The new printed issue of Crocenera is now available:
firstname.lastname@example.org 2 euros per copy plus 1.30 euro postal fees
EDITORIAL After several months here we are with another printed issue, as we see our editorial project growing and becoming real: through talks during presentations all around Italy, the publication of information and actions which we keep track of punctually on the blog, contributions from outside the editors’ circle and imprisoned comrades, who are actually editors and not simple people to be supported; this is demonstrated by both the articles of historical analysis and those of analysis and critique on more recent topics and legal choices coming from the AS2 unit of the prison of Ferrara and other places of repression. Furthermore the proposal for a solidarity fund for anarchist prisoners is taking shape, as we explain in the first page of this issue. Before
going any further, we want to take the occasion offered by the Report on the policy of information on security 2014: in other words, the annual report on various ‘subversive’ threats, national as well as international, drafted by the ‘intelligence’ (with all the required commas…) and addressed to Parliament; particularly, their conviction that Crocenera was born to ‘re-unify the area surrounding revolutionary solidarity with comrades in prison, with the idea of creating a sort of openly offensive project.’ We don’t care whether this chatter of the secret services is meant to reduce the Crocenera editorial project to a miserable (and we also hope indigestible) bite for the repression’s appetite… we don’t care much, given that there’s nothing really new or astonishing in this; rather it is their periodic updating/misrepresentation (it couldn’t be otherwise, according to what they have managed to read here and there. Instead, we are taking this occasion to strongly reconfirm that we are not contenting ourselves with being a miserable little bite; on the contrary we’d like to be a bone that sticks in their throats. Not simply an instrument meant to create solidarity with some comrades fallen into the tangles of repression, but an instrument capable of offering an overview on practices and perspectives of the antiauthoritarian and anarchist movement, with punctual and constant updating on what happens in places known and unknown – from ideas to the consequent well known practices – in respect to actions and waves of repression, a space open to discussion in the varied (and quarrelsome) components of the opposition to the status quo, in other words a mirror for the beauty and strength that anarchists’ thoughts and actions contribute to building and that the sparks and flames of subversion continue to offer.
In fact we’ll never get tired of repeating that the project was born as a place for open discussion (… and conflict) among anarchists, who share a vivid and vital vision of anarchy, even if they are animated by different sensibilities and tensions. In other words, we have no ‘placards’ to show off or more or less orthodox positions to defend: only… an exaggerated idea of freedom for which it will be worth struggling now and always.
The attempt to reduce anarchist tension, the tensions of subversion of the existent into judicial files… is nothing new under the sun…and the responses to them are the same as always.
Another topic we want to discuss is the flourishing of a debate, although aborted far too often, on what has just become an exchange of communiqués on snitching and dissociation in Milan, Turin and also Genoa, which in fact is an aborted debate on what have been, could be and will be the perspectives, alliances, projectualities, effectiveness of the anarchist movement here and now. Not so much in respect to the concepts of snitching, revolutionary complicity, ‘revolutionary code of silence’, which should have been interiorized for a long time by anyone who defines himself/herself antiauthoritarian, as for the consequences that this kind of debate should provoke in any heart not yet dried up by political ‘realism’.
We would also like to analyse the thorny topic of terrorism and revolutionary violence, because it seems to us that many, also among anarchists, are scared by it, maybe precisely because of the way these concepts are periodically spat at us in the form of mere scarecrows of the repression. As for the little back garden of the ‘movement’ it reflects, and lets itself be conditioned by the changes occurring in society, broadly speaking, and by the current culture and communication norms; sometimes sincerity of judgement is traded in the name of an easy adaptation to the ‘common feelings’ widespread in a given historical period.
For this reason we acknowledge the importance of the historical contributions (Pinelli and Bertoli as counterpoints of two views on anarchism that have been exploited and misrepresented by both enemies and ‘friends’) as well as current contributions, in order to contain media drifts (for example the syndrome Je suis Charlie/Je ne suis pas Charlie) and the movement’s naivety of interpretation. In the same perspective should be seen the far too often reductive definitions and the overwhelming enthusiasm… which very often, all of a sudden turns into disappointment, concerning any proposals or suggestions which appear more open [to society]…
After the binge of consensus in Valsusa , now clearly showing the gap between a social/subversive dream and a reality with a limited citizenist horizon… new suggestions are coming out, with the aim of going back to society, and almost losing the awareness that there exists a purely revolutionary way and it is well rooted in some effective and serious contexts of struggle, such as the struggle in Kobane; nevertheless, to organize humanitarian caravans for Rojava is not much different from the mobilization that ten years ago was made for Chiapas, and earlier on for Palestine. In all the three cases there was and is a context of ongoing armed revolutionary struggle; the role of anarchists in the outposts of the west should be that of internal enemies, not of the international humanitarian caravan.
We are anarchists (and we still don’t consider the definition as reductive, let alone constraining), enemies of any form of power, refractory and active fighters against the status quo, both the institutional one and the one that sets down in the undercurrents of the ‘movement’; in this respect we’ll continue to foment discussion, sow the seeds of disorder inside and outside the furrow of the movement… may these seeds germinate in subversion and pierce the flesh of the indolent with poison.
Translated by act for freedom now