Hello,
I saw the article “Theses on Anti-(((Tiqqunism)))” and I wanted to react
to it.
I don’t think all the things said in the pieces are false or irrelevant
but a lot are.
I speak from the french context where the situation seems more clear.
Here, the “tiqqunists” are called “appelistes”, from the book “L’appel”.
1) They don’t call themselves anarchists or distribute anarchist
propaganda or very few. They usually call themselves “autonomes” or
don’t identify themselves using precise lingo.
It’s been theorized on their publication
(https://lundi.am/Contre-l-anarchisme-Un-apport-au-debat-sur-les-identites)
: ” Se proclamer anarchiste ou d’une quelconque autre identité
révolutionnaire ne nous facilite absolument rien, cela n’augmente pas
notre potentiel révolutionnaire et ne nous aide pas à nous organiser. De
plus, cela nous isole et fait de nous une cible facile pour la
répression. Les identités idéologiques sont un pilier sur lequel
l’ennemi s’appuie et c’est donc à nous d’y renoncer.”
EN: “Calling yourself an anarchist or any other revolutionary identity doesn’t help us in any way,
it doesn’t increase our revolutionary potential and it doesn’t help us organize ourselves.
What’s more, it isolates us and makes us an easy target for repression.
Ideological identities are a pillar on which the enemy relies, and it’s up to us to abandon them. “
So if you have trouble to see who is a tiqqunist or not, it’s normal,
it’s part of their strategy. They doesn’t expose their goal or their
ideological frame.
2) “Les soulèvements de la terre” are a reformist organization. They
work and cooperate with reformists, non revolutionary unions, political
parties and have reformist goals.
For example, after St-Soline they asked that the police stopped using a
particular grenade. And after the imprisonment of some, they asked for
their release and didn’t used this moment to express anti-prison position.
3) The procedure against “Les soulèvements de la terre” (dissolution) is
not an “unprecedented juridical instrument”. It has been used since
decades against ennemy of the state in France. And it’s been used or
menaced to be in the past two years against leftist, antifascist and
anarchist groups.
And it’s used against islamist and fascist organization as well.
4) If you don’t understand why people celebrate an arson attack, maybe
you should do the effort to read about what happened on the ex-ZAD.
There are a lot of text about it.
And if you can’t do this effort, maybe don’t speak about something that
you don’t know.
5) The attack about anti-semitism is absurd. Because as we can see in
the article linked before, Tiqqun is still quoted and used as a
reference in their propaganda. Why it is a problem to designate them by
their main and oldest publication, that they keep bringing up ?
Like, how are we supposed to call them if any attempt to use a clear
term is frowned upon ?
6) This piece is a misrepresentation of the ongoing debates about
anarchism intervention, about “quality and quantity” and other
interesting things.
But the author of this piece are not interested in this debate. So as
always, it’s come down to empty string of words, no references, no
experiences and no goals.
For exemple, i think that local struggle against some structure (cop
city, an airport or “mega bassines) is an opportunity to advance a more
radical and global critique. The local struggle is, for me, like a kind
of starting point for developing and sharing our ideas and conceptions.
Because, everyday big projects are abandoned. Sometime due to struggle
(from reformist, liberals or/and revolutionary) and sometime without. If
in this struggle we cooperate with reformist and are not able to propose
and expose our anarchist vision, i don’t think it’s a win. Because at
the end, we just reinforced the power of the reformists.
P.S. : If you want maybe i can add some french references.
Submitted Anonymously Over Email