Rojava: the real frontline against ISIS; inside the Kurdish revolution

“The process of shifting towards a new paradigm was also pushed by an ideological wing within the PKK around their chairman Abdullah Öcalan, who formulated the idea of democratic confederalism after undertaking a deep historical analysis of the hierarchical system of Middle East and beyond. He stressed that the problems of power, oppression, and violence emerged from the historical process of civilization itself, beginning with the ancient Sumerian priest states, which had posed the initial challenge to the more egalitarian and often matricentric forms of social organization that had preceded them. The problems of oppression, warfare, and the quest for power are linked to the institutionalization of patriarchal relationships in state structures and the priesthood. The capitalist system, the nation-state, and industrialism are concepts that evolved out of these hierarchical and male-dominated modes of thought. Öcalan also drew on the ideas of American anarchist Murray Bookchin for his analysis of the utopian potential of democratic confederalism, and stressed the importance of embracing a new ecological, democratic, and gender-liberated paradigm. Central to his conception of the “new paradigm” of the PKK was the idea of communalism, that each part of society should organize itself and come together in a decentralized, communitarian confederation.

Inspired by this new paradigm, the Komalen Ciwaken Kurdistan (KCK), the Confederation of the Societies of Kurdistan, was founded in 2005. At its core is a system of councils in neighborhoods, villages, and cities, serving as a potent civil counter-power to foster the development of autonomy from the nation-state and the capitalist economy. The KCK forms the main assembly of the council system in Kurdistan, including delegates from all the participating Kurdish regions. They elect an executive body with a mandate to work on issues of importance for all regions, such as diplomatic representation on a global level, ideological and strategic proposals, and questions of defense. They also administrate the People’s Defence Forces (HPG), containing the armed wings from all parts of the movement. Over the past decade, despite heavy repression and wartime conditions, the movement in northern Kurdistan has created structures for a democratic, ecological, and gender-liberated society.”

UndercoverInfo

Since their successful defense of Kobanê against the Islamic State a year ago, the Kurdish resistance movement – specifically the YPG (men’s milita) and YPJ (women’s militia) – has captured international media attention. Meanwhile, their experiment in forming a stateless society in the autonomous cantons of Rojava have fascinated anarchists across the world. But in order to understand this Kurdish resistance in Rojava (western Kurdistan) we need to take a broader look at the struggles for freedom and autonomy across the region. Below is an interview with two members of a network of internationalist anarchists in Germany who spent time in Bakur (northern Kurdistan), learning from the struggles taking place there. Beginning with a historical overview of the emergence of the Kurdish movement and the PKK’s “new paradigm” of the last decade they describe how their experiences in Kurdistan reframed their understanding of anarchist struggles elsewhere across the globe.

(Note:…

View original post 6,620 more words

The Rise of Modern Fascism

“Fascism offers people a focus for their fears, an enemy to fight, a core message and a simple and easily-grasped political narrative that stands in stark counter to the minor gradations in shades of liberalism offered by traditional politics. It always takes root when things are looking their worst, only this time, thanks to the concerted efforts of the ruling elite for many decades, there no longer exists a powerful, organised anarchist or communist left to stand against it.”

BlackFlag

After this year’s European Parliament elections, it was obvious to all but the most casual observer that the major victors at the polling booth were the far right. Far-right reactionaries made a sweep of European Parliamentary seats, running the gamut from simple Euroskeptic anti-immigration racists such as UKIP and Front National in the UK and France, to outright Nazis such as Golden Dawn and Jobbik in Greece and Hungary.

This was obviously a qualified victory in many ways; turnout for EU elections is low, meaning that results will often emphasise and amplify the more extreme aspects of representation, and even with this in mind, the far right in no way maintains anything resembling a majority of seats. It would be foolish to write off these results, however, since they most assuredly reflect a growing sentiment within the European community that must be addressed. 

Why are Europeans starting to vote for…

View original post 627 more words

Resources for anti-fascist action

A collection of resources for Anti-Fascist Action – worth checking out.

Anti-Fascist Network

Following on from our guide to ‘How to set up an anti-fascist group’, here’s some useful resources for those thinking of taking action against the far-right.

View original post 583 more words

Representative Government: The Conduit of Corruption

Election time: millions of State citizens line up at the voting booths. Eagerly, one by one, they throw their support behind a preferred candidate, one who claims to be representative of certain interests and values which they will pursue within the policy-shaping institutions of government. Unknowingly, with the ticking of a box on that sheet of power, the Individual’s sovereignty and political participation are not only trivialised but by large forfeited. From what amounts to a cultish ceremony, the authority to govern over life and death is collectivised into the grasp of a privileged few under a smokescreen on freedom and collective security. This not only enslaves the Individual, but also their fellow Human Being.

Such reckless centralisation of political power and economic control has repeatedly forestalled practical progress towards a truly free and egalitarian society. Poverty, crime, famine, slavery, discrimination, terrorism, genocide, war … these are consequences of granting the socially constructed entity, known as the State, an unjustified position of authority. The most ruthless dictatorships of the Twentieth Century – ranging from Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy to Stalinist Russia and Maoist China – have all resulted from this unwarranted submission to statism. Unchallenged obedience to authority made the worst atrocities in human history possible.

Many will point to the transnational mega-banks and corporations of today as the source of global inequality and injustice. They are correct in part, as it is those institutions which undoubtedly pull the strings of the State system, but it is the immoral use of government power that ultimately permits and feeds this external institutional dominance. Such is the case of the silent dictatorships, or ‘inverted totalitarianist’ regimes of our time.

Favourable special interests are given incentives, contracts, tax cuts and handouts; others are left to make their own fate in an increasingly hostile market environment of licenses, regulations and disproportionate wealth re-distribution. Without this framework to facilitate this system of corporate welfare, the institutions perpetuating elitist domination would rapidly become unsustainable and collapse. Equal economic opportunity, let alone economic equality, rarely exists under the State system. Things rarely change, and when they do, it is almost always beneficial to the ruling class. Government acts as a beacon for those who seek power; corruption is inherent.

“We just need to elect people into government we can trust!”

I have come across this perspective multiple times in discussions. Unfortunately, it is a misleading and counter-productive notion, for it is the ancient institution of government itself – despite millennia of reforms – which lies at the core of humankind’s struggle against elitist exploitation and oppression.

Political parties in supposedly democratic nations have both incentive and obligation to return the investments made by their sponsors. Election campaigns do not promote nor finance themselves – seeking both influence through public relations and a reliable source of funding are necessities for political parties. Members of a party follow the party line, and at the end of the day, the party line is always dictated by its hierarchs. Most Western nations possess what are primarily two-party systems, where alternative candidates are heavily marginalised, discredited and alienated, particularly by the mainstream media. There is hardly anything democratic about representative government.

And the worst aspect of this system is that genuine opposition to its existence must work outside of it, and against it, demanding substantially more effort from individuals while being potentially life threatening. Modern States are sufficiently geared and trained for responding to civil dissent.

If we were to find a brigade of virtuous men and women, willing to stand by their promises and oppose the System from within… true representatives of the People… they are not likely to last. As with all modern democracies, the very structure of government make society vulnerable to coercion, and is a desirable target for it. The ruling class has consistently demonstrated its willingness to use ruthless and sinister tactics to maintain its lust for control and conquest through the State system. Sabotage, bribery, defamation, infiltration, intimidation, assassination… nothing is out of the question for the power-hungry.

It is this grotesque predatory evolution of Capitalism, sanctioned and endorsed by the political class, that has facilitated the rise of a globalised corporate oligarchy. The continued existence of such a system will gradually ware down the individual freedoms we have left – assuming what freedom we have isn’t illusionary. Whether we like it or not, representative government is on the decline, gradually being stripped away one neo-liberal policy at a time.

Some of the biggest trade deals in the world are taking place right now. ‘Free Trade’ agreements like the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSa) are essentially handing corporations the power to supersede and control the Nation-States involved. A literal corporatocracy is being constructed right under the Public’s nose – none of us are even allowed to look at it before it is signed, except for MPs who can’t reveal its contents for four years. An international authoritarian State is lurking somewhere down the road – a technocratic tyranny of near inescapable and irresistible proportions. Immediate action on our part is required to avoid this coming catastrophe.

If we are to be liberated, the need for government must be rendered obsolete, or at the very least, its role redefined to decentralise power. This will require, above all, the abolition of an exclusionary political class. True political and social equality lies in our ability to live responsibly; with respect and decency towards human rights and the environment, without having to delegate supreme authority to a special class of people. We must learn to represent ourselves, as opposed to selecting representatives. A conscious, active commitment to establishing and upholding a commonly shared moral standard, based upon the principles of Self Ownership, will nurture the type of society we seek. But only if we can, together, embody those principles. A society’s sense of morality is derived from the individuals who inhabit it.

The State is not a supercomputer nor a hive mind – it merely consists of people, like you and I, who claim an unjustified position of power over others. The politician is susceptible to human error, fear, and greed. What good can government do which we cannot accomplish without it through mutual consent and cooperation amongst ourselves?

Fascists in Disguise: Lyn Bennetts and the Velvet Revolution

Three months ago, I stumbled upon the deceptive nature of Velvet Revolution: United We Stand and attempted to expose it to the Australian Activist community. At the time, it was a controversial move. I had lost respect amongst my colleagues for apparently turning ‘the People’ against each other, and sabotaging the Freedom movement, despite my expressed assurances to the contrary.

Since that time, however, the hidden intentions of this revolution have slowly come to light, and counter-protests have been organised. Similar to the recent Reclaim Australia Rallies, this movement possesses an alarming amount of anti-Islamic sentiment. Unlike Reclaim Australia, Velvet Revolution seeks to overthrow the Australian government with populism to reinstate the 1900 Australian Constitution, while avidly promoting Referendum Voting as the regular means of addressing major political issues.

Every now and then, I see reference to my work or have individuals directed my way when seeking information on the subject. This is why I have decided to write this article: as thorough documentation of my experience with this movement and its leader, and a summary of the information obtained.

Velvet Revolution is Astroturf – a fake grass-roots movement attempting to play on anti-government sentiment in an effort to push for constitutional reform which, if successful, would likely be crafted in their favour. VR’s leadership doesn’t publicly address what constitutional reform should take place; the lack of such an opinion, even when asked directly, should be enough for a rational being to proceed with caution.

Previously working as an administrator for the Facebook group ‘Australian Freedom Movement’, I had the great displeasure of personally communicating with Velvet Revolution’s head organiser, Lyn Bennetts – former candidate of the One Nation Party. Having been given a position of trust in a group of almost 9400 people – specifically to quell the rise in abusive and xenophobic commentators – it was my duty to help my group survive and thrive, while investigating possible contingencies.

I was rather sceptical of what this ‘revolution’ entailed, especially considering it intended to use Referendum Voting so recklessly. I am not easily fooled. Claiming to be representing issues such as the Economy, Climate Change, Education, Health, ‘Aboriginal Issues’, the Banking System, and various other subjects, there was no mention as to what positions this movement took on these subjects. They were nowhere to be found, neither on the flyers been distributed digitally through various on-line alternative circles, nor on their own Facebook page. It certainly raised a few flags.

Investigating their page, I stumbled upon rather disturbing comments…

Random chatter, probably nothing. Just in case, I’ll take a quick look at the personal pages of the organisers (information obtained from the movement’s Facebook group). Oh look, pictures!

Oh my…

There didn’t appear to be anything so obvious on Lyn’s own page aside from her copy and paste slabs of misinterpreted and fraudulent constitutional law.

I then thought to myself. “Who is Lyn Bennetts anyway? Better google search her, considering she has openly stated that she is former One Nation.”

“Oh, what’s that? Her public YouTube account was the top search result. Surely this will give me a glimpse of her character…”

Golden Dawn: Check.

Australian Defence League: Check

Aussie against Islam: Check

It was as I had feared. These people had no apparent interest in what topics they were promoting in their movement – those were merely the carrots dangling in front of potential supporters to draw them in. The real goal, it would seem, was to use people power to overthrow the government and initiate rapid and volatile political transformation against the Australian Islamic community.

What was I to do with this information? First I consulted a like-minded acquaintance about the situation. He revealed to me that he had been banned from Velvet Revolution’s page for asking too many questions. Indeed, it was looking worse by the minute. I thought it best to confront her publicly and within an environment where she hadn’t the power to silence me… the Australian Freedom Movement.

And for the record, I always made people, including myself, use the freedom of speech to argue issues out, so long as it was not abusive or threatening. It was a policy that lead to very interesting discussion as well as intellectual progression within the community.

The following images are screenshots from this encounter. I have blacked out the names of the Original admin, and my acquaintance (who attempted to take part in the conversation) for their own protection. The important revelations have been underlined.

In the image below, she calls on the Original Admin to ban me. It didn’t work out for her.

Though the genie was out of the bottle at this point, she feebly attempts to make excuses for her involvement with the Australian Defence League and the non-disclosure of that information.

Might I ask rhetorically… what kind of information could the Australian Defence League possibly possess that would compel an individual to freely associate with such primitive-minded social degenerates?

Bennetts, using tropes common amongst politicians, then tried turning the conversation against me by demanding that I answer her questions in regards to where I stand on the issues promoted by Velvet Revolution. For the sake of it, I answered, only to find her still refusing to answer them herself – insisting that they are available on Facebook (despite VR’s page having nothing clearly outlined.) When looking at the images below, keep in mind that she lists Islam and Halal as issues.

And, in the face of defeat, Bennetts accused me of manipulating posts.

She eventually retreated, leaving the Australian Freedom Movement within hours of our discussion – on her own accord I might add. It was apparent that, even without the evidently xenophobic hidden motives, Lyn Bennetts was hardly a trustworthy, honest or intelligent individual capable of leading a revolution. Her very presence reeked of arrogance and immaturity. The very gesture of attempting to silence my criticism was that of a fascist dictator, not a champion of liberty.

The continued deception of this movement could not go unchallenged, so a Facebook post exposing Lyn Bennetts’ ‘revolution’ was created and distributed through the social network.

Naturally, there was blow-back. I had clearly infuriated her and she wasn’t about to let a “white ant” like me to get away with foiling her plans. She then proceeded to Name and Shame my acquaintance and I on Velvet Revolution’s page, along with a third individual who had also questioned their motives. Our photos were also on exhibit, though they have since been taken down.

She was also in the digital ears of my colleagues, who she was determined to turn against me. One such colleague relayed to me that Bennetts was considering legal action under claims of cyber-bullying – whether this was true or not, I am uncertain, but the very notion of an anti-government revolutionary launching legal action against me was laughable.

Since these events unfolded, Velvet Revolution has delayed their ‘national’ rallies until the 10th of July – probably the result of a low number of supporters, and an attempt to draw allies from Reclaim Australia. Though it is unlikely that this fake revolution will ever take off, it is somewhat important that such threats to our society are adequately addressed.

If anything, the Reclaim Australia rallies demonstrate that fascism is on the rise in Australia. All I can hope is that material such as this can shed light on their undisclosed agenda and save a few poor souls from being misguided by subversive xenophobic manipulators.

Waters of Change – A True Liberty Australia Production

Anarchy: Reclaiming a Definition

Perhaps you are in a position similar to myself years ago – a victim of the public education system, raised to believe in the power of government and all the benefits it brings to society. Society would cease to exist without government… government IS society… or so these educational institutions would have you believe. In the First World, we are relatively free to discuss the many variants of Statism within the halls of academia… but the thought of discussing a stateless society, absent of coercive government, is in a sense treated as taboo… or at the very least, is ridiculed as a juvenile and idealistic concept.

Beyond a lack of subjects in Politics and Philosophy that explore the area (at least in my experience) such an outlook comes predominantly with the terminology used to describe Anarchy. Academics lead their students to believe that Anarchy is synonymous with chaos and disorder – a state of total societal decadence, a breakdown of society through the degeneration of a common moral code. This is not Anarchy, but rather anomie, and such words are not interchangeable.

What, then, is Anarchy?

Anarchy is freedom and social equality in the purest sense, literally meaning ‘without rulers’. It is a state of nature where human beings can govern their own lives as they see fit, so long as they respect the rights of others. In an Anarchist society, Self Ownership and Non Aggression are the supreme laws of the land; the highest of all moral codes and the most desirable values to regulate human behaviour. Anarchy is voluntary social organisation absent coercive government. The only condition asked of you in a Free society is that you are responsible for yourself and your actions.

As the analysis of the two different variations indicates, the common day usage of the term ‘Anarchy’ presumes that society cannot survive nor exist without government; that somehow the ‘great and virtuous State’ creates and protects the very fabric of human civilisation. It assumes that without the State, human beings would devolve into rabid animals and tear each other apart mercilessly.

And that may be so, for the time being at least, as the State has done a marvelous job of facilitating generation after generation of increasing dependency and social division. Indoctrination centers process our young, throwing their fragile minds into a slop of nationalism, glorified history and social conformity. They are then tossed out into an environment dominated by corporate conglomerates… free enough to choose their master and their occupation of servitude; free enough to think they have a choice. It is a system, built from the ground up, to subjugate entire populations blindly to the will of a privileged few.

As Morpheus states to Neo about the Matrix, an appropriate analogy of the State and our struggle against it:

“The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.”

The average individual is far from free; whether it be socially, politically, economically or intellectually. One cannot pull a dependent out of their cozy environment and expect them to know how to be free. Most find security in the State’s illegitimate existence, particularly when they are not directly affected by the consequences. They must be educated on the realities of Statism, and adequately prepared for the transition to a Free society. The mental captive needs to be taught the value of liberty, and the responsibilities that come with it.

This is why it is vital to reclaim definitions from the hands of the State and its agents. It is next to impossible to communicate ideas effectively without properly defining terminology. If we can redirect the misguided notions of Anarchy back towards the Humanist qualities which make it so appealing to its advocates, the perception of a society without government will shift substantially in our favour.