A-Infos (en) Spaine, Regeneracion: Being Ashes of That Fire (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

The Lack of Role Models in Anarchist Activism ---- A short time ago, a 
comrade from Galicia wrote and published an article[1]about our heritage 
as activists in social and organized anarchism, and how we are nothing 
more than the ashes of that fire that our predecessors kept alive. The 
article argues that it is neither effective nor respectful to exist as a 
political current within the anarchist spectrum through arrogance, 
disrespect towards other anarchist comrades, and the denial of their 
beliefs as a self-affirmation. However, in reading the article, one also 
glimpses one of the shortcomings that most affects us as anarchist 
activists: the lack of current role models.

By role models, I mean the organizations, activists, and political 
currents in which we could see ourselves reflected, both in terms of 
political practice, the definition of theory and ideology, public 
action, and other aspects where we would benefit from having a point of 
reference. Without this figure, we lack an example situated in our 
current circumstances that would allow us to envision our potential 
capabilities as an organized movement.

On the other hand, by "current" references, I mean political references 
situated both in our same era and within our approximate geographical 
and historical context. We might well consider the Friends of Durruti 
and the Iberian Anarchist Federation as historical references, but the 
context and framework of action of these genuinely revolutionary 
organizations is far removed from our own. And we might consider the 
Uruguayan and Brazilian Especifistas, or the growing Anarchist Communist 
Federation of Australia, or even the relatively broad and strong 
French-speaking Union Communiste Libertaire as references, but we are 
neither sufficiently familiar with their activities nor do we share the 
same local context (although we can approximate it).

While our anarcho-syndicalist, autonomist, and insurrectionist 
comrades-the libertarian family-have kept alive the flame of this dream 
that shook the foundations of capitalist society in the last century, 
this journey through the desert has left the space of anarchist 
political organization empty, a void that the FAI (Iberian Anarchist 
Federation) once filled in our territory. We, the activists who have 
emerged and aligned ourselves with the anarchist project in this last 
decade, have not had an anarchist political organization in which to see 
ourselves reflected; instead, our aspirations have been subordinated to 
existing rival organizations. Understanding this situation requires 
understanding the context in which we find ourselves as anarchist 
political organizations, while also explaining the past cycle that we 
want to overcome.

The Defeat
The current context of revolutionary defeat is foreshadowed by a series 
of specific defeats of the workers' movement and the anarchist 
organization. Without intending to construct a historiography of the 
Cycles of Struggle (since that is not the objective of this article), I 
will define three particular defeats that shape the current 
organizational and social context in the local area.

First, the defeat of the Social Revolution in Spain and the Catalan 
Countries between 1936 and 1939. Originating from a cycle that includes 
the Paris Commune and a strengthening of revolutionary fervor with the 
Russian Revolution, in this context we see the working class organized 
around the anarcho-syndicalist CNT, alongside an organization with its 
own culture, practice, and strength in the FAI. This great revolutionary 
force of our class has been subjected to deadly repression by the State 
since 1936, with this persecution intensifying from May 1937 onward. The 
State dissolved the existing libertarian communism of the Aragonese 
communes that same year and militarily defeated them in 1939. From this 
period, we are left with a revolutionary myth and the practical 
application of libertarian communism, but also the discrediting of the 
project through government collaboration, the physical destruction and 
bloodshed of its militants.

Second, we have the defeat of the cycle that began with May 1968 and 
ended with the post-transition period, approximately with the Moncloa 
Pacts. This period saw the reorganization of the CNT, the establishment 
of specific anarchist groups to influence this process, a context of 
armed struggle, and the formation of what is now known as the 1978 
Regime. From this era, we have the development of the trade union models 
of the CNT's successors, but also a profound social legitimization of 
parliamentary democracy under the constitutional monarchy and a 
weakening of anarchist forces that could not prevent the replacement of 
class consciousness with the current liberal apathy.

The most recent setbacks include the electoral failure of Podemos and 
the conclusion of the Catalan independence movement in recent years. 
From this cycle emerged numerous libertarian assemblies and a 
resurgence of activism, while a diversity of struggles were also 
practiced. This defeat cannot be pinpointed to a specific date; rather, 
the events that comprise it are the gradual waning of mobilization over 
time and the subsequent abandonment of the objectives for which the 
struggle had begun. The social paralysis caused by Covid-19 finally 
buried this cycle. Many current activists draw their political and 
organizational experience from this period.

These three moments of defeat are framed within the respective formal 
models of workers' organizations in their time. To be specific, the 
first defeat, from 1936 to 1939, corresponds to the 
fortress-organization model, a large and structured organization that 
sought to direct the forces of the entire working class. The third 
defeat, the 15M-Process cycle, corresponds to the movement-based, 
horizontal, and informal model, which distrusts large structures. The 
second defeat, the Transition, corresponds to the moment of transition 
and convergence between the two models; specifically, the coexistence of 
the CNT as the large trade union structure of the historical "old guard" 
and exiles, and the informal practices of the "young activists" among 
the new generations when organizing.

The Void Filled
These defeats generated, as I have tried to explain and as my comrade 
also wrote, a lack of role models who could teach and guide us. The 
elements that could tend to be points of reference within the anarchist 
current itself came either from a distant past, from another continent, 
or were simply great individual figures of anarchism.

In the recent past, specifically, the following duality existed. On the 
one hand, there were grassroots organizations and movements that 
proposed demands and contested the streets, in which we participated; 
these were part of a political process with ultimate goals with which we 
did not agree or which we did not accept as they were presented. On the 
other hand, there was the lack of a sufficiently large, organized 
anarchist current within the emerging movement, a space occupied by a 
rival political current.

This led, firstly, to a lack of anarchist representation in that context 
of struggle-a lack of demonstration of strength and self-recognition 
that affected our morale and prospects. Secondly, lacking an anarchist 
political organization to look to for guidance, our awareness of what we 
could achieve as an organized force was defined by the actions of the 
leftist organizations that were leading that period. Just as a vacuum of 
political leadership and defense of class independence can occur in a 
grassroots organization, non-revolutionary practices can flourish, or a 
lack of understanding of power roles within an assembly can give rise to 
informal hierarchies, the void of anarchist organizational reference 
points can be filled by non-anarchist political tendencies.

This shift in perspective presents a problem: an anarchist political 
organization is not the same as a left-wing political party or a 
national liberation organization. It operates on different assumptions, 
has different objectives, and a different relationship with the working 
class. In a time of a lack of anarchist reference points, it becomes 
much more difficult to answer what we must do to achieve Social 
Revolution, especially if all we have seen around us are actions that 
lead to other, fruitless objectives, such as the conquest of political 
power.

The anarchist political organization is not a political party: it is a 
revolutionary organization. The actions it undertakes, the discourse it 
disseminates, its relationship with the working masses, and its form and 
structure are, and must be, qualitatively different from these other 
political formations. It is a problem, then, if we see ourselves 
reflected in their actions, capabilities, or slogans, because they lead 
toward an objective we do not pursue.

It is necessary, therefore, to fill this void of reference points with 
our own organization: the anarchist political organization. We must fill 
the political space with our actions, our activity, our theoretical and 
ideological contributions, our perspective in the ongoing debates, and 
our own strength.

Our Own Militant Culture
We are being born in the 21st century as a weak, scattered, and 
fragmented organized movement, with a broken memory, but with the will 
to piece together the fabric of this puzzle.

To rebuild the organized strength of anarchism and become a political 
force worthy of the times, we must strengthen and expand our militant 
culture, distinguishing it from other movements and claiming it as our 
own. At this moment, we have built, to a certain degree, an internal 
militant culture by structuring our political intervention within a 
Militant Code. Following this path, we must demonstrate our political 
actions to the working masses through political communication, dare to 
expand our militant base both qualitatively and quantitatively, and 
establish a territorially situated militant network capable of 
confronting the struggles toward the horizon of libertarian communism. 
This collective construction leads us toward organizational unity, 
toward the unity of anarchists in a common general organization that we 
have longed for during these times of wandering in the desert.

With this article, I want to invite anarchists everywhere to the 
reconstruction of this militant culture, to recreate our days of 
remembrance and our commemorative dates, our cultural references, our 
projects for building popular power, our own militant aesthetic, and a 
positive commitment to building revolutionary force.

Let us unite in social and organized anarchism so that in this new 
cycle, anarchism may be a political agent capable of intervening in the 
direction of the Social Revolution!

Malfainer, member of Batzac - Joventuts Llibertàries

1. 
https://regeneracionlibertaria.org/2025/07/29/non-somos-mais-que-a-cinza-dese-lume

https://regeneracionlibertaria.org/2025/11/18/ser-cendra-daquell-foc/
_________________________________________
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