The article above was intended to be more of a declaration of intent than any kind of finished ideological programme.

My own feeling is that unless social activists are addressing “What is to be done?” with regards to making their own local communities better places to live in – and thereby creating localised cultures of self-reliance, self-confidence and solidarity – then the bigger picture will remain just that: a bigger picture.

How these localised cultures share experiences and are networked horizontally is the challenge that we’ll have to continually address if a different type of society is to be seriously considered.

This is not to ignore the bigger picture but to try and put it into a localised context, where the dots join themselves naturally rather than through the opportunist extertions of an external political force.

The unresolved areas of “organisation, leadership and power” are works in progress for people the world over and I’d like to hope that Bella – in her own small way – can further the spirit of experimentation in those regards.

What we are doing with Bella Caledonia is trying to explore the idea of ’self-determination’ and the connections between a libertarian socialist or anarchist tradition and a republican one.

We don’t have a finished programme nor claim to have all the answers. We’d like to see openess and the exploration of Scotland as a ‘new democratic space’.

This is the area beyond leftists programme, charisma politics and Trotskyist ideology.

As for ‘questions of organisation, leadership and power’ – these are indeed where the issue lies unresolved. We are trying to create a space to examine these issues and invite participation…

But I hope somebody’s going to answer Dougie Kinnear’s perfectly sensible question. The terms “libertarian” and “anarchist” cover such a vast spectrum of ideas that they need a lot more explanation. I presume you’re in favour of an active citizenry rather than sub-contracting our decision-making to a political class; and you’re not in favour of vanguard parties that will lead us to victory. I take it for granted that you believe the mass of the population hold their futures in their own hands, and that the decisive force in politics is, or ought to be, mass action; hence you’re against state power. But what else?

I’m a little bemused by the description of the SNP as left-leaning. I suppose it’s all relative. It’s all very well to write off the SSP as doomed (in fact I have a chuckle myself from time to time at the fankle they got themselves in), but the fact is that, unlike the SNP and the other main Scottish parties, they were avowedly anti-capitalist, and gave hundreds of thousands of people, including me, hope that things actually could be different. For that reason alone I think, whatever their faults, they were a great loss.

While I agree absolutely with your comments about Goldman, Brinton and Chomsky, this viewpoint brings its own difficulties. These three thinkers would have had trouble agreeing with each other, never mind all the rest of us. Other issues that spring immediately to mind are questions of organisation, leadership and power. These issues are key to any political action, and they can’t be wished away by declaring yourself libertarian or anarchist. So lots of thinking to be done. How are we going to proceed?

Just a point on your piece.

I think the left has always over-analysed their history and that will no doubt continue as they continue to self destruct on a UK scale.

I don’t think the rise in Support for the SNP needs too much in depth analysis, there isn’t an alternative in Scotland, you couldn’t get a fag paper between the policies of the other main parties and the fringe left don’t exist anymore, at least not as a credible or effective choice.

On a site note, I’m unsure about the Libertarian left tag, could someone educate me? In laymans terms, where are you coming from and where do you want to go?