Let‘s give weight to the words
Foreword by Stecco from
„I giorni e le notti.
#8, Anarchist Magazine – October 2018“:
„This text is about the concept of responsibility between individuals and communities, between comrades, in relation to the world as we want it. As in other recent texts circulating in the anarchist movement, there is a common sentiment of trying to illuminate principles, methods and dreams that strengthen and improve our actions as anarchists. I do not claim to be exbaustive on such a complex issue that touches on delicate aspects. Responsibility can be seen from different angles and I am sure that I will not be able to see them all. I will therefore concentrate on the points that seem to me to be the most urgent, and consider this text as a stimulus for reflection among the Companions. It is a text in which I do not intend to give an outline.
My aim is to make a contribution, a wealth of reflections that stimulate me precisely on this delicate subject.“
Dealing with the issue of responsibility today means, above all, dealing with the doctrine of irresponsibility that has been organising this society for some time. By irresponsibility, I mean the goal set by the state, by those in power, and also by science, of driving the exploited to ever greater inattention to the various social problems that afflict the whole of humanity. A never-ending task, so that people stop caring about the impending and imminent social changes. So that they stop thinking more and more. So that they believe that it is not possible to live and organise life without this social structure. In short, responsibility is to be passed on to others, and nowadays more than ever to some kind of technician. Of course, this development also affects interpersonal relations in all their facets.
As anarchists, we criticise all those who do not rebel, all those who doze off, all those who take part in abominable projects, all those who want to lead us straight into an ever more terrible world. We do not want to surrender to the course of events. But we who are born into this time are shaped, influenced, have a certain lifestyle. We are surrounded by a morality based on authoritarianism, violence and also irresponsibility. All this is the reason why we are confronted with such problems. One step towards improving the current situation is to have a clear idea of responsibility. If being an anarchist means being conscious people fighting for freedom, then this means the highest degree of individual responsibility for what we say and do. With rebellion we try to get out of this dark hole, and with constant awareness we try to direct the rebellion into a world as we want it to be. This also means having other relationships than those dictated by society, in order to strengthen our anarchist intervention as such. We try to influence reality and bring it closer to freedom through the clarity of our intentions and goals.
A concept of freedom, a society where each person is responsible. But to whom? To whom is a free man responsible? To a stranger? To the whole of society? No one has to answer to any law, any justice, any public opinion. So what can we expect? We know very well that human relations, especially between comrades, should be based on fundamental concepts that correspond to the ideas we are trying to promote: Respect, mutual support, responsibility, including political responsibility, and last but not least, respect for agreements made between individuals. This last point is the result of exchanges between all the Allies. It is on this occasion that we establish the general guidelines for any human activity, whether it be projects to be developed, the way to deal with a difficult situation, the way to conduct love relationships, and so on. They are balanced, thoughtful, profound, honest and critical words that are the same for everyone.
If any of the above is missing, the risk of the free agreement failing, breaking down or being terminated increases, and with it the risk of not achieving the goals set. Worse, trust can dissolve into confrontation and separation, i.e. when separation is dictated by negative factors that are harmful to all allies. The alliance may be explicit or implicit. The latter deserves special attention. For example: When a proposal of any kind is made public, it is generally expected that those who make the proposal will take responsibility for it, and that those who consider it valid will act as supporters or flywheels, without the need for structures or formalisms. We know that this is not always the case, but I think that this aspect should be taken into account or deserves more attention. If suggestions are not taken seriously, this can lead to mistrust and difficult moments over time.
In today‘s world, words are all too easily blown away by the wind: words that carry weight, words that are often also linked to the history of past struggles, words that are meant to make us aware that certain words have consequences, that when one uses them, one can expect a positive or negative response, but always a consequence: words also have their essence. This is a very subtle point of view because it can be suggested again and again in different situations among the comrades.
What if someone does‘t take responsibility for the damage you‘be done and your irresponsibility? I believe that among comrades we must always experiment and find new tools, including cultural ones, in order to have the clearest possible ideas, given by life experience, to deal seriously with the everyday problems that surround us. Today people say that certain things did‘t happen in the past. But that is not true. When we read the biographies and stories of vehicle:ins, we see that certain events did happen in the past. So if we think about the anarchist movement of the past and assume that certain incidents never happened, we are wrong, because that would be glorifying an almost perfect past, a purer anarchism. In reality, there have been moments of intense activity in our movement, when there was the strength to achieve the desired radical change, as well as moments of strong internal and sad struggles, or specific incidents of particular gravity. All these experiences have drained a great deal of energy from the struggle. We are sure that these events were approached with responsibility, with a great will and seriousness to fight among the Companions to overcome the obstacles imposed by the moment. Certainly, coexistence among the Companions was different, more protected from a number of negative dynamics and not yet so influenced by the rapid changes and brutalisation of today‘s society.
Discussion, constant exchange, learning and, above all, the experience of healthy relationships, the desire and interest to face life‘s questions anew every day can help to consciously take responsibility for mistakes and other failures. When trust has been abused or betrayed, it is all the more difficult, if not impossible, to repair the damage, and it is neither desirable to look the other way in such situations, nor to assume the infinite goodness of those involved. At the same time, I think we should approach the problems with some understanding and without prejudice: Confrontation is not always the best way to point out or solve a problem. Among ourselves: how important is it to know that a sister or brother is returning to old ways, aware of the problems she:he has caused? How unifying can it be to look each other in the eye again and feel stronger than before, to embrace each other again in spite of everything? Would‘t that be desirable? An insight that can help strengthen relationships that would otherwise never find their way back.
«If being an anarchist means being conscious people fighting for freedom, then this means the highest degree of individual responsibility for what we say and do.»
What might be a helpful factor in developing an awareness of one‘s own responsibility for the harm or omission caused? Certainly it is the recognition of the person or collective who has suffered the harm. To feel and share a community as one‘s own, of all who have contributed, can be a way of undoing the damage. If everyone pulls their own weight without looking anyone in the eye, there is no way to recognise each other. Pursuing only one‘s own interests can lead astray, because as human beings we are related to each other. There is no individual who is not related to someone else. Therefore, as anarchists, we need to have a set of tools to recognise certain behaviours, negative words and actions. We also know that this is not always the case. Our character, our sensibilities and our experiences have an influence on how we see what exists that should not be underestimated. What‘s more, we won‘t get very far if poison, rumours, prejudice and mistrust are spread between us. And those who want to get us into trouble know exactly how and where to strike: with dirty tricks.
Mika Etchébèhere, the only female commander of the POUM in the Spanish Civil War, describes an important detail of life in the trenches in her autobiographical book
„My War in Spain“. Just before an attack on the Francoist front, during a nerve-wracking waiting period, and after she had given all the instructions for the war of positions, one of the most important pieces of advice she gave to her comrades was, in her opinion, to avoid gossip among the militia. The word she used
for this was just that: gossip. We all know what we are talking about: all these words scattered to the winds, without any practical or determined aim to solve the problems of the thousand and one different situations. Criticism that is only negative, that hides and devalues the positive, that poisons relation- ships, that loses the „objectivity“ of problems and makes them personal, that creates fronts, all this happens between us.
I believe that these practices are the order of the day in our movement today and are spreading dramatically. Where there is room for heated debate, where there is an interest in getting to know each other without indulging in gossip, whoever and however, where there is a desire to understand the sensitivities of the companions, how they move, how they deal with the various difficulties, all this is increasingly mixed with gossip, paper wars of words or, worse, the world of Internet sites, chats and the like.
On this point, I think it is a „collective“ responsibility to try to take up these practices and put them back where they belong: on the dung heap. By collective responsibility I don‘t mean the debate of the 1920s and 1930s about the platformist proposal for the anarchist movement that came from Makhno and other comrades to raise the question of organisation. Here the problem is not one of organisation, but one of recognition between communities and thus individuals trying to analyse the problems as best they can and find common ground to move forward in struggle, with the characteristics I mentioned earlier: Support, respect, etc. If there is not this desire for recognition, then there is a tendency to seek distance in a one-sided way, to turn up one‘s nose at a misspelled word in a text, at unclear terms, or even at the fact that they are considered harmful when they could open up a new discussion. That‘s why I think constant discussion is necessary and constructive. Being affected can also help us to recognise and understand each other. Perhaps ways can be shared, with some more, with others less, but without complicating or poisoning the work of others. Openness is a good ingredient. If we do not feel accountable for what we say and do, even if we know each other as „anarchists from here and there“ or through newspapers, websites, etc., trust will diminish over time and distrust between groups and individuals will grow. Thinking ahead can avoid problems. By this I mean considering the implications of what we say and do, especially when it comes to serious issues, where bad words and the inability to understand them bring the risk of danger and divisions that are never healthy between comrades.
The debate must be as clear and transparent as possible, on the issues we want to discuss in depth, and in all forms of propaganda and argument. At the moment this does not seem to be the case in our movement: The effort to be together does not always seem to be a common and achievable goal. As if it is bad for anarchists to be many, aware of their differences and with the same or similar goals, although I think it is always desirable to enlarge our movement and to give more influence to our ideas, for a radical change of society and also for something that some no longer believe in, the social revolution. By „many“ I don‘t mean a big movement, a mass movement, where the aim is to increase rather than to fight, where the aim is to formalise the structure rather than to make it qualitative. It is a question of directing the debate and the actions of the comrades towards quality rather than quantity. Simply strengthening relations between comrades and groups is not an issue that can be put aside. I will not give up and I will not be defeated, especially at this moment when the society around us is at its worst.
«We don‘t have to prove anything to anyone, we are what we are and nobody forced us to be anarchists, because being an anarchist is probably the most difficult thing of all.»
If we do not see the harm and suffering we cause each other, how can we pass on our ideas that we believe are important for everyone on the path to freedom? If we are the first to use the methods of this sick society, what proposals for a different life can we articulate? It is frightening and exhausting to find new ways that are free and constructive, but must we take the easiest and most destructive way? Only we can feel responsible for our fellow human beings and find solutions. The state wants to destroy us, that much is clear. Do we want to give it this satisfaction or do we want to strengthen solidarity, close, compact, with a thousand different projects and struggles? I think we also have a historical responsibility. Some will say that sounds romantic, but it‘s not. It‘s about remembering how many people gave their lives to fight for the ideas we believe we can pass on today. It was determined, serious and courageous men and women who dedicated themselves to anarchy. Again, we should feel responsible for everything we do and say. We don‘t have to prove anything to anyone, we are what we are and nobody forced us to be anarchists, because being an anarchist is probably the most difficult thing of all. So I think we have to be consistent in what we say, in what we agree among ourselves and in what we proclaim. The ideas we proclaim in a thousand different ways have to carry weight, otherwise no one will take us seriously, least of all ourselves.
Malatesta once wrote about the crime against Matteotti (an Italian anti-fascist who was murdered on Mussolini‘s orders. The assassination in 1924 is considered the beginning of the dictatorship): „And we are ashamed as human beings and as Italians of this terrible fact…“. Some comrades criticised him because this „Italian“ sounded patriotic. Malatesta replied that the „Italians“ was not linked to the fatherland, that is, to a moment of confusion on the part of the companion, but to a sense of responsibility, because this murder was close to him, it was up to him and to all the comrades living in Italy at that time to give a firm answer to the fascists and to the state that protected them. This sense of responsibility must be understood even more in relation to events in individual cities and regions, where, depending on the situation, we can act directly against certain injustices. Here we must not hide our shortcomings and we must be aware that the fewer reactions there are, the more the other side will be able to pursue its goals, while the signals of resistance to barbarism from our side will become weaker and weaker.
Clear words, someone once wrote, not only to our enemies, but also to ourselves. May they be hard, respectful, honest and direct, in order to find solutions to eliminate injustice, abuse and slander, because that is what has happened among us.
Responsibility is a broad and deep concept that we draw from the most conscious form of freedom. In it we are all obliged to be accountable to ourselves and to others. This is true in love, in friendship, in struggle. It is a value we seek to promote throughout society in order to improve the human condition itself. Let us start with ourselves and in our environment. Among ourselves we want to be creative, with the exploited we want to rebel, with our eternal enemies we have nothing to offer but to be forgotten.
Stecco
From the ANTISISTEMA ISSUE 1 AUTUMN 2023 PAPER FOR ANARCHY AND CONSCIOUS ACTION