November 12, 2018

Contra Info - Translation Counter-Information Network

Melbourne, Australia: Mural in memory of Mikhail Zhlobitsky

Received on 10/11/2018; for the case of Mikhail Zhlobitsky check here and here:Narrm / Melbourne so-called Australia: Graffiti mural in memory of 17 year old Russian Anarchist-Communist Mikhail Zhlobitsky who died while carrying out an explosive attack against the FSB (Federal Security Service) Regional Headquarters in Arkhangelsk, Russia on October 31st.

“Never Forget Our Fallen Comrades!”


by Contra Info at November 12, 2018 06:45 PM

November 04, 2018

Contra Info - Translation Counter-Information Network

Hambach Forest: Eviction possible next week


Based on different observations, we assume that an eviction of all soil structures and tree houses is scheduled for next week (Nov. 5th – Nov. 9th). Get ready for it, it’s best to come by early, as the access is likely to be more difficult from the beginning of the week. According to previous experience, first the accesses to the wood will probably be limited and controlled, then barricades and soil structures destroyed and then the tree houses be evicted and destroyed.

in German / in French / in Spanish

by Contra Info at November 04, 2018 03:28 PM

November 01, 2018

Contra Info - Translation Counter-Information Network

Arkhangelsk, Russian Federation: Anarchist Misha Zhlobitsky explodes FSB reception

received 01.11.2018

October 31, 2018 8:52 local time in the city of Arkhangelsk at the entrance to the reception room of the Regional Directorate of the FSB of the Russian Federation in the Arkhangelsk Region an explosion was heared. The rebel anarchist Mikhail Vasilievich Zhlobitsky, also known in the Telegram channel as Valerian Panov, blew himself up. This is the first case of anarchists undermining the FSB in 19 years – the previous attack was organized in 1999 against the reception office of the FSB in Moscow by the New Revolutionary Alternative organization.

Mikhail Zhlobitsky died as a result of a self-detonation, causing injuries of varying severity to three FSB officers. He was 17 years old.

A few minutes before the explosion, the anarchist left a message in the chat group under the nickname Valerian Panov. Here is what he wrote:

Comrades, now in the FSB building in Arkhangelsk there will be a terrorist attack, the responsibility for which I claim. The reasons are clear to you. Since FSB fabricates cases and tortures people, I decided to go for it. Most likely, I will die because of the explosion, because I initiate the bomb directly by pressing the button attached to the bomb cover. Therefore, you are requested to spread information about the terrorist attack: who committed it and the reasons.

Well, that seems to be all. I wish you to go towards our goal unswervingly and uncompromisingly. I am wishing you the future of anarchist communism!

We bow our heads before the heroism of our comrade. We were not acquainted live, but through communication he left an impression of himself as an intelligent and well-prepared person who is not indifferent and aspires to go beyond the swamp of the official opposition struggle, which is now mainstream.

There is no doubt that Mikhail acted purposefully, understood his motives crystally and consciously sacrificed himself during the action. It is impossible to read the stories of our comrades about the nightmarish torture in the dungeons of the Gestapo-FSB without the heart bleeding and without being overwhelmed with a thirst for revenge for sadists in uniform. When a feeling of indignation and a desire for justice fills up the cup of patience, when internal moral conflict becomes intolerable for an honest person, then concern for their own welfare retreats before deciding to call the scoundrels to account. Anarchists often did this in the past, rushing into a suicide attack on a tyrant and executioner.

Michael showed composure and endurance of a true revolutionary. We are deeply shocked, full of grief from the heroic death of Michael and deeply saddened that he did not leave any hope for himself.

We accept Michael as he is, and express our full solidarity and respect for his Act. He lived as he thought was right, and died, like a hero, in the struggle for the ideals of Freedom and Justice.

Death to the Federal Collision of the Infinites!

(Смерть Федеральной Сходке Беспредельщиков!)

Long live the Anarchy!

Eternal memory to Mikhail Zhlobitsky! Rest in peace, dear comrade.

videos via

in Portuguese l German

by Contra Info at November 01, 2018 09:27 PM

Gap, France: Freedom for the «7 of Briançon» !

sent 11/1/18

They are facing potential incarceration for helping migrants in danger in the French Alps. Bastien, Benoit, Eléonora, Juan, Lisa, Mathieu et Théo will face justice on November 8th in Gap.

They are prosecuted for «helping undocument foreign nationals to enter national territory, in organized gang”. The envisaged penalty is 10 years in prison and 750.000 euros fine. What should they amend for ? Being involved in a march against the far-right, little band called «Bloc identitaire», which was obstructing the border the border so as to retaliate against migrants trying to cross it.

Even though the notion of «organized gang” was meant to tackle organized crime, it is now being used against volunteers involved in the NGO’s Tous migrants and, as for two of them, La Cimade. More generally, this provision is now being misused as a tool to intimidate citizens who show solidarity with migrants trying to cross the French Alps.

The prosecutor’s office has, hence, chosen to prosecute pacifist activists while enabling the far-right activists of “Bloc Identitaire” to evade punishment, as they didn’t face any charges.

Echoing a recent French Constitutional Court’s ruling, which enshrined the principle of fraternity as a constitutional principle, we are calling for the dropping of all charges against Bastien, Benoit, Eléonora, Juan, Lisa, Mathieu, and the end of any prosecution against them.

Solidarity with the «7 of Briançon»! We all stand against the “crime of solidarity”! We are all criminals for being solidary in “organized band”!

in German

by Contra Info at November 01, 2018 05:41 PM

October 31, 2018

Contra Info - Translation Counter-Information Network

Milano, Italy: Villa Vegan Squat is under eviction threat! Days of resistance!

Updates – Tuesday 30th October

This morning Villa’s eviction didn’t happen. We stand ready to defend the place.

In the last few days lots of people came bringing solidarity and we continued organising the resistance together, working on the barricades and  discussing on what to do in case of actual eviction.

The Halloween Taz organized by Telos Collective from Saronno has been moved to Villa Vegan, on this blog you can find a communique about the need of occupation as a practice and the decision of moving this event.

We reiterate the call to bring direct support, being present here and organizing together.

Useful things to bring here: food, construction materials and tools.

Next appointments in Villa:

Wednesday 31st october: Punk show to support the prisoners of Scripta Manent Operation.


Friday 2nd november: Dinner and public meeting against the eviction

For following updates check the blog.

To contact us write to villavegansquat at


Text received 10 / 27 / 2018


In recent days it has come rumor that they want to evict Villa Vegan Tuesday, October 30th.
We believe it is a trust information and we are determined to resist, so let’s make a call to all the people in solidarity reach us to prepare together resistance and mobilization against the eviction. It is welcome anyone who wants to support the place, who has crossed over the years, who has carried on the struggles that here have found complicity, all the comrades who they think that if they want to evict an anarchist space occupied by 20 years must cost him dear.

In all these years of occupation Villa Vegan has hosted comrades from all over the world, has given logistical support to many self-managed projects, especially those from the hardcore punk scene, and a lots of fights, including those of against prison system and in solidarity to prisoners, ecologists and for liberation animal, against racism and CIEs (renamed then CPR), transfeminist queer and against gender violence, antifascist; struggles that refuse relations with institutions and always in opposition to the capitalist system and the state.

With the evacuation of the occupied spaces, the interminable overbuilding, the raids against the migrants, irregular and unwanted people of each type, the urban “redevelopment” of the neighborhoods, the growing militarization and surveillance of the roads, they want to transform the places where we live in the showcase cities useful only to run the economy and in dormitories for those included in the rhythm of production and consumption, closing more and more every possible resistance space. For this reason every eviction does not concern only the specific place that comes attacked but the more general plan of social control by the political and economic power, and must be opposed.

We invite those who can pass and stop – even to sleep – in Villa Vegan in these days.

in Italian / in German: Translations 1 & 2

by Contra Info at October 31, 2018 10:44 AM

January 14, 2018

Newsletter Ιανουάριος 2018

This is the last newsletter for 2017 on behalf of the
collective. Read on to find some useful information!

The importance of your “backup email” (once again)

Backup email is the email address you gave when you asked for an espiv
email account and where you received the
connection details for your shiny new espiv account. On this particular
address, the backup email, is where we’re goind to send you instructions
on how to recover your espiv account in case you forget your passphrase.

If you want to change your currently set backup email to a different
address, you may do so by visiting .

We urge you to immediately go and check your current backup email as
seen in and make sure that you actually have
access (can login) to this backup email. Remember that for us this
address is our only way to verify that you own a particular espiv email
account. So losing access to your backup email and forgetting your espiv
passphrase may result to completely losing your espiv email.

 Financial review for 2017


Cybrigade is funded by its members, as well as other solidarity teams
and individuals.

Balance from 2016: 485€
Contributions from members: 1274€

Sum: 1759€


Servers: 734€
Certificates: 240€
Funding to other infrastructures: 240€
Stickers: 52€
Posters: 125€

Sum: 1391€



Rainloop, a new web client for espiv mail

Around two months ago we deployed a new, friendly web client for espiv
email. Rainloop, as this new client is called, may be accessed at . You may give rainloop a try instead of the
“classic” Roundcube that we still offer at Among
other things, Rainloop features a mobile-friendly theme. Although we
don’t encourage using mobile phones for activism we do know that some of
you still use these daemonic devices.

Happy new year ya all!

by babouin at January 14, 2018 09:28 PM

October 26, 2017

The Anarcho-Tourist Reviw


§ The present convergence of parliamentary democracy, establishment media, neoliberal practices, anti-terrorist laws, social conformity, and cultural exhaustion, all lead to a societal formation greatly resembling that of the totalitarianism of the prior century. These uncomfortable facts can no longer be swept away or not dealt with. No one can deny the new phenomenon that is emerging, and the necessity to deal with it.

§ The present has characteristics like the fascism of the past, although it differs from it to a large degree. It would aid our conception far more to glance back at was seen as a forerunner to fascism. That is, the early modern world of absolute monarchy, the inquisition, counterReformation and Jesuits. The difference with today is that the prior divine right of the sovereign in executing justice, to end or save life, is now found transmitted to every cop. The inquisition against free thoughts and heresies is now largely devoted to certain practices which are then defined as heretical acts, e.g. terrorism. Although as before with the Nazis, the police demand a terror of their own to fight terrorism. The Jesuitical aspect of mainstream branches of economics, and academia more broadly (so we can include the Left as well), is quite obvious.

§ Just as the Socialists had sent the workers to the slaughter of 1914, and later worked against and violently suppressed the post-war revolutions- this earning them the analysis as social-fascist from the 3rd International- so too, what remains of the Left of today works to establish and justify the permanent state of exception that grounds the new authoritarianism. Obvious cases like Hollande or Obama should not have anyone overlook certain generals in Podemos, nor the normalization of far-right discourse under Syriza-Anel (along with a truly shameful statement opening up to the Nazis of Golden Dawn if they became peacable) and the implementation of new anti-terror practices clearly targeting family members of political prisoners.

§ The state of exception is the mechanism and institutional reality by which the new fascism can become a reality in a short time. Although when this last arrives, it will not be with stormtroopers, as in the classic view, but much more with elections, or even just the signing of a few pieces of paper. When it becomes evident, it is already too late- and thus a primary axis of political action in our times must be directed against the state of exception and its neoliberal and anti-terrorist ideology.

§ The paradigm of counter-insurrectionary cleansing by the new authoritarianism is of course, the crackdown in Italy beginning in 1979: all purely done in a legal framework, and sanctioned by the Left. Thousands of activists were arrested in a few large sweeps, and many thousands more forced into exile. The goal is the accomplishing of what the old fascism did (smashing radicalism, large transfer of wealth to the rich), but in a controlled and legalistic manner.

§ The other great counterpart to the state of exception, is the legitimation of the Left under the banner of an endless ‘lesser-evil’ argument, as well ending in an engineered ‘transition to democracy’ or ‘reconciliation’. Of course this will only become a reality after the social threat has been dismantled. This cleansing is sort of like some switch-on it will go until society is remolded into ever more atomized neoliberal forms, then the sterilized, preprogrammed consumerist parliamentary democracy, now free of its small malfunctions, can return in all its splendour.

§ These theses are not meant to be the last word, but the beginning of a larger debate about the disastrous course of events unfolding. . .

p70-71, March 2017

The Anarcho Tourist Review Issue 2

by atreview at October 26, 2017 08:51 AM


‘The conspiracy theory of history’ was in the 19th century a reactionary and ridiculous belief, at a time when so many social movements were stirring up the masses. Today’s pseudo-rebels are well aware of this, thanks to hearsay or a few books, and believe that it remains true for eternity. They refuse to recognize the real praxis of their time. . .” -Debord, Comments on the Society of the Spectacle (1988)

In provocation, timing is everything, along with a certain style and taste. Therefore I judge it a very good time to come up with a discussion that, it needs to be said, will not simply provoke for the sake of provocation, but provoke because there are things in our world of today that certainly are, as the phrase would have it, thought-provoking.

For instance, the threatened decommisioning of the 9/11 report by the Americans, and its apparent implications of the Saudi Arabian government, is surely something that would have been regarded as ‘not acceptable for discussion’ in some radical circles, even a few months ago, and yet, this is an undeniable recent fact. But once this comes out many will no doubt ask further questions about the help of other intelligence agencies, first of all, the Americans themselves, and secondly other close allies of the US, like the UK, Pakistan, Israel, and other Gulf monarchies. I think this bit of recent news is a good introduction to thinking about conspiracies, the conspiracy theory and its function in today’s world.

To begin, there are basically two popular conceptions among radicals relating to conspiracy theories, and I would summarize them as ‘too little’ and ‘too much’. For the first, these conspiratorial analyses are pooh-poohed in favor of “serious struggle” or it’s assumed that they “don’t matter anyways”. A slightly more Machiavellian conception would have it that such things might be true, but we can’t discuss them openly for fear of offending or alienating the masses, and so they are unprofitable in this regard. But I also find problematic this last spuriously realistic view, as conspiracy theories, according to various studies, have at least some mass grounding in many societies; and anyways it assumes a sort of role of guiding the bland masses, which I find problematic. This even goes into censorship, and while it’s not totally related, I read with interest an article from an aging Dutch Marxist1, complaining about being silenced for his conspiratorial thoughts:

However, people at NLR [New Left Review] and other publications are (too) keen to be recognised by the mainstream and are allergic to the faintest hint of ‘conspiracy theory’, as if the incidence of terror attacks would be all spontaneous and there would not have been an infrastructure in place which at least seeks to influence the conjuncture of terror.

This comes about, in my view, not only from a certain 19th century standpoint of outdated ideas, but also because (in a related, typically Anglophone fashion) they have confused respectability with popularity. What is respectable in today’s decomposing society (e.g. multiculturalism, identity politics, ‘reasonable’ denying of any conspiracy theory, austerity, neoliberal economics, electoralism etc.) is not very popular at all. If we are serious about trying to make some broader influence, we should not be limited by the all-too fragile search for respectability of the Marxists in academia. Actually, I truly believe that ‘crazy anarchy’ of burning cars and riots is much less respectable, but much more popular, than the (generally Anglophone) efforts to present things as if society could be reasonably talked into social revolution during a brief chat, providing we avoid some sensitive topics.

On the other hand, on the side of ‘too much’, we wind up in paranoiac paralysis (in the best case, if not spinning off into sighting UFOs, etc.). Because the modern State has quite a lot of power, it gets credited as having total control over all events, even those of an antagonistic political character. Then the smallest molotov or stone thrown becomes the work of provocateurs, and more proof of the hopelessness of resistance. Everything fits into the plans of the (depending on your taste, Masonic/Illuminati/ Soros/NWO etc.) elite. This is basically where Debord wound up in his old age, and it’s surely not an agreeable or very productive place to be. This represents mental defeat before the battle has even commenced, and becomes in this way a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But from these two views, wrong in different ways for their lack of moderation, I would hope to make a sort of synthesis between them, taking what is valuable and leaving what is not. With that said, let’s begin our further research on this ‘murky business‘ of modern society.

Surely a basic analysis should come from the country that has mainly created the contemporary ‘meme’ of conspiracy theories, the US. If one reads the conspiracy sites a bit, it’s clear that this is something like the death agony of a certain way of life. Because sometimes these don’t go in a clearly reactionary or traditionally ‘right-wing’ direction, and you can find a real opposing ideological grab-bag, as the arguments are often combined with a large degree of intellectual eclecticism, and this utopic free-market neoliberalism, this faith you can almost only find existing in the US (along with other outlandish beliefs like Mormonism, Scientology, etc.). This is sort of a local conservatism unsure of itself and intellectually confused, combined with some occasional pacifist/left/anti-imperialist influence.

There is also a great deal of nostalgia for some sort of constitutional rights and liberties (generally of the 2nd amendment variety). Generally though, most of the conspiracy websites (as far as I’ve seen) don’t seem capable to resist Trump, which is a bit sad, as it seems that despite all their rhetoric, perhaps they just wanted a clumsy and irrational authority. This points to the highly American character of most conspiracies (after all the largest debates concern Sept. 11), and this makes sense, as everything nowadays is being Americanized. Whereas in the past, certain conspiracy theories were quite well-accepted amongst the Left (e.g. the Nazis burning the Reichstag and faking a Polish attack justifying their invasion of that country, or Castro’s conspiratorial view of Kennedy’s demise) while other opposing conspiracy theories (frequently anti-Semitic) were accepted amongst the far-right. In general we would find more historical reality in dividing such a large term by saying, “which supposed conspiracy, and what proposed theory?”.

There are also more recent confirmed minor conspiracy theories that have some value- for instance, the rigging of the precious metals markets (LIBOR scandal, etc.) has geopolitical implications, in regards to gold as a denominator of currency (the free-floating US dollar, against the recently gold-backed Chinese yuan). Wikileaks, in regards to the NSA (and recently the CIA), has confirmed a lot of what has been thought about capacities for gathering intelligence from computers and cell phones. So too, with the ongoing cycle of supposed tawdry revelations about Trump, these reveal both something believable about Trump, but also the truly hypocritical, deeply sick Puritan mindset of the American intelligence agencies. So, these are just a few examples, and they are not so controversial. It serves to reason as, after all, what is rotten at the top must be rotten beneath, and so too, what is rotten at its foundation, can’t be stable at its height. As Debord wrote, concerning the growth of assassinations and conspiracies in his time:

The syndrome of this newly established social disease has spread quickly, as if, following the first documented cases, it moved down from the summits of the state (the traditional sphere for such crimes) and at the same times moved up from the lower depths, the other traditional locale for trafficking and protection rackets, where this kind of war has always gone on between professionals. These activities tend to meet up in the middle of social affairs, a place where the state was prepared to frequent and which the Mafia was pleased to reach; thus a kind of confluence begins.

I suppose some might be asking, what practical relevance does this all have? For myself, it would be something like a call to concretely evaluate every large event, not simply believing or disbelieving it. It would be something like the sharpening of a strategic understanding. And to avoid extremes: I would hope that in a radical space given over to dismissing any conception of conspiracy, this article could point to at least a few interesting facts of recent times; in a radical space given to endless paranoid analysis, that this could serve as a call to more healthy and practical actions, as a sort of “yes, and what of it?”. So too, in speaking of its middle character, we might say that many of the spectacular terror events, are probably not teleguided or fabricated, but allowed to happen. I mean that a plot is hatched by various people with many ‘red flags’ going up, they are watched, but on the day of the event, there is also a massive simultaneous simulation of a terrorist attack, or a strange malfunction in the computer systems, and they pass to action. Perhaps the old society is like Winston in 1984, who still assumes the rockets landing from time to time were authentic, whereas the younger and more worldly Julia, assumes they are sent by the Party itself.

But again, and here I would agree with many, the real critique and overcoming of the conspiracy theory would be saying that, whether believing or skeptical, this should not function as some sort of article of faith, where we join the elect or the impure, depending on the view. I suppose of actual value is simply the realization that the old method of politics, and a certain softness that went with it, have gone out the window. “Gentlemen don’t read each others’ mail” indignantly exclaimed an American statesman in the 1930’s, when these tactics began to be applied in a general way. But nowadays, the NSA has been spying on everyone’s mail and phones for years. The most worrying is the realization that in modern society, the secret police and repressive skills inherited from the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, have now ensconced themselves behind the diffuse veils of parliament, social-democracy, legality, the media and academia, consumerism, etc.

And I suppose to realize that the integrated spectacle, or in its organizational terms, the mafia-state, comes more and more to makes its appearance, as the modern State begins to collapse back into its origins, one band of robbers among others. The growth of conspiracy theories are quite obviously correlated to the growth of official conspiracies, reeds that shoot up from this swamp of decay; and these two symptoms, are in their turn just part of the larger lack of reason and meaning in a dying, irrational and decadent society. “Society can no longer be governed strategically”. Far from being a proof of the omnipotence of the modern state, some all-too real conspiracies and their all-too muddled theories in their own way, merely attest to its fatal sickness. This is how the Emperors of today (like those of the past) to cure this malady, only make it worse, by drinking a false alchemical medicine, full of arsenic and mercury. For a good example, the only ‘classical’ power further back in the past that flirted with such devious tentatives, Romanov Russia, collapsed in military defeat and popular revolution. Let’s have this be the image and thought we end on, to close our thinking about conspiracies, what they signify, and where they lead. . .

Endnotes 1


p64-69, March 2017


The Anarcho Tourist Review Issue 2

by atreview at October 26, 2017 08:50 AM


Nationalism and the nation-state are making a come back. We know that these ideas never really went away but we were all meant to be living in a new, globalized world defined and ordered by transnational bodies like the IMF and the EU. The nation-state as a meaningful and powerful institution was believed to be an historical relic. The global neoliberal order which seemed to have us all convinced it was the only possible present and future has recently come under threat. Its advocates seem worried and confused, wondering how it has all started to go wrong and where the next blow might land. We longed to witness such scenes yet now we look on in despair as it is not a revolutionary movement from below that is shaking the established order but a reactionary return to the nation-state. Trump, the proponents of Brexit and the various fascists and nationalists of Europe offer people an escape from the global capitalist market by a return to the supposed safe haven of the nation-state and its borders. The promise is of course an illusion.

Trump cares for no one but himself and the language used to promote Brexit, that Brussels is comprised of an out of touch, bureaucratic elite, could just as well be hurled at the government in London. But people hoping for an escape from the current order can see no other option than a step backwards to the days of the sovereign nation-state. This nostalgic look back is generally the way with declining powers but it means that ideas believed to be receding into history, nationalism and the nation-state, are coming to the fore again.

Therefore we will need to pick up and develop our critique of nationalism and see what alternatives we can pose. The general arguments against nationalism and the nation-state are well known. The nation-state takes one aspect of life, national or community identity, and elevates it to the single defining feature. Under this idea, if you have a certain national identity-defined by language, customs and a shared historical narrative, then you must form one single united political community. The divisions within that community are ignored, given only a secondary place or forcibly destroyed. On a practical level the unity over a society and territory that nationalism seeks to create means that there will always be one centre of power and therefore one elite to enjoy it.

As well as countering the right-wing movements sweeping the board these days we need to look at nationalism in order to develop our own ideas further. The process of creating nation-states was so successful that we still struggle to get out of the nationalist view of the world today. Alternatives to this world view have so far failed to break the hold of the nation-state, the world of the international proletariat collapsed some decades ago and the transnational capitalism of the international middle class citizen is under threat now. One reason why alternatives to nationalism have faltered is that in many places nationalism was able to turn its vision of what the population of the nation should be into a reality. Not so long ago many state territories were culturally and linguistically diverse but under the nationstates the national identity was taught and hammered home till a more homogeneous population came into existence.

One reason why revolutionary movements have so far struggled to break the state is that for most people they can not imagine a world not divided into nation-states. Even during a period when the state is failing, such as recently in Greece, most people could not conceive of breaking the state as this would break the nation. So rather than burning parliament and creating new political communities they desperately hoped someone in the parliament would listen to them. Both the xenophobic nationalism of the right and the popular nationalism of the left are equally attached to this unity of the nation-state. Popular protests will never become true anti-state insurrections until we can break the link between the nation as a community with a need for a unified state.

History should be one line of attack against nationalism. It could perhaps be one of its weak points as nationalism and the nation-state rest on the use of history much more than other political ideologies. As nationstates were created each gave itself legitimacy by creating a view of the past which proved the nation’s existence, longevity, special features and claims to territory. Such histories gave people something to believe in and allowed the division of the world into nation-states and the internal strengthening of each state in turn. The nationalists did not invent these histories, they simply looked at the past from their own point of view and turned a complex and multifaceted reality into a narrower national narrative. Links were sought to connect all the different societies that had inhabited a territory throughout time in order to forge a single, coherent national narrative for a people and place.

I suggest that looking into history and engaging with mainstream views of the past could be one way to break the hold of the nation-state, on an intellectual level at least. We can look back at the national historical narratives in each state and see which elements should be challenged and which may be useful for prompting revolutionary ideas. One possible advantage of this approach is that instead of just basing ourselves on general principles and abstract notions we can speak about specific historical examples and what they mean for the present. For example if you read material from or about the struggles in the Kurdish regions you see that general principles-democratic confederalism, ecology, feminism- are combined with and applied to Kurdish history and that of the wider region. We can reject all states and then move on to explain what it is about the history and reality of the Greek, British, French, etc, states that we reject and point out how they have failed or what could be different. It is perhaps better to try and engage with history in this way than to continue to leave this field of knowledge to the nationalists and conservatives.

As an example we can look at some of the historical narratives that underpin the Greek state. Not surprisingly the Greek state and modern Greek identity have a particularly close relationship to history. The Greeks are meant to be the successors to the ancient society upon which the west puts its historical foundations. This idea is behind much of the justification for the Greek state- it is the return of the glory and liberty of ancient Greece- while at the same time it is behind much of the disillusionment with the state and Greece’s place in the modern world- the disappointing reality of a small easily dominated state is not what people had in mind. The Greek national narrative begins with the ancient world, passes through the successive empires of Rome, Byzantium and the Ottomans and has so far reached the Greek state. Stress is laid on the continuity of Greek civilisation which goes back more than 3,000 years to the edge of recorded time. The modern state is meant to be seen as the deliver from foreign oppression and the projector of this historical continuity. The permanent presence of the Greek language from, almost, the earliest recorded time and the rhythms of daily life are used to mould these different historical societies into a single narrative of an eternal Greek presence and civilisation. This would seem to justify the conservative view of history and support the idea that Greece has always been for the Greeks and should remain so. Add to this the sense of superiority that such a long and distinguished history gives and it would seem there is little in this narrative for people who want a radical change of society.

However, the centuries of Greek history are an example of the academic cliché of continuity and change. During the last 3,000 years enough has stayed the same that it makes sense to speak of a continuous Greek presence but this civilisation has taken many radically different forms in that time. In broad terms the famous ancient world of city-states, philosophers and polytheism was replaced by the Christianity of a world empire which in turn gave way to a rival conquering empire before that was replaced in a limited territory by a nation-state. Reconciling all of these different changes into one national narrative has proven difficult. Admiring the ancient polytheistic past whilst remaining loyal followers of the Christian church can be tricky and has led some to describe the Greek national identity as a split personality.

Encouragingly, we can see that this part of the national narrative demonstrates the fact that societies change greatly over time. National history jams together completely different societies in an effort to create a sense of unity and historical depth. Instead we should stress the differences between the various periods and forms of society to show that there is just as much change as there is continuity in any national narrative. From that point we can show that another radical change in the form of society is only in keeping with the historical record. This line of argument can be used with all nation-states as any long established presence will have gone through several different forms of society and political arrangement. For example, while there has been something recognisable as France for more than a thousand years even just a century or two ago there were several ‘nations’, languages and cultures within what is now the French state.

The world of ancient Greece has aspects of interest to revolutionaries. Anyone on the political spectrum can find something they like in this period. Liberals like to point out that Greece is the birthplace of democracy while failing to see that there is no historical link between the ancient and modern systems. At the other end Golden Dawn like to think of themselves as modern Spartans, though it is not clear if they have actually read any history or just watched 300. The recent direct democracy movements have also shown interest in the ancient world. However, it remains a period associated primarily with nationalism and fascism. A Greek nationalist may draw inspiration from ancient Greece and will certainly base claims for superiority on this period but the reality of the historical record does not fit easily into the nationalist view. In some ways ancient Greece fits into an anarchist world view better than the nationalist one.

The known facts about the historic populations of the Greek territories show a world anarchists would be happier with than nationalists. The single homogeneous heroic populations of nationalist myths rarely, if ever, existed. From as far back as we can know the Greek territory has always been home to a variety of populations. In the ancient world the Greek city-states neighboured a number of different groups. Around the mountains and coasts of the north and west were a number of tribes and kingdoms which while within a Greek cultural world were considered semi-foreign. For a long period of time this included the Macedonians, an aspect of ancient history with considerable impact on the Greek state’s foreign policy today. The Greek communities themselves were divided up not just into politically independent cities but also into a number of other groupings such as Ionian and Dorian. The Ionian Athenians were one of the few Greek groups to claim that they sprang from the soil and were the ever-lasting inhabitants of their lands. In contrast the Dorians admitted that invasion and migration played a part in their story. It is not always clear what these various possible identities meant at different times but from our point of view there is enough there to show that the golden age of Greece was not produced by a single unified nation.

These facts hold true for much of subsequent history and could be used to alter people’s view of the current society and its population. The Greek territories only became host to a remarkably homogeneous population around sixty or seventy years ago. What nationalists would like to see as an eternal and essential fact, a Greece of Greeks, is in fact a recent innovation. Viewed in this way the various waves of immigration into Greece in the last decades are more of a restoration of the previous situation than a new factor. For example an Albanian population had lived in Greek territories for many generations before the arrival of the Greek state, indeed many fought against the Ottomans to create it. The return of an Albanian immigrant population post-1990 only helps restore the pre-nationalist situation.

This point on population serves as a useful counter point to nationalist myths but of more interest to us is the decentralised nature of the Greek world during its golden age. The Greeks in their different forms could, and did, identify themselves as Greek in a similar way to how we see national identities today. Being born into a community which spoke Greek, in its different dialects, worshipped the Greek gods and followed Greek customs made someone Greek. An identity understood as distinct from the rest of the world. This common identity, however, in no way implied a political unity. The Greek political unit was not the nation but the city-state. The Greek world was famously divided into numerous city-states, most of them not much bigger than a modern village, spread across the Mediterranean. These city-states could come together into various leagues and alliances and there were religious centres and festivals which demonstrated a pan-Greek feeling but there was never a united political nation as modern nationalism implies there has to be. This ancient world shows us that there does not have to be a link between a sense of identity and political centralisation.

This period of disunity was this territory’s most productive and spectacular suggesting that the pursuit of unity through the state is undesirable and misguided. In many ways the success of this period was due to its disunity. The division of the land into many city-states meant that at any one time there was a variety of political systems in operation and communication. The religion was just as decentralised with stories and myths able to change from place to place without them being seen as false or dangerous. The complexity and diversity of this world is no doubt one of the key factors behind the high level of thought and philosophy that this time produced. Disunity served the Greeks well and significantly when some kind of unity was imposed, by the Macedonians, it marked the end of Greek liberty and its golden age. Using this example we can invert the usual nationalist story which say it is always better when different regions come together to form a unified whole.

We can use this part of mainstream history, its most famous and beloved period, to show that there is no need for a Greek state to guarantee the continued existence of Greeks as a people. Once we can show that different political forms and different forms of identity have existed then we can move on to judging our own world and help people to build new political identities not limited by national feeling. The ancient Greek world also gives us a view on what a future stateless world may look like. I’m not trying to suggest that the ancient Greek world was stateless, its fundamental unit was the city-state yet it shows that within a cultural area it is possible for a variety of political communities to exist. These communities sometimes cooperated and sometimes were in conflict and many of them operated on very different principles from their neighbours. If the nation-state breaks down we may well see the re-emergence of such a world with a cultural area split into different political communities.

We could even give this argument a rhetorical flourish. Feeling the need to live up to the elevated status of ancient Greece has imposed a heavy burden on modern Greek identity and its ideas. When a past is as admired as ancient Greece it is impossible for any living reality to reach that standard. Yet the goal, trying to rediscover and renew the spirit of the ancient world is not necessarily bad and can perhaps even serve a revolutionary purpose. Restoring some of the better aspects of the ancient Greek world would mean destroying the nation-state and allowing a variety of political communities to flourish in its place. In this way anarchist revolution does not have to position itself as counter to all historical experience. Instead revolution can be shown as a way to reach an historical goal, such as a return of ancient Greece, whilst anarchist ideas and principles can help us avoid merely replicating a past period with all its many errors and injustices.

One side of the Greek national narrative can perhaps serve some purpose for us. However, in each national history there will be major elements which simply must be criticised and confronted. In Greek history the role of the Church is one such element. Nothing good can, or should, be said about the role of the Greek church in history and there is nothing in the history of this organisation that can be of help to revolutionaries. But the church takes a leading role in the national narrative and continues to be dominant today. The story goes that during the centuries when the Greek territories were under the Ottoman empire the Church preserved and protected Greek identity against its oppressors and when the time came it led the revolution against the Sultan. Much of this is simply myth. The Greek speaking church was a key part of the Ottoman administration and while Christians were a second-class group in a Muslim empire the church continued to be a rich landowner and upholder of the established order. Contrary to legend there were no secret schools where priests taught children their language and religion by candlelight and a visit to any of the monasteries of the period shows that the church was far-richer than much of its flock. When new ideas did emerge the Church was among the first to condemn them and they denounced the first revolutionaries for upsetting the established order.

In cases such as this we could try to use history to loosen the grip of the Church on Greek society. A basic point is that the Church was not always the defender and promoter of a Greek identity. In terms of identity the Christian period was as complex as any other and to an extant Christian and Greek (Hellene) were seen as two separate, and historically opposed, peoples. After almost 1,000 years of Roman rule the population of the territories had gotten used to referring to themselves as Romans. Christianity tried to draw a sharp dividing line between the Christian Roman world and the polytheistic Greek world that came before it. After the long centuries as part of the Roman and Byzantine empires the population thought of themselves as Romans and it would be some time before they learnt to think of themselves as Greek. Leading figures at the time stressed that they were not Greek but Christian or Roman. These points on historical identity are somewhat academic but again serve the purpose of demonstrating the ever changing nature of identity over time. More immediate issue with the church are its entanglement in the corruption of the regime, e.g the Vatopedi scandal, and its overlap with Golden Dawn and the far-right.

When we arrive at the two centuries of the modern Greek state the historical record of this political system is perhaps the strongest argument for revolution in Greece. The history of the current political form of society should be used to criticise the status quo. Moving on from the leftist critique of the Greek state, that a right-wing state excluded and repressed leftists for several decades, should be one of the goals of anarchist historical thought in Greece. This left wing critique of the Greek state is correct in its facts, the left had to struggle for a long time to be accepted as part of the state, but it is a phase that has passed. The left did eventually gain acceptance by the state and even came to rule it. This however did nothing to change the Greek state’s fundamental character and failings. Clinging to such a view of history leads to strange cases of amnesia, such as SYRIZA’s slogan of ‘first time left’.

A serious question the anarchist movement can put to society is how much more time should the Greek state be given to prove that it can function as an effective form of society? It has existed in its different forms for nearly two hundred years now and has so far been unable to break out of a pattern of regular crisis. At best you can say that the state has provided for a few fortunate generations in its time. If you grew to adulthood during one of the relatively calm and stable periods of the state then you were lucky. The next generation however most likely faced either a coup, dictatorship, civil war, default or bankruptcy the effects of which would last a decade or two. By this point in time the Greek state has tried almost every form of regime-it has been monarchist, republican, liberal, neoliberal, far-right, fascist, centre left and right and it has now even tried the radical left. A political form that has shown such a pattern of failure over two centuries should not be long for this world. In some respect this is already admitted. Liberals frequently claim that the Greek state’s attachment to the EU is necessary for it to stabilise and break free of its past. It is not extreme to question the wisdom of maintaining a political structure which has failed to establish itself securely and successfully after two centuries of attempts.

I have tried to give an example of how anarchists can approach mainstream historical narratives in light of the resurgence of nationalism. Of course, creating alternative histories will not on its own address the situation we find ourselves in. But we should remember that nation-states are not natural elements of the world that have always existed. Nation-states were an idea that got transformed into reality. They are a political form that was created and expanded over time not an ever present feature of the world. History gave a story and legitimacy to the nation-state builders. These stories about who people were and what they should do politically were just as important as the money and armies that forged the nationstates. Turning history against nation-states may help undermine them and prevent people from going back to a failed model as the world gets more unpredictable.


p54-63, March 2017

The Anarcho Tourist Review Issue 2

by atreview at October 26, 2017 08:48 AM


I’ve recently returned from the Kurdish Autonomous Region in Northern Syria, known as Rojava, where I had the opportunity to observe a unique form of democracy implemented by a revolutionary libertarian social movement. […] These innovations seem like good first steps towards turning democracy from a worthless antiquity into a workable principle within anarchist theory.” Paul Z. Simons, ‘Rojava: Democracy and Commune’

The status of democracy within the anarchist movement seems to be a pretty hot topic at the moment. In the previous issue of The Anarcho Tourist Review, one author wrote that “if anarchism is to become more of a force in the world, it would mean rejecting the current democratic values”. The anarchist movement, they argue, suffers from an overabundance of democracy, and we would thereby do well to accept the implicitly elitist nature of our ideas. Moreover, and in Greece as much as elsewhere, many anarchists argue that the concept of democracy has been irredeemably corrupted by modern politics, or even that anarchy and democracy were always incompatible. On the contrary, my aim here is to establish the importance of a commitment to democracy for the wider anarchist movement. The concepts of anarchy and democracy ultimately sit very well together – so well, I argue, that jettisoning the democratic commitment risks seriously undermining the potency of the anarchist agenda.


First things first, this section is used to argue that anarchism and (certain forms of) democracy are fully compatible. My approach here rests, no surprise, on the important distinction between direct and indirect democracy. Modern politics is dominated by the form of indirect democracy, in which politicians are elected to government, whilst direct democracy involves ordinary people engaging in political decision-making for themselves. For one, so many anarchist critiques of democracy are implicitly leveled against its indirect form – the one that dominates popular consciousness. And it is, of course, quite clear that any system in which a tiny group of political professionals makes the decisions for literally millions of others needs to be ardently rejected by anarchists. However, time is also wasted on talking about indirect democracy as if it were even open for consideration, because, as a political system that obviously presupposes the need for the state, it goes without saying that it is something that no committed anarchist would touch.

In fact, we should seriously be asking whether indirect forms of political participation even deserve to be called democratic in the first place (Chomsky, for example, is amongst the at least vaguely anarchist thinkers making this point). The core concept of democracy, as arising from its etymology, is rule by the people. And it is hard to see how, in a system in which a government is elected for the explicit purpose of administering a nation state, it is the people who are doing the ruling. No doubt, electoral systems allow ordinary people to have something of a say in deciding who will rule them, and maybe that counts for something. However, insofar as a minority group is vested with the explicit task of ruling over the rest of society, it is quite obvious that the general public will not be the ones in charge. As such, it seems that, just as most anarchists are ready to say that Somalia is not really in a state of anarchy, and also that the Soviet Union offered neither communism nor socialism in a strict sense, we should also forget about calling the current system democratic. In a roundabout sense, therefore, we should reject (the mainstream conception of) democracy on the basis that it is undemocratic. The present discussion thereby shifts to the more interesting question regarding the relationship between anarchism and direct democracy.

There is no reason to think that anarchism is incompatible with this purer, more direct approach to democracy – the one that is genuinely committed to bringing about rule by the people. After all, if anarchists are not attempting to put the people in power, then what is it that we are even trying to do? Indeed, it is often overlooked that the core concepts of anarchy and democracy are actually very similar. Etymologically speaking, anarchy means no rulers, and it is hard to see how a situation in which there are no rulers would be significantly different to one in which the people simply rule themselves. If the general public is the highest political authority there is, and everyone thereby takes part in ruling the political community, then this is really no different to saying that there are no rulers altogether. To establish true democracy thus can only mean to level the distinction between those who rule, and those who are ruled. And this is also to say that, irrespective of whether or not people are happy to call it anarchy, a thoroughgoing commitment to democracy can only mean a rejection of the state, capitalism, and social hierarchy in general. My belief is thus that the term democracy should be reclaimed as a fighting word rather than quarantined. Instead of ceding this revolutionary tool to the establishment, we should be thinking about how to turn democracy against them – about how to deprive the state of this dubious linchpin of its legitimacy.

This approach runs contrary, for example, to one forwarded in a recent article released by Crimethinc. (From Democracy to Freedom). Here democracy is defined – along with aristocracy, autocracy, bureaucracy, and technocracy – as just another form of government, another attempt by one subset of society to rule over the rest. Moreover, the characterization of democracy as an inherently statist ideology is hardly an anomaly, and is actually pretty popular amongst anarchists nowadays (The Coordination of Anarchist Group’s Against Democracy is another key example). However, it nonetheless stands (as was previously mentioned) that this kind of anarchist critique is really only relevant to indirect, rather than direct, forms of democracy. Insofar as direct democracy is genuinely realized, which is to say that all members of the political community play a role in its administration, then the existence of a government is hardly implied. To say that everyone takes part equally in governing surely entails that the government, understood as a body distinct from those being governed, is thereby effectively dissolved. Here it would not be a matter of one subset of society ruling over another, but instead of ordinary people doing away with mediated political power altogether and simply ruling themselves. Unless we want a world with no rules whatsoever, there is no reason for anarchists to have a problem with rule by the people.

Having said that, however, it should be noted that not all forms of direct democracy deflect the worry of reproducing governmental structures. Particularly outside of more radical circles, direct democracy is normally realized in the form of majoritarian decision-making. Here the majority gets their way, and those in the minority simply have to put up with what is decided. Now, it is true that majoritarian systems reproduce, albeit in a much more fluid sense, an order in which one subset of society rules over the rest. However, this would be a silly reason to do away with talk of democracy altogether. All it suggests is that we should prioritize systems based around achieving consensus. Insofar as everyone consents to the decisions they are subject to, there is no hierarchy of one section of society over another. Moreover, and not by coincidence either, consensus decisionmaking is also the option that remains truest to the democratic ideal, because majoritarian approaches really only offer rule by most of the people, and not by the people in general.

Bringing this discussion of the compatibility between anarchy and democracy to a close, it is worth taking a quick look at the example offered by the Occupy movement. Something striking here is that the typical Occupy camp was, quite arguably, a genuine microcosm of an anarchist society. They were political communities that were organized horizontally, without leaders, and on the basis of consensus, all of which was combined with a hostility towards the state, capitalism, and oppressive social structures more generally. And yet, the movement was not rooted in anarchist ideas, but instead in a fuzzier commitment to ‘real democracy’. This overall point surely confirms how close, both in theory and in practice, anarchy and democracy really are to one another (something that advocates of both ideals frequently overlook). All that needs to be done is to interpret the concept of democracy in a more thoroughgoing way, one that refuses to presuppose that the current global order is in fact democratic. Nonetheless, however, the Occupy movement has since melted away, or worse been siphoned off into reheating an incoherent enthusiasm for parliamentary politics. But perhaps the real problem here lay not with the convictions of those involved, but instead with our own failure, as anarchists, to nourish those convictions with the radical depth they deserved. Henceforth we must make it clear: anyone serious about getting to the bottom of the democratic ideal can only unearth the fountainhead of anarchy.


This section is used offer an argument for the usefulness of the principle of democracy for anarchist organizing. In making this case, it is worth noting, for one, that the principle of anarchy – the commitment to bringing about a world without rulers – really only entails a purely negative political outlook. This is because the fact of abolishing mastery is only necessarily connected to the destruction of the current order, and thereby fails to imply what kinds of social structures (if any) should be constructed as replacements for the currently dominant ones. In other words, whilst worrying only about anarchy explains what we disagree with, it fails to set out the alternative we are supposed to be proposing. In this sense, an exclusive commitment to the principle of anarchy is consistent with an outcome that most would find patently unacceptable – perhaps a world in which there are, strictly speaking, no rulers, but that is nonetheless just as atomized, dysfunctional, and individualistic as the decomposed pseudosociety we see today. This confirms the need to be on the lookout for additional political principles – ones that are more positive in nature – in order to facilitate the generation of a more comprehensive anarchist political programme.

Here is where the principle of democracy, insofar as it is considered on an anti-statist basis, becomes somewhat indispensible (at least for more prosocial approaches to anarchist organizing). The relevant theme here is the attainment of autonomy (and, when it comes down to it, this goal is possibly the most viable candidate for the highest good of the anarchist movement). On the one hand, autonomy is often thought about as an individualistic endeavour – as the process by which someone comes to behave in a way that is consistent with their authentic beliefs or desires, and is thereby established, as Kant would have said, as the giver of their own law. On the other hand, however, it is no less important to recognize the undeniably collective dimension to the attainment of autonomy. Even Stirner, for example – as hardened an anarchist individualist as you could find – argued that some kind of ‘union of egoists’ was necessary for promoting individual flourishing. This brings to mind a more collectivistic (and also distinctly more Spinozan) approach to understanding autonomy – one in which a number of individuals come together to form a single body, decide what form the self-organization of the community will take, and thereby realize their autonomy in common with one another.

This concept of collective rulership – one that could be applied to offer a positive characterization of our proposed social structures – is precisely the one offered by the more thoroughgoing interpretation of democracy outlined in the previous section. And whilst some anarchists would perhaps prefer not to use the term democracy to refer to this concept, doing so would only require coming up with an entirely new term that was nonetheless etymologically identical to the one we already have. In sum, therefore, anarchist democracy (really its only kind) can be thought about simply as autonomy collectivised – as the attempt not merely to balance the interests of the individual with those of the collective, but to strengthen both in virtue of their union. In this sense, one might say that the principles of anarchy and democracy are fundamentally symbiotic: anarchy gives rule by the people the necessary radical depth, whilst democracy provides our antistatism with a blueprint for planning how the future will be organized.

To make this discussion a little less abstract, I conclude here by positing (as was previously implied) that this concept of collective rulership can only be practically manifested in the form of consensus decisionmaking. Because really this is the only way of maintaining a robustly horizontal organizational structure – one in which the opinions of all individual members are supported by the decisions reached by the collective. As such, consensus decision-making is the only model that is capable of combining both the individualistic and the collectivistic forms of autonomy, the outcome of which is a synthesis in which the individual is incorporated into a larger communal body without sacrificing their personal dispositions. Moreover, this model is already well versed in many radical circles – from animal rights and environmentalist campaigns, through more mainstream movements such as Occupy and Nuit debout, right down to most of the squats here in Athens. Of course, I do not deny that there can be issues with consensus, but I would nonetheless maintain that these are not unavoidable problems as much as they are simply of consensus done badly. At the very least, it seems clear that consensus should be sought as a first port of call, and that it can only legitimately be abandoned – if at all – insofar as collective functionality will otherwise be significantly compromised (maybe this would be something to think about if anarchist communes were to begin federating with one another in the future).


Moving on, this section is used to strengthen the plausability of the anarchist commitment to democracy by clarifying the limits of democratic processes (and, in doing so, to alleviate the fear that the revolution will just be a big, long meeting…). My basic view here is that, in those cases where formal political association is needed, we should be ordering such interactions democratically. Importantly, however, this is not to say that all aspects of political life require formal association. In fact, it seems clear that the vast majority of them do not, and here democracy is irrelevant simply because no form of rule whatsoever is applicable. If people are behaving in ways that have no significant bearing on the interests of others, then there is no need to consult a collective decision-making body regarding the relevant issues in the first place. Because a commitment to democracy is not some panacea that will remedy all the shortcomings of the anarchist movement, it is merely a useful way of thinking about how to unite a diverse range of individuals into a single body (and only when doing so is necessary). The door nonetheless remains open to the great many instances of human life that ultimately have no bearing on the need for formal association.

This point can be developed in the form of a criticism of how an enthusiasm for the applicability of democracy, whilst essential for movements such as Occupy and Nuit debout to maintain, was also sometimes taken a bit too far. On the one hand, it was stunning to see how they demonstrated the redundancy of centralized institutions when organizing around issues that significantly effected the interests of all participants – perhaps where and when to set up a protest camp, or what rules those within it would be subject to. On the other hand, however, it was a big problem for some of the more docile participants in the movement to attempt to disown more militant actions – such as confrontations with the police, or attacks on the flows of capital – by claiming that they lacked the support of the general assembly (that not everyone showed up to anyway!).

The problem here is that a phony commitment to democracy was used to tell other members of the political community what to do. And I say that this commitment was phony because the very point of democracy is surely to promote autonomy, whilst applying collective decision-making processes to irrelevant aspects of the struggle ultimately does the exact opposite. Respecting autonomy often means knowing when it is time to agree to disagree, and this requires encouraging, or at least being willing to tolerate, a diversity of tactics. Otherwise, in refusing to allow others to act in ways that seem disagreeable, such movements began to look a little like the monolithic, totalizing force that dominates global politics today – precisely what they were supposed to be challenging. At the end of day, just as those who were more militant were not forcing others to take part in their actions, those who did not want to take part also had no right to try to stop them. And, whilst it is true that militancy often invites state repression, it is no less true that boredom and passivity are always going to be at least as big a threat to any vibrant social movement.

Finally, in terms of offering a final refinement to my overall view, it is important to explain something that has so far only been hinted at. Whilst I think a commitment to democracy is integral for the construction of a cohesive political community, it is undeniable that many anarchists ultimately have no interest in being part of a united body at all. This disposition is favoured by plenty of the anarchists in Exarcheia, and also elsewhere (particularly by those of a more nihilist flavour). Rather than wanting to restructure politics in an authentically nonhierarchical way, these anarchists are seemingly more committed to smashing politics altogether. If they believed there were cases in which formal political association was useful, perhaps they would accept some kind of commitment to democracy, but their basic claim is probably that there are no cases in which such relations are worthwhile. Now, this is not the place to wade into the already long simmering debate between nihilist and social anarchism (something that is becoming increasingly tense in Athens nowadays). Nor do I want to discredit those anarchists who have much more time for burning, and none at all for meetings, because this attitude is surely an important part of any effective mosaic of resistance. All I will say here is that my case for the importance of democracy is based on the presumption that we should be aiming to build a cohesive political community, whilst those anarchists who have no interest in working together in the first place ultimately escape my conclusion.


I turn now to responding to the democratic scepticism that arises from the article quoted in my introductory paragraph (Fragments for the New Politics). Here the author argues that it is not merely statists who tell the rest of society what to do, because we do it all the time as well. Given the fact that anarchism is currently somewhat unpopular, it follows that every assertion of our beliefs is based on the assumption that the vast majority of people are wrong, and that we are the ones who know what is best for them. Now this hardly sounds very democratic… On the contrary, it sides much more with Emma Goldman’s ominous claim that “all true anarchists were aristocrats”. As such, the author argues that, rather than going as far as totally abandoning a commitment to democracy, we should be mixing it with an openness to more centralized political forms such as aristocracy. This was allegedly the model seen in Ancient Athenian democracy, in which popular participation was balanced with the guidance of aristocrats such as Pericles. And this approach is supposedly also quite sensible, because ordinary people clearly make bad decisions all the time.

My response is that, whilst anarchism can be called aristocratic in a rhetorical sense, our obvious pretensions to being a righteous minority do not actually override a commitment to democracy. Yes, we tell people what we think is best, but, unlike with the aristocracy, the safeguarding of autonomy constrains the words of anarchists not to exceed the force of mere recommendation. Anarchism is not about taking control of the state in order to attempt to liberate the people, it is about convincing the masses to knowingly take the steps necessary to liberate themselves – this much is clear. In fact, an outright hostility to such aristocratic attitudes is surely presupposed by the important recognition amongst anarchists that parliamentarian approaches to politics are nowadays completely outdated. The key point here is that, beyond their undone top-buttons and hollow affirmations of people power, statists like Syriza are no less committed than the right-wing to supporting a system in which a cadre of political professionals get to tell the rest of society what to do. For an anarchist to make such arguments, whilst also supporting an openness to aristocracy, would succumb to a weird kind of crypto-Marxism – a political concoction made all the more dangerous by the fact that it is disguised as a strategy for abolishing mastery.

Relatedly, there is good reason to believe that the idea of mixing democracy with aristocracy is also somewhat incoherent. The existence of a democracy means, in essence, that the general public are the supreme authority within a political community, whilst the existence of an aristocracy means that supreme authority is held instead by the upper class. However, it is impossible to imagine a political community with more than one supreme authority, precisely because the supremacy of an authority entails that it is the highest within that community. Even if, for example, aristocrats like Pericles listen carefully to the concerns of the people, the community will, insofar as the final say goes to the upper class, nonetheless be an aristocracy. Just as well, even if members of a democracy follow the proposals of certain people more than those of others, the political community will – insofar as such recommendations are followed in a genuinely voluntary way – nonetheless remain a democracy. As such, there is no way we can have aristocracy and democracy – either we want the people to be at the top (and that means the very top!) or we do not. In fact, it was surely the failure to recognize the contradiction inherent in this two-faced kind of strategy – other versions of which have been democratic centralism, state socialism more generally, and even Bakunin’s proposal for secret societies to control popular uprisings – that led to the implosion of the majority of leftist revolutions that defined (and doomed) the last century of human history.

What it ultimately comes down to is the question of whether or not we are willing to put our trust in the capabilities of the masses. However, I think it is clear what, as anarchists, our answer needs to be. For one, whilst it is true that people often make bad decisions, this point is not relevant to democracy as much as it is to human psychology in general. Humans can be pretty stupid, and there is no political system that escapes this basic fact. As such, whilst democracies can indeed produce reprehensible outcomes (perhaps the execution of Socrates is an example), there is also no guarantee that aristocracies will behave any better. If anything, democracy is surely the least imperfect remedy to our all too human shortcomings. My assumption here is that political communities will tend to reach the best outcomes if they act in accordance with the views of all members, rather than only those of a privileged elite. And, whilst this assumption may be controversial for some, it should be a given for all serious anarchists. Because if we are unwilling to encourage people to organize themselves, and insist instead on introducing some kind of coercive vanguard, then me must surely give up on the idea of anarchy altogether. Anarchy was never merely about challenging the state, it was about challenging political mastery in all of its forms – even if the masters are waving red and black flags! If the heroic days of the proletariat, or le peuple, (or whoever!) really are over, then the heroic days of anarchism, too, have ended before they could even begin.


To give a brief summary of what has already been said: I began by making my case for the friendliness between anarchy and democracy, and then set out the role that democracy could be playing in the anarchist movement – something that culminated in an appraisal for consensus decision-making. This discussion was then tempered with a few points regarding the limited applicability of formal political association in general, after which I responded to the democratic scepticism seen in Fragments for the New Politics by arguing that anarchism is dependent on an undilutable commitment to democracy. Finally, I turn now to offering my last (and surely key) reason for thinking that aligning ourselves with anti-statist democracy can greatly increase the potency of the anarchist agenda.

One thing we rarely think about seriously enough is how best to make our movement mainstream – how to enable anarchism to overflow from the squats, and the dustier corners of libraries, and into the forefront of collective consciousness. Relatedly, it can be easy to forget, having spent too much time within activist milieus, just how radical our political programme really is. Even in its most minimal sense, anarchism amounts to a rejection of the state, capitalism, nations, borders, banks, prisons, and the police, and it is thereby unavoidable for most people who are new to to our ideas to be met with a certain degree of inaccessibility. To be clear, I am not saying that we should be watering down our message at all, because it is our unapologetic distinctiveness from the outdated rituals of modern society that grants anarchism its profound relevance. All I am suggesting is that there is a need to be on the lookout for methods of making our alternative seem a little less scary.

Accordingly, I wonder if a rejection of democracy – amongst the most highly regarded of all political ideals, something almost everyone takes for granted – would not ultimately cement our lingering irrelevance even more. For many, claiming that anarchism is against rule by the people might be just a bit too much to take. If, on the other hand, it was proven that a thoroughgoing commitment to democracy actually entails an unequivocal rejection of statist politics, one could hardly overestimate the gains. I think some of the remarks made in the first section, namely those claiming that anarchy and democracy are actually conceptually very close, suggest that such an approach is waiting to be experimented with. Instead of rejecting democracy, why not use it as a foothold in collective consciousness, a kind of handrail capable of guiding people, just a little more gently, to the radicalism of our agenda? Speaking anecdotally, I realize, for one, that this was exactly my own passage to anarchism: having internalized from birth the reactionary dispositions of our culture, it was only upon recognizing that we actually do not live in a democracy, whilst nonetheless remaining firm on my belief in the democratic ideal, that I first found myself critiquing the legitimacy of the state. Rule by the people means the abolition of social hierarchy, and the time has come to emphasize this neglected truism.

Really our only obstacle is the fact that the establishment has already succeeded in debasing the common understanding of democracy. It is undeniable that this mechanism is nowadays the Trojan Horse of modern politics – an ancient ideal so deviously hollowed out that it has gone as far as granting secular authoritarianism an air of legitimacy. However, the democratic ideal, as universally assumed as it is underestimated, can still be turned against the powers that be. If anything, the fact that it has been so deeply internalized by mainstream culture offers us, in combination with its anarchist implications, a serious advantage. Democracy is sitting in the stomach of the state, and it is ready to be converted into a virus. Many people are already beginning to ask how democratic the current situation really is, and all we need to do is fill these doubts with a degree of political maturity. Granted a fair amount of fine polishing, there is no reason to think that the democratic assumption could not ultimately offer one of the most useful tools in our revolutionary toolbox. So perhaps it is not time for the anarchists, but instead for the parliamentarians, to do away with their talk of democracy. Because, if anarchism cannot offer rule by the people, then really nothing can.

p38-53, March 2017

The Anarcho Tourist Review Issue 2

by atreview at October 26, 2017 08:46 AM


What can the Syriza disaster tell us about modern politics in general? Quite a lot, I think.

To refine my focus to a single thought: it demonstrates something quite surprising that we should be coming to take for granted – that the most destructive thing that can happen to a radical leftist political party is that they win.

In other words, radical parliamentarian approaches do best when they are in opposition, because only here can they pursue a consistent political strategy – one of voicing broadly laudable criticisms of the prevailing situation, whilst also lacking the power to be expected to do anything about it. As soon as they get into government, however, the abject hollowness of their agenda is laid bare for all to see. Suddenly all the radical rhetoric that was used to scoop up votes – the talk of ‘challenging the establishment’, or of ‘putting the people in power’ – begins to look quite out of place, precisely because it is revealed as having come from a party that, by the very fact it has assumed a position of such abject authority, obviously did not believe in its own words in the first place.

To be authentically radical – to be serious about decentralizing political power in any way – can only mean challenging the assumption that one individual or group should be granted the power to rule over the rest of society. But this is the very assumption that any engagement in parliamentary politics presupposes, meaning that it is taken for granted by anyone who lends their support to a political party. This is why the moment that a radical leftist party gets into power is also the moment that their strategy is revealed as being totally inconsistent with their stated aims – be it of enacting socialism, or, in general, of bringing the general public any closer to real political involvement.

How revealing it is that leftists further north than Greece have already abandoned their appraisal (or, really, any mention whatsoever) of Syriza, as if to pretend that such an unparalleled victory for their cause had never even happened. Instead, the excitement for Syriza, now swept casually under the carpet, is swapped for a renewed enthusiasm for parties like Podemos – an option that, by contrast, ultimately failed at the ballot. Here the winners are cast off for the losers, precisely because the deceptive consistency of their pointless agenda is dependent on the very fact that it does not come to fruition.

With the impotency of Syriza becoming overwhelmingly clear, we can only hope that the anarchist movement in Greece – previously deprived of so much of its revolutionary zeal by the political confusion of a leftist government – can begin to regenerate its strength. As it turns out, there are few things that will depoliticize people quicker, and cast doubt on their collective agency more damningly, than the parliamentary success of those who pose as our friends. No less, and with just a little forethought, perhaps our comrades abroad can learn from this unambiguous debacle, and save time by abandoning in advance the political professionals who pretend to be on the side of the people whilst simultaneously campaigning for the right to rule them.

Let’s do everyone a favour by confronting these facts head on.

The times are far too urgent to vote!


p36-37, March 2017

The Anarcho Tourist Review Issue 2

by atreview at October 26, 2017 08:44 AM

August 21, 2017

Έχω χάσει τον κωδικό του email μου, μπορώ να κάνω reset;

Αν έχεις χάσει τον κωδικό πρόσβασης(password) στο email σου, μπορείς να ορίσεις καινούριο από εδώ [1]
συμπληρώνοτας το username σου και το email επικοινωνίας (backup email), απο το οποίο είχες κάνει αρχικά αίτηση.


by babouin at August 21, 2017 07:38 PM

June 14, 2017

Πώς αλλάζω τον κωδικό πρόσβασης στο email μου;

Για να αλλάξεις κωδικό πρόσβασης στο email θα πρέπει να συνδεθείς στο [1]. Μέσα απο το περιβάλλον του μπορείς να διαχειριστείς λογαριασμό email σου χωρίς την βοήθεια των admin του
Για αλλαγή κωδικού συνδέεσαι στο (χρησιμοποιώντας ως username το email σου το ίδιο password με αυτό που έχεις για το email σου) και απλά συμπληρώνεις το νέο password δύο φορές (new και verify) και πατάς update. Προσοχή, το username είναι πλήρης μορφής, για παράδειγμα ‘’.


by cybri at June 14, 2017 12:32 PM

May 31, 2017

Ι have purchased a domain and want to enable it for my blog, what do I need to do.

At the DNS setting for your domain (most providers provide such settings), you have to add an A record and a CNAME record. The A record needs to point to the IP and the CNAME has to forward the www.YOURdomain to the plain domain you purchased.

Lets check out an example in which the new domain is domain.tld.

The A record has to have the domain name entry empty, the IP address entry needs to be, as you can see in the picture.

The CNAME record should have as hostname/alias www and for destination domain.tld.

You also have to enable at espivblogs the wpmu domain mapping plugin and from tools -> domains add the domain.tld and the www.domain.tld as domains, without changing the primary domain.

Having done the above, inform us so we can do the necessary changes on our server.

by cybri at May 31, 2017 04:05 PM

May 08, 2017

Παρουσίαση-συζήτηση: “Περί αποκέντρωσης και άλλων δαιμονίων”

Παρουσίαση της μπροσούρας “Περί αποκέντρωσης και άλλων δαιμονίων” και συζήτηση για την αποκέντρωση των κινηματικών υποδομών.

Οι υποδομές του κινήματος μπορούν να νοηθούν ως τα θεμέλια αλλά και οι μοχλοί του. Οι καταλήψεις και τα τυπογραφεία. Τα ραδιόφωνα και τα ιντερνετικά εγχειρήματα. Ομάδες αλληλοβοήθειας, αυτομάθησης και αυτοάμυνας σε γειτονιές. Δεν χρειαζόμαστε απλά περισσότερα, χρειαζόμαστε έναν γαλαξία από αυτόνομες αυτοοργανωμένες δομές. Η αποκέντρωσή τους, ως έμπρακτη κατάργηση του συγκεντρωτισμού, μας θωρακίζει απέναντι στην κρατική καταστολή καθώς μειώνει τα μοναδικά σημεία αποτυχίας. Ενισχύει την διαφορετικότητα, την πολυμορφία και τον πλουραλισμό, στοιχεία απαραίτητα στις απαντήσεις που δίνουμε κοινωνικά. Συνυφαίνει ένα ισχυρότερο πλαίσιο τεχνογνωσίας και συνεργασίας μεταξύ μας. Και μας βοηθά να κλιμακώσουμε τα εγχειρήματά μας δίχως να διαβρώνει τον αντιιεραρχικό χαρακτήρα τους.

cybrigade | /

by cybri at May 08, 2017 10:18 AM

February 08, 2016

glasgow anarchist students

Hello world!

Καλωσήρθες στο Αυτή είναι η πρώτη σου ανάρτηση. Επεξεργάσου την ή διάγραψέ την, για να αρχίσεις να διαχειρίζεσαι το blog!

by glasgow-anarchist-students at February 08, 2016 08:48 AM

June 17, 2015

αντιφασιστες-αντιφασιστριες απο τις γειτονιες του κεντρου της Αθηνας

Παιδικό εργαστήρι στην πλ. Αγίου Νικολάου

Σας ενημερώνουμε ότι το ανακοινωμένο παιδικό εργαστήρι για την Παρασκευή 26/6/2015 στην πλ. Αγίου Νικολάου (Αθήνα) δε θα γίνει.

Αντιφασίστες-τριες από τις γειτονιές του κέντρου της Αθήνας

για να κάνουμε τις πλατείες και τις γειτονιές μας

χώρους συνάντησης και αλληλεγγύης, ελευθερίας και ζωής


by antifascismroute at June 17, 2015 12:43 PM

May 19, 2015

gender-in-the-middle attack


Another super interesting thing I found:

The lack of women, queer and trans persons, and diversity in technological fields in general and hacking more specifically is acute. To change this state of affair, critical approaches towards technologies, the tech/hacking culture, among others are needed. Looking at gender issues is admittedly important, but we must compound it with an intersectional analysis to be truly cognisant of existing systems of oppression. An intersectional approach requires all of us to engage with the diversity of cultures, social status, sexual orientations, ethnicities and other power structures that create various forms and levels of inequality (in tech production centers, access, design, usability, hacking potential, etc.) for different individuals.

Moreover, we believe that to have more feminist and post-colonial activists and practitioners at the forefront of the use and development of liberation and (free)dom technologies requires safe spaces to ignite desires!


The FemHack will focus on doing just that: triggering this desire towards feminist and post-colonial approaches to technology that foster differences, autonomy, liberation and social resistance. To start this process of liberating ourselves from patriarchal technologies, we will need to push a bit more the boundaries of technologies.

Besides, let’s not forget that everybody is an expert in relation to the technologies they use in their everyday life. And as we consider gender as one of the most pervasive social technologies ever created, we bet that everybody has a lot to share on this topic too! Join us in creating an international global event for women, queer and trans people, feminist and post-colonial activists to learn, share and connect on technical, theoretical and performative issues with the long-term goal of liberation and autonomy. Join our forces in challenging the systems of oppression we encounter on a day-to-day basis.

We as citizens and communities continue to organize against different systems of oppression be it: the so-called “austerity” measures, financial system bankruptcy, mass surveillance, infringement on privacy rights, governmental and business appetite for our (meta) data, witch hunts to rule our bodies, criminalization of our reproductive rights, etc.

by g.a. at May 19, 2015 05:56 PM

May 09, 2015

gender-in-the-middle attack

April 25, 2015

gender-in-the-middle attack

Back to reality: asking random people about feminism


The idea is simple, ask 250 random people from a chatting website their opinion of feminism. In particular, the question was “What do you think of feminism?”.

We ask the question and leave two random strangers to discuss about it (without any possibility of intervention from our side).

The results are of course overwhelmingly bad:

  • In 49 discussions the two strangers happily agreed about how much they hate feminism
  • In 45 discussions one of the persons kept attacking feminism (the other one either disconnected, or went into defense/attack mode)
  • In 13 discussions no real answer came out of the question (people didn’t know what feminism is, couldn’t answer the question, or disconnected when they realized that they were both males)
  • In 9 discussions the two persons agreed that feminism is something nice (yay)

Bonus unexpected(?) answers included (too) many islamophobic reactions and of course an anti-Semitic delirium/conspiracy theory:


This is of course not really a statistical way to make conclusions about the society we are living in.

The sample was 250 from around 20,000 to 35,000 (i.e., the constantly changing number of people who were online in the website) during different times of the same day.

TRIGGER WARNING: before checking the post, be aware that the dialogs in the pictures bellow are full of extremely sexist/racist/homophobic/etc. comments.

172fa02 de6307b c8ad442 64df1f4 5c1b75a 417881b ca73a21 4058900 662f2d1 564a3db 0d8ef6db bb58b27 1c5f81d 1e24d23 ef131f4 7feb773 4995989 8e1ee0c 9074777 d801403 49abb30 07c495a3 f0dcb5f 416aedd ad3e6c9 229fa5a f654ce5 38d8b52 1cfbb5e 435b8e42 4d1232e 53e9f72 fbbf0722 77273a4 0436c8f 97cc2c9 649e07c 8e997ac 9a0d33f 0fcc3ddd 57561dc aa7e7a1c d56b6c4 34339b8 18a008c c7a4bba 6a8fd0b 366b1d3 7fe4404 9db3484 8e17534 6899ece 8fcb61a a0af036 26c1309 df3d06b c448bb5 e5b6fad 96e5981 aebc1ab bbe3ab2 cc027d5 5275848 058fae30 8e7643e 56054a0 3c12fa2 a5312dd 9716951a 50c4ca65 c824fda 9758b41 234c8d8 8405961 bdddb99 8ab6dcf 580f04d4 38dd68e 968379b fca1b79e conspiracy a4cc4ae 60e629e 37f8512 9afbd09 14d12a4 39f8221 2257702 0a6face 7643296 3e4497f ecf3f0a 3a03bdb d4b5e47 9a6dcdd 2fa69ae 6e9cd04 5838c9d 4e5cb66 9cafb40 b8c0b4d c57e63f2 0e000f6 04457e7 d2db354 9eed43b 59f7844 a9347ef a7f064b 809360c ba8f486 56666b7 9cfd985 59bc691 90bd5ef6 52825c4

by g.a. at April 25, 2015 09:31 PM

April 06, 2015

Assembly of immigrants and solidarians of ASOEE

March 28, 2015

gender-in-the-middle attack


might be interesting for the ones in Athens.

by g.a. at March 28, 2015 05:14 PM

March 17, 2015

Assembly of immigrants and solidarians of ASOEE

Photos from last Saturday’s rally at Syntagma sq. and the demonstration that followed

Photos from last Saturday’s (14.3) rally and the demonstration that followed, where about 250 people participated.

Syntagma sq. Syntagma sq. Syntagma sq. Syntagma sq. Syntagma sq. Syntagma sq. Down Ermou str. In Athinas str. In Athinas str. Down Sokratous str.

by immigrants-asoee at March 17, 2015 05:27 PM

March 10, 2015

Assembly of immigrants and solidarians of ASOEE

Photos from our rally in Amerikis Square on 7.3.15

Photos from our rally in Amerikis Square and the spontaneous demonstration round the neigbourhood after it, with more than 100 people.

3 1 8 2 4

by immigrants-asoee at March 10, 2015 05:44 PM

March 09, 2015

Assembly of immigrants and solidarians of ASOEE



You will get to know this country for real only if you don’t get drown somewhere in Aegean or if you manage somehow to cross the fence in Evros. From the detention centers in Amygdaleza; Korinthos; Paranesti to Patision; Amerikis sq.; Acharnon, the daily life for all those who have the wrong color or the wrong papers is suffocating. Or to put it better; unbearable.

In the center of the city you feel like you cant do anything. Without papers it s impossible for you to work. But even when you do find a job that would be “black”; without insurance. And the boss would do whatever s/he wants and you would be forced to go through that otherwise s/he would call the cops. Without papers you can’t move as you please, visit your family and your friends. Without papers, when you get sick, you are not sure whether the hospital will take you in. Without papers, when you are a bit late to pay the rent, your landlord is ready to throw you out and you ll either pay immediately or go away because there’s nothing else to do. Without papers, you cant even go out on the streets; most of the times you ‘re locking yourself at home when the sun goes down. And when you finally find the courage and get out, you are walking waveringly and full of fear. Every day that you go out it is like an adventure; you go out and you are not sure whether you will come back because there is one place that you might end up, and this is…

…the detention centers and the police departments. Detention centres are one of the ways the greek state and police have come up with to torture migrants. Lots of them go crazy even by thinking that they are in there without knowing when their captivity will end. In there, nothing is provided, the only thing you can do is to sleep. The summer heat is unbearable. The food is bad and too little. They do not give us medicine, clothes and, even when someone is sick, the ones deciding whether they must see a doctor or not are cops themselves, and they are always postponing it or do not care at all. The migrants cannot contact their families, since they do not have any phones, while visiting hours last only a little or are not being held at all, depending on the cops. Moving people around is a regular form of punishment, making it even harder for us to get in touch with our own people. They treat us like objects, like we are not humans. We demand the immediate change of such conditions. And when 18 months or more have gone by they let us go -if they haven’t meanwhile deported us yet- by giving us one paper stating we should abandon the country within the next month. And all those just because we are immigrants.

But it s not just that. It s all these that used to happen and are still going on everyday even if you are not in a detention center; even if you do have papers. It’s the 2 hours or even the whole night, that you are forced to stay at allodapon when the cop that checked your papers wants to be sure that the papers belong to you. It’s the familiar fascists-policemen who are still working for the police without being controlled by anyone. It’s the laws that allow cops to capture you whether you have or not papers because they consider you as a “danger for public provision and security”. It’s the situation that exists at the metro and the buses, when most of the people won’t sit next to you; when they exchange gazes that clearly say “check out the black; the pakistani; the..; the..” ; when they look at you and you know that they would prefer you to get off. It’s the cops behaviour during the street controls. And it’s not enough for them only to see your papers, but they want to humiliate you, to prove that you’ re nothing. Every time they’re asking you again and again your nationality and the reason why don’t you go back to your country and what are you doing here. Finally when they check your papers, they throw them down and they force you to pick them up. It’s all those things that lead you thinking: “why am I not coming back. Even I often wonder. Why do I stay in a country that I am seen as a stranger; as a threat; as someone who is responsible for everything bad that has happened to their lives. Because day after day you learn that you don’t belong here”.

Here however live also those who weren’t afraid. Those, who overcome together their fears by supporting each other. Those, who fought against the every day oppression. They are the immigrants, who revolted in the detention center of Amygdaleza at August of 2013. The immigrants, who revolted against the inhuman living conditions, against the complete lack of medical care, against the extension of their detention time. They are the same immigrants, who managed -with the support of the local solidarians- to let freeuncategorized in their trial, which took place one year after the rebellion at Amygdaleza. They are the same immigrants, who used to work in the fields of Skala Lakonias and Manolada; at the recycling factory at Aspropyrgos; at the fish shops at Nea Mixaniona and they united to strike against the misarable wages and the constant racist police attacks. They are the immigrants of Ermou and Asoee, who have resisted again and again -side by side with the local solidarians- to the police and the fascist attacks by defending their right to gain their lives by selling things on the street.

Those daily struggles and others less significant, who gives each one of us by her/himself, we are going to keep deep in our memory, because they give us strength for the future. The strength to face the moment, where we’ re looking beyond the fear and we’ re claiming a life with dignity. We want to raise our voices so everyone obtains papers from the very first moment without any conditions. We claim the closure even of the latter detention or hosting center of immigrants. We demand an everyday life  without racism and continuous humiliations by the police.





Assembly of immigrants and solidarians of asoee

by immigrants-asoee at March 09, 2015 03:12 PM

αντιφασιστες-αντιφασιστριες απο τις γειτονιες του κεντρου της Αθηνας

December 08, 2014

gender-in-the-middle attack

[On the security and privacy of] messaging tools

Messaging, either using your computer or smartphone is becoming a big deal lately in terms of security and privacy. Whether you are discussing with a friend for this cool queer movie you saw, or for details about a demonstration you are organizing, you might want to do this without making it really easy for organizations or individuals to eavesdrop.

Important notice: There is no (and probably never will be) 100% security/privacy over the Internet. When you want to really privately discuss something with someone, better do it in person and with all the reasonable measures (no phones around, in a trusted (bug-free) environment, etc.).

In the following we will discuss the main requirements that a messaging program should meet, and present the best choices for communicating as secure as possible through the Internet.

First of all you might be wondering, what’s the big deal, or what exactly is the problem with using the usual stuff (skype, whatsapp, viber, facebook messenger, etc.). There is a plethora of questions that we have to ask including: is the code of the program open to everyone?, does it use state-of-the-art encryption?, can the provider (e.g., facebook) decrypt your data?, has the tool been audited from an external entity? And much more. But let’s take each one of the important questions and go a bit deeper.

Is the code open?

All programs consist/are-made-out of code. With respect to this, one can distinguish programs to open-source (when the code is available for everyone to see) and closed-source (code private; only the respective company has access to it). It is important to know that when the code is closed, NOBODY can safely state that the program is only doing what is intended to do. This means that it could be possible that a program implements spying mechanisms (backdoors) that can be enabled whenever asked (e.g., from the police). Furthermore, when the code is closed, it is hard to assess the quality of it, especially from a security/privacy perspective.

Encryption and *the key*

When discussing about encryption (i.e., if data transferred can be “seen” by others or not) it is important to understand two things. The first one is of course the existence of encryption itself.This means that when Judith sends the message “performativity is important” to Silvia, Mikhail that was eavesdropping in the communication would not understand anything.

The other one, and most confusing is the location in which the cryptographic keys are saved.

The good news

Except from some rare cases (e.g., kik, and QQ) most current versions of messaging applications do encrypt their data (yes even skype, or whatsapp).

The bad news

The big question however is not the existence of encryption but rather who owns the decryption keys. This is also the most important security problem of the majority of applications (among others: viber, facebook chat, yahoo messenger, and skype OWN the keys; this basically means that they potentially have access to all your communication data).

Basically you can think of this, as if there are two ways to have encryption, one is that the key is owned by the user -good choice- and the other one that is owned by the company (its servers more specifically) -bad choice-. In the first option this means that all communications are end-to-end encrypted and the only way to decrypt is to use a key that is stored on the users’ device.

Recent code audit

Another important criterion is whether the program has been independently tested for security flaws. This means that an other entity that is an expert on security has analyzed both the architecture as well as the implementation of the program for security flaws. This is actually becoming common lately, so a number of programs do meet this requirement.

Other requirements

Many other requirements exist. For instance the documentation of the system’s design, and the ability to keep the past communications secure even when the cryptographic key is stolen. In addition, the ability to verify the identity of the person we are trying to contact (even when the service provider is compromised) is also of great importance.

And the winner is…


TextSecure (android) provides end-to-end encryption, with the keys being saved in the users’ side. The identity of the recipient can be verified, and all past communications cannot be read even when the key is stolen. In addition, the code is open to review, the security design is properly documented and there has been a recent code audit. This basically is one of the few apps for smartphones that meets all the requirements! Another alternative that I haven’t tested is ChatSecure (for android and apple).


By far the best choice is Pidgin along with the off-the-record plugin. I will have a dedicated post on Pidgin along with the off-the-record plugin soon, to describe how to install and what are the benefits of using XMPP/Jabber in contrast to other protocols.

More info

A lot of the information stated here is adapted from the super cool work done by the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation, also check here.

by g.a. at December 08, 2014 06:35 PM

October 31, 2014

Assembly of immigrants and solidarians of ASOEE

التضامن مع المهاجرين المتهمين في ثورة أميجداليزا – تجمع يوم الاثنين 3نوفمبر بالمحكمة ديجليري (شارع ألكساندراس)

التضامن مع المهاجرين المتهمين في ثورة أميجداليزا –  تجمع يوم الاثنين 3نوفمبر بالمحكمة ديجليري (شارع ألكساندراس)                                                                           3نوفمبر، تبدأ محاكمة المهاجرين المتهمين بالتمرد في معسكر الاعتقال أميجداليزا والذي حدث في اغشت2013 ضد تمديد فترة الاحتجاز إلى أجل غير مسمى.    في البداية، خلال الأحداث تم اعتقال مايناهز 65 من المهاجرين حيث تم التلفيق لهم اتهامات جسيمة. بعد ذلك بعام، تم توزيع المعتقلين في مختلف السجون، بعضهم في معسكرات الاعتقال، أخرون تم ترحيلهم، والبعض تم الإفراج عنهم. وهرب خمسة منهم دون الإمساك بهم مراكز الإعتقال، تستخدمهم الدولة اليونانية والشرطة في التعذيب المهاجرين. هناك الكثير من المهاجرين ليس لهم أدنى فكرة عن موعد الإفراج عنهم، يصل بهم الحال إلى الجنون. هناك لايقدم لنا شيئ، الشيء الوحيد الذي يمكن أن نفعله في ذلك هو النوم طوال الوقت. حرارة الصيف لا تحتمل. الغذاء من نوعية رديئة وغير كافي. لايوجد ملابس ولا أدوية، وإذا مرض أي معتقل، المسؤول الوحيد بالاتصال بالطبيب هم الشرطة أنفسهم. وماذا يفعلون؟ في معظم الأحيان، يستدعون الطبيب بعد وقت متأخر أو يظلون غير مبالين تماماً. لا يمكننا الاتصال بأسرنا، لأنه يحظر استخدام الهواتف، وساعات الزيارة قليلة جداً ومدتها المحدودة زمنياً، متغيرة بتغير مزاج رجال الشرطة. يتم نقل السجناء إلى مخيمات أخرى شكلاً من أشكال العقوبة المعتادة مما يجعل من الصعب التواصل مع أصدقائنا. رجال الشرطة، يدخلون غرف المركز ويضربون المعتقلين بدون سبب.
يعاملوننا كجمادات و ليس كيشر، نطالب بالتغيير الفوري لهذه الحالة المزرية وخارج هذه المعتقلات، يواجه المهاجر نفس الحالة  في شكل سجن عير متناهي:
>> تركنا بلداننا وراءنا، نعتقد أننا ذاهبون للعيش في حرية مستمرة. غير أن هذه الحرية قد صودرت من لحظة دخولنا إلى اليونان، بعد المخاطرة بحياتنا في البحار والنجاة من الموت كما وقع في حالة فارماكونيسي وميتيليني. وبمجرد الدخول إلى اليونان، نجد أنفسنا في سجن في الهواء الطلق. بمنعنا من العمل من خلال قوانين عنصرية، مر عليها الزمن. رجال الشرطة، الفاشيين، والعنصريين يلاحقوننا في الشوارع وفي كل مكان. كل يوم نعيش تحت تهديد الوقوع في السجن أوفي مركز للشرطة، أو في معسكرات الاعتقال. يتم وصمنا و تشويه صورتنا للشعب اليوناني من خلال حملات التضليل العنصرية. وفقا لوسائل الإعلام، نحن اللصوص، القتلة، وناقلوا الأمراض.<<
ثورة أميجداليزا هو فعل استثنائي للمقاومة ضد الحرب التي تشنها الدولة اليونانية وجزء من المجتمع اليوناني العنصري ضد المهاجرين.حرب مع القتل على الحدود والترحيل، السجن في معسكرات الاعتقال أو مراكز الشرطة، حرب مع رفض طلبات اللجوء، حرب مع الاستغلال في العمل والقوانين العنصرية، حرب مستمرة تأخدك إلى حدود الكرب واليأس.     بالنسبة لنا، فإن الحل الوحيد هو إيجاد سبل للتعايش والعمل بشكل جماعي. مهاجرين و محليين، دون تمييز بسبب العرق أو الجنس أو اللون، متحدين ضد كل أشكال الهمجية
وفاشية الشرطة. نناضل من أجل خلق العالم الذي نصبو إليه. وأسلحتنا في هذا النضال، هي المساواة والتضامن.
 التضامن مع جميع المهاجرين المسجونين.
مراكز الاحتجاز؟ ابداً وفي أي مكان!
        مهاجرون asoee     تجمع يوم الاثنين 3نوفمبر بالمحكمة ديجليري (شارع ألكساندراس) 

by immigrants-asoee at October 31, 2014 10:10 AM

August 05, 2014

Stepanyan TSP

Why I will NOT join the demo against the Israeli embassy

Because, although I do not support any form of war and bloodshed around the world, I see the leftist organizations that support the Arabs of Palestine are not willing to make any reference at all at the starting point … Continue reading

by stepanyantsp at August 05, 2014 10:47 AM

July 04, 2014

gender asphyxia

solidarity with the persecuted hiv-positive women


translation of the text written in may 2012 in solidarity with the persecuted HIV-positive women in athens.

by genderasphyxia at July 04, 2014 04:24 PM

June 13, 2014

αντιφασιστες-αντιφασιστριες απο τις γειτονιες του κεντρου της Αθηνας

Βραδιά οικονομικής ενίσχυσης&αλληλεγγύης των συλληφθέντων μεταναστών έξω από την ΑΣΟΕΕ, Σάββατο,14/6,19.00 πλατεία Πρωτομαγιάς

αφισα ελλ α3keimeno afisas en fr

Βραδιά οικονομικής ενίσχυσης & αλληλεγγύης των συλληφθέντων μεταναστών έξω από την ΑΣΟΕΕ

Σάββατο 14/6-19.00- πλατεία Πρωτομαγιάς

Ζωντανή μουσική- συλλογικό φαγοπότι-προβολές

αντιφασίστες-αντιφασίστριες από τις γειτονιές του κέντρου της Αθήνας


by antifascismroute at June 13, 2014 01:06 PM

May 15, 2014

Anarcho Syndicalistische Bond

1 MEI Dag van de arbeid

On the first of may flyers were distributed at the Ten Kate market in Amsterdam and at the 1 May demonstration in The Hague.

spandoek 1 mei2014-05-01 14.48.53

by asb at May 15, 2014 11:40 AM

May 03, 2014

αντιφασιστες-αντιφασιστριες απο τις γειτονιες του κεντρου της Αθηνας

Freedom to the 12 migrants arrested outside of ASOEE-RALLY TUESDAY 6/5/2014,18.00


arrested outside of ASOEE

Since 2009 in ASOOE the migrant peddlers have been claiming a minimum space where they can live and work with dignity.
From the very beginning, they have had to face beatings, arrests, tear gas, intrusions of their homes and the theft of their money, their papers and their commodities by the cops.
A part of this everyday war was the dramatically orchestrated pre-electoral operation by the repressive forces on the 08/04 where, following a coordinated attack, 12 migrants and 1 student were beaten and arrested.
Such repressive operations constitute the crystallization of a state-organized and socially widespread racism. They are carried out on the backs of all those that denounce the ‘illegal trading’ in the name of national economy, those that demand a clean Athens, those that obsessively cry out for security, thus paving the way for concentration camps, racist laws, pogroms, and state-sanctioned as well as unsanctioned killings of migrants on the borders and the city centers.
In spite of all these, the migrants are still there on the sidewalk in front of the ASOEE gate. They refuse to play a passive role in the attack against them, they organize, they respond vigorously and since 2011 they have created a struggle community along with those who stand in solidarity with them.
While the various mayoral candidates and deans, the cops and the rest of their lackeys may think that the electoral period is an opportunity to implement the expectations of the national backbone, they should know that the struggles of the migrants and those that stand in solidarity with them for dignity and life will continue to evolve and to make their worst nightmares a reality.
We stand together with the migrants. Deport every racist. Get your hands off the migrant peddlers at ASOEE.

AT ASOEE, 18:00

standing in solidarity with the migrants from the neighborhoods of the center of athens

by antifascismroute at May 03, 2014 09:57 AM

April 30, 2014

Anarcho Syndicalistische Bond

1 Mei activiteiten

1meiposterA2 10169148_835823309778246_729752661_n

Op 1 mei zal er in Amsterdam vanwege 1 mei geflyerd worden. Er wordt om 13:00 verzameld in ons lokaal. Zie de flyertekst hier > 1mei2014ASB Wij roepen mensen ook op om naar de antikapitalistische 1 mei demonstratie om 19:00 uur  in Den Haag te gaan. De poster met het adres staat hierboven. Om 20:30 vertonen wij in ons lokaal de film “Libertarias”, de film is voorzien van Engelse ondertiteling.

by asb at April 30, 2014 05:01 PM

April 12, 2014

Anarcho Syndicalistische Bond

April 06, 2014

Anarcho Syndicalistische Bond

Opening hours of the ASB office. Monthly filmnight.

Opening hours  of the ASB space

From now on the ASB space in Amsterdam will be open on thursday and saturday from 14:00 till 17:00 o’clock. U are welcome to pass by for information about the ASB, help with action in your workplace or to read and drink something.

ASB Filmnight – Every first thursday of the month !

every first thursday of the month we will show a film or documentary. The films will start at 20:30 and are free to watch.

by asb at April 06, 2014 11:28 AM

March 30, 2014

αντιφασιστες-αντιφασιστριες απο τις γειτονιες του κεντρου της Αθηνας

Έντυπο antifascism on route τεύχος#1

Έντυπο από τους “αντιφασίστες-αντιφασίστριες από τις γειτονιές του κέντρου της Αθήνας” που μοιράζεται  αυτή την περίοδο

Κατεβάστε το έντυπο σε pdf

by antifascismroute at March 30, 2014 03:29 PM

November 11, 2013

Anarcho Syndicalistische Bond

Het vrolijk atheïsme (Diderot) presented by Dick Gevers.

Vrijdag 22 November
Eerste Schinkelstraat 16, Amsterdam

Het vrolijke atheïsme

Denis Diderot (1713-1784) was een van de radicaalste denkers van de 
Verlichting van de 18e eeuw. Uitgeverij Iris werkt momenteel aan een vertaling 
van een tekst van Diderot die een samenvatting is van zijn ideeën die 
nog steeds actueel zijn.
    In 1771 komt bij toeval Diderot in gesprek met een rijke en zeer vrome 
dame. Er ontstaat tussen haar en de atheïstische Diderot een discussie 
op het scherpst van de snede maar ook met humor en ironie over de 
grondbeginselen van het geloof en het atheïsme. Diderot pleit voor een 
vrolijk atheïsme. Maar mevrouw laat zich  ook niet onbetuigd. Andere 
kerngedachten van de Verlichting komen in dit gesprek ook aan de orde.
Dit waar gebeurde gesprek is in deze lezing het uitgangspunt om de 
ideeën van de Verlichting toe te lichten.

by asb at November 11, 2013 02:01 PM

May 30, 2013


Let’s face the madness of nationalism!

ajde poster

Nationalism, at the service of…?
The historical disciplines at the forefront of the nationalist ideology.
Demystifying the national symbols: what do the Sun of Vergina, Alexander the Great and the Greek feta-cheese have in common?
The price that we all pay for the causes of the nationalist ideology.

A presentation of the book: “Overcoming the borders and the nations. A common front against nationalism”. A discussion.

The 8th of June, 2013/20:00
The Han(Caravanserai) across Damar-The Old Bazaar in Skopje

ajde with directions

by ajde at May 30, 2013 12:04 AM

May 17, 2013


Βοοkpresentation about nationalism in the Balkans in Kerkira


Saturday 18/5, 20:30
At the Occupation Elaia
Free Social Space in Kerkira
Dairpfleld & Afiown Theodorwn street, Garitsa

by ajde at May 17, 2013 08:34 AM

February 27, 2013


Book presentation – Discussion

Overpassing borders and nations: A joint venture against nationalism
Saturday 16/2, 19:30
Migrant’s social center
Ermou 23, Thessaloniki


by ajde at February 27, 2013 12:02 PM

February in the Selforganized Social Center in Ioannina

Friday 8/2, 20:00
Book presentation
“Overpassing borders and nations: a joint effort against nationalism” by the group The Ajde Project –
The event will take place in Antiviosi squat as an act of solidarity to the occupations.


by ajde at February 27, 2013 11:46 AM

January in the upper city

We continue to fight for the end of this world of dominance and exploitation.

Friday 21/1, Book presentation
“Overpassing borders and nations: a joint effort against nationalism” by the group The Ajde Project
Open assemply of struggle in the upper city, koule kafe square, Thessaloniki


by ajde at February 27, 2013 11:27 AM

January 24, 2013

Crying Earth

Idle No More Has Voices of the Future Generation Caught on Video

Idle No More Has Voices of the Future Generation Caught on Video ICTMN Staff January 02, 2013   The Idle No More movement has swept the globe over the last 22 days as Attawapiskat First Nation chief Theresa Spence continues her hunger strike. In the days since December 10, flash mobs and Round Dances have […]

by Crying Earth at January 24, 2013 10:10 AM

July 18, 2012


Fear to Sleep

Da oggi 18 luglio 2012, saremo online ogni tanto.

Ma ci siamo!

Paura di Dormire


From today 18 july 2012, we will be online just sometimes.

But, we still around!!

Fear to sleep


A partir de hoy, 18 de julio de 2012, estará en línea de vez en cuando.
Pero aquí estamos!
Miedo a dormir



by feartosleep at July 18, 2012 01:54 AM

en/es – Letter of Marco Camenisch about Operation Ardire (Switzerland)

Note from ABC Berlin: Anarchist Marco Camenisch, imprisoned in Switzerland, has drafted a first letter regarding the “operation boldness” (operazione ardire).

He is one of the accused in this frenzied construct against anarchists in Italy, Switzerland, Germany and Greece. Here follows a translation of Marco’s words (we gave it our best shot):

Brief no.1 about the latest anti-anarchist (baptized “bold”, what gives a marked effect to it…) construct by ROS (& f.) – Brutti

ROS stands for the special operations units, which I call dirty operations units (& forgers), since historically I’m a verity-abider. Lidia Brutti is the presiding GIP (judge for preliminary investigations) of the public prosecutor’s office in Perugia.

Preliminary remark: Until today I was not subject to official notices or reactions from the Swiss authorities, and have been informed little by little by the media and via my correspondence. I was delivered by solidarians the—over 200 pages long—construct’s strong indictment dossier, and I leafed through it, thus being able to confirm my initial (from TV and the Press) impression that it is in fact a theorem with more or less conspicuous but overall totally inane “evidence”. I have not yet realized my intention to release a personal public informative and solidarity text. But my revolutionary solidarity beyond all differences against the repression is more than obvious, and more than naturally goes out to comrades arrested and subjected to investigations in this umpteenth construct of the ROS (& f.) under the directorship of the subject Ganzer —the carabiniers’ General, who in 2010 was convicted in the first instance of international drug trade to 14 years in prison!

Today (June 28th) I received from Stefano Fosco, from Pisa prison, two letters dated June 18th and 21st, both postmarked: Pisa 26.06.2012. According to the defense counsel, a speedy transfer of him and Elisa to the high-security prison of Alessandria, or another prison near Perugia, is scheduled. I am as sure as Stefano also is that the accusatorial edifice is bound to collapse; however, it takes time to reconstruct the many years of their existence and of Culmine, and long months in high-security prison lie ahead of them.

During the interrogation by the examining judge, Stefano and Elisa (who are life companions) made use of their right to remain silent (refusal to give evidence), partly because prior to this preliminary hearing they were forbidden contact with the defense lawyer, what is probably illegal, and the lawyer will lodge a complaint.

He recommends a joint technical defense in order to tear the insane charges point by point to pieces. A joint one since there is nothing to conceal because, for example, this is all about statements of anarchist prisoners and dissemination instruments of the same, and citations from books of the 19th century such as Émile Henry. At the moment I am inclined, should the occasion arise, and as soon as it becomes necessary, to join his proposal on grounds of “economy” at all levels, particularly that of hence preventable “frictions”, by employing the same lawyer that Stefano has, or another counsel who would cooperate well with that one.

On the 18th he received a ban on meetings and correspondence with Elisa, and he was totally isolated for 6 days, facing a total ban on visits, having no TV, no newspapers, no radio, placed in bare cells, without even cleaning items.

On the 21st of June he found himself still in total isolation—what at this point is equivalent with the total ban on correspondence under a punitive action—while the only legally decreed prohibition is the ban also on telephone communication with Elisa. The Guantánamo-boys of Pisa assert that ban on contact should also be ban on postal mail. (I’m not surprised; in fact, I know this extreme-fascist prison in Pisa very well, where, as elsewhere, total isolation is simply imposed under the pretext that they ought to have high-security wing for high-security inmates.) They have at least given him TV and on the same day (June 21st) prison yard walk now along with another high-security inmate.

Solidarity and love

Marco Camenisch,
Lenzburg warehouse, June 28th, 2012


Suiza: Carta de Marco Camenisch sobre la última construcción anti-anarquista en Italia

Nota de ABC Berlín: El anarquista Marco Camenisch, preso en Suiza, ha elaborado una primera carta sobre la “Operación Osadia” (Operazione ardire). Él es uno de los acusado, por esta construcción frenética contra los anarquistas en Italia, Suiza, Alemania y Grecia.

A continuación una traducción de las palabras de Marco (que dimos nuestro mejor esfuerzo):

Nota n º 1 sobre la última construcción anti-anarquista por ROS (& f.) – Brutti (bautizada “negrita”, lo que le da un significado resaltado…).

La ROS representa las unidades de operaciones especiales, que yo llamo unidades de operaciones sucias (y falsificadores), ya que históricamente soy un respetuoso de la verdad. Lidia Brutti es la GIP (juez de investigaciones preliminares) que preside la oficina de la fiscalía de Perugia.

Observación preliminar: Hasta hoy no me habían llegado las notificaciones oficiales o las reacciones de las autoridades suizas, y me he informado poco a poco por los medios de comunicación y a través de mi correspondencia. Los solidarios me entregaron el expediente de la construcción de la fuerte causa -de más de 200 páginas, y lo hojeé, sin embargo fui capaz de confirmar mi inicial impresión (que me había dado la televisión y la prensa) de que en realidad es un teorema con más o menos visibles, pero sobre todo totalmente fútiles “pruebas”. Todavía no he avanzado con mi intención de publicar un texto personal informativo y solidario.

Pero mi solidaridad revolucionaria más allá de todas las diferencias en contra de la represión es más que evidente, y más que todo para los compañeros detenidos y sometidos a las investigaciones en esta enésima construcción de la ROS (& f.) Bajo la dirección del sujeto Ganzer- el “General” de los Carabineri, quien en 2010 fue condenado en primera instancia por trafico de drogas a 14 años de prisión.

Hoy (28 de junio) he recibido de Stefano Fosco, de la cárcel de Pisa, dos cartas del 18 y 21 de junio, las dos selladas: 26/06/2012 Pisa. Según el abogado de la defensa, está programada una pronta transferencia de él y Elisa a la prisión de alta seguridad de Alessandria, o de otra prisión cerca de Perugia. Estoy tan seguro como Stefano también que el edificio acusatorio está condenado a colapsar, sin embargo, se necesita tiempo para reconstruir tantos años de su existencia y de Culmine, y tienen por delante largos meses en cárcel de alta seguridad.

Durante el interrogatorio por el juez de instrucción, Stefano y Elisa (que son compañeros de vida) hicieron uso de su derecho a guardar silencio (se negaron a dar su declaración), en parte porque antes de esta audiencia preliminar se les prohibió el contacto con el abogado de la defensa, lo que es probablemente ilegal, y el abogado va a presentar una queja.

Él recomienda una defensa técnica conjunta con el fin de romper los cargos absurdos en pedazos punto a punto. Propone que sea conjunta, ya que no hay nada que ocultar porque, por ejemplo, esto es todo acerca de las declaraciones de los presos anarquistas y los instrumentos de su difusión, como también, citas de los libros del siglo 19, como de Émile Henry. Por el momento me inclino, llegado el caso, y tan pronto como sea necesario, a unirme a su propuesta por razones de “economía” en todos los niveles, en particular de “fricciones” evitables, empleando el mismo abogado que Stefano tiene, u otro abogado que va a cooperar bien con eso.

El día 18 recibió una prohibición de reuniones y correspondencia con Elisa, y fue totalmente aislado durante 6 días, con prohibición total de visitas, televisión, periódicos, ni radio, ubicado en celdas vacías, sin ni siquiera artículos de limpieza.

El 21 de junio, se encontraba aún en aislamiento absoluto, por la prohibición total de la correspondencia por acción punitiva, mientras que la única prohibición legal decretada es la prohibición de la comunicación telefónica con Elisa. Los Guantánamo-boys de Pisa afirman que la prohibición de contacto debe incluir asimismo la prohibición del correo postal. (No me sorprende, de hecho, conozco a esta prisión extremadamente fascista en Pisa muy bien, donde, como en otras partes, el aislamiento total es simplemente impuesto bajo el pretexto de alas de alta seguridad para los presos de alta seguridad.) Por lo menos le han dado una televisión y ese el mismo día (21 de junio) acceso al patio de la prisión junto con otro preso de alta seguridad.

Solidaridad y amor

Marco Camenisch, Lenzburg, 28 de junio 2012


by feartosleep at July 18, 2012 01:42 AM

ARMED STRUGGLE IN ITALY 1976-78 (Elephant Editions)



During these years the antagonist movement in Italy shed all its taboos concerning destruction, violence and the use of arms against the class enemy. It became normal to respond to the humiliation and tyranny of capital with the arms considered most effective, and the violence of the bosses, police and fascists found and immediate response both in the streets and in specific retaliatory actions.
When this counter-information was first published, the aim was to make known and extend the whole dimension of armed struggle, so it contains little criticism of the forms that struggle took. Now it is time to contribute to the qualitative aspect of the struggle that is spreading today, using methods that include sabotage against the structures of capital carried out by small groups of comrades who have come together on the basis of affinity. These contain a strong element of creativity and joy, in the knowledge that it is simple to attack what is oppressing us directly and that there is no need for endless documents of ideological justification for doing so.


–read online


Armed Struggle in Italy / Revised 2009 (Elephant Editions)

elephant editions


by feartosleep at July 18, 2012 01:15 AM

Radio Hafenstrasse

Radio Hafenstrasse
Radio Hafenstrasse, die Stimme aus der Vergangenheit.
Überall wo der Kampf um ein selbstbestimmtes Leben geführt wird, auch heute noch zu hören!


<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="375" src=";feature=oembed" width="500"></iframe>


by feartosleep at July 18, 2012 01:08 AM

More, Much More by Massimo Passamani

A collection of writings by Italian insurrectionary anarchist Massimo Passamani.

Untorelli Press
untorelli (at)


Attachment Size
more.pdf 798.89 KB
more-imposed.pdf 388.43 KB


by feartosleep at July 18, 2012 01:03 AM

June 28, 2012

the wild bunch

Does work liberate?

DOES WORK LIBERATE?  Work penetrates and determines our whole existence. Time flows merciless at her rhythm as we commute through identical depressive surroundings at an ever increasing pace. Working time…productive […]

by @ at June 28, 2012 03:28 PM

“Beyond the Law” – Penelope Nin

To tell the truth, I don’t quite understand what is meant today when people speak of “illegalism”. I thought this word was no longer in use, that it could not […]

by @ at June 28, 2012 03:08 PM

“A Eulogy to Opinion” – Alfredo M. Bonanno

Opinion is a vast merchandise that everyone possesses and uses. Its production involves a large portion of the economy, and its consumption takes up much of people’s time. Its main […]

by @ at June 28, 2012 02:53 PM

“The Cops In Our Heads:Some thoughts on anarchy and morality” – Feral Faun

In my travels over the past several months, I have talked with many anarchists who conceive of anarchy as a moral principle. Some go so far as to speak of […]

by @ at June 28, 2012 02:38 PM

One day of prison. Two days of prison. Three days of prison. A month of prison.

The door closes and opens, then closes and opens again. Three months of prison. A year of prison. I need to know if others are thinking about me as much […]

by @ at June 28, 2012 02:12 PM

May 29, 2012


May 27, 2012


Hello world!

Καλωσήρθες στο Αυτή είναι η πρώτη σου ανάρτηση. Επεξεργάσου την ή διάγραψέ την, για να αρχίσεις να διαχειρίζεσαι το blog!

by aliberation at May 27, 2012 01:19 PM

May 19, 2006

Farma collective

Who we are..


The main goal of the collective, that is active in Athens-Greece, is the construction and installation of a small hydroelectric unit in a Zapatista community that will satisfy the needs of the local people and a local medical clinic. Part of the activities of the group amongst others, include the technical assessments and raising the needed amount of money for the materials and equipment. At the same time, workshops of small (DIY do it yourself) wind generators take place in social centers in Greece, in order to share the acquired knowledge with the Zapatista communities and other autonomous spaces in the world. Installations of such DIY wind generators have been done in Prapopoulou squat in Athens (that now has been removed) and in FREEons Accelerator squat inside the technical university of Athens.

Who are the Zapatistas?

In the first of January 1994 the native Maya communities in the state of Chiapas in North East Mexico revolted against centuries of oppression, racism and violence caused by the Mexican state. In the following years the Zapatistas resisted the pressure of the local authorities and tried to organize and build their everyday life according to their values. These values stand for the respect of nature and humans, communalism, direct democracy and collective work. After the uprising, their decision to stand on their own feet resisting indifference, racism and repression has led the Zapatistas to organize their own system of production, cultivation and supply of their products, their own health system, their own education system, without expecting the charity of a state that remembered them only in order to buy their dignity. Resisting and self-organizing are their weapons.

The communities and electricity

One of the basic problems that the Zapatistas encounter every day is the absence of electric energy in one of the richest areas in natural resources of Mexico. Electricity for the communities is not a luxury but a means that defines directly their living conditions. This absence does not allow the communities to fulfill basic needs like hospital treatments (fridge for medicines, oven in clinic etc), preserving food and lights in houses, schools and public spaces. The fact that they deny every relationship with the Mexican state makes the supply of electricity very difficult. So a way to cover their needs in electricity is to use small units of renewable sources of energy that give the potential of decentralized production of electricity in an ecological way.

Ecology and Zapatismo

The manner of social organization of the Zapatistas, based on the rejection of power relationships, leads the communities to live in harmony with their natural environment. By creating an everyday life where there is no exploitation from one human to another, comes the desire that they frequently express, to preserve a relationship of respect with nature. They organize their life and satisfy their needs, like the production of goods and cultivation of land focusing on the balance between their needs and the environment. They produce organic coffee and deny the use of pesticides and genetically modified seeds.

Renewable sources of Energy

A way to produce electric energy that can be friendly to the environment, under certain circumstances, is the use of renewable sources of energy. This means, that by using the wind, running water, sunlight we can produce electricity without producing harmful emissions that pollute the atmosphere and destroy local ecosystems, as happens with most methods of energy production (such as thermoelectric factories that burn coal and petrol, big hydroelectric dams and artificial lakes, nuclear factories).
One of the most important characteristics of renewable sources is the potential of decentralized production based on local energy needs and the natural resources of each region. That is a way to achieve self-sufficiency of energy on local level and to abolish dependence from economical and political centers of power.

Goals of the group

– Planning and installing a small hydroelectric unit in a Zapatista village in Chiapas and the gathering of the needed funds. The amount of money needed is raised through events of solidarity like concerts, partying, bazaars, conversations and not from state and capitalist organisations.

– Creation of autonomous groups and cooperation with already existing groups who are active in subjects such as political solidarity to the Zapatistas, ecology and renewable sources of energy.

– Organizing workshops of small wind generators constructed from simple materials (do it yourself, DIY), techno activism (against patents and centers that control knowledge) we seek collaboration with other groups that are already active in these subjects such as the Linux community, group Alternative Interpretation System-ALIS etc.

– Organizing events and conversations which aim to inform about the issues that were described above.

Call for participation

The collective wants to involve as many people as possible in a self-organized process that does not set limits and does not accept leaders. You are invited to participate and enrich this effort. Any type of knowledge and experience is welcome and strengthens our actions. There are also ideas for the function of autonomous groups that can work together for the same goals such as F.A.R.M.A. having continuous contact with each other.

by farmazapatista at May 19, 2006 10:46 PM

March 07, 2006

Farma collective

Farma collective longer description

Charging the resistance with renewable energy sources: A solidarity project with the Zapatista Communities and DIY Wind Generators for Autonomous Spaces

This text was written in November 2008 for the book «Sparking A Worldwide Energy Revolution: Social Struggles in the Transition to a Post-Petrol World» published by AK press and edited by Kolya Abramsky.

It has been almost 15 years since the Zapatista Army for National Liberation (EZLN) and the
Zapatista communities have self organized their autonomy using both the Fire and the Word,
mostly a Word that has echoed in all parts of the world with the sounds of an inspiring rebellion.
Since the initiation of the Caracoles (the Conches – a way that the communities are organized in five groups according to their locations) and the Juntas de Buen Gobierno (Councils of Good
Government – the Zapatista peoples elected, but instantly recalled representatives) in August
2003, the Zapatista communities have self organized and managed their own health, education,
justice, self governance, work cooperatives and gender equality, always in a manner of
governing with obedience to the people and moving forwards by asking.

Since 2005 and with the Sixth Declaration of the Lacandona Jungle, the Zapatistas have started
constructing networks of solidarity against the neoliberal capitalist attack against all of humanity
and nature. Such networks, based upon respecting differences and using dialogue, are the
“Other Campaign” in Mexico and the “Sixth International” in the world. Many European collectives have been inspired by the Zapatista struggle and this has led to solidarity projects that have assisted in the construction of the Zapatista autonomy or inspired
global processes of grassroots networking.

F.A.R.M.A (Fight for Alternative Renewable Methods and Autonomy) started working as a
collective in the autumn of 2006 and set as its primary activity the technical study, the
fundraising and finally the construction of a small hydroelectric unit at a Zapatista community in
the region of Chiapas, Mexico. Apart from that, F.A.R.M.A. organizes workshops for the
construction of DIY (Do It Yourself) wind turbines using simple, low cost materials. These
generators are installed in squats and social centres in Athens, Greece. In addition, our
activities include the organization of various discussions on the Zapatista struggle and
renewable energy sources and we have participated in a series of solidarity actions in the city of
Athens. The main issues of concern that our collective deals with are: political solidarity in
practice, radical ecology, renewable energy sources and autonomy.

Electricity can be produced in various ways. In most of them, energy production is regulated
solely by financial terms without any care for its environmental impacts. The alternative options
that make use of renewable energy sources such as wind, water, sun nowadays appear to be
part of the solution to the problem. However, once these renewable sources are seen as means of economic benefit and competition, the balance with nature is lost. The result of this attitude is
obvious in hydroelectric plants using huge dams, where renewable production is far from
friendly to the environment, since it actually destroys local ecosystems. In the context of our
activities, it is clear that renewable sources are seen as means for establishing the autonomy of
communities with minimal ecological disturbance. This way they can be used for, decentralized
energy production without creating dependencies from centers of power and discriminating
between privileged and non-privileged users. This can only be achieved, when renewable
sources are not controlled by capital as another profitable investment.

Based on this concept, our thoughts traveled over the Atlantic to reach Chiapas, in the
mountains of southeastern Mexico and reached the constantly evolving Zapatista movement. A
movement advancing by adapting itself from the needs of the indigenous people, as they are
expressed through directly democratic and non-hierarchical processes. There, the maintenance
of dignity and autonomy sets as a high priority the respect towards the natural environment. On
the grounds of supporting the autonomy of these communities in practice and against economic
and political power, the idea of constructing a small hydroelectric unit was born and was
suggested to the Good Government Councils, who accepted it.

The anticapitalist struggle of the Zapatistas was not restricted to the expropriation of land during
the revolt of 1994, but moved forward to the creation of new autonomous structures, questioning
the basis of state control. Now that the people hold the land, they respond also to other aspects
of living, such as autonomous schools, clinics and collective shops.

The Zapatistas, apart from facing constant assaults from paramilitary groups, they have to deal
with a government policy that tries to break the Zapatista solidarity and values, intending to buy
their dignity through many “aid programs”. These include provisions from, animals and cement
to the supply of electrical energy.

Following the Zapatista point of view: “not to ask from others to do something for us, but to do it
ourselves”, F.A.R.M.A. begun, through internet research, to discover groups that have built
similar small energy projects, gathering knowledge and experience from various parts of the
world, such as Thailand, Nicaragua and Italy. Believing that, no matter how specialized and
unreachable knowledge may seem, we can obtain it at a level that meets our needs. Against
patents, while sharing it and realizing the works ourselves. Without being the “experts”, we can
access DIY technology on renewable energy sources and spread its application collectively.
This DIY concept is the basis for organizing workshops on wind generator construction by using
simple, low cost materials for collectives.

We have learned a lot from our visits to the Zapatista communities, some things difficult to be
described in words, but the moment you live it you can feel the change within you. You know
you are getting involved with something which is local but simultaneously global, something
simple but substantial, so different but familiar, while learning through solidarity how to resist by
being creative together with others in equal terms. Feeling solidarity like a bridge that links
different pieces of a common struggle, while giving and getting at the same time, sharing
experiences and learning from each other. This perspective defined the way we chose to
express our solidarity from the beginning to the end of the process.

In this concept, the necessary funding for the construction of the hydroelectric project was
raised through events of solidarity like concerts, partying, bazaars, without seeking funding from
state and capitalist organizations. The main amount of money was collected through the
organisation of a concert, where musicians participated voluntarily and the place was offered
free of charge. In the spirit of solidarity and trying to avoid authoritarian and commercial
relationships, we decided not to have an entrance ticket, but to aim for a voluntary contribution,
having a suggested price of 5 Euros. During the event, references to the repression that the
Zapatista movement is suffering on a daily basis appeared through readings, documentaries,
along with a discussion about their struggle. Afterwards, an extensive report on the expenses
and the revenue of the concert was publicized, together with a big thank you to everybody that
was involved in any way, since the event received great support.

Autonomous and decentralized networks for the production and distribution of
electrical energy using renewable energy sources

“Unless we realize that the present economy which is structured upon the ruthless competitive
tactic of a dilemma between “expansion or extinction”, is a deeply inhumane mechanism, we
will falsely tend to put the blame for all environmental problems on technology and
overpopulation. We need to see the deeper causes of the problems, namely the globalised
market speculations, industrial development and the identification of progress with the interests
of corporations.” M. Bookchin

While trying to describe the histories of our paths, we explored what brought us together on the
same struggle. In the first place all of us, and then us with the Zapatistas. We all came together
from different directions, with different needs, desires and stimulus, but we all shared the same
questioning of the relationship between humanity and nature. We all brought with us our own
small piece of experience, carrying within it the knowledge and inspiration of past movements
for social change. All this formed our words and actions.

Informing and taking action against the root causes of climate change were upon our urgent
needs, so we got involved with the production, distribution and consumption of electrical energy.
We consider energy in general, as part of the commons, not as a commodity that can be bought
and sold for the production and accumulation of profit. We understand the use of energy as one
of the basic needs of people and we propose that its production and consumption should be
carried out in a socially just manner. At the same time, we comprehend the authoritarian
relationship that we humans impose on nature, which is realized as the senseless and violent
exploitation of natural resources and ecosystems. We realize that this relationship stems from
the more general idea of exploitation and authority, which is imposed by one person on another.
As a result we propose struggling against power relationships of all kinds, as the only social
change that could contribute to the struggle against climate change. This in turn can bring about
an idea of social justice that could lead towards a balanced coexistence with the natural world of
which we are a part of. We also realize that every community, no matter how big or small, has
its own way and its own time of doing things. We also see that the paths are many, with many
colors, with many dimensions, and we propose autonomy, synthesis and respect for the
different. We realize that socially just proposals come from the movements, while moving from
the bottom and to the left. So we are engaged in the struggle for the construction of the
autonomy of all peoples, here and now, through networks of mutual help and solidarity, towards
freedom. While staying away from capitalist, state and authoritarian institutions and the
relationships of dependence that they create, we are trying to gather knowledge, to share it and
to put it in practice in our everyday lives. In this manner we meet with other histories and we
move forward together. This is how we came together. This is how we met with the Zapatistas.
This is how we met and continue to meet with comrades from close and far. This is how we are
moving forward.

Putting all this to practice, we are concentrating on renewable energy sources as one of the
most important tools in the construction of autonomy and self sufficiency. While trying to be
independent from the state and multinationals, we have started to satisfy our own needs for
energy based on solidarity, and respect for a balanced existence within the ecosystems which
we live in. The idea is to install small scale renewable energy sources (such as photovoltaic
cells, small hydro generators, and small wind turbines) in cooperation with communities in
struggle, trying to share with them the knowledge that we have gathered and at the same time
contribute to the self-sufficiency of these communities. The installations belong to the
communities themselves and are managed by them. The communities themselves specify the
production, the consumption and issues on quantity and quality according to their needs and
with respect to nature. This relationship of coexistence is very strong since the installations are
designed according to the natural resources of the region. Our first attempt will be the
hydroelectric unit in Chiapas, which is planned to be completed within the summer of 2009 (the installation was canceled, still efforts are being done). So
the goal is to construct autonomous and decentralized solidarity networks for the production and
distribution of energy, harmonizing our needs with our natural surroundings. All this goes
against the ideas of centralized distribution networks of large scale energy production units that
are managed by economic and political power centers, in order to produce profit.

The technical know-how is shared, aiming at the creation of small collectives that have the
ability to use the technology according to the needs, desires and values of their community. This
way, decision making is in the hands of the people that are directly affected and not in the
hands of some political and economical elite. An elite that does not want to, and cannot know
the needs of the daily lives of communities all over the planet. Only when technology and
science once again become tools for the self-determination of communities, based on solidarity,
only then can we consider essential climate action, through local solutions of appropriated
technology, in small scale applications. All this we have learned throughout the evolution of our
project within the Zapatista communities.

We have seen how the communities decided where a project of electricity production would be
more useful to them, in a way that was related to their general principals, not dependant on the
“bad government” as they say and with love towards Mother Earth. We have seen how the
community decided, after we informed them on technical issues, which technology would be
used. We saw how the community was willing to manage the limited amount of energy that
would be produced, collectively and with solidarity. We saw how knowledge can de transferred
and become a tool towards autonomy and self-determination, individually and collectively.

A basic advantage of the small hydroelectric installation is its low cost and the simple technical
knowledge required to install it, that of a plumber, an electrician and a builder. In this way, when
the project is completed and having shared the required know-how, future installations can be
carried out, without dependence on solidarity collectives, such us ours. For this reason, we hope
that in the future, such projects could be reproduced in nearby communities, from the Zapatistas
themselves, giving birth to the first autonomous microgrids.

Do it yourself wind generators, sharing skills and strengthening autonomy

Having, as we said, the Zapatista movement as our main source of inspiration we started to
think that we needed to connect what happens at the other side of the world with the reality
which we live in. We have seen that it would not be enough to simply support the struggle
against capitalism and the construction of autonomy somewhere else but that it would be
necessary to build self-organized procedures where we live, in our everyday life, in a process
that aims to strengthen local anti-capitalist social struggles. This is how we got involved with
constructing Do It Yourself (DIY) wind turbines from simple materials. A very plain laboratory
was set up in a social center in the city of Athens where many people came and offered their
views and hands on work.

At the beginning it was difficult since we had no manual, not enough knowledge and no
experience of any kind. However, we took it step by step trying to share the existing knowledge
and creating a “boiler” of collective knowledge that was growing. Working together and
exchanging opinions gave birth to the idea of installing these generators in squats and
autonomous spaces, in order to achieve autonomy in energy, while minimizing our carbon
footprint. The first attempt to install a DIY turbine was made at a squatted house in the north of
Athens, called Prapopoulou Squat. Being only the first attempt it did not have the expected (or
better the wanted) results and it end up with its wings flying all over the place. Nevertheless, it
was a liberating experience that showed us which way to go. Our second attempt was a bit
more organized, still including a lot of improvisations and although it stayed in one piece ,it
didn’t produce much electricity. And then, after one year and a half of having lots of fun while
gaining knowledge, but without groundbreaking results, we reached that crucial point where
things started to get together:

We discovered a workshop of constructing DIY wind generators organized by the Escanda
collective in Spain. There, we constructed a wind generator that really worked in only 9 days.
Our work there was carried out through a process of free cooperation and equality that made no
discrimination of sexes and accepted no experts. It was a precious experience which clearly
showed that solidarity and the sharing of skills between collectives from all over the world is
crucial and that the moments where the little steps of every resistance meet, can be very

During our few years of existence, we never had a very clear view of the path we were on, but
we kept moving, sensing new possibilities in the air, and always aiming for radical social
change. Like the Zapatistas say: “the path is created while walking”. Theory was born from
practice and through our needs and desires we expressed the framework of our actions and
sensed the new ways that were to be opened.

We have realized that apart from protesting and condemning, it is important to try to be creative
and start building today the world we fight to be created tomorrow. Taking knowledge and know
how back from the monopoly of state and capital is an important aspect of the struggle and
helps us believe in our ability to construct little things now, but much bigger later. Creative
resistance gives ground for people to see in action and live what self-organizing is, see the
benefits and difficulties in practice and not just have theories and abstract ideas about it.
And then an idea that was abstract in our minds for a long time started to take form. It was the
idea of getting involved with the way people learn. So we occupied together with other people
an abandoned space inside the National Technical University of Athens (NTUA) and created the
Freedons Accelerator (επιταχυντής ελευθερονίων / epitahintis eleftheronion) squat. The basic
point of the squat was the creation of an autonomous space of free exploration of knowledge in
the heart of the boring and suppressing university of the state.

As a result, subjects like libertarian education started to be amongst our interests. Organized
workshops of wind generators are starting to take place in a method of equality, trying to abolish
power relationships between all the people involved, learning from each other and aiming to
take education in our own hands. The evolution of the squat, that is actually going on now that
we are writing this text, is a separate procedure from F.A.R.M.A. containing other ideas as well
like workshops on open-source software, DIY everything, anti-consumerism, cultivating land etc.
Our plan for the future, concerning this project, is to have a workshop of DIY wind generators
once or twice a week for students and anybody else who might be interested, as well as
organizing some ten-day workshops where people from other places of Greece and other
countries can stay, work and learn how to construct wind turbines in a horizontal process.
To complete the geography and calendar of our very small resistance, we need to travel another
time to the other side of the Atlantic. To visit this time self-organized collectives that try to apply
appropriate technology while working with indigenous people, communities and squats, always
from the left and below, in this so fertile land called Mexico. During our visit in Mexico this
summer we set the base for a good collaboration in the following years, intending to exchange
knowledge, and work together on technologies that can support the struggle for autonomy
everywhere. So we keep on going ahead step by step in the unforeseeable future. There is still
a long way to cover with a lot of mistakes to be made, but when longing for freedom, life is
never boring or infertile.

Networking movements of the global north with movements of the global south

After the Zapatista uprising of 1994 and after the anti WTO Seattle mobilizations in 1999, the
movements of the global south have started to network with the upcoming movements of the
global north. Clearly, they fight as one against the neoliberal capitalist repression, in the streets
of Genoa, Argentina, North Africa etc. and it is evident that a new movement that is not
interested in taking political power is starting to form from below, creating new structures
towards autonomy.

Our paths have crossed with these movements and we have realized that solidarity between all
struggles is our weapon, by building local creative resistances which construct our autonomy,
along with communication and coordination with these struggles through common networks, as
is proposed in the Sixth International that was created in the depths of the Lacandona jungle in

We have seen the movement of the Other Campaign in Mexico and the uprisings in Oaxaca and
Atenco, being violently repressed. We have heard other voices speaking up, in the Indigenous
Peoples meeting of the Americas in Vicam in October 2007 and in the Second Meeting of the
Zapatista peoples with the people of the world in July 2007. The situation of increasing
repression is global, against indigenous and rural movements such as the movement against
the Winter Olympics in Canada, the struggles to keep the oil in the ground in the Niger Delta,
against farmers ’and indigenous peoples’ movements such as the MST in Brazil, peasants
movements in India and many more throughout the world as they are expressed through Via
Campesina (international peasant movent), against the movements in Argentina and many
other known or less known local struggles against the many faces of neo-liberalism and

The need to get to know and connect with such struggles is evident as they are part of the
global anticapitalist struggle, the fight for our Mother Earth and our right of self determination as
peoples. The indigenous struggles of “Tierra y Territorio”, for land and territory, for land and
freedom, have similar goals to the squatting movements, reclaiming the streets and many more
struggles in European history of reclaiming the commons and protecting the Earth. The meeting
of peasants from India with radical youngsters from Europe, for example, who try to find a
common ground to plant seeds and share ideas, despite the differences in theoretical analysis,
forms of struggle and culture, has a dynamic worth unleashing.

One of the most important tasks of collectives such as F.A.R.M.A., that travel the world and
come face to face with local movements, is to network these local movements with others, while
creating a global perspective of a unified anticapitalist struggle. Following the concept “think
global, act local” we hope that one day our paths will meet.

F.A.R.M.A collective
November 2008

Related links:
Freedons accelerator squat:
Prapopoulou squat:

by farmazapatista at March 07, 2006 02:07 PM

January 08, 2006

Farma collective

Information about the social struggles in Greece is an open and self-managed translation collective of the broader Greek anarchist/ anti-authoritarian/ libertarian milieu. We aim to disseminate counter-information against the misinformation of totalitarianism, connect the anarchist/ anti-authoritarian movement of Greece with those abroad, and diffuse anarchist discourse throughout society.

by farmazapatista at January 08, 2006 02:26 PM