Back in the summer of 1997, the majority of activists in the Class War Federation, including me, produced what was intended to be the last issue of Class War. It was also to be the end of the Federation itself. The suicide note took the form of "An open letter to the revolutionary movement", published in issue 73 of the paper. Written "from the heart and not as some piece of lefty theory", it wasn't aimed solely at anarchists, but more generally at class struggle libertarians with a commitment to non-hierarchic organising. (I'll use the term 'anarchists' for the sake of simplicity, with apologies to those comrades who aren't). In a (sometimes harsh) critique of Class War's own failings, the article called on other revolutionaries - groups and individuals - to face up to their problems and to come together to find ways forwards. There was an emphasis on ditching sectarianism and general bitchiness, on questioning our roles as 'activists' in relation to the wider working class, and on taking a fresh look at what, why and how we do things.
"Basically", the article said, "the paper and the Federation have gone as far as they can in their present form, and it's time for something new ... What we are about is looking ahead to something bigger, better and altogether more unpleasant for the ruling classes." So what happened? Did we all kiss, make up and change the world?
Five years is a long time in politics. J18 was little more than an idea back then, Mayday hadn't been reclaimed, the term 'anti-capitalism' was virtually unheard of and 'summit hopping' wasn't on the agenda. Few of us had email, fewer still had a website. The Taliban was still funded by the west, and who the hell was Osama bin Laden? Capitalism and the 'New World Order' were in the ascendancy, and some people still had illusions about the New Labour project.
Bradford festivities
The major event resulting from Class War 73 was the Bradford Mayday conference and festivities of 1998. This at least brought together comrades from the main national anarchist groupings, smaller local groups, elements from the invigorating RTS and environmental scene, and a range of individuals. They came for three days of relaxed but challenging debate, discussion and fun too. But what happened next?
That's where it all gets a bit murkier. Although it created an atmosphere of respect, co-operation and collaboration (which, it should be emphasised, had always existed to an extent, particularly outside London), nothing concrete resulted from Bradford. The organisers didn't organise anything else together, and when it was all over they largely went their own ways, ceasing to exist as a group (or even as a network) and failing to fulfil what they'd hinted at in issue 73.
The remnants of the Class War Federation continued in much the same way as before, occasionally getting their names and faces into the mainstream media when the periodical anarchist hysteria kicked in. The other two national groups, Solidarity Federation and the Anarchist Federation, also continued much as before, promoting their organisations and their politics (though the three of them do now subscribe to a joint email discussion list). So was that it? Didn't anything happen at all?
Yes and no is the answer. The concept of mutual respect and working together did flourish, and it continues today despite the cynicism of those few who see a conspiracy every time someone else suggests anything positive, and despite the group 'chauvinism' or 'patriotism' of those who continue to believe that only they have the right answer. The move towards clearer class struggle and anti-capitalist politics by RTS, and even elements of the environmental movement such as Earth First!, which adopted an anti-capitalist position, can be linked to the sentiments expressed in Class War 73.
The Mayday 2000 festival in London was clearly inspired by Bradford, and a number of organisers figured in the arrangements for both events. More significantly, the organising collective for Mayday 2000 (and the conference itself) brought together perhaps the widest representation of the movement ever seen, from workerists to lifestylists, from fluffies to spikeys. But people who worked in that and subsequent Mayday collectives still suffer nightmares, the inevitable result of the enormous political and class chasm between participants and the inability of some to understand the responsibilities inherent in collective decision-making.
Perhaps it's a mistake to focus on concrete developments in terms of changing organisational structures, as those who hoped something 'bigger and better' would emerge from issue 73 will remain disappointed. After Bradford (and Mayday 2000 in London) no structure or strategy was set in motion and no new direction was agreed. Once again, a promising initiative linked to Class War went nowhere because it wasn't properly thought through from the start. But as issue 73 said, "at the moment we have more questions to ask than answers to give". In addition, if issue 73 had offered a blueprint for the future it would probably have been doomed from the start, seen just as Class War
Now the good news
On the brighter side, in July 1997 who'd have thought that, within four years, the likes of the IMF, World Bank and similar organs of international capitalism would be struggling to justify, not just their existence, but that of the system they were created to perpetuate ? capitalism itself (not that we can credit issue 73 with all that!).
We could see what's happened as a process that hasn't meandered anywhere final, its destination undefined (so far) beyond an understanding that the end means the end of capitalist social relations.
It's a process that's interlinked with the warts-and-all development of the wider anti-capitalist movement; with the contradictions and confusion going on within the RTS and environmental scenes; with the inability to resolve the thorny question of middle class involvement in (and funding of) anti-capitalist and anarchist politics, and the continued group chauvinism of some groups.
It's interlinked with the continuing failure of activists to escape from the ghetto and into the wider working class, from protest politics into real local alternatives; with the low level of political discussion and understanding among those who claim to be anarchists; the increased pace of environmental and economic crisis, and the increasingly mad and sad world we live in.
All these problems and more were articulated in Class War 73, and it's depressing that they remain unresolved five years later. Older readers, of course, may feel we've debated the same problems for much longer still. But there have been positives too. Anarchist ideas permeate far more widely than the anarchist movement itself does, usually with their origins unnoticed. Many networks and groups unknowingly but spontaneously adopt anarchist principles of non-hierarchical organisation. Innovative ideas and actions continue to spring forth whenever resistance occurs.
There's a growing understanding that different tactics suit different situations, that violence is just one of many options. New groups such as the Wombles try to find solutions to past and present problems. The growth of the Social Centres Network offers the prospect of permanent bases from which to integrate with local communities, as well as autonomously controlled and self-funded meeting places for the movement.
Bulletin boards and email discussion lists provide an opportunity to debate and discuss ideas, problems and actions (though there's a danger that contributing to these alone becomes a new form of activism and increases the isolation of the individual). Websites offer the chance to reach vast numbers of people cheaply and easily, spreading the word on upcoming events and offering in-depth analysis and provocative suggestions. For an example, visit www. temporary.org.uk, the site of the Temporary Anti-Capitalist Teams idea (TACT for short), with its excellent discussion of the state of the anti-capitalist movement.
But with international capitalism in severe crisis, we need to ask again the question posed by issue 73 - "if our ideas are so brilliant, why do we collectively amount to so little and have so little influence?" As capitalism turns once again to war in its time of crisis, the anarchist movement once again seems to be failing on many counts.
It's failing to articulate and disseminate a clear rejection of, and alternative to, capitalist war, national liberation (Palestine), Islamic ideology (Khilafah - the Islamic state) and popular fronts (the Stop the War Coalition). It's failing to counter the reformist moralism of the left, and to offer alternative structures of its own. It's failing to draw people together, and failing to open anarchist ideas and groups up to the wider class. (Perhaps the problem these days is that, whatever class they're from, 'activists' constitute a separate 'political' class, and as often as not alienate others from the ideas they try to represent). Anarchists fiddle, while capitalism bombs?
What's to be done? Can we seize the day? Can we give a little in order to gain a lot? Can we develop our mutual trust and solidarity and drop the bullshit, bitchiness and manipulation? Can we utilise and expand what resources we've already got? Can we truly put our politics into practice? The Anarchist Bookfair is as good a place to start as any.
M.H
[From 'Freedom' October 2002, published as The murky message of '97 ]
Class War - still going five years
on
In 1997, some members of the Class War Federation tried to wind the
organisation up. They intended issue 73 of Class War to be the last.
Not all members agreed with this in 1997 (the federation and paper
still exist in 2003). Here, Paul Marsh of London Class War gives an
altogether different account.