Glasgow Anarchist Dayschool

104 posts / 0 new
Last post
redyred
Offline
Joined: 20-02-04
Oct 31 2004 17:09
henry wrote:
I will just repeat my last statement about revol68.

HE IS A RACIST HOMPHOBE AND ANTI ISLAMIC!

look up the past posts if you don't believe me. Is that clear enough?

No. He's criticised Islamic fundamentalism. Problem?

Quote:
And as for the stuff about 'negative shit'; redyred, bullshitboy, revol68, have come on this thread without one positive thing to say.

We tore apart other peoples' bullshit theories with coherent arguments. Oh no! Really we should respect each others opinions, no matter how much they contradict ours, and learn to love one another.

Quote:
Also to Nick Durie, "Couldn't agree more with you on that one but i think you have to be a bit more sensitive."

Dear Nick, I don't want Bullshitboy's sensitivity. He can critise my opinions until he is blue in the face, because his opinion does not matter a fuck to me. He does not have opinions. He is full of rheteric and quotes, he's a fuckin talkin Anarchist dictionary.

Wipe away some of the rabid foam and actually look at what you're saying.

Quote:
I mean, how are we going to attract people to our movement with statements like "Really we need to be developing our ideas in relation to actually exisiting class struggle, building up the resources of our movement and increasing our credibility and relevance of our ideas in actual working class struggle."

Ask the average working person what has more relevence to their life: Struggles to achieve better pay, better conditions at work, a fairer system of benefit provision and ultimately managing production for need rather than profit OR chaining yourself to trees, setting up communes abandoned manor houses and bleating on about how CCTV cameras are "the secret state, man"...

Quote:
If he can't expand on that, or offer practical examples, folk with no political experience are just going to shake their head and walk away and go back to watching popstars, or whatever.

... if you ever actually meet a member of the working class, that is

Quote:
You also state, after dismissing me as a madman, that, "I think the anarchist movement only has a chance if it starts to get capital and resources together, works at the grassroots/taproots and links in with other folks struggles, and also avoids dogma."

So by capital you mean we should continue to be part of the capital system. And all so-called communes and anarchist communities that are set up will continue to be integrated into the capitalist system. Your ideas are gradualist.

Well if you want to build a campaign on good intentions and recycled toilet paper, good luck. The rest of us will continue to make some use out of the capitalist system in order to build the fight against it. And who said anything about communes? That's your department.

Quote:
My idea, and i don't think it is mad, is about ripping ourselves away from the capitalist system and directly challenging the state and all state conventions. Off course it would not work, because in this country there are not enough people in the country with the belief that you can turn ghettoes into utopias.

Until then we will continue to be anarchists in thought but not in deed.

Exactly, so why bother? Actually it's not about the majority of people not believing in them (although they're right not to). It's because you can't build a post capitalist society by setting up little idealised spaces outside of capitalism. The truth is, to most of us your communes and "free spaces" just come across as elitist, alienating and impractical. The only way you can overturn the capitalist economic system is from within. The oppresion of the capitalist system is structured around labour - so it is only through labour that it can be defeated.

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Oct 31 2004 17:53

Small communities don't work for corporations. Are you seriously knocking legitimate aspirations to disengage from the global capitalist system, on the grounds that this makes us better off than those in endentured servitude to corporations? We ain't stopping anyone following suit, so how is that elitist? Our labour is a resource for their agendas. You want to give them that resource under more favourable conditions. We advocate denying them it's use, and using it for ourselves.

If you change it from within, you sow the seeds of its sucessor at the same time. Revolutions revolve, and you find yourself back where we started. We have a viable defence against globalisation and you object because you want to re-negotiate the conditions of everyone's slavery !!!

What you describe is an urban nightmare. I don't care how the machine is run. If it's running still, we are no better off. You are talking about wrestling the driver from the controls, even though he's heavily armed. I'm talking about slipping out of the emergency exit when we can safely do so, and walking. I may be stranded on the highway, but I'm alive, and responsibl;e for my own wellbeing. Your plan almost certainly leads to a hideous bus crash. You are willing to endanger others lives in a wreckless move, while ignoring the reasoned objections of others.

Chances are, that if your plan suceeded, someone like you you would then get in the driver seat, do a U turn, and start driving as eraticly as the previous guy.

If capitalism is structured through labour, then see to the needs of your community, and let the lack of our labour wither it on the vine. Why organise labour? For who's benefit? You're talking about organising labour to defeat capitalism, then what? Put us all to work for some other system? How about leaving us to make our own decisions about what's the best use of our labour. We'd all come to the obvious conclusion that it's best spent here in our communities.

Of course, if the revolutionary anarcho-comunist revolutionary council decide we need arms factories and armies to defeat the last vestiges of capitalism, then we'll all be organised thusly. (For the greater good brother.)

We want out. Isn't THAT what it's all about? If you want to radically re-arrange the deckchairs, go ahead, but don't expect us to sit in them.

Deezer
Offline
Joined: 2-10-04
Nov 1 2004 10:43

revol68 a racist and a homophobe? The crackpots claiming this are f**king wankers!

This startled me a bit particularly as most of it had been posted over the space of a day that saw myself and others including revol68 participating in a carnival and rally against racism, in Belfast. Later that evening revol was off to see the cheeky girls at a Belfast gay bar with a crowd of his mates that includes gays and lesbians.

I mean what the fuck, he can be a bit of a pain a times (like most people, myself included) but he is NOT a racist or homophobe. And remember this follows straight on from the same people cracking jokes about how he had an anal fixation and must therefore be gay himself. This really is the worst sort of bullshit behaviour and something I'd maybe expect from some juvenille eejits who'd lost an argument but not from adults.

I'll deal with all the other crap when I have more time. Actually was working on a post in response to henrys request for examples of what i was talking about but as my opinion doesn't count for shit whats the fuckin' point?

circle A red n black star

bandu
Offline
Joined: 24-10-04
Nov 1 2004 14:02

This thread has become spiteful. Certain individuals seem hellbent in attacking the Scottish anarchists. I also think the Belfast experience can't be compared to the Glasgow experience, since if you try to apply direct action or grassroots organising in that hostile environment you are likely going to antagonise the Loyalist/Republican terror groups, and the growing racist movements that have recently been targeting asylum seekers and Chinese.

Although debate from all quarters should be encouraged I think the Belfast lads would be better concentrating their energies on their own struggle, instead of stirring the wooden spoon in the Glasgow/ Scottish debate.

I would like to try and offer some constructive suggestions on the issue of occupying land and property.

I sometimes help out the green party on issues like protecting Green spaces. As you will know a developer spots a piece of disused land and decides to put up a carpark, or a housing complex, or a mobile phone mast on it.

The application goes to the planning department, and this allows any member of the public to view the application. Once the application becomes public through local papers or other methods, local activists, green party activists, NGOs, and other concerned individuals organise by writing letters, or collecting signatures for a petition.

If however, the developers manage to get the application accepted, then the next obvious step in blocking the developers is through direct action. That is by occupying the spaces, buildings within the area to be developed. I know that in some parts of Glasgow activists at great risk to themselves have erected tents in areas to be developed. And there has been talk of occupying and taking over buildings at another site.

Although not exactly a autonomous community, the action itself does reach out in a communual level, to locals concerned about the development and lack of democracy involved in planning applications. These locals show their solidarity by supplying food and other necessities.

I think actions like that positive in that they help challenge the distorted view of activists in the press.

Ocuppying property and land has always been a vital tactic in any anarchist struggle, protecting green spaces is a positive example of how that tactic can be used.

cantdocartwheels's picture
cantdocartwheels
Offline
Joined: 15-03-04
Nov 1 2004 14:07
revol68 wrote:
i really hate anarchists and their fucking get free quick schemes! Wouldn't mind but the schemes are even less funny than the "Only Fools and Horses Christmas Specials". Im off to join the islamists in iraq with cantdoanythingbutoffercackhandedoutdatedleninistantiimperialistrhetoric.

i rerally wish that actually was my username

Captain Jack Fury
Offline
Joined: 1-11-04
Nov 1 2004 14:17

After reading some more of this forum I reckon revol isnae a racist homophobe....he's just a bit of a fud.

bolt ya rockets!

cantdocartwheels's picture
cantdocartwheels
Offline
Joined: 15-03-04
Nov 1 2004 14:28
Quote:
I'd lay out a system of human interaction for you. It involves accepting that cities were a bad idea, and setting a maximum group number of 256 people

where do you get your mad ideas from? my guess is probabaly

john

Deezer
Offline
Joined: 2-10-04
Nov 2 2004 00:46

Hello again;

Right, I am not intent on attacking Scottish anarchists. I am intent on countering nationalist ideas and off the wall nonsense. That does not mean I support the status quo, as an anarchist I oppose all states. In the specific context I find myself in that means Westminster, the Dail and, if it is ever up and running again any devolved administration at Stormont.

Speaking of off the wall nonsense nuclearcivvy cited the cellular structures adopted by intelligence agencies and terrorists as positive examples of the use of cell structures, while arguing we should base our society and inter-relationships on such structures, he then moved the goal posts in his argument and added other examples of cell structures after I'd dealt with some pretty basic problems with these. On top of that I responded to his assertion that cities had forced rural societies, this was clearly written in relation to the societies we inhabit here and now, into mere subsistence farming in order to support them by asking if we still had subsistence farming. As we (in Scotland or Northern Ireland, or England or Wales or the Irish Republic, or Europe...) clearly don't he shifted his argument again to go on about subsistence farming in Babylon. So there ya go, cities, the source of all our problems have forced Babylon into subsistence farming in order to keep all the cities of the world afloat. Right.

Henry, well heres some more "bullshit" for you. I'm 33, I've been an anarchist (of the commie class struggle variety) since I was about 18. I was working class before I 'discovered' anarchism and I'm still working class now. One of the first things I was involved in that I would consider successful was the Just Books Collective. I was only involved in the projects last few years - it had been opened up in Belfast with a cafe, printworkshop and book shop in 1979 and remained open, promoting radical politics, collective organising and anarchism for 16 years, closing in the summer of 1995. While a positive experience of working in a collective there were also problems and 'factions' appeared throughout its history. And it never had more than a dozen members tops let alone 256. Many factors resulted in it closing down - not all of them related to the collective or the people who made it up. But 16 years of existance is no mean feat and the collective inspired other collective enterprises in Belfast and beyond. This particular project has resurfaced in recent years and holds regular bookstalls at Belfast May Day events and other political gatherings, we are also producing a catalogue of a selection of books which is improving all the time.

I've also been a member of Organise! for most of that time, in its various guises, and together with other comrades have struggled to maintain a class struggle anarchist group in the north of Ireland (we have members in the south but I don't live there) against a backdrop of sectarianism, nationalism (both Irish and British or Ulster variants) and state terror. We have been quite a small organisation throughout but we have consistently attracted support and membership from working class people from what would be referred to as 'both sides of the community'. We have members from both protestant and catholic and loyalist and republican backgrounds - many of whom know only too well the cost to working class individuals and communities that years of state repression, capitalism and nationalist bullshit has incurred. Many of us know or have been related to combatants in the conflict, we know prisoners, we know paramilitaries who have moved into organised crime and paramilitaries who are genuinely seeking a way out of this mess. Many of us have been more involved in the bullshit that passes for politics here, others haven't. We have all witnessed the devastation caused in the names of competing nationalisms on our communities, the effects of sectarianism, we have seen the effects of state terror and repression, we are still witnessing the all too often untold devastation of capitalism and neo-liberalism on the lives of working class people.

Holding together and attracting new people has been no mean feat at a time when even other 'anarchists' were picking sides and undermining those of us committed to a better future for everyone who lives here.

Despite all this we have managed to do effective support work, along with others, for workers in struggle, from the Liverpool Dockers to Montupet workers, from Richardsons factory occupation to supportin the firefighters and civil servants this is the valuable day to day work that we need to build upon, prioritise and do more effectively. Its alos worth pointing out that while we did maintain friendly and open attitudes towards the 'activist' crew and other 'anarchists' that these people never showed their faces on a picket line in support of a striking worker.

BTW we also have a number of Scottish anarchists who are living in Ireland and who are members of Organise!, I'm unaware of anyone from Organise! going about intent on attacking them.

I've also been, until recent times, a shop steward on the railways here and involved with my 'fellow workers' in trying to build solidarity in our workplace. This has met with problems and sometimes successes. We have been shafted by our union bureaucracy again and again, we engaged in some quite small scale unofficial action that paid dividends in terms of overtime payments and holiday cover - but I'm sure such concrete if unglamourous examples amount to 'radical rearranging of the deck chairs' even though they actually gained some small improvements in the lives of railway workers. I no longer work in the railway and there are certainly trying times ahead and who knows if there is enough confidence there to take on major threats and restructuring being faced, but I do know many people there and I count a great many of those workers as my mates, and a lot of them have more positive attitudes towards anarchism than they had before. Though that may soon dissipate if they get wind of what anarchism actually means to a lot of 'anarchists'.

At present we are quite successfully working towards the setting up of a printing press in Belfast which involves building up resources and capital. The response to Nick reminded me of the response I got from me ma when I told her I was an anarchist. "So you don't believe in money", the answer is no I do believe in money and its essential in a capitalist society to our survival. Whether thats in terms of the individual, groups of workers exercising their power to take collective action in order to improve their lot slightly in this society, or in the building up of 'capital' and resources in order to make our movement more effective we do need these resources. That doesn't make us capitalists, we are seeking to better equip our movement in the struggle against capitalism and the state. Its not a radical rearrangement of the deck chairs, it is the struggle toward a society in which production is based on need, people have a direct say in the decisions that effect them, workers run their workplaces and the inhabitants of communities their communities. Its a struggle that has to be based on the economic role of workers as workers 'cos Capitalism is an economic system and as such it must be defeated economically - seems to me that the only way to achieve this is for workers to take over the running of the economy at the point of production. And while we can, and I believe must, aim at the abolition of money but we can't do without it right now.

And apologies (well no not really) if I'm just sounding like an 'anarchist dictionary', maybe its because I know I'm working class, because I know my missus and kids are working class, because I know a bit about the ideology that some people seem to wear as a badge of convenience or as a lifestyle choice.

There are common points of reference and a common reality here for working class people across these islands and internationally. There are specific points that are of common concern, or should be of common concern, to anarchists in Belfast and Glasgow, in the north of Ireland and in Scotland. Both cities have for example suffered from the decimation of traditional industry. There have been links between genuine class struggle anarchist in these two cities in the past and I would hope there would be again.

Cheers;

circle A red n black star

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 2 2004 01:43
Boulcolonialboy wrote:
So there ya go, cities, the source of all our problems have forced Babylon into subsistence farming in order to keep all the cities of the world afloat. Right.

No. Babylon was a city. Things like coinage, accountancy, slave trading, regimented forces and heirarchies of nobility priesthood, and merchants. Schollars trace their earliest examples to Babylon.

The subsistence farming was replaced by huge programs of irrigated farming using slave labour to dig ditches and and provide military might, in order to perpetuate that system for the privelliged Babylonians.. The same system we have today, with minor adjustments. Ask the first farm labourers round Babylon if they thought this new way was a good idea.

Then ask the citizens, and they'll all tell you it's great.

"Look at the tower we built" They'd say.

Tsk. Cityfolk.

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 2 2004 09:14

Through military expansion actually.

Yes. Very similar. They lived on the backs of poorer, conquered areas demanding tributes, and extracting unfair trade agreements.

Revol. If you simply didn't open it your foot wouldn't fit in.

Deezer
Offline
Joined: 2-10-04
Nov 2 2004 09:21
nuclearcivvy wrote:
Boulcolonialboy wrote:
So there ya go, cities, the source of all our problems have forced Babylon into subsistence farming in order to keep all the cities of the world afloat. Right.

No. Babylon was a city...

The subsistence farming was replaced...

Ask the first farm labourers round Babylon if they thought this new way was a good idea...

Tsk. Cityfolk.

Oops, sorry, that should have been Babylons surrounding countryside I suppose. So subsistence farming was replaced in ancient Babylon a long time ago, its replacement happened quite a bit later in Ireland and presumably Scotland to. Towards the end of the 19th century in Irelands case where a system very like that of serfdom gave way to a massive redistribution of land and the emergence of many small owner farmers. But the point is you have proven my point here - you originally claimed that cities forced rural societies into subsistence and now you're saying way back in the times of ancient Babylon sibsistence farming was replaced.

I can't find any of the first farm labourers round Babylon to ask what they thought about anything - them being a long time dead sorta hinders that - but maybe you've got some sort of supernatural powers that would help out.

As to the transformation in argriculture in Ireland from subsistence farming to the transformation to a system largely consisting of small owner farmers (of course some big farms did still exist and they have expanded and consolidated in recent years but Ireland still has a high number of small to medium sized, mostly family run farms) most of our peasants and tenant farmers (who remained after the famine and mass emigration) welcomed the new system.

Ancient Babylonians, fuckenmuttermutterfuckenfuck...

Tsk Cityfolk??? Fuck sake nuclearcivvy wise up.

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 2 2004 09:35

what's your point?

I'm putting forward explanations and clarification of earlier stuff.

You are trying to dismiss what I say. Nothing in that last post strikes me as pertainent, but at least it sounds like you paid attention in history class.

henry
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Nov 2 2004 15:06

Seems like revo69 is getting himself worked-up about my assertion that he is a racist homophobe.

I think the lady doth protest too much? Should that have a question mark after it?

I have missed a few posts, but how did we from Glasgow to Babylon?

And as for Bolloksboy, I seem to remember that you yourself thought revo69s sexuality was 'dubious', or maybe you have a selective memory when it suits you? Take a few minutes to look back on your previous posts if you don't believe me.

You seem to have a lot of posts on this thread. What the fuck has it got to do with you what folk in Glasgow want to achieve?

Your contribution has been nothing but hostile, as if you and your neighbours are out to demoralize us. So don't give this shit about solidarity across the sea.

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 2 2004 15:15

Looking back on posts is good.

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 2 2004 16:27

OK. Can we leave sexuality and all affirm our approval of internationalism, Then move on?

All the best with the dayschool.

Anyone want to say something supportive of their efforts?

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 2 2004 18:43

Thanks Revol. That's cleared that up.

You believe violence can be defeated by violence, and we'll all be better off for it.

You walk over our right to peaceful protest, and you probably want to hide among peace protesters til the last minute.

Now. The anarchist dayschool.

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 2 2004 20:16

I agree that violent protest will achieve nothing. Maybe even be counter-productive. I know that most NVDA achieves little, but imagine a world where no one objected. Scarier than one where you might be making a difference.

I also agree there's not enough organisation outwith big actions. If there was, we would stand a much better chance of being more effective at those actions.

I can't share your negative outlook though. People organising grassroots, and big reactions like these, are coming at them from both sides. I think that's good, if we can join the dots, and reach understanding across the global resistance. We have to accept things like the reaction to wars, global conferences or nuclear arms defines us. We're the groups opposed to these things. We don't need defined or developed. We need cohesion. I believe greater cohesion is possible, so I'm optomistic.

Deezer
Offline
Joined: 2-10-04
Nov 2 2004 23:01
henry wrote:
Seems like revo69 is getting himself worked-up about my assertion that he is a racist homophobe.

I think the lady doth protest too much? Should that have a question mark after it?

I have missed a few posts, but how did we from Glasgow to Babylon?

And as for Bolloksboy, I seem to remember that you yourself thought revo69s sexuality was 'dubious', or maybe you have a selective memory when it suits you? Take a few minutes to look back on your previous posts if you don't believe me.

You seem to have a lot of posts on this thread. What the fuck has it got to do with you what folk in Glasgow want to achieve?

Your contribution has been nothing but hostile, as if you and your neighbours are out to demoralize us. So don't give this shit about solidarity across the sea.

Ask nuclearcivvy how we got from Glasgow to Babylon. Yeah I said revol68s sexuality was 'dubious' but I did not say he was gay or crack jokes about him being gay and then go on to call him a homophobe and a racist. As for him protesting too much I don't see anyone producing the evidence of these allegations that he's asked for. If he's annoyed you, you don't like his tone, or his style, or him telling you to 'fuck off/up/yersel'' complain about that if you must just don't throw shit that you can't back up in the hope that it sticks.

Sorry for contributing, reacting and responding to henry's questions or whatever. I did think we were internationalists, didn't see a 'paddy not welcome' sign attached to this part of the forum, must have missed it.

Oh and 'this shit about solidarity across the sea' roll eyes , I actually meant that. If you notice I have tried to explain shit and when you asked me to, just prior to yerself going off on one, I took the time to respond and provide you with some positive examples. (Maybe my initial reaction to your 'hairbrained' idea was a bit harsh but then as you told Nick you don't want my sensitivity).

My last post was in large part a response to your questions - if you don't want questions answered don't ask them.

I do actually hope the dayschool goes well, would have liked to have been there, might have disagreed with a lot and maybe even found people to agree with on some shit. I seriously believe that these issues have to be discussed, and yeah part of thats only because I think that support for nationalism, even 'underdog nationalism', in the anarchist movement has to be challenged. I can't make it (thank fuck says henry) and I don't reckon our hen' would be too chuffed on me coming into his wee peoples republic of Glasgow away.

circle A red n black star

nuclearcivvy
Offline
Joined: 8-10-04
Nov 3 2004 10:53
Boulcolonialboy wrote:
henry wrote:
... how did we from Glasgow to Babylon?

Ask nuclearcivvy how we got from Glasgow to Babylon.

South on the M74, then M6, M1, and M3 to Dover. Turn right at Callais, right at Istanbul, and ask directions from there.

Alternatively, join the black watch. smile smile

henry
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Nov 3 2004 13:40

Thanks for the directions.

Anyway, I hope the Glasgow dayschool is a big huge success, and loads of people show up to join the debate.

Personally I am not so convinced that anarchists should latch onto the independence bandwagon, since there is no guareentee that whatever magic pixie gets into power is going to grant us a fully autonomous island off the west coast of Scotland.

The trouble with grassroots movements is that they can lose energy and scope if there is no foreseeable prospect that the movement is going to make change. That is why for small numbers it is best to concentrate on direct actions, the more dramatic, creative, orginal, and surreal as possible, so as to make an impact, whilst trying to build up a movement.

Most art is about offering another perspective for the viewer, and I think anarchist direct action should be the same.

Sadly I will not be able to make the Dayschool this Saturday, I'm off to Babylon.

branded
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Nov 4 2004 09:39

Christ theres some wind up merchants in this forum!?!

Nick Durie posits this gem(hope your name is right);

"What I did however suggest is that there was _some_ validity to the 'nationalist' argument"

Are you kidding? The only validity in the nationalist argument for anarchists is that its cheaper to travel to Edinburgh to see the scum at play, that it is to travel to london.

Nationalism is a middle class capatilist stratagey that breeds middle class protectionism of every color, racism, sexism, militaryism and dont forget sectarianism.

Which royal family shall we get to rule over us, shall we just continue with the huns in london or invite that feinian Stweart numpty prince in Edinburgh (if he's still there). Or shall we go down the road of the R.O.I. and create a democratic monarchy and call it predistential?

sorry i wont be at the talk, I'm sure you will speak very well and i honestly hope the whole event goes well.

im052364
Offline
Joined: 3-11-04
Nov 4 2004 13:44

One of the discussions is scheduled on anarchist voting, going to start it off with ideas in this article: http://www.afraser.com/vote_anarchist.htm

Andrew.

bandu
Offline
Joined: 24-10-04
Nov 5 2004 12:16

I don't think the question of whether a anarchist votes or doesn't is really that important. It is all a question of tactics, for example I might vote Green Party because I think it is important that issues such as climate change, air pollution, the environment are debated in a power holding parliament.

But I am not naive enough to believe that a vote for the Greens is going to bring forward the anarchist revolution, although a strong Green party would promote a political environment where anarchist ideas are more openly discussed and made acceptable.

The German Green Party several decades ago was formed from anarchists who decided that the best way forward was through political compromise. This caused splits between the political party and the traditional anarchists.

In such a debate I would side with the non-power seeking anarchists because real democracy comes from not the vote but from grassroots development and empowerment. But I also think I am pragmatic enough to appreciate that the Green Party can make a positive contribution to our society.

Already they have made a stand opposing faith-based schools, which is controversal especially in Scotland. But it is a important stand against the tools of indocrination used by religions.

bandu
Offline
Joined: 24-10-04
Nov 7 2004 13:22

The Glasgow Dayshool was good with a lot of interesting discussions. I hope there is more of them.

If there are any Glaswegians reading this, or anybody with an interest, I have a suggestion about how to broaden our activities.

Speaking to a few folk at the meeting I was aware that they are being hassled by a organisation called Working Links, which now deals with dole claims. I have been aware of this organisation since when I was a volunteer at Citizens' Advice Bureau.

This is all part of a campaign by the government to privitise the dole.

Glasgow is a designated 'Employment Zone', this means that because of the high employment rates in the city, the government can contract unemployment claims to private companies, like Working Links, Wiseman, and others.

If a person has been unemployed for 18 months he is automatically referred to one of these companies. These companies can then provide training, or set up job interviews. They normally work from a list of supermarket, call centre and other low paid jobs which a claimant can practically walk into with no experience. The aim of these companies is to provide cheap labour for sweatshops, and to fiddle the figures by tackling long-term unemployment by putting people into short-term work.

The first stage with Working Links is more informal, but when a claimant reaches the second stage the company can become more aggressive and bullying in their methods of trying to push people into work. They actually have the power to sanction people and stop their money if a claimant refuses a interview, or refuses any other type of help. The advisers are also under pressure to put a quota of people into work.

Glasgow is the only place in Scotland that is a employment zone, but they have them in Brighton and Middlesborough. I know of people through CAB who actually approached the SSP about this issue but they were not interested.

What we have is a large body of people in Glasgow who are being attacked by private companies and have nobody to support them.

Would it be possible to set up some kind of organization along Anarcho-syndicalist lines which provides a resource and support centre for workers and unemployed alike, where anybody can be a member?

This would give us the excuse to leaflet outside jobcentres, Working Links offices, offering info for claimants on their benefit rights. And also doing direct action against dole privatisation.

What would be needed is some knowledge of benefits which can be picked up anywhere. Anybody, with or without welfare training, can representant a claimant at a benefit appeal. A centre and a phone would also help.

Anonymous
Nov 7 2004 23:52

This last post is more like it - a genuine reality for people. I can offer to help with this and I hope more will also. Down with idiotic theoretical student arguments and up with actual (& much more difficult) activities that help people on the ground!

In solidarity

Joe

im052364
Offline
Joined: 3-11-04
Nov 8 2004 15:14

There is already something somewhat like this in Glasgow - WestGAP (West Glasgow against Poverty) centre at 65 Hyndland Street, Partick, telephone 342-4343, provides advice and assistance for benefits claimants, housing tenants, debt counselling, etc. It is not anarchist but is a collective run by all its volunteers without any leaders (in theory). It takes no government money, but is funded by charities such as Oxfam, which can still act as a limiting factor. Some of its members are radical, others definitely not, but it could be a good starting point.

Andrew.

bandu
Offline
Joined: 24-10-04
Nov 13 2004 13:04

sorry for taking so long to reply.

I will look into the Westgap info, and I will speak to other radicals with this idea over the week and see what kind of feedback we get back. I imagine Westgap offer a drop-in and phone-in. Maybe we could offer a couple of folk to distribute leaflets outside doleoffices and working links offices. I could offer a few hours each morning.

These charities need custom like anywhere else, and the more people they get usually justifies more funding.

Good to see there are a couple of folk interested in this. I'll get back. cheers

bandu
Offline
Joined: 24-10-04
Nov 13 2004 13:07

I would also like to add like this would give us the chance to get together and think how we can tackle dole-privitisation, and what types of direct action could be used.