Today's Topics:
1. France, Alternative Libertaire AL #293 - Echoes of Africa,
Rwanda 1994: the dangers of racist mechanics (fr, it, pt)[machine
translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
2. Emiliano Zapata: one hundred years of the man who was a myth
on Mexican soil By ANA (pt) [machine translation]
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
3. [Netherlands] Anti-racist demonstration in Amsterdam brings
together about 10, 000 people By ANA (pt) [machine translation]
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
4. Solidarity Federation workshop & stall at the 3rd Liverpool
Anarchist Bookfair (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
5. US, black rose fed: ON THE OUTSIDE LOOKING IN: A CRITIQUE OF
INSIDE/OUTSIDE STRATEGY By Alex Isa (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
6. Poland, Workers Initiative: In concierges, the fight for
overdue salaries continues [machine translation]
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
7. Poland, rozbrat.org: Press conference and solidarity picket
"Enough repression!" [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
8. Poland, The process of participants and participants of the
Black Protest - the judicial battle [machine translation]
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
It was 25 years ago, Rwanda lived the last genocide of the XX th century, organized
against persons designated as Tutsis by extremist and racist Hutu power, with the ability
to cause a significant part of the population in the implementation of this crime against
humanity. ---- As for other known genocides, the ruling power has prepared for years the
ground from a technical point of view, by establishing lists, forming militias, buying
weapons, but also and especially an ideological point of view by getting the population to
participate, or at least to accept the elimination of a part of the population designated
as harmful. ---- It is a real racist mechanics that is at work, and whose workings are the
same as those found in France and everywhere when it comes to justify racist, sexist,
homophobic discrimination, etc.
To decipher this ideology, we can rely on the work of Pierre Tevanian (co-founder of the
collective Les mots sont important ; lmsi.net) on racist mechanics in France: a
combination of mental operations that produces a conception of the world in which he It is
legitimate that certain categories of people are privileged and others discriminated
against ... or eliminated if we consider the extreme case of genocide.
Read also our file on the Rwandan genocide and the role of the French State
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?1994-le-genocide-rwandais
The first operation is differentiation ; the polarization of a difference on the basis of
an identity criterion. In the case of Rwanda, the " ethnic " distinction is notably the
result of the first colonizers who interpreted the pre-colonial Rwandan society through
the prism of race theory. The initially social distinction (like the nobility in Europe)
turned into an ethnic distinction, and the Tutsis were then considered as a people of
invaders implanted among the " real " Hutu Rwandans ... This idea corresponds to the
second operation of the mechanics: the pejoration. " Tutsis are invaders, they are less
legitimate to live in Rwanda, cunning, etc. "
Then comes the reduction of the individual to his stigma (the Tutsi acts only for his
people) and the essentialization, the amalgam ... whatever the sex, the social class, the
geographical situation or the family, the Tutsis are identical. This mechanics leads to
scorn and / or fear of people so designated as " other ", which can then be humiliated,
enslaved, raped, or massacred depending on the case and time. And the effect is even
stronger if we can associate this " group " with a real external threat: in the case of
Rwanda, it was the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), an army of Tutsi exiles who was waging a
(finally victorious) war against the Rwandan regime from 1990 to 1994; and with which all
and all the Tutsis from within were suspected of collaborating !
Christmas Surge (AL Carcassonne)
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Rwanda-1994-les-dangers-de-la-mecanique-raciste
------------------------------
Message: 2
April 10 marks the centenary of the murder of Emiliano Zapata, one of the most prominent
peasants and guerrillas of the Mexican Revolution (1910-1917), a symbol of rural and
indigenous resistance in this country. Integrated into the revolutionary movement, he led
the Southern Liberation Army and was the driving force of social struggles and agrarian
demands. This revolutionary group of Emiliano Zapata, together with the Mexican Liberal
Party, founded by the Flores Magón brothers, with clear anarchist influences, were the two
social entities during the revolutionary period in Mexico and defended the communal
property of the land and respect to the indigenous communities, peasants and workers of
Mexico, against the oligarchy and the latifundio of the owners of the Porfiriato, Mexican
political dictatorial regime around the figure of Porfirio Diaz.
Emiliano Zapata, along with Pancho Villa, commander of the Northern Division in the
Mexican Revolution, were excluded from the Constitutional Congress of 1917, and even if
they were tactical winners of the struggle, they would be the political leaders of the
conservative or reactionary factions that imposed the political triumph in the
revolutionary process , that is, we can say that those who won were the counterrevolution,
ideological germ of the future PRI that remained for more than seven decades in power in
Mexico.
Zapata was born to a peasant family in Anenecuilco, a small village in the south-central
state of Morelos, living from childhood on the injustices that promoted landowners against
the humble peasant families who had been imprisoned with impunity. He was orphaned at the
age of fifteen, working as a tropeiro and a farmer since he was a teenager, having to flee
his hometown in 1897 after being repressed, imprisoned and released with a gun by one of
his brothers, Eufeminio Zapata.
In 1906 he attended a peasants' meeting in Cuautla to discuss how to defend their lands
against the large landowners in neighboring areas. His rebellion condemned him to forced
recruitment in the Federal Army during 1908, and in September 1909, Emiliano Zapata was
elected leader of the Anenecuilco Land Defense Board, where he would begin to analyze the
documents that originated in the Viceroyalty and believed rights of property of the
peoples on their lands, which had been denied by the Reform Laws of the mid-nineteenth
century when it was a question of constituting a middle-class peasantry and in tune with
the new liberal economy.
Because of a dispute in their village with the farm of the Hospital, the farmers could not
sow this land until the court decided. However, in 1910 Emiliano Zapata and other trusted
men occupied communal lands to be worked by peasants. After being declared a bandit and
had to flee repeatedly from the government, the Mexican situation was approaching an armed
struggle against the dictator Porfirio Diaz. His political opponent, Francisco Madero, had
been persecuted and forced into exile before running for election, trying to perpetuate
Diaz again in power, prompting the armed uprising. At the beginning of the Mexican
Revolution in 1910, Emiliano Zapata leads the seizure of land and the liberation of many
villages, such as that of Cuautla in May 1911 and becomes the leader of the Southern
Liberation Army.
Meanwhile, it turns out that bourgeois politicians like Francisco Madero only aspire to a
change of power without any pretension of social transformation, so that the Pact of Ayala
is signed with a strong revolutionary content. During the Maderista government land
grabbing by the peasants and Zapata's actions were quickly suppressed, and the government
controlled the cities as the guerrillas strengthened in rural areas. But neither the
repressive brutality and reformist gestures aimed at diminishing support weakened the
Zapatista movement, which remained in war against the military dictatorship of Victoriano
Huerta (1914) and against the constitutionalist Venustiano Carranza (1916) in later years
in a war of guerrillas
The photograph of Pancho Villa and Zapata at the Presidential Palace in Mexico City is
well known, a symbol of his entry into the political heart of the country, but Zapata's
goal was not to occupy a presidential seat, only the social and agrarian revolution. Given
the impossibility of ending the Zapata movement, they set a trap: making him believe that
Pablo Gonzalez, a faithful Carrancista, would come to his side and give them ammunition
and supplies, Colonel Jesus Guajardo, who directed government operations against him,
managed to lure Zapata to a secret meeting at the Chinameca farm in Morelos. When Zapata,
accompanied by ten men, entered the ranch, soldiers who pretended to present him arms
fired at point-blank range. The man died, but the myth continued.
Source: https://www.todoporhacer.org/emiliano-zapata/
Translation> Liberto
anarchist-ana news agency
------------------------------
Message: 3
Some 10,000 people gathered in Amsterdam on March 23 to protest against racism,
xenophobia, Islamophobia and the far-right party FvD (Forum for Democracy), which won the
local elections on March 20 . On its electoral platform, the FVD advocated
anti-immigration ideas. ---- The protest marched through various streets in the center of
the city, with demonstrators carrying banners, posters, banners and shouting anti-fascist
slogans such as "Fight against fascism", "Home for all, open borders", "Total freedom of
movement for all", "Come to the street with us. Do not give fascism a chance, "" Fascists
will not pass. " ---- The act was organized by an anti-racist committee ("21 Maart
Committee"), with support from various leftist, anti-fascist and anti-authoritarian
organizations. The anti-authoritarian bloc, based on radical anarchist and anti-fascist
groups, mainly from Amsterdam and other parts of the Netherlands, gathered approximately
500 people.
anarchist-ana news agency
------------------------------
Message: 4
For the third year, Liverpool-SolFed will be at Liverpool Anarchist Bookfair. This
Saturday, the 13th of April. ---- We will be having our stall for anarcho-syndicalist
literature, information about our campaigns and activity and materials for collective
resistance and struggle. ---- We will also be running a workshop presented by a comrade
from Manchester-SolFed: ---- 3pm SolFed: The Truth About Employment Tribunals - Defending
and improving UK Employment laws is now seen by many as the best means of protecting
workers from exploitation and combating discrimination in the workplace. In this
discussion, the Solidarity Federation will look behind the myths and slogans to focus on
the true realities of Employment Tribunals and the legal system upon which they operate,
and debunking the myth that employment laws can ever be a substitute for workers taking
collective action when it comes to protecting workers and improving working conditions.
http://www.solfed.org.uk/liverpool/solidarity-federation-at-the-3rd-liverpool-anarchist-bookfair
------------------------------
Message: 5
"Yes, I would consider my inside/outside strategy toward corporations somewhat of a Robin
Hood effect ... I use their money, which becomes my money, to produce stickers, posters,
stencils, etc. This strategy was, however, the result of my acceptance of the reality of
things. One of the most jarring realizations this project has brought about for me is the
complete inevitability of supply and demand economics in a capitalist society. " ----
-Shepard Fairey ---- How to (and whether to) engage with existing political institutions
is a perennial topic hotly contested by groups and individuals in left organizing spaces.
By performing well above expectations in the Democratic Party presidential primaries,
Bernie Sanders revived the national outlook for left electoralism. However, electoral
politics are simply one facet of what we refer to as the institutional left - "unions,
non-profits, and those with institutional interests to protect and preserve."
This brings us to the phenomenon of ‘inside-outside strategy' (IOS). You've definitely
heard this phrase used at political meetings and events, perhaps by people who have
varying and contradictory understandings of the term.
Years before Trump's win in the 2016 presidential election, a growing segment of the
anti-capitalist left represented by groups like Democratic Socialists of America
proclaimed in favor of an "inside/outside strategy." According to one popular definition,
inside/outside strategy might be defined as:
the creation of mass movements and alternative activities outside the centers of power
that work in conjunction with clusters of interest - organized or individual supporters
inside or along the periphery of the power structure. IOS is a strategic orientation that
social movements and dissenters have historically used to influence society.
In the past two years, various segments of the anti-capitalist left have dusted off
inside-outside strategy and repurposed it into a theory of revolutionary transformation.
Starting with a brief history of the term and its historical uses, we will see why
inside-outside strategy is flawed both in theory and practice.
The History of Inside/Outside Strategy as a Term
To understand the flaws of inside-outside strategy as a proposal for social transformation
and struggle, we have to understand how it entered the lexicon of social movements. The
basic idea is not necessarily new-something attested to by a long history of debates
around electoralism and political participation, even during the peak of labor radicalism
in the U.S. during the 20th century.
While it's difficult to say with complete accuracy, one of the earliest works explicitly
theorizing the relationship between an "inside" and "outside" strategy comes from a
chapter in the 1991 book Mobilizing Interest Groups in America: Patrons, Professions, and
Social Movements. The authors define "inside" strategy as lobbying activities and
"outside" strategy as "[shaping]and mobilizing public opinion." (103)
In this telling, the scope of change is nothing more than influencing public policy on
individual issues. The protagonists of this process are simply "interest groups" led by
political entrepreneurs who successfully find "patrons" in existing institutional
structures. (196) For much of the 90s and early 2000s, appearances of this phrase
unequivocally reflected and reified the typical elements of liberal political engagement:
Single-issue groups
Disconnected from any pretense of mass or class organizing
Make a few friends in government
Get some legislation passed
The system works and everyone goes home happy (emphasis on "going home").
This inside-outside dyad was adopted by progressives as part of a long period of
self-reflection on Jesse Jackson's failed presidential bids as a Democrat in 1984 and
1988, paralleled by the growth of his Rainbow Coalition. For many years thereafter,
progressives continued to express disappointment that Jackson demobilized the Rainbow
Coalition and folded it into the Democratic Party campaigning apparatus. This July 2004
piece in The Nation looks back at Jesse Jackson's presidential candidacy and the Rainbow
Coalition:
To speak with Rainbow warriors now is to confront a persistent, deep disappointment that
in the spring of 1989 Jackson decided against institutionalizing the Rainbow as a
mass-based, democratic, independent membership organization that could pursue the
inside-outside strategy he'd articulated vis-à-vis the Democrats and build strength
locally and nationally to leverage power for progressive aims.
For all of the disappointment expressed by progressives, their ideal inside-outside
strategy boiled down to a way to steer the Democratic Party and win elections. The promise
represented by the Rainbow Coalition historically represented a vampiric transfer of
social movement potential to renewed liberal hegemony in the form of a resurgent
neoliberal Democratic Party in the 90s.
"When it comes to the inside-outside dyad, "inside logic" continuously and inexorably
seeks to subsume and colonize those of us who live and struggle outside of the halls of
power-always to the benefit of a few, albeit a different few from the ones who are
currently in power."
In From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor expertly captures
how figures like Jackson presided over the institutionalization and neutralization of the
revolutionary potential of the civil rights movement at a time when the carceral state
reached ever greater heights under a nominally liberal administration.
Nonetheless, opposition to the neoconservative Bush presidency kept this idea alive,
resulting in the formation of the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) in 2004. One of
their stated goals was to act as a progressive pressure group operating within the
Democratic Party:
As a grassroots PAC operating inside the Democratic Party, and outside in movements for
peace and justice, PDA played a key role in the stunning electoral victories of November
2006 and 2008. Our inside/outside strategy is guided by the belief that a lasting majority
will require a revitalized Democratic Party built on firm progressive principles.[emphasis
added]
This meant tailoring their actions to the contours of the existing political structure -
fielding candidates in mostly unsuccessful bids for office, spending time and resources on
procedural fights within the Democratic Party structure, and various lobbying schemes such
as holding mid-day "brown bag lunch vigils" outside of the district offices of various
members of Congress in the hopes of delivering a letter or flyer to the member of Congress
or their staff. PDA also took credit for convincing Bernie Sanders to compete in the
Democratic presidential primaries in 2015. In essence, groups like PDA condition their
members to speak to "electeds" rather than the masses.
The other notable example of this strategy was the Working Families Party (WFP), a
"fusion" political party that maintains a separate ballot line in elections due to unique
New York state ballot laws, but often endorses the same candidate as the Democratic Party.
This variety of inside-outside strategy is meant to gradually pull candidates in a more
progressive direction, but in places like New York WFP will endorse unabashedly
reactionary candidates like Governor Andrew Cuomo in order to reach the 50,000 vote
threshold needed to maintain their ballot line. In order to keep the candle burning for
the faintest glimmer of even mildly progressive change, organizations like WFP must
deliver their supporters unto the altar of neoliberal capitalism in the here and now.
Until fairly recently, inside-outside strategy has meant working with and/or within the
system to accomplish limited goals. That this strategy doesn't conflict with the power
structures of capitalism is highlighted in embarrassing fashion by a blog featured on the
website of the World Bank. Yes, THAT World Bank!
In a post entitled "The Inside-Outside Strategy," a World Bank employee makes a case for
working with officials in the name of "pro-poor" reform:
The logic of the inside-outside strategy is unanswerable. If you start a reform within the
government, it is wise to build wider support; and if you push for change from the outside
you need to transform public opinion all right, but you also need to find allies within
the state. In the real world, that is how things get done.
We can assume that, being a World Bank publication, this refers to the process of
streamlining Structural Adjustment Programs.
In any case, it seems fairly clear that inside-outside strategy was conceived and executed
as a program of liberal reform, one where politics is devoid of any understanding of class
struggle and where working-class people have only the barest form of leverage via social
and political "entrepreneurs" of the institutional left. These figures and institutions
have a symbiotic relationship with the State and reinforce its hegemony while using left
rhetoric.
More than their progressive forebears, DSA did the most to bridge the gap between
liberal-progressive politics and the anti-capitalist left, more or less giving us the
current incarnation of inside-outside strategy. In 2014, for example, a statement by the
organization put inside-outside strategy in the following terms:
DSA also understands that unless the labor movement and the Left build the independent
political capacity to challenge the mainstream leadership of the Democratic Party, from
the inside and the outside, its embrace of pro-corporate, pro-austerity neoliberal
economic and social policies will continue as well.
The current political moment has seen inside-outside strategy become an incoherent jumble
of expectations, socialist in words but liberal in practice, aiming for Fully Automated
Luxury Gay Space Communism but trying to get there in a hot air balloon.
Take the Momentum Caucus of DSA, whose platform purports to critique inside/outside
strategy while simultaneously arguing that "we should attempt to use the major parties'
ballot lines without confronting the major parties' infrastructure." Since then,
ironically but to the surprise of few, it was discovered that Momentum developed
organizing projects within DSA (like Medicare for All) with the intention of "folding"
such projects into a Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign infrastructure.
Though advocates of this approach favor building a "mass left-wing formation" down the
line, candidates who have racked up endorsements by DSA-whether they be "soft"
endorsements where members significantly assist and boost campaigns or explicit
endorsements-have hewed closely to Democratic Party leadership, boosted fundraising
prospects for the Democratic Party as a whole, and have gladly accepted endorsements from
politicians who unequivocally represent the capitalist class.
The failure of inside-outside strategy is that movement activists and supporters have
failed to maintain accountability. We can see this rather prominently in the response of
certain DSA members to critiques of Ocasio-Cortez when she expressed support for a
"two-state solution" to resolve the continued civil and military oppression faced by
Palestinians and offered to sit down with "leaders on both" sides. One op-ed defending
Ocasio-Cortez's upsetting blunder threw the premise of inside-outside strategy out the
window entirely:
it would still be wrong to insist that DSA members are under an organizational discipline
to adhere to them. The right to dissent and to express views different from those of the
majority and the organizational center is a fundamental part of DSA's democratic and
socialist-feminist decision-making. DSA has taken a position to be actively involved in
electoral politics, for example, but those who have a different view - including many
signers of the petition against Ocasio-Cortez - are still free to express that
perspective. We would have it no other way.
In practice, this seems like a cynical manipulation of "democratic" practices to keep
those outside of power in a position of impotence, even when politicians claiming to
represent them contradict movement ideals entirely.
Other attempts to defend this triangulation on Ocasio-Cortez's part indicate that "inside"
and "outside" are not at all equal partners in spite of claims to the contrary:
Because the value of an elected official, of an activist in the Advocate role, is to get
things done close or in the halls of power. A senator or congressmember embracing BDS,
would probably be doing so at the expense of their effectiveness in most other areas. It's
pretty clear that the lobbying power of those who support Palestinian rights is not very
high, and in most of the country if you only want to vote for someone who agrees with that
position, you won't have anyone to vote for.
The fact that there was a perceived need to defend Ocasio from the "maximalists" and
"Rebels" to her left, including dedicated DSA members, suggests that so-called Advocates
and influencers (like Ocasio-Cortez) have an overriding role in shaping the agenda and
defining priorities. Members of social movements, on the other hand, are expected to keep
the candle burning and play a support role rather than develop forms of self-governance
that might create anything beyond the State.
The idea that the current mix of democratic socialist candidates, including patricians
like Cynthia Nixon and CEOs like Zak Ringelstein, could create the nucleus of a separate
"mass party," or that a mass party of these same political figures could offer an
alternative vision to capitalism, does not conform to what we are seeing in real time.
Thus, 4 years and a few electoral victories later, progressives and even democratic
socialists have signaled hesitation in challenging the "mainstream leadership" of the
Democratic Party as was promised in 2014.
No amount of premeditation seems to be successful in overcoming the gravity of State
power. "We'll do it right next time" becomes a perpetually unfulfilled rallying cry.
At any rate, DSA national has leaned into the press coverage, membership surges, and
increased national profile brought along by major electoral victories and endorsements. In
an e-mail dated June 28, National Director Maria Svart writes: "In the first 24 hours
since the election results were announced, over 1000 people joined DSA. That's bigger than
the first day of the Trump bump - it turns out that in dark times, people want reasons to
hope. Let's keep these victories coming!"
Whatever the inconsistencies of the candidates they support, national leadership is happy
to boast of new members and dues. It is almost certain that many of these members entered
the organization with a very general and incomplete conception of socialism, heavily
shaped by the measured statements offered on the electoral front. In this way, the
"inside" part of this strategy wields tremendous influence and puts limits on the
"outside" part where these are assumed to work in tandem.
There are more earnest attempts to conceive of inside-outside strategy as a way to build
dual power, where the "outside" might consist of more radical, working-class, and
horizontally-organized social movements, only seems to highlight the woeful inadequacy of
these strategies in relation to the task at hand. Even when inside-outside strategy fails,
the impression that it is succeeding creates a powerful perception that drives dues and
membership, reflecting the agendas and assumptions of campaigns rather than movements.
Beyond this, however, there is also a failure to theoretically recognize the nature of how
power operates at various levels of society.
The Problems of Inside-Outside Strategy: Some Theoretical Considerations
Nascent ideas of inside-outside strategy explained how single-issue interest groups of no
particularly radical persuasion and a highly-professionalized structure could influence
policy outcomes. Later, it became a way for outgunned progressives to "take back" the
Democratic Party in the name of a more humane capitalism. Currently, we are at a stage
where inside-outside strategy functions in the same way but in the service of purportedly
revolutionary outcomes ranging from a social democratic welfare state to a breakaway left
workers' party.
Even as inside-outside strategy was repackaged and painted red for a newer generation of
radicals, various interpretations of this idea reflect an unclear sense of the
relationship between existing political structures and social movements. What's more, they
don't even demonstrate a good understanding of the distinct manifestations of power and
how they operate.
The definition of inside-outside strategy quoted earlier comes from a series of 2016 posts
on the blog Be Freedom, some of which was reprinted in other outlets like Counterpunch.
The author advocates creating mass movements whose aim is to bring about change by working
in conjunction with "clusters of interest" within and on the periphery of power
structures, then gives a disparate array of examples from mainstream politics to labor
unions. From this point of view, these are all seemingly valid arenas of struggle. While
many people who identify as progressive see no contradiction here, a bit of digging
reveals a huge conceptual problem therein.
If we start from the standpoint that all legislative bodies, courts, labor unions,
political parties, and UNICEF are equally valid entry points for transformative mass
movements to exercise power, what are the exceptions? One of the problems with the
advocacy of IOS on the left is the lack of proscribed limits.
What has been jarring these last two years is that some socialists have internalized this
as a system of belief to the point where they can enthusiastically root for District
Attorneys and Judges in their electoral efforts. In the case of Larry Krasner, some viewed
his victory as a step forward and a platform for further movement building based on
reforms such as ending cash bail and civil asset forfeiture. In the interim, however, this
means supporting someone who oversees mass incarceration and prosecutions that plainly
violate freedom of expression.
The power of belief being what it is, supporters can't necessarily be moved to critically
interrogate these deficiencies or offer any broad vision other than improving things in a
piecemeal fashion, punching left and managing expectations.
This was made abundantly clear during the debate on House Joint Resolution 1, the bill
passed by House Democrats-including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna
Pressley- during the government shutdown to restore funding to the Department of Homeland
Security and, by extension, Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Surprisingly, supporters of AOC and even leftists representing more critical tendencies
pushed back against left criticism of the vote and stressed the need for the newly-elected
representatives to build their political clout and momentarily put aside their promises to
"abolish ICE."
When it comes to the inside-outside dyad, "inside logic" continuously and inexorably seeks
to subsume and colonize those of us who live and struggle outside of the halls of
power-always to the benefit of a few, albeit a different few from the ones who are
currently in power. This means that the socialist or democratic socialist label can be
rather easily used to exploit people's expectations in the most cynical way possible to
gain and hold power.
If the revolution suddenly demands that we give our votes and support to Representatives,
Senators, Sheriffs, District Attorneys, and Presidents, should we ask socialists to sign
up for the U.S. Army? ICE? Get a "democratic socialist" nominated as Secretary of Defense?
We've only seen the beginnings of such developments, such as progressive candidates
offering to "abolish ICE" by replacing itwith a similar organization controlled by the
Justice Department. Naturally, supporters of such politicians might downplay these
positions or defend them after the fact, much in the same way liberals (and oddly enough,
some leftists) defended Obama and the "long game" of his presidency: A long game that
inevitably concluded to the benefit of the ruling class and the demoralization of the
working class.
We can even take this idea to its most absurd limit: why not start a business and use that
a way to make the world a better place? Of course, most of us recognize this as a joke.
The functioning of capitalist economic institutions guarantees the highest allowable
degree of exploitation. What exempts the State from this logic, reflection of capitalist
economic development and class conflict that it is? If building socialism means occupying
State power-administering prisons, defending borders, and nationalizing the
bourgeoisie-then it is not any form of socialism with strategic or ethical value.
Advocates of inside-outside strategy misunderstand the nature of power, and consequently
make fatal errors of judgement that will limit our collective political imagination and
reduce the most vibrant movements in our workplaces and communities to servants of their
supposed representatives in the machinery of government.
From an anarchist perspective, our approach to social change is to build popular power -
a process where we use our time and resources to create "independent institutions and
organizations of the working class to fight white supremacy, patriarchy and capitalism."
This means looking to our neighbors and coworkers in our political struggles and not
politicians who promise to enact change from on high. All of the press releases and bully
pulpits available to left politicians and bureaucrats are absolutely inconsequential
compared to the popular power we can build.
Alex Isa is an educator, scholar, and member of Black Rose/Rosa Negra in Miami.
http://blackrosefed.org/outside-looking-in-critique-of-inside-outside-strategy/
------------------------------
Message: 6
Porters and porters guarding the buildings of the Board of Municipal Residential Resources
in Poznan still without pay arrears and stable employment. On April 8, another meeting of
the victims took place. Poznan's journalists, self-government authorities and central
institutions were handed over to the "Black Book of Poznan's Outsourcing and Labor
Exploitation." ---- About 25 porters and porters, guarding the objects managed by the
Board of Municipal Residential Resources, are transferred from the company to the company
shown by ZKZL. Despite earlier protests, probably from May this year. the fifth time in
the last 10 months will change the employer indicated by ZKZL. In two months (October and
November 2018) a significant part of them has not yet received remuneration. They lost
even after under 5,000. Golden.
At the same time, central and local authorities can not adequately react to the
exploitation and deprivation of workers and employees. It is all the more shocking that we
are talking about publicly-funded wages. In addition, despite the gehenna which Poznan
porters and porters go through, the city does not see the need to change the outsourcing
system, which in this and other cases is paralyzed by the injustice and ruthlessness of
exploitation. Poznan is perhaps a free city, but not exploitation; maybe it is an equality
city, but not in employment.
All correspondence carried out by the Employee Initiative regarding Poznan's porters and
porters was submitted to journalists as well as the General Prosecutor, Chief Labor
Inspector, the Mayor of Poznan and the President of the ZKZL. The collected letters are a
kind of "Black Book of Poznan's outsourcing and exploitation of work". At the same time,
the relationship does not preclude the intensification of protests in this matter and the
strike.
The protest caused that from December 1, born porters and concierges are employed under a
contract of employment. The rates from PLN 8 net per hour to over PLN 11 have also
increased significantly. The person who revealed the abuse was reinstated. Work conditions
also improved to some extent. In addition to the outstanding wages, the Employee
Initiative demands real employment stabilization, which is only possible, according to the
union, through the employment of interested parties directly by the ZKZL. More on this
subject in the upcoming issue of the IP Bulletin.
http://ozzip.pl/teksty/informacje/wielkopolskie/item/2470-w-portierniach-walka-o-zalegle-pensje-trwa
------------------------------
Message: 7
Yesterday, 9 April, a picket was held in connection with the repressions of people
associated with the Poznan anarchist community. ---- Below, we publish the text of our
statement, and thank you for participating in all of the participants. ---- Statement on
the repression of people associated with the Poznan anarchist milieu. ---- Several times,
several activists and activists associated with the Poznan anarchist movement were brought
to trial in various cases. The police and the prosecutor's office seem to have exhausted
the penal code, putting all kinds of charges against them (though equally absurd!), And
some of these cases have been going on for several years. ---- For two years, the trial of
six activists and activists who took part in the Black Protest in 2016 has been underway.
Despite the fact that the police brutally pacified the demonstrators using clubs, tear gas
and arranging round-ups of random persons, only the protesters sit on the bench today.
They are accused of, inter alia, violation of bodily immunity of officers or participation
in a violent gathering. All cases against the police were discontinued. It is a peculiar
fact that some people heard allegations only after she complained to the prosecutor's
office about the behavior of the police during the action.
In September last year, in the middle of the night, a police patrol stopped an anarchist
for a reason returning home. One of the policemen threw him into the police car and then
hit him in the face. He was transported to the police station, where he was even more
battered, kept in handcuffs and a protector on his head. They were brought closer to him,
mocked at political views and anarchist activities. He was released only before noon, when
the prosecutor presented him with allegations of insulting an officer.
A few weeks ago, a valid sentence passed in the case of Maciej Hojak, a longtime activist
of the Anarchist Federation, who was to attack police officers. In fact, Maciej only ran
to help a colleague ruffled by a few fallen men who jumped out of the unmarked (as it
turned out later) police car. Maciej was returning home from a solidarity demonstration
with Lukasz Bukowski, who was serving a three-month sentence of imprisonment for blocking
illegal eviction!
In April there will also be another meeting against the activist, which the police stopped
during the anti-nationalist demonstration. He was seated on charges of participating in a
fight, on one bench accused of nationalists who attacked demonstrators. Most of the
nationalists accused in this case decided to cooperate with the prosecutor's office,
pleaded guilty and voluntarily submitted to punishment. Due to the number of accused
persons and the number of witnesses, the length of the proceedings alone is a punishment
for an activist who has been detained by the police, despite the assurances of the
organizer and participants of the protest that he is not a member of the nationalist
attacking protest but an anti-fascist participating in a legal demonstration.
Last month, the first sentence against the anarchist from Poznan came, which blocked the
already recognized illegal logging of the Bialowieza Forest. He was accused of violating
the integrity of forest guards and obstructing their official activities, for which he was
sentenced to four months' imprisonment. An Anarchist appealed.
We know that the police and the prosecutor's office are well aware of how much these
processes cost us. We devote our time to many hours of hearing and meetings with lawyers,
writing appeals and reviewing files. Each process is also a considerable financial expense
for us. We would prefer all of this energy to be spent on political activities, money for
legal assistance to harassed tenants or persecuted employees. Meanwhile, we are still
distracted from our activities, and the police are convinced that it is at their own
request. We get a clear signal: if you are sitting quietly and you are polite then you
have peace, and if you want to protest, we will set you straight and straighten you.
However, we will never allow state oppression against activists from our side! We have the
right, sometimes even an obligation, to protest, act, and engage in political actions. We
must also show strong resistance to police impunity and officials who increasingly
organize themselves and escape social control. That is why we do not agree to the
continuous increase of police powers, the use of wiretaps and the monitoring of ever
larger areas of our private lives. Today, the system between the police and the
prosecutor's office is an everyday life, and there is more and more violence and torture
on the police stations, which often end in the death of detainees. We are creating a
police state, perfect for use by fanatical politicians or thirsty for the absolute power
of psychopaths.
We express our opposition today! Our weapon is solidarity, which we show through joint
participation in processes, physical, financial or even symbolic support. We are with all
the accused until the end of their trials, and sometimes longer in the event of an
unfavorable sentence. Above all, however, we are acting further and we do not give up in
the fight! We will not be intimidated, we will never give satisfaction to the police and
the prosecutor's office.
Anarchist Black Cross / Anarchist Federation section of Poznan
http://www.rozbrat.org/informacje/poznan/4667-konferencja-prasowa-i-pikieta-solidarnociowa-qdo-represjiq-relacja
------------------------------
Message: 8
03.10. In 2016, we took part in a black protest in Poznan. Since then we have been
regularly dragged by the courts. Some of us were unreasonably detained and arrested during
the demonstration. Maciek, Jacek and Gosia were charged with violating the police's
immunity and taking part in an illegal gathering. Asia, Iwka and Pawel were accused of
participating in the illegal gathering with the knowledge that its participants intend to
carry out a violent attack on police officers much later - after they reported that the
police had exceeded their rights. To prosecute them was a simple revenge for making
problems - a classic example of political repression. ---- The Amnesty International
report wrote about the absurdity of the whole situation:
The case of the Black Protest in Poznan is an example of the police using disproportionate
direct coercion measures during demonstrations. It is also worrying about not
investigating complaints about police officers and limiting the possibility of exercising
the right of an injured party to an effective remedy. It also seems that in the District
Attorney's Office of the Old Town, the scope of concepts has been confused, which was
justified by the use of force by referring, inter alia, to the "illegality" of the
assembly. Peaceful gathering is freedom, the implementation of which does not depend on
the consent of the authorities. International human rights law and standards do not allow
countries to require prior approval for organizing a meeting.
In accordance with international human rights law and standards, failure to notify
authorities or failure to comply with other administrative requirements does not allow the
conclusion that the assembly is "illegal." The authorities may consider that an assembly
is illegal, for example if its purpose is to prevent another assembly from being
organized, and thus to prevent others from exercising freedom of assembly. But even then,
law enforcement authorities are entitled to use only measures that are necessary and
proportionate to achieve the objective they face. International standards are clear -
especially regarding the use of force in such circumstances - and provide that when
dispelling unlawful but peaceful assemblies, law enforcement officials should avoid the
use of direct coercion measures, and if this is not possible, they should use force to the
smallest extent necessary. In other words, the fact that an assembly in accordance with
national law is illegal does not justify the use by law enforcement officials of the force
to dissipate it. The position of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and
association is unequivocal on this point: prohibiting and disperasing peaceful assemblies
just because "their message does not please the authorities" is a violation of
international human rights law. " that a given assembly under national law is illegal,
does not justify the use by law enforcement officials of the force to dissipate it. The
position of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and association is
unequivocal on this point: prohibiting and disperasing peaceful assemblies just because
"their message does not please the authorities" is a violation of international human
rights law. " that a given assembly under national law is illegal, does not justify the
use by law enforcement officials of the force to dissipate it. The position of the UN
Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and association is unequivocal on this point:
prohibiting and disperasing peaceful assemblies just because "their message does not
please the authorities" is a violation of international human rights law. "
We have been interrogated for two years, we have been taking part in court hearings almost
every month. The process has already cost us a lot of money, nerves and time. Of course,
in the meantime, the trial against the police was discontinued, despite many witnesses and
victims, the prosecutor's office did not notice any shortcomings on their part. In the
justification, we read that "It should be indicated and what can not be omitted, taking
into account the facts of the present case, that the persons injured in the present
proceedings include persons who operate in the Anarchist movement in Poznan (Anarchist
Federation Poznan, Rozbrat) or are indicated movement in a different way connected.
Members of this movement take part in various protests, trying through their provocative
behaviors,
The website of the Anarchist Federation includes a number of demonstration tips including
those referring to the need to put on face masks, bounce arrests and others. In the
present case, it is possible to observe the typical actions of this kind, in particular
provocative - as the use of masks, throwing stones and flares at officers, directing
vulgar and offensive words to police officers. Most of these behaviors are dangerous to
life and health.
[...]However, the testimony of the victims, in the context of the remaining evidence
gathered in the case - was considered subjective because they are inconsistent with other
evidence in the case, including collected documents and testimonies of other witnesses (we
remind you that other witnesses are police officers! note by the authors of the report).
In particular, it is also difficult to assume that the officers deliberately humiliated
and used unnecessary violence against unknown and strangers, without having any personal
interest in it, and also risking their own life and health and loss of employment.
[...]In the opinion of the supervising prosecutor, police officers took urgent decisions
of vital importance for the protection of life and health in a dynamic and dangerous
situation which is undoubtedly a confrontation with over a thousand people. As well, they
acted with the risk of their own life and health in extremely stressful and directly
threatening life, health and the situation. It should be emphasized that uncontrolled
crowd reactions are extremely dangerous.
You can not forget about this when assessing the behavior of police officers, because it
is easy to assess such situations in the privacy of your private office or private home.
Therefore, the issue of a call to comply with the law in the context of fulfilling the
conditions of art. Article 34 paragraph 2 of the Act on coercive measures and firearms
does not matter. "
We have been treated in advance by the apparatus of power as criminals and liars, whose
voice means nothing to the police who are fighting for life, who never abuse their powers
and do not use unjustified aggression.
Returning to our process -
During the subsequent hearings we have not been provided with any credible evidence of our
offenses. Most of the prosecutors' witnesses did not remember anything, and those who
could describe the course of events more closely, made use of strange and crazy references
to Youtube videos, denied each other or evidently confabulated, suggesting that we are
members of some professional, organized and dangerous criminal group, which seems absurd.
As a member of the criminal group, we are also treated by a judge who did not want to
accept our list of witnesses until the last minute, and called for the help of security
guards for tomorrow's hearing. In the minutes of the last hearing, she placed the
recommendation: "Ask the Judicial Police with a letter informing them of the dates of the
hearings, informing them,
It does not surprise us at all, we already knew about the approach of judges Agnieszka
Cabrery-Kasprzak to activists and activists. Some time ago, out of curiosity, we checked
whether in the past she had had contact with the anarchist community. It soon turned out
that the judge had temporarily discarded a loud case about the use of a private paralyzer
on duty by a police officer during a lecture on gender in Poznan. We dug up to the article
in which excerpts of the justification for such a decision and its criticism are quoted.
In a nutshell, Judge Agnieszka Cabrera-Kasprzak stated that the crime took place, and by
taking a private taser to the lecture, the policeman "acted in advance with intentional
intention" and "knew that he was acting in violation of the law". However, she dismissed
the matter because of ... negligible social harm. This is a guilty statement, but formally
the policeman will remain unpunished and will not lose his job. However, the judge said
that the policeman had the right to feel threatened because he was in civilian clothes,
without a vest or helmet. He also expected the lecture to be interrupted by anarchists
because the police warned the organizers about it. "He certainly knew the typical
behaviors of this type of professional experience"[...]"He had to know from the office that
public officials'.
This is the unfounded, unjustified, very vague and stereotypical approach of the Judges to
activists and activists who are shocking and worried. Today, interrogation of defense
witnesses begins. We hope that judge Agnieszka Cabrera-Kasprzak will remain objective,
forget about his prejudices and listen to what they have to say in our case.
http://www.rozbrat.org/informacje/poznan/4665-2019-04-09-13-29-18
------------------------------
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten