Balance of the anti-election mini-campaign, elections and things around ---- We
are slowly three weeks away from the end of the presidential election, so let'srecap our mini-campaign "We don't need a president". Not much happened, and wealready talked about the point in the "mysterious article" just before theelection itself. ---- We published a themed issue of the A3 wall newspaper, setup a cover website, wrote some text and created three improvised, completelysarcastic posters that appeared at least on the streets of Prague and Olomouc.Their usefulness does not end with the presidential election, they can certainlybe used, for example, around March 8, when Miloš will be replaced by Pavel duringthe media frenzy. I mean Peter. You can download them by clicking on(anti)presidential websites, which can also be spread further. It will not loseits topicality, it cannot even be ruled out that we will keep the domain untilthe next election in six years.We also concluded all the glory with an anti-presidential study held after theannouncement of the results at Zdena in Prague. To be honest - at the beginningthere was the idea of a real studio, which would perhaps be broadcast via socialnetworks, but as a result, no one wanted to do anything with it. Which was inline with the general "plan" of our campaign, i.e. not to break out inparticular. In addition, relevant questions related to choice have already beenpublicly discussed at the recent Existence Party.A few of us met in the studio. We had a limo and beer, bit into deliciousfocaccia baked by the most skilled person from our team. By the way, we havealready sent all the voluntary food contributions to our friends in war-tornUkraine. Thanks for them!The chamber atmosphere benefited our basically only plan (except "I might gosomewhere if we wanted extra"), a kind of variation on Riskuj! - knowledgecontests including the history of our movement, ecology, feminism, LGBTQ+ topicsor anti-fascism. The historical questions were interspersed with so-calledentertaining videos depicting the given events, especially the Nazis getting alesson here or there. It was nice. Given that the prizes themselves - mainlypublications and other materials from the archives - did not differ betweenwinners and, um, non-winners, I hope no one left unhappy.And now to the pointThe election result itself tells us several things. Somehow, the good news isthat the Orbán and Národov line lost, which Babiš had already attacked before the2021 parliamentary elections. Even if he did it for pragmatic reasons as acynical calculation, it was and is a sign of danger. Especially given his growingpolitical isolation on the domestic scene, there is also a growing risk that theoligarch will try to follow the examples of the "neo-authoritarian" governmentsin Poland and Hungary in order to preserve his political-business project.In the presidential campaign, Babiš's former declaration that Orbán is theHungarian prime minister and a complete moron is his friend and inspirationalnational leader, followed by the role of a "peacemaker". It was a veryunderstandable signal to the critics of helping Ukraine and agreeing to theirunspoken appeal for Western countries to let the Ukrainians be massacred byRussia unhindered. It is good that this line symbolically lost, even if we have athousand strong objections to NATO and Western politics in general.But the word "symbolically" is important here. The fact that the frustration andanger of a significant part of society is channeled into brownish, nationalistic,conspiracy-theoretic and even pro-Putin tendencies remains a fact even after theelections. The result only masks the trend. Babiš tried to use the opponents ofaid to Ukraine (mainly nationalists, opponents of LGBTQ+ rights, ecology,feminism, etc.) because they are relatively numerous and united in the onlypolitical entity from which voters can still be stolen: the brownish,anti-Ukrainian SPD. And in such a situation, even the ex-prime minister cansimply behave like the SPD with all the consequences.The fact that he has now lost does not have to tell us anything about thestrength of fascist trends. Many supporters of nationalism and "peace" did notvote for Babiš at the cost of the destruction of Ukraine. Often they still hatehim because of the anti-covid measures, other times they would like someonedownright fascist. The only luck for us as opponents of racism andauthoritarianism is that outright fashion circles chronically lack charismaticleaders who would trump Babiš's PR apparatus. The SPD candidate Bašta seemed likea confused fool, the figures from the autumn pro-Russian demonstrations - on thepolitical axis from the KSČM to the Tricolor to 100% Nazis - are usuallyincompetent and at odds with each other.Babiš's loss does not resolve concerns about fascism and anti-Ukrainiansentiments, perhaps on the contrary. Moreover, a number of people leaning towardsauthoritarians and political scumbags in the situation of the virtual absence ofthe formal left (and the marginality of the informal left) are not outrightfascists or idiots. Their - of course terrible - political attitudes ratherexpress dissatisfaction with the loss of any life certainties, and thus also somesense of human dignity, and last but not least, an effort to look for proxyproblems, just so that they do not have to admit their own inability to aim atthe right goals, i.e. primarily on capitalism.Precarization and the increase in the cost of living, the fact that the liberalelites are coughing on ordinary people, the widespread desire for "someone tomake things right", the long-standing Czech nationalism and the lack of politicalimagination that would advance the range of alternatives - all this shows thatthe problem of influence we will not just get rid of fascist tendencies.No returnA significant part of society evaluated Pavel as a better option because heembodies the status quo. Namely, the promise of middle-class decency, respect forrules, "calm and order" supported by the marketing machinery and the "general's"obvious talent for systemic politics and addressing the type of crowds that usedto gather at the Million Moments demonstrations.This completely misses the mark for us - people who want social change towards afreer, more equal and sustainable society. Pavel (just like Babiš) is arepresentative of the political-economic order that we must overcome. In summary,what we say all the time applies to us: we need to see the situation from abroader perspective and work on developing our own, more important topics thanthe trivial question of who will be president.If we look away from the names of the candidates, we see in the currentpresidential election another chapter of the clash between the social orderpresent in our country since the 1990s - neoliberal capitalism - and the attemptby a mix of nationalists, new authoritarians and political entrepreneurs to seizepower by fitting into the role of "pro-people alternatives". In our country,Babiš and Okamura are now profiled, abroad Trump, the Polish PiS party or Orbán.In a way, this conflict is a sad reaction to the attack against neoliberalismfrom the left, in which anarchists participated during the financial crisisaround 2010 alongside anti-capitalist, naturally anti-racist and environmentalmovements such as the American Occupy. It gave birth to a new generation ofactivists, but as an organized force it collapsed due to the lack of strategy,the theft of the popular movement by would-be revolutionary left parties, andfinally the reaction from the right and the confusion of some anti-system actorstowards fascism.Therefore, if the new authoritarianism loses in some conflicts with therepresentatives of the old normal, it is not so much "democracy", "decency","law" or something that wins, as rather the same conditions that gave birth tothe Trumpov/Orbánov Poloniacs. With the difference that today's situation is evenmore unstable compared to the one from the last decade, framed by the rapidconcurrence of previously hard-to-imagine crises - the covid pandemic, wars andhigh prices, not to mention the ever-escalating climate crisis.And even if the representatives of the status quo pretend to have learned theirlesson and want to listen to the poor, the humiliated, the excluded, the pissedoff, in reality the system and its logic are the same. Profits in times ofprosperity will be raked in by a narrow elite, losses through various "austeritymeasures" and "savings" will be paid by the majority. If the state lacks money -in our case mainly due to a chronic reluctance to, for example, tax the richproportionately - services protecting against the worst effects of theanti-social system, e.g. the chronically ill and otherwise handicapped, theelderly, and people on the verge of homelessness, will come under the wheels.We should not be confused by the liberal enthusiasm for Paul's victory. First ofall, it should be noted that the majority of those who voted for him did not votefor him, but against Babiš. And there are huge challenges ahead of us now, towhich we will not respond unless we take anarchist politics absolutely seriously.And that means what?Our possibilities are quite modest, the objective influence on the socialsituation is minimal. But this cannot be an excuse to resign and bury oneself ina bubble in which the only question is who is the right anarchist and who hasbetrayed some principles that were valid more than 100 years ago in a completelydifferent context. On the contrary, we need to set basic collective goals andsystematically work on them. It should and can be fun, but let's keep in mindthat these are, in a way, literally historic tasks, the results of which willshape the potential and outcomes of the anarchist movement for years, perhapsdecades, to come.Obviously, we don't need a president for that. Such a question is completelyirrelevant. So what do we need?* Build infrastructure. Our capacities directly depend on the ability tocontinuously meet, plan, use available resources for specific actions andmaintain joint projects. We still lack sufficient facilities in the form ofdecentralized physical spaces operating on a truly community basis, reliablyfunctional logistics and the overall capacity to act in an organized manneroutside of Prague and several other cities. Infrastructure does not only meanmaterial possibilities, but also "mental infrastructure": competence, trainingand, finally, the ability to analyze and understand current events, to useknowledge for practical action.* But for this we need to create a movement, not just a "scene". The signal thatfree politics from below is alive is a certain movement, the creation of newprojects, the maintenance of existing ones and the ability to take action - bothin response to the events around, and as the ability to raise one's own topics orcome to the aid of other movements or people. There is no universal pattern that"something" does. Let's look for ways to change the world and involve otherpeople in our activities. One can ask questions within the 20-year-old debateabout whether we are or should be so-called activists, or what that means - butresignation cannot be the answer.* Movements are people, so the key is to strengthen ties. Anarchist circles donot lack numbers. We don't want to be leaders that someone listens to andfollows, but rather a community of action. What we lack is continuity: at acertain interval one generation starts families, resigns or settles down due toother reasons, and a new generation takes over. A vacuum is created, there is alack of sharing of experience and attitudes between younger - usually moreenergetic - people and more experienced people who are well versed in a number ofspecialized practical matters, but slip into routine and even cynicism. There aregaps that we need to overcome with mutual respect and honesty. At the same time,so-called affinity groups, i.e. long-term friends sharing both political activityand other aspects of their lives, helping and keeping each other "up and running"- let's build them!* Building something new means updating yourself. Anarchism is not a museum.Although the 100 to 150 old founding texts are inspiring and generally valid inmany ways, we must understand that they come from a time when people simply liveddifferently. We need to focus on the reality in which we operate, not just creatediscussion circles over archives. To change everything, start anywhere - in whatwe and our loved ones really experience. What is happening in the world today,what will we face in the future. Anarchism is supposed to be an expression oflife, the desire for freedom and justice, the dynamic of striving for them. If heisn't, he can just build a monument and bury himself under it.https://www.afed.cz/text/7870/jeste-jednou-o-volbach-a-dalsich-nepristojnostech_________________________________________A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C EBy, For, and About AnarchistsSend news reports to A-infos-en mailing listA-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten