Radical Workers Bloc on the 'March for Jobs' - Saturday 6th March - Brighton
Brighton SolFed | 03.02.2010 13:46 | Workers' Movements | South Coast
Sat 6/3 :: 12 noon :: the Level :: Brighton
This demonstration, organised by Brighton and Hove Trades Union Council is billed as a “March for Jobs” – but we want more.
This demonstration, organised by Brighton and Hove Trades Union Council is billed as a “March for Jobs” – but we want more.
Radical workers bloc leaflet
Of course, we need to protect jobs. Every job lost to redundancy means more workload for those who remain. An injury to one really is an injury to all. But we also need to stop the cuts that take away vital services, hard-won by generations of struggle.
Brighton Solidarity Federation and others[1] are forming a Radical Workers’ Bloc on the demonstration. We reject the notion that voting will bring about a solution for us – the cuts will be defeated on the streets and on the picket lines, not the ballot box. We have the recent victory of the bin men to show us how it’s done![2]
We need to send a message not only to whatever government will be in power after May but also to our fellow workers. The march will pass near the Lloyds call centre where 400 jobs are at risk. Join us as we stop and make some noise to show solidarity to the workers inside. Their fight is our fight.
Join us on the Radical Workers’ Bloc on 6th March, 12 noon at the Level, Brighton. Look for the red & black flags and the Brighton Solidarity Federation banner.
[1] So far the call has been supported by Anarchist Federation and Sussex Uni Anarchist Society
[2] See
http://brightonsolfed.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/cityclean-strike-suspended-after-concessions/
[3] Facebook event for the march: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/event.php?eid=275844462408&ref=mf
Brighton Solidarity Federation and others[1] are forming a Radical Workers’ Bloc on the demonstration. We reject the notion that voting will bring about a solution for us – the cuts will be defeated on the streets and on the picket lines, not the ballot box. We have the recent victory of the bin men to show us how it’s done![2]
We need to send a message not only to whatever government will be in power after May but also to our fellow workers. The march will pass near the Lloyds call centre where 400 jobs are at risk. Join us as we stop and make some noise to show solidarity to the workers inside. Their fight is our fight.
Join us on the Radical Workers’ Bloc on 6th March, 12 noon at the Level, Brighton. Look for the red & black flags and the Brighton Solidarity Federation banner.
[1] So far the call has been supported by Anarchist Federation and Sussex Uni Anarchist Society
[2] See
http://brightonsolfed.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/cityclean-strike-suspended-after-concessions/ [3] Facebook event for the march:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/event.php?eid=275844462408&ref=mf
Brighton SolFed
e-mail:
brightonsolfed@googlemail.com
Homepage:
http://www.brightonsolfed.org.uk
Comments
Hide the following 28 comments
Woah
03.02.2010 14:04
Brighton SolFed
resized image
03.02.2010 14:54
r2d2
Don't march, get digging!
03.02.2010 14:54
What's radical about that?
The sate has got it's self into a mess by employing too many people. Now it's got to get it's tax collecting agents, who it employs, and the police, who it employs, to enforce increased taxes on the people who, it dosn't employ.
And if you refuse to pay up, for those supposed essential services, including people like the prison 'service!', police & militory etc, the threat is that you will be put in prison, by them, until you do pay up. If that isn't a protection racket, I don't know what is.
All public sector workers are little tyrants in their own way.
Why not trade you own skilled labour independently of the state.
anarchist: a self employed person who works from home.
Great!
03.02.2010 15:08
Me
@ above comment
03.02.2010 15:41
Oh, and fair play for the radical workers bloc idea - i'll be there!
(A) San ((A) public sector employee)
exactly
03.02.2010 15:49
yeah
FFS...
03.02.2010 15:50
It's a march against cuts, a march to support workers and in its own small way work towards strengthening our class.
Sorry if that doesn't sound 'radical' enough for you but it's a fuck of a lot better than suggesting everyone trade their labour 'independently of the state'. What does that even mean? Individual contracts with capitalists? Or some mythic medieval economy where we're all artisans or peasants? No thanks.
tigersiskillers
Fuck me!
03.02.2010 15:59
anarchist
@ (A) San ((A) public sector employee)
03.02.2010 16:16
However, I think the whole social/lifestyle dichotomy is tired. There's no reason why revolutionary classes of all types can cooperate. And it is silly to dismiss all so-called lifestylists off-hand; we cannot overlook the fact that since around the 60's, most major libertarian movements have had elements of more 'lifestyle' people and activities involved in them (Provos in Netherlands with squatters etc., students, situationist-types in Paris '68 -- although the role of workers in that movement is often obscured, and they were the main revolutionary vehicle probably)). One contribution to wider thought that anarchism has played an important role in spreading is that the means and ends are inseperable (Emma Goldman was especially adamant on this point). This means we should aim to abolish hierarchy in our immediate lives, as well as working towards some distant, dubious future.
Also, the class structure of our society is completely different to how it was, say, 100 years ago. So to dismiss others (who you have no idea about) as middle-class is unhelpful, divisive and not even necessarily politically reasonable. Our economy is no longer production based, and the previous poster (despite the horrible tone of her/his post) is right to point out the fact - a fact nobody, espeically on the Left, has the guts to recognise - that we need less workers; to maintain society as it is now, and even to continue on our ruinous path of economic growth, we simply do not need the same numbers of workers as once we did. Our philosophy has to take this into account.
If the old-school working class is no longer revolutionary in content (due to the increasing flexibility and shift away from manual production presumably), and one feels no affinity with it, then we perhaps need to create new revolutionary classes. We need to think of ways in which all classes that stand against capitalism, oppression, hierarchy and the state can work together to bring about the world we want.
I've written far more than is healthy on an indymedia thread - god, what has become of me?! - but yeah, in conclusion, it's all good.
[And Emma Goldman's written some excellent stuff on how the social and individual instincts work together. And Bob Black's refutation of Bookchin's sectarian 'Lifestyle anarchism or social anarchism: an unbridgeable chasm' is worthwhile too]
(A) Social and Lifestyle Anarchist
@ social & lifestylist anarchist
03.02.2010 16:54
"But what do we mean by class? At it's simplest, there are two classes: those who own or play a major part in the control of the worlds wealth and resources, the capitalist boss class and those who either have to work or claim benefits in order to survive, the working class."
Gilles Dauve:
"If one identifies proletarian with factory worker (or even worse: with manual labourer), or with the poor, then one cannot see what is subversive in the proletarian condition. The proletariat is the negation of this society. It is not the collection of the poor, but of those who are desperate, those who have no reserves (les sans-réserves in French, or senza riserve in Italian), who have nothing to lose but their chains; those who are nothing, have nothing, and cannot liberate themselves without destroying the whole social order. The proletariat is the dissolution of present society, because this society deprives it of nearly all its positive aspects. Thus the proletariat is also its own destruction. All theories (either bourgeois, fascist, stalinist, left-wing or "gauchistes") which in any way glorify and praise the proletariat as it is and claim for it the positive role of defending values and regenerating society, are counter-revolutionary. Worship of the proletariat has become one of the most efficient and dangerous weapons of capital. Most proles are low paid, and a lot work in production, yet their emergence as the proletariat derives not from being low paid producers, but from being "cut off", alienated, with no control either over their lives or the meaning of what they have to do to earn a living."
The problem with 'lifestylism' is that it is the condition where people believe that their lifestyle in and of itself is a profound political act, where say dumpster diving is believed to be somehow a blow against capitalism, or that dropping out is something possible for most people. It's when a way of living becomes a subculture that sneers at outsiders. The way we live our lives is of course important - it's where we can partially tackle say gender issues - but capitalism isn't something we can opt out of.
tigersiskillers
@ tigersiskillers
03.02.2010 18:28
"The problem with 'lifestylism' is that it is the condition where people believe that their lifestyle in and of itself is a profound political act, where say dumpster diving is believed to be somehow a blow against capitalism, or that dropping out is something possible for most people. It's when a way of living becomes a subculture that sneers at outsiders. The way we live our lives is of course important - it's where we can partially tackle say gender issues - but capitalism isn't something we can opt out of. "
I think that's maybe partly based on a false perception of lifestylism and dropout communities (or at least, there is nothing innate about being lifestylist that makes these criticisms work). I doubt you'll find anybody who sees dumpster diving as a blow against capitalism, for example. I do it, sometimes. It is not a blow against capitalism. I do it sometimes because it can feel good; because it's free; because it adds an element of surprise and excitement to an otherwise dull, ritualistic activity (shopping). If dropping out did happen on a large scale, it would become possible for most people. However, it is not at this present time, because these particular types of community of resistance have not developed. I am not a 'dropout' myself, but appreciate that they are coming from their own perspective and have revolutionary potential (that is not currently being fulfilled). I think the whole culture/ subculture is a misnoma. A shared culture is something shared by people with common points reference. Thus, you cannot avoid being attached to some kind of culture. The so-called dominant culture is also somewhat mythical; everybody is involved with some activities that could be deemed 'subcultural' - very few people have the given activity as a part of their lives. Naturally, many anarchists and radicals will tend to share more in common with each other than others. And those of us who seek to challenge privilege and hierarchy in our own lives will develop those common points of reference further - thus making us more 'subcultural'. I think this is to be embraced. Therefore, the aim is not to avoid being subcultural, but rather to be inclusive and welcoming, and precisely not to "sneer at outsiders".
It'a an interesting topic, certainly, and there are no clear answers. I'm probably not the best advocate of radical lifestylism - partly just because I'm not one, and I'm not a dropout, and I thoroughly support workers' struggles, even the work of AFed, SolFed, etc. I just don't see the two as incompatable.
(A) Social and Lifestyle Anarchist
Woah, I just saw...
03.02.2010 18:30
(A) Social and Lifestyle Anarchist
fair enough
03.02.2010 18:58
and Crimethinc's Evasion -
The reason I'm so down on this sort of thing is because I have in the past been part of it. Meetings in grimy squat cafes, people whose idea of anticapitalism is preferring smaller capitalists to big ones.
There's nothing inherently wrong with attempting to live in different ways, my problem is when this becomes an end in itself.
tigersiskillers
@ tigersiskillers
03.02.2010 20:40
"Basically anarchists accept that we are a minority and that we will always be a minority. . . . We just want to survive among ourselves"
Holy fuck that is bad. But lifestylism isn't necessarily this.
And Evasion I thought was horrible, sexist crap that had no political content. (Although I think some CrimethIncstuff is ok, and though some is just rubbish like Evasion they often write really interesting, pertinent stuff and are totally misrepresented by the mainstream anarchist movement, and they're good at writing which is all too rare in anarchist publications)
Can I just say, isn't it wonderful that we've had a kind of (admiteddly very sad) internet indymedia forum debate, and managed not to call each other right wing middle-class trolls who are closet capitalists?
(A) Social and Lifestyle Anarchist
@ (A) Social and Lifestyle Anarchist
03.02.2010 21:48
In all seriousness. This is cool.
Also CrimethInc. is way more than Evasion. Anyone who cries 'lifestylist' when ever CrimethInc. hasn't been paying attention over the last few years.
B
SolFed national website?
03.02.2010 22:42
Kronstadt
Oh the irony!
03.02.2010 23:02
I'm personally against reform, I wouldn't call for it, but if calling for the abolition of the state (a radical idea) creates more jobs (a reformist change) then it clearly shows we're getting closer to our goal. If people get jobs as a result of this then its all good in the meantime.
Why not call for abolition of the state though, instead of asking for a reformed version? And please don't respond by saying reform can be radical as its oxymoronic considering the two concepts are polar opposites!
@
Anarchists need capital too.
04.02.2010 01:23
Among self employed people who work from home, I would consider to be; beggars who have no home but the street, traveling show men, prostitutes, gipsies, the luddites of the early 1800's, the crofters who were cleared from the central scottish highlands in the late 1700's All are people who are or were to a greater or lesser extent out side of the state/capitalist/feudal systems and often fucked over by these social orders. So the "class war" agenda is irrelevant.
I would not include directors of corporations who chose not to go in to the corporate 'work place' but would rather stay home, although they may be registered as 'self employed' and 'working from home' for tax purposes, they are really employed by their corporations!
As for me personally I employ on one but myself and never will, have no debts and pay no direct taxes (at the moment), and don't wish to be beaten into line, particularly to pay the wages of public sector workers who earn considerably more than I do, and provide services that I don't want or need.
Do I think that 'a self employed person who works from home is the definition of an anarchist'?
probably not, but
'an anarchist' is probably a definition of a self employed person who works from home.
anarchist: a self employed person who works from home
Posh is the new radical workers
04.02.2010 04:46
David Evans
re: reforms
04.02.2010 10:13
"Why not call for abolition of the state though, instead of asking for a reformed version?" - "@"
It's because the organisers of the march, the Brighton & Hove TUC, are doing the latter that we've called a radical workers bloc. We're certainly not asking politely for a nicer capitalism. However 'calling for the abolition of the state' is not particularly revolutionary, it's just abstract sloganeering. the only thing that can abolish the state is a powerful libertarian workers movement, and to help bring that about is why anarcho-syndicalists involve themselves in the day-to-day class struggle (that and our jobs/benefits/conditions are on the line too...). we're quite open about our revolutionary, anti-state politics, but making abstract demands doesn't bring revolution any closer. helping build a libertarian workers movement, confident in its ability to get results through direct action without politicians or union bureaucrats just might.
"And please don't respond by saying reform can be radical as its oxymoronic considering the two concepts are polar opposites!" - "@"
Reforms and revolution are not polar opposites, they're different degrees of change. Reforms are typically conceded to stave off revolution/greater militancy, e.g. the rationale for the welfare state was 'give them reforms or they will give us revolution.' the problem is not reforms, but reformISM. this is pretty much down to how the reforms are won. Reformists tend to "call on" the state, trade union leaders, politicians etc to do things for us. Aside from the stupidity of asking the bosses to give us longer chains so we can better fight them, this approach is woefully inneffective. What gets results is direct action. But when workers take direct action, there's usually some reformists hovvering around trying to place control back in the hands of union bureaucrats, 'workers parties' and so on.
But that doesn't make the reform itself a bad thing - so long as they're won by direct action they're compatible with revolutionary politics. We should fight for everyday victories from this perspective, based on direct action, solidarity and rank-and-file control. Brighton bin men were facing pay cuts of up to £8,000 each (and they weren't on much to start with). They went on strike, and within two days the council backed down. That's a victory, for them and for the class. because it was won with direct action, it points the way for other workers to resist the cuts, e.g. we have a couple of members working at Sussex Uni where 115 redundancies are planned. It's going to take strikes or the credible threat thereof to do anything about that, and that's the message radical workers should be sending to the workers at Sussex, that (a) direct action gets the goods and (b) we'll support all industrial action by staff and occupations by students.
@ Kronstadt, i've emailed one of the web people, hopefully will be up soon...
JK.
Homepage:
http://www.brightonsolfed.org.uk
JK I think you got a bit confused mate !
04.02.2010 23:45
I wasn't comparing reformism and revolution, but reformism and radicalism! Of course reformism can be revolutionary - just look at civil rights etc!!! Then again take a longer look and its clear that it didn't work, racism is still as popular as ever, just not as institutionalised as it used to be.
A radical revolution (identifying the root of the problem and making permanent change) is the real solution that we should be aiming for, not a reformist revolution, as you were suggesting...I think.
@
well...
05.02.2010 00:15
In terms of fighting for immediate gains, or rather in this context against cuts and attacks on our living standards, again fighting using direct action is radical. Why? Because capitalism is based on the dispossession of the majority of humanity. When we assert our own interests against the plans of bosses and the state, we contest their power to manage their capital - which includes us, their 'human resources' - as they see fit. It directly challenges the logic of capitalist society at it's root; should society be run by the ruling class in their interests or by us according to our needs?
Now this is only true to the extent the direct action - be it a strike, occupation, work-to-rule... - is controlled by the workers themselves and not the union bureacuracy, which quickly strips struggles of their radicalism. We saw that with Unite's role in the Visteon Occupations last year.* But nonetheless, it's not reformist to advocate strikes and occupations against cuts to jobs, benefits and public services, or indeed to demand improvements to our living conditions. Whenever anarchism has played a radical, revolutionary role, it has been as part of such a movement (e.g. Spain '36).
Not sure if we're talking at crossed purposes here though...
* See:
JK.
Homepage:
http://www.brightonsolfed.org.uk
hell freezes over
05.02.2010 14:12
best of luck now
chilly satan
Hm
05.02.2010 15:41
SF member
I love my Job
05.02.2010 15:53
Also SF member
Declaration of the Solidarity Federation
05.02.2010 16:42
Some lifestylists, last Tuesday
- Posh people like Tamsin Omond and Marina Pepper
- Screws and cops and spooks
- JAILERS OF THE MIND (the so-called 'Education Workers Network')
We hereby declare that:
- It is the height of lifestylism to organise against cuts in your workplace, then having built up some momentum, have a march about it
- Furthermore, we resolve to literally spit upon any such attempts to do so
We call upon all readers of Indymedia to accept without reservation or critical faculties the TRUE FACTS contained herewithin, for we are determined that anarchism should never be allowed to form the radical end of the workers movement. If that ever happened, Tamsin and Marina would no longer be able to organise summit spectaculars, and our screw comrades would find it harder to imprison true working class heros like chilly satan and David Evans off the internet. What then comrades? It doesn't bear thinking about.
The Public School Workers Network
"bear thinking"
05.02.2010 17:22
bear, thinking
carebear
@ chilly satan
06.02.2010 17:28
Jason Cortez