[Father McPot]

Logik, on Jul 1 2010, 02:17 AM, said:

Father McPot, on Jun 30 2010, 05:19 PM, said:

I won't be going. Maybe next year. Give us a little report to tell us how it goes, if you can, L.

Sure mate

How did it go, then?

[Randal Graves]

I'm considering coming again this year, especially since I've been told the swp recruiters no longer line the halls, which is the entire reason I didn't return.

Anarchism and autonomism

* Marxism and Anarchism
* Victor Serge: the anarchist who supported Lenin
* Is anarchism more radical than socialism?
* Autonomism and the politics of direct action
* Consensus, democracy and leadership

looks particularly interesting. I need to look at the whole timetable really. Is the Callincos/Laurie Penny bitchfest still scheduled? it'd be worth going just to see what happens there

[Randal Graves]

Did you ever experience the recruiters lining the halls? 6 or 8 people asking if I wanted to join the SWP after every single fucking thing? I must have said no more than any other word by a long stretch. Got to the point I wanted to hit them just because it was pissing me off so much. I'm so glad they have gone.

I'm a bit :hmm: about the anarchism strand now after reading this:

hzzp://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=24453

which is so far away from my experience of anarchists/autonomists that I wonder if there's any outcome of hearing SWP lines on anarchism or if it'll just piss me off.

(This won't put me off by the way, I'm sure there will be enough speakers I do want to hear that it doesn't depend on a single strand)

If I do go then def. meet up for a drink.

[Fat Charlie]

I'd like to learn more about this kind of thing, where's a good place to start reading up?

[Arbuscule]

Fat Charlie, on 07 April 2011 - 11:11 PM, said:

I'd like to learn more about this kind of thing, where's a good place to start reading up?

Hiya Charlie

I think an excellent place to start with Marx is The Communist Manifesto - it's short, snappy concise and straight from the horse's mouth.



there's obviously mountains of secondary literature, both online and in 'proper books'


I'll try and check in to see what you decide on There's far more substantial texts like but the other one which I was quoted as a good place to start (by the OU) is German Ideology

[Boojum]

I got my greasepaint tasche, eyebrows and cigar ready to go.

Ah.

Sorry.

Wrong Marx.

[Randal Graves]

Logik, on 07 April 2011 - 11:01 PM, said:

I was in the SWP so last year marxism I did not get bothered, Yes I've seen my comrades line the corridors. Most of them mean well and just want to do something to help

To be honest I can imagine it is a bit annoying for any other person who are not in the realms of a vanguard party.

I hope theres some actual anarchists/authors coming to marxism, I'll double check but there should be, on the other hand, you're always welcome to argue/debate the lines of what you believe is the case.
Maybe you will too realise the many differences within anarchism and its sub-sections especially in london, it's hard to pinpoint a single main group

There's pubs in the university itself, people drink long into the night with movie screen on various films i.e on gaza

Oh, I know they mean well, I just think that if I'm at Marxism, you can pretty much be sure that I know the SWP exist, and if I want to join them, I will do it. When you pressure people into joining, those who join are those who will leave pretty quickly..

I know there are big differences within anarchism, that's kind of the point, but that swp article doesn't reflect any of the individuals/groups that I know.. London is a broader place though.. I hope there are anarchists talking as well, one thing that is good about Marxism is that although it's swp organised they do have a broad range of speakers.

Best thing about the year I went was seeing Rob Newman doing a stand up set.. the social stuff in the evening was cool, and I enjoyed most of the lectures/debates I attended..

Fat Charlie, on 07 April 2011 - 11:11 PM, said:

I'd like to learn more about this kind of thing, where's a good place to start reading up?

Big question, communist manifesto for sure, it's short and sweet.. beyond that The German Ideology and the Grundrisse will give you a decent grounding in the philosophy and economics of Marx. Then you could read some Gramsci and Lukacs for a less materialist (in the philosophical sense) slant on Marxism. Lenin's tract "What is to be Done?" (iirc) is pretty good.

The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and Love on The Dole are two fiction texts with a good socialist political bent to them.

For anarchism, Infoshops An Anarchist FAQ is a decent entry point, or read Bakunin & Kropotkin
Rosa Luxembourg comes up alot but I've never read her works.

R H Tawney is interesting for a non-marxist, english, christian socialist perspective on things.
Eric Hobsbawm's Age of Extremes series for a marxist history of post-industrial revolution..

[Randal Graves]

Yeah, I was going to link you to the libcom letter that refers to:

hxxp://libcom.org/blog/open-letter-socialist-worker-autonomism-07042011

Pretty much describes how I feel, especially the bits about vanguardism, in my epxerience anarchists tend to be very active within the local community and always looking for a mass movement, many anarchists seek to reject the idea of leaders and heroes even. I'm not making that as some kind of backhanded comment on marxist-leninist traditions because they also tend to be very active in the local community and looking for a mass movement, but I've also experienced more of an idea of vanguardism within those groups, it's not something I've heard anarchists saying.

What anarchists say which might appear vanguardist to someone who doesn't quite understand it, is the idea that individuals and small groups are free to do what they want - essentially someone suggests doing something and if enough people think that's a good idea, then it will happen, even if the majority of the group don't want to take part. Groups will act on consensus decision making*, but unless someone blocks the proposal it'll still happen, just with a small group of people, not the whole network.
I might try to find an article on how Anonymous operates, because this shows how this style can work on a large scale - essentially if someone wants to do an op, they setup a chatroom inside the anon chatroom for their op and try to get enough people interested to make it happen. This isn't consensus decision making but is the pure version of what I described above, as there is no possibility for a block.

It can appear as vanguardism because you have small groups, and because anarchism is a pretty small group of people to begin with, this can mean very small groups. But none of those groups are thinking that they want to lead the working class in revolution.

I think that letter is quite revealing of a lack of understanding of the openness of anarchism, and the black bloc - it's not accountable, but it is totally open - anyone can join, all you need to do is wear black and be there.
Thousands of people went to Oxford street on March 26th to take part in anarchist style organised actions, on both oxford street and fortnum and mason, of course it's not going to be as big as a TUC backed and organised march, but it doesn't need to be to be effective.

I find the claim in the latter you quoted that occupations are secretive ludicrous, the university occupations have been incredibly vocal about being there and very open.
sometimes actions need to be secretive or they won't work, but are ukuncut secretive? Only to the extent that some local groups do not decide or reveal targets until the day (and when I say decide, I mean that they set a meeting point and everyone meets there and has a discussion about what they are going to do).
Climate camp weren't exactly secretive either come to think of it.

The whole article just seems to be a very simplistic understanding of anarchism.




*For anyone who has not taken part in consensus decision making, this is how it works.. A proposal is made, and people vote on it - there are three positions you can take - Stand Aside, Block or Active Consensus.

Votes are taken in that order. If you Stand Aside, it means that you don't support the proposal but you are happy for it to happen. You give your reasons for standing aside. You are allowed to get involved in any activity that the proposal err.. proposes, but you would be expected to explain why you don't support the proposal but will do whatever is proposed if the group reaches consensus.

If you Block it means that you cannot support the action and will leave the group if the proposal is passed. You give your reasons, and this usually leads to the proposal being rejected, though it doesn't necessarily do so. The decision to block is not taken lightly, it's very unusual, normally someone will stand aside rather than block.

Once these have been done, everyone else is by default choosing the consensus.. to make sure you have active consensus where everyone displays their agreement by waving both hands (jazz hands!) - this is the sign language sign for clapping and is used partly for that reason but partly because it is not disruptive like clapping is when you want to show agreement with a point someone has made, and partly because it is very visually obvious that people are agreeing.