AUTONOMY AND SOLIDARITY:

NEW ISSUE OF 'UPPING THE ANTI': MAGAZINE LAUNCH:

Speaking of 'Autonomy and Solidarity', an Ontario libertarian communist organization that Molly has frequently mentioned on this blog, they are having a "launch party" on October 18th for the latest issue of their journal 'Upping the Anti'. This will happen at 8:00 pm Thursday, October 18th at the Smiling Buddha Bar, 961 College St, Toronto, ON. Some articles in the new Upping the Anti:

*Anti-Racism and the Women's Movement- Sunera Thobani

*Indigenous Anti-Colonialism- Gord Hill

*The Multitude and New Social Movements- Michael Hardt

*Resistance and the Tar Sands- Macdonald Stainsby Empire

*Students Movements and the CFS-Caslie Frampton

*The Three Way Fight- M. Staudenmaier

*Islam and the Left:A Reply to Staudenmaier-Rami Elamine

*Political Prisoner Roundtable-Ashanti Alston, Seth Hayes, Susan Tipograph, Sara Falconer

*Book Reviews of 'Black Power From the Inside', 'Pacifism as Pathology' and 'The Past didn't Go Anywhere'.

Please see the Autonomy and Solidarity site for more details.

MOLLY NOTES:

First of all I have to say that the ex-Trotskyites of the 'Autonomy and Solidarity' group are in the same "political field" as Molly is. This is important for understanding what I will say below because I will say it in the, perhaps hopeless, desire that such people may listen. I recognize that there is a "generational perception" problem here. Those of us of my generation who became anarchists did it in "opposition" to ALL of leftism. Those who have moved towards anarchism in the last two decades have done so in a situation where the deep connections between "identity politics" and Stalinism have not been so obvious as they were 40 years ago. In actual fact the situation has obviously changed. Identity politics is no longer a matter of manipulation of would be elites from another country. Today it is a matter of "class struggle" between the majority of our ruling class and those who hope to carve out petty empires by claiming to "represent" an "oppressed" minority. There is little doubt that this is a VERY minor thing in the class struggles of our society today, but it exists. Unfortunately it has its echo in so-called "radical politics".

Molly has her own idea of what should be presented to the general population. It would be a positive vision of hope, an inclusive vision, that would appeal to the vast majority. It would be an "activist" vision as opposed to a "reactivist" vision". It would propose to DO something rather than oppose something. Beyond all things it would speak, or try to speak, to a majority and NOT to disaffected minorities.

THIS is where Molly sees that well meaning comrades such as Autonomy and Solidarity go so wrong. They trade a long term vision of movement building for a tiny emotional desire for popularity amongst a VERY restricted section of the population. By doing this trade they close their opportunities for the greater good off as long as they persist in their beliefs. Nobody(at least amongst anarchists) doubts that say 'native communities" should have a right to self-determination. What fashionable leftism says, however, is that ONLY native communities should have such rights, that other non-native struggles for such should be ignored and that "indigenous rights" is something over and beyond the struggle for local community democracy. Molly sees it as ONLY one aspect of same, and she believes that THIS is a much firmer basis for alliances than the silly leftism that says "native issues are holy". If for NO other reason than if a RATIONAL people's movement decides to align itself with natives that the natives could be assured that they did so because of realism and NOT because of an ideology that can be easily abandoned.

Molly has said a lot about "native issues" because they are particularly important in Canada. Other issues are more important elsewhere.She sees the Autonomy and Solidarity people as surrendering to the sort of "political correctness" in a Canadian context that has come to DEFINE the American far left. She OPPOSES this because the Canadian context-and perhaps the American one to a lesser extent- has a "political vacuum" that leaves the way open to a libertarian socialist option. This option will NEVER be taken up if its proponents restrict themselves to defending sectoral interests.

Molly believes in a "politics of hope", not a "politics of resentment". Her whole vision of libertarian socialism is to build cooperation- NOT privilege. There are more than enough "hopeful signs" of such a politics today. Campaigns for sectoral privilege don't count, but campaigns for community empowerment DO. There is a great difference which I don't think the comrades of Autonomy and Solidarity understand.