From 325 by Eat (Indonesia)
It is sad to see “them” resorting to such incoherent, deluded, and even ahistorical if not unfactual analysis of contemporary anarchism and its various movements, successes and failures. It is even more sadder that the critique was poorly written. If the FAI never accomplished anything as the critique said, it is because FAI ideas were and are always to be put on trial of practice and its diverse variants. There is no monopoly of narrow individualism in the FAI as far as I comprehend it, as it is just an idea to encourage anarchists to attack with informal and antiorganisationalist forms (even this also is always within a context), because “it” [FAI] doesn’t believe in the binary logic that this critique does. While the critique seemed, at first, to try to dismiss a binary vision of the world it falls on the same mistakes when it doesn’t even know nor understand how they or their moralistic-triumphant-over-others-methods originated and empowered.
While I was in full support of ITS in attacking technocrats, NGOs, and its effort in deconstructing the western anarchist moralistic-christian tendency, they too fall to the same logic as their so “ideological enemies of gringo” anarchism.
This world doesn’t revolve around your ancestor, dear friend, and of course you cannot speak nor can understand anything about other gods and ancestors from different parts of the world. You don’t have any ideas or even understand the languages of Gong Solok Dayak of Borneo and their constant struggle against mining. You’ll also never understand my other part of ancestry of proud Northern Minahasan tribes, who, in the Tondano wars beheaded hundreds of Dutch colonials and also the Spanish in the island my great ancestors have lived. It is precisely because of this reason I consider myself as egoist-communist, why? Egoist in Stirnerist empowered me to understand myself and to stripped myself on any kind of values of subjugation and domination… the context of communism is to put the understanding of individuals and others concerning to common interests and needs: such as water and land. But you will never understand this because you already win and every other things are lost. You have achieved your absolute moral values. Congratulations, you have made your “movement” reached its end and ultimate goals. Is that your ancestor teach you about life and living? I am very doubtful, really. I Yayat U Santi.
… the ‘Anarchist Myth‘, is very painful to read not in terms of grammar but like there’s no point in there except that they were trying to convinced or critique every other tendency that they’re the best one, what the ultimate methods on how we perceived reality are and who we should react to it. Their critique on FAI is not rightly spot on because it seemed they never read the interexchanges of theories, debates, and praxis, especially pieces written by CCF. It is confusing enough to me here to decolonise insurrectionist discourse or antiauthoritarianism in general and the present dynamics of eco-extremism in South America (I hope they don’t represent the general tendency) makes me even more confused if not sad.
Why? Because I “hope” to see the other forms and unique “movements” stem from un-westernised insurrectionists, their early communiques were sharp … I was amazed, really, about how they’re not shying away from political killing… Now they seem more vague and abstract in the sense that they are abstracting an absolute moral value. It is just the same as the christian belief system but they sell the idea of defending nature and their ancestors (what kind of ancestor they were referring to?). I don’t dismiss their attentat but random killing? I don’t know. I would like to kill … people who were trying to kill me or my loved ones and I don’t care if it is politically correct to do or not as it is only natural. But their apologistic arguments makes me even more confused. I am not trying to defend the FAI because it is impossible to do so, as it is a practical movement, it will be always incoherent as it is not the goals nor end and for sure it is not the answer for all the questions and solutions in life. Such alternatives and claims are absurd and deluded. I am angry but at the same time I was also sad to read about how they [ITS] are progressing.