debate?

trot off!


Idiotic excuse (for your antisemitism}

22.02.2015 15:05

Don't try to find an ideological reason to justify your antisemitism.

Yeah, there are capitalists among the Jews. But also one heck of a lot of folks on our side of the fight. If you are a Trotskyite, you do realize that Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) was Jewish, yes? And if you are an anarchis, how about Emma Goldman?

Seriously, you don't (or shouldn't) have to look very hard to find people on the far right blaming socialism and communism on the Jews.


Oh dear is that it? How sad

22.02.2015 15:07

>>> the tooth fairy anarchist

Eh? tooth fairy wtf? Ad Hominem all you got trot?

21.02.2015 23:50

>>>i'm not asking you to ignore what you think you know about human
>>>beings, but having a 'spiritual' side doesn't mean anything

Er I don't think I've said anything about having a 'spiritual' side. what I'm talking about is knowledge that's gained through subjective knowledge practises, meditation and such - looking inwards - I mentioned acupuncture as an example of this kind of knowledge which does have 'practical' applications.

>>>it is important to think scientifically, and not with woo woo fuzzy
>>>feelgood new age or buddhist 'wisdom'.

I don't deny the importance of thinking scientifically - but you have to syntehesise the dialectic of subjective and objective knowledge otherwise you are not in balance.
Again you are not really arguing here you're just name calling and using scorn.

>>>i mean, some people believe in santa claus, the tooth fairy, the
>>>teapot round mars, leprachauns or whatever, you believe in some
>>>buddhist ideas of this sort.

Again you're not really making an argument are you trot, instead you are displaying typical Marxist indoctrination. Marx got a lot wrong, but you are a believer, you believe in the magic of an authoritarian state withering away for example, when there is no evidence or model or anything that would suggest that it has any basis in reality . It's you who is the fantasist you're not thinking scientificallly here, its a belif system based on a 19th Century invented ideology.

>>>no problem with me, and if you think anarchism gives you the space
>>>to believe in the flying spaghetti monster, thats cool.

Oh yes of course the "flying spaghetti monster" that all anarchists believe in. From your responses it's clear you are dogmatically attached to Marx.

>>>however, marxists believe in facing reality.

facing reality? - just dogmatically believing won't cut it dude. You have to synthesise the reality of subjective knowledge with the reality of the objective else you're fucked. And it would appear from this response of yours that you are indeed fucked.

See you later production unit.


not anti semitic. read bakunin.

22.02.2015 15:53

bakunin said:

“Well now, this whole Jewish world which constitutes a single exploiting sect, a sort of bloodsucker people, a collective parasite, voracious, organized in itself, not only across the frontiers of states but even across all the differences of political opinion—this world is presently, at least in great part, at the disposal of Marx on the one hand and of the Rothschilds on the other. I know that the Rothschilds, reactionaries as they are and should be, highly appreciate the merits of the communist Marx; and that in his turn the communist Marx feels irresistibly drawn, by instinctive attraction and respectful admiration, to the financial genius of Rothschild. Jewish solidarity, that powerful solidarity that has maintained itself through all history, united them.”

— Mikhail Bakunin, “December 1871 Letter to the Bologne Members of the International”

well, what do anarchists make of that? is this anti semitic? or not?

it seems to me that there is anti semitism in the above passage, but it is not all false either. i dont know what Goldman thought about it, or Chomsky or many others. I hardly need to tell any anarchists that there is no one central definition of anarchism, what Proudhon thought is not exactly what Chomsky thinks, but there are crossovers also. some anarchists are very close to marxism, with the exception of the dictatorship, while other anarchists are lifestylers and green anarchists etc. Proudhon had an influence on French fascism as well as French Anarchism, both taking different parts of his philosopy.

likewise, in dealing with Islam, i prefer to remember Bakunin's views on religion:

"God, or rather the fiction of God, is thus the sanction and the intellectual and moral cause of all the slavery on earth, and the liberty of men will not be complete, unless it will have completely annihilated the inauspicious fiction of a heavenly master."

"The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth."


trot to zoltan

22.02.2015 21:44

your 'anarchism' is similar to that of Russell Brand. a bit of new age woo with populist demands. 'flying spaghetti monster' is right, because just like these buddhist 'we are all one' crap, it is not real.

Naz- get lost! Bakunin and Proudhon were anti semitic.

It seems that anarchism can go into right wing conspiracy theory or new age woo woo too easily to be a serious political philosophy.


His Karma ran over his Dogma

22.02.2015 22:19

>>>trot to zoltan

Zoltan to Trot

Look it's really very simple just give a reasoned argument about why you think Marx's idea of the dialectic is correct - rather than name calling - Marx is wrong about the dialectic ok. Human beings are more than production units - what does the W stand for in SWP ? oh yes Worker, Worker = Production Unit. Don't you see the implication of wage slavery and a blind acceptance of the staus quo - being in a Party with a name like that? I am worker exploit me!

>>>22.02.2015 21:44

>>>your 'anarchism' is similar to that of Russell Brand. a bit of new
>>>age woo with populist demands. 'flying spaghetti monster' is right,
>>>because just like these buddhist 'we are all one' crap, it is not >>>real.

Listen dogma boy you have no idea what's real - I've asked you to explain how an authoritarian state magically withers away and you have no answer - all you have is name calling and dogma - I'm not feckin' interested if that's all you got. Marx was wrong about a lot of things right. He was wrong about Historical Materialism read Machiavelli for a much better explanation for the process of Historical change - than Marxian woo woo.

>>>Naz- get lost! Bakunin and Proudhon were anti semitic.

Naz has quoted Bakunin's anti semetic rant you dim wit.
Marx too was an anti-semite

>>>It seems that anarchism can go into right wing conspiracy theory or
>>>new age woo woo too easily to be a serious political philosophy.

Right wing conspiracy theory? - you deny then the close involvement of western capitalists and the Bank of England in the great Bolshevick State Capitalist venture. You're in denial a sure sign of a dogmatist

You use a phrase like 'Conspiracy theory' which was an invention of the CIA used to deflect scepticism over the Warren Commission's 'a lone nut did it' version of the Kennedy Assassination. You look more and more like a conditioned idiot trot.

You need to synthesise the dialectic of subjective and objective knowledge else you remain fucked.


zoltainian rhapsody

22.02.2015 23:01

you should attempt to go to Marxism, the SWP's annual event in London. that will set you right.


Ha Ha Ha!

22.02.2015 23:10

So what you are saying is that you are unable to set me right and like the good authoritarian follower you are you point me towards some authority of yours. Some Priests of the Marxian Temple!

So it becomes very clear that you don't know much about Marxism yourself and you take it from your authorities that Marx was right about the dialectic and how history changes.

Well he wasn't OK.

Au revoir Production Unit


last laugh

23.02.2015 00:35

oh yeah Zoltan,

a mix of right wing anti semitic conspiracy theories, buddhist/new age metaphysics, and some libertarian ideas. sounds like an eclectic mix up, more of a personal philosophy than a real materialist class analysis.

out of curiousity, is anti semitic conspiracy theory a la Bakunin part of the beliefs of anarchists who went to the bookfair?

for a more serious political analysis, come along to your local SWP meetings.


You boring twat

23.02.2015 01:23

>>>oh yeah Zoltan,

Oh yeah trot

>>>a mix of right wing anti semitic conspiracy theories,

You mean Ford, Lord Milner the Bank of England et al weren't involved in supporting the Bolseviks? There's none so blind.


Yeah right Buddha was an idiot of course!

>>>/new age metaphysics,

Oooo 19th Century dogma is so much more appropriate isn't it

>>>and some libertarian ideas.

Oh you mean ideas about freedom - not something you're familiar with I guess having to follow dogma and that.

>>>sounds like an eclectic mix up, more of a personal philosophy than
>>>a real materialist class analysis.

Yep that's what the dialectic is all about you chump how the I becomes universal. Again Marx got the dialectic wrong there's more to life than being a production unit.

Here's the class analysis right - there is but one self defining class and that's the ruling class - then there's the rest of us.

>>>out of curiousity, is anti semitic conspiracy theory

There you go again with your easy slurs - earlier you said this
>>>zoltan please (302207) by: Trot
>>>Ok, you are not using the anti semitic conspiracy slur.

Now your contradicting yourself just bandying about easy catch phrases like 'anti Semitic" and "conspiracy theory" to cover your sorry authoritarian arse. You wouldn't know what an original idea was if it walked up to you and gave you a big sloppy kiss.

>>>a la Bakunin part of the beliefs of anarchists who went to the

What a stupid fucking question - Marx was anti semitic too you twit!

You really are an idiot aren't you I don't notice ANY "serious political analysis" coming from you. Just blanket slurs and dogmatic authoritarian follower banality. Marx knows best Worker - follow Marx Worker - the great leader will sort it out for you. Now it's time you fucked off we're not buying the shit you're selling



Ignorant Idiot

23.02.2015 09:21

There are according to one reader of Marx 108 statements by Karl Marx from his correspondence, his books, his conversations with contemporaries — and all of them, , malevolently anti-Semitic.

Here are a few that appear in the booklet "A World Without Jews."

Below you will find some of Karl Marx's references to Jews, quoted verbatim:

"It is the circumvention of law that makes the religious Jew a religious Jew." (Die Deutsche Ideologie, MEGA V, 162)

"The Jews of Poland are the smeariest of all races." (Neue Rheinische Zeitung, April 29, 1849)

He called Ferdinand Lassalle, "Judel Itzig-Jewish Nigger." (Der Judische Nigger, MEKOR III, 82, July 30, 1862)

"Ramsgate is full of Jews and fleas." (MEKOR IV, 490, August 25, 1879)

"Let us look at the real Jew of our time; not the Jew of the Sabbath, whom Bauer considers, but the Jew of everyday life.

"What is the Jew's foundation in our world? Material necessity, private advantage.

"What is the object of the Jew's worship in this world? Usury. What is his worldly god? Money.

"Very well then; emancipation from usury and money, that is, from practical, real Judaism, would constitute the emancipation of our time." ("A World Without Jews," p. 37)

"What was the essential foundation of the Jewish religion? Practical needs, egotism." (Ibid, p. 40)

"Money is the zealous one God of Israel, beside which no other God may stand. Money degrades all the gods of mankind and turns them into commodities. Money is the universal and self-constituted value set upon all things. It has therefore robbed the whole world, of both nature and man, of its original value. Money is the essence of man's life and work, which have become alienated from him. This alien monster rules him and he worships it.

"The God of the Jews has become secularized and is now a worldly God. The bill of exchange is the Jew's real God. His God is the illusory bill of exchange." ("A World Without Jews," p. 41)

Just like Bakunin and Proudhon Marx was anti semitic

Now fuck off you ignorant trot


Time of Useful Consciousness

23.02.2015 10:45

In order to lift the veil of general blind dogmatic ignorance displayed by trot. Not much of an advert for his party old trot

Here's some audio from a Marxist I have a lot of time for - available on the Time of Useful Consciousness - Michael Parenti Archive

Michael Parenti:
One of Parenti's most influential archival speeches


anti semitic??

23.02.2015 15:10

were bakunin, proudhon, and marx anti semitic, or where they right??



23.02.2015 15:32


nothing more to say.

pity all your buddhist bollox hasn't taught you to be nice and polite.

goodbye, and good luck

Naz sounds more like a NAZI,
but i think Zoltan is more confused.

you would do well to find out about materialism.


No they weren't right

23.02.2015 15:48

If there is a conspiracy and it does involve some religion then I'd go for A white protestant conspiracy as the dominant force. JP Morgan was Protestant and he mostly owned one of the most powerful banks in the world, but I don't think Capitalists and bankers apply they're 'spiritual' ideology to their business dealings.

In the 1920s Morgan's bank told the British Cabinet to lower social security payments otherwise it wouldn't loan them a large amount of cash, the British Government lowered social security.

Sound familiar - it's just history repeating itself...

The Rockerfellers were baptists. Martin Luther was an anti semite. Ford was a Nazi sympathiser.

To understand anti-semitism you have to think of your "tribe" in a situation of isolation in a diaspora. Usually not being able to do anything other than lend money or be useful to the extant ruling class as tax farmers or beaurocrats. So think of Spain in 1492. Think about what you'd learn to value after an event like that.


Cheery bye

23.02.2015 16:42

>>> bollox

Ha Ha!

23.02.2015 15:32
>>>nothing more to say.
I know dude
>>>pity all your buddhist bollox hasn't taught you to be nice and

I think you'll find you started the name calling anyway 'polite' a slightly bourgeois idea innit?

Anyway that's Buddha's bollox not mine I was using it as an example of Hegel's esoteric materialism that Marx was arguing against in his materialism. Marx's materialism was the anti-thesis of Hegel's thesis at least that's one way he argued it. What Marx doesn't do is synthesise Hegels (for example) thesis and the anti-thesis he sets up in a dialectic. I used the example of acupuncture (a subjectively derived knowledge i.e. through esoteric practice) as something that Marx's materialism cannot explain. Therefore I argued that Marx merely sets up the anti-thesis in his materialism and in the process reduces humanity to production units. But he doesn't synthesise the dialectic. Like you need to.

>>>goodbye, and good luck

CU all the best

>>>Naz sounds more like a NAZI,

You're probably right

>>>but i think Zoltan is more confused.
>>>you would do well to find out about materialism.

Erm see the above it's what I've been arguing about all along Marx;s Materialism.



23.02.2015 20:42

acupuncture is cool, i dont see what it has to do with revolution, nor why marxist materialism cannot understand it.


Thankyou to all who attended the bookfair

24.02.2015 10:29

All feedback we have received has been positive so far. We ran out of programmes, and estimate a crowd of between 400-500 people passed through the door. There were a large number of stalls, which did not include the SWP.

One of South Wales Anarchists

Marx's Materialism

24.02.2015 10:42

It's not acupuncture per se it's about how it was discovered i.e. the method used to discover it. To put it crudely a Marxist would never have made the discovery. That's not to say Marxist Materialism is wrong and that esoteric subjective knowledge is right, but what we have is a dialectic that Marx didn't synthesise, he thought he had made a synthesis in his 'humanism' and 'naturalism'. Again crudely Marx says from Earth up to Heaven instead of Heaven down to Earth which is what Hegel was saying. But it's it not an either or situation both need to be synthesised for 'humanism' to be about the whole human being. Which acording to Eric Fromme is what Marx thought the revolution was for - the whole human being.


symptom of the problem (limited thinking about the human condition)

24.02.2015 14:23

I'll use this as an example (JUST an example of the deeper problem)

"I think you'll find you started the name calling anyway 'polite' a slightly bourgeois idea innit?"

What am I talking about? That "polite" and "bourgeois" are being linked when the former is a concept that applies to ALL human societies (what is considered polite might differ, but they would have have the concept) and "bourgeois" which has little meaning outside societies of relatively recent (say last 500 years) European societies.

LOOK --- Marx had an excuse and Engels was at least trying, but the mid 19th Century was before a great deal of understanding about the great range in the ways humans have organized their societies. A valid excise because no "Anthropology" yet and thinkers had a tendency to make general statements about humankind based on a very limited and specific base. NOT just the economic thinkers (consider Freud deciding what was normal or abnormal HUMAN thinking based just on observing middle class Viennese.

We are NOT in the 19th Century and so our thinking about the real world should not be bound by how people in 19th Century Europe saw reality. Those of us persisting in doing so really need to question what we are doing, going by assumptions like:

1) Observations of human culture and human history just of 19th Century Europe tells us all we need to know about the possibilities of "being human".
2) That "materialism" necessarily implies "material DETERMINISM". In other words, instead of material conditions simply defining the limits of what is or is not possible that they will determine which of the possibilities will come about. Note that in the mid 19th Century we believed Physics was deterministic. Do we believe that now?


Respect != Polite

24.02.2015 14:49

Well I said 'slightly' bourgeoise. as in typical middle class aspirational mores - "we don't talk politics in polite society"

Being polite then is a way of limiting human discourse. Respect is another category from which politeness comes. So showing respect (when it's due) and being polite are different things entirely.

Quite agree with your other points MDN As an example of what you are saying and going back to Machiavelli. I don't think that Machiavelli could have known that what he was describing in "The Prince" is in fact social primate behaviour that is Machiavellian behaviour has been observed in Rhesus Maqacs a social primate species not massively different from the human species.

Oh and well done Cardiff Anarchists for a successful book fair!


congrats to the bookfair

25.02.2015 22:59

i didnt think it was safe to bring a stall, after the threats of violence upon the SWP by anarchists, and the outrageous tabloid like charges and slander about Jeff H made on Indymedia.

there is thug like element to the antifa, and i thought it weren't worth it.

anarchists talk a great deal about freedom, but dont believe in free speech anymore than Leninists do, they have leaders just as Leninists have, and are as heirarchal and authoritarian as Leninists are,in fact more so. I just wish they'd admit that instead of pretending they are so libertarian.

if you enjoyed the anarchist bookfair and want to go further, check this out


lenin the libertarian.

26.02.2015 03:24

guess who said:

"It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed."

thats right, its Lenin.

I dont want no swappie rationing my liberty, thank you very much. come to the anarchist bookfair for free, or pay for a week of swappie propaganda. i know which one i'll choose, thank you very much.

ex trot

It MIGHT help the discussion

26.02.2015 16:34

If there are any (actual) "libertarians" here please step forward. It is my sense that scarce on the ground in the European anarchist scene.

As long as you accept that the terms "left" and "right" can be used in OTHER than their economic sense, it is possible to speak of "left wing" vs "right wing" anarchism >

If not choosing to side with them, are there at least any familiar with their arguments?

It MIGHT be a good idea even for dedicated Marxists. After all, Marx considered the ideas expressed in "The Ego and His Own" the only serious philosophical challenge >

In other words, we should at least be aware of the ASSUMPTIONS we are making.


national anarchism

26.02.2015 20:34

there is also a national anarchist movement, for the community, against the state

i've never seen any of their stalls at any anarchist bookfair. they are closer to the views of Proudhon and Bakunin.

there is also right wing libertarianism, ie Ron Paul in the US, some people in UKIP call themselves libertarians as well. they are against the nation, against the state, for complete free market capitalism.

left and right do not have fixed terms. in any actuallly existing socialism, the regimes are always quite nationalistic.

i think there is 'left' and 'right' anarchism, marxism, and for that matter liberalism and even conservativism. many conservatives dont think of Cameron and co as conservatives but as ultra liberals,

there may be all kind of new combinations or alliances in the future, a red brown alliance is possible.

most contemporary anarchists, as well as contemporary liberals, strike me as cultural marxists rather than anarchists or liberals.


Not QUITE understanding libertarian vs Libertarian

26.02.2015 23:50

And Ron Paul is a PERFECT example of what I meant by only a small fraction of the Libertarians being libertarians (individual anarchists).

"there is also right wing libertarianism, ie Ron Paul in the US, some people in UKIP call themselves libertarians as well. they are against the nation, against the state, for complete free market capitalism"

Uh no, because the real libertarians (right wing anarchists) would consider a corporation "collectivist". Read writings of people like Lysander Spooner or Benjamin Tucker (or go back to even earlier like "The Ego and his Own" by "Max Stirner"). Some of the more extreme individualists considered even the nuclear family (husband, wife, and their children) to be collectivist.

So we do have (over here) people who CLAIM to be "libertarian" when what they mean is just unbridled market capitalism plus perhaps lessez faire on all social issues. Not anarchists at all, simply people who want the state to enforce just the laws that they want. The real "right wing anarchists" are MUCH more consistent than that.


creepy individualist anarchists

27.02.2015 02:24


yes, you are right, there are consistent individualist anarchists who are not free market capitalists, but extreme individualists. there is a slightly creepy side to this tho, Peter Lamborn Wilson, aka Hakim Bey, who put forward the idea of the TAZ or temporary autonomous zone, was something of a pederast.. see this article

Peter Lamborn Wilson is a consistent individualist anarchist, of the Ego and its Own Stirner variety. He defends his activities by invoking individualist anarchist ideas of freedom. an ultra left trot sect, the spartacist also defend these kinds of activities on the basis of 'keeping the state out of the bedroom' as do the tiny and pathetic weekly worker CPGB.

Individualist anarchists are not all a bunch of paedophiles, of course, but lets not hide the ugly part of this position, many seem to be. John Henry Mackay, who wrote a biography of Stirner, also argued for 'pederastic emancipation'.

i do not support freedom to this degree, frankly. there are limits.
against the state, not for total freedom!


Maybe more than the state?

27.02.2015 22:10

And this is actually NOT a left anarchist vs right anarchist thing (there are left anarchists who ARE for individual freedom too).

But seriously, maybe you need to question what YOU mean by anarchism if you feel what consenting adult homosexuals do in their bedrooms is any of your business (or of mine). Of course perhaps I had you wrong and you also take exception to anal sex if indulged in by consenting hetero couples.

Yes I know, the term "anarchism" covers a great deal of ground, and I know there are people who call themselves anarchists because "against the state" but have no particular interest in individual liberties. Or at least who think that is their position. Because ........

Just how would you propose in the absence of the state to prevent consenting adults doing whatever they wanted to do in bed? That aside, while having no inclinations that way myself, I would totally reject the concept that I didn't have to consider the political ideas of people just because "they are pederasts" (or polyamorists or ......... fill in whatever you like).


anarchist child abuse

27.02.2015 23:32

look i get your point. Tucker, Spooner etc are of one type, while Ayn Rand and anarcho capitalism is quite different. individualist anarchism does not necessarily lead to free market capitalism, but it can do. likewise, stalinist marxism is often nationalism. i get the point.

pederasty is child abuse. i cant say it is right.

sodomy is a different issue, because it is between two consenting adults.

but i think many of the anarchists who went to the bookfair would agree with child abuse and be suspicious of the motives of some individualist anarchists, such as Hakim Bey/Peter lamborn Wilson.

who should decide about the bedroom? if not the state, then the community.

i would like to put this to anarchists- do you defend the freedom of child abusers based on anarchist principles?


congrats to the bookfair

28.02.2015 02:12

glad the bookfair was successful.
big shout to the south wales anarchists!

marco polo