user preferences

bolivia / peru / ecuador / chile / movimiento anarquista / debate Thursday October 05, 2023 02:24 byAsamblea Anarquista Valparaíso y Federación Anarquista Santiago

En el marco de los 50 años del golpe cívico-militar en los territorios dominados por el Estado chileno, realizaremos, en la ciudad de Santiago y en Valparaíso, un foro conversatorio en el que compartiremos nuestras reflexiones sobre lo que significó el golpe para nuestra clase y la organización popular, así como sobre los desafíos y tareas del anarquismo hoy

ORO CONVERSATORIO: A 50 AÑOS DEL GOLPE CÍVICO MILITAR
Los desafíos y tareas del anarquismo

Viernes 30 de septiembre // 18:00 hrs
Lugar: Vicuña Mackenna 636 - TRASOL

Viernes 6 de octubre // 18:00 hrs
Lugar: Calle Clave 437 - FLORA

Organizan:
Asamblea Anarquista Valparaíso
Federación Anarquista Santiago

international / anarchist movement / interview Wednesday October 04, 2023 23:52 byJurnal mapa

União Libertária, a group of young libertarians in Portugal, came into contact with militants of the Tekosîna Anarsîst (TA, Anarchist Struggle in Kurdish), present in Rojava, in northeastern Syria. This is a militant conversation around the reflections of this voluntary anarchist group around justice, art, religion and what it is to be "revolutionary". TA, in addition to having participated in the difficult fight against the forces of the Islamic State (ISIS), currently also functions as a unit of combat medics, assists in agricultural work and plays an educational role.

1 – We have seen statements about the work of TA outside of the battlefield, from medical support to education. This second one is of great interest to us, could you please clarify a bit on how you proceed with educational campaigns, not only amongst yourselves but also with local communities? Are there any lessons you wish to share about the role (and process) of revolutionary education? How do you see pedagogy as not only a tool, but also a space within the struggles you must face?

Education is what builds the foundations of a new society. It is often our best tool to defend ourselves and our communities. The kurdish liberation movement values education a lot, and this also brought us to reflect on our approach. In rojava it is a common practice to join educations of several months, where militants from different places have no other work than learn and develop. This is not a new practice from rojava, the kurdish movement has been working on their educational methods for decades. Joining some of those educations, we also noticed how much our understanding of education is connected to school, university and other state systems. And how much we should develop our own educational programs, shaped by our own political views and values. In this, the pedagogy of the oppressed of Paulo Freire can give very important perspectives.

Revolutionary education can be everything we do, if we learn from it in an organized way. Closed educations allow us to work deeper on one topic, like learning about the philosophy and political views of Abdullah Ocalan, study the proposals of Makhno or Malatesta about organized anarchism and the different attempts to put it in practice, or learn about first aid and medical care during war situations. But this also has to come with practice, which is often the best education, like when we work in society with our kurdish, arab and other comrades, when we build our organization day to day, or when we work as combat medics in the front lines. Theory brings knowledge and helps to build understanding and confidence, but is practical work what builds our experience.

Some knowledge we carry with us, is scarce here, and is important to collectivize it. We have been running educations of first aid and tactical field care to kurdish, arab and armenian comrades. We also shared our knowledge and experiences among ourselves, sometimes in short seminar formats sometimes in longer closed educations. This helped us to build our capacities and a common frame as organization, practically as well as ideologically. With time, our methods and systems of education are getting more adapted to our needs, reflecting not only of what we want to teach and learn but also how we want to do it. For some comrades it is helpful to read or listen a seminar for several ours, for others is better to do things and learn on practice. We try to keep this in mind but also challenge ourselves, like by encouraging comrades that are more familiar with academic areas to work on the ground, and push for ideological development and theoretical works with those more oriented to field work.

2- In previous statements you have discussed the need for revolutionaries to disengage from individualistic, selfish mindsets, as well as issues of ego when dealing with comrades and organization. How have you within TA managed to deal with such mindsets? We recognize this view, where anarchism and revolutionary struggle continuously straddle a difficult line between lifestyle and commodity, not allowing us to build meaningful relations on the march to liberation. Are there any lessons or warnings from your own activities that can be parted?

That is a very difficult question, because it is one of the main challenges we face. Anarchism has always discussed the contradictions between individual militants and the need revolutionary organizations. We are working to balance those points, because we see very important arguments to be made on both sides. As many anarchists before us, we reached the conclusion that organization is a necessity, not as an aim in itself but as a means to an end. We don’t accept unnecessary hierarchies and we value the individuality of our militants, often referring to the idea that “there is no organization without militants, there is no militant without organization”. With this we also want to point out the importance of individual responsibility towards the organization, as well as collective responsibility of the organization towards the individuals.

Becoming a militant of a revolutionary organization comes with individual and collective contradictions. The main aspects of our personalities have been shaped by the societies we have grown up in. Life in capitalist modernity relies on individualization. In school, in the work place, in the media we consume, we are told that individual freedom is everything that matters. “Your freedom ends where the freedom of other starts” is often the main idea running our societies. It denies collective belonging and it promotes individualist mindset and values. Is therefore no surprise that individualist anarchism manage to thrive in those capitalist societies we come from, because it connects with those individualist values that liberalism promotes. We want to challenge that. We believe our only way out is solidarity and mutual aid, and for this we have to challenge the deeply rooted individualism that we all carry with us.

Individualism can take many forms. Some are more obvious, like selfishness, elitism, or narcissism; but more subtle forms can take more time to notice, like refusing help when needed, not sharing information or knowledge with comrades, not listening or considering others proposals and ideas. We all have traces of individualism, and they are often connected with our ego and the image we have and we project of ourselves. Overcoming this requires that we are able to evaluate ourselves and others as well as our ways of relating. Criticism and self-criticism go hand in hand, we need to be able to acknowledge our shortcomings to meaningfully engage with the shortcomings of others. Admitting to ourselves that there is a difference between how we perceive ourselves/how we want to be perceived and how other perceive us can be painful. However acknowledging that gap opens the door for us to develop. Everyone has this gap, for some it is wider, for some it is more narrow, and to challenge it can create space to grow and learn. Keeping this in mind, we can build better relations that are founded in honesty and trust.

Trust is scarce in our societies. It is much easier to learn to suspect, to be afraid of your neighbor, to step on your co-workers to get upper hand and get a better piece of the cake. Capitalism relies on competition, and lying and selling yourself, on the society of spectacle. There is no place for honesty and trust in a system that is based on performance, on appearance of what you are not, on faking it and believing that one day you will make it. To be honest and transparent with our comrades necessitates vulnerability. We had been told to hide those things, to not let others see our weak points, to present ourself as the all-capable person that can do anything that is needed. All those individualist traits play against us, specially in difficult moments when stress and hardships reveal the things we try to hide.

We have been working on these issues by putting into practice tools like tekmil and platform, which we learned from the kurdish movement. We also explored other methods, and lately we have been deepening our knowledge on conflict resolution, with restorative circles and transformative justice. Transformative justice provides a good approach, connected to our ideological values and oriented towards topics like responsibility and accountability, that should always be the base of our organizing. We learned that organization is a struggle in itself, and that contradictions, conflicts and challenges will always arise in our organizing. In absence of hierarchical structures, how we take decisions and how we solve conflicts is a very important part of our organizing.

3- Maybe related to above, how is inter-personal conflict resolved at large in NES? We have seen several abstract perspectives, but little of actual accounts on the processes of justice and equity, how are such issues dealth with? Do the several autonomous groups have the freedom to deal with them “in-house”? Are all conflict resolutions centralized?

There are currently two justice systems at play in NES. One similar to state justice and one more based on communitarian justice. The communitarian system consists of peasant consensus committees and local councils that are often composed of religious leaders and community elders. These encourage people to take responsibility and agency over their own problems. However this system is not working so well, unfortunately. Because of this many conflicts are still settled through the state-like legal justice system that is half inherited from the Al-Assad regime and half reorganized by the Autonomous Administration. It is an awkward mix that works with the tools at hand in a difficult situation. The union of lawyers played an important role, as well as the effort to write the “social contract” of AANES, some kind of constitution that is revisited every few years in discussions with different political and social organizations.

The reasons that lead the Autonomous Administration to put more efforts to reorganize the general legal system instead of promoting the communitarian justice councils is not so clear to us. We suggest you talk to justice committee of the AANES directly, they will be better able to answer that. Besides these, there are also the women’s autonomous structures such as the women’s houses (mala jin) and women’s law. These have played and are playing an important role in addressing problems around gender as well as finding solutions around family conflict concerning women (marriage, divorce, abuse, etc.).

Councils, committees, communes, and autonomous organizations have some degree of freedom to deal with conflict “in-house”. How exactly it is approached and if people involve the state-like legal system depends on the nature and size of the conflict as well as the people and groups involved. With crimes that have big social impact, like brutal murders or organized treason (giving intelligence to Turkey that is used to assassinate revolutionaries, helping ISIS to plan and carry out attacks), there have been popular trials. Those trials gather different representatives of the social community, especially those more affected by the crime judged, and function as popular jury to decide the penalty.

For our organization and for organizations in europe we think it is important we come to understand the value of transformative justice, and that we build capacity to start offering alternatives to the legal ‘justice’ system, which is a racist ableist punitive lie and deeply connected to nation-state power. The topic on transformative justice has been on the table in leftist circles in europe for a while. We see it is slowly moving into a more practical phase now. Let us start with small practical adjustments, once we start gaining some experiences from the daily life, we can and should supplement them with some reading/study/theory. Conflict resolution cannot be learned from books, its fundaments can only be learned in practice, books will be very helpful to improve us but only if we are already putting it in practice. We will have to make many mistakes, and that is fine. We have a lot to unlearn from the state imposed systems of ‘justice’. We are making an imperfect start by using tools like tekmil, restorative circles and autonomous women’s structures to build on this.

4- What is the current status of art and self-expression within rojava? Has there been the chance and space for people to be able to perform, create, or show artistic creation? How is such received? How has the changing facets of the conflict affected it?

Tevgera Çand û Hûner (Tev-çand, the organization of art and culture) is a coordination of all the art and culture centers, present in every city. Most of those centers have different groups, like dance, music, theater, cinema, paint, literature, sculpture, etc. They mainly promote art connected to kurdish culture, language and identity. Every ethnic group is encouraged to promote its own traditional art and culture while also making space for other forms of art outside folkloric tradition. Tev-çand has a political approach to art, seeing it as a vehicle to share and spread the values of the revolution. A couple of successful examples are Hunergeha Welat - with their youtube channel publishing new songs and videoclips made in rojava - or the Komina Film a Rojava - the cinema commune that produced several movies, shorts, clips. Komina Film a Rojava recently published a series about rojava called “Evina Kurd” (kurdish love).

The local groups often perform in local celebrations, festive days and other cultural events. In the last years some of those groups and artists are gaining experience and getting more professional, and we start to see their art in different theaters, expositions and events. Art is seen as popular and cultural wealth, and there is no process of commodification around it. Theater, cinema and music are performed and shared for free, and we have never seen any cultural event with entrance fee. This is part of the political approach on ethics and aesthetics that is promoted. To keep it short, we can simply point the efforts to connect aesthetics to political and ethical revolutionary values. This approach challenges the standards of beauty that capitalist modernity tries to impose, seeing art as a vehicle of expression of the people, of the society and its values. A lot of art is connected to the resistance against ISIS and turkish fascism, with special focus on women’s resistances and YPJ, but also about the historical roots and struggles of the kurdish people.

In that approach to art we can see a shift that the revolution brought, that maybe started even before rojava. Kurdish cinema from the 20th century is often tragic, about the massacres and the exile that kurdish people suffered. Dengbêj, a traditional music/poetry, is also infused with stories of destroyed villages, murdered families and orphaned children. It is in this new century that kurdish art has started to reflect a new image. One not so focused on kurds just as victims of inhumane tragedies, but also as actors of change. The songs of YPG and YPJ defeating ISIS or the guerrillas fighting in the mountains, the new movies of the resistance in Sur or in Kobane, the big celebrations of NewRoz (kurdish new year) are examples of a rebirth of the kurdish people and their will to resist. They are not just a people whose faith is suffering, they are a stateless nation whose land has been occupied and whose villages burned down. They learned from other anticolonial struggles and from revolutionary movements of national liberation and they will take their destiny in their hands. They will defend their land and their culture, building a future for next generations, with weapons but also with music, with dance, with cinema.

5- What is TA’s view on the role of religion, and how has it affected their capacity to connect and relate to local communities? Have there been challenges, or chanegs in attitude of the militants? In the west we struggle to separate anti-clericalism from base islamophobia nad eurocentrism, what lessons have you gained from your insertion in Kurdish and Arab societies?


Religion is not the problem for us when it is connected to the people and ethics, it is a problem when religion is connected to power and rule. It is this wielding of authority that we are against, as you also touching with anti-clericalism. Some anarchists came here with atheist backgrounds, and when asked about our religion is easy for us to answer we have no religion. But this answer is often understood as if we have no ethics, and also made us reflect how most of us, even if not practitioners, had been raised in a christian culture.

We agree with you that we in the west can do a bad job at separating anti-clericalism from islamophobia and eurocentrism. The society we are in is overwhelmingly muslim (with small minorities of other belief), nearly everyone has belief in the Quran, even if not everyone describes themselves as practicing muslims. This reality grounds our work with people here. We should understand the importance religion holds to the people and local comrades. Knowing a little, or a lot, about islam is very helpful when we discuss with local comrades. Arguing from religion for a revolutionary perspective is a tactic that has proven successful. It is necessary to respect peoples religious conviction, but at the same time we also critique or question comrades when this leads them to take actions that are not in line with the revolutionary values in NES. There are efforts to build a democratic islam, looking at the ethical side of islamic religion and not so much at the Sharia law. This is a necessary process to come to terms with the aftermath of islamist fundamentalism carried out as theocratic fascism by ISIS. Though from the outside it might seem like ISIS is no more, the fight against its ideology very much continues here. In some regions of NES, ISIS ideology is still widespread and it will take time and effort for everyone to move towards a democratic islam.

6- Anarchist and so-called revolutionary movements in Europe have struggled for decades find something which can overcame our own weaknesses and smallness, looking at methods old and new. What is your perspective on this? Do you also agree or feel the movements are limiting themselves, and if so why? Lack of use of insurrectionary violence, lack of structures directing the struggle, lack of resources, lack of conviction?

This is a very important point and question you bring up here. We agree that movements are limiting themselves. We see the issue at the core as a lack of organizations that can create and promote long term aims perspectives, as currently we mostly see affinity based groups with short term thinking.

The wave of insurrectionism in the 90’s, especially in italy, brought a short term struggle perspective that seemed to promote effectivity. In some ways, it worked, however it did so at the cost of undermining organizational capacity. Organization capacity is crucial. By becoming an organization, we as TA, now have the ability to accumulate experience, we do not constantly have to start anew. We can also build lasting projects and relations, we can deepen our understanding and learning of other organizations that have struggled and are struggling. Not only on an individual level, but on an organizational one. Meaning that such knowledge and experiences cease to become merely tied to one person or one cell or affinity group, but that the whole organization takes ownership of it. This greatly grows our capacity as an organization.

To develop as a revolutionary organization is not easy, we already talked about this. We have to break with the liberal individualist mindset that is so deeply ingrained with capitalist socialization. Our societies are organized around those capitalist values, and to change it we have to develop our own values and social institutions, to anticipate the society we want. The things you mention lacking in anarchist movements (structures to direct the struggle, resources, conviction, action) can often be connected to the lack of organization. If we find ourselves isolated, as individuals or in small groups, our capacity to influence and change the society around us diminish. As we can learn many things in rojava, there are also many lessons we can take from the anarchist organizations in latin america. The ideas of “especifismo” (english: specifism), a theoretical frame oriented to develop specific anarchist organizations, are the result of decades of struggle. We can track them back to platformist proposal of Peter Arshinov and Nestor Maknho, but developed in practice by the Federacion Anarquista de Uruguay (FAU). As portugese anarchists, you have easy access to the materials and texts developed by brazilian anarchist organizations.

7- There was critique recently of the focus and resources given by western leftists towards nascent anarchist movements in Ukraine, who, without true autonomous structures and being inserted in statist armies, have received generous support and funds, while non-white movements have struggled for a fraction of this support. Do you agree with this critique?


We assume you are referring to the article “Anarchist who Fought in rojava: Response to ‘No War But Class War’ Debate”, that can be found on Abolition Media. We agree with the article that the amount of resources sent to Ukraine from western leftist is very disproportional with the amount of material support comrades in NES have gotten, especially given that the revolution here is so explicitly rooted in libertarian revolutionary ideology and praxis, where this is more debatable for Ukraine as the article pointed out. “Solidarity is something you can hold in your hands”, a slogan popularized by the anti-imperialist group KAK, active in Denmark in the 70s, is a statement we can very much find ourselves in. While NES has gotten an alright amount of solidarity pictures, awareness campaigns, diplomatics campaigns, etc. on the side of material, financial or other support that we can “hold in our hands” the western left has absolutely not given it serious effort.

That being said, the war in Ukraine has been going on for a bit over a year now, the war in rojava for over 10 years. Of course these timescales also have an effect. Ukraine is on the news and we aren’t, we won’t be either, until a new invasion, and even then we will only receive a fraction of the media attention that Ukraine is getting. When we look broader than Ukraine and rojava, we ask: who has been looking at the genocidal warfare in Tigray or the recent war unfolding in Sudan? Who has been organizing material support for those conflicts? The Tigray peoples self-defense forces have a long revolutionary tradition, with a project similar to the ideas of democratic confederalism. In Sudan we have recently see a military escalation after big mobilizations and uprisings shook the country, that had a remarkable anarchist organized movement not common to find in most of African countries. But few articles are written about it, and even less anarchist book-fairs discussions about those conflicts. It is not fair either that those movements received little to no media coverage, let alone material support. This is part of the colonialism that we are trying to fight against. For us this is also a reason to stay with rojava, where values of anticolonialism are very much alive.

Coming back to Ukraine, Anarchists have been struggling since the beginning of the recent conflict, they were there at Maidan square and tried to organize form there. Probably this is not the place to discuss how much this movement is rooted in the historical anarchist movement in Ukraine, with the Black Liberation Peasants Army and the Makhnovist revolution, but nowadays the presence of anarchists is crucial to question the nationalist narrative of the far-right, that has been a dominating presence in the protest in Ukraine from the start. We have a responsibility as anarchists to take our place in such times, we cannot leave all the space to the far-right, because if we do they will take it. Now the current situation in Ukraine is not a revolution aligned with our principles, but it is our task to push our principles to the forefront and make them known. We can quote Malatesta when saying that “We are in any case one of the forces acting in the society, and history will advance, as always, in the directions resultant of all the forces”.

Historically war and revolution have an important connection. War environments see state authority stumble and authority diffuse in some places. The state isn’t always there anymore to provide people with infrastructure and resources. This means there are often windows of opportunity to assist in the self organization and management of the people, initially primarily along lines of mutual aid and solidarity. This is a situation in which bringing our ideology and applying it in practice with the people can be a useful way of strengthening our tendency, as Malatesta says.

We support our anarchist comrades fighting in Ukraine, we have an approach of critical solidarity to the people of Ukraine and aim to engage the contradictions that it brings up and not devolve into a binary and dogmatic approach. We would also like to draw your attention to comrade Leshiy and comrade Ciya, they have both spend time in NES and fell on the Ukrainian front lines together with other anarchist comrades in Ukrainan front lines. We grieve this loss, and aim to learn from their lives and decisions, they also show us a way of nuanced analysis and consideration that has space for the contradictions that inevitably come up when we get our hands dirty in revolution. We agreed with the comrade who wrote the article that it is very easy to be purist and judgmental about decisions made in Ukraine and rojava from a comfortable armchair. Participating in an actual revolution or armed conflict will quickly make it clear that there are often no “clean” or clear-cut solutions and being a revolutionary in action, not just in words, means gaining a deep understanding of nuanced analysis and contradictions.

8 - How can we assist you in TA; materially or otherwise?


The main points in which we can see your assistance to be help us are; a) ideological development b) engaged network c) resist repression d) militants e) resources

a) Ideological development of anarchist struggle is the basis for us to move forward. We see that we have come to a point where we realize as european anarchists that affinity based organizing alone is not sufficient. We need anarchist organization or structures that keep us together not just based on personal affinity, but in an organized way, to be able to think long term and develop a wider strategy. By further developing anarchist ideology and praxis in our current context, we strengthen each other.

b) Engaged networks are a foundation to exchange discussion, projects, resources and experiences. We see this in the form of building long term relations with solid organizations, and such exchange can take place through visits and exchange of militants as well as other forms of communication. Related to the point about ideological development, this includes reading and discussing each other statements and letters, learning from each other experience and giving feedback, proposals and critique on them.

c) Networks also leads into resisting repression. In the past years, militants who have been to rojava and the kurdish movement in general have been increasingly criminalized. Quite a few comrades are spending time in prison or are in other kinds of legal problems. We need anarchists everywhere to push back against this criminalization.

d) We need more militants to join us in rojava to fight and struggle here. There is also opportunity for comrades are already organized in europe to join us here while remaining connected to their european organization. We would like this actually. We see this as a potential way to strengthen ties between our organization and anarchist organizations in europe.

e) On the directly material side, we need money. Since exactly what materials we need changes from time to time, sending materials directly can be a little tricky, though we can talk about this if there is a desire to do something like that. With money directly we can allocate it to the most pressing needs and make adjustments when necessary in this every changing situation we are in.

image Militants of TA planting an olive tree in a field 0.39 Mb image Making ready some basic DIY IFAKs (individual First Aid Kit) for SDF forces 0.2 Mb image A view from next to qada azadî (freedom square) in Kobane, with a sculpture, the flag of Rojava and the eagle sculpture 0.14 Mb image A commemoration of şehids in Til Temir, with mother carring pictures of their şehid sons and daughters 0.24 Mb image Cooking a tea pot in the fire to make some tea. 0.33 Mb image A newly made park in front of the wheat silos at the entrance of Hasakah city 0.17 Mb image Carring the body of Şehid Tekoşer to the borderof semalka, among hunderds of people who gathered to give a goodbye 0.22 Mb image A cat resting next to basic equipment 0.12 Mb

international / anarchist movement / review Tuesday October 03, 2023 07:13 byWayne Price

Review of "Revolutionary Affinities: Toward a Marxist-Anarchist Solidarity," by Michael Lowy & Oliver Besancenot. Two writers from Trotskyist backgrounds discuss the overlap and interaction between anarchism and Marxism.

Michael Lowy and Oliver Besancenot, two Marxists from the Trotskyist tradition, have made an effort to discuss possible convergences and interactions between Marxism and anarchism. (The little book has been well translated from the French by David Campbell, an anarchist who did most of the work while in jail in New York City.)

At first it might seem absurd to seek overlaps between these two schools of socialism. Anarchism stands for freedom and self-management, but in spite of some achievements its movement has failed to successfully create anarchism in any country. Meanwhile whatever Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels originally intended, Marxism became the ideology of repressive, mass-murdering, state-capitalisms (that is, Stalinism). Despite the collapse of the Soviet Union, authoritarian Marxist governments persist in North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, and especially in the great nation of China. Marxism and anarchism would seem to have little in common. Yet we live in the looming catastrophes of industrial capitalism. People are drawn to its radical alternatives. In this context, it is the failures of each which has drawn some anarchists and Marxists to dialogue, to learn the strengths of the alternate trend. (Although, for all their failures, anarchists never murdered tens of millions of workers, peasants, and others.)

Along with anarchism’s vision of freedom, there is a rising interest in Marxism, particularly in its analysis of how capitalism works and what might be done to end it. Some radicals focus on the humanistic, working class, and ecological aspects of Marx’s Marxism, rather than its statist, centralist, and determinist aspects. This looks to libertarian-democratic and “ultra-left” trends in Marxism, such as William Morris, the council communists, Luxemburgists, autonomists, the Johnson-Forrest Tendency, Socialisme ou Barbarie, and unorthodox and dissident Trotskyists. Unlike Stalinism, these trends in Marxism might be partners in a dialogue with revolutionary anarchists. (See Price 2017.)

Che

The authors claim to be libertarian Marxists, in opposition to both Stalinism and to social democracy (reformist “democratic socialism”). They want to see what they can learn from anarchism—and what revolutionary anarchism can learn from their view of Marxism. I am all for a Marxist-anarchist dialogue and have written some material seeking to advance it (e.g., Price 2022).

A lot depends on what one means by “Marxism” (as well as “anarchism”). The authors are admirers of Che Guevara. They have written books about him and his “revolutionary legacy” (Lowy 2007; Besancenot & Lowy 2009). In the text, they claim that the struggle of the Mexican Zapatistas show “traces of the revolutionary ethic that lead directly back to Che.” (p. 76) They do not note that the founders of the Zapatistas had abandoned the elitist guerrilla strategy of Che. They further declare that “Marx’s writings…form the political basis of the revolutionary humanism of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara.” (p. 124)

Actually Che Guevara was an admirer of Joseph Stalin. Che played a major role in turning the Cuban revolution into a one-party, one-man, dictatorship, with a state-capitalist economy, allied with Soviet Russian imperialism. Within the upper circles of the Castroite regime, Che was a strong proponent of increasing centralization and of repression of the workers. He sincerely sought to spread the revolution (as he understood the revolution), but his efforts were failures both in Africa and in Bolivia. While he wrote some high-falutin’ philosophical language about socialism, his actual conception was of a totalitarian society. (See Price 2016.)

It may seem unfair to point to the authors’ admiration of Guevara, which is only briefly referred to twice in the text. Yet it is difficult to integrate anarchism with advocacy of a Stalinist-type dictatorship, however well-meaning you might be. (Of course, many of the Trotskyist groupings have been admirers of Fidel Castro and Che; but these don’t advocate “solidarity” with anarchism.) Besancenot and Lowy may misinterpret Che as a “revolutionary humanist,” but how can they ignore his support of the Cuban dictatorship? And then seek a dialogue with anarchism?

Positive Aspects of the Book

And yet, despite this confusing contradiction, some of this book is worthwhile. Besancenot and Lowy are concerned to show “another side of history…that of the alliances and active solidarity between anarchists and Marxists.” (p. 1)

They have brief sections on events in revolutionary history when anarchists and Marxists worked together. This includes the First International, in which anarchists cooperated with Marx for years—until Marx organized the expulsion of Michael Bakunin and forced a split with the anarchists. They cover the U.S. Haymarket Martyrs of 1886. These were anarchists who came out of a Marxist background and who still used the Marxist analysis of capitalism.

They briefly cover the development of anarcho-syndicalism, which shared a revolutionary working class orientation with Marxism. They discuss the Spanish Revolution of the thirties. That revolution was betrayed by most of the Marxist and anarchist leaders, both of which joined the capitalist government together with liberal parties. Their partner, the Communist Party, tried to set up a totalitarian state. A minority of revolutionary anarchists and Marxists did try to advance the revolution, but were overwhelmed. There are brief sections (they can hardly be called “chapters”) on the May-June ’68 almost-revolution in France, on the international demonstrations against “globalization,” and on the Occupy movement.

The little book also has nine brief biographical sections on significant revolutionaries. This includes the Marxist Rosa Luxemburg. She had little use for anarchism, but her vision of revolutionary socialist democracy-from-below was compatible with anarchism. Similarly, they discuss Buenaventura Durruti. As an anarchist, he played an important role in the Spanish Revolution. He had little use for Marxism but has been respected by Marxists. The same may be said of the famous anarchist Emma Goldman. In Russia, she originally supported the Revolution and was willing to work with the Leninists—until their authoritarianism drove her into opposition.

Their little biographies include “A Few Libertarian Marxist Thinkers.” Of the three they cite, the most interesting may be Daniel Guerin. His books on anarchism are widely read. In France during World War II, he cooperated with the Trotskyist underground. Working with syndicalists, anarchists, and Trotskyists, he was a prominent opponent of French imperialism in Algeria and an early Gay liberationist. Admiring J.P. Proudhon and Bakunin, but also Luxemburg, he sought a “synthesis” of revolutionary anarchism and libertarian Marxism. (See Guerin 2017)

The Russian Revolution

The part covering the 1917 Russian Revolution is titled, “Points of Conflict,” including a section, “The Split Between Red and Black.” This is where the book’s difficulties show most clearly.

“Initially, there was a convergence between many anarchists—not only Russian but also from around the world—and the Marxist revolutionaries. Soon after, the convergence had become a dramatic clash between the two.…” (p. 80)

The “October” (Soviet) Revolution was organized by the Communists in alliance with the Left Socialist Revolutionaries (peasant-populists) and with anarchists. The initial government was a coalition of the Communists and Left SRs, generally supported by anarchists in the soviets. (“Soviet” means “council.” It originally referred to the popularly elected councils which were rooted in factory committees, village assemblies, and military units.)

But by 1920, the Leninists had banned all alternate parties, including those which had fought on their side in the Russian Civil War. These included the Left SRs and the Left Mensheviks. Anarchists were arrested, jailed, and shot. Not long after, even opposition caucuses in the one legal party were outlawed.

Essentially, the writers favor the rule of the soviets, supported by the revolutionary parties including the Communists—but criticize what happened instead: the rule of the Communist Party, with supposed support by the soviets. This went together with economic changes, “prioritizing centralized nationalization over the local collectivization of the means of production….” (p. 87) They mildly comment, “This choice, like so many others, is questionable.” (same) This is quite the understatement.

Despite this (soft) criticism of the Leninists, Besancenot and Lowy insist that the problem does not lie with Marx. “It is pointless, however, to seek a manufacturing defect in Marxism…on the question of whether to abolish the state immediately or not.” (p. 87) Similarly, they oppose “…drawing a connection between the Lenin years and the Stalin years.” (p. 89) Granted that Marx would have been horrified by what Stalin made out of Marxism—and that V.I. Lenin was no Stalin. Lenin did not aim for a totalitarian state, nor want one. This was unlike Mao Tse-tung, say, who already had Stalinist Russia as a model and goal—as did Che and Fidel.

Yet it is a bit much to deny that Marx’s strategy of working through the state was not a cause of Lenin’s building a party-state, one which laid the basis for Stalinist state-capitalism. And, like Marx, Lenin believed that he and his party knew the truth better than anyone else. This justified the one-party party-state. Believing that his party—and only his party—knew the full truth—and since only his party spoke for the proletariat—Lenin felt justified in suppressing all other points of view, including the anarchists.

In 1921, the sailors at the Kronstadt naval base rebelled. The Kronstadt fortress overlooked the capitol at Petrograd. Influenced by anarchists, the rebels demanded an end to the political monopoly of the Communists, recognition of other left political tendencies, and free elections to the soviets, as well as economic reforms. Emma Goldman urged negotiation with the rebels. Instead, the Communists crushed them militarily, and then shot the captured sailors in batches. To anarchists this was a counterrevolutionary crime. It was comparable to the 1956 crushing of the Hungarian revolution.

The two authors regard this opinion as “one-sided.” “In our view, the conflict between Kronstadt and the Bolshevik government was…a tragic and fraternal confrontation between two revolutionary currents. The responsibility for this tragedy is shared, but falls primarily on those who held power.” (p. 95) “The crushing of the sailors of Kronstadt was not a ‘tragic necessity,’ but an error and a wrong.” (p. 97)

In other words, the anarchist-influenced rebel sailors are partially to blame (they dared to demand socialist democracy) even if the “primary” fault lies with the Communist regime (which chose to massacre the sailors). This choice was a bad mistake, not a counterrevolutionary crime (no one is perfect). Still, both sides were “revolutionary currents.”

It has been argued that the Russian Communists dared not permit several political tendencies to compete in free elections. Given the poverty and destruction which followed World War I and the Civil War, the workers and peasants were unhappy with the Communists. They would likely have voted them out, supposedly with disastrous consequences. The authors quote the Trotskyist (and ex-anarchist) Victor Serge: “If the Bolshevik dictatorship fell, it was only a short step to chaos, and through chaos to a peasant uprising, the massacre of the Communists…and, in the end…another dictatorship, this time anti-proletarian.” (p. 97) They agree with this view. “A Bolshevik defeat would have opened the path to counterrevolution.” (same)

Whether this is true or not, the Bolshevik victory opened the path to (internal) counterrevolution. The one-party Communist dictatorship (assuming it ever was a “proletarian dictatorship”) led to the “anti-proletarian” dictatorship of Stalin and the Stalinist bureaucracy. Along with the super-exploitation of the workers and peasants, it engaged in “the massacre of the Communists” in the purge trials of the ‘thirties—not to mention the massacre of millions of workers and peasants. Somewhat contradicting themselves, Lowy and Besancenot agree. For “the apparatchiks in the Kremlin…the crushing of the marines at Kronstadt was a service…to their ascension to power, a power that from then on could not be contested.” (p. 100) A somewhat similar view is given of the Ukrainian independent revolutionary army organized by the anarchist Nestor Makhno—allied with, and then betrayed by, the Communists.

Policy Issues

The final part of the book is titled “Policy Issues.” It covers more theoretical, strategic, and programmatic topics. Its first section is on the “Individual and [the] Collective.” The authors declare, “the anarchist movement has held the flag of individual emancipation much higher than the Marxist family.” (p. 122)

They then go on to criticize the anarchists for being too much individualistic. They cite Max Stirner, the early-19th century German philosopher of extreme egoist-individualism. Actually Stirner had no influence in the development of anarchist theory or movement, so citing him is irrelevant. Even so, the authors admit, “he foresaw the threat that the specter of the state could potentially hang over the project of individual rights in Germany.” (p. 123) They note that Guerin referred positively to Stirner. As a gay man, Guerin liked Stirner’s opposition to moralism and puritanism, without accepting his extreme individualism.

Similarly, the writers claim that “the old tenets of anarchism [are] poorly suited to such a level of overarching political organization” as was needed in the Ukraine during the Russian Revolution. (p. 103) Actually the anarchist-led Makhnovist movement did a good job of organizing in the Ukraine, in the brief time allowed it. This was despite the need to fight off the Austrian, Polish, Ukrainian nationalist, White counterrevolutionary, and Russian Communist armies.

In any case, Michael Bakunin, among the first revolutionary anarchist-socialists, had a view of liberated individuality as social, productive, and interactive. (So did Marx, especially expressed in his earliest writings.) They summarize, “If it is essential to ‘re-individualize’ the communist project, it is just as necessary to ‘collectivize’ anarchist ideas.” (p. 125) They believe “a revolutionary humanist path remains open,” which they think (bizarrely) is exemplified by “Che Guevara”! (same)

Besancenot and Lowy have a section titled “Making Revolution without Taking Power?” In effect they argue that it is wrong for a revolution to establish a new state (to take state power) but necessary to establish the self-organization of the workers and oppressed (to empower the people). Their examples are the 1871 Paris Commune and the early soviets. They call the Commune “a new form of power that was no longer a state, in the conventional sense, but was nonetheless a government, democratically elected….” (p. 131) Without quibbling over terms (Kropotkin sometimes made the same distinction between “state” and “government”), anarchists can mostly agree, I think.

In a section on “Autonomy and Federalism,” the writers say that their vision of “Communism…intends to entrust as many powers as possible to the base and foster local initiatives.” (p. 132) This is the anarchist conception of decentralized federalism. “From the idea of federalism developed by the anarchists, we can retain the focus on power to the base and voluntary solidarity between collectives.” (p. 135)

There is a section on “Democratic Economic Planning and Self-Management.” Their proposal ”does not correspond in the least to what is often described as ‘central economic planning,’ for the economic and social decisions are not made by any kind of ‘center,’ but determined democratically by the populations concerned.” (p. 139) Like Michael Albert’s “participatory economy” or “Parecon,” their “democratic socialist economic planning…[includes] opposition to the capitalist market and to bureaucratic economic planning, confidence in workers’ self-organization, and anti-authoritarianism.” (p. 140) However, they have some valid criticisms of the Parecon program. They also give credit to Anton Pannekoek of the “council communists”/ libertarian Marxists “for opting for the socialization of the means of production under the control of the producers themselves, rather than for their nationalization from above.” (p. 150)

The theme of decentralist federalism is continued in “Direct and Representative Democracy.” In this section, the authors recognize that anarchists and Marxists have had important differences on these topics. But they claim that “some significant convergences can still be found. For example, both are favorable to forms of direct democracy in social struggles: general assemblies, self-organized strikes and pickets, etc.” (p. 142)

This may be true. But it covers-over an important difference. Anarchists can accept election of delegates to higher federal councils, but they insist that the base assemblies must have face-to-face direct democracy. Marx and Engels, even in their most radically democratic writings (for example, on the Paris Commune) advocated an extremely democratic form of representative democracy. They had no conception of basing this in face-to-face direct democracy. This is the anarchist tradition.

There is also a very brief discussion of whether revolutionary socialists should run and/or vote in bourgeois elections. They accept the view of both traditions that socialism cannot be achieved through elections. However, they still believe that it may be useful to run and vote, for various reasons. “Our point of view in this debate is closer to the Marxist tradition” than to the anarchist tradition of anti-electoralism. (p. 143) They do not mention that council communists and other “ultra-left” libertarian Marxists have been opposed to participation in elections. Anarchists would argue that history has demonstrated the failures of an electoralist/parliamentary strategy.

In “Union and Party,” Besancenot and Lowy summarize the lessons of the Russian Revolution and other revolutions and near-revolutions. They argue that the struggle needs radical parties and organizations (including anarchist federations) as well as mass organizations, such as labor unions and also popular councils. Parties are formed on agreements about particular programs. They are necessary to fight for a revolutionary program against reformists, liberals, conservatives, and fascists (for these will certainly have their parties). There is a historical tendency among anarchists of revolutionary federations. This includes Bakunin’s “Brotherhoods,” Makhno and others’ advocacy of the “Platform,” the Spanish FAI, and the current especifismo of Latin Americans.

The mass organizations provide “the framework of regular and sovereign general assemblies, open to all workers who want to mobilize…[in] the natural organ of the struggle….They can also…elect delegates, also dismissible, to participate in a coordination where the delegates from different assemblies meet to unify their activities….The power to make decisions belongs to the base…. This democratic option for organization prefigures today the way society could function tomorrow.” (p. 151)

A number of important topics are not covered in this book. These include feminism and the dominance of straight males. Also issues of white supremacy and racism, colonialism, imperialism, and national self-determination. Economic developments of world capitalism are not discussed. The writers themselves mention that they have not covered education of children, nor the vital issue of opposing fascism.

But there is consideration of the very important topic of environmentalism. This is in the section, “Ecosocialism and Anarchist Ecology.” The authors base much of their ecosocialism on the anarchist writings of Murray Bookchin, although they note that Bookchin also used concepts from Marx. Bookchin analyzed capitalist commodification, competition, and, above all, its drive to accumulate, as destroying the ecology. Bookchin wrote about the need for a new, noncapitalist, society, decentralized and directly democratic, with a liberatory transformation of technology. “…We can only admire Murray Bookchin’s coherence and clear-sightedness.” (p. 154)

They make some criticisms of Bookchin. They deny his view that there is a “post-scarcity” world. While agreeing with Bookchin on the need for economic, technological, and political decentralization, they insist on federalist coordination and planning on regional, continental, and world levels. Considering their proletarian perspective, it is odd that they do not express disagreement with Bookchin’s rejection of the major role of the working class in a revolution. Also, surprisingly, there is no reference to research about ecological themes in Marx’s works by ecological Marxist theorists. This includes John Bellamy Foster and others. (See Foster 2009.)

Revolutionary Conclusion

Besancenot and Lowy conclude with “Toward a Libertarian Marxism.” They state that “Our point of departure…is Marxism.” (p. 158) That is where they come from. They do not believe that there can be a final definition of “libertarian Marxism.” They do believe that “Marxists have much to learn from…the anarchists.” (p. 158)

Their aim, they declare, is not to create a better Marxism, with tips from anarchism. (Similarly, my goal is not to replace anarchism with a nicer version of Marxism.) Instead, “The future emancipatory battles of our century will also see this convergence, in both action and thought, of the two great revolutionary currents of the past, of the present, and of the future—Marxism and anarchism, the red flag and the black flag.” (p. 159)

The basis of this convergence is that both revolutionary class-struggle anarchism and libertarian (autonomist) Marxism share a goal. This is an international revolution by the working class and its allies among all oppressed—to overthrow the state, capitalism, and all oppressions, and to replace them with the self-organization of the workers and oppressed.

The issue is not an immediate merger of anarchism and Marxism. This is especially true when there is so much variation within each school. As I pointed out in the beginning, Lowy and Besancenot and many others see an authoritarian such as Che Guevara as within their “libertarian” version of Marxism. They may find the Communist suppression of the Kronstadt rebels as justifiable, or perhaps a tragic if understandable error. Such views must limit their dialogue with anarchism. As a revolutionary anarchist, I still find matters of interest in this book. But its limitations are also real.

References

Besancenot, Oliver, & Lowy, Michael (2009). Che Guevara: His Revolutionary Legacy. NY: Monthly Review Press.

Foster, John Bellamy (2009). The Ecological Revolution; Making Peace with the Planet. NY: Monthly Review Press.

Guerin, Daniel (2017). For a Libertarian Communism. (Ed.: David Berry; Trans.: Mitchell Abidor) Oakland CA: PM Press.

Lowy, Michael (2007). The Marxism of Che Guevara: Philosophy, Economics, Revolutionary Warfare. Rowman and Littlefield.

Lowy, Michael, & Besancenot, Oliver (2023; originally in French, 2014). Revolutionary Affinities: Toward a Marxist-Anarchist Solidarity. (Trans.: David Campbell). Oakland CA: PM Press.

Price, Wayne (2016). “The Authoritarian Vision of Che Guevara; Review of Samuel Farber, The Politics of Che Guevara”
https://www.anarkismo.net/article/29795
search_text=Wayne+Price

Price, Wayne (2017). “What is Libertarian Socialism? An Anarchist-Marxist Dialogue; Review of A. Prichard, R. Kinna, S. Pinta, & D. Berry (Eds.). Libertarian Socialism; Politics in Black and Red”
https://www.anarkismo.net/article/30411?search_text=Wayne

Price, Wayne (2022). “An Anarchist Guide to The Communist Manifesto of Marx & Engels.”
https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32578?search_text=Wayne

*written for www.Anarkismo.net

doğu afrika / anarşist hareketin / press release Wednesday August 30, 2023 15:53 byÇeşitli anarşist örgütler

Sürgün olmak asla kolay bir karar değildir. Asla bir seçim değildir. Kaynaklar olmadan, gerçek bir çileye dönüşebilir. Dayanışma, bu zor zamanların üstesinden gelmenin anahtarıdır.

[لغۃ العربیۃ] [Castellano] [Deutsch] [English] [Français] [Italiano] [한국어] [Português]


Uluslararası anarşist dayanışma çağrısı

Sürgündeki Sudanlı anarşistleri destekleyin

Sürgün olmak asla kolay bir karar değildir. Asla bir seçim değildir. Kaynaklar olmadan, gerçek bir çileye dönüşebilir. Dayanışma, bu zor zamanların üstesinden gelmenin anahtarıdır.

Şubat 2022'de, 2018'den beri ülkeyi sarsan devrimci huzursuzluğun ortasında bir grup Sudanlı anarşistle temasa geçtik. Dil engellerine rağmen, onlardan bu devrimi ve kalbindeki direniş komitelerini nasıl daha iyi anlayabileceğimizi öğrendik. Öyle ki çoğunlukla genç öğrencilerden oluşan bu grup, ülkenin kuzeyindeki anarşist bir grup tarafından taklit edilmiştir.

2011'deki "Arap Baharı" sırasında birçok ülke gibi Sudan da bu yılın Nisan ayında iç savaşa sürüklendi. "Hızlı Destek Güçleri" milislerinin komutanı General Hemetti, Sudan ulusal ordusuna karşı bir isyan başlattı. Ülkenin ilerici ve devrimci güçleri oybirliğiyle bir tarafı diğerine karşı desteklemeyi reddetti ve bu durumdan kaynaklı kendilerini bu iki militarize gerici grup arasındaki mengenede buldular. Bu anlamsız çatışmada yaklaşık 5.000 kişi öldü. İki buçuk milyon insan evlerini terk etmek zorunda kaldı ve bunların 500.000'i ülkeyi terk etti. Yağma ve tecavüz giderek artmakta ve sivillere karşı kullanılan savaş silahlarının bir parçasını oluşturmaktadır.

Anarşist yoldaşlarımız hala Sudan'dalar ve ajitasyon faaliyetlerine orada gizlice devam edebilmeyi umuyorlar. Savaştan önce ve hatta savaşın başında mali yardım sağladık. Ancak bu durumu sürdürmek imkansız hale geldi ve artık herhangi bir sosyal ya da siyasi faaliyete izin vermiyor. Grubun bazı üyeleri, evleri RSF tarafından yağmalandıktan sonra mümkün olan en kısa sürede ülkeyi terk etmeye karar verdi. Diğerleri ise şimdilik kalmaya karar verdi ve biz de onlara yardımcı olmaya çalışıyoruz.

Dünyanın bu bölgesinde bulunan yoldaşlarımızla birlikte, herkese bu bağlamda hayatta kalmak için mümkün olan en iyi koşulları sağlamak için çalışıyoruz. Kalmaya niyetli olanlar için ihtiyaçlarını karşılamalarına ve acil bir ayrılış için ihtiyaç duymaları halinde kenara para koymalarına yardımcı olmamız gerekiyor. Şimdi sürgüne gidenler içinse, bu tür tek yönlü yolculukların gerektirdiği tehlikelerden mümkün olduğunca kaçınarak onları ülkeden çıkarmamız ve sürgündeki Sudanlılarla ve ev sahibi ülkelerdeki sömürülen sınıflarla birlikte aktivizmlerini sürdürmelerini sağlamamız gerekiyor. Ancak bölge son derece istikrarsız (iç savaşlar, darbeler ve diğer otoriter rejimler) ve şu anda ülkeyi terk etmek mümkün değil.

Bunu yapmak için paraya ihtiyacımız var ve kuruluşlarımızın dayanışma fonları tek başına yeterli değil. Aşağıda tahmini masraflar yer almaktadır (ABD Doları cinsinden):

  • Vizeler: $400
  • Seyahat: 800 $ (maliyetler oldukça değişken olduğu için bu rakam belirsizdir)
  • Ev sahibi ülkede ilk kira: $200
  • Ev sahibi ülkede bir aylık yiyecek: 300$
  • Sudan'da bekleme süresi için masraflar (konaklama, yemek, internet): 1000 $
  • Minimum: $2700
Bu geçici bütçe, hızla değişen ekonomik ve güvenlik bağlamında istikrarsız kalmaktadır. Sadece en az bir aylık harcamaları karşılamaktadır. Ancak durum öyle ki, yoldaşlarımız ihtiyaçlarını sadece bir ay içinde karşılayamayacaklar. Sonunda çok daha fazla paraya ihtiyacımız olacak. Bu asgari miktarın üzerinde bile olsa bağışlanan tüm meblağlar, yoldaşların kendi ihtiyaçlarını karşılayabilecek duruma gelene kadar günlük ihtiyaçlarını karşılamak için kullanılacaktır.

Bağışlar, halihazırda uluslararası bir dayanışma yapısına sahip olan İsviçre'deki yoldaşlarımız tarafından toplanmaktadır.

Bağışınızı yaparken "Sudan Dayanışması "nı belirtmeyi unutmayın.

Bağışlarınızı şu adrese gönderin:

Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)
Place Chauderon 5
1003 Lozan
İsviçre

IBAN: CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8
SWIFT/BIC: POFICHBEXXX
Banka'nın Adı: PostFinance SA; Mingerstrasse 20; 3030 Bern; Switzerland

Ayrıca Paypal ile

İmza sahibi:

☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) - Brezilya
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) - İsviçre
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) - Uruguay
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya - Katalonya, İspanya Devleti
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) - Şili
☆Karala - Türkiye
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) - Amerika Birleşik Devletleri
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) - İsviçre
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) - Fransa
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre - Kolombiya
☆Die Plattform - Almanya
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista - Arjantin
☆Anarchist Communist Group(ACG) Büyük Britanya
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) - Rojava
☆Anarşist Yondae - Güney Kore
☆Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA (AL/FdCA) - İtalya
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement(AWSM) - Aotearoa/Yeni Zelanda

/ / Tuesday August 29, 2023 05:56 byVarious anarchist organisations

우리의 아나키스트 동지들은 여전히 수단에 남아 있으며 그곳에서 은밀하게 선전 활동을 계속하고자 합니다. 우리는 전쟁 전과 전쟁 초기에도 동지들에 대하여 재정적으로 지원을 제공했습니다. 하지만 상황이 더욱 악화되면서, 수단 내부에서의 사회적 활동이나 정치활동은 불가능한 것이 되었습니다. ‘신속지원군’에게 고향을 약탈당한 일부 회원들은 RSF에 가능한 한 빨리 수단을 떠나기로 결정했습니다. 다른 사람들은 아직 수단에서의 활동을 더 이어가기로 결정했으며 우리도 그들을 돕기 위해 노력하고 있습니다.

[عربي] [Castellano] [Deutsch] [Eλληνικά] [English] [Français] [Italiano] [Português] [Türkçe]

국제 아나키스트 연대를 요청합니다.
망명중인 수단 아나키스트 동지들을 지원하여 주십시오.

망명은 결코 쉬운 결정이 아닙니다. 결코 선택이 아닙니다. 생존을 위한 자원을 확보하지 못한 망명은 진정한 고난입니다. 그리고 이 고난을 극복할 수 있는 열쇠는, 바로 연대입니다.

우리는 2018년부터 수단을 뒤흔들고 있는 혁명적 불안의 와중에서 2022년 2월 수단 아나키스트 그룹과 접촉했습니다. 이들과 우리 사이에는 언어의 장벽이 놓여있었지만, 그럼에도 우리는 이들에게서 혁명과 혁명의 중심에 있는 저항 위원회를 더 잘 이해하는 방법을 배웠습니다. 북부의 한 아나키스트 단체가 주로 젊은 학생들로 구성된 이 단체를 모방하기도 했습니다.

2011년 '아랍의 봄' 당시 여러 국가에서 그러했던 것처럼, 수단도 올해 4월 내전에 돌입했습니다. '신속지원군'의 헤메티 사령관은 수단 국군에 대항해 반란을 일으켰습니다. 수단의 진보 세력과 혁명 세력은 두 세력 모두를 지지하지 않았습니다. 그리고 그렇게 그들은 이 두 군사 반동 세력 사이의 전쟁 사이에 휘말려 들었습니다. 이 무의미한 군사분쟁으로 거의 5,000명이 사망했습니다. 250만 명이 강제로 고향을 떠나야 했고, 그 중 50만 명이 시리아를 탈출했습니다. 약탈과 강간은 증가하고 있으며, 민간인을 상대로 전쟁 무기인 양 사용되고 있습니다.

우리의 아나키스트 동지들은 여전히 수단에 남아 있으며 그곳에서 은밀하게 선전 활동을 계속하고자 합니다. 우리는 전쟁 전과 전쟁 초기에도 동지들에 대하여 재정적으로 지원을 제공했습니다. 하지만 상황이 더욱 악화되면서, 수단 내부에서의 사회적 활동이나 정치활동은 불가능한 것이 되었습니다. ‘신속지원군’에게 고향을 약탈당한 일부 회원들은 RSF에 가능한 한 빨리 수단을 떠나기로 결정했습니다. 다른 사람들은 아직 수단에서의 활동을 더 이어가기로 결정했으며 우리도 그들을 돕기 위해 노력하고 있습니다.

우리는 이러한 상황에서 모든 사람들에게 생존을 위한 최상의 조건을 제공하기 위해 노력하고 있습니다. 우리는 수단에 잔류하는 동지들에게 그들이 필요로하는 것을 제공할 것입니다. 만약 그 동지들이 결국 망명을 결정한다면, 우리는 긴급 출국을 위해 필요한 재정을 지원하려 합니다. 우리는 지금 당장 망명에 오르는 동지들이 탈출에 수반하는 위험을 최대한 피하면서, 동시에 다른 수단 동지들 및 망명지의 피착취계급과 활동을 지속할 수 있도록 해야 합니다.

하지만 수단 지역은 내전이나 쿠데타, 그리고 권위주의 정권의 폭정으로 인해 매우 불안정한 상태에 놓여있으며, 즉각적인 출국은 불가능한 상황입니다. 동지들의 망명을 위해 우리는 재정이 필요합니다. 그리고 그 재정 규모는 우리 단체의 연대사업비만으로는 충분하지 않습니다. 아래는 예상 비용(미국 달러 기준)입니다:

비자: $400
여행 경비: $800(비용이 매우 불안정하므로 이 수치는 불확실합니다.)
망명지에서의 첫 임대료: $200
망명지에서의 한 달 식비: $300
수단에서의 대기 시간 비용(숙박, 식비, 인터넷): $1000
최소 $2700

수단의 경제적 · 군사적 상황이 불안정 하기에, 이 잠정 예산 또한 변할 수 있습니다. 또한 이 예산은 한 달 동안의 비용만을 상정하고 있는 것입니다. 하지만 한 달만으로는 우리 동지들의 필요를 온전히 충족시킬 수 없고, 결국에는 훨씬 더 많은 재정이 소요될 것입니다. 만약 모금액이 이 최소 금액을 초과하더라도, 기부된 모든 금액은 동지들이 스스로를 부양할 수 있을 때까지 수단 동지들의 일상적인 필요를 충족시키는 데 사용될 것입니다.

기부금의 모금 및 관리는 이미 국제적인 연대 구조를 갖춘 스위스의 동지들이 주관하고 있습니다.

기부할 때 'Solidarity Sudan'을 명기하여 주십시오.
연대기금은 다음으로 보내주십시오.

Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)
Place Chauderon 5
1003 Lausanne
Switzerland
IBAN: CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8
SWIFT/BIC: POFICHBEXXX
은행명: PostFinance SA; Mingerstrasse 20; 3030 Bern; Switzerland


연명 단체
☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) – 브라질
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) – 스위스
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) – 우루과이
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya – 카탈루냐
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) – 칠레
☆Karala – 터키
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) – 미국
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) – 스위스
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) – 프랑스
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre – 콜롬비아
☆Die Plattform – 독일
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista - 아르헨티나
☆Anarchist Communist Group (ACG) - 영국
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) – 로자바
☆Anarchist Yondae – 한국
☆Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA (AL/FdCA) – 이탈리아
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement (AWSM) – 아오테아로아/뉴질랜드

This page has not been translated into 한국어 yet.

This page can be viewed in
English Italiano Català Ελληνικά Deutsch



Anarchist movement

Tue 19 Mar, 14:57

browse text browse image

380713793_699111572256482_5298125431710198778_n.jpg imageFORO CONVERSATORIO: A 50 AÑOS DEL GOLPE CÍVICO MILITAR Los desafíos y tareas del anarquism... Oct 05 02:24 by Asamblea Anarquista Valparaíso y Federación Anarquista Santiago 1 comments

1.jpeg imageAnarchists in Rojava: Revolution is a struggle in itself Oct 04 23:52 by Jurnal mapa 1 comments

61thrfbmy8l.jpg imageAn Attempted Marxist-Anarchist Dialogue Oct 03 07:13 by Wayne Price 1 comments

sudan_soli_tu_copy.png imageSürgündeki Sudanlı anarşistleri destekleyin Aug 30 15:53 by Çeşitli anarşist örgütler 1 comments

text망명중인 수단 아나키스트... Aug 29 05:56 by Various anarchist organisations 0 comments

textΥποστηρίξτε τους... Aug 29 05:45 by Διεθνές κάλεσμα 0 comments

دعم اللاسلطويين السودانيين في المنفى imageدعم اللاسلطوي¡... Aug 27 18:27 by اللاسلطويين 1 comments

textSosteniamo le anarchiche e anarchici sudanesi in esilio Aug 26 02:19 by Varie organizzazioni anarchiche 3 comments

portugais.jpeg imageApoie anarquistas sudaneses no exílio Aug 23 23:32 by Várias organizações anarquistas 0 comments

internationalcampaignsudan.jpeg imageSupport Sudanese anarchists in exile Aug 23 18:19 by International anarchist organisations 17 comments

espanol.jpeg imageApoyo a los anarquistas sudaneses en el exilio Aug 23 18:15 by Diversas organizaciones anarquistas 0 comments

deutsch.jpeg imageUnterstützt sudanesische Anarchist:innen im Exil! Aug 23 17:45 by Verschiedene anarchistische Organisationen 0 comments

Appel anarchiste de solidarité internationale avec nos camarades soudanais en exil imageSoutenir l’exil des anarchistes soudanais·es Aug 23 03:53 by Diverses organisations anarchistes 2 comments

51wr6zzxrwl.jpg imageA Guide to Anarcho-Syndicalism and Libertarian Socialism Aug 03 19:17 by Wayne Price 4 comments

i5af_baby_logo.jpg imageIn Support of “Turning the Tide” Aug 02 03:38 by I-5AF 4 comments

361909747_668974455270194_7612568894314076845_n.jpg imageCarta de Opinión Julio 2023 - FAS Aug 01 02:25 by FAS 3 comments

meansandends1.jpg imageThe Revolutionary Practice of Anarchism Jun 30 08:01 by Wayne Price 9 comments

espero, Nr. 7, Juli 2023, 306 Seiten, zahlr. Illustr imageespero 7 – Die neue Sommerausgabe 2023 Jun 25 16:58 by Hajosch 6 comments

cliffordharper512x640.png imageΗ ανάγκη για restart May 29 18:36 by Ευριπίδης Καλτσάς 2 comments

Photo: Alexander Ermochenko/Reuters/Alamy imageAnarchists Support Self-Determination for Ukraine May 28 07:21 by Wayne Price 12 comments

212x300.png image1η Μάη: μέρα ταξική&... May 01 06:46 by Πρωτ. Αναρχ. Αγ. Αναργ.-Καματερού 1 comments

i5af_baby_logo.jpg imageEl movimiento Apr 25 02:18 by I-5AF 18 comments

1300x184.jpg imageΑντιεκλογική Παρ... Mar 31 20:20 by Αναρχικοί Αγ.Αναργύρων-Καματερού 3 comments

1170x255.jpg imageΠροβοκατορολογί... Mar 30 17:22 by Μ. 2 comments

Internationalists in Rojava in Solidarity with Alfredo imageSolidarity with Alfredo Cospito From Rojava Mar 27 23:06 by Tekosin 19 comments

1517671_1199237206768129_7348846615584991693_n.jpg imageThoughts on Revolution Mar 22 04:45 by Wayne Price 11 comments

download.jpg imageMalatesta για τoν Πόλεμο κ^... Mar 15 18:53 by Wayne Price 0 comments

textAre Anarchists Giving in to War Fever? Feb 18 01:22 by Wayne Price 16 comments

anarhists_and_dual_power.png imageΑναρχικοί και δυ^... Feb 17 16:18 by Matt Crossin 4 comments

textComunicado da CAB às organizações amigas e parcerias de luta Feb 01 05:27 by Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira 0 comments

more >>
© 2005-2024 Anarkismo.net. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Anarkismo.net. [ Disclaimer | Privacy ]