iww

On This Day: May 26
  • 1637: Mystic massacrer: A combined Protestant and Mohegan force under English Captain Mason attacks a Pequot village in Connecticut, massacring 500.
  • 1920: Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) Marine Transport Workers in Philadelphia go on strike.
  • 1926: A motion was filed to retry Sacco and Vanzetti after someone else confessed to the crime.
  • 1936: Further Remington Rand workers in Ohio and Connecticut walk out and join their colleagues already on strike.
  • 1937: Battle of the Overpass: Henry Ford’s goons attack UAW union organizers leafleting workers at River Rouge GM plant, Michigan.
  • 1937: “Little Steel” strike in Ohio begins for collective bargaining rights. 600 picket Republic’s mill, while 6,500 workers walk out.
  • 1998: First “National Sorry Day” held in Australia over treatment of Aboriginal children. Events attended by over a million people.
  • 2001: Eric Fairclough elected leader of Yukon NDP, becoming the first aboriginal to lead a major political party in Canada.

it’s feels weird to me, sometimes, that the raised fist is now used as a super general protest gesture that even centrist liberals will use, and it’ll be in like kid’s  movies and stuff

because it was created as a pretty explicitly communist symbol

and was used as an ‘antifascist salute’ to counter fascist salutes 

not to mention frequently used in leftist iconography 

and in IWW and other socialist organizations in the 20th century

and was used by the Black Panther Party (a socialist group) and other radical,  black activists as a symbol of anti-capitalist solidarity and action 

the raised fist has such a powerful history in radical anti-fascist and anti-capitalist protest. 

I think all activists should learn about it and foster a respect in its complex history. it’s humbling, and also can remind us of the radical roots of different movements which have now been co-opted by liberals and branded by capital. 

no matter how many t shirts it’s printed on or politicians using it there are, it has radical roots, and it will always hold that history for leftists to reclaim

„… und kein Mann konnte mich aufhalten“

1869 in Russland geboren, wanderte Emma Goldman 1886 nach Amerika aus und wurde dort nach den Justizmorden an den streikenden Anarchisten in Chicago (Kampf um den 8. Stundentag) zur militanten Anarchistin. Von 1906 bis 1917 gab Emma Goldman die anarchistische Zeitschrift „Mother Earth“ heraus und wurde mehrfach inhaftiert. 1919 wurde sie schließlich aus den USA ausgewiesen und nach Russland deportiert, ab 1921 lebte sie in England und Frankreich. Ihr konsequenter Anarchismus, der Einsatz für die “Freie Liebe” und die Rechte der Frauen machten sie zu einer Galionsfigur sowohl der anarchistischen, als auch der feministischen Bewegung.

Durch Emma Goldmans Biografie zieht sich die Verbindung von alltäglichem Leben und politischem Kampf. Auch entgegen den Standpunkten etlicher ihrer Genoss_innen beharrt sie auf der Übersetzung ihrer politischen Ideale in den Alltag. Und zu diesem Leben, dem Versuch des befreiten Lebens, gehört für Emma unweigerlich das ‚Schöne‘: Musik, Tanz, Literatur und die Befreiung der Einzelnen von bürgerlichen Konventionen. Anarchismus umfasse schließlich alle Lebensbereiche.

Plakat A1 auf 170 gramm Karton.
Disorder Rebel Store

Ain't Done Nothing If You Ain't Been Called A Red
Faith Petric and Mark Ross
Ain't Done Nothing If You Ain't Been Called A Red

and you ain’t done nothin’ if you ain’t been called a red
if you’ve marched or agitated, then you’re bound to hear it said
so you might as well ignore it, or love the word instead
cause you ain’t been doin’ nothin’ if you ain’t been called a red

anonymous asked:

im still fairly ignorant about leftism sorry but from my readings of council communism it sounds very similar to syndicalism. what would u say are the main differences?

They’re actually wicked similar tendencies. There are a few differences, though.

  • Council communism uses Marxist perspectives and methods of analysis (historical materialism, etc.), whereas syndicalism generally does not. (”Generally” being the keyword there – Greg is a syndicalist with a Marxist perspective, for example.)
  • Syndicalism is understood pretty much exclusively as an anarchist tendency, whereas council communism is not necessarily anarchist. In cases where council communism supports a transitory “dictatorship of the proletariat” state, it opposes centralization and Leninist conceptions of the vanguard party, seeking full direct democracy in the economic base in an attempt to wield the state for the benefit of the proletariat; syndicalists don’t advocate for this transition period.
  • Workers’ councils are defined as setups of spontaneous organization born in times of revolutionary struggle, whereas syndicalism relies on trade unions that exist before the struggle really takes off. For this reason, many traditional council communists argued that trade unions could only be reformist in nature and that separate revolutionary councils would instead be created by class conscious workers in times of tense material conditions; this also led many of them to refuse to work with reformist individuals or organizations of any sort (which I think is silly). Syndicalism posits that unions will become increasingly revolutionary as workers develop class consciousness.

All said, both tendencies involve near-identical final products in terms of organizational structure – councils/unions hollowing out the capitalist system from below and reforming society into linked confederations based on mutual aid, direct democracy, and a for-need economic system. When push comes to shove, a lot of it is just semantics debate. The unified leftist front that topples capitalism for good will have to focus on directly-democratic institutions of worker control in some very real capacity, and I think council communism and syndicalism truly get to the heart of this idea. 

-Daividh