[LAF] LAF 3
steve ash
steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk
Mon Aug 22 22:57:26 UTC 2005
Thanks to Justin and Joy for their supporting posts.
I agree that we should fix dates but request after 3rd
Sept it be the second and fourth Saturday of the month
and preferably starting at 2pm (if those in touch with
Freedom say it has to be a Saturday that is). I can at
least attempt to attend on a semi regular basis then,
rather than it being a near impossibility. I also
think that, unless one of the other regulars finds it
too awkward, we should also have social /general
discussion meetings at the RFH on Fridays. I'm
agnostic as to how regular that will be, I could
attend most Fridays but not all, though past social
have generally been poorly attended. The RFH has the
added beneifit of the view and being in public but in
a normally quiet environment (with only occassional
piped classical music during concerts). We could also
rotate venues if the meetings were weekly (if that was
sustainable, which I doubt).
I was planning a new discussion group there anyway, if
I had time, so perhaps this would be the next best
thing.
As to Christians post on the purpose of the LAF, I
generally concur, but would add that the group is
really like an onion. The kernal of a small number
of regulars, mostly experienced, dedicated and
knowledgable anarchists (with connections to the
broader movement) is what has always stabilised and
anchored the group, and provided much of its content,
since Kropotkin and the original founders of Freedom
Press created our precursor almost a hundred years
ago. This was also the basis of the first LAF of the
1980's, as far as I understand, and it certainly was
when I joined in the mid 90's. This fact not only
serves the group but also the needs of the central
individuals in forming a basis for the exchange of
ideas and general interaction.
Outside this is a circle of relative newcomers who are
learning about anarchism, as I did when I joined in
the 90s, and drawing their own conclusions (which may
or may not include becoming part of the kernal as I
eventually did). These maybe regulars or infrequent
attendees. There are also many who bridge these two
circles. Beyond this are the occassional anarchist and
fellow traveller visitors, and the general public who
are merely curious and mostly will not return (but are
very important even if they only attend once).
Outreach is our interface with the world and so
crucial to what we do as well, but not at the expense
of the central core of members.
This might sound hierarchical on a superficial
reading, but given the nature of the group this is not
really true, and the order merely serves to hold the
group together and perpetuate it coherently.
Given that we should really give priority to the core
group first, or we will become a random gathering of
talking heads, and lose our identity and functionality
as an anarchist / left libertarian discussion group
with a good grounding in an historical political
movement.
Steve
--- laf-request at lists.aktivix.org wrote:
> Send LAF mailing list submissions to
> laf at lists.aktivix.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> visit
> http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> laf-request at lists.aktivix.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> laf-owner at lists.aktivix.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of LAF digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: LAF2 (Joy Wood)
> 2. Re: LAF2 (christian michel)
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 21:34:58 +0000
> From: "Joy Wood" <joy_helbin at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [LAF] LAF2
> To: hooper_jackson at yahoo.com, laf at lists.aktivix.org
> Message-ID:
> <BAY102-F99600E15BAE3E430757AEE8B70 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
> Yeh, I agree with what Justin says and what Steve
> says. I do not think
> there was any slight intended to Steve by picking a
> first and third Saturday
> instead of something more convenient for Steve. I
> think it was a case of
> picking anything at all and going with it, instead
> of just emailing back and
> forth and back and forth and ending up with no
> meetings arranged at all.
> Having said that, the dates chosen ARE less
> convenient for Steve so how
> about, since Ed has only booked 3 September so far,
> if Ed books FP for 23
> September and thereafter for the rest of the year we
> go for the 2nd and 4th
> Saturdays??? And Steve can pick some Fridays for
> meeting at the Overdraught
> or RFH???
>
>
> >From: justin <hooper_jackson at yahoo.com>
> >To: LAF LIST <laf at lists.aktivix.org>
> >Subject: Re: [LAF] LAF2
> >Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 06:54:50 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >"I think the whole group would greatly suffer with
> out
> >me..."
> >
> >i think it's a great shame that what Steve says is
> true
> >here, yet he himself was the one who had to say it!
> >Anyone remember mutual support/solidarity, etc.?
> >
> >(not sure if Steve was being self deprecatingly
> >ironic by saying this, i don't think he was, and i
> think what
> >he says is true, and yet, to repeat, no one else
> >said it!)
> >
> >i mean the point is that Steve is one of the few
> ppl
> >who's been a regualar over the past nth years, and
> also
> >contributed to talks and the running of
> discussions...
> >and also has a good base in anarchist politics...
> >- there is not really anyone else who fits all
> these
> >LAF credentials within LAF!...
> >
> >i think having regulars is good, and also having a
> reasonable
> >base within anarchism is good, too... Outreach is
> important
> >as well,
> >but not to the detriment of destroying the
> anarchist base
> >which is the point of the thing in the first
> place... I mean
> >you need a sturdy, sustainable base to outreach in
> the first place!
> >
> >So, i think publicity should be first and foremost
> directed inwards
> >towards anarchists and anti-authoritarians...
> >A question to ask is why has the LAF apparently
> shrunk over recent years?
> >(Well since the late 90's as far as i can tell - i
> seem to remember
> >hearing that some primitivists became regualars -
> did that put everyone
> >else
> >off?! Maybe 1 or 2 peripherally involved
> individuals effectively
> >put ppl off around that time too?)...
> >
> >(Maybe
> >any general outward publicity is no bad thing -
> you'll only
> >get a few ppl here and there from the various
> hopefully
> >diverse sectors you're putting your publicity in -
> altho i
> >think the more diverse the advertising the better
> >- you don't want to rely on one or 2 sources...)
> >
> >Have not caught up with the other posts yet - so
> will go thru them...
> >But thought i should really respond to this post...
> >
> >Justin
> >
> >--- steve ash <steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > Not very happy with current developments now
> I've had
> > > time to think about them. As one of the last
> real
> > > anarchists left in the LAF, I can only think of
> two
> > > other regular attendees, I'm not really happy at
> all
> > > with the present ideas now I think about it and
> I
> > > think the whole group would greatly suffer with
> out
> > > me, though I still have plans of my own. If the
> > > meetings were on the 2nd and 4th of each month
> or
> > > something and started at 2pm rather than 3pm I
> might
> > > be able to attend on at least a monthly basis.
> As it
> > > is the LAF is already isolated from the
> anarchist
> > > movement and I'd rather work on a project that
> brought
> > > an anarchist discussion group closer into the
> > > mainstream of the anarchist movement.
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> >http://mail.yahoo.com
> >_______________________________________________
> >LAF mailing list
> >LAF at lists.aktivix.org
> >http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 07:55:06 +0100
> From: christian michel <chr.michel at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [LAF] LAF2
> To: steve ash <steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk>
> Cc: laf at lists.aktivix.org
> Message-ID:
> <df2c327a050821235537ac7bed at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> To answer Steve's direct question, why I hv chosen
> the first and third Sat
> in the month, it's only because I wrote the msg. It
> was time to discuss
> concrete dates, and that's the ones that came up
> with. If it's 2nd and
> 4thor any evening in the week, fine, but at least we
> are now tabling
> concrete
> proposals.
>
> Regarding the more general question in Justin's
> message, I hv the greatest
> respect for Steve's contributions. I hv said so in
> one of my posts. He is
> much more a LAF person than I am or ever will be.
> The question here, I
> think, is what is LAF's purpose. Following our
> earlier discussions at FP, I
> believed it was a forum open to all where people
> explore and debate issues
> of the day (science, war, music, media, education
)
> in a different light
> from that of the dominant ideology. With 'anarchist'
> in the name, there can
> be no mistake as to the frame of reference. I have
> no reservation therefore
> to invite lots of people (as LAF was doing when it
> was advertising in Time
> Out). What's on the label is what people will get. A
> vast majority of them
> will probably find it too extreme for their taste,
> so they won't come. At
> least they will learn that there exists out there an
> intellectually active
> and vibrant anarchist movement.
>
> It was my understanding that LAF's purpose was not
> solely to discuss
> anarchist issues amongst committed card-carrying
> anarchist ('are free-masons
> hijacking the anarchist movements?') or to plan
> actions (participation in
> this or that campaign). These topics fall outside
> the purpose of a
> discussion group open to all, I would think.
>
> I may well be completely wrong in my understanding
> of what LAF is all
> about. In which case, I happily apologise for the
> suggestions made.
>
> If every one's understanding, however, is more or
> less what I outlined
> above, we're back to the topic of days and venues. I
> personally like the
> idea of FP, it has the right atmosphere,
> participants would be giving their
> money to comrades and a few might buy books. The
> prob is opening times. If
> we could get FP to give us access on a weekday
> evening, would it not solve
> Steve's and others' problem?
>
> That's where I stand on this whole question. If I
> miss something, pse tell
> me.
>
> Christian
>
>
> On 21/08/05, Joy Wood <joy_helbin at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Yeh, I agree with what Justin says and what Steve
> says. I do not think
> > there was any slight intended to Steve by picking
> a first and third
> > Saturday
> > instead of something more convenient for Steve. I
> think it was a case of
> > picking anything at all and going with it, instead
> of just emailing back
> > and
> > forth and back and forth and ending up with no
> meetings arranged at all.
> > Having said that, the dates chosen ARE less
> convenient for Steve so how
> > about, since Ed has only booked 3 September so
> far, if Ed books FP for 23
> > September and thereafter for the rest of the year
> we go for the 2nd and
> > 4th
> > Saturdays??? And Steve can pick some Fridays for
> meeting at the
> > Overdraught
> > or RFH???
> >
> >
> > >From: justin <hooper_jackson at yahoo.com>
> > >To: LAF LIST <laf at lists.aktivix.org>
> > >Subject: Re: [LAF] LAF2
> > >Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 06:54:50 -0700 (PDT)
> > >
> > >"I think the whole group would greatly suffer
> with out
> > >me..."
> > >
> > >i think it's a great shame that what Steve says
> is true
> > >here, yet he himself was the one who had to say
> it!
> > >Anyone remember mutual support/solidarity, etc.?
> > >
> > >(not sure if Steve was being self deprecatingly
> > >ironic by saying this, i don't think he was, and
> i think what
> > >he says is true, and yet, to repeat, no one else
> > >said it!)
> > >
> > >i mean the point is that Steve is one of the few
> ppl
> > >who's been a regualar over the past nth years,
> and also
> > >contributed to talks and the running of
> discussions...
> > >and also has a good base in anarchist politics...
> > >- there is not really anyone else who fits all
> these
> > >LAF credentials within LAF!...
> > >
> > >i think having regulars is good, and also having
> a reasonable
> > >base within anarchism is good, too... Outreach is
> important
> > >as well,
> > >but not to the detriment of destroying the
> anarchist base
> > >which is the point of the thing in the first
> place... I mean
> > >you need a sturdy, sustainable base to outreach
> in the first place!
> > >
> > >So, i think publicity should be first and
> foremost directed inwards
> > >towards anarchists and anti-authoritarians...
> > >A question to ask is why has the LAF apparently
> shrunk over recent years?
> > >(Well since the late 90's as far as i can tell -
> i seem to remember
> > >hearing that some primitivists became regualars -
> did that put everyone
> > >else
> > >off?! Maybe 1 or 2 peripherally involved
> individuals effectively
> > >put ppl off around that time too?)...
> > >
> > >(Maybe
> > >any general outward publicity is no bad thing -
> you'll only
> > >get a few ppl here and there from the various
> hopefully
> > >diverse sectors you're putting your publicity in
> - altho i
> > >think the more diverse the advertising the better
> > >- you don't want to rely on one or 2 sources...)
> > >
> > >Have not caught up with the other posts yet - so
> will go thru them...
> > >But thought i should really respond to this
> post...
> > >
> > >Justin
> > >
> > >--- steve ash <steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Not very happy with current developments now
> I've had
> > > > time to think about them. As one of the last
> real
> > > > anarchists left in the LAF, I can only think
> of two
> > > > other regular attendees, I'm not really happy
> at all
> > > > with the present ideas now I think about it
> and I
> > > > think the whole group would greatly suffer
> with out
> > > > me, though I still have plans of my own. If
> the
> > > > meetings were on the 2nd and 4th of each month
> or
> > > > something and started at 2pm rather than 3pm I
> might
> > > > be able to attend on at least a monthly basis.
> As it
> > > > is the LAF is already isolated from the
> anarchist
> > > > movement and I'd rather work on a project that
> brought
> > > > an anarchist discussion group closer into the
> > > > mainstream of the anarchist movement.
> > >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > >http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >LAF mailing list
> > >LAF at lists.aktivix.org
> > >http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LAF mailing list
> > LAF at lists.aktivix.org
> > http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/laf/attachments/20050822/aa7232f8/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> LAF mailing list
> LAF at lists.aktivix.org
> http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf
>
>
> End of LAF Digest, Vol 6, Issue 25
> **********************************
>
___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
More information about the LAF
mailing list