Class War newspaper

An online archive of issues of Class War, a UK-based anarchist tabloid newspaper founded in 1983.

Submitted by Fozzie on November 10, 2018

Libcom also hosts:

As well as a number of critiques of Class War's politics:

Missing issues:
#3 New Homes For The Rich, October 1983.
#8? Bricks Bottles Burning Barricades – Summer of 1984.
#54, #59, #60.

Comments

R Totale

3 years 7 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by R Totale on September 6, 2020

The Iain Sinclair review mentioned is here. May be soft-paywalled if you've looked at other LRB articles this month but you can get around that by opening up a private mode/incognite window. Interesting to see the old Chumbawamba shit condom hoax get another mention.

westartfromhere

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on January 31, 2024

Just reread parts of the first issue. Ian Bone's rabble rousing brought this to mind from our Herakles:

In England, for instance, the way to show political power lies open to the working class. Insurrection would be madness where peaceful agitation would more swiftly and surely do the work.

The show of political power is not the same as the seizure of political power.

ca'canny

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by ca'canny on February 1, 2024

Love seeing these up here. Thanks Sparrows Nest!

westartfromhere

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 2, 2024

Not a surprise to see criticism of Class War from the cop collaborators of Sussex University above.

Samotnaf, 12 years 9 months ago, wrote:

Should point out that this article, though it appeared in Aufheben as an "intake" , was not written by anyone involved in Aufheben.

I remember being invited for a pint at The White Tart by Ian Bone and his cronnies when I worked in a post room off Finsbury Square. The overall impression that I left with was, gobbledegook.

lurdan

1 month 4 weeks ago

Submitted by lurdan on February 21, 2024

Here's a temporary link to a scan of one of the missing issues #4

Imagenetz link

(This issue was put together by Lia and Aleks and I have a dim recollection that there was some unhappiness about the content).

westartfromhere

1 month 4 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 22, 2024

The class has to be injected with higher consciousness. This higher consciousness cannot be founded on real experience, by its very definition, and so must find another basis. This is found in how other people suffer—in victims. Anger is twisted out of class solidarity which then aquires the pious stench of Christian brotherhood and can do nothing more aggressive than condemn capitalism for being immoral.

Class War, [#4], on the politics of social-democracy (of the Left and right).

Submitted by Fozzie on February 22, 2024

lurdan wrote: Here's a temporary link to a scan of one of the missing issues #4

Imagenetz link

(This issue was put together by Lia and Aleks and I have a dim recollection that there was some unhappiness about the content).

That's amazing Lurdan, thank you - it's now here.

Bone says in his book that a large number of this issue were burned...

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 22, 2024

Fozzie wrote: Bone says in his book that a large number of this issue were burned...

Don't tease us. Burnt by whom?

P.S. Read your note on the link.

Class War #1 1983

"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live!" Lucy Parsons

The debut issue of Class War, published 29th April 1983. Including: class, nuclear war vs class war, trade unions and Labour - beyond the bullshit, Yosser (Hughes) is a tosser, lots of sweary speech bubbles, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on January 31, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest archive.

Files

Comments

Class War #2 1983

Now is the time for every dirty lousy tramp to arm himself with a revolver or a knife and lie in wait outside the palaces of the rich and shoot or stab them to death as they come out

Published 24 June 1983 and including: Thatcher re-elected: five more years of this shit?, Red Action, Crass and pacifist punk, Northern Ireland, rioting tips, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on January 31, 2024

Unnumbered, but named as issue 2 on page 127 of Ian Bone's "Bash The Rich".

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive.

Files

Comments

westartfromhere

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 2, 2024

Crass commercialism is still commercialism.

westartfromhere

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 2, 2024

I am no Feeble Christ, not me! "He" hangs in glib delight upon "his" cross, above my body! "Christ, forgive!" Forgive?! Shit, fuck, I vomit for you, Jesu; shit forgive. Down now from your cross! Down now from your papal heights, from that churlish suicide, petulant child! Down from those pious heights, royal flag bearer, goat, billy! I vomit for you! Forgive?! Shit, "he" forgives! "He" hangs in crucified delight nailed to the extent of "his" vision! "His" cross, "his" manhood, violence, guilt, sin! "He" would nail my body upon "his" cross, suicide visionary, death reveller, rake, rapist, lifefucker; Jesu, earthmover, Christus, gravedigger! You dug the pits of Auschwitz! The soil of Treblinka is your guilt, your sin! Master?! Master of gore, enigma! You carry the standard of our oppression! Enola is your gaiety! The bodies of Hiroshima are your delight!

Still makes me chuckle. If only they could have come up with one good melody!

Fozzie

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by Fozzie on February 2, 2024

I always remember a mate saying that a lot of Crass' tracks were like being told off by a posh teacher for not doing enough to prevent a nuclear holocaust happening.

To be fair, a lot of working class kids got into weirdo atonal music because of Crass, so the lack of tunes did something good.

westartfromhere

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 3, 2024

That's funny.

I'm a working class kid that started producing atonal music on the back of Crass, or in conjunction with it. It might have been better I stayed in the choir?

Fozzie

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by Fozzie on February 3, 2024

Better to be more dialectical about it and crack on with the atonal choral music in my view!

westartfromhere

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 3, 2024

Sound advice

Fozzie, just had a recollection of a Class War vendor at the entrance to Victoria Park who had placed crowd barriers round his stall.

R Totale

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by R Totale on February 5, 2024

Thought I had a pretty good knowledge of this stuff but this is my first time hearing of the Anti-Social Workers, any idea if they ever recorded anything? Anyone got any memories of them?
Oh, looks like there was some recorded output:
https://antisocialworkersariwa.bandcamp.com/album/punky-reggae-party

westartfromhere

2 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 5, 2024

Mad Professor (born Guyana, resident of South London) also notable for his critique of the medical nemesis: Schizophrenic Dub, Science and the Witchdoctor, Covid Illusion Dub, Herd Immunity.

westartfromhere

2 months 1 week ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 6, 2024

That Anti-Social Workers brought me to this, Anti Social Services | SESSIONS 001. A bit of fun!

Class War #4 1983

We have our own idea of time and motion

The notorious "autonomist" issue, including: class and class antagonism, socialism and its leftovers, press cuttings on shoplifting etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 22, 2024

According to Ian Bone this issue went down badly with a number of people involved with Class War at the time and a large number were burned. (Bash The Rich: True Life Confessions of an Anarchist in the UK p150-153).

A "time and motion" study is a business efficiency technique aimed at extracting as much labour out of workers as possible.

The cover of this issue is an image from the aftermath of “Opera House Riots” in Zurich in 1980. It was also the cover image of the book "Zürcher Bewegung, Band 32" (Zurich Movement, Vol. 32) by Fredy Meier, published 1981:

Files

ClassWar04.pdf (10.11 MB)

Comments

westartfromhere

1 month 3 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 22, 2024

With the burning of this issue by members of Class War in mind:

You cannot separate class from struggle. Class warfare creates the class.
...
Those with most anger in them are the least oppressed.
...
The working class is antagonistic or it is nothing.

lurdan

1 month 3 weeks ago

Submitted by lurdan on February 23, 2024

Worth making clear what Bone wrote about the issue. ('Leah' was actually Lia).

"AUTONOMANIA

By the end of 1983, some political differences were already emerging in the Class War group which couldn't be wished away in favour of 'action'. Aleks was our last remaining situationist, adherent with his Italian autonomist girlfriend Leah. Unlike his ex-mate Nick Brandt, who could only grimace with horror at the very mention of the vulgar Class War, Aleks saw some positive things in Class War. He was however a wary critiquer of Sean Mason's 'working-classism' - that is Sean's belief that anything working class was intrinsically good. This wasn't just used to dismiss any objections to out-of-order behaviour as 'middle class' but glorified what was in fact some of the worst aspects of working-class culture.

Aleks and Leah volunteered to produce Class War No. 4. At this time, anyone who was associated with the group could just go off and write the next issue. There was no discussion of articles at meetings or desire for editorial control by the group as a whole. Me, Sean and Stella had effectively produced No. 3 and were quite happy to have a rest and let Aleks and Leah produce the next one.

Class War No. 4 is totally unlike any other issue of the paper. Aleks and Leah produced a paper which contained a sustained and cogent intellectual attack on the Mason position but which had none of the populism or propaganda values of the earlier issues. It was more of an internal discussion document than a newspaper and proved extremely hard to sell with its perplexing 'We have our own idea of time and motion' cover. You pays your money and you makes your choice - it was either one of the best Class Wars ever, or one of the worst.

I didn't really understand its content at the time and just thought Aleks had no fucking idea of how to produce a populist paper. Looking back now, the article had a lot going for it and should have led to a wider and more careful discussion leading to a more rigorous analysis of our future actions. Anyway, here's what Aleks and Leah wrote:

You cannot separate class from struggle. Class warfare creates the class. Single-issue campaigns only produce single-issue groups. Without struggle, 'class' just means your background. And the world's full of people of working-class origin who survive by arse-licking conformity, working for the nation. Some admire the rich, some vote Tory. Until they do something to combat the system, they'll continue to promote individual interests over class interests. Coming from a working-class background isn't enough: many cops come from there as well.

Britain has got the oldest working class in the world. The pride of this class in its distinctive character, its culture, language and traditions has a useless as well as a positive side.

Positive: self assertion and confidence, and a healthy suspicion of middle-class trendies and political parties who claim to speak on our behalf.

Useless: inverted snobbery which boasts such miserable compensations for impotent poverty like machismo, tepid beer, football, ignorance, dignity of labour... in political terms, this snobbery was exploited by Labourism. Labour politicos and Trade Union bureaucrats are class traitors.

It's not enough just to defend the class as it is today, class liberation has got to be the goal of struggle. So let's hear less about how the class is sexist, racist, submissive, and so ignorant it can only understand The Sun, and more about how the class transforms itself, how individual and social change actually happens. It's not simply the system that brainwashes the passive masses, rather it's the active antagonists (which include most of the people some of the time and some of the people most of the time) who by their actions force the system to change. Capitalism would never have altered since the 19th century if everyone had merely co-operated. But the class doesn't co-operate - it refuses to work on the bosses' terms, it refuses to obey the laws of property.

Self organisation and class transformation also means getting away from habitual and pathetic aspirations, like being satisfied with an extra pound in your pocket or trading your birthright for a bag of chips. The wealth we produce is immense, the desires we could make real are legion. At least we can aspire to take ALL the good things in life from the rich. The working class is antagonistic or it is nothing.

The whole paper was a brave exposition of Marx's dictum that a class is only a class when 'it's a class for itself', that is class conscious. For a paper called Class War, it was important to be clear on this but the composition of London Class War at the time was not given to careful discussion. Sean Mason was fuming. He saw it as a personal attack. Leah was told to: 'Fuck off back to Italy' and the Masonists burned a large number of issue No. 4 in the back garden in Kingsbury while they danced cider-bottle naked around the burning pyre with black flags. Sales in our usual London outlets were poor and our previous buyers perplexed to say the least. The unrelenting negative feedback and abuse from Sean Mason led to Aleks and Leah quitting the Class War group and 'working classism' was left unchallenged. 'We're all racist and sexist but so what?' Sean had written once. 'But what the fuck - we're working class'."

westartfromhere

1 month 3 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 23, 2024

Brilliant. Thanks for posting this on 'working-classism', which goes hand in hand with the 'workerism' of the British 'International Socialists'.

Nick Brandt, who could only grimace with horror at the very mention of the vulgar Class War

Sam I am, hee-hee

'Race' and class are indivisible so we should quote this in full to balance the truth contained within this issue and the off-kilter:

The Left are an enemy. And they always get it wrong. Black youth are not more oppressed than whites. Those with most anger in them are the least oppressed.

Not quite sure what was perplexing about the cover. Doesn't every worker know what the purpose of Time and Motion studies are? Has the bonehead ever had a job?

Ian—and anarchists and Marxists in general—overplay, or misunderstand, class consciousness. The class for itself acts in its own interests, not in the interests of capital. It is about actions, not thoughts.

Class War #5 1984

Huntsman: You fucking scumbag we're gonna get you

Published February 1984. Including: Class War spring offensive, Stop The City, Class War Macho?, animal liberation, Class War vs Freedom, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 1, 2024

Unnumbered, but named as issue 5 on pages 156 and 160 of Ian Bone's "Bash The Rich".

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

Comments

Class War #6 1984

MacGregor is KO'ed

Published May 1984. Including: Stop The City, miners strike, women in mining communities, forthcoming actions.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 1, 2024

Unnumbered, but the Stop The City write up is referred to as being in issue 6 on page 158 of Ian Bone's "Bash The Rich".

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

Comments

Class War #7 1984

The Rich Get Richer... The Poor Get Poorer;

Including: Sunday People vs Class War, squatting, police vs miners strike, Class War collective, animal liberation, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 2, 2024

Unnumbered and undated. Probably published June 1984, so number 7. (Sunday People smear story was May 27th 1984 and is referred to as "last week". First use of Albany Street contact address - and plug for bookshop. Albany Street "newly opened" - Freedom July 1984.)

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive.

Files

Comments

Class War #9 1984

One from the girls: we won't rest till the guts of the last social worker has been used to strangle the last probation officer

An issue by Class War women, including: royal family, sex work, sexism and racism, working class women in feminist groups, social services, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 2, 2024

Cover star is "Crazy Chrissy" from the comic strip "D.R & Quinch", illustrated by Alan Davis and written by Alan Moore.

Unnumbered and undated, but probably issue 9 from July or August 1984. (Uses Albany Street contact address which was only active in 1984. Notice of anarchist conference 18-19th August, which was a weekend that year.)

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

Comments

Class War #10 1984

Class War "Victory To The Hit Squads" cover

Including: miners strike and violence, "Open up the second front", work, Fuck the GLC, etc.

Submitted by R Totale on April 16, 2020

Possibly issue 10? (Before the Royal Parasite issue as the Albany Street contact address is used).

Published circa September 1984: B registration number plates just being issued referred to (August 1984). Hemsworth riot press clipping (July 1984). Albany Street address was evicted mid September 1984 (see Black Flag story).

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive.

Files

Comments

Class War #11 1984

Class War issue 11? 1984
Class War issue 11? 1984

An ununumbered issue of the Class War paper featuring: royal birth, miners strike - open up the second front (strategy article), press clippings, 1 in 12 Club Bradford, Camden sex shops, first "Hospitalised Copper" feature.

Submitted by Fozzie on December 24, 2022

Possibly the 11th issue? Published late 1984 (mentions 4th September in one article, so after that).

Scans via https://stillunusual.tumblr.com/post/56174121850/class-war

Comments

Class War #12 1984

Photos of Kinnock and Thatcher surrounded by a noose. Headline "the miners have the right idea"

An issue of Class War from late 1984 including: monetarism, women at work, racism, 4th Stop The City, pornography, hospitalised copper #2, Neil Kinnock and the miners.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 25, 2023

Kinnock "noose incident" was November 1984. New contact address c/o Freedom Press.

PDF with thanks to Splits and Fusions archive.

Files

Class-War-12.pdf (7.75 MB)

Comments

Kinnochio speaks and his nose starts to grow

13 November 1984 a symbolic noose was dangled in front of TUC general secretary Norman Willis

Class War on Labour leader Neil Kinnock and his hostile reception from striking miners in 1984.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 28, 2023

Every time Neil Kinnock's name was mentioned at the miners rally at Aberaven it was greeted with a chorus of boos and hisses. "Ramsey McKinnock"1 posters were prominent as were cries of "scab" and "Judas" whenever the Labour leader was referred to. When Norman Willis chimed in with his pathetic TUC compromises, he was greeted with shouts of "off, off, off" and the famous noose2 was dangled in front of him (though not close enough in our opinion). At long last there are signs that a large number of miners are thoroughly sickened with the behaviour of the TUC and Labour Party scabs -- and may be able to make the first real break of a significant section of the British working class from its 'own' supposed party.

It has been sickening in the past to watch striking miners at rallys applaud Labour Party speakers who only the day before have appeared on T.V. condemning the same men for 'violence'. Now that they are beginning to get their come-uppance, it is of vital importance to keep this process going. Judas Kinnock and the rest of his scumbag Labour cronies (Kauffman-uugh: -don't he make you want to throw-up) must be hounded and shouted down wherever they try to speak. Kinnock says that violence is alien to the British working class movement- the fucking ignorant tosser, what about the Luddites, the Chartists the Captain swing riots, Tonypandy, etc. It's alien to him because it might fuck up his chances of becoming the next Prime Minister, who would act like all the other Labour P.M.'s and attack the working class in the interests of the bosses.

The only difference with Kinnock is that he's moved so far to the right before even getting into power! The rest, Wilson, Foot, etc., usually have the decency to wait till the doors of No. 10 close behind them. At Stoke-on-Trent Kinnock tried to prove what a fearless, gusty, valleys boy fighter he was- by addressing an audience of hand-picked middle-class Labour Party members who were guaranteed to cheer his defence of middle class horror against working class nastiness and violence. Of 1700 tickets distributed at the rally 1500 went to L.P. members and only 200 to NUM members- yet this was passed off as though Kinnock was bravely addressing an audience of hostile miners. Many miners walked out in disgust rather than listen to more of his scab apologetics, others loudly snored through it, and others screamed scab and Judas at him backed up by a hard core of 30 anarchists from Stoke, Sheffield, Bradford, and London who managed to 'obtain' some tickets outside (i.e. grabbed them out of some L.P. jerk’s hand) Biggest applause of the night came when the chairman asked If people wanted to leave owing to a bomb scare - "Not if it's under Kinnocks seat" shouted someone!

So, now is our chance to keep sticking the boot in the Labour Party. But what alternative do we offer people like us? Unlike the leftie groups with their party programmes and “correct" analysis we don't see ourselves as separate from the rest of the working class, as its leadership as the leftie groups see themselves. The working class is quite capable of getting rid of the bosses, and the miners of running their strike without the benefit of advice from the would be little-Lenin's. The mass picketing, the communal kitchens, the women’s support groups, the Hit-Squads is our alternative to the Labour Party and the lefties- a working class struggle in the hands of the working class.

We have argued in the last two issues of Class War that the best support we can give to the miners is to open up a second front by rioting in the inner cities. This is still the case. There is no prospect of any other organised section of the working class taking industrial action in solidarity with the miners- so the sooner we get out on to the streets with our bricks and bottles the sooner they'll have to withdraw police from the mining areas.

In the pit villages in Yorkshire it’s not just miners who are attacking scabs, erecting barricades, attacking police stations. Large numbers of unemployed youths and kids as young as 10 are joining in. This is the unity that needed to win. On many nights the rioting spreads to the right around South Yorkshire with people rampaging from one spot to the next. It is getting to nearer to the outskirts of large towns like Sheffield and Pontefract- once it reaches to centres the police will be fucked. The sooner we can help this to happen and then to spread riot style to the other major cities the sooner both us, and the miners, will win. In his report as commissioner of the Met. police, Kenneth Newman stated that keeping public order was the No. 1 priority of the Met. Police. He listed 52 potential riot situations which have been nipped in in the bud in London alone this year. Every area of London had its own I.R.U. permanently patrolling in vans to deal quickly with such situations. The authorities know that they'd be well fucked if inner-city rioting breaks out at the same time as the miners strike. We know that too- so let’s see the old year go out with a bang.

  • 1A reference to former Labour leader Ramsay MacDonald, who refused to support the 1926 General Strike.
  • 2On 13 November 1984, a hangman's noose was slowly lowered from the rafters of a meeting hall until it rested close to the head of TUC general secretary Norman Willis. Willis was in the process of denouncing miners for picket line violence.

Comments

Class War #13 1985

A meat cleaver descends on Margaret Thatcher's blood head.

Including: CND = Wankers, miners in court, sex and anarchism, porn, crime, Edinburgh stop the city report, Bash The Rich march in Kensington announched, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 5, 2024

Unnumbered and undated but almost certainly issue 13 from circa March 1985. (Hospitalised coppers 3. Press cutting 22nd Feb 1985. “Exactly 100 years ago on April 28th 1885”. Notice of Anarchist Conference March 23rd-24th. Advert for Ladbroke Grove Bash The Rich May 11th.)

With thanks to Sparrows Nest Archive Nottingham for the PDF.

Comments

Class War #14 1985

Bash The Rich - a huge boot stamps on a Rolls Royce

Including: classroom warfare, Sheiffield Asian Youth Movement on racist violence, against alternative lifestyles, ecology, Bash The Rich Kensington march report, DHSS snoopers, against celebrity pop stars, end of the miners strike, (fake) attack on yuppies in Leeds photos, anarchism and terrorism, policing football, Bradford stadium fire, Henley Bash The Rich announced, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 5, 2024

Undated and unnumbered, but almost certainly #14 published circa June 1985. (Review of Ladbroke Grove Bash The Rich March in May. Bradford fire was May 1985. Notice for Henley July 6th 1985. Notice for Class War rally in July.)

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive.

Files

Comments

Class War #15 1985

Black and white illustration of a military general, judge and businessmen being hung from a tree branch by ropes

Issue of Class War on: gentrification in the East End of London, Live Aid, social security reforms, two pages on Bash The Rich at Henley Regatta, women and capitalism, rate capping, setting up a local Class War group, back page advert for Bash The Rich march to Hampstead on September 21st 1985.

Submitted by Fozzie on June 10, 2023

Probably would be issue #15, dated approximately August/September 1985.

Files

Comments

Steven.

10 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by Steven. on June 10, 2023

Is the question mark here because you think this is probably issue 15?

Fozzie

10 months 2 weeks ago

Submitted by Fozzie on June 10, 2023

Yes exactly - the early issues are unnumbered so a bit of guess work is involved. But there are clues in dates of articles and other things like the various logos/mastheads.

There are a few like that in the CW archive and my best guess at the order is in the gallery.

Steven.

10 months 1 week ago

Submitted by Steven. on June 11, 2023

Okay great, cheers. I have slightly edited the description info to make this clear !

Class War #16 Oct 1985

Class War on: working class fight back against Liverpool heroin dealers, Handsworth riot, Why I Hate The Rich, Guardian smears Class War, report on disastrous Bash The Rich march on Hampstead, Labour Party, hunting, Class War circulation up to 15,000, Some Wimmin Use The Sisterhood Like The Masons Use Brotherhood, Fuck SPUC (anti-abortionists), etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 13, 2021

Scan courtesy of Splits and Fusions archive.

Comments

westartfromhere

2 months 1 week ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 9, 2024

posh twats we ain’t to be messed with. Innit.

~ Jane
London CW

Is this irony or farce?

Fozzie

2 months 1 week ago

Submitted by Fozzie on February 9, 2024

Perhaps CW repeats itself - first time as irony. Second time as farce?

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 9, 2024

Fozzie wrote: Perhaps CW repeats itself - first time as irony. Second time as farce?

That's good. I was going to ask you how to do a hyperlink, as I have learnt it is called, but I asked the Mrs and she showed me.

That story is good though.

I've read it now. On first glance I thought it was satire. I'm now told by the Mrs that Ian suffers from Parkinsons. Wish I was Jesus and could wave a magic wand to help.

It is a good story in the face of so much bad "news".

westartfromhere

2 months 1 week ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 10, 2024

Class War (GB) caricature the working class more than authentically express our true culture. S'pose we can't all have the literary means to truly describe what we see and are. Who says "innit" anymore?

Fighting Back in "Smack City"

A 1986 article from Class War describing mass resistance to heroin dealers and the police in Liverpool.

Submitted by R Totale on March 18, 2021

Fighting Back in "Smack City"

Liverpool has recently been dubbed by the media as "smack city" due to the fact that Merseyside has become the most heroin-saturated area in Britain and where anyone can buy smack anywhere (in pubs, in the street, etc...) for about a fiver. News of armed police raids on the homes of suspected pushers is becoming more and more common in the local papers, as is the news of heroin-related deaths, Tory Bastards shouting for the reintroduction of everything from national service to capital punishment and Labour Party Jerks calling for the return of full employment, etc., in vain attempts to stop the growing tide of heroin abuse.

Heroin availability in Liverpool is, and is becoming more so, a life-and-death situation for many predominantly young and unemployed people who, instead of fighting back against those who have swept them aside as "surplus", are opting for oblivion as an easy way out from the all too obvious problems of being working class in Britain today. In one area in particular, Croxteth, the use of heroin is becoming common, everyone knows somebody who's doing smack or doing time for smack.

The police have not made any significant attempt on, or had any effect on, the smack dealing - we wonder why!! Ignorance, due to community distrust, and as speculation goes, links between top pigs and top dealers? Sadly, most of the community, despite the police's inaction and attitude, are still prepared to leave the ever-worsening problem in their hands.

So much for the bad news!

Vigilantes force smack dealers out

Out of the most saddening items of news from early August was the death of 14 year old Jason Fitzsimmons from a heroin overdose. He lived in Croxteth, an area of Liverpool with a well-known heroin problem. Croxteth is now often in the news as the smack trade increases, however due to police activity many dealers are getting scared and are moving out. But in one area, they are no longer tolerated and may well have a lot more to fear.

On the night of Friday 10th August, a gang of 150 youths besieged two houses in Smithdown Road, Toxteth. The occupants were trapped, missiles were thrown, the gangs broke in and the houses were trashed. Both were the homes of known heroin dealers. Later that weekend, the gang, now 250 strong and calling itself "the Anti-Smack Squad" trashed two more houses; the pushers were attacked and one hospitalised. In each case, local residents refused to give evidence against the attackers.

The vigilantes received much support from local residents and Liverpool's black community as a whole. A spokesman for the squad, speaking through the Liverpool Black Organization, asked for all information on smack dealers to be passed on to the L.B.O. who will ask pushers to stop. "If they ignore the warning then we will move in and drive them out. They will know they are at risk. We don't want to wait till one of our kids is dead before doing something. The heroin problem is not rife in Toxteth but these people are moving from Croxteth. We want them out."

Merseyside's Assistant Chief Constable, John Burrows, said "Taking the law into their own hands can only lead to public disorder and thereby deflect the police from the task of arresting those responsible." Fuck off John! We know what you really mean by your "public order" and your "police... tasks"  - and we want nothing to do with it!

Local press coverage was poor, the Daily Post chose instead to concentrate on how the Drugs Squad is to be enlarged, how successful the customs officers have been, and the latest idea to combat heroin, a string of parent committees to work with the police and collect information.The community isn't likely to cooperate with a force which spends half its time intimidating them. The information has always been there - the police's will to act never will be. At one level or another, they're part of the system in which smack dealing thrives.

The gutter press landed themselves in the shit recently when digging for dirt about heroin in Toxteth. They asked a number of local youths where heroin was sold and the youths told them that the main local dealer was a shady geezer called Panama. The Fleet Street sheep went ahead and printed the full "EXCLUSIVE SHOCK HORROR STORY" only to discover that Panama is actually one of the most well-respected elderly members of the community who neither drinks or smokes.

The heroin problem increases, the number of teen addicts increases, and the number of deaths will increase. But here in Toxteth, smack dealers have been physically forced out, and hopefully these actions will scare more away. The Anti-Smack Squad demonstrates how a community can very easily help itself, without interference by the pigs or authorities. Smack dealers will no longer be tolerated in Toxteth.

VICTORY TO THE ANTI-SMACK SQUADS!!!!
"THIS IS TOXTETH, NOT CROXTETH. STRICTLY GANJA... NO H." (local graffiti.)

Liverpool has recently been the scene of an ever-increasing number of incidents where local people have "taken the law into their own hands", gone on the offensive and increased the fight-back against both the pigs and the so-called "socialist" Militant-controlled council bureaucrats. By far the largest, most volatile and potentially riotous situations was the siege of of Admiral Street pig station in Toxteth, (the scene of the largest Liverpool riots in '81) on the night of Friday, August 30th, when hundreds of local kids, some armed with iron bars, bricks and bottles, laid siege to the local pig station for over four hours, building barricades, smashing pig station windows, pig cars and pigs' private cars (who, apparently, will receive no compensation 'cos they were parked "at owner's risk"), at the back of the station.

When the mob entered the station, forcing the pigs to lock themselves in their cells and offices for protection, (unfortunately, only one pig was injured), a large amount of wine, beer and spirits which were destined for the bar at the top floor of the station, was stolen, as was the book which contained all the names, addresses and 'phone numbers of the pigs who were based at the station (no doubt to be used at a later date!) While a number of kids roamed around the station, playing reggae music and breakdancing, with even more waiting around or doing the same outside, a group of "community leaders" with the mother and the solicitor of Stephen Nicholls, the arrested man, negotiated with the pigs to release the man on bail, which, having got the go-ahead from the Merseyside Chief Constable, Ken Oxford, they did, thus avoiding, in the words of Stephen Nicholls' solicitor, "a potential riot situation."

However, in a press statement, police chiefs said that "The release of Stephen Nicholls was not giving in to mob violence." According to some reports which have been verified by a source close to the police, Instant Response Unit reinforcements with riot gear were prevented from getting to the scene by a caravan which was dragged to the entrance of the station, overturned and then set on fire.

Other encouraging news is that, while all this was going on and many pigs were otherwise engaged, a supermarket in Park Road, nearby, had its windows smashed and was extensively looted.Some not so encouraging news, however, was the fact that the police and establishment arse-lickers, the so-called "community leaders" and a non-community and unsympathetic solicitor were allowed to muscle in on the situation and negotiate for the local kids and community (both community leaders and the solicitor praised the pigs, and were praised themselves by the pigs for "cooling down and defusing a potentially riotous situation".) Most of this information was obtained by talking to local people themselves and from a reliable source who is close to the pigs who were involved and who told us a great deal, (not knowing that we were anarchists and that we were going to publish his statements). Most local and national radio and newspaper reports, as usual, either played down the situation or just ignored (or were not told about) certain facts and events, e.g. the looting of the supermarket, the theft of the station book and drinks, the burning of the caravan, etc...

Let's hope that people can learn from both of these actions and gain confidence from them so that, eventually, working class communities can defend themselves against any attack, be it smack dealers, pigs, fascists, or anyone.

Comments

Class War #17 1986

(Rupert) Murdoch - you are scum

Including: Silent Night strike, South Africa, Militant and Liverpool, what's wrong with Anti-Fascist Action?, What do we do when the cops fuck off?, Wapping, reply to "Smack City" article in previous issue, Tottenham riots, riots roundup, new years honours list, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 6, 2024

Numbered 17 on back page. Published circa February/March 1986.

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

Comments

Class War #18 1986

Including; Class War Federation launched, Wapping, May Day, class, riots in Northern Ireland, wreck a roller day, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on August 31, 2019

An issue of Class War from circa March/April 1986.

Files

CW20-1986.pdf (13.8 MB)

Comments

Class War #19 1986

South Africa - re-tyre the ruling class

Including: South Africa, Toxteth riot, Sunday Mirror vs Class War, Wapping, Fuck of Reagan, Gadaffi, Labour party, Chernobyl, riot round up, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 6, 2024

Numbered #19 on the back page.

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

Comments

Class War #20 1986

An unnumbered issue of Class War from circa August 1986, with articles on gentrification and corrupt councils in the inner cities, South Africa, slag off of recent Class War Federation national conference (!), sugar, shoplifting, the war in Ireland, Nicky Crane, tactics, Wapping printworkers dispute, hosptialised copper, sports.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 27, 2020

Files

cw-spot.pdf (24.55 MB)

Comments

R Totale

4 years ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by R Totale on March 27, 2020

The "Who Owns Leeds?" pamphlet sounds interesting, in a David Peace sort of way.

Fozzie

4 years ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Fozzie on March 27, 2020

Yeah I think there were a few investigative journalistic things around then - I think you even had anarcho types / squatters exposing Freemasons and stuff - can't remember if that was Leeds or not.

Class War #21 1986

Class War issue 21 cover shows four men confronting a policeman with the slogan "there ain't nothing like a good game of piggy in the middle!"

An issue of Class War from late 1986 including: 3 page article on riots in St Pauls (Bristol), Broadwater Farm aftermath, riots in Plymouth, Notting Hill police station attacked, housing, anti- DHSS staff, Cardiff, Wapping, anti-gentrification antics in Wales and Hackney.

Submitted by Fozzie on April 25, 2022

Files

Class-War-21.pdf (6.11 MB)

Comments

Class War #22 1987

Class War issue 22 cover showing a graveyard with the slogan "We have found new homes for the rich"

An issue of Class War from early 1987 including: new years' riot round up, A bad case of the Trots (SWP etc), Labour Party, a quite shit anti-teacher article, work/dole, UK prison uprisings.

Submitted by Fozzie on April 23, 2022

Files

Comments

Class War #23 1987

An unnumbered issue of Class War from circa June/July 1987 with articles on Conservative Party MP Norman Tebbit, King Edward's tiny penis, Eastenders actor Anita Dobson, yuppies, riots, betting, class prejudice in the judiciary, 1987 General Election and the moral panic about rap group the Beastie Boys.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 27, 2020

Files

cw-balls.pdf (19.94 MB)

Comments

Class War #24 1987

Is this the real Queen?

Including: Queen's cousin Katherine Bowes-Lyon, Tory corruption, brothel madam Cynthia Payne, homophobia in The Sun, AIDs hysteria, strikes and action round up, the rich are ruining football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 7, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar-24.pdf (7.84 MB)

Comments

Class War #25 1987

Cut out "Thatcher" horror mask

Including: working class community, royal & celebrity scandal, sexism and sexual assault, racism, Orange Order, Frickley miners fight back, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 7, 2024

The last issue to use the original "dripping letters" masthead with the circled "A" until its revival with the May 2017 edition.

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar-25.pdf (9.72 MB)

Comments

Class War #26 1988

An issue of Class War from early 1988. Contents include: mugging, Kings Cross fire, stock market crash, round up of attacks on cops in the UK, protests against Labour Council cuts, schooling, criminalisation of black kids in London, Data Protection Act and surveillance, football.

PDF courtesy of Splits and Fusions archive.

Submitted by Fozzie on December 9, 2021

Files

Comments

Class War #27 1988

"Just what the doctor ordered" a cartoon nurse hits a cartoon Thatcher in the mouth.

Including: UK news, unemployment benefit cuts, yuppies/gentrification, health and NHS strikes, UK strikes round up, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 8, 2024

Undated and unnumbered but published circa March 1988.

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar27.pdf (9.11 MB)

Comments

Class War #28 1988

Class War 28 cover
Class War 28 cover

An issue of Class War from the late 1980s.

Submitted by Fozzie on November 10, 2018

Files

CW28.pdf (8.43 MB)

Comments

Class War #29 1988

Class War 29 cover
Class War 29 cover

An issue of Class War from 1988.

Submitted by Fozzie on November 10, 2018

Files

cw29.pdf (9.19 MB)

Comments

Class War #30 1988

CW 38 cover
CW 38 cover

An issue of Class War from 1988.

Submitted by Fozzie on November 10, 2018

Files

cw30.pdf (8.48 MB)

Comments

Class War #31 1988

An issue of Class War from late 1988 including: Acid House panic, government anti-crime campaign, Guardian Angels (uniformed anti-crime group), Grimethorpe community crime patrols, rap group Public Enemy, riot at Michael Jackson gig (!), cop fashion, letters, sport.

Submitted by Fozzie on April 10, 2021

Comments

Class War #32 1989

Wor a load of balls!

Including: ten years of Thatcher - ten years of class war, poll tax, new years honours list, yuppies/gentrification, resistance to plans for football fan ID cards, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 9, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar32.pdf (8.67 MB)

Comments

Class War #33 1989

CW 33 cover
CW 33 cover

An issue of Class War from the late 1980s

Submitted by Fozzie on November 10, 2018

Files

cw33.pdf (6.01 MB)

Comments

Class War #34 1989

This is the real community charge!

Including: May Day in Berlin, poll tax, anti yuppie actions, prison news, riot news, strikes round up, community shoplifting, Hillsborough and The Sun, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 12, 2024

PDF courtesty of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar34.pdf (12.85 MB)

Comments

westartfromhere

2 months 1 week ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 12, 2024

Extra classic copy. Important and memorable issue. 1989 crucial.

westartfromhere

2 months 1 week ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 12, 2024

2. YOUR BOSS SAYS IF YOU
STRIKE THE WORK WILL GO TO HIS
FRENCH FACTORY. DO YOU.... a. Go
back to work for the good of the national
economy, b. Tell him he's lying, c. Get
out your French-English dictionary, look
up the word strike, and get on the
phone.

Reminds me of the Union meetings, being consistently reminded of the higher rate of productivity in sister factories elsewhere. It was not lower productivity that caused production to move to Poland. It was when one of our number got chewed up by a press and spat out the other side, dead.

Class War #35 1989

That's deal with that joker (Batman attacking Thatcher)

Including: poll tax, environment, yuppies, Glasgow City of Culture vs poll tax, local government strike, Batman and Do The Right Thing films, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 13, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar35.pdf (12.16 MB)

Comments

Class War #36 1989

(Rioter) I bet he drinks Carling Black Label

Including: Privatisation of water, riot round up, World War 2, resistance to yuppies, racism, all seater football stadiums, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 14, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

The cover is a reference to a long-running series of TV adverts for a popular lager. The "I bet he drinks" ads showed someone doing something cool, clever or difficult, and having a bystander say "I bet he drinks Carling Black Label".

Files

ClassWar36.pdf (23.83 MB)

Comments

Class War #37 1990

Back to the future - dole queue

Including: huge poll tax non-payment, ambulance workers strike, yuppies, anti-social behaviour and cops in Salford, fall of the Berlin wall, West Midlands corrupt cops, letters, sport, Joe Strummer, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 15, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar37.pdf (15.23 MB)

Comments

Class War #38 1990

Run Down Kenneth Clarke - not the health service

Including: poll tax launched in England, ambulance strike, Salford vs the cops, Judge Pickles, Tory Eric Pickles, upheaval in Eastern Europe, postal workers dispute, letters, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 16, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar38.pdf (16.38 MB)

Comments

Class War special Poll Tax issue 1990

CW poll tax special issue

Including: opposing poll tax bailiffs, round up of riots outside town halls meetings to set poll tax rate, Labour Party opposes non-payment, huge non-payment in Scotland, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 19, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Comments

Class War #39 1990

you can count on 2 fingers how poll tax to pay!

Including: poll tax riots special, Scotland resists the poll tax, Nelson Mandela freed, Derek Hatton & Militant in Liverpool, bash the bailiffs, Labour fails to support non-payment of the poll tax, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 20, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar39.pdf (15.81 MB)

Comments

westartfromhere

2 months ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 20, 2024

Two? Never paid any! Don't tell the taxman!

Class War #40 1990

[Thatcher] Beware! Mad Cow

Including: poll tax non-payment after the riot, UK news, 10 things you should know about the Labour Party, prisons, Strangeways riot, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 21, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar40.pdf (14.4 MB)

Comments

Class War #41 1990

Class War #41 from 1990.

Including: death of Tory MP Ian Gow, direct action against bailiffs, Class War member Andy Murphy vs Hackney Council, Leeds rave arrests, sexist comedians, The Big Green Con, Dave Douglass on Arthur Scargill, Salford residents tackle anti-social elements, letters, world cup rip-off.

Submitted by Fozzie on October 24, 2021

Files

ClassWar41.pdf (10.26 MB)

Comments

Class War #42 1990

(Jack Nicholson coming through a wall in The Shining) "Now wher's that bailiff gone..."

Including: Guinness Trial, poll tax bailiff busters, Gulf War, Sellafield disaster, TUC, regional groups round up, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 23, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar42.pdf (16.85 MB)

Comments

Class War #43 1990

Photo of Margaret Thatcher covering her face with the headline "Here's to a short retirement - and an early grave!". "Inside your red hot copy of Class War Thatcher quits, poll tax news, gossip, sport, and scandal!"

November 1990 issue of Class War including: Thatcher resigns, Michael Heseltine, poll tax non-payment round up, interview with CW member about his time in Militant, European single market, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on July 2, 2022

Files

ClassWar-43.pdf (10.39 MB)

Comments

Class War #44 1991

No war but the class war

Including: Gulf War, poll tax, Class War new year honours, home ownership / right to buy, atomic power, John Major, letters, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 26, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar44.pdf (16.63 MB)

Comments

westartfromhere

1 month 3 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on February 26, 2024

Notable issue in that it admits that Class War is a part of the Left wing of the bourgeoisie.

Notable omission is its failure to report the incendiary targeting of the South African Embassy.

Class War #45 1991

Bailiffs.. make my day! No Poll Tax [photo of a dog]

Including: after the Gulf War, fighting evictions in Mexico, poll tax, USA union buster Lee Ballow, Class War guide to recession, Dave Douglass on MP Kevin Barron, homelessness, Class War news, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 27, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar45.pdf (18.68 MB)

Comments

Class War #46 1991

Photo of Sarah "Princess Fergie" Fergusson: "I don't work, I won't work (just like the rest of my f**king family)"

An issue of Class War from 1991 including: After the poll tax, Gulf War, uk and international news, football etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on July 8, 2022

Files

ClassWar46.pdf (10.45 MB)

Comments

Class War #47 1991

Kill The Real Mad Dogs (various Tory politican heads superimposed on dogs)

Including: UK news, bailiff busting, Labour councils, Moss Side, NHS, class culture politics centre spread, rural revolt / mass trespass, music and tv reviews, Class War international conference announcement, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 28, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar47.pdf (19.49 MB)

Comments

Class War #48 1991

Cover of Class War #48 showing suited bosses being hanged on gallows "Give the bosses the rise they deserve!"

An issue of Class War from summer 1991 including: news, dealing with the bailiff menace, leader of scab miners union Roy Lynk, feminism and sexism centrespread, green issues, various Tory scumbags, CW merchandise and groups, letters, two pages announcing Class War international conference in Shoreditch, sport.

Submitted by Fozzie on April 30, 2022

Files

Comments

Class War #49 1991

Rich Scum / Arnie Terminator

Including: Russia, UK news, poll tax, several pages on forthcoming Class War conference, abortion, water companies, football.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 29, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar49.pdf (17.41 MB)

Comments

Class War #50 1991

Class War 50 cover

Including: UK news, 10 years of class war and 50 issues of Class War, Green Revolution, poll tax non-payment, riots roundup, ram raiding, community defence, mining, Labour party, Russia, review of Class War international conference, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 1, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar50.pdf (27.43 MB)

Comments

Class War #51 1991

Sod the turkey - stuff the rich

Including: Tottenham 3, Robert Maxwell dead, UK news, bash the bailiffs, British National Party, free movement and immigration, class war not race war, federation news, reviews, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 6, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar51.pdf (20.34 MB)

Comments

Class War #52 1992

Kinnock Major - vote with your feet - boot

Including: Anti Nazi League relaunched, UK news, poll tax, Salford fire fighters, European Economic Community, centrespread: why violence?, anti-election rally announced, green politics, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 7, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar52.pdf (31.26 MB)

Comments

Class War #53 1992

vote for a hung parliament [Kinnock and Major in nooses]

Including: UK election, UK news, poll tax, Peter Clowes robs pensioners, Scottish independence centrespread, royal family, green issues, letters, federation news, anti-election alliance, reviews, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 8, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive Nottingham.

NB page 16 (the back page - usually football etc) is missing from this scan.

Files

ClassWar53.pdf (20.57 MB)

Comments

Class War #55 1992

CW55 cover
CW55 cover

An issue of Class War from the 1990s.

Submitted by Fozzie on November 10, 2018

Files

cw55.pdf (27.38 MB)

Comments

Class War #56 1992

Fergie Topless (Sarah Fergusson decapitated)

Including: war in Croatia/Bosnia, UK news, poll tax, unrest in Cork, Stoke Newington corrupt cops, Scotland news, right to riot centrespread, legal self-defence, federation news, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 11, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar56.pdf (19.07 MB)

Comments

Class War #57 1992

Cover of Class War 57, with Windsor Castle on fire and the words "HA! HA! HA!"
Cover of Class War 57, with Windsor Castle on fire and the words "HA! HA! HA!"

Class War newspaper from late 1992. Including: celebration of Windsor Castle fire, German neo-nazis, Stoke Newington police scandal, "Youth Defence" - religious zealouts in Ireland, the European Union, Italian Unions bosses sell out workers, council strikes in the UK, rank and file builders take action, confessions of a lefty, recessions - revolution or destitution?, the LA five, letters, merchandise, reviews of Richard Allen "Skinhead" anthology, Aufheben and films, miners' round up.

Submitted by Fozzie on February 26, 2022

Files

Comments

Class War #58 1993

X rated - uncensored politics [Malcolm X]

Including: UK news, workfare, supermarket price war, miners, anti-social crime, Paddy Ashdown, South Africa, Malcolm X centrespread, council tax proposals, letters, reviews, police on the back page, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 12, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar58.pdf (18.88 MB)

Comments

Class War #61 1993

Turn up the heat on the bosses and politicans - no fuel tax!

Including: UK news, fuel tax proposals, "how to sack your staff guide", Community Parents Against Drugs in Dublin, Ireland peace plan, class/race/fascism - 4 pages, letters, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 13, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive.

Files

ClassWar61.pdf (18.67 MB)

Comments

Class War #62 1994

Back to Basics: Class Unity, Class Pride, Class War.

Including: Tory scandals, the slaughter of the coalfields, BNP & racist attacks in East London, EZLN, Ireland centrespread, forestry sell-off, no M11 campaign, fuel tax, letters, readers survey, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 14, 2024

"Back to basics" was a slogan used by Conservative Prime Minister John Major in a speech in 1993:

"It is time to return to those old core values, time to get back to basics, to self-discipline and respect for the law, to consideration for others, to accepting a responsibility for yourself and your family and not shuffling off on other people and the state."

Shortly after this speech, Major's administration was rocked by numerous financial and sex scandals.

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar62.pdf (19.52 MB)

Comments

Class War #63 1994

Class War 63 cover

Including: UK news, BNP, community care, unemployment, censorship / democracy centrespread, letters, police, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 15, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar63.pdf (18.99 MB)

Comments

Class War #64 1994

Class War issue 64 1994

An issue of Class War from September 1994 including: identity cards, struggles at the Post Office, criminal cops, Bridgewater Four, anti-roads movement, housing, letters, book and film reviews, football, boxing.

Submitted by Fozzie on May 14, 2022

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

Comments

R Totale

1 year 11 months ago

Submitted by R Totale on May 14, 2022

I swear I've seen a post from Reddebrek somewhere about being shown the front cover for this one in an A-Level sociology class or similar, but I can't find it now?

R Totale

1 year 11 months ago

Submitted by R Totale on May 15, 2022

That makes sense, seems like the comments might have disappeared with the change to the new format though?

Class War #65 1994

No ceasfire in the class war

Including: UK news, sex work, McLibel, Criminal Justice Bill, Hyde Park riot, Northern Ireland peace process, letters, British army, reviews, steroids, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 18, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar65.pdf (19.19 MB)

Comments

Class War #66 1995

Relieve executive stress - execute these scumbags (judges)

Including: New Labour, UK news, UK economy, Chechnya, Bosnia, drugs centrespread, mining communities, reviews, football, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 19, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar66.pdf (19.63 MB)

Comments

Class War #67 1995

CW67 cover
CW67 cover

An issue of Class War from the 1990s.

Submitted by Fozzie on November 10, 2018

Files

cw67.pdf (26.26 MB)

Comments

Class War #68 1995

Class War 68 cover

Including: Bradford riots round up, UK news, equal opportunities, critical mass, madness/mental health centrespread, letters, international news, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 20, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar68.pdf (19.82 MB)

Comments

Class War #69 1995

Photo of the Queen Mother: "Scrounger: Queen Mum, 95 years of 'actively avoiding work'."

Contents include: three days of rioting at Marsh Farm Estate in Luton, rich scroungers, Class War in prisons, London cops' anti-mugging farce, sex centrespread, letters, merchandise, reviews, sport.

Submitted by Fozzie on August 27, 2023

Files

ClassWar69.pdf (12.77 MB)

Comments

Class War #70 1995/6

Class War 70 cover

Including: prisons, UK news, Irish famine centrespread, Scotland, against Searchlight, international news, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 21, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar70.pdf (19.64 MB)

Comments

Class War #71 1996

Class War 71 cover

Including: UK news, prisons, Black Panthers, reviews, sport, etc.

Submitted by Fozzie on March 22, 2024

PDF courtesy of Sparrows Nest Archive, Nottingham.

Files

ClassWar71.pdf (13.49 MB)

Comments

Class War #72 1996

"It's good to torch" - photo of a burning police car

August 1996 issue including: Anti-Election Alliance launched, Liverpool dockers, Scotland round up, Albert Meltzer obituary, Prisoners Justice Day, "the state we're in" editorial, prisoner column, news, reviews, letters, sport.

Submitted by Fozzie on October 21, 2023

Files

Comments

Class War #73 1997

Class War 73 cover
Class War 73 cover

The text of Class War newspaper issue number 73 from 1997, intending to be the last issue explaining why most of the organisation decided to dissolve itself.

Submitted by Steven. on May 5, 2011

Libcom note: a rump of the group decided to try to keep it going, and wound it down in 2011. It has since been reactivated, including as a registered political party which stood candidates in the 2015 general election.

Files

cw73.pdf (14.36 MB)

Comments

Introduction

Introduction to Class War number 73, the final issue of Class War explaining why the organisation decided to dissolve itself.

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

Welcome to Class War number 73. This is the last issue of Class War that will be produced by the existing Class War Federation. But before you rush off and top yourself in despair, let us explain why this is, and give you an idea of how we see the future. We have always said that Class War is different from all the other political outfits in Britain. The biggest difference between us and them is that in Class War we have never had any intention of setting ourselves up as leaders; we were never some vanguard wanting to seize power. Most other political groups only really want one thing - that is the power to tell you what to do for their benefit, not yours. In these pages you will find a no-nonsense, sometimes tough analysis of our failings. We are doing this because we feel our class needs a far better political perspective than those currently on offer from the Left - including Class War.

The whole point of Class War was for ordinary working class people to take control of their own lives back from the parasites who think they own this country. So why are we turning it in after 13 years? We are not. What we are about is looking ahead to something bigger, better and altogether more unpleasant for the ruling classes. Basically the paper and the Federation have gone as far as they can in their present form, and it's time for something new. As far as we know none of the usual political parties have ever dissolved themselves, but then, as we said, our politics are different. In order to make more sense of this we need to go back to the beginning of Class War and explain again what we've been up to all these years.

Class War was started in the early 1980s in London by a small group who soon linked up with like-minded people and formed a national federation in 1985. We were sick of the whinging lefties from CND or the Labour Party who were down on their knees pleading with the ruling class to be a little less horrid in the way that they rule the country. We were inspired by the principles of anarchism to raise the flag of direct class conflict because we know that it's the only way our class can win its freedom. To do this we have to push the middle class out of the way. In the 1980s that meant having a go at all the trendy lefties and pacifists, and so our main issues were class politics and violence.

Politicians, then as now, have no time for ordinary working class people; they even try to tell us that we don't exist any more. Class War set out to upset their cosy political world and bring real politics back into the real world. We set out to challenge all the bullshit of 'official' politics by getting back to basics with campaigns like 'Bash the Rich' and supporting any attempt by working class people to have a go at our rulers. This meant siding with the pickets during the miners' and printers' strikes. When most politicians were telling those workers to give up, or negotiate, we stood for them fighting the police who were doing the bosses' dirty work.

Our paper was written in everyday language and we made it entertaining to read. This horrified the lefties because no-one ever read their papers, and ours was something ordinary people did read. Class War was a real hit and we sold all the papers we could print. At its height we were selling 15,000 copies, and to be honest we could hardly believe it ourselves! We took the trouble to get Class War sold in quite a few newsagents in working class areas which helped to reach ordinary people that most lefties didn't even know existed.

The next important thing we did was to get our ideas across to real people and we found out how easy it is to use the media. By the time the poll tax riots came along, the media thought we had a massive membership and the police practically blamed us for organising all those riots! This showed how out of touch they are because all those people who rioted were quite able to do it themselves and didn't need Class War, or anybody else, to lead them.

The truth is that Class War never had more than about 150 members and for most of the time the membership has only been about 50 people. Now we may be pretty wonderful people but we are not super-revolutionaries. What Class War did was to act as a channel for class politics which struck a chord with people involved with those struggles at the time. We gave a voice to attitudes and feeling within our class that had been denied and ignored by the political world for too long.

The point of all this is that we only designed Class War for a limited purpose and we now think it has outlived its usefulness - it's getting in the way of people putting together something far bigger and more useful to our class.

We have to look at what has been good about Class War - and what hasn't - so that we can learn lessons for the future. One of the best things that Class War did was to aim at ordinary working class people living in the real world. Class War members were mainly working class people who had some experience in revolutionary politics and wanted to make something more useful to our class. Unlike most lefty parties we never had university academics or upper class drop-outs running this organisation. Our members live and work in the real world and we were able to use our political skills to bring our politics back into the real world. We steered clear of the strange and isolated twilight zone of extreme left wing politics and ignored the fantasy games of the existing Marxist parties. We also avoided the pointless trap of middle class student politics and let the SWP carry on with its job of pandering to that section of society. Our politics are in total opposition to their left wing elitism, and we fight for working class power so that we can manage ourselves.

We focused on what life was like in our communities and after decades of compromise we tried to give our class back a sense of pride. One of the problems we ran into is that lots of people do want us to be their saviours. But the last thing we want to do is to make people think 'leave it all to Class War, they'll sort the bastards out', because we can't and won't. Our aim was to help people to find a way to attack our rulers and organise their own lives. This will not happen if people think that others will do it for them.

The Federation remains a tiny group with a big image which has outlived its usefulness. The truth is that we will never grow any bigger in our present form. The appeal of our paper has become too narrow and limited - we have only sold between four and five thousand papers each issue for the last few years. But because it is still there, we can't move on to something better. We now need new ways of organising that can appeal to the whole working class, young and old, men and women, black and white. With a wider base in our class and a better vision of the future, we can build up something much more useful than Class War. This means looking for common ground with all class struggle libertarians and looking forward to the battles of the 21st century.

At the moment, we have more questions to ask than answers to give. But we don't see what we write here as an admission of failure or as a rejection of everything we have said and done in the past. Instead we see it as a progression, part of a process. Class War and the Class War Federation have only been one attempt by one small group to move our class forward. We have gone as far as we can: the time has come to try something new.

Comments

A Rose By Any Other Name?

A short article on the Left from Class War issue 73

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

Class War has never allied itself rigidly to any one tradition - we have always taken our ideas from everywhere. We are not concerned with what something calls itself but with what it is and what it does. So this paper is written for the revolutionary movement in general, for want of better words. To simplify things, we refer to ourselves here as anarchists with whom, in the broadest terms, we have much in common. But we are 'anarchists' with the class struggle at the centre of our politics and we believe in the mass self-activity of the working class. So, on the one hand, we are very close politically to many who call themselves 'socialist' or 'communist' (or neither of these terms), and on the other, there are 'anarchists' with whom we have no agreement.

THE LEFT AND CLASS WAR

It has sometimes seemed that the entire left press has existed for no other reason than to slag off Class War. At many times this has appeared obsessive: one paper, Red Action, has distinguished itself in this respect by slagging off anarchists in general, and Class War in particular, almost continually for years on end. For the ultra left groups it seems that life would become meaningless if they didn't have us to whinge and moan about. Other groups have had a more sinister intent behind their often bizarre and hysterical criticisms of us.

When we laid into Militant for offering to grass up poll tax rioters they wrote in their paper that when we abused their leaders we were "abusing the democracy of the working class". They even accused us in October 1990 of wearing wigs on demos to cover up our "short-cropped scalps"! This was Militant joining in with the long-term smear campaign Searchlight has been waging against us. This started in the mid-1980s when the MI5-influenced magazine reported that 'senior police officers' had told them we were all nazis! (And as we all know, the police never lie). Over the years particular journalists have continued this fiction, despite (or perhaps because of) it being an obvious smear. As recently as Spring 1997 Searchlight were busy embellishing this sad old lie. International Times (March 1986) did an excellent piece on Searchlight's MI5 links and its smear of Class War, as have various other publications.

Comments

An Open Letter to Revolutionaries

An open letter to the revolutionary movement from the final issue of Class War.

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

PISSING IN THE WIND

We've had 18 years of unrelenting anti-working class government, 18 years of unceasing attacks on the interests of working class people by the state and the agencies of capitalism. Gains we fought for in the past are being slowly, and sometimes rapidly, eroded. We're heading towards a more brutal and uncertain form of capitalist exploitation, in many ways reminiscent of earlier times. The opposition - and by this we mean everybody who has an explicitly revolutionary outlook on the problems of the world - is few in number. We are marginal, fragmented and declining in influence. In short, what passes for a revolutionary movement in this country is pitiful. At a time when an unbelievable amount of shit has been dumped on our heads, you would think that working class people, angry and pissed off, would flock to groups such as Class War in droves. Sadly this is anything but the case. After almost 15 years of sometimes intense and frantic activity, Class War is still tiny in number and, as far as many in the organisation are concerned, going nowhere. This issue of the paper will attempt to address some of the serious problems that beset Class War in particular and 'the movement' in general. We want to get some kind of debate going and get the revolutionary movement back onto more solid ground.

At present we concern ourselves with, and write about, a million and one things - the Job-Seekers' Allowance, Bosnia, fascists, the declining rate of profit, whatever. But as important as these issues may be, there is one question above all others we should be asking ourselves. That is, if our ideas are so brilliant, why do we collectively amount to so little and have so little influence?

It may be hard to believe right now, but revolutions are a common feature of history: they have happened in the past and they will happen again in the future. Two recent and close-to-home examples of revolutionary situations are the events of the late-1970s in Italy and those of May 1968 in France.

Despite what some people may say, we still live in a society that is divided along the lines of class. The material interests of the great majority of people, the working class, are opposed to those such as James Goldsmith, Anita Roddick, Richard Branson and Cedric Brown. This is an opposition based on economic, social and political grounds. The class struggle is a fact of life. As long as we live in a capitalist world people will fight against it - we are left with no choice. By fighting against it there is always the possibility that we will go beyond the limits of the class struggle and overthrow existing society. This is what we mean by 'revolution' and we look forward to it.

GANG WARFARE

Sometimes it seems as if there are unwritten rules about what can or cannot be said in a publication like Class War. In this issue we intend to break those rules. Here we come clean. What we mean is that self-criticism/analysis is rarely a feature of revolutionary publications or part of the practice of would-be revolutionaries. It is therefore long overdue. In the Class War Federation we freely admit that there is a problem, even though we are equally sure that many will seek to deny this. Some people may even find it shocking or disturbing. But our intention is to be open and very honest, even if this means saying the unsayable. Too often we look at things and do things from the perspective of 'group patriotism'. Too often there is this sense of loyalty to your own organisation above everything else. With this goes a sense of one-upmanship, of trying to get one over on each other, and of regarding any problems as lying elsewhere. The attitude is: 'We're OK, we're sorted. If only everyone else was like us, things would be brilliant.' We see these things, this attitude, as being an enormous and fundamental problem.

We say openly and quite clearly that there are problems with Class War. We also know that we have said and done many things that were wrong, and that therefore we have been part of the problem. But then isn't it inevitable to be wrong sometimes? Isn't it part of a learning process? And of course, the only way to ensure that you are never wrong is to never do or say anything. There are too many groups and individuals around who are constantly negative, who never have anything good to say about anything, who can't wait to slag off Class War (and others) whenever we have taken some initiative and put our heads above the parapet.

Every political publication in this country has had its tuppenny-worth's of slagging Class War, and very little of it could be called comradely! Fair enough, we have shouted our mouths off and we have no problem with criticism where it's deserved. But at times it has been just plain ridiculous. Over the years we've rattled a lot of cages on the Left, though we've always tried to steer clear of sectarian slagging.

The Class War Federation is not perfect; no group or organisation ever could be, although some ultra-left types act as if a perfectly coherent theory and practice were possible. We say that it isn't. One of the common criticisms of Class War is that we don't have an agreed 'position' on Ireland or unions, for example, that Class War members have had differing points of view. In fact we have always regarded it as a strength that there was no line, no dogmatic position. Although we are prepared to admit that problems have arisen because we have been an open church, nobody has yet been able to answer the question of how you get from A to B, from here to a revolution, with entirely pure and coherent politics. What happens when we confront the revolutionary masses of the working class and they don't subscribe to ideas perfectly conceived by Bordiga or Malatesta in the 1920s, or they don't have the 'correct' line on Ireland? Does the working class spring fully formed out of some revolutionary womb? We think not. What happens when we confront a working class full of contradictory ideas, maybe confused, reactionary even, as well as genuinely revolutionary? Do we get involved with what's going on? Or do we refuse to be tainted? We reckon the revolution could happen and be over before some so-called revolutionaries would dare to get involved. The fact is it won't happen according to preconceived plans, and at some level it will take all of us by surprise. But we will be even less prepared if we don't start talking openly and honestly to each other.

As we have said, we are part of the problem and we can't, and shouldn't, ignore it any longer. Class War is overburdened with baggage from the past: the myths, the lies, the illusions, the fantasies have all become millstones around our necks. They paralyse us and stop us achieving our goal - that is, playing a small part in facilitating a working class revolution that sweeps away capitalism forever. Basically, Class War is no longer able to function as a useful political organisation.

That Class War is at a low ebb is nothing new - we have shot up and down like a yo-yo throughout our short history. We have been down to a bare handful of people before (the period before the poll tax comes to mind). The fortunes of Class War have always waxed and waned in relation to the course of the wider class struggle. But Class War was born and shaped in the mid-1980s and what was valid then is no longer valid or appropriate now. The world moves on and, believe it or not, we intend to move with it.

KEEP IT SPIKEY?

Class War was designed with the intention of alienating the middle class and mainly pacifist Left. While their newspapers emphasised victims, Class War emphasised fighting back. They had bloody demonstrators and strikers, Class War had Hospitalised Copper. Class War advocated returning the aggression of the immediate enemy, the police - something which many working class people do anyway. Strangely, this emphasis was unusual, but it was legitimate then and still is. We should remember that the police were created as a body charged with the task of keeping us in line - that is what they are there for. They may also give tourists directions and help old ladies across the road, but the bottom line is that they are an obstacle in the way of what we want and what we wish to achieve. Revolutionaries who do not accept this basic fact are digging their own graves.

If there is a serious political change in this country (or elsewhere) there will be violence. In itself violence is not a good thing, it is sickening. But the wealthy and powerful will not give up their privileges of their own volition, we have to make them. History teaches us that they always fight back: the American capitalist JP Morgan once boasted that he could pay one half of the working class to shoot the other half. The world is a violent place, but we didn't make it so, that's the way capitalism is. The lock-out of Merseyside dockers is violence, child prostitution is violence, the prison system is violence, living in a cardboard box on the South Bank is violence. We could go on ad nauseam. We don't have to justify our so-called violence - let others justify their passivity. We would much rather the world could change in a peaceful way but we believe it is unlikely if not impossible.

Violence or non-violence is a line drawn by the state and the media. The state decides what constitutes violent struggle and urges instead non-violent and constitutional means - reformism. We don't determine what passes for common sense in this world - after all, it was deemed perfectly reasonable for the USA and Britain to drop bombs from B52s from five miles high in the sky onto Iraqi civilians, for the SAS to kill unarmed people in Gibraltar, and for paratroopers to shoot unarmed civilians in Derry. But advocate throwing rocks at the cops on a demo or strike and you're vilified as a violent bunch of nutcases!

Violence is a tactic though, not a strategy. We are in favour of mass working class violence, out in the open; not created or led by Class War or others, but developing according to its own dynamic, as a means of self-empowerment, a means amongst others of giving people a belief in their ability to overthrow the state. The violence of a working class community in struggle is always preferable to that of an elitist armed struggle group.

Despite what we've said, it doesn't mean there are no problems with violence in a political context. It's not something to be taken lightly - Class War's problem has been that we have done exactly that. Class War has been known for its violent image, something that we have all too readily played up to. This has been detrimental to the many other things that we have said, things that have no connection with a violent approach - sexuality, drugs, to give just two examples.

It has been said within Class War that every emphasis became an over-emphasis - maybe we are just too casual as regards such things. On occasion, the paper has become a parody of itself and Class Warriors have tended to fetishise violence. Worse, this has led to us under-emphasising struggles that didn't involve violence. The glorification of violence ended up attracting people who were more interested in talking about fighting than changing the world. Any attempt to steer Class War into territory where people actually thought about what they were doing, and why, has been taken as being 'soft' and 'liberal' (and even 'middle class') by those who refused to see further than violence. This has created a constant tension within the organisation. On many occasions Class War's macho approach has in turn alienated many people, especially women.

THE HAND THAT ROCKS THE CRADLE

This brings us to another of our problems, the lack of women within Class War - although it has to be said we are not the only organisation with this problem. Ironically, when Class War was first started, half the people involved were women. Unfortunately it's not the case now. Of course there have been some women involved over the years, but sadly they have always been a minority. We have always said that women were just as capable of getting stuck in as men and this has been proven many times. But the fact remains that there are not enough women within Class War. Maybe as we attempt to change ourselves we will be able to rectify this and in future work together on a more equal basis. But it has to be said that there may be some cultural aspects of the problem that are beyond our influence. In many ways we have faced a similar problem with respect to black people: Class War is, and always has been, an almost exclusively white organisation. Maybe black people's reluctance to get involved with revolutionary groups stems from their experience of being manipulated and patronised by middle class white leftists. Maybe the overwhelmingly white cultural emphasis of anarchism and Class War is also a reason. And, of course, there is the straightforward fact that racism exists within our society and black people are therefore suspicious of getting involved in what is in effect a white movement. We don't have any easy answers to this problem. We have tried many times to put it right but always with a lack of success - we are open to suggestions.

SOCIALISM OR BARBARISM

When Class War was started it was never conceived as anything other than a step along the way. No political organisation is an end in itself - all organisations degenerate eventually. When you have to put more energy into maintaining the group itself than pursuing your original goal, then it is time to stand back and reflect on what you are doing.

There is a certain ultra-leftist or situationist point of view that is antagonistic to all forms of organisation. This point of view believes there is some pure, untainted (by the likes of us) working class out there that will at some point rise up spontaneously. Bollocks! If there is a fundamental shift in the political situation in this country, then groups like Class War will be involved out of necessity. If you seriously believe that a revolution will occur without political organisations being involved, then you're wrong. Organisations may or may not be a hindrance according to what they say and do, but recent events in eastern Europe show that social upheaval on its own is no guarantee of a better world.

Part of the problem is that many revolutionary organisations insist on seeing themselves as somehow separate from the working class. Class War has always opposed this idea. We are very much part of the working class - not some mythical homogenised working class but one that is atomised and fragmented, with differing but ultimately common interests. We're not on the outside looking in but very much part of it.

We realise that the experience of the recent past has been bad for many people. We have had a series of what at times has felt like unending defeats. Many people are demoralised and just keeping their heads down. But we are revolutionaries and we have a dream of a better world. We're also revolutionaries because we know that revolution is the only real answer to the problems in our lives. Because of this, we have no choice but to fight. We all know the possibilities that exist For every person who is actively involved, there are dozens who have moved away but still keep those ideas of revolution.

Again we have to be clear about things and say the unsayable: revolution is not on the agenda at the present time. Maybe the best thing we can hope for is a small upturn in the class struggle in this country. Of course, most people's perception of revolution is at least partly shaped by the disastrous revolutionary experiences of this century, above all in Russia and China. Everybody knows that Stalin was scum, everybody knows that the secret police were running the show and the negative consequences of these experiences are incalculable. Most people are aware that the world in which we live doesn't work in their best interests - direct experience rams it home every day of our lives. But capitalism continues to exist at the moment because the majority accept it as being 'reality' or 'common sense', and until they begin to challenge or question this fact, we're stuck with it. Most people know that the world is shit, what they lack is a belief in their abilities to change it for the better - and that could come very quickly, almost overnight. All it needs is one little chink in the armour of capitalism for the situation to change beyond all recognition. The anti-poll tax movement is a good example. To begin with, it was 'just another campaign' - nobody expected it to become so massive. So maybe revolution is just around the corner, after all. The point is it's impossible to predict.

'MUST TRY HARDER!'

We live in the world's oldest capitalist country that ironically has one of the most backward political cultures. Maybe the passive and conservative outlook of so many working class people in this country is partly the result of the frozen theme park society that we live in with institutions that are rooted in the distant past. Even in capitalist terms the institutions that govern us are becoming untenable - they need more efficient, up-to-date ways of exploiting us, and what they have instead is a backward-looking and fossilised mess. And at a time when the monarchy appears to be on the way out, any attempt to tinker with it may mean the whole edifice will fall apart. Maybe the system we see before us is a house of cards.

At the moment, those of us interested in revolutionary ideas are few in number and have a limited influence. Class War has always believed in screaming from the rooftops and has always acted on the belief that we can make our own history, that we can change the world in the here and now. Anarchism or communism is not some torch that we carry for future generations, something that we wait maybe 500 years for - it is something which exists in what we actually do now.

We have always believed that we can have an effect. But if the rest of the working class aren't up for it, we can't force them and no matter how loud we shout, this isn't likely to change in the short term. Over the last ten years too many people in Class War and elsewhere have fallen into the trap of thinking that 'one more leaflet' or 'one more picket' will magically bring success. The end result has been burnt-out, disillusioned cynics. But it is not just the wider world that we are concerned about here, it is ourselves and others who are like-minded. Because within the pond that we (the Left) inhabit we can have an enormous effect. But we are split into tiny groups, riven by sectarianism, dominated by personalities, refusing to work together, refusing to talk, spending too much time fighting each other. Are we revolutionaries or are we fools?

Is it any surprise that the working class as a whole gives revolutionaries (that's us, remember) a resounding thumbs down? Being a revolutionary is not exactly an attractive prospect - harping on about the past, stuck in dogma, unable to act co-operatively with each other or in an autonomous manner. The average person's concept of a revolutionary is someone who is at best a muddle-headed dreamer. At worst, revolutionaries are seen as devious, lying, manipulative and only in it for themselves. Are we satisfied to be in our small but dogmatically perfect groups? And why are we so chronically unable to work together, to form a functional revolutionary movement that can seize the initiative from the ruling class? Maybe there are bigger problems in some quarters than others, but in the end these problems affect us all: we are all responsible.

OPPORTUNITY KNOCKS

On the other hand, the situation is not as bleak as we've painted it. In many respects the field has been cleared for libertarians and there are historic new possibilities. The mainstream political parties are held in unprecedented contempt. Large numbers of people refuse to participate in a political system that gives them no real say in their lives. Whatever pretensions the Labour Party had to being a working class party are well and truly over. Sure, millions of working class people have just voted for Blair and his cronies, but how many really believe in them? How can you believe in something which is in effect an upwardly mobile bunch of middle class people, who think themselves eminently qualified to run our lives for us? The Labour Party has always worked on the basis of a nice cosy capitalism that works in everyone's interests. But it isn't like that, and never will be. This time they didn't even wait until they were in power to make it very clear whose side they're really on. The influence of the unions is at an all-time low and so their ability to have a negative impact and limit working class struggles is diminished. (In saying this we don't mean that unions are monolithic organisations that always act against the interests of working class people - there is a great deal of difference between union members and union leadership.) This also means that in many ways we are more vulnerable to capitalism's worst excesses. Strong trade unions were very much part of the post-war 'consensus': alongside other institutions, their main function was to dampen class struggle. The working class was both protected - we had a health service, social security, full employment, etc. - and imprisoned.

More importantly, Stalinism is dead with the Trotskyists not far behind. We cannot underestimate their destructive influence within the working class since 1917: there must have been upwards of 50,000 people through the ranks of the SWP alone. How many people have they managed to put off politics for life? The Trots parrot out a theory and practice conceived in the clandestine conditions of 19th century feudal Russia. It was absurd in the past and now it's plain reactionary. Nobody needs them or their leadership. Maybe, finally, we can snatch Marx back from these worthless Leninist usurpers to make what use of him we can. As these political traditions are confined to the dustbin of history the opportunity finally exists to create a uniquely British revolutionary politics suited to conditions here and now, not a load of baggage from the past foisted upon us from above, from another time, another place.

This politics may have to be 'European' of course, or something else. We're certainly not suggesting we can ignore what's going on in the rest of the world or that a global proletarian revolution isn't necessary. The world as it was has changed, the working class as it was has changed. In this country fewer and fewer people work in manufacturing. Fewer people have full-time secure jobs - casual labour and part-time jobs are now very common. We live in a global economy and the nation-state is in decline. If we allow capitalism to continue to exist, maybe the differences between the First and Third worlds will diminish, and exploitation and misery will be uniform the world over. The world is already dominated by huge transnational corporations, with annual turnovers larger than many countries' gross national product, moving production to wherever it is economically and politically advantageous.

The world may have changed beyond recognition but, then as now, it's still capitalism. The conditions that gave rise to the great social movements of the 19th and early 20th centuries are still in place - ironically, nothing has been reconciled. We still live in a world riven with anxiety for most of us. Now as then we sell our ability to work in return for a wage, and most of us are but one or two pay cheques from destitution. Clearly the working class has changed but we never saw it as a static concept in the first place - it has changed continually throughout its history. Capitalism tries to contain us and we change: capitalism changes us, we change ourselves, and in our turn we change capitalism - this is class struggle, the motor of history, as Marx put it. We are changing now, possibly (hopefully) in the direction of challenging some of the ideas that dominate our lives. What is clear is that old 19th century ideologies are largely useless when it comes to understanding this world as we enter the 21st century.

In this situation the possibilities for non-authoritarian anti-capitalist politics are enormous. It would be criminal of us to ignore, or waste, this historic opportunity to move from the margins of the Left into the mainstream of it. We suspect that there could be more support for anarchist ideas than any of us have ever dreamed of. We only need to find some effective means to tap into most people's natural tendency towards an anarchist way of doing things.

In the immediate future we see some hope. Working class expectations will be higher under this new Labour government, expectations that Labour will be unwilling and unable to meet. We can seize this opportunity if we use some imagination, if we step outside our sometimes self-imposed straitjackets, if we talk to each other. Genuinely revolutionary politics is about breaking down barriers, not putting them up. It's about optimism, looking for opportunities and possibilities; it's about challenging ideas and 'givens', not being hidebound by romantic images of change, past or future.

But we must be realistic, we must see the world for what it is, not through rose-tinted spectacles. This isn't a call for anybody and everybody who simply calls themselves an anarchist or libertarian to come together. That would be pointless. The bottom line of any dialogue is a recognition that society is divided along the lines of class.

What we see is the possibility of achieving something very modest, not the immediate influx of thousands, but the creation of a base for doing something bigger and better. This is an attempt to marshal our movement's resources. We'd like to see a regroupment, a realignment, of all the serious libertarian revolutionary forces in this country. At the moment we are massively underachieving: we can do so much more, be so much more. Let's make it crystal-clear: this isn't some underhand attempt to get everybody to join Class War, Mark II. If it's seen as such, then that partly underlines the problems that we have mentioned above. As far as we are concerned, Class War as it existed has finished. It is now time to move on. We want to do something completely new, though we're not entirely sure what that is. Perhaps we need to get away from the old-style political group with its newspaper, its meetings and its leaflets. Maybe we need to create some new forum for communicating more effectively, to initiate things. We must attempt to draw in the numerous individuals who have similar beliefs but are inactive, uninvolved - and this includes all the readers of our paper, past and present.

WHAT'S THE STORY? JACKANORY

One of our problems has been that many people have been under the belief that Class War is this enormous organisation. This could be seen as a sign of both our success and our failure. They believe we have thousands of people about to go on the streets and fight, that we are a group of super-active individuals who do it for them, an essentially passive readership. The truth is that Class War, in its entire existence, has never had more than 150 members, and membership numbers have often hovered around the 50 mark.

When people have got involved with a false idea about the size and the influence of Class War, they have tended to become disillusioned very quickly. It hasn't helped when, at times, we have played up to that enormous-organisation, super-active image. We have also suffered from the illusion that we could or should become a mass-based organisation. With hindsight, we have to say this has always been hopelessly wide of the mark, and politically undesirable in any case. These illusions of ours haven't been helped by the fact that a couple of times in Class War's history it really did look like we were about to take off in a big way. But we always come back to earth with a resounding crash (we dare say the state had a hand in it a couple of times as well).

PUNK'S NOT DEAD

A strength and weakness has been our ability to recruit people who would never in a million years dream of joining any other left-wing or anarcho group. This is connected to the 'extreme democracy' that has existed within the Federation. People could get involved and be writing for the paper within a couple of months - there's never been any central committee to pass through. This has been a source of strength, but has also caused problems. Many people who became involved had a low level of political awareness, which in turn has caused mayhem within our ranks. A 'kick it til it breaks', anti-intellectual, anti-theory mentality has been prevalent within the organisation. This has been an obstacle.

Class War has always been rightly paranoid about ending up like the Left parties and sects, defending particular unchanging theoretical positions and traditions, regardless of how much things have changed since 1917 or 1936. We set out to avoid this, but fell into another trap - defending a rebellious 'attitude' and 'image', rather than looking at what's wrong with the world and how we can best intervene to change it. In many respects it's true to say that Class War failed to become much more than a 'punk' organisation.

All these factors combined to make the Federation an organisation that has been incredibly conservative and resistant to change. At certain critical periods we failed to seize opportunities to re-invent ourselves and to take our political organisation and ambitions on to a higher stage. For example, the International Conference which we hosted in London in September 1991 brought hundreds of revolutionaries together, but offered nothing new. For some of the organisers this was not a problem: the conference was an end in itself. Yet in retrospect, it must go down as a missed opportunity.

More recently, we have been unable to respond to the upsurge in environmental/anti-roads activism or the rave/free party 'counter-culture' that partly overlaps with it. The 'anti-intellectual' culture within the Federation has stifled real political debate and left us mouthing the same slogans as ten years ago.

But, having said all that, we still feel that we have done an enormous amount even within the limitations of our organisation and its practice. And the question remains: if just fifty people achieved this much, what could we have done had there been five hundred of us or five thousand?

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS

We believe that our propaganda has had a resonance and an accessibility almost unique on the British Left. Class War has always said that politics didn't have to be dour and boring, that it's a mistake to take yourself too seriously, that we should use our imagination and have a bit of laugh in what we do.

Of course, with the best will in the world it's not always good times and sometimes political activity is a pain in the arse. But we don't believe that politics should be self-sacrificial, and we have always argued against so-called 'professional revolutionaries'. The 'full-time' activist is trapped in a fucked-up social relation as much as anyone else. In our experience, this type of activist ends up splitting themselves in two, separating their own individual and social needs from their actions. It is a trap we have all fallen into at times - it's easy to forget the (personal) reasons why we can't stand the present world, and to forget the impulses that make us revolutionary in the first place. Class War always argued that life is politics and that politics is life in an attempt to avoid the robotic alienation of so much of the Left.

We believe that a great deal of what we have said politically has been right. Our task is still one of getting rid of capitalism. What we mean by that is getting rid of money, wage labour, commodities, the market system, and all of the other social relations of capitalism. The world we put in its place will be stateless.

We have always attempted to dispense with leaders, although any form of organisation is fraught with difficulties and some people shout louder than others. We even have a term for it within Class War: the dictatorship of the big mouths. However, we do recognise the fact that in certain situations some people come to the front and take the initiative. But this doesn't mean that they then have any god-given right to determine everything that happens from then on. The problem with the world is not leaders, it's followers, as we in the Class War Federation have learned to our cost on a couple of occasions. We believe that future society should be non-hierarchic, non-authoritarian, organised along the principle of from each according to their abilities and to each according to their needs.

Maybe some people reading this will get the impression that we are consumed with guilt for past crimes against anarchism, maybe for the sin of having talked to the media and welcomed their attention. But it's not like this for us: we're coming clean about our problems and mistakes in the hope that this will encourage others to do the same. We have had enough of the way that Class War has been. We believe that until we go through some movement-wide soul searching, and take a long, hard look at ourselves, then we are all condemned to go along the same tramlines, carrying out political activity within our own little ghettoes and with an equal and singular lack of success. A regroupment of our forces is possible and greatly overdue. It could be as ambitious as we care to make it. We all deserve more than we have now.

REVOLUTIONARIES AND OTHER IMPEDIMENTS TO REVOLUTION

In his article 'Anarchists and other impediments to anarchy', the veteran US anarchist Bob Black argues that anarchism as it is now, rather than being an attempt to change the world, is a highly specialised form of accommodation to it, and that if they were to ever encounter a real revolution, anarchists would run a mile! In our estimation, this is very astute and all too true of many anarchists that we know. People become 'politicised' for all sorts of reasons and not always for the most obvious one of changing the world to something better. We are not interested in anarchism as a hobby or as a way of being superior to others who haven't yet had the good sense to become anarchists themselves. Some people would surely regard an upsurge in our numbers as a threat since it would undermine their 'superior' status of anarchists. We could do without people like that and maybe this is an attempt to sort out the wheat from the chaff even in our own ranks.

We dare say that many will read this Open Letter with glee and look with pleasure at the trouble that they perceive us to be in. But we don't care too much what such people think of us: if you get a kick out of the mess we're in, then the joke's on you - it's on all of us. It may be a naive cliché to say that we are all in the same boat, but it's true. The only thing that matters on our journey is the destination itself. Organisations come and go and no organisation is bigger than the struggle itself. No group or organisation that currently exists is up to much. We see nothing that lives up to our expectations. Once upon a time there was a large, determined and sometimes violent revolutionary movement in the United States that involved hundreds of thousands of working class people. Now there is hardly anything. What is left are a few lifestyle anarchists. But at least people in the States have the knowledge that their movement was physically smashed. Over here, we are simply in danger of letting what's left of ours waste away. If we refuse to recognise this, we have no chance of reversing the decline.

Rosa Luxemburg once said that the class war is the only war in which eventual victory will be secured by a series of defeats. Someone else said that we only have to win once, whilst the ruling class have to win time after time - very true. Class War is not producing this final issue of our paper because we feel in any state of despair. We look upon what we're doing now as a positive move at a time when there are many possibilities. We are attempting to reach as high as we possibly can. We see that as being entirely in keeping with the traditional big aims of Class War.

Our goal is to bring an end to the global domination of capitalism, to create a classless society, a human community that fulfils our hopes, dreams and aspirations. To achieve this we have pretensions towards making a worldwide revolution - and yet we, several hundred of us, find it difficult to work with each other on even a limited basis. Does this inspire confidence in our own abilities or in the probability of it ever happening? Surely the way we work with each other now should be a reflection of what we want to create, something for working class people to look at as an example, as an inspiration.

NO TIME LIKE THE PRESENT

Times are hard for working class people at the moment. We're all being told to tighten our belts, and most of us have no choice but to do just that. These are hard times for revolutionaries too.

As revolutionaries we need to take a long hard look at ourselves and our movement. We need to go back to that question: with times so hard and party/reformist politics so bankrupt, why aren't people getting involved? This final issue of Class War is our attempt to spark a wide-ranging debate on this issue.

The future is open. Most working class people know the conventional parties can't offer them anything. Stalinism is dead, and it's clear that without Stalinism, Trotskyism and Leninism won't last much longer. The possibilities for a new revolutionary libertarian movement are endless, if only we put aside our squabbling and use our imaginations.'

We're looking forwards. We plan to work towards a regroupment of all serious revolutionary forces in Britain, a realignment of the whole revolutionary movement. In the short term, over the next year or so, we are planning a series of conferences to discuss all these issues (see page 16). And after that who knows? It's our world, let's seize the time.

Comments

Beyond the Bullshit: In A Galaxy Far, Far Away...

Article from Class War Issue 73 looking at the future beyond the dissolution of the Class War Federation

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

In this issue of the paper we have been as honest and as frank as we can. We have taken the bold step of getting our dirty washing out in public. Being self-critical can seem negative, but we believe that this is now the most positive thing to do.

At the moment, there's no other group on the left that has the courage to do what we have done. They will quite happily carry on trudging (and we do mean trudging) along the same path, using the same formulas, spouting the same old tired shit, in blind obedience to their doctrines and leaders. They are never allowed, and never want, to admit that maybe they have got it all wrong. One thing that has set us apart from the rest of the Left is that we have always believed that the working class movement towards revolution is the most important thing, and that Class War would only have a limited part to play in this.

To go forward you have to look in the past, to see your mistakes. This we have done over the past few years, and in this issue. It hasn't been all bad: we have had some great times, our politics have been fun and we have had an effect out of all proportion to our size. But at the same time there was always the frustration that for every person involved in the Federation there were another ten who agreed with what we said but kept their distance - people who read the paper regularly, who bought the T-shirt, who flocked to line up behind our banners on marches, but who never felt able to commit themselves further to our organised politics.

THE FED STRIKES BACK

You might be dismayed at the basic frankness and tone of this paper. It is a departure from the type of propaganda that we have always produced in the past, but while we may be saying things differently, there is no departure from our politics. In fact, quite the opposite: it is only because we can now see the potential for re-founding the revolutionary movement that we are taking the unprecedented step of dissolving the Class War Federation. With sales of 4,000 for every issue, Class War is almost certainly the biggest paper on the left apart from Socialist Worker. For some groups this would be their idea of heaven. Yet it is because we want so much more that we are now dissolving. Our underlying thought is this: if just fifty people organised into a Federation have achieved this much, what could we do if there are five hundred of us or five thousand?

The upshot of what we've said here is that we need new ways of organising ourselves that can appeal to all the working class, male and female, young and old, black and white. Class War has gone as far as it can go, and while it still exists our movement will not be able to move on to something better.

It's not down to us as Class War to say how we should organise, that's for the men and women who take part to decide. But we are taking the initiative by organising a number of conferences, to create some sort of national forum for revolutionaries. From informal chats we already know there is a groundswell of support for this. Over the next few months we will be pushing the idea as widely as possible and we urge you to do likewise.

MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU

As libertarians we aim to motivate rather than lead, empower rather than act as a vanguard. It's a difficult task given the complete and utter political alienation of the working class from both mainstream and radical politics. But if we we want to move our politics beyond the shadows of the Left - which, not to put too fine a point on it, is fucked - we need imagination, dedication, education, collaboration and a vision. Individually we may have some of the answers, but it's only by collaborating that we can come up with a practical programme which we can get on with.

If you agree with the gist of what we've written - bearing in mind that we've written it 'from the heart', and not as some piece of lefty theory - we appeal to you to get involved. We don't care what you call yourself - anarchist, communist, Sagittarius - but the bottom line will be a commitment to libertarian class struggle politics: party-builders, hacks, cynics and armchair theorists need not apply.

Don't believe the hype: capitalism has not gone away, the class struggle continues and there are huge social battles looming on the horizon. Let's get to work.

SMASH THE STATE!

DEATH TO THE RULING CLASS!

ALL POWER TO THE WORKING CLASS!

Comments

Class War and the Media

An article from Class War issue 73 looking at Class War's populism and relationship to the mainstream media.

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

Class War has been criticised for being populist or even media whores. But what does 'populist' mean, apart from wanting our ideas to be popular, and aiming to make them that way? We've even been criticised for selling our paper: apparently it's a 'Trotskyist' tactic. But why produce a paper if you just want it to gather dust in someone's back room?

We do concede that there have been problems as well as advantages arising from our populist strategy and attitude to the media. One of the permanent problems of libertarian politics is that we are unable to measure the impact of our efforts. In authoritarian groups like the SWP success is measured almost purely on recruitment to the party or paper-sales. For the rest of us, the effects of our efforts are more hidden and there has often been a temptation to see our reflection in the media as a guide to our success: at times we ran the risk of getting a distorted view of what was really going on in the world.

It's easy to be seduced by the effect you can have on a naive and ignorant media. It can be a revelation to find out how stupid and lazy most journalists are, and by playing up to their prejudices you can get media attention with very little effort. Sometimes this can work out brilliantly. When a Class War member was interviewed on the news and called the Trafalgar Square anti-poll tax rioters "working class heroes" this struck a chord with many people.

But there is a danger of having campaigns that only consist of grabbing media attention. This can lead to a lack of credibility, when people see through the bullshit. Two examples prove the point in different ways. During Euro '96 Class War produced some stickers which were sent to the media with the name 'Class War Hooliganz' on them. The press picked up on them, but as the group never existed, before or after, they were seen as little more than a joke. On the other hand, after the 1996 Hyde Park anti-CJA riot the media reproduced our 'Keep It Spikey' leaflet, with tips on how to behave if the march turned into a riot: in effect, the Sun just reprinted and distributed four million copies of our leaflets. If 'Hooliganz' was a typical arse-about Class War media stunt, then 'Keep It Spikey' was its complete opposite - the publicity was a bonus but not the aim of the leaflet.

Meanwhile spare a thought for all those pen-pushing expense-account journalists: for years they've been able to blame us for every piece of trouble that's happened, reprinting the same old article about 'blood-thirsty bootboys' again and again. Hearing that Class War was coming to an end, one journalist recently phoned up our Hotline to complain. "How can you be dissolving??? You're the most successful group on the left!" she said. "If we're so successful," replied our telephonist, "how come you're still around?"

Comments

Getting Organised

Article from Class War Issue 73 looking at revolutionary organisation.

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

When Class War started, we saw ourselves as standing in opposition to virtually every other political organisation existing in the UK. Arrogant? Maybe. But we stood in total opposition to the Left's traditional hierarchical way of doing things and we wanted some new form of organisation to match our politics. We weren't setting out to 'save' the working class - how could we when we saw ourselves as part of that class? Our message has always been the same: our class does not need organisations to lead it to salvation - do-it-yourself! As we saw it, this meant entering uncharted territory, as we tried to bypass the perverted crap that passes for most 'revolutionary' politics, and develop something new.

Over the course of the next few years, some members argued for Class War to become something akin to a tight-knit cadre organisation, with maximum theoretical and tactical unity around a commonly agreed programme. Others pushed for more of a broad church where the Fed would operate as an umbrella organisation, maybe even embracing separate anarchist and communist groups under one roof. In actual fact we opted for neither strategy. Instead we ended up with the worst aspects of both, and wasted loads of time re-inventing the wheel.

To put it another way: having started as something shapeless and almost uncontrollable, Class War progressively narrowed its vision and lost one ambition after another. The global, shit-kicking outlook got watered down by ever more sectarian, one-dimensional ways of thinking. From a vibrant and healthy (if unstructured) 'group', the Federation stagnated so that within a couple of years of the anti-poll tax movement, huge amounts of energy were being expended on internal bureaucracy - amending the constitution, electing a whole raft of full-time 'officers', tinkering with the Aims & Principles, drafting proposals and counter-proposals for conference, and the usual factional politicking. And all this for an organisation that never exceeded a membership of 150!

None of this is really new or exclusive to Class War - it seems to be part of the inevitable dynamics of political organisation. Institutional politics gradually suffocate imagination and what was once dynamic becomes merely dogmatic.

But maybe it's also a consequence of the fact that the way we organise as revolutionaries doesn't seem to have changed much over the last hundred years. 1997 or 1897? Despite all our big talk and grand ambitions, Class War's organisation has ended up hardly different from a revolutionary outfit at the turn of the century. Like them we have a readership, a passive membership, an active membership (which in our case constitutes the effective 'leadership'), a paper, a fitful 'journal', delegates, conferences, etc., etc.

So we come back to the same old problem. Most of what passes for 'revolutionary' politics in this country is fucked. Isn't it about time we tried to come up with some new form of organisation? And how do we go about organising without the organisation taking over?

BEDSITS & BARRICADES

In non-revolutionary times like this, there are two standard ways of coping. The first is to turn back to theory, to the security of some more or less academic version of marxism-leftism-anarchism-communism-autonomism - sometimes backed up by the vague idea that 'we're in a downturn and it's time for quality not quantity'. This approach is often supported by some sort of spontaneist theory - which loosely translates as 'it'll be alright on the night'. The working class will eventually become aware of its historic mission and sweep away capitalism and in so doing throw up new forms of organisation and politics. In fact some variants of this even suggest that to be organised in the here and now is actually counter-revolutionary as any form of organisation today will be inevitably corrupted by bourgeois thinking. This is the twilight world of the ultra-left, where you don't really have to do anything except read obscure Belgian journals and slag each other off in densely worded articles. We've got nothing against conscious attempts to increase our understanding of the world - that is part of what we need. But the 'theory' solution smacks too much of a retreat from the real world, of pure bedsit intellectualism - a turning-inward when we should be trying to look out more. And as for 'non-organisation', well it's a luxury we just cannot afford. Only a fool could imagine that we can get from here to some better world without a form of organisation along the way.

The second traditional response is almost the exact opposite: activism and the 'kick it till it breaks' tendency. If the theory types defend their strategy by arguing that there's nothing going on, the activists act as if worldwide proletarian revolution is just around the corner - 'It's happening now, man!' This is a less sophisticated version of voluntarism - which loosely translates as 'if you want it enough, it will happen'. If you're a Bolshevik, it means selling more and more papers, recruiting like mad and pushing for revolution; for anarchists, it translates as activist groups - leafleting, picketing, anti-fascist work, always thinking that if we all 'do' a little more, the system will come tumbling down.

Now, while we all know which of the above we'd rather have alongside us in a riot, we're not convinced that running around like headless chickens is necessarily more 'revolutionary' than sitting with your nose in a book. In practice, the activist position is bound up with a very moralist approach to politics - if you don't or can't 'get involved', then you are somehow worthless. And in the end it only seems to produce burn-out and bitterness.

RE-INVENTING THE WHEEL

In fact both approaches - the activist/voluntarist and the intellectual/spontaneist - have been present within Class War, and both share the same underlying attitude: just like the traditional Left they are more oriented towards the needs of individuals within the group than the needs of the wider working class. The sad fact is that most groups (including, in the end, Class War) do things not because they believe it will affect the world, but to defend their own integrity and maintain their sense of identity (this is the 'group patriotism' that we're determined to destroy).

We think it's time to rethink the whole idea of political organisation. What is 'being organised' all about? Why do we do it? Organisation is organisation for a specific purpose. It might sound obvious but people come together to do something. We come together as revolutionaries to organise and contribute to struggle, and to deepen our understanding of the world around us. Maybe it's time for us to turn the question of organisation on its head: it's not a problem to be solved by adopting this or that platform or this or that structure. It's not something that you can 'solve'.

There is no blueprint for the 'perfect' organisation, because in the end organisation is not a thing but a process. It's an ongoing thing - we come together to contribute to the collective struggle against capitalism, and to contribute to the active debate about the best way of doing this. That is what revolutionaries do.

Comments

Make Your Own Tea: Women's Realm and Other Recipes and Patterns

Article from issue 73 of Class War looking at the reasons why so few women joined Class War (and other revolutionary groups).

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

This piece is written for all revolutionaries. This is not the token 'women's bit' that's stuck in for the sake of appearances. This is an attempt to look at how and why the Left, and Class War in particular, has not just failed to attract women, but alienated, patronised and looked upon them as a minority group. How can half the working class be treated as a minority? We're not claiming that we have solutions for the gender imbalance but we are saying that it's time to stop ignoring the problem. Any revolutionary movement which doesn't address why there are so few women in its ranks isn't a true revolutionary movement, just a complacent reflection of the status quo.

DAZED AND CONFUSED

In the early years of Class War, the attitude was that feminist demands did not go far enough. We said why call for equal pay? Equal rights under capitalism was putting out a begging bowl for equal gender exploitation and was spectacularly unambitious. Class War were calling not for equal pay packets but for the abolition of money. The feminist fixation with voting rights was another half measure. Why choose between two evils when there's so much more to be had? Class War tried to support the principle of gender equality while disagreeing with the reformist tendencies of established feminism.

In the mid-1980s the Left was in its victim stage. 'All men are bad, all women are good' arguments were being waged by feminists who wanted the moral advantage and brownie points. Class War wasn't about pushing the politics of middle class guilt. By showing images of women who were taking control of their lives and fighting back, Class War thought it was supporting working class women. Whether it was or not is up for discussion, but the paper's intentions were honourable. The approach was simplistic, but at least it wasn't as confused as other sections of the Left - who were dancing round Goddess-based 'alternative' religions and calling them politics.

Class War's early issues show that there was a commitment to talking to all the working class as opposed to just young white males. Cervical cancer information sat on the same page as 'Battered Bobby'. Articles about sexism (admittedly basic and often moralistic as opposed to libertarian) made regular appearances. The politics were often misguided, with one article offering instructions to working class men to support women's struggles by offering physical protection. This paternalistic attitude reflected society's but it didn't make it right.

But to put Class War in context, other lefty groups and papers had even worse attitudes. Militant and the SWP's politics were so entrenched in old-fashioned rhetoric that women only featured in their papers when they slotted in to the traditional 'worker' slot. Grunwick was their finest hour: workers who were women and Asian to boot. Women Against Pit Closures and 'miners' wives' were the only other photos of a woman they'd use. Those pictures from 1977 and 1984 had to see them through almost 20 years of papers.

In 1987 a Brixton woman wrote to Class War questioning our coverage of the Brixton riots. She said that living in a police no-go area had ended not in Utopia, but in women suffering intimidation, physical and sexual violence. To Class War's credit, the paper responded with an article about the dangers of romanticising violence, and started up a debate about communities providing their own policing.

However, a lot of women who agree with Class War's aims and principles, think the organisation is too Boy's Own to become involved with. Class War's attitude to violence is alienating for women - no amount of wishful thinking will alter the fact that working class men and women have very different attitudes to violence. Class War's hard image, its music and boots are meant to attract young, white males. It's questionable whether concentrating on attracting one area of the working class (and alienating other sections of it) is worth the price, but even on its own terms this tactic fails.

WHAT DID YOU DO IN THE WAR, MUM?

Looking at Class War in isolation won't tell us much about why the Left has put gender politics on the back-burner. Class War came in to being at a time when the women's movement was in crisis. Without sketching a rough run-down of some of the events that preceded that crisis, it's impossible to challenge the cliché that feminism is merely the plaything of the middle classes.

In lefty circles all you have to do to discredit a movement or an idea is call it middle class. It's become a non-specific term of abuse. The feminist movement did have a lot of middle class women in it, but that doesn't mean that all of them opposed the interests of working class women. Nor does it mean that feminist ideas aren't useful to working class women. In the early seventies feminist ideas began to permeate through society. The media (as always) looked for leaders and personalities. Rather than talk about the anger, the ideas and the needs that were propelling feminism forward, the emphasis was on individuals. Germaine Greer and Co. fitted the media bill.

But this didn't stop women seizing the idea of liberation. Suddenly there were theories which explained why life was so miserable for the majority of women. The middle classes were the first to catch them because they had more access to education, but many working class women weren't all that far behind. The only solution to women's troubles was to change society, which was the last thing that the right wanted.

Women got down to the serious job of showing we'd no longer tolerate male domination and violence. In 1972 the first refuge for battered women opened. In 1976 the first Rape Crisis Centre opened, run on feminist lines. It mushroomed and by the mid-1980s there were centres in almost every city. The Reclaim The Night marches started in Soho in protest against the exploitation of the sex industry. The women's movement was making it up as it went along - and at that point it hadn't had to take account of the views of women actually working in the industry. In Leeds and York the Reclaim The Night marches took on a different significance. Peter Sutcliffe, the so-called 'Yorkshire Ripper', was still on the loose in Northern industrial towns. We were sick of living in a climate of fear, of being told that the only way to stay safe was to stay indoors or under male protection. Last but not least we'd had enough of the state and media distinction between 'good' and 'bad' girls; between the prostitute women who the media implied deserved to be murdered, and the good, asexual, family-type women who didn't. Feminism provided the framework for women to realise that we had a right to be sexual and safe. We were angrily rejecting the hypocritical morality of the times as well as celebrating our presence on the streets.

WOMEN: THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME TO ME

The women's liberation movement had its own internal problems. The rhetoric of 'sisterhood' above all else meant that class and race, other great defining aspects of our lives, were in danger of being buried under the 'all girls together' mentality . Working class and non-white women fought the fallacy that class and race were less important than gender. They said that middle class women were fighting for their independence from patriarchy, while keeping the perks of their class. Working class women weren't trying to destroy sisterhood; they were insisting that it be made more substantial. Some working class women said that sisterhood had to start with income sharing.

Black women refused to let the reality of having to live in a racist society be obscured by an umbrella of sisterhood. The women's liberation movement was predominantly white and middle class, but to say that the white middle class women constantly held sway is to under-value black and working class women's contributions. They forced the women's liberation movement to take account of them - whether it wanted to or not. In 1978 The Working Class Women's Liberation Newsletter was launched. To go along with the myth that working class women played no part in changing society, is to repeat the lie that we were too thick to read the writing on the wall, and add our own quotes.

Separatism helped create more schisms and split feminism into non-complementary strands. The main bugbear was whether women working or having relationships with men were letting the side down by fraternising with 'the enemy'. In retrospect separatism looks like just more Stalinist power-play. Arguments about desire and free choice were put down to women trying to hang on their 'heterosexual privilege'. Capitalism's privileges weren't given much attention. No wonder the women's movement split. Despite internal sex wars, the women's movement continued to have a positive influence on society. The one good thing about radical feminism was that it taught women to recognise the full extent of male domination. Women who chose not to live or work apart from men finally picked up on the way that trade unions/political groups/partners made few concessions to women. The revolutionary movement was found wanting.

THE ENEMY WITHIN

The women's movement would have survived and still politically progressed if the right hadn't intervened. The American Weyrich was the first of many new right leaders to declare feminist women a threat to state power: "There are people who want a different political order. Symbolised by the women's liberation movement, they believe the future for their political power lies in the restructuring of the traditional family, and in down-grading the male or the father role in the traditional family."

Thatcher and her followers had their own think-tanks which drew the same conclusions. By the mid-1980s equality seemed like a sensible proposition to most women, so the media responded by declaring that feminism was outdated, a 1970s thing like flares. 'Post-feminism' was the new thing. It came complete with a younger generation who hated the women's movement. 'Post-feminist' was anti-feminist and it was set off not by women achieving their demands but by the fact that they looked in danger of getting too stroppy, too much of a threat.

The old feminist 'leadership' were now part of the media establishment. Greer and Co. happily went back on their past calls for equality and independence. The new, revisionist line was that feminism had robbed us of our right to be mothers and home bodies. Greer declared that the model woman was the old-fashioned peasant wife up to her neck in onions and kids. One after another the old guard trundled out to tell us that women were at their most fulfilled when their influence was restricted to the home-front. Unsurprisingly, the media loved this U-turn and printed every word of it. It was the worst sort of careerism, but the right has always diffused subversive ideas by rewarding changes of opinion. Post-feminist theory smelled a lot like old-fashioned servitude.

YOU'LL ALWAYS FIND ME IN THE KITCHEN AT PARTIES

Class War was formed at the height of this period of post-feminism. The entire Left was confused by the infighting and the right's full-scale assault. Class War didn't stand back and look at what was happening, but neither did anybody else. It was a time when one after another all the women's papers collapsed under the weight of the onslaught. Feminism was too old hat to be bought, so most of the radical women's papers folded. The only voices we were hearing were the new right and its lackeys telling us to get back into the kitchen.

It's an elaborate confidence trick. The new right wants us in the traditional wifey mode, but it also wants our wage labour. The post-feminist line is that the modern women can have freedom through work, and still have the 'fulfilment' of running a home.

Capitalism needs women to work. The far right's shift to economic 'rationalism' and the expansion of the low-paid service industries mean that cheap labour is always in demand. And as far as capital is concerned, nothing comes cheaper than women. Capitalism's motto is: if you want to shell out less money and make more profits, employ women - they're worth less.

Nine out of ten single parents are women, and even in two parent households many women are the main bread-winner; yet capitalism still pretends that women's wages are 'pin money.' Women don't need a living wage, because we don't actually have to live off it. Despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary, men are still seen as the main 'providers'. Our wages pay for the little extras: food, shelter and warmth. And as we get older, in a society which judges women on appearance, we become worthless.

Single mothers on benefit are the group who have borne the worst of the post-feminism backlash. Capitalism has outlawed all non-monetary relations. In a capitalist society to have no money is to have no identity. We're not what we eat, but where we work and what we earn. Single mothers have been targeted because their existence threatens the right's social, political and economic aims. Hence the constant media attacks and housing and benefit cuts. 'Back to Basics' blamed everything from loose morals to the rising crime rate on single mothers.

Work and wages - no matter how menial and low - are often cited as proof that we've achieved our objectives and no longer need feminism. Try telling the woman who gets up at six to clean offices, that if she worked harder she too could have two homes and inter-continental air travel. The role models post-feminism holds up as 'successful' women (scum like Anita Roddick) get to the top by promoting ruthless capitalism. Gender plays no part in their story - other than their having to prove that their killer instincts are twice as sharp as men's.

One of capitalism's strategies for reducing wages is to take what has traditionally been 'men's work' - manufacturing etc - automate the plant and then bring in 'unskilled' women at a lower rate of pay. Then it is women, rather than capitalism's sharp practice, who are blamed for men being chucked out of the workforce.

Post-feminism also makes a big fuss about women's nurturing natures - we're supposed to like being dogsbodies. In 81 per cent of (two adult) homes where a woman works full-time, she's still responsible for the washing and ironing and the bulk of the domestic jobs. Maybe 'we've made it' means the beds. We're still acting as unpaid domestic servants; the only real change is that many men think they do more. There's a million excuses for why not, but men rarely take an equal share of cooking and household chores. Revolutionary groups seldom address the day-to-day inequalities in their own kitchens. Issues around housework are seen as trivial. Twenty years ago the expression for it was 'women's work'. Lefty 'man' may claim to be fighting for the freedom of mankind, but that doesn't mean he wants his girlfriend to stop doing his washing.

Part of the problem is that housework has been tagged 'personal politics'. 'Personal' like 'middle class' is just another way of saying irrelevant to the overall struggle. Class War has always understood that 'politics' is about improving the day-to-day realities of our lives. Unfortunately, that understanding doesn't seem to extend to women. Too often issues are prioritised on the grounds of whether or not they make men feel heroic. Rioting does; shopping doesn't. Washing up just doesn't get the adrenalin going: ask any woman.

GET YOUR TITS OUT FOR THE LASSES

Post-feminism has a cute chorus-line of girls flashing their knickers as a sign of liberation. We've got the Girlie Show, The Pyjama Party and the Spice Girls sticking their tits and their tongues out on prime-time TV. All three were put together by blokes. We're supposed to see them as symbols of the new 'sassy' woman, but all are a bloke's idea of the perfect feminist. They make a lot of noise but never say anything which actually threatens the status quo. They're Stepford Wives with better thighs, and a carefully programmed attitude. They're go-go dancing for equality.

At the same time there's a constant media crusade to show us what a dangerous place the world is for women. Less than eight per cent of all violent crimes are sexual attacks on women (the highest mortality rate is among young working class men), but the media loves to highlight our rapes and murders by deranged strangers. The message is that we need the security of male protection. The sub-text is: 'your relationship might be crap and abusive but look how much worse off you'd be without him'. The irony is that at least a third of all women killed in Britain are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends - the majority just after they declare their independence by breaking off the relationship.

WILL THIS MOVEMENT MOVE ME?

We don't live in an equal world. We need a feminist analysis as much as we ever did. All around us the gains of the last thirty years are under attack. The Left bowed out of women's struggles years ago, and since there isn't really a women's movement to speak of, individual women are left to slug it out alone. The whole point in joining a movement is to fight alongside people who share the same ideals and dreams. There's not much incentive for women to join revolutionary groups when the general ethos is: you can fight our battles but we're not interested in yours.

Women join revolutionary organisations because they want to change the whole of society not just the sexist bit. But to survive within them we end up having to 'put up and shut up'. Just because we've prioritised class and capitalism as major oppressions doesn't mean that we don't give a shit about gender.

The old chestnut about 'single issues' distracting the focus of the struggle has been dragged out too many times when women's struggles come up. The anti-JSA campaign or prisoner support are 'single issues'; race, class and gender aren't. We can't pick up and put down our class, our skin colour or our sex. Whatever comes after Class War needs to take a less one-dimensional approach. We don't know what will make a unified movement, but we do know what won't: ignorance.

No one is 'just' working class, 'just' a woman, 'just' black. Our politics are a mesh of different experiences, and half the time there's no cosy alliance between our different oppressions. A woman's experiences under patriarchy help shape her perceptions of class. We've been guilty of pretending that working class men and women would all live happily ever after once we've banished capitalism. Not if we still have one half serving the other half. Life isn't simple. Those who are our comrades in one area may well turn out to be against us in another. When conflict comes up we're forced to say what matters most; sometimes it's our class and sometimes it isn't. We have to acknowledge difficulties before we can start to deal with them. We don't know if we can resolve these dilemmas but we're certainly willing to try.

Comments

Middle Class? Fuck Off!

Article from Class War issue 73 on the role of the middle class in revolutionary politics, and acknowledging some of the shortcomings in the Class War Federation's understanding of class.

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

The relationship between revolutionary politics and middle class people has been a perennial problem on the Left/anarcho-scene and a problem that sometimes borders on obsession with some working class revolutionaries. Marx said that the emancipation of the working class is the task of the working class itself - if we want to be free, we've got to do it ourselves. It is a statement we take literally. Despite what some people may say, Class War has always been overwhelmingly composed of people from working class backgrounds. Middle class people have been - and still are - involved, but they have always been in a minority and this is how it should be. If you have a revolutionary organisation and it is comprised predominantly of middle class people, and they hold the positions of power as a result of their better education, greater confidence, and so on, then clearly this is a big problem. Most of the Left is like this - the SWP are a prime example.

On the other hand, is it possible to make a revolution in which only working class people participate? Is it possible to create a purely working class organisation? We suspect that it isn't. After all, how do you determine who is allowed to get involved? Do you have a class-based means test or is it down to intuition? What about the numerous grey areas? This doesn't mean that we don't know who the enemy is, but nor is everything black and white.

The problem arises because in our day-to-day life we do not directly confront the ruling class. Those who really run society never put a foot outside their heavily protected worlds. For most of us, our immediate enemy is the middle class: management, social workers, magistrates, teachers and all the other functionaries of capital. This is no accident. Part of the reason why the middle class arose was to act as a buffer zone between us and the ruling class, as a first line of defence for the bosses. But the middle class, as traditionally defined, has also expanded massively over the past fifty years, partly with the growth of the welfare state, but mainly because we have been encouraged to forget our class position and call ourselves middle class. If we recognise that some 'middle class' people occupy contradictory positions, it doesn't mean we're ditching class politics.

So how does a group such as Class War relate to middle class people who are committed and have proved themselves? Do we tell them to fuck off, or that they can only make the tea, or do we accept what they can offer, at least until proven otherwise? Of course, if they are running the show then that's a different matter. But this problem has become an obsession with some people: this has only led to a negative outlook and political paralysis because people are defining themselves in terms of the individuals they are against rather than what they are for. We believe that this issue is a red herring (at least within Class War) and we get tired of having to deal with it.

A prime example of this sort of attitude is the recently published anonymous pamphlet Educating Who About What? This is a searing rant against the middle class dropouts, 'academics', and other lifestylists who inhabit so much of the anarchist ghetto. They lead the author to conclude that '90% of the anarchist movement is a joke'. The presence of middle class elements and 'politicos' is seen as almost entirely to blame for the failings of the whole anarchist movement, and in particular the various national anarchist groups and networks. The movement gets slagged off for being a social club for misfits, dropouts and social inadequates, and for being far removed from the working class.

Many of the pamphlet's statements are so blindingly obvious that it's impossible to disagree with them, and the author is right to raise all those uncomfortable issues that the revolutionary movement needs to face. However, it's also true that Educating Who About What? contradicts itself again and again: it's laid out as a series of vitriolic slogans and very personal statements, rather than as a coherent argument. It tends to oversimplify and generalise on too many points - for instance, the author demands a purely working class organisation to overcome middle class infiltration, but makes no real attempt to define either middle class or working class. Who would decide who can join or not - the author? In fact we suspect that the 'middle class' is composed primarily of people who disagree with the author, regardless of their real class.

This work could have been much better if the bloke who wrote it had not allowed his own petty jealousies and dislikes to interfere with what he had to say. He is someone who has been close to both Class War and the band Chumbawamba, so it's pathetic that he wastes so much space smearing both with lies and distortions (we could write pages and pages about this, but to be honest it would a waste of time).

As we said, Educating Who About What? is symptomatic of a lot of the muddled thinking about class that passes for 'theory' within the anarchist movement. We hold our hands up here and admit that Class War has done little to make things clearer. Too often we talked and acted as if class is something totally static and unpolitical - 'you either know it or you don't'. We unconsciously swallowed the most obvious stereotypes of class and acted as if it was all 'common sense' - the working class was composed entirely of young white blokes on council estates, and class was all about culture and background. Which is fine if you are a young white bloke, but fuck-all use if you're not.

Comments

Peace Off!

Article from Class War issue 73 on pacifism, lifestylism and the 1990s anti-roads movement.

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

Class War came into being with the aim of sticking the boot into anarcho-pacifism and lifestyle politics. We had some success in this respect - although, ironically, we have gone full circle and these things have returned once again.

You could say that not much is happening at the moment - a low level of struggle. But anybody who is digging tunnels below would-be motorways or making their home in a tree would probably disagree. Don't get us wrong: we applaud the anti-roads movement and their actions, for their daring and their imagination. They have cost the state millions of pounds and forced a significant curtailing of the road-building programme. This is good. But a problem with this movement is that it is overly based on lifestyle, the way you dress, what you eat, etc. We have to be concerned with more than that. How do people who live out of the back of an ex-BT van, usually young and often from privileged backgrounds, relate to people who have jobs, mortgages, families, etc. - i.e. most working class people? Is such a lifestyle an option for the majority of people? How do you break out of a ghetto of self-imposed marginalisation, or is that ghetto an end in itself? The only kind of politics worth anything is that which breaks down barriers.

Environmental destruction, and the car society with roads built everywhere whether we want them or need them, are the result of an economic system that puts the accumulation of capital and profits before people. Ultimately, bringing an end to capitalist social relations is the only answer. Activism and taking a morally superior stance might make you feel good but won't bring about any significant change.

Comments

Preaching to the Converted?

Short article from the final issue of Class War.

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

This paper marks a departure in style and content: every past issue has been written to be read by, for want of better words, ordinary working class people. We have attempted to write for those who were 'unpoliticised' - it's a loaded word, we know, but we take it to mean people who wouldn't generally buy a left-wing newspaper, anarchist or otherwise. The paper and the politics of Class War have been described as 'populist' in as much as we have attempted to write about what really concerns people, as opposed to what we think should concern them, in a jargon-free, down-to-earth, humorous manner. We believe that we've had some success in this respect. Class War was a paper written for ordinary people, not for anarchists. It wasn't filled with obscure articles guaranteed to baffle the uninitiated, it wasn't written for some ultra-left clique. Class War attempted to do something other than preach to the converted.

This final issue of Class War is different. It is written for all those who already consider themselves 'political', whether they regard themselves as anarchists, communists, socialists or whatever. This Open Letter is directed at everybody who is genuine in their desire to bring an end to this class-divided capitalist society that we live in, and who is open, honest and flexible in their attempts to achieve it.

Comments

The Party's Over: The State of the Left in the 1990s

Article from Class War issue 73 surveying the remains of the left

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

The Left in Britain is at its feeblest for decades, probably since the mid-1960s and maybe even since WWI. And yet this is at a time of lowering living standards and worsening working conditions, and when the institutions of social, economic and political control - the government, police and monarchy - command the least respect since the Victorian era. Both Stalinism and social democracy have virtually disappeared in Europe in the last decade, and where once the labour movement stood to defend workers there is now a massive political vacuum. The concepts of nations and states are in turmoil with moves both for a federal Euro-superstate on one hand, and the devolvement of power on the other. While on the fringes of Europe a 19th century battle for nationhood is being fought, in the heartlands of England and Germany national sovereignty is fading as global capitalism, and its institutions, consolidate.

All this should provide a fertile breeding ground for the Left, yet they have been haemorrhaging members and whole organisations over the past decade. It is the firm belief of groups like Class War that much of the Left's irrelevance in this country is down to their sterile and conservative dogmatism and resulting political organisation. Clearly though, there are massive economic, political and social changes going on locally and globally that have had far-reaching effects on the political culture of this country. The Left have been totally incapable of developing new politics and new methods of working or making propaganda. They have no response to the changes in society, let alone the growing ecological world crisis. They ignore changes in the workplace and changes in the way young people think and behave; with their myopic vision of the industrial worker they fail to see the strengths and possibilities in today's fragmented society.

The labour movement has been devastated and this has had massive consequences for the Left. They have almost entirely lost their factory base, and the more general social changes and the change in political climate have increased their isolation. Of all the main left or anarcho groups only Class War has tried to adopt new types of 'propaganda', at least since Rock Against Racism influenced 'punk' Socialist Workers. In fact Class War's 'new' style is itself now dated, to the 1980s miners' strike/inner city riot/anti-yuppie era. Just as capitalism never stops moving, so we must never stop refining, updating and inventing. We won't get there by standing still.

Before we take a look at various left and anarcho groups, there are some general points that need to be made. Most importantly is that the majority of people who join these groups genuinely want to do something to change the world, whether they be middle class students or more importantly working class people. For this they are to be respected. Our criticisms of the Left are not directed at these people, the rank and file, but against the sterile politics and ossified leaderships that define these sects.

However, nothing is ever that simple and sadly, apart from the vast majority of recruits who eventually leave, many revolutionaries get caught up in a 'siege mentality' and generally lose touch with the very ideas which attracted them to revolutionary politics in the first place. This 'mentality' can affect all of us, but in left groups it is actively encouraged. With a siege mentality developed, the members are more likely to do what they are told and accept an absence of debate and democracy. Along with this comes the obsessive need to defend the 'organisation' above all else.

It may seem clichéd to talk about 'the means justifying the ends', but talk to any hack in any far left group and they will waste hours of your time talking black into white and that the mass slaughter of whatever (including most other left groups) is justified, as it will lead to their group gaining power and bringing on the new dawn of happy smiling faces etc. Of course, this sort of alienation can be found everywhere in the modern world, but leftist politics itself is a large part of the problem. Ironically, it's not just the left groups who are at fault with their belief that they are 'the vanguard' - the siege mentality and 'the-organisation-above-all-else' attitude has infected anarchist groups as well.

The Socialist Party (ex-Militant)

Militant were the most significant left group of the 1980s. They had over 100 councillors, several MPs, and influence and control over several councils. Today they have little or no influence in either local authorities, the Labour Party or their beloved labour movement. The history of Militant is a history of ideological schizophrenia. In the 1950s the group was a straightforward Trotskyist outfit. They entered within the 'parties of the working class', educating and creating the nucleus that, when the conditions were correct, would emerge as Britain's revolutionary party. They would use 'transitional demands' as a way of politicising and developing revolutionary consciousness. These demands were ones that they knew capital could not agree to and therefore they hoped to show that only workers' control would bring 'socialism'. However, over the years tactics and theory got very confused and the majority of Militant supporters saw nationalisation under workers' control as a thing in itself and thought those who argued for real revolution were fools.

It was this contradiction that brought about Militant's defining moment and illustrated its failure as a left reformist party. This moment was the rate capping dispute in Liverpool in 1984-85 which ended in embarrassing defeat for them. Militant was also significantly involved in the campaign against the poll tax, and just as they learned lessons from the Liverpool fiasco, that bureaucratic and dishonest politics cannot succeed, this campaign showed the importance of open and honest politics based in the community. After Liverpool Militant were witch-hunted from the Labour Party - their true base. Their recruiting machine, the youth section of the Labour Party, was taken from them and what support they had in the union movement ebbed away as they became impotent. They had no option but to move toward organising in communities when Thatcher launched her attack upon local authorities and communities with the poll tax. Although Militant took credit for starting many anti-poll tax groups the campaign showed up the worst side of Militant - the bureaucratic and undemocratic practice learned and institutionalised during years of intrigue in Labour party politics. If Liverpool had lost Militant many supporters, then the poll tax campaign split them right open. Here, two very clear and different ways of organising were shown; and indeed during the early 1990s Militant split. The old leadership were routed, while hacks in the new Militant claim that they haven't changed their fundamental politics, only material circumstances. In fact it appears that through changes in circumstances Militant themselves have changed.

For the better? Well they are more open and are more likely to work with other groups. However, they still retain some of the old Militant attitudes as well as most of their old political dogma. As the new Socialist Party they appear to be recreating some sort of Bennite left-Labour old school set-up. They are possibly the group 'most likely to do well' over the next few years, as they intend to become more community-based, but as ever, another dose of bureaucratic 'socialist' bollocks is the last thing people need.

CPGB

The Communist Party of Great Britain is finally dead and buried. By their continual defence of the indefensible they have been a disaster for the revolutionary movement for many years. Like other so-called 'communist' parties, their politics - like much of the Trot dogma - is not in any sense of the word communist, but some hybrid of state capitalist economics and totalitarianism. As the Eastern European regimes collapsed, the CPGB also collapsed, after first attempting to become a new champagne socialist party. Good riddance.

SLP

The Socialist Labour Party was set up in 1996 by a group of Labour Party old-timers. Militant tried to join but weren't allowed! Led by state socialists and ex-Stalinists like Arthur Scargill, it's heavily trade union biased and calls for the rebuilding of the welfare state and renationalisation of everything. Its strategy appears to be almost entirely electoral. In our post-Thatcher society, appeals to traditional labourism and a tired old leadership will fall on deaf ears. We believe that with neither an attractive ideology nor the people to create a vibrant movement the SLP is at best a sentimental reaction to New Labour.

SWP

The Socialist Workers Party is the biggest left group in Britain today with the same membership numbers (4-6,000) as they have had for the last 25 years, but the leadership remains the same!

The SWP is renowned for two things. Firstly, calling for strikes, whatever the situation. This policy has led to demoralisation and a loss of respect for not only themselves, but also for the very idea of fighting and winning. Secondly, opportunism. Essentially this means they chop and change policies from week to week on a vampire-like basis that whatever brings in new blood is good. The SWP is today the only noticeable group to use the word 'revolution' in their propaganda; not only this, they accept that a revolution will probably require the use of force and violence. However, they suffer from a number of fundamental flaws in their concept of revolution.

They believe in a sort of hotch-potch of Leninist and Trotskyist dogmas and critically in the concept that a revolution will only succeed if it's led before, during and after by one all-encompassing party (guess who!). They argue this from a position that a highly organised enemy (the capitalist state) can only be defeated by a highly organised single opposition led by a single vanguard party. We believe this is fundamentally wrong. It is more likely that a highly centralised state will be defeated not by a pale imitation of itself but by a decentralised, diverse and multi-headed opposition. The SWP has created an organisation with little internal debate or democracy, and worse, lacking any culture of critical debate. For a group that pays lip service to the idea of revolution it is ironic that they are totally lacking in imagination, freedom of expression and open discussion. The SWP is essentially a middle class party, representing those on the left of the middle class who believe capitalism is disorganised and 'unfair'.

Ultra Left

The ultra left is unknown to most people in this country. They have important critiques of the Leninist-Trotskyist left but like those they criticise they seem unable to progress beyond some bygone age. Their language, style, dogmatism and sectarianism offer nothing towards the creation of a new revolutionary movement, however important a large majority of their politics remain. These include keeping alive the fact that non-Leninist revolutionaries were vital to the revolutions of the post-WWI era; that workers historically have supported non-Leninist revolutionary communism; in their opposition to nationalism in all its forms; and in their constant emphasis on the total destruction of capitalism.

RCP

We almost forgot to review the Revolutionary Communist Party, the most ambitious and arrogant group in the 1980s, because they have all but disappeared from sight. Internally they had a strong 'cultish' behaviour, and they became increasingly obsessed with developing their theory over political practice. They shut down their newspaper a few years ago to concentrate on recruiting ex-students through their magazine Living Marxism (now called LM). As any fool knows, if you lose the relationship between theory and practice you soon end up with your head up your arse. This appears to have been the fate of the RCP.

Red Action

In 1981-82 a number of working class members of the SWP left, or were expelled, to set up a new group, Red Action. The pamphlet they produced explaining why they left and what the new group would be is an important one in the relationship of the Left to the working class. It documents clearly the failings of the SWP, especially how it alienates the majority of working class people who come into its orbit. Red Action portrays itself (very convincingly) as being a non-sectarian, non-dogmatic organisation well aware of the failings of the authoritarian left.

However, Red Action has also proved itself to be very much a bastard child of the SWP when it comes to how it relates to other left groups. It is also an excellent example of the double standards that much of the Left have. When it comes to this group the advice should be ignore what they say, and look very closely at what they do.

We have already mentioned the idea of the 'siege mentality'. With Red Action the siege mentality reaches a new height which they articulate with headlines like 'No-one likes us, we don't care'. This may very well be true, but since every edition of Red Action is obsessed with slagging off the Left and anarchists it can hardly be surprising. This siege mentality is not confined to its paper: years of 'squaddist' organising (they have spent the last 15 years in a never-ending battle with the far-right) have not made for an open and democratic structure. This is fine if you're a 'crew' fighting fascists, but different rules apply when it comes to organising openly and working with other groups.

Violence is a strong part of their culture, both internally and externally. A typical example of this is their Glasgow organiser who threatened a Class War Celtic supporter with a knife for the heinous crime of selling a Celtic fanzine on what he considered his turf. It is very difficult to reconcile this type of behaviour with their more recent attempts to 'celebrate the political independence of the working class'. Their organiser's violent sectarian behaviour has been the subject of at least one document circulating around the Left, and he has recently tried to explain this by referring to a dispute within anti-fascist groups, but his sectarian behaviour goes back years before this and remains a problem.

This example is far from unique within Red Action, which is logical when you consider the content of their paper - when it comes to anarchists in particular, it has taken sectarianism to absurd and obsessive levels. To be fair to Red Action members some have been embarrassed by their paper's attitude, but the best they can come up with is to explain that 'London' produce the paper and it's not their views. But what sort of organisation has a membership so witlessly unable to influence what its own paper says? One that is still much closer to the SWP in organisation and practice than they like to think, particularly when it comes to the matter of leaders and followers. Perhaps when Counter-Information described them as 'Leninist bootboys', they weren't a million miles from the truth.

Another feature of Red Action is that they are unable to accept, in any circumstances, that they may be wrong. They will argue they are right, and everyone else isn't, till the cows come home. Their favourite quote is how the Left is about as dangerous as a pond full of ducks. True, but for 'the Left' read 'everyone but Red Action' - their breathtakingly arrogant attitude is 'if only everyone else were like us ' Red Action also do a nice turn in hypocrisy. They've been slinging lies, smears and disinformation towards everyone else for many years, but they get very self-righteous and hot under the collar when the finger's pointed at them (see the editorial in RA#73 for details).

We could go on and on here, but there's little point: most people who've come into contact with this group know what they're like. Red Action, no doubt, will do their usual hatchet job in reply. Red Action have made their bed, now they must lie in it almost certainly alone.

IWCA

As the rest of the Left prove that change for them means no change at all, we should at least consider those who are presenting something a little different. One organisation worthy of note is the recently formed Independent Working Class Association, which came into existence in October 1995, with invites going out to all left groups to attend initial meetings. The IWCA's Declaration of Independence espouses sound, down-to-earth ideas on political organisation, it emphasises community and working class involvement and stresses the need for a radical alternative to Labour. The basic principle behind the IWCA was not what the working class can do for the IWCA, but what the working class can do for itself: this notion that ideas do not have to be given to people ready-packed in an ideology is itself a refreshing and positive step.

With its aim of working class power in working class areas, the IWCA's politics on the surface seem to fit in well with Class War's, and appear to have been taken in part from our own 1993 political statement Childhood's End. But Class War's response has been mixed - some groups and individuals did attend the initial meetings, while others didn't. Over the years we'd seen several unlikely alliances come and go on the left, and there seemed no guarantee that this one would be any different - especially since its main sponsor was Red Action.

Our attitude to Red Action has been made clear above, so we won't repeat ourselves here. Red Action had treated the anarchist movement with contempt for many years, so it seemed at best ironic (and at worst cynical and manipulative) that they seemed to be 'targeting' anarchist groups for involvement in the IWCA.

There has also been unease over Red Action using their dominant position within Anti-Fascist Action (AFA) to push the IWCA strongly upon AFA - particularly after years of Red Action opposing any broadening of AFA's limited brief. The danger is that if the IWCA splinters, then AFA's effectiveness could be compromised. In fact suspicions about the IWCA's independence and Red Action's agenda have already meant that some left and anarchist groups have withdrawn.

Were the cynics right? Well, not exactly. Various IWCA projects are up and running: in Newtown in Birmingham, for example, the anti-mugging initiative set up by the IWCA has formed the basis for a residents' association which is anti-police and anti-council, and is led by neither Red Action nor the IWCA. This is exactly the push for working class power that local Class War groups have been promoting for years. Perhaps the IWCA can evolve into a truly independent group that will enable working class militants to work together. Only time will tell.

Anarchy

The 'official' anarchist movement is pretty well unknown to most people in this country. In fact the organised anarchist groups are probably at their weakest since the mid-60s. The 'unofficial' anarchist movement appears to remain the same as ever with good publications out periodically (like Schnews), and outbreaks of headline direct action, e.g. Claremont, M41, Newbury etc.

It's hard to say anything good about the official anarcho groups. Dogmatism, egos, small-mindedness, sectarianism, feuding and a lack of ambition you name it, they've got it! Every group in Britain suffers from the above as well, so maybe we shouldn't be too hard. But hang on - these groups (including Class War) are part of a great historical tradition and part of a set of politics that can finally sort things out for the better. We hold the memory of past revolutions in Russia, Germany and Spain, of strikes, sit-ins, walk-outs and take-overs, of thousands who fought and gave their lives for their futures and all of ours. If we believe that we are the basis for a future revolutionary movement, and if we believe that the working class will make a revolution and that it can only do so with the knowledge of past struggles and with international connections, then we must do better.

We must accept that it is no good just holding a flame for past glories nor being self-satisfied in the knowledge that the SWP is led by a bunch of Trot wasters. If we are revolutionaries, it is our job to make revolution. And yes, there are going to be disagreements on how, but isn't that partly what makes us revolutionaries in the first place - a belief in the necessity in a society of diversity and debate as opposed to the neo-totalitarianism of all of the Left?

We could list every individual anarcho group, mention how small they are, and wonder why they can't see where they are going and why they think they're growing when they clearly are not. But this would mean falling into the same trap of snide sectarianism - that way lies perpetual irrelevance and continual defeat.

The 'unorganised' (but usually very organised) anarcho movement has enjoyed a relative resurgence over the last few years (although we hardly need to point out that they remain marginal). This movement can be divided into three areas: firstly, the notable anarcho presence in many local support and solidarity groups; secondly, the information groups like Schnews and Counter-Information; thirdly 'direct action' (DA) which has seen a major revival, essentially in support of environmental campaigns. All credit to this new wave of DA but few of the campaigns appeared to have a generalised political or theoretical basis. They appeared to be emotive reactions to single issues, however highly motivated and well-organised reactions. Those campaigns that did develop some sort of theory tended towards deep ecology. This lack of a political understanding of what they were fighting (and worse a collection of 'fluffy' anarcho-hippy ideas) led to isolation, in most cases, from those around them. Many protesters never linked what they were doing with the community but saw their struggle in terms of 'the earth'. However, others who did see the connections felt they could not run both a DA campaign and campaign locally, which is a fair point. Many DA groups also suffer both from the 'tyranny of structurelessness' (they are often as dominated by individuals and clichés as any Leninist party) and also from militarism - an obsession with secrecy, actions, the 'pigs' and the belief that commitment conquers all.

Comments

Postscript

Postscript from the "final" issue of Class War

Submitted by Farce on December 5, 2009

Sometimes you don't know whether to laugh or cry with Class War. Our most bitter rows have always been amongst ourselves, and the ones during the production of this paper are no exception. After six months of increasingly personalised arguments, the majority of London Class War have decided to part company with the rest of us and have gone their own way. We wish them luck. From the start, the members concerned were suspicious of the ideas expressed in this issue of the paper: while the overwhelming majority of the Federation see these ideas as an exciting way of moving forward, they saw them as a threat. In the end both sides realised that the situation had become unworkable and they decided to walk out. Ironically all this has come at a time when we are calling for an end to the often petty disputes that beset the anarchist scene.

Blame as always lies on both sides - we do not pretend that we have behaved like angels in pushing for our ideas. But in truth the dispute had been brewing for some time and a walk-out was probably the healthiest option. At the same time we are aware of no fundamental political differences between ourselves and the comrades who have left: in many ways the whole incident has simply strengthened our argument about the weakness of the Federation and the need to update our strategy. The spirit of this paper is that revolutionaries in this country have no choice but to find ways of working together. The dispute has obviously left wounds, but we hope that these will heal sooner rather than later.

Comments