Download 'Wobblies Down Under'

Wobblies Down Under

The Swedish-American radical socialist, songster and poet Joe Hill, became a martyr for the working classes world-wide when he was executed in 1915 for a murder he almost certainly did not commit. His ashes were distributed around the world including New Zealand but no trace of them has ever been found here. Researcher Jared Davidson set out to track them down but in the process uncovered the story of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW, known as the 'Wobblies') and their repression in New Zealand during the early 1900s and World War 1. (47′06″)

Download: Ogg Vorbis  MP3 | Embed

"...and we might cut you in half"

From here: http://jacobinmag.com/blog/?p=1854

Politics averted: thoughts on the 'Occupy X' movement

 An analysis on the protests in Ireland and the US from an Irish anarchist. 

What are we to make of the global 'Occupy X' movement which has exploded onto the streets of cities across the world, turning public spaces into campsites of opposition? Certain things are obvious: Firstly, the fact that there are thousands of people across the world taking over public spaces to express their anger at the financial system is undeniably a good thing. Having camped out outside the Central Bank on Dame Street on Saturday night, I can also say that these protests exude a positivity and hopefulness that is so often lacking from the ritualistic parades of anger that make up most protest marches. But there are also, in my view, serious political problems that prevent the movement from moving beyond a 'radical sleepover' and becoming a genuine anti-austerity grassroots resistance movement.

The analysis below is based in my own particular experience of the Dame St. protest on the ground and of the US protests as a media event. Obviously any attempt to discuss a diverse and fluid movement like this as a whole can only ever be approximate and reductive. This account is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather to sketch what I see as the major trends and tendencies emerging within the movement, and should be read with that in mind.

Non-politics, incoherence, (neo)liberalism
The 'Occupy X' movement has since its inception shown an extreme aversion to being seen as political. Some aspects of this, such as banning political party banners, are an understandable pragmatic reaction to the tendency of various Leninist parties to hijack these kinds of events by swamping them with flags, banners and paper-sellers. But the anti-politics of the movement, at least on the part of the organising core and the Adbusters collective who issued the call for the original Wall St. protest, is also ideological: an odd synthesis of post-leftist anti-organisationalism (which sees formal political organisations, trade unions, etc. as being necessarily oppressive) and neoliberal post-politicism (which sees a Left vs. Right contest of ideas as being largely irrelevant after the fall of the Berlin Wall). After decades of neoliberal governance and media spin attempting to drive ideology and politics out of public discourse in order to enshrine the liberal-capitalist consensus as being 'above politics' and to reduce political questions to technical ones best dealt with by 'experts', it is perhaps unsurprising, but nonetheless disheartening, to see this depoliticisation reflected in contemporary forms of resistance.

Most obviously, this has been expressed in the movement's unwillingness to attempt to agree on a coherent set of positions beyond some very basic points of unity with no underlying analysis of society. Instead, the occupied space is used by individuals to express a range of incoherent and often mutually contradictory ideas which are related only by being in some sense opposed to the status quo and the political and financial elites. On Saturday, I spoke to individuals who believe in everything from Rawlsian social democracy, to anarchism, to paranoid crypto-anti-Semitic conspiracy theories (the New World Order, etc.), to Stalinism. Of course, the advantage of this is that it's extremely inclusive - the only requirement to participate is a sense that things are not as they should be and that the financial sector and the state are in some way to blame - but this also means that reactionary ideas are treated the same as progressive ones rather than being robustly challenged. In practice, this means that the ideas that come to the fore tend to be those that are already dominant in society: the ideas of the ruling class. In the US context, the dominant messages from Occupy Wall Street have been liberal, reformist and nationalistic: those that posed the least threat to the establishment. For example, a call to "make Wall Street work for America" amounts to little more than a call for increased exploitation of the Third World as an alternative to imposing austerity. A call to reform banking practice to constrain "corporate greed" is merely a call to stabilise capitalism so that the course of exploitation runs more smoothly. The problem is capitalism, not regulatory failure, or corporate greed or a lack of economic patriotism, and the inadequacies of these analyses need to be exposed rather than uncritically welcomed. The Irish protest seems to be following a similar pattern, with a particular anti-IMF/EU flavour.

The theory underlying this anti-politics, so far as I can gather, is this: no two people experience oppression in the same way, and thus any attempt to unite people under a political programme inevitably ends up erasing some people's perspectives. This is superficially quite a pleasing analysis, since it creates a framework under which all ideas can be understood as equally valid, since they all derive from lived-experience, but it's extremely problematic. Implicitly, it denies the possibility of coming to an inter-subjective understanding (i.e. one based in mutual recognition of shared experiences and understanding of differing ones) of oppression through collective discussion and compromise, and instead collapses into a naive relativism that produces a vague and weak politics, which plays into the hands of those who wish to dismiss the protesters as 'hippies' who don't understand the complexities of capitalism. In any case, it's easy to overstate the case for subjective perspectives and ignore the objective factors that shape experiences: the processes and structures of capitalist domination.

Bring back the working-class!
One of the major victories of neoliberalism is the eradication of the working-class from the popular consciousness. One of the results of this is the prevalence of the idea among certain sections of the left that the working-class is no longer relevant to understanding power in the modern world - an outdated idea clung to by old-left dinosaurs. This is reflected in the idea of 'the 99%' which has become the slogan of the 'Occupy X' movement, which expresses a very crude understanding of class, where the ruling class are an arbitrarily defined proportion of the wealthiest people in society. This makes for some great chanting - "we are the 99%!" - but is a poor criterion for membership of an anti-capitalist or anti-austerity movement. Put bluntly: there are an awful lot of capitalists, bosses, managers, bankers, CEOs, politicians, police, prison wardens etc. in the 99%.

Properly understood, class is not a classification system of individuals based on how much money they have, it's a social relation between people that derives from the organisation of labour under capitalism. In other words, it's the way people are forced to relate to one another in order to participate in capitalist society. Class oppression is not a small cabal of the ultra-rich in Wall Street or Washington or Leinster House, it's in every workplace, every police station, every dole queue, every courtroom, every prison and every territory occupied by Western militaries, and can only be sensibly understood as such.

Conclusion
The radically democratic nature of the occupations creates the potential for the movement to evolve in any number of possible directions. Whether or not they become genuine resistance movements depends largely on how much the radical left are willing to engage with them, and re-assert the importance of class politics in understanding and countering oppression, by participating in the actions, discussions, and assemblies. A key hurdle has already been overcome: people are on the streets, expressing their dissent, reclaiming public spaces; it remains to be seen what comes of it.

Originally: October 12, 2011 on Workers Solidarity Movement

The Amsterdam Archives (2011)

In January 1939, the CNT-FAI special services secured 22 boxes of the CNT’s archives just prior to the occupation of Barcelona by the fascist forces of General Franco, and transferred them across Europe to the International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam. This Catalan TV3 documentary (with English subtitles) weaves a thrilling visual tapestry of the CNT’s relations with the international anarchist movements of the day, including the Makhnovists in the Ukraine and the revolutionary movement in Patagonia. It not only talks about anarchism and its history—as well as a sort of anarchism 101—but it looks at the role of records management for social causes. It also shows us through some amazing archives!

'Wobblies Down Under': Labour Day feature on Radio New Zealand

While I was in Wellington for the launch of my book, I managed to catch up with Jack Perkins (of Spectrum fame) for Radio New Zealand National. I'm pleased to say our talk has been turned into a 50 minute feature to be aired on Labour Day, October 24 at 10AM.

Songster, poet and member of the radical socialist Industrial Workers of the World, known as the Wobblies, Joe Hill became a martyr for the working classes world-wide. After a funeral in Chicago which attracted over 30, 000 mourners, Joe’s ashes were placed in 600 envelopes with the inscription ‘Murdered by the Capitalist classes’ and sent to Wobblies around the world including New Zealand. No trace of the ashes sent here has ever been found. 'Wobblies Down Under' explores how I set out to track down Joe’s ashes and in the process uncovered a story of the ruthless repression of Wobblies and other socialists in the early 1900s and World War 1.

Featuring music, sound bites from participants in the Great Strike of 1913, and readings from the book, it's well worth a listen. Tune in to 101FM or listen live here:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national.

Reproduce & Revolt: stencil & screenprint workshop

 
On October 2 around 15-20 budding street artists gathered for a community workshop on stencil-making and screenprinting, organised by Beyond Resistance. The three hour session involved a run-down on how to make a stencil, the screenprinting process, and of course, making some prints. There were some nice designs being produced, and thanks to the excellent 'Reproduce & Revolt' book, those of us with limited time or handiwork were able to take home some great wee stencils as well. The odd T-Shirt was also printed... Food Not Bombs Otautahi having planned ahead!

Thanks to the Linwood Community Arts Centre for the use of the space, and everyone who came along. Look out for the next workshop soon.

My screenprinting process

These pics are of an older two colour job for a band called 'So So Modern', designed by Autistk. The poster was printed as an edition of 50 A1's. Hopefully it helps you all understand the screenpritning process a little better.



Here's the seperations. These are the designs, turned into their respective colours/layers, as each colour is printed one at a time. Black on the right, red on the left.


The seps are then stuck to the screen. The key is UV sensitive emulsion (the orange stuff), which is coated onto the screen earlier and needs to be kept out of the light until exposure. I keep my large screens in the attic: smaller screens in a light-safe box I made.


The screen then goes into my UV lightbox for exposure...I use 6 UV bulbs at around 20mins, which burns the design from the seps into the emulsion. The foam on the right pushes the screen flush to the glass when the lid is closed, making a crisp image. You can do this with a halogen lamp, or even the sun.




After exposure, the screens are washed down. The black areas in the design block the light, but the clear areas are burned into the screen. The result is that the blocked areas (the yellowish sections) washes away, making the stencil for printing.


Sweet, so my screen is dry and I'm taping it up so I can print. The orange areas are blocked, so no ink can pass through. It's the other (yellowish) areas where the inks passes through in the printing process.


I use clear packing tape on the gutters, which helps cleaning up the excess ink and stops leakage at the sides.


Screen is locked into my vacuum table using hinges, and the stock is ready to register. I use business cards as a 3 point rego system....I also use that kick arm which holds up the screen and helps for feeding in stock.


The screen is lowered, and I then add the ink. I use waterbased inks so I don't have to deal with chemicals.


Printing the first layer, red. Generally lighter colours go first. This is the repetitive part. So for a 50 poster job I'd do this action 50 times, plus another 50 for the second colour.


And ta da! I work from right to left, and usually get up a bit of pace, which is nice. Loud punk (Minor Threat usually) or national radio is a necessity for this process.


Here's the first colour done.


The screens then get cleaned in my washout area out back. Tape, ink, blood, etc.


Time for the second colour. I line up the second colour with the transparency, then do the same with the screen to make sure registration is ok. This is probably the hardest thing because things can move during the whole process!


Tape it up, line it up, and get ready to brake my back again. Music on.








Done!

'Remains to be Seen' Auckland launch this weekend

Just a wee reminder that this is happening this Saturday! Also I'm pleased to announce that Radio New Zealand will be airing a 50 minute feature on my research on Labour Day—October 24—at 10am.

'Remains to be Seen: Tracing Joe Hill's ashes in New Zealand'—an easy-to-read account of censorship and radical labour during the First World War—will be launched in Auckland September 24.

Jared Davidson, author and designer of 'Remains to be Seen', will share a few thoughts on the book, to be followed by a screening of 'The Wobblies'—a classic and informative documentary of one of the worlds most lively and radical unions, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). You can watch an excerpt here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS5nP0F8sXI&feature=related

Come along and share in a slice of Aotearoa's radical history.

Saturday 24 September, 5.30pm, at the Cityside Baptist Church Hall (8 Mount Eden Road, Mt. Eden, Auckland).

More information on the book can be found at http://www.rebelpress.org.nz/publications/remains-to-be-seen.

Cheers,

New Katipo Books webiste is live!

After a wee hiatus, a change in the collective, and a number of major earthquakes, Katipo Books Workers' Co-Operative is finally back on track! And we're excited to say we have a brand new website.

You can now check out radical books, zines and more at http://www.katipobooks.co.nz. We've still got a swag of zines to upload, and a new shipment of books is due in next month, so there's much more to come. And bear with us if there's any bugs.

If you're in Otautahi/Christchurch then watch out for us at the Vegetarian Expo, and if you're keen to get involved then give us a buzz. Our new email is katipobooks (at) riseup (dot) net.

What is Katipo Books?

Katipo Books was established in 2006 as a way to bring more radical and alternative educational material into circulation within Aotearoa/New Zealand. We’re a small collective that aims to grow over time and expand the material we have available, through our online store and regular bookstalls at events such as speakers’ evenings, book launches and other events (such as publishing our own literature). We also support and network with other small publishing and distribution groups such as Rebel Press and AK Press. [Read more at our website]

Christchurch Protest: National Party Welcoming Committee!

 For the first time in 16 years the cabinet are meeting outside of the beehive to acknowledge the anniversary of September's Earthquake. The same cabinet that brought us 1000's of families freezing in condemned homes, record levels of unemployment, attacks on workers and beneficiary rights, billion dollar bailouts for private business and a cabinet with a clear agenda to drag New Zealand into a third world economic state - LET'S MAKE IT CLEAR THAT NOT EVERYONE IN AOTEAROA LOVES JOHN KEY AND HIS PARASITIC MATES!!!

Time: Monday, September 5 · 1:30pm - 3.30pm

 Location: Copthorne Hotel, 449 Memorial Avenue - nr Ch Ch airport

Auckland Launch of 'Remains to be Seen: Tracing Joe Hill's ashes in NZ'

'Remains to be Seen: Tracing Joe Hill's ashes in New Zealand'—an easy-to-read account of censorship and radical labour during the First World War—will be launched in Auckland September 24.

Jared Davidson, author and designer of 'Remains to be Seen', will share a few thoughts on the book, to be followed by a screening of 'The Wobblies'—a classic and informative documentary of one of the worlds most lively and radical unions, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). Watch an excerpt here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS5nP0F8sXI&feature=related

Come along and share in a slice of Aotearoa's radical history.

Saturday 24 September, 5.30pm, at the Cityside Baptist Church Hall (8 Mount Eden Road, Mt. Eden, Auckland).

More information on the book can be found at http://www.rebelpress.org.nz/publications/remains-to-be-seen.

Probably the best personal account of the riots I've read so far...

An article by London anarchist 'Max von Sudo' published on London Indymedia on the looting in his home neighborhood of Brixton.

What is the crime of looting a corporate chain store next to the crime of owning one?
-- Luther Brecht

Looters don't give many press conferences. This made all of the conversations on today's BBC morning show a little bit one-sided.

Having been out last night in Brixton, I feel as qualified as anybody to offer at least a bit of perspective as an anarchist living in the area for the past six years.

First things first. None of the people hauling ass out of Currys last night will ever pay £9000 annual tuition to David Cameron's shiny new neo-liberal university system, so beloved by the young people of London. Although Britain has a bit more social mobility now than in the Victorian era which Cameron seems to idolize, the racist overtones in the Great British societal symphony are still pretty loud. Most of the black people who participated in last night's looting of the Currys over on Effra Road may never make it off their housing estates and into the Big Society. They don't have a hell of a lot to lose.

Despite this, the fairly mixed (for Brixton) crowd of several hundred was feeling festive last night, as cars lined up on both sides of the road, all the way to Brixton Water Lane. They're not people who are used to winning very often. The chance to haul away several hundred thousand pounds worth of electronics, right under the helpless noses of the police who routinely harass, beat, and kill them, made it a great night. The fourteen year old girls heading for that 60 inch plasma TV of their dreams were polite enough to say "excuse me", quite sincerely, as they bumped into me while springing into the Currys parking lot. Last night, everybody on Effra Road was in a great mood.
This morning, killjoys in the corporate media disagreed.

Many commentators decried the lack of a clear political motive in the riots, and seemed worried about how unrespectable the looting makes it all seem. According to this line of thought, poverty is not political.

On the radio, on the web, and in the papers, there's a lot of talk right now about the 'stupidity' of the rioters, burning down their own neighbourhoods. All of the commentators who follow this line of argument haven't considered some pretty basic facts.

Outraged Guardian readers, I say to you: you're only partially correct. It's true that the guy carrying that cash register past Brixton Academy last night probably didn't conceptualize his actions according to rational choice economic theories. However, when compared with four years of failed state capitalist attempts to catapult us out of the economic crisis, his maneuvers were in fact the height of rationality. Destroying evidence by turning on the gas cooker full-blast and burning down the Stockwell Road Nandos is pretty crazy. But it makes a lot more economic sense, for Brixton, than anything so far attempted by Labour, the Conservatives, or the wizard brains of the City of London.

Smashing windows in Brixton is probably a surer road to prosperity for most people than any of the more respectable paths already explored.

The guy who showed up today to fix the smashed windows on Brixton Road may live just down the street from the shattered glass lying on the pavement; it's unlikely that he's a currency speculator or a hedge fund manager on the side. Any money he makes from fixing the windows will be mostly spent back in the local community.

The merits of endlessly sucking money out of the pockets of working people into the reserve accounts of the supercharged risk-takers at Canary wharf are quite a bit less clear to me, at present. The crisis is entering year five. Throwing hundreds of billions into the endless rounds of bank bailouts, corporate tax breaks, and other props for a global economy which increasingly resembles that of the USSR circa 1987 is not clearly a winning strategy.

The eruption of economic chaos in the Eurozone, and the police bullets which ripped into Mark Duggan, ending his life, are now two events which are bound together in a massive sequence of riots in London, the European continent's largest financial centre.

These riots are remarkable chiefly for the role-reversals they bring about, and most of the outrage in the corporate media is a reflection of this. The outrage is really interesting if you stop to think about it.
For instance: retail profit is a kind of theft. It's economic value which is hoovered out of a local community via corporate cash registers. The decisions about where to re-invest the profits are the preserve of corporate managers and shareholders, not the decision of the people from whom the value was extracted. The whole process is fundamentally anti-democratic.

This daily denial of basic democratic political rights is "normal", and may last for years, decades or centuries. Corporations may steal from poor people - but any attempt on the part of poor people to steal back must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.

Similarly, I had multiple conversations today about Saturday night's riots in Tottenham. They invariably referenced the case of Keith Blakelock, the police officer who was killed during the Broadwater Farm riots of 1985. Not one of the conversations I had included any reference to Cynthia Jarrett, the woman whose killing during a search of her apartment sparked those riots in the first place.
In the same way, I doubt whether any of the outraged middle-class commentators on the BBC 4 radio show this morning gave much thought to the dozens of people that the cops have killed in custody, or to the more or less daily humiliation of black youths who get stopped and searched outside my house. The message conveyed by all of this is pretty clear: police attacks on poor people who can't defend themselves (especially black ones) are normal. Conversely, popular attacks on police are an outrage, especially if they happen to succeed. And don't ask that guy who nicked the cash register to give his side of the story.

None of this is to say that the fire truck which just screamed past my window is a good thing. The political and economic problems of Brixton are complex. It's too easy to spout platitudes about how nothing will ever be the same again - but for a few hours last night, walking down Effra road with plasma screen TVs and Macintosh laptops, the losers were the winners. And that could have a powerful effect.

Direct democracy: An anarchist alternative to voting

Image by El Cartel

With elections around the corner, various parties and their members will be out seeking your vote, your support, or at least your attention. “It’s the time for you to have a say in how the country is run”, as the adverts say. You might also hear a rather different message from some corners, namely anarchist ones. Not only do anarchists say “don’t vote”, but they usually follow it up with “organise!” They also talk about ‘direct democracy’.

So what does that actually mean? If voting is the only way to have your say, why would anarchists question it? And what does the ‘organise’ and ‘direct democracy’ bit entail?

While there are many reasons why anarchists think voting and parliamentary representation is a bankrupt way of directly looking after our many needs and wants, such debates are not the main focus of this wee text (these arguments can be found at on various websites such as www.libcom.org or www.anarchistfaq.org). What we want to try and illustrate here is the ‘organise’ part of the critique—the ways of doing things anarchists refer to as self-management and direct democracy. These are summed up by a thing called ‘federalism’—a tongue-twister of a word that will be explained by thrashing the analogy of grocery shopping the extreme!

How democracy works now

Politics, political parties, and our current system of parliamentary democracy all rely on ‘representation’. Politicians are elected by popular vote to represent us and our interests, and in exchange, we give them the power to make decisions—in short, to govern us. We do this either a) voluntarily every 3 years (because we are led to believe that this is the most logical and efficient way of doing things); or b) unwillingly through the use of coercion or force.

This means the power to make laws, to regulate and control society, are in the hands of those in power (politicians), and are binding on you and me. Because we pass on these responsibilities we advocate a system of hierarchy—a pyramid-like structure with a few at the top, and the rest of us at various levels below. The system can be described as top-down, because information and power are concentrated with the few representatives, who make decisions for the people. If those representatives at the top don’t do a good job, we are allowed the right to replace them every three years by voting in another bunch of people at the top. This is a very basic run down of things, but it will do for here.

For anarchists, it is this very kind of hierarchy and imbalance of power that causes most of the problems in today’s world, because it means a tiny group of people (politicians, corporations), have more power, more say, and more control than others. This loss of control at the bottom leads to things like greed, exploitation and poverty—we who have no power are exploited by those with power, whether it be economic, social or political.

An alternative

Anarchists propose that a better way to do things would be to ensure that no one has more power than another, that everyone was equal and had an equal say in their direct affairs. We believe important decisions such as where and how we work, how we live, and how we relate to each other, should be decided directly by all those involved. This is what we mean by ‘direct democracy’, and as we shall see, is totally different to ‘representative democracy’.

“Anarchism is a theory for social change based on the essential belief that no person has the right to have power over another person. When you accept the notion that every person has their own personal freedom, it becomes clear that our present social structure does not allow people equal footing. It does not allow us control over our own lives.”

So, how do anarchists think direct democracy would work? And how do they think that ‘bigger’ tasks such as ‘running a country’ could be done, without falling back into structures of unequal power, control and hierarchy? How do we ensure all decisions are made fairly, democratically, and directly, in all aspects of life—local, national and international?

Far from advocating chaos, anarchists are strong believers in organisation—and in particular, ways of organising that are as non-exploitative as possible. Anarchists don’t just wont to flip the ‘pyramid’ upside down, so the bottom becomes the top and the top becomes the bottom—we would rather do away with the pyramid all together! Instead, horizontal and equal forms of decision making would replace it, making the most out of non-hierarchal systems that would function—not up or down—but from the outside edges-in, from the periphial to the centre. This form of direct democracy is known as Federalism.

Confused? In fact, we do this kind of organising in most aspects of our lives already.

Take, for example, the weekly task of going grocery shopping for the house or flat. A few of the flatmates are entrusted with carrying out the task of getting the groceries agreed to earlier by the whole flat (the dreaded shopping list), and it’s then their job to do (administer) the tasks set out (ie the shopping). We expect them to stick to the list we all agreed on, and this would make sense, because they helped create it too. They are part of the group and the decision making process, so to change the list effects them also. They might come back from the shopping with suggestions on how to do it better next time, but these are only suggestions, to discuss together as a group.

The key here is the nature of power and representation. The ‘delagates’ of the task put forward by everyone (in this case, the grocery shopping) are temporary, administrative (doing) in nature, and do not have any power to make binding or final decisions. If they really sucked at the shopping and spent all the flat money on booze and chips (‘awesome’ some might say), then obviously the next time around the group would decide on different flatmates to have a go. In fact, we all know the task of getting groceries swaps around as it’s fairer that way. Anarchists say, why not take this kind logical system and apply it our wider lives?

The key aspects of direct democracy is the fluid and temporary nature of delegation; that delegates are directly involved in the decision making, and are directly from and for the group; and that everyone involved has a direct say in the issue at hand (whether that’s shopping, running a community garden, or an entire workplace/community). What’s cool about it is the equal balance of power in making decisions, and the non-existence of an exploitative hierarchy. It is in this way that direct democracy and self-management  takes place—meaning you can have the maximum input in what directly effects you. When this process joins together with other groups doing the very same thing (such as between communities or workplaces, or even countries), federalism on a larger scale takes place—following the same structures and the same principles.

Still not sure if this is a better way of doing things? Lets bash this shopping analogy out even further, and see how the shopping would take place under the current system of ‘representation’.

The people who you ‘elected’ to go shopping—and who promised they would ‘stick to the list’—have decided to not only stay and live at the supermarket, but try and control everything else about the flat from there too. They try to make sure you’ve got the right groceries from where they are, as they say it’s more efficient than making trips back and forth. So, the flat trusts that those in the supermarket will somehow know what the flat needs each changing week, even though they are now separate and removed from the flat. If they start to get it wrong and become completely out of touch with the flat’s various needs, then all you can do is wait three years to vote in another group—who, funnily enough, also happen to live at the supermarket! And finally, if you decide to go out and actually do the shopping yourself, and at a different kind of supermarket, they send out the trolley boy’s after you!

This analogy is terribly cheesy (as is this pun), but when it comes down to it, it’s sadly accurate. The representative system is far from efficient—in fact, its illogical, wasteful and completely divorced from our everyday lives. That’s why anarchists advocate direct democracy, direct participation, and a system of inclusive, equal, federalism. That’s also what it means when we say, “don’t vote—organise!”

My first review!

Until this week I had a fear of history books. Remains to be Seen: Tracing Joe Hill's Ashes in New Zealand by Jared Davidson dispelled my fear with its stunning layout, exceptional readability and perfect length (85 pages). The book’s subtitle might be a little misleading, as the book takes us through events that seem to have produced no trace of Joe Hill's ashes in New Zealand whatsoever. The journey, however, is very informative, revealing sad truths about New Zealand's history and the origins of today's repressive state. If a history book should do anything it is to kindle an interest in the past. Davidson's book left me with inspiration to learn more of Joe Hill and dissenters during World War I, and therefore comes highly recommended. – Arthur Price.

Courtesy of the Labour History Project Newsletter #52.

'Remains to be Seen: Tracing Joe Hill's ashes in New Zealand' (Book Launch)

My speech at the Christchurch book launch (30 June, 2011). The book—an account of censorship, Joe Hill, and the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) during the First World War—is available to purchase at http://www.rebelpress.org.nz/publications/remains-to-be-seen