CNT-FAI Anarchism spain 1936

[SuperAcab666]

So much respect from Denmark

No Pasaran

(A)

[cristero1]

After all the anarchists did to so many innocent people they ended up getting what they deserved from Franco. Viva Franco.

[WingChunHard]

@cristero1 you should die

[baboon778]

imhornydadcomeinside,even your user name tells everything we need to know about you.get lost.closest thing to real freedom is inteligent educated anarquismand as they always use to cheer in these times" comunismo libertario"

we need it more than ever,look where the world is going.Globalisation and capitalism arte charging and taking us where we were 200 years ago.

ademas ,Solidaridad con los griegos ,pobre gente.sabiais que hubo un punado de ellos en las brigadas?endavant companyers!!!

[Georgiemanutd]

alza la bandera revolucionaria!!!!!

nombre de la cancion (guitarra)???

name of the song? (guitar)???

[Skinhead77Oi69]

świetne zdjęcia , świetne plakaty :)

[Davidfaca94]

@Trotskyistrevolution The problem of that union is that, as anarchist I refuse to obey any government and a atoritarian communist one will not be an exception and, as you can imagine is hard to find a neutral point in that trouble.

Sorry for my english but i'm spanish.

¡Viva la revolución libertaria!

[swfcocs1]

@Davidfaca94 your comments are exactly right

long live Durruti!

His words live on in our hearts!

p.s. your english is excellent,comrade!

Best wishes from the UK.

[Trotskyistrevolution]

Well there were many reasons the USSR failed. The only reason for its failure was not that "they were fake socialists" or whatever else. It had a lot more to do with the historical current and the material conditions in Russia at the time. Rusia's economy was quite backwards. Therefore, the beauracracy tried to implement socialist strategy to fix pre socialist problems. I think both Marxism and Anarchism can work, they just need to be implemented sucessfully. Also, I think we should try to unify

[agapeiron]

@Trotskyistrevolution There are many fine examples of Trotskyists that moved further and further to the left and became libertarian socialists.

Also a great deal of anarchists are informed by Marxism. Anarchists just tend to reject the Marxian political program of centralization, statism, etc. There are also libertarian Marxists.

The real opposition is between libertarian socialists and Leninists (Trotskyists, Stalinists, Maoists, Castroists, Juche); not between Marxism and anarchism.

[MasterAdam100]

If Anarchy is the wide, free table top of freedom and Communism is the legs that support it and keep it from falling, then I'm all in.

[juliaisafilmbuff123]

I am crying now. Very beautiful.

[Lifraen21]

hahaha Anarchism is kiddy ^^

long live our great soviet union!

[overmind25]

The Soviet Union was a terror state fantasy by make believe lovers of liberty and equality. Anarchism is against the mysticism and religiousness of state worship and political leader priestship.

[IronColumnAnarchism]

Soviet Communism fails. It can't long live since it died.

[DanteWhite]

@Lifraen21 soviet union= state capitalism

it was the biggest fail in history

[SturmUndDrang13]

Pasaremos!

[PhiloCentinel]

Ⓐ

[celticchefgirl]

Interestingly, a recent poll in Britain found that the most trusted retailer was John Lewis - a worker owned co-operative. One of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century was that the mass of the left strove for the dictatorship of the centralised state. We may now be entering interesting times, having witnessed the failure of both authoritarian socialism and capitalism.

[viloloco5]

I agree with one omission to your statement, and that's the word "failure." I think the applications of either the latter 3 governments philosophy's you've mentioned, could and have a latent of success if applied with a conscious and cooperative mass whose adherence to the cause for social solidarity is more important the their self-interest (empowerments of one person, instead of the people first). Capitalism and Authoritianism are very capable of that also; it's only been the selfishness

[viloloco5]

— that have destabilized the system, not to mention other nuances such as privatization of capitalism ect.

[Nederlandac]

Muy bien.

[Nederlandac]

¡No Pasarán!

[anarksee]

Tierra y Libertad,indeed!By the by;Kropotkin preferred the red flag(google those words).

[rappir]

you can keep your marxist ways but it is only just a phase... cos we love money money

money money money money money money money money money money money money

[withDefiance]

lol marxism is not anarchism... and I don't like your money money money money money money

[ramberghini]

someday, people will see the light and overcome money. We value people based on their social status, and not their character these days. Someday that will change.

[disgracious23]

@withDefiance

check out: anarchadia.over-blog. com

[WorldDebater]

@withDefiance in true form it is. Communism in true from is Anarchism because Marxism said that Socialism is a stage from capitalism to Communism where no government is needed....Sounds like anarchism to me but just like socialism anarchism is very broad so the is also Anarcho-Capitalism which will don't make much sense to me.

[DuffmanIRL]

To the final victory comrades!

[ramberghini]

to the final victory!

[Imhornydadcomeinside]

Fuck you leftwing state lovers, true anarchism is found with LIBERALISM.

Anarcholiberal

[bodtorent]

Qué estupidez.

[Imhornydadcomeinside]

True anarchism= egoism.

[bodtorent]

Nothing to do one thing and the other. Egoism is free from political or social order. We both must know egoist people from all political ideas and not yet anarchism has reached a country government to state that. The anarchism we are talking about here is the one from those who fought against a fascist power which stood up in Spain to take control against freedom, civil rights and free of speaking, as mi grandparents did then. Believe me, I know what I´m talking about.

[Imhornydadcomeinside]

No what they fighted for was freedom, more or less egoistic purposes, I also know what I'm talking about.

[bodtorent]

Just what I said.

[bodtorent]

And just what my family and millions more suffered. Thank you.

[bodtorent]

If you think freedom is an egoistic purpose you really have serious problems.

Find the root of the meaning of "ego". Then think about what freedom means.

[Imhornydadcomeinside]

And what's wrong with being seriously mental? Well you can call yourself wathever you want these days huh? "Anarchists", well alright, seems like I overrated you anarchists.

Politics sucks, and this "anarchism" sucks balls too.

[bodtorent]

This is not just politics, this is not about anarchism, this is a documentary talking about a civil war and one of its factions, republican, which integrated not just anarchist ideas.

If you are not interested about this, then don´t lose your time and don´t make us lose ours.

[Imhornydadcomeinside]

Who cares, I get it, you're a bunch of pussies trying to be hardcore with a name, discussion over, not impressed at all. pathetic!

[bodtorent]

As soon as you have no arguments you start to treat with that lack of respect. Poor little boy.

I even have more arguments. Were also egoistic thos "brigadistas" who came from all over the world to help the republican faction here un spain?

[NestorMakhno1936]

Get your petty individualism out of here.

[Amebixfan]

There's lots of advocates of the free market that are anarchists you stupid fuck

[SturmUndDrang13]

No, you idiot, those are libertarians. Fool.

[smthngdffrnt]

He's right. They're called market anarchists or anarcho-capitalists. Anarchists and minarchists are both concidered libertarian.

[SturmUndDrang13]

No, he's not. Anarchism is considered a no-state left-wing ideology and libertarianism is considered to be a no-state right-wing ideology. The rest is just semantics.

[Calhoon1832]

Anarchism is neither right or left wing. Antigovernment is kind of right. And civil liberty is kind of left. But Anarchy is neither. Neither side of this spectrum (which is intended to eliminate alternative opinion, offering only two solutions to each problem, where both give more ppower to the elite) truely support either of these principles. Anarchy is falsely related to this left-right spectrum by dems. who think its to antigovt. and cons. who think its to anticapitalism.

[SturmUndDrang13]

You bullshitter. It's fair to say that national-anarchism or national-communism isn't either left or right, but you're just full of shit.

Nobody wants anarchy, mate. People need a government to correct social flaws, crime and maintaining common accepted moral. Without a state there is chaos, anarchy which will result in a powervacuum which will either be filled in with capitalist corporate greedseekers or cruel crime lords, both working on laissez-faire capitalism without moral.

[SturmUndDrang13]

So like I said. It's all semantics. Fuck that.

[Calhoon1832]

Without a state, order is imposed by the people. I think the difference b/w you and me is that I believe that people are competent enough to govern their own lives. In mutual anarchism the workers run the coorporations, and people are paid based on their labor. The workers wouldn't allow coorporations to be retaken by monopolists, and would not have reason to become a monopoly, because they still be payed based on their labor, they'll get no more forbeing a monopoly.

[Calhoon1832]

Also crime would not be much of a problem b/c only things that infringe upon others' rights would be illegal. Prostitution, and Drugs the source of much criminal activities would be legal. And if someone does commit a crime they can chose b/w serving the community, and deportation.

[SturmUndDrang13]

Wrong, because you think mankind is good by nature. Al the left-wing ideologies think so. People need a state.

[Calhoon1832]

Here is where the argument will go no further. You will forever argue that all people are stupid and evil. While I will say it is the fault of our current system that many people do become this, but people themselves are kind and competent enough for self rule. Another flaw I find in your argument is that the State is in fact made up of people, so should it not be inherrently evil, and why should we follow it then.

[Calhoon1832]

Also according to your argument that peole are evil, democracy would be one of the worst forms of government, because its those evil people, who chose other evil people to rule them. I guess your ideal government would be one made of artificially intelligent computers, designed to supress the "evils" of humanity. Hey that sounds good to me. Why dont all us "Evil people" just go surrender are free will to our new overlords.

[SturmUndDrang13]

There is no ideal government. That is exactly my point. But it is better than no government.

[Calhoon1832]

How? I mean w/ your view of humanity how is it different for evil people to run there own lives, or for it to be run by evil people. If no government is good, why participate in one by allowing its existance. If anything you should recognize the greater evil of the coruption of power(which people who view humanity as naturally good aldo recognize).

[SturmUndDrang13]

Wrong. My point of view is that of conservatism. Human imperfection. A government is bad, no government is worse.

Yes, power corrupts. But when you leave it for anyone to grab, be damn sure the worse men will grab it.

That is why all left-wing ideologies are naïve. They really believe that mankind is good by nature.

[Calhoon1832]

Anarchy advocates the elimination of ALL heirarchy, and its partiicipants would oppose ne1 trying to impose their will on others. So if someone tried gaining power in an anarchist society, they would be prevented from doing so. Therefore worse men wouldn't have the opportunity to grab it.

[SturmUndDrang13]

Nature itself implies hierarcy since all men are born inequal. Some are smart, some are dumb, some are pretty some are ugly.

I ask you though, WHO will prevent anyone from grabbing power? Since there is no one above anyone and thus no authority.

[Calhoon1832]

wow..... This is my last response b/c I can see by youre statement

"all men are born inequal"

that you are very arrogant. All men are created equal, perhaps they have differing abilities, but they are nontheless equal in the sense that no one should have more rights than anyone else...

Still I just wanted to say that the masses are competent enough to recognize the tyranny of heirarchy, and dismantle it by deporting all perpatrators. Anarchy is voluntary, if you want heirarchy you must leave.

[SturmUndDrang13]

Tell me then? If you don't judge people by their abilities. On what do you judge this equality?

Smile! You have just been powned!

[Calhoon1832]

Read the Declaration of Independents, people are equal, because they have equal rights. Now you may question why we give other people you believe are inferioir equal rights. But just b/c people have inequal abilities doesnt mean:

a) that being good at something makes you superior, or even a good person

b)people have inequal rights, and when I say people are equal I mean that they are equal in their natural rights.

....u spelled pwnd wrong n00b.

[SturmUndDrang13]

They have equal rights, yes and that means formal equality in law, not in being. There is no such thing as being superious, inferiour or equal unless you ground it on certain standards. Tell me, what are your standards to state that people are equal? Face reality people are different. (In case you didn't know, that means inequal, since equal means the same)

You're still powned. Why don't you try typing it in Google, nerd.

[Calhoon1832]

Equal=have the same inalienable rights(nothing legal about it, these rights superecede law, and are the basis of the equality of man, just b/c people have different abilities doesnt mean they aren't inherently equal, or deserve to be looked upon in any other way)

powned=n00bish misspelling of pwned(typed "powned" into google, and it corrected my spelling lol)

SturmUndDrang13=fascist(look at his channel)

[SturmUndDrang13]

e·qual (kwl)

adj.

1. Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.

Voila, now I have powned you properly trough definition.

Furthermore, why don't you read the actual pages of your 'search'.

The past tense may also be spelled: pwnd, pwn'd pwn3d, pwnt or powned.

Smile again, you have been powned twice!

[sheepblitzer]

"... all men are born inequal. Some are smart, some are dumb, some are pretty some are ugly."

no one is born "smart" or "dumb," it depends on their willingness to learn as they grow up, and what priorities their parents teach them. but anyone is capable of being "smart," it just takes some effort.

as for "pretty" and "ugly," this depends on what our society dictates. there is no real truth to these words, just opinions. maybe in a better society one's appearance would not even matter

[sheepblitzer]

but calhoon was right about an anarchist society not letting someone come to power. i believe your understanding of human affairs is tainted by our current system, where power is exercised by a few while the masses barely pay attention. anarchist societies would encourage direct participation by everyone, hence someone trying to take power would be noticed and resisted.

[sheepblitzer]

also, i believe that once people experience the cooperation and mutual trust of an anarchist society, people will realize the true "nature" of humanity, which is "good." so even if they could take power over others, who would want to? remember anarchy would be run on the local level, so these would be your close friends and family.

[sheepblitzer]

(cont) so i think your understanding of "human nature" has also been tainted by our current system of greed and division. 99.99% of all humanity (throughout time) has lived in in small tribal communities, what wed now call "anarchist."

[SturmUndDrang13]

Yeah, and they were primitive hunter-gathers with not one inch of civilization whatsoever. Have fun with that.

[SturmUndDrang13]

The true nature of humanity is not good. It has never been. Therefore people need a state to reensure everything stays good. On which do you base your ridiculous statement, that mankind is naturally good?

[sheepblitzer]

"Therefore people need a state to reensure everything stays good."

thats not the purpose of states. states exist to protect the powerful individuals who run them. how much war, inequality, persecution, famine, and ignorance have we had since the states have been around? how much of that was there in pre-state times. please remember that states have only existed for 5,000 years (only in a few places until the past few hundred), which is a miniscule fraction of the history of humanity.

[SturmUndDrang13]

The purpose of the state should not be to protect individuals. Period.

There was no war before states because there was no development, you fucking fucktard. What was there to fight about? When mankind evolved from primitive hunter-gatherers to settled agricultural societies, STATES arose. An absence of states is just a feature of retarded and primitive societies. UP YOUR'S, ANARCHO-TOSSER! Go squat something, shithead!

[sheepblitzer]

"On which do you base your ridiculous statement, that mankind is naturally good? "

the fact that humans lived in cooperation for millions of years (before the state), the fact that the brain releases endorphins when one commits a good deed, the fact that we love our family and friends (most of us).....

[SturmUndDrang13]

You moron, that's because they had nothing to fight about, dipshit. Retards in primitive societies around the globe don't argue or fight either. They just didn't get to agriculture even.

RETARDED COMMIE ANARCHISTS!

[sheepblitzer]

the fact that most of us despise warfare and sympathize with the starving even if its happening on the other side of the planet (those of us who are aware anyway), the fact that every time a leader comes forth to remind us of this true nature, entire religions spring up around them (i.e. jesus). the fact that humans better be "good" if they want to survive as a species, and this greed, division, and self-destruction forced on us by states must stop

[SturmUndDrang13]

YOu fucking hypocrit. If you don't even care what happens at the other end of the country, and only care about your little fucking retard communes of 200 people, WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU CARE ABOUT THE OTHER END OF THE WORLD!?

Let's crush the last marginal en very little remains of anarchism and socialism en be done with the red menace and stinkers!

[SturmUndDrang13]

How will they not let someone to power? Trough the police? HAHA!

[SturmUndDrang13]

Euh, no. Intelligence is based for 80 procent on genetics. You can"t learn quantumphysics to a retard, retard.

[taz0k2]

"Also according to your argument that peole are evil, democracy would be one of the worst forms of government, because its those evil people, who chose other evil people to rule them. I guess your ideal government would be one made of artificially intelligent computers, designed to supress the "evils" of humanity. Hey that sounds good to me. Why dont all us "Evil people" just go surrender are free will to our new overlords."

Best comment I've seen in a long time! Excellent points!

[taz0k2]

"No, he's not. Anarchism is considered a no-state left-wing ideology and libertarianism is considered to be a no-state right-wing ideology. The rest is just semantics."

Whoever places Anarchism to "the left" is crazy

[SturmUndDrang13]

Semantic bullshit. Why?

[taz0k2]

For the non-existing god's sake, just think.

Liberalism/neoliberalism is to the "right", and anarchism is about as liberal as it can get.

[SturmUndDrang13]

Stop bullshitting everybody with semantics. Libertarianism is a right-wing no-state ideology and anarchism is a left-wing no-state ideology.

Because the first works on a non-egalitarian capitalist society and the latter on a egalitarian non-capitalist society.

Did I made it clear to your atheist left-wing ass?

[fishsmack]

No, that is incorrect.

Libertarianism is the antithesis of authoritarianism, and is not directly related to Enlightenment liberalism (or perhaps the constitutional liberalism of Ron Paul, if you want a face), which is the "right-wing" ideology you are likely referring to.

The term "libertarian" was first used by Enlightenment thinkers. The term gained political properties after being used in French anarcho-communist journals. So, if you'd like to debate "semantics", there's your answer.

[SturmUndDrang13]

Semantic bullshit. Who gives a FUCK about what was. These are the practical meanings of anarchism and libertarianism today. You are waging semantic warfare.

[taz0k2]

SturmUndDrang13:

I said that Anarchism is to the right, because that's how it is.

Communism is on the left, neoliberalism is to the right. Neoliberalists want deregulation. The most radical neoliberalists want to deregulate absolutely everything, which is Very close to anarchism.

You seem to say that these radical neoliberalists would get further and further "right" until suddenly they become anarchists and are "teleported" to the opposite side of the left-right scale.

You are not consistent.

[SturmUndDrang13]

Hey, you dumb fuck. Let me make it clear to you. The right is conservatism. The left is progressivism. It first started with the French Revolution. The pro-French Revolution are the liberals, socialists and everything that came out of it like Anrachism. The right is conservatism (like Burke and shit) and everything that came out of it like fascism.

So cut your stupid crap.

[taz0k2]

So now you place liberalism to the left?

You placed it to the right just some moments ago:

"libertarianism is considered to be a no-state right-wing ideology"

My native language is not English but isn't liberalism and libertarianism pretty much the same?

[SturmUndDrang13]

No, they're not to same. Libertarianism has the same roots, though it has never been tainted by socialism into a purple progressive blur and even evolved to retain social-conservative an danti-egalitarian viewpoints.

[Irtidad]

"...who believe that world [sic] would work without order!"

That is a complete fabrication and falsehood. Anarchists are not against order whatsoever, we are against exploitation and hierarchy.

[tipotaaa]

Respect to these people..

[neolestat13]

Inspiring...