Organise! magazine #89 Winter 2017

The latest edition the AF’s magazine Organise!, issue 89 for Winter 2017, is out in print. Copies are available from AK Press or Active Distribution. Read below for summary and contents list.

See also: download the latest edition of our paper/bulletin, Resistance.

Organise! for revolutionary anarchism issue 89 Winter 2017 cover imageOrganise! #89

The theme of Organise! latest issue is on revolutions, examining the anarchist communist approach to achieving one, the role of anarchists in historical revolutions that are having their anniversaries this year (Russian 1917, Spanish May Days and the Friends of Durruti 1937), and contemporary activities of anarchists that prefigures a post-revolutionary society. Later articles discuss aspects of modern society under capitalism that we would wish to improve drastically with a revolution (mental illness and loneliness) and examine the dire results of Chavismo in Venezuela whilst presenting positive reports of organising by anarchists in the Americas. As usual we provide book reviews of some essential new editions. Organise! will soon be available from AK Press and Active Distribution but if you cannot wait, visit your local radical bookstore or get in touch!

Contents

  • Editorial (read this below, soon): We want a revolution … Now!
  • Talking about a revolution
  • Anarchism and History
  • The Russian Revolution of 1917 and the role of the anarchists
  • The May Days in Spain and the Friends of Durruti
  • Free Women against Libertarian Machismo
  • The working class response to catastophes: Mutual aid, self-organisation and solidarity
  • Radical Housing Network: Putting the housing crisis on the public agenda
  • Psychiatry and social class
  • Loneliness: Much more than a drag
  • Venezuela: Know you enemies
  • Extract from: Anarchists of the Caribbean and Central America
  • International Anarchist Meeting in Brazil 2017
  • Book reviews: Rebellion in Patagonia by Osvaldo Bayer (AK Press); The Dossier of Subject 1218: a Bulgarian anarchist’s story by Alexander Nakov (Black Cat Press)

Statements following London Anarchist Bookfair of October 2017

The following two statements have previously appeared on AF national media following the London Anarchist Bookfair of October 2017. The first statement below was originally posted on the Anarchist Federation Facebook page on 20/11/2017 (Transgender Day of Rememberance) due to the loss of the noflag webserver containing our website. The second earlier statement was originally posted on www.afed.org.uk on 30/10/2017 immediately following the transphobic leafleting at the London Anarchist Bookfair of 28th October 2017 and was similarly unavailable due to the noflag server loss. Both now appear here on our temporary new site. Other statements include one by Edinburgh AF which was on their noflag hosted site edinburghanarchists.noflag.org.uk and can be found on ainfos, also published immediately after the bookfair.

Statement on Anarchist Federation group Facebook page 20/11/2017

The basic human dignity of being able to choose or express who we are should not be an issue within the anarchist movement. Transgender/non-binary people should never be subjected to abuse or mischaracterisation in anarchist spaces/events by TERFs (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists) or anyone else – anarchists do not tolerate bigotry in the guise of free-speech. It is very rarely that anarchists attempt to shut down debate or resort of physical or verbal violence to do so. If trans activists feel they have little choice but to resort to this in an anarchist space/event, that is a crisis for our movement.

The AF regrets that the opportunity has probably been lost to transform the London Anarchist Bookfair – which in recent years has developed into one of the most important and representative anarchist events globally – into an environment where this situation cannot not reoccur. Whilst the right of people to choose their gender identity is not up for debate, discussion about the relationship between different oppressions and their relationship to the wider class struggle are nonetheless important.

The class struggle and the struggles of specifically oppressed groups under capitalism do not run parallel with each other, but overlap. Our movement can only benefit from education and engagement with the issues effecting trans-people in the context of where the overlap happens, just as it must improve and advance its theory and action in relationship to all oppressions.

Where legal reforms will improve the material situation of trans-people under capitalism, workers with gender privilege must support them as part of the wider social and economic struggle. But this can only take place meaningfully in an environment which automatically defends the starting point that we are who we say we are, and where the imbalance of power which we bring into the movement from wider society is acknowledged and undermined as far as possible.

AFed Trans Action Faction* statement in response to events at London Anarchist Bookfair 2017. 30/10/2017

Context of the statement:
There were anti-trans leaflets put in the toilets at the London Anarchist Bookfair (the leaflets were quickly removed). There was also a small group of people who started handing out similar leaflets at the entrance. The leaflets claimed the very existence of trans people was a threat to women and girls. We reject this claim, it has no basis in reality and instead scapegoats trans people, who are already at a high risk of violence and oppression.

The leafleters were confronted by a large group and told to stop leafleting/leave. Whilst the leafleting did stop, some of those that had leapt to the defence of the leafleters continued the confrontation long afterwards.

“The anti-trans literature that was being handed out and posted in toilets, and the actions of all those who enabled this, was unacceptable and has no more place at an anarchist bookfair (or, indeed, in society generally) than sexism or homophobia.

We call on the bookfair collective to implement a policy that specifically excludes anti-trans stalls and literature, as well as ensuring the safety and wellbeing of all oppressed people at the bookfair.

This is in no way an issue of free speech. If the anarchist bookfair invited everybody we disagree with to speak, there would be no room for anarchism. Part of anarchist politics is being specific about what behaviour we do and don’t consider to have a place in an anarchist society. ”
– Statement from the AFed Trans Action Faction (*in formation)

Misogyny in Politics: It’s not Trump, it’s Trotskyists

The Anarchist Federation was amongst others organising AFem2014, a series of events and activities by anarcha-feminists two years ago. Its organisers recently signed a the letter Stand Up To Racism: Stand Up To Rape Culture highlighting the problem of sharing a platform with the Socialist Workers Party in the organisation ?Stand Up To Racism?. This is because of the SWP practice of not taking seriously allegations of sexism, rape and rape-denial, and at the highest level. The main focus was on Jeremy Corbyn, and initially it seemed that he would withdraw, but the latest news is that AFem is signing a further statement, as follows.

“We, the undersigned, are committed to resisting rape culture and rape apologists wherever they arise in our networks. Three weeks ago, we sent a letter to Jeremy Corbyn asking him to reconsider appearing as a speaker at ‘Stand Up To Racism’ conference, on 8th October. This letter was sent not only to Corbyn, but all speakers billed to appear at the conference. Our concern is that the Socialist Workers Party plays a leading role in Stand Up To Racism, despite its well-documented cover-up of rape allegations and treatment of sexual assault survivors in 2013. After sending our letter to those billed to speak at the conference, at least one high profile speaker dropped out. We were also assured by a member of Jeremy Corbyn’s media team that Corbyn had agreed not to attend. However, on 8th October it was widely documented that Jeremy Corbyn went to the conference. We suspect that we were deliberately misled to stop us from going public with our concerns about Corbyn’s association with the SWP. Some signatories have publicly defended Corbyn’s politics in the past. However we are all agreed that any platform for the SWP, because of its leadership abusing and gaslighting women inside and outside the organisation, is counter-productive for grassroots community and labour organising. Stand Up To Racism cannot be an effective anti-racist movement if it actively condones misogyny by having rape apologists in its leadership and paid staff.”

This matters because time and time again, political organisations which supposedly oppose sexism will put their own advancement above feminist principles, and find ways to justify shoving women to the bottom of their real agenda, telling us we have to wait. Organisations with hierarchical and centralised structures are particularly problematic here, because, however ‘democratically’ their leaders are chosen, they benefit from an extra tier of privilege which can simultaneously to facilitate and conceal abuses of power such as rape. It is no accident that so many cases of the abuse of women take place in privileged circles. Anarcha-feminism says that all oppressions have to be addressed at the same time – now – and that those experiencing oppression make the best progress where our interests in struggle intersect, such as where we fight sexism and racism together. Men who benefit from sexism and white people who benefit from racism must recognise their privileges and actively undermine it, not least political activism. The anarchist movement is far from immune to misogyny, but anarcha-feminists are making important and effective interventions.

Here is a discussion document on Privilege Theory that the Anarchist Federation has contributed to the struggle.

A Class Struggle Anarchist Analysis of Privilege Theory – from the Women’s Caucus

Aims and definitions

The purpose of this paper is to outline a class struggle anarchist analysis of Privilege Theory. Many of us feel “privilege” is a useful term for discussing oppressions that go beyond economic class. It can help us to understand how these oppressions affect our social relations and the intersections of our struggles within the economic working class. It is written by members of the women’s caucus of the Anarchist Federation. It does not represent all our views and is part of an ongoing discussion within the federation.

What do we mean – and what do we not mean – by privilege? Privilege implies that wherever there is a system of oppression (such as capitalism, patriarchy, white supremacy, heteronormativity) there is an oppressed group and also a privileged group, who benefit from the oppressions that this system puts in place1. The privileged group do not have to be active supporters of the system of oppression, or even aware of it, in order to benefit from it. They benefit from being viewed as the norm, and providing for their needs being seen as what is naturally done, while the oppressed group is considered the “other”, and their needs are “special considerations”. Sometimes the privileged group benefits from the system in obvious, material ways, such as when women are expected to do most or all of the housework, and male partners benefit from their unpaid labour. At other times the benefits are more subtle and invisible, and involve certain pressures being taken off a privileged group and focused on others, for example black and Asian youths being 28% more likely to be stopped and searched by the police than white youths2. The point here is not that police harassment doesn’t happen to white youths, or that being working class or a white European immigrant doesn’t also mean you’re more likely to face harassment; the point is that a disproportionate number of black and Asian people are targeted in comparison to white people, and the result of this is that, if you are carrying drugs, and you are white, then all other things being equal you are much more likely to get away with it than if you were black. In the UK, white people are also less likely to be arrested or jailed, or to be the victim of a personal crime3. Black people currently face even greater unemployment in the UK than they do in the USA4. The point of quoting this is not to suggest we want a society in which people of all races and ethnicities face equal disadvantage – we want to create a society in which nobody faces these disadvantages. But part of getting there is acknowledging how systems of oppression work, which means recognising that, if black and ethnic minority groups are more likely to face these disadvantages, then by simple maths white people are less likely to face them, and that means they have an advantage, a privilege, including the privilege of not needing to be aware of the extent of the problem.

A privileged group may also, in some ways, be oppressed by the expectations of the system that privileges them, for example men under patriarchy are expected to not show weakness or emotion, and are mistrusted as carers. However, men are not oppressed by patriarchy for being men, they are oppressed in these ways because it is necessary in order to maintain women’s oppression. For women to see themselves as weak, irrational and suited only to caring roles, they must believe that men are stronger, less emotional and incapable of caring for those who need it; for these reasons, men showing weakness, emotion and a capacity for caring labour are punished by patriarchy for letting the side down and giving women the opportunity to challenge their oppression.

It makes sense that where there is an oppressed group, there is a privileged group, because systems of oppression wouldn’t last long if nobody benefited from them. It is crucial to understand that members of the privileged group of any of these systems may also be oppressed by any of the others, and this is what allows struggles to be divided and revolutionary activity crushed. We are divided, socially and politically, by a lack of awareness of our privileges, and how they are used to set our interests against each other and break our solidarity.

The term “privilege” has a complex relationship with class struggle, and to understand why, we need to look at some of the differences and confusions between economic and social class. Social class describes the cultural identities of working class, middle class and upper class. These identities, much like those built on gender or race, are socially constructed, created by a society based on its prejudices and expectations of people in those categories. Economic class is different. It describes the economic working and ruling classes, as defined by Marx. It functions through capitalism, and is based on the ownership of material resources, regardless of your personal identity or social status. This is why a wealthy, knighted capitalist like Alan Sugar can describe himself as a “working class boy made good”. He is clearly not working class if we look at it economically, but he clings to that social identity in the belief that it in some way justifies or excuses the exploitation within his business empire. He confuses social and economic class in order to identify himself with an oppressed group (the social working class) and so deny his own significant privilege (as part of the economic ruling class). Being part of the ruling class of capitalism makes it impossible to support struggles against that system. This is because, unlike any other privileged group, the ruling class are directly responsible for the very exploitation they would be claiming to oppose.

This doesn’t make economic class a “primary” oppression, or the others “secondary”, but it does mean that resistance in economic class struggle takes different forms and has slightly different aims to struggles based on cultural identities. For example, we aim to end capitalism through a revolution in which the working class seize the means of production from the ruling class, and create an anarchist communist society in which there is no ruling class. For the other struggles mentioned, this doesn’t quite work the same way – we can’t force men to give up their maleness, or white people to give up their whiteness, or send them all to the guillotine and reclaim their power and privilege as if it were a resource that they were hoarding. Instead we need to take apart and understand the systems that tend to concentrate power and resources in the hands of the culturally privileged and question the very concepts of gender, sexuality, race etc. that are used to build the identities that divide us.

A large part of the resentment of the term “privilege” within class struggle movements comes from trying to make a direct comparison with ruling class privilege, when this doesn’t quite work. Somebody born into a family who owns a chain of supermarkets or factories can, when they inherit their fortune, forgo it. They can collectivise their empire and give it to the workers, go and work in it themselves for the same share of the profits as everybody else. Capitalists can, if they choose, give up their privilege. This makes it OK for us to think of them as bad people if they don’t, and justified in taking it from them by force in a revolutionary situation. Men, white people, straight people, cisgendered people etc., can’t give up their privilege – no matter how much they may want to. It is forced on them by a system they cannot opt out of, or choose to stop benefiting from. This comparison with ruling class privilege makes many feel as if they’re being accused of hoarding something they’re not entitled to, and that they’re being blamed for this, or asked to feel guilty or undergo some kind of endless penance to be given absolution for their privilege. This is not the case. Guilt isn’t useful; awareness and thoughtful action are. If you take nothing else away from this document, take this: You are not responsible for the system that gives you your privilege, only for how you respond to it. The privileged (apart from the ruling class) have a vital role to play in the struggle against the systems that privilege them – it’s just not a leadership role.

Answering objections to privilege

So if they didn’t choose it and there’s nothing they can do about it, why describe people as “Privileged”? Isn’t it enough to talk about racism, sexism, homophobia etc. without having to call white, male and straight people something that offends them? If it’s just the terminology you object to, be aware that radical black activists, feminists, queer activists and disabled activists widely use the term privilege. Oppressed groups need to lead the struggles to end their oppressions, and that means these oppressed groups get to define the struggle and the terms we use to talk about it. It is, on one level, simply not up to class struggle groups made up of a majority of white males to tell people of colour and women what words are useful in the struggles against white supremacy and patriarchy. If you dislike the term but agree with the concept, then it would show practical solidarity to leave your personal discomfort out of the argument, accept that the terminology has been chosen, and start using the same term as those at the forefront of these struggles.

Another common objection to the concept of privilege is that it makes a cultural status out of the lack of an oppression. You could say that not facing systematic prejudice for your skin colour isn’t a privilege, it’s how things should be for everyone. To face racism is the aberration. To not face it should be the default experience. The problem is, if not experiencing oppression is the default experience, then experiencing the oppression puts you outside the default experience, in a special category, which in turn makes a lot of the oppression invisible. To talk about privilege reveals what is normal to those without the oppression, yet cannot be taken for granted by those with it. To talk about homophobia alone may reveal the existence of prejudices – stereotypes about how gay men and lesbian women behave, perhaps, or violence targeted against people for their sexuality. It’s unusual to find an anarchist who won’t condemn these things. To talk about straight privilege, however, shows the other side of the system, the invisible side: what behaviour is considered “typical” for straight people? There isn’t one – straight isn’t treated like a sexual category, it is treated like the absence of “gay”. You don’t have to worry about whether you come across as “too straight” when you’re going to a job interview, or whether your straight friends will think you’re denying your straightness if you don’t dress or talk straight enough, or whether your gay friends will be uncomfortable if you take them to a straight club, or if they’ll embarrass you by saying something ignorant about getting hit on by somebody of the opposite sex. This analysis goes beyond worries about discrimination or prejudice to the very heart of what we consider normal and neutral, what we consider different and other, what needs explaining, what’s taken as read – the prejudices in favour of being straight aren’t recognisable as prejudices, because they’re built into our very perceptions of what is the default way to be.

It’s useful to see this, because when we look at oppressions in isolation, we tend to attribute them to personal or societal prejudice, a homophobic law that can be repealed, a racial discrimination that can be legislated against. Alone, terms like “racism”, “sexism”, “ablism” don’t describe how oppression is woven into the fabric of a society and a normal part of life rather than an easily isolated stain on society that can be removed without trace, leaving the fabric intact.5

Privilege theory is systematic. It explains why removing prejudice and discrimination isn’t enough to remove oppression. It shows how society itself needs to be ordered differently. When people talk about being “colour-blind” in relation to race, they think it means they’re not racist, but it usually means that they think they can safely ignore differences of background and life experience due to race, and expect that the priorities and world views of everybody should be the same as those of white people, which they consider to be “normal”. It means they think they don’t have to listen to people who are trying to explain why a situation is different for them. They want difference to go away, so that everybody can be equal, yet by trying to ignore difference they are reinforcing it. Recognising privilege means recognising that differences of experience exist which we may not be aware of. It means being willing to listen when people tell us about how their experience differs from ours. It means trying to conceive of a new “normal” that we can bring about through a differently structured society, instead of erasing experiences that don’t fit into our privileged concept of “normal”.

Intersectionality and Kyriarchy

Kyriarchy is the concept of combined systems of oppression, the idea that capitalism, patriarchy, white supremacy, heteronormativity, cisnormativity, theocracy and other systems that we don’t necessarily have names for, are all connected, influencing and supporting each other. The word “kyriarchy” is also a handy verbal shortcut that saves having to list all the systems of oppression every time you want to explain this concept. It means everybody who’s fighting oppression of any kind is fighting the same war, we just fight it on a myriad of different fronts.

Intersectionality is the idea that we are all privileged by some of these systems and oppressed by others, and that, because those systems affect one another, our oppressions and privileges intersect. This means that we each experience oppression in ways specific to our particular combinations of class, gender, race, sexuality, disability, age etc. 6 7

Class struggle analyses tend to mark out capitalism as separate from the other systems in kyriarchy. As explained above, capitalism operates differently from systems of oppression based on identity or culture, but it would be too simplistic to dismiss these oppressions as secondary or as mere aspects of capitalism. Patriarchy, in particular, existed long before modern industrial capitalism and, there’s evidence to suggest, before the invention of money itself8, and it’s not difficult to imagine a post-capitalist society in which oppressive gender roles still hold true9. As anarchists are opposed to all systems of oppression, we recognise that fighting capitalism alone is not enough, and that other oppressions won’t melt away “after the revolution”. If we want a post-revolutionary society free of all oppression, we need all the oppressed to have an equal role in creating it, and that means listening to experiences of oppression that we don’t share and working to understand how each system operates: in isolation, in relation to capitalism and other systems of oppression and as part of kyriarchy.10

We’re used to talking about sexism or racism as divisive of the working class. Kyriarchy allows us to get away from the primacy of class while keeping it very much in the picture. Just as sexism and racism divide class struggle, capitalism and racism divide gender struggles, and sexism and capitalism divide race struggles. All systems of oppression divide the struggles against all the other systems that they intersect with. This is because we find our loyalties divided by our own particular combinations of privilege and oppression, and we prioritise the struggles we see as primary to the detriment of others, and to the detriment of solidarity. This is why the Anarchist Federation’s 3rd Aim & Principle11 cautions against cross-class alliances, but we should be avoiding campaigns that forward the cause of any oppressed group against the interests of any other – not just class. That doesn’t mean that every campaign has to forward the cause of every single struggle equally, but it does mean that we need to be aware of how our privileges can blind us to the oppressions we could be ignorantly walking all over in our campaigns. We have to consider a whole lot more than class struggle when we think about whether a campaign is moving us forwards or backwards as anarchists. Being able to analyse and point out how systems of oppression intersect is vital, as hitting these systems of oppression at their intersections can be our most effective way of uniting struggles and building solidarity across a number of ideological fronts.

Some examples:

In the early 1800s, there were several strikes of male textile workers against women being employed at their factories because their poorer pay allowed them to undercut male workers12. The intersection of capitalism and patriarchy meant that women were oppressed by capitalists as both workers and women (being exploited for lower pay than men), and by men as both women and workers (kept in the domestic sphere, doing even lower paid work). When changing conditions (mechanisation) made it too difficult to restrict women to their traditional work roles, unions finally saw reason and campaigned across the intersection, allowing women to join the unions and campaigning for their pay to be raised.

From the 70s to the present day, certain strands of radical feminism have refused to accept the validity of trans* struggles, keeping trans women out of women’s spaces (see the controversies over Radfem 2012 and some of the workshops at Women Up North 2012 over their “women born women” policies). The outcome of this is as above: the most oppressed get the shitty end of both sticks (in this case cisnormativity and patriarchy), with feminism, the movement that is supposed to be at the forefront of fighting the oppression that affects both parties (patriarchy) failing at one of its sharpest intersections. This also led to the fracturing of the feminist movement and stagnation of theory through failure to communicate with trans* activists, whose priorities and struggles have such a massive crossover with feminism. One positive that’s come out of these recent examples is the joining together of feminist and trans* activist groups to challenge the entry policy of Radfem 2012. This is leading to more communication, solidarity and the possibility of joint actions between these groups.

The above examples mean that thinking about our privileges and oppressions is essential for organising together, for recognising where other struggles intersect with our own and what our role should be in those situations, where our experiences will be useful and where they will be disruptive, where we should be listening carefully and where we can contribute constructively. Acknowledging privilege in this situation means acknowledging that it’s not just the responsibility of the oppressed group to challenge the system that oppresses them, it’s everybody’s responsibility, because being part of a privileged group doesn’t make you neutral, it means you’re facing an advantage. That said, when we join the struggle against our own advantages we need to remember that it isn’t about duty or guilt or altruism, because all our struggles are all connected. The more we can make alliances over the oppressions that have been used to divide us, the more we can unite against the forces that exploit us all. None of us can do it alone.

The myth of the “Oppression Olympics”

The parallels that are drawn between the Black and women’s movements can always turn into an 11-plus: who is more exploited? Our purpose here is not parallels. We are seeking to describe that complex interweaving of forces which is the working class; we are seeking to break down the power relations among us on which is based the hierarchical rule of international capital. For no man can represent us as women any more than whites can speak about and themselves end the Black experience. Nor do we seek to convince men of our feminism. Ultimately they will be “convinced” by our power. We offer them what we offer the most privileged women: power over their enemies. The price is an end to their privilege over us.13

To say that somebody has white privilege isn’t to suggest that they can’t also have a whole host of other oppressions. To say that somebody suffers oppression by patriarchy doesn’t mean they can’t also have a lot of other privileges. There is no points system for working out how privileged or oppressed you are in relation to somebody else, and no point in trying to do so. The only way that privilege or oppression makes your contributions to a struggle more or less valid is through that struggle’s relevance to your lived experience.

A black, disabled working class lesbian may not necessarily have had a harder life than a white, able-bodied working class straight cis-man, but she will have a much greater understanding of the intersections between class, race, disability, gender and sexuality. The point isn’t that, as the most oppressed in the room, she should lead the discussion, it’s that her experience gives her insights he won’t have on the relevant points of struggle, the demands that will be most effective, the bosses who represent the biggest problem, the best places and times to hold meetings or how to phrase a callout for a mass meeting so that it will appeal to a wider range of people, ways of dealing with issues that will very probably not occur to anybody whose oppression is along fewer intersections. He should be listening to her, not because she is more oppressed than him (though she may well be), but because it is vital to the struggle that she is heard, and because the prejudices that society has conditioned into us, and that still affect the most socially aware of us, continue to make it more difficult for her to be heard, for us to hear her.

Some would argue that governments, public bodies and corporations have been known to use arguments like these to put forward or promote particular people into positions of power or responsibility, either as a well-meaning attempt to ensure that oppressed groups are represented or as a cynical exercise in tokenism to improve their public image. This serves the state and capital by encouraging people to believe that they are represented, and that their most effective opportunities for change will come through supporting or petitioning these representatives. This is what we mean by cross-class alliances in the 3rd A&P, and obviously we oppose the idea that, for instance, a woman Prime Minister, will be likely to do anything more for working class women than a male Prime Minister will do for working class men. It should be remembered that privilege theory is not a movement in itself but an analysis used by a diverse range of movements, liberal and radical, reformist and revolutionary. By the same token, the rhetoric of solidarity and class unity is used by leftists to gain power for themselves, even as we use those same concepts to fight the power structures they use. The fact that some people will use the idea of privilege to promote themselves as community leaders and reformist electoral candidates doesn’t mean that that’s the core reasoning or inevitable outcome of privilege theory. For us, as class struggle anarchists, the identities imposed on us by kyriarchy and the politics that go with them are about uniting in struggle against all oppression, not entrenching social constructs, congratulating ourselves on how aware we are, claiming special rights according to our background or biology, and certainly not creating ranked hierarchies of the most oppressed to put forward for tokenistic positions of power.

In the AF, we already acknowledge in our Aims and Principles the necessity of autonomous struggle for people in oppressed groups; but rather than analyse why this is necessary, we only warn against cross-class alliances within their struggles. The unspoken reason why it is necessary for them to organise independently is privilege. Any reason you can think of why it might be necessary, is down to privilege: the possible presence of abusers, the potential of experiences of oppression being misunderstood, mistrusted, dismissed, or requiring a huge amount of explanation before they are accepted and the meeting can move onto actions around them, even internalised feelings of inferiority are triggered by our own awareness of the presence of members of the privileged group. This may not be their fault, but it is due to the existence of systems that privilege them. The reason we need to organise autonomously is that we need to be free of the presence of privilege to speak freely. After speaking freely, we can identify and work to change the conditions that prevented us from doing so before – breaking down the influence of those systems on ourselves and lessening the privilege of others in their relations with us – but the speaking freely has to come first.

To equate talk of “privilege” with liberalism, electoralism and cross-class struggles is to deny oppressed groups the space and the language to identify their experiences of oppression and so effectively organise against the systems that oppress them. If we acknowledge that these organising spaces are necessary, and that it is possible for them to function without engaging in liberalism and cross-class struggles, then we must acknowledge that privilege theory does not, of necessity, lead to liberalism and cross-class struggles. It may do so when it is used by liberals and reformists, but not when used by revolutionary class struggle anarchists. Privilege theory doesn’t come with compulsory liberalism any more than the idea of class struggle comes with compulsory Leninism.

The class struggle analysis of privilege

This may all seem, at first, to make class struggle just one struggle among many, but the unique way in which ruling class privilege operates provides an overarching context for all the other systems. While any system can be used as a “context” for any other, depending on which intersections we’re looking at, capitalism is particularly important because those privileged within it have overt control over resources rather than just a default cultural status of normalcy. They are necessarily active oppressors, and cannot be passive or unwilling recipients of the benefits of others’ oppression. The ruling class and the working class have opposing interests, while the privileged and oppressed groups of other systems only have differing interests, which differ less as the influence of those systems is reduced.

This doesn’t make economic class a primary oppression, or the others secondary, because our oppressions and privileges intersect. If women’s issues were considered secondary to class issues, this would imply that working class men’s issues were more important than those of working class women. Economic class is not so much the primary struggle as the all-encompassing struggle. Issues that only face queer people in the ruling class (such as a member of an aristocratic family having to remain in the closet and marry for the sake of the family line) are not secondary to our concerns, but completely irrelevant, because they are among the few oppressions that truly will melt away after the revolution, when there is no ruling class to enforce them on itself. We may condemn racism, sexism, homophobia and general snobbery shown by members of the ruling class to one another, but we don’t have common cause in struggle with those suffering these, even those with whom we share a cultural identity, because they remain our direct and active oppressors.

When we try to apply this across other intersections than economic class, we don’t see concerns that are irrelevant to all but the privileged group, but we do find that the limited perspective of privileged activists gives campaigns an overly narrow focus. For instance, overwhelmingly white, middle class feminist organisations of the 60s and 70s have been criticised by women of colour and disabled women for focusing solely on the legalisation of abortion at a time when Puerto-Rican women and disabled women faced forced sterilisation, and many women lacked access to essential services during pregnancy and childbirth. Although the availability of abortion certainly wasn’t irrelevant to these women, the campaigns failed to also consider the affordability of abortion, and completely ignored the concerns of women being denied the right to have a child. Most feminist groups now tend to talk about “reproductive rights” rather than “abortion rights”, and demand free or affordable family planning services that include abortion, contraception, sexual health screening, antenatal and post-natal care, issues relevant to women of all backgrounds.14

We have to challenge ourselves to look out for campaigns that, due to the privilege of those who initiate them, lack awareness of how an issue differs across intersections. We need to broaden out our own campaigns to include the perspectives of all those affected by the issues we cover. This will allow us to bring more issues together, gather greater solidarity, fight more oppressions and build a movement that can challenge the whole of kyriarchy, which is the only way to ever defeat any part of it, including capitalism.

1 “A common form of blindness to privilege is that women and people of color are often described as being treated unequally, but men and whites are not. This…is logically impossible. Unequal simply means ‘not equal,’ which describes both those who receive less than their fair share and those who receive more. But there can’t be a short end of the stick without a long end, because it’s the longness of the long end that makes the short end short. To pretend otherwise makes privilege and those who receive it invisible.” Allan G. Johnson, Privilege, Power and Difference (2006).

2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16552489, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/12/police-stop-and-search-black-people (statistics not available for Scotland)

3 http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/statistics/mojstats/stats-race-cjs-2010.pdf

4 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/13/black-people-unemployed-britain-us

5 “While it is important that individuals work to transform their consciousness, striving to be anti-racist, it is important for us to remember that the struggle to end white supremacy is a struggle to change a system, a structure…For our efforts to end white supremacy to be truly effective, individual struggle to change consciousness must be fundamentally linked to collective effort to transform those structures that reinforce and perpetuate white supremacy.” bell hooks, Killing Rage: Ending Racism, 1995

6 http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-the-lowest-difficulty-settingthere- is/

7 Intersectionality as a term and an idea has been developed by, among others: Kimberle Williams Crenshaw, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Patricia Hill Collins, Leslie McCall, if you are interested in further reading.

8 Graeber’s ‘Debt: The First 5,000 Years’ suggests that young women were used in some pre-money societies as an early form of currency or debt tally.

9 See the chapter with all the beautiful and sexually available house-keeping-cleaning-serving women in William Morris’ utopia News from Nowhere.

10 One anarchist analysis of intersectionality: http://libcom.org/library/refusing-waitanarchism- intersectionality.

11 “We believe that fighting systems of oppression that divide the working class, such as racism and sexism, is essential to class struggle. Anarchist-Communism cannot be achieved while these inequalities still exist. In order to be effective in our various struggles against oppression, both within society and within the working class, we at times need to organise independently as people who are oppressed according to gender, sexuality, ethnicity or ability. We do this as working class people, as cross-class movements hide real class differences and achieve little for us. Full emancipation cannot be achieved without the abolition of capitalism.” http://www.afed.org.uk/organisation/aims-and-principles.html

12 See Chapter 7 of The Struggle for the Breeches: Gender and the Making of the British Working Class by Anna Clark.

13 Selma James, ‘Sex, Race and Class’ 1975

14 Links to these examples are on these posts at the Angry Black Woman blog: http://theangryblackwoman.com/2010/02/26/reproductive-justice-linkspam-a-starting-point/, http://theangryblackwoman.com/2008/04/14/poc-and-the-politics-of-medical-research/

Anarchist perspectives on Catalonia

We present three recent articles and communiques from Spain about the Catalonia independence referendum and the general strike (vaga general) of 3rd October (3-O) that was initiated by alternative/base unions. All articles were posted on 3rd October 2017.

General strike against state repression in Catalonia, by a member of CNT

Originally called by a group of alternative unions including the anarcho-syndicalist CNT, who represent the majority of linesman at the Port of Barcelona, the revolutionary syndicalist CGT and Catalan unions the IAC and the COS, the strike is now also being supported by the dockworkers’ Coordinadora as well as mainstream trade unions the CCOO and UGT.

Read more: https://libcom.org/news/general-strike-against-state-repression-catalonia-03102017

After the 3-O strike, CNT calls for extending the social response

Facing Tuesday’s general strike in Catalonia, CNT wants to show its satisfaction with the response which thousands of workers have given throughout the day and across trades. Popular mobilization responds again against the severe repression which Catalan society is living. Worker’s solidarity shows once again that it can do anything.

Read more:

http://www.cnt.es/noticias/cas-cat-eng-tras-la-huelga-del-3-o-cnt-llama-extender-la-respuesta-social

Communication of the Love & Rage collective about the current conflict – Comunicado del colectivo Amor y Rabia ante el conflicto actual, by Joan Peiro

Translation of http://noticiasayr.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/comunicado-del-colectivo-amor-y-rabia.html from http://libcom.org/forums/news/catalonia-situation-22092017?page=5#comment-598713

1) We condemn unreservedly the brutal police actions ordered by the central government with the support of the Socialist Party (PSOE) and Ciudadanos (Citizens), and which only serves the electoral interests of the PP (People’s Party) and Junts pel Sí (Together for Yes).

2) We completely refuse to support a ‘Process’ inititated and directed by a political caste that is as corrupt and repressive as the government in Madrid and the parties that support it.

3) As a part of the libertarian movement we reaffirm that the objective of anarchism is a world without classes or borders, based on direct democracy and equality.

What is happening in Catalonia is entirely contrary to this: it is cross class and in support of a neoliberal government that is instrumentalising social unrest for its own interests, in the name of an illusory common good and the creation of a new state that would be in the hands of those who previously supported the ‘Regime of ’78’. The demise of neoliberal globalisation has paved the way for protectionism of an identitarian character.

Amor y Rabia considers it fundamental to struggle against capitalism and to concentrate our forces on fighting class society, focusing our activity on the social question rather than the ‘national question’, which turns us into pawns in the internal struggles of rival oligarchies.

‘Changing bosses is not the same as freeing yourself from them’

Join anti-fracking mass phone-in during 27-28 September 2017

A two day mass phone-in to PJ Brown Construction has been organised to start on the morning of Wednesday 27th of September and finish on the evening of Thursday 28th of September.
PJ Brown Construction are one of the companies involved in the fracking operations at Leith Hill in Surrey.
Spread the word
We are appealing to international anti-fracking activists to spread the word about this mass phone-in encourage people to politely express their disapproval of Brown Construction’s involvement in the fracking operations at Leith Hill so that the company will change their mind.
What is Fracking?
Fracking is a type of drilling used to extract fossil fuels (Oil and Gas) from the ground, it involves drilling into a rock formation, then pushing in large amounts of a water and chemical mixture (Fracking fluid) at high pressure to extract oil or gas from the cracked rock formations.
More info about the campaign and about fracking, plus phone numbers for the protest (including how to call in safely): https://surreyandhampshireanarchistfederation.wordpress.com/2017/08/27/communications-blockade-27th-28th-sept/

McDonalds #McStrike Workers – Not Lovin’ It

McDonalds workers at branches in Cambridge and Crayford in S.E. London are set to strike on Monday Sept 4th 2017. This will be the first ever strike at a UK branch.

Many McDonalds workers actually struggle to feed and house themselves on minimum wage, and a whopping 96% of those balloted voted to strike for £10.00-an-hour. They are also demanding an end to what are effectively zero-hours contracts and generally outrageous working conditions, including informal penalties for joining a union.

This is an incredibly brave action. It is not a strike in which well-represented workers with secure contracts and strike pay can flex their muscle collectively and prove that the bosses can’t do without them. It is a strike by those left literally with no other choice in one of the least secure and most exploitative sectors of employment. But even this sector can make gains for workers if there is enough solidarity for them and if they organise in radical ways. In the UK and US the Industrial Workers of the World, Anarcho-Syndicalist unions and other non-hierarchical and worker-led organisations have made gains by standing strong. Pressure already being put on McDonalds has meant that they now technically now offer workers a choice of flexible or fixed-hours contracts, although many workers apparently did not even know that this was the case until it was ‘announced’ after the strike ballot took place.

In the US the demand is for $15.00 and similar action is being taken on Monday too, which is Labor Day. For IWW analysis https://www.iww.org/content/beyond-fight-15-worker-led-fast-food-union-campaign-building-power-shop-floor

So please go down to support McDonalds workers if you can. Show them that they can rely on more radical support than they will undoubtedly get through their union, the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union. Or picket your local branch to show solidarity for others considering striking, as is happening in many towns https://fastfoodrights.wordpress.com/. Follow and share news about the strike here https://twitter.com/hashtag/mcstrike.

See also here for anarchist analysis of past anti-McDonalds activism since the early 2000s, which many libertarian communists have been involved in https://libcom.org/tags/mcdonalds-workers-resistance?page=4

Watch a documentary about the inspiring victory of anarchists in the McLibel trial in 2005 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V58kK4r26yk

Mourn the dead, fight like hell for the living

The murder of Heather Heyer by a neo-Nazi was horrifying but not surprising. The Ku Klux Klan, the neo-Nazis and the alt.right have increased in confidence under Trump and indeed in his rambling and incoherent speeches he refused to completely condemn them. Heather’s murder was not an isolated incident. It follows the shooting of a member of the revolutionary union, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) in Seattle, the double murder on the Portland train, and many other incidents in Berkeley, Minnesota etc.

As the General Defence Committee of the IWW stated: “Fascism is a deadly threat to all of us. There is no escape from the demand that we confront it. Politicians, the police, and the university will not save us. We cannot vote our way to safety. As always, police aided and protected the fascists, while permitting and assisting wholesale violence against counter-protesters. University officials refused to use campus security to protect students and others from a gang of hundreds of fascists”.

Far from intimidating people the attack appears to have led to a strengthening of the movement against the growth of the far right. When the far right tried to rally in Boston shortly after Charlottesville, they managed barely a hundred supporters. They were surrounded by an angry crowd of 40,000.Trump labelled these as “anti-police agitators” A demonstrator was quoted as saying: “Our generation has been radicalized by police murdering people of colour. And cops shut down a massive section of Boston and protected about 25 rightwingers while 45,000 people joined counter-protests. I think for a lot of people it’s clear what side the police are on. It wasn’t on the side of the people protesting white nationalists even though Marty Walsh [the mayor of Boston] talked tough earlier in the week.”

This massive response threw fear into the far right. As a result 67 rallies across 36 states organised by the hate group Act for America were cancelled. Many actions in solidarity with the Charlottesville attack took place around the USA, and around the world. In Asheville, North Carolina a crowd gathered and tore down a statue of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee. San Francisco dockers called for a strike against a far right rally organised by the Patriot Prayer group.

The movement that is developing in America is radicalising. It sees how the police protect far right rallies, is increasingly aware that the police are a murderous and racist institution, and increasingly sees now that the whole problem of racism and white supremacy is a result of the system itself. For too long the alt.right and their allies in the KKK and the neo-Nazi groups have been tolerated and have become more and more confident under a President who is himself a racist, xenophobe and misogynist. Now they are starting to panic as mass resistance to them grows. They can be swept back, Trump can be overthrown. It all depends on mass action rather than waiting on possible impeachment.

Note: the title of this blog is derived from a quote from a co-founder of the Industrial Workers of the World, Mary Harris Jones https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mary_Harris_Jones.

Because They Were Poor: The Grenfell Fire

This article was written by a member of London AF (who are involved with housing activism in the City as published in Rebel City).

Angry Londoner writes: “The people who died and lost their homes – this happened to them because they are poor,” Akala, rapper and poet, local resident.

“Regeneration is a euphemism for ethnic and class cleansing”: Kensington resident and writer Ishmahil Blagrove.

Guilty: Boris Johnson. When Mayor of London he put through cuts including the closure of 10 fire stations and the loss of 552 firefighters jobs despite pre-election promises not to do so. When questioned over this at the Greater London Assembly he said: “Get Stuffed”. The loss to the fire services meant a slower response time to the fire, with fire teams having to be called in from outside London.

Guilty: Kensington and Chelsea Council. They repeatedly ignored warnings for years from residents about fire hazards. They attempted to close down a blogger, Francis O’Connor, member of the Grenfell Action Group (GAG) after he warned about fire hazards at Grenfell. They sent a lawyer to threaten him, which he ignored. Nicholas Paget-Brown, leader of the council, attended a private dinner to which he was invited by organizers of the MIPIM (property developers’ event) conference in 2015. The council has had plans to cleanse the residents and build luxury flats in the neighbourhood for the last three years. Now Paget-Brown is trying to put blame on the residents by falsely saying that they objected to water sprinklers.

Guilty: Kensington and Chelsea Tenants Management Organisation. The “arm’s length” body set up by Kensington and Chelsea Council to manage Grenfell block ignored tenants’ warnings. It was handed £11 million by the Council to manage the block and in 2015-2016 its bosses got a grand total of £650,794 in salaries! As GAG wrote: “We believe that the KCTMO have ensured their ongoing survival by the use of proxy votes at their Annual General Meeting that see them returned with a mandate of 98% in favour of the continuation of their inept and highly dangerous management of our homes” and that “It is our conviction that a serious fire in a tower block or similar high density residential property is the most likely reason that those who wield power at the KCTMO will be found out and brought to justice! The Grenfell Action Group believe that the KCTMO narrowly averted a major fire disaster at Grenfell Tower in 2013 when residents experienced a period of terrifying power surges that were subsequently found to have been caused by faulty wiring. We believe that our attempts to highlight the seriousness of this event were covered up by the KCTMO with the help of the RBKC Scrutiny Committee who refused to investigate the legitimate concerns of tenants and leaseholders.” (this was written in November 2016!) KCTMO was given a “deficiency notice” last year by the London fire brigade after an audit at another of its properties.

Guilty: Gavin Barwell. Now Theresa May’s chief of staff, the then Housing Minister in 2013 promised to review part B of the Building Regulations 2010, relating to fire safety, but the review never happened. This was after the fire at another tower block, Lakanal House in Southwark in 2009 that killed six people. Instead housing ministers have sat on it for four years!

Guilty: Brandon Lewis. Another Tory Housing Minister who sat on information about fire risks at blocks like Grenfell because it would “discourage building”. He waved away suggestions about installation of water sprinklers in 2014 saying it was “all red tape”.

Guilty: The Conservative government itself and back bench Tory MPS who voted against a motion to make “homes fit or human habitation” in 2016 with a clause to undertake regular electrical checking. Among these were 72 MPs who are also landlords, including the present Police and Fire Minister Nick Hurd. The then local government minister Marcus Jones said: it “would result in unnecessary regulation and cost to landlords”.

But GUILTY most of all is the whole class system, capitalism itself, that for decades now has unleashed the policies of neoliberalism on the working class, policies of the unbridled market, policies of austerity, policies of vicious attacks on social services and what is the robbing of the poor to make the wealthy even wealthier. This system should be sentenced to death.

Solidarity demo arrestees in Turkey – started hunger strike in custody on 24th May 2017 – now released

Comrades arrested and under custody in Turkey went on a hunger strike as of May 24,2017. Update 27/5/2017 – comrades now released from custody. Details below.

Yesterday an anarchist-comrade along with several others were arrested violently by the police during a solidarity demonstration with Nuriye Gulmen and Semih Ozakca*. Comrades in question are held arbitrarily by the police in custody and in protest of their treatment, yesterday they went on an indefinite hunger strike until they are released. As the anniversary of the Gezi Revolt approaches (the end of May) fascist Erdogan government fears another revolt against its violent dictatorial regime. It is keeping every protester it can arrest as hostage. I will update this as more information arrives. As always, but as it becomes more and more clear everyday, our only weapon against the state and sectarian violence directed everywhere against the working class is international solidarity!

*Nuriye Gulmen, a university professor, and Semih Ozakca, a high school teacher, were sacked by the government for no reason except being leftists and participated in the Gezi demonstrations after the military coup last year. The government officials and prosecutors clearly know that Nuriye&Semih have no ties with the islamist/Gulenist coup plotters who were until yesterday partners of Erdogan in repressing the working class and the Kurds. Unsurprisingly though state officials fear the militant working class people more than they fear coupist Gulenist army generals. Hence, Nuriye and Semih were sacked together with thousands of other teachers, professors and civil servants without any real evidence. Nuriye and Semih are on hunger strike for 76 days. Their only demand is to be reinstated at their jobs. Two days ago they were arrested at their home after a night raid by the police. These people are already under surveillance, their passports have probably been cancelled and they never attempted to hide. The prosecutors asked them if “any radical left wing group promised them any material benefit in exchange of their hunger strikes and if they are trying to overthrow the government by triggering a revolt, similar to the Gezi revolt”. These outrageous questions constituted the basis for their imprisonment. Clearly this naked state terror is only aimed to intimidate the workers not to oppose the government, whose self-confidence is daily eroding and, in fear, using the only weapon it knows best: violence.

Update 27/5/2017 via Libcom.org

All those held in custody, including the anarchist comrade earlier mentioned were released a couple of hours ago. However, Nuriye and Semih are still on hunger strike and still in jail. Everyday small solidarity demonstrations and new arrests/house raids are taking place, so the situation is still evolving. On a funny note, today the Ankara governor issued an order that singing in the streets after dark is banned until further notice. The government is trying to stop the expansion of small spontaneous solidarity demonstrations which are taking the form of small occupations and it is sinking to new depths of stupidity everyday in that effort.

What is most interesting is dozens of businessmen, who are associated with the Gulenist organizations and the coup plot are getting released, while thousands of teachers and public workers still remain sacked and/or in prison. Clearly the burden of state repression fell on the rank-and-file socialist militants and the working class, while those bureaucrats and bourgeois people who may have any ties with the coup and Gulenist islamist faction remain free. This only shows that government’s real fear is not this or that bourgeois faction but the working class. It fears the anger of the proletariat more than it fears any coup or violent inter-bourgeois conflict.

Reported previously on Leicester AF website and Libcom.org

Other relevent press about original hunger strike by Nuriye Gulmen and Semih Ozakca : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/24/turkey-jails-academics-hunger-strike-losing-jobs-post-coup-purge/

and another hunger strike on same day by French photographer Mathias Depardon :

http://www.bjp-online.com/2017/05/mathias-depardon-on-hunger-strike-against-detention-by-turkish-authorities/

Anarsist Kadinlar – Anarchist Women of Turkey

Anarchists in countries where International Women’s Day is celebrated (March 8th) actively point out its hypocrisy under Capitalism. The March issue of the Turkish anarchist newspaper Meydan is being published by anarchist women. They asked women anarchists internationally for contributions in support of this. Our gender-oppressed caucus wrote a statement:

Dear self-identified women and non-binary people of Turkey,

We would like to send our solidarity from the Gender-oppressed/women’s caucus of the Anarchist Federation of the UK. We come from different places around the world but are all writing from a little cabin in the Highlands of Scotland where we are having a quarterly meeting.

Although the situations of women and non-binary people are different in different places in the world, everywhere we are suffering and fighting against violence in our communities, in our relationships and in our workplaces. The government of the UK has made drastic cuts to domestic violence services as part of their austerity drive, as well as to housing and childcare. Trans-misogyny and violence against sex workers and LGBT people are an additional threat. The racist logic of borders is a constant source of violence against women and non-binary people, with the lack of a safe, dignified passage making an already dangerous journey more perilous, and making women more vulnerable to those who would exploit them. The denial of the existence of patriarchy is a constant problem, even within the anarchist movement. As anarcha-feminists, we work to transform the organisations that we are a part of, to make sure that the fight against patriarchy is recognised as intrinsic to the class struggle.

We reject the idea that a woman Prime Minister and First Minister of Scotland in the UK brings liberation for women. As working class women, we are oppressed by the state and capital, and who is in control of these systems makes no difference to our oppression.

We send solidarity to women everywhere on International Women’s Day, for the overthrow of capitalism, white supremacy and patriarchy. We carry a new world in our hearts, and we look forward to sharing it with you.

Incidentally, Meydan’s editor Umut Firat is currently serving a prison sentence and began a hunger strike late last year in protest against prison conditions. His conditions were improved after fifty-five days and he ended his strike.

Anarchist Federation, Gender-oppressed causus
www.afed.org.uk

More information: https://enoughisenough14.org/2016/12/24/turkey-statement-prison-sentence-to-managing-editor-of-meydan-newspaper/

See also, from APO in Greece, Group against patriarchy
Anarchist Political Organization (APO) – Federation of Collectives: http://apo.squathost.com/international-solidarity-messages-about-the-8th-of-march/ including http://apo.squathost.com/short-briefing-on-the-participation-of-the-group-against-patriarchy-anarchist-political-organizationfrom-greece-in-the-mobilizations-related-to-the-8th-of-march/