A new Anarchist Organisation!

177 posts / 0 new
Last post
Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Aug 6 2007 23:50

dundee - as for this organisation... i really cannot understand the mentality that would produce a programme like that. It's just not linked to reality in any way. It's simultaneously pie in the sky, and unambitious reformism, I'm sorry. Like the WSM's "oil nationalisation" demand but more obscene.

As for your workplace comments:

Quote:
Too often, tactics-as-ideology has been allowed to divide the socialist movement. For example, one revolutionary may desire to build syndicalist unions, whilst another favours building rank-and-file movements within existing trade unions.

Not even most leninists have such a naively uncritical view of the unions.

And as for that one, and your other supposed opposite views:

Quote:
One supports the cooperative movement as a method of reform towards freedom, whilst another believes that a sudden uprising will sweep the old world aside.

They're both stupid ideas, which I and a lot of libcom people would agree with neither. I think there are big holes in your theory when it comes to quite basic ideas. These came up before in discussions when you kept wrongly calling me an insurrectionist, and saying that I only wanted revolution now, despite myself and several other people repeatedly mentioning my involvement in and support of Unison's 5% pay campaign - a point to which you didn't respond.

Dundee_United
Offline
Joined: 10-04-06
Aug 7 2007 00:15
Quote:
Not even most leninists have such a naively uncritical view of the unions.

What the Hell are you on about? There are some anarchists who favour building alternative unions like the IWW. There are others who favour working within the unions and building rank and file movements - whether they call them workplace resistence networks, base unions, communist workers committees it doesn't fucking matter - it's the same shit ultimately although the practices may vary depending on the theories used to build these rank and file movements. That is fucking obvious. It clearly isn't an uncritical view of the unions.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Aug 7 2007 00:25
Dundee_United wrote:
Quote:
Not even most leninists have such a naively uncritical view of the unions.

What the Hell are you on about? There are some anarchists who favour building alternative unions like the IWW. There are others who favour working within the unions and building rank and file movements - whether they call them workplace resistence networks, base unions, communist workers committees it doesn't fucking matter - it's the same shit ultimately although the practices may vary depending on the theories used to build these rank and file movements. That is fucking obvious. It clearly isn't an uncritical view of the unions.

Well it is, apart from your constant fawning over them here, you are clearly saying the options are "build alternative unions" or "work within the unions." What about the 70% of workers not in a union? You have completely ignored them.

And to me this sounds pretty uncritical:

Quote:
What would you say the mass resistance organisations of the working class are in Scotland Revol?

To me it's very clear - the trade unions and residents associations.

Quote:
In workplaces where there is trade union representation, members are expected and supporters are encouraged to join that union and become active members and shop stewards in those unions.
Quote:
In some workplaces a “red” union such as the IWW may be the best option, in others a democratic network of trade union members may be the better option.

As for the municipalist bullshit - is it even worth entertaining? Seriously the mutualists died out about 150 years ago, why are you trying to resurrect their corpse?

I mean what kind of bizarre frankenstein politics comes up with an "economic programme" like this?

Quote:
1. Build the IWW locally industrially, with an interim focus on developing power at [its current focus] which can then be leveraged, the IWW seen as a "real union", for future organising efforts, such as in postal service or in call centres.

2. Education and training - Apprenticeships, starting on a part-time basis as early as age 14, alongside school system, especially of plumbers, joiners, building trades. Training undertaken by City Council workplaces in partnership with Colleges.

3. Jobs and growth - Finance new start up firms that are worker owned or otherwise tied to the community. Assist in founding a new bank to raise and direct funds to these firms. Assist in providing centralised services for these firms.

4. Push for greater co-ordination across the public sector, linking this to other initiatives in the economic programme (eg IWW) and the municipalist programme (eg residents association backing for defence
of postal services).

If you want I could take those apart 1 at a time, but it hardly seems worth doing they're all so utterly flawed. confused

Dundee_United
Offline
Joined: 10-04-06
Aug 7 2007 00:38
Quote:
What about the 70% of workers not in a union? You have completely ignored them.

I am speaking in a personal capacity here.

That's a misrepresentation of the current situation. Trade unions in the UK still have massive latent power compared to countries like the US. 50% of workplaces in the UK are covered by collective bargaining agreements. I'd frankly say what's needed is to build trade union membership, while building rank and file organisation. I think the model to aim for in terms of that rank and file organisation should be to use the IWW as a base union, or sign up your stewards to the IWW. In areas where there is no union then you should build the IWW.

Quote:
If you want I could take those apart 1 at a time, but it hardly seems worth doing they're all so utterly flawed.

I'm sorry John. you can't join Praxis as your views are too distant to ours. I'm sure your gutted though. wink

Dundee_United
Offline
Joined: 10-04-06
Aug 7 2007 00:39
Quote:
What about the 70% of workers not in a union? You have completely ignored them.

Erm, no we'd say try to unionise them, probably with the IWW.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Aug 7 2007 00:45
Dundee_United wrote:
I'm sorry John. you can't join Praxis as your views are too distant to ours. I'm sure your gutted though. wink

How goes starting your own bank? Can I get a loan please - I want a laptop.

Dundee_United
Offline
Joined: 10-04-06
Aug 7 2007 01:04
Quote:
How goes starting your own bank? Can I get a loan please - I want a laptop.

Early days yet I'm afraid. Could lend enough for an abacus at the moment. tongue

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Aug 7 2007 06:32
Dundee_United wrote:
I am speaking in a personal capacity here.

God, I hate this nonsens. You are a member of a political organisation describing it politics. This is not a personal capacity.
Devrim

Dundee_United
Offline
Joined: 10-04-06
Aug 7 2007 10:01
Quote:
God, I hate this nonsens. You are a member of a political organisation describing it politics. This is not a personal capacity.
Devrim

No I am a member of a political organisation which is only six months old and has no developed position on that issue, but which I have a personal position on which I'm entitled to outline I'd hope. What I certainly can't do though is speak for the organisation claiming my own opinions as those of the organisation as a whole when we have held no discussions on that subject as yet. Keep your knickers in a twist. tongue

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Aug 7 2007 10:53
Dundee_United wrote:
Quote:
God, I hate this nonsens. You are a member of a political organisation describing it politics. This is not a personal capacity.
Devrim

No I am a member of a political organisation which is only six months old and has no developed position on that issue, but which I have a personal position on which I'm entitled to outline I'd hope. What I certainly can't do though is speak for the organisation claiming my own opinions as those of the organisation as a whole when we have held no discussions on that subject as yet. Keep your knickers in a twist. tongue

OK, so you have a position on 14 year old's apprenticeships, but not on non-unionised workers. It is about like how the Turkish platformists had a written position paper on Homosexuality before they had a position on the South East. It is equally absurd.

It shouldn't be about 'develop[ing] positions on this [or that] issue[s]'. It is about having a level of political agreement to begin with when you start an organisation that means that you have the same positions on specifics.

Devrim

Dundee_United
Offline
Joined: 10-04-06
Aug 7 2007 11:06
Quote:
It shouldn't be about 'develop[ing] positions on this [or that] issue[s]'. It is about having a level of political agreement to begin with when you start an organisation that means that you have the same positions on specifics.

I am 95% certain what the position will be. We are not an ultra left group. It is just that we have no codified position statement on this question and as such I'm not willing to speak for the organisation. Calm down.

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Aug 7 2007 11:11
Dundee_United wrote:
Quote:
It shouldn't be about 'develop[ing] positions on this [or that] issue[s]'. It is about having a level of political agreement to begin with when you start an organisation that means that you have the same positions on specifics.

I am 95% certain what the position will be. We are not an ultra left group. It is just that we have no codified position statement on this question and as such I'm not willing to speak for the organisation. Calm down.

I am not uncalm. I just think that all of this 'in a personal capacity' is nonsense. It is liberalism, not libertarianism.

Devrim

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Aug 7 2007 11:19
Dundee_United wrote:
We are not an ultra left group.

That is very clear. I would suggest though that you discuss your politics, not the abstract demands that you are making, but your actual politics for a while before launching this new organisation upon the world.
Devrim

Smash Rich Bastards
Offline
Joined: 24-03-06
Aug 7 2007 20:02
revol68 wrote:
Devrim wrote:
Dundee_United wrote:
I am speaking in a personal capacity here.

God, I hate this nonsens. You are a member of a political organisation describing it politics. This is not a personal capacity.
Devrim

But Devrim don't you get it? if they don't make this distinction then they'd not be able to keep platformist discipline and unity, afterall much easier to deal with disagreement by just pushing it into a non sphere called 'personal capacity' , that way the organisational capacity can remain pure, there is no longer disagreement within the group just different capacities. Rather like how Joe Black can claim there are no differences between Organise! and the WSM because our written aims and principles are similar, clearly it makes no difference that they choose to interpret them in a manner that allows them to support candidates for union general secretary elections or make demands for nationalisation. The personal capacity died for all our sins!

This is pretty amusing, particularly in light of how many times I've seen other people in your group bend over backwards to let everyone know that you do not represent them and only speak in personal capacity.

Smash Rich Bastards
Offline
Joined: 24-03-06
Aug 8 2007 00:59
revol68 wrote:
you never here me saying 'in personal capacity'.

I think the others in your group who post here have made it more than clear that you do not necessarily speak for them or Organise!

It would just be redundant for you to give a second disclaimer.