Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Anarchist delusions and sectarianism are the reasons for DC fiasco
The ACC fiasco on the streets of DC isn't just the fault of Ramsey's goon squads. Failure can be laid at the feet of escalating anarchist sectarianism and hostility towards everyone else.
The ACC fiasco on the streets of DC isn't just the fault of Ramsey's goon squads. Failure can be laid at the feet of escalating anarchist sectarianism and hostility towards everyone else.
While the police are undoubtedly guilty of suppressing assembly rights, this is hardly news. What is noteworthy is that even amid mounting scandals in the capitalist system, the Anarchist network behind a significant section of the anti-cap movement has shown itself uninterested, if not hostile, to the views of most ordinary people (and activists).
This year, they can't blame Workers World or the ISO or any of their favorite, irrelevent, whipping boys. Instead, they went down entirely on their own plans. Without the support of labor, NGOs, the socialist left or the majority of activists. Years of baiting other activists as "liberals" and "authoritarians" has come taken its toll. If you think everyone else is full of shit, they aren't going to have your back or waste their time at your events. And this is a shame. Because the ACC was right on the money politically and tactically.
Anarchists have brought a tremendous energy and creativity into the movement by anyone's estimation. The tolerance of their antics, dogmatism, and hostility have been remarkable. Most activists have accepted the "diversity of tactics" approach, even though it clearly comes with severe costs. But instead of deepening organizational ties and understanding, anarchists began believing their own propaganda and started to think they alone were the movement, while everyone else was merely an obstacle, a parasite, an enemy. So they led themselves right off the cliff and into jail. Alone. Again.
While it's easy to pick on the obvious, unaccountable loudmouths like Chuck Munson of the Infoshop.org website, the problem is deeper than that and needs to be dealt with not by arguments like this, but rather from within the anarchist scene and in honest discussion between anarchists and other sections of the movement
Intoxicated by successes like Quebec City, people began to lose their bearings. The thrill of power in the streets for a day was confused with a movement rooted beyond a counter culture and activist scene. Obnoxious behavior, constant denunciations of ideological rivals, arrogance and an inability to dialogue crept into the very core of anarchism as it really exists. A movement made up overwhelmingly of new, young (white and mostly male) activists would dismiss unions, NGOs, people of color organizations and scores of radical socialist groups as part of the problem. Is it any surprise you failed in DC?
A LARGER PATTERN
Going back to the WEF marches in NYC, we can get a picture of how anarchists can relate to larger movements and communities successfully. The Another World Is Possible coalition brought thousands onto the streets of New York in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks and while anarchists did much of the initial footwork for the coalition, groups from Refuse and Resist to the ISO to student networks around the city joined in with Reclaim the Streets and explicitly anarchist collectives to build the first mass outpouring against the War on Terror, empire and capitalism itself. The march was the least "lefty" or "hippy" of any I've attended in recent years with the overwhelming majority of participants coming out to challenge the arrogance of capitalism rather than push some sectarian calling.
Direct action wasn't on the agenda in New York, but sometimes EXISTENCE is an action all on its own. The bickering and hostility from the mega-ultra anarcho types started immediately after the WEF events. Chuck Munson went so far as to claim he initiated the actions even though he wasn't there and didn't attend one meeting in New York. Another anarchist, Peter Gelderloos, issued a diatribe about the "failure" of the march and called it a "joke" because there was no mass direct action. He didn't get his adrenaline fix and he was pissed. He didn't bother to mention in his diatribe that thousands of people had just been murdered in the city and many participants and organizers were not in a frame of mind for his brand of acting out. But the "militants" kept railing about being bold and so on.
What they didn't mention was that the day after the WEF events, anarchists organized their own march. They billed it as a "brisk stroll" through the East Village. Instead of the 15-25,000 who came out to AWIP, less than a hundred gathered in their Black Bloc finest and then got the living shit kicked out of them by the NYPD. For fucking nothing. No essays from the anarchists claiming responsibility for that nonsense. Instead, they pushed for more of the same.
And so was set in motion the waste that was this year's IMF "shutdown." There was no shutdown. Instead, hundreds of the most radical young people in America gathered in Washinton DC to be taken to jail while the conference proceeded without further incident. Great. Where's Chuck and his cohorts now? Claiming success and saying nothing, respectively.
This letter is written in all sympathy. It's not an "I told you so" rant. Anarchists need to deal with each other about these things. Stop promoting sectarianism. Stop denouncing other groups all the time. Stop being self-righteous. Stop sabatoging other coalitions. Stop assembling people to go to jail.
Think about solutions for accountability from individuals and organizations. Think about how we can learn to build dialogues with each other instead of nastiness. Think about what is inherent in anarchism that fetishizes acting-out over building up. Build a movement that is able to tap the vast alienation that everyday people are feeling right now.
We need to reach out not merely to other organizations and the same East Village/Mission District/Wicker Park scenes, but to everyone. We need to expand by a hundred times the range of our discussion. This is possible. Stop going to meetings of people who agree and start going where no one has ever heard what you've got to say. And if you are reading this, that means YOU figuring out that can be done in your own locality and by what means.
This is clearly a time for self-assessment and honest discussion.
Put that on your "scavenger list."
While the police are undoubtedly guilty of suppressing assembly rights, this is hardly news. What is noteworthy is that even amid mounting scandals in the capitalist system, the Anarchist network behind a significant section of the anti-cap movement has shown itself uninterested, if not hostile, to the views of most ordinary people (and activists).
This year, they can't blame Workers World or the ISO or any of their favorite, irrelevent, whipping boys. Instead, they went down entirely on their own plans. Without the support of labor, NGOs, the socialist left or the majority of activists. Years of baiting other activists as "liberals" and "authoritarians" has come taken its toll. If you think everyone else is full of shit, they aren't going to have your back or waste their time at your events. And this is a shame. Because the ACC was right on the money politically and tactically.
Anarchists have brought a tremendous energy and creativity into the movement by anyone's estimation. The tolerance of their antics, dogmatism, and hostility have been remarkable. Most activists have accepted the "diversity of tactics" approach, even though it clearly comes with severe costs. But instead of deepening organizational ties and understanding, anarchists began believing their own propaganda and started to think they alone were the movement, while everyone else was merely an obstacle, a parasite, an enemy. So they led themselves right off the cliff and into jail. Alone. Again.
While it's easy to pick on the obvious, unaccountable loudmouths like Chuck Munson of the Infoshop.org website, the problem is deeper than that and needs to be dealt with not by arguments like this, but rather from within the anarchist scene and in honest discussion between anarchists and other sections of the movement
Intoxicated by successes like Quebec City, people began to lose their bearings. The thrill of power in the streets for a day was confused with a movement rooted beyond a counter culture and activist scene. Obnoxious behavior, constant denunciations of ideological rivals, arrogance and an inability to dialogue crept into the very core of anarchism as it really exists. A movement made up overwhelmingly of new, young (white and mostly male) activists would dismiss unions, NGOs, people of color organizations and scores of radical socialist groups as part of the problem. Is it any surprise you failed in DC?
A LARGER PATTERN
Going back to the WEF marches in NYC, we can get a picture of how anarchists can relate to larger movements and communities successfully. The Another World Is Possible coalition brought thousands onto the streets of New York in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks and while anarchists did much of the initial footwork for the coalition, groups from Refuse and Resist to the ISO to student networks around the city joined in with Reclaim the Streets and explicitly anarchist collectives to build the first mass outpouring against the War on Terror, empire and capitalism itself. The march was the least "lefty" or "hippy" of any I've attended in recent years with the overwhelming majority of participants coming out to challenge the arrogance of capitalism rather than push some sectarian calling.
Direct action wasn't on the agenda in New York, but sometimes EXISTENCE is an action all on its own. The bickering and hostility from the mega-ultra anarcho types started immediately after the WEF events. Chuck Munson went so far as to claim he initiated the actions even though he wasn't there and didn't attend one meeting in New York. Another anarchist, Peter Gelderloos, issued a diatribe about the "failure" of the march and called it a "joke" because there was no mass direct action. He didn't get his adrenaline fix and he was pissed. He didn't bother to mention in his diatribe that thousands of people had just been murdered in the city and many participants and organizers were not in a frame of mind for his brand of acting out. But the "militants" kept railing about being bold and so on.
What they didn't mention was that the day after the WEF events, anarchists organized their own march. They billed it as a "brisk stroll" through the East Village. Instead of the 15-25,000 who came out to AWIP, less than a hundred gathered in their Black Bloc finest and then got the living shit kicked out of them by the NYPD. For fucking nothing. No essays from the anarchists claiming responsibility for that nonsense. Instead, they pushed for more of the same.
And so was set in motion the waste that was this year's IMF "shutdown." There was no shutdown. Instead, hundreds of the most radical young people in America gathered in Washinton DC to be taken to jail while the conference proceeded without further incident. Great. Where's Chuck and his cohorts now? Claiming success and saying nothing, respectively.
This letter is written in all sympathy. It's not an "I told you so" rant. Anarchists need to deal with each other about these things. Stop promoting sectarianism. Stop denouncing other groups all the time. Stop being self-righteous. Stop sabatoging other coalitions. Stop assembling people to go to jail.
Think about solutions for accountability from individuals and organizations. Think about how we can learn to build dialogues with each other instead of nastiness. Think about what is inherent in anarchism that fetishizes acting-out over building up. Build a movement that is able to tap the vast alienation that everyday people are feeling right now.
We need to reach out not merely to other organizations and the same East Village/Mission District/Wicker Park scenes, but to everyone. We need to expand by a hundred times the range of our discussion. This is possible. Stop going to meetings of people who agree and start going where no one has ever heard what you've got to say. And if you are reading this, that means YOU figuring out that can be done in your own locality and by what means.
This is clearly a time for self-assessment and honest discussion.
Put that on your "scavenger list."
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$140.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
Its called maturity - the movement has a lot of young people and showing solidarity is part of being a mature adult. Get over your issues - you're the one creating them by this analysis.
While I appreciate that you took the time to do this, trying to portray these brave and angry young people as so terrible isn't helping anyone and isn't helping the movement. You could instead try to spend your time figuring out how to create bridges to bring groups together, rather than to criticize and divide them.
There will always be groups that choose more extreme tactics and appear less mature - how can people show support without attacking eachother?
Believe me, the lack of people wasn't because of the ACC - its because people are afraid of getting cracked on the head from the out of control cops who have no idea of how to manage CIVIL civil disobedience.
I for one applaud their courageous efforts - they exposed the DC Police State for what it is.
This could have been seen coming. In fact, it was seen coming. That' s why most of the crowds waited for Saturday to come out and why further thousands who knew about the events and supported them DID NOT COME.
The East coast has a pretty diverse movement. Unfortunately, an aggressive minority of activists has taken it upon themselves to denounce every other tendency they aren't apart of. I agree that calling people "liberals" and "authoritarians" who don't think they are either liberal or authoritarian means that a large number of not just everyday people, but activists, find othe things to do with their time.
Try posting an article from a marxist magazine on this website and watch what happens. Do an experiment. Anarchists think that because people don't hang out with them that they don't exist. It is starting to handicap the movement. Narrowness and arrogance (traits I think anarchists call "vanguardist") are prevelent and tiresome.
The above article asks anarchists to respect the principle of solidarity and mutual respect and taking people at face value. It asks for public speaking or whatever philosophy the speaker holds. It doesn't say to join any group or adopt and grand principles.
So, while the kids are alright – beware generals hiding behind the black flag.
Go get a job at Time magazine or some other korporate krap.
The sectarianism of many anarchists stems from their misunderstandings of how anarchism fits into historical tendencies. They presume that any Marxist is a sectarian, but anarchists can't be sectarian. (Of course, this very act of denouncing all Marxists is the anarchist form of sectarianism.) Many anarchists just don't care about class revolution, and so are mostly ignorant about what and how the various sects of Marxism are at least providing coherency, whereas some anarchists are offering a mish-mash of slogans, one-line quotes and appeals for hedonism.
So, I think this criticism is good and many anarchists need to hear it.
We wake up the next morning to hear that the Pope has declared Argentina to be in a "pre-anarchic" situation. He seems to be following in the footsteps of President Duhalde, who in the first week of February said, "Argentina is on the brink of anarchy." Weeks later, the finance minister chimes in, telling a meeting of international bankers, "Either we have continuity or anarchy." Funny how that word gets thrown around whenever power begins to feel threatened.
It seems that they are using "anarchy" to conjure up the spectre of chaos, destruction, disobedience, nihilism, the collapse of law and order. It is doubtful they are using it to describe the authentic spirit of anarchism, which has spontaneously arisen on the street corners, and in the parks and squares of Argentina: the simple desire of people to live without rulers, remaining free to govern themselves.
What is so refreshing is that this spirit has developed so spontaneously, and that no one, except a few tired old politicos (and the state of course), is using the word anarchism. This is perhaps surprising, given that Argentina had the world's largest anarchist movement at the dawn of the twentieth century. But no one needs another "ism" from the 19th century, another word which imprisons and fixes meaning, another word that seduces some people into the clarity and comfort of a sectarian box, and leads others in front of a firing squad or a show trial. Labels lead so easily to fundamentalism, brands inevitably breed intolerance, delineating doctrines, defining dogma, limiting the possibility of change.
When Moose (in a response on a different board) says my critique "laid out a few points in a rather simplistic and disengenous way" he is more right than I wish. He is right that I should have waited for people to be released from jail. I am genuinely sorry. It is a bad precedent to engage in harsh criticism anonymously. Moose is right that it was a loaded. There is more behind it than one demonstration that had some problems. It is also unfair to single one person out in this context. In fact, the whole initial essay seems ill timed.
I imagined some 17 year old kid from a small town who read this after getting out of jail and was embarrassed. It doesn't mean there isn't any truth to what I wrote... but for the record, I spoke as an individual and represented no organization. It was anonymous so that the author didn't become the issue, only the ideas presented.
I would like to hear from the DC ACC. Many of the comments to the initial letter were interesting and this may blunder into a deeper discussion, most likely in some other forum and without my participation.
In truth, it is the fact that anarchists organized an anti-capitalist demonstration that means there is anything to criticize. It is the creativity and revolutionary consciousness of anarchists that makes me care so much. The bitterness I let out comes from an exasperation at all our situation. A feeling of impotence and isolation as the government gears up for war and a fear that anarchists are repeating some of the same mistakes that have crippled resistance movements in the past.
In truth, I don't know how to engage "the anarchists." If your movement is made up of hundreds of smaller collectives, where do you send a letter?
You know you're smarter than that. One will do, even a small tiny one. Probably infoshop has links.
The next thing is to organize something yourself to help bring groups together and make them less afraid of eachother. Everyone comes to free things. Call it a "Building Bridges Against the War Party," or "Mending the Tensions / Building the Movement Free For All," or whatever. Find a cheap or free location (a park?) and have a party that specifically invites organizers from the disparate groups. Provide alcohol (or if a park, something else) and cake, food, and a DJ and a mic. Promote it as an open discussion about the disparate parts of the movement against war and capitalism - how to bring them together. Invite everyone from the Sierra Club to the most tiny arachist collective.
We had a thing here not too long ago - a party for activists in GGPark - it was wonderful. Green Peace had their solar van powering the rave music. But there was no particular discussion and the point was just to have a good time and wander tables of lit., dance, which people did.
http://dc.indymedia.org/local/webcast/uploads/metafiles/arrest_k_vermont_9_27_02vymm7l.mov