by Dave Douglass (South Shields}
THE annual Anarchist Bookfair in
London was for many many years the highlight of the Anarchist and
radical Marxist calendar. It brought together the most splendid ,
vivid fascinating and eccentric, profound and trivial, exciting and
profane, hilarious and spiritual assortments of people. They came in
thousands, they bathed in the rainbow variety of factions,
tendencies, visions and issues. Workshops and presentations,
entertainment and discussion filled the entire day as the crowds
crammed past stalls laden with literature and art, T-shirts and
stickers, posters and badges, cards and calendars, a myriad of
interesting and unique stuff you would never find anywhere else under
one roof. The Vegan food commune outside the venues hawked the most
interesting of pastries and butties, tatties and cakes, rich
wonderful chocolate cakes and angel cakes which tested the will power
of the most dedicated of health freaks. In my own judgement the
Anarchist bookfare almost vied with the Durham Miners Gala (almost)
in terms of ‘not to be missed’ events. Ancient aud Anarchists
rubbed shoulders with the Mohican punks of yesterd-a-year, born again
hippies, young activist, and what a Glasgow paper talking of the anti
polaris demonstrators of the 60’s called ‘ beardies, weirdies and
lang lagged beasties’ Sadly the great spirit of comradely diversity, the ‘let a million flowers blossom let ten thousand schools of thought reign’ which Mao had once said and may actually at one time believed, had started to change and smoulder into authoritarian intolerances. In a gradual change of attitude which I think has spread from the Ultra PC ‘no platforming’ ‘shut them up’, ‘safe space’ evangelists of the US campuses, only very particular schools of thought would be allowed to be heard.
Invited to speak one year I suggested I bring the famous ‘red’ miners banner of the Follonsby Lodge. The banner originally drafted in 1928 famously sets forth the options and variety of radical working class ideologies and ‘roads’ depicting as it does Social Democracy, Bolshevism, and Anarcho-syndicalism, the ballot box and the gun, in the form of Kier Hardie, James Connolly in the uniform of the ICA, V.I.Lenin , A.J.Cook and George Harvey. The banner encapsulates the trajectory of ideological struggle and events which led through the birth of the IWW, the ILP, the development of the Soviets, the General Strike, The Easter Irish rising and the Russian revolution. In this trajectory the debate around the nature of the state and working class democracy ideas of the anarchists and syndicalists, the Industrial Unionists, how society could function once capitalism was defeated were all marked by the birth of this banner.
I had concluded that the Anarchist Bookfare was an ideal platform to retell this story and the way in which working class history had developed. 'Nope’, I was told , the bookfare couldn’t guarantee the banner’s safety. One look at the central portrait of Lenin flanked by the hammer and sickle would be enough to stifle any debate and could lead to the destruction of the banner. It was an early demonstration of the chain of thought which would seek to re-write history by tearing down all statues and memorials and references to un-pc historic figures. It would be the fingers in the ears while shouting’ lalala’ to stop the sound of words too wounding to be heard.
Then four or five years ago we had a gang attack on Comrade Brian Bamford of the Northern Anarchist Network. Brian has a knack of rubbing folk up the wrong way it must be said, he had been irreverent to an old stalward of traditional anarchism who had passed away, Brian’s obituary was thought to be insensitive, which it undoubtedly was. But it led to his stall being turned over his books trashed and he beaten up and sprayed with ketchup. This was in the middle of an event of Anarchists who are supposed to believe we can govern ourselves without enforcement and laws imposed upon us. It got worse, as first Brian then members of his group were banned from regional anarchist bookfares, not simply from having a stall but attending on pain of violence. Book and Newspaper shops which stocked the NAN magazine were visited and warned not to stock the journal, the printers likewise were given the Gypsies Warning. He hasn’t mounted a bookstall since.
Last year, a section of the Anarchist wing fighting alongside the PKK against ISIS were invited to speak at a workshop. The hall was invaded by students from the Gulf states who although purporting to be progressives were basically supporters of the Jihadists and Theocrats. They stamped and chanted and no platformed the speakers. Bending over backward to preserve our traditions of free speech they were invited to present an alternative view before the anarchists spoke, which they did, and then broke up the meeting and stopped them being heard.
This year was the final straw. One of the anarcho-feminists had been circulating a leaflet saying why they didn’t allow transmen to attend women only sessions and workshops, when she was surrounded and shouted down and threatened by a gang of 'transmen’, who not only stopped those sessions but demanded a whole list of demands from the bookfare in general be met. This was as to content of stalls, workshops, items displayed and on sale. The organisers under a constant barrage have just said ’bollox’ you organise your own, we’re done’. ‘That’s it, were done organising this event’.
I cannot in conscience blame them. The only way to stop this march of intolerance would have been to not tolerate it and to physically impose free thought and free speech on people who plainly don’t believe in it. Which would be a contradiction too hard for Anarchists to cope with. Its a sad reflection on where mostly middle class ‘safe space’ victim-mongering, no-platforming , witch hunting, tyranny has taken us. It is a very sad day in my view. We have to ensure that this intolerance and denial of free speech and basic liberty is not fed into working class organisations and events.
Tyneside anarchists in conjunction with the Follonsby Wardley Miners Lodge Association will be hosting a Guy Fawkes Workers Bookfare in Newcastle next year, Nov 3rd. This will be an opportunity to present books on working class political ideology and history and progressive thought which one would not get the chance to see in conventional book venues. It will very much be in the tradition of the once famous bookfare although we don’t expect the same numbers. At this bookfare the principle of free speech and political liberty will be guaranteed, and anyone who doesn’t accept the principle ‘left’ or right will be not invited and if necessary excluded.
fiveleavespublications.blogspot.com/2012/10/
******
6 comments:
A few corrections:
1) I don't think there's anything particularly surprising about the treatment that Bamford got. If someone wrote a similarly "insensitive" obiturary about, say, Davey Hopper (RIP) immediately after his death, and then tried flogging it around at the Gala, what do you honestly think would happen? It's not an experiment I'd be keen to try, but I imagine you'd be very lucky to get away with just a bit of ketchup.
2) You've got the PKK/ISIS thing all backwards. There was a talk that was disrupted, but it was a talk by supporters of the Syrian revolution who were critical of the PKK, and it was shut down by PKK supporters (see: here and here). Still indefensible, but it's nonsense to claim that the people doing it were supporters of the Jihadists and Theocrats - if anything, they would presumably say that Robin and Leila were supporters of jihadists for their pro-FSA views.
3) When you say transmen, that's a word used for people who were assigned female at birth, usually have two X chromosomes and so on, who identify as being male. I don't think that's what you're trying to say there.
4) Good luck with your bookfair, it sounds like a good event, and I'll do my best to publicise it when it's organised, let people I know in the area know about it, and might try and make it along myself. One question though, will you be inviting Labour? The Lib Dems? The Tories? UKIP? The North East Infidels? How far does your commitment to "free speech" go?
Are youse not approving comments pointing out your factual errors? Much anarchism, very free speech, wow.
My colleague and joint-editor Derek, takes a dim view of Anomynous comments, as does David Douglass himself. Their reasoning is that it often leads to rash remarks and a confusing exchange of views. Confusing because if the anomynous person doesn't have the imagination to even create a pseudonym one often loses track of which 'anomynous' person one is responding to. Also it is generally excepted by editors, for obvious reasons, that Anomynous comments are not treated as seriously as those which have a clearly identifiable commentator. Thus, the reasons for the delay in publishing the above comments was that I was away and not online for almost two weeks. Therefore, nothing to do with 'free speech'.
Sounds like you heard about events at LABF third or fourth hand. You have almost all the details wrong and mangled.
1) The people giving out the leaflets weren't anarcho-feminists. One of them, for example, is a Green Party candidate.
2) You use 'transmen' when discussing trans women. WTF. Please have the decency to use language which acknowledges how people experience their own gender.
3) The leaflets weren't about excluding trans women from sessions at the bookfair, they were about wanting to exclude trans women from women's spaces in the wider society.
4) The people confronting the leafletters didn't disrupt any bookfair sessions, because that's not what the argument was about. Complete fiction.
5) The people confronting the leafletters were a whole mix of people, not 'a gang of transmen'.
6) The people confronting the leafletters did not make 'a whole list of demands'. They were focused on getting the transphobic leafletters to leave. You are probably getting confused with an open letter published later by various groups which did contain a list of demands.
7) You have exaggerated the extent of the list of demands.
IMO comradely diversity is great but it shouldn't extend to tolerating bigotry. Standing up to bigots and physically forcing them out is not authoritarianism, it's basic common sense and basic solidarity (with the groups they are trying to marginalise).
(That's relating to this year's kerfufle, I don't know enough about the other incidents you mention which do seem quite different).
One Anonymous said...:
'2) You've got the PKK/ISIS thing all backwards. There was a talk that was disrupted, but it was a talk by supporters of the Syrian revolution who were critical of the PKK, and it was shut down by PKK supporters (see: here and here). Still indefensible, but it's nonsense to claim that the people doing it were supporters of the Jihadists and Theocrats - if anything, they would presumably say that Robin and Leila were supporters of jihadists for their pro-FSA views.'
I stand corrected on the factual content, I am clearly in error as to some facts, not sure which Syrian Revolution is being referred to here but the point I was making is fairly obvious in favour of free speech which you seem to agree, no we will not be inviting non revolutionary groups but if some faction of the labour left claiming to be revolutionary apply aye we'd find them space, its meant to be a 'workers bookfair' ie books in support of working class struggle and outlook so not just an all in general bookfare regardless of politics, The comment about 'shame it wasn't petrol' isn't worthy of reply and may not have come from the same person as it isn't in the same spirit. Our platforms must be open to different views and tactics and outlooks and if someone doesn't like that sort of diversity they shoudn't come.
Dave Douglass doesn't care for 'anonymous’ commentators and here has accepted our suggestion that the we as editors respond to the Anonymous comments. He has said of the trans position 'they [the trans people] are entitled to a point of view, but that's all it is, other comrades view things differently, and other points of view are equally valid, we can’t have a specific point of view imposed upon us.'
Post a Comment