OK, so the owners of LIBCOM officially banned me from the right to create a blog (although many people here asked me to create a blog and I can say that at first such an initiative did not come from me). Now I can tell everyone openly what happened.
On the other hand, I am officially allowed create my own texts in the Library.
I report this for the reason that I want this situation to be opend and known to everyone. Many people have asked me to make a blog and now I can answer them all here.
It's like the Nazis burning books up in here. Hashtag censorship. Hashtag WATABOUTMAHRITES.
jondwhite
I asked about creating a blog too, dont think i got a response.
Thanks to several friends, I was able to contact the owners of the site and get a clear answer.
Rob Ray
It's like the Nazis burning books up in here. Hashtag censorship. Hashtag WATABOUTMAHRITES
You know, I'm not in the leftist's habit of accusing everyone of "Nazism".)
Not surprised, they must have read your posts 
Incredible that they banned you from creating a blog rather than just to host it, and you can't make a blog on any other sites either
Did they give you a reason?
As I recall meerov21 made themselves unpopular with some regular contributors on libcom with ill thought out responses on some much earlier discussions around issues of 'identity politics' which might explain the admins hesitance in agreeing to blog facilities. They have since posted a number of extended texts and useful follow-up discussions which are certainly within the parameters of libcom's politics, even if I have some disagreements personally with their views. Still they are not banned from this site as such and the 'privilege' of running a regular blog isn't handed out to everyone - not the end of the world.
Rob Ray wrote:
It's like the Nazis burning books up in here. Hashtag censorship. Hashtag WATABOUTMAHRITES.
Wouldn’t have expected sneering from you Rob Ray.
I don’t see why meerov shouldn’t have a blog. Though I frequently disagree with him he writes pretty well, has had a lot of experience that others on the site haven’t had, and often has a unique perspective of things. That makes his posts interesting and a meerov blog probably would be good for the site.
Edit: Cross post with Spikeymike
Quote:
meerov21 made themselves unpopular with some regular contributors on libcom with ill thought out responses on some much earlier discussions around issues of 'identity politics' which might explain the admins hesitance in agreeing to blog facilities.
Indeed. I personally went toe to toe with him on that very topic, but that’s just one thing and if being popular is a required criteria for getting blogging rights then that would truly be some bullshit.
Still, like you say, not the end of the world, he can still create threads or post on those created by others. I would still like to know the admins reasons though.
I think Rob Ray’s post was a ‘bit of a dig’ rather than a true sneer.
Meerov21’s stuff is interesting though usually expressed in an irritating way. The Libcom admins probably feel granting him a blog could end up as a licence to be offensive to other posters – take the way meerov21 refers to ‘the owners’ of this site, as if they behaved as capitalists or were some other form of miscreant.
So sorry, meerov21 - tough-titty.
Nobody is obligated to give you a platform. Who are you? Just some guy on the internet. Go start a Wordpress.
meerov21 wrote:
jondwhite
I asked about creating a blog too, dont think i got a response.Thanks to several friends, I was able to contact the owners of the site and get a clear answer.
Just checked and I sent the message on 10-12-18 23:52 and never got a response.
Yeah I'm mostly taking the piss a bit about the portentous tone for what, in the final analysis, is a collective saying to someone "we don't want you to have a blog on here." No collective is obligated to give a platform, it's not a "right". Plus it's totally understandable why meerov, who has a habit of getting into arguments and handing out denunciations, might not get a semi-official platform to do so.
I dispute that meerov has a habit of getting into arguments, or at least that he necessarily responsible - two to tango and all that. It’s truer to say that he has a habit of expressing views that are contrary to the more widely held views of Libcom participants. That sort of thing rarely goes down well around here.
I mean, his response in this very case to being told he couldn't have a blog was to do a post titled "the owners of LIBCOM officially banned me from the right to create a blog". Which if it was me would rub the wrong way, frankly. He has neither a right to a blog nor is he banned and phasing it like that is deliberately provocative.
Though that said, if he's likely to post stuff which is against the collective's established values why wouldn't he be told no? They've never said they're an open platform, in fact they were partly formed as an antidote to Indymedia and its salutary lesson in how letting anyone post whatever they want leads to total tin foil hat nonsense.
Well, I’m not defending his choice of words in creating this post - he’s clearly got his knickers in a knot over this and in fact, in private correspondence it was my suggestion that he let it go.
The thing is though, that meerov is nothing like a tin foil hat merchant and as has been said, his general position is one that I think most of us would agree is essentially a libcom, one, if not a Libcom one. Of course it’s the prerogative of the admins to decide such things, I’m not disputing that, but if it is because his views aren’t quite agreeable enough, I think the parameters are being set somewhat too narrow.
1) Here's the answer I got from LIBCOM: "Due to some discussions on the forums we’re not comfortable giving you a blog at the moment, however it would be absolutely fine to post historical articles to the library (and probably a better location than a blog anyway) - you should have permission to do that."
2) I made this post for the reason that many people on this site (not one, not two, but more) asked me why I didn't have a blog here and explained to me that I should have one. And I agreed with this opinion. I believe that such questions can be discussed publicly and have given a public answer.
3) I have written before in some discussions that I do not see a clear boundary between ownership and control. The group of people who control this site and make management decisions are de facto the owners. At least that's how I look at it. I don't see anything offensive about that. It's just a fact. What? Do you have a libertarian commune with a total vote of 1,000 bloggers and collective management through referendums of all participants? No. So What's the question? I didn't understand. I do not see here any provocations, I didn't tell anything special or rough.
4) Yes, of course, my views differ from the views of many people here, because I am interested in anarchism as it was seen and built by Mikhail Bakunin, Vsevolod Volin (opponent of the First and Second imperialist wars) and FORA participants, and not as it is seen by modern American antifa. Yes, I am a supporter of synthesis of anarchism and the ideas of the German-Dutch communism of the Soviets. Yes, I am speaking against fascism and anti-fascism, against identity politics, and for class struggle. But, there is a certain part of the people here share these or similar views. Some others disagree with me, but would like to participate in the debate. Therefore, I believed that the decision in my favor can be made by the owners of the site LIBCOM. Yes, we are opponents, but opponents can argue.
Auld-bod
Meerov21’s stuff is interesting though usually expressed in an irritating way. The Libcom admins probably feel granting him a blog could end up as a licence to be offensive to other posters – take the way meerov21 refers to ‘the owners’ of this site, as if they behaved as capitalists or were some other form of miscreant.
I'll tell what i think. Almost every word in the world is offensive, because there will always be someone who will consider an insult even the call of Jesus Christ to love the neighbor (many on this site 
) . Therefore, the freedom of debate suggests that it may offend someone. The denial of the "right to insult" means, in practice, authoritarian domination of one point of view and the right of its supporters to insult all others without the answer.
Of course, I believe that we should reject rudeness and the transition to personality. But everything that is said politely can be a subject of discussion.
Of course, LIBCOM is a libertarian-socialist site, denying other idelogies, but I think that the real historical Mikhail Bakunin, my compatriot and the person quite sarcastically speaking about the people from whom I originate (Jews) would not be allowed to create a blog here.
Noah Fence wrote:
his general position is one that I think most of us would agree is essentially a libcom, one, if not a Libcom one. Of course it’s the prerogative of the admins to decide such things, I’m not disputing that, but if it is because his views are quite agreeable enough, I think the parameters are being set somewhat too narrow.
Indeed, especially in light of the fact that one of the admins gets to keep being an admin after openly admitting that he "find[s] [him]self drifting" toward nationalism. The fact that this is okay but giving a blog to Meerov is not says a lot about how the politics of Libcom... evolved over time.
Yes because Juan Conatz saying he feels despondent about his experiences over the last eight years is definitely something to be dragged out as a hammer to beat the admins with in support of an argument that your boy should have a sodding blog.
I know the left is full of tossers who think winning an argument, no matter how petty, is far more important than showing some fucking common decency but I swear I never get used to it.
I see that "Lately I've been feeling sad and gloomy, therefore I get a carte blanche for my politics turning to utter shit" has been raised to a new Libcom orthodoxy. Maybe I was wrong about Libcom's politics changing – maybe it doesn't even have any politics anymore and has just turned into some kind of bizarre leftist support group.
AnythingForProximity
Indeed, especially in light of the fact that one of the admins gets to keep being an admin after openly admitting that he "find[s] [him]self drifting" toward nationalism. The fact that this is okay but giving a blog to Meerov is not says a lot about how the politics of Libcom... evolved over time.
Well, Mikhail Bakunin could say about the Germans or Jews unacceptable things, and for me, as a supporter of internationalism in the spirit of Otto Rule and Anton Pannekoek, these things are unpleasant.
But I would still provide a blog to Mikhail Bakunin or his politically incorrect friends)))
That's probably the difference between people like me and some others. I think I'm just saying something that many people are embarrassed to say: that the anarchist movement has become just an extreme flank of left-wing liberalism, identity politics and trade unionism, that it has ceased to be of value for the future as something original, something other than just a radical version of Bernie Sanders...
I don't see anything monstrous about this young man Juan Conatz had in the past sympathy for nationalism, it's just funny when he so defends the purity of ideas...
AnythingForProximity wrote:
I see that "Lately I've been feeling sad and gloomy, therefore I get a carte blanche for my politics turning to utter shit" has been raised to a new Libcom orthodoxy. Maybe I was wrong about Libcom's politics changing – maybe it doesn't even have any politics anymore and has just turned into some kind of bizarre leftist support group.
Yeah, people can come on here and whine about the admins and the site all day long when they're feeling small and inadequate. You feeling better, champ?
Also, by definition a "bizarre leftist support group" would have politics or it wouldnt be a leftist support group.
Uncreative wrote:
Also, by definition a "bizarre leftist support group" would have politics or it wouldnt be a leftist support group.
Fair point!
Quote:
I'm just saying something that many people are embarrassed to say: that the anarchist movement has become just an extreme flank of left-wing liberalism, identity politics and trade unionism
You're saying the same thing every other wannabe political gatekeeper has said since about 1840 regarding anyone they think isn't toeing the line they've laid out adequately. "Waah everyone's more liberal than I, the true arbiter of class struggle" is neither special nor particularly iconoclastic.
Uncreative
Yeah, people can come on here and whine about the admins and the site all day long when they're feeling small and inadequate. You feeling better, champ?
This is an interesting observation. To be honest, I've been feeling pretty much the way you described : not only here but my whole life: small and inadequate
So it was when I was a migrant worker who cleaned up garbage in Israel, and even when I worked as one of the editors in a publishing house in Russia (I had no administrative authority, but formed the content of books), and all my bosses regularly explained to me that I am a small and inadequate person.
To be feeling small and inadequate is the fate of most people on this planet for sure.
Rob Ray
You're saying the same thing every other wannabe political gatekeeper has said since about 1840 regarding anyone they think isn't toeing the line they've laid out adequately. "Waah everyone's more liberal than I, the true arbiter of class struggle" is neither special nor particularly iconoclastic.
But this is not true, I never considered myself a model of class struggle. I've always pointed to people and movements that are. It's just some people here are scared when I talk about some things that they think are Holy or untouchable, like your antifa or students-crybabys at the University.
And yet it seems you are in a position to judge when denouncing people (indeed the entire movement) as liberals, trade unionists and adherents of the Dread Spectre of Identity Politics. Or as antifa student crybabies (goodness, with such a constructive attitude I am baffled as to why you didn't get this blog). Don't put yourself down meerov, don't hide your light behind Bakunin's bushel, these are your criticisms and it's your ideological gatekeeping going on here, not his or Pannekoek's. There's nothing about identity politics in Workers Councils.
AnythingForProximity wrote:
Indeed, especially in light of the fact that one of the admins gets to keep being an admin after openly admitting that he "find[s] [him]self drifting" toward nationalism. The fact that this is okay but giving a blog to Meerov is not says a lot about how the politics of Libcom... evolved over time.
I don't think I've been one of the people that run the site for about 2 years now, maybe 3? Not quite sure. But I must be an important enough internet personality in your life that you remember my posts from 7 months ago. I'm flattered that you were paying attention.
meerov21 wrote:
But this is not true, I never considered myself a model of class struggle. I've always pointed to people and movements that are. It's just some people here are scared when I talk about some things that they think are Holy or untouchable, like your antifa or students-crybabys at the University.
meerov21, how old are you? Not a rhetorical question, but a sincere one since I think I remember you from an international anarchist listserv in the mid-1990s (started by a comrade from Finland). If it was you, you were a name-calling troll.
Based on the post above, you're the same internet provocateur who makes posts in bad faith, then when called out about it claims victimhood.
If you want to bash antifa, do the hard work of critique, rather than casting out facile aspersions. Hate students and youth? Give reasons why you have such reactionary positions.
And that's the key word: reactionary. Why in the world would libcom administrators give you a blog when you're incapable of stopping yourself from saying things based so much hubris? It's almost as if you're proud of your ignorance. Or is it just an act? Are you simply trolling?
meerov21 wrote:
2) I made this post for the reason that many people on this site (not one, not two, but more) asked me why I didn't have a blog here and explained to me that I should have one. And I agreed with this opinion. I believe that such questions can be discussed publicly and have given a public answer.
If you live by such noble anarchist traditions as transparency and an open collective dialogue, please simply state which libcom poster(s) has been suggesting that you have a blog.
So now meerov is a liar as well as all his other crimes, right? I think you should confess all comrade, give us all the offences that should be taken into consideration and maybe you’ll get a more lenient sentence? You’re not gonna get a blog but nobody asked you for one anyway, did they? That silly old brain of mine must of imagined those blog requests too, eh? Must be coz of all the drugs I took in the 90s for which it’s only fair I should be judged and condemned for twenty odd years later. I should imagine that Lucky Black Cat will shudder in horror when I tell her that I imagined I had read her suggestion that you should start a blog on one of the forums!
Ok, enough sarcasm, but really, this is all a bit much. People are interested in meerovs stuff, they’ve even said so on this thread, and even if he is a bit of an asshole sometimes when interacting with others, it certainly doesn’t justify the characterisation that this thread has subjected him to.
Yes, he is just some guy on the internet, like all of us, and as we have had our own trials in life, so has, no doubt, meerov, and we all need cutting a little slack considering the shit that our lives in capitalism put us through.
Anyways meerov, whilst I tend to think you should have been granted a blog, it’s not that big a deal - you haven’t been censored in any way, you can create content in the usual way on the forums, post library articles or comment on other people’s threads, right? I can understand your ire but do the dog with a bone act and you’re just inviting pain to into your life - my personal experience of doing just that resulted in me hating Libcom and staying away from it for a year or more which was a shame.
Libcom, it’s posters and it’s admins are far from perfect but as far as online anarchist forums and resources go I’d say it’s the best we’ve got by a country mile.
I asked about creating a blog too, dont think i got a response.