"Democratism" is the illusion that democracy, that system of
representative procedures and the production of rights, can and shouldregulate all of social life. Le Brise-Glacé, 1989 (1) The tremendous
retreat that, from certain formerly anti-capitalist circles, is dragging
us toward democratic pragmatism transcends the discourse and practice of
these groups and is seeping into each and every one of us, since we also
reproduce it in some way. The long afterglow of the 15M movement, as
effervescent and action-packed as it was lacking in theoretical
consistency and strategy; the impact of the Catalan nationalist and
cross-class purpose of the Procés, projected onto the rest of the State;
or the ebb and apparent stagnation of feminisms (2), paint a picture of
bewilderment. That is precisely why it is more important than ever to
reclaim our own practices and discourses, abandoning the frameworks
imposed by electoral logic and the mass media, whose agenda has clearly
dictated the pace. Reclaiming our own rhythms and strengthening the ties
between the collectives and organizations that still maintain their
autonomy, for a broader social approach, is a priority for the present
and for what lies ahead. The creation of the Action Against Hate
Foundation (ACO) is a clear example of this loss of direction towards
citizen activism (3), both for what it represents in itself and for
having been received so uncritically by the movements, probably as a
consequence of that sense of exceptionalism and powerlessness generated
by the noise of the rise of the far right.
Citizen-based antifascism?
The alarming rise in recent years of the so-called "Reactionary
International," with a sinister clown in charge of the world's largest
military power, or the billionaire owner of X, Elon Musk, making his
Nazi joke, has set off all the alarms of democratism, which is thus
awakening from its dream as a hegemonic ideology.
Democracy, the most effective lubricant for capitalism and
consensus-builder, though for whatever reason it never reached all
countries, has been advancing for decades, without abandoning the
representative structures that define it, toward a new totalitarian
cycle, blurring the line that separates "the garden from the jungle" (as
Borrell would say). Thus, the iron fist necessary to implement the
neoliberal agenda is progressively displacing other, more flexible
mechanisms of social control and pacification, starkly revealing the
State for what it is in its original function. While it is true that
this reactionary international openly champions this new scenario in
which everything seems to be working in its favor, the very social
democracy that tears its hair out in outrage has been a pioneer,
ultimately spitting against the wind, in creating laws and policies in
this totalitarian direction, as we will see later. This punitive trend
finds one of its most faithful reflections in the push given to
so-called "Crimes of Opinion," and particularly to those framed as Hate
Crimes, championed by the institutional left itself, from the PSOE to
Podemos. It is in this context that ACO emerges.
In October, it will be a year since ACO, a platform that presents itself
as a defender of democracy and whose objective is "to denounce and bring
to justice far-right politicians, agitators, and commentators who fill
the public sphere with lies, defamation, and threats," was launched,
primarily driven by CTXT. Thus, "...it is established as a response to
Article 33.3 of Law 15/2022," outsourcing the functions of the State in
"promoting the reporting of acts of discrimination, violence, and hate
speech and incidents."
However, they assert that their intention is not to "prosecute crimes of
opinion," while simultaneously making it clear that their tools will be
"the laws and the courts," acting as prosecutors albeit "in an
alternative manner." This blatant contradiction is neither argued nor
justified in their introductory manifesto, nor do they specify what this
alternative approach to using the penal code as an instrument of justice
will entail.
This is not surprising, since this project, presented as an appeal to
the citizenry, is riddled, from its declaration of principles and
subsequent propaganda, with half-truths and complicit silences (4). This
is undoubtedly due to both those at the forefront of this initiative and
many of the chosen traveling companions. But let's take it one step at a
time.
Half-truths
To analyze the project, we must begin with CTXT, as a digital platform
for debate on the left, supposedly outside the PSOE (Spanish Socialist
Workers' Party). Obliged to demonstrate a plurality that justifies its
existence, it accommodates the dissemination of staunchly
anti-patriarchal currents of thought, such as Anti-Punitive Feminism, in
addition to publishing frankly brilliant analyses on other issues
analyses that are difficult for conventional wisdom to digest. This must
be acknowledged.
Therefore, to understand CTXT's move to align itself with punitive
politics through this boomerang-like action of the ACO which permanently
legitimizes the prosecution of hate speech/opinion crimes we must not
lose sight of who most of CTXT's founders and writers are. Some are
journalists from El País and other similar European media outlets, or
they are cultural critics and academics, many of whom are part of the
new organic intelligentsia. Also present are remnants of the 15M
movement, such as social media commentators and crucially for
contextualizing this initiative progressive lawyers and jurists. In
fact, the honorary president of the ACO, Martín Pallín, a commentator on
La Sexta and emeritus judge of the Supreme Court, has also been
president of the Progressive Union of Prosecutors and spokesperson for
Judges for Democracy. Its Vice President is Joaquín Urías, a former
legal advisor to the Constitutional Court and also a frequent
commentator, with a political background in the anti-globalization
movement of the turn of the century. The foundation is also supported by
other digital media outlets and groups of diverse affiliations, along
with some well-known and subsidized NGOs within the socialist sphere.
From all of this stem the half-truths and complicit silences.
Because it is false, and they know it, that the progressive tightening
of laws and political persecution is solely the work of the right wing,
or that the "twisted" application of hate crimes, which are presented as
guarantees for minorities, is the exclusive responsibility of a
reactionary and corrupt judiciary. Just as they turn a blind eye to the
repression of antifascism through the application of these laws, or
avoid confronting the Ministry of the Interior: aren't police raids and
racist biases, or the lack of legal status, the main problems faced by
people of color?
A bit of history and laws
Years ago, authors such as David Garland and Loïs Wacquant analyzed
Punitive Populism, which began in the last decades of the 20th century
with its epicenter in the US, and which can be summarized as the
strengthening of the police/prison system, the magnification of the role
of victims, and the electoral exploitation of insecurity. In Spain, the
PSOE, rather than the PP, would be at the forefront of implementing
these policies. Beyond the ZEN Plan, the GAL, and torture in the Basque
Country (5); The construction of mega-prisons and the implementation of
the FIES (Special Regime for Social Integration), the 1992 "Corcuera
Law" on Citizen Security, the drafting of the 1995 Penal Code while Juan
Alberto Belloch (formerly spokesperson for Judges for Democracy and
co-founder of the European Association of Magistrates for Democracy and
Freedoms, MEDEL) was Super Minister of the Interior and Justice and the
policy of dispersing social and political prisoners... these were
significant leaps forward in terms of repression. The subsequent
governments of Aznar, Zapatero (who reinstated the FIES by changing its
name), and Rajoy readily deepened this path, as we should all remember,
since the PP's laws are often invoked in this narrative of half-truths.
Organic Laws 7/2003 and 15/2003 (Aznar) expanded the range of offenses
and increased the length of sentences. During this period, the
overemphasis on the role of victims became firmly established as part of
the strategy, first with the AVT (Association of Victims of Terrorism)
and the Alcàsser case, and later with the exploitation of the murders of
Marta del Castillo in Seville and the young girl Mariluz in Huelva,
which definitively set the sensationalist pattern that continues to this
day. In 2015, the Gag Law (Rajoy), designed to target social movements
and the workers' struggle during a period of intense mobilization,
granted sweeping powers to the police. It remains in force to this day,
even under the most progressive government of the democratic era, which
has been in power since 2018.
It is by following this line of simultaneous security hardening that we
can more accurately frame the role that Hate Crimes play in the
criminalization of the actions and discourse of genuinely anti-system
groups (6), who are not precisely the fascists but rather those who
fight against them. An example is how, in practice, Article 510 of the
Penal Code will end up prosecuting us just like other Opinion Crimes,
such as glorifying terrorism or offending religious sentiments.
Indeed, it was Circular 7/2019 from Attorney General María José Serrano
Crespo (appointed under Sánchez's presidency), who, like Pallín, belongs
to the Progressive Union of Prosecutors, that confirmed the criteria for
protecting fascists as potential victims/passive subjects: "Thus, an
attack on a person with Nazi ideology, or incitement to hatred against
such a group, can be included in this type of crime," effectively ruling
and giving the green light to the persecution of antifascists. This
circular would crystallize in Organic Law 6/2022, when Pilar Llop Cuenca
(7), a judge and member of the PSOE (Spanish Socialist Workers' Party),
was Minister of Justice, definitively and without further nuance
defining "ideology" as a form of discrimination to be protected,
increasing the penalties from 1 to 4 years merely for those who: "a)
(...) directly or indirectly incite hatred..." or "b) (...) distribute,
disseminate, or sell writings."
It wasn't Judge Peinado, nor the one from the La Manada case. To argue
that these could be worse is not only obvious but also regrettable and
defeatist. In any case, it is clear that, in terms of repression, the
progressive judiciary ceases to be progressive when it holds power (8).
By concealing this, ACO creates a smokescreen over this political
repression, and functions as whitewashing for the current government, by
focusing only on the quagmire of the extreme right.
The complicit silence and the boomerang
Why has the State, the main producer and reproducer of the structures of
inequality that underpin capitalism, continued to be a privileged
interlocutor of social movements in the last decade?
Marisa Pérez Colina, 2025 (9)
Legislation on aggravating circumstances and hate crimes began in the
1995 Penal Code, materialized with the 2015 amendment, and finally with
the aforementioned 2022 reform. As we all know, due to its severity,
arbitrariness, and media spectacle, it has since become the primary tool
for punishing antifascism. Alongside the Gag Law, it has been added to
other criminal offenses such as assault or public disorder, which we
already suffered, all with increased penalties in successive reforms.
There are countless cases, some very well-known, such as those of our
comrades in Zaragoza, two of whom have just been pardoned thanks to
public pressure. But even the cases that are dismissed represent a
significant drain and increase the psychosocial impact of the repression.
That's why we know that repression, coupled with media sensationalism,
is the main cause of general demobilization in the streets. To hide this
because it doesn't fit a particular narrative is to become complicit. In
this sense, ACO is complicit. Surely it's a prisoner of its alliances
which is its main problem or perhaps it will end up being the reason for
its very existence. Beyond the good intentions that motivate the people
behind this initiative, it serves to draw the fight against fascism into
the realm of civic engagement , thus deactivating its potential for
disruption by framing the problem as a matter of extremists rather than
a structural issue. They may argue that this isn't the space for
anti-repression solidarity, but then what is? Is it a trivial matter
that's irrelevant? Does the current situation dictate that some must put
their bodies on the line while others participate in the media/judicial
spectacle of the Al Rojo Vivo type? Television exposure will have its
risks, but the gap separating one scenario from the other is logically
widening, reaching the point of antagonism due to the very nature of
media spectacle, which will always serve to supplant direct action in
its entirety. Furthermore, as we see, it inevitably entails the
dissociation of self-defense from those who until recently were
comrades, a golden rule in television talk shows since the days of the
kale borroka ( which, incidentally, is once again fashionable as a
weapon used by both sides). Clearly, those activists who get their hands
dirty face-to-face on the ground are left out here until they become
indispensable in the next clash, as invariably ends up happening. And
then, once again, they will be left out. Confrontation isn't desirable
or the only way, but we all know it's inevitable, so we must carry it
and its consequences with us, along with other, more dialogue-based ways
of fighting in our daily lives at work, in our neighborhoods, and at
school. Otherwise, we're headed in the wrong direction.
Numerous LGBTQ+ organizations, or racialized groups operating within the
framework of essentialist identity politics, readily embrace hate crimes
as a valid tool for defending non-normative identities and individuals.
They thus separate their egalitarian goals from the system of
exploitation capitalism where these inequalities are produced, and
therefore from the police/prison system that upholds it. Other groups
accept this tool with considerable reservations, or even reject it
outright, because their more intersectional class activism makes them
aware of being targets of this repression. It is among these latter
groups of insurgent universality (Asad Haider) that an extensive debate
has been underway for some time, and one that will undoubtedly prove
fruitful. The punitive approach never changes anything for the better,
and we should all know that by now. Will the 22 and 27-year prison
sentences handed down to those who beat Samuel Luiz to death actually
curb the spread of homophobia? Rather, they've served to fuel morbid
television sensationalism, the emotional pornography of pain that
distances us from reason, and reinforce the perception of harsh
sentences as legitimate and effective. The pleasure of punishment. We
already have one of the harshest penal codes, and yet we continue to
burden ourselves with even more.
"For years, the radical left has equated wonderful Americans like
Charlie with Nazis (...). This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible
for the terrorism we have seen in our country today." These are the
words of Donald Trump (September 11, 2025), regarding the attack on the
far-right activist Charlie Kirk. How well the leading fascist summarizes
the logic underlying all crimes of opinion.
A colleague defended the legitimacy of hate crimes in a debate a couple
of years ago here in Seville. She championed them as a victory for the
civil rights struggles of minorities in the US: one of the most
judicialized societies with the highest number of lawyers per capita, as
well as the country with the second-highest percentage of incarcerated
population in the world (only behind Bukele's El Salvador), and whose
prisons are the only place where minorities finally cease to be
minorities. Assuming that's the case, a victory, and far from intending
to trivialize the importance of other achievements and the sacrifices of
those civil struggles, if they have decades of head start on us with
this punitive approach, we can already foresee the results. Perhaps that
is why North American Black Feminism is one of the political spaces that
contribute the most to anti-prison criticism, elaborating analyses and
practices from its own reality with approaches such as the "Prison
Industrial Complex" formulated by Angela Davis in 2016 (10), considering
the prison as an extension of the slave exploitation regime.
Interestingly, in the US, ideology is not included in federal hate crime
laws , as it is in Europe. This is the case in the European framework,
which always promotes itself as more protective of rights: in a July
2022 note from the European Court of Human Rights, in an exercise of
militant democracy , it included under the umbrella of hate speech
something as volatile as "speech that threatens the democratic order,"
and more specifically, "incitement to violence and terrorist activity,"
citing and endorsing the closure of Roj TV in Denmark for broadcasting
statements from the Kurdish PKK.
Assuming we were willing to accept this whole mess as a "lesser evil,"
one has to wonder whether, in the medium to long term, this
judicialization of the media and social media space (11) will actually
change anything. I fear not. Beyond the demobilizing complacency of
making a donation or securing a few victories in court, in the case of
ACO, we are working against the grain by justifying the prosecution of
Opinion Crimes ourselves. To change things, we need our own analysis and
rhetoric, not to buy into the enemy's. As an example, let's analyze how
the events in Torre Pacheco are being handled.
Torre-Pacheco
This town of 40,000 inhabitants has the fourth highest per capita income
in Murcia. Its economy is based primarily on intensive agriculture, made
possible by the Tagus-Segura water transfer, with a strong presence of
the Navarrese food company Florette and the multinational Syngenta, and
is sustained by the exploitation of a predominantly migrant workforce.
In mid-July, the media reported the robbery and beating of an elderly
man by a group of dark-skinned youths there we have it!
At the same time, a tangled web of networks, such as the Telegram group
Remigration, where the youth wings of the Workers' Front and Vox
participate alongside the Nazis of National Nucleus, or Deport Them Now
(DTN), with connections to Italian fascism, launched a campaign of
misinformation and calls to "hunt down Moors." Their intention was to
replicate the Islamophobic campaign in England the previous summer,
which began in Southport, having unsuccessfully attempted to do so with
other incidents in other locations, where the skin color of the alleged
aggressor is always the common thread. Later, the star of Spanish
fascism, Dani Esteve, joined the fray, along with other familiar figures.
During the first two of the four days of unrest, it was local Vox
supporters from the town and surrounding areas who led the manhunts,
rather than Nazi groups from elsewhere. And it was also the residents of
the San Antonio neighborhood, with its predominantly North African
population and the primary target of the attacks, who gradually
organized their own self-defense in the face of police inaction during
the first 48 hours. They remained vigilant in the following days,
playing a crucial role in thwarting the attempted uprising, which
ultimately led to the police taking over the area militarily. If it had
been a group of 100 day laborers armed with sticks wandering around the
town for two days, instead of fascist residents, would the same thing
have happened? We know it wouldn't have, and we've known it from the
very beginning, but two days is a long enough period not to be
interpreted as deliberate inaction on the part of the Government
Delegation, which reports to Marlaska. While disinformation campaigns,
along with the echo of racist rhetoric from the right, act as catalysts,
they are neither the sole nor the primary cause, as ACO points out. For
there, and in other similar regions from north to south, what is
racialized is a class conflict in which the European Union's immigration
policy, for which the government is responsible, plays a crucial role in
the organization and exploitation of labor.
Furthermore, the PSOE's current tactic of trying to save us from the far
right is an old, dirty, and clumsy strategy with little chance of
success. It only reinforces fascist propaganda, positioning them as
"anti-establishment" and making them a magnet for the anger of those
excluded from social mobility. Worse still, this strategy, as we see,
involves repressing our struggles because they fall outside the bounds
of parliamentary representation and because they are the ones that build
grassroots solidarity without being controlled. Therefore, projecting a
populist front in this context is utterly politically short-sighted.
"Nobody avoids a beating by running away," says a Barricada song .
Well, that's it. There are curves ahead, no doubt, but we are also
experiencing a resurgence of social conflict, and that's where we are,
with two examples. The struggle for housing is once again placing the
social debate on social and economic inequalities at the forefront,
displacing the security-driven moral panic . The internationalist
solidarity with Palestine and against the Nazi-Zionist genocide that is
being organized globally (the apotheosis of the Vuelta a España finale)
must stop the massacre. But it is also breaking with demobilization,
acting as a catalyst against the fear of migration and the other, and it
is doing so by horizontally uniting new and old activists in the face of
the impossibility of looking the other way.
Pablo , Seville, September 2025 .
(1) "Materials for a critique of democracy" VV.AA. 2005.
klinamen.org
(2)
https://zonaestrategia.net/la-hegemonia-de-la-clase-media-en-el-ultimo-ciclo-feminista/
Critical analysis by the Cantoneras Collective on this mobilization cycle.
(3) Criticism of citizenship was revitalized in the context of the
Alter-globalization movement and the Social Forums of the turn of the
century, highlighting its integrative and reformist function.
(4) On the website, designed with clear fundraising purposes, or in the
interview with its secretary and spokesperson, they argue in favor of
prosecuting these opinion crimes and value the role of the prosecution.
Front page
https://cadenaser.com/audio/1753722951958
(5) The ZEN Plan (Special Northern Zone) was announced in 1983, when
José Barrionuevo (PSOE) was Minister of the Interior. Its stated purpose
was to end ETA and the insurrectionary situation in the Basque Country,
but in practice it functioned as a covert state of emergency. The GAL
terrorism, torture, and brutal repression of all social movements were
its legacy.
(6) "Anti-system groups" was a term coined in police press offices
around 1998/2000, with the intention of criminalizing groups that
practiced sabotage and violently agitated the streets. However, it was
well received by those targeted and did not achieve its purpose, as it
generated more sympathy than anything else among the most discontented
segments of the population, which is a primary objective of propaganda
by action.
(7) This reform coincides in year and Minister with article 33.3 of law
15/2022 that inspires the ACO. The stick and the carrot.
(8) Here, special mention must be made of Baltasar Garzón, the pioneer
of celebrity judges. It should be clarified that he is NOT on the ACO
(Audiencia de Corrupción Española), despite his experience in pointing
out "the limits of freedom of expression," as he closed the newspaper
EGIN in 1998, losing the case 10 years later, and directed other
counterinsurgency operations from the National Court. Despite this, he
has been rehabilitated by almost the entire Spanish left, having won a
place in our hearts for his involvement in the processes for the
reparation of the Historical Memory of Latin American dictatorships.
(9) The debate journal Cuadernos de Estrategia (VVAA) dedicates this
issue no. 3 to "Punitive Common Sense", in a very timely manner.
https://traficantes.net/libros/cuadernos-de-estrategia-n%C2%BA
(10) https://katakrak.net/cas/blog/rese-democracia-de-la-abolici-n
(11) It is curious that those who once championed technological networks
as social, heralding a horizon of direct democracy, now, having lost the
battle for followers, seek to legalize these same networks, trying to
put fences around the open field. The truth is that these networks, as
groups like IPOLITTA warned back then, are proving to be the best
highways for the expansion of Turbocapitalism, narcissistic
self-promotion, and, consequently, the most reactionary ideas.
https://tecnoeducativas.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ippolita-en-el-acuario-de-facebook.pdf
https://regeneracionlibertaria.org/2025/11/01/otro-paso-atras-critica-a-la-aco
_________________________________________
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
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten