Reaction to The Anarchist Organisation for Reconstruction of Militant Proletariat
This is a reaction to the Anarchist Organisation for Reconstruction of Militant Proletariat's call to not side with leftists and anarchists who have aligned themselves with liberal democracy.
Dear comrades from the Anarchist Organisation for Reconstruction of Militant Proletariat,
First of all, we would like to thank you for your contribution to a much needed theoretical discussion within dutch anarchist circles. Although we disagree on several points, it is refreshing to see more serious thought on revolutionary struggle, something that has been bitterly missing in the Netherlands for a long time. Indeed, in the Netherlands today, the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat is de facto absent.
Our first point of critique is in regard to your claim that "[t]he proletarians of the Netherlands are the immigrants". You present this claim without any argumentation or class analysis. Not only is your claim baseless, it also falsely generalises immigrants as one homogeneous group. We feel your claim is jumping to conclusions without doing the hard but necessary work of analysing the complex class relations within the dutch context. But only from such an analysis can we start to meaningfully identify revolutionary potential. To be clear, this is not to say we do not approve of efforts to create a common struggle between locals and immigrants. On the contrary, we applaud such efforts. But when you accuse "[m]ost anarchists and leftists in the Netherlands" of lacking desire and understanding of class struggle - and we agree that the dutch anarchist movement in general suffers from a lack of understanding of class struggle - you would do well to work towards improving such an understanding. This cannot be accomplished by simply dropping assertions.
You then proceed to accuse anarchists and leftists of victimising and manipulating immigrants, and of counter-revolutionary activity. These are harsh accusations that require substantiation through concrete examples. You do mention the demonstrations on January 10th, but your definition of the 'para-state' is so opaque that it is hard to decipher who you are accusing. Nevertheless, apparently there were groups and individuals at the demonstration you consider traitors and enemies. We do not find this a helpful framing of political disagreements within the anti-fascist context. While we certainly disagree with the politics of many of the allies that organised and were present at the demonstration, we are nevertheless glad that they are making a stance against fascism. In appreciation of that, we can at least discuss our differences in a manner that doesn't eradiate aggression. Especially given that, as you so aptly mentioned, the struggle of the proletariat is absent, and that the radical left is marginal at best, we simply cannot afford to take a puritan anarchist stance and reject all those with whom we politically disagree as traitors and enemies. Such an approach is sectarian at best, and likely to drag along many comrades in its path towards self-destruction.
In conclusion, while we admire your spirit, we ask you to 1) better substantiate your claims, both theoretical and practical, and 2) reflect on your priorities in who you call enemies and traitors. There are enough actual fascists out there to focus your anger on.
In solidarity,
Vrije Bond Utrecht