espero 7 – Die neue Sommerausgabe 2023 16:58 Jun 25 6 comments Hier ist sie: Die espero-Sommerausgabe 2021! 18:20 Jun 16 15 comments David Graeber, anthropologist and author of Bullshit Jobs, dies aged 59 00:24 Sep 06 7 comments Poder e Governação 02:58 May 17 2 comments Against Anarcho-Liberalism and the curse of identity politics 18:34 Jan 14 4 comments more >> |
Recent articles by Flint
Necrologio di Randy "Prole Cat" Lowens 0 comments Randy "Prole Cat" Lowens Obituary 4 comments Northeastern Anarchist #15 available now! 0 comments Recent Articles about North America / Mexico Anarchist movementIn Support of “Turning the Tide” Aug 02 23 El movimiento Apr 25 23 A Companion to the English Translation of Social Anarchism and Organis... Oct 09 21 North America / Mexico - Anarchist Communist Event Friday July 07 2006 08:00 hrs Paul Finch: Building an Anarchist Movement in North America
north america / mexico |
anarchist movement |
anarchist communist event
Friday July 07, 2006 04:18 by Flint - NEFAC flint at nefac dot net
Thoughts on Developing Effective Praxis Paul Finch is a labor activist and member of Northwest Anarchist Federation, Shop Steward BCGEU Local 1201, former Executive of the Camosun College Student Society. On a speaking tour in the northeast North America, he will critically address contempory anarchist theory, practice, strategy, and tactics... and offer some thoughts on developing a more effective praxis for the anarchist movement in North America. Paul Finch: Building an Anarchist Movement in North America |
Front pageSupport 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 |
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (13 of 13)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13-Could NEFAC or Paul publish the content of his talk after the tour is completed? I'm interested in hearing what his thoughts are, but I'm obviously too far away to attend.
-What is 'second wave anarchy'? and what will be the speaking topic of Aragorn?
I've asked Paul to publish his talk, as well as his impressions of the Northeast when he finishes the tour. I also know tha this talk in Hartford was video-taped, so that should also be available.
As to Aragorn! and "second wave anarchy", you'd have to ask him. Probably some post-left nonsense, I imagine.
"...currently a rank and file worker and belong to the BC Government and Service Employee's Union [BCGEU Local 1201], where he is both a shop steward at his worksite, and a member of the executive for the 4500-person strong BCGEU 1201 Local."
Isn't this a contradiction? Rank and file worker and member of executive?
The only time i've ever heard 'second wave' anarchism it was used to describe post-world war 1, post russian revolution anarchist movement - chiefly the IWA and the anarchist-communist federations of the time.
Somehow i doubt that Aragorn(!) is going to discuss those workerists.
you could have asked...
1) Second Wave Anarchy
http://sfbay-anarchists.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=342&Itemid=26
(which was also just a search away http://www.google.com/search?q=second+wave+anarchy&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official)
2) I am not a post-left anarchist. Barely anyone is.
3) Sectarian name calling is so 1996. Get over yourselves.
A!
So, nobody is a "post-left anarchist" (or hardly anybody). I guess that you'd better notify your friends so they can catch up with the fad of the week. Yeah, I speak of the whole crew who once made such a fuss about being "beyond anarchism" way before "1996" and then came skittering back when the name became popular to say they were one variety or another, including dragging the poor pathetic corpse of Stirner out from his well deserved rest to give support to an intricate system of pseudo-intellectual word spinning that is PRECISELY the sort of nonsense that Stirner criticized in his life.
So what is "second-wave anarchy" ?Yeaaah, I know to the point of extreme boredom that when you formulate your byzantine ideology that you want to avoid anything ending in "ism", and that when you word spin your fantasies that you are NOT "ideological". Yes, and a cow is not a ruminant if it bellows loud enough.
Seems to me very much like the old Polish joke about "the dialectic" whose punch line is that "the dialectic can mean anything you want it to mean".
So "second-wave anarchy" (as opposed to "anarchism" for those who are shameless enough to lie about what they are doing when it is blazingly obvious) is perhaps a cover for "free association" in the psychotherapy sense applied to so-called "theory" ie "post-structuralism".
Say whatever you want, and it becomes the absolute truth because there are no standards to judge by. Out here in the real world beyond the fantasies of "ultimate rebellion" and "the never ending critique" there is another thing just like this. It's called "Papal Infallibility", and it predates the dogmatic pronouncements of modern pseudo-anarchists by well over 100 years.
Every last little nasty word above was meant in a very heartfelt way BECAUSE, in terms of the "sectarian name calling (that) is so 1996"(ohhh-you're sooo cool !) the BEST example of this is EVERY issue of 'Anarchy Magazine' that has ever been published. I am sure that you will continue this fine tradition. I have absolutely NO doubt about it because you and yours are so-deliberately- ignorant that you simply can't see when you are being insulting, just like you can't see so many other very obvious things about yourselves. I KNOW when I'm being insulting, like most of us out here in the real world . You don't, and perhaps never will because your minds are so bound by the "spooks" that Stirner spoke about.
So this was a little taste of your own medicine. I hope it is as bitter as when you snark at those who want to make anarchism a living reality rather than a "badge of distinction".
Actually it is no "contradiction" if the comrade in question still works at his regular job and obtains the vast majority of his income (say 98%) from his regular employment. Most shop stewards make very little,if any, money from their function. Most members of a union executive are paid either a direct honorarium or receive benefits that amount to the same thing. But-at the lower level of such unions- it is very easy for the person involved to still be "rank and file".
All this revolves around how much the union bureaucracy is a path for advancement out of the working class and into the ruling class of the managers, and this is very much a matter of "case by case". There are no firm pronouncements that one could say would apply to all unions at all times and places.
A matter for a whole different discussion, and not one of absolute pronouncements.
One of the reasons I disagree with a lot of what the post-left authors wrote is the same reason that your post, as mean spirited as it is, falls flat. I don't think being cute is the same thing as being smart.
It may very well be that your hope for anarchism may trump my tortured thinking about anarchy but I really don't think that the difference is half as important as Anarchy magazine (or you, apparently) thinks it is.
I am entirely unsatisfied that the conclusions that anarchists have made about social change (and how to do it) so I feel as though this thinking (and experimentation) should be our priority. This could mean that I am missing the point that so-called class struggle anarchists have had the whole time but I don't actually list their successes as any more overwhelming than other anarchist strategies.
Cheers.
Aragorn!
Does Aragorn mean to say that Anarchy A Journal of Desire Armed no longer considers itself post-left? I am all agog. After all these years of its editors denouncing us class struggle anarchists for being leftists! This is exciting news. (If true, which it isn't.)
The title of "Second Wave Anarchy" (or Anarchism or whatever) mixes up two concepts. One is that there is a revival of anarchism going on, after it petered out with the rise of state Communism and then the failure of the Spanish Revolution. This is a factual statement; there has been an anarchist revival; who can deny it? The other concept is that this revival supports this or that interpretation of anarchism that someone wants to put on it. Aragorn? has a theory of anarchy which he wants to say is the real, true, version of the current wave of anarchism. He has a right to his opinion about the best type of anarchism, as much as I disagree with it, but not to say that it is the TRUE Second Wave of Anarchy (making a big splash no doubt).
Yes there is a revival of anarchism, a second wave if you like--I prefer to call it a second chance. And yes, we cannot just start up business at the old stand, as if nothing new had happened since the Friends of Durruti fled from Spain. But we also need to root ourselves in radical tradition, to learn from the past, what to take and what to reject, so we can stand on the shoulders of giants--and not reinvent the wheel. Aragorn (does he claim to be a king?) must agree with this somewhat, or he would not say that he is for anarchy, instead of inventing a wholly new political theory out of his thumb.
Ok, I admit to not knowing much about all this so-called post-left stuff. In the 1970s some said the younger generation's form of anarchism was "post left" (ok, post 1960s). In the 1980s the newer anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists represented a "new wave" of ideas and actions. In the late 1990s the anti-globalization and newer anarchist-communist groups represented an additional wave of ideas and activities.
Perhaps like the ocean, each generation come s in like a new wave, some stronger and more lasting than the other.
Each generation will bring something new to the movement. Each generation will bring its own energy. Each generation will make a positive contribution. And each generation will make its own mistakes.
The newer wave of attention on anarchism simply doesn't come out of nowhere. Surely no one can take anything from this wave (generation) of militants. Perhaps it is best for every generation to learn from each other and work towards the giant tidal wave of social revolution, rather than simply give a narrow focus of attention to a generational phenom.
Well, I think we just need to keep surfing the waves until we ride "the big one".
Around 8 months back we published a set of South African anarchist articles which argued that we are now in the 5th wave of anarchism. They broke them down as follows
FIRST WAVE: THE "INVISIBLE PILOTS" STEER THE SECRET REVOLUTIONARY ORGANISATION
SECOND WAVE: THE "GENERAL UNION" BUILDS AN ORGANISATIONAL PLATFORM
THIRD WAVE: THE "REVOLUTIONARY JUNTA" PUSHES FOR A FRESH REVOLUTION
FOURTH WAVE: THE "VANISHING VANGUARD" ADVANCES LIBERTARIAN COMMUNISM
FIFTH WAVE: THE ANARCHO-COMMUNIST "DRIVING FORCE" FIGHTS FOR A LIBERTARIAN ALTERNATIVE
http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=1550
I'm actually very cautions about the tendency to try and package anarchism in a 'bright, shiny, new' form that is better than the old formula. Reminds me too much of ads for washing powder.
"Actually it is no 'contradiction' if the comrade in question still works at his regular job and obtains the vast majority of his income (say 98%) from his regular employment."
So he has two different jobs? That wasn't clear. He would be rank-and-file at the job where he's not a union official, but he wouldn't be rank-and-file at the job where he is an official.
I think that "What?" doesn't seem to realize that a shop steward position need not be a "job." It's not a job if a person isn't paid to do it. I was a shop steward and had to do everything in my own time, nor was I reimbursed anything by the union for doing so.