Final Impressions
Haymarket
Some of the moments are working their way into the marrow--the place where hope is lodged
Humans!
For me the gathering was like jumping into the ocean after a long separation--awakening lost political dimensions and renewing connections with humans in this land. sorely felt, previously my affinity had come from europe. for periods i had basically given up on amerika. now i feel stronger--those days in chicago were like a transfusion. i saw, talked with, marched defiantly, danced around with, lived with some of those like me who are trying to change themselves and derail the cancer--machine that envelops us.
On a logistical level, we are necessarily in an infant stage. naturally we were amorphous--the whole thing was experimental as i see it. we from denver weren't even sure if anyone would show up. so with the march--it was a good show of blood, of rage inside, but we had no leaflets and no one outside the group knew what-the-fuck we were yelling about. we have to learn to communicate with the other slaves--
The gathering is a liferaft--we need more of them.
Unity is at the core of the crystal.

---gian

The Haymarket '86 international gathering of anarchists. One of the most interesting experiences of my life. The only "movement" (or social idea) that has full and equal participation of every age group: old old old all the way to young young young. It worked! 300 to 500 people communicating, listening, and functionally growing WITHOUT ANY LEADERS. I learned much more by people speaking and listening without the limitations imposed by leaders than I would have otherwise. Tonight, after three days of serious and semi-serious discussing and planning, all exploded into a fun crazy free banquet with dancing poetry drawing skits and theoretical discussing. It was beautiful. (I realize this is an entirely uncritical way to look at things but I was very excited at the time.)

---Ivan

You had to be there to believe it. Over 300 "so-called" anarchists in one spot at one time. Quite a sight to behold. Young ones, middle-aged ones, even a few older ones. Every size and shape, every lifestyle was represented. I hadn't been at anything like this since the early '70s.
Four non-stop days of activity, 9:30 a.m. till about midnight. Everything that was planned happened. The plays, all 18 scheduled workshops, many free-space workshops, the concert, videos, the demos, lots of people meeting people and the banquet, it all is now history. We lived through it and all have different experiences and views.
People complained during the event and are still complaining afterwards. When I was growing up and relatives came over on holidays, they would say, "Can we help?" or "Is there anything we can do?" Very, very few people pitched in to help. Until the banquet Saturday night the overwhelming amount of shitwork that makes something like this possible was done by less than 25 people.
I said at the "What Is Anarchism?" workshop that anarchism is mutual aid, people voluntarily working together. Haymarket '86 was an opportunity for lots of "so-called" anarchists to act responsibly and cooperatively. The Chicago people, Gaz, Kaz and John from Harrisburg and a few other people from out of town were allowed to run all the errands, prepare all the food, set all the tables, etc.
We Chicago anarchists of necessity did most of the work needed here to make H '86 possible. But it wasn't a Chicago @ event, it was a north american anarchist one. A few people here, with limited resources and no real connections, depended on help from others to pull this thing off. We made it clear in all the mailings that help was necessary.
Very few people answered the checklists we sent out. According to responses less than 200 people were coming. Nearly twice that many people actually came. Had we planned for the responsible few that answered, shortages would have been of an extreme variety. The other alternative of anticipating 500 or more would have meant horrible debts and too much food at the banquet.
All things considered, things went quite well. Most people came to Chicago expecting to meet other anarchists and not much else. Lots of other nice things happened and this made most people very happy with the way things turned. A very vocal minority, during the conference and after, complained bitterly about things, but never lifted a finger to make it any different than the way it turned out.
Mechanically, I believe the conference was an incredible success. Without the adventurous ones at the Friday demo, no one would have been arrested. The arrests cost well over $1,000. More than enough to put out issues of some fine anarchist periodicals including this one.
People mailed in large amounts of money. These generous donations and our prudent expenditures netted a surplus of over $1,000. Most of this has been returned to 14 anarchist groups in $65 checks. There also remains seed money of around $250 for a similar event next year.
Haymarket '86 was a somewhat representative sample of the anarchist movement in north america today. My actual contact with other people was very much restricted by the busy work that kept me so active the first few days. My overall view of the people attending was that most of them were much more liberal than revolutionary. One more "cops are our brothers and nice people" or "anarchism is doing your own thing," and I would have thrown up. I felt very little in common with most of the people attending.
My general feeling was that most of the people at Haymarket '86 had almost nothing in common with the Haymarket martyrs, Bakunin, Berkman or Goldman. Most of the people attending H '86 were not revolutionaries. Many times I felt like I was at a quaker or catholic worker meeting rather than an event honoring the spirit of revolutionaries like Spies and Lingg.
There were incredible differences at this event. Unlike some other people, I don't believe these differences are a strength. I quite simply don't feel comfortable with an awful lot of the people that attended this conference. Having talked to several people, here and elsewhere, since H '86, it is my feeling that Revolutionary Anarchist Communists should get together and meet.

---Fred

One of the strongest feelings/images that stays with me from Chicago is how it felt to walk out of the church basement of bursting ideas, arguing, mind and body connections; down the street and turn the corner onto that busy street of flashing lights, restaurant after restaurant, people milling around me with faces and words that made me feel like an alien. i realize how inward-directed our movement often is, how important it is to reach out in an honest, real way; but how we are often beat up, jailed, spit upon for expressing the ideas that we hold. at the haymarket gathering, we were mostly white people with middle-class backgrounds (it seemed)--"well," a friend remarked to me, "it is really the white middle-class who have the power of change. they can start the boat rocking." but how do we expand? will we forget and become accommodating to the system and spout liberal backwash?

---tamara

WHAT I SAW
1.) The actual event of HM '86 was an effective way to familiarize ourselves with the major currents of anarchism making themselves felt today. I thought it was successful inasmuch as this.
2.) The major lesson I learned about anarchism at HM '86 was that a simple word, "anarchism," cannot simply sweep away the class antagonisms which repeatedly make appearances among anarchists. To try and unite into a real movement so many conflicting ideas and social tendencies because all of the participants claim to reject hierarchy is doomed to an idealistic failure.
3.) Most of the participants in HM '86 with whom I had contact were philosophers, not revolutionaries. They were talking about the "truth" of anarchism, as if the working class, the group whose interests are best reflected by revolutionary communist anarchism, could give a shit about some quasi-deduction of the "objective truth" of anarchism. To replace the abominations of capitalism they propose doctrines, dogmas, and new moralities, most of which to me bring to mind Proudhon. The creation of an underground economy is presented in lieu of a revolution. This seemingly is the best thing they can offer, a utopian attempt at what amounts to stateless capitalism or exchange economy, the historical wet dream of the petty bourgeoisie. (A. Raynd leaves that impression with me. Big business owns the state, so it's the "have-nots" who are close enough to being "haves" to like the taste of it whose interests come to mind.) To this base differing individuals add a whole spectrum of fetishisms for spice. Pacifism, feminism, spiritualism, primitivism, veganism--anything and everything which can be mystified and made into a "spook." The social backgrounds of this group, of course, leaned heavily in the direction of non-working class origins. The self-employed, students and/or those who live with parents, and those whose communal, semi-monastic settings kept them on the sidelines of capitalist society made the strongest impressions on me (I can only hope that the philosophers and mystics reading this will absolve me of using an ad hominem argument!) It was disappointing--and nauseous--to see broad-based, spontaneous working-class insurrection and expropriation rejected in favor of pie in the sky talk and "If we had some bacon, we could have bacon and eggs, if we had some eggs" reasoning.
4.) Even more gross than the philosophical anarchists were the religious ones--those who mystified anarchism beyond intellectualism. This group was just horrible; "out of the frying pan and into Nirvana might best typify it. An ideological freak show, to the extreme of those who were convinced that even though only ten people in the fucking world thought like them, the "truth" of their doctrine would prevail over all of the Devil's wiles. Elitist gnosticism, not class struggle. The non-working class nature of these currents was desirable, of course; why, the very heavens would tremble were the "purity" of their doctrines to be defiled by working-class "philistines." Not a counter-revolutionary group, but about as revolutionary as the Moonies. There's some guy that's probably still mad at me because I don't think that much of Sitting Bull!
5.) Finally, there were some actual revolutionary workers at HM '86 in some workshops; those who did not worship "anarchist" morality, but rejected morality altogether; those who were anarchists, not because it is "true," but because it reflects their interests; those who hate capitalism, not as they read about it in college, but as they spend their 40 hours a week in a shithole; they were the ones to support a revolutionary movement and insurrection to take control of their lives forever away from pigs and abstractions. As for the others--well, we either pray for deliverance or tie our hands and feet up in moralistic algebra like pacifism. These former are the self-emancipation movement; the latter--I am content to leave them to Jesus and "human nature."
6.) In the next national, or regional, conference, the revolutionary communist anarchists should concentrate on locating each other, working on things together, and not fucking away what time we do have together on every distraction and space cadet we can find. This way we can build real unity--class solidarity, not "it's a warm body and it calls itself an anarchist, so it's got to be on our side" evangelicism. We need revolutionaries, not believers.
7.) The IWW people that I met were very interesting, but generally anachronistic. Their methods are too syndicalist and reformist to actually threaten the capitalists. They seem to think that the greatest imperial power in history is going to be overthrown by a PTA.
8.) Thank Christ all anarchists present at HM '86 rejected all the Bob Avakian cultists that did show up, as well as Bolshevism in all its other odious varieties, as fascist and counter-revolutionary. I hope we all realize that in times of insurrection we must be as wary of these bastards (RCP, PLP, SWP, ad nauseum) as we will of NF and KKK militias. 9.) I wholeheartedly applaud the action taken to keep those ShiMo Underground assholes out of the affair. Too bad more people like them (who want to fuck with the pigs so someone else can get arrested, beaten up, and insulin shock in various combos) weren't kept out. Rubin and Hoffman have quite eloquently shown the poverty of Yippiedom, thanks.
10.) The capitalists, statists, and their bootlickers are working full-time to control us; part-time attempts at self-emancipation are fit only for the museum. Only with the complete and wide-spread negation of bourgeois society and our positing the post-class, anarchistic society as thesis can we liberate our world, ourselves, our descendents.

---Sabre

My overall feeling while in Chicago was one of exhilaration. My mind was racing the whole time. I didn't think of things like food or sleep for most of the four days, and while I knew I was running myself ragged, it was worth it. So many amazing experiences, so many incredible anarchists from so many different places! My major regret was probably that there was never a clear space for people to talk about where they were from, and what they were doing there. This happened informally in small groups and one-on-one conversations, but I was not outgoing enough to meet lots of people just by walking up and saying, "hi."
The gathering seemed to be a pretty good mixture of demonstrations, pre-arranged workshops, spontaneous workshops, cultural events like plays and concerts, and just plain hanging out, talking and partying. It definitely was not overstructured!
There were probably in the neighborhood of 300 or so anarchists there, although the total number could be higher, as people were constantly coming and going. It was a pretty diverse group in age, background and expectations. There were many young people, in their late teens and early 20s, also many in their late 20s, 30s and 40s, and a few who were older.
Almost everyone was an activist in their community. I had feared that this wouldn't be the case, that it would be a mixture of young punks who wanted to smash windows, and older academics who weren't interested in a "movement." But I was wrong on both counts; although there were a few in each category, the vast majority were experienced anarchist activists coming out of the anti-nuclear, anti-intervention, feminist, anti-apartheid, peace-punk and other contemporary movements. And most had a clear understanding of why they call themselves anarchists. So, at least in terms of who was there, it was exactly the kind of gathering I had been hoping for--a mixture of theory and practice, and networking between diverse anarchist activists.

---Kathy

Control Systems and Social Change: An Introduction
May 2,1986--Chicago. With a weary but practiced eye, I swept in the view in front of the Chicago Tribune Building. I noted side streets, doorways, the cops, their numbers, their deployment. I was, for all intents and purposes, invisible. Others milled about, each doing their own thing in their own way. Behind enemy lines. I examined the body language and facial expressions of the policemen. I noted their clubs, their guns; caliber and make. I counted, and waited.
I heard a drum, a dim chanting in the distance, and glanced again at my wrist watch. Slowly, wordlessly, I made my way towards what the Tribune was to call the "magnificent mile of anarchy"--hundreds of anti-authoritarian demonstrators from all over the world come to Chicago to commemorate the "Haymarket Riot" of one hundred years earlier, and to plan for the future. For me, it was primarily an opportunity to assess whether there was, indeed, anything like an "anarchist movement" in America today, and, if so, what the movement was about, at the end of a lengthy assessment of that social trend I had undertaken in 1985. As the demonstrators approached the Tribune Building, I found myself surrounded by professed anarchists, nihilists, miscellaneous crazies and a few maoist posers. And a lot of cops. It looked impressive up close, but a block away Chicago's business day went on its ordinary path, unaware. Before the day was over, 38 would be arrested, many others would play cat-and-mouse with the police for hours.
When I came to Chicago, it was against a background of 15 years of writing about anarchism. I did indeed find many people who considered themselves "anarchists" or "anti-authoritarians" during the weekend gathering, but, I was coming to realize, social and personal control systems were as deeply imbedded among this fringe segment of American society as they were in the larger social order. Instead of "anarchists"--that is, people opposed to control systems and in favor of freedom--I found mostly slaves; slaves not merely to the undoubted power of the state, but slaves also to the internalized, neurotic complexes and social conditioning that imprisoned from within. I encountered scarred, frightened people, rationalizing their own sicknesses into a host of "isms"--feminism, vegetarianism, pacifism, socialism; or narrow sectarian interests from punk to junk to bunk. Some were arrogant in their bigotries, others were merely confused. What I found precious little of indeed was a thirst for liberty, a desire for true freedom; it wasn't even on the agenda for many of those I spoke with.
There were shining exceptions; what Emma Goldman used to call "free spirits." But they were few and far between, and even these were weighed down by the host of bureaucrats, sectarians and barely concealed authoritarians. I doubted that most of those present could be, in any sense, fighters for freedom without first literally getting their heads examined, though no such prospect, I knew, was in the offing. What became clear to me was that, though there is indeed a nucleus of an "anarchist movement," no true tendency toward freedom would be possible without the personal inner emancipation of those who presumed to call themselves "anti-authoritarians." The baggage of old and bad ideas rested like a great stone upon the backs of the participants in Haymarket '86: Anarchy in Action (as it was, optimistically, called), and without the extraordinary effort it would take to realize this self-emancipation, no greater social significance will come out of this tendency.

---excerpted from Fourth World

My memories of Haymarket '86 are overwhelmingly positive, however vague. From the start, I was impressed with the CAU and other anarchists from Chicago for their flexibility in dealing with accommodations. Concerning the banquet which so many criticized--by not making an issue of serving animals before it was ordered, we all are responsible.
Although we received a lot of credit for the vegan food produced, it truly was anarchy in action in the kitchen. Can't remember a moment that at least a couple of others weren't helping. The workshops were very interesting but the discussions in the kitchen, and those at Beth and Fred's, were just as enjoyable.
The whole Cook County episode was terrible of course but uplifting as well. I ran bail money and despite all the bickering on who's to blame, coming up with so much cash was incredible!
Let's do it again!

---Kaz

The nicest thing that happened to me because of the Haymarket gathering was the appreciation I got for the time and energy I put in helping to make vegan food for everyone. To be thanked for something you thoroughly enjoyed is a priceless moment.
I was very impressed by the solidarity exhibited by all to the arrests. It was as revolutionary a moment as I have experienced. To those who have become so serious about their reservations, I can only say that we are only human beings and none of us are perfect. There are too many problems in this world to be judging so harshly those who share so many of the same frustrations.
Since the gathering we have managed to stay in touch with some of those we met who live nearby. It's great to see such a
high level of activity. I think that an annual gathering would be a wonderful event. There are so many beautiful places on this continent. Let's use them well! Forever!

---Gaz

Basically, I feel that the most positive aspect of the gathering was that we communicated and learned from each other and gathered contacts. The workshops gave the chance to learn about and discuss certain subjects. A couple of things that I think could have been done better with the workshops would have been to schedule them so that it was possible to be at all of them and to let the participants have a voice beforehand in choosing the topics of the workshops. Just having a group of people together usually ensures that a certain amount of communication happens. What I feel are negative aspects of the gathering were the demonstrations and the parts of the gathering that became entertainment. The demonstrations, I feel, were little more than a vent for frustration, which is not the purpose that they are intended for. I feel that a demonstration, especially ones like those that were carried out, are a poor way of communication with the public. Also, it gives the media the opportunity to write bad things about us, which is what they want to do. Chanting "pigs eat shit" or "kill all lawyers" may feel good to a certain person, but it does little more than shock the average person on the street into a permanent negative bias of anyone sharing the same label as you, in this case anarchist. All of the filming and cameras in the meeting served the purpose of turning the gatherings into entertainment, not education. Self-worship has often led to simplification and has slowed down the process of learning. If this is to turn into a big event, will it be a social or educational one? I think having bands play isn't a bad idea as long as those bands do have some form of a message. I think that the gathering was a positive thing, but it could be made better and if we aren't careful it could be made into something worse.

---Rex

Some constructive criticism:
1) I was disappointed by our inability to make decisions as a group, especially when it was very important that we do so. For example, we couldn't work out an agreement on what was to happen at the demonstrations. And the banquet turned into a circus, which isn't always bad, but I was hoping we would make better use of our last opportunity to all be together in the same place.

2) We need to not only tolerate diverse opinions, but we also need to be good sports about it.
3) I would have found name/pseudonym tags very helpful.
4) It would have been nice to have had one location for our meetings and workshops. I realize that wasn't possible due to circumstances, but that would be something to keep in mind for next time. A staffed information table would have been nice too.
Easy for me to say, since I didn't help organize any of it.

---Ed Slyboots

Overall, I had a good time in Chicago. But the best thing that came from it was the renewed enthusiasm of myself and my N.Y. comrades. Facing a bankrupt book club and other problems didn't seem as grave any more. We got together more often and felt better about things. We planned to hold a regional weekend gathering every Halloween and we even got together a newsletter that hadn't happened after four years of talking about it, called the "Sporadical." In this way, our going to Chicago influenced us deeply.

---Charteuse Colada

Yep, Chicago was A blast. What was best for me was just meeting people and finally being face to face with those I've heard about, traded zines and letters with, etc. And of course I got to meet the good ole Rev. Crowbar. Hopefully the event will help facilitate some N. American @ unity around common projects and things. There were serious fuck-ups though that we all should take responsibility for. While the nihilistic "fuck the world" side of me enjoyed "aimlessly" running amok in the streets, I do believe an event of the Chicago type called for a leaflet to be handed out to people explaining what we were all about. This is just common procedure. Otherwise we just look like a bunch of space cases--which is OKAY AND HAS ITS PLACE--but is senseless if we are trying to make political points about serious issues and building a movement behind them. On the other hand, it was OUR holiday and OUR party and seemed to be just an attempt at getting us together (successfully too!) so if the rest of the world didn't "compute" it too well that's not necessarily a great loss this time. But next time I think it should be different. We must establish ourselves as a viable alternative to the right and the fake "left." The other dumb thing we did was not prepare for the legal end of things. Lawyers should have been set up ahead of time, a leaflet should have been drawn up on Chicago bust procedures, we should have known typical bail amounts and been prepared with the money, affinity groups should have been encouraged, etc. The experienced among us knew things would get heavy and this also should have been communicated with newcomers. Tactically also we could have had unplanned "breakaways" and such where those who didn't want to be in a bust situation would be free from it.
There were other problems like possible scab lettuce being served at the banquet, but all in all I think it went great. It was sad to leave, I loved everybody.

---"b"oB

Bowlin' For Dharma

gulp another slug o' brew, big guy.
It's your turn--let it roll.
Steppin' up to the mark
parenthetically methink
right-hand, left-brain
good ol' line-straight eye-hand
knock 'em down--score high.

but what the fuck?
no line brain free hand counter-spin-slide
slow mo. . .#1 ego down
2, 3, no split she/he/you/we!
domino polar shit id-ee-it!
honey-suckle spring-board
johnnie (i.e.) two-way
cum lately forever

i think--
due to circumstances beyond--
therefore--
fridge-crust freon overkill stop
come alive felt sense

4, 5, 6--Can you remember
the tomorrow after yesterday?
Fat cat got your tongue?
Say you got no class?

7, 8, 9, 10--All've come down
so start again, & strike again, & again,
'til all yous losers win
& stop playin' vulgar games
while we go bowlin' for dharma.

---Ben Z Dream

I enjoyed the chaos, the yelling, the spontaneous theater--in short, the (dare I say it?!) anarchy at the banquet. Sure, there was disagreement, but it still felt like there was an underlying level of respect for each other--I didn't see anybody go away mad. I've been to several other national gatherings of activist types, but nowhere else have I felt the same sense of shared vision I felt in Chicago--I felt like I got a glimpse of that high, vibrant, joyous society we're all trying to create, and I went home full of energy and inspiration.
And somewhere in there, out near the gun club, we threw a bowling ball into Lake Michigan.

---Boog

Table of contents

Send comments to: kuniklon@elwha.evergreen.edu
Updated: 11 June 96