Statement announcing formation of The Queer Insurrection and Liberation Army

Founding statement by The Queer Insurrection and Liberation Army, a section of the anarchist guerilla forces active in Rojava. I don’t usually post stuff from or endorse armed forces. Something i’m particularly worried about at them moment is the currant fetishisation of armed struggle by Western leftists because of Rojava – but i do recognise that armed self defense is essential there to protect people and the revolution. So, with these reservations, i think its worth promoting these guys – how many times in history have queers condemned people to the gulags or sent people to die in wars that they started for their own narrow sectional interests? And, as they say, who better to fight fascists than the victims of fascism? Statement borrowed from insurrection news.

We, the International Revolutionary People’s Guerrilla Forces (IRPGF) formally announce the formation of The Queer Insurrection and Liberation Army (TQILA), a subgroup of the IRPGF comprised of LGBT*QI+ comrades as well as others who seek to smash the gender binary and advance the women’s revolution as well as the broader gender and sexual revolution.
TQILA’s members have watched in horror as fascist and extremist forces around the world have attacked the Queer community and murdered countless of our community members citing that they are ‘ill’, ‘sick’ and ‘unnatural’. The images of gay men being thrown off roofs and stoned to death by Daesh was not something we could idly watch. It is also not only Daesh whose hatred for Queer, Trans* and other non-binary peoples leads to religiously motivated hatred and attacks. Christian conservatives in the global northwest have also attacked LGBT*QI+ peoples in an attempt to silence and erase their existence. We want to emphasize that queerphobia, homophobia and trans*phobia are not inherent to Islam or any other religion. In fact we know many Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists etc who are welcoming of uniqueness and non-conforming people and some who are even Queer themselves. We stand in solidarity with them against fascism, tyranny and oppression. Additionally, we criticize and struggle against the conservative and feudal anti-Queer sentiments within the revolutionary left both here and abroad.
Our commitment to struggling against authority, patriarchy, oppressive heteronormativity, queer/homo-phobia and trans*phobia are strengthened by the revolutionary advances and gains of the Kurdish women’s struggle. The fact that Jineolojî classes debate gender constructs and sexuality further highlights the advance of the revolution in Rojava and all of Kurdistan with women pushing for revolutionary advances at a rapid pace. It is this necessity and desire to strengthen the gains of the women’s revolution while advancing the Queer struggle that has motivated Queer comrades of the IRPGF to form TQILA.
QUEER LIBERATION! DEATH TO RAINBOW CAPITALISM!

 ̶B̶A̶S̶H̶ SHOOT BACK! THESE FAGGOTS KILL FASCISTS!

MILITANT HORIZONTAL SELF-ORGANIZED COLLECTIVES & COMMUNITIES

FOR THE REVOLUTION AND QUEER ANARCHISM!
International Revolutionary People’s Guerrilla Forces IRPGF

Book Review: Getting By – Estates, Class and Culture in Austerity Britain, by Lisa McKenzie

Getting By is the result of ethnographic research by sociologist, socialist, and social housing resident, Lisa McKenzie in her own council housing estate: St. Anne’s “Stanzville” in Nottingham in England. It is an important read for understanding how class works in Britain today. Class is not just a relation to the means of production – it is a social relation defined by being fucked around and having to get through difficult circumstances on a daily basis to get by. Through telling the stories of residents at St. Anne’s we get an idea of the difficulties people have to face on a daily basis and of the strategies used to manage and negotiate these circumstances. In doing so it provides an important counter-narrative to what you might hear from the mainstream media or stereotypes about the scum and worthless benefit scroungers. Instead McKenzie is motivated by trying to show the value of who and what is there on her estate. What she gives us is a picture of a community who are constantly considered worthless by the outside and in response create their own internal systems of valuation and respect (and a lot of this value system is something the outside word should learn from, for example being black or mixed race is envied in St. Anne’s). Highlighting these kinds of things is important in order to show the value of what is there in working class communities. Because without this you have ‘community development’ programmes, designed by outsiders which miss the whole point of council estate problems. The example is given of a mentoring programme claiming that “As a result [of our programme] a ‘mentor’ feels more valued in his own community” (p 162). As McKenzie points out, “This is a very simplistic approach to exclusion and disadvantage, […] and works within a limited framework. Being respected in your community is not the problem: it is being respected outside the neighbourhood that residents of council estates struggle with” (p. 162).

Image from the publishers, Policy Press

The most interesting part of the book is not by design of research. The book talks about how the estate is stigmatised by the outside and in response the residents are creating their own value system and systems of respect. Luckily for the researcher, just as she was finishing the research, the whole business of the 2011 riots happened, and the alternative value system that Stanz people had been creating in place of the one that rejected them began to accelerate. (alternative value systems are usually ignored, and when they are looked at, they are assumed to be statically existing rather than developing). And this gives a very interesting picture of what happens. The value system they are creating values belonging to the estate and an in-group identity. As this accelerates, this identity becomes counterposed to the identities of other council estates, and with that came intra-estate violence and riots. This is what McKenzie calls ‘estatism’:

“While boundaries were put up by those who lived on the estate in order to feel safe […], at the same time those boundaries acted as a wall, keeping in a closed and suspicious group of people, whose fear of stigma and ‘being looked down on’ often prevented them from engaging in pursuits that might make real and positive differences to their lives […] I have described a tight-knit community, which has been built on pride, a sense of belonging, humour, and sharing, but also fear, instability, and stigmatisation” (p. 149).

One of the chief directions of this wall was against other council estates, something that led to turf wars, even in the city centre of Nottingham, where some areas and shops were seen as Stanz territory, and others belonging to other estates like Meadows or Radford. And when the riots came, these inter-estate rivalries became battlelines. It would be fascinating to know how it changed in the aftermath of the riots. The main outcome seemed to be that the police and the courts, spurred on by the right-wing media and politicians, cracked down on any scapegoats they could find. We hear about the stories of people who had no involvement in activities but who were imprisoned by court systems that thought they needed to sate the appetite of a right-wing press and political class.

Like the example of Perry, who was walking home with his take-away dinner on the night of the riots, when he found himself being chased by police and was arrested and later trialled and convicted by jury and sentenced to three years in prison:

“The main argument of the prosecution was that Perry had been on the street in order to ‘get up to no good’, otherwise why else would he have been there? Another part of the prosecution’s argument was that Perry was wearing a red bandanna, which, they argued, was a signifier that Perry was part of a gang in St Ann’s. This line of defence seemed to go along way with the jurors, even though there was no evidence that Perry had done anything apart from being on the street that night, and he looked like a rioter. The police went through Perry’s phone records and contacts – he was not in contact with anyone else who had been arrested that night, and the police admitted that he didn’t seem to know anyone else who he had been arrested with. But among the furore about the riots, and the rising fear of ‘the underclass’ and inner-city ‘gangs’, 12 men and women from Nottingham believed that Perry was a ‘rioter’” (p.190).

This can only feed into the existing perspectives that everybody is against them. McKenzie describes how the talk among men in the boxing gym or or barbers was always about “conspiracy theories they had read on the internet, and swapped information about new sites with ‘new evidence’, which, for them, explained ‘their situation’” (p. 98). The most popular conspiracy theory was about the Illuminati,

“an organisation that is centred around Jewish bankers and Zionist politics, which holds politicians, the media, the legal system and the banks in their hands […] and their racism towards black people is purposeful and political, with the aim of keeping racial order and continuing inequality, thus keeping poor people in poverty, while its members and the Masonic order become more wealthy and more powerful” (p. 98).

What struck me reading this is how much of ‘their situation’ they are trying to explain: racism, poverty, inequality, the1% hoarding all the wealth, the political system, the media and the courts as tools keeping them down… However, as she continues, “while these theories are discussed in the greatest detail, argued about, and the men enjoy the debates that come from new evidence they find on the internet, there is little interest and even less knowledge of national and local politics, apart from the consensus that all politicians, like the police, cannot and should not be trusted” (p. 99). And this distrust leads to a process of looking inwards towards the safety of the estate, something which manifests itself as the inter-estate rivalry and violence. What I’m wondering is if the enemies can be more concretely pinpointed and if different working class communities might come together on the basis of this shared bad treatment after the riots.

An important thing about the book is that the author is working class. This is somebody telling the story of the community she is part of, rather then somebody looking in at them. It is important that knowledge is produced by the working classes rather than for the working class by outside middle class observers. One tendency of university-educated working class people is that the university values and encourages writing for academic or policy-making audiences and the use of language that reflects a grasp of social theory or the management/corporatist ethos of the neoliberal state. This has the effect of bribing/conditioning the brightest of the working class to ‘graduate’ and become culturally middle-class. McKenzie seems to resist this. She makes use of social theory to reveal aspects of estate life, but she doesn’t make theoretical points or convolute her language with references that prove to university audience how much she knows but just make reading it difficult for everybody else.

This poses a question though: who would read Getting By? Is it likely that people from the St Anne’s estate will read this? I don’t know, but it is probable that at least some from other working class estates or communities will read it. And it is here that the biggest potential is. If there is a way to autonomously develop awareness of common experiences of (gender, racial, class) oppression and common interests, surely it must be through recognising oneself in the stories of another. Indeed, this is exactly the kind of remedy to the chief problem that she identifies. Although she tells the story of St. Anne’s from the perspective of the people who live there, she is not shy to be critical when she notices the tendency towards estatism. What this book and other estate-produced knowledge have the potential to do is to counter this division that estatism seems to create by helping people to recognise that WE are all the same (because we are all fucked over by THEM – the true enemies e.g. punishing state, upper class demonisation and complicit media, racism, capitalism, etc…).

And here there is a bit of a contradiction that I don’t think is picked up on by the author. Elements of ‘naming the enemy’ are already there: “since the end of 2010, apathy has been replaced by fear that things are getting worse, and that no one cares, that it is state policy to purposefully run down council estates, and their residents, through death, prison, or both” (p 98). But this anger gets channelled into estatism. This estatism became most pronounced and most visible during the riots that pitted groups from one estate against the others. But the source of the riots was the police murder of Mark Duggan. Somehow, council estates and working class communities all across Britain knew that it was them whose time had come to rise up. It might not be the kind of mobilization that those on the activist or organised left would hope for, but it was undeniably a working class uprising, where people (ok, men more often than not) responded to circumstances on the basis of a shared identification as council estate people – even if this mobilization was channelled intuitively into inter-estate rivalry rather than unity.

So, contrary to the idea that the working class is hopeless, the riots showed that the working class is perfectly capable of self-mobilization, even if is not on the basis of a class identity that ‘we’ would hope for, and even the mobilization it is not of a form that ‘we’ consider strategic or even recognise, and even if it is targetted at groups who should be comrades rather than enemies. Still, this is how the working classes mobilize and if leftists want to have any relevance, the 1st step is in understanding and engaging with this type of mobilization. Getting By is not an analysis of the 2011 riots, but it is an important part of understanding the last part of that contradiction in particular – when people identify as part of but against the working class.

Diversity commentary: single-author monograph written by a working class woman, although she is white and heterosexual she has a mixed race family. University educated up to post-doc level but she was the first in her family’s history to go to higher level education. From and living in and about an English-speaking, European, advanced capitalist country.

Statement: hunger striking refugees imprisoned in greece

Statement from Arash Hampay, one of three refugees on hunger strike in the prison camp Moria, greece. The have been on hunger strike for one month already. Copied from his blog.

Yes you can

Yes, you can torture us, imprison us, humiliate us, do whatever your heart desires with us. You know well that refugees are the most refugeless, the lonliest and the most defenceless. If none cares for them and stands with them, none is going to defend them and opposes you for their sake. You know well that our governments are not like the governments of USA, CANADA, GERMANY and OTHERS who defend and protect their citizens when they are in trouble abroad and create international crisis for the sake of their citizens. If we had states who cared for us, we would not be refugees in your countries. We would not be tortured in your prisons. You know that well and you seem to be very comfortable with that knowledge. 

Know very well, that we shall strike as we stroke in our country against injustices, and did not keep silent. 

Both of us shall strike. You strike with your swords, your whips, your prisons but we shall strike with our pen and our candle. We do not strike the sword in the darkness in order to show our strength, we lit our candle. Our pen and our candle is more powerful than your sword. We know and you know that we shall defeat you in this DAVID VERSUS GOLIAT struggle. We are the people, you are the government. At last the meal of victory is going to be eaten by the people, as ever. Instead of applying a healing cream on our wounds, you apply salt. But let that pass as well. 

#KozhinHussein, #BahroozArash has been hunger striking for 26 days. They shall be released as Amir Hampay was released. From this you will only inherit shame. 

We insist on our promise. All three of us are going to continue our hunger strike untill the day when Bahrooz and Kozhin shall be released

Statement: Text by the assembly of the workers of VIOME about the bankruptcy trustee 

Statement from viome, the recuperated and worker-run chemical factory in Thessoloniki, after the latest court decision that say the rights of private parasitical capital are more important than the rights of people to use the means of production for the benefit of society. VIOME workers took over their factory after the parent company of the owners went bankrupt (i.e. the bankruptcy had nothing to do with this operation) and have been resisting efforts for 4 years by Capital and the subservient Greek courts to take it back for useless purposes. 

The workers collective asks supporters to pass resolutions in support at your own unions, collectives, etc, with a draft resolutions underneath the statement text.

Statement shared from the recovered factory‘s website.

Text by the assembly of the workers of VIOME about the bankruptcy trustee 

 After four years that we work the factory and after six years that we, the workers of VIOME started our struggle, the judicial power has never stopped attacking us. 

 Now, after having enforced a despicable regulation for the bankruptcy and having refused the struggle of the workers to work the factory, the judicial power comes to force the partial auctioning of the means of production, that have been feeding dozens of families for four and a half years. This is the point of view about responsibility from the side of the “honest” judges, who in any case all they think of is how to destroy all that we, the workers of VIOME, have created with so much effort. 

 They do so, in order to discourage any other group of workers from thinking of operating the abandoned factories. 

 For these reason we impeach the judicial authorities and the bankruptcy trustee, who by all means, tries to block the operation of the factory directly by us, the workers without any boss.

 We call on you, trade unionists, workers, collectives to support us and altogether to manifest that since they can’t, we can 

 We ask your practical support so that we can keep the factory alive and our families away from fear and poverty. We call for resolutions to support us in order to prove our strength: the power of solidarity that is stronger than any form of capital repression, than any form of economic collapse of the capitalist economy.

In struggle and solidarity

The workers of VIOME
Resolution against the auction of VIOME 
We, …………….. demand that any judicial, economic, political authority stops preventing the workers from operating the factory and to make it easier for them to legitimize its operation, so that to be able to support their families and children.

For us, any attempt to block the operation of the factory of VIOME is immoral. We remind the hard economic conditions that the workers in our country have been suffering and that the judicial authorities have their share in the collective blame of the officers of the authorities, by doing nothing in order for the workers to get back the money owed to them but instead, they did everything to block the workers’ efforts to take the factory operation in their hands. 

We demand that you take a stand in favor of society who are suffering or else you will meet our confrontation 

(your union / group within a union / collective)

(your seal or logo if available)