WORLD WORLDWIDE ITALY News Journal Update - (en) Italy, FDCA, Il Cantiere #19: Animal liberation - Andres Jesi (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 I read with interest Olmo Losca's Notes on animal liberation in issue

no. 18 of Il Cantiere, because the theme is usually treated in
environments and contexts of the anarchist movement inherent to
tendencies that favor individual action, in which they often exhaust
themselves. It's a good thing that questions apparently far from class
problems are coming to the debate. ---- Specifically, the author manages
to perceive capitalism as a social relationship, and in this sense I
would like to insert myself into the topic, which cannot be treated
ideologically, as scientifically speaking we have not built a theory,
that of the communists anarchists, to discern true concepts and facts
from untrue ones, what is anarchist from what is not. Rather, a theory
is an organic and functional whole with respect to the context in which
it is applied, providing hypotheses for reading complex issues to
suggest the range of possible positions that can be taken in the face of
contingency.
However, the problem does not seem to be one of theoretical integration,
i.e. of gaps to be filled. Exploitation, in this specific case
capitalism, as mentioned above, is a social relationship, and as such it
is related to two parties: those who have resources to make choices,
those who do not.
By resources we cannot only consider money, even if we continue to think
in exclusively economic terms: resources are skills, competences,
experience, memory, knowledge, flexibility or open-mindedness,
relational networks, health, financial means, material goods... all
declinable in a capitalist and liberal sense according to the concept of
private property, exclusive possession and accumulation useful precisely
for making choices, which in the economic field can be further
simplified in being aimed at obtaining a profit and a profit which, also
considered in light of the broadening of the term "resource", acquires a
more flexible character with respect to time: a profit can also be
collected over a long time.
So far nothing new with respect to the theory of the anarchist
communists, the interesting thing to note is that we have no need to
specifically mention who plays the role of the exploiter and the
exploited: in other words the old story works for a human, for a cat , a
chimpanzee, a horse, a rabbit, in one or both positions. And it works
even if one were to try to raise the problem inherent to the fact that
the theory was written entirely by humans: in the theory the term
anarchy is assigned the task of describing a communist society in which
emerging difficulties are studied and decisions are consequently made
together , precisely to defuse the imposition as much as possible and
maximize the ability to evaluate and develop resolution strategies for a
more or less complex problem, then leaving adequate resources to the
tactical contingency to deal with it without the decision-making weight
that a deliberative assembly brings with it when called into question. A
structured but open organic whole.
Anarchy therefore as a solution that is not obvious, but continually
renewed and defined by collective decisions, by doing, with shared
resources: without private property there is less of a problem of
defining boundaries between those who are part of society and those who
are not part of it , in space and time: human? non-human? white, red, dots.
Here, however, the problem slips into the terrain of strategy: today the
world is this one, it is made like this, it has limits here and there,
how can we ensure that there is a better future in the light of the
constructed theory?
The struggle must take place in the social space that we respectively
occupy, and today we live in a time in which the resources accumulated
by us, repairing them from centuries and centuries of exploitation, we
have invested practically all of them to achieve strategic positions
that have now proven unsustainable to maintain , perhaps not having
combined them with a widespread and shared long-term vision that
envisaged the political growth of the masses themselves, therefore today
we can only draw conclusions from the experience just passed and act
with respect to those who will come after us.
And since we are for the last, we cannot help but be part of the latter.
Embracing (for those who can choose to do so obviously) this condition
means avoiding the ideological short circuits that see us
revolutionaries as saviors of poor souls. Of course it involves
sacrifices, suffering, but also comfort, mutual and immediate
understanding, support: there are last humans, there will probably be
last chimpanzees, last pigs, last bees, ...
Furthermore, as if that were not enough, the struggle must take place in
an organized and structured way to ensure that individual strength
(insignificant on its own: we are the last!) is multiplied by the
collective strength to waste the little energy we possess as little as
possible. So we need to find each other, understand each other, and
build together. This in my opinion is the problem: are we able to build
today together with the other animals who share with us the burden of
those who accumulate to our detriment? we need a form of two-way
communication that allows us to understand each other's needs and plan
together. Historically, this instrument was generated and polished in
spite of itself by collective work: working, toiling, toiling together
side by side inevitably meant that we understood each other's
difficulties, glimpsed individual gleanings and virtues and sometimes
drew collective claims from them. Certainly the common condition of
exploitation is neither desirable nor, on its own, a mechanism
generating solidarity and mutual support, on the contrary. For this
reason, rebuilding relational networks between the exploited and at the
same time promoting their political and organizational growth is a
problem to be solved of the utmost urgency, because it is a matter of
strategy, and in this historical period we probably cannot afford
anything else. Investing resources today in this direction means reaping
the benefits in who knows how many years, but it must be done, otherwise
total liberation has as short legs as this collapsing world.
By the way, another point intercepted by Olmo Losca concerns dietism and
lifestyle, as well as the need for total liberation here and now, which
I feel like reinforcing some of the emphasis: but is the world really so
ineluctably collapsing that it imposes tactical solutions on us? to the
detriment of strategic ones? Do we really have this moral urgency to
first transform our individual lives on the basis of rigorous, not to
say religious, observances? They can certainly help to achieve an
intimate, individual balance, but we certainly won't save the world from
its evils in this way. Indeed, it is entirely more likely that we will
save a part of current society when the need arises, but to our
detriment and certainly not to our will: any history book that examines
the unfortunate life of the poor describes in great detail a long past
of readjustments from rich and harmful civilizations for the entire
world and for humans specifically thanks (so to speak) to famines,
epidemics, wars, which incessantly harvest the great field of the
dispossessed.
Unfortunately, the lives of the last, ground and squeezed over
millennia, teach us that there are no shortcuts in obtaining a better
world, for everyone.

Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA Il Cantiere #19 settembre 2023
ilcantiere@autistici.org http://alternativalibertaria.fdca.it/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca