Monday, January 15, 2018

New Anarchist Research Group Programme: January-March 2018

As usual, all meetings will be held in the MayDayRooms, 88 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1DH
Please note there is a small charge to cover the cost of room hire.  

"Our meetings are friendly and informal, and we would like to hear from you if you would like to make a presentation at one of our future meetings." 

 Saturday 27th January 2018  2:00pm - 4:30pm
Would anarchism be good for our health? A look at libertarian theory and practice in relation to medical services.
Liz Willis

Starting from some of the work in the RaHN (Radical History Network) booklet “The NHS is 60” (2008), the talk will look briefly at the history of medicine, challenging the narrative of (male-dominated) progress and bringing out critiques of the medical establishment. It will look at alternative theories about how health services and medical care might be provided in a different kind of society and at a few attempts to implement some of these ideas, whether as political policy (other ways the NHS might have gone), small-scale experiment (the Peckham Centre) or on a wider scale in social revolution (Spain 1936). Discussion might focus on how practical these various sorts of initiative might be now; whether technological change has made medicine more or less accessible and its practice more or less authoritarian (is “patient power” achievable/desirable?); and how libertarians might contribute to debates about providing better health for all as well as taking defensive action to prevent things getting worse. 

Liz Willis has a political background in YCND (Aberdeen), anarchism, and Solidarity (London). A main focus since 2006 has been the Radical History Network based in North East London and its blog ( Her pamphlet ‘Women in the Spanish Revolution’ was published by the Solidarity group in 1975 and has been reprinted in various editions. She has self-published a few other small pamphlets, e.g. ‘Mary Wollstonecraft and the Doctors’ (2017).
Also available (most of it) online in two parts at
Previously on this blog: 
Can Medicine be Libertarian?
Writing about medicine and health care in the Spanish Civil War 
And elsewhere, related: 
NOT INSIDE FOR THEIR HEALTH: Some medical considerations relating to London prisons,  c.1750-1850 (20-page online pamphlet) ; Book reviewThe Health of Prisoners: Historical Essays.

Saturday 24th February 2018 2:00pm - 4:30pm
Anarchist Cartography participatory session
Rhiannon Firth

Critical cartography starts from the idea that maps – like other texts such as the written word, images or film – are not (and cannot be) value-free or neutral. Maps reflect and perpetuate relations of power, often in the interests of dominant groups. Critical cartography builds on this critique to advocate possibilities for alternative mapping practices. A lot of the existing literature focuses on theory and practices that aim to provide tools for communities to make rights and resource-claims from powerful entities. These approaches have been criticised because they often rely on making a single representation of very diverse communities, thus perpetuating existing exclusions and hierarchies. They tend to mimic existing mapping practices and spatial representations, and they frequently operate to legitimate the agencies they are making claims from. Dominant mapping conventions are often internalised so it is difficult not to fall into the trap of attempting to use the Master's tools to dismantle his house. There is a need for further work and discussion around the potential for using maps and map-making as part of self-organised resistance. The purpose of this session is to think through the conditions for an anarchist cartography. The session will involve an introduction to critical cartography literatures, a discussion of existing activist initiatives, and a facilitated map-making session.
Rhiannon Firth is Research Fellow at the University of East London, where she conducts research and teaching at the intersection of Political Theory and Education Studies. She supervises PhD students and lectures undergraduate students on radical social movements, community organising and global politics. She received her PhD, funded by the ESRC, from the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Nottingham. Her thesis involved ethnographic work with intentional communities throughout the UK. She has since published articles on topics including urban utopianism, critical pedagogy and methodology, utopian theories of time and temporality, critical cartography, pedagogies of the body and feminist consciousness-raising. She is currently writing about anarchist approaches to organising around natural disasters.
Saturday 24th March 2018  2:00pm - 4:30pm
Louise Michel in London (1890s-1905): a Political Reassessment
Constance Bantman 

This talk will propose a political reassessment of the long period of time spent in London by the French Communard-turned-anarchist Louise Michel (1890–1905). It emphasises the breadth of her militant activities as well as her very concrete engagement in specific political projects, and highlights the coherence of her political outlook and activities. This perspective challenges predominantly masculinist portrayals of Michel, which focus heavily on sentiment as an explanation for her political activism, and downplay her overall agency as a militant. It also highlights the limitations of methodological nationalism in analysing Michel’s activities in exile. Four key aspects will be examined: Michel’s print and open-air propaganda; her network-building activities; her contribution to libertarian pedagogies through the ‘International socialist school’ which she set up in Fitzrovia in the early 1890s; and her campaigning activities for the defence of the right of asylum and support for political refugees, at a time when liberal understandings of asylum were being questioned.
  Constance Bantman is a senior lecturer at the University of Surrey. Her main research interest is the history and methodology of anarchist transnationalism, with specific reference to the French movement before 1914. She has written a book on French anarchist exiles in London before 1914 (; free access at writer and editor Jean Grave (initial findings here: 
"An English tribute to the French Commune
dedicated to the workers of both countries."
For some more early 2018 listings, see earlier post.

Friday, January 12, 2018

New publications from Past Tense

Past Tense have published six new pamphlets as below, five for sale and one FREE.
“They came out in October, but we've been so busy with one thing and another that we
haven't had much time to publicise them as yet.”

The Brixton Black Women’s Group and the Organisation for Women of African and Asian Descent
£3.00 + £1.50 P&P
ISBN: 978-0-9932762-7-9

The Brixton Black Women’s Group, founded in 1973, emerged among women who had been active in the Black Power movement in London in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This pamphlet reprints two articles originally published in feminist journals in the 1980s - an interview with three Brixton Black Women’s Group activists about the development of the group, and an appraisal of the national Organisation for Women of African and Asian Descent.

£3.00 + £1.50 P&P
ISBN: 978-0-9932762-5-5

In 1960 over 2000 council tenants in the then London borough of St Pancras went on partial rent strike, against a new rent scheme introduced by the Conservative council. This pamphlet recounts the causes and the history of the rent strike, examining the reasons the rent scheme was brought in, and the history of the tenants’ movement. A comprehensive but also compelling story of a community struggle, as well as a thoughtful analysis of its motives and possibilities.

“MENACING LANGUAGE AND THREATS” The Anti Corn Law Riots of 1815
£1.50 + £1 P&P
ISBN: 978-0-9932762-4-8

At the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815, corn prices fell to nearly half their war level, causing panic among British farmers - many of whom were also voters. In response the government introduced the Corn Laws in 1815; banning cheap wheat imports, to ensure the high incomes of farmers and landowners.
This was class legislation at its most blatant. It made sure aristocrats could continue to benefit from high bread prices, and the high rents that they supported; knowing well enough this law meant penury for the poor, who relied on bread to stave off starvation.
Riots broke out in the area around Parliament as the Acts were being debated, and spread out around London and Westminster as the London houses of the MPs and lords held most responsible were targeted by crowds...


• I HAVENT HAD SO MUCH FUN SINCE MY LEG FELL OFF The North London Civil Servants Strike, 1987/88 Jean Richards
£2.00 + £1 P&P
ISBN: 978-0-9932762-2-4

An account of a strike by low-paid civil servants across North London Department of Employment offices in 1988, also involving Job Centre and Department of Health & Social Security staff who came out in solidarity when they were asked to do the strikers’ work.

By a woman civil servant who worked for 10 years in one of the offices in dispute.

£2.00 + £1 P&P
ISBN: 978-0-9932762-3-1

In the early 1830s a building on Blackfriars Road became the most notorious radical political meeting places of its era. For a few short years, the Rotunda was the heart of radical London. The Rotunda entered its golden age in 1830, when it was taken over by freethinker Richard Carlile, and was transformed into a centre of political and scientific education and theatrical anti-religious performances... It became home to diverse radical groups and speakers, including the National Union of the Working Classes, Robert Taylor (known as the “Devil’s Chaplain’), and female atheist lecturer Eliza Sharples, the ‘Pythoness of the Temple’.

The Rotunda was feared and hated by the political establishment, who saw it as influencing all radical and rebellious opinion. The reactionary Duke Of Wellington considered the battle for the future of society as one of “The Establishment Vs The Rotunda.”

[See also]


£1.00 + £1 P&P

The 1381 Peasants’ Revolt remains one of the most cataclysmic and inspiring events in British history. At its heart stands a figure of whom so littl4 is known… Wat Tyler. A man who appears for
two weeks, is elected leader of a peasant rebellion, articulates a demand for the abolition of classes, and is killed… Who was Wat Tyler?


Free (£1 P&P)

Some thoughts on gentrification & resistance to gentrification in Brixton, with historical digressions, experiences, and some ranting...


And don't forget - the 2018 LONDON REBEL HISTORY CALENDAR is still available, it's not too late to order your coy for the year...
Only £6 plus £3 P&P

All of the above are available from Past Tense, either via our publicationspage
where you can pay by card or paypal

Or ooooold style by post from:
Past Tense, c/o 56a Infoshop, 56 Crampton Street, London, SE17 3AE

These publications will also soon be available from radical bookshops in London, and some good local independent bookshops and the odd caff too!

Thursday, January 11, 2018

Lessons of the Lawrence textile strike of 1912

[From IRSP via an email from Wakefield Socialist History Group] 

January 12th marks the anniversary of the historic textile strike in Lawrence, Massachusetts in 1912.
The Battle of Lawrence, 1912:
Textile workers’ victory contains lessons for today
“We want bread – and roses!”
“Bayonets cannot weave cloth!”
“Better to starve fighting than to starve working!”
More than a century ago, thousands of men, women, and children shouted those slogans – in many different languages – in the bitter cold of a Massachusetts winter.

On January 12, 1912, thousands of workers walked out of the textile mills of Lawrence, Massachusetts and began a strike which lasted until March 24, 1912. At its height, the strike involved 23,000 workers.
Located in the Merrimack River Valley, about 30 miles north of Boston, Lawrence was a city of 86,000 people in 1912, and a great textile center. It outranked all other cities in the production of woolen and worsted goods. The woolen and cotton mills of the city employed over 40,000 workers – about one-half of Lawrence’s population over the age of 14.
Most of the Lawrence textile workers were unskilled. Within a one-mile radius of the mill district, there lived 25 different nationalities, speaking 50 languages. By 1912, Italians, Poles, Russians, Syrians, and Lithuanians had replaced native-born Americans and western Europeans as the predominant groups in the mills. The largest single ethnic group in the city was Italian.
At the time of the strike, 44.6 percent of the textile workers in Lawrence were women. More than 10 percent of the mill workers were under the age of 18.
Despite a heavy tariff protecting the woolen industry, the wages and living standards of textile workers had declined steadily since 1905. The introduction of a two-loom system in the woolen industry and a corresponding speed-up in the cotton industry led to lay-offs, unemployment, and wage reductions. A federal government report showed that for a week in late November 1911, some 22,000 textile employees, including foremen, supervisors, and office workers, averaged about $8.76 for a full week’s work. This wage was totally inadequate, despite the fact that the average work week was 56 hours, and 21.6 percent of the workers worked more hours than that.
To make things worse, the cost of living was higher in Lawrence than in the rest of New England. The city was also one of the most congested in the United States, with many workers crowded into foul tenements.
The daily diet of most of the mill workers consisted of bread, molasses, and beans. Serving meat with a meal was very rare, often reserved for holidays. The inevitable result of all this was an unhealthy work force. Dr. Elizabeth Shapleigh, a Lawrence physician, wrote: “A considerable number of the boys and girls die within the first two or three years after beginning work. … [T]hirty-six out of every 100 of all the men and women who work in the mill die before or by the time they are 25.”
The immediate cause of the strike was a cut in pay for all workers which took place after a new state law went into effect on January 1, 1912. The law reduced the number of hours that women and children could work from 56 to 54. The mill owners simply sped up the machines to guarantee they would get the same amount of production as before, and then cut the workers’ hours and wages.
On Thursday, January 11, 1912, some 1,750 weavers left their looms in the Everett Cotton Mill when they learned that they had received less money. They were joined by 100 spinners from the Arlington Mills. When the Italian workers of the Washington Mill left their jobs on the morning of Friday, January 12, the Battle of Lawrence was in full swing. By Saturday night, January 13, some 20,000 textile workers had left their machines. By Monday night, January 15, Lawrence had been transformed into an armed camp, with the police and militia guarding the mills through the night.
The Lawrence strike began as a spontaneous outburst, but the strikers quickly realized that they needed to organize themselves. At a mass meeting held on the afternoon of the strike’s first day, they voted to send a telegram to Joe Ettor, a leader of the Industrial Workers of the World, asking him to come to Lawrence to aid the strike. Ettor arrived in Lawrence the very next day, accompanied by his friend Arturo Giovannitti, the editor of “Il Proletario” and secretary of the Italian Socialist Federation.
Although only 27 years old, Joseph J. (“Smiling Joe”) Ettor was an experienced, militant leader of the IWW. He had worked with Western miners and migrant workers, and with the immigrant workers of the Eastern steel mills and shoe factories. Ettor could speak English, Italian, and Polish fluently, and could understand Hungarian and Yiddish.
Under Ettor’s leadership, the strikers set up a highly structured but democratic form of organization in which every nationality of worker involved in the strike was represented. This structure played a decisive role in guaranteeing the strike’s outcome. A general strike committee was organized and a network of soup kitchens and food distribution stations were set up. The strikers voted to demand a 15 percent increase in wages, a 54-hour week, double time for overtime, and the abolition of the premium and bonus systems.
Despite the fact that the city and state authorities imposed a virtual state of martial law on Lawrence, the strikers remained undaunted. They pioneered innovative tactics, such as moving picket lines (in which thousands of workers marched through the mill district in an endless chain with signs or armbands reading “Don’t be a scab!”); mass marches on sidewalks; and sending thousands of people to browse in stores without buying anything. They organized numerous parades to keep their own spirits up and keep their cause in the public eye.
The agents of the mill owners struck back. When the police and militia tried to halt a parade of about 1,000 strikers on January 29, a bystander, Annie LoPezzo, was shot dead. Despite the fact that neither Ettor nor Giovannitti had been present at the demonstration, they were both arrested the next day. They were charged with being accessories before the fact to the murder because they had supposedly incited the “riot” which led to the shooting. That same day, an 18-year-old Syrian striker, John Ramy, was killed by a bayonet thrust into his back as he attempted to flee from advancing soldiers.
In early February, the strikers began sending their children out of the city to live temporarily with strike supporters. The city authorities vowed to stop this practice, and on February 24, a group of mothers and their children were clubbed and beaten at the train station by cops. This act horrified the country, and swung the general public over to the side of the strikers.
Concerned that the growing outrage over the conditions in Lawrence might lead to public support for lowering the woolen tariff, the mill owners began to look for a way to end the strike. First the largest employer, the American Woolen Company, came to an agreement. Then the others followed. The workers won most of their demands. By March 24, the strike was officially declared over and the general strike committee disbanded. It was a tremendous victory – but not the end of the battle.
On September 30, 1912, the murder trial of Ettor and Giovannitti began. It lasted 58 days. The defendants were kept in metal cages in the courtroom while the trial was in session. The prosecution accused Ettor and Giovannitti of inciting the strikers to violence and murder. Witnesses proved that the two were speaking to a meeting of workers several miles from the place where Annie LoPezzo was shot. Across the United States and the world, concerned people expressed outrage at the prosecution’s attempt to punish two leaders for their ideas.
Before the end of the trial, Ettor and Giovannitti asked for permission to address the court. Ettor challenged the jurors, declaring that if they were going to sentence Giovannitti and himself to death, the verdict should find them guilty of their real offense – their beliefs.
He said:
“What are my social views? I may be wrong but I contend that all the wealth in this country is the product of labor and that it belongs to labor. My views are the same as Giovannitti’s. We will give all that there is in us that the workers may organize and in due time emancipate themselves, that the mills and workshops may become their property and for their benefit. If we are set at liberty these shall be our views. If you believe that we should not go out, and that view will place the responsibility full upon us, I ask you one favor, that Ettor and Giovannitti because of their ideas became murderers, and that in your verdict you will say plainly, we shall die for it. … I neither offer apology nor ask for a favor. I ask for justice.”
Giovannitti made an impassioned speech to the jury, the first time he had ever spoken publicly in English. His eloquence drew tears from the most jaded reporters present.
On November 25, the jury found the defendants not guilty. Pandemonium broke loose in the courtroom.
There is something especially poignant about the Battle of Lawrence – and something especially important about learning its lessons. The Lawrence textile strike took place at a time when the mill owners lacked maneuvering room because they had to maintain public support for a high tariff on woolens. That was certainly a factor in the workers’ victory. So was the fact that the textile workers comprised such a large percentage of the population of Lawrence. But those factors do not change the reality that the victory at Lawrence was won by the bravery and intelligence of the workers themselves.
The victory at Lawrence disproved the vicious lie being circulated at the time by the leaders of the American Federation of Labor that immigrant workers could not be organized. It showed that immigrant workers and women workers would not only support strikes – if given the chance, they would gladly lead them, and lead them well. The strikers in Lawrence won their demands because they never let themselves be divided on ethnic or gender lines, because they were militant (and creative) in their tactics, and because they found a way to appeal to the conscience of the general public.
One other feature of the Battle of Lawrence made it especially significant. It’s summed up in the famous slogan of the strike – “We want bread – and roses!” The textile workers who braved the Massachusetts winter in 1912 wanted more than a wage increase. They were inspired by a vision of a new society, one where the workers themselves ruled. In this society, every human being would have “bread” – a decent standard of living. They would also have “roses” – the chance to learn, to have access to art, music, and culture; a society which would allow the flowering of everyone’s talents, the full development of every human being.
On this anniversary of the Lawrence textile strike, we should take courage from the bravery of the strikers, learn from their clever tactics, and dare to think as far ahead as they did. The Lawrence strikers believed deeply in the idea expressed so well in one of the verses in the labor song “Solidarity Forever.” That verse confidently proclaims, “We can build a new world from the ashes of the old.” Despite all the misery we see in the present, a new world is possible. The cynics of today are as wrong to deny the possibility of qualitative change as the AFL leaders in 1912 were to deny the possibility of organizing immigrant workers. If all of us act with as much foresight and courage as did those who fought so well in Lawrence in 1912, the vision of those strikers can become reality, and we can win a world with both bread and roses for everyone.