A strong and clear explanation of the insurrectionary anarchist struggle, the anti-social aspect of that, and the complexities of fighting against civilization itself. The article also deals with thorny issues of security, communication and attack.
Re-posted from From Russia With Love:
When speaking of insurrectionary struggle we should not confuse insurrectionary method (which can be used by any political power) and insurrectionary movement engaged in anarchist revolutionary struggle. We’ll be talking of the latter.
What are we fighting against?
Revolutionary anarchist struggle is a social war against everything that suppresses individuality. It is a struggle that sets human being free from old relations. A struggle where an individual can experience new, free and unconditional relations with other people. It is a struggle that forms one’s personality. It helps a person to find strength necessary for uncompromising defense of her interests. A new life is born out of this struggle. But none of us can foresee how this new life will evolve.
Re-posted from 325 (December 22, 2011):
Here is an English translation of an article from the journal Conspiracion Acrata from Mexico referring to the idea of “Antiguiridismo Anarchico”. We hope you like it.
“Antigiuridismo Anarchico” which translates to “Anti-Judicial Anarchism” is a concept which has been used throughout anarchist history to define the attitude of a radical and total rejection of the concept and practice of the “justice” of the State, or as otherwise said – the judicial methods of the State including defence through a lawyer. This attitude or concept is or should be something normal within the anarchist movement but there are few companer@s who have put it into practice for diverse reasons or strategies.
Antigiuridismo Anarchico is the rejection of declaring a position to the State in front of the court or contributing to the circus of the State. Often the declarations of those who position themselves in this attitude are only directed as a dialogue or explanation to the compañer@s of their movement. This attitude is the rejection of any legal resources through which one could obtain “freedom”.
Posted in General
Tagged anti-judicialism, Azione Rivoluzionaria, Brigate Rosse, Conspiracion Acrata, Conspiracy of Cells of Fire, Emile Henry, Gabrielle Segata Antolili, law, Luigi Galleani, Mario Buda, Max Stirner, Paulino Scarfo, Ravachol, rights, Severino di Giovanni
Below is a reply from an insurrectionary individualist to a shrill denunciation by the formal UK ‘Anarchist’ Federation (AFed) of revolutionary violence by the anarchist minority – specifically, the shooting of a nuclear industry executive in Genoa (Italy) by a cell of FAI (Informal Anarchist Federation). Venona Q presents a clear yet nuanced rebuttal of the AFed UK statement and questions the dogmatic and reactionary politics of ‘civil anarchism’ .
Re-posted from 325 (May 25, 2012):
Every so often, cyclically, collective or social anarchism becomes restrictive to some anarchists and an anarchist individualism reasserts itself. It happened at the turn of the twentieth century when some of the great anarchist thinkers began to question some of the more communistic dogmas. It is happening once more, and once more we witness some of the social anarchists writhe in panic as their comfortable dream is disturbed and they wittingly or unwittingly reinforce the stranglehold of the State by condemning their unruly sisters and brothers who appear to threaten the pursuit of what one comrade has aptly described as ‘civil anarchism’.