WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE SPAIN - news journal UPDATE - (en) Spain, Regeneration: Being the Ashes of That Fire (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 Index: 1) The Lack of Role Models in Anarchist Activism | 2) Defeat | 3) The Void Filled | 4) Our Own Militant Culture

1) The Lack of Role Models in Anarchist Activism
Recently, a comrade from Galicia wrote and published an article[1]about our heritage as militants of social and organized anarchism, and how we are nothing more than the ashes of that fire that our predecessors kept alive. The article argues that it is neither effective nor respectful to exist as a political current within the anarchist spectrum through arrogance, disrespect towards other anarchist comrades, and the denial of their existence as a self-affirmation. However, in reading the article, one also glimpses one of the shortcomings that most affects us as anarchist militants: the lack of current role models.

By role models, I mean the organizations, activists, and political movements in which we could see ourselves reflected, both in terms of political practice, the definition of theory and ideology, public action, and other aspects where we would benefit from having a point of reference. Without such a figure, we lack an example situated in our current circumstances that would allow us to envision what our capabilities as an organized movement might be.

On the other hand, by "current" role models, I mean political figures situated both in our own era and within our approximate geographical and historical context. We might well consider the Friends of Durruti and the Iberian Anarchist Federation as historical role models, but the context and framework of action of these genuinely revolutionary organizations is far removed from our own. And we might well consider the Uruguayan and Brazilian Especifistas, or the growing Anarchist Communist Federation of Australia, or even the relatively broad and strong French-speaking Union Communiste Libertaire, but we are neither sufficiently familiar with their activities nor do we share the same local context (although we can approximate it).

While our anarcho-syndicalist, autonomist, and insurrectionist comrades-the libertarian family-have kept alive the flame of this dream that shook the foundations of capitalist society in the last century, this journey through the desert has left the space of anarchist political organization empty, a void that the FAI (Iberian Anarchist Federation) once filled in our territory. We, the activists who have emerged and aligned ourselves with the anarchist project in this last decade, have not had an anarchist political organization in which to see ourselves reflected; instead, our aspirations have been subordinated to existing rival organizations. Understanding this situation requires understanding the context in which we find ourselves as anarchist political organizations, while also explaining the past cycle that we want to overcome.

The Defeat
The current context of revolutionary defeat is foreshadowed by a series of specific defeats of the workers' movement and the anarchist organization. Without intending to construct a historiography of the Cycles of Struggle (since that is not the objective of this article), I will define three particular defeats that shape the current organizational and social context in the local area.

First, the defeat of the Social Revolution in Spain and the Catalan Countries between 1936 and 1939. Originating from a cycle that includes the Paris Commune and a strengthening of revolutionary fervor with the Russian Revolution, in this context we see the working class organized around the anarcho-syndicalist CNT, alongside an organization with its own culture, practice, and strength in the FAI. This great revolutionary force of our class has been subjected to deadly repression by the State since 1936, with this persecution intensifying from May 1937 onward. The State dissolved the existing libertarian communism of the Aragonese communes that same year and militarily defeated them in 1939. From this period, we are left with a revolutionary myth and the practical application of libertarian communism, but also the discrediting of the project through government collaboration, the physical destruction and bloodshed of its militants.

Second, we have the defeat of the cycle that began with May 1968 and ended with the post-transition period, approximately with the Moncloa Pacts. This period saw the reorganization of the CNT, the establishment of specific anarchist groups to influence this process, a context of armed struggle, and the formation of what is now called the Regime of '78. From this period, we have the formation of the trade union models of the CNT's successors, but also a profound social legitimization of parliamentary democracy under the constitutional monarchy and a weakening of anarchist forces that could not stop the replacement of class consciousness with the current liberal apathy.

The most recent defeat is the electoral failure of Podemos and the conclusion of the Catalan independence movement in recent years. This period saw the emergence of numerous libertarian assemblies and a resurgence of activism, along with a diversity of struggles. This defeat cannot be pinpointed to a specific date; rather, it is characterized by the gradual decline of mobilization over time and the subsequent abandonment of the objectives for which the movement had fought. The social paralysis caused by Covid-19 effectively buried this cycle. Many current activists draw upon the political and organizational experience they possess today from this era.

These three defeats are framed within the respective formal models of workers' organizations of their time. Specifically, the first defeat, from 1936 to 1939, corresponds to the fortress-like organizational model: a large, structured organization that sought to direct the forces of the entire working class. The third defeat, the 15M-Process cycle, corresponds to the movement-based, horizontal, and informal model, which distrusts large structures. The second defeat, the Transition, corresponds to the moment of transition and confluence between the two models; specifically, the coexistence of the CNT as the large union structure of the historical "old militants" and exiles, and the informal practices of the "young militants" in the new generations when organizing.

The Void Filled
These defeats generated, as I have tried to explain and as my comrade also wrote, a lack of role models who could teach and guide us. The elements that could tend to be reference points within the anarchist current itself came either from a distant past, from another continent, or were simply great individual names in anarchism.

In the recent past, specifically, the following duality existed. On the one hand, there were grassroots organizations and movements that proposed demands and contested the streets, where we participated; This was part of a political process with ultimate goals with which we disagreed or did not accept as they were presented. Furthermore, there was a lack of a sufficiently large organized anarchist current within the movement that had emerged, a space occupied by a rival political current.

This resulted, on the one hand, in a lack of anarchist representation within that context of struggle-that is, a lack of demonstration of strength and self-recognition that affected our morale and prospects. On the other hand, lacking an anarchist political organization to look to for inspiration, our awareness of what we could achieve as an organized force was defined by the actions of the leftist organizations that were leading that period. Just as a vacuum of political leadership and defense of class independence can arise in a grassroots organization, allowing non-revolutionary practices to flourish, or a lack of understanding of power roles within an assembly to give rise to informal hierarchies, the vacuum of anarchist organizational reference points can be filled by non-anarchist political tendencies.

This appropriation of reference points poses a problem: an anarchist political organization is not the same as a left-wing political party or a national liberation organization. It operates on different assumptions, has different objectives, and has a different relationship with the working class. In a moment of a lack of anarchist reference points, it becomes much more difficult to answer what we must do to achieve Social Revolution, especially if all we have seen around us are actions that lead to other, fruitless objectives, such as the conquest of political power.

The anarchist political organization is not a political party: it is a revolutionary organization. The actions it undertakes, the discourse it produces, its relationship with the working masses, and its form and structure are, and must be, qualitatively different from these other political formations. It is a problem, then, if we see ourselves reflected in their actions, capabilities, or slogans, because they lead toward an objective we do not pursue.

It is necessary, therefore, to fill this void of reference points with our own organization: the anarchist political organization. We must fill the political space with our actions, our activity, our theoretical and ideological contributions, our perspective in the debates that take place, and our own strength.

Our own militant culture
We are being born in the 21st century as a weak, dispersed, organized movement, with a broken memory, but with the will to piece together the fabric of this puzzle.

To rebuild the organized strength of anarchism and become a political force worthy of our times, we must strengthen and expand our militant culture, distinguishing it from other groups and claiming it as our own. Currently, we have built, to a certain extent, an internal militant culture by structuring our political intervention within a Militant Code. Following this path, we must demonstrate our political actions to the working masses through political communication, dare to broaden our militant base both qualitatively and quantitatively, and establish a territorially grounded militant network capable of confronting the struggles toward the horizon of libertarian communism. Building together leads us toward organizational unity, toward the unity of anarchists in a common general organization that we have longed for during these times of wandering in the wilderness.

In this article, I want to invite anarchists everywhere to rebuild this militant culture, to recreate our days of remembrance and our commemorative dates, our cultural touchstones, our projects for building popular power, our own militant aesthetic, and a positive commitment to building revolutionary strength.

Let us unite in social and organized anarchism so that in this new cycle, anarchism can be a political agent capable of intervening in the direction of the Social Revolution!

Malfainer, member of Batzac - Joventuts Llibertàries

1. https://regeneracionlibertaria.org/2025/07/29/non-somos-mais-que-a-cinza-dese-lume

https://regeneracionlibertaria.org/2025/11/18/ser-cendra-daquell-foc/
_________________________________________

Link: (en) Spain, Regeneration: Being the Ashes of That Fire (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca