Liberty and Solidarity
Jun 18 2008
So is this new group, which is announced in the latest issue of Freedom, the Platformist split from the AF? It says in the article that they have members who have dual membership with other groups, which begs the question of why the split was necessary. Some information from the comrades involved would be appreciated.
Ta
Jun 18 2008
#2
Quote:
Liberty and Solidarity New libertarian communist organisation Liberty & Solidarity held their founding conference in early May, announcing they have groups in London, Birmingham and Reading. "We have come together to build a democratic organisation that can and will make quick decision, that focuses on effectiveness over ideology, and looks at tough questions - like crime and poverty - with ambition and vision" its national secretary told Freedom. The group adheres to tight organisational principles such as a constitution and delegate democracy, but continues to have dual members with the existing federations and work in broad based groups and struggles.
Jun 18 2008
#3
Terrible name is terrible. I've been telling them this but will they listen...
Jun 18 2008
#4
hiya django, straightforward really - L&S is not a split from the AF. Some people left the AF and together with people in other groups later formed L&S. There are more people in this small group who never had anything to do with the AF than the few of us who left 
Jun 18 2008
#5
Weeler wrote:
Terrible name is terrible. I've been telling them this but will they listen...
I'm happy with the name, but as i've said to you about 15 times now, give us a better one and will run with it
You always think you're gonna come up with a shit hot, smart, mysterious yet clever when-you-think-about it kinda name and then realise you'll just confuse people and/or look like twats. Acronyms, verbs, poetic sounding phrases... It never looks so good on paper as it sounds in the pub.
Jun 18 2008
#6
Name: L&S
Tagline: Not just any platformism, but L&S platformism.
Just got Freedom as well, good issue btw and all the sweeter for my non-involvement 
Jun 18 2008
#7
Saii wrote:
Name: L&STagline: Not just any platformism, but L&S platformism.
yeah we were doing those before we even voted on the name mate 
This isn't just leftist opportunism, this is sun ripened bolshevism drenched in the finest dictatorial dressing on a bed of the most sectarian spinach leaves, etc.
Happy days
Jun 18 2008
#8
"We have come together to build a democratic organisation that can and will make quick decision, that focuses on effectiveness over ideology, and looks at tough questions - like crime and poverty - with ambition and vision."
horrible quote mind, totally empty - New Labour could have said (and did say) just the same thing in its early 'high' period. What's the 'timetable' for something more meaty?
Jun 19 2008
#9
It is indeed a terrible name. But then I'm not an anarchist.
Jun 19 2008
#10
si wrote:
"We have come together to build a democratic organisation that can and will make quick decision, that focuses on effectiveness over ideology, and looks at tough questions - like crime and poverty - with ambition and vision."horrible quote mind, totally empty
no it isn't, not at all. Anarchist say next to nothing on crime outside of 'its sympton of capitalism' or better yet, fuck the the police. Well fuck knows, maybe they say loads on crime in books i never read, but no group has a policy on crime and what the individual is supposed to do about it. When we say we are looking at it simon, it means we are looking at it. There are a number of other tough questions never looked at either, we're also aiming to tackle those. And we do prioritise effectiveness over ideology. Basically it can sound like what it sounds like, but it is word for word, true. Its not an empty statement, you do not canvass support for anarchist practice by telling people that capitalism got their son stabbed, sit tight for 100 years whilst we organise a class struggle, and you don't treat the entire class like it is living in poverty, and you don't treat those in poverty like they have the same situation as the rest of the class. There are lots of things that need to be made clear around the edges of anarchism - which is a sound ideology - before its an idea that can be properly recognised by the general public for what it is.
Quote:
New Labour could have said (and did say) just the same thing in its early 'high' period.
Thanks
Quote:
What's the 'timetable' for something more meaty?
post september, we all work full time and all spare time is pretty much taken up with campaigning. If you want something a bit more candid, i'm an email or a phonecall away old bean.
Jun 19 2008
#11
Tacks wrote:
Weeler wrote:
Terrible name is terrible. I've been telling them this but will they listen...I'm happy with the name, but as i've said to you about 15 times now, give us a better one and will run with it :)
Workers Solidarity? [N.B. Without an apostrophe - Fuck Grammar! Its just the man oppressing us]
The Real Anarchist Federation
The Continuity Anarchist Federation
An Anarchist Federation Poblactháinaigh
49 County Anarchist Movement
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist)
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist)
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Hoxhaist)
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Avakianist: Long Live Chairman Bob)
Anarchist Federation of the Left
Workers-Anarchist Federation
Anarchist Communist Federation 
Why am I slagging off a group I'm joining? 
Actually I really don't like L&S either. But I don't like WSM either (we're not a movement) and I really don't like our logo. So whats new.
Jun 19 2008
#12
Quote:
Anarchist say next to nothing on crime outside of 'its sympton of capitalism' or better yet, fuck the the police. Well fuck knows, maybe they say loads on crime in books i never read, but no group has a policy on crime and what the individual is supposed to do about it.
Come on then whats the individual supposed to do about crime? No wait let me guess you're gonna give me some idealised notions about the possibilities of residents associations. Also perhaps we'll be hearing some liberal friendly stuff about better funding for youth facilities, prisons being less shit to prevent reoffendng, and the usual stuff that every anarchist worth their salt would say about the decriminalisation of drugs. Then again your perhaps goung to give us some even some slightly naive waffle about neighbourhood patrols aswell.
In short no offence like but we've all heard it before, off every anarchist and socialist from here to frickin edinburgh; pretending its all something new or that you have ''the answers to tough questions'' just sounds ridiculous and si is quite right to call you out on what realistically amounts to rather empty new labour like rhetoric.
Jun 19 2008
#13
georgestapleton wrote:
Actually I really don't like L&S either. But I don't like WSM either (we're not a movement) and I really don't like our logo. So whats new.
Your posts interest me, lets form a cadre!
Jun 19 2008
#14
georgestapleton wrote:
Tacks wrote:
Weeler wrote:
Terrible name is terrible. I've been telling them this but will they listen...I'm happy with the name, but as i've said to you about 15 times now, give us a better one and will run with it :)
Workers Solidarity? [N.B. Without an apostrophe - Fuck Grammar! Its just the man oppressing us]
The Real Anarchist Federation
The Continuity Anarchist Federation
An Anarchist Federation Poblactháinaigh
49 County Anarchist Movement
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist)
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist)
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Hoxhaist)
Anarchist Federation (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Avakianist: Long Live Chairman Bob)
Anarchist Federation of the Left
Workers-Anarchist Federation
Anarchist Communist Federation
What about Anarchist Worker's Group? I think that would win friends and influence people.
Devrim
Jun 19 2008
#15
Jun 19 2008
#16
Other names to win people over;
Give Babies Aids
International Communist Current
Free the paedos.
Seriously though, you need to work on the name. Its quite important.
Jun 19 2008
#17
cantdocartwheels wrote:
Quote:
Anarchist say next to nothing on crime outside of 'its sympton of capitalism' or better yet, fuck the the police. Well fuck knows, maybe they say loads on crime in books i never read, but no group has a policy on crime and what the individual is supposed to do about it.Come on then whats the individual supposed to do about crime? No wait let me guess you're gonna give me some idealised notions about the possibilities of residents associations. Also perhaps we'll be hearing some liberal friendly stuff about better funding for youth facilities, prisons being less shit to prevent reoffendng, and the usual stuff that every anarchist worth their salt would say about the decriminalisation of drugs. Then again your perhaps goung to give us some even some slightly naive waffle about neighbourhood patrols aswell.
In short no offence like but we've all heard it before, off every anarchist and socialist from here to frickin edinburgh; pretending its all something new or that you have ''the answers to tough questions'' just sounds ridiculous and si is quite right to call you out on what realistically amounts to rather empty new labour like rhetoric.
you are right on all counts of course. Instead of this being a remarkably good guess, in fact what those are are the only possible positions on crime anyway; if an anarchist said they were looking at crime, they'd come up with some or all of those ideas. The other option is the classic one - blame it on capitalism and focus on other issues. That's fine but people see it as a huge hole in your arguments, as i have found from doing street stalls on a range of issues and talking to people when campaigning. We think it's worth a decent shot, and i have nothing to tell you other than thats what we'd be looking into.
Where you are misled is to suggest that having 'heard it all before' invalidates it; of course we have heard all proposals before at some point, the question is - have we seen them? I'd argue we have actually seen a lot of decent community policing projects that point us in the right direction, but in the anarchist movement in the UK, no we haven't. Community class struggle really is a relatively new and developing practice, and calling it new is legitimate. Certainly when most of anarchism's other doctrines are centuries old.
Jun 20 2008
#18
Devrim wrote:
What about Anarchist Worker's Group? I think that would win friends and influence people.Devrim
That would have been funny.
Jun 20 2008
#19
i dont think its too fair to be calling l&s out just yet. tacks has said they have other things to do first before they post what they are going to do. i think we are to quick to slag people of here before we actually know whats going on. i think we should leave this until september when we then can see what its all about.
Jun 20 2008
#20
i dont think its too fair to be calling l&s out just yet. tacks has said they have other things to do first before they post what they are going to do. i think we are to quick to slag people of here before we actually know whats going on. i think we should leave this until september when we then can see what its all about.
Jun 20 2008
#21
I agree with jambo, we can slag them in September.
Jun 20 2008
#22
I'm still curious though about what the AF branches who split and have become part of this new group think the benefits are. Its not about calling them out - I genuinely want to know what political difference that merits a new group is. One of the comrades on here said it came after the failure of discussions and proposals in the AF (presuming L&S/Anarchist Workers' Group/Symbionese Liberation Army-Platformist Tendency is the new group they were talking about).
Jun 21 2008
#23
Django wrote:
I'm still curious though about what the AF branches who split and have become part of this new group think the benefits are. Its not about calling them out - I genuinely want to know what political difference that merits a new group is. One of the comrades on here said it came after the failure of discussions and proposals in the AF (presuming L&S/Anarchist Workers' Group/Symbionese Liberation Army-Platformist Tendency is the new group they were talking about).
comrade you are being a bit odd here.
Some reforms in the AF faltered (tho i think more or less passed after i left) and a group of people left to join a new group, which is just called Liberty&Solidarity, nothing else.
The advantages for the people who joined is that L&S is platformist. The people in it are platformists, you see. So its quite advantageous.
Jun 21 2008
#24
georgestapleton wrote:
Why am I slagging off a group I'm joining?
Why are you joining a group you're slagging off?
Jun 21 2008
#25
Django wrote:
I'm still curious though about what the AF branches who split and have become part of this new group think the benefits are. Its not about calling them out - I genuinely want to know what political difference that merits a new group is. One of the comrades on here said it came after the failure of discussions and proposals in the AF .
Tacks wrote:
Some reforms in the AF faltered
Django already knows this, since he mentioned it in his question, I think he's asking for a little more detail.
And Django, it's the same group, yes.
Jun 21 2008
#26
Tacks wrote:
Some reforms in the AF faltered
Actually they didn't. The majority of the document that the L and S group presented (of which I was a signatory) was passed at national conference. Proposals that didn't pass were abandoned because they were either unclear or unworkable. A few sympathetic Afers had to take on the project after the individuals left because they still felt change and development was important. It was just unfortunate that people split from the organisation before a) they saw these reforms go through and b) we were able to initiate some formal process to accompany the group.
Jun 21 2008
#27
catch wrote:
And Django, it's the same group, yes.
No its not. Its a very small group and the majority of people were in the AF until recently. And the organisation probably wouldn't have been set up if they hadn't left but its not the same group. Of the 5 people I know in L&S one was in the group that left the AF.
Jun 21 2008
#28
georgestapleton wrote:
catch wrote:
And Django, it's the same group, yes.No its not. Its a very small group and the majority of people were in the AF until recently. And the organisation probably wouldn't have been set up if they hadn't left but its not the same group. Of the 5 people I know in L&S one was in the group that left the AF.
Well it's not a dfferent group is it? I think that's what he was asking.
Jun 21 2008
#29
They haven't told us why they left even. At least the AWG had a real reason for leaving DAM.
Devrim
Jun 21 2008
#30
It´s not important devrim. I want to encourage a constructive and positive environment where we can work with the AF. Not blab my misgivings about the organisation all over libcom.
I really don´t like this forum.
can you post up, or type out, the announcement?