[LAF] bookfair

Sun Sep 10 11:30:01 UTC 2006

I must say i find this whole area confusing...

my general view at the moment is that, as Chomsky
says, there are short term goals and long term goals
- short term goals may sometimes be in a reformist direction, 
Long term wise you're thinking about changing
the whole of society (altho dramatic changes in society
might arise sooner than you think - u never know)...

i'm happy to support Friends of the Earth, say, and did voluntary work 
with them a while ago - however i think it's true that they have become
far less radical over the years - i think Jonathan Porritt was their
director a while back and he was part of what became a
more reformist outlook...

even more recently the organisation (FoE) as a whole has improved its structure
- they've tried to become less
hierachical - but the changes seem rather halfhearted and superficial... 

i've spoken to different ppl at their HQ and i think there's quite a range
of different views, from pretty much anarchist (but that's
not often) to, yes, it's true, literally,
eco fascist (that's very rare - no one takes the person expounding this view seriously!)
Basically on the whole they're not anti-business, and spend a lot of time lobbying 
government... they have affiliated local groups who do local activism...
i bumped into their director Tony Juniper last year on the way to a meeting
about the G8 protests in Gleneagles and he was positive about
the direct action being planned... 

(FoE as an organisation will not
do illegal protests - their seems different environmental bands
- Earth First! - radical anarchist activist - then Greenpeace - 
less radical but willing to do illegal stunts but more reformist - then
Friends of the Earth - they lobby the govenrment more and also
do more environmental research than the other 2 organisations
but are more reformist) 

intuitively i feel greenism and anarchism are very closely related. 
i find it frustrating that, to me, ecopolitics implies diversity
and anti-hierachy (think networks - not top down structure),
wheras many greens don't see the significance of 
anarchism in terms of ecology...

greens generally often buy into the status quo and refer
to more radial greens as "tree huggers"

i think the green movement initially had a lot of
ex-marxists, for example, disillusioned with 
socialism - but still wanting radical change... 
now the green movement is pretty reformist... 

anarchism has the advantage of being incapable of
being co-opted by current authoritarian mainstream society by definition! 
maybe that's a significant difference between greenism and anarchism...

some maistream eco writers refer to more radical eco writers - 
e.g. Fritjof Capra does in the Web of Life - altho he tends to see
Bookchin not as a radical thinker but representing the more activist
side of greenism... 

Justin

--- stevphen shukaitis <stevphen at mutualaid.org> wrote:

> that's a pretty interesting question. part of me thinks that the green party in general
> is just
> bullshit and not worth the time at best - but i was just reading "the subversion of
> politics" by
> george katsiaficas, which has some interesting information about the formation of the
> green party
> in germany that is making me rethink that. basically he points at, at least during the
> inital
> phase of its formation, the green party was coming out of the anto-nuclear and
> ecologically
> oriented movements and thus had many close connections with interesting forms of
> radical
> organizing not based on electoral action. so there was part of the party that saw
> themselves as a
> vehicle more for keeping alive mass movements and a way to bring about political change
> by
> continually working with extra parliamentary movements. in other words electoralism
> wasn't a total
> focus or even necessarily the most important goal but only one tactic involved in a
> whole array.
> 
> while i'm not entirely sure what to make of that - and it seems this sort of
> perspective
> eventually got marginalized and the directly democratic spirit underpinning the party
> form which
> existed at first disappeared (for instance in the mandatory rotation of officers and
> other
> positions of power) - it does strike me as a much more interesting approach to politics
> than i had
> previously associated with the green party - and for that reason something which would
> be worth
> thinking about more. as an australian friend once quipped to me, sometimes green are
> like
> watermelons, that is green on the outside and red and black on the inside. hmm....
> while i haven't
> found that too often it certainly does seem like an appealing idea anyways.
> 
> cheers
> stevphen
> 
> 
> > Steve,
> >
> > I think a general eco talk for anarchists would have
> > to be about whether the audience thinks the Green
> > Party is partly anarchist and/or worth voting for (if
> > people vote at all).
> > Would people prefer to support pressure groups in
> > preference to a political party.
> > Do anarchists want to stick to anarchist organisations
> > to promote green ideas?
> >
> > Adrian
> >
> > --- steve ash <steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Ok.
> >>
> >> They initially suggested three but have marked it
> >> down
> >> to two, perhaps because the two people concerned
> >> think
> >> they will pay themselves. However the idea is for it
> >> to be a series, and two isn't really a series.
> >>
> >> Ed has said I can make a descision if theres not
> >> many
> >> responces on this so I think we should commit LAF
> >> funds to one talk and do three 1 1/2 the state
> >> ideology talk, Ed talked about, an anti class
> >> struggle
> >> talk with me, and an eco talk with Adrian. I can do
> >> titles and blurbs for first two but have no idea
> >> what
> >> Adrian wants to talk about and have to post by
> >> Monday.
> >> If I hear nothing I'll just write up on a general
> >> ecology theme and we can change it later.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >From: steve ash <steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk>
> >> > >To: joy_helbin at hotmail.com,
> >> > adrianrwilliams at yahoo.co.uk,
> >> > >laf at lists.aktivix.org
> >> > >Subject: RE: [LAF] bookfair
> >> > >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 19:49:03 +0100 (BST)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >That would be great Adrian, do you have a theme
> >> > that
> >> > >would 'make the anarchists think out of the usual
> >> > >paths' or 'stimulate fresh debate' as some from
> >> the
> >> > >ABF have requested?
> >> > >
> >> > >Basically it would be like an LAF discussion I
> >> > think,
> >> > >with a short intro from the facillitator(s),
> >> > probably
> >> > >not to long, than open debate (chaired in ways
> >> that
> >> > >depend on numbers and practicalities, as usual
> >> with
> >> > >LAF). 1 1/2 hour debates I think. I would imagine
> >> > two
> >> > >facillitators per debate perhaps, so
> >> facillitators
> >> > can
> >> > >join in debate easier, dunno. Maybe you and Joy
> >> for
> >> > >eco one?
> >> > >
> >> > >In general to everyone, are we going with the
> >> > 'we'll
> >> > >pay for one if you pay for two' plan?
> >> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________________________________
> > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security
> Centre.
> > http://uk.security.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > LAF mailing list
> > LAF at lists.aktivix.org
> > https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LAF mailing list
> LAF at lists.aktivix.org
> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 