What’s that? Never heard of the Anarchist Society in all your time at UCL?
It’s probably because no proudly self-declared anarchist would ever dare create a WhatsApp group channel — for fear of being labelled a fascist for deciding admin privileges — and, of course, because being officially registered with the Students’ Union would require the unthinkable: submitting to the tyranny of a superior body.
Thus, news of the inaugural meeting was spread entirely by word of mouth instead. A Cheese Grater journalist happened to catch wind of it in the corridors of the Slade School of Fine Art and managed to attend.
With the initial gathering finally in motion, the next crisis almost immediately emerged: how to organise future meetings without accidentally reproducing the structures of power they were formed to abolish. Naturally, they attempted to solve this by electing a president.
(EDITOR’S NOTE: We have just been informed that the title preferred by the Society is “Secretary”, and that the correct term is “selection”, instead of “election”. The remainder of this article will be amended to reflect these developments.)
In order to put into practice the doctrine of horizontal decision-making, every minor decision about the selection process was debated, amended, and re-debated in consensus committees, subcommittees, and working groups.
All this was overseen by a moderator who was themselves voted on, recalled whenever a single member disagreed with their methods, and re-elected daily. Voting schedules were decided by a scheduling committee, which had its own subcommittee to determine the rules of quorum.
Eventually, after five days of debate and no progress in sight, they consoled themselves with the thought that pure theory and process, if practiced long enough, might one day replace the need for concrete results.
With all other options exhausted, the only method the room could agree upon was rolling a vegan chocolate 20-sided die someone had in their pocket. Thus, Secretary Anna Chai was crowned.
(EDITOR’S NOTE: We have since been notified that “Coordinator” is now the preferred term. We would also like to disclaim that our use of the word “crowned” was, allegedly, an act of structural violence.)
Or was she? Coordinator-elect (sorry, select) Chai immediately refused to assume the title, claiming she wished “merely to be a caretaker of horizontal structures.” Her refusal sparked heated debate among members about whether the rejection of authority constituted a new form of authority.
Minutes later, the Society split into two factions: the Anti-Leadership Bloc and the Radical Anti-Anti-Leadership Bloc. Both immediately declared the other fascist.
(EDITOR’S NOTE: We regret to inform readers that “Coordinator” has since been replaced by “Non-Hierarchical Discussion Convener”. The editorial team sincerely apologises for any implication of structure, leadership, or decision-making authority over others in previous terminology.)
Seemingly forgetting their doctrine of consensus amidst all the shouting and pizza-throwing, a motion was hastily tabled to abolish the Non-Hierarchical Discussion Convener role altogether. Finally, the meeting adjourned to form a “Reflection Working Group” on whether meetings themselves were a form of structural oppression.
No one really remembers or knows what they were discussing by the end, only that the revolution would not, under any circumstances, be administered through Google Forms.
