We extend our condolences to the family and friends of Mahsa Amini and the victims of the demonstrations.
Long live the struggle and the uprisings of the oppressed in Iranian cities Long live the unity of the exploited class struggles
Defeat to the efforts of the ruling party and to those in the opposition Death to Class sovereignty in all its names and its colors

هاوپشتی سەکۆی ئەنارکیستان بۆ خرۆشانە جەماوەرییەکان لە ئێران ئەنارکیستەکان هەردەم پشتیوانی خرۆشانی خۆخۆیی جەماوەریی بوون و هەن. خەبات و خرۆشان و ڕاپەڕینی خۆخۆیی جەماوەریی نیشانەی هەڵکشانی ئاستی ناڕەزایەتی و بەرەنگاری و خۆهوشیاریی چەوساوانە دژی سیستەمی زاڵ و دەسەڵاتداران. هەرچەندە ناڕەزایەتییەکان و خرۆشانەکان و ڕاپەڕینەکان ناو و ڕەنگی جۆراوجۆر لە خۆبگرن، بەڵام لەنێوەڕۆکدا بەرنگاریبوونەوەی ستەمن، بەرەنگاربوونەوەی ملهوڕیی دەسەڵاتدارانن، ڕەتکردنەوەی سیستەمی زۆرداریی.
ڕاستە هۆکار و هاندەری ڕاپەڕینەوەی چەوساوان لەنێو شارەکانی ئێران کوشتنی مەهسا ئەمینی (کیژێکی ٢٢ ساڵەی کوردیی-زمان) بوو، کە بە گەشتێک لەتەک خێزانەکەی بۆ تاران چووبوو و بەبیانووی پەیڕەونەکردنی حیجابی ئیسلامی دەستگیرکراوە و لێیدراوە و ئەو لێدانە بوو بە هۆکاری مردنی و ملهوڕییەکی ئاشکرا و بەرچاوی دەسەڵاتداران بوو و دونیای هەژاند. بەڵام پەیام و کڕۆکی ڕاپەڕینی ئەم جارە هەم ناڕەزایەتی بوو بە کوشتنی ئەو و هەم پەیامێکی زۆر ڕادیکاڵ و سنووربەزێن بوو، بۆ نێوخۆی ئێران و جیهان، کە چەوساوان هەر زمان و ئێتنیی و ڕەگەز و تایبەتمەندییەکی کەسییان هەبێت، چەوساوەی دەستی یەک دوژمنی چینایەتی و یەک سیستەمن، ئیدی هەر ناو و ڕەنگێکی هەبێت.
ڕاپەڕینی ئەم جارە تێپەڕاندن و شکاندنی سنووربەندیی ڕاپەڕینەکانی پێشوو بوو لە باری هزر و بزووتن و ئامانج، ڕەتکردنەوەی ئەفسانەی نەتەوەچییەتی بوو، وەڵامێکی توند بوو بۆ حزبەکان کە هەر یەکە و بە ڕەنگ و ناوێک چەوسانەوە ناودەبات و هەر یەکەیان بە جۆرێک بۆ ئاراستەکردنی ناڕەزایەتیی چەوساوان هەوڵدەدات. ڕاپەڕینی ئەم جارە بەس پەیامێک بۆ ملهوڕانی نێو ئێران نەبوو، بەڵکو
هەموو ملهوڕان بوو، هەر ئاوا پێش ئەوە پەیامێک بوو بۆ هەموو چەوساوان، کە چەوسانەوە نەتەوە و نەژاد و ڕەگەز و نیشتمانی نییە، هەر ئاوا کە چەوساوان نەتەوە و نەژاد و ڕەگەز و نیشتمانیان نییە و یەک دوژمنیان هەیە، کە ئەویش بوونی چینایەتیی خۆیان و کۆمەڵی چینایەتی و سەەروەریی چینایەتییە؛ یەک ئامانجی بنەڕەتیی و نێوکۆییان هەیە، ئازادکردنی ژیان و بوون لە ستەم و هەڕەشەکانی لەنێوچوون، ڕزگارکردنی گۆی زەمینە لە چەپاوڵگەریی سەرمایەداران و لە پاوانگەریی ڕامیاران.
ئێمە وەک سەکۆی ئەنارکیستانی کوردیی-زمان خۆمان بە بەشێک لە ناڕەزایەتی هەموو چەوساوانی جیهان لە هەموو شوێنێک دەزانین و لە هەموو ناڕەزایەتی و بەرەنگاری و خۆڕێکخستن و ڕاپەڕینێکی دژی کۆمەڵ و سیستەمی چینایەتی لە هەر ئاستێک هەبێت، پشتیوانی دەکەین و بەڕادەی توانایی و بوار بەشداریی دەکەین.
ناڕەزایەتی و خرۆشان و ڕاپەڕینی سەرتاسەریی ئەم ڕۆژانە توانی هاوکاتی ڕەتکردنەدوەی هەوڵی ڕامیاران و حزبەکان بۆ دابەشکردن و پارچەپارچەکردنی ناڕەزایەتییەکان و گۆڕینی بە بەردەبازی دەسەلاتخوازیی، هەنگاونانێکی کتوپڕ و کارا بێت بۆ یەکێتییەکی سەرتاسەریی چەوساوان.
ئێمە هاوخەمیی و ناڕەزایەتی خۆمان لەتەک خێزان و دۆستانی مەهسا ئەمینی و گیانبەخشانی نێو خۆنیشاندانەکان دەردەبڕین، یادی ئەو ئازیزانە لای ئێمە بەرز و نەمر دەمێنێت.
سەرکەوتوو بێت خەبات و خرۆشانی چەوساوان لە شارەکانی ئێران سەرکەوتوو بێت یەکێتی چینایەتی چەوساوان شکست بۆ هەوڵ و پاوانگەرییەکانی ڕامیارانی دەسەڵاتدار و ئۆپۆزسیۆن بڕووخێت سەروەریی چینایەتی بە هەموو ناو و ڕەنگەکانییەوە
سەکۆی ئەنارکیستانی کوردی-زمان ٢٣ سێبتەمبەری ٢٠٢٢
٢ مهر ١٤٠٠١
https://linktr.ee/anarkistan


Support of the Kurdish-Speaking Anarchist Forum for the mass uprisings in Iran

Anarchists have always supported and will support spontaneous mass movement and uprisings. Spontaneous mass uprisings are a sign of rising level of discontent, resistance and self-consciousness of the oppressed against the dominant system and the authorities. Although the protests, riots and uprisings may take different names and colours, in the content they are resistance to oppression, resistance to the brutality of the authorities and rejection of the oppressive system.
It is true that the reason for the uprising of the oppressed in Iranian cities was the murder of Mahsa Amini (a 22-year-old Kurdish girl) who had traveled to Tehran with her family and was arrested by the authorities who allegedly accused her of improper behavior in regards to the compulsory hijab law and later died as the result of the beating. This tragic death has shown again the brutality of the authorities and it shook the world. However, the message of this uprising was both a protest against Mahsa’s killing and a very radical border breaking message to Iran and the world that the oppressed, regardless of their language, ethnicity, race, colour and personal characteristics, are oppressed by one class enemy and one system.
This uprising has broken the boundaries of previous uprisings in terms of consciousness, activities and goal, rejecting the myth of nationalism, a strong response to the political parties that each paints the oppression by their respective ideologies and each directs the protests according to their particular interests. This uprising was not only a message to the oppressors in Iran, but also to all the oppressors in the world. It was mainly a message to all the oppressed that the oppression has not got a nation, a race, a gender or a nationality They have one enemy: their own class existence, the class society and the class domination; They have one basic and common goal: it’s to liberate life and existence from oppression and threats of destruction, to liberate the world from the oppression of capitalists and the tyranny of politicians.
We, as the Kurdish-Speaking anarchist forum, consider ourselves part of the protests of all the oppressed people of the world everywhere and we support and participate as much as possible in all protests, resistance, self-organization and uprising against this class society and its system at all levels.
The present general protests and uprisings have been a sudden and effective step towards a global unity of the oppressed, while rejecting the attempts of politicians and parties to divide and fragment the protests and turn them into canon fodders through competitions for authority building.
We extend our condolences to the family and friends of Mahsa Amini and the victims of the demonstrations.
Long live the struggle and the uprisings of the oppressed in Iranian cities Long live the unity of the exploited class struggles
Defeat to the efforts of the ruling party and to those in the opposition Death to Class sovereignty in all its names and its colors

The Kurdish-Speaking Anarchist Forum

23 September 2022

https://linktr.ee/anarkistan

Soutien du Forum anarchiste de langue kurde aux protestations et soulèvements de masse en Iran
Les anarchistes ont toujours soutenu et soutiendront les protestations et soulèvements de masse spontanés. Les protestations et soulèvements de masse spontanés sont un signe de la montée du mécontentement, de la résistance et de la conscience de soi des opprimés contre le système dominant et les autorités. Bien que les protestations, les émeutes et les soulèvements puissent prendre des noms et des couleurs différents, dans le contenu, ils sont résistance à l'oppression, résistance à la brutalité des autorités et rejet du système oppressif.
Il est vrai que la raison des protestations des opprimés dans les villes iraniennes étaient le meurtre de Mahsa Amini (une jeune fille kurde de 22 ans) qui s'était rendue à Téhéran avec sa famille et avait été arrêtée par les autorités qui l'auraient accusée d'avoir un comportement inapproprié en ce qui concerne la loi obligatoire sur le hijab et est décédée plus tard des suites des coups. Cette mort tragique a montré à nouveau la brutalité des autorités et a secoué le monde. Cependant, le message de ces protestations était à la fois une protestation contre le meurtre de Mahsa et un message très radical à l'Iran et au monde selon lequel les opprimés, quelles que soient leur langue, leur origine ethnique, leur race, leur couleur et leurs caractéristiques personnelles, sont opprimés par un ennemi de classe. et un système.
Ces protestations et soulèvements ont brisés les frontières des soulèvements précédents en termes de conscience, d'activités et d'objectif, rejetant le mythe du nationalisme, une réponse forte aux partis politiques qui peignent chacun l'oppression par leurs idéologies respectives et dirigent les protestations chacun en fonction de ses intérêts particuliers. . Ces protestations n’étaient pas seulement un message aux oppresseurs en Iran, mais aussi à tous les oppresseurs du monde. C'était principalement un message à tous les opprimés que l'oppression n'a pas de nation, de race, de sexe ou de nationalité. Ils ont un ennemi : leur propre existence de classe, la société de classe et la domination de classe ; Ils ont un objectif fondamental et commun : libérer la vie et l'existence de l'oppression et des menaces de destruction, libérer le monde de l'oppression des capitalistes et de la tyrannie des politiciens.
Nous, en tant que forum anarchiste de langue kurde, nous nous considérons comme faisant partie des protestations de tous les peuples opprimés du monde partout et nous soutenons et participons autant que possible à toutes les protestations, résistances, auto-organisations et soulèvements contre cette société de classe et son système à tous les niveaux.
Les protestations et les soulèvements généraux actuels ont été une étape soudaine et efficace vers une unité mondiale des opprimés, tout en rejetant les tentatives des politiciens et des partis pour diviser et fragmenter les protestations et transformer les insurgés en chair à canon à travers des compétitions pour le renforcement de l'autorité.
Nous adressons nos condoléances à la famille et aux amis de Mahsa Amini et aux victimes des manifestations
Vive la lutte et les soulèvements des opprimés dans les villes iraniennes Vive l'unité des luttes de classes exploitées
Défaite aux efforts du parti au pouvoir et àceux de l'opposition
Mort à la souveraineté de classe sous tous ses noms et toutes ses couleurs

Forum anarchiste de langue kurde

23 septembre 2022

https://linktr.ee/anarkistan

We are members of the working class. We have no great fortunes to defend. Instead, the Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group raises the banner of liberty, equality and solidarity. These principles, as promised by the foundation of liberal, democratic republics, can only be made real when there are no more bosses, or governments, or the threat of poverty hanging over our heads. Such a society, based on libertarian communism, will be freer than any democracy, be more equal than any capitalist republic, and unleash a solidarity unknown to the capitalist class and which can never exist between classes. The new world will relegate monarchy, along with every other form of government, to the history books – and King Charles III will be known, we hope, as Charles the Last.

The Queen of England (as well as of Australia, Canada and numerous other former British colonies) has died. Mass media have suspended normal programming to talk about nothing else and their actions can best be described as competitive hagiography, not only of the Queen herself, but even of the Empire she represented.

Behind the non-stop coverage there is a real anxiety. The death of a monarch has always been a moment of crisis, and when the dead monarch has had an exceptionally long reign the crisis is especially acute. In days when the monarch wielded political power (which is still the case in some countries), it could open windows of opportunity for struggle, and even for power to change hands (a potential which was sometimes realised). Today, under capitalism, ‘constitutional monarchies’ are nationalist spectacles for the masses, so the crisis is different. It is the end of one show and the beginning of another. Will it rate as well? How will people feel about the new star? How should the new show be promoted? Will it help to perpetuate subservience to tradition, the manufactured image of a unified nation, and a seemingly unchangeable ‘natural order’?

For us, the death of the monarch raises a few different issues. Firstly, there is the question of inherited privilege: Elizabeth’s eldest son is due to take the throne as Charles III, but how did he acquire that right? He hasn’t been voted in, he didn’t top the class in a competitive examination, and he wasn’t subjected to a process of interviews and submission of references. He became heir to the throne by, as some would say, choosing his parents carefully.

As the epitome of inherited privilege, monarchy is an affront to every libertarian and egalitarian sensibility. Once upon a time, the emerging capitalist class was enthusiastic about abolishing monarchies, seeking to replace them with democratic republics based on a formal recognition of equal rights. It was promised (with varying levels of sincerity and radicalism) that a system of private property, operating in a competitive market, would create equality of opportunity – a level playing field, where wealth could be earned through hard work, thrift and enterprise. Revolutions were made under this banner and a particularly recalcitrant French king lost his head over the matter.

Things are different today. The ideology of capitalism still requires the pretence that wealth is earned, but faces the problem of capital’s inherent tendency towards concentration, as well as the earnest desire of each successive generation of capitalists to pass their fortunes on to their descendants. Inherited wealth can certainly be secure under a republican system of government, but the privilege of inheritance has, over centuries, given the bourgeoisie a natural affinity for hereditary power.

Australia provides an illuminating example. There has been a campaign for an Australian republic for about thirty years, but the argument advanced for it is that the monarch is English and, as Australia is now a grown-up country, Australia’s head of state should be Australian. It is an argument that would simply not apply if the debate was being had in England. As a result, public support for a republic is tepid and far weaker than the full-throated defence of tradition on the part of social reactionaries. The ‘progressive’ case for a republic offers no benefits other than the elimination of a relic so antiquated it should be embarrassing.

Replacing the monarchy with an Australian republic would not necessarily address Australia’s original sin: colonisation and the dispossession of the Aboriginal people that followed. The current republican movement would definitely not address it, given its determination that the one and only change to the Constitution would be to create an Australian head of state. Meanwhile, the movement supporting Aboriginal sovereignty grows yearly, demanding a reckoning with dispossession and genocide. One movement is based on a pretended national unity, while the other is based on resistance to a real and monstrous injustice.

Still, clearly some capitalists fear that making a democratic, rather than nationalist, argument for a republic calls into question all other inherited privileges, including those of far more significance than a symbolic head-of-state. It would be to declare that James Packer, Lachlan Murdoch, Anthony Pratt, Gina Rinehart and Ryan Stokes have no right to the billions they inherited or stand to inherit, and which will serve as the basis for their continued exploitation of the working class. And this is only the tip of the iceberg. The old money of Sydney and Melbourne, built on the foundations of genocide, and originally accumulated by bloodthirsty squatters, or by shysters who gouged gullible miners during the Gold Rush, has been laundered by a succession of heirs before reaching its present hands.

We are members of the working class. We have no great fortunes to defend. Instead, the Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group raises the banner of liberty, equality and solidarity. These principles, as promised by the foundation of liberal, democratic republics, can only be made real when there are no more bosses, or governments, or the threat of poverty hanging over our heads. Such a society, based on libertarian communism, will be freer than any democracy, be more equal than any capitalist republic, and unleash a solidarity unknown to the capitalist class and which can never exist between classes. The new world will relegate monarchy, along with every other form of government, to the history books – and King Charles III will be known, we hope, as Charles the Last.

DOWN WITH THE KING!

FOR WORKERS’ POWER & INDIGENOUS SELF-DETERMINATION!

Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group (MACG)

https://melbacg.wordpress.com/2022/09/14/the-queen-is-dead/

The unions in Australia today are a shadow of their former selves, led by cowards whose main job is to police their members to ensure that unions aren't fined out of business by the vicious anti-union laws. This needs to be turned around completely before workers will consider fighting for a Just Transition – but also for workers to defend working conditions, maintain health and safety and be adequately compensated for the inflation that is now ripping through the economy and devastating real wages. And to do that, we need to take on the union bureaucracy and beat them.

Each year, the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere increases. Polar ice melts to an unprecedented degree. The Great Barrier Reef suffers worse and more frequent bleaching events. Droughts lengthen. Record breaking floods hit Pakistan. Unprecedented heatwaves bake China, Europe, India, West Asia or Australia. A polar vortex diverts icy storms deep into North America. And, behind the year-to-year variations, the global temperature trend climbs ever higher.

This is climate change. And what we're seeing is only the beginning. Even if an emergency transition is begun today, the planet will become a good deal hotter before it starts cooling. Scientists warn that every fraction of a degree of warming beyond 1.5ºC increases the risk of setting off runaway global warming that would wreck all known ecosystems, kill 80 to 90% of the human population and destroy industrial civilisation. This is the burning issue of our time. The fate of the biosphere and, within it, the human race, is in the hands of the people alive today.

In response to the growing threat of climate change and the inaction of capitalist governments, a great social movement has arisen. Millions are taking action to stop green house emissions. Unfortunately, the movement has no effective strategy. People's energy is being directed into activities that are only part-solutions, marginally effective or sometimes even counter-productive.

The problem: capitalism

Capitalism is the fundamental cause of climate change and the sooner we get rid of it, the easier it will be to eliminate greenhouse emissions and begin restoring a sustainable climate. Some major global capitalist industries are based on the production or consumption of fossil fuels, having two consequences.

Firstly, powerful countries, huge corporations and many billionaires have large fossil fuel investments protect. Even if they also invest in renewable energy, they would lose money by, for example, shutting a coal mine which still has coal that can be profitably extracted. The same goes for corporations reliant on consuming fossil fuels. A rapid switch to electric vehicles would make Ford's existing factories write-offs and force it to build EV factories decades before they are planned, purely to prevent its competitors taking its market share.

The second consequence is perhaps even more powerful. A political decision that huge corporations have to close down and billionaires be forced to write off their fortunes would be a terrifying example that threatens all capitalist corporations. The market must always rule and, while it may be tweaked, it can under no circumstances be made subordinate to the general good. If trillion-dollar corporations can be sent to the wall because society needs it, what capitalist is safe from having their fortune confiscated?

An additional consideration is more basic and applies to the entire relationship between capitalism and the environment, well beyond climate change. This is that capitalism is addicted to endless growth and can't survive in a situation where humanity has to live within planetary limits. This slows the efforts of those capitalists who do want to stop climate change and creates ever-more-frequent crises through habitat destruction, resource depletion and environmental pollution.

Current strategies

Until recently, the most common demand of the climate movement was for a carbon price. Set a ceiling on emissions, reduce it by a predictable amount each year and let market actors buy and sell credits to allow the market to find the least-cost path to decarbonisation. The political strategy which goes with this is electoral – vote in a government which will price carbon. This is total neo-liberalism and would force the price of decarbonisation onto the shoulders of those least able to bear the burden. The rich can continue their high carbon footprint lifestyles because they can afford it, while kids have to wear clothes they've grown out of because their working class parents spend all their money on petrol for driving to work.

We saw how this plays out in Australia a decade ago. The Labor Government and the Greens in 2010 introduced a carbon price, but they were crucified by the reactionary press for it. Their neo-liberal strategy drove the working class into the arms of the climate deniers and brought Labor to a heavy defeat. In short, carbon pricing can't work. If it doesn't have holes in it that negate its ostensible purpose, it will be politically unviable.

More recently, the movement has shifted to demanding that fossil fuel production be shut down. Usually, this is framed as a demand for no new coal or new gas. As an immediate demand it is inadequate (most existing reserves have to stay in the ground, too, to preserve a liveable climate). It is also, though, a threat to the jobs of workers in fossil fuel industries and the existence of communities reliant on them. As a coal mine is worked out, it is often replaced by a nearby one, sometimes operated by the same company.

This tactic is advanced electorally by the same people previously arguing for a carbon price, but it is also attracting supporters of more militant tactics. Here in Australia, we have Blockade Australia, while Britain has seen the emergence of Extinction Rebellion and, this year, Just Stop Oil. Direct action movements have emerged in Germany, the United States and Canada as well. All of them have come under heavy police and government repression, even the dogmatically pro-police XR. The Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group opposes all police repression against environmental groups. We are especially incensed at the campaign of police persecution and lies against Blockade Australia over a botched police operation in June this year and call for all charges to be dropped.

The MACG's issue with Blockade Australia and similar organisations overseas isn't that their disruptive tactics go too far. Instead, we think they don't cause anywhere near enough disruption. A network of small secretive affinity groups can only cause minor and sporadic interruptions to the corporations destroying the planet. Furthermore, the activists are targeted with massive penalties which far outweigh the impact of their actions. We support these protestors, because at least they're doing something, but this isn't how the movement will win. A better strategy is needed.

Class struggle

The people best placed to stop the capitalist death machine in its tracks are the people who keep it going on a day-to-day basis: the working class. When workers organise in the workplace to fight for their interests, they threaten the power of capital at its source. And when workers understand their power to fight, they can lift their heads and look at the uses their employers make of their labour. When it comes to climate change, the workers who are necessary for fossil fuels to be produced, transported and consumed are the ones who can stop it.

Working class action to stop climate change would have very different dynamics from the current movement. Instead of small groups of martyrs for the cause, we'd see workers acting en masse and being protected from police retaliation by sheer strength of numbers. The action would also dodge the trap of “jobs vs the environment” that the capitalist media love to set up, because the workers would be fighting for a Just Transition they designed themselves.

This program of class struggle is not a fairy tale. Instead, it's the only possible path forward. And it is possible, as demonstrated by the Green Bans of the NSW Builders Labourers Federation in the 1970s. Workers can and do take up radical social issues, provided it is an extension of the fight against the bosses. The Green Bans weren't imposed by workers who sacrificed their material interests, but by workers who fought for and won big wage rises, shorter hours and much improved health and safety.

The unions in Australia today are a shadow of their former selves, led by cowards whose main job is to police their members to ensure that unions aren't fined out of business by the vicious anti-union laws. This needs to be turned around completely before workers will consider fighting for a Just Transition – but also for workers to defend working conditions, maintain health and safety and be adequately compensated for the inflation that is now ripping through the economy and devastating real wages. And to do that, we need to take on the union bureaucracy and beat them.

Stopping climate change therefore requires re-building the unions in Australia from the ground up, in the teeth of opposition from the union officials and the entire capitalist class. The struggle for the environment is the same as the struggle for workers' immediate issues. So environmentalists who are members of the working class should join their union and start organising.

GREEN BANS FOR A JUST TRANSITION

*This article is from the newsletter of the Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group (MACG) ‘The Anvil” Vol 11, No 4, July-August 2022.

*If you want to download this issue go here: https://melbacg.files.wordpress.com/2022/08/anvil-vol-11-no-4-web.pdf

This document was produced by the Brazilian Anarchist Coordination [Coordenação Anarquista Brasileira] (CAB), a group of anarchist organizations working collaboratively across Brazil. It is translated and reprinted here with the permission of our sister organizations participating in CAB.

The document has also served as an anchor point in recent discussions on feminism within Black Rose / Rosa Negra. We hope that by making this text available in English for the first time, we can increase its reach and impact.

Translation by Enrique Guerrero-López

Our Conception of Feminism from the Perspective of Organized Anarchism

The women that are part of the organizations that make up the Brazilian Anarchist Coordinator (CAB) see ourselves as part of a long tradition of anarchist women that have denounced and struggled radically against gender oppression; therefore, the exploitation of labor also acquires a particular form for us. We are part of the many, many anarchist women that, although they have been erased by the history of those from above, have confronted the violence we face as women head on; women who have guided new ways of loving and have problematized the bourgeois family model that is the basis of the system; women who reacted to macho violence, often coming from their own comrades; self-taught women, who promoted literacy and imagined a liberating education, who acted in the press by creating and writing in libertarian newspapers; women who took up arms! These fearless and unsubmissive women fought against an oppressive system for a dignified and free life and sowed seeds of liberation all over the world. There are many anonymous women fighters erased in the history of men. There are many who have gone before us, many who are not with us. We carry their legacy within us.

This story did not begin with us, and it will not end tomorrow. There is a lot of violence and a lot to do.

As anarchists, we believe that feminism and the anti-patriarchal struggle, as well as the anti-racist and anti-colonial struggle, are fundamental strategies to destroy this system. We understand that power relations are structured in specific ways, and it is necessary to understand them if we want to destroy the system of oppression as a whole. We believe in the development of militants that have an active participation in popular organizations; that develop action through direct action and direct democracy. In this sense, we advocate a class struggle oriented and grassroots feminism. Our feminism is a social and collective struggle. We do not believe in a specialization of feminist struggle, instead we believe that feminism must pass through all our organizations; that feminist formulations and methodologies can aim not at individual freedom, but at the conquest of the freedom of each territory and of each oppressed body.

This is our conception.

What are Our Guidelines?

Historically, anarchism has fought against the various oppressions suffered by those from below; therefore, it understood that the oppressed went beyond a restricted class category. By adopting a broad vision of class, anarchism pointed toward the idea that the oppressions to which we are subjected are structured in the most diverse ways. Thus, the feminism that we claim as anarchists could not have as its center only the idea of class, for example. This approach would lead us to a superficial analysis, in which gender and race would not have relevance, and therefore we would not be close to the social reality that we experience. In the end, such an approach would also not be in accordance with our conception of anarchism.

It is due to analysis restricted to class only that there are, for example, spaces in the black movement where the question of gender is in the background and black women are silenced. Or, on the other hand, by not taking up class, we run the risk of elaborating an analysis separated from the material reality of the black periphery question, for example. In the same way, there are also spaces for women where neither class nor race is discussed, and working women and black women cannot meet, much less identify with the speeches and discussions that take place there. Or, there are certain spaces where class is central, issues of race and gender are in the background, and white and non-white women do not feel comfortable or identified at all.

We understand that gender oppression is correlated with the issue of race and class, and this is something that changes according to the social and material contexts in which subjects are inserted. In this sense, the idea of “intersectionality” serves us as an instrument of analysis of domination, helping us to understand certain issues. In this sense, we understand that oppressions are transversal (they cut across and are crossed by other oppressions), being present in all areas of our lives and society. However, we cannot start from there and confuse this transversal character with the idea that oppressions are totally homogeneous or that they are simply a sum of several types of oppressions. Moreover, we must see social reality as a constructor of oppression and not as a consequence. At the same time, we cannot think only of questions of theory or ideology without looking at and understanding how things happen in practice (and materially), so as not to lose sight of the fact that our feminism is far from individual liberation or behavior, but is a social and collective struggle.

Therefore, for us in the CAB, our feminism can only be the “feminism of those from below,” which considers the conditions of gender, race, class and sexual diversity, understanding that these elements and their power relations go together to structure the relations of domination that pass through us.

In short, we believe that our feminism, as especifista anarchists, must be a class struggle oriented, anti-racist, anti-capitalist, non-exclusive (and trans-inclusive) feminism with a revolutionary perspective aimed at a rupture with the state.

Critique of Eurocentric Liberal Feminism

As anarchist women who believe in fighting alongside those from below, we have disagreements with and critiques of Eurocentric liberal feminism. In the course of its development, liberal feminism has guided individual freedoms, expressing and defending a view that “we are all equal”. In this trajectory, it attempted to equate women with white, bourgeois men, claiming for them the same rights as him. Like conceptions of liberalism, this feminism ends up making claims that are limited to the level of individualism.

Thus, our critique of liberal feminism refers to its advocacy of individual liberation only, without reflection on class. In this way, it reproduces capitalist logic when it thinks of women’s emancipation only as recognition and social mobility, for example, within a society that remains unequal. In this conception, women would have the right to be in the same jobs as men, but when they are there, the logic of inequality continues to reproduce itself. This liberal feminism has appropriated concepts and guidelines that are historically from the popular and women’s struggle. It appropriates, in a distorted way, many concepts to conform to liberal and neoliberal precepts. This appropriation serves capitalism in many ways. One example is the use of the very idea of equality by the market, with its mass propaganda, which contributes to the naturalization of a supposed “equality” that already exists, naturalizing the logics of capitalism and the state, which remain intact. In this way, the market feeds the false illusion of equality, preaching as “empowerment” that women can “succeed in big companies”, in State positions, etc., reaching high positions or leadership, in a meritocratic logic. However, when they are in these positions, they continue to work for and within the system, without questioning why other women have not “succeeded”, without attributing this inequality to the capitalist system.

This process of distortion also occurred with the concept of “Empowerment”, whose contours were shaped by the work of Freirean critical pedagogy. It is important to remember that this concept was born rooted in popular movements and was appropriated in a distorted way by liberal feminism. Therefore, when we speak of empowerment, we must take it up from its collective root. Only collective empowerment will make a difference in the struggle of women.

For liberal feminism, a simulated “equality” within the capitalist system itself is enough. For us it is necessary to overthrow capitalism and the state. And this is a condition for the construction of true freedom and equality for women. In this sense, we also note that we must go beyond the Eurocentric character of this feminism. For this, we take as a reference point the analysis that Kurdish women are building and their critique of the Eurocentric character that has influenced the construction of feminism in the world. We need to build a feminism with our feet on the ground of our own Latin American reality. And this is done through an understanding of our own history and our own construction as Latin American women, making use of our experiences and our accumulations, deconstructing and constructing concepts that are based on our concrete reality.

For a Transfeminism

For us, especifista anarchist women, it is extremely important to advance the conception of feminism that we want to build at the national level. Therefore, it is necessary to make it clear that our feminism includes trans people (men and women). For this reason, we do not identify ourselves with “radical feminism” (or with a trans-exclusive feminism) because, as anarchists, we advocate the end of all domination in society. For us it makes no sense to think of a feminism that excludes the oppressed, those who are being abused and massacred by transphobia, which permeates our society every day. We need to preserve and defend the dignity, respect and rights of all people, absolutely all human beings. Of course, we cannot fail to relate heteronormativity to machismo. This is a factor that ends up reverberating in the discussion on the construction of family and work. Therefore, it is important to consider the issue of masculinity as a gender discussion as well, since we are all affected by it and the way people see it.

Rejecting Feminism that is Exclusive to Women

We also believe that exclusive spaces are important to strengthen people of a certain social group and that we should understand and respect their needs. Therefore, we see no problem in having exclusive spaces (we also understand their strength, importance and necessity) when demands arise in the spaces we build, but we understand that the movement should not happen only in this way. In this sense, we also believe that we need to have mixed spaces, because gender is something that cuts across the reality of men and women, not only women. Men also feel various pressures from society to perform their masculinity in a way that common sense has already determined for them hundreds of years ago. So, we understand the importance of men also having their own spaces for training, discussion and debate to be able to think of new ways of acting in the political and social sphere; reviewing the attitudes and vices that the structure of machismo society makes them reproduce daily, whether in their personal, professional or political lives. We also have to understand that the inclusion of cis men is different from the inclusion of trans people. We understand then that a trans woman, for example, must be inserted in an exclusive women’s space and that a trans man must be inserted in a men’s space and both must be accepted in those spaces.

Advocating the Extension of Social Rights Through Popular Struggle and Direct Action

Considering that women’s struggle often needs to go through the conquest of very basic programs that will remain the responsibility of the State, we think that we should not abandon these programs, since we cannot wait for the revolution to conquer basic rights. In other words, we cannot work only with a maximum program. The social revolution will be built in the daily processes of struggle and popular power, in the advances and conquests of more policies and rights, as well as their maintenance.

Women are the first to be neglected, they are the first to be laid off in a crisis, they are the ones who suffer the most from increases in the cost of food and the cost of living. As for maternity, the very spaces of reproduction of maternity end up being appropriated by the State (Pre-natal, day-care centers, etc.). We place ourselves in the struggle for these basic directives within the limits of the State because it must be required to guarantee these rights and, if the State does not provide them, we must take them away, with our own hands and our struggle. This is how we defend the struggle for housing, day care centers, humanized childbirth and better assistance in hospitals, education and health, which directly affect the lives of everyday women.

We are aware that we are making demands of the State while we long for its end. On the other hand, our position is one of confrontation and not of asking the State. We confront the State so that it can provide today what is urgent for the lives of women from below. In this sense, we have chosen to use the term “public policies” instead of “reforms”. What we demand in confrontation with the State is the viability of public policies that make a difference for women. And it is always a demand for rights that come through struggle and popular organization. Along with this, we believe in and seek to sow autonomous efforts by women within their communities. While the State does not guarantee policies that can provide the minimum, we must build, support and defend, together with the communities, self-managed and autonomous efforts that aim to organize collective outlets for women’s lives. Therefore, we must build and show solidarity with the experiences of collective self-organization of childcare, the possibilities of building “cooperatives” or cooperative work, which are outlets for the maintenance of women in their communities. These experiences are processes that contribute to the construction of popular power, self-management, autonomy and empowerment of working women and women from below. These are principles that we defend; and therefore they are also our tasks and responsibility.

Thus, we stand beside women from below in this struggle for basic rights, but it must achieve revolutionary transformations. In this effort, we advocate for popular struggle and direct action in the conquest of rights and the advance for popular power, along with the strategy of Self-Defense, not only in the physical sense, but also as a collective posture, being thought through, elaborated and worked on together with our comrades. In this process, we are building daily, in the struggle, a rupture with the State, capitalism and patriarchy, and the advance towards the construction of self-organization and autonomy.

Armed with these broad principles and building a feminism based on the relationship between theory and practice, we stand in the ranks of women’s struggles, as anarchists and feminists! May feminism be a reality for women from below and may women’s struggles grow and spread with militancy, mutual aid and sisterhood in all corners of the world!

For people’s power!

For a life of dignity, freedom and not submissiveness!

Up with those who fight!

External Link:: https://blackrosefed.org/feminism-and-organized-anarchism-cab/

The steady revival of organized Anarchism in the anglosphere has led to a re-engagement with the fundamental strategic questions of Anarchism. In what way should a revolutionary organization be structured? How should a revolutionary organization struggle for reforms? What role does the revolutionary organization play in the revolutionary process? In grappling with these questions the most novel contemporary insights have undoubtedly come from the Anarchist movement in Latin America, where the tradition of organized, class struggle anarchism was growing and successfully struggling whilst in the anglosphere it was languishing in a long period of decline.

In the spirit of clarifying and spreading the debates of Latin American Anarchism to the anglosphere, I contacted Felipe Correa in early 2022 and asked him questions that various comrades had raised during reading groups and informal discussions concerning the tendency – questions that could not be easily answered by the texts available to us. His extensive response to my questions, ranging from the notion of power, the role of organizations, and the relation between Anarchism and class politics, offers valuable and unique insight into this important tendency.

[Português]