This is a time of great tension in various parts of the country, the discontent of individuals and groups against the State-Capital is spreading, creating a suitable environment for the continuation of our struggle for total liberation. We live in so-called “democracy”, whose representatives are doubling their efforts to consolidate a non-existent “social peace”, which in practice is nothing other than more control and power over our lives. But it is precisely this control that is generating hatred and resentment, which sooner or later will explode into riots.

We can see that we are facing a government that feels vulnerable and hurts to see itself momentarily overcome by the actions of men and women fighting against oppression and is terrified that the conflict will generalize and give way to social insurrection.

Dozens of murders and injustices are taking place all over the country, isolated cases that do not have the support of the media or the social force to provoke the indignation that raises the level of conflict, and this makes us think that we prefer the spectacular and quantitative. The latest conflict in this sense is the case of Ayotzinapa, which has acted as detonator for a series of riots that occurred in different parts of the country following the disappearance of the 43 school students, a decision taken by the spheres of governmental power demonstrating that the dirty war is not a thing of the past but continues to be a practice that prevails, as demonstrated in Chiapas, Atenco, Oaxaca.

Rivers of information flow daily on the question of Ayotzinapa, where the uncertain fate of the boys is spectacularised; so I can only say that the disappearance of the 43 students took place in a complicated context, involving many factors including disputes between the drug cartels operating in the area for the control of opium and marijuana. For them the drug trade is not just a means of acquiring weapons and money but also power and prestige for the realization of their objectives. Mix that with the theme of politics – in fact as we all know the representatives of democracy are in collusion with the mafias to increase their political and economic power, thereby creating a narco-government. There are also historically the political-military groups that have their social base in this region (the state of Guerrero).

We, individualities against all kinds of authority, cannot accept any visible or de facto power and in the same way we demonstrate our total refusal of any kind of murder or disappearance for political reasons or mafia interests.

The disappearance of the 43 students was widely spread through public opinion and the media, giving rise to the movement “Todos somos Ayotzinapa”, unleashing a series of protests, meetings, criticism on the Internet of State institutions for their “inefficiency “; citizens’ committees demanding the resignation of the fascist President Peña Nieto; family and friends demanding their loved ones alive and bringing much of the struggle into the field of legality, but also with violent forms, especially in Guerrero and Mexico City.

I personally am in solidarity with the pain that the relatives of the disappeared undoubtedly feel, in fact the situation they are experiencing is far from easy, and it seems obvious to me that, not having anarchist positions, they turn to the authorities in their demand for justice. And although I understand, but do not agree, that most of the movement prefers to demonstrate peacefully and not violently, what I cannot accept is that this same movement, or part of it, even embraces comrades who use illegal methods.

From my anarchist perspective, I consider that pacifism is a struggle that is easily recuperable by the State, as well as being against our principles. We do not want prison for anyone, in fact we fight for the destruction of prisons because we consider them unnecessary. The anarchist presence in this society does not presuppose any realization but a constant tension that we try to extend into all the areas of our lives, so we have to be careful with our positions and know how to carry out a struggle on the side of those who rebel, but without abandoning our convictions, without trying to be accepted or well-liked, far less recognized.

For example, we support the revolt that has come out around the events of Ayotzinapa but we will not fall into methods and forms that are distant from our own, allowing ourselves to be led by the current. We are not all Ayotzinapa. We are committed to extending the conflict without wearing the coat of a movement that does not represent us. I agree with comrade Mario “Tripa” Lopez that our struggle is not to improve things, or to have a more just form of government, we do not conceive of a bad or good government, do not try to develop our struggles in perspective “good vibes”. Instead, what we seek is a total rupture, “At daggers drawn” with all forms of domination, wherever they come from, a break to the bitter end.

We do not want to ask anyone for anything, just take advantage of conditions in order to continue our struggles, as each blow dealt to power makes us more free. We firmly believe that attacks in solidarity are the best way to show our support. We do not believe in unions to demonstrate our solidarity, on the contrary we desire and strive to put into practice daily and social insurrection.

Being a prisoner means being restricted and also considerably reduces the amount of information that one receives on events that occur outside, but this does not mean that we cannot express our thoughts, despite impotence due to not having the opportunity to be shoulder to shoulder with comrades when we see that conditions are ripe to bring about this insurrection I am referring to. And, of course, the moment that so many anarchists say they are waiting for, as advocated by anarchism of synthesis or the “anti-system revolutionaries” that claim to be fighting for a better world and, if that’s so, in these times cannot invent excuses to jump out from this eternal waiting and the comfort zone that offers the word as an end in itself. Now we have to continue with the tension and not allow the liberatory fire to extinguish itself. We must carry on, not just raising our fists and our voices, but with our whole bodies and our will, being clear that if there is not a composite number of comrades prepared to act, we have the fearless option to continue anonymous night attacks with homemade explosive devices, simple but effective, the objectives are not lacking.

Without a doubt, vanity and capitalism distort solidarity, confusing it with trivial acts like going to a football match or a concert, trying to appear in photographs and be famous for a moment or feel a momentary surge of energy in observing an artist or intellectual throwing out easy discourses, applaud strongly then go home and continue with their daily routine.

Or those who show their support by buying a t-shirt with some small text without clarifying that with this, instead of supporting a struggle one is only supporting capitalist industry. And we could mention many similar examples … but this does not happen among anarchists … or does it?

It is clear to me that the insurrection must be social, alongside the people, even if of different ideologies, starting from the fact that the struggle must be generalized and seeking individual fulfilment, but that does not mean that we seek alliances with anyone. In fact as Bonanno says: “as anarchists we are foreign to any kind of alliance.” I consider this union only momentary and aimed at widening the conflict and not “gaining ground” on the State, but destroying it from the foundations. In any case in my opinion alliances are usually impossible due to the inconsistencies in their principles.

An example of these inconsistencies is the EZLN where a clear contradiction is shown in that many anarchists, or anarco-zapatistas, of alleged anti-authoritarian posture, support and identify with this army, of communist tendency and authoritarian structure. These anarco-zapatistas are influenced by slogans such as “command by obeying”, and we say that command always generates power and therefore there will always be someone to obey, despite the Zapatistas saying that “it is the people who command and the government that obeys”. It is goes without saying that I do not refuse to acknowledge the worthy struggle undertaken in 1994 by the EZLN against the State, earning hundreds of supporters all over the world for their cause; and it happened that many anarchists were captivated by the “Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle”, but the disappointment of realizing that an authoritarian practice continued to exist, despite the alleged libertarian discourse, soon arrived.

Any army no matter how revolutionary it might say it is, even a black army claiming to be anarchist, will always have an authoritarian base (Maoist or Marxist-Leninist), which is contrary to anarchy and that is why I consider these alliances unnecessary and sterile. We deem it necessary to take a distance from a certain kind of left that seeks to overturn power in order to replace it with another, classical Marxist-Leninist theory.

In conclusion, we do not want to fail to point out that in the present union different groups have carried out activities: anarchists, political groups, citizens groups and also guerrillas have contributed to the conflict with separate actions and, as always, there are those who try to draw benefit from them, such as the case of the guerrilla which is devoting itself to recruiting people, including some anarchists, to expand its guerrilla circle. They promise training in military strategy and logistics of attack, the use of weapons. It is worrying that some anarchists let themselves be seduced and participate, thereby going in the opposite direction to their beliefs, but maybe sometimes due to lack of information. The guerrillas are specialized vanguards who have voluntarily chosen clandestinity as a form of attack.

We must be clear that specialization in anything is unnecessary, because we are not professionals nor do we want to be, we only use simple permanent attacks, using only what is required to make the struggle effective, since the end does not justify the means, nor we must ever lose coherence between who we are and how and why we carry out our actions.

Carlos López “Chivo”

———

Source: Act for freedom now!