New look for the AF's newspaper

[butchersapron]

what you are saying is if it were done half heartedly, not seriously, as a lowest common denominator, a mess .. i entirely agree if done like this it would be a failure

what i am suggestting is something that yes people would not like some bits .. they not IT would have to compromise

They're not going to though mate. That's precisely why the chips have fallen where they have in terms of different organisations with different politics - because people have found those small differences to be that important.

 

[durruti02]

you also assume it would be left to those already doing it to input .. avctually i think there are 100x more people who would get involved IF they thought it was a real movement paper

 

[butchersapron]

process

Some processes are fucked from the start

 

[durruti02]

They're not going to though mate. That's precisely why the chips have fallen where they have in terms of different organisations with different politics - because people have found those small differences to be that important.

why have they? and if we accept this then i may as well jump off archway bridge

 

[TopCat]

I don't buy Freedom, it's boring. Black Flag made little sense for years. Class War is a pastiche of it's former self. The others interest me less.

I can't see the benefits of having one paper at all. If it was successful the producing group would have more special branch assets joining than genuine members. Then the police mob would lead the whole project up the garden path and then it would all split in acrimony and bitterness with everyone blaming each other whilst the plod laugh.

 

[butchersapron]

you also assume it would be left to those already doing it to input .. avctually i think there are 100x more people who would get involved IF they thought it was a real movement paper

In which case, i think those who are already doing Organise! DA, etc would not get involved - it would be something different. It might end up as BF, Freedom (and their overlap) and those who don't want to be in a fed or put the hard slog into freedom.

 

[TopCat]

Durruti 2

Why do you want to unify the anarchists instead of getting on with the Hackney project?

 

[TopCat]

why have they? and if we accept this then i may as well jump off archway bridge

Think of the drivers.

 

[durruti02]

cos i have a filty cough flu and am stuck indoors !

also the hackney paper WILL be as i describe how daft would it be to have a hackney edition of BF/AF/SF/IWW/CW/Fdm?? so why do we accept that nationally?

 

[kyser_soze]

Shirely the best way to collate all the anarko-press into one E-Z-read chunk would simply be to host a page with links to all the latest issues, with the individual groups updating their own links etc?

Then you could see all the different viewpoints via a single, easily accesible link page, instead of having to fight over individual policy/ideas etc if it were in one big mag.

 

[durruti02]

Think of the drivers.

it would be a protest against climate change

 

[butchersapron]

why have they? and if we accept this then i may as well jump off archway bridge

Why have they - well, they place great importance on them as political principles based on their analysis of past history, current society and their agreement with definite organisational principles and so don't want to compromise on them.

Depends if you see the anarchist movement expanding, or a wider social movement swallowing the anarchist mvoement. A specific anarchist movement paper isnt that important (right now* if you favour the later.

 

[durruti02]

Shirely the best way to collate all the anarko-press into one E-Z-read chunk would simply be to host a page with links to all the latest issues, with the individual groups updating their own links etc?

Then you could see all the different viewpoints via a single, easily accesible link page, instead of having to fight over individual policy/ideas etc if it were in one big mag.

yes increaseingly the web will be important so yes you are right .. a street paper still imho has importnace too

 

[durruti02]

In which case, i think those who are already doing Organise! DA, etc would not get involved - it would be something different. It might end up as BF, Freedom (and their overlap) and those who don't want to be in a fed or put the hard slog into freedom.

thats the point though .. i am flying a kite that has a load more implications about what we do and hwo we do it

 

[durruti02]

Why have they - well, they place great importance on them as political principles based on their analysis of past history, current society and their agreement with definite organisational principles and so don't want to compromise on them.

Depends if you see the anarchist movement expanding, or a wider social movement swallowing the anarchist mvoement. A specific anarchist movement paper isnt that important (right now* if you favour the later.

1) they have often fetishised and personalised the differrences

2) both

 

[butchersapron]

1) they have often fetishised and personalised the differrences

2) both

They have, which is why i can't see that changing anytime soon. I tried really hard on this 10 years ago but there was just no real interest whatsoever from anyone.

Of course, trick question

 

[TopCat]

I can't see the more middle class anarcho's wanting to have much to do with the rough end, political difference has conveniently obscured a lot of class prejudice.

 

[durruti02]

They have, which is why i can't see that changing anytime soon. I tried really hard on this 10 years ago but there was just no real interest whatsoever from anyone.

Of course, trick question

even with a head full of phlegm you can't trick D02!

 

[durruti02]

I can't see the more middle class anarcho's wanting to have much to do with the rough end, political difference has conveniently obscured a lot of class prejudice.

ah well .. there is always that

 

[In Bloom]

because it shows us working together .. it shows maturity and confidence and an ability to work together ..
and people always bloody diagree with bits in their own mags anyway let alone someone elses! LOL .. theres no change there .. the point is we need to go beyond that way of looking at the world otherwise we justify schisming to the highest possible number fo groups

at the end of the day IWW/SF/AF/CW/LnS have minimal real differrences .. and none that should stop them all producing a movement paper ..

I said serious disagreement for a reason. I'm not arsed about handing out a copy of Res that has one or two articles I don't fully agree with on every single point, but I'd point blank refuse to hand out anything that included so much as a single sentence arguing the sort of tripe that emerged from some "anarchists" around the recent attack on Gaza (e.g. anarchists should support Hamas because they are the democratically elected elected government in Gaza).

Basically, I'd agree with Butchersapron, joint activity is great, but a joint paper would be a whole world of mess.

i am not in anyway suggesting the groups should shut down .. there should remain as ideological currents .. the arguements and debates will go on regardless .. and what i am suggesting IS the best example of working together practically

Resistance is the main collective voice of the AF, it's the most widely distributed of our publications, without Res, our only independent public face in terms of literature would be our pamphlets and leaflets produced by local groups.

yes because they are all small groups with no critical mass .. by working together on a project like this you would get that critical mass

What is this "critical mass", and what do you think it will achieve, in concrete terms?

this is only what happenned in Spain in the 3ts afair ..

anyway currently we have 5 almost identical groups producing and distributing their own prop in a tiny way that gets us nowhere .. and lets be honest we all WANT a mass paper .. right? so, are you saying it must be yours??? thats no better than daft left

I'd disagree that the 5 groups you refer to are "almost identical", there are real political differences there that I can't see being reconciled any time soon.

In any case, I'm not hugely interested in having a "mass paper", for me, the purpose of R! is to spread news about events and struggles that might be ignored by the mainstream media, to inspire and inform. If there are four other publications being put out that deseminate information about those same struggles, then all the better, I don't see any need to amalgamate them into one publication.

 

[bluestreak]

Shirely the best way to collate all the anarko-press into one E-Z-read chunk would simply be to host a page with links to all the latest issues, with the individual groups updating their own links etc?

Then you could see all the different viewpoints via a single, easily accesible link page, instead of having to fight over individual policy/ideas etc if it were in one big mag.

That's actually a very good idea. And I would be very surprised if there wasn't a links page out there with all this on, it's just that we don't know about it!

 

[bluestreak]

I can't see the more middle class anarcho's wanting to have much to do with the rough end, political difference has conveniently obscured a lot of class prejudice.

And indeed, vice versa. Could you see enumbers or Attica "working with" any group they considered middle class?

 

[durruti02]

1)I said serious disagreement for a reason. I'm not arsed about handing out a copy of Res that has one or two articles I don't fully agree with on every single point, but I'd point blank refuse to hand out anything that included so much as a single sentence arguing the sort of tripe that emerged from some "anarchists" around the recent attack on Gaza (e.g. anarchists should support Hamas because they are the democratically elected elected government in Gaza).

2)Basically, I'd agree with Butchersapron, joint activity is great, but a joint paper would be a whole world of mess.


3)Resistance is the main collective voice of the AF, it's the most widely distributed of our publications, without Res, our only independent public face in terms of literature would be our pamphlets and leaflets produced by local groups.


4)What is this "critical mass", and what do you think it will achieve, in concrete terms?


5)


6)I'd disagree that the 5 groups you refer to are "almost identical", there are real political differences there that I can't see being reconciled any time soon.

7)In any case, I'm not hugely interested in having a "mass paper", for me, the purpose of R! is to spread news about events and struggles that might be ignored by the mainstream media, to inspire and inform. If there are four other publications being put out that deseminate information about those same struggles, then all the better, I don't see any need to amalgamate them into one publication.

hi IB .. tbh imho this is why the @ is doomed to failure

1) you will always find something to disagree on .. it is surely more important what we agree on .. maturity would be to overcome this schismist mentality that dictates that we split whenever we disagree ( actually there is an interesting thing about this schismist idea coming from early christianity ) .. your example re hamas is simple to square .. any article that says what you disagree with has a response ..

2) joint activity rarely occurs .. for the same reasons we can not cooperate on a newspaper

3) more people will access your opinions via the internet nowadays than resistance i would have thought .. and certainly that will be the case in the future

4) critical mass?? .. between all the groups we have people in numbers in every town and city in the country

5) spain was united with its FAI, which had differrent currents, with one paper afaik

6) they agree on 99% of things .. most differrences are tactical .. what fundamental differrences are generally compatible if seen as part of a movement .. and certainly in a joint paper

7) this makes no sense .. what i suggest would do what you do but on much larger scale .. if you wish to do more of what you siggest you must support what i suggest

 

[In Bloom]

you will always find something to disagree on .. it is surely more important what we agree on .. maturity would be to overcome this schismist mentality that dictates that we split whenever we disagree ( actually there is an interesting thing about this schismist idea coming from early christianity ) .. your example re hamas is simple to square .. any article that says what you disagree with has a response ..

Wouldn't that just come across as weird and incoherent?

joint activity rarely occurs .. for the same reasons we can not cooperate on a newspaper

TBH mate, I think you're viewing this too much through the prism of the London anarchist scene. Outside of London, anarchists from different organisations cooperate a lot, we have to, we attend the same meetings, we work on the same projects, we write leaflets and organise blocs for demos together. For instance, it's becoming increasingly common for local SolFed groups to use leaflets written by local AF groups, and vice versa, where both groups have a presence locally, we often cooperate to write one leaflet together.

The trouble with the London anarchist scene, as far as I can see, is that you all spend far too much time trying to find some big project you can all cooperate on for the sake of it. That's getting it backwards, if you want to work more closely together, don't organise a monthly anarchist ho down, invite each other to your meetings, keep each other informed about what you're doing and please, for God's sake, next time somebody in London puts out a call out for an anarchist block on a demo, hold at least one meeting about it to plan things together instead of just hoping enough people show up.

more people will access your opinions via the internet nowadays than resistance i would have thought .. and certainly that will be the case in the future

The thing with having an internet presence is that only people who are already looking for us will see it.

critical mass?? .. between all the groups we have people in numbers in every town and city in the country

Not really, there's maybe, what, 5-600 anarchists in class struggle organisations and a few unaffilliated class struggle anarchists dotted about here and then. The rest can fuck off and stop playing at politics altogether for all I care.

spain was united with its FAI, which had differrent currents, with one paper afaik

FAI was one organisation, which was quite small relative to the number of people who were in the CNT.

they agree on 99% of things .. most differrences are tactical .. what fundamental differrences are generally compatible if seen as part of a movement .. and certainly in a joint paper

I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just far from convinced about the benefits.

this makes no sense .. what i suggest would do what you do but on much larger scale .. if you wish to do more of what you siggest you must support what i suggest

Resistance has a print run of 3,000. Even if we increased this to 10,000 by folding all of the existing publications into one, we wouldn't actually get our ideas out to more people, we'd just be getting them out to the same people with one publication.

 

[durruti02]

1)Wouldn't that just come across as weird and incoherent?


2)TBH mate, I think you're viewing this too much through the prism of the London anarchist scene. Outside of London, anarchists from different organisations cooperate a lot, we have to, we attend the same meetings, we work on the same projects, we write leaflets and organise blocs for demos together. For instance, it's becoming increasingly common for local SolFed groups to use leaflets written by local AF groups, and vice versa, where both groups have a presence locally, we often cooperate to write one leaflet together.

3)The trouble with the London anarchist scene, as far as I can see, is that you all spend far too much time trying to find some big project you can all cooperate on for the sake of it. That's getting it backwards, if you want to work more closely together, don't organise a monthly anarchist ho down, invite each other to your meetings, keep each other informed about what you're doing and please, for God's sake, next time somebody in London puts out a call out for an anarchist block on a demo, hold at least one meeting about it to plan things together instead of just hoping enough people show up.


The thing with having an internet presence is that only people who are already looking for us will see it.


4)Not really, there's maybe, what, 5-600 anarchists in class struggle organisations and a few unaffilliated class struggle anarchists dotted about here and then. The rest can fuck off and stop playing at politics altogether for all I care.


5)FAI was one organisation, which was quite small relative to the number of people who were in the CNT.


6)I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just far from convinced about the benefits.


7)Resistance has a print run of 3,000. Even if we increased this to 10,000 by folding all of the existing publications into one, we wouldn't actually get our ideas out to more people, we'd just be getting them out to the same people with one publication.

1) no as mature

2) yes but each group would not do their own mag for a town would they so why nationally?

3) yep

4) probably less but .. but that is enough to do something like this

5) one paper diff current i thought but not sure

6) what you are not sure of the benefit of a national @ paper on sale in every town centere every w/e?

7) no not at all .. it would give you a critical mass to actually get out of just handing stuff out to mates .. its a winner

 

[In Bloom]

no as mature

I don't think so. If anything, it'd make it look like we spend all of our time squabbling.

yes but each group would not do their own mag for a town would they so why nationally?

The AF does local newsletters in some areas, where there isn't already a local @ freesheet.

probably less but .. but that is enough to do something like this

what you are not sure of the benefit of a national @ paper on sale in every town centere every w/e?

Of course, I just don't see why it needs to be the same national paper in every town centre

I don't see Resistance as competing with Freedom, Class War or Catalyst, it's unusual for them all to be available in one area, so I don't really see what benefits there'd be to merging them together, since the print run probably wouldn't go up signifigantly.

no not at all .. it would give you a critical mass to actually get out of just handing stuff out to mates .. its a winner

I don't "just hand stuff to mates", in addition to sending Res out to bookshops, social centres and subscribers, we do regular street distributions, leave them in the Metro boxes on busses and in train stations, etc.

Personally, I aim to get as many of the copies of Resistance that Merseyside AF takes as possible out to the general public, rather than other anarchists, who are probably already aware of us and quite capable of looking us up online or taking out a subscription if they're interested.

 

[bluestreak]

I liked it, btw. A little dry in places but better than that some of the studenty wank that passes for politics in the anarchist press sometimes.

 

[TopCat]

A single anarchist paper would be really easy for the state to lead up the garden path. Put a few existing state assets into the contribution group, argue endlessly about what articles to publish, create huge splits and animosity.

 

[In Bloom]

A single anarchist paper would be really easy for the state to lead up the garden path. Put a few existing state assets into the contribution group, argue endlessly about what articles to publish, create huge splits and animosity.

Mmm, though I think it's getting ahead of ourselves a bit, talking about state infiltration of anarchist newspapers. As it stands, anarchists pose no real political threat, just a minor public order threat.

 

[Frampton]

Not really, there's maybe, what, 5-600 anarchists in class struggle organisations and a few unaffilliated class struggle anarchists dotted about here and then. The rest can fuck off and stop playing at politics altogether for all I care.

And that's the trouble with a lot of class-struggle Anarchists. It's a harsh, unforgiving philosophy. Predominantly macho. More akin to workplace bullying than working in support of other workers who might not be so blessed with a John Wayne persona. "You are with us or you can fuck off". Someone else said something like this recently.