Anarchic update news all over the world - 21.10.2018

Today's Topics:

   
1.  Turkey, DAF, meydan gazetesi: Anarchism, Geography and
      Social Struggle -- Interview with Anarchist Geographer Simon
      Springer (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
2.  France, Alternative Libertaire AL #287 - Genres: In France,
      intersex still rhymes with mutilations (fr, it, pt)[machine
      translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
3.  [USA] Boston Anarchist Book Fair 2018 By ANA
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
4.  Greece, 3rd Conference of Anarchist Political Organization -
      Federation of Collectives By APO [machine translation]
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
5.  US,  black rose fed: DISPATCH ON BRAZIL: INTERVIEW WITH HUGO
      SOUZA (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
  
 6.  black rose fed: MARK BRAY'S NEW BOOK: ANARCHIST EDUCATION
      AND THE MODERN SCHOOL (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)


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

Message: 1






Meydan: Why must a radical geography be anarchist? Why is important to talk about 
anarchism and geography with relation to each other? ---- It's a response to a 1972 
article by Steem Fook, who wrote a piece called "why a radical geography must be 
marxist?", so I said, I must not be marxist. Radical geography had become an area of study 
that has become very much dominated by marxism and Harvey had profound influence on the 
trajectory of radical geography. My concern with that is the stagnation that's involved 
when an entire field is dominated by one perspective. From the late 1960's marxism was 
dominated by particularly white males in anglo-american geography and they were content to 
ignore feminists. There's a lot of critique to be made not only of Harvey but other 
geographers and other marxists who have continued to hammer on this marxist message 
without ever having taking into consideration the feminist and anarchist critiques. If we 
have something called radical geography, how is that this distinct neglect of anarchism 
when we have this earlier tradition a hundred years ago, Kropotkin and Reclus were writing 
about anarchism from a geographical perspective. There was a colonial enterprise when 
Kropotkin and Reclus and a few others said this is terrible, we need to have an 
anti-colonial geography.

Does David Harvey still propose a central model of geography based on the state? What 
should be done to break the marxist hegemony on geography?

I think breaking the hegemony of marxism in geography is already happening. Young scholars 
are no longer inspired by marxism, even in the way 10 years ago they had. They recognize 
that the kind spatial politics that marxism is articulating, there is something 
interesting there in a historical sense, but it doesn't resonate in the same way that an 
anarchist spatial politics does with what's happening on the streets, in our 
neighbourhoods, all across the world. Anarchism has its finger on the pulse of what's 
going on in our communities because anarchism is a spatial practice that arises from those 
communities. marxism on the other hand, has been, right from the outset, something that's 
dwelled in the domain of theory without having the kind of grounded reality that an 
anarchist politics has. Within academia there is this enterprise of academics, creating 
their own little empire of knowledge and information, so there is this decided effort to 
push people to a marxist trajectory. If you look at the title of my phD dissertation, the 
compromise with my committee was to put post marxism in the title because they didn't want 
me to have anarchism in the title of a phD dissertation.

I think in the last couple of years we've sort of blown the lid off that sort of caption 
marxism have had. Last year in Italy, I was involved in organizing a first annual 
anarchist geographers conference something like 75 people showed up. I think the reason 
for the interest comes then from that there is so much left unsaid within a marxist 
politics and the way that marxism and David Harvey in particular wanting to conceptualize 
space in the kinds of relations that come from their emphasis on a spatial politics that 
preferences the state.

I see the authoritarianism, I see the statism, I see the hidden vanguard within Harvey's 
work. Harvey always wants to play himself off like he is this friend of anarchists. If you 
read Harvey closely he's very antagonistic and has a deep sense of animosity for 
anarchists, anarchism in general, certainly anarchist ideas.

There is so many limitations in the statist authoritarian perspective that marxists want 
to continue to work with, and I think when we start to ask critical questions about where 
the violence is coming from, in this world, it draws us to capitalism, which marxists 
recognise, but in that equation of capitalism where is the state in all of that? And the 
state is always in the front and center. The state facilitates capitalism. You can't have 
capitalism without a state and you can't have a state without capitalism. The historical 
record proves this to us in the sense of the Khmer Rouge engaging foreign rice markets to 
prop up their supposedly egalitarian society, Emma Goldman had scathing critique of 
communist Russia and the way that it was engaging in capitalist enterprises, the same 
thing in China, and so each and every example of where supposedly we've seen the reigns of 
the state captured by folks who are wanting to turn it into another direction away from 
capitalism, capitalism continues to fold itself into the process of the state. The is the 
nature of hierarchical relations. They are exploitative through and through, and what 
better way to exploit than through the means of capitalism. I don't think contemporary 
marxists have come to grips with this, or can come to grips with this. There is no 
accounting for it.

David Harvey says that anarchism is a slippery slope to neoliberalism because of the 
decentralised politics that anarchism wants to evoke. Of course this is nonsense. Because 
a decentralised capitalist project looks nothing like a decentralised anti-capitalist 
project. It's a ludicrous assumption but it's something that Harvey always wants to ploy.
I have read Rebel Cities when it came out and I was just pissed off because there was so 
many mischaracterizations of anarchism embedded in the kind of spatial politics he was 
wanting to evoke. The other thing is the question of scale. Harvey goes to scale 
repeatedly to say that an anarchist project is impossible and it's just this very 
localized idea that just simply doesn't work and when anarchists respond saying well look 
at Murray Bookchin's municipal libertarianizm or think about the way that Kropotkin was 
articulating a federalist idea of anarchism, Harvey just says well if it looks like a 
state, and walks like a state and quacks like a state, it must be a state. He 
misrecognizes the kinds of horizontal organising that anarchists imagine, this 
reconfiguration of our political geographies in a horizontal sense, rather than a 
hierarchical sense as being the equivalent of the state. Let's think for a minute what is 
a state. A state is about having a police force, it's about having discernable laws that 
are enforced by police, it's about having a military. Where are these components within a 
federalized version of anarchism in the sense that Kropotkin was talking about. They don't 
exist, so Harvey's wanting to actually make these mischaracterizations, I think very 
purposely.

Not just to blame Harvey, his ego is fed repeatedly by the wider academic community. Why 
is David Harvey unchallengeable? Marxists particularly get uptight about this because they 
buy so heavily into the idea of cult of personality. We see this around the figure of Marx 
himself, as though he was the only person who was writing and thinking about these kinds 
of ideas at the time he was writing. Here is we see that the parallels between author and 
authority, they have a similar root word, so what is an author? My name appears on my 
books, but am I the actual author of that, I'm the compiler of that information, but all 
of my ideas built off conversations with the communities that I engage in. And the same 
with David Harvey and the same with Marx.

If we start to remember that in our spatial practices as well in the kind of politics we 
want to evoke, than that changes the way we think about organising. If it's not just about 
David Harvey or some other academic or a politician or an elected official telling us what 
to do, rather it's about us thinking about these ideas for ourselves and working them out 
together, that evokes an entirely different geographical imagination than the one that 
marxists are wanting to push forward.

You use the concept of commons in your book. What is commons?

In some ways it's a very straightforward and simple idea, it's been made complex because 
the capitalistic world that we live in has lost this idea of what a commons actually is. 
At a base level, I'd boil it down to the commons being the actual geographical expression 
of mutual aid, the way Kropotkin articulated mutual aid as reciprocity and cooperation.

The thinking is constrained by the political imagination that is at least some of the 
literature, like Henri Lefebvre and Habermas, in the way that they articulated notions of 
public space and private space. Private space very overtly referring to the spaces of 
capital they claim, on the other side, we have public space where in an idealized form 
that it is a space for the people, by the people, of the people and there is no sort of 
intervention or authority that constrains that space. The reality of course is those space 
are frequently controlled by the state. If we have a political imagination that wants to 
see public space as only a state based domain, that that limits the possibilities of what 
we can do with space. Or we can broaden out further and reclaim public space to transform 
it into a communal space and articulate it in such a way that it comes closer to the 
vision of the commons that we like to see.

The other way that the commons has been confused is the entire notion of property and how 
that is so taken for granted. The question of property is something that I wrestle with 
very explicitly in my work in Cambodia, That wrestling is a reflection on the lived 
experiences of everyday rural Cambodians who have a very different geographical 
understanding of property. Their notion is based upon actual use rather than a legal 
certificate of a piece of paper that says you own the land. So they understand it in a 
sense that Pierre Joseph Proudhon wanted to articulate a distinction between property and 
possession. Everyday Cambodians understand land holding as a possession. What is property 
in contrast? And this is the way that Proudhon was wanting to frame it in his most well 
known "What is Property?" In which he answered, property is theft. Proudhon said property 
is rooted in the idea of sovereign right, which is then bestowed upon a proprietor where 
it becomes, his right to use and abuse that property as he wishes. Property becomes 
fundamentally a means for exploitation which stands in stark contrast with possession. And 
property of course vested in sovereign right, in the past meant the divinity of kings, but 
in the present moment it means the sovereign state and the legal authority that comes with 
it becomes a means for unleashing the violence of the state. There are soldiers who shoot 
and have even killed Cambodian villagers for not walking off the land when they told to do 
so. Property isn't just theft as Proudhon was trying to articulate, it's also violence, 
very explicitly. It is a means of domination, a means of violence. It's something that's 
lost in present understanding which relates to the commons, in the sense that the world is 
increasingly constrained in this view spatial politics that is rooted only in property as 
though that's the only way to conceive of land holding and only way of how we define and 
articulate various spaces, that it has to be proprietary relations. And there is huge 
enterprise behind this. We have the IMF and the World Bank, who are more than willing to 
enact Cadastro regimes upon any country they've got their hooks into to enforce a property 
system because of course it's been the bedrock of capitalism.

A commons thinks in the landholding in the same way as Cambodian villagers do, instead of 
being a individual possession, it's a communal possession. It's based on the actual use of 
a community and so, when we start to think of public space as a commons, we're going to 
see significant resistance from the forces of property, the forces that are trying to 
continually prop up the notion of property, very explicitly the state. Once again, we see 
how the state and capitalism come into concert with each other. The state is thoroughly 
woven into capitalism, it's impossible to untangle that.

In the context of neighbourhoods, we see efforts to actually create a commons. We have 
this huge narrative about capitalism and about the state and the way they condition us in 
particular ways, and of course they do, but we also have agency, both at the individual 
level, but also at community level. Very simple things like organising a childcare co-op 
instead of one mom or dad soldiering by themselves all alone with their children and 
putting their children in paid childcare, what happens when you organise a group of mom 
and dads together. Then you start to think, what kind of space would we need to actually 
make this work? If we start to live closer together and we start to live in a more 
collective kind of way. So all of these ways of rethinking the commons, there is a 
distinct spatial politics that's embedded within them, but therein is the challenge 
because the world is constructed for us to think in terms of property relations and to 
think of ourselves as lone individuals against the world. What makes life beautiful is 
these kind of connections that we have for each other, so it's about reimaging how we 
bring ourselves together and trying to reconfigure our spaces in ways that work towards a 
sense of value that includes the commons.

You talked about Reclus and Kropotkin at the start of Radical geography and went back and 
studied them. Who else in the course of geography can we read who are thinking in parallel 
with anarchism? And that are sources for Anarchist Geography?

AAG, the largest geographical organisation in the world, 10,000 people show up and we make 
sure that we have a few anarchist geography sessions in yearly conference. The IDU, we 
organised sessions on Kropotkin in Moscow and Bolivia last year.

In 2016, there was a trilogy on Anarchist Geographies, you've covered it in newspaper 
before. What are the kind of ways which anarchism is resonating with the empirical work 
that you're doing, and so one of them was focused on pedagogy, one on theory, and one on 
more empirical forms of resistance.
Currently I am collectively working with others on four volumes on Anarchist Political 
Ecology, so another sort of trajectory for anarchist geography is an anarchism more 
generally to go and to explore what are the ecological implications of the arguments that 
we're making.

We put the call for papers out and the response is overwhelming. This is the beauty is 
that there is so much interest in this, rather than having a cut throat approach to 
academia where we choose only the "best papers", we work with all of the ones we received 
and as inclusive as possible, and really start to try to create the networks, foundation 
for anarchist geographies to blossom even further.

Also getting involved in some of the Anarchist Studies Conferences, North American 
Anarchist Studies Network, they have a conference every year, this year it was in Quebec 
and also the Anarchist Studies Network in UK, I know many geographers go to those 
conferences as well. Just trying to build the foundation of this being something that is 
no longer taboo and that increases awareness and wants to draw more people into it rather 
than being my thing or your thing, this very specialized nhieshe, let's try and expand 
this as far as possible, is the overarching objective.
I think there is a lot of people who are doing work that is in the vein of anarchism, but 
they won't necessarily define themselves as an anarchist. Dorian Massey's book For Space 
(2005) shows geography is a process, a living breathing thing that continues to evolve, 
we're continually shaping it and reshaping it. The potentiality of space to be reshaped 
not just by state or capitalism but actually by ourselves, that there is no preconditioned 
destination that we are headed towards.

Audrey Kobayashi on the politics of race. Rhys Jones, doing work on borders, Federico 
Ferreri is a historical geographer, scouring the archives and finding letters that were 
written between Kropotkin and Reclus. Other anarchist geographers like Anthony Ince, 
Gerónimo Barrera doing work on anti-statist geographies. Richard J. White in everyday 
relations of mutual aid. Ophélie Veron, exploring anarcha-feminism.

Yesterday there was a question about Rojava Revolution. The geographies and processes like 
Rojava, like Chiapas are important for us. What can you say about these kind of 
experiences which is directly related with geography?

I've not had any connection with either of these particular communities, so it's hard for 
me to articulate. There is decidedly spatial politics within the movements that have been 
created there, so I think that's fantastic and inspiring to see, but it's very difficult 
for me to say, ok this is what they should be doing, or they did this right, they did that 
wrong, and these sort of things. I don't think it's my place as an outsider to make those 
kinds of value judgements.
The way that I locate my politics is, even in the work I did in Cambodia, I'm an outsider 
in that context. I've been going to Cambodia for almost 20 years now and speak the local 
language which helps facilitate a bit of a deeper connection, and of course my daughter is 
adopted from Cambodia which makes a stronger personal relationship as well, but I'm not 
Cambodian, so I can't speak for Cambodians and what the political vision they're wanting 
to articulate is. My way that I approach is to want to work with those communities rather 
than to impose my views upon them and speaking with them like what is the message if I'm 
writing a paper on the work that I'm doing in the communities with the people I'm working 
with, what is the message you want to transmit back to the world? So I think it's always 
important for that message to the extent possible to come from that people who are 
directly involved in the struggle, to have them voice their view and their opinion about 
the successes of their movement, the missteps of their movement, and the future 
possibilities of that movement.

In the same way, I am inspired by these movements, I think they're critically important in 
the sense that they give, as an anarchist academic, they give us something very tangible 
to say, there are real world applications to what we're thinking about. This isn't just 
theory, there are ideas that being manifested in very particular ways. Look at how the 
work of Murray Bookchin has been taken up. The kinds of ideas that come out of that had 
been applied in a very particular sense, that part if it is interesting and inspiring.

This interview published in 46th issue of Meydan.

http://meydangazetesi.org/gundem/2018/10/anarchism-geography-socialstruggle/

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

Message: 2






In September, the intersex and Allied collective (CIA) launched the first campaign to stop 
mutilations for intersex children and adolescents ; in France, nearly 2 % of births would 
be affected, so many people still suffering medical violence. ---- Intersexuation is the 
presentation of sexual characteristics that do not correspond to those of the binary 
classifications of men or women. When this happens, parents will have to decide to assign 
a sex to their child, with all that it will involve ; in fact, the medical profession will 
then practice various interventions, whether from hormonal treatments or surgical 
procedures, so that the child enters the desired space. ---- The vast majority of the 
children concerned are in good health, and there is no justification for constructing 
these interventions from a medical point of view. Conversely, the consequences of these 
protocols are often cumbersome, physically but also dramatic for the identity construction 
of the people concerned, who have been imposed an identity and unnecessary bodily changes.

The current justification for these acts is that they would promote the child's good 
psychological and social development by allowing him to identify with peers and not be 
stigmatized. stigmatization is produced by medical professionals, for whom these children 
are above all " abnormal ".

The appeal launched by the Intersex and Allies collective 1 highlights these elements, 
recalling that these practices have been denounced internationally and by many rights groups.

In France, the report of the Council of State published last June preparing the revision 
of the bioethics law puts forward the question of the consent of the child as a 
prerequisite for any intervention, if its state of health does not require intervention of 
'emergency.

No longer see intersex as a pathological condition
The idea of waiting for the child to express a choice has emerged, with all that implies. 
On the one hand, all professionals should be trained not to see intersex as a pathological 
condition to be remedied, but as the existence of variations in the construction of sexual 
characteristics.

It must also be possible to implement this right to expectation, with the possibility of 
postponing the attribution of sex to civil status for the children concerned, until a 
decision has been taken by the person herself. However, if recommendations could be 
formulated in this sense, nothing has yet been proposed in a concrete way.

The campaign [1]proposed by the collective, which has created a dedicated site, an online 
petition and tools to disseminate, aims to federate around the stop mutilation and the 
possibility of choice, but it also allows to give visibility to intersex and all related 
issues, being carried by people directly concerned.

Flo (Lorient)

[1] 
https://collectifintersexesetalliees.org/2018/09/10/lancement-de-la-campagne-pour-larret-des-mutilations-intersexes/

http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Genres-En-France-l-intersexuation-rime-encore-avec-mutilations

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

Message: 3






Reading, Writing and Revolution: The Boston Anarchist Book Fair will bring together 
hundreds of people from across the country. Join us for a weekend of books, art and 
workshops. ---- November 17 and 18, 2018 ---- 10:00 a.m. - 08:00 p.m. ---- Boston 
University George Sherman Union ---- 775 Commonwealth Ave, Boston, MA ---- Press contact: 
bostonanarchistbookfair@gmail.com ---- Boston, Massachusetts - Join anarchists and 
community members for two days of learning and organizing for a better Boston and world. 
Faced with the prospect of a presidency like Trump's and research showing high levels of 
aversion to both government and capitalism, anarchists are taking action toward building a 
world without politicians or billionaires. ---- The last year also reinforced the 
importance of community self-defense against white supremacists, fascists and the police.

Boston is one of the cradles of the revolution in North America. So it is consistent that 
people from different backgrounds - from seasoned organizers to curious politicians - are 
united in a time when the ideas, methods, and tactics of anarchism are more important than 
ever.

Radical organizations and groups from all over the country will be selling books, music 
and art, and sharing knowledge at this community event. As in previous editions, the 
organization of the Anarchist Book Fair expects an audience of hundreds of people.

A partial list of topics to be discussed at the Book Fair:

* Anarchism

* Antifa and organization against fascists

* Feminism and trans rights

* Resistance to police violence and white supremacy

* Digital security and mass surveillance

* Student organization and higher education

* Labor organization

* Medical training for the streets

* Performance art

* Writing and publishing books

For a complete list of events and publishers and organizations that will be attending, 
visit  bostonanarchistbookfair.org .

Entry to the Book Fair is free. There will be shelter for the children.

The Anarchist Book Fair is presented and sponsored by the University of Boston's Gender, 
Sexuality and Activism Center.

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

Message: 4






The 3rd Congress of the Anarchist Political Organization (APO) | The Federation of 
Collectives will be held on  December 1-2, 2018, in Thessaloniki.
On the first day of the Congress and for specific procedures, the presence of observers is 
foreseen.

For expressions of interest and communication you can contact the  mail:  anpolorg@gmail.com
Anarchist Political Organization - Federation of Collectivities
apo.squathost.com

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

Message: 5





We present an interview with Brazlian anarchist militant Hugo Souza with his opinions on 
the current situation and advice for leftists in the US. As Brazil is rocked by economic 
recession, parliamentary coups and scandals, into the void has stepped far right-wing 
presidential candidate Jair Bolsonaro. Winning the first found of voting earlier this 
month Bolsonaro is headed to the second round on October 28 where he will face off against 
the Workers Party (PT) candidate Fernando Haddad. Often compared to Trump, Bolsonaro is 
actually far more dangerous with a much more coherent and reactionary ideology and in 
praise for torture and Brazil's previous military dictatorship. ---- We also recommend the 
statement by Brazilian anarchists "The Claws of Empire, the Rise of Fascism: Brazilian 
Anarchist Statement on Bolsonaro." For those in New York City, Black Rose/Rosa Negra - NYC 
will be hosting an event with speakers from Brazil on Saturday, October 20, details here.

This interview was conducted by Amelia Davenport and has been republished from the online 
publication Cosmonaut.  To clarify language and references that may be unfamiliar to a US 
audience we have added reference notes at the end.

Amelia Davenport: So to start, can you introduce yourself?

Hugo Souza: My name is Hugo Souza, I'm a leftist from Brazil who belonged to an anarchist 
collective for a couple years and self-identified as a Marxist-Leninist for a decade 
before that.

AD: What anarchist collective were you involved with?

HS: Coletivo Mineiro Popular Anarquista, Compa, a branch of CAB (Coordenação Anarquista 
Brasileira - Brazilian Anarchist Coordination) which organizes in the 
especifista/platformist group Anarkismo.

AD: So what sort of organizing work did you do with them?

HS: I was a member of 3 movements. The first was MPL, or Movimento Passe Livre, which was 
an organization that sought to fight mercantilization of public transport and promotes a 
self-managed, horizontal, cooperatively run model of public transportation. It was 
federated itself nationally and the Sao Paulo branch started the June 2013 protests.

I was also a member of MOB, Movimento de Organização de Base, which is a community 
organizing group also nationally federated that promotes community organizing. They mostly 
deal with illegal settlements, which are the initial stages of slums but not exclusively.

Last, I was a member of the Committee for Solidarity with the Popular Kurdish Resistance, 
which sought to bring awareness to the Kurdish cause.

In these three movements I took organizing roles, such as helping set up meetings, 
protests and such, took media roles, such as creating websites, facebook pages and 
publicity pieces in general, helped shape, reshape, found and design multiple 
organizations and also had a diplomatic role inside CAB and with regard to other 
organizations in Brazil as well.

AD: You also helped organize a publication is that correct?

HS: You mean elcoyote.org? I came up with the concept and set it up, I even translated 
some texts, but even though the website is technically mine I only do maintenance work 
nowadays.

Political Situation in Brazil
AD: Shifting gears a bit, what do you make of the general state of politics in Brazil?

HS: Worrisome. We are going to have a fascist elected in a couple weeks.

AD: Brazil had previously been considered a part of the ‘Pink Tide'. What do you think 
changed to shift the electorate so far to the right?

HS: A combination of multiple factors. I believe the main one is a perception of an 
economic and moral crisis that was hammered by the media and the judicial caste, which 
portrayed the Worker's Party (PT) as responsible for everything wrong in people's lives. 
The media bombarded the public with negative information about the Worker's Party. This 
fostered a sentiment known as ‘anti-petismo' here.[1]Neoliberal authors claim PT 
mismanaged the economy and public companies like the oil giant Petrobras. Petrobras is a 
matter of pride in Brazil since a nationalist campaign in mid 20th century called ‘the oil 
is ours' made the issue crystalized in the public's' mind. PT was accused of robbing the 
government, trying to ‘Mexicanize' (institute a PRI like dominance) Brazilian politics and 
hire their cronies to positions within the state.[2]

People, in general, are afraid of Brazil becoming a new Venezuela, even though that is 
decidedly not the Worker's Party intent, and there are also conspiracy theories about a 
sort of tropical Soviet Union known as ‘URSAL' which are widespread.

The scenario shifted gradually from pro-PT views to anti-PT, with the help of groups 
trained and funded by Steve Bannon and the Koch Brothers, decidedly through Whatsapp fake 
news posting. They created a sense of impending doom and presented a messiah to solve all 
the country's issues: Jair Messias Bolsonaro. There is a history of messianic beliefs in 
Brazil dating back to the Portuguese Empire when a Portuguese king disappeared fighting 
the Moors and Portugal ended up being ruled by Spain. In the resulting power struggle, the 
Portuguese establishment tried to fight it by creating a "king in the mountain" lore. It 
is a phenomenon culturally relevant to the entire Lusophone world, known as Sebastianism. 
Sebastianism had a clear manifestation in a monarchist insurgency of poorer people in the 
19th century against the newly established republic. In the 19th Century, they thought the 
lost king would return to save Brazil. The first choice for vice president for Bolsonaro 
was the ‘heir Prince of the Brazilian monarchy', but he declined. Brazilians have a weird 
combination of an anti-authoritarian outlook in life with an acceptance of an 
authoritarian delegation of a carte blanche for politicians to do as they please as long 
as there are results.

AD: So you're saying that a big factor here is a political belief in a Messiah figure. Did 
Lula play a similar role in the past?

HS: Yeah. The judicial caste sought to punish the Worker's Party disproportionately, even 
arresting Lula without non-circumstantial evidence, and tarnished Lula's image gradually. 
Lula still has such an image in the northeast of the country, but I believe in most of the 
country he is more rejected than supported, which does not mean he has little support 
nationally.

Role of the Workers Party (PT)
AD: What sort of response is PT mounting to Bolsonaro?

HS: Ciro Gomes was polling ahead of Bolsonaro. The PT response was to delay their 
candidacy as much as possible to 1 month before the election by making a bogus ballot with 
Lula as president, considering there is a constitutional amendment saying people with 
convictions are ineligible for 8 years I think, passed by PT itself, and spreading the 
word people should vote on whomever Lula decided.

Best case scenario they were relying on vote transfers to happen fast and there would be 
no time for a counter campaign, worst case scenario and my actual opinion is that they 
knew they could not win and were only competing with the Ciro Gomes campaign for a spot in 
the second bout of elections so they could lead the opposition and not lose hegemony as 
their right-winged rival PSDB did.

They sabotaged Ciro Gomes campaign by alienating parties from his campaign and fighting 
internal PT members who considered the thought of allying with him in the elections. We 
estimate PT controlled unions will become more radicalized again once they have to fight 
for their lives, but only to a certain point. PT has a good number of congressmen overall, 
enough to be a nuisance to a Bolsonaro presidency.

AD: If PT does not have an interest in socialism, either of the Bolivarian model or the 
old Soviet one, why are the Brazilian media and political establishment so hell-bent on 
their destruction?

HS: PT is currently dominated by Lula's current which is similar to British New Labour in 
outlook, but there are more radical elements with no expression within the Worker's Party. 
They also have a history of radical rhetoric so the establishment can frame it that way. 
And the Brazilian establishment does not wish to cede an inch of privilege. They are 
literally bothered by poor people on airplanes.

AD: So the issue is not preserving capitalism but rather the position of established old 
money?

HS: No. PT has support from some of the oldest money there is. Agrarian elite, banks, 
international manufacturers...the Brazilian middle class does not wish to share places 
with people who were poorer before. Brazil before Lula had the worst GINI coefficient in 
the world, Lula changed it with very little effort, they invested more in photocopies than 
in social programmes and people thought they were bankrupting the country with welfare 
programmes. People were bothered with the ascension of the dirt poor to a less poor 
status. ... Literally bothered they were able to go to university and buy airline tickets.

Rise of Reaction
AD: So it's a reaction of the middle classes then? Would that be small and medium business 
owners or professionals in Brazil?

HS: Liberal professionals, medium business owners, a varied class. But small businesses 
are mostly proletarianized.

AD: Why do you think that the Haute Bourgeoisie[upper class]backs PT despite their 
anti-elite rhetoric, and the liberal professionals back Bolsonaro despite his rhetoric 
against the "establishment" they seem to make up?

HS: The haute is divided. Some of it made more money than ever during PT, and is resilient 
about Bolsonaro, other parts of it embraced full-blown fascism because they can make more 
money. The middle classes think this crisis is PT's fault. This section thinks it can make 
more.

AD: Interesting. What sort of response has the left given so far?

HS: They are making meetings all over the country, broad left meetings, to discuss 
strategy and support the Haddad campaign in neighborhoods. But I believe it will not be 
enough. The Brazilian left abandoned a long time ago base work, and Pentecostals started 
doing it. The main Pentecostal leader in Brazil supports Bolsonaro and has put the weight 
of his church behind him

AD: Oftentimes the rise of fascism is accompanied by street violence. Has that happened 
much in Brazil?

HS: Yes.

AD: Is it organized or mostly "lone wolf attacks"

HS: There are hundreds of reported cases of LGBTQ+, women, black people and merely people 
with the #elenão hashtag on their bodies being attacked by Bolsonaro supporters. 3 
Bolsonaro supporters carved a swastika on a woman with an #elenão bottom's belly and the 
police claimed it was a Buddhist symbol. A woman was spray painting the hashtag #elenão 
near her place and got arrested, the police immobilized her violently took her to the 
station cuffed her from behind stripped her naked and told she'd only get out if she 
apologized and said ‘Ele Sim' (slogan of Bolsonaro campaign). So there are lone wolf 
attacks, far right groups doing it and sometimes the police do it or cover it up, like in 
the Marielle case of which we suspect a police hit squad did it for 50k USD.


Master Moa do Katende, capoeira master, was stabbed 12 times in a bar after declaring he 
was not going to vote for Bolsonaro.
AD: So the police are firmly in Bolsonaro's camp. What about the Gendarmes?

HS: We refer to the gendarmes as police here. The entire police military establishment is 
in Bolsonaro's camp and he has connections to cop mafias in Rio known as milicias (militias).

AD: Does the left have any armed street presence?

HS: None. Gun control is really restrictive here.

AD: What about unarmed street defense?

HS: Leftist Brazilians are mostly hippies. Unions and some social movements have security 
though.

AD: There are some groups that have talked about base building on the Brazilian left like 
the Brigadas Populares. Have they been successful? If not, why so in your view?

HS: They have been successful with their proposal that was dealing with illegal 
settlements, but this right winged wave swore to sweep settlements down.

AD: Illegal Settlements?

HS: Yes. Proto-slums. Bunch of people invade a property and build houses. We call them 
occupations

AD: How did the Brigades relate to them?

HS: They mostly do the judicial aspect of their defense, but some Brigadas members in my 
city have criminal lawsuits on them accusing them of planning such settlements.

AD: So you've said the Brazilian left has mostly focused on the Haddad election campaign 
but that this won't be enough. What do you think needs to be done?

HS: First I think the Worker's Party and specifically Lula's current needs to go. I will 
never forgive them for trying to blackmail the country into voting and supporting them 
with the threat of fascism. Second, the left needs to get back to doing base work and 
organize itself in perhaps a new formation without the vices of the old one. Brazilians 
will suffer a lot in the coming years, but maybe hard times can make harder people.

AD: Will it be possible to do the necessary work under fascism?

HS: It was possible in the dictatorship and it is possible now, the left just needs to get 
smarter, more organized and set their eyes on community organizing.

AD: Which groups would you identify with having the best chance of returning to community 
organizing? Or do you think entirely new formations are needed?

HS: Some groups like Brigadas, PCR, and CAB already do it, they could expand or a new 
formation could arise. I don't know.

AD: As an American, Brazilian politics seem remote, is there anything you think left 
formations here could do to support the movement there?

HS: Funnelling money to organizations you choose and perhaps helping out refugees, 
although I'm not sure if that is possible under Trump. The Brazilian left desperately 
needs training in diverse skills too, such as digital marketing.

Advice for US Leftists
AD: Okay last question, do you have any advice for American communists and radicals 
dealing with conditions under Trump?

HS: The biggest lesson in both Trump and Bolsonaro is that people do not necessarily 
prefer centrist candidates over right or left ones. Moderation does not please more 
people. The right is not afraid to radicalize. Do not fear that either. Radicalize.

AD: Well put. Thanks so much for taking the time to be interviewed Do you have anything 
else you'd like to add?

HS: Yes. Bolsonaro is projecting himself as a new Pinochet. Neoliberals are siding with 
him over that. His minister of the economy will be a famous neoliberal economist and have 
free reign. There is a small chance the Worker's Party wins. A recent poll was a technical 
tie of 52-48%. 3 million voters mostly in the Northeast which is a PT stronghold had their 
voting card nullified because they didn't register their biometric information, and those 
3 million were the difference for PT in the last election, so PT would have to turn even 
more the tide. Assuming PT wins, there is a risk of a full-blown military coup, already 
announced by many partisans of Bolsonaro including his vice president who is a retired 
military general.

To read more on the political situation in Brazil we recommend "Interview on the 
Assassination of Marielle Franco" and a statement by the CAB "Marielle Franco, Presente! - 
Political Murder and State Terrorism in Brazil."

Notes
1. "Petismo" is the phonetic pronunciation of "PT," acronym for Partido dos Trabalhadores 
or Workers Party, combined with "-ismo" or "ism." The PT is the social democratic party 
that came to power in Brazil with the election of former union leader Luiz Inácio Lula da 
Silva, known as "Lula," to the presidency in 2002.

2. The PRI, Partido Revolucionario Institucional or Institutional Revolutionary Party, was 
founded after the Mexican Revolution and held uninterrupted power in the country for most 
of the 20th century until 2000. While Mexico remains ostensibly a republic with democratic 
elections, the PRI was known for maintaining a semi-authoritarian rule through 
clientelism, domination of all aspects of the state and corruption.

http://blackrosefed.org/brazil-interview-hugo-souza/

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

Message: 6





Author Mark Bray created a twitter thread to discuss his new book Anarchist Education and 
the Modern School: A Francisco Ferrer Reader just released on PM Press. For those not on 
Twitter we created this blog post so you can read along and learn about Francisco Ferrer. 
(We apologize for the duplicate tweets)

http://blackrosefed.org/bray-modern-school-ferrer/

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