💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › rory-mcgowan-claim-no-easy-victories.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 13:41:06. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Claim No Easy Victories Author: Rory McGowan Date: 07/22/2003 Language: en Topics: anarchist analysis, anti-racism, Anti-Racist Action, anti-fascism, history, North America, Northeastern Anarchist Source: Retrieved on September 30, 2012 from http://nefac.net/node/523 Notes: Published in The Northeastern Anarchist Issue #7, Summer 2003.
1. WE GO WHERE THEY GO: Whenever fascists are organizing or active in
public, we’re there. We don’t believe in ignoring them. Never let the
nazis have the streets!
2. WE DON’T RELY ON THE COPS OR THE COURTS TO DO OUR WORK FOR US: This
doesn’t mean we never go to court. But we must rely on ourselves to
protect ourselves and stop the fascists.
3. NON-SECTARIAN DEFENSE OF OTHER ANTI-FASCISTS: In ARA, we have lots of
different groups and individuals. We don’t agree about everything and we
have the right to differ openly. But in this movement an attack on one
is an attack on us all. We stand behind each other.
4. WE SUPPORT ABORTION RIGHTS AND REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM: ARA intends to
do the hard work necessary to build a broad, strong movement against
racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, discrimination against the
disabled, the oldest, the youngest and the most oppressed people. WE
INTEND TO WIN!
- Anti-Racist Action’s ‘Points of Unity’
The current climate of war and repression is foisting on us an urgent
need to try and decipher what in hell is happening. Questions of
capitalist restructuring and expansion, occupation, white supremacy,
racism, white privilege and fascism are all topics being raised in
anarchist circles. Questions, that are of the utmost importance in our
developing of a fighting movement that can intervene in struggles that
are breaking out, or soon will.
Without veering too far into negativity, it must be said that for much
of the North American anarchist movement, we are short on theory and
much of an analysis of historical conditions and developments. While
there is growth and promise, we still have an uphill journey. Partly
because the current anarchist movement is quite young in age and does
not have a solid connection with any historical lineage – no
institutions or infrastructure that we can claim some linear connection
to, not much living history that is explicitly anarchist and maps out
decisions or breaks made for the political or social advancement of our
groups and people in struggle. However, this isn’t to say we haven’t
participated in any way or that were short on experience. Since the mid
1980’s the North American anarchist scene/movement has been developing
collectively and taking part in struggles that, when examined, can give
lessons to build on. We are young, but we have been a part of many
not-so-insignificant projects and battles. Looking backwards from recent
direct action against the war, to the globalization protests, to
political prisoner/prison abolition work, to Zapatista support, to
further back with anti-apartheid work and solidarity with people of
color and the oppressed, including Black and Native struggles, looking
at this it is clear anarchists have sought to develop ourselves by
learning from and being real participants in these many fights.
It is in these struggles that we can gauge our success and failings, and
with the formation of critical perspectives, applied and integrated into
our work, we may be in better positions to identify, defend, and help
generate more autonomous and potentially insurrectionary action.
For fourteen years the work of ARA has been to popularize the ideas of
direct action in the fight against racism. Along the way ARA’s own
internal development has meant connecting racism to other struggles
against oppression, from the pro-choice and anti-patriarchal organizing
to pro-queer struggles to emphasizing the continual need for
participation and initiative in political direction from young people.
While there is no single, homogenous, ARA political line beyond ARA’s
‘Points of Unity’, generally, ARA has and continues to be an
anti-authoritarian arena for debate and action around the connectedness
of various forms of oppression. This allows for an experimentation and
self-activity essential to the development of a conscious movement
outside of the control and direction of the State. Constructing
organizations and movements at the grassroots can be instructive in both
the difficulties and simultaneously the radical potentials of people in
action.
And that is what we need. From a revolutionary perspective, we need
movements that can challenge peoples notions of what is possible and
then sketch out in our heads what its going to take to make our
endeavors succeed. Is ARA such a movement? Is the work done by ARA
building towards an actual radical opposition movement? Is that even the
intention of ARA? After fourteen years what has ARA’s contribution been?
And what has been the contribution of anarchists within ARA? If we find
in ARA the elements that are essential components of a movement capable
of influencing the emergence of radical currents, is ARA up to the
challenge of understanding and building on these elements.
These questions represent a kind of “ruler” that I think we size up ARA
with, and provide a context for discussion. While I hope this article
answers these questions, I am prepared to admit that it only scratches
the surface and prompts more questions than it satisfies (but this isn’t
a bad thing). If ARA is to be relevant it’s got to be constantly
subjected to a critical assessment of its work, from outside and from
within. And in regard to the broader discussion of where we
revolutionary anarchists see organizing potentials and lessons to be
learnt, then ARA may be as good a starting point then most anything our
movement has been connected to.
To best access the impact ARA has had and what role it could play in the
future, it could be helpful to look at its past and development. From
starting as an organization of anti-racist Skinhead crews in the late
1980’s, to remaking itself into a political movement of nearly two
thousand during the mid 1990’s, and ending with the current period of
the ARA movements life.
ARA originally came out of the efforts of Minneapolis anti-racist
skinheads to create an organization that could combat the presence of
nazi skinheads in their city and its neighboring city, St. Paul. The
Baldies, a multi-racial skinhead crew having members of black, white,
Asian, and Native American origins, was fighting the Nazi skinhead
group, the White Knights, and had set a code within the local punk and
skinhead scenes: if Baldies came upon White Knights at shows, in the
streets downtown, or wherever, the nazis were warned once. If Baldies
came across the nazis again, then the nazis could expect to be attacked,
or served some of what the Baldies called “Righteous Violence.”
While the Baldies actions went a long way to limiting the presence and
organizing efforts of nazis in the Twin Cities areas, the Baldies
realized that a successful drive against the nazis would mean having to
form a broader group that appealed to kids other than just Skins; ARA
was that group. However, the attempt to make ARA into a group beyond the
Baldies was met with limited success, and ARA remained predominantly
skinhead.
But the experience of the Baldies was not limited to Minneapolis alone.
Across the Midwest, nazi activity was growing and anti-racist Skinheads
were organizing in similar ways to what the Baldies had done. Soon,
these different anti-racist skinhead crews were meeting up with each
other and deciding to create a united organization of anti-racist
skinhead crews. ARA as a name was adopted and a brief network of the
crews was formed: the Syndicate.
Like Minneapolis, Chicago had multi-racial crews. These ARA skins were
generally left-wing sympathetic and in Chicago it was not uncommon to
find some Skins warming to Black liberation/Nationalist ideas. And it
was not just racist and nazi ideas that were confronted. The Chicago ARA
crew banned the wearing of American flags patches on jackets on bomber
jackets (a standard piece of the Skin attire). At this point in time
this was a rather significant step in Skinhead circles. While many
Skinheads could claim to be “anti-racist”, a vast majority also were
ProAmS (Pro American Skins). It was generally unheard of to find whole
crews of Skinheads rejecting patriotic trappings. Many ARA skins took
their cue from the words of groups like Public Enemy, America was a
racist nightmare and the Stars and Stripes a symbol for, “…a land that
never gave a damn.”
The success of ARA could be found in its being a truly organic product
of a youth culture. Young people, in this example Skinheads, were
creating a group that was explicitly anti-racist and sought to confront
and shut out the nazi presence in the scenes specifically and the cities
generally. ARA as an idea was made a pole to rally around and as an
actual body of people it fought for “turf” and the establishment of a
type of hegemony – lines were drawn and you had to choose where you
stood. From putting on music shows, to producing zines and literature,
to holding conferences where people could meet up and hang out while
simultaneously trying to build an actual political project capable of
fighting and winning.
However, ARA had many weaknesses’ that would lead to this initial
incarnation having to be “reformed.” ARA was at this point predominantly
male, and despite the growing political consciousness and understanding
that ARA needed to be more than just a Skinhead group, the emphasis
placed on physical confrontation and violence often breed a mentality
where in the end, ARA was only about beating down the nazis. Larger
political concerns became subordinate to the internal scene life. Women
in the ARA groups saw double standards. While emphasis was placed on
combating the oppression of racism, sexism ran rampant. Several women
would leave ARA to look for a politic that dealt more fundamentally with
Patriarchy. Some left in plain disgust at the macho behavior of some ARA
men. Other women decided to stay in the movement and challenge the
behavior and attempt to integrate radical and feminist ideas into the
core politics of ARA. The decision by these women to stay was based on
the realization that there were few other organizations existing that
were as radical and militant. ARA had managed to attract a number of
dedicated and determined individuals and this encouraged the idea that
it was possible to develop an anti-sexist vision.
ARA helped expand peoples understanding of politics and oppression but
the sword is double edged, and the new political consciousness worked to
illustrate the limitations of this first incarnation of ARA. ARA needed
to grapple with its internal contradictions if it was to develop into
the broad, militant anti-racist youth organization and movement it
originally hoped to be.
From ‘88 to ‘90 ARA had spread throughout the Midwest United States and
was even seeing some West coast groups spring up. However, by 1991 the
Minneapolis grouping represented the most consistent and in many ways
the more diverse and politically engaged group, this was made possible
in part by ARA’s relationship with revolutionary anarchist groups like
the RABL (Revolutionary Anarchist Bowling League). Despite the somewhat
silly name, RABL had a rep for being extremely confrontational and
solidly pro-class war anarchist. Some of the members of ARA and the
Baldies were involved with RABL and hoped to bring anarchist politics
into ARA’s program.
While keeping the militancy and uncompromising attitude that ARA had
been built on, anarchists in ARA made efforts to address the weakness
that had run through ARA earlier. Attention to Queer struggles,
Patriarchy, imbalance of power between whites and people of color, were
all issues thrown to the fore now.
ARA Minneapolis was trying to turn itself into a popular,
anti-authoritarian direct action group. Institutionalized oppressions of
class society were given as much priority to thought and action as the
continued struggle against nazi organizing. From police brutality to
anti-war activity to actions to defend abortion clinics, ARA was a much
more dynamic organization and this aided in its recruitment of new
militants.
ARA had ceased to be a group centered around Skinhead culture, and while
the limited potential of ARA’s first wave had been overcome, problems
would still plague the group. Understanding class, gender, sexual
definition and internal sexism would continue to be a challenge for ARA.
By 1993, ARA in Minneapolis had reached a stage where after an extremely
intense and inwardly focused grappling with group and individual
identity, ARA almost totally fell apart and for the next year ARA
remained dormant. It was now in Canada that ARA would find its strength.
Toronto ARA was formed in 1992 as a response to a rise in nazi activity
in the city. Arson, vandalism, and physical attacks were being carried
out by fascists. Made up of anti-prison activists, native/indigenous
organizers, anti-racists, anarchists, and kids from the local punk and
skinhead scenes, ARA went to work to challenge and shutdown the
fascists.
At this point the main organization of fascists in Toronto was the
Heritage Front (HF). Founded by long time neo-nazi and KKK organizers,
the HF was attempting to bring the different nazi tendencies together
under its banner. The most well known of these fascist groups was the
pre-Matt Hale COTC (Church of the Creator) which served as the “muscle”
to the HF’s political rhetoric.
Through the work done by ARA in the States and its promotion in the
radical anti-imperialist press, Love and Rage’s newspaper, and the punk
scenes many publications (in particular magazines like MRR and Profane
Existence), ARA as a name and model seemed to be the best avenue for
organizing a grass roots, militant, and independent anti-racist project.
Like previous ARA organizing, emphasis was put on creating a visible
culture through music shows, literature, and mass in your face
demonstrations. ARA Toronto was having organizing meetings of over a
hundred and their demos were in the several of hundreds. Toronto ARA
quickly became a successful campaign and it’s establishment in youth
scenes and areas of Toronto like Kennsington Market made it impossible
for fascists to carry out their activity openly. ARA proceeded to go
after the HF leadership and held “outings”, instead of organizing boring
demos with speakers talking to the wind, ARA mobilized to march on the
homes and hangouts of the nazis.
While previous incarnations of ARA had envisioned themselves moving
towards a broad youth oriented style of organizing, it was Toronto ARA
which really illustrated the potentials for ARA to do just that. The
support and interest ARA created in less than a year’s time was seen
when an anti-HF demo in downtown Toronto in January of 1993 drew over
500 anti-racists who were going to prevent HF members from marching
through the streets. The ARA contingent was attacked by police on horse
back, with some ARA members being arrested for assaulting police.
Despite the attack, ARA found the demo an overall success. The demo
sought to shut down the nazi march and it did that, but it went further
and showed ARA as an organization uninterested in playing the games of
established liberal “anti-racist” and left groups. ARA knew that direct
action was a more powerful force than lobbying for State action or
selling papers – two things which will never stop racist and fascist
organizing.
The success, and draw towards, ARA’s work would soon catch the attention
of larger political Left groups. Organizations like the IS
(International Socialist) tried to enter into ARA, but after a period of
a couple months were voted out by a 2/3 majority. However, ARA now a
known force and center for militant youths and activists would be sought
out more and more for joint actions and Left groups would try and place
themselves into a position of “leadership” within ARA, this especially
with the formation of the ARA Network in 1995.
In 1995 several different groups came together to discuss creating a
united front of various independent anti-racist forces. ARA had
reemerged in Minneapolis and met with members of the MAFNet (Midwest
Antifascist Network), an ARA-type group that contained several Left
tendencies from anarchists to smaller Marxist groups like the Trotskyist
League to older SDS veterans.
After much debate, the new body would be called the Anti-Racist Action
Network, and would be held together by the ‘Points of Unity’ (POU). Any
individual could participate in a chapter so long as they agreed to the
POU (although, different chapters could have additional political points
of unity, reflecting the specific groups political orientation. This
would later cause trouble where one groups POU would be taken as the
Networks). Strategically, it brought in a larger mass of people and
could be a vehicle for taking direct action and democratic left ideas of
organizing to a higher level. The new ARA Net was also genuine in its
not being a front for any one political group.
Utilizing internal discussion bulletins, national meetings, having a
delegate system to facilitate decision making between the different
chapters, ARA Net represented something new and fresh. And it also was
an overwhelmingly anti-authoritarian organization. A sizable segment of
the membership identified as anarchist and were now in a position to
argue for anarchist models of organizing. There was no other movement
that was currently existing that saw anarchists in a position to define
avenues of action.
Anarchists involved with Love and Rage Revolutionary Anarchist
Federation worked within ARA to keep the organizations structure and
aims transparent and participatory. Love and Rage, as an organization,
viewed ARA as a potential mass movement (e.g.: SDS), where politics
could be raised and debated and where through practice and constant
analysis win people to more and more radical positions. The relationship
between the different political tendencies was often rocky, and there
was constant debate around the setting up of different committees and
how much influence they would have. Other issues of contention were the
ability of organizations to join ARA en masse. ARA Net was set up on a
chapter basis, and each chapter was made up of individuals. No
organization could just join ARA Net. Chapters could have its members
coming from any tendency, but a specific organization could hold no sway
beyond the number of chapters their members were apart of. And even then
each chapter was allowed only two votes. This made it difficult for Left
sects to highjack ARA for opportunistic interests.
The next several years saw hundreds of activists join up with ARA.
Network annual conferences could easily see 500 in attendance and
conference weekends would be a mix of both decision making plenary and
educational workshops with topics ranging from anti-Prison work to
Colonialism to State repression to developments in the Far Right
movements.
But the life’s blood of ARA remained its action in the streets. The
following years from ‘96 to ‘98 provided ARA militants the greatest
chance of demonstrating the politics of the movement on a much more mass
level. But this period would also emerge as the most difficult period in
ARA’s life. From accountability, to the need for a more coherent
analysis of race, class and gender, these issues along with the ever
present need to struggle against sexism, patriarchy and internal power
imbalances would come to dominate the movement unlike at any time
previously. Internal conflicts would split ARA at the seams and it would
take the pulse of the new protest movements erupting in Seattle ‘99 to
give help ARA a new focus and energy.
Newspapers were scrambling for info on the new street militants and
their ideology of anarchism, debate started to rage in the radical
press. The Black Bloc was seen by some as misled youth, interested only
in adventurism. Sometimes the Black Bloc was condemned outright and
treated as criminal – an attitude that rolled in from the established
Left. During riots, liberal and leftists do-gooders actually tried to
defend capitalist property from the anarchists. In several instances,
avowed ‘pacifists’ have attacked the Black Bloc in an effort to protect
places like the Gap and Starbucks.
The actions by the Black Bloc and anarchists turned traditional politics
on its head… ARA groups quickly defended the Seattle Black Bloc, seeing
a similarity in tactics and motivation -– also in the way that militant
anti-fascism had suffered from the denunciations by the established left
and liberal reformists.
The Seattle events had an immense effect on the ARA movement. ARA, like
many groups, was taken by surprise when the Battle of Seattle erupted.
The profound change the demonstrations had on political discourse and
life itself could hardly have been foreseen. In ARA, there had long been
debate about expanding our role and focus beyond the most basic
anti-racist organizing. Many saw ARA as a grassroots direct action,
anti-racist, anti-nazi, and for many ARA’ers, anti-cop movement. But
explicit anti-capitalism was never taken up as a whole. Within several
individual chapters this would have been probable, mostly in the
anarchist dominated groups in Minneapolis, Detroit (two cities that also
had L&R members as active ARA organizers) and Chicago. But within ARA,
there were tendencies that saw adopting more explicit politics as
potentially detrimental to ARA. Seattle helped to turn this around.
But this gets too far ahead, it is important to first outline the
pre-Seattle ARA period and raise what events were fueling its growth and
significance.
Throughout the Midwestern United States, Klan groups were on the
offensive and holding blatantly provocative mass rallies that could
attract hundreds of supporters. The Klan and assorted neo-Nazi allies
were pinpointing cities that were faced with tinderbox-like racial
tension. Fights around affirmative action, welfare, police brutality,
housing, continued school de-segregation practice, or any struggle that
brought about conflicts that poised people of color against the
interests of White Supremacy in either its institutionalized form or
autonomous actions by White citizens, the Klan would use as an
opportunity to polarize the debate and saw their numbers and influence
grow. Klan groups, like the one lead by longtime KKK member and neo-Nazi
Tom Robb, became seen as fighters for White “rights.”
From Cincinnati, Ohio to Ann Arbor, Michigan, the Klan started holding
its demos but the effect was that thousands of counter demonstrators
came out to vent their disapproval and hatred of the racists. In some of
these cities the smoldering racial tension that had long been present
was about to be ignited. It was this counter-organizing that became the
main thrust of the ARA Network. Doing pre-rally agitating, trying to
meet up with sympathetic groups, and boldly stating that the aim of it’s
counter-protesting was to “shut down” the rallies, ARA established
itself as the group that rolled out to force the racists to take flight.
In particular, there was a massive riot that erupted when the Robb Klan
faction came under attack from Black residents and ARA’ers in Ann Arbor.
Police attacked the crowd using tear gas. Several Klansmen and fascists
were wounded by protesters. Six years later, that riot is still talked
about in Ann Arbor, partly due to continued legal issues brought on by
the subsequent arrest of dozens of anti-racists charged with inciting
and participating in mob action and assault. The arrests came two months
after the Ann Arbor action, when at another Klan rally in Kalazamoo,
Michigan, police using both video tape and statements made by “peace”
marshals, identified several activists. The “peace” marshals, whose
ranks were comprised of mostly older male Trade Unionists, had seen
their influence and authority at the Ann Arbor rally ignored and
undermined – they had been unable to prevent anti-Klan protesters from
(un)peacefully taking matters into their own hands. While Ann Arbor was
seen as a victory for anti-racists, the later arrests seriously
demoralized many ARA’ers and showed that ARA was not completely ready
for the repercussions of its activity. Many arrested activists felt let
down and un-supported. The combination of high legal costs and the
potential of lengthy jail time left many activists feeling alone and
insufficiently supported. Even more, without a solid political
understanding of how these actions were part of a broader strategy, it
is easy to see how the stress could make some question the relevance of
what ARA was doing. There were cases of activists asking why they were
risking so much for a few hours of street fighting. This is a real
concern that should not be discounted.
Many radicals in ARA could point to the significance of the mass action:
sharpening political differences and solidifying existing positions,
generating spontaneous organizing and/or the need to quickly reassess
plans, the coming together of comrades and new groups of people, and
polarizing the mass of the protesters against the police and government
officials who would be spending time and money to allow the racists to
rally. For anarchists, this atmosphere provided opportunities to speak
and agitate for more radical positions and actions while simultaneously
supporting steps being taken by folks from the communities who were
operating outside of any political formation and sought to work in ways
that directly went against government or community “leaderships”
sanctioned plans and conduct. Out of these actions, connections and
dialogue could be had about what the needs of the communities are,
beyond these one time explosions of anti-racist action. For anarchists,
an assessment of the confidence and abilities of our forces could be
made. Anarchist revolutionaries wanted to spread and popularize ARA, but
personal and group development was equally important. This process of
developing a nuclei, or cadre, of fighters is an important point of
militant, extra-legal activity.
The ability of a movement like ARA to resist the emergence of a
centralized, top-down structure where there would be a minority
determining the politics and the strategy, would be found though the
widest possible discussion and planning within the various ARA circles,
and stressing the collective process. It happened on more than one
occasion that one person would form an ARA group and would attempt to
exercise ownership over it. Others who would come into the group would
feel as if their opinions and work were subordinate to a few who may
have greater economic resources or social influence. As with any growing
movement, the result was an attraction of individuals who sought to use
the movement for their own ends, rather than making ARA the property of
the whole of the membership. These groups did not last long within ARA,
but they had the effect of alienating many new and enthused activists,
including women, who felt some of the ARA locals were controlled by men
who were interested in women for dating purposes more than as comrades.
It should be emphasized that at this time (1996–97), ARA had reached its
pinnacle in membership, easily estimated at 1,500 supporting activists.
The anti-Klan organizing and a number of anti-police brutality campaigns
initiated by ARA groups had helped swell the ranks of ARA. But in 1998
at the ARA national conference several internal conflicts would put the
fire to ARA and test its ability to cope with its own weakness’. A
series of accounts from women of having been treated in abusive and
demeaning ways, and one woman ARA activist having been sexual assaulted
by a male involved in ARA, lead to a major split. Local ARA groups
collapsed into different factions and individual members would sometimes
side with particular split off factions in other cities, depending on
who knew who. At the core of this was the fact that several women felt
that their concerns and struggles against sexism were being ignored or
undermined by their own male “comrades”. Women were told to not bring
their personal issues to the meetings and long standing cases of blatant
male chauvinism were discounted as having been exaggerated by women to
suit their private interests. ARA’s movement structure had little in
terms of a plan of resolution. ARA existed as a loose network centered
around the POU, and mechanisms of accountability and action to solve
internal disputes and problems of such high and sensitive degree were
not present. A few activists intimately connected to the situation used
this unfortunate truth to evade criticism. Though ARA was being affected
as a whole, individuals directly involved (or who had sided with certain
persons who were being accused of sexism and misconduct) would say that
the matters were of local concern and that they were uninterested in
Network involvement, despite several women contacting ARA groups and
individuals in other cities asking for help because the local group
would not deal with, and in effect would try and mute, the issues.
Attempts at mediation failed and ARA left its annual conference
splintered and demoralized. Several local groups never regained momentum
and others who outwardly appeared strong would themselves come crashing
inwards. Most notable was the split in the ARA affiliated RASH UNITED
(Red & Anarchist Skinheads) who split into East Coast and Midwest
factions, and ultimately ceased all together (a Canadian RASH in Quebec
continued but was more thoughtful and committed to group accountability
than many of its American counterparts). Once again cases of sexism and
un-accountability by a mostly male membership caused implosion.
While the next year did not see ARA groups stop their organizing, it was
a rough year and introspection on the part of many in the movement
slowed down outward perceptions of action. It was crucial for ARA to
grapple with its limitations, and many comrades worked tirelessly to
open up debate about what had happened and what needed to change: how
groups formed or were “vested” into the ARA Net, structures and practice
for resolution, rotating Network roles, and attempting to hold more
gatherings where internal network life and issues involving its members
could be discussed. ARA would remain a network of chapters united around
the Points of Unity, but it was smaller and the level of discourse was
more intense and productive than before. If ARA was to continue as a
movement, then a higher commitment on the parts of its overall
membership was required and a realization that a few words of who it was
or some mechanical structural adjustments would not be adequate.
Emphasizing political quality over membership numbers was what the
movement needed.
Even current internal strategy planning and political discussions have
been influenced by this introspection started a few years back. Drawing
out experiences within ARA combined with developing theories of women in
society and our movements, several ARA chapters have tried to draw more
attention to the need for anti-patriarchal organizing and political
prioritizing. The Chicago ARA group (which found its beginnings firmly
rooted in clinic defense and exposing far-right ties to the
anti-abortion movements) is one chapter that has tried to integrate a
more serious womens’ focus into its work. With a recent ARA conference
held this past April, and the fact that several committed and longtime
ARA activists are women and continue acting as “responsibles,” ARA will
be hosting a women’s conference towards the end of summer to continue to
elevate anti-patriarchal politics to the front of direct action, and
anti-fascist, organizing.
But moving back to Seattle. It was at this time that several ARA
affiliates re-grouped and started to organize, building off of their
connections and history of direct action. Seattle was a moment that lit
up peoples imaginations and many ARA groups that were still active threw
themselves into the various mass protests. Seattle, Washington DC,
Cincinnati, and Quebec City saw numerous ARA militants participating in
the protests’ planning and actions. While internal debates over
anti-capitalism and ARA’s adoption of this as a unifying politic
continued, the majority of ARA supported the organizing and saw issues
of “globalization” intrinsically connected to larger struggles around
race, gender, and class inequality. Another point for ARA to organize
around was the increased attraction the “anti-globalization” movement
was having for far-right and neo-fascist groups. It was here that work
by smaller ARA groups took shape. More theoretical works were developed
to analyze ARA’s activity and the emerging social movements – from
advancements and tactics in State repression to the needs of social and
more specifically, revolutionary left – to build on current battles with
the State and resist co-option or destabilization, to the influence the
new movement was having on other areas of struggle. Mass protest and the
increased connectedness movements had with one another via internet and
these series of mass demos helped expand possibilities for quick
mobilization and affinity that had in the past been established less
frequently and taken a greater period of time to develop.
But ARA’s orientation was not to be defined solely by its relationship
to the anti-globalization movement. ARA had for years been struggling
against racism and fascist organizing. Many Klan groups saw their
rallies cease as they suffered from their own internal power struggles,
State infiltration/repression, and having ARA out-maneuver them on many
occasions, by successfully mounting campaigns to build effective street
and community resistance. But new fascist organizing, lead by more
sophisticated and potentially dangerous fascist movements, started to
emerge. In the days following the 9/11 attacks, the National Alliance
started a campaign to build on white people’s insecurities and fears.
ARA participated in defense of Mosques and Arab centers. Struggles to
fight the tightening of immigration laws, the rising number of cases of
detentions and deportations of immigrants, and the general racist
backlash, were all areas that ARA activists found themselves involved
in. Yet the rapidly changing circumstances of 9/11 and the escalation of
Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq made it difficult for much of the Left and
progressive forces to get a stable footing. The US State was quickly
moving to enact stauncher repression measures that were geared towards
silencing protest with fear and intimidation. More concerning, they may
potentially be launching a campaign of infiltration and encapsulation
wherein the State may actually direct the activity and political
trajectory of a group or movement by utilizing moles and
dis-information. The authorities were now working overtime to curb
outbreaks of militant action.
A recent article entitled “Revolutionary Anti-Fascism,” published in
NEFAC’s agitational magazine Barricada, posed several questions about
ARA. While it praised ARA’s commitment to organizing street level
defense against racist attacks and fascist groups, where most of the
Left fails miserably, the article is critical of ARA’s continued lack of
developing positions on a range of issues: patriarchy, white supremacy,
class, and even fascism. The article is important and I sympathize
notably with its emphasizing that ARA needs to seriously grapple with
political questions and commit itself to a higher level of debate,
whether or not there is immediate agreement. Where I disagree with the
article is that beyond articulating radical anti-fascist positions it
see’s ARA’s main contribution in the past and future as its anti-fascist
organizing, anti-fascist organizing that is based more times than not on
straight-forward anti-nazi activity. A point the article makes is that
where there is no visible or active nazi presence, ARA groups fall into
a state of inactivity. This has become an unfortunate reality for a lot
of ARA groups and shows an inability to connect anti-racism with other
struggles beyond the pale of nazi activity. Anti-nazi action is
important, but like past ARA attempts to attack inequality and
oppression in the interconnected realms of race, gender, and class
exploitation, current ARA activists would do well to connect with
developments in their cities, communities, schools and workplaces. Sorry
for the run on sentence, but the main point here is that anti-fascist
politics should be a lens threw which we view class society as a whole.
It is a critique of power and anti-human tendencies and its
incorporation coupled with a willingness to fight and utilize direct
action in whatever arena we are struggling in, may help to develop the
necessary mass movements capable of breaking down our society’s rule of
exploitation and division.
I chose the title “Claim No Easy Victories” to point out that ARA has
been an essential fighting movement in North American radical politics.
Its success in mobilizing and politicizing hundreds of activists can not
be ignored. Current organizing by anarchists would look vastly different
if ARA had not exploded into the scenes, or had ceased when difficulties
arose. However, while significant advancements have been the result of
ARA organizing -– the development of anti-fascist politics, staunch
defense of collective and decentralized organizing, the use of direct
action and militancy in the face of a legalistic and pacifist Left, and
the important defeats of various fascist organizing — ARA still has a
long road ahead of itself, and it may be too easy to rest on what has
been done thus far. Success is temporal and fleeting – the struggle
continues…