NavigationAnnouncementsUpcoming eventsEvents
Recent blog posts
|
Temporary Anti-Capitalist TeamsTACTile1 writes: "Temporary Anti-Capitalist Teams
In terms of activists, the real number of active people is vastly outweighed by spectators and sympathisers, by the amount of activity carried out, and in turn by the effect made on the wider political scene. Adding all the groups together, we are really only talking about a couple of hundred activists as a maximum. Many of these activists are firmly wedded not just to their particular political specialism, but to their particular political group. This group chauvinism has been a perpetual block on change and unity on the anti-Capitalist Left. Many groups are quite convinced that their direction is the only direction - like a Party line without the Party - and don't even have a desire to work within a wider context. As a broad political idea, the anti-Capitalist movement is a continuum of groups from liberal mainstream organisations that lobby politicians about 3rd World debt, through Left Parties and reformist groups, to the Anarchists and Environmental activists - a diverse de facto coalition of groups drawn together by their opposition. Outside of the organisational core there are huge numbers of individual sympathisers and a growing sense of unease at the direction the world is being dragged. Increasingly, efforts are being made to separate the liberal, social-democratic reformers away from those perceived as "hardcore" troublemakers, efforts which include new laws to criminalise dissent in its most aggressive forms. The definition of troublemaker correspondingly spreads to those groups that use the most effective tactics. The power of the media in this process is shown by the ease with which individuals who were vilified as hardcore "leaders" during the G8 protests rapidly became portrayed as victims of brutal policing in the aftermath. For us, the focus is always going to be on revolutionary non-hierarchic organisations, notably Anarchists (who have tended to act as the engine of protest) rather than reformers, but there also needs to be a way to draw activists over the line away from the ineffectual protest movement, if only as supporters of more dynamic action. The division between activists and spectators has always been a very fluid one, affected by the political mood and by opportunities for action. There are a lot of people who have been and gone but who still remain sympathetic. Unlike in the USA, trade unionists and trade union work are not part of the existing movement. The Anarchist movement in particular is full of interesting ideas, although largely held without much of an idea about how to use or enact those ideas, and has pathological inability to make connections with the wider working class. It seems like a large part of the Anarchist movement is fuelled by gut-reaction resistance to the State and a lot of wishful thinking. The level of political debate is embarrassingly low, the profile of Anarchist ideas is raised only by reference to violent activists on demonstrations, and most of the time and effort of Anarchists is wasted on irrelevant and juvenile activity. As a broad cultural expression the lager-and-crusty social scene seems to be dominant, along with a sprinkling of dreamers and what the French call "casseurs" - people who reflect the stereotype Anarchist back onto the media that created it. The Environmental movement also has problems with political debate, specifically in its "little Englander" manifestations. The whole basis of some activity revolves around the "cars are bad" mentality, at its extreme viewing workers with cars as the enemy. The loose and ambiguous nature of the politics of the environmental movement, and an emphasis on individual action, are preventing new ideas from progressing and allowing consumer-orientated and social-democratic activities to dominate. The emphasis of the slicker environmental organisations on harmless publicity stunts, whose intention is to use the media to put pressure on the State ("indirect action"), means that their members end up effectively as another set of lobbyists within the status quo. The SWP's Globalise Resistance is performing its usual function, that of hoovering up new activists and jumping feet-first into the publicity vacuum. With their long experience of parasitical activity, large finances and tight concept of organising they are becoming fairly successful at presenting themselves as the spotty face of anti-Capitalism. Any serious alternative to the existing form of the movement has to address the SWP problem. Whilst in some forums they are currently presenting themselves as tolerant of different approaches, the nature of their politics means that as an organisation they believe that their Party alone is the only one with the right answers for the working class and their historical intolerance of Anarchism continues unabated. The Anarchist end of the anti-Capitalist movement functions as a very loose network of groups, although there are no formal connections. Allegiances ebb and flow, collectives set up to organise particular events disappear, taking their contacts and experiences with them. There is a morbid fear of "telling people what to do". The small numbers involved allow a degree of social connection, but outside of that there is no mechanism to draw people together. In terms of activity, the emphasis is very much towards travelling to other countries to demonstrate outside conference centres, and on annual spectacular events like May Day. Local work in communities or workplaces is at a very low level, and that which does take place has no clear reference to being part of a greater whole or global movement. Many activities are purely self-referential, i.e. only of interest to other activists. There is a sense of detachment from everyday life and from struggle, leaving activities isolated from cultural and political reference points. The knock-on effect of the numerous injuries and arrests at these spectacular protests is to absorb more and more resources into defence campaigns and other navel-gazing memorial events. Particularly since Genoa (but already a phenomenon beforehand), the wider political climate is now unable to ignore the anti-Capitalist movement as a source of discontent and committed activism. There is a very broad sympathy for, if a lack of understanding of, anti-Globalisation. The business "world" is certainly running a bit scared of the movement, if only at a consumer-orientated level. Tony Blair can write us off as a "travelling circus" partly because as a movement we have no grounding in everyday life, but the corporations that are targeted fear adverse effects on their profit margins. Despite the overwhelming failure of the movement to successfully use the news media, the idea of an anti-Capitalist movement has greater political currency than it has for 20 years, even if that idea is as vague and incoherent as to be impossible to easily explain. There are vocal attempts being made (particularly by the liberal reformers in an effort to distance themselves from radical protest) to define more clearly what the movement is for, rather than what it is against. There is significantly greater popular support (and publicity) for the positive outcomes which revolve around things like reducing 3rd World debt, the treatment of sweatshop workers and reducing the power of corporations, than there is for the (largely undefined) fundamental destruction of the Capitalism system. Raw anti-Capitalist ideas are being carried at the head of a wave of popular antipathy to Globalisation and the seismic effect of the protests and deaths in Genoa has dramatically galvanised activists, even pushing some of the more reformist commentators to re-assess their positions. It would seem that we are at a time of great opportunity, or it could be that we are believing our own publicity and over-estimating our resources. where its going
Another possibility that is always on the cards is that this brief upsurge in radical ideas and activity will gradually dissipate and fade, the liberal end of the movement becoming recuperated and the activist end becoming burnt out and directionless. Some people are suggesting that the peak of the current movement has already passed and we are now on a downhill slide, having missed our chance. The rise of Globalise Resistance may play a part in this process, if the history of the ANL is anything to go by. Nice jobs for a few Oxbridge columnists and the dustbin of history for the rest of us. Some of the indications from France are that the upsurge of a more focussed reformist movement has already sidelined radical ideas. The reaction of the State and the police indicates that they are completely ruthless in their desire to see the progressive anti-Capitalist movement crushed. Following the response to May Day 2001, the shooting in Gothenberg, the murders in Genoa and subsequent promises of repressive legislation, its possible that a more hardcore and illegal response will emerge as a reaction, with isolated nutters taking up arms against the State. I suspect that the paranoia and ineptitude of the wilder extremes of the Anarchist movement mean that this is more likely to be a continental european phenomenon, although I wouldn't discount new attempts by the State to manufacture such a response (the activities of fake Black Blocks in Genoa being one example). Tony Blair's behaviour during the Genoa summit, supporting the violence of the police actions against the protestors, whilst dishing out hugs all round to the millionaire debt-campaigners Bono and Saint Bob Geldof, suggest that a carrot-and-stick approach may be used more explicitly, to demonise the nasty radicals whilst at the same time appearing to support the media-friendly face of protest as an acceptable and harmless hobby. Another option is that, out of the current primeval political swamp, a new creature evolves - an anti-Capitalist movement that exists as a functioning coalition, rooted in the wider class struggle and with a coherence of purpose that enables it to break out of the activist ghetto and begin the process of transforming society. This option is surely what we all want - the question is how? There are plenty of good ideas around, and plenty of good activists mired in the existing form of the movement. There is a chance that a non-sectarian, inclusive, diverse and progressive current could give new life to the anti-Capitalist movement, allowing non-hierarchic forms of organisation and new ideas about society to be built on the broad foundations of community and workplace struggle, feeding the flames of working class resistance and spreading the possibilities of meaningful change. This may not change the world, but it could change the movement into one that had a better chance. BUT for even the possibility of this chance, there would need to be major seachange in attitudes, a lot of creative thinking and a lot of work. Sectarianism and group chauvinism would need to be challenged, the acceptance of plurality and difference would need to be embraced. Harsh realities would need to be faced - about the status of the movement, about the relevance of some tactics and activities, about the need for co-ordination and hard work. Its reasonably clear that we are a rag-tag battalion, just a small part of an army of workers fighting hard in the face of huge odds and an unclear future. We are at a point where we can consolidate our small successes and move on, or we can be swept away on the tide of history. some new ideas
Neither is there one solution to organisation, other than a necessity for grass-roots activity and an emphasis on diversity. Its not clear that new structures are needed. In terms of effort, numbers or resources the prospect of creating a new umbrella organisation is a very daunting one, without any suggestion that it would be either useful or successful. What might be useful is a different understanding of the way we organise and the process by which we make our movement more effective. Small acts of resistance occur all over the world every day, carried out by groups and individuals who (consciously or not) are acting as part of a bigger whole. People acting in their own way, with their own concerns and struggles. Sometimes those struggles coincide with others and a more effective challenge can be made - individual refusal broadening out into a genuine and fundamental challenge. These shifting connections and allegiances are a vital part of the anti-Capitalist movement. Part of the task of that movement is to generate awareness that these everyday struggles are part of that greater whole, to give practical support and resources and articulate that sense of solidarity. One of the ways that this can be done is to celebrate that resistance, lending it a name that draws it into the sphere of our activity. The idea of the Temporary Anti-Capitalist Team is a response to the need for greater coherence and inclusivity. There are Temporary Anti-Capitalist Teams working all over the world all the time - every time that a group of workers comes together in self-defence for industrial action or even collective bargaining that is a Temporary Anti-Capitalist Team in action. Whenever people come together in forms of activity that step outside of the domination of Capitalism, that is a Temporary Anti-Capitalist Team in action. When a community works together for its own purpose in defiance of the bureaucracy of the State that is a Temporary Anti-Capitalist Team in action. And when the groups and collectives that make up the movement are doing what they do best, that too is a Temporary Anti-Capitalist Team in action. Sometimes the "Teams" overlap and coalesce, sometimes they are more "Temporary" than at others, sometimes the link to "Anti-Capitalism" is not so clear. But a TACT is not a form of organisation, its an idea - about society and struggle, about interaction and collective response, an expression of resistance: Temporary - the very nature of our struggles emphasise the fleeting allegiances we build. We are a fluid and changing dynamic of political ideas. A recognition that we are not interested in a leadership role, or in accumulating power for a particular group or speciality (but we must be responsive to feedback, answerable for our actions and and not afraid to make suggestions). A celebration of a diverse response to a constantly changing situation. An acknowledgement that this idea is not the final answer to all our problems. Anti-Capitalist - we are a global movement with a common problem, Capitalism. It is the system that unites us all in struggle, whatever our intended political destination (there is plenty of time to work that out along the way - now is not the time for intricate post-revolutionary dogma). We are inclusive, we value difference - difference of priorities, focus, membership. At its core this is an understanding of the class nature of society and the imposition of work. Team - we work together as a team, with no leaders or cadre within our group. We are a convergence of commonality with a non-hierarchic way to work together. We are open, with space for all. As working class people we know that as individuals we are denied power and that unity is strength. As working class people we fight all the things that divide us. The idea of TACT is to give a name to our activity and to be able to make links with others who are already active. To articulate opposition in a useful way and to draw others, already carrying out similar work under a different name, into a wider movement of overlapping action and commonality, explicitly locating them within that wider struggle. The very process of spreading the idea of TACT is itself a process of resistance. No-one has to leave their existing group to join a TACT - it is an idea, not an organisation - it is enough to understand that that is the nature of what you are doing and that you are part of a larger whole that needs your support and will in turn lend support to you. Its not a question of asking people to join, its a process of recognition of being a part of a greater whole, recognising commonality in the struggles of others - there is no membership drive, no monolith to be built - it cannot be a process of uniformity. No-one is being asked to organise their own struggle in a different way (or being told how to struggle), but to be part of a network providing practical and political support where its wanted, to work together with others where things co-incide, where its useful. There are a few fundamentals to consider when thinking about how to break out of the activist ghetto and engage with the wider class. Whatever is done, it must be relevant and inclusive. It must be effectively publicised as well as just plain effective. The relationship between spectacular events and everyday struggles must be clear - protest is for every day, not just once a year. For the idea to work there has got to be one TACT that gets the ball (hopefully a snowball!) rolling. As things progress there will be many different teams with many different functions, some will be established groups that carry on much as before, another could be a new TACT that has the task of producing a bulletin that celebrates our resistance. There could be a TACT whose role is to go out and spread ideas, perhaps one that acts as a union, others could focus on particular local issues, workplace activity, particular events. We could be working together in a diverse reaction to events or on a specific action - a TACT could be long-lasting, others could only last a few days (or hours). The teams would not necessarily be defined by geography, although they could be. The full range of communications technology must be harnessed to our needs, enabling discussion, the sharing of ideas, support and solidarity over long distances, the co-ordination of disparate activities, or just connecting parts of the same city. There will be many ways that these teams will overlap and interact, and no limit to the number of possibilities. In this way we will be able to move forward in a collective response to our political and economic situation, a response that exists as a dynamic, a process of struggle that is recognised as a part of working class activity - not outside or 'other' - but within it and of it. http://www.temporary.org.uk e-mail: discussion@temporary.org.uk " |
SearchAnalysisNewsReviews |