Thanos Chatziangelou on The Palestinian Resistance

Car bomb attack of Red Army Faction at the HQ USAFE and HQ 4th ATAF parking lot of Ramstein Air Base in 1981

From Dark Nights

“A sacrifice today for tomorrow

the numbers suck their blood

Good morning, you’ll say good morning to me again on Saturday.

wrapped in a shroud.”

The Zionist atrocity of the Israeli occupation forces and the Western allies is growing day by day. Invoking the provocative narrative of the rules of war, they baptize entire migrant camps, hospitals, churches, playgrounds and entire urban centres as Hamas bases and operational centres in order to legitimize the exemplary massacre of the Palestinian resistance for communication purposes. Israel’s war crimes are officially underwritten by the North Atlantic Alliance, with bilateral military support and the legitimisation of Israeli interventions by Western media propaganda. The Western narrative cuts off the practical popular resistance of dozens of Palestinian organizations from the Palestinian right to self-determination and independence, wanting to criminalize and drown in blood any attempt at liberation defined by the popular base, moving outside and against the imperialist Western centers.

Combatant comrades,

Since the dawn of Saturday 7 October and the realisation of Operation “Al Aqsa Storm” on the Israeli military bases outside the Gaza Strip, we have witnessed a historic breakthrough. Decades of armed popular resistance by Palestinian fighters is verging on an impending victory for the twin goals of liberation and self-determination. A victory of the armed struggle against Zionism and imperialism. It is our responsibility, our duty, but above all our political choice whether to be spectators of these events or to make a decisive contribution as a real and existing part of the internationalist front in defence of the liberation struggle everywhere.

This juncture can and must become the contemporary reference point for the combative construction of the international anti-imperialist front, constituted by revolutionary initiatives that will speak with action – will speak the language of fire. It is today that the strategic experience of the internationalist comrades and the experiences of those who wrote history in blood and gunpowder must become a common ground and source of inspiration for the necessary revolutionary initiatives.

Israel is slaughtering the Palestinian Resistance with the signature of NATO, this is the content and focus of our struggle. In the face of this treaty, it is revolutionarily fruitful to build a political and military alliance on the basis of actions, where strategic convergences are not bound by the need for tautological association. Today, the practical revolutionary solidarity that will contribute decisively to the victory of the armed Palestinian resistance is expressed on 2 strategic axes:

– The construction of the international anti-imperialist front, a political, social and strategic necessity for the waging of the anti-imperialist civil war in the western metropolitan centres.

The organization of a real humanitarian aid, which will break the military blockade of the Gaza Strip, defined by and for the needs of the people’s own will for freedom.

Crear dos, tres, muchos Palestine, es la consigna! The declaration of anti-imperialist civil war on Western interests is the return of violence to the womb of imperialism, the Western metropolitan centres – where it is born and nourished politically and militarily.

The declaration of anti-imperialist civil war in the western centres is transmuted through organised urban guerrilla warfare. This is the political task of those who support in practice the popular right of independence. This is our place in the history and present of resistance.

The real solidarity with the Palestinian resistance is the practical polemics of Zionism and imperialism in every geographical point of reference and expression, the shifting of the conflict to the strategic core of Western domination. To support the Resistance is to participate actively and militarily in the deepening of the rift of social peace in the West. Only the anti-imperialist civil war, with the expression of the urban guerrilla in the Western metropolises, will justify the arms of the Palestinian Resistance.

The real solidarity with the guerrilla will for collective liberation is the attack on the Western centres of power and Israeli investments. The attack on the NATO bases and western human resources that contribute to the immediate launching of the “peacekeeping” bombing of the Gaza Strip. The attack on the war industry that fuels imperialist militarism. The attack on the political and economic centres of consultation that set the political agenda for the massacre of the Palestinians. The attack on the purveyors of Western propaganda that launder Israel’s war crimes behind the narrative of the right to self-defence. We support the struggle of our brothers and sisters in Palestine and on the affiliated fronts of Syria and Iran when we stand by their side with acts of war, diverting the conflict to an international scale. We support their struggle against Zionism and imperialism when we fight, in the territories where we live and struggle, against the representative existence of Israel and NATO.

The decades-long military blockade of the Gaza Strip from basic goods and resources puts the Palestinians at war on two fronts: the military war against the services of Zionism and imperialism, and the daily war for survival and livelihood. Western proclamations to provide humanitarian aid to civilians and a ceasefire for a hostage exchange only serve the communicative purpose of polarising the division of the Palestinian people into criminal rebels and civilian housewives who extend a helping hand to the West. Humanitarian contributions and peace missions from the same centres that have been feeding the blockade and massacre of Palestinians for years are evidence of a provocative attempt to remove the stigma of war crimes from the civilised footprint of the West.

Mavi Marmara case – 2010

Those who today shed crocodile tears for the war dead are the same people who, 13 years ago, were responsible for the massacre (and its cover-up) of the Multinational Freedom Flotilla. In May 2010, an internationalist initiative of thousands of activists for the Palestinian Right to Resistance assembled a fleet of 8 ships to suspend the blockade of the Gaza Strip, carrying 700 militants and 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid. On 31 May, 80 km outside Gaza, Israeli special forces stormed the ships. The resistance of the militants on the Mavi Marmara boat leads the snipers to execute 10 activists, while the number of wounded from the operation is over 60. A few years later, International Criminal Court prosecutor Fatou Bensouda closes the investigation into possible war crimes, arguing that the criteria of large-scale deaths, premeditated plan or Israeli policy were not met. The alignment of the West with Israel’s needs is even evidenced in the fact that European allies, such as Cyprus, refused to supply and allow the Freedom Flotilla to disembark, feeding the blockade of Palestinians at the mercy of Zionist and imperialist agencies.

Today, initiatives such as that of the Multinational Freedom Flotilla are as necessary and timely as ever. For they show in practice that in the Gaza Strip the local expression of the international anti-imperialist war is raging. Because they show that only the multi-ethnic constitution of the popular base can nourish the just struggle for self-determination and freedom. Because they show the real face and intentions of tyranny in the face of unconstrained support for the rights of the Palestinian people. Because they show by deeds, not words, that the armed right of a people is and must remain the preserve of all.

The mouths that today speak of Freedom and Independence have a responsibility to arm themselves with an iron will and a subversive will. The armed Palestinian Resistance is the generalized task and cause of every revolutionary. Today, when capitalist alienation and individualization are perpetuating the social inertia of civil disobedience and rebellion, the Palestinian Resistance must be a shining beacon of universal human dignity and revolutionary will. By declaring anti-imperialist civil war in the western metropolitan centres, we become an active part of a political history that is being actively transformed in a warlike way for the benefit of the people’s interests. By declaring the anti-imperialist civil war, we defend with deafening acts those who arm their human dignity, those who are imprisoned in the hellholes of the secret services of Zionism, those whose blood flows in the rivers of Intifada. The brothers of the Resistance are miles away, the enemy is in front of us. Let us speak with action.

For the building of the anti-imperialist civil war in the western metropolises.

For the Revolution first and always.

The peoples triumph with gun in hand.

Thanos Chatziangelou, captured member of the Anarchist Action Organization

C’ Wing, Larissa Prison

24/11/2023

 

24/11/2023

There are 28 Comments

I don't like to criticize anyone by doubting that they are "really" anarchist, but I don't see how the above is anarchist as opposed to Maoist or nationalist or Castroite or other state socialist. Everything it says against the Israeli state and its US and other Western imperialist allies is correct. So is its support of the Palestinian people's struggle for national self-determination. But there is no critique of Hamas' reactionary statist, theocratic, and pro-capitalist politics, let alone its horrendous atrocities and war crimes--which were immoral as well as tactically stupid. Its political estimate of Hamas' actions is nuts: " Decades of armed popular resistance by Palestinian fighters is verging on an impending victory...." If only. What world are these folks living in?

Their program of "building of the anti-imperialist civil war in the western metropolises" is also nuts. What it means is that a tiny number of revolutionaries should take up arms, commit some small acts of violence, and get themselves arrested or killed. Hardly an "anti-imperialist civil war."

Instead we need to continue to build the popular mass demonstrations against Israel's actions, demanding an immediate and permanent ceasefire, withdrawal of Israel from Gaza and the West Bank, and the right of return of dispossessed Palestinians, among other things. Meanwhile we should be raising the full revolutionary anarchist program. There has been a tremendous expansion of anti-Zionist and anti-Israeli protests, including by progressive Jews, which has shaken U.S. politics at least. At this point, this is the road forward.

I am sick of the complete lack of engagement with anticolonialism from American 'anarchists'. Maybe they can learn from the Maoists and Marxists instead of aligning with liberal rhetoric. Hamas can be critiqued for many reasons. However, this is NOT the time NOR context to do so. Claiming that the action they did was an immoral war-crime and the constant need by so-called American anarchists to 'condemn both sidesreeks of white liberal privilege. They are a national liberation movement (among many). You cannot claim to support Palestinians while denouncing completely their resistance movements . Anarchists should support critically support national liberation movements even if their politics do not align with theirs. If anarchists want to wait for an idelogically 'pure' movement to support then I don't know how this makes them any different than liberals. One last thing, the 7 Oct attack that you consider tactically stupid is the whole reason while everyone is talking about Palestine again and while there is this impetus in the street.

sure you're tired, sure you're Arab, but your sub-maoist Anti-Imperialism is despicable and delusional, and barely recognizable as even anarchist-adjacent. anarchists don't have to be "white" or "liberal" or have "privilege" (really, the deployment of this weasel word is the first refuge of the scoundrel) to know war crimes when we see them. we have a bad habit of denouncing the deliberate targeting of non-combatants for murder, maiming, and kidnapping regardless of who perpetrates them. anarchists are against war, war crimes, and war criminals. anarchists are against the zionist project for exactly the same reasons we are against the Hamas project. anarchists are for liberation; self-liberation from structures and institutions of power and domination. if you really think that Hamas - an explicitly reactionary quasi-fascist theological pro-capitalist antisemitic gang that's been in dictatorial power over Gaza since 2007 and that's afraid to organize even the most corrupt elections to have some kind of PR coup for their "resistance" and "liberation" strategies - is not to be critiqued NOW and ALWAYS, then you're a lost cause, and certainly no kind of anarchist i'd ever want to be associated with. even Wayne Price, a notorious pro-nationalist pro-war self-described anarchist, is ahead of you on this one.

Fortunately, the anarchists in Southern Europe (where I live) are not liberal-posers and they all support indigenous people uprisings ;)

btw, klee benally just came out with a book from detritus called no spiritual surrender: indigenous anarchy in defense of the sacred. he definitely talks about settler colonialism, and his writings in general (in black seed and his own pamphlets) are a lot closer than anything roger is ever going to write.

time frames for discussion and critique: hamas, to a pretty extreme degree, are not anarchists, nor do they have a genuine interest in fighting "colonialism".

This current war is more of a spectacle than a resistance fight...need i remind you, the israel/palestine conflict has now been going on for aroumd 70 years. If hamas were interested in the autonomy of "their people", they would not continue to murder israelis. The interests of both IDF and hamas boils down to 3 things:

-religion

-a relatively small piece of land

-money

It is naive to believe that islam has anything whatsoever to do with autonomy, same goes for people who want there to be a palestinian state.

Yeah it's really strange how much conflict and pushback there was from anarchists who demanded that u condemn both sides. Like I could tune into CNN or talk to my liberal family members and I would hear the exact same stuff from anarchists. It was a real shame that the disscussion was basically just arguing about how condemning both sides is a really shitty discussion to have while Isreal just tried to genocide the entire west bank.

I definely am grateful to ppl putting in the work but yeah I think it's pretty fair to say the anti colonial aspects of anarchism are pretty weak and I certainly don't have great opinions either bc the dialogue is minimal and largely arguing over super basic stuff.

But to make sense and be respectful to me as you can...but condemning islamic fundamentalism and under-dog states seems pretty basic to me as far as "anarchy" is concerned. Do you think proximity to being an "oppressed people" is more important than what anarchists do and say?

So part of the problem is that what is refered to as hamas isn't real. So David killcullen wrote about how a big part of the war on terror was the US government getting a tip a out a al queda soldier in a rural area so they would take some soldiers and drive their armored trucks though a village and look if potential insurgents and not find any. But the local would freak out seeing soldiers come and decide they are being invaded so a few people would grab their families mosin and set up a ambush for when the Americans come back. Because they don't want their rural village to get invaded. They would fight and the USA would wipe the floor with them.

This happened a lot and most of the killed al queda for ghters had 0 affiliation and were just random villagers shooting at Americans for driving their trucks though the town acting like asshokes. A key part here is the Americans running stuff we're not very bright and thought they were doing a great job killing terrorists and actually thought they were killing al queda. They were not.

This is the exact same. It is in Isreal best interest to badjacket all Palestinian resistance as hamas bc it looks bad if they are just killing like a group of neighbirs banding together to fight back. And looking at all Jazeera interviews of many fighters they are not hamas soldiers. They are just Palestinians with guns who have banded together not under hamas. Which isn't anarchist but is not worth condemnation. And Palestinian anarchists have also repeated this too.

Also authoritarian movements love taking credit random people did so they can build clout and get more recruits. Hanas also has a lot to gain claiming any decentralized Palestinian fighter is hamas. MLs do this all the time bc claiming everyone fighting in X country was fighting for a communist revolution such as Cuba and China.

And Palestinian fighting back aren't real easing communiques in English to explain they aren't in hamas for obvious reasons.

And secondly sometimes ppl in such desperate situations just don't have that many great options and don't have much choice but die or betray their principles. If I was in the west bank I would betray a lot of my principles if ai thought that increased my likelihood of survival. Bc such desperate situations it can be death to have too high of moral standards.

So to condem hamas one first has to fall for the authoritarians completely covering up decentralized individual resistant that is absolutely happening. What is really hamas and what is talked about as hamas in the discourse are two different things. Hamas is just what Isreal calls any resistor for optics reasons. So I'm not going to condemn ppl fighting back just bc isreal calls them hamas.

Also like I care about what is relevant to my life. Like I don't care about the Iraq government bc it has nothing to do with my life. I care about the destruction of Isreal bc people fly Israli flags arround me, IDF trains cops who are my enemy, Isralis recruit for settlers around me, many businesses find and recruit for IDF soldiers arround me.

So if hamas is irrelevant to me life and it's not really any of my business. While Isreal is my business bc it is a meaningful oppressive force arround me.

7:03 referencing roger white (a maoist friendly academic) is not compelling for anarchists.

timing is one thing, maybe, but telling anarchists to not reject hamas as a palestinian liberation "movement" (hamas is not a movement but a recognized state actor) clarifies that you are not on my team.

Can you please point me towards non Maoist-friendly postcolonial anarchist literature ? Or is it the case that anarchists do not recognise colonialism (especially of the settler-apartheid type like that of Israel) as an instuition of oppression over and above the state, capitalism, patriarchy etc.. ? If the answer is yes, then you can have your eurocentric anarchism. As an Arab, I don't want anything to do with it.

Dear Tired Arab Anarchist: The following is not "post-colonial" but it lays the groundwork for such and you may find it interesting:

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/24619?search_text=Wayne

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/19702?search_text=Wayne

To others: I am described as pro-war and pro-nationalist. This is not true. I do support the armed struggles of the Ukrainian people against Russian imperialism and the armed struggle of the Palestinian people against Israeli colonialism (but not atrocities)--which means I oppose the wars of the Russian state and the Israeli state. I don't think this makes me "pro-war. " I do not support "nationalism" which means support for winning a new state as a solution to national oppression. But I am for an oppressed people being free to decide for themselves what kind of political set-up and social system they want without being dominated by another nation. This is "national self-determination," not "nationalism."

"national self-determination," not "nationalism."

Supports a nationalist movement that specifically is determined to have a state.
Says he doesn't support states.

Supports armed struggle (blowing people into bits with automatic weapons and explosives).
Draws the line at using machetes to chop off a few heads.

What a fucking clown

i would say it depends on how you define colonialism and what jargon one is willing to put up with.

i personally agree that anti-colonialism is a lens worth looking through, but i also distrust a lot of the people who use it, because jargon almost always (eventually) gets owned by people who are trying to make a living, gain tenure, etc (i know, no one's motives are pure, but work with me here).

anarchists talk about power relations and nationalism (fredy perlman leaps to mind), but i have no idea what you would consider anti-colonial, and there are plenty of anarchists (see wayne price all over the ukraine topic here on anews) who agree with you. maybe roger is even still calling himself an anarchist, who knows. but if you're looking for a text/author to start with, fredy's "the continuing appeal of nationalism" is where i would start.

i think that there are non-anarchist anti-colonial thinkers who have useful things to say, and the problem comes from what they think the solutions are: uncritical support of groups that have and/or are in the middle of creating state formations is a case in point.

Freddy Perlman in "The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism" literally states that Palestinian and Navajo nationalisms are inspired by Hitler and Mussolini!! How on Earth would anyone consider this to be anti-colonial? Putting indigenous colonized people national movements on the same level as fascism and nazism is eurocentricisity at its finest. For colonised people who the coloniser try to have their identity suppressed, NATIONALISM IS A MUST. If white anarchists do not realise this then that's their problem.
Apart from Roger White's work (which I already quoted) I can hardly find any real anti-colonial theory by anarchists. It seems many white anarchists do not realise how bad this is for anarchists of colour around the world (especially those who are fighting colonisation today like Palestinians).

You do understand that there has been a generalized anarchist hostility toward nationalism since at least the middle of the 20th century, right? You may have come across some essays about that in your introductory anarchist education. If you had actually internalized those lessons, you'd be able to recognize the genetic essentialism in Roger White's absurd scribblings. You might also be able to recognize the cringeworthy Leninist pedigree of the assertion that colonialism and imperialism are the driving forces of StarCraft rather than the other way around (contrary to Lenin and Stalin and Mao et al, capitalism is the highest stage of imperialism).

The fight against colonialism is still real, but once you accept that nationalism and statecraft is the only legitimate and/or possibly successful manifestation of anti-colonial struggle, then you're just throwing in the anarchist towel, implicitly agreeing with the leftist enemies of anarchism.

The fight for an anti-colonialism that rejects statecraft - and the strategies of states, like massacring non-combatants because they're not the right color/religion, taking hostages, and generally disregarding the health and well-being of those people you presume to represent, then you've merely become the monster you're fighting against. Just because it's happened for at least the last hundred years doesn't make it inevitable, but it's definitely an uphill battle.
For an anti-state anti-capitalist anti-religious anti-colonialism.

yeah, anyone reasonable is going to concede some nuance there, around telling some of the most oppressed people in the world not to drink the nationalist koolaid. like, it might not be the right time to make an observation like that, sure, that's fair but the anarchist position IS anti-nationalist by definition. if you don't get that, hit the books harder or maybe consider that you might not be an anarchist, which is fine too.

there's no point putting "white anarchists" on blast for the theory itself, that's just how deductive reasoning works. you can't reconcile nationalism with anarchist theory and you shouldn't try to but you could criticize "white anarchists" for being tone deaf and oblivious about when/where to grind their axes ...

or someone could think whatever they want and just be incoherent, that's also fine ;)

I think colonised nations have a right of national liberation which necessarily involves rallying around a nationalist ideology (which can be combined with other ideologies like marxism, anarchism or even religious ideologies). Once such nations are free from the colonisation, then I agree that nationalism would immediately turn into something dangerous and undesirable that should be abolished, but simply dismissing it at the stage of anti-colonial struggle is naive and only serves the colonialist interests. As one comment notes, nationalism is an obvious tool used by colonised people around the world. Your suggestions for ideologically pure anarchist anti-colonial struggle seem to me, unfortunately, detached from historical and material conditions. How on earth should individuals that do not share a unified national identity wage a struggle against a ruthless colonizing state? In the case of Palestine, for example, Palestinian nationalism only arose in response to Zionism and its attempt to erase the Arab population of Palestinian and their culture. And ever since then it has become an essential tool in fighting against this colonial project.

we're not the only ones with a "purity" issue tho, you can't escape it either.

here, i'll point to it.

"Once such nations are free from the colonisation [whenever that is, likely never] then I agree that nationalism would immediately turn into something dangerous [no it didn't immediately turn, it always WAS dangerous because ALL OF HISTORY]"

^ this part right here. i fixed it for you.

i get why you don't want to drill down but you still should. or you can keep race baiting about it, whatever you prefer.

yeah 16:04, your definition of colonialism seems shallow. how would you determine when "such nations are free from the colonisation"? since colonisation is economic, psychological, social, political, philosophical, etc? when would you (anyone) know when the effects are adequately gone that it's ok to start resisting that nation?

again, the fact that nationalism is the simplest and most obvious tactic doesn't make it anarchist, and doesn't make it a good tactic in a longer-term, deeper struggle.

Freddy Perlman in "The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism" literally states that Palestinian and Navajo nationalisms are inspired by Hitler and Mussolini!! How on Earth would anyone consider this to be anti-colonial?

I dunno what was his argument with the Najavo on this, but the relationship of Palestinian nationalism with Nazism is well-documented, and Holocaust-denial is still being taught in Palestinian schools and some Arab countries, afaik. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/28/hamas-un-holocaust-lessons...

But I am anti-colonial as anarchist. I just don't see Palestine as the only anti-colonialism that matters. Colonization is still happening all over the place in North America (there's a huge push for it in Canada nowadays) and don't see why I should care about WHO are the new settlers... what is their ethnic background or whatever. If I would... I'd find out that most settlers are very White caucasian/germanic families.

Jews? They're usually pretty fine people living in central urban areas, and many of them got a long history of expansively contributing to science, culture, arts, music, theory,,, and not menacing any ecosystem their WalMart lifestyles. And yet, they recently got attacked, at schools and synagogues. That aren't not located anywhere near Israel.

So you link an article from 12 years (even though Hamas's 2017 updated charter clearly states that they do NOT wage struggle against Jews and that they are explicitly anti-zionist), and then you point out a "well-documented" relationship between Palestinian nationalism because of a single meeting that happened during World War II between a Palestinian leader and Hitler during a time when Palestine was occupied by the British and the context was trying to look for potential allies (not saying it was a good tactical move). I guess the next thing you should say is to blame the entire Holocaust on Palestinians (like Netanyahu did) and say that Hitler only wanted to deport the Jews but the evil Mufti Al Husseini convinced him otherwise.

You claim that Palestine is not the only anti-colonialism that matters. It is not and no one claimed it is. It just happens to be the arena of an ongoing campaign of violent ethnic cleansing verging on genocide. You can choose to ignore it but do not try to justify it because "oh well there is colonization happening in my backyard also". I take it that in Canada no 20000 indigenous people were butchered last month with food, water, and electricity cut off from them ? isn't it You try to insinuate that the whole problem is that the evil Palestinians are just Jew-hating evil people who would not otherwise care that their homeland was being stolen if it was anyone apart from Jews doing it. And then you draw a contrast to yourself.: The enlightened White North American anarchist who is "anti-colonial" but does not care who the settlers are (unlike these savage Palestinians who are driven only by anti-semitic hate). If you happen to describe your model of White and enlightened anti-colonial struggle, I would try to relay it to Palestinians. I am sure they would appreciate it.

20:57, youre muddying the waters unnecessarily.

23:30
a. there is both islamaphobia and anti-jewishness deeply imbedded in many places, definitely including the u.s.
b. resistance/rejection of those biases (ie, embracing what anarchists like about islam and judaism) can also be anti-state
c. comparing oppressions implies a hierarchy of oppression, which is both not helpful and also ridiculous. palestinians absolutely need help right now, and the state of israel is doing what states do, and what specifically israel has been doing for decades and is now only getting worse. while hamas' attack was awful, it's hard to argue that at least the gradual increase of the grinding has now become a torrent, impossible for the world to ignore (although corporate media continues to do its best to delude and misdirect). that's not saying hamas was justified, it's saying that there's not a good option apparent for palestinians, or anyone else in the position that palestinians have been in.
d. the anarchist thing to do (not the only good thing, as there are complexities to goodness) is to support people who are not trying to be a state, who are at worst using any state-like forces temporarily for their own autonomous benefit.

again, acting like a state is what we all learn how to do from the overwhelming strength of state-friendly forces on so many levels. that is assumption/default is part of what we're fighting. that is all.

nationalism is the most obvious and likely tool to use against a colonizing force. the idea that nationalism will turn into something anarchist later, is the issue here, apparently.
states are the most obvious tool to use against other states, especially when state ways are the ways that we're all taught. (which i believe is the point fredy was making with his comparison)

but if states are required to fight other states, then we will only ever have states. and i don't want any states, not indigenous ones nor eurocentric ones.

if a nation describes a group of people who are, arbitrarily but actually, born into a certain form of struggle or certain mode of oppression, meaning that regardless of whether they would have chosen it in the abstract or not it's what the world has put on them by the bare facts of their birth, it isnt just that their sense of nationality is the most obvious tool for their liberation against the antagonizing force, but that their sense of nationality must be, again completely arbitrarily, either one of surrender (to whatever conditions are the grounds of their nationality) or of resistance (against the imposition that has made them a nation to begin with). maybe this is why the great "nation-states" try so hard to mythologize and propagandize the supposed threats that the people they claim as citizens face; they are trying to MAKE a nation out of a people with no basis to call themselves one.

as for nationalism, if you take my definition of nation above it should be clear where you and others in this conversation are correct. if a nation is defined by a shared, arbitrary struggle of some certain group of people then its greatest expression is to cease to exist. people hate letting things die and so pervert them into institutions devoted to representing the things and preserving those representations forever--becoming a state. an anarchist critique of national liberation struggles should i think be clear eyed about this. but i disagree that a nation is the same as a state from the jump. it's a useful tool for people in dire circumstances because it describes something real, an imposition (whether by other people or by the environment) that is so generalized it comes to override the divisions and conflicts that would have defined their lives otherwise. i'm prepared to support people as they recognize themselves and each other in this way, while reserving criticism for the tendency all people have to extend that kind of recognition past the moment it was sensible and into the mythologized realm of merely justifying power.

Add new comment