đŸ’Ÿ Archived View for library.inu.red â€ș file â€ș crimethinc-riders-on-the-storm.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 08:46:27. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

âžĄïž Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Riders on the Storm
Author: CrimethInc.
Date: May 15, 2018
Language: en
Topics: analysis, Paris, France, may day
Source: Retrieved on 16th June 2021 from https://crimethinc.com/2018/05/15/riders-on-the-storm-a-blow-by-blow-report-and-analysis-of-may-day-2018-in-paris

CrimethInc.

Riders on the Storm

In Paris, on May Day 2018, nearly 15,000 people joined a confrontational

march rejecting capitalism and the state, including a black bloc of 1200

people. Intense clashes immediately broke out with the police. This is

the story of the events leading up to May Day, what we experienced that

afternoon in Paris, and what comes next.

Tension has been building in France for years now, from the street

confrontations of 2016 against the Loi Travail to the defense of la ZAD

at Notre-Dame-des-Landes. Here, we offer firsthand reports from the

events of May 1, 2018 in Paris and discuss the aftermath of this day in

order to participate in the critical analyses that have emerged within

our radical circles for several days now.

To hear reports from other May Day actions worldwide, listen to the May

Day 2018 roundup episode of our podcast, the Hotwire. To learn more

about the origins of May Day, read “The incomplete, true, authentic and

wonderful history of May Day”, or read our timeline charting its legacy.

Background: 127 Years of History

May Day is observed as International Workers’ Day in France, as it is in

many other countries. For more than a century, workers, trade unionists,

traditional leftists, and anarchists have demonstrated together or

separately to pay tribute to the struggles of the late 19^(th) century

and the introduction of the eight-hour workday.

Yet May Day has never been limited to legal demonstrations. On May 1,

1891, in Fourmies, soldiers shot at striking workers, killing nine

people—including four under the age of 18—and injuring 35 more.

Afterwards, a crowd took the streets of Clichy brandishing a red flag.

At the end of the demonstration, police attempted to seize the

revolutionary emblem, provoking a riot. Gunshots echoed in the streets

and some policemen were injured. Three anarchists were arrested and

detained. Tried in August 1891, the defendants were sentenced to up to 5

years in prison. These events awoke the convictions of many future

radicals, including the notorious anarchist François Koënigstein, better

known by his nickname, Ravachol.

In France, May Day also has other connotations. In 1941, aiming to force

a rupture with socialism, Marshal PĂ©tain—fervent anti-Semite, head of

the French government during the occupation, and among those chiefly

responsible for state collaboration with the Nazis—passed legislation

declaring that May Day would be called la FĂȘte du Travail et de la

Concorde Sociale (“the day of labor and social harmony”). Since then,

Labor Day in France continues to bear the name “FĂȘte du Travail,” paying

tribute to PĂ©tain’s maxim ”Travail, Famille, Patrie” (“Work, Family,

Fatherland”).

During the 1950s and 1960s, Labor Day disappeared in France. During the

war in Indochina (1946–1954) and the Algerian War of Independence

(1954–1962), successive French governments seeking to preserve their

colonial holdings instituted a State of Emergency (1955-1958-1961). The

state used this “exceptional” law granting special powers to the

executive branch to forbid demonstrations of all kinds in France. It was

only on May 1, 1968 that people in France were once again able to take

the streets to celebrate Labor Day.

More recently, in 2016 and 2017, anarchists and other autonomous rebels

succeeded in taking the front of the afternoon May Day demonstration,

relegating trade unions and political parties to the end of the

procession. By adopting an offensive strategy—attacking every single

potential target on our route—we brought new life to the demonstration,

interrupting the ritual it had become.

As we approached May Day 2018, we faced a new challenge. Once again, we

had to rewrite the story.

The Storm Approaches

“We are the birds of the coming storm.” –August Spies

This year, May Day took place in the context of France celebrating the

50-year anniversary of the uprising of May 1968. This event had a

massive impact on the collective imagination—not only in France, but

also worldwide, as evidenced by the slogans, artwork, and images of

rioters throwing cobblestones it summons to mind. The so-called

“revolution of 1968” saw massive demonstrations, general strikes,

wildcat strikes, and occupations of universities and factories

throughout France. Initiated by Parisian students, the revolt spread to

working class milieux and then to many other demographics. What began as

a local struggle became a national upheaval. According to historians,

May 1968 represented a new form of cultural and social movement that

emerged outside of traditional parties and trade unions. This movement

challenged consumer society by critiquing its ideology of productivity

and profit, but it also questioned the authoritarian political model of

the time and put the notions of individuality and personal subjectivity

at the center of the struggle.

From traditional leftist activists to career politicians and

reactionaries of all stripes, everyone has something to say about May

’68. The struggles of May 1968 became yet another component of the

society of the spectacle. Since the beginning of 2018, the French

government, politicians of every party, the corporate media, and the

Ministry of Cultural affairs have all been commemorating this long-past

social and cultural upheaval that supposedly marked a turning point in

French history. The museum exhibitions serve to fix the possibility of

revolutionary change in a long-concluded past, but they are not even the

worst part. For example, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a former student activist

who became the self-proclaimed heir of the revolution of May ’68, took

up a career in journalism and politics and finally came to support

President Macron and his neoliberal policies. We can appreciate the

irony of the situation and the hypocrisy of the French government as it

actively strives to suppress any contemporary form of

experimentation—see, for example, the recent evictions at la ZAD and of

several occupied universities.

In response to this political farce, some radicals published a call

announcing that “instead of commemorating May 1968, we could try

organizing a beautiful month of May 2018.” You can read translations of

this call here. The authors invited people to converge in Paris in order

to dethrone the myth of May 1968 and precipitate the fall of Macron and

his government. This can only be understood in the context of the

social, economic, and political situation in France today. As some have

argued, the growing anger against President Macron and his reforms could

become a serious threat for the government. For months now, railroad

workers, airplane company employees, civil servants, students,

professors, postal employees, hospital employees, and many others have

been out on strike or protesting government policies. If all of these

groups joined forces against the authorities, the impact would be

considerable.

Two days before May Day, the Police Prefecture of Paris published a

press statement in which Michel Delpuech, the Police Commissioner,

announced that he would receive the trade union leaders and other

organizers of the demonstration to warn them about the potential for

public disorder that threatened the smooth functioning of the march.

Amid typical redundant gibberish, the communiqué stated that:

“During the traditional May Day demonstration, activists of protest

groups belonging to extremist movements are planning to violently attack

law enforcement and capitalist symbols. [
] Thus, in the continuity of

May 1, 2017, and accentuated by the 50-year anniversary of the events of

May ’68, activists want to take advantage of this demonstration to

engage in multiple attacks and destruction against street furniture,

banks, real estate or insurance agencies, car dealerships
 and violently

attack police forces. It appears that incendiary devices could be used.”

In view of this threat, the Prefecture deployed some 1500 policemen and

gendarmes in order to insure order during the march. Regarding the risks

of violence, the communiqué added that:

will be implemented upstream and on the outskirts of the demonstration,

as well as at nearby public transport access points.

of all objects considered to be potential weapons.

anticipation of a judicial procedure.

trying to blend in the crowd in order to commit acts of violence.

exploitation [sic].”

With such statements, the authorities sought to set the tone for May Day

in advance. Anyone who wished to do anything to express discontent

beyond marching passively would face uncompromising repression. The

Police Prefecture of Paris also sought to increase its control over the

May Day demonstration by imposing a shorter route than usual. Instead of

the classic route linking Place de la RĂ©publique to Place de la Nation,

the 2018 march was only authorized a two-mile walk between Place de la

Bastille and Place d’Italie, a route that seemed to offer fewer

potential targets for rioters. It was obvious that authorities hoped to

lead us into a trap.

In response, some radicals of the “cortĂšge de tĂȘte” (“the leading

procession”) published their own communiquĂ© on May Day morning.

Regarding the threats and injunctions made against them, they answered:

“We, members of the leading procession, announce for May 1 that we are

going on renewable strike concerning the role assigned to us by

authorities in the demonstration. We are making the call to retaliate by

invading the Latin Quarter as soon as the demonstration has been

dissolved.”

Joking aside, many of us were determined to break the spell of May ’68

once and for all by invading the streets of Paris for May Day and

letting our dreams, inventiveness, and rage speak for themselves.

The Storm Rages

“Fuck May ’68, fight now!” –Unknown

On May Day morning, as is customary, several small morning gatherings

occurred before the classic massive demonstration in the afternoon. That

morning, no fewer than five different actions were planned. Around 10

am, traditional unions and organizations (including the CGT, FO, FSU,

Solidaires, and UNEF) gathered at the PĂšre Lachaise cemetery in front of

the “Mur des FĂ©dĂ©rĂ©s”—the wall where many of the last participants in

the Paris Commune were executed. (Although the Communards died fighting

as revolutionaries, they have been dead long enough that these

legalistic organizations can risk keeping company with them.) At 10:30

am, a morning demonstration took place in Saint-Denis, a northern

suburban city. At 11 am, after leaving their own traditional morning

procession, some people gathered in downtown Paris in memory of Brahim

Bouarram, a 29-year-old man killed on May 1, 1995 by supporters of the

French National Front after they left the National Front May Day morning

procession. At noon, as usual, the traditional annual

anarcho-syndicalist march left Place des FĂȘtes to walk to the departure

point of the afternoon procession. Finally, around 1 pm, people were

supposed to meet at Place de la Bastille for a lively gathering to

support the ZAD.

In view of the threats of the authorities, we decided to play it safe

and joined the anarcho-syndicalist march to get a sense of the situation

in the field. Once we reached Place des FĂȘtes, some of us decided to

redecorate the police station with personal messages and posters about

the Haymarket affair and the origins of May Day. As more and more people

arrived, it was already apparent that a lot of autonomists, anarchists,

and other radicals had decided to join the morning festivities before

the afternoon march. Throughout the crowd, we could hear people speaking

in French, Italian, German, and English. International call or not, some

comrades had decided to visit France and spend May Day in Paris with us.

The morning march finally started. Everything went smoothly; trade

unionists and families walked alongside autonomists and newer

generations of anarchists while police remained almost invisible the

entire time. Some of us took this opportunity to take action: banks and

insurance companies saw their front windows smashed and colorful

messages appeared on the walls. As we were approaching Place de la

Bastille, the departure point of the afternoon procession, tension and

apprehension were palpable. Would the police actually stop and search

everyone attempting to join the May Day demonstration? Not at all! As

the anarchist procession passed a group of policemen in plainclothes

(members of the anti-criminality brigade, the BAC) and insulted them, we

reached the Place de la Bastille. We had entered the belly of the beast

without a hitch!

When we arrived, the Place de la Bastille was packed. Thousands of

people already thronged the streets, making their way through the

numerous food trucks, traditional organizations, political stands, and

balloons. As in 2017, we decided to leave traditional organizations

behind us and hurried to catch up with the front of the procession.

Along the bassin de l’Arsenal, hidden by the blossoming trees, the

colorful crowd progressively changed color. Waves of black appeared

among the leading procession. Once everyone was properly changed and

equipped, we all moved forward to reach the first lines of the march,

already located on the Austerlitz bridge. Once on the bridge, we

realized that we would not be at the front of this May Day

demonstration, as another crowd of activists was already walking ahead

of us.

The beginning of the demonstration was quite strange. While we waited on

the bridge, a line of journalists separated us from the front of the

procession. All the corporate media outlets wanted to have their own

footage of the impressive bloc that was occupying the bridge. For long

minutes, we remained completely static; several smoke bombs and torches

were lit and the banners at the front formed a perfect line. To us, this

entire situation was unproductive and somehow narcissistic, as it seemed

that part of the bloc was completely at ease with having their pictures

taken by photographers. We felt that they were actively participating in

the political spectacle of May Day by playing their role and posing so

the media could broadcast their sensational images. In the end, when

people were tired of waiting, fireworks and large firecrackers were

thrown at journalists to push them back. After several unsuccessful

attempts, the bloc charged them and thus finally managed to cross the

bridge.

Once we reached the other riverbank, we found police forces and water

cannons waiting on both sides. This created confusion in our ranks. For

several more minutes, no one knew what to do or what we were waiting

for. Would police forces try to split the procession and carry out an

enormous mass arrest before the march even started? While the bloc

paused again, indecisive about what to do next, the journalists

recreated their line in front of us, taking more shots of the famous

“black bloc” while preventing us from reaching the other group of

demonstrators ahead of us.

Then things began to accelerate. Someone climbed a post and started to

smash a city camera with a rock. As the journalists continued filming us

unrelentingly, we were finally compelled to respond by smashing or spray

painting every single camera in our path. It was time to put out the

eyes of the state; in such a situation, rather than being neutral tools,

cameras are connected directly to the apparatus of repression. Then the

first advertisement billboards were smashed, along with some bus

shelters. It seemed that we had finally found our pace.

We entered the boulevard de l’Hîpital, passing the Jardin des Plantes (a

large public park) and the rue Buffon, where additional police units

were already blocking the street, until we reached a McDonald’s. The

storm broke. Activists took out all the front windows of the fast food

restaurant while others enthusiastically decorated the walls. As the

windows fell to the ground, others entered the restaurant, destroying

and looting everything inside. At the end, someone threw a Molotov

cocktail inside. Other activists extinguished the flames, as inhabitants

living in flats above the restaurant started appearing at their windows.

(As lundimatin put it, “Finesse was not the theme of the day.”)

From this point on, nearly every window display was smashed and every

wall spray-painted. The march continued thus, destroying everything in

its path, until it reached two car dealerships. Again, some activists

ran to the front windows and shattered them. Others entered the premises

of one car dealership, wrecking everything inside. Finally, they pulled

two cars out onto the sidewalk and set them on fire.

On the other side of the street, not far past the Austerlitz train

station, several activists were breaking down the barriers around a

construction site. Behind the fencing, they found an excavator. This,

too, was set on fire. As the flames consumed the machine, someone took

the time to spray-paint “ZAD everywhere” on it. Whatever happens at

Notre-Dame-des-Landes, the ZAD will survive! Perhaps not in its current

form—as the process of normalization seems to leave fewer and fewer

breaches open for experimentation—but its spirit continues to inspire us

in other struggles, as this tribute action demonstrates.

At this point, we looked ahead and saw that we couldn’t go any further:

police forces were waiting with anti-riot fences and water cannon

trucks. They were blocking the route of the demonstration, probably to

prevent us from reaching the district police station located a little

further ahead on our right. At the same time, confrontations with police

broke out at the construction site near the train station. It seemed

that police were located inside or near the station, behind additional

fences. Law enforcement units answered our projectiles with showers of

tear gas canisters, which created a great degree of confusion. As

reported by lundimatin:

“Then, we witnessed the most absurd scenes of the day. Dozens of

activists in black threw hundreds of stones over the fences at an enemy

that was completely out of reach. Others threw stones at a machine in

flame, others at a McDonald’s that would no longer cause any harm to

anyone. Actions that showed that the static but overwhelming and

ubiquitous police presence was about to win, that is to say, to diffuse

powerlessness. There was certainly a lot of will and determination

during these events, but it ended being compressed in a restricted space

where in reality frustration and fear prevailed.”

Little by little, the police trap was closing. While we were distracted

by the confrontations near the construction site, the police lines

blocking the boulevard ahead of us took the opportunity to move forward

with their water cannon trucks, then filled the streets with tear gas.

Our only option was to retreat. We were pushed back near the ruins of

the McDonald’s. There, we were blocked between the thick clouds of tear

gas, the closed fences of the park, and a disoriented and panicking

crowd. Facing the jets of water cannons and uninterrupted showers of

tear gas canisters, some of us tried to resist with Molotov cocktails

and stones, but without any real success. As the intensity of

confrontations escalated, people began to escape by climbing over the

fences of the public park. Eventually, realizing that the increasing

panic could lead to a potential tragedy, firemen decided to open the

gates of the park. A breach was opened, and some of us took this

opportunity to exit the confrontations. Shortly after, police units

fanned out to attempt to arrest people inside the park.

Those who stayed on the boulevard de l’Hîpital continued retreating as

the water cannons were now in full use. They ended up crossing the

bridge we had departed from and then tried to start several actions by

taking other routes. Some joined the march of the CGT, others went back

to the bassin de l’Arsenal in order to bypass police lines and harass

them. For the occasion, a huge barricade was built to slow the police

while others were attacking another car dealership and several stores.

Then, as police reinforcements arrived, activists dispersed into the

nearby streets, only to gather again a bit further away to begin another

spontaneous demonstration. Several Autolibs—electric car sharing

vehicles owned by the BollorĂ© industrial group—were set on fire during

the action. Later, the Place de la Bastille was occupied by police, who

repeatedly tried to surround people in order to carry out additional

arrests, while other small groups of activists were blocked in a nearby

boulevard by other law enforcement units. The authorities cleared the

entire square of any potential activists.

Once the afternoon demonstration was definitely over, people began to

converge around a bar located at Place de la Contrescarpe, in the Latin

Quarter, the same district where most of the confrontations of May 1968

had taken place half a century earlier. The main objective of this event

was to gather people from different political horizons in order to meet,

debate, and create new connections. Unfortunately, police forces were

already on site when the first groups of people showed up at the square.

As more and more people arrived, police left the square so people could

occupy it, but not without stopping and controlling some groups that

wanted to join the gathering. Clashes erupted, with police repeatedly

beating and pepper-spraying the crowd. The rest of the night witnessed

an ongoing cat-and-mouse game between activists and police forces,

involving several reoccupations of the Place de la Contrescarpe.

During these events, several spontaneous demonstrations took place. In

one case, activists succeeded in escaping police units by entering an

already occupied building of the EHESS, the School of Advanced Studies

in the Social Sciences. Fascists and neo-Nazis armed with gulf clubs

were patrolling the Latin Quarter at the same time. They assaulted

several activists who were on their way to the gathering, injuring at

least one individual.

After the Storm

May Day 2018 was a special day on several different levels. First, fully

14,500 people joined the non-affiliated march, demonstrating behind or

alongside a black bloc of 1200. These are the figures provided by

authorities. That means that about half the people who attended the May

Day demonstration decided to abandon the traditional political marches.

We saw the first signs of this in 2016. It reveals a deep change in

terms of political traditions. It seems that more and more people are

searching for something more in their activism while losing faith in

trade unions and political parties. We are glad to see that this is

continuing to spread. To illustrate this phenomenon, here is a

translated extract of a personal account written after May Day 2018. The

authors explain why they decided to join the leading procession despite

their “non-violent” moral stand:

“[
] We recognize that we might have come to the head of the procession

because we are attracted by the smell of powder, with the feeling that

‘this is where things happen.’ All this precisely because elsewhere,

there is not much going on. The rest of the march is nothing but a

deadly boredom, both politically and philosophically. The trade union

processions are saturated with trucks, sound systems, a technical power

that crushes all life and reduces demonstrations to, at best, a nice

walk, at worst, a funeral march. These regulated parades do not disturb

anyone and always end with the ritual discussions about figures. The

human reduced to numbers: beautiful result!”

The great number of radicals present during May Day—the largest black

bloc constituted in Paris so far—along with the intensity of the attacks

(31 stores attacked and 16 cars damaged) and our mobility and

determination not to be separated from the rest of the leading

procession: together, these created difficulties for the authorities.

Because the police decided to avoid direct confrontations with

demonstrators in favor of maintaining a security perimeter from a

distance, they were not able to contain us or track all of our movements

once we had no option other than to retreat. Because of the chaotic

situation, the Police Prefecture of Paris, with the agreement of trade

union leaders, decided to simply cancel the May Day procession. A

surprising decision, when we bear in mind that beforehand, the

Prefecture had discussed an alternative route with trade union leaders

in case violence occurred during the march. It is always instructive to

see the masks of trade union leaders fall, revealing how superficial

their convictions are.

Later that night, authorities, politicians, trade union leaders,

journalists, and “specialists” of all kinds continued to argue over the

events of the day and the tactics used by police against the black bloc.

Journalists and politicians are still having a great deal of trouble

understanding that the “black bloc” is not a specific entity but a

street tactic; the black bloc was blamed not only for the cancellation

of the May Day procession, but also for all the evils of our modern

world. As usual, the same old patronizing discourse distinguishing “good

demonstrators” from “violent thugs” returned to center stage in these

debates. What irony, to see self-proclaimed leaders celebrating May 1968

one day, then denouncing demonstrators the next day on account of some

of the same confrontational tactics.

Due to intensifying polemics regarding the tactics used by law

enforcement during the afternoon, the Prefect of Paris had to improvise

a press conference to explain why the police did not simply charge the

crowd to put a stop to the vandalism. The Prefect explained that the

results of the day were extremely positive in that, despite the property

damage, only one policeman had been lightly injured and the police had

carried out numerous arrests. On our side, we don’t know how many people

were injured during the confrontations.

The trap the authorities had set for May Day 2018 ended up being more

effective than we expected: afterwards, we learned that over 250 people

had been arrested during the day. That night, the authorities announced

that more than 100 had been taken into custody, and that the first court

appearances were already scheduled for the end of the week.

On Thursday, May 3, six individuals went to court; all of them refused

immediate appearance. Their trials will be held at the end of May and in

mid-June. In the meantime, two friends were put in pre-trial custody and

three under judicial control. On May 4, seven individuals were indicted,

two were convoked later, and thirteen just received reminders of the

law. Three defendants accepted immediate appearances: two were

discharged, and the last one received a 1000-euro fine for carrying a

smoke bomb and spray-paint cans. The others will be tried later. Two

more people were put in pre-trial custody and others under judicial

control. We send our love and support to everyone arrested on May

Day—not only in Paris, but everywhere. For those seeking more details

about the several days of hearings concerning the events of May Day in

Paris, we recommend this report by the Parisian legal team.

Even if this massive wave of arrests ends up being simply a symbolic

gesture orchestrated by the government and the Police Prefecture of

Paris, the number of individuals held in custody shows their

determination to increase repression towards anyone suspected of

belonging to the leading procession—even simply on account of clothes,

accessories, or medical supplies. By spreading fear of being arrested

for “participating in a group formed in order to commit vandalism or

violence,” the authorities aim to discourage demonstrators from the

practices of the leading procession, and to compel everyone else to

dissociate from us. History will show whether we can avoid this trap.

Reflections

The storm of May Day 2018 is over. It’s time for us to reflect on the

events of that day, the strategies and decisions on the field, and some

attitudes and postures within the leading procession that, in our eyes,

are becoming problematic. Many personal essays and reflections have

already appeared online on the subject, indicating that everyone feels

there is room for improvement.

Deserting Social Media, Keeping a Low Profile

As anarchists, we are all aware of the risks that new technologies can

involve. It is no surprise that our phones and computers can be tapped

and that our favorite websites and social media platforms are monitored

by the authorities. This is why, for strategic reasons, we believe that

we should minimize our dependence on social media and new technologies

in general. How many times has online information—statements, posts,

pictures, friendships, events—been used against us in court to add more

charges to our cases? We need to be more cautious with these tools in

order to protect others and ourselves. As younger generations of

activists are joining us for actions like those of May Day, we have to

find ways to pass on proper security practices to new participants

before they get themselves into trouble.

A Facebook event entitled “May Day 2018: A Day in Hell” and a call for a

“revolutionary, determined, and fighting procession” were posted online

before the eyes of the world. Our point here is not to attack the

authors of this call, but to consider the use of social media as a

platform to announce actions. What is the goal of advertising such an

event online? Publicity, certainly. It is true that we need to announce

events in order to draw people to them who are not already involved in

our circles, but perhaps there could be a way to do this that would not

also forewarn the authorities as to the character of our plans. When we

do so, it enables them to prepare strategies for media narrative and

repression in advance. Of course, the authorities already suspected that

we intended to join the traditional procession and unleash hell, as we

did in the past; but we should not make it easy for them to predict

where and how we will strike, nor to identify the most confrontational

elements. Regarding such press statements from our side, they may

sometimes be necessary, but we should avoid publicity stunts of all

kinds, and we also have to consider what the process is by which it is

determined which actions are announced and how. These announcements can

make things possible, but they can also make things impossible. One of

the greatest structural challenges of organizing in the 21^(st) century

is how to resist the dictatorship of those who have the most media

access.

Because we openly announced our intention to carry out a frontal

assault, the authorities had plenty of time to prepare a trap for us.

They used this call to warn trade union leaders and to stir up the

tensions that exist between them and some individuals in the leading

procession. We should take care not to use rhetoric or publicity

strategies that will leave us more isolated and vulnerable in the end.

There is no doubt that the government is increasing its pressure on us,

and an approach that works once may not work so well the next time.

Michel Delpuech, the Police Commissioner of Paris, reported that the

police and government officials were generally pleased with the results

of the law enforcement strategy they used on May Day, and that they

already knew in advance what our main targets were: the train station

and the district police station.

All this raises a lot of questions regarding our discretion, our ability

to stay under the radar while getting organized until the day of the

action, and also our ability to remain unpredictable. We should not

depend on social media to communicate among ourselves, and we should be

intentional in determining which information we share in different

venues. There have to be other safer ways to reach out to

others—especially newer generations—without having to rely on social

media or voluntarily drawing attention to ourselves before an action.

For us, the solution lies deeper underground, in our informal

assemblies, gatherings, meetings, and parties, where real human

interactions and affinities can flourish. It is there, and through

meeting new people in the streets or during actions, that we can develop

and extend new informal connections and solidarity while escaping as

much as possible from the constantly increasing state surveillance.

Down with Radical Rituals, Postures, and the Cult of Images

Another concerning issue is that since its first appearance in 2016, the

head of the leading procession—the “black bloc”—is becoming more and

more ritualized, at the risk of becoming a caricature of itself. When at

first, groups of students, anarchists, autonomists, and other radicals

decided to take the head of the demonstration at the expense of trade

unions, it was to open up new horizons for activism in France. This

strategy worked: new forms of action and solidarity emerged as people

decided to secede from the trade union processions. The leading

procession became an uncontrollable body for which diversity, mobility,

and spontaneity were the watchwords.

Two years later, the situation has changed. Of course, we are happy to

see that the leading procession still exists and keeps attracting more

and more people. Nevertheless, when we decide to take part in an action,

everything follows a familiar pattern: we join the demonstration, we

reach the front of the procession, we change our clothes for anonymity,

we create a bloc at the head of the leading procession, we pose with our

banners and smoke bombs for photographers, we march, we shout the same

slogans, we attack some targets, we confront police forces, we escape

and disband. Once again, we have reached a plateau, and we find

ourselves fulfilling a role in an orchestrated spectacle. What used to

be an unpredictable spark, a way of outflanking specific demonstrations,

is now becoming an expected form of action. In ritualizing our

strategies, we end up integrating them into others’ expectations and

facilitating the task of the police at the same time. We have to create

a new momentum in our actions. Only our creativity and originality can

add new subversive, spontaneous, and chaotic elements to the “black

bloc” strategy.

As a starting point, we could start by refusing the cult of images, an

integral part of the “society of spectacle.” It seems that there is a

lot of work to be done in this regard among the monochrome bloc of the

leading procession. For us, it is clear that images of all kinds are

nothing more than invisible chains that tie us to the narcissistic and

materialistic aspects of the prevailing order. We should not be

imitating popular images of struggle; we should seek to interrupt a way

of living based on emulating images. While the autonomous bloc was

waiting on the Austerlitz bridge, we witnessed a strange scene in which

dozens of photographers captured footage of the autonomous procession,

while some of us proudly posed with banners and smoke bombs. It took the

crowd a long time to show the first signs of irritation against

journalists, even though they repeatedly blocked our path.

Regardless of the intentions of journalists, their profession endangers

us. They record us before, during, and after actions; often, they are

positioned between us and our targets, or our comrades, or the police.

Their presence can distract us from other important objectives, obstruct

our movements, and incriminate us afterwards if police utilize their

footage for investigations. After May Day, discussing this subject with

comrades, we all agreed that some of the newer generations in the

leading procession probably decided to join us only because they saw

images online of the confrontations during the movement against the Loi

Travail. Unfortunately, the power of images is a double-edged sword: on

one side, it can make people choose to join us, but on the other side,

they might remain fascinated by this warrior posture and the production

of spectacular images.

As the government tries to intensify control and repression, we have to

be especially careful regarding the presence of cameras during actions.

Once, the only cameras we had to be worried about were police or city

cameras. Today, they are everywhere. But this should not make us accept

them as inevitable: we need to keep journalists and cameras out of our

procession, without any exceptions. What is more important, the

dissemination of images flattering our egos, or making it possible to

act freely during demonstrations?

For more information about the issue of cameras in our radical

processions, you can read the zine “Dialogue imaginaire avec un-e

dĂ©fenseur-euse de l’image photographique d’individus.”

Improving Our Organization, Strategies, and Solidarity

Rather than taking for granted the simplistic dichotomy of “victory”

versus “defeat,” we would like to discuss several points that could be

improved for future actions. Some decisions taken on May Day raise

questions that we must confront if we want to move forward.

First, when we passed the Austerlitz bridge to enter the boulevard de

l’Hîpital, we all realized that police forces were waiting for us on

both sides of the procession. This made us uneasy for some time. Then,

when we finally decided to move forward and reached the McDonald’s, we

realized again that police forces we blocking the nearby street rue

Buffon. In our view, as soon as we ravaged the McDonald’s, we were

already within the trap of police forces, as anti-riot fences and water

cannon trucks were blocking us from progressing further. In other words,

starting at that specific moment, we had no options except to retreat

via the park, to return across the bridge we had just crossed, or to

endure the police attacks. Next time, we need to be more aware of our

surroundings, to anticipate the movements of law enforcement, and to

think ahead of time about possible escape routes in order to avoid the

moments of panic that we saw on May Day. We are fortunate to be able to

say that we succeeded—for the most part—in escaping and outflanking the

massive police presence, at least for a moment. But we could certainly

do better.

We also should revisit individual decisions, such as the choice to throw

a Molotov cocktail inside the McDonald’s when people were living above

the restaurant, or to set cars on fire on the sidewalk so that flames

threatened the apartments above them. The point is not to criticize the

use of Molotov cocktails, but to consider when and where to use them. We

should never risk collateral victims because of our decisions. Let’s

avoid another tragedy like the one that took place in Greece several

years ago in the Marfin bank fire. A tragedy like that would affect all

of us on several different levels.

Also, we need to take better care of each other during actions. On May

Day 2018, many people were not equipped to endure the showers of tear

gas. Many people experienced panic attacks or respiratory issues while

caught in a middle of a large confused crowd. We saw at least one person

with a head injury receiving medical attention from firemen. It is

obvious that we need to bring more medical supplies with us to these

actions.

Finally, let us recall that solidarity is one of our greatest assets.

Today, about 50 arrestees await trial. Several gatherings took place in

front of the police stations in which individuals were incarcerated.

These actions need to intensify, and not only because friends known to

us personally are detained. Solidarity is for everyone, friends or not.

One idea for future actions could be to find new tactics to protect each

other from being arrested, or to respond to arrests.

Our Rage Must Not Be Contained

It is now apparent that the autonomous procession, in all its diversity,

needs to use creativity to break out of the current stalemate. To

accomplish this, we need to free ourselves from the defeatist rhetoric

that tends to crop up in our discussions, to accept criticism, and to

abandon the ritualized framework of the leading procession. We need to

become unpredictable again.

Regarding the argument currently circulating to the effect that we

should join forces once more with trade unions, we have some

reservations. Let’s not forget that trade union leaders are the ones who

negotiate with every successive government to determine the length of

the chains with which we are all bound. We don’t need longer chains, but

to be rid of chains once and for all! And what about the trade union

service personnel who attacked students and radicals on several

occasions during the demonstrations of 2016?

Let’s make it clear that we don’t want to join forces with trade

unions—with an authoritarian and hierarchical political apparatus.

Rather, we want to create connections with everyone—unionized or not—who

is disillusioned with the presiding political hierarchies. We can form

these connections during blockades, in spontaneous actions, or in the

leading processions.

Here are some closing thoughts that we could discuss in hopes of opening

new breaches in our struggles:

First, why not take law enforcement by surprise during major events like

May Day? Instead of converging for the afternoon demonstration as we

usually do, we could desert the demonstration. As police units would be

positioned along the official route, we could seize this opportunity to

carry out actions everywhere else, outside the official route of the

demonstration. Certainly, such action requires a lot of preparation and

organization. The goal would be that every single affinity group that

would otherwise have constituted the head of the leading procession

should attack a specific target, all at the same time. It might not

work, of course—calls for “autonomous actions” often fall flat, and this

strategy (branded as “Plan B” for the 2007 G8 summit in Germany) has

failed before. People usually need to experience a certain amount of

concentration to gain the morale necessary to take transformative

action. But if we could decentralize our efforts, we could outmaneuver

the police and draw more people into the confrontations.

Another solution could be to dissolve the autonomous bloc at the head of

the leading procession, as the latter is now becoming too predictable

and somehow too slow. In doing so, we might be able to use to our

advantage the fact that the majority of the crowd in the leading

procession supports our actions, so as to move through the crowd like

free electrons, attacking one target after another. If they had to

control the entirety of the leading procession, police forces would

constantly being harassed or overtaken by events. As mentioned earlier,

traditional trade unions are still eroding, and more people are joining

the leading procession; therefore, we can expect more and more people on

our side. Strategically, it would be a nightmare for law enforcement.

How would they carry out arrests amidst thousands of uncooperative

individuals? If they sought to divide the procession, they would risk

being surrounded by demonstrators as they were on May Day 2016; if they

charged the crowd, it would be a public image nightmare for the

government. The Police Commissioner of Paris made it clear that the

current strategy of the police is to avoid direct confrontations; if

this continues, it means that sending undercover officers into the crowd

to arrest specific individuals is not an option. Our mobility and

agility would be a precious asset. Finally, distributing the

confrontational black bloc throughout the rest of the leading procession

would dissolve the dividing lines of identity, creating confusion for

the authorities as to who to target and opening up the possibility that

people who had not previously expected it of themselves might cross the

threshold into action.

One thing is certain: the present situation cannot continue. As the

authors of an article entitled “Ce sera tout?” (“That will be all?”) put

it:

“The self-satisfied ‘leading procession’ has now been instituted as a

norm of superficial radicalism to the detriment of inventiveness,

effervescence, and riotous joy, thus removing all its subversive

significance and opposing the savage and uncontrollable aspects that no

longer find a place to express themselves within it.”

It is vital to consider every single criticism made of the leading

procession, in order to find solutions to escape from this dangerous

stalemate. We need to rethink everything and begin acting according to a

different logic.

All of that being said, the events of that afternoon continue to fill

our hearts with warmth, joy, and passion. Count on us to continue

smashing every single symbol of the prevailing order until we reach its

very foundations.