between marxism and anarchism

The Question of Internationalism: Between Marxism and Anarchism (nov 2025) 1 hr video via ayça çubukçu (earlier – tried to listen to livestream but couldn’t find a link) and her repost of this tweet today [https://x.com/histmat/status/1996061228658311509]:

HM London 2025 panel “The Question of Internationalism: Between Marxism and Anarchism” with Ayça Çubukçu, Rahul Rao, Sandro Mezzadra, Richard Seymour, Alessia Lunghi, Michael Hardt

michael hardt.. karl marx et al.. anarchism.. et al

notes/quotes from video:

10 min – ayca (intro – on campism):.. question.. are there only 2 camps at times of war.. enemy of enemy must be friend ness.. either/or logics that characterize.. alts beyond what binary allows.. ie: feminist internationalism.. difficult question: how can global left approach enemy of enemies as well as struggles critically.. need to co articulate and learn from ..anarchist – way of expressing discomfort of ..leadership.. in global movement for palistinian lib.. why no room for expressing discomfort w hamas and iranian state.. such expressions of discomfort and disagreements.. were common place debates.. today foreclosed by labeling of ‘traitors’ et al.. is this repressions worth the loss of debate.. solidarity demands articulation of such critiques.. strengthening thru political diffs.. what if.. instead of acting as though enemy of enemy is friend.. enemy of enemy may become my provisional ally.. esp when people undergoing genocide.. internationalism can’t be resolved.. by unchanging bonds that admit no criticism.. then question is.. how/when .. to what purpose should critique be made

18 min – (next guy to right of ayca): i agree with you that you want to do away w/either/or.. and i want to present some of the in between states

29 min – (next guy to left of ayca): (haven’t listened yet)

42 min – (guy 2 to right of ayca)

52 min – michael: i have an annoying habit.. immediately convinced by arguments.. then come back to my own opinion.. good characteristic for a friend but not so much for this.. i think there have been moments to distinguish between anarch and marxi.. but today is not one of them.. the either/or mandate that involves critique of campism.. also should apply to the state.. not an either/or.. helpful to think about elements of tradition of communist internationalism and characteristics of it because it has gone between the movements of state.. and another.. internationalism has to be said in the plural.. on 19th cent 1st international to 3rd international shifts.. 1960s-70s variations of both.. but also states.. 1\ continuous back/forth between state/movement as actors in international articulation 2\ diff streams.. internationalism is not one thing.. it’s a mandate to think fem, anti-racist, et al.. work them together..

57 min – michael: what matters to me though in this question about campism.. want to avoid the displacement of political judgment.. campism’s mandate to suspend political judgment.. i’m trying to work thru not having that suspension to extend.. say 20 yrs ago.. not hard to get what diff movements are .. today.. ie: gen z movement.. very difficult to understand.. but not a reason to not pay attention.. that’s what we have to learn about.. even if hard to understand.. bandaid of internationalism is to understand and politically evaluate it..

1:00 – michael: one thing about mandami.. the miopi of revolt in us.. shifts in us.. as posing importance at a larger scale..i want to refuse a traditional either/or.. revolutionary only made in weakest chain.. i think internationalism has an equal opp for revolutionary action.. to articulate in radically diff situations..

1:02 – (guy on far right):

_______

_______

______

______

_______

______

_______