Trust

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
Molecatcher
Offline
Joined: 8-05-10
May 27 2010 22:09
Trust

As your organisation appears to be open and flexible, with what seems to be a minimum membership criteria, do you feel your membership are trustworthy and genuine? Can you be sure that your internal information doesnt get leaked? This is a genuine question btw. This question equally applies to other groups such as the Solidarity Federation.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
May 28 2010 10:39

There's absolutely no guarantees we can make. We try our hardest. But if we let our (real) fears of the security apparatus take over, they will have succeeded and we will be paralysed.

gypsy
Offline
Joined: 20-09-09
May 29 2010 15:52
Molecatcher wrote:
As your organisation appears to be open and flexible, with what seems to be a minimum membership criteria, do you feel your membership are trustworthy and genuine? Can you be sure that your internal information doesnt get leaked? This is a genuine question btw. This question equally applies to other groups such as the Solidarity Federation.

No-one can be sure about anything.

swabb
Offline
Joined: 31-05-10
May 31 2010 22:47

Perhaps one can't be completely sure, but one has a duty to be pretty sure.
The open source software community uses the web of trust Wikipedia, Web of Trust to reduce the exposure to, and impact from, malign elements. It looks to me like we could be doing more to emulate these largely self-organizing groups which have come together over the internet to further our own aims.
I feel I've said too much. wink

action_now
Offline
Joined: 16-02-08
Jun 15 2010 15:52

With abit of a surge of interest in radical movements lately by the security services, I reckon it would be well advised to bring in abit more caution into the recruitment of new members, though of course this is all down to the disgression on the individual group conponents of the Fed. But since infiliteration will effect the whole organisation, I'd stress that this needs to be looked into if you're going to pose any effective coordination of opposition to the state and capital. However, this is less likely to matter if the body continues to act like a propaganda machine.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Jun 15 2010 15:57

Quite simply, it's impossible to completely avoid infiltration by state assets, even becoming a cladestine organisation with recruitment based on friendship groups (i.e. becoming completely closed off and inneffective) is no guarantee to any really determined infiltrator. We do the security services' job for them by worrying too much about this stuff.

action_now
Offline
Joined: 16-02-08
Jun 15 2010 16:11
madashell wrote:
Quite simply, it's impossible to completely avoid infiltration by state assets, even becoming a cladestine organisation with recruitment based on friendship groups (i.e. becoming completely closed off and inneffective) is no guarantee to any really determined infiltrator. We do the security services' job for them by worrying too much about this stuff.

I'm not suggesting that there's a sure fire way to avoid infilteration, nor suggesting clandestine groups. Only suggesting more caution be given in an organisation that has positions which contain personal information about known anarchists, I'm sure that you know how much that can hinder an organisation with revolutionary aspirations?
Anyway, as the Galleanisti showed in the USA during the crackdown on unions, the affinity group structure can be more effective than formal organisation in avoiding any clampdowns, but that is a different subject. I was just making a suggestion to comrades based upon my own experiences with the AFed and other formal and informal organsing shells.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Jun 15 2010 17:09
action_now wrote:
Anyway, as the Galleanisti showed in the USA during the crackdown on unions, the affinity group structure can be more effective than formal organisation in avoiding any clampdowns, but that is a different subject. I was just making a suggestion to comrades based upon my own experiences with the AFed and other formal and informal organsing shells.

To be perfectly frank, I don't think that the affinity groups model is a particularly useful one. The groups seem to always end up incredibly inneffective and elitist.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Jun 15 2010 17:28
madashell wrote:
action_now wrote:
Anyway, as the Galleanisti showed in the USA during the crackdown on unions, the affinity group structure can be more effective than formal organisation in avoiding any clampdowns, but that is a different subject. I was just making a suggestion to comrades based upon my own experiences with the AFed and other formal and informal organsing shells.

To be perfectly frank, I don't think that the affinity groups model is a particularly useful one. The groups seem to always end up incredibly inneffective and elitist.

and judging by the US ALF/ELF, infilitrated to fuck

Farce's picture
Farce
Offline
Joined: 21-04-09
Jun 15 2010 17:42
action_now wrote:
Anyway, as the Galleanisti showed in the USA during the crackdown on unions, the affinity group structure can be more effective than formal organisation in avoiding any clampdowns, but that is a different subject.

Not convinced by that claim.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Jun 15 2010 18:01

Man, what is it about insurrectionists that makes them so desperately egocentric as to think they're a real threat? The roz who got the gig being an anarcho must love it, there's fuckall to do or report. As long as you enjoy ketamine, it must be a blast!

action_now
Offline
Joined: 16-02-08
Jun 15 2010 18:33
madashell wrote:
To be perfectly frank, I don't think that the affinity groups model is a particularly useful one. The groups seem to always end up incredibly inneffective and elitist.

That's a generalisation that can be levelled at federations and other formal organisations. However, this is not the point of my post, where I didn't advocate an affinity group structure anyway.
Ineffective in this case is a very subjective term, as groups usually complete their task, making them effective and if the tactics deployed are ineffective, try something else. Learning through struggle is a major point of informal organisation. But elitist? How?

Joseph Kay wrote:
and judging by the US ALF/ELF, infilitrated to fuck

I wouldn't look to ALF/ELF actions as an explemary use of the affinity tactic, and this time of organisation and uses of different types of organisation are ever changing and being contributed to in a fluid fashion.

Farce wrote:
Not convinced by that claim.

Which claim? The recorded fact that Galleanisti continued their lectures and acts of sabotage against the bosses while the syndicalist unions were getting busted? In fact a member of AFed and ASN (Anarchist Studies Network) mentioned this, on a piece on insurrectionism.

Caiman del Barrio wrote:
Man, what is it about insurrectionists that makes them so desperately egocentric as to think they're a real threat? The roz who got the gig being an anarcho must love it, there's fuckall to do or report. As long as you enjoy ketamine, it must be a blast!

What? Anyway, I wouldn't say that any insurrectionist believes that they, themselves, or their group are any real material threat to the status quo. However you could be talking about sabotage which can have a direct effect on businesses, opposed to an actual threat which would have to see the replication of such activites and self organisation among our class to beable to intervene effectively in the workplace aswell as in the streets of capital.

I find this text useful in speaking how formalism and informalism can be complimentary- http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=5319

I'm surprised at the hostility shown in this thread when all I was doing was making a friendly suggestion. Nevermind.

Farce's picture
Farce
Offline
Joined: 21-04-09
Jun 15 2010 21:03
action_now wrote:
Farce wrote:
Not convinced by that claim.

Which claim? The recorded fact that Galleanisti continued their lectures and acts of sabotage against the bosses while the syndicalist unions were getting busted? In fact a member of AFed and ASN (Anarchist Studies Network) mentioned this, on a piece on insurrectionism.

I'm not convinced that they actually managed to achieve that much more. The IWW survives to this day, albeit in incredibly weakened form - how long did the Galleanisti last? Not being members of a formal org certainly didn't do anything to protect Sacco or Vanzetti. Obviously, formal organisations are vulnerable to repression as well, but I think it's a lot easier for them to re-establish themselves at the end of periods of repression, whereas completely underground groups will find it harder to grow again, while still not being immune to infiltration and repression.

Quote:
I find this text useful in speaking how formalism and informalism can be complimentary- http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=5319

I'm surprised at the hostility shown in this thread when all I was doing was making a friendly suggestion. Nevermind.

Yeah, I don't deny that both formal and informal organisations are necessary - I've worked in both, I'm just not convinced that informal ones are that much better at surviving clampdowns. I think the only really hostile post in this thread was the last one from Caiman, all the other replies have been pretty measured.

gypsy
Offline
Joined: 20-09-09
Jun 16 2010 06:48
madashell wrote:
Quite simply, it's impossible to completely avoid infiltration by state assets, even becoming a cladestine organisation with recruitment based on friendship groups (i.e. becoming completely closed off and inneffective) is no guarantee to any really determined infiltrator. We do the security services' job for them by worrying too much about this stuff.

This is so true. Also the state infiltrators will probably be the ones who people least expect. As they have been trained in espionage etc.

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Jun 16 2010 08:57

All right! I own up- the state asset is me. All these years I ;ve been working to get people enmeshed in the web of the secret services.

gypsy
Offline
Joined: 20-09-09
Jun 16 2010 09:01
Battlescarred wrote:
All right! I own up- the state asset is me. All these years I ;ve been working to get people enmeshed in the web of the secret services.

hehe i was thinking of joining afed lucky I didnt send away my application! All along it was you.

action_now
Offline
Joined: 16-02-08
Jun 16 2010 16:26

Everyone knows the old guard are informants who created AFed to ensare fiesty young firebrands! eek

JoeMaguire's picture
JoeMaguire
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Jun 17 2010 07:52
Quote:
Anyway, as the Galleanisti showed in the USA during the crackdown on unions, the affinity group structure can be more effective than formal organisation in avoiding any clampdowns, but that is a different subject. I was just making a suggestion to comrades based upon my own experiences with the AFed and other formal and informal organsing shells.

Wasn't the problem with the IWW its complacency in being repressed, and the tactics it tried to use to counter the repression crucial rather than simply its method of organising?

Molecatcher
Offline
Joined: 8-05-10
Jun 17 2010 09:01

Battlescarred wrote:

All right! I own up- the state asset is me. All these years I ;ve been working to get people enmeshed in the web of the secret services.

Indeed, the police even address you by name on demo's!!!!!!!!!!

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Jul 2 2010 16:25
Battlescarred wrote:

All right! I own up- the state asset is me. All these years I ;ve been working to get people enmeshed in the web of the secret services.

Molecatcher wrote:
Indeed, the police even address you by name on demo's!!!!!!!!!!

two massive clues!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Farce's picture
Farce
Offline
Joined: 21-04-09
Jul 2 2010 17:50
action_now wrote:
Everyone knows the old guard are informants who created AFed to ensare fiesty young firebrands! eek

The conspiracy goes deeper than that, I heard that Bakunin and Kropotkin were actually working for the Okhrana all along.

unsacred's picture
unsacred
Offline
Joined: 27-08-10
Nov 5 2010 22:17

As far as the truth is concerned there is only one way out. We, the working class, must relinquish power over each other on a personal as well as a political level in terms of race, gender, sexuality, health, ability and age.
Basta!
Basta!
Basta!
Basta!
Mr. T
False Synergy
Of Mass Consciousness

Nationalism The State

Reactionaries Reductionism

Hierarchy