Anarchic update news all over the world - 11.07.2019

Today's Topics:

   
1.  YouTube, Social Media and Anarchy - Bringing Radical
      Politics to the Masses Hosted by London Anarchist Communist Group
      ACG (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
2.  [Greece] Protest against poverty and fascism in Agistri,
      Agistri Island By ANA (pt) [machine translation]
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
3.  ait russia: Greece: Anarchist anti-election actions [machine
      translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
4.  Labor concentration against the abolition of Sunday's
      holiday: Sunday14 / 7, 10am, Ermou by vogliamo tutto. [machine
      translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
5.  France, Alternative Libertaire AL #296 - Editorial: Merge to
      excel (fr, it, pt)[machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
6.  US, May1 AA: The Attack on Women's Rights - A presentation
      by Miriam Pickens at M-1-Detroit public meeting, June 29, 2019.
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
7.  Grece, anarkismo.net: zero geographic #25 THE WAR AS A
      REVOLUTION - THE ANARCHICAL OPTICAL AND THE 
      ROLE OF ANARCHICS IN
      THE WORLD WAR by Panagiotis Xirouhakis (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)


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

Message: 1





How do we share our ideas with non anarchist family and friends? How do we share our ideas 
with the general public? ---- These are important questions for the often insular left.
On Saturday July 20th at the Rumsey Wells in Norwich we'll be tackling these very 
questions. ---- We'll be showing a video from the Lucky Black Cat YouTube channel and 
explaining their strategy for bringing anarchist ideas to a broader audience.
This will be followed by an open discussion after which we will hopefully feel empowered 
to go forth and take our ideas to the people! The revolution surely can't be far 
behind?!!! ---- Saturday July 20th at 2pm ---- The Rumsey Wells Public House ---- St 
Andrews Street ---- Norwich  ---- NR2 4AF
https://www.facebook.com/events/706998449751508/?active_tab=about

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

Message: 2





On Wednesday, July 3, in front of the church of Agio Pantes in Agistri, there was a 
concentration of solidarity against poverty and fascism. The meeting was convened by the 
Libertarian Assemblies of the Western Neighborhoods and by the squatting of Terra 
Incognita, and an hour later followed a march in the central region of Agistri, with the 
presence of approximately 100 companions from the neighborhoods of the West and other 
regions. During the concentration and the march, several slogans were shouted, texts were 
distributed to the passers-by, and all the fascist graffiti written a week before in some 
walls were erased. ---- Agistri supports the refugees, outside fascists of our 
neighborhoods. ---- Build communities of solidarity and fight against poverty, 
impoverishment and fascism. ---- Western Neighborhood Libertarian Assembly

Earth Incognita Okupation

>> More pictures here:

https://athens.indymedia.org/post/1598888/

anarchist-ana news agency

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

Message: 3





An unknown anarchist group, calling itself the "Ballot Incendiary", claimed responsibility 
on Monday for stealing and burning the ballot box in the central Athens district of 
Exarchia during general parliamentary elections on Sunday. ---- The officers of the 
special police of the Greek police were sent to the 303rd polling station (Koletti str.) 
On Sunday after the anarchists took the ballot box from the polling station. The attackers 
used a sledgehammer and a tear gas to threaten polling officers. "A few seconds later, we 
used the contents of the ballot box for the only purpose it deserves: fire." ---- It is 
reported that the anarchists, solemnly and not hiding their faces, burned the ballot box 
on the Exarchia square. The police did not risk interfering. "This action is our warm 
welcome for Kyriakos Mitsotakis and the New Democracy, who promised to do away with us. We 
are waiting for you," the group said on the anarchist website.

According to SKAI, a second attack was made on a polling station on Arahovis Street in the 
same Exarchia. The anarchists threw stones at the school where the elections were held, 
but this time the ballot boxes remained in place.

According to ANT, a police operation was conducted in the Exarchia area to find those 
responsible for the attack. An ambulance was called to the polling station in Colette, as 
several people experienced breathing problems due to the tear gas that the attackers sprayed.

Vice-President of the Union of Police Stavros Balaskas commented on the theft of the 
ballot box from the electoral centers in Exarchia. "They came, took the ballot and left. 
In fact, no one could do anything. We could not allocate more police officers to the 
polling stations in Exarchia," he said about the incident and continued with a statement 
from Kyriakos Mitsotaksis that he ... would clean the Exarchia and how it will be one of 
his top priorities. "To my colleagues who were there, it is very difficult - by law, they 
could not be armed at the polling stations - accordingly, they could not chase the 
attackers." "If they did, we would now search for the police along with the ballot box," - 
he said, turning to ANT1, openly drawing attention to the fact that anarchists are a real 
force (Source: 
https://rua.gr/news/procrim/31838-anarkhisty-ukrali-urnu-dlya-golosovaniya.html)

Earlier, clashes between anarchists and the police took place in the Exarchia region. And 
in May, anarchists attacked even the parliament building. On May 21, a group of anarchists 
threw bottles of paint, stones, and smoke bombs into the Greek parliament building. The 
attack was carried out by a group of about 15 people. They threw bottles of red and black 
paint, stones and smoke bombs at the parliament building, aiming at the windows of the 
office of the parliamentary chairman Nikos Vucis. After that, the attackers fled.

In previous days, anarchists carried out numerous attacks on state organizations, party 
offices and election meetings. Most of them were committed, according to their statements, 
as a sign of solidarity with one of the leaders of the group "November 17" Dimitris 
Koufodinas, who was sentenced in 2003 to 11 life terms. Authorities denied Kufodinas 
another vacation home from prison, after which he began a hunger strike on 2 May.

Later, the anarchist group Rubicon claimed responsibility for the attack on the Greek 
parliament building. This was announced by the local information portal Nuysuit.

According to him, Rubicon, in its appeal, posted on an anarchist website, the name of 
which is not indicated, stated that the attack was committed because of the authorities' 
refusal to grant Kufodinasu another leave.

It is reported that the police managed to detain one of the attackers on parliament.

Members of the organization "Rubicon", which appeared in 2009 in the wake of the economic 
crisis, carried out over 10 years about a hundred attacks on various organizations, 
ministries, embassies and representative offices of foreign companies and organizations. 
In particular, on May 15, anarchists attacked the residence of US Ambassador to Greece 
Jeffrey Payette in Athens, on May 16 they staged a pogrom in the office of the main 
opposition party New Democracy in the Athens district of Ano Glyfada. The police also 
linked the Kofodinas case with an arson on May 14 by unidentified persons on the car of 
the journalist Mina Karamitru, who reports on criminal topics, as well as attacks on 
police stations and the office of the center-left party association "The Movement of 
Changes" (KINAL) ( https://tass.ru/) mezhdunarodnaya-panorama / 6454214 )

https://aitrus.info/node/5293

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

Message: 4





July 14, 2019, we are in a labor gathering at 10 am at the beginning of Ermou (Syntagma) 
in the fight against the abolition of Sunday's holiday. ---- We note that a strike has 
been launched for this day by the Library of Workers-Paper-Digital Media Association of 
Attica .[update - announcements] ---- Also, during the last few days there are excursions 
to work places from the meeting of employees in the trade-Orthostasis sector with an 
announcement referring to Lies and truths about the operation of the stores for 32 Sundays 
per year . ---- NO 52, NO 32, NO 8! WE DO NOT CHARGE A SUN! ---- WE LOOK AT OUR EMPLOYMENT 
INTERESTS AND NEEDS FRONT! ---- SUNDAY SUNDAY SUCCESSFULLY WAS FOUNDED, WITH GAMES WE WILL 
REMOVE IT. ---- Sunday 14/7, 10am, Ermou (Constitution): Labor concentration against the 
abolition of Sunday's holiday | Assembly of Coordinating Action: Wednesday 10/7, 8pm

The next meeting of the Coordinating Action Against the Abolition of Sunday Holidays and 
the "Liberated" Hours will take place on Wednesday 10/7 at 8pm just at the offices of 
SYVXPSA (Lotus 6, Exarchia).

In order to prepare and realize on the best possible terms the workers' mobilization on 
Sunday 14th of July, we again appeal for participation in the Assembly of Coordinating 
Action to all working unions and collectives, colleagues and colleagues, we were in strike 
mobilizations and in all our interventions all in the past, and generally to all those who 
wish to develop / coordinate action on this issue.

Coordinating action against the abolition of Sunday holidays and "liberated" hours | 
https://syntonistikokyriakes.espivblogs.net , syntonistiko_drasis@espiv.net

This entry was posted in Home , Central Procedures . Bookmark the permalink .
<- AWAY FROM THE ELECTIONS of the assignment, representation, false hope, supposed change. 
CONFIDENCE IN OUR POWER.

https://vogliamotutto.espivblogs.net/2019/07/07/ergatiki-sygkentrosi-enantia-stin-katargisi-tis-kyriakatikis-argias-kyr-14-7-10pm-ermoy-syneleysi-synton-drasis-tet-10-7-8mm/

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

Message: 5




The process initiated between Libertarian Alternative and the Coordination of Anarchist 
Groups has therefore come to an end. ---- The Libertarian Communist Union was born under 
the acclamations of the Allier congress. It's a political success and a method. ---- 
Wanting to avoid stagnation in endless, purposeless discussions, as well as a hasty and 
ill-controlled merger, AL and CGA co-elaborated a "  road map  " setting out each stage of 
discussion, verification, validation, etc. . ---- The general philosophy was: no device 
negotiations, no deal behind the scenes. Everything had to be put on the table and 
approved collectively. Eighteen months had been considered sufficient to go around the 
question, imagine what could be this "  merger-overtaking  " and culminate in the joint 
congress of June 2019 which was to pronounce the final decision.

But a mechanism, even well designed, is not everything. Goodwill, the desire to overcome 
the obstacles to get there have counted for a lot. And the climate of confidence created 
by the Red and Black Summer Days of July 2018 will undoubtedly have contributed greatly. 
Without this goodwill on both sides, the process could have repeatedly slipped on 
unforeseen glitches, each of which could have become a bone of contention. It has not 
happened.

The bet of the merger has thus prevailed. Which of the overtaking will it be ? It is our 
action that will decide.

UCL, June 28, 2019

http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Edito-Fusionner-pour-se-depasser

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

Message: 6





First, the anarchist desire for freedom, in its largest, most expansive interpretations, 
is the basis or heart of our fight for women's freedom.  This is tempered, of course, by 
the fact that your freedom does not trample on mine; you cannot oppress me, or any one, 
and claim it as "freedom." ---- We differ from Marxists on this point, in that they 
believe the working class can seize state power and use this vehicle to gain freedom.  The 
purpose of a state, any state, is to oppress, that is, deny freedom. ---- Transmen are not 
women, yet they experience attempts to exert patriarchal control over their reproductive 
rights.  They also experience oppression from some women who claim to be feminists. Some 
feminists dismiss sex workers. In Canada there was a library exhibit on feminism, 
including works by Andrea  Dworkin and other separatists who have a limited idea of what 
constitutes inclusive feminism. This exhibit was protested by the trans community and 
their supporters, which highlighted the way the separatist politic oppresses others in 
their claim for freedom.

When I say women and women's rights, it is easy to universalize the experience of white, 
cis, u.s.-born women.  Not all women experience the world in the same way. Trans men and 
women have certain different experience of the world; Black and Brown women face different 
challenges and have a different experience of the world than white women.  For example, 
white women have fought for the right to employment and the right to be their own person 
in the world (own bank accounts, credit, right to rent or purchase a home) while Black 
women have been forced to work by the threat of starvation, having always worked, and 
suffer discrimination based on white defined ideas of hair, etc., dreadlocks being ruled 
inappropriate by the courts.   As Fannie Lou Hamer once said, "Black women have never been 
able to call their bodies their own." All women are now being called on to fight for this 
most basic of rights: our bodies, our choice.

The attack on women's rights has taken on increased strength.  This is fueled by the 
general turn to the right, the acceptance of open hatred and brutality towards women, the 
steadily declining confidence of men in their understanding of their role in the world and 
the fluidity of family structure.  The economic turn to neoliberalism has also left both 
men and women unsure of their ability to survive. This shaky ground leaves many searching 
for some certainty in a world that provides no certainty at all. They grasp at old 
solutions that have, in fact, never worked and try to bully and blunder their way to 
dominance.

Patriarchy was one of the first forms of hierarchical domination, a way to hoard resources 
(and power)  for the few at the expense of equality for all, or an equal sharing of 
resources. In the development of class society, this domination was enshrined in the form 
of the nuclear family.  Capitalism used this pre-capitalist form because it provided one 
sector, men, with the free labor of women: sexual and emotional support, child bearing, 
raising and care, food gathering and preparation, maintenance of a home.  These are social 
expenses that are not directly paid for but are essential to the running of society. In 
order to maintain this dominance, an entire ideology was created that determined women to 
be unequal to men and less than them in every way.  Men also desire/d to control women's 
sexuality and ability to give birth, the one thing they could not do for themselves. They 
needed children, specifically male heirs, but could not control this outcome without the 
complete control of women.

The current attack on abortion rights is rooted in this history and in this need for 
dominance.

The white supremacist movement is a male movement, even though it is supported by many 
women.  The Nazi slogan of "kinder, kirche, kuche" or "children, church, cooking" echoes 
in the views of those promoting a specific role and place for women, to be determined by 
the men.  The respectable pillars of society echo this as well, politicians, churchmen, 
lawyers and judges. The women who support them feel secure and safe in a tradition that 
is, in fact, not secure, nor safe.

The violence towards women who seek self determination, control over their own bodies, is 
an indicator of how insecure these men are.  They want to be able to have sex with whoever 
they want, regardless of age, force them to bear children, and make them responsible for 
the welfare and well being of that child.  They want to be able to claim that child, 
without financial responsibility, and force themselves into the lives of their rape 
victims. They feel that if women are continually pregnant, they will not take jobs away 
from them or be able to live without them, thus ensuring their dominance.  This is about 
control and power.

The fight for women's self determination, the right to control our own bodies, the right 
to determine whether or not we bear children is a fight for our lives.  We cannot afford 
to lose. Women will still get abortions - rich women will continue to finance their own 
abortions, poor women will die in attempts to provide themselves with adequate medical 
care.  Poor women will be put in jail, with untold suffering to their families and 
themselves. Just last week, a woman was arrested in Alabama for having a miscarriage. 
Doctors will be frightened out of providing medical care, and unsafe and unclean, 
unscrupulous hatchet men will make themselves  rich.

It is the task of the entire working class, men as well as women, to fight back against 
this attack.  Women will lead this fight, because it is our health that is on the line. 
But we can expect women as well as men to be against us; false consciousness is very high.

It has been suggested to me that men have a specific role in confronting patriarchal 
attitudes and actions among other men.  This is true, but we should be cautious in 
adopting what could easily turn into a paternalistic attitude: it is Not men's role to 
protect women; it is their job to join with us in countering every attack.

The extreme brutality of the laws being passed in, so far, 15 states and the speed with 
which this is being pursued testifies to the level of anxiety, frustration and anger that 
is being whipped up.  Along with the economic attacks on workers, the police and non 
government attacks on Black people, the viciousness of the attacks on international 
workers attempting to enter the u.s. and their children, the growth of the jails, prisons 
and concentration camps being built and expanded, the attacks on LGBTIQ and trans people, 
the increase of shootings, kidnappings and daily brutality experienced by so many, women 
are also facing attack.  Everyone of us must join with every other person facing attack 
from this capitalist, heading toward fascist system, wherever that attack comes from and 
whatever its excuse. An injury to one is an injury to all. We, international workers all, 
must unite, organize ourselves, and fight back.

To bring it back to anarchism, we propose community self defense as the form the 
resistance should take.  In our communities, our schools, our workplaces, our parks, all 
of our social space must be defended and protected from the capitalist and predator 
onslaught.  Every protection we have ever had, in our entire history of struggle, has been 
what we have provided for ourselves. We must organize to resist, opening our communication 
with each other, so we can figure out our best tactics and strategies.   These 
organizations are posed defensively, yet they lay the basis and provide a form for a 
revolutionary overthrow of the entire system. There must be a revolution because they will 
smash us, until we smash them.

Miriam thought it would be useful to also post these notes by comrade KS of the m1 
Michigan Collective:

Women are not a homogeneous social class but contain various intersections of identity and 
oppression. Philosophically, this requires of us to criticize essentialism and also to 
recognize that causation is multiple: it all can't be boiled down to one thing like class, 
race, placement or non-placement on the gender binary, sexual orientation, and so on, but 
all these things are historically intertwined and *also* unique. Politically, this 
requires us to have an orientation toward all marginalized peoples and the ability to 
*embrace difference*; to not assume circumstances, or even commonality beyond the most 
basic human drives (for survival and autonomy)

The trap we fall into by universalizing the experience of any one woman or group of women 
is that we inevitably appeal to the dominant culture as the universal culture. We do this 
because all of us, too, are assimilated to some extent. Instead, our approach should be to 
take everybody, with their own life story, seriously. We don't need scientific studies to 
tell us that a trans woman is a woman; all we need to do is listen to her, in her own 
words. What does a black woman have to say about wages and employment in the US? What 
about the Bangladeshi garment worker? Or third gender in Pakistan?

We don't *assume* commonality, but we inevitably do find, in every case, areas of common 
interests. That's because we live under a common global capitalist and patriarchal system. 
Our fight is each other's fight, this is the practical basis of our solidarity.

It should be more than obvious than a united feminist political force could shift the 
world more than it has ever been shifted, patriarchy being as old as it is. But for this 
to happen, there needs to careful consideration about hierarchies. Trans, third gender, 
queer, non-binary, black, brown, indigenous, refugee, and working class women in general 
outnumber wealthier and relatively independent cis white women in this world, yet it has 
been western white women who have dominated the popular narrative around feminism, and 
have shaped its demands. Sometimes the results can be disastrous, such as with the Burka 
Ban in France.

With the right wing on the ascent, it is more pressing than ever for feminism to assert 
itself as a political force. Unfortunately, tendencies like white supremacy and religious 
fundamentalism are strong, and are able to accomplish oppressive measures against women 
with the support of some women. Whether its conservative white women in Alabama who 
support restrictive abortion policies, or anti-trans so-called feminists speaking at alt 
right and far right nationalist events - its clear that some women do feel protected by 
the white supremacist nation-state and "traditional" gender binary, even as they are 
actively oppressed by patriarchy. This reminds me of the Arab native informants that would 
come onto CNN and Fox News to justify the war in Iraq during the Bush years.

However, more women are outside of the inner circle of white supremacy and wealth than 
inside. And although women are under severe attack right now, people are fighting back 
around the world, from protests in Alabama to Sudanese and Algerian women exercising 
revolution. And under this climate of global austerity, these struggles are interlinked 
with class struggle in the natural way they should be. What would happen if women workers 
of the world unite, in all their variation, diversity, and strength?

For one, we could see the end of gendered violence. The means of force have always been 
only considered proper to a man, and men have used this power to murder, rape, imprison, 
and exploit women - whether through the nuclear family, employment, state violence. What 
would community self defense for women look like such that it could defend from this? What 
would it look like to smash this power?

We could also think the end of economic exploitation proper to women, the "primitive 
accumulation" of unpaid domestic work.

Both of these call for the end of the state and capital, ultimately, as intertwined as 
they are with patriarchy. They mean empowering women politically and economically. It 
could mean women arming themselves to achieve this. Ultimately, it's a fight against the 
state's patriarchal institutions and ties to capital, and capital's ability to decide the 
distribution of income (dependent on the profit motive).

It's also a more diffuse cultural fight, within our homes, neighborhoods, places of work, 
schools, and so on - but these are all connected with the greater institutions that 
regulate our lives and foster our dependence.

http://m1aa.org/?p=1671

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

Message: 7





http://www.mediafire.com/file/ag87nn2st0sdgcj/zero+geographic+25+j.pdf ---- "Bring the 
rifles you built into the streets and the barricades. Let all the forces of the 
proletariat rise and arm them. Put an end, with the power of weapons, on the systematic 
destruction of the human race. Proletarians! Raise your axes now, your axes, your 
barricades, the social revolution! Proletarian soldiers, despair! If you have to fight, do 
it against those who oppress you! Your enemy is not on the so-called borders, but here. 
Protestant women, rebel! Prevent the departure of your loved ones! Let it be you, the 
factory worker and the earth, the conscious and the powerful, let it be you who will let 
down the tools and you will cry: Enough! No more!

[1])

INTRODUCTION

The first world war was the result of the execution of the throne of the Austro-Hungarian 
Empire Francis Ferdinand in Sarajevo by the young Bosnian Serb Garchil Prinsip, a member 
of the Mlada Bosna organization (New Bosnia) . Bosnia and Herzegovina was officially 
annexed to the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1908, while 50% of its population was Bosnian 
Serbs (Howard, 2006). But the irresponsible feeling of liberation from Austro-Hungariania 
and the union with Serbia was very strong (Ferguson, 2006), and the successor would pay it 
with his life, as it was executed by an organization, New Bosnia, which aimed to overthrow 
the Austro-Hungarian zy

After the declaration of war in Austria by Austria, developments were rapid (Hauard, 
2006). One great force declared war on the other, leading mankind to a major world war. In 
this war, eventually named World War I, the camps were two. On the one hand, the Entente 
(which consisted of the British Empire, Russia, France and later the United States, 
Romania, Italy and Greece) and the central forces (Germany, Austro-Hungary, Bulgaria and 
the Ottoman Empire) The causes of the war were of course not the possible involvement of 
Serbia in the execution of the successor (as Austro-Hungarian invoked to declare the war 
in Serbia) but the imperialist antagonisms.

The war has evolved into a real massacre as, due to mass industrial production and 
technology (Howard, 2006), older military tactics (cavalry use, bayonet raids, etc.) were 
overtaken, and the new technological arsenal was introduced into the scene: the use of 
trains for mass movements army, bulk throwing of artillery, chemical gases, guns, 
airplanes, tanks, etc.

In all major conflicts, ideology plays an important role. The same is true in the case of 
the First World War where various competing ideological trends (communism, nationalism, 
etc.) collided with each other. At that time, anarchism was also a very powerful and 
massive movement that in some countries even overshadowed the Marxist and other left-wing 
movements. Such a dynamic movement could not have affected the war-related developments 
and especially the revolutionary processes that this war caused.

In the first part we will look at the relationship between anarchist "terrorism" and the 
first world war. In the second part we will present the anarchists who supported the war 
and we will emphasize the contradiction of this attitude. In the third part, the anti-war 
action of the anarchists will be presented, as well as their participation in revolutions 
both during the war and in those that followed its end. In the latter part, an attempt 
will be made to explain the attitude of anarchists during the war but also in the years 
that followed, and an attempt will be made to assess the role of the anarchist movement of 
those times.

Finally, we will show that the majority of the anarchists were distinguished for their 
anti-war and revolutionary attitude. In the years of the war and in the years that 
followed (1918-1922), they participated in the great uprisings and revolutions.

ANARCHY AND "TERRORISM"

First we clarify that the notion of terrorism is ideologically charged. For anarchists, 
states are terrorists. On the contrary, power considers any form of revolutionary movement 
(national liberation, communist, anarchist, etc.) that assumes the violence against it as 
terrorist. Things become even more confused as yesterday's terrorists can be seen after a 
victorious revolution as heroes from the newly established state and be imposed 
internationally for these beliefs. Some cases, however, remain controversial forever. For 
example, in the international bourgeoisie, even today, there is talk of the assassination 
of the successor by the terrorist Gavrilo Principe, with the exception of today's Serbia, 
who is considered a national hero.

After this parenthesis, we can present the relationship of anarchism to what the 
bourgeoisie of the time called terrorism. In any case in the late 19th century. and in the 
early 20th century. the anarchist-related violent movements can be distinguished in 
Russian zeroing and the blows associated with "Propaganda through the Act" (Laqueur, 
1977). The Russian zenith as a reversal movement embraced "terrorism" as a means of 
achieving the purposes of the revolution. Even though it is not identical to anarchism as 
a movement, it has coalesced with and interfered with it. I would point out that Netsayev 
was an important Russian nilist, who at some point affected Bakunin.

Of all the nihilist movements, the most important was Narodnaya Voia (Tzol, 1975) who 
killed several Russian highs. In September 1879, Revolutionary People's Court of Narodnaya 
Voia condemned Tsar Alexander II to death. Eventually and after two unsuccessful attempts, 
success came in March 1881. Continues of the Russian Zionists were two decades later the 
Social Revolutionaries.

A new wave of "terrorism" erupted (mainly from anarchists and social revolutionaries) 
after the Bolsheviks seized power in November 1917 during the First World War. In part, 
they targeted the Bolsheviks (Lenin was injured in such an attack) and against German 
diplomats and soldiers, in order to undermine the peace talks between Germany and Russia.

The anarchist "Propaganda through Operation" in the 1990s was the culmination of anarchist 
violent action (mainly with bombings, executions and robberies) in Europe, and had a large 
share of the anarchist movement. Anarchists of this trend believed that by running rulers 
they brought the masses closer to the revolution. In their view, it was very important for 
the masses to see that even the elders could "kneel". Also the bombs of the 1880s and 
1890s were the desperate reaction to the disappointment that came with the bloody crush of 
the Commune and the suppression of the First International. Between the last years of the 
1970s. and the 1930s spread the "Propaganda through the Act" throughout the world. The 
most important executions of the leaders (out of several of those years that were made and 
attributed to the anarchists) are the following: In 1894 the French President Karnos was 
killed, in 1897 the Spanish Prime Minister Antonio Canovas, the Emperor of Elizabeth in 
1898 and the Italian King Umberto in 1900 (Laqueur, 1977). In 1912 King George I was 
killed by anarchist Schina. In Spain, political violence was particularly flourishing as 
it became part of the trade union (and anarcho-syndicalist) struggles. For example, a 
group set up, among others, by Duroutti (later the leading figure of the CNT-FAI) killed 
the Bishop of Zaragoza. In US the US president was killed, while political executions from 
anarchists also took place in Argentina.

Some analysts argue that the political murders we mentioned did not have a significant 
effect but only increased repression. However, the execution of the successor that day in 
Sarajevo, even though it was the cause and not the real cause of such a blood-warned war, 
triggered sweeping and rapid developments.

ANCIENT AND SUPPORT OF THE

KROPOKKIN WAR AND THE MANIFEST OF THE 16

The role of the left in the First World War was not consistent with the anti-militaristic 
spirit that pre-warped it. In Germany, for example, most members of the Social Democratic 
Party (with the more obvious exception of the anti-militarist Karl Liebknecht) voted in 
favor of the war budget and thus advocated their country's war effort (Harman, 1997). In 
Russia, Marxist Plekhanov set himself unreservedly on the side of the Tsar. In Britain, 
the Labor Party supported the war effort (Ferguson, 2006). Not only was the left the 
majority in favor of the war. In Britain, most prominent feminists stood with the Entente 
to be defeated, as flamboyant Germany argued, although some important feminists argued 
against the war. In the field of spiritual people, the same situation prevailed. Even the 
famous science fiction writer and humanist X. Gi. Wells settled with the Entente. On the 
contrary, the Bolshevik party was against the war as it believed that the war was the 
product of capitalism, and there were no good or evil but only imperialist interests.

Anarchists generally followed an anti-war attitude, as we will see below, with some shaky 
exceptions. More important was the support provided by the famous and very popular 
anarchist of that time Kropotkin on the Russian side. Kropotkin was a Russian prince and 
recognized geographer and environmentalist, as well as one of the founders of anarchist 
communism. Together with other anarchists he signed the "Manifesto of the Sixteen" 
(Avrich, 2005). In opposition to the majority of the anarchists who were against the war 
(Woodcock, 1990), Kropotkin and other anarchists (mainly anarcho-communists and 
anarcho-syndicalists) who had similar views supported socialist La Bataille in 1916 (where 
the manifesto was first published) allies had to defend themselves in Germany's aggression.

It is important to understand that Kropotkin (Jol, 1975) was distinguished at a cultural 
level by a "anti-German" attitude as did other Russian revolutionaries (such as anarchist 
Bakunin, Bakunin's anti-Germanism was proverbial). In general, Bakunin blamed German 
civilization for excessive militarism. Perhaps one of the causes of Bakunin's views on 
German culture is to be traced back to the German Marx (Jol, 1975). In general, Kropotkin 
believed that Germany was a country where militarism and expansionism dominated culturally 
(Nettlau, 1996). If eventually Germany prevailed in the world's chessboard of imperialism, 
its totalitarianism would be channeled everywhere, increasingly removing the idea of an 
anarchist and social revolution.

The majority of the anarchists felt that Kropotkin betrayed the anarchist beliefs. The 
latter thus received an angry critique (Avrich 2005). Besides, in February 1916 (before 
the "Manifesto of the Sixteen") an anti-war manifesto was published by eminent anarchists 
(Rudolf Rooker, Emma Goldman, Alexander Bergman, etc.). Kropotkin, however, went against 
the dominant anti-war stance of the anarchists and went along with others in the 
publication of the "Manifesto of the Sixteen." Then Malatesta (among many others) attacked 
the protest of Kropotkin (Nettlau, 1996). Other anarchists accused Kropotkin of chauvinism 
and "anarchopatriotism" (Avrich 2005). Finally, the Bolsheviks accused Kropotkin and the 
group of betraying the revolution. Already in 1915 (before the 16 Manifesto) in "

A big issue was whether Kropotkin was eventually a crypto-fascist. This was supported by 
many political enemies at that time, such as the Bolsheviks. The truth is that this trend 
is especially strange if one compares it with Bakunin's attitude of life, a man who has 
played an important role in the formation of anarchism. Bakunin, though in the early years 
of his revolutionary action, was a supporter of the Slavic Revolution, eventually 
reversing many of his views.

The truth is that Bakunin, shaping his ideological identity (and partly the anarchism of 
which he is now regarded as a spiritual father), eventually became an internationalist. 
For Bakunin, the social and class revolution was a priority, and he was envisioning a 
humanity based on anarchist federalism. But even in the anarchist phase of his life, the 
patriotic uprisings (Bakunin, 2000) that had taken place at different times in the world 
did not leave him indifferent. He then showed interest in national liberation issues but 
trying to turn them into the class and internationalist direction.

A patriotic rebellion, therefore, did not tell him anything unless he approached the 
realization of anarchy (Bakunin, 2007). Why Bakunin's purpose was the ultimate 
co-existence of all peoples in an extreme society. So it was not the creation of a new 
nation-state through a national revolution and he was struggling in the opposite direction.

Indeed, he believed (as we will see in more detail) that a patriotic rebellion (which he 
hoped to have evolved) was possible against the Prussians when the latter invaded France 
in 1870 and fought in this direction by participating in the failed rebellion of Lyon . 
Ultimately, Bakunin's political belief was correct, at least in the case of Paris where 
the Parisian people actually revolted in 1871. The fruit of this insurrection was the 
Paris Commune of 1871 (to which Bakunin was unable to take part) who was drowned in the 
blood Nettlau, 1996).

Generally speaking, Bakunin was not a chauvinist but the opposite. An important fact is 
that in the anarchist phase of his life he did not support any of the major state entities 
in the intra-imperialist conflicts of his time (Bakunin, 2007). He opposed Prussia during 
the French-French War (1870-1871), but it did so after Napoleon's collapse and when the 
Prussians had invaded France. Bakunin's ultimate goal was to turn an imperialist conflict 
into a class rebellion. "True patriotism is essentially international ... The boundaries 
of the proletarian homeland were broadened to a degree that now includes the proletariat 
of the whole world" (Bakunin, 2007, p. 104).

On the contrary, Kropotkin gave his support (indirectly) to Tsar. Ultimately, the fear of 
Bakunin and Kropotkin against German totalitarianism would be justified by the rise of 
Nazism in power. What would not be justified (especially in the eyes of the anarchists who 
felt betrayed) is the support of Kropotkin on the Russian side in a war that killed 
millions of poor Russians and led to the Russian revolution and the execution of the last 
Russian tsar.

It should be stressed that the opposition to this war was not a harmless act. People who 
resisted many times were persecuted or imprisoned (Ferguson, 2006), while many lost their 
lives. Indicatively, I mention Ben Russell, who paid his anti-war attitude with 
imprisonment. Thus many anarchists paid their choices with imprisonment and persecution 
(Proletocultur, 2011).

ANARCHIA AND RETROSPECTIVE GAMES

Some anarchists favored or fought in the 1st. war because they saw the vindication of 
their irredentist views. The young Bosnians were a revolutionary move before the First 
World War. It did not have clear political goals, but its members supported 
panayugoslavism and other pervasiveness (Ferguson, 2006). Today, other sources are 
referred to as nationalists and others as anarchists. In fact they had influences from 
both nationalist and anarchist theorists (Pavlowitch, 2002).

But let's take things from the beginning. The period from the mid-19th c. until the 
beginning of the 20th century, when anarchism emerged as an important revolutionary 
stream, and an ideological foundation was formed, many anarchists were perpetuated by 
anti-authoritarian ideas and fought in various patriotic uprisings against imperial armies 
(Tzol, 1975). Also important was the influence of Bakunin, which aimed at transforming the 
patriotic revolutions into class (Bakunin, 2000) wars. Bakunin in his anarchist life 
supported a form of proletarian patriotism aimed at to create a new nation-state, but to 
realize the classless and extreme society.

At this point it is good to remember that the concept of patriotism has changed meaning 
over time. Nowadays it usually means different things for people with different 
ideologies. The notion of patriotism is subjective and often identifies with nationalism. 
And in Bakunin's years, patriotism had begun to mean different things about the various 
competing movements. Thus, the concept given to him by Bakunin is also subjective and not 
necessarily acceptable by the majority (both then and now). In any case, Bakunin, as we 
have already argued, was not a chauvinist and was opposed to nationalism (Bakunin, 2007). 
The same can be said of the majority of the anarchists who fought on various revolutionary 
fronts.

Thus, the contribution of anarchists who fought in various revolutions against empires in 
the late 19th century should not be overlooked. Amilcarhe Tsipriani is such an anarchist 
case[2]. Tsiprianis even acted in Greece. In 1862, during the anti-ethnical uprising, he 
was in Athens, pursued by the Austrian police. Tsiprianis participated in the events of 
1862 from the first moment. Indeed, in the area of Kavikaray, he created with other 
barricades where for the first time in the "Greek" area waved the red flag. He was then 
arrested and deported. In 1868 he participated in Crete during the rebellion against the 
Turkish authorities.

In 1897 he returned to Greece, taking part as a volunteer in the Greek-Turkish war along 
with other Italian anarchists. Indeed, in the battle of Domokos, a group of anarchists 
also participated. Also in the same year, some Italian anarchists fought in the rebellion 
of Crete, which was preceded (and was the cause) of the Greek-Turkish war. Anarchist 
rebels2, mostly Italians, fought as volunteers in Domokos and Crete, because they believed 
that there was a popular uprising and not a national conflict organized by a competitive 
nation.

Bulgaria was the country where the anarchists actively activated the national liberation 
struggles (Proletcult, 2011). A classic case was the anarchist Boeff, who today appears as 
a national hero of the Bulgarians (he died in the 1876 uprising against the Ottoman 
authorities), but his beliefs were anti-nationalist and abortive. Anarchists will also be 
actively involved in the revolts in the Macedonian area (Dhimon of the Printing House, 
2001), which originally expressed social demands rather than the organized conflict of 
state-driven nationalisms. Many anarchists (Proletcult, 2011) will take part in Ilinden's 
failed rebellion. For a month in Thrace, during this uprising, the rebels tried to 
implement libertarian communism.

Finally, in Bulgaria, anarchists resist the country's entry into the First World War 
(Proletcult, 2011). Power will answer hard. Anarchists will be imprisoned for their 
opposition to the war. But in the course of the war, anarchists attack armies of symbols 
of power and wealth.

Generally, however, some anarchists obviously crossed the dividing line that separates 
revolutionary-proletarian patriotism and passed into chauvinism. An example is the 
Bulgarian anarchists who fought the Bulgarian army during the Balkan wars against the 
majority of Bulgarian anarchists who had anti-war views (Prolektul, 2011), but also the 
Italian futurists. However, as far as the organization that "fired" into the First World 
War, the contradictory of the case is that the Young Bosnians, an organization partially 
influenced by Bakunin, received assistance from the Black Hand by an organization created 
by the Serbian Army (Ferguson, 2006) .

The artistic-political movement of futurism (Botsola and Tisdale, 1984) also had 
contradictory and strange views on the present day. As a mixture of nationalism, anarchism 
and Nyceism, this important movement for the art took place from the outset in favor of 
Italy's entry into the war, even organizing artistic happenings to propagate the war. It 
should be noted here that in Italy there was a strong irredentist at that time, as it was 
believed that Italian integration was not complete and that many Italians lived under 
Austro-Hungarian yoke. With the outbreak of war, the Futurists ranked in the army faithful 
to their ideas, resulting in many losing their lives (Botsola and Tisdale, 1984).

ANARCHY, AN INTERNATIONAL WAVE AGAINST WAR AND REVOLUTION

"The revolution is nothing but war (just as war is the continuation of politics by other 
means)"

(Ehrman Esse in Coker, p. 11)

Anarchism played an important role in revolutions associated with the First World War in 
both direct and indirect ways. Thus we can say that anarchism as an ideology influenced to 
a certain extent Marxist revolutionary Lenin and consequently the Bolsheviks. The latter 
were very important for the success of the Russian Revolution, a historic event that 
triggered the revolution in the rest of Europe. Apart from their indirect influence, the 
anarchists actively participated in the revolutionary activities of these years (1914-1922).

"Letters to a Frenchman in the Present Crisis" (1870) is one of Bakunin's most important 
writings, as it is an essential contribution to the theory and practice of the revolution. 
Written during the tumultuous period of the Franco-Prussian War, when France was now 
defeating the defeat, the Napoleonic III government had collapsed and the Powers were at 
the gates of Paris. On this occasion Bakunin developed the idea of turning the wars 
between the imperialist states into civil wars for the Social Revolution[3].

In "Letters to a Frenchman in the Present Crisis", Bakunin called on the people (farmers 
and workers) to rise up to defy the invading army. It also called for the creation of the 
Communists who would abolish the French state and, at the same time, defend this new class 
society from the defeats of the French state (Bakunin was in favor of the civil war if it 
served the purpose of the social revolution). A little later the Parisians will rebel to 
protect Paris from the Prussians and the Paris Commune (1871) in which Bakunin was unable 
to take part and which eventually drowned in the blood of the French state itself. 
However, this rebellion was a vindication for Bakunin who believed that the popular 
uprising in that circumstance was possible (Nettlau, 1996).

But beyond the Paris Commune, this ideological tactic (that revolutionaries should have as 
a direct priority and the pursuit of a generalized and violent revolution during a period 
of intra-imperialist war) will find its ultimate vindication during the first world. war. 
Those years, devotees of this ideological positioning, (except the anarchists) and the 
Marxist Bolsheviks played a very important role in the October Revolution. In particular, 
Lenin worked systematically both theoretically and practically in this direction 
(Appignanesi, 1977). To point out here that the anti-war line of the Bolsheviks was called 
de-fetishism. According to the latter, the rebels should try to defeat their country in 
order to provoke a revolution there.

On the contrary, Marx and Engels believed that it was best to win the most progressive 
force (the one with more developed urban consciousness), because this historical 
development is a positive consequence for the working class of both the winning and 
defeated countries Draper, 1953/54). In this sense, their disdain for their tsarism and 
their conviction that it is good to be defeated in the battlefields also comes from. On 
the other hand, they believed that in cases of a defeat it could cause revolutionary 
processes in the state that would suffer it (Draper, 1953/54), but Bakunin was the one who 
consistently worked out a program to try to turn the war into a civil war.

It is of course possible that Lenin was influenced by the events of the Paris Commune and 
not directly by Bakunin's ideological position. Even so, however, the Paris Commune was 
more of the work of the Blank Communists and the Anarchists (the latter of course had 
already exerted a great theoretical effect outside Proudhon and Bakunin) and not so much 
of the Marxists. It is therefore quite possible that the anarchists exercised (at least) 
indirect influence on Lenin, who was in great appreciation of the Communist rebellion. 
Besides, in his work "State and Revolution" (1917) he had presented the commune as a model 
for the future revolutionary society (Jalketsis, 2017), where the armed popular masses 
would revive power by taking the road of self-government (of course when the time came the 
Bolsheviks did).

Of course, Lenin's position on imperialist wars differs in some respects from Bakunin's 
views or from the practices of the Communists. Lenin sought the defeat (Appignanesi, 1977) 
of Tsarist Russia from Germany (so that the revolution in the now defeated Russia was 
easier) and believed that in the same direction the German revolutionaries had to fight 
and propagate (defeat of the country their). As he himself stated his theory of 
imperialist war was the opposite of socialist patriotism. The rebellion, always according 
to him, must hope for the defeat of his country, so that the civil war (Appignanesi, 1977) 
is easier. The Communists, as we have already said, have fought against the First Invaders 
(patriotic and socially motivated) but also against the French state (with class and 
social motivation). Bakunin also called, as we have already seen, a struggle for the 
ultimate goal of the social and class revolution. Nevertheless, this idea of the 
revolution through the imperialist wars, even if it was used by Lenin slightly modified 
(as "revolutionary liberation"), does not cease to appear for the first time in Bakunin's 
revolutionary speech. But the Marxist and Anarchist gap during those years is already 
large, and it may have been difficult for Lenin to admit that he was influenced by 
Bakunin. even though it was used by Lenin slightly modified (as "revolutionary 
defeatism"), it does not cease to appear for the first time in Bakunin's revolutionary 
speech. But the Marxist and Anarchist gap during those years is already large, and it may 
have been difficult for Lenin to admit that he was influenced by Bakunin. even though it 
was used by Lenin slightly modified (as "revolutionary defeatism"), it does not cease to 
appear for the first time in Bakunin's revolutionary speech. But the Marxist and Anarchist 
gap during those years is already large, and it may have been difficult for Lenin to admit 
that he was influenced by Bakunin.

Here, to point out that Lenin's left-wing political enemies like Plekhanov and Martov 
(Jelketsis, 2017) accused him of the "Bukunism" civil war, especially as regards his 
pursuit of the revolt by violent and the destruction of the old system (if Bakunin would 
have considered his honor if he lived to have influenced Lenin, even if he was part of it, 
is another matter).

Also, as I have already said, in his work "State and Revolution" (1917), Lenin had 
presented the commune as a model for the future revolution (Jelketsis, 2017), where he 
puts the armed popular masses as bodies of the revolution aimed at self-government. But 
the "State and Revolution" is an exception (and contradiction) in Lenin's entire 
theoretical work. In general, he believed in the inadequacy of revolutionary spontaneity 
and gave priority to the discipline of the party, the revolutionary leadership of party 
members, and bureaucratic centralization.

However, Lenin's relations with anarchism do not stop here. Leninism, according to the 
Ulam historian (1998), has some similarities with Neyjayphism. Nechayev (Jol, 1975) was a 
Russian zenith who had been influenced by Bakunin (of course, the latter for some time 
seemed to have accepted the influence of Netsayev). Netsayev absolutely believed in the 
achievement of the revolution through the use of any means, even of terrorism. We must 
emphasize that in the early years of his life Lenin accepted the influence of the Russian 
Nile Movement, whose member was his eldest brother (Ulam, 1998), who was even executed for 
his attempt to assassinate Tsar with other zeros. Also after his life, although he 
embraced Marxism, Netsayev's influence was not indifferent (Service, 2000).
It was also influenced by Netsayev's idea of the revolutionary who should be solely 
interested in the revolution and for nothing else. In Leninism, however, this idea (that 
the revolution is the absolute priority) will not be realized through the action of the 
nihilists that in its eyes seemed romantic and did not fully express the working class4. 
On the other hand, Lenin considered the Bolshevik party (which is the leader of the 
working class) as an ideal body of the revolution. Thus he adapted Netsayev's idea into 
his own political perception (Radzinsky, 1997). The revolutionary party had to devote 
itself totally to the idea of the revolution. The latter became the Bolsheviks' ultimate 
goal. However, the prominent Marxist Plekhanov accused the Bolsheviks of using Netsagev's 
tactics (Jalketsis,

The conviction of the graphs is that subsequent Marxist historiography silenced as much as 
these influences could have found, and at least as far as the influence of Russian 
zeroism, and Eric Hobsbawm (1959) were concerned. We see, however, that the anarchism of 
the 19th century (through Bakunin, the anarchists of the Paris Commune and Netsayev) 
influenced to a certain extent the ideological identity of Bolshevism (which, of course, 
is most strongly influenced by Marx and the general Marxist political philosophy).

However, the anarchists of those war years who were faithful to the idea of revolution, 
took part with zeal in the revolutionary events of the First World War (Nettlau, 1996).

At the international level, the majority of the anarchists opposed the war, such as the 
CNT's anarcho-syndicalists in Spain. In Russia most anarchists did not follow Kropotkin 
and his team in their anti-bolshevik and anti-bolshevik stance (Avrich 2005). Indeed, many 
anarchists have originally favored an alliance with the Bolshevik party. Such was the case 
of the Makovites.

Nestor Makhno's movement is an anarchist effort with a huge geopolitical influence on the 
events associated with the First World War and its post-revolutionary consequences (Bielas 
and Bielas, 2008). During the Austro-German invasion of 1918 against the Russian 
Revolution (which had acquired radical features since October 1917), Makhno organized an 
armed resistance. Then, during the Russian civil war, the Makhnovites allied with the 
Bolsheviks against the "White" and other "enemies of the revolution" (Tzol, 1975). The 
most important force of counter-revolutionaries was the "White". Though many "White" were 
tsarists, tsarism was not the connecting ideological link of this movement (indeed, there 
were "White people" who were supporters of democracy, republicans, socialists, etc.).

Eventually, Makhno's army (which even reached its top tens of thousands and relied on 
self-management) after crushing the Ukrainian nationalists and the White House, was 
betrayed by its old ally, the Red Army, and eventually defeated. Until recently, Makhno 
was forgotten even in Ukraine (where the Bolshevik winners had seduced him). However, 
Makhno's contribution to the Russian Revolution was huge (Tzol, 1975). Makhno's army was 
excellent at a tactical level (Tzol, 1975), achieving many victories against the enemies 
of the revolution. He also invented "smart weapons", such as farm horse-drawn chariots 
equipped with machine guns (and called tachanka). Last, for some time,

In Hungary, the small but militant Hungarian anarchist movement (Everett, 2006), 
co-operating with the Bolshevik Party and left-wing socialists, helped create the Budapest 
Commune (which ran from 21 March to 1 August 1919). On 21 March, the Hungarian Soviet 
Republic was declared the first after Russia. The relationship of the anarchists with the 
Bolshevik party in the case of Hungary despite some confrontations was good. But the party 
itself had a relatively anti-authoritarian character. And because in 1918 (Everett, 2006) 
some of the Hungarian anarchists participated in the newly established communist party of 
Hungary (which played a very important role in the events of the commune) and tried to 
turn the party into more libertarian paths.

Eventually the commune collapsed when the Romanian army on behalf of the Advent invaded 
Hungary and defeated the revolutionary forces. The Commune succeeded a trade union 
government, while on August 6 the Romanian army occupies Budapest. But things will get 
worse. The coup d'état of Hungarian Admiral Michel Horty (who in the coming years as a 
regent binds Hungary to the chariot of Nazi Germany) follows the government. Then the 
Hungarian nationalists, under the eyes of the Romanian occupation army, unleash the 
"white" terror that left behind the thousands of victims (including several anarchists).

At the beginning of the 20th century, the Italian anarchist movement flourished. In 
addition, by 1914, the anarchist movement was boosted by the influx of new members as a 
result of the struggles against the Libyan campaign and struggles to defend the working 
class. In Italy, the results of the intra-national struggle over the issue of war were 
less damaging to the anarchist movement than in other countries. But in general, the 
Italian left has not had such a mood as in the other countries. So Partito Socialista 
Italiana (PSI) has not fervently boosted the war effort as did various major socialist 
parties in the rest of Europe1.

The anarchist interventionists in favor of Italy's entry into the conflict were not many, 
and it has been argued that 1 such attempts were initiated by Nysex and hibernate 
anarcho-individualists. We have already seen the case of the futurists who fall in part in 
the category of anarcho-individualists (Botsola and Tisdale, 1984).

The conflict within the revolutionary trade union organization USI, part of which was in 
favor of the Italian involvement in the war, brought the organization into the hands of 
the anti-militaristic majority in September 1914. Also the major Volonta magazine had the 
strongest anti-nationalist and anti-war line and promoted the internationalist and 
anti-capitalist role of anarchism. Eventually the anarchist supporters of the intervention 
were unable to enforce themselves in the anarchist movement. On the contrary, the 
anti-militarist tendency of anarchism when Italy finally entered the war was manifested in 
the army with many deserts and other acts of disobedience. Anarchists also organized and 
participated in popular anti-war demonstrations.

The anarchists participated in the Turin uprising in August 1917 - where the hostility of 
the Italian proletariat in the war and the desire for social change skyrocketed. In the 
last year of war due to excessive repression, anarchist activities declined. Nevertheless, 
the end of the war marked a return to mass action and organization within the movement. 
However, the October Revolution awakened the anarchists' hopes. In general, the end of the 
great war found the anarchists ready for revolutionary action (Staid, 2013).

In Germany, the anarchists turned against the war. Also, the artistic group of the 
dancers, in contrast to the futurists (of whom artistically had been influenced enough) 
reacted to the war (Hans, 1983). After the war, the pro-aristocratic artistic group of 
"Progressives of Cologne", who were Communist advisers (Everest, 2013), emerged. But the 
most important events concerning anarchists were in Bavaria after the end of the war. The 
Bavarian Soviet republic (which lasted about five months) was part of the 1918-1919 German 
revolution which followed the German defeat in the First World War (Harman, 1997). Both in 
the German revolution and in the creation and operation of short-term democracy, 
anarchists played an important role.

Karen Aisen (socialist and member of the Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany 
(USPD)) declared Bavaria on November 8, 1918 (Harman, 1997) as a free state, as the crowd 
had been uprooted in the past few days. free state[5]. The capital of the new state was 
Munich. Although the Bolshevik Revolution was inspiration to most of Europe's rebels, 
Einser tried not to identify with the Bolsheviks and thus did not touch the property. 
Aisner was finally murdered by a far-right (Harman, 1997). Gradually, the anarchists and 
Communists began to gain more power, and on 6 April 1919 Soviet democracy was proclaimed, 
with the reigning Gustav Ladywur[18](1870-1919) as anarchist Erik Muhammad.

This soviet pro-initiation phase did not last long. Finally, on April 12, 1919, the 
Communist Party took control of the rebellious Soviet republic led by Eugen Leviné6. The 
army and the far-right Freikorps eventually entered Munich and defeated the rebels after 
hard fighting, while many of them fought. Also included in the soviet was Ret Marut, who 
during the war published the anarchist magazine Der Ziegelbrenner. After the commune 
defeat, Maruto left exile in Mexico to save his life. We can say that he almost 
disappeared from his old comrades to protect himself, and changed his name. It is none 
other than the famous author B. Treven (Everest, 2013).

CONCLUSIONS-EXPLANATION OF THE ANARCHY STATE

Anarchists played a very important role in the events associated with the First World War. 
We have already seen that they were related to the explosion of war. A group of 
revolutionaries, influenced by various ideologies, including anarchism, triggered the 
First World War. Of course, the execution of the successor in Sarajevo was the cause and 
not the cause. Surely the war would break out sooner or later but it would obviously have 
a different shape and maybe a different course.

We also saw that most of the anarchists resisted the war, unlike the Socialists and the 
Social Democrats. An exception to the anti-war attitude of the anarchists were some 
anarchists who tried to influence the whole anarchist movement in favor of the war. 
Eventually they did not.

To understand this fugitive anarchist tendency, one has to look at the history of anarchy. 
Until the outbreak of the 1st World. all anarchists were unambiguously identified with the 
internationalist and anti-militaristic struggle. This is due to Bakunin's past before 
becoming anarchist (he was a slave nationalist) but also to some controversial movements 
of important anarchists (with a great influence on the then revolutionary movement) such 
as the participation of Proudhon in the (democratically elected) government of Napoleon 
III (Preposier, 2011 and Tzol, 1975). The above events had created some misunderstandings 
and ideological ambiguities. Notwithstanding the aforementioned anarchist philosophers, 
there have been internationalists and rebels,

So before the First World War some anarchists had overcome Bakunin's internationalist 
standards and had chauvinistic views. With the outbreak of the Great War this became more 
intense. The futurists (most of them because there were exceptions) in Italy are a classic 
case of anarchopatrians who became after fascists (Botsola and Tistandl 1984). They were 
certainly not the only ones. However, the fact that some anarchists in Italy easily 
embraced some fascist-nationalist beliefs demonstrates that before they joined the fascist 
party, and even then they still had anarchists, they should not have truly 
internationalist views. Indicative of the ideological ambiguity of the time is that even 
Mussolini came from a family of anarchists, while in his socialist era he liked anarchist 
terrorists.

Lastly, the anarchists had a very significant impact on the revolutions brought about by 
the war. Significant action was in the revolution of Russia, but also in the revolutions 
and revolts that followed the end of the war (especially in Italy, Hungary, Germany). Thus 
thousands of anarchists participated in these revolutions, playing an active role, while 
many also sacrificed their lives for the revolutionary purpose (for example, Ladotun was 
murdered). Indeed, Italian anarchists participated in the anti-fascist struggles of Italy 
in 1920-1922 (Staid, 2013). In Spain a few years later (Paz, 2006), CNT-FAI anarchists 
will fight against Spanish nationalists during the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939). For 
years (1917-1939), anarchists found themselves in Europe with nationalists, conservatives, 
extreme right and fascists. These events altered the anti-communist stance of the anarchists.

As the war and military struggle of the anarchists against fascism and nationalism was 
taking a dramatic turn, the ideological identity of anarchism became clearer because of 
some thinkers like Bergman, Goldman and Rocker. For example, I mention the example of 
Rocker. His book, "Nationalism and Culture," Rooker wrote it in response to nationalism 
that became the dominant stream at that time in Germany. Nationalism, according to Rokeer, 
enslaves the individual in the state (Rocker, 1998). This book has had an enormous impact 
on anarchists.

His general political stance identified (along with other intellectuals, of course) the 
anarchist movement as completely anti-nationalist and internationalist, thus clearing many 
misunderstandings that had been created by the life and work of Proudhon, Bakunin and 
Kropotkin. Whatever the influence of Rocker and other internationalist anarchists, 
however, the majority of the anarchists from those troubled years of the First World War 
had a clear stance against the war.

We have already mentioned anarcho-syndicalist CNT but the same applies to all major 
anti-authoritarian groups and organizations such as the American IWW. But even the most 
prominent anarchists turned in 1914-1918 against the war. Lautauer, Sorel, Bergman, Emma 
Golmann, Malatesta (Jol, 1975) are just a few of the examples of well-known and 
influential anarchists who said no to the war.

The anti-nationalist, anti-racist, anti-militarist and internationalist spirit within the 
anarchists (though during the First World War was already the most powerful) will become 
the dominant in the years following the end of the First World War with the result that 
anarchism is almost synonymous with anti-militarism and anti-vowalism.

In the Second World War, many anarchists fought anti-fascist guerrillas across Europe. 
These anarchists saw the Second World War as a continuation of the Spanish civil war, that 
is, as a continuation of the anti-fascist struggle. No matter how historically this choice 
(that they fought against the Axis forces) seems to have been justified, as World War II 
is now regarded as a fair war, at least if one is seen by his anti-Nazi party. On the 
contrary, the First World War seems so unfair and irrational. So the choice of the 
anarchist minority in favor of the war is still condemned by the anarchist movement.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABROAD

Abel P. (2006) Durruti in the Spanish Revolution. AK Press

Avrich, P. (2005). The Russian Anarchists, AK Press.], Edinburgh

Appignanesi, R. (1977) Lenin For Beginners, p. 118. Writers and Readers Cooperative, London

Ulam, AB (1998) The Bolsheviks: The Intellectual and Political History of the Triumph of 
Communism in Russia, pp. 628. Harvard University Press

Coker C. (1994) .War and the 20th Century: A Study of War and Modern Consciousness. 
Brassey's (UK) Ltd

Everett M. (2006). War and Revolution: The Hungarian Anarchist Movement in World War I and 
the Commune of Budapest, 1919. Kate Sharpley Library

Edvard Radzinsky (1997) Stalin: The First In-Depth Biography Based on Explosive New 
Documents from the Russian Secret Archives. Anchor

Harman Chr. (1997) The Lost Revolution: Germany 1918 to 1923, Bookmarks

Draper H. (1953/1954) The Myth of Lenin's "Revolutionary Defeatism", New International 
Magazine, Vol. XIX No.5 (September-October 1953), Vol.XIX No.6 (November-December 1953) 
and Vol.XX No.1 (January-February 1954)

Gaab JS (2006) Munich: Hofbräuhaus & History, Peter Lang International Academic Publishers

Laqueur W. (1977) TERRORISMUS, Resegensburg.

Lenin V. (1984) Socialism and war, progress

Nettlau M. (1996) A Short History of Anarchism. Freedom Press.

Service R (2000). Lenin: A Biography. Macmillan, London

Skirda Al. (2002) Facing the enemy: an anarchist organization from Proudhon to May 1968. 
Edinburgh; Oakland, CA: AK Press / Kate Sharpley Library.

Pavlowitch SK (2002) Serbia: The History of an Idea. New York University Press.

Ulam AB (1969) Lenin and the Bolsheviks, FONTANA

Woodcock G. (1990) Peter Kropotkin: From Prince to Rebel. Black Rose Books.

Hobsbawm E. (1959). Primitive Rebels.University of Manchester Press, Manchester

HELLENIC REPUBLIC

Andrea St. (2017), Arditi del Popolo. The first armed struggle against fascism 1921-1922, 
Etopia publications, Athens

Arsinov II (1980), The History of the Makhnovist Movement (1918-1921), Free Press, Athens

Jalketsis (2017) The Utopia in Power, Publishing, Editors' Publishing

House of the Printing Demon (2001), The Bargains, Dhimon Publishing of

Everest M. (2013), Art as a Weapon. Franz Zebert and the Progressives of Cologne, 
colleagues, Athens

Bakunin M. (2000), From the National War in the Class War, Free Press

Bakunin M. (2007), Critique of Existing Society,

Panoptikon Bielas B. and Bialas A. (2008), The Streets of Nestor Makhno, Babylonia

Publishing A. and Tisdale K. (1984), Futurism,

Ferguson N. (2006), World War I. Military, diplomatic and social history-1914-1918, Iolkos 
publications, Athens

Preposier B. (2011), "Proudon the father of anarchism", periodic eutopia, pages 32-37, 
eutopia publications, Athens

Proletcoult, (2011) Bulgaria, publications proletkoult

Rocker P. (1998), Nationalism and Culture, radically, Athens

Tzol (1975) Anarchists, publishing assistant, Athens

Hans P (1983), Dada, Infrastructure, Athens

Haard M (2006), First World War, GIRATHEN, Athens

Related Link: https://zerogeographic.wordpress.com/

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/31478


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