user preferences

mashriq / arabia / iraq / community struggles / non-anarchist press Wednesday January 10, 2018 19:53 byAraz Bağban

The protests against the high cost of living in the cities of Khorasan province on December 28th soon spread to many cities of Iran incredibly quick and almost turned into a revolt within a week. The protests primarily targeted the high cost of living, financial difficulties and corruption. However, they quickly became politicized and began to target the foundations of the Islamic Republic (IR), namely the religious autocracy. The slogans quickly turned from “death to high cost of living” to “death to the dictator.”

These demonstrations and protests emerged as a result of the spontaneous act of the masses. Currently, it does not have any leading or coordinating center. It is still in its early stages and needs some basic organs, such as local committees and councils to lead it to go further. Due to the present weakness of the progressive opposition forces in Iran, there is no revolutionary structure to lead the movement. But this spontaneity and being leaderless, for this moment, adds a great power to it. This power has deeply shaken the IR. The authorities of the religious dictatorship were almost astonished in the face of this power. Authorities which, under normal conditions, could immediately have linked such a movement to foreign forces began blaming each other. Later, when they realized the destructive power of the rage of the poor, they invited each other to come together against “the world powers’ provocations.” In fact, the different wings and factions of the IR are aware that this revolt has its origins in the economic difficulties of the people. But they are at a loss in understanding how they can control this uprising.

The Origin and Extent of the Demonstrations

The demonstrations first started in four towns of Khorasan. The largest of these was Mashhad. Mashhad is Iran’s biggest city after Tehran. Yet it is not industrialized as are Isfahan, Karaj and Tabriz, despite the latter being much smaller. Mashhad’s economy is based on tourism, as it hosts the Shiites’ eighth imam’s tomb.[1] It is a city that accepts labour force immigration and, consequently, there are large poor neighborhoods around the city. In recent years, the general economic problems, as well as a strained relationship between the Islamic Republic with the Gulf countries, have hit the economy of this city. Increasing unemployment rates, inflation and high cost of living were waiting for a spark to explode. On December 28th, a demonstration of which the origin was a subject of controversy[2] revealed this spark. The protests in Mashhad quickly spread to other cities of Khorasan and turned into mass protests against the high cost of living and corruption. The police attacked the protests and tried to disperse the protesters with pepper spray.

The next day, the demonstrations spread to different regions and towns and there have been more than 80 cities involved in these demonstrations until now. On December 29th there were widespread protests in twenty cities and even some news that the people were clashing with security forces. Especially in the following days, the cities and towns where the Lori people[3] live became the center of the armed conflicts.[4] Though the number of those who participate in the protests is not so big, the anger that arises is huge. The center of these protests is the non-industrialized poor cities in Iran, commonly referred to as ‘the periphery’. Although some protests have been held in big cities like Tehran, Tabriz and Isfahan in recent days, the locomotive for the protests is still small and poor towns. It seems startling to see that these protests are spreading rapidly, become politicized instantly, and the people’s anger is so strong. However, if the difficult living conditions in Iran are taken into consideration, the situation is easy to understand.

In recent years, the high costs of living, high unemployment rates and low wages have been on the agenda even in the parliament. Worker protests and strikes were increasing steadily. Workers and public employees frequently voiced their long-standing demands in front of parliament and ministries. The state authorities were warning the Hassan Rouhani government for the possible breaking out of social unrest of the poor for a long time. Meanwhile, while the Islamic Republic was in search of a so-called solution, it was preparing itself for a possible revolt of the poor.[5] The regime was aware of the fact that this kind of social unrest is not that easy to overcome.

It is worth noting that the emergence of protests by the poor against the high cost of living in Iran is not a new issue. During the two presidential terms of Rafsanjani, under the impact of his brutal neoliberal policies, the great economic difficulties of the people were reflected into the streets in 1992 and 1995. Those protests were suppressed by the sharp attacks of the repressive state apparatus and were prevented from expanding.

The Bases of the Demonstrations

The Islamic Republic prepared the ground for the mass protests with their own internal contradictions. On the one hand, the IR found it convenient to see the structural problems in its economy as accidental, and to postpone the crisis, which is understandable for a capitalist structure. On the other hand, the IR was pleased by and swallowed the long term silence and political stagnation of the working class, and only tried to please the bourgeoisie and middle class who declare their discontent frequently. The IR preferred to regard the poor living conditions of the working class as a secondary problem, making its solution dependent on other factors such the nuclear crisis with western powers.

In fact, the Islamic Republic is struggling with long-standing economic troubles, but succeeded in delaying these troubles by different methods. In the 1990’s, the IR, with President Rafsanjani’s neoliberal policies, aimed to move away from an oil-incomes-dependent structure (in fact the goal of the Islamic Republic was to move away from an economic policy pivoting around the public sector, which was one of the achievements of the 1979 revolution). These practices led to a relative growth in the Iranian economy, but they also established the bases for impoverishing the people. Reformists came to power to thoroughly appease the protest and dissatisfaction that emerged throughout the country against Rafsanjani’s harsh neoliberal policies. Under the leadership of Muhammad Khatami, this wing of the Islamic Republic claimed that it would be possible to carry the country to the utopia they have promised, with reforms within the framework of the regime.

Reformists asked people to accept everything and not to object, emphasizing that political development would bring in its wake economic development. However, at the end of the eight-year reform government people’s economic demands rose. Thus, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took the stage with a populist economic justice rhetoric against the reformists’ liberal political theses. But, he became the most brutal implementer of neoliberal policies in Iran. The pressure of the economic problems and the tension creating foreign policies started to show their effects. In addition to this problem, the regime faced another problem when widespread unrest spread across the country after reformist voters and politicians claimed the reelection of Ahmadinejad was massively fraudulent. Religious dictatorship had to offer a moderate option that could calm the high tension. So Rouhani emerged as the last solution to the IR problems.

The Islamic Republic was seeking solutions to three major problems after the 2013 presidential elections. The first one was the crisis of legitimacy that challenged the foundations of the IR (among both the people of the country and in international circles) after the popular uprising that followed the 2009 presidential elections. The second was economic problems that made the life of the people unbearable. The third was the international political crisis, such as the nuclear crisis with the West. In 2013 Rouhani’s campaign was established on a very simple assumption. The sanctions are the main source of all the problems and to relieve sanctions he promised to the people that he will solve the crisis over Iran’s nuclear program through negotiations with world powers. According to Rouhani, the deal would open Iran’s closed trade routes and normalize oil exports. The Islamic republic would have the ability to renovate old and worn out oil extraction facilities, or negotiate with major international companies for this purpose. And eventually, the country’s non-functioning industry would start to operate again. This would produce a flood of funds and with competent economic management would improve the living standards of the Iranians. When Rouhani was elected, the people celebrated the results chanting an interesting slogan: “dictator, thank you.” The national satisfaction and the international congratulations after the election pleased the regime.

During his first presidential term, Rouhani secured a deal with the West.[6] The bourgeoisie was pleased with the results. Thanks to this agreement, the middle class, which had played an important role in the 2009 uprising, was also proud of its choice in 2013 election. It seemed that the Islamic republic had largely surpassed the legitimacy crisis that emerged with the 2009 elections. It seemed that the only problem left to be solved was the living standard of the people.

The expectations of the IR from the last elections in May 2017 were also very clear. It aimed to maintain the soft approach toward Iran, created by the nuclear deal; to give signals that its foreign policy will not change much; and to continue the stability that exists in the domestic sphere. The regime hoped to ensure foreign investment in order to inject hopes to the masses that everything is going to be all right.

In spite of these, the living conditions have worsened in recent years. Economic stagnation has continued. The unemployment rate has increased steadily. Hawking in the streets has become the source of income for tens of thousands of people. Thousands of homeless people are living in the streets of the capital city, Tehran. What poor people get is a piece of carton to sleep on or being hunted under the guise of the war on drug dealing. Accordingly, it was clear that the rage of the poor was going to erupt, eventually.

Did the elections change the situation? No, it didn’t. Because the regime only cares about the bourgeoisie and the middle class, which now have an organic relationship with the government. On the other hand, the regime is preparing its forces for a possible uprising of the proletariat. Recently, security forces have conducted exercises against feigned protests, so as to develop their defense of the bourgeoisie. The lack of organizations that can lead the working class obviously makes it easy for the dictatorship to suppress protest that remains local.

Surely, the external factors play a role in the emergence of Iran’s economic troubles. However, the decisive factor is the corrupt structure of the Islamic Republic. Corruption, theft and attempts to make quick and easy windfall profits have paralyzed the Iranian economy like a disease. It is obvious that no medicine will be effective until resolving these problems. People have waited long enough to see that these diseases are going to be cured and when they saw there was no hope they eventually rebelled.

The Difference with the 2009 Uprising

The two uprisings differ in some very basic features. The 2009 uprising started in Tehran and later moved to remote provinces. The big cities actively participated in the uprising, and in the early days (especially in Tehran), demonstrations started with large masses flowing into the squares. The demands were mainly political, but did not exceed the demands of freedom and democratic rights for certain classes. The demands were not very radical until the last days and did not exceed the frame of the demands enforced by the reformist movement. In general, it had the character of a middle class movement so it could not absorb the demands of the working class.

In contrast to the 2009 uprising, this time the small cities and the poor regions are leading the demonstrations. Although the initial protests have emerged in Mashhad (the second largest city in the country), the overall distribution of protests shows that small cities are more active. The demonstrations didn’t start with large participation. Only on the third day it weakly spread to big cities and only on the fifth day big demonstrations took place in these cities. The poor are leading the protests and the demonstrations have rapidly radicalized. Despite being economic in the first place, the demands were rapidly politicized, and express the demands of large segments of society. They cover a wide spectrum, ranging from jobs and bread to social freedoms. The whole regime with all its components is targeted in the slogans of the masses and there is no distinction between reformists and conservatives. Interestingly, no slogan has been chanted about Mousavi and Karroubi’s house arrest in these demonstrations.

Debates on the Legitimacy of the Demonstration of the Poor in Terms of Regional Balances

The rage of the poor has deeply shaken the Islamic Republic. But if we consider the position of Iran in the Middle East and its role in the regional balance of power, it is not difficult to observe that the effects of these demonstrations would not be limited to Iran’s borders alone. The emergence of such a vigorous movement is not a national issue in any country in the Middle East. It is therefore a natural process to assess this uprising in terms of regional balances or even broader international conflicts. Accordingly, a massive movement in Iran worries its allies and those who think this alliance has a progressive role in the region. Indeed, almost from the first day we have witnessed the presence of such concerns within the regional actors and even the international socialist movement. Some socialist groups immediately revealed their position on the first day and opted to support the Islamic Republic.

These concerns can be understood up to a certain point. U.S. imperialism under Trump and its regional allies have long targeted the Islamic Republic and have the potential to try every way to break it down. Thus, question marks may arise about the origin of an uprising targeting the foundations of the IR. It is more comprehensible if we consider the dissatisfaction of Trump and Netanyahu on the latest developments in the Middle East. However, it becomes problematic when we only focus on the regional dynamics and ignore the connection between a social movement and its roots in internal contradictions. This perspective may be the approach of structures like the Syrian regime and Hezbollah, but it should not be the Marxists’ approach. Beyond an abstract anti-imperialist approach, Marxists should evaluate the events from the perspective of the ground for struggle that social contradictions create on the national level, the class position of the elements that drive the struggle, and the opportunities and consequences of the struggle.

Demonstrations in Iran emerged from the demand for the most fundamental rights of the poor but almost turned into a revolt against a 38-year old reactionary dictatorship. For years, this enemy of the workers, of women, of the different ethnic groups, of the environment and of basic human rights has not displayed anything other than oppression and massacre. A reactionary fundamentalist Islamist movement built this system, in its origin, by confiscating the gains of a popular revolution, established its dictatorship by pouring the blood of revolutionaries’, and subsequently survived by exploiting society and nature. Thus, the people’s revolt against this regime is unquestionably legitimate.

It is possible that the reactionary forces of society would confiscate the gains of such a movement.[7] Despite this, the possibility of overthrowing of a reactionary structure like the Islamic Republic with the uprising of the masses does not only provide the prospect of freedom for the masses in Iran, but also may pave the way for the overthrow of other reactionary structures in the Middle East. Eventually, it may open the road to a real struggle against imperialism and Zionism in the region.


It is not easy to predict the outcome of these demonstrations. It may progressively gain in strength or vanish in time. It is a spontaneous mass movement and there is not yet a strong progressive structure to lead it. Long-running mass movements can reveal their own various organizations such as committees and local councils that can protect the masses against the eruptive but disorderly action. If such organizations are properly guided, they can attain significant achievements. On the other hand, we must not forget the rich experience of the IR in suppressing popular uprisings. The IR will mobilize all its means to suppress these demonstrations. As a matter of fact, over the first week more than ten deaths have been confirmed by official sources. This shows how determined the IR is in suppressing these demonstrations which have a great potential to turn into a widespread popular revolt.

It should be noted that, independent of its outcome, this movement will first of all instill a most needed confidence of defeating the environment of oppression and fear. The masses will remember the great feat of demolishing the Pahlavi regime, which was the main fortress of imperialism in the Middle East. Even if they are defeated, these actions will form the basis of new struggles. Here, the most important task falls on progressive forces from within the masses. Those who hear the voice of this rage should organize the masses against the Islamic Republic and drive the destructive power of the mass to destroy the reactionary repressive discriminatory capitalist regime on the national ground and to establish the foundations of the free and revolutionary Middle East on the basis of principles of solidarity and equality on the regional ground.

[1]The structure that governs this type of building is known as Astan-i Gods-i Rezevi, the richest Iranian company known for its proximity to Khamenei. This company, which is a large landowner, banker, factory owner and executor of plenty of other economic activities, is enriched by the Shiites who visit the 8th imam, all the while it dispossesses the Mashhad people.
[2]It is suggested that this protest erupted in the direction of objections by people who did not get what they wanted from the banks and the call was issued by the far-conservative section of the Islamic republic. Similar objections were made in many places that were long-lasting, but the slogans were aimed directly at the high prices even with the people gathered for the same reason.
[3]Lori people is an ethnic group that speaks a dialect of the Persian language living in the Central and South-western part of Iran.
[4]In the conflicts that arose in the town of Ize in the south of Iran, the people controlled state buildings for a short period of time.
[5]At the beginning of the new year, a security drill took place against the threat of workers’ protests in the name of improving the defense of bourgeoisie’s.
[6]On this see our article “Iran’s Nuclear Deal: Escape from Crisis”
[7]For a more comprehensive characterization of the various rival actors within the Islamic Republic, see our article “An Iranian Classic: For the Continuation of the Dictatorship, Long Live Elections!”
central asia / the left / non-anarchist press Wednesday January 10, 2018 19:48 byFarooq Tariq

Communists have won a landslide victory in the elections for House of Representatives of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal held in two phases on 26th November and 7th December 2017. In a parliament of 275, the elections were held for 165 seats under the first past the post system (FPTP) and the rest, 110 seats, were by proportional system. Farooq Tariq visited Nepal for four days after the election results were announced from 13/17 December 2017 and reports.

The Communist Party Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist UML) won 80 seats under FPTP while their Left Front partner CPN (Maoist Center) won 36 seats. The ruling Nepali Congress (NC) could gain only 23 seats. The Communists won 116 seats out of 165 in total. Two parties based in Madhes, in southern Nepal, the Rastriya Janata Party-Nepal (RJPN) and the Sanghiya Samajbadi Forum (SSF), combined to secure 21 seats; other fringe parties won the remaining five seats.

In the proportional system for the 110 seats, UML got 33.25 per cent vote while Congress came second with 32.78 per cent. The Maoist Center got 13.66 per cent votes.

In total, out of the 275 seats in the House of Representatives, the left alliance holds 174 (121 for the CPN-UML and 53 for the Maoists), the NC 63, the RJPN 17, and the SSF 16.

The Congress was at the losing end in the FPTP system as the Communists united and put up joint candidates under a 60/40 formula in favor of UML. It was mainly one-against-one race in the elections under the new 2015 constitution that made the difference in favor of Communists unlike the past parliamentarian practices, when three main parties were contesting against each other during the last 2013 and 2008 general elections.

The newly constituted seven provinces also saw a massive victory for UML. Six out of seven provinces were won over by UML and the process of forming new provincial governments is under way.

The two main parties of Nepal, UML and Maoist Center, had decided prior to the elections, not only to form the alliance but also to merge within six months to form one united Communist party. This was approved very well by the people as this brings the two parties into a binding contract to unite and not just an election alliance.

There were celebrations in the street of the Katmandu after this historic victory of the Communists. This was the first time that Communists have an almost two third majority in Nepal, the most poverty stricken country of South Asia. The UML and Maoist Center have been in power several times since 1994 but always for a short time and as part of coalitions.

The appeal of UML for a stable and strong government worked very well among the Nepali masses who were tired of weak coalition government of opposite ideologies. The Nepali Congress was also taught a lesson for their impression of a pro-Indian party.

The Indian Blockade

India’s blockade of September 2015 was remembered very well by Nepali masses who had to make kilometers of lines to fetch petrol for vehicles after most supplies from India were stopped.

This was after the Madheshi community protested over the issue of constitutional rights. Madheshis are mainly located in Terai area of Nepal and were unhappy with the rights they had within the first constitution of Nepal. The blockade choked imports of not only petroleum, but also medicines and earthquake relief material. The United front of Madheshi parties could win only one province and around 10 per cent of the total votes during the present elections.

During the election campaign, Nepali Congress leaders said that a victory by the left alliance would bring a totalitarian regime to power; that a one party system and age old communism has failed miserably in the world. These arguments failed to impress the general public. Over the last three decades, the CPN-UML has transformed itself into a democratic force; voters were not convinced that its victory would lead to one-party communist rule. UML at best could be termed as left social democrats. They had adopted multi-party system in their constitution.

Women’s Participation
A total of 41 women candidates contested in the first round of elections to the House of Representatives and State Assemblies, in 32 districts out of 75. Of them, 18 women are contesting in the House of Representatives and the rest in the State Assemblies. Only five women won the elections in the FPTP system on the open seats contest. The Nepal constitution guarantee at least 33 per cent of women’s representation in the parliament – that means 91 women in a parliament of 275. Only five were elected, rest of the 86 women would be elected through the proportional system to qualify the general election in accordance with the constitution.

The UML Leadership
The UML is led by KP Sharma Oli (65) who joined the Communist movement at the age of 13. Inspired by Indian Communist leader Charu Majumdar, known as “father of Naxalbari peasant movement of Bengal” he spent fourteen consecutive years in jail from 1973 to 1987. He was elected Member of Parliament for the first time in 1991 then 1994 and 1999. He lost to Maoists in 2008 general elections but won comfortably in 2013 and 2017. He has served in important ministries during the past 21 years and was also Prime Minister of Nepal from October 2015. He resigned in August 2016 after the Maoists ditched the Left Alliance government to join the Congress. Pushpa Kamal Dhar, known as Prachanda, leader of the Maoists, was elected Prime Minister. However, before the present elections, Prachanda opted to form the Left Alliance and won 36 seats in the FPTP system and around 13 per cent of the votes in PR system.

A Short Note on History of Communists
Nepali Communists are not traditional communists. Realizing the negative effects of the collapse of the Soviet Union, CPN UML was formed on January, 1991 through the unification of the Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist) and the Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist). The party has led four governments before the present landslide victory. The UML surprised many internationally, when they took over power for the first time briefly for nine months through elections in 1994 at the time when there was massive propaganda against socialism. Many brushed aside this victory as “communists governing under a king.”

In this present period of right wing surge, it is very pleasant to see that Nepal is a sizable country where Communist parties of various stripes cumulatively enjoy the support of the majority of the country’s voters – even if it is the only remaining one.

However, this is not an accidental landslide victory of the CPN UML and Maoist Center. It took years of hard work with a Nepali touch unlike the other CPs of the region that they were able to keep, sustain, consolidate and muster this mass support of the working class. The Communist Party Nepal formed in 1949, in India, has gone through various phases of development, from being a party in exile to a party with significant presence in every part of Nepal. It has seen dozens of splits within its ranks and has allied to various international trends within the communist movement. However the urge of unity among various factions and groups which identify as Communist was always at the centre of their strategy.

From Maoism to Left social democratic ideology, from armed struggle to parliamentarianism, from war to peace, the Communists of Nepal in various forms were always known as communists. This identity as Communists has been very strong among their ranks and with good reasons. The term never brought them a negative response. It was always a vote winning term.

The predecessors of UML and Maoist Center have always learned to live and survive in most difficult circumstances and keep their support intact. While all political parties were banned between 1960s – 1980s, they managed to work along with the dictates of the King. They worked through Panchayats [1] established as an alternative to parliament1 and tried to popularize their ideas. The main debate among them was how to be popular among the masses with their own name.

The decade’s long rift between the Kingdom and the Congress, the main party of the bourgeoisie, was very well maneuvered by various groupings of Communists in their favor. They sided one against the other. However, most of them were never afraid to go to jail. And many spent years behind bars.

The Maoists

The Maoists, during 10 years of armed struggle from 1996 to 2006, used a combination of armed attacks on police and official buildings and personnel while negotiating with the government and the King. The rejection of negotiation was not written in the dictionary of their strategy. So was UML leadership who was always ready to find a way out of the crisis.

It was the Maoist determination to abolish the office of the King that won the day after the 2008 parliamentarian elections when Maoist emerged surprisingly as the second largest party trailing behind Congress. This was a great victory for Nepal to get rid of the King through a combined strategy of mass movement and elections.

After abolishing the office of the King, the main challenge was writing a new constitution that could guarantee all the basic rights of all the communities, no matter how small. The challenge was not met without years of negotiations and sacrifices of various governments.

Maoist splits continued during the 2008/2013 power period through coalition governments along opposite parties and fellow Communists. They were bitterly divided on the issue of the path of the ‘revolution’. One faction of Maoism advocated a boycott of 2013 election, a strategy that failed miserably. However the damage was done as Maoists emerged as third party rather than the second position they had before, losing a significant layer of mass support to the UML.

Maoists under the charismatic leadership of Prachanda made various overnight U-turns in terms of forming coalitions and alliances. However, the cleverest timely move by the Maoist Center was to form an election alliance with UML prior to the 2017 elections and decide to start a merger process of the two parties. Had they not made this move, they would have lost badly in the present elections. A political scenario of a three way race in the present election would have benefited the Congress and thus another unstable government, probably based on another kind of alliance.

The Constitution
The year 2015 saw the acceptance of the constitution with 90 per cent parliamentary support. The yearlong boycott of Madheshi parties and the economic blockade of Nepal by India was well fought by the vast majority of Nepal. They succeeded in bringing back the Madheshi parties to main stream politics by making some amendments to the constitution in agreement with those advocating the boycott.

A Positive Development and Real Challenge
The Communist’s alliance landslide victory is a positive development in the South Asian region. It is like a wave of fresh cool air in an over-heated region of the Indian subcontinent. The real challenge begins now. The massive victory has raised massive expectations. Reforms are on the agenda. However, reforms under capitalism can never be of permanent nature. The capitalist path in the longer run is a road to distraction and losing mass support of the Communist’s ideology. They have to move ahead on the road of parliament to abolishing capitalism and remaining elements of feudal society. They know best how to do it, if they want to do it.


[1] Panchayats are a system of local organization used at village and town level for example in India.
Ελλάδα / Τουρκία / Κύπρος / Εργατικοί Αγώνες / Ανακοίνωση Τύπου Wednesday January 10, 2018 03:54 byΑντιεξουσιαστική Κίνηση Αθήνας

ΟΛΟΙ στη συγκέντρωση που καλεί η Πρωτοβουλία Αλληλεγγύης Βιο.Με Αθήνας [1] την Πέμπτη 11 Γενάρη στην Κλαυθμώνος στο Υπουργείο

Ζούμε στο καθεστώς των πλειστηριασμών όπου μια ολόκληρη κοινωνία ανήμπορη να αντιδράσει, παρακολουθεί την ξέφρενη πορεία του χρηματιστηριακού κεφαλαίου των τραπεζών να αρπάξουν και να ρευστοποιήσουν το έχειν και το είναι των φτωχών και εργαζόμενων. Σύμμαχός του σε αυτήν λησταρχική προσπάθεια το κράτος και η κυβέρνηση η οποία με πρόταγμα τα συμφέροντα των τραπεζών πρώτα, επιβάλλει και θεσμοθετεί διευκολύνοντας και νομιμοποιώντας αυτή τη βαρβαρότητα.

Μέσα σε αυτό το κλίμα έρχεται άλλος ένας πλειστηριασμός του αυτοδιαχειριζόμενου εργοστασίου τη ΒΙΟΜΕ την Πέμπτη 11 Γενάρη στη Θεσσαλονίκη.

Αντί να δημευτεί η περιουσία της Φίλκεραμ ΑΕ και ΒΙΟΜΕ ΑΕ για τα τεράστια ποσά που χρωστούν, και να δοθεί στην συνεργατική ΒΙΟΜΕ, αδιαφορούν βάζοντας σε κίνδυνο την ύπαρξη του αυτό διαχειριζόμενου εργοστασίου. Και αν η προηγούμενη κυβέρνηση το 2012 προέβη στη δήμευση ενός οικοπέδου (και άρα εξαιρετέου από τον πλειστηριασμό) αυτή η κυβέρνηση αφήνει τους αλλεπάλληλους πλειστηριασμούς που έρχονται ει βάρος της ΒΙΟΜΕ, νίπτοντας τας χείρας.

Είμαστε μαζί με τους εργαζόμενους και είναι οι λόγοι που παραθέτουν οι ίδιοι:

«Με συμμετοχή τόσο των εργαζομένων όσο και της κοινωνίας στον έλεγχο της παραγωγής και της διανομής.
Με έλεγχο μέσα από συνελεύσεις όλης της οικονομικής λειτουργίας.
Με απόλυτη ισότητα στις αποφάσεις αφού έχουμε όλοι μια ψήφο.
Με ίσο μεροκάματο για ίσο χρόνο εργασίας.
Με προσανατολισμό της παραγωγής στις κοινωνικές και περιβαλλοντικές ανάγκες και όχι στη συσσώρευση κέρδους.
Αυτά παλεύουμε τόσα χρόνια τώρα. Οι κυβερνήσεις που έχουν περάσει όλο αυτό το διάστημα δεν έχουν κάνει αυτά που έχουν υποσχεθεί. Δεν έχουν καταθέσει και καμία πρόταση που να στοιχειοθετείται νομικά, άσχετα με ισχυρισμούς μελών πολιτικών παρατάξεων που τους στηρίζουν. Όσα ισχυρίζονται είναι απλά αποπροσανατολισμός και πολιτική παραφιλολογία που απλά δεν ισχύουν».

ΟΛΟΙ στη συγκέντρωση που καλεί η Πρωτοβουλία Αλληλεγγύης Βιο.Με Αθήνας [1] την Πέμπτη 11 Γενάρη στην Κλαυθμώνος στο Υπουργείο

Αντιεξουσιαστική Κίνηση Αθήνας

Ελλάδα / Τουρκία / Κύπρος / Ιμπεριαλισμός / Πόλεμος / Γνώμη / Ανάλυση Tuesday January 09, 2018 20:09 byΑντιεξουσιαστική Κίνηση Αθήνας

Για όλα αυτά λοιπόν, παλεύουµε σήµερα:

για την αναγνώριση της µακεδονικής µειονότητας, της γλώσσας της και της παράδοσή της και την άνευ όρων επιστροφή των µακεδόνων πολιτικών προσφύγων.
ενάντια στον ελληνικό (και κάθε) εθνικισµό - οικονοµικό ιµπεριαλισµό.
για τον κοινό αγώνα εργαζοµένων-κοινωνιών σε Ελλάδα-Μακεδονία-Βαλκάνια, ενάντια στο κεφάλαιο και τα κράτη και τους σχεδιασµούς τους.

Το ζήτηµα που έχει προκύψει από τις αρχές του 1990 για την ονοµασία της ∆ηµοκρατίας της Μακεδονίας και απασχολεί την ελληνική κοινωνία ως σήµερα είναι πολύ πιο βαθύ από όσο εµφανίζεται και σίγουρα ιδιαίτερα σηµαντικό για όσους και όσες από εµάς συµµετέχουν στο λεγόµενο ριζοσπαστικό, επαναστατικό, ανταγωνιστικό ή όπως αλλιώς κίνηµα. Και είναι σηµαντικό για τρεις κυρίως λόγους. Πρώτον, το µακεδονικό ζήτηµα µε όλες του τις προεκτάσεις είναι βασικός άξονας συγκρότησης του ελληνικού εθνικισµού και του κράτους του. ∆εύτερον, υπάρχει το πολύ συγκεκριµένο επίδικο ζήτηµα της µακεδονικής µειονότητας στην ελληνική επικράτεια. Τρίτον, απλά και µόνο το γεγονός ότι αυτή η υπόθεση αφορά πλειοψηφικά την ελληνική κοινωνία, η οποία ήδη έχει πάρει θέση, αναδεικνύεται σε δείκτη ωριµότητας και υπευθυνότητας αυτού του κινήµατος να πάρει και αυτό θέση δηµόσια.

1.Το μακεδονικό ζήτημα ως βασικός άξονας συγκρότησης του ελληνικού εθνικισμού

Για να κατανοήσουµε την εθνικιστική στάση της ελληνικής κοινωνίας πρέπει να αντιληφθούµε ότι στην Ελλάδα, όπως και σε όλη τη Βαλκανική, κύριο φαντασιακό αυτοπαράστασης της κοινωνίας αποτέλεσε και αποτελεί η ιδέα του έθνους στη ροµαντική της εκδοχή, ελλείψει ιδιαίτερης σχέσης µε το κίνηµα του ∆ιαφωτισµού. Αντίθετα µε τον πολιτικό εθνικισµό που αναδύθηκε στην αµερικάνικη και γαλλική επανάσταση, όπου το έθνος συγκροτήθηκε στη βάση πολιτικών σωµάτων ισότιµων πολιτών που δηµιούργησαν το σύνταγµά τους ή εναντιώθηκαν στον βασιλιά που δρούσε ενάντια στα συµφέροντα τους, ο ροµαντικός εθνικισµός επικαλείται το αίµα, το αρχέγονο της καταγωγής και της γλώσσας και το ένδοξο παρελθόν.

Στην περίπτωση της Ελλάδας πρέπει να προσθέσουµε και τη συνύφανση της ορθοδοξίας στον εθνικό µύθο, η οποία ακόµη και σήµερα πηγαίνει χέρι-χέρι µε το ελληνικό κράτος και τον εθνικισµό. Χαρακτηριστικό του ροµαντικού εθνικισµού είναι ότι αποκρύπτει την ιστορικότητα της δηµιουργίας του εκάστοτε έθνους και δηµιουργεί την πεποίθηση ότι το συγκεκριµένο έθνος υπήρχε ανέκαθεν. Αυτό το πλαίσιο συγκροτεί ένα βαθιά υπερβατικό και ετερόνοµο θεµέλιο θέσµισης της κοινωνίας. Η εθνικιστική κοινωνία φαντάζει σαν ένας εκτεταµένος ιδιόκοσµος, φαντάζεται δηλαδή τον εαυτό της, σαν να είναι το κέντρο του κόσµου και της ιστορίας, να βάλλεται από κάθε κατεύθυνση και φυσικά εχθρεύεται ο,τιδήποτε απειλεί αυτήν την τάξη πραγµάτων. Και ό,τι δεν µπορεί να το αφοµοιώσει, φυσικά προσπαθεί να το εξολοθρεύσει.

Γι’ αυτό και τα τυπικά επιχειρήµατα κάποιας Ελληνίδας ή κάποιου Έλληνα εναντίον της συνταγµατικής ονοµασίας της ∆ηµοκρατίας της Μακεδονίας είναι ότι “ο Μέγας Αλέξανδρος µίλαγε ελληνικά, όχι βουλγάρικα” ή ότι “τη Μακεδονία την κατοικούσαν από τα αρχαία χρόνια οι Έλληνες”, γι’ αυτό και η συγκάλυψη ή και άρνηση ακόµα ύπαρξης της µακεδονικής µειονότητας και της καταπίεσής της. Αν και υπάρχει µια τάση “υποβίβασης” του ζητήµατος σε ιστορικό από πολιτικό, αναγκαία είναι η ιστορική αναφορά και στα εγκλήµατα του ελληνικού κράτους στην προσπάθειά του να δηµιουργήσει το ελληνικό έθνος. (Να σηµειώσουµε ότι το ζήτηµα δεν είναι ιστορικό, πόσο µάλλον γεωγραφικό όπως παρουσιάζεται, γιατί τότε το µόνο που θα αρκούσε για την επίλυσή του θα ήταν ένα καλό βιβλίο ιστορίας, αλλά ούτως ή άλλως τέτοια υπάρχουν αρκετά). Το ελληνικό κράτος από τη στιγµή της ίδρυσής του προβάλλει το αίτηµα ότι ο ιστορικός του ρόλος, να συµπεριλάβει στην έκτασή του το σύνολο του ιστορικού ελληνισµού, µένει ανικανοποίητος. Υπάρχει όµως ένα πρόβληµα. Σε αυτές τις περιοχές που διεκδικεί το ελληνικό κράτος κατοικούν και άλλοι άνθρωποι οι οποίοι δύσκολα µπορούν να χαρακτηριστούν “Έλληνες” αφού είναι Αρβανίτες, Βλάχοι, Μουσουλµάνοι (Τούρκοι δηλαδή), Σλάβοι, Βούλγαροι και διάφορες άλλες εθνοτικές οµάδες.

Στη γεωγραφική περιοχή της Μακεδονίας όµως υπάρχουν ήδη από τα τέλη του 19ου αιώνα και άνθρωποι που αυτοπροσδιορίζονται εθνικά ως “Μακεδόνες”. Το 1893 ιδρύεται η ΕΜΕΟ µε πρόγραµµα την ανεξαρτητοποίηση του µακεδονικού κράτους και τη δηµιουργία µιας βαλκανικής οµοσπονδίας. Κορύφωση αυτής της κίνησης ήταν η εξέγερση του Ίλιντεν το 1903, η οποία καταπνίχτηκε στο αίµα από τον Σουλτάνο. Μετά την αποτυχηµένη απόπειρα του 1897, όταν ο ελληνικός στρατός νικήθηκε κατά κράτος από τον οθωµανικό, το ελληνικό κράτος προετοιµάζει ξανά την επέλασή του προς το Βορρά. Στέλνει στην περιοχή της Μακεδονίας παραστρατιωτικές οµάδες γνωστές ως “Μακεδονοµάχους” µε σκοπό τον προσεταιρισµό του ορθόδοξου πληθυσµού και την εκτόπιση του βουλγαρικού και του µουσουλµανικού στοιχείου από την περιοχή. Χαρακτηριστικό είναι ότι οι Μακεδονοµάχοι έχουν µείνει στην εθνική µυθολογία ως ήρωες που πολέµησαν έναν άνισο πόλεµο, ενώ στην πραγµατικότητα αυτό που έκαναν ήταν ό,τι κάνει κάθε στρατός: φόνους, βιασµούς, εµπρησµούς, καταστροφές.

Με τους βαλκανικούς πολέµους του 1912-13 το µεγαλύτερο µέρος της Μακεδονίας πηγαίνει στο ελληνικό κράτος, ένα στο σερβικό και ένα στο βουλγάρικο. Το πρόβληµα όµως παρέµενε το ίδιο. Στο µεγαλύτερο µέρος της η Μακεδονία δεν ήταν ελληνική!

Χαρακτηριστική είναι η φράση του Χ. Τρικούπη: “Όταν έλθει ο µέγας πόλεµος η Μακεδονία θα γίνει Ελληνική ή Βουλγαρική κατά τον νικήσαντα. Αν τη λάβωσιν οι Βούλγαροι θα εκσλαβίσωσι τον πληθυ- σµόν. Αν ηµείς την λάβοµεν, θα τους κάνοµεν όλους έλληνας µέχρι της Ανατολικής Ρωµυλίας”.

Σύµφωνα µε στοιχεία του Οικουµενικού Πατριαρχείου, πριν από τον πόλεµο µόνο το 10% περίπου του πληθυσµού αποτελείτο από ελληνόφωνες Μακεδόνες, ενώ το 40% αποτελείτο από σλαβόφωνες Μακεδόνες και το υπόλοιπο 40% από Μουσουλµάνους Μακεδόνες. Σχετικά ολιγάριθµα πληθυσµιακά στοιχεία της Μακεδονίας αποτελούσαν οι λατινόφωνοι Βλάχοι, οι Αλβανοί, οι Εβραίοι και οι Τσιγγάνοι. Πλειοψηφικό στοιχείο αποτελούσαν οι Εβραίοι µόνο στην πόλη της Θεσσαλονίκης. Από την κατάκτηση και έπειτα όµως εκτοπίζονται χιλιάδες εξαρχικοί Μακεδόνες και Μουσουλµάνοι και στη θέση τους εγκαθίστανται Έλληνες πρόσφυγες.

Αν και το ελληνικό κράτος σήµερα δεν δέχεται επίσηµα την ύπαρξη µακεδονικής µειονότητας στην επικράτειά του, τότε γνώριζε καλά ότι υπήρχε. Από το πλήθος αποδεικτικών στοιχείων χαρακτηριστικότερο είναι η έκδοση του (σλαβο)µακεδονικού αλφαβηταρίου ABECEDAR το 1925. Με βασικό άξονα την οµογενοποίηση της περιοχής από το 1926 αρχίζει η συστηµατική εθνοκάθαρση των (σλαβο)µακεδόνων από το ελληνικό κράτος µε το κλείσιµο των σχολείων τους, την απαγόρευση χρήσης της γλώσσας τους ακόµη και στον ιδιωτικό τους χώρο, µε δηµόσιες τελετές αποκήρυξης της γλώσσας τους, µε αλλαγές τοπωνυµίων και ονοµάτων µε φυλακίσεις και βασανισµούς. Ο δεύτερος γύρος εθνοκάθαρσης της περιοχής από τους (σλαβο)µακεδόνες συντελείται µετά από το τέλος του εµφυλίου πολέµου και την ήττα του ∆ΣΕ. Τότε πολλοί (σλαβο)µακεδόνες που συµµετείχαν στο ∆ΣΕ αναγκάστηκαν να καταφύγουν στο εξωτερικό ως πολιτικοί πρόσφυγες, λόγω της πολιτικής του µετεµφυλιακού ελληνικού κράτους. Το 1982 το ΠΑ.ΣΟ.Κ. επέτρεψε την επιστροφή όλων των πολιτικών προσφύγων στη χώρα πλην αυτών που ήταν ‘‘µη Έλληνες το γένος’’. Τα περί κατασκευασµένου από τον Τίτο µακεδονικού έθνους όπως γίνεται φανερό, στον βαθµό που συγκαλύπτει την ύπαρξη αυτών των ανθρώπων, είναι µπούρδες.

τα έθνη κράτη είναι (και στα Βαλκάνια) πολιτικές κατασκευές
Ούτως ή άλλως η Λαϊκή ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας υπάρχει από το 1945, χωρίς ποτέ να υπάρξει τόσο σοβαρό πρόβληµα διµερών σχέσεων µέχρι το 1991, όταν η ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας κήρυξε την ανεξαρτησία της. Μάλλον γιατί δεν ετίθετο από κάποιον ως τότε ζήτηµα αναγνώρισης της µακεδονικής µειονότητας στην ελληνική επικράτεια. Επίσης γελοία είναι η ρητορική περί απειλής της Ελλάδας από τη ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας, ενός κράτους στρατιωτικά υποδεέστερου από το ελληνικό, τη στιγµή µάλιστα που το τελευταίο είναι µέλος της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και του ΝΑΤΟ. Ενός κράτους οικονοµικά εξαρτηµένου, αφού τη στιγµή που το σύνολο της ελληνικής κοινωνίας “διαρρηγνύει τα ιµάτιά του” για το όνοµα και την ελληνικότητα της Μακεδονίας, τα ελληνικά κεφάλαια αλωνίζουν στη ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας, αναδεικνύοντας για άλλη µια φορά ότι ενώ, αντίθετα από τις επιθυµίες µας, µερικές φορές οι προλετάριοι έχουνε πατρίδα, το κεφάλαιο δεν έχει καμιά.

Είναι σηµαντικό βέβαια να αναφέρουµε ότι και η ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας πέρασε τα αναγκαία των εθνοκρατικογένεσεων με την ανάδυση ενός εθνικισμού (αντιπαραθετικού και πυροδοτούμενου από τον ελληνικό), µε τη µακεδονική κοινωνία να µοιάζει µε εργαστήρι παραγωγής έθνους. Μπορεί να δει κανείς εκεί την κατασκευή της εθνικιστικής ιστοριογραφίας, µυθολογίας και µίσους, µε γραφικές μετονομασίες οδών και συλλαλητήρια. Η ανάρτηση ελληνικών σηµαιών µε τη σβάστικα βέβαια δεν απέχει πολύ από το ελληνικό συνήθειο αναπαράστασης της σηµαίας των Η.Π.Α. µε τη σβάστικα. Και τα επεισόδια σε ελληνικούς στόχους στη ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας είναι στο ίδιο µήκος κύµατος µε τα εθνικιστικά συλλαλητήρια στην Ελλάδα, όπου κυριαρχούσε το σύνθηµα “η λύση είναι µία, σύνορα µε τη Σερβία”. Όπως επίσης η καταπίεση των µακεδόνων πολιτών που ζητούν βουλγαρικό διαβατήριο (µεταξύ αυτών και ο µέχρι πρότινος Μακεδόνας εθνικιστής πρωθυπουργός Λιούµπτσο Γκεοργκέφσκι!) και η αντιμετώπιση τους ως προδότες εντάσσεται στο ίδιο εθνικιστικό πλαίσιο.

Οι παρακινδυνευμένες αλλαγές τοπωνυμίων (αγαπηµένη τακτική και του ελληνικού κράτους) και η προγονική επίκληση στο ‘‘Μεγαλέξαντρο’’ είναι όντως αρκετά χοντροκοµµένα. Αλλά πρέπει να αναγνωρίσουµε ότι ενώ η Ελλάδα είχε περίπου έναν αιώνα να κατασκευάσει τη δική της εθνική ταυτότητα (µε ό,τι αυτό συνεπάγεται), η ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας είχε µόλις µια 15ετία! Η πολιτική σκοπιµότητα του ελληνικού κράτους µη αναγνώρισης της συνταγµατικής ονοµασίας της ∆ηµοκρατίας της Μακεδονίας είναι συγκεκριµένη. Αναγνώριση του ονόµατος σηµαίνει αναγνώριση της µακεδονικής εθνότητας και της αντίστοιχης µακεδονικής µειονότητας και της εθνοκάθαρσής της, και κάτι τέτοιο αποτελεί απειλή για τους εθνικιστικούς µύθους των Ελλήνων.

Ελλάδα: το αφεντικό των Βαλκανίων

Τo µακεδονικό ζήτηµα αποτελεί πλήγµα για την εικόνα της “ψωροκώσταινας” Ελλάδας, του ανάδελφου έθνους που όλες οι δυνάµεις το χτυπούν αλύπητα, αυτό όµως αντιστέκεται και συνεχίζει την πορεία του. Παραθέτουµε από την ιστοσελίδα του υπουργείου εξωτερικών: «Το µέγεθος των ελληνικών επενδύσεων, σύµφωνα µε το επενδεδυµένο κεφάλαιο είναι ανώτερο του επισήµως εγγεγραµµένου και ανέρχεται σε €950 εκατ. καταλαµβάνοντας την πρώτη θέση, απασχολούν άνω των 20.000 ατόµων και οι σαράντα µεγαλύτερες εταιρείες ελληνικών συµφερόντων σε πΓ∆Μ διαθέτουν επενδεδυµένο κεφάλαιο €830 εκατ.»

Ήταν βέβαια αυτή η Ελλαδίτσα που από την ίδρυσή της µέχρι σήµερα έχει υπερδιπλασιάσει τα εδάφη της, που το 1992 συζητούσε το σενάριο διαµελισµού της ∆ηµοκρατίας της Μακεδονίας από κοινού µε τον σφαγέα Μιλόσεβιτς, της επέβαλε εµπάργκο το 1994 και τώρα ασκεί veto για την ένταξη της ∆ηµοκρατίας της Μακεδονίας στο ΝΑΤΟ. Φυσικά δεν µας κόπτει εάν η ∆ηµοκρατία της Μακεδονίας θα ενταχθεί στο στρατιωτικό και δολοφόνο οργανισµό του ΝΑΤΟ. Θέλουµε να αναδείξουµε τη συνεπή ιµπεριαλιστική και ηγεµονική στάση του ελληνικού κράτους στην περιοχή.

Από τη πλευρά µας ελπίζουµε ότι η ίδια η µακεδονική κοινωνία θα αντισταθεί σε αυτή την κίνηση του µακεδονικού κράτους και στεκόµαστε αλληλέγγυοι/ες στις αντινατοϊκές, αντικαπιταλιστικές και αντικαθεστωτικές φωνές εκεί. Κριτική πρέπει να γίνει οπωσδήποτε και στην Αριστερά (εκτός φωτεινών εξαιρέσεων) εντός και εκτός κοινοβουλίου, η οποία εν ονόµατι ενός συνωµοσιολογικού αντι-ιµπεριαλισµού και αντι-αµερικανισµού έχει ενσωµατώσει (όχι µε µεγάλη δυσκολία) µέρος της πατριωτικής-εθνικιστικής ρητορικής σε πολλά ζητήµατα της λεγόµενης “εξωτερικής πολιτικής” όπως και τώρα όσον αφορά το µακεδονικό.

Με µικροµέγαλες συµπεριφορές (του τύπου ‘‘αν ήµουν κυβέρνηση εγώ θα...’’), διατυπώνονται απόψεις του τύπου “δεν µπορούµε να δώσουµε λευκή επιταγή στον ιµπεριαλισµό όσον αφορά το όνοµα”, απόψεις που είναι ξεκάθαρο (τουλάχιστον για αυτούς που βλέπουν) ότι πριµοδοτούν τον ελληνικό εθνικισµό. Κριτική πρέπει να γίνει όµως και σε λογικές που υποβιβάζουν το ζήτηµα µε λαϊκισµούς όπως “προσπαθούν να αποπροσανατολίσουν την κοινή γνώµη από τα σηµαντικά ζητήµατα”.

Το γεγονός ότι τις µακεδονικές θέσεις τις υπερασπίζονται οι Η.Π.Α., ότι υπάρχουν κόντρες συµφερόντων του ρωσικού και αµερικανικού ‘‘τόξου’’ στα Βαλκάνια, ότι ο µακεδονικός εθνικισµός είναι υποκινούµενος από κάποια ‘‘σκοτεινά συµφέροντα’’, πολύ ή λίγο έχουν σχέση µε την πραγµατικότητα. Είναι ένας ακόµη λόγος όµως, όχι τόσο για το ελληνικό κράτος όσο για την ελληνική κοινωνία, να αλλάξει γραµµή πλεύσης εγκαταλείποντας τον εθνικισµό και να προτάξει τη συναδέλφωση των λαών και την ισότητα των µειονοτήτων πάνω σε διεθνιστικές βάσεις, και όχι βάσεις ‘‘ισορροπίας δυνάµεων’’ και ‘‘εθνικών συµφερόντων’’.

Η Εθνική Ενότητα Είναι Παγίδα
Ψευτοδιλήµµατα δεν υπάρχουν. Όταν η κοινωνία θέτει στο σύνολό της ζητήµατα είσαι υποχρεωµένος να πάρεις θέση. Αλλιώς είσαι έξω από το πολιτικό - κοινωνικό. Εµείς που προσεγγίζουµε τα πράγµατα από την αντικρατική, διεθνιστική µεριά οφείλουµε να αντιπαλέψουµε κάθε εθνικισµό και µισαλλοδοξία. Οφείλουµε να παλέψουµε για µια κοινωνία που η διάκριση σε εθνότητες θα είναι αδιάφορη και δεν θα αποτελεί αιτία πολέµων, σφαγών και διακρίσεων. Οφείλουµε να παλέψουµε για µια κοινωνία όπου η ίδια στο σύνολό της θα αποφασίζει για τις υποθέσεις της απαλλαγµένη από τον γραφειοκρατικό βραχνά του κράτους. Αυτή η πάλη όµως αρχίζει σήµερα µε την αναγνώριση και ισοτιµία των µειονοτήτων, το δικαίωµα στον αυτοπροσδιορισµό, την αποεθνικοποίηση του δηµόσιου χώρου και βέβαια την εκδίωξη της εκκλησίας από αυτόν.

Για όλα αυτά λοιπόν, παλεύουµε σήµερα:

για την αναγνώριση της µακεδονικής µειονότητας, της γλώσσας της και της παράδοσή της και την άνευ όρων επιστροφή των µακεδόνων πολιτικών προσφύγων.
ενάντια στον ελληνικό (και κάθε) εθνικισµό - οικονοµικό ιµπεριαλισµό.
για τον κοινό αγώνα εργαζοµένων-κοινωνιών σε Ελλάδα-Μακεδονία-Βαλκάνια, ενάντια στο κεφάλαιο και τα κράτη και τους σχεδιασµούς τους.

Αντιεξουσιαστική Κίνηση Αθήνας

Γενάρης 2018

argentina / uruguay / paraguay / repression / prisoners / press release Tuesday January 09, 2018 17:57 byFederación Anarquista Uruguaya

On 2 January 2018, the Transport Workers Union (SUTCRA) realized a strike to advance pressure for concrete gains before the Wage Council. During the strike, a “scab” got in between our comrade Marcelo Silvera and his family with a result that is now known to everyone - our comrade was assassinated by the “scab”, hitman, or gunmen at the service of the management.


See also (in Spanish) :
Comunicado de SUTCRA ante el asesinato de Marcelo Silvera | Sindicato Único del Transporte de Carga y Ramas Afines - SUCTRA

featured image

This filth bragged about going armed to his workplace, of having intimidated workers so that they do not join the union and/or union actions, of having “offered” to his boss to take down unionists with the truck that he drove... A fatal repertoire, but nothing that escapes the reality that exists in our country. This was not the work of a “crazyman” or a “maladapted.” Maybe there has been a component of “excess,” but an excess that is still within the framwork of the political-ideological positions of many sectors of the owning classes.
There is a great quantity of bosses that do what they want with their enterprises and their employees. They pay what they want, when they want, refuse to comply with labor rights, and when workers organize among themselves to make corresponding demands, these bosses say with total impunity that they are not going to pay anything, that they will not comply. Hundreds of these cases exist in the interior of the country.

In many of these cases we encounter a strong reactionary component, in many cases a fascist one. The reactionary logic that has been permeating important sectors of our society permit, with total impunity, the occurance of these acts. That same reactionary and anti-union logic, anti-poor in general, provides that framework for which a fascist can assassinate a union militant and officer.
And now where is the discourse about “serious and responsibly negotiation,” “democratic,” “the labor-management accord,” when there is a union officer assassinated? All of that discourse turns out to be hot air in moments like these. This action is what inaugurates the round of Wage Councils for 2018, a round that will not be the same as those before. This act marks a before and after that they will make a ruling on the negotiations and struggle in the Wage Council.

The bosses want to play dirty. This is not strange to us. As a class, they were the ones who gave us the military coup of 1973. Their managerial associations greeted the coup with open arms and took advantage of the opportunity to fire unionized workers and labor militants by use of the 4 July 1973 Decree implemented by President Bordaberry and the Council of National Security. Fascist sectors that supported the coup took advantage of the opportunity to attack students and workers. The JUP (Uruguayan Youth on Foot) had already assassinated Santiago Rodriguez Muela in High School #8 before the coup. Those fascist groups were already getting involved in the police and military structure. Today, their members move around in those spaces, loose.

The bosses did not come out to denounce the murder, nor did the government aside from the Ministry of Labor. But these, like others, were lukewarm declarations that located the emphasis in “violence” and “co-existence” and in the “peaceful resolution of conflict.”   
How else can one explain the main project of the State whose Ministry of the Interior has developed a militarized force to invade and bring violence to the poorest neighborhoods of the country? How else can one explain that the Armed Forced cost millions of dollars daily? Peaceful coexistence when the armed apparatuses of the State are armed for war? Peaceful coexistence when the majority of femicides have been carried out by members of the police? It is a sick joke!

We reassert that in capitalism a peaceful coexistence between classes is an illusion. It is impossible. This recent lamentable act speaks clearly to this. The bosses do not have any shame in applying force to repress popular movements. Capitalism is “naturally” violent, it is in its constitution to utilize violence to maintain an unjust social order. Historical examples show that the dominant classes retaliate with a ferocious repression against el pueblo, all the way up to the use of genocide.

In response to these acts, which are turning points, we believe that a united popular movement should come out to the street to denounce, demand justice, and prevent the same impunity that keeps allowing for these sorts of scenarios. But looking beyond just that, we have to prepare ourselves. More difficult and complex times are ahead. In our neighboring countries military persecution is becoming more and more normalized, such as the offensive against Mapuche and solidarious leftist organizations in Argentina and  attacks against anarchist organizations in Brazil.

The assassination of comrade Marcelo Silvero will not remain an isolated incident without punity. It should not be forgotten. We are obliged to escalate the struggle, to escalate our commitment to militancy for a society without bosses, middlemen, nor militaries.
This is a alarm sounding that the political situation is beginning to change and it requires that we remain alert for the times that come. The only guarantee of change and victory for those from below is that of organization and struggle. Only through popular direct action can we create a Pueblo Fuerte that can flip over this tortilla.


Uruguayan Anarchist Federation

This page has not been translated into 한국어 yet.

This page can be viewed in
English Italiano Catalŕ Ελληνικά Deutsch

żQuč estŕ passant a Catalunya?

żQuč estŕ passant a Catalunya?

Sat 20 Jan, 11:01

browse text browse image

textThe Iran Protests: A Third Path to Political Change? Jan 19 06:36 by Fouad Oveisy and Behnam Amini 0 comments

Donato Romito (1954-2018) imageCiao Donato ! Jan 18 09:16 by FdCA 0 comments

26991887_2063969017172753_3989592990748405220_n.jpg imageΓια το Μακεδονικa... Jan 18 05:42 by Libertatia 0 comments

cgt_1.png image[Iberia] CGT convoca huelga el 9 de febrero en la enseńanza andaluza Jan 18 03:17 by 0 comments

Donato Romito (1954-2018) imageA propos du départ prématuré de notre compagnon et ami Donato Romito Jan 17 20:52 by Anarkismo 0 comments

460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_donato_romito.jpg imageDonato Romito (1954-2018) Jan 17 16:29 by 0 comments

Donato Romito (1954-2018), pintando un cartel durante el encuentro anarquista de St. Imier, Suiza, Agosto 2012 imageSobre la prematura partida de nuestro compańero y amigo Donato Romito Jan 17 03:15 by Anarkismo 0 comments

Donato Romito (1954-2018), painting a banner during the St. Imier, Switzerland, anarchist conference, August 2012 imageOn the untimely departure of our comrade and friend Donato Romito Jan 17 00:06 by Anarkismo 0 comments

fotojaviera.jpg image[Chile] El feminismo desde la otra vereda Jan 16 08:05 by Javiera Rivas 0 comments

umlem_mapuche.jpg imageElementos para una izquierda anti-racista en Chile: la cuestión colonial mapuche Jan 16 08:01 by Claudio Alvarado 0 comments

videoanarchism OR marxism Jan 16 01:52 by Kevin Doyle 0 comments

mak_1.jpg imageΟι φασίστες μιλοa... Jan 15 20:50 by "Μαύρο και Κόκκινο" 0 comments

cgt.png image"Los trabajadores recordamos perfectamente los recortes del gobierno de Artur Mas en Catal... Jan 15 13:31 by Mario Hernández 1 comments

460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_1.jpg imageSUTCRA communiqué on murder of Marcelo Silvera Jan 15 07:08 by SUTCRA 0 comments

thewarroom750x430.jpg imageGovernança global e hegemonia dos EUA Jan 15 07:00 by BrunoL 0 comments

Donato Romito (1954-2018) imageCiao, Donato! Jan 14 09:15 by FdCA 1 comments

mavrokokinessimaies725.jpg image«Ο κοκκινόμαυρος ... Jan 13 20:08 by Λένορμαν 0 comments

Kôtoku Shűsui y Kano Sugano imageCarta desde la prisión: Kôtoku Shűsui (18 de Diciembre de 1910) Jan 13 05:36 by Kôtoku Shűsui 0 comments

encuentroanarquistadelmediterraneocretagreciaanarquismoacracia.jpg image[Iberia] Por un anarquismo a la altura de las exigencias de nuestro siglo Jan 13 03:54 by BlackSpartak 0 comments

lead_automation.jpg imageThe political nature of the Fourth Industrial Revolution Jan 13 00:51 by Shawn Hattingh 0 comments

textThe Rage of the Poor in Iran Jan 10 19:53 by Araz Bağban 0 comments

textHeyday for Nepali Communists Jan 10 19:48 by Farooq Tariq 0 comments

5d8b2c1c45e967e4f7f8557686e98be7.jpg imageΗ ΒΙΟΜΕ κινδυνεύ^... Jan 10 03:54 by Αντιεξουσιαστική Κίνηση Αθήνας 0 comments

makedonia2750x500.jpg imageΜακεδονία και Εθ_... Jan 09 20:09 by Αντιεξουσιαστική Κίνηση Αθήνας 0 comments

textOn the Murder of a Labor Militant : Marcelo Silvera Jan 09 17:57 by Federación Anarquista Uruguaya 0 comments

81ndr2bexfl.jpg image[Book Review] Anarchism in Korea. Independence, Transnationalism, and the Question of Nati... Jan 09 10:57 by José Antonio Gutiérrez D. 0 comments

af0e5d30ecaaecdaf8b1b3fd7ee8b99esocialistpartyusapolitics.jpg imageUna propuesta para el debate sobre la transformación social y el anarquismo Jan 09 05:37 by José Luis Carretero Miramar 0 comments

460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_img_0511.jpg imageΕίναι επαναστατι... Jan 08 19:55 by Zaher Baher 0 comments

arton82762.jpg imageΤο κράτος είναι ο &#... Jan 07 13:42 by Acción Socialista Libertaria 0 comments

460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_resized393d3a8559f207ef470feeea55d0343f.jpg imageΗ ΒΙΟ.ΜΕ. θα μείνει ... Jan 07 03:41 by Ελευθεριακή Πρωτοβουλία Θεσσαλονίκης 0 comments

more >>
© 2005-2018 Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by [ Disclaimer | Privacy ]