Kommende VeranstaltungenInternational | Anarchist movement Keine kommenden Veranstaltungen veröffentlicht
|
Recent articles by Ilan S.
Anarchists in Rojava: Revolution is a struggle in itself Oct 04 23 An Attempted Marxist-Anarchist Dialogue Oct 03 23 A Guide to Anarcho-Syndicalism and Libertarian Socialism Aug 03 23 On the margins of the debate and split in the Irish anarchist organization WSM international |
anarchist movement |
debate
 Monday October 15, 2012 09:55 by Ilan S. - AAtW, ainfos. Mazpen ilan at shalif dot com Tel Aviv
 Mass line versus workerism The term "reverse engineering", used in computer programming, differs from the old strategies used in the past to start with a problem and try to find a solution to it as it starts with characterizing the goal and then working backwards to try to find the way to it. The anarcho-syndicalist approach characterized the revolution for cancelling capitalism as an organized uprising of the working class in a crisis of the capitalist system in a similar manner to that of the Marxist left, which claimed that the revolution would be led by an organized party... but differed from it with a slight change: the revolutionary uprising would be led by an organized revolutionary labour syndicate which would be dominant in the working class and would be built and led by anarcho-syndicalists. |
HauptseiteSupport Sudanese anarchists in exile Joint Statement of European Anarchist Organizations International anarchist call for solidarity: Earthquake in Turkey, Syria and Kurdistan Elements of Anarchist Theory and Strategy 19 de Julio: Cuando el pueblo se levanta, escribe la historia International anarchist solidarity against Turkish state repression Declaración Anarquista Internacional por el Primero de Mayo, 2022 Le vieux monde opprime les femmes et les minorités de genre. Leur force le détruira ! Against Militarism and War: For self-organised struggle and social revolution Declaração anarquista internacional sobre a pandemia da Covid-19 Anarchist Theory and History in Global Perspective Capitalism, Anti-Capitalism and Popular Organisation [Booklet] Reflexiones sobre la situación de Afganistán South Africa: Historic rupture or warring brothers again? Death or Renewal: Is the Climate Crisis the Final Crisis? Gleichheit und Freiheit stehen nicht zur Debatte! Contre la guerre au Kurdistan irakien, contre la traîtrise du PDK Meurtre de Clément Méric : l’enjeu politique du procès en appel International | Anarchist movement | en Sat 20 Apr, 07:22
Solidarity statement with the anarchist prisoner Alfredo Cospito 1st of May, 1886! 136 years ago today, the American working class created a priceless experience for the upcoming struggles of the working classes of the whole world by saying “this fight is our last fight!”. It remains a victory till our time. The demand of “8 hours for work, 8 hours for sleep, 8 hours for whatever we want” to replace the 16 hours of work and the assaults of capitalism which targeted the lives of the working classes then in the 19th century turned into a general strike in America. General strike has been one of the most significant weapons of the anarchist action as an earning to the history of the class struggle. For anarchists, the struggle for 8 hours has never been seen as a simple request for reform. Anarchists fought to replace it with a social revolution, with the claim that “Regardless of our working time, whether it be 2 hours or 8 hours, it is slavery if we work for bosses”. [Castellano] We recognise the FAU's contributions to the libertarian movement and the sacrifice of comrades past and present. We send our congratulations on the 65th anniversary of the FAU. In solidarity with the struggle for freedom and socialism, the undersigned Anarchist-Communist groups of Oceania. Over the past 18 months Zabalaza Books has published over two dozen new publications or new editions of previous publications, all of which can be read online or downloaded in PDF format from the Zabalaza Books website. Read the full list of titles and overviews of their contents, with links to the full texts, below. After a series of meetings and instances, anarchist political organizations in Latin America have decided to relaunch the Latin American Anarchist Coordination (CALA), within the framework of this complex political and social context that our continent is living through. The European organizations which are part of the Anarkismo network met on the 18th and 19th of November in Genoa. We discussed and exchanged, thought and reflected together, attempting as a network to plan a strategy for forward movement.
Delegations from Wales, France, Italy, Switzerland and Ireland - with a warm solidarity statement from our Catalan comrades of Embat - expressed the need to clarify and deepen our common work. The Anarkismo network has already published a statement that it would wait until all parts of the accusations by Reid Ross and Stephens were published, as well as the answers of M. Schmidt, before making any judgements on the case. Now that this has been forthcoming, as well as two more responses by Reid Ross, we are issuing a second statement to make public our intentions regarding the present situation.
This is a solidarity Statement For Rojava from an old group that is reviving itself somewhat: Neither East Nor West-NYC
We are very pleased to be able to congratulate you on the realisation of your First Congress as a specific anarchist political organisation. In light of the disbanding of the Federación Anarco-Comunista Argentina we believe that this is a very important step both for our shared especifista tendency as well as for the development of anarchism in general, both in Argentina and the region. Anarchist Women attending to the Young Women Conference, in a small village Amara which is in Urfa (Kurdistan), made a speech on the resistance in Kobane, the effect of women on this resistance and women's freedom struggle. more >>
In response to a paper by the anarchist Ron Tabor in which he re-thinks revolutionary politics.
The present text —the core of which was taken from the introduction that we wrote for the French edition of Social Anarchism and Organization, by the Anarchist Federation of Rio de Janeiro (FARJ)[1]— aims to discuss the question of the specific anarchist political organization, based on the contributions of Mikhail Bakunin, Errico Malatesta and the Organizational Platform for a General Union of Anarchists, written by militants organized around the magazine Dielo Trudá, among whom were Nestor Makhno and Piotr Archinov. We are going to take up the contributions of Bakunin and Malatesta to establish a dialogue between them and the Platform, trace the similarities and differences between the proposals of anarchists who advocate an organizational dualism and those of the Bolsheviks, and we will see the proximity of Malatesta with the Synthesis, as well as the historical impact of the Platform, which will make it possible to elucidate the positions that have been disseminated about this debate.
The present text aims to discuss, from a theoretical-historical perspective, some organizational issues related to anarchism. It responds to the assertion, constantly repeated, that anarchist ideology or doctrine is essentially spontaneous and contrary to organization. Returning to the debate among anarchists about organization, this article maintains that there are three fundamental positions on the matter: those who are against organization and / or defend informal formations in small groups (anti-organizationism); supporters of organization only at the mass level (syndicalism and communitarianism), and those who point out the need for organization on two levels, the political-ideological and the mass (organizational dualism). This text delves into the positions of the third current, bringing theoretical elements from Mikhail Bakunin and then presenting a historical case in which the anarchists held, in theory and in practice, that position: the activity of the Federation of Anarchist Communists of Bulgaria (FAKB) between the twenties and forties of the twentieth century. [Português] [Castellano]
To begin the discussion on popular power it is important to return to the idea of a strategy of social transformation, since our political practice, as anarchists, is what could point toward this transformation.
The theoretical elements and historical experiences discussed undergird the theses developed throughout this article. Anarchists have a conception of power and a general project around it that forms their conception of class, understood in relation to a certain type of power (domination), and constitutes the foundation of their notion of social change, which is characterized by: their belief in the capacity for action of the subjects that are part of the distinct oppressed classes, their implication in the transformation of that capacity into social force, their commitment to permanent growth of this force, and their defense of a revolutionary process that allows for overcoming enemy forces and replacing the power of domination over society by a self-managing power. more >>
1st of May, 1886! 136 years ago today, the American working class created a priceless experience for the upcoming struggles of the working classes of the whole world by saying “this fight is our last fight!”. It remains a victory till our time. The demand of “8 hours for work, 8 hours for sleep, 8 hours for whatever we want” to replace the 16 hours of work and the assaults of capitalism which targeted the lives of the working classes then in the 19th century turned into a general strike in America. General strike has been one of the most significant weapons of the anarchist action as an earning to the history of the class struggle. For anarchists, the struggle for 8 hours has never been seen as a simple request for reform. Anarchists fought to replace it with a social revolution, with the claim that “Regardless of our working time, whether it be 2 hours or 8 hours, it is slavery if we work for bosses”. [Castellano]
We recognise the FAU's contributions to the libertarian movement and the sacrifice of comrades past and present. We send our congratulations on the 65th anniversary of the FAU. In solidarity with the struggle for freedom and socialism, the undersigned Anarchist-Communist groups of Oceania.
Over the past 18 months Zabalaza Books has published over two dozen new publications or new editions of previous publications, all of which can be read online or downloaded in PDF format from the Zabalaza Books website. Read the full list of titles and overviews of their contents, with links to the full texts, below.
After a series of meetings and instances, anarchist political organizations in Latin America have decided to relaunch the Latin American Anarchist Coordination (CALA), within the framework of this complex political and social context that our continent is living through.
The European organizations which are part of the Anarkismo network met on the 18th and 19th of November in Genoa. We discussed and exchanged, thought and reflected together, attempting as a network to plan a strategy for forward movement.
Delegations from Wales, France, Italy, Switzerland and Ireland - with a warm solidarity statement from our Catalan comrades of Embat - expressed the need to clarify and deepen our common work. |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Twitter
|
Zeige nur Titel der Kommentare
save preference
Kommentare (8 de 8)
Spring zu Komment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8I find this to be a generally hollow article. Without any convincing arguments to speak of, we are being told what "the right direction" is. But this article overall is based on flawed premises and has no strength.
The first idea which I find remarkable (in the negative sense), is the very false idea that their are quite separate roads for anarchosyndicalists and other anarchists. The reason for this is simply because many participants in anarchosyndicalist organizations are at the same time anarchocommunists and anti-authoritarians. It simply is not true that people in these organizations see the workplace as the only important area of activity. Any basic research into what people are actually doing shows that this idea, which seems to be a central point in the author's argument, is just false.
The author also writes: "Organizing the workers' struggle in the workplace was for many years the only prominent field of battle/struggle and contradiction between the interests of the workers and capitalism."
What on earth? Other types of struggles with capitalism outside the workplace have been prominent for as long as I can remember. In fact, one can say that in some areas of the world, the participation of anarchists and anti-authoritarians against capitalism has not been primarily in the workplace. I would be quite curious to learn where the author thinks concretely the workers struggle has been so prominent as to exclude the others. I cannot think of any such places, although I can think of a number of places where there are large anti-authoritarian movements, but no large anti-authoritarian workers movements to speak of.
Maybe the author would use the latter as some sort of argument against the necessity of building workplace movements, but anarchosyndicalists would all argue that they are a necessary part of tearing down the capitalist edifice. I don't know people personally who would argue they are the only part. Which makes this article seem ingenuine to me, some sort of ideological baiting in promoting what seems to be weakly argued assumptions.
The article was not intended to be a stand alone. It referred to the criticism of ex-WSM activists who criticized the "neglect" of WSM activity within workplaces and "inflation" in the activity within the other "social struggles".
The objection expressed to "anarcho-syndicalism" was not directed to all who self label themselves so or their political/social activity - only towards those whose core is the old anarcho-syndicalist claim that anarcho-syndicalists should build revolutionary unions for wide spectrum of people (including non anarchists) in anarchist stile organization. This "one big union" will do the revolution.
Like many other anarchists I hold that anarchists should organize themselves and not organizing non anarchists. I stress the difference between initiating and/or involvement in organized activities and projects with other and monopolizing the leadership of these.
In the work place struggles anarchists activists can and often are elected to the position of shop stewards and heads of workers comity within general (and reformist) unions...
I regard the main difference between my opinions I label them "libertarian/anarchist communist" and that of these who label themselves as "anarcho-syndicalists" in a) the role dedicated to syndicates and the work of anarchists within them; b) the role of the pre-revolution anarchist lead syndicates and the occurring of the revolution.
As for my claims about the way people opinions are built and the dynamics within the system, they are based on big pool of research tat is no reason to quote them here as this is not a scientific paper.
To the: "Maybe the author would use the latter as some sort of argument against the necessity of building workplace movements" The answer is clearly NO.
The difference is about who initiate and building workplace movements, who manage them, and the role of anarchists in workplace and syndicates movements.
The comrade akai - zsp is invited to clear for us the difference she see between anarcho-syndicalists and libertarian communists we do not label themselves anarcho-syndicalists...
Ilan wrote: The objection expressed to "anarcho-syndicalism" was not directed to all who self label themselves so or their political/social activity - only towards those whose core is the old anarcho-syndicalist claim that anarcho-syndicalists should build revolutionary unions for wide spectrum of people (including non anarchists) in anarchist stile organization. This "one big union" will do the revolution.
Ilan, can you enlighten me as to what is in your head?
Are you saying that unions should not contain non-anarchists, or that somebody is claiming that only a union will do the revolution? And, as far as I know, few anarcho-syndicalists refer to the OBU - that is usually the idea of anarchists working in neutral syndicalist organizations.
Ilan wrote: Like many other anarchists I hold that anarchists should organize themselves and not organizing non anarchists. I stress the difference between initiating and/or involvement in organized activities and projects with other and monopolizing the leadership of these.
So, how is participating in a grassroots, democratic workers organization organizing "other people"? There are organizations without leaders, where people decide for themselves, even if they are not anarchists.
Ilan wrote: In the work place struggles anarchists activists can and often are elected to the position of shop stewards and heads of workers comity within general (and reformist) unions)...
Sure, but this has nothing to do with anarchosyndicalism.
Ilan wrote: The comrade akai - zsp is invited to clear for us the difference she see between anarcho-syndicalists and libertarian communists we do not label themselves anarcho-syndicalists...
Well, maybe I will attempt that later, but it would surely not satisfy anybody working on certain assumptions. First assumption to get over would be that all people in anarcho-syndicalist organizations are actually anarcho-syndicalists. The other assumption which is clearly seen on this portal is that reformist syndicalist practices in which anarchists participate are somehow equal to anarcho-syndicalism. Third assumption is that libertarian communists have such similar ideas and therefore see a clear distinction between their work in the here and now and that of activists in anarcho-syndicalist organizations. Without overturning a few of these assumptions, led by a desire to define things for other people, my answer would not fix into somebody else's boxes.
AKAI wrote:
"Well, maybe I will attempt that later, but it would surely not satisfy anybody working on certain assumptions. First assumption to get over would be that all people in anarcho-syndicalist organizations are actually anarcho-syndicalists. "
Ilan
Long long ago a study on the affiliation of people reveled that only about 50% of those enlisted in political organizations have a political opinion compatible with the official one.
No reason i will be different in anarcho-syndicalist organizations....
AKAI
"The other assumption which is clearly seen on this portal is that reformist syndicalist practices in which anarchists participate are somehow equal to anarcho-syndicalism."
Ilan
I wonder where this come from as it was not raised in the debate within the WSM or in the margin of it. The spectrum of syndicates is wide. There are ones from the extreme right on one side and revolutionary syndicates on the other. To my opinion the only and objectionable characters unique to anarcho-syndicalism is the role they give to the "one big anarcho-syndicalist union." and the role of anarchists within it. Activists who just self label themselves anarcho-syndicalists but do not hold this principles are not subject of my criticism.
AKAI
Third assumption is that libertarian communists have such similar ideas and therefore see a clear distinction between their work in the here and now and that of activists in anarcho-syndicalist organizations. Without overturning a few of these assumptions, led by a desire to define things for other people, my answer would not fix into somebody else's boxes.
Ilan
For sure the spectrum of libertarian/anarchist communism is relatively wide. However there is at least one common distinction between them and the anarchosyndicalists - even those anarchosyndicalists who do not object to specific organization of anarchists in addition to the syndicate.
The difference to my opinion is about the role of anarchists in the building of syndicates/ organizing workplaces and about the role of the "one big anarchist syndicate" in the revolution.
llan wrote:
I wonder where this come from as it was not raised in the debate within the WSM or in the margin of it. The spectrum of syndicates is wide. There are ones from the extreme right on one side and revolutionary syndicates on the other. To my opinion the only and objectionable characters unique to anarcho-syndicalism is the role they give to the "one big anarcho-syndicalist union." and the role of anarchists within it. Activists who just self label themselves anarcho-syndicalists but do not hold this principles are not subject of my criticism.
It came from you because you argued that people are shop stewards, work in the mainstream unions, etc. And if a person who defines him or herself as an anarchist is part of this, well, it is their activity, but NOT as anarchosyndicalists as it is not by nature anarchosyndicalist activity. Although some anarchosyndicalist organizations allow dual carders, these people do not see their activity in the mainstream unions as anything other than economic one, maybe forced because the other workers have chosen it and no other union is functioning.
I don't think it is correct to make some generalization about the role of one big anarchosyndicalist union since this is more an academic theory than a revolutionary dogma for the anarchosyndicalists from the anarchosyndicalist unions. (Don't know what ideas are predominant from those calling themselves anarchosyndicalists working in the state-funded and straight syndicalist ones.)
Ilan wrote: The difference to my opinion is about the role of anarchists in the building of syndicates/ organizing workplaces
This is truly mysterious for me. Seems like you took this from a history or ideology book, not from real life.
All of us here at least are workers. We build organizations with people in different areas, in the workplace, outside, in the community, etc., sometimes specific to one struggle. The role of anarchists is the same role as anybody else in the organization. The only thing is when we found an organization, we want to found something to promote direct decision making, horizontal structures and some basic political aims. If people are fine with that, they join. If not, they don't join. It's sort of crazy to thing there is any special "role", except for starting something based on certain principles. It is part of promoting our principles and whether or not people like this depends on what they see us do concretely. And everything else is bullshit from some history books. Joining an anarchosyndicalist organization is something people do of free and conscious choice, so why is there anything wrong with anarchists building self-managing organizations with other people in their workplace and community?
If people in the end don't like that way of working, they will either outvote the others out of anarchosyndicalism or will do something else. Anarchists are not forcing people to do anything.
Of course there are some people who call themselves anarchists who behave like vanguardists, but I would not assume this is part of anarchosyndicalism, but rather something in strict contradiction to it.
Did not read the WSM debate and do not know what it is about; my comments here only relate to your article and tendencies to try and examine anarchosyndicalism from a theoretical point of view which doesn't correspond to most people I know.
Irrespective of the merits of Ilan and Akai's debate, where can I find information about this supposed split in the WSM? What information is Ilan taking into consideration to base his arguments? Could you give some links? Thanks
It refers to this article:
Not really a split as such as although a few people left (4 in that group, one of whom has since rejoined) they didn't carry out any political activity as a group afterwards. Two of them are involved in that website but they have quite a different view on how to implement their proposals (one has joined the broad left ULA, the other hasn't).
I have a reply to the text linked to above in the works - I'd hope to finish that soon but for now just keep in mind its one persons' perspective and memories and others would have significant differences with both. It will be easier to discuss the specific points raised once differences of perspective and memory have bee outlined.