Right well ignoring national stuff and so on for now, I’m pretty sure a lot of us would agree that starting groups in your area to try to get involved in local struggles, link them together and argue for anarchist organisation and tactics.
Also quite a lot of new local groups and projects are starting up at the moment, like the Bristol Anarchist Network, Ipswich Anarchists, South west London anarchists, Hereford AF, and there are loads of groups around already.
But what’s the best way to organise? People in the nat feds presumably think that the only way they’ll function as feds is with a fair bit of theoretical unity. Why would local groups be different? Cos the concerns are more immediate?
Is it best to avoid the word “anarchist” in any group like Haringey solidarity group do? I spose benefits of this would include that
· revolutionary non-anarchists (like autonomists, lib. Marxists etc.) would be more likely to get involved at the beginning
· people wouldn’t be put off by the word “anarchist”
· you’d sound more “respectable”
· well ideally you’d be more likely to just get random (non-@) people
· you can get a lot more agreement between some strains of anarchism and some libertarian socialism or something than between different strains of anarchism (say revolutionary as opposed to individualist/reformist)
Negative points:
· if we don’t own up about being anarchists, anyone else who gets involved will pretty much realise anyway
· if we don’t use the term anarchist and associate it with positive things we’ll never challenge any pre-conceptions
· the word “anarchist” does intrigue people, and anarchism has a relatively high profile
Hmmmm I had some important (to my mind) questions I wanted to ask here, but they seem to have got lost and I can’t remember exactly what I was asking... basically some friends and I have been talking for a while about trying to get some local thing off the ground, but what kind of group is worth starting? A specifically anarchist one which we know will not get mass participation (in the foreseeable future at least 
) or attempt a more “united front” non-hierarchical solidarity group. But then isn’t that what the trots do with their united fronts – tone down their politics to attract recruits? Cos no one’s fooled by that, and the trots just end up acting like reformists on their own.
Hmmm maybe I’ve answered my own question then...
But still any and all thoughts appreciated 8)
groups is a lack of continuity...cos mostly we tend be quite nomadic. groups tend to dissolve when activists move on...you end up with gnerations of groups repeating stuff done by a group 5 years earlier.
o on, i'd be delighted to hear of some)
cos unfortunately you do need reasonable numbers to actually do anything effective, so that we you can mop up any straggling isolated types who's only excuse is they don't know if there's anyone near them... 
Interesting topic! No easy answers either.
I think any comrades setting up a local group have to be prepared for the long haul, there is no overnight success, and it's easy for the initial enthusiasm (and even success) to be dimmed.
To me formal local groups can give a public face to anarchist ideas & activity, sort of anarchist outrreach - stalls, discussions, basic anarcho info,accessibility for new people and so on, as well as doing stuff.
I'm involved in the attempt to set up an anarchist network in Bristol, which I must stress is very much at an early stage - too early in fact to say whether or not it's going to work even in the short term. The thinking behind it is that it can fill a perceived gap in Bristol, cos there's lots of informal networks/groups doing actions & benefits, but they are very scene based, and not that easy to get into. Also people hear about them doing this and that, but because of their nature they can be hard to find. The nat Feds don't presently have much presence here, just a couple of SF'ers and one (ex?) AF as far as I know, but the Sf'ers to their credit are willing to give the network a go along with a small variety of other individuals. I suspect a lot of the 'direct activists' are gonna wait and see what we do before they may get involved, which is ok - nothing wrong with people who just like to 'do' actions, but they need to remember they need to interact with the wider public, and actually discuss the politics that inform their actions.....and maybe that's were this network can come in? We'll see.
We're doing our first semi-public discussion meeting on April 8th, on 'revolutionaries & community organisations', the pros & cons of getting involved in local community groups. We'll have introductions from a member of a residents group in St Pauls, as well as a guy from HSG in London. Be interesting to see how much interest we get, and then compare it with the turnout etc at the Schnews event on 11 April (some of us of course will help with both!).
Be interesting to hear from others with experience of local groups.....?