A-Infos (en) Spaine, Regeneracion: Another Step Back: A Critique of the ACO (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

"Democratism" is the illusion that democracy, that system of 
representative procedures and the production of rights, can and should 
regulate all of social life.   Le Brise-Glacé, 1989 (1)   The tremendous 
retreat that, from certain formerly anti-capitalist circles, is dragging 
us toward democratic pragmatism transcends the discourse and practice of 
these groups and is seeping into each and every one of us, since we also 
reproduce it in some way. The long afterglow of the 15M movement, as 
effervescent and action-packed as it was lacking in theoretical 
consistency and strategy; the impact of the Catalan nationalist and 
cross-class purpose of the Procés, projected onto the rest of the State; 
or the ebb and apparent stagnation of feminisms (2), paint a picture of 
bewilderment. That is precisely why it is more important than ever to 
reclaim our own practices and discourses, abandoning the frameworks 
imposed by electoral logic and the mass media, whose agenda has clearly 
dictated the pace. Reclaiming our own rhythms and strengthening the ties 
between the collectives and organizations that still maintain their 
autonomy, for a broader social approach, is a priority for the present 
and for what lies ahead. The creation of the Action Against Hate 
Foundation (ACO) is a clear example of this loss of direction towards 
citizen activism (3), both for what it represents in itself and for 
having been received so uncritically by the movements, probably as a 
consequence of that sense of exceptionalism and powerlessness generated 
by the noise of the rise of the far right.

Citizen-based antifascism?

The alarming rise in recent years of the so-called "Reactionary 
International," with a sinister clown in charge of the world's largest 
military power, or the billionaire owner of X, Elon Musk, making his 
Nazi joke, has set off all the alarms of  democratism,  which is thus 
awakening from its dream as a hegemonic ideology.

Democracy, the most effective lubricant for capitalism and 
consensus-builder, though  for whatever reason  it never reached all 
countries, has been advancing for decades, without abandoning the 
representative structures that define it, toward a new totalitarian 
cycle, blurring the line that separates "the garden from the jungle" (as 
Borrell would say). Thus, the iron fist necessary to implement the 
neoliberal agenda is progressively displacing other, more flexible 
mechanisms of social control and pacification, starkly revealing the 
State for what it is in its original function. While it is true that 
this reactionary international openly champions this new scenario in 
which everything seems to be working in its favor, the very social 
democracy that tears its hair out in outrage has been a pioneer, 
ultimately spitting against the wind, in creating laws and policies in 
this totalitarian direction, as we will see later. This punitive trend 
finds one of its most faithful reflections in the push given to 
so-called "Crimes of Opinion," and particularly to those framed as Hate 
Crimes, championed by the institutional left itself, from the PSOE to 
Podemos. It is in this context that ACO emerges.

In October, it will be a year since ACO, a platform that presents itself 
as a defender of democracy and whose objective is "to denounce and bring 
to justice far-right politicians, agitators, and commentators who fill 
the public sphere with lies, defamation, and threats," was launched, 
primarily driven by CTXT. Thus, "...it is established as a response to 
Article 33.3 of Law 15/2022," outsourcing the functions of the State in 
"promoting the reporting of acts of discrimination, violence, and hate 
speech and incidents."

However, they assert that their intention is not to "prosecute crimes of 
opinion," while simultaneously making it clear that their tools will be 
"the laws and the courts," acting as prosecutors albeit "in an 
alternative manner." This blatant contradiction is neither argued nor 
justified in their introductory manifesto, nor do they specify what this 
alternative approach to using the penal code as an instrument of justice 
will entail.

This is not surprising, since this project, presented as an appeal to 
the citizenry, is riddled, from its declaration of principles and 
subsequent propaganda, with half-truths and complicit silences (4). This 
is undoubtedly due to both those at the forefront of this initiative and 
many of the chosen traveling companions. But let's take it one step at a 
time.

Half-truths

To analyze the project, we must begin with CTXT, as a digital platform 
for debate on the left, supposedly outside the PSOE (Spanish Socialist 
Workers' Party). Obliged to demonstrate a plurality that justifies its 
existence, it accommodates the dissemination of staunchly 
anti-patriarchal currents of thought, such as Anti-Punitive Feminism, in 
addition to publishing frankly brilliant analyses on other issues 
analyses that are difficult for conventional wisdom to digest. This must 
be acknowledged.

Therefore, to understand CTXT's move to align itself with punitive 
politics through this boomerang-like action of the ACO which permanently 
legitimizes the prosecution of hate speech/opinion crimes we must not 
lose sight of who most of CTXT's founders and writers are. Some are 
journalists from  El País  and other similar European media outlets, or 
they are cultural critics and academics, many of whom are part of the 
new organic intelligentsia. Also present are remnants of the 15M 
movement, such as social media commentators and crucially for 
contextualizing this initiative progressive lawyers and jurists. In 
fact, the honorary president of the ACO, Martín Pallín, a commentator on 
La Sexta and emeritus judge of the Supreme Court, has also been 
president of the Progressive Union of Prosecutors and spokesperson for 
Judges for Democracy. Its Vice President is Joaquín Urías, a former 
legal advisor to the Constitutional Court and also a frequent 
commentator, with a political background in the anti-globalization 
movement of the turn of the century. The foundation is also supported by 
other digital media outlets and groups of diverse affiliations, along 
with some well-known and subsidized NGOs within the socialist sphere. 
From all of this stem the half-truths and complicit silences.

Because it is false, and they know it, that the progressive tightening 
of laws and political persecution is solely the work of the right wing, 
or that the "twisted" application of hate crimes, which are presented as 
guarantees for minorities, is the exclusive responsibility of a 
reactionary and corrupt judiciary. Just as they turn a blind eye to the 
repression of antifascism through the application of these laws, or 
avoid confronting the Ministry of the Interior: aren't police raids and 
racist biases, or the lack of legal status, the main problems faced by 
people of color?

A bit of history and laws

Years ago, authors such as David Garland and Loïs Wacquant analyzed 
Punitive Populism, which began in the last decades of the 20th century 
with its epicenter in the US, and which can be summarized as the 
strengthening of the police/prison system, the magnification of the role 
of victims, and the electoral exploitation of insecurity. In Spain, the 
PSOE, rather than the PP, would be at the forefront of implementing 
these policies. Beyond the ZEN Plan, the GAL, and torture in the Basque 
Country (5); The construction of mega-prisons and the implementation of 
the FIES (Special Regime for Social Integration), the 1992 "Corcuera 
Law" on Citizen Security, the drafting of the 1995 Penal Code while Juan 
Alberto Belloch (formerly spokesperson for Judges for Democracy and 
co-founder of the European Association of Magistrates for Democracy and 
Freedoms, MEDEL) was Super Minister of the Interior and Justice and the 
policy of dispersing social and political prisoners... these were 
significant leaps forward in terms of repression. The subsequent 
governments of Aznar, Zapatero (who reinstated the FIES by changing its 
name), and Rajoy readily deepened this path, as we should all remember, 
since the PP's laws are often invoked in this narrative of half-truths. 
Organic Laws 7/2003 and 15/2003 (Aznar) expanded the range of offenses 
and increased the length of sentences. During this period, the 
overemphasis on the role of victims became firmly established as part of 
the strategy, first with the AVT (Association of Victims of Terrorism) 
and the Alcàsser case, and later with the exploitation of the murders of 
Marta del Castillo in Seville and the young girl Mariluz in Huelva, 
which definitively set the sensationalist pattern that continues to this 
day. In 2015, the Gag Law (Rajoy), designed to target social movements 
and the workers' struggle during a period of intense mobilization, 
granted sweeping powers to the police. It remains in force to this day, 
even under the most progressive government of the democratic era, which 
has been in power since 2018.

It is by following this line of simultaneous security hardening that we 
can more accurately frame the role that Hate Crimes play in the 
criminalization of the actions and discourse of genuinely anti-system 
groups (6), who are not precisely the fascists but rather those who 
fight against them. An example is how, in practice, Article 510 of the 
Penal Code will end up prosecuting us just like other Opinion Crimes, 
such as glorifying terrorism or offending religious sentiments.

Indeed, it was Circular 7/2019 from Attorney General María José Serrano 
Crespo (appointed under Sánchez's presidency), who, like Pallín, belongs 
to the Progressive Union of Prosecutors, that confirmed the criteria for 
protecting fascists as potential victims/passive subjects: "Thus, an 
attack on a person with Nazi ideology, or incitement to hatred against 
such a group, can be included in this type of crime," effectively ruling 
and giving the green light to the persecution of antifascists. This 
circular would crystallize in Organic Law 6/2022, when Pilar Llop Cuenca 
(7), a judge and member of the PSOE (Spanish Socialist Workers' Party), 
was Minister of Justice, definitively and without further nuance 
defining "ideology" as a form of discrimination to be protected, 
increasing the penalties from 1 to 4 years merely for those who: "a) 
(...) directly or indirectly incite hatred..." or "b) (...) distribute, 
disseminate, or sell writings."

It wasn't Judge Peinado, nor the one from the La Manada case. To argue 
that these could be worse is not only obvious but also regrettable and 
defeatist. In any case, it is clear that, in terms of repression, the 
progressive judiciary ceases to be progressive when it holds power (8).

By concealing this, ACO creates a smokescreen over this political 
repression, and functions as whitewashing for the current government, by 
focusing only on the quagmire of the extreme right.

The complicit silence and the boomerang

Why has the State, the main producer and reproducer of the structures of 
inequality that underpin capitalism, continued to be a privileged 
interlocutor of social movements in the last decade?

Marisa Pérez Colina, 2025 (9)

Legislation on aggravating circumstances and hate crimes began in the 
1995 Penal Code, materialized with the 2015 amendment, and finally with 
the aforementioned 2022 reform. As we all know, due to its severity, 
arbitrariness, and media spectacle, it has since become the primary tool 
for punishing antifascism. Alongside the Gag Law, it has been added to 
other criminal offenses such as assault or public disorder, which we 
already suffered, all with increased penalties in successive reforms. 
There are countless cases, some very well-known, such as those of our 
comrades in Zaragoza, two of whom have just been pardoned thanks to 
public pressure. But even the cases that are dismissed represent a 
significant drain and increase the psychosocial impact of the repression.

That's why we know that repression, coupled with media sensationalism, 
is the main cause of general demobilization in the streets. To hide this 
because it doesn't fit a particular narrative is to become complicit. In 
this sense, ACO is complicit. Surely it's a prisoner of its alliances 
which is its main problem or perhaps it will end up being the reason for 
its very existence. Beyond the good intentions that motivate the people 
behind this initiative, it serves to draw the fight against fascism into 
the realm of  civic engagement  , thus deactivating its potential for 
disruption by framing the problem as a matter of extremists rather than 
a structural issue. They may argue that this isn't the space for 
anti-repression solidarity, but then what is? Is it a trivial matter 
that's irrelevant? Does the current situation dictate that some must put 
their bodies on the line while others participate in the media/judicial 
spectacle of  the Al Rojo Vivo type? Television exposure will have its 
risks, but the gap separating one scenario from the other is logically 
widening, reaching the point of antagonism due to the very nature of 
media spectacle, which will always serve to supplant direct action in 
its entirety. Furthermore, as we see, it inevitably entails the 
dissociation of self-defense from those who until recently were 
comrades, a golden rule in television talk shows since the days of the 
kale borroka ( which, incidentally, is once again fashionable as a 
weapon used by both sides). Clearly, those activists who get their hands 
dirty face-to-face on the ground are left out here until they become 
indispensable in the next clash, as invariably ends up happening. And 
then, once again, they will be left out. Confrontation isn't desirable 
or the only way, but we all know it's inevitable, so we must carry it 
and its consequences with us, along with other, more dialogue-based ways 
of fighting in our daily lives at work, in our neighborhoods, and at 
school. Otherwise, we're headed in the wrong direction.

Numerous LGBTQ+ organizations, or racialized groups operating within the 
framework of essentialist identity politics, readily embrace hate crimes 
as a valid tool for defending non-normative identities and individuals. 
They thus separate their egalitarian goals from the system of 
exploitation capitalism where these inequalities are produced, and 
therefore from the police/prison system that upholds it. Other groups 
accept this tool with considerable reservations, or even reject it 
outright, because their more intersectional class activism makes them 
aware of being targets of this repression. It is among these latter 
groups of  insurgent universality (Asad Haider) that an extensive debate 
has been underway for some time, and one that will undoubtedly prove 
fruitful. The punitive approach never changes anything for the better, 
and we should all know that by now. Will the 22 and 27-year prison 
sentences handed down to those who beat Samuel Luiz to death actually 
curb the spread of homophobia? Rather, they've served to fuel morbid 
television sensationalism, the emotional pornography of pain that 
distances us from reason, and reinforce the perception of harsh 
sentences as legitimate and effective. The pleasure of punishment. We 
already have one of the harshest penal codes, and yet we continue to 
burden ourselves with even more.

"For years, the radical left has equated wonderful Americans like 
Charlie with Nazis (...). This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible 
for the terrorism we have seen in our country today." These are the 
words of Donald Trump (September 11, 2025), regarding the attack on the 
far-right activist Charlie Kirk. How well the leading fascist summarizes 
the logic underlying all crimes of opinion.

A colleague defended the legitimacy of hate crimes in a debate a couple 
of years ago here in Seville. She championed them as a victory for the 
civil rights struggles of minorities in the US: one of the most 
judicialized societies with the highest number of lawyers per capita, as 
well as the country with the second-highest percentage of incarcerated 
population in the world (only behind Bukele's El Salvador), and whose 
prisons are the only place where minorities finally cease to be 
minorities. Assuming that's the case, a victory, and far from intending 
to trivialize the importance of other achievements and the sacrifices of 
those civil struggles, if they have decades of head start on us with 
this punitive approach, we can already foresee the results. Perhaps that 
is why North American Black Feminism is one of the political spaces that 
contribute the most to anti-prison criticism, elaborating analyses and 
practices from its own reality with approaches such as the "Prison 
Industrial Complex" formulated by Angela Davis in 2016 (10), considering 
the prison as an extension of the slave exploitation regime.

Interestingly, in the US, ideology is not included in federal hate crime 
laws  , as it is in Europe. This is the case in the European framework, 
which always promotes itself as more protective of rights: in a July 
2022 note from the European Court of Human Rights, in an exercise of 
militant democracy , it included under the umbrella of hate speech 
something as volatile as "speech that threatens the democratic order," 
and more specifically, "incitement to violence and terrorist activity," 
citing and endorsing the closure of Roj TV in Denmark for broadcasting 
statements from the Kurdish PKK.

Assuming we were willing to accept this whole mess as a "lesser evil," 
one has to wonder whether, in the medium to long term, this 
judicialization of the media and social media space (11) will actually 
change anything. I fear not. Beyond the demobilizing complacency of 
making a donation or securing a few victories in court, in the case of 
ACO, we are working against the grain by justifying the prosecution of 
Opinion Crimes ourselves. To change things, we need our own analysis and 
rhetoric, not to buy into the enemy's. As an example, let's analyze how 
the events in Torre Pacheco are being handled.

Torre-Pacheco

This town of 40,000 inhabitants has the fourth highest per capita income 
in Murcia. Its economy is based primarily on intensive agriculture, made 
possible by the Tagus-Segura water transfer, with a strong presence of 
the Navarrese food company Florette and the multinational Syngenta, and 
is sustained by the exploitation of a predominantly migrant workforce. 
In mid-July, the media reported the robbery and beating of an elderly 
man by a group of dark-skinned youths there we have it!

At the same time, a tangled web of networks, such as the Telegram group 
Remigration, where the youth wings of the Workers' Front and Vox 
participate alongside the Nazis of National Nucleus, or Deport Them Now 
(DTN), with connections to Italian fascism, launched a campaign of 
misinformation and calls to "hunt down Moors." Their intention was to 
replicate the Islamophobic campaign in England the previous summer, 
which began in Southport, having unsuccessfully attempted to do so with 
other incidents in other locations, where the skin color of the alleged 
aggressor is always the common thread. Later, the star of Spanish 
fascism, Dani Esteve, joined the fray, along with other familiar figures.

During the first two of the four days of unrest, it was local Vox 
supporters from the town and surrounding areas who led the manhunts, 
rather than Nazi groups from elsewhere. And it was also the residents of 
the San Antonio neighborhood, with its predominantly North African 
population and the primary target of the attacks, who gradually 
organized their own self-defense in the face of police inaction during 
the first 48 hours. They remained vigilant in the following days, 
playing a crucial role in thwarting the attempted uprising, which 
ultimately led to the police taking over the area militarily. If it had 
been a group of 100 day laborers armed with sticks wandering around the 
town for two days, instead of fascist residents, would the same thing 
have happened? We know it wouldn't have, and we've known it from the 
very beginning, but two days is a long enough period not to be 
interpreted as deliberate inaction on the part of the Government 
Delegation, which reports to Marlaska. While disinformation campaigns, 
along with the echo of racist rhetoric from the right, act as catalysts, 
they are neither the sole nor the primary cause, as ACO points out. For 
there, and in other similar regions from north to south, what is 
racialized is a class conflict in which the European Union's immigration 
policy, for which the government is responsible, plays a crucial role in 
the organization and exploitation of labor.

Furthermore, the PSOE's current tactic of trying to save us from the far 
right is an old, dirty, and clumsy strategy with little chance of 
success. It only reinforces fascist propaganda, positioning them as 
"anti-establishment" and making them a magnet for the anger of those 
excluded from social mobility. Worse still, this strategy, as we see, 
involves repressing our struggles because they fall outside the bounds 
of parliamentary representation and because they are the ones that build 
grassroots solidarity without being controlled. Therefore, projecting a 
populist front  in this context is utterly politically short-sighted.

"Nobody avoids a beating by running away," says a  Barricada song . 
Well, that's it. There are curves ahead, no doubt, but we are also 
experiencing a resurgence of social conflict, and that's where we are, 
with two examples. The struggle for housing is once again placing the 
social debate on social and economic inequalities at the forefront, 
displacing the security-driven  moral panic . The internationalist 
solidarity with Palestine and against the Nazi-Zionist genocide that is 
being organized globally (the apotheosis of the Vuelta a España finale) 
must stop the massacre. But it is also breaking with demobilization, 
acting as a catalyst against the fear of migration and the other, and it 
is doing so by horizontally uniting new and old activists in the face of 
the impossibility of looking the other way.

Pablo , Seville, September 2025 .

(1) "Materials for a critique of democracy" VV.AA. 2005.

klinamen.org

(2) 
https://zonaestrategia.net/la-hegemonia-de-la-clase-media-en-el-ultimo-ciclo-feminista/ 


Critical analysis by the  Cantoneras Collective on this mobilization cycle.

(3) Criticism of  citizenship  was revitalized in the context of the 
Alter-globalization movement and the Social Forums of the turn of the 
century, highlighting its integrative and reformist function.


(4) On the website, designed with clear fundraising purposes, or in the 
interview with its secretary and spokesperson, they argue in favor of 
prosecuting these opinion crimes and value the role of the prosecution.

Front page
https://cadenaser.com/audio/1753722951958
(5) The ZEN Plan (Special Northern Zone) was announced in 1983, when 
José Barrionuevo (PSOE) was Minister of the Interior. Its stated purpose 
was to end ETA and the insurrectionary situation in the Basque Country, 
but in practice it functioned as a covert state of emergency. The GAL 
terrorism, torture, and brutal repression of all social movements were 
its legacy.

(6) "Anti-system groups" was a term coined in police press offices 
around 1998/2000, with the intention of criminalizing groups that 
practiced sabotage and violently agitated the streets. However, it was 
well received by those targeted and did not achieve its purpose, as it 
generated more sympathy than anything else among the most discontented 
segments of the population, which is a primary objective of propaganda 
by action.

(7) This reform coincides in year and Minister with article 33.3 of law 
15/2022 that inspires the ACO. The stick and the carrot.

(8) Here, special mention must be made of Baltasar Garzón, the pioneer 
of celebrity judges. It should be clarified that he is NOT on the ACO 
(Audiencia de Corrupción Española), despite his experience in pointing 
out "the limits of freedom of expression," as he closed the newspaper 
EGIN in 1998, losing the case 10 years later, and directed other 
counterinsurgency operations from the National Court. Despite this, he 
has been rehabilitated by almost the entire Spanish left, having won a 
place in our hearts for his involvement in the processes for the 
reparation of the Historical Memory of Latin American dictatorships.

(9) The debate journal Cuadernos de Estrategia (VVAA) dedicates this 
issue no. 3 to "Punitive Common Sense", in a very timely manner.

https://traficantes.net/libros/cuadernos-de-estrategia-n%C2%BA
(10) https://katakrak.net/cas/blog/rese-democracia-de-la-abolici-n

(11) It is curious that those who once championed technological networks 
as social, heralding a horizon of direct democracy, now, having lost the 
battle for  followers,  seek to legalize these same networks, trying to 
put fences around the open field. The truth is that these networks, as 
groups like IPOLITTA warned back then, are proving to be the best 
highways for the expansion of Turbocapitalism, narcissistic 
self-promotion, and, consequently, the most reactionary ideas.

https://tecnoeducativas.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ippolita-en-el-acuario-de-facebook.pdf

https://regeneracionlibertaria.org/2025/11/01/otro-paso-atras-critica-a-la-aco
_________________________________________
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