Today's Topics:
1. Poland, zsp.net: Solidarity action with teachers striking in
Lithuania [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
2. fcs-villa verde cnt.es: Concentration of the union section
of Wesser (ca)[machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
3. France, Alternative Libertaire AL Montpellier - What to deal
with state violence ? in Montpellier on December 20th (fr, it,
pt)[machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
4. France, Alternative Libertaire AL #289 - Echoes of Africa:
The accommodated remains of colonial ideology (fr, it,
pt)[machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
5. Anarchy in Indonesia and the Guerrilla Struggle in West
Papua: An Interview (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
6. Britain, London Anarchist Federation: Building coalitions
outside SUTR/SWP (9th Dec write up) (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
7. Australia, Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group: "The Gilets
Jaunes have blown up the old political categories"
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Polish Association of Syndicalists belonging to the International Workers' Association
(IWA) organized solidarity pickets with striking teachers and teachers in Lithuania.
Pickets were held in Wroclaw and Warsaw at the embassies of Lithuania last week. The
solidarity campaign is to be a support and encouragement for the strikers, it is a
response to the request of activists and activists operating in the Lithuanian trade
union, May 1. This is important because teachers also come to strike in Poland too.
http://zsp.net.pl/
------------------------------
Message: 2
Objective fulfilled, our first contact with the company, even if it had to be from the
street. ---- On Tuesday 18 we concentrated in front of the office of our work center,
located on Fuencarral Street. About 30 people went to support the fired compas and to
remind the company that we will not tolerate more layoffs without rights. ---- After
trying to agree a first meeting in December with Wesser, and this being postponed to
January, with the concentration we were able to show our position before the famous
"contract extinctions". Way of dismissal that leaves in the street to compañeras without
any type of compensation. ---- A peaceful concentration that served to introduce us to the
rest of the workforce and demonstrate that we are here to improve the working conditions
of all . ---- We also want to thank for the support of the compars of other sections of
the Southern District.
In short, goal fulfilled, although we have many to achieve. We will continue fighting to
make it possible.
CNT Wesser
Southern District Federation
http://fcs-villaverde.cnt.es/concentracion-de-la-seccion-sindical-de-wesser/
------------------------------
Message: 3
From 8pm to 10pm at the Barricade, 14 rue Aristide-Ollivier, in Montpellier ---- The
recent movement of yellow vests has shown in a chilling way that the state is backing away
from nothing to maintain its dominance. In a list that is not exhaustive one can speak
about preventive mass arrests, gassings in rule of peaceful crowds, mutilation targeted
and frequent by the weapons "not lethal" that are flashball and grenades GLI-F4. ---- What
to do when the state violates the most basic rights of democratic freedoms and does not
hesitate to mutilate to defend its neoliberal policy in the service of the rich ? ----
Should we be confined to pacifism ? Should we set the conditions for self-defense ? ----
What about Article 35 of the Revolutionary Constitution of 1793 ?
He says: " When the government violates the rights of the people, insurrection is for the
people, and for every portion of the people, the most sacred of rights and the most
indispensable of duties. "
Facebook event
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Que-faire-face-a-la-violence-d-Etat-a-Montpellier-le-20-decembre
------------------------------
Message: 4
Colonialism is the ideology, born in the XIX th century in Europe, justifying
colonization, that is to say the exploitation of territory by a State to its own benefit
and those of its nationals settled on these territories. It is a culture that has been
instilled in our societies, and that we must get rid of at the same time as we attack the
colonial structures still in place. But getting rid of an ideology is not easy ... ----
Until the mid XX th century, colonialism was able to generate very strong support of
European populations in the colonial enterprise. The right and the conservatives see above
all the economic interest ; while the left is seduced by the civilizing mission, granting
itself a form of moral duty to share our enlightenment. ---- In this ideology, racism
plays a primordial role and finds many forms: scientific with the theory of races ;
educational through school programs ; cultural through books, various works, songs, not
to mention the colonial exhibitions like the one of 1931 in Paris where millions of
visitors were able, among other things, to admire Kanak playing the wild cannibals ... a
grotesque staging trying to stick to the clichés colonial.
Today colonization is largely less popular, but colonialism has left traces still alive in
our cultures and therefore in our minds (including left !). The apparent anticolonialism
in many discourses often hides forms of racism and paternalism that legitimize the many "
leftovers " of colonization: armed presence, political and cultural domination, economic
predation, and so on.
In official speeches, the need for " civilization " has given way to the demand for "
democracy " (as if we had lessons to give in this area), " security " or " stability
", a major argument in relations with the worst dictatorships. In textbooks, the
reality of colonization is euphemized, and racism denied ; while decolonization is
supposed to have arrived " gradually and without bloody conflict except in Algeria "
... ignoring the countless violence of this period, including the war in Cameroon that
killed hundreds of thousands !
Let us not forget the law of 23 February 2005 on the " positive role of colonization "
in textbooks (part of which was repealed on 15 February 2006), a reflection of the still
important place of these ideas in society and in society. spheres of power. Is it a
question of generation ? Be that as it may, the denunciation of colonization must be
continued, while supporting the emergence of all forms of decolonial culture that flourish
everywhere.
Christmas Surge (AL Carcassonne)
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Echos-d-Afrique-Les-restes-accommodes-de-l-ideologie-coloniale
------------------------------
Message: 5
Anarchists in Indonesia are making their presence felt as a dangerous threat to the
Indonesian state, capitalists, and monarchies. In the spirit of international solidarity,
we reached out to an anarchist in Indonesia to discuss the history of anarchism there,
anarchist involvement in the struggle against land grabbing and mega-projects throughout
the country, and the guerrilla struggle against Indonesian colonialism in West Papua. We
also spoke about the May Day rebellion and its aftermath in Yogyakarta. ---- How did the
1965 anti-communist purge affect the left in Indonesia? ---- In short, the 1965
anti-communist purge created a chilling effect on any sort of leftist organizing and
anti-capitalist struggle. The Indonesian Communist Party was once one of the largest in
Southeast Asia and possibly in the global south, but the massacres of communists,
suspected communists, sympathizers, and the Chinese minority of Indonesia swiftly and
abruptly ended any sort of left struggle for about thirty three years. While this is not
to discount those who were active during the Suharto years, Indonesia in that time faced
severe repression. Textbooks were censored, books banned, suspected sympathizers continued
to be hauled away for questioning and the sheer amount of corruption and cronyism going on
in all levels of government served to further intensify the great income inequality and
the theft of resources from the people.
However, this moment in Indonesian history, along with the earlier failed communist
revolution in 1926, had shown the limits of what Marxism-Leninism could do in Indonesia.
As a result, this made it less likely for leftist struggle to approach fighting capitalism
from a socialist or communist point of view than from an anarchist one, which may explain
the prominent role of anarchists of varying stripes in Indonesia today
(anarchist-communists, syndicalists, egoists, etc.).
When did the resurgence of anarchism begin in Indonesia, and what factors led to the
revival of anti-capitalist organizing?
Most would say that 1998 was when anarchists and anarchism came to the fore in Indonesia,
but I have to admit it may have started earlier with the punk and metal scene in the 80s
and early 90s. That being said, the overthrow of Suharto in '98 was a key time when those
of the older generation took to the streets and fought the military, police, and the
government (like the three-headed hellhound). Increased access to information beyond the
sanitized channels, whether it was illegal books bought under the table in pasars (local
markets) or zines produced by local activists/musicians or the internet, played a role in
the revival of anti-capitalist organizing and action. Of course, Indonesia being one of
the places that is directly affected by the rapacious greed of capitalism in its twin
forms of climate change and globalization, there was plenty of popular action against
resource extracting multinationals like Freeport-McMoRan and palm oil companies in the
early 2000s. Most of these early protestors and groups probably would not call themselves
green anarchists or eco-anarchists but there was overlap and solidarity with other eco
groups worldwide. These struggles continue today.
How is privatization and land grabbing affecting poor residents in different cities of
Indonesia and how are anarchists organizing against gentrification?
In cities all over Indonesia it is common for the local government to seize residents'
lands through something similar to eminent domain law. Usually the justification is to
develop infrastructure (toll roads, MRT, etc.) or high-income residential areas. There is
very little actual public space in Indonesian cities and those that exist are mostly
Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS.) Thus residents are increasingly and continuously
priced out of their own neighborhoods or have their own neighborhoods entirely bulldozed
to make way for the latest mall/apartment combo.
Anarchists in every city have been at the forefront of the struggle against land seizures
and privatization. Efforts in Bandung include direct action against the machines
themselves, preventing them from working and also community efforts to raise funds
supporting displaced residents.
Anarchists in every city have been at the forefront of the struggle against land seizures
and privatization. Efforts in Bandung include direct action against the machines
themselves, preventing them from working and also community efforts to raise funds
supporting displaced residents. Further below there is the case in Yogyakarta with the new
international airport. That being said, the specifics in other cities like Surabaya or
Medan are unknown to me and one should best ask those directly involved in the fight.
Can you discuss Indonesia's colonial relationship with West Papua and the involvement of
the United States and United Nations in ensuring this arrangement?
Indonesia bases its claim to the western part of Papua on the national myth of the
Majapahit Kingdom. While the history is accurate, in the sense that the Majapahit Kingdom
did control lands that make up modern-day Indonesia, this really amounts to nothing more
than an irredentist fantasy similar to the Greek Megali Idea or Greater Serbia or Greater
Armenia.
West Papua was the most eastern part of the Netherlands Indies and one of the few places
that remained in Dutch control after World War II. Ostensibly Sukarno's motives were that
of decolonization when he supported an invasion of Dutch New Guinea, but whether or not he
said this or that, the point remains that what happened to West Papua from 1963 on was
nothing less than colonialism or imperialism.
In 1961 an independent Republic of West Papua was declared and the Morning Star Flag was
raised. In 1962 Dutch rule ended but by May the following year Indonesia had taken over.
This came about due to the UN-ratified New York Agreement which transferred authority to
Indonesia in all but name. From '63-69, West Papua was under UN Temporary Executive
Authority and in 1969 came the much-promised referendum. Known ominously as the "Act of
Free Choice," the referendum amounted to an overwhelming support by so-called community
elders for West Papua to join Indonesia. Clearly controversial, even observers at the time
noted that those who voted seemed to be under duress to vote Yes.
Let us not forget the United States' role in all this, which is most apparent in the
infamous mining company Freeport-McMoRan. This US-based mining company owns the Grasberg
mine in West Papua, just a short distance from Mount Jayawijaya. The mine has been in
operation since 1967, when Suharto essentially signed away mining rights in Papua so long
as he and his family gets theirs. As the largest gold mine and second largest copper mine
in the world, the environmental impact of its operation is astronomical and satellite
photos of desolate fields and rivers running red and black with pollution should shock anyone.
Just like the Old West or the Belgian Congo, company towns are ubiquitous in West Papua
and the largest of these, Tembagapura, is at the foot of the Grasberg mine. Workers are
routinely subjected to long hours, live in cramped quarters, and some get paid with
company scrip. This is of course not including the facts that entire villages are ousted
from their homes, pollution rots the soil and kills crops, and it is increasing difficulty
for natives to get clean groundwater.
Recent years have shown little improvement of conditions for Papuans while the capital
owners in Indonesia and the United States are getting fat off the profits.
What kind of guerrilla struggle has been active in West Papua?
Since the Act of Free Choice and possibly earlier, there has been efforts by Papuans
within and outside the region to rid themselves of the tyranny of Jakarta. Known as the
Free Papua Movement, it is more proper to say that it is an umbrella term for different
groups and movements with varying goals. Organisasi Papua Merdeka's actions include
everything from solidarity protest abroad and local peaceful action, to outright sabotage
and guerrilla warfare. Diversity of tactics is something they embrace. Just the other
week, on the 27th of June during the regional elections in Indonesia, gunmen opened fire
on a polling station in Papua. Earlier this year, Freeport vehicles were shot. Of course,
the state and all its myriad apparati has clamped down on these movements. A recent
Amnesty International report states that extrajudicial killings by the police and military
over the last ten years have amounted to 95. Activists are routinely jailed and denied
visiting rights or a fair trial. Any official complaint of police brutality or military
excess are either dismissed outright or languished and forgotten by the justice system.
Organisasi Papua Merdeka's actions include everything from solidarity protest abroad and
local peaceful action, to outright sabotage and guerrilla warfare. Diversity of tactics is
something they embrace.
Groups continue to operate in the Papua highlands and jungles, whether or not they are
affiliated with OPM or other independence movements. An additional difficulty that Papuans
face is the strict control Indonesia has over who is allowed to go to Papua and for what
purpose. Journalists often get carefully curated itineraries to show off Potemkin villages
so they can write puff pieces or they are denied travel outright. Foreign journalists also
face extra scrutiny. As such, getting news out is tough and even dedicated online accounts
have slowed in recent months. Nevertheless, on the ground struggle is still happening and
it doesn't look like the Papuans are giving up to the bastards any time soon.
What is the context of the anti-feudalist march that happened on May Day in Yogyakarta?
Why were people marching against feudalism and how does the feudal situation relate to the
struggle against the new international airport in Yogyakarta?
While Indonesia is, for the most part, a representative democracy, monarchies still exist
all across the archipelago, foremost being the Sultanate of Yogyakarta. Due to an
agreement between the Sultanate and the Indonesian revolutionaries during the independence
struggle, the Sultan was allowed to keep his temporal powers over his territory equivalent
to governor in other provinces. Thus, the old systems of power remain intact.
Feudalism being a term defined more or less by one's relation (and lack thereof) to land,
it is a useful way to look at hierarchy in Yogyakarta's context. The Sultan of Yogyakarta,
Hamengkubuwono X, owns all of the land in the Special Administrative Region of Yogyakarta
and all taxes and levies go to the royals. In a feudalistic sense, everyone merely leases
the land in exchange for labor. As such, even if one lives in a particular area or
neighborhood, the Sultan and by extension the government has the power to remove and
resettle anyone in his holdings.
This is precisely the case with the new Yogyakarta airport project in which residents have
been forcibly removed in order to make way for the construction. Kampungs or shanty towns
are routinely seen by the government and capital owners as disposable so in Yogyakarta and
beyond, the most vulnerable population are targeted for forced evictions and relocations.
Efforts to fight against the state and capitalists include direct action on construction
machines and sabotage. Solidarity actions beyond Yogyakarta have included fundraisers and
protests against PT Angkasa Pura, the company behind the airport.
What took place during the May Day rebellion and what is the status of the anarchist
prisoners in Yogyakarta?
On May Day 2018, anarchists in Yogyakarta took to the streets to protest the Sultanate and
the construction of the Yogyakarta airport project. At the March Against Feudalism, the
call was out to "murder the Sultan!" and a police post was destroyed. 69 May Day
participants were arrested and of those people 11 were considered suspects by police. Of
those 11, 6 comrades were transferred to Cebongan Prison and 5 comrades were detained at
Yogyakarta Regional Police Station. After months in detention, the anarchist prisoners
were all released.
On May Day 2018, anarchists in Yogyakarta took to the streets to protest the Sultanate and
the construction of the Yogyakarta airport project. At the March Against Feudalism, the
call was out to "murder the Sultan!" and a police post was destroyed.
One case in particular involved the anarchist Brain Valentino (Ucil), who was beaten and
tortured during interrogation without access to legal council, and was later hospitalized.
He was the last anarchist prisoner to be freed on December 7.
Any final thoughts about anarchy in Indonesia?
I do not wish my words here to be taken as definitive nor to imply that I speak for anyone
other than myself. Anarchists in Indonesia have come a long way since 1998 and are still
fighting in the streets everyday. Shout outs to Palang Hitam Indonesia and any and all
anarchists of all stripes in every city for fighting against the capitalist death machine
leading us straight to Armageddon.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Stand Up To Racism/Unite Against Fascism (which I will treat as interchangeable from this
point) already has a less than stellar reputation among anti-fascists, and their behaviour
on the mobilisation against Tommy Robinson on the 9th of December has done nothing to
challenge that reputation. As a participant in that mobilisation, my ground level
experience of events is obviously incomplete and even before that day I had no love for
the Socialist Worker Party, which Stand Up To Racism is widely agreed to be a front
organisation for, but what I did see was a stab in the back of the broader anti-fascist
movement involved in the mobilisation. ---- But before the events of the day, some
background... ---- The Near Death And Renewal Of Anti-Fascist London
The events that led up to June 9th are complex; The rise and split of the Football Lads
Alliance/Democratic Football Lads Alliance, Tommy Robinson's media circus, Brexit, Trump.
It would take a long time to untangle the web of causality that allowed for such a sudden
upsurge in far right mobilisation, and I do not have the inclination or ability to do so.
The important thing is that on that day around 10,000 far right supporters of Tommy
Robinson gathered in Trafalgar Square to chant racist slogans, harass passers by, and
fight the police. This was the largest far right mobilisation since World War Two. They
were opposed by only 300 counter demonstrators, mostly under the Stand Up To Racism banner
but also backed up by a few dozen people involved in more radical anti-fascist groups.
They were attacked by far right hooligans multiple times. No one really saw it coming and
the anti-fascist movement was caught completely unprepared.
It was a disaster.
The next big far right demo in London was scheduled for the same place on July 14th. We
had a little over a month to try and come back from a position of being outnumbered thirty
to one, and that time was filled with leafleting, public assemblies, planning meetings,
brainstorming, and unfocussed flailing panic. Many individuals and organisations not
previously directly involved in anti-fascism made heroic efforts to get numbers out for
the 14th, and new networks of cooperation were created to facilitate this. Plan C London
especially played an important role in this burst of organising.
When July the 14th came around, Stand Up To Racism managed to get 1,500 people out on the
streets, and a coalition organised by Plan C and the Anti-Fascist Network (among others)
rallied a further 500 people in an independent anti-fascist bloc. The objective
articulated at the time was simply to survive, and the radical bloc linked up with the
Stand Up To Racism march and set up to protect their rear in parliament square. With a
militant independent bloc defending the counter-demo, the police suddenly felt compelled
to form a line behind the demo almost immediately. This is something that they had been
slow to do on previous counter demos in the same place, leading to fascist hooligans being
able to break off from the main far right demonstration and attack anti-fascists from behind.
The day was, all things considered, a massive success. The open attacks on the
counter-demo that had characterised the previous outings were prevented by the presence of
our more militant bloc, and the far right drew a crowd of 6,000, "only" outnumbering us by
three to one. Under most circumstances this would have been disheartening, but in context
we had reduced the disparity in numbers by an order of magnitude and at the end of the day
there was a feeling or triumph and relief.
Spurred on by the experience of successfully organising an independent, militant, and
disciplined bloc across many different organisations, the disparate groups and individuals
involved continued to organise around smaller events and in preparation for the next big
far right mobilisation. Football Lads And Lasses Against Fascism was set up as a direct
answer to the Football Lads Alliance, and the Feminist Anti-Fascist coalition held a
series of assemblies to discuss how feminism and anti-fascism can intersect.
When the next far right march happened on October 13th, the composition of the
anti-fascist response had become a mirror image of July 14th, with the independent radical
bloc drawing 1,500 people, and Stand Up To Racism drawing 500 to 800 at a separate demo.
The independent anti-fascist bloc, led by the feminist coalition that had formed in the
run up to the event, successfully blocked the far right march, which only drew in 2,000
supporters. The combined anti-fascist presence on the street now outnumbered the far
right, and the majority of that presence consisted of groups independent from Stand Up To
Racism.
The Limits Of Unity
At this point, someone not familiar with Stand Up To Racism might be questioning why an
independent bloc was necessary. Surely such a massive rise in far right activity would
demand we put aside sectarian difference and unite under one banner? There are several
problems with this line of thinking.
The first is that Stand Up To Racism has been totally ineffective at countering far right
demonstrations. Their preferred strategy is an A to B march that deliberately avoids any
contact with the far right. This kind of mild mannered march does nothing to disrupt the
far right, either by directly blocking it or by forcing the police to keep them in a
kettle. In failing to disrupt the far right we allow them to build on their success.
Symbolically, if nothing happens to disrupt a far right demo it is often just reported on
its own terms, emboldening those sitting on the fence about joining the next one and
demoralising those who might oppose them and those communities that are threatened by
them. "Counter demo avoids far right, heckles them from sidelines, disperses when asked to
nicely by police" is not exactly a stirring narrative of resistance for anyone watching,
regardless of what side they are on.
Beyond the symbolism of militant opposition to far right demonstrations, practically
speaking letting them go functionally unopposed is always a disaster. The police are
notoriously light handed in their handling of far right demonstrations when they do not
have to worry about protecting them from anti-fascists. Often the far right are allowed to
rampage around at will, attacking locals and counter-demonstrations, terrorising the area
and generally having a great time doing it. Passive anti-fascism of the Stand Up To Racism
type reduces itself to voicing disagreement with the far right while letting them do as
they please.
Now, this understanding of the limits of passive anti-fascism is does necessarily create
an unbridgeable divide between Stand Up To Racism and more militant anti-fascists. Within
the independent anti-fascist bloc there has been an understanding that not everyone is
able to confront fascists directly, and that this is perfectly OK. The militants who do
pursue a more confrontation form of anti-fascism and also try to defend those who, for
whatever reason, can not join them. On July 14h the bloc acted as the rear-guard to the
Stand Up To Racism march in order to ensure London anti-fascism in its entirety was not
crushed on the street on that day. On October 13th the bloc operated independently from
Stand Up To Racism march and did not interfere with their passive demo. Within the bloc
itself there are varying levels of militancy. A diversity of tactics is not only possible,
but necessary.
However...
Stand Up To Racism does not take a live and let live approach to other strains of
anti-fascism, and it is tarred as a focal point for unity by its association with the
Socialist Workers Party. Stand Up To Racism stewards are known to prevent militant action
within their march and cooperate with police against more militant anti-fascists. Their
idea of "unity" is everyone towing their line, and they often fail to even mention other
anti-fascist organisations in their media around mobilisations, let alone credit them with
any achievements. From Stand Up To Racism's press releases you would not even know that a
militant bloc existed on July 14th or October 13th.
The fact that Stand Up To Racism is commonly accepted to be a Socialist Workers Party
front causes even more problems. The Socialist Worker Party both has a reputation for
being dishonest and domineering, attempting to take control of every movement they get
involved in, and was the centre of a nasty rape scandal in which the party closed ranks
around the higher up accused and expelled anyone who disagreed with them. No one should be
asked to unify under an authoritarian banner stained by rape apologism, especially not the
feminists and libertarian-socialists who have been among the most dynamic elements of the
recent mobilisations.
December 9th
With that all out of the way, on December the 9th the militant anti-fascist bloc was
sabotaged by Stand Up To Racism from the very start. In the run up to the day, the
coalition attempted to organise a separate meeting point for their bloc so that they could
operate independently of the Stand Up To Racism bloc as they had on October 13th. However,
Stand Up To Racism changed their meeting point to the same place as the independent
anti-fascist bloc, which they did not mention in media in the run up to the event, giving
an impression that this was a Stand Up To Racism led mobilisation.
This made it impossible to tell who had come to join which group, and meant that there was
effectively now one march with two separate stewarding teams attempting to implement two
very different approaches to anti-fascism. As soon as the march itself was underway Stand
Up To Racism wasted no time in trying to get to the front (with the cooperation of police)
and co-opt the march. As the march went on Stand Up To Racism filtered more and more
people ahead of the front formed by stewards from the independent bloc, trying to relegate
our bloc to tag-alongs to our own fucking march and take control of the route of the march
as a whole.
On top of this very un-comradely co-option of our march, Stand Up To Racism stewards were
also cooperating with the police. Both cooperating with the police on the route the march
would take and even pointing out our stewards to the police and calling us troublemakers
to watch out for. Partly thanks to Stand Up To Racism's service as an arm of police
intelligence, and also partly thanks to their attempts to peel as much of the march away
from us as possible and leave us isolated, our bloc had its own special team of police
heavies shadowing it for most of the march. This would later make it far harder for us to
break out of the now co-opted march and result in many of us getting beaten and batoned
for attempting it.
When fascists attempted to block the march, our stewards rushed to the front to defend it,
only to be harassed, insulted, and pushed into police by Stand Up To Racism stewards. The
fact that Stand Up To Racism had, at this point, moved so much of the march ahead of our
"front" meant that our stewards had to operate well ahead of the bulk of their own bloc in
order to do this, and police could cut them off from the rest of the bloc for some time.
This would later leave the militant bloc short on stewards as it attempted to break away.
Our stewards ended up having to compromise the safety of their own bloc to defend the
overall march, which was at this point led by a group doing its best to disrupt and disown
them. If only Stand Up To Racism was willing to be so magnanimous in its handling of
fellow anti-fascists.
To sum up, Stand Up To Racism dropped their march on top of ours, co-opted that march and
attempted to sideline the people who organised it, cooperated with police against fellow
anti-fascists, insulted and endangered our stewards, and for what? Their actions did more
to disrupt anti-fascism than they did the far right, which their route did nothing to block.
Judging from October the 13th Stand Up To Racism may be losing the ability to pull numbers
in comparison to more radical anti-fascist coalition, and that is probably why they
decided to try and co-opt that bloc instead of march by themselves on December 9th. If
they are on the way out it can not happen soon enough, because they have become an active
hindrance to anti-fascist organising. If there was ever a reason to put up with their shit
in order to form a broad coalition, that reason died with the ability of coalitions to
bring mass marches onto the street independent of them. The question now is what can we do
to stop them from co-opting our efforts next time?
Further Reading - Reports On Demonstrations
While Rome Burns report on June 9th:
https://whileromeburnsjournal.wordpress.com/2018/06/14/the-far-right-threat-is-getting-more-dangerous-we-need-to-act/
AFN report on June 9th
Anti-Fascists oppose Tommy Robinson and the DFLA's Day for Freedom/Bigotry
Plan C report on July 14th:
https://www.weareplanc.org/blog/report-on-14th-july-stop-tommy-counter-demo/
Plan C report on October 13th:
https://www.weareplanc.org/blog/report-on-feminists-to-the-front-13th-october-anti-fascist-demo/
AFN report on October 13th:
https://antifascistnetwork.org/2018/10/15/report-october-13th-we-go-where-we-want/
Plan C report on December 9th:
https://www.weareplanc.org/blog/no-to-tommy-no-to-fortress-britain-report-on-9th-december-demo/
AFN report on December 9th:
https://antifascistnetwork.org/2018/12/11/no-to-tommy-robinson-no-to-fortress-britain-a-success-for-anti-fascists-a-blow-for-tommy-robinson/
Further Reading - Dunking On The SWP/SUTR
Stand Up To Rape Culture:
https://mediadiversified.org/2016/10/06/stand-up-to-rape-culture/
Don't Let Stop The War And The SWP Hijack The Anti Trump Movement:
http://littleatoms.com/trump-stop-the-war-swp-protest
Centering Survivors: The Trouble With Stand Up To Racism:
http://www.basepublication.org/?p=438
SWP Bullies London Black Revolutionaries:
http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2014/11/swp-bullies-london-black-revolutionaries.html
The Depravity Of The SWP:
https://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-depravity-of-swp.html
https://aflondon.wordpress.com/2018/12/18/building-coalitions-outside-sutr-swp-9th-dec-write-up/
------------------------------
Message: 7
The article at the link below is the best one we have found on the Gilets Jaunes (Yellow
Vests) movement in France. We recommend that people read it and think: ----
https://roarmag.org/essays/gilets-jaunes-blown-old-political-categories/ ---- "The Gilets
Jaunes have blown up the old political categories" ---- PEOPLE & POWER ---- France's
neoliberal order trembles as the yellow vest revolt shatters established political
conventions. The new terrain presents both dangers and opportunities. ---- The present
order is the disorder of the future. ---- - Saint-Just (1767-1794) ---- As I write these
words, a veritable earthquake is rippling through French politics and society. Four weeks
into its most serious social unrest since the banlieue riots of 2005, large parts of the
country continue to be shaken by a groundswell of popular protests, roadblocks and
occupations. This past Saturday, the so-called gilets jaunes - a loosely structured
movement of angry citizens named after the yellow high-visibility vests all French drivers
are required to keep in their cars in case of distress - defied an unprecedented security
crackdown to return to the streets of Paris and other French cities in their hundreds of
thousands. The protests can only be described as a resounding repudiation of the
widely-despised president, Emmanuel Macron, and his neoliberal assault on working-class
living standards.
Confronted with a change of tactics by riot police, who now found themselves backed by
dozens of armored vehicles and water cannon, the gilets jaunes did not manage to overwhelm
security forces as they had during the previous two weekends, when some of the wealthiest
neighborhoods of the capital were smashed up in scenes of generalized disorder not
witnessed in central Paris since May '68. Nevertheless, even the mobilization of 89,000
riot police and the arrest of over 1,700 protesters across the nation could not withhold
the yellow vests from once again descending upon the main avenues leading up to the Champs
Élysées for "Act IV" of their mass rebellion. A police spokesperson noted that, due to the
more dispersed nature of the riots, the overall damage from property destruction was much
greater and much more widespread than in previous weeks. A number of other French cities
also witnessed violent clashes, including Bordeaux, Toulouse, Lyon, Dijon, Nantes and
Marseille.
What began four weeks ago as a nationwide response to a widely-disseminated Facebook call
by two angry truck drivers to block local roads and highway toll stations in protest
against a new "ecological" fuel tax introduced by Macron's government has now spiraled out
into a full-blown popular revolt against the banker president and the wealthy corporate
elite he so openly represents. While the yellow vest movement - if it can even be properly
defined as such - remains inchoate and contradictory in terms of its social composition
and ideological orientation, there is little doubt that it has opened up a major fissure
in French politics. The neoliberal center finds itself under siege, and the political
establishment appears to be at a loss on how to respond. "We are in a state of
insurrection," Jeanne d'Hauteserre, Mayor of the 8th District of Paris, lamented last
week. "I've never seen anything like it."
Four weeks in, the uprising also continues to confound mainstream journalists and experts.
"The gilets jaunes have blown up the old political categories," one French media activist
told ROAR on Saturday night, after a long day of riots in the capital. "They reject all
political leaders, all political parties and any form of political mediation. No one
really knows how to confront or deal with this movement - not the media, not the
government, nor anyone else. What we are witnessing is unprecedented in French history."
While the outcome of these dramatic developments remains uncertain, it is clear that
France is currently living through a rupture of historic proportions, taking the country
onto uncharted terrain. For the left, the emerging scenario presents both exciting
opportunities, but also a number of significant political risks. How are radical and
autonomous social forces to insert themselves into this unfamiliar and uncertain situation
without losing sight of the dangers that lie ahead?
A DEEPENING SENSE OF CRISIS
For now, only one thing is certain: the explosion of popular outrage and the implosion of
the old political categories has left a gaping hole at the heart of French politics. The
resultant sense of crisis and confusion is palpable. For several weeks now, all the major
news channels have been airing non-stop footage of roadblocks and burning barricades,
while the main newspapers have consistently splashed the gilets jaunes onto their front
pages. During "Act III" of the uprising on Saturday, December 1, live TV images broadcast
to millions of people from the Alps to the Atlantic revealed how police had effectively
lost control over large parts of the capital. As tens of thousands of yellow vests stormed
the Champs Élysées, other groups went off into the surrounding beaux quartiers, where they
burnt luxury cars, built barricades, smashed bank windows, looted luxury stores and
defiled public monuments.
Elsewhere in the country, hundreds of roads, roundabouts and toll stations as well as a
number of supermarket distribution centers and eleven Total fuel refineries were blocked
by yellow vest protesters, while the port of St Nazaire continues to be occupied as well.
Fearing a complete loss of control, some government officials have begun to openly call
for a state of emergency and the mobilization of the army to quell the popular revolt - or
at least to assist over-stretched police forces in the capital. Authorities on Île de la
Réunion, a French dependency in the Indian Ocean with a population of around 865,000,
recently declared a curfew after protesters there overran local security forces and
blocked access to the main port, the airport and the island prefecture.
This past Saturday, December 8, French authorities - determined to reassert control over
the street - placed large parts of central Paris on lockdown, blocking roads, shutting
metro stations and sending in armored vehicles and water cannon to reinforce police lines.
In the morning, an eerie calm descended upon the French capital as thousands of stores and
restaurants shuttered their doors and boarded up their window displays in anticipation of
renewed violence. By the early afternoon, it became clear that the government's
unprecedented security operation had - unsurprisingly - failed to deter the gilets jaunes,
who once again poured into the streets surrounding the Champs Élysées in large numbers,
only appearing strengthened in their resolve to confront the cops and reinforced in their
conviction that Macron must go.
Given the heavy-handed police repression, which left at least 120 protesters requiring
immediate medical assistance, renewed clashes were all but inevitable. In an appropriate
irony, the situation got especially heated around the Boulevard Haussmann, named after the
reactionary urban planner under Napoleon III who designed Paris's iconic broad avenues
specifically to maintain social order and forestall further popular uprisings in the wake
of the revolution of 1848. Police fired rubber bullets, stun grenades and copious amounts
of teargas to keep the gilets jaunes from accessing the Place de l'Étoile where the Arc de
Triomphe stands, but repeated attempts to disperse the protesters faltered as different
decentralized groups simply kept reassembling on the main avenues. At night, small-scale
skirmishes and isolated incidents of looting continued in the area surrounding the Place
de la République.
In recent days, the political crisis has been aggravated by what appears to be a veritable
convergence of social struggles. On December 1, ambulance drivers joined the fray,
demonstrating in front of the presidential palace with screaming sirens. On Monday,
December 3, French students radicalized their ongoing struggle by blocking access to over
200 high schools; the following Thursday an estimated 100,000 of them participated in a
nationwide walkout against Macron's changes to university admission procedures and a rise
in administrative fees. Shocking footage of several dozen students being placed in stress
positions by riot police for an extended period of time soon went viral and served to
further inflame the tensions and anti-police sentiment among the gilets jaunes. Then, last
Saturday, thousands of environmentalists at a pre-scheduled climate demonstration in Paris
donned yellow vests in solidarity. Meanwhile, the main unions for French farmers, truck
drivers and public transport workers have all announced their intention to go on strike.
Further compounding the government's paralysis in the face of these developments is the
widespread support the protesters have received from the public. Polls indicate that over
two-thirds of respondents approve of the gilets jaunes, presenting a stark contrast to the
abysmal 18 percent approval rate for Macron. Interestingly, despite the concerted campaign
of disinformation waged by the government and establishment media, which have consistently
sought to drive a wedge between the "real" gilets jaunes and an "extremist fringe" of
left-wing and right-wing casseurs, or "hooligans", the protesters themselves have so far
largely refused to be divided along these lines, displaying a relatively high tolerance of
targeted property destruction and physical confrontations with the police, providing more
militant elements with significant room for maneuver. When several banks were smashed and
a number of luxury cars went up in flames on Saturday, the crowd could be heard roaring in
approval - and subsequently cheered on firefighters as they put out the flames.
AN INCHOATE AND CONTRADICTORY MOVEMENT
Given its inherent complexity, the international media have so far largely failed to make
sense of the puzzling yellow vest phenomenon, with many reports lapsing into an uncritical
regurgitation of the disdaining moralism proffered by the French bourgeoisie. One
columnist for The Guardian even wrote that they had "never seen the kind of wanton
destruction that surrounded me on some of the smartest streets of Paris on Saturday - such
random, hysterical hatred, directed not just towards the riot police but at shrines to the
French republic itself such as the Arc de Triomphe." For good measure, the author added
that "an extreme wing of the gilets jaunes has turned towards the nihilist detestation of
democratic institutions and symbols of success and wealth."
On Monday, the unreconstructed soixante-huitard class traitor Daniel Cohn-Bendit decided
to chime in as well, condemning the gilets jaunes - true to style as a classical Bourbon
reactionary - for their "extreme" and "frightening" violence, while saying nothing of the
notorious brutality of the French riot police. Some of the most horrific injuries
inflicted by the CRS and the BAC on Saturday included a young woman in Paris who lost an
eyeball after being shot in the head with a rubber bullet, and a man in Nantes who lost a
hand after he accidentally picked up a stun grenade thinking it was a teargas canister.
The gilets jaunes, of course, have yet to deploy armored vehicles, fire any weapons or
dismember a policeman. Their "violence", as Pamela Anderson - of all people! - has so
cogently argued, has been almost entirely symbolic.
For all his bourgeois hallucinations, however, it should be clear that Cohn-Bendit's
derision of the gilets jaunes is far from an isolated occurrence; indeed, it neatly
reflects the intense contempt in which the French ruling class have historically held the
uneducated jacques bonhommes, the insolent frondeurs, the ill-mannered sans-culottes - in
short, all the uncultured peasants and lumpen who somehow mustered the conceit to
insubordinate the divine authority of the king. The widespread use of the term casseurs is
a testament to this, as is the statement by Interior Minister Christophe Castaner last
week that "the movement has given birth to a monster." It was a choice of words that would
not have stood out among the litany of dehumanizing abuse the Versaillais once hurled at
the communards, before proceeding to indiscriminately massacre over 20,000 working-class
Parisians accused of having participated in the revolt of 1871. As the celebrated young
French author Édouard Louis astutely put it, the gilets jaunes, just like their
predecessors, "represent a sort of Rorschach test for a large part of the
bourgeoisie,[forcing]them to express their class contempt and the violence that they
usually only express in an indirect way."
The reality of the matter is that it is not the movement itself, but the neoliberal
restructuring of French society that has given birth to a monster - the monster of a
resurgent nationalist far-right. It should not come as a surprise, then, that the gilet
jaune phenomenon started out on the wrong foot, as an anti-tax protest initiated by a
number of people with known anti-immigrant views and prior association with far-right
groups. In the first weeks of the roadblocks, the media widely reported a number of
disturbing incidents of racist, sexist and homophobic abuse, especially in some of the
more peripheral areas of France. It is also undeniable that several ultra-nationalist,
monarchist, fascist and neo-Nazi elements have actively participated in the clashes in
Paris in recent weeks.
Nevertheless, despite this problematic start and the continued reference to symbols of
national unity like the tricolor and the Marseillaise, the yellow vest uprising quickly
overflowed the capacity of far-right elements or Le Pen's Rassemblement National to claim
the movement as their own. As the protests spread like a wildfire and spilled over into a
generalized popular insurrection against the child-king Macron and his neoliberal stooges,
hundreds of thousands of self-declared "apolitical" citizens - most of them first-time
protesters with no prior street fighting experience - were drawn into the roadblocks and
mass demonstrations. As a result, the social composition and ideological orientation of
the movement has become increasingly diverse with every passing act of the revolt, opening
up to a greatly expanded constituency between the relatively conservative Act I and the
near-insurrectionary Acts III and IV.
The result is that the gilets jaunes, while certainly not representative of the entire
French population, can now safely be classified as a popular mass movement. As such, the
social composition and ideological orientation of its participants by definition mirrors
some of the diversity found within the wider society - which is a different way of saying
that the movement contains many of the same contradictions and pre-existing political
fault-lines that run through contemporary France at large. If the gilet jaune phenomenon
remains confused and difficult to pin down politically, that probably has less to do with
any supposed moral failing on the part of the French working class than it has with the
thoroughly disorganized and depoliticized nature of the country's post-democratic
late-capitalist society - itself a consequence of four decades of neoliberal restructuring
and political decomposition.
RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES
But even if we should not condescend the gilets jaunes for the inchoate and contradictory
nature of their movement, we can - and certainly should - be wary of the dangers involved
in sharing a broader field of contestation with the racist, sexist and homophobic
far-right. To some extent, it can be argued that such far-right participation is
inevitable in a highly heterogenous mass mobilization like the yellow vests. The challenge
for the broader left, then, would not be to denounce such "impurities" from the comfort of
its armchairs, but to prevent those far-right elements from establishing a hegemonic
position within the movement. Since it does not look like the popular outrage that gave
rise to the insurrection will dissipate anytime soon, radical and autonomous social forces
have little choice but to actively engage with the movement in an effort to marginalize
its racist and nationalist tendencies as much as possible.
Thankfully, the left has plenty of "raw material" to work with in this respect. If there
is one thing that unifies the gilets jaunes, it is their shared hatred of President Macron
and their collective opposition to his virulent anti-poor policies. As one yellow vest
protester explained, "Macron's first move in office was to slash the wealth tax for the
mega-rich while cutting money from poor people's housing benefits. That is a serious
injustice." Seen from this perspective, the widely despised "ecological" fuel tax is
really only an attempt to make up for lost revenue and impose the costs of the climate
crisis onto the working class - part and parcel of Macron's political role as a reverse
Robin Hood for the capitalists: stealing from the poor to give to the rich. In an
excellent piece for Jacobin, Aurélie Dianara neatly summarizes some of the extreme
inequalities at the heart of Macron's neoliberal project:
Immediately upon reaching office, Macron abolished the Solidarity Wealth Tax (ISF), giving
€4 billion to the richest; and has strengthened the Tax Credit for Solidarity and
Employment (CICE), a tax cut and exemption program transferring €41 billion a year to
French companies, including multinationals. Shortly afterwards, with the 2018 budget bill,
Macron established a flat tax that allowed a lowering of taxation on capital, handing
another €10 billion to the richest ... As if that were not enough, the new "carbon tax"
will weigh five times more heavily on the budgets of the middle classes than on that of
the upper classes. Yet the government has taken no steps to counterbalance this obviously
unequal treatment - for example by giving aid to the families on the most modest budgets.
The challenge for the broader left, then, will be to build on the widespread popular
resentment over Macron's utter disregard for working-class people while trying to steer
popular anger in a more explicitly anti-systemic direction, articulating a clear
anti-racist discourse and pursuing a broader convergence with striking workers, protesting
students and the ever-marginalized banlieues. The good news is that comrades in France
have already been making some important advances on several of these fronts, organizing
powerful anti-capitalist and anti-racist yellow vest rallies from St. Lazare train station
during Acts III and IV, forming militant antifascist brigades to actively remove
ultra-nationalist and white supremacist elements from the general demonstrations, and
trying to get the wider movement to articulate a more structural critique of capitalism by
taking on symbols of state authority and bourgeois excess.
Moreover, in this emerging new phase, radical and autonomous forces will be able to build
on the organizational legacies and accumulated experience of a number of important
struggles in recent years, including:
The struggle against racist police violence in the banlieues, which led to a wave of riots
in 2016 and to the subsequent groundwork of the Comité Vérité et Justice pour Adama, a
prominent action group founded in response to the unexplained death of 24-year-old Adama
Traoré in police custody that year. It was the Comité that called for the formation of an
anti-racist bloc alongside the gilets jaunes during Acts III and IV of the uprising.
The mass resistance against the Loi Travail in 2016, which involved several months of work
stoppages, mass demonstrations, violent clashes and the temporary occupation of the Place
de la République by the Nuit Debout movement, in scenes reminiscent of the Spanish
indignados, the Greek aganaktismenoi and the international Occupy movement. Macron was one
of the most prominent supporters of the widely despised labor law reform, establishing a
direct connection between the resistance to the Loi Travail and the yellow vest uprising.
The defense of the ZAD, an autonomous zone in the small western commune of
Notre-Dame-des-Landes that has been successfully struggling against the construction of an
airport in a nearby nature reserve for years, and that earlier this year fended off a
violent militarized eviction attempt by the French state following several days of pitched
battles with Macron's riot police. Many Zadistes were present at the St. Lazare yellow
vest march on Saturday.
The #NousToutes feminist movement, the powerful French equivalent of #MeToo, which has
been organizing actions to protest violence against women, including nationwide marches on
November 24. In Montpellier, the feminist march was welcomed by the gilets jaunes with a
guard of honor.
The emerging areas of confluence between these ongoing social struggles and the mass
mobilizations of the gilets jaunes hint at the possibility that the yellow vest uprising,
despite starting out as a tax revolt with conservative overtones, may nevertheless be
headed in a more progressive direction. One exciting development in this respect is the
recent call by the gilets jaunes of Commercy, in northeastern France, to propose the
construction of "autonomous local committees, direct democracy, a sovereign general
assembly, delegates with a precise mandate, revocable at any time, rotation of
responsibilities." On this basis, local groups would federate "to avoid political
recovery, self-proclaimed leaders, or delegates without an imperative mandate from the
grassroots." As local organizer Pierre Bance puts it, "the time of the communes still
rings out!"
THE MOST BEAUTIFUL OF ALL DOUBTS
Still, despite these emerging opportunities and the widespread revolutionary enthusiasm, a
number of serious challenges remain. When the mass mobilizations gradually begin to fizzle
out in the weeks to come - as they inevitably will, especially with the holidays coming up
- popular ressentiment will continue to simmer below the surface all over the country.
While some of this popular energy will undoubtedly be channeled into new social movements
and grassroots initiatives, the more isolated individual frustrations will mostly fail to
find any immediately productive outlet. In the comedown, broader questions will therefore
arise about the yellow vests' political legacy, and opposition leaders on the left and
right will continue to jostle with one another to be recognized as the legitimate "heir"
of the great revolt.
In this context, the frightening scenario of a Le Pen presidency, reinforced by the
momentum of a popular mass mobilization, looms ominously on the horizon. The political
fallout of the mass demonstrations in Brazil in 2013 and the Ukrainian revolution of 2014,
as well as the pitchfork protests in Italy in 2013, clearly demonstrates that this risk is
not to be underestimated. Moreover, as the memory of May '68 reminds us, we cannot exclude
the possibility that, even if radical and progressive forces win the battle in the
streets, the right may ultimately win the war at the ballot box. This danger makes it even
more important for radical, progressive and autonomous social forces to use the ongoing
mass mobilizations to lay down the basic movement infrastructure for a powerful
antifascist resistance that can immediately spring into action in the event of an
electoral victory for the Rassemblement National.
Despite these considerable dangers, however, it is important not to conflate the
underlying causes of a potential Le Pen presidency with the role of the yellow vest
uprising as a catalyst for the collapse of the neoliberal center. In the final analysis,
the gilets jaunes are but a symptom of the profound legitimation crisis that has beset the
political establishment; they may act to hasten its inevitable implosion, but they are
hardly responsible for the present disorder. The concerned citizens who now express a fear
that the far-right will seek to capitalize on the protests are not necessarily wrong, but
they do tend to overlook the fact that Le Pen actually came within a hair of winning the
presidency 18 months ago, and had already overtaken Macron in EU parliamentary election
polls last month, before the yellow vest roadblocks had even started. In other words, if
Le Pen turns out to become the next president of France, that will not be due to the gilet
jaune uprising; it will be a result of the bankruptcy of the old way of doing politics
after four decades of widening class polarization. In the absence of a credible and
inspiring left, the crisis of the neoliberal center was always already pointing towards
the right.
At the same time, it is also important to note that the outcome of the present disorder is
by no means written in stone. While the ongoing revolt could strengthen Le Pen's position
in the next presidential elections, it may just as well undermine it. After all, the
far-right leader currently finds herself in an awkward and increasingly untenable
position. On the one hand, her carefully crafted image as an anti-establishment outsider
effectively compelled her to throw her weight behind the original anti-tax protests when
the first yellow vest roadblocks appeared. On the other hand, however, as these protests
rapidly escalated into a much more antagonistic mass mobilization against economic
inequality and bourgeois class privilege, involving widespread property destruction and
violent clashes with the police, she has also had to defend her credentials as the
preferred "law and order" candidate of the traditionalist petite bourgeoisie. The result
has been a series of contradictory statements denouncing some elements of the revolt while
embracing others. This ambiguity potentially opens a door for the left to capitalize on
the widespread anti-establishment sentiment by profiling itself as the only authentic
opposition force.
In this light, the more immediate risk for the left would appear to lie in the coming
state crackdown on some of the more radical tendencies within the movement. After a
strategic reorientation in the wake of its disastrous handling of Acts II and III, the
contours of the government's new approach clearly began to emerge in Macron's televised
address to the nation on Monday night, in which the humiliated president - speaking from
behind a gilded desk in the golden room of the Élysée Palace - declared his intent to take
into account the grievances of ordinary citizens while simultaneously vowing "zero
tolerance" for violent troublemakers. These statements are clearly part of a broader
attempt to co-opt the "apolitical masses" within the yellow vest movement while
simultaneously cracking down on its "extremist fringes".
In sum, the situation remains extremely fluid and can still develop in many different
directions. Last Saturday, one protester captured the general mood in France with a simple
question written on the back of his yellow vest: et maintenant? What happens next is
anyone's guess - but it is now rapidly becoming clear that the centrist political
establishment is in the process of imploding. Even if the consequences remain uncertain,
perhaps it is precisely in this universal state of confusion that the left must now be
looking for answers. For as Bertolt Brecht once put it in his striking poem, In Praise of
Doubt*:
... the most beautiful of all doubts
Is when the downtrodden and despondent
raise their heads and
Stop believing in the strength
Of their oppressors.
https://melbacg.wordpress.com/2018/12/20/the-gilets-jaunes-have-blown-up-the-old-political-categories/
------------------------------
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten