On the breaking out of the largest prison in the world

Some thoughts on the breaking out of the largest prison in the world

From Dark Nights by Rigaer94

Original title: Berlin, Germany: Some thoughts on the breaking out of the largest prison in the world by Rigaer94 EN/DE/ES

Since a couple of weeks, we have heard from many about the necessity of expressing themselves regarding what is “happening now in Gaza”. Arguments that seem to almost suggest that a new war has started are common even in radical or anarchist circles. Since the break out from Gaza took place, the Palestinian struggle for liberation has been suffering in Germany from being reduced to Hamas’ actions. The German State, political parties, and even sometimes our comrades, are very concerned about how far or close one can be towards Hamas’ ideas. But very little about the historical roots of an asymmetric war that has lasted more than 70 years is brought into discussion by these positions. An ongoing massacre of Palestinian people has been happening since the days of British colonialism, assisted by the establishment of an apartheid regime in an artificially created settler society.

Today, the need to condemn constructed horror stories, even when they have been already denied in the hegemonic media, still prevails in Germany. Instead of listening to voices from Palestine or their exiled communities, there is little resilience to the orientalist discourse that the state and the media are pushing, constructing the image of “the Arab” as the ultimate evil. This dynamic has been present in all so called “Wars on Terror” since 9/11, but it originated long before. Individuals and collectives, who have never been sympathizers of Hamas, today find themselves backed up against a wall, expected to follow the directives of a white german movement. First they must publicly declare their distance from Islamist ideas before being given the space to speak about their own political ideas about liberation from the colonial and fascist oppression of Israel.

The level of violence displayed in Berlin in the last few weeks cannot be explained merely as a reaction to the break out of Gaza. Students can be slapped by a teacher in school, people are facing brutal police violence in the streets, and demonstrations are systematically banned. Although anti-Semitism finds its greatest expressions in this territory, and we see it as our responsibility to fight the multiple expressions of white christian supremacy – be it Aiwagner, AFD, Reichsbürger or others – the German state deflects attention from this by accusing others. The idea of imported anti-Semitism is and remains a way for Germany to find a new demon of history and to push anti-Semitism from itself to Palestine in a historically revisionist way. The results are evident today. With the usual racist agitation, by constructing the idea that Palestinians are anti-Semitic by nature, the German state is trying to divide our class along ethnic and religious lines, as a smokescreen for the division between us and the gun-grabbers who are currently earning a lot of money from Rheinmetall shares.

In order to silence any resistance to the complicity between the german state and the Israel military and its Zionist authorities, the well-known narrative of guilt is utilized, unfolding it like a transparent mantle over the people socialized in the territory controlled by the german state.

Only now, after over 100 years?!

The sea of contradictions in which war is immersed weighs heavily upon us. Since over 100 years, we see images of Palestinian people being murdered by colonial forces. Since over 100 years, we see images of Palestinian people being displaced from their own territories. Since the II Oslo Accord in 1995, we have witnessed how the narrative artillery of peacemaking attacks all forms of self-defense and self-determination, characterizing them as barbaric, zeal-driven, or uncivilized.

We are sick and tired of seeing tons of rubble in Gaza, after decades of bombardments by the Israeli forces. And it is with this feeling that we observe the fences of the biggest prison in the world being torn down. People in Gaza have been subjected to constant violence, violence which we cannot even imagine being inflicted upon our own bodies but have normalized for others. After all, normalizing the oppression of certain people is a necessity of the colonial capitalist world we still live in. This beast needs the colonized to remain silent, to passively obey. The german “left” also loves victims to “care for” to redeem their guilt.

What disturbs some people in Germany today, is not the violence in and of itself, and not all deaths are equally disturbing. We internalize the valuation of the deaths we can put faces to, while we do not care about the faceless ones. We accept the fact that some can mourn for their beloved ones, and bury them, and at the same time we simply accept the disappearance of thousands and thousands. What disturbs some people, mostly the ones in power, is the fact that those expected to remain passive are taking action on a path to liberation, and this is when the system finally shakes. Through their actions, people in Gaza are forcing us in central Europe, to stop navel-gazing and to take a position on their reality. Today, people who should be pursuing the Western developmental ideal, throw in our faces a reality that is at times difficult for us to understand. This gets us out of our heads, forcing us to leave the place of those who dictate discourse, who say what is of interest and what is not, and demands that we draw attention to a reality that we all profit from. Or do we still think that our well-being and economic stability in this country is independent of the slaughter of others in the Global South?

For many here, it is a blow to their ego, to be confronted by this reality, to be exposed as not having a clear stance. Because until today they could have been indifferent, like some of us were, but no longer. Taking a stance in this genocide should be easy for anyone. For us it is painful, contradictory, and exhausting, but necessary. War puts us in the position of not having any ready-made option to choose, but requires us to build positions of our own, or get sidelined…

Maybe this can be a chance for many to begin to understand what colonialism means also for people here, for our daily life and praxis, and therefore to walk on the path of anti-colonial fights.

Facing contradictions while remaining in solidarity.

Despite the contradictions mentioned above, we do not distance ourselves from our anti-militarist and anti-war convictions. It is clear to us that the war machinery and the market of death are never the path to liberation. We learned that the idea of white supremacist peace, in which only the military of UN-recognized nation states fights in occupied territories, is not peaceful. It is simply an ignorant idea, which is intended to take away the space for self-defense by monopolizing violence on a global scale. All deaths that have happened so far are awful, as are those happening today. That is why we want a struggle that ensures that no one else dies, or is marked for death because of their identity, and becomes just another number in a global statistic.

And we know for a fact that the regime’s politics, which are shaped by the Israeli military and supported by the Palestinian Authority that ruled this land from the 90s on, did not provide any fertile ground to a life in freedom, and wouldn’t do so in any possible future.

In recent days, the news repeats the position that Germany stands with Israel. Well the german state might, but we have shown in Sonnenallee, Potsdamer Platz, O-Platz… that we stand with Palestine.

From West Sahara to the mountains in Chiapas, from Wallmapu to the Kashmir Valley. From our hearts to Gaza, 48, and the West Bank, that is to say, to Palestine as a whole, we embrace self-organization and the self-determination of peoples. We greet those who are oppressed and rise up for other worlds, and who engage in dialogue through actions.

We stand side by side with the people facing repression. Let’s join Sonnenallee, and be in the streets in any way one chooses.

From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!

There are 26 Comments

Overall this is a good statement by some German anarchists, but is confusing in parts. It clearly supports the Palestinian Arabs against Israel, which is the most important thing. It stands for the freedom of national self-determination of oppressed peoples. "From West Sahara to the mountains in Chiapas.... From...Palestine as a whole, we embrace self-organization and the self-determination of peoples. " (Unfortunately it does not mention Ukraine.)

Its position on Hamas is somewhat ambiguous. It states, "The Palestinian struggle for liberation has been suffering in Germany from being reduced to Hamas’ actions." A good point, since the Palestinian struggle is not simply the horrendous actions of Hamas.

But it says, "the war machinery and the market of death are never the path to liberation." This could be read as a criticism of Hamas' inhumane tactics. But it could also be read as a statement of pacifism, a belief that the Palestinians should never use mass violence (war) in their struggle for liberation--even *without* the atrocities and war crimes of Hamas. If so, it conflicts with the statement of support for "those who are oppressed and rise up for other worlds." As a general philosophy and strategy, pacifism makes a fetish of nonviolence. (This is not to oppose certain tactic uses of nonviolence where appropriate, nor the condemnation of statist militarism, nor the total rejection of nuclear bombs.)

I think we are in agreement but the statement could be clearer.

Still going on with the intentionally bad (faith) readings , conflating anti-militarism with pacifism, I see. Seems like you've been around long enough, you should know better by now.
Anarchist Anti-Militarism

As I have repeatedly pointed out, on this site and elsewhere, revolutionary anarchists are opposed to imperialist wars, including those between imperialist states, such as in World War I. Almost all the pieces which you reprint are making this point. But revolutionary anarchists do not oppose wars of national liberation (where one side is not imperialist, even if it is capitalist and statist). This is even if the rebellious people are influenced by nationalism (which we do not believe in). At least that was the opinion of Malatesta, in the article you reprint but may not have read. In the article, devoted mostly to opposition to World War I, Malatesta wrote:

"We are cosmopolitans.....We would like every human group to be able to live in the conditions it prefers and to be free to unite and break away from other groups as it pleases....

"But we understand that in countries where the government and the main oppressors are of foreign nationality, the question of freedom and economic emancipation presents itself under the guise of nationalist struggle, and we therefore sympathise with national insurrections as with any insurrection against the oppressors. In that case, as in all others, we are with the people against the government."

This applies to the Palestinian people and to the Ukrainians as well. It does not require that we give up our opposition to nationalism or to nationalist leaders such as Hamas or even the Zelensky regime in Ukraine.

I believe I've read most if not all of your articles on the subject. If you'd even so much as glanced at my site, you'd have seen that I'm in favor of national liberation, as many historic anarchists like Malatesta were. I agree that this apples to Ukrainians (whatever that people may be) as much as Palestinians (or people in the Donbas or Crimea). This however doesn't negate anarchist anti-militarism, particularly for anarchists living under states that militarily supply both Ukraine and Israel. Anti-militarism is neither pacifism nor against national liberation. Being in favor of national liberation does not mean ignoring the militarism of imperialist states. If you had in fact read Malatesta ('For Candia', etc.), you would know this.

Ukraine artillery production will pay off during Israel support, US officials say (Task & Purpose)

I am glad that we agree on national liberation.

I did not say that I was against "anti-militarism." However the discussion would be much clearer if you defined what you mean by "militarism" and "anti-militarism" as opposed to being pro-war and anti-war as such. If by "anti-militarism" you mean opposition to large standing armies and glorification of national states, then we agree. I already wrote that anarchists favor guerrilla and militia methods. But perhaps we disagree in that I would support armed struggles by oppressed groupings which are not using such methods. For example, if the Palestinians had invaded Israel using standard military methods but without the atrocities, I would have supported that, even if they had not used the methods we advocate.

liberation" doing on this website? Aren't there enough community altruism groups and marxists counsels for that type of shit?

Like, when was nationalism compatible with anarchist philosophy/ideology AT ALL? Oh well, i guess this site needs an anthem or something.

" nationalism [is not] compatible with anarchist philosophy/ideology AT ALL." Completely agree.

But wanting your people to be free of an oppressor from another nation ("national liberation" or "national self-determination") is not the same as "nationalism." Nationalism is the "philosophy/ideology" of denying class and other divisions within the nation, ignoring oppression and exploitation, supporting a new (local) ruling class and a state. On the other hand, supporting the right of a self-identifying people to separate out or integrate-with another people as they decide is part of anarchism and always has been.

I suggest looking at my quotation from Malatesta in this thread.

LOL "national liberation" or "national self-determination") is not the same as "nationalism."
Like saying "looking after my own affairs is not individualism." Lol

"your people" crap is indistinguishable from nationalism. Stop assuming everyone in every country is some patronizing crypto-nationalist like you.

Not sure how it's possible for Palestinians to "invade" their own territory. I think for anarchists who live in countries that support the state of Israel, it's not our main concern how Palestinians fight anyway, our main concern is "our own" states, including their militarism (an international problem). With Ukraine on the other hand, anarchists are merely enlisting as soldiers in a regular state army, trained & supported by Canada, & other 1st World states. It's not a site of settler colonialism, & the main imperialist powers support the Ukrainian state. It's not a matter of pacifist opposition to resistance against the Russian state, but of the militaries/militarism of the Ukrainian, Canadian, etc..states

"Not sure how it's possible for Palestinians to "invade" their own territory"

So there's two types of people in the world... those who read and consider new ideas, even if they're conflicting with their own received notions, and those who just don't, and keeping droning the same stuff 'til they dead.

I said it already... Palestinian only started to be a national identity bullshit in the '60s. Before that whatever factions were fighting against the Jewish "invaders" were the Pan-Arab nationalist movement, that was set up and backed ON THE FUCKING RECORD by both British and German Nazi imperialists. There was no such thing as a Palestinian Arab identity, as it was the result of the nation-building that occurred during the British Mandate. This is all made-up, just like the Jewish homeland nationalism.

Palestinians, for the nuance, are natives in the area. But there wasn't an land that was their own and taken away by the Zionists. That's complete bullshit.

be neatly separated from "atrocities". So wait, there are ways to violently invade a territory, so that your enemies are like "oh cool, we have guests! Let's welcome the guests and give them all our shit if they ask politely!"

I'm dying over here.

"if the Palestinians had invaded Israel using standard military methods but without the atrocities, I would have supported that,"

I tOotally support STANDARD MILITARY fully auto machine gunning some collateral damage civilians in their face until their head explodes into hamburger (according to the agreed upon standard rules of war as per the Geneva Convention) but I draw the line at chopping their head off with a machete. That's going TOO far.

BAKUNIN MAKHNO!

Describe himself: "national liberation", "revolutionary socialist", yet his opinions keep looking like NATO and american military support...

The US is technically socialist, but in a minor kafkaesque way.

You assert that, although I refer to myself as a "revolutionary socialist" and "anarchist", my "opinions keep looking like NATO..."

Yeah, the US state and the other states of NATO are going all-out to support the Palestinians against the Israeli state. ;-) Sure they are.

for the sake of their politics (NATO and Israel are "our ally" supposedly, while hamas and "the axis of evil" are the bad guys).

Your positions, however, are not clear and do not make any sense. National liberationists try to liberate nations, not people. They're 100% compatible with white nationalists and marxo-socialist jibberish words, not at all compatible with anarchism. But i get it, you aren't a national liberationist, you are just filling the room with hot air. Fuck "my people", they're a buncha friggin' dumbasses.

Pacifism doesn't make a "fetish" of nonviolence. Pacifism and nonviolence are different imperatives, even if they often overlay. Pacifism is about being anti-war, put simply, where nonviolence is a doctrine of refusing violence as a course of action.

Also in the light of anything that happened in this conflict for quite a long time, it really doesn't look like pacifism was either the dominant imperative of the Palestinian struggle, or that non-nonviolence imperative has worked to ANY beneficial ends. So, yea... why keeping those self-destructive violent tactics?

Oh yea... coz some statists got planned wars to justify!

But how do we have, as anarchists, to be supportive of all this war-mongering? Perhaps Wayne ain't the right person to ask to, tho.

No, pacifism is *not* "about being anti-war." Pacifism is about being absolutely anti-war, rejecting war or any kind of mass violence in any situation whatsoever. All anarchists, and really almost all normal people are "anti-war" in the sense of being against war. But almost everyone is for war in some conditions, such as when their country is invaded. Revolutionary anarchist-socialists reject wars waged by imperialist states. We support wars (in the sense of mass violence) waged by oppressed classes or peoples in revolutions. While we do not advocate mass regular bourgeois armies, our support of militia or guerrilla struggles is hardly "anti-war." (Which has nothing to do with the usefulness of nonviolent tactics when appropriate.)

"Revolutionary anarchist-socialists "

Translation: Anarcho-Nationalist, Anarcho-NATOists, WarArchists

Wayne Price is a liar that said he was leaving and he can't even do that right.

War on UkWayne's Bloodlust!
War on Ukwayne's Bootlicking Dog Whistles for NATO

INB4: "Am I an Bootlicking Dog Whistler?" "Is Wayne Price a Nationalist?"

BAKUNIN MAKHNO ZELENSKYY!

Even though, you note, I call myself a "revolutionary anarchist-socialist," you claim I am really an "Anarcho-NATOist" and a "Bootlicking Dog Whistler for NATO."

I repeat: Yeah, the US and other states of NATO are going all-out to support the Palestinians against the Israeli state. ;-) Sure they are.

Idiot.

"But almost everyone is for war in some conditions, such as when their country is invaded."

Ah, here's the nuance to consider. And when did the Palestinians got invaded, again? I only heard about some British colonial Mandate being taken over in '48 by a Zionist movement. But were Jewish refugees from the Third Reich the "invaders'? That'd be the same-old closet antisemite reading of history... and furthermore there was a literal invasion by Muslim Arab paramilitary troops from neighboring countries during the '47-'48 war, as well as the '67 war.

So ain't denying the colonialism in the Israeli state, but discourse on "invaders" is always a maze filled with booby traps and pitfalls, behind the cartoonish narrative it's always droning about.

My reference to people fighting invaders of their country was to common popular consciousness. Anarchists do not "defend their country" if the invasion is really part of an inter-imperialist war (such as German invasion of France during WW I).

During and after WW II, the Zionist leadership channeled homeless Jewish refugees into Palestine. The Zionists' aim was not to find a refuge for the victimized Jews but to use them to take over the country. (That the British ruled the land under a "mandate" is irrelevant; it was occupied by a Palestinian Arab population.) To aim to create your own country and state in a land already populated by another people is to aim to dispossess that people--or to at least subordinate and dominate them. That people has the right to resist and fight back.

Add new comment