Juan Sorroche: Open letter re the invitation to participate in the Anarchist Publishing and Propaganda Fair in Rome as anarchist prisoner. To those who organised it, those who are going to it, and all the comrades, anarchists and not, who would like to read my considerations

Hola comrades everyone,

I received the books with the Fair material at the beginning of March and read them with great interest, particularly concerning the Publishing and Propaganda Fair due to be held in Rome on 4-5-6 April 2025. I thank you for the invitation to the prisoner comrades to participate and keep up the discussions between outside and inside and not break the link of solidarity with those of us who find ourselves locked up. And I thank you for the sign of solidarity

But I feel obliged to answer, concentrating in this letter and in your organized space exclusively on the net positions you have decided to take. The discourse, yes, is very divisive, so I think it’s very important and fundamental that there be collective perspectives and the broadest possible continuity in this respect, also with us, prisoners and not only. With compromises among comrades. For me personally compromise is not negative and not always enemy in absolute, on the contrary. I am for clear compromises between all comrades, male and female. Concerning the net position you have decided to take. As far as I am concerned these are a priori decisions, with automatic mechanisms and methods, decided elsewhere. It is therefore deciding exclusively whether to adhere and then perhaps discuss questions that have clearly already been decided.

Well, already put like that the question is controversial. Then, all the more so, if at the start of facing fundamental questions of anarchist principals, the regulatory, methodological and instrumental bases have already been decided and established as a priori mechanisms, personally this approach and ethical method for me is already very, very questionable.

And therefore participating would mean positioning myself with these clear rules decided elsewhere and not clarified and delegating these principles of mine without having been able to question them, discuss them and decide them beforehand.

So I do not agree with the basic assumptions of your positioning text. Between me and the collective of the organizers of the Fair, this is our first exchange of correspondence.

We have never discussed collectively, and therefore we have never gone into fundamental questions together, none of them, which I cannot, we cannot, take for granted. Especially such fundamental issues as systemic sexual and gender violence of this society that we all reproduce. But above all we have never discussed in depth those fundamental questions of how and which resolutions and solutions are most suitable ethically and also useful for treating these problems, without taking them for granted.
Also, between us, we have never gone into the fundamental questions of the structural violence of the authoritarian legal-penal roles of this society and that we all reproduce. Just as we have never discussed in depth the fundamental questions of how and which resolutions and solutions are more ethically appropriate and useful for the treatment of these problems without taking them for granted.

I believe that, yes, we systematically create both of these situations in the Italian anarchist movement. Dual and polarised, and that none of these helps to find and reach the causes of the structural problems of systemic violence and our collective taking responsibility.
So, you can understand that because I do not share the basic assumptions,  I would therefore not want to delegate this to anyone without having discussed these issues collectively and well, thoroughly, beforehand.
Therefore, I do not adhere to the positions already decided in this specific space of the fair. I will send this open letter of criticism of mine and if you want you can publish it and distribute it wherever you want.

And as far as I am concerned, this is not a closure, I say this sincerely, and if we want to create more of these ways, spaces, times, to discuss these systemic issues of violence, together in depth, at the roots, I am willing to do so in the future with the necessary time and space they require and with collective discussions. As I believe it would also be very very important if there were also specific and collective discussions like anarchist masculinity.
But if we want to discuss anarchist principles and ethics to put them in common, for me it must be at the root and in depth. I think one must be able to question everything, without established decisions made in advance. And then, yes, decide whether or not we want to be mutually part of the same anarchist community or collectivity.

Certainly the assumption is, in fact, that these sexual acts of violence are mainly done by cissexual men, and of our aggressive behaviour, of the abuse systematically and structurally by us men. And that inherent in these dynamics and situations is silence as the systemic rule of male corporatism and structural sexism, denying systemic violence collectively; this is also a fact.
But to individualise systemic violence and stereotype our aggressive behaviour, our structural abuses by us privileged men, is in a certain way, also part of this systemic silence in fixed models. But individualising systemic violence and stereotyping our aggressive behaviour into fixed patterns, the structural abuses by us privileged men, is in a way also part of this systemic silence, and I do not think it is qualitatively useful for collective responsibilisation.
And also individualising and stereotyping in the same way, taking for granted even those fundamental questions of how, and which resolutions and solutions are most ethically suitable and even useful for the treatment of these problems, is, in a way, also part of this systemic silence by collectively de-resposibilising us. To claim to reduce resolutions and solutions of complex facts to a few simple elements and fixed and automatic models does not, I believe, lead us to collective responsibility for the systemic violence we reproduce.
So I believe like you that there is a need, a necessity, to change the culturally learned behaviours and roles of this authoritarian society in order to paradigmatically change the reality in which we live.
And given our, and especially my, experiences, it is a self-criticism and, I put it in question.
I know that these are very, very, sensitive and complex questions.
But I believe that it is necessary to make an in depth and not instrumental and not anecdotal reflection on all our experiences of serious systemic violence.

But I think that setting it exclusively in the selective-anecdotal character, as I also see happening is a mistake. And that later generates the sensation that the system rules that the acts of violence are isolated outside ourselves, as males.

My question is: does this have a qualitative effect in resolving and solving and treating these problems?
In addition, it seems to me that it greatly misleads the discourse and practices, for addressing the real structural systemic causes of gender and sexual violence. And in addition, it seems to me that it also increases the structural juridical-legal violence of this society which, like patriarchy, we reproduce very well in our Italian anarchist movement.

Sincerely, in such ways I do not see the usefulness for resolving conflicts in a qualitative manner or that they produce suitable tools, now, or to reach through time libertarian perspectives to solutions for remedial cures of the problems.

And that the systemic violence that we all reproduce is very complex and comprehensive.  So I believe that discussing it to find practices always is essential. Especially when it is divisive, in fact, so there’s a greater need for continuous discussion.

Then of course comrades, if you don’t want to discuss because your positions are not up for discussion…

Certainly there is plenty of room to organise oneself differently.
And you have to bear in mind, and reflect well, the great limitations in dealing with these complex issues in our circumstances of isolation, as prisoners, both materially and practically and emotionally. And that they can also be misled by this. This is not to play the victim, it is a fact.
But, I repeat, what I can do and do, is be open to put myself in question.

For anyone who’d like to write to me:

Juan Sorroche
– Strada delle Campore -32 –
– 05100- c.c. Terni –

17/03/2025

————–

Translated by Act for freedom now!

[Received by mail and published in https://lanemesi.noblogs.org/post/2025/03/31/juan-sorroche-lettera-aperta-per-linvito-a-partecipare-come-prigioniero-anarchico-alla-fiera-delleditoria-e-della-propaganda-anarchica-di-roma-a-chi-lha-organizzato-a-chi-la-frequentera-e-a-tutti-i-compagni-anarchici-e-non-che-vorranno-leggere-queste-mie-considerazioni/]