Happy to present the international section of the Ukrainian online publication "Nihilist". We translate our articles about Ukrainian affairs, military conflict and anarchist theory mostly in English.
Editorial site NIHILIST are anarchists and anti-authoritarian radical left.
We allow ourselves to call a spade a spade directly honestly and sincerely. We are not afraid to seem «unconstructive», because we understand that «constructiveness» is a so-called «fair play».
We are not afraid to offend someone’s feelings and aesthetic tastes, because these feelings and tastes are formed by the system we are fighting against.
We are not afraid to seem destructive, because we are the destroyers indeed.
The State, the Family, the Church and the Сapital must die, and we make sure these ungrateful dead, guided by the thirst for power, do not drag the whole world down into their graves.
Sooner or later some beautiful flowers will grow on these graves and they will be cultivated by wise and sensitive gardeners. But now mankind needs much more evil and uncompromising gravediggers.
Read the newest articles here: https://www.nihilist.li/inter-antinational/
Fascists and
Anarchism and
Why leftists can’t support
Despite a reasonable sounding
Despite a reasonable sounding start to this announcement, we should have some serious doubts about aspects of this groups claimed independence from Ukrainian nationalism in it's 'lesser evil' approach to fighting the authoritarian Russian lead occupation of eastern Ukraine and Crimea until there is chance to examine their politics more thoroughly - maybe others who post on libcom with more knowledge on the Ukrainian political scene could help with that??
I'm sure that you are guided
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
My previous post here
My previous post here expressed my doubts about the 'internationalist' credentials of this group specifically in relation to the short text titled 'Anarchism and War' which I found confusing and in need of some clarification. They say for instance, ''Due to the circumstances,the anarchists were not only permissible, but it was also necessary, to join the ranks of the armed formations'' fighting against the Russian supported authorities in the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. Which 'armed formations' and within which territories is unclear and who exactly these anarchist would be fighting alongside isn't stated. 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'. The 'lesser evil' chosen in this case is the limited freedoms for them and others to operate within the confines of the Ukrainian state as compared with the more repressive conditions in the Russian occupied areas. 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? Given previous criticism on this site of some Ukrainian anarchist politics and activities in the period prior to the Russian incursions I thought this aspect of the groups politics deserved more scrutiny and preferably by some of those who have previously contributed on these issues.
PS: See here just one of a very long list of previous discussions that come to mind.
https://libcom.org/forums/general/ukraine-crisis-left-07102014
Spikymike wrote: Which 'armed
Spikymike
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
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
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.
2C-B wrote: The defeat of
2C-B
An interesting new take on stage theory. Classically it was national liberation movements supported by the Soviet Union and opposed by the USA that had to be victorious before capitalism could be properly opposed. Now it's a nationalist movement supported by the USA. Where else have we seen that lately?
I witter on about modern
I witter on about modern 'anarchists' being, in practice, indistinguishable from tankies and, like magic, before my very eyes one appears.
About historical tradition:
About historical tradition: Anarchism and Nationalism
And I wonder what all the
And I wonder what all the groups who much earlier signed this statement:
https://libcom.org/news/declaration-internationalists-againt-war-ukraine-critical-introduction-15042014
would make of this current Ukrainian anarchists strange approach to strategy and tactics that appear to diverge from an otherwise familiar critique of capitalism and the nation state if not of the more recent phase of inter-imperialist confrontation??
About revolutionaries and
An unfortunate direct line of
An unfortunate direct line of argument from the second world war's 'defence of democracy' against fascism, the defence of the democratic republic against fascism in 1930's Spain, the defence of democracy against Islamic Fascism in Syria, to the defence of Ukrainian democracy against Russian state Fascism today on the basis of anarchist principles! Generally Internationalist anarchists and communist were opposed to that line previously and certainly things have moved on in today's global capitalism and imperialist line-up not to simply give old arguments some new clothes.
So what's your practical
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?
2C-B, Well I'm not arguing
2C-B, Well I'm not arguing against people resorting to self-defence when directly attacked by state or state aligned forces but that is a long way from signing up with the same such forces on either side of state sponsored inter-imperialist/civil wars. I understand the choice you have made but minorities such as yours will be fighting alongside your enemies for reasons that may seem sound in your own mind but in practice will serve the objective interests of the relevant states.
Well, the self-isolation
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.
2C-B wrote: Well, the
2C-B
Even if many of those thousands of people are outright fascists?
Why are Eastern European "anarchists" so frequently drawn towards fascism?
bastarx wrote: Even if many
bastarx
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
Who are those "Eastern European anarchists"?
Anarchist military
Do you try to make contact
Do you try to make contact with anarchist groups in Russia?
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?
bastarx wrote: An interesting
bastarx
RO-RO-ROjava
O-O-Ocalan
2C-B wrote: bastarx
2C-B
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.
You for a start, supporting the war against the separatists in Eastern Ukraine, a war that is very popular with fascists.
Noa Rodman wrote: Do you try
Noa Rodman
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
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 wrote: The common
bastarx
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
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
2C-B wrote: Our editorial
2C-B
There's no denying that your Nihilist.li group appears to be a deeply committed, and genuine and well-read anarchists (e.g. you translated an article on nationalism from old TheCommune website).
And your defencist position can be found already in Bakunin himself, who in 1870 urged French workers and peasants to fight in the Franco-Prussian war, to exterminate every one the 5 to 600,000 of the "armed gangs of Prussian militarism" on French soil ("d'exterminer jusqu'au dernier soldat du roi de Prusse et de Bismarck") – not to leave a single one of them alive (letter 2 September 1870), in the name of the holy cause of revolutionary socialism. His reason too was, like yours, that the official French government was not actively enough in the prosecution of the war.
(not that I compare Donbas situation to Prussian invasion)
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?
Noa Rodman wrote: Quote: And
Noa Rodman wrote:
But Bakunin insisted that before the German troops could be expelled from France, there had to be a popular revolt to overthrow the "internal Prussians," i.e. the French bourgeoisie. This is quite different from a defencist position that intends to preserve the prevailing social system.
Bakunin's writings on the Franco-Prussian War were used by anarchists (James Guillaume, for one) to justify their defencist position in World War I (supporting the Entente powers). But very few anarchists at that time were swayed by their arguments.
As for exterminating the "armed gangs of Prussian militarism," let's look at Bakunin's complete sentence:
I would translate this as:
Since Bakunin suggests that German soldiers could leave France if they laid down their arms, perhaps he was not as bloodthirsty as appears at first sight.
double post
double post
Another difference from the
Another difference from the time of Bakunin in 1870 France, is that people employed in agriculture (I don't know if they include independent peasants) in Ukraine today are about 6% of the labour force, so there's no sense to call for a popular revolt of peasants in the countryside of Ukraine.
2C-B, if I may, I have a few
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? 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?
Noa Rodman wrote: In case of
Noa Rodman
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 wrote: 2C-B, if I may, I
jura
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
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
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:
So your position is that of
So your position is that of the defense of Ukraine (and its constitution etc.) against the pro-Russian forces/Russian occupiers. Do you see any parallel between this and, for example, the defense of the French Third Republic against the German Empire in WW1?
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? (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...?)
jura wrote: So your position
jura
Correct
jura
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
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
Defeatist propaganda? For what reason? To be smashed by Russia and get a far-right pro-Russian regime?
2C-B wrote: Ukrainian
2C-B
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!
2C-B
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?
So, some honest if obvious
So, some honest if obvious answers from 2-CB based on their earlier longer linked posts, but then ....Ukraine was, and still is, a pawn in bigger imperialist games - outlined here back in 2015 with not much change today despite the confusions of the USA states foreign policy following the election of Trump:
www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2015-02-22/ukraine-torn-apart-by-imperialist-conflict
2C-B wrote: 1. Ukraine isn't
2C-B
Well, obviously colonialism is over, so states no longer have colonies. I asked about France and Germany because some on the left (including Kropotkin) argued for the defence of the French state as the bearer of democratic traditions of the Enlightenment, as opposed to the junkerist, backward and conservative German Empire. They also argued for a purely defensive war. It seems to me that your reasoning is similar. Fortunately there were anarchists and other socialists who remained on internationalist positions in 1914, as I'm sure there are today in Ukraine.
2C-B
By "both sides", I meant Ukraine and Russia (including Russia-occupied territories of Ukraine).
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?
2C-B
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.
2C-B
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.
I'm sorry to say this but it seems that, as the saying has it, you've "excluded yourself from the proletarian camp".
2C-B wrote: jura
2C-B
Which is obviously way, way worse than the current far-right pro-US regime.
Uncreative wrote: Thats a
Uncreative
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
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 wrote: Ukraine was,
Spikymike
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 wrote: Well, obviously
jura
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
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
What is the reason? What benefit could we get?
jura
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
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
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
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 wrote: Which is
bastarx
Hell yeah! The uncompromising struggle against Banderite Fascist Kyiv Junta that kills innocent Russian-speaking babies for glory of world's gendarme USA!
2C-B wrote: Alright then, how
2C-B
I think it's simply imperialism. The idea that anarchists should jump to the defense of weaker or poorer capitalist states based simply on these criteria is ludicrous. There's a weaker and poorer state in any war. (And this is in fact the logic of traditional "anti-imperialism", but I'm quite surprised to see this coming from anarchists.)
2C-B
I'm not sure I understand. 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? That would be a pretty tragic story (no joke), but I'd still disagree with you (see below).
2C-B
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.
2C-B
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.
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.
2C-B
I don't think Ukraine is a post-colonial country with a revolutionary army. In my view, there was no war of national liberation in Ukraine. There is actually a continuity in the army that stretches back to pre-1991 times. There was certainly no "progressive" national liberation movement in Ukraine of the sort that some Marxists (and anarchists) talked about in the period of decolonization. So yes, I am comparing two capitalist nations and their armies. The army is a respected instution in many bourgeois democracies, even within the working class. That doesn't mean revolutionaries should defend it.
2C-B
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...
2C-B
It's not a matter of morality, just class analysis.
But anyway, I'd be interested in the actual activities that your group is involved in. 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?
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that your group is rather small and without any real influence on what goes down (no offense intended – this would be just like any of the groups that I was ever involved in, and many other people on these forums as well). 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?
2C-B wrote: Uncreative
2C-B
I have at no point declared "everything around is fascist, authoritarian, capitalist, nationalist and nothing can be done except of pure proletarian revolution led by anarchist syndicates". 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 and 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. I'm not really in a position to give you advice on what you should be doing (and who would make life or death political decisions based on what some guy said on an internet forum?!), i just thought it was really strange how deeply you support your governments military whilst still regarding yourself as anarchists.
My question about 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?
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.
I'm in the UK for what its worth, but im fairly confident that my stance on joining the governments army is not some new thing invented by a decadent, soft Western European with no understanding of the reality of international conflict, and in fact has numerous precedents in anarchist politics since forever.
2C-B
[/quote]
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.
jura wrote: I think it's
jura
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
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
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
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
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
It's your right to think what you want, but I live here and see it.
jura
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
French pre-war pacifists had such illusions and we all know how it was in the end.
jura
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
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 wrote: I think
Uncreative
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
Actually there is no working class activity that might disrupt the defensive war so I don't see any sense in theorising this.
Uncreative
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
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
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
We are doing anarchist politics while having military/paramilitary activities. We still have a possibility to do both of them.
Anarchists in Russia are a
Anarchists in Russia are a tiny minority who continue to do their best to oppose the Russian State but in the harsher conditions which 2C-B recognises and doubtless these kind of reports:
https://freedomnews.org.uk/several-tortured-anarchists-flee-russia/ will tend to reinforce 2C-B's defence of the Ukrainian States's limited democratic rights and it's military front line within the Ukrainian East and (or has it been abandoned) Crimea. 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 in 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. 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. It is sadly the case that internationalist anarchists and communists are presently too small and ineffective to alter the major course of events in these situations (anymore frankly than 2C-B) but we need to stand firm to that internationalist (or anti state nationalism) if we are to have any influence on the potential growth of an independent working class across national frontiers.
Spikymike wrote: Anarchists
Spikymike
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
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
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
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,
Thanks, I think I've seen
Thanks, I think I've seen enough. Just one more thing:
2C-B
How do you think WW1 ended, if not by means of two proletarian revolutions, first in Russia, then in Germany?
jura wrote: How do you think
jura
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.
Since 2C-B have continued
Since 2C-B have continued providing directly and indirectly a substantial listing of their extended texts via this discussion thread perhaps I can even this up a bit by recommending as alternatives the following few links from a variety of different sources on the libcom site here:
https://libcom.org/blog/nation-or-class-31052017
https://libcom.org/library/against-nationalism
https://libcom.org/library/against-patriotism-against-nationalism-down-national-boundaries-humanaesfera
https://libcom.org/library/nation-state-nationalism-oiseau-temp-te-andr-dr
There are lots more which contest the approach of 2C-B who's tortured logic against 'anarchist dogma' just leads them back to a voluntary and enthusiastic compromise with the capitalist nation state.
And presumably 2C-B didn't attend this gathering:
https://libcom.org/news/over-walls-nationalisms-wars-statement-participants-8th-balkan-anarchist-bookfair-19092014
Spikymike wrote: And
Spikymike
They were on the front with Azov battalion, presumably. All Ukrainians, in it together, etc. It would be wrong for us foreigners to criticise of course.
2C-B wrote: Civic
2C-B
I have seen so many suggestions made by those so-called industrialised and western lefties, but they always, take the context of their living conditions and without the real knowledge of local context, and trying to teach others. Fuck them and they need to listen more. Long live anarchist of ukraine. Do whatever you think suits for your condition, and good for you to ask them to live in Ukraine.
From Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia!
Raja Otek wrote: 2C-B
Raja Otek
Yup, anarchism means nothing - join your states army, literally fight alongside actual neo-nazis for the national cause, stand for parliament, join the police, whatever. Its all local context, right? Foreigners can fuck off with their criticism, they don't know anything about the great nation of Whereverland.
Btw, I heard Putin is actually an anarchist, he's just adapted it for Russian conditions. Great to see how succesful the anarchist ideal has been over there! I have some nagging doubts, but I'll keep them to myself, as a good foreigner should.
Uncreative wrote: Yup,
Uncreative
Nope. anarchism means try to listen and understand other people context first, and do not inherit your imperialist forefathers narration whose trying to enforce other people to follow you and worship you as a master.
join your states army, literally fight alongside actual neo-nazis for the national cause, stand for parliament, join the police, whatever. ----- who?
Btw, i heard Queen Elizabeth is returning back all the wealth her forefathers robbed from the people of south east asia and turn herself as an anarchist. Great to see how successful the work of anarchist there! Good for you to keep it to yourself but then write it up...
Just to be clear the
Just to be clear the Ukrainian NIHILIST group's strategy and tactics are not shared by other anarchists in Ukraine or those of other of the adjoining industrialised countries of the ex-Eastern bloc, quite apart from the criticism made by others within the wider libertarian communist milieu.
Raja Otek wrote: Nope.
Raja Otek
Ah, here is the crux of the problem - I thought anarchism was an anti-state, anti-capitalist political philosophy. My mistake.
Raja Otek
Telling someone over a web forum that enthusiastically joining their states military doesn't accord with anarchist principles is not the same thing as "trying to enforce other people to follow you and worship you as a master". Where are you getting this from?
Raja Otek
As you and your Ukrainian comrades have established (and who am i, a humble lacky of British imperialism, to disagree?), people are not allowed to comment on what anarchist movements in other countries are doing, whether it has been succesful, makes any sense, or is even anarchism
EDIT:
Raja Otek
The folks at NIHILIST have joined their states army, as have the neo-nazis of the Azov battalion.
All the arguments against
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
2C-B wrote: Once again, but
2C-B
Let me try. First, the choice that you are implying (join the national army) is never available to all, for a variety of reasons (health, age, gender). Second, in a life-or-death situation (unlike the frozen conflict of the present), it's common sense to fight for bare survival. If individual anarchists wanting to survive and protect their families etc. see no choice but to enlist, then so be it, but 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. It's better to abandon any pretense than to spread illusions. Third, given the absence of any wider workers' movement or any influence of anarchists in Ukrainian society, the idea of a separate workers' militia is an illusion. In this situation, if there's a choice, I think it's always better to opt for retreat, to try to preserve anarchist militants and their organization, and if circumstances allow that, try to put forward the classical internationalist and defeatist positions, and put them in practice, whether through open or illegal activity. Otherwise, avoid the draft and wait it out, or seek exile.
jura wrote: First, the choice
jura
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
Do you have any experience of living in a post-colonial country that suffers from imperialist military aggression?
jura
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
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
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.
And see also my April 20th
And see also my April 20th comment added to this library item here;
https://libcom.org/library/anti-imperialism-idiots-leila-al-shami
See also relevant critical discussion of the history of Irish Republicanism elsewhere on this site.
2C-B wrote: Do you have any
2C-B
I dont think Jura does, but you do have that experience, and yet you still manage to be wrong so I'm not sure what benefit that experience would give them?
2C-B
Actually lots of Irish people and British people were, are, and have been friendly with one another, because people who haven't 100% bought into nationalist politics are capable of recognising that the population of a country and the state that run it are two different things. Shocking, i know.
2C-B
This is an absolutely absurd thing to compare the situation in Ukraine with. Surely you can see that?
2C-B wrote: That's right,
2C-B
No, for some people there simply isn't.
2C-B
Why are you trying to make this about personal experience? Pretty much anything can be "justified" by pointing to incommensurable personal experiences.
Second, your simple logic that a post-colonial situation of imperial agression warrants anarchist support for "national defense" means that anarchists should have supported the Viet Cong or a number of other anti-working class movements, parties, and governments.
Third, I think that your analysis of Ukraine as a "post-colonial country" is just flawed. Ukraine wasn't a colony of Soviet Russia/the USSR.
2C-B
I meant more the preservation of an anarchist movement for when the situation normalizes – there will be no occupation of Ukraine by Russia and it seems pretty clear to me that this was never the intention. The intention was to create a zone of low-intensity conflict that currently seems to have been frozen.
But if the intention had been to occupy Ukraine, then yes, preparing for workers' self-defense during the occupation would make sense, and I guess joining the army would be a way of doing that. But as long as the idea is simply to gain experience and access to equipment, it would not involve lending official support (by an anarchist organization) to the army. It would probably also involve stealing from the army and doing other things the state wouldn't find commendable.
2C-B
No, it means opposing your national as well as international bourgeoisie, sabotaging their ideological, economic, political, and military efforts and seeking comradely relations with the working class of the opposing state(s). "No war but the class war", as the slogan goes.
2C-B
Yes, there are plenty of examples (including the one you mention).
And again you seem to be saying something like "all Russians" deny Ukrainians their identity, langauge, and right for self-determination. It looks like you're a victim of your state's nationalist propaganda. Try looking at it from a class point of view for a change.
2C-B
The goal would of course be to incite mass sabotage of the war effort, e.g., mass draft dodging, to prevent as many people as possible from going and dying.
A young American going to Canada instead of Vietnam also meant that someone else would have to go and perhaps die. I can't see how this justifies going.
2C-B
The Ukrainians I've met in person who are living, studying, and working in my country, were doing OK. There are many others working on construction sites here. Like for other migrant workers, their situation is not great, but it seems they prefer it to staying in Ukraine. I guess the anarchist calls for defending the motherland haven't reached them.
2C-B
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot how great the war and cooperation with the Spanish state worked out for the CNT-FAI and world revolution. Also, where in Ukraine are the agricultural collectives, where is the CNT-FAI and POUM, where are the Mujeres Libres, where is anything that would be worth defending in a revolutionary war?
I’m rereading this thread in
I’m rereading this thread in light of “recent events” and some of my views/predictions didn’t age well, to say the least.