towards federation anarchist conference

76 posts / 0 new
Last post
axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Mar 6 2013 06:13

I'll actually get to more points when I am not doing so on my phone and limited with time .. I'll approach this one first.

happyanarchy wrote:
The week-end before a workshop on Anarcho-sydicalism during the Brisbane Anarchist Summer School had 50-70+ people involved.

This is incorrect.

I was one of the people delegated to administer the anarcho syndicalism discussion at the summer school. There was around 30 people in attendance and most all of those were not anarcho syndicalists but wanting to find out more about it. The largest group of anarcho syndicalists present that made themselves known by such, were members of the IWA, from the ASF and the CNT.

Anarcho syndicalism is a method, it is not simply an idea someone holds. To call yourself anarcho syndicalist is to state you are using this methodology to work toward libertarian communism.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 6 2013 07:04

happyanarchy wrote:

Quote:
So the overwhelming majority of anarcho-sydicalists in Australia are not members of the ASF. A small proportion are members of the IWW. And a fact is that in Brisbane, most are in close touch within the Brisbane Solidarity Network. Being a network it is dynamic and more fluid.

So considering these facts, in light of your comment ..."Fuck the unaffiliated anarchists. Get in a group or give up. Organised anarchists can and should aim to exert influence over temporary organisation ..." I would say that statment actively demonstrates a degree of 'vandgardist politics'.

What facts do you refer to? You are wrong about anarcho-syndicalism. It refers to a method of orgainising that aims to replace permanently the state and capitalism with a free and equal society. The ultimate aim of anarcho-syndicalism is its own obsolescence. Anarcho-syndicalist refers to those who practice this method.

Taking a quote from Lumpen as a demonstration of vanguardism does not make it so. Lumpen is clearly urging anarchists to organise in a collective framework. Is it not a fair challenge to make?

Quote:
Not being 'vandguardist' means working with what exists on the ground, and build from the grassroots up with free association and mutual aid. From your statements, to me it seems you want to create an overarching organisation, so that you can put out 'public statements' on behalf of the anarchist 'movement'. And that either anarchists join, or "they can go and get fucked". Especially strange for a politics that emphasises the freedom of the individual, and their right to direct democracy.

Anarchism does not emphasise the freedom of the individual over and above a social responsiblilty. You are making an appeal to classic liberalist politics with your emphasis on freedom of the individual alone. As for direct democracy; where better to practice than an anarchist group that meets in assembly accessibile to all members?

Quote:
If you were really, honestly, serious about this, you would have spent the last 12 months making direct contact with as many anarchists accross the country as possible. Putting the date for the conference well ahead of time to allow as many people as possible to plan to attend. Creating a draft template for discussion, and even being general discussion online many months before hand to being nutting out various issues.

Where have you been? This has been an ongoing process since the conference was held in Melbourne in 2009. It was at that conference that an agreement was reached that, as a percursor to the founding of an anarchist federation there would be a co-operative effort to share skills and resources by producing a paper called 'Sedition'. You are not only sloppy with facts to the point of negligence, you are highly selective with them as well.

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Mar 6 2013 07:06
happyanarchy wrote:
Now let's not forget this is an organisation that not only publically claims to be a Federation, but also has the 'General Transport Workers Assembley' (which actually has no members)

This is yet another false claim by yourself.

If the ASF-GTWA had no members it would not have been able to be represent them at Fair Work Australia, where it is legally required to provide legal statements from members as to it being their representative body to even be heard.

* BTW it's General Transport Workers Association

Lumpen's picture
Lumpen
Offline
Joined: 11-02-08
Mar 6 2013 10:57
happyanarchy wrote:
…In light of your comment ..."Fuck the unaffiliated anarchists. Get in a group or give up. Organised anarchists can and should aim to exert influence over temporary organisation ..." I would say that statment actively demonstrates a degree of 'vandgardist politics'.

I stand by my statement. People committed to staying isolated and outside of groups do not require federation, but you'll note that MAC has done the courtesy of listening to their arguments anyway. Fuck them, though.

By your definition, any amount of initiative or organisation is vanguardist. This conference, being both organised and seizing initiative, allegedly "demonstrates a degree of 'vandgardist politics'". Given the anarchist hostility to Leninism and the vanguardist model of social change, I take it this is meant to be a pejorative description and not meant to have any actual merit.

happyanarchy wrote:
Not being 'vandguardist' means working with what exists on the ground, and build from the grassroots up with free association and mutual aid. From your statements, to me it seems you want to create an overarching organisation, so that you can put out 'public statements' on behalf of the anarchist 'movement'. And that either anarchists join, or "they can go and get fucked".

We exist. We are on the ground. We are a free association. We recognise that other groups are also of the same disposition. What MAC has proposed, and what I support, is these groups organise with each other on a permanent basis. There is no compulsion for us to wait for the horizon to meet us.

I was very explicit in stating that a federation consistent with anarchist practice only speaks for itself. I personally advocate an association that is consistent with this. There is no basis for your statement that I (or the group that I am in) wishes to speak on behalf of anyone. Given that it would take a deliberate misreading to state that I advocate the opposite, this is another pejorative. Name-calling is not especially persuasive.

What is correct is that I personally think that anyone who does not wish to join an anarchist group and federate can go get fucked. I'm willing to get t-shirts made with this message.

Quote:
If you were really, honestly, serious about this, you would have spent the last 12 months making direct contact with as many anarchists accross the country as possible.(etc)

We have been really, honestly and seriously discussing this since 2009 with groups with which we have affinity. There is no obligation for us to do otherwise.

I can't speak for the others in MAC, but I agree that a pre-circulated agenda and call for position papers would have been a better way to go. I think it would be accurate to say that those of us who support the move to the conference see this as an information-gathering exercise and survey of support.

I personally advocate for proposals for provisional associations and projects to test the waters and then confirm this organisation on an annual basis after that.

I'll let the ASF speak for themselves. From what I know your statements are factually incorrect and obviously motivated by personal hostility. In any case, your single, incorrect example is not emblematic of anything concerning.

ites's picture
ites
Offline
Joined: 10-02-11
Mar 6 2013 07:33
happyanarchy wrote:
Not being 'vandguardist' means working with what exists on the ground, and build from the grassroots up with free association and mutual aid. From your statements, to me it seems you want to create an overarching organisation, so that you can put out 'public statements' on behalf of the anarchist 'movement'. And that either anarchists join, or "they can go and get fucked". Especially strange for a politics that emphasises the freedom of the individual, and their right to direct democracy.

I don't know that it's vanguardist strictly speaking since that attributes a level of organisation and knowing what you're doing generally to this process that it doesn't appear to merit. Even more problematically than a vanguard organisation which is at least willing to speak its own name, what we see in the course of a single group attempting to set the agenda and the timeframe for this process is I would argue informal hierarchy, or personalties over politics.

The level of defensiveness reflected in the extent to which those concerned are willing to blacken the name of anyone who dares to contradict them too often and the time and energy they put into attempting to correct everyone else rather than communicate and discuss on the basis of a free and reciprocal exchange of ideas seems to me to be testament to that. Many of the anarchist groups in this country don't actually do very much because they spend a lot of the time you would expect them to be organising keeping the informal hierarchies intact, the proof of which is evidenced in the marginality and general (one is inclined to say utter) lack of influence of the anarchist ghetto.

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 6 2013 09:22

Maybe happyanarchy is confusing the X conference with the Brisbane Anarcho-Syndicalist Conference? But even then he is right about the small attendance on the 27th correct?

But all that is by the by. If people want to form a federation ( not my cup of tea) I can't see the point about arguing against it. But the line of division between federation/informal doesn't seem to actual be the line of division among anarchists on the East Coast any more ( at least as far as I can see as a non-anarchist) but between more one between 'old school' class struggle types and insurrectionist. At least that is my impression
cheers
Dave

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Mar 6 2013 10:29
With Sober Senses wrote:
Maybe happyanarchy is confusing the X conference with the Brisbane Anarcho-Syndicalist Conference? But even then he is right about the small attendance on the 27th correct?

Yes I think so, there was massive storms in Brisbane that led to flooding and hardly any one showed up for the conference. But this was kinda expected as we had contacted many people individually from all walks inviting them to the discussion and most were busy, but from what we can see there is very little Anarcho Syndicalist activity in Brisbane at all. We also did not invite hostile individualists. From my personal perspective I see there as being a lot of hard yards needed to put forward constistant, accurately portrayed anarcho syndicalism. There is a lot if misinformation/misunderstanding regarding what anarchism entails within the 'scene' that is projected by personalities. Individualist liberals that actively argue against anarchist organising as something that no one is ready for yet. To them it is always something in some utopian future. When anarcho syndicalists organise in the workplace, they are ore ready to try and disparage it than make any effort to get involved. Meanwhile they have their comfortable scene with no accountability to anyone. The issues of actually organising a society are something to think about "down the track". Which is very convenient as it means they are not held accountable to the assembly for their actions.

Quote:
But all that is by the by. If people want to form a federation ( not my cup of tea) I can't see the point about arguing against it.

On the contrary, if there is actual arguments to put forward by all means they should be. However it would save a lot of time if in doing so the people involved actually understood and were consistent in their position, and were not simply mudslinging.

I'm open to arguments against anarchist groups federating. I have yet to see one that holds any merit.

Solidarity!

Lumpen's picture
Lumpen
Offline
Joined: 11-02-08
Mar 6 2013 11:45
With Sober Senses wrote:
…The line of division between federation/informal doesn't seem to actual be the line of division among anarchists… but between more one between 'old school' class struggle types and insurrectionist.

It would seem so. There isn't any significant political differences amongst the various groupsicules that do exist, which is why I support an effort to dismiss needless division. I doubt any conversation on broader principles of organisation amongst existing groups would hold much interest for an insurrectionist. We might have to watch the MAC roller door to see what they think!

Ites wrote:
we see in the course of a single group attempting to set the agenda and the timeframe for this process is I would argue informal hierarchy, or personalties over politics.

The word you are looking for is initiative, and MAC is very open about it.

MAC Aims & Principles wrote:
Goals
M.A.C. aims to facilitate the establishment of a federation of anarchist groups. Source.

That is literally the opposite of informal. We will see if it is premature or not. Given that MAC plans to have one day to receive proposals and critiques from anyone and another to receive and distribute proposals from delegates, it is far from ensnaring anarchists into the gulag archipelago.

Like Axxs, I am open to other ideas. There are overwhelming benefits to federating imho, but it all depends on what others think and what they want to do. There are almost as many benefits in making and learning from mistakes if it comes to that.

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 7 2013 00:10
Quote:
On the contrary, if there is actual arguments to put forward by all means they should be. However it would save a lot of time if in doing so the people involved actually understood and were consistent in their position, and were not simply mudslinging.

I'm open to arguments against anarchist groups federating. I have yet to see one that holds any merit.

Well since you ask.....In short my opposition is similar to my opposition to how socialist groups organise - that the model that people draw on is one plucked from the realm of good ideas rather than arising from the actual conditions of class composition today. However if people actually end up in a room together under the label of 'Federation' and from there start to look at actual living conditions and go from there well fair play to them.

Quote:
Yes I think so, there was massive storms in Brisbane that led to flooding and hardly any one showed up for the conference

Hmmm.....no..... Considering how successful the Brisbane Anarchist Summer School was just a week before hand this is a bit of cop out. I don't know why people didn't go ( I am not a mind reader) and the weather may have played a role, probably the almost total lack of advertising didn't help but I don't think you should down play the level of antipathy in Brisbane felt towards the ASF by many anarchists and fellow travelers.

Now part of this has to do with what I will call here personal conflicts and I don't wish to comment on them because I am sure they are very difficult and painful and I have no wish to stir the pot, cause any upset or derail yet another thread.

But part of this antipathy is that at least with people I talk to no one really believes the claims around the Dominoes campaign. To the point that it has become something of a running joke. Now if we are wrong and this is actually the struggle that the ASF claim it to be then I think you at least need to know that the usual reply to our objections - you say 'Oh yes it is' - isn't actually convincing anyone and you perhaps need to think about that. Lugius' reaction to me on this thread certainly didn't help.
You also need to consider the history of Brisbane. Considering the damage that Brisbane's most famous anarchist caused through years and years of bullshit (including an old comrade losing his life savings) people up here are really sensitive about that stuff. At whilst I know that MAC and ASF are formally separate organisations since the same people are involved if you want this to be successful up here you really need to consider things beyond the weather.
I hope these comments are taken in a if not 'friendly' at least a comradely way
cheers
Dave

ites's picture
ites
Offline
Joined: 10-02-11
Mar 7 2013 05:41
Lumpen wrote:
The word you are looking for is initiative, and MAC is very open about it.

Ah okay, that's what you call it. I guess we'll just ignore any moves towards organising where MAC doesn't play a dominating role then, eg this, shall we? Initiatives are good as long as they're yours I always say.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 07:03
Quote:
I hope these comments are taken in a if not 'friendly' at least a comradely way
cheers
Dave

Do you not refer to yourself as a communist? Why would a communist be friendly or comradely towards anarchists?

I was in Brisbane on the 27th of January and never seen anything like that kind of weather, at least that not that kind of wind. An uprooted tree was blocking Boundary St. You're right, there was little advertising and it was cancelled at the last minute announce on FB page.

Quote:
should down play the level of antipathy in Brisbane felt towards the ASF by many anarchists and fellow travelers.

Who are you talking about? It feels like you are trying to give your own opinion greater weight by invoking public opinion.

Quote:
Now part of this has to do with what I will call here personal conflicts and I don't wish to comment on them because I am sure they are very difficult and painful and I have no wish to stir the pot, cause any upset or derail yet another thread.

You making a reference to an assault by a member of the IWW and BSN (I'm told) perpetrated against a member of this ASF. Unless you are prepared to condemn that (as LR from 4ZZZ did) then are you not complicit? If you want to stir the pot and derail this thread, start another thread.

Quote:
But part of this antipathy is that at least with people I talk to no one really believes the claims around the Dominoes campaign.

Whare are you talking to? Or again is it just you?

Quote:
You also need to consider the history of Brisbane. Considering the damage that Brisbane's most famous anarchist caused through years and years of bullshit (including an old comrade losing his life savings) people up here are really sensitive about that stuff. At whilst I know that MAC and ASF are formally separate organisations since the same people are involved if you want this to be successful up here you really need to consider things beyond the weather.

WTF? You're talking about BL right? Whose even more famous brother has a stadium named after him. What has this got to do with anything?

If you want to bag the ASF, go for it. But start another thread.

I fully expect a self-avowed communist to be hostile to an anarchist federation.

You post is full of hearsay and innuendo and consequently I'm not interested. If you have an argument to make, then make it.

If you don't believe the Domino's campaign is real, I don't feel any need to prove anything to you. You can take the ASF on trust or not. But without providing a skerric of proof with regard to ASF Brisbane trustworthiness it will remain only your opinion.

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 7 2013 07:32
Quote:
Do you not refer to yourself as a communist? Why would a communist be friendly or comradely towards anarchists?

Well libcom is a place where communists and anarchist seem to get on well. As is the zine Mutiny and I assume lots of other places too....(Some even have blogs together!) Indeed an anarchist comrade and I had coffee today and it was lovely. I haven't seen lumpen for years but last time we did I think we were both friendly and comradely with each other as we had a beer in a warehouse... as are we over facebook,.,its not some unique phenomena

Quote:
Who are you talking about? It feels like you are trying to give your own opinion greater weight by invoking public opinion.

This is from conversations with comrades in and around BSN. They can obviously speak for themselves, I am just giving my impression about why your event was a fizzer. An event axxs invited me to by the way so maybe you should ask him about why horrid communists like myself were included....

Quote:
WTF? You're talking about BL right?

Yes...and it means people here are pretty skeptical of claims that don't seem to gel with reality.

Quote:
If you don't believe the Domino's campaign is real, I don't feel any need to prove anything to you

Mate you aren't helping yourself here..... wall
cheers
Dave

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 07:31

Neither are you mate.

What the connection between Brian Laver and the MAC and what relevance does it have to this thread?

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 7 2013 07:40
Quote:
What the connection between XXXXXX (I don't like the guy but I am not about to post his name on the internet and the MAC and what relevance does it have to this thread?

All I am saying is that people are suspicious of big claims that don't seem to fit with what they see around them. This is I think is important in relation to axxs' point about why the ASF conference wasn't a smash hit. Obviously you think it isn't.... fine.
I don't think there is any relationship between said individual and MAC and I don't see where I have suggested that there is. I also know MAC and the ASF are separate groups...though since there is a cross over in participants I think it is understandable why they are often associated together
Personally I hope your federation goes well. I think we need political experimentation to find what works. I just think you should think about the reasons why this proposal is not generating heaps of excitement in Brisbane. A town where the group BSN ( and I am not a participant) has been a fairly interesting and involved project.
cheers
Dave

ites's picture
ites
Offline
Joined: 10-02-11
Mar 7 2013 07:47
With Sober Senses wrote:
Well libcom is a place where communists and anarchist seem to get on well. As is the zine Mutiny and I assume lots of other places too....

Give me the right kind of communist over the wrong kind of anarchist any day of the week.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 08:03
Quote:
This is from conversations with comrades in and around BSN. They can obviously speak for themselves, I am just given my impression about why your event was a fizzer. An event axxs invited me to by the way so maybe you should ask him about why horrid communists like myself were included....

I asked the question with reference to your assertion that the Domino's campaign is not real. Are you not being disingenuous?

You were invited so you could avail yourself of opportunity to engage face-to-face with members of the ASF with regard to any topic you like instead of sniping from behind a keyboard. According to you, the weather certainly didn't prevent you. You're an intellectual coward.

As I have said before, if you want to engage constructively on the topic of anarchist federation from an autonomous Marxist point of view, go for it!

If you want to put shit on the ASF, start a new thread.

You still need to explain your remarks with regard to BL and the MAC;

Quote:
WTF? You're talking about BL right?
Yes...and it means people here are pretty skeptical of claims that don't seem to gel with reality.

Instead of invoking the authority of public opinion, why don't you speak for yourself. What connection is there between BL and the MAC?

With regard to the Domino's campaign not being real, how would you explain the FWA commission acknowledging the ASF-IWA as a bargaining representative under the Act.

Don't be lazy - look at the Act and find the relevant sections. The FWA hearings at which ASF-IWA were acknowledged as bargaining representatives are a matter of public record. Come on, pull your finger out! Find it and then repeat your assertion that the Domino's campaign is not real.

If you have an argument against the ASF or the IWA, make it. On another thread.

I won't be holding my breath as in my experience Marxists are unable to come up with honest criticism of anarchism in general and anarcho-syndicalism in particular. They try to come across all libertarian while deliberately ignoring or distorting the history of anarchism.

If you were to accuse me of being an anarchist who is hostile to Marxism - I'd plead guilty! So spare me the Left Unity rubbish.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 08:14

With Sober Senses wrote:

Quote:
You also need to consider the history of Brisbane. Considering the damage that Brisbane's most famous anarchist caused through years and years of bullshit (including an old comrade losing his life savings) people up here are really sensitive about that stuff. At whilst I know that MAC and ASF are formally separate organisations since the same people are involved if you want this to be successful up here you really need to consider things beyond the weather.

then

Quote:
I don't think there is any relationship between said individual and MAC and I don't see where I have suggested that there is.

Bullshit, mate. It's true I don't have a PhD in semiotics but I know shit when I see it. You're attempting to link BL with MAC and the ASF. You are being dishonest.

Quote:
reasons why this proposal is not generating heaps of excitement in Brisbane. A town where the group BSN ( and I am not a participant) has been a fairly interesting and involved project.

But you post to the BSN list do you not? Any connection between a post on the BSN list calling for anyone interested in forming an anarchist group in Brisbane and the current rubbish you're posting here or is it complete coincidence?

Again, start a thread on whatever topic you like. But I'm interested in a discussion about anarchist federation here. Thanks, mate.

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 7 2013 08:18
Quote:
You were invited so you could avail yourself of opportunity to engage face-to-face with members of the ASF with regard to any topic you like instead of sniping from behind a keyboard. According to you, the weather certainly didn't prevent you. You're an intellectual coward.

I was in Tamworth. This distance prevented me. I told axxs as much. So be nice and say sorry.

Quote:
With regard to the Domino's campaign not being real, how would you explain the FWA commission acknowledging the ASF-IWA as a bargaining representative under the Act

But this isn't only what the ASF claims is happen. All I am saying is that the line we get from axxs and yourself of 'yes it is happening' -EVEN IF THAT IS TRUE - isn't very convincing. What I am talking about is the antipathy, the perception that comrades have - EVEN IF THAT PERCEPTION IS WRONG.

Once again good luck with the Federation though you may want to consider your approach.
cheers
Dave

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 7 2013 08:20
Quote:
Bullshit, mate. It's true I don't have a PhD in semiotics but I know shit when I see it. You're attempting to link BL with MAC and the ASF. You are being dishonest.

And no I am not. I am explaining why people are suspicious of grand claims.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 08:21
Quote:
experimentation to find what works. I just think you should think about the reasons why this proposal is not generating heaps of excitement in Brisbane.

Ok. Cue thinking music.

Now, why aren't Marxists in Brisbane not exactly thrilled about the prospect of an anarchist federation? Hmmmm....... Um...........Hang on! Ive got it!

It's because Rod Laver's brother is a cunt!

With No Senses

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 08:26

Which people, mate? (Aside from happyanarchy)

You are invoking the opinion of others to support your own assertion. Why noy just own you're own opinions?

Why not just say like most other politicians do when they invoke the authority of public opinion;

Australians are suspicious of the motives of the ASF and MAC and (insert current threat here)

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 08:27
Quote:
I was in Tamworth. This distance prevented me. I told axxs as much. So be nice and say sorry.

But you knew the weather in West End? Yeah?

All Australians agree the weather in Brisbane is fine

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 7 2013 08:30
Quote:
But this isn't only what the ASF claims is happen. All I am saying is that the line we get from axxs and yourself of 'yes it is happening' -EVEN IF THAT IS TRUE - isn't very convincing. What I am talking about is the antipathy, the perception that comrades have - EVEN IF THAT PERCEPTION IS WRONG.

Mate, it's a matter of public record. If you and your 'comrades' find the truth is unconvincing perhaps you need to ask yourself why.

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 7 2013 08:37
Quote:
But you knew the weather in West End? Yeah?

Well I do live there.... Jesus wept...

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Mar 7 2013 08:48
With Sober Senses wrote:
All I am saying is that people are suspicious of big claims that don't seem to fit with what they see around them. This is I think is important in relation to axxs' point about why the ASF conference wasn't a smash hit.

I have responded in a new thread here so as to allow this thread to keep on topic.

Lumpen's picture
Lumpen
Offline
Joined: 11-02-08
Mar 7 2013 11:28

So, um, who is Brian Laver and why should we worry about him?

Talk of the ASF is a distraction from the topic at hand. Presumably the ASF would not join any local anarchist federation. It has one up on any theoretical local association by being part of a functioning international one.

Is it really that big a deal to want to organise formally with other anarchist groups?

With Sober Senses wrote:
I am explaining why people are suspicious of grand claims.

What are you defining as a "grand claim"? That, contrary to the claims of happyanarchy and yourself, the ASF did something half-way decent? That they took a leadership role in a small industrial dispute ignored by the SDA (the SD-fucking-A!)? If so, we are at odds on what constitutes a grand claim.

The question can be put back on you; why are you diminishing their modest achievements? If it is because the general public is overwhelmingly apathetic toward anarchism and the ASF as evidenced by the cancelled ASF congress, I can't imagine how they feel about obscure variants of Marxism that had its heyday in the early 2000s (oh yeah, I just went there laugh out loud ).

My point is, qualitative claims of achievement or levels of participation by the workers are useless without any system to quantify them. By ASF standards, it's easy to see why they are happy with their efforts and they are open about it. From what I gather of yours, you do not, but it's more difficult to see why. I put it to you that, aside from the irrelevance of the discussion in this thread, you are unlikely to get much agreement from within the ASF when you fail to adequately explain your framework.

The only relevance to the ASF is happyanarchy stating, on a factually inaccurate basis, that the ASF is emblematic of any move to organise amongst extant anarchist groups and does not have active members. It does not have much relevance to the thread in any case. It is evidently untrue.

Ites wrote:
I guess we'll just ignore any moves towards organising where MAC doesn't play a dominating role then, eg this, shall we? Initiatives are good as long as they're yours I always say.

I've referred to it several times in this thread. I stated that it should be considered as a valid proposal on equal footing with previous discussions. I met informally with one of the people taking the (other) initiative today and expressed support for their efforts. I do not see it as counterposed to MAC – why would anyone? I look forward to seeing what they have to say and working in solidarity with them. I'm pleased that more anarchist groups seem to be forming. In what sense is this "ignoring" it? That isn't a rhetorical question. Explain how you came to this conclusion, or withdraw it.

FWIW, this thread has helped clarify some things and sharpen some arguments. It would be good if the personal attacks and axe-grinding was stopped, though. They are a pointless distraction.

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Mar 7 2013 22:38

Hi Lumpen I'll respond on the other thread
cheers
Dave

ites's picture
ites
Offline
Joined: 10-02-11
Mar 8 2013 10:26
Lumpen wrote:
I've referred to it several times in this thread. I stated that it should be considered as a valid proposal on equal footing with previous discussions. I met informally with one of the people taking the (other) initiative today and expressed support for their efforts. I do not see it as counterposed to MAC – why would anyone? I look forward to seeing what they have to say and working in solidarity with them. I'm pleased that more anarchist groups seem to be forming. In what sense is this "ignoring" it? That isn't a rhetorical question. Explain how you came to this conclusion, or withdraw it.

Where? Why would anyone indeed? It's very clear from a cursory examination of the anarchist milieu that it's perfectly possible for authoritarian tendencies to arise that seek to polarise it by demonising those who are regarded as threats to it and by invoking the logic of 'you're either with us or you're with the enemies of anarchism.' This should not be controversial to anyone who has any practical experience of it and to play innnocent and unawares in that respect is to my mind to be complicit in perpetuating it.

Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Mar 12 2013 02:37

Any anarchist federation would require some basic ideas upon which it would be founded. Please find below some links for comparison;

http://mac.anarchobase.com/about/

http://jura.org.au/files/jura/WhyAnarchism_0.pdf

http://asf-iwa.org.au/

Contrast and compare for difference and commonality.

Also worth a look for ideas about federative organisation and decision-making processes are the ASF statutes on the conducy of a Congress (Article 7.B)

ites's picture
ites
Offline
Joined: 10-02-11
Mar 15 2013 06:29
Lugius wrote:
Any anarchist federation would require some basic ideas upon which it would be founded.

There's basic and then there's vague, particularly where practical strategies are concerned. The ASF statement is the better of the three and at that only to the extent that it borrows heavily from the IWW Preamble.

Anarchy is only relevant to the extent that it provides a means for people to develop their capacity for self-activity, for thinking and acting for themselves, through direct action. This is to be contrasted with the state, the pinnacle of all alienated social relationships, and the autocratic hierarchies characteristic of capitalism.

To say then as MAC does that "The concept of individual human freedom lies at the heart of anarchist philosophy" is meaningless, because free market capitalism and capitalist democracy also claim the same concept for themselves. Why should anyone put themselves out by getting involved in the anarchist milieu when on a rhetorical level at least capitalist democracy offers more or less the same thing? 'Illegitimate forms of authority" is likewise subjective and could just as easily mean the autocracy of perpetual monarchies. If you're needing a reason to go to the trouble of sticking your neck out by embracing anarchism you need a good reason, and no meaningful distinction that might aid the formation of one is made here that I can see.

For this to work you would need something more along the lines of "The concept of individual human freedom lies at the heart of anarchist philosophy, and that is why we oppose the wage system which has been based on coercion and economic monopoly since the days the peasants were booted off the land and forced into the cities to be deprived of control over the product of their labour."

This to my mind actually demonstrates seeking "to maximise the ability of individuals to live freely, in the absence of the arbitrary constraints imposed by illegitimate forms of authority" if not to say attempting to "oppose all forms of domination and exploitation, and work, through both individual and collective struggle, to subvert all social structures based on these practices."

If actions speak louder than words than actually doing what you're talking about rather than just talking about it would naturally make a far greater impression — if you care more of course about being active as opposed to being seen to be active, which are arguably by no means the same thing.

Topic locked