A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists
**
News in all languages
Last 30 posts (Homepage)
Last two
weeks' posts
The last 100 posts, according
to language
Castellano_
Català_
Deutsch_
English_
Français_
Italiano_
Português_
Russkyi_
Suomi_
Svenska_
Türkçe_
All_other_languages
{Info on A-Infos}
(en) US, report from mid-west anarchist federation meeting
From
Mark Laskey <kronstadt@juno.com>
Date
Wed, 13 Dec 2000 03:03:31 -0500 (EST)
________________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
http://www.ainfos.ca/
________________________________________________
Here is a report from the Mid-West Anarchist Federation conference that
was written by a friend of mine who used to be involved with the Lucy
Parsons Center (Redbook) here in Boston for about 15 years before moving
to Kansas City, MO. He forwarded a copy to me, and I thought it may be of
some interest to people in NEFAC.
Solidarity,
MaRK, Sabate Anarchist Collective (NEFAC)
===================================================
November 5, 2000, Sunday
Here finally are a few remarks about the conference I attended in Chicago
on Saturday, Sept. 23. I only managed to attend for one day, Saturday.
The conference continued on the next day (minus at least a third of the
people who were there on Saturday), so I have no idea what happened on
Sunday, and therefore what the final outcome of the conference was. The
conference was called and organized by several members of Chicago’s
A-Zone infoshop and collective, with an eye to setting up some sort of
Midwest Anarchist Federation.
About twenty-five people attended, I would say, mostly from Chicago and
nearby towns, but also from Detroit, and Madison (I think). I may have
been the one coming from the furthest away (Kansas City). (I didn’t take
notes so this report will be mostly general impressions; it will be
somewhat weak on concrete details). I only knew one person there, Cindy
Milstein, who is just by chance living in Chicago for several months. She
normally lives in Vermont, and teaches at the Institute for Social
Ecology there, and is also on the Board of the Institute for Anarchist
Studies. I also knew about Mike Hargis, who is on the editorial board of
the Anarcho Syndicalist Review. I knew about him through my friend Jon
Bekken, also of ASR and the Lucy Parsons Center in Boston. As expected,
those attending were predominantly young people in their twenties, with a
few in their thirties and forties, and then me. Food Not Bombs provided
us with lunch Saturday. The two long discussions, Saturday morning and
afternoon, were well moderated. We used the device of going around the
room and hearing from everyone in both sessions, but it was mostly a
general discussion, since the group was small. If I had made it back on
Sunday, some of the other people there might have become real for me, but
as it was there was not time enough to establish new acquaintances.
The question immediately emerged as to why we had
assembled, and what we hoped to accomplish. There were no concrete
proposals on the table. In retrospect, this was the biggest single oversight by
the organizers of the meeting. To have had any chance of nailing down
anything specific or concrete in a short weekend conference, some
proposals would have to have been circulated in advance. I had with me a copy of
the founding documents of the just established Northeast
Federation of Anarcho Communists, but I had neglected to make copies,
thinking that others would already have them or that I would be able to
copy them there if necessary (both assumptions proved wrong). But I was
able to describe the documents for them. There were two: a two-page
statement of beliefs and principles, and a detailed constitution
(organizational structure, operating procedures, etc.). Nefac had emerged out
of a fairly long process among friends and acquaintances on the East
Coast. It was immediately clear that we (i.e., this weekend
gathering of strangers in Chicago) could not hope to duplicate that model.
I floated the idea of establishing an anarchist
"Circle" instead. Cindy Milstein was able to give details about such a
structure, as she was acquainted with what had been the New England
Anarchist Circle, which had been a much looser arrangement, and mostly used for
sharing information and resources. After discussing these two approaches
for awhile, my impression is that it was near unanimous that a
looser "circle" type arrangement was about all we could hope for at that
time, but that perhaps it would evolve into something more
structured later on. But that idea ran into difficulty right away because a number
of people did not want to put their names and addresses on a mailing
list, so I think it was arranged for items to be sent to one address and
distributed from there (but I don’t have the details on this; I don’t
think it was really nailed down by the end of Saturday afternoon’s
session, or if it was I missed it; we’ll need to contact them about this,
and about what happened at the conference on Sunday).
Except for the three people from A-zone and Mike and
Fred from "Some Chicago Anarchists" and perhaps one or two other
groups, I think most people at the meeting came as individuals, and not
as representatives of organized groups. This is another difference between
the Midwest and the Northeast. The Northeast has more established
groups, which are therefore in a position to form an association on a regional
basis. The Midwest has mostly individual anarchists living in scattered
cities around the region. So perhaps some kind of individual
‘membership’ organization would be more appropriate to this region. It’s
pretty clear that there is neither the energy nor resources to attempt the kind
of complex constitutional structure that Nefac has put into
place.
What about a tiny newsletter (one-two pages) for anarchists in the
region? I had thought of volunteering to do this. But is this really the
way to go? Newsletters, even brief ones, take a lot of work. You have to
collect the materials, scan or type them into the computer, get them made
up into pages, get them printed out and photocopied, and then mailed.
Even a small newsletter to a short mailing list would be a lot of work
for one person. Is it really worth it? The internet is simply loaded with
anarchist material. There are hundreds of web sites with resources and
contacts listed. I realize that many activists don’t have access to the
internet, but surely usually at least one person in a project or circle
of friends does. Perhaps a web site, patterned after the indymedia sites,
for midwest anarchists, would be the way to go. It could be set up so
that anyone could post to it, and thus become a way to announce events,
share resources, distribute materials, and so forth. Unfortunately (or
fortunately) I cannot volunteer for this because I have never learned
html or how to set up web sites.
There were undercurrents at the meeting which I could not possibly
unravel from one brief exposure. So the remarks that follow are extremely
impressionistic, and may be wrong. It seemed however that the A-Zone
group and ‘Some Chicago Anarchists’ can’t get along. Even though both
sides constantly said that they ought to find ways to cooperate, this
didn’t seem to be happening. At one point I asked them what seemed to be
the trouble. They said it was a long story. Apparently there are a couple
of severe personality conflicts, one person in particular coming across
as dogmatic and sectarian. But beyond that, ‘Some Chicago Anarchists’ are
apparently fairly strict anarcho-syndicalists, with a more fixed and
established set of beliefs, while the a-zone people are rather more
general and vague (inclusive, pluralistic) theoretically, and are mainly
into street actions and organizing rallies. It was my impression that it
was primarily the rigidity of the anarcho-syndicalists that prevented
cooperation rather than any reluctance on the part of the a-zone crowd.
But I may be wrong.
When we each explained what we meant by anarchism, it did not seem to me
that there were any insuperable splits. Mike Hargis insisted several
times that labor had to be a central focus of organizing, but no one
disagreed with this, and a couple of the a-zone people explicitly agreed
that labor was key. In practice however, I think this may be a pretty
serious split, with the a-zone militants primarily focusing on rallies
and street actions and the syndicalists on workplace organizing. The
a-zone activists were also more interested in community organizing I
think than workplace organizing, even though they didn’t reject workplace
organizing. I argued against a strict, sole focus on workplace
organizing, saying that workplaces, neighborhoods, and households were
all strategic sites for confronting ruling class power. There are other
ways to confront the powers that be, as for example in single issue
campaigns, and direct actions of various kinds, but these three sites
have the advantage of actually being situated to take real power away
from the rulers while simultaneously allowing us to build an anarchist
society.
I think a disagreement about ‘primitivism’ was mentioned once or twice
but did not receive extended discussion. I could not see any reason off
hand why an umbrella organization, with very broad anarchistic
principles, wouldn’t work for this group. But is it needed? Would it be
worth the effort? Perhaps if all the anarchists in the Chicago area could
come up with a formula and mechanism for cooperation, then scattered
individuals and groups throughout out the rest of the midwest could join.
We anarchists face a dilemma when it comes to
organizing among ourselves. The more time we spend on organizing ourselves the
less time we have to try to actually establish anarchist social relations
and defend them. We need to be better organized among ourselves in order
to get the word out about anarchism. But organizing among ourselves is
still one step removed from actually making a revolution. If this is all we
ever do, the revolution will continue to be put off. On the other
hand, we live in an intensely conservative country, and have just made
it through thirty years of counterrevolution. Perhaps all we can do at
present is continue with our anarchist propaganda. But wouldn’t it be
better to actually be trying to set up neighborhood assemblies, household
assemblies, and workplace assemblies, and thus start taking the
first steps toward gutting capitalism and establishing a free society?
Thanks to all those who helped organize the
conference and for getting us started down the road toward greater cooperation.
James
********
The A-Infos News Service
News about and of interest to anarchists
********
COMMANDS: lists@ainfos.ca
REPLIES: a-infos-d@ainfos.ca
HELP: a-infos-org@ainfos.ca
WWW: http://www.ainfos.ca
INFO: http://www.ainfos.ca/org
To receive a-infos in one language only mail lists@ainfos.ca the message
unsubscribe a-infos
subscribe a-infos-X
where X = en, ca, de, fr, etc. (i.e. the language code)