Our response is like an earthquake: It comes sooner or later
Since the inception of eco-extremist actions and interventions, there has been a steady and unending flow of criticisms from various schools of thought. It should be pointed out that few of these have the intention of being constructive. The majority are just plain shit-talking, criticizing for criticism’s sake, or straight defamation. Here we are going to try to answer and refute them. We say “try” because it would seem for our haters that eco-extremist texts are written in a special hieroglyphics, as it seems impossible for them to understand. Or maybe they’re just retarded, hard to say, but either way, let’s get started…
“Those who take aim at us the most are the ones who admire us the most.’“
A) From the blog
As we’ve mentioned before, “Maldición Eco-extremista” is not a cute inoffensive blog. We are not a news site that avoids discussion and we don’t really want to keep putting up preliminary notes on any text that tries to describe our disagreements with a particular position. If the content of a particular text does not convince us usually we just ignore it.
We don’t publish criticisms, analysis, and claims of responsibility for actions that smell of radicalism with explanatory notes for good measure. That’s what most “counter-information” sites out there do, and it’s clear we aren’t one of them.
It should also be taken into consideration that eco-extremism means illegality. It’s pissing on legal and juridical statutes imposed by civilization. Since we follow this attitude we state it openly. Thus, in our preliminary notes we publicly root for individualists to satisfy their darkest instincts while leaping over barriers of what is “legal” or “permitted.”
Sure, these have logical consequences before the legal representatives. These are well-known and it would bore us to have to describe them again here. As we say, those are the consequences, reactions to our actions or the actions of others. Being the “public face” of eco-extremism carries with it certain responsibilities and one of these is to reply to all of the shit-talking against us. We would love to not have to deal with all of this stupidity and gossip, but as the title states: “Our response always comes, like an earthquake.”
B) Critics of México, Argentina, Chile y Gringolandia, UNITE!
For some time, a handful of criticisms have been published on different blogs, in magazines, etc. mostly of the anarchist persuasion. Most of these are incorrect interpretations or mere unfounded judgments of the words and deeds of the eco-extremists. These are texts that it would be worth the time to respond to rapidly, but to be honest when we first read them we had to laugh:
-(México) “Contra el eco-extremismo a la mecsicana” was written by Heliogeorgos Caro (HC), a self-styled intellectual in the Department of Political and Social Sciences at the UNAM who thinks that his intellectual formation makes him “slightly above average”. The eunuch HC, to refresh your memory, was owned several times by the criticism of Reacción Salvaje in the piece, “Ya nos habíamos tardado: Breves contemplaciones sobre los comentarios catedráticos de Heliogerogos Caro,” from March 18th, 2015.
It seems that “Hípster Cagón” [Shitty Hipster] wanted payback with his little essay, the rematch (LOL!) for all of the butthurt that RS inflicted on him and now he is searching desperately for a reply. Poor thing…
Of this criticism, we’ll not say much. Only that it’s totally off base. His premises are useless since they don’t have much to do with the essence of eco-extremism. It’s a criticism from a pseudo-mathematician who defends scientism at all costs. So there’s not much to see there, really.
-(Argentina) Another staunch critic wrote an expose in the Argentine magazine, “Puñal Negro,” [Black Dagger] that in its first issue had an article entitled, “Objetivos ¿amorales? del ataque”. These anarchists look up to us so much they even gave us their first essay in their magazine. Wow!
Those “black dagger” folks are an example, but don’t get excited, they’re an example of bad interpretation of eco-extremist writings. For one thing, they confuse “indiscriminate attack” with “random attack,’ which to be fair is a common mistake for the nuns of anarchism and brain dead folks like them.
It’s pretty obvious that the objectives that eco-extremists choose to hit are OBJECTIVE TARGETS and not random as those dagger folk would have it. Eco-extremists have at least had the guts to say that they do NOT regret the wounding of bystanders who find themselves in the middle of an attack. This is what is meant when we bring up “indiscriminate attack,” and, in fact, this is the ancient and venerable manner of waging war. To be sure the most primitive ancestors of the black dagger folks brutally killed and maimed members of other tribes indiscriminately during any given conflict. Only it seems like this brand of anarchist only accepts “modern” methods of attack: ones that are done with much care, going out of the way not to harm the random bystander. What garbage!
We know that our conditions aren’t the same as those of our ancestors, but the war practically is. It is the War against the Artificial within the eco-extremist perspective. So that’s why we exhort anarchists of this type to see more than what they want to see and look beyond their own noses. If they don’t want to, it’s better if they just shut up.
It’s an all-too-common hypocrisy in some radical circles, those which are always going on about the defense of “life,” “against domestication,” “against exploitation,” and other boring endless dreck. But when a passerby is wounded in one of their attacks, they either keep quiet about it or apologize. The first is cowardice, the second is a sign that, if you keep on carrying out actions like that, others might be similarly injured or even killed. So if you don’t want to die from all of those pangs of conscience, you might as well devote yourself to helping old ladies cross the street, or something similar.
When eco-extremists speak of “Indiscriminate Attacks,” they’re saying that they DON’T care if bystanders get hurt or killed during their attacks, as long as the target is hit. That is to say, they are out to hit a SPECIFIC target. That’s it.
This was also the case with Severino Di Giovani and his gang. Do you remember that from your Anarchist History class, Dagger dudes? No. Alright, let’s refresh your memory, boludooos:
May 7th, 1928: A powerful explosion destroyed a significant portion of the Italian Consulate in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The target was the General Consul of Italy, one Mr. Capani, one of the right hand men of Benito Mussolini. The two anarchists, Severino and Ramé, not being able to make it to Capani’s office, abandoned the suitcase with the bomb in it on the stairs of the diplomatic headquarters. The bomb exploded powerfully, leaving nine dead and 34 wounded. Seven of the dead were fascists, the other two dead and the majority of the wounded were BYSTANDERS. Because of this attack, Severino’s group would be labeled as a “gang of violent crazy men.” Today we don’t live in Severino’s time when he used terrorism to fight the fascism of his age. Today we fight the new face of fascism which is civilization and the domestication of those who celebrate it. The eco-extremists don’t hesitate to attack it.
We mention that this attack of Di Giovani is what we mean by “Indiscriminate Attack,” so that you idiot daggers can understand better where we are coming from. The Great Terrorist Di Giovani’s act was a good example of this. Compare this REAL anarchist with the fascist gangs, take into consideration the fierce and indiscriminate practices of the past. Do it and they will come back from the past to take your lives like they did that of the anarchist López Arango, who talked a lot of shit about Severino.
Then the “daggers” continue saying: “what we carry out is what we do because we feel like it. It is not a call from any type of morality or a call of the sacred forest or any other mystical bullshit.”
We have thrown the bible of anarchism and its church in the trash a long time ago. Specifically, we have cast aside that slogan, “no gods, no master,” or “against any God.” For sure, we piss and shit on the Christian god and his religion. No doubt about that! Our belief is in Pagan animism.
Our paganism believes in the cycles of the Earth. Thus, we venerate and extol the Wild and Ineffable: the Mountain, the Rain, the Thunder, the Sun, the Wind, the Moon, the Rivers, the Condor, the Deer, etc. With the greatest pride we extol that which WE ARE and what we believe. We walk with our DEITIES at all times, as once our ancestors did. Just as the last wild tribes on Earth do, bound to their Gods and their mysteries.
The truth is that in every attack against civilization, eco-extremists act possessed by that spirit of what you call the Wild Forest. This call incites us to commit violent and radical acts against progress and civilization.
Eco-extremist Paganism is Accursed, its attacks will also be Accursed…
We hope with this that we have cleared up any doubts concerning the term, “Indiscriminate Attack.” And if we haven’t, that’s not our problem. It’s the result of your inferior intellectual abilities. Lastly, if our pride bothers you, or our paganism, or what we are or do, just stop reading eco-extremist communiqués and stop coming by our blog. Stop being our judge, jury, and executioner. Stop saying that you don’t want to argue even when you’re making an indirect argument. Either way, eco-extremists aren’t ones to lie down and keep quiet.
-(Argentina) The anarchist publication “De la propaganda a los hechos” (May 2016).
It would seem that the anarchist who wrote the essay, “On ITS” has understood the concept of “Indiscriminate Attack” better than many others. This only goes to show that it’s only out of stubbornness and stupidity that some have refused to understand this term and not because eco-extremists have explained themselves badly.
But hold on a second, this anonymous anarchist also doesn’t seem to have understood all of the questions that disturb them. Let’s take a look.
To start, it’s necessary to state to the anonymous author that eco-extremist attacks are NOT POLITICAL. Eco-extremism does not seek or claim any determined political positions, and thus our acts ARE NOT POLITICAL, Thus, by pure logic, its ends are not political either. Therefore, the majority of the criticisms that have to do with “virtual symbolisms,” “unleashing material actions that really affect progress,” etc. are self-refuting.
He states, “if they only attack for the sake of attacking, and they don’t seek to move past the line between virtual symbolism and unleashing in material actions that truly affect progress”.
Really eco-extremists are not looking to end civilization with their attacks, or anything of the sort. To think otherwise would be delusional, since doing that is impossible. Even if you killed all of the scientists in the world, destroying their labs and blowing up all of the bridges of the city. Not even the most destructive action can halt the advance of techno-industrial progress. In this we are extreme realists and we ask ourselves if any of our actions will stop progress and we believe that they won’t. That’s the sad reality and we have come to accept it.
On this point, we are confused as the author of the text, at coming to the same conclusion by saying, “but the structures that allow civilization to function cannot be allowed to halt one minute for fear of the citizenry. We see that after these attacks the places of exploitation will keep functioning, the machines will keep working, and if the employee dies, he will be replaced with someone else the next day,” still he criticizes the idea of disinterested attack or attack for attack’s sake. Yes, eco-extremists are pessimists and sadly we have concluded that the destruction of civilization is impossible. The only one capable of inflicting SERIOUS harm on civilization, or better to destroy it, is Wild Nature herself. So then, what is to be done? Twiddle your thumbs and wait? Watch civilization spread far and wide destroying all Wild places, without doing anything? NEVER!
Yes, eco-extremists choose disinterested attack that expects NOTHING in return: an attack in the name of Wild Nature against civilization. An attack in defense of ourselves and all that we are losing. And let it be known that they do it for the EGO trip too, for the sheer pleasure of attack, and they have no qualms admitting it. That’s why they claim responsibility for their attacks and they adopt acronyms and names for their groups.
Let it be clear: eco-extremism doesn’t pretend to try to “destroy civilization.” It does not want to “end progress.” It aims to HARM civilization, to STRIKE OUT at progress in the PRESENT and DESTABILIZE what can be destabilized. For that, eco-extremism employs indiscriminate and selective attacks, terrorism, sabotage, assassination, threats, various criminal activities, etc.
The anonymous author also writes about ISIS. He writes that the attacks of those terrorists carried out in the metro and airport in Belgium didn’t halt progress, stating, “we see that after these attacks, people don’t stop heading out to their places of exploitation, the machines don’t stop working, if an employee dies, he’s replaced by another the next day.” He’s right, of course. Progress doesn’t stop for anything. And sure, groups like ISIS want to destroy Western civilization by force to impose an Islamic civilization instead. But what does this have to do with eco-extremists?
The author continues: “While capital advances with the great strides in technological developments, and world overpopulation gets worse by the day, why should we think that attacking an innocent bystander who is bound in servitude has any effect on the advance of civilization?”
When was that ever mentioned in the communiqués of eco-extremists?
No one has ever said that attacking an innocent bystander halts the advance of civilization! Because saying that would be really dumb.
And, to be honest, we can turn that question the other way around and ask the anarchists: Why do you plant bombs in banks when the next day the insurance will cover the damage and the bank will keep functioning as if it never happened? Why plant bombs in police stations if people don’t stop becoming police afterwards? Why support anarchist prisoners if solidarity actions won’t shorten their sentences let alone free them? Why write hit pieces available in PDF format if most of the criticisms contained therein collapse under the weight of the ignorance of their anonymous authors? Why “struggle” and “heighten the contradictions”? Why anarchy then?
The anonymous author continues with his dumb questions saying: “Why have recourse to symbolic terror against the docile masses during their commute when we could be thinking about biotechnologists instead and the significant infrastructure that provides the city with energy?”
It seems that this idiot thinks that civilization is only about the electrical grid and scientists, which is obviously NOT THE CASE. Civilization also includes the neighborhood corner store. But of course that’s not eco-extremism’s target (for the time being).
Dear Mr. Anonymous, please think before you write things down, because your supposed criticisms are poorly thought-out. It’s appropriate to say that your words seem to be only “criticisms” vested with “good intentions” for the sake of “moving discourse forward” while employing the technical language of anarchy. But really they are counterproductive defamation. And even if we don’t particularly care for confronting these sterile criticisms, we mention them without censoring them.
The anonymous author also criticizes the word “antisocial”. We eco-extremists affirm that yes, EVERYONE IS OUR ENEMY: all hyper-civilized people, the masses, the accomplice citizenry, civilization as a whole. Why, Mr. Anonymous Author, are we EXTREMISTS then? Because we advocate half-measures? It should be mentioned that if we had the power to kill off 40 million people in your region and others, annihilating the infrastructure that maintains civilization, we would do so without thinking twice about it.
The anonymous author asks as well, “Being antisocial would be any action that attacks a passerby or a worker? Or only the actions that are classified under the title of being ‘wild’?”
We respond that this is not necessarily the case. An attack that is truly antisocial is one that is carried out with an attitude of hatred, revenge, reaction, etc. against the values of society; against its symbols and its members, and it wouldn’t necessarily fall under a misanthropic attack.
And even if it appears that the author has a computer he doesn’t seem to have a dictionary. For he doesn’t quite know which definition of the world “anti-social” to employ. Since I have a dictionary right here I can help him so that he stops spewing such epic idiocies:
“Antisocial: 1 – That which is contrary to society or harmful to it. 2- One who has difficulties with life in society or who feels repulsion to it.”
Dude, it’s that simple!
And when the anonymous author pretends to have the bull by the horns and celebrates his “victory” by deceiving himself that he has our number with his shitty criticisms, he then labels our tendency as “moralist” since he recalls the slogan that ITS used back in 2011: “Nature is the good, Civilization is evil.” Let’s remind this anarchist again that ITS has not used this slogan since beginning its new phase in 2016. If he wants to criticize stuff from five years ago, maybe it’s best that he doesn’t, because these arguments no longer apply.
ITS has not used this slogan recently, nor the term, “individual freedom”, nor used an “x” to designate the gender of words, nor returned to any of the other bad habits that were present in the first communiqués. We recommend that the author read the ITS communiqués again, and take notice this time the evolution of eco-extremism in ITS and other groups. Then he can avoid spitting out dumbass arguments that only confuse and deceive his readers.
And the dummy keeps asking, “or are we to affirm that misanthropy, hate, rebellion, or war exist in wild nature?”
We respond that NO, in wild nature there is no misanthropy, or hate, or rebellion, but there is WAR and REVENGE. We recommend that the author also spend less time in the city and more time outside of it in contact with nature. If he doesn’t, he’s probably not going to understand what we’ve written.
And in addition, without wanting to repeat ourselves, we recommend that he also learn to distinguish between “warning calls” and “threats” before saying that ITS has contradicted itself in that regard.
-(Chile) There’s no doubt that eco-extremism has been a pain in the side of many since its arrival in South America. So much so that “some” anarchist cells have staged a drama “demanding” (directly or indirectly) that all of the other anarchists excommunicate us from their “churches” for being blasphemers. These arson-committing “nuns” have taken on many names, but it’s evident that it’s the same group of assholes. They deceptively hide behind the initials of the Informal Anarchist Federation (FAI), and they issue communiqués published on various important blogs in anarchist circles. You guys know which ones we’re talking about it, don’t think we’re not going to notice! So keep on reading.
February 1st: Note that this was only weeks after the fierce arson attack on a Transantiago bus that had all of its passengers on board in broad daylight, an attack for which ITS in its third communiqué took responsibility. This also announced the internationalization and expansion of the group. After this attack, the Paulino Scarfo Revolutionary Cell (FAI/FRI) devoted itself to anarchist business as usual in setting fire to a bank, and then issuing a boilerplate communique recording the facts of the attack, the “revolutionary reasoning” behind it which is now as sacrosanct as Christ’s cloak, and some other things for good measure. However, they deviated from the standard anarchist fare by mentioning two things that surprised us.
One of them was this:
“(herp derp) Also on the basis of this revolutionary perspective of conceiving of the confrontation with Power and Authority, we distance ourselves from all discourse that seeks to propagate indiscriminate attack and the defining of any person as a target to physically harm and kill. The unlimited source of our actions seeks to avoid collateral damage against persons who by chance are found near our targets during our operations. This understands that all planning today is according to the narrowing down of the material objective. Attack has a morality to it and is not indiscriminate. We embrace the arson but we do not share the discourse that it sought to propagate.”
For those who don’t speak “revolutionary anarchist,” here’s a translation:
“We didn’t understand jack shit of what the eco-extremists wrote about concerning ‘Indiscriminate Attack, but it sounds ugly so we don’t agree with it because it doesn’t sound like revolution, or social war, or solidarity with prisoners, or insurrectionalism, or the FAI, or ‘againstpowerandauthority’.
Our attack on the Santander bank was an exemplary attack, that’s how it’s done folks. We teach by example.
We are morally superior since we have morals unlike those eco-extremists, but we don’t just come right out and say it because we’re cowards.
We wouldn’t know what to do if in one of our attacks, innocent people were hurt. We don’t want to judge anyone, but we’ll make an exception for that text that ITS-Chile put out taking responsibility for the incendiary attack against the Transantiago bus with people on board.”
The second thing that surprised us was that these anarchists are shameless (though to be honest we find that kind of admirable) in christening their “cell” with the name of Paulino Scarfó!
We laughed heartily at that, as it seems like these shit-flinging anarcho-nuns, with their insinuations and great sense of humor, have no idea what the anarchist Paulino Scarfó did in his day; that is, being a member of Di Giovani’s fierce indiscriminate gang of anarcho-bandits. These anarchists need to read more and immerse themselves in the history of the TRUE anarchists of yesteryear. We’re sure that Scarfó is turning in his grave knowing that his name has been taken up by a bunch of anarcho-Boy Scouts, who are always looking out for the citizenry and launch insinuations against the bad terrorists who don’t care about hurting people when hitting their target.
Scarfó executed many attacks, and here we will mention only one:
January 20th, 1931: Three powerful explosives were detonated at three different train stations in the subways of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Paulino Scarfó abandoned one of the bombs at the Plaza Once station. Mario Cortucci placed another bomb at the Maldonado Station of the Central Argentine Railway. And Márquez left the last explosive at Constitution station. The casualties were serious, with four dead and twenty wounded. All civilians. (Severino Di Giovani: Ideologue of Violence. Osvaldo Bayer. “Sombraysén Editores”/ PDF page 272).
Certainly more than one anarchist crosses himself when faced with this information and wholly denies that Scarfó was one of those responsible for this act that is “despicable,” “ruinous,” “similar to the acts of the Islamic State,” (as modern anarchists bloviate when faced with similar acts). Funny how this bears a resemblance to the Indiscriminate Faction’s aborted attack against the Mexico City subway in October 2015 that spooked so many anarchists. But go ahead, read Osvaldo Bayer’s book on the subject and see for yourselves that Scarfó was an indiscriminate terrorist and a TRUE anarchist. We hope that in the process you will realize that your words and hypocritical precautions for the populace are nothing but humanist garbage.
-In March, days after ITS groups published their Fifth Communique where they make public their expansion from Mexico into Chile and Argentina, the “Cell of Individualists and Anarchist Nihilists for Anti-Authoritarian Insurrection (FAI / FRI)”, after detonating an acid bomb at an auto dealership, issued a shitty communiqué which was way funnier than the other one.
“History, past and present, has shown us that the foundation and exercise of authority has also developed in communities that existed before the emergence of civilized life, and also it has been manifested in groups that have remained outside of civilization. That is why our struggle is essentially ANTIAUTHORITARIAN. This obligates us to distance ourselves from the self-proclaimed ‘eco-extremist tendency’ that has defended indiscriminate attack. It goes against the idea of being ‘against all authority’ and denies international solidarity in word and deed with comrades who have been imprisoned for the cause of insurrectionary anarchy.”
So to begin, we have to state, “LOLWUT?” Who wrote this? This doesn’t even seem to be
from anarchists, more like a group of priests who want to dress up the Virgin Mary in the black mantle of anarchy!
We’re going to further break down their argument. They state:
“This obligates us to distance ourselves from the self-proclaimed “eco-extremist tendency” that has defended indiscriminate attack. It goes against the idea of being “against all authority” and denies international solidarity in word and deed with comrades who have been imprisoned for the cause of insurrectionary anarchy.”
“This obligates us as purists to not mix with the sinful eco-extremists, those who have defended blasphemy. It goes against the idea of eternal salvation, and they deny philanthropic solidarity of supporting one’s neighbor.”
It’s clear that these anarchists are so puritanical that they are beyond absurdity.
After saying that shit they continue stating:
“We’re not interested in online polemics with them. We prefer to dialogue with our comrades through action.”
That’s hysterical. They throw a rock and hide their hand behind their back instead of launching it and staying for the rest of the fight. It’s clear that these modern anarchists have nothing to do with the fierce anarchists of two centuries ago. What a pity…
Before that they wrote:
“History, past and present, has shown us that the foundation and exercise of authority has also developed in communities that existed before the emergence of civilized life, and also it has been manifested in groups that have remained outside of civilization. That is why our struggle is essentially ANTIAUTHORITARIAN.”
On this we’re not going to attempt to make them understand that not all forms of authority are harmful, since they obviously WON’T GET IT. They should think more profoundly and not remain in the old expired discourse of social criticism that they defend. It’s true that “authority” has existed in ancient ethnic groups before civilization, but it’s worth asking: Is the authority exercised by a leader of a Bushman tribe (for example), one that helps to feed them, something that is harmful? Is the authority of the Taromenane shaman, one which cures and alleviates illnesses in his band of wild humans, something harmful? Was the authority of the great Teochichimeca warriors, who were able to take revenge against the Spanish in their day, something harmful? If you say “yes”, you’re hopeless…
You guys are so pure that surely you notice in every social circle the stain of sin… oh sorry, I meant to say, “authority.” You reject it, just like your Neonazi rivals are also so pure that they notice every stain of sin… oh, sorry again, my bad, I meant to say, “multiculturalism.” They reject it in the same manner. The only difference between you and them is the banner you defend, and nothing deeper than that.
-The last defamatory “cell” to publish its poison was the so-called, “Heriberto Salazar Gang of Saboteurs (FAI-FRI)” in May. Once we suspected that the other two “cells” were the same as this one, we stopped to analyze the communiqué, as well as profoundly think out and compare these situations. In this way, we reached two conclusions:
1.THE SUPPOSED ANARCHISTS ARE REALLY COPS:
On this communique before anything (besides making our sides hurt from so much laughing, like when they asked that people boycott our blog LOL!) , we find the origins and intentions of this document rather dubious. At least the other two communiqués took responsibility for an attack, this one didn’t. That led us to believe straight away that these people were either COPS or REPORTERS. We’re 98.99% sure of this.
We’re not just saying it to say it. Any reader with half a brain would notice something strange going on here. Reading the way they phrase things, how they mix up terms right and left, this would at least set off alarm bells for a careful reader.
*On blogs that have performed the task of spreading the poison of the police
The poisonous communique can still be found on the “Contrainformante blog”, “Voz como arma,” “Instinto Salvaje,” “Autistici-Cruz Negra” (Italian translation), and “325” (English translation) (for whoever wants to read it). You could have found it as well on the super-blog, “CONTRAINFO” until they realized that they made a mistake and then deleted it. The other blog, like the sheep they deny being, took it as being authentic on the basis of having been published on the “reliable source” Contrainfo (ha!), just as the “preliminary note” says on the Spanish blog, “Voz como arma”:
“I republish from Contra Info this communiqué signed by the Heriberto Salazar Gang of Saboteurs – FAI / FRI, which criticizes from some place in Chile the so-called, ‘eco-extremist tendency’. In particular, the issues center on indiscriminate attack, and the distinct insults and threats from these factions against the wider anarchist scene.”
It seems that these dumb sheep dressed in wolves’ clothing have fell hook, line, and sinker for the words of this “Gang” of police. All the latter had to do was start saying bad things about eco-extremism, as some time ago the same people decided to publish the communiqués of Reacción Salvaje (for example) and say in their boring “preliminary notes” that they didn’t agree with the texts but they did agree with the attacks. Thus we ask, why did you publish the RS communiqués if you didn’t agree with them? That’s a sign of your negligent “positivity”, your solicitous and promiscuous attitude, a lack of analysis and your suffocating inclusive modus operandi. Then we noticed again that you call yourselves, “Voz con arma (Voice with Weapon), with good reason because your words are toxic and they can be used as a biological weapon.
The fact that Contrainfo deleted the suspicious communqiue confirms for us the doubts as to the origin of the text, and that we aren’t just being paranoid.
What a shame that these “important” blogs within militant virtual circles, which make “important” interventions for “libertarian theory and praxis,” don’t have any filters and publish any shit that pretends to be or is signed by FAI-FRI even when it’s actually COPS or REPRORTERS who wrote it. What a shame that they can’t distinguish “critical comments” from poison like that.
The police are so obliging that you mistake them for comrades? But you aren’t so obliging with the eco-extremists, since those at “Contrainfo” didn’t publish the Seventh Communique of ITS nor the Indiscriminate Faction’s communiqué taking responsibility for the assassination of the IPN computer science student, or the presentation of the now-defunct “Tierra Maldita” blog (which should be mentioned was sent multiple times). And for obvious reasons you probably won’t publish this either. Nevertheless it’ll be in the inbox of Contrainfo as well as the other blogs (wink). We get why they haven’t published the latest eco-extremist texts, since we looked over again their “Conditions for publication”, and one of the points reads, “only that which conforms to limits of decency and respect for human dignity, personal information, equality of the sexes and of all human beings will be published.”
Eco-extremists definitely are neither decent nor do they respect the humanist values that are implied in that condition, and they spit on the equality of the sexes. That is to say that eco-extremists have been “EXCOMMUNICATED” by Contrainfo!
We’re not saying that they have to publicize the controversial words and acts of eco-extremists just because they are emailed to them or they have to do it by force. No, but for fuck’s sake, everything signed “FAI/FRI” is published without even reading it? That’s a damn shame, because it would seem that any idiot who wants to stir up shit in a communiqué will have a place to do it in the blogs of “counterinformation” if they just stick as “FAI/FRI” at the end of it. What a bunch of dumbass motherfuckers!
It’s sad that they are so bewitched by those acronyms, which are important to many anarchos, that they are manipulated by people coming out of the woodwork who want to poison the well of many radical circles.
Sure, anyone can make the mistake of publishing such idiocies as those of this “Gang”, but the thing is that they won’t even fess up to doing it, at the very least. It’s to be expected that, if they fuck up publicly, they can at least admit that they made a mistake, right?
*Does this type of anarchist remember anything?
A similar story occurred some months ago, the same thing but with a few changed details.
This was the supposed criticism that was signed by the “Colectivo Libre Observador (CLO). Some will remember this, if not, we will refresh your memories.
The campaign of the “Black December” having ended, CLO published a defamatory communiqué entitled, “Criticism of the Gray December”. In this communiqué the CLO came out of the militant campaign sowing doubts and distrust in anarchist circles. At the end of it they expressed their doubts and also invited various “comrades” to question the actions of other groups, among them the “Kapibara Group,” a group of fierce eco-anarchists who we sympathize with. In other words, they wanted to point the finger at these groups accusing them of being “cops”.
On the scene then arrived the again the anarcho-pleasers who administer the “Instinto Salvaje” and Contrainformante” blogs. With the same incompetence and unwillingness to read or analyze what comes to them or what they publish, they uploaded the CLO text on their sites. This created a series of discussions, criticisms, and polemics within anarchist circles, the same as what is happening now with the stuff from the “Gang”.
A group called “Uncivilized Southerners” published its own sharp polemic against the CLO entitled, “Against the Calumnies of Civil Anarchism”, which concludes as follows:
“We believe that this defamation against this group also attacks those individuals who embrace eco-extremist practices against civilization and progress. These are having increasing relevance in the lands of the south with the emergence of various individuals opposing technology. These idiotic words (halfway down) by the “free thought collective” show nothing more than their fear at the heightening of the conflict. They assume the role of defaming all that is not in accord with their anarchist principles, while labeling as ‘terrorist’ all those who diverge from their ideal (though ‘terrorist’ is a compliment in our eyes.)”
They should know that the war against civilization and its supporters will not cease, on the contrary, we will make sure that our acts horrify those who continue to defend the ideals of justice and social equality, as well as those who defend anarchism. Here we make a distinction between that and anarchy itself.
We are putting the pressure on so that the conflict takes a continually extremist direction in the name of all that is wild. We will ensure that the ideas and acts of ecological radicals spread and continue in the southern lands.”
It was a surprise to many when this same group (Uncivilized Southerners) took responsibility for the attack on the Transantiago bus, adopting the acronym “ITS”, in an internationalization of the eco-extremist project into South America.
Other anarchists who took positions against the CLO were “Sin Banderas Ni Fronteras”, who issued their own communiqué entitled, “On Black December and police tactics to poison us with doubts and distrust,” in which they wrote:
“No one in these months has issued ‘reflections’ which have come from those addresses. However, the blog, ‘Instinto Salvaje’ and the Facebook page, ‘Contrainformante,’ published the text, ‘Against the Gray December” and opened the door for validating those who have been sending the calumnies and detractions previously mentioned. Instinto Salvaje retracted the text from their blog, probably since people pointed these things out and criticized various counterinformation projects, including the one to which we are presently writing.”
Thus when we write, “the ones (Instinto Salvaje and the Contrainformante blog) with the same idiocy and lack of reading comprehension of what they read or of what comes to them,” we aren’t mistaken, since these two already have a history of not checking the texts that come to them, allowing this poison to spread in radical circles.
And in this case, the same thing happened with the “Gang.” They got wind of the dispute between the anarchos and the eco-extremists, and used it to spread their defamatory message by taking advantage of the lack of reading comprehension and ignorance of eco-extremist texts (a common trait shared by many anarchos). This meant that more than one of them would fall for these lies and even sympathize with the shit that the “Gang” was spewing, as one can read in the “Voz como arma” page.
Those of the “Sin Banderas Ni Fronteras” affirmed the following in their previously mentioned text:
“Already in 2012 the ex – Chief of the National Intelligence Agency of Chile, Gonzalo Youseff, announced that they had begun a campaign of ‘poisoning’ due to their difficulties in infiltrating anarchist cells. He stated:
‘Among the departmental techniques to inhibit political violence are collaboration with police, increased hostility from the judiciary… and internal poisoning by spreading distorted information given to anarchist cells so that, for example, distrust is spread among their members’. (Gonzalo Youssef in an interview with the newspaper, “La Segunda,” December 2012)”
Let’s remember that the police paint all “radicals” with the same brush: anarchists, feminists, occupiers, eco-extremists, etc. For them, we’re all the same. They use this strategy to counter those who seek to undermine societal order, no matter what ideological orientation they claim. It’s a pity that those who are in charge of publicizing actions on anarchist blogs don’t get that this is what is going on. Through their negligence they end up assisting the police in spreading their poison in radical circles as the author of the above cited text indicates. We also feel pity for the cell that issued its polemic against the eco-extremists (the ones who attacked the La Cisterna bank), which was cited by the poisonous communiqué of the Gang.
To conclude this point, we will mention the last paragraph of that same text:
“To conclude, the problem isn’t that the police or dumb people send fake messages to try to deceive us. Today it could be ‘Libre Observador’ and ‘Rodrigo Opazo,’ but tomorrow it could be another message with the same intentions.”
2.THE “GANG” ARE ANARCHISTS OF THE MOST “RADICAL” TYPE:
Or maybe they really are anarchists (who act like police or reporters) who wrote that communiqué and we are just being paranoid. And knowing that there are anarchists who are very close to these positions, as well as the fact that various anarchist blogs have published their communiqué without reservation, and it’s still up on their sites today, we should take them at their word. We will examine this position below.
We thus proceed to review the communiqué that this “Gang” issued. They wrote:
“(Herp derp) These are so-called eco-extremists who shout coolly ‘death to anarchy’ thus disowning their own origins and formation, the idea following which they used to take nourishment from the warriors of the urban guerrilla of the past and the present, and then they went on to emphasize certain aspects that have always been within anarchy and its struggle for the liberation of humans, our brothers the animals and the earth.”
First of all, eco-extremists have NEVER stated or indicated that we support the defamatory slogan, “death to anarchy” (death to civil anarchism, SURE). Maybe the members of the “Gang” were stoned or drunk when they read something about eco-extremism and that’s what they understood. That seems far more likely of an explanation.
They say that we deny our anarchist roots, something that is false since eco-extremists have always at every opportunity pointed out anarchists who we identify with in the past and the present. We’ve never denied our start as eco-anarchists, and on the contrary, we are proud that we came out of that scene. The thing is that we have made our own path out of it.
This “Gang” of stoners wants to damage our relationship with the few anarchist to which we maintain some affinity. That’s not going to happen, since TRUE anarchists can read the bad intentions of the “Gang” which only have the potential of getting either our people or theirs thrown in prison.
“Being extraneous to the constant tension we want to keep and to our struggle to make anarchy alive, a certain self-proclaimed eco-extremist sector is throwing away the libertarian ideal that manifests itself in the insurrectional struggle.”
If the ideas of the “Gang” defends are to poison our relations, talk shit, and then hide behind the “FAI/FRI” designation, and these symbolize the “libertarian ideal”, for certain we’ll toss these in a trash heap so that we can spit, piss, and shit on them as appropriate.
“A certain small group linked to the imaginary category of ‘symbolic populations’ and musical/countercultural university areas (they disown university but they attend it… and they study the subjects they hate so much), despise the human animal and therefore see the enemy everywhere.”
What the hell is this? Is this an accusation? This paragraph is irrefutable evidence that the “Gang” is a police front that is trying to get some benefit out of the “dispute” between some isolated anarchists and eco-extremists, in order to strike out at the terrorists or whoever.
If these anarcho-police want to look for the eco-extremists in the universities, let them look. For certain we’re studying nanotechnology or communications in order to work on NatGeo Wild, that’s for sure.
In order to point out more groups, the “Gang” states:
“7 years after Mauricio Morales went away we greet warmly the Manada de Choque Anarquico Nihilista for their cool and intelligent insurrectional actions during the demos of May 1 and April 21, when they gave yet another proof of the importance of the coordination between people in affinity.”
What does MCAN have to do with any of that?
In conclusion they state:
“We also greet the warriors of the Célula Revolucionaria Paulino Scarfó (FAI-FRI), who in their claim of an attack on the Banco Santander in La Cisterna wrote: ‘Attack has its ethics and is not indiscriminate; we embrace incendiary actions and we don’t agree with what is being said around.’
It should be remembered (again) that the CRPS (FAI-FRI) was the first “cell” in this block of three “cells” that directly and indirectly positioned themselves against the eco-extremist attacks. They should be thanked for drawing the attention of the security forces of the State (which they hate so much) on this “dispute. No doubt the police will greatly benefit from all of this.
The responsibility of all of this has been on both sides: our responsibility as we have responded to them, and the responsibility of those who have published the calumnies of the “Gang”. But the people who got the ball rolling were the anarcho-cops. It should be remembered that when you play with fire you will get burned.
This is the first and the last time that as Maldición Eco-extremista we comment so extensively on this shit. We don’t want to give more fodder for more confrontations nor acknowledge the acts of the most puritan anarchists of the southern part of the continent. Or keep responding to the trolling of police playing anarchists. This latter action was necessary to make themselves visible in virtual anarchist circles where there are few who are truly analytical. It could even be said that intelligent anarchists with a publication project are an endangered species, such as those few who did not publish the “Gang’s” communiqué knowing what we have described above. Many pages of “counterinformation” fell for the trap, even those of similar ideological trajectory in foreign countries (325, CAN-Italy, etc.). The latter sites don’t know anything about this shit and were tripped up by their own ignorance. But here we say that they were just as culpable as the Spanish language “counterinformation” sites.
We also recall here the whole past drama back in 2011 when ITS began to publish its communiqués publicizing its terrorist actions in Mexico. At that time, many anarchists in the region were beside themselves once they found out about the situation. They couldn’t believe that a group like that could exist. Many blogs just ignored ITS (in particular, saboteamos.info), and a bunch of anarcho-Zapatistas even made a video where they drew the conclusion doubting the existence of the eco-extremist group. They stated in particular that ITS was a “front group” created by the Mexican army, that they were fascists, that they were agent-provocateurs of the PRI (the governing party) and the CIA to unleash repression on the poor “social movements.” They also stated that ITS was an “anti-anarchist group of the left” and a bunch of other laughable things. In their exasperated reasoning and desperation for someone to believe them, they were almost to the point of saying that ITS was a puppet group of alien reptiles trying to take over the world (?) They said many things at that time, but ITS always responded with attacks and by continuing the project up to this day. That is the situation as it plays itself out in Chile, Argentina, the United States, business as usual…
Thus, having thoroughly gone over and exposed the supposed “critique” of the “Gang”, we conclude by asking these anarcho-cops: What did you think you would gain by this communiqué? It doesn’t scare us. Do you think it will make the Eco-extremists stop their attacks? Do you hope to demoralize us and that we retreat? That’s not going to happen. It’s true that the poisoning of the anarchist milieu took place just as the ex-chief of the National Intelligence Agency of Chile predicted, thanks in large part to the same anarchists who have fallen for it because certain “counterinformation” sites have dropped the ball. Before this situation all that there is left to do is be intelligent, sniff things out and be aware of the enemy dressed up as a critic. Some anarchists have shown themselves to be imprudent and have jumped to erroneous conclusions. They are unable to recognize their mistakes which is why they are bogged down in the mire in which they find themselves.
We are certain that some of the publishers of these “blogs” will read what we wrote above and reflect on this situation and their role in it. Others will double down and continue to swallow the poison that comes down to them from the “spheres of power” (putting it in terms that they can understand).
-(Gringolandia) Speaking concretely, we can divide the criticisms of the “yanquis” into various groupings. The most significant for our purposes is the response from U.S. anarcho-primitivism, which has a broader influence on eco-radical circles. Specifically, John Zerzan has accused eco-extremism of being “nihilist” and “postmodernist”. “Nihilist” presents us with no problems whatsoever since we have nihilist buddies, specifically in Italy, and we’re proud of our affiliation with them. But leaving aside that particular calumny, Zerzan excommunicates eco-extremism for its use of indiscriminate attack and its lack of respect for leftist values. These values have a special place in the heart of the old hippy even though he proclaims himself to be “post-left”. His leftism is anything but “post-”. According to Zerzan, we have to have “hope” that 7 billion people will unite in one accord to dismantle the economic, political, and social system that sustains their existence, and that they will do this more or less peacefully. (“The future primitive”) But in pointing out that this is an impossible fairy tale, we are condemned as “nihilists” (as if that word was offensive to us, LOL!) and cast out of the flock of U.S. green anarchism, with all of its resources and professional websites (we mention here Anarchist News among others).
In the end, Zerzan wants to destroy civilization in the physical realm without destroying the values on which it is based. This really means that no one will do anything save for supporting the same mischief of anarchist kids with Daddy issues, and any act of resistance amounts to the same “creative destruction” that is characteristic of any given civilization.
Civilization destroys Wild Nature, sure, but you still have to respect the concepts of innocence and guilt, morality and solidarity because… well to tell the truth we don’t know why. Of course, you can question language and “symbolic thought” (as Zerzan and his acolytes do) but civilized morality is sacrosanct for them.
Then we have the phlegmatic U.S. nihilists. The ones who are cooler than anyone else, the popular kids of the class, who reject all action a priori since they don’t want to make a mistake and by that be considered “moralists” or anything like that. We applaud their egoism, but we are a bit confused as to why their nihilism always ends up doing nothing, supporting nothing, but criticizing everything. It should be mentioned that some even support eco-extremism (with reservations, of course). Maybe one day they’ll even pass over to our side, little by little. All we can say now is that, for being such nihilists, they sure have the certainty to be super-critical of everything that crosses their path. If they really believe in nothing, maybe they can leave us alone, right? Or is it the case that they wear their nihilism like designer clothing which makes them special snowflakes but means nothing more than producing books that change nothing, but hey, it sure feels good publishing them…
In general, we don’t know if we are translating things into Mandarin instead of English, because it seems that people up there are only reading what they think we are saying, and not what we are really saying. It’s almost as if the “hard sayings” traumatize people since they don’t square with the modern liberal mind (we mean “liberal” here in the classical sense). Just to be clear: we eco-extremists aren’t searching for reasons to attack, because we don’t need them. If you need them, you’re part of the problem and not the solution. Your needing a “reason” is domestication if it’s anything at all. And eco-extremists already know that trying to find ways to include the masses in what we do is a waste of time. That the anarchists rack their brains trying to include them in a “winning strategy” perplexes us to no end. If history teaches us anything, it’s that the masses will never change the world. If that’s the case, does that mean you’re going to stay home and twiddle your thumbs because nothing can be done? Are you going to wait for the masses’ or democracy’s permission to attack?
The strategy of attack in the here and now comes from the premise that society does not exist nor can it, at least how anarchists conceive it. In truth, society is merely a grouping of confused human animals dominated by interlocking webs of power with the aim of augmenting human power as an end unto itself. In that sense, these human animals are only “talking tools” in this process. Collective agency, as Chahta-Ima points out in one of his essays, is an illusion. What’s more, to try to spread ideas like “liberation” or whatever other stupidity in the masses is trying to destroy the machine with its own logic. In these attempts, the machine always wins. The machine has ways of transforming any given project for “liberation” into a method of strengthening domestication against Nature.
Thus, eco-extremists don’t care about society, and only take it into consideration to the extent that it is destroyed under its own weight or by entropy. We are on entropy’s side. Civilization with its ideas about equality and self-determination don’t impress us. If you don’t want to use the term “Nature” here you can use “entropy” or “chaos” instead, they’re all the same thing. All civilized order is a threat to Nature: that’s the way it is, it’s always been this way, and it always will be. From the cradle, we are trained to love that which isn’t good for us, to do things we don’t want to do, and think things that are foreign to our interests. We applaud any behavior that attacks that slavery; domestication in which the animal, the plant, the forest, and the river don’t exist for themselves but rather are manipulated to serve the Idea of Civilization: of control, security, innovation, progress, and, (why not?) liberty, equality, and fraternity. For us, the love of specific wild places with which some of us have an extensive personal relationship, but also the wildness within ourselves, the complete rejection of domestication and society, all of these are the only things that we hold dear. What’s more, they are the reason behind our rage which leads to the indiscriminate war against society.
The reality is that eco-extremism is expanding. From a tendency that only existed in North America, it has spread into South America, and allied Nihilist Terrorist groups are multiplying in Europe.
Because Nihilist Eco-Extremism is not only the explosives of ITS in Mexico, Chile, and Argentina; not only the bullets of the Indiscriminate Faction piercing the brain of the techno-geek; not only the nonchalant terrorist attitude of the “Guamera Eco-Extremist War”; not only the polemical words of Revista Regresión and Chahta-Ima; not only the Indiscriminate Attacks of the Memento Mori Nihilist Sect in Italy; not only the translations of “Místico y Maldito”, “Nechayevshchina,” “Palmer Amaranth,” and others… no. Eco-extremism is the armed resistance of Amazon tribes in their war against the logging, oil, and mining industries; it is the arrows of isolated tribesman fired at helicopters in Africa; it is the continuation of pagan belief which resists total Christianization; it is the resistance of the individual against domestication manifested in criminal activities; it is the tornado, the earthquake, the fierceness of the last coyotes, the hostility of elephants, the bee who stings and lets loose her stinger before dying. Eco-extremism is the violent defense of the same Wild Nature: her reaction, her answer, her power.
You can jail, finger, defame, or even kill all of us eco-extremists as well as all of the Nihilist Terrorists who have declared themselves our allies, but the War will continue, even if under another name, or even as something nameless…
We end with these words of a known and controversial imprisoned anarchist whose name needs no mentioning. We recall here his powerful words to demonstrate that the era of “good feelings” has ended, and that killing and terrorist indiscriminate violence against civilization is now underway:
“To those critics, judges without gavels who judge and criticize those who entered that church, I send my infinite hatred. From here and not from anonymity I say that I consider them my enemies. They are the same as those who sat in judgment (if not exactly the same) against those who put planted an explosive device in a house in the La Reina neighborhood in 2011 (which unfortunately didn’t explode), and that threatened to blow up a school. The same as those who sat in judgment of an action in Macul con Grecia in 2013, where they threw Molotov cocktails at a Transantiago bus that ran their barricade and where people from the bus were “affected” by the vengeful and beautiful fire. They are as idiotic as those who claimed to be the “Macul Blockade” arguing that those who attacked the bus weren’t the real blockade, ha! For sure some miserable university folks criticized. They are the same as those who criticize / criticized (even from other parts of the world) the bomb in the Metro Military School in 2014, where many bystanders were wounded and a woman “suffered” the amputation of her fingers; and some months later she would parade her mutilated hand on television. They are the same as the judges who cried for the death of those who lit a bank on fire during a demonstration in Greece, which resulted in the bank being reduced to ashes with three workers inside. We could go on giving a thousand more examples. I shit and piss on all of those judges without gavels. I expect for the common citizenry that an infinite number of bombs explode among them, since “filthy citizen life is not only found in the barracks.” I am against civilization and in the citizenry / humanity I find the most civilized target (myself included). These are the ones clinging to progress and who devote themselves to destroying the untamed, all for the filthy and disgusting plastic called money.
Long live individuality! Strength to those who conspire!”
In the spirit of attack:
Öme Archival Group
Místico y Maldito