Article

CLASS WAR NO 73

If they are to be believed, this is the last issue of CW, though no doubt someone will republish it, just as all the ageing punk bands who still provide the inspiration for one half of CW always stage comebacks - welcome to the old timers, but offering nothing new.

That said, there are positive things to say about this paper. To quote, "We need to find new ways of organising ourselves that can appeal to all the working class, male and female, young and old, black and white." We wholeheartedly agree. While we could nitpick that this is not the first time this has been said, what matters is what we have in common, and what we can achieve together. So we recommend people do go along to CW's meetings, with an open mind and clear from preconceptions, just to see if there are worthwhile common projects.

There are three areas where we can work together, in the locality, in the workplace, and around issues. Here are some of our thoughts.

Working locally is the most important and most neglected. It is in the local area where you can have the greatest impact and greatest visibility. And visibility is important, it's the only reason anyone ever joins the SWP. However, local activities do have their problems. The reason many anarchists don't prioritise local activity is often, we suspect, because they don't feel connected with the locality, especially in cities like London, where many anarchists tend to ghettoise themselves in areas like Hackney and Brixton. Allied to this, it can be dull, and will take a long time. It is fair to say that concerted local work will pay back in terms of members, success and influence after 5 to ten years, depending on conditions. For young activists that is very daunting. It is also difficult at times for people to work out what to do. Fighting for a zebra crossing isn't very glamorous, is it?

A good example of what can be done locally is the Bradford 1 in 12 Club, who have the confidence in their politics and the influence (and know a lot of the local politicians and bureaucrats because they've been around as long) that they can call meetings, demand that the council sends someone to answer questions, and the Council does! This isn't to buy them off, it's because the Council has learnt the hard way the price of ignoring them. Bad examples of local activity are legion, unfortunately.

Local groups do not have to be based around a social centre, though it obviously helps. They do need to have an understanding of what's going on in their locality, and this is one of anarchism's advantages over the 57 varieties, so why don't we make more use of it? Perhaps we're afraid of people breaking up our cosy little world, or perhaps we scare people off with jargon or the promise of loads of work as the victims of burnout see new members as an opportunity to rediscover a life.

Workplace organisation is just as essential, though obviously not everyone is in a position to do it. That many who are in such a position don't is a result of confusion about unions and their role. Put simply, there is a difference between defending your rights at work and becoming general secretary of the TUC. There is not the same opportunity here as there is in local organising, but the two are complementary. If someone is victimised at work the local group can support and help out in terms of pickets, solidarity, doing stuff for organising campaigns where the workers want to remain anonymous. With the JSA and the quick succession of temporary dead end jobs many are now faced with, having a local is vital. It is worth being a shop steward or union rep, both for the knowledge and skills you will learn as well as the satisfaction of fighting the bosses at a small but meaningful level. In our opinion union positions outside the workplace, such as branch secretary and so on, while someone needs to do them, are not the best places for anarchist militants to put their effort into.

Successful workplace organisation needs two things - local support in terms of numbers and solidarity, and solidarity and advice from others in the same industry. These require both a local organisation (see above) and an industrial network of like-minded militants.

Issue based campaigns are perhaps the most problematic. We'll start with a good example, the Anarchist Black Cross (ABC). The ABC has no problems in terms of members / supporters agreeing on political principle and on what they want to do collectively (it is a voluntary organisation after all). It is also not bound by constraints of geography or circumstances, even if you are the only anarchist on Rockall you can still write to prisoners.

What get called single issues are usually not single issues. The problems associated with them include working with other people who not only do not share your politics, but are openly hostile to them, such as Trots and Stalinists.

We are clear that we are not talking about a new organisation, there is no need for one. Should one arise it must come from the bottom up, from local groups networking. Our energy is better spent in organising than in another organisation. These meetings are to be welcomed.

CW73 available from BM 5538 London WC1N 3XX for 50p