the all new 2005 who's taking a trip to holloway thread

[The Black Hand]

Q for attica: if half a dozen crusties walked into a Crook working men's club with their own music, set it off... leading to the bar being shut down... and then fucked off before the filth arrived to said working men's club, leaving the occupants to cop the flak from the bill, would you still say this is acceptable*?

*coz i note that you've concentrated on the flashpoint with the bill, but left any discussion of the rights or wrongs of what led up to it

But that's the point, they wouldn't go into Crook working mens club, it would just be too scary for them. If they wanted to try, the locals are very well known for fighting so either getting rid of a few crusties or a ruck with the old bill wouldn't matter that much - certainly it would not cause them the angst it has caused the anarchist movement... And btw, Crook working mens is known locally by experienced politicos as a relatively 'right wing' working class establishment because it wouldn't allow left political meetings let alone anarchist ones FInally the repressive function and history of the police does not disappear even if they were acting against 'anti socials' in the first instance, they managed to treat ordinary people like shit down holloway road, swearing at them, agressive and violent as they were to non crusties...

 

[rednblack]

 

[catch]

*coz i note that you've concentrated on the flashpoint with the bill, but left any discussion of the rights or wrongs of what led up to it

need your eyes testing or something Attica?

 

[montevideo]

its funny that you start from the position of blaming the people that wont turn up to these things... "self excluding" etc. etc. ie. its the fault of the non-attenders that they wont engage in the process. Rather than begining with the process and considering what can the initiative do to encourage & enable the maximum no. of people to attend? What issues, problems, concerns might disbar them? etc.

Look back over the thread and you'll see several people who've expressed exasperation at the bickering thats going on and have suggested it's informing their impression of @ists or at least the london ones. How many more lurkers in P&P think the same but dont dare post for fear of being flamed??? Will we ever know?

Its a similar baseline to the perennial hand-wringing that goes on in meetings about why there arent more women involved in our scene... led of course by confident, assertive, (and/or else predatory) agenda-mad men, talking about the question in the abstract... in a pub.

Yeah... i cant think why there arent more women involved in our scene

I don't think i am blaming people who don't turn up. I am saying that turning up is a starting point from which things can develop from. Sitting on the sidelines simply decrying the lack of 'a movement' (or more pointedly 'a movement' that's isn't doing anarchism properly) has no possibility of evolving beyond its own self-exclusion. Maybe you attach the same significance to the trivial & often banal banter exchanged on a message board (me included) with hands on political activity (whatever that activity may be)?

Be surprised if any genuine people were put of by my presense to be honest. Maybe you're talking about a different message board.

Probably wouldn't surprise you to know that the soundsystem debacle at the wetherspoons was initiated by women.

 

[Chuck Wilson]

I don't think i am blaming people who don't turn up. I am saying that turning up is a starting point from which things can develop from. Sitting on the sidelines simply decrying the lack of 'a movement' (or more pointedly 'a movement' that's isn't doing anarchism properly) has no possibility of evolving beyond its own self-exclusion. Maybe you attach the same significance to the trivial & often banal banter exchanged on a message board (me included) with hands on political activity (whatever that activity may be)?

Be surprised if any genuine people were put of by my presense to be honest. Maybe you're talking about a different message board.

Probably wouldn't surprise you to know that the soundsystem debacle at the wetherspoons was initiated by women.

Did Herbie get any pictures of them? Apart from the ones on Inymedia I haven't seen any more.

 

[Top Dog]

I don't think i am blaming people who don't turn up. I am saying that turning up is a starting point from which things can develop from. Sitting on the sidelines simply decrying the lack of 'a movement' (or more pointedly 'a movement' that's isn't doing anarchism properly) has no possibility of evolving beyond its own self-exclusion. Maybe you attach the same significance to the trivial & often banal banter exchanged on a message board (me included) with hands on political activity (whatever that activity may be)?

that isnt my point tho. What im saying is who you get (or rather dont get) attending these events may be dependent on what they believe they can expect to find if they come along to a real life meeting. If they expect bickering, fighting, personality cliques, in-jokes etc. then that is going to put off a lot of people. You dismiss the effect that bulletin boards can have on people's perceptions of the 'movement' too easily i think. It might not mean much to those that know you personally, are confident enough in their own views/abilities, or are not put off by some of the nastiness that comes up here time and again. But that might be different if youre 18, new to politics and dont know anyone else that feels like you...

We could all do with a bit more consideration of and empathy with these things sometimes

So my point is that to blame non-attendance simply on personalites (or politics) rather than accept that there might a problem with the process is to remain wilfully ignorant.

... stringing out the analogy with women and politics further... its like finding the conclusion that the reason many women avoid meetings or getting involved generally in stuff is because they're not interested in politics

Probably wouldn't surprise you to know that the soundsystem debacle at the wetherspoons was initiated by women.

whats that got to do with anything?

 

[rednblack]

Probably wouldn't surprise you to know that the soundsystem debacle at the wetherspoons was initiated by women.

????!!!! bovvad, am i bovad?

 

[sovietpop]

that isnt my point tho. What im saying is who you get (or rather dont get) attending these events may be dependent on what they believe they can expect to find if they come along to a real life meeting. If they expect bickering, fighting, personality cliques, in-jokes etc. then that is going to put off a lot of people. You dismiss the effect that bulletin boards can have on people's perceptions of the 'movement' too easily i think. It might not mean much to those that know you personally, are confident enough in their own views/abilities, or are not put off by some of the nastiness that comes up here time and again. But that might be different if youre 18, new to politics and dont know anyone else that feels like you...

I totally agree and think these are important points. And you don't have to be new to politics to be put off by bulletin board banter, I rarely post on Libcom because I find the atmosphere of it totally off putting. People should remember that for every poster, there are dozens (hundreds?) of lurkers. I find it amazing that people aren't aware of how "public" the internet is.


I think Monty mentioned that it was women that started out the soundsytem muppetry because there was an implication in your earlier post that women weren't into that sort of action (you wrote something about women not being attracted to discussions in pubs ), so he was pointing out a counter case which indicates that your assumption is incorrect.

 

[Top Dog]

And you don't have to be new to politics to be put off by bulletin board banter,

absolutely

I think Monty mentioned that it was women that started out the soundsytem muppetry because there was an implication in your earlier post that women weren't into that sort of action (you wrote something about women not being attracted to discussions in pubs ), so he was pointing out a counter case which indicates that your assumption is incorrect.

my point wasnt so much about the bookfair stuff, more about giving consideration to things that exclude people attending meetings ... for eg. where there are childcare issues (that was my point about pubs) or for those (unfortunates ) that dont drink alcohol, dont like rowdy pub atmospheres etc. etc.

 

[rednblack]

I rarely post on Libcom because I find the atmosphere of it totally off putting. People should remember that for every poster, there are dozens (hundreds?) of lurkers. I find it amazing that people aren't aware of how "public" the internet is.

it's also interesting to think that is down to just two individuals as well in most cases

 

[sovietpop]

. for eg. where there are childcare issues (that was my point about pubs) or for those (unfortunates ) that dont drink alcohol, dont like rowdy pub atmospheres etc. etc.

grand. accepted. but it's not childcare issues that is preventing women from being involved in left wing politics (or rather not alone, I mean they only become issues when women have children, if it was only childcare, you'd expect lots of young women in the movement, gradually dropping out as they had kids).

I suspect the reasons are bigger than the anarchist movement, more to do with womens accepted role in society and the gendered division of space (male public/political space vs female personal/private space). but I really don't know. I don't even know how you'd go about finding out the answer....

 

[Top Dog]

I suspect the reasons are bigger than the anarchist movement, more to do with womens accepted role in society and the gendered division of space (male public/political space vs female personal/private space). but I really don't know. I don't even know how you'd go about finding out the answer....

me either! But i think awareness of some barriers that can and do prevent people that would like to be involved is a good first step

The one about children/families is one i think that applies to both sexes actually as it is still predomiantly a movement dominated by young people (yet another question!). But yeah... i deliberately didnt pose the alternative perennial question of "why are there so few black people/minorities in the @ movement" precisely because of your point that

the reasons are bigger than the anarchist movement

 

[Top Dog]

... FInally the repressive function and history of the police does not disappear even if they were acting against 'anti socials' in the first instance, they managed to treat ordinary people like shit down holloway road, swearing at them, agressive and violent as they were to non crusties...

catch and I are still waiting for an answer

 

[montevideo]

that isnt my point tho. What im saying is who you get (or rather dont get) attending these events may be dependent on what they believe they can expect to find if they come along to a real life meeting. If they expect bickering, fighting, personality cliques, in-jokes etc. then that is going to put off a lot of people. You dismiss the effect that bulletin boards can have on people's perceptions of the 'movement' too easily i think. It might not mean much to those that know you personally, are confident enough in their own views/abilities, or are not put off by some of the nastiness that comes up here time and again. But that might be different if youre 18, new to politics and dont know anyone else that feels like you...

We could all do with a bit more consideration of and empathy with these things sometimes

So my point is that to blame non-attendance simply on personalites (or politics) rather than accept that there might a problem with the process is to remain wilfully ignorant.

... stringing out the analogy with women and politics further... its like finding the conclusion that the reason many women avoid meetings or getting involved generally in stuff is because they're not interested in politics

whats that got to do with anything?

but surely 'the movement' would be judged on what it did rather than a few individuals trading insults across the superhighway. And this largely is the problem i have with the anti-socials - their refusal to participate in anything at all on any level.

What i heard 80 or so people turned up at the assembly. I'm not arguing numbers though. Or non-attendance. I'm arguing the process of coming together as a starting point. People who choose to come together do so because they think they have something to contribute, those who exclude themselves do so because they have nothing to contribute. I wouldn't disagree with either of those positions.

If you are 18 & read a flyer about the anarchist assembly handed out at the bookfair that read -

"this is not a debate about who lays claim to the best variety of 'anarchism', we feel 'the anarchist movement' has matured enough to recognise all genuine expresions of anarchist intent as valid and, if passionately held, as vital and necessary. No this assembly is an attempt to bring people together through what we choose to agree on, how we choose to work together, how we articuklate our desires, build on our similarities...
We invite all those who consider anarchism an idea worth fighting for and an activity worth defending"

would you be put off? In fact you can't get a more inclusive, open, concilatory invitation than that? So i honestly don't know what you're trying to say here.

And as you well know i'm an absolute pussycat in real life.

 

[Top Dog]

If you are 18 & read a flyer about the anarchist assembly handed out at the bookfair that read...

would you be put off? In fact you can't get a more inclusive, open, concilatory invitation than that? So i honestly don't know what you're trying to say here.

You dismiss the effect that bulletin boards can have on people's perceptions of the 'movement' too easily i think. It might not mean much to those that know you personally, are confident enough in their own views/abilities, or are not put off by some of the nastiness that comes up here time and again. But that might be different if youre 18, new to politics and dont know anyone else that feels like you...

so im not suggesting that the @ist assembly (meeting & flyer text) was anything other than a genuine attempt to do what it says... but the first step isnt to put a flyer into the hands of an already present audience... it is to get people through the doors to the bookfair in the first place. And if your impressions of @ists/@ism have been influenced by following things from a distance... lurking here for instance reading u75 exchanges... then you might be disinclined to go along if you thought it was gonna be a public slanging match

 

[blamblam]

but surely 'the movement' would be judged on what it did rather than a few individuals trading insults across the superhighway. And this largely is the problem i have with the anti-socials - their refusal to participate in anything at all on any level.

[For people who don't realise, the "anti-socials" comment is directed at me, other libcom people, etc.]

That's just the thing though - I'll participate (as will other people in libcom/social anarchists) in things that affect me, things I give a shit about, things that affect my life - at work, for example.

Participating in alienated subcultural politico spectacles with people like you, and others who inhabit the politico subscene - miscellaneous liars, backstabbers, anti-social muppets, fantasists, nutcases etc.* - doesn't interest me in the slightest. Nor does it most people. And why the hell would it?



* NB there are of course a lot of great human beings in the politico subculture, but you can still see them without having to "participate" in pointless activistoid stuff.

 

[Pickman's model]

from today's islington tribune (which had to be typed in as it's not published on the net, i think):

Officers accused of over reaction as riot police clear drinkers from pub
ACTIVISTS CLASS WITH POLICE IN BATTLE OF THE GHETTO BLASTER
by Roisin Gadelrab

MISSILES were thrown at police when anarchists were ejected from a Holloway pub for playing a ghetto-blaster on Saturday.

Traffic in busy Holloway Road was halted as trouble erupted after the anarchists attending a book fair at the London Voluntary Resource Centre were asked to leave the nearby Coronet pub. Several arrests were made and two police officers were injured.

Pub regulars and Arsenal supporters found themselves caught up in the confrontation when more than 100 drinkers were pushed onto the street after managers decided to shut the Wetherspoon-owned pub.

They had repeatedly asked customers to adhere to the pub's strict no-music policy.

Holloway Road was blocked for some time as police attempted to control the situation.

Some customers have since criticised police for what they say was a "disproportionate" response to an incident which they say had already been resolved.

Pat Cassidy, a member of left-wing activist movement Class War, said: "The police turned up tooled up. At least one arrested man was trussed up and hooded, like the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay

"The calm situation became highly charged when riot police appeared at the scene.

"They then cleared the area, forcing people up the road with scant concern for who they shoved.

"In fact, they vied with each other to see who could push people the hardest up Holloway Road."

He added: "There's never been anything like this before at the book fair, which has been going on for 20 years."

Green Party worker Jon Nott witnessed the trouble when he went for a drink after canvassing residents.

He said: "Some people who didn't like the pub's no-music policy had got their ghetto-blaster out.

"They were being a bit irritating but they weren't being violent."

Mr Nott added: "What started off with a minor dispute ended up with a stand-off in Holloway Road. The police probably overreacted. They came in with riot shields and started hemming people in and when you have a large crowd it escalates."

A police spokeswoman confirmed several people were arrested for public order offences.

She said: "Police attempted to eject the crowd, believed to be approximately 100 people. As the crowd spilled outside the pub a number of missiles were thrown at police and it is believed two officers received minor injuries.

"Holloway Road southbound was blocked for a time during the incident."

 

[Paul Marsh]

Bump, Bang and Baloney!

And from the Class War newswire:

http://londonclasswar.org/newswire_londonanarchistbookfair.htm

 

[sihhi]

And from the Class War newswire:

http://londonclasswar.org/newswire_londonanarchistbookfair.htm

That's well summed up.

The 2005 bookfair will perhaps be best remembered for the “bookfair riot” a small disturbance that occurred on Holloway Road as the bookfair ended, but has already been hyped beyond all proportion

Hyped by police and to quote icepick "anti-social muppets" alike.

 

[sovietpop]

it's also interesting to think that is down to just two individuals as well in most cases

Ach I know. If I was involved in the Libcom project I'd be pretty pissed off with them but instead it seems that they are allowed to set the tone of the board.

[edit to add: this is quite an old document (and probably needs editing), but perhaps is relevant; it outlines how WSM thinks it should relate to other left groups.

wsm policy paper ]

 

[blamblam]

Ach I know. If I was involved in the Libcom project I'd be pretty pissed off with them but instead it seems that they are allowed to set the tone of the board.

There's not that much mods can do - we get accused of authoritarianism all the time as it is - even down to one of montevideo's Womrades trying to trash our jointly-held meeting at the bookfair (which was well shite anyway) with it . The only way to change the forum culture I think is sheer force of numbers of people who'll act differently (more polite, or what have you).

 

[sovietpop]

The only way to change the forum culture I think is sheer force of numbers of people who'll act differently (more polite, or what have you).

But the way it is at the moment, who is going to bother? Who is going to put up with the abuse?

You could have a statement of what you believe is acceptable practise and what isn't, and delete comments which contravene your statement. That's what indymedia Ireland do. Yes those you delete will call you authoriatarian but the rest of us wil be delighted (and those you delete may learn to alter their behaviour).

edited to add: these are the Indymedia Ireland editoral guidelines guidelines
You could definitely do with number four.

4: Libelous or slanderous posts. Choose your language carefully. Do not make allegations against named individuals unless you can substantiate them. Posts which contain personal abuse against named individuals, rather than against their arguments or their political affiliation, will be removed without delay, particularly if those individuals are not public figures. 'Play the ball, not the player'.

 

[blamblam]

But the way it is at the moment, who is going to bother? Who is going to put up with the abuse?

People who get something out of posting there. It's only a web forum. I'd say politically it's almost entirely useless, so not worth much angst or bother really.

 

[catch]

There's not that much mods can do - we get accused of authoritarianism all the time as it is - even down to one of montevideo's Womrades trying to trash our jointly-held meeting at the bookfair (which was well shite anyway) with it . The only way to change the forum culture I think is sheer force of numbers of people who'll act differently (more polite, or what have you).

I'd also say there's less flaming on libcom than there is on here, or at least the politics forums on here. The difference with urban is there's loads of fluffier forums which balance it all out, and simply much more traffic so it's easier to avoid threads which have gone into pages of fighting. the forum culture on libcom is improving as well, slowly, but it's improving.

 

[Random]

People who get something out of posting there. It's only a web forum. I'd say politically it's almost entirely useless, so not worth much angst or bother really.

Over on libcom several people have described writing for libcom as important political work; I'm sure you don't need me to name names. Face it -- you put loads of time and effor into libcom, as do a few other people. because of that you have the right to run it as you like, but don't try to have it both ways by saying 'its only a website', as though that excuses all kinds of anti-social behaviour.

LimCom's got much better, however. In fact, recently it's been out-performing U75 for days on end, politics-wise. Often I'll not post something on urban because I know it'll get trashed by liberals or sleazers, but if on libcom it'll get a reasonably political response.

 

[sovietpop]

thats good to hear, maybe I gave up on it too soon.

 

[blamblam]

Over on libcom several people have described writing for libcom as important political work; I'm sure you don't need me to name names. Face it -- you put loads of time and effor into libcom, as do a few other people. because of that you have the right to run it as you like, but don't try to have it both ways by saying 'its only a website', as though that excuses all kinds of anti-social behaviour.

LimCom's got much better, however. In fact, recently it's been out-performing U75 for days on end, politics-wise. Often I'll not post something on urban because I know it'll get trashed by liberals or sleazers, but if on libcom it'll get a reasonably political response.

Nah I agree even the forums have got a lot better (there are too many posts for even me to read them all now for one, and some ace new posters) - I wasn't talking about the site as a whole which I think could be really ace, I meant the forums in particular, which are IMO the least important of the sections. Okay maybe more important than the listings.

 

[catch]

Over on libcom several people have described writing for libcom as important political work; I'm sure you don't need me to name names. Face it -- you put loads of time and effor into libcom, as do a few other people. because of that you have the right to run it as you like, but don't try to have it both ways by saying 'its only a website', as though that excuses all kinds of anti-social behaviour.

I think John's trying to say the forums aren't as important politically as the rest of the site. I'd disagree that they're "almost useless" - they're good for thrashing ideas out and meeting people with similar politics you otherwise might not.

LimCom's got much better, however. In fact, recently it's been out-performing U75 for days on end, politics-wise. Often I'll not post something on urban because I know it'll get trashed by liberals or sleazers, but if on libcom it'll get a reasonably political response.

<3

 

[rednblack]

thats good to hear, maybe I gave up on it too soon.

i think maybe you did, the tide is turning as random and catch have said, it has improved drastically imo. i also think icepick is wrong to say it is not politically important - it clearly is - otherwise the libcomers wouldnt put so much effort into it, i certainly think it's important it really has the potential to promote a constructive, class struggle agenda

also i don't think most of us would have a problem over strenghening the moderation culture - i reckon you should crack down on flaming outside the general forum tbh

i do think it's improved massively and i do look to libcom more and more

 

[gurrier]

There's not that much mods can do - we get accused of authoritarianism all the time as it is - even down to one of montevideo's Womrades trying to trash our jointly-held meeting at the bookfair (which was well shite anyway) with it . The only way to change the forum culture I think is sheer force of numbers of people who'll act differently (more polite, or what have you).

I disagree a lot. The internet is replete with trolls. You deal with them by stopping them or they dominate. 1 troll can post the word 'cock' a million times a day, whereas it takes a lot of time and effort to write something thoughtful. If the 'cock' to 'thoughtful' ration is too high, that will be the preception of the board and people who are constructive and serious won't bother.

The indymedia experience of 'free speech' provides a wealth of evidence that you can not rely on the weight of numbers to deal with disruption. Every indymedia site that adopted a free speech policy (by allowing contentless abuse, racist posts, etc) collapsed quickly. There are loads of other examples out there, from usenet, to slashdot and wikipedia which all lead to the same conclusion.

To be honest, I think the lack of willingness to tackle this problem - leaving it up to 'weight of numbers', ie somebody else's problem - is a misapplication of anarchist ideas of freedom. Those who put work into the project have a right to set the basic rules of association and everybody else then has the choice of whether to freely associate within that project. Leaving it up to the punters on the internet, means that you effectively give a much greater say to immature people who don't give a shit about the project but who have too much time on their hands and are amused by being disruptive - or trolls, to put it succinctly.

My biggest problem with libcom is that, to the casual observer, it makes anarchists look like a bunch of teenage h4x0Rz - fuk de RuLeZ types, despite the fact that I know that the vast majority of people who post there are nothing like that and respect them and am interested in what they have to say. For example, I would not consider directing my mother or my next door neighbour there as a place where she might acquaint herself with modern anarchism. I think this highlights a certain lack of ambition on the part of anarchists, a certain comfort with existing as a sub-culture. It's fine if you are familiar with the scene, and know that people are taking the piss in the style of the sub-culture. But the internet is as public as you can get and there is a vast audience who are looking at all the 'cocks' and many inevitably come to the conclusion that anarchism isn't serious, just another funny sub-culture. This frustrates me a lot as I think anarchism is an extremely serious movement and that we have arguments that can appeal to an enormous audience as long as we take ourselves and our politics seriously.

I understand that there is a strong liberal individualist strand to modern anarchism which doesn't hold ideas like discipline or collective responsibility in high esteem. Rather old-fashionedly I think that, in public, people who call themselves anarchists have a duty to act as ambassadors of anarchism and this extends to the internet. In fairness, there are a fair number of posters who do this admirably on this and other boards, but I don't think that the libcom collective have taken nearly enough steps to try to ensure that the board as a whole serves this function, rather than being a place where anarchists can form a comfortable and exclusionary sub-culture.

edited to add: I'm talking about the boards, rather than the overall site, which is a much better thing altogether