A - I n f o s

a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **
News in all languages
Last 30 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts Our archives of old posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Catalan_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours

Links to indexes of first few lines of all posts of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008 | of 2009 | of 2010 | of 2011 | of 2012 | of 2013 | of 2014 | of 2015 | of 2016 | of 2017 | of 2018

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF - How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups

(en) avtonom.org: "Russia finances a lot of opposition groups in Europe, which we really do not like": an interview with anarchists in Norway [machine translation]

Date Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:22:38 +0200

The correspondent of "Autonomus" interviewed two participants of the Norwegian anarchist organization Motmakt (the name roughly translates as "Against the authorities"). Norway and Russia share a common border, but in spite of this, there are almost no links between the anarchist movements of the two countries. Perhaps the publication of the interview will help to establish contacts. You can contact Motmakt through their website and pages in social networks: ---- https://motmakt.no/ ---- https://www.facebook.com/motmakt ---- "Many call themselves anarchists, but this term is very broad and indefinite. How, in your opinion, is it better to call Motmakt? Anarchists, socialists, leftists, Marxists ...? ---- "Usually, we use the term" libertarian socialists ", which is partly due to the Norwegian context: when we interact with people, they understand what they are talking about and who we are.

- Well, if you just say that you are an anarchist, you are perceived as punk from squat, about this type. This is not necessarily bad, but still want to attract a wider audience.

"So," libertarian socialists, "but does this mean something to you about the left scene, the socialists? What do "socialists" mean for you?

"I think the" socialists "here simply mean that we are against capitalism and we want the means of production to be in public ownership and be managed collectively democratically. It's all.

- We feel very strongly in the camp, well, or in the historical tradition of struggle for control over the means of production. Of course, there are also theories, especially among the autonomist left, who define themselves outside the existing system or aim to become autonomous from the system rather than destroy it entirely.

"I think that we consider ourselves part of the historical working-class movement in Norway, we can definitely associate ourselves with it - but, of course, critically."

- Many doubt that anarchists and libertarian socialists in general should consider themselves leftists. I mean, how do you see yourself in this spectrum "left" or "right"? Because there is an opinion that anarchists are not leftists and not rightists, they are beyond this opposition. What do you think about it?

- It is difficult to answer for all Motmakt. Personally, I believe that, of course, our position in the political climate in Norway is on the left. It is in this discourse that we usually work and cooperate with other organizations and just people precisely as a certain force on the left flank.

- Of course, there are many questions to the division on the right and left, and you can argue about this until you become blue. But the idea of transferring power to the hands of workers, the idea of fighting against authority and authority - all this historically was quite strongly associated with left-wing politics.

- At least, the destruction of private ownership of the means of production is accurate.

- But do you somehow prioritize (if I may say so)? What is more important for you: the abolition of private property and the return of the means of production to the workers or the destruction of a centralized state and power. Or for you it is equally important? What is primary - class struggle or struggle against power structures?

"I think you can come to an organization like ours in both ways, and it seems to me that they do not contradict each other." Yes, the left is criticized for class reductionism, because they are too focused on class issues. But it seems to me that this is not such a big problem actually. When you create a new organization, you can give equal attention to both parties, and specific working groups or people can focus on one of them. You can sometimes cooperate with people who oppose the dismantling of the state, but this does not determine the face of the whole organization.

- I think that the transfer of production to the workers implies the abolition of the state. This can not be done without abolishing the centralized state.

- Yes I agree. These things are really connected, but there are people with a more neutral stance, and they are quite democratic and federalist ... For example, people in the modern world do not necessarily advocate the immediate abolition of private property as a first step. But I think that a "pure" libertarian-socialist tradition can work with those who have slightly different goals, and you can cooperate with people without giving final answers. You just work on different projects, like "I do it, but you do it", without discussing how the society will look after the revolution in detail.

- So, let's move from theory to practice. You recently held an annual congress, it was the fifth, right?

- The fifth since we became a federation.

- You can briefly describe the history of Motmakt. How did the organization come about, for what reasons?

- Well, Motmakt was founded in March 2009, as far as I remember. It originated from a movement whose name can be translated as the "Libertarian Initiative".

- The meaning of the word "libertarian" is slightly different in Norwegian. This word is used for libertarians and libertarian socialists, but not for the ideology of libertarianism (as in English).

- It's more like the same meaning that in the phrase "freedom of speech"?

- Well yes. Well, and several people gathered a group that wanted to create a more formal anarchist or libertarian-socialist organization. A more rigorous organization and a more formal structure than anything that existed in Norway before, because before that, I would say that anarchist politics was limited to working with punks and squatters.

- Historically, there were anarchist organizations in Norway, and all sorts of initiatives related to the labor struggle and other things. But at the time when Motmakt appeared, there was no other formalized anarchist organization.

- The last time the formal anarchist organization (of any size) we had in the 1970s.

"But she disappeared?"

- Well, it was swallowed up by a big wave of Norwegian Maoist groups. Then there was this great pan-European youth uprising in 1968, which was very decentralized, and anarchists could promote their ideology within it, but in Norway all such a movement was swiftly swallowed by such hardcore Maoists.

- Yes, the revolution of 68 was strongly influenced by the Maoists in principle ...

- Oh sure! Well, the last incarnation of the Norwegian anarchists as an organization was, apparently, then.

- So, there was 2009, for starters we had only a group in Oslo, not very numerous, maybe 10-20 people there for the first 2-3 years.

- Rather 10.

- Probably. We were focused on the theory and building the right organizational structures and organizational culture, such as meetings and other formalities. Then, in the year 2012 there was a group in Trondheim.

- This is one of the three largest cities in Norway, in the center of the country.

- Yes, we have some critical mass and, accordingly, a federation.

- We then existed as some sort of vague federal structure, without a real collective form ... We tried different options until we had 3 groups already, and then ... Stavanger was before Bergen?

"No, Bergen first."

"OK, then it's Bergen." The third of the largest cities in the country has formed its own groups, and by our rules it was the minimum to try to make the federation work as a decision-making structure. And since then we have a federation, and we have already held 5 annual congresses. At the moment we have active teams in Fredrikstad, Bergen, Oslo and Tromsø. Trondheim and Stavanger are now in a pause. All this time we tried to understand how to build a decentralized organization based on direct democracy, in a country that is quite large, in fact. From here from Oslo to Tromsø go for 21 hours, for example. If you also go the other way, you will find yourself in Turkey for the same time. Therefore, there are some purely logistical problems for teamwork.

- Many, especially in Russia, but I believe that in the whole world, Norway is a kind of socialist paradise, a country with developed social programs and a fairly humanistic government. Good laws, good people, "trust" - a national word and all that. Question: why should you be a libertarian communist here? Is the society really egalitarian or is it just an illusion? What problems are you struggling with?

- Something society in Norway is really more egalitarian than, say, Russia, or the USA, or Spain, or Greece, or elsewhere. That is, something in Norway is really much better from a socialist point of view. At the same time, although there may be more equality here than in many other countries, but still there is poverty, and even in Norway people are still exploited. This is not to say that there is this entire Norwegian context in the international global capitalist order, implying the role that Norway plays in legitimizing exploitation everywhere in the world. Well, it seems to me that this creates the need for the emergence of libertarian socialists or anarcho-communists, or someone else in this spirit, as an answer. Well and besides, in Norway such a slow shift to the right is noticeable: as already mentioned, There are a lot of good laws and all kinds of things like strong trade unions that we have won in the last 60 years. But right-wing governments are now gradually eroding and destroying all this. Therefore, an answer is required from the organized radical working class, because that is what he achieved all this once.

- Well, in principle, Norway is not immune from some basic trends of capitalism. Just as in the US and Europe, the workers' movements succeeded in gaining some kind of power - for example, in the United States before the Second World War and immediately after, they made big concessions for the workers. But just like in the rest of the world, since the 1970s, many of these victories are now being questioned by capital.

"And it happened in such a way that we had very strong radical leftists who demanded great changes, and then they concluded an agreement with the capital and the state, and this cooperation designed the demands of workers in such a way that they became acceptable to the capitalists and the government. To some extent, this stereotype of Scandinavian countries as a socialist utopia prevents people from realizing that they are being deprived of their rights. For example, last year in France there were riots, when they tried to change the labor code. Almost the same changes, according to the same scheme, were implemented in Norway two years before, people were also deprived of their historical rights. The answer from the Norwegian working class was a two-hour rally. That is, in France there were two months of unrest, and in Norway they stood for two hours, some actors appeared on the stage, the minister of the right-wing government made a speech, and stuff like that. Thus, the social consensus in a sense facilitates the task for those who want to take away our rights, because class antagonism, conflict of interests is not so clearly understood in society.

- In Norway, relations between trade unions and employers are very regulated. There are many agreements that make trade unions very legalistic: instead of using direct action, they hire lawyers.

- In this sense dockers are a very good example. For three years there were labor conflicts, the Union of Transport Workers Union and Norwegian dockers were doing such a very good direct action - but the rest of the Norwegian trade unions did not support them.

- Strikes happen rarely?

"They are not that rare, but they are more symbolic." They go on strike for a week, and then the government says: "So, that's enough, let's sit down and talk", and the strike stops, because that's what the law says.

- This is all very formal, because the laws (sold by the main trade union confederation and the main employers' confederation) say that you can strike only once a year.

- Yes, while negotiations are underway for a new contract. While the old contract is valid, you can not go on strike.

"Thus, every second year there are negotiations, and if an agreement is not reached, then there can be a strike.

- But strikes still occur quite regularly, and people are used to them, even if it's good. Strikes happen every year, but in an international context they look strange, because they are not as radical and tough as elsewhere.

- So, you tried to help workers organize themselves during strikes or other conflicts? What is the role of Motmakt in this?

- In Norway, there is no normal syndicalist union, except for a small section of the NSF, which is part of the International Workers' Association (MAT). They have a group of 8 members, but this, of course, is not a true union by any standards. That is, they are probably good people, but ...

"... they basically sit and eat fish soup."

- Well, and in the absence of a direct trade union or syndicalist tradition in Norway, Norway did not try to directly create separate trade union initiatives that would be strictly in line with our political direction. They tried to open a section of the "Industrial Workers of the World" (IWW), but nothing happened. But what has happened is that we have many participants interested in working with trade unions, and they have established relations with existing organizations. In Norway, there is no such tendency in trade unions to get rid of radicals, as in many other countries. Therefore, it is often possible in existing unions to find people who are openly working there from the autonomous left scene or from the communist parties. This forms a network of contacts that are useful when there is a real strike or situation that requires direct labor struggle. We try to use it all, spread our view of these conflicts, show that we can arrange strikes with direct action, and in general describe what trade unions should do in terms of anarchist activism. This we have been doing for the last 4 years.
Where this leads us, this is an open question. Apparently, you need to wait and see, I do not think that anyone from Motmakt will be against the creation of their own union, but this will lead us into conflict with the existing radical scene in the trade unions. Perhaps this is what we will do in the end, but at least thanks to this cooperation we have the experience of trade union work, the experience of labor conflicts, we are able to build relationships with the mainstream trade unions, so that we can get out of ultra-left isolation. to show that it is possible to arrange strikes with direct action, and in general to describe what trade unions should do in terms of anarchist activism. This we have been doing for the last 4 years. Where this leads us, this is an open question. Apparently, you need to wait and see, I do not think that anyone from Motmakt will be against the creation of their own union, but this will lead us into conflict with the existing radical scene in the trade unions. Perhaps this is what we will do in the end, but at least thanks to this cooperation we have the experience of trade union work, the experience of labor conflicts, we are able to build relationships with the mainstream trade unions, so that we can get out of ultra-left isolation. to show that it is possible to arrange strikes with direct action, and in general to describe what trade unions should do in terms of anarchist activism. This we have been doing for the last 4 years. Where this leads us, this is an open question.
Apparently, you need to wait and see, I do not think that anyone from Motmakt will be against the creation of their own union, but this will lead us into conflict with the existing radical scene in the trade unions. Perhaps this is what we will do in the end, but at least thanks to this cooperation we have the experience of trade union work, the experience of labor conflicts, we are able to build relationships with the mainstream trade unions, so that we can get out of ultra-left isolation. This we have been doing for the last 4 years. Where this leads us, this is an open question. Apparently, you need to wait and see, I do not think that anyone from Motmakt will be against the creation of their own union, but this will lead us into conflict with the existing radical scene in the trade unions. Perhaps this is what we will do in the end, but at least thanks to this cooperation we have the experience of trade union work, the experience of labor conflicts, we are able to build relationships with the mainstream trade unions, so that we can get out of ultra-left isolation. This we have been doing for the last 4 years. Where this leads us, this is an open question. Apparently, you need to wait and see, I do not think that anyone from Motmakt will be against the creation of their own union, but this will lead us into conflict with the existing radical scene in the trade unions. Perhaps this is what we will do in the end, but at least thanks to this cooperation we have the experience of trade union work, the experience of labor conflicts, we are able to build relationships with the mainstream trade unions, so that we can get out of ultra-left isolation.

- I would like to believe.

- We almost accidentally stumbled upon this form of action, and it turned out that it works. We managed to establish a fairly good relationship with many existing unions, simply because they know they can trust us, can cooperate with us.

- And besides working with trade unions, what other directions of activity does Motmakt have? Any specific problems?

- This year we had events within the framework of the "Return to Yourself" movement: these are mostly street demonstrations, such as "return your street." The main theme here is that being a woman in urban space is not the same as being a man. You are treated differently, you are not allowed into some places, and so on ...

- Basically this is the answer to discrimination against women and gender-based non-normative people. The tactic is to go out a lot and occupy the city space to draw attention to the violence against non-men that occurs every day in Norway. This tactic is very successful in Sweden, there is a long tradition, but for Norway it is unusual. We have worked very hard with the feminist agenda and the problems of the LGBT community, and we spend a lot of time on this. Now we are also developing international solidarity with the Kurdish resistance in Syria and Turkey, as well as in Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Throughout the year, we did a great job of raising funds in various forms. We are trying to build a space for left libertarian politics, for example, to organize concerts, cultural events, lectures, to create networks of contacts in universities, in general, we try to normalize and structure the existence of the libertarian left-wing scene of Norway. For example, we are fighting to ensure that we have more places for meetings, physical spaces that belong to us - including several times we held buildings.

- In addition, in Oslo in recent years, a collective organization against the fare for public transport has appeared ...

- There were more than 1000 participants, it was quite successful, but eventually the authorities closed it.

"... accused of illegal provision of insurance services or something like they were a registered financial institution with a board of directors and bank accounts.

- Speaking of anti-racist initiatives: Nazis and Bonheads pose a real threat in Norway?

- Recently, they are becoming more dangerous, yes. In the early 1990s, Norway had a rather large Nazi skinhead scene, and they represented a real physical threat in the streets of Oslo, regularly attacking leftists, migrants and people who looked informally or as sexual minorities. Then in 2001, a neo-Nazi killed a 16-year-old immigrant in Grønland. And, along with a lot of structural problems, this led to the complete disintegration of their movement and their subculture. This went on for a long time, except for the Russian Nazis: this dude named Datsik came to Oslo and tried to open a tattoo studio near the parliament, and then he was deported, in 2012, it seems to year.

And we mostly have anti-Islamic organizations like "Stop the Islamization of Norway" and the "Norwegian Defense League", which are far from the level of threat that the bonheads used to be, but still their existence is unpleasant. And in the last couple of years the "Nordic Resistance Movement" began to grow, they were originally a Swedish organization, but now they have a group of 50-60 people in Norway. They make more and more noise, conduct activities throughout the country, closer and closer to Oslo. But while in Oslo they do not feel safe, so for the rest of the people there is no danger. Now they are mostly active on the southern coast of Norway, in the Ostfold between Oslo and Sweden.

- I heard that at some point the Nazi movement in Norway was largely connected with the musical black metal scene. It's true?

- It used to be. It was like this in the early 90s, before the era of Nazi skinheads. But it has never happened that the main stream of people went to the Nazis from black metal.

- For some reason, this music is often associated with the Nazis.

- No, now this is very small. The current Nazi scene departs from the use of subcultures - such as before the Nazi punks tried to recruit new supporters, relying on the subculture. In general, today they rather position themselves as normal ordinary people.

- Yes, subcultural Nazis, of course, are more attractive to journalists, since they do not disguise themselves. But real Nazis rather act in the spirit of "yes, we are your neighbors, our children go to school with your children, we are normal, we like to walk in the forest."

- "... we just like to hit people"

"Yes, and we also want to kill a couple of million people." They want to look normal, not subcultural.

- ... that is, they do not upload pictures of the holiday cake in the Instagram for Hitler's birthday.

- Are there any movements similar to alternative right in the US?

- There are some attempts associated with the identity of the tradition that came from France, they are doing something in Norway. They took control of one magazine, and they have such an intellectual scene of 10 or 20 people, but in fact they do not represent organized power and all the time they quarrel. They have a seminar that unites the identity and alto-right from America, but in fact they do not have any organizational expression in Norway. There are several sites on the Swedish model of "alternative media", inspired in part by the US. They publish there a right / neo-Nazi / fascist / Islamophobic analyst in connection with the news agenda. Some of these sites are in Norway. They are usually very small, they have not been able to obtain the wide recognition that is necessary for such an initiative "

- Let's move from marginal movements to parliamentary parties. In Norway there are strong leftist parties, the Workers Party and so on. You, like Motmakt, feel any difference between them and, for example, conservatives? Do you support any parties or is it all parliamentary nonsense for you?

- There are several opinions in our organization. Some Motmakt members are simultaneously in the left parties (basically passively but still support them and sometimes go to meetings), while others stand on super-anti-parliamentary positions, boycott the elections and all that. But, in my opinion, most of the members of our organization vote for lesser evil.

"They do not spend much time and energy on it, but they can vote. If we talk about the main Social Democratic Party and the main conservative party, then I think that few people in Motmakt are ready to choose between them. But now the situation is that the Norwegian government includes the right-wing populist party, the Progress Party. And I personally would vote to be kicked out of there. Of course, they are not so much connected with the fascist movement, as, for example, the right populists in Sweden, the "Swedish Democrats", who largely directly came from neo-Nazis. The "Progress Party" comes more from the classical libertarian right-wing position, like, we do not want taxes, and so on, but in the 70s, 80s and 90s they became more and more anti-migration movement. Then they began to approach power and were forced to soften the rhetoric. And now they have a couple of people who can say some hell about migrants, when the party needs more votes, but then the party leadership says, "Oh, no, he did not mean it," but everyone understands what they want limit migration.

This party has traditionally received great support from the apartheid government in South Africa, for example, South Africa gave them money in the 70s. If you say so, they will sue you, so do not put my name next to this statement:-). But in general this is a fact that is confirmed by historical records. Well, if you take the right terrorist Breivik, he was in this party, in a local group in Oslo.

Many of their main figures, especially in small towns, are very right, and it is quite dangerous that this party has power. This often encourages people to vote for the left, rather than boycott the elections.

- That is, Motmakt as an organization has no opinion on this matter?

- We have an organizational opinion that the most important thing is daily politics, not parliamentary elections, but if you want to vote ...

"... Everyone decides for himself."

- But we do not allow those who sit on the boards of directors or work in the government in Motmakt, we have such a rule.

- Can the police officer not join the organization?

- No, he can not. No army officers, no police, no party leaders, no government employees.

- And not those who sit on international boards of directors

- By the way, once we had such a situation with a man in Bergen who wanted to join, but he worked for many years in the local government.

- We take many different approaches to politics, if you agree with our basic model and basic principles.

- But theoretically you can imagine that Motmakt will run for parliament or is this impossible?

- I would leave the organization in this case, I think. But it is difficult to say, we are a small organization, we are growing, and everything can change. But with the current ideology that we adhere to, and with the current rules, this can not happen.

- It's hard to imagine a situation where it makes sense ...

"... and that people will agree to this."

- Since you mentioned these Russian nationalists, it would be interesting to know Motmakt's opinion or individual participants about the current situation in Russia.

- I do not feel super confident to answer this question. From here everything looks very bad for you. Authoritarian right-wing government, ready to practically not hide to cooperate with open fascists, violence towards the left, it's all pretty scary. Well, I'm not an expert on Russian protest movements. From the side it seems that you have very strong subcultural autonomy in some cities, it's interesting.

- I asked exactly what you see from here, how you perceive Russia as a country, as a state.

- We, in fact, do not have much information about what is happening in Russia.

- It is interesting that now many are trying to portray Russia as a big threat to the Scandinavian countries, as if to restart the Cold War. In some organizations they talk about relations with Russia in this way. There are entire journalistic collectives, which do nothing at all, except to publish articles about how great a threat to Russia is for Norwegian independence.

- I think they believe that the events in Ukraine, can eventually happen again here.

- By the way, do you have any opinion about the situation in Eastern Ukraine, as you see it?

- At one time the Scandinavian Nazis were there on both sides and shot each other, it seemed very funny to us.

- The same was with the Russian Nazis.

"It's fun, yes." But in all other respects, it is difficult to develop a clear opinion on this situation. In general, our approach is that we support people, not national forces or state armies.

- It seems that neither side wants to support.

- This is not the most advanced analysis, we understand. From the geopolitical point of view, it is quite interesting how social movements were used in this region to create separatist groups. Then it was used as an excuse to seize control of the region. In principle, this is a dangerous trend. We see that Russia finances many opposition groups in Europe, which we do not like very much.

For example, in Gothenburg, a trial is currently under way against three fascists who blew up a syndicalist café and refugee camps, two or three of them having undergone some kind of pre-war training in Russia. We, of course, would not want Russia's extremists to provide funding and resources to the reactionary forces in Europe and other countries.

- And Russia financed Le Pen in France.

- Yes, they do everything that destabilizes the situation, sometimes this destabilization is more useful, sometimes it's bad. I think that Ukraine is too far away for us to have a clear opinion on this matter. It seems that from the very beginning there was a Nazi influence on both sides ... There was a time when it seemed that it was just the ultra-right Nazis fighting with each other, and we, like the left organization, certainly did not support any of them. This is probably not a very detailed analysis, but this is how this conflict looks from here.

"In many European countries, leftist organizations or movements actually supported Russia's actions in Ukraine, saying something like this:" This is an anti-American national liberation movement, we must support them. " Is there such a party in Norway, there is such a tendency?

- I would not say that there are such parties or movements, but there are such people. Among the Norwegian left, there are certainly those who agree with this.

- Approximately the same people that support Bashar Assad.

- Yes, such characters with an imperialist approach to global politics.

- There is a lot of propaganda in these circles about the fact that the Ukrainian government banned the Ukrainian Communist Party ...

- In general, they are, but this is not a very big force in Norway.

- That is, this is not a mass trend among the Norwegian left?

- Now in Rødt ("The Reds", the most popular near-communist party), some participants hold such a position, but this is not the dominant point of view in the party. They look more like a crazy uncle who you can not get out of the party.

- These people were active in the left movement in the 1970s ...

"... and now they can not be expelled, because they have done so much good, blah blah blah ... So this is not a particularly powerful trend, I would say.

- If we talk about Rødt, then this is the most leftist party. They do not have seats in parliament yet, but they may appear soon. They are moving in the Social-Democratic direction, such radical Social-Democrats.

- In many ways they are inspired by the populist leftist movement in Europe in recent years. They study and try to reproduce what was done by "Siriza" in Greece, "Podmos" in Spain and Jeremy Corbin in England. They are really fascinated by what can be achieved in such an "acceptable" left-wing policy.

- They have all the bookcases packed with these names: Corbin, Sanders and so on.

"They pretty much smoothed out their Communist perspective, but still I rather like what Rødt does, to a certain extent, of course." In public, I usually protect them, but in bars we argue with them to hoarseness.

- It's good that such a position is not in mainstream Norway. Because from the Russian point of view this is absolute folly, when people who call themselves left say something like "Putin is the new Che Guevara, he is fighting against American imperialism."

- For me, this is also a very strange position. I do not understand how they were not expelled from all the Communist parties, because it contradicts all ideological attitudes. But in the end they are sitting in these parties and slowly go crazy. The chief propagandist of these views in Norway, named Paul Steigan, was the leader of the Maoist Party sometime in the 1980s ...

- I met Paul Potot and Mao ..

- Now he has a blog, and probably for an external observer he seems very active. Every day there are new articles that Russia is the anti-imperialist hope of our time, but in fact, he himself writes all this, and the person 8 reads it. In general, the blog looks worse than it really is. I think he still has some authority among the old guard, people who have been on the move for many decades.

- Maybe among the youth.

- I think there are very few of them.

- He still constantly publishes all kinds of conspiracy materials.

- Many screenshots from "Russia Today".

- You said that Motmakt is probably the only formal anarchist organization in Norway, but what about the anarchist scene in the country in general?

- In Norway there are still remnants of the squat scene. We in Oslo have a "Blitz", an autonomous house connected with a punk subculture, they do a lot of good: concerts, fundraising, sometimes support demonstrations. A similar place is in Trondheim: also punk squat and part of the social scene. In general, there are a couple of autonomous spaces.

"It's more of an area."

- Yes, the old military barracks, which were first zakvotirovani, and then they were sold to a non-profit foundation. It is interesting that all these places are now municipal property, that is formally it is no longer squats, they simply rent a house from the state. Russians usually find this strange:-)

"Does Blitz rent from the city?" It sounds funny.

- Yes, and this is quite symbolic.

- In fact, they pay quite a bit, but this is all sanctioned by the state, yes. Now it is very difficult to create new squats, now in Norway there is only one really misquoted house, and the rest have contracts.

In addition, there is a decentralized anti-fascist movement throughout the country. When necessary, they do what needs to be done. They are not necessarily outspoken anarchists, but this movement has certain connections with anarchist politics. There are anarchists in the trade unions, but they do not stick out, because it is too radical for the trade unions. Here, in fact, that's all.

- Yes, I also do not think anything else.

- The last question is very controversial, but it is often asked left, libertarians, revolutionaries. Do you think that the transition to a stateless, non-capitalist society will occur somehow gradually through small businesses, such as trade unions and all that, or do you rather think that it will happen through a more or less violent revolution?

- A very good question. I think that maybe so, and so. I think that it totally depends on what the institutions of change are, how they will be built.

- I think many changes are very difficult to make without a revolution or some real breakthroughs. And such changes will inevitably cause strong resistance from some forces. But still I do not really believe in the revolution as a separate event, which simply transforms society overnight.

- I think that in any case, we need to start with the construction of our own institutions and powerful organizations that help people in their daily lives. And then only on the strength of these organizations it will depend on whether there will be one big leap or everything will happen gradually. It seems to me that much depends on what people, most people will do. Not only does everything depend on us. We must do what we do, and then the masses will determine how it will look. But, at least, I often think about it.

Now Norway is a very stable country, so at the moment we are focused on creating such institutions, social scenes, spaces where our ideological position and our viable alternative can exist, well, and everything else can be argued. I do not like to just sit and reason: "It will be so, no, it will be so." I often feel that we spend too much time on pointless arguments about hypothetical things.

"Besides, it makes us more alienated and generally unattractive." People do not understand how all this has to do with their lives.

- Excellent, I think the interview turned out interesting, thank you! What would you like to say to the Russian readers of "Autonom" at last?

- If you are going to come to Norway, write to us! Let's meet, drink coffee, and you can call us reformists:)

- We do not have a lot of contacts with Russia, and this is wrong, because we have a common border. It would be great to have more relations with Russian organizations. It would be very interesting for us, especially since some circles here in Norway are trying to construct the image of Russia as a threat. They use this to increase the cost of the army and intensify repression.

The material was prepared for the magazine "Avtonom" . The Editorial Board of the journal will be grateful for your support:

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
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en
A-Infos Information Center