Open Meeting on The 2nd of October

London Anarchist Federation


In September 2020 the government will be rolling out compulsory lessons about LGBT+ relationships nation wide. When this scheme was trialed in Birmingham earlier this year there was a backlash against it and a rise in hate crime in the area, with the far right trying to jump on the band wagon.

With the potential for a national backlash in 2020 and a year to plan ahead, our gender and sexuality working group want to start discussing what we might be able to do to fight that backlash in London and further afield.

We will be holding an open meeting at 19:00 on Wednesday the 2nd of October at Freedom Bookshop to get our strategic thinking caps on.

View original post


  1. I bet it’s not an open meeting!


    • It says open. Obviously cops, journalists and fash are never welcome.


      • Fash? Defined by who? I have been on the streets fighting fascists, real fascists for more than 50 years. Over the last year I have been called a fascist, a nazi and Tory scum. I havn’t changed at all. What’s that all about? The victory of identity politics over class-based analysis and action. Are Terfs welcome?


      • I can’t speak for the London anarchists, but given the scope of the meeting, what purpose would their attendance serve? Personally I wouldn’t welcome them anywhere, like all paranoid obsessives, they are bad company. As evil is banal, so bigotry is tedious, like listening to a dripping tap.

        Those who call down state coercion to constrain others against their will, or hide their disdain for certain categories of human behind ideological bullshit, are explicity not anarchists. They’re at best left social democrats, with a few embittered old bolsheviks, as relevant as the flat earth society. It’s the people who haven’t changed and can’t adapt that are the problem.

        I can only claim forty years of antifascism, but Martin’s been doing it since the 1960s, we’re anarchists, we get it, you don’t, so what?

        Liked by 3 people

      • So all are NOT welcome. You have decided in advance that any questioning of the post-modern ideology is akin to fascism. Once upon a time anarchists saw the value of material reality. In God and the State, Bakunin argued against the pre-enlightenment dependence on faith, ideology, fairies and unicorns. You are not anarchists, but extreme liberals with your pathetic desire to keep up with the woke. People CANNOT change sex, women are entitled to their space and it is those who refuse to debate those things who are the bigots.


      • People who make assumptions about others’ opinions and choose to argue against these rather than their actual words make no contribution to any debate. I pride myself on precision and unambiguity, so perhaps you should read the last comment again.

        Your petulant use of the caps lock points the direction in which you are heading, we’re used to seeing this from the far right, the cry of the frustrated bigot “why won’t they agree with me?”. We haven’t refused debate, or what is this?

        Your last sentence consists of three assertions that are purely ideological.

        If Bakunin were to attend one of our meetings he would be challenged over his antisemitism, and called upon to modify his behaviour or leave. We don’t look up or down, we have boundaries and agreed codes of conduct within our groups. I define liberalism as a philosophy that postulates a theoreetical freedom and equality under the law whilst denying the existence of oppressive structures readily co-opted by ruling elites to temper the ‘rights’ they offer. it’s usually bound up with an illusory ‘social contract’ after Locke and Rousseau. Your postulates require acceptance of just such an illusion.

        The enlightenment gave us racism, among other things, as retrospective justification for the wars of empire and the transatlantic slave trade.

        You’ll find a detailed contribution to the debate here: there isn’t much more to say.

        For the record I consider myself a utilitarian, materialist, libertarian socialist, in other words a nihilist, it conveys the advantage that I don’t need you to agree with me.


        Liked by 3 people

  2. Reallyoldhippy what is your question? Whenever I hear this argument that any questioning is akin to fascism it usually comes from a place where there is no question because the person complaining they can’t question has already made their mind up and isn’t interested in the answer.
    What is the question? If you would like to question and listen and respond then we can communicate. If you want to assume and complain without ever asking your question and waiting for an answer then I am left with no way to communicate with you….

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I don’t think there is a question. Looks like they were trying to be smart-alecky and got drawn into a discussion for which they were ill-equipped.

    Liked by 2 people

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.