Anarchism and Community Politics

A finger points at the moon at a mass assembly, Porto Real

An anarchist critique of the community politics of the Independent Working Class Association from Black Flag issue 224, 2004.

The last issue of Black Flag had an article on the "Independent Working Class Association" (IWCA) called "Fighting on Home Turf Community politics and the IWCA." As the article noted, bar the Haringey Solidarity Group, there is "no compatible anarchist organisations doing the same sort of work." For that reason it was good to hear about the IWCA. Sadly, however, the author shied away from critiquing the IWCA and, in particular, its electoralism.

Yes, many anarchists do "feel uneasy" about the IWCA standing in elections and it is a shame that all the author did was to state they were not going to "rerun arguments about elections." I think that we should be discussing why anarchists "feel uneasy" about electioneering and, more importantly, discussing alternatives to it. This is nothing to do with dogma or sectarianism. It is to do with understanding how we can change the world for the better while, at the same time, avoiding the mistakes of the past. It seems incredible that some anarchists are participating in an organisation using tactics which have failed time and time again. I know that most Marxists tend to ignore evidence and history in favour of a blind repetition of the conclusions a couple of dead Germans drew 150 years ago from a short period of British labour history, but I thought better of anarchists.

I won't go into why anarchists reject electioneering in any depth. History shows that it produces reformism. Whether it be the Marxist Social Democrats before the First World War or the German Greens, the experience of organisations using this tactic have confirmed the anarchist analysis. All it produced was a slow and slippery decent into reformism, hidden behind radical rhetoric. Unsurprisingly, Lula in Brazil who has now joined that large pantheon of leftists who betray their voters and implement capitalist policies.

Even if radicals managed to get into office with their politics intact, they would soon face economic and political pressure to conform to the capitalist agenda. Any radical administration would face pressures from capitalists resulting from capital flight, withdrawal of support. Politically, the pressure is just as bad. We must remember that there is a difference between the state and government. The state is the permanent collection of institutions that have entrenched power structures and interests. The government is made up of various politicians. It's the institutions that have power in the state due to their permanence, not the representatives who come and go. So real power does not lie with politicians, but instead within the state bureaucracy and big business. Faced with these powers, we have seen left-wing governments introduce right-wing policies. So we cannot expect different politicians to act in different ways to the same pressures.

Every supporter of electioneering argues that they will be an exception to this sorry process. They can only appeal to the good intentions and character of their candidates. Anarchists, however, present an analysis of the structures and other influences that will determine how the character of the successful candidates and political parties will change.

Parliamentarianism, moreover, focuses the fight for change into the hands of leaders. Rather than those involved doing the fighting, the organising, the decision making, that power rests in the hands of the representative. The importance of the leaders is stressed. Politics become considered as parliamentary activities made for the population by their representatives, with the 'rank and file' left with no other role than that of passive support. Instead of working class self-activity and self-organisation, there is a substitution and a non working class leadership acting for people replaces self-management in social struggle.

An Alternative

Those libertarians in the IWCA are correct to argue that anarchists should work in their local communities. However, anarchists have done and are doing just that and are being very successful as well. The difference is that anarchists should be building self-managed community organisations rather than taking part in the capitalist state. That way we build a real alternative to the existing system while fighting for improvements in the here and now.

That can only be done by direct action and anti-parliamentarian organisation. Through direct action, people manage their own struggles, it is they who conduct it, organise it. They do not hand over to others their own acts and task of self-liberation. That way, we become accustomed to managing our own affairs, creating alternative, libertarian, forms of social organisation which can become a force to resist the state, win reforms and become the framework of a free society.

This form of community activity can be called "community syndicalism." It means the building of community assemblies which can address the issues of their members and propose means of directly tackling them. It would mean federating these assemblies into a wider organisation. If it sounds familiar that is not surprising as something similar was done during the campaign against the poll-tax.

The idea of community assemblies has a long history. Kropotkin, for example, pointed to the sections and districts of the French Revolution, arguing that there the masses were: "accustoming themselves to act without receiving orders from the national representatives, were practising what was to be described later as Direct Self-Government."

He concluded that "the principles of anarchism . . . already dated from 1789, and that they had their origin, not in theoretical speculations, but in the deeds of the Great French Revolution" and that "the libertarians would no doubt do the same to-day " (The Great French Revolution, vol. 1, p. 203, p. 204 and p. 206)

A similar concern for community organising and struggle was expressed in Spain. While the collectives during the revolution are well known, the CNT had long organised in the community and around non-workplace issues. As well as defence committees in various working class communities to organise and co-ordinate struggles and insurrections, the CNT organised various community based struggles.

The most famous example of this must be the CNT organised rent strikes during the early 1930s in Barcelona. In 1931, the CNT's Construction Union organised an "Economic Defence Commission" to study working class expenses such as rent. The basic demand was for a 40% rent decrease, but also addressed unemployment and the cost of food. The campaign was launched by a mass meeting on May 1st, 1931. Three days later, an unemployed family was re-installed into the home they had been evicted from. This was followed by other examples across the city. By August, Barcelona had 100,000 rent strikers (see Nick Rider, "The Practice of Direct Action: the Barcelona rent strike of 1931" in For Anarchism, edited by David Goodway)

In Gijon, the CNT "reinforced its populist image by... its direct consumer campaigns. Some of these were organised through the federation's Anti-Unemployment Committee, which sponsored numerous rallies and marches in favour of 'bread and work.' While they focused on the issue of jobs, they also addressed more general concerns about the cost of living for poor families. In a May 1933 rally, for example, demonstrators asked that families of unemployed workers not be evicted from their homes, even if they fell behind on the rent." The "organisers made the connections between home and work and tried to draw the entire family into the struggle."

However, the CNT's "most concerted attempt to bring in the larger community was the formation of a new syndicate, in the spring of 1932, for the Defence of Public Interests (SDIP). In contrast to a conventional union, which comprised groups of workers, the SDIP was organised through neighbourhood committees. Its specific purpose was to enforce a generous renters' rights law of December 1931 that had not been vigorously implemented. Following anarcho-syndicalist strategy, the SDIP utilised various forms of direct action, from rent strikes, to mass demonstrations, to the reversal of evictions."

This last action involved the local SDIP group going to a home, breaking the judge's official eviction seal and carrying the furniture back in from the street. They left their own sign: "opened by order of the CNT."

The CNT's direct action strategies "helped keep political discourse in the street, and encouraged people to pursue the same extra-legal channels of activism that they had developed under the monarchy." (Pamela Beth Radcliff, From mobilization to civil war: the politics of polarization in the Spanish city of Gijon, 1900-1937, pp. 287-288, p. 289)

More recently, in Southern Italy, anarchists have organised a very successful Municipal Federation of the Base (FMB) in Spezzano Albanese. This organisation is "an alternative to the power of the town hall" and provides a "glimpse of what a future libertarian society could be" (in the words of one activist).

The aim of the Federation is "the bringing together of all interests within the district. In intervening at a municipal level, we become involved not only in the world of work but also the life of the community... the FMB make counter proposals [to Town Hall decisions], which aren't presented to the Council but proposed for discussion in the area to raise people's level of consciousness. Whether they like it or not the Town Hall is obliged to take account of these proposals." ("Community Organising in Southern Italy", pp. 16-19, Black Flag no. 210)

In this way, local people take part in deciding what effects them and their community and create a self-managed "dual power" to the local, and national, state. They also, by taking part in self-managed community assemblies, develop their ability to participate and manage their own affairs, so showing that the state is unnecessary and harmful to their interests. In addition, the FMB also supports co-operatives within it, so creating a communalised, self-managed economic sector within capitalism.

The long, hard work of the CNT in Spain resulted in mass village assemblies being created in the Puerto Real area, near Cadiz in the late 1980s. These community assemblies came about to support an industrial struggle by shipyard workers. As one CNT member explains, "every Thursday of every week, in the towns and villages in the area, we had all-village assemblies where anyone connected with the particular issue [of the rationalisation of the shipyards], whether they were actually workers in the shipyard itself, or women or children or grandparents, could go along. . . and actually vote and take part in the decision making process of what was going to take place."

With such popular input and support, the shipyard workers won their struggle. However, the assembly continued after the strike and "managed to link together twelve different organisations within the local area that are all interested in fighting. . . various aspects [of capitalism]" including health, taxation, economic, ecological and cultural issues.

Moreover, the struggle "created a structure which was vets different,from the kind of structure of political parties, where the decisions are made at the top and they filter down. What we managed to do in Puerto Real was make decisions at the base and take them upwards." (Anarcho-Syndicalism in Puerto Real: from shipyard resistance to direct democracy and community control, p. 6)

Even more recently, the Argentina revolt saw community assemblies develop. Like the sections of the French Revolution, they were directly democracy and played a key role in pushing the revolt forward (see "From Riot to Revolution", Black Flag, no. 221).

Unsurprisingly, the politicians were aghast at the people actually wanting to make their own decisions even going so far as to label them "undemocratic." Faced with real democracy, the politicians quickly tried to concoct a general election to place the focus of events away from the mass of the population and back onto a few politicians working in capitalist institutions. And, of course, the left went along with this farce, helping the bourgeoisie dis-empower the grassroots organisations created in and for direct struggle.

Conclusion

These examples all show the possibilities of "community syndicalism." They show anarchists creating viable libertarian alternatives in the community. In contrast to the dead end of electioneering, they involved people in managing their own affairs and struggles directly. They did not let a few leaders fight their battles for them within bourgeois institutions. Moreover, it allowed revolutionaries to apply their ideas in practical ways which did not have the same de-radicalising and reformist tendencies as electioneering.

Ultimately, the recent turn to electoral politics by the left is (as it always is) a sign of weakness, not strength. Such a strategy of building alternative community organisations is much harder than trying to get people to vote for you every few years. It would be a shame for anarchists to follow the left down the well-trodden path to opportunism and reformism. The left is declining, politically, morally and organisationally. We should be talking about how we can create a libertarian alternative which has practical ideas on how to apply our ideas in the here and now. But it seems that some libertarians seem happier to join non-anarchist groups than try and develop a genuine anarchist approach to the problem of spreading our ideas within our class. Hopefully these examples from our past will provoke a wider discussion on where to go now.

Posted By

Fozzie
Jan 31 2019 12:22

Share

Black Flag magazine


  • Through direct action, people manage their own struggles. That way, we become accustomed to managing our own affairs, creating alternative forms of social organisation which can become the framework of a free society.

Attached files

Comments

Fozzie
Jan 31 2019 17:02

I was a member of Hackney IWCA (which became Hackney Independent in November 2004) when this was published and remember being slightly bemused by it at the time. We were going to respond, but I don't think anyone had the time or the energy.

Rereading it today I think it is a useful critique, but it suffers from being almost comically abstract in places. I lived (and still live) in Hackney and the IWCA was doing useful work there. Whilst I had some misgivings about elections, the IWCA people I spoke seemed to completely understand this and were pretty open about there being pros and cons to standing in council elections. (There was some healthy scepticism about the London Mayoral election and the one Parliamentary election that the IWCA contested - in Oxford).

It was the pragmatism of the IWCA that interested me in it. The examples cited in the article are inspiring but I lacked the motivation to move to Spain or Argentina (or get in a time machine and head back the French Revolution) - or to start something purer from scratch.

It is glaring that the only UK example of contemporary anarchist community politics of significance that anybody ever mentioned was Haringey Solidarity Group. My recollection is that we were on good terms with them (and I think at least one of our members had previously been in HSG before moving to Hackney).

Indeed, the year after this article was published, Hackney Independent and Haringey Solidarity Group co-organised a “Community Action Gathering” meeting in London – a really positive event which drew together community activists from across the UK, and those interested in getting involved. Which is possibly exactly the sort of thing the article was calling for.

Most (if not all) of us were clear that running in elections was a tactic rather than a matter of principle. At the very least, it’s an opportunity to knock on people’s doors and have discussions with them at a time that they are thinking about politics and local issues. If that is preceded by a survey of issues faced by working class residents in the area (along with other work) then so much the better. To leap from this sort of local activity to "Parliamentarianism" is stretching it a bit.

It is noticeable that the article opposes the representational aspects of “electioneering” but has little to say about the actual platforms that IWCA candidates stood on.

For example the Hackney IWCA 2002 election manifesto is here. It includes (amongst a bunch of other things that I would stand by) an actual call for a mass assembly of residents:

Quote:
We would call a Ward Meeting as soon as we were elected and then every six months and invite everyone who lives in the Ward to come along and participate. Councillors would report back on what they have done in the last six months and outline what would be likely to happen in the next six months. In this way councillors would be held directly accountable to the community.

I completely agree with the first part of the Conclusion of the article: “Ultimately, the recent turn to electoral politics by the left is (as it always is) a sign of weakness, not strength.” Of course it is, which is why comparing London of the 2000s to London’s resistance to the poll tax (or Argentina or the Spanish Civil War!) is not useful.

I disagree with the rest though:

“Such a strategy of building alternative community organisations is much harder than trying to get people to vote for you every few years. It would be a shame for anarchists to follow the left down the well-trodden path to opportunism and reformism.”

The only reason the IWCA and Hackney Independent did so well in elections was because of our patient work all year round. People knew who we were.

“The left is declining, politically, morally and organisationally.”

Unfortunately this is not the case.

R Totale
Feb 3 2019 16:19

Would be interested in your (or anyone's) thoughts about the trajectory of the IWCA and/or comparable anarcho projects over the 15 or so years since then. Is LCAP still going, or is there anything comparable to it?

fingers malone
Feb 3 2019 18:15

Yes, Haringey Housing Group and HASL are active LCAP groups and there's a group in Edinburgh.

Review of HASL's activity last year here

https://housingactionsouthwarkandlambeth.wordpress.com/2018/12/24/end-of-year-blog/

Fozzie
Feb 3 2019 20:36
R Totale wrote:
Would be interested in your (or anyone's) thoughts about the trajectory of the IWCA and/or comparable anarcho projects over the 15 or so years since then. Is LCAP still going, or is there anything comparable to it?

I can't really say too much about the IWCA, having left it when we formed Hackney Independent. I assume they faced similar difficulties to us in sustaining the work and numbers of people needed to be credible at a local level.

We had some key people move away, get new jobs, etc which cut down our capacity. And I think we were all a bit knackered and had reached a level where it was hard to see what the next step would be.

In 2008 a bunch of Hackney Independent people decided to prioritise Hackney Solidarity Network instead, which I was less interested in. It seemed to me like it was more about forging links with other active groups rather than going out directly to working class communities. I still helped distribute the newsletter though and got involved with things like stewarding the "Give Our Kids A Future" march after the 2011 riots.

At the same time the pace of gentrification in Hackney became quite insane. For example all of my younger mates (in their 30s) who were renting were priced out of the borough. But there were good housing campaigns going on like Focus E15, Northwold Estate etc.

I still think it's a good model but it's hard to sustain. We hoped that the Community Action Gathering would lead to a new network of anarchist and other pro-working class groups doing this stuff which it mainly didn't.

I still find the work of Haringey Solidarity Group and South Essex Heckler inspiring. Also the various renters unions and so on.

fingers malone
Feb 3 2019 21:16

Most anarchist organising in the community isn't very visible as that because it will be one or two anarchists being involved in something very near them, eg a school campaign against being turned into an academy or a library being closed down, and they join in the campaign and perhaps argue for more direct action and direct democracy if possible, so it wouldn't be visible as anarchist organising from afar. I mean I've done some anti bedroom tax stuff on my own estate, wouldn't be much point in doing it as 'Malone's Estate Big Anarchy Against the Bedroom Tax' as that would be a group of one with a big name.

Noah Fence
Feb 4 2019 02:28
Quote:
wouldn't be much point in doing it as 'Malone's Estate Big Anarchy Against the Bedroom Tax' as that would be a group of one with a big name

I disagree - to bring a group with such a splendid name into existence would make it well worth doing!

R Totale
Feb 4 2019 13:41

Yeah, I suppose the tricky thing is that from a distance, it's hard to tell the difference between "doesn't look like much is happening because people are prioritising talking to the people around them over doing big flashy things to impress other activists on the internet" and "doesn't look like much is happening because not that much is happening" - obv that's fine in a way, and I'm certainly not saying that people should refocus their activities to impress me or whatever, but it does make it hard to do stuff like working out whether a movement's growing or declining over time and so on.

The Irish water tax campaign from a few years back (might still be going on?) is a good example of this as well - as far as I can tell it seems like a really inspiring and successful community organising/direct action campaign, probably some of the best anti-austerity stuff that's happened anywhere in the Anglophone world in recent years, but I still don't really know that much about it, probably because those involved were more focused on organising with their neighbours over getting the attention of random Brits.

fingers malone
Feb 4 2019 17:53

This is true. I think a lot of what people are doing is probably more desperate rearguard actions than successful and proactive campaigns.

fingers malone
Feb 4 2019 17:55
Noah Fence wrote:
Quote:
wouldn't be much point in doing it as 'Malone's Estate Big Anarchy Against the Bedroom Tax' as that would be a group of one with a big name

I disagree - to bring a group with such a splendid name into existence would make it well worth doing!

Ok I'm gonna come clean and admit that whenever the most slightly interesting thing happens on my estate I spend ages daydreaming of good names for the group we will surely be launching soon....

fingers malone
Feb 5 2019 00:03


I can tell you a bit about HASL. The group has been running for a few years, the number of people coming to meetings has trebled in size since I started going about two years ago so we have had to move to a bigger venue. The group meets twice a month.
In the meetings we break into smaller groups, sometimes one group for Lambeth, one group for Southwark, one group for any other borough, other times we create a group that has a specific issue to work on. Most HASL members speak Spanish so we need two or three translators for the meeting, there are also speakers of other languages. As we have many small children attending a group of volunteers run kids activities.
Several new people come every single meeting now, our system is that as people keep coming they get more time and effort put into their case so new people get some signposting and advice and it's explained that they need to keep coming. Many people have been coming to HASL for two years or more. We have an arrangement with a bakery who give us their unsold bread and we often bring more than a dozen loaves of bread to the meeting to distribute.
Around 30 families have got council flats and several of them continue to come to the meetings to support the group. We run trainings to help HASL members and new volunteers get involved in running the group and we now have three long term HASL members who take very active roles in facilitating the group and we put a lot of work into helping people participate. The biggest problem with this is the language barrier and the complexity of the housing process. HASL members do a lot to support each other including accompanying each other to appointments as a buddy and helping new people to fill in forms.

fingers malone
Feb 4 2019 20:28

HASL out today in solidarity with Aylesbury Estate tenants who have no hot water or heating.