The events inside the event on 15 October in Rome in some way represent a turning point with respect to the path of radical opposition in the processes of revolt against the ruling oligarchies. The turning point in the evidence is raw, no longer be ignored, rebellious explosion which does not bow his head. One problem is that it is not easy to accept what has happened, as it is not reject. Yet we must put his mind at rest, because I fear that from now on will be practically impossible to avoid.
It is personally repugnant to me to quickly explain the careless use, in many cases free of violence, which I think inconclusive, unnecessarily brutal, and often purely vandalism no sense reasonably acceptable. In my eyes these newly barbarians (as they were represented by information officer, even similar to the troopers who made the famous "Sack of Rome") at first glance seem pretty stupid politically, easily exploitable even if you do not realize it. But these statements merely photographing my state of mind and may not be appropriate to look to help you understand.
For the determination angry is natural to associate what happened to the Jacquerie of 1358, which became the symbol and emblem of spontaneous revolts from below, which was characterized by a strong spontaneous uprising of the peasant masses, without any preparation and political organization. But the facts of Rome, unlike the Jacquerie, have led thousands of young players pissed, who moved well organized and determined, which had previously decided to unleash a systematic destruction of property and symbols of power and to put in serious trouble the police. If we wanted to, they could storm the palaces of power, trying to drag the mass present toward an insurrectionary struggle to transform the whole of today's event in a Jacquerie. In fact it is instead moved to Rome vanguard who acted on their own, if necessary clashing with protesters do not agree with their actions.
On the side of those who rebel
Regardless of these facts we have to get used to the idea that more and more likely to erupt in riots, because the dominant powers are systematically destroying and impoverishing a society and each time the outbreak of violence is proportional to the accumulated rage. There are understandable reasons for the various Jacquerie, that have occurred and those that will be encountered, although rarely are sensible: they are at any time of the outbreak of the reaction, which is reinforced and implement repressive actions disproportionate. The violent revolt is not right nor wrong and misleading to judge. The power of the judges because they can not control it, but he was able to manipulate or even to use it. Manipulation through pushing infiltrators in a functional sense of power. He uses it as an excuse to implement authoritarian and repressive flare, and so is targeted indiscriminately. So clear how the violent revolt are widely used for the benefit of a ruler, without which, among other things, be able to make any progress towards emancipation.
The subject of anger that turns into a violent revolt is inevitable. Always happen as long as the level and amount of social injustice will be unbearable, until the triumph of injustice and oppression ruling powers, which in truth are the only real troublemaker. It makes no sense to judge righteously, putting perhaps waiting for the revolt generated from despair to be pursued with good manners and politeness. Think of it or support it is unrealistic because it takes into account that the anger and despair, hunger, poverty generated by continuous humiliation and abuse, leading to uncontrolled and powerful reactions.
For anarchists can not be elected by the famine and the powerful oppressors, who are the main violent, the real generators of general violence. We can not but be on the side of those who rebelled against this state of things even if it is repugnant to the way in which the rebellion occurs. Even when we do not support the systematic use of indiscriminate violence that occurs, which would fall with great force against the irrational, overpowering, the hungry and the torturers of the dominant power, we must be on the side of those who revolt because it is naturally our part. But we have to do with the firmness of our ideas and our beliefs, we strive to contribute to the struggle that arises spontaneously not fall into the trap of violence above all else, is not driven by the myth historically failed of uprising at all costs, high in to a mystical and dogmatic only effective means of struggle against injustice and domination overpowering.
The basic problem to be addressed is because he has taken and is taking root in a meaningful way this practice violent elite, which would lead to the square of a real Jacquerie, so incisive and yet so foolish, at least from the point of view of practices that would be able to subvert the dominant way of being and living, with the intent to build a society of solidarity and self-managed libertarian, no longer subdued. The immediate answer is because these young people, violently deprived of all hope from the oppressive system in force, pursuing violent insurrection against the myth of the dominant power as the only possible answer to get rid of the hood leaden above us.
Yet it is so obvious that living this belief in an absolute way, consciously or not, want to impose what they believe in a dogmatic way the only valid practice. I also strongly believe that this general theoretical support is tailored perfectly with psychological need to unleash the existential rage built up, hurling it against those who oppose the unleashing of their unmet needs charged.
Personally I find it hard to believe that there are still some really convinced that the revolution in this way. Behind them is a lot of ingenuity, if not stupidity, even if there is a lot of heart and a great desire to fight. But you can not fight blindly, or for the sheer pleasure of fighting to free energies, because that is doomed to fail. If you declare war, I mean real war with weapons, not mere social conflict (such as these seem to advocate direct confrontation with the power of the newcomers), and rely on it alone the chances of rescue, the war is over to a professional 'golden opportunity to experience their professionalism, which will make them much more devastating and destructive anger that is unleashed from below.
Errico Malatesta and "necessary" violence
There are some deep flaws in the evaluation of the use of this choice rebellious street violence. By its nature, physical confrontation is to crush the enemy that wants to throw down, to humiliate him, to make it inoperative. There is therefore a first non-trivial problem is the identification of the enemy, that is lashing out against those who actually need. At a first superficial glance, the type of violence perpetrated and the things that are affected, one would assume that the police are considered the main enemy and the police facing them, the banks in their buildings, the palaces of power as places that are home to the powerful.
But these "newly barbarians" are not so superficial and naive. Unleashed their anger on police officers, bank buildings and palaces of power because they have elected to symbols of the dominant power. In this missing after their choice, no one knows what they want instead of the power that would break down. They seem however to believe that, as in every respect since the uprising that has no history of insurrections, the real goal is the capture of the "Winter Palace", with the consequent reduction of power that will act in and of their power. I do not know if you want even in their imagination "honor" to the bottom of the myth of the revolution that takes hold of the "Palace" to establish a new revolutionary power. Since many of them self-proclaimed anarchists, logic should not aspire to build a new power, but would they want to abolish all kinds of power from on high, who wants to impose any constituted authority. Very difficult to achieve, if not impossible, if the fundamental means for the final victory is the insurgency, as demonstrated historically.
It is this overall picture, therefore declared their strong will to act exclusively through the insurgency, which is a huge flaw with respect to the purpose of triggering a revolutionary process, identified as deficient in the moment of slaughter and the overthrow of the power force, without making it clear at all what they want and make it happen once so hated that the power has been taken or killed. When there were similar conditions, as well as storage of death and carnage caused, historically it has always triggered the devastating social disasters.
Errico Malatesta, anarchist thought from refined very important in the general history of the revolt of the oppressed, even if at the time that the insurgency was necessary to emancipate itself, it is always his best to clarify that if the revolution should lead to erect gallows and guillotine is better not to do it, and that violence by insurgents must be limited to defensive action against the violence of power, never become an instrument of taxation and oppression. While admitting the necessity of violence as an act of rebellion, anarchy has always touted that rejects violence as a method of social control, because it is above all an act of love toward humanity. This thought is rightly become a classic of anarchistic view of the revolutionary transformation of society.
Lack of awareness
There are two main flaws in the current violent street protests, which took in the events of October 15 in Rome at a particularly emblematic.
On the one hand the violent insurgency arise to arrogance, refusing the comparison with other different positions, wanting to impose their own practices to anyone in their way. Significant number of their statements published in the papers ... it is useless to wonder, everybody knew it ... we had said for days now ... what we would do so. and so on. Clashed with protesters along the parade number did not want to endure their interference, spoon-fed to those who manifested physical assaults and clearly authoritarian methods of taxation. In this way they got that, exasperated, the protesters have handed over to the police and that some of them policemen and policemen have been applauded because they were defending themselves from attacks by so-called black-bloc. One way of acting which is supposed revolutionary impact that arouses sympathy towards the police power against which it occurs is at least doubt, not only in its results but also in the way.
On the other hand there are the victims of the illusion that there is a power center, which once demolished will get underway as the desired release. In fact, the current domain has no power centers from which emanate the commands that require submissions. Today the enemy determines choices and policies that affect the lives of everyone who enslave and impoverish whole masses of people, overlooking each structure. More than a system in the proper sense is a set of autonomous forces that are able to impose its supremacy moving in synergy, is a method of action, induction of appropriation and much more effective than any building of any command structure, of each apparatus of exploitation, all forms of hierarchical imposition.
From a revolutionary point of view, the real danger is the lack of awareness and the blind and not axiomatic understanding of reality.
anno
41 n. 367
Andrea Papi