Anarchist Paper - 1987-1991

This paper was born from the need to accompany the review "Anarchismo" with an agile publication capable of developing 'circumscribed and condensed' analyses. Political and social analyses, leaflets, communiques and documents of the anarchist movement as well as of other groups and organisations, as well as many short and very short articles concerning attacks on the structures of power, news items testifying forms of spontaneous rebellion, that are manifesting themselves with different modalities and often turn out to be quite extraneous to the specific ambit of the anarchist or antagonist movement.
Starting from a series of analyses - concerning among other things, the modifications in the productive structures, the perfectioning of information technology, transformations in the world of work and school, the progressive cultural emptying - a perspective of struggle is outlined: not only the attack on the 'great temples of death', on the 'visible complexes that attract everybody's attention' but also and principally small and often simple objectives, peripheral structures spread over the whole territory that are beginning to take on increasing importance for capital: factories, commercial structures, seats of power, but also electricity pylons, communications cables, everything that combines in the development of capital and the continuation of exploitation. These analyses and proposals precede the publication of 'ProvocAzione' in part, but in this paper they are gone into further and turn out to be still, valid at the present time.


What better solidarity can a comrade who finds himself in prison receive than that of learning first from the media, then from the papers of the movement, that the struggle against injustice and exploitation is attacking in first person.
For a comrade who finds himself in prison, all actions such as this, or of another kind but which however support an irreducibility against power, are the best attestations of active solidarity, and also against all those who with paternalism and gradualism theorise and put into practice an illusory counterposition that maintains oppression intact.
Who knows why I, on the contrary to the OACN/FAI, never had any doubt that the authors of these actions were comrades? It is in individual autonomy, united to a continuous critical development both of oneself and the group one belongs to, that one finds the means for avoiding taking positions or making congressual proclamations...
It is due to their instinct of conservation that structures of synthesis have recourse to these systems. Free people do not need structures of synthesis that transform organisation into an institution whereby the latter, initially conceived to increase freedom, becomes an instrument that limits it.
The informal organisation does not have, nor does it want, strategies drawn up at a table, but
organises itself in affinity groups which meet and disband according to the needs of the moment, because they recognise their common action on concrete political presuppositions, basing their methods on an insurrectionalist logic...
Gradualism, anarcho-syndicalism, social ecology a la Murray Bookchin are nothing more than invitations to desist, propagandists of mental schemas that accustom the proletarian masses to accept the logic of slow change or quantitive illusions of the kind "if there are only a hundred of us we cannot do anything, if there are 56 million, then that's all right".
...As good christians for Libertarian socialism, those of the OACN/FAI are trying to reconcile interests so far removed from each other that only those whose are brains are polluted with the myth of the working class can affirm such a thing. But these impavid ones do more, taken as they are by the fear of falling into the hands of the repression, these villains want to confuse comrades comparing attacks of a fascistic kind aimed at terrorising and killing people indiscriminantly with the endorsement of the secret services, with sabotage which speaks for itself as revolutionary and antagonistic on the basis of the objective struck. The choice of objective shows that they are comrades. What would be the point otherwise of making counterinformation about nuclear power, militarism, or about revolutionary solidarity, against everything that the media invent, or publishing lists of Italian companies that have relations with South Africa? Isn't it an implicit invitation to comrades to act, also possibly in the line of attack? What other aim could this list have?
There is no separation between theory and practice. Only in the logic of inconclusive chatter poses these problems to dig the grave of those who de not conform, failing to show active solidarity with those comrades who at an informal level and autonomously decided, in their own specific situation, to attack, believing that it is right to strike now right away without waiting....
It is more incisive to organise in one's own situation. Self-organised forms of struggle based on permanent conflictuality, against delegating and above all for the direct action of all the exploited. As anarchists are also exploited in first person they must be the first to do what they advise others to do....
Any action that concretely upsets power or that hinders the project of social control, any action that demonstrates that in Palestine, as in all the other places in the world, anyone who rebels against power is in the right. If we begin to draw distinctions, then it is the usual tune, that of an organisation of synthesis, which for its way of relating, that is of approaching the reality of the struggle in order to synthesize it within the organisation, becomes an obstacle on the path to social revolution.
Pippo Stasi