Are you an anarchist but not a member of an anarchist organisation?

[danny la rouge]

According to the definition of middle class you have essentially created there then yes. As I’ve tried to explain, you’ve applied the label on an incredibly wide basis. You think that spent our people off? You’re othering them! Rather than laughing, too, you might want to at least consider the outsider perspective. If you’re genuinely mystified why membership remains low, anyway.

Do you think you’re middle class?

 

[danny la rouge]

I suspect that people who find this difficult aren’t working class and are looking for reassurance that they’re nice people.

Here’s the definition the Glasgow ACG tweeted yesterday:

 

[kabbes]

Do you think you’re middle class?

Me personally? Very much so. I personally have no place in an organised anarchist group. I’m not just management, I’m executive. I also, for reasons explained earlier, have always been deeply uncomfortable with groups that cohere around labels. But I’m not talking about me, and it shouldn’t be me you’re interested in.

Since we are talking about me, though, here’s a data point for you.

Three things in your favour:

1) I already am well-read politically, and find myself well persuaded by Marx
2) I already believe that much of the anarchist political philosophy is well founded
3) I like you personally, find you erudite and thoughtful.

And yet the engagement we’ve had about your involvement with your own and other anarchist groups has made me want to stay as far away from it as possible.

If you can’t even attract somebody (in theory, at least) who already supports your cause and already thinks you personally are worthwhile then honestly what chance have you got with those who don’t have those preconditions?

Now, you can dismiss this. You probably will. You don’t want me anyway, after all. But there’s a point in there that is at least worth mulling on.

 

[Pickman's model]

According to the definition of middle class you have essentially created there then yes. As I’ve tried to explain, you’ve applied the label on an incredibly wide basis. You think that spent our people off? You’re othering them! Rather than laughing, too, you might want to at least consider the outsider perspective. If you’re genuinely mystified why membership remains low, anyway.

i remember dave morris talking to a comrade out of dam in the tottenham unwaged centre about 30 years ago telling him he'd join dam when they had 100,000 members. i was so naive then i thought it might be possible

 

[danny la rouge]

Me personally? Very much so. I personally have no place in an organised anarchist group. I’m not just management, I’m executive. I also, for reasons explained earlier, have always been deeply uncomfortable with groups that cohere around labels. But I’m not talking about me, and it shouldn’t be me you’re interested in.

Since we are talking about me, though, here’s a data point for you.

Three things in your favour:

1) I already am well-read politically, and find myself well persuaded by Marx
2) I already believe that much of the anarchist political philosophy is well founded
3) I like you personally, find you erudite and thoughtful.

And yet the engagement we’ve had about your involvement with your own and other anarchist groups has made me want to stay as far away from it as possible.

If you can’t even attract somebody (in theory, at least) who already supports your cause and already thinks you personally are worthwhile then honestly what chance have you got with those who don’t have those preconditions?

Now, you can dismiss this. You probably will. You don’t want me anyway, after all. But there’s a point in there that is at least worth mulling on.

I think - I may be wrong, and if so that’s my failing (of which there are many) - that I’ve already made caveats describing people in your position: good people with the right political impulses who are nonetheless best off staying out of revolutionary organisations.

 

[Pickman's model]

I think - I may be wrong, and if so that’s my failing (of which there are many) - that I’ve already made caveats describing people in your position: good people with the right political impulses who are nonetheless best off staying out of revolutionary organisations.

but who will be on the right side of the barricades

 

[danny la rouge]

but who will be on the right side of the barricades

Correct.

 

[8ball]

I suspect that people who find this difficult aren’t working class and are looking for reassurance that they’re nice people.

Here’s the definition the Glasgow ACG tweeted yesterday:

Yeah, we'll see how well that definition flies when someone turns up with a homemade sourdough foccacia.

 

[Flavour]

Yeah, we'll see how well that definition flies when someone turns up with a homemade sourdough foccacia.

are working class people not allowed to make sourdough focaccia at home? (the double c is the second one, not the first)

 

[8ball]

are working class people not allowed to make sourdough focaccia at home? (the double c is the second one, not the first)

Straight into my spelling trap!

<writes in little book>

 

[danny la rouge]

Yeah, we'll see how well that definition flies when someone turns up with a homemade sourdough foccacia.

That’s the cultural identity thing that always happens on these threads.

Cards on the table: I like avocados on sourdough toast, balsamic vinegar, classical music, jazz, I grind coffee beans to make stovetop espresso, and I read literary fiction. I listen to BBC radio 3 on occasion, if I listen to the radio at all. I like Schubert’s leider, and Hayden’s string quartets. And I like foreign films.

I work as a classroom assistant in an FE college on a zero hours contract, earning far less than the average wage. I have no private pension. I do have an ISA but it wouldn’t last me very long if I tried to live on it. My mortgage is paid off. I live in a flat in Glasgow G20.

I am working class by a communist definition. The media would want me to identify as middle class. But that’s bollocks.

 

[Serge Forward]

Yep, it reminds me of the old "we need more working class members of parliament" nonsense. I seem to remember John Prescott being portrayed as working class, even though he was in the fucking government and was part of the ruling class... yeah, but accent, and he could swing a punch

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

Yep, it reminds me of the old "we need more working class members of parliament" nonsense. I seem to remember John Prescott being portrayed as working class, even though he was in the fucking government and was part of the ruling class... yeah, but accent, and he could swing a punch

And he was quite a mover on the dance floor.

 

[8ball]

That’s the cultural identity thing that always happens on these threads.

Cards on the table: I like avocados on sourdough toast, balsamic vinegar, classical music, jazz, I grind coffee beans to make stovetop espresso, and I read literary fiction. I listen to BBC radio 3 on occasion, if I listen to the radio at all. I like Schubert’s leider, and Hayden’s string quartets. And I like foreign films.

I work as a classroom assistant in an FE college on a zero hours contract, earning far less than the average wage. I have no private pension. I do have an ISA but it wouldn’t last me very long if I tried to live on it. My mortgage is paid off. I live in a flat in Glasgow G20.

I am working class by a communist definition. The media would want me to identify as middle class. But that’s bollocks.

 

[Shechemite]

Does the ACG allow doctors to be members?

 

[platinumsage]

The only anarchist organisation I have been a member of is my local Indymedia collective. Well, I wasn’t formally a member but I‘m not sure if anyone was. I went to meetings and held the talking stick sometimes. I’m pretty sure it was an anarchist organisation, because we did local actions and participated in national actions - the media/reporting bit was more of a sideline, especially as there was no evidence anyone read our articles apart from ourselves.

I am not currently a member of an anarchist organisation because I’m pretty sure I’m not currently an anarchist.

 

[Serge Forward]

Does the ACG allow doctors to be members?

If they're a doctor who isn't in one of these categories

• those who have the power to restrain or imprison in detention centres of all varieties
• full-time paid trade union officials
• members of political parties
• strike breakers
• those who have ultimate power to hire and fire or those whose primary role in the workplace is to hire and fire
• those who have the ultimate power to remove benefits
• those who make a living out of the exploitation of others

Then why not? Though I suspect many quacks may well fall into at least one of those.

 

[8ball]

The only anarchist organisation I have been a member of is my local Indymedia collective. Well, I wasn’t formally a member but I‘m not sure if anyone was. I went to meetings and held the talking stick sometimes. I’m pretty sure it was an anarchist organisation, because we did local actions and participated in national actions - the media/reporting bit was more of a sideline, especially as there was no evidence anyone read our articles apart from ourselves.

I am not currently a member of an anarchist organisation because I’m pretty sure I’m not currently an anarchist.

You had a talking stick?

 

[Serge Forward]

Surely not one of these

 

[platinumsage]

You had a talking stick?

Yes! It was introduced solely due to one supposedly disruptive member, about whom more discussions were had than about any external issue.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yes! It was introduced solely due to one supposedly disruptive member, about whom more discussions were had than about any external issue.

you, no doubt

 

[8ball]

If they're a doctor who isn't in one of these categories

• those who have the power to restrain or imprison in detention centres of all varieties
• full-time paid trade union officials
• members of political parties
• strike breakers
• those who have ultimate power to hire and fire or those whose primary role in the workplace is to hire and fire
• those who have the ultimate power to remove benefits
• those who make a living out of the exploitation of others

Then why not? Though I suspect many quacks may well fall into at least one of those.

That last one seems a little tricky and possibly vague.

 

[danny la rouge]

View attachment 296447

 

[Magnus McGinty]

What are the subs for the ACG? Fairly sure I was put off joining the AF as based on what I earn it started looking pretty eye watering. I agree with the principle that those who earn more should pay more. I am a high earner. I pay slightly over £20 a month to the RMT but was looking at a much greater sum for the AF iirc.

 

[LDC]

If they're a doctor who isn't in one of these categories

• those who have the power to restrain or imprison in detention centres of all varieties
• full-time paid trade union officials
• members of political parties
• strike breakers
• those who have ultimate power to hire and fire or those whose primary role in the workplace is to hire and fire
• those who have the ultimate power to remove benefits
• those who make a living out of the exploitation of others

Then why not? Though I suspect many quacks may well fall into at least one of those.

I suspect he's hinting that as some (very few) doctors can detain people under a mental health section they fall into the first category.

It's not a good argument imo, very few can or ever do it, it's done as a last resort, and for the good and also usually the safety of the patient and sometimes others. They're also hospitals not detention centres.

 

[Serge Forward]

What are the subs for the ACG? Fairly sure I was put off joining the AF as based on what I earn it started looking pretty eye watering. I agree with the principle that those who earn more should pay more. I am a high earner. I pay slightly over £20 a month to the RMT but was looking at a much greater sum for the AF iirc.

Sliding scale starting from a quid a month to "loadsa monay!!!" for those who are more flush (but if push comes to shove, what you can reasonably afford).

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Sliding scale starting from a quid a month to "loadsa monay!!!" for those who are more flush (but if push comes to shove, what you can reasonably afford).

So like an honesty box or do I hand you my last 3 months bank statements and I’m basically paying you what I pay in child maintenance (which is an astonishing sum, I’m basically paying off her house whilst I live in a room lol, but then I’m lucky to be in that position I guess)
Makes me think of my mate’s parents who are Mormon and give a percentage of their income to the church. Easier for them I suppose as they aren’t drinking themselves to death (fun is forbidden! Lol)

 

[danny la rouge]

So like an honesty box

Yes, but you’re required to hold the treasurer’s gaze each time you pay your subs.

 

[Pickman's model]

What are the subs for the ACG? Fairly sure I was put off joining the AF as based on what I earn it started looking pretty eye watering. I agree with the principle that those who earn more should pay more. I am a high earner. I pay slightly over £20 a month to the RMT but was looking at a much greater sum for the AF iirc.

You pay for quality tho

 

[Serge Forward]

So like an honesty box or do I hand you my last 3 months bank statements and I’m basically paying you what I pay in child maintenance (which is an astonishing sum, I’m basically paying off her house whilst I live in a room lol, but then I’m lucky to be in that position I guess)
Makes me think of my mate’s parents who are Mormon and give a percentage of their income to the church. Easier for them I suppose as they aren’t drinking themselves to death (fun is forbidden! Lol)

We need to see the last three payslips and bank statements and a note from your employer...

Nahhhh... it's like an honesty box. Like I say, you see what banding you're in, see how it fits in with your own real circumstances, then you pay what you can really afford.