Unconditional defense of the December 1st vandals

Translation from Spanish (Castellano) of the Pepitas de Calabaza reedition of a text written, in Aragon, by the Unos Caníbales on the events that transpired in the 1988's student strike in Spain, annexed to the book Os Cangaceiros. España en el corazón. Actas de la Guerra Social en el Estado español (1868-1988).

About this document

The successes of the 1st of December 1988, which had the merit of serving as a catalyst to the will and talent of those who wrote this pamphlet, had the added merit of placing themselves abruptly and with no return towards the “immensity of their tasks”, up to the point of putting an end to the continuity of such a promising beginning.

There’s nothing to be sorry about, however negative the unfolding of events. Only the platformist bureaucrats and militant groups defend, above all, the perpetuation of their formal existence; subversive associations, on the contrary, deliberately put their existence at stake when confronting crucial issues and immediately suffer the consequences of their shortcomings.

With this indispensable exception established, one needs to recognize the positive aspects of the pamphlet. Besides its sound and corrosive use of the language, it overflows with critics of undisputable virtue and unfortunate validity, and passes without difficulty from the most colloquial questions to the theoretically complex.

With this indispensable exception established, one needs to recognize the positive aspects of the pamphlet. Besides its sound and corrosive use of the language, it overflows with critics of undisputable virtue and unfortunate validity, and passes without difficulty from the most colloquial questions to the theoretically complex.

Among these one must place in the spotlight the critic of the university and student universe, which the French group Os Cangaceiros did in the context of the student movements of December 86, whose analysis Unconditional Defense owes a lot to.

No less concrete and pertinent was the critic of the politics, including of the “apolitical” that cemented the first antiterrorist student mobilizations to the point where it furthered the future well-known general actions, such as the one orchestrated in July 97 due to the sequestering and assassination of Miguel Ángel Blanco. The potential of the aberrant “apolitical” humanism of the students didn’t pass unnoticed to the State in order to “spontaneously” spread antiterrorist hysteria into the population. An achievement that the entire political spectrum operating in consensus would not have been able to achieve by their own means and that afterwards, due to the size of the political incomes in question, would threaten to destroy. Not so long ago, and in the global context created by the 11-S, we were able to confirm how a terrorist action serves to replace a political team with another and to feed an international pseudo-controversy that promotes the existing militarism. One supposes that the origin, just like our glorious and praised “transition”, would take long to be exported to wherever the change of power demands it.

The link between the form of the successes of the 1st of December and the Algerian rebellion crushed in the same days also stands out and that despite the repeated “antiterrorist” barbarism of the Algerian State in its efforts to subjugate it, it has nonetheless reappeared periodically. It’s left to point out that while the “anti-globalization” incidents of Göteborg occupied the front page of all the newspapers and the headline of the TV news, the Algerian rebellion, that almost reached the point of general insurrection, was the object of absolute silence and despise from the media, without the “anti-globalization” altar boys making the slightest explanation of the reason for such.

Finally, the pamphlet showed us another defining trait of the moment, since the current CGT (at the time CNT-A) revealed itself at the time as a good preacher of citizenship when “instead of lowering to the gruesome level of the Stalinists and their supposed “fascists”, resorted to the ethical and moral denouncing of these vandals whom at their eyes were excluding themselves from the respectable community of “alternative” citizens”.

The duty of any spectacle’s neo-militancy cannot be anything other than to prevent the access to the words and conducts from which all real revolutions begin, to forge and to repress the debate from within. As little as they may seem to have in common and no matter how real the differences are that separate them, from the NGO volunteers to the “radical” algazarras of the anti-globalization tourism, without forgetting the propagation of spontaneous civic movements and “democratic revolutions” with generous media coverage, the current movements of pseudo-resistance – well prefigured by the enemies of the vandals of the 1st of December – still represent the modern face of order, and we’ll soon see how they’ll merge in their practices.

1. Looting as one of the fine arts

Marx wrote:
We have no respect; we do not expect any from you. When our turn comes, we will not embellish violence

Wednesday 1st of December, the eternal guardians of misery, putting on ritual display the false opposition, suffered a heavy blow. In less than an hour a group of daring mutineers ruined all pretensions of the congregation of papier-mâché subversives that was occurring and put light on the misery of the lamentable and disgraceful student environment, making some show themselves for their true colors: apprentice seminar speakers of inquisitors and mercenary police.

The ridiculous protest-procession had occurred exactly as predicted: order and boredom ruled until the end. When the protest dissolved, some four-hundred people remained at the gates of the University. It was then that a group of around thirty people started the ruckus, breaking in a positive manner the suspicious peace that could be felt, declaring war on misery in all its forms and on all of its representatives; from setting fire to a garbage can to the wrecking of some cars it moved on to setting fire to a parked van with propaganda of the municipal campaign against AIDS1. They didn’t lack motives: in the current phase of internationalization and homogenization of the Market’s domination, what doesn’t stop being internationalized are its taming methods; AIDS, born in the labs or in the African jungle – we don’t so much care about its origin as we do about its use -, fought as any other disease by stupid reformists with or without State subsidies, has revealed itself as the most modern International Taming System, presenting the State and Capital (supreme beneficiaries and organizers of sexual misery) as the supreme saviors of Humanity. It’s against the provocateur appearance that the authors of these “acts of vandalism” acted. Curiously, it was those that are unsatisfied with their safe, but monotonous sexual life with an eternal partner that were astonished.

After this, the robbers proceeded to loot and setting fire to the monument to the Market’s omnipresence situated in the campus’ entrance. Which consists of a bank (from which after expulsing the employees, was robbed of 300.000 ptas.), a deposit for expendable materials (now more expendable than ever), an information office for the students and a travel agency. Thus contributing in their own way to the critic of the ridiculous organized trips. If University students like to celebrate their academic success basking in contemplation of the misery exhibited all over the planet, the “1st of December vandals” had to fight against it in their own city (after all internationalism starts at home); if the “adventure” of organized trips has extended itself as if a biblical plague, it’s because it needs to fill the void left by the loss of the adventure of life2. In case there was still any doubt that they were uncontrollable and that they didn’t desire to be controlled by any intellectual, bureaucratic process or frontier; they destroyed and fucked up all the data on the control of people that was archived there as well as telephone conversations, computers, glass, furniture, etc. with an estimation of damages on a modest, yet pretty, 2.000.000 ptas. (pesetas).

The average person will only see in these acts of destruction a celebration of madness, irrationality and nihilism. The rats of the press only saw destruction in the destruction, enjoying themselves with a bereaved description of them; the economists were moved by the amount of losses. Consequently this noble world, filled with rational and responsible people, has contributed to prevent people from understanding that what took place was a critic by action of the misery of life itself, accompanied by the violence which they were so quick to classify as “gratuitous” only because they know how expensive it can be to them. All of these secular priests that preach the humanism of the Market (authentic merchants of humanity) comes the supreme inhumanity in the destruction of the objects whose production sacrifices millions of lives every day, but no inhumanity in the permanent sacrifice demanded for the perpetuation of the holy cause of the Divine Economy, that keeps being today more than ever the complete denial of Man.

As such, a reduced number of “uncontrollable” – they were unanimously baptized as such by the craftsmen of social control, such as the press and the parties that know perfectly well that it reflects their failure – managed to invert the meaning of the day: what was supposed to be a day of triumph for the guardians of social peace and the unanimous exaltation of the spirit of democratic unity in the student movement, converted to a day that ended on a note of social war and the division into two clearly outlined and irreconcilably opposing factions.

Thus nobody can be surprised that a group of students led by members of the Students’ Union3 assumed the defense of the harassed institutions as proper action. For the glory of local patriots it was an idiot flying the Aragonese flag that put himself in charge of raising the moral of this weak and improvised attempt to restore order: “People, be you from private or public schooling, or from the Union, we need to form a block and kick them out, if we’re few they’ll beat us, but together we can beat them”. It was obvious that once the Market and its mediators are denied, once liberated from the jailers of the mind, they had to face the police of “good citizens”: when tedium and boredom dissipate, only the police force can end the real communication that propagates. Since they weren’t being civilized by the lies, they had to be suppressed by force; but at that place there wasn’t a force capable of stopping them. The sad replacement for an anti-disturbs force was quickly dispersed by the rocks frown by the mutineers. Onlookers that had adopted the cadaveric position of “first hand spectator of serious events”4 suffered the same fate.

Since we’ve mentioned these civilian clothed police, we might as well explain why the uniformed police officers cannot enter a campus without permission from the dean, to great embarrassment and derision of the university’s pigs: it’s simply the case of maintaining the illusion of a real struggle between students, giving them a space, limited by the authorities, in which to “play revolution” once in a while. As students are the ones to be locked there, there’s nothing to fear, because the culture that they adore so much and have entrenched in them is nothing but a bunch of policed ideas, as it was once again demonstrated.

2. Contributions destined to rectify the public’s opinion on the so-called “youth rebellion”

Félix Mansilla, leader of the CEOE, to Cambio 16 18/09/77, wrote:
The plants don’t have enough strength, unlike in other European countries, to guaranty a social pact. They can start a conflict; but one doesn’t know, as we confirmed from recent events, if they are able to refrain it

The background for this beautiful riot are the protests called by the unions (the speeches of the future union bureaucrats, the pride of their elders and reserve police force, were leading the parade: you’ve guessed it, the stinking Students Union) against the Plan de Empleo Juvenil (Youth Employment Plan) in the country’s major cities. These protests are a part of the spectacle of confrontation between the PSOE government and its union appendix, the UGT, whose high point is the famous call for a “general strike” in the 14th of December. Reality, in the spectacle, is always upside down, in order to extract its truth one generally only needs to invert it: the intentions of this sudden syndical “radicalization” is to recover the credibility of these bureaucrats in danger of losing their jobs for good, manage to get workers to accept their “proposals for struggle” and thus enjoy a year of “tranquility”. Under the apparent confrontation between the colleagues of the farce there’s a hidden strategy of social pacification, of domestication of the restless deafening discomfort that today rules the streets and factories; it’s a matter of getting ahead of any unorganized explosion of acute dissatisfaction that threatens to break the surface uncontrollably. As this is a dangerous game, there have been attempts to conduct a sort of general trial using the students as lab rats, as they are a strong center of docility and civism in society and consequently easy to manipulate. The best proof that students are fertile ground for aberrant illusions and maneuvers lies in the irrefutable empirical achievement of the anemic militant groups that can only seek fresh blood at the gates of the Institutes and Universities. There’s nothing as natural, as a result, than the government and unions to count on them for the creation of an environment of loud activism and contestation in face of the 14th of December.

As the spectacle sanctioned contestation vanguard, the students promptly answered to the 1st of December call. The managers of dissatisfaction had prepared the stage for a fixed fight by means of a provocation for them: the famous PEJ. With it, they were only legalizing what had been going on for years (legalization is real oppression’s dumbass brother), and if it was done it was not due to any supposed need to legalize the “informal economy”, since Capital and the State use the Law and legality with the same ease and regularity that they choke it. The only motive they had was the need to reinvigorate the spectacle with false confrontations.

The universal ignorance that goes on in that idiot factory called University was thus receiving exactly the recognition they deserved: the authorities didn’t expect them to react in any other way than they did: protesting peacefully against the “abuse” and demanding a more dignified treatment of the people whose fidelity to their masters is as unbreakable as their attachment to their own sad condition.

University students are definitely one of the poorest sectors of modern society, not just economically, but in their actual lives. They compensate the minimal amount of their experiences with a disproportional rate of ambitions in relation to the most mediocre of social destinies that awaits them and prevented from any chance of hiding their misery in ostentatious consumption of the Market’s abundance, they make their cakes from the passive consumption of the garbage cans of the political and neo-cultural world (sub-intellectual revolutionaries and subservient post-modernism are the typical examples). They are as poor as the worst paid worker, or worst, but see themselves as future rich, while the other poor at least know that they are poor (and there lies their true wealth) and don’t expect to find satisfaction in exactly that which impoverishes them: the Market. On the contrary, they tackle it when the opportunity arises.

The fraction of students that adorn their boring existence as militants in all kinds of little bunches with the term “radical”, one look or a short exchange of words is all it takes to see that they’re not so much politically radical as they are socially civilized: if they have an abstract rupture with everything is because they don’t actually rupture with anything. That their ecologist, feminist and anti-nuclear “struggles” radicalize especially in the circles of institutes and faculties already says it all, but since everything needs to be spelled out…let’s get it over with.

At each moment revealing itself as the antithesis of that innumerable youth that has no other “future” other than the factory, drugs or prison and that still constitutes a bastion of the denial of this society, it only makes sense for students to be despised by them. These youth critic real oppression on a daily basis, but does so with concrete actions, for instance, stealing in order to work the minimal amount possible. They’re delinquents no just due to necessity, but also due to simple boredom. And if they do work, they are aware that no salary, no matter how high, can compensate the time wasted earning it. University students have never done anything other than the political and juridical critic of misery (that’s why they are such fans of Human Rights, Amnesty International and Saint Sting) and, as such, they haven’t criticized anything; that’s why they hide their particular misery in political chapels and temples of culture. The spectacle of the “youth rebellion” that is put on display for the delight of the Old World is nothing but a smokescreen to hide the rebellious youth whose existence they want to deny and that expresses itself with actions such as this one.

The student youth go out of their way to participate in the management of the World and the Market, and to convert themselves by minimum cost into the owners off…average and mediocre positions in the social ladder. They react in face of the famous “crisis”, just like their programmers expect, by ensuring now their future right to shut up and work, trusting in the Unions as their future spokesmen in the “working world”. The young people that have passed through the F.P. (Formación Profesional) or the part-time workers know quite well what to expect of offers and of the “working world”; they have no illusions about it. For university students, the idea of a job when they end their studies is nothing less than a holy blessing. Meanwhile, a good chunk of those young unemployed are so (and this does a good job of shutting up the responsible for economic and information intoxication, despite complaining about it in private) because they don’t want to work and they, especially, don’t want to suffer the new conditions imposed on workers. Their absolutely negative attitude makes them un-defendable in the eyes of the defenders of society. And since the spectacle inverts all reality, this un-defendable youth is presented as the “backwards” part of young people, while the students are its “modern” part, when in fact there’s nothing more backwards than to still think that they can get rich by working; and they live haunted by the ghost of unemployment.

Among those that lost their illusions struggling to survive, the refusal of politics, understood as a technique to civilize and channel their anger, is widely spread. This highly dangerous reality to this World’s governments is so obvious that they even recognize it in their own way: oppressing it. But the inversion of the real isn’t just a common illusionist’s trick conducted by the “mass media”, it is something real that should be performed in social categories whose lives are upside down (that behave in accordance to the spectacles norms). Thus, the generalized refusal of politics (that is compensated with the injection of massive doses of civism and respect of order fomented by the permanent campaign of “civil insecurity”) is recognized… in the “apolitical” student youth, that becomes a model to impose in the whole population. The reason is simple: this “apolitical” that rejects any political affiliation; conserves and prolongs the spirit of the political: civism, respect for the rights and duties and faith in the State and the “progress” of the science of Capital as an answer to all ills; it resonates inside of the limits of politics and the dominant ideas of polite and “reasonable” petitions, and of a “responsible” and “open to dialog”1 attitude.

The critic of politics is today the primary condition to any critic. The willingness to participate in the decisions of the power only aids in the unreserved acceptance of the State and its political “rationality”; students place themselves in the place of their masters and rationalize from their perspective. It is thus logic for them to have a globally positive and apologetic stance towards this society and to commit themselves to improve what can only be destroyed. By not wanting, nor being able, to question more than a certain detail separately from the whole, they are the organic carriers of the principles of the State and they have, as a result, the monopoly on protest that is admissible and acknowledged by power.

The revolts of the fraction of the youth that is excluded are radically opposed to the political spirit; if they don’t want to “dialogue” it is because they know that they have nothing to say to the Old World. Only the State, political organizations, terrorists, representatives and those that let themselves be represented dialogue amongst themselves, as they have something in common to talk about: how to discipline their enemies, those savages that are the poor that still refuse to be controlled, how to best civilize them.

When students protest against something that in their eyes is an “abuse” of power or for not being consulted in the time to reformulate their lamentable role in hierarchical society to which they wish to be a part of, they do it thinking themselves as victims of a specific grievance that is susceptible of being repaired by having dialogue with the people in charge. They are the opposite of the youth that rejects the disgusting destiny that the Market World offers them and that, as a result, don’t see themselves in any particular grievance, they only see themselves in the absolute grievance of being set aside on the margin of society, a complete misery that can only be fully rejected.

Instead of feeling excluded from “participating” in only some decisions that the authorities administer more or less arbitrarily in their conditions of immediate existence, they see in existence itself an obligation to work to “live” the agent of universal exclusion, the essence that separates from life itself, of the access to existence. In the same way as the consciousness of this exclusion is much more unbearable, more terrible and more contradictory than being merely excluded from participating in decisions relating to details, the reaction against it is immeasurable more violent and intense, and of infinitely bigger reach and more full of consequences from the usual “protest” of the mediocre element of civil society humiliated in its illusory “dignity” of happily being a slave.

Young proletariats with their acts of the dissolution of the existing social structures (money, laws, family, property) are revealing the secret of their own existence, as they are in fact the dissolution of this world. When through vandalism and theft they reject the submission of their own lives to the norms of the Market, they are applying to society what society did to them: conviction with no appeal. By how much partial and alienated it may be, the revolt against the mere appearance of life that the managers of society attempt to reduce us to has a universal reach, since it doesn’t attack any particular aspect of modern misery, it attacks its totality. On the other hand, the universally apparent political pseudo-rebellion dissimulates with its colossal pretensions (“changing the world”, “establishing socialism”: these pretentions are obviously colossal in as much as they are only that, pretentions) a pesky and partial spirit that in practice reduces itself to taking a seat in the dominant spectacle, taking charge of its own management and surviving in the market with the most sordid of trades: the ideological compensation for the misery endured in silence.

3. Against Capital, a criminal struggle

Parliamentary investigation on the 18th of March insurrection wrote:
The equal right to all goods and pleasures in this world, the destruction of all authority, the denial of the moral restraints; that is the reason, when we get to the bottom of it, for the insurrection of the 18th of March and the frightful association that produced it an army

In other occasions the lugubrious student rallies have been touched by “incidents” more or less “serious”, to which the most ass-kisser sectors could express their reservations, but as a whole, those incidents, by not going directly against the political spirit, where still admissible and didn’t endanger the holy union of the “student forces”. The merit of the arsonists of the 1st of December consisted in its actions being categorically inadmissible thus forcing the covert defenders of law and order to take of their subversive masks and openly display their true face of upholders of passivity.

With achievements such as these, the micro-bureaucratic choirs of emolument militants can no longer hide their true role of instructors of the future managers of misery, where they are initiated into the submissive learning of the lie for the good of the “cause” and to break through the competition through slanders, faithfully following the example of some of the father-heroes amongst the founders of the existing world. All of these wastes of unintelligence, of the Christian circles breast fed by the milk of the worker priests and the cultural circus performers, can be summarily judged by a simple rule: that which they respect exactly measures their own horrible reality. The “Revolution” is their hidden God, the abstract ideal in whose name they accept to participate in the lowest of earthly actions and then immediately forget them by contemplating the beautiful horizon of the revolutionary future that will one day come to redeem them.

Don’t expect compassion from the assholes passionate for the liberation of the seals in the North Pole or Nelson Mandela, the champions of noble causes (South Africa, Chile), the ones that voluntarily go to work for the greater glory of the Sandinista “revolutionary” exploitation, all those women that only see exploiters in men, in summary, all those cockroaches that claim to desire an end to it all don’t actually want to change anything, since it has been quite clear that those that only want to change particular details are the ones that throw themselves as if one person to save all that is under threat in their foundations: the old Market fetishism.

For authority and those that think like it, the 1st of December looters opposed nothing, since they didn’t have any reivindications. Distant from the spectacle of politics, they could not be recognized for what they were: the true opposition. In fact, if they didn’t reject anything in particular is because they rejected everything that emanates from the rotten Market order, master and lord of all that exists. The mutineers abandoned all particular slogans and mottos and placed on the front of the ransacked building the program that had been outlined on the ground: “Death to Kapital”. To keep asking in these times for the lack of “móviles positivos” in an act of insubordination of this kind we describe here is to disqualify oneself immediately by not seeing the obvious: that which one desires is contained in its own negation, it doesn’t need to be “reivindicated” since it can only be lived. Only those that seek the recognition of power or the contemplative mass – immediately recognizing themselves in them – need to justify themselves.

Besides, the mutineers didn’t need to demand through bureaucratic paperwork what they had already taken from Capital. And since there’s nothing that justifies the Market World, they didn’t wield anything against it, with the exception of their anger and desire to party, knowing that they didn’t have any justifiable reason from the point of view of those that judge them, that their actions were unjustifiable and that against the enemy there’s no language other than open violence and sabotage, that also do not need to be reivindicated in any other way than by their own manifestation even if some “publicity” is made, since fundamentally they are public.

If the Old World needs justifications to fuck us (productivity, hygiene, “war on terrorism”, “insecurity”), then we don’t need any to hurt them and bury them so completely that even their hateful memory will be lost.

The uncontrollable that had this healthy and exemplary initiative consequently refused to be some “fearful” unemployed or to lose out on their lives seeking to “earn” it working. Conscious that the need for money forces them to work, they took advantage of this lamentable student rally to secure for themselves a time of rejoicing; and they did so in accordance to the law of maximum profitability, the risk1-return tradeoff, temporarily resolving their problem in a fun and audacious manner, making the individual theft and sabotage public and collective for all those that clandestinely manifest their dissatisfaction. The mutineers had realized that the spectacles struggle against the aggravation of the economic poverty maintained the poverty that is lived by young people intact and as a result refused to participate in this religious offering of an “alternative” to the management of Capital and its miseries. They were the living denial of Capital, manifesting the ludic and destructive aspect of all truly subversive acts against the sacrifice and discipline of the missionaries and militants.

The student spokespeople bitterly lamented that their reivindications were “used to mask acts of delinquency”. And it is when life has been manifested in the common ditch of thought that one confirms through the mummified mouths what was already obvious: in the society of the dead, life itself comes as a delinquency; all the zombies, conspirators to the eternal exploitation of other people’s labor, thus united in unanimous condemnatory psalm. The Stalinist party, veteran in fights that never go anywhere, showed us how its qualifications as an ancestral latiguillo by saying that the looting mutineers were “uncontrollable fascists”. In accordance to their auto-assigned position in the vanguard of repression, they criticized the police for their late and passive intervention (it is without a doubt that if they were in a situation of being able to order the cops, subtleties like the University special status wouldn’t stop them).

The clowns at the UGT-banca also spoke in condemnation of the theft (bank workers should reflect on this) and soliciting urgent identification and apprehension of the perpetrators.

In turn, a University employee declared on the radio that “they didn’t look like students, much less university students”, thus recognizing that university students are unable to act in such a way. The fact that some of the uncontrollable study – due to preferring it to work – doesn’t contradict the infamous truth in relation to the mass of unfortunate subordinates in this academic environment.

Meanwhile the remaining sidekicks in the ideological circus, the subtle and modernist CNT-A “deplored” the acts and, faithful to its cultured and refined style, instead of lowering to the gruesome level of the Stalinists and their supposed “fascists”, resorted to the ethical and moral denouncing of these vandals whom at their eyes were excluding themselves from the respectable community of “alternative” citizens: “People such as these are destroying one year of work in company committees, union locals and citizen activities”, angrily declared the CNT spokesperson to Heraldo de Aragón in the 2nd of February 1988. In due reciprocity these radicals of the spectacle, lovers of light disobedience, were praised by the press as the defenders of the civilized anarchism for good citizens and free of any suspicion. Bravo! A good behavior prize to add to the collection.

“Two souls, alas, live in my chest” (Goethe). Next to the “realist”, “earthly” and “modern” soul of the CNT-A there’s the “idealist”, “uninterested” and “incorruptible” soul of the CNT-AIT, eternal guardian of a past that is dead and buried, which they wish to resuscitate. Their extraterrestrial unrealism, of immaculate ideological purity, was nonetheless lowered to the level of a pesky Jesuitism when it had to lower itself to “mundane” matters. As expected, the press spoke of the present of banners with the caption of “Student Anarchists” amongst the mutineers, the AIT, feeling forced to publicly explain itself, pulled out a bland and ambiguous communicate attributing the responsibility to the organizers for not having done the organization through assemblies. Thus insinuating that had they organized in assemblies nothing would have happened, as a result revealing the ultimate truth of abstract assemblies: there are a lot of lambs organized in assemblies claiming their patent as a “revolutionary product”. Of course that there is the sorry excuse that “there are things that an officially recognized organization cannot say”, but that only goes to show that the rioters “said” it all. That’s the drama of sanctioned revolutionaries: they can’t say what they think, as it would lead a lot of people to think about everything that they usually say. The hard-working bees that circle the honey of subversion to take whatever can be collected and taken back to their fucking beehive, until now could only insult, silence or “support” the subversive acts in order to recover them (as it is in the shit that is the “support” for real struggles where group bureaucracy best grows). Now there is another possibility; they only speak so that it is clear that the CNT-AIT exists and is among the living, ¡Presentes!

In exchange, the atrocious label that a part of the student body that was there used for the vandals wasn’t as laughable: “you, the anarchists, are the terrorists!” as both assiduous and faithful believers of all the lies of the spectacle, the students have shown the full extension of the despicableness, the cowardice and stupidity demanded from the model-spectator. Since the spectacle wants the belief to be that only terrorists attack the system, the media have inoculated people with this lie against which these unfortunates have no defense against; it is logical, as such, for them to see in all attacks against the system as the work of terrorists or their allies. In this way surpassing even the Stalinists in disproportionate slander and verbal criminalization, and the worst is that the difference between them is that while the others acted deliberately with the deliberate bad faith of professionals, they did it spontaneously, simply acting from an unconscious reflex resultant from the media propaganda that has been hammered into them. It is necessary to add a few more things in respect to such a lie (see “Annex”).

If the mutineers’ violence wasn’t the antithesis of the misery of the political spirit shared by terrorism, university students, militants and authorities, then it wouldn’t have incited such savage reactions and such shameful lies. It is not a matter of the quantity of the damages, but the quality of their purpose (to have fun with the plunder instead of using it to purchase explosives or finance political propaganda) which surpassed the limits of what is tolerated by the spectacle and has embroiled in horror all those that share amongst themselves the defense of the old order of forced labor and the Market. The proof of the profoundly subversive character of the acts resides in the desire for criminalization manifested in the accusations of “delinquency” and “vandalism”, since under the kingdom of appearances true acts of denial – misunderstood and misrepresented by all of the trained commentators – appear under an appearance of criminality and/or as “unjustifiable” and “irrational” acts. Let’s make it clear, in order to avoid confusions, that we are not saying that stealing in itself is revolutionary. There are plenty of rats that resort to it: market hoarders, terrorists,… the list would never end. Yet, the way it was done and against whom it was done leaves little doubt over the nature of what happened.

The immediate fury that the looting, the attack and the fire caused in the defenders of public order, showed how an action that clarifies the real problems and presents a concrete answer in a practical manner, supposes in each group a moment of truth. And since ideology is nothing more than a speech of subtle lies based on passivity and non-intervention, when these disappear and the misery that is reality is before one’s eyes, their believers take the closest exit, covering their usual lies with shameless and grotesque lies in which not even they believe, but in which they trust to free them from the ridiculous situation in which they’ve fallen into.

Those that aren’t intoxicated by ideology could only believe what they were: some unjustifiable criminals. That of “fascists” or “terrorists” is something that is hard to sell to them, since they are aware that all of these public figures likes to dialogue with the authorities and the social acceptance of their actions. The anonymous vandals neither dialogue with power nor seek support from the masses; quite the opposite, they fight them. Denominating the mutineers as “anarchists” is as false as it is to call them “fascists”, and for the same reason: their action expressed the most clear practical refutation of ideology and to what it can lead. To a posteriori give it an ideological label and interpret their actions in accordance to that label constitutes the need that militant groups have that prevents them from being able to conceive that people are can act collectively without being inspired by an ideology and an hierarchical organization, methods that they don’t stop using for even an instant as much as they can and with the results that one can observe. To recognize that such would be possible and that it has magnificent results, is to recognize that the best they could do would be to disappear once and for all; as a result, the distortion of reality comes from a matter of life or death for them and so they consciously start to sniff around for the plot, the deliberate sabotage or the hidden police provocation, since they feel more dignified and less ridiculous with such pseudo-explanations than simply admitting that they are being ridiculed by the times.

For their part, the socialist and UGT scoundrels resumed their Manichean dispute, though now with a little less conviction, if that is even possible. PSOE, with the best of the lies aimed at diverting attention, accused the “political and union organizations” (!!) of “creating an environment leading towards civil unrest” (!!!) while UGT said that acts such as these “provide reason” to the government’s arguments against the 14th’s “general strike”. This dispute between the poles of the same lie in an attempt to save the spectacle of opposition, so greatly uncovered with the 1st’s insurgency, that for an instant made all pedigree differences take the background amongst all of the dogs that guard the order, thus being reduced to a vulgar ritual exorcism when faced with an unexpected interruption of the real struggle in the field of false struggles.

4. Defense of vandalism against common opinion

Victor Serge in Conquered City to some revolutionaries bothered by a looting wrote:
We will break all porcelain in the world in order to transform life. You love things too much and people not enough…You love people as things too much, and people not enough
Algerian citizen to the periodical Libération, 10/x/88, wrote:
is not known what they want; they break everything and don’t even explain why

If there’s something from this riot that should be highlighted it’s its modernity. The remains of old forms of uprising, now insufficient and fully recuperated by the owners of false contestation, are being buried all over the place. The English kids and inhabitants of the Algiers ghettos are frequent users of this kind of actions that are silenced and censored by the Wholly Alliance of Media and so-called leftists. Nonetheless, the recent massive insurrection in Argelia has been spoken of in a misrepresentative manner by the professionals of disinformation in order to avoid incentive, given its exemplary character, of other mutinies in the West (the laughable intentions of attributing to it the repugnancies of Islamic ideology doesn’t even begin to touch what actually happened and only aims to distort the reality of this completely modern uprising). What was achieved in this “third world” and “under-developed” distant country allows the Spectacle to display it with an exotic particularity and thus hide the concrete character of the rage of young Algerians and the lucid consciousness with which they recognized their enemy in the Market itself, and not in mere scarcity. With such it is intended to crush the old saying that only the hungry can have a revolution. But the hunger for revolutions that affects these countries can always be disguised as a “hunger revolution” until it hasn’t been fed by the ideological missionaries, sociologists and economists that work hard to “develop them” through the Market path; which, judging by this slogan from some of the looters in Algiers, isn’t that far: “We have cannibalized the shopping mall”. The only under-development which is necessary to overcome is that of the theory and practice of subversion, a task that all of these pigs try to prevent with their plans for “development” and “modernization”.

The uprising of the Algerian youth has been identical for the most part – only in a much larger scale – in terms of content and form to the one of the 1st of December mutineers. Since misery is essentialy everywhere, its refusal, which circulates speedily around the world, has shown itself to be visibly identical. Nobody can ignore that all professional ideologues that speak of stages, second and third worlds are just spewing garbage.

When the comical fraction of the militant and journalist riffraff “radically” supported the Algerian movement precisely because they had understood it in a radically false manner they could appreciate the same right under their noses, just like they didn’t predict anything, they understood nothing. These supposedly contestatory and subversive activists and columnists only felt the terror of the markedly menacing scent that this uncontrolled savagery meant to their own existence. And it is reality and by extension misery that is highlighted by the uncontrollable anger it causes, this revelation has something of sacrilegious for all those that participate in the spectacles trickery of social war; in any case, they are very badly placed in order to understand its real manifestations, they are still in the unreal situation that they wanted. Those that organize the spectacle of negotiation don’t understand of what consists the misery of daily life and the violence that it logically creates; all they have left is to scream in order to exorcize their fear and to call the police to restore order to things and things to order. Who but them to tolerate, foment and perpetuate modernized misery in their own home while at the same time ecstasy to the exotic revolutionary under-development away from their borders?

5. Reflexions and Consequences. The end of a battle is nothing but the beginning of another more decisive battle

Guy Debord, in Society of the Spectacle, wrote:
What hides under the spectacles oppositions is a unity of misery
Cardinal de Rech, in Memoirs, wrote:
I know you despise them because the Court is so well armed, but let me tell you that they are so confident of their power that they feel their importance. They are come to that pass that they do not value your forces, and though the evil is that at present their strength consists only in their imagination, yet a time may come when they may be able to do whatever they now think it in their power to do.

With the convocational democracy of the fictitious fight put on display by the false opposition, the real opposition appeared, revealing its essence (as a consequence, the false distinction between “economical” and “political” struggles was ridiculed, showing that there is only one division: real struggles and spectacle struggles). When the spectacle’s denial and the real one occur in the same space – like in December 1st – all present discover that there is no such thing as “neutrality” (onlookers are nothing but the spectacle’s reserve army) and that it is necessary to fight in one of the fronts. All ambiguity quickly dissipates and the distinction between friends and enemies is as easily established. There is no turning back from there.

The 1st of December riot made all of the fuss from the routine student reivindications to dissolve, thus proving its real nature: false problems for false protests. The Market and its guardians were directly attacked and when faced with this desecration of the sacred essence of the Old World, all of the fake feuds around how to better organize were left behind until order was restored.

All those dedicated to the business of political representation forgot their competitions when offended and embarrassed by the necessarily criminal conduct of those that only represent themselves. And those that let themselves be represented were ridiculed for delegating control of their own misery to others by those that nobody wants to represent. Throwing away the status of representatives and highlighting the uselessness of representatives, they left it quite clear that the only thing that distinguishes “apolitical”, “libertarian” and “Marxist” is the role that hides their unbreakable unity in the defense of modern misery.

In the general anathema and the indiscriminate slander that has hit the mutineers, there is only one truth: effectively, it was a group of truly uncontrollable people. Those that thus intend to ignore those that refuse to obey anyone other than themselves can stop dreaming: they completely missed the target. This is an accusation for which they can be proud and congratulate themselves for each time there’s an occasion that enables them to make it again, rubbing their scandalous truth on the face of the enemy. The unanimous and exclusive hate of the Old World thus professed by the patented guardians should be understood for what it is: through it, the enemy recognizes that the first victory of the uncontrollable has consisted of making them show their true face, and that the strength of their appeal resided in allowing the owners of false contestation to speak, decide and act in their name. It is that which the enemy never forgives.

The line that divides real revolts and its reasons from the sub-contestation ones and their impotent ideological caricatures has remained noticeably drawn. Each has to choose their side; nothing can exist like it did before in this pigsty of a city. From now on every dignified struggle can be judged by the level of the contemplation of the rage it manifested.

The “legalidad grupuscular” has been franchised and the kiosk political-syndicalists have openly shown themselves to be something that they never stopped being: a wheel-less bicycle in which everyone pedals, but never goes anywhere. The discreet nest of crabs that they make has never known anything else than walking backwards and they will soon return to their usual routine. So let nobody believe that because those reptiles’ have been shown for what they are that they will die of embarrassment and/or “self-criticize” in any way. And those that don’t directly participate in the stalls but that share with them such pious hope, let them wait…let them wait for the biggest beating that a pig has ever received. All those radical commentators and Machiavellian apprentices have always been wrong without ever recognizing it, and that is enough to understand what they are.

A period that carries the unification of what was seemingly separated (the defense of the same by the official authorities and the “alternative” ones) has been inaugurated and the separation of that which appeared to be unified (the rage of those sans-réserves and the ideological garbage of a militant brotherhood committed to salvaging their piece of the market).

Those that know to serve themselves don’t need to serve any cause nor resort to the ideologue in service in order to be explained for whom and for what to fight for; they know quite well that it has been only for themselves. While we wanted to take advantage of this magnificent gesture to express with words what the 1st of December mutineers expressed with fire, throwing rocks and looting. We don’t present ourselves before reality saying: “Here’s the truth, on its knees!” as so many ideologues do looking for their glorious disciples. We simply aim to expose concretely the forms and content of the current struggles; by doing so, we certainly don’t hide our intentions, which are the same as of the uncontrollable. The nature and the reach of the existing issues, the answers that are drawn up all over the place, the paths that open up and the obstacles to overcome have to be consciously possessed in order for them to be possessed in reality, that is all. The theory of social war is nothing other than the definition and expression of what is already being done, in order to do it better.

By giving reason to these acts, we have also proposed to give the reasons for other riots to occur against market domination. If there is something that those that side with the Old World fear and shush away when they can, it is the simple real communication about the world, directly transmitted clandestinely from daily life where, without any official statements, the acts and practices of refutation are drawn out. And this is the terrain over which all those that feel the need to declare war to everything that doesn’t belong to them and against everything that prevents them from ruling their own lives will be found.

Unos Caníbales
Zaragoza, December 1988

Annex

The spectacles organization of the defense of the existing order has for an axis that no central matter for its survival (with the artificial ignorance that is created on who are its real enemies and its false opposition being one of them) escapes its conversion to the realm of appearances. It has been years since the externalization of the violence engineered by the modern conditions of oppression has become essential to the management of this world; the only thing it asks for is that this externalization presents itself, both in form and content, as effectively exterior to the daily reality of the misery that the modern poor have to recognize and face in every moment of their concrete existence. As long as it distances people from the real battlefield, the Society of the Spectacle can very well promote the violence of this or that armed group, under its own terrain and through its own methods, and it is still strengthening the spectacle of which it is an integral part; in terrorism the violence is exactly as the spectacle is able to understand it, recognize it and employ it to its own gain.

Terrorism has a status as the figure of evil officially recognized by authorities, offered at all times so that people can choose between the unconditional defense of what exists and its false alternative. The kidnappings, the bomb plots, the massacres, etc., are actually a completely false confrontation (by being between people that, despite their differences, essentially defend the same thing), and conform the representation of a pseudo-revolution for people to contemplate in order to stop real revolutions from happening or even being conceived.

In exchange, the proletariat violence exerted against the existing conditions, by being foreign in both form and content from the politics of terrorism and the terrorism of politics, dismisses itself by manifesting itself both against the State and the social relations colonized by the Market and the lies that come with it: it establishes communication and collective enthusiasm, all the while the spectacles essence is the passivity and the lack of communication. Precisely for this reason it needs to be hidden, distorted, misrepresented: since it threatens everything (and not only the fight on this or that realm or person in power) it has no right to existence and needs to be expelled by the spectacle from reality, categorized with the inconsequential terrorist happenings, whose extraterrestrial violence passes for an omnipresent and permanent threat.

It is enough to know that the student rebellion, with its symbolic and ritual confrontations, is a play of false oppositions over false problems in order to deduce that it is much easier to establish connections between this pseudo-rebellion and the spectacles terrorism, which between this last one and nameless violence, no symbols, nor communicates, from the uncontrollable proletariats when manifested.

To its real enemies, the workers sick of being tired, the unemployed sick of being controlled, the young people sick of being bored,etc… power wants to deny even their true condition as such. The ultimate function of the terrorist hoax is to have an official enemy, the only one that is recognized as such, since the true enemy is not recognized by the spectacle, for the simple reason that it is easier to defend oneself against a fake enemy than a real one. Any true or fake enemy of “Democracy” equal each other and, if necessary, will receive the same treatment: never has censorship been so perfect or repression so indiscriminate.