Federation co-operation

122 posts / 0 new
Last post
Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Nov 25 2009 17:29

AF have an Edinburgh branch. Isn't there SF in Sheffield?

~J.

knightrose
Offline
Joined: 8-11-03
Nov 25 2009 17:48

Most are groups - Hull, Lincoln, Birmingham, Leicester, Newcastle, Preston, Bristol are contacts (though obviously we've got aspirations).

Farce's picture
Farce
Offline
Joined: 21-04-09
Nov 26 2009 22:10

At the risk of repeating myself, if anyone fancies putting the Sheff SFer in touch with us, it'd be welcome.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Nov 26 2009 22:20
Farce wrote:
At the risk of repeating myself, if anyone fancies putting the Sheff SFer in touch with us, it'd be welcome.

i've emailed an internal list i think he's on

Farce's picture
Farce
Offline
Joined: 21-04-09
Nov 27 2009 15:30

Thanks, is appreciated.

rat's picture
rat
Offline
Joined: 16-10-03
Nov 27 2009 22:43

Interests:

Closer formal links (officially somehow, may be liaison secretaries?), communications about area contacts, closer practical links with texts, leaflets and joint articles for strike support and analysis also joint internationalist pickets and solidarity actions, joint discussions and open meetings, observers at conferences, socials…

Dislikes:

Merging.
(edit)

JoeMaguire's picture
JoeMaguire
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Nov 27 2009 20:04

Technically the term merger is incorrect and is out of theme with the bulk of this discussion. Lets keep it practical and we will see where we are next time a thread like this appears on libcom wink

RednBlack's picture
RednBlack
Offline
Joined: 30-04-06
Dec 6 2009 16:45

I think "Freedom" is making moves in a positive direction. Providing a non-alligned anarchist paper across the federations and also independent of them. The recent page Around The Federations (The Bookfair issue, I think) is a good way of drawing us together even though a merger isn't going to happen (nor is it particularly desirable). I also agree with "Freedom"'s calls for an annual Anarchist Movement Conference.

nastyned
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Dec 6 2009 23:31

I haven't seen Freedom in ages so don't know if it's worthwhile at the moment. I don't agree with annual Anarchist Movement Conferences though. Anarcho- get togethers all feel very good but seem to achieve little. I'd prefer to see more day to day cooperation.

The Outlaw's picture
The Outlaw
Offline
Joined: 6-12-09
Dec 7 2009 01:05

I think all the left should work more closely together, instead of always fighting the enemy within.

Battlescarred
Offline
Joined: 27-02-06
Dec 7 2009 12:22

Yeah let's all get together and love each other. Nothing I'd like better to work with the SWP and the SP
Bless!
p.s. class struggle anarchism is not part of the Left.

The Outlaw's picture
The Outlaw
Offline
Joined: 6-12-09
Dec 7 2009 12:49

Yes it is.

The SWP are traitors.

Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Dec 7 2009 17:23
Quote:
The SWP are traitors.

Lol, to what? To the proud heritage of V. I. Lenin and "shoot them down like partridges" Trotsky? Get real. The SWP may be opportunist cunts, but if they are it isn't because they've "betrayed" some magnificent leftist past that they should have remained true to.

Quote:
Anarcho- get togethers all feel very good but seem to achieve little. I'd prefer to see more day to day cooperation.

This. An annual anarchist movement conference is easy to do, but achieves next to nothing; it's just a talking shop. An inter-federation network of militants, on the other hand, would be harder, and might challenge some peoples organisational inertia, but would be a thousand times more worthwhile.

~J.

arminius's picture
arminius
Offline
Joined: 11-08-06
Dec 7 2009 17:44
nastyned wrote:
I haven't seen Freedom in ages so don't know if it's worthwhile at the moment. I don't agree with annual Anarchist Movement Conferences though. Anarcho- get togethers all feel very good but seem to achieve little. I'd prefer to see more day to day cooperation.

I agree that the day to day cooperation is the most important thing now. Especially as we are all so thin on the ground - 1 in town A, 2 in town b, etc. It would better facilitate local stuff where there is some practical, on the ground agreement, and on those things that aren't agreed, hey, to each his own - no worse than now.

The conferences, discussion groups, etc. *are* now talking shops. They won't be of real value to the practical day to day 'real' movement until it (if it does) bubble up from the networking/accumulation of on the ground cooperation. And maybe it never will - still nothing lost.

Their only value is the transmitting of information - and even that is still pretty haphazard and hit-or-miss, despite this technology we're now using. That is something that is possible to fix, to coordinate better, but I see not much effort to do so.

Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Dec 7 2009 18:00
Quote:
The conferences, discussion groups, etc. *are* now talking shops. They won't be of real value to the practical day to day 'real' movement until it (if it does) bubble up from the networking/accumulation of on the ground cooperation.

I doubt if, even then, they'll be of much real use. I think groups like the AF, which are organised, theoretically coherent and engage in practical work could be relevant to a movement of the type you describe (nice imagery of resistance 'bubbling up' btw, like it smile ) but stuff like the Anarchist Movement Conference, or the Bookfair, just seem like they would be left out/behind by any such upsurge in the class struggle. They just aren't integrated into real struggles in any meaningful way, that I can see. They don't produce theory, really; they don't publish anything, they don't do agitational work. What are they for?

~J.

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Dec 7 2009 18:07

Well, in the case of the Bookfair, I think the clue is in the name. beardiest

Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Dec 7 2009 18:43

True, bad example. Don't know why I said that. *is losing his mind*

~J.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Dec 7 2009 19:57

in practical terms I think this website is a good example of practical cooperation between anarchists/libertarian communists etc.

I think it would be good to expand on this and have more structured input from different organisations. Combining our efforts, as we are so small, is the only way we will be able to compete with other tendencies in the terrain of ideas. Online and print media is an area where we can do this.online media is an area where we can do this effectively.

Example, no libertarian group has the resources to compete with the SWP say in terms of print media, because it would be too expensive. But already libcom is far more popular than their website. And as online takes over more and more from print media, this means that proportionately we could reach more and more people.

See these estimates of site traffic from Alexa.com:

ChrissyBoy's picture
ChrissyBoy
Offline
Joined: 17-09-06
Dec 7 2009 20:18
nastyned wrote:
I've long been of the opinion that difference between the AF and SolFed are not that big but I think people should hold off on the grand strategies and CNT/FAI comparisons (ancient and modern) for now. Let's get some practical stuff sorted and see where we can go from there.

I agree with this, whilst I believe its a positive move to have this discussion, both internally and openly, we need concrete cooperation before we can make any bold moves like dual membership. Its only when working together can our similarities and differences really become apparent.

Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Dec 7 2009 20:24

That's a pretty slick graph. Good stuff.

I put it down to the library; that, and having a site design that doesn't look like total shit.

~J.

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Dec 7 2009 21:39

Except on the forums where they allow f*cking avatars which totally ruins the clear,simple design.

Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Dec 7 2009 21:55
Jason Cortez wrote:
Except on the forums where they allow f*cking avatars which totally ruins the clear,simple design.

Meh, doesn't really take anything away imo. I generally prefer reading threads where posters have avis; it's much easier to keep track, when you're not familiar with the forum.

~J.

Halifaxclasswar
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Dec 8 2009 00:00

I'm really happy how much discussion has come out of this, its nice to see that it wasn't all just hear-say.
The movement conference was my first real introduction to the anarchist movement (except the net but thats not the same) and it was really inspirational to see just how many people are out there. Granted not much did come out of it but, as a few people have already said, it does feel great. Perhaps if more social events where arranged on a smaller scale, Like a yorkshire anarchist social, or london social etc. I think it would help to keep momentum going, it allows people to hear first hand about whats happening in the rest of the country and to make contacts etc. Also it would be fun, after all a revolution without dancing is not a revolution worth having.

*prepares to be shot down* black bloc

The Outlaw's picture
The Outlaw
Offline
Joined: 6-12-09
Dec 8 2009 00:12

Lenin and Trotsky were traitors, infact the only true "left orientated" group in the past 100 years has been the various anarchist movements.

Halifaxclasswar
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Dec 8 2009 00:29

Arent you just arguing over semantics. I would say that the left is a betrayal of the working class. By which i mean that centralist, authoritarian SWP types betray the organised working class, whereas you say that SWP betray the left, by which you meant that centralist, authoritarian SWP types betray the organised working class?

Tomato, tomato?

The Outlaw's picture
The Outlaw
Offline
Joined: 6-12-09
Dec 8 2009 00:44

I mean what you're saying, as i believe the left should fundamentally be for the working class.

Regardless we need greater solidarity.

Halifaxclasswar
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Dec 8 2009 01:03

People generally take the term 'left' to refer to trots and stalinists and so on. Although i do think that most anarchists are leftists a lot of anarchists will disagree based on what they mean by the term 'leftist' and so generally when talking to or about anarchists its best not to refer to it as part of the left to avoid misunderstandings. I'm pretty sure that most people on here would agree as well, but so is the nature of language

The Outlaw's picture
The Outlaw
Offline
Joined: 6-12-09
Dec 8 2009 01:02

Stalnists and the trots, i've tried engaging with them, they're a fucking strange lot.

Yorkie Bar
Offline
Joined: 29-03-09
Dec 8 2009 01:15

Even so, I'm rather wary of abstract calls for 'left unity' or 'anarchist unity'. I don't think getting all the anarchies in the country together in one organisation will necessarily make them any more relevant, though certainly our bizarrely schismatic situation right now doesn't help.

~J.

Halifaxclasswar
Offline
Joined: 4-11-09
Dec 8 2009 01:35

True, but its best to have these kinds of debates and find a middle ground, because as you say the current position isnt ideal, and nor would be a single national organisation, but a more tightly knit network or something between the two i think could be a very good thing