Angry Not Apathetic

No. 158

Resistance Special Edition

Free/Donation

What anarchists do

instead of voting
The general election is here, and once again the
parties are all over us like a rash, promising that they
will fix things. But you dont have to be an anarchist
to know that nothing changes, whoever gets in. This
is why politicians are keen on new methods such
as postal voting. Labour, Tory, Liberal Democrat,
nationalist (Plaid Cymru, SNP, Sinn Fein), principled
or radical (Green Party, or leftists in some alliance),
or nationalist-racist (UKIP etc), the
fundamentals of the system are
the same.
Whether we have the present
electoral system or proportional
representation,
or
however
many people vote or dont vote
in an election or referendum, as
we have just seen in Scotland,
capitalism is at the driving wheel
globally. As working class people,
we are exploited whether we can
take part in free elections or live
under an authoritarian regime.
Capitalists and property owners continue to control
the wealth that we create, and they protect it through
the police, legal system, and military.

You cant complain

Non-voters are told that, If you don't vote you can't

complain. But voting under these circumstances is

just pretending that the system we have is basically
alright. It lets the winning party off the hook. The fact is,
we have next to no say in the decisions that get taken
by the people we elect. This is called representative
democracy. Anarchists organise by direct democracy,
where we can have a say in every decision, if we want
to. We dont put our power in someone elses hands,
so no one can betray us and abuse
it. This really could work globally!
Ask us how...

Campaigning against
voting
A don't vote campaign on its own
is just as much a waste of time.
The same goes for a protest vote
for a leftist or novelty candidate.
The time and money spent
campaigning could be better
used fixing some of the problems
we face in our lives. Protesting,
whether it is spoiling a ballot paper or marching in the
street, fails to offer any real challenge. So, anarchists
say, vote, or dont vote. It wont make any difference.
What is more important, is to realise that elections
prop up a corrupt system and divert us from winning
real change.
(continued on page 2)

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly

limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate
within that spectrum. Noam Chomsky

No. 158

Resistance General Election Special Edition

(continued from page 1)

Dont vote, organise!

We should
organise with our
neighbours, workmates,
other
people we have shared interests
with, and others who dont have the
privileges that some people have.
We are the experts on what we
need, and on the best way to run
things for the common good. We
need to use direct action to achieve
this. Direct action is where we solve a problem without
someone else representing us. By this we mean, not just
protesting and asking for change, but things like occupying,
sabotaging, working to rule, refusing to pay their prices or
their rent, and striking (but not waiting for union leaders to
tell us when we can and cant!).
For example, when workers arent paid the wages owed
them, rather than asking the government to give us better
legal protection, we take action to force employers to pay.
The Department for Work & Pensions has even named the
Anarchist Federation and the Solidarity Federation among
groups that are a serious threat to workfare, because we
have shut down programmes. This was achieved with only
a few hundred people. Imagine what could be done with
thousands!

Taking it back
In reality, people are understandably afraid of taking the
state on. But direct action doesnt have to mean an all-out
fight to defeat capitalism in one go. Anarchists do think that
ultimately, there has to be a full revolution. But by confronting
the system directly at any point we can start to take control.
In fact, all the good things we think of as having been created
by the state free health care, free education, health & safety
laws to protect us at work, housing regulations, sick pay,
unemployment benefits, pensions came about historically
to put an end to organised campaigns of collective direct
action that threatened their power. And where we would fail
as individuals, together we can win.

Labour and
the Unions

The infatuation of the trade unions with the Labour party

should be nothing other than mystifying for ordinary workers.
Whether it is Unions Together or TUC voter registration
drives, trade union members amongst us should feel deeply
insulted at being asked to prop-up the Labour party as the
best available solution.
The Labour Party was set up in the early twentieth century
as a political wing of the trade union movement. Despite
the rose-tinted view of history, it has continually regulated
workers under capitalism. It is not a case of Labour having
lost its way and needing recapturing. To echo the anarchist
Rudolf Rocker, political parties and elections havent brought
workers a hairs breadth closer to socialism.

The Special Relationship

The TUC and parts of the left continually present us with a
picture of Labour which has nothing in common with its actual
actions. They tell us that we still have a special relationship,
and that despite its failings, the Labour Party stands-up best
for ordinary working people. So we should support it without
illusions, because it is better than the Tories. Not that you
would notice! All the major parties support austerity against
the working class. This is irrefutable, and Labour even says
as much.
What remains of the dwindling trade union movement is
essentially shackled by harsh restrictive anti-union laws and
a totally compliant TUC leadership. These laws tell us how to
manage our affairs, seriously restrict our ability to withdraw
labour, and tell us who we can and cant expel, which means
that we have to accept scabbing in our own unions. They
restrict free association in a way that no other organisation
can under British law and are regularly condemned by the
International Labour Organisation, which is hardly a hotbed
of radicalism. The only time Labour repealed anti-union
laws was when its hand was forced by a mass grassroots
workers movement in the 1970s.
Overturning these present laws and rebuilding a militant
culture around the workplace is going to require not the
politics of the ballot box, but sheer will and the determination
to oppose so-called representatives in both the Labour
Party and the TUC. Their class interests under capitalism
are intimately linked; our interests begin and end with us.

Paper of the Anarchist Federation

No. 158

Resistance General Election Special Edition

Free Education and the Liberal

Democrats: A Students Perspective
Neo-liberalisation
Living in Sheffield at the time of the last election, I saw that
there was massive voter turn-out and support for the Lib
Dems amongst students. A tangible optimism and excitement
existed in Nick Cleggs constituency. Personally, I spoiled
my ballot paper with, If voting changed anything theyd
make it illegal. However, I did wonder whether a Lib-Dem
rise could contest the New Labour/Conservative stalemate
of neoliberal similarity.
Clegg now sports a satisfaction rating of minus-40 (Mori
survey). This is well deserved. Instead of capping tuition fees
he has overseen them triple to 9,000. Young people among
many others who voted Lib-Dem have been left disillusioned
by this, becoming disengaged from politics. What has been
proven is not that young people are not interested in politics,
but that politicians are not interested in young people.

Debt
I was lucky and only had to pay 3,000/year in fees. But
I now owe the Students Loan Company 23,000. This
increases by at least 30 a month due to interest, which
started whilst I was still at university! I am persistently being
hassled by them checking if Im earning enough yet to start
paying it back.

When I finished university I wanted to continue studying.

However, funding for a social science Masters degree is
rare and most students are self-funded. I couldnt stand the
thought of incurring more debt by taking out a loan, so I
gave up on the idea. I moved home and worked in a caf
trying to get out of my overdraft. I found out that there are no
tuition fees in Sweden for EU citizens. I applied to Stockholm
University and got in, paying living costs with money Id
earned in the caf. I then found out I could return to the UK
on an Erasmus exchange, avoiding tuition fees and even
getting an EU grant!
This illustrates the lengths that you have to go to if you come
from a background where higher education is unaffordable.
Furthermore, it has taught me that a free education is feasible,
but cannot be accomplished by relying on political parties
and the establishment. The neo-liberalisation of higher
education has proliferated under the Coalition. Education is
becoming the preserve of the upper-middle-class. Research
too must now be competitive, not expressing critical,
independent thought.
To contest this, to strive for free education, the only way is
to self-organise! The demise of the Lib-Dems has shown we
cannot rely on any political party to deliver this. This is why
we argue Dont Vote Organise!

Paper of the Anarchist Federation

No. 158

Resistance General Election Special Edition

Tories on bikes:

the Green Party in power

F***ing Tories on bikes thats how one Brighton bin worker
describes the Green Party. As the largest party on the local
council, with 23 seats at the 2011 election, Brighton is the
only place in the UK where the Greens have had so much
as a sniff of power. And look what theyve done with it.

lines. We did see her picking up litter during the strike of

June 2013, despite a statement from the bin-workers
asking people not to, because as they say, any attempts to
lessen the impact of a strike [by picking up litter] completely
undermines our action.
No doubt the Greens in Brighton have made tough choices,
with their hands tied by central government. So is that all
there is to politics tough choices and a world of perpetual
disappointment when your elected representatives betray
you? As anarchists, we say that the problem is not with who
is in power, and how they exercise that power. The problem
is political power itself. As anarchist Noam Chomsky points
out, the smart way to keep people passive and obedient is
to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow
very lively debate within that spectrum. The Greens might
be on the fringes of that spectrum, but theyre still part of the
party political system, established to keep us quiet.

Despite trumpeting a commitment to the living wage (7.85

an hour outside London, compared to a National Minimum
Wage of 6.50), they tried to impose a pay modernisation
scheme on low-paid council workers with the support of the
Conservative group on the council. It meant that refuse and
recycling staff at Hollingdean depot faced a paycut of up to
4,000 a year.
Acting like the worst kind of union-busting boss, the council
threatened the workers that if they refused to accept the
new terms, they would sack them and re-employ them
on a worse contract, without compensation. Binworkers
responded with a wildcat occupation of their depot, and there
have been numerous strikes and wildcat stoppages since.
And the attacks on the binworkers terms and conditions of
employment continue.

Litter picking
Green MP, Caroline Lucas claims to have made her
opposition to the proposals clear, and even said that she
would join the picket line if the Council forces a pay cut
on low paid staff. Well, we havent seen her on any picket

Paper of the Anarchist Federation

No. 158

Resistance General Election Special Edition

The end of a grassroots

movement in Greece

Many leftists have been overjoyed that an anti-austerity party won the general election in Greece. For the left, including
those in the UK, Syrizas victory is seen as a turning point in Europe against economic policies based on harsh cuts.
SYRIZA (Coalition of the Radical Left) started off as an alliance of various reformist left-wing currents. Its programme was
very similar to Pasok, a socialist coalition of the 1980s. In fact, a large part of the old Pasok leadership is now in Syriza.
Alexis Tsipras took over as Syriza leader in 2008, as the party was moving away from reformist Eurocommunism to build
a relationship with the grassroots social movements that had grown in Greece against austerity. As it was developing
a presence on the streets and joining the large square protests, the party also increased its influence in trade unions,
especially the public sector, and organised among university students. It quickly positioned itself as a last hope for change
for the social movement.
Syriza will now be the political wing of a repressive State apparatus - the police, the army, the judiciary - that is historically
riddled with right-wingers and fascists. It has already formed a coalition with a right-wing anti-immigration party and will
continue to make compromises to stay in power. As the party is quite small with 35,000 members, around 10,000 will be
moved into government positions in an attempt to counter the right-wing, well away from the grassroots initiatives that
carried them into office.
Greek radicals with longer memories will remember that after Pasok was elected it rapidly dropped the radical programme
that helped it to power. In any case, it was all but wiped out in later elections. Now here we are again with more leftist
promises from Syriza. As one Greek anarchist Spyros Dapergolas remarked about the importance of people sticking to
grassroots organising, Everything else is a recipe for failure, disappointment, loss of time, and, of course, political and
individual corruption ... what power and state always create.

Paper of the Anarchist Federation

No. 158

Resistance General Election Special Edition

What the Suffragettes Did For Us

Its election time again, and anarchist women are once more
being lectured on doing our duty to those who died for our
vote.

For the record, the suffragettes demand was that women

should be balloted wherever men were. They werent
fighting for every woman in perpetuity to be guilt-tripped into
supporting any political system that used the ballot box to
legitimise itself. They trusted future women to make their
own decisions. Sylvia Pankhurst, for one, lived to reject
parliamentary democracy as an out of date machine and
refused to cast a vote or stand for election herself. This
election, shed be angry with every partys participation in
cuts to essential womens services, not the women who
spoil their ballots or stay away.

More than the vote

There was a lot more to the suffragettes than just the vote.
They were about womens solidarity, our ability to work and
fight together, to write and speak from our own experience,
not just on the vote but on sexual, social and vocational
freedoms, like fair pay and reproductive rights. Being denied
the vote was an insult to women as intelligent, rational
human beings, regardless of how much use the vote itself
was. Using the vote was almost beside the point compared
to what it would mean for women to have the vote, to not be
seen as mere extensions of their husbands.
Getting the vote was a victory largely because of what
women achieved through the process of fighting for it. The
speeches, publications, smashed windows, battles with
police, martial arts training, imprisonments, hunger strikes,
resistance to force-feeding and refusal to give in: these did

more to raise the status and confidence of women, as public

and political people, than the vote itself ever has. Much more
than having women MPs or careerists who have cynically
used womens struggles to promote themselves.
Telling us that we have to vote because votes for women
were hard won, is condescending, paternalistic shit. Working
class men also fought for the right to vote, but are much less
criticised if they suggest that there are more effective means
of change than the ballot box. For women, voting is turned
into an issue of conformity rather than conscience, in direct
opposition to who suffragettes were and what they fought
for. The suffragettes never intended their campaigning to
stop with getting the vote. Many continued fighting when
their leaders were co-opted. They werent satisfied, and
they didnt intend us to be.

Co-option
The suffragettes achieved their aims because they were a
radical, inspirational and effective direct action movement.
They achieved incredible things for themselves and for
future generations of women. Yes, they deserve our respect
and our gratitude. But more than that, they deserve our
study and our effort to comprehend the full enormity and
complexity of their struggle. They deserve better than to be
reduced to a single-issue sound-bite.
So this polling day, whether you vote or organise or both,
consider honouring the suffragettes memory by not using
them as a stick to beat women with when they treat their
vote exactly as the suffragettes did: as their own, to use or
not, on their own terms.

Paper of the Anarchist Federation

No. 158

Resistance General Election Special Edition

So, is Russell
Brand right then?

Celebrity sexist Russell Brand has recently added

revolutionary to his CV, and hes written a book about it.
He has also turned out in person to support things like the
successful housing struggle of the New Era Estate residents
in London. If you can stomach the man himself, he seems to
offer something to people sick of inequality, war-mongering
and political hypocrisy. Brand agrees with anarchists on
many things and refers to himself as an anarchist in his
new book Revolution. He wont be voting in the election
for pretty much the same reasons that anarchists wont
be. The Spanish revolution inspires him as the best social
experiment in history, as it does us. So, we should say what
we think about him.

Money, money, money

Brand genuinely does see political parties as all the same,
and electoral politics as a sham which serves the rich
and powerful. But he seems unaware of what lies behind
inequality. This is how he has come to the conclusion that
society should be run by small, decentralised groups,
which dont act against anyone elses interests, and which
help each other out when needed. Great! But they would
apparently still use money.

that Brand is a pacifist, but that he glosses over violence by

thinking that if enough of us rise up, the state wont be able
to do anything about it. Aside from talking to the prominent
anarchist David Graeber, he doesnt seem to have thought
about this stuff seriously. So where he agrees with Graeber
that we should take-over the functions of the state and make
it redundant, he disagrees that we will need to defend the
revolution. In fact, he says he has no ill will towards the police
or army. Well thats OK for this white, male revolutionary, who
these days is rich and healthy too. In fact, when it comes to
political freedoms in general, he is a little vague and places
his faith in human nature and Love, as opposed to properly
thought-out social structures.
Also, although Brand talks of social recalibration, his is a
purely economic revolution, not one which would change
other aspects of our damaged society. For example and
Brand, who claims to be challenging his own sexism, should
take note - it would mean a believing stance towards rape
survivors, instead of towards Julian Assange, such as he
takes in Revolution.
So, genuinely angry at Capitalism as he is, Brand is not
qualified to be a spokesperson of the revolution. He will
be using the royalties from Revolution to set up a selfmanaged business for recovering addicts. But revolution
has to be made by people oppressed by class, race, gender,
sexuality, ability and lack of opportunity, all acting together.
We should use as little violence as possible, but we have
to defend the gains we make, which the people on the New
Era Estate can do with or without Russell Brand.

You cant have both equality and

money! The whole point of money is
to have more of it than someone else.
And no, we wouldnt all be trading
turnips for sheep in an anarchist
society. Wed give and receive freely.
So, although Brand has face-palmed
Marxs From each according to
(their) ability, to each according to
(their) need, he doesnt understand
what Marx meant. Money doesnt
enter into it.

Talking about a revolution

So how does he think this revolution
will happen? Unfortunately, Gandhi is
explicitly his model. It isnt so much

Paper of the Anarchist Federation

No. 158

Resistance General Election Special Edition

NEW
publication

Liked Resistance? Try Organise!

Basic Bakunin
This 2014 fully updated
4th edition of our first
ever pamphlet outlines
the ideas of one of the
19th century founders of
class struggle anarchism
whose birthday was 200
years ago - 1.50 +p&p.

Organise! is the Anarchist Federations theoretical

and historical magazine. It is published in order to
develop anarchist communist ideas. It aims to give
a clear anarchist viewpoint on contemporary issues,
and initiate debates on areas not normally covered in
agitational journals.
You can order or subscribe online www.afed.org.uk,
or get in touch with your local AF group for a copy.
Organise! Single issue (including postage and packing):
3.50 UK / 4.00 EU / 4.50 rest of the world
Annual subscription to Organise!:
6.00 UK / 7 EU / 8 rest of world

Are you interested in finding out more about anarchism?

The Anarchist Federation of Britain aims to link together campaigns
that empower working class people or that challenge capitalism and
irrational systems of power. We have groups throughout Britain so
contact us to find out about activities near you.

Email: [email protected]
Website: www.afed.org.uk
Post: BM ANARFED, London, WC1N 3XX

First published Spring 2015

Resistance