đž Archived View for library.inu.red âş file âş anarchist-workers-group-why-the-awg.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 21:56:14. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
âŹ ď¸ Previous capture (2023-01-29)
âĄď¸ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Why the AWG Author: Anarchist Workers Group Date: July 1989 Language: en Topics: Socialism from Below, Anarchist Workers Group, United Kingdom Source: Retrieved on 27th October 2021 from http://struggle.ws/awg/awg_editorial1.html Notes: This is the Editorial from Issue 1 of Socialism from Below, the journal of the now defunct Anarchist Workers Movement
Welcome to the first edition of Socialism From Below, discussion forum
of the Anarchist Workers Group. The AWG was formed in June 1988
following a split within the Direct Action Movement, over the issue of
building syndicalist unions in Britain. Although we are a young
organisation , we have not only grown in our first year of existence,
but we have started to re-establish, for anarchism, a reputation as a
serious ideological force to contend with. We have began the task of
creating an effective anarchist grouping, with clear and dynamic ideas,
which can put anarchism firmly on the political agenda.
What passes for an anarchist movement today, has become divorced from
the working class movement. For years anarchists have been content with
living outside of society, rather than trying to change it. Anarchism is
therefore seen as a âcounter-culturalâ rebellion at societyâs margins,
rather than as a dynamic force within our class. The article âAnarchism
in the Thatcher Yearsâ takes a critical view of anarchism in the last
decade, and argues for a complete re-think of anarchist strategy. A new
approach demands political discussion, and an abandonment of the ghetto
mentality. We hope that Socialism From Below can begin that discussion.
Anarchism first appeared in the wake of the industrial revolution, born
out of the first workers struggles. The ideas of Bakunin emerged within
the First Socialist International as a school of thought distinct from
Utopian Socialism and the Marxian Socialists. The Bakuninists were the
only consistent opponents of the state as a agent for affecting social
change from above. Anarchists have always understood that the state
apparatus, which exists to protect class society, cannot possibly be
used as an instrument of workers emancipation. Bakunin warned that the
âambiguous âpeopleâs stateâ of Marx could provide cover for the
emergence of a new scientific ruling elite.
The experience of the Russian Revolution, where a tyranny calling itself
Socialist, grew out of the first workers revolution, proves the validity
of the anarchist case. Of course we realise the horrendous conditions
following the October revolution with famine and imperialist armies
wreaking devastation. However this can never excuse the use of
dictatorial methods against the working class itself., Workers democracy
and self-management of industry were concepts which the Bolsheviks used
and abandoned where they felt it was necessary. The factory committees
and Soviets, through which the workerâs exercised their power, were
systematically usurped by the Party. When the Kronstadt insurgents
demanded free elections to the Soviets in 1921, the Red Army was sent in
to settle the argument. it was clear that the working class had been
robbed of its power by the âworkers stateâ, and a new ruling class
accountable only to itself had emerged.
Anarchists have an entirely different vision of socialism. We see
workers democracy and self management of industry as essential
components of our socialism. We therefore see socialism as the product
of the self-activity of the mass of workers; a socialism from below,
rather than a set of nationalisation decrees imposed âfrom aboveâ by
parliament, or enforced at gun point by a âvanguard partyâ. We, unlike
much of the left, understand that working class is capable of achieving
its own liberation, and that this fundamentally democratic process
necessitates an entirely different form of social organisation from the
existing state machine with its civil service, standing army, judiciary
and police. We say workers power must be exercised through councils of
elected and recallable delegates, accountable to mass assemblies, and
the defence of the revolution must be carried on by democratic work
militias, accountable to the councils. The Marxists have shown in
practice that their term the âworkers stateâ does not necessarily entail
a commitment to this democratic aspect of class power.
Most Marxists also advocate the use of the existing capitalist state to
bring about progressive social change, whether through electing a left
Labour Government, or capturing local authorities. This latter strategy
of âmunicipal socialismâ has back fired in recent years as so called
socialists have made council workers redundant, slashed essential
services and co-operated with Poll Tax implementation. The article on
the Poll tax re-affirms that relying on the Labour Party to defend
living standards is a dead-end. Anarchists are un-compromising on this
issue. workers interests can only be furthered by the mass action of the
working class, controlled by the working class itself. We give no
political support âcriticalâ or otherwise, to the Labour Party because
it is a bossesâ party which has sent troops into break strikes,
tightened immigration laws and sent the army into Northern Ireland.
The keynote article â Myth Illusion and Warâ rejects the dominant view
that that the British troops are playing a âbenevolent peacekeepingâ
role in Ireland. We oppose the argument that the British army should
police withdrawal, by disarming Loyalists, just as we oppose longer
sentences for rapists. Even when it appears that the state is playing a
progressive role, for example in banning pornography or dealing with
child abuse- we recognise that any powers conceded to the state will be
used against the working class. The Marxist misinterpretation of the
state not only leads them to call for a âworkersâ stateâ but also brings
forth demands for greater state interference in our lives for example
laws to outlaw racism and ban fascists from marching.
To many people anarchism is the opposite of effective political
organisation. Anarchists have always understood, however, that workers
do not spontaneously become anarchists, but they must be won to our
ideas. During the 1920âs a group of Russian exiles drew similar vital
lessons from their experience of the failed Russian revolution; They
sketched out a short but clear outline of the necessity of anarchist
political organisation, to prevent a repeat of their tragedy in future
revolutions. The Organisational Plat- form of the Libertarian Communist
detailed a practical strategy that is relevant in Britain today where
anarchism finds itself disorganised and unable to wield much influence.
The âPlatformâ is discussed briefly in our book reviews, end we will be
returning to this text in later issues of Socialism From Below.
The events in Spain during the 1930âs prove that anarchism can become a
reality. the fact that millions of workers joined an anarchist labour
union- the CNT, is proof that you do not need a Bolshevik Party to
precipitate a revolutionary situation. However because the working class
in Spain did not complete the revolution by destroying the old state
apparatus and establishing workers power, it allowed the ruling class to
re-organise and erode the gains of dual power (the militiaâs and the
collectives.) Some anarchists in Spain did realise the necessity of
establishing class power, the most significant of these being the
Friends of Durruti, an anarchist grouping within the CNT, who opposed
CNT collaboration with the Popular front. The Friends of Durruti
understood that anarchism needed a sound theoretical base and a
programme of action. We in the AWG understand that anarchists must be
able to think as well as act, argue as well as fight.
Our political ideas will be elaborated and explained more fully in this,
and future, issues of Socialism From Below. our immediate aim is to make
libertarian communism clearly understandable; ultimately, we want our
ideas to take centre stage in the class struggle.
The failure of the labour movement to successfully stave off the
employers offensive in the 1980âs has created a political climate that
encourages defeat. The highly political nature of the attacks on our
class has considerably raised the stakes involved. Every industrial
dispute faces the full weight of state legislation media propaganda and
the economic threat of unemployment.
Reformism has proved itself incapable of rising to meet challenge,
because it equates workers interests with the prosperity of British
capitalism. This is the root of âNew Realismâ. We, unlike our labour
leaders are not prepared to wait until British capitalism revives before
we start to fight. Nor unlike some of the left, do we believe that the
workers are not yet ready for political independence. We are not going
to vote Labour and wait until Kinnock starts to break up strikes. Nor do
we think that the working class is dead. We believe it is not only
necessary but possible for our class to fight today and win. One of the
key failures of the labour movement has been to break from the shackles
the anti-trade union laws, which hamper every economic struggle today.
We say that whatever the prevailing economic and political climate, the
working class must mount a political challenge to Thatcherâs anti-union
legislation It is the task of anarchist to argue for and assist the
politicisation of all struggles and build a movement which is
ideologically and organisationally independent from the quango minded
bureaucrats who head the trade union machines. The article âServants no
Moreâ argues the case for a rank and file movement in one particular
sector: the civil service. For anarchists, rank and file control of
struggle is vital to pave the way for a social system where the working
class is in control.
Part and parcel of the ruling class onslaught in the 1980âs, has been a
blatantly anti-working class ideological offensive. The role of women as
second class citizens and ânurturersâ has been reinforced. The promotion
of the family as a ânaturalâ social unit, and the stigmatisation of
homosexual couples as âpretended familyâ relationships, have
ideologically underpinned the dumping of welfare provision (through
hospital closures, and benefit cuts etc.) onto the backs of working
class families and primarily onto women. The Tories champion the family
because it reproduces the labour force without pay, and atomises the
working class. The âReturn to Victorian Valuesâ, has involved a crude
series of moral panics about Aids, football hooligans, lager louts,
muggers, illegal immigrants and acid-house parties which all serve to
tighten the governmentsâ political control, and legitimise increasing
state intervention in all spheres of social activity. We plan to discuss
these issues further in Socialism From Below as we realise there
centrality to the battle against capitalism.
We intend to let no argument go unchallenged, and no question to go
un-answered. We intend to win the âbattle of ideasâ through our active
involvement in all the vital struggles of our class, as we work to
re-build an influential anarchist movement. As we have said, our aim is
to make anarchist ideas the leading ideas in a victorious workers
revolution. Only in this way can we ensure the creation of a new world,
where the wealth we produce is put to the service of humanity, and
decision making power becomes the property of all. This is what
libertarians mean when we talk of âcommunismâ. We want Socialism From
Below to become essential reading in the struggle for itâs realisation.