Anarchists join fight against IS to defend Kurdish autonomous areas

Anarchists join fight against IS to defend Kurdish autonomous areas

Taken from a report by the French Anarchist weekly paper Alternative Revolutionaire this short article gives a taste of developements on the ground in the fight against Islamic State.

On Friday 26th September Alternative Libetaire reported that "Istanbul anarchists along other leftists and feminists, have managed to cross over into Syria and the northern town of Kobane which is currently threatened by ISIS.”

“For several days at the Syrian-Turkish border, the city of Kobanê is besieged by forces of the Islamic State (Daesh). Kobanê is a strategic turning point. If the city falls, the whole of Syrian Kurdistan is threatened, and with it a political and social model, that of "democratic autonomy" and "democratic confederalism" built since July 2012.

More than 100,000 inhabitants and residents have become refugees on Turkish territory.
The city is defended by the People’s Protection Units (YPG), militias linked to the PKK, and in which alongside the majority of Kurdish fighters, are also Arabs, Turks, Muslims, Yazidis, Christians or atheists, united against the fanatics of Daesh/ISIS.

Thousands of young people, socialists, trade unionists, revolutionaries, feminists, libertarians have poured in from all over Turkey to Kobanê. They go there to support the refugees and defend the city.
The Turkish army tries to disperse them, yet is accused of being much more permissive with the jihadists who are also trying to cross the border to join Daesh/ISIS

Despite the blockades of the Turkish army, hundreds of activists and militants have managed to cross the border. Among them, the comrades of the Revolutionary Anarchist Action Group, who made the trip to Istanbul to join the defence of Kobanê.

Posted By

Glimmer
Oct 3 2014 21:42

Share

Attached files

Comments

tw_
Oct 19 2014 12:19

DAF in generall another group who likes to be a part of the instutional power structure, they have no kind of critics even though they said that famous but most times empty rhetoric: "We're supporting the oppressed ones, we're on the same side". What the fuck about the "mandatory military service?" in Rojava? In that sense their practical support to so called social movement is supporting the ones who have instutional power structure in the name of "being against the power" and "in the special circumstances", is just another propaganda to spread their own ideological motivations, influences and practices. Of course they're are not evil as none can be., they may be doing some good thing with refugees for example.

But need to consider everything with its goods and bads. DAF, now supports an organisation who doesn't call itself a state but practically a state with its police, military forces and prison structures.

And once again, we're going to have another kind of disaster in an another ongoing disaster. The one which has the similarities with Palestine but that time it is much more faster in terms of its statization period.

So, as in general, need to go beyond labels to see what really is going on. Beyond the label of anarchist, beyond the level of autonomy. DAF is pretty good example what may happen if there's very limited or not at all critical analyses and perspective about what's going on.

So, Bonanno said about the palestinian state in Palestine Mon Amour:
" A Palestinian State could not fail to move in the direction of all States: that of military reinforcement, armed intervention, and the transformation of future diplomatic agreements into instruments of threat and retaliation. "
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alfredo-m-bonanno-palestine-mon-a...

So, as already before the the early signs of the coalition agains "evil enemy" Rojava started that process of practical statization.

And, with its unique differences, it seems there'll be somehow same experiences too, that will be lived as it's already started in the discussion like that happened in the Palestine:

" In the same way that it took us years to convince ourselves that the Israelis were torturers even though they had just come through the extermination camps, now goodness knows how long it will take to see that the Palestinians, comrades once upon a time, can become torturers today. "
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alfredo-m-bonanno-palestine-mon-a...

Marx-Trek
Oct 19 2014 14:18

tw,

As for DAF's rhetoric, I think the Ireland WSM comment (posted above) on solidarity for Rojava adequately addresses why someone would/should generally support or look positively at the recent developments.

Quote:
The one which has the similarities with Palestine but that time it is much more faster in terms of its statization period.

I am not quite sure if I got your point completely right here, are you saying that the Rojava Canton's and the other Kurdish "democratic autonomous" areas are an example of a more rapid "statization" than Palestine or are you comparing the Kurdish democratic autonomous areas to a certain period in Palestinian history?

At this point I would have to disagree with you comparison. Seeing that Palestine is still working towards official state recognition, then there is the pretty strong critique that the PLO eventually became the managers of Palestine heavily influeneced through the political process with Israel, effectively policing their own population for Israel. Furthermore, we have the Palestine Authority and the Palestine legislature. I would probably say that if anything this has closure resemblance to the Iraqi Kurdistan political landscape. However, resources and the plethora of militias and the individual parties activities within Palestine makes the comparison a little difficult to generalize.

One of the things I find interesting in Palestine as well as in Kurdistan in general and in Northern and Western Kurdistan in particular is the absence of total state authority and power from Turkey and Syria which provides actual political space for social organizing and fighting forces to emerge. And what is really interesting and worthwhile is the actual mention and emergence of something that not only in words but in practice is beginning to experiment with autonomy and collective/communal social organizing.

As for the mandatory military service, sure that is a relevant and interesting topic that needs to be discussed further. Which military service and what military, militia, or fighting group are you specifically are you referring to? YPG?

tw_
Oct 19 2014 20:15

The only option is fight in the army of YPG. You can not fight indepedently even if you like.

That mandatory service law is in practice, confirmed by the old friends who are now with Kurdish Movement... It's also confirmed that's in practice by other sources...

Here is detailed decision of the Rojava cantons:

------------------

The news site is close to the "Kurdish Movement". Can be seen also as a part of that movement...

http://www.diclehaber.com/en/news/content/view/410688?from=1923065108

-------------
"Rojava to defend itself with this law"

KOBANÊ (DİHA) - The Democratic Autonomous Administrations Founder Assembly held a meeting in Rojava and legislated an important law regarding the service of defense.

According to ANHA, the Democratic Autonomous Administrations Defense Law, which will be applied in all three cantons of Rojava, has been published in the official gazette. Defense Law includes 9 articles. According to the law, civilians aged between 18 and 30 must enlist in the military for six months. The law also states that the soldier can choose to either serve the six months with no interruptions or in break the time up into different phases. The duties and responsibilties of those residing in Democratic Autonomous Administrations are as follows:

First Article: The participation of residents of Democratic Autonomous Administrations into YPG fronts is defined as "Defense Service".

Second Article: The duty of defense is a/an social and ethical duty. Each association and family must charge someone for defense service.

Third Article: According to the law, each citizen aged between 18 and 30 has to enlist in the defense service. The participation of young women is voluntary.

Fourth Article: The duration of defense service is 6 months. When the duty of defense ends, attendant can optional leave or can join in the units of defense. It's necessary to complete the duty of defense within one year. Students must finish their defense service over a period of two years.

Fifth Article: The situation of quitrent from defense service; Those, who are in the ranks of YPG/YPJ (People's Protection Units/Women's Protection Units), asayish (security) and Kurdistan Freedom Movement, are exempt from the defense service. Families' only members, youths with heavy illnesses and disableds are exempt from the defense service.

Sixth Article: Financial contribution is given to the families of those who put the bread on the table in the family along their defense service.

Seventh Article: Those, who refuse to give the defense service and to join in defense of country, will be face disciplinary measures. Those who acts unlawfully during their duty will be on trial which will be based on the military law.

Eighth Article: Those, who want to give defense service, join in YPG units.

Ninth Article: This law is valid when it is published in the Offical Gazette.

(nt)

tw_
Oct 19 2014 20:59
Quote:
I am not quite sure if I got your point completely right here, are you saying that the Rojava Canton's and the other Kurdish "democratic autonomous" areas are an example of a more rapid "statization" than Palestine or are you comparing the Kurdish democratic autonomous areas to a certain period in Palestinian history?

I'm saying about what's happening now, in terms of practice. Kurdish people were under attack for long time, in many form for long time by different states.

That comparison with Palestine was generalized in terms of being under attack and one of the ideas as a solution to that attacks was forming a state. But i totaly agree there're huge differences with Palestine. The groups, the individuals, history and so on, pretty much everything except forming a state and a practically a state which is not called a state, still those are not the list of the all different and same/similar parts of those two.

I'm sorry but i think you like to be pretty much optimistic about when there is and there was no power structure which is called as state. In palestine, when the times it was called as Palestine Authority and Hamas in the place that it can govern or more recently when it's called as state, practices are in that direction, but if you wanted to mean they're not succesfull like the many other states on realizing their power to controll life: punish, organise and other power practices in systematic mean, i can agree on some points. But, since you may have missed as might many other things, there're a manifest some years ago which was pretty much good from GYBO

Quote:
One of the things I find interesting in Palestine as well as in Kurdistan in general and in Northern and Western Kurdistan in particular is the absence of total state authority and power from Turkey and Syria which provides actual political space for social organizing and fighting forces to emerge. And what is really interesting and worthwhile is the actual mention and emergence of something that not only in words but in practice is beginning to experiment with autonomy and collective/communal social organizing.

"Fuck Israel. Fuck Hammas. Fuck Fatah. Fuck UN. Fuck UNWRA. Fuck USA! We, the youth in Gaza, are so fed up with Israel, Hamas, the occupation, the violations of human rights and the indifference of the international community!
...
"
http://gazaybo.wordpress.com/manifesto-0-1/

"Trying to shut us up by saying “don’t criticize, keep your divisions “secret” and discrete” is most harmful! It just confirms our politicians that they can keep on doing it the way they do it, they will be supported by people who don’t know the theory lying in political programs. In other terms, criticizing Hamas political leaders – but the other factions’ political leaders AS WELL – is a way for us to say “if you keep it this way, all you will get is division, which is what Israel seeks”."
http://gazaybo.wordpress.com/about/

"For this we demonstrated, for this we put in weeks of work to bring the people of Gaza to the streets, for this we were knocked down by thugs on the streets, for this we have been arrested and abused."
http://gazaybo.wordpress.com/gybo-2-years-after/

And unluckily there'll be many stories about as you called "no state in practice" but for me canton named but statization in progress and some state practices is in progress in Rojava.

AES
Oct 19 2014 22:52

Anarchism is founded on class solidarity against militarism - since when are 'anarchists' public relations agencies for capitalist paramilitary political parties?

Anarchists in Support of Rojava-Kurdistan wrote:
"ISIS KILLS. PKK PROTECTS"
"Solidarity with Kobane, York Minster York UK"

tw_
Oct 19 2014 23:45

I couldn't understand much about your critic AES, what is it and to who? There're some posts here who are in sympath with PYD -not me..

Since the only thing i got from your post is that ISIS is bad and the PKK is good. How good you're feeling with that simplistic dualism?

AES
Oct 20 2014 00:31

tw_, thank you for your information above about miltary conscription. I am commenting about earlier discussion on this forum thread on the subject "Anarchists join fight against ISIS to defend Kurdish Autonomous Areas".

My comment is about a photo which someone shared on facebook (see link above), where they wrote on a placard "ISIS KILLS. PKK PROTECTS".

My comment "Anarchism is founded on class solidarity against militarism - since when are 'anarchists' public relations agencies for capitalist paramilitary political parties?" was directed to anyone else who thinks "PKK PROTECTS".

PKK are fucking capitalists.

Marx-Trek
Oct 20 2014 03:38

tw_,

The quotes from the Palestinian youth are awesome and make a valid point.

Sure you can call me optimistic about what I consider a weak state, that is fair and fine. But I still think that if multiple different militias/fighting units that represent different political interests can emerge and fight against a larger enemy (be it ISIS, Turkey, Israel. etc...). Also, to be clear, my point is not support for Hamas or Hama's views or other organizations. However, I do understand the popular support, despite the youth's view being valid, that emerges because these forces fight against the larger "oppressor" - that just reality. All aspects are interesting areas to discuss, both positive and negative. To be clear, I look more favorably towards across the borders solidarity and international solidarity that happens in challenging "oppression" or Palestinian anarchism activities in the area, one example being cutting power to Settlements. Though what is lacking from the anarchist left and larger left in general in the area or internationally is its inability to effectively deal with or engage with militarized oppression (invasions, etc...)

Hence comes in groups like Hamas that do deal with the military attacks from Israel (popular support through traditional "state" politics and figthing). Then the view of resistance and the observation of "militarized" resistance, passively look at any resistance (ex. "at least some group is fighting against "oppression", which is not the same as supporting or saying I love Hamas). Then groups like Palestinian youth,citizens, mothers, etc... voice certain favorable amazing views and other organizations with views that are closer to one's own political view make real on the ground impact and you can see it as favorable, etc... Hence this discussion.

As for the military service in YPG, thansk for the analysis and information. I see your point and admit this is obviously a sign of hierarchy and demanding something. Maybe my on view on 6 months which can be split up into 3 month terms makes me a bad anarchist but I am not losing sleep over it. However, hypothetically, I would have argued for voluntary service not demanded service but then would have joined and rejoined as needed anyway. So yes, this is a point proves the anarchist tendency on how to socially organize did not win out and again I think the Irish WSM speaks to this issue (ex. What is emerging in Rojava is interesting and like the Chiapas, the point on not being strict anarchists but using certain tendencies and strategies that has gathered valid support from the international anarchist movements.).

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 08:04

tw_

Quote:
DAF in generall another group who likes to be a part of the instutional power structure. In that sense their practical support to so called social movement is supporting the ones who have instutional power structure in the name of "being against the power" and "in the special circumstances", is just another propaganda to spread their own ideological motivations, influences and practices. Of course they're are not evil as none can be., they may be doing some good thing with refugees for example.

So everyone should abolish every form of institution for you? You have very high standarts man, what can we do to reach your level I don't know.

Quote:
But need to consider everything with its goods and bads. DAF, now supports an organisation who doesn't call itself a state but practically a state with its police, military forces and prison structures.

We discussed and know this already, And it is why actually (unfortunately) Rojova experiment is similar to CNT in Spain with its liberated areas. They also killed unarmed people (priests) they also implemented their law (women in military then to supporting positions) they even participated in government etc... I want to see a somewhat similar experiment can evolve into. (And besides my wishes and more importantly Kurdish population seems to want to see it come true)

Quote:
DAF is pretty good example what may happen if there's very limited or not at all critical analyses and perspective about what's going on.

Good old anarchists/communists they just emphasize lack of critical thinking in their (mostly intellectual) rivals like liberals.

Quote:
So, Bonanno said about the Palestinian state in Palestine Mon Amour:

Bonano in this article makes an totally superficial separation between people who throws stone to tanks and their political views, so that he can speak as if these are two totally different things. I think at best this is a very bad and crude form of materialism philosophy (combined with idealist politics, more on it below). This also makes politically nearly impossible to support these people who throw stones and support political party. For example in your comment you could only mention one thing: refugees, (ICC people also say the same thing over and over again), or for Palestinian situation you can only mention humanitarian stuff. OK nice, but if you think this is political support for people or solidarity in any political sense you are wrong. First of all you need to recognize the people you want to support and have a political solidarity relation with. You must recognize that they are people they made a decision, they have an agency (not of course unlimited but at least can lead them to a position among available options) I think the main problem is this unfortunately western anarchist/communist tend not to wish to recognize any other political entity. In their minds it is basically so given that "if the revolution will ever be occur" it will occur in the places they are part of (so issues of arms etc will mostly be eliminated, as they will make their revolution at the heart of imperial power there will be a spectacular opposition between interests of imperial powers and working class etc...) or it will happen according to ideas produced by them (critical individual, working class, communism etc...)

(Before rape apologist accusations begin, I must say: I do not oppose any of the ideas I referred, I am just saying, demanding of all of them to be true at the same time for a social movement is a form of orientalism (because this ideas exist and become part of social consciousness of some sort in relation to a material context and a specific social organization, which might or might not exist in its totality in Rojova) and it results in misunderstanding the political content of situation at hand)

Quote:
" In the same way that it took us years to convince ourselves that the Israelis were torturers even though they had just come through the extermination camps, now goodness knows how long it will take to see that the Palestinians, comrades once upon a time, can become torturers today. "

I mean this is true, Kurds could do that. however again the same issue here: Why everyone is asking Kurds to become what they failed to become? I very so wish they establish an society where basically "all unnecessary human suffering will end (as it was used to be said) however who managed to do that, and whom are we judging that the Kurds might to realize this ideal. If you know how to do it (I mean as a real political and social power) go do it. I am sure the Kurds will run into your arms to be part of it. However there is no such alternative seems to be available for it right now (and for example forum thread "what current movement inspires you most?" seems to imply that as everyone either mentions (according to their account) something small or historical)

I will jump ahead a bit: for me the question becomes in the light of the lack of real alternatives to current capitalism: where might such non-capitalist society would emerge? Will it spring by the hands of industrial working class in the global centre, or by the actions of those in the periphery who are oppressed by the hands of the state and its never ending quest for implementing capitalism in these places. I think it might not be wise to pick a side first then produce an answer according to it and then generalize it to all places and social formations.

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 08:17

AES:

Quote:
Anarchism is founded on class solidarity against militarism - since when are 'anarchists' public relations agencies for capitalist paramilitary political parties?

Since when anarchists side with states and condemn people's self organization or movements? If you care to look at you would see anarchist have a long history off supporting national liberation movements (as freedom from people's own liberation from their racial/capitalist oppressors)

Quote:
PKK are fucking capitalists.

You must be expert on "fucking capitalists" (pun intended). I guess you could show me examples of who is "fucking capitalists" right now? I really admire your detailed political analysis that goes way beyond just ideal principles, it is so complete and elegant I now wish to denounce my past as a rape apologist and side with your anti-capitalist global worker movement.

Serge Forward
Oct 20 2014 08:55

Is it just me who's finding the shameless cheerleading for the PKK on the one side versus 'the communist left says NO!' said in the voice of Ian Paisley (and yes I know it's not just left comms) all a bit tiresome? There's been a bit already but can we have some more of the nuanced stuff please?

tw_
Oct 20 2014 08:56
Quote:
Bonano in this article makes an totally superficial separation between people who throws stone to tanks and their political views, so that he can speak as if these are two totally different things.

It's not his seperation, it's real seperation that exists, there's no one block in anywhere, that's what the fucking power lovers wants to see, wants see the things in "easier" way, easier to understand. For the simplification of life, for trying to control the life easily.

Since you wrote and it shows pretty much uninformed about Bonanno and you just read a part from the little book of Bonanno about Palestine issue, did not understand it even thought you opened the link of it, it was much more than a simplistic article like you would do. Bonanno is not trying to simplfy the things as you do in the sake of supporting something you called as revolution. And some more ignorant argument from you follows "idealistic" do you know wtf is that? Do you think it's a gun that you can use everytime without giving a shit who you direct it to? Alfredo Bonano is an insurrectionist anarchist, who support propaganda by deed. He was in jail some years ago when they robbed a bank. He's not feeling guilty because he's not "hopefull" like you who sits in front of the computer and calls for support to authoritarian organisations because of conditions. Did you heard about International Revolutionary Front / Informal Anarchist Federation (Global)? I guess it's an another idealistic west fantasy for you. What a bad it's not just in west, i did not want to made you feel unhappy, too bad smile

I'm saying that, if that's revolution, i'm against it, i don't care how they call themselves, democratic federalists or even anarchists, or even the one identity which we do not yet. I'm not against any form of authority just because it's named state, it calls itself authoritarian, it calls itself fascist, it calls itself socialist, i'm against it and i want to attack it because it's an authority, it's a form of oppression. Can you understand what i mean!

Since you are not going to stop "yes this is problem but anarchist did that too" stupid argument to stop criticising of mine and others, it's not so much meaningfull. I'm not personally supporting the authoritarian practices that happened in the history, i'm crticising it, i want it to be criticised, as a possibility to stop it, but not as a guaranteed formula that will prevent that, no ideology in that form. As i agree in that sense with Bonanno, it's critical analyse that's vital for me.

Quote:
I am sure the Kurds will run into your arms to be part of it. However there is no such alternative seems to be available for it right now (and for example forum thread "what current movement inspires you most?" seems to imply that as everyone either mentions (according to their account) something small or historical)

I'm not surprised you trust that much to Kurds (i'm really so much afraid to ask which Kurds because as you pointed out it's a revolution, and i need to be carefull it's called like that. i'll not ask which Kurds to you, i don't want to provoce you to think, don't want to destroy your comfortable "thinking" zone)

I did not check the forum for inspiration list, but that may be good to open a wider thinking and discussion yet i can not say so much about. One of the basics that i learn is that, there's a word called as "populism" and very interestingly it happens in the wider/bigger "revolution", what a coincidence. Really interesting irony, isn't it? And in your thinking way, if everything we can support with very little critic or sometimes without critic is so small, it may not a problem of the reasons for criticising the those "bigger ones", it may not be the problem that the bigger ones are authoritarian in some form rather then all those "desperate" thinks it may be that we might be wrong about analysing the real politics and conditions/contexts for "revolution" and we need to consider supporting the so called anti-state authoritarian practices. If you want to be revolutinary you need to face with the disgusting and painfull facts, different realities -not instutional ones that's also being realized by individuals which are organised in different forms only. So yes, even though there's very small and very little hopefull things going on in generall things are really bad, and it's not getting good in generall nor it seems in that way. And it's impossible if there's no miracle of the worst, which may happen much more rarely than the miracle.

About picking sides, can you explain me how you can pick the side of the oppressors and the oppressed ones at the same time? And remember that the oppression is not just state or the imperialists that can realize their power to order life, control the life, if needs to be more clear with your words to help you understand what i mean, there are "good oppressors" which i'm against.

P.s: i can speak and read turkish very well, but i don't want to say where i live. Since the discussion had to turn in some kind of individualisation of attack to you also, i want to read your next "critics"... I want to see what category you'll put me in smile.

Another Note: In Many Turkish languaged web site, today there's a confirmed news that PYD got logistic support which is arms (different qualified ones, propably much more heavily ones too, and medical things too) from the Iraq Kurdish Federation that are sent by the C-130 cargo airplanes of the United States from the air to the Kobane.
Source: CENTCOM

Another problematic article in their uncritical support for weeks turns now into critical, you may feel that position closer, since it's not "idealistic" smile

http://roarmag.org/2014/10/kobane-kurds-us-imperialism/

You or the some other ones may be guessing why i am discussing here since i feel closer to the insurrectionary anarchist ones. Basically, with another reasons of mine, it was pretty much crazy to see the people were defending undefendable positions in Turkey and in Europe and some in U.S about Rojava.

tw_
Oct 20 2014 09:06

tw_

I'm not saying there're only PYD members in Kobane, and in all Rojava, or everyone supports that structure. At least i know some people from the Turkey went there to support the "anti-fascist" fight. But i'm not quite sure if all of them was aware of the signs of the authoritarian practices. But that doesn't mean that left can not support their authoritarian politics. Personally i think that the left, except some individuals and some little organisations is a part authoritarian culture, in a way or so.

But do you really think that the only reason why so many people since at least some of them know that Turkey was a fucking supporter of islamic militants in Syria an indrectly the ISIS (that's clear for sure, may be direct support to ISIS which we may find later) moved from the Kobane? Numbers changing between 50.000 to 200.000 and some more. If there was a libertarian structure in Rojava. Can't be reason that they don't want to forced to military service at least for some if not for all?

I'm sorry to say that, I don't see the ISIS and the YPG as equally bad as fucking most democratic and oppressor, currently president of the Turkey R.T Erdogan see them equally evil. I'm attacking the politics of the YPG-PYD and contributers to it, -yes in that circumstances!.

tw_
Oct 20 2014 09:26

Kobani: US drops weapons to Kurds in Syria
Kobani air drops likely to anger Turkish government, which opposes sending arms to Kurdish rebels in Syria
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/20/us-drops-weapons-to-kurds-i...

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 10:33

tw_

Wauv, you wrote so long, shit, I met my pair finally now the this from will explode I guess.

Quote:
Quote:
Bonano in this article makes an totally superficial separation between people who throws stone to tanks and their political views, so that he can speak as if these are two totally different things.
It's not his seperation, it's real seperation that exists

according to what it is real?

Quote:
Since you wrote and it shows pretty much uninformed about Bonanno

I am not uninformed about Bonanno, I am critical about Bonanno (though you are right I did not read the full of the book you shared, however thanks to Turkish anarchists Bonanno's translated represented in Turkey)

Quote:
And some more ignorant argument from you follows "idealistic" do you know wtf is that?

Yeah I mean if you put subjective idealist aims to heart of your political analysis you become idealistic. If you separate material people and their consciousness you are either: materialist or idealist. As Bonanno does in its article

Quote:
lfredo Bonano is an insurrectionist anarchist,

Yeah I know his deeds he is translated to Turkish, all you wrote can be found in wiki.

Quote:
guess it's an another idealistic west fantasy

I did not said his actions (or related people's actions) are idealist (however in another context they could be considered idealist, which I would never wish to condemn, on the contrary sympathize, however this is totally different from an ontological discussion, I tried to point to above)

Quote:
I'm saying that, if that's revolution, i'm against it, i don't care how they call themselves, democratic federalists or even anarchists, or even the one identity which we do not yet. I'm not against any form of authority just because it's named state, it calls itself authoritarian, it calls itself fascist, it calls itself socialist, i'm against it and i want to attack it because it's an authority, it's a form of oppression. Can you understand what i mean!

yeah and say it is wrong. It is a very basic, 101 explanation of separation between freedom/oppression which is an old ideal going back to enlightenment and it is simply wrong.

Quote:
Since you are not going to stop "yes this is problem but anarchist did that too" stupid argument to stop criticising of mine and others, it's not so much meaningfull.

Why discussing history is not meaningful?

Quote:
it's critical analyse that's vital for me.

No defending Bonanno and his "critical analyse" is vital for you and it is just your subjective stand point in this debate. (Tip: you need to show me something to prove me I am wrong, not praise intellectual capacities of you or your mentors).

Quote:
Another Note: In Many Turkish languaged web site, today there's a confirmed news that PYD got logistic support which is arms (different qualified ones, propably much more heavily ones too, and medical things too) from the Iraq Kurdish Federation

Yes you are right on it.

Quote:
Another problematic article in their uncritical support for weeks turns now into critical, you may feel that position closer, since it's not "idealistic" smile

http://roarmag.org/2014/10/kobane-kurds-us-imperialism/

Come on grin Now you are suggesting me articles, thanks so much grin (If you had read any of the discussion made in here, everyone knows that article pretty well)

Quote:
it was pretty much crazy to see the people were defending undefendable positions in Turkey and in Europe and some in U.S about Rojava.

What is undefendable? what must be defended in context of Rojova especially in Turkish context you think? To help you with your answer: Maybe I should sent you a link grin in response: so why do you think insurrectionist anarchists here support Rojova and especially the solidarity with Rojova demonstrations in Turkey? http://sosyalsavas.org/ as you know turkish check them.

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 10:38

tw_

Quote:
I'm not saying there're only PYD members in Kobane, and in all Rojava, or everyone supports that structure. At least i know some people from the Turkey went there to support the "anti-fascist" fight. But i'm not quite sure if all of them was aware of the signs of the authoritarian practices. But that doesn't mean that left can not support their authoritarian politics. Personally i think that the left, except some individuals and some little organisations is a part authoritarian culture, in a way or so.

I alo think so yeah. But I think everyone was aware who go to Kobane of the history, culture etc of Kurdish struggle. So why do you think DAf also go there as "human shields"? DAF being also a very action oriented, antagonistic part of anarchist movement in Turkey?

Why do you think your position is so separate from the insurrectionist anarchists of Turkey? Any comments on that?

Quote:
I'm sorry to say that, I don't see the ISIS and the YPG as equally bad as fucking most democratic and oppressor, currently president of the Turkey R.T Erdogan see them equally evil. I'm attacking the politics of the YPG-PYD and contributers to it, -yes in that circumstances!.

Yeah but I agree with you on it, why do you attack me?

Joseph Kay
Oct 20 2014 10:47
AES wrote:
Anarchism is founded on class solidarity against militarism - since when are 'anarchists' public relations agencies for capitalist paramilitary political parties?

Anarchists in Support of Rojava-Kurdistan wrote:
"ISIS KILLS. PKK PROTECTS"
"Solidarity with Kobane, York Minster York UK"

Quite aside from the dubious politics of red-and-black-washing the PKK, they're also a proscribed organisation in England and Wales, and displaying public support for them therefore carries a sentence of up to 10 years imprisonment and an unlimited fine.* A prosecution in the immediate term seems unlikely since the US are working with the PKK at the moment, but that photo could come back to haunt people.

tw_
Oct 20 2014 10:53
Quote:
Maybe I should sent you a link grin in response: so why do you think insurrectionist anarchists here support Rojova and especially the solidarity with Rojova demonstrations in Turkey? http://sosyalsavas.org/ as you know turkish check them.

They are not insurrectionists smile i know many people who contribute to that site smile One more funny argument from you, sorry no joy to you from me smile Since you were pretty much confident about you know everything, i needed to stop that empty joy too.

Decide if the someone you called is idealist or not. Stop playing intellectual masturbation game, looking from different points game.

You don't have a problem with authority, you want it to be apart of it. Bonanno in Turkish is very very limited. Some texts are wrongly translated, pretty much of them don't exists and some of them is named with Bonano even he did not wrote.

-------

You can start the party, PYD just thanked to the Coalition for their support. And Iraq kurdistan said we'll send more help soon with U.S airplanes.

Quote:
No defending Bonanno and his "critical analyse" is vital for you and it is just your subjective stand point in this debate. (Tip: you need to show me something to prove me I am wrong, not praise intellectual capacities of you or your mentors).

It's not my duty the put something in your eyes to help you to be able to see it, if you want to ignore, there's no solution for that, nor i will try to convince the one who defends his/her position in all means, no critical thinking of own position.

Quote:
yeah and say it is wrong. It is a very basic, 101 explanation of separation between freedom/oppression which is an old ideal going back to enlightenment and it is simply wrong.

I'm not talking in terms of modernist dualism (even democratic modernist dualism one smile ) I never talked about freedom, it's a word. I'm not an ideolog who likes to program an ideology by simplistic dualist thesis.

Even on the affinity groups there will be some form of power relations but that's beyond good and bad dualism. The point is the absence/rejection of authority.

--------------
What are anarchists

Who do anarchists struggle against

Against the State seen as the centralised organisation of power in all spheres (administrative, financial, political, military, etc.)

Against government which is the political executive organ of the State and makes all decisions concerning repression, exploitation, control, etc.

Against Capitalism which can be considered both as the flux of productive relations in course and individual capitalists, their activity, their projects and their complicity in this form

Against the individual parts that the State and capital are divided into. In other words the police, judiciary, the army, school, newspapers, television, trade unions, the large multinational firms, etc.

Against the family, which forms the essential nucleus upon which the State structure is based

Against the world of politics, therefore against political parties (all of them), Parliament which is the expression of bourgeois democracy, and the political ideology which serves to mask real social problems

Against fascists and all the other instruments of repression used by the State and Capital

Against religion and the Church which constitute a potent ally to repression

Against the army which is an armed force that is used against the people

Against prisons which institutionalise the repression of the poorest of the exploited classes

Against asylums which repress the different

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 10:55

This is potentially really sad news for Rojova:

http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/turkiye_pesmergenin_kobaniye_gecisine_...

This says Turkey let peshmerga to cross its land to reach Rojova. This might make Barzani stronger n the region. This is potentially not so good. If the effect of Barzani increases in Rojova, we will see an orientation toward parts of imperialist plans.

And also I think it is no coincidence that the weapon support happened at the same time with transportation of Peshmerga to Kobane.

tw_
Oct 20 2014 11:00

What false ideas do anarchists struggle against:

Against reformism which wants to set social problems right by using laws, political parties, parliaments, referendums, votes, etc.

Against efficientism which wants to reduce man to an automat always capable of working and obeying

Against humanitarianism which calls for peace and safety of an abstract idea of man but does not act concretely to attack class enemies.

Against nonviolence which blocks the just violence of the exploited which is their only arm of liberation

Against patriotism which feeds the absurd idea of the homeland in preference to other nations, whereas the exploited have no homeland but are brothers of the exploited of the whole world

Against militarism which justifies the function of armies with the swindle that their role is the defence of the homeland.

Against racism which defines a part of the human race as inferior

Against male chauvinism which reduces women to sex objects.

Against feminism which closes itself within an asphyxiating inverted male chauvinism.

Against the delegate which separates the exploited from direct action.

Against hierarchy which educates towards social stratification.

Against obedience which represses all individuality.

Against authority which prevents the autonomous development of the individual.

Against progressivism, a modern version of evolutionism which is the ideological covering of reformism.

Against economism which puts the economics at the centre of the history of class exploitation

Against trade unionism which is the direct product of economism and which means to limit the class struggle to claiming at the level of the workplace. Anarcho-syndicalism, with all its revolutionary declarations does not escape this reformist limitation.

What anarchists want:

Abolition of the State, Government, Capitalism, the family, religion, the army, prisons, asylums and every form of power which uses the law to force others to do something. Therefore refusal also of any kind of workers’ or socialist State and of any form of dictatorship of the proletariat

Elimination of the private property of land, the tools of labour, materials, machines, factories, the land and anything else required for the production of what is necessary in order to live

Abolition of salaried work and reduction of work to a minimum organised by individual groups federated on the basis of their own aptitudes and sympathies as well as on the basis of their own needs

Substitution of the traditional family with life in common based on love and reciprocal affinity and on the basis of real sexual equality

Organisation of life, such as that of production, based on free associations differing according to the problems to be faced, interests to be defended and affinities to be developed. The whole of these organisations federated on a local basis, by groups of communes, then widening the relations to a larger federation until it reaches the maximum possible of the liberated areas of the revolution

Education free and aimed at an awakening of individual aptitude which in a liberated society will be meaningful only in the limits in which this liberation is realised

The spreading of atheism and anti-religious propaganda, always necessary because on these problems even the liberation that has come about cannot exercise more than a limited clarification

Completion of the social revolution until all domination of man over man be abolished.

The means anarchists want to use:

The specific anarchist organisation which is an active minority of conscious individuals who share personal and political affinity and give themselves the aim of calling on the exploited to organise themselves with a view to revolution.

A federation of different anarchist groups who while changing nothing of their particular specific structure, link with each other with informal, federative pacts in order to better coordinate their own action

Propaganda to explain through books, pamphlets, newspapers, leaflets, graffiti, etc. what the intentions of the ruling structure are and the dangers facing the exploited. Also to supply indications of the anarchist struggle and show who anarchists are, or to urge the exploited to rebel, denouncing the consequences of obedience and resignation

The struggle to claim better conditions — Although we are not reformists, the struggle to obtain improvements in one’s immediate situation (wages, habitation, health, education, occupational, etc.) sees anarchists present although they do not see these moments as ends in themselves. They push the exploited towards this form of struggle so that they can develop the elements of self-organisation and refusal of the delegate which are indispensable in order to develop direct action at all other levels.

Violent struggle to realise the social revolution along with the exploited. The attack against the class enemy (State, government, capital, church, etc.) must necessarily be violent, in the case of the contrary it would only be a sterile protest and would determine a reinforcement of class dominion. This attack could be:

isolated attacks against individual structures or people who are responsible for repression

an insurrectional attack by a specific minority

a mass insurrectional attack

a mass revolutionary attack

Each of these levels, starting from the first, may or may not create the conditions leading to the successive one to develop. Political and economic analyses can foresee this possibility within certain limits, but cannot give an absolute response: action itself is the only test for action. The moral foundation of violent struggle already exists in the fact of repression as it has been exercised by power for centuries.

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 11:16
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe I should sent you a link grin in response: so why do you think insurrectionist anarchists here support Rojova and especially the solidarity with Rojova demonstrations in Turkey? http://sosyalsavas.org/ as you know turkish check them.
They are not insurrectionists smile i know many people who contribute to that site smile One more funny argument from you, sorry no joy to you from me smile Since you were pretty much confident about you know everything, i needed to stop that empty joy too.

What? But they are into Bonanno? If you search news related just to Bonanno you will see like 20 of them if you search for Bakunin you will find only 3. I know they have also an primitivist tendency but this does not contradict their direct-action oriented approach.

However real question is: But why do you think they support it?

Quote:
You don't have a problem with authority, you want it to be apart of it. Bonanno in Turkish is very very limited. Some texts are wrongly translated, pretty much of them don't exists and some of them is named with Bonano even he did not wrote.

So? Still he is possibly the most translated, topical contemporary anarchist in Turkish circles. Except Bakunin and Kropotkin I guess Bonanno is doing literally in turkey grin

Quote:
You can start the party, PYD just thanked to the Coalition for their support. And Iraq kurdistan said we'll send more help soon with U.S airplanes.

What Iraq Kurdistan sent is not just weapons it is also political power in region. PKK ad Barzani do not get very well. and they have political and ideological disputes and even a history of fight.

Quote:
Even on the affinity groups there will be some form of power relations but that's beyond good and bad dualism. The point is the absence/rejection of authority.

Pufff... so why don't you like Rojova and its direct democracy experiment? on what basis, if there is always some sort of power even in affinity groups? how do these people accept authority mindlessly?

And unlike you I do not see the role of anarchists as only a negative one. (in reference to your poetical manifestation of against this and that) (

NOTE: but come on I get it you are hyped up to see the world as a better place, so do I, why do you try to attack me so viciously? I really do not get it? You say like ISIS is not same for me with YPG, so do for me. Why you only attack me and not the others who claim so. I am all for people's self action against or with PKK etc.. But why do you criticize me? I really do not get you.

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 11:15
Quote:
The moral foundation of violent struggle already exists in the fact of repression as it has been exercised by power for centuries.

Come on, you got to be kidding me? You think so and you think PYD should not be supported even critically?

tw_
Oct 20 2014 11:31

Power in the Foucalt's way interpratation of power, it's not power to controll, as an authority. "Power" is not always power but in that time seems like it's because of limited description of mine. If you go beyond the beliefs that suppose that human nature is good, you'll need face with the different possibilities that may happen, but in an uncomparable level with the authority of power...

To be honest, that last post of you was the good one in some parts it was also included some feelings of you. I don't want to put you in an evil position but, please, it's not just temporary moment that you're offering that:

Quote:
I am all for people's self action against or with PKK etc.. But why do you criticize me? I really do not get you?

You can not be in a position where you can say "against or with PKK". First of all PKK doesn't want this. They have political program in first place. So if you are with them, imagine how much initiative you can have, or may be not at all?

As i said many times, and gave examples about authoritarian practices in the Rojava, in some point you agreed and for example you said: the mandatory military service is problem but then? It was just a momentarily critic. I can not except your position, you say it's problem but you see that as something bad which can be tolerated, will be disappear. So what?

Things are going even worse in terms of what that organisation wants. And it'll be... For us too, people are getting mad, in that sense you're even better position for some of critics even then you continue that...

I may have attacked you a little bit more than i need to, but i'm not saying all of my attacks wrong. It would have been just a little less. Because i'm also a little nervous about how that militarisation of the region turning people into some kind of authoritarian ones... Some pacifist ones turn to support the mandatory military service, some conscientious objector says, mandatory military service in practice but it's not that strict and so on.

Why i'm defending my attack is that, you're still supporting and saying needs to be supported... It's an individual contribitution to the authoritarian culture, and if you said you're not an anarchist but a socialist, i would attack less. (Sorry if you're not an anarchist but if it was just my prejudice) Because what happens is not so much contradictory to the socialist tendencies in generally...

tw_
Oct 20 2014 11:38

If PYD was not imposing the authority for the mandatory military service as a part of the power structure there, i may reconsider my position about it.

Actually, earlier position, because of my limited knowledge of what's going on in Rojava was much more positive about critical support. I agree, it was a little bit my mistake, my stupidity too.

But now? What can say different about when they're forcing people to "defend" their own land just under their control? How can i support them? If you can explain that to me i would be happy to listen in the context of what's going on...

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 11:45

By the way

My suspicion is kind of confirmed. US does not say they give arms to YPG. They say they transferred the guns from air to near Kobane (arms of Iraq Kurdistan). Also the second news I share says Turkey now let Peshmerga to pass from its lands to reach Kobane. as you know Turkey was not letting people to pass to Kobane legally and arrest members of PKK-YPG.

Therefore although YPG might benefit from the guns. These guns are guns of Iraq Kurdistan trasferred there by US and possibly will be used by/with Peshmerga.

I know people will label again YPG for this. However the real problem is this. If Peshmenrga becomes active in region and affect Rojova. Will it still continue to be a democratic autonomy experiment? (Without the power of YPG and PYD to politically support it to be so)

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 12:33

tw_

Ok thanks for giving me some credit.

Mandatory service is horrible. however I only assume they do it because they are under conditions of war and it will hopefully be a temporary policy. The thing is yeah I am here thinking optimistically without evidence, you don't need to except that.

However there is also this. Rojova is a real piece of land and people inhabiting it right? (I think we can agree here:) I support people's right to defend it, not to be slaughtered by IS (might not agree on this:) moreover if the political programme of these people's organisation is (at least) relatively good (on issues like democracy, economy, gender equality etc...) I can also support them politically, I consider them my ally and I am all for solidarity with them. I think this is what a political relation is. However this relation should not have to be unconditional or eternal. And according to developments we can make changes.

Quote:
You can not be in a position where you can say "against or with PKK". First of all PKK doesn't want this.

Yeah you are right, but there is also no significant resistance to PKK please read all the first hand accounts of Rojova. YPG is seen as a heroic army who defended its people. Its influence even increased to Iraq where they are not active actually (it is the part of Barzani) The same thing is with the class. All the first hand accounts of Cantons say there is very social policies and democratic communes in existence, there is not a significant economical inequality that will spark a popular class based organization. I do not want to be a non-critical supporter of anything. But there seems to be no such accounts, no evidence. I am just hoping PYD will be able to stick to its programme and continue direct democracy experiment showing the world how people can build democracy from bottom up (in all aspects of social life) and how this is a better model than capitalist modernization. If the things do not go this way and they become an authoritarian state by all means I would really love to act against it with Kurdish anarchists.

But current situation is more like we (global anarchists) condemn Kobane's authority but Kurdish anarchists and people from there say us: "no it is actually not that bad at all, and support us". I just think we should give them more credit. We should not force them to denounce all their "Kurdishness" before even speaking to them. I think this is what harms solidarity, be it between anarchists or between different ethnicities. If you find my position is a "temporary" critique, I guess. Its OK.

Quote:
hat militarisation of the region turning people into some kind of authoritarian ones.

Yeah militarisation is really bad. however YPG is not the one responsbile for thta and if they do not wish to build a state and imply a communalistic economy and do other politically progressive stuff they are doing etc... I would be glad to say that I am gald they did that. that's all.

Quote:
If PYD was not imposing the authority for the mandatory military service as a part of the power structure there, i may reconsider my position about it.

Yeah I mean they should not. But I am not in a war like they really are. This military thing is very new though the law has passed some time ago. They made a kind of census to know how many people will go to military even this month. I do not think they still punished anyone for not doing it. (But they will I guess) I mean it is your decision if you do not want to support it due to this as an anti-militarist I understand that.

But I think from a larger perspective PYD is comparatively the best option for anti-militarism (for example: they do not want to control all of syria, they are ok with autonomy in their own land, all others wish to expand and conquer all.) comparative to other actors in the region. But again my explanation makes sense in the context of the war in Syria and it is not a generalization. I don't know if you are willing to discuss this real-politic issues.

kurekmurek
Oct 20 2014 13:22

http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/tezkereden_faydalanan_ilk_yabanci_aske...

This news says: Turkey is training Peshmerga.

The collaboration between Barzani and Turkey is really bad and it might give PYD hard time to hold their non-totally-cooperative position with the imperial powers and their political ideals. As Peshmerga can become powerful with support from Turkey in the region and alter what YPG wants to implement (and also they are very open to western cooperation like Turkey).

boomerang
Oct 20 2014 18:29
Serge Forward wrote:
Is it just me who's finding the shameless cheerleading for the PKK on the one side versus 'the communist left says NO!' said in the voice of Ian Paisley (and yes I know it's not just left comms) all a bit tiresome? There's been a bit already but can we have some more of the nuanced stuff please?

PLEASE!

Where are you so I can shake your hand?

If you haven't already, read libcom.org/blog/rojava-anarcho-syndicalist-perspective-18102014
Rojava: An Anarcho-Syndicalist Perspective -- good stuff

I also liked Zaher's report http://libcom.org/news/experiment-west-kurdistan-syrian-kurdistan-has-proved-people-can-make-changes-zaher-baher-2 ... a first hand witness report, so that's valuable in itself (I've only been able to find one other first hand report). He describes what he witnessed very positively, then at the end he talks about criticisms.

AES
Oct 21 2014 00:13

In the Russo-Japanese War and the Second Boer War of 1899-1902 Kropotkin opposed both sides on an 'anti-statist' basis. In 1905, he had published a letter in LE TEMPS in Paris noting "if Germany invaded France, I would take a rifle and defend her."... When war broke out in September 1914, Kropotkin wrote the "Germans threatened new to eradicate this Latin civilization [France] which had given birth to 1789, 1848, and 1871"...

It is particularly because of this example of Kropotkin's betrayal of class solidarity and revolutionary anti-militarism that I have come to despise historiographies that follow a lineage of anarchist thinkers because all are inadequate, and same for every other 'intellectual'.

For a realiable history which follows the development of worker organisations as its historical markers, see Revolutionary syndicalist internationalism, 1913-1923: the origins of the International Working Men’s Association - Wayne Thorpe and (a later version of this authors studies) The Workers Themselves. This shows considerable coinsistency on internationalism and anti-militarism. Another useful document (especially about Spain 1936) see Anarcho-syndicalism in the 20th Century - Vadim Damier.

... how is Kropotkin's failure different to the error of siding with PKK(etc) vs ISIS/ISIL? Genuine question.

Is it because of the atrocity of beheadings that we can accept workers being recruited into the slaughter as an acceptable situation, as a justified war?

If that is the case, then why did revolutionary workers not argue for their comrades to take sides in wars when concentration camps were first introduced in the Cuban war of 1868–1878? Revolutionary anti-militarism was our position against the second Boer war despite widespread repulsion because it was there that trench warfare was first introduced and concentration camps were used for the second trime in history on large scale causing deaths to ten of thousands of women and children? We were supposed to stand without equivocation against militarism in both World wars and every other war... but workers and poor who were broken by despair of witnessing atrocities, or learning of them were recruited against each other, and especially against those who oppose militarism.

Should we not rather have an objective marker to decide against all militarism such as class which is the only correct and timeless position against all wars and hierarchy, or can we just be swayed by the shock value of "enemy" soldiers as portrayed by the rival warring capitalists?

Fuck ISIS. Fuck PKK. Fuck Class Collaboration.

Marx-Trek
Oct 21 2014 03:16

Boomerang and serge, etc....

First, I reall appreciate the Anarcho-Syndicalist article on Rojava cantons and the regional politics and history. A great look at the region.

Let me point out that this thread has included many similar points and articles that describe things in a similiar manner. Great article to add to the conversation.

As to your concerns for lack of indepth analysis, I get your concern and agree. However, I would have to point out, despite the want for a indepth critical discussion, this thread has:

1. gone from a discussion of anarchists in the region going to support the Kobani fight against ISIS and solidarity; to,

2. to asking why anarchists would go to the region to support such a fight; to,

3. having to defend the very idea of solidarity and explaining why anarchists would come to the conclusion of showing support for Rojava and YPG's fight against ISIS and for something; to,

4. people having to constantly validate their own position as an anarchist position on solidarity and arguing against simplistic arguments (only anarchists/communists can do good things and that is all we can support); to,

5. finally some more people wanting to engage in further and more in depth discussion on what is happening in the region despite even more ridiculous accusations and deeper irrelevant ideological arguments (such as arguing and comparing imperialist wars between imperial power, Kropotkin and Bonnano....huh?)

Again, great article from an Anarcho-Syndicalist perspective, reads much like the book Democratic Autonomy in Northern Kurdistan (informative yet critical)!