A reply to the blogger kittysjones: “The ultimate aim of the “allthesame” lie is division and disempowerment of the Left.”

What a fucking cop out!

What follows was posted as a reply to the blog post here: twice; we then asked the blogger whether our comment had been censored, as we could see other, more sycophantic comments had since been approved by the admin; that reply didn’t appear either. It doesn’t auger well for a future under labour if even their supporting bloggers seek to stifle mild dissent.

From the anti-capitalist point of view of course they’re all the same, – should the turkey vote for Christmas? The Chartist and suffragette campaigns were not primarily about the right to vote, that was just a means to an end. They were an attempt to bring the selfish and greedy ruling class to heel, and they weren’t afraid to fight. But it was too late, they let us have the vote once they had completed the theft of our means of production, and condemned every single one of us to wage labour, which however you dress it up, is an abusive relationship; an abomination. The labour party gave the working class someone to vote for that could speak politely for it in the corridors of power then take its seat again without ever altering the balance of that power.

The worst thing about voting is that it’s an excuse for not doing anything, it reinforces the idea that someone, somewhere, is in control and it’s up to them to solve the problems they created, it isn’t, it’s up to us. People waste their time and energy campaigning in an election and then sit back on their arses as if they’ve done something worthwhile. What a fucking cop out. The working class has power, governments claim to have it; government is a conspiracy between rulers and ruled. Your reward for allowing yourself to be governed is absolution from responsibility for the misery created by the society you inhabit. Recent history has shown that whilst elected governments must bend to corporate interests a handful of determined militants can thwart their best laid plans. An example of the futility of parliamentary democracy can be found here: yet generations of leftists have defeated themselves in this arena. Read how the labour member respects our enemies for their ability to frustrate us.

What if labour do get elected? A thinly-veiled corporatism is sold to us on the basis that it will be slightly kinder; and to the bourgeoisie on the premise that it will be more stable than their cut-throat piracy (in other words we will be persuaded to collaborate in our own exploitation). When we start kicking off, wildcatting, blockading fracking sites, stopping evictions and deportations, closing down exploiters, actually hurting our capitalist enemies, they’ll tell us to stop rocking the boat or we’ll let the tories in again, just like they did in the 70’s. Anyway, here’s our original reply:

“All three parties are fighting this election under false pretences, the idea that countries must balance their books like petty bourgeois households and that abstract debts created in computer programmes exert some moral obligation over real people – much less the working class, who even built their wretched computers for them. The idea that there is a shortage of work and money when in fact there is too much of both. There is plenty to do; to be sure, saving the bloody planet for a start, but the only activity that will earn you a qualified right to exist in their world is one that adds value to someone else’s capital thereby enhancing the fetishised status of the socially useless. A true socialist would have the courage to say so.

Of course the tories are despicable and wish to enslave the working class, but need I remind you the last labour government introduced workfare and lied to the United Nations to start a war in which a million people died, despite an unprecedented and inarguable level of active public opposition. Short of taking up arms against the state the British people were powerless to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe engineered by Tony Blair on behalf of his sponsors in the oil industry – Halliburton – who were at the time running the United States. They’ve got form for this; the Wilson government took a solemn decision in cabinet to lie to the U.N. over Diego Garcia which it had sold to the U.S. for a military base, had the population forcibly removed and left to stave to death on a rock.

Now Miliband will pander to the moral panic painstakingly created by the corporate media over immigration; curiously the public service broadcaster has led the way in this. The BBC incessantly prompts callers for reactionary comments, reassuring wavering racists that it’s understandable to be scared of foreigners. Any fool knows that economic migration is not controlled by governments but by the bourgeoisie, who use it to lower the wages and conditions at the bottom, whilst ‘quality immigration’ – importing I.T. specialists from India or doctors from the Philippines is just a shameful pillage of the education systems of the poorest countries by the richest – primitive accumulation. National borders are of no use to us, being only necessary to maintain differentials in prices and wages to the benefit of the employing class. A true socialist would have the courage to say so.

A ‘Labour’ party would stand for the working class regardless of nationality and expose the concept of national interest for the scam it has always been. It would stop lying about the realities of economics, stop apologising for the excesses of global capitalism, stop trying to fix the economy, stop polishing the turd. If we want an end to capitalism we have to stop trying to make it work. The economy is the mechanism that maintains the dominance of the few over the many and we must push it until it breaks.

We don’t want a different government we need expropriation of private property and to take control of the infrastructure to institute sustainable demand-led production. No political party is going to do that for us, the emancipation of the exploited is the task of the exploited themselves, not some lily-livered apologist for the exploiters.”

Mal C x

Tear gas, police spies and the lie of democracy

When the police start firing tear gas and rubber bullets at you for having the audacity to protest in the streets, you know you’re not living in a democracy.

The current rulers of both Turkey and Brazil were sold to the people as outsiders – an Islamic moralist and a former Marxist freedom fighter.

But Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Dilma Rousseff are both from the same mould as Tony Blair, who fooled so many people in the UK back in 1997, or Barack Obama, who delighted liberals all across the world when he first became President of the USA in 2009.

They are nothing but frontpeople for the same deadly neoliberal system that has the world’s population and environment in its toxic grip.

Once in power, the pretence cannot be maintained and, if challenged by dissent, the local franchise of the global capitalist system will always react in the same way – with repression of one kind or another.

It will hardly come as a surprise to most anarchists that the UK state has been developing a method of total surveillance of electronic communication passing through the country.

But the details provided by a report in The Guardian on Saturday, thanks to courageous whistleblower Edward Snowden, are certainly welcome.

Perhaps more people will wake up to the reality that the state is not a benign entity, protecting the population from “terrorism” and crime, but a hostile organisation that regards its own subjects as a threat to the interests it really represents.

Behind the official language used to justify the surveillance, we see that these interests are, as you’d expect, its own monopoly on power (“national security”) and the unimpeded continuation of the capitalist system which it imposes on us (“economic wellbeing”).

When Special Branch police officers openly argue that protest is covered by the definition of terrorism in the 2001 legislation, you don’t have to be a genius to understand the intent behind these insidious systems of control.

The aim of the British state is to ensure we never reach the point here where it has to resort to using tear gas and rubber bullets on the mainland, that its totally ruthless determination to maintain the stranglehold of the ruling elite is never exposed as such, that the illusion of government by consent remains intact.

Coincidentally, the same issue of The Guardian also includes a report on police spies in the protest movement, ahead of the publication of a new book, Undercover: The True Story of Britain’s Secret Police.

It reveals that Special Branch conman Bob Lambert not only infiltrated London Greenpeace (and sexually and emotionally exploited female activists), but also co-wrote the leaflet that led to the McLibel court battle.

Although the affair ended up as a great moral victory for Dave Morris and Helen Steel, and a PR disaster for McDonald’s, it is fair to assume that this was not the intention of the police spy.

Instead, he was presumably acting as an agent provocateur, aiming to serve up an easy target for the corporate lawyers and thus deterring other campaigners from criticising McDonald’s.

This is a key element to the story of state’s infiltration of groups who dare to challenge the state-capital mafia which is sometimes overlooked – they’re not just “spying”, watching what’s going on, but taking a pro-active role in steering activists in directions favoured by the state.

Another example of this is revealed in a recent book published by Corporate Watch, Managing Dissent: Capitalism, Democracy and the Organisation of Consent. Tom Anderson notes there that the presence of undercover officers “can help the police to shape and mould the activities of groups that they have infiltrated” and “undermine and disrupt political activity which challenges the system”.

The British state is a powerful and sophisticated creature. Who knows in what other ways its infiltrators have, and no doubt continue to, undermine efforts to combat capitalism? What has so far been revealed may only be the most obvious tip of the iceberg.

Anarchists should be careful not to fall into the trap of accepting reformist liberal framing of these issues – for instance, despite the quality of its news coverage here, The Guardian’s editorial piece still trotted out the usual warning about what could happen if the total surveillance system fell into “the wrong hands”.

The hands of an ultra-powerful group of secretive, corrupt, power-hungry, warmongering sociopaths who are happy to destroy the planet we live on for their short-term material greed, perhaps?

We need to counter that line by saying loudly and clearly that we are already living in that plutofascist society and that the tear gas, surveillance and police spies are all just part of the prison they have built around us.

We need to say loudly and clearly that as anarchists we reject all of that, in its entirety, and aren’t just calling for some adjustments here and there.

We need to say loudly and clearly that we refuse to be confined by the mindset that cannot see any other possibilities than the sick capitalist society in which are imprisoned, that we refuse to play their game by their rules, that we don’t even accept the language in which they talk to us or their most basic assumptions about the legitimacy of land ownership, of authority, of their judicial system and the force by which they impose it on us.

This, as I argue in The Anarchist Revelation, is the first step to doing something about it. Our vision – of an entirely different future from the one with which we’ve been presented – has to be voiced before it can be heard. After it has been heard it can be shared and dreamed. And after it has been dreamed it can be turned into reality.

As Dave Morris told The Guardian on Saturday: “All over the world police and secret agents infiltrate opposition movements in order to protect the rich and powerful but as we have seen in so many countries recently people power and the pursuit of truth and justice is unstoppable.”