workplace resistance groups

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
booeyschewy
Offline
Joined: 18-10-06
Nov 8 2006 21:18
workplace resistance groups

can someone find me this article? I can't find it anywhere and have been looking for a while.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 23:07

Which article is this? There's a bit about workplace resistance groups in the 'Industrial' section of our manifesto Beyond Resistance.

Quote:
Obviously, what is emerging in an alternative workers movement which is both economic and social. Revolutionaries need to give thought to the question of how this should be structured. The AF has discussed whether the establishment of a permanent support groups network is a good idea, as the matter has been raised by workers. We should be wary of establishing any permanent structures, useful though they may seem in the short term. They may become as paralysed by bureaucracy as the unions, have to have full-time or paid workers, be prey to leftist take-over, or worst of all, have limited resources and have to decide which struggles to allocate them to and which to neglect. Not least, if they are permanent, then the State can attack them.

What is needed is the growth of a new culture of economic resistance without a permanent structure but able to produce high levels of militant activity as and when it is needed. this is not to say that there should be no on-going radical work. Far from it. We believe that, even when not officially in dispute, workers should establish semi-secretive (but never elitist) non-permanent 'workplace resistance' groups. These have been established by Revolutionaries in some industries have in the past, with some success. Their secrecy and lack of permanent structure means that their members cannot be identified, victimised or bought off by management, and they can concentrate on action and theory, not on self-perpetuation. Such groups must not seek to be alternative unions. They must be anti-capitalist, anti-company, anti-union and anti-party political and have no respect for legality. They should advocate class war and practise direct action to achieve their objectives. Such groups would have a propaganda function (pushing resistance and rebellion, slagging management, attacking trade and alternative unionism, advocating go-slows, non-cooperation, sabotage and unofficial action, mass sick-days etc.) and an active function (co-ordinating such activity in practice).

These groups will probably be initiated by revolutionaries, such as AF members, but they will be made up of any one wishing to take effective action against the bosses. Class fighters of all kinds will be involved - anyone who can be trusted in fact. In times of greatest anger in the workplace they might include everyone working there and their strength will be in mass participation. At other times, smaller groups will adopt radical tactics (vandalism, sabotage etc. to hurt the bosses' pocket and intimidation of scabs and managers, for example). The effectiveness of their action will encourage more people to get involved. Their actions must be determined by active mass participation in decision making and not become a battle ground for politicised cliques. Their networks of support will extend into the community, into other workplaces, and into the revolutionary movement.

booeyschewy
Offline
Joined: 18-10-06
Nov 8 2006 23:41

I've seen that one. For some reason I thought there was an article that called for them and elaborated on experience around such. I know that it is referenced as being in this one issue of the Northeastern Anarchist, but then isn't actually available.

http://flag.blackened.net/af/online/nefac_interview.html

"AF: Well, you printed our strategy on workplaces in the last issue of your magazine ["Workplace Resistance Groups"; NEA#5]."

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 8 2006 23:46
booeyschewy wrote:
I've seen that one. For some reason I thought there was an article that called for them and elaborated on experience around such. I know that it is referenced as being in this one issue of the Northeastern Anarchist, but then isn't actually available.

http://flag.blackened.net/af/online/nefac_interview.html

"AF: Well, you printed our strategy on workplaces in the last issue of your magazine ["Workplace Resistance Groups"; NEA#5]."

Can you not get hold of that issue of NEA?

Edit: I see, the issue is online, but the article doesn't appear to be there confused

booeyschewy
Offline
Joined: 18-10-06
Nov 9 2006 04:11

Yeah that's the weird thing. Maybe it was purged! wink just kidding. Does someone inside the AF have a copy? I'd like to use it for an internal discussion piece.

little_brother's picture
little_brother
Offline
Joined: 30-01-06
Nov 9 2006 12:36

It's a short piece. I searched on first sentence of my hard copy and found the entire thing here (last item in thread):
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=05/01/06/7640998

workplace resistance groups, by Anarchist Federation (UK)
North Eastern Anarchist #5, fall/winter 2002, page 20

"Whether unionized or non-unionized, the idea of resistance groups in your workplace may seem a long way from reality (especially in the current social climate), but this is a goal we need to be moving towards.

Obviously, if such a thing is unrealistic where you work and would only quickly get you sacked then it would be silly to advocate it (unless you don’t mind getting sacked). For others though, it might seem a plausible possibility, especially if you have been involved in some ongoing dispute or there is a degree of anger and discontent.

Such groups must not seek to be alternative unions; they must be anti-capitalist, anti-company and act outside of the union’s structures and all political parties. They should advocate class war and practice direct action to achieve their objectives and have no respect for legality. Such groups have a propaganda function (pushing resistance and rebellion, slagging management, attacking union bureaucrats, advocating go-slows, non-cooperation, sabotage, unofficial action, mass sick days, etc.) and an active function (i.e. actually doing or trying to organize for what they advocate). They would have to be semi-secret (for obvious reasons).

Obviously, they shouldn’t be limited to revolutionaries or anarchists only; they are intended for angry people who basically want to fight management and the bosses by the most effective means. People don’t have to call themselves revolutionaries to be good class fighters and potential revolutionaries. The important thing is that such groups have no official dealings with the union (even though members might be in the union) and have no pretensions of becoming an alternative union. Their aims should be to hammer the company as effectively as possible (a bit like a “hit squad”) and link up with other similar groups (if or where they exist).

Such resistance groups may operate in a particular workplace or may be a national grouping of revolutionaries and rebels based around a particular industry or line of work."