APOC Miami Report Back

Fellow Revolutionaries, Bakunin, in my mind, is not a revolutionary. Not only was he outrageously anti-Semetic but he openly supported the South in the US Civil War. Why is anti-Semetism so taboo among many (certainly not all) anarchists? Proudhon believed the Jews should be "driven back into Asia". Did he struggle for human liberation? When Mahkno and his army carried out pogroms against Jews in southern Russia during the Russian Civil War was he being a revolutionary? So why in all the anarchist books detailing the horrors of the Bolsheviks is there no mention of such acts? I understand that these were maybe anarchists of another era, and that young anarchists in the US are not anti-Semetic. I accept that argument, but why do anarchists seem uninterested in this history? How closely could you have been reading Bakunin if you didn't notice his support for the South, his hate for Jews, or his absurd anti-intellectualism? And when you did surely run across these references in Bakunin, Proudhon, Mahkno, etc, what did you make of it? Were you outraged or did you raise a fist?
Anyway,, I don't want to take up too much room but I did want to make a point about the Spainish Civil War and it's on a similar topic so I'll include it. The anarchists held dearly to the idea of being 'against power'. So when the powerful CNT, which was a millitant class-struggle union and the main organizational base for the anarchists, was faced with the chance to sieze power in the name of the working class they refused. But when a reformist, anti-revolutionary coalition government was attempted the anarchists couldn't wait to join up. So anarchists don't believe (even in a time of full-scale working class revolt) in siezing power, but fascists do. And they siezed power instead. I'm not suggesting that the anarchist are to blame for four decades of brutal fascist rule (surely Moscow also played a central role in selling out the Spainist revolution), but what I am saying is there is a fundamental difference between the power of the working class and the power of the rulling class. I want the working class to take power, and therefore take power away from the rulling class. That is the starting point of my differences with anarchism. Any thoughts from the board?
-Brad

Besides that-who can support a political affiliation which bases itself on narrow scopes and means-so they exploit the political entities which command attention and priviledge yet-they deface their own dignities by endulging in self destructive and criminal behavior which are supposed to satisfy their angst for sticking it to the man-the March 4th protests only demonstrated that they are hardened criminals who deface public property and hate the general public at large-there are a lot of blue collar folk out there that might rally for social change-but not for pampered white kids who bitch about leading oppressed-these kids came from the bourgeoise-yet they act defiant and indignant of that fact-And they denounce hippies but forget that it was the hippies who helped form their means to revolt-fucking hypocrites!