TOP TEN BRISTOL RIOTS: THE OFFICIAL LIST

The Bristolian

THE LIST THEY DON’T WANT YOU TO READ!!!

To celebrate last night’s small riot, here’s one list the local media will not print. Lovingly compiled by our Violent Disorder Correspondent, we give you Bristol’s Top Ten RiotsRiot - skater
Now, next time you hear some poncey local liberal politician pronouncing on a local riot and claiming that “This isn’t Bristol” or “We don’t don’t do this” you can tell ’em, “Oh yes this is us. This is exactly what we do. The problem is that you are not us”.

10. 1090 Slave Riots

More

Informal organisation: Alfredo M. Bonanno 1985

the anarchist library in various formats

From Anarchismo, n. 47, 1985

Informal organisation

Alfredo M. Bonanno

First let us distinguish the informal anarchist organisation from the anarchist organisation of synthesis. Considerable clarification will emerge from this distinction.

What is an anarchist organisation of synthesis? It is an organisation based on groups or individuals that are more or less in constant relation with each other, that culminates in periodical congresses. During these open meetings basic theoretical analyses are discussed, a program is prepared and tasks are shared out covering a whole range of interventions in the social field. The organisation thus sets itself up as a point of reference, like an entity that is capable of synthesizing the struggles that are going on in reality of the class clash. The various commissions of this organisational model intervene in different struggles (as single comrades or groups) and, by intervening, give their contribution in first person without however losing site of the theoretical and practical orientation of the organisation as a whole, as decided at the most recent congress.

When this kind of organisation develops itself fully (as happened in Spain in ’36) it begins to dangerously resemble a party. Synthesis becomes control. Of course, in moments of slack, this involution is less visible and might even seem an insult, but at other times it turns out to be more evident.

In substance, in the organisation of synthesis (always specific and anarchist), a nucleus of specialists works out proposals at both the theoretical and ideological level, adapting them as far as possible to the program that is roughly decided upon at the periodic congresses. The shift away from this program can also be considerable (after all, anarchists would never admit to too slavish an adherence to anything), but when this occurs care is taken to return within the shortest possible time to the line previously decided upon.

This organisation’s project is therefore that of being present in various situations: antimilitarism, nuclear power, unions, prisons, ecology, interventions in living areas, unemployment, schools, etc. This presence is either by direct intervention or through participaton in interventions managed by other comrades or organisations (anarchist or not).

It becomes clear that participation aimed at bringing the struggle to within the project of synthesis cannot be autonomous. It cannot really adapt to the conditions of the struggle or collaborate effectively in a clear plan with the other revolutionary forces. Everything must either go through the ideological filter of synthesis or comply with the conditions approved earlier during the congress.This situation, which is not always as rigid as it might seem here, carries the ineliminable tendency of organisations of synthesis to drag struggles to the level of the base, proposing caution and using contrivances aimed at redimensioning any flight forward, any objective that is too open or means that might be dangerous.

For example, if a group belonging to this kind of organisation (of synthesis, but always anarchist and specific) were to adhere to a structure that is struggling, let us say, against repression, it would be forced to consider the actions proposed by this structure in the light of the analyses that had roughly been approved at the congress. The structure would either have to accept these analyses, or the group belonging to the organisation of synthesis would stop its collaboration (if it is in a minority) or impose the expulsion (in fact, even if not with a precise motion) of those proposing different methods of struggle. Some people might not like it, but that is exactly how things work. One might ask oneself why on earth the proposal of the group belonging to the organisation of synthesis must by definition always be more backward, i.e. in the rearguard, or more cautious than others concerning possible actions of attack against the structures of repression and social consensus. Why is that? The answer is simple. The specific anarchist organisation of synthesis, which, as we have seen, culminates in periodic congresses has growth in numbers as its basic aim. It needs an operative force that must grow. Not to infinity exactly, but almost. In the case of the contrary it would not have the capacity to intervene in the various struggles, nor even be able to carry out its own principle task: proceding to synthesis in one single point of reference. Now, an organisation that has growth in members as its main aim must use instruments that guarantee proselytism and pluralism. It cannot take a clear position concerning any specific problem, but must always find a middle way, a political road that upsets the smallest number and turns out to be acceptable to most.

The correct position concerning some problems, particularly repression and prisons, is often the most dangerous, and no group can put the organisation they belong to at risk without first agreeing with the other member groups. But that can only happen in congress, or at least at an extraordinary meeting, and we all know that on such occasions it is always the most moderate opinion that prevails, certainly not the most advanced.

So, ineluctably, the presence of the organisation of synthesis in actual struggles, struggles that reach the essence of the class struggle, turns into a brake and control (often involuntarily, but it is still a question of control).

The informal organisation does not present such problems. Affinity groups and comrades that see themselves in an informal kind of projectuality come together in action, certainly not by adhering to a program that has been fixed at a congress. They realise the project themselves, in their analyses and actions. It can occasionally have a point of reference in a paper or a series of meetings, but only in order to facilitate things, whereas it has nothing to do with congresses and such like.The comrades who recognise themselves in an informal organisation are automatically a part of it. They keep in contact with the other comrades through a paper or by other means, but, more important, they do so by participating in the various actions, demonstrations, encounters, etc., that take place from time to time. The main verification and analysis therefore comes about during moments of struggle. To begin with these might simply be moments of theoretical verification, turning into something more later on.

In an informal organisation there is no question of synthesis. There is no desire to be present in all the different situations and even less to formulate a project that takes the struggles into the depths of a programme that has been approved in advance.

The only constant points of reference are insurrectional methods: in other words self-organisation of struggles, permanent conflictuality and attack.

Solidarity with the Colston Four!

Alternative Bristol

Almost exactly 6 months after the statue of the racist slave-trader & murderer Edward Colston was torn down by anti-racist & Black Lives Matter protesters on the 7th June, (as we warned on Sunday in this article) 4 people hunted down by A&SPolice have now been charged, this afternoon, with ‘criminal damage’. This is a decision by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), after the Police sent their files to them in mid-September.

This is both a political charge, and frankly a confusing one. Six people out of the thousands present on the day have already been offered ‘a conditional caution for the offence of causing criminal damage to property valued under £5,000.it was reported here. Yet these 4 face court for an apparently identical charge (we have not of course seen either the court papers, nor the police’s evidence). This makes the case a political one, by picking on just these 4 people, it is clear that the ‘powers that be’ – primarily the Tory Govt in London – want an example made, even if anyone found guilty is unlikely to face much more than a major fine (we hope), and they may well of course be found not guilty. They are innocent until the court case is over.

What happens now? The Colston 4 will no doubt be consulting with their solicitors, considering their options, and planning their defence, with the back-up from their legal support team. The first date set for their court hearing is 25 January. If just 10% of the 10,000 plus who were at the demo on 7th June turn up outside court to show their solidarity, it will send a clear message to the prosecutors & politicians. As we said back on 8th June – Solidarity with anyone persecuted for the removal of Colston. We all did it!

The case will also be a political trial because it will keep in the spotlight both the Society of Merchant Venturers, those cheerleaders for Colston and great beneficiaries of the slave-trade (see this article) – who continue to be protected by their power, wealth & networks; and of course Bristol’s Mayor Rees, who collaborated in the police investigation when Bristol Council gave the Police the necessary statement regards damage to the statue. Rees, who failed for 4 years to do anything about the hated statue (see part 3 here), but took down a sculpture of south Bristol’s Jen Reid in under 24 hours, has shown himself to be both unprincipled and corrupted by his own pursuit of power. He’ll be looking forwards to next May’s Mayoral election with trepidation.

It is now up to all of us committed to eradicating institutional racism and seeking justice in relation to the horrors & legacy of the slave-trade, to stand with the Colston 4. Until all are free!

Corona virus pandemic comment number four, from the south of England. By Mal Content.

C.W. Profanity, cannibalism.

One nasty side-effect of all this is a widespread acceptance that there is some virtue in doing as you’re told, or that a government can rule by decree, in fact you cannot make statute law by announcing things on twitter. Their intent has been to condition the population into following arbitrary “rules”, raking over the details of what is permitted rather than thinking for themselves, with predictably catastrophic results.

Whatever you decide to do you should have a bloody good reason for doing it.

Why are people calling for “clarity” from the fucking government? Can they not make their own minds up? I find it hard to credit that anyone listens to the incoherent blitherings of Boris de Pfeffle fucking Johnson, let alone discusses them. Remember when he said he wanted the pubs to stay open but he didn’t want anyone to go there?

Did you know?

The UK government’s Coronavirus Act 2020 comprises a series of statutory instruments, supposedly deriving their legal authority from the emergency provisions contained within the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984, as amended.

“In accordance with section 45R of that Act the Secretary of State is of the opinion that, by reason of urgency, it is necessary to make this instrument without a draft having been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.”

Remember now who the Secretary of State is – Matt fucking Hancock! Anyone interested in his opinion? Thought not.

Did you know?

Examinations of sewage samples from Italy and Spain (apparently they keep these things) show that the virus was present in Europe as long ago as March last year, months before it was identified in China.

You could be forgiven for failing to keep up with their ever-shifting injunctions about who can do what with some people but not others, here but not there, and for this reason but not that. In fact if you have been keeping up, you’ve clearly got too much time on your hands, in other words, you’re middle class, and probably work in the media – or rather, you’re sat on your arse looking at the internet and getting paid for it. Even the chattering classes, marooned in their expensive flats with little else to chatter about, have been getting it wrong.

Did you know?

The ban on taking exercise more than once a day, widely touted in the media, is in fact not in the English Regulations at all; it comes from The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) Regulations 2020.

Did you know?

The equally widely-touted “one hour duration rule” is not in any government document but was made up on the spot by Michael fucking Gove!

Did you know?

The phrase “reasonable excuse” set out in Regulation 6(2) has never been defined, though examples were given. Early high-profile test cases were thrown out on appeal. It allows politicians to suit themselves.

Did you know?

The words “furlough” and “lock-down” were borrowed from the US prison system.

We should always be wary of people who find it necessary to coin new terminology out of the blue. When they started banging on about “linked households” I dropped out, but for the purposes of this blog post have looked into it.

Did you know?

(7) After regulation 7, insert—
“Linked households
7A.—(1) Where a household comprises one adult, or one adult and one or more persons who are under the age of 18 on 12th June 2020 (“the first household”), the adult may choose to be linked with one other household (“the second household”), provided that—
(a)the second household is not linked with any other household; and
(b)all the adult members of the second household agree.
(2) There is no limit on the number of adults or children which may be in the second household.
(3) The first and second households are “linked households” in relation to each other.
(4) The first and second households cease to be linked households if neither household satisfies the condition in the opening words of paragraph (1).
(5) Once the first and second households have ceased being linked households, neither the first household nor the second household may be linked with any other household.”.
(8) In regulation 9(2), after “Regulations” insert “, including any person who is a relevant person for the purposes of regulation 8,”.
(9) In regulation 10(12), at the end insert “or the obstruction under regulation 9(2) of a person carrying out a function under regulation 8”.

You lot got that?

Did you know?

On 4th July 2020 the regulations were repealed in their entirety and were replaced with The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) Regulations 2020 (SI 684).

Could you construe morality or responsibility in terms of counting “households”, an abstract bourgeois concept? Here are some dictionary definitions of “household” (noun):

  • individuals who comprise a family unit and who live together under the same roof
  • all those who are under the control of one domestic head.
  • the people of a house collectively
  • a family including its servants.
  • one or more people who live together in a common space, share meals, and combine economic resources.

Many of us do not live in “households” at all but share crowded dwellings, occupy sites, or borrow sofas and spare rooms from more settled folk. Some vulnerable people live alone, or with dependants.

Did you know?

(8) In regulation 8—
(a)in paragraph (3)—
(i)in the opening words, for “outside” substitute “staying overnight at a place other than”;
(ii)at the end of sub-paragraph (a), omit “or”;
(iii)omit sub-paragraph (b);
(b)omit paragraph (4);
(c)in paragraph (5), in the opening words, for “outside” substitute at a place other than”;
(d)in paragraph (8), at the end insert “in regulation 6(1)”;
(e)in paragraph (9)—
(i)in the opening words, for “three or more” substitute “a number of”;
(ii)in sub-paragraph (c), for “the gathering” substitute “a gathering in a public place”;
(f)in paragraph (10), after “a gathering” insert “in a public place”.

I wonder what time you’d have to leave to avoid the charge of “staying overnight”…

Did you know?

If you’ve ever tested positive for coronavirus in England and were subsequently killed by something else, you would be counted as a covid death by the ONS, but not necessarily by the government, which only counts deaths in hospitals. If you died in Scotland or Wales however, you would need to have died within 28 days of your test. If a positive test result came in after your death certificate was issued, you would not be counted. If you died in a care home before 29th April you would not be counted, after that you would be counted if it was mentioned on your death certificate, whether you had been tested or not.

Pfeffle excelled himself this morning. After blithering that he wanted people “to go back to (office) work” – everybody else is already working you numbskull – he stated that it wasn’t up to the government to tell people what to do. When challenged on the scientific advice he retorted that it was a matter for politicians to decide. He then clarified that he wanted the bosses to make the decisions for their workforce.

The government is the bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie is the government!

There has been much speculation over what a “post-furlough” society might look like. The idea of “working from home” appeals to those who can get away with it, of course. People who habitually do fuck all in offices can do fuck all much more efficiently in their kitchens. In future will we continue to pay them to stop indoors doing fuck all, as a sort of tax on the genuine Working Class, while they become ever more dissociated from reality?

Perhaps we will see the logistics Worker, the builder, the cleaner, machine operator and other indispensables emerge as a new labour aristocracy. In H. G. Wells 1895 novel, The Time Machine, the bourgeoisie have evolved into the Eloi, feckless weaklings who caper about in the sun, serviced by the troglodyte Morlocks, who prey on them at night.

Instead it is the middle class who will grow grey and pale, locked indoors jabbering over their futile tasks. Unlike the Morlocks they won’t develop good night vision; their eyes will be ruined by the computer screens and they will have compromised immune systems with no Vitamin D. They will become inbred, as they mate only with their “linked households”. Meanwhile we build our strength and confidence, take over the infrastructure, occasionally drag one out and chuck them on the barbeque. Doesn’t seem so dystopian after all!

Did you know?

The wearing of face masks is to be compulsory in a week or so, until then you are deemed safe without one. There are exemptions, make sure you know what they are …

This will coincide with the re-opening of gymnasia and sports halls, which in the meantime, remain unsafe. My personal view of the masks I have seen is that they are a placebo, which may give a little comfort to those who are especially worried about catching the virus. Now if they succeed in absorbing viral material, what is to happen to discarded masks? Will they be handled as hazardous waste? In a hospital they would be incinerated.

These are mostly pieces of cloth or paper, necessarily loose-fitting and porous. I write as someone who has spent a fair amount of time running around masked up. As you exercise and the carbon dioxide builds up, you puff and blow in your mask forcing material around the sides and through the pores. If you wanted to make a difference you would need a demand valve and a HEPA filter, which would remove all particles down to a third of a micron. Corona viruses are typically around a tenth of a micron and the filter would remove a proportion of these. This isn’t a practical proposition, being prohibitively expensive and impossible to enforce.

The best reason for wearing a face covering is to prevent identification and photography by fascists and agents of the state, and to show solidarity with those putting themselves in harm’s way every day to fight oppression. On the plus side, the cops won’t be using section 60AA anytime soon.

Red and Black Telly roundup







Mayday 2020 in Dorset.

Why we celebrate May Day

Red And Black Telly: THE “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH” CAMPAIGN.

Red And Black Telly: HONG KONG,U.K., EXTINCTION REBELLION.

Indonesia: Post-May Day Update and Call for International Solidarity

mpalothia.net

Palang Hitam / Anarchist Black Cross Indonesia has temporarily ceased activity due to problems with a former member who misused international donations. At present there is no anarchist organization supporting those facing repression, so support is being provided spontaneously and individually. Here is an update about the situation in several cities.

In Bandung, there was a peaceful action by a group of anarchists almost 1000 strong. It even consisted of mothers, children and teenage girls. Police attacked them and broke the bloc into two groups. They were then chased, beaten and arrested. The pretext for this was ‘vandalism’, some spray-painted graffiti. Many of those who were arrested were stripped and had their heads shaved. Some were spray-painted on their faces and bodies as well. Many were forced to crawl along the road in their underwear. In total 619 anarchists were arrested, of these, 3 still remain in custody for destruction of property.

In Yogyakarta West Papuan students expressed their solidarity with the 619 arrested anarchists in Bandung. The students also faced severe repression from Indonesian authorities during May Day 2019 demonstrations.

In Jakarta, there were small clashes between anarchists and police who were blocking the road. Anarchists attacked a police blockade so that a huge group of trade union members could continue their journey to a gathering point where thousands of people were assembled. An anarcho-syndicalist union in Jakarta is now being targeted by the police.

In Malang, one person was forcibly arrested without a warrant, but they were released later.

In Makassar, the number of arrests increased from 9 to 21, they are all facing charges related to destruction of property. Makassar was totally paralyzed by police sweeps looking for anarchists.

In Surabaya, there were two different May Day actions by anarchist groups. The first action was carried out by a group working with leftist organizations. Three people were arrested but they have been released. The second action was carried out by anarcho-syndicalists and individualist anarchists were beaten by the police.

So now many comrades are on the run because as we have counter-intelligence informants within the police apparatus who have told us that ‘mapping’ of Indonesian anarchist networks is being carried out.

Right now we would appreciate international solidarity in the form of actions and also financial support. If people are able to provide financial assistance please send it to the paypal below. We will use it for legal fees and to help support our friends who are in hiding because they are being targeted by police.

https://www.paypal.me/adnandi

Catut Anarchist Library

https://www.instagram.com/pustakacatut/

Stop the city (London) 21st February 2019