OscailtAnarkismoAll the latest news posted to Anarkismo's anarchist-communist newswire.2024-02-28T08:50:30+08:00Anarkismoanarkismoeditors@lists.riseup.nethttp://www.anarkismo.net/atomfullpostshttp://www.anarkismo.net/graphics/feedlogo.gifMalatesta’s Revolutionary Anarchism in British Exilehttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328622024-02-28T08:50:30+08:00Wayne Pricedrwdprice at aol dot comReview of The Armed Strike: The Long London Exile of 1900—13. The Complete Works of Errico Malatesta. Vol. V. (2023).<BR>
A review of the writings and speeches of Errico Malatesta, the great Italian anarchist and comrade of Bakunin and Kropotkin. Material is taken from the 13 years he spent in London exile. His views remain relevant--and controversial among anarchists. The Italian Errico Malatesta (1853—1932) was a comrade and friend of Michael Bakunin and Peter Kropotkin. Calling himself an anarchist-socialist, he was respected and loved by large numbers of anarchists and workers, in Italy and other countries. He was closely watched by the police forces of several nations. He had escaped imprisonment in Italy and lived in various countries in Europe, the Middle East, the U.S.A., and Latin America. Four times he spent time in Britain. This volume has collected works from his longest stay there, from 1900 to 1913, from when he was 48 to 61. <br />
<br />
Britain, secure in its wealth and imperial power, was the most open European country in providing asylum to political refugees—so long as they obeyed local laws. As a result, the UK had communities of anarchists and other socialists from all over Europe. There was also an overlapping colony of Italians. Malatesta lived in London, supporting himself by running a small electrician’s shop. Only at one point, in 1912, did the police and courts make a serious effort to expel him. This set off massive demonstrations of British and immigrant workers and outcries from liberal newspapers and politicians. The attempt at expulsion was dropped. <br />
<br />
However, Malatesta was frustrated by being penned up in Britain. He made several efforts to produce an anarchist-socialist paper which would circulate in Italy, but with limited success. He participated in anarchist activities in Britain, but his English, while apparently serviceable, was not fluent (when not speaking Italian, he preferred French). This volume includes his translated articles, pamphlets, and written speeches, as well as interviews of him by both bourgeois and radical newspapers. There are also reports by police spies (at least one of whom passed as a close comrade). They faithfully recorded his speeches and private comments and passed them on to their superiors. <br />
<br />
In the course of Malatesta’s lengthy sojourn in London, he discussed a number of topics which were important to anarchists then and are still important. He was not an major theorist of political economy or history, but he was brilliant about strategic and tactical issues of the anarchist movement. This makes the study of Malatesta’s collected work valuable even today.<br />
<br />
Terrorism<br />
<br />
Around the time the book begins, in 1900, an Italian anarchist who had been living in the U.S., went back to Europe and assassinated Humbert, the Italian king. Apparently Malatesta had met the assassin, Bresci, briefly while in Patterson NJ. Otherwise he knew nothing about the affair. However the press continually tried to interview him about it, seeking to tie anarchism to assassination.<br />
<br />
Malatesta always opposed indiscriminate mass terrorism (such as throwing bombs into restaurants). Nor did he call for assassination of prominent individuals, whether kings, presidents, or big businesspeople. In general, it did not advance the cause. His approach had become one of building revolutionary anarchist organizations, to participate in mass struggles. However, he was understanding of the motives of individual anarchists driven to assassination—and not sympathetic at all to the rulers and exploiters whom they killed. The Italian king, he noted, had previously ordered soldiers to massacre peasants and workers. <br />
<br />
When US President William McKinley was shot dead by Czolgosz, who claimed to be anarchist, Malatesta called the president, “the head of [the] North American oligarchy, the instrument and defender of the great capitalists, the traitor of the Cubans and Filipinos, the man who authorized the massacre of the Hazelton strikers, the tortures of the Idaho miners and the thousand disgraces being committed in the ‘model republic.’” (Malatesta 2023; p. 75) He felt no sorrow for the death of this man, only compassion for the assassin, who “with good or bad strategy,” sacrificed himself for “the cause of freedom and equality.” (p. 75) <br />
<br />
However, he did not advocate this as a political strategy. It was more important to win workers to reliance upon themselves rather than kings, bosses, and official leaders. “…Overthrowing monarchy…cannot be accomplished by murder. The Sovereigns who die would only be succeeded by other Sovereigns. We must kill kings in the hearts of the people; we must assassinate toleration of kings in the public conscience; we must shoot loyalty and stab allegiance to tyranny of whatever form wherever it exists.” (p. 59) <br />
<br />
In another incident in London, a small group of Russian anarchist exiles was interrupted in the process of robbing a jewelry store. There was a shoot-out with the police (led by Home Secretary Winston Churchill) which ended in the death of some officers and all the robbers. As it happened, one of the thieves had met Malatesta at an anarchist club, and ended up buying a gas tank from him, claiming a benevolent use for it. In fact it was used to break open the jewelry safe. <br />
<br />
Malatesta patiently explained to the police and the newspapers that he had no foreknowledge of the robbery. However he wrote that it was unfair to link the robbers’ actions with their anarchist politics. Was a murder in the U.S. blamed on the murderer being a Democrat or Republican? Were thieves’ thievery usually ascribed to their opinions on Free Trade versus Tariffs? Or perhaps their belief in vegetarianism? No, they were essentially regarded as thieves, regardless of their beliefs on politics, economics, or religion. The same should be true for these jewelry thieves, whatever their views on anarchism. <br />
<br />
Syndicalism/Trade Unionism<br />
<br />
By the last decades of the 19th century, many anarchists had given up on only actions and propaganda by individuals and small groups. These tactics had mainly resulted in isolation and futility. Instead many turned toward mass organizing and the trade unions. Anarchists joined, and worked to organize, labor unions in several countries. (Often these efforts were called “syndicalism,” which is the French for “unionism.”) <br />
<br />
There remained anarchists who opposed unions: individualists and anti-organizational communists. But most turned in the pro-union direction. This gave a big boost to the anarchist movement at the time.<br />
<br />
Errico Malatesta had long been an advocate of unions. He had contacts with militant unionists throughout Britain and other countries. In London in this period, he directly participated in unionizing waiters and catering staff. He gave support to the struggles of tailors to form a union, which led to a large strike. <br />
<br />
“Syndicalism, or more precisely the labor movement…has always found me a resolute, but not blind, advocate.…I see it as a particularly propitious terrain for our revolutionary propaganda and…a point of contact between the masses and ourselves.” (p. 240) <br />
<br />
But once it was decided that anarchists should participate in the labor movement, the next question was how should they participate? What should be the relation between anarchist activists and the trade unions? On this question, differences among anarchists were made explicit at the 1907 anarchist conference held in Amsterdam. <br />
<br />
At the conference, Malatesta took issue with the views of Pierre Monatte, who spoke for the French syndicalist movement. Malatesta argued, “The conclusion Monatte reached is that syndicalism is a necessary and sufficient means of social revolution. In other words, Monatte declares that syndicalism is sufficient unto itself. And this, in my opinion, is a radically false doctrine.” (p. 240)<br />
<br />
The unions had great advantages, as they brought together working people in enterprises, industries, cities, and regions. They included only workers, and not capitalists or management. They had the potential of stopping businesses and whole economies, in the pursuit of working class demands. They were schools of cooperation and joint struggle.<br />
<br />
Yet, the unions’ very strengths also pointed to certain weaknesses. They are institutions within capitalist society. They exist (at least in the short term) to win a better deal for the workers under capitalism. Therefore they must compromise with the bosses and the state. Further, they need as many members as possible, to counter the power of the bosses. They cannot just recruit revolutionary anarchists and socialists. They must take in workers of every political, economic, and religious persuasion. (A union which only accepted anarchists would not be much of a threat to the bourgeoisie.)<br />
<br />
These and other factors brought constant pressure on unions to be more conservative, corrupt, and bureaucratic. All anarchists recognized these tendencies among officials of political parties, even among liberals or socialists. But the same tendencies existed for union officials. <br />
<br />
Malatesta drew certain conclusions. Anarchist-socialists should not dissolve themselves into the unions, becoming good union militants (as he understood Monatte to be saying). Instead, they should build revolutionary anarchist groups to operate inside and outside union structures. Nor should they take union offices which gave them power over people. But they could take positions which were clearly carrying out tasks agreed to by the membership—but with no wages higher than the other workers. They should be the best union militants, always advocating more democratic, less bureaucratic, and more militant policies, while still raising their revolutionary libertarian politics. <br />
<br />
“In the union, we must remain anarchists, in the full strength and full breadth of the term. The labor movement for me is only a means—evidently the best among all means that are available to us.” (p. 241)<br />
<br />
A central concept of the syndicalists was the goal of a general strike. Malatesta had certain criticisms. Not that he opposed the idea of getting all the workers of a city or country to go on strike at the same time. This could show the enormous power of the working class, if it would use it—much more powerful than electing politicians. But there is no magic in a general strike. The capitalist class has supplies stored away with which they could outlast the workers—starve them out. The state has its police and armed forces to break up the strike organization, arrest the organizers, and forcibly drive the workers back to their jobs. <br />
<br />
In brief, Malatesta did not believe in the possibility of a successful nonviolent general strike (this is not considering a one-day “general strike” set by the union bureaucrats for show). He felt that a serious general strike would require occupation of factories and workplaces, arming of the workers, and plans for their military self-defense. It would have to be the beginning of a revolution. (Hence the book’s title.)<br />
<br />
However much he criticized aspects of syndicalism, Malatesta was completely opposed to “…the anti-organizationalist anarchists, those who are against participation in the labor struggle, establishment of a party, etc. [By ‘party,’ he means here an organization of anarchists—WP] ….The secret of our success lies in knowing how to reconcile revolutionary action and spirit with everyday practical action; in knowing how to participate in small struggles without losing sight of the great and definitive struggle.” (p. 78)<br />
<br />
War and National Self-Determination<br />
<br />
This collection of writings by and about Malatesta ends in 1913. Therefore it does not cover his response to World War I which began the next year—nor his break with Kropotkin for supporting the imperialist Allies in the war.<br />
<br />
However, in the period covered here, he could see the increase in wars, both between imperialist powers and between imperial states and oppressed peoples. “…Weaker nations are robbed of their independence. The kaiser of Germany urges his troops to give the Chinese no quarter; the British government treats the Boers…as rebels, and burns their farms, hunts down housewives…and re-enacts Spain’s ghastly feats in Cuba; the Sultan [of Turkey] has the Armenians slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands; and the American government massacres the Filipinos, having first cravenly betrayed them.” (p. 33)<br />
<br />
He opposed all sides in wars among imperialist governments—as he was to do during World War I. The only solution to such wars was the social revolution.<br />
<br />
But Malatesta supported oppressed nations which rebelled against imperial domination. (Some ignorant people believe that it is un-anarchist to support such wars. Yet Malatesta did, as did Bakunin, Kropotkin, Makhno, and many other anarchists—even though they rarely used the term “national self-determination”.) Malatesta wrote, “…True socialism consists of hoping for and provoking, when possible, the subjected people to drive away the invaders, whoever they are.” (p. 58)<br />
<br />
This does not mean that anarchist-socialists have to agree with the politics of the rebelling people. Speaking of the Boers, who were fighting the British empire, he wrote without illusions, “The regime they will probably establish will certainly not have our sympathies; their social, political, religious ideas are the antipodes of our own.” (p. 59) Nevertheless, it would be better if they win and British imperialists are defeated. For the people of the imperialist country, “It is not the victory but the defeat of England that will be of use to the English people, that will prepare them for socialism.” (p. 58) (The British won.)<br />
<br />
The Italian and Turkish states went to war over north Africa around 1912. Malatesta condemned both sides, but supported the struggle of the Arab population. “I hope that the Arabs rise up and throw both the Turks and the Italians into the sea.” (p. 321)<br />
<br />
He understood that “love of birthplace” (p. 328) was typically felt by people, including their roots in the community, their childhood language, their love of local nature, and perhaps their pride in the contributions their people have made to world culture. But this natural sentiment is then misused by the rulers to develop a patriotism which masks class division and exploitation. <br />
<br />
The rulers “…turned gentle love of homeland into that feeling of antipathy…toward other peoples which usually goes by the name of patriotism, and which the domestic oppressors in various countries exploit to their advantage. ….We are internationalists…We extend our homeland to the whole world, feel ourselves to be brothers to all human beings, and seek well-being, freedom, and autonomy for every individual and group…..We abhor war…and we champion the fight against the ruling classes.” (p. 329)<br />
<br />
As can be seen, to Malatesta, internationalism did not conflict with support for “autonomy for every…group.” This included groups of people who held a common identity as a nation. Anarchists are internationalist, but <br />
unlike the centralism of Lenin, anarchists do not want a homogenous world state. They advocate regionalism, pluralism, and decentralized federations. This particular passage went on to support the Arabs against Italian imperialism. “…It is the Arabs’ revolt against the Italian tyrant that is noble and holy.” (p. 329)<br />
<br />
Yet Malatesta may be faulted for his lack of concern about racism. In supporting the Boers, and even when listing their extreme (antipodal) differences with anarchists, he does not mention their exploitation of the indigenous Africans. Nor does he make other references to racial oppression (such as in U.S. segregation). This must be put beside his fervent anti- colonialism and support for the rebellion of oppressed peoples. <br />
<br />
Similarly, he does not mention the oppression of women or its intersection with class and national exploitation. It is not at all that he was misogynist (like Proudhon). I am sure he treated Emma Goldman as an equal at the 1907 international anarchist conference. But, like most male radicals of his time, he had a “blind spot” in thinking about this major aspect of overall oppression.<br />
<br />
Imperialism, war, national oppression, and national revolt are issues which are still with us. Look at Palestine or Ukraine or the Kurds, among other peoples. These issues will be with us as long as capitalism survives, as Malatesta knew.<br />
<br />
Other Topics<br />
<br />
Besides terrorism, syndicalism, and national wars, Malatesta covered quite a lot of topics in the course of these thirteen years, as we would expect. <br />
<br />
He condemned a French anti-clerical town council which outlawed the wearing by priests of their cassocks within the municipal borders. Malatesta was an opponent of religion and certainly of the Catholic Church. But he did not believe that people would be won from it by means of police coercion. That would only provoke resistance. At most, it would replace the religious priests with secularist ones, “which would all the same preach subjugation to masters….” (p. 68)<br />
<br />
Today, the French government forbids Muslim girls and women from wearing headscarfs in schools and other public buildings—in the name of “secular” government. The left and feminists are divided on how to respond. “Oh, when will those who call themselves friends of freedom, decide to desire truly freedom for all!” (p.68)<br />
<br />
Unlike Kropotkin, Elisee Reclus or (more recently) Murray Bookchin, there was not much of an ecological dimension to Malatesta. However he was concerned with the way landlords and capitalists had kept Italian agriculture backward. He believed that under anarchy, the peasants would be able to make the barren lands bloom.<br />
<br />
By 1913, his experience with state socialists was mainly with the reformist Marxist “democratic socialists” (social democrats). This was four years before the Russian Revolution, which ended in the dictatorship of Lenin’s Bolsheviks and the rise of authoritarian state capitalism. <br />
<br />
Yet he was prescient enough to write: “…Depending on the direction in which competing and opposite efforts of men and parties succeed in driving the movement, the coming social revolution could open to humanity the main road to full emancipation, or simply serve to elevate a new layer of the privileged above the masses, leaving unscathed the principle of authority and privilege.” (p. 102) The validity of this anarchist insight (which goes back to Proudhon and Bakunin) has been repeatedly demonstrated.<br />
<br />
All the subjects Errico Malatesta discussed in this period had one guiding social philosophy. Quoting the famous lines written by, but not created by, Marx: “…The emancipation of the workers must be conquered by the workers themselves.…Throughout history the oppressed have never achieved anything beyond what they were able to take, push away pimps and philanthropists and politicos, take their own fate in their own hands, and decide to act directly.” (p. 220) This was the principle of Malatesta’s revolutionary anarchist-socialism and remains true today.<br />
<br />
References<br />
Malatesta, Errico (2023). The Armed Strike: The Long London Exile of 1900—13. The Complete Works of Errico Malatesta. Vol. V. (Ed.: Davide Turcato; Trans.: Andrea Asali). Chico CA: AK Press.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<BR>
L’Intifada depuis la Francehttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328462023-12-01T03:38:36+08:00AnonymeNotes sur l'élargissement de la lutte pour la libération du peuple palestinien<BR>
Ce texte est une traduction et une adaptation collectives d'un texte originellement écrit sur Puget Sound Anarchists à l'attention des anarchistes nord-américain/e/s. La section "cibles" a été adaptée par nos soins à la situation européenne et plus particulièrement française.<br />
Ce texte se propose d'apporter des solutions à la passivité dans laquelle nombre de camarades se sont enfermé/e/s face à l'horreur des crimes d'Israël, leur permettant des sorties par le haut et qui reposent sur des principes horizontaux et anti-autoritaires, sur des modes d'action à notre portée géographique.Le monde occidental reste sidéré face à l’attaque surprise spectaculaire menée contre une superpuissance coloniale, et les colons autant que les spectateur/rice/s occidentaux/les réclament fanatiquement du sang, craignant que sinon iels « seront les prochain/e/s ». Pour venger cette humiliation mondiale, l’État colonial exige des centaines d’yeux pour un œil, des milliers de dents pour une dent et mène une campagne agressive d’extermination de la population palestinienne qu’il retient prisonnière.<br />
<br />
Ce génocide se déroule sous nos yeux, tandis que les idéologues du monde colonial s’empressent de nous expliquer que la vie d’un/e Israélien/ne vaut autant que celles de centaines de Palestinien/ne/s, qu’un/e otage israélien/ne équivaut à des milliers de prisonnier/es/s palestinien/ne/s, et que 70 ans de nettoyage ethnique, 16 années de blocus militaire total sur Gaza, et les bombardements et opérations militaires constantes d’une superpuissance nucléaire ne sont rien face à une offensive à coup d’armes légères et de roquettes bricolées.<br />
<br />
Certain/e/s anarchistes, encore pétri/e/s de l’humanisme des Lumières, pourraient être tenté/e/s d’hurler qu'on ne devrait pas soutenir cet acte et qu'on devrait condamner le Hamas et les atrocités qu’il commet ! Mais à l’attention de qui formulent-iels cette condamnation ? Les Gazaoui/e/s ne peuvent nous entendre à travers le blocus, assourdi/e/s qu’iels sont par le grondement de leurs estomacs vides, par les frappes aériennes constantes ou par les pleurs des parents sans enfants et des enfants sans parents. Et même s’iels le pouvaient ? Que leur importerait, puisqu'on ne peut leur envoyer ni cargaisons d’armes, ni nourriture, ni eau potable, ni médecins.<br />
<br />
C’est vrai : le colonialisme produit des monstres. Cependant, si on veut vraiment condamner les monstres et leurs atrocités, pourquoi ne pas alors commencer par celles du colonisateur, car c’est bien le colonialisme qui engendre ces monstres, et les modèle à son image.<br />
<br />
On ne peut pas se contenter de condamner. Quand les bombes pleuvent, les mots ne peuvent rien. On doit penser, on doit agir. C’est par l’action que se forgent de nouveaux liens. C’est par l’action que se concrétise la solidarité. C’est par l’action qu'on peut avoir un impact tangible sur l’occupation et faire advenir un pôle d’opposition anti-autoritaire conséquent.<br />
<br />
Je souhaite partager humblement ces quelques mots avec les anarchistes de France, et peut-être d’Europe, pour qu’iels méditent, réfléchissent, critiquent, adaptent et agissent afin d'étendre la lutte pour la libération du peuple palestinien et s’engagent dans une forme de solidarité plus durable, plus concrète et plus menaçante.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Sensibiliser, Agiter, Attaquer – Multiplier les modes d'actions</u></b><br />
La guerre n’est pas aussi lointaine qu’il n’y parait. Israël est précurseur dans le développement de techniques de contre-insurrection et de maintien de l’ordre qui s’exportent ensuite dans le reste du monde. Ce qu’Israël fait à la Palestine, notre police et notre gendarmerie nous le fera subir. Mais cet échange n’est pas à sens unique. D’une part, de grands groupes français et européens fournissent l’infrastructure qui contribue à l’apartheid et au génocide tandis que d’une autre, nos impôts financent le terrorisme d’État si directement que ça fait de nous, plus que de simples complices, de véritables coupables.<br />
<br />
Si on veut considérer sérieusement la question de la solidarité, on doit abandonner notre attitude de soutien passif et faire nôtre leur lutte en s'y impliquant pleinement, avec tous les risques que ça entraîne. Je souhaiterais proposer un modèle d’analyse et d’action adapté à notre échelle géographique. Tirez de cet outil ce que vous trouvez pertinent et débarassez-vous du reste. La stratégie que je vous soumets repose sur trois piliers : Sensibiliser, Agiter, Attaquer. Ces trois aspects ne doivent pas forcément rester séparés ; la meilleure sensibilisation est parfois l’agitation et l’attaque peut contribuer à l’agitation tout autant qu’à la sensibilisation. Avec un peu de créativité, ces trois aspects peuvent être articulés de nombreuses manières fascinantes.<br />
<br />
Il est important de noter que ces trois aspects ne sont pas les étapes distinctes d’une stratégie, mais des outils individuels qui se combinent aisément, ne doivent pas nécessairement être séparés, et gagneraient au contraire à être mobilisés simultanément. N’attendez pas pour passer à l’attaque et ne vous engluez pas dans la sensibilisation en étant persuadé/e/s qu’il faille, pour agir plus efficacement, atteindre un certain degré de quelque conscience abstraite.<br />
<br />
<b>Sensibilisation et Contre-Information</b><br />
Je pense que de nombreux/ses anarchistes prennent pour acquis notre degré d’information sur les actualités mondiales et s’imaginent que tout/e un/e chacun/e est autant informé/e que nous. Non seulement est-ce tout bonnement faux mais ça revient à oublier que la majorité des informations auxquelles la population a accès sont soumises à des intérêts idéologiques privés (rappelons qu’en France, 90 % des médias sont détenus par de grands groupes privés dirigés par exemple par Bolloré, Niel, Lagardère…), des intérêts idéologiques étatiques, ou, plus fréquemment, à un déluge de fausses informations qui inondent les réseaux sociaux. S’il y a bien une chose sur laquelle les anarchistes ont 20 ans de retard, c’est sur la guerre de l’information, devenue pourtant un aspect incontournable de la lutte révolutionnaire.<br />
<br />
Chaque jour, les canaux d’informations de l’ennemi débitent des absurdités, les idéologues en ligne rédigent leurs tweets et leurs petits blogs ridicules, et les officines militaires et autres agences de renseignement déploient leurs armées de bots pour inonder de conneries et polluer l’écosystème informatif. Le faux bon sens nous commanderait alors de faire la même chose, mais en mieux ! Ce serait cependant une impasse pour les anarchistes. On n'est pas là pour produire un flux constant de contenu pour un public passif, et on ne dispose pas non plus des capacités de financement pour entretenir l’infrastructure qu’exigerait un réseau national d’information en continu ou une armée de bots (quoique, pour celleux qui s’y connaissent en informatique, des armées de bots sont peut-être à notre portée, mais c’est une question qui mérite sa propre réflexion). Non, on doit être plus créatif/ve/s et favoriser les interventions visant à sensibiliser dans l’espace physique.<br />
<br />
Ça inclut par exemple les traditionnels graffitis et collages (à faire régulièrement, environ tous les deux-trois jours, pour conserver une présence dans l’espace public, pas juste une fois de temps en temps), ou encore installer une table dans un parc, en pleine rue ou dans un autre lieu public et y disposer des zines ainsi que des tracts sur les évènements en cours et à venir pour tenter d’interpeler les passants. Sinon, on peut également passer à des modes d’action plus originaux quoique, c’est vrai, un peu plus embarrassants peut-être. Si vous voulez faire un collage, pourquoi ne pas le faire en pleine journée dans des costumes outranciers ou masqué/e/s et habillé/e/s tout en noir pour attirer ouvertement l’attention ? Pourquoi ne pas aller avec quelques ami/e/s et un mégaphone dans une zone très fréquentée (dans l’idéal en bloquant une route ou en perturbant un lieu, par exemple en tirant des feux d’artifice) pour parler de la situation ? Il peut alors être utile de distribuer des tracts aux gens ou même d'en lancer en l’air par centaines. Et pourquoi pas même du théâtre de rue ? Idéalement en perturbant autant que possible. Ou plus généralement, n’importe quoi qui sorte les gens un instant de leur routine et les interpelle.<br />
<br />
Sinon, on peut aussi se lancer dans quelque chose d’un peu plus osé. Peut-être est-il temps que les radios pirates fassent leur grand retour ? Vous pourriez essayer de diffuser des informations sur les évènements actuels et sur où s’informer en piratant les ondes d’autres stations sur les heures de grande écoute. À l’occasion d’une manifestation massive, pourquoi ne pas scinder une partie de la manif vers une station de radio ou de télé et y forcer le passage jusqu’au plateau pour diffuser un message ? Ça peut sembler risqué et invraisemblable, mais merde, un génocide est en cours !<br />
<br />
Cependant, la sensibilisation et la contre-information ont leurs limites. Idéalement, on devrait chercher à toucher directement la population, ou bien l’inviter à assister à une rencontre ou une assemblée offrant un point d’accroche concret. Il est essentiel de disposer de tracts avec de plus amples informations et des liens renvoyant à des sites permettant d’en apprendre plus et de se tenir au courant des prochains évènements.<br />
<br />
Pour le dire clairement : il faut diffuser l’information et offrir un horizon tangible. <br />
<br />
<b>Agitation et perturbation</b><br />
Mais on ne peut se contenter de sensibiliser. La liberté se conquiert, elle ne s’apprend pas, et on n’arrête pas un génocide seulement en informant de son déroulement. Il est vrai que, la plupart du temps, l’agitation et la perturbation n’y font pas grand-chose non plus mais c’est un début. Par agitation, j’entends mettre les gens en mouvement : motiver les personnes et leur donner une liste concrète de cibles et d’actions potentielles. Par perturbation, j’entends particulièrement la perturbation de la vie économique normale. C’est un élément essentiel, à la fois pour la lutte anarchiste en général, et parce que la France est si banalement et étroitement liée au financement et au soutien logistique du génocide en cours en Palestine.<br />
<br />
Quand on se questionne sur la manière de perturber, on doit réfléchir à comment bloquer les échanges commerciaux : empêcher les transactions dans les magasins et les banques, perturber le fonctionnement quotidien des entreprises et des institutions qui soutiennent ou profitent de l’apartheid et du génocide, ou encore bloquer le transport des personnes et le fret. On doit également réfléchir à la manière de briser la routine de la normalité, le sentiment que tout va bien. Penser l’impact économique et psychologique. Toute perturbation est une opportunité de communiquer et de sensibiliser. Des banderoles et des tracts avec des mots d’ordre clairs, des slogans entraînants et de la bonne musique. Un discours peut parfois être utile pour enflammer les foules, mais attention, car il peut également rendre cette même foule passive. Voyez les choses en grand : comment pousser les gens à agir ? La clé est de propager et généraliser le conflit.<br />
<br />
Certaines tactiques de perturbation ont fait leurs preuves depuis longtemps. Par exemple, les mobilisations visant à bloquer la circulation et les intersections, ou mieux encore, directement à l’intérieur des entreprises et des institutions pour les forcer à fermer le reste de la journée. Les grèves dans les entreprises et institutions qui soutiennent et s’enrichissent du génocide. Bloquer les autoroutes et les rues les plus empruntées peut se montrer une excellente idée, mais il est peut-être plus efficace encore d’installer une véritable barricade hérissée de drapeaux en ne laissant qu’une seule file ouverte de sorte à ralentir assez la circulation pour pouvoir distribuer des tracts aux conducteur/rice/s. Sinon, mettre en place des déviations, saboter les rails ou bloquer physiquement les trains sont autant de moyens d’entraver les transports ferroviaires afin de perturber efficacement les flux commerciaux.<br />
<br />
Il existe encore d’autres moyens percutants, ceux-là exigeant bien plus de coordination et d’efforts, tels que les boycotts ou les blocages. On peut par exemple se rattacher à Boycott Divestment and Sanction (BDS), une campagne de boycott de longue date disposant de nombreuses ressources. Sinon, on peut tout bonnement perturber voire faire fermer continuellement les lieux ciblés par le boycott, voire voler leurs marchandises, idéalement via une action de masse, ou au moins les saboter.<br />
<br />
Le point commun entre toutes ces initiatives est qu’elles permettent d’amener un conflit qui paraît lointain au contact direct de la population, de sorte qu’il ne soit plus possible de l’ignorer et de faire comme si de rien n’était ou comme si ça ne nous regardait pas. En outre, notre approche doit être mûrement réfléchie afin que nos actions et notre message incitent la population à s’engager par elle-même, sans attendre un jour bien précis de manifestation ou d’en recevoir l’ordre. Il nous faut constamment insister sur l’idée qu'on est toustes les protagonistes de ce conflit, qu'on ne peut pas attendre que les autres agissent à notre place, que de nombreuses cibles sont à notre portée et qu'on dispose d’un large éventail de tactiques pour s'y attaquer.<br />
<br />
<b>Passer à l’attaque !</b><br />
Fondamentalement, être solidaire signifie attaquer ; détruire physiquement l’infrastructure oppressive et génocidaire. C’est ça qui inflige le plus de dégâts et est le plus à même d’entraver le bon fonctionnement de la machine génocidaire, mais c’est également la tactique la plus risquée. Il y a deux manières, complémentaires, d’approcher cette question : d’une part, en petits groupes, et d’autre part, avec la foule. Les actions en petits groupes ne nous sont pas inconnues puisque les anarchistes ont l’habitude de ce genre de pratiques. Du cassage de vitrine aux incendies volontaires, en passant par les effractions dans les laboratoires et les abattoirs pour en libérer les captif/ve/s ; des tactiques du même genre peuvent sans problème être appliquées dans la lutte pour la libération du peuple palestinien.<br />
<br />
Cependant, il nous faut mûrement réfléchir à nos objectifs. Certes, un petit nombre d’entre nous pourrait aller mettre le feu à des infrastructures d’Amazon ou de Carrefour, mais le message envoyé ne serait-il pas bien plus impressionnant si on parvenait à entraîner un millier de personnes avec nous pour vandaliser et piller l’endroit ? On peut et devrait, chaque fois que c'est possible, entreprendre des actions en petits groupes, mais si on cherche à élargir le périmètre de lutte, c’est pour permettre à une masse de personnes de s’impliquer dans des actions enflammées et combattives. Or, forger des relations, organiser des actions et une communication audacieuses, et planifier méthodiquement de telles actions, tout ça est long et fastidieux.<br />
<br />
Quelquefois, il pourrait s’agir de prévoir un détachement combattif du cortège de la prochaine manifestation, ou bien alors prendre le risque et faire l’effort de lancer nous-mêmes un appel à une action combattive de masse. Que ce soit à travers des petits groupes ou des actions de masse, toute action expose à des risques et exige des efforts immenses ; c’est néanmoins fondamentalement nécessaire pour ouvrir un nouveau front dans la lutte anticoloniale et prendre de court les colonisateurs.<br />
<br />
Il est crucial qu'on cesse de croire à l’idée tenace qu'on ne serait pas capables d’être à l’initiative de grands soulèvements et révoltes, que notre unique rôle se cantonnerait au soutien et à l’intervention. Ce qu’il nous est possible de faire est en grande partie déterminé par l’effort et l’assiduité dont on est en mesure de faire preuve pour une cause déterminée sur une longue période. C’est là notre habituel point faible, mais on peut changer ça et, de toute façon, il faudra que ça change si on veut se montrer à la hauteur de l’immense tâche qui nous incombe au sein de la machine impérialiste.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Définir des cibles</u></b><br />
Ce qui suit est une courte liste non exhaustive de cibles qui soutiennent, appuient et/ou profitent de l’apartheid et du génocide en cours depuis la France.<br />
<br />
Premièrement, chaque ville de France abrite un certain nombre de personnes dans les administrations, les entreprises, les associations, les institutions, et autres, qui soutiennent l’État d’Israël et se font le relai de sa propagande. En cherchant un peu, on peut aisément les identifier et en faire des cibles prioritaires. On devrait faire de nos espaces des lieux, au moins socialement si ce n’est politiquement, hostiles aux sionistes. N’ayez nul doute qu’iels le font déjà envers celleux qui soutiennent la libération du peuple palestinien, en leur faisant par exemple perdre leur travail ou en les excluant de diverses industries et institutions.<br />
<br />
Deuxièmement, de nombreuses institutions et entreprises européennes sont directement impliquées dans la colonisation des territoires palestiniens. Une quinzaine de banques européennes financent ainsi à hauteur de dizaines de milliards d’euros des groupes israéliens opérant dans les territoires colonisés illégalement par Israël. Des sociétés d’Europe exploitent les ressources minières de la Palestine et cherchent également à s'approprier ses ressources pétrolières sans que jamais le peuple palestinien n’en tire aucune retombée économique, tandis que d’autres vendent allègrement du matériel de gros travaux à des projets de démolition des maisons palestiniennes et de construction des infrastructures de la colonisation.<br />
<br />
Troisièmement, plusieurs institutions financières françaises (donc davantage à notre portée) financent largement la colonisation, dont notamment AXA, BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale ou encore BPCE. Les institutions françaises sont les troisièmes d’Europe qui coopèrent le plus avec les banques israéliennes, après celles du Royaume-Uni et d'Allemagne ; sachant que l’intégralité des banques israéliennes sont impliquées de près ou de loin dans des financements d’entreprises colonisatrices. Ce n’est cependant pas une fatalité : de nombreuses institutions européennes ont déjà mis sur liste noire les banques israéliennes après des campagnes de boycott.<br />
<br />
Quatrièmement, on ne saurait omettre le sujet du tramway de Jérusalem, construit dans le but de relier Jérusalem-Ouest aux quartiers, illégalement contrôlés par Israël, de Jérusalem-Est et aux colonies alentours. En effet, ce projet a été largement financé par AXA - et d’autres institutions françaises et allemandes - et une importante partie des travaux a été effectuée par les entreprises françaises Alstom et Egis Rail. Plus généralement, Alstom est extrêmement impliqué dans le transport et les infrastructures en Israël et dans ses colonies, ayant par exemple construit des centrales devant les alimenter en énergie, un projet estimé à plus de 300 millions d’euros.<br />
<br />
Cinquièmement, le groupe AXA n’est pas en reste puisque l’assureur français commerce régulièrement avec l’entreprise d’armement israélienne Elbit Systems, responsable de la production de drones de combat et de phosphore blanc pour le compte de l’armée israélienne et des colons. Il y a quelques années, AXA a sournoisement feinté de se retirer de cet investissement pour en réalité y réinvestir encore plus d’argent, mais au travers de ses filiales, de sorte que le nom AXA n’y soit plus associé. Elle participe donc toujours activement au meurtre des civil/e/s palestinien/ne/s.<br />
<br />
Sixièmement, la campagne NoTechForApartheid explique que les multinationales Google et Amazon ont signé un contrat avec Tsahal d’une valeur de plus d’un milliard d’euros pour fournir à l’armée israélienne la technologie informatique et cloud nécessaires à leurs opérations dans les territoires palestiniens. Autant leurs sièges dans la Silicon Valley nous sont trop lointains, autant leurs sièges et leurs entrepôts en France nous sont plus accessibles.<br />
<br />
Septièmement, le géant français Carrefour a fourni bien gratuitement des rations alimentaires aux soldat israéliens qui assaillent actuellement Gaza. Le groupe dispose également de trois magasins dans des colonies illégales en Cisjordanie. C’est à ce titre que la campagne BDS le fait figurer en bonne place dans sa liste d’entreprises à boycotter.<br />
<br />
Enfin, le gouvernement français lui-même n’est pas exempt de tout reproche. En effet, la France d’Emmanuel Macron, en s’alignant de plus en plus sur les positions américaines, a rompu ses positions historiques vis-à-vis de la Palestine et en vient à soutenir quasi inconditionnellement l’armée israélienne. En septembre dernier encore, la France organisait un exercice militaire conjoint avec Tsahal et récemment, la France a même dépêché un de ses porte-hélicoptères près des côtes de la région, officiellement pour assister les hôpitaux débordés de Gaza. D’autre part, le ministère de la Défense a signé un contrat de cinq millions d’euros avec Elbit Systems, finançant ainsi la machine de guerre colonisatrice en se servant de matériel testé sur les civils. À travers nos diverses taxes et impôts, chaque fois qu'on achète un produit, qu'on paye notre loyer ou qu'on va au travail, on finance donc la colonisation menée par l’État d’Israël. D'autres pays européens, en particulier l'Allemagne, entretiennent également des liens privilégiés autour du commerce d'armes vers et depuis Israël.<br />
<br />
Ces cibles listées ici ne constituent que la partie émergée de l’iceberg. Il nous est nécessaire d’approfondir nos recherches pour obtenir les noms et adresses des individus, entreprises ou autres qui sont également impliqué/e/s.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Être solidaire dans la durée</u></b><br />
Ce que j’ai écrit ici s’applique pour le court et moyen-terme, mais la solidarité est un principe qui s’affirme dans la durée et le long-terme et malheureusement, les anarchistes se sont peu illustré/e/s en ce sens. Cela peut et doit changer. On devra continuer de s'impliquer dans le combat quand on n’en entendra plus parler aux informations, et ce jusqu’à la chute d’Israël et la libération du peuple palestinien.<br />
<br />
La solidarité entraîne risques et périls, faire nôtre leur combat implique de se mettre soi-même en danger. Nous faut-il alors aller là où pleuvent les bombes pour forger des relations personnelles avec les communautés insurgées ? Les libéraux nous tiennent ici en échec ; il nous suffit de regarder l’exemple de Rachel Corrie qui s’est rendue en territoire occupé et qui a été assassinée par l’armée israélienne quand elle s’est interposée entre un bulldozer et la maison d’une famille palestinienne qui était sur le point d’être démolie. Elle n’aurait pas dû avoir à mourir et la lutte n’a pas besoin de nouveaux/lles martyr/e/s.<br />
<br />
Débarquer dans un contexte flou sans avoir aucune connexion nous conduira très certainement à la mort. On doit nouer en amont des relations avec des individu/e/s, des groupes et des organisations qui luttent activement sur place. Le premier pas dans cette direction est d’apprendre leur langue, qui est pour moi l’étape fondamentale à la création d’une solidarité internationale. De là, on peut nouer des liens, parfois favorisés par le biais d’ami/e/s, de réseaux, d’organisations ou d’Internet. Il nous faut ensuite monter des structures, formelles ou informelles, pour faciliter et assumer les coûts de la venue de camarades pour qu'iels puissent nous faire part de leur lutte, et pour nous permettre à nous d’aller sur place pour constater la situation, établir des connexions, nous associer à leur lutte et affronter les mêmes dangers qu’elleux.<br />
<br />
À partir de cette base relationnelle et affinitaire, on peut alors se pencher sur des aspects plus complexes de la lutte : Comment falsifier des documents ? Comment faire passer de l’argent, des personnes, du matériel, des informations, de la nourriture et des armes ? Ces propositions peuvent nous sembler lointaines et fantasques mais elles représentaient le b.a.-ba pour nos aînés et sont ce dont a besoin l’internationalisme. Autrefois, les mouvements révolutionnaires et anticoloniaux pouvaient se reposer sur un bloc mené par une superpuissance pour leur fournir l’aide nécessaire, non sans contrepartie cependant. Nous, anarchistes, ne pourrions jamais utiliser un tel ressort, qui de toute façon n’existe même pas. Ce qu'on fait dans notre pays et ce que d’autres font dans le leur (comment on lutte, comment on noue des liens, comment on communique) doit semer les graines d’une Internationale noire, capable d’articuler l’anarchisme comme une force d’opposition mondiale en mesure de fournir une assistance matérielle aux luttes d’émancipation afin que les peuples n’aient pas à choisir entre deux ou trois tyrans différents.<br />
<br />
Ça représente un projet à long-terme, comprenez cinq, dix, peut-être vingt ans. Mais c’est ce qu’exigent une véritable solidarité et un internationalisme antinationaliste. La tâche qui nous incombe est immense ; il nous faudra donc être à la hauteur ou sombrer à nouveau dans les bas-fonds de l’Histoire. À nous de choisir.<BR>
An Anarchist View of Trotsky’s "Transitional Program"http://www.anarkismo.net/article/328422023-11-22T05:26:03+08:00Wayne Pricedrwdprice at aol dot comAn Anarchist Review of a Central Text of Trotskyism<BR>
Trotsky's "Transitional Program" has both strengths and weaknesses from the viewpoint of revolutionary anarchist-socialism. It is an important document of historical socialism, although deeply flawed.This is a discussion, from the viewpoint of revolutionary anarchism, of Leon Trotsky’s Transitional Program, perhaps the central text of Trotskyism. (Trotsky 1977)<br />
<br />
There are huge differences between anarchism and Trotskyism, centered on the state. Yet there is also a significant overlap. Both are on the far-left, opposed to Stalinism, in all its hideous varieties, as well as to social-democracy (“democratic socialism”). Both propose the overturn of the existing state and capitalism, by the working class and all oppressed, to be replaced by alternate institutions. There are many varieties of Trotskyism as of anarchism, some more in agreement than others.<br />
<br />
Given this overlap, there have been quite a few Trotskyists who have become anarchists, of one sort or another—and anarchists who have become Trotskyists. Personally, I have done both. In high school I became an anarchist-pacifist, and then in college turned to an unorthodox version of Trotskyism. Eventually I became a revolutionary class-struggle anarchist-socialist. However, I still remain influenced by aspects of unorthodox-dissident Trotskyism (also by libertarian—“ultra left”—Marxism, and other influences.)<br />
<br />
This is not a discussion of Trotsky’s earlier years in politics, when he opposed V.I. Lenin’s authoritarian approach (similar to Rosa Luxemburg’s views). Nor of Trotsky’s collaboration with Lenin in leading the Russian Revolution. Following which they created a one-party police state, the foundation for Stalinism. The Transitional Program is from the last period of Trotsky’s life, when he fought against the totalitarian bureaucracy. This was until he was murdered by a Stalinist agent—about a year after the document was written. (For a critical overview of Trotskyism, from a libertarian socialist perspective, see Hobson & Tabor 1988.)<br />
<br />
Anarchism and Trotskyism have certain things in common as well as major distinctions. It may be useful to explore these similarities and differences, from the perspective of analyzing Trotsky’s Transitional Program. In my opinion, it is an important historical document of socialism, but remains deeply flawed.<br />
<br />
The Program’s Expectations <br />
<br />
This document was adopted in 1938, as the founding program of the new “Fourth International” of Trotsky’s followers. Its official title was “The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International.” It became known as the Transitional Program. Mostly written by Trotsky, he held extensive discussions about it beforehand. (Trotsky 1977)<br />
<br />
Of course, a work written this long ago, before the upheavals of World War II, must be out of date in various ways. There is a section on the “fascist countries,” although the explicitly fascist regimes are now gone. Another section is on the USSR, a country which no longer exists. One is on “colonial” countries, but the colonial empires of Britain, France, and so on have been mostly destroyed. Yet fascism, Stalinism, and imperialism are still with us. <br />
<br />
We can judge the Transitional Program by comparing what it predicted to what actually happened. Trotsky’s program is based on a belief that the world was going through “the death agony of capitalism.” Aside from the Marxist analysis of capitalist decline, empirically there had been the First World War, the Great Depression, a series of revolutions (mostly defeated), the rise of Stalinism, and the rise of fascism. It was widely expected that a Second World War would break out soon—as it did within a year. The state of world capitalism looked pretty dismal.<br />
<br />
Trotsky had expected the war to be followed by a return to Depression conditions. So did most bourgeois economists as well as most Marxist theorists. Under such conditions, he believed, there would be continuing revolutionary upheavals throughout the world. The Soviet Union would either be overthrown in a workers’ revolution or would collapse back into capitalism. These developments would give the Trotskyists, although few at first, a chance to out-organize the Stalinists, social democrats, and colonial nationalists, and lead successful socialist revolutions. <br />
<br />
In fact, there were upheavals and revolutions following the world war—from the huge wave of union strikes in the United States, to the election of the Labour Party in the U.K., to the big growth of Communist Parties in Italy and France, to the Communist-led revolutions in eastern Europe (Yugoslavia, Albania, and Greece—the last failed) to the independence won by India and the great Chinese revolution, among other Asian revolutions. These were followed by decades of revolutionary struggles throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America. <br />
<br />
Despite the Trotskyists’ best intentions, almost all the upheavals and attempted revolutions were led by liberals, social democrats, and“Third World” nationalists—but worst of all was the disastrous misleadership of the Communists. In places where they had a working class base, such as France and Italy, they followed reformist programs. In other countries they channeled popular revolutions into one-party, authoritarian, state-capitalisms (as in Yugoslavia and China, and later Cuba). <br />
<br />
This could happen because the “developed” countries did not collapse into a further Depression. Instead they blossomed in a period of prosperity, often referred to as “Capitalism’s Golden Age.” The world war had reorganized international imperialism, with the U.S. now at its center. There had been an expanded arms economy, a concentration of international capital, and a major looting of the environment.<br />
<br />
This period of high prosperity (at least for white people in the imperialist countries) lasted until about 1970. The Soviet Union had difficulties after this too, but lasted until about 1990. Then it finally fell back into a traditional capitalist economy.<br />
<br />
In discussions before the international conference, Trotsky considered the possibility of a temporary period of prosperity. “The first question is if a conjunctural improvement is probable in the near future….We can theoretically suppose that [a] new upturn…can give a greater, a more solid upturn….It is absolutely not contradictory to our general analysis of a sick, declining capitalism….This theoretical possibility is to a certain degree supported by the military investment….A new upturn will signify that the definite crisis, the definite conflicts, are postponed for some years.” (Trotsky 1977; Pp. 186-7, 189) At one point he even speculated that the U.S. might have “a period of prosperity before its own decline …[for] ten to thirty years.” (p. 164)<br />
<br />
In other words, there might be a period of apparent prosperity within the general epoch “of a sick, declining capitalism.” This possibility does not seem to have been taken very seriously by the Trotskyists. In any case, the prosperous period was not brief or brittle, as the Trotskyists expected, but lasted for decades. <br />
<br />
In my opinion, Trotsky (and other Marxists and anarchists) were correct to conclude that we are living in the general epoch of capitalist decline. Developments since the 1970s have supported this belief. But he downplayed the probability of the results of the world war creating an extensive period of prosperity within the overall epoch of decline.<br />
<br />
In particular, he overlooked the possible effects of the technological and ecological effects of the war and its aftermath. Of course, he could not foresee the nuclear bomb and nuclear power. Also, he did not realize that the massive use of “cheap” petroleum would provide a boost to the capitalist economy. And then its aftereffects would create the ecological disasters of global warming, international pollution, species extinction, and pandemics. These are all signs “of a sick, declining capitalism.” <br />
<br />
Few radicals of Trotsky’s generation focused on ecology. This is even though Marx and Engels had considered the negative effects of capitalism on the natural world (as has been examined by John Bellamy Foster and other ecological Marxists). Among anarchists, Kropotkin and Reclus had explored ecological issues. More recently, so has Murray Bookchin, even before the eco-Marxists. <br />
<br />
In the current period, conditions of crisis and pre-revolutionary situations may be recurring—economically, politically, and ecologically. These conclusions imply that at least some of Trotsky’s proposals for a revolutionary program may still be useful for anarchists to consider, even as other aspects are rejected. <br />
<br />
The Most Oppressed<br />
<br />
Perhaps the most libertarian part of the Transitional Program is its insistence on revolutionaries reaching out to the most oppressed and super-exploited layers of the working class. Trotsky is not against better-off unionists, not to mention intellectuals, but he most wants to win the worse-off workers. <br />
<br />
During militant struggles, he writes, factory committees may stir workers whom the unions do not reach. “…Such working class layers as the trade union is usually incapable of moving to action. It is precisely from these more oppressed layers that the most self-sacrificing battalions of the revolution will come.” (p. 119) “The Fourth International should seek bases of support among the most exploited layers of the working class, consequently among the women workers.” (p. 151) “The unemployed…the agricultural workers, the ruined and semi-ruined farmers, the oppressed of the cities, women workers, housewives, proletarianized layers of the intelligentsia—all of these will seek unity and leadership.” (P. 136) “Open the road to the youth!” (p. 151) (Elsewhere, in his discussions with U.S. Trotskyists, he criticized them for not reaching Black workers.) Bakunin, who always looked to the most oppressed, could agree!<br />
<br />
Councils and Committees<br />
<br />
When the working class was in a militant and rebellious temper, Trotsky advocated that revolutionaries advocate the formation of councils and committees—not instead of existing unions but in addition to them. In particular, he called for “factory committees” which would be “elected by all the factory employees.” (p. 118) These would begin to oversee the activities of the bosses and their managers. They would organize regular meetings with each other, regionally, industrially, and nationally—laying the basis for a democratic planned economy. He also writes of “committees elected by small farmers” as well as “committees on prices.” (pp. 126-7)<br />
<br />
This focus on democratic committees of workers and others does not (to Trotsky) necessarily contradict a belief in governmental economic action. He is all for “a broad and bold organization of public works.” But this should be done under “direct workers’ management.” (p. 121) Further, “Where military industry is ‘nationalized,’ as in France, the slogan of workers’ control preserves its full strength. The proletariat has as little confidence in the government of the bourgeoisie as in an individual capitalist.” (p. 131) This last sentence is certainly one with which an anarchist would agree! <br />
<br />
The Transitional Program considered how a new workers’ revolution in the Soviet Union would change the economy. It would have a “planned economy” but in a democratic form—managed by committees. “[To] factory committees should be returned the right to control production. A democratically organized consumers’ cooperative should control the quality and price of products.” (p. 146)<br />
<br />
Anarchists might agree that society should be organized through radically democratic committees. But anarchists would disagree with the notion that all committees should be representative. The Transitional Program does not mention face-to-face direct democracy. Perhaps, in Trotsky’s concept, the workers will gather together in order to elect the factory committee, and then go back to their work stations, waiting for orders from the committee? Anarchists are not against choosing delegates to go to meetings with other committees or to do special jobs. But an association of committees must be based in directly-democratic participatory assemblies, if people are really to control their lives.<br />
<br />
A society of democratic committees should culminate in an association of overall councils or “soviets” (Russian word for “council”). “The slogan of soviets, therefore, crowns the program of transitional demands.” (p. 136) Under capitalism, these soviets would be a center of power which would be an alternative to the state—a “dual power.” In the course of a revolution, the soviets would replace the bourgeois state as the center of society. To Trotsky, this would make it the basis of a “workers’ state”—“the dictatorship of the proletariat.”<br />
<br />
Instead, anarchists work towards the federation of councils and committees, of the workers and all oppressed, federated with all voluntary associations. They would form overall councils (although we probably would not use the term “soviet”!). This federation would be the alternate to capitalism and the state.<br />
<br />
The Transitional Program states that the soviets must be pluralistic. “All political currents of the proletariat can struggle for leadership of the soviets on the basis of the widest democracy.” (p. 136) Democracy would include “the struggle of various tendencies and parties within the soviets.” (p. 185) Presumably this would include anarchists as a “political current”or “tendency.”<br />
<br />
Trotsky proposed the competition of various parties and tendencies within the soviets, implying that one would eventually win the “struggle for leadership.” He does not mention the possibility of mergers, alliances, and united fronts—as if one tendency could have all the best militants and all the right answers. Yet the October Russian Revolution was carried out by a coalition of Lenin’s Communists, Left Social Revolutionaries (peasant-populists), and anarchists. The first Soviet government was an alliance of the Communists and the Left SRs, supported by the anarchists. It was the Leninists whose policies created the one-party state, and made it a matter of principle.<br />
<br />
In the Transitional Program, Trotsky never explains why Lenin and himself established the Soviet Union as a one-party state. In all his writings, he never explained why they made a principle out of it. Within the USSR, the Trotskyists opposed Stalin, bravely going to their deaths, but still advocating a one-party state. It was only in the mid-thirties that Trotsky came out for multi-party soviets. <br />
<br />
A federation of soviets and of committees in workplaces and neighborhoods would be able to take care of overall problems, including economic coordination, collective decision-making, settling of disputes, setting up a popular militia to replace the police and army (managed through committees), and so on. But anarchists insist that it would not be a state. A “state” is a bureaucratic, centralized, institution, over the rest of society. Inevitably it would serve a ruling minority. The Trotskyists regard a soviet-council system as the basis of a new (“workers’”) state, once it is led by (their) truly revolutionary party. <br />
<br />
This might seem like an argument over phrases. But once accepting that your goal is a “state,” then you are not limited to a radically-democratic council system. Trotsky continued to call the Soviet Union under Stalin a “workers’ state”—if a “degenerated workers’ state.” He fully recognized that the Russian working class (not to speak of the peasant majority) had absolutely no power under Stalin’s bureaucratic dictatorship. Nevertheless, Russia kept “nationalization, collectivization, and monopoly of foreign trade.” (p. 143) That, to Trotsky, is what made Russia still a “workers’ state”—however much “degenerated.” Trotsky advocated the revolutionary overthrow of the Stalinist bureaucracy, but meanwhile it had to be defended from capitalism.<br />
<br />
To Trotsky then, the key criteria for a state of the working class was not that the “state” was the self-organization of the workers, but that property was nationalized, etc.<br />
<br />
Following this logic, the “orthodox” Trotskyist majority regarded the new Communist states after World War II as “deformed workers’ states.” The countries of eastern Europe, China, etc., all had nationalized property and monopolies of foreign trade. So they too were “workers’ states” —just “deformed.” And Cuba and maybe Vietnam were “healthy workers’ states.” <br />
<br />
A minority dissented. They regarded the Soviet Union (like its imitations) as a class-divided society, ruled by a collectivized bureaucratic class, which exploited the workers and peasants. Some called it “state capitalism,” others a “new class” system. Anarchists agree overall with this view—but believe the system’s roots lay in Lenin and Trotsky’s policies.<br />
<br />
The key question is not so much the analysis of the Soviet Union, a country which no longer exists (replaced by Putin’s Russia). It is: What is meant by socialism (or a “workers’ state” or a society moving toward socialism)? Is socialism defined by nationalization of industry, or by the freedom and self-management of the working people—the anarchist view? <br />
<br />
National Self-Determination<br />
<br />
Most of the world was (and is) the victims of imperialism. Therefore the Transitional Program expected “colonial or semicolonial countries to use the war in order to cast off the yoke of slavery. Their war will be not imperialist but liberating. It will be the duty of the international proletariat to aid the oppressed nations in their war against the oppressors.” (p. 131)<br />
<br />
Historically many anarchists similarly supported wars of oppressed peoples “against the oppressors”: Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, and many others. (See Price 2022; 2023) But today quite a number do not. They do not accept that imperialism divides the world between imperialist and exploited nations. They reject all wars between states without distinguishing between oppressor and oppressed countries. <br />
<br />
This issue has divided anarchists over the Ukrainian-Russian war. Yet to many of us, the situation seems clear: the Ukrainian people are waging a defensive war of national self-determination, while the Russian state is engaged in imperialist aggression. Anarchist-socialists must be on the side of the oppressed, especially when they fight back.<br />
<br />
It is possible that another imperialist government—in competition with the one oppressing the rebellious country—might give aid to that country (as the USA is aiding Ukraine). The Transitional Program says that revolutionaries should not give support to that “helpful” imperialist state. “The workers of imperialist countries, however, cannot help an anti-imperialist country through their own government….The proletariat of the imperialist country continues to remain in class opposition to its own government and supports the non-imperialist ‘ally’ through its own methods….” (p. 132)<br />
<br />
At the same time, “…the proletariat does not in the slightest degree solidarize…with the bourgeois government of the colonial country….It maintains full political independence….Giving aid in a just and progressive war, the revolutionary proletariat wins the sympathy of the workers in the colonies…and increases its ability to help overthrow the bourgeois government in the colonial country.” (p. 132) This is not nationalism but internationalism. “Our basic slogan remains: Workers of the World Unite!” (p. 133)<br />
<br />
In contemporary terms, revolutionaries should be in solidarity with the Ukrainian workers and oppressed people in their military struggle—“giving aid in a just and progressive war.” (Interestingly, several current Trotskyist groupings do not support Ukraine against Russian imperialism, despite their formal belief in “national self-determination.” This says something about the present state of Trotskyism.) Yet revolutionary socialists do not give political support to Biden’s US government nor to the Zelensky Ukrainian government. Our goals are the eventual revolutionary overturn of these states, as well as that of Putin’s Russia. The same approach goes for other anti-imperialist national struggles around the world, most of which are directed against the U.S. and its allies.<br />
<br />
[This was written before the latest irruption of the Israeli-Palestinian War. Following the above approach, revolutionary anarchist-socialists should be on the side of the Palestinian people struggling for national self-determination against the Israeli state, while opposing the reactionary politics of Hamas as well as its reactionary and criminal tactics. Again, many Trotskyist groups of today do not follow this approach.]<br />
<br />
An anarchist perspective on national self-determination would be in agreement with that of the Transitional Program—with one important difference. Like Trotsky, the anarchists’ ultimate goal of supporting a nation’s struggles is to “overthrow the bourgeois government,” in both the imperialist and oppressed countries. For Trotsky, this is to be followed by establishing “workers’ states.” But anarchists want to replace all bourgeois governments with non-state associations of councils, committees, assemblies, and self-managed organizations.<br />
<br />
The Transitional Method<br />
<br />
Trotsky objects to the traditional Marxist approach to program, as developed by the social democratic parties (especially in pre-World War I Germany). That approach had two parts: a “maximal” and a “minimal” program. The maximal program was the ultimate goal of socialism. It was raised in speeches at yearly May Day parades. Like the Christian’s hope of heaven, it had little to do with day-to-day living. The minimal program was one of union recognition, better wages and conditions, public services, and democratic rights. These demands were limited to what could be achieved under capitalism. <br />
<br />
Trotsky was concerned with the wide gap between the objective crises of capitalism in decay and the consciousness of most workers and oppressed people. He proposed a “bridge” between the crises and workers’ thinking. These demands would offer a “transition” from the old minimal, partial, and democratic demands to socialist revolution. <br />
<br />
“This bridge should include a system of transitional demands, stemming from today’s conditions and from today’s consciousness of wide layers of the working class and unalterably leading to one final conclusion: the conquest of power by the proletariat.” (p. 114) <br />
<br />
For example, to deal with the effects of inflation on wages, he proposed “a sliding scale of wages.” All wages, salaries, and public benefits should be attached to the level of prices. Wages would automatically rise when prices rose (judged by committees of working class consumers). <br />
<br />
Unemployment should be dealt with through a “sliding scale of hours.” The more unemployment, the shorter hours should be overall, without losses in pay—as in “Thirty Hours Work for Forty Hours Pay.” These are essentially socialist principles: the total amount of wealth produced should be divided among those working and dependents; the total amount of work that needed to be done should be divided among those able to work. The title of one section in the Transitional Program pretty much summarizes the method: “The picket line/defense guards/workers’ militia/the arming of the proletariat”.<br />
<br />
Unlike the minimal program of liberal union bureaucrats or of social democratic politicians, transitional demands are not limited to what the capitalists can afford—or say they can afford. The transitional demands start with what people need. If the capitalists are able to pay this (in wages or public services), then they must be forced to do so. If they cannot pay what people need, then they should no longer be allowed to run society for their private benefit. Let the working people take over and run the economy to satisfy everyone’s needs. “‘Realizability’ or ‘unrealizability’ is in the given instance a question of the relationship of forces, which can be decided only by the struggle.” (p. 116)<br />
<br />
The revolutionary implications of this method were clearer in a period of severe economic crisis, when basic needs could not be met for most working people. This was the case in the depths of the Great Depression. But in a period such as the 1950s post-war boom, there was an even greater gap between immediate, limited, demands and the need for revolution. A large proportion of white workers and newly middle class people were living better than ever before (in the U.S., and then in other imperialist countries). The underlying threats (of nuclear extermination or ecological destruction) could be downplayed. The transitional method had less usefulness.<br />
<br />
Now the post-war prosperity is over. With periodic ups and downs, world capitalism has overall been stagnating and declining. Wars are continuing and ownership of nuclear bombs is spreading. Despite efforts by climate reformists to find ways of limiting the damage, global warming is crashing through the veneer of capitalist stability. Something like the Transitional Program—or at least the method of transitional demands—is needed more than ever.<br />
<br />
Along with Trotsky’s demands, there needs to be a program of ecological transitional demands: democratic ecological-economic planning; worker’s control/management of industry to transition to non-polluting, green, useful production; expropriation of the oil-gas-coal corporations; socialization of the energy industry under workers’ and community control; public subsidizing of ecologically-balanced consumer coops and producer coops; support for organic farms in the country and in towns and cities; etc., etc.<br />
<br />
Revolutionary Organizations<br />
<br />
The “Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International” was written as a program for a specific organization, intended to be an international revolutionary party. It was hoped that this body, beginning small, would replace the Second (Socialist) International and the Third (Communist) International (or “Comintern”). And thereby save the world.<br />
<br />
It begins: “The world political situation as a whole is chiefly characterized by a historical crisis of the leadership of the proletariat.” (pp. 111)<br />
<br />
The fundamental crisis of decaying capitalism periodically inspires the mass of the working class to rebel. This shows the possibility of successful revolutions. But, during the preceding non-revolutionary periods, the leaderships of the main workers’ parties and unions have “developed powerful tendencies toward compromise with the bourgeois-democratic regime.” (p. 117-8) The anarcho-syndicalist unions were included in this. As a result, the unions and parties (which the workers had previously come to trust) hold back the revolution. They lead the people to defeat.<br />
<br />
“In all countries…the multimillioned masses again and again enter the road of revolution. But each time they are blocked by their own conservative bureaucratic machines.” (p. 112)<br />
<br />
This generalization was most observable during the revolutionary years after World War I, up to the rebellions following World War II. During the post-war prosperity, there was less likelihood of the “multimillioned masses” becoming revolutionary. Therefore, even the best revolutionary party (or federation) would have had difficulty overcoming bureaucratic “tendencies toward compromise.” <br />
<br />
Yet there were revolutions and almost-revolutions. As mentioned, there were upheavals in poorer Southern countries, including the Vietnam war of national liberation, the Cuban revolution, and the South African struggle against apartheid. In eastern Europe there were attempted revolutions, such as the 1953 East Berlin workers’ revolt and the 1956 Hungarian revolution. Western Europe had the almost-revolution of France’s May-June 1968, among others. In all these cases, a revolutionary leadership might have made a difference (perhaps preventing the victory of Stalinism in Vietnam and Cuba).<br />
<br />
Among anarchists, many have also advocated revolutionary organization. This includes Bakunin’s Brotherhood, the St. Imier anarchist continuation of the First International, the syndicalists’ “militant minority,” the views of Errico Malatesta, the Platform of Makhno, Arshinov, and others, the Spanish FAI, and Latin American especifismo. <br />
<br />
These conceptions agree only somewhat with Trotsky’s perspective of a political organization, composed of revolutionaries who are in general agreement. An anarchist grouping does seek to coordinate activity, to develop theories and practice, and to influence bigger organizations and movements (such as unions, community associations, anti-war movements, etc.). They try to win the workers and others from the influence of their political opponents, including reformists and Stalinists. <br />
<br />
Trotsky sought to build a centralized (“democratic centralist”) Leninist party internationally. While supposedly democratic, the International and the national parties would be managed from the top down. Anarchists have proposed organizations which are internally democratic and organized in a federal fashion. And, unlike political parties, no matter how radical, their aim would not be to take power, to rule over the councils and committees. They want to inspire, organize, and urge the oppressed and exploited to free themselves. <br />
<br />
Anarchism and Trotskyism<br />
<br />
In the Transitional Program, Trotsky mentions anarchism (or anarcho-syndicalism) only a few times. In France, he points out that the union federation once organized by anarcho-syndicalists had turned into a business union (and had supported World War I). During the 1936-9 Spanish Civil War, the leaders of the anarchist federation—and the union federation they led—had betrayed the revolution by joining the capitalist government. From the viewpoint of revolutionary anarchism, his criticisms in these situations are legitimate.<br />
<br />
Trotsky lumps the anarchists overall with the social democrats and Stalinists as “parties of petty-bourgeois democracy…incapable of creating a government of workers and farmers, that is, a government independent of the bourgeoisie.” (p. 134)<br />
<br />
If the term “government” is used as a synonym for “state,” then anarchists have had no interest in creating any kind of “government.” However, the word could be used to mean democratic coordination of popular councils and workers’ organizations. This is what the Friends of Durruti Group advocated during the Spanish Civil War. In that sense, the question is whether anarchists can lead in organizing society “independent[ly] of the bourgeoisie.” <br />
<br />
Trotsky ignores the revolutionary anarchists who denounced the French and Spanish union officials for betraying the program and principles of libertarian socialism. It is such anarchists, eco-socialists, syndicalists, internationalists, anti-state communists, and true revolutionaries on whom an up-to-date revolutionary program depends. <br />
<br />
The Transitional Program has virtues and insights, which have been pointed out here. The “method of transitional demands” remains valuable—even more valuable now than in the recent past. The vision of a federation of councils, committees, and assemblies is important, if we leave out Trotsky’s conception of a centralized “workers’ state.” To anarchists, the Transitional Program remains as an important document in the history of socialism, but one which still has serious flaws.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Hobson, Christopher Z., & Tabor, Ronald D. (1988). Trotskyism and the Dilemma of Socialism. NY: Greenwood Press. <br />
Price, Wayne (2022). “Malatesta on War and National Self-Determination” <a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32666 title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32666>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32666</a> search_text=Wayne+Price
<br />
Price, Wayne (2023). “Anarchists Support Self-Determination for Ukraine; What Did Bakunin Say?” <a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32774 title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32774>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32774</a><br />
Trotsky, Leon (1977). The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution. (Eds.: George Breitman & Fred Stanton.) NY: Pathfinder Press.<br />
Includes: The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International. Pp. 109—152.<br />
Discussions with Trotsky. Pp. 73—108.<br />
Preconference Discussions. Pp. 153—199.<br />
<br />
*written for Black Flag: Anarchist Review (UK virtual journal)<BR>
Resist Genocidehttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328382023-10-14T20:31:14+08:00Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group<!-- feature image change class to "left" to align image left-->
<div class="feature-image-left"><a href='http://www.anarkismo.net/attachments/oct2023/resist_genocide.jpg'><img width='300' height='172' class='feature' src='http://www.anarkismo.net/cache/imagecache/local/attachments/oct2023/300_0___20_0_0_0_0_0_resist_genocide.jpg' alt='featured image'></a>
<div class="feature-caption"></div>
</div>
<!-- end of feature image -->
The Israeli military has ordered the residents of the northern half of Gaza to evacuate within 24 hours. It is impossible for over one million people to do this in such a short time. The order can only be interpreted as a public relations formality and prelude to genocide. All workers and soldiers in a position to prevent this have a duty to act.
<h3>[<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32839">Français</a>]</h3<BR>
The order to evacuate is a sign that the IDF is about to launch a ground invasion of Gaza that will make no distinction between civilians and combatants and from which there is no safe refuge. The result will be a massacre.<br />
<br />
What is being prepared is not about bringing Hamas to justice. It is the collective punishment of an entire people, dominated by an apartheid system, which the far-right government in Israel wants to see eradicated. The legal prohibition against genocide erected in 1945 will be rendered utterly meaningless.<br />
<br />
Enlisted soldiers of the IDF must defy their orders. They are being sent to kill innocent men, women, and children who only want to be free, and to live. To end this atrocity they need to mutiny. They must march on Jerusalem and arrest their criminal government.<br />
<br />
Workers of Israel must strike and cut off supplies to the military and cripple Netanyahu’s war.<br />
<br />
Sailors of the US Navy in the Eastern Meditarranean should also defy their orders. Otherwise, they will be complicit in the destruction of homes and the murder of families. If they sail their ships home to port they will be welcomed as true defenders of human rights and justice.<br />
<br />
Workers of the US — Israel’s immunity from justice depends largely on your government’s aid and support. Take to the streets. Raise this with your co-workers and unions. Demand an end to American complicity in apartheid and genocide. Action can be taken in support by workers across the globe through solidarity protests. Local challenges to ruling class and media complicity with Israel’s crimes can begin to coalesce international pressure.<br />
<br />
Wherever work is done which contributes to the Israeli war machine, the workers must strike, cut off trade, and close down any activity assisting the IDF in their massacre.<br />
<br />
We recognise it is likely too late to prevent Israel’s massacre in Gaza. If it can be prevented, it must be. If it cannot be prevented, it must be stopped as early as humanly possible. And once the workers of the world have prevented the planned genocide, we can address the question of peace with justice for all.<br />
<br />
“NEVER AGAIN” MEANS NEVER AGAIN – FOR ANYONERésister au génocidehttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328392023-10-14T20:28:54+08:00Melbourne Anarchist Communist GroupL’armée israélienne a ordonné aux habitants de la moitié nord de Gaza d’évacuer dans les 24 heures. Il est impossible pour plus d’un million de personnes de le faire en si peu de temps. Cet ordre ne peut être interprété que comme une formalité de relations publiques et un prélude à un génocide. Tous les travailleurs et soldats en mesure d’empêcher cela ont le devoir d’agir.<br />
L’ordre d’évacuation est un signe que les FDI sont sur le point de lancer une invasion terrestre de Gaza qui ne fera aucune distinction entre les civils et les combattants et contre laquelle il n’y aura pas de refuge sûr. Le résultat sera un massacre.<br />
<br />
Ce qui se prépare n’a rien à voir avec le fait de traduire le Hamas en justice. Il s’agit de la punition collective d’un peuple entier, dominé par un système d’apartheid, que le gouvernement d’extrême droite en Israël veut voir éradiqué. L’interdiction légale du génocide érigée en 1945 sera vidée de son sens.<br />
<br />
Les soldats enrôlés de Tsahal doivent défier leurs ordres. Ils sont envoyés pour tuer des hommes, des femmes et des enfants innocents qui ne demandent qu’à être libres et à vivre. Pour mettre fin à cette atrocité, ils doivent se mutiner. Ils doivent marcher sur Jérusalem et arrêter leur gouvernement criminel.<br />
<br />
Les travailleurs d’Israël doivent se mettre en grève, couper les vivres à l’armée et paralyser la guerre de Netanyahou.<br />
<br />
Les marins de la marine américaine en Méditerranée orientale doivent également défier leurs ordres. Sinon, ils seront complices de la destruction de maisons et du meurtre de familles. S’ils rentrent au port avec leur navire, ils seront accueillis comme de véritables défenseurs des droits de l’homme et de la justice.<br />
<br />
Travailleurs des États-Unis - L’immunité d’Israël face à la justice dépend largement de l’aide et du soutien de votre gouvernement. Descendez dans la rue. Parlez-en à vos collègues et à vos syndicats. Exigez la fin de la complicité américaine dans l’apartheid et le génocide. Des actions de soutien peuvent être entreprises par les travailleurs du monde entier dans le cadre de manifestations de solidarité. Les contestations locales de la complicité de la classe dirigeante et des médias avec les crimes d’Israël peuvent commencer à faire converger la pression internationale.<br />
<br />
Partout où un travail est effectué qui contribue à la machine de guerre israélienne, les travailleurs doivent faire grève, interrompre le commerce et mettre fin à toute activité qui aide les FDI dans leur massacre.<br />
<br />
Nous reconnaissons qu’il est probablement trop tard pour empêcher le massacre d’Israël à Gaza. S’il est possible de l’empêcher, il faut le faire. Si l’on ne peut pas l’empêcher, il faut y mettre un terme dès que possible. Une fois que les travailleurs du monde entier auront empêché le génocide planifié, nous pourrons aborder la question de la paix et de la justice pour tous.<br />
<br />
« PLUS JAMAIS » SIGNIFIE PLUS JAMAIS - POUR PERSONNE<BR>
A volunteer from Kharkov was tortured by the military after trying to leave Ukrainehttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328352023-10-11T22:55:17+08:00AssemblyFull original version: https://assembly.org.ua/ustalost-rozhdaet-zlost-pytki-harkovskogo-volontera-v-tczk-i-chto-o-nem-izvestno/<br>
First published on Libcom: https://libcom.org/article/volunteer-kharkov-was-tortured-military-after-trying-leave-ukraine<hr>
News about the latest militaristic and repressive measures has been flowing in such a stream for weeks that it sometimes interrupts attention to events at the front. There is an increasing impression that the Kremlin and the Office of Zelensky are starting to fight not so much with each other, but with those who do not want to fulfill their “duty to their homeland.” The Ukrainian parliament will soon consider bill No. 10062 on a unified electronic register of conscripts and those liable for military service – modeled on the neighboring chamber, where summons will now be considered served from the moment they appear in it. The Ministry of Defense allowed to draft into the Armed Forces of Ukraine those who are of limited fitness due to hepatitis, cured tuberculosis, asymptomatic HIV, mental problems, etc. Bill No. 9672 proposes to cancel the deferment from the army for recipients of the second higher education, post-graduate students and those who first attended the university after 30 years. Doctors are being stormed with large-scale checks for trading in disability documents. Women from among medical staff and pharmacists will be registered with the military from October 1st, and those who have a military record will have to update their data; after the launch of the e-register, they can be screened out when trying to leave Ukraine. Threats of extradition and punishment to men who went abroad, deceiving the authorities (as the authorities themselves did to them all their lives). The Border Guard Service of Ukraine has already begun to publicly show “educational work” with violators of the western border, forcing them to listen to the anthem and the priest’s sermon, after which they are handed over to the enlistment officers. To detect such citizens in the bushes, the border patrols began using drones with thermal imaging cameras, supposedly so necessary for the front. Then, presumably, they will start to drop grenades or hunting nets on the migrants. In turn, the deputy head of the Russian Guard in Donetsk, former separatist field commander Alexander Khodakovsky called for the creation of barrier detachments for Russian soldiers – because “many are ready to wait from prison for their loved one, who threw away their weapons and refused to fight, just so as not to die.”<p>
Against such an informational background, the story of a Kharkov resident at the military recruitment office of Staryi Sambir in the Lviv region received a huge resonance. This is not the first time that they tried to send into the army those captured trying to escape from the “country of dreams”, this time the mobilizers just did a little less work and video records were transferred to bloggers, instantly exploding social networks with anger. The inmate was kept there from September 12th to 19th, beaten on the head with a pistol, starved, not provided with medical care, threatened with death and that “the police would not look for him.” Even before this video, hardly many people doubted that the cops act in conjunction with the enlistment kidnappers, while the State Bureau of Investigation reported on the 19th that the deputy chief of one of the departments in the Sambir districtal recruitment center and its driver are detained. They face up to 10 years in prison under Part 3 of Art. 406 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code (violation of statutory rules, relationships by military personnel using weapons). The Bureau requested that both be taken into custody without bail; the court in Lviv sent them under round-the-clock house arrest for 2 months. The National Agency on Corruption Prevention has found suspicious property worth 4.4 million hryvnias owned by the chief of the same facility. Of course, even if they are found guilty and imprisoned, it will not change anything systemically – power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.<p>
The investigation established that the suspects illegally detained at least two men – residents of Kharkov and Krivoy Rog. After being detained by border guards during unauthorized crossing the border with Poland, they were taken to the enlistment office, where the servicemen tried to force them to go through the medical examination. One of these refusers was kept for 10 days, another one for 7 days.<p>
The resident of Krivoy Rog says that his name is Roman Kuzmenko, born November 12, 1985. Our compatriot is 43 years old and he was hospitalized with a concussion; he introduces himself as Vadim Spokoynyi (Ukrainian spelling – Vadym Spokiynyi). “Vadym is an animator. His stage name is Max. The first weeks Vadym was in Kharkiv – he volunteered a lot, helped people, tried to entertain children in bomb shelters so that they would not be so sad and scared. Later, he moved to Staryi Sambir with his acquaintance Dina. They didn't have a home here, so they temporarily lived in a van near the river. I helped them find accommodation. Later, his father also moved in with Vadym, he has a disability, does not walk much, is practically bedridden. His father somehow found the strength to come to the Military Commissariat. But they didn't let him in. They didn't even let me see each other. It's terrible. He is not a criminal and is not in a pre-trial detention center”, his local comrade Sofia Ryzhenko told the LMN newsletter. She does not know whether Vadim has official guardianship over his father. “Can you imagine what it's like to be an animator and work with children? He is very kind, harmless. Well, how can you force a person to sign that he will go to war, if he is afraid of it or cannot?”, the girl asks a rhetorical question. The fact that he, with such a peaceful character, showed an iron will and managed to withstand many days of attempts to break him is what is most shocking in this situation.<p>
Those living in Staryi Sambir note that this is not the first case of such imprisonment of citizens by the enlistment officers. And, as a Kharkov resident named Ivan shared with us on September 20th, hell was going on there long before the full-scale Russian aggression:<p>
“I got into this recruitment center in 2016. I almost got beaten there too. Barely escaped. They even wanted to send me then to the ATO [Anti-Terrorist Operation, the official name for hostilities in Donbass], despite the fact that I had a referral for a surgery in Kharkov. They said I didn't need surgery. I was registered there, went to sign up through the enlistment office, I had documents that I was undergoing surgery, and receipts for payment. Two drunk doctors came (like a medical commission). They said I didn't need surgery. They decided so without practically examining it. They said that the ATO would be just right for me, since I go to the gym and am in good physical shape. I said that I would probably refuse and am informed a little about my rights. They fucked my brain for a very long time and didn’t hand over the documents, and I also communicated in Russian. This really threw them up. Military commissars generally communicated as with cattle. Like you're pissing to go to the ATO, etc., etc. Although they themselves saw this ATO only on television. Something like this, in short.”<p>
The Ukrainian public is more and more asking the question: how does this state with such everyday practices differ from the Russian one? In particular, Yevgenia, the wife of the Russian mobilized Yevgeniy P. from military unit 61899, turned to the Russian liberal pacifists ASTRA. For refusing to go to the assault with injuries, he and other soldiers were sent to the basement in Zaytsevo (a village controlled by the so-called “Lugansk People’s Republic” near the Kharkov region), where they are threatened and forced to continue fighting. The detainee told his wife about this on September 18th by phone, after which contact with him disappeared. In May, in Bakhmut, he received a fragment wound in the leg, due to which he was sent to the hospital. However, Yevgeniy was not given aid there; the fragment was not removed, his wife says. He was sent home for rehabilitation for a month. A month later, the commander changed, the new one sent a unit to Naro-Fominsk near Moscow. The entire company with wounds was locked in the barracks and kept there for a week. The surgeon then concluded that they could all continue to fight despite their injuries. They were taken in the direction of Svatovo and abandoned in the forest without any means of subsistence. “My relatives and I cut off all the hotlines, reached the head of the unit, but our requests and prayers for the salvation of the guys are simply ignored, citing the fact that, they say, there is a war, etc. This is just madness and absurdity, the boys with wounds were thrown just like cannon fodder!”, the woman told this media.<p>
Ukraine is a prison of the people. Russia is a prison of the peoples. That's all the difference.<BR>
FORO CONVERSATORIO: A 50 AÑOS DEL GOLPE CÍVICO MILITAR Los desafíos y tareas del anarquismohttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328332023-10-05T02:24:45+08:00Asamblea Anarquista Valparaíso y Federación Anarquista Santiagogrupolibertariovialibre at gmail dot comEn 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 hoyORO CONVERSATORIO: A 50 AÑOS DEL GOLPE CÍVICO MILITAR<br />
Los desafíos y tareas del anarquismo<br />
<br />
Viernes 30 de septiembre // 18:00 hrs<br />
Lugar: Vicuña Mackenna 636 - TRASOL<br />
<br />
Viernes 6 de octubre // 18:00 hrs<br />
Lugar: Calle Clave 437 - FLORA<br />
<br />
Organizan:<br />
Asamblea Anarquista Valparaíso <br />
Federación Anarquista Santiago<BR>
Anarchists in Rojava: Revolution is a struggle in itselfhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328322023-10-04T23:52:41+08:00Jurnal mapaInterview of Uniao Libertaria to Tekosina Anarsist<BR>
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.<strong>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? </strong><br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
<strong>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? </strong><br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
<strong>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? </strong><br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.). <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
<strong>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? </strong><br />
<br />
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). <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<strong><br />
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? </strong><br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
<strong>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?</strong><br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<strong><br />
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? </strong><br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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”.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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. <br />
<strong><br />
8 - How can we assist you in TA; materially or otherwise?</strong><br />
<br />
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<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
<BR>
An Attempted Marxist-Anarchist Dialoguehttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328312023-10-03T07:13:45+08:00Wayne Pricedrwdprice at aol dot comReview of Michael Lowy & Oliver Besancenot, Revolutionary Affinities: Toward a Marxist-Anarchist Solidarity<BR>
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.<br />
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.)<br />
<br />
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.)<br />
<br />
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.)<br />
<br />
Che<br />
<br />
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).<br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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.)<br />
<br />
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?<br />
<br />
Positive Aspects of the Book<br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
The Russian Revolution<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
“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)<br />
<br />
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.) <br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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.”<br />
<br />
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)<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
Policy Issues<br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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)<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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)<br />
<br />
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.)<br />
<br />
Revolutionary Conclusion<br />
<br />
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) <br />
<br />
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)<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Besancenot, Oliver, & Lowy, Michael (2009). Che Guevara: His Revolutionary Legacy. NY: Monthly Review Press.<br />
<br />
Foster, John Bellamy (2009). The Ecological Revolution; Making Peace with the Planet. NY: Monthly Review Press.<br />
<br />
Guerin, Daniel (2017). For a Libertarian Communism. (Ed.: David Berry; Trans.: Mitchell Abidor) Oakland CA: PM Press.<br />
<br />
Lowy, Michael (2007). The Marxism of Che Guevara: Philosophy, Economics, Revolutionary Warfare. Rowman and Littlefield. <br />
<br />
Lowy, Michael, & Besancenot, Oliver (2023; originally in French, 2014). Revolutionary Affinities: Toward a Marxist-Anarchist Solidarity. (Trans.: David Campbell). Oakland CA: PM Press.<br />
<br />
Price, Wayne (2016). “The Authoritarian Vision of Che Guevara; Review of Samuel Farber, The Politics of Che Guevara”<br />
<a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/29795 title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/29795>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/29795</a><br />
search_text=Wayne+Price<br />
<br />
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” <br />
<a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/30411?search_text=Wayne title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/30411?search_text=Wayne>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/30411?search_text=Wayne</a><br />
<br />
Price, Wayne (2022). “An Anarchist Guide to The Communist Manifesto of Marx & Engels.” <br />
<a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32578?search_text=Wayne title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32578?search_text=Wayne>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32578?search_text=Wayne</a><br />
<br />
*written for www.Anarkismo.net<BR>
Taller de Estudios Anarquistas: La experiencia de los paros nacionales en Colombiahttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328292023-09-12T08:38:39+08:00ViaLibregrupolibertariovialibre at gmail dot comDel 14 de septiembre al 5 de octubreTaller de Estudios Anarquistas: <br />
La experiencia de los paros nacionales en Colombia<br />
<br />
Del 14 de septiembre al 5 de octubre<br />
Jueves 600 pm<br />
La Redada Miscelánea Cultural (Calle 17 #2-51) <br />
Bogotá<br />
<br />
Primera sesión: Introducción y primeras experiencias (1944-1957) 14 de septiembre <br />
Segunda sesión: Auge y crisis (1963-1990) 28 de septiembre <br />
Tercera sesión: Recomposición y estallido (1999-2021) 5 de octubre<br />
<br />
Entrada libre<br />
Grupo Libertario Vía Libre<BR>
Comunicado Público a 50 años del Golpe Cívico-Militarhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328282023-09-12T05:10:51+08:00Asamblea Anarquista de Valparaíso y Federación Anarquista de SantiagoA pesar de los golpes y las heridas: ¡organizadxs y en comunidad luchamos por la vida!<BR>
El terror fue desatado sistemáticamente desde el Estado y cayó la noche sobre la alegría de los pueblos. La contra revolución capitalista se abrió paso brutalmente con una imparable avanzada de muerte, tortura, violencia sexual y desaparición forzada, a la vez que llevaba a cabo la misión estratégica de desarticular todas las expresiones comunitarias en donde la vida fuera resuelta de manera solidaria, colectiva y en autogestión. La dictadura cívico-militar se desplegó tácticamente en múltiples dimensiones para sembrar el miedo en la sociedad, con el fin de desmantelar la fuerza social organizada que había hecho posible la experiencia socialista en la región chilena. Estos procesos de desmantelamiento político, social y emocional de gran parte de la clase organizada han provocado una herida colectiva, profunda y traumática, herida que la impunidad y los pactos de silencio institucionales mantienen abierta hasta el día de hoy y que ha traído múltiples consecuencias en la experiencia vital colectiva de todxs quienes hemos crecido en estos territorios los últimos 50 años y más.En estos días se conmemoran 50 años del golpe de Estado que dio rienda suelta al terrorismo estatal y patronal, significando años de persecución, tortura, violación y desaparición. Sin embargo, queremos iniciar este documento con un balance de la experiencia desarrollada en los años previos al inicio de la dictadura cívico-militar. Aquel periodo suele asociarse al gobierno de Salvador Allende y a su “vía chilena al socialismo”, no pretendemos extendernos en las claras distancias políticas e ideológicas que nos separan del gobierno de la Unidad Popular (UP), toda vez que lo consideramos un proyecto de modernización capitalista que impulsó la conciliación de clase y el fortalecimiento de los mecanismos estatales de dominación, terminando en el dramático escenario de la dictadura que supuso la pulverización del tejido comunitario, la destrucción de la organización social, el asesinato y tormentos de miles de militantes populares y una profundización en la precarización de nuestras vidas latente hasta el presente.<br />
<br />
Por lo tanto, quisiéramos enfatizar en el proceso que se tejía por debajo de las direcciones partidarias, aquel fenómeno que no seguía las pautas de la institucionalidad burguesa y supuso una verdadera amenaza para el orden del Estado y el Capital; hablamos de lxs pobladorxs en las tomas de terrenos y en las Juntas de Abastecimiento Popular, nos referimos a lxs obrerxs en los Cordones Industriales, pensamos en lxs campesinxs en las tomas de fundos y en la alegría popular corriendo el cerco de lo posible, nos referirnos al Poder Popular. Esta capacidad desarrollada por diversos sectores de la clase oprimida, supuso un ejercicio de audacia tremendamente valioso, ya que, en el desarrollo de esta fuerza popular se gestaba una potencialidad capaz de sobrepasar al Estado y plantear un escenario abierto y favorable en la lucha de clases, de allí que el gobierno de Allende no escatimó recursos en iniciar un proceso de institucionalización, cooptación e incluso represión sobre estas expresiones, tratando de desactivar aquella potencia de ruptura revolucionaria.<br />
<br />
Sin embargo, no son solo causas “externas” las que debilitaron esta rica experiencia, sino también errores y límites internos que no pudieron ser superados allí donde se apura la historia. El primer traspié fue el burocratismo que operaba sobre las bases populares a partir del comportamiento parasitario de las instituciones estatales y los partidos políticos de la UP, cuestión que se reflejó en la obediencia de las bases a los lineamientos gubernamentales, temiendo, incluso, pasar por encima de Allende aun cuando las fuerzas reaccionarias se preparaban para iniciar el exterminio. Si bien el desarrollo del Poder Popular no es impulsado por el gobierno de la UP, rápidamente, la burocracia institucional inicia un proceso para su cooptación y debilitamiento, por eso, la lección es que ninguna fuerza social puede someterse a un marco gubernamental: el Poder Popular es antiestatal o no será, por tanto, es ineludible rebasar aquellas propuestas políticas que pretenden subyugar el protagonismo de las bases a lineamientos institucionales, tal como hoy ocurre con muchísimos empeños sociales que están completamente sometidos al gobierno de Boric, iniciando procesos de desmovilización y silencio cómplice ante el avance de su agenda represiva, precarizadora y extractivista. La organización popular no debe jamás confiar en un gobierno cualquiera sea su color o signo político, ya que, en la sobrevivencia y fortalecimiento de los pilares de la dominación está nuestra derrota.<br />
<br />
El segundo traspié fue la débil coordinación de las diversas experiencias del Poder Popular, dado fundamentalmente por el sectarismo y la política de trinchera de los partidos de izquierda. Estamos convencidxs de que los procesos revolucionarios no le pertenecen a ninguna ideología, partido o movimiento político, más bien, son de lxs oprimidxs que buscan dejar de serlo, por ello, es necesaria la coordinación de los diversos esfuerzos que pretenden trazar el camino de la emancipación, desde perspectivas antiestatales, anticapitalistas y despatriarcalizadoras. Dicha coordinación debe realizarse desde las organizaciones sociales a partir de sus experiencias de lucha, dejando de lado los discursos identitarios y paternalistas. Lo anterior, nos permitirá dotar de perspectiva las luchas del presente y desarrollar, en conjunto con las expresiones organizativas de la clase oprimida, una fuerza capaz de romper el actual tránsito histórico, desechando los atajos institucionales y los personalismos mesiánicos que se nos presentan como barreras en nuestro camino hacia la libertad.<br />
<br />
Ya lo dijimos antes, más allá del proyecto de la UP y de la cara institucional de los procesos políticos vividos en los cuales se inscribe el espectacular bombardeo a la Moneda, pensamos que lo que finalmente movilizó el complot golpista cívico-militar fueron las capacidades que mostraron las capas populares y oprimidas de tomar el destino de sus vidas con sus propias manos. Estas capacidades fueron gestadas y desarrolladas en décadas de lucha, constituidas a partir de los aprendizajes colectivos de nuestra clase, desde, al menos, los albores del siglo XX en los centros urbanos y mucho antes por las comunidades en resistencia a las diversas dimensiones de la colonización. Esta capacidad hizo posible la generación de fuerza social organizada que puso a temblar a la clase dominante y a los intereses imperialistas, quienes desataron toda su crueldad contra este protagonismo popular que comenzaba a escribir una nueva historia.<br />
<br />
El terror fue desatado sistemáticamente desde el Estado y cayó la noche sobre la alegría de los pueblos. La contra revolución capitalista se abrió paso brutalmente con una imparable avanzada de muerte, tortura, violencia sexual y desaparición forzada, a la vez que llevaba a cabo la misión estratégica de desarticular todas las expresiones comunitarias en donde la vida fuera resuelta de manera solidaria, colectiva y en autogestión. La dictadura cívico-militar se desplegó tácticamente en múltiples dimensiones para sembrar el miedo en la sociedad, con el fin de desmantelar la fuerza social organizada que había hecho posible la experiencia socialista en la región chilena. Estos procesos de desmantelamiento político, social y emocional de gran parte de la clase organizada han provocado una herida colectiva, profunda y traumática, herida que la impunidad y los pactos de silencio institucionales mantienen abierta hasta el día de hoy y que ha traído múltiples consecuencias en la experiencia vital colectiva de todxs quienes hemos crecido en estos territorios los últimos 50 años y más.<br />
<br />
La reestructuración capitalista que instauró el golpe y posterior dictadura cívico-militar se tradujo en una serie de rearticulaciones económicas y políticas, las cuales se transformaron en los pilares del sistema económico que heredamos de la dictadura y que los gobiernos de los 30 años han consolidado. Todas ellas han tenido efectos directos en nuestras experiencias vitales compartidas: la reconfiguración de las ciudades a través de la expulsión de lxs pobladorxs de los centros hacia las periferias y el desarrollo de la ciudad neoliberal, el freno de la reforma agraria y la continuidad del antiguo latifundio a través de un modelo agroexportador y el fomento del negocio forestal, el abandono de la educación y la salud pública, la creación de las AFP, la privatización del agua y, en general, la instauración de un modelo neoliberal y extractivista anclado a los deseos de consumo del norte global y los intereses de la clase dominante.<br />
<br />
Como planteábamos anteriormente, todos estos mecanismos de terror y precarización de la vida humana y no humana, sumados al acceso al mundo de las cosas, el consumo y el crédito, han permeado capas más profundas de las comunidades y las personas, atomizando e individualizando las experiencias comunes y reduciendo la socialización humana a espacios de consumo y mercado. Nos han educado en la competencia y la violencia para sobrevivir, bajo la premisa del desarrollo y superación personal en base al esfuerzo. Nos han aislado a lxs unxs de lxs otrxs para mantenernos en sensación de soledad y tristeza persiguiendo un modelo de éxito individual que poco conoce del goce de las alegrías y las penas compartidas.<br />
<br />
Enfrentadxs a esta devastación ecológica y social de los 50 años de implementación de un programa de muerte y desarticulación de las comunidades, no nos basta con contemplar la derrota de un proyecto institucional ni con reconocer el profundo daño que cargamos como una maldición que pareciera irremediable, porque en medio del despojo, han resistido y germinado diversas experiencias de organización y solidaridad popular como la lucha por la vivienda, las ollas comunes, la colectivización de los cuidados de la niñez, los múltiples espacios comunitarios culturales y deportivos, las luchas anti patriarcales, la defensa y cuidado de los ecosistemas, la lucha mapuche, la resistencia de las comunidades migrantes, entre muchas otras que apuestan por vidas dignas. Estos espacios de acumulación de fuerza, experimentación de formas orgánicas y métodos de lucha son aprendizaje y sabiduría práctica para disputar el presente y construir el futuro.<br />
<br />
​​​​​​​Hoy, a 50 años de aquel dramático martes 11 de septiembre, desde el anarquismo no solo tenemos mucho que reflexionar, también debemos comenzar a romper con la inacción y el inmovilismo. Frente a los sectores pusilánimes que nos gobiernan, incapaces de defender a sus propios muertxs ante el avance de los discursos y acciones negacionistas de la derecha reaccionara, es fundamental asumir un rol protagónico en la batalla ideológica que hoy se libra, con lenguajes, narrativas, metodologías y herramientas que nos permitan salir del “gueto”. Si nuestras ideas no se enraízan en nuestra clase, otras lo hacen y, con esto, no pretendemos que todxs lxs oprimidxs se reivindiquen como anarquistas, más bien, buscamos que valores como la solidaridad, el apoyo mutuo, la acción directa y el antiautoritarismo se constituyan en la base de las relaciones sociales de nuestras comunidades, por ello, es fundamental hacer retroceder las ideas y prácticas promovidas por la burguesía, ya sea en su modalidad fascista, liberal o progresista.<br />
<br />
Por otro lado, concebimos al anarquismo social y organizado como una caja de herramientas y, como tal, se demanda su uso, por ello es que apostamos por superar las posturas identitarias y sectarias, abrazando la organización social y la construcción comunitaria de poder popular. De esta manera pretendemos desarrollar la fuerza necesaria para destruir la sociedad de clases y la mercantilización de la vida, desplegando una capacidad organizativa que ponga en el centro el protagonismo popular y se oponga a cualquier proyecto personalista, reformista y de conciliación de clases. El anarquismo debe y puede retornar a las luchas sociales y a la organización territorial, no somos ajenxs a las realidades del campo popular porque también somos pobladorxs y trabajadorxs que luchan por vidas libres y dignas, por eso, seamos hoy parte del fortalecimiento organizativo y de la necesaria coordinación de aquellas luchas libradas por diversos sectores de nuestra clase.<br />
<br />
Finalmente, reconocemos que es necesario romper con la falsa oposición entre Estado y Mercado, apostando por construir una alternativa popular con foco en la reproducción de la vida que, desde la gestión comunitaria, prefigure aquella nueva y buena vida que buscamos, a partir de la autonomía y de un programa antiestatal, anticapitalista y con una perspectiva despatriarcalizadora. Resistir no significa soportar los oscuros tiempos aferrándonos a nuestras convicciones, más bien es transformar nuestra realidad, organizarnos comunitariamente, sin retroceder ante las contradicciones y amarguras de la situación actual. Confiamos en que la memoria, la lucha y la organización popular nos acercan a la emancipación y a la construcción de comunidades más sanas, más alegres, más dignas.​​​​​​​<br />
<br />
A pesar de los golpes y las heridas: ¡organizadxs y en comunidad luchamos por la vida!<br />
Asamblea Anarquista de Valparaíso - Federación Anarquista de Santiago<br />
<BR>
A Talk on the Ukrainian-Russian Warhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328252023-08-31T03:36:37+08:00Wayne Pricedrwdprice at aol dot comBased on a talk I gave at the August 12, 2023 Los Angeles Anarchist Book Fair<BR>
A talk on the Ukrainian-Russian war, from an anarchist perspective. I reviewed my reasons for being in solidarity with the Ukrainian people. But revolutionary anarchists should give no political support to the Ukrainian government nor to the U.S. imperialists who help it. When the Russian state invaded Ukraine, I was immediately on the side of the Ukrainian people. Mainly this was because, like most people, I hate oppression, exploitation, and bullying. I am on the side of the oppressed, the exploited, the beaten, the marginalized, and the dominated. Especially whenever they fight back. While my political opinions have evolved over the years, this attitude has continued to be at the heart of my worldview. <br />
<br />
Also, I have long supported the freedom of an oppressed people to national self-determination. I learned this concept during the fight against the U.S.-Vietnamese war (dating myself). My comrades and I had no illusions in the North Vietnamese state nor the leaders of the south Vietnamese war (the “Viet Cong” or NLF). They were Stalinists and would establish a Communist-type state-capitalist dictatorship (as they did). They received military aid from the imperialist Soviet Union. But there was no question that the peasants and workers of Vietnam were supporting the war and its leadership. We gave no political support to the Stalinist leaders and rulers, we were their opponents. Yet we definitely were in solidarity with the Vietnamese people in their fight for independence and unity and whatever freedoms they might gain. We wanted the U.S. military forces to lose.<br />
<br />
I thought these lessons of the Vietnamese-U.S. war applied to this war. They implied solidarity with the Ukrainian people (however much we opposed the Ukrainian state and its capitalist “oligarchs”) and full opposition to the Russian invaders. It implied that the oppressed people have the right to get arms from wherever they can, even from other imperialists who were competing with their immediate aggressor (then the Soviet Union, now the U.S. and NATO).<br />
<br />
However, when I wrote this, I received much disagreement, often expressed with great personal hostility, expressed in name-calling, childish insults, and red-baiting. I was betraying anarchism! Some of my critics could not separate political disagreement from personal conflicts.<br />
<br />
The first wave of arguments I faced held that “no anarchist” would support the war. This was because anarchists did not support wars, or anarchists did not support wars between capitalist states. This is to say that my critics rejected (or ignored) the importance of imperialism. They did not distinguish between wars between imperialist states and wars between an oppressed, colonized, nation and an imperialist state.<br />
<br />
It was repeatedly pointed out to me that Peter Kropotkin had supported France and the Allies in World War I but that almost all anarchists at the time and later felt that he was badly mistaken. His comrade Errico Malatesta had written to condemn Kropotkin for taking sides in the Great War. But my critics did not know that Malatesta had also supported wars of national liberation by oppressed peoples (for example, in Libya against the Italian army, or in Cuba against the Spanish empire). (Price Nov. 2022)<br />
<br />
I demonstrated that “classical anarchists” had supported popular struggles for national self-determination: including, but not limited to, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, Makhno, and others. All (with the exception of Kropotkin) distinguished between wars among imperialists (of which they opposed all sides) and wars between imperialists and oppressed, non-imperialist, countries (of which they supported the oppressed peoples). (Price July 2022; 2023)<br />
<br />
I also pointed out that many—perhaps most—of the Ukrainian anarchists supported—and participated in—the Ukrainian side of the war. Similarly, Russian and Belarusian anarchists were on the side of the Ukrainian people, and so were many other anarchists.<br />
In a report on the 2023 International Anarchist Conference at St. Imier, Switzerland, a commentator wrote, <br />
<br />
“Most events held on the war accepted the right of self-defence for Ukrainians as the minimum anarchist political basis….The event by anarchists from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, who are actively resisting the invasion, was one of the most interesting of the meeting.” (Transnational Institute 2023)<br />
<br />
All this does not prove that it is right to support the Ukrainian people, but it does disprove the claim that no anarchist would take such a stand.<br />
<br />
In general, my opponents could not distinguish between “nationalism” and “national self-determination” or “liberation.” “National liberation” meant the freeing of a people from the oppression of the state of another nation. “National self-determination” meant that a people were able to decide for itself whether to be independent and what kind of political and economic system to have (which could be a capitalist state or libertarian socialism). But “nationalism” is one possible program meant to supposedly solve national oppression—by creating a new state and national capitalist economy (perhaps state capitalist). Anarchists should be for “national self-determination” and “national liberation” but are thoroughly opposed to “nationalism.” Instead we advocate international anarchist socialism to achieve freedom for all peoples everywhere.<br />
<br />
Others argued that Ukraine did not deserve national defense because it was not really a nation! They claimed that Ukraine was a recent invention, that its people were indistinguishable from Russians, and so on. (While not supporting the Russian invasion, many anarchists repeat Putin’s propaganda and lies.) In my opinion, all these claims were irrelevant. Historically there had been a Ukraine for centuries, oppressed by the Czars and then by the Stalinists. During the 70 years of the Soviet Union, there had been a recognized Ukrainian Republic in the USSR. But this too was not really relevant.<br />
<br />
What was important was that the Ukrainians regarded themselves as a nation. In 1991 the Ukrainian people voted overwhelming for national independence from Russia—by more than 92 per cent. This included about 80 per cent in the eastern, mainly Russian-speaking, Donbas and about 54 per cent in Crimea. (Mirra 2023; p. 126) It was their opinion which counts, not that of foreign anarchists nor of Putin and his army.<br />
<br />
To which some replied, that therefore the people of the eastern Ukraine, the Donbas, were a nation or nations because they had voted for their own republics merged into Russia. I would agree, except that the drive for their “national separation” was so clearly a Russian put-up job (with Russian soldiers everywhere). Indeed the whole movement for Donbas secession was organized since 2014 by Russian and pro-Russian agents.<br />
<br />
Another argument was that anarchists must not support a capitalist state. In fact, no Ukrainian anarchists gave any political support to the Zelensky government. They did not vote for it nor urge others to vote for it. They did not join the ruling party nor any other. They did not participate in the government in any way. They have opposed the neoliberal austerity and anti-union policies of the Zelensky government. There is no “Popular Front.”<br />
<br />
Suppose there was a strike in the U.S. Anarchists would be on the side of the workers. Outside anarchists would do labor-support activities to help the strike. Anarchist workers at the workplace would join the strike and be active in its organizing. Yet the union would undoubtedly be run by a bureaucratic and possibly corrupt leadership. Should anarchists still participate? Or should they stand aside or perhaps cross the picket lines, because the union was undemocratic and centralized? Obviously, revolutionary anarchists would join the strike and be the most militant strikers, while fighting for a more democratic, federalist, and militant union. The same is true of anarchists in a just national war of self-determination, being part of the war while working for an eventual anarchist-socialist revolution.<br />
<br />
Anarchists are participating in the war. Some distribute food and medicines. Others help refugees. But some formed Territorial Defense groups affiliated with the army. And some joined the army, fighting at the front. <br />
<br />
It would have been optimal if Ukrainian anarchists had been able to organize militias or guerrilla groups independently of the state. Unfortunately they are far too weak to do that. They must either support the existing army in one way or another, or be passive. After all, while Ukrainian anarchists have much to criticize the army for, anarchists are not opposed to its fighting the Russian invaders!<br />
<br />
Suppose anarchists were to say to the Ukrainian people, “We are against the Russian invasion, but we are also against the national army—we are even for sabotaging it—because it is the army of a state and capitalism.” Most workers would (correctly) regard this as treasonous de facto support of the invaders. On the other hand, anarchist participation in the war, in whatever capacity, can only increase positive views of anarchists among the population.<br />
<br />
Much of the opposition to supporting Ukraine is due to its getting arms and aid from the U.S. and the rest of NATO. It is often called a “proxy war.” There is an assumption by many that only U.S. imperialism is evil. But while U.S. imperialism is terrible, it is not the only imperialism. There is Russian imperialism, as the Ukrainians know.<br />
<br />
It is not unusual for one imperialist power to intervene when a colony rebels against its imperialist master. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union often aided, with guns or money, national struggles against Western imperialists—in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Meanwhile the U.S. was “on the side” of eastern European states against the Soviet Union. Even during World War II, Nazi Germany gave “support” to Arab rebels in Britain and France’s colonies, and even to Ireland, while Imperial Japan claimed to be “freeing” Asian colonies from Britain, France, and Holland. So it was not surprising that Soviet Russia gave aid to Vietnam against the U.S.—or that the U.S. and allies should give aid to Ukraine. The U.S. state is acting for its reasons, its imperial interests in weakening its imperial competitor, not out of the “idealism” of its cynical politicians.<br />
<br />
But make no mistake. For the Ukrainians, this is no “proxy war.” It is their villages, towns, and cities which are bombed and destroyed, not those of the U.S., Germany, or Britain. It is their population which is being massacred on the ground and from the air. It is their soldiers who are fighting and being killed in massive numbers. They are fighting and dying for their country, their people, and no one else.<br />
<br />
I would not offer tactical advice to Ukrainian anarchists. But strategically I would say that their goals are two-fold: to defeat the Russian invasion and to spread anarchist ideas among the people, especially the workers. As revolutionary anarchists, we continue to be in solidarity with the oppressed, especially when they fight for their freedom.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Mirra, Carl (2023). “The War in Ukraine.” New Politics. Summer 2023. Pp. 125—137.<br />
<br />
Price, Wayne (July 2022). “Malatesta on War and National Self-Determination” <a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32666 title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32666>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32666</a><br />
<br />
Price, Wayne (Nov. 2022). “Kropotkin and War—Today.”<br />
<a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32683?search_text=Wayne+Price title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32683?search_text=Wayne+Price>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32683?search_text=Wayne+Price</a><br />
<br />
Price, Wayne (2023). “Anarchists Support Self-Determination for Ukraine; What Did Bakunin Say About National Self-Determination?” <a href=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32774?search_text=Wayne+Price title=https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32774?search_text=Wayne+Price>https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32774?search_text=Wayne+Price</a><br />
<br />
Transnational Institute of Social Ecology (2023). “Report From the International Anarchist Meeting in St. Imier, Switzerland”<br />
<a href=https://anarchistnews.org/content/report-international-anarchist-meeting-st-imier-switzerland title=https://anarchistnews.org/content/report-international-anarchist-meeting-st-imier-switzerland>https://anarchistnews.org/content/report-international-anarchist-meeting-st-imier-switzerland</a><br />
<br />
* submitted to Workers Solidarity: A Green Syndicalist Webzine<BR>
Sürgündeki Sudanlı anarşistleri destekleyinhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328242023-08-30T15:53:51+08:00Çeşitli anarşist örgütlerUluslararası anarşist dayanışma çağrısı<BR>
Sürgün olmak asla kolay bir karar değildir. Asla bir seçim değildir. Kaynaklar olmadan, gerçek bir çileye dönüşebilir. Dayanışma, bu zor zamanların üstesinden gelmenin anahtarıdır.
<br><br>
<h3>[<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32820">لغۃ العربیۃ</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32815">Castellano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32814">Deutsch</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32812">English</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32813">Français</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32819">Italiano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32823">한국어</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32818">Português</a>]</h3><hr>
<center><h3>Uluslararası anarşist dayanışma çağrısı</h3>
<h1>Sürgündeki Sudanlı anarşistleri destekleyin</h1></center>
Sürgün olmak asla kolay bir karar değildir. Asla bir seçim değildir. Kaynaklar olmadan, gerçek bir çileye dönüşebilir. Dayanışma, bu zor zamanların üstesinden gelmenin anahtarıdır. <p>
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. <p>
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. <p>
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. <p>
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. <p>
Bunu yapmak için paraya ihtiyacımız var ve kuruluşlarımızın dayanışma fonları tek başına yeterli değil. Aşağıda tahmini masraflar yer almaktadır (ABD Doları cinsinden):
<ul><li>Vizeler: $400</li>
<li>Seyahat: 800 $ (maliyetler oldukça değişken olduğu için bu rakam belirsizdir) </li>
<li>Ev sahibi ülkede ilk kira: $200</li>
<li>Ev sahibi ülkede bir aylık yiyecek: 300$</li>
<li>Sudan'da bekleme süresi için masraflar (konaklama, yemek, internet): 1000 $</li>
<b><li>Minimum: $2700</b></li></ul>
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. <p>
Bağışlar, halihazırda uluslararası bir dayanışma yapısına sahip olan İsviçre'deki yoldaşlarımız tarafından toplanmaktadır. <p>
<b>Bağışınızı yaparken "Sudan Dayanışması "nı belirtmeyi unutmayın. </b>
<h3>Bağışlarınızı şu adrese gönderin: </h3>
<i>Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)</i><br>
Place Chauderon 5<br>
1003 Lozan<br>
İsviçre<p>
<b>IBAN:</b> CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8<br>
<b>SWIFT/BIC:</b> POFICHBEXXX<br>
<b>Banka'nın Adı:</b> PostFinance SA; Mingerstrasse 20; 3030 Bern; Switzerland<p>
<h3><ahref="https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=AEFSQKQKKPQX2">Ayrıca Paypal ile</a><form action="https://www.paypal.com/donate" method="post" target="_top">
<input type="hidden" name="hosted_button_id" value="AEFSQKQKKPQX2" />
<input type="image" src="https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donate_SM.gif" border="0" name="submit" title="PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!" alt="Donate with PayPal button" />
<img alt="" border="0" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_CH/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" height="1" />
</form>
<h3>İmza sahibi:</h3>
<h4>☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) - Brezilya<br>
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) - İsviçre<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) - Uruguay<br>
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya - Katalonya, İspanya Devleti<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) - Şili<br>
☆Karala - Türkiye<br>
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) - Amerika Birleşik Devletleri<br>
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) - İsviçre<br>
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) - Fransa<br>
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre - Kolombiya<br>
☆Die Plattform - Almanya<br>
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista - Arjantin<br>
☆Anarchist Communist Group(ACG) Büyük Britanya<br>
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) - Rojava<br>
☆Anarşist Yondae - Güney Kore<br>
☆Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA (AL/FdCA) - İtalya<br>
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement(AWSM) - Aotearoa/Yeni Zelanda</h4>
<BR>
망명중인 수단 아나키스트 동지들을 지원하여 주십시오.http://www.anarkismo.net/article/328232023-08-29T05:56:43+08:00Various anarchist organisationsgiocganarkismo at riseup dot net국제 아나키스트 연대를 요청합니다.<BR>
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.
<h3>[<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32820">عربي</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32815">Castellano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32814">Deutsch</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32822">Eλληνικά</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32812">English</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32813">Français</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32819">Italiano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32818">Português</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32824">Türkçe</a>]</h3>국제 아나키스트 연대를 요청합니다.<br />
망명중인 수단 아나키스트 동지들을 지원하여 주십시오.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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:<br />
<br />
비자: $400<br />
여행 경비: $800(비용이 매우 불안정하므로 이 수치는 불확실합니다.)<br />
망명지에서의 첫 임대료: $200<br />
망명지에서의 한 달 식비: $300<br />
수단에서의 대기 시간 비용(숙박, 식비, 인터넷): $1000<br />
최소 $2700<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
기부금의 모금 및 관리는 이미 국제적인 연대 구조를 갖춘 스위스의 동지들이 주관하고 있습니다.<br />
<br />
기부할 때 'Solidarity Sudan'을 명기하여 주십시오.<br />
연대기금은 다음으로 보내주십시오. <br />
<br />
Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)<br />
Place Chauderon 5<br />
1003 Lausanne<br />
Switzerland<br />
IBAN: CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8<br />
SWIFT/BIC: POFICHBEXXX<br />
은행명: PostFinance SA; Mingerstrasse 20; 3030 Bern; Switzerland<br />
<h3><br />
연명 단체<br />
☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) – 브라질<br />
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) – 스위스<br />
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) – 우루과이<br />
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya – 카탈루냐<br />
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) – 칠레<br />
☆Karala – 터키<br />
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) – 미국<br />
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) – 스위스<br />
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) – 프랑스<br />
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre – 콜롬비아<br />
☆Die Plattform – 독일<br />
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista - 아르헨티나<br />
☆Anarchist Communist Group (ACG) - 영국<br />
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) – 로자바<br />
☆Anarchist Yondae – 한국<br />
☆Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA (AL/FdCA) – 이탈리아<br />
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement (AWSM) – 아오테아로아/뉴질랜드</h3><BR>
Υποστηρίξτε τους Σουδανούς αναρχικούςhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328222023-08-29T05:45:20+08:00Διεθνές κάλεσμαΔιεθνές κάλεσμα αναρχικής αλληλεγγύης<BR>
Οι αναρχικοί σύντροφοί μας βρίσκονται ακόμα στο Σουδάν και ήλπιζαν να μπορέσουν να συνεχίσουν τις αγωνιστικές τους δραστηριότητες εκεί κρυφά. Παρέχαμε οικονομική βοήθεια πριν από τον πόλεμο και ακόμη και στην αρχή του. Αλλά η κατάσταση έχει γίνει αφόρητη και δεν επιτρέπει πλέον καμία κοινωνική ή πολιτική δραστηριότητα. Κάποια μέλη της ομάδας αποφάσισαν να εγκαταλείψουν τη χώρα το συντομότερο δυνατό μετά τη λεηλασία του σπιτιού τους από τις ΔΤY. Άλλα αποφάσισαν να παραμείνουν προς το παρόν και προσπαθούμε να τα βοηθήσουμε και αυτά.<br />
<h3>[<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32820">عربي</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32815">Castellano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32814">Deutsch</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32812">English</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32813">Français</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32819">Italiano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32823">한국어</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32818">Português</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32824">Türkçe</a>]</h3><h1>Διεθνές κάλεσμα αναρχικής αλληλεγγύης</h2><br />
<h2>Υποστηρίξτε τους Σουδανούς αναρχικούς στην εξορία</h2><br />
<br />
Η εξορία δεν είναι ποτέ μια εύκολη απόφαση. Δεν είναι ποτέ μια επιλογή. Χωρίς πόρους, μπορεί να γίνει μια πραγματική δοκιμασία. Η αλληλεγγύη είναι το κλειδί για να ξεπεράσει κανείς αυτές τις δύσκολες στιγμές.<br />
<br />
Ήρθαμε σε επαφή με μια ομάδα Σουδανών αναρχικών τον Φεβρουάριο του 2022, εν μέσω των επαναστατικών ταραχών που συγκλόνισαν τη χώρα από το 2018. Παρά τα γλωσσικά εμπόδια, μάθαμε από αυτούς πώς να κατανοήσουμε καλύτερα αυτή την επανάσταση και τις επιτροπές αντίστασης που βρίσκονται στην καρδιά της. Αυτή η ομάδα, που αποτελείται κυρίως από νεαρούς φοιτητές, βρήκε μάλιστα μιμητές σε μια αναρχική ομάδα στα βόρεια της χώρας.<br />
<br />
Όπως πολλές χώρες κατά τη διάρκεια της "Αραβικής Άνοιξης" του 2011, το Σουδάν βυθίστηκε σε εμφύλιο πόλεμο τον Απρίλιο του τρέχοντος έτους. Ο στρατηγός Χεμέτι, διοικητής της πολιτοφυλακής "Δυνάμεις ταχείας υποστήριξης", εξαπέλυσε εξέγερση εναντίον του εθνικού στρατού του Σουδάν. Οι προοδευτικές και επαναστατικές δυνάμεις της χώρας αρνήθηκαν ομόφωνα να υποστηρίξουν τη μία πλευρά εναντίον της άλλης, και έτσι βρέθηκαν στη μέγγενη μεταξύ αυτών των δύο στρατιωτικοποιημένων αντιδραστικών φατριών. Σχεδόν 5.000 άνθρωποι έχουν χάσει τη ζωή τους σε αυτή την άσκοπη σύγκρουση. Δυόμισι εκατομμύρια άνθρωποι έχουν αναγκαστεί να εγκαταλείψουν τα σπίτια τους, 500.000 από τους οποίους έχουν εγκαταλείψει τη χώρα. Οι λεηλασίες και οι βιασμοί αυξάνονται και αποτελούν μέρος του οπλοστασίου των πολεμικών όπλων που χρησιμοποιούνται κατά των αμάχων.<br />
<br />
Οι αναρχικοί σύντροφοί μας βρίσκονται ακόμα στο Σουδάν και ήλπιζαν να μπορέσουν να συνεχίσουν τις αγωνιστικές τους δραστηριότητες εκεί κρυφά. Παρέχαμε οικονομική βοήθεια πριν από τον πόλεμο και ακόμη και στην αρχή του. Αλλά η κατάσταση έχει γίνει αφόρητη και δεν επιτρέπει πλέον καμία κοινωνική ή πολιτική δραστηριότητα. Κάποια μέλη της ομάδας αποφάσισαν να εγκαταλείψουν τη χώρα το συντομότερο δυνατό μετά τη λεηλασία του σπιτιού τους από τις ΔΤY. Άλλα αποφάσισαν να παραμείνουν προς το παρόν και προσπαθούμε να τα βοηθήσουμε και αυτά.<br />
<br />
Σε συνεργασία με συντρόφους που βρίσκονται σε αυτό το μέρος του κόσμου, εργαζόμαστε για να παρέχουμε σε όλους τις καλύτερες δυνατές συνθήκες επιβίωσης σε αυτό το πλαίσιο. Για όσους σκοπεύουν να μείνουν, πρέπει να τους βοηθήσουμε να αντιμετωπίσουν τις ανάγκες τους και να βάλουμε χρήματα στην άκρη αν τα χρειαστούν για μια επείγουσα αναχώρηση. Για όσους πηγαίνουν τώρα στην εξορία, πρέπει να τους εξοστρακίσουμε από τη χώρα, αποφεύγοντας όσο το δυνατόν περισσότερο τους κινδύνους που συνεπάγεται αυτό το είδος του ταξιδιού χωρίς επιστροφή, και να τους δώσουμε τη δυνατότητα να συνεχίσουν τον ακτιβισμό τους με τους εξόριστους Σουδανούς και τις εκμεταλλευόμενες τάξεις στη χώρα υποδοχής τους. Ωστόσο, η περιοχή είναι εξαιρετικά ασταθής (εμφύλιοι πόλεμοι, πραξικοπήματα και άλλα αυταρχικά καθεστώτα) και δεν είναι προς το παρόν δυνατή η έξοδος από τη χώρα.<br />
<br />
Για να το κάνουμε αυτό, χρειαζόμαστε χρήματα, και τα κονδύλια αλληλεγγύης των οργανώσεών μας από μόνα τους δεν αρκούν. Παρακάτω παρουσιάζονται τα εκτιμώμενα έξοδα (σε δολάρια ΗΠΑ):<br />
<br />
- Βίζες: 400 δολάρια<br />
- Ταξίδια: 800 δολάρια (το ποσό αυτό είναι αβέβαιο, καθώς το κόστος είναι εξαιρετικά ασταθές)<br />
- Πρώτο ενοίκιο στη χώρα υποδοχής: 200 δολάρια<br />
- Τρόφιμα για ένα μήνα στη χώρα υποδοχής: 300 δολάρια<br />
- Δαπάνες (διαμονή, διατροφή, Διαδίκτυο) για το χρόνο αναμονής στο Σουδάν: 1000 δολάρια<br />
- Ελάχιστο: 2700 δολάρια<br />
<br />
Αυτός ο προσωρινός προϋπολογισμός παραμένει ασταθής σε ένα ταχέως μεταβαλλόμενο οικονομικό πλαίσιο και πλαίσιο ασφαλείας. Καλύπτει μόνο τα έξοδα για τουλάχιστον ένα μήνα. Αλλά η κατάσταση είναι τέτοια που οι σύντροφοί μας δεν θα μπορέσουν να καλύψουν τις ανάγκες τους σε ένα μόνο μήνα. Είναι πιθανό να χρειαστούμε πολύ περισσότερα χρήματα στο τέλος. Οποιοδήποτε ποσό δωρίζεται, ακόμη και πέραν αυτού του ελάχιστου ποσού, θα χρησιμοποιηθεί για την κάλυψη των καθημερινών αναγκών των συντρόφων μέχρι να μπορέσουν να εξασφαλίσουν τον εαυτό τους.<br />
<br />
Οι δωρεές συγκεντρώνονται από τους συντρόφους μας στην Ελβετία, οι οποίοι έχουν ήδη μια διεθνή δομή αλληλεγγύης.<br />
<br />
Μην ξεχάσετε να αναφέρετε "Solidarity Sudan" όταν κάνετε τη δωρεά σας.<br />
Στείλτε τις δωρεές σας στην ακόλουθη διεύθυνση:<br />
<br />
Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)<br />
Place Chauderon 5<br />
1003 Lausanne<br />
Suisse - Ελβετία<br />
<br />
IBAN: CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8<br />
SWIFT/BIC: POFICHBEXXX<br />
Όνομα της τράπεζας: PostFinance SA- Mingerstrasse 20- 3030 Bern - Switzerland<br />
<br /><h3><href="https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=AEFSQKQKKPQX2">Επίσης με Paypal</a><form action="https://www.paypal.com/donate" method="post" target="_top">
<input type="hidden" name="hosted_button_id" value="AEFSQKQKKPQX2" />
<input type="image" src="https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donate_SM.gif" border="0" name="submit" title="PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!" alt="Donate with PayPal button" />
<img alt="" border="0" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_CH/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" height="1" />
</form>
<br>
<br />
Υπογράφεται από:<br />
☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) - Βραζιλία<br />
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) - Ελβετία<br />
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) - Ουρουγουάη<br />
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya - Καταλονία, ισπανικό κράτος<br />
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) - Χιλή<br />
☆ Karala - Τουρκία<br />
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) - ΗΠA<br />
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) - Ελβετία<br />
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) - Γαλλία<br />
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre - Κολομβία<br />
☆Die Plattform - Γερμανία<br />
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista - Αργεντινή<br />
☆ Anarchist Communist Group (ACG) - Μεγάλη Βρετανία<br />
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) - Ροζάβα<br />
☆Anarchist Yondae - Νότια Κορέα<br />
☆Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA (AL/FdCA) - Ιταλία<br />
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement (AWSM) - Αωτερώα/Νέα Ζηλανδία</h3><BR>
Η Κομμούνα της Στράντζαςhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328212023-08-28T20:23:09+08:00Γιάβορ ΤαρίνσκιΗ Κομμούνα της Στράντζας υπήρξε ένα βραχύβιο πείραμα, με ξεκάθαρα ελευθεριακά χαρακτηριστικά, στο εν λόγω βουνό που βρίσκεται στη σημερινή νοτιοανατολική Βουλγαρία και στο ευρωπαϊκό τμήμα της Τουρκίας. Η δημιουργία της ανακηρύχθηκε στα μέσα Αυγούστου του 1903, εν μέσω της εξέγερσης του Ίλιντεν –ενός αυτονομιστικού αγροτικού ξεσηκωμού ενάντια στην οθωμανική διοίκηση και υπέρ μιας αυτόνομης πολυεθνικής Μακεδονίας–, από αντάρτες της Εσωτερικής Μακεδονικής Αδριανουπολίτικης Επαναστατικής Οργάνωσης, της οποίας τότε διοικητής είναι ο μεγάλος και σπουδαίος αναρχικός Μιχαήλ Γκερντζίκοφ. Η Κομμούνα της Στράντζας και ο Μιχαήλ Γκερντζίκοφ<br />
<br />
Του Γιάβορ Ταρίνσκι<br />
<br />
Στις 26 Ιανουαρίου του 1877, γεννιέται ο Βούλγαρος αναρχικός Μιχαήλ Γκερντζίκοφ, ιδρυτής της Κεντρικής Επαναστατικής Μακεδονικής Επιτροπής και μέλος της Εσωτερικής Μακεδονικής Αδριανουπολίτικης Επαναστατικής Οργάνωσης (αργότερα ΕΜΕΟ ή ВМРО). Υπήρξε από τους πρωτεργάτες του μακεδονικού απελευθερωτικoύ αγώνα του 19ου-20ού αιώνα. Κορυφαία στιγμή της δραστηριότητάς του αποτελεί η ενεργός συμμετοχή του στην ίδρυση της Κομμούνας της Στράντζας, γνωστής επίσης και ως Δημοκρατία της Στράντζας. Πρόκειται για άλλο ένα κομμάτι της βαλκανικής ιστορίας το οποίο θάβεται από την επίσημη ιστοριογραφία. Είναι άλλο ένα στιγμιότυπο από την ιστορία των από-τα-κάτω, όπως η άγνωστη περίπτωση του νησιού Άντα Καλέ. Τέτοιες στιγμές της ιστορίας είναι σημαντικές ώστε να μπορέσουμε να ξαναφανταστούμε τα Βαλκάνια, όχι ως το σημερινό προπύργιο των εθνικισμών και του σοβινισμού, αλλά ως μια δυνατότητα ειρηνικής και αλληλέγγυας συνύπαρξης.<br />
<br />
Η Κομμούνα της Στράντζας υπήρξε ένα βραχύβιο πείραμα, με ξεκάθαρα ελευθεριακά χαρακτηριστικά, στο εν λόγω βουνό που βρίσκεται στη σημερινή νοτιοανατολική Βουλγαρία και στο ευρωπαϊκό τμήμα της Τουρκίας. Η δημιουργία της ανακηρύχθηκε στα μέσα Αυγούστου του 1903, εν μέσω της εξέγερσης του Ίλιντεν –ενός αυτονομιστικού αγροτικού ξεσηκωμού ενάντια στην οθωμανική διοίκηση και υπέρ μιας αυτόνομης πολυεθνικής Μακεδονίας–, από αντάρτες της Εσωτερικής Μακεδονικής Αδριανουπολίτικης Επαναστατικής Οργάνωσης, της οποίας τότε διοικητής είναι ο μεγάλος και σπουδαίος αναρχικός Μιχαήλ Γκερντζίκοφ. Η Κομμούνα αυτή περιλάμβανε τις πόλεις Βασιλικό, Αγαθούπολη καθώς και άλλους μικρότερους οικισμούς και χωριά στο βουνό Στράντζα.<br />
<br />
Έπειτα από μία σειρά επιτυχημένων μαζικών τοπικών εξεγέρσεων, υποστηριζόμενων από αντάρτικες ενέργειες, μεγάλο τμήμα της ανατολικής Θράκης βρίσκεται υπό τον έλεγχο των ανταρτών του Γκερντζίκοφ.<br />
<br />
Γύρω από την ορεινή περιοχή της Στράντζας και για τρεις εβδομάδες ο κόσμος γιορτάζει.<br />
<br />
Ιδρύεται μια νέα κοινότητα, βασισμένη στις αξίες της ελευθερίας, της ισότητας, της αδελφοσύνης. Όλα τα ζητήματα σε πόλεις και χωριά φέρονται σε λαϊκές ψηφοφορίες και οι παλιές διαμάχες μεταξύ των ντόπιων βουλγαρικών και ελληνικών πληθυσμών έχουν μείνει πίσω. Καίγονται τα όλα φορολογικά μητρώα. Για περισσότερο από 20 ημέρες η Κομμούνα της Στράντζας λειτουργεί με έναν εντελώς ελευθεριακό τρόπο, με την απουσία κάθε είδους κρατικής εξουσίας.<br />
<br />
Αυτό γίνεται εμφανές και από τη στρατιωτική δομή των ανταρτών. Το ηγετικό της όργανο δεν είναι κάποιου είδους στρατιωτικό αρχηγείο, αλλά το «Κύριο Συντονιστικό Μαχητικό Σώμα». Με αυτόν τον τρόπο, οι αντάρτες υποδεικνύουν δύο πράγματα –ότι αυτό το όργανο έχει μόνο προσωρινό χαρακτήρα (δηλαδή όσο διαρκούν οι μάχες) και δεύτερον, ότι έχει καθαρά συντονιστικό ρόλο στην επανάσταση. Ο Χρίστο Στογιάνοφ, μαθητής του Γκερντζίκοφ, αναφέρει πως οι αντάρτες δεν το ονόμασαν «αρχηγείο» γιατί δεν ήθελαν να «βρομάει» μιλιταρισμό.[1]<br />
<br />
Ένα ελευθεριακό στοιχείο της εξέγερσης αυτής είναι το ότι δεν τίθεται ποτέ ζήτημα συγκεντρωτισμού της εξουσίας. Οι άνθρωποι των απελευθερωμένων οικισμών δημιουργούν συμβούλια/επιτροπές αντί της εκλογής δημάρχων/αντιπροσώπων. Ο ρόλος των πρώτων είναι να συντονίζουν, ενώ των δεύτερων να κυβερνούν. Αυτά τα συμβούλια και οι επιτροπές λειτουργούν υπό τον έλεγχο του επαναστατημένου λαού, καθώς η πραγματική εξουσία έχει ανακτηθεί από αυτόν.<br />
<br />
Πρέπει να σημειωθεί ότι υπάρχουν πολλές ομοιότητες μεταξύ της στάσης του Γκερντζίκοφ για τη ριζική ενδυνάμωση του λαού και του μαχνοβίτικου κινήματος στην Ουκρανία που ξεσπά 15 χρόνια μετά. Και οι δύο βλέπουν τον ρόλο των ανταρτών τους ως υποστηρικτικό και προσωρινό. Το ζήτημα της δημόσιας διοίκησης επαφίεται στα συμβούλια των τοπικών πληθυσμών. Σε ένα από τα κάλεσματά τους [2], οι μαχνοβίτες γράφουν ότι «Ο επαναστατικός-εξεγερτικός στρατός στοχεύει στο να βοηθήσει τους αγρότες και τους εργάτες […] μην επεμβαίνοντας στην πολιτική ζωή […] (και) καλεί τους εργάτες στην πόλη και στα περίχωρά της να προχωρήσουν στην αυτοοργάνωση […]»<br />
<br />
Όσον αφορά τον τρόπο αναδιανομής της Κομμούνας της Στράντζας, ο Γκερντζίκοφ, αφού περιέγραψε τις πρώτες στρατιωτικές νίκες της εξέγερσης, γράφει: «Αρχίσαμε να οργανωνόμαστε εσωτερικά με κάποιο τρόπο… Ο πληθυσμός ήταν χαρούμενος, στα χωριά οι άνθρωποι γιόρταζαν. Δεν υπήρχε “δικό μου-δικό σου”: στα δάση είχαμε ετοιμάσει αποθήκες. Όλες οι σοδειές συγκεντρώνονταν σε αυτά τα κοινά κτίρια. Και τα βοοειδή ήταν πλέον κοινά… Γράψαμε μια ανακοίνωση στα ελληνικά, στην οποία δηλώναμε ότι δεν πολεμάμε για να αποκαταστήσουμε το βουλγαρικό βασίλειο και να καταλάβουμε εδάφη, αλλά μόνο για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, και ότι οι Έλληνες χρειάζονται επίσης αυτά, ας μας στηρίξουν ηθικά και υλικά…»[3]<br />
<br />
Στα απομνημονεύματά του [4] ο Γκερντζίκοφ θυμάται ένα συγκεκριμένο παράδειγμα απαλλοτρίωσης και αναδιανομής αγαθών: στην πόλη Αγαθούπολη υπήρχε ένα εργοστάσιο αλατιού, όπου εκείνη την εποχή αποθηκεύονταν πάνω από 200.000 κιλά αλάτι. Τα χωριά της περιοχής ήταν φτωχά και είχαν ανάγκη από αλάτι, και έτσι ο Γκερτζίκοφ και οι αντάρτες του εισέβαλαν στο εργοστάσιο και το άφησαν ανοιχτό για να πάρουν οι χωρικοί το αλάτι και να το μοιράσουν οι ίδιοι.<br />
<br />
Η Κομμούνα της Στράντζας λειτούργησε από την αρχή της εξέγερσης και έως τα τέλη Αυγούστου 1903, όταν το τεράστιο κύμα του οθωμανικού στρατού αποτελούμενο από 40.000 στρατιώτες –καλά οπλισμένο με πεζικό, ιππικό και πυροβολικό– συντρίβει την αντίσταση του ντόπιου πληθυσμού.<br />
<br />
Ο Γκερντζίκοφ, και κάποιοι από τους αντάρτες του, καταφέρνουν να διαφύγουν στη Βουλγαρία. Εκεί ο αναρχικός θα συνεχίσει να προπαγανδίζει τις ιδέες του μέσα από εφημερίδες που θα εκδώσει όπως η «Ελεύθερη Κοινωνία», η «Αντιεξουσία» και άλλες. Το 1910, ο Γκερντζίκοφ μαζί με έναν άλλο αναρχικό –τον Πάβελ Ντελιράντεφ– θα γράψουν την αντιμιλιταριστική μπροσούρα «Πόλεμος ή Επανάσταση». Το 1912 θα ηγηθεί και πάλι μιας αντάρτικης ομάδας στην περιοχή της Στράντζας, αυτή τη φορά κατά τη διάρκεια του Βαλκανικού Πολέμου. Αργότερα, το 1919, θα είναι μεταξύ των συνιδρυτών της Ομοσπονδίας Αναρχοκομμουνιστών στη Βουλγαρία.<br />
<br />
Μετά την εγκαθίδρυση του μοναρχοφασιστικού πραξικοπήματος το 1923, αναγκάζεται να εγκαταλείψει τη χώρα και να ζήσει στο Βελιγράδι, στη Βιέννη και στο Βερολίνο. Με την αλλαγή καθεστώτος στις 9 Σεπτεμβρίου 1944, ο Γκερτζίκοφ επιστρέφει στη Βουλγαρία και καλεί τους συντρόφους του να υποστηρίξουν το νέο σοσιαλιστικό σύστημα, μόνο για να απογοητευτεί πολύ σύντομα από αυτό και να ανακαλέσει την υποστήριξή του. Το 1947, μάλιστα, θα αρνηθεί κατηγορηματικά να προταθεί ο ίδιος από το καθεστώς για απονομή βραβείου για τη συμμετοχή του στην εξέγερση του Ίλιντεν.[5] Θεωρεί ανήθικο να βραβευτεί από μια εξουσία που κρατά τους συντρόφους του αναρχικούς υπό κράτηση. Η αποφυλάκισή τους θα ήταν η καλύτερη ανταμοιβή για αυτόν. Θα πεθάνει σε βαθιά γεράματα το 1947 στην πόλη της Σόφιας.<br />
<br />
[1] <a href=http://www.savanne.ch/svoboda/anarchy/history/IlindPreobr.html title=http://www.savanne.ch/svoboda/anarchy/history/IlindPreobr.html>http://www.savanne.ch/svoboda/anarchy/history/IlindPreobr.html</a><br />
<br />
[2] „Към цялото трудещо се население на град Александровск и околността му“, 7 октомври 1919 г.<br />
<br />
[3] <a href=http://www.savanne.ch/svoboda/anarchy/history/IlindPreobr.html title=http://www.savanne.ch/svoboda/anarchy/history/IlindPreobr.html>http://www.savanne.ch/svoboda/anarchy/history/IlindPreobr.html</a><br />
<br />
[4] <a href=http://macedonia.kroraina.com/ilpr1968/ilpr1968_5.html title=http://macedonia.kroraina.com/ilpr1968/ilpr1968_5.html>http://macedonia.kroraina.com/ilpr1968/ilpr1968_5.html</a><br />
<br />
[5] <a href=http://macedonia.kroraina.com/giliev/mg/mg_predg.htm title=http://macedonia.kroraina.com/giliev/mg/mg_predg.htm>http://macedonia.kroraina.com/giliev/mg/mg_predg.htm</a><br />
<br />
ΒΙΒΛΙΟΓΡΑΦΙΑ:<br />
<br />
Георги Хаджиев: Националното освобождение и безвластният федерализъм (София: Артиздат-5, 1992).<br />
<br />
Михаил Герджиков: “Въ Македония и Одринско: Спомени на Михаилъ Герджиковъ” в Материяли за историята на македонското освободително движение, книга IX (София: Македонски Наученъ Институтъ, 1927).<br />
<br />
Христо Силянов: Спомени от Странджа. Бележки по Преображенското въстание в Одринско — 1903 г. (София: Полиграфи а.д., 1934).<br />
<br />
Надежда Недкова, Евдокия Петрова (съст.): Михаил Γерджиков и подвигът на тракийци 1903 г. (София: Университетско издателство „Св. Климент Охридски“, 2002).<br />
<br />
<a href=https://www.aftoleksi.gr/2022/01/26/kommoyna-tis-strantzas-o-michail-gkerntzikof/?fbclid=IwAR2sEIB08s6Q5yDVznqqPkLtBlEWHvJc1KO4h3QlJ7f9tnL3n6Odd49zuyU title=https://www.aftoleksi.gr/2022/01/26/kommoyna-tis-strantzas-o-michail-gkerntzikof/?fbclid=IwAR2sEIB08s6Q5yDVznqqPkLtBlEWHvJc1KO4h3QlJ7f9tnL3n6Odd49zuyU>https://www.aftoleksi.gr/2022/01/26/kommoyna-tis-strantzas-o-michail-gkerntzikof/?fbclid=IwAR2sEIB08s6Q5yDVznqqPkLtBlEWHvJc1KO4h3QlJ7f9tnL3n6Odd49zuyU</a> <br />
<BR>
دعم اللاسلطويين السودانيين في المنفىhttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328202023-08-27T18:27:01+08:00اللاسلطوييننداء التضامن الأناركي الدولي<BR>
<p style="text-align: right;"> لا يزال رفاقنا الاناركيين في السودان يأملون أن يتمكنوا من مواصلة أنشطتهم بي ادوات التعبير السلمية المجربة والغير مجربة هناك سراً. لقد قدمنا ​​مساعدات مالية قبل الحرب وحتى في بدايتها. لكن الوضع أصبح غير محتمل ولم يعد يسمح بأي نشاط اجتماعي أو سياسي. وقرر بعض أعضاء المجموعة مغادرة البلاد في أسرع وقت ممكن بعد أن تعرضت منازلهم للنهب والتدمير والإرهاب المستمر من قبل قوات الدعم السريع. وقد قرر آخرون البقاء في الوقت الحالي، ونحن نحاول مساعدتهم أيضًا</p>
<h3>[<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32815">Castellano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32814">Deutsch</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32822">Eλληνικά</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32812">English</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32813">Français</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32819">Italiano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32823">한국어</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32818">Português</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32824">Türkçe</a>]</h3><p style="text-align: right;">المنفى ليس قرارًا سهلاً أبدًا. إنه ليس خيارًا أبدًا. وبدون الموارد، يمكن أن يصبح الأمر محنة حقيقية. التضامن هو المفتاح للتغلب على هذه الأوقات الصعبة<br />
<br />
تواصلنا مع مجموعة من الاناركيين السودانيين في فبراير 2022، في خضم الاضطرابات الثورية التي تهز البلاد منذ 2018. وعلى الرغم من حواجز اللغة، تعلمنا منهم كيفية فهم هذه الثورة ولجان المقاومة بشكل أفضل. قلب. هذه المجموعة، المكونة بشكل رئيسي من الطلاب الشباب، تمت محاكاتها من قبل مجموعة فوضوية في شمال البلاد <br />
<br />
مثل العديد من البلدان خلال "الربيع العربي" عام 2011، انزلق السودان إلى حرب أهلية في أبريل من هذا العام. وشن الفريق أول حميدتي، قائد مليشيا "قوات الدعم السريع"، تمردا ضد الجيش الوطني السوداني. لقد رفضت القوى التقدمية والثورية في البلاد بالإجماع دعم طرف ضد الآخر، وهكذا تجد نفسها عالقة في رذيلة بين هذين الفصيلين الرجعيين العسكريين. لقد قُتل ما يقرب من 5000 شخص في هذا الصراع الذي لا طائل من ورائه. واضطر مليونان ونصف المليون شخص إلى مغادرة منازلهم، وفر 500 ألف منهم من البلاد. وتتزايد أعمال النهب والاغتصاب، وتشكل جزءاً من ترسانة أسلحة الحرب المستخدمة ضد المدنيين <br />
<br />
لا يزال رفاقنا الاناركيين في السودان يأملون أن يتمكنوا من مواصلة أنشطتهم بي ادوات التعبير السلمية المجربة والغير مجربة هناك سراً. لقد قدمنا ​​مساعدات مالية قبل الحرب وحتى في بدايتها. لكن الوضع أصبح غير محتمل ولم يعد يسمح بأي نشاط اجتماعي أو سياسي. وقرر بعض أعضاء المجموعة مغادرة البلاد في أسرع وقت ممكن بعد أن تعرضت منازلهم للنهب والتدمير والإرهاب المستمر من قبل قوات الدعم السريع. وقد قرر آخرون البقاء في الوقت الحالي، ونحن نحاول مساعدتهم أيضًا<br />
<br />
وبالتعاون مع رفاقنا المقيمين في هذا الجزء من العالم، نعمل على توفير أفضل الظروف الممكنة للبقاء على قيد الحياة في هذا السياق للجميع. بالنسبة لأولئك الذين ينوون البقاء، نحتاج إلى مساعدتهم على تلبية احتياجاتهم وتوفير المال جانبًا إذا كانوا بحاجة إليه من أجل المغادرة الطارئة. بالنسبة لأولئك الذين يذهبون إلى المنفى الآن، نحتاج إلى إخراجهم من البلاد، وتجنب المخاطر التي ينطوي عليها هذا النوع من الرحلات ذات الاتجاه الواحد قدر الإمكان، وتمكينهم من مواصلة نشاطهم مع الشعب السوداني في المنفى والطبقات المستغلة. في البلد المضيف لهم. ومع ذلك، فإن المنطقة غير مستقرة إلى حد كبير (الحروب الأهلية والانقلابات والأنظمة الاستبدادية الأخرى) وليس من الممكن حاليًا مغادرة البلاد<br />
<br />
وللقيام بذلك، نحتاج إلى المال، وصناديق التضامن التي تقدمها منظماتنا وحدها لا تكفي. فيما يلي النفقات المقدرة (بالدولار الأمريكي) <br />
<br />
- التأشيرات: 400 دولار<br />
- السفر: 800 دولار (هذا الرقم غير مؤكد، لأن التكاليف غير مستقرة إلى حد كبير)<br />
- الإيجار الأول في البلد المضيف: 200 دولار<br />
- الغذاء لمدة شهر في البلد المضيف: 300 دولار<br />
- تكاليف (الإقامة، الطعام، الإنترنت) لوقت الانتظار في السودان : 1000 دولار<br />
الحد الأدنى: 2700 دولار<br />
<br />
ولا تزال هذه الميزانية المؤقتة غير مستقرة في سياق اقتصادي وأمني سريع التغير. يغطي فقط النفقات لمدة شهر واحد على الأقل. لكن الوضع هو أن رفاقنا لن يتمكنوا من تلبية احتياجاتهم خلال شهر واحد فقط. من المحتمل أن نحتاج إلى المزيد من المال في النهاية. سيتم استخدام أي مبالغ يتم التبرع بها، حتى لو تجاوزت هذا المبلغ الأدنى، لتوفير الاحتياجات اليومية للرفاق حتى يتمكنوا من إعالة أنفسهم <br />
<br />
يتم جمع التبرعات من قبل رفاقنا في سويسرا الذين لديهم بالفعل هيكل تضامن دولي <br />
<br />
لا تنس أن تذكر "Solidarity Sudan" عند التبرع<br />
<br />
: أرسلوا تبرعاتكم إلى <br /></p>
Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)<br />
Place Chauderon 5<br />
1003 Lausanne<br />
Switzerland سويسرا<br />
<br />
<p style="text-align: right;">CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8 : (IBAN) رقم الحساب الدولي<br />
POFICHBEXXX :(SWIFT/BIC) سويفت/بيك<br />
PostFinance SA; Mingerstrasse 20; 3030 Bern; Switzerland :اسم البنك
<h3><a href="https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=AEFSQKQKKPQX2">Paypal</a><form action="https://www.paypal.com/donate" method="post" target="_top">
<input type="hidden" name="hosted_button_id" value="AEFSQKQKKPQX2" />
<input type="image" src="https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donate_SM.gif" border="0" name="submit" title="PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!" alt="Donate with PayPal button" />
<img alt="" border="0" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_CH/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" height="1" />
</form>
<br>
<h3><a href="https://pay.raisenow.io/drtcq">: (سويسرا) TWINT</a>
<div id="rnw-paylink-button"></div>
<script type="module">
import {PaylinkButton} from "https://pay.raisenow.io/button.js"
PaylinkButton.render('#rnw-paylink-button', {'solution-id': "drtcq", 'solution-type': "pay", language: "en", size: "small", width: "fixed", 'color-scheme': "dark"})
</script>
<h3>الموقعون</h3></p>
<h4>☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) – البرازيل<br>
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) – سويسرا<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) – أوروغواي<br>
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya – كاتالونيا، الدولة الإسبانية<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) – شيلي<br>
☆Karala – تركيا<br>
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) – الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية<br>
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) – سويسرا<br>
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) – فرنسا سويسرا و بلجيكا<br>
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre – كولومبيا<br>
☆Die Plattform – ألمانيا<br>
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista – الأرجنتين<br>
☆Anarchist Communist Group (ACG) – بريطانيا العظمى<br>
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) – غرب كوردستان/شمال وشرق سوريا / روج آفا<br>
☆Anarchist Yondae – كوريا الجنوبية<br>
☆Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA (AL/FdCA) – إيطاليا<br>
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement (AWSM) – زيلاندا الجديدة / أوتياروا</h4><BR>
Sosteniamo le anarchiche e anarchici sudanesi in esiliohttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328192023-08-26T02:19:41+08:00Varie organizzazioni anarchicheAppello di solidarietà anarchica internazionale<BR>
<P>
Le nostre compagne e i nostri compagni anarchici sono ancora in Sudan e speravano di poter continuare le loro attività di agitazione in modo clandestino. Abbiamo fornito aiuti finanziari prima della guerra e anche all'inizio. Ma la situazione è diventata insostenibile e non consente più alcuna attività sociale o politica. Alcuni membri del gruppo hanno deciso di lasciare il Paese il più rapidamente possibile dopo che la loro casa è stata saccheggiata dall'RSF. Altri hanno deciso di rimanere per il momento, e stiamo cercando di aiutare anche loro.
<h3>[<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32820">لغۃ العربیۃ</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32815">Castellano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32814">Deutsch</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32822">Eλληνικά</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32812">English</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32813">Français</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32823">한국어</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32818">Português</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32824">Türkçe</a>]</h3>
<!-- Feature Image change class to "left" to align image left-->
<div class="feature-image-right"><a href='http://www.anarkismo.net/attachments/aug2023/internationalcampaignsudan.jpeg'><img width='300' height='300' class='feature' src='http://www.anarkismo.net/cache/imagecache/local/attachments/aug2023/300_0___20_0_0_0_0_0_internationalcampaignsudan.jpg' alt='featured image'></a>
<div class="feature-caption"></div>
</div>
<!-- End of Feature Image -->
<p>
L'esilio non è mai una decisione facile. Non è mai una scelta. Senza risorse, può diventare un vero calvario. La solidarietà è la chiave per superare questi momenti difficili.<p>
Siamo entrati in contatto con un gruppo di anarchici sudanesi nel febbraio 2022, nel bel mezzo dei disordini rivoluzionari che scuotevano il Paese dal 2018. Nonostante le barriere linguistiche, abbiamo imparato da loro a comprendere meglio questa rivoluzione e i comitati di resistenza che la animano. Questo gruppo, composto principalmente da giovani studenti, è stato persino emulato da un gruppo anarchico nel nord del Paese.<p>
Come diversi Paesi durante la 'Primavera araba' del 2011, il Sudan è precipitato nella guerra civile nell'aprile di quest'anno. Il Generale Hemetti, comandante della milizia "Rapid Support Forces" (RSF), ha lanciato una ribellione contro l'esercito nazionale sudanese. Le forze progressiste e rivoluzionarie del Paese si sono rifiutate all'unanimità di sostenere una parte contro l'altra, e quindi si trovano strette nella morsa tra queste due fazioni reazionarie militarizzate. Quasi 5.000 persone sono morte in questo inutile conflitto. Due milioni e mezzo di persone sono state costrette ad abbandonare le loro case, 500.000 delle quali sono fuggite dal Paese. I saccheggi e gli stupri sono in aumento e fanno parte dell'arsenale di armi da guerra utilizzate contro i civili.<p>
Le nostre compagne e i nostri compagni anarchici sono ancora in Sudan e speravano di poter continuare le loro attività di agitazione in modo clandestino. Abbiamo fornito aiuti finanziari prima della guerra e anche all'inizio. Ma la situazione è diventata insostenibile e non consente più alcuna attività sociale o politica. Alcuni membri del gruppo hanno deciso di lasciare il Paese il più rapidamente possibile dopo che la loro casa è stata saccheggiata dall'RSF. Altri hanno deciso di rimanere per il momento, e stiamo cercando di aiutare anche loro.<p>
In collaborazione con le compagne e i compagni che risiedono in questa parte del mondo, stiamo lavorando per offrire a tutte e tutti le migliori condizioni di sopravvivenza in questo contesto. Per coloro che intendono rimanere, dobbiamo aiutarli a soddisfare le loro esigenze e a mettere da parte il denaro necessario per una partenza di emergenza. Per coloro che vanno in esilio ora, dobbiamo consentire loro di abbandonare il Paese, evitando il più possibile i pericoli che questo tipo di viaggio di sola andata comporta, e consentire loro di continuare l’attivismo con i sudanesi in esilio e le classi sfruttate nel Paese che li ospita. Tuttavia, la regione è altamente instabile (guerre civili, colpi di Stato e altri regimi autoritari) e attualmente non è possibile lasciare il Paese.<p>
Per fare questo, abbiamo bisogno di denaro, e i fondi di solidarietà delle nostre organizzazioni da soli non bastano. Di seguito sono riportate le spese stimate (in dollari USA):
<ul>
<li>Documenti (visto): $400</li>
<li>Viaggio: $800 (si tratta di stime di massima, poiché i costi sono difficilmente prevedibili)</li>
<li>Alloggio iniziale nel Paese ospitante: $200</li>
<li>Vitto per un mese nel Paese ospitante: $300</li>
<li>Costi (alloggio, cibo, Internet) per il tempo di attesa in Sudan: $1000</li>
<b >Importo minimo: $2700</b></ul><p>
Questo bilancio provvisorio rimane instabile in un contesto economico e di sicurezza in rapida evoluzione. Copre le spese solo per un minimo di un mese. Ma la situazione è tale che le nostre compagne e i nostri compagni non saranno in grado di soddisfare le loro esigenze in un solo mese. Probabilmente avremo bisogno di molto più denaro alla fine. Qualsiasi somma donata, anche eccedente questo importo minimo, sarà utilizzata per provvedere alle necessità quotidiane dei compagni, fino a quando non saranno in grado di provvedere a se stessi.<p>
Le donazioni vengono raccolte dalle nostre compagne e compagni in Svizzera, che hanno già una struttura di solidarietà internazionale.<p>
<b>Non dimenticare di menzionare "Solidarietà per il Sudan" quando si effettua una donazione.</b>
Inviare la donazione a:
Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)
Place Chauderon 5
1003 Lausanne
Switzerland<p>
<b>IBAN:</b> CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8
<b>SWIFT/BIC:</b> POFICHBEXXX
<b>Nome della banca:</b> PostFinance SA; Mingerstrasse 20; 3030 Berna; Svizzera<p>
<h3><a href="https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=AEFSQKQKKPQX2">Anche con Paypal</a><form action="https://www.paypal.com/donate" method="post" target="_top">
<input type="hidden" name="hosted_button_id" value="AEFSQKQKKPQX2" />
<input type="image" src="https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donate_SM.gif" border="0" name="submit" title="PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!" alt="Donate with PayPal button" />
<img alt="" border="0" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_CH/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" height="1" />
</form>
<br>
<h3><a href="https://pay.raisenow.io/drtcq">E con TWINT (solo Svizzera):</a>
<div id="rnw-paylink-button"></div>
<script type="module">
import {PaylinkButton} from "https://pay.raisenow.io/button.js"
PaylinkButton.render('#rnw-paylink-button', {'solution-id': "drtcq", 'solution-type': "pay", language: "en", size: "small", width: "fixed", 'color-scheme': "dark"})
</script>
Appello sottoscritto da:<br>
☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) – Brasile<br>
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) – Svizzera<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) – Uruguay<br>
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya – Catalogna<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) – Cile<br>
☆Karala – Turchia<br>
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) – Stati Uniti<br>
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) – Svizzera<br>
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) – Francia<br>
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre – Colombia<br>
☆Die Plattform – Germania<br>
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista - Argentina<br>
☆Anarchist Communist Group (ACG) Gran Bretagna<br>
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) – Rojava<br>
☆Anarchist Yondae – Corea del Sud<br>
☆Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA (AL/FdCA) – Italia<br>
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement (AWSM) – Aotearoa/Nuova Zelanda<br>
<p>
<p><BR>
Apoie anarquistas sudaneses no exíliohttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328182023-08-23T23:32:50+08:00Várias organizações anarquistasChamado anarquista internacional de solidariedade<BR>
Nossas companheiras anarquistas ainda estão no Sudão e esperam conseguir dar continuidade às suas atividades de agitação clandestina. Nós garantimos apoio financeiro antes da guerra e também no início dela, mas a situação se tornou insustentável e não nos permite mais qualquer atividade política ou social. Alguns dos membros do grupo decidiram deixar o país o mais rápido possível depois de sua casa ter sido devastada pelo RSF. Outros decidiram ficar por enquanto e nós estamos tentando ajudar eles também.
</P>
<h3>[<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32820">لغۃ العربیۃ</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32815">Castellano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32814">Deutsch</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32812">English</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32813">Français</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32819">Italiano</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32823">한국어</a>] [<a href="https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32824">Türkçe</a>]</h3><p>
<hr>
<center><h3>Chamado anarquista internacional de solidariedade</h3>
<h1>Apoie anarquistas sudaneses no exílio</h1></center>
O exílio nunca é uma decisão fácil. Nunca é uma escolha. Sem recursos, pode se tornar um verdadeiro tormento. Solidariedade é a chave para superar estes tempos difíceis.<p>
Nós entramos em contato com um grupo de anarquistas sudaneses em fevereiro de 2022, que estavam em meio a uma agitação revolucionária que vinha chacoalhando o país desde 2018. Apesar das barreiras linguísticas, aprendemos com eles como entender melhor esta revolução e os comitês de resistência que estão no seu cerne. Esse grupo, formado em sua maioria por estudantes jovens, foi inclusive imitado por um grupo anarquista no norte do país.<p>
Como muitos países durante a Primavera Árabe de 2011, o Sudão mergulhou em uma guerra civil em abril deste ano. General Hemetti, comandante da milícia "Forças de Suporte Rápido", formou uma rebelião contra o exercito nacional sudanês. As forças progressistas e revolucionárias do país se recusaram, de forma unânime, a apoiar um lado contra o outro e se encontraram entre essas duas faccções militarizadas reacionárias. Cerca de 5000 pessoas morretam nesse conflito desnecessário. Dois milhões e meio de pessoas foram obrigadas a deixar suas casas, das quais 500.000 fugiram do país. Saques e estupros estão aumentando e fazem parte do arsenal de armas de guerra utilizadas contra civis.<p>
Nossas companheiras anarquistas ainda estão no Sudão e esperam conseguir dar continuidade às suas atividades de agitação clandestina. Nós garantimos apoio financeiro antes da guerra e também no início dela, mas a situação se tornou insustentável e não nos permite mais qualquer atividade política ou social. Alguns dos membros do grupo decidiram deixar o país o mais rápido possível depois de sua casa ter sido devastada pelo RSF. Outros decidiram ficar por enquanto e nós estamos tentando ajudar eles também.<p>
Junto das companheiras que estão nessa parte no mundo, estamos trabalhando para garantir a todas as melhores condições possíveis de sobrevivência nesse contexto. Para aqueles que pretendem ficar, precisamos garantir as necessidades básicas e também a reserva financeira pro caso de uma fuga de emergência. Para aqueles em exílio agora, precisamos tirá-los do país, evitando tanto quanto for possível os perigos desse tipo de jornada só de ida e permitir que sigam militando junto das pessoas sudanesas exiladas e da classe explorada do país em que estão. Contudo, a região está extremamente instável (guerras civis, golpes de estado e outros regimes autoritários) e e no momento não é possível sair do país.<p>
Pra fazer isso precisamos de dinheiro e o fundo de solidariedade das nossas organizações não é suficiente. Abaixo estão as dispesas estimadas (em dólares estadounidenses):
<ul>
<li>vistos: $400</il>
<li>viagem: $800 (instável)</il>
<li>primeiro aluguel em outro país: $200</il>
<li>comida pra um mês em outro país: $300</il>
<li>custos pro tempo de espera no sudão: $1000</il>
<b>mínimo: $2700</b></ul><p>
Esse custo provisório é instável em um contexto econômico e de segurança que muda muito rápido. Cobre apenas os custos mínimos para um mês, mas a situação é tal que nossos companheiros não vão dar conta das suas necessidades em apenas um mês, provavelmente vamos precisar de muito mais dinheiro. Qualquer quantia doada vai ser usada para garantir as necessidades diárias dos companheiros até que consigam se manter.<p>
As doações estão sendo recebidas pelos nossos companheiros da Suíça, que já tem uma estrutura para solidariedade internacional.<p>
<b>Não esqueça de mencionar "Solidarity Sudan" ao fazer a sua doação.</b>
<h3>Envie sua doação para:</h3>
<i>Association pour la Promotion de la Solidarité Internationale (APSI)</i><br>
Place Chauderon 5<br>
1003 Lausanne<br>
Suiça<p>
<b>IBAN:</b> CH84 0900 0000 1469 7613 8<br>
<b>SWIFT/BIC:</b> POFICHBEXXX<br>
<b>Nome do Banco:</b> PostFinance SA; Mingerstrasse 20; 3030 Bern; Switzerland<p>
<h3><a href="https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=AEFSQKQKKPQX2">Também com Paypal</a><form action="https://www.paypal.com/donate" method="post" target="_top">
<input type="hidden" name="hosted_button_id" value="AEFSQKQKKPQX2" />
<input type="image" src="https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donate_SM.gif" border="0" name="submit" title="PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!" alt="Donate with PayPal button" />
<img alt="" border="0" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_CH/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" height="1" />
</form>
<h3>Assinam esse chamado:</h3>
<h4>☆Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira (CAB) – Brasil<br>
☆Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (OSL) – Suíça<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) – Uruguai<br>
☆Embat, Organització Llibertària de Catalunya – Catalunha, Estado espanhol<br>
☆Federación Anarquista Santiago (FAS) – Chile<br>
☆Karala – Turquia<br>
☆Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra (BRRN) – Estados Unidos<br>
☆Libertäre Aktion (LA) – Suíça<br>
☆Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) – França<br>
☆Grupo Libertario Vía Libre – Colômbia<br>
☆Die Plattform – Alemanha<br>
☆Roja y Negra Organización Politíca Anarquista - Argentina<br>
☆Anarchist Communist Group (ACG) Grã-Bretanha<br>
☆Tekoşîna Anarşîst (TA) – Rojava<br>
☆Anarchist Yondae – Coreia do Sul<br>
☆Alternativa Libertaria (AL/FdCA) –Itália<br>
☆Aotearoa Workers Solidarity Movement (AWSM) – Aotearoa/Nova Zelândia</h4>
<p>
<BR>
Αργεντινή: Το κλείσιμο της Sugar Engineershttp://www.anarkismo.net/article/328172023-08-23T21:22:17+08:00Organización Anarquista de TucumánΤην ημέρα αυτή διεκδικούμε τις εμπειρίες του αγώνα και της μαχητικότητας του λαού μας, κρατώντας την ταυτότητά μας ως γυναίκες και άντρες του Tucuman που, ακόμα και στις πιο δύσκολες στιγμές έχουμε μάθει να αντιστεκόμαστε και να κρατάμε ψηλά την ελπίδα για την οικοδόμηση ενός πιο δίκαιου κόσμου!Αργεντινή: Η επέτειος του κλεισίματος της Sugar Engineers <br />
<br />
Η 22 Αυγούστου σηματοδοτεί την "Εθνική Ημέρα Ζημιάς στο λαό Tucumano" από το κλείσιμο της Sugar Engineers που σήμανε και το κλείσιμο της πηγής απασχόλησης στην εν λόγω επαρχία.<br />
<br />
Με διάταγμα του 1966, επήλθε το κλείσιμο 11 από τις 27 βιομηχανίες ζάχαρης με αποτέλεσμα 50.000 απολύσεις, τη μετανάστευση 250.000 ανθρώπων και την εμφάνιση των χωριών που περιβάλλουν σήμερα μέρος της περιοχής San Miguel de Tucumán. <br />
<br />
Ωστόσο, η διαδικασία αυτή αντί να προκαλέσει παθητικότητα, έγινε αντίσταση και αγώνας. Η δικτατορία, σε συνεργασία με την εργοδοσία συνέχισε τη σκληρή γραμμή κατά των συνδικάτων. Οι εταιρείες χωρίς να σέβονται τις συλλογικές συμβάσεις και τις συμφωνημένες συνθήκες εργασίας, προκάλεσαν ξανά απεργία, ξεκινώντας ένα νέο κύμα απολύσεων που ενέτεινε το ήδη τεταμένο κοινωνικό κλίμα.<br />
<br />
Η πόλη προσχώρησε στον αγώνα με οργάνωση λαϊκών κουζινών, στάσεις εργσίας και άλλες μορφές. Το 1967, η Hilda Guerrero -ακτιβίστρια και σημαιοφόρος μιας γενιάς γυναικών που αγωνίστηκαν μαζί με τους συζύγους τους για την υπεράσπιση της εργασίας- πέφτει δολοφονημένη από την αστυνομική καταστολή στην Bella Vista.<br />
<br />
Η απάντηση της δικτατορίας ήταν αδίστακτη, φυλακίζοντας τους ηγέτες των εργαζομένων, παραποιώντας την προσωπικότητα των αγωνιστών και “παγώνοντας” τα οικονομικά του συνδικάτου τους.<br />
<br />
Το cerrojazo είχε ως κίνητρο το λεγόμενο "πρόβλημα Tucumano" υπονοώντας ότι κάποιοι άνθρωποι ήταν αντιπαραγωγικοί που προκαλούσαν μεγάλο κόστος στο έθνος και ότι οι εργαζόμενοι ήταν προβληματικοί, ένα σαφές παράδειγμα του πώς η ολιγαρχία της ζάχαρης του Tucuman (Conception Engineer) και Jujuy (Engineer Ledesma) είχε την υποστήριξη της δικτατορίας για τον έλεγχο της εθνικής αγοράς ζάχαρης. Τα γεγονότα αυτά κορυφώθηκαν με διάφορες απεργίες, πυροβολισμούς σε εργοστάσια και την καφετέρια των φοιτητών στο πανεπιστήμιο, που αποτέλεσαν την αφορμή για μια σειρά λαϊκών εξεγέρσεων μεταξύ 1969-1970, γνωστές ως Tucumanazo και κορυφώθηκαν με το Quintazo το 1972. Κατά τη διάρκεια του Tucumanazo φοιτητές και εργάτες στο κέντρο του Tucumano αγωνίστηκαν σθεναρά ενάντια στις δυνάμεις καταστολής.<br />
<br />
Ο λαός του Tucumano επέδειξε τη σθεναρή αντίστασή του στις αδικίες που προκαλούσε η δικτατορία που στη συνέχεια με την εμφάνιση του αγροτικού αντάρτικου το 1974 και το κατασταλτικό κύμα σε όλο το εύρος της Λατινικής Αμερικής θα κατέληγε να είναι ο ύμνος της στρατιωτικής δικτατορίας με την επιχειρησιακή ανεξαρτησία το 1975 και να γεννά την τελευταία πολιτική στρατιωτική δικτατορία του 1976 που διήρκεσε μέχρι το 1983 τα χρόνια αυτά υπογράφηκαν από τη συνεχή παραβίαση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, εγκλήματα κατά της ανθρωπότητας με περισσότερους από 30.000 αγνοούμενους, εκατοντάδες απαγωγές, παράνομη στέρηση της ελευθερίας, βασανιστήρια σε παράνομα κέντρα κράτησης βρεφών.<br />
<br />
Την ημέρα αυτή διεκδικούμε τις εμπειρίες του αγώνα και της μαχητικότητας του λαού μας, κρατώντας την ταυτότητά μας ως γυναίκες και άντρες του Tucuman που, ακόμα και στις πιο δύσκολες στιγμές έχουμε μάθει να αντιστεκόμαστε και να κρατάμε ψηλά την ελπίδα για την οικοδόμηση ενός πιο δίκαιου κόσμου!<br />
<br />
Organización Anarquista de Tucumán<BR>