For whoever has decided to pass from words to insurrectionary action and carry this in every scope of life where it is necessary to prioritize engagement in continual reflections and in this way reconsider again and again your thoughts, tools, and strategies of fighting. This is in order to not fall into the passive dynamics which are sterile and counterproductive when it is time to attack.
From here comes our necessity to revisit important themes that because we do not consider them something fixed, should always put up for debate and discussion.
In a manner of personal capacity and humility I take the work of re-positing what is understood by informality and insurrectionary anarchism-in a brief manner- with the intention that those who can identify can contribute and from their place, give it more depth and debate. At the same time I will make a small critique towards those anarchist currents who have been determined to treat us as “pyromaniacs without ideas”.
Around the world conflicts and tensions continue to be generated by anarchist compañerxs against the complex apparatus of domination, those whose struggle coincides with us do not stop filling us with inspiration, seeking in this way to extend and generalize the conflict in a manner of decided and destructive attack. The efforts of the compas who decide to start their projects based in the coherency of theory-practice and practice-theory (understanding that each complement the other) should be taken into account, not leaving them to be forgotten and putting them up for debate and discussion in a critical-constructive manner seeking in this way to learn from mistakes and successes to later take to the battlefield: social war.
This makes clear that the confrontation against all power and authority is not an idea of lunatics and stooges, but a real and palpable form of seeking in an incisive manner our total and definitive freedom.l
We speak of an Anarchy that for us is not an ideology (a struggle which is based in fixed ideas which dictate to us how to act), but a form of shaping life and living it in accordance with our theses, analysis, and criticisms arising in reflection of the struggles that reflect our reality which are always in search of new methods, strategies, and forms of attack; this is why we claim ourselves as insurrectionary anarchists and organize in an informal logic.
We understand insurrectionary anarchy as an action born from individuality, like the rupture that everyone carries with themselves, transforming the entirety of what surrounds them, from the nuclear family, social and political, which much of the time we maintain in this prison/society from which it is not so easy to escape. In this way we transcend the conflict. If something identifies with the insurrectionary struggle it is precisely that which carries it farther away from illusion and words, of taking the initiative in the conflict of classes and breaking with the passive attitude of resistance to go into action, without limiting oneself to waiting to be repressed, to therefore have justification to attack; but rather doing it already, here and now. Permanent conflict, we carry it in our daily life, in our heads and hearts, always seeking to generalize it in the neighborhoods, colonies, towns, and beyond; to come to organize ourselves -through base nuclei- along with people who are not anarchists who wage heavy battles, for example, to stop government projects which put their well being and /or lives at risk. It is important to not situate the insurrectionary struggle in a minimal structure of “specific organization”, as it goes beyond clandestinity, as I previously explained.
Even though this struggle is nothing new, it has been rekindled, we can cite old struggles of peasants and indigenous people who revolted with dignity against rich landowners and landlords, but in another historical context, thus, we see past struggles as reference points not as methods to follow.
It is necessary to stop only remembering past combat forgetting that it is in the here and now that we should actualize them.
Understanding informality as the organizing structure of insurrectionary anarchists as the more or less stable relation of people, groups, or movements which are maintained in a constant approach seeking to deepen the knowledge gained in struggles, without bureaucratic structures nor delegation of responsibility and rejecting possible hierarchies which give way to relations of power. Here within -we say- the part that we “insus (insurrectos)” talk so much about and defend which is the constant reassessment and rearrangement of the forms and methods used to bring the destructive attack to the battlefield.
Informality is not something static and is in constant restructuring (we never forget that “that which stagnates rots”), on the contrary it would not be informal.
The affinity groups who are inspired by this organizational form meet in general in small groups, connected by a mutual personal knowledge. Study and critique of social problems are also important to generate affinity, not only of partial struggles, but as debates taken to the most profound in order to understand from the roots that which is confronted; and above all it is the same destructive urge towards all of the existent which makes us feel affinity. In this way we reach complicity. Affinity is not the same as friendship, although they can go hand in hand or separately,that it is to say, to be in affinity without being in friendship and vice versa. This way these groups build and learn with those they can count on when it is time to take action. These small groups are intended to disappear after completing the objective for which they were formed and from this new ones will arise, retaking the aforementioned “that which stagnates rots”. The union of diverse affinity groups is also part of this informal form of organization.
It is from here, this small contribution, trying as I said, to see that it is deepened.
Now it is time for me to deal with a small critique of some groups, platforms, federations, and some “insus” compas, about a behavior I consider worthy of attention that I do not share. Although anarchism is antagonistic towards every form of structure and relation of power- that which we commonly know as “the system of domination”, – there also exists within the same movement different currents that discredit with a serpentine tone the action of some which go beyond simply words and decide to leave the monotonous passivity that they themselves bear. Currents which extol “preaching” that things should be this or that way like grand cafe theories, just like that, without more. For some time I have felt certain refusal to accept said anarchist doctrine where passionately talking of “searching for” freeing oneself of every imposition, to form fraternity and love horizontal amongst equals almost departing to christian idealism which prays the phrase “eradicating the sins of the world”, but… without doing anything more that getting together to talk, talk, and continue idolizing their perspective of a life in freedom!!, but forgetting themselves or leaving to the side that said life is in the hands of a powerful enemy which is necessary to attack in a permanent and destructive manner.
By themselves rabid and ingenious ideas- theories don’t do much. I consider propaganda and contra-information as something important, but not when they are only use to move the masses; especially if this “moving” carries implicitly waiting for the ideal moment” to launch the offensive, like someone who waits for their messiah, and in this waiting they will dedicate themselves to proselytizing to swell their ranks and fall into quantitative positions.
Therefore, while not agreeing with those who decide to put into praxis direct action, without waiting for the mediation of the State and Capital, they decide to act without solidarity to silence their struggles and consequences, acting like “nothing is happening here” and continuing with their talks and populist indoctrinations -like one who gathers sheep for their flock-
I think that through the means of marches, meetings, and, talks of anarchism, congresses, great and pompous recitals of liberty -by themselves- will not change much less will they destroy the enemy they say they fight.
Finishing this writing, if its true its only a ton of things I have already said, they are also things that I have lived and reflected on closely, leaving it to the criticism and debate of whoever sees fit.
To all of them and those I am unaware of, my love, rage, and solidarity.
Always irreducible and unyielding, because the struggle is not about winning privileges nor a comfortable future, but is a condition-act seeking to destroy every form of domination; to therefore rise from the ruins and then be free.
Carlos López “Chivo”
Eastern Penitentiary, México D.F.