A-Infos (en) Greece, Protaanka: Presentation of the Anarchist Initiative of Agion Anargyroi - Kamaterou at the event on the anarchist organization in the occupation of Evangelismos (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

On Saturday, June 14, the event - presentation of the "Platform of the 
General Union of Anarchists and the dialogue on it" as well as the 
discussion on the anarchist organization in the here and now in the 
occupation of Evangelismos in Heraklion, Crete, was successfully held 
and with the active participation of dozens of comrades, as part of the 
events for the anniversary of the occupation. We warmly thank the 
comrades from Evangelismos for the invitation and of course all those 
present for the long-lasting dialogue that took place around the burning 
organizational and strategic issues of our movement.

What is always desired is that the findings from these discussions be 
accompanied by the appropriate processes for our organizational and 
political upgrading and that they be reflected directly at a political 
and militant level within the battles of our times.

The following is our collective's proposal for the event:

Comrades and comrades, good evening,

We are particularly happy to be in Heraklion, Crete, in the context of 
the events for the anniversary of the Occupy of Evangelismos, shortly 
after a new evacuation and a new reoccupation. We wish, comrades, that 
the building will remain occupied and a bastion of struggle for decades, 
in defiance of the state and the government and in defiance of every enemy.

We are therefore here to present our publication "The Platform of the 
General Anarchist Union and the Dialogue on It" as well as to discuss 
the burning issue of anarchist organization in the here and now. In a 
large city like Heraklion and in a place with significant footholds in 
the local community, we consider the discussion that will follow an 
important opportunity, first of all, for acquaintance and fermentation.

As we have mentioned in our previous presentations at a series of events 
in Athens, Thessaloniki and Ioannina, our publication did not see the 
light of day solely to fill a historiographical gap in domestic 
anarchist bibliography. On the contrary, we put it forward with comrade 
Dimitris Troaditis, mainly to contribute to the broader opening of the 
discussion around the organizational issue and around the political and 
strategic tasks of the anarchist movement in the present historical 
juncture.

In fact, we have diagnosed a practical value in republishing the 
"Platforma" and the dialogue that followed its publication among 
anarchists of the time, since everything that is exposed, including the 
disagreements and the struggle that the documents of the correspondence 
illuminate, constitute key issues that plague the anarchist movement to 
this day. In our opinion, in fact, they plague it with even greater 
intensity. We would dare to say that the reason why this is the case is 
based on the voluntary acceptance of the counter-argument in the 
Platform, which struggled to convince of a synthetic anarchism without a 
clear identity. The positions of the so-called "syntheticists" are those 
that, as it seems, dominated the contemporary anarchist movement and not 
those of Delo Truda. We will analyze these in the discussion that will 
follow.

What is certain is that knowledge of historical experience, not as an 
accumulation of information, but as a distillation of the active and 
constantly moving flow of the historical evolution of class struggle and 
anarchist political struggle, is important both for the interpretation 
of "how we get to today", as well as for avoiding past mistakes and 
charting our strategy for today. Consequently, knowledge of anarchist 
history is crucial for us in terms of the theoretical and political 
constitution of the anarchist space, but also an indispensable resource 
for forging an anarchist ideological and political identity today, for 
every comrade.

After all, the "Platform" was also published for these reasons nearly 
100 years ago. The anxiety of the exiled anarchist revolutionaries of 
"Delo Truda" for the formation of a "General Union of Anarchists" was in 
response to historical errors and omissions, it was the result of Delo 
Truda's account of the causes of the defeat of the anarchists in the 
1917 revolution. At the same time, this anxiety was based on the 
perception that the anarchist movement had lost its class and 
revolutionary characteristics, in short, its existential identity. The 
departure from class and revolutionary goals was the cause of the 
"chronic disorganization", together with organizational fragmentation, 
the "apotheosis of individuality" and certain "distortions in terms of 
theory". All of this contributed to the anarchist movement being 
condemned "as just a small episode in the history of working class 
struggles."

What we point out in our texts contained in the publication, as well as 
in every relevant event, is that the "Platform" cannot be seen as a 
narrow "organizational text" as is often the case. This belief is 
attested both by the smaller extent of the "organizational sector" of 
the "Platform" in relation to the other chapters, and by the way in 
which the necessity of organization is given meaning by its authors. The 
principles, the goals and the anarchist revolutionary program were what 
constituted the great stakes of Delo Truda. We believe that these are 
still the case today. The organization is nothing more than the 
necessary culmination, the one that will promote with its hard and 
persistent struggle, the principles, the goals and the program, our 
counter-proposal for another society, in the heart of the class struggle.

2nd part

It is true that we have spilled tons of ink to argue not only for the 
necessity of the organization but also for its compatibility with the 
anarchist worldview and tradition in the face of distortions that have 
plagued anarchism since the time of Delo Truda. A significant part of 
comrades seems to agree, another disagrees, and a not insignificant part 
of comrades is indifferent, wandering in the clouds of informalism 
consciously or not. What is certain is that few counterarguments have 
been articulated to refute these positions.

From the perspective of consciously anti-organizational or informal 
anarchists, there is perhaps not much to say at this stage. There are 
historical differences in theory and practical goals, which have often 
been contested in the sphere of ideological and political struggle 
within the development of the anarchist movement. We speculate that once 
the proposal of organization acquires the foundations for which we are 
fighting, then such a confrontation will probably become inevitable. 
However, we must admit at the outset that the real background of such a 
confrontation will not concern the type of organization or the means and 
methods. It will essentially concern a confrontation around the 
character, identity, and goals of anarchism. In short, it will be a more 
or less "traditional" confrontation around the class and revolutionary 
issue, around the relationship between the individual and society, a 
confrontation of competing agendas, which, with whatever arguments or 
examples, will contrast the "rebellion of the individual" with the 
Social Revolution.

On the other hand, we see anarchist forces with whom we seemingly do not 
differ on the "big issues" not taking a position on the issue of 
organization either because they do not immediately see the prospect of 
starting a new organizational effort, either due to "fatigue" from 
previous attempts, or because they are content with things "as they 
are." There are also many hundreds of comrades who do not organize even 
at a group-collective level, who are content to participate occasionally 
as "individuals" in struggles or ephemeral formations, or other fighters 
who are active in movement processes or thematic structures but not at a 
stable political level.

We perceive certain problems in these attitudes. Without organization, 
without a revolutionary strategy and without a proposal competitive with 
the existing one, every small or large struggle is doomed to be trapped 
in reformism and "lesser evil governmentism" as a result of the impasse 
that always comes from the absence of foresight and planning for the 
"after". This outcome is inevitable for every struggle that does not 
have a clear crystallization of its purpose. It is not a matter of 
intentions, it is the dialectic of things itself that leads to the 
impasse. We are even frightened by the fact that many defend the 
existing organizational form that is dominant in the space, in the name 
of "massness". Thinking that a kinetic microcosm united not naturally 
around agreements, but around the hubbub of temporary action, is "open", 
while a movement that moves in a planned manner, on the basis of 
agreements and looks outward and not only inward, is "closed".

We wonder: don't we see that our persistence in this model is shrinking 
us year after year, both numerically and in terms of our social and 
class influence? How can anyone believe that a marginalized microcosm 
"open" only to "its own", which makes ideology a blender of 
heterogeneous theories to "fit everyone", can ever acquire any influence 
or mass appeal?

We even hear that the insistence on agreements, on organization, on a 
program, etc. constitutes, in addition to "closedness", a certain 
"ideological ankylosis". Reaching the point where these voices consider 
that these positions against the ephemeral but sometimes noisy 
informalism, they want to box the anarchist movement into "forms" and 
cut off the vitality of informalist action. We will say two things. 
First, the tendency that we advocate is not a tendency of 
"philosophers", it did not bring in liberal academics through the back 
door to sterilize the revolutionary vitality of anarchist ideas. And 
secondly, the "ease" of informalism to produce action was filled with so 
many illusions in previous years, that now that things have "tightened", 
we see even more vividly its consequences and inadequacies. And of 
course, things did not tighten up in general and indefinitely due to the 
intensification of repression. The intensification of repression found a 
movement weak and integrated, and instead of finding the answers that 
suited it, we closed ourselves even more in our shells, believing that 
this is how we will "survive."

The results of the weaknesses and impasses of action without a strategy 
and proposal, we see in the lived experience itself. Thousands 
demobilized in the previous decade when they realized that their efforts 
and struggles in 2010-12 brought the party of the 3rd memorandum to the 
government and that all their sweat, blood, tears from tons of chemicals 
became glue for gluing ballots. Of course, there are also political 
responsibilities for the defeat of 2010-12 and the existence of 
satellites of the "winners" of the 2015 elections within the movements, 
even within the anarchist space. However, everything starts from the 
absence of organization and counter-proposal. For the satellites to take 
root, there was a certain void. A void that is even more acute today, 
and especially in a new period of enormous liquidity and absence of 
counterweight. In a period when new, enormous historical opportunities 
are opening up and we have unfortunately not realized it, instead of 
learning from the past and making progress, others are hoping for the 
"fall of Mitsotakis" and the change of government, and others have left 
every central revolutionary goal "off the agenda", dealing detachedly 
with "peripheral" issues, often with liberal means of reading society 
and reality.

We say all this, being part of the problem and not from above and from 
the outside. We all have responsibilities for the course of our 
political space whether we walk together or apart. What we support is 
that there should be decisions and developments in our political space, 
to understand the criticality of the times and to answer the burning 
question: do we want an anarchist space that is fighting, but without 
foundations and without the ability to change the correlations and 
become a catalyst of the times? Or a revolutionary anarchist movement, a 
catalyst and vanguard in the struggle for the revolution? Our answer is 
clear. Without even for a moment letting the immediate war wait, we must 
within it, alongside the battles in the here and now, seek the ways, 
methods, tactical and strategic steps that will allow us to dynamically 
invade social and class antagonism, to become factors of developments 
and not simply a noisy, but weak, voice of protest in the queue of the 
great events of our time.

3rd part

With the aim of finding solutions to the above questions as our compass, 
we will conclude our presentation in the way we "close" at every similar 
event. With our proposal for the organization that will fight to 
overcome the inadequacies of our political space to date, as well as 
outlining the steps we believe are necessary towards its establishment.

Let us clarify that when we talk about organization, we mean the 
formation of a single anarchist political body, with one name, with one 
strategy for all its forces, with absolute ideological and tactical 
unity among its members, but also with due autonomy (but not 
autonomization) per city, on the basis of anarchist federalism and local 
specificities at each time.

The structure we propose takes as its cell the regional or city nuclei 
of the organization and not autonomous groups/collectivities. In other 
words, we are not proposing a federation based on already existing 
collectivities but a federation of groups that the organization itself 
will create. We consider this step to be necessary in order to overcome 
the weaknesses of today. We will also return to this issue in the 
dialogue that will follow if we are asked for clarification, as it is an 
issue that is always problematic in the events we hold on the issue of 
organization.

Subsequently, at a second level, we propose suburban and prefectural 
associations in regions and at a third level, a central pan-Hellenic 
body (e.g. a political council) which will constitute the concentrated 
expression of all individual forces, nuclei, regions, etc.

At the same time, sectoral and professional associations can be formed 
with the aim of penetrating and ideologically engaging within labor 
unions, for the promotion and elaboration of plans for strengthening and 
radicalizing the trade union and labor movement in a libertarian and 
revolutionary direction, as well as for the elaboration of issues 
surrounding sectors of production, against the backdrop of today's 
problems and with an eye on the collectively managed production of tomorrow.

The organization should open libertarian centers in every city and every 
neighborhood, be a supporter of social and class initiatives, popular 
assemblies and grassroots associations, while its position should be at 
the forefront of social and class struggles.

Its strategic guidepost should be the revolution and the new society, 
which its revolutionary program will foreshadow. The more the 
organization grows, the more the realism of this program will be 
perceived as a necessity by those who will be called upon to implement 
it: the great social majority of workers, the unemployed, the young, all 
those who suffer exploitation and oppression by the dominant economic 
and political system. In addition, we should also work out ways of 
directly implementing our proposal, namely an immediate program of 
socialization of buildings and land, collective management structures 
and mutual aid networks.

Furthermore, we should never forget that no revolution is possible not 
only without a proposal for what will replace the existing, but also 
without the fierce, material armed conflict with the existing and its 
guardians. Revolutions are truly social phenomena and not islands of 
freedom or upheavals in the sphere of ideas and spirit. They are carried 
out by collective subjects and not by "individuities". The new society 
that we will have to build in the shell of the old, in order to be truly 
new, must not coexist, but develop in competition with the existing. And 
in order to be new, too, it must clash with it and claim to succeed it. 
Not to build structures in which we will boast that we "live anarchy in 
the now" in an illiberal world of power, wars and harsh labor exploitation.

As for the pace, a necessary condition for the issue of organization to 
come forward, is in our opinion the formation of a new movement pole 
that will be made up of groups and comrades, which will be reflected 
first of all in the struggles that are raging. Revolutionary 
organizations are born within the struggle and not detached from it, in 
literary greenhouses. What is needed is the strengthening of anarchist 
groups that talk about organization, the creation of new ones in every 
city, cooperation, interconnection and a common path so that as soon as 
possible, the prospect of a nationwide anarchist organization can 
realistically and with a plan be put on the agenda. To generally agree 
on a theoretical level about deficiencies and necessities but not to 
take initiatives for joint action in the here and now, practically means 
abandoning the goal of the organization on the altar of the temporary 
"run" that absorbs us, to the detriment, in our opinion, of even the 
very sweat we pour into a temporary that becomes permanent and into a 
marathon that without a strategic compass, we will never reach the end 
of its course.

Finally, we must say that two years ago today, the waters of Pylos were 
stained with blood by hundreds of people who were drowned by the Greek 
state, in the most massive murder in modern Greek history. Pylos and 
Tempi, comrades, are half of the post-memorandum Greece of "development 
and prosperity" that the last government helmsmen have given us from 
2018 to the present. The other half is in the genocidal war that Israel 
is waging in the Gaza Strip against the Palestinian people, with the 
Greek state as an accomplice. Therefore, no peace without justice, the 
only solution is the global Social Revolution, from Greece to the Gaza 
Strip and the West Bank and throughout the enslaved world.

INITIATIVE OF ANARCHIST SAINTS OF ANARGYROS - KAMATEROS

https://protaanka.espivblogs.net/2025/06/21/eisigisi-tis-protovoylias-anarchikon-agion-anargyron-kamateroy-stin-ekdilosi-gia-tin-anarchiki-organosi-stin-katalipsi-eyaggelismoy/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en