leaving aside the image that the State creates of terrorists ), you have also the fact that one believes that the more specialisation the attack requires , and the more the means of attack are specialised , more damage is done to the infrastructures of power ( meaning by this persons and things ). The practice itself showed that this is not true and that this is many times a projection .
The comrades who in 2011 attacked the Wal-Mart of Buenavista in the central zone of the Federal District , give during an interview for the book “ Que se ilumine la noche ” a clear account on how just some easily acquirable elements and determination were needed to cause mayor damage to the infrastructures of power . A glass bottle , gasoline , condoms as a time delay and pills of ammonia sulphate were enough to cause the total destruction of the Wal-Mart . Another example could be mentioned of the comrades who in Tijuana burned 31 new patrol cars of the municipal police . Some short guns to cover the retreat , a car , some litres of gasoline and determination where enough . We are just mentioning these two examples because of their supposed “ spectacularity ” and huge damage , leaving aside the hundreds of sabotage actions that are being realised with molotovs or home made devices consisting of plastic bottles , matches , cigarillos and gasoline .
Also , the myth of the professional of violence or of specialization is often supported by another factor : to be or to want to be always at the height of the system .
By always wanting to be at the height of the system and to wage competition with its armies , besides falling in the trap of measuring ourselves with the same stick as the system is measuring us , the attacking group ends up being a mirror image of the armies of the system , even ending up considering the armed act or the guerilla group an end in itself and not a means to attack – giving often more valour to guns and its iconography than to other means of intervention .
When sometimes it has been said that groups end up begin a deformed mirror image of the State itself , one is also speaking about the vainglory and the overestimation given to guns , to rifles , to explosives . These elements , that should just be tools of the revolutionary , end up becoming his identity , loosing his particularity as an individual , delegating his own identity to a false identity supported by a commercial instrument-icon of the system like weapons – instruments that one uses out of necessity , far away from all fetishism towards them . Weapons are a commodity and the best we can do with them is to render them … usefully useless . As anarchists , I believe this strongly , we are against the fetishism of arms and against any organisation ( or acronym ) that converts itself into something identitarian and that ends up with denying the individual or the individuals . Our only identity is our own individuality , our only identity are we ourselves and this can be seen reflected in our words , thoughts and acts , that flow together as one .
So then , what do we want and what are we proposing ?
Concerning the attack against the structures of the State and Capitalism , but above all against Power , we desire a propagation of attack , of sabotage and of the insurrectional perspective . What we are looking for , is the intensification of the social war day after day . That every person who feels the need to attack the State , Capitalism and Power does so , getting , above everything else , out of the idle position of spectator or of the immobility due to a lack of means .
Concerning anarchist organisation , we propose an informal organisational method , that is therefore in constant development and self-criticism , a method based on affinity and not on delegation or systematic agreement . An organisational method built starting from the needs that we experience in our immediate surroundings . An informal method that doesn ’ t place any organisation or acronym above the individual , but where the organisation stays subjected and submitted to constant practice and constant thinking , just as action is . An organisation based on the informal method of struggle that can be capable to propagate itself and be reproduced in qualitative terms .
Concerning the use of guns and explosives ( easily acquired in this territory ), a struggle consistent with the acratic principles and with informality . An acting that cuts in a slash with the vainglory of guns , that breaks with the fetishism created around the armed sabotage ; a consistent struggle that by attacking power destroys the discourse that places the armed act above other acts of sabotage , and a critique on the fetishism of illegality . Through acting , break with the commercial discourse on guns , mirrored by the big vanguards and militant armed organisations who are placing their militants in a game of power , mirrored in every aspect of their organisation . This is what we want to say by seeing oneself through the deforming mirror of power . We are not proposing a structured armedist struggle , but a direct struggle against power in its totality , a struggle that is capable to propagate and to reproduce itself . And if guns are easily acquired , may their use then be consequent and always as means , never as a goal .
The social war is a constant reality , the individual or collective attack is also so , better when this reality propagates even more , disperses , spreads out through the whole territory . And to contribute to this , the means of attack easily reproducible and easily acquired should be the perspective of concrete attack that accompanies our struggles for anarchy .
For an informal , anonymous and autonomous practice of attack against power
| 15 |