Starting out my political life as an anarchist I was continuously surrounded by anarchists usually of the somewhat dogmatic variety. Thinking that was the political norm I took what some of them said as gospel. One key area of my physical and political activity has always been anti-fascism so inevitably it was not long before I began hearing about Anti-Fascist Action (AFA) and the largest component of that group, Red Action (RA). Curiosity kind of struck me immediately about AFA in general and RA in particular. I began to ask people and I received mixed responses. Some of those responses were favourable, some were ambivalent, some were neutral and some were outright hostile. To my eternal regret my dogmatic side took over and other people’s ambivalent and hostile view of Red Action took over in my mind. This is not to say that I was particularly hostile to the politics and ideas of Red Action, simply due to listening to the many lies and misconceptions about them, I had my reservations. I was always aware that they done the business with regards to anti-fascism and very much respected them for that and also for their overwhelmingly working-class composition. However I listened far too much to the criticisms, some of which were “too much analysis”, “Bolsheviks”, “Leninists”, “Trotskyists”; “Stalinists”, “nutters” and “authoritarian” among others. Of course there was also the accusation of “IRA front” (is that a bad thing even if it were true?). When this is all you are hearing from people, this is what you will believe. The initiative of independent research did not even cross my mind because I had the lazy attitude of “what’s the point? People have told me all I need to know anyway”.
Then a brilliant book called Beating the Fascists came out. This is the story of Anti-Fascist Action told from a Red Action member’s perspective. It caused a total shit storm and as a result I was immediately attracted to it. I bought a copy from a mate of mine back in 2011 and finished it in a week. What I was reading in Beating the Fascists sparked some thoughts and feelings that what I was reading in the book and what I was being told by other people did not quite sit right somehow. I then decided to do a bit of research online and came across some discussions and pieces written about Red Action, some of these providing another view from what I had always been told. I gradually began to view Red Action in a different light although did not pay too much attention to their politics. After all, I was too busy throwing stuff at coppers, dressing in black and wanting to smash the windows of every bank and posh hotel in sight.
I eventually began to change the view around my praxis, the way in which I practiced my political ideas. I started wearing less of the black bloc gear and engaged in less of the rioting. Maybe a black hooded top with a black mask, jeans and trainers was as far as I would go with the black bloc tactic towards the end of my flirtation with it. I was never a crusty and outside of a black bloc I was always mildly to very casually dressed depending on mood and situation. I was also increasingly taking the view that the black bloc tactic in this country was a spent force, a thing which happened successfully a couple of times and now the police had caught on and adapted their tactics accordingly. 26th March 2011 was not going to happen again, at least the way it did then. Also black blocs in this country pull embarrassingly low numbers and is treat as a fashion statement rather than a tactic to be used. On this basis I would still engage in this tactic on Mainland Europe for example where there are the numbers and the tactical know-how to form successful black blocs. I would however not make this the sole preserve of my activity which far too many people seem to. In this country it has almost became the defining image of the dilettante. Although I must say that not everyone on a black bloc is a dilettante but in my experience most are. An “activist” who will simply turn up to a demo dressed in black, have a bit of a push and shove with the police and then go home hardly, if ever, to be seen or heard of doing anything else. Little real world social activism comes from this. So due to this frustration I began to look for other alternatives and something which periodically cropped up was Red Action stuff.
I began to look more and more into it. I eventually began talking to a member of Red Action and there was an immediate realisation that my own political, social and economic beliefs were hardly, if at all, different. Then I eventually met members of Red Action and associated groups and found that they were absolutely nothing like the negative views which I heard from other people. I felt comfortable around them, not having to watch what I was saying and being in one of the most solidly working class political settings I had ever been in. Then the Red Action Archive and the Anti-Fascist Action Archive went online. This provided me with a wealth of Red Action literature and a from the horse’s mouth insight into the politics and views of the group and some of the individuals within it. Red Action were by no means perfect, no group ever has been and ever will be but I rapidly found out that what I had always been led to believe is a huge pile of steaming horse shit.
Through conversations with its members and supporters and through reading its own writings I quickly concluded that Red Action is in fact where I am at politically.
As I began to adopt a Red Action position and to increasingly identify with what I see as whole tendency in and of itself, I inevitably came into some debate and verbal conflict with others on the left. The most common theme is that Red Action are Bolsheviks. By this point I knew that was rubbish so I found two references, among others, which would disprove that. These are the Open Polemic and Red Action Scotland Constitution, Principles and Perspectives. The former consists of discussions between Red Action and Stalinist and Trotskyist groups, with Red Action taking a position contrary to Stalinists and Trotskyists. The latter gave opinions on various topics among them being the Soviet Union and Leninism.
On the Soviet Union:
“RA formally acknowledges that Stalin led the counter revolution in Russia which did not overthrow the Communist Party but was organised within the Communist Party which instead overthrew the workers state.
Before Stalin could use bastardised Marxism as its formal political basis, that Marxism had to be ground up, re-hashed, reprocessed and warped into something entirely different. The Bolshevik leadership did not cause Stalinism, which was due to the social and economic factors, but the theories they advanced to justify the tactics they deemed necessary to retain power laid the theoretical groundwork, which by separating in theory and practice the concept of the workers state from below, later facilitated the development of the counter revolution led by Stalin. (1991)”
On Leninism:
“Red Action recognises that the representative groups on the Left are neither ‘worker’ nor ‘revolutionary’. The time has come for a clean break from ideology and philosophy. (1988)
In regard to contemporary politics Leninist ideology and the cult of Lenin is the authority quoted to justify all sectarianism. The concept of one party rule in a one party state is the end that justifies THEIR means. As such Leninism is the major ideological impediment to the renaissance of the revolutionary left. As long as the left is dominated by conservative sects, the left will be dominated by conservative thinking. For the influence of RED ACTION to grow the dominance of the Bolshevik left will have to be broken.
…[as RED ACTION] we proclaim that the singular objective of revolutionary Marxism is the establishment of unconditional democracy. This is the self rule of the producers without qualification…this means there is no privileged position demarcated for the revolutionary party or indeed for the revolutionary class within the proletarian dictatorship. (1992)”
Very Bolshevik, very Bolshevik indeed!
As well as dispelling the myth that Red Action are “Stalinist”, “Bolshevik”, “Leninist” or even “Trotskyist” (some contradictory accusations there, what next? “Racists”? “Fascists”? Oh wait…), the perspective on Leninism provides us with an almost prophetic forecast of things to come for those of us one generation later. This is that “representative groups on the left are neither ‘worker’ nor ‘revolutionary'” and that “the time has come for a clean break from ideology and philosophy”. Looking at the landscape of the left today this point-of-view cannot be any closer to the truth. That left landscape being dogmatic, doctrinaire, overwhelmingly middle-class and at the first opportunity acquiesces to the trap of social democracy, a counter revolutionary philosophy in itself.
The left did not take heed to this warning because their prejudices about Red Action blinded them. Red Action in my view, an independent view at that, has been fully vindicated.
“As long as the left is dominated by conservative sects, the left will be dominated by conservative thinking” and this cannot be more evident by the dominance of conservative thinking emanating from sects like the Socialist Worker’s Party (SWP), Socialist Party, Counterfire and the like. Dogmatic, middle class, vanguardist and irrelevant.
Then we have class composition of which Red Action was one of just a few groups on the left with a thoroughly working class composition. For this and especially for emphasising this as absolutely vital to progression, growth and victory they received the accusation of “workerism”. They faced this accusation as if wanting working class ideals, politics, groups and actions to be composed of and led by actual working class people is a bad thing.
From what I have seen most criticism of Red Action, although not exclusively, has came from middle class quarters. I can only come to the conclusion that this is because Red Action, among one or two others, acted as a counter weight to this middle class dominance. The middle class left have never liked overwhelmingly working class groups and tendencies like Red Action and fought tirelessly to trample on and discredit any vestige of them. The middle class left still smothers and suffocates working class activists, groups, campaigns and tendencies today. Those of us who are sick and tired of this are beginning to fight back and look to the tried and tested and in my personal case and the increasing cases of other working class socialists, Red Action provides that for us. Red Action is STILL a breath of fresh air among the sea of middle class trendy lefties dominating the left.
We have a last chance to reverse this and personally speaking I believe that Red Action, as a tendency, is as relevant today as it was in the 80s, 90s and 00s. We have a great deal to learn from their analysis and perspective, snubbed in the past but vindicated today by the current state of affairs. We would be foolish, indeed reckless to ignore Red Action’s analysis and perspective and not apply that to struggles today.
I have only touched upon a few areas and aspects of Red Action’s thinking, leaving you to do the rest just as I have done. Working class people are not stupid, contrary to the left viewing us as such. We can work things out for ourselves and Red Action has been one of the few groups and tendencies on the left to actually acknowledge that simple fact.
Red Action’s political honesty and frankness is a welcome break and one which I will do my very best to promote in the future.
Here’s what the Socialist Standard (August 1986) said
Not so long ago the Islington branch of The Socialist Party had a debate against a bunch of bar-room rebels called Red Action. Their main speaker argued that winning the war against the British state in the north of Ireland is the key issue in the class struggle, exhibiting a degree of sincerity unusual on the Left. His comrades cheered him when he made his comment and spoke loudly about the important and brave struggle of the Republicans in Ireland. But killing workers is not a theoretical position, it is a practical one. Why don’t those who are so eager to cheer when it comes to supporting military violence get in on the act? After all, if socialists genuinely believed that defeating the British army in Ireland was the decisive issue in the class struggle (a nationalistic belief which no socialist could share) we would have an obligation to join the armed struggle. But for the bar-room rebels it is much easier to sing a few nationalistic songs (it is a sight worth seeing: these so-called Red Internationalists sitting in a pub on a Saturday night singing A Nation Once Again) and paint a few slogans on the toilet walls than to go and do what they urge other to do.
Whatever the Socialist Standard (I had never even heard of them before this comment so, thumbs up for being so captivating) said in this piece about Ireland and Red Action was nullified and void by the simple fact that some Red Action members later did go on to join both the Provisional IRA and the INLA. In a nutshell, Socialist Standard (whoever they are/were!) is talking out of its arse. But I guess to the likes of the Socialist Party (I thought they formed in the 90s out of the embers of Militant rather than existing in 1986?), who have never lifted a finger in support of the cause against British imperialism in Ireland, facts are irrelevant. After all it is they who are there to provide the answers. Also of course in their infinite wisdom, you need to be an AK47 wielding gunman in order to be an active Irish republican socialist. There is absolutely no political work to be done at all, that is very much clear by this article.
As for socialism and the struggle in Ireland, I would suggest that both the Socialist Party and Socialist Standard take their heads out of their arses and read some James Connolly or even the very basic text of the Provos, the Green Book (Or even the poetry of Bobby Sands). Then again why should they? They have all of the answers for the people in Ireland. I mean I could just imagine communities under siege on the Falls, Clonnard, Creggan, Bogside etc. are just waiting for the Socialist Party and Socialist Standard to come and save them. The armed death squads of the British state (UDA/UFF, UVF/RHC, LVF, OV, British military etc) will just float away without a fight.
Who is talking about “Socialist” Standard now? No one, in all of my years as an active socialist I have not heard of Socialist Standard once! People are still talking about Red Action now, people are increasingly looking towards the politics of Red Action, Anti-Fascist Action and the Independent Working Class Association. Socialist Standard has absolutely 0 traction now.
Their caricatured view of Irish republican socialists, whether armed or otherwise is clear from this article and obviously rooted in some puritanical, lefty British pseudo-colonial viewpoint.
Edit: Just found out that the “Socialist Party” mentioned here is the Socialist Party of Great Britain (SPGB) and not the one formed out of Militant in the 90s. The SPGB have done even less than the Socialist Party where Ireland is concerned.
More from Socialist Standard August 1986;
Guns and bombs and the sophisticated instruments of murder are sickening, obscene objects, not symbols of human freedom. Armies are necessarily brutal and authoritarian.
The case for political violence is the case against the possibility of working class consciousness. Once workers understand our oppression we can dispossess he ruling class of both the means of violent coercion and the means of wealth production and distribution. The bar-room rebels base their talk about violence on the defeatist belief that the ruling minority will always be bigger than us. Indeed, the capitalist elite might respond to majority socialist revolution with violence. But if they do they will be powerless in the face of the democratic majority. There is no glory in getting killed; as workers, our aim must be to avoid at all costs the possibility of suffering for our class, while ensuring victory for our class.
If you think that the ruling classes will give everything up without a fight then you are seriously deluded and need to retire altogether from the political arena.
“The case for political violence is the case against the possibility of working class consciousness.” – That must also include violence employed by unions in pursuit of worker’s rights, including but not limited to bombings and sabotage e.g. the Molly Maguires.
“Once workers understand our oppression we can dispossess he ruling class” – With the military, police, intelligence services, fascist gangs and death squads back by the state in the way, how do you expect to dispossess the ruling classes?
“Indeed, the capitalist elite might respond to majority socialist revolution with violence.” – In which case unless you want to face certain death you you will need to respond in kind. This cancels out the “The case for political violence is the case against the possibility of working class consciousness” part of the article. It is contradictory.
“There is no glory in getting killed” – No one ever said that there is, that accusation merely exists in the deluded heads of “Socialist” Standard.
“as workers, our aim must be to avoid at all costs the possibility of suffering for our class” – We suffer as a class under capitalism because of capitalism, we can not avoid capitalism. To level the blame for suffering squarely at people who use violence against capitalism is folly and again, deluded.
Since this is mentioned in the context of Ireland, I am yet to see any solid, practical real world proposals from “Socialist” Standard on how communities in Ireland who are under siege from the military, police, intelligence services and death squads should deal with their situation. When people are literally being murdered in their homes by the state and the gangs it sponsors, how do you expect people to respond? Offer the gunmen in and sit down to a nice cup of tea and read a copy of Class Consciousness 101? Maybe stick a flower in the barrel of their firearm which hopefully will stop the round from exiting the barrel and embed itself in the body of someone?
If “Socialist” Standard did not exist it would be necessary for Wolfie Smith to make it up.
Nobody has said the ruling classes will give up everything without a fight. But then the Molly Maguires don’t represent an effective successful way to dispossess the ruling class either. Saying there is no glory in getting killed is not an accusation. Nor is anyone blaming those proposing violence as responsible for capitalism.
As for solid practical real world proposals they are not hard to independently research for the curious so this will be my last quote from the article.
“Socialists would not be historically scientific if they did not understand why workers join the IRA, why they join the ANC. The present writer was once told by a comrade in Belfast how after the British troops started beating up and killing Republicans the IRA won more recruits than they had guns. State violence breeds counter-violence. The Socialist Party is not the Liberal Party; we do not sit around tutting at workers for becoming violent. But neither are we opportunist liars who will tell workers that violence will create anything but new rulers. Only the struggle to end capitalism will bring genuine human liberation. And the struggle is easier to win than those in which countless workers have had their lives wasted as they have swallowed nationalist myths and joined the dead heroes.”
“It is not for socialists to begrudge our fellow workers a few drinks and a bit of shouting on a Saturday night. The bar-room rebel is but a political reflection of the poverty of working class life. Out of the emotional anger of the heated pub debate socialists have been made – and many more will begin to think about politics in the place where workers try to escape and brewers get rich. But to the bar-room rebel we have a warning: you can’t romanticise the struggle forever. The need to get rid of this rotten capitalist system is urgent. Sloganising and fighting wars with bar mats and looking for new nations is no solution. And the bar-room rebel knows that it is no solution. Perhaps that is why one or two of them are reading this article.”
P. S. Wolfie is a reference to the Irish revolutionary Wolfe Tone who used the pseudonym Citizen Smith in order to evade capture by the British.
Re: black block. ‘I was never a crusty’ – i didn’t realise you had to be.
‘the black bloc tactic in this country was a spent force, a thing which happened successfully a couple of times’ – have you been to any demos of late? dover?
‘black blocs in this country pull embarrassingly low numbers’ – what is the official preferable number then?
‘treat[ed] as a fashion statement rather than a tactic to be used?’ Really? What do you propose instead?
And this is gross generalisation and fantasy fiction:
‘An “activist” who will simply turn up to a demo dressed in black, have a bit of a push and shove with the police and then go home hardly, if ever, to be seen or heard of doing anything else.’
you got 2 things right: RA did the business and the BTF book is superb (was using it last night for researching a book).
also, can i reiterate my thanks to whoever uploaded the Red Action Archive and the Anti-Fascist Action Archive. Mal
“i didn’t realise you had to be.” – I never said that you needed to be.
“have you been to any demos of late? dover?” – Yes, plenty, too many in fact.
“what is the official preferable number then?” – There is not one. But if you compare what happened on 26th March 2011, an event in which I was present, you will see what a black bloc is supposed to be. Since I was emphasising my point about ‘black blocs’ in this country, compare the numbers they pull here to say France, Germany, Greece, Italy or Brazil. I often see people on demos dressed from head to toe in black in numbers as little as 1, 6 and 10. That is not a black bloc, that is a glorified fashion statement. Take the recent “general strike” in London as an example of this. Look it up if you can be arsed and you’ll see what I mean. It had a ‘black bloc’. Black bloc is supposed to be a mass action where people act based upon their strength in numbers.
“Really? What do you propose instead?” – Yes, really and I propose that people stop treating it as a fashion statement. Either that or find, better still create, something different. Black blocs are supposed to be used to carry out direct action, usually blockades or property damage, not to simply march from A to B without anything happening.
As someone who has been active for years and has engaged with black blocs and ‘black blocs’, I have seen groups of people dressed head to toe in black and simply marching from one place to the other with often the most happening is a push with the police, maybe an arrest or two (which sadly some see as a badge of pride). That is not black bloc, that is not the purpose because as I stated it is a tactic to be used in order to carry out illegal acts. Marching from A to B is not an illegal act, not mostly anyway. The black bloc on the 26th March 2011 demo in London was a black bloc, Heiligendamm 2007 was a black bloc, what is happening in France right now contains a black bloc working in tandem with a wider movement, get my drift?
I have seen and participated in black blocs ranging from the hundreds to the thousands across Europe. Those are black blocs, not less than one hundred marching from A to B which is usually the case. Take the following as a case in point. The admittedly fairly decently sized break away bloc, which could have been classed as a black bloc, last summer on the People’s Assembly demonstration in London had the police on the run, I was there although not dressed head to toe in black. There were loads of targets, the police could not catch up. One golden ‘target’ was the show office of a block of former council flats which was recently refurbished as yuppie “apartments”. I thought great, what a winner, could not hardly find a more legitimate target than that. The break away, passing banks, a few posh shops and an unmanned police office, did not touch a thing apart from spray something on the front of the target’s show office. No property damage on that target or any of the potential others which the break away passed. Oh I suppose if you count the dick who threw the traffic cone at a Ford Fiesta car passing by. So rebel! Really shook the establishment to the core with that one. It was a glorified run around in the end despite ample opportunity and ample instances of free reign to have a proper go at property damage. This was the best opportunity in my opinion since 26th March 2011, one of those rare moments but it was squandered. This would not have happened anywhere else. This is what I meant by both “fashion statement” and “spent force”. This is not isolated, this is one of many cases which I have personally witnessed and experienced.
I am forever also seeing and hearing about ‘black blocs’ which have happened where a small number of people have simply marched somewhere and went home with maybe like I say, the brief adrenaline rush that you get from a bit of push and shove with bored coppers. I could go on and on about this.
“And this is gross generalisation and fantasy fiction:
‘An “activist” who will simply turn up to a demo dressed in black, have a bit of a push and shove with the police and then go home hardly, if ever, to be seen or heard of doing anything else.’” – “Although I must say that not everyone on a black bloc is a dilettante”, I made the point of actually saying that this does not apply to everyone on a black bloc or a ‘black bloc’.
I see too many people, regular faces, who turn up for black blocs and ‘black blocs’ only to never be seen on any other type of action such as a picket line, a ‘normal demo’, commemorations, leaflet drops in and around estates, organising in the workplace etc. But then again I suppose furiously masturbating to World Riots on Facebook and black bloc Youtube videos of goings on in France, Brazil, Greece etc. takes up a lot of valuable time that people can not find the time to do other things. The real fantasy here is in the heads of dilettantes.
Touchy eh?
Whilst I generally have the upmost respect for your output Mal, I am slightly bemused by the style and content of your comment. It reads like a snide Facebook reply even to the inclusion of a spellcheck.
If ever an example of how black bloc in its current form fails to serve anti-fascism was required, Dover would be my first choice. Despite a reasonably large mobilisation any chance of a decisive victory was squandered by the total lack of advance planning. (Coaches stopping at the only services on route?) Without a clear objective and leadership this form of counter-protest can only result in a chaotic bit of “push and shove”
Like it or not, if you accept the RA analysis of the failures of anti-fascism in the “superb” BTF book, you must admit the failures of black bloc in this country.
touchy eh?
Cheeky fucker eh?