The left pinned down - ways out of failure

 The left pinned down - ways out of failure

(Translation of „Linke Bewegung am Boden – Wege aus dem Scheitern“ version 1 from 28.11.2024)

 

Foreword

 

We, the leftist movement in Germany, are constantly failing. We feel it. Because what have we really achieved and who have we really reached in recent years despite blood, sweat and tears? Resignation, frustration, anger, despair, but also self-delusion and self-deception are common reactions. Let's overcome this!

This text provides concrete impulses with appropriate analyses, criticism, old and new ideas on what we can do differently as a movement and is therefore aimed at all those who see themselves as part of this movement.

Who are we? Of course, the left as a movement is not a uniform group. We, the authors of this text, are predominantly part of the radical wing of the climate justice movement. Nevertheless, we would like to address the entire movement with this text. We are convinced that this makes sense given the interconnectedness of the various struggles (intersectionality). We believe that many aspects can therefore be applied to very different struggles.

Furthermore, we do not want to criticize or celebrate individual political movements, groups, organizations, etc. We want to focus on content, not on group affiliations.

About the way this text is written: We want this text to appeal to as many people as possible. That is why we try to write in an understandable rather than academic way, use a glossary to explain terms, which is referred to by superscript numbers, and sometimes go quite into detail. At the same time, we want to keep the text as short as possible, because long texts are not for everyone. As a result, many points are broken down considerably and an entire book could easily be written about some arguments made in half a sentence.

The text takes about 38 minutes to read.

The structure of this text: First, we will briefly define some basic assumptions and fundamental objectives. Even if not everyone agrees with this, it will make the following sections easier to understand. We will then work in thematic blocks that combine analyses, conclusions, strategies, tactics and means of action. Finally, there is an epilogue.

 

 

Basic assumptions

 

What are we actually fighting for as a movement? Or: What kind of world do we want to live in? We answer these questions like this: We want to live in a liberated society that lives in self-determination and solidarity with one another. Everyone's needs should be respected and fulfilled wherever possible. Of course, this applies globally and not just to Germany (even if this text refers to the movement in Germany).

What do we mean by a liberated society? Liberated from what? We see that people are suffering and dying in many ways under the prevailing system and its consequences. What do we mean by the system? What does the system consist of? We see its components as: Capitalism, patriarchy, various forms of oppression and the multifaceted concept of domination as such. These components do not exist independently. They are connected and interdependent and we must think about and fight against them together. For example, the fight against neo-colonialism or continuing colonialism means a fight against racism, imperialism (a form of oppression) and capitalism. But the struggle against patriarchy and other components of the system also play a significant role here.

Because of this, we are fighting for radical system change (complete change of the existing system).

 

 

Climate collapse, other disasters and crises

 

Our needs can be very different. However, our basic needs such as food and shelter are the same. Humanity is currently experiencing various crises at the same time, which are making it difficult or even impossible for us to meet our needs. However, one crisis is particularly worth highlighting. It is the climate crisis, which is no longer a crisis but rather a catastrophe. Climate collapse causes suffering and death every single day - especially in the Global South. Droughts, forest fires, storms, the greatest extinction of species in world history, scrambling for vital resources and so much more...

Every war comes to an end. But if our climate collapses, our planet as a habitat collapses in a way that cannot be restored. This is exactly what is currently happening and can no longer be stopped. The 1.5-degree target, which should have been a 0-degree target, has been broken. The tipping points, such as the melting of the polar ice or the thawing of the permafrost, have already tipped or are about to tip. Due to the complex interdependence between climate factors, precise forecasts are not (yet) possible. The fact is, however, that the world as we know it will not continue to exist. If the current system continues as it is - and it will continue in full force despite all the protests and “climate protection measures” - billions of people will die as a result and entire species will continue to die out at a rate we have never seen before.

And this is the point. If things don't continue as they are, we still have the chance to avoid a great deal of suffering and death. Every tenth of a degree counts, makes a difference, and the slower climate collapse takes place, the more opportunities for adaptation open up. It is also a question of justice. Who is responsible for the climate collapse and who suffers the most from the consequences? Forms of discrimination continue to increase and those already affected suffer all the more.

As outlined in the previous section, we are in the midst of a climate catastrophe. How are we responding? Let's take a look at the various players.

Politics and economy are mentioned together here, as they are deeply connected in the current system through lobbying, corruption, and the like. Politics & economy continue as usual according to the logic and constraints of the ruling system. Green capitalism is a contradiction in it self and serves only as a facade, nothing but an illusion. The maintenance of the status quo (the way it is now) is being enforced more violently than ever, as the massive repression and absurd criminalization of the climate justice movement show. States are thus becoming increasingly totalitarian[1].

Mass media and social media are part of the economy, but should be mentioned separately. They have a special role because they have an immense influence on the perception society has of reality, the things we know and our beliefs. For example, the media continues to trivialize or ignore climate collapse. Where would the AfD (far-right german party) be now without the Axel Springer press (right boulevard press)? No matter if we are talking about newspapers, TV stations or other media, they are all subject to the prevailing system in that they have to be profitable according to market logic (what kind of news sells and how well?) and are always owned by someone and subject to their interests. At the same time, mass media and social media also influence those who use them, leading to a vicious circle (feedback loop with the same opinions).

Society is confronting the climate catastrophe with denial. This denial takes very different forms. Examples are ignorance, relativization, trivialization and almost religious wishful thinking about completely unrealistic technical miracle solutions. Denial is understandable. The climate catastrophe is really frightening, overwhelmingly complex and straight up terrible. But these are not the only reasons for ignoring the problem. Feelings of shame and guilt play a major role due to complicity and privilege in the face of climate collapse. Clinging to one's own self-image also plays a major role. Psychologically speaking, we humans have a strong tendency - even if completely subconsciously - to maintain our self-image, including our world view. A good example of this is the objection a vegan diet. A vegan diet is basically ecologically and ethically the best and, with a balanced diet, also the healthiest. Nevertheless, the objection is strong and emotional. Here we can clearly see the reasons for ignorance described above.

Another aspect is that we live in an extremely individualistic and capitalist society. The focus is not on the “we” but rather on the “I”. Elbowing, social Darwinism (right of the strongest) and all-against-all logic are consequences of this.

The movement unfortunately has even more battles to fight than the fight against climate collapse. We also see similar things in other struggles, and they are further intensified by the climate catastrophe. Basically, we see the prevailing system continually failing, often cruelly compensating for its own contradictions.

 

 

What are we doing in the meantime? Failing.

 

Every now and then we achieve small wins. Sometimes we draw society's attention to important issues and sometimes we influence the prevailing discourse. Sometimes we empower and politicize people, educate ourselves and others politically and share experiences and skills. But we have no major political successes to show. Since the anti-nuclear movement, which won the nuclear phase-out, there has been no major success. On the contrary, we are even seeing roll-backs on many fronts (successes that have been achieved are being reversed).

We are stuck in a defensive struggle to prevent everything from getting even shittier. We can hardly stop reacting and actively pursue our own goals. If we are honest with ourselves, nobody really believes in system change at the moment ...

It's high time to change that!

 

 

How we do our political work

 

- Let's get real! -

Be honest - who among us doesn't want to feel like one of the good guys? Making a contribution to improving the world, doing something good - that makes us feel better. Unfortunately, we've realized that we don't actually achieve this. So we need to take a critical look at our own feel-good activism. Do we seriously want to change something or do we just want to feel better about ourselves?

Of course, our political work can (still) be fun and that is also important to avoid burning out. But for serious change, we need to be serious about what we are doing.

 

- No half-assing -

If we are aiming for system change, we cannot afford reformism[2]. The existing system is the underlying problem. Consequently, “corrections” etc. are far from sufficient. It also makes little sense to work on every symptom of the system. In addition, changes are only permitted to the extent that they are compatible with the existing system, as we can see from greenwashing[3] and pinkwashing[4].

Another aspect is that if we got involved in the game of reformism, we would run the risk of being taken over or divided by the system. How many groups have lost their momentum over random promises? How many groups have allowed themselves to be divided because some have been satisfied with crumbs while others have continued to want the whole bakery?

 

- Form gangs -

Organization is key. It's hard to achieve anything as a loose, chaotic bunch and it's equally hard to achieve anything as a bureaucratic, slow organization. How can we achieve our goal as effectively as possible with as little hierarchy as possible?

How many of us are there? How do we want to work? Are we a construct of local groups with delegates? Do we have working groups? Are we a (semi-)open or closed group? There are many questions to consider when setting up or reorganizing a group.

You can't do without plenaries, but plenaries don't necessarily have to drag on and on and be grueling. It is worth taking the time to learn how to organize more effectively. How do we prepare and follow up plenary sessions? How do we write minutes and what do we actually do with them? What belongs in a full plenary session and what belongs in a small group plenary session? Which (moderative) methods do we use? How do we reach decisions? Etc. ...

Of course, our own organization does not only consist of plenaries, but these are to a certain extent the heart of the whole thing.

We see new groups forming all the time. For every new or “new” Struggle, a new group pops up. This is in line with the firefighting policy that we predominantly operate. Of course it is valuable to be able to react quickly to things, but do we need a new group every time? Groups spring up, just as quickly as they disappear again. Or someone can't let go and drags the group around like a zombie forever.

That is grueling. However, the better we know, understand and trust each other in a group, the better and more seamless we can work together. That's why we think continuous, permanent groups make more sense.

The feel-good activism criticized at the beginning of this article too often leads to people only doing what they feel like doing and not what is perhaps appropriate and agreed upon. Commitment and reliability can both strengthen our political work and make it more sustainable. Most people drag themselves to paid work without any ifs or buts. Of course, we don't want to copy this pressure to perform, but it should give us pause for thought when we read irrelevant emails from paid work without thinking about it twice, but not the minutes of the missed plenary session.

 

- Form alliances -

How do left-wing groups multiply? By splitting.

Jokes aside, how do we come together again as a movement to share resources and achieve more? We think the best way to do this is bit by bit. Every group that manages to network with another group contributes to this. The debate about Israel/Palestine at the latest shows how hardened the fronts are. This makes it all the more important to start talking to each other again, and we are not talking about conversations scribbled in the toilets of our autonomous centers. Common ground is a good way to start a conversation. We don't have to share exactly the same world view to stand in the way of Nazis, for example. When working on a specific topic, it's easier to network than if we say “Hey, let's network somehow in order to be networked.” Social networking is also crucial, as people get to know each other personally. We need the spaces and opportunities for this. If we work on overcoming our own dogmatism[5] and prejudices and constantly reflect on ourselves, it is no longer so difficult to find common ground without betraying our own ideals and ideas. Open and honest criticism and a culture of debate among ourselves helps us to develop further instead of falling out.

 

- Respect for those who do it themselves -

Whether in the autonomous center, in the climate camp or in the company, self-governance (autogestione) is fundamental. Our goal should be for all institutions to be able to manage themselves. Organizing this from the bottom up by means of political groups, trade unions and cooperatives is a direct step towards autonomy and at the same time a valuable preparation for the event that the state administration completely fails - be it in the event of a disaster or a revolution.

 

- Using our own resources -

It sounds obvious, but we should make better use of the resources we have. For example, does every group in the city need its own megaphone, its own colors to paint banners? The sharing of skills and experience in solidarity is even more important. We are constantly reinventing the wheel and starting from scratch. That doesn't have to be the case. A more lively culture of mutual skill sharing reduces knowledge hierarchies and strengthens our political work and resilience (more on this later).

When it comes to resources, we can't avoid the topic of money. Money sucks, but as long as the system exists, it is unfortunately still necessary. In addition to membership fees, solidarity events, shared economies and the like, financial donations are important for our political work. These are mainly reserved for groups that appeal to middle-class people and are approachable in public. Groups that are not, and for whom it is sometimes not even possible due to their political work, tend to go away empty-handed or only receive money with much greater effort. We must also not forget that most of the money comes from outside our movement. Like other resources, we should therefore also share money within the movement in a needs-oriented way. Furthermore, DIY[6] and action planning that cleverly avoids the costs of repression instead of condoning them can also save money for the benefit of the movement.

Privileges are also resources. A reflective approach to one's own privileges also means, among other things, using them responsibly. For example, it is of little use to be ashamed of your own wealth in the face of comrades with less resources. But it does help if the assets are used for the movement. Another example: As a white person and therefore not affected by racism, you have less to fear from cops and therefore have different opportunities and risks than BIPoC[7] when dealing with cops. It is important not to drift into white saviorism[8].

 

- Continuous effort -

The world is complex and constantly changing. This makes it all the more important to integrate political analysis and education into our everyday lives so that we are not left behind or left with outdated, unreflected concepts and ideas.

When thinking outside the box, we should always keep an eye on the (extreme) right. In addition to Antifa research, this can also mean learning from the current political winners. This in no way means adopting any of their inhumane ideology. It is more about strategies and tactics. While we on the left mainly hang out in the cities and our feel-good bubbles, the right has used the time to win over large parts of rural areas almost undisturbed. Another example of many would be the ability to seize opportunities. The right-wingers manage to seize opportunities such as new discourses (see Corona) significantly more often than we do, without engaging in a defensive struggle or fire-fighting policy. We can see from the Nazi preppers hoarding weapons how the strategy of preparing for opportunities (in this case state instability) is represented across the right-wing spectrum.

We often simply get lost in side quests or are even just occupied with ourselves without any added value. The focus on the current goal, if this is clear at all, gets lost along the way. Our permanent guiding question should be whether our current action - be it an action, debate, networking or whatever - brings us closer to our concrete goal or not.

 

- Practice makes perfect -

It sounds obvious (again), but we think it's important to emphasize: In addition to sharing experiences and skillshares, practicing actions is incredibly important and it happens far too little. This applies to all forms of action. How often do we experience that people are not familiar with the concept of fixed lines at demos or how often do things go wrong when banner dropping at night? Dry runs can provide a lot of security - also emotionally for turbulent and exciting situations. The exercises can also just be fun as a group.

 

- We have to take risks -

In view of the incredible number of crises and disasters, it is clear that we need to take urgent action. But we also need to take more risks. People are being imprisoned for non-violent road blockades. Sometimes even so-called anti-terror laws are used for this, wtf ... The repression is becoming more and more intense in the general authoritarian trend - without the forms of action developing the same way. Or to put it another way: the actions are not the cause of the increasing repression, the authoritarian trend is.

What do we conclude from this? Let's go hard while we still can; the repression will get worse either way! This is an increasingly narrowing scope for action ...

 

- Huh, where has everyone gone? -

When we look around in the movement, we realize that there is a lot of coming and going. In some bubbles, people are already considered old at 30. Many people become politicized, but then don't really remain part of the movement for long. How can that be?

• As mentioned at the beginning of this text, we don't exactly have many successes to show as a movement. Many people are frustrated and resign themselves to the fact that, despite all their efforts, hardly anything has been achieved.
• It is not uncommon for groups to fall out and for people to drop out due to conflicts among themselves.
• The system knows very well how to (re)capture people with carrots and sticks. They become bourgeois and fall away.
• Activism is often unsustainable and people run the risk of overworking themselves to the point of burnout until nothing works anymore.
• We reproduce the shit we have learned in the system, such as patriarchal patterns of behavior and racism, which harms us all and causes those affected to withdraw. Incidentally, age discrimination is also an underestimated problem. Some forms of discrimination are often not even noticed or their complexity is underestimated. Unfortunately, our left-wing spaces are not safe spaces.

There is no division between private and political. All these reasons for leaving the movement are therefore not purely private matters. In our groups we should think about this consistently. The keys here are awareness, mutual aid, political education and accessibility of our groups.

Awareness means being considerate of each other as a group, being approachable in case of problems, discomfort, experienced discrimination or conflicts. There are many different concepts and requirements for this (see demo and party situations). All groups can use an anti-patriarchal practice, for example through appropriate educational and self-reflection groups.

Mutual aid means helping each other as a practice of solidarity. In this way, groups can work to absorb the (personal) struggles of individuals. Creating compatibility between different life circumstances and activism, for example through childcare, is another example. Emotional work such as mourning together in the face of the often overwhelming overall shit can also help a lot to be able to carry on.

 

- We need to change our lives -

What do we do with our lifetime? Many of us are in paid employment and therefore contribute to the system either through our work itself or eventually financially by paying taxes. How much time and energy do we have left for the political struggle? What is the priority in our own lives? How can the position, the connections, the information and the resources of the respective wage labor be used? What can be achieved with strategic wage labor[9]? What is the wage used for? How can useful skills be acquired for political work? How do we reflect on and overcome our socializations[10], which the system has often deeply engraved in us? How can we manage to lead our lives politically in a holistic way? Only each person can find the answers to these questions for themselves, but asking these questions together can be very helpful.

 

 

What is the lever to unhinge the system?

 

- Direct action instead of petitioning -

Our movement is dominated by the mistaken belief that we can change the system by appealing (making demands) to the system - be it politics, the economy or whatever. With appeals such as petitions, symbolic actions, etc., we can draw attention to issues and introduce them into the discourse. We are very good at that. But then? Even if we don't fail to lead the discourse because of the media, we have to realize that discourse can never bring about system change, because it always takes place within the system. No matter how big a demonstration is, it will never bring about change. It always remains an appeal and appeals are ignored. All components of the system and its consequences are not errors in the system, but a central component of it. Racism, for example, is essential to keep the neo-colonial machinery running. Accordingly, any appeal to correct the “flaws” simply falls flat.

Let's stop working on such petitioning and reformism. Let's bring about revolutionary system change ourselves!

 

- Self-empowerment instead of traumatization -

Many of our usual forms of action involve confrontation with the cops, but without being able to withstand this confrontation. We are regularly carried away, beaten up and dragged off to their cells. This is not exactly self-empowering ... The resulting physical, psychological and financial damage caused by legal repression is often accepted as a “necessary” evil instead of being avoided by choosing other forms of action.

And don't we actually want to become more? Such actions rightly have a deterrent effect on many. Wouldn't it be much nicer if our campaigns triggered FOMO (fear of missing out) instead? This is not an appeal to only organize party parades - even if fun is of course very welcome at actions. Rather, participants in our actions should experience self-empowerment. This requires actual success.

 

- Action goals -

Sure, we want a system change, but what steps do we need to take to get there? The key question is again “Does this or that action help us get closer to our goal or not?”. Clearly defined (i.e. measurable) and achievable goals are important for every action. We can use these goals to plan, act and then evaluate the action. These questions can help when selecting the action goals:

These questions can help when selecting action goals:

• Are we hitting it where it hurts?
• Do we hit it where our target is weak?
• Are we hitting it where it is not expected?

 

- Means of action -

Direct actions are actions that lead directly to change. This can be, for example, sabotaging a coal excavator, hacking a fascist social media channel or a strike at work. But direct action alone will not lead us to our goal. A variety of means of action is crucial. Even though direct actions should be the focus, they should be seen as an addition to the usual forms of action.

Other actions are often needed for explainability and therefore relatability. This can lead to synergies and flanking effects. Synergies mean that different actions engage with each other and reinforce each other through their interaction. Flanking effects mean that more radical actions or positions legitimize more moderate ones. If, for example, a higher price than appropriate is set as the starting point when bargaining for the sale of a product, it is more likely that the appropriate price will emerge at the end of the price negotiation than if this had been the starting point, as the buyer wants to negotiate the price down either way. (This is by no means to say that radical targets are not appropriate, but merely serves as an explanatory aid).

 

- Presenting actions -

Particular attention should be paid to public relations work in the case of direct actions. On the one hand, an explanation is often needed as to why certain means are used and why it is necessary to take action. On the other hand, such actions are often swept under the rug and not reported on. This does not happen because it lacks news value, but because the system wants to hide its own vulnerability, as this can deter supporters or investors. It can also be swept under the rug for fear of free riders (copycats), which we very much want. Our public relations work must therefore ensure that our campaigns and their messages reach their target groups. We can't rely on conventional media for this - apart from the fact that they rarely report favorably on such campaigns ...

And apart from that, the psychological impact of direct actions should not be neglected, no matter how successful they were in themselves. They can cause uncertainty and demoralization in the system, while they can empower us enormously. The presentation of the successes achieved is also crucial in order to become attractive to potential comrades-in-arms and supporters.

 

- Frequency and places of action -

Places of crystallization, where our fights enter their critical phase, offer enormous potential, right up to revolution. But the circumstances must be right for this and the struggle must be big enough already. It can make sense to act in a decentralized manner. Guerrilla tactics can sometimes open up greater scope for action than “the big thing”, to which the cops etc. then also turn their attention and a one-to-one showdown quickly follows.

The system is also very resilient and can cope well with a few major campaigns a year, while they cost us a lot of capacity and resources. Keeping up the pressure is crucial. Pure event activism will not get us anywhere. So we need to carefully consider how centralized or decentralized a fight should be fought.

It is very exhausting to start new struggles from scratch. Our struggle is global. It is therefore advisable to make existing local struggles bigger and clearly show that they fit into international struggles instead of trying to copy struggles from other countries here without any tangible reference.

 

 

#AntifaHelps

 

What can we offer as a movement? It can strengthen us immensely if we try to satisfy people's basic needs in line with our own values such as solidarity. This creates acceptance and support. Because instead of being dismissed as “weirdos” or “troublemakers”, we as a movement are visibly perceived as constructive and authentic. As a side effect, we can also hope for more growth and fewer comrades dropping out.

Satisfying needs can include all kinds of things. Obvious is the material satisfaction of needs, such as the provision of food. Less obvious, but no less important, is the satisfaction of immaterial needs. For example, there is the social need to be on “the right side”. One tool of mainstream ideology for this is the narrative of the horseshoe “theory”[11]. Believing in this, mainstream people believe they are on the “right side” if they do not deviate to the right or left of the political status quo and thus accept and, if necessary, defend the system.

Another example of satisfying needs is the currently extremely successful ploy of the right. They use agitation to stir up fear of refugees and create a need for apparent security. They then satisfy this need with deportations, authoritarian law-and-order policies[12] and the like.

In addition to the movement's existing approaches to satisfying needs, here are two further suggestions.

 

- Identity and community -

United we are strong and a danger to the system. The system knows very well how to avoid this through isolation. Elbowism in the sense of “all against all” and “kick down and hump up” serves this purpose. Systemic propaganda such as “everyone is the architect of their own fortune” tries to make us believe that we are all little capitalists and that we can win the “game” if we just work hard enough and outdo everyone else. To this end, we are supposed to identify with our exploiters and oppressors as if we were suffering from Stockholm syndrome[13]. Far too many people believe in "their" company and "their" state almost religously. People cling to every little thing that seems to provide identity and community, as many soccer fans demonstrate. At the same time, even the mass media are talking about an epidemic of loneliness.

The need for identity and community therefore is great. This is exactly where we, as a left-wing movement, can tie in very well. We have a long, eventful history that we can build on. We are following in the footsteps of our comrades from the past, to whom we owe every little gain over the system. The 8-hour day and women's suffrage, for example, were hard fought for by the left-wing movement. Identifying with the left-wing movement therefore has the potential to create identity.

How much better a community can we offer than so many actors in the system? Lived solidarity, acceptance of different people instead of the pressure of standards and performance - these are things we are really missing in mainstream society[14]. But are things really so much better here? Considering the deep division and fragmentation of the left-wing movement? How catastrophically do we often carry out conflicts among ourselves? Considering the fact that we reproduce much of the shit we want to fight ourselves? Which left-wing project is free of sexual assault, for example?

And yet: we have what it takes to create identity and community. But to do so, we have to get together and reflect on our values.

 

- Welcome to climate hell -

Let's think back to the beginning of this text. The rules of the game have changed fundamentally. It is too late to warn of climate collapse. It is here. Even if we were to stop emitting a single gram of greenhouse gases right now, climate collapse will rage on for decades - just a little slower and therefore a little less murderous. Nevertheless, hundreds of millions of people will die and continue to fuel other crises, disasters and wars. Everything is ultimately intertwined in this system.

The central question now is: in the face of this horror, do we also give in to ignoring the crisis and use our capacities for that? Or do we accept this as the new reality, accept the pain, the grief and carry on? Do we continue to fight for the best possible life for all, every tenth of a degree, justice and solidarity? The collapse of the system will come despite and precisely because of the ignorance of many. By collapse here we mean that our basic needs can no longer be satisfied the way we are used to.

And that brings us back to the topic of “satisfying needs”. When all the forests are on fire, who from the fire department is going to come to put out our burning house? If whole areas are flooded, which disaster response unit is supposed to supply us with clean drinking water when the regular infrastructure has long since been destroyed? It's up to us.

Self-organization and DIY are enormous strengths of our movement here. The camps that our movement organizes time and again are proof of this. If we use these skills to overcome crises, disasters and wars in solidarity, then we really have something to offer. For example, we can also tie in with left-wing neighborhood work.

In addition, there is inevitably the struggle for resources and their distribution. For example, the fight for drinking water is already in full swing. These struggles are inevitably part of our focus. (More on this in the following chapter.)

 

- Pitfalls -

It remains important that we do not allow ourselves to be taken in. States like to exploit volunteers by letting them take on central social tasks for which they are actually responsible, such as helping the homeless. In addition, the NIMBY (not in my backyard) mentality is widespread, according to which many people are only interested in the struggles that are directly visible around them or that affect them personally. Anything beyond that is of no interest. This makes it all the more important to remain political in such work and to point out the connections within the system.

 

 

Resilience

 

Resilience means and the ability to withstand a shock, but also to adapt. In view of the future we are facing, resilience is undoubtedly essential.

The rise of fascism poses a particular threat to our movement. We are being increasingly criminalized and subjected to more and more absurd repression. Added to this is the end of all truth. The media that shape the image of our world are in the hands of corporations, states, the rich - in short, in the hands of the system. Now there is also the rise of AI (artificial intelligence) and live deep fake (image and video manipulation), which promises us fully automated fake news and omnipresent propaganda.

 

- Learning how to get along from right wingers -

Discourse is becoming wilder and so is polarization. In the discourse, we are not only confronting the right. We also work against each other and tear each other apart. The right hardly has this problem. Why is that the case? What can we learn from this?

The right-wingers are excellent at tolerating contradictions, because right-wing ideologies are full of contradictions in themselves: “Foreigners are taking our jobs!” vs. “Foreigners are all social parasites!” There is no serious interest in facts and coherent arguments. It's all about emotions. They skillfully tap into perceived struggles such as the fear of asylum seekers. They manage to find a common denominator along their “values” such as queerophobia and racism and fight together for right-wing hegemony (supremacy) using a wide variety of means. They are very successful in normalizing radical right-wing positions. As they cannot rely on conclusive arguments for their positions, they simply throw their claims and ideology into the room until the positions no longer shock, but are accepted as normal and ultimately adopted.

What do we learn from this?

• We need to start taking society's emotions seriously on the one hand and addressing them ourselves on the other - combined, of course, with coherent arguments based on facts.
• We can no longer afford to be divided within the movement, as we increasingly have our backs to the wall. We can still discuss our differences sufficiently in an internment camp[15]. Where prevailing differences cannot be ignored, constructive discourse is needed instead of eternal self-profiling and bias.
• We have great ideas about how the world could be different. Let's bring our ideas of a system change to the world more confidently, because it can obviously tolerate radical ideas.

 

- Fight for resources -

In the climate catastrophe and in this system, the fight for dwindling resources is becoming more intense. Water, the basis of life, is becoming increasingly scarce and at the same time increasingly privatized. Access and use are determined by the owners. The situation is similar for fertile soil, the basis of the majority of our food supply.

It's high time we turn our attention to this!

 

- Prepping in solidarity -

When we hear the word “prepping”, we quickly think of weirdos hiding in bunkers because of conspiracy stories or fascists preparing for “Day X” with weapons and death lists. The word usually remains in this dirty corner, but wrongly so. We should urgently prepare ourselves - not for a zombie apocalypse but for the very real threats, not by stockpiling toilet paper but with common sense and solidarity. After all, it's not just about saving our own asses.

Here is a non-exhaustive list outlining everything that can fall under solidarity-based prepping:

• Strengthening and expanding our structures like:
• Awareness structures
• Mutual aid structures
• Legal structures such as EA[16] and legal aid advice
• Solidarity pots to bear the rising costs of repression in solidarity
• Technology collectives that enable anonymous email addresses and websites, for example
• Sanitary groups
• Collective kitchens
• Groups that provide camp infrastructure
• Groups that carry out solidarity-based neighborhood work
• Defend, maintain and expand our free spaces such as autonomous centers, squatted land, clubs, etc.
• Becoming and remaining ungovernable or not being exploitable by the system through an autonomous, subversive[17] mindset and practice
• Learning how to evade the increasing surveillance
• Prepare to allow those being persecuted to go underground if necessary or to go underground ourselves
• Acquire and share the necessary skills and materials for possible scenarios
• Be actively involved in civil protection and disaster relief
• Network locally and take joint precautions

With regard to some of the points mentioned, it should be emphasized that care and reproductive work are the basic prerequisites for the existence of our movement. Care and reproductive work include tidying up, cleaning, cooking, structural work, etc., which makes productive work such as actions possible in the first place. We need to work much harder to overcome the patriarchal unequal distribution of reproductive work.

 

 

Class struggle and connectivity

 

- Why class struggle at all? -

Increasingly absurd differences in income and wealth, constant exploitation, completely unequal participation in (political) decisions and access to resources of all kinds - the injustice is overwhelming. We, who keep the machine running, get breadcrumbs at best, while the rich have several bakeries. But not only are we much more, we are also the ones who provide the labor. This means we have the upper hand if we organize ourselves and the word “we” really becomes “we”. Through strikes or the withdrawal of our labor, we have the power. “Imagine there is a war and nobody goes.” can be applied well here.

 

- Class consciousness -

In the movement, we talk a lot about class struggle. However, the majority of society is largely unaware that we live in a society with different classes. Accordingly, there is usually a lack of awareness of which class people are in. Frequently used terms such as “bourgeois conditions”, “lower earners” or “wealthy” hardly do justice to the class system. They are primarily used to highlight differences in income and wealth.

The prevailing neoliberal ideology uses fairy tales such as “from rags to riches” to convey that we can achieve anything if we just work harder. We are told that we are all little capitalists who can win in this “game”. We are forced to sell our labor and our lifetime in the form of wage labor. But working does not make you rich. People become rich or richer through inheritance, exploitation and capital. Just look at the rich people.

Another lie of neoliberal ideology is the so-called “trickle-down effect”. It is claimed that it is a good thing if the rich get richer, because some of it will trickle down to everyone else. The mere fact of how much less tax the rich pay, shows that trickle down is just a lie to make us work harder.

Of course, we could go into more detail. But this is just to show that we still have a long way to go in terms of the class struggle. In fact, currently the class struggle is being fought from the top, against us. We first have to create an awareness of this in mainstream society.

In this text, we use a very simplified class model. On the one hand, we distinguish between those who keep the store running and speak of “workers”, even if we include the bourgeois spectrum, and on the other hand, “the rich”, who benefit most from the system and its exploitation. People who do not work for wages but are also not rich (e.g. homeless people) are included under “workers”, as they are just as indispensable in the prevailing system. They serve as motivation for wage laborers and at the same time as scapegoats for the numerous struggles that the system produces.

 

- Between classism and left-wing arrogance -

There are numerous clever texts and theories on the class struggle and the role of the “working class” in it. Too bad that only in the rarest of cases are they formulated in such a way that they are also understandable and contemporary for “workers”. This shows that the left currently has a big problem with classism. By using language that is far too academic, we actively exclude people who cannot understand it. This is often made worse by an arrogance that comes from a sense of intellectual superiority. So we shouldn't be surprised if our events and demonstrations are predominantly attended by people who have the privilege of an academic background (such as students) and not “workers”.

It's high time to get back to reality from the ivory tower. What does the reality of “workers” actually look like? As a movement, we need to listen to people. If we don't know about their situations, their worries, fears and desires, we can't meet them where they are. So the wokeness debate is not just a culture war from the right. It is also an expression of the fact that people feel left behind and insecure. The right is very good at communicating “Hey, we feel what you feel; we understand you!” while we often just throw around terms that hardly anyone outside our bubbles understands, thus putting even more distance between us and mainstream society.

In order to be able to listen to the “workers”, we also have to meet them. So get out of the lecture halls and autonomous centers!

 

- Connectivity -

So how do we win a majority for the fight for system change? How can we at least build understanding and acceptance for our ideas and actions?

When we look at the rise of fascism, we do not believe that the masses who are now voting for radical right-wing parties have always been so right-wing. Rather, we can observe that most people are more like flags in the wind. Many do not have a firm world view or political stance. For them, politics is just one of many topics and they simply go along with many things, true to the motto “Most important is to keep things running!”. Yes, the business is running, but it's just really shitty.

Those with the most resources and the greatest reach are the upper classes, who are (still) too well off to deal with the problems. After the really rich, they are the ones most likely to benefit from the system. The lower classes, on the other hand, often barely have the capacity to deal with the fundamental problems because the everyday struggles are already eating up the necessary capacity. The carrot and stick mechanism works excellently to keep the rebellion of the masses in check. It is therefore very difficult to achieve connect and be relatable, as our failing practice proves.

It is exciting to look at where the majority society becomes politically active. This is usually where the privileged believe their privileges are in danger. The reactions to a possible diesel ban or speed limit on German freeways are a good example of this. The fact that these reactions are completely irrational shows what a strong role emotions play. What we can take away from this is that we need to appeal to people's emotions as well as using conclusive arguments. Listening, as mentioned at the beginning, is the first step. The second step is to show that we understand them and can honestly empathize with their concerns, fears and wishes. As a third step, it is important to categorize what has been said and to make visible how it actually relates to the system. This is where we can expose the contradictions of the system.

Only then we can create space to criticize the system. Building on this, we can communicate our alternative of system change.

But we also need something tangible. It is not enough to hear fine words and promises. In view of the fact that almost no election promises are kept, this is not surprising. That is why we also need to satisfy the needs of our movement as discussed above. Last but not least, we naturally also want to activate and empower people. This could, for example, be an invitation to the next event, an open plenary session or an action.

This does not mean that we should primarily target the privileged members of society. It is precisely the margins of society or the less privileged, marginalized and most affected by the system who should be our target group. The idea is rather that if we manage to reach the privileged part of society, then we will also reach the other part of society.

We communicate with the outside world in a variety of ways. Be it direct conversations when leafleting, speeches at protests and events, interviews in the media, social media or with the Antifa sticker on the lamp post. All this and more is public relations work. If we want to reach mainstream society, the above steps always apply accordingly, adapted to the respective medium. Our actions, which go beyond the mere expression of opinion and often go beyond the legal framework, are a special feature. Here, it is particularly important and at the same time difficult to communicate why we are doing this and why our actions are appropriate and not excessive or inappropriate. The shorter the explanation sheet required for the action, the better. For example, in the fight for climate justice, it is easier to explain the blockade of a coal excavator than the blockade of regular road traffic. The style of our appearance is also important. Does it put people off? Or is it perhaps simply cringy? The wording, i.e. what terms are used for and how, is also important. Are we talking about sabotage, disarmament or attacks?

It is also important to be clear about who the campaign is intended to affect and who it actually affects. Ultimately, the question is: can the majority of society identify more with us or with those affected by the campaign? And that brings us back to the listening mentioned at the beginning. There is no other way to understand our target groups, let alone reach them.

We will never reach everyone without betraying our goals. Polarization is not only unavoidable, it is also good because it gets people moving. Simply swimming along is no longer enough. It's time to take a stand and not just stand on the sidelines.

 

 

Hope is not a feeling; hope is a moral obligation

 

With all the shit we are fighting against, we should never forget what we are fighting for - no matter how distant system change may seem. We must never stop dreaming and testing our utopias. Otherwise we would only have a defensive struggle on offer, not hope. Bitterness would be the end of our movement. Perhaps what we need right now is a good dose of left-wing influencing, educational work pointing out alternatives and stories that convey how the world could look different.

In order for realistic hope to arise and not unrealistic dreaming and empty promises, we have to create something really unpleasant: Acceptance. This does not mean simply accepting the whole mess. It means accepting the new reality in the face of climate collapse and the crises, disasters, etc. that come with it. We have to say goodbye to the “old world” and the familiar patterns once and for all. We are up for some rough seas ...

We have to go through the phases of grief[18] towards acceptance, not alone, but together, in order to be able to look ahead unclouded. Only then can we achieve realistic hope and the ability to act.

So let's get going! There are a hell of a lot of us and our time will come!

 

 

And now?

 

What happens now? As a movement, let's take the time to pause, reflect and then reorient ourselves. Let us have the courage to break with our failing practices and break new ground. Feel free to use this text as a reference point in your respective contexts/groups, section by section. And feel free to spread it!

 

 

Epilogue

 

When reading this text, you will certainly notice that many of the ideas are not new. And they don't have to be. They just need to be implemented (wink). “As well as” is the unofficial slogan of this text. If we are honest, it is extremely difficult to implement everything that is being called for at the same time. Unfortunately, there is no one master plan. Rather, the text aims to provide impetus for change in the movement and touches on relevant issues.

In order to remain up to date and to be able to take criticism, additions and other ideas into account, the plan is that new versions of this text will appear regularly. You can find these and other texts from us here:

https://pad.riseup.net/p/r.d68982ea9856063ee555766a77a8ac0e (provisional)

https://themakollektiv.noblogs.org/ (under construction)

We can be contacted by email at thema-kollektiv@systemli.org and are particularly happy to receive more translations of this text.

 

 

Glossary

 

1. totalitarian - politically unrestricted ruling
2. reformism - belief that the system can be improved step by step instead of bringing about a system change
3. greenwashing - presenting environmentally harmful things as environmentally friendly
4. pinkwashing - presenting anti-queer things as queer-friendly
5. Dogmatism - opinion or doctrine that is held as absolutely true and universally valid by its advocates without questioning them critically
6. DIY (do it yourself) - doing things yourself instead of employing professionals to do them
7. BIPoC - Black, Indigenous, People of Color
8. White saviorism - colonialist assumption that BIPoC need to be saved by white people and that BIPoC, who are perceived as inferior, cannot survive without the intervention, instruction and guidance from whites would not be able to survive
9. strategic wage labor - the pursuit of wage labor without the exchange of time and labor for wages as the main motivation, but for political reasons such as for industrial action (e.g. trade union), to sabotage the company, to gain information (e.g. in public authorities), to occupy key positions (e.g. in the health care) or to acquire skills for political work (e.g. technical skills for occupations)
10. socialization - lifelong shaping of people through upbringing, norms, social requirements etc.
11. horseshoe “theory” - propaganda that equates right-wing and left-wing extremism with each other
12. Law and order - term for drastic police measures to combat (alleged) criminality
13. Stockholm syndrome - psychological phenomenon in which victims of hostage-taking develop a positive emotional relationship with their kidnappers and sometimes cooperate with them or even defend them
14. majority society - part of the overall population that represents the cultural norm due to its size in contrast to subcultures etc.
15. internment camp - detention camps in which people who have been imprisoned for political, ideological and/or military reasons and often abused under cruel conditions
16. EA (Investigative Committee) - legal aid structure that can be contacted by telephone during and after actions in order to primarily to provide legal assistance to those affected by repression
17. subversive - concealed system-destroying
18. stages of grief according to the Kübler-Ross model:
    I. repression in the form of:
    a) denial
    b) anger
    c) bargaining
    II. depression
    III. acceptance