April 2000

Mayday 2000 egroup

Dear Maydayers,

In light of some of reaction to my forwarding of the critique of Mayday 2000 by Green Anarchist 2 weeks ago (if you have subbed since then and want to see a copy email me); I would like to clarify some issues.

My essay in response the widespread support for Green Anarchist during the GAndALF trial http://www.stewarthomesociety.org/ga/folly.htm, explains some of the problems with GA. My position on Green Anarchist is clear: do read GA but don't support them (unlike some people who support GA without reading GA or engaging with what they are about). I gave my opinion that the critique of Mayday 2000 by GA was pepper with bullshit, I should have said FULL of bullshit, especially the smears against many people and the way they view every thing as a conspiracy. Viewing people behavior as a wide conspiracy is a lazy way to view the world. I should have also made it clear that the that the smears GA banded about in their critique and elsewhere (especialy against Paul Bowman and Fabian Tompsett) are smears. I don't take them seriously for a moment. Though I hope people reading it saw these for what they are, from what GA themselves say. They don't even try to make a case. I did say that I was in vague agreement with the general sentiment of the essay. I don't believe everything written in Green Anarchist useless or false, if that were the case then GA would not be such a problem. To make it clearer about what I feel the essay did touch on, that rings true with me, I will make it clear I did not have time for the sentiment of the essay that viewed the rest of movement as a conspiracy against them, nor their smears.

So what is it that does rings true? Someone said to me why did I not write my own critique of Mayday 2000 rather than just forward the GA essay to the list with my comment. Whatever my views on Mayday 2000 I would have forwarded the critique to the list as I hope other people would forward articles already in circulation concerning Mayday 2000 to this list whatever there source whether alternative or mainstream press; the critical or supportive. Critical articles should only damage an event if they are true. I have not produced a critique of Mayday 2000 myself because I have not made up my mind about it, don't have enough information about it. Also I would only bother write one if I though it served some purpose for me; Green Anarchist bother with there critique to try bolster their position; I clearly would not have written their critique.

Perhaps my comment failed to serve any purpose as far as say improving what might happen at Mayday. So I should explain myself here (but only a little, as I will await the event itself to form an opinion).

I do feel uneasy about interface between the conference cum book fair and the International Day of Action.

The International Day of Action follows from previous ones which were based on unity around opposition to G8, WTO, Capitalism, mayday moving towards being for an alternative vision rather than just being opposed to present and called to imagine an alternative (I liked 'imagine' theme to June 18th we used it in leaflet for event last year in Edinburgh, http://burn.ucsd.edu/~lothian/j18/ ). Although the differing views on alternatives causes friction, this is part of the process. This mayday 2000 conference was promoted originally as coming out of June 18th day of action and Mayday 98 conference. But it bears more resemblance to the Anarchist Book Fair that happens each year except the balance between book selling and meetings is reversed. A worthwhile event maybe but it is open to everyone who wants to be involved only as passive consumers not in way J18 was open. Some of people who were involved in June 18th have been exclude from the planning of this conference, not because their behaviour but because of political affiliation. Mayday 98 was about revolutionaries leaving ideological and group affiliation behind and get together in atmosphere of mutual respect; part of political process that come out of issue 73 of Class War (c/o www.spunk.org) and coincided with developments with environmental direct action movement. Mayday 2000 conference seem to be about re-enforcing group/ label affiliation.

As I said before I don't really have enough information to go on maybe it has been necessary to excluded people from the organising of the conference based on group affiliation rather than if they behave disrespectfully, acted as a caucus etc.; as their group affiliation alone may undermined the conference, especially if the purpose of the conference is to recruit to anarchist brand. This has not happened with the day of action which has much wider involvement of people planning for it many of whom are bared from organising for conference as they support electoral activity (the criteria for exclusion) for example an article discussing an option for the day of action appeared in Labour Left Briefing, also I note that Derek Wall is contributing to this list, who I seem to remember is a local councillor.

Something I noted in the leaflet for Mayday 2000 conference is reference to 'genuine' communism. I believe it is a mistake to base what we do on a search for authenticity and what is 'natural'. Green Anarchist latch onto the mismatch between the conference and the day of action, and use it to bolster their attempt to claim the mantle of authenticity. My comment was to point to this attempt, which fails miserably with there use of smears. Can these smears help Green Anarchist's position? When I forwarded the Green Anarchist critique I thought not. But on reflection as some people supported Green Anarchist during the GAndALF trial despite there use of smears and stated politics before then, which prompted me to write my essay GAndALF folly , perhaps they are easily fooled by GA's speculative accusations despite no proof been attempted. Hence I understand peoples concern at my forwarding the essay. Was I giving Green Anarchist credability or losing my own in some peoples eyes? I hope neither.

I do wish May Day 2000 well and hope the conferance and the Day of Action are constructive.

Yours in the Struggle,

Space Bunny

More on Green Anarchist