Showing posts with label Anarchist History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anarchist History. Show all posts

Saturday, April 13, 2019

New Anarchist Research Group Programme Update

* Venue:  MayDay Rooms, 88 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1DH  - please note that we take a collection at the end of the afternoon to cover the cost of hiring the room.  
Here are the details of the next three meetings of the New Anarchist Research Group: 


Saturday 27 April, 2019, MayDay Rooms 2:00-4:00 pm*
          This month's meeting is slightly different from our usual format, as the presentation will be given by one of the other groups that often meet at the MayDay Rooms on the same day as we do - Plan C.    
Anarchists like us! Communists like us!
Plan C is a unique organisation in the UK, one that sits at odds in both the Left and the traditional Anarchist scene. Though it draws its history from both Anarchist and Communist movements, Autonomist Marxist Feminism, New left Populist movements as well Anti-Capitalist struggles, it has refused to be drawn into dogmatic and scholastic schisms that categorise the left, opting to put its energy into developing communities of care and resilience, and developing new alliances and forms of action through an ecology of movements. 
In this talk, a founder member of Plan C LDN  presents the history and formation of Plan C from its beginning in 2012, the fusion of various ideas within the Post “anti-capitalist” movement of the early 2000’s that met the student movement of 2010, and the emergence of ideas like social strike, social reproduction, luxury communism, commons and forms of constituent power all the way to our current conjecture.  

Saturday 25 May 2019, MayDay Rooms 2:00-4:00 pm* 
Anarchy or Chaos: M.P.T. Acharya and Indian Anarchism
Ole Birk Laursen
M.P.T. Acharya 1887-1954 libcom image
This talk explores the life and activities of the Indian anarchist M.P.T Acharya from his anticolonial activities to life in Russia during the Revolution, and more than three decades in the international anarchist movement.

Ole Birk Laursen is a Lecturer at New York University in London.  His research concerns anti-colonialism and anarchism in the early twentieth century 

Saturday 22 June, 2019 MayDay Rooms 2:00-4:00pm*
Anarchist Theory in Landscape Planning
Tim Waterman
Kropotkin in 1864 - wikipedia image
Anarchism’s influence on landscape theory and planning, dating back to Proudhon, but perhaps more importantly to Elisée Reclus and Peter Kropotkin, is powerful, but has long been suppressed or denied. This makes it difficult to understand just how strong anarchism’s undercurrents have remained in landscape theory, and how continuous a lineage anarchist planning possesses, through figures such as Patrick Geddes and Colin Ward. This talk will trace the emergence of the contemporary idea of landscape as situated social ecology within green anarchist theory since the 19th century and show how it is an emancipatory ecological, social, cultural, and intellectual framework for planning and design 
Tim Waterman is Senior Lecturer in Landscape Architecture History and Theory at the Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL. He is also a non-executive director at the radical digital arts collective Furtherfield. He is at work on the book Landscape Citizenships and has recently edited two others: Landscape and Agency: Critica Essays with Ed Wall and the Routledge Handbook of Landscape and Food with Joshua Zeunert. 



Wednesday, February 20, 2019

Walsall Anarchists and West Midlands Police

– a personal experience of using the “Freedom of Information Act” to research anarchist history
                                                                                                    by Christopher Draper


In 1892 four Walsall anarchists were imprisoned for a bomb plot orchestrated by Auguste Coulon, a police agent-provocateur. Although the police and trial judge conspired to conceal Coulon’s role he subsequently boasted of his involvement to reporters. For over a century the Metropolitan Police refused to disclose details of its part in securing conviction until in 2001 there was a breakthrough. Despite claims that all relevant documents had either been lost or destroyed a serving police officer seeking early retirement and academic respectability was granted access to hitherto hidden Special Branch files to complete his PhD: ”Three “Special Account” books, each measuring 160mm by 200mm, and printed into five columns per page. They detail, among other items, what appears to be the cash amounts paid out to individual informants. In all, approximately six thousand individual entries span a total of the twenty four years from 1888 to 1912”.


These files revealed Coulon was paid almost £1,000 by the Metropolitan Police (and incidentally also revealed the previously unsuspected involvement of a second police agent in a separate high-profile “anarchist-terrorist conspiracy). This initiative prompted me to wonder whether the Walsall anarchists’ local police force might similarly be sitting on undisclosed evidence so in September 2017 I made a formal FOI request to West Midlands Police (WMP) for copies of documents relating to this 1892 case. It has taken almost 1½ years for that simple enquiry to be concluded and in the hope that it might amuse, enlighten and encourage fellow researchers I’ve recorded details of my quest.


My initial FOI was emailed to WMP on 4.9.2017. WMP replied on 12.9.2017 suggesting I instead contact their ”Heritage Project” adding, Can I please ask you to confirm that you are happy for this request to be withdrawn under the FOI Act?”  I responded by refusing to withdraw and insisting on a formal FOI response. The law allows 20 working days for an FOI response so on 7.10.2017 I reminded WMP, ”After 25 working days you are yet to comply. It is regrettable that a Police Authority should demonstrate such little regard for the law…”


I received a substantive response on 9.10.2017 declaring my FOI “Vexatious” which technically means it would take them too much effort and consequently cost more than the nominal £450 the Act allows to supply the information I requested (WMP later suggested my request was also vexatious in the non-technical sense as I was impertinent). “The information that we hold in respect of your request is a very old, large, fragile and very rare document. It is not suitable for scanning and therefore we would have to investigate the provision of specialised services in order to supply an electronic copy to you. This would be costly and burdensome.”


WMP had whetted my appetite – they’d revealed they held a relevant old and rare document. At this point FOI inquirers can either accept the brush-off or if they choose to persevere must request an authority reviews its own FOI decision. On 18.10.2017 I did the latter, pointing out to WMP that historic documents are nowadays digitally photographed in situ with minimal handling or cost. On 13.11.2017 WMP’s internal review conceded, “You suggested that the documents could simply be photographed… this is a sensible suggestion”!  Then WMP went on to explain that as their resulting photographs weren’t clear enough “to be certain that there was not any harmful information in the documents”  it would require further time, effort and cost to satisfactorily censor the information. WMP’s response was peppered throughout with technical references to various clauses and sub clauses of FOI legislation (sections 8/1c, 12, 14, 14/1, 23, 31 etc), not forgetting “Section 38 (health and safety)”! What all this amounted to was as far as WMPI was concerned I was getting nothing.


I read hundreds of pages of FOI legislation and precedents to escalate to the next stage, an appeal to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Of course the ICO comes at it cold so it is up the applicant to gather all relevant communications and present a coherent case to challenge the combined expertise of a public authority – a demanding and time consuming business, but in for a penny…


My 25.11.2017 appeal to ICO rested on two main grounds, firstly it was not credible that WMP did not have expert photographers at hand to efficiently produce excellent copies of the historic document and so it could not fairly cite “vexation” as grounds for withholding information. Secondly I argued that full disclosure was in the Public Interest. Of course I had to play the game of citing specific clauses and precedents and supplying supporting documents. Five months later I received the ICO’s 17.4.2018 Decision Notice, “The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not vexatious and so section 14(1) was relied on incorrectly. WMP is now required to issue a fresh response to the request… WMP must take these steps within 35 calendar days… failure to comply may be dealt with as a contempt of court”. Now the ball was firmly in WMP’s court, would it hand over the contents of the 1892 document or appeal over the head of ICO to the mysterious “First-tier Tribunal”?


Thirty-four days later (21.05.2018) WMP responded, “We have considered the above judgement and although we do not agree with the conclusions drawn by the Information Commissioner, we have made the decision not to take this case to the Information Tribunal.” WMP explained that its substantive response would be further delayed whilst it applied a “Public Interest Test” on what precisely it would disclose. Unfortunately this further delay is permitted by the FOI Act.


On 16.6.2018 WMP emailed copies of all 57 handwritten pages of the large (300mm X 250mm) bound volume with the title “WALSALL ANARCHIST TRIAL 1892” embossed on the cover, a document containing almost 20,000 words of “evidence”. After ten months this was a huge advance but the contents had been censored by almost 300 redactions so on 25.6.2018 I requested another WMP internal review.


On 20.7.2018 that review conceded much of my case, restored almost 90% of the redactions (posting me paper photocopies) yet maintained that the name of the agent-provocateur should continue to be withheld along with the addresses of those involved in the prosecution. This despite the fact that Coulon’s name had been in the public realm for over a century and one of the redacted addresses, “238 Stafford Street”, the home of Joe Deakin, was marked by a “Walsall Anarchist Blue Plaque” erected in 1989 by the local authority.


On 11.8.2018 I contacted ICO to contest WMP’s reliance on sections 30/2 (informants' names) and 40/2 (witness addresses) in retaining 39 redactions. Five months later, on 17.1.2019 ICO ruled “that WMP was entitled to rely on section 30/2b to withhold information but that section 40/2 was not engaged”. Consequently WMP were directed to disclose all redacted addresses but permitted to withhold any mention of Coulon and they had just 28 calendar days to comply, appeal to the “Tribunal” or risk Contempt of Court. Twenty-five days later I received full disclosure of thirty addresses and I filled in the few redactions of Coulon’s name myself!




I’m sifting through this new evidence and will write more of the Walsall Anarchists in due course but I’m pleased with the FOI outcome. In a future post I’ll reveal the shocking fate of the Special Branch files and the officer who uncovered them and draw lessons on the workings of the FOI Act. In the meantime I’m just about to launch a new FOI seeking information about an intriguing anarchist artefact exhibited in 1889 in the Metropolitan Police’s “Black Museum”…





Thursday, April 19, 2018

“The Red Flag of Anarchy” by Andrew Lee: Review


(A Book Review by Christopher Draper)


Do you remember those wooden rulers on sale at Woolworths with the names and dates of all the British Kings and Queens on the back? That was the kind of history I learnt at school. Regrettably, a lot of alternative history isn’t much better with a similar emphasis on London-based leaders. I’ve always preferred to read about radical lives and politics away from the metropolitan bubble and Andrew Lee’s new history of Sheffield’s pioneering socialists and anarchists is a perfect paradigm of “people’s history”.


Andrew Lee’s book embodies the ideals it chronicles with a beautiful cover designed by libertarian socialist Walter Crane. The text is printed on decent quality paper and it’s lavishly illustrated with numerous portraits and political posters. Computer screens might usefully churn out dry facts but Andrew Lee appreciates that wisdom is more surely gained through a slow, aesthetically pleasing book-read and there is a lot to mull over in “The Red Flag of Anarchy”.

Focussed on the Sheffield scene from 1874 to 1900 the author depicts a rich political culture created by predominantly working class activists of every flavour. He doesn’t push any political line but the book is suffused throughout its 178 pages with an inspiringly libertarian spirit. Lee’s achievement is to conjure up a vivid picture of a welcoming, inclusive yet militant socialist milieu. Activists who for an all too brief moment managed to create the germ of a new society within the shell of the old. An alternative society that created communist colonies, embraced gay lifestyles, published a regular anarchist newspaper, operated a “Commonwealth Café”, organised picnics and ran raffles with books by Bellamy and Thoreau as prizes or alternately “A Handsomely Framed Portrait of Ravachol”!

“The Red Flag of Anarchy” is invaluable not just for its contents but as an inspiration and model for socialists all around Britain to get your shovel out and start digging down into your own local libertarian past. I know from my own researches that there’s always been far more going on out of London than our erstwhile chroniclers would have us believe.

I have just two criticisms which I hope Andrew might address in future editions. The first is the absence of an index. This isn’t so much of a handicap as it would be in a text-only volume as the extensive contents list and numerous illustrations facilitate navigation but digitisation makes compiling an index simple and speedy. Secondly I would like some analysis of why Sheffield’s socialist oasis became barren. At the end of the book Lee observes, “It was the end of an era, everything was going to change…Parliamentary politics was to become the order of the day” but it wasn’t inevitable, what exactly occurred in Sheffield? My own research, for example, shows that in Leicester all manner of socialists cooperated for years until the foundation of the ILP in 1893. Thereafter Leicester ILP refused to have any truck with local anarchists whose direct-action was thought detrimental to attracting votes. ILP sectarianism thus transformed Leicester’s lively socialism into bureaucratic electoralism. Were the same forces at work in Sheffield?

If we are ever to regain the radicalism and comradeship of early socialism it’s crucial that we identify what went wrong last time. Andrew Lee reminds us of an era when Labour Clubs were far more than dreary drinking dens. Available from Amazon for £10.00, in my opinion “The Red Flag of Anarchism” is the most valuable and entertaining study of grass-roots, pioneering Anarchy in the UK since John Quail’s classic “Slow Burning Fuse”.



Thursday, February 8, 2018

The TORCH of Anarchy (1891-1896)

       By Christopher Draper



The TORCH was an incendiary nineteenth century anarchist monthly. It wasn’t Britain’s first anarchist journal, it wasn’t even well produced but it was unique. Started by children, throughout its five-year existence it remained effectively owned and published by a teenage girl who later turned to Fascism. The TORCH comprised articles by leading thinkers and activists, was distributed around the world and although acclaimed by cultural commentators is often overlooked by anarchists.


Quiet Beginnings
The journal’s unique origins lead some to dismiss it as a juvenile enterprise initiated by the privileged progeny of artistic liberals. The facts are accurate but the evaluation unwarranted for The TORCH channelled original ideas into a nascent native anarchist movement whilst serving as a haven, both practical and intellectual, for exiled revolutionaries.
Britain’s first anarchist newspaper, the English-language Freiheit, was issued as a defiant political response by seasoned revolutionaries to a savage act of State repression. The TORCH could hardly have emerged in more contrasting circumstances. Handwritten in the comfortable bourgeois domestic setting of the family library (illustrated below) by three adolescent offspring of artist Lucy Madox Brown and writer William Michael Rossetti (WMR 1829-1919), a founder member of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, The TORCH began as more of a childish hobby than an incendiary anarchist campaign yet appearances can be deceptive.                         
Analysing the Origins
The Rossetti parents were iconoclasts in a cultural movement that inspired William Morris and Lucy’s father and next door neighbour, Ford Madox Brown, “welcomed the Russian revolutionaries of different shades of opinion” including Kropotkin and “encouraged their (the children’s) youthful socialistic and anarchistic leanings”. William Rossetti had been encouraged in his own youth by his grandfather, Gaetano Polidori (1764-1853), to print his own early writings on a press installed in the garden shed and as an adult edited the Pre-Raphaelite movement’s magazine, The GERM.
Lucy and William shared admirably advanced opinions on child rearing as he recorded in his “Reminiscences”, “She considered that on the whole it would be a pity to chill our youngsters in their generous enthusiasms…I was somewhat less inclined than she to allow the children to go to the end of their tether: still I entered into her general view…The parents, while it is their obvious duty to regulate the children should not, in my opinion wrest them aside, attempting to alter their identities; the attempt  will probably fail and we shall have meagre and stunted hybrid growths instead of natural and naturally developed growths”.
The children’s 1891 determined decision to jointly produce and distribute their own monthly newspaper was therefore encouraged by their parents although the title and contents, The TORCH - a Journal of International Socialism, proved quite a surprise.
William Rossetti was himself a friend of Kropotkin’s and it was his book, “An Appeal to the Young”, that inspired the adolescent Rossetti’s to produce their journal. When Kropotkin turned up at their 3, Edmund Terrace home one day in 1891 to visit their parents the young trio intercepted and requested that he endorse their publication and he duly obliged.

Handwritten
Olivia, born 30 September 1875, the eldest of the three, was prime mover in the project, Helen (depicted above, on the sofa), born 10 November 1879, was youngest whilst Gabriel Arthur (invariably called “Arthur”) was the middle-born, 28 February 1877. When the trio produced their first issue of The TORCH in June 1891, Olivia was 15, Arthur 14 and Helen just 11. Two years later Arthur confided to Max Nettlau that they’d only turned out three handwritten copies of the first edition with the cover depicting winged figures of “Liberty” adorned with the words, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”. By employing a “hectograph” duplicating process they managed to extend the “run” but the handwritten appearance of the paper made it difficult to read, limited its appeal and prompted Stepniak (1852-1895) to describe it as a “children’s magazine”.

Mechanisation
The trio never intended The TORCH to be a private pastime and maintained a monthly production schedule for a year until Alfred Belcher, the husband of their housekeeper, managed to obtain for them a printing press for a modest (undisclosed) price. A friend of Belcher’s secured a fount of type for nothing whilst, as they detailed in their first printed edition (July 1892, “vol.II no.VII”), a compositor, Mr John Thomas, “devoted his evenings to teaching us composing”. The trio explained, “This month’s Torch appeared in print for the first time which must be our excuse for its shortness and late appearance, for we have comp’d it ourselves and as we are but novices in the noble art of printing we are yet slow but with use we hope to improve”.
Installation of the press required a descent from the domestic library to the basement and the journal now bore the legend, “Printed and Published at the Torch Office by O, A, and H Rossetti”. Olivia, Arthur and Helen at last had a product worthy of their Sunday sales at Hyde Park where they advertised their wares with the energetic waving of red banners. As sales of the newly readable Torch increased they began to attract the attention of an ever widening circle of serious anarchists despite its limited print run (probably considerably below 1,000 per issue of which very few copies appear to have survived). Within two years of starting The TORCH  H B Samuels wrote to Nettlau admitting that the adolescent Rossetti’s were, “growing in influence and power among people we could not reach the in ordinary way” (24 April 1893).

Crisis and Recovery?
Heavily influenced by Kropotkin and fellow Russian exiles, Stepniak and Volkhonsky, as readership increased, The TORCH attracted new authors and new ideas. The involvement of French exiles prompted the promotion of “propaganda of the deed” which cooled Kropotkin’s initial enthusiasm but drew in others as The TORCH celebrated a bizarrely eclectic mix of anarchist ideas.
The summer of 1893 presented an opportunity for expansion with the imminent collapse of Commonweal until crisis struck the Rossetti household. Lucy, the children’s mother had long suffered ill health but suddenly doctors feared for the worst and ordered convalescence in a warmer climate and the parents deemed it advisable for both Olivia and Helen to accompany her to Lake Maggiore. The group departed for Italy in October leaving publication of The TORCH in abeyance and the issue of 15th July 1893 the last, until Lucy was fit enough to return to London.
Sadly Lucy never recovered and in March 1894 William and young Arthur hurried to San Remo to visit her in what appeared likely her final days. On 12 April Lucy passed away in the presence of William and the children. Following the funeral, as soon as Olivia, Helen and Arthur returned to London they lost no time restarting the paper which appeared 15 June 1894 denominated as, “New Series, Issue 1”.

New Site, New Politics?
After Lucy’s death William applied for and was granted immediate pensioned retirement and was in no mood to any longer allow his children to fill his basement with anarchists and other assorted reprobates. Olivia, Helen and Arthur were directed to light their Torch elsewhere and it’s extraordinary that under these circumstances they’d managed to get that June 1894 edition out so promptly. Described on the masthead as, “A Revolutionary Journal of Anarchist Communism”, that issue was, “Printed and Published by F. Macdonald, 1 Arlington Terrace, Arlington Road, Camden Town, NW”. Their saviour and new sponsor was Dr Thomas Fauset Macdonald (1862-1910) who’d previously backed Commonweal but he wasn’t yet in a position to provide The TORCH with a permanent home. From October to December 1894 the paper was nominally printed and published by Macdonald at, 43 Crawford Street, W. Despite these production problems the journal no longer depended on street sales but was by then also available through two fixed outlets, Lapie’s shop at 30 Goodge Street and William Reeves, 185 Fleet Street.
This new series of the paper still carried articles espousing Russian revolutionary causes and French “propaganda of the deed” but also exemplified the arrival of Antonio Agresti (1864-1926) and his Italian comrades who would come to profoundly influence both the paper and its adolescent progenitors. 
WMR approved of Agresti despite recording his own downbeat first impression, “a young man, dark short and slight with an unhealthy complexion and dressed in black like a poor clerk”. Born in Florence in 1864, after publishing “a seditious manifesto”, Antonio had been forced to flee to France where he was later arrested and jailed. Expelled to Brussels in early 1894 he’d moved to London where he lodged with Malatesta, who was already involved with The TORCH. Agresti signed the “News of the Month” in the first issue of the new series and a prominent advert advised comrades, “Anarchist Leaflets! To be had at 2s 6d a thousand. Apply to A. Agresti at 7 Frederick St, Portland Town, N.W.”. The editorial modestly announced, “We aim at a complete, radical, absolute overthrow of the Bourgeois system” but first came the practical search for permanent premises…

                                   

Permanent Premises
At the end of 1894 The TORCH found its final resting place in Somers Town, north London. The protracted search had eventually identified “127 Ossulston Street”. Harry Kelly described the premises as, “A small two-storey building situated in a back yard, in one of the poorest neighbourhoods of London…The building had two rooms, one upstairs for the composing room, and one downstairs, the press room”.
The Rossetti girls recorded their first visit to the new office and Nettlau’s introduction to the premises, We stopped in front of a little greengrocers’ shop in a side street”,…“The place I mean is behind here, the woman in the shop (Mrs Upchurch) lets it, we will go in and speak with her”. “She turned out to be as loquacious as she was bulky, a fair specimen of the good-natured Cockney gossip, evidently fond of the convivial glass, not over-choice in her language, the creature of her surroundings, which were not of the sweetest, but withal warm-hearted and sympathetic, with that inner hatred of the police common to all who belong to the coster class, and able to stand up for her rights, if necessary, both with her tongue and her fists. She showed us over a damp ill-lighted basement shop, in a corner of which was a ladder leading to a large, light shop, which seemed well suited to our purpose.”
The TORCH acquired all the old equipment previously owned by the Socialist League and Commonweal including a hand-press that had been employed by Johann Most to print Freiheit before it was passed on to Joseph Lane’s Revolutionary Committee for their leaflet propaganda. In December 1894 these presses were rapidly installed in the downstairs room at Ossulton Street and that month’s edition of the paper informed readers this would become The TORCH’s registered address from New Year.

The TORCH Club
Securing a permanent base and proper, if antiquated, printing presses enabled the paper to flourish as the office became a haven where exiled anarchists dropped in, made contacts and contributed the occasional article. WMR described it less positively, “a sort of club where the hangers on of the extreme Left idled away an immense amount of time whilst their infant host and hostesses were extremely active over their formes” concerning conditions back home. Throughout 1895 a regular monthly production schedule was maintained and pagination increased from a previous average of about a dozen pages up to sixteen and occasionally twenty pages and this pattern continued into 1896. From its launch to its eventual demise the paper’s price remained at one penny which incidentally exactly matched that adopted by Commonweal, The Anarchist, Freedom and Liberty.
Nettlau testified to the popularity of The TORCH in this period, claiming that it sold every issue produced and the print-run was usually between 1,500 and 3,000 although surviving copies show The TORCH was far and away the worst printed of any of the above titles. Whatever the print quality the contents, when readable, were never dull at a time when its contemporary Freedom was described by one comrade, “as a middle-class philosophical organ, not intelligible to the working classes, not up to date in late information and…less revolutionary than “Comic Cuts””

Incendiary Eclecticism
Whilst The TORCH carried stuff found elsewhere in contemporary anarchist journals five distinct elements ultimately characterise the paper;
  • Eclectic
  • Literary and Artistic
  • Praise for “Propaganda by the Deed”
  • Feminist
  • Revolutionary trade unionist
Although Freedom openly debated issues, especially “individualist” versus “”communist” versions of anarchy in its early years by the time of The TORCH it had settled into a tolerant but rather staid pattern which the brash newcomer implicitly challenged. The TORCH was always inconsistent, both from issue to issue and within each issue. Readers could never lazily imbibe a “Party Line” as an article commending peaceful cooperation might be followed by a call to bomb throwing and assassination.
The TORCH challenged readers to reflect and decide issues for themselves and whilst this intellectual eclecticism earned the admiration of literary critics it attracted the ire of political ideologues. The Rossetti’s roots in the literary and artistic world was evident with poetry a regular feature and publication of an original Pissaro print an outstanding example.
Where many English anarchists distanced themselves from “Propaganda by the Deed” enacted in mainland Europe The TORCH wasn’t afraid to offer praise. In March 1895 Fauset Macdonald described Ravachol, Pallas, Vaillant, Henry and Caserio as “priceless heroes “who met their deaths “at the heart of an effete society” and Gori, Alexander Cohen and Bevington all added their own paeans to dynamiters in various editions. BUT The TORCH also published damning indictments of anarchist terrorism from the pen of Thomas Hastie Bell and other pacifist comrades.
The two Rossetti girls ensured the paper challenged the patriarchy from the outset. The TORCH denounced police harassment of prostitutes and defended Minnie Wells and Amy Gregory, who’d been sentenced to death for infanticide, as innocent, impoverished women driven to desperation by an uncaring society. The paper campaigned for Edith Lanchester, a young woman confined to an asylum by her parents when she sought to live unmarried with a socialist. An article by F S Paul claimed, “Every woman has an inalienable right to do with her body whatever she likes; to give herself to whomsoever she likes.”
The TORCH took more account of trade union activity than other anarchist journals and Agresti, James Harragan and Malatesta were particularly concerned with “Strike Tactics”. In April 1895 Agresti ridiculed Northampton strikers parading through the streets in pathetic demonstrations designed to elicit public sympathy and suggested instead they occupy their factories and workshops and turn out stuff for themselves or for sale or they could sabotage the machinery to punish the bosses. Malatesta’s articles developed Syndicalist ideas of trade union activism and the revolutionary potential of the “General Strike”. These pioneering notions of revolutionary unionism were taken out onto the streets by soap-box propagandist Harragan who was as contemptuous as Agresti of the servile attitude of contemporary trade union leaders.

The End is Nigh
By the end of 1896 the Rossettis would be children no more for Helen would be 17, Arthur 19 and Olivia 21 and each for their own reasons was anxious to move on. Early in the year it was already apparent that Olivia and Agresti were more than merely comrades, that Helen’s health was suffering and Arthur was really more interested in engineering machines than society.
Officially The TORCH and its presses were owned by Olivia and whilst she didn’t need the money she was anxious if she departed to facilitate the continuance of the title. Fersenheim Paul offered her £20 and promised to keep the paper going but whilst she considered this option Max Nettlau who was on the lookout for a home for Freedom wrote matching Paul’s offer. She granted Paul first refusal but when he failed to find backers she gave Nettlau the go-ahead. Max’s comrade, and TORCH associate, Bernard Kampffmeyer supported his initiative by chipping in half the purchase money and jointly guaranteeing the rent.
From April 1895 Freedom was (unofficially) printed at Ossulston Street along with The TORCH on the same presses but the gradual withdrawal of Agresti and the Rossetti trio left a hole in the paper that proved hard to fill. Freedom thrived on the new arrangement but no sooner had compositor-editor, Tom Cantwell, got his foot in the door at Ossultson Street than he used it to bar the way to The TORCH group. Even the Rossetti’s weren’t any longer welcome and Pietro Gori and Edoardo Milano, two Italians temporarily lodged upstairs, were ejected by Cantwell at gunpoint. Two of the erstwhile TORCH group, Byrne and Paul managed to get a few issues of the paper printed elsewhere but in January 1897 their initiative ended and, after six years and almost sixty issues, The TORCH was finally extinguished.

Life After Death
The TORCH premises continued to be used to produce Freedom for the next thirty years until the building was demolished under “slum clearance”. The Rossetti children left London to go their separate ways. Olivia followed Antonio Agresti to Italy when he was granted amnesty in 1896. They married in Rome the following year.
In 1896 Helen was dispatched to Davos to convalesce but following a relapse her father accompanied her on a voyage to Australia. During the return sailing her ship was becalmed and menaced by fifty-two huge icebergs which, Helen calmly proceeded to sketch from a comfortable position on deck.
Arthur, unusually for a Rossetti, showed no real interest or aptitude for the arts and according to his father’s Reminiscences, “Studies of chemistry, algebra and other matters of science engaged his chief personal attention; for a spell of light reading he would take up the Differential Calculus. He wanted to be an electrical engineer and was put in that way of pursuing that vocation.” In 1896 he was obtained a student placement in the large engineering works of Jackson & Co., Salford where he became very friendly with the work’s manager, John Slater Lewis. In 1899 he was appointed manager of the “Lancashire Stoker Works” in Bolton which had just emerged from an embittered strike. In September 1901 Arthur married Dora Lewis, the daughter of his manager at Jacksons and more or less, lived happily ever after (d.24.9.1932), having no further involvement in politics and recording none of his experiences at The TORCH.

Helen’s Story
Unlike Arthur, neither of the Rossetti girls went quietly. Both maintained a public role and together they published a fictionalised account of their time at The TORCH. Helen remained closest to their father and most faithfully followed the family’s artistic inclinations, as an artist and author. In the autumn of 1903 whist living in the family’s Edmund Terrace house Helen met and fell madly in love with a young Italian journalist Gastone Angeli. On 1 December, accompanied by her approving father she sailed for Naples where, on the 10th she married Angeli before leaving with him three days later for Cairo where he held an appointment in the Italian Chamber of Commerce. Weakened in health by previous service in the Congo, Gastone died in Egypt on 18 July 1904 leaving Helen heavily pregnant. She then sailed for Rome to stay with Olivia who’d settled there with Agresti. Helen had her baby, Imogene Lucy Cristina Maria, in September and was visited in November by her father William and sister Mary (who’d been too young to have involved herself during The TORCH years).
Helen and Imogene returned to the old family home at Edmund Terrace. Helen maintained herself and her young daughter through a combination of authorship and office work until her father died in 1919 leaving her Shelley’s old sofa in his will (depicted above), he bequeathed a locket containing part of Shelley’s skull to Olivia!
Relieved of responsibility for both father and daughter Helen was appointed Secretary to Signor Attolico of the Italian Ministry of Commerce in both London and New York. She also set-about establishing herself as a full-time author, publishing books on Shelley, Dante Gabriel Rossetti and “The Pre-Raphaelite Twilight”. The Times marked her death on 11 September 1969 with an obituary describing both her early conversion to anarchism by Kropotkin and her initiative in jointly igniting The TORCH, as well sketching a brief account of her later literary career.

Olivia’s Life
Of the The TORCH trio there is no doubt that Olivia was the leading light. All three contributed whilst no-one accused Olivia of being bossy or dominating but she was the eldest and remained throughout her life the most overtly political. Although her husband, Antonio Agresti, had been a fiery revolutionary before and during The TORCH years when he returned to Italy with Olivia in 1897 he abandoned anarchism and embraced bourgeois journalism and literature. In 1914 he campaigned for Italy’s intervention in the First World War. After the conflict he collaborated on the conservative newspaper La Tribuna and supported Mussolini’s Fascists.
Olivia’s politics followed a similar trajectory although in 1903 she collaborated with Helen in writing a fictionalised account of their years producing The TORCH which portrayed prominent anarchists disguised only by the thinnest of veils. Jointly authored under the single nom de plume, Isobel Meredith, “A Girl Amongst the Anarchists” is a fascinating read giving insight into both the character of the Rossetti’s and the sociopathic tendencies of several anarchist “heroes”. “Isobel” used the opportunity to slight Cantwell (“Short”), describing him as, “a queer uncouth figure with his long tousled black hair and sallow, unhealthy face…his whole attitude was somewhat deprecatory and cringing”.
The air of disillusionment that suffuses the work disappoints hagiographers and so like The TORCH it’s been similarly undervalued by anarchists. Olivia was certainly no saint, through meeting David Lubin, Olivia became an advocate for world economic cooperation and a leading “League of Nations” interpreter. These influences propelled Olivia from class-struggle anarchism through Corporatism to Fascism. From 1921 to 1943 she edited the newsletter of the Associazione fra le Societa per Azioni, a group closely allied with the Fascists and in 1938 co-authored, “The Organisation of the Arts and Professions in the Fascist Guild State” with the Fascist journalist Mario Missiroli. When “Signora Olivia Agresti” died in Rome on 6 November 1960 her Times obituary recognised her early years of, “advanced socialism and anarchism…and friendship with Prince Krapotkin (sic)” but tactfully overlooked her support for Fascism.
The adult disillusionment of the adolescent revolutionaries encourages critics to view the trio as mere dilettantes whose anarchism ran into the sands of factory life, literature and fascism respectively but no libertarian initiative ever entirely fails. It’s surely better to light a candle than curse the darkness and in a most gloomy Victorian era of international repression Olivia, Helen and Arthur ignited The TORCH of Anarchy.

                                                                                     Christopher Draper (February 2018)


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 (http://radicalhistorynetwork.blogspot.com). 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 smothpubs.blogspot.com
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 (https://liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk/products/60219; free access at  https://www.surrey.ac.uk/englis writer and editor Jean Grave (initial findings here: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-review-of-social-history). 
"An English tribute to the French Commune
dedicated to the workers of both countries."
=======================
For some more early 2018 listings, see earlier post.