Anarchic update news all over the world - 9.04.2019

Today's Topics:

   
1.  US, black rose fed: OPPRESSOR AND OPPRESSED NATIONS:
      SKETCHING A TAXONOMY OF IMPERIALISM (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
2.  The Workers' Initiative supports a general strike in
      education [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
3.  Greece, vogliamo tutto: Intervention-concentration against
      nationalism and fascist attacks on Petralona ISAP
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
4.  anarchist communist group ACG: Brexit chaos... we need a bit
      more anarchy! (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
5.  US, First of May Anarchist Alliance (M1): Recent Rise of
      Visible Anti-Semitism (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)


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

Message: 1





With much of the left's analysis of imperialism trending towards simplistic binaries of 
imperialism and anti-imperialism, a deeper analysis of the relationships between states 
created by modern imperialism and colonialism are desperately needed. This thoughtful 
essay by Sweden-based author Gabriel Kuhn provides attempts to outline how we might form 
an alternate and more useful model of seeing states and how they relate to each other in 
the global capitalist order. While we may quibble with some of the conclusions offered, 
this piece is an excellent start. ---- By Gabriel Kuhn ---- Introduction ---- In recent 
years, the left has shown a renewed interest in anti-imperialism. This is an encouraging 
development, since global economic injustice remains one of the most glaring 
contradictions of the capitalist order. After having been a central part of 
anti-capitalist struggles in the 1970s, anti-imperialism largely vanished from left 
radars. Among the reasons were the demise of socialist national liberation movements as 
well as the often disappointing record of them seizing power; the defeat of 
anti-imperialist armed groups in the metropolis; the fall of the Soviet Union and its 
consequences; the adaptation of anti-imperialist rhetoric by reactionary actors; the 
uncanny relationship between anti-imperialism and anti-Semitism; and the substitution of 
multitudes fighting various forms of oppression for a much more straightforward 
good-vs.-bad script.

Among the reasons for the resurgence of anti-imperialism are the limitations of a 
postmodern anti-oppression analysis unearthing so many injustices that it can't properly 
analyze and attack any of them; the urgency of organizing effective left-wing resistance 
in the face of neoliberal domination and the increasing threat of fascism; the reemergence 
of internationalist perspectives through the support of struggles in the periphery, 
especially in Kurdistan; and the ongoing - and growing - disparities in the global 
distribution of wealth, not least highlighted by authors hardly known as radicals such as 
Thomas Pikkety (Capital in the Twenty-First Century, 2013) or Branko Milanovi (Global 
Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization, 2016).

English-language publications that have brought left-wing anti-imperialism back to the 
fore are Zak Cope's Divided World Divided Class: Global Political Economy and the 
Stratification of Labour Under Capitalism (2012), Samir Amin's The Implosion of 
Contemporary Capitalism (2013), Gabriel Kuhn's Turning Money into Rebellion: The Unlikely 
Story of Denmark's Revolutionary Bank Robbers (2014), the 2015 Monthly Review special 
issue on "The New Imperialism", and John Smith's Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century: 
Globalization, Super-Exploitation, and Capitalism's Final Crisis (2016).

At the same time, the picture of what imperialism is and, perhaps more importantly, what 
it looks like on the ground remains murky. Sometimes, anti-imperialism is used as a 
synonym for anti-colonialism. Sometimes, it is used whenever one nation attacks another. 
And in its crudest form, it simply means anti-Americanism. This is no viable basis for 
effective political resistance. If we want to combat imperialism - which is necessary to 
combat capitalism - we need to have an understanding of what it looks like, how it 
functions, and where we need to hit it.

This also requires translating some very abstract concepts into a language that becomes 
relevant for activists. The abstract concepts and related debates are important (unless 
they deteriorate into irrelevant quibbles between big men, which, sadly, happens 
regularly), but they are unlikely to generate much action if they stay in ivory towers. 
How do we fight "generalized-monopoly capitalism," "super-exploitation," or "unequal 
exchange"? Some concrete and tangible questions are: Who benefits from imperialism? Are 
there centers of imperialist power? How can imperialism be attacked?

In the 1970s, when the anti-imperialist movement was at its peak, the world was divided 
into rather simple categories: First World nations were the villains, Third World nations 
the victims, and - depending on one's ideological persuasion - Second World nations heroic 
allies to the Third World, neutral, or an equally imperialist Soviet-led bloc. Today, 
things have become messier; or, let's say, the mess has become more obvious.

Immanuel Wallerstein's world-systems theory, employing the categories of core, 
semi-periphery, and periphery, is more sophisticated, but not bereft of problems. It is 
strongly based on economic data, pays little attention to differences within the three 
main categories, and has difficulties accounting for the at times enormous contradictions 
within single countries.

I am not claiming that my categorizations of individual nations are superior to others, 
let alone the only ones possible. ... The goal is rather to help outline a framework that 
allows for meaningful collective categorization and, ultimately, well-informed 
anti-imperialist resistance.
A proper taxonomy of imperialism needs to take into consideration not only the 
relationship between economic systems, political formations, and cultural hegemonies, but 
also the one between nations and classes.

I am not claiming to provide any answers in this sketch. I am trying to help facilitate a 
discussion that will lead to a picture of the imperialist world complex enough to function 
as a base for effective anti-imperialist resistance.

Among the questions that motivated me to draw this sketch are the following:

Why are there oppressor nations that never had colonies or even once were colonies themselves?
What is the status of nations serving the imperialist system as financial centers or tax 
havens?
Where are the countries of the former Second World positioned in today's global order?
What is the role of Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs) or the often cited BRICS 
countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa)?
Is there any such thing as an internal colony?
Can oppressor nations and oppressed nations coexist in one and the same nation state?
How do class formations and migration affect the picture?
The sketch presented here is based on involvement in internationalist and anti-imperialist 
projects, the study of relevant literature, and, most importantly, the experiences of many 
years of traveling on all continents, meeting with laborers and peasants as well as with 
politicians and academics. While the paper will hopefully be relevant for all readers with 
anti-imperialist leanings, the target audience of the practical implications are 
anti-imperialist activists in the First World such as myself. People in different 
positions will discuss the forms their own resistance needs to take. The trick is to 
combine the respective approaches into a common effective movement.

Working Definition
The question of whether a certain country, policy, or action is imperialist, is, first and 
foremost, a matter of definition. Whether China is an imperialist country or not, does, 
for example, not depend on whether the essence of the nation of China contains an 
imperialist element, but on whether the country's role in the global economic and 
political order fits our definition of what imperialism is. In other words, we can't talk 
about imperialism (or anti-imperialism) and hope to clarify things without providing a 
definition of what we are talking about.

Any discussion can come to an instant halt when passionately arguing over the best 
definition of what is being discussed. There are certain criteria that seem commonly 
accepted as qualities of a good definition (it ought to be coherent and clear, neither too 
wide nor too small, etc.), but there is no objective measure to identify the one that 
trumps all others. In order to make sense of the following pages, I therefore need to ask 
the reader to accept the working definition of imperialism offered here - which, of 
course, does not mean that it can't be criticized.

I will not follow an exclusively Marxist take. In Imperialism, the Highest Stage of 
Capitalism (1917), Lenin defined imperialism thus: "Imperialism is capitalism at that 
stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is 
established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which 
the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division 
of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed." 
This economic approach is of crucial importance, but there have been others within the 
left. In Culture and Imperialism (1993), Edward Said defined imperialism as "the practice, 
the theory, and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant 
territory". This, of course, is very brief. The working definition I am suggesting is the 
following:

Imperialism is a system where a conglomerate of capitalists, politicians, and security 
forces asserts control over a particular territory and its population to increase its own 
wealth. In order to establish its authority, it uses ideological means (racism), cultural 
means (proselytism), political means (direct or indirect colonialism), economic means 
(exploitation), and military means (the stationing of its own security forces, the 
employment of mercenaries, or the creation of dependent local police and military). A 
characteristic (albeit not necessary) feature of imperialism is the conglomerate sharing a 
part of the extracted wealth with the population in its home countries to secure that 
population's support for the imperialist project. Therefore, labor aristocracies are an 
inherent feature of the imperialist order.

It is important to note that, according to this definition, imperialism doesn't simply 
mean that a certain population wants to extend the territory it controls. Fights over 
territory have been part of humanity since time eternal, caused by competition over 
natural resources and other factors. This is not imperialism. Imperialism means to extend 
one's sphere of control in order to institutionalize the exploitation of the (human and 
natural) resources of the territories brought under one's control. This is why any 
analysis of the former Soviet Union having been an imperialist power must imply an 
understanding of the Soviet Union not as a socialist country but a state capitalist 
country. In my understanding, this analysis is correct and also applies to today's China 
(see "sub-imperialism" below).

Nations and Empires
The terminology commonly used in reference to imperialism has for a long time rested on a 
strict dualism. (Mao's Three Worlds Theory might count as an exception but never had much 
resonance in anti-imperialist circles - and, for that matter, not even in Maoist ones.) 
The world is divided into two big camps. Lenin's distinction between "oppressor nations" 
and "oppressed nations" has been reproduced in numerous variations, whether it was 
juxtaposing the "First World" to the "Third World," the "metropolis" to the "periphery," 
or the "Global North" to the "Global South." Such a dualism can be useful for orientation, 
but, unsurprisingly, things are more complicated when you look at the details.

In their modern-day classic Empire (2000), Michael Hardt and Toni Negri proclaimed that 
"imperialism is over", citing the "declining sovereignty of nation-states" and "their 
increasing inability to regulate economic and cultural exchanges." Hardt and Negri 
contended that "we continually find the First World in the Third, the Third in the First, 
and the Second almost nowhere at all."

Well. First, imperialism is not dependent on the Three-World Model. Second, to suggest 
that economic power no longer has a location and that the oppressors and the oppressed 
randomly mingle across the globe is false. No one who has ever been to both Paris and 
Niamey could seriously make such a claim, extreme expressions of poverty in Paris and of 
obscene wealth in Niamey notwithstanding. Third, nation states have lost neither their 
meaning nor their power in a globalized world. Neoliberalism might have pronounced the 
fact that nation states are not isolated and certain multinational corporations may have a 
frightening influence on international relations, but despite corporate power, free trade 
agreements, and international political bodies, nation states remain the key units of the 
global political order and the main actors in the administration of capital. Perhaps most 
importantly, they are central for the division of the world's riches. Citizenship is the 
single most important factor in deciding which share an individual can expect in the 
distribution of wealth and related privilege. And while the power of multinational 
corporations might extend to all corners of the earth, these corporations have much 
tighter relationships and shared interests with the ruling classes of certain nation 
states than with those of others. It is therefore not only legitimate but necessary to 
focus on nation states when sketching the imperialist order, and it is also important to 
consider nations without their own state, from First Nations on the American continent to 
Kurds and Basques. Nations are defined as peoples with a collective identity based on 
traits such as language, culture, and an intimate relationship to a certain territory.

Of course, the position of individuals within the imperialist order is not exclusively 
determined by citizenship, national affiliation, or place of residence. There are national 
bourgeoisies profiting from imperialism even in the poorest of countries; there are 
expatriate communities acting as agents of imperialism in oppressed nations; there are 
undocumented migrants in imperialist nations who do not benefit from the imperialist 
order; there is an urban-rural divide that needs to be accounted for; and there are 
millions of women who constitute what Maria Mies and others have called the "last colony" 
in an imperialist system inseparable from patriarchal power. Any detailed study of 
imperialism's workings must consider this. Unfortunately, the task is beyond the scope of 
this paper, but I will return to some of the mentioned aspects in the concluding remarks 
on anti-imperialist practice.

Taxonomy
In the following sketch of a taxonomy of imperialism, I will use three main categories: 
imperialist nations, sub-imperialist nations, and oppressed nations. Each group will be 
divided into several subcategories. Certain nations straddle the boundaries of various 
categories. This seems inevitable given the generalizations required in a rough sketch 
such as this one.

I am not claiming that my categorizations of individual nations are superior to others, 
let alone the only ones possible. It is not a priority here to get every single 
categorization right. The goal is rather to help outline a framework that allows for 
meaningful collective categorization and, ultimately, well-informed anti-imperialist 
resistance.

1. Imperialist Nations
A. Imperialist Core

The imperialist core consists of those nations whose citizens profit from the imperialist 
system. Each nation has a class that profits from the imperialist system, but only the 
imperialist core nations can extend this privilege to its entire population. Imperialist 
core nations also run very little risk of being pushed to the margins of the imperialist 
order. Power balances between them can shift, but each of them is firmly entrenched in 
imperialist rule, due to a combination of economic, political, and military reasons; key 
aspects (although not all of them need to be present in each imperialist core nation) are 
strong productive and finance capital, military prowess, racial privilege, advantageous 
geographical location, and a world language, preferably English, as the national language.

It is not necessary for imperialist core nations to have been colonial powers. Colonialism 
is a part of the imperialist project, but it is not a requirement for profiting from it. 
Imperialism is broader than colonialism. In fact, several former colonies (most notably, 
the United States of America) belong to the current imperialist core, while some former 
colonial powers (for example, Spain and Portugal) belong to the imperialist periphery.

It would also be a mistake to identify the imperialist core nations as those invited to 
powerful summits such as the G20. Some G20 nations are invited because they are important 
for the imperialist order (for example, India and Indonesia), not because they belong to 
the imperialist core.

Currently, the imperialist core consists of only one united bloc. In the case of strong 
rivalry and a relative balance of power, the imperialist core can split into different 
blocs. This was the case during the Cold War, when the U.S.-led imperialism of the Triad 
(North America, Western Europe, Japan) was challenged by the imperialism of the Soviet Union.

The imperialist core nations can be divided into four subcategories:

a) The colonial powers, that is, nations that controlled and exploited large territories 
under prolonged periods, thereby increasing their wealth and global influence: Belgium, 
Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, Japan, and the Netherlands. Present-day Austria 
is a special case, still profiting from its former internal colonies, that is, the 
non-German-speaking parts of the Austrian Empire.

b) Nations that had no colonies of their own (other than perhaps small overseas 
territories that mainly satisfied national prestige) but were intrinsically linked to 
colonial exploitation through Eurocentric and racist ideology, political alliance, and 
trade: Luxembourg, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, and European micro-states such as Andorra, 
Monaco, and Liechtenstein.

c) Former colonies with white settler populations that acquired internal and external 
colonies of their own and became an integral part of the imperialist order of the Triad: 
Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States of America.

d) Israel is a special case. It is a former colony turned settler nation, albeit not a 
white settler nation akin to the examples above. Israel is also a sub-imperialist power 
(see below) when considering its role in the Middle East. It is hugely dependent on the 
Triad for its survival, which is a characteristic of the nations of the imperialist 
dependency rather than the core. However, Israel's geopolitical role for the Triad is so 
important that its place in it seems firm and it can be considered part of the imperialist 
core.

B. Imperialist Periphery
The imperialist periphery consists of nations whose citizens profit from the imperialist 
order because of white supremacy, vicinity to core nations, political ties, and trade 
relations. However, these nations are exploited by the core nations and their standing 
within the imperialist nations is fragile.

The nations of the imperialist periphery can be divided into two subcategories:

a) The European periphery, which includes Western-oriented former Soviet republics (such 
as the Baltic states), former Warsaw Pact members (such as the Czech Republic, Hungary, 
and Poland), and former Yugoslav republics (such as Croatia and Slovenia), as well as 
Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, and Spain.

b) Occupied territories of self-identified nations (or including majority self-identified 
nations) within the Triad, such as the Basque Country, Catalonia, Corsica, Northern 
Ireland, Okinawa/Ryukyus, and Quebec. Exploitation is relative in these cases (people in 
Catalonia are economically better off than the people in most of Spain's other regions, 
etc.), and the strength of independence/secession movements varies largely. But due to 
these nations' lack of self-determination, they cannot be considered imperialist core.

C. Imperialist Dependency
The imperialist dependency consists of nations that serve specific roles in the 
imperialist system as cost-efficient production sites, suppliers of rare raw materials, 
tax havens, exclusive holiday destinations, or locations of military bases. They benefit 
from this, but their standing within the imperialist order is entirely conditional.

The imperialist dependency can be divided into four subcategories:

i. The Gulf States Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.

ii. The Asian Tigers Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. (The status of Hong Kong is 
difficult to assess since the territory's return to China in 1997.) These nations could 
also count as imperialist periphery, but their geographic isolation speaks against this.

iii. Some micro-states in the Caribbean (such as Bermuda or the Bahamas), the Pacific 
(such as Nauru), and the Indian Ocean (such as Mauritius and the Seychelles).

iv. Dependencies of imperialist nations such as the French overseas territories (e.g. 
French-Polynesia, Guadeloupe, Martinique, New Caledonia, and Réunion) and U.S. American 
overseas territories (e.g. American Samoa, Guam, and Puerto Rico). It is important to note 
that the indigenous peoples of these territories must be considered oppressed nations (see 
below).

2. Sub-Imperialist Nations
Sub-imperialist nations are nations outside of the imperialist core with imperialist 
ambitions. They can act as regional imperialist powers and/or aim to enter the imperialist 
core, either as allies of the current bloc or as rivals. Sub-imperialist qualities also 
apply to imperialist core nations that act as regional centers of power, for example 
Australia in the Asia-Pacific region.

Sub-imperialist nations can be divided into five (quite distinct) subcategories:

a) China is possibly the most contested example, as some would define it as an imperialist 
nation (see, for example, N.B. Turner's Is China an Imperialist Country?, 2015), while 
others would strongly reject the characterization of China as imperialist in any form. In 
my understanding, China has imperialist ambitions, but no matter how much it aims to 
extend its reach (especially in Asia and Africa), the vast majority of its population is 
still exploited by the Triad. In other words, China is not (yet) a rival of the 
imperialist core nations.

b) Russia and its Second World allies: The current Russian Federation is the successor of 
powers with imperialist ambitions, that is, the Tsarist Empire and the Soviet Union. This 
legacy remains, but Russia and its current allies (predominantly former Soviet Republics, 
such as Belarus and Kazakhstan) cannot compete with the Triad. Some former Soviet 
Republics, most notably the Ukraine, are caught in a struggle between forces remaining 
loyal to the Russian project on the one hand, and forces who want to enter the Triad's 
periphery on the other.

c) There are three nations in the Middle East/Arab Peninsula with an imperialist legacy 
that continue to act as sub-imperialist powers: Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. Due to 
both internal rivalries and the strong efforts of the imperialist core to control the 
region, the reach of these nations remains limited (although it can be felt in many ways, 
especially in financial and military support for ideological allies). There are also huge 
differences in how these nations relate to the Triad: Iran is sub-imperialist in the 
purest sense, while Saudi Arabia could count as part of the imperialist dependency, and 
Turkey as part of the imperialist periphery.

d) Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay are characterized by huge income gaps and the oppression 
of indigenous nations, yet they have a high level of industrialization, well-established 
middle and upper classes, and an economic sway over South America, which renders them 
sub-imperialist. (Arguably, Mexico plays a similar role in Central America but has less 
economic strength and is overshadowed by its neighbor to the north, the United States.)

e) South Africa is a particular case. It is sub-imperialist with regard to its role in 
(particularly southern) Africa. It is also the home of a white settler community that can 
be considered part of the imperialist core. At the same time, the majority of the 
country's population lives under Third World conditions. No other country (except Israel, 
perhaps) straddles the boundaries of the categories used here in more ways.

3. Oppressed Nations
Oppressed nations are nations whose citizens, by and large, are victims of the imperialist 
order, notwithstanding national bourgeoisies and privileged expatriate communities.

This category includes all nations in Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, Latin America, and 
Oceania, except the ones listed in other categories above. There are huge differences 
between these nations (Egypt is not Chad, and Malaysia not the Solomon Islands), but they 
are all exploited and oppressed by the imperialist nations and have little (or no) 
influence on global power structures. The differences between these nations must be 
analyzed on the basis of their respective histories, the colonial (and neocolonial) 
regimes they were and are subjected to, their assets in terms of raw materials and 
manpower, their landmass and location, and their populations' racial identification.

This category also includes nations that are not united in a nation state, except for 
those belonging to the imperialist periphery (see above). Concretely, this means the 
peoples of occupied territories such as Palestine and the Western Sahara, nations divided 
into different nation states such as the Kurds, First Nations in the Americas and in 
Oceania, traveling people such as Roma and Sinti, and the indigenous populations of French 
and American overseas territories. Members of these nations have sometimes relatively 
privileged access to wealth and opportunity because of their partial integration into 
and/or their proximity to the imperialist core, but the nations themselves are denied 
self-determination and remain oppressed.

Conclusion: Remarks on Anti-Imperialist Practice
If the outline sketched here has any validity, the following are, in my eyes, the most 
important implications for anti-imperialist practice:

The struggle against imperialism must be led by indigenous movements and progressive 
working-class and peasant movements in the Global South.
Especially in nations with a weak education system and a high level of government 
repression, alliances with the progressive sectors of the bourgeoisie are mandatory, no 
matter the dangers they entail.
It is crucial to support experiments searching for economic alternatives to capitalism. 
These include cooperative farms, worker-controlled factories, and exchange economies. 
Imperialism cannot be separated from capitalism and to fight it means to establish a 
different economic order.
Sub-imperialist countries pose no threat to the imperialist order. They might pose a 
threat to the current imperialist core and can possibly enforce a more balanced 
distribution of imperialist power and wealth, but they are unable (and unwilling) to 
change the imperialist system itself.
The most important struggles occur in the oppressed nations and in the imperialist core 
nations. It is at both ends of the imperialist system where it is most vulnerable. 
Struggles in the imperialist periphery and dependency are important as possible 
instigators of struggles in the core and in the oppressed nations, but they themselves 
have little potential to threaten the imperialist order. Struggles in sub-imperialist 
nations require specific analysis. Often, they are similar to struggles in the imperialist 
periphery and dependency; in certain cases, however, when they concern central links in 
the imperialist order, their potential is significantly bigger. A current example are 
workers' struggles in China.
In the imperialist core, various initiatives are of importance: campaigns for global 
justice around issues that broad sections of the population can relate to, for example 
Third World debt; the redistribution of funds to progressive actors in the oppressed 
nations; political alliances with migrants; linking anti-racist and anti-patriarchal 
struggles to anti-imperialist struggles; and developing forms of economic production, 
distribution, and consumption that undermine capitalist demands of permanent growth and 
circulation.
Gabriel Kuhn is an Austrian-born author living in Sweden involved in radical labor and 
migrant solidarity efforts. He is the author of numerous books including Antifascism, 
Sports, Sobriety: Forging A Militant Working-Class Culture and is a Central Committee 
member of the syndicalist union, Sveriges Arbetares Centralorganisation (SAC).

For more of Kuhn's writings we recommend "Class War in Social Democratic Sweden" and "If 
You Want a Better Capitalism": An Interview on Social Democracy with Gabriel Kuhn.

http://blackrosefed.org/oppressor-oppressed-nations-kuhn/

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

Message: 2





Everything indicates that on Monday, April 8, a national general strike in education will 
begin, organized by the Polish Teachers' Union. ZNP demands increases in basic salaries of 
teachers, educators, other pedagogic employees and non-teaching employees by PLN 1,000 
(with compensation from January 1 this year). By. PANS willingness to take strike action 
was expressed by the staff of about 80% of schools in Poland. Mobilization is supported by 
the Forum of Trade Unions and the school committees of OZZ Inicjatywa Pracownicza from 
Stargard Szczecinski, Golub-Dobrzyn and Racibórz take part in it. Solidarity with the 
strike was also expressed by IP committees operating at universities, [Read the position 
of the XI National Congress of Delegates and Delegates regarding support for strikes and 
protests in the budgetary sphere]

Below we present the positions of the OZZ IP committee in the education industry:

Works Commission at Primary School No. 11 in Stargard Szczecinski:

In connection with the planned strike, we conducted a referendum together with other 
unions about joining the strike. The results of the referendum in our school are 98 
percent of those voting for the strike. All employees of our school voted - teachers, 
administration and service.

The strike is currently the only possible means of pressure on the rulers. It results from 
the fact that the needs of our professional group have long been neglected. Earnings 
provided by the media are fictions that do not cover facts. Earnings compared to other 
budget sphere groups (professional soldiers, police officers, doctors) are embarrassingly 
low. The last so-called "hikes" are embarrassing - PLN 122 after 30 years of work. We have 
eastern salaries, but living expenses such as in the west. If the prime minister claims 
that there is such a good and good budget situation, we expect a decent income.

Inter-enterprise Committee of the Education Sector of the Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship:

We express our full support for the teachers' protest.

We are opposed to low teachers' remuneration, inadequate to their qualifications, work and 
responsibility for educating and educating future generations of Poles.

We believe that the authority of the Polish teacher has been undermined for many years, 
and the prestige of the profession is practically non-existent.

Other government teams contributed to the situation, however, the last reform introduced 
led to unprecedented chaos in Polish education.

Also irresponsible, full of contempt and untrue words spoken to teachers and teachers by 
some politicians poured a bitter bitterness.

We solidarize with the teachers' strike announced! We know that fighting for increases is 
at the same time fighting for the quality of education.

We are also disappointed with the attitude of the NSZZ Management Board "Solidarity", 
which, unlike its regular members, tries to divide the environment and, in our opinion, 
works to the disadvantage of teachers, including its own members.

We express our hope that the environment will not divide, and despite the differences, 
will present a solidary attitude towards the strike, because the matter that teachers are 
fighting for is of great importance!

Works Commission in the Secondary School of Sports Championships in Racibórz:

The OZZ Inter-enterprise Commission "Employee Initiative" in ZSOMS joins the nationwide 
protest of teachers organized by the PNA. We are deeply moved by the teachers' situation, 
underestimating the contribution they bring to their work. We have in mind above all the 
well-being of children, but we must remember that the future of education depends on a 
good teacher who must be paid duly. That is why we are demanding an increase in basic 
salary of PLN 1000. The strike is the only way to draw attention to the currently 
marginalized problem of underfunding of education, overloaded core curricula and excessive 
bureaucratisation of the teaching process.

http://ozzip.pl/teksty/informacje/ogolnopolskie/item/2468-ozz-ip-wspiera-strajk-generalny-w-edukacji

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

Message: 3





On Friday, March 29, we held a meeting at the Petralona ISAP against nationalism, 
intolerance and fascist attacks. The intervention, which was based on many partner-mates 
and contestants, lasted about two hours, banners were posted, microphones were set up, 
texts were distributed, and tikki were thrown. ---- Here is the text that was shared: ---- 
In the days of nationalism, war and intolerance, whoever sows patriotism raises fascism. 
---- Nationalist rallies were the right ground for the fascists to be brought back into 
the public domain. For more than a year we are again experiencing the outbreak of fascist 
and racist violence as an attempt to normalize racism and nationalism. We find that both 
fascism and its tools appear with remarkable consistency and in relation to the needs of 
the state and capital. While in systemic stability they are lagging behind in the social 
and political margin, at times of economic or political or value crisis, the regime is 
gearing its fascist reserves either to preserve its existence or to advance its agenda.

The 2008-2013 period is indicative. In response to the social uprising of December 2008 
and in connection with the rapid crisis of Greek capitalism, the state has prized the 
neo-Nazi coffers of the Athens Stock Exchange. The Nazi Nazis functioned as the faithful 
dogs of power, absorbing part of the social dissatisfaction and turning it against its 
weakest links (immigrants / strays) and against those who actually resisted the attack of 
state and capital. The state has prized the Nazis at that time to the point of being 
turned from a partisan mechanism of racial committees of "indignant citizens" into a 
parliamentary party. Pogroms, racist violence, the pseudo-bangs on TV windows and the 
ballots of the House also fatally led to murders such as those of Sahitt Lukman and Paul 
Fussa. When the system had been shielded, and the dynamics of social competition worsened 
when the ND-ASA co-operation struggled (in the summer of 2013), right-wing political 
managers, taking advantage of the assassination of Paul Fussa and under pressure of the 
anti-fascist movement, gathered their dogs with the well-known communication body of state 
"anti-fascism" of the capture of top executives of the AS. The Greek state was glad to 
have done his job. then right-wing political administrators, taking advantage of the 
murder of Paul Fussa and under the pressure of the anti-fascist movement, gathered their 
dogs with the well-known communication body of state "anti-fascism" of the capture of top 
executives of the Athens Stock Exchange. The Greek state was glad to have done his job. 
then right-wing political administrators, taking advantage of the murder of Paul Fussa and 
under the pressure of the anti-fascist movement, gathered their dogs with the well-known 
communication body of state "anti-fascism" of the capture of top executives of the Athens 
Stock Exchange. The Greek state was glad to have done his job.

This treaty is a period of normalization of racism and nationalism through the parade of 
partisan narratives on both sides of the parliamentary arc. On the one hand, the left-wing 
patriotism of SYRIZA, which prompted a national consensus to leave the memorandums and to 
promote the agreement on the Macedonian as a patriotic duty. On the other hand, we have 
the nationalist frenzy of the entire right-wing block of flats (from NW to the AS), which 
rallied around the Macedonian as the main chariot of the production of oppositional 
discourse. The result is the same. Nationalism itself, left or right. National plagues 
again brought social and racial racism, violence against immigrants, homosexuals, 
seropositive women and women. At the same time,

The fascists deflated again from the margin and in the run-up to the upcoming elections 
(European elections, municipal / prefectural and parliamentary) are often demanding 
presence in the public space. 1 the February to Cell square dikavala scooters with 
chrysafgites head and the neo candidate scurfy Athens mayor beat two girls were reacted in 
the presence fascist.

On Wednesday, February 27, at 11 am, goldsmiths led by Kasidiaris again appeared in 
Petralona to share pre-election brochures and sow their half-poisoned poison. They were, 
as expected, faced with comrades / comrades who were immediately mobilized to make it 
clear that they are undesirable in the neighborhoods of resistance, solidarity and 
self-organization. So the fascists just saw the first two comrades approaching them drew a 
gun with which they targeted and threatened to shoot them and then fled away.

On March 8, a fascist enters a tram at the Aegean station in N. Smyrna and when the doors 
of the vehicle are closed, he makes a knife and pretends to the passengers saying he wants 
to slaughter Albanians. For the entire duration of his presence on the tram, the fascist 
was sober and mentally calm. When he was attacked by cops alerted by the tram driver, he 
responded as a genuine goldsmith saying that he would not resist being with them, even by 
publicizing his ideological identity by shouting "live golden dawn", "death to the 
Albanians," " immigrants will die "and" Greece to the Greeks ". Any resemblance to the 
rhetoric of the Islamophobic terrorist in New Zealand that murdered about 50 people is NOT 
accidental.

On March 15, Mayor Mandra in a militant / racist pre-election campaign called for a 
protest outside a hotel in Vilia, Attica, where immigrants are housed to save and 
capitalize on the conservative reflexes of the residents and to gather any more. During 
the racial interference some people threw stones and woods on the doors of the immigrants, 
among whom they were children. All this in the presence of the cops and the blessings of 
the mayor himself, who during the flood in Mandra forgave any responsibility for the 
deaths of 25 people, while it was the same that refused to make flood defense works for 
the residents.

On Monday, March 18, in the Ceramic, eight fascists attack two Afghan immigrants and beat 
them and try to stab them even on the head. Immigrants were transported to the hospital 
with injuries.

The above events were added to the assassination of Petrit Zifle, who was murdered in 
Corfu by the gold medalist Dimitris Kouris because he dared to challenge the murderous 
nationalist delirium. The murder of Angeliki Petrou from her father because she did not 
follow his "orders" and chose an Afghan immigrant as her life partner. To thousands of 
immigrants, women, workers, members of the community of people who have tasted social 
oppression and fascism produced and imposed by power and diffused into the social fabric.

We are aware that the outbreak of fascist violence is not addressed either by wisdom, nor 
by legal means, nor by the state apparatus which, in fact, does not bite its ends. In 
order not to become accustomed to the macabre work of the fascists, it is our historical, 
social and political duty to deal with the fascist symptom on the street, in the 
workplace, in schools and universities, where public speech and political events are 
produced. The anti-fascist struggle is multiform and part of a wider anti-nationalistic, 
anti-static and anti-capitalist struggle. The Lerna Hydra of nationalism, as it appears 
(as patriotism, as fascism, as racism, as sexism, as patriarchy, as islamophobia, as 
anti-Semitism), is not formed, refined,

We all have to fight against the state, their capital and their fascist reserves. Against 
the exploitation and oppression of man by man, against what separates the people. Fight 
for a world of equality, solidarity, justice and freedom

To set up mounds against nationalism, fascism, intolerance and war, to fight for the 
overthrow of state and capitalist barbarity, for the social revolution, for anarchy and 
communism.

  anarchist collectivity Vogliamo tutto e per tutti

https://vogliamotutto.espivblogs.net/2019/04/03/paremvasi-sygkentrosi-enantia-ston-ethnikismo-kai-tis-fasistikes-epitheseis-ston-isap-petralonon/

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

Message: 4





The spectacle of the Brexit debacle would be comic if it weren't for the fact that the 
consequences of the antics of the politicians will be felt largely by the working class. 
We are seeing the complete inadequacy of politicians of all shades. The phrase, ‘they 
couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery' comes to mind! So why do we still let them 
decide our future? ---- It is clear that they are only thinking of their own political 
futures rather than sorting anything out. The right-wing Tories want to see Britain 
becoming some kind of Singapore - an offshore unregulated tax haven off the coast of 
Europe in which workers are exploited even more then they are already. The SNP has eyes 
only for what might make people more likely to vote for an independent Scotland. Labour is 
divided between those who think leaving the EU and curtailing immigration will somehow 
make it possible to have a workers' paradise under the leadership of Corbyn and those who 
are forging links with business interests who want cheap labour and free trade. The centre 
- some Tories and Liberal Democrats - are mainly concerned with business stability and 
keeping markets open to business. Then there are the racists and the little Englanders who 
think that by leaving the EU the British Empire will live again.

For anarchist communists, whether in or out of the institutions that are the EU, we know 
that the only way we will be able to resist the attacks from the bosses and the State is 
to build up a strong international working class movement. We argue for no borders, not 
the open borders of capitalism, but the free movement of people whether they are from 
Europe or elsewhere. Low wages and poor conditions can only be fought by a strong united 
movement which includes all workers wherever they come from originally.

https://www.anarchistcommunism.org/2019/04/04/%EF%BB%BFbrexit-chaos-we-need-a-bit-more-anarchy/

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

Message: 5





Tags: Anti-Semitism, Anti-Zionism, Antifascism, International, Solidarity ---- By Miriam 
of the Michigan Collective, a retired Jewish autoworker. Miriam was raised as a communist 
in Compton, California and is now an Anarchist operating out of the Detroit area. ---- The 
recent rise in visible Anti Semitism - vandalism of synagogues and Jewish cemeteries, 
shooting and murder in a synagogue in Pittsburgh, the fascist slogans pointing to Jews as 
the enemy - shows that the ground of security is once again cracking.  The economic and 
social insecurities thrown up by the decay of capitalism, and its attempts to stabilize 
itself globally through a neoliberal strategy, have allowed hatred of "the other" to rise 
to the surface. This enables racists to publicly act out against Black people, questioning 
their right to be in public places; it enables public policies to detain, and sometimes 
murder, refugees seeking survival and protection; and it enables hatred of Jews.

Israel's role in the world as agent of the United States and apologist for apartheid 
allows a conflation of Jews and Zionism.  They are not the same. Zionism and the state of 
Israel is supported by people and institutions that are not Jewish; there are Jewish 
people who do not support the state of Israel.

Currently, Jews have assimilated into the United States to such an extent, particularly 
through the professional class, that they are seen as the face of authority among other 
groups, who have also been othered, and discriminated against, particularly Black people.

The Jewish people have been seen as other, as heretics from their first refusals to go 
along with Roman authorities during the rise of Christianity.  Driven from living spaces, 
corralled in ghettos (Italy) or the Pale of Settlement (Russia), the diaspora, or 
dispersion, spread Jews throughout the world.  Expelled from Spain (1492), they were 
forbidden to live openly in Spanish colonies. They lived as secret Jews, or Marranos 
(pigs), openly Christian, following Jewish traditions in secret.

The first Jewish settlement in what is now New York was in 1624.  Through peaks of 
nativism, hostility against Jews rose periodically.  Jews were forbidden to live in 
certain areas, there were quotas on their entrance to schools, they were caricatured, 
identified as greedy, money hungry, sly and devious, dirty, and, of course, the killers of 
Christ.

Jews sought assimilation and were allowed to participate as settlers; as Europeans 
displaced Native Americans across the western United States, Jews were among their number. 
  In order to become "white", or "truly American", one must adopt attitudes of 
anti-Blackness. This was the route all settlers took as they established themselves as 
Americans, as they threw off their European identities.

The first major influx of Jews to the United States was in the 1840s, primarily from 
Austria and Germany, after the failed revolutions in Europe.  They were primarily 
shopkeepers and financially able to secure employment and businesses. In Europe Jews were 
prevented from becoming farmers and were denied access to education and to the 
professional classes.  They sought protection from their anti Semitic neighbors by 
appealing to the king or members of the king's court for protection. They were often used 
as usurers, or money lenders, as this profession was forbidden to Christians.  This role 
linked them to banking and money in the public eye; it also linked them to the ruling classes.

This group set itself against the second wave of Jewish immigration around the late 
1880s-1900s, which was larger, poorer and escaping from the Russian and Polish pogroms. 
This wave also brought the anarchist and Communist influence into the Jewish communities, 
into the working class neighborhoods where they settled, and into the shops they helped 
organize.  The many daily newspapers in Yiddish provided cultural adhesion, along with a 
strong cultural practice of poetry, theater and music, and a high value placed on education.

The "Jewish Community" has always been divided among itself - culturally and by class; by 
religious expression and by how it identifies itself.  Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and 
Reconstructionist are all forms of religious Judaism, each one seeing itself as the "true" 
Jewish religion. The humanist or secular Jews also see themselves as Jews, but without a 
religious identity, living within a cultural tradition.

These divisions were aggravated with the establishment of Israel as a "Jewish" state in 
1948.  Set up as a British and United States outpost in the Middle East, intended to 
represent British interests against the rising independence movements of the Arab states 
and as a place to send Jews displaced by World War 2, that were not welcome in the United 
States or in Europe.

Zionism was never the ideology of all Jews.  Jews hold a range of politics and opinions, 
based on their upbringing and experiences, their desires to assimilate or remain a part of 
a Jewish community, whether religious or secular.  It has served the purposes of both 
Israel and western imperialism to conflate Jews with the Israeli state and with Zionism. 
This has aggravated many Jews who do not identify with either.

Jews have played a major role in the various professional layers of American society - 
doctors, lawyers, businessmen, academics, movie moguls.  Some have amassed great wealth 
and use this for the benefit of the many right wing causes and politicians they support.

Part of the othered persona has led Jews to a role of middleman, particularly in regard to 
Black people.  They are the owners of stores in Black communities, the managers of 
recording artists, the landlord or slumlord willing to rent to Black people when others 
would not.  This relationship has exacerbated a particular understanding of Jews as the 
face of the white man, even when the white man does not consider the Jew white, or allow 
them to live in their white only neighborhoods. Many Jews changed their names and hid 
their identities in order to attend schools with Jewish quotas. The fact that they were 
able to pass allowed a degree of assimilation unavailable to more recognizable groups.

Jews have also played major roles in various left wing and social justice movements, 
putting ideas and bodies into the struggles for rights for working class people.

http://m1aa.org/?p=1640

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