💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › anarcho-review-on-fire.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:33:31. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

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

Title: Review: On Fire
Author: Anarcho
Date: April 28, 2009
Language: en
Topics: book review, anti-capitalism, Genoa 2001
Source: Retrieved on 29th January 2021 from https://anarchism.pageabode.com/?p=238

Anarcho

Review: On Fire

On Fire: The Battle of Genoa and the anti-capitalist movement (One-Off

Press: ISBN 1 902593 54 5)

This is an excellent book. It contains sixteen eye-witness accounts and

analyses of the protests at Genoa earlier this year. All shades of

opinion within the libertarian wing of anti-capitalist movement are

contained in it and so it is a diverse but always interesting (and at

times, moving) account of ordinary people doing extra-ordinary things in

difficult circumstances. That is in itself enough to recommend it. These

are the accounts of the people who want to make history rather than the

interpretations of journalists (mainstream or so-called “revolutionary”)

and the specialists in ideology (again, mainstream or “revolutionary”).

As such, the accounts of those involved in the Black Block should be

read by all. Combined with the personal accounts is some excellent

political analysis. All in all, a wonderful account and analysis of what

contributor calls “the ecstasy of resistance.”

Needless to say, it will be impossible to cover all the issues raised,

never mind all the lessons that can be gained from these accounts. I

would suggest that the following can be considered among the most

important.

Firstly, the need to (to use Jazz’s words) get “out into workplaces and

communities, getting beyond the narrow activist base and its

marginalised periphery... Politics has to be made real to everyday life

... and not just dependent on six monthly spectaculars for a political

fix.” Only once the movement has strengthened its links it has been

building with working class struggle and life can we actually start to

transform society for the better. Until then, events like Genoa may

inspire by they will never transform (as participants are aware, of

course. As one says, “we were not in Genoa to destroy capitalism, so

that kind of criticism misses the point. What happened in Genoa was a

generalised riot, not an anti-capitalist insurrection.” In Genoa, many

(most?) Italian anarchists (including the two national federations)

worked with the base unions (COBAS) and striking workers and marched

with them. The way RTS and other groups here are linking up with workers

in struggle is the way forward.

Secondly, the need for organisation comes through clearly from the

accounts. While, of course, organisation is generated spontaneously

through struggle, it means reinventing the wheel every time there is a

demo (and, of course, it does not address what we do between demos). As

such, Massimo de Angelis makes a valid (and extremely old anarchist

point) when he argues that “not even the slogan on T-shirts in Genoa was

entirely correct: another world is not only possible. Rather, we are

already patiently and with effort building another world — with all its

contradictions, limitations and ambiguities — through the form of our

networks.” This clearly ties in the first point. We do have to build the

new world in the shell of the old is we want to end capitalism.

Thirdly, communication between activists is essential. As numerous

contributors argue, by (for example) Black Blockers and pacifists

talking to each other then there will be less likelihood that the cops

and media can use splitting tactics. As Starhawk put it, we “have to

communicate. We can no longer afford to wage parallel but disconnected

struggles at the same demonstrations. We need to clearly state our

intentions and goals for each action, and ask others to support them.”

But, as she stresses, “agreements are only agreements when everyone

participates in making them.” As such equality, solidarity and respect

are essential and that, of course, flows naturally from point two (the

need to build the new world, as far as possible, today in our

struggles). It may be difficult, but it is essential.

Fourthly, the question of police violence in Genoa. As one contributor

argues, the “police could carry out such a brutal act openly ... means

that they do not expect to be held accountable for their actions. Which

means that they had support from higher up, more powerful politicians

... That those politicians also do not expect to be condemned ... means

that they too have support from higher up, ultimately, from Berlusconi

... That Berlusconi could support such acts means that he must be

certain of support from other international powers” (Brian S). As

Starhawk rightly puts it, blaming the Black Block misses the point (as

the State wants). The Black Block was “not the source of the problem in

Genoa. The problem was state, police and Fascist violence.” In Genoa “we

encountered a carefully orchestrated political campaign of state

terrorism.” The police planned to attack the march and by blaming the

Black Block (as liberals and trots have done) has effectively let the

state off the hook.

Fifthly, the book helps others to understand those who take part in the

Black Block tactic. It clearly shows that the Block in Genoa was not

exclusively anarchist and that its roots lie in the German Autonomists

and not anarchism as such. It also allows its participants to refute

some of the charges against them (such as being “elitist,” being

“responsible” for the police violence, being police agents and so on).

As such, it helps to push the debate on tactics forward by allowing

people to understand where others are coming from.

Lastly, the importance of (in Starhawk’s words) “staying on the

streets.” The very fact the state went to such lengths to attack the

anti-globalisation demonstrations (and to split the movement) shows that

we are a threat to the status quo. While the leaders of the world may

like to dismiss it as “an anarchist travelling circus” the fact is that

these demos, regardless of their limitations, do show that people are

resisting and that there is an alternative to capitalism. Particularly

in these days of war, we must stay on the streets and show that there is

only one war worth fighting — the class war.

This book is, it is to be hoped, the start of a process in which we can

discuss our ideas, our tactics, our movement and actions. We are clearly

considered as a threat, hence the attempts to spilt the movement along

the lines of “violence” and “non-violence” by the state (although, as

Starhawk says, “if breaking windows and fighting back when the cops

attack is ‘violence,’ then give me a new word, a word a thousand times

stronger, to use when the cops are beating non-resisting people into

comas.”). We cannot let them succeed, particular as the events in Genoa

show that state violence was pre-planned and would have occurred even if

the Black Block did not exist.

Ultimately, in order to build a militant anti-capitalist movement we

need to make it relevant to the class who keep the global system going

by its labour and which has the power to end it. The class which most

anarchists are members of, the working class. This may well be a harder

task than participating in a Black Block at demonstrations but until

every workplace, community and school is a black block in terms of

militancy, solidarity and politics an alternative to capitalism will

never be on the cards.

Dare to dream, yes, but also dare to put that dream into practice!