Subversion – the Party’s
Over!
Ten years ago a group of us got together to form
Subversion. Some had been in (and out of) Wildcat, others had been
politically working together with those comrades for a number of
years previously. We wanted to create a new organisation that could
carry on the work of developing communist ideas and politics free
from the need to label ourselves as either dogmatically marxist or
anarchist.
Recently though, despite continuing to agree on
our basic revolutionary politics, we have had disagreements about the
way forward both organisationally and practically. There have also
been some personal disagreements. These have made it hard for some of
us to work together. As a result there are now only five of us left
in the group and we have had to conclude that we no longer have the
energy or enthusiasm to continue our activities as a
collective.
There will be no further issues of our bulletin,
though back issues and other publications are still available for the
cost of postage for the time being. The Box number will be kept open
for the next six months. The web site will continue indefinitely, but
as the personal responsibility of the comrade who set it up.
A balance sheet of our
activities:
- We have produced 24 editions of the Subversion
magazine, 23 of which have been distributed for free. The print
run since issue 10 has been 1000 and most have been successfully
distributed – many by people who write to us for bundles. We have
produced eight pamphlets, four of which are still available. We
have produced numerous leaflets.
- In Manchester we have run many public meetings
– some good, some awful. We organised these in collaboration with
variously the Anarchist Communist Federation (ACF) and Class War
as well as on our own.
- We organised a national conference on the
State and Capital and initiated a series of day schools with the
ACF.
- We have attended networking meetings,
including the Revolutionary Socialist Network, the Class Struggle
Anarchist Network and the Northern Anarchist Network. We continue
to be involved in the latter project.
- Wherever possible we have involved ourselves
with nationally and locally important episodes of the class
struggle. These included: the Anti-Poll Tax movement, where we
helped set up one group and were active in a number of others;
support for the Merseyside Dockers – again helping set up the
Manchester support group; fighting the Job Seekers Allowance –
getting the group going in Manchester as well as being active in
other towns and nationally through the Groundswell network;
involvement in the campaign against the M66 around Manchester and
subsequently becoming involved in some Earth First! activities in
Oldham and Manchester. This list would not be complete without
mentioning our continuing efforts where we work and some,
admittedly limited, success in initiating industrial action
amongst teachers in Oldham. Our work around these issues led to
the best articles we wrote. They were based on our real personal
experiences of struggle, either as direct participants or through
involvement with support groups.
- Set up a web-site featuring not only our own
publications, but also important texts produced by earlier
communist groups and individuals, a number of whom were
participants in the 1918 German Revolution.
- Maintained regular international contacts and
correspondence.
In all these activities we have sought to work in
a principled and non-sectarian way with other revolutionaries.
This is not bad going, in our opinion, for a group
that for most of its life numbered than eight members or less.
Most importantly, we have been part of a process
that has reshaped those politics that are often labelled communist,
anarchist communist, council communist or libertarian communist. We
would have liked to have had more influence, unfortunately by
choosing to distance ourselves from both the marxist and anarchist
labels, we have bred some suspicion amongst those who have preferred
their cosy comforts.
Our greatest success was probably the Subversion
bulletin. This provided an organised framework for revolutionaries to
debate new issues arising in the class struggle. It attracted many
contributions from non-members of our group, especially in the last
six issues. At the time there wasn’t really any other publication
fulfilling the same role. On the other hand some of us felt that, in
the process, the Subversion viewpoint got somewhat diluted. Moreover,
there was too often little editorial critique or comment on the
articles we published. At times we were reluctant to take a
collective stance on the issues they raised. Whilst some might see
this as another example of non-sectarianism, it all too often
reflected a laziness on our behalf. This process also reflected the
malaise that we had got into. In recent issues there has been little
new produced by ourselves other than reports or book reviews. Our own
lack of anything new to say is probably the most compelling reason to
wind up the group.
Hopefully other opportunities will arise for a
publication similar to Subversion in the future.
So what was the problem?
When we started Subversion we didn’t really have a
clear idea of the direction we hoped it would go in. However, we were
pretty clear what we didn’t want it to be. We didn’t want it to be
monolithic, though we did want the politics to be clear and for
disagreements to be based on an understanding of what others were
saying – all of which suggested the need for pretty rigorous
discussion. As time went by, we also realised that we needed
Subversion to grow. We never intended ourselves to be a purely local
group, indeed although most of us live in and around Manchester, we
do have a couple of members in other parts of the country. On the
other hand, we did not see ourselves as some focal point for others
to join, as some embryo of a new organisation or party. We had always
hoped that other groups would emerge in other places and that as a
result of practical co-operation a fusion would come about, creating
a new communist organisation. That is the reason we have tried to be
non-sectarian and have enthusiastically worked in the different
networks we mentioned above. It is also the reason that we have
worked so closely with the Anarchist Communist Federation.
In our opinion, groups need to grow or they
stagnate. After a period of working together, people either end up
agreeing on everything or end up knowing too well what the lines of
disagreement are. Groups need a tension within discussions to provoke
the development of ideas. If that does not happen, the result is
sterility. We were faced, in Subversion, with having reached the
point where that sterility was beginning to set in. As we said above,
as a group we have produced nothing original for the past two years.
We ended up living off other people’s reactions to two discussions we
started – one over the JSA and the other over the article "Green
Communism". Even those responses had begun to dry up.
It was out of this situation that the
disagreements we mentioned at the beginning arose. Some of these were
personal and frankly, had we been a larger and more thriving group,
would have counted for little. As with tired marriages, small
problems become multiplied until only divorce is the solution. We
also disagreed on the direction the group should go in. One viewpoint
was that we should be working towards creating a national network of
communists. This should be based on individual membership, drawing
upon groups like ourselves, the ACF, Aufheben and the like. The
majority in the group felt (and feel) that this proposal, whilst
laudable, is impractical. We do not see where the basis for such a
network exists. Indeed, since the aborted attempt by Aufheben to get
a kind of loose network to produce a newsletter a few years ago,
nobody else has shown much enthusiasm for the idea. We actually think
that the ACF as it exists is already such a network and don’t see why
they would want to join in another effort. Outside of the ACF we can
see nobody that would be interested. We may be wrong and would love
to be proved so. If we are wrong we would undoubtedly support such an
initiative. Failure to agree on this point, combined with the other
problems was enough to make us look more seriously at the state we
were in.
At the end of the day, our main form of activity,
as a group, at the moment is the production of Subversion. It is
hard, intensive work to produce and distribute it. As we no longer
feel any great enthusiasm for doing this, we had to ask ourselves –
"What is the point?" Therefore the only honest thing to do is to
cease publication and to explain to those who read Subversion why we
are doing so.
What Next?
At the moment we can see no particular political
organisation that we could all enthusiastically join. There
are organisations doing good work and we would refer you to previous
issues of Subversion for recommendations. In this country we would
recommend Organise! as an interesting publication and suggest our readers
contact the ACF to obtain a copy. It looks like Smash Hits could also provide a
useful vehicle for discussion. For information purposes, both
Counter Information and SCHnews make good reading.
We still see the need for political organisation
and hope to be able to contribute to something new and worthwhile in
the future. In the meantime we will continue to be active as
individuals in various ways. We may also, if the need arises and the
energy allows, produce future interventions in the name of
Subversion.
Our thanks go to our many contributors, readers
and supporters during the last ten years.
Comradely,
Subversion
Sept 1998.
Subversion on the Web
http://www.oocities.org/Athens/Acropolis/8195
email: knightrose@oocities.com
The web site is currently receiving around
120 – 150 visits a month. It contains the following:
- Subversion – issues 17 to 23.
- Subversion pamphlets: The Best of Subversion;
the Second Best of Subversion; Ireland, Nationalism and
Imperialism; Labouring in Vain, why Labour is not a Socialist
Party.
- Wildcat pamphlets: Class War on the Home Front
– the history of the Anti-Parliamentary Communist Federation; How
Socialist is the SWP?; Capitalism and its Revolutionary
Destruction
- The German Revolution – various pamphlets by
and about participants in the struggle from 1918 to 1923.
- Communism v Reforms by Anton Pannekoek and
Sylvia Pankhurst.
- Other texts including a Wildcat text on the
Zapatistas; 24 Hours in the Life of the Car; a vision of the
future.
- A discussion section.
I currently have three projects planned for the
future:
- Blasts from the Past. Texts that influenced us to become what we are today.
I have uploaded texts from Point Blank! (1972) probably the best
Situationist Text to come out in the 70s. I have also scanned "As
We Don’t See It" and "Third Worldism or Socialism?" (from the
pamphlet Ceylon – the JVP Uprising). I would welcome suggestions
for other inclusions – particularly if already typed!
- A pamphlet on the Factory Committees in the
Russian Revolution. Originally published in 1984 by Rod Jones in
Wales, an excellent account of the period. This will take some
time to type, hopefully it will be out by Christmas.
- Working Class Opposition to the Nazis in
Germany. I am just about to start
researching this area and at the moment intend to focus on the
Edelweiss Pirates.
I would also like to expand the discussion section
and would welcome contributions. These can relate to anything on the
web-site. I only ask that they are sent to me either on disk (PC or
MAC) or to my email address. It may be that this way we can continue
some of the spirit of Subversion, albeit in a more restricted way. I
would also welcome new contributions on any subjects that are broadly
in line with our statement "Where We Stand".
I can also be contacted by mail at the following
address:
Box 127, Oldham OL4 3FE
What we said in our first ever
issue.
Introducing Subversion
This journal is being produced by
ex-members and sympathisers of the WILDCAT group, which dissolved
itself earlier this year.
We got together in February this year [1988]
because we wanted to see the continuation of a voice for
revolutionary communist p0litics.
We want Subversion to contain articles which are
both interesting and informative – and most importantly free of the
idiotic jargon and sectarian slag-offs of most of the left communist
press. It is in this spirit of non-sectarianism that we have
reprinted a number of leaflets produced by other groups.
Subversion welcomes contributions from its
readers, whether articles, leaflets or letters. We would prefer them
to be typed and insist that writers attempt to produce them in a
style that is easily understandable by anyone interested in reading
them.
Spoofversion
We are producing a limited number of a "final"
issue of Subversion – called "Spoofversion" – in time for the
Anarchist Bookfair. As with all our other publications, this one if
free. If you’d like a copy, then send a first class stamp to: Box
127, Oldham OL4 3FE (without mentioning Subversion in the
address).
Return to Subversion Home Page