Radical media, politics and culture.

Analysis & Polemic

Kevin Keating writes:

"Another View of the Failed Bay Area Transit Fare Strike"

Kevin Keating

A brief re-examination of this missed opportunity in working class-based radical mass action on the West Coast on North America.... This article is derived from a series of posts on a forum on libcom.org. Some of these posts involved exchanges with an individual who writes under the name "Comrade Mobuto."

I.

By now many libcom.org readers will have seen or read a long document or pamphlet titled, "FARE STRIKE! San Francisco 2005: First-Hand Accounts," available here.

This account of the failed effort to foment a transit system fare strike is largely a fraud. It systematically misrepresents the character of the politics that the pamphlet's authors asserted, or attempted to assert, during the fare strike and during the lead-up to the fare strike.


My response that follows here is from an e-mail I originally sent to a London comrade about this.


The London comrade criticized the "FARE STRIKE! San Francisco 2005: First-Hand Accounts" pamphlet for not criticizing the leftist recuperators in the group called Muni Fare Strike. The people who produced this pamphlet were in the group called Muni Fare Strike during the Muni effort in 2005.

The South African State Moves Againts Shackdweller

Abahlali baseMjondolo

Today the KwaZulu-Natal Elimination & Prevention of Re-emergence of Slums Bill will be tabled in the provincial parliament. Abahlali baseMjondolo have discussed this Bill very carefully in many meetings. We have heard Housing MEC Mike Mabuyakulu say that we must not worry because it is aimed at slumlords and shack farming. We have heard Ranjith Purshotum from the Legal Resources Centre say that “Instead of saying that people will be evicted from slums after permanent accommodation is secured, we have a situation where people are being removed from a slum, and sent to another slum. Only this time it is a government-approved slum and is called a transit area. This is the twisted logic of the drafters of the legislation”. We have heard Marie Huchzermeyer from Wits University say that this Bill uses the language of apartheid, is anti-poor and is in direct contradiction with the national housing policy Breaking New Ground. Lawyers have told us that this Bill is unconstitutional.

It is very clear to us that this Bill is an attempt to mount a legal attack on the poor. Already the poor, shack dwellers and street traders, are under illegal and violent attack by Municipalities. This Bill is an attempt to legalize the attacks on the poor. We know about Operation Murambatsvina. Last year one of our members visited Harare and last week we hosted two people from Harare. This Bill is an attempt to legalize a KZN Operation Murambatsvina before the World Cup in 2010. We will fight it all the way.

Kevin Keating writes:

Muni Social Strikeout

Kevin Keating


A critique of our efforts to foment a mass "self-reduction" movement on San Francisco's Muni public transit system.

INTRODUCTION
In early 2005, bureaucrats in San Francisco's Municipal Transit Authority announced plans for a fare increase and service cuts for Muni, SF's main public transit system. Fares had been hiked in 2003 from $1.00 to $1.25, and the 2005 fare hike, slated to begin Sept.1st, was to be from $1.25 to $1.50. Several dozen bus lines would see drastically reduced service; other lines would be cut altogether. Plans were also announced for mass layoffs of Muni employees, focusing in particular on bus drivers.

In response, a small group of anti-authoritarians initiated an effort aimed at uniting Muni riders and drivers in large-scale action that could spike the attacks.

Our effort, modelled on similar actions in other parts of the world, especially Italy during the unrest of the 1970's, aimed at fomenting a city-wide "social strike" where Muni drivers and riders would act together, drivers would let people ride for free, and the fare collection system would collapse until the fare hike, cuts and threats of layoffs had been rescinded. The events would jump off on the date the fare hike and cutbacks were to begin, Sept. 1st, 2005.

An action like this around mass transit would be an arena of conflict between proletarians and capitalism that hadn't yet been colonized by the left, the left-wing of capital; the pro-wage labor, pro-state, culture of leftist failure that is what passes for an opposition to the powers-that-be in this part of the world.

Unfortunately the people behind the action, in the typical manner of contemporary US anarchists, lacked backbone and nerve, practical solidarity with one another and political cohesion.

The result was that the spineless anarchists ceeded the political initiative in the Muni action to the first Leninist-led/culture of leftist failure group that came along to hustle them. The culture of leftist failure crowd, with the anarchists sheepishly trotting along behind them, couldn't catalyze enough widespread and decisive resistance to defeat the austerity measures.

The fact that the fare strike didn't stop the service cuts and the fare hike wasn't in itself a failure. The failure was that the people behind the fare strike succeeded in turning the Muni action into a single-issue campaign, robbing the effort of any potential to be something new under the sun. The efforts of the leftists went ignored by the overwhelming majority of Muni employees and riders. In a much more important sense, an arena of potential autonomous working class resistance to ever-increasing exploitation and impoverishment has now been colonized by the leftist culture of failure crowd.

This article examines this failure. These problems aren't etched in stone. A rigorous critical examination of what happened with the failed 2005 Muni effort can contribute to a better, more aggressive, more far-going effort next time.

Against Globalization and its Non-Emancipatory Responses

Rob Augman


The grassroots mobilizations against the G8 summit, held in the northern German town of Heiligendamm in early June of this year, were organized by broad networks of direct actionists, anti-racist groups, anti-border groups, anti-fascist militants, queer activists, squatters, debt-relief groups, trade unions, environmental organizations and many others. Despite the very restrictive policy of the German state that forbid any demonstrations in a large perimeter around the ‘security fence’ protecting the G8 summit, activists successfully disrupted the G8 meeting.[i]

The tiny enclave of Heiligendamm was for two days only reachable by helicopters or with boats from the seaside, as demonstrators blocked roads and train tracks leading to the site of the summit. Impressive were the pictures of thousands of people crossing fields and forests, in their effort to out-maneuver the huge police force, and make their way to the fence.

Heiligendamm will mark another memorable moment in the alter-globalization movement, a movement whose strength is often attributed to its diversity of actors. But this multitude, however, should not be mixed up with arbitrariness, as the movement itself also struggles with the challenges in developing a critique of global capitalism that provides emancipatory possibilities.

Contemporary social conflicts, a widespread sense of alienation, deep feelings of powerlessness, and the increasing intensity of violent conflict sets off a whole host of resentments and oppositions to the global situation that are not emancipatory. Many people who are deeply dissatisfied with the global political and economic order do not gravitate towards progressive or social justice organizations. The rise of racist, nationalist, fundamentalist and other forms of reactionary politics emerge as responses to the global situation as well, and they compete for power and influence on the same social terrain of those on the Left. These are present in the discourses, policies and politics in struggles around globalization/anti-globalization as well, and were therefore are present in the mobilization against the G8 this year.

In Germany, with its history of National Socialism as well as uprisings of neo-Nazism and nationalism after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the left must struggle with and position itself against critiques of “the new world order,” of “globalization,” and even of “capitalism,” from non-emancipatory positions, including those from the (far) Right. Such non-emancipatory critiques range widely, from proponents of economic protectionism and political isolationism (which can be seen in Right-wing anti-war positions), to the cultural field of “preserving cultural uniqueness from commercialism,” all the way to the far Right and its attempts to solve social questions in hyper-nationalist ways.

The scale of right-wing involvement in anti-globalization politics, or broader sentiments of reactionary anti-capitalism, present facts that have not gone ignored by some on the German Left and can be seen present in the anti-G8 mobilization, whether against the far-Right, the state, or as self-criticism of our own social movements. These groups are employing various approaches, and seeking various goals in their emancipatory aims. In their confrontation with “globalization” on the one hand, and reactionary anti-globalization on the other, transformations can be observed in the analyses and the practices of the Left itself. The international mobilization against the G8 summit in Germany provides a unique look into these struggles in order to consider how left and social justice groups can better confront the complicated and varied challenges we face.

Against Globalization and its Non-Emancipatory Responses

Rob Augman


The grassroots mobilizations against the G8 summit, held in the northern German town of Heiligendamm in early June of this year, were organized by broad networks of direct actionists, anti-racist groups, anti-border groups, anti-fascist militants, queer activists, squatters, debt-relief groups, trade unions, environmental organizations and many others. Despite the very restrictive policy of the German state that forbid any demonstrations in a large perimeter around the ‘security fence’ protecting the G8 summit, activists successfully disrupted the G8 meeting.[i]

The tiny enclave of Heiligendamm was for two days only reachable by helicopters or with boats from the seaside, as demonstrators blocked roads and train tracks leading to the site of the summit. Impressive were the pictures of thousands of people crossing fields and forests, in their effort to out-maneuver the huge police force, and make their way to the fence.

Heiligendamm will mark another memorable moment in the alter-globalization movement, a movement whose strength is often attributed to its diversity of actors. But this multitude, however, should not be mixed up with arbitrariness, as the movement itself also struggles with the challenges in developing a critique of global capitalism that provides emancipatory possibilities.

Contemporary social conflicts, a widespread sense of alienation, deep feelings of powerlessness, and the increasing intensity of violent conflict sets off a whole host of resentments and oppositions to the global situation that are not emancipatory. Many people who are deeply dissatisfied with the global political and economic order do not gravitate towards progressive or social justice organizations. The rise of racist, nationalist, fundamentalist and other forms of reactionary politics emerge as responses to the global situation as well, and they compete for power and influence on the same social terrain of those on the Left. These are present in the discourses, policies and politics in struggles around globalization/anti-globalization as well, and were therefore are present in the mobilization against the G8 this year.

In Germany, with its history of National Socialism as well as uprisings of neo-Nazism and nationalism after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the left must struggle with and position itself against critiques of “the new world order,” of “globalization,” and even of “capitalism,” from non-emancipatory positions, including those from the (far) Right. Such non-emancipatory critiques range widely, from proponents of economic protectionism and political isolationism (which can be seen in Right-wing anti-war positions), to the cultural field of “preserving cultural uniqueness from commercialism,” all the way to the far Right and its attempts to solve social questions in hyper-nationalist ways.

The scale of right-wing involvement in anti-globalization politics, or broader sentiments of reactionary anti-capitalism, present facts that have not gone ignored by some on the German Left and can be seen present in the anti-G8 mobilization, whether against the far-Right, the state, or as self-criticism of our own social movements. These groups are employing various approaches, and seeking various goals in their emancipatory aims. In their confrontation with “globalization” on the one hand, and reactionary anti-globalization on the other, transformations can be observed in the analyses and the practices of the Left itself. The international mobilization against the G8 summit in Germany provides a unique look into these struggles in order to consider how left and social justice groups can better confront the complicated and varied challenges we face.

Our Place, Our Time

John Holloway


This is the text of a speech delivered by John Holloway during a concert in the harbour of Rostock in the context of the anti-G8 protests, on June 3 2007

Our place. This is our place. Not theirs, ours. Ours is a space without borders, without definitions. They have their own place, over there, behind the metal barriers, the barbed wire, surrounded by thousands of police. That is where the mass murderers belong, in the prison that we have created for them. The political leaders of the world move only when they are surrounded by police and bodyguards, behind high walls, protected by guns and helicopters. They cannot move freely because they are afraid of us.

Our time. This is our time. Not theirs, ours. A time of intensity, a time of passion, a time of dreams, a time of breaking time. A time in which we refuse all continuity, a time for making the world anew. We shall dance to dawn and beyond if we want. Their time is the time of the clock that ticks the seconds of death, the time of continuity that says "obey today, obey tomorrow". Their time is the timetable of their plan to destroy humanity.

Our music, our dance. This is our music, our dance. Not theirs, ours. They have no music, the only music they know is the music they turn up loud to drown the screams of the people they are torturing in Guantanamo and in prison camps throughout the world. The only dance they know is the march of their soldiers who are trampling over the world.

Our place, our time, our music, our dance. We are the centre of the world.

Solve et Coagula writes:

"Monopoly Men"
Fraud at the Federal Reserve

Solve et Coagula

The U.S. Federal Reserve, or the Fed as it is lovingly called, may be one of the most mysterious entities in modern American government. Created during Wilson's presidency to protect the economy in times of financial turmoil, its real business remains to be discovered.

During the Wilson presidency, the U.S. government sanctions the creation of the Federal Reserve. Thought by many to be a government organization maintained to provide financial accountability in the event of a domestic depression, the actual business of the Fed is shrouded in secrecy.


Many Americans will be shocked to discover that the principle business of the Fed is to print money from nothing, lend it to the U.S. government and charge interest on these loans. Who keeps the interest? Good question. Find out as the connective tissue between this and other top-secret international organizations is explored and exposed.

Watch the video
here.

"We Are Negative"

Imaginary Fraction

1. Stop. Stop. Stop. It is time to say stop. It is time to become
negative. A break has occurred that forces us to refuse. We know very
well that there are no half solutions: We have to refuse and dismiss
the development occurring in Denmark right now. Stop, stop, stop.
Racism, cultural homogenization and criminalisation of alternative
lifestyles are official government policy. Stop this fucking madness.
In the current situation it is important to express our dissent in
the streets, but marching in Copenhagen is not enough and must not be
confused with the long dangerous fight where we challenge the basic
machinery of the state. The state is continuously shaping our lives
and our bodies though its biopolitical offensive. But it is possible
to discourage the state and break its will. This has happened many
times throughout history, it is happening in Iraq today and it can
happen here.

2. The state is a fragile mechanism, that’s one of the lessons learned
during the March events in Copenhagen. The confusion was evident: dark
rubber skinned elephants ran galloping through the blacked out streets
searching for their own shadows. They were not able to locate any kind
of frontline where they could mirror their crushing and destructive
power. We were not there. We had gone before the heavy movement of
their machinery eventually came to a halt. There was nothing else to
do for the police than to arrest coincidental bystanders; the need to
catch someone, just anyone, was evident. Going back empty handed was
not an option. Now we know it: the state suffers from a serious case
of sclerosis when reacting like this. It is desperately trying to hold
a divided and dissolved society together by creating images of deviant
subjects wearing veils, being pierced, throwing bricks or just saying
‘no’. If they don’t exist they are created. Stop, stop, stop.

Cerámica de Cuyo: A Profile of Worker Control in Argentina

Benjamin Dangl

From Upside Down World


In the worn out meeting room of worker-run Cerámica de Cuyo, Manuel
Rojas runs a rough hand over his face. The mechanic recalls forming the
cooperative after the company boss fired the workers in 2000: "We didn’t
have any choice. If we didn’t take over the factory we would all be in
the streets. The need to work pushed us to action."

After working at the ceramic brick and tile factory for nearly 35 years,
Rojas joined the other two dozen workers at Cerámica de Cuyo and began
to organize into a cooperative. These workers were part of national
movement at a time when Argentina was in an economic crisis. Across the
country, hundreds of factories, businesses and hotels shut their doors
and sent their employees packing. Many workers, like those at Cerámica
de Cuyo, decided to take matters into their own hands. As the stories of
these workers illustrate, the cooperatively-run road hasn’t been easy.

Cerámica de Cuyo is surrounded by vineyards and artists' homes in the
bohemian community of Bermejo, Argentina, right outside Mendoza. Dust
blows around the sun burnt factory yard as I sit down with Rojas and his
co-worker Francisco Avila. Rojas wears a weathered blue plaid shirt
while Avila has a baseball cap resting on a head of gray hair. We’re in
the Cerámica de Cuyo meeting room. The ancient chairs have crumbling
foam cushions. Phone numbers and Che Guevara slogans are scrawled on the
walls. It’s easy to sense the wear and tear that lifetimes of labor have
had on the place.

NOT BORED! writes:

"Protest to the Libertarians of the Present and the Future

About the Capitulations of 1937"

An 'Uncontrollable' from the Iron Column

Preface

"This appeal[1] from an unknown anarchist militia, part of the famous "Iron Column," appears to be — even to this day — the truest and most beautiful text that the Spanish proletarian revolution left us. The contents of this revolution, its intentions and its practice are coldly and passionately summarized in it. The principal causes of its failure are denounced: those that proceeded from the constant counter-revolutionary action of the Stalinists relieved the disarmed bourgeois forces under the Republic, and the constant concessions of the leaders of the CNT-FAI (here bitterly evoked by the term "our own") from July 1936 to March 1937. Those who proudly claimed the title, then insulting, of incontrolado [uncontrollable] proved to have the greatest historical and strategic sense. One had made the revolution half-way, forgetting that time does not stand still. "Yesterday, we were the masters of everything; today, they are." At that time, the libertarians of the "Iron Column" could no longer "continue until the end," together. After having lived such a great moment, it was no longer possible to "to separate us, to leave each other, to no longer see each other again." But all the rest had been repudiated and squandered."

"This text, mentioned in the work by Burnett Bolloten,[2] was published by Nosotros, an anarchist daily newspaper in Valencia, [in installments] on 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 March 1937. On 21 March, the "Iron Curtain" was integrated into the "Popular Army" of the Republic under the name of the 83rd Brigade. On 3 May, the armed uprising of the workers in Barcelona was disavowed by its leaders, who succeeded in putting down it on 7 May. There would then remain two Statist powers of the counter-revolution, the strongest of which would win the Civil War." — Guy Debord

[1] Translator's note: Protest to the Libertarians of the present and the future about the capitulations of 1937, by an "Uncontrollable" in the Iron Column, was translated from the Spanish by "two aficionados without qualities," that is to say, Guy Debord and Alice Becker-Ho. It was published in French by Editions Gerard Lebovici in December 1979. Translated from the French by NOT BORED! June 2007.

[2] Translator's note: The Great Camouflage by Burnett Bolloten (1961), published in 1977 by Ruedo iberico under the title The Spanish Revolution, the Left and the Struggle for Power.

Protest to the Libertarians of the Present and the Future About the Capitulations of 1937

I am one of those who was rescued from San Miguel de las Reyes, the sinister penitentiary that was elevated by the monarchy to bury alive the men who — because they were not cowards — never submitted to the infamous laws that the powerful dictate to the oppressed. They took me down below, like so many others, for having committed an offense, for rebelling against the humiliations of which an entire village was the victim: in other words, for killing a "leader."[1]

I was young, and I am young now, since I entered prison at 23 and I left — because anarchists opened the doors — when I was 34. Eleven years submitted to the punishment of not being a man, of being a thing, of being a number!

Pages

Subscribe to Analysis & Polemic