AUT: Marxism/Anarchism AND Post Seattle Discussion

[Dave Graham <davgraham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all

I'd just like to endorse Steve's post because it is the only practical way we can proceed. I'm always struck by the way discussions proceed on this list and how it usually [IMO] seems to be the same few people who look to try and go 'beyond' rather than simply restate worked out views. For the most part however discussion very quickly go to a very abstract level which effectively locks me [and I suspect others] out. There are only a few that I can relate to and I am glad to see Harald is back.

Because it is always a pleasure to read Haralds very measured and considered contributions not least because they are rooted in a social reality which he uses as part of his arguments. Harald looks for the 'commonality' of experience and it not too bothered about the labels people put on what they describe themselves. Steve does the same.

During the dockers dispute, one of the very noticeable things was that because of the 'moral authority' [I can't think of a better description] of the dockers the usual Leftist stupidities were held in check. People were working on a common, practical project and it rapidly became clear that NO tendency Marxist, Anarchist or whatever had a clue as to how we were to proceed. Individuals [from any tradition] had good ideas, proposed them, they were taken up and we collectively organised around them. Some of these people I am still working with. My relationship with them does NOT involve endless discussions of 'isms'. It doesn't mean we don't have political discussions - just that they take place in a different context, and are rooted in where we find ourselves now. What some of us have recognised is the near meaninglessness of labels - especially when they take the form of 'isms'. I'm reminded of something Jan Appel said to us in 1972 -

'We were told we were fighting for Socialismus and against Kapitalismus and that other workers were in favour of Fascismus or maybe Kommunismus - but we didn't really know what any of them were.'

While we are still arguing over 'isms' it means we really don't know where we are going, our understanding needs to become far more rooted in the reality we experience. Trying to understand what was for me at the time [1995] the entirely new notion of class composition during the dispute enabled me to escape from the prison of 'isms', and since at least in the UK there is no Autonomist movement anyway, what is the practical point of such an endeavour?

Sorry if this has turned into a bit of a rant - but I print out these discussion for people here and it is sometimes difficult for me to explain just why folk here should bother to read them.

Now the n30 movement HAS grabbed people's attention and the process of trying to recuperate such a 'movement' is already underway, witness the attempt to isolate the 'perpetrators of violence' or 'anarchists' or to create a split between US workers [somehow priveleged ?] over 'Third World workers' etc etc.

The WTO and the TNCs will now attempt to 'democratise' by drawing in 'civil society' [a dubious term]. We have a chance to create a world wide 'constituency' of those who just say no - and all of a sudden we are involved in an argument of 'Marxism' versus 'Anarchism'. It just 'does my head in' as we say here, I don't need it.

Gra

--
Dave Graham
<davgraham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your own FREE e-mail address at http://www.merseymail.com/


     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---