The Curious Case of Kate Sharpley Library ________ by Christopher Draper_____________

“KATE SHARPLEY LIBRARY (KSL)” is an institution “dedicated to researching and restoring the history of the anarchist movement”. Its name commemorates a young woman who “under the influence of anarchist propaganda” in 1917 reacted to the carnage of WWI by flinging her family’s war medals back into the face of Queen Mary - a defiant gesture that earned her a severe beating from the boys in blue. In his book “I Couldn’t Paint Golden Angels”, Albert Meltzer recorded extensive details of the incident after meeting Kate shortly before her death in 1978. This dramatic protest was cited by Nigel McCrery in his book recording professional footballers killed in WWI, which linked it to the death on the Somme of Kate’s brother, William. It’s an extraordinary tale but is it true?

THE FOOTBALLER’s TALE

IN April 1912 Sgt William Sharpley of the Essex Regiment made a trial appearance for the Leicester Fosse reserves football team playing against Worksop Town. After winning this match 4-0 he was picked to play left back, for Leicester’s first team the following month, in a second division game against Leeds City. Although Leicester won that game 4-1 William made no further appearances for the club and returned to his unit to serve as a regular soldier. With the outbreak of war he was immediately sent with his regiment to the Western Front where “he served with honour” and was decorated before being killed on 1st July, 1916.

This story has recently been told by Nigel McCrery in his book “The Final Season” (Random House) where the author goes on to reveal that this early casualty of the Somme offensive was none other than the brother of impassioned anarchist protester, Kate Sharpley.

ALBERTS’s ACCOUNT

KATE SHARPLEY LIBRARY acknowledges that, “One of our frequently asked questions is who was Kate Sharpley?” In response KSL publishes two overlapping accounts, both written by Albert Meltzer. The first, originally penned in 1978 was printed in “KSL Bulletin 6, Sept 1996” while the second appears in Meltzer’s “I Couldn’t Paint Golden Angels” - both accounts are freely available online. Meltzer, and hence KSL, makes several very specific claims, including:

·

“Sixty-five years ago Queen Mary was handing out medals in Greenwich, most of them for fallen heroes being presented to their womenfolk.”

·

“One 22-year old girl, said by the local press to be under the influence of anarchist propaganda having collected medals for her dead father, brother and boyfriend then threw them in the Queen’s face”

·

“The Queen’s face was scratched and so was that of her attendant ladies.”

·

“The girl was Kate Sharpley.”

CURIOUS and CURIOUSER

MELTZER’s first reference to “sixty-five years ago”, made in 1978, dates Sharpley’s medal protest to 1913. Was it not remarkably prescient of Queen Mary to present commemorative medals for a war and its consequent casualties yet to occur? Is it not curious that such careless inattention to detail was not spotted by either Meltzer or KATE SHARPLEY LIBRARY corrected over the four decades since publication?

Is it not more curious still that despite extensive research there appears to be no report or record of this most dramatic incident in any contemporary newspaper or other documentary archive? No reference to this incident of any kind has been recorded that does not derive from Meltzer’s entirely unreferenced account. Meltzer specifically states that “the local press” claimed she acted under anarchist influence yet there appears to be no reference of any sort to “Kate Sharpley” in the local press for this or any political action. Even if the authorities conspired to effect total censorship of the mainstream press it would certainly have been reported in anarchist, socialist or pacifist papers. As a fearless activist surely Kate would have afterwards informed the radical press of her action and the police’s violent reaction.

Confirmation?

MELTZER’s account might appear to derive a degree of substantiation from McCrery’s description of the death of Kate Sharpley’s brother on the Somme were it not for the fact that Sgt William Sharpley (Reg. No. 9214) of the 2nd Battalion Essex Regiment had no sister called Kate, Kath, Catherine or any other variant. Like Mr Meltzer, who he references and relies upon, McCrery doesn’t seem to have done his homework by insisting on primary evidence. Although I emailed my detailed criticism of this invalid claim to a familial relationship to McCrery’s agent on 7th April 2021, requesting evidence for his assertion, answer was there none.

Dodgy Dogma

I DON'T DOUBT Meltzer met Kate Sharpley sometime in the late 1970’s and she recollected fragmentary tales of a half-remembered anarchist past. There’s usually a germ of truth in every story and it’s not clear who was the more guilty of over egging this particular pudding but Meltzer’s subsequent account is certainly more akin to anecdote than history. Through extensive research into primary evidence I believe I have identified the Kate Sharpley that Meltzer met and whose life he purports to describe but I’ve learned from experience that KSL prefers convenient myth to inconvenient truth.

It’s ironic that Meltzer’s autobiography claims “I Couldn’t Paint Golden Angels” for much of what now passes for “anarchist history” is little more than gilding applied to plaster saints. In claiming to chronicle anarchist history “FREEDOM" “Lib Com” and “KSL” all enforce ideological censorship with an absence of self-critical rigour.

ON 15th May 2006 “Lib Com” published Meltzer’s account on its own website. Eleven years later it finally dawned on editor “Steven” that the account lacked evidence if not credibility. On 15th May 2017 “Steven” belatedly, and unsuccessfully, asked “Does anyone know any dates in her life, either when she was born, when she died, or the date of the medal-throwing incident?”

In conventional journalism, which is after all the first draft of history, it’s generally considered good practice to test the evidence before publishing the story but at Lib Com it’s apparently an afterthought and at KSL a revisionist tendency to be defiantly resisted.

Anarchist History or Jesuitical Dogma?

SO dear reader, KSL - “dedicated to researching and restoring the history of the anarchist movement” has had 43 years to come up with evidence to substantiate this tale it began promulgating in 1978. I challenge KSL and its acolytes to now stand this story up with independent evidence or otherwise accept their founding myth is as false and dishonourable as that of the Catholic Church.

Christopher Draper (May 2021)

****************************************************************

Stuart Christie: an insider's study of an authentic classical anarchist by Brian Bamford - Part Two

ANARCHISM IS not a very well understood doctrine in British politics. I realised this when Tameside Trade Union Council first published a booklet commemorating the 60th anniversary of the Spanish Civil War in 2006 with Durruti on the cover. The then delegates of the Greater Manchester County Association of Trade Union Council clearly didn't appreciate the publication at the time, but during the meeting a large party of French trade unionists from the CGT [communist] happened to be present and while many of the local English trade unionists held back the French delegation waded-in to buy up most of the commemorative booklets we had to hand, and even later following me to the toilets to get extra copies.

It struck us at the time how utterly frigid the English trade unionists were compared to their French 'communist' CGT comrades.

This thought occurs to me now as I now with sadness write my friend and comrade, Stuart Christie's obituary. I remember that sometime after Stuart wrote the first volume of his autobiography 'GRANNY MADE ME AN ANARCHIST', I wrote a critique of it entitled 'God Help the Anarchist movement that Needs Heroes'. This in turn led to a bitter altercation between me and Stuart on the website 'Libcom' in which I believe he labelled me 'an arsehole'. However, in 2006, it was a measure of Stuart's nobility that when I invited him to write an introduction to Tameside TUC's Spanish commemorative booklet he had no hesitation in agreeing to do the job.

He probably did it because he knew me from when I first met him in Paris in August 1964, when he was about to go on to embrace the risky venture in his ill-fated journey to Madrid and ultimately to a Spanish jail for his part in a proposed attempt to assassinate General Franco. At that time we were all staying in a 'safe house' with Germinal Garcia at his apartment near Place de la République*. My wife Joan and I were returning from Spain, having first worked in Denia, Alicante throughout 1963, and later on in early 1964 moved on to La Linea on the border with Gibraltar where I worked for the MOD at the Gibraltar airport. While in Denia my eldest lad was born at the clinica there in September 1963. While in Spain and later Gib. we had taken photos of the conditions in the shanty towns in Barcelona and we sent back reports on working conditions over there for the FIJL publication Nueva Senda. At that time we were being debriefed, and thought Stuart may have been on a similar mission to us, but soon found out that they had other plans for him. At one stage he asked for our advice and was naturally interested in our own experiences.

Stuart was still in Carabanchel jail [Madrid] when my family again returned to Spain in early 1967 on our way to work in Gibraltar having had difficulties working as an electrician in Rochdale following my involvement supporting the national engineering apprentice strikes in November 1964 and February 1964. Having been blacklisted by the British MOD and throughout Gibraltar with private companies with contracts with the MOD and other contracts with the British authorities the only place on the Rock that I had a serious chance of work was with the Gibraltar City Council, supported by the Transport & General Worker's Union and Albert Risso who had close links with Sir Joshua Hassan the Chief Minister.

The anarchists on Gibraltar at that time were active within the Transport & General Workers Union and were basically anarcho-syndicalists. Stuart identified with the syndicalists, and had fallen under the influence of Bobby Lynn who he says 'had become the backbone of the Glasgow anarchist movement'. I'd stayed with Bobby Lynn in the Gorbals in 1961 and he gave me his copy of 'The Sexual Revolution' by Wilhelm Reich. Bobby was a member of the Syndicalist Worker's Federation when I stayed with him in 1961. As news leaked of Stuart's arrest Peter Turner [FREEDOM EDITOR] had contacted Bobby Lynn in Glasgow and up there they had assured him that Stuart was so dedicated to the peace movement and that it was not likely that he was guilty as claimed by the Spanish authorities. This may have influenced the report in the syndicalist Direct Action which took the line that he must be innocent, and Wynford Hicks on behalf of the anarchists argued on TV news that he was probably the victim of an 'agent-provocateur'. Another Freedom editor Vernon Richards argued more sensibly that it mattered little whether Stuart was innocent or guilty the anarchist position should be to support him.

For my part I knew what had taken place, but anticipating returning to work in Spain and expecting to continue to help the group of young Spanish exiles of the FIJL involved with the failed attempt, I decided to remain silent. Stuart himself had not been prudent before his departure for Spain and had actually participated in a BBC2 program entitled 'Let Me Speak' hosted by Malcolm Muggeridge. Muggeridge, who had been a friend of George Orwell, had often identified morally and intellectually with Tolstoy and anarchism.

In his autobiography 'MY GRANNY MADE ME AN ANARCHIST'[2004] Stuart documents the sequence of events in the summer of 1964: 'In mid-July Salvador and Bernado [Gurucharri] told me I should be ready to leave for Paris by the end of the month. Everything was now in hand for my trip to Spain. Shortly before I left... I was invited to appear on what later turned out to be, for me, an almost disastrous chat show called Let Me Speak, on ...BBC2. Having a small spectrum of anarchists, with me and another young lad called Vincent Johnson representing the "revolutionary anarchists" Muggeridge asked me if I was sincere in my revolutionary aims...would I, for instance, given the opportunity, assassinate Franco?" It was an unlucky shot in the dark, for that was pretty damn close to what I was hoping to do. What could I say but yes?.'

It is an extraordinary admission for a revolutionary anarchist to make! I doubt that the Spaniards I knew in Paris or in Spain in the 1960s would have made such a confession on the BBC or before going on a mission such as Stuart anticipated. It's almost as if he had a death wish or secretly wanted to get caught. When we knew him in Paris in August 1964 he was hopelessly naive and clearly knew little of the reality of everyday Spanish life or working conditions. He struggled to pronounce the Spanish word for 'workers'.

On page 107 of his autobiography he writes: 'I may not have been wise or competent in what I did or the way I went about it, but I did not have the benefit of hindsight'.

Never mind 'hindsight' given what he had done did he have the benefit of foresight or even a glimpse of common sense? I say this knowing, as Stuart did, that other people suffered as a consequence of what he did and the mistakes that he and his handlers made at the time. I also say this as a friend of Stuart who exchanged correspondence with him regularly over the last few years, and had documented and detailed our differences in my earlier pamphlet. One thing that troubles me is not that he wore a kilt, but that he sported a war resister badge of a broken rifle on his chest while walking around Paris in 1964 as he carried our one-year-old son Deon. He told us that he'd visited Paris the year before in the Spring; it was more 'romantic' than in August. Being romantic was probably what attracted most people to Stuart as it was part on his charm.

Yet, when we had visited Ken Hawkes, then secretary of the Syndicalist Workers Fed., and his wife before we went to Spain in February 1963, the worst winter since 1947, they treated us to a bottle of Champagne as we'd just got married and reminded us to remove our Ban the Bomb badges before we left their house on Parliament Hill for Spain. I wonder why none of us thought to urged Stuart Christie to take off his tell-tale War resister badge?

I suppose that in August 1964, we were all a bit intoxicated by the atmosphere of a time in which Franco had just celebrated 25-years of peace, and a pale-faced Salvador Gurucharri and others had just been released from jail. In Paris, at that time, we were all in high spirits as things seemed to be moving in the right direction.

While there Stuart met other major figures in the exiled Spanish anarchist movement, the organised FIJL [Fed. of young libertarians] around the Internal Defence (DI), and including militants of long standing like Octavio Alberola* and Luis Andres Edo.

In his autobiography he describes what he did as 'the act of an adolescent' and he quotes a verse from Longfellow:

'A boy's will is the wind's will, and the thoughts of youth are long, long thoughts.' [page 120]

On reflection he goes on to admit: 'Now it will seem like to many a foolish, naive, impulsive act...'

and 'I cannot claim, either, that it was entirely altruistic - my motives were certainly in part a desire for excitement and adventure.'

On reflection he goes on to admit: 'Now it will seem like to many a foolish, naive, impulsive act...'

Essentially he was doing what we had done a year earlier when we went to Spain to escape from what then seemed like dreary Manchester; he was he says not satisfied with what would now be called 'gesture politics' of petitions and protests, and sought to engage directly with a struggle in Spain. Foresight or prudence would make cowards of us all; it was not part of his engaging personality at that time. It set Stuart outside the smelly little left wing orthodoxies which he left behind. Yet it led him to get a 'GO TO JAIL' card to a Madrid prison cell, and was for him a life changing event.

Once in Paris Stuart had made contact with the action groups of the exiled Spanish anarchist movement, organised around Internal Defence (DI) and involving militants of long standing like Octavio Alberola and Luis Andres Edo. As such during his disastrous mission he was later arrested in Madrid and charged with the possession of explosives. These were intended for an attempt on Franco’s life and he was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. Thanks to a continuing international pressure he was freed after 3 years.

Why was General Franco and the Francoist regime so susceptible to international public opinion in the 1960s?

I think it was in his book 'The Face of Spain' [1950] that Gerald Brenan tried to explain the mellowing of the Franco regime. In that book he explained how the Falange and those who adhered to Franco began invest in real estate and escape the relative poverty of the 1940s and 1950s. We too quickly forget that it was not just the Spanish working-class that suffered after the Civil War, but the Spanish middle-classes experienced insecurity also. My boss Senor Such told me of how in the 1940s everyone in the fishing village where I lived and worked in 1963-4 had suffered depravation after the war and some had to eat cats. Later on it had become possible to make some progress and by the time we got there in the early 1960s things were looking up as the tourists began to arrive and with the development building work on the costas things were much more prosperous for many including the low-level Falangists. This allowed some softening of the regime which may some helped Stuart Christie escape with what turned out to be a relatively short sentence of 3-years in the end. Had he been arrested some ten years earlier for the same offence it may have been an altogether different story, but by the mid-1960s the supporters of the Franco regime felt much more secure than they had been during the Second World War or in its aftermath when to some extent Spain had been isolated internationally.

* FOOTNOTE: In the early hours of 11 May 2011, 86-year-old Germinal García, a militant of the Juventudes Libertarias (FIJL) and the Paris Local Federation of the CNT in the 1950s and 1960s, passed away (in Paris). At the end of the Spanish Civil War, 13-year old Germinal had been interned in Argeles-sur-Mer concentration camp where an unknown English woman, to whom he was ever grateful, cared for him. Stowing away on a Danish freighter, the Kitty Skov, from the port of Barcelona, he escaped to the United States, where he remained for a time in New York, passing himself off as a French citizen, returning later to France to became active in the anti-Francoist struggle. Shunning the limelight, but always in the background with his strong sense of solidarity, Germinal’s apartment in the Rue Lancry was a safe haven for comrades who had escaped from Franco’s Spain — and for guerrillas such as Quico Sabaté whenever he was in Paris (it was also used by Stuart Christie prior to his trip to Spain in 1964). For that and for his ongoing service to the libertarian movement, Germinal won the respect and friendship of all who knew him. With his passing, we have the satisfying memories and the privilege of having known the friendship of a good comrade. Germinal’s remains were cremated in Paris on 17 May 2011.

Octavio Alberola, May 12, 2011 SEE ALSO https://www.facebook.com/TheOrwellSociety The Orwell Society - Home | Facebook The Orwell Society. 1.4K likes. The Orwell Society aims to promote the understanding and appreciation of the life and work of George Orwell. Join here:... www.facebook.com

Dave Douglass, libcom comment & Mr. Saunders

N.V. Editor:  the comment below was written on libcom following the Dave Douglass statement by MH who is an editor on the libcom website.  The MH comment seems fair and reasonable.  What is more interesting is the swift breakfast-time response from Rob Ray or Simon Saunders, the somewhat half-baked anarcho-syndicalist editor of Freedom when he's not acting as a hack for the Morning Star.  We have no hesitation in doxing a juvenile pen-pusher such as Simon a former public schoolboy from East Anglia who admitted he had difficulty getting his head around the concept of syndicalism, not having even one working-class bone in his body.  Meanwhile, Rob Ray/ Simon speaks of 'stirring'!  He might well, many people are now saying the FREEDOM COLLECTIVE STATEMENT is feeble minded, and it seems the COLLECTIVE is split over it.
******

MH  Nov 21 2017 00:36

Well those comment pieces/statements on the London Bookfair keep rolling out, although with some glaring ommissions - AFed & SolFed nationally, Freedom collective amongst others?

Anyways here's Dave Douglass writing in Northern Voices on 17 November. He's a former striker in 1984/5 miners strike & NUM activist. He's also spoken at a variety of Bookfair's including London several times. He's toyed with anarcho-syndicalism, and flirted with Class War in the distant past, these days he's more of a historian (i think). He may come over as a bit rough & ready for Libcom towers, but that shouldnt reduce the validity of his viewpoint. So grit your teeth and read on:

Quote: 

SORRY END TO A GREAT INSTITUTION
by Dave Douglass (South Shields}

THE annual Anarchist Bookfare 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’

Read the full piece here - http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/sorry-end-to-great-institution.html
Northern Voices has a couple other bits on the Bookfair - here and here - note the second (Letter in Weekly Worker) contains certain factual errors, the most obvious being that the writer says Helen Steel is a member of the London Bookfair Collective. This is not true, and never has been, as far as i know.

******

Rob Ray [or Simon Saunders] Nov 21 2017 08:33 
I'll break my silence on here briefly to note that Northern Voices are habitual doxxers and liars, and their admin tried quite hard to get someone from Freedom arrested after he himself had assaulted our members. I'm mildly surprised Dave Douglass would want much to do with them tbh [to be honest].

As for "glaring omissions" if groups do or don't want to make statements that's up to them, tbh [to be honest] this smacks of stirring a bit.

libcom report on Catalan strikes

 Posted By

Cipo Fraioli
Oct 3 2017 12:14

WORKERS in Catalonia have launched a general strike today in response to the brutal police repression following Sunday's Catalan independence referendum.

Originally called by a group of alternative unions including the anarcho-syndicalist CNT, who represent the majority of linesman at the Port of Barcelona, the revolutionary syndicalist CGT and Catalan unions the IAC and the COS, the strike is now also being supported by the dockworkers' Coordinadora as well as mainstream trade unions the CCOO and UGT.
They are also being joined by a wide range of student groups, social centres and Catalan nationalist organisations such as La Taula per la Democràcia, an organism created just before the referéndum, the ANC (Catalan National Assembly), FAPAC (the Federation of Catalan Neighbourhood Assemblies) and UFEC (Union of Catalan Sports Associations).
Neighbourhood defense committees which have been developing alongside the repression of the referendum vote met last night in squares around Catalonia to prepare for the strike. Many neighbourhoods held protests outside hotels at Calella, Pineda de Mar and Figueres to protest the hospitality given to National Police and Civil Guard, successfully forcing the hotels to end their stay.
Demonstrations involving tens of thousands have broken out in the streets this morning. Central Barcelona has an ongoing march of thousands led by the 'bombers' firefighters who were brutally attacked by police last week when they tried to protect demonstrators. Around Barcelona different groups have blocked roads and motorways both with throngs of people and barricades of tires. Tractors have driven into town from local villages to block roundabouts.
Strikes are taking place on Barcelona public transport, and ports at Barcelona and Tarragona are completely shut down. The University of Barcelona has been in occupation since September 22nd with most schools closed for the day. Flying pickets along demonstration routes have been calling on shops to strike for the day.
In a statement, the CNT said: "the unity of Spain has always been a rallying flag for the far right here. Therefore, any calls for self-determination from any part of it, as is the case now in Catalonia, spark a vicious response. We are already seeing an increase in the presence of fascist groups in many towns across Spain and the conservative government is taking an increasingly authoritarian stance, trampling on many fundamental freedoms. These are ominous signs of what might lie ahead for us. Repression is only likely to worsen on many fronts, maybe even involving the military.
"Make no mistake, while we firmly oppose repression from an increasingly authoritarian state and their fascist allies, we are in no way supportive of the nationalist agenda."
The statement also explained that CNT activists have "been busy making things uncomfortable for the nationalists, bringing economic and social issues to the fore, reminding people that the Catalan government was very keen to introduce social cuts only a few years ago.
"This should not be a fight between nations, but between classes. Between an oppressive regime and its fascist allies (as much a part of the “people” as anyone else) and those of us who stand for freedom and rebellious dignity.
We expect repression to increase during the following weeks and days and we will use our weapon of choice, the general strike, to make it difficult for police to move around, get supplies and do their work in general.
The statement concludes: "As revolutionaries, we don't believe we can just remain idle, while the police attack the people in the streets and fascist gangs roam our towns freely."
On Sunday, what should have been a peaceful referendum turned into a carnage. Ten thousand police officers from the Guardia Civil, sent by the central government in Madrid, surged against the peaceful voters, trying to thwart the referendum, by shutting down polling stations and seizing ballot boxes

Violence erupted quickly, and the Sunday turned bloody. More than 800 hundred people were hurt. Everyone from young children to pensioners were victims of an unnecessary display of police brutality. Female protestors have also complained of police sexually assaulting them during arrests.
All in all, police actions in Catalonia have felt to many like a revival of the ghost of Franco still alive in the Spanish right. At least 884 people were injured, after the police savagely attacked the people who were trying to cast their votes. Police officers resorted to rubber bullets (forbidden in Catalonia since 2013), truncheons and even tossed people away from polling booths. The gruesome images of police officers dragging by the hair several women, using tear gas on voters and brutally clashing their batons on even elder people, are available in the internet for everyone to see the strength that fascism has nowadays in Europe.
President Mariano Rajoy, of the right-wing Partido Popular, refuses to recognise the referendum, even declaring that “there has been no independence referendum”, before paying tribute to the Spanish Police, that responded with “firmness and serenity”.
The referendum bill was turned into law by Catalan President Carles Puigdemont on September 6, after being voted in the Catalan Parliament, with 72 votes in favour and 11 abstentions, in the 135-seat chamber in Barcelona. This law stated that 48 hours after the referendum, a yes vote would be followed by the declaration of independence, but was quickly suspended by the Spanish Constitutional Court the day after, with the Spanish government claiming the vote illegal and unconstitutional.
The Catalan government declared that the referendum had been approved by 90% of the 2.3 million people who voted out of a total voter pool of 5,343,358. This means that the turnout was of 42%, with 58% abstaining.
The EU still remains largely silent, and hasn’t condemned the police violence in Spain. This represents the tension in the EU as a whole, where national independence campaigns in Scotland, Flanders, Veneto and elsewhere in other EU member states as well as the Basque Country in Spain. Catalonia is a major player in the Spanish economy and growth, accounting for around 19 percent of its GDP.
Lead image: twitter/@janinavilana

Libcom, Nationalism & the Cultural Dope!

  Cookbook Thinking on the Left

READING on the so-called 'anarchist' website libcom their recent analysis of the Manchester Arena Atrocity and an article on the rise  of  nationalistic popularism, I was impressed initially by the rapidity of their response to events.    But on closer examination we see the architecture of the arguments are built on sand.  Such exotic assertions as the pretentious Internationalist Communist Tendency [ICT] and its affiliate the CWO [Communist Workers Organisation]** presented on libcom can clearly be seen to be nonsense if we boil them down to their basic propositions:

The Brexit vote = [a] green light for bigots and racists everywhere. 

IMPERIALIST AGRESSION ABROAD =  INCREASED RACISM AT HOME.

The Turkish referendum = [a] green light for bigots and racists everywhere. 

Trump becoming President = [a] green light for bigots and racists everywhere. 

Our job = [to] undermine racism by stressing the fact that wage workers [world-wide] are in the same boat

The working class = a class of migrants and has been throughout capitalist history

 “Workers have no country”

Whatever other differences we have, we are united as a class by the fact that we are all the exploited victims

 'No war but the class war'.

Now read the orIginal piece entitled 'NATION or CLASS?' in full in all its drama:

'Imperialist aggression abroad means increased racism at home. The Brexit vote, like the victory of the AK party in the Turkish referendum, or Trump becoming President, have given the green light for bigots and racists everywhere. Attacks on people perceived to be outsiders have escalated dramatically. Some of this has been orchestrated by the state. Under the umbrella of “the war on terror” regimes around the world have a perfect excuse to lock up and murder anyone whose very existence might spoil the official picture of ‘the nation’.
'The working class is a class of migrants and has been throughout capitalist history. Let’s not fall for “nationalist” claptrap or defence of any country. When capitalists call on us to “defend the country” they are really calling on workers to die in defence of their property. “Workers have no country” as Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto. Whatever other differences we have, we are united as a class by the fact that we are all the exploited victims of capitalism. This makes the working class the international and internationalist class. Collectively it is the only force capable of putting an end to the infernal cycle of crisis and war. Today it’s not so much that we have a world to win – we have a world to save from a system which offers only social and environmental devastation.'

The basis of this so-called Marxist class analysis is that it treats working people as if they are cultural dopes and are constantly being tricked by events.    This can be understood by perusing the propositons they propound below:

Why should 'Imperialist aggression abroad = increased racism at home'?  
Why does 'The Brexit vote = [a] green light for bigots and racists everywhere'?
 Why does 'The Turkish referendum = [a] green light for bigots and racists everywhere'?
Why does 'Trump becoming President = [a] green light for bigots and racists everywhere'? 
Why is 'The working class = a class of migrants and has been throughout capitalist history'?
Why is there 'No war but the Class War'?  and if so how does it help us in our current situation?

Nothing is really explained for us in the text of either of the articles 'Nation or Class?' or 'The Manchester Arena Atrocity' account.

The problem with this kind of writing and analysis is that it is about using a formula or recipe to spin a tale so that the critique almost writes itself.  

Why is libcom, an anarchist website, publishing this kind of vulgar Marxism?  Why is it offering us this half-baked anarcho-marxism sometimes called anarcho-communism?

Simply because the anarchists around this website lack intellectual rigor.  Few of them seem to have served  a serious apprenticeship in practical anarchism or factory conditions.  Consequently, they have fallen under the influence of a kind of Sunday School League types like the former Manchester housing manager, Mike Ballard (revolutionary communist) from Chorlton or is it Didsbury?, and the former London librarian, Nick Heath of the Anarchist-Fed. These are both white-collar office staff creatures who promote the kind of clap-out thinking which prevails in the International Communist Tendency above, and which now dominates the libcom website. 

It makes no attempt to grasp why nationalism is so attactive to many working people, and why it represents something they are often prepared to die for in a way they are unwilling to throw down their lives in the class struggle. 

 *    The Internationalist Communist Tendency is a political international whose member organisations identify with the Italian left communist tradition. It was founded as the International Bureau for the Revolutionary Party in 1983 as a result of a joint initiative by the Internationalist Communist Party (Battaglia Comunista) in Italy and the Communist Workers Organisation (CWO) in Britain. Its other affiliates are the Internationalist Workers Group / Groupe Internationaliste Ouvrier in the United States and Canada, the Gruppe Internationaler SozialistInnen (GIS) in Germany and a small French Section.
**   The Communist Workers Organisation (CWO) is a British left communist group and an affiliate of the Internationalist Communist Tendency, formerly the International Bureau for the Revolutionary Party. It publishes a quarterly magazine, Revolutionary Perspectives and distributes an agitational broadsheet Aurora.

NHS London March & advocates of anonymity

'SPIKYMIKE', otherwise known as the now retired Manchester City Council housing manager Mike Ballard, on libcom on Feb 6th, 2017 commenting on the forthcoming London NHS March on the 4th, March wrote:

'This will be big I'm sure but although I've attended a few local NHS demo's and picket lines in the north west over the last couple of years I can't bring myself to get up before 5am to catch a coach with a load of lefties down to London for a tramp around the big smoke - its bad for my health. There are some useful local campaigns around but the trade unions that will be at the forefront of this have hardly shown themselves able to mount any genuine solidarity action in the workplace where it matters (during the doctors strike fore instance) and one wonders how much of this effort will be about garnering support for the Labour Party in forthcoming elections rather than anything else?  Still it would be good to get some reports and feedback from London comrades on this. The NHS really is descending into something of a crisis - round here for instance with at least two local hospitals planning big cuts in beds just as the national news is highlighting the shortage of both beds and staff!!'

Well, it was indeed a 'big' demo, and there wasn't a red and black banner to be seen on the march. 

Yet the National Shop Steward's Network, otherwise known as a front for the Socialist Party, estimated the numbers and reported it thus:

'But this march of over 100,000, although some reports say double that attended, must be the start not the end of the campaign. The health unions and the TUC must call another national demonstration that could be absolutely massive. This would give health workers the confidence to take co-ordinated strike action, which we believe last year’s junior doctors’ dispute showed, would have the full support of patients and communities.'

On an early TUC march against the cuts some years ago, I had just come out of the Gent's Urinals at John Lewis and my heart skipped a beat when I saw the red and black banners blowing in the wind on Oxford Street.  It soon sank as the anti-climax set-in, especially as I scrutinised the feeble figures with their pigeon chests who were carrying the flags.  These bands of fellows were being followed by a bunch of press photographers hoping no doubt for something untoward to happen, and trailing behind these were the Metropolitan Police.

Last Saturday, there was no sign of the BLACK BLOC  or the anarchists with their pigeon chests, just an orderly well organized demo put on by Unite and the Peoples Assembly.

Meanwhile, on the anarchist FREEDOM webpage on February 4th, the FREEDOM 'publishing House' ran a story recommending demonstrators wear mask and entitled:  'Why covering your face at a protest is the right thing to do' by someone called Kevin Blowe.

Mr. Blowe writes that:

'In June 2015 Netpol launched a campaign to try to encourage activists to start covering their faces when taking part in demonstrations and marches.

'We saw this initiative as one of the few remaining ways of resisting the growth of intrusive surveillance on the streets, which sees police monitoring social media for images and live-streamed video, chatting to protesters in the guise of ‘facilitating’ their activism and routinely filming everyone. This data-gathering is overwhelmingly overt rather than involving undercover officers — and most of the information is handed over by ourselves without objection. It is also carried out on an almost industrial scale, intended to build up a picture of different social movements, their structures and alliances.'

This is an interesting little essay and very typical of the kind of psychological state of mind of those who inhabit the metropolitan bubble of paranoid politics with its cheap thrills for the pigeon chested.  Such an approach has no insight into what was moving the participants on last Saturday's March.

The point about the March to save the NHS was that it had mass support from people who wouldn't normally consider themselves 'activists', indeed it was probably supported by many of the officers policing the demo.

For the organisers to introduce bundles of masks wouldn't have encouraged a spirit of revolutionary fervour it would have inspired fear and alienation among the crowds.

Mike Ballard above is right to ask the question 'one wonders how much of this effort will be about garnering support for the Labour Party in forthcoming elections rather than anything else? '

Last Saturday's demo had much to do with boosting support for the Labour Party, and there is a real underlying danger that inconclusive demos of the kind we were involved in actually undermines morale in the end.

Yet, covering one's face will not improve matters anymore than knocking off a few policemen's helmets.

Marching Together: an anarchist view on libcom

SATURDAY 20 June saw up to 250,000 people march in London under the banner ‘End Austerity Now.’    But four years on from the first ‘March for the Alternative’ back in 2011, how far have we actually travelled?


Having brought up to 250,000 people to the streets of London on Saturday, the People’s Assembly officially confirmed itself as a mass movement. Or so said Lindsey German of Counterfire, in her capacity of one of a number of interchangeable Grand Old Dukes of York of the left.


In reality, her article confirms that the PA is actually just the latest banner for the annual round of big fixture protests. Next on the agenda, we’re told, are budget day protests and a Conservative Party Conference demo; more Big Days Out for everybody to wave their banners and let off a little steam. Although obviously using phrases like 'lay siege' and 'make a splash' makes it all sound like so much more.


Reports of the march from a variety of sources are also talking about ‘the start of the fight back.’ It sounds good: one protest isn’t enough – this is the start of the fight, not a one off but a springboard to further action and resistance. There’s only one problem: this start isn’t the first start and it won’t be the last.


Every single massive demo is couched in exactly the same terms, as a beginning, with so much more to come.  But, like a terrible Hollywood movie franchise, they never quite get it right and so we get endless reboots.  We see the same story over and over and are continually told that it’s something new.


The reason for this is straightforward enough.


The trade union bureaucracy’s position and privilege is built upon its role mediating between the workers and the bosses.  This mediation means presenting workers’ demands to the boss class, of course, but it also means being able to compromise on their behalf, and to keep the workers in line when the deal is done.  If they can’t do this, as ‘responsible’ negotiating partners, then why should the bosses listen to them?


German and others who sit at the top of the various left sects seek a similar role in the political arena. The People’s Assembly is just the latest version of any number of fronts set up to allow them to position themselves as ‘movement leaders,’ even if on the surface it’s more successful than other endeavours at not looking like a front for a tiny Trotskyist group.  It’s how they recruit, sell newspapers, and maintain their own positions of relative privilege on the coat tails of the unions.
The various celebrity leftists attached to these events have a career to build on the back of speaking at such events. It builds a fan base, keeps their newspaper columns in demand, sells their books, and generally provides more of the only sustenance that matters to a celebrity: attention.


None of these people have a material interest in breaking the formula. Not the Len McCluskeys, not the Lindsey Germans, and not Owen Joneses. So we stay trapped in the endless cycle of reboots – one beginning after another, on launch pads with no springs.
Hell, even the cynical denunciation of this cycle is part of the cycle. But it remains necessary until we break that cycle.


Demonstrations aren't in themselves a good or a bad thing. In the context of a movement led from the top down by bureaucrats concerned to maintain their own positions, they're a pressure release valve for rank-and-file workers. But it doesn't have to be that way.


A march and rally can be what it says on the tin – a way to rally people together and give them confidence. Not confidence that the people talking at them have their best interests at heart, because that kind of confidence is demobilising. But confidence that they are part of something much larger and do not stand alone.


That only works if they are genuinely built from the ground up. A bunch of leftist talking heads in London organising a demonstration and then inducing the masses to attend can use the word 'grassroots' all they like – it doesn't make it true. When there's no pre-ordained platform, but rather anyone is allowed to speak, making the demonstration a way for people to connect with one another rather than be addressed by grandees, then we can believe them. This was the case with demos organised by the community Bedroom Tax campaign Stand Up In Bootle, to give one example, but it's not something you'll ever get from those behind the People's Assembly.


Likewise, when the demonstration has real links with the community and workplace organisation on the ground, you can truly talk about a movement. But the People's Assembly only cares for class struggle when it's managed and sanitised by the bureaucrats of the TUC unions.


Organising isn't an academic speciality that only an elite few can grasp. It begins with people who share a grievance discussing it, agreeing what to do about it, and taking action. By doing this in the community and in the workplace, and by linking these struggles up, we can build a movement worthy of the name.


On the other hand, if we surrender control of our struggles to those whose goal is to maintain themselves as our leaders and representatives, we'll constantly hear talk about the grassroots and a movement that's fighting back. But it'll just be talk, and we'll be trapped in that cycle of unlimited beginnings, never taking a single step forward.

Posted By

Phil
Jun 22 2015 16:35 on Libcom

Critiques of Free Speech & PEN

ON the 2^nd, May this year in Dallas, two Islamists tried to do a critique of Pamela Geller's 'Muhammad Art Exhibit & Contest' with assault rifles.  Dominic Green argues in the June issue of Standpoint magazine that 'The depiction of Muhammad is a test case for the practice of Western freedoms'.  If a guard had not suspended the art critic attackers' 'freedom of assembly' with a Glock pistol there would probably have been a massacre.  

Days later PEN held its annual dinner in New York at which the PEN board conferred its annual  'Freedom of Expression Courage Award' on Charlie Hebdo.  Six of the dinner's table hosts Peter Carey, Michael Ondaatje, Rachel Kushner, Frances Prose, Teju Cole and Taiya Selasi, resigned, and Salman Rushdie twitted '6 pussies' only later to amend it to 'Six Authors in Search of a bit of Character.' 

In an essay in January 1946 entitled 'The Prevention of Literature' George Orwell wrote about a meeting of PEN commemorating the tercentenary of Milton's Areopagitica  - a pamphlet in defence of freedom of the press:

'There were four speakers on the platform.  One of them delivered a speech which did deal with the freedom of the press, but only in relation to India; another said, hesitantly, and in very general terms, that liberty was a good thing; a third delivered an attack on laws relating to obscenity in literature.  A fourth devoted most of his speech to a defence of the Russian purges.  Of the speeches from the body of the hall, some reverted to the question of obscenity and the laws that deal with it,  others were simply eulogies of Soviet Russia.  Moral liberty – the liberty to discuss sex questions frankly in print – seemed to be generally approved, but political liberty was not mentioned.' 

Then with eyes and ears like a shit-house rat Orwell then discerns:

'Out of this concourse of several hundred people, perhaps half of whom were directly connected with the writing trade, there was not a single one who could point out that freedom of the press, if it means anything at all, means the freedom to criticize and oppose....  In its net effect the meeting was a demonstration in favour of censorship.' 

When the Salmon Rushdie affair first broke out in the late 1980s, I argued that writers ought to be prepared to take risks in the same way miners and building workers did everyday in their working lives.   Following the recent PEN resignations Salmon Rushdie said:

'If PEN as a free speech organisation cannot defend and celebrate people who have been murdered for drawing pictures, then frankly the organisation is not worth the name.  What I would say to Peter, Michael, the others is, I hope nobody ever comes after them.' 

In 1946 when Orwell wrote, it was not the fashion on the left to attack the Soviet Union, perhaps with the exception of the anarchists and some trotskyist groups; today even the anarchists are likely to embrace a sickly sophistry when challenged by the quandary of the freedom of the press.  With the Stalinists, the British trade unions and the main-stream left, free speech has often been a difficult concept for them to embrace wholeheartedly as Orwell discerned. 

In a posting on the 'anarchist' libcom website earlier this year someone wrote:  'By the magazine's (Charlie Hebdo) own admission, the point was to offend and provoke anger.' 

The writer disapproves of this because '... by and large, here you're actually getting a reaction from a maligned and marginalised minority community, who already suffer violence and prejudice.' 

I suppose the National Front supporters who were banned by the Church elders from participating in the election hustings at St.Chads Church in Rochdale earlier this year, could equally claim that they too were 'a maligned and marginalised community'.   Though I doubt that libcom would want to defend them. 

Coincidentally, as I write these words an editor on our Northern Voices' Blog is currently facing a 'Rule 27, Panel Investigation' by a Unite union panel, based on a report that appeared in March about a meeting of the Local Authority Regional Sector Committee entitled 'Unite Committee Bins Motion on Blacklisting'.  As George Orwell realised the English Left, and I would say the trade unions, may call for transparency and openness when referring to others, but they often lack a robust ability for self-criticism and self-examination.       

In 1946, George Orwell complained:  'Fifteen years ago, when one defended the freedom of the intellect, one had to defend it against Conservatives, against Catholics, and to some extent – for they were not of great importance in England, against Fascists.  Today one has to defend it against Communists and “fellow-travellers”.' 

Now, not only do we have to fend off the Fascists; the Communists (if they still exist); tin-pot anarchists on libcom; and trade union bosses who are covering-up for those who colluded with companies who blacklist, but we also have to challenge trade union committees that are run like petty fiefdoms, and Labour Councillors who produce pious proposals to cover-up for Labour Councils that do business with, and give public contracts to blacklist companies. 

Naturally, none of this can be as challenging as having to confront the assault rifle analysts in downtown Dallas, but it does make for an interesting life.

White Man's Burden

Comrades
A White Man march is to take place in Liverpool on 15 August. The initial announcement was given in https://libcom.org/news/next-white-man-march-be-held-liverpool-03052015
We are planning to hold a united counter demonstration involving as many interested parties as possible. A previous White Man march took place in Newcastle in March and was met by a counter demonstration of over 4000 trade unionists and anti-fascists. We have asked members of Newcastle Unite to come down and share their experiences with us.
The first meeting of the planning group for the demonstration will take place at 7 pm on 10 June in the Unite building in Liverpool and I am writing to invite your union, anti-fascist organisation or community group to send a representative if you wish to be involved in the planning for this counter demonstration. If you are sending a representative please let us know at merseysidetuc@gmail.com . 
Thanking you in anticipation
Yours in solidarity

Liz Epps
Secretary Merseyside TUC

Who Killed Freedom?: an unauthorised history 2.

Horny Handed Son of Mum & Dad

Unlike Toby, Simon Saunders had no track record of Marxism, in fact he had no track record of anything:  'I had no idea what I was doing…bear in mind my politics, whilst veering towards class-based, were very much those of a left-liberal at this point. I had read Kropotkin, and some of the Anarchist FAQ, but I had only a vague idea of what I wanted to see happen in society.  Days before I started, when a guy commented about a bunch of SolFed pamphlets I was handing out “You’re a syndicalist then?”, I’d had to shamefacedly admit I had no idea what they were talking about'

What Saunders lacked in knowledge and experience was more than made up for in middle class confidence, for the kids of the affluent middle class expect to inherit whatever section of the earth they fancy, whether Parliament, the City, charities, the media or editorship of FREEDOM.  Ignorance was no check on Simon’s ambition or opinions and, as editor, he was soon dismissing the ideas of seasoned anarchists with arrogant aplomb.

Financed by mum and dad ('one parent a Liberal, one a Tory') FREEDOM provided a valuable internship for Simon who, just out of college, fancied a career in journalism and was duly enabled to gain an NUJ card. FREEDOM was less fortunate, under his regime the paper exhorted readers to revolt whilst its editor hid behind the fantasy name 'Rob Ray'.  Simon’s adolescent obsession with computer games, especially, 'Dracula in London', shaped his politics.  Whilst his avatar 'Rob Ray' fearlessly roamed the world proclaiming violent revolution on screen and throughout the pages of FREEDOM, in real life he was the mild mannered Simon Saunders un-associated with anarchism lest it limit his career prospects ('I keep my real name off such things…as it becomes immensely easy for a prospective employer to keep me out of a job').  Before Toby Crowe, editors of FREEDOM had the courage of their convictions, after 2004 anonymity and aliases became commonplace at FREEDOM.  Anonymity might be essential in the immediate period before revolutionary overthrow, but has no proper role in our everyday political task of 'pre-figuratively' modelling a better, more anarchist society.

Under 'Rob Ray’s' editorship examples of self-help and mutual aid so meticulously identified, described and promoted by FREEDOM anarchists from Kropotkin to Colin Ward were notably absent as the paper echoed the politics of other 'class-struggle' publications.

Anarchists who weren’t yet entirely alienated by the paper’s content continued to be discouraged by the offhand treatment they received as prospective contributors. Cumbrian anarchist Martin Gilbert was first asked to submit a collection of articles on 'Anarchists in Social Work' for publication by FREEDOM as an edition of its journal the RAVEN but when this was closed down by Toby, Martin financed publication out of his own pocket. FREEDOM under Simon first agreed to review the book but then didn’t.  Martin Gilbert subsequently asked me to review the book and this review was duly submitted to the collective.  Determined to force FREEDOM to belatedly acknowledge the value of Martin’s work I persevered until Simon eventually published my review but it is illustrative to read the accompanying admission (reproduced verbatim): 

'There has been a catalogue of errors and let downs regarding both the book and this review.  In the case of the book, the manuscript was originally intended for the Raven, but this journal ceased publication before his hard work could appear.   He then, as Chris mentioned, printed it himself and got Chris to review it for him.  The review was then lost, found, lost again, re-found and finally disappeared completely.  Following his letter in the last issue, we had it re-sent to us, and have now finally printed it here.'

At least as an authoritarian Toby was efficient; under Saunders’ editorship, 'Correspondence went missing or unanswered, features were lost and former disagreements and feuds went unnoticed, only to resurface months down the line as the group struggled to cope…Freedom’s organisation began to unravel.'

Having belatedly learnt the meaning of 'Syndicalism' Saunders joined the 'Solidarity Federation'  (SolFed) and as FREEDOM’s editor continued to pursue Toby’s failed strategy of appealing to 'class-struggle anarchist organisations' to support and sell FREEDOM with a similar lack of success.  In 2009 Saunders resigned his editorship (but remained part of the editorial collective) to spend more time writing articles for the newspaper of the British Communist Party.

Perks for the Privileged

By 2009, little remained of the paper’s former politics and sales continued to nosedive yet FREEDOM provided perks for a privileged few.  For A.F. and SolFed FREEDOM supplied free advertising, an enhanced profile and a convenient central London location for meetings.  For student radicals it offered informal political experience and credibility that led on to other fields, professional journalism for Saunders and editorship of libcom website for others (collective members Jim Clarke and Steven Johns for example).  FREEDOM’s book publishing business offered another invaluable opportunity that the collective were soon to exploit with disastrous consequences.

In tomorrow's exiciting installment of 'Who Killed Freedom...' we get another star turn of anarcho-syndicalism with Dean Talent of the Solidarity Federation and the Copywrite Kid!