Today's Topics:
1. The situation of the anarchist Sevket Aslan in the hunger
strike is getting worse (tr) [machine translation]
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
2. Britain, brighton solfed: 'I own a portfolio of some seventy
houses': the millionaire landlords G4Lets are trying to protect
with legal threats (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
3. black rose fed: THE POSTMODERN LEFT AND THE SUCCESS OF
NEOLIBERALISM By Scott Jay (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
4. Czech, afed - A3: Another annoying reality show - Is he the
president? Thanks, we do not need! (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
5. anarkismo.net: On the Murder of a Labor Militant: Marcelo
Silvera by Federación Anarquista Uruguaya - FAU (ca)
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
As anarchist prisoner Sevket Aslan entered his 51st day of hunger strike, which was
increasingly in prison and against the recognition of anarchist identity by the prison
administration, lawyer Gökhan Soysal made an announcement to Medyan Haber. Soysal stated
that Şevket Aslan's health condition has deteriorated. ---- Hunting. The explanations of
Gökhan Soysal are as follows: ---- "Şevket started hunger with the same demands on July
19th and concluded his action on the 53rd day. However, on the occasion of the same
problems being resurrected, Aslan began his "endless-irreversible" hunger strike on
November 20th and said he would continue his action until the demands were accepted. ----
On top of all this, Şevket was unable to find any solution other than hunger. Moreover, it
did not pass too much over the previous hunger act. So, Sevket's situation is a little
more distressing. And according to the latest news I got, the situation is getting worse.
Şevket does not need any water at the moment. Needy solidarity. It is especially important
during this period that you write a letter to him and show him your trust. It is enough
that you send your letters and solidarity messages to "İzmir 2 Nolu T Type Closed Prison -
Aliağa Penal Execution Institutions Campus, Bahçedere Village No: 63 Yenişakran / Aliağa /
İZMİR" on behalf of Şevket Aslan. I will also take my greetings on my visit. "(Source:
Medyan Haber)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Anarchist Prisoner Sevket Aslan 48 Gündür Hunger Strike
3 days ago News Write a comment 177 Viewing
It was learned that the main reason for Şevket Aslan, whose information we received
through his lawyer Gökhan Soysal, was to start the hunger strikes is that the prison
administration has not recognized the anarchist identity and is increasingly under
pressure in prison.
Sevket Aslan, on July 19, started the same demand with hunger action, the action concluded
on the 53rd day. However, on the occasion of the same problems being resurrected on 20
November, Aslan began his "endless and irreversible" hunger stating that he would continue
his action until his demands were accepted.
Sevket Aslan, together with another prisoner, is now known as "coffin", with a bunk, but
there are 2 people in a room designed as a single cell. Such a narrow area of the lion
indicates that there is no moving area in any way.
Şevket Aslan stating that he had been dictated that he would not be able to meet if he did
not wait in the wall of the officer and wait in the wall of the officer when he wanted to
meet the officers in charge of the problems and pressures in the prison, he conveyed his
wishes with his hunger strike.
The demands of the anarchist prisoner Sevket Aslan are as follows:
1. To be identified with another anarchist prisoner in prison, or to be taken to a single
room if this is not the case.
2- If the books from Kargodan are not banned, they are given to the side.
3- Not to lose the petitions addressed to the official institutions and give the exit
numbers when requested
4. Termination of shoe removal except open visits and health reasons
5- In behalf of the administration to see the behaviors of the people in honor of the
honor and standing on the wall to stop the application of standing
6- Providing the oil painting materials themselves or getting access to the painting
workshop. (Source: Medyan Haber)
Share
http://www.yeryuzupostasi.org/2018/01/09/aclik-grevindeki-anarsist-sevket-aslanin-durumu-kotuye-gidiyor/
------------------------------
Message: 2
Brighton SolFed is continuing its campaign against local letting agents G4 Lets into the
new year, as the agency has not yet made an adequate offer to meet the demands of two
groups of tenants. Both groups are asking for the return of their deposits and for
compensation. In one instance, tenants were charged for pre-existing damage to the house
they were living in, which was damp and infested with vermin throughout their tenancy; in
the other, tenants have been charged for wear and tear and for redecoration costs, even
though they had the interior of the property repainted professionally before they moved
out. ---- As part of this ongoing campaign, and because of the unwillingness of G4 Lets to
accept their mistakes, Brighton SolFed has contacted the landlords of the two properties
in question. As with G4 Lets, we appraised them of the situation and offered them the
chance to negotiate with the tenants. As with G4 Lets, they have missed our deadlines and
failed to accept their culpability in the problems with the two properties.
Because of this failure to engage, we are extending our public campaign to cover the two
landlords in question, as well as the letting agent they have chosen to administer their
properties. The landlord of 11 Queen's Park Road is Andrew Kinnear, and the landlords of
43 Beaconsfield Road are Adrian and Judith Batchelor.
Mr Kinnear is the director of Sussex-based Lurbeck Properties. In his words, this consists
of a property portfolio of some 70 houses. According to his company's latest accounts,
from December 2016, it is worth some £10.4 million in terms of its total assets.
In our brief correspondence with Mr Kinnear, he said: "Perhaps unusually, in the case of
11 Queens Park Road, when the tenants moved out, I went into this property with my four
sons to redecorate it top to bottom ... I own a portfolio of some 70 houses and so I'm
very used to dealing with properties coming back in various conditions at the end of
tenancies". Given that Mr Kinnear was apparently planning to redecorate the house anyway,
and given his company's financial position, it is striking that the tenants' attempts to
reclaim their £1,000 deposit have so far been met with silence. While £250 each is a lot
of money for a group of students in one of the most expensive cities in the UK, it would
not appear to be very much for Mr Kinnear.
Adrian and Judith Batchelor, who themselves live in a £1.5 million property outside of
Brighton, have so far failed to respond to our letter.
Recently, the campaign has been attracting increasing attention from local and national
media. In response to this, G4Lets have made legal threats, stating that ‘if any
statements are made that are slanderous or libellous we will have no hesitation in taking
legal action'. It is ironic that an agency that attempted to charge tenants for the
cleaning of a carpet that had been replaced is apparently concerned with ‘false'
accusations about their conduct. G4Lets have also been provided with over ten pages of
evidence to support the tenants' claims, including invoices, pictures, and email chains,
but have so far refused to make an adequate offer to resolve the situation.
The problem for G4lets and for these landlords is that the solidarity we have been shown
already goes to demonstrate that agencies cannot treat tenants like this, and testifies to
the widespread and increasing frustration on the part of tenants in Brighton and beyond.
Tenants looking for properties have emailed us to say they will now not be renting through
G4Lets, whilst we have heard numerous other stories of G4Lets' neglect of their tenants
from those offering support to our campaign. Recognising how our problems are shared by
others grants us real power to fight back against the appalling neglect that threatens the
safe and peaceful enjoyment of our tenancies. Through solidarity and direct action,
ordinary people have the power to improve their lives.
If you want to support these tenants, give G4Lets a call this week (9-12th January) on
01273 552600 or 01273 558699, and send them an email at info@mark-shields.com and
info@g4lets.co.uk to let them know that they should pay up!
http://www.brightonsolfed.org.uk/brighton/i-own-a-portfolio-of-some-seventy-houses-the-millionaire-landlords-g4lets-are-trying-to
------------------------------
Message: 3
The rise of neoliberalism across the globe for decades, and its continued resilience since
the 2007-2008 financial crisis in particular, forces us to ask why there has not been a
more successful resistance against it. ---- We might start with the changing structure of
the working class, especially in the West, and that would be worthwhile, but it is not as
though neoliberalism has abolished working class resistance entirely. It is not as though
there have not been multiple general strikes in Greece, for example. Additionally, the
United States just recently saw a series of urban rebellions against police killing Black
people, with buildings set on fire and police cars destroyed in revolt against the
conditions imposed upon them by the state. Many of the participants have since been
convicted of arson and other crimes and are now serving out years-long prison terms.
The problem is not that militancy is not possible or even at times imminent. Working class
people in the US have shown great courage against police terrorism, and in Greece refused
to accept yet another round of austerity even with European capital holding their economy
hostage.
The alternate question to ask, then, is why has the Left specifically failed to resist
neoliberalism?
Uncomfortable truths
We might answer this question in dozens of ways, one answer for each Left that exists. But
the failure of SYRIZA in Greece to resist yet another wave of austerity measures-in fact
to embrace austerity-sharpens and clarifies the problem, posing uncomfortable truths.
That is, perhaps the Left hasn't failed to resist neoliberalism. Perhaps it has not even
tried.
Wasn't SYRIZA a decade-long project to build up an alliance of radicals in response to the
collapse of social democracy into neoliberalism? It certainly seemed so at the time,
probably to its participants most of all. And yet the entire project collapsed so
immediately and so spectacularly, going from the cutting edge of the international Left to
the symbol of all that is wrong with it, in less than a week.
The defining moment of SYRIZA and of the international Left of the current generation
occurred in the early morning hours of July 11, 2015. Many histories will forget this
detail as just one of many parliamentary sessions, yet this was by far the most
significant. In this moment, just days after the spectacular "Oxi" vote by the Greek
people rejecting austerity, their parliamentary representatives chose to embrace it. With
149 seats in parliament, only two members of the radical coalition of the Left dedicated
to ending austerity found themselves voting "Oxi" along with the people they claimed to
represent. It was a stunning moment that no radical should forget for the rest of their
life, unless they simply want to repeat these exciting failures over and over indefinitely.
Certainly, the votes improved later in the month, but the collapse of July 11 should not
be so easily forgotten. For a brief moment we saw the crux-or one of the cruxes-of the
problem of the international Left.
In short, these members of SYRIZA were more committed to the image of SYRIZA as a united
coalition of the radical Left than they were in actually opposing austerity when the
opportunity to do so was right in front of them. They recoiled from reality and its
consequences and embraced the image of what they had built instead. This is the Postmodern
Left in practice.
In the face of unrelenting neoliberalism, the international Left has embraced
postmodernism, not in theory but in practice, putting style over substance and feel good
moments and flashy leaders over the brute reality of resisting capitalist exploitation.
The Postmodern Left does not reject metanarratives or objective reality in theory. In fact
it embraces the metanarrative of its own centrality to altering the course of history, but
when it finds itself at the center of historical development, then history is treated like
an ethereal, formless blob that nobody can make any sense of. It simply happens, and no
options are possibly available that can shape it. Once the Left is placed in the driver
seat, there is no alternative other than to passively participate in the machinations of
the system. Anything else is just too difficult
The Postmodern Left avoids building actual power among the poor and the oppressed, instead
focusing on self-promotional spectacles which feel like struggle and power but are
entirely empty.
The Postmodern Left talks about "class struggle unionism" then carries out pension reform
in the name of a balancing the budget and then insist that they never supported any such
thing because words are meaningless and have no relationship to objective reality.
The Postmodern Left is detached from reality because it makes its own reality.
The Postmodern Left does not believe in postmodernism. The Postmodern Left is postmodernism.
The material roots of Postmodern Leftism
The Postmodern Left is not the result of the declining relevance of objective reality. On
the contrary, it has a solid material base from which it arises, and to which it is
shackled, specifically in the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) form. Under
neoliberalism, the destruction of social welfare programs and other sources of stability
for working class people have been replaced by services granted by NGOs, funded by
foundations and governmental grants as well as directly from corporations. This
organizational form has extended beyond the service sector and into the Left itself, where
protest movement organizations can build up an infrastructure of full-time staff members
through many of these same grants. The problem for NGOs, then, is to challenge the status
quo without challenging the elite sources which fund the operation. This has proven to be
an impossible problem to solve, and instead NGOs have served to reproduce neoliberalism
rather than challenge it.
A few examples will illustrate this.
The Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung is a global network of organizations based in Berlin and New
York that celebrates the life of Rosa Luxemburg, a Polish revolutionary best known for her
role in the German socialist movement as a critic of its support of electoral reformism
and imperialism. She was later killed by her reformist comrades when they came to power.
Meanwhile, the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung has taken her name while supporting the the United
Nations and hailing the electoral victory of Alexis Tsipras after he embraced austerity.
Her name has become little more than a tool for garnering funding.
DeRay McKesson is an activist who rose to prominence during the rise of the Black Lives
Matter movement, especially in Ferguson, MIssouri. While he is known as an activist, few
people can point to what he has accomplished beyond amassing an enormous Twitter following
and gaining the accolades of the corporate media. McKesson was also a school administrator
associated with Teach For America, a pro-corporate school "reform" organization which
weakens teachers' unions by supplying schools with inexperienced, low-cost and temporary
teachers fresh out of college. More recently, McKesson quit his job to become a "full-time
activist" working with the Democratic and Republican parties, Twitter and other corporate
sponsors to host presidential debates. In short, DeRay McKesson is not really a left-wing
militant, but at times he sure looks like one. The problem is, there are so many
McKesson's on the activist scene, typically much less tied to corporate interests than he
is, that it can be difficult to discern the difference between a "real" militant and
"fake" one.
A group of non-profit organizations recently held a housing and tenants rights conference
in Oakland, California. This is a city where two-bedroom apartments regularly rent for
$2,000 or more and the Black and Latino working class is rapidly being displaced. One of
the sponsoring organizations was recently bargaining with the City of Oakland over a
$320,000 contract to oversee Oakland's Day Laborer Program, which supplies low wage
immigrant labor to various employers. Meanwhile, one of the speakers at the conference
plenary session declared the enemy to be no less than the capitalist system itself.
Recently deposed mayor Jean Quan, who was sitting in the audience and maintains a close
alliance with many of the organizers, did not bat an eye at such a statement, and neither
will anybody in Oakland City Hall, because this is all just window dressing to create the
illusion of radicalism. Nobody who takes $320,000 from the city is going to threaten the
political alliances that helped them garner it, no matter how loudly they proclaim their
opposition to capitalism.
The Left exists in the general milieu of NGO activism created by such organizations. That
is, not all radicals have to succumb to the NGO form, they merely need to adapt to the
activism led by NGOs, which is the appearance of militancy, in order to build up a base of
support and win reforms, without the substance of militancy, in order to avoid
embarrassing important funding sources and allies. In short, the image of something that
seems fundamentally revolutionary-Rosa Luxemburg, and the urban rebellions against police
terror-can be used by people whose aims are totally compatible with neoliberalism.
The Postmodern Left does not need to take money from the City of Oakland, or even have a
tax-free status. It merely needs to confuse such activism as a challenge to the system
without identifying its severe limitations. And why would anybody do that? Because this
sort of activism is so exciting! And everybody else is doing it. And being the sole figure
in the room who says there is something wrong here is a terribly lonely place to be,
especially when you are attempting to build a base or recruit people or just mobilize
people around anything at all in the hopes that something will be a basis for future
struggle. But instead of struggle we get the performance of struggle.
Anybody who attended one of the larger meetings of the British Socialist Workers Party in
the past will be aware of the performative aspects of this organization. Having failed to
build a workers party during its decades of existence, it must create a performance as
though it is a workers' party, otherwise workers won't join it, capped off with chanting
"The workers united will never be defeated!" Who they are chanting to is unclear. There
are no bosses nearby, so it is more likely directed to the workers in attendance, or
perhaps just to the party faithful to remind themselves of their commitment to the working
class. It is not as though they are not committed-they certainly believe they are-rather
the problem is that their commitment is a performance. Rather than build a workers party,
they simulate one in the hopes that the workers will join it.
The Postmodern Left is the simulation of a Left, with all of the chants, banners and other
paraphernalia of a militant Left with few to none of the acts of resistance. It simulates
struggle, basks in the glorious imagery, then wonders why it never achieves victory, which
is impossible unless there is an actual battle. Most of the time these battles will end in
defeat, so the Postmodern Left accepts the happy illusion over the sad reality. Of course,
working class people cannot ignore the bitterness of their own lived reality, but the
Postmodern Left generally does not inhabit this world so it is not a problem for them.
On the one hand, Postmodern Leftism has completely failed to challenge neoliberal
austerity measures. On the other hand, we can see that full-time staff of the Postmodern
Left has done a spectacular job of staving off austerity once we realize that the only
jobs they are committed to protecting are their own.
Postmodern social movements
Arun Gupta discussed the postmodern method behind many social movements, describing the
People's Climate March in 2014, a stunning victory of style over substance. He noted that
there were "no demands, no targets,and no enemy. Organizers admitted encouraging bankers
to march was like saying Blackwater mercenaries should join an antiwar protest. There is
no unity other than money."
How could a march of hundreds of thousands be made so powerless? Because it was run by
NGOs committed most of all to continuing their own stream of revenue. All that was
necessary was the image of a mass march, the feeling that we are doing something. That
this was entirely inadequate to the problem at hand-saving the planet from destruction by
capitalism-is not so much a problem if your real goal is to get donations, sell books and
set up speaking engagements. In other words, this is not struggle but merely marketing in
the form of struggle. It is merely a simulation.
Or, as Gupta described the logic:
Branding. That's how the climate crisis is going to be solved. We are in an era or
postmodern social movements. The image (not ideology) comes first and shapes the reality.
The P.R. and marketing determines the tactics, the messaging, the organizing, and the
strategy.
One of the most blatant current examples of illusory struggle is the Fight for Fifteen
campaign, particularly at the national level, which has led thousands of low-wage workers
in strikes against fast food employers. Or have they? One participant describes her
experience: "In Miami, I've attended Fight for $15 demonstrations in which the vast
majority of participants were paid activists, employees of NGOs, CBOs (Community Based
Organizations), and union staff seeking potential members." In fact, many people who have
attended these actions will look around and ask, who is really on strike here? There are
certainly people who risk their jobs to participate, but in many cases the hundreds of
people who attend one of these "strikes" are simply supporters of the idea of low-wage
workers striking. The striking workers are far and few between, with a small handful
designated as media spokespeople and none others identified at all.
Jane Macalevy is a former staffer with the Service Employee's International Union (SEIU),
the union which runs the Fight for Fifteen in the background, but quietly in order to
maintain the image of a worker-led campaign. She has described how illusory this campaign
really is: "The problem is that there isn't any depth to the Fight for 15 campaign. We
call it the Berlin Rosen campaign: one hot-shot media firm that's gotten something like
$50 to 70 million from SEIU to paint, through social media, the illusion of a huge movement."
Berlin Rosen is a public relations firm employed not only by SEIU but also by the current
Mayor of New York City and was involved in the bankruptcy of Detroit, the belly of the
beast of neoliberalism. They were also employed by the leadership of the United Auto
Workers to convince Chrysler employees to accept a contract after these same employees
rejected an earlier one that did not go far enough in cancelling the two-tier wage system.
In this case, postmodern activism and neoliberalism are one and the same. Berlin Rosen
proves, if nothing else, that there is good money to be made in postmodern social movements.
SEIU has since endorsed Hillary Clinton, who does not support a $15 per hour minimum wage.
Meanwhile, the most recent Fight for $15 strike ended with appeals to get out the vote in
2016-we can imagine for whom-and has shifted its campaign slogan to "Come Get My Vote."
That is, the movement is being openly positioned to being co-opted by the Democratic
Party. This is not usually how a national workers' rebellion plays out, but might be how a
simulated one could be directed.
Richard Seymour described the empty, feel good activism, in which the good feelings of
people finally able to express their opposition to the horrors of neoliberalism overcomes
the question of what can we do to actually stop these things. Why ask these difficult
questions when it feels so good just to finally be marching?
It was, indeed, a joyous occasion[Seymour writes of a march against austerity]. The people
thronged into streets barely big enough to contain them, and chanted and sang in notes of
cheerful defiance. Those who claim that such events are ‘boring' are wrong in point of
fact, and give the impression of political thrill-seeking. We all had a lovely time. And
this was precisely the problem.
A minimum condition for sentience on the left is an awareness that this protest is itself
evidence of at least five years of catastrophic failure. There is something powerfully and
stunningly incongruous in the subjectivity of a left marching as if in recreation, when we
know we are also mourning for the casualties and the dead. It suggests that we don't
really mean business. It suggests that, rather than wanting to shake the walls and pillars
to the earth, we want to grab some ice cream and go home.
What Seymour describes is the problem posed by February 15, 2003, the high point of
postmodern activism, when millions around the globe marched against the war in Iraq in
possibly the largest day of demonstrations in world history. Millions of people flooded
the streets and for many it felt like the most empowering moment of their lives, and yet
how little power we actually had. Of course, millions of people have an enormous amount of
power, but not when they just stand there on the street, even if they are carrying a
banner or wearing a political t-shirt. The Postmodern Left can still be heard, from time
to time, saying how we nearly stopped the war in Iraq. Nothing could be further from
reality, but reality does not bother the Postmodern Left.
"The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the
living," wrote Marx in the 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. In this case, it's more like
a daydream, a fantasy of struggle with all the imagery of resistance and none of its
substance. If this is all we can do, and no more, then we are utterly lost.
Some people have been grappling with the problem posed by February 15 for the last decade.
Others are perfectly content to repeat this same process over and over again, as it allows
them to continue selling books, booking speaking engagements, recruiting people to their
organizations and funding their non-profit organizations. These machinations can continue
indefinitely and are entirely compatible with the capitalist system. One can make can make
quite a satisfying career and lifestyle as a revolutionary of sorts, so long as it is all
within the confines of the Postmodern Left.
SYRIZA's Postmodern Neoliberalism
If this is the age of illusions, then the rise of SYRIZA in Greece must be the penultimate
illusion. Sadly, but predictably, the SYRIZA bubble has been popped and we have all been
forced back down to reality. Since SYRIZA's acceptance of austerity, former SYRIZA Central
Committee member Stathis Kouvelakis has written a number of autopsies of what was once the
SYRIZA dream. In one especially revealing statement, he notes how so many moves by SYRIZA
were so contrary to what any radical Leftist would accept.
For example, he notes the acceptance of an early agreement on February 20, 2015, to extend
the bailout, well before the July capitulation:
Its first and most immediate consequence was to paralyze the mobilization and destroy the
optimism and militancy that prevailed in the first weeks after the January 25 electoral
victory. Of course, this downgrading of popular mobilization is not something that started
on January 25 or February 20, as a consequence of a particular governmental tactic. It is
something that was preexistent in Syriza's strategy.
This is the exact opposite of what was supposed to happen, but the facade had to be
maintained. Kouvelakis then notes the rapid decline of internal democracy in SYRIZA in the
last few years.
What we saw being constructed after June 2012 - step by step but systematically - was a
party form increasingly leader-centered, centralized, and detached from the actions and
the will of the membership. The process went entirely out of control when Syriza went into
government.
None of this should be unexpected. These are the well known consequences of electoral
strategies, which Marxists have been aware of for a century, since the capitulation of
European Social Democracy to World War One and repeated many times since. Yet, eager
Marxists the world over looked to SYRIZA as something different, but it was merely the
illusion of something different. In the end, it was exactly the same sort of radical
electoral strategies of the past, but the appeal that these plucky Marxist intellectuals
and activists could take on the European powers was far too seductive. In SYRIZA, the
international Left saw itself, and could not imagine that it, too, might collapse in much
the same way under similar circumstances.
The problem is that these strategies appeal to a certain brand of Leftist occupying a
certain social position-specifically, intellectuals and NGO leaders-including those who
have spent their careers explaining the limitations of electoralism. The appeal of
electoral glory is simply too great for these people to be withstood against a rock-solid
critique of reformism.
After July 11, no serious Leftists can ever, for the rest of their lives, look a prominent
left-wing figure in the eye and take their promises at face value. We just cannot take
ourselves seriously if we continue to pretend that lofty promises from self-important,
self-selected leaders can be trusted. And yet, this is precisely what the Postmodern Left
will continue to do, assuring everybody that no, this next project is not an other SYRIZA,
even though they almost certainly said the some sort of thing about SYRIZA itself.
Greece has had dozens of general strikes over the last few years and some even predicted
that the working class might rise up in response to SYRIZA's capitulation. There was even
a one-day general strike of public sector workers carried out the day that the first round
of austerity was approved by the Greek parliament on July 15. Surprisingly, this general
strike seemed to have no impact whatsoever on parliament. "The fight is now on," heralded
one breathless commentary announcing the impending strike. "It is not off: it's the period
of shadow boxing that is over." The strike came and went, but the mere shadow boxing
continued.
We are left to wonder whether or not working people can challenge their own governments if
even a general strike cannot alter the course of history. There is, of course, an
alternate explanation, which is that at least some of these may have been mere simulations
of general strikes, turned on and then turned off by the union leadership with little
threat of disrupting much beyond halting a days' work, after which order was fully
restored, if it was ever even threatened in the first place.
If we cannot tell the difference between simulation and reality, we risk descending from a
healthy pessimism over the current state of affairs into believing that working class
struggles can have no impact simply because it deceptively appears that they don't.
Simulation hits reality
SYRIZA played out like a simulation of Marxist theory. The collapse of social democracy
required a new electoral force to take its place. In stepped SYRIZA, an electoral alliance
that assured everyone that they were actually going to take on the financial powers in
Europe. Marxists around the world who have documented in detail how social democracy has
flailed and decayed for decades suddenly believed that yes, this electoral reform project
would succeed, and no, there was no reason why it was any different than the failures of
the past. Without a "fake" Marxist Left-the Stalinists, reformists and other revisionists
of the past-the "real" Marxist Left stepped in to take its place, heralding the dawn of a
new age in Europe, for a few exciting months anyway.
It can seem impossible at times to tell the difference between the real and the fake, the
simulation and reality, but ultimately we do not live in a postmodern world. We simply
live in a world where so many on the Left act as though it is. Nonetheless, all of these
simulations do eventually confront the brute material forces of reality, and suddenly the
complete inadequacy of the simulated Left-not just in SYRIZA but across the board-is laid
bare for all to see. Eventually, a Ferguson or a Baltimore revolts and the irrelevance of
the Postmodern Left to the project of organizing working class resistance is made
completely clear.
If there is any way out of this rut, it is to reject the spectacle and the simulation in
favor of substantive material resistance. The feel good moment of triumph with a hollow
center, the exuberant meetings and chants that people remember for the rest of their
lives, just might be an obstacle toward building something with actual power. The image of
revolt, and even talk of socialism and-hold onto your seats!-"political revolution" coming
from the Bernie Sanders campaign for President will go nowhere. It is the courageous act
of resistance and the rein of terror that it must face in response from the neoliberal
state that transforms a class into a force for rebellion.
In short, if social movements do not directly hurt the people in power-and not just mildly
embarrass them-or empower the exploited and oppressed-and not just temporarily mobilize
them-then it may not be a worthwhile strategy. It may simply feel like one.
In other words, if it feels good, don't do it.
We may struggle to see past the illusions from our current vantage point. No doubt, we
will find ourselves in the trenches of class war, only to look outside and realize that
the entire spectacle has been constructed by a charlatan. This will continue to happen, so
long as neoliberal capitalism provides career opportunities for charlatans, as it no doubt
will.
There is a great need, then, to breakdown the facade, to no longer allow the false images
of resistance that surreptitiously enable neoliberalism and distract from the fundamental
project of resistance. The SYRIZAs of the world will insist that this is counterproductive
to their project. And that is exactly the point.
Scott Jay is an independent socialist living in Oakland and was previously active with
Occupy Oakland. Republished from libcom.org.
If you enjoyed this piece then we recommend "A Blueprint for a Party of an Old Type" also
by Scott Jay and "A Socialist on City Council: A Look at the Career of Kshama Sawant" by
Micheal Reagan.
http://blackrosefed.org/postmodern-left-neoliberalism/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Download, print and enlarge the January issue of the A3 wall paper! ---- They tell us it's
a serious thing. We can influence the political direction of the Czech Republic. Outside,
however, the direct election of the president, a campaign that was launched about half a
year ago and now culminates, looks like another annoying reality show. Robinson Island
gained a serious competitor. Overcome The Chosen One will not be a brunch. ---- The direct
election of the head of the Czech state was preceded by the element of direct democracy,
which enables people to directly and freely influence politics. It is only a naive mind
that can be cheered over the introduction of properly measured elements of direct
democracy into the bourgeois democratic apparatus. No one over his results. You can get to
know the anarchists and anarchists about this phenomenon in the November issueof our wall
paper. In a nutshell. A free man needs room to engage in political life. She can not spend
her active life in a complex undemocratic or autocratic workplace. Equal access to
information means, among other things, that one has to track, study and analyze time and
energy. Equal access to resources is equally important, "in the capitalist referendum, not
the will of the people, but an economically dominant interest group. Whoever pays enough
information, experts, commercials, billboards and internet trolls. "The campaign's
financial limits can not solve this problem, there are thousands of ways to get around.
Therefore, if the two basic conditions mentioned above are not met, direct democracy can
not be a word.
Proponents of these measured and capitalist systems of completely harmless elements of
direct democracy are slowly pushing into the political agenda another phenomenon. Its
ideal is a 100% voter and an obedient citizen. These slightly rebellious politicians, with
the support of the Trolls and the Barrande Creed, are pushing for an increase in electoral
opportunities, such as nationwide referendums or direct election of officials. At the same
time, they declare that direct elections confirm their mandate. Similar arguments support
their efforts to dehonesce non-election civic activities. Stroze. Voice attendance. Trade
unions, non-governmental organizations, and other emancipatory societies to ban.
To choose a suitable candidate for the head of the Czech state wants nerves strong and
reliable as a lightning conductor. It would be easier to prepare a tasty breakfast from a
bucket of rotten apples. The direct choice of a single person with relatively large powers
and extreme media attention not only in the Bohemian Basin does not surprisingly attract
the exotists of all shades in a similar way as when the Czech Republic is looking for a
superstar or a female farmer. Candidate profiles are not worth considering. Briefly, here
we have one gambling gentleman. A lot of opportunism over there and a bit of opportunism
here. There is also a humanist, for whom the teeth of nails beat the remains of the
left-wing state. Funny is certainly a representative of the armory lobby fighting against
refugees. Then we find the liberal of the occupational manipulator, top manager and
paranoid fool. The debate sparked a glimpse of what he had stolen and sent to the tax
havens what was contaminated.
We met representatives of two mainstream political streams. Supporters of corporate power,
bourgeois democracy and cosmopolitan worldview, on the one hand, and mercenaries plundered
by plutocracy, strict pioneers (not to confuse "direct") bourgeois democracy and the
chauvinist worldview of the twenty-first century. Do you want to sleep tonight in the
container or on the manure? Against the global corporate power of the Russian oligarchy.
Against artificial processes, forced disappearance. Against media manipulation of total
dulling. Instead of the ignorance of the emancipatory movements of their struggle. Other
alternatives, according to the creators of a fresh, privileged dissident policy, do not
deserve a Czech citizen. What did the protectors of the state quo? Liberal Democrats pull
powerful weapons in the fight against chauvinist conservatism. Flavors for the mass media
industry, a truly objective and impartial source of information; a megalomania business
mall to the European Union, to be a space for free cooperation; and a global NATO army
whose warfare is overlooked or downplayed. In the fight against stupidity, they pulled out
with a negation of common sense, instead of a promotional carton of free-market macronutrials.
We thought the super hypocrisy of Havel and super gaunier Klaus could not be overcome.
Even during their term of office, travel was not easy, and a person with a Czech passport
had to avoid political discussion or to be demonstrably ashamed. For Milos Zeman, we
stopped crossing abroad completely, and when an alien appears in our country, we only have
to drag the lower lip over our head and swallow or call the police. As anarchists, we
rarely come up with reformist demands. This time, however, it is an easy solution to
cancel this misfire once and for all. The choices of elections all begin. "You're still
looking for a leader, a man without blame, but they are not. They're like you. It will
change. They're running away. They will die. They are not leaders, only people and strong
people, they are the only permanent force. "
A3 ( January 201 8 ) HERE to download . http://www.afed.cz/A3/A3-2018-01.pdf
Download, print, spread!
The A3 wall paper is published annually by the Anarchist Federation. They are intended
primarily for spreading through street lifts or posting in workplaces and schools.
https://www.afed.cz/text/6775/a3-dalsi-protivna-reality-show
------------------------------
Message: 5
On 2 January 2018, the Transport Workers Union (SUTCRA) realized a strike to advance
pressure for concrete gains before the Wage Council. During the strike, a "scab" got in
between our comrade Marcelo Silvera and his family with a result that is now known to
everyone - our comrade was assassinated by the "scab", hitman, or gunmen at the service of
the management. ---- See also (in Spanish): Comunicado de SUTCRA ante el asesinato de
Marcelo Silvera | Sindicato Único del Transporte de Carga y Ramas Afines - SUCTRA ----
This filth bragged about going armed to his workplace, of having intimidated workers so
that they do not join the union and/or union actions, of having "offered" to his boss to
take down unionists with the truck that he drove... A fatal repertoire, but nothing that
escapes the reality that exists in our country. This was not the work of a "crazyman" or a
"maladapted." Maybe there has been a component of "excess," but an excess that is still
within the framwork of the political-ideological positions of many sectors of the owning
classes.
There is a great quantity of bosses that do what they want with their enterprises and
their employees. They pay what they want, when they want, refuse to comply with labor
rights, and when workers organize among themselves to make corresponding demands, these
bosses say with total impunity that they are not going to pay anything, that they will not
comply. Hundreds of these cases exist in the interior of the country.
In many of these cases we encounter a strong reactionary component, in many cases a
fascist one. The reactionary logic that has been permeating important sectors of our
society permit, with total impunity, the occurance of these acts. That same reactionary
and anti-union logic, anti-poor in general, provides that framework for which a fascist
can assassinate a union militant and officer.
And now where is the discourse about "serious and responsibly negotiation," "democratic,"
"the labor-management accord," when there is a union officer assassinated? All of that
discourse turns out to be hot air in moments like these. This action is what inaugurates
the round of Wage Councils for 2018, a round that will not be the same as those before.
This act marks a before and after that they will make a ruling on the negotiations and
struggle in the Wage Council.
The bosses want to play dirty. This is not strange to us. As a class, they were the ones
who gave us the military coup of 1973. Their managerial associations greeted the coup with
open arms and took advantage of the opportunity to fire unionized workers and labor
militants by use of the 4 July 1973 Decree implemented by President Bordaberry and the
Council of National Security. Fascist sectors that supported the coup took advantage of
the opportunity to attack students and workers. The JUP (Uruguayan Youth on Foot) had
already assassinated Santiago Rodriguez Muela in High School #8 before the coup. Those
fascist groups were already getting involved in the police and military structure. Today,
their members move around in those spaces, loose.
The bosses did not come out to denounce the murder, nor did the government aside from the
Ministry of Labor. But these, like others, were lukewarm declarations that located the
emphasis in "violence" and "co-existence" and in the "peaceful resolution of conflict."
How else can one explain the main project of the State whose Ministry of the Interior has
developed a militarized force to invade and bring violence to the poorest neighborhoods of
the country? How else can one explain that the Armed Forced cost millions of dollars
daily? Peaceful coexistence when the armed apparatuses of the State are armed for war?
Peaceful coexistence when the majority of femicides have been carried out by members of
the police? It is a sick joke!
We reassert that in capitalism a peaceful coexistence between classes is an illusion. It
is impossible. This recent lamentable act speaks clearly to this. The bosses do not have
any shame in applying force to repress popular movements. Capitalism is "naturally"
violent, it is in its constitution to utilize violence to maintain an unjust social order.
Historical examples show that the dominant classes retaliate with a ferocious repression
against el pueblo, all the way up to the use of genocide.
In response to these acts, which are turning points, we believe that a united popular
movement should come out to the street to denounce, demand justice, and prevent the same
impunity that keeps allowing for these sorts of scenarios. But looking beyond just that,
we have to prepare ourselves. More difficult and complex times are ahead. In our
neighboring countries military persecution is becoming more and more normalized, such as
the offensive against Mapuche and solidarious leftist organizations in Argentina and
attacks against anarchist organizations in Brazil.
The assassination of comrade Marcelo Silvero will not remain an isolated incident without
punity. It should not be forgotten. We are obliged to escalate the struggle, to escalate
our commitment to militancy for a society without bosses, middlemen, nor militaries.
This is a alarm sounding that the political situation is beginning to change and it
requires that we remain alert for the times that come. The only guarantee of change and
victory for those from below is that of organization and struggle. Only through popular
direct action can we create a Pueblo Fuerte that can flip over this tortilla.
AGAINST THE IMPUNITY OF BOSSES AND THE HITMEN AT ITS SERVICE
STRUGGLE AND ORGANIZATION
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF POPULAR POWER
ARRIBA LOS QUE LUCHAN!!
Uruguayan Anarchist Federation
Related Link:
http://federacionanarquistauruguaya.uy/carta-opinion-fau-ante-el-homicidio-de-un-militante-sindical/
https://www.anarkismo.net/article/30781
------------------------------
Home »
Anarchic update news all over the world - 14.01.2018
» Anarchic update news all over the world - 14.01.2018