organisation

Why You Should Start a Solidarity Network

SeaSol's "Winnability" Graph

People often accuse anarchists of being opposed to all forms of organization. Some of us are quick to point out, however, that it’s not all organization we are opposed to – just apparently the effective ones.

When I first became interested in Anarchist politics, there weren't many groups for me to get involved with. All of the collectives I joined seemed to form, fall apart, and reform - always the same people reshuffling into new groups, disbanding, and starting over again. If they took part in any discernible action at all, it was normally because some other group had organized it.

Comments on organisation - Solidarity (Swansea)

A member of Solidarity criticises 'elitism' in the organisation.

SOLIDARITY AND ELITISM.

This small piece is occasioned by the’ Solidarity’ Conferences of Liverpool and Oxford, both 1976, and by the written offerings of some of the members that appeared during the same period.

Toward Theory of Political Organization for Our Time Part III: nature of our period

The Nature of Our Period: looking to an autonomous working class alternative

The end of the twentieth century was a time of transition. The regime of low-intensity warfare, the dismantling of the welfare state, and neo-liberal privatization schemes ultimately was running its course[1].

The illusion of 'Solidarity' - David Brown

David Brown's letter of resignation from the Solidarity group, and critique of the groups' - and by extension Cornelius Castoriadis' - fundamental misunderstanding of Marx's critique of political economy.

Editorial notes by the Hobgoblin Collective, 21 January 2011

Towards Theory of Political Organization for Our Time Part I: trajectories of struggle, the intermediate level, and political rapprochement

Political organization is a collective answer to common problems. People organize based on a collective sense of need, and the perspectives and problems encountered in social groups crystallize into organizational forms and moments. This is a general historical trend; even without a theory, organization emerges to meet concrete needs that cannot be solved except by building social forms to address them.

The end of the twentieth century was a time of transition. The regime of low-intensity warfare, the dismantling of the welfare state, and neo-liberal privatization schemes ultimately was running its course[1].

Rackets - F. Palinorc

Article examining various theories against organisation for the sake of organisation.

Like classes, rackets are a product of domination. They probably emerged when shamans, military chiefs or clan patriarchs first conspired against other humans from their own or nearby communities. Pillage, warfare and enslavement dissolved primitive communities, and rackets were formed in that violent process.

Revolutionary syndicalism and organisation

An English translation of an early 1980s Greek anarcho-syndicalist text by the Anarchosyndicalist Group.

Translator’s foreword

Social Anarchism & Organisation: Concentric Circles

An excerpt from the FARJ programme "Anarquismo Social e Organização"

The specific anarchist organisation uses, both for its internal and external functioning, the logic of what we call "concentric circles" - strongly inspired by the Bakuninist organisational model. The main reason that we adopt this logic of functioning is because, for us, the anarchist organisation needs to preserve different instances of action.

What is the union? - Emile Pouget

Emile Pouget essay outlining the aims, priniciples and functions of unions.

Property and authority are merely differing manifestations and expressions of one and the same "principle" which boils down to the enforcement and enshrinement of the servitude of woman. Consequently, the only difference between them is one of vantage point: viewed from one angle, slavery appears as a property crime, whereas, viewed from a different angle, it constitutes an authority crime.