Telegraph et al: Put up or shut up

Picture: Phillie Casablanca

The trashing of Tory HQ has thrown up piles of shoddy reportage which should shame the people writing it.

Notable in today's hilarious Daily Telegraph "scoop" is that the paper's reporters have been reading Libcom's forums in an attempt to track down the ringleaders of the direct action at Tory HQ this week.

Given this fact I'd like to invite you, Daily Telegraph reporter, to:

a) Actually show some sort of direct link between a couple of dozen anarchists calling for a radical bloc on a march* and several thousand people trashing the offices of an unpopular political party

b) Wind your bloody neck in and accept that sometimes large masses of people can collectively and spontaneously decide to do things you don't approve of

In the case of option b, if you have a shred of professional dignity you might want to consider publishing a retraction of a number of related falsehoods you've been bandying about, accusing several individuals involved with anarchist organisations of being "ringleaders" in this bizarre tower of assumptions you've constructed.

Apart from any other consideration, the Solidarity Federation and Anarchist Federation both work on non-hierarchical principles (the clue here being that, as you have pointed out, we are anarchists), meaning we constitutionally bar our members from assuming the sort of vanguard roles you've been fantasising about. Sorry to disappoint.

Oh and one more thing, stop repeating rushed comments made on Facebook verbatim with "sic" in brackets to make it look like we're a bunch of illiterates - reporters are hardly saints when it comes to writing things not destined for publication and the sub's red pen.

* Please note, the definition of a radical is someone who wishes to significantly alter or replace existing economic and social structures NOT, as you appear to think, someone who wants to drop a fire extinguisher off a roof.

Posted By

Rob Ray
Nov 14 2010 12:49


Attached files


Nov 14 2010 13:25

Well said. Likely to fall on deaf ears, but still needed saying.

Nov 14 2010 13:31

Yeah, I doubt any anarchist response to the press will receive publication or attention, unless elements of it can be spun out of context. Luckily, though, people are capable of thinking for themselves (despite the media image of helpless lambs waiting to be dragged along by the will of us evil anarchist types) and can find and read them anyway.

Caiman del Barrio
Nov 14 2010 13:36

Phil, the last 4 days have pretty much proved you wrong. I've read a million anarchists and sympathetics in the press, most saying right on stuff. Sure the papers have their own take which they'll push, but people are reading this relatively critically right now.

Either way, the alternative of non-engagement seems ridiculous.

SF's response:

jef costello
Nov 14 2010 21:34

Good stuff Rob.