1st Congress of the Anarchist Federation of Rosario

During the months of March and April we held our first congress as a political organisation. We opened a new phase in our organisation and that is why we have decided to reflect this by changing its name for one that takes fuller account of our organisational forms and our horizons of construction. As such, the Anarchist Federation of Rosario is the continuation of the Columna Libertaria Joaquín Penina.

We have been organised as anarchists for seven years, in which we have tried to make our libertarian contribution to the resistance and struggles of our oppressed class. This journey which, although with comings and goings, fruit of successes and failures, demonstrates a marked tendency to consolidate ourselves as a political organisation, a reference of organised anarchism in the city of Rosario, and it is as such that we believe we can (and must) take another step in strengthening our anarchist political organisation.

[Castellano]

7 years of the Columna Libertaria Joaquín Penina

1st Congress of the Anarchist Federation of Rosario
(Federación Anarquista de Rosario – FAR)

During the months of March and April we held our first congress as a political organisation. We opened a new phase in our organisation and that is why we have decided to reflect this by changing its name for one that takes fuller account of our organisational forms and our horizons of construction. As such, the Anarchist Federation of Rosario is the continuation of the Columna Libertaria Joaquín Penina.

We have been organised as anarchists for seven years, in which we have tried to make our libertarian contribution to the resistance and struggles of our oppressed class. This journey which, although with comings and goings, fruit of successes and failures, demonstrates a marked tendency to consolidate ourselves as a political organisation, a reference of organised anarchism in the city of Rosario, and it is as such that we believe we can (and must) take another step in strengthening our anarchist political organisation.

The systematisation and conclusions of the congress have in large part been fruit of collective discussion, of the revision of our political practice, the use of and search for specific tools of analysis consistent with anarchist practice, and of the contribution of other especifista organisations in the region that began to struggle before us and whose experiences have nurtured us. In this sense we feel ourselves part of a collective effort to build an anarchism of struggle that is classist*, organised and capable of social interpellation. An anarchism in which, although its historical roots are long-standing, we can not fail to mention the great contribution that the Uruguayan Anarchist Federation made to our current and that it has been sustaining for more than half a century.

We were able to share and realise this congress with comrades from the Uruguayan Anarchist Federation (Federación Anarquista Uruguaya – FAU), as well as with comrades from the Brazilian Anarchist Coordination (Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira – CAB), comrades from Chile, from other parts of the country and notable comrades from the struggle in our city. Below we share a summary of some of the themes addressed at the congress, concerning our historic phase, programme and strategy.

FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE SYSTEM OF CAPITALIST DOMINATION!
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SELF-MANAGED SOCIETY!
MILITANT ANARCHISM AGAINST THE DOMINANT CLASS!
LONG LIVE ANARCHY!

F.A.R (Anarchist Federation of Rosario – Federación Anarquista de Rosario)

1. Historical context: a stage of resistance for those at the bottom

When characterising the current period we find the system of capitalist domination in its neoliberal phase. Thus we can see how in the search for refinement, this model of power of domination is conditioned both by the various processes of resistance from below as well as by infighting within the ruling class itself. Establishing, then, reconfigurations in its strategy of political, cultural, social, economic, ideological, legal and military oppression. From the previously developed analysis we can see that some of the fundamental characteristics of this model of power are:

• Interventionism of imperialist projects as one of the principal strategies, expressed by the invasion of territories, the promotion of civil wars and the stimulation of political and economic instabilities in dependent countries.

• Geopolitical arrangement of large areas of the world in the service of the strategy of domination of the different hegemonic powers and the international division of labour. Political-economic regionalisation according to blocs.

• Primacy of the extractivist model following a period of dominance of finance capital that left the elites of the poorest countries in a greater degree of dependence on the (super) powers, creating a devastating effect on the oppressed classes.

• Speculation and control of extractive capital to the point that it has generated an unprecedented food crisis at global level provoking a recessionary period.

• Financial leakage that was muted by the ruling class and the most powerful states in the world based on the interests of the major powers.

• Increased interference by international credit agencies in dependent countries.

• Ideological-cultural triumph of neoliberalism expressed in social fragmentation and commodification in the logic of social relations.

• Widening of the gap between rich and poor, increasing poverty and the precariousness of life.

• Increase in famines, epidemics and endemic diseases, worsened by natural disasters and food crisis.

• In Latin America the political class guaranteed this new phase of the model of capitalist power through a re-priming of economies based on the international devision of labour, either through a continuation of conservative projects of the elites of the region, or through a shift toward projects of local political sectors of nationalist and socialist rhetoric. The latter based on an institutional rearrangement of the state in response to various popular outbursts.

• New forms of social control, among which stand out targeted policies that sharpen social fragmentation and consolidate the exclusion of a large part of the world's population, both from work as well as from access to basic services.

• In Argentina preeminence of the interference of foreign powers and extractive capital after the control and emptying of financial capital that ended up marginalising a large part of the popular sectors.

• Deepening of the configuration of a centralised map of power mounted on historic-structural elements that generated a greater dependency of the provinces on the National State.

• Unprecedented energy crisis that generated greater foreign debt.

• Institutional validity and political-ideologocial inheritance of the repressive structure of the state expressed in the organisation and actioning of security forces and intelligence services.

• Open confrontation between dominant sectors at the economic, political, legal, cultural and ideological level, among others.

• Confrontation between popular sectors in the context of growing social violence as a product of persistent inequality, precariousness of life and increased drug trafficking as a catalysing factor.

Moreover we can see that, with few exceptions, there is a discontinuity in the accumulation process of the resistance of the oppressed sectors against the power model. This is expressed in a greater fragmentation and regionalisation thereof. Although during this stage, waves of popular unrest by region, local uprisings as well as sectoral struggles have and continue to occur with different intensity, but these experiences have not become catalysts for spatially or temporally broader resistance. Notwithstanding the above, there are some processes of resistance that have had significant levels of accumulation and have some potential that could allow for an offensive move against the dominant sectors. Among them stand out the two decades of indigenous-peasant uprising of the Zapatistas in Chiapas and the recent revolutionary process initiated by sectors of the Kurdish people in Rojava after years of liberation struggle against states in the region. Highlighted in these processes are articulating elements based on ethnicity, multiculturalism and the struggle against patriarchy, among others. Both processes of confrontation with the system of local domination restore hope in the possibility of building a self-managed society.

2) Our conception of programme: a praxis for building self-management

Based on the discussions that arose for this new moment in the organisation and which were addressed systematically during the congress, the need for a more planned orientation of our militant force was crystallised in the need to have a programme that gives consistency and guidance to our daily practice in relation to our finalist objectives.

In this sense we understand by programme a set of proposals for action aimed at developing a project of transformation of reality from an anarchist praxis and towards an anarchist horizon, conceiving this programme as something provisional, subject to be tried and tested by reality.

In this sense, the idea would be to attempt to plan guidelines that go a bit beyond what appears to us as immediate. So the programmatic necessarily leads us to consider the temporal dimension of what we do, and although there is always talk of short-, medium- and long-term, in general the analyses and proposals are often framed in the extremes. It tends to build a more than imaginary bridge from the short to long term, without trying to delineate the medium term.

To conceive our programme according to our theoretical and ideological definitions we reject any kind of apriorism or determinism. In this sense we understand that you can not define once and for all the scope of these guidelines, nor the way in which we will conquer our objectives, since it will depend on the particular experience that we present as an oppressed class in the struggle against domination. As Malatesta expressed: "we do not claim to have prepared a pre-packaged solution, infallible and universal to all problems that come to mind." In any case, through our praxis we can elucidate more or less precisely the reality of the concrete social formation in which we find ourselves and the guidelines and projects that we believe contribute to the process, in order to improve our practice of social transformation. For us an effective political practice requires, therefore, activity aimed at elucidating the social-historical (theoretical activity), harmonious application of the values and goals of transformation (ideology) and concrete political means to achieve it (political practice) . The three elements are fused into a dialectical unity which constitutes an effort at the social transformation that the organisation postulates (praxis [1]). It is in this sense that we understand the programmatic definitions that have been made so far [2].

3) Strategy: Finalist objectives, methodology and tools for building our utopia

We understand as finalist objectives the distruction of the system of capitalist domination and the construction of a self-managed society.

The destruction of the system of domination can be framed in the search for a revolutionary process of rupture with the current social order, which occurs in parallel with the construction of a self-managed or anarchist society.

Returning to Errandonea we define Social Revolution as "profound modification or alteration of the system, affecting its fundamental aspects and identity (the model of power). It can be understood as revolution and occurs when social conflicts become open and conscious class struggle, extrapolating spheres and generalising to all social relationships" [3].

A rupture [4] with the model of power of domination, and the construction of a model of self-managed power, necessarily leads us to discard statist and institutional routes in our strategy for being contradictory with the aim of social revolution. In this sense Bakunin refers to the social revolution, "… it is precisely this ancient system of organisation by force that the social revolution must put an end to, giving the masses their full freedom, to groups, to municipalities, to associations, to individuals themselves, and destroying once and for all the historic cause of all violence; power and the very existence of the State ... "[5]

That is why we advocate self-management, libertarian federalism, anarcho-feminism and anti-colonialism as methodologies of social organisation that can transform the model of power of domination in order to convert it into self-managed power.

We propose, therefore, a federal organisation of society through basic organs of discussion and decision, which jointly developing ways of decentralised administration through a dynamic and directly controlled system, may create a vast network of self-managed organisms that reanimate the social fabric and that can in a moment of rupture with this system, make this revolutionary, thus constituting the basis of a new social organisation [6].

In the economic sphere, this process will go hand in hand with the abolition of private property and the pooling together of all the means of production, everything produced and all vital resources for humanity. The form of building a new egalitarian society entails collective product distribution based on the identification of needs, and where work is distributed fairly and according to individual abilities. [7] Directing all economic activity towards the sustainability of life; understanding that the economic also includes all actions relating to the reproduction of individuals and should also be conducted within a framework of respect for and protection of the environment in which we live.

In the political-cultural sphere, the destruction of patriarchy [8] in pursuit of a just society which does not discriminate based on people's gender will involve not only the questioning of institutions such as family, compulsory heterosexuality and the state; but requires, starting from now, the construction of other types of relationships on par with the specific struggle for demands coming from social movements. For this, anarcho-feminism together with gender perspective and gender equality [9] as methodological tools will allow us to recognise the origins and expressions of this type of oppression, generating positions of rupture and directing specific actions against patriarchy and machismo.

But we understand these organisational models in relation to the processes of struggle, and the particularities of each locality; understanding by this cultural, language, lifestyle and ethnic integrity. So, we do not think of revolution as a phenomenon of homogenising society, but precisely as able to bring forth those individual, collective, cultural, regional, etc. particularities that do not negate others and that are recognised and strengthened in difference. On this subject the author Maia Ramnath clearly expresses that, "Where ethnicity is brutalised and culture decimated it is insensitive to disregard the value of ethnic pride, affirming the right to exist as such; not forgetting that cultural expression must include the right to redefine the practices of one's own culture over time, in dialogue with multiple external and internal influences, without sanctifying a closed tradition ... The decolonisation of culture should not mean rewinding to a 'pure' original condition, but to restore the atrophied ability to grow freely without external interference that reduces the scope of potential"[10]. That is why we advocate anti-colonialism [11] as a perspective and methodology of action that points toward the cultural self-management of peoples.

From this perspective, then, we consider it possible and necessary to point to overall changes in society, and thus reject those views that believe that these methodologies and principles are only realisable on a small scale. For us prefigurative politics is also nourished by political and ideological imaginations that will be forged in concrete struggles; if our starting point is the impossibility of a self-managed social organisation it is possible that this conditions our practice from today and makes that impossibility for tomorrow real. In this sense "we understand that ideas have a kind of materiality, they are tangible, palpable. They are as compelling as an economic measure or a political decision". [12]

This profound alteration of the model of power to be a process at once destructive and constructive can not, for us, occur spontaneously, as a simple evolution, but must be sought and built through a strategy of building self-managed popular power.

The consistency of our strategy with our finalists objectives will occur through the self-managed character of the web of social relations that constitute the social force we aim to build. Understanding that this self-managed character will be such, meanwhile, it enters into dispute with domination, since social forces and the configuration of a self-managed power occur as part of the class struggle.

For this we highlight four fundamental and basic features of the strategy for the period:

- Social insertion:

We believe in a process of radical transformation of society in which the oppressed class take their destiny into their own hands. For this, the existence of social organisations to drive and sustain the process is essential. That is, to confront the organised ruling class it is indispensable to have the organised force of those from below.

In this sense, the anarchist organisation and its members should be inserted wherever the popular experience – social struggle – takes place, promoting and forming part of their organisational experiences. In other words, our ideas only work in as much as they are part of our political practice in the context of experiences of social organisation [13].

- Political organisation:

The political organisation is a strategic element for us, as we believe it serves as an enhancer of social struggles, that feed back to it, providing an ideological vision antagonistic to the values imposed by the dominant vision; moulding organisational alternatives and resistance that tend towards building a revolutionary praxis in an anarchist direction.

This is how the tasks of political organisation are related to the construction, on the one hand, of a collective ideological vision, namely, to weave in the lived social experience a web of our own meanings in relation to the way of seeing the world and acting on it. On the other hand, a common theoretical framework is required, namely a series of elements and tools that enable us to analyse as profoundly as possible the historical processes of which we are part. Translated into an act in unity of action, that is, based on collective guidelines that guide us in developing a project of revolutionary rupture, defining our strategies and tactics for the period in question, thus providing from our political practice in social struggles, traversed by a style and profile of our own consistent with our libertarian principles [14].

- Building self-managed popular power

The construction of self-managed popular power summarises the strategic orientation of our forces and also provides an analysis of how we consider social processes, class struggle and the state.

"Our fundamental political proposal consists of the destruction of the state both as a special institutional sphere of political domination and the abolition of governmental forms that constitute a power separated from the whole population ....

Well now, when we talked of appropriation by society, by all the people, of the possibility to perform the functions held by the dominant classes or groups, we are referring, in essence, precisely to the disappearance of the state and with it all the culture of power that sustains and reproduces it. "[15]

According to our point of view:

"to reintegrate political power into society is to replace the state and government in their tutelary and habitually repressive functions. It is to socialise the mechanisms of expression and decision that should be their own and abandon the mechanisms of repression and violent coercion to benefit relations of coexistence based on responsible freedom and freely agreed commitment.

In terms of libertarian embodiment this means that political power takes the form of direct democracy, exerted from grassroots institutions and the globalised instances that express them…

This is a road we propose so that all people can genuinely express their needs, can discuss them, confront and ripen them. And that they can capture this process of development and exchange in general political decisions. These are some of the foundations of what we understand as popular power. Popular power which, we reiterate, is conceived by us as as revolutionary power driven by popular organisations, where the political and social acquire and stabilise a new articulation. Without such coordination, we estimate, there will be no real self-managed power. "[16]

- Libertarian Methodology: the organisation as school of life

We propose the construction of a liberating methodology for our political practice as a strategic element, as we believe it provides coherence, cohesion and possibility for the concrete realisation of those programmatic definitions that we have reached. It is in this sense a methodology of action, a way even to disseminate our practice and project, because the organisation is not only expressed in statements and declarations, but also in its daily practice.

We understand by libertarian methodology the consistent application, both at the individual and organisational level, of the methodologies and perspectives defended by the organisation, as developed above.

LAST WORDS

Building on the strengths that we learned to build, and trying to learn from mistakes and limitations we had to face, it is that we face this new stage of the organisation with the expectation of improving and developing our practice according to the definitions mentioned above. Thus, the development of a program to guide us toward developing a strategy to break with this system of oppression which channels and enhances our daily militancy towards building a self-managed social force - together with the consolidation of the political organisation in its libertarian federal operation; materialising this development as a Federation.

The historic moment we are experiencing – and which demands the task of analysing it in depth from an anarchist perspective – presents us great complexities for our objectives, but also presents us with the ethical challenge of making every possible effort to confront the system of domination unwaveringly, with ideological firmness and conviction. In this sense, we have decided to organise ourselves as anarchists in the FAR, to potentiate this historical praxis of the oppressed, which is anarchism, and we undertake that challenge as the main task of our lives.

---

[1] Rafael Viana - Teoría, ideología y práctica política: La praxis Anarquista -https://ithanarquista.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/rafae...ia-id...

2] "Revolutionary praxis does not, therefore, have to produce the overall and detailed schema of the society that it aims to establish, nor to guarantee in the absolute that this society will be able to solve all the problems that may ever arise. It is enough to show that, in what is proposed, there is no inconsistency and, as far as the eye can see, its realisation would vastly increase the capacity of society to deal with its problems, "Cornelius Castoriadis - The imaginary institution of society

[3] Errandonea, Alfredo – Sociología de la Dominación.

[4] "Bachelar tells us that epistemological changes occur through ruptures and discontinuities with the above. He say it especially for the sciences. For the social-political it seems it also serves as a premise. We must discontinue what there is to give birth to new possibilities, to discontinue you must make ruptures. Perhaps every day and in several camps." Wellington Gallarza and Malvina Tavares document. Work material towards joint FAU-FAG theoretical training.

[5] Bakunin Mikhail. The Paris Commune and the idea of the state

[6] Declaracion de principios Columna Libertaria Malatesta, Joaquin Penina, Durruti.2012

[7] Declaracion de principios Columna Libertaria Malatesta, Joaquin Penina, Durruti.2012

[8] We understand patriarchy as a system of sexual-political social relations based on different institutions and the interclass and inter-gender solidarity established by men who as a social group and individually and collectively oppress other genders both individually and collectively, dominating their bodies and their products, be it by "peaceful" means or through the use of violence.

[9] Feminism (or for us anarco-feminismo) being considered a practice that seeks the liberation of people oppressed by gender, in particular, and everyone in general, is a body of ideas that makes exposes, denounces and struggles against the patriarchal order; in a dialectical movement with practices of personal and collective transformation.

Also, the gender perspective as a theoretical framework adopted for this program involves: a) recognising the power relations that exist between the genders, generally favourable to men as a social group; b) that these relationships have been socially and historically constituted and are constitutive of people c) that they traverse the entire social fabric and link with other social relations such as class, ethnicity, age, religion. This gender perspective is not contingent on its adoption by women nor is it directed exclusively to them; but seeks to observe reality from the perspective of genders and their power relations to see if they are reproducing or combatting them (there are no gender-neutral decisions or actions).

Additionally, gender equality is established as a set of tools and mechanisms that – recognising that men, women, transgender, transvestites, gays and lesbians have different needs and interests and establish asymmetrical relations of power – seek to ensure equal opportunity in participation (in all areas of life, including political). That is, it seeks to eliminate social inequality based on gender, on the one hand, and on the other the disrespect of difference.

[10] Maia Ramnath – Decolonizing Anarchism

11] Returning to Maia Ramnath we define imperialism as a projection of the power of a political entity beyond its territorial jurisdiction, by economic or military means, in a strong or gentle manner, or some combination of these. And Colonialism as domination through the imposition of culture.

[12] Wellington Gallarza and Malvina Tavares document. Work material towards joint FAU-FAG theoretical training.

[13] Declaracion de principios Columna Libertaria Malatesta, Joaquin Penina, Durruti. 2012

[14] Declaracion de principios Columna Libertaria Malatesta, Joaquin Penina, Durruti. 2012

[15] Declaración de principios de FAU adopted at the Xth Congress (Montevideo, March 1993)

[16] Ibid.