💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › a-few-words-of-freedom.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 06:51:35. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: A Few Words of "Freedom" Author: Alfredo Cospito, Conspiracy of Cells of Fire Date: July 2014 Language: en Topics: FAI/FRI, CCF, nihilist, interview Source: Retrieved on July 27, 2018 from https://325.nostate.net/2014/12/01/interview-by-ccf-imprisoned-members-cell-with-alfredo-cospito-greece-italy/][325]] via [[https://writerror.com/texts/a-few-words-of-freedom. Notes: Source: http://radioazione.org/2014/07/greciaitalia-intervista-delle-ccf-ad-alfredo-cospito][RadioAzione]]. Translated for [[http://interarma.info/ by Nihil Admirari
INTERVISTA CCF/ALFREDO COSPITO
From the Greek prisons to AS2 unit of the prison of Ferrara: a few words
of “freedom”.
Interview by CCF to myself.
Before answering your questions, I’d like to stress that what i’m about
to say is my own truth. One of the many points of view, sensitivities
and individual nuances within that crucible of thought and action that
goes under the name of FAI-FRI.
Informal federation that, rejecting any hegemonic temptation, represents
a tool, a method of one of the components of anarchism of praxis.
Anarchism of praxis that only when it is informal, without being forced
into organizational structures (specific, formal, of synthesis) when it
doesn’t seek the unbearable consent (therefore rejects politics) it can
be recognized in a wider chaotic universe called “black international”.
To understand this better, FAI-FRI is a methodology of action that only
some of the sisters and brothers of the black international practice,
it’ s not an organization nor a simple collective signature, but a tool
that aims towards efficiency, whose objective is to reinforce cells and
each comrade of praxis through a pact of mutual support based on three
key points: revolutionary solidarity, revolutionary campaigns,
communication between groups or individuals:
REVOLUTIONARY SOLIDARITY
Each group of action in the Anarchist Informal Organization is engaged
in showing revolutionary solidarity to comrades who are arrested or are
on hiding. This solidarity will show itself mainly through armed action
and the attack against men and structures responsible for the
imprisonment of comrades. Solidarity will always be practiced as an
indispensable feature of anarchist way of life and action. Of course we
do not refer to legal and technical support: bourgeois society offers a
sufficient number of lawyers, social workers and priests, which means
that revolutionists can be engaged in another kind of activities.
REVOLUTIONARY CAMPAIGNS
When a group or individual starts a revolutionary campaign through the
deeds and related communiqués, other groups and individuals in the
Anarchist Informal Organization will follow according to their methods
and time. Each group and individual can launch a struggle campaign on
specific targets through one or more actions signed by the single group
or individual and by the claim of the Federation. If a campaign is not
agreed by the other groups, the critic will show itself through actions
and communiqués that will contribute to correcting or discussing it.
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN GROUPS OR INDIVIDUALS
The groups of action in the Anarchist Informal Organization are not
required to know one another. This will avoid repression to strike them
and possible leaders or bureaucrat from emerging. Communication between
groups or individuals is carried out through the actions and through the
channels of the movement without them to know one another directly
(drawn from the responsibility claim for the attempt on Prodi, that time
president of the European Commission, 21 december 2003, taken from Il
dito e la luna.page 15-16).
This pact of mutual support in fact bypasses the assembly, its leaders,
the specialists of speech and politics and the authoritarian mechanisms
activated even in anarchist sphere when the assembly becomes a
decision-making body. What the black international should do over the
coming years is to reknot that “black thread” broken for a long time.
A thread that binds anarchism of yesterday which practiced “propaganda
of the deed”, offspring of the International Congress of London in 1881,
and anarchism of today, informal, anti-organizational, nihilistic,
anti-civilizational, antisocial.
Nicola and i, the only members of “Olga Cell”, don’t know in person the
other brothers and sisters of FAI, knowing them would mean seeing them
locked up within the four walls of a prison cell. We were convinced of
the utility of FAI-FRI thanks to the words (communiqués) and the actions
of the brothers and sisters who preceded us. Their words always
confirmed by their actions, gave us the indispensable tenacity, without
which any project is reduced, in the era of the virtual, to useless,
sterile words in the wind.
We needed a compass to find our way, a tool to recognize and unmask
those who have created an anarchist gym for verbalists, a filter to
distinguish empty words from those that carry reality.
We found in this “new anarchy” , in its claims and the related
revolutionary campaigns, the perspective of a real attack that amplifies
our destructive potentialities, protects our autonomy as rebel and
anarchist individuals and gives us the opportunity to collaborate,
strike together, without knowing one another directly. No kind of
coordination can be included in our planning.
“Coordination” necessarily requires knowledge, organization between the
sisters and brothers of different cells. Such a coordination would kill
the autonomy of each group or individual. The most “efficient” ,
prepared, courageous, charismatic group would inevitably prevail,
reproducing the same deleterious mechanisms of the assembly, in the long
run leaders, ideologists, charismatic “bosses” would rise again, it
would be a step towards organization: the death of freedom itself.
Some might say that even in an affinity group, in a FAI cell a
charismatic leader, a “boss” could hide.
In our case, however, damage would be limited as between cells there is
no direct knowledge. Gangrene could not be extended.
Our being anti-organizational preserves us from that risk. That is why
we need to rely on “revolutionary campaigns” which exclude knowing
groups and individuals directly, killing every glimmer of organization.
Campaigns must never be confused with coordination, this is the
informality, this is the essence, in my opinion, of our operating
planning. It must be clear that when I speak of an affinity group or
action cell, I may refer to a single individual or a numerous affinity
group.
We should not make an issue of numbers.
It is clear that every single action is planned between the various
members of the group, in that case one should not speak of coordination,
never such a planning should be extended to the other groups of FAI-FRI.
Outside each group, communication must be “limited” only through
“revolutionary campaigns” and the actions related.
Our knowledge of FAI-FRI must always remain partial, limited to our
affinity group. We only need to know the paw marks, the scratches, the
wounds FAI-FRI causes to power. It would be mortal to create something
monolithic or structured, each of us must avoid hegemonic
misunderstandings or fantasizing.
Organization would restrict tremendously our perspectives, reversing the
process from qualitative to quantitative. The action of one strengthens
the will of others, creating inspiration. Campaigns are spread unevenly.
A thousand heads raging against power, cutting them all off is
impossible. It is these very actions followed by words (communiqués)
that allow us to exclude with certainty theorists, pure lovers of
speech, giving us the chance to relate exclusively to those who live in
the real world, getting their hands dirty, risking their own skin. These
are the only words that really matter, the only words that allow us to
grow, to evolve. Revolutionary campaigns are the most efficient tool to
cut, harm where it hurts the most. Giving us the opportunity to spread
throughout the world like a virus, carrier of revolt and anarchy.
CCF: To get to know you better, tell us something about your current
situation.
Alfredo: There is not much to say, we were arrested for the kneecapping
of Adinolfi, managing director of Ansaldo Nucleare. Lack of experience
led us to mistakes that cost us the arrest: we didn’t cover the license
plate of the motorcycle used for the action, we parked it too close to
the ambush site, and most importantly we didn’t notice a camera in a
bar, a very serious mistake that we’re paying right now. We claimed
responsibility for our action as “Olga FAI-FRI cell”. I was sentenced to
10 years and 8 months, Nicola to 9 years and 4 months. Over the coming
months we will have a further process for subversive association. This
is more or less our current situation on the case.
CCF: Anarchist prisoners and prison. Which are the conditions in special
sections, how do jailers behave and how are your relationships with the
other prisoners?
Alfredo: In Italy through maximum security circuits, which involve many
restrictions, the democratic state wants to isolate us, relegating us in
sections completely separated from the general context of the prison.
Any contact with other prisoners is impossible, we don’t have the chance
to go to the open air, only for two hours in a small concrete courtyard.
Censorship for me and Nicola has always been renewed, therefore we
receive mail and journals delayed and with difficulty, things of special
interest to us are seized in the entrance and exit. Right now we are
locked in an AS2 high surveillance unit for anarchist prisoners.
“Relationship” between us and jailers is that of mutual indifference and
natural hostility. What else can I say, from my point of view
“civilized” protests outside and inside prison are useless, “livability”
in here is just a matter of power relations. One must leave prison, it’s
up to those who are inside to realize it…
CCF: Anarchy for us is not a party, it doesn’t have central committees,
it is a stream of acts, ideas, positions, values. Which are the trends
of the anarchist movement now in Italy, which its features, its
contradictions, its activities?
Alfredo: This is an important question that requires an articulated
answer. I attend the anarchist movement since the late 80s.
Over the past 20 years, many things have changed, many relationships
between comrades were broken, many trends –even negative ones- were set
in motion, giving sometimes poor results and accentuating
leadership-driven and political attitudes, but also giving new
perspectives, a new generation beyond assemblies, beyond mechanisms of
politics has made its voice heard.
To answer your question about the situation of the italian anarchist
movement today I need to take a step backwards.
People often think that insurrectionalism is a whole, made of concepts
and theories frozen in time, in their “ideological” rigidity. An
ideology with actually (something completely aberrant) its own Lider
Maximo and its dogmas. Nothing is permanent over time.
Women and men through their actions forge ideas. It’s not up to those
three or four well-known comrades, with their books and articles, to
show us the way, not even a matter of the long and inconclusive
assemblies. It’s those unknown comrades with their practice of attack
that push us forward, leading us to life.
It was because of this practice that in the end of the 90s, the previous
groups- Crafts and Fire Cooperative (Occasionally Spectacular), July 20
Brigate, Cells against Capital, its Prisons, its Jailers, and its Cells,
International Solidarity – questioned two established dogmas of the
so-called “insurrectionalism”, the anonymity of actions and the
predominance of the assembly which had turned into a decision-making
body.
Two fixed points that were dragging us inexorably to a lethal inertia.
Giving voice and continuity to the practice itself through claims,
escaping from the shackles of the assembly and imposing no longer
comprehensibility limits regarding “people” and the rest of the
“movement” , anarchy became terrifying once again.
With ongoing bombs and responsibility claims, these groups dispelled the
dogma of anonymity of action, breaking up the silence surrounding us
after the wave of repression that followed the Marini case, seriously
obstructing those dynamics that were dragging us to a citizenism* that
risked to erase every instance of violence.
After these groups appeared, the term insurrectionalism for many
anarchists, assumed a negative connotation, especially when journalists
began to use it as a synonym for “terrorism”.
At that point, many took a step back claiming that certain “spectacular”
attacks and the related communiqués drove people away.
To understand the divisions within the anarchism of praxis, today, in
Italy, we need to go back to the early history of the struggle at Val
Susa against the TAV: in 1998, after the tragic deaths of Baleno and
Sole, many were the calls for a democratic legitimacy, a “right”
justice, a fair trial, not only by eminent representatives of democratic
“radicalism”, but also by a part of the anarchist movement.
A large part of anarchists were engaged in an “innocence-proving”
crusade to the limits of denigration. Sole and Baleno were represented
as two innocent, poor, naive victims, caught up in a story greater than
themselves.
After the arrival of about ten letter bombs addressed to some of those
responsible for the death of the comrades (actions never claimed) , the
anarchist movement almost in its whole, fearing future waves of
repression, distanced itself from such practices, considering them, at
best, not “worthy” of anarchists, at worst, a true and proper police
provocation.
Very few the exceptions, that naturally attracted the attention of the
magistrature in the years to come. Ever since, the vast majority of the
so-called “insurrectionists” was engulfed by an uncontrolled, suicidal
desire for consent, setting out to a relentless pursuit towards civil
society. Chasing the chimera of social/ working-class struggle, wherever
it showed up, bouncing like crazy spinning tops from CIE (TN: CIE,
Identification and Expulsion Centres ), to Val Susa (TN: struggle
against High Speed Railway Line in Susa Valley), to squatting, to the
struggle of the prisoners, watering down their own planning just to
appear credible, reliable, realists, approaching more and more
dangerously citizenism.
A small part of them, years later, realized the gradual and political
ugly turn that social struggles were taking, withdrawing themselves into
their classic ivory tower, pontificating against everything and
everyone, immersed up to the neck in a desperate practical nihilism.
(TN: nullismo= practical nihilism meaning the inability to act, to
achieve, especially in the sphere of society).
Others instead experimented, without limits, with every single vital
potentiality, not caring for the great theorists or the maximum systems.
The most “lucid” that were keen on society, at least in the beginning,
tried to repeat at Val Susa the experience of the 80s against the
stationing of missiles in Comiso. Experience still trumpeted as a real
example of insurrectional intervention methodology in the area.
At Comiso the planning actually had, although criticized for its
political-deceptive content, an insurrectional perspective. The
intermediate struggle, throwing out americans and their missiles, had to
be the spark for a generalized uprising in the heart of Sicily, as in
the classical case of the Matese Gang**.
Fake working-class alliances formed by single comrades, populist
speeches to terrorize people and drive them towards revolt, absurd long
speeches on possible rapes by american soldiers, tried to leverage the
italiote machismo, turning this intervention into a phenomenon all
political, strongly reprehensible from my point of view, but still, we
must admit, with an insurrectional perspective.
In Val Susa things turned out differently, from the very beginning the
insurrectional objective was quickly replaced by the simple struggle
against Tav. The intermediate struggle got the upper hand, qualitative
became quantitative, with the counting of protesters at the barricades,
the struggling next to Alpine citizens, policemen, mayors, political
parties, losing sight of the ultimate goal: the destruction of the
existent.
The insurrectional perspective was transformed into a more modest,
political improvement of the existent.
Once again “realism” had canceled the vital potential of anarchism.
Personally I don’t criticize a priori, “ideologically” the so-called
intermediate struggles, what i do criticize is the method with which one
intervenes, acting as a representative and setting limits to the action
itself, inevitably running great risk of becoming vanguard.
When you start doing what could drive people on your side instead of
what you think is right, you do politics. From the moment you impose
limitations on yourself out of fear of not being understood, you are, de
facto, already a political entity, therefore you become part of the
problem, one of the many cancers that infect our existence. One should
never measure his own words and actions just to become acceptable to
people, to the crowd, otherwise there is great risk of being transformed
by the very “intermediate” objective he wants to reach.
Reading today the old responsibility claims of the groups that after the
year 2000 will give life to FAI, i realized that through their actions
they often intervened in the intermediate struggles, trying to reach
partial objectives: FIES abolition, (TN: FIES, Ficheros de Internos de
Especial Seguimiento, regime for political prisoners held in conditions
of extreme isolation in Spain) CIE, etc. Not once seeking a general
consensus, a quantitative growth. Always aiming at a qualitative growth
of action, greater destructiveness, greater reproducibility.
The quality of life of an anarchist is directly proportional to the real
damage he causes to the deadly system that oppresses him. The less he
accepts compromise, his feelings, his passions become stronger, crystal
clear, his hatred more lucid, always sharp as a razor. Unfortunately,
the vast majority of anarchists act in accordance with the criminal law,
many actions are not put into practice simply by fear of the
consequences.
We must realize that the worst fate for an anarchist is not death or
prison, but surrendering to fear, to resignation. Actions and writings
of the black international emphasize on the total rejection of this
resignation, the strong vitality, the energy of a movement that turns
the quality of life, the sense of community and solidarity, the
permanent struggle, into the center of its own existence.
Death, prison, have already made their appearance in this path without
defeating us. Our strength is the full awareness of what we are, full
awareness that once fear is defeated, a full life worth living, unfolds
in front of us, for as long as it lasts, it’s the intensity that
matters.
Getting back to your initial question on the trends, the features and
the contradictions of the anarchist movement in Italy today, i must say
that the debate on using or not acronyms and claims is still very
strong.
Even in this case, i wouldn’t make an “ideological” approach of the
subject, i have nothing against actions not claimed, from my point of
view they simply tend to disappear, they do not stimulate debate, they
have a minimum potential of reproducibility.
That’s why i made the FAI-FRI methodology my own. On the other hand
“insurrectionalists” here, do make an “ideological” approach of the
subject.
Whoever claims responsibility with an acronym is an enemy worthy of
denigration. Those who know them, are very well aware of the reasons for
this intransigence, communicating through claims puts clearly in danger
their “power”, their theoretical hegemony. Actions claimed lay bare
their practical nihilism.
Behind them, the failure of a classic insurrectional planning unable to
adapt to reality; forward, profound discussions or so.
As a reaction to a reality that crashes them, panic, rage, hatred take
over for anything that moves outside their rigid, disastrous plans. The
main component of anarchism of praxis here in Italy, consists of those
insurrectionalists who have embraced with undeniable enthusiasm and
sacrifice the social trend.
They sometimes “dirty” their hands with action, always though with an
eye pointing towards civil society, always measuring with an attention
all political, their own steps. Departed from a “classic” insurrectional
planning, they arrived today to a revolutionary “citizenism”, wonders of
the political realism.
A few more years and we will find it hard to distinguish them from the
militants of the Italian Anarchist Federation by which more and more
frequently are accompanied in demonstrations, processions and rallies.
Often praising absurd free Republics, they take two steps forward, two
backward, remaining actually still, yet always with a nice, pleasant
company.
The odd man out, the so-called “wild card” of anarchism of praxis in
Italy is the informal FAI and even before all of these groups that
created it: Metropolitan Cells, Tremendous Anonymous Revolt,
Revolutionary Cell Horst Fantazzini, Cells against Capital, its Prisons,
its Jailers and its Cells, International Solidarity, Sisters in arms,
Nucleus Mauricio Morales, July 20 Brigade, Armed Cells for International
Solidarity, Animal Revolt, Revolutionary Cell Lambros Fountas, Damiano
Bolano Cell, Anti-Civilization Subversive Individualities, Conspiracy of
Black Fire and Nicola and me of Olga Cell.
A hundred and more actions scattered over 20 years. Those years I
witnessed as a spectator the panic of anarchists of every “current”.
Those that were terrorized by repression and the similarity of the
acronym to their federation. Those that were puzzled (and so was i) as
they couldn’t understand what was happening, what was going on. As a
reaction, the most ugly accusations flew thick and fast: secret
services, authoritarianism. The smarter ones ignored the phenomenon
hoping for its quick passing, but when the FAI-FRI virus, thanks to you
CCF, began spreading all over the world, rivers of words started and are
still pouring in by “anonymous” censors of orthodoxy: ”Arcipelago”,
“Lettera alla galassia anarchica”, (TN: writings of italian anarchists
supporters of anonymity of action ,criticizing FAI-FRI), rivers of words
never followed by deeds, at least not here in Italy.
CCF: In your writings when you talk about power, are you referring
exclusively to the power of the state or even to the one spread in
society and its structures?
Alfredo: When i talk about power, I’m referring to all of its aspects,
the most obvious and the most subtle, hidden ones. Power penetrates
everywhere, in the relationships between comrades, in our love affairs,
in our emotional relationships and friendships. That is why i consider
it vital to search for a new way to make plans, to live our own
passions, to interact, so that we can improve the quality of our action,
of our life, of our being rebels above all.
I still believe that society exists only under the sign of dominants and
dominated. Better still, between dominants and those who allow
themselves to be dominated. It is certain that responsibility lies on
each side, both social subjects contribute to the limitation of my
freedom, of my happiness.
The democratic citizen, as a good servant, fears and respects authority,
begs for its attention, strengthens the chains that bind his wrists.
Fact remains that responsibilities are not the same, a gradation exists.
Between a man or woman of authority, a rich man, a manager, an
industrialist, a politician, a scientist, a technocrat, and a “simple”
citizen, an employee, a worker, who supports with his very own quiet
living, his own consent, his own vote the status quo, i strike without
any hesitation the first.
This does not detract from the disgust that i feel for “voluntary
servitude”, for the resigned, if the “good” citizen stood between me and
my freedom, I wouldn’t hesitate to act accordingly. For that little
experience i have, I can tell that people, the crowd, the excluded, the
oppressed, are much better than what our “ideological” glasses show us.
I don’t struggle for the resigned but for my own freedom, my own
happiness. The only possible point of reference is my “community”.
My idea of “community” is antithetical to the all-inclusive,
authoritarian, abstract concept of “society”. My being part of a
nihilistic, anarchist, anti-civilizational, completely different, in
permanent struggle against the existent “community”, forces me to
declare war on society ever single day.
I do not want to garner support, but to reinforce through violent action
the bonds of true solidarity with my brothers and sisters.
Black international is my “community” spread throughout the world,
fellow travelers who share my need to attack without hesitation, without
knowing each other, in our differences we are one, a clenched fist, a
hook in the stomach of “society”: A plan that combines the mind with the
feeling, the ice of strategy with the fire of praxis, here with now, the
tension with the duration, with the direct aim of destroying the social
apparatus and the liberation of our lives. (CCF- Let’s become
dangerous).
During struggle, new ideas have blossomed like seeds in the wind,
carried away by the fire of praxis, inspirations, strategies previously
inconceivable were born. In a modernity where terms such as society and
authority reveal their full synonymity, i feel the need for new
meanings, new words that can transmit my constant tendency towards new
anarchy.
To use new words because the old ones are holding me tight. New meanings
for a completely different planning. The same words at different
latitudes may represent very different concepts. The so-called “informal
organization”, at least as it was theorised between the late 70’s and
the early 80’s in Italy, is way far from the informality of FAI-FRI.
According to italian insurrectionalists, informal organization should
mainly be based in the tool of the assembly and the creation of base
committees and self-managed federations. Where anarchists as a true
minority that acts, after having contributed to their creation through
networks, contacts, affinity groups, should have to try and guide the
“real movement” towards insurrectional solutions. The battlefield of
this insurrectional strategy: the “intermediate struggle”.
The “concrete” examples are always the same: the previously mentioned
Comiso and the wildcat strike of the railway workers in Turin in 1978.
With a certain embarrassment, I remember, as a witness before the judges
in the Marini case, overelaborating next to a comrade, the difference
between insurrectionalist methodology and the concept of the armed band
of Revolutionary Action ( armed anarcho-communist organization of the
70’s) all this to emphasize on the distances with “lottarmatismo” (TN:
lottarmatismo, strategy of armed attack of the organizations of the
70’s, that began to lean towards militarism), subtleties of a certain
“noble” insurrectionalism, which doesn’feel familiar at all.
Today, certain strategies reappear among anarchists here in Italy in the
noTav cases, with the addition of a dangerous corollary of sympathy by
democratic magistrates and left-wing intellectuals. A civil society
welcomed with open arms, to counter the fear that follows repression.
Nothing could be further from the antisocial, anti-organizational,
nihilistic, purely anarchist concept of FAI-FRI. So, when I speak of
FAI, i’m not referring to the informal organization, but to a different
methodology of praxis. Certain words are outdated, words like
“organization” i prefer not to use, as they do not represent us, they
are different from us. As different as authority and society, with all
the corollary of abominations and monstrosity.
CCF: A large part of the anarchist movement, both in practice and
theory, contrast the state and its institutions, but don’t act likewise
when it comes to civilization and technology. On the contrary, many are
those who imagine self-organised factories and an “anarchist government”
of our lives. What is your opinion on technology and civilization?
Alfredo: Still today, the vision of the nineteenth-century, scientific,
positivist anarchism is the dominant one.
There are still those, in 2014, who raise absurd “questions” about the
day after the revolution.
How to manage production, deal with the inevitable shortages,
self-manage factories, regulate future social relationships. If i put in
the center of my action, the contrast to civilization and technology,
the concept of revolution as it was intended a century ago will be, in
fact, put aside. Questioning civilization in its whole, implies a total,
apocalyptic, utopic, unachievable destruction.
Revolution, with its “simple” possible overturning of social relations
is very little, a useless palliative as it creates new civilization.
When declaring war on civilization, we satisfy our need to live not
outside (that’s impossible, civilization never abandons us, we always
carry it inside) but against it.
By creating communities at permanent war with society, we build moments
of happiness, we live flashes of intense joy in our lives. Revolution is
an insufficient tool, with its political, concrete “realism”, even in
its libertarian variant, with its self-managed communes, its
administration-ruling of the world, its inevitable creating of
status-quo: breaks wings, shatters hopes, creates new chains.
Revolt, with its endless charge of breaking, with its lack of future
prospects, with its absolute negation of politics: creates hopes, breaks
chains. A woman and a man in revolt, destroy chains without wanting to
build other, this is enough to fill up with adventure and happiness any
existence.
CCF: What do you think of the international network of ALF and ELF? Are
there any prospects of connection with FAI?
Alfredo: To comrades like me, formed during the struggles of the 90’s in
Italy, the contribution of the groups of action ALF and ELF, with their
international network, concerning the revolutionary anarchist imaginary
and how to organize into affinity groups, was very important. Their
environmentalist, animalist perspective has changed the view of many
anarchists.
In Italy, their propensity to affinity groups was greeted with
enthusiasm as a concrete example of informal organization. The first
actions of ALF in Italy were strictly related to an anarchist vision.
Over time, anarchist perspective went fading away.
Today, my only objection regards their opposition on striking people.
Although I know that there have been great debates, this position of
theirs i honestly can not understand. I understand and agree more with
the violence of the mexican ITS (TN: ITS, Individuals Tending Toward
Savagery), with their anti-civilizational, wild, anti-ideological
concept.
As for the “connections” between FAI-FRI and ELF, ALF they are beyond
doubt a fact, which one could easily acknowledge simply by reading the
responsibility claims of the russian ELF-FAI-FRI and the mexican
ALF-FAI. At the risk of becoming repetitive, I must reiterate that
FAI-FRI is a methodology, a method, to sign as such, you invite other
groups of FAI-FRI around the world to enter into a real campaign of
struggle, you increase your own strength, you spread actions from one
part of the world to another. You make action more efficient and
destructive.
Nothing more, nothing less. The sisters and brothers of ALF and ELF that
signed as FAI-FRI, joined this methodology without renouncing their own
history in any way. We are not playing at Risk, FAI-FRI is not an
organization that incorporates acronyms spread around the world. One
becomes part of FAI-FRI only at the very moment he/she acts and strikes
claiming as FAI, then everyone returns to their own projects, their own
individual perspective, within a black international that includes a
variety of practices, all aggressive and violent.
After all, i was convinced (maybe I’m wrong) that the brothers and
sisters of ALF and ELF that signed FAI, did so to emphasize on their
being anarchists, on their adherence to an anarchist planning, to what I
call “new anarchy”, to distance themselves from that ecologism based on
empathy and pietism.
CCF: Right now FAI is an international network of anarchists of praxis,
with dozens of cells in many countries around the world. This adventure
began in Italy in 2003, with an open letter to the anti-authoritarian
movement. If you want, tell us briefly how you see the evolution of FAI
and which are now your points of reference.
Alfredo: When i read back in 2003 the “open letter to the anarchist and
anti-authoritarian movement” signed by Crafts and Fire Cooperative
(Occasionally Spectacular), July 20 Brigate, Cells against Capital, its
Prisons, its Jailers, and its Cells, International Solidarity, I was
very impressed.
Several saw in this writing only a goliardic provocation to the old
dogmatic anarchism of the Italian Anarchist Federation. Still today,
most worthy comrades, such as Gustavo Rodriguez, support this view in
their writings, misinformed by italian anarchists who know nothing and
have done much since the very beginning to obstruct this new trend of
anarchy.
I open a small parenthesis: I believe that the writings of Rodriguez
concerning the international black are remarkable, some of the ideas
developed truly open new perspectives.
That said, i since the very beginning have taken very seriously the
choice of the acronym FAI, seeing not only an attack to the old formal
federation, but also a new planning. Despite being, at that time, very
far from that perspective, I started off with that long process that
brought me, in 2012, to act as Olga cell of FAI-FRI.
Rereading today the “open letter to the anarchist and anti-authoritarian
movement” i realize how much has been done, how much this concept of
anarchy has evolved, and how greatly it keeps evolving:
FEDERATION because of its wide-spread horizontal structure, that is to
say federation of groups or individuals, free and equal men and women
bond together by common practices of attack against dominion and aware
that mutual support and revolutionary solidarity are instruments of
freedom. Relationships inside the federation are stable and flexible at
the same time; they evolve continuously thanks to the ideas and
practices brought in by new individuals and groups that will join. We do
not want any democratic federation, as this would involve
representatives, delegates, official meetings, committees, and organs
implying the election of leaders, charismatic figures and the imposition
of specialists of speech. In the informal federation, communication must
be based on a horizontal and anonymous debate, which will come out of
the practice (claims of actions) and of the widespread of theories
through the means of communication of the movement. In other words, the
meeting will be substituted by an anonymous and horizontal debate
between groups or individuals who communicate through practice. The
federation is our strength, that is to say the strength of groups or
individuals that help one another through a well-defined pact of mutual
support.
ANARCHIST because we want the destruction of capital and the State. We
want a world where only freedom and self-organisation “dominate”, and a
society where exploitation of men over men and of men over nature does
not exist. We strongly oppose any Marxist cancer, which is nothing more
than a fascinating and dangerous siren that claims freedom for the
oppressed but actually denies the possibility of a free society and just
substitutes one dominion with another.
INFORMAL because we do not believe in vanguards nor do we think that we
are an enlightened active minority. We just want to live as anarchists
here and now and this is why we consider the informal organisation as
the only kind of organisation capable of preventing the creation of any
authoritarian and bureaucratic mechanism. It allows us to keep our
independence as individuals and/or groups and to resist power with
continuity. The Informal Anarchist Organisation practises the armed
struggle but it refuses classic monolithic organisations implying a
base, regular and irregular members, columns, executive cadres, huge
amounts of money and living on hiding. We think that this kind of
structures is an easy target for power. In fact, an infiltrated cop or
an informer is sufficient to have the whole organisation or a good part
of it collapsed like a house of cards. On the contrary, as the informal
organisation is formed by 1000 individuals or groups that do not know
one another (as they recognise one another through the actions the carry
out and the mutual support bonding them), if by some unfortunate chance
infiltrators or informers should come out, this would affect a single
group without spreading to the others. Furthermore, whoever takes part
into the Informal organisation is a militant only when preparing and
carrying out an action. The organisation, therefore, does not affect the
entire life and projects of the comrades so that all kind of
armed-struggle sectarianism are avoided. Once we are well rooted, power
will find it very difficult to destroy us. (drawn from the
responsibility claim for the attempt on Prodi, that time president of
the European Commission, 21 December 2003, taken from Il dito e la
luna.page 14-15)
The vital force of FAI-FRI is its constant renewal, its stimulating
evolution. Today the need to overcome old concepts such as
“organization”, “liberated society”, “revolution” is more urgent than
ever before.
Other concepts such as “federalism”, “informality”, “mutual support”, ”
horizontal-anonymous debate between groups/individuals through praxis”,
” rejection of plenary assemblies” retain their full strength as the
main pillars of our planning.
Since 2003, anarchists of praxis of FAI have set themselves on new
perspectives, have developed new connections. Ignoring the nihilistic
delusions of pure theorists of insurrection, against every political
“realism”, they have ensured that concepts such as nihilism, antisocial
struggle have made their reappearance more vital than ever.
The brain of FAI-FRI is this constant chaotic debating of women and men
through praxis. Words and new perspectives will be describing new paths
hard to imagine today, words that in turn will be overcome by even more
effective and disruptive concepts, as they will be already tested in
action.
An ongoing experimentation of revolt, nothing established, nothing
permanent over time, only fixed point the insatiable desire for freedom
and the constant striving for anarchy.
Nicola and i, by the action against Adinolfi (even though delayed), have
joined this planning, making our own anti-civilizational and
anti-technological contribution to FAI-FRI. Very interesting the
contributions on the same line of the english FAI, the mexican and the
chilean. Keep in mind though that the news we receive in prison are few
and censored, therefore knowing what happens out there is extremely
difficult.
It was your contribution, CCF, concerning the internationalization of
FAI that sped up the creation, in parallel, of the concept of the “black
international”. The point of reference of the methodology of FAI-FRI can
only be this “international”, with all its universe of actions claimed
or not, conflicts, barricades and violent assaults.
The “new” nihilistic perspective with all of its anti-organizational
potential is the greatest result of this dialogue through praxis. A very
important, vital role have those who through actions, not just small
talk, criticize our methodology by pointing out the risk we run that all
boils down to an acronym.
To avoid that risk, we need to develop further the “revolutionary
campaigns”, which are too often ignored by the other groups of FAI-FRI·
sometimes instead (hopefully more often) they take us by surprise, one
of the first examples the “Phoenix Project”, started in Greece and
spread throughout the world.
CCF: Anarcho-nihilism is probably the most calumniated trend of anarchy,
both by “official” anarchists and by state propaganda. What are your
thoughts on anarco-nihilism and the criticism it receives?
Alfredo: By nihilism, i mean the will to live anarchy now, right away,
leaving aside expectations of a future revolution.
To live as an anarchist means to struggle, to arm yourself, to conflict
with the existent without waiting. Only in this conflict, one can savour
full happiness with its ever-present accompaniment of relationships,
complicities, loves, friendships, hatred.
For me, there is no other way to live with satisfaction and fullness the
present, life. It is in this nihilism that my anarchy is being
fulfilled, true, real, today, now. A nihilist destroys, he doesn’t build
anything because there is nothing he wants to build.
A revolution would inevitably create more chains, new authority, new
technology, new civilization. An anti-civ anarchist can only be a
nihilist, for it is in the destruction of society that this new anarchy
is being fulfilled.
To destroy not because the desire for destruction is also a creative
desire, but because there is nothing that we want to build anymore. To
destroy because there is no future in civilization. I’m not surprised at
all that nihilism is the most calumniated trend of anarchy by the very
same anarchists.
Its ruthless concreteness, removes the happy ending of the good-night
story (the future revolution), forcing us to action, here and now,
scaring away all those quitters always ready to postpone conflict.
My nihilism goes hand in hand with life, with action, rejects
overhumanism, it has nothing to do with the verbalistic individualism of
the passed century or of our time. Much in common with the
individualistic, anti-organizational anarchy of men of praxis like
Novatore, Di Giovanni, Galleani.
CCF: As an anarchist nihilist do you accept the idea that “mass society
will make its revolution when conditions are ripe” ?
Alfredo: as an anarchist nihilist i stand clearly against any
deterministic vision of anarchism, against any “scientistic” anarchism.
I do not think that history will lead us by the hand towards anarchy, on
the contrary I think our “destiny” is always to go against the tide.
Society will always be based on some type or form of slavery.
The very thought that someday we will achieve the “perfect society”
terrifies me, anarchy would be transformed into a regime. Utopia would
become dystopia. I prefer to strive for anarchy and through this
continuing tendency of mine, achieve happiness.
Conditions are ripe when desire overcomes fear, conditions are always
ripe for an act of revolt. The more so, when revolt creates communities
through complicity with other individualities, in that case our strength
increases a hundredfold and proportionally our pleasure grows. Only the
women and men of praxis can understand the true potential of the will:
what seems impossible is carried out, desperate actions become an
example reinforcing other desires.
An anarchist without courage is an anarchist with no will, he knows what
is right yet doesn’t have the strength to confirm it with deeds, he
stands still watching, at most he speaks, he writes. The saddest
existence of all.
CCF : What is your opinion on the formal anarchist structures (for
example federations) which mutilate their practice and theory in the
name of massivity and social acceptance?
Alfredo: formal structures have a head -leaders-, arms -the militants-,
legs – the committees related. In the informality of FAI-FRI, each
individual is the head, affinity groups are the arms and violent action
the legs.
However, affinity group is not an exclusive feature of the informal
structures, many the examples of the formal anarchist organizations
which base their action on affinity groups: the spanish FAI pre 1936,
Fijl, with their groups of action after Franco’s victory and so on.
In all these cases though, there was a coordination, a political
direction, the freedom of each individual was limited. The distinctive
feature of the informality of FAI-FRI is the complete absence of
organization, direction, coordination. The full autonomy of each group
or individual. Organization is being replaced by dialogue through
actions, the engine is no longer society but each community in struggle.
The so-called informal “organization” as was theorized in Italy
includes, willingly or not, a direction, experts of informality who lead
the assemblies, directing indirectly the affinity groups. The most
clever, the most good at talking, the most charismatic one has the
possibility to impose himself on others.
The “hierarchy” formed through this “informality” is the most subtle and
difficult to eradicate as it is invisible. The “classic” informal
insurrectional strategy involves relating to specific organizations,
associations, people’s committees, as they have a perspective which
includes revolution, quantitative growth. A perspective that is absent
from FAI-FRI, from its anti-social, anti-civilizational tendency, for us
politics, compromise, settlement do not exist, in that way we do not run
the risk of becoming leading class.
I couldn’t stand to be part of an organization as my individual freedom
would be limited. Then, there is the matter of repression, it is lot
easier to rip apart an organization than 10-100-1000 single individuals
and affinity groups that don’t know one another, but this is secondary.
CCF: Today in Greece several anarchist squats instead of creating
meeting points for new comrades with the aim of acting, appear as an
alternative to cultural centers. What is the situation in Italy and your
opinion on squats?
Alfredo: i never had a great sympathy for those called in Italy social
centers. In the 90s, the places occupied by us were defined “nor centers
nor social”, we acted in a playful, existential, individualistic way, we
didn’t have a social, communicative perspective with the district around
us, we mainly aimed at the quality of our life, our relationships, we
strongly criticized “militancy”.
Perhaps that is why some of us, not caring about communication,
expressed great violence against the system. I believe that occupation,
squatting, if it creates conflictuality, complicity and actions, it can
become a wonderful place where one can experience conflictuality with
the rest of the world. In the end, I must tell the truth, in the past
few years I have attended squats very little and have searched for my
complicities elsewhere.
CCF: Every anarchist of praxis struggles with the dilemma between public
activity or illegal. What is your opinion?
Alfredo: I am convinced that the only actions that really count are
those illegal. It is only through illegalism that one can live anarchy.
This does not detract from the importance of newspapers, books,
brochures, demonstrations, occupations, but the priority, the
irreplaceable, indispensable activity for an anarchist can not be other
than the direct conflict with the system, the violent action.
The system is well aware of it, in democracy they let you say whatever
you want, the true problems begin when you put what you say into
practice. I don’t agree with the comrades who think that every action
has equal dignity, violent action has more than the others.
To hell with the risks of specialism, especially when the only
specialism left is that of the pen.
CCF: In certain European countries there is a trend known as political
anonymity. Ideological supporters of political anonymity claim that
“responsibility claims and acronyms such as FAI, create an ownership of
action”. We CCF think that our actions define who we are and claims are
not a property title but an act of war. What do you think about that?
Alfredo: The lack of acronyms and responsibility claims can’t protect us
from the risk of authoritarianism and vanguard.
The comrades of the “letter to the anarchist galaxy” accuse us of having
a desire for hegemony, of being an organization, one of the many
anarchist federations.
Like the magistrates who have condemned us, they see in us an
organization, a pseudo armed party. Convinced that our objective is the
recognition by the state, they present us as a caricature of the armed
struggle.
This “witty” and “granitic” belief, follow other more active and
optimistic: the belief that, as if by magic, by not claiming
responsibility, an action can become reproducible, a heritage of “all”;
that by not having a name and an acronym, automatically one avoids the
perspective of doing politics; that those who communicate through the
tools that the “movement” offers -assemblies, conferences, newspapers,
magazines, websites- do not succumb to authoritarian leadership-driven
mechanisms and similar specialisms and -icing on the cake- that when not
claiming responsibility, courts find it hard to repress us.
Let’s say that these firm points are the backbone of the classic social
“insurrectionalism”, the way it was spread in Italy, France, Belgium…
with its ups and downs, successes and failures.
Let’s leave aside all the silly accusations that this “current” of
informal anarchism, in its italian component, addressed to FAI-FRI:
accusation of considering the practice of parcel bombs mediocre;
accusations of us wanting the hegemony of the movement and to overshadow
anonymous actions, the accusation of being an organization, a political
party and, finally, the accusation of being vanguard.
The same bullshit that the formal FAI foist on us, 12 years now. Insults
that certainly do not facilitate a balanced debate and that do not
surprise me that much, given the previous.
The same comrades claimed a few years ago that whoever practiced the
abduction of a person wasn’t worthy of being called an anarchist , while
later they resented the fact that some anarchists, in an excess of
panic, distanced themselves clearly from our (mine and Nicola’s)
shooting in Genoa. I find it difficult to relate to these comrades, not
so much for the insults, but because such declarations of intent here in
Italy, i stress it in Italy, are followed by more than 15 years of a
great deal of theory and very little practice -not to say of nothing at
all- and it would be hypocritical of them to pretend otherwise.
In Belgium, where this vision of informality is actually moving forward,
the facts are clear as well as, unfortunately, the repressive responses
of power. For as much as the supporters of anonymity say, no theory can
give us the certainty of impunity, especially when action turns from
symbolic to destructive.
The rejection of an acronym, the anonymity of an action can not
certainly make us impervious to repression and sometimes even the
so-called “innocence” is not enough.
Besides, i’m telling the truth, those who act according to the penal
code always caused me a certain disgust. My approach on the actions
claimed or not is pragmatic, it is not a matter of principles,
ideological but a matter of efficiency and concreteness. I myself in
certain occasions may decide not to claim responsibility, FAI-FRI is a
very efficient tool from my point of view, only a tool, one of the many
tools that my community, the black international, adopts in its war on
society, on civilization.
That said, i have adopted the method of FAI-FRI because i oppose any
organization, to avoid being subject to any kind of leadership, to
bypass, with communication through claims, all those potentially
authoritarian mechanisms, like assemblies, associations, base-cells,
committees, movements, to protect my anonymity and mainly to reinforce
my destructive potential through revolutionary campaigns, without
setting limits to my individual freedom.
Not knowing directly the other brothers and sisters of FAI-FRI,
charisma, prestige find it very hard to penetrate, limiting greatly the
risks concerning our freedom. Only facts speak, only praxis, creation of
the will, counts.
In the “classic” insurrectionalism, despite anonymity, everyone knows
everyone, concepts, ideas develop within the assemblies, giving harmful
space to the unavoidable specialists of theory, of ideology. When
bypassing the plenary assemblies and communicating only through the
actions of FAI-FRI, we can avoid spending valuable time arguing for
hours about maximum systems with people who have never dirtied their
hands with action and never will. Allowing us eventually to cut out of
our lives those who do not put their words into practice.
Today i feel the need to see the energy that i put into action bloom,
reproduce, to see new paths built, through bouncing from one part of the
world to another. Through responsibility claims, actions speak, spread,
increase their virulence.
The practice of the so-called anonymity of action doesn’t satisfy me at
all, no matter how respectable and pleasant it is, it does not reinforce
our action, it does not favour debates, in the long run it grows weak,
limiting, dissolving, isolating us. It reduces greatly the
reproducibility of the deed which when not followed by words, fades out.
Anonymity of action in a social perspective has a sense of camouflage.
They want to convince people, they seek consensus to start a revolution,
they pretend to be “people” so that they can turn their action into
heritage of “all”, for an action not claimed could have been carried out
by “anyone”.
In that case, the action not claimed has a strong meaning, a meaning all
political, social, a meaning that is likely to turn us into one of the
many vanguards of the square.
Naturally, this could never be my own meaning, for i reject in its whole
any social perspective regarding my action. Anonymity of action in an
antisocial perspective finds its meaning in the recreational pleasure of
trying to make whatever destroys us bleed, in that immense satisfaction
of doing what needs to be done, simply because it’s right.
It’s not a small thing, this egoistic perspective is fully included in
the antisocial paraphernalia of the practices of the black
international. It has been my practice in the past, it could become my
practice again in the future, today, however, FAI-FRI is my perspective
on the world.
Today, the debate is not between claiming responsibility or not, using
an acronym or not, but between a social-political conception of
anarchism and an antisocial-nihilistic conception of anarchy. A crucial
choice, the one between anarchism and anarchy, revolution and revolt,
old and new anarchy, a crucial and inevitable choice.
The anti-civilizational subject can not exist in a social perspective,
just as much as there can be no anti-technological subject in a social
perspective. Society, culture, technology, civilization: one can not
exist without the other. Historically, only political parties with their
authoritarian, hierarchical paraphernalia made a revolution. There is
nothing more authoritarian than a revolution, nothing more anarchic than
revolt.
Revolution structures, organizes, creates civilization and progress.
Revolt deconstructs, has no future, leaves in the present, suspends our
lives in an eternal ” here and now”, never satiates our desires pushing
us forward to a continuous search of the impossible.
A constant trend that feeds on the destruction of the existent. When I
speak of “new anarchy” i refer to that anarchy that can easily exist
without the concept of revolution, realism, politics.
The restless spirit of Bakunin, the visionary madness of Cafiero, the
thirst for justice of Ravachol and Henry, the hatred and vengeance of Di
Gioavanni, the poems and the lead of Novatore, the bloodthirsty despair
of Bertoli are all part of this “new anarchy”. The black international,
my brothers and sisters of FAI-FRI are today the incarnation of this
“new anarchy”.
The time has arrived to acknowledge that we are different, that an abyss
divides us from the old anarchism. We have no space for the great
illusions: revolution, progress, civilization.
Our path is different from that of social, realist, rational,
positivist, proactive, creator of new order and civilization anarchism.
A different path that finds within anti-civilization the closing of a
circle.
A circle that leads us to nowhere else than living life to the full.
Defining ourselves carriers of “new anarchy”, naive as it may sound,
serves as a distinction from the political anarchism as well as from a
certain social insurrectionalism that oozes ideology.
CCF: ”Solidarity between anarchists of praxis is not just a word”. How
have italian anarchists dealt with your case and how have they expressed
their solidarity?
Alfredo: There are two types of solidarity. A passive one that all too
often serves only to wash away conscience for someone’s own inactivity
and that does not bridge the gaps between words and deeds.
And then the active, concrete, real solidarity that some call
revolutionary, created in silence and anonymity, where only destructive
actions speak even through the words that follow. Needless to say which
one I prefer.
In final analysis, the best solidarity that i could receive is to see
the planning of this new anarchy, in all of its forms, continue to move
forward, insensible to the strokes of repression. I will not deny it, in
every action that someone salutes us as anarchist prisoners, both in
Italy and the rest of the world, my heart fills with joy.
This is my life today. The war continues, never give up, never give in.
Long live FAI-FRI
Long live CCF
Long live the black international
Alfredo Cospito
–
able to govern themselves. Distinctly rejects the concept of
representation, preferring other patterns of direct or participatory
democracy. In the absence of alternatives, the so-called representatives
of the citizens commit to the order they received and the
decision-making power remains intimately related to the citizen.
Officially rejects leaders and every mediation, as it is based on the
moral superiority of the citizens. Rejects organization, as the citizen
must be free to express his opinion without ideological or “political”
limitations.
According to this ideology, organizations that could survive in the new
society are not based on any ideology or a worldwide vision. Only
post-ideological organizations with an objective, such as citizens for
the water, citizens against the Tav, citizens against taxes and so on,
can survive.
the Matese Gang, based on propaganda of the deed. According to
Ceccarelli, a small armed group is able to “move in the country, as much
as possible, proclaiming social war, urging people on acts of social
banditry, occupying small communities and after having accomplished as
many revolutionary actions as possible, heading to those places where
our presence will show itself in the most efficient way”. The gang
decides to act in San Lupo (Benevento). Unfortunately, one of
Malatesta’s associates gives away their plans to the police and San Lupo
is placed under surveillance. Many anarchists are being arrested while
an exchange of gunfire between anarchists and the police takes place
inside the village. A cop dies of his wounds.
Cafiero, Malatesta and Ceccarelli along with 25 comrades decide to climb
up the mountains and try to trigger revolt in the isolated villages.
Revolution at Letino is greeted with enthusiasm by the villagers who aid
the rebels. In the next village Gallo things proceed similarly, although
this time villagers are less excited as they hear about the arriving of
government troops heading to encircle the rebels. For two days Malatesta
and his comrades wander around in the mountains, searching in vain for
food and shelter. Hungry and shivering from cold, they are surrounded by
the army and driven to prison, where they are held for sixteen months
without a trial. They are accused of the death of a police officer but
on the trial held on August 1878, they are released without charges.