Strategy and Struggle - "The Brighton Manifesto" now available
Feb 8 2009 11:08
Pamphlet produced by Brighton local is now available, dealing with Anarcho-syndicalist strategy for the modern era.
http://libcom.org/library/strategy-struggle-anarcho-syndicalism-21st-century
Feb 8 2009 18:01
#2
Below the article in the library is the discussion so far - just follow the link! 
Feb 20 2009 05:43
#3
Quote:
-it is brief in the early parts with the critiques of anarchosyndicalism. it makes it readable, but hey brevity vs depth. For instance it is worth pointing out that rosa and dauve's critiques are basically straw men. They have some truth, but have to distort history to get them to be true on sectarian grounds. Still solid though.
I would disagree strongly. The only non-anarcho-syndicalist tendency I've ever come across which does not resort to pathetic straw-man arguments would be the Left Communists, and Rosa Luxemburg.
I would agree though that I find this to be quite close to my politics. I think it takes alot more from Left Communism than it wants to admit, but nevertheless, think its good.
More like this
- Strategy and struggle - anarcho-syndicalism in the 21st century
- Parallels between anarcho-syndicalism and council communism
- Left Communists on Brighton SolFed's approach to anarcho-syndicalism and revolutionary organising
- Anarcho-syndicalist strategy & the meaning of 'union'
- the role of an anarcho-syndicalist organisation and the role of an anarchist federation
Is there a thread discussing this? This is crazy good. Honestly this is the closest statement to my politics I've seen.
I have a couple critiques:
-it is brief in the early parts with the critiques of anarchosyndicalism. it makes it readable, but hey brevity vs depth. For instance it is worth pointing out that rosa and dauve's critiques are basically straw men. They have some truth, but have to distort history to get them to be true on sectarian grounds. Still solid though.
-the end part about organization- I think there is an artificial critique of platformist and councilist political organization. The critique basically argues against artificial unity of groups with different politics. That is strange because that's the whole platformism vs synthesism thing. Honestly I think the FoD, this pamphlet, and platformists share positions on the need for political organization, the division is on mass organization.
I also think its a mistake to call it a propaganda organization. The political organization does more than that since it coordinates in the network of militants and mass movements, it fights authoritarian and coopting elements, etc.