Anarchic update news all over the world - Part 1 - 3 March 2017
Today's Topics:
1. France, Alternative Libertaire AL #269 - Feminism - History,
Memory of struggles: Free women against libertarian machismo (fr,
it, pt) [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
2. Indonesia, anarkis.org: Anarchism, Nationalism and Identity
Politics - ADITYA N. [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
3. South Africa, zabalaza.net: Why Workers' Education? Why
trade unions and what's next? by Lucien van der Walt (ZACF)
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
4. Ireland, derry anarchists: Industrial Workers of the World:
Then & Now Tour 2017 (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
5. wsm.ie: Disney's Moana - an individualistic neoliberal spin
on the old reactionary princess tale (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
A feminist organization founded just before the Spanish Civil War, the Free Mujeres
contributed to the libertarian struggle, but also put forward the struggle for the place
of women in society and in the militant world. A fight still current. ---- Of the Free
Mujeres, we often know certain things. That this organization which claimed in its name
the freedom of women existed in a revolutionary context and civil war, in Spain, between
1936 and 1939. That it was self-managed and federalist. That its militants were numerous
(20 000 in July 1937). That they were addressed to the working class and often came from
them. They spoke on topics as diverse as working conditions and wages, pregnancy, female
pleasure, family structure. They refused to ally themselves with Communist feminists, but
found little support even among libertarians. That they considered the education of women
as an indispensable tool for their emancipation. They provided technical, general and
militant training for women. Above all, they had the will to articulate class and genre to
counter the bourgeois feminists of the time.
Sometimes it is also known, but not always, that it was primarily in the face of their
libertarian organization, the CNT, that they stood up. In particular, it was because of
the practices of some activists that they wanted to create this militant space reserved
for women (it would now be considered as non-mixed).
The CNT advocated gender equality, and many women unionized. Some even had
responsibilities. The ideas of Proudhon, who wanted to leave the women in the kitchen,
were rejected. But the gap between the theory and the practices of the militants was too
great.
Companion left to its traditional role
Thus, an activist, Pepita Carpena, reports: "There was then a lot of machismo among men in
general. The buddies of the CNT, they, willingly accepted a woman coming to the union.
(...) The problem of the feminists of the CNT was raised by contact with militancy: they
realized that these men who were libertarians were a little less when they were in their
homes. They did not do it on purpose. They had been raised like that and were not aware of
it. " Based on this evidence, it was less of a problem of integration amid militant as the
report that the militants had with the women around them.
The difference between the militant willingly accepted and the companion left to her
traditional role is explained in this testimony: "The friends were very happy to have a
companion who understands them as militants, but not that she is Activist. They always
thought that women were not able to do this, except a few. (...) Men thought they did not
understand economic and social problems. Most, moreover, had no militant companions. Those
who had women activists ... well, they were there to receive all the friends who came, to
eat, to make the hostesses. "
This gap denies the existence of a cause common to all working-class women, militant or
not: the need for a double emancipation. The resistance of many militants to feminist
practices, despite a progressive discourse (especially in relation to context) can be
explained in two ways. Some activists remained locked in a traditional view of the family
in which the man worked and the woman looked after the home, while others focused on the
idea that what is now called patriarchy[1]would disappear with capitalism.
Lucia Sanchez-Saornil[2], the future cofounder of Mujeres Libres, fought these two
conceptions. As a militant of the CNT since the early 1920s, in 1935 she published several
articles called "The question of women in our circles" in the newspaper Solidaridad
Obrera, which must be re-read today. In reply to her comrade Mariano Vazquez, who had
written on the "feminine question," she notes: "The anarchist who asks his wife for
collaboration in the task of social subversion must begin by recognizing her as equal, All
the prerogatives of individuality. "
There is thus no question of waiting for the end of capitalism to grant women the same
rights: it must be able to take them right now. In fact, while some activists wanted women
to join their struggle in order to increase the strength of the organization, Lucia
Sanchez-Saornil demands the education of women. She goes on to say: "I have proposed to
open to women the prospects of our revolution by offering her the elements to form a free
mentality capable of discerning for herself the false of truth, politics Of the social.
For I believe that before organizing it in the unions - without disdaining this work - it
is more urgent to put it in a condition to understand the necessity of this organization."
An exclusively female group
This debate was difficult because resistance was present, but it should not be overlooked
that many activists simply considered these issues to be secondary. It is perhaps for this
reason that Sanchez-Saornil concludes his series of articles by announcing the creation of
an "independent body". The Mujeres Libres thus formed an exclusively feminine group not
only to be able to construct a specific reflection on what was called "feminine condition"
and to carry out a real work of educating women, but also because feminist questions do
not, Had no space of expression sufficient to allow them to pose them urgently in the
libertarian milieu.
The Mujeres Libres had thus exposed the fundamental idea that, since one can not build a
libertarian society within an authoritarian organization, one can not build a society
where gender equality is the norm within a Macho organization.
Lucia Sanchez Saornil expressed in 1935 the responsibility of militants against sexism:
"Outside our circles ... it is very understandable, very excusable and even very human if,
just as the bourgeois defends his position and his Privilege of command, man desires to
retain his hegemony and feels satisfied to have a slave. But I (...), I spoke exclusively
to the anarchists, to the conscious man, to him who, being an enemy of all tyrannies, is
obliged to extirpate from him, Every remnant of despotism. "
Adele (AL Montreuil)
[1]Patriarchy is the system of exploitation of women.
[2]The quotes from Lucia Sanchez-Saornil were collected through the work of William Drop,
Lucia Sanchez-Saornil - Poet, anarchist and feminist.
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Memoire-des-luttes-Femmes-libres
------------------------------
Message: 2
The moment of the local elections had passed the people of Indonesia. Apart from the local
elections were conducted simultaneously in different regions, the local elections in the
capital of the main spotlight on a national scale. We could argue that it shows that
Indonesia has not been cured of a Jakarta-sentirisismenya. Not suprisingly. ----
Anarchists understand very well that the state is inherently centralized institutions, so
that whatever happens in Jakarta as the central government is considered to have more
weight than the interest in other areas. ---- But we can not also denying that there are
other things that make the local elections in Jakarta have their own charm which
exacerbate the battle of two ideologies are actually equally reactionary in their
respective levels. Incumbent candidate for governor of Jakarta, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, or
Ahok, is an Indonesian-Chinese Christian. This makes tantrum some parties and some others
see it as a thing to be celebrated. Ethnicity and religion Ahok be a problem for those who
see that the people of Indonesia for predominantly Muslim unfit led by a non-Muslim. Peak
rejection of the non-Muslim leaders occurred in December last year when various Islamist
organizations and their mass supporters from various regions conduct mass actions in
Jakarta, demanding the criminalization Ahok, after he was considered an insult to the
Koran.[1]Objectively speaking, we must admit that the mass action classified as
"successful". Besides being managed to collect a huge mass of various regions, Ahok also
then be a suspected blasphemy.[2]Although, of course, with its privileges as part of the
ruling class, Ahok suspect status did not prevent him to continue to fight in the arena in
the elections.
On the other hand, those who mendapuk themselves as nationalist pro-diversity see that
shook Ahok as head of the region as it should be supported. In addition to its Ahok seen
as a figure that is different from other politicians, have leaders from diverse ethnic
backgrounds and religious minorities are considered a social progression. It should be
recognized that ethnic Chinese in Indonesia is indeed a marginalized ethnic community in
Indonesia. Ethnic Chinese in Indonesia has a history of its own kelamnya. During the New
Order regime, for example, many policies that specifically discriminated against the
people Indonesian-Chinese, such as prohibiting the use of the Chinese language (or
languages of the country other Chinese), Chinese New Year celebrations in public, the
obligation to have the name of Indonesia, obstacles to be civil servants, and so forth.[3]
Indonesian society also has its own suspicions and prejudices against ethnic Chinese.
Starting from the assumption that the Indonesian-Chinese rich are the ones that stingy to
affiliate with communism. The climax occurs when the 1998 riots, in which the mass is
haunted by a prolonged economic crisis was mistakenly blame the Indonesian-Chinese as the
cause of the crisis. Efforts belonged to the Indonesian-Chinese looted. There are many
reports of rape of women Indonesian-Chinese.[4]Despite the many efforts undertaken to
tackle discrimination directed against ethnic Chinese in Indonesia, such as the repeal of
discriminatory policies, and kecurgiaan prejudice against them is not necessarily lost.
Discourse anti non-Muslim leaders propagated by demagogues have become a kind of fuel that
ignited hatred against ethnic Chinese who was already there. For the nationalist
pro-diversity, demagogues are hordes of people who threatened nationalism in Indonesia.
Nationalism in their mind is a sacred ideology that could be a solution to social problems
that exist, including racism. The problem is they are rolling the discourse anti
non-Muslim leaders also view themselves as nationalists. We can see from the slogans they
indeed true that they are nationalists. One of the slogans they used at various mass
actions and also their propaganda in social media: Homeland bersyariah. Of these slogans
can be seen that they essentially do not oppose the Homeland entity and instead support
nationalism in different forms.
There are fundamental differences between them and other Islamist movements such as Hizb
ut-Tahrir Indonesia and Islamist organizations affiliated with ISIS or Al Qaeda which
clearly showed his opposition to nationalism and the Homeland, as well as their
aspirations to establish a caliphate. Although both Islamist, organizations such as the
FPI, which became one of the main driving organization of mass action anti non-Muslim
leader, not an organization that is opposed to nationalism. Even Rizieq, one important
figure FPI write concerning the application of sharia law within the framework of
Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution in his thesis at the University of Malaya, Malaysia.[5]
In addition to capitalism, nationalism is an ideology that has been opposed to the
ideology of anarchism since the early hatched. However, just like Islamism, we can not
assume that nationalism is an ideology that is monolithic. In some contexts, nationalism
can have its own progressive values. Palestinian nationalism as an oppressed nation, for
example, is different from Nazi chauvinistic nationalism. In this case, Palestinian
nationalism has its progressive side as part of the struggle against Israel's occupation
of the country. However, that does not mean nationalism oppressed nations do not have
their own reactionary potential.
Anti-Semitic tendencies can be encountered from Palestinian nationalists and those who
support the Palestinian struggle for national liberation. Likewise nationalism oppressed
nations such as Papua nationalism. We must be able to objectively see the progressive
elements in the Papuan nationalism against colonialism in Indonesia. Of course, support
for the national liberation of the people of Papua that does not mean uncritical support
to the Papuan nationalism. Indonesian nationalism was started from oppressed postcolonial
nationalism that now would be a justification for the occupation in the land of Papua.
The ideological struggle sharpened by the election of Jakarta this was basically a battle
of two different nationalist ideology: nationalism, ethno-religious versus liberal
nationalism . The first of course is much more reactionary than the second. The
ethno-religious nationalists crave a theocratic state (within the framework of NKRI, of
course) that is based on the rule of 'indigenous' Muslims, where the priestly class (or in
this context: the clerical class) became part of the ruling class. However, if then
anarchists should be allied with the liberal nationalists against ethno-religious
nationalists is this?
One issue that has become a central issue brought by the liberal nationalists is the issue
of identity politics. In the view of the liberal nationalist, Indonesian national identity
is an umbrella for a variety of identities that exist in Indonesia. Liberal nationalism
still see that a national identity is required as the basis of political sovereignty but
also reject xenophobia and to promote pluralism. To a certain extent, this is certainly
more progressive than nationalism, ethno-religious nationalism based on lineage (and
trust) and see that national identity can be defined unambiguously based on it, which in
the context of Indonesia has elements of xenophobic against ethnic Chinese , Ironically,
those who mendapuk themselves as nationalist pro-diversity was not uncommon to slip into
the same xenophobia, only directed against the Arab identity. Phrases such as "camel" or
call to "just stay there in Arabic" are some examples of expression is often asked those
who should be pro-this diversity. Of course, ethnic Arabs in Indonesia has not experienced
discrimination the same with ethnic Chinese (because Arab synonymous with Islam, the
majority religion in Indonesia), but wrong if we affiliating ideology of Islamism with the
identity and culture of the Arab and then being xenophobic toward anything that is
synonymous with culture Arab.
Yes, as other cultures, Arab culture has its problems, but being allergic to whatever is
seen coming from the Arab also the other xenophobia. Keep in mind that the political
situation in the Middle East was not as simple as 'Islamism is Arabic and Arabic are
Islamism.' There are many political factions in the Middle East and Islamist ideology is a
matter of its own in the Middle East. Affiliating Islamism and Arab identity is a mistake.
Here we can see how a small example of how liberal nationalism has its own reactionary
tendencies.
Tendency reaksioner of other liberal nationalism is how support for Ahok seen as part of
the fight against ethno-religious nationalism intolerant. This is problematic because,
although Ahok is part of a marginalized ethnic groups, it remains part of the ruling
class. He is a businessman who later went into politics.[6]Positioning someone with an
ethnic minority background as part of the ruling class is not the answer of the racial
problems that exist. Moreover, many Ahok issuing policies that oppress the poor city he
served as governor during such evictions until the ambitious project of reclamation of
Jakarta Bay, which, besides damaging nature are also detrimental to the traditional
fishermen.[7]In the case of forced evictions, the administrative court appeal to stop
evictions in Bukit Duri date the lawsuit class action by residents of Bukit Duri was not
diindahkannya.[8]He even accused Sandiawan Sumardi, a former Jesuit priest founder
Ciliwung Merdeka community, as the instigator.[9]It should be emphasized here that the
Ciliwung Merdeka community is a community of shared Ahok Jokowi visited her when she
campaigned as cawagub. Once inaugurated, Jokowi-Ahok government was again approached the
Ciliwung Merdeka community and show good faith with a promise not to be forced eviction
and let residents leave the village structuring concepts Bukit Duri.[10]Ahok showed his
character as a bourgeois politician when he was finally fixed evict kampung Bukit Duri,
broke his promise and had ignored calls by the Administrative Court. Administrative court
ruling was eventually won Bukit Duri residents whose homes had already razed to the
ground. Ahok policies assessed disability law and the provincial government of DKI obliged
to pay compensation.[11]
Liberal nationalists usually justifies this for the sake of "a better Jakarta." Once
again, we see how the liberal nationalism is also essentially a reactionary ideology which
does not have a class perspective. For them, the beauty of the layout of the city is a
matter that should be realized for the sake of the beauty of the layout of the city
itself, despite having to sacrifice the living space of thousands of poorer citizens who
are marginalized economically through forced evictions.
So, how should anarchists see politics Identity? Should we categorically reject the
politics of identity and see it as something reactionary and focused on class struggle only?
Basically, the issues of concern is the problem of identity politics-valid issues. Racism,
sexism, homophobia, transfobia, religious discrimination, etc. are real problems to be
solved. Naturally anyone who mendapuk themselves as anarchists oppose these things. Of
course, anarchism is not also an ideology that has answers to all the problems.
It should be recognized early anarchist thinkers have views to the tendency is
problematic; like Proudhon or Bakunin seksismenya with anti-Semitismenya. Early anarchist
thinkers is not much to discuss gender or race-based oppression. The main Anarchism was
born as an anti-authoritarian ideology that opposes capitalism and the State so that
issues such as sexism, racism, homophobia, transfobia, and so forth are not a major
concern early anarchist thinkers. The struggle against gender oppression within the
framework of a completely new anarchist ditesiskan by Emma Goldman, who is now regarded as
the mother of Anarcha-feminism, in the 20th century. Anarchism can not be seen as an
ideology that has plenary. It must be seen as an ideology that continues to grow in
accordance with the conditions of the existing material.
Anarchism can learn from the politics of identity, both in practical and theoretical
level. Identity politics has its own contribution in understanding the roots and nature of
identity-based oppression, be it gender identity, sexual orientation, race, or ethnicity.
To some degree, anarchists can support the struggle of identity politics. However, just as
support for national struggles oppressed nations, support for identity politics was not
entirely uncritical support. Just like nationalism, identity politics has its own
reactionary tendencies that we need to take very carefully.
We have discussed about the reactionary identity politics in Indonesia with its support
Ahok. The reactionary attitude is not only unique attitude occurred in Indonesia alone. In
the United States, the Democratic Party's national convention ago, many feminists who
support Hillary Clinton than Bernie Sanders solely because she is a woman. Hillary Clinton
presidency was seen as progress for the feminist movement in the United States, ignoring
the fact that Hillary Clinton is part of a dynasty and also involvement in US imperialism
as long as he served as Secretary of State.[12]
This does not mean that identity politics is a pure movement reaksioner progressive
elements have been removed altogether. However, identity-based oppression is real and
efforts to counter such oppression are attempts that basically progressive. The struggle
against apartheid in South Africa is a progressive struggle. Perjuangan movement Black
Lives Matter in the United States in the fight against police brutality against the black
community is a progressive movement. Perjuangan feminist and LGBT movements against
oppression based on gender identity and sexual orientation is also a progressive movement.
The synthesis between anarchism with identity politics was not impossible. We have touched
briefly on Anarcha-feminism above. The struggle to eliminate gender-based oppression must
be on the agenda of the anarchists, and Anarcha-feminism be the answer anarchists on
gender-based oppression within the framework of the anti-capitalist and anti-state.
Anarchists see that, despite the oppression of women existed before capitalism and the
nation-state conception that there is, both of these women's oppression melanggengkan
succession so that the resistance to the oppression of women can not be separated from the
fight against capitalism and the State. Gender-based oppression is not going to go away by
giving women important positions in state government and in the bourgeois capitalist
corporations.
Another example where anarchism and identity politics can go hand in hand is the struggle
of the Zapatista movement in Chiapas, Mexico. Can not be denied, the Zapatista struggle is
a political movement of the original ( indigenous people ) of Mexico. Is not that a form
of identity politics as well? Of the Zapatista struggle we learn that identity politics
can be a part of the struggle against the oppressive hegemony widely, both directly and
indirectly. The same thing can be seen from the struggle of Native Americans in North
Dakota against the construction of an oil pipeline that route crosses the Standing Rock
Indian Reservation settlement. Their struggle is not just a struggle over the rights of
the Native Americans, but also the struggle against the expansion of capital that
contribute to ecological degradation.
This is similar to what is thrown Ashanti Alston, one of the figures of Black Anarchism in
the United States and a former member of the Black Panther Party. According to him, "black
culture has become the opposition and is a matter of finding ways to creatively find ways
to resist oppression here, in the most racist country in the world (United States). So,
when I talk about Black Anarchism, it is not related to the color of my skin, but who I am
as a human being, as a person who can fight, who can look differently when I got stuck,
and therefore live in a different way. "[13]
But, like nationalism, identity politics has its own limitations. When the identity of the
political struggle into a single issue, he has the potential and preserve the oppression
divisif other progressive masks. Of course, not all efforts to combat identity-based
oppression can be considered divisif. The anarchist movement in general have their own
problems with sexism, homophobia, transfobia, and racism in it, and it should be resolved.
The anarchist movement in Catalonia, Spain during the Civil War in 1936 also had a problem
with sexism to the female fighters mengorganisiasi themselves and formed Mujeres Libres to
fight sexism in the anarchist movement both in Spain itself and sexism in general
experienced by working class women. Of course, Mujeres Libres can not be said to be a
women's movement that divisif.
The task of anarchists also to try to fight identity-based oppression is outside the
anarchist movement. However, how do we fight oppression based on identity also can not be
arbitrary. We can not refuse to cooperate with certain labor movement simply because they
still do not have a gender-awareness qualified, for example. Yes, it could be indeed the
workers were still having outlooks sexist and that they express through words and their
behavior. But if then we must refuse to cooperate with them because of that? Should we
unilaterally labeled them as sexist, ignoring class oppression they experience and the
fact that they have never had the opportunity to be exposed theories of gender progressively?
Back to Jakarta. In response to the mass action anti non-Muslim leaders yesterday, calling
the demonstrators with designations such as 'army of unemployed' or 'troop rice wrapper'
as practiced by some liberal groups pro-diversity, is the attitude of outstanding
reaction. Designations were intended to attack the economic conditions of the participants
of mass actions, many of which it is a part of society who are marginalized economically.
Instead, we must examine how to position them as part of society who are marginalized
economically make them vulnerable to racist rhetoric as initiated by the mass
organizations of the Islamists.
Anyone who has been involved in organizing mass actions must understand that organizing
mass action by the mass action last December is not an easy job. Mass action of that can
happen only when a movement has a strong grassroots base. Mass organizations such as the
FPI has worked to build their grassroots base over the years since the reform movement
began. They embrace those who are marginalized economically; go into the villages, doing
social work, and so forth. They were present to accompany the citizens victims of forced
evictions under the leadership Ahok. Meanwhile, proponents of Ahok agrees accusation
against the people affected by forced evictions as the residents 'illegal' worth evicted.[14]
Identity politics becomes reactionary when he failed to see that someone who is part of
the oppressed can become oppressors. In this case, although Ahok is part of an ethnic
minority, he is a bourgeois politician with policies that oppress the poor people of the
city. Against Ahok does not necessarily mean we refuse to admit that the ethnic Chinese in
Indonesia is being bullied or just us embracing the discourse rejecting non-Muslim leaders.
Identity politics shows keterbatasannya when he fails to notice that there are other
oppression experienced by other groups outside the group, or even within its own group. In
the United States, for example, we could agree that those African-Americans are victims of
structural racism. However, if all African-Americans suffered the same oppression one
another? Does Beyonce as a black woman experiencing the same oppression by a black woman
who had to work with three different jobs to support his family? Certainly not. Beyonce is
a celebrity bourgeois who exploit workers in Third World countries through the company's
clothes.[15]Attacking Beyonce on this does not necessarily make us sexist or racist. A
white male factory workers in the United States certainly suffered oppression more than
Beyonce regardless of race and gender identity.
See identity politics of glasses anarchist does not mean rejecting the theories or
practices that offers overall. Identity politics has contributed itself as a progressive
movement. However, like nationalism, anarchists should be able to see the
limited-limitation in identity politics and reactionary potential in it and beyond it. The
struggle against oppression based on gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, and so forth in
an anarchist perspective is part of the resistance against capitalism and the state as an
oppressive institution. Of course, the oppression will not be completed only by going
against capitalism and the State, although both of these must have had its own
contribution in melanggengkannya. However, anarchists should be able to see how the
oppression and more intertwined.
endnotes
[1]https://news.detik.com/berita/d-3360651/penampakan-lautan-massa-2-desember-putihkan-lapangan-monas
[2]http://www.beritasatu.com/megapolitan/399436-ahok-tersangka.html
[3]http://www.tionghoa.info/diskriminasi-etnis-tionghoa-di-indonesia-pada-masa-orde-lama-dan-orde-baru/
[4]http://www.tionghoa.info/korban-mei-1998-mengapa-harus-perempuan-tionghoa/
[5]Al-Habib Muhammad Rizieq, Hussein Shihab. 2012. The effect of adoption of Pancasila
Against Sharia in Indonesia. Masters thesis, Universiti Malaya.
http://studentsrepo.um.edu.my/5038/
[6]http://bio.or.id/biografi-ahok-basuki-tjahaja-purnama/
[7]http://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20160429104154-20-127492/ahok-disebut-cetak-sejarah-penggusuran-paling-brutal/;
http://www.cnnindonesia.com/politik/20160825151045-32-153799/dosa-ahok-di-mata-warga-penggusuran-hingga-reklamasi/
[8]https://metro.tempo.co/read/news/2016/09/28/083807948/alasan-ahok-tak-menunda-pembongkaran-bukit-duri
[9]http://metro.news.viva.co.id/news/read/821808-ahok-tuding-romo-sandyawan-penghasut-warga-bukit-duri
[10]https://ciliwungmerdeka.org/warga-berdaya/
[11]http://megapolitan.kompas.com/read/2017/01/06/07325911/warga.bukit.duri.menang.di.ptun.pemprov.dki.harus.ganti.rugi
[12]https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/08/hillary-clinton-secretary-state-war-drones/
[13] https://web.archive.org/web/20080313085929/http://www.anarchistpanther.net/node/17
[14]http://www.fpi.or.id/2016/04/kunjungi-korban-penggusuran-luar-batang.html
[15]https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/beyonce-topshop-ivy-park-sweatshop-factory-labor
http://anarkis.org/anarkisme-nasionalisme-dan-politik-identitas/
------------------------------
Message: 3
In these grim times, both globally and locally, it is important to reaffirm the centrality
of workers' education, and the need for a strong working-class movement. Ordinary people
have immense potential to change the world, and steer it in a more progressive direction
than that promised by capitalists, populists and the political establishment, writes
Lucien van der Walt. ---- Why Workers' Education? Why trade unions and what's next? ----
by Lucien van der Walt (ZACF) ---- The working class - people dependent on wages, and
lacking control over their work, including workers, their families, and the unemployed,
including blue-collar, white-collar and pink-collar workers - has been widely dismissed by
a range of political traditions.This dismissal can be seen everywhere, from journalists
who blame uneducated workers for the rise of demagogues like Donald Trump, to conservative
and centre-right parties who insist that trade unions - not capitalism - cause
unemployment, to radicals who proclaim the death of the unions, or dismiss organised
workers as a bribed ‘labour aristocracy'.
WORLD-CLASS WORKING CLASS
But the working class has not gone anywhere. By 1998, there were more industrial
workers in South Korea alone, than in the entire world when Karl Marx and Frederick
Engels wrote the Communist Manifesto (1848). Around that same period, there were,
American labour analyst Kim Moody notes, almost a billion people unemployed or
underemployed worldwide, part of a massive proletariat thrown up over the previous 40
years, the very period when the working class was being dismissed as declining. By 2004,
the working class was the biggest class in history, reaching three billion, by some
estimates, with the world's population, for the first time, predominantly urban.
At the same time, the single most important organised formations of the working class, the
trade unions, have been under relentless assault. Some of the pressures have been
external: casualisation and outsourcing, industry closures and downsizing and relocation
elsewhere, a massive ideological barrage, including within the media and the universities.
Other forces have been internal, and include: union bureaucratisation, the incorporation
of union leaderships into political parties, and through these, into the state, and a
complete lack of progressive political direction and vision in many cases.
This is the context where the radical right, populists, demagogues and religious
fundamentalists have surged forward, massively, poisoning public debate with racism,
xenophobia and other bigotries, and where empty, failed or reactionary solutions havebeen
on display.
UNIONS AS PROGRESSIVE FORCES
Yet despite this, the working class and the unions - including new unions,
independent unions and innovative types of unions - have remained key agents of
progressive change. Recent examples include the July 2016 general strike in Zimbabwe, the
massive battles on the mines, farms and campuses of South Africa, the huge strikes that
were at the core the Egyptian Spring. The growing rumbles of China's vast proletariat are
already felt globally.And, as a recent collection by Manny Ness has shown, radical forms
of unionism, drawing on left traditions like anarcho-syndicalism and revolutionary
syndicalism, and often centred in the postcolonial countries (the so-called ‘global
south') have been central to working-class insurgency. Although some leaders have betrayed
workers, unions as a whole have not been co-opted, for the simple reason that, to survive,
they must represent working-class aspirations and these aspirations cannot be met, or
bought-off, under capitalism and the state. It has been through titanic struggles and
heroic efforts that working-class people have fought against a social order based on
injustice and inequity, on exploitation and oppression, and on burning national and social
questions.The right to life and dignity has never been conceded from above, through the
largesse or the wisdom of the rich and powerful: it has been won from below.‘What is
important is not that governments have decided to concede certain rights to the people,'
wrote Rudolph Rocker in his 1938 book Anarcho-syndicalism, ‘but the reason why they had to
do this'. The reason, he showed, lay in popular struggle and direct action.
CENTRALITY OF ORGANISED WORKERS
To build a better world requires building a stronger working class and building and
renewing the unions. It means understanding the centrality of the working class (broadly
understood - and not confined to factory workers in boots), and the centrality of the
unions. Every gain that has been made, has been through struggle and courage and love.
It is the working class that can provide, through its power, its numbers, its social role,
and the justness of its struggle, the central force to end the injustice and inequity, the
exploitation and oppression, and answer the national and social questions with justice and
equality and solidarity.
The working class, even where small, even where a minority, even where embattled, wields
enormous structural power through its ability to organise workers, and the ability to
withhold labour power from capital and the state. Historically and currently, unions have
played and play a key role in championing many struggles against oppression. The workers'
movement has never been one simply about higher wages - although, of course, it is
essential for such movements that workers get higher wages. The organised working class -
in particular the unions -has fought against colonialism, racism, state repression and
capitalist domination.
DEEP CHANGE NOT ELITE TRANSITIONS
Real transformation in society is needed to uproot exploitation, domination and
oppression.This is not the same as changing the composition of elites. It requires a deep
structural change - a radical redistribution of power and wealth to the popular
classes.And this can only be brought about by powerful, democratic, mass movements, armed
with ideas, vision and that have accumulated power and resources and experience over time.
Real freedom requires, in the final analysis, a new society, based on freedom and
equality, on democracy - real democracy - where we live and work, not just through voting
every five years. A universal human community, based on meeting needs, on ending
inequality and oppression, based on self-management and freedom. Such a society can only
be brought about by a class struggle: only the working class and peasantry have the
numbers, power and class interest for its creation.This means that only class struggle
provides the means to fight all forms of oppression in a way that truly emancipates
ordinary people, rather than simply changing the colour, gender and nationality of
politicians and capitalists.
IDEAS AND ACTION
Seen this way, workers' education education for the workers' movement - assumes a new
significance. It is not about vocational training, but about building the power and
progress and potential of the broad working class, and the union movement, as a force for
progressive change, as an ally and a spearhead of the oppressed, as a voice for the
popular classes.
Of course, the working-class movement includes many views and different perspectives. But
what needs to be understood by all is that union struggles, and workers' struggles, and
movements cannot be neatly divided from political and social struggles, and should not be
turned into narrow demands, or degenerate into top-down bureaucratic unionism.
Worker educators share a commitment to the working class: to worker organising, to
unionisation, to resistance and struggle.A commitment to a better world, based on a
radical democratisation of society, of freedom, social justice, and economic and social
equality. A faith in the belief in the role of ordinary people in changing the world.
Central to this project is education and changing ideas. Building capacities for working
class-driven transformation can take many forms. But at the end of the day, change and
transformation starts with the individual. Self- transformation and development is
essential. This means educating ourselves, through ideas and struggles and organising.
OPENING SPACES, BUILDING UNIONS
Effective working-class movements need effective, democratic structures. But these
also require open debate and political pluralism. Different views need to be expressed
and debated, and positions taken as a result of evidence-based discussions, and comradely
debate, rather than labelling, silencing and closure. This means we need to be open to
different views, and open to changing our minds and develop a capacity for critical
thinking and engagement, rather than the ability to mouth slogans.
It is important in education to debate different views, develop our understanding of how
the system of capitalism, the state and imperialism works and to have evidence-based
reasoned evaluation of different theoretical perspectives. This means developing critical
thinking, rather than narrow ideological training. Different ideologies need to be debated
and weighed up. It means not only to accumulate knowledge but also the ability to manage
knowledge, evaluate arguments and engage in big ideas, or theory.
It means changing our attitudes and our relations with one another. Change starts with
individuals.That means a need to fight for equality, not just in theory, but changing how
we treat each other and fight to ensure that society treats all members equally.
Understanding how we act and organise now, must mirror the future, and the better society
we want.This means that we need to fight oppression and discrimination within our
movements, such as prejudices against women, and racism.
It is precisely here that many unions fail. Debates are closed down. Education assumes a
low priority and often skirts the big issues. It is rarely adequately funded in unions,
and limps along. Employers try and capture the space of workers' education with vocational
programmes. Union leaders are often not made of hard metal, that can withstand
temptation, but of lead - soft under pressure, and slow and heavy.
INTERNATIONALISM AND PERSPECTIVES
The working class cannot be united unless it fights against its internal divisions and
barriers. It cannot be successful, unless it mobilises to fight against all forms of
oppression in society, and that includes fighting for national liberation, racial equality
and women's freedom.
People are not the prisoners of the past.We can change our attitudes and views.The spaces
for these changes include union movements, working-class movements, and labour education.
These spaces make change possible, but they need to be contested, remade and changed, in
order to meet their true potential.
We need to share experiences, learn from each other and from best practices.This also
means internationalism: learning from and about different contexts and models. In this way
we share. But we also start to understand what we have in common, as working- class
people, across regions, continents, colours, languages and borders.
We need to rise above divisions, network and build alliances, create spaces and forums and
institutions for debate and education, empower our minds and movements.The reality is that
workers who are so-called ‘foreigners' have more in common with ‘national' workers, than
any capitalist from our own countries. Donald Trump may rail against immigrants, as may
King Goodwill Zwelithini, but what has either ever done for ‘their' own workers?
RADICAL IMAGINATION
Class-based organisation provides a powerful lever to change the world, unite the people,
the popular classes, to resist the ruling 1%, to fight against all forms of oppression,
and to change the world. Not just one country. The world. Our world.We need a radical
imagination, staying power and a deep, abiding faith in the mass of the people.
To fight and win, and, in the words of a great revolutionary, Nestor Makhno, to win, but
not ‘in order to repeat the errors of the past years, the error of putting our fate into
the hands of new masters; we will conquer in order to take our destinies into our own
hands, to conduct our lives in accordance with our own will and our own conception'.
Lucien van der Walt teaches at Rhodes University, Makana, South Africa, and has long been
involved in workers' education. This article is based on a presentation at the 10th
anniversary of the Global Labour University (GLU), at the University of the Witwatersrand
in May 2016.
SOURCES MENTIONED:
Arshinov, P. ([1923]1987). History of the Makhnovist Movement 1918-1921. London, Freedom
Press.
Moody, K. (1997). Workers in a Lean World: unions in the international economy. London,
New York, Verso.
Rocker, R. ([1938]1989). Anarcho-syndicalism. London, Pluto Press.
https://zabalaza.net/2017/02/25/why-workers-education-why-trade-unions-and-whats-next/
------------------------------
Message: 4
The IWW union would like to invite you to the first meeting of the Industrial Workers of
the World (IWW) in Ireland. ---- On the 11th of March at 4pm in Sandinos Bar, Wateside,
Derry the IWW will be holding it's first first meeting as part of a nationwide tour
looking at the IWW both then and now. ---- The meeting will include a history of the IWW
and an update on the ongoing process of forming an Irish section of the IWW- with an
opportunity for those interested to voice their interest. ---- The evening will conclude
with a social event with workers ballads and a chance to meet and talk to members of the
IWW. ---- History ---- The IWW is a revolutionary global union, fighting for better
conditions today and economic democracy tomorrow. By training our members in powerful
organising methods, direct-action and direct-democracy, we put power in the hands of workers.
We believe that ordinary people are best placed to lead and create change, both at work
and in society. We put our members in charge, training each and every one to build and
lead their workplace unions, organise their own campaigns and take the action that wins.
We're an active and fighting union. We know solidarity is strength, and we prove it by
looking after each other. We provide advice and representation when you have problems at
work, but we're much more than that.
We're not here to provide a service; we're here to build a movement, winning bigger and
better victories for working people as our movement grows in strength and confidence.
Originally formed in 1905, the IWW has a rich and proud history, organising workers into
revolutionary ‘industrial unions' along the supply chain of their industry. This form of
union organisation provides workers with the maximum clout in any dispute with employers.
When workers in one section of an industry have an issue, their fellow workers along the
supply chain can take action to support them, having maximum impact on the running of that
industry and hitting the employer where it hurts. This is the basis of our slogan, "an
injury to one is an injury to all".
This is how we can defend and improve our pay, terms and conditions of employment. This is
how we can build a better future. Political democracy is (at least) severely limited
without democracy within the economy, within industry. The production and distribution of
goods and services is the real power that shapes our society.
In the hands of the few - our employers - this power benefits the few. In the hands of all
working people it could benefit everyone. Who else but us, working people, produce and
distribute all the world's goods and services? We make the world turn yet see little of
the wealth and make few of the decisions.
Organised into industrial unions, linked together into one big movement, we could take
possession of our industries and run them democratically for the good of all. Your union
is your future. Get involved.
Over the next few months IWW Ireland will host a series of talks in a number of towns and
cities throughout the country as part of our latest building efforts.
Join the IWW today!
For more details click on: https://iwwireland.wordpress.com/
To help organise in your area email: ireland@iww.org.uk
http://derryanarchists.blogspot.co.il/2017/02/industrial-workers-of-world-then-now.html
------------------------------
Message: 5
Just because Disney characters look cute doesn't mean Disney films are inoffensive. In
fact, they should be recognised as a powerful propaganda weapon, meant to inculcate
neoliberal ideology in the earliest years of life. Thus, by virtue of self-defense, the
authors of this article, who work in the industry, will not be bothered to avoid spoilers.
---- Disney's Moana is set in Hawaii. Moana, the daughter of the Island's chief, is meant
to become the first woman to rule. But the island faces ecological imbalances which
threaten the survival of the islanders and lead Moana on an adventure that she will share
with a demi god named Maui. ---- If the title of Disney's feature is the name of its main
female character, one wouldn't go so far as to say that Moana is the central character of
the story. Indeed, as soon as Maui appears on the screen, a shift of focus occurs and
Moana becomes no more than Maui's side-kick. This is neatly illustrated by the memorable
"go save the world" addressed by Moana to Maui as he is about to face Te Ka the lava
demon. A closer look at Maui's character can help us understand why this failed attempt at
creating a strong heroine might have happened.
Besides Maui's design being offensive to Polynesian people due to the stereotypes it
conveys, there are many issues with the reasons invoked to explain Maui's personality and
his psychological evolution. Maui first comes across as overconfident, bombastic,
physically abusive and sexist. In other words, he is what a capitalist and (thus)
patriarchal society tends to raise cis white males to become. Of course if you are
familiar with Disney films, you already know the drill: Maui is meant to evolve over time
as he learns from his contact with Moana. The problem is that Maui didn't need to start
off as a sexist to have an interesting character arc. But a much greater source of concern
is the way Maui's personality traits are explained away: poor Maui has Mommy issues. His
mother rejected him as a kid, so he developed an unquenchable urge for recognition, which
eventually got him to accomplish great deeds. But after an ultimate defeat at the hands of
a goddess, Maui lost his peni... sorry his magic hook, fell into oblivion and developed an
individualistic and cynical mindset. In other words, Maui's sexism, his condescending tone
and his abusive attitude had nothing to do with patriarchy but are the result of what
women have done to him. On top of this, Maui's sexism in presence of Moana will only
disappear when Moana proves (by Disney's standards) to be a true heroine. The message is
painfully clear: if a woman wants to be treated with respect, she has to prove to be
exceptional despite the many obstacles patriarchy has set before her.
At this point a question comes immediately to mind: How could someone fail to understand
the systemic nature of patriarchal oppression and as a result imagine a character arc like
Maui's?
When it comes to human behaviour, looking for explanations at the level of the individual
rather than analysing the social context, is a reliable indicator that one is dealing with
a neoliberal mindset. To deny the existence of social classes and argue against the
redistribution of wealth, neoclassical economics will not distinguish between an employee
selling his labor and a capitalist selling what his employees produce. Both are buyers and
sellers, assumed to produce what they sell and to compete on equal footing in the
marketplace. Differences in income will be attributed to hard work or laziness and these
behavioral discrepancies will be explained using religious concepts like free will. When
free will doesn't cut it, genetic predispositions are brought up. Yet since these tend to
undermine merit, it will be argued that one shouldn't create negative incentives (like
high income taxes) which might dissuade risk-taking prone individuals from becoming the
kind of heroic entrepreneurs that our economy supposedly needs so badly.
Disney's Moana is fraught with this very kind of ideology: despite being constantly
socialised to live by the rules of society, Moana seems to have inherited her father's
repressed drive to take risks and explore the world, a drive that she doesn't seem to
share with any other islander. This sets Moana up to become the special individual who
will have the courage to sail beyond the horizon and restore ecological balance by
repairing the harm done to Te Fiti, the life giving goddess.
One could think that by forming an assembly where all the islanders would have shared
their knowledge, a solution the the ecosystemic threat could have been arrived at. But
democratic decision making doesn't seem to be Moana's cup of tea. After learning about her
ancestor's voyager past, her mind is made up and she sees no reason to waste time
deliberating with the uninspired islanders. Moana storms in the village's assembly,
demands that people agree to her plan and then walks away in a unilateral decision to
‘follow her heart'. After she leaves the Island, on many occasions, Moana will be shown as
overcoming adversity by finding resources "in herself". This "free will" oriented line of
explanation has become distressingly common in animated features produced by corporations
such as Laika, and Disney.
Now you might wonder why Moana would have to travel away to remedy the ecosystemic
imbalance occurring on the Island. What does her literally far fetched solution
symbolically stand for? It is interesting to note that the ecological problems that the
islanders are facing are of a kind that is more likely to occur in a capitalist economy
practicing monoculture and trawling. On top of that, we are told that the ecological
imbalance came as a result of humans always asking more from the demi-god Maui who was
shaping the environment to their convenience, and who eventually stole the Heart of Te
Fiti, the life-giving goddess. One gets the impression that Disney is pasting rampant
consumerism and the ensuing ecological devastation on a society which is supposed to be
set in precolonial times. To put an end to environmental destruction, Moana is supposed to
give her heart back to Te Fiti. It is pretty clear that Disney expects us to read this
gesture as symbolising a reborn respect towards nature. But after such a display of
individualistic and entrepreneurial ideology, should we grant Disney this interpretation?
One would be tempted to see the use of Te Fiti's magical heart to solve problems as
symbolising the kind of high-tech solutions that are being developed by capitalists to
address productivity issues without addressing ecological damage on a systemic level.
But for all the neoliberal propaganda distilled through her character, Moana doesn't come
out as the leading character of the film. Her lack of experience and skills serve to
justify Maui's paternalistic attitude towards her. Her acts of bravery almost always stay
in Maui's Shadow: Moana defeats the coconut monsters only because Maui can't be bothered
to do it. Maui teaches Moana to navigate, but she falls asleep at the bar and it is Maui
who eventually allows them to safely meet their destination. When Moana tricks the crab
monster it is only to advance Maui's story by getting his magical hook back and later
encourage him to believe in himself and revive his transformation skills. Finally, when
Moana faces the lava demon she is meant to defeat, she starts off with a series of
impressive moves. Yet she soon finds herself in difficulty, at which point Maui arrives at
her rescue. And as if this wasn't enough, the personified wave which had assisted Moana
throughout her journey also jumps in to help, giving a definite sense that Moana is but a
little girl taking steps in the world under the careful supervision of her divine parents.
As if we needed a confirmation that Moana isn't the hero and center of this story, after
restoring ecological balance, she gets to have a tattoo of herself on Maui's chest...But
as stated at the beginning of the film, Maui's tattoos are supposed to represent Maui's
victories. In other words, either Maui is appropriating Moana's victory, or he's rewarding
her by having her displayed on his chest... which is as patriarchal as you can get. If
this is a shared victory, why didn't Moana get a tattoo as well?
The fact of the matter is, Maui and Moana's heroic deeds rarely take the form of a
cooperative and concerted effort. The only time they do "cooperate" is when Maui sends a
reluctant Moana to serve as bait for the crab monster. The rest is a juxtaposition of
individual deeds.
So in sum, Moana is just more of the same from Disney: yet another princess story that is
postmodern enough for the characters themselves to recognise this and dismiss it. The film
has taken what should have been female empowerment and the celebration of Polynesian
culture and blister-wrapped it in individualistic neoliberal ideology ready for mass
consumption.
Image: Disney graphic used under fair use for criticism purposes,
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107
http://www.wsm.ie/c/disney-moana-individualistic-neoliberal-reactionary-princess-tale
------------------------------
