WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE POLAND - news journal UPDATE - (en) Poland, FA: Bombing civilians - from Guernica to Gaza (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 No one has any doubts that we are once again dealing with an increase in

both the number of armed conflicts and the direct victims of wars. The
war in Ukraine and Palestine, but also in Lebanon, Yemen and Congo, has
caused a significant increase in the number of direct casualties, both
on the side of the combatants and civilians. Some statistics suggest
that their total number is the highest since at least the beginning of
this century. At the same time, the conflicts mentioned above once again
illustrate the brutality of war.
More and more civilian casualties
In the early 1990s, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, one could hear
opinions that wars were becoming a thing of the past, that no country
would take up arms in the name of defending its interests. Everything -
it was said - would be resolved through peaceful talks and through the
efforts of diplomats. Even if local conflicts still break out, they are
very limited in nature and result from a certain type of social atavism.
More people - it was argued - die as a result of ethnic or religious
pogroms, internal conflicts, than as a result of interstate conflicts.
However, this observation is no longer valid - if it ever was.

Another optimistic thought was that in interstate conflicts, even if
they do occur, not so many people die. After Nuremberg, the rigor of
international law regarding the rules of warfare and the precision of
modern weapons with which today's armies are equipped mean that a blow
is dealt to the enemy without unnecessary casualties, especially
civilians. For example, Alvin and Heidi Toffler wrote in the early 1990s
in their book entitled "War and Anti-War" about the demassification of
war that weapons are sought that minimize lethality and destruction.
Unfortunately, this observation is also highly questionable. What we are
currently seeing in Ukraine and Palestine contradicts this.

Quite the opposite. We can say that with the development of war
technology, the invention of all kinds of weapons of mass destruction,
historically speaking, wars are becoming increasingly brutal. Especially
the so-called systemic wars such as: the Thirty Years' War in the 17th
century, the Seven Years' War in the 18th century, the Napoleonic Wars,
and finally the last World War I and II. What is more - as other
analysts report - it is estimated that at the beginning of the 20th
century, 90% of war victims were soldiers, while at the end of the
century the same percentage were civilians[1].

Air warfare
In the 20th century, air attacks became especially common and deadly,
which stopped distinguishing between civilians and soldiers. And even
more - the concept of total armed conflict has penetrated the war
doctrines of states. According to it, the enemy must be destroyed, not
only the armed forces, but also the demographic and economic potential.
The enemy must suffer from hunger, die from disease, bleed out as a
result of wounds and lack of medical assistance. If this terrible
suffering and death came from the air, the military simply spoke of
"strategic bombing". The fathers of this type of "air warfare" are
considered to be Generals Giulio Douhet and Hugh Trenchard - an Italian
and a British. A hundred years ago, they claimed that in the coming
wars, the bombing of population centers would be the norm, and other
forms of using aviation were, according to them, to impair its potential.

During World War I, air attacks did not yet have such significance and
were most often carried out on the front line, against military targets.
However, even then, attempts were made to bomb - for example, using
airships - seaports and railway junctions behind enemy lines. However,
their effectiveness was limited. The total destruction of cities from
the air, however, began even before World War II, symbolized by
Guernica, which was wiped off the face of the earth during the war in
Spain by the German and Italian air forces in 1937. Both fascist states
supported the forces of General Franco. 70% of the city's buildings were
destroyed. There are very divergent estimates of the number of people
killed, but it was certainly several hundred to over 1.5 thousand, out
of about 8 thousand people staying there. This brutal attack on the
Basque city was deliberate.

In September 1939, German air raids on Warsaw had already caused the
deaths of - depending on the estimate - several to a dozen or so
thousand civilians. German bombings of Belgrade in March 1941 caused
similar losses among civilians.

Although the army of Nazi Germany committed many other unprecedented
murders of civilians, so that innocent victims can be counted in the
millions, the forces of the anti-fascist coalition did not remain
indebted. As early as May 1940, Winston Churchill was to decide on
bombing raids on German cities. Over time, they intensified. On the
night of July 27-28, 1943, a raid was carried out on Hamburg. In that
one night alone, 50,000 civilians died, many in terrible agony, burning
alive or slowly dying under the rubble rather than from bomb fragments.
An even larger bombing took place in February 1945 in Dresden. The
infamous raid killed about 100,000 people. As we remember, the Red Army
also razed German cities to the ground on its way to Berlin and had no
regard for civilian lives.

The Americans, in turn, carried out the famous carpet bombing of Tokyo,
which took place at the beginning of 1945. Incendiary bombs led to a
firestorm, as a result of which hundreds of thousands of buildings
burned down. Over 80,000 civilians died in the flames (some estimates
say as many as 120,000). Finally, the dropping of atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki - ultimately, first from the shock wave and fire,
and then also as a result of injuries and radiation sickness, several
hundred thousand civilians lost their lives[2].

Also during the Vietnam War, the American Air Force carried out numerous
air raids not only on North Vietnam, but also on Laos and Cambodia.
Hundreds of millions of bombs and napalm were dropped. The losses among
the civilian population were of course enormous[3].

Without protection
Immediately after World War II, it was realized that the protection of
civilians had become a fiction. This was confirmed de facto by every
subsequent major conflict. Georg Schwarzenberger, one of the leading
British experts in international law, stated that the distinction
between soldiers and civilians had been systematically blurred. Various
categories of civilians began to be considered legitimate targets of
attacks. The destructive power of the atomic bomb dropped on Japan
clearly demonstrates this. Nagendra Singh, one of India's leading
experts in the field of national law, was to state in 1959 that World
War II de facto eliminated legal protection for civilians[2].

Moreover, prominent politicians clearly declared that no norms and
values apply. "We must dispense with any sentimentality, we must stop
thinking about human rights, raising the standard of living and
democratization"[3]. These words were formulated by George Kennan, a
famous American diplomat, strategist and geopolitician, advisor to
President Ronald Reagan, in 1948.

In the Middle East
For decades, Israel was considered a democratic, liberal and civilized
Western-style state surrounded in the Middle East by "Arab barbarians"
threatening the Jews who survived after World War II. From the very
beginning, the authorities of this state complied with Kennan's
directive. Israel was created as a result of wartime aggression, ethnic
cleansing and the murder of innocent civilians. However, since its
creation, it enjoyed almost unconditional support, first mainly from
France, and then from the USA.

Of course, the other side did not remain indifferent. Palestinians
killed both Israeli soldiers and civilians in retaliation. However, the
disproportions from the beginning of this conflict have always remained
unchanged. For every murdered Jew, there are many more civilian
casualties among the Palestinian population: women, children, and the
elderly. Reliable data shows that, for example, from 2008 to 2022, 6,107
Palestinians and 289 Israelis[4]were killed - approximately 20 times
less. Let us add that under international law, Israel occupies
Palestinian lands.

The current Israeli army, in retaliation for the crime committed by
Hamas on October 7, 2023, a crime that was of course a consequence of
the spiral of violence between the antagonistic parties, began
systematically bombing the civilian population of the Gaza Strip. In
these air raids and bombings, over 55,000 people have died to date, and
if we count those declared missing (probably lying dead under the
rubble), the number will be several thousand more[5]. The vast majority
of those killed are women and children.

Moreover, these are only direct victims of the war in Gaza. If indirect
victims caused by hunger, disease and lack of humanitarian aid,
deliberately withheld by Israel, were added to this, the numbers would
be three or even four times higher[6]. The extermination of civilians in
Gaza continues and there is no end in sight to the bombings.

Jaroslaw Urbanski

www.rozbrat.org

Footnotes:

[1]Cheyney Ryan, "Pacifism as War Abolitionism", New York 2024.

[2]I quote data on bombings during World War II mainly from: Sven
Lindqvist, "Juz nie zyciasz. Historia bombowania", Warsaw 2023.

[3]https://instytutsprawobywatelskich.pl/bombardujemy-dla-pokoju-specjalna-operacja-wojskowa-usa-w-kambodzy/

[4]https://www.ochaopt.org/data/casualties#

[5]Al Jazeera provides the current number of victims:
https://www.aljazeera.com/tag/israel-palestine-conflict/

[6]https://prawy.pl/131074-Lancet-W-Gazie-zginelo-186-000-Palestynczykow

https://federacja-anarchistyczna.pl/2025/06/17/zbombardowac-cywilow-od-guerniki-do-gazy/
_________________________________________
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

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE GREECE - news journal UPDATE - (en) Greece, Protaanka: Presentation of the Anarchist Initiative of Agion Anargyroi - Kamaterou at the event on the anarchist organization in the occupation of Evangelismos (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 On Saturday, June 14, the event - presentation of the "Platform of the

General Union of Anarchists and the dialogue on it" as well as the
discussion on the anarchist organization in the here and now in the
occupation of Evangelismos in Heraklion, Crete, was successfully held
and with the active participation of dozens of comrades, as part of the
events for the anniversary of the occupation. We warmly thank the
comrades from Evangelismos for the invitation and of course all those
present for the long-lasting dialogue that took place around the burning
organizational and strategic issues of our movement.

What is always desired is that the findings from these discussions be
accompanied by the appropriate processes for our organizational and
political upgrading and that they be reflected directly at a political
and militant level within the battles of our times.

The following is our collective's proposal for the event:

Comrades and comrades, good evening,

We are particularly happy to be in Heraklion, Crete, in the context of
the events for the anniversary of the Occupy of Evangelismos, shortly
after a new evacuation and a new reoccupation. We wish, comrades, that
the building will remain occupied and a bastion of struggle for decades,
in defiance of the state and the government and in defiance of every enemy.

We are therefore here to present our publication "The Platform of the
General Anarchist Union and the Dialogue on It" as well as to discuss
the burning issue of anarchist organization in the here and now. In a
large city like Heraklion and in a place with significant footholds in
the local community, we consider the discussion that will follow an
important opportunity, first of all, for acquaintance and fermentation.

As we have mentioned in our previous presentations at a series of events
in Athens, Thessaloniki and Ioannina, our publication did not see the
light of day solely to fill a historiographical gap in domestic
anarchist bibliography. On the contrary, we put it forward with comrade
Dimitris Troaditis, mainly to contribute to the broader opening of the
discussion around the organizational issue and around the political and
strategic tasks of the anarchist movement in the present historical
juncture.

In fact, we have diagnosed a practical value in republishing the
"Platforma" and the dialogue that followed its publication among
anarchists of the time, since everything that is exposed, including the
disagreements and the struggle that the documents of the correspondence
illuminate, constitute key issues that plague the anarchist movement to
this day. In our opinion, in fact, they plague it with even greater
intensity. We would dare to say that the reason why this is the case is
based on the voluntary acceptance of the counter-argument in the
Platform, which struggled to convince of a synthetic anarchism without a
clear identity. The positions of the so-called "syntheticists" are those
that, as it seems, dominated the contemporary anarchist movement and not
those of Delo Truda. We will analyze these in the discussion that will
follow.

What is certain is that knowledge of historical experience, not as an
accumulation of information, but as a distillation of the active and
constantly moving flow of the historical evolution of class struggle and
anarchist political struggle, is important both for the interpretation
of "how we get to today", as well as for avoiding past mistakes and
charting our strategy for today. Consequently, knowledge of anarchist
history is crucial for us in terms of the theoretical and political
constitution of the anarchist space, but also an indispensable resource
for forging an anarchist ideological and political identity today, for
every comrade.

After all, the "Platform" was also published for these reasons nearly
100 years ago. The anxiety of the exiled anarchist revolutionaries of
"Delo Truda" for the formation of a "General Union of Anarchists" was in
response to historical errors and omissions, it was the result of Delo
Truda's account of the causes of the defeat of the anarchists in the
1917 revolution. At the same time, this anxiety was based on the
perception that the anarchist movement had lost its class and
revolutionary characteristics, in short, its existential identity. The
departure from class and revolutionary goals was the cause of the
"chronic disorganization", together with organizational fragmentation,
the "apotheosis of individuality" and certain "distortions in terms of
theory". All of this contributed to the anarchist movement being
condemned "as just a small episode in the history of working class
struggles."

What we point out in our texts contained in the publication, as well as
in every relevant event, is that the "Platform" cannot be seen as a
narrow "organizational text" as is often the case. This belief is
attested both by the smaller extent of the "organizational sector" of
the "Platform" in relation to the other chapters, and by the way in
which the necessity of organization is given meaning by its authors. The
principles, the goals and the anarchist revolutionary program were what
constituted the great stakes of Delo Truda. We believe that these are
still the case today. The organization is nothing more than the
necessary culmination, the one that will promote with its hard and
persistent struggle, the principles, the goals and the program, our
counter-proposal for another society, in the heart of the class struggle.

2nd part

It is true that we have spilled tons of ink to argue not only for the
necessity of the organization but also for its compatibility with the
anarchist worldview and tradition in the face of distortions that have
plagued anarchism since the time of Delo Truda. A significant part of
comrades seems to agree, another disagrees, and a not insignificant part
of comrades is indifferent, wandering in the clouds of informalism
consciously or not. What is certain is that few counterarguments have
been articulated to refute these positions.

 From the perspective of consciously anti-organizational or informal
anarchists, there is perhaps not much to say at this stage. There are
historical differences in theory and practical goals, which have often
been contested in the sphere of ideological and political struggle
within the development of the anarchist movement. We speculate that once
the proposal of organization acquires the foundations for which we are
fighting, then such a confrontation will probably become inevitable.
However, we must admit at the outset that the real background of such a
confrontation will not concern the type of organization or the means and
methods. It will essentially concern a confrontation around the
character, identity, and goals of anarchism. In short, it will be a more
or less "traditional" confrontation around the class and revolutionary
issue, around the relationship between the individual and society, a
confrontation of competing agendas, which, with whatever arguments or
examples, will contrast the "rebellion of the individual" with the
Social Revolution.

On the other hand, we see anarchist forces with whom we seemingly do not
differ on the "big issues" not taking a position on the issue of
organization either because they do not immediately see the prospect of
starting a new organizational effort, either due to "fatigue" from
previous attempts, or because they are content with things "as they
are." There are also many hundreds of comrades who do not organize even
at a group-collective level, who are content to participate occasionally
as "individuals" in struggles or ephemeral formations, or other fighters
who are active in movement processes or thematic structures but not at a
stable political level.

We perceive certain problems in these attitudes. Without organization,
without a revolutionary strategy and without a proposal competitive with
the existing one, every small or large struggle is doomed to be trapped
in reformism and "lesser evil governmentism" as a result of the impasse
that always comes from the absence of foresight and planning for the
"after". This outcome is inevitable for every struggle that does not
have a clear crystallization of its purpose. It is not a matter of
intentions, it is the dialectic of things itself that leads to the
impasse. We are even frightened by the fact that many defend the
existing organizational form that is dominant in the space, in the name
of "massness". Thinking that a kinetic microcosm united not naturally
around agreements, but around the hubbub of temporary action, is "open",
while a movement that moves in a planned manner, on the basis of
agreements and looks outward and not only inward, is "closed".

We wonder: don't we see that our persistence in this model is shrinking
us year after year, both numerically and in terms of our social and
class influence? How can anyone believe that a marginalized microcosm
"open" only to "its own", which makes ideology a blender of
heterogeneous theories to "fit everyone", can ever acquire any influence
or mass appeal?

We even hear that the insistence on agreements, on organization, on a
program, etc. constitutes, in addition to "closedness", a certain
"ideological ankylosis". Reaching the point where these voices consider
that these positions against the ephemeral but sometimes noisy
informalism, they want to box the anarchist movement into "forms" and
cut off the vitality of informalist action. We will say two things.
First, the tendency that we advocate is not a tendency of
"philosophers", it did not bring in liberal academics through the back
door to sterilize the revolutionary vitality of anarchist ideas. And
secondly, the "ease" of informalism to produce action was filled with so
many illusions in previous years, that now that things have "tightened",
we see even more vividly its consequences and inadequacies. And of
course, things did not tighten up in general and indefinitely due to the
intensification of repression. The intensification of repression found a
movement weak and integrated, and instead of finding the answers that
suited it, we closed ourselves even more in our shells, believing that
this is how we will "survive."

The results of the weaknesses and impasses of action without a strategy
and proposal, we see in the lived experience itself. Thousands
demobilized in the previous decade when they realized that their efforts
and struggles in 2010-12 brought the party of the 3rd memorandum to the
government and that all their sweat, blood, tears from tons of chemicals
became glue for gluing ballots. Of course, there are also political
responsibilities for the defeat of 2010-12 and the existence of
satellites of the "winners" of the 2015 elections within the movements,
even within the anarchist space. However, everything starts from the
absence of organization and counter-proposal. For the satellites to take
root, there was a certain void. A void that is even more acute today,
and especially in a new period of enormous liquidity and absence of
counterweight. In a period when new, enormous historical opportunities
are opening up and we have unfortunately not realized it, instead of
learning from the past and making progress, others are hoping for the
"fall of Mitsotakis" and the change of government, and others have left
every central revolutionary goal "off the agenda", dealing detachedly
with "peripheral" issues, often with liberal means of reading society
and reality.

We say all this, being part of the problem and not from above and from
the outside. We all have responsibilities for the course of our
political space whether we walk together or apart. What we support is
that there should be decisions and developments in our political space,
to understand the criticality of the times and to answer the burning
question: do we want an anarchist space that is fighting, but without
foundations and without the ability to change the correlations and
become a catalyst of the times? Or a revolutionary anarchist movement, a
catalyst and vanguard in the struggle for the revolution? Our answer is
clear. Without even for a moment letting the immediate war wait, we must
within it, alongside the battles in the here and now, seek the ways,
methods, tactical and strategic steps that will allow us to dynamically
invade social and class antagonism, to become factors of developments
and not simply a noisy, but weak, voice of protest in the queue of the
great events of our time.

3rd part

With the aim of finding solutions to the above questions as our compass,
we will conclude our presentation in the way we "close" at every similar
event. With our proposal for the organization that will fight to
overcome the inadequacies of our political space to date, as well as
outlining the steps we believe are necessary towards its establishment.

Let us clarify that when we talk about organization, we mean the
formation of a single anarchist political body, with one name, with one
strategy for all its forces, with absolute ideological and tactical
unity among its members, but also with due autonomy (but not
autonomization) per city, on the basis of anarchist federalism and local
specificities at each time.

The structure we propose takes as its cell the regional or city nuclei
of the organization and not autonomous groups/collectivities. In other
words, we are not proposing a federation based on already existing
collectivities but a federation of groups that the organization itself
will create. We consider this step to be necessary in order to overcome
the weaknesses of today. We will also return to this issue in the
dialogue that will follow if we are asked for clarification, as it is an
issue that is always problematic in the events we hold on the issue of
organization.

Subsequently, at a second level, we propose suburban and prefectural
associations in regions and at a third level, a central pan-Hellenic
body (e.g. a political council) which will constitute the concentrated
expression of all individual forces, nuclei, regions, etc.

At the same time, sectoral and professional associations can be formed
with the aim of penetrating and ideologically engaging within labor
unions, for the promotion and elaboration of plans for strengthening and
radicalizing the trade union and labor movement in a libertarian and
revolutionary direction, as well as for the elaboration of issues
surrounding sectors of production, against the backdrop of today's
problems and with an eye on the collectively managed production of tomorrow.

The organization should open libertarian centers in every city and every
neighborhood, be a supporter of social and class initiatives, popular
assemblies and grassroots associations, while its position should be at
the forefront of social and class struggles.

Its strategic guidepost should be the revolution and the new society,
which its revolutionary program will foreshadow. The more the
organization grows, the more the realism of this program will be
perceived as a necessity by those who will be called upon to implement
it: the great social majority of workers, the unemployed, the young, all
those who suffer exploitation and oppression by the dominant economic
and political system. In addition, we should also work out ways of
directly implementing our proposal, namely an immediate program of
socialization of buildings and land, collective management structures
and mutual aid networks.

Furthermore, we should never forget that no revolution is possible not
only without a proposal for what will replace the existing, but also
without the fierce, material armed conflict with the existing and its
guardians. Revolutions are truly social phenomena and not islands of
freedom or upheavals in the sphere of ideas and spirit. They are carried
out by collective subjects and not by "individuities". The new society
that we will have to build in the shell of the old, in order to be truly
new, must not coexist, but develop in competition with the existing. And
in order to be new, too, it must clash with it and claim to succeed it.
Not to build structures in which we will boast that we "live anarchy in
the now" in an illiberal world of power, wars and harsh labor exploitation.

As for the pace, a necessary condition for the issue of organization to
come forward, is in our opinion the formation of a new movement pole
that will be made up of groups and comrades, which will be reflected
first of all in the struggles that are raging. Revolutionary
organizations are born within the struggle and not detached from it, in
literary greenhouses. What is needed is the strengthening of anarchist
groups that talk about organization, the creation of new ones in every
city, cooperation, interconnection and a common path so that as soon as
possible, the prospect of a nationwide anarchist organization can
realistically and with a plan be put on the agenda. To generally agree
on a theoretical level about deficiencies and necessities but not to
take initiatives for joint action in the here and now, practically means
abandoning the goal of the organization on the altar of the temporary
"run" that absorbs us, to the detriment, in our opinion, of even the
very sweat we pour into a temporary that becomes permanent and into a
marathon that without a strategic compass, we will never reach the end
of its course.

Finally, we must say that two years ago today, the waters of Pylos were
stained with blood by hundreds of people who were drowned by the Greek
state, in the most massive murder in modern Greek history. Pylos and
Tempi, comrades, are half of the post-memorandum Greece of "development
and prosperity" that the last government helmsmen have given us from
2018 to the present. The other half is in the genocidal war that Israel
is waging in the Gaza Strip against the Palestinian people, with the
Greek state as an accomplice. Therefore, no peace without justice, the
only solution is the global Social Revolution, from Greece to the Gaza
Strip and the West Bank and throughout the enslaved world.

INITIATIVE OF ANARCHIST SAINTS OF ANARGYROS - KAMATEROS

https://protaanka.espivblogs.net/2025/06/21/eisigisi-tis-protovoylias-anarchikon-agion-anargyron-kamateroy-stin-ekdilosi-gia-tin-anarchiki-organosi-stin-katalipsi-eyaggelismoy/
_________________________________________
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

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE FRANCE - news journal UPDATE - (en) France, OCL CA #351 - UAWC Call for Volunteers for Palestine (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 Dear Friends and Partners, We are writing to share an urgent call to

action from the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC). As
violence by Israeli settlers and occupation forces continues to escalate
in the West Bank, Palestinian farmers, herders, and rural communities
are under daily attack, facing the theft of their land, the demolition
of their homes, and the destruction of their crops and livelihoods. In
response to this situation, the UAWC is launching an international
volunteer campaign to provide a protective and supportive presence to
these communities. We are calling on trusted partners and allies to help
us spread the word and identify committed individuals willing to stand
alongside Palestinian farmers on the ground. About the Campaign
As part of this initiative, UAWC will deploy international volunteers to:

Support Palestinian farmers and herders in high-risk areas targeted by
settler violence;
Document and report human rights violations and land confiscation; and
Support communities in their struggle to remain on their land and defend
their right to food sovereignty.
The campaign will take place in two phases: the Solidarity Shields
campaign during the summer (July-August) and the Olive Harvest campaign
in the fall (October-November).

Who can volunteer?
We are looking for individuals who are deeply committed to the
Palestinian cause, eager to act responsibly and respectfully within
Palestinian communities, and fully aware of the risks and challenges
associated with this work. This is not a tourism or development program,
but a solidarity campaign to resist the continued displacement of
Palestinian communities by Israeli settlers. Volunteers will receive
orientation and training from UAWC and our partners.

How to Get Involved
If you or someone in your network would like to participate in this
crucial effort, please visit uawc-pal.org to learn more and complete the
international volunteer interest form.

Help us spread the word!
We ask that you widely disseminate this call within your organizations,
networks, and communities. Now more than ever, Palestinian farmers need
international solidarity to resist forced displacement and defend their
right to land and dignity.

If you would like to join this campaign or discuss it further, please
contact us at info@uawc-pal.org. We thank you for your continued
solidarity and support.
In solidarity and struggle,

Union of Agricultural Works Councils (UAWC)

http://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4470
_________________________________________
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

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE ITALY - news journal UPDATE - (en) Italy, FAI, Umanita Nova #19-25 - A Thought That Resounds. He-Yin Zhen. The Thunder of Anarchy (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 A lot of interest has recently been activated around He-Yin Zhen, a

Chinese anarchist, feminist and philosopher who lived between 1884 and
1920. The first publication in Italian of the collection of her writings
edited by Cristina Manzone, "Il tuono dell'anarchia", a book that was
presented at various anarchist circles and groups in recent months, has
certainly contributed to this attention. Zhen means thunder and is the
name that He-Yin wanted to give herself, evidently aware of the
noisiness of her thought, of how thunderous it was. ---- Politically
active in Chinese anarchist groups both in China and in Japan, where she
lived for some years, a contributor to various newspapers and magazines
in the 1910s, very attentive to the issues of exploitation and
oppression of women, He-Yin was many things, starting from the simplest
of her activities, that of translator. In addition to the translation of
anarchist texts by figures such as Kropotkin and Goldman, it should be
emphasized that she is the first Chinese translation of Marx's Communist
Manifesto. Despite her cultural depth, however, He-Yin's thought has
been obscured and removed; even today, after more than a century, it is
still forbidden to read her writings in China. A censorship that
obviously has affected the diffusion of her works and thoughts even
outside China, where she is in fact little known.

In the presentation of "The Thunder of Anarchy" that I had the
opportunity to follow a few months ago at the Germinal club in Carrara,
the few editorial traces of her writings were reconstructed: a small
translation produced in the Seventies and included in an anthology of
anarchist thought in English; some texts published in 2013 edited by an
anarchist group in New York; a subsequent translation into French of
some passages. Few and partial translations until, in fact, the recent
publication in Italian of "The Thunder of Anarchy", which represents the
most complete collection of He-Yin's writings published so far. It is a
series of essays that appeared in 1907 in the magazine "Giustizia
Naturale", of which He-Yin was editor.

In the collection, her feminist thought emerges with great effectiveness
and extraordinary modernity. "Women's liberation means neither women nor
men subjugated": a phrase that opens to a series of considerations
linked to a project of authentic social revolution. He-Yin rejects the
political strategy of seizing power: the goal for women should not be to
fight to be part of the government, but to abolish it; absorbing women
into government functions only serves to legitimize a power that is
oppressive for everyone. It is certainly not a foregone conclusion, as
the persistent rhetoric of the glass ceiling demonstrates, after more
than a century.

Fundamental in her texts is the reflection on the roots of female
oppression starting from what today we would call the binary and sexist
setting of society. According to He-Yin, the concrete division between
male and female - meaning by "concrete" that division that passes
between bodies that are classified according to a male/female division -
represents the first means through which female oppression was
established, based on the metaphysical idea that some bodies due to
their intrinsic capacities are superior to others, and perpetuated by
the daily experience of sexual bodies that can exercise dominion over
other sexual bodies. An oppression that capitalism has taken up,
translating it into class oppression and using an institutional
apparatus, the State, to make this class oppression universal. He-Yin
therefore shares the idea that patriarchy pre-exists capitalism, that
oppression based on the male/female opposition, or on the domination of
male bodies over female ones, is the matrix of oppression, on which the
oppression of males over other males is then structured and in general
the system of exploitation determined by capitalism and the accumulation
of wealth.

And it is precisely the accumulation of wealth that makes further forms
of oppression necessary, such as armies, which forcefully guarantee that
a few can oppress many in order to benefit from wealth.

How can we overcome all this? How can we break this mechanism of
oppression? He-Yin states that a new form of government, a more open
political turn would not solve the problem of the oppression of the
female body; patriarchy cannot be supplanted by a simple change of
government or political direction. It is necessary to completely subvert
the existing order and every type of government, breaking every field of
domination. Phrases like "Every day that money is not abolished is a day
that the economy is a source of inequality" illustrate a clear
anti-capitalist vision. Capitalism is indicated by He-Yin as the "law of
the individual", meaning with this expression the will to dominate and
supremacy that allows the affirmation of private property against the
common management of goods, a dominion that materializes with the
exploitation of bodies and classes guaranteed by the legal system of
transmission of wealth and even before by patriarchy and sexist
oppression. Something that must absolutely be gotten rid of, just as we
must get rid of armies, another element that is much insisted on.

In the essay "On the anti-militarism of women" He-Yin states that the
military system is the guarantor of capitalist exploitation, has the
task of protecting the accumulation of wealth and private property and
of preventing the subversion of class rule. But militarism is not a
generic expression of power, it also has its own specifically sexist
matrix, it represents the exaltation of the male body and the use of
force. He-Yin highlights the frequent practice of rape by armies and
observes, among other things, how marriage is nothing but a
secularization of the original rape of war. She believes that
antimilitarism is a necessity, that it has a fundamental function so
that "common people" can free themselves from the armed domination of
the state, from the system designed to guarantee exploitation and
division into classes, but also so that women, specifically, can free
themselves from the domination of men embodied in the figure of the
military. An essential path to "alleviate people from war and ensure
that peace and happiness make their way in the world".

Obviously, He-Yin's thought must be contextualized, referring to the
historical period and the cultural context of China at the time, but
what is striking is the extraordinary and clear radicality of her
reflections at a time like the one in which she wrote, in the years
immediately preceding the First World War. And one wonders what would
have happened if at the time (but the reflection is still valid today)
feminism had taken this path, instead of following, at least in its
greatest expression, the path of obtaining political rights, thus
sharing the perspective of exercising government, that is, domination,
and therefore not questioning the roots of patriarchal oppression.

And extraordinarily modern - it must be emphasized once again - the
denunciation of binarism as the matrix of oppression. The current
transfeminist debate aims to characterize itself by overcoming the
binary approach, but often addresses the issue in terms of individual
choice and the claim of a fluid identity: a fully shareable position,
but perhaps sometimes not adequately linked to a plan of overall social
change. He-Yin in 1907 argues, as part of an overall reasoning, that
abolishing the very definitions of man and woman must also be an
objective. A statement that may seem provocative or uselessly
nominalist, but on which we should reflect carefully, trying to open
ourselves to a new perspective, perhaps difficult to conquer, but
fundamental to practice and build real paths of freedom and prospects of
social revolution. The differences between bodies exist, but once
education and experiences are common, not bent to logics of power and
subordination, the differences in conformation between bodies are simple
facts, no longer declinable in terms of gender binarism and sexism.

Patrizia Nesti

https://umanitanova.org/un-pensiero-che-rimbomba-he-yin-zhen-il-tuono-dellanarchia/
_________________________________________
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