A - I n f o s

a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **
News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts Our archives of old posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ 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 | 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 | of 2019 | of 2020 | of 2021 | of 2022

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

(en) AIT Russia: Peace to huts - war to palaces (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Date Wed, 7 Sep 2022 07:32:20 +0300


"War is Peace" ---- George Orwell ---- "This is a war against us - ---- The world of exploitation» ---- Chicho Sanchez Ferlosio ---- The invasion of Russian troops into Ukraine came as a shock to everyone who is not sick with the disease of patriotism, at least in its last, fatal stage. But those who do not suffer from ideological amnesia remember well that wars in the so-called post-Soviet space have not stopped for more than 30 years. They began with a creeping and then legally secured division of the Union between rival factions and clans of the ruling oligarchy, and since then there has hardly been a single year that, at one end or another of this vast corner of the world, armed conflict did not blaze and blood flow. .

Even then, three decades ago, it was clear that the ruling bandits, who divided the vast territories and resources of one sixth of the planet among themselves, would not rest on what they had captured, and a wild, fierce and merciless struggle would begin between them for the redistribution of the already demarcated "hunting grounds" where they can freely torture, oppress and exploit their subjects. As usual, having fenced off their possessions and formalized them into states, the ruling circles began to design and build nations, that is, to rally subject slaves, unify the ruled, train them in the spirit of unity with their own rulers and reverence for their masters, while simultaneously persecuting, cutting off and discriminating against all those who, for one reason or another, did not fit into the new construct, including linguistic or cultural minorities, migrants, foreigners, etc.

The states created and cut out the nation, using the national ideas suggested and hammered into the heads of people. Wild, brutal nationalism became a magnificent means of maintaining and legitimizing the domination of the ruling castes and a universal way to mobilize the masses of people, preparing them to kill and die for their overlords. This picture, typical of any state formation, at least in the last 200 or 300 years, we could observe on the ruins of a divided Union in all successor countries, regardless of what form of government they were hiding behind - democratic or openly authoritarian - and from the ideology they proclaimed.

The internecine strife of rulers, like the wars of medieval feudal barons, is always accompanied by instilling pride in their own slaves and serfs for the "right" to fight and die for the master - against the slaves and serfs of the neighboring ruler. In today's society, such "pride" takes the form of patriotism. The oppressed and exploited working people must think that it is not their masters who are fighting for the redistribution of possessions, power, property and resources, but a "national" or "ethnic" conflict is taking place, an "imperial seizure" or "national liberation resistance" is going on ...

I repeat: the inhabitants of the notorious "one-sixth" planet have seen enough of these bloody fights of the bourgeois-nomenklatura oligarchic elites with all their vile effects: in Karabakh and Abkhazia, Ossetia and Transnistria, Tajikistan and Chechnya, Transcaucasia, Donbass, Crimea ... and in many other places and "occasions". There was almost no post-Soviet state that has not been drawn into one or another armed conflict over these decades. So, unfortunately, there is nothing new for us in this respect in the Russian-Ukrainian war. And, nevertheless, for the first time, two largest states entered into an open armed conflict - two most powerful parasitic apparatuses that grew like poisonous mushrooms on the ruins of the former Soviet Union. For the first time, a war between ruling factions has acquired such proportions and is accompanied by such a large bloodshed.

The state-juridical approach proclaims that the one who fired the first shot, that is, "attacked" and "committed aggression" is always to blame in a war. But for those who understand that law is just the interests of the ruling classes molded into laws and treaties, the situation is much more complicated. Of course, there is no excuse for whoever caused the situation to escalate and pull the trigger first. However, this does not mean that the other, "defensive" state side is innocent. Any state is a parasitic growth that serves the interests of those who have political and economic power. Any state, by its very nature, is aimed at expanding its power and control and strives for such an expansion, as far as it can. Another question is that sometimes he does not have such forces - at the moment.

In wars between states, there are no and cannot be "rightists" - there are only guilty parties: the ruling circles of all belligerent states, both "attacking" and "defending". It is their desire to expand or retain the lands, resources, property and power they control that gives rise to wars. And it is precisely these benefits and privileges that they defend, forcing ordinary people to shed blood - their own and others. The oppressed and exploited working people, in the final analysis, really do not care what language their master, master or boss speaks and in what capital he sits. So it was everywhere and always. This was the case in the First and Second World Wars. This is how things stand, fundamentally, even now.

Today's Russian-Ukrainian war - if we consider it at the regional level - is just a continuation of the struggle between the ruling castes of the post-Soviet states for the redivision of the post-Soviet space. Contrary to popular myth, the Soviet Union collapsed not as a result of popular liberation movements, but as a result of the actions of a part of the ruling nomenklatura, which divided territories and zones of influence among themselves, when the usual and established methods of its rule were in crisis. From the moment of that initial partition, which was based on the then balance of power, an ongoing struggle for the redistribution of territories and resources has unfolded, which leads to constant wars throughout the post-Soviet region. At the same time, the ruling classes of all post-Soviet states (all of them, to one degree or another, come from the Soviet nomenklatura or their successors) have adopted militant nationalism in ideology, neoliberalism in the economy, and authoritarian methods of management in politics. And in their methods of forced construction of "nations", the introduction of unification and cutting off minorities, all these states seem to look at each other in a mirror: that the Kremlin, declaring the "Russian people" to be "state-forming" (and all the rest, respectively, second-class people), that Kyiv, conducting a violent "Ukrainization", that the Baltic states, depriving civil rights of up to a third or more of the population, the so-called. "Russian-speaking", etc. Some want to keep the captured and looted for today. Others - to multiply it, since the opportunity presented itself. And here everything does not come down to international legal norms, to who attacked whom first or who provoked whom in the first place. The interests of those who make decisions in any state and hierarchical society are always predatory in their essence. There is a redistribution of what is stolen from us, what is squeezed out and pumped out of working people.

However, the matter is not limited to this. Wars on the "periphery" of the capitalist World-System are always intervened by the more powerful powers of the capitalist "center". And today, a fierce struggle for hegemony in the post-Soviet space has unfolded on "one-sixth". Russia, as the strongest state in the region, claims to be a regional power and considers all post-Soviet territories as a zone of its hegemonic interests. Everything is used - from economic penetration and diktat by manipulating prices for energy supplies to putting forward claims with completely delusional references to the conquests made centuries ago by the Russian Empire, which has long sunk into oblivion. The absurdity of such an argument is easy to understand when one imagines how modern Mongolia will demand, say, control over all of Asia, or modern Italy - over the entire Mediterranean basin. Once again, references to a misunderstood history are intended to cover up claims based on bare power.

But the powers of the world-system "center" are not at all inclined to recognize the hegemonic claims of the Kremlin. The states of the Western bloc (although the interests and aspirations of the United States and individual European states of NATO and the EU may, in turn, not completely and not always coincide) believe that they won the confrontation with the Soviet Union and now wish, by the same "right of the winner, ", to control the post-Soviet lands themselves. This is their trophy! As a result, both sides seek to establish their economic and political control over the countries of the former Soviet Union. Hence the clash between NATO expansion to the East and the Kremlin's desire to secure these countries under its influence. In the political systems of these countries, which are increasingly turning into satellites of "curators" from Moscow, Washington or European capitals, there is a stubborn,

However, this, alas, is not all. What is happening has to be considered in the context of a new stage in the world capitalist system, which is rolling over us like an avalanche, right before our eyes, here and now. You can call it "later capitalism" or whatever you like - the essence of this will not change in any way. The systemic problems of capitalism, with all the external "well-being", sneezing economic growth and showcase abundance in the "center" of the World-System, are becoming more and more aggravated, and neither the Keynesian nor the neoliberal model can save. A monstrous concentration of wealth, gigantic social inequality, artificial maintenance of demand by inflating financial, debt and credit "bubbles", a growing shortage of resources, catastrophic climate change, tougher rivalry and competition between states, corporations,

This search is still ongoing, and far from all the features and characteristics of the "brave new world" are clear today. But some of its main contours are already clearly visible in the fog of the present-future: the nightmarish oligarchic and caste system, the erosion and disintegration of society, the increasingly "austerity" for working people, the precarization of labor relations and employment, "green" energy, even greater fusion state and corporations, the totality of control with the help of information technology (poor Orwell never dreamed of this!), management with the help of intimidation and "sanitary dictatorship", the growing introduction of elements of emergency, the curtailment of rights and freedoms ... This creeping fascisization of the modern world is quite summed up by a simple formula: control + "plague" + war. And it does not happen due to the "evil will" of some cunning little group of "globalists", but in full accordance with the very logic of capitalist competition: the ruling circles and classes of all states observe the actions of each other, diligently borrow those elements of the new order that seem to them effective and efficient, and develop them further, striving to outflank and outstrip competitors. So it was with the "covid-dictatorship", it seems to be happening with the "social rating" and electronic surveillance of society.

It was against this background that the war broke out on the eastern outskirts of Europe, as a reflection of the aggravated contradictions of the global transition to a new model of capitalism. It is no coincidence that modern Russia is called "an appendage to the gas and oil pipeline." Today it plays in the world market, first of all, the role of a supplier of energy resources, gas and oil. The predatory and thoroughly corrupt ruling class, purely parasitic in its essence, did not invest in the diversification of the economic structure, being content with super profits from gas and oil supplies. Meanwhile, Western capital and states are embarking on the path to a new energy structure, the so-called "green energy", heading towards reducing the consumption of gas and oil in the future. For Russian capital and its economy, this will mean the same strategic collapse, which was caused in due time for the Soviet economy by the fall in oil prices. Therefore, the Kremlin seeks to either prevent this energy turnaround, or slow it down, or at least achieve more favorable conditions for itself in the redistribution of the energy market. For example, seeking long-term supply contracts and better prices, pushing competitors aside, etc. If necessary, this also implies direct pressure on the West in various forms. It is no coincidence that the aggravation of relations between the Kremlin and European states was preceded by energy problems in the fall of 2021. However, having now decided to go for broke, the Kremlin risks losing: its actions may, on the contrary, accelerate the European Union's rejection of Russian gas and oil supplies in the future. But here it is truly "who does not take risks - he does not drink champagne." Therefore, the Kremlin seeks to either prevent this energy turnaround, or slow it down, or at least achieve more favorable conditions for itself in the redistribution of the energy market. For example, seeking long-term supply contracts and better prices, pushing competitors aside, etc. If necessary, this also implies direct pressure on the West in various forms. It is no coincidence that the aggravation of relations between the Kremlin and European states was preceded by energy problems in the fall of 2021. However, having now decided to go for broke, the Kremlin risks losing: its actions may, on the contrary, accelerate the European Union's rejection of Russian gas and oil supplies in the future. But here it is truly "who does not take risks - he does not drink champagne." Therefore, the Kremlin seeks to either prevent this energy turnaround, or slow it down, or at least achieve more favorable conditions for itself in the redistribution of the energy market. For example, seeking long-term supply contracts and better prices, pushing competitors aside, etc. If necessary, this also implies direct pressure on the West in various forms. It is no coincidence that the aggravation of relations between the Kremlin and European states was preceded by energy problems in the fall of 2021. However, having now decided to go for broke, the Kremlin risks losing: its actions may, on the contrary, accelerate the European Union's rejection of Russian gas and oil supplies in the future. But here it is truly "who does not take risks - he does not drink champagne." achieve more favorable conditions for themselves in the redistribution of the energy market. For example, seeking long-term supply contracts and better prices, pushing competitors aside, etc. If necessary, this also implies direct pressure on the West in various forms. It is no coincidence that the aggravation of relations between the Kremlin and European states was preceded by energy problems in the fall of 2021. However, having now decided to go for broke, the Kremlin risks losing: its actions may, on the contrary, accelerate the European Union's rejection of Russian gas and oil supplies in the future. But here it is truly "who does not take risks - he does not drink champagne." achieve more favorable conditions for themselves in the redistribution of the energy market. For example, seeking long-term supply contracts and better prices, pushing competitors aside, etc. If necessary, this also implies direct pressure on the West in various forms. It is no coincidence that the aggravation of relations between the Kremlin and European states was preceded by energy problems in the fall of 2021. However, having now decided to go for broke, the Kremlin risks losing: its actions may, on the contrary, accelerate the European Union's rejection of Russian gas and oil supplies in the future. But here it is truly "who does not take risks - he does not drink champagne." this also implies direct pressure on the West in various forms. It is no coincidence that the aggravation of relations between the Kremlin and European states was preceded by energy problems in the fall of 2021. However, having now decided to go for broke, the Kremlin risks losing: its actions may, on the contrary, accelerate the European Union's rejection of Russian gas and oil supplies in the future. But here it is truly "who does not take risks - he does not drink champagne." this also implies direct pressure on the West in various forms. It is no coincidence that the aggravation of relations between the Kremlin and European states was preceded by energy problems in the fall of 2021. However, having now decided to go for broke, the Kremlin risks losing: its actions may, on the contrary, accelerate the European Union's rejection of Russian gas and oil supplies in the future. But here it is truly "who does not take risks - he does not drink champagne."

It is very important not to lose sight of the main inter-imperialist contradiction of today's world - between the leading capitalist superpowers, the retreating USA and the advancing China, around which blocs of allies, vassals and satellites are being formed. Both countries are contesting global hegemony today. For China, with its "one belt, one road" strategy, gradual conquest of the economies of Asia, Africa, Latin America and penetration into Europe, Russia is an important junior partner. The response of the United States and its allied West is the expansion of NATO to the East, approaching through Ukraine and Georgia to the Near and Middle East and its resources. This is also a kind of "belt" project. It meets the resistance of imperialist rivals - China and Russia, which is increasingly dependent on it. And in this respect, both Russia and Ukraine are ultimately as suppliers of "cannon fodder" for the main players who prefer not to engage in direct combat themselves. This has been happening since the 1960s, when the American and Soviet blocs fought each other through the hands of their vassals in the countries of the Third World. This is happening, in a certain sense, even now.

However, both the Russian and Ukrainian ruling oligarchy, and even the ruling circles of the West, have enough internal reasons and motives to organize and prolong a "limited" war in the backyards of the World-System. The so-called "COVID" crisis has revealed a deep internal instability of the political, economic and social structure in all countries of the world. This also applies to Western countries, and Russia, and Ukraine. The deterioration of living conditions, the growth of high prices and social inequality, the mass indignation of the population with coercive and dictatorial measures and prohibitions gave rise to widespread discontent in society. In some places, this has already increased political instability - or, with a very high probability, could increase in the very near future. And in such situations, the ruling classes always resorted to tried and tested methods, allowing to restore the notorious "national unity" and the population's trust in the authorities: creating the image of the enemy and whipping up military hysteria, up to a "small victorious war." Especially if, as in the NATO states, this is not accompanied by the risk of direct participation in hostilities, but it will also bring huge new profits to manufacturers and suppliers of weapons, the flows of which only add fuel to the fire of a military conflict. But the Kremlin and Bankovaya have diverged with might and main ... streams of which only add fuel to the fire of the military conflict. But the Kremlin and Bankovaya have diverged with might and main ... streams of which only add fuel to the fire of the military conflict. But the Kremlin and Bankovaya have diverged with might and main ...

Given all this disgusting, foul-smelling intersection and interweaving of world trends and conflicts, and indeed the very oppressive nature of any state as such, there is not the slightest reason for social revolutionary activists to take sides in this war - except for the side of ordinary people. who always and everywhere become victims of wars and conflicts between the ruling factions of all countries. There is not a single reason to sympathize with either the owner of the Kremlin and his administration, or the authorities of Ukraine. Their neo-liberal policies have led to a real collapse of health systems, education, poverty of pensioners and public sector workers in the province. Wages in the countries are monstrously low, the labor movement is virtually paralyzed ... Suffocating nationalism sows hatred and makes people struggle in paroxysms, losing human form. The victors of the war will receive even more power, privileges, money and control, will achieve the strengthening of their regime and, of course, will hasten the implementation of the imperialist plans of the protecting powers. But it doesn't matter to us who it is. Whoever wins, the losers in this, like in any other war, are always us, ordinary people. And it is no coincidence that the oligarchic juntas of Moscow and Kyiv already now, when the conflict has acquired a long positional character, are using the situation to "tighten the screws", push through cannibalistic bills, for mass arrests and reprisals, crush any dissent and strangle civil liberties. Under the roar of cannonade in both belligerent countries inflate prices. In Ukraine, draconian anti-worker legislation is also hastily approved; in Russia, it is likely that this is yet to come: at least

We are not naive pacifists. We are well aware that wars will continue as long as the very institution of the state and capitalism as an economic system are preserved. Like all the major problems that shake the world today, conflicts, including their military "form", are precisely systemic. And the only way to solve these problems is to destroy the social system that gives rise to them.

What does this mean? This is how the internationalist anarchists answered this question, who issued in 1915 the famous manifesto against the First World War. War, it said, is "the natural consequence and inevitable and fatal result of a society based on the exploitation of the workers, a society based on wild struggles between classes and forcing the workers to submit to the domination of a parasitic minority that has seized political and economic power." It makes no sense to "put all responsibility on this or that government", because "none of the warring parties has the right to speak in the name of civilization or declare itself in a position of forced defense." The causes of the war "must be sought solely in the fact of the existence of the state, which is a political form of privilege." "The role of anarchists in the current tragedy, - the text emphasized, - in any situation, to come out with their propaganda, saying that there is only one kind of war for freedom: this is a war waged in all countries by the oppressed against their oppressors. Our task is to call the slaves to revolt against their masters." Anarchist agitation is called upon "to strive for the weakening and destruction of all states; it must cultivate the spirit of resistance and cause discontent among the peoples and armies." War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. - in any situation, to come out with their propaganda, saying that there is only one kind of war for freedom: this is a war waged in all countries by the oppressed against their oppressors. Our task is to call the slaves to revolt against their masters." Anarchist agitation is called upon "to strive for the weakening and destruction of all states; it must cultivate the spirit of resistance and cause discontent among the peoples and armies." War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. - in any situation, to come out with their propaganda, saying that there is only one kind of war for freedom: this is a war waged in all countries by the oppressed against their oppressors. Our task is to call the slaves to revolt against their masters." Anarchist agitation is called upon "to strive for the weakening and destruction of all states; it must cultivate the spirit of resistance and cause discontent among the peoples and armies." War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. that there is only one kind of war for freedom: it is the war waged in all countries by the oppressed against their oppressors. Our task is to call the slaves to revolt against their masters." Anarchist agitation is called upon "to strive for the weakening and destruction of all states; it must cultivate the spirit of resistance and cause discontent among the peoples and armies." War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. that there is only one kind of war for freedom: it is the war waged in all countries by the oppressed against their oppressors. Our task is to call the slaves to revolt against their masters." Anarchist agitation is called upon "to strive for the weakening and destruction of all states; it must cultivate the spirit of resistance and cause discontent among the peoples and armies." War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. Our task is to call the slaves to revolt against their masters." Anarchist agitation is called upon "to strive for the weakening and destruction of all states; it must cultivate the spirit of resistance and cause discontent among the peoples and armies." War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. Our task is to call the slaves to revolt against their masters." Anarchist agitation is called upon "to strive for the weakening and destruction of all states; it must cultivate the spirit of resistance and cause discontent among the peoples and armies." War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution. War and its hardships will inevitably cause social upheavals: "We must take advantage of all revolt movements, general discontent, provoke an uprising and organize a revolution that, we hope, will put an end to all social injustices" and destroy states, wars and militarism forever. It was about turning the imperialist war into a social revolution.

This was announced in 1915. After 2-3 years, mass dissatisfaction with the war and its hardships caused a social explosion in many countries, and it put an end to the world slaughter.

Let's be realistic: today the new 1917 or 1918 is still far away. The conflict has just flared up, and, unfortunately, there is no end in sight. But what social revolutionary activists on both sides of the front line can do right now is not howl with the wolves. Not to support any of the belligerents, to expose their predatory, exploitative and oppressive plans, to demonstrate their inhumane, anti-human and cannibalistic nature. Do not fall into justifying the actions of "one's own country" (what is "one's own" country for an oppressed and exploited worker in general!?) or "defensiveness" - not helping the heads of the prisons in which the System put us, prisons called states. Everywhere and always, where and as soon as possible to resist the poisonous wave of patriotism, nationalism and militarism. Explain, to whom and why this war is beneficial - and any wars in general. Not assist or support any war effort. Do not go to war and persuade your relatives, friends and acquaintances not to do this. Provide assistance to those who refuse to fight, refugees and civilians. Spread the idea of a genuine, social revolutionary alternative to war. Not allow any "class peace" under the pretext of "national unity" and "mobilization of all forces for victory." Stand up for your rights and interests. Strike. Not allow any "class peace" under the pretext of "national unity" and "mobilization of all forces for victory." Stand up for your rights and interests. Strike. Not allow any "class peace" under the pretext of "national unity" and "mobilization of all forces for victory." Stand up for your rights and interests. Strike.

Let us remember: their (top) war is not our war, and their victory is not our victory. We have yet to win our victory in the struggle - and not in the trenches, but in the streets and squares, in factories and in neighborhoods. When their time is gone and our hour comes. Peace to huts - war to palaces!

Oa Kekki

July 2022

https://aitrus.info/node/6003
_________________________________________
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
A-Infos Information Center