Anarchic update news all over the world - 19.11.2017

Today's Topics:

   
1.  Poland, rozbrat: Anarchist relations taking part in the
      occupation of the General Directorate of State Forests Diana &
      Marta - Report of the arrested anarchist [machine translation]
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
2.  [Peru] 1st Anarchist Fair in San Marcos By ANA (pt) [machine
      translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
3.  Kurdistan, Riza Altun: Socialism cannot be built with the
      tools of capitalism - part 2 (ca) (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
4.  [Spain] In full libertarian drift By ANA (pt) [machine
      translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
5.  Greece, anarchist-federation: Anarchist Federation: November
      17, All in the streets (gr) [machine translation]
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
6.  Indonesia, Student Federation of Libertarian Salatiga - Call
      for the National Congress [machine translation] 
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1





On November 11, 2017, I joined the Forests Camp for the Forests, and I entered the 
building of the General Directorate of the State Forests in Warsaw to begin the occupation 
of the leading predatory forestry policy of the institution. When we entered the building, 
we banners with the slogans: "The last such forest in Europe. Stop the pruning!", "Forest 
is not raw", "Retire harvesters"; At the door we put a barrel to which the activists 
crouched. Inside the Mafia Institution, we set up a second blockade - environmentalists 
cling to the barriers with pipes, handcuffs and u-locks. After about 20 minutes, the 
police arrived at the building and called for food. The state servicemen, along with state 
foresters (forest guards) surrounded the demonstrators in the middle of the cordon, 
separating us from those who were outside. At that time, the cops saw the clanging tools 
and planned the closure of the blockade. LP delegated to state bargaining, whose task was 
to scare off activists who would meet them if they voluntarily left the institution. 
Negotiations started from the beginning were the pressure on us - the other side did not 
intend to negotiate anything, criminalized our actions and threatened us with 
consequences. Renowned for his choleric behavior, the state forest director Jan 
Tomaszewski turned out to be a coward - he did not reach the talk with immobilized 
activists. Negotiations started from the beginning were the pressure on us - the other 
side did not intend to negotiate anything, criminalized our actions and threatened us with 
consequences. Renowned for his choleric behavior, the state forest director Jan 
Tomaszewski turned out to be a coward - he did not reach the talk with immobilized 
activists. Negotiations started from the beginning were the pressure on us - the other 
side did not intend to negotiate anything, criminalized our actions and threatened us with 
consequences. Renowned for his choleric behavior, the state forest director Jan 
Tomaszewski turned out to be a coward - he did not reach the talk with immobilized activists.

Approx. h. At 16.30, we completed an external blockade at the front of the building, 
recognizing that it was more important to maintain the occupation. About 5:30 pm police 
officers began removing our blockade. At first, the apparatches warned us that they would 
use force against the protesters, and then began to tear up people doing so. sitting. 
Environmentalists were sent "specialists" equipped with shears for cutting rods. Police 
sadists, as usual, showed a thoughtlessness - they stretched the pinned people's shoulders 
so as to give them the most pain. After some time they decided to divide the u-loc, which 
I climbed to the railing. When they decided that they would not twist the barrier from the 
floor, they began cutting the metal bar with cancer. In no way did they protect my neck 
and face from possible injuries. One of the policemen pulled the bike up, so that I was 
subdued all the time; The second policeman held my head behind my elbow, and the third cut 
the rod. During the activities I heard: "you wanted it yourself". At the intersection of 
the u-loc, I was picked up by five policemen, still in a cycling collar around the neck. 
During the arrest, the policeman knotted me with handcuffs and urged me to stand on my 
feet, and another apprentice would cut the u-locks so they could be removed from the neck. 
I refused, because there was a fear that the metal would hit my neck. One of the policemen 
grabbed the end of the u-strike, and the other extended the incision to squeeze the rods 
through my neck. I told them not to do it because they put my life and health at risk, but 
they did not respond to my requests in any way.

What was going on outside this time?
The anarchist's participation in the blockade outside the building

Protesters who did not pin on the outside door at the entrance door and did not 
participate in the blockade inside the building exchanged speech, kept the banners, made 
the whistle sound, distributed flyers. At one point, the police, who were increasingly 
coming to the site of the occupation, suddenly cut off the cordon outside of the occupants 
of the occupied building.

Seeing this, we came to the activists pinned to the barrel and close with them wrapped 
around and at the same time demanding the cessation of the police. In response, the police 
tugged at the people, one person got a blow in the face. We were dragged outside the 
second cordon, which stood in front of the building, separating the protestors from all 
the pinned. In spite of all their efforts, no one was allowed to stay there for a few 
hours, and there came a strange number of police officers, forming new cordons. The 
situation became more and more tense. When the lock was interrupted inside the building 
and the substitute prisoner wanted to take out the protesters, we made siting in front and 
behind the vehicle, solidifying with the detainees. Then the police went into complete 
madness. She torn violently the people sitting at the front, and at the back she 
surrounded the wheel, Thanks to the pressure of the protesters, I managed to get out. The 
police kept turning us around, tugging at us. Accidentally caught girl was crushed to the 
ground by several officers and detained. She received an absurd accusation of infringement 
of the inviolability and violation of home law even though she was not in the building at 
all (sic!). Finally, the chaotic behavior of the officers weakened enough that we could 
leave the blockade and move to the police station where they had detained to begin a 
solidarity action there. even though she was not in the middle of the building (sic!). 
Finally, the chaotic behavior of the officers weakened enough that we could leave the 
blockade and move to the police station where they had detained to begin a solidarity 
action there. even though she was not in the middle of the building (sic!). Finally, the 
chaotic behavior of the officers weakened enough that we could leave the blockade and move 
to the police station where they had detained to begin a solidarity action there.

Inadequate police response and uncritical interaction with the LP are no surprise to us. 
In Warsaw we met a model of action known to us from the Bialowieza Forest. Our simple 
posture during the protest so that next week we meet someone from the LP management met 
with the answer: police violence and allegations of crime and the eloquent silence of the 
corporation LP. The events that have articulated clearly show how closely "public" and 
private companies are involved, the protection of the forest police (police), and what is 
the position of the authorities against the public who wants to directly protest their 
opposition. It is brutally pacified and criminalized, the police remain impaired,

Commissar
Anarchist arrest report - continuation

At the police station I heard that I was a "hunting flea" of a policeman arresting me. The 
policemen allied themselves with sexist comments to the detained activists, turned to us 
at "you" and issued the command "go!", "Sit!", "Sign!". During the search I heard: "There 
is no need to repent". During my personal check, I was given lingerie because, according 
to the police, it was probable that "the detainee would be detained", I was checked for 
hidden razor blades and other sharp tools. The police kept saying they were "pissed off" 
because we kept them at work. In retaliation, handcuffed handcuffs were tightly packed and 
misleading, inter alia, that the lawyer who came to us was not "our" lawyer. Some people 
refused to see the lawyer at the time.

22 activists were placed in custody in the whole of Warsaw. Accused, we were transported 
to custody, where the parties continued until early hours. No "water" was given. Some 
people got dry bread, Chinese soup and salad when they refused to eat non-vegetarian 
meals. After 24 hours, 15 people have heard charges of committing an offense under Art. 
193 of the Penal Code, and two others on the violation of the bodily integrity of the 
bodily officer. During our arrest under command at ul. Opaczwska still had a solidarity 
action. Hot meals and drinks were given to the activists.

One is sure - if we have come so far, there is no way we can surrender and give up 
fighting for the common good of the Bialowieza Forest. State forests can be sure that the 
protest will continue until the decision on nature has returned to the hands of the 
public. TURN OFF THE POWER, AND DO NOT LEAVE!

http://www.rozbrat.org/publicystyka/ekologia/4578-relacja-anarchistek-biorcych-udzia-w-okupacji-generalnej-dyrekcji-lasow-pastwowych

------------------------------

Message: 2





This event was created with the idea of generating a space of diffusion and companionship. 
The ideal pretext to make known the anarchist ideas and practices of different individuals 
and groups of the city. ---- All and all are invited to attend and participate, it is a 
free space, if you have anarchist material or something else self-managed that sales, give 
it, join. ---- >  Fanzines ---- >  Books --- > Vegan Food --- > Documentary "Antifascists" 
(2017) ---- Trailer "Antifascists" (2017):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPare1-fHXM 
---- Date:  Tuesday, November 14. ---- Time:  It will start at noon. ---- Place:  Los 
Tubos, back of the Faculty of Arts, UNMSM. ---- Health and Anarchy! ---- FB: 
https://www.facebook.com/events/1133098363492669/ ---- Related Content:
https://noticiasanarquistas.noblogs.org/post/2017/09/27/peru-convocatoria-feira-do-livro-independente-e-anarquista-do-sul/

------------------------------

Message: 3






KCK's Altun pointed out that most of the anti-system movements are turning a blind eye on 
the fact that they are living capitalism and imperialism in every aspect and are deceiving 
themselves with their ideologies and dogmas. ---- Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK) 
Executive Council member Riza Altun spoke to ANF English service about the delusions with 
regards to having a true stance against the system, imperialism and capitalism, PKK's 
approach to real socialism and socialism, change of paradigm after the capture of Abdullah 
Öcalan. ---- Below is the second part of our detailed interview with Altun. ---- In some 
western countries, especially in Latin America, the Syrian and Iranian regimes are 
considered as anti-imperialist because of their stance against ISIS. Recently Turkish 
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has also started using anti-American rhetoric. What lays 
beneath the anti-Americanism of these states? Are they really anti-American or can we say 
that this is a result of an inner struggle of colonialist powers?

There are several movements in the west that we can say are against the system. 
Historically there are movements and powers that indeed give a freedom struggle. Now these 
are very immense powers against the system. And Latin America is an important centre. When 
we look at what happened since the discovery of America, especially the guerrilla warfare 
and socialist movements in 1960s, it's an important field of revolutionary struggle. But 
both have their problems. For example in the west, the anti-system movements look detached 
and marginal. There are serious issues with how they handle ideological, political and 
organizational problems. They have problems with converting themselves to an anti-system 
and libertarian movements, and also there are problems of determining the real 
ideological, political and military anti-system movements, so they can't show the 
foresight to develop identity. It's problematical in that regard. There is a serious 
obscurantism and dogmatism although they are against the system.

Take a random movement in the West and we can accurately criticize it. For example when we 
evaluate the 150 year history of Marxism, we see that it mainly resulted in real 
socialism. The reality of real socialism can be discussed in various dimensions. Of 
course, Marxism is an expression of an anti-system stand. It's a turning point against the 
hegemony and it reflects a hundred or a hundred and fifty years of background. No one can 
deny this. But in the end, we have to question a freedom path transforming into real 
socialism and getting to a position feeding the system like fresh blood.

Now, with the real socialist perspective it's not possible to get to the level of 
libertarian line, nor to evaluate an existing line of victory correctly and support it. 
Similarly, when we look at anarchism, the differences between wings of anarchism are 
mainly quantitative. There is no fundamental difference between them. Philosophically, its 
approach to freedom, equality and its stance against hegemony created a valuable 
accumulation. But because they don't manifest this accumulation in ideology, struggle, 
resistance and organizational aspect, they can't get a foothold in society and expose the 
power to represent the line of victory. And because they can't do this, they treat a 
struggle developed somewhere else in the world from their own equation, approach and sense.

Despite all the radical discourse, it cannot free itself from the capitalist system's 
lifestyle and way of relations. This is a very important problem for the freedom front. 
You can add feminist and ecologist fractions to this front.

When we look at their stance, although they look like they are against the system, there 
is serious dogmatism. There is a serious political autism and self-abstraction. If it 
isolates itself from everything, this will mean self-destruction.

The same thing goes for Latin America. Latin America has been through critical periods in 
the history. It carried out struggle against Spanish and Portuguese colonialism, US 
imperialism. It gave a struggle for socialism, to which it later contributed with 
guerrilla warfare. We have to give them their due. But now there is a serious problem 
about how they handle the problem.

For example we can directly say that those who act on behalf of socialism can't go beyond 
real socialism. If they base mainly on a nation-statist and pro-ruling approach, it's 
impossible for them to reach a true line of socialism. The problem of the anti-system 
movements in Europe and Latin America originates from here.

Their approach is this: "who is against the system is anti-capitalist". But 
anti-capitalism has its own criteria. There are countries that represent capitalism and 
imperialism and these are enemies. They are in a delusion that breaking with those 
countries is the basic approach and define freedom on this basis. But when we look at 
their lives they are living the capitalism or imperialism itself. They are living in their 
cities, under their power, with their identity and within their market. They are living 
with it up to their chins and yet in a delusion of being libertarian. There is something 
wrong here. We know that real socialism's problem is this. They think it's possible to 
build socialism with the basic tools of capitalism.

Most of the anti-system movements are turning a blind eye on the fact that they are living 
capitalism and imperialism in every aspect and are deceiving themselves with their 
ideologies and dogmas. These movements are taking stances without thinking about what's 
going on in the Middle East, what historical and sociologic factors there are, or what the 
relationship between them and global powers is. This is actually a great peril.

In fact, they should think about global imperialist system with its sub-units, the nation 
states. They should understand that the contradictions among them result from exploitation 
and hegemony not from equality, freedom or justice. Those powers cannot be positioned 
against one another in ideological aspect. Only people and revolutionary socialist 
movements and social segments can be positioned against them.

Now when we look at Latin American reality, I will not discuss if it's anti-imperialistic 
or not. We have no objection against a line which gives a democracy struggle against 
imperialism. But there is a point they have reached. We need to see that.

There is a great delusion here. We need to question how anti-imperialist the real 
socialism in Latin America is. It is anti-American for sure. But anti-Americanism doesn't 
mean anti-imperialism. America is imperialist. It is possible to develop a stance against 
American imperialism. But being anti-imperialist is another thing. Being anti-imperialist 
means being against the capitalist world order, against the hegemony of imperialism in the 
world and against the sub hegemonic centres of imperialism. Saying "I am against the US" 
does not mean anything. This is the point where Latin America stands. They are against the 
US and made huge gains in this struggle, but they also have relations with sub-hegemonic 
countries which are associated with imperialism. This caused a very undesirable situation. 
The Western European capitalism is also an expression of imperialism. The revolutionismof 
Latin American should take the anti-American stance to a level that will include the 
Western imperialism. They are facing a very serious problem because of this. It's not 
logical to say the imperialism which doesn't attack me is good.

Imperialism is a main stream which organizes itself in different centres. Without standing 
against each of them it's impossible to defeat it. Because of this approach the 
anti-Americanism has never been able to achieve a victory in Latin America. This is 
because they can't change themselves into anti-imperialism. This is why, although they 
made gains against the Portuguese and the Spanish, they couldn't break their dependent 
relationship.

The guerrilla wars on behalf of socialism didn't achieve the desired results. Why? We need 
to question this. The main reason is the inadequacy of attitude.

Let's look at the reality of Kurdistan. Kurdistan is divided into four parts. This 
happened during the World War I. Turkey, Iran, Arab states didn't do this themselves. The 
worlds capitalist system divided Kurdistan and shared it between Turkey, Iran, Syria and Iraq.

Latin American movements can't see this reality. They don't treat the imperialist system 
and its local collaborators as a whole. When Turkey, Iran, Syria or Iraq contradicts with 
the US, some think that they are anti-imperialist. Therefore they don't see the genocide 
perpetrated by these countries in Kurdistan. This approach should be changed. The system 
of the states is a capitalist, imperialist and colonialist system as a whole. Their 
contradictions cannot possibly be evaluated as anti-imperialistic.

For example the current government in Turkey, although it's a colonialist, fascist and 
fundamentalist government, has been supported because of its contradictions with the US 
for it was seen as anti-imperialist. But its colonialist character and its relations with 
imperialism was not seen.

Turkey is a centre of capitalism in nationalism, as well as fundamentalism, nation-statism 
aspects. Turkey is the strategic ally of the US. So how can we evaluate it as an 
anti-imperialist power only because of its contradictions with the US? This is a 
capitalist-liberal approach that defines itself within the system.

The same thing is also valid for Ba'ath parties that once were the favourite of the 
revolutionary movements in Latin America. Everybody knows that the Ba'ath parties are the 
most rotten and most imperialist form of Arab nationalism and Arab nation-statism. It's a 
disgrace that they are evaluated as anti-imperialist just because they had close ties with 
the Soviet Bloc and they sometimes contradict with the US. Ba'ath regimes are known for 
their cruel regimes over the peoples of Middle East.

And also Iran is a fundamentalist regime which is grounded on a sect of Islam. Its current 
structure is not separate from the capitalist world order. It has close ties with 
imperialism. The relations based on the view that Iran is an anti-imperialist power 
because of its contradictions with the US, show the problematic condition of Latin 
America's anti-imperialist powers. Look at Cuba, Venezuela and other Latin American 
countries where there is a leftist government, they are praising the sub-hegemonic powers 
of imperialism in the Middle East and Asia only because of their anti-American stance. 
This is a serious delusion.

I want to say it again: being anti-American does not automatically means anti-imperialism. 
Anti-Americanism is to be against a centre of imperialism. Staying only as anti-American 
is to legitimize other colonialist and imperialist powers. Therefore we need to have a 
strong, rooted paradigm for our vision of world's capitalist system and its imperialistic 
hegemony.

After Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan was captured in 1999, there was a change of paradigm 
on the Kurdish side. Does this have an influence on the relations you have developed with 
the US and Russia? If you hadn't changed your paradigm, would it still be possible for you 
to develop relations with the US and Russia? A lot of groups think that the PKK gave up 
socialist struggle? Did PKK do so with its change of paradigm?

The PKK is a socialist movement from the first day it was found. But when you look at that 
time and the historical conditions, it was under an intense influence of real socialism. 
There were also effects of national salvation movements, especially the struggles in 
Vietnam, guerrilla warfare in Latin America, the Chinese revolution and national movements 
in Africa. Therefore its origin is both socialist and national liberatarian.

But when you look at the situation of the world and ideological dominance of the time, PKK 
was formed under the influence of real socialism. PKK carried out a long national 
liberation struggle with these characteristics. But after the fall of the eastern bloc and 
the integration of national liberation movements into the capitalist system, we had to 
question this situation. We questioned both real socialism and national liberation. If we 
look closely, the collapse of real socialism and integration of national liberation 
struggles resulted with the collapse of various libertarian movements. That was a total 
defeat. PKK suffered from the consequences of this process. And during this process, PKK 
faced an attack unlike other socialist and national liberation movements. The imperialist 
system targeted the PKK as the first step of its intervention in the Middle East. They 
tried to leave the PKK without a head and ideology by capturing our leader through an 
international plot.

Of course, this was an important case for the PKK. If PKK didn't fall apart, it is because 
PKK has a distinctness from the real socialist and national liberation movements. Although 
PKK bears the effects of real socialism, it has a unique characteristic. And this is not 
only ideological, but also organizational case. The thought and organizational model which 
is unique to Middle East's historic conscious societies was the main reason PKK was not 
dissolved. PKK was indeed formed in this manner by our leader. Our leader's captivity 
revealed new circumstances for the PKK. There already existed a search for a new 
ideological and politic concept before the captivity of the leader. The insistence on 
women's freedom and efforts of a democratic resolution through ceasefires are an 
expression of this search. The captivity conduced toward a new concept in all aspects. The 
change of paradigm began here.

Renewed quests cannot be criticised if they are socialist or if real socialism is taken as 
a reference. And no new quests can be established with that attitude.

The new PKK's change of paradigm is not based on denial of real socialism. I want to 
especially underline this. This is a new situation based on a criticism of real 
socialism's ideological, philosophical and political approaches. There is an effort to 
redefine socialism with a more libertarian, equalitarian and democratic approach. 
Therefore PKK didn't give up on socialism. On the contrary we are constructing a new 
socialism based on the criticism of real socialism, especially a criticism of anti-system 
movements. All the terms that we use are developed after a criticism of real socialism. We 
must see these as the libertarian, equalitarian and democratic terms of the new socialism. 
The war in the Middle East and relations developed on this basis cannot be explained with 
the ideological situation. It is more of necessity out of political situations. If PKK was 
in its former line of real socialism it would have carried its struggle that way. And it 
was doing so anyway. But after its change of paradigm, the power and self-confidence this 
has created gave PKK an advantage to face the new Middle East crisis. If it hadn't changed 
its paradigm for sure it would have continued to resist but it wouldn't have a chance to win.

The terminology you use mentions the terms of democracy, democratic nation, freedom of 
women, environment and ecology more than socialism. Do you give new meanings to these 
terms apart from their traditional meanings? Do you replace socialism with these terms?

These are not things that exist in spite of socialism. Socialism stands there as a general 
term. You can say that these terms add to the content of socialism. For example there is a 
distortion of democracy when you look at it from liberal capitalistic and reel socialist 
point of view. They are distorting the democracy term. How do they express democracy? They 
are expressing it as a method of government. Looking at democracy this way is a great 
delusion, deception. Putting state and democracy side by side is never possible. Democracy 
can be expressed as the self-governing model of the societies before the state. How did 
the society was ruled before the civilization emerged and when people didn't need a state? 
They had their self-governance. But these governments were not based on exploitation, 
oppression and invasion. This a democratic government. Democracy should better be defined 
with this. The liberal view of history denies this governance model by the societies at 
that time. It served democracy as an invention of the civilization to the society. They 
used democracy as barrier to mask their exploitation.

We cannot talk about a democratic state, or a democratic government of a class. This is a 
deception. If we take socialism as a reference we have to define a term for the socialist 
governance approach. There are terms for real socialism's governance model. For example 
Marxists use the term "proletarian dictatorship". Also they use the state a basic element 
of the socialist literature. They see the hegemony of a class as a governance model. They 
define democracy as an administration method of a state. This way they turn democracy to a 
passive term for an administrative method, although it was used by human societies for a 
significant period of time in history. This is a problematic situation. If we say that we 
are socialists, first the socialist governance approach should be expressed and 
conceptualised in the most libertarian manner. It's not difficult to find this in the 
human history and apply it to the actual situation. This can be derived from the 
equalitarian and libertarian life that societies keep alive even under the circumstances 
of capitalism and imperialism.

The most modern meanings that are attributed to democracy were present in the natural 
society and they are the characteristics of communal life. Therefore, democracy can be an 
actual term for an equalitarian and libertarian administration model. We are using this 
term with this meaning.

To express it more clearly, we are using the term democracy as an administration model of 
our socialist understanding. This is not a democracy term that is based on the state. We 
are using it to define the self-governance of the society. This is not different from 
socialism or a disengagement from socialism. On the contrary it aims to bring a new 
meaning to socialism or bringing a system of socialism. The same can be said for all the 
other terms. Without a criticism of socialism we couldn't have brought socialism to a 
point where it can be put into practice in life in real terms.

Ecology is also important. From the point of capitalist world order or socialist approach, 
the relationship between the nature and society is problematic. The capitalism made the 
world an intolerable place with its industrialism and profit approach. Humanity is on the 
verge of annihilation. When we are facing such a threat, taking socialism as an utopia 
based on artificial freedom and equality does not mean anything. Then socialism should 
have an approach to save the world and humanity. In that regard, it should have an 
ideological approach against the damages caused by capitalism to the world. But there is 
no such thing in real socialism which generally says that capitalism exploits the nature 
and environment. But it can't save itself from being a part of ecological destruction with 
its industrialist approach and defence of nation state. In addition to that, it cannot 
define the relationship between ecology and society from an ideological stance. This is a 
very serious situation.

Is the approach of real socialism problematic? Yes. Its defence of an unlimited 
industrialism, its view that puts industry and development on the same page and defines 
human as the hegemonic power against nature are serious ideological problems. You cannot 
think of socialism without ecology. You cannot think of life without ecology. If you 
relate socialism with life you can understand its relationship with ecology.

This also goes for the line of women's freedom. Capitalism turned women into a meta and an 
object. Capitalism imposes the ugliest things on women. The male dominant mindset is 
experiencing its most intense form in the capitalist system. Now without thinking about 
the freedom, salvation and position of women in the society and without defining this in 
context of socialism, it's not possible to save the world or to achieve equality, freedom 
and democracy. The freedom issue of women is too deep, it's not possible to resolve it 
with the real socialist approach that says: "when the revolution comes the problem of the 
women will be resolved". It is more than that. It should be evaluated as the basic problem 
of socialism or even as the primary problem of life in broader terms. Those who do not 
develop a unique approach for the freedom problem of women have a weakness in their 
socialist senses.

What comes out when we think all of these a whole? There emerge rough and ineffective 
approaches on the problems of real socialism and construction of socialism. Philosophical, 
ideological and political gaps emerge which lead to the destruction of socialism. With its 
change of paradigm, PKK addresses these problems, it finds solutions and reconstructs 
socialism basing on a new and real social science.

This is not a disengagement from socialism. This is bringing a true meaning to the 
socialism after revaluating the collapse and defeat of real socialism. There is no room 
for development for anti-imperialist, socialist, libertarian and anti-system movements if 
they don't question themselves in this regard. We need to see that the collapse of those 
who collapsed alongside real socialism, the consequences of confining your fate to such a 
failure. PKK managed to regenerate itself after assessing the situation correctly and 
criticising real socialism. It didn't create its entity and power by disengaging from 
socialism, on the contrary it made this possible with socialist philosophy, ideology and 
life. Only with this PKK managed to become an ideological and political power in the 
Middle East.

I want to talk about the democratic nation concept. We know that imperialism envisions a 
new world order which will go beyond the current national identity and nation-state. A new 
world government or a new world state, which will exceed nations, is being talked of. Is 
democratic nation an alternative to this?

Capitalism's social formation is based on the nation-state form. When we talk about nation 
state it recalls capitalist form. This means building a hegemonic system over the nation 
category which is a social form and turning this form to a violence and exploitation area 
of capitalist monopoly. Here the main problem is the creation of the nation category 
through the state. This nation category is very elastic and transitive. The efforts to 
homogenise the society during this creation will mean a genocide of all different social 
and cultural qualities. Therefore creating a nation and converting it to a sovereignty 
zone creates a social problem. Now the most basic problem of the real socialism appears 
here. Its greatest mistake is to think that it can move forward and reach freedom with the 
most basic elements and arguments of capitalism.

The major problem of the real socialism is to not develop a deep analysis of state and 
nation during the formulation of socialist paradigm against capitalism. It evaluated 
nation as an ethnic fact rather that a cultural one and considered state as an 
irreplaceable home for the nations. It couldn't think of the relation between capitalism 
and constructing a state based on the exploitation wheels of capitalism.

This situation emerged more clearly after the collapse of real socialism. Defining freedom 
with state and trying to overcome this through the nation state model by coalescing with 
the social form, was a very big mistake.  The real socialist model tried this for about 
70-80 years. It couldn't help but become a part of capitalist system in the end.

If we concentrate and look at this issue, we can see that nation state and freedom won't 
co-exist. The state system is a political system which is against freedoms. States will 
never produce freedom.

On the other hand, nation is a formation which has well defined borders and carries 
various social, ethnic and religious identities. As the nation term contains all of these 
it cannot be singular. In nation state system, the state is a tool of exploitation and 
sovereignty while the nation completes it as a system singularised basing on a single 
ethnic, religious or ideological structure. In other words, it bases on the assimilation 
and destruction of social diversities.  This model must exist for an all-out exploitation 
to continue. Capitalism lives on this. It creates a regime of genocide over the 
sovereignty of the state and singularity of the nation.

When real socialism emerged as an alternative to capitalist system, it couldn't go beyond 
the paradigm of nation state and its system. It's approach on these terms was almost 
copied from capitalism.

Now we know that this term is a problematic one. You can't define a socialist identity 
without reassessing the nation state term and putting forward an alternative to it.  When 
we say that we don't want a state everybody finds it odd, including those from nationalist 
or socialist circles.

Ethnic nationalists get angry with us because we are against the state, which is a tool 
that will carry their own ethnic identity to power and help it dominate over others. On 
the other hand, real socialists think that they can solve the issues of freedom and 
equality by becoming a state. Refusing to be a state is perceived as denying socialism and 
nation.  However, the state is a fundamental institution that massacres both of these. No 
socialist libertarian can politically express himself with a state. The state equals to 
enmity towards freedom and equality. Freedom and state can never co-exist. Therefore we 
need to put the state aside in the first place.

We must separate the concepts of nation and state from one another. The nation can be 
accepted as a social format. I mean it can be accepted without being a part of a nation 
state. But we need to define nation very carefully. We must understand what nation is.

Nation is a social form. But we are talking about a society with different cultures, faith 
groups and opinions. Society is made up of diversities and their unity.

We can't make a definition of nation that denies diversities and relies on one single 
ethnic identity, belief and ideology. This will result in a genocide of all diversities. 
This is not freedom. Democratic nation is a form of the society built on a democratic 
basis. Democratic nation is the real formation of nation. Every undemocratic social 
formation and construction is problematic and foes against the nature of society, which 
eventually results in continuous violence and conflict. The societal entities that make up 
the nation can only be held together through a democratic administration system based on 
democratic politics.

------------------------------

Message: 4





I am not well versed in the history of the libertarian movement in Catalonia, but I 
imagine there must have been a good reason why in 1934 the CNT, which was at the height of 
its force, refused to cooperate in the attempt to proclaim the  " Catalan State in the 
form of Catalan Republic " . I simply imagine that. However, what I do not imagine, but I 
am fully convinced of this, is that there is  no  good reason  for part of the current 
libertarian movement in Catalonia to collaborate in one way or another with the process of 
  "national independence" carried out by the Catalan Government , by the political parties 
that support it, and by the large nationalist popular organizations that accompany it. 
---- The least that can be said is that this part of the libertarian movement is " in full 
swing ", since after having contributed to  "protect the polls"  during the Referendum 
that the Government called for the express purpose of legitimizing the creation of a new 
state in the form of the Republic of Catalonia, also launched to call a general strike in 
the immediate sequence of the Referendum, with the expected effect of  increasing its 
effects .

This drift is now reaffirmed by joining another general strike for tomorrow, November 8, 
demanding the release of the  "political prisoners" caused by the repression that the 
Spanish State in its Judicial component exercised against certain activities aimed at 
promoting the independence of the and the creation of the new State.

Of course, this time it is not all the anarcho-syndicalist unions that join this strike, 
but a significant part of the CGT unions and the libertarians integrated in the CDR 
"Committees of Defense of the Republic" . If I had already expressed my "perplexity"  at 
the general strike on October 3, that perplexity is further compounded by the fact that 
these CGT unions and these CDR libertarian activists will support the initiative of a 
tiny,  radically independent union , the  "Intersindical-Catalan Trade Union 
Confederation", which launched the call and received only the support of the two large 
pro-independence Catalan organizations that cross-section the popular sectors and 
bourgeois sectors of the Catalan population (Ómnium Cultural and ANC).

No one doubts that repression should be rejected, but perhaps it is surprising that this 
rejection can only be translated into a general strike when the repressed are members of a 
government along with the two main leaders of the pro-independence movement, limiting 
manifestations of rejection and of solidarity when it comes to other people.

Fortunately, in the libertarian realm, struggles have always been assessed in terms of 
their political significance and, if these struggles are suppressed, solidarity will be 
activated through this political evaluation. Or is it that, condemning any kind of 
repression, we must also mobilize our energies when repressing the extreme right-wing 
"fighters"? From the libertarian point of view, any repression is undoubtedly motivating 
our rejection, but it does not automatically imply   our solidarity. Moreover, what is 
unacceptable is that the recent anarchist victims of the repression are evoked to declare 
that  "this list" has  been enlarged with new reprisals that are only the detained rulers. 
I imagine that some of those fellow inmates would be outraged at amalgamated  with these 
new  "political prisoners"  to justify in this way that they also require our solidarity.

The drift of a part of the libertarian movement becomes even more evident when we observe 
that enough of its elements are now involved in the  "Defense Committees of the Republic," 
originally promoted by the CUP. If I have been sensitive to the argument so far that this 
participation was a way of hearing our voices and of proposing our proposals within the 
popular mobilizations, hoping to  "overflow"  the narrow sense of independence of their 
demands, that this "perspective of overflowing" always seemed to me totally illusory.

However, when, as happened with me this afternoon, posters signed by the CDR's official 
organization calling for "stopping the country" on November 8 in response to the "arrest 
of the legitimate government  of our country" can be read on the streets of Barcelona  . 
the perplexity with the incorporation of a part of the libertarian movement in these 
committees does not stop to increase and it opens the question of the extent to which the 
part of the libertarian movement will  drift .

The only consolation that can remain is that through these committees, politicization and 
the experience of struggle acquired by sectors of the population, especially young people, 
encourage future mobilizations in other contexts, far from autonomy and self-determination 
of the struggles that we defend from practices of libertarian struggle.

Tomás Ibáñez

Barcelona, November 7, 2017

Translation> Liberto

------------------------------

Message: 5





On November 17, 1973, the tanks, the police and military forces of the dictatorship, 
invaded the National Technical University of Athens with the aim of suppressing the 
insurgency of the students and not only against the military dictatorship. The sequel is 
well known. Dead fighters, suppression and hardening of the regime by replacing the 
dictator Papadopoulos by Ioannidis. It should be noted that the rebellion had taken place 
at a time when the junta had attempted to embellish it through a process of 
"democratization", reputable democracy and "government" Markesini. ---- Then and now the 
regimes are fluctuating: at other times they "offer" additional freedoms-sometimes they 
reduce them. We must not allow ourselves to be deceived by the toys of the one and the 
other of the Domination. What is always concealed by either Jones or the Civil "Republics" 
is the fact of assignment: we have given the right to someone to give us or to take away 
our freedoms or even to think that it is not even worth talking about them .

The issue is exactly that! Who actually gives all sorts of Sovereigns the right to decide 
on our lives? When will we finally understand that this alternation of tranquil or violent 
periods characterized by the rule imposed by the Sovereignty is nothing but a disorienting 
mascara? Its aim is to preserve the power of the societies that we live in. A core of 
social inequality, the exploitation of man by man, and the cruel class domination of some 
over others. The memory of the uprising and bloody repression of the Polytechnic has often 
been attempted in the past to be silenced or transformed into a controlled fist of 
bourgeois democracy. But the memory of youthful momentum and the revolutionary romance of 
this struggle against the monolith of Power, despite the inequality of forces on the two 
conflicting sides, has always managed to escape control. The insurgents and the oppressed 
of every age renew the political content of the Polytechnic's anniversary with their own 
protests and uprisings in the decades.
Today, from yesterday, it may have very big differences, but nothing is really accomplished.
The struggles for education, social justice, dignified living conditions for everyone and 
above all for Freedom against every regulator of our lives have remained incomplete, not 
only locally but also globally. Capital, the national and supranational elites, alongside 
emerging fascism and religious fundamentalism, have launched worldwide brutal 
exploitation, violence and death on proletarians and oppressed people. The 17th of 
November 1973 for us is a day of rebellion - yet another moment in centuries of struggles 
in all the lengths and the backs of the planet. We, the exploited and oppressed, are all 
these millions of people who are being overwhelmed by power over the centuries. We are 
always the ones who, when we realize it, revolt. This fight is not just about a foggy past 
decades ago, but it is about NOW, our own struggles. Today's matches. The Anniversary of 
the Polytechnic always stands against all kinds of sirens of power and 
intellectuals-intellectuals at universities and media, against the networks of interests, 
in the judicial and bureaucratic institutions of the ruling group. It is a call of 
insurrection and as such must sound in our ears. A call for unparalleled struggles, and 
for linking these races to each other. A call against every form of enforcement and a call 
for release. For us anarchists - as in November 1973 as today - this struggle is always a 
call to society for a life without power and power,
In the place of yesterday Papadopoulos, Karamanlis, Nixon and Kissinger correspond today 
with Trab, Putin, Mitsotakis, Tsipras, Merkel, Makron and a number of others. Some with 
more pleasant and smiling and others with tougher and more cynical faces, but all within 
the spirit and act of totalitarian vision to eliminate all resistance to class 
sovereignty. Let us stand against them with the power of memory from our sacrifices in the 
Paris Commune, in Chicago in 1886, in Spain in 1936, in Chile in September, and in Greece 
in November 1973.
The masters of this world are releasing daily the worst of their plans. Biopolitical 
border and neighborhood populations, emergency laws, repressive forces, housing auctions, 
gambling robbers hand-to-hand with directors of banking groups and off shore companies.
We're not here to stop them - We're here to destroy them!
Let us remember in November 73 not as the memory of a brave defeat. Let us remember it as 
an extra fuel that will feed the flame of our wrath against the bosses of the Past - the 
Present and the Future. Our duty is not only to the memory of our dead. It is not only to 
everyone who crashes daily in the millstones of material and mental carters that power 
produces on a planetary level. First of all our debt is against our own selves.

1973 - 2017 OTHER TIMES EQUIVALENT
ALL ON THE ROAD

17 NOVEMBER 2017
ATHENS
PORIA, 15:00
Square Klaithmonos ....
THESSALONIKI
STREET
18:00, Technical University
LAMIA
CONCENTRATION - MICROPHONES
18:30 Eleftheria Square
HERAKLION CRETE we
participate in the common anarchist block
For Social Self-Administration and Anarchy
Anarchist Federation

http://anarchist-federation.gr/archives/1637

------------------------------

Message: 6






Departure from the passionate desire to restore the damaged and unjust social order, and 
how disappointed it is to see people compromise with the situation, we are now witnessing 
a significant rise of young intellectuals in college that began to embrace the idea of 
​​libertarian socialism. It arises from the results of repeated reflections on the failure 
of the authoritarian and unethical orthodox leftist revolutionary project. ---- Many of us 
are cornered, aloof, feeling minor and walking without direction, but with little hope, 
organizing individuals as long as they do not violate our principles: freedom, equality, 
interdependence, cooperation, mutual cooperation, and solidarity. Revolution is indeed 
created spontaneously, but the revolution is impossible to succeed in sporadic ways. The 
revolution also will not happen tomorrow, but this is not a reason to mobilize 
revolutionary forces in the student sector. Therefore, it is time we stop the movement 
with the disorganisational trend among students of anarchists in Indonesia.
The criticisms of Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky and other orthodox comrades against us may be 
true. The disorganized nationalist tendency among libertarian socialists has brought a 
more tragic disappointment to experiments to create better social change. The Paris 
Commune of 1871, the 1936 Spanish Revolution, the 1968 Paris Riot, and the libertarian 
socialist failures in India by Mahatma Gandhi, in Cuba by Che Guevara and Jose Rizal & 
Isabelo de los Reyes in the Philippines, proof that we can not close the ears of the 
criticism. The success of the 2014 Rojava Revolution in Syria, gives us a lesson in the 
methods we have used so far to create direct self-governing democracy and common ownership 
of the means of production:

Come on, agitate and organize yourself, form a libertarian student federation in your 
city! Unite in the barricades of workers and peasants!

STUDENT UNITE! ONE BIG FEDERATION!

https://www.facebook.com/notes/federasi-mahasiswa-libertarian-salatiga/seruan-kongres-nasional/302893730165745/

------------------------------