NIHILIST — Ukrainian anarchist online zine

Fascists and rebellion

It happens that the fascists behave like revolutionaries. They fight with the police, expose large property fraud, use their flags at the strikes. This is their common tactic. They manipulate something precious and close to target audience’s heart by using flattery. When there is a need to agitate the masses of dissatisfied — fascists will build barricades, turn over cars and embody other dreams of an embittered citizen. And then, on a wave of universal trust, they come to power and turn the country into hell. Under their vigilant leadership, the «fatherland» will always be «in danger». Not the time for revolution, my dear! You’d better look for enemies not think about radical measures of justice.

Anarchism and war

Among leftist pacifists, it is widely believed that those Ukrainian anarchists who took an anti-Russian position, had made their choice under the influence of state or nationalist propaganda. Allegedly, life in an aggressive, authoritarian environment, broke their will and forced them to obey. I would like to stop this nonsense, because the anarchists came to the anti-Russian position not because of, but in spite of propaganda.

The authority shout like on bullhorn that Russia violated treacherously our sovereignty. Are state borders an argument for those who profess anarchist views, after all? Absolutely not. The state and its jurisdiction is not a value, and the more this state comes to freedom, the more resistance it deserves. In the current conflict, the Russian state is the more terrible enemy of freedom, and therefore, logic and common sense force to oppose it, first of all.

Why leftists can’t support Novorossia

I write this only to make people stop talking about «the division of the left into supporters and opponents of the Novorossia». Novorossia is a non-class project: the workers in it are fighting against other workers, and not against the capitalists. The workers are not fighting under the leadership of the workers’ party, but under the leadership of the Moscow oligarchs and Russian fascists (not those, of course, on the battlefields). Novorossia is an anti-humanistic project: its agents deny the diversity of religions and life-styles, any right of an unarmed person. And all these facts are known to us, unless we are afraid to face the truth.

I'm sure that you are guided by the best motives and you did not want to insult anyone, but such a comment looks really disrespectful and arrogant.

What is nationalism for you and why do you have doubts about the relationship between the magazine and the nationalists?

What is "the lesser evil" in your understanding and why should this concept influence the evaluation of events that happen without your participation and far from your home?

Nationalism and the National Question

It should be noted that ethnocultural and even just linguistic unity in the formation of the nation plays an important part, but it is, by no means, paramount. Examples being of a Swiss nation made up of several compactly residing ethnic groups, or the antagonism of the nations of the former Yugoslavia, which sometimes has a purely confessional and political background, with actual cultural and linguistic homogeneity, is clearly demonstrated. A nation is a product of the development of capitalist production relations in a particular territory and the basic structural unit of the world capitalist economy. On the subjective plane, this is a product of socio-political action, that is, created (in many cases artificially, virtually from scratch, then to be used by the state, as in the case of Ukrainian and Russian nationalisms) at a certain historical moment, a community that relies on developing economic relations. National identity can not be measured and defined in any way, but ideological. In other words, a nation exists as long as its representatives coexist in a homogeneous socio-economic space, believe in a common goal, and support the actions that lead to it.

Spikymike

Which 'armed formations' and within which territories is unclear and who exactly these anarchist would be fighting alongside isn't stated.

Ukraine is just as a post-revolutionary colony that suffer from imperialist military reaction. The armed formations means army and unofficial military formations that resist Russian military aggression. Anarchists aren't a major political group so would be fighting alongside other citizens of different political views.

Spikymike

The text alongside others makes clear this groups ideological opposition to the state and nationalism but also appears to acknowledge that what they are advocating is still in practice aligned with the interests of the Ukrainian state 'in the circumstances'.

That's true - right now Ukrainian anarchists have no better choice rather then fight alongside other citizens of different political beliefs in the ranks of army. If they had a possibility to fight Russian intervention separately it would be fantastic. But the point is that there are no such possibilities and they can't just hide from military tasks behind the backs of Ukrainian soldiers - people that die for peace in the larger part of unoccupied territories.

Spikymike

Whilst there is a history of independent anarchist armed formations in the past acting within and across national state boundaries as auxiliaries to rising class struggles against their respective states, the approach of this group seems a long way from that?

The defeat of Russian imperialism will break Ukrainian dominion status. This means there will be many ways to develop class politics that isn't much popular during all-national military suffer. Independent anarchist armed formations were based on mass peasant, working class and soldiers' support.

About historical tradition: Anarchism and Nationalism

We have been confronted with the fact that some individuals who have aligned themselves to the anarchist movement are trying to consider certain emancipatory traditions of certain members to be the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists and Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN, UPA).

We understand the reasons of such ideological mutations. They provide an opportunity to build alliances with those representatives of Ukrainian nationalists who are trying to invent another and more decent ideological pedigree. Let’s recall the past of the organized nationalism of the «Bandera trend», focusing on the events of the 40’s. After all, the events of this period are often falsified.

About revolutionaries and armies

Until the end of the 19th century, in a number of the largest and most influential powers, the army had been a kind of hard labor where an ordinary man, a soldier, could count on survival only. Powers, privileges and career opportunities had been in the hands of the commanding officers, treating soldiers as supplies. The only exceptions being the forces of those countries in which the revolution had won.

Thus, volunteers went en masse into the army of the first French Republic, for ideological reasons. The military patriotism of that time gave formerly disenfranchised French the opportunity to make an independent decision and rely on its fruits.

The old empires had been able to achieve goodwill from the patrials only towards the 20th century, but far from all social groups. The German Empire could count, for example, on patriotic high school students, ready to rush for the fatherland into trenches. In the Russian Empire, the students of military schools joyously died for their faith, the tsar and the fatherland. The ideological heir of the Empire — the White Movement — and all allegedly «Voluntaria».

So what's your practical proposition for anarchists in Ukraine during reactionary military aggression, if you think they're wrong about joining the armed structures?

Well, the self-isolation during military suffer from far-right clerical dictatorship is equal to malicious inactivity. You can't be neutral during all-social crisis but you can choose the closest side and fight for your truth alongside thousands of people who believe in the better world, even if it's not anarchy. So it goes.

bastarx

Even if many of those thousands of people are outright fascists?

I'm not sure that it's possible to cooperate with outright fascists. I am talking about majority of people who follow the common sense ideas.
bastarx

Why are Eastern European "anarchists" so frequently drawn towards fascism?

Who are those "Eastern European anarchists"?

Anarchist military organization during the civil war in Spain

According to a widespread prejudice, «ideological anarchism» excludes a classical military organization based on a one-man command and obedience to orders. This comes not only from the anti-anarchist propaganda of the Bolsheviks, who represented the anarchists as an uncontrollable rabble. Even the anarchists themselves, competing in a level of ideological purity, sometimes claim that true anarchism is so much anti-authoritatian that it excludes a one-man command from military tasks. This can usually be heard from insurgent anarchists, who reduce all forceful actions to the coordination of the set of affinity groups.

But if this can be effective for direct action, then to protect the revolution, and even more to counter foreign invasion, this method is not suitable. How can you fight the thousands-strong army formation with the autonomous groups of 10-20 people who at any moment can split up? A war with anyone requires supplies, strict discipline and guarantees that units will not give up their weapons.

But even those who glorify the role of the Iberian Anarchist Federation (FAI) and the National Confederation of Labor (CNT) in the Spanish revolution, can’t ignore or deny the fact that they have typical army principles. Dissolve these prejudices by the example of the Confederal Militia — the armed forces of Spanish revolutionaries during the civil war of 1936-1939.

Noa Rodman

Do you try to make contact with anarchist groups in Russia?

Sure thing. NIHILIST.LI editorial board includes also Russian anarchists. But the broader anarchist circles in Russia treat us with suspicion.
Mostly they stand for the "civil war" concept - an idea that Ukrainian conflict means internal quarrels of the bourgeoisie and has nothing in common with Russian imperialist aggression.
Other Russian anarchists believe that Russian-Ukrainian war is the conflict between USA/NATO and Kremlin (or between Ukrainian and Russian bourgeoisie), so the revolutionaries shouldn't step in.
Thanks god that pro-Russian puppet Donbass republics (so called "workers'/antifascist mass uprising against Ukrainian fascism") aren't popular among them.
Russian anarchists in the majority don't want to support the Ukrainian resistance against Russian reactionary intervention. This is the main point of communication failure.
While Russian revolutionaries talk about possibility or impossibility of supporting Ukrainian resistance, Russian bombs kill Ukrainians and Russian special services special services kidnap, torture and imprison Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars in the occupied territories.
Noa Rodman

And if I may ask, how many people are working on your site and organisation? Does it represent just some isolated young intellectuals or do you have influence on the (political) scene?

Our editorial board consists of 15 authors (30 y.o. in the majority) that work in different industries and are active in different social movements.
About the influence. For example, our media efforts revealed reactionary essence of Ukrainian leftists that joined "novorossia" project and led to the fact that their funding from the majority of the European left was stopped.
Also NIILIST.LI remains the only independent editorial office that deals with socio-economic and class matters of Ukraine and doesn't submit to the reactionary forces of Ukrainian, Russian or German establishment (Like Die Linke and their international foundations). We bear the burden not only of anarchist but also of liberal political work, revealing the reactionary nature of right-conservative and nationalist parties and movements that oppose the rights of women and LGBT people. It's hard to say how much our publication affects the state of affairs in Ukrainian society - but we continue to work.

bastarx

The common sense ideas of nationalism? It's certainly unfortunate that so many proles have nationalist ideas. Doesn't mean radicals have to pretend to share them.

Civic nationalism of liberal kind is the common idea in Ukraine, that's true.
Are you trying to teach us? Well, you can settle in Ukraine and show us, what the real radical politics is.
bastarx

You for a start, supporting the war against the separatists in Eastern Ukraine, a war that is very popular with fascists.

1. There are no separatists in Ukraine. There are right-conservative, clerical and fascist pro-Russian irredentist.
2. Ukrainian fascists (the Dark Enlightenment, Neoreactionary kind like the "National Corps" party) promote the so called pan-slavic and monarchist ideas of white brotherhood of Russians and Ukrainians. Traditional Ukrainian nationalists die out as a political force. Of course fascists support the war against occupants - this is all-national idea.
3. The fact that anarchists and fascists have similar tasks doesn't make this tasks toxic. The main difference between us is that anarchists want make Ukraine free from reactionary forces, both Ukrainian and Russian, and fascists want make Ukraine a right-conservative police state of Russian kind.

Kievan anarchist’s confession

Events in the Crimea and in the East were classic counter-revolution and intervention in one bottle. In Russia, there is a similar regime of bureaucratic kleptocracy, which acted as the suzerain of Yanukovich. To demand peace and an agreement with the Russian Federation — to give guarantees that the bourgeois revolution will be strangled by political methods. There are no other tasks for Russia and the clients of the owners of Donbass and cannot be.

The counter-revolution acquired the character of a clerical-conservative reaction. In the Donbass, we see the realization of the very «conservative revolution» that the far-right thinkers of the West and the East have long dreamed of. The ideology of the DPR / LPR is an original form of Russian totalitarian nationalism. That is, it is fascism in the «anti-fascist» wrapper.

Noa Rodman

In case of the (for now unlikely) scenario that the Ukrainian government at some point in the future will accept the situation of Donbass autonomy/loss of Crimea, and cease the war/mobilisation, what will your position be then?

If Ukrainian military command capitulate at eastern front and the government stop all the claims about Crimea that means two scenarios:

1) Ukraine is crushed. In this case there is no reason to continue conventional war - the better way is the guerrilla warfare against the occupants.
2) The power in Ukraine is usurped by the coalition loyal to Russia. This is one of the possible scenarios - in this case we can face the real civil war. Of course we will take part at the side of the constitutional order because it will gather the most progressive parts of Ukrainian society.

Anyway, I'm not sure that current status quo will change soon, so these scenarios are more hypothetical than real.

jura

2C-B, if I may, I have a few questions from across your Western border. What is your attitude toward deserters and draft dodgers? Do you support disciplinary action against them?

We stand for volunteer army type. It means that compulsory military conscription should be abolished. But we can face the situation when the enemy declares a total war - in this case mobilisation is the only way to hold the positions. No difference - is this an anarchist project or common capitalist society.
I'm sure that discipline is the main mean of military force so desertion is a serious misconduct (I can say it only in the context of current military defence).
jura

What would be your attitude towards a strike or sabotage in armament or munition factories, or in transport, that would disrupt the Ukrainian war effort? Would you support disciplinary action against strikers?

The same thing. The war is the most antianarchist action, but violence is necessary for survival. I don't know any type of modern society that can survive in a war while not using violence and power. It's no other way, so I understand Syrian curds.

I think that the formula is simple: if you hold a defensive war, everybody who threats your positions against the invaders is your enemy and should be stopped. Of course, it will be better to satisfy the demand of striking workers in the defence industry rather then crack them down. But there are no real threats of such kind of situation in reality - Ukrainian workers mostly disappoint by classic strike methods.

There was such kind of situation in Ukrainian history, when socialist government of Ukrainian people's republic cracked down the strike on the Arsenal military factory in 1918. People wanted the solution of the land issue, and government delayed the decision. As the result the UPR lost it's popularity and Ukraine entered the long going civil war.

By the way, our syndicalist organisation was involved in the "Italian strike" at local machine gun factory in 2011. The factory management solved the wage issue so the workers had won that strike.

Ukrainian far-rightists: doomed to be Russian

The remains of the far-right ideologies are being dumped by the whole world into wastewater. Ukrainian traditionalists, racists, ethnicists etc gratefully collect this garbage to raise it later as a banner. They haven’t learned to have their own meanings. Actually they have, but the problem is that everything that is meaningful and viable naturally stops being far-right and moves towards a more decent policy. And this is good.

Do you know what is even better? However this may sound ridiculous, geopolitics has placed the Ukrainian far-rightists before a very unpleasant fact. All their degenerate Western friends don’t give a fuck about dealing with Ukraine — for them there are no independent Ukrainians who have any of their desires. The idol of the new-fashioned Alt Right is Vladimir Putin, the public ideal is the Russian Federation, in which it is always cold and nothing can be done, and favorite philosopher — the Eurasian Alexander Dugin, who has recently urged to kill Ukrainians. In fact, Ukrainian far-rightists also love Dugin, but can not openly admit it. Ukraine has suffered from Russian «spiritual joints», reinforced by «Grad» rockets.

Their love to everything Russian is so obvious that it’s too lazy to repeat it. But, obviously, it is necessary.

jura

So your position is that of the defense of Ukraine (and its constitution etc.) against the pro-Russian forces/Russian occupiers.

Correct
jura

Do you see any parallel between this and, for example, the defense of the French Third Republic against the German Empire in WW1?

No, I don't see because of 2 facts:
1. Ukraine isn't an imperialist state with colonies and aggressive foreign policy;
2. Ukraine was a post-revolutionary country with a big of window of opportunity while it had become a victim of military aggression.
No similarity with WW1 French Republic at all.
jura

Purely hypothetically: don't you think it would make more sense for anarchists to organize, in whatever limited way, resistance to the war on both sides?

What do you mean "on both sides"? Who is the second side? Ukrainian government? Ukrainian anarchists do oppose the government, but it doesn't mean to oppose the army and it's positions. Government and army aren't the same - the Armed forces of Ukraine are the most popular institution that has a lot of people's support and represents people's aspirations. The government has to support the army with gifts and privileges. It doesn't mean that the army is it's self-sacrificing servant - it serves the people, and it's not a propagandist cliché.
The major enemy of Ukrainian people is the Russian military/proxy force. The minor enemy is Ukrainian government. While there is no guarantee that Ukrainian army will be able to hold the front while the revolution will smash the government, there is nothing to talk about. Anarchism is not about 24/7 riot - it's about people's freedom. During the war we have no choice but to choose a side that will ensure more freedom or less slavery.
jura

(E.g., by helping people avoid the draft, by spreading defeatist propaganda, by supporting struggles that threaten the war effort, if there are any such struggles...?)

Defeatist propaganda? For what reason? To be smashed by Russia and get a far-right pro-Russian regime?

Uncreative

Thats a really strange thing to read from someone who calls themself an anarchist. Out of interest, would you be pleased if the army took over the running of the country? Imagine how effectively the generals could serve the people then, wow!

Hahaha, very funny. Where do you live? Did you ever faced the militarised reaction while having no professional army?
Do you know any recipe how to survive as an individual and as an anarchist while not sitting at home and saying that everything around is fascist, authoritarian, capitalist, nationalist and nothing can be done except of pure proletarian revolution led by anarchist syndicates? Honestly, I'd like to hear about that!
Uncreative

Do you envisage a day that the Ukrainian government will not be saying that Russia (or someone else) is a threat to itself and to the freedom of Ukrainians, and when you may be able to resume any form of political activity that is anarchist without fear of undermining the national interest?

Actually we spotted Russian aggression and opposed it even before the legitimate government of Ukraine had established in winter-spring 2014, when the first Russian infiltrators revealed in the eastern cities.

Spikymike

Ukraine was, and still is, a pawn in bigger imperialist gamest

Anarchist Geopolitics? Hahaha.
Ok, let's imagine that Ukraine is "a pawn in bigger imperialist games". What should honest anarchist do then if pro-Russian proxy establish military far-right juntas and violate the basic human rights? Sit at home and repeat what wise anarchist gurus from the West say? Run away from the country and get a discriminated refugee, for not to stain hands while having disputed occupations? Please, give some workable advice about how to survive and defend basic human rights.

jura

Well, obviously colonialism is over, so states no longer have colonies.

Alright then, how would you call the circumstances in which one new-born country is under political and economical pressure (and after 2014 under military pressure) from the bigger and stronger imperialist country? No matter how, the reason is that a weak and poor democratic state is under attack. You may not join our struggle but you have no moral right to judge.
jura

Fortunately there were anarchists and other socialists who remained on internationalist positions in 1914, as I'm sure there are today in Ukraine.

During the WW1 internationalist acted within imperialist states. This example is not relevant for current Ukrainian-Russian war. In 1914 anarchists from France and Germany counted on solidarity to oppose the interimperialist war. Today's Ukrainian and Russian anarchists have no mutual solidarity, because one reasons: Russian anarchist are the one's who's state began the imperialist war against post-colonial Ukraine so they have to provide anti-war and pro-Ukrainian agenda, but the don't. We were ready to "antiwar" actions if they take place in both countries, so then Russian military could be removed from Crimea and proxy - from Donbass. It was the guarantee of peace. But Russian anarchists mostly decided to blame on Ukraine because of conscious or unconscious Russian state propaganda about fascist putsch in Kiev.
So why should we demonstrate the Christian virtues?
jura

By "both sides", I meant Ukraine and Russia (including Russia-occupied territories of Ukraine).

What is the reason? What benefit could we get?
jura

So do you support defeatism on the part of Russian anarchists and defencism on the part of Ukrainian anarchists? What do you think Russian anarchists should be doing?

Because their government started this war, they haven't done nothing to prevent it before and stop it after. If there was no Russian imperial interest, there wouldn't be any war in Ukraine.
jura

Since the 1980s, the US military regularly comes up in Gallup polls as the most trusted institution. It does represent many people's aspirations. It provides many poor working class people with a route to a good education, housing etc. This doesn't mean US anarchists should support the military.

Do you really compare an imperialist army and post-colonial revolutionary army? Maybe you think that proto-anarchists in the First French republic shouldn't fight against the royal absolutist reaction alongside French army? Or maybe you think that Rojava doesn't deserve solidarity in the war against "Islamic State" because it's... not very anarchistic?
jura

The goal would obviously be to cause a major disruption of the war effort in both Ukraine and Russia, the cessation of hostilities, and ultimately (although unlikely) a proletarian revolution.

How would you provide the secure anti-war policy that doesn't lead to risk of occupation of Ukraine and violation of all human rights here? I have no recipes and guess that there are such recipes. There is a vital need to oppose the intervention at all fronts including the military front. I still can use basic citizen and political rights because Russian proxy in the east faced the strong defence. If I work for undermining this defence, I will be a disfranchised peace of meat under Russian military control.
jura

I'm sorry to say this but it seems that, as the saying has it, you've "excluded yourself from the proletarian camp".

It's some kind of anathema? Ok, I even wasn't a part of your church.
But anyway, before you judge on me or my comrades for being "not very proletarian-oriented" move to Ukraine and raise a political movement that you talk about. Then you'll have a moral right for excommunication etc.

bastarx

Which is obviously way, way worse than the current far-right pro-US regime.

Hell yeah! The uncompromising struggle against Banderite Fascist Kyiv Junta that kills innocent Russian-speaking babies for glory of world's gendarme USA!

jura

I think it's simply imperialism... And this is in fact the logic of traditional "anti-imperialism", but I'm quite surprised to see this coming from anarchists.

Well, it might be comfortable to live somewhere far away from imperialist war and argue about acceptability of anti-imperialist concept. But we live beside the real imperialist war and have no such privilege. We see how the human lives are depreciating within Russian-occupied territories. So there is no questions about acceptability of anti-imperialist struggle for us - there is a vital need to protect that freedom that we already have.
jura

Are you saying that you would rather be organizing against the war (and against the war effort), and that you were ready to start doing just that, but then decided not to, because there was no solidarity from anarchists on the Russian side? And that this ultimately led you to supporting the Ukrainian war effort?

We were ready to organise anti-war actions if we had the guarantees: solidarity actions in Russia, it's troops withdrawal and removing the far-right juntas in Donetsk and Luhansk. Nothing of these happened and the large war for independence had begun. So from May-June 2014 all dreams about anti-war strategy were vanished and our community understood that there is no more options except of supporting of Ukrainian military.
jura

Again, I'm not sure I understand you correctly, but above you implied that you know that a joint effort of Ukrainian and Russian anarchists or socialists against the war would make sense (so you know "what benefit" you could get), but eventually you decided against it since the Russian anarchists were not doing anything against the war.

That's right, the benefits were visible in March 2014. Beginning from June 2014 there is no such possibility. The war has started and there is no "political" mechanisms to stop it. The only political way is to push Putin's authority, but western imperialist states won't do it.
jura

Well it's not like it's "their" government. Anyone worthy of the "anarchist" label in Russia is surely against the Russian government. It seems like you simply identify the Russian population with the Russian state. That would be quite shocking for an anarchist.

If you live in an imperialist state and use citizen privileges, you are responsible for the government actions. If you are doing nothing for stop your government's crimes - it's "criminal omission". Russian anarchists could be radically against Russian government but they do nothing to stop the anti-Ukrainian propaganda (Russian state media blame Ukraine as fascist junta) and military invasion. It's like "not their business". So yes, they are also responsible for it while they live in Russia and use it's citizenship privileges.
jura

Note that the internationalists during WW1 didn't apply this "tit-for-tat" reasoning. They didn't base their internationalism on what socialists on the other side of the front were or were not doing – for them, it was a matter of principle, based on a class analysis of the war.

Did it worked? I don't see any results. Maybe it's not the best strategy if it failed once and never came back to implementation.
jura

I don't think Ukraine is a post-colonial country with a revolutionary army.

It's your right to think what you want, but I live here and see it.
jura

In my view, there was no war of national liberation in Ukraine.

In my opinion several liberation processes started in 2014. Ukrainian nation wasn't oppressed culturally because Ukrainians had their own national state since 1991, freedom for national culture and it's budget support. So those liberation processes include civil society kind growth and political dependence denial.
jura

There are no guarantees, just as there no guarantees that Ukraine will not lose a (potential) larger conflict with Russia. Even if anarchist battalions participate...

French pre-war pacifists had such illusions and we all know how it was in the end.
jura

Are any of the people in or around Nihilist involved in actual fighting? Or do you concentrate more on spreading your ideas by means of articles, leaflets etc.? Do you agitate for joining the war effort?

Nihilist editorial board consists of people who fought at the eastern front, joined territorial defence institutions or paramilitary forces, spread ideas and teach people in civic paramilitary groups. We agitate for being ready to the guerrilla warfare and conventional war if the frozen conflict in the east becomes hotter.
jura

Being "pro-war" (in the defencist sense) probably means that you are left alone by the authorities, seen either as low-risk or even beneficial (for the time). Honest question: isn't it really the more convienent alternative, as opposed to being defeatist?

Authorities disturb left radical groups in a co-working with far-rightists despite of their position in war conflict. Earlier the special services and far-right gang "c14" fabricated "evidence" of terrorist activities for local left nationalist group. Only the media efforts made this case cool. What about the defeatist position - it's rather stupid and senseless then dangerous. But even the defencist position isn't an antidote for conflicts with the state or far-right groups.

Uncreative

I think perhaps there may be some other position, besides sitting round declaring things to be whatever, and joining the armed wing of your state

Within this war conflict there is no other solution but supporting the regular army and irregular paramilitary forces. Only this two institutions have a force to end with Russian occupation that threatens our rights and lives.
Uncreative

declaring it to be a progressive force thats nothing to do with the government and which serves the people and opposing any working class political activity that might disrupt the state waging war.

Actually there is no working class activity that might disrupt the defensive war so I don't see any sense in theorising this.
Uncreative

i just thought it was really strange how deeply you support your governments military whilst still regarding yourself as anarchists.

Well, we could simply pretend that we have nothing to do with it and continue our syndicalist, anticlerical, pro-feminist etc. activities that are still possible just thanks to the strong defence. We all are in the same boat here in Ukraine - anarchists, liberals, people with no classified views and even nationalists. It would be hypocritically to use the privileges of peace within Ukraine and see no merits of the military defence.
Uncreative

how you would feel about the military and the generals taking over running Ukraine was a serious one, in light of your belief that they are a popular force serving the people and are nothing to do with the government or state. Would you oppose this, and if so why?

Military junta means the violation of freedom in it's most concentrated form. There was the only case when the putsch brings towards democracy and liberation (check Capitães de Abril). I'm not sure that it could be repeated without mass socialist mood in society. So I strongly oppose all of military junta ideas.
Uncreative

And I dont have a professional army to defend me, no - I haven't got the money, for one thing. The state in my country has one though, and they of course do what the government say.

You don't have any vital need for military defence in imperialist UK. You have more rights and privileges that average Ukrainian could imagine and you have no risks to loose them. And we face the risc to loose the basics.
Uncreative

My point was that if you're waiting for your state to no longer have any threats to it before you do anarchist politics, you're going to be waiting forever. Although your response is interesting, nonetheless.

We are doing anarchist politics while having military/paramilitary activities. We still have a possibility to do both of them.

Spikymike

Anarchists in Russia are a tiny minority who continue to do their best to oppose the Russian State but in the harsher conditions

That tiny minority could honestly say it can't do anything to stop the invasion. But it (in mass) writes manifestos about two-front resistance and blames Ukraine as a beginner of the military conflict. Globally it legitimates Russia's military occupation of Crimea and proxy invasion in Donbass among world's left movements. Also there still is a tendency to blame on Ukrainian anarchists that argued their point of view.
Spikymike

But unlike Russian anarchists and some other radical opposition in Russia 2C-B provide practical and theoretical support to 'their' Ukrainian state and it's nationalist ideology

Sad but true - the defedist position goes alongside with civic nationalism and nothing could be done here. We don't know any other ways to support the resistance and not to feed nationalism (don't confuse civic nationalism with far-right, fascist nationalism; they're separate in Ukraine).
Spikymike

the process reinforcing the view common in Russia of a Ukrainian and 'Western' anti-Russian offensive that can only be a disservice to any current or future Russian opposition

Even Russian honest liberals stand against the Russian state and deserve it's disintegration unlike Russian leftists and most part of anarchists. Nationalist liberals/right liberals as Alexei Navalny and his party don't plan to de-occupy Crimea, empower Crimean Tatars' rights and leave Ukraine alone (he stated this many times in public speeches, talk-shows and interviews).
In other words we can't sacrifice our vital interests to help Russian opposition to take power. In addition it doesn't guarantee the withdrawal of Russian forces from Crimea and Donbass.
Spikymike

Understandable as the immediate political and psychological pressures on anarchists and communists in the Ukraine are to join in the 'national effort', working class internationalism cannot be just for peacetime.

Well, if militarised Russian reaction causes political and psychological pressure then you're right. Usually there is no mass joining to the armed forces without the fear of being oppressed by reactionary intervention.
What about working class internationalism - I think it could work only when both nations' working classes are in same conditions, have common tasks and interests. I haven't seen any working class solidarity when Ukraine was attacked - only few manifestos against Russian invasion from minor anarchist groups that even wasn't Russian.

Why people leave anarchism, and how to make anarchism work

An unusually wise and rich political philosophy of anarchism is encountering with serious simplification and dogmatization nowadays, turning into a clichéed and self-centered naivete. Most often, people «outgrow» anarchism, based on the representations of some local talking heads and hangouts. On the one hand, they realize its insolvency and inability to influence the situation, and on the other hand, they face political challenges, to which anarchism has no answers.

Most anarchists are generally more interested in how to declare something hostile, unnecessary and contrary to anarchism than to find answers to topical questions. When reality shows that this approach does not work — anarchism is ditched.

jura

How do you think WW1 ended, if not by means of two proletarian revolutions, first in Russia, then in Germany?

I think that the revolutions weren't the result of international working class concerted actions. Both Empires - German and Russian - fell under the weight of internal contradictions.

Also the western front didn't fall after the Russian imperial government dismantling in February 1917 and the war de facto stopped in march 3, 1918 - a year after. By the way, the Bolshevik government, established after November 1917, didn't wanted nor peace neither war with Germany. German imperial government was dismantled in November 1918 - in a half year after. So I wouldn't call it a plan.

All the arguments against joining the army in Ukraine breaks the question: if it is "taboo", then how can anarchists survive and protect human rights from foreign military aggression without having their own means-like anarchist battalions with tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and artillery, with a statute and a tribunal against their own war criminals? Do we need to be ashamed to remain silent about our activity in the conventional forces? Or is someone ready to give money for military equipment for an anarchist army in Ukraine?

None of the people gathered here will have an answer to this question, since no one has the experience of directly threatening their home and their rights at such a level as it happened and is happening in Ukraine. Your friends, who are not even radicals, did not shoot crowds of police and snipers on the streets (I'm talking about the Maidan revolution). Nobody took home, work and civil rights from you, having established in the city the military junta of Russian nationalists (I'm talking about the war in the Donbass).

It turns out that the argument against the participation of an anarchist in the army even in such a period is a purely subcultural, religious, lifestyle issue, rather than rational thinking and readiness for accountability greater than the destruction of the bank's showcase on the May Day rally. In fact, some people in this discussion banally refuse to military anarchists to consider themselves as anarchists, referring to the texts that are not connected with modernity and do not reflect real circumstances. Risorgimento, the second Spanish Republic, the resistance movement in France... They did not exist? Or were they all wrong?

Once again, but honestly: what should a Ukrainian anarchist do if his rights and life itself are under attack by the forces of the neighbour imperialist state?

Dark Enlightenment for Ukraine

Recently we’ve published a series of texts about a techno-fascist philosophy with the pathetically funny title Dark Enlightenment. This philosophy born in the US, denies democracy and equality, preaches racism, absolute market freedom, «traditional values» and the subordinate position of women. It’s alternative self-name — neoreaction — speaks for itself. The adepts of the Dark Enlightenment are sure that they are creating an influential secret society that works to restore the social foundations of the time of absolute monarchy, while promoting transhumanism and other high-tech ideas about improving humanity.

Furthermore this is not the story of a couple of freaks — the philosophy is successfully developing, there are influential intellectuals among its creators and supporters, including it should be separately highlighted Nick Land. He combines neo-reaction with accelerationism, and in the formulation of his ultra-capitalist and misanthropic ideology relies (this is not an abusive language, Land is an honest and open misanthrope), among other things, on Marxist and Deleuzian theory. However, Land himself repeatedly admits that the union of religious fanatics, racists and neo-futurist technocrats is situational and temporary — they will kill each other if they have to share one state.

jura

First, the choice that you are implying (join the national army) is never available to all, for a variety of reasons (health, age, gender).

That's right, trans-people, children, persons with disabilities and old people have no ability to join the army. But there is always a possibility to join the paramilitary movements to make a contribution in the defence.
jura

they should not confuse this with anarchist or any sort of progressive political activity, and they should not try to cover this up with defencist ideology.

Do you have any experience of living in a post-colonial country that suffers from imperialist military aggression?
jura

I think it's always better to opt for retreat, to try to preserve anarchist militants and their organization

You're right if you mean preserving people for partizan activity during the occupation. But you should have some experience, weapons, ammo and social ties for that. Joining the official army and paramilitary movements help to reach it.
jura

try to put forward the classical internationalist and defeatist positions

Classical internationalism means international friendship and cooperation. Can you imagine friendship and cooperation between imperialist and a colony? United Kingdom and Ireland in 20-30th? You can't make friends and cooperate with people that deny your identity, language and right for self-determination.
jura

avoid the draft and wait it out, or seek exile.

Avoiding draft means staying alive in the rear while somebody dies at the front.
Exile means to run away in different country and be a disenfranchised and homeless person that has no future. Imagine if FAI-CNT refused the participation in the war against Francists and ran away from Iberia.