militant manifesto
translators | 17.08.2002 18:26
MILITANT MANIFESTO
Preliminary notes
There were many reasons not to write this text.
Doesn`t the current situation demand something completely different?
Do we make ourselves victims of our own myths and other people`s clichés?
Do we try to to combine things that can not be combined?
Hasn`t it all been said and written down before?
Is there any sense in trying in spite of the above?
The answer to all of these questions can only be:
YES!
After the “summer of resistance” in 2001 and under the heavy media bombardment of a new/old war we want to try to expose what could be of value underneath the rubble of words said and written over the last months.
The meeting of large numbers of left radical activists in Genova in July 01 and the hard confrontation with the ruling powers resulted in a lot of discussion.
Questions about the radical left and questioning oneself took a great deal of space, in general unfortunately more than giving the appropriate answers.
In spite of all the “intergalactic meetings” poor global networking among the left became clearly visible.
Although several critical views of radical left politics and forms of action have been expressed, these mostly have not gone beyond the borders of countries and political tendencies.
The proposal of the “Militant Manifesto” is to develop a discourse regardless of political and geographical borders.
The idea is not to create a new political program.
The idea is not to organise and discipline.
The idea is not to speak for and impose on others.
The idea is to gain more political space for the radical left movement by exchanging its` ideas on the movement and forms of action, by becoming aware of its` own role, especially in relation to the “outer world”- to those whom it wants to involve.
Thus it was a conscious decision to make the political framework of this essay a very wide one.
The term “militant” has different meanings and different conotations in different languages. It can be used to describe disciplined party officials as well as fierce street fighters, to describe determined social democrats as well as radicals.
Let us, as combative radical left movement, try to gain hegemony of this term!
When we speak of “the militant movement” (in the sense of combative) this term contains a large number of varying political ideas and forms of action.
What these have in common is that they:
- put more importance on action and its` effects than on theoretical work
- consciously break the rules of political opposition given by society
- regard the existing systems of power as non reformable
But there is even more connecting us- or there could be more that connects us:
-open mindedness: we know that there are various theories and ideologies that exist parallely. These should try to learn from each other and try out new methods. We do not want to plan the future until we do not have one.
-hope: we trust that the new emerges when people move, rebell and become aware of their potential; individually as well as collectively. We are moving towards this with ideas, but without uniformity.
- (self) education: we act of our own free will and not out of a sense of duty towards an organisation or ideology. A crucial part of this is self-reflection, where we started from, where we are and where we are going ;
Another crucial point is reflecting on human rights, ethics and the analysis of power structures and the system of rule.
Besides all of that we are anarchists, autonomous, communists, antagonistic left, social revolutionaries, ecos, punks, rebells, ”anti globalization activists”, feminists, squatters,antifascists, rootless, theorists, syndicalists, anti authoritarean, searching, cripples, queer, angry, irreconcilable….
We are not content with the present state of the world.
We declare the future as open.
1.our goal: to end the rule of human beings over other human beings, be it of economical, gender, ethnical or religious nature.
2.our way: revolutionary change of society. We do look at this as a process that can neither happen from one day to the other, nor be localy isolated.
3.we stand up for a variety of political programs. The experience of the failure of“big plans” and the standardization of the 20th century world brings us to a global process of communication, to a process of experimenting, learning from each other in order to get to the point at which a better world becomes imaginable.
This process inevitabley contains conflicts which we willingly face.
4.We do not accept any predominance of a party or similar organisation. There is no such thing as “the pure doctrine”.
5.We want to dissolve power.We neither want to participate in current power systems (like some reformist groups do,i.e. NGOs), nor to conquer power for us (like the old hegemonial parties, i.e. communist and socialist parties)
We distrust officials who gain personal power by either of this practices.
We do not, however, regard the people who are involved in it as enemies, but as potential allies whom we need to convince of our ideas.
6.We regard transregional and transnational networking of self determined grass root organisations and groups as the best base for processes of liberation for both individuals and society as a whole.
7.We do not let ourselves be told what forms our actions should take, not even by our allies.
We do, however, respect criticism and the need of others to bring to life their own forms of action.
8.Political violence is one of our forms of action. It is a necessary, although insufficient tool in political struggle.
As long as revolutionary forces are weak, political violence is a symbolic tool of propaganda and can not overthrow power.
Its` sense does not lie within itself but in its` tactical use.
It can not be identified with militancy- our militancy can also be witnessed in many other aspects of ourselves: in our daily life, in our political work, in our media, groups, centers etc. etc.
9.Political violence is not indifferent. It includes a various number of possibilities, ranging from active civil disobedience to armed struggle.
It is always connected to a social enviroment, to the fight for notions, ideas and interpretations of reality.
To decide which form fits to which situation is up to those who are facing the particular situation.
10.Thus the use of political violence implies assuming a high level of responsibility for one`s self as well as for others. It can never be allowed to be terroristic, that is aimed at innocent people.
We do not, however, consider those innocent who defend the existing power systems by force, such as police, military or politicians.
Nor do we consider those innocent who`s aim is to radicalise the existing forms of oppresion: fascists, racists and sexists.
And last but not least we do not consider those as innocent who think that they own humankind and the earth: the “upper eschelon”.
11.We do take responsibility for our actions, for our success as well as for our failure and faults. The more we communicate with each other, the harder it will become to influence our forms of action through external and/or internal provocation by the agents of our enemies.
12.Those who use political violence always have to be able to answer the question wether and why their actions are politically and morally justified- as well if asked by their enemies!
We know that limited confrontation now and revolutionary change sometime in the future are not games!
They come with faults and mistakes, with aggression and victims.
But nevertheless one is obliged to measure his or her own actions with respect for life and by the political moral of a possible better world to come.
This thext has been written in Berlin in November 2001 and translated in August 2002.
It was ment to start an international debate on militant actions.
The two main reasons for this where the lack of militant/radical positions in public and some militant actions in Genova that took counter-productive forms(like the burning of a bank that was in an inhabited house,the smashing of cheap cars that probably belonged to working class people...).
Sadly,the latter was not only done by agents provocateurs.
The concept of the Militant Manifesto was to translate it into many languages and spread it all over the world to start a discours on radical and militant politics.
Unfortunately this didn`t happen yet.So far we have not seen any other english translation.
We think the text is still important and up to date.That`s why we translated it.
We do not know if it is still possible to contact the authors or if they have given up on their project, however there address in 2001 was
manifesto@so36.net
the translation crew
Preliminary notes
There were many reasons not to write this text.
Doesn`t the current situation demand something completely different?
Do we make ourselves victims of our own myths and other people`s clichés?
Do we try to to combine things that can not be combined?
Hasn`t it all been said and written down before?
Is there any sense in trying in spite of the above?
The answer to all of these questions can only be:
YES!
After the “summer of resistance” in 2001 and under the heavy media bombardment of a new/old war we want to try to expose what could be of value underneath the rubble of words said and written over the last months.
The meeting of large numbers of left radical activists in Genova in July 01 and the hard confrontation with the ruling powers resulted in a lot of discussion.
Questions about the radical left and questioning oneself took a great deal of space, in general unfortunately more than giving the appropriate answers.
In spite of all the “intergalactic meetings” poor global networking among the left became clearly visible.
Although several critical views of radical left politics and forms of action have been expressed, these mostly have not gone beyond the borders of countries and political tendencies.
The proposal of the “Militant Manifesto” is to develop a discourse regardless of political and geographical borders.
The idea is not to create a new political program.
The idea is not to organise and discipline.
The idea is not to speak for and impose on others.
The idea is to gain more political space for the radical left movement by exchanging its` ideas on the movement and forms of action, by becoming aware of its` own role, especially in relation to the “outer world”- to those whom it wants to involve.
Thus it was a conscious decision to make the political framework of this essay a very wide one.
The term “militant” has different meanings and different conotations in different languages. It can be used to describe disciplined party officials as well as fierce street fighters, to describe determined social democrats as well as radicals.
Let us, as combative radical left movement, try to gain hegemony of this term!
When we speak of “the militant movement” (in the sense of combative) this term contains a large number of varying political ideas and forms of action.
What these have in common is that they:
- put more importance on action and its` effects than on theoretical work
- consciously break the rules of political opposition given by society
- regard the existing systems of power as non reformable
But there is even more connecting us- or there could be more that connects us:
-open mindedness: we know that there are various theories and ideologies that exist parallely. These should try to learn from each other and try out new methods. We do not want to plan the future until we do not have one.
-hope: we trust that the new emerges when people move, rebell and become aware of their potential; individually as well as collectively. We are moving towards this with ideas, but without uniformity.
- (self) education: we act of our own free will and not out of a sense of duty towards an organisation or ideology. A crucial part of this is self-reflection, where we started from, where we are and where we are going ;
Another crucial point is reflecting on human rights, ethics and the analysis of power structures and the system of rule.
Besides all of that we are anarchists, autonomous, communists, antagonistic left, social revolutionaries, ecos, punks, rebells, ”anti globalization activists”, feminists, squatters,antifascists, rootless, theorists, syndicalists, anti authoritarean, searching, cripples, queer, angry, irreconcilable….
We are not content with the present state of the world.
We declare the future as open.
1.our goal: to end the rule of human beings over other human beings, be it of economical, gender, ethnical or religious nature.
2.our way: revolutionary change of society. We do look at this as a process that can neither happen from one day to the other, nor be localy isolated.
3.we stand up for a variety of political programs. The experience of the failure of“big plans” and the standardization of the 20th century world brings us to a global process of communication, to a process of experimenting, learning from each other in order to get to the point at which a better world becomes imaginable.
This process inevitabley contains conflicts which we willingly face.
4.We do not accept any predominance of a party or similar organisation. There is no such thing as “the pure doctrine”.
5.We want to dissolve power.We neither want to participate in current power systems (like some reformist groups do,i.e. NGOs), nor to conquer power for us (like the old hegemonial parties, i.e. communist and socialist parties)
We distrust officials who gain personal power by either of this practices.
We do not, however, regard the people who are involved in it as enemies, but as potential allies whom we need to convince of our ideas.
6.We regard transregional and transnational networking of self determined grass root organisations and groups as the best base for processes of liberation for both individuals and society as a whole.
7.We do not let ourselves be told what forms our actions should take, not even by our allies.
We do, however, respect criticism and the need of others to bring to life their own forms of action.
8.Political violence is one of our forms of action. It is a necessary, although insufficient tool in political struggle.
As long as revolutionary forces are weak, political violence is a symbolic tool of propaganda and can not overthrow power.
Its` sense does not lie within itself but in its` tactical use.
It can not be identified with militancy- our militancy can also be witnessed in many other aspects of ourselves: in our daily life, in our political work, in our media, groups, centers etc. etc.
9.Political violence is not indifferent. It includes a various number of possibilities, ranging from active civil disobedience to armed struggle.
It is always connected to a social enviroment, to the fight for notions, ideas and interpretations of reality.
To decide which form fits to which situation is up to those who are facing the particular situation.
10.Thus the use of political violence implies assuming a high level of responsibility for one`s self as well as for others. It can never be allowed to be terroristic, that is aimed at innocent people.
We do not, however, consider those innocent who defend the existing power systems by force, such as police, military or politicians.
Nor do we consider those innocent who`s aim is to radicalise the existing forms of oppresion: fascists, racists and sexists.
And last but not least we do not consider those as innocent who think that they own humankind and the earth: the “upper eschelon”.
11.We do take responsibility for our actions, for our success as well as for our failure and faults. The more we communicate with each other, the harder it will become to influence our forms of action through external and/or internal provocation by the agents of our enemies.
12.Those who use political violence always have to be able to answer the question wether and why their actions are politically and morally justified- as well if asked by their enemies!
We know that limited confrontation now and revolutionary change sometime in the future are not games!
They come with faults and mistakes, with aggression and victims.
But nevertheless one is obliged to measure his or her own actions with respect for life and by the political moral of a possible better world to come.
This thext has been written in Berlin in November 2001 and translated in August 2002.
It was ment to start an international debate on militant actions.
The two main reasons for this where the lack of militant/radical positions in public and some militant actions in Genova that took counter-productive forms(like the burning of a bank that was in an inhabited house,the smashing of cheap cars that probably belonged to working class people...).
Sadly,the latter was not only done by agents provocateurs.
The concept of the Militant Manifesto was to translate it into many languages and spread it all over the world to start a discours on radical and militant politics.
Unfortunately this didn`t happen yet.So far we have not seen any other english translation.
We think the text is still important and up to date.That`s why we translated it.
We do not know if it is still possible to contact the authors or if they have given up on their project, however there address in 2001 was
manifesto@so36.net the translation crew
translators
