💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › anonymous-smoke-signals.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:38:40. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Smoke Signals Author: Anonymous Date: Summer 2018 Language: en Topics: protest, radical movement, riots, G20, Hamburg, RauchZeichen, The Local Kids, The Local Kids #1 Source: Translated for The Local Kids, Issue 1 Notes: First appeared as Ein Gespräch mit einigen Militanten über die informelle Koordinierung im Vorfeld der G20 in RauchZeichen (Worte und Taten gegen die Welt der G20), Fall 2017
At the end of the summer of 2016, several communiques propose an
informal coordination of radical groups in the run-up to the G20 summit
in Hamburg. You took part in it. What interventions were you aiming for
and which perspectives did it entail for you?
[Chuzpe] On the occasion of several big events like the G8 in
Heiligendamm in 2007 or around the Destroika prior to the inauguration
of the European Central Bank in Frankfurt in 2015, there have been
similar proposals and radical campaigns. It is not a very new idea.
Starting from an anarchist analysis, I see the necessity of a permanent
conflictuality and I’m sceptical towards this staging of a political
play where everyone has its role. Focusing on such an event leads often
to the side-lining of everyday struggles. But at the same time, I see
the possibility of a tension opening up in such moments, in which the
scope of our interventions can amplify. Towards this end, I think that a
focus on the practice of radical actions rooted in local struggles while
referring to each other, can be a good way to resolve this contradiction
and to work towards sustained action. Meanwhile, the practice of direct
actions inside the mobilisation gives the possibility of showing this
means of struggle, which can motivate and inspire other people.
[Peter Pan] I think that a lot of the actions that happened during the
year are part of specific struggles. Each specific struggle is valid on
its own and is important, but the articulation of shared points gets
lost. To create a certain ambience, but more so, to find shared points
in the different strategies and analyses, points of reference are
important. Which are created rather well with this kind of coordination.
Individuals, groups, but also movements, that don’t know each other, can
in this way communicate and get in touch.
[HoodLum] The aim was to go beyond a political campaign and to set out
lines on a European level, on which to work together. Events like the
G20 mean that texts are more translated and diffused than normal.
Through these, it becomes possible to affirm affinities towards other
struggles or structures and to build upon them. For example, currently
the actions against the construction of new prisons in Switzerland are
inspired by the struggle on a similar topic that took place in Belgium.
We have to express our utopian dreams. Or at least can we develop our
dreams more if we know we’re not the only ones working to bring them
about. I think a lot of groups reconsider their offensive when they
don’t see immediate results, and that the feeling of isolation and
futility of radical actions proliferates. Coordination like the one of
the G20, the Greek call for a Black December, or from before, the
campaign against the Olympics, can find a resonance beyond the event. If
it is formulated well.
Can you give some examples of what resonated in the run-up to the G20 or
of shared points between different struggles?
[Peter Pan] Good question. The G20 was probably itself the biggest
shared point, that also explains why there’s always a certain calm after
such an event. But I think the context of the “campaign” against the G20
has created the possibility of different tendencies to focus on the same
topic. Before, each tendency put forward different positions. Now,
through the coordination, a shared position was developed by different
tendencies. One of the most evident shared points was the choice of
method, expressing the incompatibility with the rules of the state and
the values of society which have been indoctrinated. It’s from there
that we consciously encountered each other.
[Chuzpe] I have the impression that there was a stark need for an
international dimension, which is also rather evident with a topic like
the G20. A point of reference – one that was soon to emerge after the
first attacks and that became clear through the choice of targets, as
well as in the texts through the analyses and research – was the attacks
against big companies that are known to be profiteers of crises through
the rule of the Troika and the managing of German imperialism. This can
also be considered as a continuation of the discourse expressed prior to
the inauguration of the ECB in Frankfurt. Besides companies like Cosco,
Telekom, Hochtief, Deutsche Bank, Allianz and others that profit from
the privatisations in Greece, also multinationals like ThyssenKrupp,
Thales, Actemium, Sodexo and much more have been targeted. What I find
interesting, is the international scope that has been developed. This
creates the possibility of correspondence with other struggles elsewhere
and most of all, in resonance with it, the expansion of terrains of
struggle. For example, there was the burning of a car of a French
diplomat in solidarity with the ZAD, or a police station that had its
walls blackened by flames in solidarity with Greek prisoners.
[HoodLum] Those who follow texts from other regions, will notice that,
for example, the security industry is, worldwide, more and more
attacked, and that sabotage of cable connections and antennas increases.
In texts, there are often comments that imply that people are aware of
what is going on in Germany and vice versa. That is the precondition
that will allow people to really meet, that discussion will take place
and that something like a strategic orientation can be found.
Furthermore, the people who participated in the direct actions in the
run-up of the summit, and who were partly also in Hamburg, are evidently
a target of political pressure in their regions and cities. Pressure
from the side of our political enemies from the Left. In Italy or in
France, there have been many times fights in demonstrations with labour
unions or their security stewards. In Greece, there is a dispute over
the right moment and objectives for radical actions. The dissociations
and, hopefully also, ruptures after Hamburg make it more easy to find
conditions that entail shared points. For us this means that we also
wanted to strengthen the tendency that some might call insurrectionary
or nihilist, which are not adequate terms. Through the communique from
the attack on the police station in Zografou (Athens), it becomes clear
that some have taken up the call to do something in their own city if
they’re not coming to Hamburg. I think that is great!
It seems that the international dimension has played a significant role
to you. At the same time, there was also a lot embedded in struggles on
local levels. In which way does it make sense to combine such projects
with a mobilisation like the one against the G20?
[Chuzpe] I think we should never only concentrate on the dates set by
our adversary, like the G20, because we get often stuck in an abstract
relation. In this sense I think it is important that we try to connect
our struggles – in which we are engaged and which are directly related
to our lives – with such moments. In the run-up to the summit, there
were mostly struggles against displacement of people and redevelopment
of cities that are in lots of places a terrain of permanent conflict.
But in the end it is about the question of the development of a
revolutionary perspective. With only an event, how good it might be,
these question don’t find their solution. Therefore this means that
without a daily practice, we will never be able to experiment with our
theoretical reflections and to question them. The mobilisation against
the G20 cannot be seen as more than a fragment. One that allowed us to
create situations to encounter each other and to have shared experiences
in the streets. I don’t think we can consider this as different projects
that take place detached from each other.
[Peter Pan] The G20 meeting is a meeting of the self-proclaimed elites
of the world to discuss different topics of world politics. Decisions
that concern different themes all over the world are prepared or
finalized there. So this happens also on the side of resistance.
Different spheres fight on different levels for totally different areas.
A shared reference point is what is lacking at times without a
polarizing moment. To make this coordination permanent, it could be
useful to focus it in something concrete.
[HoodLum] Between us, the discussions of the last year have been
concentrated on not having a typical campaign with an occasion, a
beginning and an end. We rather wanted to try to provoke a permanent
state of attack, that maybe already exists if we look attentively at the
daily messages of resistance worldwide. Lots of things are only visible
on a local level, either because the participants don’t diffuse them, or
because they get lost in the information stream. The G20 was for us only
the vehicle to use to propagate that what we practice every day. And
that also got more attention and resonance due to the behaviour of the
cops during July in Hamburg. There are regularly calls to radically act
about something, but most of the time such calls are last-minute and
very specific, which makes it difficult to respond to them. The
anarchist call against the G20 summit in Hamburg was diffused from
August 2016 onwards and was quickly translated into several languages.
And it was rather open, which invited a lot of persons to participate.
The radical campaign against the G8 in Heiligendamm from July 2007
started even sooner, namely with the first attack during the summer of
2005 against the CEO of Norddeutsche Affinerie, Werner Marnette. But
these were very specific attacks, that raise the bar high on the level
of research and explanation. Without having in mind the texts of that
time, I think there were other main emphases made. For Hamburg it was
more important to us to make the practices of resistance that are
already present more palpable.
Do you see a possibility that the calm – that has set in after the
summit – dissipates, and that the dynamics from the run-up to the G20
can be taken up again? Also, to respond to the desire that the
coordination doesn’t vanish into thin air after the end of the event?
[Peter Pan] I think that for a lot of people the summit, but also the
period of the run-up, was very impressive. It is very probable that for
a lot, especially youths, it was the first time to see whole units of
riot police fleeing in panic. Even for the older, lots were impressed by
the ability from all these people to coordinate and organize and to not
keep quiet in the face of, on one side, an apathetic and disinterested
society, and on the other, a highly militarised and repressive state.
These are the kind of experiences one doesn’t forget easily. Personally,
but also collectively, this summit will be remembered and in some years
we will be still able to build upon it. The period after the G8 in
Rostock was not characterized by a blaze of activity, but it lay the
first building blocks for the following mobilisations, for example the
one of 2009. Also, some persons who weren’t pleased by the clashes in
the Schanze quarter or who took it personally when the connection of
their mobile phone was interrupted due to attacks on antennas, have
asked themselves why this happened and have looked into texts for
explanations. That this entails a potential danger, seems to have become
clear to the state. This will also have been a reason for the taking
down of linksunten.indymedia.org.
[HoodLum] This perception of calm is also relative and surely
subjective. It is clear that for some months there have been less things
going on in Hamburg or Berlin, but that doesn’t matter so much. Neither
sabotage, nor riots recognize borders. Since the G20 there has been
worldwide a big part of the capitalist structure fucked up, and in
numerous riots cops have been attacked. We have to stop measuring our
effect or potential on a local level. The statement of Panagiotis
Argyrou from a Greek prison, is for me more meaningful than the rhythm
of attacks in Germany. Through this we see the proof of an emergence of
affinities based on the combination of words and deeds that are
spreading to more hearts in fortress Europe. The rulers can shut down
internet sites, diffuse false information, or bring out their servants
dressed in magistrate robes to enforce their law; there will certainly
be other attacks. The formulations of coordination will not disappear
when we get into the habit of putting as much importance into the
follow-up as the preparation, when we make the effort of translating the
texts from us and our international friends, when we are able to put
into practice the necessary solidarity with prisoners and, finally, when
we practice what has for a long time been deformed by some; riot
tourism. All the talk about international coordination is useless when
we don’t find ourselves together with our people from other regions in
the streets or the forests. We have to broaden our horizon and
experiences.
[Chuzpe] I think we have to be careful to not fall into the illusion
that only the amount of direct actions says something about the
condition of our struggles. We would be making the same error as lots of
others, who tire themselves with counting heads and for whom the motto
“More is Better” becomes a paradigm. This way of thinking comes from a
capitalist logic and is not suitable for us. We should rather examine
things based on our principles and convictions, and take care that the
way we fight and the perspective it holds, indicate a bit towards our
utopian dreams. That does say something about the quality of our
actions. If there is now a bit less things going on, it could be because
people are in a process of reflection and are questioning themselves
about how to go on. I think that also for this, you have to take time.
And it would be wrong to fall into a blind activism, only to maintain
the illusion that everything seamlessly continues.
The G20 is over now, and the experiences have surpassed our
expectations. Would you say that they are also the outcome of the
actions in the run-up?
[Chuzpe] It would be too flattering to locate the origin of the
collective rage during those days in the mobilisation through radical
attacks. Of course, these have contributed to an ambience and motivated
some milieus to travel to Hamburg. But I think that the events just
before the week itself; like the generalized state of emergency in
Hamburg, the rude expulsions of the camp, the brutal repression of the
“Welcome to Hell” demonstration and other episodes – that were
supervised by the police boss Dudde & co – were surely more important
factors. We know from other mobilisations that the idea of actions by
small groups are not the ultimate thing and that we have to be able to
question its limits. With a sober look, we also have to admit that the
desired proliferation of certain types of intervention doesn’t last in
the long term. At the same time, we can see that this practice can
provide us the necessary skills to face the police apparatus. Certainly
in Germany, where the power relation in demonstrations is seldom in our
favour and where a riot can only be provoked with considerable risks and
efforts. Several times it would have been useful to have the know-how to
realize decentralized actions. I think that during the G20 there was a
good mix of different forms of action that interacted with each other,
which led to the loss of control on the side of the state. On one hand,
the spontaneity of the masses, on the other, pin-pricks well-prepared by
small autonomous groups or wild, swarm-like demonstrations like on
Friday morning in the Altona district. Ultimately, we could say it’s
because of this mixture that a police force of 30,000 was pushed to its
limits. But also thanks to the fact that there are groups who have a
practice of attack during the whole year and that bring with them a
certain experience in these situations.
[HoodLum] Absolutely, as always for such type of mobilisation, it’s
about creating a certain ambiance. It seems that we were able to
transmit to a lot of people in Germany and Europe, the feeling that in
Hamburg – despite the high level of risk – there was something possible.
The conditions were present. On one side, the determination for
confrontation. On the other, the capacity to attack highly secured
places and to put out statements that speak to the hearts of many. There
have been also mobilisations that produce negative resonances. For
example, the yearly Munich Security Conference (SIKO). Prior to the
event, there is the eternal communist babble that ends with a march,
that is eventually hemmed in. In such circumstances, there’s nothing
that could have happened and that would be appropriate to the topic. But
in Hamburg, there are also youths and other dissatisfied who haven’t
been perfectly assimilated by the system and who – traditionally – are
close to the radical left or chaotic resistance. They always came to the
block parties in Schanze and look for any occasion to get back at the
state for their daily humiliations. The fact that a lot of people were
up for it, is partly thanks to our agitation but also to the media scare
prior to the summit. When the media write that on this day and at that
place, there will be a lot of stones hurled at the cops, then lots of
people will turn up to do exactly that. That the media reinforce this
message through their propaganda, contributes to the mobilisation; we
don’t demand anything, we only want to attack the state and the society
that legitimises it.
To conclude, a look towards the future. A lot of persons are still in
prison and will be sentenced to quite harsh punishments. We can also
expect more investigations. On that level, there will be for a long time
a shadow cast on the G20. How to go on? How to deal with repression and
which perspectives can we envision from these days in Hamburg and the
preceding days?
How we see it, there are already some groups that are busy with
gathering funds. Our task is in showing to prisoners and other accused
that we not only support them through words and materially. We have to
continue to push forward the struggle of the prisoners. There are
already letters from those who assert their positions. Ideally, our
message is that their repression will not stop people from acting. It
will increase tension and people who otherwise wouldn’t have met, will
come together. But in general, we’re not very well organised on a level
of repression. In Germany there’s more of an individual approach than
elsewhere. I doubt that it’s clear for everyone that more resistance
will entail more prisoners. For me, the perspectives are connected to
knowing each other better, knowing our ways of acting, and the cities
and situations from where they arise. We should confront our –
frequently too abstract – theories with their workings. For example,
what our affinity really means. After a long period of moving around to
riot, the coordination of the struggles also has to advance. We should
be able to talk concretely about things and not only through public
texts. It could be the next phase if, throughout Europe, we can
coordinate on a topic or companies against which to act. Or to find each
other next time in the streets without public call. We have to destroy
this feeling of a “Heimat” [a specific German word that could be
translated as “home”, “homeland” or “nation”, but always with
connotations of tradition, identity and territory] and be ready to be
everywhere to take part in struggles. For example, I was surprised that
in March there was a riot in Copenhagen for the 10 year anniversary of
Ungdomshuset’s eviction, and that almost no one knew about this in
advance. It could be a development to share more plans and discussion
prior to this kind of actions, so as to have more people participating.
[Peter Pan] I share this feeling of not being well prepared to face
repression now and also in the coming times. But I think some letters
and statements of prisoners have been encouraging. From certain
statements, we can understand that the struggle doesn’t stop with
incarceration, but on the contrary, is part of it. Also, a lot of
solidarity actions with those afflicted by the repression show that
connections made prior are continuing to take shape. The actions in
Hamburg, but also the actions from before, as well as the media frenzy,
show that the ambiance we invoked earlier, cannot be stopped from a
certain moment on. Then the state can try to do whatever it wants… I
think the campaign in the run-up has created a nice perspective to
continue connecting different intentions and forms of actions in
everyday struggles. Maybe this will continue?
[Chuzpe] The terrain of repression provides us, in general, with a good
target. Especially now, when the digitalisation of surveillance and
security technologies is developing fast and when big events are used as
testing grounds for counter-insurgency methods. This could be taken as a
challenge to expose the shit that is going on and attack the companies
that profit from it. Law enforcement is being outsourced already for a
long time. And the cops are dependant on the technology of private
security firms who provide the useful software. That can be seen very
well for example in Hamburg. Never in the history of criminality in
Germany has there been such an abundance of images and video material
obtained by the authorities. On a snitching portal specifically set up
for this occasion by the cops, there have been 7,000 files uploaded
apart from the ones of the cops. Before, because of the overload of
data, it would have been impossible to find a needle in a haystack.
While now, with the help of facial recognition software – like the one
from Cognitec, a company from Dresden – the data can be analysed in a
small amount of time. That is a new level of repression, which we cannot
ignore. We have to have discussions and share information to be able to
develop counter-measures, but also to integrate in the struggle against
repression on a practical level. Something that already happened during
the yearly police congress in Berlin, but was also focused on in actions
in the run-up to the G20. I see perspectives there of how to oppose the
repression with an offensive response in a concrete struggle.
Furthermore, I share what has been said before about continuing to be
mobile. After Athens, Frankfurt, Milan, Paris, Hamburg, there will be
other places where to meet and conspire. Outside the metropolitan areas,
there are lots of interesting struggles that also contain this
possibility. Like the Hambach Forest, Bure or Notre-Dame-des-Landes, and
still more places where there is an autonomous zone to defend. These
moments of coming together are very important and make it possible to
together accentuate and develop projects which can continue on a local
level.
Thanks a lot for this conversation. I hope to see you soon in the
streets, on the barricades, or at Rewe.
[There has been a significant intervention during the process of
translation. When in the German version, the interviewees use the term
“militant” (and its variations), here this has been translated as
“radical”. These two terms have both a similar generic and ambiguous
character while “radical” avoids the immediate negative overtones the
English “militant” would garner. In a German context this term is still
widely used, although also – notably – consciously rejected (as a
positive thing) by some. Specifically here, the insistence on speaking
of “militants” can be seen as a symptom of the vagueness about what
constitutes the bases of the desired informal coordination. - TLK]