Anarchic update news all over the world - Part 2 - 30.06.2019

Today's Topics:

   
1.  Britain, northeastan archist group: Study for Struggle #2 BY
      NEAG (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
2.  cub ferrovie: NEW CUB RAIL EXIT: NEAREST PRINTS. THE NUMBER
      54 IS OUT! (it) [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
3.  anarkismo.net: Trump is Not the Main Problem by Wayne Price
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
4.  Greece, 2nd Eleftheria Festival of Social, Classical &
      Internacial Solidarity (Full Program) By APO [machine
      translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
5.  Greece, vogliamo tutto: LOST BY THE ELECTIONS the
      assignment, the representation, the false hope, the supposed
      change. CONFIDENCE IN OUR POWER. (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)


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

Message: 1





After the success of our first session, we are back! ---- Study for Struggle is North East 
Anarchist Groups reading group, where we get together and discuss texts relating to 
radical politics and the emancipatory struggle for freedom. ---- In our second session, we 
will discuss some chosen texts on workplace organising and working-class struggle in the 
workplace. Make sure to read some of them beforehand! The texts are:- ---- Theses on the 
Role of Communists in the Economic Struggle of the Working Class by CWO 
https://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2016-02-26/theses-on-the-role-of-communists-in-the-economic-struggle-of-the-working-class 
---- 1926: The social general strike - why 1926 failed by Tom Brown ---- 
https://libcom.org/library/social-general-strike-1926-failed-brown

Chapter 11: Revolt in Fast Food Nation: The Wobblies Take on Jimmy John's by Erik Forman 
in New Forms of Worker Organization
https://libcom.org/library/new-forms-worker-organization-syndicalist-autonomist-restoration-class-struggle-unionism
(We will be uploading a PDF copy to Libcom soon if you can't use ePubs)

We hope to see some of you there and if you decide to participate further, you can help 
shape the content of future reading group sessions! After this session, we are looking to 
run two sessions regarding environmentalism, one from a historical Anarchist perspective 
and one from a more modern perspective.

None of us are experts! So come along and join the discussion!

https://northeastanarchistgroup.org/2019/06/26/study-for-struggle-2/

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

Message: 2





IN THIS ISSUE OF CUB RAIL: 2 TEN YEARS AFTER: JUDGMENT OF APPEAL ON THE VIAREGGIO  3 
EDITORIAL ACCIDENT: EVEN THE PUBLIC IS PRIVATE! 6 CRHONICUB (ITALY AND TICINO)  9 DEIF 
4.11: ARIDATECE ER PUZZONE  10 NON-STRESS EVALUATION IN THE UP INTERCITY 12 PENALTIES FOR 
THOSE WHO DEFEND SAFETY. INTERVIEW WITH STEFANO PENNACCHIETTI  15 LICENSES FOR ALCOHOLIC 
RATE  16 FROM PLANTS: DONATION OF METALMECCANICAL WORKSHOPS  TO THE CASSA DEI FERROVIERI 
RAILWAY PROCUREMENT. MANITAL WORKERS IN STRIKE BUSINESS PROTECTION RFI,  FLORENCE IN 
STRIKE  19 STATION SCHEMATIC PLANS: WHAT ARE THEY FOR WHAT ARE  THE 20 SERVING THE 
BALCANIC ROUTE  23 THE PROBLEM (AGAINST WHICH) ---- 24 THE VINEYARD OF THE BRAND  26 IF 
SON ROSE FIORIRANNO 28 THE  APPEAL FOR CONFINDUSTRIA EUROPE AND CONFEDERALS  29 ALDO 
MILANI ABSOLUTE 30 THE PARTY  FAMILY: THE PIOLS  31 CUB RAIL IN THE WORLD  32 AIR 
TRANSPORT: INTERVIEW WITH HERBERT CLAROS  (EMBRAER - BRAZIL)  34 L 'POWER ELECTRONICS IN 
RAILWAY TRACTION  (II)  35 NO TAV. ENVIRONMENTAL ALTERNATIVES TO THE GREAT WORKS
36 ASSAULT TO THE GALLERY  38-39 INITIATIVES AGAINST THE SECURITY DECREE  39 SIMONE LEO 
"MOVING THE LIMIT"  40 THE CUBETER  43 ODE TO THOSE WHO DOES NOT  LEAVE 44 A WAVE OF 
RETIREMENTS. COMMON JOURNEY GREETINGS

http://cubferrovie.altervista.org/nuova-uscita-cub-rail-stammi-vicino-e-uscito-il-numero-54/

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

Message: 3




Democrats, Trump, and the Upcoming Elections: How Should Anarchists See Them? ---- Many 
liberals and other Democrats see Trump as the main problem facing the U.S. Therefore their 
focus is on defeating him in the next election (or impeachment). They focus on the 
electoral system and hope for salvation through government action. I disagree. Trump is a 
major problem, but he is the culmination of years of political and economic development, 
and is related to similar politics in other countries. The fight against Trumpism requires 
a non-electoral and militant program. ---- To many liberals, progressives, unionists, 
activists of various just causes, Democrats of all stripes, democratic socialists, and 
concerned citizens, the problem the U.S. is facing is essentially that Donald J. Trump is 
president, and is backed by the Republican Party. I disagree with this widespread belief.

It is likely that Trump will be removed from office in the next two years, whether by 
impeachment (unlikely due to the Senate Republicans) or by national elections (probably 
but not certainly). Liberals, progressives, etc., look forward to this as a glorious day. 
The sun will come out from behind the darkling clouds, little birds will sing again, the 
miasma of evil and stupidity will lift from the land, and all will be well again. Things 
will finally go back to "normal."

Alas, I do not think that things will be "normal" ever again. I too long to see the vile 
Trump gone. I am not cynical and have hopes for the future. Yet I do not see the 
replacement of Trump by a Democrat or other establishment politician as the coming of a 
glorious new day.

But first I should make clear my views on Trump. As a revolutionary anarchist-socialist, I 
have never liked any of the presidents of my lifetime. But I have particularly hated a 
few, starting with the Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson, because of the U.S. war on Vietnam. (We 
chanted, "Hey, hey, LBJ! How many kids did you kill today!?") And I especially hated the 
Republicans Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush. They were the cutting edge 
of the ruling class' attacks on working people of the U.S. and the world.

But I have never hated any politician as much as I hate the despicable Trump. Personally 
he is utterly devoid of conscience or of empathy for others. Mean and cruel, he is 
completely self-centered. Devoid of honor, he breaks laws and ethical norms, big and 
little, and sells out friends and associates (and "his" country) without a qualm. He sees 
women as things to be used. He is a racist. He cannot keep from lying on matters important 
and unimportant. While he has a certain sly cunning, Trump is ignorant, incurious, and 
stupid. He makes stupid decisions-not just from my standpoint but from that of U.S. 
imperialism.

Politically, he holds some bizarre views which are unusual even among the corporate rich 
and the right wing Republican establishment: his attachment to the Russian state and 
Putin, his unwillingness to condemn Nazis, his reckless use of tariffs, his commitment to 
building a wall on the Mexican border, his quarrels with U.S. allies, etc. While most 
Republican politicians have bowed to anti-immigrant fervor, Trump really believes in the 
"threat" of immigrants. He is not a fascist but neither is he a non-fascist.

As a result of all this, Trump is a very unpopular president (according to the polls). 
This is so even in spite of a relative (if shallow and uneven) prosperity (which raises 
the question of how voters would react if the next downturn takes place before the 
national election). Why do the Republican politicos still support him? Mitch McConnell, 
leader of the Senate Republicans, is an intelligent man, if totally cynical. Why does he 
back Trump, considering what he must think of him? There are two pro-Trump forces pressing 
on the Republicans, one from above and one from below.

 From above: Most of the capitalist class did not support Trump in the last election and 
would prefer someone else even now. But they love the enormous tax cuts for the rich which 
the Republicans passed, with his strong support. They like his and his party's attacks on 
Obamacare. They love the deregulation which he has pushed through all parts of the 
executive branch. They are delighted with the conservative, pro-business, judges whom he 
has appointed-to the Supreme Court and throughout the federal judiciary. And so on. They 
do not want to kill the goose which is laying the golden eggs, even if the goose is 
otherwise nuts.

 From below: Around 40 per cent, more or less, of the population supports Trump solidly 
and fervently. This is the base of the current Republican Party. Republican politicians 
fear being voted out in primaries if they oppose Trump. This grouping ranges from crazed 
fascists (who identify with the Nazis and Klan) to some who voted for Obama in previous 
elections (the loosest part of this base). These people have been lied to and miseducated 
in a conscious effort by right-wing forces. They are fed a steady diet of Fox "News," talk 
radio, and Internet blogs which put them in a delusional bubble. Their sexual fears are 
whipped up, over homosexuality and abortion rights, by their church leaders. Many are 
strongly racist and vote for Trump for that reason; others vote for him for other reasons 
but are not turned off by his racism.

A large section of these people do have real grievances: after eight years of Obama, 
including a brittle "recovery," much of the country was still poor, stagnant, and lacking 
good jobs. This included many rural and semi-rural areas, in and out of the "Rust Belt." 
The white workers and middle class residents of these regions rejected Hillary Clinton as 
an establishment politician. They expected (correctly) that she would continue the 
policies which had not helped them (but many also rejected her because she was a woman). 
Unfortunately, turning to Trump was no answer to their problems.

The Historical Pattern of Presidents

Does this mean that kicking Donald Trump out of the White House will bring things back to 
"normal"? Even though big business will still push for its program of tax cuts and 
deregulation and even though a big minority continues to support right wing politics? Can 
these forces be defeated through elections?

It is worth going over some history here. The Democrat Lyndon Johnson, who had betrayed 
liberals' hopes by his war on Vietnam, was followed by Richard Nixon. Hated by the Left, 
and caught up in the Watergate Scandal, he was forced to resign. Then his hand-picked 
successor was beaten in an election by Jimmy Carter. To liberals, progressives, etc., 
these were indeed glorious developments. A new day dawned! Yet Carter, after one term, was 
defeated by Ronald Reagan, a far-right "conservative" (which is what reactionaries are 
called in the U.S.). He won two terms, plus one presidential term for his vice president, 
George H. W. Bush. But Bush was then defeated by Bill Clinton. Clinton could play the 
saxophone and appeared to get along well with African-Americans. Again, a glorious new day 
finally seemed to have dawned! But after two terms of Clintonian Democracy, the people 
voted down his vice president, Al Gore, and elected George W. Bush. (Actually Gore 
probably won the popular vote, by a hair's width, but the Supreme Court majority put Bush 
in.) Bush was terrible and stupid, said the liberals, progressives, etc., gnashing their 
teeth. He won a second term (probably fairly).

Then Barack Obama was elected, an African-American president! Liberals were ecstatic. Pete 
Seeger sang at the inauguration with Bruce Springsteen. Naturally, African-Americans were 
particularly pleased, although few of them believed claims that the U.S. was now a 
"post-racial" society. Sure enough, the history-making Obama was then followed by...Donald 
Trump. (Actually Trump lost the popular vote by a few percentage points, but the archaic 
Electoral College put him in.) I am not going to discuss voting suppression by the 
Republicans, and various shenanigans by Comey of the FBI, the Russians, etc., which 
undermined Hillary Clinton. The U.S. state has intervened in other countries' politics at 
least as much as Russia has.

This little history does not mention the effects of mid-term elections, which often 
empowered the reactionary opposition to bind Democratic presidents from carrying out their 
more-or-less progressive agendas (as in Obama's last six years). Nor am I discussing just 
how limited these "progressive" agendas turned out to be, time after time-much to the 
surprise and dismay of the liberals, progressives, etc. (as in Obama's first two years). 
My point here is the obvious one that the repeated defeats of reactionary presidents and 
presidential candidates has not ushered in the dawn of a glorious new day. Instead, the 
more-or-less progressive presidents have repeatedly been followed by another reactionary 
president. Over time the Republicans have gotten more reactionary and the Democrats have 
occupied the space once taken by the Republicans-until we have reached the current 
president, a new low in U.S. history.

Why is this? Partially the reason is the two-party system. Unlike many other countries, 
U.S. laws make it very difficult to form effective third parties. (There has not been a 
new major party since Lincoln's Republicans replaced the Whigs.) So if people get fed up 
with one party, they have little choice but to turn to the other. The range of political 
discourse is very limited, generally from mildly liberal to extremely reactionary (but not 
usually fascist). The newspapers and television play this up, mostly analyzing elections 
as "horse races" and ignoring programs. Citizens are taught to look at the personality of 
the individual running rather than at what programs they might implement.

However it would be a mistake to focus too much on U.S. factors. The growth of right-wing, 
nationalist, "populism" is world-wide. Other countries, with leaders with personalities 
quite different from Trump's, and with electoral systems quite different from the U.S. 
constitution, have developed their own forms of reactionary "populism." There is Britain 
with its "Brexit," authoritarian right-wing leaders in Hungary, Poland, Italy, and Brazil, 
the rise of the far-right LePen in France, Netanyahu in Israel, Modi in India, Duerte in 
the Phillipines, and other examples. There are also authoritarian regimes which do not 
bother with elections but have similar politics-Putin's Russia being somewhere in-between 
these types.

So, on the one hand, there has been a pattern of increasingly bad presidents, racheting 
down, through waves of "moderate" Democrats and reactionary Republicans. On the other 
hand, there is a world-wide growth of far-right, authoritarian, regimes. These 
developments demonstrate that the problem is bigger than just Trump.

Something New is Happening

For decades after World War II, U.S. politics swung back and forth between the Democrats 
and the Republicans. There was little difference between the two. It was a platitude of 
U.S. "political science" that this was a strength of U.S. politics, providing stability 
and consensus. This changed about the time that the post-World War II prosperity came to 
an end (in the 1970s). The economy stagnated, and the making of profits became more 
difficult. Big business declared war on the working class (and the environment) in open 
and covert ways. The Republicans became the leaders of that attack. Today many look back 
on the era of political consensus with sighs of regret. The bitter partisanship of the two 
parties is dismaying to many politicians, political "scientists," and ordinary voters. The 
Republicans have moved to the far-right, and the Democrats have stayed just behind them.

Even this development has been shaken up in recent years. On the right, there has grown 
white-supremacist, fascist, violent, forces. (By "fascist" I do not mean people who are 
simply very conservative, but people who wish to overturn the representative bourgeois 
democracy of the U.S. and replace it with a dictatorship.) They have been encouraged by 
Trump and have encouraged him, even if he himself is not a fascist.

Perhaps even more surprising is the growth of a socialist movement. Polls have found 
thirty to forty percent of the population-especially young adults-with a positive view of 
"socialism." Many have become disillusioned with capitalism. The presidential runs of 
Bernie Sanders built on this sentiment and encouraged it. The Democratic Socialists of 
America rapidly expanded, attracting people of varying views (even anarchists joined, to 
form a Libertarian Socialist Caucus). Socialists were elected to local and national 
office, the most well-known, besides Sanders, being Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

These socialists are not very "socialist." They do not advocate taking away the wealth of 
what Sanders has called "the billionaire class." They do not propose socializing the major 
corporations-not even the oil producers and the rest of the energy sector. By 
"socializing" I mean anything from national government ownership to municipal ownership to 
worker management to consumer cooperatives. (As an anarchist-socialist, I am for the last 
two.) Their model is usually an idealized version of the New Deal of Franklyn Roosevelt. 
This was an effort to save capitalism from its own failures in the Great Depression-to 
save capitalism from itself. That is, they hope to use the existing capitalist state to 
manage the market economy in a more efficient, more benevolent, fashion, supposedly in the 
interests of the working population. As such their program is not particularly different 
from that of liberals, such as Elizabeth Warren. This should not be surprising given the 
semi-liberal programs of European social-democratic parties, such as in the Nordic 
(Scandinavian) countries, the UK, France, or Germany. Although far from Stalinist 
totalitarianism, liberals and democratic socialists have an unjustified faith in the 
effectiveness of the state to solve social problems.

The Democrats?

As I am writing there a year and some months to go before the election. The Democrats 
still enjoy over 20 candidates for their presidential nomination. They are struggling over 
how "left" their rhetoric should be and how generous their proposals should sound (so far, 
not one has called for big cuts in the military budget). If they sound "too left," they 
may seem to threaten the capitalist system. This could drive off the big donors who 
otherwise would support them against Trump. And it might (or might not) drive off the 
moderate base of the Democrats (as opposed to educating them). But if they are not "left" 
enough, they will not really challenge Trump, his Republicans, and his corporate backers. 
Nor will they motivate their liberal base. What to do?

Liberals often complain about how wishy-washy and spineless the Democrats are in the face 
of right-wing attacks. This is in contrast to the Republicans who are "principled" and 
even fanatical about their goals. There is a reason for this difference. If the 
Republicans stir up their white, relatively privileged, racist, middle class base into 
hysterical frenzies, this might result in the nomination of a Trump or, at worst, an 
attack on bourgeois democracy-but not on capitalism. But if the Democrats were to rile up 
their base, to excite the African-American community and blue collar workers, to mobilize 
unions and to organize mass action by youth-this could threaten capitalism. Unlimited 
demands by workers, People of Color, people threatened by climate change, etc., would go 
past the limits of the capitalist economy. This the Democrats cannot allow and will not 
permit.

As far as I am concerned, the Democratic candidates are vying to be the top manager of the 
most dangerous institution in the world today, This is the U.S. national military-state 
and its capitalist economy. I am not sympathetic to this goal. (The U.S. has a military 
force larger than the next eight national states. It is a key part of the 
life-threatening, climate-destroying, system of national states and the capitalist world 
market.)

Some liberals, progressives, etc., are impressed with the current flock of Democratic 
candidates. This requires taking their words at face value, ignoring what they do not say 
(about foreign policy or military spending, for example). And a focus on individuals, 
rather than the history of the party. Others, more realistic, argue that the Democrats are 
the "lesser evil." This is to admit that they are evil, even if lesser. I would not deny 
that, especially in comparison to Trump and his minions.

But here is my question: Who has a program which is adequate to solve the deep problems of 
the U.S. and world? That is, global warming and other ecological catastrophes, the danger 
of nuclear war, the probability of a collapse of the capitalist economy-as well as 
"lesser" problems such as continuing racism, gender oppression, LGBTQ repression, economic 
inequality, stagnation,"small" wars, political authoritarianism, and so on. The very 
survival of industrial civilization, and perhaps of humanity and our fellow creatures, is 
at stake. Whether the Democrats mean well or are hypocrites and liars, their programs are 
simply inadequate for the crises we face. Can it be claimed, by any knowledgable person, 
that any Democrat has such a needed program?

It would be delightful to get rid of Donald Trump, this pustule on the ass of humanity. 
But if the result is that we are still on the road to armageddon and the destruction of 
the world, then my joy is limited.

What Shall We Do?

This is not a discussion of whether to vote. I don't really care. I doubt that the votes 
of a handful of anarchists-or even of all the conscious socialists and radicals in the 
country-would make a difference.

The issue is not what a few individuals should do. it is what we radicals should advocate 
that mass institutions and movements should do. This includes the unions, the 
African-American community, Latinx communities, LGBTQ groups, the ecological and 
environmental movement, feminist organizations, etc. These are the base of the Democratic 
Party. They donate a large amount of money, and human energy and time, to the Democrats' 
electoral efforts. Yet their rewards have not been great. In recent elections, the 
Democrats have turned their backs on them, especially on the unions and the working class. 
Similarly, unlike the Republicans, the Democrats have admitted that there is a climate 
crisis. Yet they have done little about it and advocated limited programs. They have 
sought African-Americans votes but done little to improve their lives. And so on.

Errico Malatesta, the Italian revolutionary anarchist-socialist, was a co-worker with 
Bakunin and Kropotkin. He commented, "Electionists...compare what is done in the electoral 
struggle with what would happen if nothing were done; while instead they should compare 
the results obtained when other methods are followed and with what might be achieved if 
all effort used to send representatives to power...were[instead]employed in the fight to 
directly achieve what is desired." (Malatesta 2019; 179)

There needs to be massive union organizing drives through the U.S. There should be city 
and regional general strikes to fight back against attacks on working people. There need 
to be massive and militant demonstrations, with civil disobedience, to fight against 
police brutality and other aspects of racism and poverty. Cities should be brought to a 
halt until steps are taken to limit global warming. Colleges should be occupied by their 
students. So factories and other workplaces.should be occupied by their workers, who 
should run them for the common good.

If a Democrat is elected president, with a Democratic Congress, we can expect liberals, 
progressives, and activists to be disappointed. The Democrats, whatever their motives, 
will stay within the limits of capitalism. Therefore they cannot stop climate change or 
improve the living conditions of working people-not under the current conditions of 
capitalist stagnation and decline. This disappointment will lead to greater opposition, I 
hope. Opposition should not be channeled into the Democratic Party (there to wither and 
die),nor into other electoral parties (that is, into other supports of the capitalist 
state). They should be directed to direct action and militant activities.

To save the humans, a different system is needed-one based on cooperation, equality, and 
freedom, with production for use not profit, and with radically-democratic self-management 
of the economy and all aspects of society. Only a few are for this now, but a radical left 
wing of the developing movements can be built to fight for this revolutionary goal. If we 
are not mesmerized by the flam-flam of the electoral system.

References

Malatesta, Errico (2019) (Davide Turcato, Ed.) (Paul Sharkey, Trans.). "Towards Anarchy"; 
Malatesta in America 1899-1900. The Complete Works of Errico Malatesta; Vol. IV. Chico CA: 
AK Press.

*written for www.Anarkismo.net

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/31473

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

Message: 4





FREEDOM FESTIVAL - PROGRAM ---- Eleftheria Festival of Internationalist, Social and 
Classical Solidarity # 2 ---- Athens 4-5-6 July 2019 | University Campus of Zografou | 
School of MITHE, Entrance from Taxilos (3rd FEPA, buses 220, 221, 5th stop of Ilissia) 
---- 3 days of political discussions, book presentations, cinematic screenings, anarchist 
printed material and bookstore, poster and photo exhibitions, artistic events ---- 
ORGANIZATION AND RACE FOR WORLD SOCIAL REVOLUTION, ANARCHY AND FREEDOM COMMEMORATION ---- 
Thursday 4th July ---- 18.00 Presentation of Diego Abad de  Santillan "An Eleutherial 
Order: History, Evolution and Practice (Volume B: State, War and Revolution) ---- from 
Stay Downs ---- 19.00 Event - Discussion: Contemporary totalitarianism, war, nationalism, 
fascism.

The upgrading and expansion of military bases and the mobilization of international 
solidarity. (Dwarf Horse)
The Macedonian issue in the context of the upheavals in the Eastern Mediterranean. The 
fascist threat and the kinesthetic response. (Black & Red, Libertatia)
School squats for the "Macedonian" and the struggle against the rise of nationalism. 
(Anarchist Student Group Ataxia)
21.00 View of the Contesscion Suarez Aguilar's Koltavanej (Liberation) documentary

The case of indigenous Rosa Lopez Dias, detained in the prisons of Chiapas for a crime he 
never committed, who wholeheartedly joined the struggle for the release of political 
prisoners.

22.00 Tsiersancules present the theatrical play "It hurts my mind".

A cabaret performance based on texts by Anthony Chekhov, Carl Valentin and Monty Pithon

Friday July 5th

18.00 Presentation of the Book and Campaign "Rebuild Green Rose" of the Interfaith 
Communist Party of Rosawa

from the Eupopia publications

19.00 Event - Discussion: "Against State and Capitalist Barbarism, Social Cannibalism and 
Gender Violence"  by the group against patriarchy

Take part:

Annie Paparousou, lawyer of the family of Jacques Kostopoulos
Comrades from the arrested anti-fascist motorbike on 30/9/2012
Coaching initiative from Exarchia
22.00  Rebetiko Feast of financial support of the Eleftherias Festival with Afrodon

Saturday 6 July

17.00 Event - Discussion: Games for Earth and Freedom from Acheloos to Agrafa and Epirus

18.00 Event - Discussion: "Elections as a means of renewing state and capitalist aggression".

20.00  Event - Discussion: "The struggle for Exarchia of social self-organization and 
class solidarity" with the participation of comrades and comrades from the assembly for 
the re-exoneration of Exarchia

21.30 Concert of financial support of the liberal festival with: T imetrap , cricket dead, 
stigma and Gorgos Tsingos & Black Circles

Anarchist Political Organization - Federation of Collectivities

apo.squathost.com | anpolorg@gmail.com

http://apo.squathost.com

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

Message: 5





Text against delegation, mediation and electoral process, by the anarchist collectivity 
Vogliamo tutto e per tutti . In the last few weeks, interventions have taken place, from 
collegiality and in coordination with other anarchist collectives, in the neighborhoods of 
the center, Koukaki, Petralona, New World, Nea Smyrna with the distribution of texts and 
posters. Interventions will continue next week by sending the message: " Public 
participation means DEPRESSION from the elections of delegation, representation, false 
hope, supposed change. The only person competent and able to manage his / her life is 
himself / herself oppressed, the exploited. ---- Below is the text of the anarchist 
college Vogliamo tutto e per tutti against the elections and the delegation: ---- Do not 
choose your ruler! Abstention from elections!

Involvement in the public means DEPRESSION from the elections of delegation, 
representation, false hope, supposed change.

"Vote for us so that the right does not come," "vote for them to leave SYRIZA", "vote for 
them so that the fascists will not be strengthened", "voted for them to strengthen your 
voice", " voted for the good for a better future, "or" with the fascists or with us "," 
with us to get the place out, "" privatization or the social state ".

Countless pseudo-dilemmas that once again bring back the bourgeoisie on the occasion of 
the upcoming elections. Dilemmas that have been built and served by citizens who are 
rehearsing for citizens. After the governments of national unity, the appointed prime 
ministers, the referendum that re-socialized the institutions of representation, 
parliamentary regularity reminds again the brilliant and bipartite 1980s / 1990s. 
Artificial polarization around non-existent issues such as citizen security, favoritism, 
reform bidding, black promises, blobs, fascist crowns. The whole spectrum of 
parliamentarism in election campaign parade.Primary role plays the media, which is a 
dominant means of manipulating the bottom. Through spectacle, propaganda, news, and 
"events", they serve the interests of power. Its countless contenders invest time and 
money in propaganda campaigns calling everyone and all of us to "participate" in the 
democracy fest by depositing a piece of paper in a wooden box every four years. The 
institution of the elections is presented as the top instrument of politicization, where 
voters participate in decision-making and are supposedly co-managers of power. 
Participation in the elections is the same as the concept of politics. Voters in this way 
become members of the state and the deputies, their representatives on land ...Democracy, 
or just the celebration of mediation and commissioning!

Election participation is a denial of your own self-management. The vote is suited to 
passive consumers, who entrust professionals to "manage everything". Elected 
representatives, being elected using every means, ranging from promises and promises to 
direct chores, are called upon to legislate and implement policies across all disciplines 
defining every aspect of our lives. Election participation acts as a means of legitimizing 
and passively supporting the system of exploitation and oppression. Elections are nothing 
more than a mechanism of consensus building. The only choice made through the elections is 
that of the dynast and the elected, regardless of intent, act as representatives of 
capital.It is not at all arbitrary how many professional politicians are involved in 
interference scandals with private companies (Siemens, NOVARTIS, AKTOR, THALES, Ellinikos 
Xrysos SA, MEVGAL, Deutsche Telekom, some examples), and the phenomena of extreme 
enrichment of members of the "National Delegation". Whether small or large the forces that 
promote the assignment, they will always cluster and serve the interests of capital. This 
is not a Greek accident or an exception, but the essence of parliamentarianism.

The only person competent and able to manage his / her life is himself / herself 
oppressed, the exploited. No bureaucratic and hierarchical group hoping for power, either 
"conservative" or "progressive", will not take care of the needs of the bottom. As 
anarchists, we consider the daily struggle against state and capital to participate in the 
elections incompatible. The logic of "our inferior optimal" is alien.Participation in 
electoral processes costs ideological consistency, but also political dynamics. Our goal 
is not simply to abstain from the elections, but also to re-pursue politics and to 
identify it with uninterrupted procedures, with self-organization and anti-command. 
Besides, the bottom-up story has shown that sharpening the uninterrupted struggle away 
from and against institutional illusions is the only way for oppressed and exploited to 
defend their interests and resist capitalist barbarism. The solution for us is not to 
"bother them in democracy", but to abstain from their feast and to resist their 
imperatives. Against the pseudo-dilemmas,solidarity, self-organized structures, 
neighborhood assemblies, political hangouts, grassroots clubs, anti-hierarchical 
collectivities, Communists, and the revolution of every day.

Why the election outpouring for us means civic participation.

Self-organized, anti-hierarchical, radical struggles to overthrow state and capitalist 
barbarism, anarchy and communism.

anarchist collectivity Vogliamo tutto e per tutti

https://vogliamotutto.espivblogs.net/2019/06/27/apochi-apo-tis-ekloges-tis-anathesis-tis-antiprosopeysis-tis-kalpikis-elpidas-tis-dithen-allagis-empistosyni-stis-dynameis-mas/

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