Visit Sedgemoor Union for all your aural needs...
This is a very long article, you might want to go away and come back to it (if you're interested enough!) It is the (edited!) text of an e-mail argument US had with a self-confessed anarchist and supporter of the recent 'Vote Nobody' campaign. You pick it up 3/4 of the way through, after my anarchist friend has suggested that Bristol/Easton become an autonomous zone like Chiapas in Mexico...
US: You have a low opinion of human beings.
A: Not of human beings but in the small amount of people who, for the last 2 centuries have been making sure that the western countries were run in their pecuniary interests.
If I had a low opinion of human beings, I would have stayed where I was living without any need from this society, seeing people for no other reason than socialising and partying, as I was able to sustain myself. I then was able to avoid all the human beings I would have liked if I had a low opinion of them.
What MP's mandated by the French people, for instance, in 1789 refused from the rich has been taken over 3 years afterward.
I can't remember the name of the guy, big tissue merchant in Troyes (Champagne area) who wrote then about how people should think to make choice for themselves (by voting for instance) while they were making choices in the interests of the businessmen. He also started a newspaper! I may remind you that, though it was engaged in Great Britain, the industrial revolution was still far from being in France but the system was already there to make sure the workers, then peasants would stilleed the greed of a few! The system is still there and the people jumped from the nobles (Francs oppression) to the bourgeois (Gallic descendant wishing to take their power back as shown in Molière 16th Century masterpiece: le Bourgeois Gentilhomme).
I live IN the system and I want to change it but I can't but as you say: I can make a little difference.
I don't believe the system is 'designed' for exploitation. I think there are worthy elements within it,
It is designed for exploitation, that's part of the history. It doesn't mean there are not worthy elements in it. I'm not voting for MP's. It doesn't mean I don't ask them to do their duties (making sure that the government governs according to people wishes if this is a democracy).
To tell the truth, the contradictions in this are as obvious as the contradictions in anarchism itself. You want to be able to ask them to do their duty, but you don't want to vote. You want democracy, but you won't take part (unless you get to slag someone else off). And that's it isn't it; you're only AGAINST everything, never FOR anything. A group of anarchists given their own country to look after wouldn't have a clue where to start. Everyone would suggest something, nobody would do it, and then you'd all fight amongst each other about who was more of an oppressor. How can a govt. 'govern according to your democratic wishes' if you don't vote? The point is you DONT WANT them to succeed, you NEED them to fuck up (and I agree, that is inevitable in the current climate) so that you can slag them off. One minute you're a part of it, the next you're nothing to do with it. All the time, surrounded by the trappings of western capitalist luxury ...We currently live in a representative democracy, it isn't as good as Direct democracy, but it's nearly there.
Everything I can think of which makes it nearer to a democracy hasn't been obtained by vote neither by the representant but by people forcing their representant, their bosses or their leaders. And a lot is lost: trade-union are not so active though the working conditions are worse than 30 years ago. As you said in a previous message, it is just the same things with another word... but "representative democracy" means that you give a piece of cake and pretend it is still yours apart that the cake is the power to act in your everyday life.
What's your plan for changing the country you eventually settle in to a direct democracy?
My plan is to act directly in agreement with the people I do things with as I do for 14 years, it is not a plan to change the country (which country by the way?).
My plan is to get involved with a party that supports my aims.
No problem with that. I probably do things with member of your party without any problem for me, neither for quite a lot of my mates (even if, sometimes, we feel the weight of the parties when we work with them)
Remaining vigilant for things I don't like, and asking for a referendum whenever I think the issue is important enough.
Who is choosing the question to be asked? When you have to choose between nationalism and a monetarian Europe, how can you say that you want humanitarian internationalism?
Don't you think that elections are a referendum about "Do you want Blair again or not ?" / "Blair (yes) or Hague (no)"
Our representatives will be merely administrators who run the day-to-day tax collection etc.
When this happens or happened without representative in so called 3rd world countries and is destroyed by so called "our representative"... I'm not sure you know about voting decisions (it is definitely not a Referendum) neither if you experimented it in a certain scale (like 1000+ people).
The point is that the current representatives cannot move the country in that direction if nobody turns up to vote, or if they all treat it as a joke.
Have you seen any difference when 80% of the voters were turning (that was just 3 or 4 elections ago!)? Apparently, they were nearly as many people turning for the "joke" than turning and vote for the last person elected in Easton ward for BCC. Isn't the real election a joke then?
Why have a referendum on the EU if only 50% of the country will vote, and 5% of those 'spoil' their ballots.
Why have such a referendum when the question will be asked in order to have the answer chosen by the party asking it? (I already did it, sorry!)
The reason I said you have no faith in humanity, is that you don't seem to believe that any group of people can organise something good (even if it is a political party)
Well, you're wrong: I don't believe it can be for the benefit of all if that group is hierarchical. Political parties trying to get elected for a hierarchical system (remember: system designed to oppress!), I believe they won't be able to organise things for the benefit of all once they are elected even if they wish to.
I've been part of co-op with more than 1000 people. Everyone deciding the contracts the co-op would sign, the conditions of work, everyone's salary, if we needed to employ more people... No one needed to be a manager or a representative inside the company. We had for each customer or provider a spokesman so that the people in touch with us were not lost with 1000+ managers... that is supposed to benefit everyone.
If you accept that you and the people you interact with daily are all good people, why couldn't you get a popular person to stand for Bristol?
Why a person should be popular to stand?
promising that he/she will always consult the public in decisions,
Most of the candidates always do (see BCC!) promise and never consult or consult for their purposes (see Council Tax consultation).
They could organise community meetings and voting sessions,
WE already organise plenty of community meetings in the Easton area but what the people are deciding in these meetings is overruled by the city council or other groups (see LIDL in Eastville though one is already @ Lawrence Hill + 2 TESCO -eastgate and church rd + market + sweet mart/raja... : the conclusion was that the main interest was to support the sale of cheap alcohol...)
so that people can make decisions, then the person could REPRESENT our wishes to parliament. How do roads get fixed in an autonomous zone?
Are they getting fixed in England. When GB is known everywhere in Europe to be a country where they always want to build more road but are not able to fix the ones already done. In St Pauls, very few were actually happy that council and government decided to fix a road between city center and M4 (as half of the neighbourhood had to move out !
Who pays the teachers in an autonomous zone?
Have you read an interesting Britol magazine published in Easton called Bristle ? Teachers and parents have tried to find a few answer's to it... I've been working in a school myself...
How do we buy food?
I rarely do so and when I do, it is mainly @ Eastville market. What I know, is that food would be cheaper if BCC was not making money from it (may be we could use that money to pay the teachers...)
Where does the employment come from?
For now it comes from arms trade (1st employer in Bristol) ! So, it probably would be better not to have employment...I'm not employed myself (neither get benefits). I do things for me to live and for my community to be better. But as I told you, I've been working in a company which is still an autonomous zone, which stock market giants don't like because thay can't put their money in it, they can't corrupt it, they can't buy shares... And because the co-op doesn't look for profit neither pay huge salaries to bosses, they still get the contracts though people get paid better working in conditions they've chosen.
It's OK in Chiapas, these people have a culture, family ties, historical links to the land (inc. farming methods etc.),Villages, established systems of trade, barter and exchange, even a racial/religious base for their own 'zone' what does Easton or St.Pauls (where I live) have? Disaffected youth, excluded minorities, poor educational/skills achievement, no land to grow food, no community cohesiveness, no shared religion, beliefs etc. How could we hold it together?
Have you been to Chiapas ? I'm sorry but, though I haven't been there neither, they also have disaffected youth, excluded minorities, poor> education/skills achievement, no land to grow food (all taken by companies, not allowing to grow : start of the revolt !), no shared religion though race (at least 9 different one in Chiapas and 14 different languages... but all are of the human race) and they decided to get together to change it, to stop seeing the youngsters getting into coca, crack and alcohol... to stop progress of the unemployment, to stop the bad salaries and the richness taken from their soil. How do I hold it together here (as I live in the same neighbourhood as you) ? Well, I take part in a bike workshop where many kids of the area come to repair their bike, where we can also sometimes spot the 'ho ho, are you sure this bike is yours ?', I've been supporting after school clubs as a volunteer, I'm chatting w/ prostitutes or drug addict, advising them for support. I do work w/ SARI against racism. I do work w/ BDASC (which you may know) to support refugees as they are quite a few in the area, and w/ the Somali community. I'm involved in housing people who don't get benefits, I'm also part of an allotment campaign and supporting 3D garden (I've been living on the 21st floor with a 2*1 balcony and that was enough to produce all our food (2 people) around the year, apart 1 out of 5), I also care after people having disabilities (did you know that a person getting invalid need to wait for 6 months to get an allowance ?).
I reckon that I haven't got much time to get involved in a party after that, neither to get employed (I already don't sleep much) specially as I try to have a bit of personal life as well.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to try and start an autonomous zone, but I'd be afraid that the 'black bloc' who were so keen to have the zone would become very quiet once we got it.
I reckon I've seen quite a few of them being part of the same projects as me (see above) and more in which I'm not involved myself.
While the socialists argued about how/when/why they should tell everyone what to do!
I reckon I don't want anyone to tell me what to do, neither I want to tell anyone what to do.
As a movement we need a vision, and we can't base it on the Indians in Chiapas, because they have a history which binds them together, we don't! We need to start with what we've got,
We've got 250 years of 'actions' for change, some good (individual freedom until the 60's when we started to go backwards on this matter) and some bad (see atrocities of the French revolution) but all better than what a few in power wanted (and too often succeeded well enough). It didn't come through parliament neither vote but through actions, strikes, people getting together. The vote has always been used to get told : "well, if you're not happy, you should not have voted for him". Some have chosen to vote for nobody, which I think is better than not turning to vote...
and change it slowly- starting with electing a real, genuine REPRESENTATIVE for Bristol.
If you think someone can be it...
There is nothing wrong with leaders, they're needed in fact, as long as it's not always the same person, and they know that they can't make decisions, only we can do that.
If a leader can't make a decision, he's not a leader anymore. He may be a spokesman of everyone's decision, a facilitator of other's expression... I'm far from being against that, we always have some (very often several). You may find out that the black block @ ECC the other day is actually doing things on a every day basis which doesn't get them money but the pleasure of doing things together for the local community (Have you seen by the railway bridge/St Marks Rd and between ECC and cycle pass ?> Doesn't it look nicer ?) instead of trying to get people to vote for themselves. You may also find out that quite a few were not there> because they were actually doing things @ the same time. (I was myself writing an appeal for a refugee who got is asylum seeking turned down).
The reason you don't get what you want from the council (in your meetings) is that you don't even recognise them as a legitimate body (and you don't vote!)
I'm not allowed too... I thought I told you that already !
Why should they listen to you?
They don't listen the ones who vote for them neither. "My plan is to act directly in agreement with the people I do things with as I do for 14 years, it is not a plan to change the country"
Why get involved in activism if you're not trying to change the country? Why slag off politicians if you think they CANNOT do anything in the current system? Surely they are unfortunate victims, lured in by the promise of being able to make a difference? Or do you believe they went into it for selfish reasons? Presumably you think your lifestyle is beneficial to you and those around you, but you ARE telling others they should do the same. The government has the power and access to make things like 3-D gardening and co-operative companies a possibility (i.e.. Popular and feasible for lots of people), you can't do that by voting nobody. A person needs to be popular in the current system in order to win an election, if that person was you (if your friends all chose you) wouldn't you do as you'd promised? I would! The green party has no leaders (no hierarchy), I don't see the problem with any of their policies. You're not going to change the way people do things overnight, don't you think that if more people were encouraged to live in the ways you do, we would soon reach a de-centralized decision making situation? When you make decisions in your co-op, there is a structure to it, there are rules, there are procedures (formal and informal), there will always be leaders (in your case they're called spokespeople, but they will shape the conversation on a certain subject, because they'll know about it. If your co-op existed for 100 years, some of those procedures would be out of date, they wouldn't seem as 'radical' as they do now. Also, your co-op operates within capitalism, is it not just the same as every other company with an ethical focus/methods? You still need to make money etc. How would your ultimate system work?
"with no shared religion though race (at least 9 different one in Chiapas and 14 different languages... "
This ignores the Indian vs. white thing, which is VERY strong, the situation in Mexico (south America generally) is VERY different to here. In this country, the original (older) settlers tend to be the richest in this country, not the other way round. Mexico has a long history (until very recently) of rural, Indian, agrarian communities, that's why they can base their society on this principle, we DONT have that in this country. (Read about southern Mexico and Mayan culture etc.) What do you do when your wishes/actions don't suit a lot of other people? We do need a system for dealing with this.
"How do I hold it here (as I live in the same neighbourhood as you)? Well, I take part in a bike workshop where many kids of the area come to..."
This isn't the same for most people, they cannot live like you do, some people want to work etc. Your solution keeps you happy, it doesn't work for everyone. How can you support getting rid of the benefits structure and at the same time complain that,
"a person getting invalid need to wait for 6 months to get an allowance"
Do you support beaurocracy or not? Should there be a benefits system? Or should these people be taken care of by the community? Should we have asylum rules or allow anyone in? If we allow anyone in, do we give him or her all benefits? How does this work in your system? I'm enjoying this conversation, but I must point out that I'm not having a go at you; I'm trying to understand why you don't want your ideas to get into the institutions that can really bring about changes. Your life sounds very interesting, and (no offence) but bordering on the impossible. The last thing I'm saying is that you should join a party and become a politician, but maybe don't turn your back on the established system so much. When I said you live in luxury, I was pointing out that compared to most of the world you and I are LOADED, and while we can do our best to alter our own behaviour, we can only affect Multinationals etc. By hitting them with the same tactics they use against us (get involved with the parliamentary system). But election time is when people think about stuff like this, and the message they get from you (and others who believe similar things) is 'don't vote.' It seems pointless. It also seems arrogant, as you're not the only one trying to do good things, and to reject so many of them out of hand is quite arrogant. You never answered the question, What if we got OUR representative into BCC, what would we want him/her to do? What if they did listen, what would you suggest?
"I'm not sure you know about voting decisions"
Maybe I don't, tell me how decisions are taken in your collective. Does everyone vote them all? how does your vision of democracy work in practice? Did you see the results of the councils Bristol referendum on council tax and spending on education? I think the council do whatever they're told to do, but people like you and I don't get involved enough in doing that. I realise YOU can't vote, but those friends of yours (co-op workers, bike workshop friends, asylum seekers-they can vote too) who can vote could put our point of view forward, and contribute towards making change in everyone's lived experience.... You also avoided the question about providing public services, Fine it is shit now, but what would be better?