Anarchic update news all over the world - 27.02.2018

Today's Topics:

   
1.  Britain, brighton solfed: G4Lets campaign covered in student
      paper (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
2.  anarkismo.net: The federal intervention in Rio de Janeiro
      and the chess of the ruling class by FARJ - Anarchist Federation
      of Rio de Janeiro (pt) [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
3.  A-Radio Berlin: The Chaos Communication Congress 2017 in
      Germany - an anarchist perspective (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
4.  France, Alternative Libertaire AL - Syria-Kurdistan, A
      libertarian communist in the IFB # 06: Tribute to two comrades,
      Kurdish and Breton, from the French State (fr, it, pt) [machine
      translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
5.  Greece, Liberation Initiative of Thessaloniki:
      Concentrations of solidarity in the total denial of engagement
      Demetris D. (gr) [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
6.  Holand, ag amsterdam - Anarchist library saturday 24
      februari: G.A.R.I.! 1974 - a film by Nicolas Réglat (nl)
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
7.  Czech,   afed: Support for retained squatters [machine
      translation (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
8.  anarkismo.net: Labor and social self-management / Martin
      Bubber by Giorgos Meriziotis (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)


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

Message: 1





This week's Badger - the student newspaper at Sussex university - reported on our campaign 
against the G4 Lets. The agency - who specialise in renting to students made a group of 
students live in squalid conditions, the responsibility for which the local council's 
Environmental Health Report placed firmly on the shoulders of the lettings agents. The 
tenants had to live in mice-infested, unsafe accommodation for a year, and then had £2000 
illegitimately deducted from their deposit for these costs. ---- Tenant's account
We had an unreasonably bad time living in our house last year and this was down to the 
fact that G4 lets ultimately don't care about the people living in their properties. We 
were excited to move in together, we had a large 8 bedroomed house and we were promised 
that it would be thoroughly cleaned, the carpets would be changed and it would be painted 
throughout. We were also promised that the garden would be cleaned, I attach our inventory 
that we made ourselves in the first week at the house as we didn't feel satisfied with the 
state of the property, we never signed G4 lets inventory as they didn't give us a hard 
copy and when we asked if we could amend it we were basically just ignored, we sent them 
our own inventory and didn't get anything back. G4 then sent the cleaners back after 
sending us an email thread from the cleaners saying that the house was beyond cleaning and 
they did a very minimal job of wiping the sides.

The worst thing about the house was the colossal mouse infestation that we were then 
charged for. I was careful to make sure that I never had food in my room and still had 
mice under my bed every nice. We first told G4 about the problem in October and the issue 
was ongoing throughout the whole year.

I personally found the year extremely difficult, I suffer from sever anxiety and have OCD 
tendencies. During our tenancy there were points when I was cleaning the kitchen in the 
house 4 times a day, the kitchen twice and hoovering the whole of the downstairs just so 
that I could sit down in the living room because the house generally just felt dirty and 
grotty. I had to have therapy for the whole year because I was unable to study and I 
basically had to move home to my parents and communicate with my tutors via email. I am 
lucky that I passed the year to be honest. The fact that G4 lets claim that we didn't keep 
the house clean is an exaggeration. We are students for a start so we are all just 
figuring out how to live on our own, we have friends that lived in exactly the same way as 
us and didn't have mice running all over their counters. It felt like we were in a horror 
movie.

The thing is fair enough, they have taken our money now and have managed to convince 
themselves that everything that happened to us is our fault but our aim is to reach out to 
younger students and tell them about our experience. University is a hard enough time 
without being villainised by your housing agency. You have arguments with housemates to 
worry about and stand offs about who's doing the washing up and pre drinks and late nights 
finishing essays. So whatever you do, please don't let a housing agency like G4 lets ruin 
what is supposed to be the freest and best time of your life. I won't get those months 
back that I lived with my parents when I could have been out with my mates or actually 
going to university so I understood what was going on.

As they have done in their response to you, they've consistently and maliciously denied 
any wrong-doing in our attempts, with Brighton SolFed, to address these issues and get our 
deposits back. We have on several occasions tried to arrange a meeting with them to 
discuss the evidence pack of photographs, email chains, and invoices that corroborate our 
claims. On each of those occasions we have met with open hostility and as yet have seen no 
sign that anyone in the agency has actually engaged with our claims or addressed the 
evidence. Because of this, we have publicised their total lack of concern for tenants, and 
it's the public aspect of this campaign that they consider to be ‘extreme'.

We now have an Environmental Health Report, in which the inspector clearly states that the 
house has ‘fire precaution issues, a mouse infestation,[and]poor decoration and disrepair' 
that ‘represents an offence under the regulations', and that it was the 'duty' of G4Lets 
to deal with this. They haven't dealt with it, and are still trying to blame us for it. 
This means they're ignoring legal demands from Brighton & Hove City Council in favour of 
maligning and bullying tenants. In comparison to what we've been doing (handing out 
fliers, talking to members of the public and other students, staging protests outside of 
their agency), it seems to me like all of the intimidation is coming from G4 Lets.

Our response to G4 Lets claims
G4 Lets make false claims about Brighton Solfed which we reponded to.

Brighton Solfed Housing Union always attempts to resolve disputes amicably first, before 
moving on to naming and shaming them public. In this specific case, Brighton Solfed and 
the tenants began this dispute by clearly outlining the ways in which G4Lets breached 
various different regulations (fire safety, having to show breach of the tenancy agreement 
to make a deduction from the deposit etc) in a letter that was delivered to them, and gave 
them a week to respond to the tenants demands. The tenants asked for the deposit back and 
for compensation for poor living conditions - it's not uncommon to be compensated when 
your capacity to live properly and peacefully in your home has been compromised.
When G4Lets didn't respond, ourselves and the tenants visited them to offer them an 
opportunity to talk - it became clear then that the staff member (aggressively) discussing 
the matter with us hadn't even read the letter. As G4 Lets were unwilling to resolve the 
matter, we began to inform the public about how G4Lets had mistreated the tenants simply 
by handing out flyers to passersby outside the shop. Following this, G4Lets were given 
another opportunity to open negotiations, and were provided with an evidence pack of 
photographs, email chains, and invoices to corroborate the claims. They again refused to 
negotiate. Ourselves and the tenants therefore continued to inform the public about the 
situation via informational pickets and articles online.
At the third time of asking, they reviewed the evidence pack and admitted that £400 of the 
deductions were not justifiable. In response to this, they were provided with a ten-page 
document, further evidencing the tenants' claims, but refused to negotiate any further or 
to meet up to discuss the situation.
The tenants then obtained a copy of the Environmental Health Report, in which a Brighton & 
Hove City Council Environmental Health Officer states that the house has "fire precaution 
issues, a mouse infestation,[and]poor decoration and disrepair" that "represents an 
offence under the regulations", and that it was the "duty" of G4Lets to deal with this. 
G4Lets had had a copy of this report all through the dispute, and had misleadingly quoted 
from it to try and blame the tenants for the issues at the property. It is incredible that 
G4 Lets still try to justify the deductions in their response to the Badger. Once the 
tenants obtained the report, they informed G4Lets that they had it, sent another 3 page 
document of evidence, and gave them another opportunity to negotiate. They didn't respond, 
so ourselves and the tenants made the report public.

Solfed Housing Union has been organising housing struggles for over two years, and we have 
not come across any agency that is as prolific as G4 Lets in making unwarranted deposit 
deductions from students. Since we started the campaign, several former tenants have come 
forward with their stories, and comments on agency review sites and our articles also 
commonly mention deposit theft.

Another student described how she was served an unlawful eviction notice two weeks before 
her final exams - https://twitter.com/KateFlood/status/951046020141604864

This is why G4 Lets are so concerned about our campaign being public: they have something 
to hide, namely that they are systematically ripping off student tenants. When asked about 
the details of this case, they claim to be unable to discuss specifics. When held to 
account to their general business practices, they claim tenants must go through their 
bureaucratic channels - the reality is of course that tenants are at a disadvantage 
because they are not full-time professionals fighting for their deposit, unlike G4 Lets. 
G4 Lets are so accustomed to having their way that when tenants who refuse to do so, they 
get maligned by G4 Lets.

We have protested outside the G4 Lets office, on social media, by email and by phone. 
Protest and calls for boycott are not intimation - they are legitimate forms of action, 
they have been common practices of the union movement for centuries, and are the source of 
much social progress. We stress that staff should never be the target of verbal abuse - in 
fact we have every sympathy with lettings agency workers, whose job only serves to enrich 
landlords and the agency owner, and is of no genuine social benefit.

We have not made "misrepresentations" - G4 Lets should either substantiate this claim or 
withdraw it.

Finally, G4 Lets call us "left-wing extremists". Brighton Solfed believes that every 
person deserves a safe home, and we are committed to work towards this goal as a union, on 
the basis of tenants' solidarity and mutual aid, and through collective protest. If that's 
"left-wing extermism" then so be it. However, we feel that what's 'extreme' and 
'intimidating' is a business knowingly ignoring their legal responsibilities even after 
they've been told by the council to fulfil them, and then blaming the student tenants for 
the issues; what is 'extreme' and 'intimidating' is threatening to evict someone two weeks 
before their final exams.

http://www.brightonsolfed.org.uk/brighton/g4lets-campaign-covered-in-student-paper

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

Message: 2





We are witnessing the inauguration of another chapter of the government of "shock" applied 
to the state of Rio de Janeiro. A chapter that is the complete continuation of the 
nefarious public security policy implemented in the state, aligned with the advance of the 
coup against the workers, which had previously removed a government that no longer served 
the full interests of the ruling class in this new phase of the capitalist system. ---- In 
the carnival of this year and following the tradition of resistance of the Afro-Brazilian 
culture, Paraíso do Tuiti washed the souls of all the Brazilian workers, showing that the 
reform of the social security and labor are attacks against their social rights and opened 
the past slave of the Brazilian elite. Now, this same elite, makes a new agreement and 
approves a federal intervention plan in public safety in Rio de Janeiro, which will now be 
under the control of army general Walter Braga Neto.

Federal and military intervention in Rio de Janeiro.

Containment of the lower from the control of the favelas and peripheries
With the advancement of neo-liberal barbarism, the ruling class resorted to restraining 
those from below, replacing the failed UPP policy promoted by the Dilma-Lula-Cabral 
government for direct intervention by the Army and the creation of the Ministry of 
Security. The past implementation of the so-called "National Force", which resulted in 
several joint operations of the army with the police in different favelas in Rio de 
Janeiro, already indicated that they would follow the murders of residents (mostly black 
and young) by military forces and noncompliance with minimum rights - on the grounds of 
combating burglary and the "drug war". Nothing causes more fear in the elites and in part 
of the middle sectors aligned with corporate / bourgeois media than the "sense of 
insecurity" of losing their assets or their lives, in a barbarism produced by the 
capitalist system itself, and which strikes harder workers and workers. This sense of 
insecurity is mainly produced by the bourgeois newspapers, which weeks before the federal 
intervention showed incessantly thefts to pedestrians and residents of the south. This 
need for frequent militarization of society and social control by a significant part of 
the working class is a long-term demand that has already been experienced with the various 
occupations of the army in the Rio de Janeiro favelas, ending workers' rights and 
instituting police arbitration without improving the life of the working class (asphalt 
and favelas). They will suffer, especially the black and poor population of the state, who 
remains the victim of arbitrariness and the genocide of the state-police system. This 
sense of insecurity is mainly produced by the bourgeois newspapers, which weeks before the 
federal intervention showed incessantly thefts to pedestrians and residents of the south.

This need for frequent militarization of society and social control by a significant part 
of the working class is a long-term demand that has already been experienced with the 
various occupations of the army in the Rio de Janeiro favelas, ending workers' rights and 
instituting police arbitration without improving the life of the working class (asphalt 
and favelas). They will suffer, especially the black and poor population of the state, who 
remains the victim of arbitrariness and the genocide of the state-police system. This 
sense of insecurity is mainly produced by the bourgeois newspapers, which weeks before the 
federal intervention showed incessantly thefts to pedestrians and residents of the south.
This need for frequent militarization of society and social control by a significant part 
of the working class is a long-term demand that has already been experienced with the 
various occupations of the army in the Rio de Janeiro favelas, ending workers' rights and 
instituting police arbitration without improving the life of the working class (asphalt 
and favelas). They will suffer, especially the black and poor population of the state, who 
remains the victim of arbitrariness and the genocide of the state-police system. This need 
for frequent militarization of society and social control by a significant part of the 
working class is a long-term demand that has already been experienced with the various 
occupations of the army in the Rio de Janeiro favelas, ending workers' rights and 
instituting police arbitration without improving the life of the working class (asphalt 
and favelas). They will suffer, especially the black and poor population of the state, who 
remains the victim of arbitrariness and the genocide of the state-police system. This need 
for frequent militarization of society and social control by a significant part of the 
working class is a long-term demand that has already been experienced with the various 
occupations of the army in the Rio de Janeiro favelas, ending workers' rights and 
instituting police arbitration without improving the life of the working class (asphalt 
and favelas). They will suffer, especially the black and poor population of the state, who 
remains the victim of arbitrariness and the genocide of the state-police system. ending 
the rights of workers and instituting police arbitration without improving the life of the 
working class (asphalt and favelas). They will suffer, especially the black and poor 
population of the state, who remains the victim of arbitrariness and the genocide of the 
state-police system. ending the rights of workers and instituting police arbitration 
without improving the life of the working class (asphalt and favelas). They will suffer, 
especially the black and poor population of the state, who remains the victim of 
arbitrariness and the genocide of the state-police system.
Since before the carnival, the "vampiresco" and coup president warned that he would create 
the Ministry of Public Security after the popular celebration, obeying an old demand of 
the most reactionary sectors that operate outside and within the Brazilian state. The 
founding of the Ministry of Public Security is another step in the consolidation of this 
Brazilian police state, which, together with the anti-terrorism law (also approved by the 
PT and its allies), improves the standard for the treatment of those below. And it also 
has a pragmatic purpose, to provide electoral capital for the bankrupt Temer and PMDB.

The role of the Brazilian army and judiciary in the institution of the neoliberal nightmare
The Brazilian army has a historical role of control of the subaltern classes and had 
already mentioned in statements of its superiors that it would not accept a situation of 
"social chaos". At the same time, military exercises a few months ago, in front of the 
Guandu station (CEDAE), testified to the submissive role of the Brazilian army, which, 
while singing the national anthem, guarantees the security of state sales (like CEDAE) at 
a banana price. international capital. So while poor and black workers were dying 
underground, or losing their assets with the heavy rains that hit the state this week, the 
army comes not to bail out the population, but to secure the commercial traffic of 
businesses and give a false sense of tranquility to population. May also,
To fulfill the national agreement "with the Supreme, with everything", the role of the 
judiciary is fundamental in the implantation of neoliberalism in the country. If in the 
previous phase of capitalism, neoliberalism was imposed by the "Chilean" way of coups and 
military regimes, now we have within democratic government a "shock", the judicial action 
endorsing the Tax Recovery Regime (RFF) in our state and judicializing politics 
(persecuting militants, unions and organizations). Recently, Minister Carmen Lúcia, of the 
STF (with the supreme, with everything ...) suspended the obligation of the government of 
the state of RJ to appoint 900 professors approved in competition. The justification used 
was that the hiring of 900 teachers causes "budget imbalance"! This, coming from a 
judiciary that earns salaries of hundreds of thousands of Reais, extrapolating the public 
roof and entitled to various aids (housing, education, etc.) while the majority of the 
people continue to die in the hospital queues, in the queues to enroll their children in 
school and facing structural unemployment. Nothing more political and coward than a 
judiciary and the allegedly neutral military but fully aligned with neoliberalism, its 
state of shock and in full attack on the rights of those below!

Plan of the elites: to stifle the resistance and to approve the pension reform ...
The Temer government has already indicated that the intervention in Rio de Janeiro acts as 
a buffer for the approval of the pension reform. A temporary and pyrotechnic state of 
siege (which can become a model for other states) that strengthens and gives unity to the 
government in its quest for the destruction of the retirement of all the workers of the 
country. In addition, the people of the state of Rio de Janeiro have a beautiful history 
of demonstrations, protests and rebellions. Being one of the most precarious states by 
neoliberal barbarism, the ruling class knows that a spark of collective popular struggle 
can ignite a fire and an inescapable example for the rest of the country. Abolishing 
protest and class struggle and ensuring the tranquility of the approaching elections will 
be the role of elites and everyone who believes in the illusion that this situation can be 
changed at the polls.
It is up to the popular movements and trade unions to point out the road of struggle in 
the streets. Fight against the arbitrary intervention of the army and against the tax 
recovery regime!

Defeat the ruling class's plan and neoliberalism in the streets!
Defeating the pension reform! Not the intervention!
Anarchist Federation of Rio de Janeiro
Related Link: 
https://anarquismorj.wordpress.com/2018/02/18/a-intervencao-federal-no-rio-de-janeiro-e-o-xadrez-da-classe-dominante/

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/30848

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

Message: 3





Dear all, In the Bad News show 08 (01/2018) we released a short story about the last Chaos 
Communication Congress (from December 2017) in Leipzig, Germany, that included pieces of 
interviews taken there. Now we are publishing the full interviews to give you some idea of 
what the Congress can be. You'll find the audio (to listen online or download in different 
sizes) here: 
http://aradio.blogsport.de/2018/02/18/a-radio-in-english-the-chaos-communication-congress-2017-in-germany-an-anarchist-perspective/ 
Length: 21:15 min You can find other English and Spanish language audios here: 
http://aradio.blogsport.de/englishcastellano/. Among our last audios you can find: * An 
intro audio to the hungerstrike of Mapuche Political Prisoners in the Iglesias Case in Chile:

http://aradio.blogsport.de/2017/09/26/a-radio-in-english-chile-the-hungerstrike-of-mapuche-political-prisoners-in-the-iglesias-case/
* An interview on Charlottesville, the murder of Heather Heyer and
antifascist perspectives:
http://aradio.blogsport.de/2017/08/31/a-radio-in-english-reportback-from-charlottesville-unite-the-right-and-the-murder-of-heather-heyer/
* Brazil 2: Indymedia Sao Paulo on the struggles in Brazil in the last
years:
http://aradio.blogsport.de/2017/08/23/a-radio-in-english-brazil-2-indymedia-sao-paulo-and-the-struggles-of-the-last-years/
* Brazil 1: Indigenous Struggles in the Amazon:
http://aradio.blogsport.de/2017/07/13/a-radio-in-english-brazil-1-indigenous-struggles-in-the-amazon/
* A presentation by Anarchist Black Cross in Czech Republic on the Fenix
operation and related issues:
http://aradio.blogsport.de/2016/12/04/a-radio-in-english-anarchist-black-cross-czech-antifenix-presentation/

Enjoy! And please feel free to share!

A-Radio Berlin

ps.: We are now on Twitter! Please feel welcome to follow us at
@aradio_berlin!
ps2.: Please note: We are always looking for people willing to lend us a
hand with transcriptions and translations from Spanish or German into
English as well as people able to do voice recordings - in order to
amplify our international radio work. You can contact us at
aradio-berlin/at/riseup(dot)net!

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

Message: 4




" Kendal was well aware of the danger, like all of us, but that did not lessen his 
determination. When he left, he asked me, " Wish me luck ! " Not for fighting against the 
Turkish army and the Islamists, but to successfully pass under the radar of the Syrian 
regime that prevented us to get to Afrin." ---- Libertarian Alternative reproduces the 
posts of the blog Kurdistan-Autogestion-Revolution where, after Arthur Aberlin, engaged in 
the YPG, now expresses Damien Keller, engaged him in the International Liberation 
Battalion (IFB). ---- Over the weeks, he will testify to life in the IFB, the debates that 
are going on and the evolution of the revolutionary process in the Democratic Federation 
of Northern Syria. ---- Canton of Cizîrê, February 22 ---- We learned two weeks ago the 
death of our comrade Özgür Seyit Karakoçan (Kemal Serhat Akyol Nicolas), killed by a 
bombing of the Turkish army on September 4, 2017. This young Kurd of 21 had left Paris to 
defend freedom peoples before his 18 th birthday to defend his people against the fascist 
Turkish state in the mountains with the guerrillas of the PKK and in Sinjar and the Rojava 
against the fascists Daech.

Our comrade fell as a martyr to defend the democratic society under construction in 
Rojava, based on feminism, ecology and direct democracy.

A tribute was paid to the premises of the CDKF in Paris:

On February 10, 2018, our comrade Kendal Breizh (Olivier) fell in battle following an air 
strike by Turkish aviation against the position of YPG he occupied on the front of 
Cindirêsê. Another internationalist from the Spanish state, Baran Galicia (Samuel), was 
also killed during the bombing.

Coming from Brittany [1], Kendal Breizh joined the YPG and participated in the liberation 
of the city of Raqqa and the region of Deir ez-Zor from the YPG International battalion.

Like Kemal, he joined the revolution in Rojava because, with democratic confederalism, she 
defends a vision of society other than what we can know in the West.

Olivier (Kendal) during a demonstration in Brittany.
This revolution is thus opposed to what against Kendal struggled in France: capitalism and 
Jacobinism of the French state. Indeed, he also campaigned for the independence of 
Britain, the self-determination of his people, subject like those of the Basque Country, 
Corsica or Alsace, the centralism and the bureaucracy of the French state.

YPG had put forward for their video on the international volunteers who choose to brave 
the 2 e army of NATO and bombs to continue to defend the ongoing revolution in northern 
Syria. It was on this occasion that I had the pleasure of meeting him, during the three 
days of interval between my two attempts of passage for the canton of Afrîn.

He was happy to be able to continue fighting the enemies of the revolution, to fight the 
Turkish state and the fascists who make up his army.

Kendal was well aware of the danger, like all of us, but that did not lessen his 
determination. When he left, he asked me, " Wish me luck ! " Not for fighting against the 
Turkish army and the Islamists, but to successfully pass under the radar of the Syrian 
regime that prevented us to get to Afrin.

Our comrades Kemal and Kendal were both victims of the complicity of the French state.

Complicity because it persists in keeping the PKK on the list of terrorist organizations, 
and Emmanuel Macron recently described the YPG-YPJ as " potential terrorists ". This 
conviction comes from the fact that the French State prefers to maintain good relations 
with a trading partner than to defend the peoples fighting for their self-determination.

Not surprisingly, it is also a French tradition to consider separatist activists and 
activists, including those from the colonies of the French state, as terrorists.

That's why Kendal bet on his detention on his return. He had nothing to do with it;

Kemal, in the mountains of Kurdistan.
In the same vein, the French State today retains a dangerous position regarding the 
Turkish State's offensive on the canton of Afrin, even if the victory of it would lead to 
a reimplantation of the jihadists in the region. region.

The fight of our martyrs is ours, we will continue it regardless of the States or the 
fascist forces against us.

Long live independent and socialist Brittany !
Bevet Breizh dizalc'h ha sokialour !
Bijî Bretanya serbixwe u sosyalîst !

Long live the self-determination of peoples and internationalism !
Bevet an emdidermenañ ar pobloù ha ha etrebroadelouriezh !
Bijî xwediyarkirin gelan u navnetewetîyî !

Martyrs never die !
Kenavo Kamalad !
Sehîd namirin !

Damien Keller

[1] The AL group in Lorient paid special tribute to him .

http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Un-communiste-libertaire-dans-l-IFB-06-Hommage-a-deux-camarades-kurde-et-breton

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

Message: 5




On Tuesday 27/2, the military court of the associate Dimitris D. was appointed, who chose 
the road of total refusal to serve, refusing to join any national army, any armed defender 
of capital and state. ---- Prosecutions and fines are the price of each fighter's decision 
to directly declare to the militants that he will not lift the weapon against any 
proletarian, regardless of nationality and religion. This decision disturbs every state 
mechanism in the world, as it challenges the basis on which its own existence rests: the 
"people" rallying around a national idea - always to cover up the class exploitation. 
Against this ideology that all he does is serve the interests of capital, we answer that 
there are no Greeks or foreigners. There are only proletarians, melting under the wheels 
of wage slavery, melting under the wheels of the tanks until they stand up and fight the 
world of the bosses.

As the partner himself states in the statement of his refusal to engage: "We recognize 
ourselves as part of the struggling community of the exploited and oppressed class who, 
like the masters, does not have a specific origin and speaks all the languages of the 
world. We count as our own dead all the oppressed who were thrown into the front line of 
battles under the threat of death, all the exploiters dying all over the world from the 
miserable living conditions of world domination and even more those who were assassinated 
in their battles social and class war. Our story is the world's story of the uprisings and 
revolutions that raised black and red flags, our anthem is the International. For these 
dead, for this story,

We did not nurture illusions at any moment that the SYRIZA-ANEL government would abolish 
compulsory engagement. We never believed that the Greek army and Hellenic Army would be 
democratizing. Left, right, centered, each government manages the state machine and with 
it all institutions of expansion and domination inside and outside, including the armed 
forces. And so the courts of the deniers of conscription continue as usual, and the sixth 
fines fall down.

In this context, the trial of comrade Dimitris D. is not just a judicial issue of an 
individual with the armed forces, but a political question that goes beyond any of the 
governments and forms part of our struggle with the deep state and the rotten institutions 
that incarnate it.

We express our unreserved solidarity with our partner and with all the deniers of the army 
that are at the forefront of judicial, military and state institutions. Their struggle is 
a struggle of our whole class.

STOPPING ALL TRACKINGS TO THE TOTAL STRUGGLE NEEDS

WE DO NOT WANT TO FIGHT FOR THE INTERESTS OF OUR AFFECTS

NOT NATIONAL - NON RELIGIOUS,
OUR OWN WAR IS TAXIC

CONCENTRATIONS:
SATURDAY 24/2
at 12.00, Aristotle with Egnatia

TUESDAY 27/2
at 09.00 at the Military Tribunal of Thessaloniki

Eleftherial Initiative of Thessaloniki - member of the Anarchist Federation
lib_thess@hotmail.com
http://www.libertasalonica.wordpress.com

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

Message: 6




19:00: soup, salad and bread ---- 20:00 15 min introduction about the MIL, Gari, the main 
characters like Octavio Albarola, Marc Roulian. After the intro the docu starts. ---- 
Spain, march 1974. Different members of the M.I.L. (Movimiento Ibérico de Liberación) are 
about to be sentenced to death by the franquist law enforcement. Five groups of activists, 
in Paris and Toulouse, decide to bundle their forces and create the G.A.R.I.(Groupes 
d'Action Révolutionnaire Internationalistes). They organize in Paris the kidnapping of 
Balthazar Suarez, the director of the Banco Bilbao in Paris. With this they want to attain 
the liberation of their M.I.L. comrades and a hundred political prisoners. Fourty years 
later, thanks to the passing of the statute of limitation, Nicolas Réglat, who grew up 
without any knowledge of this adventure, lets his family and other former members of 
G.A.R.I. speak. This film recreates an incredible history told by its protagonists, who 
are not afraid to tell it like it is.

Language: French, English subtitles.

Location: Anarchistische Bibliotheek
Adres: Eerste Schinkelstraat 14 -16 Amsterdam

http://www.agamsterdam.org/g-a-r-i-1974-een-film-van-nicolas-reglat/

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

Message: 7




Information about the actions that took place in solidarity with the squat squads and the 
squat squat. ---- The second attempt to occupy the long-time unused building Šatovka, 
which is located in Prague in the Šárka Valley, lasted five days. During them, several 
squatters and squatters, who called their team Resurp Crew, occupied the flat part of the 
roof, where most of them survived the frosty weather until Wednesday 14th February. ---- 
During the occupation of the roof, the squatters were receiving all the support from the 
surrounding area, where the expanding police tape allowed them. Drumming, recorded music, 
singing, or screening from below, all kept the upbeat of those above, even in the face of 
various police shocks in the form of dazzling, intense noise, pepper spraying, or blunt 
attempts to negotiate.

His support was also expressed by Spatka Šatovka, who during the last year unsuccessfully 
negotiated with the city section about a possible project of a community center in a 
building, which should include a refreshment room, a bicycle shop, a gallery or a space 
for other artistic and social activities.

After the squatters left their positions, they were immediately detained and transferred 
to Bartholomew and then to the regional police headquarters at Vyšehrad. He faces charges 
of unauthorized interference with the right to a home, apartment or non-residential area, 
for which he faces two years in prison and under extreme circumstances, if it proves to be 
an organized group for up to five years. Their sympathizers and sympathizers reacted in 
turn, and tonight, in the number of about thirty people, they organized a noise solidarity 
demonstration before the headquarters.

Another evening demonstration in the same spirit was convened on the following day, 
Thursday 15 February. It swayed, sang and chanted slogans such as "Bite and Live!" Or "Our 
Weapon is Solidarity". This time, the action did not go without police buzzing. For 
three-quarters of the hour, the heavy crows surrounded them and forced about 25 people to 
legitimize. Fizzles did not forgive the insults and threats of violence. In addition, they 
were unable to explain the legal reason for the illustration.

Other actions to support squat squads and squatters can be expected, including benefits to 
cover the costs of their defense.

https://www.afed.cz/text/6796/podpora-zadrzenym-squaterum

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

Message: 8




In light of the small "labor and social self-management experiments" that have taken place 
recently in Greece, as well as the so-called "social and solidarity economy" promoted by 
today's left-wing government, we publish our own constructive criticism and a text / study 
by Martin Bubber on Labor and Social Self-Management Experiments in the 19th Century * to 
find out how and why these experiments either failed or dissipated or assimilated from the 
capitalist system. ---- Circus. Joan Miró. 1934 ---- Experiences of Labor and Social 
Self-Management  ---- (From the failed past to the successful future?) ---- Prologue ---- 
1. From the failed past to the successful future? ---- In Greece and today, the situation 
reminds a bit of PASOK's first PASOK rule in 1981, where it promoted the so-called 
socialization of troubled "bankrupt" private companies, such as Sophetx, Skaramagas, etc. 
PASOK promoted the "tripartite economy "Or the" third way to socialism "as it called it, 
ie the private, state and social economy, because it was contrary to nationalization - 
nationalization of sectors of the economy, which was promoted by the domestic Marxists of 
all tendencies.

Naturally socialization and falsified self-management by the workers of socialized 
businesses end up later went by walk, but how and why this attempt was wrecked is not in 
the intentions of this text, without this meaning that it does not need an analysis and 
study - in-depth - for that period.

With what we write, we do not want to despair the struggles and experiments that have 
taken place in the past or today in this direction, but - as anarchists and with 
particular interest in these issues - we want to criticize with the criticism and the 
necessary reflection to draw useful conclusions for the race.

2. Urban influences on the "subversive" - competitive movement

I. In our era of minimalist modernity, everything seems new, capitalism creates a fake 
image of itself wants and always imagines a new one, in our time it succeeds through the 
renewal of technology / innovation in this field are now happening any revolutions ... I 
write about the "Premiere for a world story of dishonesty" ... Capitalism is like Oscar 
Wilde's novel "The Doctor Gray's Portrait". Capitalism is turning away from the past and 
fears the future, wants to imagine as a new eternal child - a teenager who does not age 
and is constantly renewed, hence in his everyday life he excites and distorts time into a 
constant present in one now, .

What happened as a historical (let alone class) memory and what will happen or could 
prospectively happen is secondary to capitalism and to the extent that it manipulates 
social and individual time manipulates us all. Capitalism fears death, namely its decline 
and overthrow. Capitalism wants to look like a new child-teen, the bourgeoisie always want 
to hide the fact that capitalism and the state, among other things, come from very old 
age, is an ancient rust ... "(1)

Thus, a large part of the subversive-competitive movement - or what it wants to be called 
- has become entangled - and many unrepresented and ignorant people have stung the 
neocapitalism story about modernity, and when you ask them that some of these issues we 
are busy today and are not new and have been concerned and previous generations of rebels 
give you the following answer (typical recent online dialogue with a man of this mentality):
You say: "I do not think tomorrow is something that history should help us deal with ... "

I answer:" ... Obviously you and many other new (not only age-old) anti-authoritarian, 
anarchist, libertarians are writing this to your old shoe:
"... A movement that ignores or discards the social and class history, but also its 
history, does nothing but to be constantly on the island of the lofotens ..." (GM)

Or even better this:

"His struggle man against power is the struggle of memory against oblivion "(Milan 
Kundera). Expand and say that: the loss of class memory is - it was one of the constant 
aspirations of the superiors and pretty much they did.
Now if the story does not repeat itself, or it makes circles or is linear, if there is a 
constant evolution in human societies, my friend, there is a small evolution and an 
evolution, a step back but you - you who write in the soles of your old shoes story to see?

A little about the usefulness of the story in order not to be accused of historicism.

Our history needs us not to repeat mistakes omissions and shortcomings of the past in 
today, without sacrificing neither the past in the present nor the present in the past. 
Let us draw useful conclusions from the world revolutionary experience because the 
compromises and half the revolutions of the past have determined and haunted today.
II. Coming to today we say:

{...} Under the conditions of capitalist barbarity we only live in the creation of a 
movement from the base, that is to say from the social, labor and municipal space, to a 
rupture and overthrow of the institutions and processes of the capitalist order, issues of 
overcoming these conditions.

Through the procedures of general assemblies and the revived representation for the joint 
functioning of social life, creating and proposing to society processes and instruments 
that will open it in conditions of restored freedom, destroying the centralization of the 
state and the urbanization of the cities. Against the economy for economy and consumption 
for consumption, turning work from wage slavery into creative action and creating the 
conditions that allow understanding and cooperation with nature.

In this direction, it is necessary to create libertarian associations of action 
(neighborhood councils, local committees, collaborative actions, autonomous trade unions, 
cultural hubs, work councils, youth and student clubs, ecological groups and 
organizations, ecosciences etc.) that can be transformed in organs of deconstruction of 
state and party control and rupture with the existing situation.

These deconstruction instruments, in horizontal interconnection, cooperation and 
coordination, both for their own, local, and for their general problems and interests, 
must involve separate from the partial and total issue of overturning through the 
connection of everyday life with the actual problems that this society of exploitation, 
oppression and contamination creates, in a process inextricably linked to the whole 
rupture and overthrow of capitalist society.
Finally, these self-contradictions create their own model of life, their own "inner" life 
with their own human relationships that are against alienation and alienation, where each 
fighter, and each oppressed person, will He must find warmth, understanding, love, warmth 
and solidarity. These self-governments, these collective organizations can and should be 
our "anti-society", the model for the transition to the new social life. {...}

{...} Even if we wanted to, it is impossible to describe, prescribe or predefine in their 
details the form and content of the social regeneration that social self-management will 
bring at all levels. Without that, it does not mean that we do not let imagination and 
imagination be envisioned and designed.

Nothing can be predetermined-trapped in deadly strokes and militant deeds, the orgasm and 
the wealth of life in the non-class society, in a society in which life acquires meaning 
and content, in a society that man as a person becomes important and meaning. In this way, 
the question of overcoming and transitioning into these new conditions excludes any sense 
of legitimate certainty, since the liberation of the oppressed-exploiters of the present 
era is a work of their own.

Besides, design under the guise of scientificity is a fanny, ". The invocation of science 
instead of the invocation of the people restores, echoing, those old pages of Bakunin 
about the sleeping, the happy children of the bourgeoisie, the diplomats, who, as he says, 
"devote themselves exclusively to studying the great problems of philosophy, of social and 
political science - and they are working on theories that ultimately have no purpose other 
than to show the ultimate incompetence of the working and grassroots masses. "

It is not historically confirmed that the oppressed exploitants of the present age will 
follow one way or the other. What, however, can be said with certainty is that without 
this broad massive libertarian, anti-partisan, counter-organizing organizations, without 
popular counter-institutions, without consistency of theory and action, this struggle can 
not be achieved. Or that will be a liberating struggle or it will not be! Since there can 
be no libertarian-anti-communist society without libertarian-anti-authoritarianism, and 
since these are only created by rational discussion and understanding of the struggles, 
those who are already confronted with state and class sovereignty must support and help 
positively and practically these processes and the games.

The struggle for a society towards the more human, that is, without humanity and human 
dominance, will be lasting and multiform. It will not only be a struggle to improve the 
standard of living but also a struggle to change our consciousness and our way of 
thinking. A struggle that is not only about changing the "social basis" (economy, 
production relationship), the Marxist theory, but also the "superstructure" (civilization, 
social relations), challenging and overthrowing its state and cultural model capitalism 
and the state. {...} (2)

(3) and the islands of non-exploitative relations within the capitalist world that promote 
a piece of the "subversive" movement (4a) are not the precursors of a rapidly expanding 
new but heterotopias, whose very existence and meaning depend on the continued dominance 
of capitalism all around them. The necessity of the social revolution as a first step 
towards the establishment of a communist self-directed (5) libertarian mode of production 
reverses the temporal sequence of the previous mode of production, bourgeois or bourgeois, 
in which productive relations have changed before political relations changed or changed 
institutions).

Returning to the subject of the new and old, (6) a young comrade in a meeting said: "let 
me say something new," and I said with pleasure that: "after the Big Bang - Big Bang, the 
universe is - it's finite because time began to count. "But let's leave the jokes and 
let's see why all the experiments of labor and social self-management since the 19th 
century failed or assimilated from the system, when these issues were concerned a large 
part of it rgatikis class in movement terms.

Finally, as far as the so-called "parallel social and solidarity economy" is concerned, 
there is, of course, the capitalism of alternative movements, and if you think they are 
new, just look - as I foretold - in the twilight of the 19th and early 20th centuries to 
see the hundreds producer-consumer cooperatives and how they were assimilated by the 
system, last few remnants were some of the kibbutz in Israel.

Giorgos Meriziotis

Notes:
1) The whole text here: Preamble for a universal history of dishonesty
2) Extract from the "Handbook of Historicity of Speech and Action. Synopsis of social 
anarchism "
3) On Friday July 17, 2015, a news item was given that gives the opportunity to comment: 
"The reopening of the autumn of the Naoussa, Marnea and Komotini spinning of the former 
Lanara Group, which has been inactive for more than three years, announced the Secretary 
General of Industry of the Ministry Production Reconstruction by Yannis Tolios. He said a 
cooperative reopening plan was being prepared by joining the new corporate scheme to 
create workers and the banking sector, with a capital of 10 million euros to be provided 
by the National Bank.
However, it has not yet been clarified whether the new scheme will take the form of a 
social cooperative or the Commonwealth of Independent States. According to the Secretary 
General of the ministry, "the debt regulation has been very high and has been secured". 
These are debts to employees, to IKA and to third parties totaling 250 million euros. "It 
is urgent to see capital participation with a co-operative scheme of the workers 
themselves that some of the employees owed to get them back payment. Part of them will 
participate in the chapter and a part, unfortunately, will be lost, "said Mr Tolios. (The 
program remains with the current government).
Commentary: This is a new scenario that employees have to reject. It will not only solve 
the survival problems faced by EN-CLO's redundancies, but also contribute to their 
disorientation, along with the final loss of their due to them. We will repeat it, even if 
it sounds like a "wooden tongue". Socialist self-governing islands can not exist under 
capitalist conditions. "Cooperative experiments" and in our country have - at least as a 
duration in time - fail! And it is necessary to look at two issues (apart from the failure 
of the cooperative productive-consumer movement in the 19th century).
(a) why self-management in former Yugoslavia, Algeria and so on has failed,
b) the differences and similarities between this self-management and self-management.
4a) Some time ago, the employees of BIOMME proceeded to the occupation and operation of 
the closed factory that worked, because for them / their class brothers, in these 
socio-economic conditions since we are a matter of substantial survival, we are with them 
solidarity, the "experiment "Has many positive elements on the issue of self-management, 
but if it is not generalized and unrelated to the overall social-class movement, it is in 
danger of being assimilated like similar" experiments "in Argentina pochi discretion.
Capitalism has powerful assimilation weapons because it continues and perpetuates this: 
"... From the emergence of the power-hierarchical systems and the state as the force of 
enforcing the will of the few, the oligarchs perceive and organize social life" by image 
and likeness " of themselves. They perceive the world, and thus life, uniquely, 
one-dimensionally and uniformly, therefore, sovereignly.
For this reason, where a different manifestation and organization of social life appears, 
sovereignty tends to suppress it. And when it is not enough, the repression attempts to 
assimilate it and accept it insofar as it manages to reproduce itself within it ... "(see 
note 2). With what we say, we do not want to despise the struggles that are taking place 
in this direction, but with our criticism we want to draw the attention and the necessary 
reflection to draw useful conclusions about the struggle.
4b) To update the text, see this: The social and solidarity economy is pushing ... Gazi
5) What are the basic principles of self-management?
We will briefly mention them:
Self-management means by definition self-determination. It excludes the direction of 
others, the dominance of man over man. It excludes not only the state's permanent legal 
authority with repressive institutions, but also demands the abolition of the state 
principle by unofficial associations of the people: from trade unions, from workplaces and 
from the myriad clusters and relations that constitute society .
Self-management, by definition, is the idea that workers (all workers, including 
technicians, engineers, scientists, developers, coordinators, all) who are engaged in the 
production of goods and services can themselves run and to effectively coordinate the 
economic life of society.

This belief is based on three inseparable principles:
a) belief in the creative ability of the masses, in the "common man", and not in an 
aristocratic class of "superior" people.
b) autonomy (self-government),
c) decentralization and co-ordination, with the federalism's free agreement.

For more insight into the subject, see the tribute:
GENERAL SOCIAL SELF-ADVICE
Self-direction and hierarchy Self- governing
society and its enemies
Community Control, Labor Inspection and Cooperative Commonwealth
What is Communalism? The democratic dimension of anarchism
6) For the new and old see this: Their democracy, modernity and political lie

3. Labor and social self-management experiments of the 19th century *

Martin Bubber

With the same oversimplification as the first socialist "utopian", the people named the 
two great waves of the cooperative movement that upset the largest part of the working 
class in England and France in the 1830s and 1848 "romantically" absolutely unjustifiably, 
since the word means daydreaming and unrealistic view. These waves were an expression of 
the deep crises that accompanied the mechanization of the modern economy, as were the 
political movements themselves: Papermanship in England and the two revolutions in France. 
But, as opposed to the political movements that wanted to change the entire hierarchy of 
power, the cooperative movements wanted to start with the creation of social reality,

They were accused of overriding the role of man in the desired transformation and 
underestimated the role of circumstances, but you can not measure the potential of man in 
a given situation that must change, except if the demands are excellent. The "heroic" 
forms of the cooperative movement have demanded from their members a belief and 
self-sacrifice which, at least in the long run, was impossible for them to have but this 
does not at all prove that faith and self-sacrifice, which exist during the extraordinary 
moments of political turmoil, to have a satisfactory degree in everyday economic life.
It is easy to ridicule and say that the founders of the heroic cooperative movements "put 
the ideal man in place of the real man"; but the "real" man very much approaches the 
"ideal" equally when he is expected to fulfill tasks that overtake him, or who thinks that 
they are beyond it is not only true. for the person that he "is taken to the height of his 
superior pursuits". And finally, it depends on the purpose, the awareness and the will to 
achieve it.

The heroic era of the modern cooperative aimed at transforming society, the era of 
technology is essentially aimed at the economic success of each separate cooperative 
venture. The first failed, but this does not condemn the cause, nor the way to the latter 
has to show great successes, but they do not seem to be stages on the way to the end. A 
supporter of the bureaucratic cooperative movement says the following about his 
beginnings: "Let us especially admire the humble and loyal souls guided by the lighted 
torch of social beliefs ... But let us acknowledge that heroism is not by itself a mental 
state suitable for to bring economic results ". Actually,

With regard to the three main types of cooperative (apart from credit cooperatives), 
namely consumer cooperatives, productive cooperatives and general cooperatives based on 
the union of production and consumption, let us give a few dates from the two seasons of 
the movement. 1830: In 1827, the first English consumer cooperative was established in the 
modern sense under the influence of Dr. William Qing in 1832 set up the first French 
productive cooperative according to Buzez's plans; in the middle, were Owen's experimental 
"colonies" and his followers: the American experiment and the experiments of England?

Era of 1848: first the consumer cooperative of Rohden's weavers, then the "national 
workshops" of Louis Blan and such, finally, as a parody, the comic-tragic "Ikaria" of 
Cambe (which was genuinely utopian in the negative sense, with absolute ignorance of 
people) on the Mississippi banks. We will say about these attempts to make "utopian" 
socialism only what is needed for the purposes of our book.

King and Bushez were doctors and, unlike Owen-who had set war on religion as his primary 
purpose-were faithful Christians, Protestant and Catholic. This has its meaning. For Owen, 
socialism was the fruit of reason, for King and Busez was the realization of the teachings 
of Christianity in the sphere of public life. Both, as Bushez says, felt that the time had 
come "to create social institutions from the teachings of Christianity." This basic 
religious feeling profoundly influenced the overall view of both, and King, who liked the 
Quakers and collaborated with them, influenced the tone of his words: everywhere we feel 
the tangible, direct, profound care for his fellow humans, for life and their soul.

They justifiably named King in his time - before falling into oblivion - the first and 
greatest English theorist of the cooperative movement. But beyond and above that the 
charisma had to speak simply and to show to everyone the essential nature of the things 
that he was talking about. In the entire co-operative secretariat, I do not know of a text 
that gives the impression of the "popular" and "classic" of the twenty-eight issues of The 
Co-operator magazine, written and edited by King in the years 1828-1832 to educate those 
who spread their ideas. He had a depth and clarity of social perception that had no other 
touch, except for the more scientific but more abstract, William Thompson. It starts from 
the job, "the root of the tree, regardless of the height at which it will eventually reach".

The job is "in this respect everything". The working class "monopolizes this good". No 
power on earth can take it because all powers are "the only power to direct the work of 
the working class." The workers are missing capital, that is, machines and the ability to 
be maintained as machines work. But "all capital is created by labor" and it is "nothing 
in itself". To be productive, it must be united with work. This union is now achieved, the 
chapter "buys and sells the worker as an animal".

True union, "the physical alliance", can only come from the working class itself - but the 
working class does not know it. Its only hope of succeeding is to unite the workers, to 
co-operate, to create joint capital, to become independent. King is passionately 
expressing the thought Thomson had already said before him, that cooperative is the form 
of production that suits the work. "As soon as the workers unite on the basis of the 
principle of labor rather than the beginning of capital, they will sweep everything ... 
and it is a pity, because the dust will also blind some bosses." If the workers unite, 
they will acquire the tools they need - the machinery - and they will become, in their 
cooperatives, the same subject of production. But they can also get land. King clearly 
states that he considers consumer cooperatives only a start, that his goal, like that of 
Thompson, is the general cooperative. Once he has enough capital, the cooperative "company 
will be able to buy land, live in it, cultivate it and produce what it loves, so that it 
covers all the nutrition, clothing and housing needs of its members . Then the company 
will be called a community. "

King asks the unions to buy their land with their economies and settle their unemployed 
members, creating communities that will mainly produce to meet their needs. These 
communities will embrace not only the special interests and functions of their members but 
also their lives insofar as they want and can live together. But the community of life, 
even if it can only be fully realized in the general cooperative, could potentially 
already exist in the relations between members of the consumer cooperative. King has in 
his mind not a faceless faceless solidarity, but a personal relationship, generally latent 
and yet ready to manifest at all times, a "sympathy that will gain new energy and 
eventually become enthusiastic." Therefore,
The basic law of the cooperative means, for King, the establishment of genuine 
relationships between people. "When a person enters a cooperative society, he acquires a 
new relationship with his fellow human beings - and this relationship is immediately 
ratified morally and religiously." Of course, this ideal, this "heroic" demand was not 
respected in the years to come, when the members of the cooperative grew and the 
cooperative was bruised and bureaucratised; but if we see things from the perspective of 
the restructuring of society, this is precisely the cause the inadequacy of "individual" 
cooperatives.

When William King stopped publishing his magazine in 1830, three hundred companies had 
already been created under the influence of his teaching. For the most part, these were 
short-lived, because the "selfish spirit" prevailed within them, as one of their leaders 
said at the 1832 conference. The crucial stage of consumer-based cooperatives began in 
1844 when the severe industrial crisis that hit once again in England shortly after the 
loss of a strike, a small group of weavers and representatives of other branches met at 
Rohdale and wondered: "What do we do to escape from misery?" Several thought that everyone 
should try alone u luck - and indeed this is true in all situations, because without it, 
nothing can ever succeed; only one must know that it is just a piece of what must be done, 
but an important part. And because they did not know this, they offered to give up the 
pleasures of alcohol, and of course they did not convince their comrades. (How important, 
however, it seemed to be the proposal we can see from the fact that, later, in the statute 
of "Equal Pioneers of Rohdenel", the construction of a hotel Abstinence from alcohol was 
mentioned on the company's agenda.

Again, there were some members of the paper movement that aimed to change the constitution 
and take power, who proposed to take political action in order for the Labor to conquer 
what they needed from legislative power - but the movement had begun declining and they 
had learned that, although the political struggle is necessary, it is not enough. Some 
Owen fans who were present proclaimed that there was no longer any hope for them in 
England and that they had to emigrate and set up a new life abroad (probably thinking 
about new experimental colonies in America); but it was also rejected because the dominant 
sense was: "to do" means to do here, means not to put it on the feet in the face of the 
crisis, but to endure it with as much power as we can. This power was small, and yet some 
witches, familiar with William King's teachings, indicated that if they were all together, 
they would probably create a force with which they could do something. So, they decided to 
"co-operate".

The duties assigned to her by the company were very high, but we should not impute the 
authors of the charter statutes. Tasks were classified in three stages. The first, 
consumer cooperative, was considered to be organized immediately. The second, the 
productive cooperative, which would include building houses for members, jointly producing 
goods and jointly farming fields from unemployed comrades, was also a perspective of the 
not too distant, though not the immediate future.

The third stage, the cooperative colony, was even more distant, because of the term "as 
soon as possible": "as soon as possible, the company will proceed with the resolution of 
production, distribution, education and governance powers - or, in other words, set up a 
self-sufficient colony of common interests, or help other companies set up similar 
colonies. " It is amazing how the practical intuition of Rohden's weavers caught the three 
essential areas of the cooperative. In the first field, the consumer cooperative, their 
simple and effective methods (for example, the distribution of profits to the members 
according to the relative volume of their markets proved to be particularly successful) 
marked a new path. In the field of production, they have made several advances with 
increasing success, especially in the grinding of cereals,

Only half of the workers were members of the company, and therefore shareholders, and that 
they immediately applied the principle of rewarding work with salary but distributing 
profits exclusively among the shareholders, "entrepreneurs and business owners", as 
observed in his monograph on the Leaders, the important co-operative Victor Amee Hyber, 
who repeatedly visited Rohdeel in his first steps. They did not, however, reach the third, 
the largest and most decisive task: the realization of the cooperative colony based on the 
combination of production and consumption.

It is worthwhile to pay attention to an element of the Rohdaten cooperative. The 
co-operative cooperatives, the cooperation of the various cooperative groups and 
institutions, which the "Pioneers" themselves attempted and later extended to others. "The 
principle of federalism," says Romanian researcher Mladenic in his work The History of 
Cooperative Theories, apparently based on Proudhon, "derives naturally from the idea that 
forms the foundation of the cooperative system.
Just as the cooperative company unites people to jointly meet certain needs, the various 
cooperative cells unite with each other by applying the principle of solidarity to jointly 
perform certain functions, especially production and supply. " Here again we find the 
basic principle of restructuring, although, of course, consumer associations as such, ie 
cooperatives that only combine certain people's interests but not people's lives, do not 
seem suitable to serve as cells of a new social structure.

The modern consumer cooperative, which has become an important reality in the economic 
life of our time, derives from the ideas of "utopian" socialism. William King's plans have 
a clear tendency to reach the great socialist reality through the creation of small 
socialist realities that are constantly expanding and federating. But King acknowledged at 
the same time, and clearly, the nature of the technological revolution that had begun in 
his day. He recognized the key importance of the machine and approved it; he rejected all 
the attacks on the machines and described them as "madness and crime".

But he also acknowledged that the inventors, who are themselves workers, destroy with 
their "marvelous inventions" themselves and their comrades, because "selling these 
inventors to their bosses works against them instead of keeping them in the hands and 
exploit them by working for them themselves. " That is why, of course, it is necessary for 
co-workers to work in companies. "Workers have the ingenuity to make all the machines of 
the world, but they still do not have the ingenuity to get them to work on their behalf. 
It should not be long to awaken within them and this second ingenuity. " Consequently, the 
cooperative organization of consumption is, for King, only one step towards the 
cooperative organization of production,

In the first hundred years of his life, the consumer co-operative conquered a large part 
of the civilized world, but without fulfilling hitherto King's hopes for his internal 
development. Consumers may, in many places, and sometimes to a large extent, have turned 
to production for their needs, and there is, as Fritz Naphtali rightly points out, a 
tendency to penetrate increasingly into production and to lead it in the direction of 
'Basic' production. But we have not come any closer to an organic alliance of production 
and consumption in a comprehensive Community form, although we have already noted examples 
of large consumer companies - or groups of companies for individual productive sectors - 
organized into productive cooperatives,

Similarly, the confederation of local companies has maintained a genuine federal 
character, even when their association has taken place on a large scale - in these cases, 
small companies, as reported for some decades, have been mainly transformed from 
independent outlets social solidarity in simple institutions with members, and their 
stores in simple branches of the overall organization. The technological advantages of 
such a concentration are obvious; the bad thing is that there was no authority to try to 
save as much autonomy of individual companies as was compatible with technological 
requirements, although people tried in some cases - in Switzerland, for example - to 
compensate with a planned decentralization the gradual loss of "soul" and the essence of 
companies.

But for the most part, the operation of large cooperative societies is more and more akin 
to the operation of capitalist institutions, and the bureaucratic authority has in many 
cases purged the voluntary principle, which was once considered the most valuable and 
indispensable property of the cooperative movement . This is particularly clear in 
countries where consumer companies have increasingly collaborated with the state and the 
municipalities, and Charles Zid did not fall far short when he reminded us of the wolf 
legend that was disguised as a stomach and expressed the fear that instead of doing the 
state "cooperative", we will only succeed in making the partnership "state". Because the 
spirit of solidarity can truly remain alive only if there is a lively relationship between 
people.

Tainis considered that when they moved to the joint market and then to production for 
their needs, consumer companies would "lay the foundations of an economic organization 
that would openly oppose the existing social order" and that in theory "the capitalist 
world, as a result of which, would be dismantled. " But "theory" can never be realized as 
life forms of capitalism permeate cooperative activity.

Busez, who came shortly after King and designed and inspired the founding of productive 
cooperatives in France, is also a deeply "utopian" socialist. "The communist reform that 
circulates everywhere in the atmosphere," writes in his magazine "L 'Europeén" in 1831, 
"must be supplemented by the union of workers". For Busez - who, though Catholic, attended 
the school of Saint-Simone where he liked the radical socialist Bazar - production is 
everything and the organization of consumption, not even a stage. In his view, the 
productive cooperative-and, having less understanding of technological developments than 
King, means manual workers rather than modern industrial workers-leads directly to the 
socialist order of things. "The workers of a branch unite, put down their economies,

A small industrial community: here, Busees approaches King's idea that a company aspires 
to become a community but only prematurely attributes this character to the productive 
cooperative as such while King, with his deepest intuition, saw such a possibility only 
for him total cooperative. Buzez concludes in the simple, very simple wording: "Let all 
the workers do this, and the social problem will be solved." He knew very well that this 
did not solve the great problem of land ownership, and for this he devised the additional 
slogan: "Land to farmers, factory to workers" without properly and thoroughly 
understanding the problem of social reform of agriculture - did not understand the problem 
of the creation of the entire cooperative, the major problem of the rebuilding of society,

On the other hand, Bouzez clearly distinguished most of the dangers that threaten the 
socialist character of the productive cooperative from the inside, and especially the 
ever-increasing diversification within the cooperative in its early stages between the 
comrades who founded it and the workers they came after a differentiation that puts it in 
the cooperative, although strongly advocates socialism, the indisputable seal of its 
integration into the capitalist order of things.

To eliminate this risk, Buzez received two countermeasures in the modified program he 
published after his first practical experiences in 1831: first, the "social capital" that 
will increase each time with the addition of one fifth of his profits will remain 
inexpensive property of the company, which is declared unresolved and is constantly 
strengthened by acquiring new members and secondly, the company will not hire external 
workers as employees for more than one year, and then will be obliged to she has new 
partners according to her requirements (in a standard contract published in 1840 in the L 
'Atelier newspaper, the year was limited to a trial period of three months). For the first 
of these points, Buzez says that, if we abandon this chapter,

As has been rightly said, this program aimed at creating a capital that would eventually 
absorb the "industrial capital of the whole country and thus expropriate all productive 
means through labor cooperatives." We also find this "utopian" element here; but what, 
ultimately, is more practical: to try to create social reality through social reality, 
with its rights to be preserved and expanded by political means, or to are you trying to 
create it only with the magic wand of politics?

As a matter of course, the two companies that were founded under the influence of Bouzeg 
have very little respected these two rules, and after twenty years the basic principle of 
indivisible capital has been challenged so that those who have been faithful to them have 
been forced to give a tough and fruitless battle, as well as the basic principle under 
which property conditions would change and capital would come under the sovereignty of 
labor - a basic principle that had to be supported if the cooperative wanted to benefit 
the whole working class century not only "the lucky few founders who, thanks to this, had 
become rentiers rather than employees." And right at that time, in 1852, we read about 
similar experiences in England in a report by the Society on the Promotion of Labor 
Cooperatives.

But from all this, from the similar experiences of the Middle Ages and from similar 
experiences in the history of consumer companies, the only conclusion we can draw is that 
the internal problems of cooperatives and the dominance of the capitalist basic principle 
that still prevails within them , can be overcome only gradually and only through and 
within the entire cooperative.

Luis Blanc may have been influenced by Buseaz's thought, but he differs from him in 
essential points. At the same time, the important thing is not that, as Lassal later did 
for his working and productive cooperatives, he asked for state help for the "social 
workshops" he wanted to establish, since "what is missing from the proletariat to be 
released is the tools, and it is the government's job to give it to him. " This was, of 
course, a great mistake, a contradiction in the terms we would say, since a government 
representing a certain state order of things can not be forced to create institutions 
designed to abolish this order of things (as Blanlan explicitly said).

Therefore, logically, the anti-socialist majority of the interim government of 1848 
replaced Bull's plan first with a caricature and then destroyed even that caricature - but 
with regard to the nature of the social reform he was planning, this Blaan claim was not 
absolutely necessary. More important is the fact that Blanco's social program was 
centralized: he wanted every big industry to be formed as a single association centered on 
a central lab.

He wanted a lot of blame at the root of the "cowardly and brutal basic principle" of 
competition, as he called it once in a speech to the National Assembly - that is, to 
prevent the emergence of collective competition in the place of private competition. And 
this is, in addition to internal diversification, the main risk that threatens the 
productive cooperative. A good example of this widely spread risk is given by a letter 
written long ago by a leader of the Christian-Socialist Cooperative Movement in England, 
in which he says about the productive cooperatives that founded this movement that "they 
were pushing for a completely mercurial competitive spirit" and " they were only aimed at 
a more successful competition than in the present system. "

This risk was recognized by Buzez and his supporters - but they refused to fight him with 
monopolies, which considered them even more dangerous, because monopoly meant for them 
paralysis, the end of all organic development. According to their proposals, competition 
between cooperatives should rather be organized and regulated by a union of the 
cooperatives themselves. Here, free federation opposes the planned merger. But we must 
acknowledge that this federal idea is constantly appearing in Blanch and breaking the 
crowd of centralization, especially after the failure of his state plan. It slightly 
amends Bouchez's plan for the reserve fund,

But as soon as the state plan for free cooperatives moves forward, the only way it sees to 
achieve its goal is to federate from existing cooperatives; they have to get together and 
set up a central committee; which will organize throughout the country "the most important 
recruitment of all: the recruitment that will eliminate the proletariat". These words are 
mediocre between the wonderful and the ridiculous - but the call to the proletariat to 
self-abolish through co-operation implies a certain practical gravity which is of great 
importance for the immediate next period. And by the end of 1849, we see Blaan approving 
the Union of Brotherhood Cooperatives,

Everywhere in Blaan we come across thoughts that belong to the living tradition and to the 
"utopian" socialism. He sees the productive cooperative as a whole cooperative in the 
future, just as King was seeing the consumer cooperative merged into the whole; and in 
this respect, just as the Union of Brotherhood Cooperatives, whom he praised, was aiming 
to establish, as a federation, agrarian and industrial colonies "on a large scale, so he 
aimed to create community colonies on the territory of the national territory. Its 
starting point is the technological necessity for large-scale enterprises: "We need to 
launch a large-scale farming system for agriculture by linking them to union and joint 
ownership" and wants, if possible, to transplant industry to the countryside and to "marry 
industrial and rural work". And here he announces Kropotkin's idea of "sharing work in 
time" for the union of agriculture, industry and craft professions in a modern rural 
community.

Despite the rapid repression of the cooperative federations by the reaction, many new 
productive cooperatives were created in France in the years to come; as doctors and 
pharmacists were united on a cooperative basis (obviously, in these cases, genuine 
producer cooperatives could not be said, since here was no ground for working together). 
The enthusiasm for cooperatives lived much longer than the Revolution. Even the 
persecution and dissolution of many cooperatives after the coup d'état[of Louis Bonaparte 
in 1851]failed to tame the movement.

The real danger that threatened them was, as in England, from the inside: their 
capitalisation, their gradual transformation into capitalist or semi-capitalist companies. 
Forty years after the enthusiastic attempts of the British Christian-Socialists to create 
a broad network of workers-productive cooperatives, which "rejected any idea of 
competition between them as inadequate with the true form of society," beginning in 1850, 
Beatrice Weber stated that, with the exception of a few cooperatives that had remained 
very loyal to the ideal of the "brotherhood of the workers" - which, however, became 
questionable for the most part - all the others "have an amazing variety of excellence 
government, plutocracy and monarchist statutes. " And fifty years after Louis Blair, a 
completely productive (in this respect) productive cooperative in France was created, the 
actors of the spectacle, who, apart from the few partners and about the same number of 
supporters, employed ten times as many employees. Yet, we can find everywhere perfect 
examples of the internal struggle for socialism. Sometimes they have something tragic, but 
also something prophetic.

The productive cooperative was rightly named "the child of sorrows and the beloved" of all 
those "waiting for the cooperative movement to create something essential for the 
salvation of mankind"; but we can easily understand from the facts why an advocate of 
consumer cooperative societies the productive cooperatives working for the free market 
"completely anti-socialist in spirit and substance" because "producers, starting something 
on their own and on their behalf, strap and in all circumstances have been divided, 
individualistic or mikrofatriastika interests. " Beyond, however, from the exaggeration 
inherent in such an assurance, productive cooperatives should never "start something on 
their own and on their own."

The development of the consumer cooperative follows the straight line of numerical growth; 
a large percentage of civilized people (except America, which is remarkable) is currently 
organized in terms of consumption on a cooperative basis. On the other hand, the 
development of productive cooperatives (and I speak here only for the productive 
cooperative in the strict sense, not for the many individual, mainly agricultural 
cooperatives that simply aim at facilitating or intensifying production) can be 
represented by a broken line, which, in general, does not show an upward trend. New 
generations are constantly being created, but over and over again most of the most 
vigorous go into the sphere of capitalism; there is no continuity.

But the overall / general co-operative is a different case - its development, as long as 
it grows, looks like a circle of small circles, which are generally not really connected 
to each other. Consumer and productive cooperatives were based on a broad movement that 
stretched from one region to another - colonies in the sense of the whole cooperative were 
always sporadic, improvised, they did not have specific goals. Unlike others, they lacked 
something Franz Oppenheimer called "the power of long-lasting impact." Not that only some 
of them were spoken - but their pulling power was individualistic, they did not generate 
new community cells. In the history of cooperative colonies, nor in Europe (with the 
exception of Soviet Russia,

Consumers' cooperatives are constantly and continuously federated - productive 
cooperatives in the true sense have done this incongruously, sometimes incrementally, 
sometimes downcastly - community colonies in general, at all. Their fate is different from 
their desire: at first they did not want to be isolated, but they were isolated - they 
wanted to become functional models, but only interesting experiments were made - they 
wanted to be the dynamic and dynamic beginnings of a social transformation, but each 
contained the end of it. The cause of this difference between a consumer and productive 
cooperative on the one hand and a total cooperative on the other, I think it is ultimately 
their fundamentally different origins. However, there have been developed situations that 
were roughly the same in many places and factories,

In addition, the plans that inspired the founding of these cooperatives did not come from 
an overall thought, but from a question that in some way addressed the designers 
themselves the situation. We can clearly follow this process in King and in Busees, 
because both of them were initially champions of federation; Busees even had in mind a 
federal union of unions he had proposed. In both cases, the projects were aimed at 
tackling a given difficult situation and were local inasmuch as they sought to solve these 
problems at the point where they arose. Such plans can be called locally in all the 
meaning of the word, because they were by their nature linked to the specific places where 
the problems arose.

Quite different is the history of "colonial" total cooperatives. Here, every now and for 
all, irrespective of the situation, but with no real relation to the given place and its 
requirements, we see the "idea" of dictating its commands, preparing its plans somewhere 
in the clouds and then downloading them on earth. Regardless of how theoretically these 
are the plans at the outset and therefore totally schematic as in Fourier; no matter how 
much they rely on specific experiences and empirical assumptions as in Owen - they will 
never answer the questions that raise a specific situation but will to create new 
situations, irrespective of the place and the local problems. This becomes strangely 
evident when we study colonies in foreign countries: immigration is not organized and is 
not regulated in socialist directions; anyway - the future of migration is linked to a new 
drive, ie to the desire to participate in the realization of a social plan - and that too 
often turned into the dogmatism of an organization that felt and they believed that it was 
the only right, the only fair and true organization that its binding claims sometimes 
oppose to the free game of relations between members. (The sense community is never enough 
to establish the community of life; this requires a deeper and more vital bond). The 
colony that remains faithful to the doctrine is threatened by paralysis; that which is 
increasingly revolting against doctrine, from fragmentation - both are lacking corrective,

Where the doctrine rules, the only result is the isolation of the colony; the exclusivity 
of "the only right form" prevents the union even with homogeneous colonies, because in 
each of these "believers" they are totally captured by the absolute character of the 
unparalleled achievement their. But where the doctrine subsides, the economic and 
intellectual isolation of the colony, especially in a foreign country, is familiar with 
the same fate: isolation, lack of association, inefficiency. None of this would have been 
so important if a great educational force, supported by a vigorous spell of life and fate, 
could secure a will-to-be community victory over the residual selfishness that goes with 
it, or rather exalt itself in superior form this selfishness. Usually, however, collective 
selfishness,

Most of the known experimental colonies failed or flushed, not just the communist ones, as 
some think. Here we have to exclude the individual efforts of various religious groups, 
efforts that their vitality can only be understood by the faith of a particular group and 
as a separate manifestation of this faith - it is characteristic that the federal form 
appears only here , such as, for example, the Russian heresy of Duhovor in Canada or the 
"Chuterite Brothers". Kropotkin, then, fails to attribute the collapse of the experimental 
Communist colonies to the fact that they "were founded on an upsurge of religiosity, 
instead of considering the community as merely a way of consumption and production imposed 
by the economy."

Of the reasons Kropotkin mentions for the collapse of colonies, it is worthwhile to pay 
attention to two, though in depth, one is the same: isolation from society, and isolation 
from one another. It is mistaken when the small size of the community is considered to be 
the cause of the failure, believing that in such a community members will come to dislike 
each other after a few years of such close coexistence: because there are small and large 
colonies that have endured in time. But he rightly claims a federation to make up for the 
small size of the teams. The fact that the federation allows its members to go from one 
colony to another (which is crucial to Kropotkin) is in fact only one of its many positive 
elements; the federation itself is vital, complementing and assisting each group with the 
others, the flow of community life that flows between them and strengthens from each 
group. It is, however, less important that the colonies have a somewhat altered 
relationship with the wider society not just because they need a market for their surplus 
products, not just because youth, as Kropotkin points out, does not tolerate to be cut 
off, but because colonies must, if they do not possess a special Messianic faith, 
influence the surrounding world to survive. Anyone who eavesdresses a message must be able 
to express it, not necessarily with words, but necessarily with his own. less important is 
the fact that the colonies have a somewhat changing relationship with the wider society 
not just because they need a market for their surplus products, not just because youth, as 
Kropotkin points out, does not tolerate being cut off but because colonies must, if they 
do not possess a special Messianic faith, influence the surrounding world to survive. 
Anyone who eavesdresses a message must be able to express it, not necessarily with words, 
but necessarily with his own. less important is the fact that the colonies have a somewhat 
changing relationship with the wider society not just because they need a market for their 
surplus products, not just because youth, as Kropotkin points out, does not tolerate being 
cut off but because colonies must, if they do not possess a special Messianic faith, 
influence the surrounding world to survive. Anyone who eavesdresses a message must be able 
to express it, not necessarily with words, but necessarily with his. if they do not 
possess a special Messianic faith, to influence the surrounding world to survive. Anyone 
who eavesdresses a message must be able to express it, not necessarily with words, but 
necessarily with his own. if they do not possess a special Messianic faith, to influence 
the surrounding world to survive. Anyone who eavesdresses a message must be able to 
express it, not necessarily with words, but necessarily with his own.

In a question from the inhabitants of a colony, Kropotkin once responded with an open 
letter to all the gathered groups - he stressed that every state worthy of this name 
should be founded on the basic principle of the union of independent families that unite 
their forces. It meant that even every group had to come from the federal union of even 
smaller community units. If the federal movement is to spread beyond the group, space is 
needed. As he says in his book Modern Science and Anarchy, "the experiment must be in a 
certain territory". He adds that this territory must include city and countryside. Once 
again, with the great social motivation must be linked to financial incentives; genuine 
community life means a complete game of all functions and their interaction, not 
limitation and isolation. But it is not enough, even if Kropotkin thinks it, to become a 
city "community"; if he faces the delicate articulated federation of the villages as an 
uncoordinated and socially amorphous entity, it will have a rather negative influence in 
the long run. It must be co-ordinated, transformed into a federation in societies, to have 
truly fruitful relations with the villages. We can already see remarkable moves towards 
this in today's "planned economy" theories, stemming mainly from technical and managerial 
thoughts. to become a city "community"; if faced with the delicate articulated federation 
of villages as an uncoordinated and socially amorphous entity, it would have a rather 
negative influence in the long run. It must be co-ordinated, transformed into a federation 
in societies, to have truly fruitful relations with the villages. We can already see 
remarkable moves towards this in today's "planned economy" theories, stemming mainly from 
technical and managerial thoughts. to become a "community" city; if faced with the 
delicately articulated federation of villages as an uncoordinated and socially amorphous 
entity, it would have a rather negative influence in the long run. It must be 
co-ordinated, transformed into a federation in societies, to have truly fruitful relations 
with the villages. We can already see remarkable moves towards this in today's "planned 
economy" theories, stemming mainly from technical and managerial thoughts.

 From their long and teaching history, we can only give here a typical example of the 
problematic career of many experimental colonies to date: the first such Owen colony, the 
only one he himself built, the New Harmony in Indiana. He bought the estate from the 
heresy of the Separatists who had migrated from Germany - after twenty years of work, they 
had managed to give them little fruit. The members were admitted without choice - the 
great German economist Friedrich List noted in the American Diary: "Elements[people]do not 
seem to be the best". In the beginning, the charter of the new community was based on full 
equality of members, and was named "The Community of Equality". Two years later, after 
having cut off some groups, attempted to turn the community into a union of small 
societies. But this and other conversion plans failed.

When Owen, returning from a trip to England, saw the colony that had already lived for 
three years, he had to admit that "the attempt to join a crowd of strangers not previously 
trained for that purpose, who would live together as a family, was premature, "and that" 
the habits of the individualistic system "are hard to die. Selling part of the land as 
plots and leasing in the same way another - the experiment costing him a fifth of his 
property - replaced the company with a colony of colonies operating under conditions of 
private capitalism, only incidentally giving them the following advice: "To join the 
general work, or to exchange work with work with terms that are most beneficial to all, or 
do both, or both,
We have here the example of a colony that failed not because of doctrine - despite its 
specific plans, Owen did not insist on this point - but rather by the lack of a deep, 
organic link between its members. As an example of the opposite, we can mention the 
development of Camber's "Icaria". As he attempted to realize an amateur but successful 
utopian novel, it was then followed by terrible disappointments and deprivation and, like 
the Owen colony, he settled in the lands of a sect - the Mormons, in this case - the 
colony, fifty years from the beginning until its fragmentation, she experienced slots. 
First of all, a schism was made because Cambe (an impulsive and sincerely enthusiastic 
man, but modest) attempted to command dictatorship with a dogmatic plot,

Of the two groups that were born of the schism, the first was dissolved after the death of 
Cambe; in the second it became a second schism, between the "Young" and the "Elder", where 
the "Young" supported the dogmatic plan to abolish, thanks to the pergolas around the 
houses where the members planted and fruitless except for flowers. Here we actually had a 
pitiful "remnant of individualism". The question - when judged in court - resulted in the 
division of the colony - the part that contained buildings that the "Geri" had built with 
their hands was given to the "Young". The piece that remained in the "Elder" lasted 
another twenty years and then died from old age. The economic powers were strong enough to 
survive, but the faith had faded away. She writes a woman in the colony:

The colony of "Young" lived very little. After having faced all kinds of difficulties, 
they moved to California, but in the new way of organizing, the basic principle of private 
ownership took hold, so the colony was rightly considered to be a joint stock company; it 
did not take long to dissolve and in its dissolution the role of valuation value of land. 
Thus, the career of Ikaria is a strange sequence of dogmatism and opportunism. "We had the 
strong desire to succeed," wrote a member a few years later, "but the clothes we wore were 
heavy and long, sometimes dragged into the mud; I want to say that the old Adam, or the 
beast he had inadequate suppressed, he made his appearance willy. " But it was not the 
beast, it was only the special human selfishness.

Finally, let's look at the three main types of cooperatives from the point of view of the 
restructuring of society. The much stronger, historically, consumer cooperative is by 
itself very little suited to functioning as a cell of the restructuring of society. It 
connects people only with a very small and very impersonal part of their total self. This 
piece is not, as we could at first glance suppose, consumption. Consuming as such has 
great power to unite people; and, as we know from antiquity, there is no better symbol of 
community life than the symposium. But the consumer cooperative deals not with actual 
consumption but with shopping for consumption. The joint market as such does not raise any 
particular requirements from the individuals who make it, extraordinary in exceptional 
times, when it is a question of shared care and responsibility for a joint project, such 
as in the "heroic" era of the cooperative movement or in the later periods of crisis when 
private individuals appeared in a sacrificial spirit to relieve the misery of many. 
Similarly, as soon as the joint market becomes a job, the responsibility for it is loaded 
into employees, it no longer connects people.

The bond becomes so relaxed and impersonal that communal cells can not be said and about 
joining them in a complex organic structure, even if the co-operative organization of the 
alpha or beta branch of production is linked to the cooperative's warehouses. This view is 
set out very clearly in Irish poet George William Russell's narrative (pseudonym: SA); 
this book is written in true patriotism and deals with the social restructuring of 
Ireland. He says: "It is not enough to organize the growers of a region for a single 
purpose in a credit company, a dairy, a meat producer, a fruit and vegetable company or a 
cooperative. All this can and must be the beginning - but if they do not develop and 
absorb all their agricultural work in their organization, they will have little impact and 
no character. No genuine social organization will have been created. If people join as 
consumers to buy something together, they come into contact only at this point there is no 
general identity of interests.
If cooperatives are specialized for alpha or beta purposes - as in Great Britain or the 
rest of Europe - greatly limitation of objects prevents the formation of a genuine social 
organization. And that has a huge impact on humanity. The specialized cooperative develops 
only economic efficiency. The evolution of humanity beyond its present level depends 
entirely on its power to unite and to create genuine social organizations. " That is 
exactly what I mean by the organic restructuring of society.

The productive cooperative is in itself more appropriate than the consumer to participate 
in such a restructuring, that is to say, to act as a cell of the new structure. The joint 
production of goods involves people deeper than the joint acquisition of goods for private 
consumption - it embraces much more their forces and time. Man as a producer is naturally 
better prepared to coexist with his similar assets than man as a consumer and is more 
capable of forming living social units. This is true for the employer, although he draws 
more power from the union to discharge his productive activity than he ever did or could 
do as a person. But it is especially true for the employee because only within, and through,

But as we have seen, it succumbs very easily, indeed almost fatally, to the desire to 
overwhelm others to work on its behalf. If the consumer cooperative is externally adapted, 
in a technical and managerial sense, to the capitalist model, the productive cooperative 
is adapted to it internally in a structural and psychological sense. At the same time, the 
latter is more receptive to a genuine, not just a technical federation - but how little 
has been recognized the immense importance - in terms of restructuring - of small organic 
units and their organic-federal development (even in the circles of the most enthusiastic 
supporters the revitalization of society through productive cooperatives), we actually saw 
it two decades ago in the English Socialist Movement.

On the one hand, they argued for the blatant plan to turn the state into a dual system: 
multi-faceted, coordinated representation of producers, and unified, mass representation 
of consumers. On the other hand, there was soon a tendency towards the "national" (that 
is, embracing the whole industry) trade unions for "disciplined organization in a single 
group of all those working in a given industry", which proved to be much stronger than the 
a tendency for the formation of "local" guilds, ie small organic units and their 
federation. If the basic principle of organic restructuring is to become a decisive 
factor, it will need the influence of the entire cooperative, because production and 
consumption are united and industry has to supplement agriculture.

For as long as it may be necessary for the whole cooperative to become the cell of the new 
society, it is vital that it now begins to build itself, as a long-term cluster of 
interconnected, magnetic poles. A genuine and time-consuming restructuring of society from 
the inside can only thrive on the association of producers and consumers, where each of 
the two partners will be composed of independent and homogeneous cooperative units; a 
union whose power and vitality for socialism can only be guaranteed by a multiplicity of 
total cooperatives that work together and, with their operational composition, exert a 
mediating and unifying influence.

Therefore, it is necessary, in place of all the isolated experiments (which the nature of 
things condemned to isolation) that have occurred in more than one hundred years of 
struggle, to develop a network of colonies, based on a territorial territory and will be 
federally built, without dogmatic rigidity, which will enable the most diverse social 
forms to coexist side by side and always aim at the new organic whole. {...}

* This text is the seventh chapter of the book "Trails in Utopia" by Martin Bubber, from 
the "Nisides" Publications. The title was given by us.

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/30851

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