Assassination as an Anarchist Tactic

From Montreal Counter-Information

Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info

This is a raw, underdeveloped reflection on why political assassinations of CEOs, politicians, slumlords, etc., should happen more often. The assassination of UnitedHealthCare Executive CEO, Brian Thompson left me spiralling in a myriad of unexpected ways, mostly around these two questions: why doesn’t this happen more often? And perhaps, why do anarchists seemingly no longer do this?

Assassinations are primarily political. They are a radical act resulting from either a political analysis of power, or a threat to the order of it. Police, state, and corporations commit assassinations but they use their justice systems to legitimate them.

I find myself so hesitant to discuss with some of my most trusted, beloved comrades. It feels so taboo. What has liberal democratic propaganda done to anarchism that makes the topic of assassination so uncomfortable to talk about it as a rationale and reasonable act? Even if we hate to admit it, non-violence has a more pervasive creep than many of us are willing to admit.

In some circles, I hear a lot of people talk about the necessity of violence, but I’m not sure if it’s anything more than a romanticized notion of it. The experience of committing violence against one’s adversary is many things, though it often comes with a rush of adrenaline, sometimes a fleeting sense of euphoria, but it can also come with nausea, shock, and the intuitive feeling that with every act of violence a piece of one’s self is forever changed.

And at the same time, what the fuck world? We’ve been shown that the legal system is a joke. We know laws are made for the most powerful. We know that politicians don’t care about systemic change, but rather, they are more invested in the maintenance of capital and state order albeit with different takes depending on the political party. We know demonstrations alone don’t work, we know breaking windows or setting an executive’s car on fire isn’t enough to deter or intimidate, so what is one left with to do? What is left to be done so that when one says, “no, this will not happen any longer,” and acts accordingly, it happens no longer?

Those who have power and shape the socio-political terrain of this world will not step aside peacefully. We are fucking delusional if we think that another petition, demo, vigil, frontline is going to change anything. While friends and comrades caught RICO charges from the Stop Cop City struggle, Donald Trump caught the same charges and became President, again!

The state uses the police to back multibillion dollar projects. We cannot win when we try to stand against them as equal opponents, even in asymmetrical attacks the outcomes are grim. But if the heads of corporations, etc were killed, one by one, think of the way their networks would implode into chaos because of the fear and knowledge that they are no longer untouchable? They can be found. I’m not saying that assassinations are the only thing left to do. I’m just wondering aloud into the anarchist universe as to why this tactic is used more by the state, the police, etc., and less by individuals who understand/ experience the harm and greed of certain individuals who just need to die.

Millions of people applauded the recent assassination of UHC CEO Thompson, they also applauded the most recent assassination attempt of Trump. We are on a precipice. I want those reading this text to seriously examine their relationship to violence. Ask yourself and trusted friends, “how far are you/ am I willing to go?” Would you know the conditions necessary for that relationship to change or intensify? Or, do you provide endless justifications as to why a tactic of accelerated violence won’t make a difference. Be honest. Sometimes we say such things because we are just afraid of the consequences of getting caught or failing. When we are honest about our fears we can make plans to move beyond them. What things would you need in place to feel like you could increase your capacity to act violently? And to that end, to commit an assassination?

Assassinations are an anarchist tactic. The following is a list of known anarchist assassins – definitely incomplete – who decided that this was a viable tactic throughout history. Wikipedia has pages on each of them:

Michele Angiolillo
Milan Arsov
Joëlle Aubron
Germaine Berton
Georgi Bogdanov
Dmitrii Bogrov
Marko Boshnakov
Gaetano Bresci
Arthur Caron
Sante Geronimo Caserio
Georges Cipriani
Alfredo Luís da Costa
Leon Czolgosz
Buenaventura Durruti
Vladimir Gaćinović
Herman Helcher
Émile Henry (anarchist)
Liu Shifu
Gino Lucetti
Luigi Lucheni
Paulí Pallàs
Manuel Pardiñas
Giovanni Passannante
Yordan Popyordanov
Antonio Ramón
Ravachol
Gennaro Rubino
Santiago Salvador
Alexandros Schinas
Sholem Schwarzbard
Oleksandr Semenyuta
Jean-Baptiste Sipido
Sergey Stepnyak-Kravchinsky
Moishe Tokar
Kurt Gustav Wilckens
Wong Sau Ying
Vera Zasulich
Bogdan Žerajić

Comments

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 09:58

Likely coz the socio-economic strata from where the most vocal anarchists came from, the past few decades was petty bourgies social milieus only interested in bureaucracy, academia and representative politics as tactics for bringing forth their "anarchist" utopias?

Wayne Price (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 13:09

Maybe because anarchist assassinations have not worked out very well. They may remove one official or capitalist at a time, but each will be replaced immediately. Meanwhile most of the population will have turned against anarchists. This will be used by the state to justify increased repression. Brave militants will be locked up for years or killed. The people will have been taught by anarchists to passively wait for heroes to fight for them.

I am not making this up. This is exactly what happened in the period when anarchists were prominent in such attentats. The anarchists shrunk in size. Then they revived only by working in mass organizations, and by building the unions (syndicalism). The times when anarchism has done best has been when participating in popular struggles. (I am not against assassinations if done in the course of a popular uprising or revolutionary civil war.)

anon nero (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 14:25

In reply to by Wayne Price (not verified)

Tell us Wayne, what HAS "worked out very well"? You're such a fucking bootlicking, reformist piece of shit that takes every opportunity to undermine anarchists and others that are actually attacking power because you're a fucking worshiper of power and want to control radical activity. ALL of you beloved examples of what you think anarchists should do have utterly failed, crushed, and/or are merely theory that you hide behind coupled with the fallacy that "well it wasn't done correctly" just like every commie bootlicker that claims "well it wasn't true communism!!.
Fuck all the way off, Wayne.
Anarchy has nothing to do with you.

BLACK DECEMBER EVERYWHERE!

EmmaAintDead Sat, 12/14/2024 - 14:37

In reply to by Wayne Price (not verified)

1) popular momentum is not only in support of this assassination, but is encouraging MORE assassinations in kind. It's to the detriment of your mass-movement-building popular-moment activism to repeat the line that this is unpopular. At best you'll squander the moment, at worst you'll actually convince someone this was unpopular and create an opponent out of a supporter.

2.) the state does not need your permission or any provided excuse to repress. It's their only function. No matter what happens, the state will repress because the state is designed to do that and only that, and it does it in all situations.

3.) "The people" will be taught no such thing. "The people," if anything, will be learning that there's tons of support for merc'n CEOs and popular movement orgs aren't the ones doing it. "The people" will not abandon red and black anarchist orgs because "the people" never joined them to begin with, they'll just continue not joining red and black anarchist orgs and continue not waiting for permission from The Workers Council to do whatever it is they would like to do.

Syndicalism is dead. The torch bearers of the tendency are the thrice reanimated partial corpses of wobblies and seditionists of the 1910s, and while they shamble about groaning "BRAAAINS" they turn past their necromancers in the IWW and BRRN because they know there's no sustenance to be found there. Union density plummeted again recently, and it's not because of some tragic Reganite busting, but because these morons cannot - for the literal life of them - stop fighting their losingest battles in the Social War. Rank-n-File love the assassin. Rank-n-file hate the CEO. Rank-n-file voted trump and did so proudly, with hand painted signs in their yards and flags on their work trucks. Rank-n-file don't care about a bunch of college pink-hairs calling them fascists for caring about their families before yours. If these are your people... start listening to them like Ben Fletcher and Frank Little did! Don't tell them what they believe, they're telling YOU.

Le Way, (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 14:51

In reply to by Wayne Price (not verified)

I agree with the more nuanced approach to rebellion you propose Wayne, and I'm always pleased when a seasoned anarch such as yourself offer wise and compassionate advice to calm the seething ressentiment and testosterone levels which marre all intelligent gatherings.

I am Makhno (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 14:34

First of all, anyone who posts an open call to commit political violence is probably a cop or a paid informant looking to entrap people. Secondly, as for the Trotskyist Wayne Price, whose groupscule, the RSL (Revolutionary Socialist League), made the tactical decision to throw in their lot with the equally left-sectarian faux-anarchist group Love & Rage around 1989, he just keeps repeating the same blather about mass organizations and organizing the working class that authoritarian leftists have been hypnotized by for over a century.

There will never be a political revolution, because that implies a seizure of State power, rather than challenging the very concept of political power. "Seizing the means of production" is just another way of perpetuating capitalism and mass production, along with the hierarchical , exploitative social relations that such a mass economy necessitates.

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 15:42

In reply to by I am Makhno (not verified)

yeah you're right everyone is a fed, everything is a honeypot, taking direct action is impossible, only the state has agency

god i despise this kind of thinking

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 16:20

In reply to by anon (not verified)

^^^
It licks

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 17:14

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Nice try, fbi!

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 17:59

In reply to by anon (not verified)

^^^
Nice try, FBI.

I hope you get paid well for your feeble attempts at quelling descent so you can afford to buy a nice noose later to hang yourself with when your capitalist masters are no longer around to provide you with boots to lick.

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 18:59

In reply to by anon (not verified)

No, I hope UUUU get payed well trying to convince people to do stuff that you yourself would never do in a million years.

By all means tho, go ahead and lead the way, glowie ;)

anon (not verified) Sun, 12/15/2024 - 16:10

In reply to by anon (not verified)

VERY telling the moderators leave this one up. We ALL know they hate the idea of people taking action.

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 15:56

In reply to by I am Makhno (not verified)

Not a workerist but i think you seem smart, but like you have developed too much of your analysis from talking to people who all agree with you. I think you should study insurrections, who precipitated them, and why, AFTER the Spanish civil war but before the Arab spring. Like really dig in, memoirs, history books, reports, etc. Skip Paris 1968 and Italy 1977. Study any other place in that time under those parameters and i have the feeling your worldview will be altered.

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 18:11

In reply to by I am Makhno (not verified)

> "First of all, anyone who posts an open call to commit political violence is probably a cop or a paid informant looking to entrap people."

Calls for propaganda by the deed are made anonymously. Just because you're a clueless do-nothing doesn't mean everyone else is.

> Imma MAkHnOoooo!!!
No, you're a fucking idiot.

anon (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 22:54

It's kinda dumb that some ppl here get so insecure about calls for political violence being posted here when your got thousands of proles out there showing support to Luigi and crowdfunding his legal fees already without even knowing anything about anarchy or anarchism or this web site. And that's good, coz these thousands, millions of noobs out there are covering for the tiny numbers of hardcore anarchists still existing, even those advocating for murdering filthy rich parasites... which in my book is TOTALLY FINE. It's murder by necessity... when there are no other known means of accountability.

anon (not verified) Sun, 12/15/2024 - 09:37

In reply to by anon (not verified)

The only people that are upset for calls for political violence that are made anonymously in radical circles are the capitalist targets, the politicians that serve them, the pigs that serve them on here glowing all over their feeble attempts at squashing dissent. Imagine being so shit at your pig job you get assigned to convince Anews anons that killing capitalists is bad and that anyone who likes or encourages it must be a cop! Lulz.

anon (not verified) Mon, 12/16/2024 - 19:58

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Many Libsocs and other Leftoids these days appear to be included in that category, especially ever since Covid. It's only cool to use violence on the Rich, as far as you did it 100 years ago. Far enough for comfort!

Le Way, (not verified) Sat, 12/14/2024 - 23:31

As I said before, the only revolutionary manifestos that Luigi ever displayed for public scrutiny were his eyebrows,,,now can we change the subject please!

anon (not verified) Sun, 12/15/2024 - 14:20

> Assassinations are primarily political. They are a radical act resulting from either a political analysis of power, or a threat to the order of it. Police, state, and corporations commit assassinations but they use their justice systems to legitimate them.

The first sentence is meaningless. The second sentence is a strong claim. The third sentence suggests that this "radical act" is done by the presumably non-radical grouping of police, state, and corporations. It also says they use "their justice systems to legitimate them".

Corporations don't. Maybe the East India Company did back in but I don't see Apple or Rio Tinto assassinating people and then having those assassinations stamped as legal in a court. I am sure the odd assassination does happen that is commissioned from on high, but like, they cover it up.

Governments don't, either. A lot of people think India's government killed a guy in Canada recently. The Indians aren't saying "it's legal", they're saying "we didn't do it and fuck you for saying we did". Ditto the Saudis when they killed that journalist in Istanbul. This matches what Israel does in its assassinations, to some degree.

I guess this matches what police do. But I don't know how this is a radical act or a political act. Everything is political, sort of, but most of the time when the police kill people, it's not, like, a targeted attempt to kill a specific person. The officer or the police department or whatever did not get up in the morning expecting to kill that person that day. Instead, a circumstance arose where a person got killed. Btw, if you think this is an anti-ACAB argument you need better reading comprehension

Wayne Price (not verified) Mon, 12/16/2024 - 15:42

Errico Malatesta: "We deplore those acts of unwarranted violence that, being inspired by hate and vengeance, lash out at individuals while leaving the cause of the evil intact. All the more when such acts are turned on the crowd....but we explain them in terms of ...the terrible provocations to which anyone possessed of human dignity is exposed, and the examples of violence and ferocity continuously given by the bourgeoisie and governments." (1897)

anon nero (not verified) Mon, 12/16/2024 - 17:49

In reply to by Wayne Price (not verified)

This took you a week Wayne? You must be exhausted with all your panic searching for a quote. But you STILL FAIL, fucker! Malatesta's keyword here is "unwarranted violence", Wayne! Propaganda by the deed / political assassination by against the capitalist class is not "unwarranted violence"! This is Malatesta AND Galleani's fucking point. Do you fucking understand??? Additionally, NOTHING was "TURNED ON THE CROWD", You misdirecting, bootlicking, reformist FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT FUCKING FUCK.

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
5
q
c
1
C
&
*
j
Enter the code without spaces.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.