Looking to join anarchist group

[Spion]

Not at all. 'Groups' are the basic unit of anarchist organisation. Contrary to what it may appear from p+p...

I think there is a contradiction between the anti-party, non-vanguardist proclamations of many anarchists and the idea that it's apprarently OK to form groups, which are by definition exclusive and de facto vanguards of some sort or other

 

[bluestreak]

The strict syllable limit is not really of huge importance in Haiku. Besides, the traditional 5,7,5 pattern is for the count of japanese phonetic units, which are quite different from western syllables. Therefore, it is common for haiku in english to have different syllable counts.

Yes, thank you Mr Smarty Pants.

 

[bluestreak]

I think there is a contradiction between the anti-party, non-vanguardist proclamations of many anarchists and the idea that it's apprarently OK to form groups, which are by definition exclusive and de facto vanguards of some sort or other

Not at all. Groups are not parties. They are organisation and educational units open to all, non-hierarchical and with no leadership.

An anarchist group is no more a party than any collection of individuals is.

 

[Spion]

Not at all. Groups are not parties. They are organisation and educational units open to all, non-hierarchical and with no leadership.

Are they open to racists, to Tories, to union bureaucrats? I doubt it - I imagine they define who joins them according to what they view as anarchist

And to suggest any gathering of humans is non-hierarchical and has no leadership is ludicrous, IMO. There will always be different levels of ability, articulacy, familiarity with the ideas the group places an importance on etc. Ignoring hierarchy is the best way to ensure it runs rampant, IME

An anarchist group is no more a party than any collection of individuals is.

An anarchist group is political so it's certainly more like a party than a knitting circle is. And if it is political it is presumably telling others not in the group what it or they think, so is therefore acting like a party.

 

[scumbalina]

I am hoping that you or someone you know may be able to assist me. I currently live in Victoria (London) and I am looking for a group to join an anarchist group in my vicinity. Unfortunatly I had to move back to the UK after spending several years abroad

(I was travelling and trying to experience life with people who aren’t corrupted my mass consumerism etc) I was always together with people who felt the same way about life as I do. Now I am back in London, I find myself alone and without people around me who feel the way I do, and want to do something about it. Anyway if you can help me I would be grateful, if not thank you for taking the time to read this.

God, bet you're so glad you started this thread

If you can ignore the large amount of cocks on there and not get dragged into some tedious debate (if you thought this thread was bad...), this might be a good place to ask/look http://libcom.org/forums/south-east-london

 

[bluestreak]

Are they open to racists, to Tories, to union bureaucrats? I doubt it - I imagine they define who joins them according to what they view as anarchist

And to suggest any gathering of humans is non-hierarchical and has no leadership is ludicrous, IMO. There will always be different levels of ability, articulacy, familiarity with the ideas the group places an importance on etc. Ignoring hierarchy is the best way to ensure it runs rampant, IME

An anarchist group is political so it's certainly more like a party than a knitting circle is. And if it is political it is presumably telling others not in the group what it or they think, so is therefore acting like a party.

firstly, it does of course depend on the group. I imagine that it would be up to any individual group to decide if they'd allow entry to someone whose politics weren't anarchist. Many anarchists will set up non-politically aligned groups to fight single issues within the community and encourage as broad a range of the community to join as possible.

An anarchist group that excludes people who wish to genuinely participate would be a failure.

Re; hierarchies. There aren't hierarchies within anarchist groups. of course there are going to be people who may see themselves as leaders, or people who are basically the leader due to the time and effort they put into the organisation - but decisions are made by the group and ideas are welcome. attendance on actions is not required, if you disagree with something but the majority don't then you are not required to no nor ostracised for not going. Hierarchies are not necessary, and the absence of a formal structure certainly doesn't lead to to "hierarchies running rampant". On the other hand, I would be lying if i said that some anarchist groups have been hampered by this due to having a collection of fevered egos and no leadership structure to prevent them running riot. Most groups I have known have quite adequately dealt with this problem within the group.

Yes, alright, an anarchist group is more like a party than a knitting circle is like a party, but it certainly does not mean that an anarchist group IS a political party. There is a world of difference between the formalised structure of a political party (with a manifesto and a whip and the bizarre interaction between members, activists, leaders etc etc) and the informal nature of an anarchist group.

 

[chico enrico]

OP, no, really, it isn't. libcom is like the flat earth society for folk who don't wash.

anyway, i think this thread , lamentably, illustrates the answer to your original question better than any suggestions could:

don't bother, anarchist groups in Britain are full of nutcases and sadly here there is nothing more guaranteed to put you off your 'ideals' than many of those who (ostensibly) share them.

just find out what is going on in your own community that you can become involved with. it might be something totally unglamarous that doesn't require getting masked up and waving FAI flags about, such as joining a campaign to get a zebra crossing put in near a school where kids have been knocked down or against a library closure, but it's a damn sight more worthwhile and relevant to people than the abstract bollocks most @s spraff on about these days.

"from the smallest acorns, mighty oaks grow" 'n' al that

 

[bluestreak]

Or ignore chico's tired cliches.

IME there's more of "such as joining a campaign to get a zebra crossing put in near a school where kids have been knocked down or against a library closure" in Anarchist groups these days than "getting masked up and waving FAI flags".

Mind you, it's been a few years since I've been part of it, so I might be wrong.

 

[chico enrico]

Or ignore chico's tired cliches.

IME there's more of "such as joining a campaign to get a zebra crossing put in near a school where kids have been knocked down or against a library closure" in Anarchist groups these days than "getting masked up and waving FAI flags".

Mind you, it's been a few years since I've been part of it, so I might be wrong.

fair enough mate, maybe it's different where you are. in fact, i really hope it is and i'm wrong. but all i ever seem to hear about is folk talking bollocks on the net and anti-globalisation protests in far off countries and suchlike

 

[bluestreak]

That's the net presence alright... most of the activists i've known have spent far more time in the real world than bickering on the internet about stuff.

The internet is for arguing, the real world is for action!

 

[Spion]

firstly, it does of course depend on the group. I imagine that it would be up to any individual group to decide if they'd allow entry to someone whose politics weren't anarchist. Many anarchists will set up non-politically aligned groups to fight single issues within the community and encourage as broad a range of the community to join as possible.

An anarchist group that excludes people who wish to genuinely participate would be a failure.

Re; hierarchies. There aren't hierarchies within anarchist groups. of course there are going to be people who may see themselves as leaders, or people who are basically the leader due to the time and effort they put into the organisation - but decisions are made by the group and ideas are welcome. attendance on actions is not required, if you disagree with something but the majority don't then you are not required to no nor ostracised for not going. Hierarchies are not necessary, and the absence of a formal structure certainly doesn't lead to to "hierarchies running rampant". On the other hand, I would be lying if i said that some anarchist groups have been hampered by this due to having a collection of fevered egos and no leadership structure to prevent them running riot. Most groups I have known have quite adequately dealt with this problem within the group.

Yes, alright, an anarchist group is more like a party than a knitting circle is like a party, but it certainly does not mean that an anarchist group IS a political party. There is a world of difference between the formalised structure of a political party (with a manifesto and a whip and the bizarre interaction between members, activists, leaders etc etc) and the informal nature of an anarchist group.

In short, anarchist groups vary from egalitarian collectives where everyone gets on just fine to ego-driven fiefdoms, so are just like all political groups/parties really, except perhaps in the strange contradiction between eschewing hierarchies and their de fact existence.

I'd suggest that the extent to which any of these organisational characteristics manifests itself is mostly dependent on the political circumstances surrounding them.

I can't imagine it'd be very sensible to run an anarchist group as a fluffy open thing with no element of compulsion in any sense in times of severe repression and police agent activity

 

[bluestreak]

I'd suggest that the extent to which any of these organisational characteristics manifests itself is mostly dependent on the political circumstances surrounding them.

I can't imagine it'd be very sensible to run an anarchist group as a fluffy open thing with no element of compulsion in any sense in times of severe repression and police agent activity

Yes and no - certainly any political organisation's structure will reflect the needs of the organisation in relation to the currenct socio-political environment; however, without examples of what form compulsion might take I can't really agree or disagree with the second paragraph.

More importantly, I think that, given we're not currently in a time of severe repression (and that most anarchist groups that I've known have operated on the assumption that there is at least one police agent in the group at any given time ), this is getting into the realms of pointless theory and may risk falling into the abstract bollocks spaff previously mentioned, and I may be undermining my own argument simply by continuing down that route!

 

[Spion]

S'alright. I was sort of thinking out loud anyway

 

[sleaterkinney]

I was just about to do one like that!

All rise.

England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales
Ruling over all the waves
God save the Queen.

Ireland doesn't have any parasitic inbreeds. Thank you very much.