I appreciate that you bring yourselve in and contribute where you stand. This is important for us anarchists - we need to struggle where we stand. I must say however I have some reservations about the way you write about a movement in a country where you have been only a couple of months. I do see some problems too with the position of some (and read that clear, some) antifascists, turning a blind eye to migrant and radical islamic organisations with fascist agenda's (like for instance the Grey Wolves, salafists etc.). These groups have their own agency and are just as responsible for their actions as white people. The measuring scale is reaching from libertarian to authoritarian.
I think it is unfair to say that the "political position of the so-called anti-fascists in the Netherlands is not in favor of the immigrants but it is in collusion with the fascists." I think your critique is partly valid, but you seem to make no distinction between different parts of the antifascist movement and dismissive towards is as a whole. A movement that is actually, as you put it yourself, supposed to revolt. But due to your seeming lack of faith, who do you suggest should revolt?
The time of uprising has come, fascism has taken over the whole country, you may not see it, but I and many other immigrants experience it every day. Also I think this statement will lead us nowhere. What are you actually suggesting. If we, as anarchists, believe that revolution, that is social revolution, should come from the people, then how is it exactly that this should look like if "the whole country has been taken over by fascism" or that the "proletariat"' as you suppose "has been destroyed" and that "the majority who are the bourgeoisie and the micro-bourgeoisie with the ideas of neoliberalism". Because I wonder who then is to revolt if it's not the antifascsts, there is no proletariat and the majority of society is bourgeois or petit-bourgois? And how is that revolt ever going to lead to a succesfull and effective change (say a social revolution, if that revolution is not made by the people, but by a small minority)?
I am an antifascist and a revolutionary anarchist. I do think that you are right by stating that there is a threat of fascism, this goes not only for the Netherlands, but for many European countries. That however, doesn't call for a direct "uprsing", but for thoughtfull work, movement building and reconnecting with society. Our movement has bumped its head into the walls of repression without being prepared and having no anchoring in society before. However 'right' one might be at that moment, it leads to nothing else but defeat. Part of our weakness lies in our isolation: our lack of connection with and anchorage in society. To regain this however is asking for painstakingly slow work of which the fruits are sometimes hard to see.
Response to a comrade
Dear Abtin,
I appreciate that you bring yourselve in and contribute where you stand. This is important for us anarchists - we need to struggle where we stand. I must say however I have some reservations about the way you write about a movement in a country where you have been only a couple of months. I do see some problems too with the position of some (and read that clear, some) antifascists, turning a blind eye to migrant and radical islamic organisations with fascist agenda's (like for instance the Grey Wolves, salafists etc.). These groups have their own agency and are just as responsible for their actions as white people. The measuring scale is reaching from libertarian to authoritarian.
I think it is unfair to say that the "political position of the so-called anti-fascists in the Netherlands is not in favor of the immigrants but it is in collusion with the fascists." I think your critique is partly valid, but you seem to make no distinction between different parts of the antifascist movement and dismissive towards is as a whole. A movement that is actually, as you put it yourself, supposed to revolt. But due to your seeming lack of faith, who do you suggest should revolt?
The time of uprising has come, fascism has taken over the whole country, you may not see it, but I and many other immigrants experience it every day. Also I think this statement will lead us nowhere. What are you actually suggesting. If we, as anarchists, believe that revolution, that is social revolution, should come from the people, then how is it exactly that this should look like if "the whole country has been taken over by fascism" or that the "proletariat"' as you suppose "has been destroyed" and that "the majority who are the bourgeoisie and the micro-bourgeoisie with the ideas of neoliberalism". Because I wonder who then is to revolt if it's not the antifascsts, there is no proletariat and the majority of society is bourgeois or petit-bourgois? And how is that revolt ever going to lead to a succesfull and effective change (say a social revolution, if that revolution is not made by the people, but by a small minority)?
I am an antifascist and a revolutionary anarchist. I do think that you are right by stating that there is a threat of fascism, this goes not only for the Netherlands, but for many European countries. That however, doesn't call for a direct "uprsing", but for thoughtfull work, movement building and reconnecting with society. Our movement has bumped its head into the walls of repression without being prepared and having no anchoring in society before. However 'right' one might be at that moment, it leads to nothing else but defeat. Part of our weakness lies in our isolation: our lack of connection with and anchorage in society. To regain this however is asking for painstakingly slow work of which the fruits are sometimes hard to see.
December 29th, Tommy Ryan